Planning Board - Regular Meeting

So like to call to order tonight's regular planning board meeting for July 15th. Thank you. Had a small delay. I appreciate everybody's patience. I'd like to go ahead and uh determine a quorum with a roll call, please. John, if you lead us off. John Gmanani. Daniel Ferris.

Thank you everybody. A quorum is present. I'd like to go ahead and approve tonight's agenda. Um, unless anybody has any modifications. No modifications. So, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to approve tonight's agenda as uh as presented. I make a motion to approve the agenda for this evening. I'll second it. All those in favor? I I thank you very much.

Moving down, we have item D. We have inquiries to any conflicts of interest um in GS 160D-109. Barbie. Yeah. Is is this uh us and you and I are or staff or is this something else? No, this is where the board determines if they have any conflicts with the um uh the projects that are coming up. This is your new um order of business. So this will determine if you have any conflicts and you'll either say yes or no depending on what u what what you have.

So on on the agenda um it's not a conflict of interest but in disclosure I did attend church at the address for um our the new business the the resoning petition that we're going to be looking at tonight. um don't have any financial stake in the property, just attend a church there. And now that church is moved to another facility, Cindy, is there any other actions that we need to take with that disclosure?

No conflict. Thank you, Cindy. Awesome. Thank you, John, for disclosing that. We appreciate it. Um going ahead and moving down to item E for approval of the minutes uh from the June 17th, 2025 planning board meeting. Does anybody have any notes for correction um on the that item? Just a just a spelling of your last name on page three, I think it was. That was it. I think that might Otherwise, I approve those. I mean, those minutes look fine. Whose name was mine? Oh, so sorry. It's okay. It was a small typo. Uh,

it's a typo. F E R R I S is Ferris wheel. I am F A R R I S. First in the alphabet, but no problem on that. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Thank you, John. I appreciate it. Thank you, Pel, for seconding. All those in favor? I unanimous. Thank you very much. Chamber board, you it is not required for a second. Oh. Oh, thank you. Cindy, just for clarification, once it's uh once it's motioned, then can I just say all in favor or do we to confirm and no second? All in need. We need a motion, but you don't need a second.

Perfect. Thank you so much. Then moving down, uh, item F, old business being none, I'd like to go ahead and move forward to new business in consideration of reszoning petition RZ016 261-2025 for 5017 Waxaw Marvin Road. Tonight's presentation is Madison. Thank you, Madison.

Good evening. I'm not used to being this close to you guys. I'm used to running the presentation from the seat back there. So, good evening everyone. I am before you tonight for RZ016261-2025, a reszoning petition for uh 5017 Wax on Marvin Road. This a is a request by Sharon Debnam for a reasonzoning map amendment for parcels ending in 042, 043, and 044. Uh three parcels totaling 2.05 05 acres again located at 5017 Wax on Marvin Road. This is a request from R4 single family residential zoning to NC neighborhood center. Uh here you can see the different views of the current property from the north and from the south. Uh and I'll dive a little bit deeper in the next slide here. Uh so this is the former Grace Presbyterian Church, a 2600 plus square foot structure uh located on Waxaw Marvin Road. Uh with the three parcels included with this reszoning petition, uh it is currently at the corner or intersection of Utah Drive and Waxaw Marvin Road. Um you can see it is uh just east of Coldwater Mill Drive which is the Millbridge subdivision and it is located at the entrance of the uh Wasaka Park uh neighborhood as well. Uh and again lower to the south side or the south portion of the map you can see the future cottage park development there at the Waxelon Marvin and Helms Road intersection. So the current zoning for the parcel and along with all the adjoining parcels here is R4 single family residential. Um you can see it's kind of surrounded by the R4 zoning u other than the one donut

hole uh that you can see to the west which is currently Union County RA20. Um, so I'd like to also draw your attention, uh, three parcels south, uh, is neighborhood center as well along majority of Wax on Marvin Road until you get to downtown. Uh, in addition to, uh, the Cottage Park development, which is a conditional zoning, uh, neighborhood center development there. So along with the zoning there are two overlay districts uh that correspond with this property. Uh the first being the wax on Marvin corridor overlay. This is an overlay primarily for streetyard landscaping and then also for the future rideaway dedication for wax on Marvin Road. Um so part of that rightaway dedication um for this corridor is to ensure a three-lane section for Wax on Marvin Road as identified in our corridor study. Um so we have an overlay district just to help ensure uh that we have that rightway there. Uh so in addition there is also the manufactured home overlay. Um so the neighborhood directly behind these parcels uh is a mobile home subdivision. So this is one of our two mobile home overlay districts which just pretty much allows and a per and permits mobile home installation. So for the future land use um you can kind of see denoted in yellow this parcel calls for medium density residential as much of the surrounding area does. So that's your typical three to four units per acre density with a mixture of housing types including single family detached, single family attached, uh, and duplexes, triplexes, and quadruplexes in certain scenarios. Um, so again, it's primarily a residential zoning district. Um, so I

have included the mixeduse uh, future land use designation here on your screen uh because this coincides with the requested zoning here. So mixed use uh future land use is intended for a mixeduse style development for smaller office uses, neighborhood oriented retail and service uh along with some housing types uh that include uh town homes and cottages typically at 8 units per acre. And so these these future land use designations are intended as an alternate to the autoor oriented commercial centers you find along 16. Um so they're closer typically to neighborhoods and they try to capture and express the architecture of our downtown. So the proposed zoning is neighborhood center. So those mixeduse nodes uh are formed using this neighborhood center zoning district. Uh you can see the district description there matches that of the future land use designation. Again, a mix of uses which is more of a neighborhood scale uh development of office and retail with a mix of residential uses. Um and so I'll divide more on the next slide, but a a question that often comes up are the buffer requirements. So between neighborhood center and R4 is a class A buffer buffer type. So, it's either a 10-ft landscaped area or an opaque fence or wall. Uh, and then again, more details will be on this coming slide. Can you jump back one slide, please?

One from this one. Yes. And then I'd like actually No, you were right on it. Sorry. Um, can you go jump down to dup uh duplexes, triplexes, uh, quadlexes? Sure. uh development shall meet 150% of the minimum lot and depth standards. My question with this specific lot, what would be the frontage that we would be examining? Would the frontage be on uh Utah Drive or Wax on Marvin Drive? And would they be allowed a zero lot line setback with this possible general considerations?

Yes. So the lot frontage would be either or. It could be both Utah and it could be wax on Marvin since it is a corner lot. Um so it just depends on the orientation of the duplex. Um so you talk about the zero. You're talking about the side setback being zero. Talk about the side setback and I'm just trying to understand what would technically be the frontage because the front the front setback could also be zero as determined by the zoning administrator on these smaller parcels. Correct.

Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Um, so what you'll see, uh, Daniel called out the 150% of the minimum lot width and lot depth standards. So you take, for example, your lot width of 60. To do a duplex, you would need to to times that by one and a half. So you would have to have 90 foot lot width. But then yes, you would have potentially a zero foot front setback potentially and then also the side setback of zero. Um, and just also as a reminder for strictly residential. So, for example, if they were wanting to do a duplex in the future, um that would require a conditional zoning request. So, it's not something that would be by right within this neighborhood, neighborhood center zoning.

No, but it would not be by right for pure pure residential, but it would be a byite or a possibility that we must consider for future uses based off of a general reasonzoning.

Sure. Yeah. So you have to and and I'll get to that in my my ending slide. So when you look at a general reasonzoning just as as Daniel has alluded to, you look at it as an entirety for the zoning district. So so I could tell you that the use could be this but tomorrow uh someone could do something else. So you have to look at the entire parameters, the entire zoning district of what it is now at R4 versus what it is proposed to be. So the neighborhood center. Thank you for answering my question. Of course.

Yes. So, these are from the notes section of that cut sheet you saw on the slide earlier. Um, so for non-residential buildings, there is that 10,000 square footprint requirement per building. Um, so they couldn't do a a 10,01 square foot building footprint. It would have to be limited to that 10,000 square feet. For multifamily, they're only allowed to be on the second floor or above. Um, and then as I as I alluded to, for the residential uses, uh, they must be a part of a mixeduse development, um, and approved by the zoning administrator on a case-by case basis. And again, we discourage strictly residential projects in these zoning districts. Uh, and then that's why we require the conditional reszoning. Um and so then again the maximum res residential density for this is eight units per acre uh for all residential uses being 2.2. So we'll just round down. So technically with a general reasonzoning there could be a potential a future potential to where there could be as much as 16 units added onto that 2.2 acres.

Correct. Yep. in a perfect in a perfect world where there wasn't any they were thinking of open space tree safe or storm water requirements that is correct. Yeah. So if you're looking at a simple number uh 1 acre lot could provide eight units based off of just a general math or simple math for this. Yeah. But we have to stick with general math because Yeah. Because you're doing it all in generality. Yes, that is correct.

Yeah. So there was uh some I think a question about commercial uses for neighborhood center um again the small retail office. So, I have pulled from our table of uses uh the primary uses that we see in neighborhood center. Um, and there are a few that I left off, but they're all general in this nature as far as uh anywhere from animal grooming, clothing store, daycare, ice cream shop, grocery store, or a pet store. Um, we tailor the uses to be more of a neighborhood oriented services. Um, and so with this application, the request is for what we will call an event center. Um, so the goal and the and the proposed tenant here is wanting to do micro weddings. Um, and so that kind of falls under the classification of event center. Um, so that's what the application is for and the purpose for the reasoning, but again, you have to look at the the entire zoning district as a whole to make your decision. And so pedestrian improvements. Um so here's a snidbit from the pedestrian plan. Um and it calls for path 13 along Wax on Marvin Road, which is located on the west side of Wax on Marvin. Uh so for any new development or large redevelopment of this parcel, we would require the typical 5-ft sidewalk along the frontage. Um and then they would be of course required to install and fund that project. Um, and again, we call it path 13 here, but that's located on the west side as as called out in the Wax on Marvin corridor study. Um, and then you can kind of see path 16. So, to give you an idea, that's along the proposed Waxall Parkway that connects from where it is now at the Harrison Park neighborhood to the the future Helms Road roundabout. So, that's just to kind of give you a general idea of of those paths there.

Um, question on path 13. Sure. Do we already have easement acquisition with this parcel for right away?

So we don't um so if there was a new development, say let's say um developer A purchases the property, they want to do a mixeduse along the front and then they want to do town homes in the rear. We would require um a 50-foot setback from the center line of the rideway. And so that dedication goes to DOT to ensure that there is adequate width for the three three-lane section for Wax on Marvin. Um and then would require the sidewalk installation. And if this development was on the west side, we would require the 10-ft multi-use path

similar to what we did over at Cottage Park and and that Helms Road extension where we we that was going to from raw land to redevelopment, but we saw a need and we asked that developer to consider additional rightway so we can improve Helm's Road and that connectivity and and that essentially that road infrastructure. Yep. And if you guys remember the Brinley conditional zoning, the 13 units, that rideway dedication was a part of that plan. So they are showing the 10-ft multi-use path and the rideway dedication there for that future turn lane, center turn lane.

So similar with this application, if it had been conditional, we could discuss this thing these details in and find a common stance with the application, but because it's general, we can't,

right? Right. And and I think here for the general reasonzoning, it's more so and and I included it in my consistency statement. It's more of a reuse of an existing structure. Again, is is the plan, but again, you have to look at the entire district. Now, if it was a mix, if it was a developer for a mixeduse project, they were coming forward and needed to do a conditional zoning. Staff would already ask for that because it's a requirement in our ordinance. Um, so it wouldn't necessarily need to be a condition. It would just be as part of our review process.

Quick question. Um, so this is currently zoned three parcels R4. So I just would like for the residents to better understand is this currently in a status of legal nonconforming. So, we I believe we were allow religious institutions in R3 or within our residential zoning district. R3, but this one's R4.

R4, I apologize. R3, R4, all of our residential. Um, I can confirm that specifically, but if it was uh if it wasn't allowed and it was a church existing, it would be a legal non-conformity. But I'm pretty sure we allow religious institutions in in the residential all residential zoning districts. Either way, it would fall under either e either a legal non-conforming or it is because it was being uh utilized and operated as a religious. It was permitted within that residential zoning.

Correct. And I I believe prior to our adoption of the land development code and updating our zoning districts, it would have been in a residential zoning district to begin with um way back in the our unified development ordinance or UDO. Correct. Yes. Yep. So a religious institution is a permitted use by right in R1, R2, R3, and R4. So, it would be it would be it wouldn't be a legal non-conformity because it wouldn't be a non-conformity. Got it. I just wanted to make sure that we we were explaining this correctly. Like for some residents, I could see how if they were watching this evening, how did it how did it go from our four to a

a religious or or a commercial-like activity? Got um and so I can I wanted to make sure that the residents could understand that this is allowed. Uh this was permitted in our old ordinances and and it's still permitted today. Um but what the applicant is using would like to do today is something completely different than what was priorly established. Correct.

Yes. So your requested action I have a draft consistency statement here. Um, and I will point out that the the resing request is inconsistent with our Waxaw 240 future land use map. Um, but is reasonable and in the public interest for these various reasons. And again, I want to point out the the opportunity for adaptive reuse and repurpose of the existing structure. Um, and so your potential uh motions are listed on the screen. Um, and as always, I am available for questions, and I think as we've alluded to in the conversation thus far, this is a general reasonzoning, so you can't apply conditions to the request. Um, again, you got to look at the zoning district as a whole when you're making your decision. Um and again uh the applicant is here as well if to answer any specific questions but again u from the application and the use uh the goal is for it to become an event center for micro weddings. Um, so before I open it up to to the balance of the board, I'd like to give the applicant an opportunity if she would like to say anything or he or she

Yeah, I I think she you were good not saying anything, but uh if you have any specific questions, um I'm sure we can work together to answer those. Sure. I just wanted to give the applicant an opportunity.

Y now I'd like to go ahead and open it up here to my other board members. So the you have a g general reasonzoning and it's you what you're saying is you decided not to apply as or you maybe you helped the applicant were not applying it for a conditional resoning because we're using the same structure. Is that that's what I heard but give me a little bit more.

Yeah. So, we thought neighborhood center zoning was more appropriate for the type of use that she was wanting to do. Um, now I think depending on, let's see, an event center under our classification is a S under our four zoning district. So, under that, we could have requested a conditional zoning um or a special use permit. Um, so I don't know if you guys recall the groomer looking to do the overnight kenneling. Um, so for an existing business where a use may be a special use, we typically recommend the special use permit process because they're utilizing an existing facility. So they may not have new elevations or a new site plan because they're already established as a business or the structure is existing. Um, now if there was a developer wanting to do strictly residential, then that would be a good opportunity for conditional zoning as what our ordinance requires. Um, but for this particular, we could go from one zoning district to another and that would meet the intent of what she's wanting to do with the property. I hope that makes sense. So to answer your question, a conditional zoning, you probably wouldn't have had you wouldn't have had anything to really look at um because there wouldn't have been an update to the site because the the building is is remaining. The existing 40 plus or minus parking spaces will likely be reused. Um and uh we thought it would be best just for a general reasoning. you have an opportunity to uh just I guess broadcast to the board to the commissioners

that it's for a specific purpose in the general reasonzoning like you you already discussed you're kind of opening up somebody could use it for one thing today and then change change it later. So I I'm I'm just trying to figure out why the conditional reszoning wasn't recommended.

Yeah. So again, conditional zoning is really more sight specific to where it could either be a complicated site or ordinance just doesn't allow something specific to where they come in, they show a site plan, they have renderings, and it's a more more of an involved process. um a general reason only. I I I understand because you're not seeing a site plan. It could be the number of lists listed uses that I showed on the screen. Um and so yeah, this this is one of those instances where, you know, we believe an event center or for this to be a wedding venue in a in an existing church facility made sense just to do a general resoning. Um but uh that also is the applicant's choice to do a general resoning. can request that and we take it through the process which is what we're we're doing here tonight.

So take it down the road 7 8 10 years um this this has nothing to do with the current applicant but let's say it's sold or uh you know business business gets or yeah somebody changed their mind. It can can with this general reasonzoning, it can be used for what Danny was talking about 16 apartments on a twoacre lot, something like that down the road. That's a possibility. It could. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, that's that's true. It could in the future it could become something different. Um the event center could become a pet store, could become animal grooming. It could it could change. um or it could remain an event center for the next decade. Could um could staff pull up the table of uses for us uh if they get a second? Yeah. I apologize for my use because I'm on a slanted surface here.

No problem. Can you scroll down to the very last page all the way at the bottom? So I went ahead and um counted the permitted uh in neighborhood NC it would be 87 byite uses that the applicant would be able to adjust the business to not just in an event space because it is a general resoning. So there would be 87 different possibilities. Um can you go all the way down to the last page please? One of the most egregious ones that is permitted is a telecommunications attendant and equipment tower. And it's permitted by right in the general. Is that something that you would see that is a general reasonzoning permitted by right that would be good in that spot?

Yeah. So that is I don't think so. Tele telecommunication attendant equipment that is an accessory use to a support tower to a support tower. Yeah. So, it would be a it could be a cell tower location, which a cell tower would require a special use permit and would require a special use permit process. Okay. A cell tower could, but the equip the equipment down below. Yeah. So, I think that equipment is tended to support and to be utilized along a cell tower, not usually. Can you for I'm going to ask you to step to the microphone for the residents. Sorry. Thank you.

Um, typically when those are in there, those are for switch outs and mechanical equipment and stuff like that. So once you have it in there, you don't have to go back for the uh special use permit process again. Wouldn't you want it already included though in the in the entire scope of a special use permit process, especially if it's it's mechanical to go along with cell phone equipment? It would be. Would they not? Have you done one of those recently where they've done a change out? Yeah. Well, no. Have you done a new one? Yeah. I mean t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t typically both of those would be included at the same time during the initial installation, but the buy right aspect of it allows for them to go through and make those changes without coming back for a They're not adding a new tower. They're just changing the equipment out on it.

Well, if they're changing the equipment out, then it's already established. So why would it be permitted by right? I didn't write it. I know there is. We also had an instance where there was a gas station with fuel and a gas station without fuel and which one was permitted and which one was special use. Mhm. So there's some cleanup we we have ahead of us. Understand that. Yeah. For sure. And so there's some gaps and and when we have to do a general, we have to consider everything. Yeah. Even the good and the bad.

Well, and I think that's important for y'all to do is to consider those and if there's changes that need to be made to be made to them. But, um, coming from other areas and everything and seeing that the conditional conditional zoning is a great tool to have, it should really be the exception rather than the rule. Uh, when it comes to these, you have your your your zoning districts and you have your allowed uses in there, but the zoning district actually doesn't show this developing in this manner. It does not show NC development. It shows it as R4. No, I understand that. All right. So, if we stuck with our district, I'm talking about what's the requested district. You have your your set districts here and what's allowed in them in the ordinance. We stuck to our districts, right? It would stay R4. That's correct. Yeah. Yeah.

Am I So, I I'm I'm not going to speak for other folks, but I think it's open for discussion right now. It would be pretty much an easier call if it was conditional and we we kept it to because the use would be the specific the use would be specific and and and so the way we're where we're at currently is would the applicant like to amend her application and come back later to for with a special use permit. So just to clarify, we've

into the microphone, please. I'm sorry. We initially started out with this being a recreational center that is uh a huge undertaking. So we currently are using as you know the church is not used or hasn't been used for a church um since Grace left. So, with the building sitting there and this new um contractor came and offered suggested using this space for micro weddings so that it's not just sitting there for two years or whatever it would take for us to get this project off the ground. Is this your contractor or is this someone else? Is it my contractor?

Is this your are you is this your contractor that's doing work for you or was this someone that came in and gave you an advice? Advice for what? for reasonzoning. The lady who wants to do the micro weddings called the town of Waxaw to ask about putting her sign up and it opened up this can of worms. She was told that she could not put the sign up and that particular building had to be reszoned. Yes.

Which is why we're here. So the again the initial the initial idea and suggestion we wanted to do with this building it's my parents old church building was to create a space for the whole community which was my dad's vision at that time. So we've gone from being able to immediately develop that to what we can immediately use it for now which is for micro weddings. So the intention of creating some space for the community has not changed. What level um or what degree we're going to be able to do that will depend on uh what the architect comes up with that's feasible for that space. So we will um broaden that. It will go beyond just being micro used for micro weddings. Again the intention was

use of scope is broaden in the future. You you hope to expand to different things. So that's Blair and I had a lengthy discussion about this which is why we came up with the general the neighborhood center as opposed to provisional. Blair was your key contact during this uh between Lauren and Blair. But yes, I had ext extensive conversation with uh Blair. Blair. Okay. Yes. Awesome. Does that clarify? Oh, no. That that's excellent.

No. And we I I'll be I'll be frank. I like what you're doing. I just have to consider 87 other things that you could have and change in a year, six months, 18 months, six months after it gets approved. It doesn't matter what the timeline is and we have to consider everything because we have this broad broad paintbrush

in the middle and in the middle of our four and we I actually really like what you want to do. Sure. I just would like to see it conformed to that use and only that use so we can be more mindful and comprehensive for the residents because you do have surrounding established neighborhoods right right near you and and I know you know this because this was your your your your home pretty much and I get that but we also have to consider those neighbors and how what's the balance and give and take and you're asking for a very broad general paintbrush but you you're selling a very narrow specific use and I like that use. I support you on that use, but I can't support the general because it's so many uses. 87 by right possibilities. Well, and also also your um the future change in scope for the building. It doesn't really uh veer off the the path of of a conditional that could be limited to two or three uses. So I still I because what it does is it it keeps it on that path and it doesn't allow the 87 other or whatever 84 other uses

uh to be to be considered at a later date. So I still I still think the conditional would have been um in pretty easy call. It would have been a much more comprehensive evaluation of what you want to accomplish. And I tell you right now, I support that comprehensiveness under conditional. Under conditional. Yes, ma'am. Okay. So, I also want to point out though, this property was reszoned in 2021. So, to R4. Okay. So, it was what? On the documents that I have, it was commercial. it's in an R4 neighborhood or

I can't see that and I can't take that into consideration really as part of the facts of the case. I believe Cindy that's essentially nothing I can consider. Correct. Well, this is a general reasonzoning and so you shouldn't be considering any of this. Yeah, I can asking questions about what the use is going to be. You shouldn't be I can only consider the 87 uses that could be or what it used to be. This is just a general reasonzoning. Yep. And I and I have to paint with a very broad brush. Even though we're talking specifics, as our town attorney has advised, I have to stick with the the broadest brush possible. So, with that being said,

under your recommendation is is to withdraw your application and come back with a conditional site plan. So, it would be tailored specifically for your requested use. and staff should be able to assist you with that. So, you're saying we can only use this building? So, if I'm standing here before you now and I say, "I want to use this building for micro weddings." It would be for recreational events and and micro weddings and it couldn't be a dog parlor in two months. It wouldn't be a dog parlor anyway. I'm just But it's a use that could be that we have to consider. I'll say something. Can I

You're saying that it could be event micro wings and recreation or event center. Is that what you just said? I would leave that up to staff to help guide you to what you just said. That's not far off. Would you I I I was asking you to repeat what you said. I think you said recreation recreation. Yes. The recreation event space that that cover I believe covers micro weddings. I I but I would leave that to staff to help fine-tune and tailor that. So, whatever falls under the recreation, is that what you're saying in general, or are you saying I have to specifically identify what that recreation is going to be? You can you can put a couple in there. You can, but but not the 87.

No, no, no. I know. I'm not being flippant about I think I think I get what she's saying. There's different types of recreation that could be So, a club may want to rent it and it's not a wedding. Is that good example of what you're trying to describe? Well, I'm just saying if we decide to add the gym, so they do micro weddings now. The gym would be a different July of 2026. A gym would be a completely different use and you would have to come back through the process. So that's why we're having this under general. So I don't have to come back because the again the initial plan or goal for this Why would you want a gym? But you're telling us you want micro weddings. No, no, for the future. I know for the future. And but but what I'm saying though is that she could

as a conditional put those uses in there. If I could if I could for the for the board. Um this is what she's requested for y'all to consider tonight. So I would encourage y'all to consider Sure. Um the reasoning request that she has on the table at this time and changing it and going back is always an option for her later on. But I mean it's you know she's as she's requested this and I I'll ask the application again. Would she like to withdraw and work with staff to come back with a conditional use? Yes or no? The planning board doesn't have the authority to ask an applicant to withdraw their application. We don't. What the planning board has the authority to do is to either approve or deny her request.

Um, and to go back to a question that you asked me earlier, whether you could consider in this general reasonzoning as part of your consideration whether the property used to be commercial. Sure, you can consider that. But what you can't consider is what she plans to do with the property. Got it. And that's why we have to stick with understanding that there could be 87 different possible uses. So it's my it's my understanding that when you present an application for whatever zoning that the intended use does not have to be specified in the general. That is correct.

Okay. So, but we've we've discussed that and in hearing me say I'm going to use it for this or for that based on what my interpretation of what I've heard is that I'm limited to using it only for that specific reason. I don't understand your question. You it was said that if you're going to do micro weddings, then you have to do only micro weddings and you'll have to come back if you intend to add a gym or if you intend to do something else because the intended use of it has changed. So it would be because it would be a specific or or a specific application for those uses. So yes.

So on my application I put commercial. On my application I put um general. I put event center, recreation, wedding venue. I put all of that on my application to cover myself. But also understand less than a mile down the street from me is a pizza parlor. Mhm. which was an old abandoned house that they redid and turned into a pizza parlor.

Yes. But that was also within the bounds of essentially our 2040 map where it showed NC zoning and where we had planned for some commercial activity. We had not planned and we did not have essentially the resources and infrastructure to carry the commercial activity and the trips. I believe in my personal opinion because it is a general and I can't go into specifics and we can't talk about trips. We can't talk about your m what's the maximum use that uh a grocery store could be put there I believe and that's one of the highest trip generators and it would be by right that you could have in the future because this is a general you could put a general store or or a a grocery store there and it wouldn't actually account for the correct amount of trips because we couldn't discuss it. So in your 2030 204

2040 I read them both. In your 2030 and your 2040 comprehensive plan no I'm sorry NC does not go up to your site. Well I'm not specifically referring to the neighborhood center. I'm referring to what the residents and what is spelled out in there that's that's reverberated over and over throughout that plan. and that is for more activities, recreation, um, which this center would fall well within those guidelines. Um, again, less than a quarter mile from where this building is, this structure is,

you have Helms Road, as he spoke about, there's going to be a roundabout there. There's going to be a frontage of businesses there, and behind it, town houses. So, I'm not sure why this particular spot, like it's it's a hit or miss. It's like spaced out. This this particular business qualif spaced out. It's disconnected and disjointed from the balance of the commercial ex but it's less than a mile. It's less than a half a mile.

It is less than a half a mile. You are correct. But based off of our zoning maps, if we stuck to our zoning maps, NC does not reach you. We would be amending our zoning maps this evening to make a essentially an adjustment in the maps. Well, my my decision or the sorry, the the application that was put forward, I followed the recommendations that were um made to me. We we understand. Thank you so much.

Yeah. And so, you know, we talk about reszoning process versus special use process. So, these are all processes allowed by the state to which an applicant or a property owner can submit for and we bring it through the process. So I know um we are bringing this forward to you tonight. So um I would like to shift back to potentially making a motion tonight on this pro on this general reasonzoning um if there are not any additional questions. I know I appreciate the dialogue um because it's a lot to consider when you're looking at a general reasonzoning because you're not looking at a sight specific plan. Um, and so I would uh unless you want to look more at the table of uses, I can switch back to the presentation or dive into anything further.

That last page would be fine.

Yeah. So again, so staff um had met with her and wanted to guide her through a process for her to to ultimately reach her goal of doing what she wants to do with her property. So we recommended a general reasonzoning because again that is something that is granted to us to allow by the state. Um and so we didn't see the need for a conditional zoning for a property that is existing and the structure is intended on being reused. Uh, and so with that, I will leave it open for additional questions or if you guys want to go ahead and make a motion on the resoning request.

Ted Pelvy, do you guys have any other questions?

No, I think he makes some very good points. I mean I mean uh the applicant has really good intentions, but the question is let's say in five or six years he decided to tear it down and build whatever. I mean that's that's the problem. this town changes very quickly and that's the problem is um so again that that's the reason why I agree kind of with your issue of trying to put some sort of a condition on or just make an assumption that probably that whole area is going to be incventually because the fact it's all going to turn into basically commercial because there's nothing stopping um people from acquiring the land and so forth. So, I think that's the big decision is um how important is the rest of it being um residential versus becoming NC. Um and I think that's to me that's kind of where I'm coming down at.

Yeah. And I I'll say the town of course has established processes and guidelines that to guide this development if it was proposed for something in the future for redevelopment. Um, you know, we have our TIA ordinance, we have a storm water ordinance, we have all these requirements to really gauge future development to make sure that what is proposed is mitigating their impact to the community, whether it be developed at R4 and uh it could be the church could be bulldozed and town homes could be built right now or under neighborhood center where they could do a mixeduse project. Um and again I know it's a lot to look at because you're looking at whatifs and I understand um how difficult of a decision that can be. So u I just want to say I appreciate the dialogue and the investment you guys make as plan members.

Madison, let me ask you one question. You you stated if they bulldozed it and did houses, they'd have to do the pet plan though, right? They'd have they'd have to because they're they're doing a redevelopment. they'd have to do and have to give us the rightway. They'd have to come in and do a ped plan. But right now with it way it currently is, they don't have to do the ped infrastructure. They don't have to do the 50 foot center line. They would just stay status quo. Yeah. So, for example, um well, this may not necessarily work. So, R4 allows for a cluster where you could do up to five units per acre. 4.5.

So, for R3, you can do up to 3.5. And for R4, it allows one additional unit per okay per acre. Um, so if they were doing 10 units, that would require a major subdivision request. That would require the rightway dedication. That would require the sidewalk setbacks would be increased. We we would be able to look through essentially. Yeah. So you would look at a plan for a byite development, uh, major subdivision. It would just be a technical review, but we would be able to see something along with the rest. You would be doing the checklist, right? making sure it conforms to the land development code.

However, if someone wanted to purchase the property now at R4 and they wanted to build two single family homes, well, that's an infill development and they're they're not going to install a sidewalk. They're not going to make improvements. They're not going to have to dedicate right away. Um because that is that is simply a a building inspections process where they pull building permits um and they go directly almost in building. But now it goes back to we're almost one house per acre, right? In that situation, it would be or they could do, you know, nine or less and then they would still not have to follow and do any infill development for a sidewalk. Yeah. Well, if I was going to take the, you know, poison pill, I'd rather take the, you know, closer to one house per acre and and I understand that we might not get sidewalks, but

Sure. when looking at the general and what all the uses could be. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, and I'll say the neighborhood center really focused on development outside of the downtown periphery and then also in key nodes along major corridors. So there's some additional at Waxel Marvin and Pine Oak. There are some on Highway 16 um Red Trail and N6.

Correct. Yep. So there are nodes of that that are meant to have small scale development to to m to mimic what downtown looks like. Um, and so I imagine for this intersection, we we kept it residential because it's it's an existing church. It was a church when we were doing our update. Um, and and religious institutions are allowed by right and R4. So, we wanted to make sure it was a a conforming structure. So, um, again, those are all the things we look at when we're drafting comp plans, future land use plans. Um, and so that was really the intent of the neighborhood center. and and of course as we brought text amendments to you guys, we've amended neighborhood center because we were seeing a lot of things that we necessarily didn't want to see. So

Ble Mill was correct right after we established one of the most hurtful uh essentially where we the intent was to have something not as as dense what Black Mill ended up being because we wanted more commercial. It was supposed to be some more commercial or less dense. Yeah. And yet somehow we they got what they got. Yeah.

So So just kind kind of walking through your comment about coming back if the area was really changed. Like for example, let's say that they decided to bulldoze it and build a mixeduse, you know, three or four story multif family first floor being retail. would they would be required to do traffic studies and so forth and we could actually then turn down the project or would by right would they be able to go ahead and build this multi-use building?

Yeah. Yeah. So, if you're talking about a three-story building, they have commercial on the bottom and then multif family on the top. That would be a buy right project. And so, um, depending on the size, the scale, the uses, number of multif family, that would go through our TIA ordinance, uh, process, but also our T ordinance allows our town engineer to require a a TIA or a tech memo if there is already a need for traffic improvements or if the intersection is already unsafe. So there are parameters that allows that discretion just as the zoning administrator has some discretion. Um but you would not necessarily see that because it would be a byite project.

Um there's also I remember something back in the day um on these smaller NC parcels and this was something that I had um questioned our last uh zoning administrator and director on um when it came into these NC parcels. There was some uh on the smaller parcels, it focused down to where it didn't need to come back before the board. There was some more latitude for the zoning administrator to make micro decisions once it was through the general reasonzoning. Is that correct?

Yeah. So you're talking about uh so I remember we had added the part about mixed use residential and non-residential uses are proportionate to the lot size I think. Is that what you're kind of alluding to because there was some discussion about because we looked at all the neighborhood center parcels because there were some that are two acres a quarter of an acre all the way up to five acres, right? So how can you determine what is proportionate?

Yeah. Uh, so that's why we added in that verbiage there to make sure that if there's a 5acre neighborhood center parcel, it may not make sense just to have one 2,000 square foot building and then uh, you know, 60 town homes or something. Yeah. As an example, I think is that what you're alluding to or you thinking of something else? No, that's what I was alluding to to to where to where the the zoning administrator could decide what was proportional. Yeah, correct. Y in the NC. And so it doesn't come back before the board uh board of commissioners or the planning board. It's just a zoning administrative decision. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. That's again we we have our ordinance in place for a reason, right? We want an ordinance that's good and strong that works to to better the town with development and we have guidelines and requirements that developments must follow. Um, and so that's really the reason for our ordinance is to ensure that development is done in a way that is in favor of waxall. So I'll slide back to this slide if there are any additional questions. Uh, and again I'm just looking for a motion on the resulting petition. I'll make a motion.

Uh I'm making a motion for an unfavorable recommendation for the petition of RZ 016261-2025 with the reasonleness and and consistency statement as presented. Yep. So I'll um I'll just need a modified a reasonableness and consistency statement since you gave an unfavorable recommendation. Um, so I would just need someone well to second it. Well, you would need to state a new Oh, new reasonleness and consistency statement. So, it's inconsistent. It I was going to say, should it be inconsistence and probably unreasonable?

Yes, inconsistent and unreasonable. uh based off of the uh current land use code and the 2040 uh land use map. Would that suffice for staff? Is that sufficient, Cindy? It is. Okay. Thank you. Uh we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second? I don't need one. Oh, do we need a second? Oh. Uh all those in favor of the motion I I That's unanimous. Good. Thank you so much, Madison. Appreciate it. Thank you to the applicant for coming this evening. With that, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to go

make a motion to adjurnn. Ajourn. Thank you. Seconded. Thank you. All those in favor? I I Thank you.