[1:00] Good evening. It's 6 p.m. I'd like to
call the meeting to order. I'd like to
[1:04] welcome everyone to the Town of Leland
Planning Board meeting. Please note that
[1:08] the public may videotape these
proceedings at any time. At this time,
[1:12] I'd like to remind everyone to please
place their cell phones on vibrate or
[1:15] turn them off so we do not disturb the
business of tonight's meeting.
[1:20] First item of business. Everybody would
stand for the pledge of allegiance,
[1:23] please.
[1:28] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[1:32] republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:38] justice for all. [snorts]
[1:44] » Bless you.
>> [clears throat]
[1:47] » person.
>> Um, item number three, the approval of
[1:50] agenda. Does anyone have any amendments
to the agenda, Mr. Whitney?
[1:54] » No, not the agenda.
>> Not the agenda. Okay. [laughter]
[1:57] May I have a motion to approve the
agenda as stated?
[2:01] » I'll move.
>> Do I have a second?
[2:03] » Second.
>> Thank you. Any discussion? All in favor?
[2:07] » I.
>> Any opposed?
[2:10] Agenda's carried. Number four, approval
of minutes. Does anyone have any
[2:13] amendments to the minutes?
>> I have uh one comment on the meeting
[2:17] minutes of June 3rd. I was not attending
the meeting. I was uh out of town. So um
[2:26] I would move that the uh minutes be uh
approved as amended.
[2:32] » I have a motion. Do I have a second for
that?
[2:35] » Second.
>> Any discussion? All in favor?
[2:39] » I. Any opposed?
Minutes are approved. [clears throat]
[2:45] Item number five, public comment. At
this time, do we have anyone who signed
[2:49] up?
>> There's no one signed up at this time.
[2:52] » Okay, then we can go from there. Um,
>> please go ahead and continue.
[2:58] » Um, yeah, anyone has signed up to speak
during the public comment prior to the
[3:01] start of the meeting may come forward
after all the speakers who have signed
[3:04] up and finished. Anyone who did not sign
up but wishes to provide public comment
[3:08] will have an opportunity to speak. We've
had no one sign up at this point in
[3:11] time. Um is there anybody else who has
wishes to speak at this time?
[3:18] All right. Seeing none, um um then at
that point I think we can move on to the
[3:24] presentation item number six, quarterly
update for the Leland 2045 comprehensive
[3:28] plan. Miss Thirsten will now present the
update.
[3:34] » Thank you chairman, members of the
planning board. Uh, I appreciate the
[3:37] opportunity to update you on the Leland
2045 plan. As you know, we do these
[3:42] updates quarterly to keep you a breast
of the progress that we're making
[3:46] towards implementation of this plan. Uh,
these updates will help connect back the
[3:51] work that staff is doing to the Leland
2045 plan and show you what themes we're
[3:55] advancing through the organization.
So, there are six main themes that make
[4:00] up the comprehensive plan. I'll go over
those briefly because most of you have
[4:04] seen these before. Um, we tie these
back. We tie each action item back to
[4:09] one of these themes, but you'll note
that many of the action items support
[4:13] more than one theme at the same time.
Um, and so as we go through these
[4:18] updates to look at what was done and how
that fits into the town's broader goals,
[4:22] we'll tie them back to the predominant
theme and any any related themes that
[4:27] are applicable.
So, first we have first we have the
[4:31] Westgate area mobility and safety
improvements. Uh you'll recall from the
[4:35] last quarterly update that we put in the
um teardrop roundabout and finished some
[4:40] pedestrian improvements in that area. Uh
this update is referring to um some
[4:47] sidewalk improvements on the north side
of West Gate that improves three high
[4:51] visibility sidewalk or crosswalks, ADA
compliant curb ramps, updated pavement
[4:57] markings, and just general pedestrian
improvements there. This connects back
[5:02] to Leland 2045 by improving pedestrian
safety, multimodal access, traffic flow,
[5:08] and infrastructure reliability in one of
the town's busiest commercial areas.
[5:14] Um, the next item that we have is the
extension of Founders Drive from
[5:19] Settller's Village to Woodland Drive.
This fills in a gap in the local street
[5:24] network, improving connectivity between
neighborhoods and providing additional
[5:28] access from that neighborhood.
Um, this ties back to the Leland 2045
[5:34] emphasis on connected development,
multimmodal access. You'll see the
[5:37] sidewalks that were installed as part of
this improvement. And generally
[5:41] resilient infrastructure.
[5:45] Not as much fun as um well, Founders
Park was way more fun than Founders
[5:49] Drive extension if you haven't been out
there. Um Founders Park serves as a
[5:53] central place for recreation, events,
and community gathering. The
[5:58] amphitheater has so so far supported
several concerts and public programs and
[6:02] the splash pad has already proven to be
an extremely popular family-friendly
[6:06] amenity.
Leland 2045 is about quality of life,
[6:11] investing in public spaces
uh that support recreation, health, and
[6:16] com and community life.
[6:20] Back in June, town council authorized
the design build of a boardwalk and dock
[6:24] by Inter Coastal Marine. Surgeon Creek
Park is planned as Leland's second
[6:29] public water access with Cypress Cove
Park being the first. And this supports
[6:33] the Leland 2045 goal of providing water
access to natural resources, promoting
[6:39] outdoor recreation, and continuing
long-term investment in parks and open
[6:43] space.
[6:47] I hope you were here along with about
3,000 other people for the Leland and
[6:51] Bloom Festival on May 16th. There were
several food trucks, art vendors,
[6:56] farmers, environmental stewardship
organizations, and live music. This
[7:01] event supports local economy by giving
visibility to local businesses and
[7:05] organizations. And it shows how
long-term planning goals translate into
[7:08] real community experiences.
So this is what I was talking about how
[7:13] each of the action items for this
quarterly update has a primary theme
[7:18] with the big circle and then you'll see
the supporting circles on the bottom
[7:22] showing other themes that it relates to
maybe not quite as directly. So you'll
[7:27] see the infrastructure projects also
support safety and connectivity. Park
[7:31] and water access supports livability and
infrastructure that supports community
[7:35] life. Leland and Bloom supports local
activity, placemaking, and community
[7:41] identity. And this just demonstrates how
Leland 2045 is an integrated framework
[7:45] for connecting town projects,
partnerships, and public investments to
[7:49] long-term goals. These updates are
intended to uh show progress over time
[7:54] and reinforce the comprehensive plan as
an active implementation document. I'm
[7:59] happy to answer any questions you may
have about any of these items or the
[8:02] Leland 2045 plan in general.
Does anyone have any questions?
[8:09] » I have a comments, a couple comments to
make. Um,
[8:13] I journeyied over to the concert two
weeks ago [laughter]
[8:18] and it was a wonderful experience for
um, a lot of folk that were there. Um, I
[8:23] think I did miss the um, um, the open
the grand opening, but I heard that was
[8:29] also a big hit. And uh I think that um
you might be able to get one of those
[8:35] yellow green dots up there under the
Founders Park, but I because I think
[8:40] it's going to be coming
a a headliner place for for other
[8:46] communities to uh come to Leland and to
participate in those um concerts that
[8:52] are that were were there. Um, I believe
there's one tomorrow night. And, um, the
[8:59] only thing that I've heard is that the
parking is somewhat of a of an issue.
[9:05] It's too popular. You know, it's like
Yogi would say, nobody goes there uh
[9:11] anymore because it's so popular. Um, but
I think that um I'm sure the town is
[9:17] looking at certain options to deal with
the with the parking concerns. I
[9:22] understand there there is some kind of a
shuttle. I think that there's uh coming
[9:26] from the high school. Yes, sir.
>> Here. And
[9:30] » um I think there needs to be um maybe
some better communication in the you
[9:34] know in the town information to let
people know that there are other options
[9:39] available for the for parking and to
make it a um um a communitywide event.
[9:45] So, uh, I applaud the the town for its,
uh, it work on the, uh, Founders Park
[9:51] and, um, I think it's a great amenity
for, uh, for the entire community.
[9:57] » Thank you. And certainly, I agree that
it's going to it's already a regional
[10:00] draw and it will hopefully continue that
way. Um, your point about the parking,
[10:05] thank you for that, too. Uh, there is
parking available at the high school and
[10:09] a shuttle to run people um, back and
forth. And um our communications team
[10:14] does a really good job um explaining
that on Instagram and other social media
[10:19] outlets like Facebook. So I guess they
say like and subscribe or whatever to
[10:26] stay up to date on what's going on and
how best to get there.
[10:29] » Thank you. I'll be there tomorrow night
early. [laughter]
[10:32] » Excellent. Are there any other questions
or comments? Not seeing any. I will have
[10:37] to say I think this is an excellent
update and there's a lot of progress and
[10:41] it's a really good to see. Thank you
very much.
[10:44] » Thank you.
[10:48] » I think we have another we have an
introduction.
[10:55] » Good afternoon everybody. Uh just wanted
to introduce our next speaker Drew DLA
[10:59] since this will be his first time
presenting before you all. He's been
[11:01] with the town for a couple months now
but uh he's originally from North Salem,
[11:06] New York. Uh he got his undergraduate in
sports management from Sunny Courtland
[11:11] and later he earned his jurist doctor
his JD from Elizabeth Hob School of Law.
[11:17] Uh he moved down to North Carolina and
initially started working with the town
[11:20] of Oak Island doing some code
enforcement and uh slowly before leaving
[11:24] there kind of transitioned over to more
planning activities before he joined us
[11:28] as a planner. on uh currently he does
anything from uh commercial development
[11:34] review, subdivision reviews, permitting
um and helping out with a lot of other
[11:38] processes like annexations and things
like that. Um we're very happy to have
[11:43] Drew. He's been a great team member from
the start and we're really excited to to
[11:47] have him grow with us with the town. So
without further ado, all you
[11:58] Thank you for the introduction. Good
evening. My name is Drew Damela and I'm
[12:02] here to present the zoning map amendment
for Brunswick County tax partial ID
[12:06] shown on the screen.
>> Excuse me one second. Um Drew, does
[12:10] anyone have any conflicts of interest or
disclosure statements to make on this
[12:13] item?
>> No.
[12:15] » Okay. Seeing none, then we're ready to
proceed. Um and this is a reasonzoning
[12:19] request to amend the US Highway 17
overlay district. Go right ahead.
[12:25] This slide addresses some of the points
for consideration in their alignment
[12:28] with the North Carolina General Statute.
In summary, the planning board will be
[12:32] evaluating whether the proposed zoning
map amendment aligns with and advances
[12:35] the goals and vision in the adopted plan
as well as whether the proposed zoning
[12:39] map amendment is appropriate for the
area.
[12:43] This table shows the public notification
schedule. Although there is no statutory
[12:47] requirement for planning board
notification, town goes above and beyond
[12:50] by providing notice through several
different channels.
[12:55] to provide you with some background of
the resoning application. It was
[12:58] submitted by Branch Columbia Leland
Associates. The subject parcel is
[13:02] currently classified as a shopping
center located on 16.79 acres. The
[13:07] following slides will include maps to
help orient yourselves on where the
[13:11] property is located.
This vicinity map shows where the site
[13:16] is in relation to the area. For
reference, it is across the street from
[13:19] the villages at Bronzik Forest as well
as the Bronzac Forest neighborhood.
[13:26] This aerial map shows the developed land
of the subject site, Leland Village,
[13:29] formerly known as Savannah Branch, and
the surrounding areas.
[13:36] This map shows the existing zoning
district. Site is currently within a
[13:40] commercially zoned district and that
underlying designation will remain
[13:43] unchanged with the adoption of the
overlay.
[13:47] The C2 zoning across the corridor, also
a commercial district, further reflects
[13:52] the area's existing commercial
character.
[13:57] This next map shows the US Highway 17
overlay district as a whole. For those
[14:01] unfamiliar, an overlay district is an
additional layer of zoning that
[14:05] establishes supplemental regulations
within a specific area. In this case,
[14:10] the overlay provides corridor oriented
standards for businesses along Highway
[14:14] 17.
[14:17] This map shows a more magnified view of
the US Highway 17 district in relation
[14:22] to the site. [snorts]
[14:25] And this final map illustrates how the
US Highway 17 overlay district would
[14:29] appear with the subject site
incorporated into the district.
[14:35] I included this comparison table to
highlight allowable signage under the
[14:39] site's current zoning and the proposed
US Highway 17 overlay district. The
[14:43] primary differences highlighted in bold
is that the overlay district does not
[14:47] limit the number of of the total number
of wall signs provided that they meet
[14:51] the applicable dimensional requirements
which I will discuss next.
[14:57] This table compares the maximum
allowable sign area under the site's
[15:01] current C1.
Sorry. This table shows it compares
[15:05] compares the maximum allowable sign area
under this site's current C1 zoning
[15:10] versus the US Highway 17 overlay
district. The key differences are
[15:14] highlighted in
in bold. There are two notable
[15:18] differences. First, the overlay district
allows significantly more sign area for
[15:22] ground signs within combined
development.
[15:25] Second, wall signage is calculated
differently. Under C1, wall signage is
[15:30] limited to 55 square ft. Whereas under
the overlay district, the allowable sign
[15:34] area is tied to the size of the
building. As a as a result, a larger
[15:38] sign can accommodate more total wall
signage.
[15:43] I'll provide a brief example on how
signage is calculated within the US
[15:47] Highway 17 overlay district using this
example shown on the screen. First,
[15:51] you'll need to calculate the linear feet
of the building perimeter. In this
[15:56] instance, it is 400 linear feet. Next,
it will be 75% of that, which equates to
[16:03] 300 square ft. That is the total
allowable signage on the building. Now,
[16:08] you are capped off at 10% of the wall of
a singular wall. So, with this
[16:12] calculation, that is roughly 200 square
ft. So, you are permitted to have 200
[16:18] square feet on one wall. Whereas, if
this same building was in the C1 zoning
[16:22] district, you'd only be permitted to
have 55 square ft.
[16:27] This last table compares the maximum
sign heights allowed in each zoning
[16:31] district. The key differences
highlighted in bold apply to ground
[16:34] signs. Individual business signs can be
2 feet taller in the overlay district,
[16:39] while the combined development signs can
reach 28 ft compared to just 8t in the
[16:43] C1 zoning district.
Transitioning into our consistency with
[16:48] the town adopted plans, the proposed
resoning aligns with the Leland 2045's
[16:53] vision for a livable, diverse, and
connected neighborhood that accommodates
[16:57] growth as the overlay district would
provide a greater flexibility for
[17:01] development and signage along the major
commercial corridor.
[17:06] The applicant had a presentation
prepared but is unable to present this
[17:09] evening due to an illness. Okay, if I
could interrupt you for a second, I
[17:13] failed to mention exactly how this
procedure goes. This is a public
[17:17] hearing, so we've heard now from staff
and you mentioned that the applicant uh
[17:21] is not here at the moment. No sir.
>> Um so we then would hear comments from
[17:25] any members of the public that have
signed up to speak. First from anyone in
[17:28] support of the proposal, then from
anyone in opposition to the proposal and
[17:32] public comments limited to three minutes
per person. After all public comments,
[17:36] staff will complete the presentation and
the board will deliberate. Um so
[17:41] therefore if there is no um applicant
presentation at this time anyone who has
[17:45] signed up prior to the start of this
meeting to speak directly about the
[17:48] action today may come up and speak and
after all registered speakers have
[17:52] finished. Anyone did not sign up but
wishes to provide comment will have an
[17:55] opportunity to speak. Do we have anyone
signed up?
[17:59] » No sir
>> we don't. Is there anyone out in the
[18:01] audience that even though they didn't
sign up wishes to say something?
[18:05] All right. Seeing none. Um, that's in
support or in opposition.
[18:11] Okay, then I guess we're probably ready
for deliberation.
[18:16] » Yes. So, questions.
>> So, staff recommends approval and
[18:19] suggests a motion to recommend council
approve the zoning map amendment
[18:23] presented.
>> So, in front of you are four potential
[18:26] determinations regarding the resoning
request. Thank you for your time.
[18:32] So before we go into questions, uh,
everyone here has received a document
[18:37] which shows you all the options we have
available to us. Uh, in case you have
[18:41] any questions, please refer to that. And
so at this point in time be our
[18:45] deliberation. Does anyone have any
comments or questions they'd like to
[18:49] make?
>> I have a question about the height.
[18:54] So, if I'm understanding this correctly,
that a ground sign
[19:01] can be as high as 28 ft.
>> Yeah. In combined development. And that
[19:09] is to emphasize the ability to see the
sign as they are driving on a commercial
[19:14] uh road.
>> I was just trying to visualize 28 feet
[19:18] versus 8 feet. Um,
which is interesting. And I guess I'm
[19:23] asking this for a purely selfish reason
because the entrance to this new
[19:29] development is directly across the
street from where I live. And um, it's
[19:34] really interesting to be able to drive
out and have one visual and then when
[19:40] the signs go up, you drive out and you
have another visual. So, we don't we
[19:45] will not have any control over how high
the sign will be. We do not have a any
[19:50] control other than the fact that there
is a cap of 28 feet in that zoning
[19:54] district.
>> Okay.
[19:57] » Okay. Um
>> but it's still limited in total area. So
[20:01] that if it may be 8 28 ft high, it can't
go all the way to the ground, right?
[20:05] It's there's a a formula that says that
it has to be what? 200 square feet or or
[20:12] some maybe I'm wrong on the number, but
>> two um
[20:16] » 210.
>> Yeah. So you are capped at 210 square
[20:20] feet of the sign itself. That is just
the height that can go up to 28 ft
[20:25] » if it's that proportion.
>> Yes, sir.
[20:28] » Right.
>> Whatever is proportionally able to fit
[20:31] in that 210 square footage.
>> Okay.
[20:35] » Does it say, did I miss it? Um how many
ground signs they may have?
[20:44] » One per frontage. Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So that and and that is the
[20:47] same delineation from C1 to US Highway
17 overlay district. So that is not
[20:52] changing regarding this determination.
[20:57] » That's one sign per each
if they're broken up into multiple
[21:06] uh shops for example each one can have
one sign.
[21:10] » That is for individual businesses. Yes
sir.
[21:12] » Right. Right.
But something like the let's say in the
[21:16] case of Publix which is a much bigger
business
[21:20] » they still are limited by the same
formulas.
[21:22] » Yes sir.
>> As the other one but only one per
[21:27] business.
>> Yes sir.
[21:32] » Would that then a sign on public be
considered a wall sign?
[21:37] » Do you mind repeating that? I apologize.
>> Would that would that what Mr. Whitney
[21:42] was just talking about, would that be
considered a wall sign? Like where it
[21:45] says Lowe's or Publix on there. Would
that be considered a wall sign?
[21:49] » Wall signs are only if they are affixed
to the building itself.
[21:53] » Correct. So, as I understand it though,
there's no maximum if that's correct on
[21:56] this one. Wall sign says uh they uh
under C1 is one per building frontage.
[22:02] Now, it's no maximum. Is that correct?
>> So, that is correct. However, based off
[22:06] of this calculation, that is the
determination for the amount that can be
[22:10] placed. So there's no cumulative number
that could be placed. However, there's a
[22:15] square foot maximum that could be
placed.
[22:19] » Um could you go back to um showing us uh
the the area that is being included in
[22:25] this?
>> Okay. The site. So there really would be
[22:28] what would be considered frontage? Just
17.
[22:33] » Yes, sir.
>> Okay.
[22:38] How about the the road coming up on the
u
[22:43] was it Kingsway or Kingsbridge or
whatever it's called
[22:47] you know on the left side or the right
side
[22:50] » Leland Village Road.
>> Yeah. Well, the extension of uh
[22:54] Brunswick Forest I think it's King
something or other Kings Bridge or
[22:59] » it's more.
So, as that road comes up past the the
[23:05] site, is that that's considered
frontage?
[23:07] » On the picture we're looking at now, I
think he's Mr. Whitney is requesting is
[23:11] it not just the the 17, but would it
also include the blue line on the right
[23:16] hand side, which um which would be the
access into this area. Is that a
[23:21] frontage?
>> So, it could be considered frontage. It
[23:24] all depends how the how the layout of
the building and everything else is on
[23:27] there. Now, mind you, that Kingsbridge,
it's no longer that name, but it's
[23:30] formerly known as Kings Bridge. I can't
remember the name off the top of my
[23:33] head.
>> Um, that is not included as part of this
[23:36] UI highway overlay district request.
>> So, that would not be able to
[23:40] essentially do a 8 foot or 28 foot sign
in regards to that.
[23:44] » So, going back to a question regarding
like individual business can have a
[23:49] ground sign versus a 28 ground um 28
foot combined development sign. If you
[23:55] on a combined development sign, then you
are not able to have a individual sign
[24:00] itself. So you either have one or the
other. Good. And then each parcel can
[24:05] only have one ground sign in regards to
that. So let's say Publix chose to have
[24:10] its own ground sign at on that parcel.
>> No other uh business would be able to
[24:15] have that. So typically they work
together in terms of saying, "Hey, let's
[24:20] all have a combined development sign to
have that." So it won't have a plethora
[24:24] of individuals ground signs plus a large
28 foot high sign.
[24:31] » Does the town get to have ability to
suggest or demand where a a 28ft ground
[24:38] sign would be located?
>> That is completely up to the discretion
[24:42] of the applicant.
>> That's a very
[24:45] » as long as it is out of the designated
site triangle.
[24:50] Other [snorts]
[24:52] questions? So just
understanding that this is a zoning
[24:59] request and we're not supposed to talk
specifics but to use an example
[25:05] this would be similar to I think if you
go back to
[25:10] so when we're talking about
the area Lowe's home improvement that
[25:18] something that's come in front of us
recently
[25:21] » we would be talking similar to where
Chick-fil-A has a sign on their building
[25:28] but doesn't have signage in the same
sign where Lowe's Home Improvement does.
[25:34] That meets that example, right? If they
have a sign on the building, it's not
[25:39] necessarily going to be on the larger
sign.
[25:47] » Yeah.
So in that specific example, um,
[25:51] everyone is going to allow be allowed to
have wall signs, any business. All
[25:55] right, that's taken by its tenant space.
All right, so Chick-fil-A does have a
[26:00] wall sign. Now, mind you, Chick-fil-A
does also have a ground sign, but
[26:04] they're also not part of the Leland Town
Center,
[26:07] » okay,
>> development, but to use that example,
[26:09] the Leland Town Center, that will give
you an example of a size sign that would
[26:13] be permitted across at this location
here. And then if you've noticed all the
[26:18] other tenants have their own small
combined development signs on those
[26:22] inville, we'll say strip mall parcels,
right? So like the Starbucks and the
[26:26] firehouse subs, they have their own
smaller one that's allowed on that
[26:31] parcel, but they are not allowed to be
back onto that larger combined
[26:34] development sign. So that space is
probably reserved more so for those
[26:39] properties that are more behind that
don't necessarily have the road frontes
[26:42] on US Highway 17. So again, each
individual business will be permitted to
[26:48] have a wall sign based upon the the the
calculations that are on the screen that
[26:52] Drew had presented to you, but there may
be some limitations on what ground signs
[26:57] they would be allowed whether to all to
have one individually or to be on that
[27:00] combined development side.
>> Okay. So I I think I agree with you,
[27:05] Barbara. It's kind of hard visualizing a
signage, but I think that's not
[27:12] necessarily what
they will build, but is it an example of
[27:17] something that could be built?
>> That's correct. Yeah, the parameters the
[27:22] 210 square ft for that entire sign and
the maximum height is 28. It could be
[27:27] lower, it could be smaller than square
footage. It's all depends on what the
[27:31] developer wants in terms of that.
>> Okay,
[27:36] » other questions or comments?
[27:42] Um my only other comment would be that
having been in the retail business for
[27:46] quite a while um I find this frankly to
be rather typical um that you'll find in
[27:52] many new developments. That's my own
personal opinion. Um so then at this
[27:57] point and uh would anyone like to make a
motion?
[28:01] I'll make a motion to recommend council
approve the proposed resoning to include
[28:07] the subject parcel within US Highway 17
overly district as presented by staff.
[28:13] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[28:16] » Any discussion?
All those in favor?
[28:20] » I. Any opposed? Seeing none, it's
carried. Thank you very much. Thank you,
[28:24] Mr. Dilla.
>> Thank you. I appreciate your time.
[28:28] » Item eight, discussion topics. Mr.
Andrea will now begin the discussion.
[28:35] » Thanks. Good evening, planning board
members. Nice to see you. Uh back in
[28:40] June in your agenda packet, you received
the draft of article 4 for the unified
[28:46] development ordinance that we're working
on. This [clears throat] is the article
[28:49] that includes the zoning map and the
zoning districts that the town would
[28:53] have on adoption of the UDO.
um July we did not have a meeting so
[29:00] we're this is on the topic for
discussion tonight just want to go over
[29:04] at a high level what this article
includes some of the rationale behind it
[29:11] generally speaking as I mentioned this
sets out all of the zoning districts
[29:14] that would be included in the UDO so
some of those we currently have some of
[29:18] them would be new zoning districts this
article also would create what we call
[29:23] legacy districts we have a
uh zoning districts that essentially we
[29:28] would want to retire as far as them
being an option to be applied to
[29:32] properties moving forward after the
adoption of the UDO specifically that
[29:36] those include the multif family district
C1 2 and three which are are our three
[29:42] commercial districts and the residential
excuse yeah yeah residential
[29:47] manufactured home district
so essentially any property that's zoned
[29:51] with any of these districts could stay
zoned that zoning district, they could
[29:56] still do what is allowed under the
current regulations. Uh but no
[30:02] new application of those zoning
districts would apply moving forward.
[30:06] Part of the reason for that is that
we're in an interesting time trying to
[30:11] write this ordinance and update our
development regulations with some of the
[30:15] constraints at the uh state statute
level. And so it's easier just to say
[30:21] you can have what you have now, but
moving forward here are your new
[30:24] options. Um, this is a way to not create
nonconformities, but also to allow for
[30:30] us to have updated development standards
applicable to new zoning districts
[30:34] moving forward. any zoning district
moving forward would be at the option of
[30:40] um sort of at the behest of the property
owner through a reszoning request or
[30:45] through the application of an initial
zoning at the time a property is annexed
[30:50] into the town.
[30:54] Similarly, the residential manufactured
home district. We would like to offer
[30:59] that manufactured homes be allowed in
some of the lower density um residential
[31:04] districts and not have a zoning district
specific to uh residential manufactured
[31:10] homes.
We currently have three uh zoning zoning
[31:17] districts that are strictly for excuse
[clears throat] me for residential
[31:20] purposes. R six, R15, and R20. We'd like
to fill in the gaps with four new
[31:25] residential districts. Uh between the
three existing and the four new ones, we
[31:29] would have a pretty comprehensive
suite of residential zoning districts
[31:34] that could be chosen from. This would
offer a
[31:39] breadth of uh variation as far as the
densities that would be allowed. Also
[31:45] with the UDO all density all density
would always be
[31:52] um sort of administered through
performance standards. So currently
[31:57] right now the only performancebased
way we control density is in the R six
[32:03] zoning district. What that means is that
in R six there's an option to say you
[32:08] can have up to seven units an acre.
seven units an acre and the dimensional
[32:14] standards are relaxed or don't exist
versus in an R15 or R20 the mandate is
[32:21] that you have a 15,000 square foot or
20,000 square foot lot size minimum. So
[32:27] moving away from that sort of old way to
manage density and moving towards the
[32:32] option for performance-based density in
all zoning districts. What that offers
[32:36] is more flexibility in site design which
can provide benefits in putting areas
[32:41] that are uh either in the flood zone or
maybe have some environmental
[32:45] constraints. not forcing development or
not forcing prop private property to
[32:50] include those areas and instead offering
a neighborhood to be sort of designed
[32:58] around those areas and that those areas
become common space andor preserved open
[33:04] spaces
[33:07] with all of these zoning districts the
residential and the commercial
[33:12] districts. Um, we are writing into the
ordinance some guidance for what
[33:18] classifications from the Leland 2045
plan would be more most appropriate for
[33:23] these districts. Uh the idea there is
that when the 2045 plan was written, it
[33:29] was written in a way to identify areas
of the town with both uh on one end of
[33:35] the potential development spect spectrum
of hey, it should probably just be left
[33:39] alone due to its environmental
constraints all the way up to areas that
[33:43] are identified as the most um
the areas with the highest development
[33:49] potential. And so those are the areas
that we want to see used to their
[33:53] highest and best use.
What that can help us do is combat the
[33:59] effects of sprawl. It can help us
maximize a return on public investment
[34:03] on things like streets, public
utilities, and infrastructure. So if we
[34:08] can target density and higher intensity
development into areas that we've
[34:13] identified in the land use plan as
appropriate for those areas, it
[34:17] alleviates pressure on development for
areas that were identified as uh maybe
[34:22] have some constraints or maybe should be
left alone from a development
[34:25] perspective.
I talked about retiring the three
[34:28] commercial districts. What we would do
in their place is to essentially
[34:32] establish three new uh commercial
districts.
[34:36] um tailored based on the
uh sort of the si both the size and the
[34:43] intensity of the non-residential
development. So the idea there is to
[34:48] locate smaller scale more neighborhood
scale uses closer to residential areas
[34:53] versus things like a shopping center
probably should be u
[34:59] more carefully thought out about where
they're located. So again, three three
[35:05] uh non-residential districts to replace
the ones that would be retired.
[35:11] Also wanted to mention this article
would include the flex code districts.
[35:15] Um we went through a pretty long and um
involved effort into evaluating our flex
[35:21] code over the past couple years. don't
anticipate any major changes to that,
[35:25] but because they are zoning districts,
we want to include them into this
[35:28] chapter versus in a standalone chapter
as they are now in the code of
[35:32] ordinances.
We also would include the conservation
[35:36] district. Um and then finally the US
Highway Overlay District which was the
[35:42] subject of the uh of the case before
this discussion item. We would propose
[35:49] to essentially get rid of that and write
the allowances for the signed codes that
[35:53] would come about as part of being
included in in that overlay district to
[35:58] just be allowed instead of having
individual properties have to come and
[36:02] request this resoning to be included
into this special overlay district to be
[36:07] able to get those special sign
regulations.
[36:12] with that. Uh, what kind of comments do
you have or questions that I may be able
[36:16] to answer?
>> I I I would just like to know or have an
[36:22] example of a neighborhood business
service versus a community business and
[36:28] service because to me it's kind of close
there. So, do do you have any examples
[36:33] current examples in Leland?
>> Uh, in Leland maybe not so much, but
[36:38] more hypothetical examples if that's
okay. I would consider a neighborhood
[36:44] um business to be more like your your
corner coffee shop in whereas instead a
[36:50] community uh business may be it may
still may be a coffee shop but it might
[36:55] it is probably larger in scale and it
may have some incillary service. Maybe
[36:59] they roast their own beans or offer uh
they have maybe they have a restaurant
[37:04] associated with it. So things that are
more neighborhood oriented, I think you
[37:09] can think about that they're things that
you might
[37:13] involve or include in your day-to-day
activities.
[37:19] » How would live work situations fit into
this?
[37:24] We [clears throat] the actual uses that
are allowed in each of these zoning
[37:29] districts are going to be part of the
upcoming chapter that we're still
[37:33] working on, article 5. Um,
when we talk about live work, there's
[37:39] kind of two things that can be talked
about there. One being either a home
[37:43] occupation or one being a place where
someone could live in their business, so
[37:50] to speak. The home occupation
um is actually been made pretty easy for
[37:55] us because in the most um there was some
statutes passed recently that uh gave
[38:02] some uh some mandatory guidance on how
local jurisdictions should approach home
[38:07] occupations. So we'll essentially mimic
that as far as the ability to live in a
[38:13] residential unit. That's something that
we still would would need to to work
[38:16] through. [clears throat]
Glad to take any feedback if there's any
[38:20] thoughts that you may have as we're
thinking about that.
[38:23] » So, next question is, do you have an
example of a legacy district in Leland?
[38:28] » No, there's not any legacy districts
currently in Leland. This is something
[38:32] that's um a little bit unique. It has
been done in at least one other place.
[38:39] Um,
but again, the idea is that
[38:45] I'll say it in a different way that I
said it earlier. We are in a position
[38:50] where we run the risk of running a foul
of the downzoning law if we try to make
[38:57] changes to these existing districts that
would create nonconformities.
[39:02] » And so this is the the way around that
that issue. So there there aren't any
[39:08] legacy districts in the town currently.
>> Is that one last thing? It has to do
[39:12] with the flex code districts.
>> Um I guess my question is why are there
[39:18] so many? Because you have rural,
suburban, general urban, general urban,
[39:23] open, urban center, urban core.
[39:30] I mean are they truly that specific in
nature?
[39:34] » They are. They they all serve a unique
purpose. Uh in the flex code, those
[39:38] districts are associated with the rural
to urban uh trans spectrum. Um I could
[39:46] invite Mr. Watts up here and he could
probably talk for an hour if you all
[39:49] wanted to hear about that. But they all
have some very uh unique and different
[39:55] allowances and restrictions
>> which ultimately collectively get to
[40:01] this idea of the rural to urban uh
transex spectrum
[40:06] » and they could be in close proximity to
each other.
[40:09] » They generally are. So with those
individual transexs
[40:15] uh I'll use the the gateway district the
area around here as an example. um
[40:25] most of those not not all those in this
case in the gateway district but there
[40:29] there's the applicability of those
transexs kind of moving out from an
[40:34] urban core in the gateway district. So
there is
[40:38] within any new uh flex code area there
has to be a certain allocation
[40:46] um that's thought about as far as how
many what acreage and in what proximity
[40:51] these different transcts work together.
>> Okay.
[40:56] I I think my take on that was
>> flex code is specific and that's a
[41:03] recent update that we've undertaken and
from my reading of this I think we're
[41:08] moving more towards that specificity
instead of broader zoning.
[41:13] » That that's a great way to to look at
it. So with the spectrum of residential
[41:19] zoning districts that we're proposing
um it gives us that predictability as
[41:25] something is coming in to know what the
range of density is going to need to be
[41:31] developed on a particular property. So
it's in some ways similar to the
[41:34] transexs.
[41:38] » Other questions?
A followup on the live work. Um you say
[41:43] that you're working on something with
that just a thought is that you've got
[41:48] here minimums and maximums as units in
residential
[41:53] » and when someone begins the live work
past experience I've seen it has a
[41:58] tendency if it works if that that is a
successful kind of idea they can grow
[42:03] off each other and I just question how
is that going to fit within your minimum
[42:08] maximums if if if you see I'm not
suggesting you have an answer to that
[42:11] now, but something you to think about
because it's like success breeds success
[42:17] » and so you may have one which has a
minimum number of units and suddenly you
[42:21] have more people who want to do things
and I'm just just something you have to
[42:24] think about if it's going to grow into
something. I don't know if it will or
[42:26] won't.
>> Sure. But but
[42:28] » sure I I if I'm thinking of live work
units as the same way in the same way
[42:34] that you are I would imagine those being
more in the non-residential districts
[42:39] where these max fine because I was
thinking since it's got the live
[42:44] component might be split into the
residential right
[42:47] » makes sense.
One one other thing. Could you speak to
[42:53] » uh the conditional zoning
>> and and having that as part of each of
[42:59] these as well?
>> Yes, thanks for pointing that out. Uh we
[43:02] do have a conditional pro zoning
process. Now, a conditional zoning
[43:05] process uh is somewhat rare. I think
this board has seen a few. That's a
[43:11] process where an applicant proposes to
change the zoning district, but is
[43:16] proposing to change it in a way that is
conditioned based on a site plan and
[43:20] then sometimes some additional
conditions that may accompany uh their
[43:24] proposal. So, every zoning district that
we offer, we also want to offer the
[43:31] conditional counter part to that. And so
the benefit there is that it provides
[43:36] even more specificity than we're kind of
building into this UDO in in so far as
[43:42] to provide a site plan or a a sketch of
the subdivision or whatever the proposal
[43:47] may be. So that this article also
includes that um and sort of authorizes
[43:53] that as an option.
[43:59] » Any other comments or questions?
Thank you.
[44:03] » Okay, thanks very much. Um, we're
getting into the next couple of uh
[44:08] chapters which are pretty complicated,
so bear with us as we continue to work
[44:13] on those. When we feel that they're
ready to come to you, we'll bring them
[44:17] to you.
>> Thank you.
[44:19] » Thank you.
>> U, that was item eight. Item nine, old
[44:22] new business. Does anyone have any old
or new business they wish to bring up
[44:25] and discuss? [clears throat]
[44:29] Seeing none. Um,
>> can I speak to some new business real
[44:32] quick?
>> Oh, of course.
[44:33] » Yeah. Um, [clears throat] so we had a
meeting uh planning staff and the
[44:37] clerk's office today and talk about some
uh potential educational and training
[44:41] opportunities that for the planning
board. Um, before we offer any
[44:45] suggestions uh for for something you
guys may want to do, we want to hear
[44:47] from you. So, um, hopefully you can take
some opportunity uh this week. Adam's
[44:52] going to send an email out here uh
within the next week or so to ask what
[44:57] type of things you want to learn about
whether it's our processes or anything
[45:00] zoning related or anything that might
benefit you as a planning board member.
[45:04] So, um please consider that uh and we'll
follow back up with you regarding that
[45:09] based upon your answers.
>> Great. Thank you. Any other new or old
[45:14] business? Seeing none, then planning
staff to present the monthly reports.
[45:20] So, um, give you a little update what's
going on here. So, on July and August
[45:24] town council meetings, uh, there wasn't
any applications that you had any
[45:27] actions on or recommendations on. Uh,
just want to make pass that forward. Um,
[45:32] however, just for some, uh, sneak
preview, there was some movement um,
[45:36] with some annexations. If you did not
recall, the general statute um, sorry,
[45:41] the the state has provided us some um,
annexation powers again. So we have
[45:48] started the initial process to bring in
some of those properties into the town
[45:52] that started last town council meeting.
How your role fits into the annexation
[45:56] process. You will be able to provide us
um a recommendation for the initial
[46:00] zoning u before it goes to town council.
So not necessarily the annexation
[46:04] itself, but what be the best appropriate
um zoning district um after an
[46:08] application from that um from the parcel
owner as well as planning staff's
[46:13] recommendations. So something to be
aware of the next couple meetings. next
[46:17] few months, uh, they'll be coming
towards you. Um, going into some
[46:21] numbers, we'll go into June and July
since we didn't have meeting last month.
[46:24] Um, we had, um, June building permits,
uh, 242.
[46:29] Uh, we had 77 single family homes and
town houses permits as well. The second
[46:33] one was the mechanical change out of
which could be expected with the
[46:36] temperatures going on. Uh, we had just
short of 3,000 inspections and the value
[46:41] of construction was 27,714
plus. in July. A little bit higher in
[46:47] our permits with 285,
[clears throat] excuse me, with 113
[46:52] single family residential homes and town
home permits with 50 mechanical change
[46:56] outs,
[47:03] [clears throat] excuse me. Um, total
inspections were a little bit higher as
[47:06] well with over 3,200. Uh, value
construction was very similar to the
[47:10] month before, just over uh just short of
28 million. um give you some highlights
[47:15] on some recently approved plans. These
are obviously plans that you have seen
[47:18] through the TRC approval. Uh there was
definitely more plans than I'm going to
[47:22] say, but I'm not going through the minor
modifications or slight modifications
[47:26] you've seen from approvals. So, the Taco
Bell off of New Point in front of
[47:29] Walmart was approved. Um the uh 1,500
800 I'm sorry, 15,800 mixeduse retail
[47:36] building that's off of Westgate Drive
next to the self self storage business
[47:40] was also approved. Uh and the 20,000
plus square foot retail and office space
[47:45] off of old regent way next to the custom
home furniture outlet was also approved.
[47:49] So those are those recent approvals that
have gone through the planning staff.
[47:53] Other than that, that's pretty much all
I have. Um all the other reports
[47:56] including the transportation report is
in your packet. Um any questions or
[48:00] comments? I'd be glad to try to address
any.
[48:02] » You mentioned um the ability to do
annexations. Now um could you briefly
[48:07] mention what kind of limitations, if
any, have been put on that?
[48:10] » Sure. Um, if I recall correctly, it's
everything that uh any part property
[48:15] that the town of Leland owns or it's
also any applications that we have
[48:20] received prior to July 1st of this year
that are no more than three
[48:26] is it three miles? I'm getting confused
from from the previous language, but
[48:30] there's a geographical limitation of how
far we can go, but the application had
[48:34] been received prior to that July 1 um
adoption date. So, um, those are pretty
[48:40] much the limitations that we have. So,
we can't
[48:42] » So, after July 1st,
>> we cannot annex those properties at this
[48:46] time.
>> Thank you.
[48:50] » Other questions? Um,
>> yes, Mr.
[48:52] » The uh the property there next to
Lowe's, it was a sports center. It seems
[48:57] like it's closed. Is there any uh
discussions about what's going to happen
[49:02] with that property?
>> Um, are you talking about Lowe's
[49:04] hardware?
>> Yeah. where the um
[49:06] » I think O2 fitness
>> um I am not aware of any um new
[49:11] businesses going in there at this point
applications.
[49:15] » Okay.
>> No, unaware.
[49:16] » People have asked questions. I
>> Yeah, I don't know the status on that.
[49:21] » Okay.
Anything else? And item 11 is
[49:25] adjournment. Do I have a motion to
adjurnn the meeting?
[49:29] » So moved.
>> Do I have a second?
[49:31] » Second.
>> Any discussion? All in favor? I
[49:35] » I any opposed? Then the next regular
meeting of the planning board will be
[49:38] held September 22nd um at 6 PM right
here.
[49:43] » Thank you.