Planning Board - Regular Meeting

good evening. Uh like to call to order the town of Pittsburgh planning board regular meeting for Monday, September 15, 2025. Um, looking around and we do have a quorum. Miss Charity Dawton is uh absent tonight to note that, but we do have a quorum. Uh, has anyone does anyone have any proposed changes uh to the agenda?

Yeah. Uh with that then um if I get a motion to approve. Motion approve the minutes as is. Motion by Alfreda Alustin. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Christina Pard. All in favor please say I. Motion passes. Um, and then as well the minutes, we have any changes to the August minutes? I saw on there that it said um I was absent and then Alfreda Austin was absent and then at the bottom it says that she adjourned the meeting.

It's because I was like a couple minutes late. We were late. That's what happened here. Were you also late? No. Okay. Then that would need to be right. But you said it says you you were absent. It's definitely absent. Oh, you were. Okay. It's definitely absent. Okay. My apologies. All right then. Um I will Can I get a motion then to approve the August minutes? Make a motion we approve the August minute. Motion by Alfreda Alston. Do I have a second?

Second by Alan Wilson. Uh all in favor to approve the um August minutes as presented uh please say I. Thank you.

Motion passes and we will move to our public comment period. Um before before we get started, I would like to say uh when you approach the stand, please state your name and address at the start of your comments. Um and there is a time limit of 3 minutes that should be on that screen. Uh in the interest of uh time and fairness, it is the board's policy not to respond directly to comments during this period. Um staff will follow up as appropriate. I have I am going to mess this one up. I the Davis uh lens waspecker.

There's not a microphone. Is that fine? Uh it's actually it's that circle right there. Yeah, you're okay.

Well, I'm Davis Lindsay Weisbecker and I live 99 Reeves Road. I'm speaking this evening about um the major subdivision preliminary plat for phase one of Reeves Farm. I live in the neighborhood just west of the subdivision. And I want to highlight first how excited I am, including my my whole family, including my son here, about the parks and greenways that are coming. Um I know they wouldn't be coming if it weren't for this development. And so I'm generally positive, but I do have a few questions and recommendations. Uh my questions concern conditions of the resoning that stipulated that there would be a phasing plan, a development agreement, and a traffic impact analysis before the preliminary plat approval. So I just wanted to check if these conditions had been met, and if so, how the public could learn more about the content of those documents. And then my recommendations, I really am trying to be pragmatic and look for things that are mutually beneficial or at least not burdensome. Um, and I'll go through them quickly, but I did provide a print out with more like benefits that I see to the community, the developers, people moving here. So, first and foremost, I think we need to integrate affordable housing into all phases. Based on this plan, all the affordable housing is limited to phase two, and I think there's equity concerns there as phase one is the section closest to the schools, the library, senior center, etc. Second, I think we need to ensure commercial development is keeping pace with our residential development to broaden our tax base, support walkable growth, and maybe moderate some traffic. Third, and this relates to the next one, I think it's in the best interest to decline the fee in lie of parkland as land cannot be bought in this area for $40,000 an acre, even if it were available. Um the land use plan is recommending at least 75 contiguous acres of forest for the Robertson Creek headarters conservation area that this is mostly marked for and it looks like only 20 acres are designated to be preserved with the rest clearcut. Um

most of phase one is early successional habitat. Um and again the the condensed area near the pond is not really meeting the recommendations in the land use plan about how much land needs to be conserved to really meet that use. And then finally, I would just urge them to utilize native or at least native cultivars rather than the exotic landscaping species listed in their plat. There's plenty of options in the UDO that meet the same sort of recommendations for foliage, drought, deer resistance, etc., there's going to be mass removal of native species happening from this parcel no matter what. So, whatever we can do to try to mitigate that, I think benefits everybody. Thank you.

Thank you. Next I have Liz Cullington. That's me.

Name is Liz Cullington. I live at 390 Rocky Hills Road, Pittsburgh. Um I'm here speaking on the small area plan. Um the timeline for review of a small area plan was written for a plan covering one or at most two planning sections. It also seems wrong to ask you to review a totally different type of plan and and a new two-step process without the town board revising those requirements. It's important to note that the town board hadn't been given the fine print of what's really been proposed when they allowed this to be referred to you. Initially, it seemed that this very large fine was going to be conceptual because it was so sketchy with details to follow. But the proposed smaller section design plans wouldn't replace uh the small area plans or that process. They would have only some detail that's supposed to be in this plan. But more importantly and even worse, the review process for those later plans is very different and very constrained. All the review would be at the staff level and just be box checking. Neither the planning board nor the town board would have any discretion or any input on virtually all aspects of those later plans nor any affected members of the public. On pages four to five, it states, "If all required standards are met as determined by town staff and the proposed public facilities are deemed adequate by the town board of commissioners, then the section design plan shall be approved. And where the text lists the contents of those design plans, there are footnotes confirming how little only the town board is allowed to weigh in, limited to the location of parks, greenways, and fire stations. That's it. Regarding land use, the so-called conceptual plan adds almost nothing to the master plan anyway, except for somewhat sneakily allowing a large amount of remaining non-residential acreage to be converted

to yet more housing. Um, that's also at page four. Something you could easily miss. Even if called conceptual, whatever details are in this plan would be approved with the plan, such as that one. But even those could be changed later. Meanwhile, there's no requirement that submittal design plans be spaced out in time and site plans could come too soon. All of this constitutes an upended process. So entirely opposite to all normal procedures and what park investors had agreed to. It's breathtaking. This proposed process is outlined in the plan before you and I urge you to reject it. If not as undesirable, at least as not approved. If you're forced to proceed, please take your time. Please also consider the big picture. Does this plan provide any of the benefits that supported the original approval 10 years ago? It was not supposed to be just thousands of new homes, but a job generating engine with a vast amount of uh new um non-residential property tax and sales revenue. Thank you for

Thank you, Mr.

Next, I have uh Mora Dylan.

What I just handed to you is actually nothing that I'm submitting. It's from my neighbor Betsy Krauss, who is sick tonight and unfortunately couldn't be on us. Um, I am Mora Dylan and I live at 326 Mocrronut Road in Pittsburgh. Um, I'm going to be quick this time. Um, I just am going to echo a lot of what the the last speaker um was saying that I hope that you will take your time in reviewing the small area plan and not feel rushed into making recommendations to the board of commissioners before you've had plenty of time to review it, get your questions asked and responded to, and to make sure that you have your work session. It seems to me that aside from all the questions about the details of the plan, which you've only recently received, there are a lot of questions about this new process that was presented at your last meeting, breaking up the small area plan procedure that was originally agreed on in the 2015 in 2015 into a conceptual small area plan and the smaller section design plans. First of all, is it possible to change the terms of the process even while it is taking place? Um maybe this is okay. Um but it seems unusual to me and maybe questionable. Um is this a precedent for other procedures in the future? Um it seems like maybe it's sidelining some of the conflicts um and and issues that people are having. Um, assuming that it is an acceptable procedure according to the town, it seems very unclear how the conceptual small area plan with subsequent section design plans differs from the original small area plan. It seems sort of convoluted to me at this point. Um, there has been a general master plan that was going to be followed up with multiple detailed small area plans over time. The new suggestion is that a non-binding conceptual small area plan, which does not offer a lot more detail than the master plan, be approved and followed up with smaller,

more detailed section design plans. It's very unclear what the implications of the change is to me. What does the town achieve? And what are the advantages to Chattam Park investors? I'm I'm just very unclear about this. Um, in the material I've seen, the primary difference seems to be there's no place for public input or community engagement and that it reduces or eliminates um any oversight capacity for the town. Um, so my worst fear is that this is a strategy that ultimately gives the developers what they want, but there could be more to it than that, but I think it's very convoluted at this point. So, I just urge you to take your time. Um either way, it's important for it to be made crystal clear what's gained or lost in the process. Um and that is what you need to make a responsible choice. So, thank you.

Thank you, Miss Dylan. Um next is Lenor Jarger.

Hi, I'm Lenor Jarger. Uh 3355 Woody Store Road, Tyler City. And uh once again, I want to appreciate y'all for your patience and taking time and attention to listen to us speak on the small area plan. Um I sit on the county transportation advisory board and I know that it takes me volunteer hours to deal with big issues like this. So I just want to say that I appreciate you. I'd like to ask a few things of you tonight. Um I think first of all that many of us have made it pretty clear that we're concerned about um the town board foregoing its ability to influence the future development of the South Village. If one giant small area plan is approved, town staff have included a proposal for section design plans in the SAP as an attempt to maintain town influence. But we are concerned that the language of the SIP as it now reads um which defines these section design plans and the process for their approval doesn't yet meet a standard that will ensure the same degree of town influence um or public engagement as would the original proposal in the master plan for multiple small area plans. So before you consider your recommendation about this SAP, I ask that you work with the town staff to strengthen the language around the section design process so that we're all convinced that this is actually in the town's best interest. If that can't be done, then I ask you to recommend against this plan. Second, I hope that you will give yourselves the time you need to digest all this material and work through it. I ask you to formally request town staff to organize a working session for you. I thought you had asked that at the last board meeting. I'm not sure where the breakdown in communication came, but I hope that that will take place. Um, and I also ask encourage you to request an extension of the 60-day time limit for you to make a recommendation to the town board. Even a small extension would ensure that you can have at least two more planning board meetings prior to your having to

make a recommendation on this. And finally, uh, we still lack significant clarity in a financial analysis to which others may speak tonight because it doesn't include a detailing of expenses to the town and I don't think any recommendation for this plan should be made until the financial piece has been accurately and adequately detailed. Thank you. Thank you.

Next, we have Emily Sutton. Good evening. I'm Emily Sutton. I'm the Hall River Keeper and Executive Director at Hall River Assembly. I come to you tonight along with several other Sorry. If you would, your address, please. Oh, sorry. I'm at 143 Binham uh Binham Beach Road, Pittsboro.

Thank you. Um, I come to you tonight along with dozens of other community members to ask that you do not vote on the small area plan as proposed by Chattam Park. The proposal to put forward The proposal that has been put forward by Chadam Park investors fails to address each area of the 5,000 acre plan as individual designs as initially proposed in Chadam Park's commitment to the town of Pittsburgh. By approving one unified plan for the 5,000 acre project, the town will not have the ability to protect specific areas of concern such as streams and wildlife corridors, steep slopes, and highly erodable soils, buffers, and storm water infrastructure. The initial proposal from Chadam Park investors identified 27 small areas to review. By consolidating that initial proposal into one 5,000 acre small area plan, Chattam Park investors have taken yet another step to erode the public trust for the community members that call Pittsburgh home. As this 30-year project plan is developed, the planning board and town board members must maintain the ability to review progress and amend plans if necessary. By approving a small area plans individually as the project progresses. This provides an opportunity for Chattam Park investors to build trust with elected officials, staff, and members of the public to show that their approved plans are effective and protect our resources. If the plans are not successful, this gives the staff and elected officials the opportunity to amend and modify proposals if additional small plans are approved. Chattam Park Investors has designed construction plans and post construction storm water measures to withstand a 10-year storm, which is the minimum allowable by the state of North Carolina. Chattam County requires plans to design for a 25-year storm. Only a

few months ago, our town experienced catastrophic flooding during what has since been called a 1,000-year storm. Much of this plan includes locations that are already within the flood planes. And as we have seen, increased impervious surfaces dramatically increase flooding downstream. These areas of high risk must be addressed as individual small area plans in order to protect future residents of the Chattam Park community and existing residents along our impacted streams and along the Hall River. So again, I urge you as members of the planning board to use your authority to abstain from voting to move forward with the small area plan as proposed and request that Chattam Park investors present each of the 27 initially proposed areas as individual plans. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Steve Wolford. Good evening. Uh, I'm Steve Wolford of 3355 Woody Store Road. Um, people who went ahead and me covered some things that I was going to say. So, I I wanted to speak about the Chattam Park issue. Following the conversations I've heard lately, I I look at maybe changes from the original plan to approving things in a different set of packages. I've heard the staff from Pittsburgh talk about the advantages that come, why this might be a planner's dream to be able to be in in the beginning working on every stage. And I see value in that. And at the same time, I I heard people I heard commissioners talking about they want to be sure that there's ongoing input and not hand over. From my own perspective, I mean, at some point everything is going to get planned. It's going to happen sooner or later. I understand packages and but where I have the most concerns is that there's a lot of clar maybe maybe there can be a best of both worlds where there can be a whole lot of oversight for a big plan but there's still plenty of room for ongoing modifications or or different steps have to pass still be reviewed by a planning board still have to be passed by the town um I think Language is important. There's things I've heard talked about that I can't find exactly in the plan. And you can have a you can have an understanding that exists in a staff person's head and in the developer's head. And then I see a scenario later on where that parcel's been sold to somebody else and that staff person may be working somewhere

else and people have different impressions of what was agreed to. So, I just think it's really important to have something that you can fall back on and say, "Here, we can see clearly what we agreed to. Here's where we worked it out and and everybody knows." And if expectations are different, it's clear from that plan how they get resolved and who gets to decide how they get resolved or what the process is. soul.

So, I'd just like to see in light of maybe these changes in this different kind of vision than than what I thought was there that that that be as clear as possible so that nobody's in a situation down the road where people are saying we never agreed to that. We wait, you said and and there's there's just a clear picture for working those kinds of things out. Um, I think that's that's as much as I'll say for now. Thanks.

Thank you. Next, we have Megan Kimble. Good evening, chair and planning board members. My name is Megan Campbell. I'm a senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, and I have um prepared remarks tonight, but um they overlap with a lot of what everybody's already said about the Chattam Park um South Village Small Area Plan. So, I'm going to hand this um to your staff member along with my card um and ask her to please um share this with you. And I thought I would just speak off the cuff a little bit um to share a little bit about my organization and a couple of just brief thoughts. So, um the Southern Environmental Law Center, if you're not familiar with us, we're a regional organization. We work um throughout the Southeast. I'm on our land and community team and I'm located in Chapel Hill um just down the road. And um all of my work is about building what we call clean connected communities. In fact, we have a statewide group that we call clean connected communities. And a couple of the people in the audience here today um participate in that. And we work with communities across the state to um try to help put policies and plans in place um that build the communities that everybody really wants. Um you know, connected, walkable communities where the air is clean. um people have vibrant places to get together and build community and um you know places it kind kind of like the Chattam Park development the way that it was um described in the beginning this sort of live work play vision um this utopian ideal um and and so I'm here tonight to offer myself as a resource um like I said I pass along my card so um if any board members individually would like to talk with me or if the town would like to work with us um you know,

we provide our services for free. Um but I think I also just wanted to to stress that, you know, I think that you're right, um to be asking questions, um taking the time to think these things through. All of this is so complicated and I know that it it must be a really heavy weight um to to have to make these decisions because you know that the decisions you make today are going to affect Pittsburgh um forever as as it grows from a town of 5,000 to tens and tens of thousands of people. Um and I think you're also right to insist that the developer follows through on the commitment that it made 10 years ago. this sort of utopian idea of um these beautiful walking um walkable uh connected villages. Uh and so I think some big questions that I have are sort of around um this conceptual plan, this idea that sort of midway through the game um the rules are going to change and um we're we're not talking about multiple small area plans, but this sort of more general thing. Um, and I see I'm running out of time, but um, please refer to what I provided and and reach out. We're here to help. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, and then lastly, we have Carol Hewitt. Did you say last but not least? Did I hear you say last but not least? Absolutely.

I'm Carol Hu at 424 Johnny Burke Road, Pittsburgh. And I want to start with in the spirit of honesty and trust. I said something in the town board meeting last Monday that was not accurate. I said that you're going to clear cut 5,000 acres. That is not true. They are required to leave 10% tree coverage at least. So maybe it's 4,500. Maybe it's 44. But honestly, I was wrong. I exaggerated. And I asked Tadam Park to be honest with us and I want to be honest in my comments. So, um, yeah, I I I am prone to exaggeration. Moving on to tonight and the small area plan. Uh, much of what my thoughts have been said. Your work session, you asked for a work session. I heard you. You didn't get it. I think you're going to have to do a formal motion. Uh, you're going to have to be more assertive for the things that you want. Uh it is not going to be in anybody's best interest but yours to ask for what you want. Do you all have a printed copy of the vast amount of documents that came in the mail to all of us?

Copy better.

Digital copy. Okay. I mean I printed one app last time. It was rather expensive. I will try to print one up for myself in order to look at these maps and to compare them and to really see what's going on. you deserve a printed copy. That's I'm just saying. So, I hope you will get one. Um it's really hard otherwise to do you there is this is complicated. Um you're being asked to do something and take on a responsibility for a recommendation that will impact this town, this county, this state, this world for beyond decades, forever. Um this is a really significant significant proposal uh project. There's there's not anything really like it that we've seen ever in North Carolina certainly. So, um and I'm really excited about the Southern Energy Southern Environmental Law Center offering to help you for free. Those are free, highly skilled professionals that work in this field. She handles traffic. Took me three minutes to get from Walgreens to Havoc tonight. I mean, that's that's 210 of a mile in three minutes. And we don't have anybody the new people here yet. So we we need a serious traffic analysis. I mean, you know, in my neighborhood where I live right next to Chattam Park, they put 30,000 people here. I may never come to Pittsburgh again, which is kind of hard. And the last thing I want to say is you have you heard the phrase, you'll never have to vote again. Well, the way I read this, you may never get to vote again. So, I know I've asked Teresa about this, but I'm not finding in this package where after this conceptual plan is passed, public meetings like had been held for the 40 years that I've been in Chattam County, whenever we had issues, we had public meetings and we had public input and

planning board got to vote and town board got to vote. I just I don't see that in here. So, um thank you, Miss Huitt. Gonna get educated. Thank you very very much. Moving on to old business. There is none. So moving to new business. Uh this is the recreation fee and loo I believe is being presented by Mr. Paul Messik.

Good evening. The the reason I'm doing this is um the director was uh Alan Cickle and I volunteered and but he's back like look like Lazarus. At any event, let me uh try to explain what's on the table. The first matter is is primarily a housekeeping measure that um deals with the recreation fees in lie of uh the the state authorizes u cities like Pittsburgh to be able to require dedication in certain areas uh for recreation purposes. This formula is 133 of an acre per lot. In some cases, because of the size of the development, it's not particularly um feasible or practical to have public recreation in that small development. So, there are alternatives that are proposed. The um current UDO allows for recre dedication of recreation areas off the site of the development and also uh the payment of a fee in lie of this proposed amendment is to address the the way the fee is calculated in the prior to the u the formation of the UDO and the old subdivision regulations the fee was based upon the postdevelopment value of the property that is required to be dedicated This change suggests that the the valuation be based upon the postdevelopment value.

You said in you said it was based upon post and now it's based it's based upon pre now in the current UDF and the proposed change would make it postdevelopment. It's as simple as that. Well, what's postdevelopment value like how generally be more? Sure. Yeah, I imagine. But like how far post development like within 50% of the development or after it's completely developed or how is that assessed? Post development is after it's developed 100% developed. The the area that is in involved in the calculation of a recreation space could be it could be a phase or it could be the complete develop.

Sure. But you figure out how many lots there are and you multiply that by 133rd and you come up with a certain area and then you calculate the post development value of that area for tax purpose. Okay, I I'm sorry, maybe I'm just not understanding this. Like, so pre-development area, there's nothing there. And then postdevelopment area, there's homes, there's infrastructure, there's other things, right? And the value of that at a given time at which you measure it is at the beginning of development of that. No sir, postdevelopment is after it's developed. Pre-development is before it's developed.

I understand that. Like after it's completely developed or a certain percentage of that. So, if you're developing 400 homes, May I May I maybe help? Sure. I'll try at least maybe if I understand your question. So, would it be for example if I'm building a subdivision that has 33 homes and each home is worth a million or we're projecting the home is worth a million dollars. It's not the it's not the value of the homes, it's the value of the land, the land itself of just the land. So it so and that calculation would happen before the in and part of the process that they go through with the planning uh comm with the planning

would be by the time of final plant approval that would be before any houses are built at all.

So land is more valuable. So the post the the postdevelopment value would be would be a an estimate obviously but it would the the number would are the number of acres that they have to provide would be based obviously on the whole parcel as they got it. Then whatever they did not provide whatever they provided short of that initial requirement would be a fee in loo and that fee in loo would be calculated on the value of the land after it was developed.

So so it would generally be it I shouldn't say generally it's it's always going to be more valuable after it's developed. So like they could have developed more homes on that like and that's the value of the land after they developed those homes. Say if you know like if you have quarter acre um homes right and they didn't develop those is now the value of that land what you could have put four homes on.

No sir you don't understand. Uh for example, the Griffin farms develop 99 lots 99 units that would divide that by 33 and come up with three. What is the postdevelopment value of 3 acres? That's it. That's all that and and what determine what's sorry. What's the difference between pre and post of that three acres? It's just the value. So the the the raw land before before it's before it's been cut and anything put on it, say it's worth $40,000 an acre. After it's developed, it's worth $75,000 an acre.

But what if it's like an eighth of an acre amongst, you know, separated there's 38 of an acre? There's it's not it's not really cut into pieces like that. It's just it wouldn't be a a a lot like a home site versus if they fee in lio they're not going to have any public recreation area at all. There's not going to be any all of it will be developed. Yeah. And just in your I know you said always it will always be more valuable. Is that is that is that what I hate to say always, but I can't imagine that a piece of land with water, sewer, streets is not more valuable than raw land

unless it was undevelopable because it was small and disjointed like four acres divided by 16 different small spots, you know. Never mind. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Quick question. This does this impact the timing of when we receive the fee in No, sir. That's not changed. It's it's at final plat approval stage. Okay. Which means that it has to be at least 75% complete.

And this is just this is just a request to change the calculation. Yes, ma'am. Okay. the the number that we use to calculate. Okay. Anyone else? Any other questions? All right. Uh can I get a motion then to uh approve the changes as presented? Make a we make change make a change. Um sorry. Motion by Alfreda Austin. Do I have a second? I second the motion

seconded by Christina Pard. It is a motion to approve changes to the recreation fee and loo as presented. All in favor, please say I. I. Uh. All opposed. Motion passes. Um, and then next also by Mr. Paul Messik, the planning board provisions in the unified development orders.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh this matter is is also more of a housekeeping matter than anything else. Um state law requires that uh representatives of advisory boards like yourselves uh that have ETJ representation, those members have to be proportional to the number of people that are in the ETJ and requires that after every dennial uh census that that figure be recalculated. Uh we currently have seven members, regular members of the of the planning board, five of whom are in town and two of whom are ETJ representatives. That number of the ETJ representatives could change depending on the population uh in the town and in the ETJ and that has to be recalculated but the current method is five and two. Um this proposed amendment to the UDO provisions about the planning board incorporates that. Um it was never specific in the ordinance before. It was a policy and and the town made that adjustment uh previously, but this just puts that into into black and white in the in the ordinance itself. The other uh substantial change to the uh planning board uh provisions in the UTO is to incorporate the policy that the town board adopted some time ago about absences and how you calculate attendance and what the consequences of not not attending meetings should be. Uh the rest of it is sort of reformatting what was in the um the current UDO and I think that the clerk handed out copy of the existing ordinance provisions. This is a little bit longer but it's basically the same thing. If you have any questions I'll be glad to try to respond.

I'm sorry Paul. Can you is there any way anyone can kind of articulate the differences between the the existing policy for representation and this new proposed? I know that I gave you copies of both. Sure. Um but I just didn't see like um didn't see like the previous version. What were the differences or changes, Randy? Or can anyone tell me what changed? I don't have the old version in front of me.

Specific about the ETJ representation and about the actual policies. Yeah. Yeah. What's what's changed? I don't know. I knew I know like the proposed all added. They were all um just um I think he said the attendance policy was changed or added to the the statute or I don't know if it's like they're there now. Okay. So no changes just they're here house claiming house claim. They were a gentleman's agreement before and they're official to the call.

You have any questions on that? No. If not, um, can I get a a motion to approve the uh required extra extra juris extra territorial jurisdiction representation provisions to the unified development ordinance as presented? Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the required extra extr territorial jurisdiction representation provisions United unified development ordinance UDO as presented. Thank you, Mr. James Buster. Do I have a second? Seconded by Alan Wilson. All in favor, please say I. I. Uh. All opposed say I. Thank you.

Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Messik. We'll move on to a resoning request. PB 23358 at 102 Park Drive, I believe. Yes. Mr. Kahun Tingle is going to present that one to us. Excuse me. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening. Make it back and I did live despite welcome back

to the opposite. Um so this evening's um presentation from me. Uh we received a legislative request by VC VRC, excuse me, Limited, Jan Nichols here behind me, uh submitted a petition for a map amendment which I believe in just a second will be up on the screen in front of you guys. This one's one of the more um plain ones. Unlike most of our uh recent ones, this is not a conditional reszoning. This is just anything that's allowed in the parcel that is closest to Ellsbur Street would be allowed on this particular one. Uh it is 3.72 acres. It's currently located next to the Alpha Center. Property is currently vacant. Owner intends to utilize the parcel for offices and residential uses. Um, it's currently classified as residential and future land use plan, which I believe will be the next slide. Yeah, there you go. Um, the yellow is residential. The red is of course commercial. Excuse me. It's adjacent to a mixeduse activity center in the Pittsburgh future land use plan parcel has open space designated along Park Drive. And if you go to the next slide, basically the net effect is the part that's cross-hatched would become highway commercial as well. Um I'm going to send um the petitioner up. The only thing I'm going to note to you all is that when this package was prepared um what was not included in the final draft was a um consistency statement for approval and a consistency statement for disapproval. So once the petitioner comes up and leads their case, we'll go over how that works out. would also like to mention to the board that you received two consistency statements in your packet. There was also a draft

consistency statement that the applicant supplied. That is not what you were going off of. Information. Okay. This is Jan. Thank good evening.

Thank you very much. My name is Jan Nichols. I'm with BRC Limited. Good evening, chair, board members, town staff. I'm here in support of our request to reszone parcel 79930 from R12 to C2 first. And this is a summary of a sheet that I provided that has more detail. Pittsburgh is facing strong growth pressures. And this isn't just about new housing. It's also about providing the commercial and retail services our residents need close to home. Second, adding businesses and commercial options strengthens and diversifies the tax base, and that balance helps ensure long-term financial stability for the town. Third, zoning is a planning tool. It is not a legal constraint. The town has consistently adapted zoning to meet evolving needs. Fourth, there is strong precedent. In just the last two years, this board and the town commissioners have approved reszonings that demonstrate flexibility and responsiveness. Consider the plant reszone to community mixed use in 2025. Cooper's Ridge to mixeduse plan development in 2025. Robson's walk from heavy industrial to highway business and multif family in 2024. And Reed's Farms Ree Farm over 5,000 acres to neighborhood mixed use center in 2023. And there are more on the document that I distributed. All of these approvals advanced Pittsburgh's broader needs and many were granted even though they were inconsistent

with the land use plan. Fifth, this site is appropriate for C2 zoning given current infrastructure improvements. 15501 is being widened and this property sits on a primary stretch in the approach to downtown. With the future widening of Hillsboro Street, access to this area will be significantly improved. It is appropriate for C2 property to be located near the town's arterial connections. Sixth, site access realities favor commercial rather than residential use. There is an environmental feature on Park Drive that prevents or searly severely limits direct site access from that road. And you could see that stream on one of the preceding slides if you want to scroll back up the one that showed the water. This resoning would allow, excuse me, access from the east toward 15501 through the existing alpha center. Importantly, it is not feasible to provide a conventional single family neighborhood entrance through the alpha center from 15501. Attempting to develop this parcel under current residential zoning would require a stream crossing and buffer impacts to the branch that runs parallel to Park Drive. Our preference and the more environmentally responsible option is to preserve existing vegetation along Park Drive and allow C2 access from the Alpha Center. For these reasons, we respectfully ask that you approve this resoning. have questions for myself or our

engineer at this point? The only question I have really is the obviously the the access to that site is is going to be very sensitive certainly off of Park Drive. Park Drive itself, the road itself, I know you said there's no to to use that. There's no plan, but is I don't I don't I don't want to say plans change, but and you've had sorry say again resetta buddy I mean we have never discussed in the discussion about the property that would want to come in from park drive but

so I think everyone's familiar with the widening of 15501 and actually the widening of Park Drive so uh the land not familiar with the widening of Park Drive

so they are they are actually going to have a a threelane turn on Park Drive so part of this property uh is going to be utilized by NC do uh where you see it kind of going up toward the environmental feature of the the stream and it it has been noted in all the years that uh we've discussed with the town and came forward years ago with a resoning or condition resoning uh we would want the access to come from the existing crossing coming into the Alpha Center which used to be you know a place where people sold cars right so It's it's got a very wide entry there. And

you are you are speaking about the entry off of 15501, not the one from park. There's a park exit entry now. Okay. And so you wouldn't need to add an extra one. You just use utilize that

utilize that one because now it's the same property owner. They'll just combine it into one. And at some point in the future, they would make use of the property in the back. Right? It may not be today or tomorrow. many years ago, they just simply wanted to build a parking lot because Spectrum wanted to come to town and rent half of the Alpha Center in order to, you know, have like a, you know, they knew development was coming and they wanted to actually put a center in there, but they didn't have, weirdly enough enough parking, right? You have all the parking in front, but they wanted a place where they could go and put up fencing for their trucks. And so that's what started this process four and a half years ago. So then that that is the idea. Now

the idea would ultimately be you you'd build some type of office use that would come under C2, but they would all be not just parking lot. No, we're not. Yeah, that that was the original thing, but that went out the window when a it didn't get resoned and b spectrum decided it was taking too long. I mean, the original application was in 2021, right? Are you talking about the ingress and ingress being the same place into that property? Yes, there's currently a place that you can come off Park Drive into the office center. If anyone's ever gone to Kakalaki or Hoops Pizza,

there's one off Park Drive. That is not going to change. DOT is going to widen that. The the property owner cooperated with DOT. So, that's all been done and baked into the cake. And then you'll still have an entry across from Springdale to the to the Alpha Center. So adding this on the back side, the intention is not to have another process. The intention is just to use those to turn in up and into. Correct.

So So y'all have been talking about offices. When I read through this stuff, there was information about a potential hotel. So what's that? Well, you could you could put a hotel potentially according to C2 on uh on the current site, you know, for as well as town homes, I believe, right? And apartments, whatever is currently You say current site, you mean the alpha site?

The alpha site is C2. Yes. So, if you were going to site a hotel, it might be better if this was zone C2, so you could wiggle it around. But the engineer right here, Susan Joplain and Brandon Moore cited a hotel there many years ago when they were just the property owner was looking at options. The thing that would be best I think for everyone I think this board is quite aware of of the rain and the flooding that happens further down on Oakway. As long as I've been here in town, that's been an issue. that land on the front side of there could be worked between that current land owner and the town to create some type of storm water catch basin system you know cooperating with the town if there was to be some development there and Susan could speak to this you'd have a storm water pond and that would be a perfect opportunity for the town and that property owner to cooperate and ameliorate a problem that's been going on for at least 20 years right and so getting this thing moved along I think would help that happen. What happened tomorrow? The the land owner has no no plans to do anything yet. They've just been trying to get this reszoned since 2021. But I think at that point there would be an opening for a dialogue. And Susan, if you want to address that issue.

I'll just say that back in 2021, we did look at trying to make an access off of Park Drive through that um exist sorry through the existing buffer and it just it wasn't very feasible. There's a 60oot buffer, there's the stream, there's flood plane, there was so much impact that it just didn't make make sense to even try to do that. So,

so I understand it just wouldn't make sense the So then in this case, would it make sense for this to be a conditional resoning and remove the residential option from C2? Is there a residential option currently in C2? Yes. Well, not single family, but town homes and apartments. Yes.

But if if they were to be built, let's just say hypothetically, you would still be access you could still access them through a circulation plan from the Alpha Center. You wouldn't necessarily want to come across there, right?

Okay. My understanding was the way we were talking was if if it was residential, it would you would want it off of Park Drive. I'm sorry if I misunderstood that. No, I think what Jan's referring to is let's just say the property owner said, "You know what? I'm retiring. I'm moving away and I'm going to sell this to someone and someone just bought the three and a half acres." Well, then that some whoever that buyer would would come there and say, "Okay, I'm going to try to build some houses." And they would attempt to do that. But as long as it's under one owner that wants a coherent plan that makes sense, you aren't going to have that situation, which is why they would like to get this moved along because they want to work with the town. office is over there. We rent from that owner. We're representing that owner. That's why we're here.

Understood. I have another question. In in this packet of information, there was a lot of conversation with the property owner of the two adjoining lots to the north. They don't show on that map, but Cory Golden. Yeah. and and it sounded like there was a potential of if this piece of property gets reszoned then expanding the resoning into those other two properties which would expand commercial further north behind the residences that are on

to be specific Lori has a real estate company in town. She used to rent over there and she and her husband who also own and Allen and son own that own those two lots. they have had interest and I think they've come to the town or representatives come to the town in the last few years to inquire what they could do. When she sat down with us and we went through the options, we said, "Look, here's some plans that were drawn up if you wanted to cooperate, but if not, they can do whatever they want to. They have an access off of 15501. They could come in there and build whatever they want. We just said that if you did decide to build something, we'd cooperate with you, help you so you wouldn't have just developments on developments without connectivity.

Randy, you're talking about like uh 6613 and Yeah. Okay. These two. Yeah. Right. to this north of the highlighted portion and then to the up. She was in favor of the of what of the plan and she just wanted to be assured that if something happened that this property owner would cooperate with her and the answer was yes. I mean you don't want people doing resonings and not cooperating with their neighbors. So, my understanding with reszoning is y'all y'all are saying you want to build offices, but reszoning opens it up to the possibilities of of lots of other commercial things.

C2. Yes. If if this pro if we voted to reszone and then the property owner decided to sell it to somebody else, then they could come in and do whatever. They could build apartments without coming back having to reszoning. I don't think they asked for a conditional res. This is not No, this is not conditional. This is a straight C2 reasonzoning.

To be clear, the property owner came in four and a half years ago, met with town staff. Now, town staff has had some changes and they submitted a conditional O andi zoning to try to do the parking lot. Then that was withdrawn because it's it appeared that some of the neighbors didn't like that. There was we had a neighborhood meeting. Then they came back and did a conditional use zoning that this board unanimously supported and many many months were spent negotiating that and because the town was going to do a new land use plan, it was voted down at the town board level because a new land use plan was going to be done and the instruction was to come back later. Then the property owner came to the town and said, "What would you like us to do?" and they said, "You know what? It's C2 on the front. It just makes a lot more sense to have it all one coherent thing, especially with DOT coming in and widening all the way up to your property line." So, they submitted C2. So, essentially, if the board said go back and come back and do that, it would be the third time that they were going and doing that it in four and a half years for a very small thing. I mean, this is not this is just a little parcel that they're just trying to get coherent with the front parcel that they've owned since 2018. I wasn't part of any of those previous discussions and so this is new to me

and so I just want to put that I don't I don't know I think Freda may you may be the only one left who who was around but that's just makes sense to it make it all one one zoning and not one here and one there. Yeah, it would make sense to make it C2 to make it all all correct.

Well, the thing about the land owner, I've known the property owner in question for 32 years. These are long-term people who care about the community, live in Chapel Hill. They're not looking to speculate and sell. In fact, they worked hard with DOT to change the plan for DOT to make it better on the quarter because that property is kind of a key piece for the widening. So they're not going away. You know, they brought Kakalaki in there, which is a local owner. This is something that they intend to own and sit on, not flip as evidenced by buying the property behind it from JA Webster and sitting on this for almost eight years.

Anyone held any more questions? Just refresh my memory. Where does the widen stop? widening goes all the way down 15501 on the front side of that property. Uh and they've already that's already been worked out with DOT on the front on the park. Uh if you go out there, we you can see that they're tapering it in because they're going to create a turning lane. I mean, I'm sure Randall, you've seen the turning lane plan this all the way up to McDonald's. this be like a turn. I'm talking about going uh heading west.

We're going to go pretty much the full almost the full length of that property 102. It doesn't get to the property to the west, but pretty much most of that property. DOT contacted them to create to have a drainage easement and to have a taper for the turn. Kind of follow the dotted line here on the map. a huge stitch going down since

if that is all then um I'll accept a motion right here in the middle of this because there's already access point here you have it like readily right there. If you could bring that up then yeah, that'd be great. Um Allan, she said they have a map of that they can put up quickly for us. [Music]

Thank you. While we're waiting, I really really appreciate the orange. Thank you. Thank you. Doesn't look like the fall. That's exactly. This is why I have my own. There you go. Is there anyone wish to make a motion to approve or deny or I think she'll pull up the She's going to pull that then. I'm gonna I'm going to ask for a motion. Pulls it out way. Make a statement if you don't mind. Yes. And then we'll get to that. That sounds great. Let's just let her get that down.

So, just to make sure I'm clearing my mind, I know I'm getting So, the the access point would be there on Park Drive going into the parking lot. Um, the ex the existing the existing the existing drive. There would not be a new access on be a revamped access because they're going to widen it. And then also the access off street coming in on the north side, right? It doesn't any wider. It's already made for a car lot. Gets wider just gets better or bigger different. All right. So, where are we?

Okay. Is um while we're waiting. So, I mean, there you go. All right. I'll see two already. That should help you see what they're doing on Park Drive. Yeah. Yellow. The Alpha Center is that orange. Yeah.

So, the preference of the property owner is to keep the the land down by Park Drive, roughly an acre of it, all wooded anyway, and use their current access to come in and do something if and when. And you can see that DOT wants to put in a turn lane. You can see they they work with the property owners there to acquire the easements and the drains. It's done. So we were doing really good a second. There we go. But now coming out of Park Drive going north on 15501 exist

would pretty much be the existing situation only folks would have to cross three lanes rather than the current two. Is that right? Yeah. That doesn't have a that's not a for this reasonzoning. That is not an issue for this zoning residence or not. Okay, so just for the sake of clarity, want to throw in a couple of things. First, if the petitioner decided to come back with conditional reszoning, they would need to withdraw this application. Understood.

The only you cannot write one of those on the fly. So, as long as we're cool with that, what we have here is there's no dispute regardless of which one of these three consistency statements you use. This does not match the land use plan. Okay? Everybody needs to be completely cool with the idea. this is a non-match. The um reasons for potentially going against the land use plan is that um oh goodness, where are we? All right, so for approval, it says here request is also deemed an amendment to the plan. Um and it's reasonable public interest because it's proximity to the mixeduse activity center. The denial one is of course the usual language of it's not in the public interest um won't benefit the surrounding community etc. But again essentially you've got one piece RDC2 and you just bump it back. You don't change any driveways. You simply give somebody more land to work with which has a very wide very very environmentally sensitive area that is not only flood plane. There's a large amount of wetlands there, which is why it has largely not been developed. Okay, as long as I got that out of my system, I'm ready to hear where we're going.

All right. Do does anyone have any questions for Randy? Um, can you just explain again like how this does not um how it doesn't match the land use plan? It's very simple. Actually, if you went to the slide, you see that the front thing is red and the back thing's yellow. Yellow on the land use plan is residential. That is literally the way in which it doesn't. Okay. So, if it was red and this was red, then we would simply be working consistent with the plan. Sure. Yes. Right. But um can I just just dive in? Devil's advocate. Right. So, please go ahead.

Right. We're talking about uh um um density in terms of developing homes, developing town homes or new new homes. You said this one hasn't been developed because ABC and D. It's on a big hill. Yeah. And and and Randy had said, I think you said like the they're really only considering the north side of that property could which is on top of the hill. Yes. Not in the flood zone, right? You would not be able to do that. Yes. Flood zone part. Not in the flood zone. So the north side of that property that's not in the flood zone is what they're they're most interested in doing something with. Potentially town homes, potentially something else. Um

office is what they right. But I think that we articulate like the C2 you could do town homes or in C2. Yes, that is

um um the alternative be like to hold it as top of the hill to do some to for the environment. Actually at this point if it's if if okay when you get past this board and you go to the board of commissioners but it's not approved then it just stays exactly as it is right now. If it gets changed, it gives them an opportunity to expand the alpha center. Basically, the question is that or remove it from the site and build something else.

And I I just a quick question. So I remember many months ago we had a discussion about changing uh zoning according and then it's in disagreement with the land use and then therefore something happens with the state legislature. Okay. So, basically, is it is it possible to bring back up the the last map, the three from the So, basically what happens is if you get to the one that's yellow and red, little ketchup and mustard for us here. Outstand. So basically what happens is if this were to get reszoned by the board of commissioners then what is now yellow would be red

that's in that box and that's black. It just changes what's in that black box a different color. Okay. So the map is it just makes the change the map. It doesn't change the text. It just changes the map. Very simple map. All right. At this point I lost it. I have a question. Yes ma'am. may not be for you, but you you planning director. Are you sure? May be for the engineer. You you talked about the sensitive area. Yes. Bottom of that. Yes, ma'am. You you build some more offices. I assume there's going to be some more paved parking lots. Has has any that device built there to address it. You can't build something new without a storm water device. That's my question. Yes, ma'am.

Okay. What? And again, I'm not sure again I'm not familiar with the extension off Park Drive. I know that like the widening of Hillsboro Street, but I wasn't sure about the widening of Park Drive, which addresses halfway into this property or thereabouts. Mhm. Right. So, like that's already going to be Well, they they will they would have to work with the core of engineers and mitigate any of that. Make sure that Yeah. That's all right. taken care of. Yeah. And whose responsibility would that be? That's on DOT. Okay. Not that's not our state. Yeah. That's transportation.

Not the owners. Not on the town. I have one question. Okay. Everybody gets one. Yeah. What controls do we have as a town to limit the economic of the sorry the ecological impact of the change? Is it the site plan that will actually set that and the construction drawing? So once you get past this if they plan to build something they bring construction drawing in house for staff and we look at it there bring it back. Can I do that? Make sure. All right, everyone.

Um, I will accept a motion on this item. Either way, um, I move I move to approve PB 25358 as presented and to adopt the town of Pittsboro Planning Board land use. No, just I make a motion to uh approve the recommendation for PB um 25358 as present. A motion to recommend approval of PB25 358 as presented has been made by Matt Hayes. Do I have a second? I'll second that. Second by Alfreda Alustin. All in favor, please raise your hand.

Raise your hands. Okay. All oppose. Okay. The motion passes. Thank Thank you all. Christina just it was a uh wasn't sure which way it was going to go. I wanted to make sure I could see. Yeah. Yeah. It's not not like voting on the agenda. It's just like oh we're changing. Okay. Thank you everyone for that. Moving on to the rest preliminary plat for Reeves Farm.

Good evening, chair and board. My name is I'm a senior planner planning department here. Uh tonight, uh we have Ree Farm Pittsburgh LLC has submitted a preliminary plat for a major subdivision application for phase one of Ree Farm development. Respawn in Pittsburgh is approximately 496 acre master plan community. It was reszoned to neighborhood mixed use center district, a conditional zoning in November of 2023. The site is located along US64 business west east of Robertson Creek Road, currently in the town's ETJ, which is literally right across the street. Um, phase one application is proposed to include 251 single family detached lots with an average lot size of 6,710 square ft. Phase one portion of the project consists of 91.75 acres. The community will be constructed in four phases of development. The first phase of development will be on the east side of the community boarding West Street which is Highway 64, Hill Creek to the east, Robersonson Creek to the south, future phase 2 to the west. The first phase of the community aligns with the character district map dated September 23rd, 2003 2023, sorry. The character district map outlines character districts 3A, 3B, and 4A as possible character districts in the first phase of development, which is single family residential in all three character district. As noted, the approved map delineates a setback of land uses from West Street, proposes future interpal connectivity, reflects the general roadway system proposed, and establishes buffers along the environmental features of the property. Um, next I'm going to go through our

staff analysis uh that is attached in your packets. And instead of waiting till the end, please feel free to stop me at any time to ask questions. Um, the plan use as stated is single family detached. Uh, the density is 2.7 units per acre with the smallest lot size proposed being 4,400 square ft. For the utilities, a serve letter uh for sewer and water allocation has been provided by Tri River water. Um it is to provide treatment to Sanford Regional Force main. This development will receive uh water service from from Tri River. as well as stated uh the erosion control permit will be obtained at the construction drawing phase. The impervious is 28.42% for phase one. Oh no, for the entire phases, sorry. Storm water. Uh the applicant will submit storm water plans to engineering with construction drawings. Streams and wetlands. There is a perennial stream running along the eastern and southern side of the site. plat shows required 100 foot riparian buffers on each side of the stream. Property is also located within a flood plane that is running along the eastern and southern side of the site for landscaping parkland and open space. Um there is no required perimeter or streetscape buffer in this zoning district for parkland. If you look at your screen there, um the required uh public park land is

45.09 acres. They are providing 50.53 acres and they are doing that with 55.03 acres of land and the applicant is providing $500,000 at $40,000 per acre. That equals an additional 12.5 acres. Uh that money is for amenities to go into the parkland on this property. This property alone uh that calculation deducts 7 acres for the surface water of the pond that is in phase that is up there highway 64. You can see it but it's it's the the existing pond.

Yes, the existing pond. Yeah.

Um for the open space uh this is required 24.24 245 acres for all phases of development. They are providing 24.245 acres as noted on the on the map there. Uh and this is to be maintained by their HOA for the overall landscaping. Planning staff will review detailed landscaping plans during the construction drawing phase for access and circulation. Uh preliminary street designs have been reviewed by the fire marshall. Final approval of roadways is required also at the construction drawing phase. Uh phase one will have a gravel access road proposed and a secondary access on the west side of the property for emergency access. This will be a temporary access road until future phases are built out for roadways. Uh in respawn phase one there are 11 public subdivision roads. The main loop, Reeseform Crescent Road, has a 60- foot rideway with 15 foot travel lanes. All other roads have either a 50 or 56 ft rightway and 11T travel lanes. The 56 ft rightway roads include a 6 foot to accommodate for Arm Street Park. Um there is a road stub at the south side of the property for a future connection. [Music] Um residential lots will have driveways that will provide two vehicle parking spaces per unit uh for pedestrian use along 64. Uh there will be a 10-ft multi-use path. um five five ft sidewalks on both sides of all internal subdivision streets. And

if you go back to the park and recline, um a 6,000 line foot paved public greenway trail along Robersonson Creek from West Street to future intercal connector to be installed. That's that those orange dots. Where's the U future roadway on to the south? Am I missing? Where? Oh, connection. Yeah, sorry. Um, it's Oh, can you go back to the little layup plan? Southwest corner there.

Southwest corner. Oh, okay. West Corner is that go down to Chapel then or like just the future connection over Robson Creek. I mean yes um is that part of there's the west route. Sorry I'm just Yeah, I have the same question. Is the west route that has the loop and goes west back to 64 and then there's a south. Is that what we're identifying as that south point? That's Yes. Okay. Yes. When like we didn't we go through like a big um another development south of them that wasn't approved.

That's what we're saying. I think that's right now that would right that is a stub in case there is development that could connect. Yes. Okay. So it's not approve. It's not approved. There's not an approved Okay. That was okay.

Yeah. It's just a stub. There was a traffic a traffic impact analysis that was completed for the project. Uh the comments from NC do DOT uh for phase one requirements are to construct a left turn lane with 100 ft storage and appropriate tapers at site drive A on US 64 business west. Construct a right turn taper at site drive A on 64 business west. maintain 12 foot wide through and 12 foot wide through and turn lane widths throughout the project limits and provide a 100 foot in internal protected stem at site drive A. Uh your site your site analysis also contains improvements for the full buildout that are also you might have said it um but I think I missed it. the um the $500,000 free fee in Lou. How much um how many acres is that being provided?

12.5. Sorry, say again. 12.5 12.5. Okay.

That's $40,000 or Okay, it's down to 27. and the traffic traffic traffic impact analysis will be updated with each phase. Um for consistency with Pittsboro's comprehensive plans, uh the comprehensive transportation plan, the proposal is consistent with the CTP. The CTP does not recommend any improvements for this project area for the long-term vision map in the bicycle and pedestrian plan shows proposed physically separated bike pike and ped facilities. Therefore, the 10- foot wide multi-use path will be installed on the front along the front of the property of its entirety.

That's like the mold line at the top. Yes. And for the parks and wreck uh plan, it shows a greenway trail in the project area along the eastern property line towards the southern portion of phase one. Um so the 6,000 ft of p public greenways to be installed as earlier stated. Um, that's all I have. If you have any questions, anyone have any questions for Brian?

Question on the Robersonson Creek, all the for later expansion. That's all going to be greenway slash protected. Is it part of the total green space um part of the plan forward? Yes, it is protected. It's uh it's if you go back to the uh to the open space document um that greenway stops, you know. Yeah. Yeah. Right there, you know, at the

line will be basically park. So, in the the part about the the in lie of park land, I'm I'm looking at the comments from the speaker a while ago and she asked to decline the fee in lie of parkland as land cannot be purchased in this area for the proposed $40,000 per acre. I'm not sure I understand her thinking on that, but explain exactly what this in lie. You're you're you're paying for the acreage that the pond takes up. Is that

So, um the uh pond is not is is not in the equation. Um, pretty much the uh the the town in communication with the applicant um it was uh considered to to offer the five the $500,000 at that amount to a cape for the 12.5 acres so that the town can then improve the parkland the public parkland within Reese Farm with amenities.

I think they and maybe I'm wrong and stuff. I think that like the fe and loo is usually I don't know $27,000 an acre or something less than that and stuff and they're taking the pond and removing it from the denominator but in essence paying $40,000 an acre higher than an obligation of our current fe is that right is this not based on the calculation that we just voted to recommend this would not be based on the new yeah yeah clearly not but on the old calculation right it would be that's I mean then Yeah. Cool.

I I guess part of my confusion is it it says that 45.09 acres are required. The developer is providing more than that. Yes.

So, so why do they need to pay anything in loop? Good evening. My name is Jody Lid off the 481 Bennett Mountain Trades in Chapel Hill. I represent Reese Farm Pittsburgh. The park recreation is is it's been a wonderful collaboration between the town and Reese Farm Pittsburgh. There was a couple of objectives through all this park was really a linear park along West Street, right? And then it was the pond is so internal to everybody's life coming up and down business 64. So preserving that kind of scenic corridor, if you will, that hence all the open spaces happening along West Street where citizens can engage and the multi-use path will be there for everybody to access all the park. We were initially entitled for 1,700 homes. The 45 acres represents 1,200 homes, right? So, as we stand here today and we did our master plan, we laid out all the lots and we laid out the multif family, we came to a number that was 1,200 units, 1248, and that 133rd of the acre gets you to the 45. In essence, what the fian moved of and the whole discussion with the surface water allows for additional density to meet the entitled density of 1700 if the world changes over the next five years. And there was a desire to add more density in the neighborhood mixeduse center district. And also it's it's it's a the other aspect of this is day one when Reese Farm gets under construction and

the first lots are built. What happens in that park space around the pond right to keep it and what is those mechanisms to begin developing park space top lot swings planting actually building a beautiful park there that when people visit the a center and look across the road they see a beautiful park. So it's not mine. So part of this was helping the town develop.

Anybody else have anything else more for Mr. Collie? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Um with that then I'll accept a motion. Make

a motion that we approve. Motion by Alfreda Alustin uh to approve the uh recommend that the board of commissioners approve the subject major subdivision preliminary plat including payment of fees in lie of public recreation land dedication in the amount of $500,000 and provision of public recreation land dedication of 50.53 acres as illustrated on a preliminary plat to be paid and dedicated prior to final plat approval. Is that long enough?

Yeah. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Alan Wilson. Um, all in favor, please raise your hand. Motion passes unanimously. Everybody came. All right. Moving on. Uh the South Village small area plan. Miss Teresa Thompson. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Break. Take a break. We can Yeah. What do I Do we need to suggest a motion for You have a motion for recess?

Yes. Say five minutes. Motion for a fivem minute recess by Connie McAdams. Do I have a second? Second by James Buster. All in favor say I. I.

good. Um, believe we still have some members in the uh Matt if we could give you three extra minutes there. All right. Wheat and potatoes. Now, may I have a motion to go back into session?

Make a motion we go back into session. Motion by Alfredo Alston. Second. Second. Second by Christina Pard. All in favor, please say I. All right, back in session. On with the South Village small area plan. This Teresa Thompson. Hey, good evening everyone. Evening.

Good evening.

We're going to start with the memo. Um, I'm gonna give a little go back to the uh small area plan when it was first submitted. Kind of go through staff's conversations with Chattam Park at that time. Um, go through a couple of the attachments. Um, mainly the staff analysis and then we'll touch on chapter one. That's what has the language regarding the section design plans. Um, it seems like that's what most of the questions are about. So, if that if that sounds good to the board, we can start with that.

Um, so going back to when the smaller plan was submitted to staff. Um, it it was not clear that this was a conceptual plan. So, this is something that staff recommended from the beginning. that. Yes. So, if you're going to submit a 5,000 acre small area plan, like I said the last presentation with y'all and when I presented to the board of commissioners, staff does not feel like that's sufficient. The details are not sufficient to approve that as a small area plan as defined with the intent um listed in the master plan in the small area plan agreement. So staff has been working with Chadam Park the applicant in what does that look like then if st if you are going to submit a 5,000 acre smaller plan which per the language they can do in the small area plan agreement it says they can submit one or more which is pretty pretty clearly written um not saying that was the intent originally but we have to go by what's written you know and it clearly states they can submit one or more so we can't say we're not going to look at this because it's 16 of these sections because they are allowed to submit 16 at a time. Um but going through it from the beginning staff said to the applicant that this is not enough detail. It doesn't show the minor roads for example. Um it doesn't show the clear layout in order for staff to make a recommendation to move forward on each individual section. So if we are looking at this being conceptual, what we would have to at that point require additional steps. Um and to answer the question on

uh the section design plans being you know is that allowed? Yes, it is. The small area plan language and then agreement can supersede anything that's already been approved. So, uh, the language that we submitted to y'all that we presented to you at the last meeting, um, that has to be agreed upon by the planning board and board of commissioners because it's not written out yet. So, that's just staff's recommendation is if we are going to approve a 5,000 acre small area plan, staff recommends it to be conceptual. And then we also recommend updating the language to require these additional sets and conditions, which I'll go through more in a few minutes. Um, and also to clarify, when we're looking at this being conceptual, the town's looking at it from the perspective as you all look at like the land use plan when you looked at the resoning tonight, for example, and you compared that to the land use plan. um staff has well and the board has the option to either require that what's in that or you can deviate from it. Uh you just have to have reasons why. So um in terms of staff looking at a conceptual small area plan in the future that's there is wiggle room there. Now the applicant they are tying themselves to what is in the small area plan. So when they say that this is where we're proposing a park to be, if everything works out and the town says yes, that's where we want it to be, then that's where it's going to be. So um that's the benefit to having a large layout of 5,000 acres planned out at least to this scale is we can start making decisions from a planning

perspective you 15 20 plus years out. Um because this is basically a land use plan. It can be updated. Chattam Park can come back to the town and again that's a legislative process and say we we would like to change X Y and Z. Um but they would have to go through the same process that they're doing right now. Does that make sense? But does the door swing the other way as far as anything that the town would want changed? Correct. Yeah,

there needs to and we'll go in that detail in the next few pages, but um the way it's written is it would need to be based on evolving conditions, you know, uh that staff recognizes as an issue that needs to be addressed in the future. Is that related to like the elements or is that separate from the existing elements? It's separate. Um the elements are already written. Um they can be updated. Okay, those are more of the standards that we go by. So, when we're reviewing flats and site plans, we're looking at um how many parking spaces do they have to have, things like that.

Uh the small area plan, that's more of that guiding framework of the overall layout. So, it's not the same. Okay. is that there it's just one of many documents that we'd have to look at when we're reviewing the learning plat section or site plans.

We would look at if it's approved the way it's staff's recommending um first we before we can approve a clearing platter site plan the section design has to be approved for that area. when we're reviewing that section design plan, we're looking for consistency with the 5,000 acre small area plan. So once we get that section design plan, that is going to show the detail that we need for staff to say that yes, we recommend moving forward with this plan and that there's no um outstanding issues that haven't been addressed by the time we take it to the board. Um that's what we use when we review the pling site plan. We go by that section design plan. Yes. Um okay. So second page of the memo. Um I included the process for small area plans. Um the timeline for review that we've uh basically the last eight nine months I think. Um staff analysis which we'll touch on in a second. And last is the public information information meeting summary. I did not have time to um create a table that compares all the changes between the submitts. I think this the planning board asked for us to be able to do that and

so I still plan on doing that. I just haven't had time to to finish that. um the small area plan itself is submitted and the design guidelines which are a requirement um they're the basically the same as the north village design guidelines and they're not written in stone that's not the way it was required for the master plan and uh to clarify on the motion um as I explained to the board of commissioners staff does not think that the planning board would be making a decision tonight. Uh but our recommendation is when all of the conditions are addressed

um we do recommend approving the small area plan that given that it's a conceptual plan along with you know contingent on all the additional steps that's included in it. Um, but again, we not not to say that we were thinking you were going to do that tonight. You just received the plan last week. So, um, okay. So, at the board of commissioners meeting, there were a few comments made, uh, that I can update you on. Um, they did, uh, there were a couple of board members that did recommend the planning board have a work session. Um, so depending on, you know, how much time we want to spend tonight, if there are things that you want to dig into more on the actual plan itself, that could be an option to do it at that time. More of like a round table discussion. Um, where I could get all the materials and have them, you know, ready to, uh, answer more detailed questions and have additional staff there as well. Um, additional comments included, uh, concern about moving forward with with these section design plans being administrative approvals and not being legislative approvals. Um, so the way it's written in the master plan is that Chattam Park would come back, you know, 20 27 times for legislative decisions. And so what what staff is proposing is this large small area plan. This is a legislative decision. Coming back, uh, it would be more administrative. So staff would work with the applicant months before the actual plan is submitted, work out the logistics. Staff

can require modifications to the Mario plan and additional requirements like I said based on specific issues that we see. We then take it to the planning board and the board of commissioners. Um public facilities, anything regarding that the board still have full discretion on. So there was some uh concern about that though, you know, giving away the I guess legislative

uh type of approval. Another commissioner asked to have at least three small area plans um approved versus just one. There was also comments about updating the elements and what's that process look like? As I explained, as of now, um we we work with Chattam Park on issues that we find in the elements, you know, over time. Uh we'd sit down with them in a workshop, kind of come up with a solution and um present that to the board and that would be done in the at a minimum annually. Has it been done annually or or is this has this been done kind of as needed PRN at this point or

um the the workshop has not been done. So that's something that we have talked to Chattam Park about doing though there is an ongoing list. So I think that has worked well you know going through the um talking about the issues we need we would actually need to have a workshop and bring it to the to the town. So it's just kind of one off little bit that you guys discuss here and there or

sometimes I we meet um bi-weekly some you know usually so we're bringing up those kinds of issues that we depending on what plat we're reviewing something like that. Um, but yeah, that's been the process. There's nothing that's written that requires an update to be made. And I think that's probably more of a legal question on what can be done at that point because this is the language that was approved back in the the master plan. Um, and from a staff's perspective, uh, when you have an issue and you talk to the applicants about it and you try to work out, um, a solution and you bring it to the board, um, that that could be a good way to, you know, update the elements as well. But is there a way that we can absolutely require it? No. So just to

require a meeting with require if the town says you we need you to update XY Z we can't it has to be mutually agreed upon and stuff correct but there but we can can we require like a regular meeting I thought that was like in the provisions like regularly meet yes that annually we're proposing or it needs to the the conversation of updating the elements should be happening with the board of commission ers and will the planning board as well at least once a year. Okay. And that's has been happening or we're not sure.

I know the um Chhattam Park gives annual updates. I don't know if they've specifically talked about updating a lot of the elements. I know a couple updates have made but I don't know if it was through that process. Okay. Thank you. Is there is there a plan then to moving forward to make sure that that's happening? every year. Well, that's why we want it to be clearly written in these additional steps. Okay. So that as an additional staff uh we want we want everything to be as clearly written as possible for future staff as well.

You know, we want them to know, okay, this is this is exactly what's required. Um because it can get confusing otherwise. you know, the language that was approved back in 2015 doesn't necessarily say like this is how you go about doing this. Yeah.

And uh so the the language that staff proposes does do that. Um okay. So there was also a comment about uh board input during section design plan reviews. So, as it's written now, staff uh would start meeting with the applicant three to six months prior to the actual section design plan being submitted and that would be for, you know, early on coordination. Um, and it was mentioned at the board commissioners meeting that is that something that uh a a board member could be included in as well. So, um and the answer is yes. That's not how it's written though. Um, okay. So, just make sure I those are all the main points I wanted to make to begin with. And moving on to the staff analysis. It's several pages. You can just go through Yeah, the one after this one. Okay. So, I'm not going to go through the all the staff analysis. Um, but I wanted to mention that uh we're still awaiting final comments and approvals um for parks, transportation um and Tri River. So, we're not Sorry, I didn't stop your thought. um just that what's presented to you tonight, we wanted to get this before you. We think

that it's very close, you know, to to being final. Um but we also at this step want to get feedback. We want to let you know we're still waiting final comments. I don't foresee them being anything that's going to drastically change the plan um just based on feedback that we've received. So the is this the is this a six I I think I remember from the watching the thing uh 60-day clock starts today or or uh in terms of having to make a decision on this. Does that start today since you're bringing it to us today? Well, you do have the plan.

So it there is, you know, that 60-day requirement. um having I think that would be more of a legal question as well, but you know if if the board of commissioners if the board of uh if the board of commissioners were to not make a decision and uh ask the planning board to do more, you know, research and uh give more information, you know, I don't think that would be something that the applicant would try and say that that couldn't happen.

Wait, so this says, are you saying the 60 day? This is a great question. The 60 days starts today. If we don't ask for more time, Paul, I don't know that we can ask for more time. I'm I'm time the time is relevant, but the question is more about if it's not final, why are we looking at it to make a decision on it if it's not if it's not the final product? Um, staff wanted to start the conversation, but does that also start the 60-day clock? Yes. Okay.

But if you wanted to go through all of this, I mean, we you we have it, but that's a lot of information and just to sit here tonight and listen and everything you're saying is very valid. I can't I actually can't see making a decision on it tonight without having like a and we we don't have to. We absolutely can table this. I would like to have a work session to do to work sit and work on it. But I agree.

How can you start the timer though? Are the clock because it's presented in a pro. Is this the final draft? Is is it the final draft or don't didn't it have to be final? So the so there updates can be made. Um, so when you say final, I think it's final enough where in regards to needing the information to to start having conversations, you have that.

I don't foresee the ch the the plan changing. Like I said, once we receive final comments from um the consultants, I don't foresee the plan changing drastically or we would not have brought it to you. Chapter one includes the section design plan language which we definitely wanted to get that to you so we can start having conversations um because that's new language and if changes need to be made we can have that you know conversation and get that direction from y'all. And just to clarify one more question about the 60-day time limit. Um is that for the board of commissioners to vote on on it or is that for us the planning board?

So after 60 days whether the planning board gives a recommendation or not, the board of commissioners can start considering the item. But like I was explaining before, um I don't foresee that being an issue if it's beyond the 60 days in the but I don't want to speak for you know the board or anything like that. Um but that's the way it was written in 2015. So, you know,

I don't see that in the pro the approval process. Like, do we know what that language is? Like, what starts the I don't mean to harp on it and stuff, but I think that's like a significant milestone to say, "Hey, and now you have 60 days to make all these comments and talks and stuff." Is there language that says master use plan? Yeah. Do you know what it is? Does anyone in the body? I don't it's in should be in that agreement that was uh on the screen. I think it was the third page. You want to go back? I'm sorry. And far it's not I didn't Yeah, it's

going I mean I understand your confusion but it could be one more. I think like said, I don't think it's something that we need to but we could potentially worry about number six. Are you an recommendation within 60 days? The planning. So this is the official referral to the planning board. Is that what you're saying? Correct. This is the referral to the planning board. So submission of the small area plan. This is

um so this is the submission of the small area plan. There's no language that says the final final you know draft. Uh but like I said beyond the um chapter one which you know that's what we want to talk to you about tonight in more detail. I don't foresee there being any additional changes for to be the final draft other than a few minor things I mentioned in the staff analysis. Yeah, I have a definition question. Design plan or the activity center design plan. those two terms interchangeable based upon where that design plan is being located or

so the when they when the applicant submits the section design plan they can overlay correct thank you they have the option it wasn't clear from the town board discussion to me uh whether or not I think you've covered it but I apologize for asking will section design plan go back to the planning board with public comment. I understand that to be legislative. Are you stating that that's not part of the section design plan approval process or it is because the in here it looks like that is the process

that that is the process for the small area plan going to the section design plan being more of an administrative decision. That public comment uh requirement is not in the language currently. So if that's something that we can, you know, we can discuss that if that's something that the the boards would like to see. Okay. Just thank you has anybody done a side byside matrix to show the difference between the content and procedure for a small area plan versus section design.

I can do that. Um but everything that's in required in the small area plan I included in the section design plan. So you know what's required in it. Mhm. So the additional agreement language that requires like public comment and thing like things like that that's not included. That's the sort of stuff I'd like to have highlighted. Okay. a bit of a difference. Is is that appropriate then for things like that for us to request like is that a timely recommendation from the planning board to request that information or sure

see that before it's a final recommendation. Correct. I mean the the process process would change. So really like this would not be the process anymore moving forward. It would just be what's in the the um language which basically states 3 to 6 months prior to the section design plan being submitted, the applicant shall start coordinating with the town of Pittsburgh staff. I mean that's basically everything that's in here would not uh be applicable to section design plan like the process okay

if that makes I mean I can list it out but it's you know the requirement to have um the community input meeting in the very beginning the public information meeting um all of those kinds of requires requirements that that would not unless that's something that we would change. That's not how it's written for the process to review a section design plan. I just think it would be a good communication device, you know, not only just for us, but also the general public to know to see it side by side.

Okay. Yeah. I can list out everything that's required in here and basically just say no, no, it's required. Okay. Um, that's not If we decide to have a work session, how quickly do we need to have it? Just between now and the next meeting essentially. Okay. We just want to coordinate with staff and make sure. Okay. Good.

And it was mentioned by the I think the board of commissioners to have workstation for them as well. So I don't know if it was meant to be like a joint or Okay. I might be jumping ahead and stuff, but is this the financial impact analysis that we received? Yes. Um and that's one of the conditions I mean helps make this small area plan proposal complete, right? I mean like having this is part of it. Um

yes and and staff has had that since December of 2024. Okay, I just got it today at noon, but um the and I'm not like a financial person and stuff, but it's sensibly absent of like the other side of the balance sheet like the expenses. These are like revenue. There's no expenses on here. Like how do we know a financial analysis about what the expenses are could be? And and from Yeah, from staff's perspective, we looked at that Yeah. as more of an in-house review. Same thing like with the traffic modeling, right?

Um, we didn't put that on the website either. You know, that was sent to the third party consultant to review. Um, so yeah, that's the reason why it wasn't put on the website because it was being reviewed in-house, but you know, knowing that that's what the board would like to review, obviously we understand that. And

I'll take these notes and we can go over that with um like the finance director for com. I'm just saying I'm just I just feel it would not be like a complete submission without it. Like I don't think that a timer should start. We have all the information. We get 60 days. I don't know if we'll get that in 59 and a half days, you know. I just don't know if the timer should start right now without being able to consider a lot of that information. And I yeah I understand it's everything that's required though like the the um all the the modeling for example that's not that's not something we included as part of what we put on the website. So I was

explaining that that's we put that in the same category. We thought for the board to look at the small area plan. Yeah. how you know uh actual plan itself. Yeah. Um was more for the the board to review. Yeah. And that document was more for in-house review, more technical review. But I understand what you're saying. Yeah. It wasn't like not submitted intentionally for, you know, right not get feedback. We just thought it was more of a technical type of document that

I think it's significant perspective to review, you know, from a prudence, you know, perspective instead of being, you know, cavalier about. Yeah. Um, so we could if you have a work session, we could, you know, answer questions specific to that because I'm not I'm not the one that reviewed that. That's more, like I said, technical, so I'm not sure. Um, I would be the right person to answer questions. Yeah. I'm just saying I consider a a significant component of the plan. Gotcha. In the absence of it, I don't think that the proposal is complete.

Either way, that baby's been born, right? Like it's already here 60 days. in terms of what I mean I know that you said it can be it's it can it can be extended out for the board to vote on it but that baby's been born in the sense it's already here in front of us I'm saying it probably shouldn't be because it's not complete in my view it should but I'm I'm clarifying that despite that it's still here am I correct about

that that is that is the risk that the the applicant would take by submitting something that's not complete. Is if we are looking at something incomplete, you would generally say no, we don't want that to go. So that's kind of like if if they don't think it's going to be close to what they've got, then they're not going to submit submit its submitted. That's what I'm that's what we're asking. Yeah. In terms of it being complete submittal, it was submitted for staff to review last December.

Um, and I explained the reason why it wasn't included in the on the website along with some several of the other more technical documents. Mhm. Um, but uh I'm pretty sure it's on the website now. So, yes, it's on the website now. Um, again, we didn't put like the models and things like that. Uh but if you want to say like that's what you need to say it's complete. It's on the website.

It is not complete though. It is a part of a financial analysis or what I would consider a financial analysis. The revenue there's no expenses. There's no like okay cool here's potential revenue but like what could it cost us with you is not there right? This is half of the piece of information I would need for it to be considered. Okay. So the way we would interpret that is it has been submitted. You know, does that mean it's adequate? I'm not sure that's been reviewed in house. The the language in the master plan and small area plan agreement, it just says

financial impact analysis. It doesn't say it has to include all these, you know, bullet points. So I we can have that conversation with the finance director on if they need more information for that. But I see what you're saying. You think they could just say a receipt that says $1, you know, and and that would be a financial assessment. They could say that. Therefore, it's complete. We could start 60 days. Okay.

I mean, that's the way it's been written. I didn't write it. That's just the way it was written. for just one one point of clarification on the back side of this where nothing talks about the annual water and wastewater fees. None of that will be flowing to the town or the county. This would all be Tri River, right? Yes, sir. Okay. Articulated here. It's listed as revenue. Yeah.

Okay. So um I think moving on uh to the first chapter this more area plan. Um this is the language that has been inserted by the applicant that um staff has drafted and it's like I explained before this is the language that I foresee seeing the changes in the small area plan but we wanted to go ahead and get it submitted to you. This is currently the official submitted language. Um, and as I stated in the staff analysis, uh, staff recommends changes to it. And I wanted to focus, it seemed like that's kind of like the big, um, I guess area of concern right now with the with the small area plan is, you know, should we be approving a 5,000 acre small area plan and then what are the next steps? So, that's what I'm more addressing tonight, especially since you just received the small actual small area plan last week. Um, and then we could dig in more to that at the work session or next meeting. Um, so I explained that uh the applicant can submit one or more sections. Um, staff recommends it to be conceptual. So, there's language on what that means. is the conceptual nature of the small area plan. Um I as I explained the first presentation that the purpose of the small area plan is to give uh more

detail than the master plan which it does uh for example like parks gives a lot more detail on that. Um not as much detail that you would see on a plary plat site plan. Um, so because it's at the 5,000 acre scale, staff thinks that it should be conceptual. So there are, like I explained to this board and board of commissioners, there are benefits for that from a staff's perspective, from planning perspective. And that's again getting that holistic comprehensive view of what the 5,000 acre layout would look like,

similar to like the town's land use plan. Currently, the town's about 4,000 acres in size. So, you know, we have a land use plan that shows what the future growth should look like within that 4,000 acres. That's similar to what Channel Park has done. Um, and so there are benefits to that. Uh, again, there's pros and cons. It's a dumb question. Can you approve a conceptual plan separate from the small area plan? Like, this is a conceptual plan that we have, but it's not an approved small area plan. Sure. I mean you could you could um now for it to yeah that's okay

count as the small area plan it wouldn't you know if you just were to take you know just call it a conceptual plan for the benefit of having a conceptual plan right it wouldn't be like an official document though right so uh I think in order to make this the official legislative stand it has to say small area plan

thank you Um going on to the next page, we talked about the elements a little bit. Um an annual meeting to discuss that. I've already gone over the annual updates and look aheads at the last meeting. Um and moving on to the uh section design plan language. And we want this to be super clear. So any questions that we have about it, we've been taking notes. Um, and we we'll make sure that they get updated. Uh, including like the the second sentence under section design plans. Um, we need there to be a sentence that says 3 to six months prior to the section design plan being submitted,

staff will uh start coordinating with with the applicant. Um, I also wanted to point out going down to number four, seems like there's been questions about uh the town having I guess uh conversations with the applicant about density and uses and things like that. Um, and is that something that can be required through a legislative small area plan process? And I I wanted to uh explain that back in 2015, the way it was agreed was uh Chattam Park can build up to a maximum of 22,000 dwelling units and 22 million square ft of non-residential. So it's a maximum

um in there. Wait, did you say 22 million nonresident square feet of non-residential square feet? Acres. Yeah. Yeah.

Uh so in their land use summary table it states that in the residential sections they can have a maximum of 10% of non-residential uses. Nothing was ever agreed upon to state that let's say in the research and development section you have to have like a minimum amount of non-residential. So the way it was approved in 2015 is through the permitted use table. Residential is allowed in every section in Chattam Park. So the way it was approved is it could be all residential. It really I mean research and development section can be 100% residential based on what was approved. Um, and if if I have interpreted that language, uh, I'm sure someone will correct me, but that's that's how I, uh, read it. Um, so we did put the stipulation for number four in there that Chattam Park agreed to. Um, that in the research and development section, uh, up to 50% can be residential. So back in 2015 there was no requirement and staff is saying that well at least 50% of it has to be non-residential in these research and development sections. Um this was something that was mutually agreed upon with staff in Chattam Park. So I I just want to uh explain that you know when you go through the legislative process it has to be mutually agreed upon and

elemental change. Sorry. An elemental change but not really that

correct. Uh now if staff were to say you know that we want there to be a minimum of you know 20 dwelling units an acre. I that's probably not something China Park would agree to. That's not mutually agreed upon. So in terms of going from a legislative to administrative standpoint, staff can require things that are logistical issues. So pros and cons to that. Um but I just wanted to make that comparison to like a legislative decision versus non-legislative. And um there it was questioned about transportation planning analysis. So those would be required for the section design plans. Um and if they don't have it for the first section design plan within one of the 16 sections, they have to have it for the first plinary plot. So staff worked with uh the applicant on drafting that language. You can go to the next page. Um, and I think, you know, for clarity, we'll have these uh numbered, but looking down at the um fourth one from the bottom, as part of the review, town staff will assess each section design plan for consistency with the South Village area plan. Modifications from the small area plan may be required to comply with updated town standards and regulations or respond to change circumstances, emerging community needs or evolving conditions.

There's been questions about you if we go from legislative to administrative, what what if there's an issue that comes up 10 years from now that no one's ever thought about? we tried to mitigate that with this this language and it be more of logistical issues. So again, there's pros and cons to that. Taking away the legislative type of approval, uh making it more administrative, but also stating that additional conditions can be required by staff. And that would of course go to the town board and uh planning board for each one of those.

In my brain, I'm just trying to think like legislative versus administrative. Is this like administrative is like planning department handles these negotiations and legislative is like you bring it to us? Not necessarily. So the Reeves Farm plinary plot tonight was administrative. I Okay, that's more of staff presenting to you that these are all the rules and that they okay meets the requirements. Plats also include um public facilities. So there, you know, there's input from the boards on that for sure.

Uh but on just like what standards are being met, staff's already done that. And so basically it is kind of like checking the boxes. If it's a if it's um if it's uh met then it would be approved. Um so not not saying that this sentence is what the final language will be but just that we are trying to address potential issues that we can't think of exactly what they might be today. Um, so yeah, just reviewing legislative versus administrative. I try to get into a little more detail on that. I can answer any additional questions you might have in that uh regard. Moving forward section design plan. Teresa, are you aware of any other municipality that has used the section design concept in lie of a small area plan?

No. And that's because none of this is something that is standard. So this is all new ground for us. Correct. Yes. So, back in 2015 when the resoning was approved contingent on having the applicant come back for additional legislative small area plan approvals that I've never heard of that before. That's new, too. At least to me. Yeah, that's not standard.

Previous to that, their initial recommendation of 16 or whatever small area plants would have just been like that at that point in time. It wouldn't approve like that. Well, typically a condition zoning when it's approved, that's it. Everything after that's administrative approvals. You already Okay. So, I think the intent back then was, well, this is 7,000 acres, so we need more information. And that was how it was decided to get that. It was it was but I mean that itself is not standard. I've never seen that before. Mhm. So just be so the section design plan concept that was put forward by staff. Correct.

And that and that was some um lessons learned in the north village is what that stemmed from because the north village was approved conceptually as well. Um and staff wants to ensure that that early coordination happens not necessarily to to make major changes to like density and uses like that, but more for logistical reasons like the road layouts, where are the parks going, proposed schools, things like that. We want to be able to have that coordination early on um and not just get it when the applicant submits like a plenary platter site plan because at that point it's more uh it's more difficult to change things

like so when you say that like where are the schools going where are these going where the like that's been proposed in the small area. There's there's one school proposed and that's because um the schools they only uh plan five years in advance for construction of schools. So there's a memorandum of understanding for the school system that um additional schools could be required. Well, we have we have maps with like where parks are going to go and stuff. Correct. Right. And we're saying that that's not even though it's in the small area plan, but would it have to be that place? Like what are

China Park's committing to that, but the town is not. So there's been a lot of there was a lot of planning that went on in those park locations. You know, months and months of conversations, but five years from now, if we're looking at that section design plan, it includes that park, staff can require changes at that time for different reasons. for for the reasons specified in this graph.

It's pretty open-ended. And in addition, that's a public facility, so the town board has complete discretion anyways. I was hoping to try to answer some of the questions um regarding the proposed language, get any additional feedback from the board or if you just need more time to digest it. That's we understand that as well. It's not it's not simple. Yeah.

I need more time to dig. I don't know about anybody else, but I need more time to digest. Yeah. Teresa, is there a map of just the what are I couldn't that would be in you

age six. Oh wait, excuse me. That doesn't show the Well, it kind of it shows it. It's not as phases which is that those colors are they kind of all broken up into 16? Yeah, I think the the map that I saw uh last it was a a little clearer. I think the one on page eight, you know, it shows the section numbers.

Okay. Like there is another map that I thought Yeah, the one on page 15 the the activity centers on page 15 are uh clearly you know you can see the boundaries for that but yeah I agree the all like the section 2.1 versus 2.2 too. Those are originally different sections. Those are like the 16 sections. Yeah, the original 16 sections. So, we can we can ask the applicant to make those lines a little clearer on this map.

If we just add up all the the 4.3 would be one section. So, we know 4.2 is one section, correct? One is one section. 2.2 is a different section. Is that the way? Yes, sir. You can't tell where the line between

depending on how much it does time you'd like to um review the small area plan that was submitted uh in your packets. Like I said, if you if you do want a work session, uh it's just as quickly as we can it last night, right? Set that tonight. So then with that, um I recommend a uh a motion to table this item to the uh October 20th at 6 pm. We do that.

Thank you, Alfred Al. Motion to table the South Village small area plan item to October 20th at 6 pm. Do I have a second? Second by Alan Wilson. All in favor say one discussion point before you vote. Is that one discussion point before you vote? Um again I just want to go on the record and stuff and say like it's still to me incomplete and as it submission and stuff, but I don't know what the rules are in terms of 60-day. I just think that should be clear that there's not everything that we need to have it as a submission. You Yeah, it all should be on the website now. Yeah. Well, I mean, just it be on the website or it being here doesn't necessarily mean it's complete in my mind. I just want to say that.

Understood. Okay. All in favor of the motion to table the item to October 20th, 6 p.m. Uh, please say I. I. Great. Thank you. Uh, anyone opposed? All right, motion passes. So, we will table it to October 20th at 6:00 p. p.m., which is our next regularly scheduled meeting. While we're all here, um, we will with Carrie, we will schedule a work session. Since we're all here, let's just nail a date now. Sure. Okay. Um,

you need staff to come too, right? For that I do. What are the limitations for staff open to the public and staff have to be here or So, we're we're just trying to get a date for the work session now since we're all here. Is there are there limitations for staff that would need to be there? What any dates that would be off? Maybe two. Great idea. Yeah. There are staff there and we'll have to facilities. Okay.

Why don't y'all send us a couple of days and then let us email you back with what works best and whichever one fits with everybody. You say 6 p.m. though on a weekday. We could say we can narrow it down to a Monday. You said it's easier for staff during the work day especially but during the right time. Yeah.

I would say yeah if we can. So I was just looking like maybe the 29th which is a Monday. sixth. That would work for me as well. Yeah, we'll say the 6th and the 29th. I'm the 29th. I can't. Sweet. Anybody else have any objections? I can do 29. Yeah. Okay. Well, that is a definite maybe. And this has to be available to give. I think it's would you say 48 hours? Okay.

Okay. So we got great. Okay then.

Thank you everyone. Uh Mr. Kahun Tingle, do you have any updates? All right, great. Um all I have is thank all you guys for the time and staff the insane amount of time that is poured over all of these items. Uh, I greatly greatly appreciate it. Also, staff at the for the a center for staying with me late. I know we're not we're not pushing it like uh town board does, but but thank you either way. So, um, yes. Sorry, Connie. Do you have anything?

Just wanted to say I really appreciated the offer from the Southern Environmental Law Center. Absolutely. I think should consider u taking is that something? Let well let's invite her to work session. She's here. We can ask her if the clear. Yes. Yes, we can. Absolutely. Let's uh coordinate. Does anybody have anything else they'd like to say? I just had one. No. Okay. It's Thank you. Joking. All right. Um sorry. All can have a motion to uh motion to adjurnn. motion by Christina. Second second. Second by Alfred Alston. All in favor say I. I. I.