Planning Board - Regular Meeting

welcome everyone. This is our June planning board uh meeting and uh calling the meeting uh at 6:34. Uh first is the attendance. We'll go in sequence probably starting with Rick Rick Cross John Gmanani Deep Lay Trey Taylor. Uh we have three of our board members who have an excused absence and they have conveyed it ahead of time with our town clerk. All right, we will go to the item number two. Uh approval of agenda if there are any amendments to the agenda. All in favor? Can I get a motion to make a motion to approve the agenda for tonight? Second. Thank you. Second. Thank you both. Item number C. Uh we got a vote. Oh, okay. All in favor? I I I Thank you. Um item number C, uh minutes from the month of May. Are there any amendments to the minutes that were presented? I I Go ahead. I don't I don't have any uh changes. Anybody? I make a motion to approve the minutes from May 20 meeting. Second. All in favor? I thank you. And I I'll say real quickly, uh Rick had one uh correction to make to the minutes where there was a bullet point that wasn't fully completed. So that that correction had been made and that is what's shown there in front of you. Just a FYI. Yeah. Thank you, Madison. Of course.

All right. Item number D, um old uh old business. And I request our board me our town town staff to present this item. Yeah, absolutely. So, at the last uh planning board meeting, our town clerk presented the updated uh proposed planning board rules and procedure and you guys had a good discussion on a few of those items. Um, so those changes are reflected in your um, updated packet and are highlighted in yellow. Um, I will like to point out one of the discussion items that you guys had was about the term limits for chair and vice chair. And so from re-watching that meeting and being in attendance, um it was left as is to where the chair and vice chair will just have two term limits and then you have to roll off and then that member will serve as a ex officio member. You guys also discussed having no term limits and then in addition to that you discussed um you know if someone was a vice chair their term was up they could go to uh chair position and then if the chair was up they could go to vice chair. So as it states now it's it's what it was originally proposed as. Um so watching the meeting there was really no decision on that. Um, now I know Chair Ferris had looked at it and he was comfortable where it was and uh I think you guys were kind of comfortable with a lot of things. So I just wanted to bring that up. It it's it's as it is originally, but we can always bring that section back real quick if we need to make modifications to it. Um, but that is for you all to discuss what your comfort level is with with it now. Yeah, I think once we had the discussion

it was more clear. I don't I don't think there was any ambiguity. It was probably more centered around just being unfamiliar with some of the phrasiology. Sure. Yeah. So, uh I think we're pretty comfortable with it and um I I would assume just leave leave the language the way it was. But okay, you know, the but the one thing about having not to revisit that same long discussion that we had for future planning boards, just maybe take a second look at if if we can make that more concise and tighten it up or or even put a little bit more context to it so it's more uh user friendly. Okay. For future playing boards. Yeah, that's perfectly fine. At our education. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I think we're we're well aware of what it means and now that the clerks are assisting us much more in the in the planning board process, um I think we'll have that be part of our education piece for new and upcoming board members as they as they come online. Um so then if you guys are comfortable with that and the additions then uh we would just want a motion for you guys to adopt the rules of procedure and then they will go forward to the board of commissioners for for final approval. Right. Right. Can we get a motion to adopt a proposed planning board rules of procedure? I move that uh we adopt the rules of procedure and um convey them on to the board of commissioners for their final approval. I second that. Thank you. All in favor? I I The second item was about the decision on the planning board goals for 2025. Yeah, absolutely. Another uh old business item from the last meeting. Um,

so since we will push back uh with our work plan from the beginning of the year, we're pushing it to now. Um, the goal of this is to really come up with ideas on goals that you think are achievable for this year. And um, and a part of that, uh, Chair Ferris will be giving a a report or an update to the board of commissioners at our next week's board of commissioner meeting. Um, so there was some general discussion last time. Um, and then I also have um, you know, depending on on Rick your comfort. I know you had some ideas depending on if you want to bring for bring those forward or if you want to kind of stick with what the rough outline is now or if you want to uh, again, it's it's up to you guys what your comfort level is and what you want to achieve for 2025. Um, again, I from what I captured from the from the meeting last month, I captured that into the work plan. So, it again, it's it's your plan. We want you to make the most out of it. Um, depending on what you want to do this year. Go ahead. Okay. Yeah, I had a couple of questions and then some comments. Um, just to confirm, so the planning horizon for these objectives um is the end of calendar year 2025, correct? Yep. So this will be revisited again in January 2026. Okay. And um I assume that uh therefore we would be having some activity around that in November, December of this year time frame potentially. What typically happens and and this year has been kind of weird with having an interim manager and more focus on our board retreat. Typically the planning board chair and or vice chair will come to the board retreat and give a presentation on what they want to work on for the next year. So they can typically work with us at staff level or work with you guys to propose a general work plan for the upcoming year. So typically this is kind

of vetted out and ready for the board retreat because they typically like an update uh from what you guys are working on or what your goals are. Um and again this year was just kind of weird. Right. And and and they actually need to approve our work plan if I understand correctly. Is that right? No, this this is for you guys. Okay. In the past they had when the board of commissioners used to have a liaison specific to each advisory board. Okay. Then they kind of got away from that and then they brought on the organizational advisory board. Um so they've kind of changed that a little bit but this is your plan and your plan only. So what you want on it is is is what you want. And if there's things in there where it requires you to have additional coordination, it could include better coordination with the board of commissioners or with other advisory boards. Um, again, it's it's what you will want to make of it and then the amount of time and and dedication you want to have with it. Okay. Well, since Daniel's not here and you had a good suggestion, yet another suggestion. Um, I think Daniel said he was going to uh take those uh recommendations individually and he'll be back in town or Yeah. So, he'll be available Thursday and to talk with the board members individually, right? Sure. That's fine. That's perfectly fine for you guys to to figure it out. We'll aggregate that information and present it. Okay. But I'm pretty comfortable with where we are right now. Yeah. good with that as well. Yeah. So, you know, as you said, I I had a couple of um uh suggestions uh one new objective, one revised objective. We had a little bit of back and forth uh with some good ideas um via email. However, definitely not anything settled. Um so, my only um statement, I guess, for the record is that um

um you know, this is still a work in progress. Um and uh what um our uh chair of Ferris will discuss or present at the board of commissioners meeting next week will still be a work in progress. Um and if everybody here is comfortable with that, I'm comfortable with u not having further discussion on my proposed goals here. Um but rather uh later this week and beyond. Okay. Yeah, that that is perfectly fine. So I would say um if you guys for now want to review and finalize this work plan as it is now with uh the notion that um it's a working plan and updates can be made as as you guys discuss further. So that's all we would need at at this point. So if you just want to make a motion to finalize the work plan as is and um then you guys can continue the discussion on making modifications. make a motion to finalize the work plan as it's work work in progress. Yes. Um actually I'm I'm not quite comfortable with that. I would need one change to be able to go along with that. So let me just throw that out. I may still be in the minority, but um currently I'm listed as the champion for for goal four. Um and as written, I'm not comfortable being listed as the champion for goal four. Okay. So then you could do a a motion with modification to work plan to remove Rick Krauss as the champion of goal number four. Yep. And then I'm fine. And then you can just make a motion as I just stated. Okay. I will make a motion. Yeah, I'm getting the hang of it. Um I move that we um remove um uh my name as the champion for draft goal number four on the draft work plan. Okay. Anybody? I can second that. Okay. All in favor? I I Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. No, I appreciate the coordination and uh look forward to to you guys meeting and

kind of further vetting this. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Coming to new business view of the Olivia conditional resoning. I invite Blair to present this item. Good evening everyone. Want to note that we have a very large audience with us tonight, larger than usual for planning board. So we appreciate you all making the trip. Um so tonight I will just go through um a basic presentation of u staff review of the conditional resoning. Uh we also have Brady Finley tonight to speak uh towards the TIA. I believe he has a um a presentation and I believe uh the applicant has a presentation or two tonight. So we'll uh we'll just start. Let's see. So anyway, okay. So an explanation of the request. This petition is requested by Tyson Carlton Mark trustee for a conditional reasonzoning map amendment for four parcels. You can see them there in the map in gold. And I just want to point out in particular uh the third one ending with E. That is a a partial resoning. There is a creek that you don't see in this graphic, but you will see it later. There's a creek that divides that parcel and in the plan you will see that they are not wanting to reszone that portion of the parcel. So that would just be a partial reszoning of the and that would be the largest parcel. And then the parcel at the top that ends with B that is um currently in Union County and that's going to be up for annexation. Um so um anyway, so that gives you a little bit of background,

but as far as the the overall um land, it's basically 33.34 acres. Um a little more than a tenth of that will be uh dedicated to commercial area, which would have about 20,000 square ft of commercial space. That's what's planned. And then um the remaining portion of the land uh would be for a multif family area and it would feature no more than 307 dwelling units. You can see it there in that plan situated on future Parkway East. And we'll show you more about the context in I keep hitting the wrong button. So here you can see where it where it sits in town. Uh the map on the left shows downtown Waxaw and then a gold frame that shows the the blowup here. Uh you can see going up 16 uh you can see the dash line for the Parkway plan. That's a just a vision plan. It's not exact, but um Parkway East already does exist to some degree. You can see it there in the larger map. And about.3 miles down that partially paved uh road um is the beginning of the project. You can see it there on Microsoft Parkway East like I said. And then you see uh on the north side the Union County with the parcel that's in there. To the the west is a residential community, Providence Farms, and on the east is undeveloped land. And the red development to the south, it's red because it's under construction. That's Ble Mill Apartments. So here is the current zoning. And you can see the property outlined in kind of the gold. You see it there on Parkway East with the with the gold star and uh again you see the portion that's in Union County. You can see uh the uh Providence Farms U development that's on the west as R1

and to the south um it's also well to the east and the south of it is all employment center zoning. Um and of course the property itself is employment center zoning currently. I also want to point out that uh the red there uh as you can see is corridor commercial and it actually goes down the parkway. It actually touches the property. Um so there is a a common um uh the properties meeting that in other words this property does is adjacent to CC zoning. So in the future land use plan what was envisioned uh in this plan that was adopted less than two years ago actually seems like a long time ago but it wasn't. Um you can see that that property was envisioned to remain employment center and and the property around it. Um because the the idea for employment center as is as is written out here under principal uses you can make out very quickly that it's intended for high-tech manufacturing or light industrial or warehousing or businesses any businesses basically that employ um that was the that was the overall goal for employment center. But of course there were there's of course opportunity to to have conditional zoning like we're seeing tonight. When you have an EC you can put retail in an EC. Yes, there well in the land development code there's of course the entire table of uses and some it would not be appropriate for all types of retail but there is some um so we can delve into that but I I would have to consult the table of uses to be able to show you exactly what it what it will allow um but we'll talk about that a little bit more when we get into their resoning plan. Okay. Uh I just want to point out um that you know here you can see like the brown area below that's that Blemill apartments that's that's was slated for mixed use. Um and then of course the the lands to the north and

and west of it are are more low density and rural. One other quick question. Yes employment center. Thank you. Thank you. Um uh is any residential allowed in employment center? It can be done through conditional zoning and that's what this that's what this conditional zoning is partly about. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, just to clarify employment center CZ employment center conditional zoning where it's still employment center that is the way that you can get uh apartments into uh employment center. Okay, that makes sense. But yeah, it has to be run through the conditional zoning process. So tonight we are looking at a conditional zoning and the proposed zoning for these four parcels or most of these four parcels is conditional zoning mixed use. Um this particular category uh while it hasn't really been used in Waxaw, it is devoted to this kind of situation where it's uh an overall land area of greater than 25 acres and of course tonight we're looking at a over 33 acre um total land land area. So it meets that criteria. Um, ideally or actually per code for the CCMU, the residential to non-residential mix is important. Um, but it's it's a broad range. It can be for non-residential uses anywhere from 20% to 60% is what the intention is for this zone, uh, the zoning district. But this can be adjusted if a project is found to provide a significant economic benefit to the town as determined by the zoning administrator. Um, I want to point out if you read the fine print what the district description is all about. I'll just read it to you. The uh CZMU allows for flexibility and layout and design of larger parcels that are of significant public interest due to either location or economic benefit, environmental

reasons or cultural characteristics. And it and it also it it allows for all uses of other districts. So, it gives the developer a great deal of of flexibility as to what they can put in there. Um, if they had uh gone with uh employment center CZ, it still would have limited what they could put in what their commercial area is. And there may be other reasons why they also have decided to to reszone to this um district. I'll let them explain that, but um this gives gives you the the general idea of what this zone is about. So you put a um kind of like a ratio or this percentage in there of 60 a 20% nonresidential use that would apply to the 20,000 square foot commercial space. Correct. In in the context of the toll project where there's 307 apartments. So, I I'm interested in the math of how do you equate the 20,000 square foot uh commercial space with residential uh rooftops. I think the way that it's computed is just land area that is devoted to that particular district. Um there may be some fine lines there that um you know legal would need to get involved in if there was some splitting of hairs, but in general it's just what area of the land is devoted to one versus the other. Not all that scientific. It's we try not to be but sometimes you have to get down to the I guess I was looking for more science. It would be more interesting. I don't I don't think it would be by by square footage of the of the buildings. But um if we do get into those questions, I will need to consult uh legal for that. Um but just generally the way it's written in zoning is yeah that 20 to 60% non-residential or in other words in

this case particularly commercial. Um but and and I guess it begs the question then where are we in that range of percentages? I'm going to show you that next. Thank you. Okay. Well, actually we already have seen that a little over a tenth of the of the land area um is devoted to the commercial. But here I can show it to you graphically. Um here you see the site. It's turned on its side. So north is is to the right. And so you can see Parkway East um would be on the left there to the south of the of the project. And so up against Parkway East is that commercial area. And you can see a dashed line behind the there's like two buildings and then some parking layout and then you see the uh dividing line between the commercial area and the residential. So that comes to just a fraction more than uh 10% of the property. Um so we'll get into you know the conditions and how they want to approach that. Uh but just for right now I just want to show you a general description of the property. This is just um sort of a boiled down general features of the property that I want to point out and the the the applicant. Well, I'm sure we'll get into more detail about what's planned. But what you can see here is yeah, I've got a line on the top just basically showing where's the commercial, where's the residential along with the common open space that's devoted in this in this property. Um, but I also want to point out there the along the the top or in this case the west between the prop the project and the R1 residential area um that's you know that's built out um large lot homes. There is a 40 foot undisturbed buffer there. So those trees are not disturbed by grading. Um they exist now and they will continue to exist and be protected through the construction of this project and beyond.

um to the on the parkway side that's actually a 50- foot buffer a 50- foot buffer between the commercial and the residential. So these are just according to our our buffer rules that are in the LDC. Uh on the east side of the project at the bottom you can see there's a 30-foot stream buffer uh for that existing creek there. So um you know it's going to be 30 foot on this side, 30 foot on the other side. Um, you can also see on the well just I'll I'll get into some of the detail now that's more about the circulation. Um, you can see Parkway East and the way they have it drawn is that it is extended to what is called public road A for right now. Um, that shows that that main spine that connects to both the commercial and the residential area and it ends in that culde-sac. Um what's planned there at least what what at least is in the conditions is that there would be a future road connection as required by the land development code from that culde-sac to the next property which would be to the east. So that's why it says future road connection there with the big yellow arrow. The smaller longer arrow is the future trail connection. that is one of the conditions that um the LDC imposes or at least it's a way of approaching the general land development code requirements for connectivity because those apply to both vehicular and pedestrian. So in this case because that creek is there um what we did was determine that we could satisfy the land development code uh requirements for pedestrian connectivity by having a a creek crossing there, pedestrian creek crossing. I was going to say while we're talking about that little connection for the road, um this is going this is for a zoning change tonight to to hear about it, but

the uh property to the bottom of the page or would be to the east of this property would still be zoned EC. Yeah, this resoning does not affect that. uh industrial equipment, trucks, all that. I guess I adjoining or being adjacent to residential. I I I guess trucks aren't going to be using a roundabout, but there's there's more heavy traffic with the EC or or different traffic. I'm not going to say heavy, it's going to be different to nonres for that traffic continuity. How's that work with a um residential area with all those apartments? Well, there yeah, those are good concerns. I mean, frankly, from the the history of employment center zoning district and how it's been developed so far in the town, you're not seeing a lot of industrial coming in. Um, I I think the town would benefit greatly if there were some light industrial that did come into the town that this that the EC is particularly, you know, appropriate for. Yeah. But employment centers, you know, you might jump to the far end of the scale of, uh, you know, saying, oh, it's going to be industrial, but there's a whole range of uses that are allowable within the employment center that's about employment. Yeah. I would so I mean it's it's a potential. Yeah. Yeah. It's a potential but um first of all there is the there is the buffer of the stream you know 60 feet alto together of what has to be maintained around that stream. Um so that provides that that eastern buffer and it goes all the way up to the to the north end. Right. Um yes there would be a road connection. Uh, and maybe the applicant will speak to what they envision would happen to

the east of this property, but I'll leave that to them. Um, but uh, but yeah, I mean that's that that's why I go through what the current current zoning is. Um, but yeah, go ahead. Even if there is the buffer to John's point once from the future uh uh employment zoning even if I'm coming into the culde-sac and I'm going out from the public road a and that will still that will be this heavy traffic that will impact the residential correct well I want to I want to clear up what might be a misconception just from you know you're just looking at this plan so you're seeing public road A and perhaps imagining that the that the adjacent property would also have to use that road, but the adjacent the development of that adjacent property would also have its own requirements for circulation. So, they would and and certainly if it's something that's heavier traffic, you know, they're going to want to get directly onto Parkway East. They're not going to want to cut through a, you know, a development like that. Um, I would imagine, but just remember that there will be more circulation with with subsequent development. Mhm. So, um but yeah, I understand and maybe that the applicant will speak to that. Um just a couple other things to point out. Uh the where they show the Parkway East extension. Um that is you'll see that there's a 300 ft arrow there and what that goes to is the current property line. I mentioned that uh the applicant did not want to reszone all of that particular large parcel. Um, but that is one of the that that that um hatched area to the south is currently one of their parcels. Um, I'll let them speak to their plans for that portion of the parcel. Is there different topography there? Well, it's on the other side of the creek. So, I I can say that right away. Yeah, I guess there's not it's not uh

so it's just not part of this development plan. and but I'll it'd be better for them to speak to what their plans are for that. Um so anyway, one other thing I want to point out uh as far as the circulation goes, you can see public road A, uh is the main spine for this project by which someone can access the commercial area and the residential area. You'll see that there's I'm going to use the little red light here. You can see that there's that entrance. You can also see another entrance into the residential and then a third a third entrance that would go into the residential. One thing that doesn't show up on this graphic, I wasn't able to update it in time, but the what this says about future trail connection that is most likely going to come from this crossing. There would be a road crossing here, a pedestrian crossing, and then it would go down to the creek probably more from that area because that is so dependent on natural conditions uh grading particularly. That's something that's usually worked out more at the construction document phase. But the important thing for a conditional zoning is that it is shown on the conditional zone that there will be that future trail connection and that part of it will be built, the part that at least goes to the 30-foot stream buffer. We'll get into those conditions um in upcoming slides, but I just want to point out that you know again here's the pedestrian connection all the way to path 24 and that's in the adopted pedestrian plan. So that's, you know, because it's in an adopted plan, it's incumbent upon the developer to construct that path to um Waxaw standards. And so parks and recreation would be involved in that, making sure that the trail was something that they could take over uh once it's done because it would become, you know, public at the risk of getting in the weeds if that that uh creek is on the property. So any type of bridge for a

pedestrian walkway it's expectations of the developer to to build that forward. Well in this it's a good question. In this situation we have two connections across the creek that are that the town is insisting that go in as part of our you know to meet our land development code. One is the connection by road. Sure. and one is that creek crossing. What we would do generally, and there's other staff here that can that can correct me on this, but my understanding is that we would that road would need to be built to a practical point where but they wouldn't have to like build half a bridge, you know, it would you would you would build it you would have the easement. you would build it as far as you could and then it's incumbent actually on the the future development in this case the development to the east at the bottom they would have to make that connection. Generally we would want the street um the paved street to go all the way to the property line but when it does involve a creek there has to be an arrangement worked out for that. So I just asked because I know bridges are expens I asked because bridges are expensive. Oh absolutely. Yeah. And the same is true to a lesser degree with the future trail connection that in this case we're saying build build a trail um down to the 30-foot buffer and and and that location even though we have some general parameters of where it would be somewhere in here um it would be determined at the construction document level as to where exactly that should be and then again it's incumbent upon the the other property owner or the the next developer basically um to complete that connection. And I want to point out that I don't know exactly how big this creek is, but it's it's probably it may be a

situation where it's a culvert rather than a bridge. Sure. So, I just want to remind everybody of that. Um I'm just on that topic. Um is there any um precedent for having the current developer who isn't being expected to build a bridge or half a bridge um to provide fee in lie of um that construction so that the cost to the next developer which I know in this case happens to be owned by the same the same group but um if it weren't um could be you know shared or deferred. Is there a precedent for that? I would like to defer to staff if anybody has an example. Can you think of anything? No, not as far as a a fee in LW where one developer pays another developer. A lot of time we see when developments again this is just at you know a certain scenario if if they're coming online around the same time we would ask them to coordinate but as a as Blair was alluding to looking at a construction document phase um we would ensure that the connection is feasible because we don't want a project to build something at at their grade but then on the other side it's 50 ft above. Um, so we look at that more in depthly to ensure that that connection can be adequately made. Um, but we don't have a precedent to where we would require a developer to pay another developer for their side of of a of a u a development. It's it's pretty much first come first serve. Uh the same with um TIA improvements. Two developments may come online at the same around the same time. Their mitigation requirements are the same. uh developer A comes in first and they want their cos so they will do the improvement first. Um but we often ask for coordination to where they can do the mitigation at the

same time but sometimes that doesn't work out if if a development is two or three years ahead of another development. We do our best to coordinate to where it's simple rather than developer A putting in said requirements and then developer B developer B comes along and then has to rip out those requirements and then do something else. Um we we work well with uh James and Kimley Horn to kind of make sure that um they do it in unison to the best of their ability. Yeah, I understand. I would just say in this particular case it's not first come first serve. It's sort of a last come first serve in that in that the um uh the requirement falls completely on the second you know the future developer um to um cross over to the other cross over the property line cross over the stream. Um so maybe you lose a little bit of le um negotiating leverage um you know with the first developer and you create a little bit of a barrier a little less trade space with the second developer. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Madison. Okay, so one last thing I want to show you on this graphic is um as I was getting to there's public road A was describing that. There's also another road um that gives another access to the commercial area and the residential area. Um this is partly for um fire to to do the best to meet fire code for this. They're supposed to have two different um access points, preferably on either side of course, but in this case, that was the best that could be worked out. Um but this is important circulation for other reasons for the commercial and residential. Um but anyway, they show it as a gated access um that would be set up so that emergency vehicles could open it. Um but anyway, I I just want to impress that graphic on your mind um

because the next slide will just summarize that in written form um with staff summary of of this this development proposal. So again, some of this will be already familiar, but as far as the capacity goes, uh, in summary, it'd be up to 307 multi multif family dwelling units and no more than 20,000 square ft of commercial space. Um, some of this is what the um what the applicant has asked for. Some of this is something that more the town is for, but this is the summary of conditions as is. Um again that land use ratio commercial portion may be less than well in in this case the the applicant is asking um or or wanting to or saying that the or describing the plan uh that the commercial portion may be less than the required non-residential mix for CZMU zoning district. Um, again that the LDC says 20 to 60. In this case, it's roughly 1090. Um, or or I'm sorry, 10% rather than up to 20%. Um, roads, there's the construction of TIA improvements that includes the Parkway East segment. Um, they show it going to public road A, uh, which is a 900 foot extension of the existing. And then also what we just talked about the street stub from public road a that culde-sac to the adjacent property and then also that gated secondary access road to residential. Again I want to emphasize that this is what the applicant is putting forward in this particular development scenario. The pedestrian facilities uh the trail easements extended to the property line um trails constructed to connect to and include path 24. again that was at the north end. Um that's part of the pedestrian plan and the one that goes down to the

stream um more in the mid part of the of the development. It goes to the 30-foot stream buffer. Um the easements would continue all the way to the property line, but that but the actual construction would be as described. the buffers, as you saw in that graphic, there's the required 40 foot wide undisturbed perimeter buffer along the western boundary um between the the development and that um large lot residential area. And um then there's it extend it it widens to a 50- foot um buffer between the commercial and that uh residential area. And then of course there's the 30- foot required stream buffer. Um and then as far as open space and the amenity areas, um there's some detail about that that the applicant can provide uh in their presentation. Um but I just want to sum up by saying there's a required uh 3.33 acres. That's the minimum at least that's required and that's publicly accessible recreation space. That means 10% of the site. As far as the parking goes, um they according to land development code, they can request up to a 20% reduction in the required parking just as it's laid out in the table. You know, the required parking for for whatever uses. They've chosen to do a 15% reduction. Um so that's well within the 20%. Um, and so, and the way they've done it is, you know, their one-bedroom units require 1.5 spaces, twobedroom, 1.75, threebedroom, two spaces. So, that's how they have their their parking counts um calculated. Now, I just want to remind you that a conditional resoning is sight specific design and any major design changes, major design changes requires a revised submittal and review proceeding. Um, so now we get to the planning staff recommendation. Um, you know, naturally the town and the and the applicant are

trying to come together to an agreement with conditional zoning. And so staff provides assistance in that by saying, "Okay, this is where they've met the code. This is where we think they have not met the code or, you know, something that they would need to do to satisfy the intent of the code." And so what you're going to see here, what I'm going to read to you is basically that staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional resoning from EC to CCMU contingent upon the extension of Parkway East to the existing property line um which would be not the 900 ft but they would be the 1,200 ft that goes to the property line that was shown on the plan and that was part of the original um TIA scoping document. and I'll allow the our TIA experts to to elaborate on that. Um, but that does include a stream crossing, the stream that we've been talking about, whether it's a bridge or whether it's a culvert. Um, the estimate is that well the width of that would be about 70 70 linear feet basically. Um, and that would so that's the stream mitigation. That's an important number when calculating what the stream mitigation would cost. Um, but anyway, that's that's one of the factors. That's one of the contingent clauses. The next is the construction of the 180 foot segment of path 24. That's really just underscoring what the code already um explicitly requires. If the pedestrian plan shows that path, the developer needs to build has to build it. Um and so and then of course there would be a pedestrian connection to the proposed project so that the public could could access it along the the sidewalk system. And a third is the removal of the gate at the second road connection to the residential units. That road connection uh ultimately provides a connection for those residents to reach Waxaw Parkway East, but it also provides a way for

them to access the commercial area, benefiting the connectivity of the site and connectivity overall for Waxaw, which you know this this development because it's such a a long string, it's hard to make it a well because of the constraints really along the west, east, and north. the south is really the only opportunity at present to provide connectivity. So we insisted that u it started with of course with with um fire code but there is the the the necessity for those two roads and we feel that that necessity extends not just to the commercial but to the residential as well. In fact it's even more important for fire that they are able to reach the residential. Granted, there is a gate there that's that can be that can be um accessed by emergency vehicles, but just for the sake of of connectivity in general for the residents um and for the benefit of the commercial area, the fact that they could get there through that road is important and important to the town. Um another reason for the staff recommendation is that there is additional commercial space here. We don't see that every day in Waxaw. So, this would be 20,000 square feet and that would favor the town's property tax balance. I I've added this statement here. Um, I think it's something that everybody's already aware of that that the views of Olivia serves as the first phase of a multi-phase Olivia development that would continue Parkway East. That's critical um all the way to Waxaw Indian Trail. So, that large area that I showed you that was all employment center, that's that's basically the area we're talking about that I'm talking about. I'll leave it to the applicant to expound on that uh if they wish. Um and so this this larger vision featured a mix of uses including additional retail, commercial, office, civic institutional space, no light industrial that wasn't

really in the mix and then uh recreational amenities. So that was that's what we understand the case to be. Um but those are the the staff recommendations with the contingencies a reasonable and reasonableness and consistency statement. Um you know we the staff can suggest that it's up to ultimately the board of con of commissioners to decide upon that but I want to read it to you what we have the request is consistent with stated goals of the Waxaw 20 240 comprehensive plan by furthering the construction of the Waxaw east Parkway and path 24 uh of the Waxaw pedestrian plan and by including non-residential land uses for greater balance to the tax base. So that's the statement that talks about how it's consistent with the Waxaw 24 comp plan uh and it's its stated goals. The request is reasonable and in the public interest as it meets the requirements of the land waxall land development code for the conditional zoning mixeduse district the CZMU which is intended to provide flexibility and design for properties of significant public interest and I say here due to location particularly the Waxaw Parkway location. So, the requested action tonight for the planning board is either a motion to recommend the conditional resoning CD uh 006 uh6 I'm sorry 006 2024 that shows you how long ago this project got started for views of Olivia as presented or a motion to recommend with modifications or a motion to deny the recommendation of the conditional resoning CD 006 2024 for views at Olivia. So, that's what I have for my presentation. And you can see the this

visual, this last visual is looking from Providence Road down existing Parkway East. As we all know, it kind of just goes down there and just kind of stops and we want to see it continue. So, that's a big part of what this project can can bring forth. Um, on the issues of transportation and all, um, again, Brady Fininkley is here to present about the TIA. um if you want to go ahead or if the applicant would rather go ahead first. I think that's up to y'all. Okay, Brady. Thank you, Blair. Good evening. Good to see you all. Um Brady Finley, Kimy Horn. So, I'm here tonight to present on the uh TIA that we performed on behalf of the town of Waxall the site. Um I'll go through basically a highlevel overview of the TIA um to hit some some major bullet points there. But my goal here tonight is to make sure that I answer any questions that y'all have to make sure that you have your answers question your questions answered to be able to uh make your decision, your recommendation. So feel free to stop me or uh ask questions at the end. Okay. Okay. So, I like to start off, most of youall have seen this slide before, but I like to start this off by sort of establishing what a TIA is and what it is not. So, the purpose of a development TIA is to is to evaluate and identify the incremental impacts caused by a site um on the surrounding transportation system and then to identify the mitigation improvements to offsite offset that delta um impacts and it's consistent with the town and NCOT mitigation requirements. So the the point there being is we know traffic waxall is is uh especially on 16 is bad. This is not to you can't you can't require development to fix all the existing problems but instead to to offset their their impacts.

All right. So generally speaking high level for for this TIA the TI um the development level did meet both town of Waxall and NC DOT thresholds for TIA uh both the analysis and mitigation was based off of town and NC DOT requirements. So you can see there the town's TIA policy NCDOT's policy and their TIA guidelines. Uh we had the town of Waxall NCDOT the applicant and ourselves there for both the TIA scoping and going through review. Um and I will say that we've u it's been submitted to NCDOT for a couple of months now. We are expecting their time their allotted time period to uh to be up right about I think today is what I had down. So we should be receiving their final review comments any any time now. We have not received those yet. All right. So big picture of how to boil down what a TIA is. It's it's really we're looking at four four major steps. So basically we start out with existing conditions. We go out there and we collect data at the existing uh study intersections. We then take that data being the counts and the overall intersection geometry. We take the counts, we grow them up to a future horizon year, which we call the buildout year. In this case, um it was specified as 2028. So we grew the volumes up to 2028 to uh more or less reflect what would be anticipated based on what we know now of 28 conditions without the site. And that's number two, our background or non-p project conditions. We then take that, we apply the site traffic on top of it, and then we determine the delta and then we compare that to NCDOT and and the town of Waxaw requirements to identify mitigation. All right. All right. So, existing study intersections you can see here. Uh they're they're basically along 16 from downtown at 1675 uh north up through Alma Boulevard. Uh

based on the town of Waxaw's TIA policy, uh we are required to in to evaluate all signalized intersections within a mile of site and then all unsalized intersections, major signalized intersections at discretion of the town and CDF. So you can see there um we have those five along NC16 as well as the site access. We did collect counts when school was in session last spring. So both April is is a combination of April and May counts uh based off the town's policy. We collect 6:30 to 8:30 in the morning and then in the afternoon we collect 4:30 to 7 and then we identify the one hour peak within those time periods. And that's that's what our TI or our analysis is based off of. All right. So, background conditions. So, this is we when we grow it up to 2028, we sort of look at it uh two different buckets. One is we call non-specific growth where it's really um general growth that we that you project um is going to continue to happen outside of the other specific developments. We'll talk about it in a second. That could be traffic from the south that we don't really know about, but really growing that traffic up as we know it's going to continue to grow whether or not we have other developments happen um locally around here. So that that one bucket and that was 2% per year and then you add on top of that seven other approved developments within the area. So we took the specific traffic from those seven approved developments and added those on top and when you combine those together it come comes out to about 9% per year and that was taken uh right at the intersection of Waxaw Parkway and 16. So here are those seven approved developments within the area. Um, you'll probably know them well, but you've got Oldtown Village, uh, Ble Mill Town Homes, Seven Hills, Rogers Pond, The Preserve at Forest Creek, Emerson Park, and Yarborough Farm. Now, a reminder, a TIA is a TIA is based off a snapshot in time. So, these were the developments

that we knew to be moving forward at the time that we scoped the project um, back then. So, and at that time when we collected counts, which was last April and May, none of these developments have started. I think some of them have started now but we basically projected 100% of those developments on top of those 2024 counts. All right. So then we look at other uh tip projects which are transportation improvement program. That's NCBO's uh main funding mechanism for for transportation projects and um and one of them is is coming here um that was awarded through the town successful uh pursuit of a grant and that's uh HL0115 that is the uh Broom Street widening improvements widening Broom Street from downtown at 1675 up through Church Street as well as including an eastbound left turn lane that is when around 75 coming from South Carolina side to turn left to go north on 16. It includes that eastbound left. Um construction is currently scheduled for 2028. I mentioned earlier that our future horizon year buildout for this project was 2028. Those coincided. So we assume that this project was in place. That's going to be key for later on when we come to mitigation. We assume the eastbound left turn lane was in place already. We assume the improvements or the widening was going to be in place along Broom Street. um uh which is which is huge. The other one is uh I'm sure you're familiar with is the NC16 widening U5769. That one unfortunately is not planned to be constructed by 2028. Um but it is currently uh planned for 2029 to 2033. And so with that being beyond the 2028 time year, um we we do the town's TA policy does require us to look at a bill plus five to to capture projects like that so we can see what the network would look like with those improvements

in place. And so we did run an analysis period that included the 16 widening in place as well, which does by the way include signals, new signals at Alma Boulevard and at Waxaw Parkway when that project comes in. So, that's another key thing to remember as we get into mitigation. All right. So, now we're going to talk about the site specifically. A lot of numbers here. Um, we have a laser. Yeah, perfect. All right. I'm going to train your eye really on these bold numbers. It's the 287 and 288. Those are when you when you add everything together, you take your internal capture trip reduction, which is essentially um great from a traffic standpoint because it's is think about, you know, you have medical office buildings. Some of those employees may go over to the bar after work or something. They don't they're not going to drive and so they have some internal capture there. Um as well as your your residential as well. You know, they may use the fast uh the fast casual restaurant. And so it it provides um an allocation for trips that are not specifically coming in and out of the driveway to every single, you know, every single trip's not coming to one of those. But um once you take those into account, we end up with 27 287 AM peak hour trips and 288 PM peak hour trips. So to give you a relative basis, the town's TIA threshold for requiring a study is 100 peak hour trips or more. Okay. All right. And then we run all analysis. Do a little fun. Go back. Could you go back one? Just just give me another 30 seconds. Absolutely. So, um, what I was looking for, I just saw it as you were clicking away. So, about half of those trips are associated with the retail, and you're just making some assumptions about what kind of retail might be in the 20,000 square feet. Um, and about half are due to people living there. Is that am I reading that right?

Pretty close. I'd say a little bit less than half would be if you just Yeah. If you split just residential and commercial. Yeah. Um, somebody does some quick math. 127 by 27. Yeah. Yeah. A third is just from people living there and twothirds are from the retail. That That's I don't know, surprising to me. Counterintuitive to me. That's correct. And you can see the the the big one there. So um again we have to go off of um the the institute of transportation engineer it okay land use codes that we had provided it's huge book has a lot of samples um I think they had provided a juice sort of a juice smoothies type shop which kind of fell in more in line with that coffee donut shop without a drive-through window. So you can see that's where um the more majority of your AM trips came from. Um, but it's so depend. I mean, you just look at those numbers. It's like if you hadn't put a doughnut shop in there, um, or something like it, um, you'd have almost no trips for for residentials. There could be two doughnut shops in there. Okay, that's right. So, I'm a good point. Yeah. Any other questions on the trip, Jen, before I move off? No. John was studying. You should you good? Oh, no. I was looking at No, you're good. You're good. Okay. All right. So, we run all analysis and we ended up with uh with three of the intersections where we identified mitigation at. Um so, you can see them highlighted there. Um you'll see so down um at the south at NC16 and 75. It's our favorite intersection. Um you have Waxaw Parkway and NC16 and of course um the site access which includes the extension of the Waxaw Parkway. So, maybe I'll start there. So there we um I think Trey, you might have been one of the ones that had mentioned it. Um someone had mentioned it before when we looked at a study on Waxaw Parkway, but um making sure that we think about not just right now, but eventually that Waxaw

Parkway is going to extend to the east. So if we looked at it isolated right now, there's no conflicting traffic if you're to turn left into the site. None today, which wouldn't war in a turn lane, but we know in the future once you extend it, you're going to have conflicting traffic. And so we wanted to look at the site with the um the future traffic along Waxaw Parkway, make sure we're planning for a turn lane, and it did warrant a turn lane. So we're showing a left turn a left turn lane into the site there. Um the extension of Waxaw Parkway to the east um to the to eastern side of of of the site that would include a cross-section of um reserving 120 ft of rideway. So that's for the future planned four-lane divided Waxaw Parkway. that's currently within the adopted transportation plans. But in the in the short term, constructing the three-lane section of that. So having like 12 foot lanes, three se three lane section, believe it was a ditch section um with with the multi-use path and planning strip um along that section. So really that left turn lane will more or less just be some paint in the middle, right? So it just be left painting left turn lane. So then if you move over to the west at Waxaw Parkway and 16. So that one's interesting because we know a signal has been approved by NC DOT there for the future TIP project. However, because that keeps being put off, the reality is with Waxaw Parkways, um, with it not extending east to Waxaw Indian Trail right now, if you put if you open that development up today, all of that traffic, almost all of it, if not all of it, would have to come out and access 16 at a stop controlled intersection today that doesn't have a whole lot of traffic, but it's already bad, right? And it'll be really, really unsafe. And so, um, it did warrant a signal in both peak hours, um, under under buildout and clearly showed the need for a traffic signal. So, um, I say that with a caveat because

that is up to NC DOT, but they've already approved a location for a signal there, and to me, it would be really unsafe not to have a signal there and allow an extra 300 trips to to be accessing that that intersection. Um and then as you move Oh, and then one more thing on that. You know, there who knows timing. There's there's some things to think about. So, let's um let's say in the future this development opens where um the TIP project hasn't come in place yet. So, no signal there yet. But the Waxaw Indian Trail, it has ex the Waxaw Parkway has extended the Waxaw Indian Trail. I think additional analysis would have to be done there to see what kind of relief that would go. We won't we didn't study that. So that's that's a thing that would need to be studied if that were a scenario that that played out. Um and then moving down south at 16 and 75. So again, we had already assumed that eastbound left turn lane was in place because of the tip project and um you know there's there's just a lot of demand on the intersection as you know not a whole lot of um uh really acceptable ways to improve capacity there. Really, we know the fix there is to remove cars from there because you have all of the constraints with the railroads, the historic impacts, uh the buildings, on street parking, you have a downtown environment where people are crossing. So, the more lanes you add means more pedestrian exposure, um railroad tracks, a lot of stuff down there that that limits your ability to really increase the capacity down there with making really significant improvements. So, what we've what we've ident identified there which is consistent with the Emerson Park development is uh is is uh would be to provide a pavement in L at that intersection based off of their impact at intersection um that would go towards either intersection improvements

there or to a future way to relieve traffic from there i.e. a Waxaw Parkway extension. Um just a quick question. Um sure. Do you have a sense um you just mentioned that um this development would add let's say 300 350 um trips in the morning and the afternoon. What's uh what is the baseline today? Just have a ballpark like through intersection for Yeah. for what's coming out of Waxaw Parkway now? Yeah. Yeah. So today it's um let's say in the ballpark of AM is 30 and the PM it's 45ish. Okay, thanks. Yeah, so significant um increase in traffic there. Um that's way too fur small for y'all to see. So, I just I went over all that and then um really I'll stop here because I've got more detailed mitigation to get in there if if if you're interested, but I'll stop there and just, you know, um happy to stop and answer any questions. Thank you. Questions? Open for questions for the on the traffic. You can go back to the map. Yeah. I think you It was pretty thorough. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It answered a couple questions that I had. So, good. Um, no, I'm I'm comfortable with uh your methodology there. So, happy to answer questions if they come to mind as we're talking through it.

Just a note, not specific to this, but for future reference, um, I might have missed it, but I don't think this uh TIA report was in the packet um, uh, for the meeting. I personally would have liked to have been able to review it beforehand. If that's something that we can do going forward, that'd be great. Yeah, understood. We're gonna do that now. Thank you. Brady is an old pro at this. He anticipates a lot of our questions. I would love for you to read through through the report. No, you I have a question together. So, we are looking at number six, which is going towards the Olivia site right now. Right. But have you also thought about or anticipated anything that we've been talking about the future EC which is per Blair's presentation it is going to stay as EC and that from the map that I saw in Blair's presentation that Vaxa Parkway is still continuing into that uh ECZONED uh business uh area. So have we anticipated that traffic into this analysis already? No, not in this analysis. There was discussion last year when we were looking at, you know, they could probably get into more of it, but looking at more of a holistic um look at a lot of this undeveloped land. Um, but that that sort of broke apart and we were we were asked to look at this site alone. Sorry, just one more because once assuming that this is this is all correct and good for this particular site in discussion and once that comes in that layer will add up to this correct. That's right. That's right. Yeah. So, so that so we'll get to go through that with with that site which I believe was probably a lot larger than this one too. So anything in the future would then get would get um would get added to assuming this got approved to this site and we would look at that

together. So with this site uh taking traffic into uh 16 the light at 4 of course it's necessary but the road itself is another situation. Is there lane widening for multiple turn lanes? Did you go over that and I missed it or a little bit? So, the current and um I think at the end of Blair's presentation, he had a great shot of what it looks like today and I might even have one in here. Um you sort of see it because right now it's just a stop sign. It's it's it's really it's a wide piece of pavement. It's like a like an airport runway almost that with no striping on there. Um, and so there would there would not at this time would not be any widening needed on the current section, but they would need to extend it over to their site. Currently, it stops I think 900 feet or,200 ft short of their site. So they would have to extend that section along and then I would think need to add paint on there because a left turn lane would be needed. But no widing needed, but also at the light there's no um extra lanes that would have to be accommodated by moving over a sidewalk or No. No. No. Um the Blemill Town Homes is actually required to to to restripe a left turn lane coming from Waxaw Park because they know BL Town Homes I believe has the connection their another connection up to Waxaw Parkway. So they they're required to to add if it hasn't already been added. Maybe it's already been added recently. Anyways, um there's they're supposed to be adding a left turn lane with striping, but the payment width is already there. So it's really just restriping. Okay. Left hand l that's between six to four right at the junction. Actually, I was just talking about at the light

the four. Yeah, the proposed light right at the 16 intersection. Correct. Yeah, that's where Black Mountain Town Home is. You've got plenty of room there. You got plenty of room. That's right. All right. That was my question. Okay. Any other questions on traffic? Thank you. Thank you. I feel like you all have been listening to this things on this petition for almost an hour. If not, so I apologize. Bridget Grant, Langy's consultant with Morin Van Allen. Pleased to be here on behalf of our very large team. Um, we're representing Taipar, which is a local landowner and developer that's going to be working on the site and as you noted also own owns a large part of the rest of the site that's EC. So, we're working with ESP, Vizark, Bradleyball Architecture, and Hagen Engineering. I might give a little bit of a choppy presentation because I don't want to repeat some of the things that Blair has already described or Brady has already described. So, I'm going to kind of go through my slides and try not to duplicate anything that they have already said. So, bear with me while I jump ahead a little bit. We spent a little bit of time at the front side talking about land use designation and the EC and why not using the full EC. EC does require conditional zoning for you to be able to do residential and though some commercial uses are allowed not necessarily that oddly the types of commercial uses you would expect to support your employees in a future employment center or like the nail salon that was mentioned or the quickserve restaurant. Those uses weren't actually allowed in the EC. So we switched to the MU though it still aligns with the purpose of the EC just sort of as a technical tool to use to be able to allow the full range of uses. So this

supports the infrastructure expansion by supporting the Waxel Parkway. Another really important thing and Brady started to mention at the end is that we have to build a section of the parkway to get up to our site. So, it's not just us building our portion in front of our site, but we also have that leg to provide that connection to even get us to the site. Um, this will facilitate that future future commercial and employment center growth and really does a good job of sort of providing some of the rooftops and beginning to what we sometimes say in real estate like unlock the rest of the story, unlock the rest of the site to support the future EC development. We're going to be adding up to 20,000 square feet of commercial space that helps support some of the residential that's there. And the employment center generally is intended to be looked at as a whole. And so while we're providing that smaller mix of retail and residential, when you look at the employment center as a whole, this is just the beginning, a smaller portion of a much larger piece. As Blair mentioned, he already walked you through the expansion or the extension of the parkway. There are some buffer pictures that are small that are in our actual resoning package that gives you an idea of those undisturbed areas and how far we're staying away, you know, from our edges and our neighbors. We've provided residential and commercial elevations to give you an idea of the overall quality of the site. We've really spent, I mean, you can see the size of our team. We have spent a lot of time paying attention to the details, the types of materials, change in windows, change in the roof lines, variation, and those architectural details that really cannote the quality of the buildings to be constructed on the site. You can see that these are some of the commercial elevations. They don't align exactly with the residential, but they're intended to be complimentary to and sort of fit the character of the overall development. These are some of the open spaces. I know it says elevations, but it's really the open spaces. We have a series of

open spaces throughout the community. And so these are just a couple of vignettes just showing the amount of green space, our opportunities to provide trails, increase open spaces. I know one of the requests from staff would be that we constructed that segment of trail and we we agree we will be able to do that. We also provided some precedent imagery. As Blair mentioned, this is part of a story for a much larger district. This is part of a very large employment center. So these are some of the images that helped us come up with the overall plan and the idea of creating this residential community. It is a very narrow site. It sort of was interesting to look at how you could build the site, provide the roadway infrastructure. Um I like to sort of close by saying that there's a series of development standards that are in our petition. Those all are conditions. It's very precise. We are limited to the number of units, the maximum amount of square footage. our buffers, all of those details, parking spaces are all spelled out in great detail. And so the only way for us to ever make any of those changes are to come back for another reasoning if we wanted to do any of those tweaks. And so the only deviations that we were looking for from the ordinance was that 15% reduction in parking, which is more in line with the market reality for multif family, as well as um the deviation on the mix of uses. and we think that's important for where we're starting. I'm going to go back to the site plan. There were two the of the three things that um staff has requested the conditions. The one is the removal of the gate. I'm going to see if I So, we've proposed a gate right in this location. This isn't a road. It's actually a driveway. Okay. So, the driveway was required by fire because they need an additional emergency access.

Essentially, if you're looking at the site, it's less than 600 ft wide. It doesn't necessarily necessitate another public street to be constructed because the street along this edge of our property where we've got the roundabout provides sufficient traffic relief for all of the residents here to be able to get out. But what fire likes to have is one other driveway that in cases of emergency there's another option. So we'd like to keep that gated in that location to provide some separation between the residential and commercial so the commercial users aren't cutting through the parking lot of the multif family to get up to the roundabout. We look at it more as trying to allow it in case of emergency, but really because the site's so narrow, they don't necessarily it's not like they have to drive very far out of their way to get to that public street. Um, as I mentioned, we are amendable to building the trail. And the the other thing that they're asking, Bridget, I'm I'm good with what you said. I think that that's generally true. It's pretty skinny. So, if they want to just go a few more parking spaces, they can make it over public from here right to there. Um, my concern would be just in the minutia of what that intersection looks like at public road A to uh the Waxaw Parkway. That's not going to be one car in and then one car out. No, that would have to be there's plenty of queuing. I mean, that's also when staff looks at this, they want to make sure that there's enough stacking in this area that for right turns and left turns. Absolutely. Yeah. I'm sure James or Brady can correct if I misspe, but it's my understanding. Yes, there should be plenty of room for stacking to be to allow free that that would be Brady. That'd be one of those areas where you can turn left out of that driveway. Okay. Yeah, we actually evaluated it. We actually evaluated with

just that one intersection because it's a sort of worst case scenario and uh it would operate fine. So, yeah. Okay. Sorry. Thank you. No, that's fine. And the last thing I was going to touch on was that staff did request, and I'm sorry I've got the laser up again, that we extend the road all the way across. As we mentioned, we only did the resoning limits to the center line of the creek because it sort of makes sense to look at that other side of the creek as part of the other larger parcel and development that's going to occur. And again, we're the property owners of the other side as well. So, we'd like to not build that extension because we are taking on some of the offsite by building that section of the parkway prior to getting to our site to provide that connection from 16 to fill in the gap. So, we'd like to be able to stop at at a place that makes sense when we get in before the creek so that we can carry the burden of the creek crossing with the larger development that's to come. Just a point of information. This is James Kelly uh traffic and transportation engineer. So going back to the um the stacking point that Bridget was making the the the term for that that we look at from a traffic perspective is internal protected stem and they do have adequate IPS or internal protected stem. Um, we do have one concern from the the parkway perspective because we're looking at the existing property line as it exists with this plan with this submitted plan and that full extension would be 1,200 ft and that's that's something that we looked at from the initial TIA scoping phase and that was agreed to within the TIA scoping documents and then we uh proceeded with the TIA and it's identified as a uh required mitigation for the,200 ft. So considering that this is a conditional reasoning, the board can decide whatever the board wants to decide, but from a TIA perspective, it's it's a requirement for the full two for

the full 1,200 ft. Can I ask Brady? I'm not I don't believe that extending it or not extending it impacts mitigation in terms of level of service or changes. That That's correct. Yeah. Yeah. It's more of a James could probably answer. It's more probably more of a what was agreed upon initially versus from an engineering standpoint looking at this site solely. Um yeah, it would be it would have to be built in the future by someone anyway, right? I think is the point. So is either to extend to continue to extend it. Um but to serve the property as it is, it would only need to extend at least to to its driveway. Understood. I noticed that um on the public road that you're I think um proposing parking um on the public road. Uh at least that's what I interpreted those little hatch marks to be. Um is that right? First of all, it is I believe it was ordinance requirement as part of this cross-section. James on street parking I believe so for that one particular issue for for that one particular area. Um going back to the parkway um Brady is correct as far as from a level of service perspective that that that is accurate. Um what is also accurate is and important for you all to understand as well as the board to understand is that again there are executed documents in place that there was an agreement to have the full 1,200 ft um at initial TIA scoping. Again that's always conditioned uh per the board since this is a conditional resoning. Um with regard to the parking um I don't have any idea what the normal best practices are. I saw the ratios that I guess are required by the code. Uh, and you're pretty much right at

them. Roughly, uh, 600 parking spots, I think, for the roughly 300 um different residences, which could be one, two, or threebedroom. So, we're assuming 600 cars for 300 um for 300 units. Um, it feels really tight. And so I just wonder what the over um uh if it turns out that parking is tough in there um you know what happens and and I'm guessing people will end up parking on public road A um as the first fall back. Um but um can you give me uh any better sense of like what um you know where the benchmarks are you know is this really tight or is this you know generous? I mean, you've got a it it definitely meets market realities. And I would look at it like this. They have to be able to get funding and financing. So, it's got to meet the requirements of the market. You have to have enough parking to be able to build the product. Another way they I'm sorry. No, I'm sorry. I was going to say the other way is that it can be managed. if there are parking issues, they can institute parking passes with the assumption that's what I was going to ask um are like um I know in some cases uh you know the the equivalent of an HOA can establish no more than two cars per household or or things like that. Um I don't know whether that intersects with town of Waxaw policy or whether those can be conditions. Um um but I I do worry that um um you know there's no real capacity for overflow if if uh it's not sufficient. Yeah. And one thing from staff perspective too because we like to see less parking overall. But when you have two varying uses, right? You have the multif family, then you have the commercial. we have an option to where if it need be there can be a shared parking agreement arranged to where the

commercial businesses are probably operating at a different peak hour than maybe what the multif family people leaving and going. So um that could also be something in arranged uh as well um because if commercial businesses close by seven or eight well then there's probably residents who can then occupy that parking spaces as well. So there there are things that we can work on to to ensure that there's adequate parking without paving the entire world. Yeah. And true as part of the development continues uh east, uh there could be other opportunities for shared parking or other parking amenities. Yeah. I'm I'm I'm assuming that um we don't know um for sure you're not ready to commit to what the um uh properties further east will be. Right now they're there's zoned um economic centers. Um but you might come back for resoning there. You might want to do more residential things. I So I assume we can't know that just yet, right? We're not ready just yet. I think there's a vision that we're looking at that's a a wide range of residential employment as well as recreation uses, but we we're not ready to look at that yet. Okay. Okay. I'm happy to answer any questions. The only other slide I didn't show you was the thank you slide. So, I did have some others that no one else has. I I probably only have one or two, but go ahead. Okay. Um I just wanted to confirm the um path 24 um that's greenway if I understand the plan correctly. So that's a 10-ft shared use path um that's being built. Is that uh I see yes is back there. And um the pathway to path or the sidewalk or the pedestrian connection to path 24 is that also going to be um a

10-ft shared use path. Did you figure out that? Do you know that detail? Gravel maybe. I don't know. We've got large plans over here. So, yeah. And what goes retention pond as well? You Is that what you're talking about? All of it is pond in those path 24. I'm assuming they're all the same, but it's all 10 ft. It's all 10 ft and it's all confirmed with our engineer. Yes, correct. All right. Thank you. That's good. Um, go ahead. Okay. Um, one thing that hasn't come up at all, uh, and I know that you had a neighborhood meeting, um, um, I don't know, I think it was LA late last year. Um, but I don't see anything in the briefings about what, um, community feedback has been uh, or what came out of that and what your responses were. Is that something that you're able to brief? I was actually not present for the community meeting. Marcus or Katherine? If if Blair has it, then we can get it from him. I mean, that's cool. As long as he has Don't have it tonight. I'm sorry. I don't have the final answer for that. We can get it from you. Yes. Yeah. submitted all of our everything that was submitted to us that was probably well the staff is not directly involved in those neighborhood meetings but we do receive the minutes and we give the instruction of how the meetings are to be information you're looking for right the minutes or the meeting yeah the minutes of the meeting would be good or uh that and any um um you know uh responses or or positions feedback Yeah. Would you require that before you can make a recommendation? Uh, that's my feeling. Yeah, I would

like to have that. I would agree with Rick on that. Yeah. They were actually pretty good. Unfortunately, we had It was in the It was in the parking lot at the elementary school, right? Yeah. Yeah. We couldn't get in the school. You were very You were fast on your feet for sure. That was Oh my goodness. Improvise on that day, but it was a beautiful day out. So yeah, it was that bad. I have no connection. I know. I was going to say it's very difficult to get a connection here to pull up a file. So I see you guys. I can read some summary points from the if you got summary points. We got summary points. I think we could also take a quick 3 to 5 minute break to obtain that material for you to pull up on the slide. Okay. Right. Yes. Yes. Yes. We can we can So just call for a quick Okay. Make a motion to recess real quick. I'll make a motion to uh recess for five minutes. I can. All in favor? I. Perfect. Thank you. Thanks.

We are ready to reconvene. When you are ready, make a motion to reconvene and then we can get started with the remainder of the meeting. I can make a motion to reconvene. Um, second that motion. All in favor? Hi. Hi. So, thankfully we were able to pull up and it's just a list of general questions. And so, I think that based on the site's location, it wasn't necessarily that we had a lot of adjacent neighbors, rather we had people who were just broadly interested in the overall development of the entire employment center. So, you can see from the questions listed above, there are questions about road projects, additional open space, price points on rental units, the types of things that you'd specifically want to know if we've identified any of the commercial tenants, and generally at the phase of resoning, we don't necessarily know exactly who the tenant mix is going to be, where traffic improvements will be made. And I think we've answered a lot of those questions for you here tonight. And then Blair, I don't know if you want to scroll down to the It's still just more questions about if we're clearing the site, sewer capacity, and all of those things come to how we will meet all ordinance requirements and local and state regulations. Um, there's of course always comments about people who are concerned about losing the existing open space on the site. I think you can see that we've done our best to protect the buffers along the streams and add the amenity of the trails. And then in terms of answers, oh, someone did mention that renters don't add to the tax base. It's a little bit, and I think you all have had um someone from the county come and speak to you a few times. It's a little bit of an oddity that the commercial tax benefits of the multif family is actually fairly high compared to some single family. So, in

the answers, we talked about the pond being sized to meet all state and local storm water regulations. Um, that there's enough capacity, but allocation is not issued, as you all know, until we're at the construction drawing phase. Areas will be required to be graded on the site. Other areas will remain undisturbed. Um, at this point, the only plan for our pond is a walking trail. And I think we've pretty much walked through a lot of the answers with our presentation tonight. So it gives you an idea of the type of community engagement they had early on in the process. I just just a simple uh question. Um I have a dog I saw you have a dog park uh laid out. Um, is that a uh are all the open spaces here uh intended to be um available to the broader public or um uh are they really intended as neighborhood amenities and not uh not really encouraging public? Um we have, as Blair mentioned, 10% of the site has to be publicly accessible open space. So about 3.3 acres is publicly accessible. I don't think any of our open spaces are necessarily fenced off unless there's specific amenities for the multif family users. And does the town of Waxaw um have any control over that uh as far as whether they're truly public amenities or just community amenities? And would that bring extra cars to this spot? only if there's a place to park. That was my point. Does that get factored into the TIA? Is the extra trips of the public coming there to use the amenities? Yeah. So, from the town perspective, I think path

24 that will be constructed will be accessible to the public. Typically, we want publicly accessible amenities and that could be just the general public of this development. So, that's your open space as trails, paths, seating, dog park. Um, and I think you guys will have an amenity center which will be private to the residents of the development. So, we use publicly accessible as a term just being visibly and connected to public areas such as roadways, parks, greenways. Um, so I imagine I mean to to point I wouldn't expect the public to use the pool, right? Agree. But the dog park would get they would use that. They would Yeah. dog park, which is kind of needed in the town, but um we hear that every day. I know you do. And and you start thinking about the cars. I have a dog to get there from a liability. I have two dogs. So anyway, that that's uh something to think about from a liability perspective. The dog park would be something that was meant for the residents of the community. Again, just that's something even with your park and wreck department would understand that. No, but I'm disappointed. But I know but I I but I appreciate the answer. Thank you. Try to keep the dogs out of there. I couldn't hear you. I'm sorry. Could you Yeah. So once the trail is constructed, the path 24 and the connection to the app, that will be publicly available and accessible. Um, so that would be the biggest publicly recreation area for this for this development. Yeah. One one question that a couple of us had was the um when you talk about a zoning change, the original zoning is EC, the commercial

square foot as a byite, can we put a a actual number to that by square footage, what that would have been in an EC original zoning or does Does it depend on the use? It would it would depend on the use. Um because you could maximize a site for employment center for industry or business park uh in a different because it'd be in a different layout and a different parameter than what multif family would be. The parking would need to be different. I mean there would be it would be sight specific on what would be allowed because our employment center is is very gracious with allowing square footages for because we want in the future big industry we want business parks we want employment to remain local. Um so that's that's really a difficult question to answer without um having more specific detail about the parameters of it. Mhm. And then in the similar topic commercial, has the developer anticipated what is what is the commercial use or what type of commercial uh they will be having in this proposed uh development? I apologize I missed the first question. No worries. Any idea of u any anticipated commercial use what you're thinking of in this development? So, as uh Brady indicated in the tripgen table, that is our best guess at the type of uses and we try to be a little aggressive to make sure that we've captured enough retail to that to align with the trips. And so, I think we had in there some food based, restaurant base, some retail, and potential for office. So, it was a wide range, but not not tenant specific. Okay. the range is is as wide as possible with

using the CCMU because it's any use that's allowable in in any district can be can be done there. So that was again that was their reason for going from ECCZ uh employment center CZ to CZMU because they had a much broader range of uh uses. So consider the corridor commercial um those types of retail um that's much broader than what employment center would provide as it's in its uh table of use or the table of uses for it. On that point, Blair, um what would have been uh would this level of density of residential development been allowed on a conditional zoning EC? Well, the nature of conditional zoning is that you could, you know, the applicant can ask for as much as they like. Um, that's just the way conditional zoning works and it's up to the town to decide, okay, well, it's up to both parties to decide what is mutually acceptable and beneficial. Right. So, in this case, also being conditionally zone um zoning change request, you could conceivably limit the the type of um tenant for retail. Well, the zoning itself doesn't. I mean, as a as a well, we could as a condition. As a condition, like if if we said, you know, we just don't want a gas station in that spot because it gum up the um the traffic in a certain way, we could as as a board limit those those could be listed as conditions. Thank you. Um is there any um I'll ask for commitment, but but shy of a commitment. Is there any intent um that the developer has with regard to the sequencing of the development of commercial versus the residential? In

other words, is are you going to uh want to build all the apartments and get them uh rented out before you build the commercial? Is the commercial going in first? Um can you say anything about that? It's always ideal like everyone wants it to happen at the same time because you're holding on to land and you're trying to execute as quickly as possible. It's also less disruptive for either side. Unfortunately, it's difficult to guarantee that one will happen before the other. We have a specific developer already for the multif family. We don't have tenants yet. And so, I think it's likely that the retail will lag behind the residential just as customary in the market. Thanks. Any other questions? I got one for Blair. This in the um the petition there's a section vested rights. It's a seven-year vested rights. Can you explain that for the public and and what's your take on that? understanding is that the vested rights in other words that the what's being adopted is good for seven years and if they have not built out at that time then it's void but I'm not sure Cindy being the attorney can probably answer best. Yeah, I can take a stab at saying vested rights protect you for up to seven years under state law when you've got a project of this size and mix of uses that the local government can't come in and downzone you to something else. And so it's a way to protect your rights when the 7-year period expires if they make a change. If Waxaw changes their ordinance and says all multi-use trails need to now be 20 feet wide instead of 10, we would have to meet newer ordinance requirements and

adjust to the new ordinance. Is that fair? And would they be That was a good explanation. I agree with that. And would they be grandfathered in if they built some portion of the project or all of it? I mean, they Well, by statute or some of it, I guess. Well, by statute, for multi-phase development over a certain acreage, they're they have they're entitled to seven-year vesting period. But there's also common law vesting which is with if you start a project then you're vested by common law. So there's two types of vesting but they're the same. Yes. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other questions from the board? I guess I'll ask this as a question. It's really a concern, but I'd like to give the developer a chance to um help me understand a different perspective. It feels like um the requested reszoning um is asking the town to um accept fairly high density housing, which there are definitely advantages, although we haven't really talked about having um uh the more efficient use of land to provide housing stock. um in a time when housing stock is in demand. I think that's a good thing. Um but the specific reasoning um request is asking for us to trade away um the EC zoning which wouldn't have had any residential uh added to the burden of a fast growing town uh in exchange for a very small percentage of the property being commercial uh in fact smaller than the guidance for the for the land use would have been just 10% not even at the 20% level. Um, so that's that's what I'm wrestling with a little bit and I'd love to hear maybe your perspective on um the

the more pros around it. Absolutely. Overall, I mean, it's over a thousand acres when you look at everything that's out here. And so EC does allow for residential, I think, and I can't speak for staff or the staff that was in place at the time or the planning director or manager, but the thought, as I understand it, was that they knew that residential was an important component to an employment center, but they wanted it to be done with intentionality. And so when we look at the site, it's right on the edge. So it won't be in the middle of any future employment center. to your point earlier about the mix of uses and research and development and other uses. This provides a transition from the existing uses into the employment center. So it sort of as I mentioned it unlocks by starting to provide that gap in the parkway starts to create that connection. Unfortunately or fortunately rooftops tend to be what's needed most in terms of providing for retail and creating that other synergy. And so we really believe that this is a good way to start activity in the employment center. And to your point, we are in a housing shortage both in the rental community and in the forale community. And so we're happy to try to fill some of that gap. Is there is there any um opportunity to incorporate conditions that relate to um I know you're not ready to come out with the plan for the rest of the Did you say a thousand acres? Um but you know I think if um to your point about a unified plan if if if the big picture was that the bulk of the housing for the economic center um you know is is is in this se is in this section and we're not looking at you know three more wedges of of 400 500 more units um you know that's a it's a huge difference in terms of um there was a glimpse of There was a glimpse of it

on one of the drawings. I saw the really I I swear I saw a building named Kroger on there. Did I not see that? Or maybe it was something else. It was just for a blink of an eye. One of our plans showed a sort of bleeding over. So, unfortunately, we can't commit to something legally on this resoning that's tied to a different piece of property. And so I think the only thing we can tell you as I mentioned Taipar is the owner and developer and their intention is much larger on the whole site. I think your your choice of words as unlocks is um appropriate because eventually eventually we'll get to build some commercial in this town. Eventually maybe I know some people who are interested. That's where I struggle. I mean, I think we're seeing like a piece of the puzzle and not the entire puzzle. And this piece has been coming up. Yeah. This isn't the first time we've looked at something like this and got to, you know, hey, we're going to build the road for you, but we're going to have to put in rooftops, but we're going to take out, you know, a section of your employment center and we're still waiting on that commercial, right, part of it. Okay. Well, are we good with the questions? Any more questions? Uh I would like to open this for any public comments if we have uh any anybody who would like to speak for about three minutes. Can I say one more thing about Sure. Sorry, Mr. Taylor. One of the things that's precluded some of the property owners that are a little bit further down on the Parkway was that you couldn't get to their site. And so back to the unlocks, there are some parties interested in commercial that we're almost waiting for this to happen because it can get to some pieces on the southern side of the parkway that have commercial interest. I know I know you've heard it, but I can I can tell you what I've months ago,

somebody stood there and told us the exact thing. And we're going to st sit here for the next hour to listen to those ideas from staff. That's a joke, by the way. Thank you. So I I suppose there are no no public comments. I don't see any. Okay. Do you want to do you want to clarify that Blair about what's in here and what us to do? Blair, question for you on the agenda. We're we're just the recommend the recommended action is for review and provide feedback from the board. you you put the um the requested action. I thought maybe that was part of the presentation for another time. Is this are we looking to vote on this tonight? The requested action is motion to recommend, recommend with modifications or deny recommendation. So I have those up now. Okay. Well, um, anything else? Um, I'm not sure whether Yeah, I don't know. Well, I I'll get the party started. I may have misunderstood you. Um, we have the agenda goes staff recommendation as well, if that's what you were referring to. No, the if you look in the agenda, it says um recommended action is to review and provide feedback. What's that? Review and provide feedback. But you're looking for a motion. Yeah, because usually there's a motion in there on the agenda. Yeah. And that that should be there as well. Yeah. Okay. That's an error.

Now you can get the body started. Well, I'm going to um make a mo make a motion to deny the recommendation of conditional reasonzoning CD006-2024 for views at Olivia based on the um it's not reasonable and it's not consistent with the current land use map. And um if you go back to the consistency statement, I could probably read more into it or I can just leave it as is am I? Yeah. not consistent with the 2024 comprehensive plan and it's not reasonable in the public interest as it does not meet the minimum requirements based on a reduction in parking. um it's it's underneath the 20 to 60% commercial space and for that reason um I made the motion to deny anybody I will second that all in favor do we discuss this is I'm sorry yeah let's have some discussion we're going back and forth between motions about recommending or not and the reasonable and consistency and I'm not sure which um which motion is necessary and which motion we're on. So like right on the screen right now is is the necessary one as I understand I read it all together. You did read it all together which is fine. So there's a motion on the floor

and would you do you want would you like for him to bifrocate that motion? Yes. Yes. I think so. Could you restate your motion in two separate motions? Thank you. I'll make the motion uh for the um well on the reason can I um if if you're comfortable with it like these are easier for me to vote on than the reasonable and con um and consistent one and I'm not sure the reasonable and consistent are necessary if we are about to recommend you do have to vote on both though you do so could they do it as one motion Just as John did, he made a motion to deny the recommendation based off of the consistency statement of XYZ. Yeah. Yes, he can do that. I thought that Rick was asking for it to be separate motions, but it can be one motion and that's the motion that's on the floor right now. Yeah. So, John made a motion as one for the deny for the denial and then included the reasonleness and consistency statement with that. Um, so as Cindy was alluding to, you could do it as two or you could do it as one. Uh, I think we've typically done it as one depending on what the recommendation is. Let me ask this question. Um, are are um does North Carolina law allow us to deny the recommendation even if it is consistent and reasonable? So, one of the facets of conditional zoning is that it's a legislative process. So it is at your discretion to make a recommendation um at your at your again at your discretion um even if uh you know if the board doesn't see it as consistent or reasonable they just have to make a statement as such and give the

reasonings why. So legis this legislative process gives you that opportunity uh and that discretion at your at your own will. Okay. Thank you. There just has to be a rational basis for your denial. [Music] Okay. And you've and you've already stated one. Thank you. Great. So motion seconded and then I'll get a vote. Yes. So you would then do an overall vote on the motion that is on the table, right? That's what we want. That's what we want. So could just Yeah, I would ask one. Okay. So if there's no further discussion, you could call for a vote. I've already done it. He's already said Oh, he has already put the motion on. He put the Yeah. Yeah. John put the motion on the table and and you don't necessarily need a second. You just need to make a um overall vote. Okay. All in favor of the motion. Make sure. Did you get the discussion you would like? Um so we're looking at the wrong one, right? So you you made a proposal on it's all together. It's all together. It's all together again. Okay. I I guess I would prefer to split them if it's okay. So if you go we could do uh for example I would make I don't want to over I I get where you're going. I'm having trouble verbalizing what I would do for the first Yeah. Splitting this. Okay. So if you if you want to split it then I would say you start with the motion that is on the screen take a vote and then you go and then you adopt a consistent. Is that a okay Cindy? I'm looking well I think it's cleaner to withdraw your motion. Withdraw the motion that's on the floor now and then if you want to make a motion to deny and split it, you make a motion to deny because of the reasons listed on the next screen. But I mean there's a motion on the floor to deny. There's a second even though you don't need a second. And if there's

no further discussion, you can call for a vote. But yeah, Rick, is there a point of order? I'd like to call for a vote. Yeah. I I don't know that it's I don't know that it's material. So if you if you'd like to go for the vote, go ahead. Just a vote now. Call for vote. All in favor? I I opposed then you do. Yeah. All All oppose. All oppose. Nay. Okay. And the motion passes to deny. Yeah. Right. Okay. All right. Moving on. Are we have to We done with this. We're going Yeah, we're going to move on to number two. Moving on to item number two. I invite Janet to present the consideration of the tax amendment. Okay, good evening. I'm Janet Pirano, your senior preservation planner. I promise not to drag this out as long. You're fine. You take all the time you need. Okay. So, we have a text amendment here tonight uh for deconstruction. Um, and this is a request by your planning department to amend the land development code section 12.2 section D to allow for de a deconstruction plan prior to the demolition of a structure that has been determined to be contributing to a national register historic district or designated as a local landmark or within a local historic district. So deconstruction is a process where buildings are carefully taken apart uh with a goal of salvaging as many materials and components as possible with a focus on preserving the elements

that can be reused, recycled or restored. There are several benefits of deconstruction. Uh probably the most important is preservation. Uh deconstruction helps to preserve the key historical elements, architectural features like woodwork or decorative plaster, ceilings, um building materials and historic fixtures and fittings like light fixtures or doors or windows or hardware. Um you can see uh on the screen the building on the top is the Tyson store that was demolished last year. Um some of the important features of that building were the uh prism glass transoms uh above the uh store windows there. Uh that was the only building in town that had that prism glass and was not saved. Um on the interior there were tin ceilings in there, beautiful tin ceilings that were uh demolished when the building was torn down. Um, and the picture in the lower corner is the uh post office, the original post office in town. That building was deconstructed. Um, we did try to convince the property owner not to demolish that building, but um she chose to um and that wood is now part of a shed in her brother's backyard. So, at least it was re reused. Uh, another benefit to deconstruction is waste reduction. Uh, construction and demolition waste accounts for one-third of all solid waste in the United States. Building material reuse rate is less than 1% of all construction and demolition waste. So, if we can find a way to help close that system and make it more of a circular system and reuse these materials instead of everything winding up in a landfill, um, that would be a good thing. And another benefit of deconstruction is

public health. Uh particles from demolition can travel up to 600 feet. There are some uh towns that have a requirement to do a wet demolition where you're hosing down the material so that they're not floating in the air. Um some of these old buildings contain asbestous or lead. So demolishing them uh can allow those particles to get into the air and can be a health hazard. So, the requested change uh is in red on the screen. Um we're adding the word deconstruction to relocation, demolition, or um destruction. Uh and I'll just skip down to the bottom. During such a period, uh the we can we can delay demolition for um up to 365 days. And during that period, the HPC may negotiate with the owner and with any other parties in an effort to find a means of preserving the building or site. And we want to uh include or identifying salvageable materials of historical or architectural value. Uh, and then continuing on, uh, when demolition is approved for any structure individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or deemed to be contributing to a National Register historic district or individually listed as a landmark or within a local historic district. Uh, the HPC shall evaluate whether deconstruction is feasible and may request a deconstruction plan. And the purpose of the plan is to encourage the salvage and reuse of historic or architecturally significant materials and reduce landfill waste. And the required action this evening is a motion for a favorable recommendation and the reasonleness and consistency statement uh which says that the text amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan and future planning goals of the town of Waxaw. It is reasonable and in the public interest in that it encourages preservation of historic and architectural elements, provides a source of affordable building

materials for renovations of historic structures or reuse in other projects and reduces landfill waste and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Is this just part of um a text code upgrade or is there an overriding or a more urgent need that precipitated this change? Well, it started uh with a webinar that HPC watched that talked about deconstruction um at a bigger level. Uh there San Antonio uh Texas has a plan um where they require deconstruction. They don't demolish buildings, they deconstruct everything. Uh so we thought well how can we make that appropriate in Waxaw um we don't have a lot of demolitions um but we do have a few we have several members of the community who do woodworking or other uh construction projects that uh have expressed an interest in being able to um get some of these salvage materials. Um I have one particular person in mind who um had a had called this planning department and asked that we keep him informed when there is demolition um because his plan was um more to preserve the history. So for instance um Emerson project uh the Howie farm he his intent would be to take a something from that original building and preserve it and then present it to the Howie family and say this is you know some a memory of the um farmland that's been in your family. Um but yet there are several people who have expressed interest in this. Um and the Museum of the Waxaws has also said that uh they would be willing to take some of the um materials and store them. Uh we have a project

right now that we're in discussion with for downtown uh a facade grant that they need a door. Uh they they need a wooden door that could possibly have been saved from that Tyson building that was demolished. Um, so, so there are opportunities to reuse some of this material. Cool. Has HPC weighed in into this? Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, I didn't update that slide, but yes, at their meeting last week, HPC um heard this and uh voted unanimously to recommend approval. Thank you. Yes. Any other questions? Rick, would this only affect um things in the historic um preservation district, whatever it's called? Okay. Yeah, that's a good question. Yeah, I'm replacing a door right now. I don't need to give it to you, do I? I didn't hear you. I'm I'm replacing a door right now. I don't need to give it to you. Your historic home 17 years almost there 2020 for Waxaw. That might be historic for the for the folks. No, only thing I ask is it go back a slide so we can wrap this up. Oh, yep. Sorry. Yep. Uh, I make a motion for a favorable recommendation of the text amendment TA-019-2025 and the reasonable consistency statement of that this text amendment request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and future planning goals for the town of Waxaw is reasonable and in the public in that it encourages the preservation of historic and architectural elements, provides a source of affordable building materials for renovations of historic structures or reuse in other projects and reduces landfill waste. I can second it. All in favor? I I I Thank you. Thank you.s. Um I think the

next item was work session. I don't think we need it any further right now. Um the next is can I get a motion to adjurnn? Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I thank you all. You guys let me do that every time. You're the best. You're the best.