Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Thank you everyone for being here for the town of Pittsburgh Planning Board regular meeting uh for Monday, October 20th. call. Going to call that a call to order. And um we do have a forum. We are missing Miss Alustin. I do believe she is coaching the middle school softball team right now. So wishing her good luck. Uh um has everyone had an opportunity to look over the agenda and do you have any edits you'd like to make to set agenda?

I'll move to approve the agenda. Second. All right. Motion to approve the agenda. Seconded by James Buster. All in favor say I. I all opposed a agenda is adopted. Um and then we do have we have two sets of minutes. Um obviously one from our September meeting and then one from our special meeting on the 6th. Uh well one at a time has everyone for the September minutes. Does anybody have any changes they'd like to make to the September minutes? And can I have a motion to approve those minutes?

So move.

All right. Move. Moved by Alan Wilson to approve the September 5th. If you planned to uh sign up, we will I'll just uh I guess if you would whoever is signed up, we'll go ahead with and then afterwards If you would like to speak, just come and state your name and your address when you get to the the podium, please. All right. So, first we do have Miss Megan Kimble.

Sorry. and I did uh if you would pause her time um please please state your name and address at the start of the of your comments. There is a time limit of 3 minutes which will be displayed on the screen and in the interest of time and fairness is the board's policy not to respond directly to comments during this period. Staff will follow up as appropriate. Any speaker with handouts shall be given to the town clerk and will be distributed to the board at the conclusion of this meeting.

Sorry. Thank you. Good evening. Uh my name is Megan Campbell and I'm here with the Southern Environmental Law Center. Um I've already submitted um some extensive written comments which I printed out and handed up um to the clerk. Uh but I thought I would just u make a few brief ones um in case you didn't have the chance to to read what I put together. Um and I really just wanted to start out by um centering ourselves on kind of what the the decision before the town is. Um, and we have the small area plan process that was legislatively adopted in 2015. It sets out the process. Um, and in it, it's very helpful. It says that the, um, board of commissioners may approve or deny um, the small area plan if it finds that it number one fails to comply with the requirements of the master plan or number two fails to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare. So you guys have very broad discretion here in making your recommendation to the board of commissioners. Um you know at the very baseline um it's checking the master plan which includes um the additional elements and um to see does the small area plan include everything that it needs to. Um and we in our comments we have a chart that sort of lays out some places where it falls short. I think one of the most striking places um is the facilities element. There are a lot of places in that element where it talks about what should be in the in the small area plan and it's just absent from um what's before the board. Um and so that's not only a failure to meet the requirements of the master plan, but that's also something that you could raise concerns about in terms of public health, safety, and welfare. That's just one example of many. Um and I know that you you all have been thinking about this already um as as you've been having your

discussions the past couple sessions. Now I know um the SDPs the um site SDP site development plan maybe um has been proposed as a solution. Um but honestly I think it may cause more trouble than it solves. uh you could potentially have 96 plans um that may or may not be administrative decisions made by staff. So I think there would be concern about unlawfully delegating um decisions that should be made by the governing body. Um if the town wanted to you use this new tier of approval, it could um but it can't do it through this small area plan process. Um it's my feeling that the town would need to amend a couple of ordinances because the SAP is um enshrined in an ordinance. Um and then it would also have to amend the um the small the small area process is is in an ordinance and then it would have to amend the development plan too. Um so that is my time but um thank you guys for your your careful decision tonight. I know um there's a lot that goes into this. Thank you, Miss Kimble. Uh, next up we have Miss Carol Hewitt.

I was going to say I don't see her. We'll skip over her for now. Do Do we have anyone else that was Okay. If you would, please just state your name and your address. Good evening. need to move this. Uh, no, the uh the Yeah, microphone's actually thing sitting there next to you. Um, where's the time? Um, it's there it is. There it is. Yeah, there we go.

Liz Cington, 390 Rocky Hills Road, Pittsburgh. The small area plan is so fundamentally flawed, it needs to be rejected wholesale. It may not matter that right now it's incomplete and may always be incomplete. One general sentence early on promises us that nothing in here is to be trusted. Page one. Quote, "This conceptual plan is not to be considered final or the only way development may occur, but presents concepts and guidance that may vary as actual development unfolds," unquote. statements about how this plan or anything in it is binding on the applicant or quote what they have agreed to are meaningless if those are not spelled out in a document that is itself binding which is what the Southern Environmental Law Cent's letter to you has confirmed a small area plan is supposed to be however what there is in the plan can be taken subsequently as town board approval if it suits the developer but anything that they wish to change will not require additional approval. I would urge you to pay attention to the other issues raised by um Southern Environmental Law Cent's letter to you. Um they rightly point out that this proposed plan and process gives away a vast amount of town board authority and control for which town staff is no substitute. Pages three to four make it clear that these later section design plans are no substitute for a smaller small area plan either in content or review process but instead would be almost purely a staff review and approval matter. It's unclear why Channon Park investors can't present an adequate plan for this or small area. I hope the planning board will recommend that the town board simply reject this plan entirely along with the two-step process in favor of a more binding small area plan um for the whole south village

or some portion. If you cannot achieve a majority to recommend denial, then some things may need attention now, especially if there are those that indicate what the developer does intend to do. Um, for instance, a change in the balance between non-residential and housing. Chapter one, page three. Um, 50% of the acreage in two of the three non-residential sections converted to all housing. That's unacceptable. That should be reduced to 5% which is adequate for apartments. Non-residential acreage needs to be set aside for later. And uh in addition, developed non-residential acreage could yield far higher property taxes and lower costs. Secondly, the only mixeduse section 4.2 need now only have 10% non-residential acreage. That's the same as all the residential sections. That ought to be a minimum of 40%. It should encourage more building upwards and walkability. Finally, there are conflicting references in chapter one about the scope of the section design plans. either six per numbered planning section or that they can cover up to six numbered planning sections. That's a huge difference and could affect just what kind of detail would be presented with so much defer to that next.

Thank you, Miss Colleen. It's unacceptable. It's not clear what they will be. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh, Miss Carol Hewitt,

sorry I was here. I gave these to Carrie, but then they didn't get to follow along. So, can I give them to them and they can't see? If you would give them to Carrie. Great. Can you give them to them? Think that's enough. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Can they have before I speak?

They can't. I'm sorry. Okay. Well, okay. That's tough. That's like going to college and they don't let show you the screen until you've All right. Well, I'll just hope for your memories and you do are going to get this. So, I'm Carol Hu at 424 Johnny Brook Road, Pittsburgh. I have spent hours on this 139 page document as well as Teresa's comments as well as everything else has been sent because I'm really concerned. Um, this is just a few reasons why I suggest you recommend the town board not approve this plan at this time. There's a regulatory control shift from the planning and the town board to the applicant and the staff, which I know Megan spoke to. This is the last time this development will come before you, unless they change it. It will go to the town board only for approval of these new site design plans. These are not in the master plan. They're not in the development agreement. They're not even a legal structure given what's been legislated by this uh town. They're intentionally confusing as far as I'm concerned. There are so many discrepancies in the plan with the site developments and the numbers of sections. Number two, as you know, this is incomplete. We won't even go there. Um, but there are two sentences I really find alarming. If you open your document up at some point to page one, you're going to see under the conceptual plan, this conceptual plan is not considered final. Not intended to be considered final in or the only way development can occur. Why are we voting on something that's not final? uh who decides what's final. And then it gets even more murky. It goes on to talk about section design plans. No more than

six per section. Zero is no more than six. Can there be none? It's so unclear. Then on page three, right on the very next page, there's 10 items that have an asterisk. Open space, trees, preservation. You can look for them. The asterisk that they reads staff level administration decision by the town board of commissioners. I have put that phrase and every grammar check AI Chad GP. No one knows what it even means. What is staff level administration decision by the town board of commissioners? I don't think it's unclear. It's I think it's intentionally unclear. And um you're going to get when you get this this other thing which is very interesting which is there actually is an application for public notice to the US Army Army Corps of Engineers. Um there's already a beautiful detailed map and um I've given you I cut and pasted a a screenshot of the purpose of this u whatever it's called. Anyway, it's all here. So, what you want to be voting on is a legal small area plan as designated in the master plan and the development plan of this of this town, not a developer's invention with no legal precedent that puts the town at serious risk for legal challenges. So, be careful tonight. I will tell you that after public comment, when staff and others begin to speak, it just gets more and more confusing. And I don't think that's unintentional. So, thank you very much.

Thank you, Miss Huitt. Uh, did did I have anyone else that intended to sign up tonight that did not have the opportunity? Okay, we will move on then to our old business of the Chattam Park South Village Small Area Plan. Um, Miss Teresa, will you be presenting that for us?

Good evening everyone.

Good evening. Tonight, we're going to continue the conversation, review, and consideration of the small area plan. We're going to go chapter by chapter again. Um the uh comments, questions that the planning board has made the past two months and the town board uh made at the last meeting last week have been included in the staff analysis. So there are uh responses to the majority of them and the ones that we don't have responses to I can explain what the next steps are for that. Uh, so the goal is to try and get through the existing comments, make sure there's no questions on that, speak to any additional questions or concerns y'all have tonight, so that staff can try and um update the staff analysis again for the next town board meeting, which that will be in November, that we're bringing this back to them again. Um, and uh, another goal is we would like to meet with the applicant to update the small area plan. We didn't want to just do it over and over again. Um, we've been collecting all your comments and we just want to make sure we're all on the same page before we meet with the applicant and ask them to make the adjustments needed um, to satisfy the planning board and the town board.

Um, if we could. I don't know if if we need to go line by line again. I we we can't do that. Um I don't but I think it might be more useful to go through the comments and questions that we had from our last meeting more so than just kind of line by line if that's if you can do it that way. Oh yeah. Yeah. Okay. I can skip over some of the things that I think there's already consensus made. Awesome. Thank you.

Great. So, if you have your staff analysis in front of you, um, we'll we'll put the small area plans on the screen. So, I don't think we can put both on the screen. Um, so we starting with chapter one, um, we do have some feedback on the financial impact analysis. So that and that is a requirement um that is mentioned in chapter one. I'm sorry. The for when you review what is it? Rather than having this one up, can we have the staff analysis up

instead of the actual plan just so that we can see that if we're not going to go through this then let's go through Well, we Yes, I see what you're saying. Might be easier for me personally if we just did that if Okay, that makes sense.

I agree. Thanks. [Music] and we'll start with chapter one. Well, the abbreviations um as staff stated before, we are going to work on rewarding that first chap or the first paragraph regarding the purpose of the small area plan. Um if it is approved, that's it's presented. uh the parks comments in the abbreviation section that it has been reviewed for final review by parks and um given the green light that it's good you know uh in the final document language and there is a minor update that needs to be made on the affordable housing section and abbreviations as well. Um, chapter one. So, the financial impact analysis staff has looked at uh what the tax

revenue is for homes based on home sale or home prices, sale prices. And as of right now, uh the sale price in Chattam Park is over $200,000 beyond what the average home price is. So it meets our um service demands today and today's just a snapshot. So looking into the future um compared to average home sales versus Chattam Park, there's still an increase of from what we can see of at least $100,000. Um so staff is not concerned with being able to meet future uh service provisions needed um based on what the development the development that occurs in Chattam Park based on the tax revenue that's going to come from that.

Okay. Just to make sure I understand, you're saying that your projection or the projection that was looked at by town finance director is saying that revenues will exceed expenses for what the development brings. Yes, sir. So, as far as additional police and fire and electrical needs and everything, all that was considered in terms of additional expenses that would be incurred by the town as a result of that. So, they're saying that that additional revenue will cover everything

based on what we're looking at now. You know, we don't have the crystal ball, of course, but from what we can um summize today, that is correct. And it's just staff related. I mean, excuse me, uh, town government related. That includes staff. So, not electric, anything like that, like private infrastructure. Um, anything that is going to be provided by the town as a service? Was the revenue that was shown for Tri River, was that extracted from that analysis? Yes, sir. That's a completely different entity. I know. That's why I wanted to make sure because it was it was on the original Okay. No, that that's not what we would look at.

Okay. Teresa, what about county expenses? Um like additional schools, things like that. Was that also taken into consideration? That is provided by county taxes which everybody pays. Okay. Separate from town taxes. Okay. Um is there a um where's the description of the analysis and stuff with the numbers besides just saying like yes this would be or is there um that analysis available? Um I can ask to make sure that there's no other updates needed.

Right. That is the feedback that I've received so far on the inter internal review of the financial impact analysis. So if there's anything else that needs to be done, I'll double check. But overall, um the the review shows that it's adequate for future expenses needed. I mean, is that is it is it fair to ask for like the actual review itself and stuff? Is that with the analysis? Yeah, the analysis. Is that um assuming a projection comments on it?

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, just does it assume projections of it'll be 2 $200,000 over and above market, you know, for things that sell here or homes forever or for whatever period of time and stuff?

Sure. Yeah, we can provide that. Yeah, that'd be great. Righty. Um, looking at the next steps, as we've stated, that whole section is going to be updated. Um, staff agrees it's there's some confusing terms in there. That was the first draft that staff wrote and we wanted to get all the feedback from it on how it needs to be updated before it comes um back for final approval. But just I think we've discussed what all the changes are and that includes um removing those asterisks, the the staff level administrative approvals. We've explained that to y'all and what that means. Um, so let me know if if you need more information on that. Uh, so just to be clear, the section design plans, it would still be approved by the town board. Um, what we would be looking at for that review are the two two things. Does it does it meet all of our applicable standards at that time, state law, local law, and any issues that come up regarding public health, safety, and welfare? you briefly um bullet the administrative review components of like what wouldn't require to come to the planning board.

Everything would come to the planning board. Everything. So the entire plan would come to you. Do you have any idea where are we breaking down here? Because we're we're constantly hearing obviously uh public feels that that that's not the case. Um how it sounds on one end. Um, and then uh from you it says that it will come to the planning board and the town board. I just want to know where that breakdown is because I don't think that anyone's we can say it as much as we want to say it, but I I want to make sure that if it's true that we we're showing where that is so that people can trust that.

I think when that's that whole section is reformatted, it'll be a lot easier to understand. Okay. The way it was written was more of just like bullet points of information and it's going to be reorganized so that it's very clear staff level review and then again we talked about there being a board liaison possibly on that um planning board recommendation town board approval. We're also going to remove that uh little asterk that says staff level administrative decision. I think that's caused a lot of confusion as well. Yeah. So, so where where would public input be in that process?

At the board meetings and public comment. Well, that would be one forum for it. But there's always before anytime that we receive uh documentation, it becomes public even a if when we start meeting with the applicant and they submit a concept drawing to us, that is public record. But it would be it would be it would be um uh it wouldn't be a legislative decision on the boards on the town board or the planning boards part. It would be administrative decision, right? The moving from the small area plan to the section design plans would become an administrative.

So the when you're looking at the standards, correct? when you're looking at safety, health, and uh general welfare with that going to the town board, that is still a legislative decision, but it's not what you would see like with a resoning or like a conditional resoning. It is it's very specific. It's based on what are the absolute issues that have to be addressed. Um, and it's not opening up the entitlements again that Chattam Park had received over the past several years if that and we will clean up the language to explain that better. Um, but the town couldn't just, you know, ask to uh change the entire table of uses for a section or say you can only do apartment complexes, you can't do single family detach. These are all entitle entitlements that were received. the town cannot legally ask them to do something different than that. I mean, you could ask, but answer would be no, and you cannot use that for a reason to deny. Um, that's one reason that staff recommends going this route. Uh, so that it's clear for future boards. What are we looking at versus what are we not looking at? As of right now, it just says completely legislative. Uh, the plan has to be suitable to the town. very very broad and it's caused a lot of confusion I think on what can we ask at this point. Um and the town attorneys here can explain more of the you know entitlement process that's already been received and what we can require today versus what we can't require.

Okay. Um just to clarify one more thing. You said that would be that would that that new section that clarifies and delineates with a like a line with a chart would be available once the actual small area plan gets um given to the town board. Is that correct? Yes. We are meeting with the applicant this week after we meet with y'all tonight. So, we're going to take all the feedback that we received, anything in addition and make sure that's included in the update. And is there a requirement that the that we see the same document like in terms of our approval? Like, do we do we not need to see the same document that the town board would need to see?

Uh, you don't necessarily have to. If everything we talk about tonight you are in greens of just like when you see a um a resoning request come to you or a ply plaque come to you there could be discussion on well we we approve we recommend approval with the condition of xyz being done that doesn't come back to you again we just make sure that either one it's done either the applicant does it or two we let the town board know what your uh contingency were for approval I think or denial I think kind and correct me if I'm not saying this correctly but so if if we approve it

with conditions then they cannot make any changes other than the conditions that we asked for or town comments correct wait I want to make so we cannot we cannot approve one thing and then they change everything and send it to the board and say that we approved it is what I'm saying. Certainly not. But in my mind, if I'm asking for a financial analysis, right, and the financial analysis says XYZ, we wouldn't we wouldn't see that today in order to make a a a judgment call on that financial analysis. Only the town board would be able to do that

and and they and they would vote on that. And so so that's why I'm saying is it possible or how is it that we are going to um how are we going to weigh in on a recommendation if we don't even see what you know yes we could recommend that a financial analysis be included but the financial analysis could say whatever it wants to say right theoretically and then the town board would have to vote on that given and then also have the evidence that we approved it already. we wouldn't have any we wouldn't have any say so on the analysis of of the numbers itself in the future questions and you know that that's a very good point yes absolutely okay just wanted to clarify that

these meetings um I know you discussed like a planning board leaison and stuff is that um available now right can we have a planning board leaison at these meetings we can next week or whatever or so and and also toy. We have not sat down with the applicant to all the additional requests. Um there's two two options. One is the applicant agrees right now and goes ahead and updates the plan. Two, we take it to the town board and the applicant states, you know, they would prefer not to have a board leaison. I don't foresee that happening. Just so you know, whatever your recommendations are, we will make sure the town board knows what they are

and if they are already in the plan or not, and then the town board can agree or disagree. And I'm sorry, I I'm so sorry, Alex. Oh, no, that's okay. Go ahead. I Okay. So, if I if I heard what you just said correctly, what you're saying is that the applicant still has the ability given any recommendation we provide or any additional thing, they still have the ability to take to the town board whatever they want to take with or without our with or without our uh uh our um expressed wishes in terms of making changes to the document.

Correct. I mean, that's just like with any obligation you see. Um depending on what it is, staff might recommend denial unless XYZ is done. Um and of course the planning board can recommend denial unless X Y and Z is done. So and then the town board would take that into consideration when they make their decision. But that's not normally how it I don't I mean maybe it's not maybe I've been on the board a short amount of time but it's not normally uh that we would approve or deny a draft that then you know what I mean like normally we would get a finalized document at which we could No. Is that not true?

No not necessarily. conditional resonings. For example, if you have a narrative that y'all review or a plan, the conceptual development plan is what the UDO calls it and you're looking at it and you say that a certain use needs to be removed from that section of a certain plan, let's say. Um, staff would make sure that's either done if this applicant doesn't agree to it, staff would make sure the town board knows what your recommendation was. It doesn't need to come back to the planning board though. No, no, certainly not. Just

now if there are uh certain situations where it's ongoing conversation still, I you know, I think it makes sense when something smaller is updated each time. But

um especially the town board would be made aware. So when we when we approve something, we have a consistency statement. So it's very clear what we approved, whether we added conditions or we approved it as as is. So if anything changes, the town board would be made aware that that was not specifically the document that we Yes. Similarly, if we say no, I think that the practice now is to ask whoever voted in against it for why you voted against it and that will be made aware as well. Correct. Thank you. Yes, of course.

Right. So um to clarify that uh some of the planning board questions um the language that's in the small area plan supersedes additional documents. So, um, the way that staff interpreted that is not ne the development agreement or other documents don't necessarily have to be updated because it's superseded by the small area plan. So, whatever the south village requires in the south in the smaller for the small airplane, they have to do. So, um just to make sure everybody understands that it is it does supersede

um [Music] Can you say that again? Sorry. The language supersede the language from when supersedes these changes. Anything that's agreed upon in a small area plan

can supersede anything else that's already been approved. So this entire this entire process that we're talking about if board is going to approve one small area plan 5,000 acres contingent on it being conceptual and contingent on there being section design plans. That's new. That's not in the approved steps already. That's not in the, you know, the development agreement. Um, for example, the development agreement set states that the elements cannot be changed for 25 years. And so the applicants already agreed to having that conversation, which is what was approved back in the master plan.

Mhm. the um development agreement uh also states that the so it's the elements and um and this is in that comparison table at the end oh yeah the standards the UDO standards

um that it would be stuck in time from 2021. So this is the language that got approved back in 2021 and the applicant has agreed that in the future they would meet all standards applicable at that time. So just going through all of the conversation with the conversations with the applicant uh for the small area plan. These were issues brought up by staff and they have agreed to it based on what what has gone before you. Did I answer your question? I'm kind of I mean, yeah, leads to a lot of other questions, but we can continue on and stuff. I'm sure they'll come up.

Okay. The superseding existing documents. Does that make sense? Yes, it does sense. Um, also, we will be meeting with the applicant 3 to 6 months prior to them submitting a section design plan. Um, that needs to be updated in the plan as well. We create the sideby-side table

and then they and again like sorry they you said you'd ask them if they agreed to have planning board leaison so we can maybe have a heads up and um instead of a couple days before getting a lot of information um to have a planning board leaison present at those meetings that will take what approval to make that happen there they have to agree to it or correct this would be updated in this plan language so as as of right Now, from what I wrote down based on prior comments, that was a board recommendation. Mhm.

I'm assuming that's still the board's recommendation that there be a Yes. So, that would be as an example a condition for approval. So, if we get through all of the concerns tonight, answer your questions, make sure we're all on the same page of what the changes need to be in order for this planning board to be satisfied. Um, we will talk to the t the applicant about that. Uh, ideally everything will be updated in the small area plan and then we take it to the town board for consideration. Ideally,

um, I can't think of something that we've discussed that wouldn't be updated, but I don't want to speak for the applicant. So, and we are meeting with them this week to finalize the details. um going through the workshop questions on the 6th. Do you guys know when you're meeting with them? I'm sorry. I Tomorrow afternoon.

Afternoon. Okay. Um we discuss what conceptual means. It's binding on the applicant, not on the town. I'm going to not go through each of them. Um and that is correct. There can be up to 96 section design plans. Um I'm looking at number three right now. So when staff created that table of comparisons um and staff does agree that if there is 96 that could make it more difficult to see bigger picture um layouts depending on how it's broken up.

Again that is entirely at the discretion of the applicant. If the number if the town board agrees to allowing up to 96, then yes, the the applicant can provide as many as they want. Up to 96, they would have to provide a minimum of one section design plan for each section. No, they have zero. They can do up to six. It says up to z. Okay. Well, that's why I wanted to That's the point I was making there. Yeah.

Yeah. Um so they can submit up to six for each section. Um if they provide let's say a section design plan that incorporates a overlap of two sections we could we consider that.5. Correct.

Okay. So, if there if the planning board feels that there needs to be um a minimum number if if you're agreeing to up to 96, but if you want to say that there needs to be a minimum of 16 since there's 16 sections, we can we can include that in your recommendation. So in that case the quoted small area is really the formerly known as subsections the two smaller area smaller I know okay

instead of a minimum of 16 it would make more sense to say a minimum of one per section because minimum yeah they can they can provide basically a boundary line that might overlap two. So it might not be exactly the boundary of like let's say they just provide one for a section. It might not be the exact boundaries. Well, change the Okay. And change the say 16. It's still meeting the intent. No, but I think that there's a difference though. Like one per section. Okay. Do 16 for one section and zero for the other 15. Don't want to do that. Right.

Right. Okay. So, minimum of one. She's writing it down. Is that agreeable with everybody? I think so. Okay. Got it.

All right. So, um we discussed the the public how the public would be involved. Um as I stated, everything is public record. So just like a preliminary plot um we have uh community members come in sit down and go over that those with us as well and we listen to their concerns um and we work with the applicant. I don't foresee that being an issue moving forward with section design plans as well. Uh but just to make sure you know we're again we're all on the same page with the type of approval. uh if it's the if it's like a plenary plat you're looking at what the standards are and then in addition with the section design plans you're looking at public health safety and welfare. So you just want to keep that in mind when you receive public comment that it needs to be specific to those issues. we will add a definition of development and that would be the same definition we use in the UDO and in the statutes. Um the elements can be updated based on the information that's um already approved

but that's after 25 years. So that's what's currently agreed on. That's the first time I heard that and maybe I miss the development agreement which we didn't talk about the development agreement because that's already been approved but if you look at the section design plan we talked about like annually to review elements and that's because the applicant agreed to it. Okay. But they can't be changed. What was the language in the development agreement? They can't be changed for 25 years. Correct. How would they meet? Why would they agree to to meet to just to entertain

with with the language that we're proposing for these section design plans and it being specific to general health, safety, and welfare? We we also can't ask Teresa to Teresa to speculate for the applicant if we can keep things to the document. I understand. Yeah, I get your question. Perhaps asking tomorrow. Yeah. For the app. Just ask them tomorrow. Right. It's okay. There's Yeah, there's a difference in asking an update to an element

um based on staff's concerns that we've seen like in a site plan review versus saying uh we want you to do the, you know, we want you to build SCMs to meet the 100redyear storm. that that's that's not that's not something that is required by by law and it's not something that uh we could hold up an approval for.

Okay? is it's not relevant to public health, safety, and welfare in terms of what their entitlements were, what they got approved for, which is the 10 year 24 or yeah, 10 year 24hour and per um the approvals in the past, whatever state laws that change, they will meet that.

So if state law changes to 25 year, they will have to meet that. you know, because the conditional resoning that was done. I'm just trying to like make sure everybody understands this isn't like a completely reopening of a reasonzoning request. Any additional concerns based on what you have thought of between now and last time for chapter one? We will move on to chapter two and you go to the next page. [Music] I'm just making sure there's no updates since before the 9:15. Okay. So 9:15 comments. We're asked to make the section lines clear. Um 106 questions and concerns. Uh there's a typo in the table that will be fixed and we will ask the applicant reg, you know, jobs, but I think I explained last time that uh that's not really something that they would be able to accurately answer. We also asked about um timeline stuff too though like you know when these um commercial or industrial areas that can have 50% residential.

Yes, that's number six. Okay, sorry.

Yeah, so that that would be a question that we're going to ask as well. And let's see. So I think the responses in the staff analysis should be pretty clear on the questions from 106. So unless we want to go over anything in particular, we'll move on to 1013. Um it was asked where will the non-residential areas be going in the north village. So again that's not specific to the south village but that will be asked of the applicant and it was also asked for staff to prepare a comparison between the land use plan goals and the small area plan goals. So we will do that. And what's the applicant's plans for solar fields? We will ask that as well. Any additional questions or concerns? Chapter two. Moving on to transportation. We have another update from the um consultant RK that they should have uh their comments from the second review ready for in was it two what was what was it been two weeks final report within two weeks. Um from what we understand there are no major red flags.

um uh which is what we were initially told when they did their first review. So uh otherwise we would not have brought the plan to you guys. Um and if there are any major concerns that come up that uh they have not mentioned before and we'll make sure that that is addressed for sure. But as of right now there hasn't been Okay. And moving on to planning board workshop 106. Okay. Um we talked about what's the difference between a traffic model and traffic analysis last time and clarify that the street typicals are conceptual. Um, we also talked about Bill Thomas Road and the town board asked if there's a way that Bill Thomas Road, the the new part of it, can stay on Chattam Park property. Um, and staff is looking at that as well from a logistical standpoint versus tying into the existing road. And, uh, we did talk to we looked into that as well. That would be definitely something that would be addressed at a TIA. If we if you remember what the difference between the model versus the TI, TIA shows what on-site and off-site improvements are required based on the impact from a development. So if you know the impact requires Bill Thomas Road to be paved, two lane paved or whatever it needs to be, the applicant would need to pay for that unless it's an approved STP project through the state state funding

because that is an NC DOT road. Has has NC DOT reviewed any plans for that and had any comments on? They would not they won't receive those reviews until the TIA is ready. Okay, that makes that would be in the future. Yes, they would and it would actually be uh their final decision because it is a DOT road, but you know, town staff and DOT always discuss um any any type of transportation issue and recommendation in town. I was just curious if it was something that they they had already seen and brought up any issues on their end with but Oh, on the small area plan. Yeah,

you have seen it. Okay. But based on the model, they want to also um get the final recommendations from the consultant. Okay. And at that point, we will uh get something in writing from DOT on if they recommend approval of the small area plan or not, but it it was contingent on the review of the model. Perfect. Thank you.

And transit needs. Um we we are talking to RK about potential future transit needs um in the south village staff has talked about that internally as well and um for the staff analysis that you know a full transit review that would that would basically be like in a completely different plan. So I don't know then that would be for the whole town as well. We don't know exactly what that looks like at this time, but we can try to we can try to like if we assume that there's going to be a bus system in the future that's separate from Chhattam Transit, um we could look at that. That's not specific to Chattam Park necessarily because Chadam Park would be reliant on whatever transit system is within the whole town. There wouldn't be a transit system just for Chattam Park. So as of right now all we have is Chattam transit and that's more of a individual basis you know income based type trips

that be considered like a significant expense then it's not that would be the town's responsibility. Uh it just it depends on what if it's a public transit could be it could be the towns it could not be the towns could go through the county none of that's been figured out like you know the town of Kerry Apex I think they have Chapel Hill they have their own municipal uh bus systems so you know that would be a townwide service not just for Chattam Park it would be based on tax revenue which we definitely don't have enough right now for a transit system.

Okay. Um, any additional concerns with transportation for utilities and um, we had a representative from Tri River Water speak to the board of commissioners and they did clarify that uh they have no concern with future capacity issues in Chattam Park and we all are still waiting for the final approval of the utility master utilities plans reviews which Trevor did consult that out as well. Um again we have not heard of any sort of major concerns. So uh if there are any then we would have to address that. Of course as of right now though that doesn't seem to be the case. Any additional concerns with utilities?

I um natural gas. We would have to ask the applicant that we said it was just absent on the map. natural gas is typically not shown for mines are not going to put them in. That's not a requirement. They would show um a utility easement typically. That's what we would see at like plary plat step. Uh and that's where all the utilities would go. But natural gas is not a requirement. It's not like water or sewer. Not planning on it. We don't know. We'd have to ask the applicant. We haven't done that yet. Question. Yeah, that was our question. I thought that's what we asked last um on the 13th.

Yeah, we haven't spoke with the applicant tomorrow. But any questions regarding concerns with the small area plant specifically like the natural gas that's not a that's not a requirement. Is that just more for you're curious if there's Yeah, they're cutting for people's property sometimes and stuff too. Yeah. Yeah. Safety and like they're it's going over like the water lines are going over pe individual's property lines like on the map, right? Um how is that going to be addressed and stuff and like does that exacerbate with

No, that's typical very typical construction of subdivisions. Yeah. No, that is something that you got in the water map. So I thought but

that's a requirement. That's why. But no, any any sort of issues like that would be addressed at the plinary plat. Well, section design plan we would talk about more specifics, but the actual like easement lines and whose property that goes through that would all be figured out uh between plenary plat and final plat. So that's way down the road. and we'll talk about uh parks next. Um the town board asked for the consultants um written uh review. So that will be provided. They asked what would be the pros versus cons of accepting wetlands and buffers in parkland. Um and again the the final parks review has been complete. So the language that the plan the parks consultant and parks staff requested to be put in the small area plan has been done and has received a final review and approval by the consultant and staff.

Any questions on parks? I said um just the strikeout the change you know final sizes and locations will be previously verified during the subdivision and site plan approval process and now it's determined by the town of Pittsboro um prior to section design plan approval and stuff. So we get to determine where the parks are correct unconditionally. Yes. Everything that's in here is what staff is going to talk to the applicant about updating. Okay. And I I do not foresee anything being an issue, but again, I don't want to speak for staff. Um, the applicant

I mean applicant, thank you. And based on the applicant's response, uh, they staff might not recommend approval. So, um, and from what I'm hearing from the planning board, you would not recommend approval either if any of these things have not are not going to be complete. So we can discuss that when we're done. You know, make sure that we have the list finalized on what are your recommendations for approval um or denial based on XYZ. I

think that's um so like in our job is to help the town board make a decision, right? And then it's hard when we don't have like the language of the SAP is not finalized. Um, anyway, there's eight or nine points, right? And then also just like the legislative piece of this, I the financial piece of it, I find it hard to believe that the town board wouldn't expect us to understand the financial piece or if not, they're going to need to know it, right? They talk finance all the time on the board meetings. So, they're going to want to see something there. I also think we should get ahead of any kind of any method to have the town board at least if not the planning board to have an option to call legislative review of an SDP because I don't think that's responsible. So,

so it it it is a legislative review just to be cleared and everything, but there needs to be a carb launch discretionary ability for the town board in my opinion to call legislative review of an STP and that is that is what it go on record is stating that but it's but would just be health welfare and welfare and or did you check all the boxes? Yeah, I just which is which to me feels different than it is different.

It's not like a conditional reasoning where you can basically ask for anything and so long as the applicant agrees then you approve. It's that's already been done. Okay. So, any additional concerns with parks and public art? There was discussion at the town board level to incorporate local artists in the recommendations for public art. So, we will discuss this with the applicant and incorporating that language. Chapter seven, cultural and historical resources. There was discussion regarding road naming um approvals. So staff is looking into that. As of right now, we look at um we talk to the 911 addressing department with the county. They make sure uh road names are not duplicated or confusing. And then when a applicant submits their preliminary plat, their proposed street names are requirements on that preliminary plat. So you see that whenever you see, you know, proposed subdivisions and that is the town board giving final approval of that street name. So we're going to add a step in there. Um well, we're going to look at the options and then come back to the town board with them in adding a step to do an additional internal review like a local review of what the name proposed names are.

Okay. I think it just in my experience that even sounds like a step above what what other municipalities are already doing. So, thank you. I've never even heard of it. Well, sounds like a fun idea. I'm sure I'm sure there's jurisdictions that do and we can we can look that up. I think in my experience that's typically how it goes is it goes to E911 at the county. Um as long as it's not a duplicate or sounds like another name or obvious I don't that there's other requirements obviously they have as well but they approve it and essentially the municipality says well their approval is good and you kind of stick names where you want to stick them and

correct. So yeah, we're we're we're going to look into that and propose some language. And then regarding chapter 8 phasing, all the required plans um have been submitted for again these are um not 100% accurate. We don't know. You know, this is what they're supposed to provide is like what your future phasing plans are and which they showed how many dwelling units per section and things like that that they've proposed that they plan on happening. And we will ensure that this is done for each section design plan. Um there was a request at the town board level that um they update the fiscal analysis from 10,000 to 22,000 units which staff will discuss with the applicant. That was that was based on the the the 10,000 figure was what they said was a conservative number if I remember correctly and the 22,000 is closer to what will actually likely be or is a okay

max allowed. So that was again an entitlement uh approved. There is no minimum. Um and replacement. All right. Chapter 9, public facilities. We will um there was a question about how the applicant would provide additional school sites. that would be determined by the town county schools per the MLOU that's been approved and attached in the small area plan.

Uh where were future school sites be located? That's to be determined. Um, again, we would look at what the needs are for section design plans, work with the Chattam County schools, make sure that they give approval of whatever is being proposed for section, which is what the applicant has agreed to as well. and that uh any future transit plans that we have at the time 10 years from now we might have one. It will be clear that the applicant has to follow any sort of future plans that we have in that applicable section design plan. We were asked to reach out to Chad Transit uh to try to coordinate again with future transit needs. Um, we have done that and the staff has reached out as well and as of right now there there are none other than what's already in place. Okay. And um discussion to require receiving public comments. So, I explained what the process is, what the legal process is, if you would recommend anything in addition, if you would like to do an official twoe comment input just like we're doing with the section or small area plan, we can we can put that in there. Um, we would just, you know, of course, as staff have to explain to the planning board and town board at that time what the legal parameters are, of course. Um, but we can add that or at least request the applicant to add it as a step that we just receive public comments for two weeks.

Now, those public comments would come in through email or through a website that says all of the above. And we also put a um questionnaire on the website and Facebook. And I'm getting a ton of responses. Make sure they all go to the the town board per the requirement.

Since this section includes greenways, did we get clarification on because my understanding is there will not be bike paths on the streets. South Village. Will bicycles be allowed on greenways? Yeah, I think that was I think it was gone over it that it would be multi-use paths. Correct. That was my understanding for the sidewalks, but not specifically for the greenways. But I think typically greenways bicycles are allowed on greenways typically anyway. Right. Required at least 10 ft. Is there a speed limit on those? No. Okay. No, but that's a good point because a lot of towns are

Oh, yeah. Most are 25 35 miles per hour. So then if you didn't have a bike path, you were kind of out of luck. Electric bikes. Just remember any specs we have Yeah. they have to follow. Okay. Any specs that we have at the time, Chattam Park has agreed to follow per the development agreement. They would not have to. Whatever our town specifications were in 2021, whatever the UDO says in 2021, that's all that Chattam Park would ever have to follow based on the current language.

They have agreed to meet whatever standards we have in place at the time as uh language to be added in the smaller plan. So, I'm just foring speed limits and such, if that's a standard, then they would have to meet that. Okay. And then the appendix, uh, there are town board comments about there's any endangered species in the south village. Um, get that clarified and 10 million liability be referenced in the fiscal analysis, uh, impact analysis. Uh the last question was and this was at 11:00 p.m. um at night was to explain um the benefits of approving a small area 5,000 acre small area plan.

That's probably we've asked that many times I think.

Well, we've we've touched on it many times and we've you know discussed it. Um, so I let the board know I would put together a table of possible uh benefits versus disadvantages. You know, this is based on staff's and professional uh information and uh opinion. So, that has been provided and um if y'all have any questions about it, I I I think we could be here a very long time if we went over every single um part of it. But

um thanks for doing that. I do have one likely very easy question. Could you remind me what ah stands for in the uh $10 million liability? Oh, I'm sorry. That's affordable housing. Okay. I should have Okay, perfect. There.

So, you know, as staff, we provide you all the information to help you make an informed decision. Thank you very much. And it it certainly seems to me like you guys have have compiled everything that you could uh that we've asked think of. Right. Right.

Um you know, there's a lot of things that obviously are beyond your control. Um, so I hate to obviously I don't want to beat you up about those, but um, you know, if we have anyone has any further further questions um, get those out now or um, conditions they would like to see added to a possible approval or we've we got to discuss this.

I think it's really hard for me. I think it's really hard to have I mean there's been a ton of work answering a lot of our questions and stuff and there's a lot of like it will be provided or um information that's not complete yet and it's hard to just don't understand how to vote on something that that is not final. I mean it's kind of I I don't know how to do that and I know that Yep. one 99% of what needs to be updated is the next steps language.

Wait for that, right? Wait for things to be complete. Wait for information for us to digest and and understand and be presented to us before voting on it and saying, "Well, someone else will be able to see it or I can see it after I voted on it." I just um wouldn't be I guess my question is then if if we don't vote on it tonight when will our opportunity be to vote on it? You don't get one. So we that's kind of that's what I was looking for. As of right now, we have all of your recommendations

that you would like to see updated in the small area plan or from what I can gather, you would recommend denial. So, this will be either taken to the town board in an official motion, okay, or relay them just the information verbally. Um, but this is going to the town board in November. Okay. So, you know, if then I guess so, so then we will not see it again on our agenda

if if there and I have no idea if there would be a vote or not. Of course, that's not on the agenda to vote, but just taking it back to them with all of the questions answered, all of the concerns addressed. I mean, it it will not come back to our agenda. Well, I was I was trying to explain like if they agree uh to consider it either for approval or denial, then it would not come back to you. Okay. Sorry, I was a little longwinded. No, I was getting to it.

I I don't think I understood the um agreeing to see it for approval or denial rather than just a an information item essentially. I don't know. I I really all I'm getting at is is where where our opportunity for input ends is kind it's kind of board approves it recognize it. So, so we if we voted to deny recommendation and the board

denied it, then some other plan would come back to us in the future, I assume. And then we could do this all over again. Is this the new board or the the existing board or a new board? New board would not be in place yet. Next month. Okay. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Wow.

I'm ready. You ready? I'm ready. Well, else questions. If there other questions, I made my conditions and my input clear a little bit earlier, so I'm not going to restate them, but I just want to make sure everyone knows that like the things we just went through, I recorded nine things that were problematic. And um so anyway, can we reiterate the conditions that we're talking about? The big one is I think the I'm trying to put myself in the town board's shoes. Yeah. And saying I would want to see financials.

I would want to see um some way to have a discretionary legislative approval process that doesn't have to be the norm or the standard operating procedure, but would give some method for the town if needed to call for legislative review. Maybe just the town board, maybe both the planning board and the town board. And that that is what it states. Yeah. But like a cart blanch version, not a abbreviated version of the asterics, right? No, no, no. That's those are the requirements that have to be in the smart plan. That's completely different than the legislative decision on public health, safety, and welfare. Okay,

that's and again that that's going to be it's already in the language but the the asterisk that's just what's required in the small area plan. Okay. But I think it should be small area plan is going to take precedent legally over the m and it's not state restated clearly in the small area plan. I think we're missing something there possibly. But that's you know that's a legal thing I guess. So there there's that and then just you know

yeah and we're going to update the language but just to be clear like based on conversations input it will state it is a legislative decision based on public health safety and welfare and any additional applicable standards at that time whether it be specs or UDO standards or state law they will have to abide that's on top of that list that you were referring to. Okay.

I feel like um this plan is great and it's great to see that everything has been thought through and laid out, but I'm still missing why this needs to be a small area plan. If the phasing is already planned, then let's see a small area plan for C1 and leave this as a master plan as a conceptual, you know, overview of the whole South Village. I think it's great what's been presented to us. Um, but I'm struggling to see why we need to abandon the small area plan legislative pro process. And you don't have to. Yeah. And that's what that if you want to bring that back up like where I'm at right now. Right.

Um, so the table it goes over all everything. Yeah. I've not just the conceptual, you know, that's the first that's the first It talks about conceptual or not conceptual. Then there's all the other items that staff has worked with the applicant

that would be agreed upon with this 5,000 acre small area plan that otherwise would not be. So that that you know does include no language to update elements. It does include uh specs and UDO standards based on 2021 requirements for 25 years. Um so you know and I can go through them if you like. I just want to make sure everybody understands. Yeah, I do the benefits of this. Yeah. Um but I feel like there's a lot of loose threads. Um,

and we can talk about that for sure, you know, and staff's not we're like here tonight to vote. It just feels if there's anything in addition that you have concerns with beyond what we can go through in this table, we can

I mean I think I I I recognize and appreciate all the hard work that you put into this, Teresa, but I I do think that there, you know, even on even based on my understanding, my limited understanding of what was decided in 2015 and 2021, all all the different pieces, it feels like there are Um there there is con there is um a movement away from allowing for for following the regular process in terms of public input. And I understand people can send emails but I used to work in a congressman's office. I know exactly what happens with those emails. I'll just be frank, right? But if you have to hold people accountable based on their votes for real, their actual votes, and actually decide whether or not you I want you to represent me or not, based on your actual votes, I think that's a different it's a different um accountability system than just collecting emails from people or collecting public comments.

And I and I and I recognize that this is um this is a way to move move this forward. And I and I'm happy I'm happy Chattam Park is here. There are some great people that live in Chattam Park and that that are um that are residents there. And I don't want to do anything to I'm not it's not my intention at all to do anything to stop progress from happening in the town of Pittsburgh. But I do think that the movement from small area plan approval to conceptual design plan to you know all these different pieces to ultimately get to a yes or no vote based on public what the safety general public

remove some of the power remove some of the power of the of the legis legislative branch that we've that we have voted in in this town and so I I I really um to me. I think the public for me the public has spoken and and we're supposed to be representing what the public has asked us to do and like you I like what you said about loose threads. There's so many loose threads that have not been answered. And I feel I feel very I I'm not sure that I would feel comfortable, you know, walking into Food Lion tomorrow and having voted on this given all the loose the loose ends, the loose threads and some of the outstanding questions that that that still exist. Um I I just don't feel comfortable with that because it feels uh like a way to avoid the public accountability that comes when the legislative the legislative voting on this on smaller small area plans.

Um that um and then the time frame as well. I I'm I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that what Christina Pard said today in 2025 will have effects on people, you know, down the road without again without providing some additional legislative input um where people are accountable to the voters of the town of Pittsboro. And so so it's not about please add, you know, one more paragraph here and all that. For me, it's not about that at this point. It's about what does it what are the the residents of this town have what have they asked us to do and I'm not ready to seed all of my uh power in a sense to um to a document that is not complete and that does not have the financial analysis and some of the other pieces even the the um the uh consult the consultants with the with the water uh you know all the different all the different um consulting firms that have been asked to help us make a good decision. It's like we're seating all of that now today and I'm I'm personally not ready to do that.

Okay. Um just to clarify regarding I was taking comments or writing notes when you were making those comments. So public input and board input fourth down fourth row down. So we we are going to talk to the applicant about adding that required two week comment review period which is exactly what's required for small area plans. So nothing would change and we are also talking about having a board leaison and that's not even a requirement right now for small area plans. regarding um the comment. This is more just forformational purposes, but the planning board in general. You're a technical advisory board.

Absolutely. So, yes, you do listen to public concerns, but you also look at what are the actual specific issues that need to be addressed because you're not a political board. Understood. You know, so that just keep that in mind too. you know, if you're looking at a a resoning and it's a contentious resoning, um you could have a room full of, you know, a hundred upset people that don't want it. The purpose, the intent of the planning board is to look beyond uh it being a political type of decision. Yeah. And I'm not I'm not suggesting that it would only be right. I'm just saying that given the loose threads we've talked about, given

Oh, yes. And I have that as well. So some of that is that's where I that's where I sort of say I don't know about this. And I think you know and I and I like I said again I reiterate again I I I know that you have put a lot of time and effort into this plan and I also don't want it to even give the impression that I'm sort of anti-development or any anything like that. That's not it at all. It's more that um I don't I don't I don't think it would do a certain like I wouldn't be able to again face anybody in Food Lion tomorrow or tonight if I go there and say you know

again that's the hard part about being on this board is sometimes you make tough decisions and you're not as popular person I just want to make sure because I know there's a lot of new board members and just want to you know explain the difference between a planning board and a town board. Um, so, uh, I totally understand. Yeah. Okay.

I think what's being said is there needs to be balance. I don't know this document or at least what we have in front of us yet does provide that balance. I mean, I'm looking here under and and thank you for doing this table because this certainly is very useful, but it says here under section design plans versus small area plans. So, to me, this sums it up. STPs provide detailed non-conceptual guidance for larger areas with presubmittal coordination to streamline the review of preliminary plants and site plans. And and to me the emphasis on all that I've seen here is to streamline the process and I don't know that that is you know a balanced benefit

that specific row is not speaking to the only benefit for a section design plan. That's only speaking to based on the current process for small area plans. we will not be coordinating with the applicant ahead of time.

When we received this plan, it was 100% written by the applicant and they said, "Here you go." And then we had to basically start from that point. So that's the only intent for that row is to state that with the section design plan we will be mitigating that issue to have early coordination which has been a continued um source of uh confusion for staff in the north village and that's the reason why we are we asked for that to begin with and similar to like multiple small area plans though to be able to do that. Correct.

Yeah. and and all the requirements that are in the section design plan are the same that's in a small area plan. The biggest difference is Chattam Park has agreed to additional conditions that um we are also it is a legislative decision. We are also are looking at protecting the um public's health, safety and welfare. So that is still that's still it's just we want the language to be clear because as of right now it's not clear. It's very much sounds like a threat though honestly like do it now otherwise we're not going to have these provisions even considered if you don't approve it like this like we can ask for that as those same conditions to be approved by the applicant 16 more times you know like between each vote right like it just seems threatening saying like

you cannot you cannot you could not deny a small area plan if the applicant let's say is it agreed to change the language in the development agreement? So, it's not it's not a threat.

This was a concern brought up by staff that um we see the benefit of being able to be able to update the elements and go through that process of working with y'all and which we do have a good relationship. Um, and like I've stated in the past, we've had uh plenty of workshops where we've talked about issues that has uh both parties agreed that we do need to update elements. So, um, and then meeting future uh, standards that was brought up by staff. Um, so it's not it's not a threat because again, you cannot deny it. I mean, you could not Yeah,

you if they said no, that can't be a reason for you to deny, right? So, it's definitely not a threat.

Um, it sounds to me like uh the majority of us or possibly all of us are probably close to uh agreement or making a decision. So, if if anyone has a motion um and I would also if you are going to be at this point to make a motion, if it makes a difference to ask the applicant to come up and speak to anything, you can do that as well. Um thanks. But it's staff has done everything we can to answer questions if there's any additional information. Like I just want to again say that I really appreciate all the work that you've put into this and

thank you your your willingness to answer our the minutia of questions that we've asked. I appreciate that very very much. Especially since I know that it feels like you're you you're up there and and we're yelling at you and that is not the case. But I'm sure I'm I know that's what it feels like. It almost feels like that from here. Um, and that's not uh me I work for certainly not the intent. So nice.

Thank you for taking that point too. Like if if if whatever happens if this goes on to the town board then town board approves it gets everything they need and it's all good. Wonderful. Right. It's just that right now tonight for me no vote. I think it's Yeah. Well, I think it would be prudent to ask the applicant if they wish to, you know, address all the items that we've talked about and if they wish not to, then that's their decision as well. If that's an option, like you said, well, to go through the entire Well, I mean, whatever they'd like to address or or No, no, no. Good idea. I thought that just we going to Okay, that's fine.

We're considering the document that we have in front. Sure. Okay, that's what we're going to do right now. Happy to do it. Do we have Do I have a motion? Read this suggested motion here. That's right. No. Okay. Uh, no. Yes. Do you have to do you have to state it with the recommendation to approve? No. No. No. No. No. So, just say no. Those who vote no. Just no. you you put in there whatever you feel you need to put in there. Do you feel like you need more? I don't know what your motion is.

You can put that in your motion as well. I I wrote down financial analysis um final approval by cons consultants. That's I heard you say that. So if these are the things that you would like to see in order to be able to make a vote, we'll make sure that that's done and brought back to you next time. We don't have be able to vote on it though if you decide. You don't have to vote tonight. But the town board is going to vote, right? When When is the town meeting? November. No, we're not saying the town board's going to vote. We're saying this is going to correct. Yeah.

Yep. So, make a make a motion to recommend that the town board does not approve the South Village small area plan. We do. We do. We do. Is that what? I would make a motion uh to recommend the denial of the South Village small area plan as currently presented. I have a motion on the floor to recommend disapproval of the South South Village small area plan as presented. Do I have a second? Second. Who got there first? Um, give it to Connie.

Connie McAdams. Seconded. All in favor say I. Say I. All opposed say I. Motion passes unanimously. Great. Thank you. Thanks for the kind comments. I get paid for this and y'all don't. So, thank you to you for all the time we spent on this. Thank you so much. I need rest before the next time. I was going to say uh do we need to uh do I need to make a motion for a five minute recess? Get up.

Okay, we're going to go into recess for we'll come back at 8:40. Sorry, 7:45.

Did we ever determine where the water water bottles are? No more water. No more water. Probably good. Really need coffee. There are good people in there. Oh, you would be surprised. I mean, we have a great Yeah, I I have some friends who live in T Park. Okay. Yeah. Oh, really? Where you're at? Mindy's plane. It's two streets over from the parks. Okay. I run a lot over there. Oh, okay.

Yeah, it's fun. Different. You used the greenway or Yeah, kind of all of it. Sidewalk. I thought I thought it was going to be contentious. SP

[Music] freak. [Music] Okay, we are back from recess late. Uh, but thank you for to everyone for hanging in there, especi especially Mr. Randy Kahun Tingle, who I appreciate so much. He is going to present our new business item, the PB25456 uh 627 West Street, Park Avenue grooming resoning.

Yeah, everybody take a deep breath. This is nothing like the last piece. This is very very simple in in the most simple possible way. So uh a legislative request has been filed by Charlotte Kepler uh petitioning a map amendment for reszoning parcel uh it's 8021 from its current classification which is R10 highdensity residential to C2 highway business. Um what should what y'all should remember about this is that about a year ago we did one on um on 90 9002. So um quite quite similar. This particular parcel is located directly beside the 7th Day Adventist Church. Property is currently rental uh residential. The owner is a professional dog groomer and wishes to locate her pet grooming studio into this structure. And so in this series of maps, the current zoning right there, it's the sort of mustard colored one. We go to the next map. I'm sorry, this is the land use map. If you go back to I'm sorry. There you go. That's the current zoning. So it's consistent with the residential. But again, if we go back over to where we just were, I'm giving uh this is the land use plan and it has it slated for traditional neighborhood uh infill, which traditional neighborhood can include this type of service industry. And if you go over one more, we see there, there we go. It's cross-hatched, but that is the property. What we're trying to uh do here in this particular case is to create the highway corridor because this um these two highways uh that are intersecting here uh the 902 and 87 has become our truck route. So it is now 501. So this is the truest of the highway business districts I've worked with in my entire time in this particular career. Uh you all might recall that there is a frame shop across the street.

There's a restaurant over here. There's a gas station over here. It's just got that kind of highway business feel. And it is on a highway uh which makes it uniquely unsuited for residential and very suited for uh this particular business. uh staff did go over with the petitioner uh a great number of uh considerations such as the fact they're going to need paid parking lot, handicap parking spaces, and the house is going to have to be modified to become more of a business. But um this one's pretty much a slam dunk in this particular direction uh in my particular point of view, but I would love to hear questions as long as none of them have to do with the small area plan. Can you go back to the future land use plan? I just my question is so that piece obviously there was some intent in the cutting the adjoining

um what what does it stay that way? Oh yeah. Well, basically yes it does because in this well in this particular case um this is a neighborhood um infill kind of you know TND kind of thing traditional neighborhood that lot will stay well basically I think it doesn't change the land use map in this case now when we go to amend the land use map uh in a year or so or as soon as we possibly can um tonight would be not a great time but any other time in the world would be marvelous. I would love to see this more accurately reflect the fact that when the land use plan was written, this was not the truck route and it is now.

So, it may have been a quiet neighborhood before, but uh quiet is not what you have on truck routes. And of course, the truck route was moved to reduce the congestion down, which I'm telling you something you all know. But this is actually on 64, not it's 64 and and what had been the intersection of 90287 and 64, but it's on the 64 side. Yes. Yes, ma'am. Did you say there was going to be paved parking because this says Yes, they're going to they're going to actually we have since talked to them. They're going to pave their parking lot. I would also I would also just say we're looking at a reason the intent should not be

considered. We talked about converting to the business. We want to make it super clear this doesn't go back to being a house later because you'd have a funky parking lot in your in your backyard. What are the neighboring properties currently? Um, as I said, there's a frame shop to the north. There's a gas station also to the north. The one beside them, I'm not sure what the use is. I didn't look at it very closely from the way here, but this is like a whole corner that actually mirrors the highway business aspect. Al's Diner is on the corner. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. My question I guess was just like that neighboring property. I have absolutely no idea. That'd be a great question.

One side is one side is a business because a sign out sort of I give up. I read I saw it on the way over here. It was like one blur for one second while I was on the phone going you shouldn't text ride and talk at the same time. Even if you are talking through the phone. Okay. But we did go down and thoroughly inspect it. Um, they came to us probably I'm I'm going to tell you it was the earliest possible part of the spring and we're about to have Thanksgiving in about a month. So long drawn out process, but I'm super happy to be here. So my my only issue

Yes, sir. uh which you know is safety on that highway because we're going to have Reeds Reeves Farm coming in there which is going to put more traffic not less traffic on there. The driveway is somewhat obscured from or it's not very visible from 64 east because you've got the church on one side, you've got you've got the lawn that comes up at a hill and sort of blocks the Yeah. And then there's shrubbery all along the one side of the driveway. So

the intent is to have people drive in and do all the things you would do that make you not. In other words, nobody's backing into the highway. You're going to have to turn around inside the site and go out. Okay. But there's no plans to widen that driveway. I do not know. That would be a construction question. And this is a reszoning. Oh, I understand that. Well, but the reasonzoning I again with safety and welfare issues. I understand what you're saying, but also the intent because we're not going to get any sort of intent in writing. So, we don't want to use, right? But I just want on the record that is a that should be a consideration for the applicant. When you start thinking about most businesses, most driveways for businesses are two-way and that just naturally makes them 22 feet.

This one is unless you want to hit somebody head on. Uh, but most of us who are a little safety-minded tend to believe that. So, we actually sat down and in much the same way as we're doing right this minute, we took apart the I don't want to talk to you about construction. I want to talk to you about zoning. That's what we're doing. They're also relocating a business from Holly Springs to here. So, this is actually a this is using the highway business district to move a business to a business district. Great. As long as my daughter doesn't suffer, they're not one of their She's also a dog grammar. Is she also a dog grammar? Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry to hear that, but uh Yeah,

I think there's enough dogs to go around. Oh, yeah. Randy, what is a high-end dog grooming facility? Oh, this is this is a boutique. This is a boutique. I'm only sorry they're not here to tell you about it. It's a boutique. Bark Avenue. I'm sorry. Bark Avenue. Fancy. Yeah. Well, I guess yeah, I guess they didn't want to call themselves 627 West, but that would have been cool, too. Depends on how, you know, if it becomes super high class, they'll probably change to just sort of that 902. Yeah. Um, James, you look like you've got a question. I was going to make a motion. Oh, I can't wait to hear it. I'll shut up if that's what we're doing. Thank you so much.

I'd like to move to recommend approval of PB25-456 as presented. Second. All right, we got a motion by James Buster to recommend approval of PB25456 as presented, seconded by Christina Pard. Um, any further discussion? Hearing none. Uh, all in favor, please say I. I. I. All opposed say I. Motion passes unanimously. All right, we will move on then to planning board, planning department updates. M, not a whole lot to say tonight other than I'm very happy this is all um moving down the road and certainly next month we'll be bringing in some additional new projects.

Okay, so look forward to it. Super excited. Awesome. Thank you, Mr. Randy. Uh, board comment period. Does anybody have anything they'd like to say? Um, I I'd just like to Well, she's left. I was going to, you know, thank the uh Megan from the Southern Southern Environmental Law Center. Yeah. For all the work that she did, all the public input we've got on this. It's it's been fantastic. And the board for their questions as well, even though half of them were mine, so sorry. Thank you for your question. 40%

from down there, but no, just kidding. Um uh and again can't ask or ask sorry can't say enough about our uh our staff. I try to as much as possible. Thank you guys. You're obviously a very dedicated group and we as a as town members benefit from your efforts. So very much appreciate it. Um, I also did I told Jenna that I would mention the downtown Pittsburgh public properties um survey. Uh there's a the project sites I think uh I don't know Teresa if you've got a better understanding of it. I was hoping Jenna would be here tonight to uh but there's um 22 properties that uh they are looking for public input on uh for Yeah. Yeah. Please, please, Mr. Jonathan Franklin town.

I don't get manager if you would please elaborate.

We have a so it's a partnership between the town of Pittsburgh and Chattam County. Uh we went 50/50 on the consultant fee and they were looking at publicly owned properties in the downtown area and along West Street. Uh the pop-up park, some areas behind the historic or I guess between the historic courthouse and the annex. uh the old sheriff's office, the old school board um property, uh one of Habitat's property is included because it it squares off uh yep, ABC store, fire department, and I think it's the current tax office and the IT building. And so looking at what those future properties can be used for, best case, um how we might get those into the hands of private developers in the future for for housing, maybe a hotel, uh a new fire station, some other public uses. Um and that study will go on for probably the next six, eight months, but the now we're trying to get survey information from the public to figure out what the public might want to see in those different locations.

Yeah, absolutely. Thank you'all. So, if you have an opportunity, um, please get on the website and take the survey. Um, other than that, I've got nothing. If no one else has anything to add, uh, take a motion to adjurnn. So, move. Motion to adjurnn by Alan Wilson. Do I have a second? Second. Second by James Buster. All in favor say I. I. Don't oppose.