Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends council review of two FD Raleigh subdivision proposals amid open-space waiver requests
Summary
The planning board recommended that the town council consider two FD Raleigh preliminary plats — a 22-lot proposal on a 40-acre tract and an amended 84-lot proposal on a 78.9-acre tract — both proposing fee-in-lieu payments instead of meeting the UDO open-space requirement; the larger proposal passed the board 4-1.
The Town of Summerfield Planning Board voted to forward two major-subdivision preliminary plats from FD Raleigh Inc. to the town council after discussion about open-space requirements and extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) limits.
40-acre parcel (2486 NC Highway 96 North): Staff described a 40-acre proposal for 22 single-family lots in the town’s ETJ that would be served by county water and individual septic systems rather than town utilities. Engineer Scott Brown said the applicant elected to pay the fee-in-lieu option instead of providing the UDO’s 20% open space; he stated the fee is $2,000 per lot and that, at 22 lots, the payment would total $44,000. Board members discussed whether fee-in-lieu funds would be used for parks and recreation and noted limits on the town’s ability to use funds for properties outside municipal limits. The board voted to recommend the proposal to the council.
78.9-acre parcel (1704 Old Buoy Road): Staff presented a second FD Raleigh proposal originally for 91 lots and amended to 84 lots. Brown said the change reduced lot count to increase the number of larger (three- and four-bedroom) lots; lot sizes vary and many exceed the minimum. Like the 40-acre plan, the proposal would use a fee-in-lieu for open space rather than reserving 20% of the tract. The board voted to recommend the proposal to council; the vote was recorded 4-1 in favor.
Both proposals were discussed as developments in the ETJ, where the town has planning jurisdiction but the properties will not be served by town utilities. Board members pressed staff and the applicant’s representatives on fee usage, open-space trade-offs, and how the town will apply in-lieu funds if properties lie outside municipal limits. The board’s recommendations are advisory; the Town of Summerfield council will consider both preliminary plats at a future meeting.
Votes on the planning-board recommendations were taken and recorded; the larger Old Buoy Road proposal passed the board by a 4-1 tally.
