Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Clayton Planning Board recommends rezoning for Winston 3H, seeks onsite recreation and sidewalks

Clayton Planning Board · March 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board voted to recommend approval of a conditional rezoning and master-plan amendment for an 11.66-acre Winston 3H parcel, approving up to 87 units while asking the applicant to include a small active-recreation area and at least one sidewalk where feasible; the recommendation goes to Town Council.

The Clayton Planning Board voted March 23 to recommend that Town Council approve a conditional rezoning and master-plan amendment for the Winston 3H project, a proposal to rezone roughly 11.66 acres south of Winston Road for attached single-family townhomes.

Robert Tate, the town’s senior planner, told the board the request would change the parcel’s Future Land Use designation from low-density residential (about three units per acre) to a higher-density residential designation and would allow up to 87 dwelling units on the site. “This is a request to rezone the subject parcel from the Residential Plan District to the Residential Conditional Zoning District,” Tate said, and staff recommended approval given surrounding land-use patterns while noting the request is inconsistent with the adopted future land use map.

Attorney Toby Coleman, representing the applicant, said the team returned with a detailed concept plan and revised conditions after concerns raised at an earlier review. Coleman said the applicants are working with staff and the town attorney to clarify a proposed site-specific vesting condition so the project’s entitlements are clearly tied to the conditional zoning. He told the board the applicant does not intend to waive statutory rights and is seeking language acceptable to town counsel and staff.

Preston Royster of Thomas Hutton Engineers walked the board through the concept plan and explained two requested deviations: counting single-car garages as one required parking space for attached units, and reducing townhome guest parking from the UDO-required 22 spaces to 11. Royster and the applicant argued the changes reduce impervious surface and are consistent with nearby phases. The project team’s traffic engineer, Nate Bokwin of McAdams, said the consolidated master-plan approach and elimination of previously proposed commercial space reduced projected daily vehicle trips compared with earlier analyses, noting a reduction of roughly 6,700 daily trips versus the original TIA assumptions.

Board members pressed for practical design measures. Several members urged inclusion of sidewalks and at least a small on-site active-recreation area so future residents would not always have to drive for basic neighborhood amenities. One board member said sidewalks “on at least one side” would improve safety; applicant representative Patty Harrell Hillburn said the team would review the plan and easement options and committed they “can find room for active” recreation on the site.

The board also discussed stormwater, landscape buffers, and whether town cross-section standards apply inside the NCDOT right-of-way; staff recommended clarifying conditions to state town policies and standards apply outside the DOT right-of-way and that NCDOT standards govern in the right-of-way.

After debate, a member moved to recommend approval of the conditional rezoning and master-plan amendment, including an update to the future land use map to high-density residential and added recommended conditions calling for a small active-recreation area and sidewalks on one side where feasible. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote. Board member Bland had recused for the item and rejoined the meeting afterward. The Planning Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to Clayton Town Council for final action.

What’s next: Town Council will consider the rezoning ordinance, the recommended conditions, and the future land use map amendment at a later meeting; the Planning Board’s action is an advisory recommendation and not the final legislative decision.