[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[14:31] Thank you. We're working with some height issues back here. Just ignore our shenanigans, yes. All right, we are going to start our evening with town manager's comments. Regan, welcome back. Thank you. Good evening, mayor, members of council, members of the public. Your agenda this evening, pretty straightforward. We're opening with a presentation by the Parents Commission of Southern Pines and this prusing up awards for 2020
[14:59] You
[15:00] Section 6. You can send agenda, includes three items, one being authorization of an application for sewer rehab funds, the second being an authorization to my office to execute an agreement with the Visit Pinehurst Southern Pines Aberdeen, previously known as the CBB, relative to a public art installation that will be taking place out at Reservoir Park. Town staff has had an opportunity to meet with representatives from Visit Pinehurst Southern Pines Aberdeen.
[15:28] talk about what their expectations are and everybody is comfortable with the installation
[15:34] of that Patrick Dirty piece at the Reservoir Park.
[15:38] And then finally, your minutes from the August business meeting and work session.
[15:43] Beyond that, item 7a is called an action item.
[15:47] However, my understanding is you had a conversation at the work session regarding the YMCA project,
[15:53] had asked your town attorney to come back with some recommendations.
[15:56] You should have found in your packet a memo from Attorney Macarlie, essentially recommending that we allow that existing contract with the YMCA to sort of run its course, and then in the event that they are able to follow through and get some positive results based upon what you all talked about at the work session.
[16:16] We can reconvene moving forward with basically putting in a new agreement in place.
[16:24] Obviously, Attorney Macarly is available when we get to that item on the agenda.
[16:28] Should you have any questions of him?
[16:30] And from there, we'll move into a series of three public hearings of the legislative
[16:34] nature followed by an evidentiary QJ hearing.
[16:38] Planning staff will be present to introduce those items when we get to that point on the
[16:44] agenda.
[16:45] With that, I'm happy to take any questions or otherwise request an adoption of the agenda
[16:49] as presented.
[16:51] Thank you.
[16:51] Council, do you have any questions for our manager?
[16:56] All right.
[16:56] I'll make a motion to approve the agenda.
[16:58] Second.
[16:58] All those in favor?
[17:00] Aye.
[17:00] Aye.
[17:01] Any opposed?
[17:02] Motion carries.
[17:03] Thank you.
[17:04] All right.
[17:05] Let's start with our presentation from the Appearance Commission
[17:09] for sprucing up southern pines.
[17:17] Good afternoon, everyone.
[17:18] Good afternoon.
[17:19] Would you like to introduce everyone on your commission
[17:23] as you start?
[17:24] I would.
[17:25] Okay, that'd be great.
[17:26] Thank you.
[17:26] of
[17:31] the Spursing of Southern Pines Commission.
[17:34] And you know, several members of the commission
[17:36] here this afternoon, and you can use mine,
[17:39] all of you stand up, and I will go from there.
[17:42] That way, that's been a lot of fun.
[17:44] Yeah, you're speaking water.
[17:46] Right here, Terry Lennahan.
[17:49] Carol Haney, former, and Kim.
[17:54] I'm sorry, Terry.
[17:56] Terry, Jerry.
[17:57] Jerry, pardon me.
[17:58] She's one of our newbies.
[17:59] And then they're still learning.
[18:02] Kate Schinquen.
[18:04] Oh, sorry.
[18:06] And Ashley Traumatine, who is one of our resident,
[18:12] resident business owners.
[18:14] Thank you very much.
[18:16] So this is our crew minus about five or six
[18:18] who are missing four or five that are missing right now tonight.
[18:22] So this is our committee.
[18:24] Take names a bit of water on the wire.
[18:26] And we're looking for more.
[18:28] any of you that might want to volunteer come join us.
[18:32] All right, and giving that acknowledgement to our committee, I'd like to give
[18:37] acknowledgement and honor to our mayor, Taylor, Clement tonight and
[18:41] town council, along with, as I've mentioned, my name is Cynthia,
[18:49] I'm squeezing up a certain file.
[18:50] Now, the certificate tonight will be given at the end of our presentation.
[18:54] And what I'd like to do when I start out with this every year is just tell you a little
[18:59] bit about screw-seeing up southern pines.
[19:01] We have an acronym for it.
[19:03] It's S-U-S-P.
[19:05] And acronyms, we know how that goes, screw-seeing up southern pines.
[19:10] What is screw-seeing up southern pines?
[19:12] The screw-seeing up southern pines award program is an annual program administered by the town
[19:18] of southern pines appearance commission.
[19:20] The town is committed to preserving its natural beauty and environment.
[19:27] The town of Southern Pines and Parents Commission is a volunteer board appointed by the town
[19:32] council that may have as many as 13 members, 10 being residents of the town, and 3 being residents
[19:42] of more county within the extra terrestrial jurisdiction.
[19:47] Oh, extraterritorial jurisdiction, sorry about that, ETJ.
[19:55] This community must have missed in plans and carries out programs to enhance and improve
[20:02] the visual quality and aesthetics characteristics of the town and the extraterritorial jurisdiction
[20:10] addition beyond the town's limits.
[20:13] The Appearance Commission studies the visual problems as best we can and needs of the town as well as the ETJ extra territorial jurisdiction commission planning slash zoning jurisdictions.
[20:28] If we need help, we call on people like BJ in terms of planning and other people not mean necessarily, but my committee is well connected with a lot of you town council people and thank goodness for that.
[20:40] for me. As examples of who can be awarded are commercial, industrial, residential site improvements,
[20:49] upgrades, additions, landscapes, renovations, and new structures that are architecturally
[20:57] noteworthy. Qualified recipients in each of the residential and commercial industry
[21:03] industrial industry categories may be chosen as well.
[21:07] A committee chairperson takes responsibility for the program with committee members.
[21:13] The entire Appearance Commission considers the nominations and we vote.
[21:18] That starts around the March time of the year where nominations are accepted for
[21:24] approximately six weeks.
[21:26] Eligibility, properties must be located within the corporate limits of the extraterrestrial
[21:32] jurisdiction area of the town of southern Pines.
[21:36] Projects must be visible from a public street.
[21:40] Submissions must have the consent of the owner, self nominations are encouraged.
[21:47] In new construction, a certificate of occupancy must have been issued to be nominated.
[21:55] projects that have won in the previous two years are not eligible. Improvements must have been
[22:01] completed within the last 12 months. So I am so proud this year of our residents who were
[22:08] nominated and what they have created on their properties. We'd like to encourage town council
[22:14] members and staff to help and our residents to help promote this initiative that we've done
[22:23] Now I approximately eight years and nominations again are open starting March 27th.
[22:31] Now from here, what I'd like to do is show you this year's properties.
[22:35] The one thing we must apologize for this year is we don't have any, and I won't say any,
[22:42] all of the ten residents that were nominated. They have soccer, they have Portuguese, they have this
[22:48] that or the other. So, unfortunately, unlike some other years, not all of our nominees are
[22:54] here tonight. So, what we'll do if you don't mind, Mayor, is at the end of this, we'd like
[23:01] to still take a picture of our commissioners and the few gentlemen that are here from one
[23:07] of our nominations, okay? To start, do you hear it, everybody? Okay, this is 440 South
[23:18] May Street. This is, we happen to have a before picture. And the previous landscaping on
[23:25] this property was so overgrown, the home was unable to be seen from the road. And there
[23:30] was major yard work has been done to tame the overgrown yard and give the home some need
[23:36] of curb appeal. In addition to the yard, major work has been done to this home. The
[23:43] carport was enclosed, the exterior was renovated, and painting given this property a new lease
[23:49] on life. This is more of it before,
[23:55] which you see the end. Oh, starting to get there. Looking
[24:00] pretty good, when you say from those first few pictures. And this is what we look for as a
[24:05] commission as a committee. You know, when we're
[24:08] tooling around town, we want to see people who are
[24:10] working outside. It doesn't have to be a lot. Just a
[24:13] little bit can help make a difference in our
[24:15] community. And next to the next one, not to keep you
[24:20] 465 South Ash Street. This owners worked very hard as
[24:25] we understand to improve the exterior of their home,
[24:28] their first home. She did everything herself and is so
[24:31] proud. She picked out appropriate plants, colors,
[24:34] coordinated at all. This is her first time renovating a home inside and out. They have
[24:40] named the cottage the Fox box and have Fox items all around. Little before, sorry, little
[24:49] before and after. The bottom is before, yes, and the top is before, also. Okay, sorry.
[24:58] All right, and this has been new.
[25:00] Look at that.
[25:02] Okay, this is still before.
[25:04] It looks pretty good to me.
[25:06] This is the after.
[25:07] Ooh, that's what you might see here.
[25:09] That's what we like to hear.
[25:11] This is the after.
[25:12] Haven't seen these in a while actually.
[25:15] I love this.
[25:17] Yeah, and look more after and she's done it all herself.
[25:22] This is an old properties, 475 Glover Street.
[25:27] just a mature beautiful greenery and flowering and pine trees all over the
[25:32] place. I see my name I nominated this person don't have too many before but when
[25:39] I say old-party property it's mature and they keep it lovely all the time
[25:44] this is Mr. and Mrs. Will Cable on Glover Street. Lovely peaceful serene.
[25:57] I mean you
[25:57] can keep it simple. If you've got work to do, just do it. I know it's easier
[26:02] seven done in many cases. Now where it's 470 at 670, Kensington Road, this
[26:09] is a before. Now check this out. Person is a garden designer. This new garden is
[26:15] lovely and going to be a spectacular in a few years. We've worked hard, she says,
[26:21] on this house for the past year. The property was extremely rundown and
[26:25] and in horrible shape.
[26:26] I think it's made a big improvement to the neighborhood.
[26:30] Miss Lisa Grumble.
[26:33] You hear Miss Grumble?
[26:34] No.
[26:35] This is the after.
[26:37] Again.
[26:40] To make, look at that.
[26:43] Nice.
[26:44] I'm not in the wall's way.
[26:46] Am I behind me?
[26:48] OK.
[26:49] This is 56 East Indiana Avenue.
[26:52] This is a before.
[26:54] Looks good to me.
[26:55] however she this person is very appreciative of the neighbor who likes what the new owners have done
[27:02] to renovate and update this house. The new painting and landscaping is lovely that was the
[27:10] comment of the neighbor that's the new looks good just amazing what a few plants and gravel can do
[27:20] I say that like it's inexpensive, but I'm sure it's not.
[27:25] And you guys really know, I'm sure.
[27:29] And this is another portion of it, just lovely, lovely.
[27:32] These homes are in Southern Pines, it's such a quaint, and we all love our little town
[27:37] once we're here.
[27:39] I thought when my husband and I moved here eight years ago, I'd never live in Southern Pines,
[27:43] though my parents are from here.
[27:45] I grew up in Connecticut and I never come back to this little town, I'm here and I don't
[27:52] want to leave.
[27:55] And this is the last of that home, which is so lovely and they have their guard outstanding
[28:01] out.
[28:04] Three, oh, one mid-loathe and drive.
[28:07] Just want to read this from this woman, my husband has worked tirelessly to renovate
[28:12] our home for our family. Shortly after moving in he made it his mission to improve the exterior,
[28:18] the exterior landscaping so our neighbors could enjoy the fact that someone bought this abandoned
[28:24] home and put love into it after so many years. We're proud of what we've done and look forward to
[28:31] improving this house over the years to come. Next, still before pictures of that property. They
[28:40] clean that up still before pictures. It's nice when we have good before pictures.
[28:46] That are lovely. Open to that totally up looks fabulous.
[28:54] Very nice. I wish our
[28:57] nominees were here.
[29:01] That is the end of the residential awardees this year.
[29:13] A few
[29:13] and where is Gigi?
[29:15] I'm not here, but she is the nominated.
[29:17] These gentlemen here are here to receive their award, OK?
[29:22] And Valmede is one of their new landscape managers
[29:26] has made a huge difference in the property.
[29:30] His team cares for all the home's cottages.
[29:33] It's just beautiful over there.
[29:34] For apartment buildings, the clubhouse,
[29:36] health-related buildings, and they must say this young man
[29:40] has given his blood, sweat, and tears.
[29:44] Imagine that's on there.
[29:45] Probably some tears.
[29:47] Oh, some tears. Probably some tears
[29:49] over this beautiful land.
[29:51] Thanks, Gigi.
[29:53] And here we go.
[29:55] Entrance way.
[29:57] Before you see the app.
[29:58] Before.
[30:01] Yes, that's what we do. Just judge on the outside. The before to the left, this huge, what we call it, evergreen, removed and now it's so open and airy. And of course, that's building. It's been there how many years, property, almost 100, oh, yes, 100 years. All of us are pretty much familiar with this building, quite a history. And there you are.
[30:29] here. Very nice with our sign. Very nice. Okay. Thank you, Belmead. And thank you for
[30:39] being here. Thank you.
[30:44] Are you all mistakenly still going to pay your spectrum bill here?
[30:52] Do you really? Okay. This building stood vacant for quite some time. I would come back
[30:59] I can forth visiting my folks and it was still dead, dead.
[31:05] Are they ever going to do anything on that corner?
[31:08] Since taking ownership, LKC, which I believe is an engineering firm,
[31:14] thoughtfully transformed the space, constructing a new building that not only revitalizes the site,
[31:21] but also complements the character of our downtown.
[31:23] The rest, the results is a welcoming building that reflects the spirit of our area by Ashley nominated by Ashley Commissioner on the appearance commission that before the after it's a beautiful looking building for downtown
[31:45] town, Southern Pines. It doesn't take away from the style and the old historic, just a
[31:52] little pop of new here. Like you're building now, it's a pop of new on Broad Street.
[31:58] That's how I figure this building is now, a pop of new LKC engineering. Okay, and this
[32:06] is to 37 Davis Street, the design of the building and property look great. It isn't a typical
[32:12] office building. It looks sharp, well designed, and it is great fit to the street. This particular
[32:19] property is a golf type which go in and can hit balls and that kind of thing. As I understand
[32:27] it, I haven't been there yet. It's over by behind the Walmart area and the work out place
[32:34] first health work out area, lovely, and it's a brand new building, so it fits, it fits,
[32:48] still looks good.
[32:49] Now our last but not least is 105 East Pennsylvania Avenue.
[32:56] One of her neighbors nominated this particular property and said I would like to nominate
[33:03] this property because it constantly enhances the beauty
[33:07] in charm of southern pides.
[33:09] Through thoughtful planting, curb appealing, and pride
[33:12] of ownership, it is a standout example
[33:14] of how well maintained outdoor spaces contribute
[33:18] to the character of our community
[33:21] while bringing smiles to past survivors.
[33:25] Thank you, Mr. Heidschman, and I'll
[33:28] believe he's here either.
[33:30] Brent?
[33:31] Oh, she's here.
[33:32] Oh, you are.
[33:33] Wonderful.
[33:34] Yes, thank you.
[33:36] I hope we did it credence, you know,
[33:38] and talking about it is lovely, lovely, lovely. Thank you for nominating it. And that actually ends
[33:45] our presentation and that this so you all can keep it moving. We'd like to take a quick photo
[33:53] together with Mayor. Would you like to do one with the whole council as well? Okay.
[34:03] We do it in front of the dios and then have it stand or say it or however you stand.
[34:10] Yeah, maybe they should stand because we just going to use our phones.
[34:16] Come on.
[35:08] I'm going to do like I've done before many years, squeeze in, folks.
[35:23] This may be, you know, who knows, the front page of the Wall Street Journal.
[35:30] Go to you want to get in it?
[35:33] No, I don't want these folks.
[35:36] Or you get one, you just get something.
[35:39] Oh, come on.
[35:41] I'm here.
[35:42] She does.
[35:44] No, I'm a picture tape.
[35:49] Thank you.
[35:49] No, thank you.
[36:00] Thank you.
[36:01] Thank you.
[36:03] Thank you.
[36:10] Good job.
[36:12] Thank you.
[36:13] Thank you for being our photographer.
[36:16] I'm
[36:20] so...
[36:22] Can you just pull it out?
[36:26] Thank you.
[36:29] Thank you.
[36:30] Thank you.
[36:30] Thank you.
[36:30] You're very welcome.
[36:31] To you and to everyone on the Appearance Commission.
[36:33] Thank you, guys, for all the work you do all year round.
[36:37] And what a wonderful opportunity we have to recognize some of our community members.
[36:41] And we appreciate that you all put the effort into making it happen.
[36:46] For next year, you mentioned that you appreciate our and the community's involvement in that process.
[36:52] How does our community know that the nominations are open for next year?
[36:58] Well, they are posted. We post them on the town website. Okay, perfect. As well as we have
[37:05] three signs that go out telling as they walk around town nominations are open for
[37:10] Scroozing up.
[37:11] Seven times.
[37:12] Perfect.
[37:13] Okay.
[37:13] So there are several venues that we go to.
[37:15] Social media.
[37:17] Social media too.
[37:18] And then on.
[37:18] Okay.
[37:19] Yeah.
[37:19] Towns, social media.
[37:21] Okay.
[37:22] We're going to do a smaller version in the water bill.
[37:25] Okay.
[37:26] Next year, we did last year, but we're going to be doing a smaller version of it.
[37:30] It'll be there.
[37:31] Okay.
[37:31] Good.
[37:31] A reminder to always be the insert in our water bill.
[37:34] Thank you.
[37:39] Thank you.
[37:40] to recognize some people. I just also want to start our meeting by saying that I received
[37:44] to call it 8 o'clock this morning with a compliment to our planning department. So,
[37:48] AJ, I've already told you that I received that call. What a great way to start my day
[37:52] to you and all of your team that's here and not here. Thank you guys for all the work you
[37:56] do. Thank you. Thank you.
[37:57] All
[38:02] right. Does anyone else have anything to add before we move to public comment? No. Okay,
[38:09] we will move on to public comment. We have a timer up here with three minutes. At one
[38:12] minute you'll get a quick reminder to maybe 30 seconds to wrap up what you're
[38:16] working on and yeah I can see it thank you do we have anyone with a comment okay
[38:28] seeing none we will move right along okay on to our consent agenda council do
[38:33] you have any questions for our manager or input on our consent agenda if not is
[38:39] their emotion no
[38:43] comment I'll move to approve the consent agenda thank you is
[38:48] in favor by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. And our action items,
[38:56] our town attorney sent us, oh I guess our assistant time editor forwarded the recommendation
[39:01] for my town attorney regarding the YMTA. Do you have anything you'd like to say?
[39:07] My recommendation is no action. Okay. The way I understand it is the ease of this process
[39:16] Well, to make it easier is just to take no action now.
[39:20] Correct.
[39:21] And if you all decide to give them additional time,
[39:24] we will write up the conditions and do another deed.
[39:27] Okay.
[39:28] And I think knowing that our community cares a lot about the YMCA,
[39:33] I want to make sure that it's clear our lack of action is not a reflection
[39:38] of lack of interest for the YMCA.
[39:41] It's something that we all would like to see advance
[39:45] but you'll have other thoughts on.
[39:47] No, thanks for your comments in that.
[39:50] Just for, since we're in public record,
[39:52] when was they were having an informational meeting
[39:54] for the why information?
[39:57] It's not so, but 13th, wasn't it?
[39:59] You mean the...
[39:59] The one at the...
[40:00] Yeah, they were hosting.
[40:02] I would have said 10th off the top of my head,
[40:03] but I can't remember.
[40:04] I know I've signed it for it, but...
[40:07] I don't know, maybe the 13th.
[40:08] I know it's in the minutes that you adopted.
[40:10] It is.
[40:11] I thought about it.
[40:12] So where's the best place for the public to sign up?
[40:15] You said you signed up in?
[40:17] I did.
[40:18] You can actually call the Center in Western Impines
[40:22] and sign up that way if you want to.
[40:24] You can also go on the town website, I think.
[40:29] There's the QR code there that you can use.
[40:32] There was a QR code and the information
[40:34] we received last meeting that you can use.
[40:38] I don't know if the YMCA has that posted anywhere else.
[40:40] I'm not sure.
[40:41] but I was I signed up digitally through the information that I had and then I
[40:47] also talked to somebody from the Center in Western and Pines and they took my
[40:52] registration in case the original registration hadn't worked.
[40:55] Reagan can we get that link just added either to social media or the town
[40:59] website. Yes we can do that and looking at your minutes it is
[41:03] October 13th at the land and housing trust auditorium it says daytime but
[41:07] but there's not an hour here, so I forget about that.
[41:09] It is daytime and it was a 9.30.
[41:12] Tell them I remembered that.
[41:13] It was 9 to 10.30.
[41:15] It was, you and I were both concerned how early it was.
[41:17] Right, right.
[41:19] And their explanation was they wanted employees of groups
[41:23] and towns and schools who would be working during that time
[41:27] and might therefore make an appearance.
[41:32] But Dr. Gray and I had the same response
[41:34] months, that it sounded hard to put a pretty enormous group together at 9 o'clock in the
[41:39] morning.
[41:41] But I'm going to do it.
[41:43] Man, I had one quick question on this.
[41:46] I'm like you said, I'm with you, I'm 100% behind getting a YMCA here and supporting
[41:51] it.
[41:52] Well, my only question is, as I was looking through this, should the town retain the asset after
[41:59] October 30th, after September 30th, if we do in Faxe, you have six more months.
[42:04] to plan. I'm trying to understand what the utility is of resigning a deed, and they're
[42:09] just going to go ahead and plan anyway. It seems like staff worked. It's probably unnecessary.
[42:15] Is there something legal that I'm missing? Do they need land? If we know we're not going
[42:20] to do anything with it until that time is up?
[42:22] I think I'll let the term hardly answer that.
[42:24] Yeah. The idea is to have a clean record in the Register of Deeds office for who has
[42:29] title to that land and under what conditions and since the conditions under the previous
[42:35] deed will have expired there wouldn't be anything on record to tell anybody looking
[42:40] at it what the current status is. So we want to just have a clean record showing who owns
[42:46] it under conditions.
[42:48] Okay. And there was a minus. Thank you. There was a minuscule amount that was to be paid
[42:52] for that land was that actually did the money change hands $5,000 so at this
[43:00] point after this expires naturally that money would revert back to the YMCA no
[43:08] ma'am tell me what would happen we will have kept it okay okay because it's
[43:13] a non-refer-okay understand okay are
[43:19] there other questions no I'm sorry thank
[43:21] Thank you.
[43:22] Is there any, we'll be out in motion because it's no action.
[43:26] So seeing that nothing is necessary, we'll move on to our public hearings.
[43:29] Our first one is the Skyline Manor Bed and Breakfast, conditional rezoning.
[43:38] Mr. Maddox, good evening.
[43:40] Good evening.
[43:41] Apologies for the delay.
[43:48] I got through why I'm saying a little faster than I thought.
[44:03] Madam Clerk, I may require some assistance with our shiny new toys down here.
[44:13] Never mind.
[44:14] Just test in your legs.
[44:17] Thank you.
[44:18] Thank you.
[44:18] All right, evening council, Mason Maddox, Planner with the town. I'm the Planner responsible for facilitating this application.
[44:26] Let's jump right into it. For your orientation, the property is located where that star is. It's right off of U.S.1,
[44:33] Skyline Manor in, Skyline Manor Road. You'll see Windridge Gardens right next door,
[44:37] and we're really close to Highland Golf Club, just for your orientation, about halfway between Southern Pines and Vass.
[44:44] This is an outline of the subject property, pretty substantial in size.
[44:49] There's multiple buildings on the property, but the main one that I want to highlight
[44:53] is this one.
[44:55] This is what I will refer to as the Manor House.
[44:57] It is the main principal structure that is being...
[45:00] Meeting proposed to turn into a bed and breakfast in. Interesting enough the applicants have helped me find this postcard of when the same subject property was a guest home and otherwise an in back in the day. So the request is to return this to its former and intended land use as a bed and breakfast.
[45:22] The zoning is currently all over the place. We have three zoning districts on the subject parcel. The largest one is rural residential.
[45:30] The application is for a conditional zoning district that would also be rural residential
[45:34] and that would clean this up tremendously so that staff never has any question of which
[45:39] one applies and where just a unified district, and I'll get into why that's being requested.
[45:44] I'll note that next door there already is a conditional zoning district, it's general business
[45:48] and that is again for those Windritch Gardens, where you buy statues and other things.
[45:54] The urban transition highway corridor overlay applies for most of the site, that's going
[46:00] to come into play for two things. That overlay usually impacts new construction, new development
[46:05] where you can build something. No new construction is proposed with part of this application,
[46:11] but the applicants are requesting to use a parking area basically on the south side of your screen
[46:16] and the overlay would dictate that that parking area would violate the parking setbacks and parking
[46:21] minimums, but the applicants have the right to request a deviation from that as part of this process.
[46:28] I'll touch on that some more.
[46:31] I'll note, in case it's come up in any of your reading,
[46:35] state statute actually has a slightly different definition for these uses,
[46:38] and it really just comes down to the unit total.
[46:41] It doesn't really matter for these purposes.
[46:43] It's a bed and breakfast in under southern pine zoning,
[46:45] so that's why I'll refer to it as such.
[46:48] Applications for seven rooms,
[46:50] the applicants could go up to 12 without having to come back before you all,
[46:54] if approved.
[46:55] served.
[46:56] Bed and breakfast in, as we've established, five to 12 rooms, only allowed by conditional
[47:02] zoning.
[47:04] Yes, it was one historically, but for the sake of the record, and like Max says with
[47:08] YMSA, let's clean it up and make sure there's no inconsistency.
[47:12] Two other land uses are also proposed as part of this.
[47:16] Special home events, so think of your weddings and family gatherings and that sort of thing.
[47:21] Those are also only allowed in southern pines through conditional zoning.
[47:25] So we're two for two thus far.
[47:27] And then the third land use is the keeping of horses, which is already done on site.
[47:32] We're just adding it in there so there's no inconsistency.
[47:34] The reason the applicants chose a rural residential conditional zoning district is because horse keeping is only allowed in the highlight area.
[47:43] So that's two keeps it nice and clean that way.
[47:46] And it's also the predominant zoning that's already on site, so we're keeping it very
[47:50] clean in that regard.
[47:54] There's a lot going on on this one.
[47:55] I'll walk you through it.
[47:56] The applicants are proposing separating the land uses on the site.
[48:00] That is actually coming from fire code and building code and some other concerns.
[48:03] The manor house that you saw is what would be used as a bed and breakfast in.
[48:07] And under fire and building codes, that residence, that property would not be able to be used
[48:11] for special home events.
[48:13] So where are the special home events happening?
[48:15] Well, for one, the parking is going to occur in the blue square at the south side of your screen.
[48:21] And then the actual events will use weddings as they go to example would have to happen at this time,
[48:26] intense and that sort of thing on the north side of the property farther back from the highway.
[48:30] But strict separation of those.
[48:34] And I'll also note that blue square is probably the biggest ask of the whole project just to get that out there.
[48:40] It's used as a horse trading area at the moment.
[48:42] the applicants request that it is used for special event parking and I'll
[48:46] note a couple things about that. The first is that special home events are
[48:50] limited to no more than 20 a year and 80 guests. The applicants went to the
[48:55] planning board proposing 80 guests, 80 vehicles, we'd like to park 80 cars there.
[49:00] They've since revised that at staff's recommendation to come down to 60
[49:04] vehicles. So the actual ask is to park 60 vehicles in that blue square up to 20
[49:09] times a year. One of the components that came out of planning board, probably the largest
[49:14] one, if you saw in the recommendation, is the current proposal is for that traffic,
[49:18] all that parking, to egress onto US1 when the events are over. And the planning department
[49:23] had not received any comment from the DOT regarding this. So I reached out to the DOT following
[49:28] planning board who essentially said that it may not be an issue at all. They're going
[49:32] to review it when the time comes. But the applicants have chosen to address this as
[49:37] condition. Basically saying the default is that cars can exit on to us one, but if the
[49:42] DOC ever has an issue with it, they've got to go back up through the northern part of
[49:46] the property in down the long ways if you will.
[49:51] I'm not going over every condition, I'll
[49:53] put you to sleep, but here's the big ticket ones that I thought you would care about. It's
[49:58] only color coded, help it up here on the screen a little bit better so you can disregard the colors
[50:01] otherwise. Again, three land uses total, that's it. Can't subdivide the property. Hites
[50:08] would normally be 35 feet in the highway corridor or a relay, excuse me, the applicants believe
[50:16] that the existing man are somewhere between 35 and 40 feet so they're requesting to go up just
[50:20] a little bit. There's a provision that any new construction on site say if they build a former
[50:26] a formal special home event building would have to match the existing home and that's a little caveat
[50:32] we've carved out for other projects before not complying with the full architectural code
[50:36] And not being exempt from it either, but something in between.
[50:39] So they've got to have a lot of brick, and that's the word of thing.
[50:43] Setbacks and maximums, really the only deviation being requested is for that existing area where
[50:48] horses are being trained.
[50:49] Again, that blue right there being allowed to exist in function.
[50:53] I'll put a pin in buffers and landscaping.
[50:55] I've got a pretty picture.
[50:56] It's going to make that make a lot more sense.
[51:00] Parking, they're actually minimums for bed and breakfast in the UDO, but in complying with
[51:05] state statute that will remove parking minimums come January 1st, 2027. The applicants have
[51:10] been working with me to go ahead and just get rid of that. So for each land use, bed and breakfast,
[51:14] up to 12 vehicles part there, right in that orange area around the house. You can see the swimming pool
[51:20] on your screen right next to the house. And that would also allow for them to go up to 12 rooms if
[51:24] they ever wanted. And then staff is grateful that they have revised to go down to 60 parking spaces
[51:30] for the special home events. There's a condition that talks about access, just what I mentioned with the
[51:35] the DOT, making sure that's never a future issue.
[51:38] And then I encourage that the applicants
[51:41] add the standards that are already in chapter five
[51:43] of our radio.
[51:45] Those are standards that cannot be
[51:46] flexed or modified with conditional zoning.
[51:49] Maybe a little bit redundant, but when
[51:52] and if there's ever a complaint or a question
[51:55] about what can be built, the first document that a planner
[51:58] is going to pull is going to be that list of conditions.
[52:00] It's essentially their covenants and restrictions, right?
[52:02] So, I thought that including about half a page is that everything else that's required
[52:07] would make it nice and tidy for us, doesn't add that much length, and that way if anything
[52:11] ever changes in our video, we know exactly what the bed and breakfast standards and these
[52:15] special event standards are.
[52:17] So, query at this point.
[52:19] You say chapter five says 80 gas, and you said 60 gas.
[52:24] 60 vehicles, ma'am.
[52:26] 60 vehicles, but there is 80 gas.
[52:28] Correct.
[52:29] Okay.
[52:29] All right.
[52:30] Thank you. And the applicants cannot request more because the provision to request more isn't in Chapter 5 of our UDO.
[52:36] So, 80 guests. And did you say that events would not, can we go back to the map with the events would not take place and the area where the manner is in the actual house because of fire code concerns.
[52:51] The applicants that originally reached out to our fire department about using their
[52:55] port to Shea like the right right as you know having wedding pictures and things taken under it but fire
[53:01] code says no so if there is an event explain to me if there is an event with 80 people what
[53:10] give me a colored area where that takes place is it take place in the orange area just outside of
[53:14] the main house is that what's happening yes man they have to stay away from the house okay in the
[53:19] You got it.
[53:20] And the fire code on the manner is how many?
[53:23] There actually isn't an occupancy as far as people goes, because it's not at the full
[53:29] commercial code, I say a hotel, but they're proposing seven rooms and they could have up
[53:33] to 12 guest rooms, and that's what's regulated, number of rooms.
[53:38] And 12 parking spaces.
[53:39] With no regulation for a number of people in the room.
[53:42] Technically not.
[53:43] So the UDO says number of guests is the heading and an under number of guests, it talks about the number of rooms.
[53:52] So there's a bit of a thing there.
[53:54] I did bring this up with the fire marshal and said, hey, there's no capacity on the number of people.
[53:58] Does that concern you and your department for safety reasons?
[54:01] And at this time, it did not.
[54:04] Might that be something to look toward in regard to just clarity within the UDO?
[54:08] Not specifically to this case.
[54:10] but might that be something that we want to address as far as just the UDO in general?
[54:15] I think that's a fair ask. Yeah. I would be interested in making sure we all know the rules of the
[54:20] game and noted that we're basically doing a cleanup here later tonight on UDO. So if we could add
[54:27] that to the cleanup list, that'd be great. No, no, we can't. No, I mean, not tonight. Oh,
[54:33] future. That would be some pretty remarkable turnaround. No. I'm not asking.
[54:46] Yes.
[54:48] We want to do some research on that.
[54:53] Right. In terms of how
[55:10] we do it in a room. Right.
[55:12] See that I carefully. I'm not sure about that. It's only going to be an appropriate tool
[55:17] to regulate.
[55:21] Okay. Well, I would be really interested to have you look into that.
[55:24] I would like for you to think spring break. I would like for you to think 14 people.
[55:33] 14 people in the motel room, you were once young, as was I.
[55:39] So the concern is you just want to make sure there aren't too many people.
[55:43] Yeah, I would like for it to not become a party room.
[55:46] And I would think that the owners would not let that happen.
[55:49] But I also think that would be really nice to have that clarity within the UDO.
[55:54] And I understand you're concerned about family.
[55:59] If it's a family of five and you have a restriction of four people, then do you leave a child in the hallway now?
[56:08] Right.
[56:09] There's
[56:22] research in any public or work session.
[56:24] And I would look so forward to your information.
[56:28] Thank you.
[56:29] I will add to that conversation that the parking for the actual manner is limited to 12.
[56:35] And so if they have more guests than that and that parking goes into the blue area, it's technically violation of the zoning.
[56:42] because that blue area is for special home events.
[56:44] Okay, my other following question is about the 40-foot height,
[56:48] which we believe perhaps is building that already exists is 40 feet.
[56:52] We don't know.
[56:53] It's 38 to possibly 40.
[56:56] Is that right?
[56:57] That is according to the applicants themselves, yes, ma'am.
[56:59] Okay.
[57:00] And so are we are we allowing other structures to be built within that 40 feet?
[57:09] And what exactly what are we accomplishing with the 40 foot the default for
[57:14] anything that is newly built. Without the zoning would be 35 feet they're
[57:19] asking for an additional five so that if something else were to be added on
[57:22] per se it would match the height of the existing structure. So what do you mean by
[57:27] something else would be added on to the original to the original manner to the
[57:31] original manner or a special home events sensor if you will maybe like a
[57:37] ballroom. None of that has been proposed at this time by the applicants. So we're trying
[57:43] to mitigate how and what would regulate them building down the line. There was one square
[57:48] that said potential future, but it was a small square. It is in your staff report good
[57:54] catch. It is actually for a cottage that's about right here. And the applicants are considering
[58:00] using that as maybe a bridal suite or something similar at a later date.
[58:03] But if they build a ballroom or something that is large on this property, and we have
[58:10] already re-zoned it CZ, is there a process that will go through at which point you all
[58:18] say, well, that's too much, or I guess what is allowed by right once we go through this
[58:24] conditional zoning?
[58:27] The process would follow our standard site plan review process and our architectural compliance.
[58:32] as far as what triggers too much, I think staff would look closely at the scope of what they're proposing and if it's first subordinate to the land uses, that's one thing can't be an arcade, right?
[58:44] That's not in here, but would we say that a gathering space for weddings is a part of special events? I think staff would say yes.
[58:53] And then we would look into making sure that that complies.
[58:55] I think it's still be limited to the 80 people accessing the CZ zoning we're doing tonight like even if they build a massive ballroom
[59:01] They're still limited to 80 people unless they change the zoning is that correct?
[59:06] Not quite 80 is a limit from chapter five so they cannot request a change the only authority that can make
[59:12] The limit of 80 deaths for special moments a hundred is you all with the text of the minute which is not proposed at this time
[59:20] So is there a disadvantage to
[59:22] So, maintaining the 35-foot height limitation with the exception of the possible already existing height of the mana.
[59:33] The great question, the already existing height would be if anything, maybe a non-conformative grandfathered in, right?
[59:41] Right.
[59:41] So, I will let the applicant speak since they are here this evening and I'll see their comfort with the height, because they have given me additional comments that might inform your decision.
[59:50] Thank you.
[59:52] I think I definitely have questions for applicants when we get there.
[59:59] Otherwise, I-
[1:00:00] I promised you some review on buffering and landscaping. This is not to scale, but it's pretty darn close because I drew it myself to help. The applicant's actually supplied all other images and have worked very closely with staff to make all of that happen. And you can tell that their work is much more superior than my ability to draw on a map. So not to scale, but just to give you an idea. The dark green 50 foot buffer, no changes there. That would be what staff determines would be the default. And again, nothing is being proposed at this time.
[1:00:29] that also influences a bit of why the buffers are what they are.
[1:00:33] The green that goes around most of the site, the light green 25 feet, all of these buffers
[1:00:36] mind you, undisturbed. The biggest ask is for the existing parking area.
[1:00:42] The proposal is to go down to 20 feet adjacent to U.S.1 right there
[1:00:47] and five feet on this side. I'll note a couple things about that. How is this area to find without a
[1:00:51] leap? Well, this area is existing and it's being used for horses at the moment. It's dirt
[1:00:56] and it is bound by gravel on this side and on this side so that area that is bound would not be
[1:01:02] able to expand upon staff's review. This would be the smallest buffer at five feet. It is adjacent to a
[1:01:09] commercial property that is owned general business conditionals owning district. As a default, if that
[1:01:16] adjacent property was not a conditional zoning district, general business may not have the same
[1:01:22] offering requirements. All of this is done to allow for something that's already there
[1:01:29] without expanding it, if that makes sense. The applicants have agreed to not touch anything
[1:01:34] within these colored areas, and that is their concept of mitigating concerns on neighboring
[1:01:40] properties.
[1:01:45] Landscaping conditions would essentially follow and say that the buffers aren't touched,
[1:01:50] that everything around that perimeter is kept nice and clean. That's the short hand.
[1:01:54] And someone owns the land on the other side of that five-foot buffer.
[1:01:59] Correct.
[1:02:00] And if the person on the other side of that five-foot buffer builds all way up against their land, five feet son-a-lot.
[1:02:07] Right.
[1:02:07] If they build up against their land is he.
[1:02:12] Also present this evening we're very lucky we have the applicants and the adjacent property owners, so I might have to defer some.
[1:02:17] Okay.
[1:02:18] Yes.
[1:02:21] I'll just go through criteria A and B, criteria A and A and B, can I prefer that?
[1:02:25] Just a cliff notes version, if you will, consistency with the comprehensive plan, our plan
[1:02:29] explicitly calls for reinvesting in existing properties, some form of infill in its own
[1:02:34] right, if you will, especially as sort properties.
[1:02:38] And then place-based tourism is spelled out within our comprehensive plan.
[1:02:41] And staff believes that this proposal would do both of those, revitalizing a former business
[1:02:45] from 110 years ago as a bed and breakfast and then I also wanted to highlight adverse impacts.
[1:02:52] It is staff's belief that the parking area and that blue while limited to 20 events per year is negligible and a maximum of 80 guests.
[1:03:04] If this were around the clock for commercial business, I think we would be having a very different conversation but it is staff's perspective because these are limited to 20 times a year.
[1:03:13] The risk is much smaller.
[1:03:15] Staff find the proposal be consistent with all of the other criteria for reasons listed
[1:03:22] in your staff report.
[1:03:24] I do want to know really quickly since this is legislative that the first inquiry came
[1:03:28] about a year ago to me and the applicants have since worked tirelessly to attempt to mitigate
[1:03:35] as many concerns as they possibly could.
[1:03:38] I have had very few applicants that have come back to me with a list of conditions saying
[1:03:43] how about now? And I take a look and I grade the homework if you will. And then a week later,
[1:03:47] how about now? And we have done that over the course of many, many months. So this list of
[1:03:51] conditions is not something submitted to you last week. The planning just looks at. It has been
[1:03:55] in progress for a very long time. If it your discretion in each week, that's one thing. But I'm
[1:04:02] very grateful to work with Tristan and her husband Nick to make this happen.
[1:04:07] and to bring you something that's ideally not sloppy.
[1:04:11] They have set the gold stars to what planning staff can expect from applicants and communicating
[1:04:16] with us, being transparent and allowing us to visit the site and just work on this.
[1:04:21] That's the standard.
[1:04:25] It is for the reasons of consistency that staff ultimately recommend approval of the conditional
[1:04:30] zoning district that would allow for three land uses.
[1:04:32] is, as is, I will let the applicants answer any questions as well as perhaps the adjacent
[1:04:39] property owner. I'll let them come up with this. Before you sit down, let me just make
[1:04:43] sure this council have questions from us from Attics right now. Okay, thank you. We'll
[1:04:49] pull you back up if we have more. Yes, please, ma'am. Yes, please.
[1:04:58] Good evening, council.
[1:05:00] Good evening. Would you guys like to introduce yourselves? Yes, I'm Tristan and this is my
[1:05:03] has been Nick. Nick Williams, pleasure to meet you. We are a long time residents. Army
[1:05:08] brought us here. So Nick is still in. I'm a veteran. And between us we've been here
[1:05:12] probably over to well over 20 years. Yeah, well, over 20. Thank you. Absolutely. So I know
[1:05:19] I have some questions. Do you all have questions for the applicant? Okay, start wherever you would like.
[1:05:25] Go ahead. Yeah, I guess I'll be first. My question is in the past when Ben breakfast
[1:05:32] to ask us come up, neighbors have been very vocal against it.
[1:05:37] I know you got a commercial aspect inside of it, but I do see
[1:05:40] Tin and Root or the other, there are like house houses around the property.
[1:05:44] Have you had communications with those surrounding neighbors
[1:05:47] as far as their, have they been notified?
[1:05:49] Have you talked to them, or what's that interaction that I'm like?
[1:05:52] Yes, so as part of the process, they were all notified.
[1:05:54] They received letters in the mail inviting them to the public hearing for
[1:05:58] the planning board and also this meeting.
[1:05:59] And so we did have a couple of neighbors show up to the planning board meeting, one just
[1:06:03] had some concerns about traffic and noise, which is exactly what we expected.
[1:06:07] Neighbors would think, and I do think we were able to sort of mitigate those concerns
[1:06:11] for him.
[1:06:11] He's not good tonight, so.
[1:06:14] And then our other neighbor, the Long Streets, who on that general, it's the general business,
[1:06:20] commercial, sorry, who is it?
[1:06:21] Conditional districts, yes, which is directly adjacent our supporters, which is great.
[1:06:27] So, we haven't really had any, it doesn't seem like we have any outstanding issues that haven't been able to be resolved from neighbors.
[1:06:34] Was that something that was posted and the letters sent?
[1:06:40] Yes.
[1:06:40] Okay.
[1:06:42] How did you address the traffic concerns?
[1:06:45] So, the egress on the highway one was our main proposal for that, which are understandings that we will have to obtain a driveway permit
[1:06:52] if a DOT doesn't see any obstacles to that.
[1:06:54] So at night, when people are going to be, you know,
[1:06:57] driving out with their headlights on,
[1:06:58] rather than driving through the neighborhood,
[1:06:59] they can just go straight on to the highway.
[1:07:01] That's our vision for it.
[1:07:03] And then, of course, the ordinance also
[1:07:06] just regulates the number of guests,
[1:07:08] and then we have proposed that condition
[1:07:09] for limiting the number of vehicles.
[1:07:12] And at some point, if DOT says you cannot access U.S.1,
[1:07:20] is there a chance that that happens?
[1:07:22] There is and there is a condition in place that the applicants have added following the
[1:07:26] planning board, which essentially says whatever the DOC, the DOT says goes.
[1:07:30] So if US1 is now too much, then you have to go up through Skyline Manor Road and onto
[1:07:36] Valley View to exit.
[1:07:39] Yeah, which I had a quick question.
[1:07:45] My good May.
[1:07:47] I know if you wanted to follow up.
[1:07:48] Go ahead, no, go ahead.
[1:07:49] For what I'm understanding right now,
[1:07:53] right now you can have 80 guests,
[1:07:55] but all 80 can't go into the manner.
[1:07:57] Correct.
[1:07:57] So right now it stands, everything's an outside event.
[1:08:01] Yes, that's correct.
[1:08:02] And you foresee that unfolding for quite some time,
[1:08:07] and that's why we're looking for 60 parking spots
[1:08:10] in the horse-go-around.
[1:08:12] That's all correct.
[1:08:13] Yes, so the only people that could go inside the manner
[1:08:16] would be any overnight guests.
[1:08:18] So like, you know, maxing out with seven rooms,
[1:08:19] seven rooms worth of guests. The other guests would have to be in tents, tables, and chairs on the
[1:08:25] lawn with outside restroom facilities. So it would probably be one of those like port-of-pilot
[1:08:30] party trailers that you can rent. So and I'm just I'm trying to go through the the types of events
[1:08:36] that would be held here. So we were talking like outdoor I'm not talking Metallica like outdoor
[1:08:44] concerts and things of that nature. I just wanted to clear that you know obviously some sort of family
[1:08:51] events that would be like that and then hopefully down the road you'll look into transition
[1:08:54] to where you could bring in. I think I saw somewhere here like weddings and things of that nature
[1:09:00] or bridal things around bridal showers and things. I never went to a bridal shower. I'm just
[1:09:06] you know right off the bat. That's correct. That's correct. Yes. And so that only brings me
[1:09:11] my only concern because I think it's a great idea. Love the fact that you're remodeling some
[1:09:16] history or you're reusing history. I'm kind of a history nerd and I'm proud of it. But
[1:09:24] as you grow and as things get bigger, I think that's where we get back to, you know,
[1:09:29] ensuring that we're wire tight on the sides of the scope of the buildings and what your growth looks
[1:09:33] like. And I'm not here to tell you how that's going to look and go, but I think that's the only
[1:09:37] concern I would have is how did you you know because I want you to be extremely successful
[1:09:42] my honest with you sorry to put you off no you did not I needed to be cut off good I'll ramble
[1:09:48] my understanding is that the conditions set forth by the zoning by the um special home events
[1:09:54] ordinance they will not change even if we like decide that we want to and again we don't have any
[1:10:00] plans to do this but hypothetically speaking if we were to put in a ballroom or something um nothing
[1:10:06] on here would change. It would still be limited to 80 guests. We would still be bound by 60 vehicles.
[1:10:10] There would still be no, you know, and fun music a lot outside. And honestly, Metallica's not going
[1:10:15] to come to play for 80 people anyway, so I think we're safe. Thank you. And to really put a,
[1:10:20] you know, a finer point on it, you know, what our vision is, we've already executed. We got
[1:10:24] many. We had our wedding there. We got Mary. So what we have in our heads, we've done. And it works.
[1:10:29] It works. It works wonderful. Yeah. That's awesome. Thank you. Absolutely.
[1:10:36] Well, first of all, congratulations on your marriage.
[1:10:40] Secondly, thank you very much for your service in both cases.
[1:10:43] I really appreciate that.
[1:10:46] And next, as a woman who owns a 100-year-old house,
[1:10:50] I appreciate what you're doing.
[1:10:52] My two concerns are the 40-foot height.
[1:10:57] And I certainly don't want to ask you to shave off the top
[1:11:00] of the existing manor house, so we're not sure how tall it is, but I am interested in whether
[1:11:05] or not you do willing to abide by a 35-foot height restriction with the exception possibly
[1:11:10] of the manor house that we have an unknown height on.
[1:11:13] And I'm also concerned about the five-foot buffer, which is like for you to address the steps
[1:11:20] that you have moved through with that neighbor, the adjacent neighbor, who I think is here.
[1:11:34] So tell me that tell me that you're in science regarding business things. Yes, so the 40 foot height was basically similar to the architectural compliance is just to match the existing manner to the extent possible.
[1:11:45] We believe it's probably taller than 35 feet. We don't have a specific number on that. Yes, we would be willing to doubt that back down to the default standard.
[1:11:54] So you'd be willing to make that a 35-foot highway through extension.
[1:11:58] Yes.
[1:11:58] Okay, talk to me about the five-foot buffer and what I know you've jumped through some
[1:12:02] hoops in regard to that and you want to keep your width of your parking area in order to
[1:12:07] be able to accommodate the cars that you're entitled to have.
[1:12:10] So talk to me about your thought process.
[1:12:12] So that area, which you can see it's in the blue, is an existing pasture.
[1:12:16] So, it's dirt and grass and it is bounded on almost all sides by, you know, the typical wood
[1:12:23] and fencing that you see around a pasture.
[1:12:25] On that left-hand side, it is open other than, you know, there's some long-leaf fines there.
[1:12:30] But our exemptions that we're requesting are all to reflect the existing landscape, essentially.
[1:12:35] So, on U.S. one, there is a buffer.
[1:12:38] On the north side of that part of the land, there is a buffer and then just on that side
[1:12:43] with the gravel driveway, there's just not a significant existing buffer. So our thought is,
[1:12:50] again, just like Mason said, because it's going to be sort of a temporary or secondary use,
[1:12:56] whereas the horse training and jumping lessons will remain the primary use. It's sort of a risk
[1:13:01] trade-off, but we certainly aren't going to take out anything in that area. It's just a reflection
[1:13:07] of the existing situation. So really a 25 foot undisturbed buffer, nothing's there. So it's no
[1:13:15] difference. No, there is there is something there. So we're going to clear out something. No,
[1:13:19] we're not planning to clear anything. Okay. So and it's because each side is different and to
[1:13:23] reflect the pretty much we literally took a tape measure out and we measured what is the existing
[1:13:28] tree line here. Okay. So on that side that like dark blue, there is about 25, it's about 22.
[1:13:37] So
[1:13:37] and shrubs. On that north side, like the green, there is a pretty significant buffer there.
[1:13:44] It's just that light blue side that has a few trees, but especially towards the middle of the
[1:13:49] pasture, it's just more minimal.
[1:13:54] And so the buffer on US one would be mandated to be a 20-foot
[1:14:01] but you're telling me it's actually a 25.
[1:14:04] It's about 22, I'd say.
[1:14:06] But undisturbed buffer.
[1:14:08] Well, 22 current buffer.
[1:14:10] It's not a two current buffer, right?
[1:14:14] And talk to me about conversations
[1:14:16] with adjacent property owners who would share the land
[1:14:20] or would have the adjacent land right next to that five foot
[1:14:22] undisturbed buffer.
[1:14:24] Our neighbor from what he has told us
[1:14:26] is fine with the situation and has no plans
[1:14:28] to clear the land or take down any trees as well, but I don't want to speak for him.
[1:14:33] He is here.
[1:14:33] The neighbor is here on the scene.
[1:14:35] Yes.
[1:14:36] Our friends at the Long Streets.
[1:14:37] Yes.
[1:14:38] Okay.
[1:14:41] The way I see it is we're making decisions not just for you all and for the current neighbors
[1:14:46] is we're making a decision for the future of this property and whatever it's going to be.
[1:14:54] And I think that's where Miss Peterson and I are falling maybe a little bit uncomfortable
[1:14:59] with the 5.
[1:15:12] That's where, I feel like it's,
[1:15:16] I would probably prefer more than five feet on that one. Tell me, are you done? Sorry. Tell me in the parking area. Have you guys done some sort of a study as far as being able to get parking on both sides and having enough room to pay for the buyer?
[1:15:33] back up. I mean if you thought through all that, is that what's guiding part of what
[1:15:37] you're doing? Yes. And also, as far as the buffers that we're talking, it's what's
[1:15:41] actually there now. So we're planning this based upon the existing trees that are in
[1:15:46] the ground. So that's what my question earlier was undisturbed buffers the same as, I mean,
[1:15:51] it's a 50 foot undisturbed buffer because there's no buffer. Mason, I mean, if there's no
[1:15:56] trees and we call it undisturbed, they can't take down the trees that don't exist.
[1:16:00] Yes.
[1:16:00] I don't know what the difference is.
[1:16:02] Except doesn't it trigger a planting requirement if there's nothing there at certain points?
[1:16:07] I'm not under undisturbed.
[1:16:08] I don't know.
[1:16:10] Under this zoning it would not trigger planting requirements.
[1:16:12] I would not.
[1:16:13] Okay.
[1:16:13] There is significant amount of tree coverage within that dark green adjacent to US one.
[1:16:20] The applicant said that they are requesting buffers based on the widths of that which is
[1:16:24] already present.
[1:16:26] Okay.
[1:16:27] Mason, what is, this is a question I shouldn't know the answer to and I apologize that I don't, what is the highway overlay buffer that's required?
[1:16:37] 50 feet man. So they are choosing to comply with as much as possible with the exception of the parking area.
[1:16:44] I
[1:16:49] can make some real quick describe a few, if it were to remain strictly a horse facility
[1:16:57] and not parking, would the conversation be different and if so, what would that be?
[1:17:02] There would be a very different conversation, very question.
[1:17:05] The applicants would have to choose where if they would allocate that parking for special
[1:17:09] events otherwise.
[1:17:10] Okay.
[1:17:11] Yep.
[1:17:11] That's the quagmire where I got it.
[1:17:13] Thank you.
[1:17:13] A lot of this is driven by a desire to utilize something that is existing as cleared instead
[1:17:20] of clearing alternative space.
[1:17:22] Right.
[1:17:22] I appreciate that.
[1:17:24] I understand.
[1:17:28] So totally unrelated, probably a question for you, Mr. Parsons.
[1:17:34] In regard to highway overlay, which is a hot issue right now, other municipalities have
[1:17:41] of past resolutions in favor of maintaining the highway
[1:17:47] overlaid.
[1:17:48] Do you see, I mean, obviously, we have not.
[1:17:52] And we have not really discussed that.
[1:17:53] And that's something I would like for us to discuss
[1:17:54] in the future and totally irrelevant
[1:17:57] to what you're asking for tonight.
[1:18:00] Do you see us at a disadvantage if we
[1:18:02] approve something that it just requires a 20-foot
[1:18:06] undisturbed buffer along the highway
[1:18:08] as opposed to the 50-foot buffer that would be mandated by the highway overlay.
[1:18:14] I think in this instance, Councilman Peterson, Planner Maddox and staff have worked with
[1:18:22] the applicants and what we're really talking about is recognizing what is already in existence
[1:18:27] there.
[1:18:28] I think it was referenced earlier that if this were permanent parking, this would be a very
[1:18:34] different conversation.
[1:18:35] I don't think planning staff would have it in front of you where they recommendation to simply have that 20 foot buffer in that area if in fact the applicant we're looking to put a permanent parking lot there because it's simply parking during a very limited number of events throughout the year I don't think you are
[1:18:55] per se giving up anything relative to if your ultimate desire is to ask the county to maintain these buffers along the highway corridor because again they're not talking about
[1:19:05] putting permanent parking within that, I'll call it 30 feet in question, it's simply that it would
[1:19:11] be utilized during 20 periods, a maximum of 20 periods throughout the year. So I don't I don't
[1:19:17] think you're giving anything up there because it's currently already cleared. It's there's nothing
[1:19:23] there to disturb at this point in time. It's my understanding that the highway quarter overlay also
[1:19:28] you can put parking. And you can do a number of things within, yes. Yeah, this is really discussion
[1:19:34] of an undisturbed buffer which again just in general is recognizing what is already there,
[1:19:41] what is already planted. And as they said, they've been out with the tape measures on site.
[1:19:46] So I don't think this application really impacts that too much. And I think you bring up a very
[1:19:54] interesting point in that there's been some discussion at various meetings about those
[1:20:00] resolutions that may have come out of other jurisdictions and one of the real keys and
[1:20:06] there's been varying opinions on whether people should be asking the county to do certain
[1:20:13] things when we don't like them to come in and tell us how to run our planning jurisdictions.
[1:20:18] But this is one of those areas where, as you are aware, having been on council, ETJs are
[1:20:25] are constantly under attack or under question out of Raleigh.
[1:20:29] So this is an area that should the county forego, forego highway corridor standards,
[1:20:36] and suddenly we were to lose ETJ jurisdiction, a piece of property like this would come into
[1:20:44] play at that point, because it would defer to the county at that point, and the county
[1:20:48] wouldn't have a highway corridor in place.
[1:20:50] So I think it's a very valid question, and this is a perfect example of a property that we would have an interest in in the event we were to lose extra territorial jurisdictional authority, but this particular application, and I would offer that the planning staff's approach to it in working with the applicant.
[1:21:11] I don't think you're giving anything up here or should feel like you've somehow
[1:21:17] slated
[1:21:19] the highway corridor
[1:21:21] Concept because again
[1:21:36] So it's essentially
[1:21:38] Although it doesn't have it quite a time here, but it's using the Campbell House
[1:21:42] Long to park cars for the children
[1:21:44] Rather than right
[1:21:46] Right
[1:21:48] And I think everybody's on the same page as far as trying to protect that 20 foot
[1:21:53] Mr. Buffer, so this is the best safeguard we can do long-term, if the E.T.J. jurisdiction
[1:22:04] were to become under the thumb of the county.
[1:22:10] Makes sense.
[1:22:12] Whatever the county chooses ultimately to do with highway corridors would play a role here.
[1:22:17] Okay.
[1:22:18] Okay.
[1:22:18] I appreciate when I appreciate that you're trying to maintain the historic preservation.
[1:22:23] I also try to think 50 years ahead and make sure that we're all on the same page.
[1:22:30] I know that you're really making every effort to maintain what you have there and I also
[1:22:39] appreciate you're not paving over a parking lot.
[1:22:42] We definitely wanted to avoid that.
[1:22:44] Our judgment is not on you at all.
[1:22:45] It's you all are doing a great job.
[1:22:47] It's on the ordinance.
[1:22:47] Yeah, the zoning outlives all of us.
[1:22:50] I make perfect sense.
[1:22:51] Can I just ask two quick questions?
[1:22:52] And I think one's a meatball for the boss, man.
[1:22:56] Is there anything in our UDO's, regulations,
[1:22:59] or ordinances that allow us to safeguard historic sites like this,
[1:23:03] even though we don't market as a historic site?
[1:23:05] I mean, this is a building and a piece of private
[1:23:08] is over 100 years old.
[1:23:10] And it's not like they're trying to change the scope of the landscape.
[1:23:14] They're trying to maintain the exact landscape.
[1:23:16] That's my first question, and it leads to this, which is more important.
[1:23:21] And I'm by no means advocating for this.
[1:23:22] But if we just said no, stick to the buffer zone, stick to the ordinances, and we're not
[1:23:26] giving you an exception.
[1:23:28] What is the time?
[1:23:29] What would be the reasonable timeline to go back to the citizens of our county and go, hey,
[1:23:33] ma'am, sir, we need you to plant, you know, 750 trees to fill out this buffer.
[1:23:39] And so, just in the, my conscience tells me, what is the smart decision is, how do we safeguard the property, how do we safeguard the town, and how do we keep those that want to get into our business out of it? Does that make sense?
[1:23:55] I think so along the lines of your first question, I don't know that there's anything per say to safeguard depending on what it is you are trying to guard against.
[1:24:07] I mean the application is in front of you because you have applicants looking to do something I'll call it different with the property.
[1:24:15] In this case, interestingly enough, that different thing is actually a return to its original
[1:24:21] use.
[1:24:22] But, I mean, if not for that, if they were simply going to live in it as a single
[1:24:26] family home and continue to run horses on the back acreage and all the things that are
[1:24:31] currently occurring there, there's no reason this would be in front of you, which is to
[1:24:37] say it's safeguarded from current zoning because they would be allowed to continue to utilize
[1:24:43] the property as they purchased it eight years ago and as they you know operate it today.
[1:24:51] At the same time, if by safeguard you mean, is there anything in the code that says they couldn't
[1:24:57] go out and get forbid pulled bulldoze the home or something along those lines? No, there's nothing
[1:25:03] in the code about that. So it depends on how I interpret your question as to whether a safeguard
[1:25:09] or not, but it is safeguarded from the standpoint of they can continue to utilize it as they
[1:25:15] purchased it and as they have up to this point because they're wanting to do something different
[1:25:19] as why they are in front of you and why are we why we are talking about the history and
[1:25:24] looking at these conditions.
[1:25:32] I have a question about, and I'm not sure if this is going to be a good idea, but I
[1:25:38] for the applicant or for staff if they build something else on this property are they're set back
[1:25:44] requirements because I think I would care more about how close it is to the neighbors than I
[1:25:49] would the height or even even the buffer per say because if it's right up against the the property
[1:25:56] line for new building it's going to be more I don't know overbearing on neighbors. Yes there are and
[1:26:05] applicants are proposing keeping them exactly as the default would be within highway corridor,
[1:26:09] which depends on the side. But I believe it's 75 feet from US one and a great distance on the
[1:26:16] other sides. I might have to have the check for me. Pretty much keeping new development in the middle
[1:26:21] of the property. Okay. And so for the applicants there are the map that's up right now.
[1:26:29] You've got your little hash outlines about where things are going to go. And then there's
[1:26:33] one piece of land on the top left corner,
[1:26:35] it's completely empty and then a line
[1:26:37] through the middle that's empty as well.
[1:26:40] Are there, do you all have proposals
[1:26:43] for what's going to be, what that land will be used for
[1:26:46] or is that a side for potential future build?
[1:26:50] Another currently being used to house horses.
[1:26:53] Well, I think she's talking about like in between.
[1:26:55] Well, the stuff that is not good.
[1:26:57] Our vision is that those are essentially unused.
[1:26:59] So that gives a little bit of extra space
[1:27:01] from, you know, the neighborhood to where people are having their events. And then that other space,
[1:27:05] the one that's sort of like in between the yellow red and orange, that is right next to the
[1:27:11] horse pastures. And for people that are on the property for lodging or special home events, we do
[1:27:16] not want them going near really the horse pastures, you know, for like risk purposes. And so no one gets
[1:27:20] hurt. So that's just, that's sort of like our own internally decided little buffer between those
[1:27:26] areas. Okay. Pretty just said, later on, after these folks have finished, and we're like 50 years
[1:27:33] away, somebody acquires it, only wants the special use. It's not doing anything with courses. They
[1:27:39] would be held to some default standards as to any new builds with those default buffers as you
[1:27:46] mentioned. Correct. Okay. Tell me about who owns this property that's on the left side. That is
[1:27:54] also owned by Nick it's what it's oh okay so you all are not bothered by
[1:27:59] yourselves as neighbors so it was sold to him as one transaction both of the
[1:28:04] two properties okay back in 2016 so okay so I would love to hear from the
[1:28:13] long streets number one and number two I would be interested in maintaining the
[1:28:16] 35-foot height and other than that kudos great yeah I think
[1:28:23] We'll do that.
[1:28:23] I'll do that.
[1:28:24] We'll do that.
[1:28:25] Sounds great.
[1:28:26] All right.
[1:28:27] Do you have a number on setback from the interior line?
[1:28:33] Yeah, in the highway yard.
[1:28:34] It's going to be 75 foot from the highway.
[1:28:36] And then from the general business zone.
[1:28:38] It's 50 feet on the side, 25 in residential properties.
[1:28:42] 25 in residential properties?
[1:28:43] Yes, ma'am.
[1:28:47] I also put
[1:28:50] right here.
[1:28:55] I was hoping before staff has done to add two small points
[1:29:00] that I was thinking of.
[1:29:01] But there was a conversation earlier about if new structures come on or anything like that,
[1:29:06] those structures will still have to fall under only one of the three uses it's allowed
[1:29:11] in under this conditional zoning.
[1:29:12] So that structure would have to be part of the bed and breakfast in, part of the horse farm
[1:29:15] or part of the special home events, just to not lose sight of that.
[1:29:20] And then that made me think we actually have an example of how we've administered something
[1:29:24] very similar to this over time, which has done Craig Manor.
[1:29:26] When Duncreg Manor came in, it was the original developer, the Nacemus.
[1:29:31] They came in and at that time it was a special use permit that they got approved and they had a number of things very specifically listed for a site plan, very specifically listed for a use.
[1:29:40] Even so much similar that the Duncreg Manor main home cannot be used as a gathering place during special home events.
[1:29:47] They have to do it outside under tents and that has come up over time.
[1:29:51] And then Duncreg Manor was sold to some new owners.
[1:29:53] And we've had a number of interactions with them about changes they want to make and whether it's allowed into the special use permit
[1:29:58] So for example
[1:30:00] In February of last year, they inquired about building a pavilion. And ultimately, it was determined
[1:30:04] that a small pavilion outdoors in a certain location was consistent with the authorized use,
[1:30:09] so they were allowed to do that. They called and asked about ticketing of events, and
[1:30:13] we didn't find anything in the UDO that forbid them, as long as the number of attendees did
[1:30:18] not exceed 80. So we allowed that. But then they also came in and asked about some very aggressive
[1:30:24] of fencing, and that was not allowed because the UDO has fencing requirements, there wasn't
[1:30:29] anything special in the special use permit, so they had to meet that.
[1:30:32] So that's how these kind of play out over time with new owners might call and ask questions
[1:30:36] because they're aware the only reason that's entitled is from that process, the only reason
[1:30:40] they can do it.
[1:30:46] The only other thing I wanted to say is thank you for working so closely with the planning
[1:30:51] department, and as Mason said, doing the homework fully appreciate it.
[1:30:56] It's been very mutual as well.
[1:30:57] We're very grateful for Mason.
[1:30:58] It's been a great point in the department and obviously you've been great to work with.
[1:31:03] So thank you.
[1:31:04] Thank you.
[1:31:05] All right.
[1:31:06] Thank you.
[1:31:07] Thank you.
[1:31:16] Council, if you allow me to add one last little thing just for your awareness.
[1:31:22] New construction in particular has to abide by our welfare standards and staff does not compromise
[1:31:28] those under any circumstance.
[1:31:30] I mean, we don't get to be tree city while those are getting adjusted, but I believe manager
[1:31:34] person summarized everything that I have portrayed to you perfectly as far as utilizing something
[1:31:39] existing goes. So just the one off for something that's there is a lot harder to navigate than
[1:31:45] something that's being built and anything being built 50 feet above room or I'm going home.
[1:31:51] So it's 50 feet above room on the residential side.
[1:31:55] From US one.
[1:31:56] From US one.
[1:31:57] It's only 25 from residential side.
[1:31:59] I think I explained that very poorly in my reading of this chart, so I need to apologize.
[1:32:04] No, it's from a residential zone, it's 50 feet from the GBCD is 25.
[1:32:10] So less of a buffer is required from the general business zone right there, and
[1:32:13] then more buffer from the residential properties.
[1:32:16] Okay, so it's the larger, the 50 foot from the residential properties.
[1:32:20] Yes.
[1:32:20] Okay, thank you.
[1:32:21] I feel better about that.
[1:32:22] Okay.
[1:32:24] And I think Mr. Longstreet is here.
[1:32:26] We were able to hear from him.
[1:32:29] I'd appreciate that.
[1:32:30] Hello at all.
[1:32:33] As I said at the planning board, my wife and I are fully
[1:32:36] behind their plans.
[1:32:37] We think it's a great thing to take the historical building
[1:32:41] and reestablish it after all these years.
[1:32:45] One thing I will say is where they have the horse training
[1:32:47] and where the lift parking would be.
[1:32:51] That is actually right now zoned RS3.
[1:32:54] We were, God forbid, they put those shoebox houses along in there.
[1:32:58] I would be, I'd be just paul'd at that.
[1:33:00] I mean, I couldn't, wouldn't be able to live with that.
[1:33:04] So I'm perfectly happy with that five foot buffer.
[1:33:08] It'll look exactly like it does right now.
[1:33:10] Their driveway goes out through there and their training horses and stuff.
[1:33:14] So we have no issues with it at all.
[1:33:17] As a general contractor, I have to look at, it's a wonderful use where they're not creating
[1:33:22] a lot of impervious places and going to cause a lot of runoff and those problems it's a great
[1:33:28] reuse of what's already there and then like we own Windritch Gardens next door and we own the
[1:33:34] property we live on that buts it as well and thank you just a wonderful idea.
[1:33:42] I have one quick question since you're up there. The amount on the issue was yeah potential
[1:33:48] neighbor complaints they've noticed that planning board happened this has happened and the fact
[1:33:54] that you know you're the only neighbors that have come and spoken and you're in favor of it
[1:33:58] to your knowledge no other neighbors have grumbled or said anything adverse to this plan.
[1:34:03] Now with the planning board there was the one neighbor who was just concerned about the traffic
[1:34:08] and noise and that was taking care of and after we walked out with him and he was happy with it and
[1:34:15] all excited about it. And my wife's son lives in the neighborhood. They're happy about it,
[1:34:22] so they live right on the corner of Tannen and Skyline Manor. And there's been no
[1:34:29] scuttle but in the neighborhood. Thank you for confirming that. I appreciate it.
[1:34:38] I think this is just for planning, maybe. I was thinking about that five foot buffer too.
[1:34:47] If someone came along and they didn't own horses, what will we do in terms of that buffer?
[1:34:56] If we wanted to have, would we be able to say let's increase it from the five foot underserved?
[1:35:03] You know what Saddle talked about?
[1:35:06] Was I clear? I don't know. I'm a little congested all of a sudden, but yeah.
[1:35:17] Yeah, exactly because I guess five foot right now works because the force jumping is it? Yeah, that's what I heard so
[1:35:25] It's
[1:35:38] a new owner couldn't pave it or build on it or
[1:35:44] Do something right up again to the five foot buffer
[1:36:02] Thank you
[1:36:03] Council do you have other questions for the applicant or staff?
[1:36:05] All
[1:36:08] right, is there a motion?
[1:36:12] We'll close the hearing.
[1:36:12] Oh, yes.
[1:36:14] Is a public hearing.
[1:36:17] So I'll open the floor for public comments.
[1:36:19] Anyone who would like to participate in the public hearing?
[1:36:25] Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.
[1:36:27] Now is there a motion?
[1:36:29] Yes.
[1:36:31] I'll make a motion that after reviewing the proposed conditional zoning district
[1:36:36] after considering the criteria for approval of zoning map amendments found in
[1:36:40] Section 2.17.9, that the proposed amendment to the town of Southern pound zoning map is reasonable
[1:36:45] in the public interest and consistent with criteria set forth in the town of Southern
[1:36:49] pound's UDO, Section 2.17.9.
[1:36:52] Is there a second?
[1:36:54] I was interested in the condition of 35 feet instead of 40 and where the council stood on
[1:37:01] that.
[1:37:03] I'm okay with the flexibility of 40 as long as it's not right against the property.
[1:37:07] Okay.
[1:37:07] Well, where's everybody else?
[1:37:09] Yeah, when I, uh, when, uh,
[1:37:13] Claire and Maddox first mentioned that he said he wasn't sure if it was 35.
[1:37:17] If the height was 35 or if it was somewhere between 35 and 40.
[1:37:21] So yeah, I'm all right with.
[1:37:23] Well, I mean, that would be the exception of the manner.
[1:37:27] But otherwise new buildings on the property will have new buildings.
[1:37:31] So I'm talking about if a new building is there that we restrict that to 35,
[1:37:34] which is, otherwise I think we said a dangerous precedent.
[1:37:37] I think, yeah, I think that's already established.
[1:37:40] Am I right?
[1:37:41] I can also discuss it that we don't set precedence
[1:37:44] with the conditional zoning, but I'm open
[1:37:48] to hearing everyone's thoughts.
[1:37:49] What is the default for the neighbors, for that land?
[1:37:53] What would it be?
[1:37:55] Thirty five.
[1:37:55] With exceptions, generally, 35 feet.
[1:38:02] And I think consistency with the neighbors is important.
[1:38:06] So that would be the only condition that I would like to alter and they've indicated they're
[1:38:12] okay with altering that condition.
[1:38:15] Obviously, the manor house, I don't want to, like I said, I don't want to shave the top
[1:38:17] off the manor house if it ends up to this 40 feet, but for new buildings, I would like for
[1:38:24] that to be restricted to 35 feet rather than 40.
[1:38:27] But if the manor is 40 feet, then consistency would be 40 feet, right?
[1:38:33] Now if the manor is 40 feet, the manor is 40 feet, there's, again, I don't want to knock down 5 feet of the manor, but for new builds, I would like for the building height to be restricted to 35 feet.
[1:38:48] Councillor, where does every else fall on this on the height? Do you feel like it needs to come down to the 35, or are you okay with the condition set at 40?
[1:38:57] You mentioned a keyboard when you said consistency, if the man is 40 feet that's going to make
[1:39:06] it stand out amongst any other new development on the property and I don't know if I
[1:39:14] want to restrict the owners to that kind of book so I'm willing to go 40 if the man
[1:39:23] 40 feet that are willing to say any other development on that property should
[1:39:29] can go up as high as 40 feet. Not above it, but of course. And if your
[1:39:33] concern is consistency in the rest of the neighbors are held to 35, you have no
[1:39:36] problem with that. That's also what our staff has gone through this and made the
[1:39:40] recommendation of 40. So I think part of it's also supporting the work that they've
[1:39:47] put into it. I was member Curtin, do you have thoughts? Yeah, I mean I'm definitely
[1:39:53] because I feel that if we were to treat this as a standalone campus, I think for aesthetics
[1:40:05] and what a community would be looking for, I could definitely get behind the 40.
[1:40:09] I understand what mis-counselman Peterson's top concerns are set in the slippery, slow
[1:40:16] press since.
[1:40:17] But I think in this situation, I think 40 for me would be okay, just so that it would
[1:40:22] look consistent with the rest of the property and I think that level of aesthetics and consistency
[1:40:30] would really bring more people to their establishment and that really brings a little bit a lot more
[1:40:36] people to the community. So I'm kind of good with it in this situation, man, with the 48. I know it's
[1:40:41] kind of what I normally say, but I think it's good. It's funny. It's only five feet, so it feels like we're
[1:40:50] We're just, you know, cutting hairs here, but it's also, I feel like when you're building something,
[1:41:00] having ability to go a couple of feet higher versus restricting high, I mean, especially on an
[1:41:08] event space, I would not want, I'm not a big fan of ceiling height being lower than necessary, but
[1:41:14] But I think the big thing, man, though, it's not a new bill.
[1:41:19] It's not like we're starting from Jump Street, and we can say, hey, the entire campus
[1:41:23] needs to be at 35 or 38 or 40.
[1:41:26] We're looking at an established infrastructure, and that's why I feel comfortable making the
[1:41:32] decision tonight that I'm making as opposed to, if you were asking me as a new bill, I would
[1:41:37] say, I'd like to stand firm at 35, but in this case, I think it's a little different
[1:41:40] from me.
[1:41:42] Thank you.
[1:41:45] Okay, either way. I'll see both sides, but in this situation every season is unique as
[1:41:51] somebody said, so we're not setting any standards to be duplicated anywhere else, but for this,
[1:41:57] I'm okay with the 40. Okay, so a motion stands, the original motion that's in our
[1:42:04] in our packets, is there a second to that motion? All those in favor vote by saying aye.
[1:42:10] I. I. Any opposed motion carries and then a second part of that to look that one therefore I will make a motion to approve
[1:42:18] Z-04-26 with the conditions as we read you tonight at the September 8th Council meeting for the rule residential is a conditional zoning district
[1:42:28] Zero seconds. I second all those in favor. All right any opposed motion carries
[1:42:36] Thank you, guys, for all the work staff and the applicants for the work you put into
[1:42:40] that application.
[1:42:41] When you, from our perspective, when you see that many conditions come across before
[1:42:46] it comes to us, you can tell there's a lot of work put into it, so we appreciate the effort
[1:42:50] put in.
[1:42:53] Could we please take a break?
[1:42:56] Yep, it is 7.32, according to that clock, let's come back at 7.40.
[1:53:44] Public hearing, the UDO text amendments, the first one, o, a, dash, o, three, dash, two, six. All right. Good evening, everyone. James Bragg with the Foreign Department. And yes, this is that UDO cleanup package text amendments we mentioned earlier. And we do these every so often. We'll propose amendments. We'll just give the UDO is up to date, accurate, legally defensible, and efficient as possible. Because an important part of our job is to really make sure that UDO states
[1:54:14] Everyone says confident in it and that it is a document that we can all live by.
[1:54:19] And tonight's amendments range through nine topics and those nine topics clarify three
[1:54:28] administrative processes, correct three discrepancies with North Carolina General Statute
[1:54:34] and correct four older UDO vestiges and inaccuracies.
[1:54:38] It's a lot of detail, so feel free to stop at my point in time if you have any questions.
[1:54:42] And also, as I'm going through each one, I've got the slide up of the UDF section just
[1:54:48] so the audience can follow along with where we are in your last packet.
[1:54:51] I don't need to actually read it just more for their reference.
[1:54:53] Thank you.
[1:54:54] So the first one is about the site plan and engineering plan review process with the technical
[1:55:00] review committee, and more specifically when an applicant proposes changes after a plan
[1:55:06] has already been submitted.
[1:55:08] Right now that language says that anything no matter how minor, if there's a change following the approved plan set, it has to go back through the entire process.
[1:55:18] That might be something as small as the sewer line needs to be five feet this way.
[1:55:23] Hey, the landscaping contractor can't get the species of tree.
[1:55:26] Can we do this species of tree or fire truck turn radius is going to change just a little bit because we're moving the driveway a little bit down the street.
[1:55:34] Anything like that has to go through the entire TRC review process.
[1:55:39] We find that is a bit cumbersome on staff time as well as the applicants.
[1:55:44] And there are many instances where it makes a lot of sense to grab what the change is
[1:55:49] and provide it to the department, the individual from that department, to review and then add
[1:55:54] the adjusted shoot from there.
[1:55:58] So that's what these changes do.
[1:55:59] It says that if the TRC determines that a change can fall in the review scope of a member
[1:56:05] or subset of the TRC, then the committee can delegate that authority to that person
[1:56:11] or group individuals.
[1:56:13] I'll also point out we have two sections of the video that cover this.
[1:56:17] One is with the Residential Subdivision Review, and the one is mainly your commercial site
[1:56:22] plans.
[1:56:23] They're the same thing, and that we've made it to the language exactly the same in both,
[1:56:28] and that eliminates a little bit more of that discrepancy with that as well.
[1:56:32] So really it just makes it so small changes can be done with a smaller group that it makes sense for.
[1:56:38] We don't need more process or more cumbersome term, but it's not necessary.
[1:56:43] And not change would enable that.
[1:56:47] So other questions off to you?
[1:56:48] Yeah.
[1:56:49] What determines the scope of the change?
[1:56:54] like I mean you're talking obviously minor adjustments which makes absolute sense to me like
[1:57:01] have the resident expert there take care of it knock it out of the park but at what point does
[1:57:06] it get to a point where you in the planning department and staff go this really changes the scope
[1:57:12] of the project and we need to revisit it through the entire process. Is there a safeguard in there
[1:57:17] for that and I think that safeguard you as well as us as in council.
[1:57:22] And typically it'll come mid construction that kind of you know what a actually this sewer line is gets got to go here because of
[1:57:28] X reason and they'll bring that to our attention usually it's one staff member they were they were talking with and at that point that
[1:57:35] staff member then brings it to the TRC and the TRC as a group at our weekly meeting will say yep you know David you've got this one go
[1:57:45] I guess my point is, sir, is whatever change is being affected mid-stream, so let's just say we want to move the applicant comes back.
[1:57:57] It says I want to move the building and I want to shave off the buffer.
[1:58:03] Does that go back to the TRC and get approved at your level?
[1:58:07] Or now we've significantly changed the plan.
[1:58:10] That's where I'm getting that.
[1:58:11] You know, yeah, if it's something that falls in the administrative approval purview, but still significant
[1:58:17] We're going to hit multiple departments then yeah go back for another plan with the old TRC now
[1:58:23] It's something that's not administratively approval then it would probably come back to you all okay
[1:58:27] We're changing something that was approved in a PDP or a major subdivision plan and it doesn't fall within what we can approve
[1:58:33] Administratively, then we have to send it back to the plan board and town council. Okay. Thank you
[1:58:37] All right.
[1:58:40] Is there any more I'll keep going?
[1:58:42] Go ahead.
[1:58:43] Thank you.
[1:58:44] Oh, yes.
[1:58:44] And one more with this one right there, that Table 2-1, where you see that highlighted Board
[1:58:50] of Adjustment.
[1:58:51] That was blank.
[1:58:52] It should not be blank.
[1:58:54] The appeal authority for any administrative decisions is the Board of Adjustment.
[1:58:59] Why that was blank?
[1:59:00] We are not sure.
[1:59:01] But we're going to fix it out.
[1:59:03] Okay.
[1:59:06] Number two is certificate of appropriateness minor work.
[1:59:10] And minor works, major works, those both deal with the Historic District Commission and the Historic District which is that main ten blocks of downtown that are governed.
[1:59:20] Minor work is something that can be approved administratively, major work, the Historic District Commission approves.
[1:59:26] That language as written has a problem with statute because it says that staff, they determine that something for a minor work does not meet the standards, then it can be denied by staff.
[1:59:37] As a no-go with state statute staff can't do it on their own if it is determined not to meet a standard
[1:59:43] Then it's forward to the HTC for their final off-call and issue and that verbiage change just makes that clear
[1:59:55] Number three travel trailers so once upon a time
[2:00:00] Chapter three, travel trailers were no longer permitted as a permanent or temporary residence, and with that came what's called an amortization clause. In other words, everyone has, if you are using a travel trailer as a residence, one year to come into compliance. This one year is long since passed, so this change just strikes that one year amortization from the section.
[2:00:28] And number four, industrial zoning minimum lot size. So this is a discrepancy
[2:00:33] we found in the UDO. In one chart it says there is no minimum, which is consistent with
[2:00:38] their commercial neighborhood business, zone district, and so forth. And then in the
[2:00:42] other one it says it's 50,000 square feet. Anytime we come across an issue like this
[2:00:47] where there's, it's unclear the UDO contradicts itself. Ty goes to the runner and the person
[2:00:52] who owns the property. We would defer to that judgment call on, which we would in this
[2:00:56] case anyway. But to eliminate this confusion and what was clearly intent was to have a
[2:01:01] no minimum lot size for your industrial commercial type zone
[2:01:04] districts. We're taking that out and showing it as no minimum as
[2:01:08] well.
[2:01:14] And number five extension of compliance dollar amount. So
[2:01:18] two things with this one. First is that general statute says
[2:01:21] what, excuse me, let me explain that it's first. So the extension
[2:01:25] for compliance is something that pertains only to bonding for
[2:01:29] landscaping. So in other words, I'm going to open my ice cream
[2:01:32] shop and it's May 15th, but the UDO says I can't plant pine trees until December, so I want
[2:01:40] to apply for an extension of compliance so that I can get my shift kit of occupancy now
[2:01:45] and then plant when the time comes. Part of that dollar amount, whether it be for a line of
[2:01:50] credit or a bond, coming from statute says it can exceed 125% of an estimated cost and the UDO right
[2:01:59] else is 150% of a sense of no-go, so we're going to change that.
[2:02:04] That's the first thing, encapsulated number five.
[2:02:07] The other one is about planting season.
[2:02:11] A different section of the UDO talks about how, for long-leaf pines, specifically, the planting
[2:02:16] season is December to April.
[2:02:19] But then in this section, extension of compliance can only go for 90 days.
[2:02:24] So if I apply for it in May, then that's a problem.
[2:02:27] So, the correction is that it's a full year, so it doesn't matter what point of the year
[2:02:31] you apply for it, you're guaranteed to hit that full planting season that isn't part
[2:02:35] of it.
[2:02:42] This one's really straightforward, this is a sign code cross reference issue, there's
[2:02:47] that one section is pointing to a different part of the sign code, talking about landmark
[2:02:54] signs, whereas it should be pointing to temporary signs that are unauthorized uses, just a simple
[2:03:00] point to the wrong section of the sign code on that particular page.
[2:03:09] And number seven, open space standards.
[2:03:12] This is something we noticed that doesn't pertain to the open space standards adopted
[2:03:15] a few months ago.
[2:03:17] This comes a lot later in section 4.9.
[2:03:22] Obviously, open space pertains to most types of development, all your residential subdivisions,
[2:03:28] commercial, industrial, and so forth.
[2:03:29] But this section specifically calls out residential development, which obviously that is not consistent with the rest of the section and its applicability.
[2:03:40] So just to eliminate any confusion there, we're just striking the word residential to make it clear.
[2:03:50] James, when you do that.
[2:03:52] Oh, no, okay.
[2:03:52] I see.
[2:03:53] In development is capitalized for a reason.
[2:03:56] I was thinking it was any sentence.
[2:03:58] Okay, go ahead.
[2:04:03] Next, almost there, is accessory dwelling units, and this is another state statute correction.
[2:04:09] And state statute says that local government cannot regulate the architecture or entrance
[2:04:16] locations on anything that is subject to the residential building code, and that includes
[2:04:20] accessory dwelling units.
[2:04:22] And those two sections, you see at the bottom right there, do exactly that.
[2:04:26] It says architecture must match that of the principal structure and the entry has to be
[2:04:31] the side or rear. And both of those are no goes with statute. So there we go.
[2:04:40] And last one,
[2:04:41] special home events, something you all just saw a moment ago. When this change was adopted back in
[2:04:47] 2015, ordinance 1716, it changed the approval process for a special home event from a special
[2:04:54] use permit to conditional zoning like you all just did. And that change reflects in table 315,
[2:05:00] where it should, but it did not change in the actual Section 519, as you should have.
[2:05:07] So correcting that as well.
[2:05:12] And that's our nine things.
[2:05:14] Overall, that's three important review processes administratively that are clarified and improved.
[2:05:20] Three discrepancies with state statute corrected, and then four just old vestiges and inaccuracies that we've found in the UNIO.
[2:05:29] Now that we're waiting for all the changes.
[2:05:32] Thank you.
[2:05:33] So many questions. That is all I have on this presentation council. Do you have any questions? I had one sir
[2:05:39] Can you go back to number seven and just kind of walk me through that
[2:05:45] We
[2:05:46] And clear up the difference between a single residential use and let's say we
[2:05:51] We want to put we want to come in which is happening in the north of the county
[2:05:56] So we want to put in multiple homes
[2:05:59] 3040 we want to overcrowd but we say that there's no requirement for open spaces in those areas like town
[2:06:05] part not town but my community parks and things like that is that what we're saying we're not
[2:06:10] dictating that was just for not exactly single use just clear that up for me please sir sure so
[2:06:19] the very top of chapter 4.9 open space it talks about open space pertains to anything subject to
[2:06:25] made your subdivision review, all of your commercial
[2:06:27] developments, industrial developments,
[2:06:29] and then get into what open space it is,
[2:06:31] what it must comprise.
[2:06:33] And then this section is later on in chapter 4.9,
[2:06:36] and it has this word residential,
[2:06:38] which it shouldn't, because it just says that
[2:06:41] this particular section talks about flexibility,
[2:06:44] is oftentimes, and then we just see the word
[2:06:48] for residential developments,
[2:06:49] which open space applies to a much wider type of development
[2:06:54] and then just that.
[2:06:55] So to eliminate ambiguity,
[2:06:56] we're taking the word residential,
[2:06:58] and so it's just developments.
[2:07:00] Okay, so this amendment does not materially expand
[2:07:05] and restrict the property owners' development
[2:07:07] or anything of that nature.
[2:07:09] It does that.
[2:07:09] Okay, I appreciate that.
[2:07:11] Thank you.
[2:07:13] Other other questions?
[2:07:19] I appreciate you guys doing this.
[2:07:20] This is like the not fun nitty gritty stuff.
[2:07:24] And so thanks for the intricate detail
[2:07:27] that you give to do these updates. Thank you. And staff, I'm looking at you, but all of you.
[2:07:34] And keeping up with state regulations as well, and this is one of those, we have little errors,
[2:07:39] but also as things change at a state level, there's a constant review process in place, and we appreciate
[2:07:44] that you guys have good work. I definitely appreciate that it's in smaller chunks. The first time we did this,
[2:07:51] there was a 47 of them and it was my first
[2:07:54] council meeting and I was
[2:07:56] dude I was overwhelmed as you know that was
[2:07:58] hazing so I do appreciate that whoever prompted this on
[2:08:02] just do that for new council members I can't wait for the next guy
[2:08:05] it was hazing yeah this is like the count this is like the count down in the
[2:08:09] old days you listen to the radio for the last number one yeah
[2:08:12] he's teasing us with just nine tonight top 10 top nine thank you guys really
[2:08:17] Thank you, Madam Barbel.
[2:08:18] All right.
[2:08:19] If unless there are further questions or considerations if someone has a motion.
[2:08:24] And there is one on page 57.
[2:08:27] I do.
[2:08:27] I'll move that after considering the criteria for text amendments found in the UDA Section 2.17.10,
[2:08:34] the town council finds that the proposed text amendments are consistent with the comprehensive
[2:08:38] plan and are a reasonable way to implement that plan for the reasons that forth in the
[2:08:43] planning boards. Resolution that was included as an attachment to the staff report for OA-03-26.
[2:08:50] Second. All those in favour? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries?
[2:08:55] And therefore I move to approve the proposed amendments to the UDO as shown on the attachments to
[2:09:00] staff report OA-03-26 in the September 8th, 2026 town council packet. Second. All those in favour? Aye.
[2:09:08] Aye Aye.
[2:09:09] Any opposed?
[2:09:10] Motion carries.
[2:09:11] Thank you.
[2:09:12] Awesome.
[2:09:13] All right our last item.
[2:09:18] I did not make time for public comment.
[2:09:22] Can you guys see us a public hearing?
[2:09:24] And we've already heard each other so make time for public comment, if there is any.
[2:09:29] Can you go back here and if there is public comment,
[2:09:31] we'll茶 the phone, and we'll give it so.
[2:09:34] All right being that I skipped over the public comment,
[2:09:36] completely my fault if there is anyone from the public who would like to speak
[2:09:40] Okay, seeing none, thank you. We won't have to recall that.
[2:09:45] All right, our last public hearing this evening is a petition for voluntary annexation of 13.935 acres while number AX-03-26.
[2:09:55] Good evening, Director Grieve.
[2:09:59] Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of Council, B.J. Grieve, with a ton of Southern Pines Planning Department. I have before you this evening an application to annex approximately 13.9 acres.
[2:10:11] located at the southern intersection of Wainer Road and Highway 22. The reason I say southern
[2:10:17] intersection is because Wainer Road comes off and then loops around and comes back. So there's a
[2:10:20] northern intersection with Wainer Road and 22 and there's also a southern intersection. Subject
[2:10:25] property is proposing to Annex in order to develop. This is the property that is the subject of the
[2:10:31] public hearing under the evidentiary hearings. And so again, in order to connect with
[2:10:36] of town water and follow town policy, the property has to annex.
[2:10:42] Now, an interesting part of this annexation that is worth talking about is that the first
[2:10:49] bit being annexed is just over 12 acres, and that is the actual subject property being developed.
[2:10:55] There is another, in the deed, there is another chunk of ground that I'm going to pull up here that,
[2:11:00] when I hit the next button it's going to show is also the property they own but it adds
[2:11:05] approximate other acre to get up to the 13.9 and then it leaves us with one additional
[2:11:11] challenge and this is just kind of interesting history with the description legal descriptions in
[2:11:15] the deeds. Now we have under North Carolina law in order to when we are annexing we have this little
[2:11:21] sliver here that is located on the bottom of Wainer Road you'll see that the second portion I have
[2:11:29] there has this kind of jagged line that leaves portions of Wainer Road not annexed.
[2:11:35] And so we're going to tidy that up in the description you have in the annexation ordinance
[2:11:39] in front of you.
[2:11:40] If you watch for the third piece, we'll now include those pieces as well.
[2:11:45] And then the final question will also, if the general statute allows for the annexation
[2:11:50] of adjacent state rights of way, why not also include Highway 22.
[2:11:55] The reason for that is that on the other side of Highway 22 at the north end there is
[2:11:59] actually whispering pines as jurisdiction, so whether or not they want us to come out
[2:12:03] that far and also the triangle there is owned by Moore County as part of the airport.
[2:12:08] So as part of this annexation, it was a little bit of scope creep to go ahead and start working
[2:12:13] with both whispering pines and Moore County to talk about that.
[2:12:16] It just didn't seem necessary when we could just go ahead and get the property annex and
[2:12:19] also tidy up the way in a road.
[2:12:21] So all of Wainer Road now will be nice and the portions that are annexed, the adjacent
[2:12:25] state-righted way will be tidied up with this annexation.
[2:12:29] So, and that was actually brought to our attention by Reagan early in this annexation process,
[2:12:34] so we appreciate him bringing that up.
[2:12:35] And then, of course, we were able to work very closely with Amy Kirk and our GIS department
[2:12:39] who really did the Omen's work on reviewing the meets and bounds descriptions
[2:12:43] and making sure they were accurate as well as adding this additional piece of right away.
[2:12:47] So we appreciate their help and the assists on all this.
[2:12:49] And of course, that does all the usual stuff on annexation.
[2:12:52] So great team effort across the board.
[2:12:55] As always.
[2:12:56] As always.
[2:12:58] Council, do you have questions for staff on this annexation?
[2:13:04] OK.
[2:13:05] Hearing none, is there anyone from the public who would like to comment?
[2:13:10] Did you have something to add?
[2:13:11] No, next year, OK.
[2:13:13] All right.
[2:13:13] Oh, we're going to wait.
[2:13:16] He's pushing away.
[2:13:18] He's done with you.
[2:13:19] All right.
[2:13:19] I will close the public hearing.
[2:13:21] And if there is a motion, have a couple
[2:13:23] We'll draft it on page 85.
[2:13:25] I'll move the adopted ordinance proving voluntary annexation.
[2:13:28] Request AX-SO3-26 for the property as defined in the legal description attached to the staff
[2:13:34] report and to have the ordinance effective immediately.
[2:13:37] Thank you.
[2:13:38] Is there a second?
[2:13:39] A second.
[2:13:40] All those in favor?
[2:13:41] Aye.
[2:13:42] Any opposed?
[2:13:43] Motion carries.
[2:13:44] Thank you, Director Grieben.
[2:13:45] Welcome to the podium.
[2:13:47] Mason.
[2:13:49] Moving on to our last public hearing.
[2:13:52] It is an evidentiary hearing as such.
[2:13:55] We have a small audience tonight, but for the benefit of the public, this hearing is
[2:14:00] quasi-judicial and evidentiary.
[2:14:02] State law sets specific procedures and rules for bringing how the board must behave and
[2:14:07] make its decision.
[2:14:08] Our discretion is limited and decisions must be based on competent, relevant and substantial
[2:14:12] evidence on the record.
[2:14:13] If you'll be speaking as a witness, please focus on the facts and standards, not personal
[2:14:17] preference or opinion.
[2:14:19] other individuals may serve as witnesses when called by the board and testimony is limited to facts not opinions anyone providing expert opinion on property value and traffic will need to have professional expertise in that field and provide evidence upon which their expert opinion is based and must swear or firm their testimony.
[2:14:36] At this time will administer the oath for all individuals who intend to provide witness testimony if you will stand and raise your right hand.
[2:14:48] Do you swear to tell the truth and only the truth in your testimony as well as responses
[2:14:52] to questions?
[2:14:53] Yes.
[2:14:54] Thank you.
[2:14:55] And now our attorney will qualify the council.
[2:14:58] Does any member of council have a-
[2:15:00] Fixed opinion prior to this hearing that is not susceptible to change. No. Has any member of council had exparte communications about this matter? No. Does any member of council have a close familial business or other association relationship with an affected person? No. Does any member of council have a financial interest in the outcome of this matter? No. Does the applicant or any other party
[2:15:29] We wish to challenge any member of council on the basis of bias or impartiality.
[2:15:38] Do you wish to challenge any member of council?
[2:15:41] No.
[2:15:42] Thank you.
[2:15:43] All right.
[2:15:43] Thank you, Attorney Maccarly.
[2:15:44] All right.
[2:15:44] You can proceed.
[2:15:45] All right.
[2:15:46] Staff enters the staff report dated to say into the record as Exhibit A and the associated
[2:15:51] presentation as Exhibit B.
[2:15:53] All right.
[2:15:54] This is actually three applications that we are rolling into one for convenience outside of
[2:15:57] the annexation, the preliminary development plan, the subdivision which is the MAPP file
[2:16:03] and then also watershed allocation. That's the subject property zone PD that looks familiar.
[2:16:07] The council approved a conceptual development plan back in June. Subject property is very
[2:16:13] heavily forested as of within the past half year when that was taken. Friendly reminder, this is part
[2:16:19] two of three in the process of building on a planned development. This would be the last time that
[2:16:23] the council would see this application, essentially, is what I'm getting at. I'm bringing up another
[2:16:28] Another example of these, just for your orientation on how detailed this one actually is,
[2:16:32] a CDP for the target, home goods development, if you will, in Morton Park, includes land
[2:16:37] uses, and each PDP is brought in to assume compliance with those.
[2:16:42] We have something very different with this application, and that's that the approved conceptual
[2:16:47] development plan actually looks very similar to the proposed preliminary development plan.
[2:16:52] Council has been a long time since we've gone to the eye doctor together, it's like a
[2:16:56] couple months.
[2:16:56] so do you prefer one or two? Or they're about the same. I think they're about the same,
[2:17:02] and that's my purpose this evening. There are some changes here. I'll show I'll go over
[2:17:07] where the refinements are. But again, it's unusual to have this level of detail with the CDP,
[2:17:12] and staff appreciates it because that makes this hopefully that much easier.
[2:17:17] This is the proposed subdivision, if you will. The 100-foot buffers probably the biggest component
[2:17:23] of this whole thing against Highway 22, that is retained.
[2:17:27] The numbering has shifted as well as phasing,
[2:17:29] no issues without whatsoever.
[2:17:31] That's all done so that the church can take their piece,
[2:17:34] which is basically the whole right half.
[2:17:36] Chop it off as a minor subdivision and start building.
[2:17:39] That's why all this is done,
[2:17:40] and why the lot numbering is different.
[2:17:42] As far as layout and everything else goes,
[2:17:44] no inconsistencies identified by staff.
[2:17:48] This red area is what Mr. Lindsey has provided
[2:17:51] to show in purview surface.
[2:17:52] this is part of the application for watershed.
[2:17:55] It's actually not for the entire site,
[2:17:58] and I know it's a lot to keep up with,
[2:17:59] what's being annexed and what for watershed for it.
[2:18:01] The residential portions, everything outside
[2:18:02] of that blue square is at about 20%,
[2:18:05] so they don't need the allocation.
[2:18:07] The church does need it.
[2:18:08] They're going up to about 40%,
[2:18:10] which is in between that 24 maximum
[2:18:13] without your approval and 70% with your approval.
[2:18:18] All right, the criteria for the
[2:18:20] the preliminary development plan is on the left, subdivision on the right, everything green
[2:18:26] is what staff found to be consistent. The yellow, I'll discuss as part of a condition, but no
[2:18:31] inconsistencies identified, staff thinks that the image you see here matches this one.
[2:18:39] All right,
[2:18:40] staff is recommending two conditions as part of this. The first, with the PDP, it would be condition
[2:18:44] one with the PDP approves watershed allocation to just the church. To find that to be a reasonable
[2:18:49] use of watershed allocation credits, it would just be for 7.41, as Director Greve mentioned,
[2:18:54] the whole parcels are about 13 acres, so watershed for half only, staff loves not wasting it
[2:18:59] and using it resourcefully, and belief that is doing so. Second thing, right after planning board,
[2:19:06] staff received letter from the Moore County Airport saying that the development needs to fill out
[2:19:12] a form and be reviewed by the FAA, that is the Federal Aviation Administration,
[2:19:16] To ensure that nothing hazardous is being proposed, staff assumes that that would relate
[2:19:21] to things such as, for example, steeple height, maybe.
[2:19:26] That to staff's knowledge has not been filled out yet, but staff is confident that that
[2:19:30] can be mitigated with the site plan review process after this, and so that conditions essentially
[2:19:35] says that they have to do so and address any concerns of the FAA, a federal agency, before
[2:19:40] we would approve the site plan, which would likely be the case anyways, but we're just putting
[2:19:44] it in there to not be nice and clean. Finding no inconsistencies. Oh, let me go over
[2:19:50] the timeline real quick too. This is just over your old gentleman from Salt Lake City reached
[2:19:54] out to me in June of 2025 to discuss the possibility of building a church. You may recall
[2:19:59] from the CDP discussions that this has had a lot of back and forth. Eleven revisions before
[2:20:04] this even went to the planning board and then following planning board. There's discussions
[2:20:07] of a public road being built. Just another shout out to the applicant in this case,
[2:20:13] the
[2:20:14] sat through all the other hearings this evening,
[2:20:15] but worked with me and sat through dealing with me
[2:20:18] to make sure that this is clean and tidy for you all this evening.
[2:20:23] Staff does not find outstanding issues for that reason,
[2:20:26] trying to keep it nice and easy for you.
[2:20:29] And because we've worked so hard on the CDP together,
[2:20:31] Staff recommends approval of the preliminary development plan
[2:20:33] and major subdivision preliminary plat,
[2:20:37] as presented to you this evening.
[2:20:40] Thank you.
[2:20:41] That's all I have.
[2:20:42] Thank you.
[2:20:42] All right, Councilor, are there questions for staff?
[2:20:47] You've done a really good job at outlining,
[2:20:49] especially when we come back with this hearing,
[2:20:51] the fact that we are trying to match the CDP,
[2:20:54] it's really nice to have it clean-line through it.
[2:20:57] Yeah, just an appreciation for the work you put into it.
[2:21:00] Thank you.
[2:21:02] I'm Kevin Lindsay, engineer for this project,
[2:21:06] and Mason's covered everything.
[2:21:08] So I'll just hear that.
[2:21:09] If you have any questions with me, I'll try to answer.
[2:21:12] So one of the things that did change,
[2:21:14] I notice was a there's a right in right out for traffic. Yes. Okay. Can we? There it is.
[2:21:23] Okay.
[2:21:29] That
[2:21:32] particular drawing doesn't show it very well. No, but they're labeled.
[2:21:38] Okay, but go. So there's an addition of a turn lane on to wainer and it's two way interns there.
[2:21:46] And then right in, right out in the other one.
[2:21:49] Will there be a median where there's a right in, right out to avoid people turning left?
[2:21:55] We have to submit for a driveway permit.
[2:21:58] And so unless DOT requires it, I would not recommend a median there simply because there's
[2:22:08] enough, I think you're starting to get into the approaching the turn lanes, the three lane
[2:22:15] road is changing in that area. And I don't think it's necessary. There's always a possibility
[2:22:21] that somebody's going to drive around it and go the other way. But I wouldn't put it in there
[2:22:26] unless DOT. We have to do whatever DOT says. If DOT looks at it, it says he wants to do something,
[2:22:32] we'll have to do it. And we will. So I hope to get that permit in this week, assuming that it's
[2:22:40] approved tonight.
[2:22:44] I'm trying to do that. Council, do you have the questions for the applicant?
[2:22:56] Is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on this application?
[2:23:02] Say that like we have an audience. All right. Council, before I close the public hearing,
[2:23:08] do you all have other questions or would you like anyone else to come in and speak or answer?
[2:23:13] questions clarify.
[2:23:16] No, ma'am. I'm okay. I'm going to close the public hearing. Is there
[2:23:20] any motion on? Yes, sir. Can we make one motion? Would you like to? You can make one motion.
[2:23:27] Okay. Thank you. All right. So a motion on the PD and the preliminary plot.
[2:23:38] Turn the figure on the component. I'll move to adopt. You can do it, sir. If I may,
[2:23:42] Okay, that's not how we set them up in the staff report.
[2:23:44] We set them up as we think in consistent with what Attorney Macarly just said is that the motions to adopt
[2:23:51] attachment one as findings of fact and then to approve with the one condition for the PDP.
[2:23:56] That could be wrapped into one motion and then the motions to approve the findings of fact for
[2:24:01] the preliminary flat and then approve with one condition that could be wrapped into one.
[2:24:05] So you'd have two total motions to cover the two different applications.
[2:24:11] Is that work for you of course there is an easier way to do it but yes given how it's written up yes that works all right we'll do that
[2:24:21] That's the easiest way it's written the way that you all would like it in the records and we'll stick with that
[2:24:26] Okay, so we have the first motion. I'll adopt a test one of the staff report as drafted as the findings of fact for PD-File-26
[2:24:34] Is there a second second all those in favor?
[2:24:38] Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
[2:24:41] And as such, I will move to approve the preliminary development
[2:24:44] plan for PDO 5-26 with the following condition indicated in
[2:24:49] the report, I'm dealing with the allocated water shed
[2:24:52] exemption.
[2:24:54] Second. All done in favor? Aye. Any opposed? No, it's
[2:24:59] okay. You were quicker than I was. I'm glad you are. All right.
[2:25:02] And then that one passes. So we'll move on to the motion regarding
[2:25:08] I'll move though, we adopt attachment two of the staff report as drafted as findings
[2:25:13] effect regarding the proposed preliminary plat MAPP-02-26.
[2:25:18] Is there a second?
[2:25:20] Second.
[2:25:21] All those in favor?
[2:25:22] Aye.
[2:25:23] Any opposed?
[2:25:24] Motion carries.
[2:25:25] Therefore, I'll move to approve the preliminary plat for MAPP-02-26 with the following
[2:25:31] So in condition related to the federal agency compliance in the packet.
[2:25:36] Is there a second?
[2:25:37] Second.
[2:25:38] All those in favor?
[2:25:39] Hi.
[2:25:40] Any opposed?
[2:25:41] Motion carries.
[2:25:42] Thank you so much.
[2:25:43] I will hear a motion to adjourn the meeting for this evening.
[2:25:47] I'll make a motion to adjourn the meeting.
[2:25:49] All right.
[2:25:50] Is there a second?
[2:25:51] Second.
[2:25:52] All those in favor?
[2:25:53] Hi.
[2:25:54] Thank you.
[2:25:55] Just as a note to the public, we have the 25th anniversary of 9-11.
[2:25:58] A event will be held at 830 outside the Sunrise Theater in the green space if you're able
[2:26:06] to attend.
[2:26:07] It's a great opportunity to reflect on the history but also to recognize our current
[2:26:12] first responders.
[2:26:14] It's always a hard but good event.
[2:26:18] So I hope to see some of you there.
[2:26:20] Thank you guys.
[2:26:22] Anything else?
[2:26:23] Okay.
[2:26:24] Done.
[2:26:27] Thanks, Ellen.
[2:26:28] It makes me feel better.
[2:26:32] He's in for eight hours, was like 30 hours long.
[2:26:37] My hazing was, I had 12 hours hearing in my bedroom on the computer.
[2:26:42] Oh my god, over here.
[2:26:46] Yeah.