Wegmans amendment at Grove 98 PUD draws split recommendations; staff urges denial, planning board favors approval

Adam Mayer, a town planning staff presenter, briefed the council on legislative case RZ 18 15, an amendment to the Grove 98 planned unit development that would modify vehicle channelization standards and add an employee parking area on a 14-acre parcel that includes the Wegmans store. The amendment would reduce a Unified Development Ordinance channelization requirement (from 100 feet to a proposed minimum of 80 feet) and add a parking area between Forbes Grove Way and the west building frontage, surfaced with permeable pavers and rain gardens as proposed mitigation.

Why it matters: Staff said the proposed parking and circulation changes are inconsistent with the town’s community plan for the commercial corridor and would change a prominent gateway appearance; the applicant argues the design includes enhanced stormwater features and plantings. The Planning Board voted 5–0 to find the request inconsistent with the community plan but nevertheless reasonable and in the public interest, recommending approval; staff recommended denial.

Details of the proposal: Mayer noted the proposal is for an existing PUD parcel at the southwest corner of Ligon Mill and the NC 98 Bypass and involves a new employee lot with permeable pavers, at least three curb cuts to drain to rain gardens, and landscape plantings at roughly double the UDO minimum. Engineering staff preferred the UDO’s 100-foot channelization standard for safety and sight-distance reasons, but Mayer said the applicant and staff discuss mitigations, and the applicant characterized the parking as employee-designated and right-only access to Forbes Grove Way.

Questions from council: Council members asked who would use the employee parking (the applicant designated it for employees), whether the permeable paving and rain gardens were consistent with sustainability goals (both staff and the applicant said these features would support stormwater infiltration and resiliency), and whether the one-way circulation and right-only exit addressed safety concerns (staff said one-way movements help circulation but sight distance and channelization standards still apply).

Process notes and next steps: Mayer noted the Planning Board’s 5–0 recommendation for approval and the staff recommendation of denial; no council vote on zoning was recorded at the meeting. The applicant representatives Jordan Peterson (Bolton and Mink) and Art Perez (Wegmans) attended and are available for follow-up questions when the item returns for formal legislative consideration.