Board of Commissioners (boc) - Regular Meeting

There you go. Good evening. Glad to see all you here this evening. I will call this meeting for the Pittsburgh Board of Commissioners for May, Monday, October 13, 2025 to order. And we will start

with a moment of silence. Please join me. Thank you, Mr. Pharaoh. Will you lead us in the pledge of

allegiance? Everyone rise for the pledge to the flag of the United States of America to the stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Right. We in front of us we have the agenda and the consent agenda for this evening. Are there any changes uh or additions to either of those?

I'll take a motion to approve the agenda. So moved. Thank you. There second. Okay. Uh moved by Commissioner Vos, second by Commissioner Bonnets. All those in favor say I. I. Take a motion to approve the consent agenda. So move. Thank you, Commissioner Post. Second, Mr. Bonnets. All those in favor say I. I. Thank you. Um no information items this evening. for a ceremonial ceremonial item. We have a presentation uh from Duke Energy. Is anyone here from Duke Energy? Hung up in traffic. Could we do that after Citizens Matters?

Yes. Thank you. Okay. Uh up next is Citizens Matters and we will start with the assistant manager updates this evening. Um so we had LGC approval of our financing for purchasing the Rafi building and that was approved last week. So we will be proceeding with um doing the loan closing at the end of the month. And um then we also had our new assistant finance director started today um and her name is Edna and she she's not here tonight but um she's doing very well. Wonderful. Thank you.

Okay. Up next is uh board updates. I will start with mine. On September 20th, we had the ribbon cutting for the skate park. So, very excited to do that and thankful for all the community support to get that open. Um go go check it out and skate and be safe. Uh on October 10th, I went to a meeting uh sponsored by Triangle AIA. Um a conversation with architects and local electric leaders. So, I appreciate everyone that put that together. On September 20th, we had the sculpture celebration kickoff at the plant for the sculpture show. And I think all the sculptures are still out there, but I'm looking to get more sculpture and and art around town. So, go check that out. September 29th, we had the joint uh meeting with the county here and uh very uh good presentations and discussion there of our partnership. Uh some training. September 11th, I did the um UNCC School of Government Advanced Leadership Core Program. And then uh September 17th, we had the North Carolina Mayor's Association meeting. So good uh good networking there. And then coming up, we have a mask fair, mask parade on Friday at 5:00. So bring your dogs, bring your mask, and uh October 25th is the street fair downtown. So looking forward to that as well.

Pro Timbalt. Yes, thank you. I actually attended the Central Pines regional meeting on September 24th and that was actually for the executive committee and we discussed our strategic planning for Central Pines Regional Council. There were a lot of good ideas and what they're going to try to do hopefully is to strive to meet those particular ideas and implement and move forward. So that's the only thing I attended other than the joint meeting with the CH with Chattam County which was very good also. Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Bonnets.

Yes. Thank you. So um the Chattam County Climate Advisory Board is meeting with the county board of commissioners this Friday for a retreat in preparation of development of their climate action plan. and our own town of Pittsboro climate action plan draft is being presented this Wednesday for public input. Uh big thanks to town staff for that extra diligence to get public input and get it right. Uh thank you Jenna Peterson if you're watching video. Um, also last Friday, myself and the mayor and others participated in a breakfast event at our community house called building conversations. Thanks again, mayor, for participating in that. Uh, it was a lively informal gathering with separate conversations at different three different tables and architects and builders and Habitat for Humanity were there. Thank you to them for attending. Uh the main objective I think was certainly achieved facilitating uh greater interactions between elected officials and architects and others uh interested in seeing more affordable and attainable housing get built. And that's it for me.

Thank you, Commissioner Ferrell. I also attended the skate park ribbon cutting and the uh joint county and town official. That was uh very interesting. outside. Y'all never seen Commissioner Frell skate. You need to He's the only one that had elbows. Commissioner Foley.

Uh yeah, a couple things. Uh first off, first off, uh affordable housing advisory committee. I've been there for about 10 years. We met at the Wallock properties that is uh the Wallock properties in Siler City, the Oakville Oakview Apartments. It's a threetory garden style apartment building and it filled up just like that last year. So we had a meeting there just to show uh our respect, give our thanks to the developer and talk about what's coming in the future. We are we have agreed to meet in November to discuss new projects for 2026 and so uh I'll update those when once we uh get the applicants and review them. I was also at the uh the joint county and town uh presentation right here in this spot and we learned a lot about the county and and the the whole idea of them moving out from downtown Pittsburgh and what it does the vacancies downtown what what we can do with that that's open space. So it was a very exciting meeting for that reason. We also had a review of the uh the uh climate action plan update that that we gave to the county commissioners at that point as well. We talked about transportation and how the county is providing a micro u micro transit bus. It's a trial run and what it is is you you you sign on to an app and the the transit would come to your home, pick you up and drop you off where you want. That's kind of exciting. So, it's first come, first serve, but we'll see how that that plays out. I do have a couple of comments I wrote down because I know I forget something.

So, if you wouldn't mind, I I'd like to read a couple things. First, about the South Village small area plan. Uh what we talk about is how it's being developed, but in this case, I'd like to think about something completely different about that. And the difference uh we talked about it about six six 16 months ago I think it was about proposing a bond referendum to the county. The Pittsburgh really can't do a bond yet but the county can. And what it would be for it used is to buy up land that right now is not being used so we can preserve it much like White Pines's natural uh space uh just south of us. So much of the the the area is being consumed by developments and we have to be proactive. And I I I kind of think of it like Central Park in New York. The vision they had in Central Park was profound. And look what it did to that that city. It's I've walked it and I've ridden bikes through Central Park. It's enormous. And it's it's made New York the Manhattan Island a gem. And that's the kind of idea a bond referendum to the county would be. It's making a gem out of Chattam out of Chattam County. I see areas up and down the Haw River that could be purchased, maybe down Poke Berry Creek, all sorts of places that preserves natural tree growth and promotes what we're talking about with with climate control. So, uh, I urge the the board if I if I brought a resolution to talk about that very thing, I'd love you all to consider recommending to the

county that we would support such a bond. So, and then one more cautionary note while we're talking about Chattam Park and this this is a in response to uh to the request we made. Well, it's in response to the League of Municipalities. They our board sent a resolution in opposition to House Bill 765 in May. What's House Bill 765? House Bill 765 in a nutshell limits the town's ability, the town's power to issue zoning laws, especially down zoning. And the general assembly has another bill in the state state senate uh senate bill 205 that reflects these changes in and in and negotiations from the tabled seven house bill 765. I I can assure you that there are people there are groups in Raleigh right now that watch are watching us and how we make our decisions with Chattam Park. Uh, I would love to maintain our control of how we decide to do Chattam Park, how we vote yes or no, and stay on the ship as it steams forward. If we get off the ship, we we can't steer it. So understand that the powers we have are given by the state legislature Dylan's law and what it says is we give you the power local municipalities follow our rules and you know we'll just be very happy with you but they can take those rules right back from us. So, I'm not saying I'm in favor of a small area plan, but I also am I am in favor

of making sure that we retain our power here as a board. So, just a sobering fact that we I wanted to share and I think those happy thoughts. I'm done. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Vos. I was also at the ribbon cutting for the skate park and I've got just a few words to circle back from our last meeting. Um, we talked about the welcome center and I believe we agreed that staff would work with them to confirm details needed to support a possible $20,000 line item for funding. There was also some talk about the downtown advisory board being involved and uh the possibility of funds coming from that bucket. After speaking with Theresa Thompson, it's clear that the bud their budget has already been reduced and those folks are community volunteers, not elected officials. So, I don't really think that's the right place for that decision to be made. Uh, I value their input on issues of operations, but I don't think they should be put in the position to be asked to vote on the funding uh for a local nonprofit while also being asked to cut their budget mid year to do so. The welcome center's mission is to support our downtown. It aligns with what we all want to do and see succeed. So, I think it makes sense for staff to move forward and to bring back a clear proposal for a budget amendment for the next board meeting and for board review at the next board meeting. I'm sorry. Since November's meeting will be my last opportunity to vote, I would really appreciate seeing it on that agenda.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, up next we have public comment. So, when I call you up, please state your name and address at the start of the comments. There's a time limit of three minutes, which will be displayed on the screen. In the interest of time and fairness, it's the board's policy to not respond directly to comments during this period. Staff will follow up as appropriate, and any speaker handouts should be given to the town clerk and will be distributed to the board. Uh, so I'll call up people and I and I'll note to a couple people I think are signed up for uh Reese Farm in public comment and we have some public hearings later. So um let me know if you if you got on the wrong sheet. Uh but we will start with uh Jennifer Platt followed by uh Cara O'Connell. I'm Dr. Jennifer Platt. I live at 65 Harriet Watson Road. I founded my company nine years ago right here in Chadam where we manufacture and ship products across the country and I'm speaking here tonight as a business owner. Live, work, play goes far beyond a clever marketing slogan for Chadam Park. It's actually embedded in their founding documents. The sustainability principles that they uh use have positioned Chattam Park as a national case study in thoughtful development. As a business owner and a member of the board of the Chadam Economic Development Corporation, I've followed the growth of Chadam Park closely. In reviewing the South Village small area plan, I want to bring your attention to a sentence in the introduction under section design page three number four that gives me

pause. Research and development sections 4.3 and 3.2 2 shall allow a maximum of 50% of their combined land area to be developed in residential uses. And those are the ones that I've circled here in green on my fancy map. That language raises some concern. The landmark community of Chadam Park was originally branded to have a strong commercial core, a foundation that expands our tax base and reduces the financial burden of our citizens. Now this is not to scale but it gives you an idea of how we want commercial development to bring in most of the money residential development to support but not have bear the burden. When we change that percentage we're going to lose dollars from our commercial and then that has to go down to our citizens and taxpayers. Um so uh you know replacing those residences on top of the commercial property to increase density might be a way to deal with that challenge. Absolutely. That would be smart integrated design. Uh we would get our cake and eat it too. This document doesn't yet make that balance clear. Um, I would like to urge us to learn from our neighbors in Chapel Hill and Kerry and not make the same mistakes that they have made over the last 20 to 30 years. Uh, let's diversify our tax base, create a vibrant, sustainable

community where people can truly live, work, and play. Thank you, Carara Okonnell. And up next is Rachel. And and if this is the clerk is over there, but if this is about Rey's Farm, let's do that at and those public hearings and this out later. Sorry, there's no public hearing in the platform, is there? Um, no, that's correct. Sure.

Yeah. And Davis eloquently spoke about the area behind uh the pond in phase one that will be affected. And there's uh in the maps that I shared there's Okay. Can you Sorry. Can you start with your name and address?

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Carol Connell and I live at 568 Robertson Creek Road and um I I can't help but advocate for the tree line behind the farm behind the pond where the eagle's nest is. Um, I feel like they will get their uh eagle tape permit um based on what I've I've heard from the uh Federal Wildlife Commission. And I think that as a riparian buffer that this area has a very small drainage area that comes off of that pond and goes into Robertson Creek and that could be an important feature where they're planning to build all the way across that little drainage area. Um, so anyway, Ree Farm now has a beautiful tree line behind it that I believe is an authentic representation of a southern farm if the trees in the front were cut down so you could see it like you used to be able to. You would see this very authentic southern farm and it was amazing. It is amazing. Um, and the tree line with the eagle's nest just behind the pond, I feel it was like a really important part of the habitat and the historic nature of the property. The family uh that owned the property owned it for many, many, many years. Um and as you know the the planning board just approved phase one and um this will put a large development on the top of the Eagle's Nest and the

drainage area. Um they plan to clear cut that area and have only green space along the Robertson Creek with without that in mind. And I am concerned one for the drainage and the animals moving to and from the area. you know, um, Jean Reeves and her husband had established a broad sweep sweeping conservation easement that was under a a UDO and that was removed after she passed on June 5th, 2019 at 99 years of age um, so that the property could be developed. And I I understand that this development is going to bring a lot of good things to the community, but I also feel like I want to make sure that there's smart growth.

Thank you. Thank you.

Up next is Rachel, followed by Carol Hewitt. Hi, I'm uh Rachel or people call me Davis Lindsay Weisbecker and I live at 99 Reeves Road in the neighborhood that is directly west three development. Um so I'm speaking about the plat. I have separate comments on the development agreement that I'll say at that hearing. But anyway, I do think the reuse farm is a tremendous project and will bring many benefits to the western side of town where I live. Um it's not as expansive as Chadam Park. Um, but at full buildout, it will reshape the west side of town with more than 1500 new dwelling units, more than 15,000 new daily car trips based on their TIA, and more gallons of storm water runoff than we probably want to think about. I understand reefs preliminary platr, but I do have questions about whether the conditions of the resoning that were to be completed prior to this review and approval have been met to the standard called for for a project of this scope. Condition six indicated that by the time the subdivision plans are submitted, there will be a phasing plan. When I requested to see this plan, I was forwarded a one-page map with some colored parcels labeled one, two, three, and four. Um, I'm not a planner or an elected official, but I do feel this lacks the detail appropriate to the scope of this development. Condition 5E specified that a traffic impact analysis will be conducted and approved by the town and the NC DOT before the preliminary subdivision approvals. I reached out to the NC DOT regarding this and they they informed me that this was still under review and no determination of approval had been issued as of Thursday last week. Condition 16 indicates a development agreement will be negotiated prior to the preliminary subdivision approvals. And since this development agreement is only coming in front of you tonight and at the same time as the preliminary subdivision approval, I question if this really had the consideration due or if it's just being treated as a administrative task. And then finally

looking at the staff analysis that's pres presented for the phase one plat in particular it reads as if two and a half% of dwelling units in this phase are going to be affordable in this phase but there is no affordable housing that's for the overall um development. All the affordable housing according to this plan is going to be clustered in phase two not across the entire development. So, I understand some of what I have raised is probably open to interpretation based on the wording of the conditions and it can be hard to work out what the spirit of the agreement was versus the letter of the agreement. But I do ask of the town that we hold the development to the highest standards possible as I think this is what the community deserves. At the end of the day, let's have this be a win-win for the development and the people of the town. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is Carol Hwitt followed by Eric Williams. Hi, you have a full night. I'm gonna be brief, give you this in writing. Um, but unfortunately, this is something you would have to act on tonight. My name is Carol Huitt, 424 Johnny Burke Road. I want to highlight the issue that Liz Cington sent to you in an email, and it went to all of you, maybe even yesterday, and it might even have been today, but I have a copy, so I'll show it to you. in her recent email requiring the planning board is being asked to make an informed recommendation back to you on a plan that they haven't even seen a completed small area plan. As you know, it's still undergoing revisions. It does not have a financial impact analysis that's complete. It's just revenues without expenses. If I ran my business and only knew what I made and not what I spent, I'd have been out of business a long time ago. Um there's discrepancy in the numbers. The transportation review is not complete. We're still waiting on that. It's outdated. It doesn't reflect the number of people that live there now. So I just hope that you will give the planning board. These are people you appointed. They're virtually volunteers. They make a little bit of money as you know a month maybe to cover gas or something. But they, you know, they're doing this. They're working hard and they're being asked to make a decision, an intelligent decision on the basis of not a full plan. And if I were on the planning board, I would be offended. It'd be like, what? You know, you gave me this job and yet you've gave me incomplete information. So, um, I hope you'll give them a full 60 days. Start that again when they get a complete small area plan with a financial analysis, with a transportation plan, with the discrepancies fixed, with the numbers repaired, uh, completed. Um, and you may even hear about some changes again

tonight. So, um, thank you all again for, you know, making this an amazing, wonderful place to live. What I'm going to hand you is what kind of what I just said. And then the second page is excerpted from Oh, thanks. You think it's great. I think here's another copy of that. That's all enough for that. There you go. And I can email it to you as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is Eric Williams. Hi folks, my name is Eric Williams. I live at 1076 Binham Road in Pittsburgh. Uh, and I grew up here in Pittsburgh and uh, from a young age really developed a deep appreciation for for nature. Um, and I wanted to talk a bit about that here tonight. Uh, in the last couple months, I've seen a lot more nature uh, than I have over the last several years. Um, first time that I ran on the Cadam Park Greenway, I saw an owl, which uh was really neat. Um, twice in the last two months, I've seen otter in the Hall River. Uh, which made my day. Um, but I also kind of reflect on that and realize that maybe we shouldn't be seeing those animals um out so close to my home and, you know, where there's so many people. Um, I also note that some of my neighbors in Binham have lost animals to coyotes and have noted um, you know, perhaps displaced coyotes um, that are now getting a little too close to home. Um, so I wanted to just talk about that here tonight. Um, as you evaluate uh, the small area plan. Um, what I see in that is is verbiage alluding to uh, conservation efforts. And when I look at the map, I just I I don't see as much green space as I personally would like to see. Um and then again in the in the verbiage, um there seems like there is plans for um you know, further conservation efforts. Um, I don't have it right in front of me, but there's a a plan to get uh I think there was fines for or or um payments from homeowners and businesses to pay for those conservation efforts. And again, I just

think as you consider this plan that perhaps we slow that down. Um just because you know especially when it comes to conservation once something is built it's really hard to go back and conserve after that. Uh it's kind of a final decision. So again as I um see these creatures that are amazing and and uh enjoy the land. I just um I I hope that uh we kind of slow things down and make sure that everything is fleshed out before approving it. Um and really appreciate uh yall's work to make this place such an amazing place. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, that's the end of our uh public comment period this evening. We will do check presentation now. You want to join me at the podium.

Right. Yeah. So, um, mayorship and mayor proin, thank you so much for and all who serve town of Pittsburgh, thank you so much for allowing me to be here this evening and, um, providing flexibility um, to present this check for $25,000 um, uh, for storm preparedness. I'm Sarah Stevens. I am your new like two months in Duke Energy District Manager. So, I'm here on uh those stormy days and I'm here on the blue sky days, too. So, you all have my contact information. Please don't hesitate to call me. Um I represent Durham, Orange, Lee, and Cadam counties, and I'm here to work with you. So, happy to do this.

Thank you. And this is for the police, correct? Police. Yes. Where do we This all came about because of Sharon did once they got approval for that they started out all keep everybody interested participate emergency plans.

Sarah, thank you. Okay, three public hearings this evening. The first one is for an annexation of Ree Farm Pittsboro LLC A.202504 PB25468. So I'll take a motion to enter the public hearing. So move. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim Bald. Second. Second, Commissioner Foley. All those in favor say I. I. Right.

Good evening. Uh in your in your packet tonight, there is a uh complete application here for the Ontario contiguous annexation petition for a portion of uh Reeves Farm. Uh petition is in here. There's a vicinity map as well. Some in the middle perhaps not. Uh anyway, it is fully contiguous. The meets and bounds are in here as well. And there is an ordinance to uh adopt as well as a statement from the clerk that this is u met sufficiency required.

Thank you. Um there's no one signed up to speak for the public hearing. Uh sir, [Music]

my name is Patrick Bradshaw. practice law at 128 Hillsboro Street in Pittsburgh and I represent Reeves Farm Pittsboro LLC. As you all are aware, the zoning conditions for Reeves Farm and the UDO require the owner to petition for for annexation before subdivision or site plan, but not that the property actually be annexed before the subdivision or site plan. So, the Reese Farm Pittsboro wanted me to advise you that it only consents to annexation to be effective when the preliminary subdivision plan for phase one of the development is approved. We respectfully request that any motion to approve the annexation either be conditioned on approval of the phase one subdivision plat or that you defer voting on it until after the phase one plat has been approved. And I also point out to you that the property that's being annexed is the same property as the phase one subdivision plat. So we really need to know that that plat is approved before you know what property you should annex. Understood?

Well, that that was my only concern with the annexation petition was that uh I think there's some some a lot of questions about uh agenda item 6.2 to the actual development agreement for this Reeves Farm project. And so, um, I would suggest we we delay that, uh, annexation petition. Uh, other commissioners, I have Yeah, just maybe, uh, Randy, you can, uh, head me in the right direction on this. Why would we want to not annex this at this time? Is

that from the request? I'm not I'm not sure. I would assume that most of this is going to be sold. Sorry. You you're referring to the uh development agreement? Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. As as their council pointed out, the cross-hatched area is the actual annexation area. It's also the first phase subdivision and it is also the topic of the other item.

And if if we do not approve the annexation tonight, where does that put them back into queue? Is it a start over us for uh um uh what am I trying to say? The uh to get a letter out or does it go back one month? Do we have to start back all over with the annexation? In view of how long I think this this evening's meeting is going to be, I would assume it would just circle back around after those items were if that was the board's pleasure. I don't know. Although I

disagreement about just that I think that the development agreement is quite substantial and we literally got complete document 36 minutes ago. So, um, and and given that the attorney for the developer has suggested either a a text amendment to the annexation petition or delaying it, I think the cleanest thing is just to delay it. No concern about annexing. That's what what changes are there with the new document development agreement? Oh, that's a wonderful question for the We can deal with that.

Let's do them one at a time. I mean I think at a minimum this it's a voluntary annexation and that is saying they don't consent to it at this time. So table can't do it could close hearing and move this uh to an action item number 8.2 or something. Okay. Um, I mean, yeah, no one signed up to speak at the public hearing, so I'll take uh take a motion to close the public hearing. Moved. Mr. Bonnets. Second.

Second. Vos, any discussion? I'm still not sure why we can't go ahead with this amendment for this annexation. Mr. Messik, any It's as as the mayor indicated, it's a voluntary annexation, which means that the applicant has asked for it to be annexed. You've heard tonight that they're asking for it to be annexed only if the plant is approved.

Is this their decision or ours? to annex is your decision, but when it's the when the voluntariness when the request is being made effective is theirs. I think you're talking about a half hours difference. I'd like to make a motion to approve the annexation.

If we can offer an amendment approve the annexation contingent on the approval of the pre preliminary plat. You have to have a de development agreement before the preliminary plat. Correct. I can do that. Mr. Messi, is that work? I think you got to go out of public hearing though. I don't Oh, this is discussed. That's correct. Um, any other discussion? All right. All those in favor of leaving public hearing. Okay.

Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. All right. We are out of public hearing. We are still in the item. Would you like to make a motion? Make a motion to approve the annexation per the uh make a motion to approve the uh annexation for reforms. Do you want to make it contingent on contingent on the area action? Yeah, action 82 development group. So are we going to discuss that portion? It needs to be contingent upon the plan being approved and then the discussion comes when discussion after that we can discuss.

That's the motion for the annex. Yes. Okay. Is there a second for that? Second. Mr. F. Any other discussion about that motion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Up next, we have a public hearing for the Reese Farm Development Agreement. I'll take a motion to go into public hearing. So move. Mayor Proen Baldwin second. Second. Commissioner votes. All those in favor say I. I. I post. All right.

Mayor Commissioners, good evening. As we set forth in the memo in the your agenda package, the development agreement is required in this particular instance because of the conditions that you all put on the resoning of the property back in 2023. Um it says prior to the site plan or preliminary subdivision approval, the applicant uh was supposed to submit uh and obtain approval of a development agreement. And so that's what they have proposed to do. They've submitted the um proposed development agreement. And uh just before you this evening um just to repeat a little bit about what a development agreement is. It's to ensure the adequacy of public facilities and encourage capital improvement planning while providing certainty in the process of obtaining development approval and reducing economic cost of development. Um this particular development will have benefits obviously to the uh developer and to the town as well. Um annexation would be one option for uh increased tax revenues. There will be other benefits as well from the increased traffic and increased uh commercial activity or in the residential activity that's being proposed in the development. Um there is a draft of the development agreement attached in your agenda package which was um the state of things a week ago or whenever the clerk's deadline for uh agenda materials was implemented. Um but in the meantime since then there has been revisions of the development agreement. Uh the final version of it is at your table tonight. Uh there's no particular substantive difference between what was on the agenda package and what's before you tonight except for a couple of uh items. There have been some improvements to the

recreation area um description of the multi-use path in the U in the document that's the wording in the document before you. It's satisfactory to the town's recreation director. There were some changes in the traffic analysis with respect to traffic projections. Uh those changes are also satisfactory to the town's engineer. Um the only other significant change was that uh change in the uh to allow the ability of the developer to assign portions of its responsibilities under the development agreement to prospective purchasers of the property when pieces of it are sold to various uh builders. in the course of doing this thing. So, whoever the assigned rights and obligations of the development agreement are, because they're the subsequent owners of the property, they they will be responsible for complying with whatever the terms of the development agreement are. Um, except for that, it's the same document that you've seen in your agenda pack. Um, it's pretty standard garden variety development agreement. requires your approval and has uh exhibits to be attached to it that are basically all the documents in our existence that relate to this particular project. The UDO um than the other documents they are the benefit to the developer is that uh the rules and regulations of the town uh that apply to this development will be fixed as of the date of the uh adoption of the development grant. So um there will be changes that are possible in the future but basically the rules today if you do it today uh will be applicable to the develop if yall have any specific questions about any of the provisions of the development agreement I'll try to answer

I do it's probably more staff related I just want to be uh clear on how the staff's handling the TAS is there any difference I It's been referred to three times. So I'm I'm just piquing my curiosity.

Understanding that there has been a TIA for the preliminary plat. Mr. Coley can address that when he comes up on on that uh matter if you like. the changes are for future developments as they get into the internal uh layout of the residential lots and uh traffic studies for for those uh those lots and making sure that um you know depending on what the uses are that are being proposed that that the streets will be adequate for that. So that's the purpose in the first place. Okay.

Anything else? What was the uh changes on the multi-use plan? Multi-use path. Yeah. Uh basically is to say that it's going to be built in sections because depending on who owns what portion of it that is adjacent to that particular area that's shown on the map, they will be responsible for constructing the multi-use path. Thank you. It's not it's not going to be built in phase one. It will be built only the portion that's shown on the phase one map would be built in phase one. Excuse me. I'm talking about the greenway. I get them multi-use path.

That just begs the question. So let's say uh builder one is on the southeast corner, builder two is in the northwest corner. Does that mean the path won't meet until the last builder developer builds it? It won't be complete until the last builder builds that section. Yes. Okay. I understand your answer.

I appreciate that clarification. I mean, uh, multi-use paths and greenways are transportation, and they're not very useful if they're not connected. Yeah. You're riding on pavement and then you're riding on mud. That's not a plan. If the mud is an undeveloped area, the purpose of the multi-use path is not needed. It's only for the developed area that you want to have the multi-use path. and if it's being built as that section is being developed.

So, let's talk about uh Highway 64 business. Uh there will be a path right across that. Is that correct? Mr. Coley, would you like to come up and help with that? Sorry, can you repeat that? I was looking at my screen, but I'm brownie. We are concerned about the continuity when it comes to bike paths and multi-use paths. So, if uh one part of the development agrees to develop the southeast section,

they're going to build their path. But what if uh the central person never develops and we're going to have a we're going to have a gap in that pathway? We do we have any discussions on that as staff? to with with my acknowledgement and with this project that was brought before the planning board that the multi-use path was to be built within phase one. Oh, the whole thing. Yes. That correct? Change tonight though. That's what we're saying.

Yeah. I don't have private that um but that's what was voted on and what was recommended by the planning board. uh reflected here. How is it reflected in here? Each developer have a copy of that. It did say developer shall construct the multi-use path during the first stage of construction of the project. Now the version here says developer shall construct portions of the mult section 33. 33. Thank you. uh developers shall construct portions of the multi-use path during construction of portions of the project that are adjacent to such portions of the multi-use path.

Okay, if I can comment on this issue from the concern that we had wasn't so much that it would be subsequent developers building a multi-use path. It was that if you build a multi-use path along the entire front of along West Street adjacent to property that's not been developed yet, when you come in to develop that property and put in new uh road connections, you're going to tear the path up and have to be reconstructed.

So sections of the path would be destroyed in the future and be rebuilt. That's the real concern. Okay, that's that's an understandable concern and and we do that all the time with roads and thorough affairs and this is a a transportation infrastructure for bicycles and pedestrians and that's appropriate. It's appropriate that he be connected. I think one of my concerns is that the town is getting the parkland donated further west on 64 and so then if this project never progresses we won't ever have a multi-use path connection to that land like from phase one for example. So if phases additional phases never happen then we wouldn't have a multi-use path connection to the the parkland that's going to be further west. Um, so I wonder if we could put like a a time constraint in there is, you know, either or if by phase or in a period of years or something like that.

My client has just proposed here by sign language is that they'd be willing to commit to complete construction of the entire multi-use path within five years after approval of the phase one building years. I mean, how does that compare to their phasing plans currently? That's better.

Good evening. My name is Jody Lol, but I'm not representing the developer. The phasing with multi-use path it is concurrent with the uh donation of public recreation area along the front. So the entire frame of 64 that we own will be donated. You know we have that dimensional standard. I think it's 100 ft or 140 ft. So the multipath will go along with when those donations of those public recreations will occur and we're happy to construct it with those donations as we face project. We think the project is probably a seven to eight year project. Five years will go early. We there's still that out parcel that won't let the multi-use path connect. So we don't own the entire frontage. So if you think about phase one, phase two being up to Robbertson Creek and the primary frontage and the primary open space and primary park system, we can commit to a sooner time on that. It's that last third piece all the way down that doesn't connect to the existing system, if you will.

Okay. So, um five years I think is is enough time to get all that constructed, get through all the part donations and deliver that to Pittsburgh. Miss Keller has indicated consent to that. Mayor, I didn't sign up, but may I be heard briefly on behalf of the owner? As Mr. Messik mentioned the zoning conditions for Ree Farm require the owner to obtain approval of a development agreement from the town prior to site plan or subdivision approvals. For a number of months, we've been working with the town staff on the subject matter of this agreement. On uh September 12th, I believe it was, we submitted a full draft of the written agreement to the town and we've been working on it with them since then. And of course, at your agenda deadline, a copy of the agreement was submitted and was placed on the town website. We've continued to work with the town attorney and the staff on some modifications that they requested after that draft was submitted. And I believe we've come to resolution on all of the issues that have been raised. Uh this agreement provides detailed standards and a process for the creation of the affordable housing that's required by the zoning conditions for Reeves Farm. It provides for Ree Farm Pittsburgh to dedicate over 45 acres of public recreation area and to contribute a half a million dollars to an escrow fund as a fee in loot payment that will be used by the Reese Farm Pittsburgh developer to construct improvements on the dedicated land. They will also construct and design or design construct a 6,000 foot long paved greenway and pedestrian trail

interior to the property. We're not talking now about the multi-use path, but they've also agreed to design and construct that multi-use path within the public recreation areas. The agreement also includes provisions that bring clarity to Reeves Farm's obligations regarding transportation and public and private utilities. We believe this development agreement that's before you satisfies the requirements of applicable law and zoning conditions for Reeves Farm Pittsboro and respectfully request that you approve the agreement with the few changes that were presented to you left on your table tonight. Thank you. Are we are we agreement with the five years? I'm I'm still trying to process it and I'm I'm not very comfortable with it. Um you know what are what are the uh means of uh enforcing that or securing that? Um Mr. Messi, can you speak to that? like the the means of enforcing the five-year

it's in here

would be like any other provision of the development agreement would be enforceable according to its terms depending on whether it be considered to be a major default or or not. Um obviously permits can be withheld uh in the future if there's not compliance. Um, and it's just like any other provision in the development plan, affordable housing, the recreation area, any of those things. The agreement provides for what you do in that event. The the development agreement can be terminated if it's um, you know, serious enough to fall and then there would be no authority to go forward with any other development. But short of that, you know, hopefully that if there were an issue that would come up, the parties could agree and make some accommodation and and go forward. But bottom line is the town has the authority to terminate the agreement if there's a default and um it's a serious one and there's no no effort to cure it.

Mr. IC on the affordable housing section. Is there any changes? Not from the draft that was in the agenda package. Notice there had been some talk about changes, but that that's been resolved. And the 500,000 fee loo escrow for public recreation area A, which one is that? Or is that constructed in phase one? Uh it's it would be it would be p deposited upon construction plan approval for phase one public recreation area a that is going to be used for is that yes

I mean that's in the escro language about the physical public recreation area A is physically located in phase one that yes yes got a thumbs up from Yes. Public recreation area A is 22.4 acres around pond and that's in phase one and that will be constructed. Okay. Because my concern was what that 500,000 is going to be five years from now but that will be part of phase one. That'll be part of phase one. Yes.

Jody, may I ask a question? Yes. So I think uh you know an earlier um question uh of discussion between yourself and staff had to do with the programming of the surface of the water itself. Right. And uh your contention that that that is active recreation and uh how was that resolved?

We came to concurrence that it is active recreation. Um it's it it got a little complicated in that we took the surface area. So the 500,000 is equatable to the surface area of that pond. So we there is the true land donation of 45 acres that meets the total units that are being proposed for affordable housing that got to the 112 affordable housing units that will be built and we're not doing fee in lie of and we've didn't put a cap on. Um and so we we in essence purchase an extra seven acres of public active recreation which is the surface of the park. So people can fish, we can put a dock out there, we can activate that edge and make it a beautiful park. And um I think the language in the uh development agreement allows for a good collaboration between town staff and ourselves to do the programming and find the means and methods to spend that $500 to the benefit of the town. 500,000

500,000 you try I have a question for you. Hold on before we get off. Where does it where does it talk about that like surface area calcul? Okay. So that was when you say an extra I mean it says like fe and lucha satisfy the obligation for 12 and 12 acres. Yes. Are you saying that was that's the you know prior to the last board of commissioners meeting that was the valuation of the land.

So if you the the assumed value the 40,000 an acre 500,000 that's 40,000 each year 12.5 acres which is above and beyond where we needed to be and way above the actual units that were be constructed. So, I'm sorry I'm so a little confused.

It was a little So, if you read the UN UDO for 1,488 units of 133rd an acre, we needed to provide 45 acres. We have done that in true land donation along the frontage and the linear power of the senior. There is an additional in the 500,000 that we agreed to provide to stimulate the development of that park. We were given a consideration of additional public recreation area. So we we met the true spirit of the UDO with the land donation, the surface area and the extra acres was that $500,000 that goes towards the development of the pond. It's a unique accounting, but if we didn't the town did not want to set precedent on counting the pond as surface area, active recreation. So, we took care of the actual land donation, but then backed into some accounting for the pond. I correct me myself, mayor. uh in 3.5 it talks about in the course of development if the public recreations areas have all been dedicated and and there are additional dwelling units that are be would be permitted then the developer is entitled to use 7acre pond uh as a public recreation area dedication count towards that

but only for affordable housing or multif family Commission in a way it's disapp if if the market changes and we wanted to do additional multif family we've already paid into the public recreation it is really the kind of caveat that you know 45 acres that are the you know by code by The UDO 133rd an acre for the resident is 45 acres round numbers. We are contributing that in true land value and then bought in essence security in case re farm wants to densify and we come back and change the plans at a later time

and and in the event that you choose to densify in future uh if you choose to densify in future that $500,000 would be a fee in L. Yes. for the additional public recreation areas. I think I'm understanding it better now. It's it was a unique discussion and um but in essence again we've met the UDO and the true land donation and then the 500,000 becomes the additional aggregate public recreation fee and above in case the market changes world changes and we need to densify the project.

The 500,000 would only be paid in escrow. No, no. We're going to pay it in escrow and it's going to go to the the lands around the pond and develop that park. And so we will we will pay it goes into a escrow account with a u construction got the time. Yeah. construction documents will go in um parks and recreation department and rearm Pittsburgh will begin working together on program design and we will construct those facilities on that park area in phase one regardless of whether they fire or not right

it was a unique account but in essence you know we're we're you know by the UDO we were supposed to buy the 25 acres with the additional 12 acres based upon the valuation you know we're 57 acres plus in public recreation area by means of that fee public recreation or active recreation public recreation is active recreation it's the same if you read the UDO there's not a differentiator between active recreation public recreation you have common open space and you have public recreation area.

Okay. Um the staff agrees with that. I think the point of this is that this is going to be a $500,000 active recreation area whether any other recreation areas in town are active or not. You have some land on the Mikey Road that's not an active recreation area. We have some property on Robertson Creek. It's not an active recreation area, but this will be Mr. Loff, thank you for explaining it. I am I am still u

I'm still really um uh trying to get my head wrapped around the whole thing. And and I'll be honest with you that I I had before we even started the conversation, I would really have preferred to table this for certain until the next meeting. Um I I will feel a lot more comfortable with it at that point. I'm confident. Um so I'd like to ask you about the affordable housing yes agreement that you have. uh explain to the public exactly what it is, what you're offering, and I have a couple questions.

Okay. So, for Reese Farm Pittsboro in our zoning condition, we agreed to provide 7 and a half% of affordable housing. Two and a half% of that would be between 30 and 60 AMI. How how much? Two and a half and a half% two homes. 37 units. 37 units

above the total density, right? Okay. So, if you in the current density target is 1,488 units, 7 and a half% of that is 112 units divided by three, that's 37 in each category. So, 37% of the homes will be between 30 and 60 AMI. 37 of the homes will be between 60 and 80 AMI. And 37 of homes will be above the 80% AMI. So that's 112 units. Um in the discussions with staff they asked us to please provide the units and not do it in fee in lie of and we have agreed to do that for you know Corbett Landing paid a fee in lie of it's in the UDO but we agree through the development agreement that we would take that option out of it. Again it's generous and I do appreciate the I'm curious is are these deed restricted homes?

Yes. Okay. And who monitors that portion?

I might be able to address that one, Commissioner Foley. So really the only thing that this development agreement adds to the zoning condition on this is it gives examples of how to calculate qualification for the three AMI levels. And then it also has a deed restriction provision that says before the units are conveyed, they will be subjected to a deed which has been submitted to and approved by the town. that keeps the first two categories of AMI in affordable housing for at least 30 years and the third category which is the highest income level for 15 years. So there will be deed restrictions. They will be submitted to and approved by the town in advance uh and they give the town this assurance that these they will remain in this affordable housing qualification or category for those restricted periods.

Okay. Thank you Mr. Bradshaw. All right. Um, we have one person signed up for public comment. So, uh, Davis, you want to come up?

I'm Davis Lindsay Weisbecker, 99 Reeves Road. So I just I had to educate myself on development agreements before coming here. But it seems to me that the issue before you is whether this development agreement is in the best public interest for the community. This is not just administrative review. So as such I think it is important again to give the agreement the time and consideration necessary to ensure it is in fact in the best interest of the community. there's reasonable likelihood that those involved in approving this agreement will not be available to resolve questions eight or 10 years down the road or maybe just won't remember what transpired. So I think careful attention to specificity is important for practical and legal reasons and I think that's a lesson that um you all have learned from recent experiences with other large developments. So, I've noted a few areas of development agreement that I feel could be strengthened to best meet the public interest, and I've tried to ground these in what I understand is required and allowable for these instruments um by statute and by the UDO. Um the goals of the Pittsburgh land use plan, your your comprehensive document, and then just pain points that I that seem to come up over and over in deliberations around these their large developments. So first off, the statute the statutes allow for development agreements to include phases and other defined performance standards to be met by the developer and I believe performance standards for commercial and non-residential development and occupancy by phase would be in the best interest of the community without any minimums or standards placed on these commercial or non-residential uses. We could end up with an entirely residential development across all the phases. For example, while many commercial uses are allowable in the character map that corresponds to their phase one plat that you'll see tonight, only residential housing is actually planned. Um, and I believe the development agreement represents an opportunity to ensure that the reefs farm is the re recreate work play development that we all want it to be and that's their tagline that they add in their documents. Um, on the same note, I believe to the extent possible,

the development agreement should set standards for when and where affordable units will be built. um in relation to these market rate units because I really feel that we need mixed income and affordable housing now, not 10 years from now. Um the second piece is that any provisions to protect environmentally sensitive lands are required to be included in the development agreement. And while a large portion of the project area falls within the natural resources conservation target area delineated in your land use plan, no provisions are described to protect these lands at all. Could tree canopy targets, limits on unpermable surfaces, wildlife corridors, or other approaches be negotiated? Anything? Um, and I'm not saying this to be snarky snarky, but truly if nothing can be done, then I wonder if the town should just amend the land use plan and delete chapter 6 because I've never seen a single recommendation put into place over the years that I've been that I've been coming to these meetings and watching these meetings. Um, and just to point out that the Robinson Creek waters are draining to Town Lake, which you all know was recently impacted by flooding. So, I just think it's important that we learn from what has worked and not worked in the past. Take steps necessary. Um, that, you know, 10, 15 years from now, everybody, all parties are going to look back and say this was the right way to plan a large development. Are there comments or questions from the board?

I have one maybe um for staff. How do how does staff feel about these uh amendments or the final version? The version that is on your uh tables is acceptable to the town staff. And when did they get this? They who staff they seen pieces of it as gone along for the lake. Did they get this one we just got? Um they've seen pieces of it. They haven't seen the whole Did they get this one we just got?

They have not gotten that. They've looked at the pieces. Miss Keller has looked at the recreation area pieces. U the engineers looked at the traffic parts. And I believe Heather has been copied on all it. I feel a little more need to table this till we have a little more staff involvement or iron out iron out some of the differences. I'll move we table this proposed breach farm uh development agreement until board meeting close the public hearing. Oh, excuse me. Certainly. Take a motion.

Move to close the public hearing. All right. Thank you. Second. Second. Thank you. Mr. Votes. All those in favor say I. I. I. I'll move to table the proposed farm Pittsburgh LLC development agreement uh until the next town board meeting. Is there a second? Second discussion. We'll say Mr. Vost second. Uh any discussion?

Yeah, I I received this actually I received four amend amendments the agenda in four days. We meet once a month and this is entirely unacceptable. It doesn't make us look good when we receive a copy of this agreement hours before the meeting. It doesn't make us look good. And uh I move to table it al agreed that we should table it. I won't make a movement motion but I I just on principle this last minute is unacceptable to me as a commissioner. I represent we represent the town and we can't act like this. That's all I wanted to say about it. Any other discussion?

No, but I do have to say basically we definitely need to have all of our questions ready so when they come back they can give us concrete answers because it seems like there is a lot of things which are sort of up in the air and don't have concrete answers. So we need concrete answers, concrete questions so they can give us concrete answers. Can you give an example where what do we

Well, you were talking about on Commissioner Bonnets said he was confused about the $500,000 for the fee and L. So what was it that he was unsure about that they can expand upon?

Do you want to talk about that? basically that developer be will be reimbursed once the design and the construction goes forward. Was that some of the concern or whatever the specific concerns were in reference to this degree this agreement and also the same thing with affordable housing if there's questions about affordable housing then we want to go on and have those ready so they can respond to those and answer those particular questions feedback. Thank you. Any other discussion? All right. All those in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? What was the motion? I'm sorry. Can you repeat it? You table it till the next meeting. Okay. Can you repeat it? I haven't voted yet. I Okay. In favor. In favor. Yes. Okay. All right. Um, up next is a public hearing for a reasonzoning request, PB25358, 102 Park Drive. Uh, I'll take a motion to open the public hearing. So, go ahead, Commissioner Vos. Uh, second. Mayor Proin Baldwin.

Yes. All those in favor say I. I. Um, we're going to start with Commissioner Foley.

First off, let me say that as as a real estate broker, I've had some people question whether or not I should be voting on this. And I just want to clarify what I do, how I get paid, and so that everybody sees that this is an ethical vote on my side. Well, as a realtor, as a broker, how do I get paid? I get paid by the seller or the buyer of a property. If I I list a house to sell, I get my commission from the seller of that house. I get paid by the seller. If I if I help somebody buy a house, I get paid by the buyer. In this case, with all brokers, all brokers have their own firms that they have to report to. I report to VRC, which is part of this. VRC is represented today. But what I do, I have to pay VRC a portion of my commission. So in a way, I'm paying them. They don't BRC does not pay me. So I don't benefit at all by voting yes or no to anything because uh there's nothing financially inappropriate with that. And I'll I'll defer to uh Mr. Messik if you have an opinion on that. I'd be happy to listen.

I think the issue or the is whether or not uh a decision that you make has some financial impact upon you. It it does not. So I defer to the board. He thinks it's appropriate for me to vote. Discussion. Well, from my understanding, you don't have to recuse yourself unless you are receiving some type of financial impact. I am not. That's from my understanding. Correct. And the board would have to vote to refuse excuse to sell.

Right. Again, I I get paid by the sellers and the buyers. I do not get paid by VRC. Actually, I pay VRC for office space. I pay 30% of my commission for office space, for for desk space, for advertising. So, I'm actually paying them for me to use their services. So, I I get nothing at all with this result. I wanted to share that because I want to be upfront and and ethical. So, love to hear some feedback or comments.

Thank you for sharing that, Commissioner Foley. Uh my understanding is that u everything that's been said is accurate. It is um uh I guess it was in ethics training in my first few months in uh this role as a town commissioner that I understood from the institute of government that it's um I think the wording was it's actually difficult to recuse oneself uh and that there has to be a clear and direct payment into one's pocket as an elected official in order to be able to recuse oneself. Um, I questioned that at the time. U, but, uh, that's I I admire your having stated and and clarified things.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mayor Fley. I agree. I appreciate you uh, speaking up on this, but I feel like you still are an employee of of BCR. No, BRC paycheck from them. No, no. Again, my people who pay me, BRC does not pay me. The sellers and the buyers of homes or land pay me.

Well, that that would be on you to make that decision, but I I feel a little hesitant about it. I wouldn't feel comfortable voting on the issue if I was in that realtor business like that. Again, it's just about making money and I I don't there's no benefit one way or the other for me for this. So, um I bring that up. I'm I'm I'm completely forward with it. You've never since I've been a commissioner, you've never seen a John Foley for sale sign. I I'm not a commissioner. As a matter of fact, David Price, our our representative for this state the longest time was a commissioner, was a a real estate agent. And so there's there's precedent there. Um, and that that's all I have to say to leave it to the good the good faith of my board to understand that I am an ethical man and I will do what's right for these these this community.

Thank you. Any other questions discuss that back to the slides?

All right. Good evening. Um, we've received a legislative request by uh PRC Limited for uh petitioning a map amendment for reszoning parcel 79930 from its current classification R12 medium residential to C2 highway business. do want to point out that this particular of the alpha center in this photograph here is currently zoned C2. So it would be uh basically the next parcel back being zoned in an identical way. Um the tree line behind

yes go to the next slide. There we go. All right. So, as I say, this is the request. It's 3.78 or SE 728 acres. It is located essentially behind it. It's the next parcel over where you see the star currently vacant. and the request that showed up in the application which is included in your packet request for utilizing this parcel for offices and residential uses which a C2 district does allow. So go to the next slide. This basically shows the land use plan on the left, which obviously this request is not consistent with. The area that is sort of the red color up there or whatever color that is on this screen is actually a um is actually a um mixeduse activity center. They want to be real clear. This is the current zoning on the right hand side. On our next slide, we will see. And there's an aerial right here of the site next door. The next lot is the one that we're actually talking about and it's crosshatched in that picture up there. Um, at the request of the mayor, and I do appreciate being asked this because it's actually a very valuable tool. Included in your packet on about the third page of fourth, fifth page of this is a comparison between the current zoning, which is R12, and the C2 uh highway district. uh there are some rather significant things. This is a general use uh reszoning as opposed to conditional use resoning. So when you um forfeit the uh R12 designation which is

predominantly a residential uh use with some u very small number of commercial type uses. um you hold on to some of the same, but you basically pick up 41 new permissions that you did not have. And they are listed here. A couple of items are that a family care home requires a special use permit in a residential district, but in this district, it is a use by right. And a group home requires a special use permit here. It's not allowed at all in a residential. Um you do have sort of your usual sorts of things that you would associate with highway business like um kennel indoors and out bed clinic uh community center as a use by right cultural facility nursing home. Again we get into the office portion of this which would be medical or dental or you can have an office park. You can also set up I'm sorry about that. It might you can also set up a park and ride terminal here. Um you can collect solar energy here. Um also restaurant, specialty food service, bar, nightclub, office building, adult establishment, special use permit, micro brewery. Um private recreation facility outdoor and private entertainment rec facility outdoor. Um of course gaming operation would require special use permit. put a convenience store there, farmers market, retail sales, uh and then there are some automotive uses that are um it's a somewhat exhaustive list after that. So essentially um the reason for the staff recommendation to approve despite the fact that it does not it is not consistent with the land use plan is the very fact that the property in front of it is commercial. Currently in in traditional zoning as opposed to conditional, you do take into consideration the neighboring properties. Having said that, let me also draw your attention to the fact the

majority of the property that abuts this on three sides is in fact residential. So it's sort of a coin toss in my training. That's my speech. Thank you. [Music] questions, comments?

Yeah, I have several. Um, C2 just opens this zoning up to anything. Just about anything can go tire recapping, um, adult establishments, it just goes on and on. It's just opens it up for everything. Um question I had in here was um also Randy I believe it said that they were going to use the ingress and egress off of uh the alpha center. That was the petitioner statement at the plan. Okay. And five years down the road, 10 years down the road, does that not mean that they can put a driveway on Park Drive?

The issue with Park Drive, I think if you go back a slide or two, let's surprise me and see how I did. Okay. Whoa. Actually, that was it. Go back. There you go. See that nice big green area there? That is wetlands area. It is also um contains a blue line stream. So, could you put a driveway there? Yes. Would it be costly? Yes. It would involve more than one permit. One from the state, one, you know, 401 404. Um but can it be done? Sure. It's in a flood plane that area as well. So, um, that picture there is basically a sort of a nice representation of gosh, there's a lot of environmental potential for Yeah. But then again, that said, there's also a house next door that did the same thing. And clearly, the Alpha Center has a side driveway and a front driveway,

which we discussed at length at the planning board meeting. That that's how that matter came up, right? But there's no conditions here. Absolutely not. One other question, sir. On the application, it says prior resoning case. It says no here. Did we not see this about two years ago? I believe it was a conditional reasoning two years ago. Yes, sir. I I did not help prepare the application. The applicant is here. Oh, goody. Okay. born that

I don't know is it yes or is it no with ERC limited I did not prepare that application my knowledge of it such as it is is that it was conditional it was not passed because you were currently about to start on your reszoning your new zoning plan and it was going to be folded into that however staff staff turnover and institutional memory were such that it never got included in that new zoning plan. So, we're back. The the question I'm sorry, his question was this application says I did. Sorry. You prepared back there.

Got you. I'm sorry about that. His question was this application that you prepared says this was not subject to a prior resoning case, but it was in 2022. was conditional, not like this and it was okay. It was a different kind of zoning application with less uses. Yeah. Am I starting or It seems to me it's still a prior resol case.

I I think my my question here is it it says the owner intends to utilize this pro this parcel for offices and residential uses. I don't think we should state the owner's intentions in a reasoning like this, but uh you know they didn't go for O andi or conditional O andi or even the office uses that would be allowed in the current zoning um you know are not acceptable I guess. So that that's my concern is like the additional uses like like you mentioned adult establishments, tire recapping, you know, those type of things are not well most specifically uh give you a couple of things. First, the petitioner provided that information the application. So I do my report. My report is based entirely on their information. If they were on another planet and this was the only way I could find out anything about it, that's basically how I treat it. Um, we did talk about it, but only briefly. Um, and there is a very long narrative in here. But let me also say that when you turn in a conditional reasoning and you uh do your decline, regardless of the rationale, when you bring it back, if you're trying conditional again, your new application needs to be substantially different because the way the law and this and I'm sorry, we having multiple attorneys around here, so I have a very strong feeling I'm getting ready to get lasered. But um what I was going to say is in this state essentially you're required to come back with a different application. So if you literally pulled it out of mothballs, slapped it back up here and removed one use that's not substantial in the eyes of the school of government. My mother should. So let me just say and the American planning association for that matter. So let me just say this is a standard ukitian zoning which would be the opposite of doing a conditional. If they wanted to come back and try conditional again, I would have to take the original application, lay them side

by side, and it needs to look different enough that I I don't go, "Oh, rerun." Okay. Thank you. Otherwise, I'm not doing my job. I don't know if that helped. Other board comments before public comment. Oh um well we can still comment after public comment. So let's let's go into public comment. Well before you go into public comment my concern is all of these uses that are in C2.

Yes ma'am. And then a lot of the residents have responded indicating that they are not in favor of this reszoning because of course they live close very close. So my concern again is all of these NCDC2 any of those can be there. Yes. And we receive those were said you know used by uh special use right we received feedback from the neighborhood as well and it was Yes. So that does concern me also. Yes, ma'am. I understand that. We have five people signed up for public comment. I'm going to sit. Uh you can take a break. I'm going to sit right here.

Uh up first will be Shelby Daniel followed by uh Paul Neville. Again, please state your name and address when you start and you'll have three minutes.

Hi, I'm Shelby Daniel. I live at 166 Park Drive. It's the house immediately to the west of subject property. Um, and while I believe the applicant has good intentions with their reasonzoning request, I have several concerns I'd like to bring to your attention. Um, one of which you guys have kind of hit on a lot is that it's incompatible with our neighborhood allowing all of these uses um, and a kind of quiet residential area. Um, it brings more traffic, noise, lighting. Um, plenty of people walk up and down Park Road. So, um, it's currently inconsistent with the town's land use plan. Um, it park drive isn't designed for heavy commercial traffic. and CT uses would bring more cars, delivery trucks, visitors to a narrow residential street. Um, this could create safety issues for residents, pedestrians, and put an additional strain on local infrastructure that wasn't built to handle that kind of volume. Um, and my biggest issue here is the storm water. U, this area already experiences a ton of flooding and runoff, as you can see by the green big splotch on the map. Um, the town storm water standards only require peak flow control for up to 10ear storm event. And we're seeing stronger and more frequent storms. that exceed those limits. So, even if a development here meets those minimum requirements, adding more pavement and rooftops without accounting for larger storm events will almost certainly make flooding worse for the homes downstream. Um, and then lastly, the environmental impacts. Again, the applicant has kind of mentioned their intention is to not um impact the environmental area in any way, but again, there's no conditions here that will require them to uphold that. So, thank you. Thank

you. Up next is Paul Neville, followed by Dawn McBride.

My name is Paul Neville. I live at 194 Park Drive, just a few doors down from the subject property for this reasonzoning. Um, and I'm here to speak against the reasoning. You'll be hardressed to find anybody lives on Park Drive who's in favor of this. By the way, Park Drive is in a flood zone. On July 6th this year, we had a heavy rain. My property and my neighbor's property and park drive flooded to the extent that my retaining wall crashed into the culvert. The next day, the the landscaping mat and the stones were in the middle of the culvert and it eroded part of my property. My next door neighbors the land around her driveway. I rode it to to the the extent that I could see the concrete had been poured about a foot deep because that her land eroded it. Next door neighbor on my other side lost her air conditioning unit had her flood her crawl space flooded and and experienced significant damage to her home because of this. Right. The next day when I looked at that, I had debris throughout my yard. Everything that the flood you would think that you would get from flood, stick, stones, dead animals, everything else, right? Had there been an emergency that night, I don't think I could have got out of my property because I couldn't get down my driveway out on Park Drive and been able to to get to had I had to leave for an emergency. Right. By the way, this is not the first time that Park Drive, Florida. I've been here since 2017. This might be the worst, but it's not the first by any stretch of the imagination. It floods all the time, right? Because of it's in a flood zone, we're mandated to have insurance, flood insurance. So, it costs us more to live on Park Drive than it does suing property somewhere else in this because we have to have flood insurance mandatory and we also have deductibles when the when we have damage through the flood, right? Reszoning will exacerbate this problem. I heard though that might be substantial changes to the plan while the plan sounds wide ranging to me. And not only that, what hasn't changed except adversely is that if park drives flood, it floods all it floods more now than it did when I first moved there. Right?

This resoning will have a negative impact on quality of life, safety, property values, right? It doesn't it not only doesn't benefit the surrounding community, it's actually detrimental to it. Right? You have to take a look this despite the fact and I find it a little bit inconsistent that both the advisory committee and the planning and the staff looked at this found out it was inconsistent or does not comport with the land use provisions and decided that they they recommend for approval anyway right I just don't see that that seems what that seems inconsistent to me right there's sufficient commercial development in Chattam Park and everywhere else we don't have to be taking residential pieces of property and just reszoning them for the hell of it right and Consequently, this isn't the type of development that we should be looking to do in Pittsburgh. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, up next is Don McBride, followed by Ed Wilson.

Hello, I'm Don McBride. I live at 324 Oakwood Drive and I've experienced the flooding further up or whatever downstream, whatever. I'm down from them. It's my neighbor. I see him walking his dog all the time. and they stop and talk. I'm concerned about my neighbors. I'm concerned about this this there's talk of building a storm water retention pond there from the person the petitioner to for this reasonzoning and that they're not without risk like drowning. Someone who's worked over 30 years with special needs kids autism spectrum are like retention mods are magnets. the greatest drowning is the number one cause of death in children with autism. So there'd have to be a fence that a child could not get through. And then also they uh there's nitrogen fixation with retention ponds and um they need to be maintained. They draw mosquitoes and yes, I am concerned about what uses of these property is going to be and um Paul already addressed the houses downstream when there's rain and that I would think that we should not do anything until we address the flooding that happens on Oakwood Drive that every time it rains it it flooded in May, June, and July of this year that water just goes right there and blocks the vote and um there's been for years it's been tabled to do something about that and I don't think this should be done until that's addressed and certainly I don't think I know that people have a right to develop their property or do whatever but we don't have a right to infringe on people in their homes and flood their homes that's all thank you

thank you for what you do thank you up next is Ed Wilson And then it looks like uh Cal Cunningham. I'm here for the owner, Mr. Mayor. So I Okay, we'll get you. I got you. I want to make sure it's the person that scratched their name out. So, okay. Um Ed Wilson followed by Sarah Moore.

Thank you. My name's Ed Wilson. I live at 90 Kensington Drive, which is very close to the property. and just wanted to say that although I very much respect the property owners right petiti to petition the board for this reasonzoning change. I'm also really grateful for the opportunity to engage in the process and speak about my opposition to the proposal. I thought a lot about what words I might choose to best convey my opposition. And then I I realized that that's not my burden. Um instead um I don't believe that I should have to explain why this is a a bad idea. I think the applicant maintains the burden to demonstrate why this resoning would actually benefit the community. And over the next couple of minutes, I'm going to tell you how they fail to meet that standard.

First, the application is very vague. In response to one of the prompts that applicant indicates, quote, "This request request is solely for resoning and not tied to any specific development proposal at this time, leaving open all of the other options that we heard about earlier. Instead of articulating a coherent vision for the property, the application is full of generic real estate buzz terms like contextsensitive infill, infrastructure efficiency while flaunting empty promises such as expanding the local economy, job creation, and a balanced and resilient growth. The application further cites a community need for additional neighborhood scale and corridorbased commercial development. I'm not sure what that is, but what I do know is that every single quiet piece of Pittsburgh doesn't need to be retrofitted into some sort of pseudo mosaic. The only economy that will be expanded by this proposal is that of the owners. Second, there's no meaningful community input. According to the application packet, it was a so-called park drive community meeting. That meeting was attended by four people. a person whose name was on the application, I think their boss, some land planning firm representative from Raleigh, and a property owner that actually lived miles away. No residents were in attendance, and every resident that I know and that's here tonight is actually not so much in favor of this proposal. The actual community residents, neighbors, families, um, are just trying to live their lives in a safe and, uh, quiet area. that community meeting, they openly talked about purchasing, acquiring, and transitioning the other adjoining lots into commercial space when and if this is approved. So, that's where you guys live. Um, Mr. Webster's old yard. They talked about that in this meeting.

Another fact that they talk about or reason is um that the property adjoins C2 space already. And if that's the case, then when does this ever stop? Everything touches something. So when does it stop? I think I demonstrated why this is a a bad idea. Um I suspect you already know what this community already does need, and that's storm water management and safe walkable roads. And I thank you for uh carefully considering how this decision actually impacts your actual neighbors. Have a good night. Thank you. Uh Sarah Moore up next. My name is Sarah Moore. I live at 66 Circle Drive. Um and I'd like to share with you why I do not support the reszoning of 102 Park Drive. The first reason is traffic. Without a north south bypass around Pittsboro, all the 501 traffic flows down Hillsboro Street. That's directly in front of Alpha Center and Park Drive. Aside from already being completely unsafe along Hillsboro in that section for pedestrians and cyclists during rush hours, it's very challenging to turn left, even in a car onto Hillsboro uh from either Park Drive or the proposed egress and ingress point Alpha Center. The second reason is noise pollution. The noise level at homes near 102 Park is already very high, mostly from traffic. That would also uh include engine braking of large trucks and sirens from emergency vehicles that have to come down Hillsboro because there's no bypass. Um but this also includes local commercial tenants that are zone C2 like smart cars that run compressors, generators, and other equipment often for 12 hours a day. Commercial construction followed by more commercial tenants will make a bad situation worse. The third reason is light pollution. The powerful all-night security lights at Alpha Center and Smart Cars already flood the yards and windows of the homes in the neighborhood, adding more

commercially zoned property will exacerbate this problem. The fourth reason is a loss of green space. The housing development boom in Pittsburgh this year has led to unprecedented development of a commercial lot at War Park will lead to clear cutting of another 4 acres right beside Pittsburgh's historical downtown. In addition, losing this vegetation will only compound the noise and light pollution issues. The fifth reason, as my neighbor explained in detail, flood risk, Park Drive is at high risk for flooding and that risk was a reality during uh this summer uh for our neighbors on Park Drive. We already know that climate change climate change is making these events both more common and more extreme. commercial zoning will lead to a drastic increase in imperial impermeable surfaces which would dramatically increase the risk of flooding for homes and businesses in that area. And the third the sixth reason is lack of need. Existing commercially zoned properties in this area could be used more efficiently uh eliminating the need for additional development. There are plenty of vacant storm uh storefronts both within Alpha Center and in down downtown Pittsboro. There's also another one of the I think proposed uses was a hotel. There's a large new hotel at Mosaic that appears to have plenty of vacancy. Um, which brings into question the need for another hotel so close. In closing, I'd like to propose an alternative option that would fulfill the promises of the Pittsburgh future land use plan, which is coincidentally very similar to what Commissioner Foley proposed earlier, which is to uh have the town instead purchase 102 Park Drive and create a public park with walking trails.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Uh no one else has signed up for the public hearing. I'll take a motion to close the public hearing. Move. Uh, Commissioner Vos second. Second, Commissioner Frell. All those in favor say I. I. Um, any other board comments or questions?

I believe the person representing the speak. Wonderful. Yeah. Okay.

Can we get a GIS map of the flood zones on top? Put up Can you put up the GIS map of the flood zoning and uh water features on Park Drive? That will be useful later on in this presentation. Thank you. Yes. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, town commissioners. My name is Jan Nichols. I'm with VRC Limited. I'm here with our attorney Joe Cunningham and an engineer Susan Joplin with the site group to support this request to reszone. We know Pittsburgh is experiencing strong growth pressures. This isn't just about new housing housing. It's about ensuring that the town's residents have convenient access to the services, retail, and employment options they need close to home. First, adding business and commercial options strengthens and diversifies the tax base. It balances the long-term fiscal stability and helps reduce burdens on homeowners. Second, zoning is a planning tool. It is meant to adapt as community needs evolve. The town has shown this flexibility before, approving reszoning, such as the plant, Cooper's Ridge, Robson's Walk, and Reeves Farm to name a few. Each of those moved Pittsburgh towards its larger goals even when they were inconsistent with the land use plan. Third, this site is well positioned for C2 zoning given ongoing infrastructure improvements. US5501 Hillsboro Street is being widened and this property lies along one of the key approaches into downtown. The upcoming

Hillsboro Street improvements will enhance access and it makes sense to locate the two properties near there. And you should have received a document that has a blowup of that section of the NC DOT plan that shows what they're planning to do in terms of drainage along 15501 and into Hillsboro Street. Fourth, site access constraints favor commercial over residential use. An environmental feature, i.e. The blue line stream along Park Drive limits direct access from that side and we would not propose to access it from that side. The proposed C2 zoning allows access from the east through the existing Alpha Center, avoiding stream crossings and preserving vegetation along Park Drive. It's more environmentally responsible and practical. Finally, NC DO's planned drainage work and right turn improvements associated with 15501's widening project will further support safe coordinated access to the site. And we're already collaborating on NC do on their plan for both containment ponds. They're also putting sidewalks along 15501 going up past the Alpha Center. So it will be a pedestrian friendly area. I would like at this point to ask Cal Cunningham to come up and join us with further responses to some of the comments.

Before Mr. Cunningham begins, Miss Nichols, can you elaborate please on the nature of the collaboration between your company or the land owner and DOT as regards storm water retention? There have been conversations where we've met with DOT. We met and talked about their plans. They've done revisions based on those conversations. And should we go forward with this, we would then look at what they need us to do along that lower section, which is actually if the flood plane map were up, you would see that there is a large section on the lower part that is in the flood plane and would not be developable.

Understood. Yeah. And I and I've heard from one of the planning board members that's the reason why that particular person favored this as commercial rather than residential because if it were residential it would have to access off a park. Right. You can't come you can't come through. The revisions that DOT is doing are they maximizing storm water retention on the front property? That I I can't answer that. Are they reducing sto I mean the goal is not to reduce. Okay. I think overall can answer this is not

commissioner bonnets let me ask your questioner BRC unlimited uh NC do obviously has worked with the town for many years on the plan to widen 1551. In fact I was the chair of the RPO when that got approved I think 15 years ago. So in government world, it takes 15 or 20 years to eventually see this happen. And the town, including yourself, have weighed in on significant changes for pedestrian access, bike lanes, etc. We met with NC DOT to try to enhance the plan. We had informed the mayor at the time a while back. It might have been well over a year ago that we wanted the plan as it came to the Alpha Center and representing the owner to have walkability and not have a dangerous ditch where you couldn't walk straight on. So they would put curb and also work with them to create some form of storm water retention and perhaps enhance that pipe down at the corner. We also reached out to DOT and said there is a perpetual flooding issue downstream. We shared video and other information from the engineer that some of the residents have discussed and said the property owner in question would like to work with DOT to figure out ways to address it either through a dry pond or a wet pond or approaching the town. We have frequently presented to the town as far back as when Brian Bruce Beck was the town manager to say, "Hey, this area could have some type of storm water detention or retention. So maybe not a wet pond, maybe a dry pond like Chattam Forest to handle this flow." DOT has made some improvements, but they deferred to the town because this is not a DOT road when you look past the improvements. But we had always hoped that to cooperate with the town. And I think more most recently we had mentioned that to the town manager that look this property owner is

open to cooperating in that area if and when something ever got built there like an office building to have a storm water detention pond that was larger than what was needed to help address the situation west and stop having the perpetual flooding. I mean, the only reason we're here is four, I think four years ago or five years ago, Spectrum wanted to rent the space where Kakalaki is now, and they wanted to have a place to park their vehicles safely, and they needed to have a gravel parking lot with a fence. And our our code at the time did not allow you to simply build a parking lot to accommodate that. So this is essentially four and a half years from that point where they came in and because of that they moved their center somewhere else. But all along the property owner has said he would be willing to cooperate with the town and its staff to figure out how to help the folks downstream because it's kind of silly that that flooding persists.

Is that Mr. Bowler? Is that operation contingent on this reasonzoning? Well, I suppose if the town were to approach and say we would like to work with that would be a separate separate conversation. But if this was reszoned and a proposal came forward during the conditional resoning, there was an actual plan if you recall for an office building and a uh storm water pond and I believe engineer, she can talk about it, Susan Jofflin. But that was the idea and they never wanted to access off of Park Drive because a it's nice to keep the buffer in the trees there and b there's no need to put an access across there if it's commercial. If it just becomes residential as you astutely pointed out earlier, it would have to have an access. So anyway, that's I hope that answers the question.

Mr. Waller, thank you for that clarification because previously what I had been hearing was that the applicant was not interested in that kind of collaborative. What I had heard was actually that the applicant via Logica wanted to increase impervious surface by expanding the parking lot or some other thing. So, um, I think the the absolutely overwhelming public interest here is best served by addressing headon storm water. And I think we've got a really unique opportunity here because of the ownership of these two pieces of land to work something out, I would hope, that truly is outstanding and an and excellent storm water retention. I'm talking 100ear standard because we've got an existing problem. I'm not saying that the organization the owner is is contributing to that but there is an opportunity here to do some tremendous public good and um

need the map. I've been I've been very frustrated because in my conversations uh it it seems like a really obvious place with an existing depression uh with existing wetland uh across the street with the fact that we know that the Hillsboro Street widening is going to increase impervious surface upstream by an acre and a half friends. An acre and a half of imperous surface as that road is widened. Right. This is an absolutely extraordinary opportunity for an extraordinary problem. Now, all of that said, I think that the complexity of this is that I'm I'm reluctant to address this matter tonight with this kind of negotiation. Well, we haven't finished our presentation.

Thank you. We would like to have the opportunity to do that. Okay. also would like to point out if you look at this map which shows the flood plane and somehow there is a stream on the west side of Park Drive that is not in the picture but there are at least seven homes that were permitted I don't know how many years ago and built in the flood plane

flooding that they are experiencing has nothing to do with Park Drive at our end they were built in the flood plane in addition, the stream that comes down on the west side, that brings a significant amount of the water that they're dealing with into that area, it is not necessarily coming from the Hillsboro street side. So, the contributions issued are not all from the east. And that's an important thing for you to consider. Now,

Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, uh, Cal Cunningham from Raleigh, it's a pleasure to be with you representing the owner of this project and encouraging your support to allow us to do effectively mirror the C2 that's on the existing Apollo Center on this three acres and we are talking about exactly why that is superior to the existing by right opportunity on this exact site. This is currently R12 and just like Kensington Place which is where some of our public speakers have come from and just as we have heard the discussion about the flooding we could go into this site and could have any time in the last I think we've owned it since uh 2018 the Alpha Center site since 2011 could have gone in and built about 10 houses single family residential houses but it would have sent us right through a blue line stream and done exactly on that site what has been a problem for the speakers who have come up right up right up uh 194 Park Drive. I'm sorry I missed his uh Miss uh Dawn McBride. She raised the flooding issue. We want to address it and we indicated in every single way that we intend to be partners in addressing it through that entire corridor. And it starts with giving us the opportunity to send everything, our traffic, our use out to Hillsboro Street, out to 15501. DOT is going to put in bike lanes. They're going to put in a sidewalk. They're going to curb and gutter it so that it becomes walkable to downtown which opens up opportunities to make this more connected to scale down from the residential that's just up this flood plane from where we intend to and we will bring in site plans for that that in are intended to address first

every aspect of the UDO but are where we're also going to have conversations about being partners to solve the problem through this whole corridor. I want you to hear us very clearly. We intend to be partners and we've signaled that all along the way, including how we address this with DOT. We don't want more traffic on Park Drive, which is why if we're C2 with the C2 at the Apollo Center, we can take everything out on the 15501. We don't want more lights and traffic. If we go in and do 10 residential units, that does not meet the highest and best concept board. And so, let me just address a couple of other things. The exact same owner that owns the Apollo Center could have done any number of the things that folks are spooked about in a C2 usage and he hasn't. We intend to be thoughtful about ways to make sure that this is consistent with this corridor. It opens up some potential for some smallcale residential office, retail, restaurant, an inn or bed and breakfast with a hotel in or bed and breakfast. That's Pittsboro. That's what McCrae wants to bring in. All the concepts have us ingressing and egressing to 15501 less traffic onto Park Drive, especially as it relates to by right. We held a neighborhood meeting. It would have been wonderful to have heard these voices in the neighborhood meeting process. The neighbors that showed we mailed out the neighbors that showed up, the Golden who live or own the tracks north here, they said they favored this. We think it helps us address the challenges for this site and in this corridor. Let me hit a couple of other things. One thing really quick because we've talked a little bit about the

future land use plan and I want to talk about the elements of it that this is consistent with among many. First of all, the land use plan says that the land use plan will be regularly updated based on infrastructure availability and capacity. Well, that's what we're talking about the improvements on 15501. It's time to think about this in terms of new improvements through that corridor. focus growth near that infrastructure with walkable commercial and service centers and away from sensitive natural resources. We're avoiding having to go through the blue line stream and the wetlands al together because we're tying to the alpha center. Support development proposals that reinforce or create walkable commercial and servicebased activity centers. This from the future land use plan evaluate existing R10 and R12 sites. and consider revisions to allow for slightly higher densities and or greater diversity of housing, including, as we talked about, the potential to do some apartments, remove barriers to attach and missing middle housing types in key areas like this, which transitions us down from Kensington Place into the existing commercial. Encourage new development that integrates medium to high density housing with mixeduse activity centers on the future land use map. This gives us the connectivity and the flexibility to bring those two sites together, address the blue line and wetlands issues. And we in fact some of the very very things that neighbors have spoken about that they are concerned about are the very reasons we think this is superior to us going in here and putting 10 single family homes through a wetlands here. Thank you. Happy to answer any questions as well. Appreciate the board's consideration,

Mr. Cunningham. What are the specific uses that the applicant is interested in that are allowed in C2 that would not be allowed in O and

I don't know as it relates to O and I. I haven't done that comparison. I know as it relates to what's existing as of right and you you were astute to ask for that comparative chart. What I've discussed with the owners and representatives is that this opens up to do small-cale apartments, office including medical office, retail, restaurant, and in or bed and breakfast. That's where that's conceptually where the owner is. And right now on the Alpha Center, there's little bit of, you know, the retail, a little bit of food, some offices. It's building off of that concept, but then transitioning and opening up the opportunity to do small amount of residential as we transition out of that neighborhood area. But again, doing it in a way, Mr. Mayor, all of it flows to 15501 and not onto Park Drive. I think those are good concepts, but with this resoning, what would prevent the owner from doing a freight terminal with access off of Park Drive? What would prevent the owner from doing a freight terminal? Uh, first of all, you've given him that idea right now, Mr. Mayor, because that has never been any part of the concept here. It's C2. If he wanted to do a freight terminal with access on the Park Drive, he's got 4.3 acres that he owns right now that he could do a freight terminal with access on the Park Drive, but he hasn't. It's C2. question.

I think I think your question mayorship gets to the my remaining issue here and that is that we don't have any conditions here really um to um reduce the number of potentially offensive uses. Um, that's uh, again, I I think that's that's really secondary to the overwhelming necessity to address storm water um, in an extraordinary way. Um, and

second, Commissioner Bonis, the applicant is speaking. Mr. Cunningham, do you have something to say to the board? I just I was questioning because we we hear that concern and want to be able to address it.

Asking the planning director whether there is a mechanism under the C2. The planning director's already briefed the board on why we didn't come back conditional because of what happened when it got taken out of consideration before the future land use plan was updated and the UDO was updated. And so I was just asking him if we had the opportunity to add conditions to the straight C2 uh without it being conditional and I'm getting his guidance on that. I'm sure you understand as well that there's not correct. Yes. And that was that was my answer. Yes. There there are not. Okay.

The way to actually achieve that is to withdraw this application, come back with a conditional actually decide. But the issue there is just they don't have a tenant which was part of my guidance on Okay, let's Sorry about that, Mr. Bonnets. Please continue. All right. Sorry for I lost my train of thought, but it's it's fine. Yeah, you were saying the overwhelming issue is

storm water. I mean, I I'm I don't mean to in any way dismiss the additional concerns and numerous concerns that residents have expressed about the possibility of a commercial development here. Um, it's just that we know that Oakwood floods and we know that there's going to be more flooding

in future and we know that there's going to be that's with without anything changing. And yet we also know that Hillsboro Street is going to be widened an acre and a half more pavement and that's going to mean a very significant amount more runoff. I I have received assurances from the manager and previously the town engineer that DOT is looking at doing something extraordinary, but we don't know what that is yet. Um, and um, I will say that I'm I'm relieved to hear that the applicant is interested in doing something extraordinary. Uh, I hope that those conversations can continue. Um, I think I think the opportunity to do something positive for that whole side of town is so tremendous. That's why I'm speaking in terms that sound favorable to this project. Storm water, I think, is the greatest challenge that I've seen this year. And you know, previously affordable housing and the quality of our drinking water were neck and neck. It just seems like it consumed all of my attention other than dealing with Chattam Park. Um, but storm water is a major issue and I just I hope that we can find something positive here, but sounds like we can't do conditions tonight. So, Mr. I was going to say about the storm water pieces obviously beyond getting the resoning approved. Your next piece is to come in with a site plan for something or a subdivision plan. At that point, when you get that approved and then you're over at construction drawings, that's when we do storm water. That is literally the way this works.

There is nothing built in where someone reszones, agrees to do a phenomenal job of treating storm water and then this land sits there for knows how long and nothing happens. You can't very well go back and say, "Hey, where's the storm water?" where the storm water occurs or the stormwater treatment occurs at the time that you get a plan in front of you for development. Right now, this is a speculative and theoretical discussion that involves some very real real life items. You know, certainly staff who came in from the outside during those times of heavy flooding were endangering themselves and bringing into question whether or not they're going to make it safely back out of here. So yes, as a person with six certifications in storm water, I can certainly tell you it's a daily concern of mine. But in this particular case, my concern is giving a false sense that a reasonzoning is going to address that issue when I feel that it is the starting point and certainly if we went back and withdrew this went into conditional, oh my god, now it's time to really go into this condition is this and this and this and as these things happen, you must do the following. You could theoretically ask them to address the underyear storm for an example. I'm not giving your client any ideas or taking any away. I'm simply saying in this in the planning board which Jay was there and I don't know who else was because I have a very short memory on those sorts of things. But we had a discussion that sort of fell apart in the middle where it was like oh this should had conditions. Yes. And it should have been a conditional reasoning if that was the case. What we could not do in that context was take it apart that night and rewrite it as a conditional unless they willingly withdrew, which I did offer as an option. So, let me just say it's not that I don't think about storm water. It's all I ever think about. I live on a lake, so obviously no no slight intended

towards that. Yeah. Thank you. Any other comments?

I'll just mention one thing. um this is a reszoning from R12 to C2 and uh storm water overall is a is an issue for the town and that we should address that immediately. But um I'll just rate my other con my other concerns at after discussion. I'd love to hear some concrete yes and nos about storm water and whether or not the owner of the property will commit to something with the town. I know it's uh it's not really something we can do until after it's reszoned. Is that correct?

That's correct. M in in this way this say again saying if they withdrew this application and came back for conditional then yes that would be a very good time to have that conversation otherwise you're relying on construction drop

pain the pain of the people downstream on park drive is considerable in Oakwood Drive uh you know that's that's the hills they get the brunt of all that lows coming down and Belmont Station that hill all funneled down into Park Drive, cross those those driveways in a flood plane through a couple of homes right on the beginning of Oakwood Drive. It's it's phenomenal. One way to one way to resolve that is to mitigate that by putting these beautiful storm water retention ponds. whether I kind of like the dry idea because it mitigates it, collects it and then then it goes down slowly and then that alleviates I think one one of our guests commented on about drownings. Uh that would eliminate that but that is something perhaps a a hydraologist can address. There's also bio retention, an example of which is at uh the vineyards, you know, gem park,

the newly completed and much improved uh storm water device over there is a bio retention cell. So yes, there's great number of things that can be done. And can you hear from the hydraologist? Well, I think I think we're getting off topic of the it's not a negotiation that we can do this easy. There any other questions or comments on the resoning? Okay. Would someone like to make a motion? The motion to close the public hearing. We did that. Second.

We already did. Sorry. Um, yeah. I I'll move that we table this Wait, if we can't if we can't modify it with conditions, then there's no point in tableling. It's a decline in a motion for denial that it's inconsistent with the land use plan and it's bordered on three sides with residential. Hear it.

I can second that. Second motion by Commissioner Ferrell, second by Commissioner Bonnets. Any discussion?

Uh my my my comments would be C the C2 zoning at Alpha Center is exactly what they're asking. what they do at the at at the Alpha Center doesn't there's no incredibly awkward businesses there. Um, if we convert it to C2 zoning and the the applicant then comes to the town and works with the town, would that not be what we need? Why are we typling this? Love to hear some comments. the motions to deny the reason.

Thank you. I can sort of answer that. I believe the reason why it is being denied is because of those number of uses in C2 because basically if you approve the C2 reszoning you can have any of these uses and that basically is not exactly what we want because if you reszone it that we can't just go back and say okay you can't put this here that here or that here because it is allowed in C2, right? And C2 is already allowed at the Alle, right?

Well, right now you're trying to change it to C2. I'm not talking about the You're correct. Yeah, that's property. Yeah. But also, as somebody else stated, just because it's a joining doesn't mean that it's automatically worked in. And if so, where does it stop? Yeah, that's what I think agreements, but I don't really think that's relevant. Yeah. One other comment I'd like to make and that is Pittsburgh is changing

and uh we we we had one guest that spoke about tax basis and how instead of putting the tax burden on the residents, we put it on commercial. And that's that's something we haven't really talked about. Um, and I I respectfully uh understand the applicant is speaking again. Mr. Cunningham, do you have something to say to the board? We have a strong sense of the board and would like to withdraw it so we can bring you back a conditional application. Oh, good. staff is very supportive of. Okay, you have to take action.

They're withdrawing. I don't think you have to take any action other than to wish me a good evening. Good evening. Thank you very much. All right. Up next. Okay. Now or do we need to withdraw the motion? Yeah. That's not right. C2's on the additional street sides. There was a motion on the floor. Mr. Mayor, I think somebody knew something. Commissioner Frell, will you withdraw your motion a lot if possible? We should have voted on it when I had the motion on the floor and a second. We should have voted. Was that

Well, that's true. But I think the the with withdrawal took place before you all vote.

There's nothing on the table to vote on. I know you're frustrated with that. Made a motion. You did. And got a second. You did. All right. We should vote. There was no application to vote on withdraw. Motion was made before the applicant withdrew. Was but before you voted it was withdrawn. I could disagree. Second check. Amen. All right. Interesting trick. Yeah. Uh

interesting trick. Said that right trick. So So if she doesn't want to withdraw the motion and we can't vote on the motion, what do what should we do? If you vote, it's not it's a null. If you can vote, you want to. It would not prohibit coming back with a conditional zoning application. You don't want to withdraw. Confused as ever now. I mean, message's got me so confused now. She's straight that out.

I think what he's saying is we can vote, but it doesn't or you know why we vote if it doesn't count for anything. All right. All those in favor. All those in favor of denying I. Any opposed? Okay. And I was freaking sorry. Let's take a five minute break. I'll call a 10-minute recess. Yeah. Thank you.

reszone and it turned into storm water issues. Right. We are 16.

All right. The next item is an action item. the preliminary plat PB 25211 ree farm phase one. Brian,

hello Mayor and commissioners. Again, my name is Brian Ki. I'm a senior planner uh for the town. Um as uh received earlier this evening with the annexation and the development agreement, um this action item is for phase one for Breeze Farm Pittsboro LLC. Um it was reszoned uh back in 2023 to uh a neighborhood mixeduse center district conditional zoning. In those conditions, it stated that before any preliminary plat could be approved by the town that a development agreement had to come first. So, with that being said, um it is me as staff staff's advice tonight uh to also table this until after the development agreement is decided upon. And I I agree as well. I just want to give the opportunity if there's any major questions from the board. Um before we get to that, before we wait another month, any comments or questions outside of development agreement? No. Okay, thank you.

Make a motion to table this move. Thank you. Uh to our next meeting. Uh Mayor Pro Tim Baldwin. Second. Second. Commissioner Vos. All those in favor say I. I.

Right. Thank you. Um okay. Up next we have the an update to the board of commissioners code of ethics in conduct. So this is a item that I worked on with uh staff and the town attorney. there was a state law in 2010 that required uh boards to adopt the code of ethics. So this this board did at that time. Um and then just looking at update a rewrite really in and updates to that uh to take in account what has changed in the last 15 years. Um and make it slightly more comprehensive. And then also just kind of personally, I see, you know, some I really appreciate how our board interacts with each other um and with with everybody really and I see things in other um towns near us and and all those things. And um I I think it's wise to refresh our understanding uh on the code of ethics and conduct uh in particular before we get uh new board members in um and have that prepared for them. And then my follow-on recommendations will be that we uh continue to look at what is in our uh code of ordinances about that and look at modifications. And then the North Carolina League of Municipalities also has a program uh training and a resolution called commit to civility. Um and I would recommend that we do that, you know, early next year with with a new board with some new board in place. So, um, we sent, uh, sent this out and then also, uh, included the 2010, uh, the current location. So, any comments or questions? [Music]

Yes, Mr. Mayor, I do have some questions about the the the document that you shared with us last week. you know, this this document this document isn't just for us. It's for the the commissioners in the future. And I appreciate the effort that you and and the staff, especially Mr. Messi, has uh done to prepare it. Um I do have some sticking points that I'd like to talk to the board about. Um I'll start with the code of ethics and conduct. The purpose is great. I think that's right on on target. Definitions uh 2.5. I have a concern about the vagueness of 2.5. Any financial personal those are fine or relational interests. That's good. Or bias. Uh bias to me with a conflict of interest is is vague and difficult. Um what is a bias? Is it a political bias. Is it to bias for wheelchair people or I'd love to be able to we're using the word bias needs to be stricken from that in in my opinion because it's such a vague term. my bias may be completely different than another court's bias. And so I have an issue with that that wording. Um the other thing under imperes appearance of impropriety conduct that a reasonable person would view as undermining integrity or impartiality even if technically lawful.

It's that again is is kind of vague. What if an elected official me work for a large corporation? Uh, do I do I bow out on anything that the large corporation sells in Pittsburgh? How how specific can that be? And the other the other issue I have is that normal day that was 2.6. Okay. And the other, you know, I know you wrote this, Mr. Mayor, but does it also include the mayor in this? Yes,

it does by definition. So, Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Board of Commissioners and mayor or it should be Pittsburgh Board of Commissioners and elected officials.

So, 22 the definition of commissioner is any elected member of the board being the mayor. The other thing I'd like to do is just bounce it off the legal department and the League of Municipalities. And I think that's fair enough to do. I know the board's coming on. The newly elected board will be coming on soon. But I and I think it should be just like you said prepared for them as much as us. But I I do feel like it might be something that they could provide feedback to since they are not reinventing the wheel. we are they they already have this experience. I'd love to get their feedback on it, comments, questions, their comments.

Yeah.

Um so I greatly appreciate the modernization of our ethics code and support nearly every section in this document. Uh my concern is that I want to ensure that it continues to encourage communication and transparency and that it not unintentionally silence commissioners who are acting in good faith to uphold due process. Um so my specific concern is section 7.2. Um, that language is as it currently reads, individual commissioners shall not attempt to instruct, direct, or influence advisory board members outside of board authorized action. And my concern is this could be misinterpreted as prohibiting any of us from communicating with advisory boards or individual members of advisory boards. Specifically, factual and procedural information is fair game. It should be fair game. Um, and if if we're to proceed with this, I'd like some assurance that sharing public information with members of advisory boards or expressing individual personal opinions. Um, or encouraging adherence to adopted processes shall not be deemed a violation.

I think that that that's that's not the you know the individual expression is not the intent here. It's the you know the place of authority that we hold as board members and that influence that can be on what are meant to be advisory boards to us. So um I'm certainly open to you know rewarding suggestions on that but that is the

yeah I'll speak on that a little but basically I think that it's sometime when there's an advisory board and you express your opinion to them what your opinion is they might say I have to go along with that because they are the individuals that put me on this particular board. So I think that that is what this particular section is trying to get at. I don't think it's saying that you can't discuss factual information with the board with that advisory board. I don't think it's saying that. But you could certainly clarify that and say that specifically is specifically what you want to talk about or actually the issues the facts not that that's your opinion because again a lot of times an advisory board will say okay they're telling me to vote this way or to do this because it's their opinion and a lot of times it might make someone uncomfortable. Agreed. And I think that's the instruct and direct thing. We want to make sure we're not directing advisory boards to do things, but you know, certainly sharing information with them. It's not direction or doesn't have to be direction.

You know, ethics is what we stand on. You know, it gives us legitimacy. The town trusts us if we are ethical. If we are ethically based. So, I love this document. I really do. I would love to see it just reviewed by the league legal department and see what they say with it. There's maybe we didn't catch everything. Maybe I didn't catch everything, but uh I'd love them to provide some feedback as well. I'm fine with that, too.

Any other comments or any other sections? I don't have any comments, but I'm fine way it's written. Make a motion. Okay. Move to We want to table this. What do we want to do here? Can we can we say we move to forward this document for review and feedback with the league municipality legal department? Is that motion that would be

I think we say move to table pending to the next meeting. Okay. For feedback from feedback. Very good. So move second. Any other discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? I um up next we have a miscellaneous item, a discussion of the Chattam Park South Village small area plan. Teresa it's up to them to decide not

evening mayorship members of the board. Teresa Thompson assistant plan director and downtown director. Tonight we're going to go through the South Village Mall area plan. Um, this is a required step for the master plan that was approved with the 2015 2015 resoning of Chattam Park to the plan development district. Um, we're going to go through it chapter by chapter answering any questions y'all have along the way. So, we're going to pull up the small area plan. Um, we had a similar discussion with the planning board on Monday. Um, and we have additional staff here. Same as at the planning board work session, parks and rec director Katie Keller, uh, project engineer Benji with engineering department. We also have Jason Ber Bertino Bertino Tri River. He's the engineering director. Um the applicants representative Chuck Smith also here tonight and we will get started with the abbreviations section. This is a fairly new section. Um staff is still reviewing specifically the purpose of the small area plan uh which that language is similar to what was in the original uh version. So that that's probably going to be updated. We're also um receiving final any final remarks regarding um the mini parks and trail heads and uh also the affordable h housing. Go to the next page or next page. Affordable housing still mentions um everything being finalized at

preliminary plat. So that will be changed to section design plan if that's how the board agrees to move forward. Any questions on abbreviations chapter one? Before we go any further, Teresa, thank you for all your work. Absolutely. That's monumental effort. I acknowledge that and thank you. Uh just just bluntly are we on the clock now that we're giving this presentation 60 60day clock starting today is

no sir um that the clock the 60-day clock was for the planning board and Paul Messi can correct me if I'm interpreting it wrong but um the way that staff interpreted it is that within the 60 or 5 to 60 days the plan should be uh presented to the board of commissioners. You do not have a time limit how long you have to review it and consider it. Okay. Is that 60 days after a final draft?

The language the way I read it does not say final draft. So their clock is rolling right now. Correct. But um because the plan the the town board does not have to make a decision within a certain period of time um you do not have to require the planning board to do so either.

Thank you. Is that correct? partially there is a clock running and the clock starts as far as the 60 days is concerned when the plan was submitted to the planning board which I think was September 18th 13th. Yeah. Um so 60 days from there the board this board you are supposed to start considering the plan start not necessarily finished but start for October no it's so November 18th 13th which one okay

and the plan can change you know I mean it provides for the changes that can be made to the plan sorry to interrupt I don't no worries Teresa I have one more question can you reiterate now you had said about the 60 days okay if the plan is incomplete and it's at the planning board the 60 days can start can still start even if it was incomplete if it's not the the updates can continue to be made to the plan and the 60 days is still running

still but it can set because a lot of people were talking about the uh the financial portion and that was incomplete. So the the requirement is that the financial analysis is submitted. um that does not necessarily mean that it will receive final approval, but if it's if it was submitted then it's considered part of a complete application even if it was not as uh thorough or didn't have as much information was necessary and that's where staff would there needs to be additional edits to it. Okay. All right. Thanks. Yes, ma'am.

Thanks. Okay. Um, so the introduction chapter, this speaks to the intent of the plan, implementation, and next steps, speaks to the plan being conceptual. Um, again, that's if that's how the board approves it and that this is basically a tool for staff to use um when having conversations with the applicant for future section design plans um to look for consistency and bring the section design plans to the planning board for recommendation and town board for final approval. Um so the basically the intent is to allow for some flexibility but also consistency with uh the South Village small area plan. Um providing like a a clear footprint on what's to be expected after the small area plan uh is approved. Um and there was some discussion with the planning board uh regarding um what conceptual means and the definition of development um which we plan on bringing back any questions asked. We plan on bringing back some responses at the next planning board meeting which will be next week. Any questions on introduction? Okay, go to the next chapter which is land uses. This chapter identifies where all the different uses of land will occur including residential, commercial, um institutional, mixed use and research and development. Um

there are specifications like standards. If we go to well actually we'll start with page 14 that's the land use quantities table. We talked about this for a little bit with the planning board as well. This shows a breakdown of the proposed amount of residential dwelling units and non-residential square feet for each section which totals to the um amount that was entitled to Chattam Park in 2015. Give you an idea of how it will uh be developed and dispersed. There was questions regarding um the uses in the research and development section and um regarding the standards. We talked about how that's not set in stone. Um if you want to go just a few more pages right there is good or that one that's that's fine as well. So there's development standards for each section. It's not set in stone. Um, but this is what Chattam Park is agreeing to. So, it's regarding the way I was explaining conceptual with the planning board is um the town can require changes to this based on future uh evolving conditions. An example being like the driveway length. Uh we increased that from 18 to 20 feet from the north village to the south village. Um but at a minimum this is what the applicant Chattam Park is agreeing to. So it is binding for them but not for the town if that makes sense.

Yes sir. So this is a silly question but bear with me. Why isn't uh under development standards I think you're right there on that page right? Why isn't why aren't sections 2.1 2.2 etc. why aren't they small labeled small area plans? What's the rationale? Well, they they are small areas, right? Um that is how they are defined. Uh but in regards to small area plans, the applicant can submit one or more. Yes, sir.

Okay. Um, so these these uh these sections are they still under commissioner approval or is this is this staff approval? Currently the applicants proposing just the one small area plan. Right. That's a commissioner approval. Correct. But when we're going down to sections 2.1 2.2 are we approving those as a board a section design? Yes. If you approve what's being proposed, then they will need to come back for board approval for the section design plans. Each one of these? Yes, sir. Okay. So, we do still do have that power. We do.

That authority to approve or disapprove section 2.1. Is that correct? Correct. Thank you, sir. Um, any questions on development standards? Okay, we can move to page 25. This gives a little one question back here. Um on the um non-rigal non-residential square footage. Um in our master plan we had 22 million square foot of non-residential. Correct. Yes sir.

And the south section is saying 9,450. Uh, so that leaves somewhere around 12 million square foot of non-residential in the north section. Yes, sir. Where is this at? I mean, where is all our nonresidential commercial and commercial property going to be? We can look at the uh the map their their land use map that shows what their the uses of each section are going to be. And that's at the beginning of the plan. We can go back to that if you'd like. to look at it. But basically,

we do not have a just say the north section, we do not have a total of how many square foot of non-residential uses they have in the north section like currently. Yes. Yes, sir. We do. We do. Yes, sir. Can we get those numbers? I think they would be helpful sometime. I'm assuming that they they're the financial analysis those numbers. Wouldn't they be um I don't I don't think the financial impact analysis addresses Yeah. I think that's more on impact on the town infrastructure, not Yeah. Okay. Or staffing

because this is about the Commissioner Fre, you're asking about the division of non-residential property between the north village and the south village. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And you know what? To me, it doesn't look like we got I get my number.

You got 12 million in the south section. You got to remember this number is an entitlement. It is not an obligation to build 22 million square feet of non-residential space. They can go up to that. They don't have to go. They don't have to do it. Correct. It's a maximum of So we can just be all residential then. Correct. It could go up to 22,000 dwelling units. Yes, sir. Right. 35. That's a big difference.

Affordable housing policy gives them entitlements to go up to 35,000 residential units. So you're talking density exchanges for density

that and that um that was addressed with the applicant in regards to the research and development section. So uh you are correct the way that it was approved in 2015. Residential is an allowed use in every section even the research and development section. So staff uh discussed that with the applicant and the applicant agreed that in the research and development sections they would limit the percentage of residential to 50%. But the entitlement in 2015 was that they could go up to 100% residential. Go to what?

They could go to 100% residential. Um, so at at this point the applicant is not required to agree to going up to 50% max residential, but they they did um agree to that when staff asked. So in the R&D sections, you're saying correct. But again, it wasn't required of them to agree.

I'm I'm sorry. I'm I'm missing that. Miss Thompson, can you repeat that, please? The entitlements that the applicant received in 2015 allowed for residential uses to be allowed in every section um including the research and development. As Mr. Messi stated, the entitlements are a maximum. There was no minimum. So there's no minimum percentage of non-residential required in Chattam Park. Um, now in the residential sections, there is something in the master plan that limits up to 10% non-residential in the residential sections, but there isn't any language to speak to that on the flip side for the for the non-residential sections. So this staff had the conversation during our review of the small area plan and asked for similar language for the non-residential sections and we started with 10%. Which is a maximum of 10% residential could be allowed in the research and development sections. So basically when we went back and forth with the applicant on it, they agreed to 50%. But again, that's not a requirement of them. That was something that they agreed to do. So, uh, we go to page.

Um, can you go to the next? No. I think the red line version might be a little different actually than the one that we took to the planning board. Um, I didn't realize the page numbers were a little off on this one. Um, [Music]

okay. So, the content's the same, but it looks like maybe with the formatting, the page numbers didn't line up exactly as the one that uh the version that went to the um the planning board because that was not the redline version. Um if you want to just go past these sections here. Yes, there we go. You go back. Um, looking at B, the al approval of al alternatives. The way that this was originally worded was that um this this plan could be updated with uh board approval. We just wanted to be clarified that or clarify that um if the applicant wishes to make any changes to the small area plan that you would have to go through the legislative process all over again. Um which is that's a requirement in the master plan and the agre agreement in 2015.

So um can you give me an example of that? Uh if you remember the amendments that were done to the north village in 2023 similar to that. Okay. Comment period. I'm sorry. It would come across to the board. Correct. But it would we would go through this whole process all over again. It would be legislative public comment periods, public community meeting, all that. Um you want to go to the probably in two pages. Go to the next page. And one more page. Yes. Okay.

Page. Um, it says 24, but it's crossed out.

Staff was requested to submit the red line version. um which again it's the same version that went to the planning board. It's just red line. So the formatting is a little different. So the page numbers aren't exactly the same. Um so regarding uh section J public facility site locations wanted to um remind the board that this would still be legis or a discretionary decision by the board. Uh this small area plan does not give the final layout or details needed for some of the public facilities such as the fire department, um transit and schools. So for example, uh we don't really have a true transit network in Pittsburgh right now. We have Chattam Transit, which uh that's more of an on call base, but in the future, I'm sure we will. And so change needs are going to be need to be met to u meet the needs of transit network in the future. We just don't know what those are yet. So that would be an example of evolving community needs that staff would then say you need to if we have a transit plan you would need to meet that with regarding bus stops and routes and things like that.

Again that would be board approval.

Correct. Yes sir. and uh and revisions. Again, we we would clarify that this would go through the legislative process, which is K. Um, also wanted to note that M park dedication, this is fairly new language as well. Um, drafted by, uh, town staff and consultants. So, um, it has been added to this version and it's going over final reviews as well. So, we don't foresee any major changes needed, but this is a section that we're doing a final review on. I think that's a really key change because we've we've ran into some things with park design in the past. And so I think that's a really good addition to have that review with staff and consultants on the design.

And nothing's written in stone. Again, a lot of planning was done in the smaller plan for for parks. It does give a lot more detail than the master plan. Um, so it should give staff, future boards, um, future developers, the community some pretty good direction on where to anticipate growth and infrastructure, public facilities. Um, but again, it's not uh, finalized at this point based on any changes. um staff can require updates be made and that would be vetted by the planning board and the town board as well.

Okay. Um so those we went through those sections with the planning board. Uh there was a question asked about what the timeline might be by the applicant in regards to residential versus commercial development. um not really a requirement and uh not something that the applicant probably knows 100% but we did say we would talk to the applicant about that and come back to the planning board. Any questions? Chapter 2.

Yeah. Um, so I'm I'm trying to get a sense of of density uh per acre. Yes, sir.

Um, since we're trying to go big picture here, um, and you know, acknowledging that there's about 2,000 acres of uh, set aside, I'll just say land that's not to be built. Um so uh how how do we how do we get a sense of the projected residential density? The um the 5,000 acres including about 15,000 dwelling units. If you just look at that, the simple math would be approximately three dwelling units an acre.

That's 5,000. Correct. But I think we we've already acknowledged that there's like about 2,000 acres that are going to be in uh open space or green space and that's prominent in the document and in the marketing. Okay. So, if we removed the 2,000 and we just had the 3,000 square feet left at up to 15,000 dwelling units, we'd have to do the math. I think that would would that be about what would you estimate? That's a quarter acre. Yeah. Quarter acre per.

Do you want to come up? Yeah. [Music]

Chuck Smith with Chattam Park. um you're getting into issues that get into net versus gross density. So obviously Teresa answered you correctly with you got 5,000 acres 15,000 units that's three basic math three units to the acre across the projects and that's generally the way you look at density. Um but if you want to subtract out the as you say there's about 2,000 acres that's accounted for as open space or parks or different things like that. So that results in 3,000 acres and 15,000 units of five units the acre. Um you'll see lots getting smaller through time just because of affordability issues. And I mean you'll be seeing that across all the different projects that come before you. You can't really have acre lots, five acre lots and keep them affordable.

So why are we talking about 15,000 units and the fiscal analysis talks about 10,000 units and We were trying,000 units total remainder. We we were trying to be conservative with some of those numbers in the physical impact analysis because it's a positive analysis no matter how you look at it. And so it would even be more positive with more units. I think that's yet to be determined. Shock. I really appreciate you saying that with conviction. I hear you. But we don't know the the costs. We don't know the the the expenditures or the liabilities

when when construction costs are costing now $300 a foot. It's uh the value of of homes is difficult to keep prices down to the point where you're uh not going to be the cost of services to serve residential is going to easily be met. But the uh amount of non-residential that we've already provided offsets because that's a less expensive cost for public services than residential. So you are looking for a higher uh ratio of non-residential and we've been providing that. I mean, we we've developed I mean, I think at most 1500 units now. I don't have an exact number on that, but we've got about 500,000 square feet that's on the ground now of non-residential. Um, so it's moving in the it's moving in a good direction on that. You look at the ratio of that, it's a it's a it's an appropriate ratio at this point. Now, that's certainly me saying that. You got to come to your own conclusion on that. But we feel pretty good about that given that we've just started the development and anytime we talk to non-residential developers, they want rooftops before they are going to commit to put non-residential.

Yeah, of course.

Thank you. Any other questions on chapter 2? Oh, the uh the land use map um figure 2.1. Um, how does that align with u our future land use plans goals or um mixed use nodes within a quarter mile of transit?

A comparison of the lane use plan goals. I would need to draft that for you. Can you say that question again?

Sure. Yeah. I'm curious about how basically how the FLUP and the maps uh specifically map figure 2.1 how they align or overlap or whether or not there's any consistency there. And um recognizing that uh a lot of this has been promised for the future, uh I know that the the uh public is very concerned about tree canopy uh and our numbers of uh I think it was TCA. Is that the acronym?

Sure. Um, so it'd be great if we could see uh what percentages are are planned.

There's a chart maybe we can provide that. You asked for the small area plan comparison to the land use plan. The mixed use areas in relation to the distance of I think uh there's a mixeduse I can't remember where this is from but a requirement that our mixeduse nodes be within a quarter mile of transit or Yes sir. I think that's the activity center. Yeah.

Yeah. facing. I mean, it see looks to me like we're we're we're seeing fewer activity centers than were originally proposed. Uh, one of them has looks like half of it is taken up by solar fields. I'm curious about that. Is there a plan to decommission terminate the lease for the solar field and or are the Chattam Park investors planning on developing a mixeduse node within eyesight of beautiful solar field? That could be really interesting. Any additional questions

on that section?

We'll move on to the next chapter then, transportation. And this section re uh reviews the plan major street networks um trails and um it's also a comparison of the town's comprehensive transportation plan which if you can go to the next page uh a model was complete by the um applicant and it has been reviewed by the town's consultant or K and K. Uh based on the model, Chattam Park recommends removing a couple of the corridors that you would see on the eastern side of the small uh south village uh mostly in the Hanks Chapel area. So uh any any changes to the CTP plan um RK has been reviewing, we have not received final uh recommendations from them yet. Um it's gone back and forth with the applicant a couple of times. Uh so that is something that we are waiting on as well. Um the the planning board did ask what the difference is between a model what the um traffic model is compared to traffic impact analysis.

Uh so I can go through that if you'd like as well. Um okay.

Yes sir. So the uh small area plan requires a traffic analysis and that shows that the proposed road network is going to be adequate for all of the um proposed trips per day within Chattam Park and how is that going to affect the surrounding community as well. Um the model itself you need special software to review it. uh DOT reviewed it but also requested that the town hire a consultant. Um so once we receive the consultant's recommendations, we will forward that to NCD as well uh for their final recommendation. traffic analysis or traffic impact analysis is what you would see on a smaller scale. Um for individual uh sections per se that would show the individual street improvements required such as like stop signs versus stop lights uh traffic circles, turn lanes and things like that. So that's a requirement typically at plinary plat step. Um what staff recommends if the board approves this uh small area plan is that they be provided either with the first section design plan within one of those 16 small areas that uh we were referring to earlier. Or if not then with the very first preliminary plat they have to show up for the entire section. And that's going to help staff coordinate future traffic impacts in that entire area. Uh which is a benefit compared to how we typically get them which is just perliminary plat which is a lot more peacemeal if that may

it does. Okay. It's important as a matter of fact.

Planning board also asked about Lorax Lane and how how that does that fit into the small area plan. So, we discussed how that's um connected with the US15 connector. Um we zoomed in a little bit so we could see better. So, if you'd like us to do that, we can as well. A planning board also asked about Bill Thomas Road. Um a portion of it being outside the small area plan and um that is a DOT road. So going back to the the TAS that I was referring to, that's something that uh would be reviewed with the traffic impact analysis on what kind of improvements are needed. So that includes like offsite improvements as well. So if based on the the traffic proposed traffic in Chattam Park, if Bill Thomas road, the existing portion of it needs to be improved, the TIA would say that and DOT would then either require the applicant to make those improvements. Um the the other option would be if we have some sort of stip project in place.

Um as of right now, that's hasn't been discussed. Resa um on the bill regarding the Bill Thomas road it says needs improvement on this but does that mean it's going to be a two lane or a thoroughare four lane the CTP does give recommendations uh for each of the thorough affairs proposed thorough affairs is that what you're referring to the map yeah I think I'm yeah but it just says needs improvement correct right there. Yeah, this doesn't say anything.

I mean, so we don't know if it's going to be two lane, four lane.

Um, so the model does propose what street typicals it could be and that is being reviewed by RK and K. um based on the model shows, we would actually be updating the CTP to match that and we don't have that information approved yet. Um if I remember the the CTP proposed the future corridor would be a two or four lane divided if I'm hopefully I'm not remembering that incorrectly. Um so again that that would be a combination of what the traffic model proposes if that gets approved by the board we would update the CTP to say this is what the future impact would be and and what's needed for that corridor to be improved what what type of street typical that would be

right now it's it's a small it's a minor thorough affair correct the existing yes sir Yes. And then there's also the traffic impact analysis which could possibly be different than what is shown on the CTP based on the actual proposed development. Okay. I'm I'm going to ask this question. And I know it's a state road, but is it a possibility of the Bill Thomas extension not going through the regular Bill Thomas road and coming down below and staying in Chattam Park property.

Share that curiosity. We can look into that for you. I don't think that question has come up in conversation. Um if I'm not Bill Thomas is a dirt road, gravel roads of it. Yes. Is it a dead end road also? Yes, ma'am. Dead end road. So, yeah, we could look at that. But it is it is connected to a recommended road, right? Correct. Connecting with Eubanks,

sir. You want to compare that to um it's a dirt road. You want to go uh a couple more pages?

Um about two more pages. We're going to pull up the uh proposed transportation layout for you. Is it different than what we have online?

No, sir. But it is different from the CTP map which is what we're looking at. Yeah. How are we getting out of here? That's not a road. That's not proposed. There we go. So, as you can see, a few of those corridors on the the eastern side of the south village are removed. And this is what the proposed layout is. It's similar to the CTV, but there are some differences.

That's different than the TPP, correct? With approving the small area plan and the model, um staff's recommendation would then be to update the CTP to meet what the proposed small area plan shows. If that is agreed upon, this area. So there were some roads up in the northern extent of the south village um concept that we've seen that there was discussion about eliminating some some of those thorough affairs up there

Hanks Chapel area south village the northern extent of the south village uh where do those where does that stand as regards this document I'm sorry I missed it but uh Can can we make that explicit? Those roads are those roads are no longer desired or in consideration. We can we can elaborate on that more. We can ask the applicant to put in a few sentences about that

area again. Commissioner um Teresa Thompson referred to as the Hanks Chapel area. That's what uh I think we're all understanding what I'm referring to with my sweeping hand and waving gestures. Is that right? Yes, sir. The the areas on the eastern side if you Yeah. Go back a couple of p you can kind of Yes. So see if right there's several north south corridors or two of them that will be would be removed were to be removed. Yes, sir. So, new far east road, is that removed? Yes, sir.

To be expeditious way to move north and south. That's that's gone. And Charlie Brooks extension. Thank you. Those are the names. Yeah, we can ask the applicant to make that more explicit. We also include the Bill Thomas Road in that. Sorry. Can we also include the Bill Thomas road in that too, please? Yes, we can. Thank you. There you go, fans.

So, if we're talking about the traffic analysis, they're they're doing it right now without those with probably some of those extensions around Hank Hank Chapel, but Hanks Chapel, but not the Bill Thomas restrictions. Is that correct? because we need to see like how traffic going to flow through these are going death. It's hard to hear you. Okay. Sorry. Um I don't know. So the the the study of traffic that's being done now doesn't have all of those restrictions that were just mentioned. Correct. In terms of the transportation network like not using Bill Thomas Road, the model,

right? Well, based on the model, it's the recommendation is that they're not necessary. That around Hanks Chapel, correct? But the Bill Thomas connection still required is planned. Yes.

So to make that restriction, we would need to remodel where that traffic is going to go in that area. Is that correct? If if we were to look at possibly relocating um that might be more of a technical question around same point Ab

I got you. So if you're saying like if a new road was constructed around that then it would likely be the same analysis. Okay. Um if we can go I think probably this see 10 pages or so or eight one and two. This is good. These are the proposed cross-sections, also known as street typicals, for all the different corridors, proposed corridors in the south village, um, including the major and minor. Just wanted to note that these are still conceptual. Th this is what Chattam Park is binding themselves to. Um, it does meet current master plan requirements. Also, in the future, if additional changes are needed based on town specifications, uh the applicant could be required to to update their street typicals. So, just wanted to make that clear as well.

Thank you. Um yeah, along those lines, uh you're in the cross-sections. Uh, I didn't didn't see any, but um, is there any thought of having protected bike lanes rather than multiuse trails within the rightway? Yeah. And that might be a little more technical for me to answer. Okay.

I'm not sure if that's a question for staff or the applicant. it for either. But I mean, just to elaborate a little bit more, I mean, the the difference is very significant between a um a protected bike line, as I see it, that's on the same level of pavement as vehicles versus uh a multi-use trail within the rideway, which as as shown in the crosssections is separated by trees and a grass grassy area, things like that. So just kind of double checking, you know, if are they are they intending in any areas to have that kind of protected bike lane instead of a multi-use trail within the right.

Would you like me to add this to like the question and we'll get back or we can try answer if we can answer. Lose my place.

Evening. Ben Schmataki, project engineer. Commissioner, do you mind repeating your question? Sure. Um, so are there any cross-sections planned either explicitly in the current conceptual SAP or in discussion that might include a protected bike lane on the same pavement as the vehicles as opposed to uh the multi-use paths that we see here in the crossed by like a curb. There's many ways of protecting you know curb or or the plastic ballards the or jersey wall or what have you.

There are not um I think what is being proposed is the town standard either a inroad bike lane or a multi-use path. Um we don't have any protected bike lanes in town. I think that brings up some maintenance concerns with public works resurfacing and things like that. So that that's the main reason why uh to date we we just stuck with multi-use paths. Okay. As the protected bike lane.

So So there is there is the possibility of bike lanes that are on the same surface as vehicles. With these, we've taken out bike lanes in lie of the multi-use path. Okay, good. That's I guess that's what I was getting at. I I just was concerned that we not have bike lanes on the same surface as Okay. vehicles, right? Yeah. So, I think that that was something that we agreed with Chattam Park on to keep the bike lanes or to keep the multi-use paths uh instead of the bike lanes.

Wonderful. All right. Thank you. Um, and to clarify though, if our specs were to change in the future, it there whatever the future standard is, they would need to meet that. Teresa, could you repeat what, excuse me, could you repeat what you indicated uh few minutes ago about that it meets the master plan requirements that if changes are needed, the applicant and if if the applicant's going to request changes to this small area plan,

it would need to go back through the whole process again. If it's a staff change based on the language that Chattam Park has agreed to, it's you know in the proposed language that would just be updated in the section design plan if it's a staff change. Correct. So if the applicant does propose a change and let's say staff agrees to it, then we could just include that in a section design plan. Okay. But if it's something that the applicant would like to do individually, then it would require the entire process again. Thank you.

Um, any more questions on transportation? Yeah. Yeah. Um, so going back to the RK and K, they're our consultant for review of the travel demand model. Yes, sir. Um, and are they aware of our draft climate action plan or the board's vision statement?

Not sure if that's uh something Ben, do you if Ben knows I know the um prior engineering director was the main contact for sending out the information to them. So, I'm not sure if that was included. just to review the generated without any policy context.

We could if we could update them on that, I think that'd be useful. I don't think there's any debating that we do have uh a um a vision statement that the board has already approved. Uh, I could understand staff's reticence about sending the draft climate action plan, but um, if nothing else, it'd be good to send them the vision statement. The vision statement. I mean, ideally send the draft climate action plan as well, but

and a question for them is is whether or not the transportation demand model uh underlying assumptions have been validated with kind of I don't know how to describe it except maybe postcoid travel accounts. Um, and this kind of gets into um what assumptions have been made about remote work, e-commerce, telecommuting,

Mr. And uh what percent of total trips are assumed or projected to be walking, biking, transit versus private auto. And there's been a lot of talk about how we don't really have a transit system. Um, I think that's kind of um, how should I put this? We're not rising to the challenge. Um, we also have a very small police department, but we're planning to build that police department. Um, and so to just say, oh, we don't have much of transit is is not really uh, very good. So, um I think we really need to seriously reconsider that as an as a starting assumption. Um we do have agreement from the Chattam Park investors to uh build transit stops. Um that's clear language. Um, and so not sure exactly what I'm asking for, but I would hope that we contemplate this um in a in a rigorous way.

Uh, and I don't mean like blue sky. I mean what do we actually need in terms of transit? And I think that that's going to be very helpful for the Chattam transit network. um because I think they fully recognize that as the community grows, they're going to have to change, evolve, and grow. Um and giving them some quantitative basis would be really useful. I think

um if we can go back about five pages back to the um yellow map figure 3.2 two two more. There we go. Um, as of right now, the red dots is Chattam Park uh giving, you know, an estimation of future transit stops.

Um, I mean, I agreed staff agrees with you that it would we do need a transit plan. Um, and as we do get one in the future, it will be implemented within the section design plans. So, as of right now though, without having that, this is what the proposal is. Mhm. Okay. So, nothing on the on the east west corridor. Charlie Brooks Road.

With this being more of a a 5,000 acre viewpoint, I'm sure there will be additional that's going to be required, but that would be when we get to the section design. I think too that's where we need to partner with and push chat transit similar to schools like the schools aren't projecting out that far reserving. So we we made provisions for that to happen in the future um in providing them with the information, but I think that you know Chattam Transit is likely going to be that entity in the future and we need to partner and push I would agree um you know towards that

support. we have reached out and so has the applicant reached out to both the schools and challenge transit several times over the years and um yeah I I I don't have any expectation that they have the wherewithal at this moment in time to do this kind of analysis and that's why I think we really need to fold that into our K&K

or you mean currently create the transit plan. I think we need to have something other than the assumption, oh, we don't have a transit network today or something like that. I mean, I've heard various different wording, but it seems dismissive of what we got today. And I think we're we're going about a conceptual small area plan. we say something about transit, then let's say something rigorous that's based on some quantification. Okay. Yeah, we will inquire about that and bring that feedback back to you.

Thank you. I think part of that is right now it's assumed that Chattam County is going to be doing it. Maybe there a good point embarking on something medication barrier. So maybe I wonder if it's the same. Yeah, that's in the future there could be a completely separate transit. Completely separate. So that's I'm assuming then what we should be talking about. Thank you. But I was I mean I was encouraged by the discussion we had about Chattam Transit and recent changes there at our joint board meeting. So I think that you know maybe there's a a fresh ask of what they're what they're looking for.

Okay. um and and also tell them you know sort of the opportunity that's in front of them to to look at this ahead of time. Sure. Yeah, we will reach out again.

Hey, thank you. Yes, sir. Any additional questions on transportation? Not at the moment on transportation.

All right. Uh we will move on to the next chapter which is utilities. This is probably the chapter I know the least about. Um in general we uh worked with uh Tri River of course they have been working with the consultant. Um we have not received the final recommendations from the consultant. Tri River representative did present to the planning board a couple of months ago that in general director. So, if you have any questions, I'll probably refer it to him.

Good. Miss Thompson, I don't have a specific question, but at the planning board meeting, it appeared that they were concerned about capacity beyond Chattam Park. Yes, ma'am. That is correct. So, if we could hear from him. Sure. Thank you for bringing that up. Be great. Thank you. Thank you.

Mayor, members of council, my name is Jason Burton. I am the uh new engineering director for Tri River Water. Um keep want to say Tri River Utilities, but our name is uh Tri River Water. I also have dual role. I am the uh city engineer for the town of Sanford as well. Um relative to the capacity, again, this document goes a very long way to helping us understand our needs well into the future. Um, at this time we have no concerns relative to keeping up with the pace of development as it relates to water and sewer capacity in Pittsburgh or even the other subdivisions you're doing. You guys bring me two or three data centers, we might have another conversation, but the information that they're uh providing here certainly helps us plan for the future and their pace of development at this time doesn't give us any specific concerns. and the other developments also.

Correct. Sounds great. Just just a round number. This 18inch force man that's going or 36inch force man that's going now. What's the projected capacity of that? There's a lot of variables that come there. Um our initial plans are to send 2 million gallons of sewer a day to our wastewater plant in Sanford. Um, essentially immediately it's capable of sending up to seven million gallons a day of sewer capacity. Seven.

I have a question for you. This is education on my side. Normally you don't do stream crossings, but I'm assuming you you are. Is that right? It's a Rocky River. You're going across the Rocky River or Deep River.

I'm talking about water and sewer lines. Yeah. A couple different ways that you do that. Uh you can you can do what they call boring jack. In all cases, typically we do not hang utilities on dot bridges. We do try to go underneath the streams. Uh you can either put them in a casing pipe, a larger pipe that holds the pipes or you can do what they call directional bore. Um I believe we're doing don't know this exactly over the head. I am the new guy, but I believe we're doing directional bores with that force man project. We won't quote you. I think we're actually doing a little bit of both. We're doing directional board. They're doing directional board now if you want to drive down there and look at it down um Sanford Road. Sanford.

Okay. This would critical to the state approvals. Correct. That be drilled underneath. You have a completion date. Our cont July 2027. July 2027. That's the commissioning date. That is the operational date for that operation. That's correct. Okay. Hold you to that. Thank you. I got one question. Yeah. Water. So, the water is on a 36 inch line now and the sewer is on 24. So,

right now the I believe it's a 36 inch sewer main that's being constructed. We are also working on a um we believe it's ultimately going to be a 36 inch line. It's under design now. There's been some conversation between 24 36 of a water man extension up Pittsburgh Monure Road. Um I believe it's ultimately going to be a 36 inch water man as well. And you can promise granular activated charcoal filtration systems. I'm not capable of making that statement yet. At the water plant. Yes. At our water plant. Yeah. I'm not with our

plant. We are undergoing an extremely large water treatment plant project. Right now we have four different contracts underway. I cannot tell you all the water chemistry involved. I haven't gotten up to speed that far yet specifically on but I could certainly respond back to you directly on that. Appreciate that. Thank you. Please do. So, previously we've had I think only verbal assurance that it will be uh we we've had written assurance. It's in the it's in the design documents will be there. That's right. It's in the design documents, but uh and written assurance. Was it in the merger contract as well?

I don't think it was. So, I don't think it's in the merger, but it will be there. That'd be great. I'm not aware of any secret meetings that change anything, but I'll be happy to respond. Any other utilities questions? Thank you. Thank you. And welcome.

Good to meet you. Can we talk about storm water before you move to parks?

Um, you know, from my personal experience, the storm issues that we have are not necessarily with Chattam Park, they're with the town. So, um, a lot of this is, um, directed in the wrong way, in the wrong spot. But when it comes to storm water retention, uh, and flooding issues, what is the, uh, Chattam Park position on adapting to uh, stronger pretention ponds or more more retention ponds? What's Chadam Park's position on that? I think that for that

20 20 year 25 year I mean can't well the requirements 10 year 24hour um not not 25 year okay so it's still 10 correct right thanks I'll just quickly hit back on GAC from the uh tri river website it says um talk about explosions as a part of the construction which are normal um But it says this is where the new granular activated carbon filters will be located. These will remove the unwanted contaminants. The GAC technology will be used in conjunction with advanced settling and filtration that will allow TR to continue to provide hot drinking water. So

fantastic. Thank you. Yeah. And one more question about storm water. At the end of that section, it indicates that Chattam Park will serve as the sole point of contact for all storm water maintenance and compliance responsibilities. So, would they give you a report in reference to that? Annual report. Annual report. All right. Thank you. And it's it's true that the county monitors that correct? No, sir. Ben does. What a responsible. Okay. Okay. So, I thought this the county was reviewing the erosion control plans.

Erosion control. Okay. A little bit different. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Sorry, there's a bug that's been bothering me. Okay. Uh, moving on to parks. Um again, we we've consulted out the review. There's a lot more detail shown in the small area plan. Um it is not set in stone for the town. This is what is binding for Chattam Park. As we receive more information in the future, uh especially when we are starting to look at section design plans, park locations can change and the town board does have full discretion on any public facilities. So that includes parks.

So any questions regarding parks? Uh yeah. So so far as the parks have been contemplated so far, the actual sites uh do any of those what 400 50 plus acres include wetlands and buffers. All right. Can you repeat your question?

Sure. Do the acres of parkland in the small area plan of the south village include wetlands or buffers or only usable recreation acreage?

So they had the 65% for requirement for each specific site. And again like Teresa mentioned is to keep in mind um that these are subject to change, right? um they have a certain amount of area that they have to stay within to meet each of each of the sections per the elements. Um we have had some um third parties that have a third party that has taken a look and a deeper dive into that usability front just from this standard. Um so I would encourage everyone to take a look at those. Um we do have some on our radar. I'm happy to have any conversations as well for that too.

Look at those. What's those the sorry the the different park sites? Um whenever you're looking at the at the park page at the I'm sorry I don't know what what number page you can just start scrolling through. I can. So if you're looking for specifically a Gine right that has a creek that's going all the way across it. that that will be an example that so what our consultant pond is doing is a calculation of those exact areas and how they meet the requirements. Okay. So it's not necessary that we board members do that examination.

Right? And that's part of the revised language about parks is that the consultant is and staff as part of that evaluation of park sites to make sure that that Can you tell us about the third party that's doing that for us? Um, yes. They're a landscape architecture. They're a landscape architecture firm. Um, landscape. Okay. Okay. they prioritize and they're um that they are in the parks and recreation field mostly but landscape architect they're parks and recreation driven I guess a lot of their

so you send them out I'm just trying to tweeze it just third party review so or a simple review for this um we we can't dive too deep in them because they're subject to change right we wanted just an overview view of what this could potentially look like. Hey, are there any areas that are are big flag areas for us? Um or or that we need to take in consideration topography or Yes. topography, all the things, you know. Okay. Okay. Thanks. So, so we'll hear back pros and cons of accepting wetlands and buffers in that acreage. I'm happy to send it to you if you would like.

Yeah. And do we know yet what percentage of households are going to live within a five or 10 minute walk of our parks? You can our NERPA rating. It so it meets the 10. It doesn't always meet the five um per uh per their findings. Um, so which is that that is one of the goals. I will say for the National Recreation and Park Association, that initiative is a 10-minute walk. Okay. [Music] I don't know where I got the five from then. Maybe that

Well, the five minute is one of one of the goals in in the small area plans. Okay. Um, which great, right? I mean, as a park person, I love that. Yeah, that's in our parks master, isn't it? Yep. Okay. That's where I got the five. Um so uh greenways are in your purview right who is going to maintain I think there's going to be 20 miles greenway is that right so uh that doesn't include multi-use paths correct um so who who is going to maintain those

as set of the approved D plans and elements that's going to be on us if they're public greenways. And I think what I've heard from NC do is the same goes for multi-use paths that that maintenance is on us. Is that correct? It depends, right? If it's a I don't maybe you can from a planning perspective on that. Thanks. Depends on whose rightway it is. If it's town road versus DOT road. No. Okay. Sorry. Sidewalk maintain sidewalk same.

Oh, that's correct. Sorry. All parks, soccer fields, are they in here? Depends. Depends on the site. It depends on the topography. There's a lot more. Would it be potentially on one of these sites? Absolutely. I see 50 acres C2. Is that Yes. And and that's ideal. Okay. For athletic facilities close to town flat. Yes. Correct. That is a a prime location for that. What about you, Jack? Yeah. Baseball. Ky to see too. That's not up there where we sold half of that land. Oh, no. It just hasn't been updated. Oh, okay.

Yes. that that you're correct that is that site. It just it was whenever we were reviewing this process that had not come to vote or but the acreage is accurate, right? 52 acres. No. So because we sold it's now 25 because we sold 27. Okay. So, can we move acreage from say G1 up to C2 and and build a ballpark? So, I I wouldn't do it at C2 because remember you have the the creek. The reason

I meant C1 or or D2, what I mean, can we move? Oh, so so D2 is is PR prime location for I think there was I think there was confusion when you were you Commissioner Fo you were saying ball fields at D2. Is that what you meant? Uh C2 C2. Okay. So sorry D2. D2 C2. Yes. Correct. Sorry. Y letters are hard. It's more centrally located. It's right on the on the highway. Can we that's 50 acres remove acreage from G1 to another park if necessary.

Yes. So again and things fluctuate right? So this isn't exact. Okay. Um so there are things of I've I've made it very clear that I don't like G1. So just from a professional standpoint of because it's so way location so far away. Well, no, not not because of the but the shape of it and and the stream that goes directly across it. Um that limits. Yeah. Significantly limits. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Good. We've met as Yeah. I'll make sure. Yeah.

So, you said there's going to be a golf course here. He didn't say that but is that see 2.1 it is in discussion. It's in discussion 2122 and I go back for a minute to um multi-use paths. And this might not be a question for you. I'll tag it. Um, we we have a number for greenways, 20 miles. Do we have a number for multi-use paths?

Think that that maybe looped into that as well is what I would assume.

Okay. I'm sorry I missed it, Chuck. At least 12 and a half miles. I'd love to know. It's shown on that transportation map that we were looking at before. Yeah. Sorry, I missed that. Chapter four, three, but it says the multi-use trails are in it. D2 miles 11.94 said trails total. I'm sorry, a lot of numbers. 11.94

12 miles listed on figure 33.5. Okay, thank you.

And uh what do we know about the phasing of parks? Are they to be built concurrently with the housing? Well, that was the intent with the north. Yes. So, they are I mean that's part of their requirements, right? To meet their build as they can build out. So, yeah, it depends. Um are you are you referring to sight specific locations in that time or general? What point will that be checked and confirmed kind of thing? By final plat approved by final plat by final plat

unless a family was paid. Okay. Mistreat. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Any additional questions on parks? Next chapter is public art. It's a pretty short chapter. Um do not have uh all the details on this yet as we will receive that section design plan. So that will go to to the board on what their public art plans are. Yeah. Um, so, um, again, forgive me if I've missed this, but it is the funding of public art, uh, binding requirement or, uh, optional?

No, sir. From from my understanding, they should show what their public art plan is, but there's no minimum requirement of, you know, dollars spent. So, there's no no specific budget.

No, sir. almost reluctant to ask this, but uh how might uh the selection or commissioning of public art uh from how might that be informed by local artists uh or local arts organizations? Uh, can cultural historians be involved with that? Um, ensuring relevance to our community and our identity and local culture as it is.

We can have that conversation with the applicant and see if they would be immutable to some additional language.

And loop in the arts council. Yeah. Next chapter is cultural and historical resources. A uh cultural or historical um assessment has been done. Um it will they will be required for each additional section design plan of course. Um, and this has been reviewed by the Chattam Historical Association's Representative Sai Robbins. Um, and his write up was included in that email that was uh sent to y'all as part of the TRC input that we received.

The next chapter is phasing. Oh, I'm sorry. No. Um, yeah. I I think this is where we need to have the conversation about uh naming. Um uh so this um I think we've had a misstep with regard to naming that happened in the past. and

roads are yeah there was a road that got named unfortunately um and that was resolved. Um but uh I think it would be really vital uh for us to develop a a process. Um, our former mayor Randy Valler suggested a naming commission long time ago and I think um that might might not be a bad idea. This is probably more in the context of our UDO. Well, you do have discretion over names. Yeah.

As you approve preliminary plats, you're also approving the name. Yeah. But that's not the kind of thing the governing board should be involved with really. I mean that that's a very detailed stuff. I really didn't want to be involved with it when a road was named after a rapist. Um but that happened and fortunately we we fixed it. Um so yeah, I think it'd be a really good idea if we did something intentional to avoid that problem happening in future. looking to that. That'd be great. Yes. Sorry to blurt that out, friends.

No, that's okay. So, so you're you're talking about creating a commission to or a board that would do it.

I'd like to hear from staff. Um but um yeah, David Fanning was uh a monarchical loyalist and uh defended the king and u was on the wrong side during our revolutionary war and um there's pretty solid evidence that he tortured chates um and then later after the war um committed that very offensive uh act was found guilty in a court of law. Uh I believe that he evaded justice by going to Canada and I just think that you know

put a little thought into who we named roads after. So the process is we just um coordinate with 911 addressing. Yeah. Ensure that a name's not a dup which is quite complicated in itself. I understand. Yeah. There's an additional step to that. We can look at options. I'll just remind the board that for parks and recreation areas, we have a naming policy. We may want to look at that and go over that, but we have a policy for that. I don't know if it would scale well to naming all roads. I think it's a different process to probably Yeah. scan road names for situations like you mentioned. Yeah,

we can do some research and see what other jurisdictions do. Yeah, parks I would think would be theme related like a natural theme or conservational theme something like that. Yeah.

Thank you. First uh chapter 8 is phasing which um the applicant has provided all the phasing required phasing plans and it's just a snapshot right now. Any questions on that?

So what is their process? Just a big 20,000 foot overview. So the requirements are that um Chattam Park they provide an estimate of the annual increase in the number of dwelling units and non-residential gross square footage and population. So they've done that. Uh it's required to provide an accurate estimate of dwelling units um on an annual basis versus non-residential gross square footage that's required per the phasing uh element and they're reporting it to the board or to the staff.

Well, this is just proposed phasing kind of like a just giving us an idea of what is expected projecting it here. Okay. So, not a report.

Yes, sir. action. I was just double checking that is um looks like that's also a requirement for the section design plans too. So it will be updated. Okay. Sorry, lost my All right. Chapter nine's public facilities.

Wait, can we Sorry, I got a couple questions on phasing. What What are the triggers that determine when the next phase begins? Is that population thresholds or market demand or some combination of both? But the so what was required or what was submitted was just what's required per the phasing element um which is it looks like it's just the annual timeline proposed annual timeline. So um I'm not sure what the specific reason was for that you know when the master plan and the elements were drafted but that's that's just what the requirement is. So this phasing is not market driven right it's not um

I think it's the it is it is I mean these are these are estimates of of market but it's it rolls sequentially or over a period of time right correct okay so the phasing is market driven So the the here goes out to 2045 which aligns with their projected development. [Music]

It is um this might be a place to say this I guess in the financial analysis um it is puzzling to me. Uh, notwithstanding Chuck Smith's explanation that they wanted to have a conservative revenue projection, it's puzzling to me that projection there is only for 10,000 plus few hundred residential units um when the overall entitlement is clearly 22,000 residential units and by extension in the affordable housing policy 35,000 residential units. Um it makes the effort of considering the financial impacts and trying to guess at the general impact the impact on the general welfare of this community very hard. we will review that um number and uh have that conversation that can be increased to 22. I would say overall with the financial analysis I think it very much is a shot in the dark like it's you know the projections so far have been uh I think more rapid than what has been produced and you know I think it's it's very difficult to say what's going to happen financially from you know or from a phasing plan how the market drives the phasing um and it says in here like this is based on historic market data for the region over 25 years because of changing trends, it could change dramatically in the future. And and I think that's the case. I mean, I think a financial uh analysis at this point is is not like

useful necessarily from a budgeting or or planning standpoint. Um

well, I guess this is part of my problem with the whole process of trying to do a 5,000 acre small area plan then. So, I mean, I don't disagree with you, but if we're trying to do this, and our master plan says there has to be a financial analysis, and reasonable folks say a financial analysis should have both revenues and expenditures. Um, this is what the developer is attempting to do. And if you're attempting to do something challenging, I don't think we should just write it off and say it's a shot in the dark. we shouldn't even bother looking at the FIA. I think we need to try and be diligent about it. And um yeah, I'm going to dwell on this for a moment longer because in conversations with our manager, Jonathan Franklin, he says, "Oh, don't worry about that. We're going to do our own projections." Heather Meechum has a very well-considered process of looking at the expenditures and the liabilities. That's fine, but that's it. The master plan and the SAP approval process don't say staff are gonna do that. They say it says documents say financial impact analysis is

sorry and staff is not doing that. Okay. So maybe Jonathan Franklin misspoke. I'm not the staff is not preparing any expenditures related to this level because I don't I don't have the detail from Chattam Park in terms of um the impacts and we and I can't project out the impacts of you know road care on the roads. Okay. Um maintaining the sidewalks and greenways do I mean I just I do not have I don't have the time to prepare anything like that. we would have to outsort that. Outsource that if we were doing that, but that's not something that we are prepared to do. That's good to know. Thank you for that clarity.

Um, nevertheless, the master plan says we're going to have 168 police officers and nowhere is that represented in the financial impact analysis. We can ask for that and we can ask for that to be updated. Um, that was done in the North Village. So we can request that again.

Um same goes for fire. Um, I think there have been some conversations about the numbers of firehouses, but I not knowing anything about that line of work and the complexity of projecting the the need for numbers of firehouses across 3,000 or 5,000 acres. Um, it does seem to be very very impactful at 5.6 6 million per house. I mean, that's that's the pricing that we have in our budget right now for that first one near Eubanks.

Um, looking about 28 minimum employees for one station.

So, 28 would translate into some kind of per annual uh salary costs and benefits. And uh we need to think about apparatus too. And that's what probably if we went out to market now that's $ 1.5 to $2 million per truck. Um so you know if it's going to be four firehouses or six firehouses I think we need to know that now if we're addressing this large conceptual small area plan. Um, and I believe again not not my business, but I believe that the I imagine that the density of the entire project will have some influence on response time and the numbers of of people at each house, uh, the numbers of apparatus at each house. Uh and clearly the heights of buildings would impact whether or not we're going to get another ladder truck.

Um so uh Miss Thompson, I know that your effort has been very challenging to try and figure out the right level of nuance and and uh detail given that your your new thrust for a concept uh a conceptual plan. But um these are very expensive considerations and uh I as one commission one. That would be great because they do show three fire stations in a school also. Thank you. All right.

And so we're

one question regarding that financial uh analysis. We not need a third party to do that or would this be the responsibility of Chattam Park? Uh well internal review uh would be the town manager and finance director and we did receive some input that additional information is needed. So that that will be resubmitted and we'll review it um and pass the the feedback along to you. Okay. Uh next chapter public facilities. Um so again um there were requirements in the per the master plan the different elements. We have the public facilities element, transit element. Um those have been submitted and uh again this is completely discretionary decision by the board in the future but what has been proposed by the applicant does give a snapshot of what to expect in the future. So that includes um utilities, schools, greenways, um water, sewer, police, fire, parks, recreation. Um sidewalks, multi multi-use paths, those are all required.

And this will be updated as we receive section design plans and again section design plans are not conceptual. So we will have more definitive finalized plans at that time. Right now the section design plans are primarily um as I understand it in would they would be in staff domain and then brought to the board for final approval.

Yes sir. So staff would review um in regards to public health safety and where welfare and where there's in you know inconsistencies with town specifications or policies things like that that staff would say need to be updated even if it's in contrast to the small area plan. So, uh, a major difference between this concept and the original small area plan approval process building upon some combination of 16 sections as small areas in the south village. A major difference there is that we're with this SDP with the section design plan concept we're missing community meetings. We're missing the public board uh planning board where often public input is allowed

and that still will be allowed. That's still part of the process. It is correct. Is there a public hearing at the town board? There's public comment. Um, there's not a public hearing. Not a public hearing. Um, we wouldn't be able to do any sort of public hearing because that's a resoning requirement, which that's already been approved. At this point, we wouldn't even be able to require a public hearing. But I think that a small area plan does require a public hearing. It it requires a public com you have to receive public comments for two weeks prior to when you plan to make a decision. Yeah. Right. I mis misread that.

You can you can still receive public comments on section design plans. Okay.

But it's optional. I'm hearing you say you can still, but it's it's not it's not a required process of the section design plan. Not currently. Not currently. Do you would like to if that's the board's decision? I say other than public comment is allowed at meetings and they would come to the board for approval. Correct. So,

I mean, if you if you'd like to step such as the twoe public comment period before, I mean, we could look at that. It would just have to be something we discuss with the applicant for them to agree on because everything that section design plans and and all of that, you know, that that was agreed upon by the applicant. Mhm.

I don't foresee that being an issue though. Again, what staff's looking at though would be more on the public safety side. So, um there's a there's a line of where what you request in a section design plan. Um if if staff is saying that this is necessary to meet public health, safety, and welfare versus is this something that we're we're we think is a good idea and we think we should just require it by the applicant because that's that's a more of the like conditional reasoning type approval. And so it's it's it's it is confusing, but that was that was already approved. So at this point, we would have to keep our reviews specific to what are the absolute requirements needed for a section design plan. For example, we wouldn't staff wouldn't request that we change the, you know, uh table of uses at this point. That was approved back in 2015. or say that we're only going to let you move forward on this section design plan if you only do town homes and not single family detached. That's an entitlement that they received back in 2015. And I'm getting a little bit more into the legal territory, so I might refer to town attorney um if there's additional questions. So, with this uh hypothetical section design plan, then what is the memo actually going to look like when it's brought to this board's

agenda? And we we're working on finalizing that. What's included in this version that you received was staff's initial language. Okay. and we we have not gone through and made a ton of updates because we are trying to receive direction from the planning board and town board first. Good. Uh we don't want to give you a bunch of different iterations and Sure. Thank you. But I'm guessing that the memo would read something along the lines of introductory information overview and then uh action require or action requested of board uh finding of concurrence with the conceptual small area plan approval process.

Yes, sir. Consistency. Consistency. But again, changes can be required by staff or staff brings it to the town board and you might not agree with it. Okay.

We would be working with the applicant for several months before anything is even uh submitted officially. And it has been brought up by um I think the planning board at least once they requested would a board member be permitted to be in included um kind of as a liaison and that wasn't originally discussed with the applicant but we can certainly discuss it if someone would like to be involved in those initial conversations. Typically um like for plary plat reviews for example that's uh starts with staff and then we take it to the boards after a lot of the you know little issues get worked out. The implications of of this section design plan scheme are that they are much greater than um preliminary site or plot approvals which is I have so much concern about

from a staff's standpoint. The section design plan gives more of an overview than a plinary plot. Plimary plot can be anywhere from five lots up. And so a lot of times we receive plary plat uh and it's hard for staff to look at that big picture of interconnectivity issues with roadways. Um the way it lays out parks for example uh lots of public facility type issues come about when we only receive plinary plots. So the section design plan um would you know mitigate that issue.

I I have a question for you uh regarding facilities. We can go back to that for a second. So I'm looking at the master public facilities plan dated uh 2018, November 26, 2018. And in it, um, there are a number of objectives that Chad Park has agreed with the town to provide. The section two is public safety. I don't see any of that in in what you share with us. What? I'm sorry. What are you referring to? It's a master public facilities plan uh 2018. It's the element. I'm sorry. I think it must be the element. The older one.

The ele element is what he's reading from. Oh, you're the public element. Oh, yes, sir. I know it's different. So, everything that's required um Thank you. for the public facilities element staff gone through. Yes, we've gone through approved. Okay. So, it's all been approved. Correct. Yes, sir. Where you going to locate your water towers? And I think that's part of it also. or at least speaks to what is required in a small area plan. Okay. But not necessarily location right now. Correct.

Uh we're not talking about locations. They probably already have those, but I would include that does include locations, but again, it's not completely ironed out. Understood. So, uh that's why it's not in the plan that you have right here. It is. already been approved. It is. So, uh, the the the chapter, you know, it speaks to all the different public facilities, but that the locations, a lot of them are shown, they're illustrated throughout the plan. Okay. In the different chapters eventually that will come to us. It's in like Okay.

Water towers are shown in the utility section. Yeah. You just have to go chapter. Okay. I'll step away. Thank you.

Any other questions on public facilities? Last chapter is appendix. Um and the applicant has provided everything that's required. streams, buffers, wetlands, steep slopes, significant natural heritage areas, subwaterheds, uh up mature hardwood forests and gameland hunting safety buffers. Any questions on that? Any uh additional questions going through the whole plan?

Yeah, our questions on uh the appendices. Um how are the endangered species maps influencing uh allowable disturbance areas? And I think that would be a question for the applicant. Um I was I'm thinking I thought they didn't have when I looked at it originally. I don't remember the endangered species, but applicant can speak to that or we can 113. We can bring it back to you. Um

yeah, I'm I'm getting pretty pretty tired. Yeah, it' be great to have that. Sure. Um and and I have some vague questions about theou with the Chattam County Schools, but I I haven't find those yet. I do apologize. Um yeah, if if you have specific questions for the schools, I can ask um Representative to come to a meeting as well. My main contact has been Chris Bice.

I have one question before we close. Um, what is the benefit to the town of this conceptual small area plan? The benefit, the pros and cons of this. Okay. Okay. All right. We can we can table that question for another night. Be okay. Maybe I mean, I would appreciate that. Okay. My bedtime was a couple hours ago. All right. That's a lot that's a that's a much bigger conversation than I think. Yes. I mean I can easily speak to that typically. Right now I'm sound good.

You have been strong. Yes. Doing a great job. Appreciate that. This is tough. That's probably coffee in that jug right there. Right. No, I need some though. That would be nice. What's the next step? What do we can we expect next time we meet?

Um, so like I mentioned, we're we're trying to button up the uh questions asked by the planning board last Monday to get back to them this upcoming Monday. Um, and if we're able to answer their questions, staff would ask the planning board uh if if they're ready to move forward on a recommendation or not and what additional information they might need. Um, we will take this back to the board of commissioners again in November, give you an update on everything and we'll try to get as much of your questions answered at that time. And then whatever the the vote of the board is at that, you know, if you need more time to consider or want to make a recommendation, we'll have to

That will be the last time this board will be together as a whole. Yes, sir. November. Correct. I think that's current. Um, we I did suggest a uh special meeting on the October 27th, but I think there was some scheduling conflicts, but I mean, I think this board could have an additional session if we wanted to. We certainly could. you're more than welcome to call me anytime as well and we can sit down and go over things in more detail if that's helpful.

Um ju just one one other thing to make note of on the FIA. Um, uh, can we please make sure that I I I know that staff are attending to this, but can we please make sure that the it does include the $10 million plus liability for housing and development fee credits. Um again I I have every confidence that that is being tracked by staff but having it comprehensive into this uh financial impact analysis yeah useful just make it more transparent. Thank you.

Well thank you all. See you again soon. One more thing Miss Thompson just one quick thing. the question that Commissioner Frell asked you about what's the benefits and all that. If you could explain that also to us as well as to the planning board, that would be great. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Like me to do like a a written That would be pros and cons. Yes. because I feel like we've touched on it off and on over the past couple of months and it it might be a good idea to like actually put something in writing and we can review it together. That's a great Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Um if we if we can uh I just had one one question going back to the park driver resoning. Randy, did you receive a written request? If you can hear you better, you can hear me talking. Yes, those two things. Yes. Did the Did the applicant give you a written request to withdraw or just ver did not can provide one tomorrow? We did sit out in the hallway and go over my expectations. Okay. Because it seems that 1034F requires a written withdrawal. delighted to get it first thing in the morning.

I'd be interested on Mr. Messik's opinion on if we can still if our vote best I can do. The guy went home. Mr. Mesik, I don't know what you're referring to. Okay. So, the you're talking about UDO. The the applicant for the reasonzoning tonight withdrew. He wanted to know if we need something in writing like now. The UDO stand UDO says the withdrawal must be written given to the planning. If that's what it says, that's what it said. What it mean was verbal and then we voted still it would appear to be denied. and they sort of broke procedure by ripping it out in the middle of the UDO says it's a written withdrawal and That's

to adjourn. So move. Second. Thank you. All those in favor say I.