CYAMESTONN  Town of. Jamestown Planning Board  Welcome to the Town of Jamestown Planning Boardi meeting. We appreciate your interest and we encourage, public participation inc our meeting. Your comments are important to our decision making process. Please note that there will be opportunities during the meeting for you to address the Boardi members. The first opportunity will come ift therei is aA public hearing ont the agenda, when the Chairo declares the hearing open for comment. The second opportunity to address the Board will come near the end oft the agenda when the Chairy willl inquire ifo anyone wishes to address the members of the Board. Anyone addressing the Board will approach the podium; give) your first and last name and your complete physical  address. Comments may be limited tot three minutes.  TO: FROM: RE:  Planning Board Members  Matthew Johnson, AICP Director of Planning Monday, October 12, 2020-6:00PM Jamestown Town Hall, Council Chambers  Regular Meeting  Items on the agenda:  1. Call to Order-S Sarah Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board  2. Roll Call- -Matthew Johnson, Assistant Town Manager/Director of Planning  3. Consideration of the adoption of the August 24, 2020, Special Called Meeting Minutes -S Sarah  Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board  4. Public Hearings:  Procedure: Staff will present the case to the Board, followed by commentary, from the applicant. The Chair will open the public hearing and request to hear from both those inj favor and those opposed. Ifyouv wish to address the Board during the public hearing, please come to the podium and state) your name and address for the record. Speakers may have up to 31 minutes to address the Board. Please note, this is not a time for dialogue or discussion and the Board may or may not engage with you at this time, even if direct questions are asked. Once the public hearing is closed, no one may speak on the issue unless spec/ficalyrequested. by the Board Chair. A. CONTINUED FROM THE September 28, 2020, special called meeting Rezoning Request - Matthew Johnson, Assistant Town Manager/Director of Planning. A rezoning application  has been received fori the following parcels:  2221 Guilford College Rd. (Parcel #159144) Approx. 27.89 ac +/-. From AG ii. 5300 Mackay Rd. (Parcel #159105) Approx. 30.70a ac+/. From AG tol PUD.  (Agricultural) to PUD (Planned Unit Development).  Ify you are unable to attend this meeting, please callt the Town Clerk at 336-454-1138    iii. 2207 Guilford College Rd. (Parcel#159106) Approx. 384.49 ac +/. From AG iv. 5303 Mackay Rd. (Parcel#158765) Approx. 0.6a ac+/-. From AG to PUD.  to PUD.  **This will be a continuation oft the standard public hearing. format whereby the applicant and the Board will engage in dialogue about the proposal. The purpose oft this meeting will be to allow the Board toj further explore the plans for the development and to encourage a conversation amongst Board members toj find solutions which meet the vision for the Board and the public. The meeting discussion willl bej facilitated by Benchmark Planning, consultants to the Town.** **The public will bei invited to speak at this meeting. Due to COVID-19 restrictions and the limited space available in the Council Chambers there will not be space available for a public audience. The meeting is available to view live on YouTube at wwyourbecom//ownelometownNc Those wishing to speak should line up outside the Council Chambers doors at 6pm. An usher will escort you into the building one at a time and each speaker will have 3 minutes to address the Board. Temperatures will be taken with a contactless thermometer andj face coverings are encouraged. *** b. Vote on recommendation: to Town Council -Chair oft the Planning Board (**to be continued Adoption of the Statement of Consistency- -Chair of the Planning Board (**to be continued 5. Discuss possible change of time and venue for next meeting - Matthew Johnson, Assistant Town a. Staffrecommends: adjusting the time and location fort this meeting to allow for longer periods of discussion amongst Board members and the consultant. A date will be  to a later meeting date**) to al later meeting date**) Manager/Planning Director  discussed and decided upon during the meeting.  6. Public Comment - Sarah Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board  7. Adjourn  8. Next regularly scheduled meeting will be announced in agenda item #5. **Due to COVID-19, restrictions on public entry to Town Hall will be observed. Public entry will be permitted at the Oct. 12, 2020, meeting during the public hearing as described above.** Anyone entering Town Hall must agree to have their temperature taken by a contactless thermometer  and are encouraged to wear af face covering.  The meeting willl be broadcast live on the Town's YouTube channel at: https/www.youtube.com//lownotlamestownNC  Click Subscribe" and tapi the "bell" icon to be notified when we go live.  Ify you: are unable to attend this meeting, please callt the Town Clerk at 336-454-1138  2    WORKING AGENDA Items on the agenda:  1.C Call to Order - Sarah Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board  i.  Welcome tot the October 12, 2020, Regular Planning Board meeting. In order to allow all attendees to be able to hear Board business, would ask that at this time, members oft the board and the audience please set your cell phones to "SILENT". Thank you.  2.  ROLL CALL Sarah Glanville Dennis Sholl Eddie Oakley Ed: Stafford Russ Walker Richard Newbill, ETJ Steve Monroe, ETJ Cara Arena, ETJ Sherrie Richmond, ETJ Rebecca Rayborn, Council Rep. Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board a. Motion to adopt minutes: b. Second: VOTE:  Present  Absent  3. Consideration oft the adoption of the August 24, 2020, Special Called Meeting Minutes -Sarah  4. Public Hearings  A. CONTINUED FROM THE Sept. 28, 2020, special called meeting. Rezoning Request - Matthew Johnson, Assistant Town Manager/Director of Planning. A rezoning application  has been received fort the following parcels:  i. - 2221 Guilford College Rd. (Parcel #159144) Approx. 27.89 ac +/-. From AG (Agricultural) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). ii. 5300 Mackay Rd. (Parcel #159105) Approx. 30.70 ac +/-. From AG to ii. 2207 Guilford College Rd. (Parcel #159106) Approx. 384.49 ac +/.  PUD. From AG to PUD.  Ify you are unable to attend this meeting, please callt the Town Clerk at 336-454-1138  3    iv. 5303 Mackay Rd. (Parcel #158765) Approx. 0.6 ac +/. From AG to b. Vote on recommendation to Town Council -Chair of the Planning Board (**to be Adoption of the Statement of Consistency -Chair oft the Planning Board (**to be  PUD.  continued to al later meeting date**) continued to al later meeting date**)  5. Discuss possible change of time and venue for next meeting -I Matthew. Johnson, Assistant a. Staff recommends adjusting the time and location for this meeting to allow for longer periods of discussion amongst Board members and the consultant. A date will be  Town Manager/Planning Director  discussed and decided upon during the meeting  6. Public Comment - Sarah Glanville, Chair of the Planning Board  7. Adjourn  a. Motion to adjourn: b. Second: VOTE:  8. Next regularly scheduled meeting will be announced in agenda item #5.  Ify you are unablet to attend this meeting, please callt thel Town Clerk at 336-454-1138  4    DRAFT  Planning Board Special Meeting August 24, 2020 6:00 pm in the Civic Center Minutes & General Account  Planning Board Members Present: Sarah Glanville, Chair; Ed Stafford, Vice Chair; Eddie Oakley, Russ Walker, Dennis Sholl, Richard Newbill (ETI), Steve Monroe (ETI), Sherrie Richmond (ETJ), & Cara Arena  (ETJ)  Council Member Representative: Rebecca Mann Rayborn Staff Present: Kenny Cole, Matthew Johnson, & Katie Weiner  Visitors Present: Kerry Miller, Jane Walker Payne, Amanda Hodierne, Zach Tran, Jeff Hochanadel, Beth  Blackman, & Neal Beasley  Call to Order- Glanville called the meeting to order.  Glanville welcomed the newest ETJ Planning Board Member, Cara Arena.  Arena introduced herself to the Board, and Glanville thanked her for being willing to serve.  Roll Call-. Johnson took roll call as follows: Sarah Glanville- Present Dennis Sholl- Present Eddie Oakley- Present Ed Stafford- Absent Russ Walker- Present Richard Newbill- Present Steve Monroe- Present Cara Arena- Present Sherrie Richmond- Present Rebecca Mann Rayborn- Present  Public Hearing for Rezoning Request for the following parcels: 2221 Guilford College Road, 5300 Mackay Road, 2207 Guilford College Road, 5230 Mackay Road, and! 5303 Mackay Road from AG (Agricultural) to PUD (Planned Unit Development)- Glanville opened the public hearing that had been Johnson stated that staff did find through their research that 5230 Mackay Road had already been annexed into Greensboro. He added that there would be more information on those findings later. He Johnson gave al brief overview oft the agenda for the meeting. He noted that the topic of overcrowding in Guilford County Schools had come up at the previous meeting. He added that the Mayor, staff, and Glanville had been in touch with some oft the Guilford County School representatives. He noted that a  continued from the August 10th Regular Planning Board meeting.  noted that it would not cause a problem with the ongoing public hearing.  1  5    LMAFT  letter had been sent regarding the issue to the Planning Board. He said that there was someone present from the Guilford County School system that could answer questions that the Board Members may Glanville called Amanda Hodierne forward. She stated that she was representing her client, Diamondback Investment Group. She said that her office was located at 804 Green' Valley Road, Suite 200 in Greensboro. She noted that the following people from the Diamondback team were present: Zach Tran (the Principal of Diamondback Investment Group), Beth Blackman (representative of the design professional team), Jeff Hochanadel (representing the traffic engineers), and Neal Beasley (the Glanville stated that there were numerous issues regarding the rezoning request that the Board needed to discuss. She encouraged everyone to focus on one issue at ai time in order to have a more organized, productive conversation. She suggested that the Board discuss the school issue first. Hodierne said that Diamondback remained a ready and willing participant in the conversations regarding the school. Glanville asked Hodierne to provide the Board with information regarding school projections Glanville stated that she had reached out to the Guilford County School Board about potential impacts that could result from the development. She added that Deena Hayes-Green, Chairperson of Guilford County Board of Education, sent her al letter which had been distributed to the Board. She noted that she had learned that the Guilford County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) also needed to be involved in the conversation about funding of schools. She added that the BOCC had already identified $1.6 billion in unmet facility needs across the district without the addition of the development. She highlighted the bond referendum that would be on the ballot for the school system in the upcoming election. Glanville was very concerned about the lack of funding for schools and the unmet needs that already existed within the community. She suggested that the developer consider donating 40 acres oft the. Johnson property for the construction of a new school. She also underscored the importance of being aware of the Guilford County Schools Master Plan while ensuring that it was aligned with growth.  have.  arborist consultant).  that would result from the development.  Stafford arrived at the meeting at 6:20 pm.  The Board Members discussed the Facilities Master Plan, the reduction of density within the  development, and the potential of land donation from the developer. Glanville asked the school representatives to come forward.  Angie Henry, Chief Operating Officer with Guilford County Schools, came forward. She thanked the Planning Board for allowing her to be a part of the conversation. Henry distributed copies of the Guilford County Facilities Master Plan Recommendations to the Planning Board Members. She highlighted certain aspects of the Plan that related to. Jamestown. She also gave a brief overview of the Master Facilities Plani in regard to the. Jamestown area. She noted that it would take millions of dollars to fund the upgrades to the schools that were listed in the Master Plan. She stated that it was important to encourage the BOCC to continue to prioritize funding improvements and maintaining the schools.  2    DAFT  Glanville asked Henry ift there were options to address overcrowding that she had seen be successful. Henry said that there was precedent for developers to donate land for a school. She noted that it had Glanville discussed the school bond that would be on the ballet in November with Henry. Planning Board Members discussed the details oft the Master Facilities Plan with Henry.  occurred a couple of times within the last several years.  Glanville thanked Henry for attending the meeting on such short notice and for answering the Board's questions. She said that everyone she had reached out to about the issue had been very responsive. Glanville asked Khem Irbyi if she had anything that she would like to add to the discussion. Khem Irby, School Board Representative for District 6, came forward. Irby thanked the Planning Board Members for reaching out to the School Board. She noted that it was important for everyone to engage inal holistic conversation about the county school system. She added that the Superintendent had taken the initiative to create al Master Plani to ensure that every school's needs were taken into consideration. Irby encouraged everyone to be supportive of the Master Plan and to be mindful oft the long-term needs oft the schools within Guilford County. She thanked the Planning Board fori inviting her to be a part oft the conversation regarding the new development and its potential impacts to the school system. Glanville called Hodierne forward to continue the discussion about the details of the proposed rezoning. Hodierne stated that she was aware of the Master Facilities Plan fort the Guilford County schools. She said that she was grateful that the representatives could attend and give everyone more context about thei issue. She noted that it would be important for everyone to figure out how to work together within that context moving forward. She added that it may be best to discuss the issue within the parameters Glanville asked Hodierne ift the developer would be willing to consider donating a portion of land fora new school to be constructed. Hodierne stated that there would need to be further discussions about the details of a potential donation of land with the School Board. Hodierne added that it would need to  of development infrastructure and potential community impacts.  be a much larger conversation, but the developer would be open to it.  Glanville called for a five minute recess at 6:55 pm. Glanville called the meeting back to order at 7:00 pm.  Glanville stated that she was grateful that the Board had such ai thoughtful conversation about the development's impact ont the school system. She asked the Planning Board Members which item they would like to discuss next. It was decided that the Board would discuss the square footage of the homes Hodierne stated thati it seemed that one of the main concerns that the Board had with lot/home sizes was compatibility with existing neighborhoods. She said that it could be dangerous to think about the homes in terms of whole price and final numbers and how that may compare with areas like Cedarwood. She added that it may be more useful to consider the homes in Castleton Village int terms of price per square foot. Hodierne said this would allow for everyone to take into consideration that there  and lot sizes.  3  1    DRAPT  were buyers int the market that were looking for different things. She stated that the Board could then Hodierne stated that she understood that the development would be located next to multiple different neighborhoods that already exist. However, she said that it was important to remember that the property was almost 500 acres. She noted that it would establish its own neighborhood with a unique feel. Hodierne stated that the new development should complement existing areas and certainly not detract from them. Hodierne added that this would be the first Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) in the Town of Jamestown. She noted that lot sizes were usually a little bit smalleri in a TND.S She said that the development would need to be compatible, but it would not look exactly like the Richmond was concerned that there would be division between Castleton Village and the rest of Jamestown. She noted that she had heard from several people that they were worried about potential negative impacts to their home values that may result from the development. Hodierne said that everyone wanted to build the best community possible, and she did not believe that the development Monroe stated that the developers would not be able to duplicate Cedarwood, but that Castleton Village should complement the surrounding neighborhoods. He noted that Bourdaux Retreat along Renaissance Parkway was a good example ofa development that flattered the existing area. Sholl said that he had some questions about the dimensions of the townhomes and the size oft their Hodierne requested that Beth Blackman, design representative, provide more information on the design Blackman introduced herself to the Board. She noted that she worked for Timmons Group and her office was located at 5410 Trinity Road Suite 102, Raleigh, NC: 27607 for the record. She said that the townhomes were generally between fifty and fifty-five feet deep. She said that the garageso could Sholl discussed the size of the garage with Blackman. Sholl was concerned that the garages would be too small. He added that most people had two cars and that they would probably have to park int the driveway or on the street. Sholl stated that the Town may have to provide garbage totersi ift the development were annexed because ofa an increase in demand for trash collection. He was worried that Blackman said that there were potential design solutions that could be used to address the concern about the garbage toters. Hodierne stated that the development team would be open to looking into Planning Board Members discussed the need for more parking options within the development. Hodierne stated that the developer had planned to provide auxiliary parking. She noted that she would provide more information about where those lots would be located and their specific capacities. Planning Board Members discussed their concerns about the density of the development with Hodierne. Arena stated that she was concerned that the density statistics that were provided by the developer  considerv what elements contribute to the price per square foot.  neighborhoods that have already been developed in the Town.  would lower existing home values.  garages.  of the townhomes.  accommodate one car.  agarbage toter would not fit in the garage along with a vehicle.  providing an indent within the garage for storage.  4  8    DRAFT  included public spaces. Hodierne said that she understood her concerns. However, she noted that smaller lot sizes would allow for more amenities to be provided to the residents of Castleton Village. She added that it was a balancing act and she wanted to be sure that she understood the priorities oft the Sholl was concerned that some of the residents would not be able to walk to the proposed commercial areas. Arena suggested that the developer consider moving the amenities towards the center oft the Arena asked whether the amenities would be available for community use. Hodierne stated that most of the amenities would be available to the residents of Castleton Village through homeowner association dues. She added that the greenway and the proposed baseball field would be dedicated to the Town. Glanville stated that she was concerned about the "Civic" area being placed at the corner of Guilford College Road and Guilford Road. She noted that it would increase traffic and that any sort of use that would involve sirens would be detrimental to the neighborhoods that already exist surrounding it. Hodierne said that the parcel was not very accessible from Guilford College Road. Therefore, the development team believed that it would be best to allow GTCC to do something with the parcel orto Walker discussed the proposed townhomes located on Guilford College Road and Mackay Road. He noted that he lived in. Jordan Creek which was adjacent to that parcel. He suggested placing a medical office there instead. Arena stated that the Cedarwood community seemed to be happier to see  Board.  development in order to increase accessibility.  seti it aside fora a different civic use.  townhomes in that location than an alternative.  Richmond was concerned about the farmers market being located across from the Cedarwood area. She noted that there was already ai farmers market that was held by the Baptist Church. She added that she was concerned about the sustainability of the market during the off season. Hodierne stated that the developer included the farmers market within the plan as a result oft the feedback that they had received from the community in February. She encouraged the Planning Board to be specific about their priorities in order for their concerns to be addressed in the updated plan. Hodierne highlighted that the developer wanted to provide something for the community that they would enjoy. Glanville stated that the Planning Board needed to be clear about their changes sO that Hodierne and the rest of the team could begin implementing changes to their plan. She added that there were a lot of Hodierne agreed that there would be several changes made to the plan. Therefore, she added that they  topics to cover, and that she did not expect to get through everything in one night.  did not need to discuss all of the details that night. Glanville called fora five minute recess at 8:11 pm. Glanville called the meeting back to order at 8:16 pm.  Glanville called. Jeff Hochanadel forward to present an overview of the traffic study that was conducted  for the proposed development.  5  a    DRAFT  Hochanadel stated that he worked for Timmons Group and his office was located at 5410 Trinity Road Suite 102, Raleigh, NC 27607 fort the record. He said that Timmons Group had determined the scope of the project area in 2019. He added that counts were conducted around. January 2020 before the Coronavirus pandemic. Hochanadel highlighted that school had still been in session and that the study had taken place during a time with a normal traffic pattern. He added that the study followed all NCDOT guidelines and procedures. They! had examined existing year traffic and had also taken into consideration the three phases of growth that were proposed for the Castleton Village Development. He stated that their recommendations had been submitted for NCDOT review and approval. He said he would be happy to answer any questions that the Board may have about the study. Glanville reiterated that she was concerned about the traffic that would be generated by any use that was placed at the corner of Guilford College Road and Guilford Road. Hochanadel stated that NCDOT would not allow for anything to be constructed on that corner that would create major traffic concerns.  He explained the NCDOT approval process to the Planning Board. The Planning Board discussed the details of the traffic study with Hochanadel.  Monroe asked if there would be sidewalks constructed along Guilford College Road. Hodierne stated Oakley asked if curb and gutter would be included along Mackay Road. Hodierne stated that she was unsure about the Town's curb and gutter requirements. Oakley requested that staff provide the curb Planning Board Members discussed potential traffic that would be generated for the Cedarwood  that sidewalks would be constructed along that road.  and gutter requirements to the Planning Board. community with Hochanadel and Hodierne.  Hodierne thanked the Planning Board Members for their feedback.  Glanville requested that the arborist come forward and give the Planning Board al brief introduction on Neal Beasley introduced himself to the Board. He stated that he worked for Timmons Group. He noted that his office was located at 1001 Boulders Parkway #300, Richmond, Virginia 23225 for the record. He added that he went to NC State and had earned al landscape horticulture degree. He noted that he was a Beasley stated that he wasi introduced to the project ai few days ago. He added that he had driven the perimeter of the site and had taken al brief list of existing species on the property. He noted that it was very evident in the Town's ordinance that there was al lot of value placed on trees within the community. Beasley gave al brief overview of the protections that were required for trees within the ordinance. He stated that it would take some effort to document the existing species, but he had begun Discuss possible change of time and venue for September 14, 2020 Regular Meetings- Glanville stated  his role within the development team.  registered landscape architect, a certified horticulturist, and a certified arborist.  that process.  that staff had proposed to continue the hearing to September 14that6:00 pm.  6    DRAFT  Walker made a motion to continue the public hearing to! September 14th at 6:00 pm in the Civic Center without further advertisement. Monroe made a second to the motion. The motion passed by unanimous Adjournment- Newbill made a motion to adjourn. Monroe made a second to the motion. The motion  vote.  passed by unanimous vote. The meeting ended at 9:11 pm.  7  II    BENCHMARK 400 CLARICE AVESTE 130 CHARLOTTE, NC 28204  MEMORANDUM To: Sarah Glanville, Chair From: Jason Epley, President Date: October 2, 2020  Town of Jamestown Planning Board  RE: Planning Board Planned Unit Development Input Summary  On September 14and! September 28, Benchmark: stafffacilitated discussion witht the Planning Board regarding the continued review of the proposed rezoning of four properties along Mackay and Guildford College Roads toal PlannedUnit Development. The summary oft thei input gathered from the Planning Boardi is presented on Att the beginning ofthese discussions, Benchmark provided an overview of! key elements related tot the review  thet following pages.  oft the proposed rezoning. These elements included:  Residential Form Residential Composition Residential Architecture Transportation Bike & Pedestrian Parks  Public Space Open Space Commercial Community Impacts Landscaping Project Phasing  Afterreviewingthese: elements, the Planning Board provided theiri input ont thei issuest that are mosti important  tot them.  Residential Elements  Inr regard to the residential elements of the review, the Planning Board considered a comprehensive list of items related to the development form, composition, and architecture proposed in the planned unit development for both single family and townhome units. Thet following summary representsthe main topics  of discussion and the most important elements identified by the Planning Board.  Single Family Residential Design Concerns  The quality of cladding materials isi important; however, the use of a variety ofr materials is acceptable. Specifically, the Planning Board would like tos seea al higher percentage oft the primary materials include brick or stone cladding, witha a preference for brickt to match the character of Jamestown.  1/Page  12    The Planning Board doesr not desiret the use of fvinyls siding ast the primary material. Although,amixture ofr materials, with vinyl or hardy board as a secondary cladding material is acceptable to help create Windows and architectural details are important, including the use of transom windows, arches, The use of slabs, crawlspace, or basements should be based on the topography and types of The Planning Board agreed that a usable porch or covered entrance should be provided along the The Planning Board had a range of comments concerning lot sizes. These are summarized as follows:  some more affordable homes int the proposed development. unique features, and otheri interesting details. residential structures within the proposed development. Thel Duffering/screening of mechanical equipment is desired.  front oft the house.  A variation in lot sizei is encouraged from within the development. All of the single family residential lot sizes currently proposed are too small. The overall density oft the proposed development is tool high. All setbacks (front, side, and rear) are too small.  Front yard setbacks should provide for more variation in depth. The proposed range of 18't to 22'( (6' change) front yard is too small ofar range. Considera a range with 8' to 10' of change. The Board would like to see a variety of garage locations (front, side, and rear), with the house as the Driveways should be long enough to allow for a vehicle to be parked without blocking the sidewalk The Board would like to see a variety of housing plans / custom designs to avoid a monotonous,  focal point and less prominent garages. ore extending into the roadway. "cookie cutter" feel.  The Board desires separate driveways for single family residential lots.  Townhome Residential Design Concerns townhomes. These include:  The Planning Board discussed a variety of concerns related to garage size and parking for residential  Allow for a variety of garage sizes and placement.  Ensure garages are atl least 12' wide for single loaded and 24' wide for double loaded. One option discussed by the Board was to place larger townhome units with double loaded garages on the end units with: single loaded garages located in the middle oft the townhome Driveways should be long enough to allow for a vehicle to be parked without blocking the sidewalk The Board would like to explore other options considering garage access for residential townhome The Board would liket to: see no more than six attached units pertownhomel building withap preference The Board would liket to encourage: ay variety of one and two story townhome options.  building.  orextending into the roadway.  Garages should not bei focal point oft the structure and should be set back.  buildings.  fort four or fewer. A variety is acceptable.  2IPage  13    The Board desires the use of high quality primary cladding materials, such as stone or brick; however The use of vinyl, hardy board, and other materials are acceptable as secondary cladding materials. Thel location of townhome units mayi impact overall design and desires for buffering. Windows: and architectural details are important,i including the use oftransomy windows, arches, other Outdoor living areas and entertainment space such, as courtyards or decks, are desired to include  not as high ofa ap percentage as would be requiredi for single family residential. Avariety of cladding materials and combinations is acceptable.  interesting features, and unique details. privacy/buffering. oft those areas.  Proposed Location ofU Uses  The Board does not see a needi for a ballfield as presented int the plan and would liket tos seei it removed The Board would like to see the age targeted housing relocated to a more appropriate (accessible) The Board would like to see single family residential uses across from the entrance at Cedarwood The Board would like the amenities for the planned unit development to be centrally located within the interior of the development to encourage greater accessibility of the residents within the development, while screening larger play structures and similar facilities from the view oft the public Astrong desire was expressed to reducet the number of cul-de-sacs, whilei increasing opportunitiesfor The Board would like to: see a significant buffer area aroundi the entire perimeter of the development. The Board would like to examine more options concerning the Civic corner at Guilford College Road and Guildford Road. Is there a demand /need for that type of use? Can this land use be considered Thel Board would liket tos see thet farmer's market moved tot the commercial: area. The Board questioned ifafarmer'si market was needed at alla and/ori ifit could become a multi-use area. The Board would like to receive more information regarding the pipeline to better assess potential safety concernsrelated to the pipeline's location within the development anda access.  orr relocated soi that it is not across from established residential areas. area, sucha as the currently proposed location oft the ballfield.  instead of the proposed1 townhomes.  from Mackay and Guilford College Roads. connectivity: and walkability.  open: space?  Buffering/Screening  The Board desires several improvements along Mackay Road. These include:  50' buffer area along Mackay; similar to what is proposed along Guilford College Road.  Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalks. Provide at turn lane.  Include Greensboro's plans for Mackay Road in the review. The Board desires aj perimeter buffer to block/screen views. Buffers are to include: Entire perimeter of the proposed development.  3IPage  14    Use of berms to help increase height of vegetation. Utilize dense planting patterns ofr native vegetation.  Incorporate existing forested/natural vegetative areas as screening where feasible. Along areas proposed for development adjacent tot the. Jordan Creek development. The Board also expressed concerns about street lighting and dark skies, specifically:  Downward facing lighting. Light color/ /illumination /bulbs.  Scale of street lights/match character of Jamestown.  Density  The Board is very concerned about the overall density of the development. Thel Board wantst to know the overall impact oft the development on school capacity. Thel Board: suggests smallertownhome buildings, limitingthenumberofa attached unitst to helpreduce The Board would like more information on how the overall density compares with the minimum The! Board would liket tol knowt the number ofu units peracref forthe developable landy versus the number ofunits per acre based ont the gross acreage (to better evaluate the overall density). The Board would like to know! howt the overall density compares tol Whittington Hall. The Boardi isi interestedi in howt the proposeddevelopment willi impact wastewatertreatment. capacity.  overall development density.  dwelling units per acre allowed within the current zoning districts.  Community Impact  The Board is concerned about traffic and would like to have more information from the firm that The Board wants to know NCDOT's comments concerning accessibility and turn lanes for the The Board would like to hear from the PSFD concerning anyi issues with fire protection. The Board would like to hear from the Guilford County Sheriff concerning law enforcement impacts. The Board would like more information form the Guilford County Schools regarding capacity, land donation, school construction, and the overall potential impacts oft the proposed development on the The Board wantst to knowi ift there willl be any challenges presented withi trash pickup and recycling. The Board would like to see greenways connected to Town greenways, sidewalks, andi trails. Commercial development comments by the Board included thet following:  prepared thet traffic impact study.  development.  School System.  The Board would like to see utility! lines placed underground.  Commercial development is neededi to avoid overcrowding ofexisting commercial areas.  No drive-thru businesses should be allowed. The Board would liket to see thet following uses:  Restaurants, Small shops, Professional offices, medical uses, day care facilities, fitness  centers, breweries/wine: shops, or bicycle shops  4IPage  15    Other Conserns/Questions  The overall density of the development remains an open question and concern. The Board would like more information about the age targeted housing and what is proposed. The Board would liket to see more elevations, views (including rear views), and other renderings. The Board would like more information ont the pipeline location and accessibility. More information is desired on impact to Town services/service levels.  Planning Board would liket to have morei informationfromthe. arborist, fire department, transportation Thel Board expressed concerns about communications. How do youi improve communicationsand  consultant, and law enforcement. flow of information about the process?  5IPage  16