Regular Meeting

What? Heat. Heat. N.

[snorts]

All right. Good evening and welcome to the planning and zoning board meeting. Thank you for joining us and I'll call this meeting to order. Our board clerk, Julie Mitchell, will take roll call this evening.

Thank you, chair. For the record, the following uh board members are absent. S Camarada, Bosshana Etton, Andy Co, and Ruben Moore. The following are present. Chris Johnson, Mike Rosselli, Jeff Monreef, Shawn McAndrew, Diane Mayo, and Ken George. Thank you. [snorts] So, the Kerry Community Plan will continue to be the guiding document for this board. Our role is to function as citizen adviserss to the council who will ultimately make the final decision on all resoning activity. We recognize that all resoning requests are supported unanimously by the members of our community. We strive to balance the impact of increased building density required to support K's growth while maintaining the historic charm and character of Kerry. The Kerry community plan was initially adopted in 2017 following a collaborative effort between Kerry's citizens and our town government. That collaboration has continued and resulted in a recently updated version of the plan adopted by council in January of 2025. The chapters of the plan include live, work, shop, engage, shape, move, enrich, serve, and act. The community plan can be found on K's website. Your citizen opinions based on the Kerry community plan document play a very important role in advising our leaders. We encourage our citizens to refer to the plan and provide fe feedback that's based on the guiding principles of the plan as it relates to the zoning request. While this is a public meeting, it is not a public hearing. There's no opportunity for the public to speak during this meeting. If you have comments about any of these items, we encourage you to reach out directly to staff by email or phone. You may also reach out to the board members through

email. may also contact council directly through email or during the public speaks out portion of any regularly scheduled account council meeting. These meetings are also streamed live on K's website and will be posted on YouTube. Past planning and zoning board meetings are available to view on YouTube as well. Uh now that we've gotten that out of the way, we're going to adopt our agenda agenda and would welcome someone to make a motion to approve the agenda out set out for tonight.

So moved.

And a second.

Second. All those in favor, please state I. I.

Any opposed? [snorts]

And we have a couple of minutes to approve. And so, uh, yeah, I guess I'll do these independently. And so, the first is our March 23rd, 2026 meeting, regularly scheduled meeting. Uh, we need to approve those minutes. If someone would approve the, uh, motion or suggest a motion on that, I'd appreciate it.

So, moved.

And any second?

Second.

All right. All those in favor, please state I. I.

I. Any opposed?

All right. And then we also

And I have a question before we move on on this one because I wasn't here and I don't think I can vote present. So

yeah, I think I had the same issue with March uh as well. I was here for June. So um do u

I didn't I didn't watch the meeting so I don't know if the that meeting [snorts]

So can we can we pass it with just the five of us? Um, so as a board yours, even though you weren't here for that meeting, you can still vote on the minutes. And so if you hear from your colleagues that the minutes seem accurate to you, you can vote as well.

Okay.

Okay. Do you all think this accurate?

Uh, if if you're okay. Yes, I did read them this afternoon, but so [clears throat] so we'll take a unanimous uh vote on that as I uh moving forward to the June 22nd minutes. I'm looking for a motion there.

So move.

Any second? [clears throat]

Second.

All right. All those in favor, please state I. I.

Any opposed?

All right, that moves us to our order of business for this evening. Um, we have a

case 2516, Jacobs Creek Lane Reszoning. Uh, our case here is uh Rachel Smith will be the presenter on this. Following her presentation, the applicant will share their remarks. Board members will have an opportunity to ask questions of the staff and the applicant. Miss Smith, please proceed.

Thank you. Good evening, board. The owner of approximately 8.99 acres addressed 4312 Jacobs Creek Lane requests the application of initial Town of Kerry zoning upon annexation. The property is located east of the Cadam and Wake County line and west of the American Tobacco Trail and White Oak Elementary School. The site is located a sixth of a mile west of the American Tobacco Trail, which is accessible via an existing greenway trail connection extending east from the Jasper Olive Road and Yates Road intersection. [snorts] Yates Road, a four-lane thoroughfare, provides access to the site. The applicant will extend Yates Road along the site's eastern boundary. You may recall the Courtyards at White Oak Reszoning approved last year, now known as the Courtyards at Jacob's Creek, a 55 and older age restricted community. This community is presently under development plan review and surrounds the subject property on three sides. This development will provide additional connectivity to the site via the extension of Mystic Seal Lane. The current zoning is Wake County residential 40 watershed or R40W and the applicant requests reszoning to carry residential 12 conditional use or R12CU with the Jordan Lake Wershed Protection Overlay District and the Conservation Residential Overlay District.

The proposed zoning conditions include limiting the use to 16 detached dwellings, a minimum of 2400 square ft of community gathering space, and minimum lot size calculations will not include repairarian buffer areas. Buffer shall be in common open space and there will be sidewalks on both sides of all streets and Yates Road will be constructed to all applicable specifications. Because the courtyards at Jacob's Creek Development is expected to be built first, Mystic Seal Lane will initially terminate with a turnaround bulb at the courtyard's property line. The applicant will remove the turnaround bulb when they connect their development to Mystic Seal Lane. Staff has evaluated the request with the Imagine Carry Community Plan. The site is located within the green level special planning area neighborhoods west of Flat Branch sub area. This special planning area supports a gradual downward transition in density moving west from NC540 towards the Chattam County line with areas west of the flat branch stream not to exceed about 2.5 dwelling units per acre. Additional policy guidance includes shielding development from streets, contextsensitive design, and a predominant land use of detached dwellings on a quarter acre or larger lots. The proposed 16 detached dwellings on 12,000 foot minimum lots and the resulting density of 1.78 dwellings per acre is in keeping with the area's land use pattern and generally meets the policy guidance of the special planning area and the shape chapter for compatibility and transitions. The proposal would provide at least 2400 square ft of community gathering area, which is twice the LDO requirement for a development of this size, which may help

to promote open space and tree canopy preservation. Move chapter policies are generally met by the proposal's commitment to build sidewalk on all sites sides of subdivision streets where the LDO only requires one side for local streets. the removal of the mystic seal lane turnaround bulb and the extension of Yates Road as a multimotal street subject to all town specifications. A neighborhood meeting was held in February and six nearby residents attended. There were no direct questions or concerns related to the proposal, only a question about a different resoning. Staff has received intermittent emails with questions and concerns about existing and future traffic on Bachelor Road. A public hearing was held in June. There were no written comments and there were no in-person speakers. Council had questions and comments regarding resonings and special planning areas, watershed overlay zoning, the timing of the removal of the Mystic Sea turnaround, and town policies to pl place street connection signage on turnaround and culde-sac bulbs that will be connected in the future and comments regarding the relationship between density, revenue, and the cost to provide service to annexed property. There have been no changes made to the request since the council hearing. In terms of staff's evaluation of the case against the imaginary community plan, we find that for the green level special planning area and the live and shape chapters, the proposed 16 detached dwellings at 1.78 units per acre with 12,000t minimum lot sizes generally aligns with recommendations for the neighborhoods west flat branch sub area and fits the established residential pattern of the area. For the enrich chapter, the applicant is committing to 2400 square feet of

community gathering area, double the LDO requirement, supporting open space preservation, and for the move chapter, sidewalks on both sides of all subdivision streets, frontage improvements along eight store road, and removal of the Mystic Sea lane turnaround to support multimodal connectivity and street connect continuity. This concludes my presentation. Uh Worth Mills, the applicant's representative, is available to provide comments and after his comments, I'm available to answer any questions you may have.

Terrific. Thank you. [clears throat] Good evening, planning and zoning board members. Worth Mills with Longleaf Law Partners. I'm here on behalf of Sterling West LLC, who is the property owner and the reasonzoning applicant for 4312 Jacobs Creek Lane. Will Norton, an engineer with Jones Kasan, is also available uh and present to answer questions uh after my brief remarks. Um thank you to Rachel for giving a very comprehensive summary of what we're asking to do here. Um but again just to reiterate some of the uh key uh points, our reszoning to R12 conditional use would allow up to 16 single family detached homes on this approximately 9 acre parcel which uh results in a 1.78 dwelling units an acre density. Uh that density and the minimum lot size is consistent with the green level special planning area. Um to the south and southeast are planned developments with uh denser housing products. So I think we're very much keeping in line with the density recommendations and the minimum lot size recommendations of that special planning area. Um, key commitments include uh requiring that all perimeter

buffers be in the common open space, a commitment to sidewalks on both sides of all internal streets, and uh 2400 square feet of community community gathering area space, which is again doubled the amount required by the LDO. Um, town council did raise a few points at the public hearing that I would just like to respond to. Some of these may deal more with the annexation, but they are somewhat linked given uh there wouldn't be a reasoning without an annexation here. Um but the extension of Mystic Sea Lane into this site and the removal of that uh bulb at the boundary line. Um to my knowledge that is a standard operating procedure in the town of Kerry. Uh I I know that I worked on a previous case um a couple months ago where we had a similar situation where that bulb would be removed uh to provide that vehicular connectivity. Uh and then there was I think just a general concern about extending town services to this site. Um this is not an extension of sort of current municipal limits. uh we are within a sort of a somewhat large donut hole uh where we are surrounded by um town of Kerry corporate limits on all sides. So this would just be really filling in that uh Wake County gap that exists today. U but just to summarize because of the consistencies with the community plan, the compatibility with the surrounding developments and the offered zoning conditions, we think that this request is uh reasonable and in the public interest. Um Will and myself are available to answer questions, but we appreciate the time to speak with you this evening. Thank you very much.

Appreciate that.

Thanks, Worth. [clears throat]

So before we have any dialogue, I'll just state that the Kerry community plan is in place to guide the development in Kerry. As you think about your questions, keep in mind how this proposed case fits or does not fit within the Kerry community plan. When making a motion, it would be helpful to describe how you see your motion

impacting the Kerry community plan. for example, the work shape or live chapters. While this is not a requirement, it would be helpful for the town council to understand how we're thinking about the case as it applies to the plan. And so I would just start maybe down with you, Chris, if you have any questions or comments. We'll work our way down.

I just had one quick comment or question. U what's the primary difference between R12CU versus the TRCU that's there surrounding the current property? So, the TRCU allows additional uses, primarily town houses. It also has a um smaller minimum lot size, 6,000 square feet.

Okay. So, this is a little bit less dense.

Correct.

Gotcha. That's all I have.

Okay. Bye. [clears throat]

Uh Miss Smith, so council members had questions and comments and they said uh there was a discussion of annexation costs, balance between service costs, anticipated property tax revenue. Um I guess what was the crux of that discussion or

so this case I think was also um maybe influenced by other discussions about budgeting right it was got adopted right at the same meeting as the budget being adopted so it seemed like the council was relatively sensitive um to the cost of extending services to new newly annexed property if I were to characterize their comments.

Sure. Um was there an answer? Was the ex cost of extending services more than the cost of revenue?

So there was discussion of previous study that had been undertaken by the town maybe 20 years ago or so. Um the mayor specifically um was was talking about that he it was during his tenure tenure um he described that typically only high density um would have return on investment in terms of property revenue. Now, other council members did have suggestions or or commentary about there are other reasons perhaps to annex um as well other than just this the sheer cost of services and then the amount of revenue taxes would bring in. Um there was also discussion about the potential to have a new study undertaken

that might look at density and development patterns and then the the return or the cost on that investment.

Okay. But there is a max density in this wershed anyways. I think it's is it two dwell

1.785? No. Oh, in the in the area I'm sorry the watershed was like

correct

2.5 I believe

2.5 down to 1.5 if you go further. Right.

So this is in the green level special planning area and that plan recommends that the aggregate um for this area relative um to the flat branch stream be about 2.5. Now there's some averaging certainly over the larger development scale not just site specific.

Sure.

Okay.

No more questions. Anything?

No. Is this development part of the courtyards at Jacob Creek or is it just a completely new development?

I just wanted to Yep.

compliment. Okay. Thank you,

Diane.

No question.

Yeah, Ken almost had no questions. I was going to mark the calendar. Um I we see a lot that that try to maintain the with the energy and and and having you know plugs for EVs and stuff as part of the care community plan on energy and conservation and um and I don't see that in this one. We see it in a lot of them and I just was wondering um there's no discussion of that here. So I guess there's no there's no guarant there's no they're not proposing any kind of conditions. Um then then my other question is it's it's still kind of overl with the with the budget and people's budget in mind uh and the constructing budget. If if the other develop if the other Jacob's Creek group um development around it is in planning is in review right now.

It's in development plan review. Yes.

Development plan review. If this gets approved by council before it gets out of development plan review,

can't the bulb be changed to a a street?

Yes, the timing could absolutely align where the bulb is not built um with a development of this size, they might be able to move a little bit faster, but the courtyards at Jacob's Creek is just farther ahead in the process

because we have plenty of places with dead ends. And if we know that there's something on the other side, I I don't didn't understand how that in the care community plan the interest of the it just just was curious.

Yes, certainly the development timelines could align.

Okay, great. That's all I have.

Um no, I don't think I have any any specific questions either. I think this is a you know small infill area. We're trying to maintain density, those types of things. So um it seems pretty straightforward. Any anyone like to make a motion or any additional comments or questions prior to a motion?

I move that the board find 15 REZ16 is consistent with the comprehensive plan and all other applicable plans for the reasons set forth in the staff report presentation and discussion by the planning and zoning board.

And we have a second. Okay. So I guess Sean if you have any comments to support that uh recommendation or motion. No, again looks well researched, good infill. Um, you know, good report, good presentation, you know, continue continued uh shaped growth.

Ditto and and the the EV things don't bother me if people can choose to buy a house without an EV connection and pay for their own.

So, yeah, doesn't bother me.

D, anything?

Mike? No. Uh, and I would say the same thing. I mean, one of the things I asked Rachel about in advance was this is an area that has some of our older structures in the county and the area and you know whether or not there's a there's a hope that we would have some architectural or some character things. Ultimately, the design of some of these single families may have some of those characteristics, but it's not a requirement. So, um you know, it would

be unfair to impose something on such a small infield development to fix a much bigger uh kind of development plan. So um I guess then that case we would move forward with a vote. All those in favor please state I.

I. Any opposed?

All right. That means that our one and only case has been concluded with unanimous uh uh conclusion. And at this point I think I'm allowed there's no new business. So I'm allowed to adjourn the meeting unless anyone opposes that. All right. Meeting Jiren. [music]