HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Agenda Packet - October 1 2025 1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
131 W. MARGARET LANE, SUITE 201
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
f
17 52
s�
Q
AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
WHITTED MEETING FACILITY
300 WEST TRYON STREET, SECOND FLOOR
I-IILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
Wednesday, October 1, 2025
Regular Meeting — 7:00 pm
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. 4 - 5 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
a. Planning Calendar for October and November
3. 6 - 43 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 3, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes
4. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
5. PUBLIC CHARGE
Introduction to the Public Charge
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute,
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB)to uphold the written land development
laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and
future needs of its residents and businesses through efficient and responsive process that
contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB
will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services
during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.
Public Charge
The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The Board asks those attending this
meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner toward each other, County
staff, and Board members. At any time should a member of the Board or the public fail to
observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it
become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will recess the
meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
The Planning Board asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and
computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
Please be kind to everyone.
2
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
6. CHAIR COMMENTS
7. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT (CONDITIONAL DISTRICT) (CONTINUED) - To
continue review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on a Zoning
Atlas Amendment to rezone +/- 78.11 acres (PIN: 9865-87-8090)
located at 1039-UT NC 86 North, Hillsborough, within the Hillsborough
Township of Orange County. The proposed rezoning is from AR
(Agricultural Residential) to R-CD (Residential - Conditional District).
The anticipated BOCC public hearing date is November 6, 2025.
See September 3, 2025 agenda for this item's materials:
https://www.orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/ 0903
2025-2340
Note: Public comment concluded at the September 3, 2025 meeting.
Additional public comments will not be taken.
Presenter: Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning
Manager
8. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT— IMPERVIOUS
SURFACES, WATERSHED PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AND STREAM
BUFFERS - To review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on
Planning Director-initiated amendments to the UDO pertaining to
impervious surfaces, watershed protection overlay districts, and stream
buffers. The anticipated BOCC public hearing date is November 6,
2025.
This item was on the September 3, 2025 agenda but was not discussed
and tabled to the October meeting date. See the September 3 agenda
for this item's materials:
https://www.orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/ 0903
2025-2340
Presenter: Christopher Sandt, County Engineer
9. ADJOURNMENT
Sign up to receive a notification when Planning Board agendas are posted
Interested persons can sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx to receive a
notification when agendas are posted. (Scroll down to the "Agenda Center" category and choose
Planning Board).
Monthly Planning & Inspections Newsletter
Sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx?ListlD=408 to receive the monthly
communication on happenings in the Planning & Inspections Department.
3
Written Comments
Interested persons who cannot attend the meeting in-person are invited to submit written
comments on agenda items to the Planning Board via email at
planningboard()orangecountync.gov no later than 3:00 p.m. on the afternoon of the meeting.
Please include in the Subject line of the email the title of the agenda item your comment pertains
to. Emails sent to this address are viewable on Google Groups:
https:l/groups.google.com/g/ocplanningboard
Written comments can also be dropped off at the Planning Department's offices at 131 W.
Margaret Lane, 2nd floor, Hillsborough, NC during normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday). Written comments will be scanned and sent by staff to the email address
indicated above.
Review Process
The Planning Board is an appointed volunteer advisory board which makes recommendations to
the Board of County Commissioners (the elected officials). The Board of County Commissioners
holds a formal public hearing and makes decisions. Section 2.8 of the County's Unified
Development Ordinance contains a flowchart depicting the review process for rezoning and text
amendment applications.
Planning Board Member Potential Conflict of Interest
It is the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances of conflict.
Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with respect to matters
before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict and refrain from undue
participation in the matter involved.
As a reminder, NC General Statute § 160D-109 establishes the following standard: Members of
appointed boards shall not vote on any advisory or legislative decision regarding a development
regulation where the outcome of the matter being considered is reasonably likely to have a direct,
substantial, and readily identifiable financial impact on the member. An appointed board member
shall not vote on any zoning amendment if the landowner of the property subject to a rezoning
petition or the applicant for a text amendment is a person with whom the member has a close
familial, business, or other associational relationship.
If any Planning Board member has any concern about a possible conflict related to an agenda
item, please notify Planning staff and get in touch directly with a member of the County Attorney's
staff before the meeting time to determine whether a conflict exists— and if so, how best to handle
the potential conflict.
4
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4
Planning Board
Meeting
7:00 pm*
Whitted Bldg.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
BOCC Board of
Business Adjustment
Meeting Meeting
7:00 pm 7:00 pm
Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
BOCC Joint
Mtg w/Fire
Departments/
Work Session
7:00 pm
Whitted Bldg.
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
BOCC
Business
Meeting
7:00 pm
Southern
Human Sery
Ctr.
26 27 28 29 30 31
Notes:
* Planning Board member attendance required
Planning Board meetings are held at Whitted Human Services Building - Donna S. Baker Meeting
Room (2nd floor) 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278
5
• •
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Planning Board BOCC
Meeting Business
ELECTION 7:00 pm* Meeting
7:00 pm
Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg.
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
BOCC Board of
Work Session Adjustment BOCC Retreat
7:00 pm 7:00 pm 8 am—Noon
Southern
Human Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg.
Services Ctr.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
BOCC
Business BOCC Retreat
Meeting
7:00 pm 1 —5 pm
Southern Whitted Bldg.
Human
Services Ctr.
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
Notes:
*Planning Board Member Attendance Required
Planning Board meetings are held in room 230 on the second floor of the Whitted Building
located at 300 W.Tryon St., Hillsborough, NC 27278
6
1 MEETING MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 SEPTEMBER 3,2025
4 REGULAR MEETING
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor(Chair) Cheeks Township, Chris Johnston (Vice-Chair) Hillsborough
7 Township, Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large
8 Representative; Beth Bronson, At-Large Representative; Venkat Yendapalli, Cedar Grove
9 Township Representative; Jonah Garson, At-Large Representative; Whitney Watson, At-
10 Large Representative.
11
12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Liz Kalles, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Charity Kirk, At-Large Representative;
13 Steve Kaufmann, Bingham Township Representative; Meg Millard, Little River Township
14 Representative.
15
16 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director- Long Range
17 Planning &Administration; Christopher Sandt, County Engineer; Patrick Mallett, Deputy
18 Director— Development Services; Taylor Perschau, Current Planning Manager; Jack
19 Moran, Planner 1
20
21 OTHERS PRESENT: Ward Marotti, Joshua Reinke,Jason Rivenbark, Don Sever, Rachel Cotter, Nicole Steele, David
22 Barcal, Beth Trahos, Laura Haywood, Lindsey Sealy, Winifried Johnson, Daniel Rawlins,
23 Stephanie Waller, Robert Medred, Peter Childers, Cathy Owens, Laura Streitfeld, Susanne
24 Berglund,Wayne Honeycutt.
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
27
28 The meeting began at 7:06 PM
29
30 Lamar Proctor: Welcome everyone. Once again, I am Lamar Proctor. I am the chair of the Planning Board. We
31 are going to call this meeting to order. We do have a quorum,the necessary seven members.
32
33 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS
34
35 Lamar Proctor reviewed the upcoming Planning Board and Board of County Commissioners meeting
36 calendars.
37
38 Lamar Proctor: The next item is a Land Use Plan 2050 update.
39
40 Cy Stober: Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, I'm happy to provide an update on that. There is no materials to share. We
41 were planning on it, but the item was presented to the commissioners at about 10:20 p.m. at their
42 August 26th business meeting, and they chose to continue the item to tomorrow night, so we will
43 be discussing it with the commissioners tomorrow night. The overview is that in April the
44 commissioners directed myself and the long-range planning and administration staff, namely Tom
45 Altieri and Perdita Holtz to provide further explanation and subject matter expert reports on 17
46 different topics related to the comprehensive land use plan that's being drafted at this time.
47 Essentially the schedule that you just went over, every work session there will be either staff or
48 subject matter experts presenting topics. At least as proposed, the calendar seemed to be
49 acceptable to the board, although they do want to discuss the presenters and when the subject
50 matter will be discussed on a date-by-date basis. In addition to the work sessions there will be
51 two retreats in November, a morning retreat on November 14th and an afternoon retreat on
52 November 21 st. Those are both Fridays. Minutes will be taken at all these meetings in
53 accordance with open meetings laws,and that's the current status of the land use plan, and we'll
7
54 be presenting deep dives to the elected board so they have more understanding and comfort with
55 the relevant planning concerns from everything from our joint planning agreement that established
56 the rural buffer to detailed conversations about community septic systems and wells and so forth,
57 so stay tuned, and please feel free to participate as you like. Just a reminder for the public,work
58 sessions do not permit public comment, but they will be streamed and made available to the
59 public as well as recorded as minutes.
60
61 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you, and just so the public knows,what we're talking about is the overhaul or
62 renewal of the comprehensive land use plan that guides zoning and land use decisions for Orange
63 County government, and I think that website is orangecountylanduseplan.com, and so if you're a
64 member of the public and live in or are interested in land use development in Orange County,
65 please check out that site because it will describe the process and what's going on. It's basically a
66 process where many different voices are heard,and a lot of input is given and a lot of review of
67 census data and economic data and land data to come up with a comprehensive land use plan
68 that guides our decisions in zoning and land use.
69
70 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
71
72 Lamar Proctor: The next item is the approval of the Ordinance Review Committee notes from July 9th. Do I have
73 a motion? Do we need to approve those? Sorry.
74
75 Cy Stober: Yes, please unless there is reason not to.
76
77 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Do I have a motion for the approval of those committee notes?
78
79 Chris Johnston: I make a motion to approve as written.
80
81 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Do I have a second?
82
83 Statler Gilfillen: I'll second.
84
85 Lamar Proctor: All right. Statler seconds. All in favor please raise your hand.
86
87 MOTION BY Chris Johnston to approve the July 9 ORC meeting notes. Seconded by Statler GiIfillen.
88
89 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
90
91 Lamar Proctor: Seeing that it's unanimous,the committee notes are approved, and as to the August 6th regular
92 meeting minutes, do I have any addition, corrections, or a motion. Yes.
93
94 Delores Bailey: One correction please. The spelling of Delores is D-E-L-O-R-E-S.
95
96 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Do I have a motion with that amendment? To approve the August 6 regular meeting
97 minutes with that spelling correction of Delores' name.
98
99 Jonah Garson: So moved.
100
101 Lamar Proctor: Do I have a second?
102
103 Statler GiIfillen: I'll second it.
104
105 Lamar Proctor: Statler seconds. All in favor please raise your hand.
106
107 MOTION BY Jonah Garson to approve the August 6 meeting minutes. Seconded by Statler GiIfillen.
108
8
109 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
110
111 Lamar Proctor: Let the record reflect that all members voted approval of the minutes, so the August 6, 2025
112 regular meeting minutes are approved.
113
114 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
115
116 None.
117
118 Lamar Proctor: Do we hear any additions to the agenda? Hearing there are none, I will move on to the public
119 charge.
120
121 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE
122
123 Lamar Proctor read the Public Charge.
124
125 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS
126
127 Lamar Proctor: I do have a few comments. First of all, I'm just going to ask members of the Planning Board to
128 always give their full attention to the presenters and to the public when they're making comments.
129 It's okay if you need to speak to each other to reference a page number because we are dealing
130 with hundreds of pages in these packets, and there is a lot of information that's being considered,
131 but we should refrain from having lengthy or substantive discussions amongst ourselves. This is a
132 legislative process, and we should be discussing that amongst ourselves in public at the
133 appropriate time. I also wanted to remind the Planning Board that if there are errors you notice in
134 the packet that are grammatical or scrivener's errors as we call them in the courtroom or,
135 formatting errors,those can be directed to Cy Stober as the planning director, and those do not
136 have to be necessarily brought out in the open meeting. We need to make the most efficient use
137 of our time and discuss the substantive issues that are before us. I would just like to reiterate to
138 everyone,the Planning Board takes this job very seriously. We're all volunteers. We understand
139 that planning, and especially zoning decisions and land use planning decisions are very emotional
140 for the people it effects,that is you're talking about changing the character of people's homes,
141 where they reside,the characters of their community, and these are very important decisions, and
142 we take them seriously,so we would ask just for everyone to respect each other. Sometimes
143 these are not popular decisions. Sometimes they're difficult, and we are doing our best to try and
144 hear all the voices and make an informed recommendation to the Board of County
145 Commissioners, and I would just remind everyone that we are not the final decision here on these
146 planning land use issues. We make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners,
147 and they make the final decision as to these issues. Moving along to Agenda Item 7,we have a
148 zoning atlas amendment to review and make recommendations to the Board of County
149 Commissioners on a zoning atlas amendment to rezone plus or minus 78.11 acres located at
150 1039-UT NC 86 North Hillsborough within the Hillsborough Township of Orange County. The
151 proposed rezoning is from agricultural residential to residential conditional district. The anticipated
152 board of county commissioner public hearing date is November 6 of 2025, so we will have a
153 presenter from the developer on this project, and I would remind them that we limit these
154 presentations to 30 minutes.
155
156 Taylor Perschau: Thank you, Chair Proctor. Good evening, board. My name is Taylor Perschau. I am the current
157 planning and zoning manager,the staff planner on this zoning atlas amendment as Lamar just
158 summarized. I will be going through the conditional district zoning process as a reminder of what
159 has already happened in the review process to get the project to this Planning Board. The
160 applicant team are familiar faces to you all, as we saw a different application from the Forestar
161 Group at your August meeting, so a reminder on the conditional district zoning process. There are
162 two different zoning processes available to applicants. One is conventional district. The other
9
163 tonight's is a conditional district zoning. For a conditional district zoning,the request is going to be
164 use specific with an individualized development plan, including a site plan, conditions that are
165 agreed upon by the applicant and ultimately the Board of County Commissioners, and site-specific
166 standards, so the site-specific development plan has been included in the application from its very
167 submittal. It has gone through minor revisions. It has had, it started with planning staff review,
168 went through the development advisory committee,there was a neighborhood information
169 meeting, and finally we're here tonight for Planning Board review and recommendation to the
170 Board of County Commissioners. As Lamar stated,the project is in the Hillsborough Township.
171 The green in the map you see on the screen is the Hillsborough Township, so the dark gray notes
172 city limits for Hillsborough. The light gray notes Town of Hillsborough's extra territorial jurisdiction
173 in which municipal services,so city limits don't extend to the ETJ, but planning and zoning
174 jurisdiction do.
175
176 Lamar Proctor: I just have a minor correction before we go on. I think I said developer. I should have said
177 applicant,so using the proper nomenclature, so we have an applicant who is applying for a zoning
178 change.
179
180 Taylor Perschau: Correct.
181
182 Taylor Perschau: As Lamar noted, it is currently zoned agricultural residential. It is also located in the Lower Eno
183 unprotected watershed. The request is for a rezone to residential conditional for the use of a
184 major subdivision and single-family dwellings specifically. Surrounding zoning in the green on this
185 visual is agricultural residential, some yellow are R1 and R3,which is low to medium intensity rural
186 residential uses. To the east of the subject parcel is Eno River Academy,which is within the Town
187 of Hillsborough city limits. To the south, that grayed area, again, is the extra territorial jurisdiction
188 for the Town of Hillsborough. As with all zoning requests,we're asked to compare what's being
189 requested to what the future land use map as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
190 designates this area for. This particular parcel falls under both rural industrial activity node and
191 agricultural residential. I wanted to particularly highlight what rural industrial activity node means,
192 as that's quite different from one that we often see. The future land use plan describes this as
193 land designated in the comprehensive plan that is designed on designated road intersections
194 which serve as nodal crossroads for surrounding rural community and is an appropriate location
195 for small-scale industrial uses which do not require urban-type services, and there is no proposed
196 amendment to either of these two future land use designations. Of note,this property is also
197 mapped within the Town of Hillsborough Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area land
198 use plan. The subject parcel is classified as mixed residential neighborhood by this land use plan,
199 which is defined as the dominant land use in any proposed development is expected to be
200 residential based on square footage of proposed structures. Developments may contain a single
201 or variety of dwelling types and densities or may integrate a variety of supportive commercial
202 public and semi-public uses and open or public space. Small developments that provide only
203 supportive non-residential land uses in an infill arrangement serving more than 50 dwelling units in
204 a walkable manner may also be considered. So part of what has been brought before you tonight,
205 as is required by the unified development ordinance for a conditional district rezoning application
206 includes site-specific plan, an environmental assessment, a biological inventory, and as noted,
207 this has gone before review agencies, including the Orange County Development Advisory
208 Committee,which includes addressing and land records staff; building inspections; department of
209 environment, agriculture, parks and recreation; environmental health; erosion control; and fire and
210 life safety. North Carolina Department of Transportation is also involved in our DAC review, and
211 staff submitted the entire application packet to the state environmental review clearinghouse. The
212 DAC comments included in the application packet note all of the needed permits or concerns or
213 advisory comments from all the DAC members. I will let the applicant get into their site-specific
214 plan. I will quickly say it's proposing a 49-lot subdivision with lots 20,000 square feet in size. It is
215 proposing two accesses on NC 86 North, and the property does have various mapped
216 jurisdictional streams on site,which are subject to Orange County stream buffer regulations. Per
217 state statute, imposed conditions and site-specific standards are limited to those that address
10
218 conformance of a development and use of the site to local government ordinances and adoptive
219 plans or the impact is reasonably expected to be generated by the development or use on site.
220 You will find in the application that the applicant has proposed conditions. You as the Planning
221 Board are also open to suggesting conditions, as is the Board of County Commissioners.
222 Ultimately, the Board of County Commissioners and the applicant would have to agree to stated
223 and imposed conditions. I think I might let the applicant also get into the conditions. I think you
224 have that on your own slide show, so I'll keep these here for reference, but we can come back to
225 them as needed, so there are a total of ten conditions, all of which are land use specific, and with
226 that, I will hand it over to the applicant team. After the applicant presentation, I do plan on coming
227 back to finalize some staff notes before we open up to board discussion and public comment.
228
229 Beth Bronson: The conditions are in the packet or are not in the packet?
230
231 Taylor Perschau: They are.
232
233 Beth Bronson: They are in the packet, so I just wanted to make sure.
234
235 Cy Stober: Staff has provided those conditions. In addition to the applicant's packet, they should be in the
236 staff report,the ordinance,and the statement of consistency.
237
238 Lamar Proctor: I think they're on Page 82.
239
240 Beth Trahos: Good evening, Mr. Chair, and Planning Board members. My name is Beth Trahos. I am an
241 attorney with Fox Rothschild, and I am here tonight on behalf of Forestar Development to propose
242 the development of the 49-home community on Highway 86. 1 have with me a big team of experts
243 who will be available tonight to answer any questions you have. Laura Haywood and Jason
244 Rivenbark with Forestar, Don Sever,with Bowman,who is the civil engineer, Rachel Cotter and
245 Nicole Steele with Weston and Sampson, our landscape architects, Josh Reinke with Bolton and
246 Menk, the traffic engineer, Ward Marotti with Spangler Environmental and David Barcal with
247 McConnell and Associates, and we have worked very closely with your staff who has been
248 available and helpful and collaborative with us, and we really appreciate their professional
249 expertise and assistance. This is the subject property. It is 79.76 acres on Highway 86 North. It
250 is immediately adjacent to Town of Hillsborough corporate limits with the Eno River Academy to
251 the back. There are a number of surrounding residentially focused land uses to the site. Of
252 course,the Eno River Academy, Pathways Elementary School, Mars Baptist Church as well as
253 some homes, some small neighborhoods, and some vacant land. The broader area here includes
254 a wider variety of uses, HVAC repair, a construction company, Orange County Public
255 Transportation,several churches, Fairview Park and more homes and neighborhoods and vacant
256 land. You can see the variety of zoning that's out here, everything from AR to industrial, and in
257 between. We propose residential conditional district, and as your staff said,that means we have
258 committed to a concept plan as well as written conditions, and our goal with this plan is to provide
259 much needed housing while representing the rural heritage of this area,which is now very close to
260 the town of Hillsborough with its many desirable amenities, actually not so far from where we sit
261 here today. I'm going to ask Rachel Cotter to come forward and talk with you about, about the
262 design.
263
264 Rachel Cotter: Good evening, Mr. Chair and board members. The concept for this design is based in beautiful
265 living that celebrates the local character and context, natural resources and context and culture of
266 rural Orange County. These qualities are represented throughout our proposed design. First, to
267 protect and celebrate the natural resources on site and regionally,we are clustering the proposed
268 lots and thus limiting disturbance of the site. Different from many residential developments,we
269 are not mass grading the site. We are maintaining stream and wetland buffers and preserving
270 these features themselves keeping habitat and corridors in place to the extent possible. We have
271 a total of 49 of the nearly 80 acres preserved as, or I'm sorry, proposed as tree protection areas.
272 In terms of the character and context of the site, it is honored by the inclusion of a sculptural art
11
273 piece and three experiential gardens in spirit of rural Orange County and southern charm. This is
274 some of our experiential garden,just simple precedent imagery that we really imagine these
275 capturing the native landscape of Orange County and serving as rooms throughout the
276 development, and then finally,the culture and lifestyle we imagine and have designed for is one
277 with a strong sense of community promoted through gathering spaces and trails meandering
278 through the site. Approximately 1.7 miles of natural surface trail allow this community to be active
279 where residents can connect with the natural beauty of the Orange County landscape and move
280 through a connected series of trails that lead them to these individual gardens, and I will turn it
281 back over to Beth to talk about the details of the zoning commitment.
282
283 Beth Trahos: I'll just touch briefly to reiterate what your staff has said that this is compliant with the Orange
284 County Hillsborough COCA plan which designates the site for mixed residential neighborhood,
285 and as Rachel said, preserves in the cluster of flexible development subdivision significant
286 amounts of natural area. In our conditions we have the commitment to our site plan, a minimum
287 lot size of 20,000 square feet,a commitment with regard to the experiential gardens,which are
288 shown on that concept plan and a requirement that each of the gardens have a plan designed by
289 a landscape architect at the time of final plat and that they contain seating opportunities such as a
290 bench or a hammock so that they will be attractive and usable amenities in the community. We
291 also have committed to native plant materials to supplement perimeter plantings in an effort to
292 maintain that local flora. We have committed to the trails that Rachel discussed. They will provide
293 access to the community gathering areas and each of the gardens. Nine thousand linear feet is
294 roughly 1.7 miles. We've also committed to having way-finding signs located along the trails to
295 guide walkers as they move throughout the community. We will have a mail kiosk with a weather
296 covering and recessed lighting. The designated community gathering space will include that
297 sculptural art piece that Rachel mentioned and seating opportunities all to be maintained by the
298 HOA. We made commitments with regards to the individual septic system size to serve at least
299 four bedrooms and a commitment that no home shall contain no more than four bedrooms, and
300 finally, an acknowledgment of the dark sky preservation lighting requirements in your UDO that we
301 will comply with as a part of this project. We are proposing individual septic systems on each lot.
302 We have taken time to do a soil and site evaluation,which I understand to be the modern perc test
303 to confirm that there is an opportunity to use these systems on each lot. We have then shown
304 how these systems would lay out on individual lots spread throughout the community, so you can
305 see on this overall the designated lots we have chosen for fit tests. We have included those fit
306 tests so that they can be reviewed in greater detail. We also propose a community well, and we
307 went to Orange County and requested a permit and received a permit to install a community well,
308 to confirm that there was sufficient water capacity here to serve the planned homes,and we hired
309 a consultant to do a study using three wells to determine whether there was sufficient water,and
310 the results showed that there was sufficient water, and Ward and David Barcal are both here to
311 talk with you in detail about the work that they have done.This was in response to questions we
312 had heard from neighbors who wanted to understand the impact of a community well on existing
313 wells. In addition to our community meeting,we reached out and had discussions with several
314 members of the community after that meeting, and we took action to add conditions based on
315 what we heard. We think our proposal offers quite a lot of public benefit for the community
316 providing 49 homes in close proximity to the amenities of historic Hillsborough with a significant
317 walking trail and unique gardens and gathering spaces, a commitment to native plant materials
318 and a commitment to protect more than half of the site as open space. We recognize that Orange
319 County and the town of Hillsborough are growing rapidly, and that people want to live here, and
320 more housing is needed, and we believe that the proposed neighborhood does a good job of
321 protecting the rural heritage of the area while acknowledging that Hillsborough is growing and
322 there is this need for additional housing. So,we ask for your support,and our full team is available
323 to answer any questions you might have about our proposal.
324
325 Lamar Proctor: All right. Does that conclude the presentation?
326
12
327 Beth Trahos: For our portion. Of course,we would request the opportunity to reserve any remaining time to
328 answer questions if needed.
329
330 Lamar Proctor: Okay. We'll hear from staff, and then we'll move to public comment because I think it is much
331 more helpful to us to have had public input before we start engaging and questioning and then
332 board discussion.
333
334 Taylor Perschau: Thank you. I'm just going to finish up a few notes about how the application and review met
335 ordinance standards to get to the board today. So, public notices were mailed via first-class mail
336 to property owners on August 20th. As required by the ordinance,those notices go to all
337 properties within 1,000 feet of the subject property. Signs were similarly posted on the parcel the
338 same day, Wednesday,August 20th, and the application information has been posted publicly on
339 our department's active development web page since we get those applications on the web page
340 as soon as a neighborhood information meeting is scheduled. Staff has determined that the
341 application is complete in accordance with the requirements of the LIDO. All submitted materials
342 were in compliance with the following applicable sections. That includes Sections 2.8,which
343 details zoning atlas amendment application requirements, Section 2.9 for conditional districts and
344 Section 5.21.1,which defines submittal requirements for major subdivision conditional districts.
345 Staff review of the application included considerations for how the request relates to Orange
346 County 2030 comprehensive plan. You see notes on that in the drafted statements of both
347 consistency and inconsistency. The requested zoning district of the residential conditional district
348 is noted to be consistent with the 2030 comprehensive plan, as detailed in Appendix F,which
349 relates the relationships between land use classifications and zoning districts. As well,the
350 applicant has provided an environmental assessment as part of the submittal. Staff reviewed, as
351 did the state clearinghouse for environmental review, and determined no significant environmental
352 impact is expected from the property based on existing and proposed conditions, so tonight,you
353 have already heard from the applicant and staff. You now have the opportunity to hear from the
354 public, at your discretion review and discuss the analysis and staff recommendation, and finally
355 you're tasked with making a recommendation of either approval or denial to the Board of County
356 Commissioners. So,the planning director recommends that you all receive the rezoning
357 application. You deliberate on the proposal. You consider the planning director's
358 recommendation, and then finally make a recommendation to the Board of County
359 Commissioners.
360
361 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you. We're going to move to public comment. I'm going to reread the public
362 charge to remind all of us about our commitment to respect and having a peaceable discussion
363 and on these issues. The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The board asks
364 those attending this meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful courteous manner toward each
365 other, county staff and board members. At any time, should a member of the board or the public
366 fail to observe this charge the chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it
367 become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting,the chair will recess the meeting
368 until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. The Planning Board
369 asks once again that all electronic devices be set to silent. Please be kind to everyone. I'm going
370 to read the names as they appear, and if there is no agenda item listed, I will just make a brief
371 inquiry. This Highway 86 subdivision is Agenda Item 7, so we are taking public comment on
372 Agenda Item 7, and then when we move to Agenda Item 8 after this, then we can take public
373 comment on that item. So,the first name is Lindsay Sealy.
374
375 Chris Johnston: So just to clarify for everyone in the audience,what's going to happen is if you would be so kind
376 as to state your name and location. I'm going to hit the button here and it'll give you a 3-minute
377 timer. It'll show you a little red light when you're getting close, and we just ask that you respond to
378 that.
379
380 Lindsey Sealy: Great, thank you. My name is Lindsey Sealy. I am the executive director at Eno River Academy
381 that was referenced several times in that presentation. They also held the neighborhood
13
382 information meeting at our school, so we have learned all about this proposal already, and we just
383 want to express that we have a very vested interest in this property, and we currently use it. We
384 have an agreement with the current owners that we can use the cross-country trail on it, so we
385 would lose that, and we just wanted to share that we are interested in the property and that we
386 would obviously love to continue to have our cross-country program. Thank you.
387
388 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you. Winifried Johnson.
389
390 Chris Johnston: If you could come to the front. I apologize.
391
392 Winifried Johnson: I am just concerned about the traffic situation on 86. It's already really bad,so with this new
393 development, I'm just concerned about the traffic on 86. That's what I'm here to hear about.
394
395 Chris Johnston: Okay. Do you, do you have any, any additional comments on that?
396
397 Winifried Johnson: No,that's the only comment I'm concerned about. I just came to hear about what's going to
398 happen with the traffic.
399
400 Chris Johnston: Wonderful. Thank you.
401
402 Winifried Johnson: You're welcome.
403
404 Cy Stober: Ma'am, before you leave,just so we have it on the record, could you just say your name once
405 again please?
406
407 Winifried Johnson: I'm sorry. My name is Winifried Johnson. I live on 86.
408
409 Lamar Proctor: Thank you very much,Winifried.And once again, if you step up,just make sure you speak clearly
410 into the microphone. State your name and your location in the county. Daniel Rawlins.
411
412 Daniel Rawlins: I am Daniel Rawlins. I live at 200 Governor Burke Road. I just wanted to point out to support Ms.
413 Johnson, I don't know if anyone's been on 86 between 7:30 and 8:30 in the morning, it's a train
414 wreck. There are hills that already,there is many accidents already on that road in the morning
415 when you come over certain hills. If you've been up there you've seen it. I am concerned about
416 the traffic on 86 in the morning. Also, acutely for us,we have on Governor Burke Road,and if
417 anyone is there during the school hours, people cut across from 86 on Governor Burke Road in
418 the morning, especially high school children flying down our road. This would increase traffic
419 across, not only in the morning for school but also when people want to access that side of
420 Hillsborough where like Food Lion is, and they come through that area. The increased traffic
421 would definitely be a nuisance to us, but that would just be a nuisance. I am concerned about 86,
422 especially between 7:30 and 8:30. It is quite crowded already. There is plenty of traffic from the
423 Eno River Academy on 57 already, so anyone who's been there, I would say go drive over there in
424 the morning just once to see how bad 57 is from Eno River Academy and how bad 86 is from
425 traffic coming from north to south already, and that will increase that, and of course,for us
426 personally on 80, on Governor Burke Road in the morning, that would increase traffic cutting
427 across between 86 and 57, and I,without any kind of study of the traffic I'm kind of concerned, as
428 is already pretty bad already in the morning if anyone would come and see what it looks like at
429 8:00. It's pretty congested in that area already. Thank you.
430
431 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. Stephanie Waller.
432
433 Stephanie Waller: Hello. My name is Stephanie Waller, and I reside at 113 Blackman Lane. Growth is inevitable,
434 and I just want to have some accountability with the growth. The project I think is lovely. If I had
435 to actually choose between different builders or developers,what they propose is really good 1
436 think having come from Durham as a native person and having seen the overgrowth in Durham.
14
437 This is why actually we moved here and relocated from Durham to Hillsborough a year ago. Now
438 one thing that I wanted to ask this, this board and anyone that is responsible for approving or
439 thinking about or considering this is that the accountability is there. One of my concerns is 1
440 actually, our house,we volunteered to use our well for the water test to see if there is a draw down
441 effect. We were part of the neighbors, and at that time there was another neighbor that wanted to
442 as well, and I was glad that they did use our well. My concern is that they used the minimum
443 requirement,the minimum that is required by North Carolina, and in looking and researching
444 usually it's actually suggested that four to six existing wells be used, and especially North Carolina
445 actually states that they recommend more observation wells if there is heterogeneous aquifers,
446 and so right now we're actually researching even in our own home where there is water
447 fluctuations, and we're planning to hire a plumber to see what that's about because after being
448 there a year that was not the case. The other thing is, the concern is in researching the parent
449 company for Forestar, DR Horton,there was a complaint for injunctive relief and civil penalties in
450 Baltimore, Maryland. The department had issued a complaint for injunctive relief and civil
451 penalties for the unpermitted discharge of pollution in violation of sediment pollution, so my
452 concern is not what's done, it's how it's done. I don't have the expertise to really keep them
453 accountable, and I just hope that people keep them accountable. The project that they propose is
454 great. My concern is, and having and actually lived in a town home and gone through the process
455 where the developer,the builder, and then, you have separate entities, and my question to them
456 during the first meeting was who is going to make the builders accountable to or keep that plan
457 that you propose? It's a great plan I think, but who is going to actually follow every step of the
458 process to make sure that plan results in what you propose? And that's my only concern, and
459 also the traffic because right now we have a private road, and we don't have any kind of a
460 stoplight, and so it is very treacherous to try to get out. Thank you for your time.
461
462 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you. I don't see an agenda item, but I just want to check, Robert Medred.
463
464 Robert Medred: Robert Medred. I own the 13.5 acres that this property surrounds me on three sides. I have
465 owned that property for 27 years. I was a friend with the Browns, and I watched over it while she
466 lived there. I have a question about the diagram of the map. My property has a 1-acre notch
467 taken out of the southeast corner. That map,from what I can see because the printing is so small
468 up here, it looks like that notch is taken out well away from the southeast corner, so I question
469 that. My other question is, I think, based on my walking on my property that I see engineering
470 tape on my property,so if there is,we're going to have a problem with that, and I really don't want
471 to pay for another survey to prove that they're on my property. I have had surveyors trespass on
472 my property. I have had Raleigh State engineers trespass on my property, so I'm not too
473 impressed with what is really going on to date, so I'd like to talk to the developer and get more
474 information, and I'd like to know what kind of buffer is going to be put to keep people off of my
475 property. Is there going to be a fence put up or how is that going to work. I am surrounded. 1
476 don't know if I can stop it, but I really don't want it. Not much I can do, but I'm the most affected of
477 anyone in this room, and so I would like to be taken seriously on this, and that should do it. Thank
478 you.
479
480 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. Peter Childers.
481
482 Peter Childers: Peter Childers, and I live on Morrow Mill Road. So,this presentation and development is a cookie
483 cutter for the one we heard last month. I think that the people look familiar. It's the same
484 developer possibly,and the presentation was cookie cutter. The board approved that one.This is
485 the one by White Cross that last month that you guys approved, so I don't know how you're going
486 to really not approve this one, but in any event, I have lived long enough to see what creeping
487 densities do in destroying quality of life. I have lived through it, seen it, and I've observed it, and
488 this is a very nice presentation, but the densities to me are too high. The developer already can
489 do 1-acre lots without changing the zoning,and that's what I would approve the 1-acre lots, not
490 these half-acre lots where there is barely room to plant a tree. Density presents all sorts of
491 problems to communities, and it destroys communities,traffic, more schools, more this, more that.
15
492 We don't have to live like that. The developers and the builders, they make their money. They do
493 the project. They move on, but the people living there as this creeps, density creeps and creeps
494 and creeps, and before you know it, your quality of life is gone, so I will not support this project for
495 those reasons, and I guess I am asking the board not to approve this one because the county
496 commissioners are still looking at the 2050 plan. They haven't had enough information. They're
497 having, I heard tonight they're having more sessions, retreats I guess, to talk about it, so I would
498 just like to put a pause on these rezoning applications until we get the 2050 plan and more
499 information, and more experts can comment on that. So that's what I have to say. Thank you
500 very much.
501
502 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. Cathy Owens.
503
504 Cathy Owens: My name is Cathy Owens, and I currently live at 158 Blackman Lane in Hillsborough, North
505 Carolina. Very recently, our very same house address was 1501 NC Highway 86 North. We are
506 the first driveway north of this gentleman here who is surrounded. The proposed access roads to
507 the proposed development are on each side of his driveway. Both are blocked. I confirmed with
508 the North Carolina Highway Patrol today that there had been three recent fatalities in that stretch,
509 including an infant child who was recently orphaned because of the traffic there, and you can
510 check with that as well. I also want to add that our property is the vacant lot that they keep
511 mentioning. A better word for that is pasture. We have had the hay baled. We have goats there.
512 We have chickens. We have roosters. I guarantee their HOA is going to want to take into their
513 own hands our roosters crowing all day long. My children swing, and I don't know if you see this
514 little white house, that's our home, standing with our back to their property. Our children,that big
515 tree next to the house is over a 200-year-old pecan tree. We have a 325-year-old sycamore tree.
516 They've already approached us about building a road through our property,which Daniel Boone
517 walked on back in the day. It's not on your agenda, but I promise you that if you approve this,
518 that's next. If you look at the picture in the corner with a man to his back to us,that's the view
519 from my living room looking out my front window. Those trees are what they are going to mow
520 down to make that open space. This is our driveway. This is our pasture. This is to prove to you
521 that we use our agricultural land. I am a 4-H member. I have been a member of Orange County
522 4-H for 24 years. We have lived here for 24 years. Both my children are 4-H members. They
523 want to raise pigs. They want to learn how to raise cows. This property was used for cattle. Our
524 barn is one of the 20 oldest barns in North Carolina. I don't think we should give this up just so
525 people who do not have a connection to this community can make a lot of money. I mean, please,
526 please consider keeping this agricultural. Please consider rural. Please consider the quality of life
527 that us and this gentleman and our neighbors,who are not vacant land, have worked very,very
528 hard to maintain and keep, and we moved here intentionally as an agricultural zoning so that we
529 could maintain our life. Thank you.
530
531 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. Laura Streitfeld.
532
533 Laura Streitfeld: Hi, I'm Laura Streitfeld, and I am with Preserve Rural Orange, and I live in Bingham Township. My
534 apologies. I just have multiple notes from multiple comments.
535
536 Chris Johnston: I can pause while you get your notes.
537
538 Laura Streitfeld: Yes. Thank you.
539
540 Chris Johnston: Just let me know when you're ready.
541
542 Laura Streitfeld: Okay. All right. My apologies. Regarding this property, excuse me one moment. Let me just
543 make sure I have the right notes. I apologize. Okay. I'm urging you tonight to deny Forestar
544 Group Incorporated's rezoning request for the property on NC Highway North, I'm sorry, NC 86
545 North. Rezoning from agricultural residential to residential conditional district zoning would burden
546 the property and adjacent communities with 49 densely sided lots and individual septic fields
16
547 surrounding Stroud's Creek,streams, and wetlands. To call it a conservation cluster is a stretch.
548 If you were to build a highway, and you paved the roads but not the median or the shoulder,would
549 you call that conservation? That's the concept here. Commissioners have not yet decided
550 whether or how to define or regulate conservation clusters, and that topic isn't on their agenda
551 until later this fall, but it's being closely considered. I realize it's in the UDO, but they are closely
552 considering how to more thoughtfully consider and whether or not to use conservation clusters
553 and where. On this property, it's misleading. This does not appear to conserve in any meaningful
554 way,watershed land,wildlife,creeks, streams,wetlands, or buffers. If this property were not
555 rezoned, construction could still take place on the property, and the same areas would be
556 excluded from construction because they are not buildable. They are buffers, and they are
557 wetlands,and they are water areas that are not buildable. Putting in gardens and benches is not
558 really a public amenity, and neither are the trails. This property, if developed as proposed,would
559 provide benefits to only those who would choose to live there, and the housing that's provided is
560 not affordable. It would not be available to the public. In the agenda you can see there are
561 questions from the planning staff and from Hillsborough officials asking about whether the trails
562 would be available, and the answer is no that they are private. They're not being built to any
563 public standards, and they would not be able to be used by students who are walking to school to
564 create a more walkable community. I have heard from residents around the community that there
565 are significant questions about traffic because not only are they burdened with serious traffic
566 issues, as you have heard, but there are many, many cars coming and going during school hours
567 with the two schools and folks who already cut through neighborhood streets posing great risk to
568 the folks who live there. It's also a concern that like the project a month ago, the wells are already
569 being dug and tested in a way that may cause fluctuations in water availability or effect water
570 quality and that that would preclude the folks who are there now from assessing at a baseline how
571 their properties might be affected. With the considerable septic that's being proposed, I ask you to
572 consider not recommending this project knowing that they could still build on this property,just not
573 at the density that they're requesting. Thank you.
574
575 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. Wayne Honeycutt, did you want to speak?
576
577 Wayne Honeycutt: No.
578
579 Lamar Proctor: No. Okay. And Susanna, I'm going to mess that up. You're good. Okay. Thank you. All right.
580 So that concludes public comment. I'm going to turn it over to the board to see if we have any
581 questions of the applicant,so Delores, do you want to start?
582
583 Delores Bailey: I do. Thank you. I actually have a couple questions. While sitting here taking note of the number
584 of folks that had come up with questions about the traffic, and I know I think we talked a little bit
585 about that before. Are there any changes to the plan since we last met that can alleviate the
586 traffic danger that everyone is talking about? Is there anything that can be done about that?
587
588 Beth Trahos: I'm going to ask Josh Reinke to come forward and talk to you about the work that he did to study
589 traffic in this area.
590
591 Josh Reinke: Josh Reinke with Bolton and Menk. We did a traffic study,so nothing was officially required by
592 NCDOT or by the county based on the number of trips that this will generate, but the team wanted
593 us to proactively look at this and run some analysis, submit it formally to DOT so that they would
594 have to issue a response. So, in looking at this,we do acknowledge,yes, there is traffic on 86.
595 This is a,while it's a low generator that doesn't require a TIA,we're always concerned about
596 accidents,things like that. One of the things that will have to happen,so a traffic study would
597 formally say here are recommendations. It's the driveway permit that will have the requirements
598 that NCDOT has, so what came out of this traffic study in coordination with DOT is there is a
599 preliminary field investigation looking at that sight distance,which has been referenced. You've
600 got topography,things like that with the sight distance, so when you're making movements there,
601 and probably to be honest,when you say you've got a lot of crashes, it's usually,when you have
17
602 fatalities, it's higher speeds. It means people can come and go very quickly out there,so one of
603 the things that has to be investigated further with the driveway permit,which you will need to get
604 driveways, is in part of the design is looking at that sight distance and saying what needs to
605 happen,so that could be turn lanes out there,things like that that would alleviate,the turning folks
606 out of that through movement into an exclusive lane to turn into the site, so that's one of the things
607 that could come out of that. Once again, I can't guarantee or anything because it is a DOT road.
608 It is a DOT decision, and they're just saying we want you to look at this in the design. We know
609 there are considerations for safety there, and what is ultimately decided. I can't promise anything
610 but those are typical things when you have sight distance issues is you need to make sure people
611 can safety get out of the through movement into a turn lane so they can get in and out of the site,
612 and the same thing with the folks exiting the site. They need to be able to see the cars coming.
613 Design needs to consider that,so there will be likely some sort of mitigation there. Once again,
614 that all comes with the driveway permit, once again,this wasn't even a required document we did.
615 It was the team being proactive saying,we know there are going to be concerns. We want to look
616 into that, not just say here is how many trips it generates but actually collect data. I know there
617 are concerns. People said, I heard there wasn't a study done. There actually was. We collect
618 data at those peak times when the school is in session and things like that, and once again,the
619 purpose of this study isn't to fix any problems in the area. It is to mitigate any problems caused by
620 this development's traffic, so that is what that would look at,and when they are pursuing the
621 driveway permit,we have already coordinated with NCDOT,and they said we do need to look at
622 that sight distance further and look at design things.
623
624 Delores Bailey: Can you tell me what date that study was done?
625
626 Josh Reinke: That study was done, let's see, it is March 4th,2025.
627
628 Delores Bailey: So, before we started discussion on this?
629
630 Josh Reinke: Started discussion, how is that?
631
632 Delores Bailey: I'm asking what dates you did that because we were last month talking about this, but.
633
634 Josh Reinke: March 4th, 2025.
635
636 Delores Bailey: Right. So that was done in March and last month we talked about the traffic too, so nothing more
637 recent. That's, that's my question, nothing more recent than March even after everybody said
638 there was a problem.
639
640 Beth Trahos: For clarification,this is the first time we have presented Highway 86 project to the Planning Board.
641 I think the one you're referencing is a previous project.
642
643 Delores Bailey: Okay.
644
645 Beth Trahos: That is not being considered tonight.
646
647 Delores Bailey: Thank you. My second question— I'm done with the traffic piece of it,though I am concerned
648 about all of the folk who stood up and had traffic issues, and understandably, adding 49 more
649 homes to this area is going to absolutely cause a traffic situation, but I'll just say that piece. My
650 second question is I appreciate your statement about housing being a major need in Orange
651 County. I more than anybody probably on this panel know that, but as you may know,the most
652 needed housing in Orange County is for families earning $50,000.00 and below. Will any of these
653 homes been available for families earning that kind of income?
654
655 Beth Trahos: This is intended to be a market-rate project,so, given the cost of development here these will be
656 market rate. We're not proposing affordable housing.
18
657
658 Delores Bailey: And I appreciate that. Understandably,there is plenty of housing at market rate around here and
659 not as much for affordable housing.
660
661 Beth Trahos: Well,we still see demand for housing at all price points,and that's why we're here proposing this
662 project.
663
664 Delores Bailey: Okay. So, my main concern would be that there is no affordable housing in any of this, and that's
665 a concern for me. Thank you.
666
667 Lamar Proctor: All right. Beth.
668
669 Beth Bronson: I'm, I'm still kind of formatting my questions. Do you mind coming back?
670
671 Lamar Proctor: Sure. No problem. Whitney?
672
673 Whitney Watson: Sure. Thank you, I'm going to follow up a little bit with Delores'question. Could you describe then
674 what the target audience is,or buyer is for these homes? Is it 50 plus empty nesters? Is it
675 families with small kids? All of that has an impact on both traffic and uses of the space.
676
677 Jason Rivenbark: Jason Rivenbark with Forestar. We don't have an intended restriction or on who the intended
678 buyer would be. It could be young families, professionals. It could be people over 50,whatever.
679 We're not restricting that.
680
681 Whitney Watson: To be clear, I don't expect you to say a restriction, but in the marketing materials who is likely to
682 receive this, and who are you going to spend your marketing dollars on? Is it young families with
683 kids or is it people who are thinking they're going to retire in 5 years or so.
684
685 Jason Rivenbark: I could see it more geared towards people that are empty nesters or getting ready to have all their
686 kids in college or moved on. That type of audience is probably that. We see that. We also see
687 move-up buyers where they have a home,and maybe their family has grown or they've grown out
688 of the space they had,their lifestyle has changed or something and they're looking for something
689 like this.
690
691 Whitney Watson: All right. The other question I had seems to do with the recreational activities. The applicant was
692 really clear the trails are going to be private. There is also nothing in there about if it's a private
693 recreational opportunity,what is the county getting out of granting permission for the development
694 to have private recreation? Is there an in-lieu payment coming or what's going,and especially
695 since that comes up not just with the neighbors but also from the town of Hillsborough. They were
696 very clear about that concern.
697
698 Beth Trahos: Oh sure.
699
700 Taylor Perschau: I can just answer ordinance wise, so as a regulated subdivision, if they are not dedicating publicly
701 available recreational facilities,they have the opportunity to make a payment in lieu for parkland
702 fees,which is a per-lot basis. It's also based on the property's location.We have a community
703 and district parks map that I believe was mapped by DEAPR, so the price is per lot,and it's
704 dependent on whether they're in a community park district or I think community or district park.
705 Sorry. So, this is the zoning portion. If this property were to be approved by the Board of County
706 Commissioners, the next step would be submitting a preliminary plat application. A final plat for
707 any regulated subdivision cannot be recorded until that payment in lieu or a public dedication is
708 made.
709
710 Whitney Watson: Thank you.
711
19
712 Beth Trahos: And of course,we would meet and comply with all the requirements of the LIDO that your staff will
713 make sure of that, but I think the benefit of the private amenities is that it does provide an
714 opportunity for folks to live here, to recreate, to walk on the trails, to exercise,to gather with their
715 neighbors in these community areas, so they are spending time in their neighborhood rather than
716 utilizing busy county parks, and I would say as well that a really key consideration about
717 maintaining these amenities as private is liability for a small homeowner's association,so that is
718 what we are proposing.
719
720 Nicole Steele: If you don't mind, I'd like to add to that last question. I formally served on the Orange County
721 Parks and Recreation Board, and in 99.9 percent of my career, I am actually sitting surveying
722 public parks and recreation agencies and developing, helping them develop strategic plans for
723 recreation and building out their departments, and what we have seen is the best way that a
724 developer can give back to a community is the fee in lieu because you have greater autonomy
725 and choice over what you can do with that money. If we provide some sort of public amenity on
726 our site, that means anyone in the community would have to drive there to use it. There are
727 liability and maintenance restrictions, and it's often unclear how that ownership or responsibility
728 transfers between homeowners, the public and the parks and recreation agency, so from the other
729 side of the table and where I usually sit,there is usually an advantage to the fee in lieu.
730
731 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you. Chris.
732
733 Next Speaker: Yeah. I guess I'm still on the traffic run, and I apologize. This is the first time that I have seen on
734 the NCDOT side where they specifically call out the intersection slight distance as a potential
735 problem. I understand that the number of homes that you have is under the minimum. I have
736 gone through the Bolton and Menk study where it says that a TIA is not required. I am struggling
737 here because I see that everyone is acknowledging that this intersection is a problem. 1
738 understand that you have gone above and beyond. You have gotten the study,and 1
739 acknowledge that, and I want to be clear about that. That being said, everyone seems to
740 understand that there is a problem here, and I'm trying to figure out whose job it is to own up to
741 that fact. So,what is the next step here. You said that the driveway permits are coming through.
742 1 got that,and once that happens,then at that point you have to make a decision based on
743 NCDOT standards? I just want to be clear.
744
745 Next Speaker: It's not just the driveway permits are coming through. I'm saying that the design and all those
746 things.A lot of people, I'm an engineer, but a lot of people are like you're a planning level, so
747 you're projecting into the future what's going to happen and it's going to come up in the design. So
748 the design comes up, and that's why I'm saying even if this were a full traffic impact analysis that
749 was done, it's considered recommendations, even though the DOT is going to say this is what you
750 shall do. Nothing was required there. We've discussed and we're saying we have a safety
751 concern with that. We want to see, because they're going to then see the actual design of here is
752 where exactly the driveways will be, not a conceptual sketch or anything like that, and obviously
753 we're at the rezoning level, so as they get more into the site plan, I feel that is when that would
754 come into play,as the design folks would say here is where our driveways are going to be.
755 They're going to coordinate with DOT. They have to issue drawings and all those things saying
756 here are the exact locations,topo, all that stuff is considered, and DOT will say you either do or
757 you do not have adequate sight distance. Here is what we need you to implement to do that or
758 you do not have a driveway at that location, or it's restricted to a right in, right out. Something like
759 that.
760
761 Chris Johnston: I think that some of my confusion is we have a conditional zoning, a site design and site drawing
762 and that sort of thing, but it seems like we're still waiting on a key component which is that NCDOT
763 traffic fill in where they tell exactly what's going to happen, so we could approve this tonight, and 1
764 apologize. I'm looking at Cy here. We can approve this tonight, but there may be large changes
765 that need to be made based on the traffic requirements of NCDOT, and would that then cause it to
20
766 come back to us or is that something that's handled at the higher level, and we have approved it
767 and what needs to happen in order for NCDOT to be happy with it is just part of the process?
768
769 Cy Stober: I want to address that in two parts. One is that anything that happens in the public right of way,
770 which is owned and managed by NCDOT is an NCDOT permitting matter exclusively. So, if all of
771 those improvements can be made inside of the right of way, that's just NCDOT, it doesn't include
772 the county at all, provided it's consistent with anything that would be approved by the county. If it
773 is inconsistent, if it would say remove a substantial amount of required landscaping or something
774 to that effect, then it would have to come back if it was deemed to be a major modification from
775 what was approved, and there are, in Article 2,with regard to conditions, it lays out explicitly what
776 are minor modifications that can be approved by the director and what cannot. Then there's the
777 separate matter of those modifications. If it's on the private property, how are they going to
778 accommodate the need and that would be, the minor modifications broadly speaking allow for a
779 reduction in intensities so they may have to lose a lot. Perhaps they have to lose lot size.
780 Anything that would be seen as a part of the public contribution and the separation of the uses,
781 such as buffers namely I'm thinking of and that where the access to 86 North would be would have
782 to be a minor modification,or it would have to come back to the Board. So,the cost is going to
783 come to the owner, not to the county and the taxpayers of the county. The one variable to this,to
784 your point Mr.Johnston is anything that would be offsite at that intersection,that really is a
785 conversation between DOT and this owner and this applicant.
786
787 Chris Johnston: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. So, in regard to, and I want to make sure that I've got the
788 public comment correct here. In regard to the Waller's question in regard to accountability and
789 that sort of thing, if there are issues,and this has come up a number of times, if there are issues
790 with well or whatever the case may be,what is the correct avenue for a homeowner who is in the
791 situation to then go to, in regards to my well is no longer working after this X,Y and Z? Is that a
792 civil dispute at that point a lawyer's involved kind of deal, or is there a county mechanism?
793
794 Cy Stober: There's no county mechanism I am aware of.To answer the question that you didn't ask but was
795 asked at the last hearing with the same applicant for a different subdivision. All permitting is done
796 by the county, and should the soils not perform to accommodate the septic needs or should the
797 well not serve the purposes of the subdivision,then that would be, again, at the cost of the owner.
798 Any claims of impacts to adjacent property owners is a civil dispute.
799
800 Chris Johnston: Okay. So, at that point then, if there's any issues on the well or anything along those lines it would
801 be a civil dispute, but otherwise the permitting. In regard to the concerns with the encroachment
802 on Mr., and I apologize, Medred? Is that correct? Yes. In regard to that, I mean again, this
803 sounds more like an issue with the developer,whom you have here now, and then in terms of any
804 kind of wall or perimeter or anything along those lines, is that something that is in contention or
805 anything on that?
806
807 Beth Trahos: I would say we're certainly happy to talk with Mr. Medred. I don't believe he attended our
808 neighborhood meeting, so this is our first exposure to this question.We do have a survey,and
809 we're absolutely willing to talk about how we address those issues.
810
811 Chris Johnston: Wonderful. I think that was my last question. I mean, it sounds a lot like the town of Hillsborough
812 had a few recommendations in regard to the NCDOT and in regard to other things, and I think
813 those have been addressed as best as possible.
814
815 Lamar Proctor: All right. Statler?
816
817 Statler Gilfillen: In the reports, and I have listened to questions from the school. There was an email sent to the
818 Board from a Rebecca Gallegly,who is not able to be here tonight. I don't know if you've seen
819 that.
820
21
821 Beth Trahos: No sir, I have not.
822
823 Statler Gilfillen: It goes, our small neighborhood and our children's school Eno River Academy both share the
824 property line. The proposed new big development on Highway 86. We were at the initial property
825 meeting, and just received notice of the application to rezone 78 acres, I will be out of town and
826 unable to attend the meeting but wanted to voice my concern regarding this development. The
827 proposed property runs next to Stroud's Creek, a major tributary to the Eno River and protected
828 watershed.The creek is used by Eno River Academy students as a significant learning tool, the
829 students do creek studies and hike trails they created year-round. There is an outdoor classroom
830 that is utilized almost daily.We would be heartbroken to have sewage from the proposed 50
831 septic fields to each home or runoff from the building process leaking into this creek causing
832 contamination. Thank you for your consideration in not rezoning for a large housing development.
833 Now, my question is two-fold. I think it has also been established that 86 as a highway is
834 potentially dangerous to access to. Your development is putting two new entrances on 86, not
835 one,which raises questions to me as an architect and planner about the safety during the peak
836 hours. Two exits instead of backup coming onto the property. The Eno and this raises the other
837 point. The Eno Academy is right behind your property, have any discussions been done with
838 them about the possibility of bringing access through their property and better coordinating with
839 them of things that what you develop on your property could actually benefit the academy more,
840 and the students could use, particularly natural trails and other things, might be really useful in a
841 public setting to your neighbors. Have any discussions in this direction begun to be thought or
842 taken?
843
844 Beth Trahos: So,you have asked two things.The first was with regard to access, and Josh, you jump in, but I'll
845 just say,the layout was designed with Josh's input and shown to NCDOT, but obviously it is
846 NCDOT that will permit any access points. If they determine that an access cannot function
847 safely, they will not issue a driveway permit for that access. So,we have to do what NCDOT tells
848 us to do to make the accesses function safely. And we will do those things.
849
850 Statler GiIfillen: Well, let's put it this way. Why have you designed it, I'll continue this, as two accesses when you
851 have the option to make one of them a dead end and let the entrance to the site only come
852 through one.
853
854 Josh Reinke: I won't say the why the team has designed that, but I would say more often than not, I actually
855 hear the flip side of that in these meetings, and it's,what happens if something happens at that
856 one driveway, and you don't have a secondary access for somebody to respond to a house that's
857 further back,say there was a car crash at a driveway, but a fire happens at a house in the back,
858 and now how does the fire department access.That additional access, and once again, exactly
859 what Beth said, is if they say there's an issue with site distance,they could restrict it to a right in or
860 right out,they could do any one of a number of things. DOT could say we want turn lanes at both
861 driveways to make sure we have that. But I'd say having the additional driveway, as long as the
862 design is safe,where we're saying we're not concerned about the site distance because they've
863 mitigated those concerns, then I think the additional access actually is a safety precaution,saying
864 now you have two ways to access that in case there was an emergency.
865
866 Statler GiIfillen: All commercial buildings, as an architect speaking, under state law, have to have two exits. I am
867 not sure of the specific highway requirements, that's why we'll defer to you.
868
869 Josh Reinke: Yeah, and once again, not a requirement, more of a, like I said proactive just like doing this traffic
870 study is saying this might be a concern having to access, usually I see much larger developments
871 where they say they just want one because it's less improvements that they'd have to do things
872 like that, and they're forced to, based on development ordinances and such. This one, like I said,
873 no requirement,just forward thinking in case something were to happen,worst case scenario, now
874 you have that additional access, and once again both, if DOT says we have concerns, it's not
875 they're going to say put a turn lane at one but don't worry about the other because you put it. It is
22
876 there. They are going to look at those individually and say,whatever our concerns are have to be
877 addressed, or they could restrict it and say one is equal you have access. That's all we have to
878 allow you on our public roads is to have access, and that could even be right in right out,to be
879 honest I've seen that before where they say that's still full access. You just need to find a way to
880 turn them around,whether it's,you know, not in this case, I'm not saying anything, but they get
881 creative and say now you need to design a U-turn bulb down the street or something like that.
882 And that's where I'm saying DOT does control that. They would have to say you have access to
883 the site, how that access is. That's what they've seen. They understand and say we want to
884 make sure when we get into that design component that we address the concerns that we all have
885 out there with safety. So,the second one I think is beneficial.
886
887 Statler Gilfillen: Now the second part of your question is,the possibility of eliminating any danger, along that state
888 highway,which I think the report's pretty clear. That's a difficult access area. You've got an
889 adjacent neighbor that you might be able to benefit and work together running your access
890 through the school, because you're not with the number of units. There might be a better solution
891 and far safer for everybody. Has that been even discussed? Because there may be trade-offs that
892 you can help each other.
893
894 Josh Reinke: And are you saying like access the school to ingress and egress our vehicles where they come in
895 the same driveway as the school?
896
897 Statler Gilfillen: Very possibly. Has this discussion even taken place yet?
898
899 Josh Reinke: That I'm not sure with the project team. And I know, at some point it was brought up like the
900 traffic, and we actually tried to reach out to DOT and track down a traffic study that was done for
901 the school because that's obviously a significant generator and we could not find anything that the
902 DOT had with congestion management at the district,so I'm not sure. Once again, even looking at
903 what do their driveways look like in terms of safety, but I'm not sure if the project team had any
904 discussions or if there would be cross-access.
905
906 Beth Trahos: And I think there are environmental features as well that might inhibit that access.
907
908 Statler Gilfillen: Okay, but my point on the question was, had the conversation even been considered, and
909 apparently it has not, if I'm hearing your answer.
910
911 Beth Trahos: I don't believe it has, but I think there were some site constraints that may have made that less
912 than achievable. However,we did have our neighborhood meeting at the Eno River Academy and
913 representatives of the academy attended the meeting, and so there certainly have been
914 discussions. We understand that the school has benefited greatly from this landowner generously
915 allowing them to use this property. Now this landowner is looking to sell it, and that's going to
916 impact their ability to continue to use it.As it becomes a neighborhood or, even if it were to
917 become a farm or something else, the ability of these students to continue to have access to a
918 resource, that they have benefited from, maybe impacted. But we have certainly discussed with
919 them the opportunity once the homes are sold, and the homeowner's association is formed to
920 reach an agreement with that association about the potential for in the future continuing this
921 relationship.
922
923 Lamar Proctor: Jonah?
924
925 Jonah Garson: You can go onto the next one.
926
927 Lamar Proctor: Venkat?
928
929 Venkat Yendapalli: I have a similar question I had at last month's meeting. We had similar subdivision. Very high
930 density. Smaller lots,with the septic, and one well.
23
931
932 Beth Trahos: Sure. So,we have both of the folks who, if you have questions about the septic,we have our
933 septic engineer, and we have our environmental consultant with regard to the well who are both
934 available to talk with you. I would say in my view, a 20,000 square foot lot is actually quite large in
935 other areas of the triangle.
936
937 Venkat Yendapalli: Yeah, no, I've lived in Cary before I moved here. Tell me about it. But on sewer it's a different
938 story compared to a septic site, next to all the big lots. Your neighbor has 13 acres, and other
939 neighbors I was check, 2, 3 acres, 1 acre, some of the are small but most lots are larger. While
940 the development is not harmonious with the surrounding areas, I have a concern about this
941 approach,you know, last month was a similar application that one well, having a lot of water
942 capacity and all that, but that's not a foolproof design. No fault tolerance building to it because all
943 these 49 lot owners, if it is a prudent build,will go dry with one well failing. It can't be,flip a switch
944 and they get water from someone else. Like there's no option having a backup well. Or two or
945 three wells and to connect it.
946
947 Beth Trahos: Let me have the Ward come up and talk with you about the wells. I would point out that in this
948 area there are lots of variety of different sizes, including within the town of Hillsborough, more
949 traditional subdivisions. Ward, let me ask you to talk about the wells if you would.
950
951 Ward Marotti: Ward Marotti, Spangler Environmental. So we had the initial hydrologic analysis in there,that is
952 the direct results of the well draw down that we did where like previously we're in the process of
953 implementing those data into a model and having our PHD hydro geologists use those data to
954 extrapolate in using the models, but just based on the raw that we have collected and have
955 reported on in the document presented to you all today, there's clear evidence that,for one thing,
956 just backing up with regard to existing conditions,wells are at different depths, and the other two
957 wells that were analyzed are both at 200-foot deep, the well that is proposed and has been drilled
958 is 649 feet deep in connection with a totally different aquifer with hundreds of feet of 100 percent
959 impervious bedrock in between those different aquifers at different elevations below in the
960 substrate below the surface. And so,with regard to your question or valid concern with regard to
961 other adjacent wells filling,those wells would fail in the context of their connectivity to different
962 aquifers. There are hundreds of feet of vertical distance between the aquifers that different wells
963 are connected to. To the best of my knowledge and looking at the, at least the available data,
964 which is certainly not all the wells in the area are not part of the county's database, or at least the
965 easily accessible GIS layer that's available, but none of those wells are in the 600-foot depth
966 zone, and as a result, they are sort of by default, by definition have documented that they are in
967 contact with different aquifers and that again are those aquifers are separated by hundreds of
968 vertical feet of impervious bedrock.And so,this aquifer down here,for one thing, the results of our
969 direct data analysis clearly show that both 200-foot wells that were our two comparative wells
970 relative to the proposed community well. Both of those are 200 feet deep, and there was no
971 impact whatsoever with a significant draw down of the proposed well to a steady state of like 90
972 gallons a minute I believe. Something, substantive consistent draw down. No noticeable, not
973 even documented, observable changes to those other wells,and again,that in no small part is
974 directly related to the connectivity of those aquifers,or the lack thereof. And so,while aquifers
975 that are in higher elevation in the cross-section so to speak of the depth below the surface,the
976 impacts and levels and quantity of water in those higher up aquifers are not the same and not
977 directly connected to and thereby affected by the disconnected much deeper aquifers. And so if
978 that aquifer 200-foot, runs out of water, it is not the resultant cause of the lower aquifer drawing
979 down, and similarly there's a possibility that that lower aquifer could run out of water in the context
980 of the neighborhood and not have any effect on the 200-foot deep aquifers. And I guess the
981 applicant can speak with regard to the private utility that's going to take over, upon approval and
982 build-out of this proposed development,there's going to be a private utility that's going to take
983 over the maintenance and ownership of this well system.And so,the supply of potable water to
984 the users will, correct me if I'm wrong, be dependent upon that hired private sector utility.
985
24
986 Venkat Yendapalli: Well, thank you for answering the well and its impact to the adjacent wells. That part I'm not too
987 concerned, because you clearly answered it,you're going at a different aquifer level, and bedrock
988 is in between. My concern is predominantly on one well serving 49 homes and having a fault. If
989 the one pump fails, the whole well will fail if it goes bad.
990
991 Ward Marotti: Well, I would go back and point to that private utility, because if that well itself, if the pump or
992 another part of the hard infrastructure for that system fails,that utility is going to be there to fix it,
993 whether it's a replacement of the pump or some of the piping or the conveyance system or
994 whatever other utility component fails,the onus is on that private sector utility to replace that, and
995 have implementation in a timely manner.
996
997 Beth Trahos: We have that slide, as well, that shows how much water exceeds the state requirements.
998
999 Ward Marotti: And I think, like you said,you're concerned with regard to capacity, and interaction between the
1000 aquifers isn't so much of a concern to you with regard to having provided that.
1001
1002 David Barcal: I'm David Barcal. Since we're doing the design of the well system,we can get to that, but, right
1003 now we'd be looking at a design by the public water sector,the number of connections you can
1004 have,you have to have .56 gallons per connection. We're proposing 1 gallon per connection. So,
1005 we're already doubling the draw of that, and then you look at your storage requirements,which
1006 you look at what you're drawing versus what your peak demands are. If you were to do those
1007 calculations,you'd have a minimal amount of storage required from the public water sector for
1008 this. Because it's going to be owned by a private utility,they require nothing less than a 5,400-
1009 gallon hydropneumatics tank. So,there's built-in storage within their storage tank onsite, and then
1010 like Ward was mentioning, they're going to be responsible much like if you have a utility and your
1011 water main breaks, they have to shut off that section of the water main, and that neighborhood all
1012 of a sudden doesn't have water. It's going to be the same—
1013
1014 Venkat Yendapalli: But here it's all one valve, and the pumps can go bad, and a lot of things can go bad here, like, the
1015 gentleman was touching on earlier, and the company,Aqua was referenced last time, I'm
1016 assuming,Aqua is involved here as well, and they have a lot of experience, but it takes time to
1017 restore the power water supply. It can't be done just like that, and I have seen it myself firsthand.
1018 Pulling a 600-feet deep well pump out and fixing it and putting back, it takes time.Anyway, I'm
1019 assuming that Environmental Health and other departments look into these in details. It's not the
1020 Planning Board's responsibility to vet those things here right here. But in general, I have a
1021 question on the septic fields and repair fields. Do you have any concept plans to share that they
1022 can be accommodated?
1023
1024 David Barcal: We did, so,we looked at the overall site, overlaid the usable green, conventional soils. Yellow is
1025 low-profile soils, so,still good for chamber systems, but we focused just on the conventional. So,
1026 we looked at four different sites and laid them out for four-bedroom homes, .25 LTAR,which is
1027 kind of a low end for conventional soils, and we were able to, at least using the survey data, lay
1028 the lines out on contour and make it work with all the setbacks, building footprints, Orange County
1029 setbacks to property lines, building foundations,driveways,tanks,that sort of thing.
1030
1031 Venkat Yendapalli: Okay, so,you're quoting 1 gallon per minute per house. Does it accommodate their irrigation
1032 needs and, and water and all that? Is there enough pressure for them to, get their yards and lawns
1033 and whatever.
1034
1035 David Barcal: If you look at the state rule, public water sector, the way they look at it,they just look at the
1036 potable water use, not the irrigation use,which is why you get the .56 gallons per minute that they
1037 require. A lot of the private utilities have taken it upon themselves to up that requirement,so,they
1038 won't actually, most of them will not accept the system with less than 1 gallon per connection to
1039 make up for that irrigation. So, that's the reason why they have that higher standard, so they can
1040 meet the pressure demands of the neighborhood. People want nice, irrigated yards and that.
25
1041
1042 Venkat Yendapalli: Okay. Thank you.
1043
1044 Beth Bronson: Sorry if you don't mind just staying up there for just a minute. Is it okay if I go over my questions,
1045 then?
1046
1047 David Barcal: Oh, yeah, go ahead.
1048
1049 Beth Bronson: So,you were saying that the requirement is .5 gallons per minute.
1050
1051 David Barcal: What they do is, if you look at public water standard they say 400 gallons per day per connection,
1052 and then they assume 12 hours of pump time for your well. They do 400 divided by 12, divided by
1053 60. That gets you the .555 gallons per minute.
1054
1055 Beth Bronson: You're not talking about your actual output.
1056
1057 David Barcal: Yeah. So, that's the output of the actual well. What it has to do per connection.
1058
1059 Beth Bronson: And this may be a question for you and for Ward,too, because it's, it's well and septic related, so,
1060 with the well,you are asking for, it's at 600 feet, and it was over 80 gallons per minute, right?The
1061 idea being that this community well will service 49 four-bedroom homes?
1062
1063 David Barcal: Yes.
1064
1065 Beth Bronson: That's correct? The idea that you wouldn't be at half a gallon a minute if all 49 people turned their
1066 well on or turned their water on at the same time.
1067
1068 David Barcal: The way public water looks at it, the number of connections you're allowed is one thing. So,that's
1069 the .56. Then they have you look at your peak demand storage,which in this case we have been
1070 proposing a 5,400-gallon hydromatic tank. So,the rule says, basically,you take your peak
1071 demand minus the yield of your well, and then you times it by 20 minutes, and then, there's a
1072 formula to come up with your minimum amount of volume you have to be able to push out of your
1073 storage tank.
1074
1075 Beth Bronson: This makes sense. Yes.
1076
1077 David Barcal: That's what size is to meet your peak demand, so, like,you're saying,you get everyone showering
1078 at 7 a.m. and then, or everyone using their water at night.
1079
1080 Ward Marotti: Just let me clarify. It's not coming from the withdrawal well to the house. It's through the storage
1081 tank and thereby accommodates peak flow,yes.
1082
1083 Beth Bronson: Yes. Absolutely. So,you have to have that reservoir tank. In my house I have a well, and we
1084 have a,what is it, the tank that's there. That tank goes into the house, and then the well pumps
1085 into the tank.
1086
1087 David Barcal: It's just a big version of that.
1088
1089 Beth Bronson: And the idea that you're within feet of a township that does provide water, I guess? I'm just trying
1090 to understand why there wasn't a conversation or at least even a request to serve, or a feasibility
1091 to serve.
1092
1093 Beth Trahos: In fact,there was. The initial approach was to the town of Hillsborough. The town of Hillsborough
1094 declined. So,the project came through the Orange County process. Now the town has come
1095 back in comments to this case to say we,we may be able to provide water.
26
1096
1097 Beth Bronson: Only.
1098
1099 Beth Trahos: Yeah,water only. Let me just point out that that is an additional safeguard. There is water and
1100 sewer immediately available to the property as well. And I would also just point out that another
1101 user, even permitted out of the current zoning, could be a significant water user, more so than
1102 even a residential community. I mean, agriculture with irrigation is a big water user that could be
1103 permitted by right. So,just don't consider zero impact to what is being proposed.
1104
1105 Laura Haywood: I'm Laura Haywood. I don't think I've stated my name. Hey. I did want to clarify on the septic,
1106 when it comes to the town of Hillsborough,when we approach them, there is no capacity
1107 available in the town of Hillsborough. I saw Chris, I saw your face. You're, like,wait a second. 1
1108 did want to clarify that as far as water is concerned. When we went to them,they were, like,well,
1109 we don't really want to annex you in, because there's no sewer capacity, and on that note,we're
1110 just not going to give you water either. But, since then,when we applied for this application,we
1111 received town of Hillsborough comments directly,and I believe on the second page they had
1112 mentioned,well,we would possibly be willing to offer you water, but that came after the fact, after
1113 we had already drove the well and everything, so, I just wanted to bring clarification of that
1114 timeline.
1115
1116 Beth Bronson: It doesn't say in the application that you had requested, it was denied, and if there was, I just didn't
1117 see it?
1118
1119 Laura Haywood: We did sit down directly with, town of Hillsborough Utility and actually met with them onsite, and
1120 that was the outcome of that conversation.
1121
1122 Beth Bronson: Okay. And then the conversations with the town of Hillsborough regarding some of their other
1123 comments about cleaning that sidewalk or that frontage on 86, and I didn't understand it at first,
1124 but I get what the road dedication is. So, are these things that were taken into consideration, even
1125 though this isn't a final plan or plot?
1126
1127 Laura Haywood: Yeah, so,as far as this sidewalk is concerned, I just want to remind everybody that this has not
1128 been fully engineered out. So,we would still need to consider how feasible that would be on that
1129 side of the right of way, and what was your second question one more time?
1130
1131 Beth Bronson: The road dedication.
1132
1133 Laura Haywood: Roadway dedication.Yeah, so,we anticipate we have the right of way dedication there. It's 60
1134 foot right of way.
1135
1136 Beth Bronson: For traffic,the way that it was flagged and the way that, you know,there is a huge concern
1137 because of this major intersection, or multiple major intersection south of the parcel, and the idea
1138 that it's not a well-served area already, and it may have been answered already. I understand that
1139 it's not a requirement. I understand you don't have a final plan. I understand this is just for
1140 rezoning, but the idea that we have to consider the rezoning,the condition is for 49 lots,without a
1141 traffic impact analysis,without DOT weighted, because you don't have a final plan. So, I guess,
1142 what kind of contingencies and mitigation plans are you prepared to take with this project
1143 specifically?
1144
1145 Josh Reinke: So,first off, DDT's, it's not that they're not weighing in because we don't have a final plan. That's
1146 going to be the driveway permit. So,they're weighing in. They wouldn't require a traffic study. So,
1147 some of these off sites, so, like, I know some of the big concerns are 86 and 70, 86 and 57, and
1148 what's going on. We heard that in the neighborhood meetings. I know people are, like,we want a
1149 roundabout. We want, a this or that. Once again,the purpose of this study if a full TIA were even
1150 required,the purpose of that would be to mitigate this site's traffic. And once again, I know you're
27
1151 saying 49 units is a lot. Each individual that spoke about traffic problem is a unit, and I guarantee
1152 no individual house is doing that, and that's why we say we have safety concerns when you have
1153 these individual driveways. Here, at least,you're saying we can mitigate some of that at the
1154 driveways. The offsite stuff,we heard about one sixth of the trip generation that DOT would even
1155 require a TIA for. The school,which is a much bigger generator, like I said,we were trying to
1156 track that down to see has anybody addressed these big intersections where they're generating a
1157 lot more of that traffic. Everybody that drives through that is generating some of that traffic, but
1158 there are obviously developments that have happened that it's, like,what was done there,and 1
1159 even started looking at low-hanging fruit. If all of our traffic went through there,what percentage
1160 are we? Okay,we're, like, less than 2 percent. It's a small amount compared to what's going on
1161 out there. I know we heard that in the neighborhood meeting, roundabouts at 86 and 57.
1162 Honestly, unless it's a major development came in, I think that's got to be a public DOT-type
1163 project. Roundabouts aren't cheap, you know? If you have a school that goes in and isn't making
1164 these improvements, generating far more traffic. It's just big capacity issues of a lot of people that
1165 are maybe not even living right around here cutting through there, as that's where a lot of these
1166 issues are with a lot of intersections everywhere is people are using it as a major road to cut
1167 through to where employment centers are, and they don't even necessarily live near there.
1168 They're just a pass-through traffic volume, and that's what a lot of this is. It's a through volume
1169 that's going all the way to 70 and heading towards Durham.
1170
1171 Beth Bronson: It's, as much it is also people coming 70 miles an hour from the country into town.And they're
1172 coming by both ingress, egress areas.
1173
1174 Josh Reinke: And, and I will say, and I know nobody likes hearing this, but honestly, development and traffic
1175 volume does slow down traffic in urban areas. I can drive through downtown areas and you're not
1176 moving very fast, because there's a lot of traffic, and usually when you have these speeding
1177 problems, it means there's not as much. I think the biggest concern is some of the TOPO and
1178 stuff like that is why you're seeing this, is you have people that are speeding through, and you're
1179 starting to have the school traffic that then is coming out and they haven't gone through. Different
1180 roads that have stopped controlling things like that. We understand. I try to see if there is some
1181 low-hanging fruit and see if there's anything we can kind of do that's reasonable for a development
1182 of this size, even if it wasn't required. Even as we go for the driveway permit, DOT is not going to
1183 say start studying 70 or anything like that just because of the size,the relatively small size of this
1184 development.
1185
1186 Beth Bronson: No,that would be the need of the town,you know, in its ETJ.
1187
1188 Josh Reinke: If there were an existing project DOT had, they could say, hey,we'd like some sort of dollars and
1189 cents put into that, because you do have some impact on that. They're can't retroactively,
1190 everybody that's driving through, but with new developments,they can. They don't have any
1191 plans that are funded and whatever that they can collect money on. So, that's kind of the
1192 challenge with that.
1193
1194 Beth Bronson: All right,yeah. I mean, as far as traffic goes, I get that there's only so much you guys can do.
1195
1196 Josh Reinke: Yeah.
1197
1198 Beth Bronson: Thanks. The question I did have about public access was sort of addressed. There is no indicate,
1199 like,there is no reason to request a condition for this public trail easement that would go from 86
1200 to Eno Academy,for anybody that's walking to school? And is that because the fee is better than
1201 accommodating the public structure.
1202
1203 Beth Trahos: Well, I mean, there will be a fee paid for the UDO requirement for parks. I think there is an
1204 opportunity with what the trails that are on the plan to, in the future if the HOA and Eno River
1205 Academy are agreeable to create a connection for walkers, but that is a decision that would have
28
1206 to be made by the future homeowners,just given the liability and maintenance issues that it would
1207 create. So,there is an opportunity for that in the concept plan if it makes sense in the future, it
1208 can be implemented.
1209
1210 Beth Bronson: It's hard because most of the times, these come together as a rezoning and approval for the
1211 neighborhood. So,where are we talking about in theory,where are we talking about, or this is
1212 applicable for just the rezoning?
1213
1214 Laura Haywood: I would also like to point out on Page 66 of your packet, the overall site plan that Beth is
1215 presenting to you, I would like to point out that we did put an access easement connecting both
1216 Pathway Elementary School and Eno River Academy, so,that there is an opportunity for us to
1217 collaborate and work out a scenario where this is beneficial, because one of the takeaways of our
1218 conversations with Cy, Pat, Taylor, and the rest of their staff,was this idea of walkability,and, I'm
1219 a proponent of walkability. I love the fact that people can walk to and from places and enjoy trails
1220 and all that stuff. I'm for that. So,we did put that on our site plan to also present that we are open
1221 to these conversations and to build a neighborhood and an area where I'm hopeful, in my vision, 1
1222 envision this to be a residential community where people do have children, and that this is an
1223 opportunity for them to attend Eno River Academy, or to attend Pathways Elementary School. 1
1224 am originally from Colorado, and my neighborhood did have a walking trail from our neighborhood
1225 down to my elementary school, and that was our way of commuting.
1226
1227 Beth Bronson: It's extremely informative, and the idea that we need to consider that as we start recommending
1228 these types of subdivisions in this area, right? Like, it's not an option, say, in the middle of 54.
1229 But it is an option when you're trying to develop outside of the town.This is the only time that we
1230 have an idea to be able to have an impact on that.And, if it's not going to be annexed into the
1231 town, this is a great opportunity to require a condition that you collaborate with the adjacent parcel
1232 for, say, a cross country track.You know, in that trail. That could be used.
1233
1234 Laura Haywood: I think Lindsey is still here. We have had conversations with Lindsey on multiple accounts,
1235 bearing different things, but that is an opportunity for sure. Two things. One, Eno River Academy
1236 is, 1, 1 think Lindsay said it's starting to reach capacity or it's full?
1237
1238 Lindsey Sealey: It's way full.
1239
1240 Laura Haywood: Okay, it's way full. Her words. So, it's way full,which means it's a popular institution where people
1241 want to send their children to school, and I would love for more families to have the opportunity to
1242 that educational system, as they choose.
1243
1244 Beth Bronson: I'd love for there to be affordable housing in these neighborhoods so we can make sure those kids
1245 could have access to that school.
1246
1247 Laura Haywood: Yeah. I mean there's only so many battles we can address all at once.
1248
1249 Beth Bronson: Housing.
1250
1251 Laura Haywood: Yeah, I would love to address all of the problems in the world, but I cannot do that here and now.
1252 But, yes,to address that and Eno River Academy is car centric. They do not have a bus system.
1253 So,there are a lot of people driving their kids to and from school. There is that traffic that adds.
1254 What is this scenario where you have children living in this school, their parents love this idea of
1255 them either walking or biking to school, and now you have that many cars less driving to Eno
1256 River Academy or Pathways Elementary School. I just want to put it in a different perspective
1257 there.
1258
1259 Beth Bronson: I mean, that would be one thing if it was a public school. But it's not. It's a charter school. So,
1260 anybody in those neighbors may or may not even have the ability to go to the school.
29
1261
1262 Laura Haywood: But Pathway Elementary School is an Orange County School. Am I correct?
1263
1264 Beth Bronson: It is a public school?
1265
1266 Jonah Garson: Yeah, it's a public school.
1267
1268 Beth Bronson: Thank you.
1269
1270 Beth Bronson: I did have a lot of questions about the septic and well. If there is any other questions that are
1271 related to this and anybody wants to go on them?
1272
1273 Jonah Garson: I have school related questions.
1274
1275 Beth Bronson: Go right ahead then.
1276
1277 Jonah Garson: Can you show me where Pathways is on the rendering?
1278
1279 Laura Haywood: Yes. So, Pathways would be in this area, but there is Eno River Academy.
1280
1281 Jonah Garson: And do you all have renderings of the public right of way? For the schools?You mentioned that
1282 there was an ingress and egress to both schools.
1283
1284 Laura Haywood: The trails. There was a conversation about why we did not have a driveway for the Eno River
1285 Academy.We are not impacting buffers. Furthermore,we would not impact buffers to put a
1286 driveway.
1287
1288 Jonah Garson: Is there a pedestrian corridor to Pathways?
1289
1290 Beth Trahos: There's a path here to Eno River, and there's one, here to Pathways. But they are not being
1291 proposed as public paths. Now,we could in the future, maybe be public, but if you are a resident
1292 of this subdivision, I see no reason why you couldn't cross the neighborhood and onto the school
1293 property. Folks may choose to live in this area because they are already enrolled and they'd like to
1294 make this a little bit easier, or they may move here and decide that the charter school's for them.
1295
1296 Jonah Garson: Apologies for my reference to public right of ways. I'm specifically interested in the path to
1297 Pathways. Do you have a rendering of what these paths look like to the schools?
1298
1299 Beth Trahos: We have pictures of what the trails might look like.
1300
1301 Jonah Garson: I've seen those. Okay. I think that those are paved, those were paved trails,correct.
1302
1303 Beth Trahos: These are not paved.
1304
1305 Jonah Garson: They're not paved trails?
1306
1307 Laura Haywood: They're like sand, pathway kind of thing. They could be aggregate.
1308
1309 Jonah Garson: I'm done. I know Beth had further questions not related to schools, and paths to schools.
1310
1311 Beth Bronson: I did. There is a concern the conservation neighborhood in the sense that so much of the water, or
1312 floodplain and watershed and set back requirements prohibit development. Would it prohibit use
1313 of the public space because it couldn't be managed by the HOA as well?
1314
30
1315 Beth Trahos: It could be, and those environmental features could be incorporated into individual lots, but then
1316 they would be subject to the whims of the homeowner, right? Who folks aren't necessarily familiar
1317 with the buffer requirements,wetlands requirements, and, so, the idea that these things are
1318 captured in a common, open space where they can be maintained by a homeowners association
1319 that has knowledge as to those things creates a better stewardship of those lots than putting them
1320 in someone's back yard, and they can use them as though they were a part of their yard, like,they
1321 use every other part without recognizing the significance of the features there.
1322
1323 Beth Bronson: And the HOA could not build anything,they wouldn't be able to have any structures,they wouldn't
1324 make the community gathering space proposed would be outside of that obviously.
1325
1326 Beth Trahos: Not within the environmental features, correct. Yes.
1327
1328 Ward Marotti: I'd just like to add,though, that while that's the case,the landowners,while that may be the case
1329 on paper and legally,without having knowledge of that, the enforcement of that has potential to be
1330 retroactive in that if landowners are not aware of those restrictions and move forward completely,
1331 not on purpose or with any mal intent, but the retroactive fixing of those violations is much more
1332 difficult than the selective management of that same space.
1333
1334 Beth Bronson: I was just pointing out that all of this preserved area is literally wetland.
1335
1336 Beth Trahos: Not all of it, but a good bit.
1337
1338 Beth Bronson: A good bit, yes.And is this correct, in the boring, that they were hitting water at like 2 feet, 3 feet,
1339 or more than 5 feet? Is that how to interpret that environmental assessment?
1340
1341 Ward Marotti: By definition,waters in the United States have connection to groundwater within the top foot, at
1342 least for part of the year. There's three components in a wetland. Hydrology, vegetation, and
1343 soils. In the hydrology component,there are different parameters that define or that document
1344 that there is the presence of ground water within the top foot for at least a portion of the year. So,
1345 the wetlands have water in the top foot for part of the year.
1346
1347 Beth Bronson: And so, in these boring locations in the environmental assessment,where it says depth to water
1348 surface from soil surface, is that what you're referring to?
1349
1350 Ward Marotti: Correct.
1351
1352 Beth Bronson: Okay, and so it's not like you dig 5 feet down and there's a puddle.
1353
1354 Ward Marotti: Right. There are secondary indicators of hydrologic presence in the top foot. It doesn't have to be
1355 standing water within the hole, although they were left, I believe,for 24 hours to set before the
1356 analysis of the connectivity or the depth to the actual standing water in the test pit was there, but
1357 there's also secondary indicators of hydrology higher up than just standing water. Secondary
1358 indicators meaning soil color.
1359
1360 Beth Bronson: Moisture content.
1361
1362 Ward Marotti: I'm sorry?
1363
1364 Beth Bronson: Moisture content?
1365
1366 Next Speaker: Yeah, moisture content as well as root oxidization of live root paths,and there's quite a few
1367 different secondary indicators of surface hydrology.
1368
31
1369 Beth Bronson: They talk about the different components of the neighborhood, like the hardwoods, like the mature
1370 hardwoods, and then the recently ecological community. Is there going to be a prioritization on
1371 preserving the mature hardwoods.
1372
1373 Ward Marotti: I believe a lot of them are, because a lot of those areas, as I recall, are within the areas that are
1374 not able to be impacted, and thereby,they're not going to be cleared or cut just as part of the
1375 development unless there needs to be earthwork done in those areas, and that is not the case
1376 within those conservation areas.
1377
1378 Beth Bronson: Yes.
1379
1380 Laura Haywood: We do have a tree conservation plan on Page 67 of your packet. And in the lower bottom right-
1381 hand corner,the primary tree protection area that we have in our plan is 22.23 acres or 20,very
1382 small, 28.4 percent of the overall site. Secondary tree protection area is 27.04 acres,which is
1383 34.5 percent of the site, and the total protected area is 49.27 acres,which is 62.9 percent of the
1384 overall site.
1385
1386 Ward Marotti: In addition to the environmental assessment,we did do a tree survey of the entire parcel and
1387 documented the size, the diameter at breast height, species, and location of all the trees. I
1388 believe, I'd have to look back, but I believe it was all trees greater than 4 inches diameter breast
1389 height,so everything bigger than about like that got identified to species and it's at least
1390 approximate location documented.
1391
1392 Beth Bronson: Now,was that back in 2024 or was that more recently?
1393
1394 Ward Marotti: I believe it was'24, is that right? I mean, not a whole lot is going to happen in a year. With
1395 exception of having it be cleared, obviously, that could have happened. But with regard to the size
1396 and the species wouldn't change substantively.
1397
1398 Laura Haywood: I was just going to clarify. It has happened at the end of'24.
1399
1400 Ward Marotti: Yeah,that's what I thought it might have been in the early winter this year.
1401
1402 Delores bailey: Can I ask a quick question about the trees, so that means her trees won't get cut down,the ones
1403 that this owner was referring to.
1404
1405 Laura Haywood: Correct, there is a 100-foot buffer surrounding our property boundary edges, so I don't see a
1406 scenario in which those would be impacted. That would be tree save.
1407
1408 Delores Bailey: So, Cathy's trees won't get cut down?
1409
1410 Laura Haywood: No.
1411
1412 Delores Bailey: Okay.
1413
1414 Jonah Garson: And there's a 100-foot buffer around Mr. Medred's property?
1415
1416 Laura Haywood: It should be a 100-foot perimeter buffer on all sides of our property.
1417
1418 Jonah Garson: Where it's not developed or are you just leaving natural state?
1419
1420 Laura Haywood: It's going to be a natural state. Now, I will say that there has already been, on the back side of his
1421 property,there is some young succession trees that have not been touched by us that would have
1422 been from previous or from the land seller, I can't confirm, but they are much smaller, very small
32
1423 trees, but yeah, nothing would be impacted and I just spouted out the percentages and with that
1424 being said,obviously, that 100-foot buffer is it taking into consideration that tree save.
1425
1426 Beth Bronson: I see a 50-foot buffer.
1427
1428 Laura Haywood: Is it 50 foot? I couldn't remember if it was 50 or 100 foot. We're doing what's required by the
1429 LIDO. Taylor? Taylor can speak to this.
1430
1431 Taylor Perschau: It might be helpful to point them out. So,as I understand it,there's a 50-foot development set
1432 back around Mr. Medred's property.
1433
1434 Beth Bronson: And I'm looking specifically, lot 49,48,47,those are the ones that are going to be the closest. And
1435 then, obviously, on the north side, Lots 50, 35, 36 and 37 are right there. I mean, it's 20,within 50
1436 feet.
1437
1438 Taylor Perschau: And so I will there's a variation against the Eno River Academy property, it is a 100 foot buffer.
1439 The RCD is a zoning that kind of is like choose your adventure. So,this is one that is part of the
1440 dialogue about what's appropriate.
1441
1442 Beth Bronson: Absolutely and the idea,you would want a 100-foot buffer from the school location and then
1443 require a 20-foot buffer from the property line adjacent, but then a 50-foot buffer for the
1444 development itself, and specifically, Lots 35, 36, 37,those are small.
1445
1446 Lamar Proctor: A hundred at the school. And it's 20-foot around Mr. Medred's property.
1447
1448 Laura Haywood: It is 50.
1449
1450 Lamar Proctor: Well, it's a 50-foot development limit and a 20-foot buffer.
1451
1452 Laura Haywood: Yeah,the 20 foot is encapsulated in the 50 foot.
1453
1454 Delores Bailey: So it's not 70, that's 50?
1455
1456 Lamar Proctor: Correct.
1457
1458 Venkat Yendapalli: The trail is in the 50-foot buffer.
1459
1460 Beth Bronson: The trail is more than 20 feet in most parts and there's no house within 50 feet.
1461
1462 Beth Trahos: No lot.
1463
1464 Beth Bronson: No lot, I'm sorry. No lot within 50 feet and then no trail or whatever space within 20 feet,
1465 theoretically.
1466
1467 Lamar Proctor: Not theoretically, actually.
1468
1469 Beth Bronson: Well, it's at this south line and absolutely encroaches. Because of the way that it juts in, I don't
1470 know what the question is.
1471
1472 Lamar Proctor: I say that because I think Mr. Medred wants it to be actually not theoretically because he wants a
1473 buffer, right?
1474
1475 Beth Bronson: Well, no, it absolutely needs to be a condition and because this isn't the final plat, I can't say
1476 anything about it, right.
1477
33
1478 Beth Trahos: This plan is a condition.We have a concept plan associated with our project and that first
1479 condition is that it will be developed in accordance with the concept plan, right? So, your staff is
1480 going to require that,what is developed looks very much like this. There is an opportunity for
1481 some small modifications, particularly with regard to reducing intensity and, and then in terms of
1482 what NCDOT may require with regard to site access,there may be some additional right of way
1483 dedication or something like that that they require.
1484
1485 Beth Bronson: And,to that point about the idea of less density, I think that's really what this entire conversation is
1486 getting at, right, and where I'm coming from as far as this is conditional. Obviously,you would
1487 have to follow this with these minor adjustments. The minor adjustments that I would want to
1488 consider is how this trail because of the property line, because of the way that the neighborhood
1489 itself abuts up to the neighboring parcel, that would definitely need to be clearly defined that it was
1490 more than 20 feet from the property line. But also, I don't think I would be having this
1491 conversation, or I would have all these questions if this was say for even 30 parcels, right,or 30
1492 lots planned. Considering the amount of wetlands that are undevelopable.
1493
1494 Lamar Proctor: That kind of leads into my question. So, the areas that are not developed, and I appreciate
1495 preserving natural space, but are they areas that could not be developed anyway?
1496
1497 Beth Trahos: Some of the areas that are not to be developed are areas that are environmentally sensitive
1498 areas. They could be included in lots, but could you put a house right on the environmentally
1499 sensitive area? Probably not. It would, depending individually, my understanding is the cluster
1500 subdivision process as a land planner in addition to a lawyer is that, it was to protect some of
1501 these environmental features that are better left as common open space rather than platted in lots,
1502 so there certainly is some of that and Rachel,you can maybe add to that.
1503
1504 Rachel Cotter: I also wanted to point out that a lower density doesn't mean less impact and with the higher
1505 density, you can actually have less impact to some of the nature features we're trying to protect
1506 than a lower density.
1507
1508 Beth Trahos: And I, 1 would just say, one of the things we're solving for here,from our perspective and I think
1509 from the perspective of your community and many communities in the triangle is the need for
1510 additional housing. So,you can decide that you would rather not see this move forward but you're
1511 giving up an opportunity for housing that is being developed in a way that is generally sensitive.
1512 You know, that is providing the things that you are after and so,we would suggest to you that
1513 there is some compromises to be made when land is being used and, as you look at the
1514 compromises for this piece of property that's very close to the Town of Hillsborough, it's already
1515 gotten many urban or Suburban uses around it that this use makes sense. This fits in better than
1516 perhaps an agricultural industrial area that your plan might support. That this area has changed
1517 significantly and the consolidated plan with the Town of Hillsborough recommends this kind of
1518 mixed residential. Your staff has said that this is in compliance with what you plan for this area
1519 and of course, change is hard for everybody and particularly when change is happening near
1520 where you live. It is difficult to see, but we would submit to you that what is being proposed is
1521 reasonable and in the public interest and it shows a developer that has gone above and beyond
1522 what an ordinary project might bring forward.
1523
1524 Lamar Proctor: Well, that's the,and I'm not trying to interrupt you but,we are getting pressed for time and do we
1525 have a second agenda item, but my point is we've seen other projects where the applicant
1526 specifically increased density on one portion of the property to leave other areas of the property
1527 that could have been developed undeveloped, and this was kind of pitched like that at the
1528 beginning. I think one of your team said that we're not going to bulldoze,we're not going to grade,
1529 so, I'm just trying to get a transparent answer, like this is a project where you are essentially
1530 putting lots wherever you can put lots.
1531
1532 Beth Trahos: There are some areas that are developable that are not platted in lots.
34
1533
1534 Lamar Proctor: Okay,where are those? Because there's a, there's a lot of talk about these sort of conservation
1535 subdivisions where you try and concentrate and you cluster the housing in one area and you leave
1536 other areas that you could develop, undeveloped. So, my question is where on this map does that
1537 occur?Can you point it out for me?
1538
1539 Laura Haywood: The secondary tree protection area does not include any. Page 66?
1540
1541 Beth Trahos: Or the PowerPoint because we do have that on the PowerPoint. I would submit as well that the
1542 idea of the conservation subdivision is not only that developable land would be preserved but that
1543 specifically environmentally sensitive land would be preserved.
1544
1545 Cy Stober: On Page 67 of your packet.
1546
1547 Laura Haywood: 67. Yeah. Thank you.
1548
1549 Lamar Proctor: So, on Page 67 in the packet,the darker crosshatched areas are areas that could be developed
1550 that are being not developed.
1551
1552 Chris Johnston: When you say darker, is that the kidney-bean shaped darker?
1553
1554 Laura Haywood: Yes.
1555
1556 Lamar Proctor: I'll reiterate. Looking at Page 67, let the record reflect the witness is pointing to not the areas that
1557 are lighter where there's clearly stream buffers, but the other areas outside of the measured lots
1558 that are not within the stream buffers.
1559
1560 Chris Johnston: So, it's not the darker kidney-bean shaped, that's not what we're talking about,the little tiny itty
1561 bitty little thing.All that fill in there. Okay, thank you.
1562
1563 Lamar Proctor: Yeah,that's what I'm just trying to clarify and understand. So,to see whether this project is
1564 consistent with the comprehensive land use plan and what we're trying to do in Orange County
1565 which is preserve as much rural space as possible, concentrate housing and leave as much
1566 natural space as we can,then my only other question was,what are the flood prevention
1567 measures? Because we've seen in recent years hundred-year flood plains and, things that are
1568 only supposed to happen once every 100 years are now happening,you know, once every 20
1569 years.
1570
1571 Venkat Yendapalli: Every 2 years, actually.
1572
1573 Beth Trahos: So, in terms of storm water,we will meet the requirements of your ordinance and there are
1574 locations where storm water ponds might be appropriate.
1575
1576 Lamar Proctor: It's just passive storm water, right? Measures consistent with the UDO. There's no pumps or
1577 anything like that.
1578
1579 Beth Trahos: That's correct. Our civil engineer nodded his head.
1580
1581 Lamar Proctor: Okay, great. Does anyone else have any other questions?
1582
1583 Whitney Watson: Yeah, I have a couple actually. Looking at the GIS map that was up just a moment ago, I was
1584 wondering if you could show where that potential pathway might be from this development to
1585 Crossroads School, because it looks to me like you'd have to cross property that is owned by
1586 someone else.
1587
35
1588 Beth Trahos: Pathways Elementary?
1589
1590 Whitney Watson: Yes.
1591
1592 Laura Haywood: So, in order to get across the creek,yes,a walking bridge would need to traverse it.
1593
1594 Whiteney Watson: It's not that, it's the property.
1595
1596 Laura Haywood: Yes,there's an HOA-owned property back there that we would need to get permission from the
1597 HOA, but that would also be an additional collaboration piece that we are willing to address when
1598 the time comes.
1599
1600 Whitney Watson: Okay.
1601
1602 Beth Bronson: With Shrouds Creeks Homeowners Association.
1603
1604 Laura Haywood: Yes,that's correct. There's a small neighborhood right there of I don't know, a handful, 12 to 15
1605 homes, and their HOA kind of whips around.
1606
1607 Patrick Mallett: I can offer some historical perspective to that. When some developer develops Shrouds Creek,
1608 the developer went to the Town of Hillsborough and to the schools and said, hey, I've got this
1609 open space,would you consider a greenway or a path or a connection point. And at that time,the
1610 town said we're not really interested because there's stream features there and we're concerned
1611 about hazards without a full-blown greenway and adequate bridges. The school ultimately
1612 concluded we just want one little sidewalk along the right-of-way there, so it has been discussed
1613 before. I think that that HOA would need to be approached and a legal agreement arrived at. 1
1614 would think that they would be in the same theoretical position as the homeowners here,willing to
1615 talk, but there's essentially two to three, if not four parties that would need to be involved. Just
1616 wanted to let you know that that has been discussed in the past.
1617
1618 Whitney Watson: So,the other question is,there's a little tiny narrow tail of property that is part of this proposal, and
1619 what's up with that little piece? Could that be transferred to Eno River Academy or somebody
1620 else?
1621
1622 Beth Trahos: I don't know the, the genesis of that piece, but certainly it's something that could be discussed if it
1623 makes sense for it to be a part of Eno River or something like that. It certainly could be discussed.
1624
1625 Whitney Watson: Or,yeah, or to the property owners that are adjacent to it already if they wanted to buy that.
1626
1627 Cy Stober: Mr. Chair, if I may. So unlike when we're discussing DOT regulation and the right-of-way,
1628 conditioning a zoning approval on a property to compel conversation commitment with other
1629 property owners is outside the bounds of even the commissioners. We have to focus on this
1630 property and the regulations that apply to it and anything else is outside the bounds of what we
1631 can do as a zoning regulation.
1632
1633 Lamar Proctor: Thank you. And I do think it's been clear through this discussion that any communication or
1634 agreement between other adjacent property owners or other property owners is a matter of private
1635 interests between those legal entities and the landowners. And as the applicant has pointed out,
1636 as the developer they will eventually develop and sell these lots and that neighborhood will have
1637 an HOA, and once again,we can't get involved in that. That's a private matter between the
1638 people who buy that, but that HOA as a legal entity would have discussions with Eno River
1639 Academy or with adjacent landowners, but we can't condition zoning on those things.
1640
1641 Cy Stober: That's correct. I'm very happy to see and I know Taylor worked very hard at is basically teeing up
1642 those conversations as best we can through the powers that we do have to compel the easements
36
1643 and rights-of-way to be extended to the property lines, so those conversations can be had, and
1644 the applicant has responded to that staff guidance and conditions.
1645
1646 Jonah Garson: Just very quickly. I understand and I've heard that there's a small HOA with an adjacent
1647 neighborhood, private property owners. What is, and this is informational,what is the extent of
1648 our mandate with regard to conversations with public schools, public entities?
1649
1650 Cy Stober: None. They have a different elected board,and that board would need to take action,the OCS
1651 board to compel, and they need to make that commitment as part of a written document that'll be
1652 provided in the packet. None has been provided.
1653
1654 Statler Gilfillen: However, if those organizations had talked before they made a presentation, say,this evening,
1655 and they presented an agreement between those organizations which impacts the final layout of
1656 the plans tonight, that could impact our decision, right?
1657
1658 Cy Stober: Similar to the town providing a willing to serve letter for utilities, yes,that would be a factor you
1659 could consider.
1660
1661 Statler Gilfillen: Thank you.
1662
1663 Whitney Watson: So again, if you could,Taylor, if you could scroll,zoom out a little bit on the GIS map. I was
1664 wondering if you could speak to what the relative density for this new project would be like or
1665 similar to other developments in this part of Orange County. Is it going to be greater than what's
1666 represented by the property lines here or is it going to be less or about the same? Because that
1667 kind of gets to the rural character.
1668
1669 Beth Trahos: Sure. So,you see quite a bit here of the Town of Hillsborough, and I don't know specifically the
1670 size of these lots within these neighborhoods. A third of an acre with a traditional platted
1671 subdivision, that's what these subdivisions are.
1672
1673 Venkat Yendapalli: I think that subdivision is on sewer if I'm not wrong. Maybe planning team knows better.
1674
1675 Cy Stober: Yes,those are all Town of Hillsborough.
1676
1677 Beth Trahos: Sure. But so,these lot sizes would be larger. However,there would be open space that would be
1678 surrounding rather than just lotted out 20,000 square feet is roughly half an acre as compared to a
1679 third of an acre. That accommodates the septic that would be needed to serve these lots that are
1680 not getting service from the town. So, lots would be bigger than some of the lots you see,smaller
1681 than others that you see, but they would be surrounded by that common open space.
1682
1683 Venkat Yendapalli: What's the minimum lot requirement as per UDO for this property? Haven't seen this.
1684
1685 Beth Trahos: So,the AR zoning district anticipates 40,000 square foot lots, so roughly an acre lot. From a
1686 density perspective,this is less dense total number of units,total acreage,than could be built if it
1687 were traditionally platted. If it were traditionally platted,you would have to get way back into the
1688 subdivision and bring roads and it would impact the environmental features which we're trying to
1689 avoid doing. Smaller lots but larger open space.
1690
1691 Cy Stober: Mr. Chair, I need to offer a correction. When I spoke to, to Mr.Yendapalli, I said that that was a
1692 subdivision in the Town of Hillsborough's jurisdiction. It is a patchwork of annexation that is the
1693 Highland Woods neighborhood, so some of those lots are annexed into the town, and some
1694 remain outside the town limits.
1695
1696 Lamar Proctor: Thank you for that clarification.
1697
37
1698 Delores Bailey: So just for my benefit, there are a few comments that we got from the community, and would you
1699 just speak to the validity of this comment. We would be heartbroken to have sewage from
1700 proposed 50-plus septic fields to each home for runoff from the building process leak into this
1701 creek causing contamination. Can you just speak to that, is that not true? Is that something this
1702 community needs to worry about?
1703
1704 David Barcal: I mean, if you had sewage leaking directly into the creek, you'd be getting served an NOV from the
1705 County Health Department. So that would indicate a failed septic system. What we've done up
1706 until now,we've done a preliminary soils analysis,we've identified suitable soil.
1707
1708 Delores Bailey: I know. Remember,we had this conversation last month.
1709
1710 David Barcal: Yep, I know.
1711
1712 Delores Bailey: That should not happen.
1713
1714 Ward Marotti: The second part of that question was with regard to runoff during construction and similar to the
1715 permitting, or the septic system compliance while this project is under construction, it's subject to
1716 the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permitting process,and weekly inspections
1717 and fixing problem areas. And so it is subject to an NPDES permit and if it is determined to be in
1718 violation of the permit,that retroactive fixes will be required pursuant to that permit.
1719
1720 Beth Bronson: To be clear, does every lot have a septic plan and a repair area?
1721
1722 David Barcal: We haven't looked at each individual plan for each lot, but from the PowerPoint, you can see the
1723 general area of the suitable soil in most of the lots.
1724
1725 Beth Bronson: I saw the examples,yeah. Lot 1 and Lot 49.
1726
1727 David Barcal: But we have not gotten through to each individual lot. At this point,that'd kind of be, because you
1728 don't even have the detailed soils analysis, you're not going to actually flag it. It'd kind of be a
1729 judgment based on how much resources and money that they want to put into something that's
1730 pretty much theoretical at this point.
1731
1732 Beth Bronson: Theoretically, yeah, if you get approval for the rezoning for 49 lots,you could still only have 20.
1733
1734 David Barcal: You would have to go out there, do individual soil borings on each lot, lay out the lines,flag the
1735 lines and design the system, submit the application to Orange County Health Department and
1736 then it'd have to go through their approval.
1737
1738 Beth Bronson: So,the conversation about having a community septic was not had?
1739
1740 Cy Stober: It was.
1741
1742 Beth Bronson: It was?
1743
1744 Cy Stober: Prior denials discouraged that line of thinking.
1745
1746 Beth Bronson: That's unfortunate,yeah.
1747
1748 Lamar Proctor: I don't know I mean,just as by way of discussion, I think there's historical issues with community
1749 septic systems and bailing and who maintains them and individual lot owners being responsible
1750 for their own poops.
1751
38
1752 Chris Johnston: So just to confirm though, and in the interest of time and such, do we have as a board what we
1753 need in regard to this particular application? I want to make sure that we're asking the right
1754 questions and that sort of thing, but I also want to be cognizant of everyone's time and to make
1755 sure that we're not beating around a bush here.
1756
1757 Lamar Proctor: Yeah,thank you, Chris. I think the idea is,are there additional conditions that we would seek that
1758 in addition to or modifications of the ten conditions that they have already. I was going to ask that.
1759 So,the conditions are based on the discussions with the County and from the NIM, the
1760 Neighborhood Information Meeting? Is that how these conditions were developed?
1761
1762 Beth Bronson: Yes.
1763
1764 Lamar Proctor: Okay. I'm just clarifying your points. Are there any other questions of that applicant, and is there
1765 any discussion that anyone has,wants to have in regard to approval or conditions?
1766
1767 Chris Johnston: And just to confirm do we have the page number for the conditions?
1768
1769 Lamar Proctor: I think it's Page 82 but correct me if I'm wrong.
1770
1771 Beth Bronson: I would just like to make one comment before we kind of further this discussion, is that this been a
1772 lot of information and there has been a lot of good conversation about it. I do not know that it
1773 would be realistic to come to a decision tonight, necessarily, given that it is 9:40 and that
1774 discussions we've had on the theoretical conditions that could be in place could continue.
1775
1776 Chris Johnston: My ask,what additional information you feel we'd be able to get before approval that we don't
1777 currently have?
1778
1779 Beth Bronson: I would say additional time to review all the materials.
1780
1781 Chris Johnston: The problem with saying that is the applicant went through the process and I believe Cy is going
1782 to say something like has a legal right for us to move some level on this. If there's not something
1783 that we're particularly waiting on, I would caution against asking for additional time. If there's a
1784 specific thing like we need this information before we move forward, yes, absolutely. If there is
1785 just a general sense that we need additional time to take in this data.
1786
1787 Delores Bailey: Is the fact that they're working on a new memo or Land Use Plan.That plus the fact that this is so
1788 theoretical, is that not cause to delay the voting for zoning change?
1789
1790 Lamar Proctor: I think that would come by way of a motion,well, Cy, can you tell me what the time limits are on
1791 the consideration?
1792
1793 Cy Stober: Section 2.8.8.B of the Ordinance Page 2-28 or 84 of the whole ordinance states that the plain
1794 words action on the application shall be one of the following. 1)To recommend approval. 2)To
1795 recommend denial. 3)To recommend approval that was specific conditions. Or 4)To
1796 recommend the Planning Board be given extended time to consider the matter. And then on 289,
1797 the Board of County Commissioners shall hold a public hearing after the Planning Board either
1798 makes its recommendation or takes no action on the application within 30 days of its referral. So
1799 that would be 30 days from tonight.
1800
1801 Lamar Proctor: What,that the County commissioners have to hear it?
1802
1803 Cy Stober: Shall hold a public hearing.
1804
1805 Lamar Proctor: County commissioners?
1806
39
1807 Cy Stober: Yes. Right. Can act without a Planning Board recommendation according to the UDO. And the
1808 applicant has the right to seek that hearing.
1809
1810 Jonah Garson: Wait, so my understanding of what you're saying is its Subsection 4 of that prior head was that we
1811 can get an extension of time and that can be the action we take, and then subsequent to having
1812 that extension, then we considering this,then that starts a 30-day clock.
1813
1814 Cy Stober: That's accurate.
1815
1816 Chris Johnston: The only thing I would say to that again is if we are asking the applicant to do something in those
1817 30 days,to provide us with additional information, that feels like a reason to extend. What it feels
1818 like we're doing is we are asking for a holding pattern and I'm not quite clear why.
1819
1820 Beth Bronson: We didn't really ask for a holding pattern. I literally just made a comment for discussion about
1821 delaying if we can consider this more.
1822
1823 Lamar Proctor: So procedural,what that would be is a motion to delaying or whatever the Option No.4,to request
1824 more time for Planning Board consideration that would need to be a second, and if it was a
1825 second, it would be voted on,and then if it passed, then we would move it to I guess, the October
1826 1 st session.
1827
1828 Beth Bronson: No, again, I'm making this comment and I mean if Chris if you'd like to.
1829
1830 Chris Johnston: No, I don't have a motion to make it come to that. I'm simply saying that I personally, if we have
1831 something we're asking the applicant to do that we need additional time for them to do,what I'm
1832 concerned about is it sounds like people are saying I need more time to think about this and that's
1833 of what we've already been given in some ways. We've been given the packet. It was 86 pages
1834 of hydrological studies which,thank you,very deep wells. But we've had a fair amount of time to
1835 go over 270 pages.To ask these questions, to have these comments. It's a very similar
1836 application to what we've talked about prior, but I just want to make sure that if we extend this, that
1837 we have a good reason.
1838
1839 Lamar Proctor: I think procedurally we have to make a motion so if there's no further discussion, I'll entertain a
1840 motion to adopt the statement of consistency in Attachment 6 or a motion to adopt the statement
1841 of inconsistency, or a motion to allow the board more time to consider the application.
1842
1843 Beth Bronson: I mean, I wasn't necessarily finished, again,the reasoning for this would have more to do with the
1844 idea that the applicant could seek additional conditions or could think about additional conditions
1845 that address the concerns that have been brought up tonight. So additional considerations of a
1846 contingency plan for,should 49 lots not work, could there be a backup design where you lower the
1847 density of it.
1848
1849 Cy Stober: Mr. Chair?
1850
1851 Lamar Proctor: Yes.
1852
1853 Cy Stober: Ms. Bronson, that would be a new application.
1854
1855 Beth Bronson: Yeah, I know.
1856
1857 Cy Stober: No,that would have to start over.
1858
1859 Beth Bronson: Well, I would not recommend that, I guess.
1860
40
1861 Cy Stober: That could not be submitted. That's my point. That could not be submitted as a substitute at this
1862 point.
1863
1864 Beth Bronson: Okay.
1865
1866 Cy Stober: You have the application before you.
1867
1868 Lamar Proctor: I will entertain any motions one way or the other. Does there need to be any more discussion? 1
1869 think generally I'll just try and leave the discussion. I think people are concerned about the traffic
1870 and concerned about just the density in that area. The traffic seems to be the primary concern.
1871 But that's DOT, it's part and parcel of the application and the site plan. You get some stuff,you
1872 lose other stuff,you get some benefits, you get detriments. So, I think we do have enough
1873 information to move forward on a vote as to whether we can make a recommendation to the
1874 Board of County Commissioners that this is something that's consistent with the comprehensive
1875 land use plan and the surrounding character of the land uses around it, or it's inconsistent.
1876
1877 Chris Johnston: We just need someone to make a motion.
1878
1879 Lamar Proctor: Right. Any motions? I guess I can make the motion.
1880
1881 Beth Bronson: I have a question about a condition.
1882
1883 Lamar Proctor: Delores?
1884
1885 Delores Bailey: Mr. Chair,you're saying you can make the motion?
1886
1887 Lamar Proctor: I think I can make the motion. I'm a board member.
1888
1889 Statler Gilfillen: Just do it.
1890
1891 Lamar Proctor: I mean, any board member can make the motion.
1892
1893 Cy Stober: I'm just checking the rules of procedure Perdita likely knows, but I'm checking the rules of
1894 procedure.
1895
1896 Perdita Holtz: I'm checking it too.
1897
1898 Beth Bronson: I could also make a motion with my condition to hold on this decision until the applicant has an
1899 opportunity to go back to the Town of Hillsborough and make a discussion about water supply.
1900
1901 Lamar Proctor: You can either,you either make a motion to adopt the statement of consistency, adopt the
1902 statement of inconsistency, or make a motion for the board to have more time to consider the
1903 application. Or you can make a motion to adopt the application or recommend the application with
1904 specific conditions, but I don't think you can do this conditional come back whenever. I mean, this
1905 is the application. We have to make a decision on it.
1906
1907 Chris Johnston: I'm going to make a proposal and if it gets voted down,then it gets voted down and we move from
1908 there.
1909
1910 Lamar Proctor: Okay.
1911
1912 Chris Johnston: Does that serve the purpose?
1913
1914 Lamar Proctor: Yes.
1915
41
1916 Chris Johnston: Okay. I'm going to butcher it. I make a motion that the application as stated follows the statement
1917 of consistency, the Planning Board finds that it is within the statement of consistency and should
1918 be moved forward with the conditions as proposed with no additional conditions or changes.
1919
1920 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So that's a motion to adopt the statement of consistency in Attachment 6 and recommend
1921 approval to the Board of County Commissioners.
1922
1923 Chris Johnston: With the conditions as stated,yes.
1924
1925 Lamar Proctor: With the conditions as stated in the application. Do I have a second?
1926
1927 Whitney Watson: Second.
1928
1929 Lamar Proctor: Second. All in favor of approval?
1930
1931 MOTION BY Chris Johnston to approve the statement of consistency. Seconded by Whitney Watson.
1932
1933 MOTION FAILS 4-4:Venkat Yendapalli, Statler Gilfillen, Beth Bronson, and Delores Bailey opposed.
1934
1935 Lamar Proctor: I'm sorry, how many approval? So, one, two,three,four.And then for those who say nay, I think
1936 you're required to state your reasons as to why is that right, Cy?
1937
1938 Cy Stober: That's requested,yes.
1939
1940 Lamar Proctor: All right,so all those against? All right. So, Delores, you want to state your reasons as to why it's
1941 not consistent.
1942
1943 Delores Bailey: I do not feel like this is consistent with rural character of this area.
1944
1945 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Thank you. Beth?
1946
1947 Beth Bronson: I just,yeah,the density does not fit the rural character. I don't find that the complete testing for
1948 the rezoning application as it stands is sufficient enough to move forward with a recommendation.
1949
1950 Lamar Proctor: All right. Who else was a no? Statler.
1951
1952 Statler Gilfillen: Professional architect who's dealt with these types of issues at the university level and as a
1953 licensed architect who has taught for years at universities, planning and development and design,
1954 1 do not believe that this layout is in the best interest consistent with what the Planning Board
1955 should be approving.
1956
1957 Lamar Proctor: Okay. And Venkat?
1958
1959 Venkat Yendapalli: Yeah, my reason is same with Beth. The density, the 40,000 square foot requirement, and there's
1960 not enough usable land that we can accommodate 40,000 square foot here and with what they're
1961 saying is leftover space which is not usable. So, my concern is the density.
1962
1963 Lamar Proctor: Okay. I thank you.
1964
1965 Chris Johnston: Now we need another motion. I mean,we need another motion one way or another if we're going
1966 to table or if we are going to disapprove?
1967
1968 Lamar Proctor: I think Cy is probably looking what happens with a four-four.
1969
1970 Cy Stober: All actions have to be determined by a majority vote.
42
1971
1972 Beth Bronson: So, I can make a motion to postpone a decision?
1973
1974 Lamar Proctor: No wait. What was the vote? I voted yes, so did I not count myself?
1975
1976 Beth Bronson: There are eight of us here, Lamar.
1977
1978 Lamar Proctor: There's eight of us, okay. Sorry, it's getting late and I am getting tired.
1979
1980 Statler Gilfillen: We've postponed the other parts of the meeting until the next meeting.
1981
1982 Lamar Proctor: Well, I think what we should do here is since we could not come up with a majority vote,we, and
1983 just so the public knows,we have adopted a hard stop at 10:00. So, I think what we'll have to do
1984 is, I'll make my own motion for this to be considered at the October 1 st Planning Board meeting,
1985 for the board to have more time and more members.
1986
1987 Delores Bailey: Second.
1988
1989 Lamar Proctor: All right. All in favor?
1990
1991 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to continue the agenda item for the October 1, 2025, Planning Board Meeting. Seconded by
1992 Delores Bailey
1993
1994 MOTION PASSED 6-2: Chris Johnston and Whitney Watson opposed.
1995
1996 Lamar Proctor: So, by six to two,we are moving to move this to the October 1 st for more time for the Planning
1997 Board. Correct, Mr. Stober?
1998
1999 Cy Stober: Yes.
2000
2001 Lamar Proctor: And do the nays have to state their reasons for that vote? It's not related to the statement of
2002 consistency so I wouldn't think so.
2003
2004 Cy Stober: Correct.
2005
2006 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So, I think procedurally what has occurred is Agenda Item 7 has been moved to October
2007 1 st for further consideration. Without a majority vote from the Planning Board.
2008
2009 Delores Bailey: Mr. Chair, motion to adjourn.
2010
2011 Lamar Proctor: We have another agenda item.
2012
2013 Statler Gilfillen: Given the late hour,to move that to the next meeting.
2014
2015 Lamar Proctor: I would just ask staff to comment on their recommendation as to whether to move that agenda
2016 item to the October 1st meeting.
2017
2018 Cy Stober: If the intention is to complete discussion by 10:00,we don't have adequate time for even the
2019 presentation.
2020
2021 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Do we need to take a vote on moving that?
2022
2023 Beth Bronson: We could motion to move the meeting until 10:30.
2024
2025 Lamar Proctor: You can make a motion.
43
2026
2027 Delores Bailey: But you had one,you had one going, didn't you? Did you finish your motion?
2028
2029 Cy Stober: You have a published agenda,so you need to take action on that item. It's on the agenda.
2030
2031 Lamar Proctor: We have to take action on Agenda Item 8. So, do we need to take a vote to move that as well?
2032
2033 Cy Stober: Yes, please.
2034
2035 Lamar Proctor: All right, I'll make a motion to move Agenda Item 8 to the October 1st Planning Board meeting.
2036 Do I have a second?
2037
2038 Statler Gilfillen: Second.
2039
2040 Lamar Proctor: Statler, I hear a second. All in favor?
2041
2042 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to move agenda item 8 to the October 1,2025 Planning Board Meeting.
2043
2044 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
2045 Lamar Proctor: I have one,two, three,four,five—all, unanimous on that one.
2046
2047 Statler Gilfillen: Move to adjourn.
2048
2049 Lamar Proctor: Do I have a second?
2050
2051 Jonah Garson: Second.
2052
2053 Lamar Proctor: All in favor?
2054
2055 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Jonah Garson.
2056
2057 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
2058
2059 The meeting adjourned at 9:53 PM