On the agenda: Siler City meeting — data center (Jun 1)

TOWN OF SILER CITY
Board of Commissioners
June 1, 2026
Regular Meeting Agenda
ELECTED TOWN OFFICIALS

Donald Matthews

Travis R. Patterson

Mayor

Mayor Pro Tem and At-Large Commissioner

Albert Alston

Norma Boone

District 1 Commissioner

District 2 Commissioner

Curtis Brown

Alec Hauser

District 3 Commissioner

District 4 Commissioner

Michael C. Feezor

District 5 Commissioner

Cindy B. Bray

At-Large Commissioner

TOWN STAFF

Town Manager
Jack Meadows

Assistant Town Manager
Kimberly Pickard

Post Office Box 769
311 North Second Avenue
Siler City, North Carolina 27344-0769

(919) 726-8620
Fax (919) 663-3874
www.silercity.org

[email protected]

Briana Martinez
Town Clerk
[email protected]
919-726-8658

[email protected]

1.

TOWN OF SILER CITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR SESSION MEETING AGENDA
Monday, June 1, 2026
6:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
1.1.

INVOCATION - COMMISSIONER ALSTON

1.2.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

1.3.

RECITATION OF TOWN OF SILER CITY MISSION STATEMENT – MAYOR PRO
TEM PATTERSON To advance a framework for our success through
balanced governance, dynamic partnerships, and an engaged community.

1.4.

RECITATION OF TOWN OF SILER CITY VISION STATEMENT – COMMISSIONER
HAUSER Siler City is committed to strengthening infrastructure, promoting
responsible economic growth, and delivering dependable services to
support a safe, thriving community.

2.

ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA and APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Items may be added or removed if necessary.

3.

CONSENT AGENDA
Consent Agenda items are non-controversial routine items unanimously
recommended for approval by all involved parties. A single vote may be taken
for the approval of ALL consent agenda items. Any individual council member
may pull items off the consent agenda to discuss them. Items pulled off the
consent agenda will be handled with the “NEW BUSINESS” agenda topic.
3.1.

May 18, 2026 Minutes

3.2.

Town Manager 2nd Employment Agreement Addendum

4.

PUBLIC COMMENT
Each speaker is asked to limit comments to 3 minutes, and the requested total
comment period will be 15 minutes or less.

5.

PUBLIC HEARING
5.1.

6.

7.

Siler City Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)

NEW BUSINESS
6.1.

East Cardinal Street - Restricted Parking

6.2.

Hill Street Renaming (to MccLain Street)

MANAGERS REPORT

Town of Siler City Board of Commissioners Monday, June 1, 2026
Agenda

7.1.

Manager's Calendar - Table Night Of

7.2.

Monthly Financial Report - Table Night Of

8.

GOVERNING BODY COMMENTS

9.

ADJOURNMENT

Please contact Town Clerk Briana Martinez with any questions about this agenda:
[email protected] or 919-726-8658

Town of Siler City Board of Commissioners Monday, June 1, 2026
Agenda

Page 1 of 47

TOWN OF SILER CITY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MAY 18, 2026
PAGE 1 OF 4

TOWN OF SILER CITY
The Siler City Board of Commissioners met for a Special Meeting on Monday, May 18, 2026 at
6:00 pm in the Joseph Moody Buckner District Courtroom with Mayor Matthews presiding.
Mayor Matthews gave the Invocation with the Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Commissioner Feezor gave the Mission Statement and Commissioner Brown recited the Vision
Statement.
ELECTED OFFICIALS: Cindy Bray, Albert Alston, Norma Boone, Donald Matthews, Travis
Patterson, Curtis Brown, Alec Hauser, and Michael C. Feezor.
TOWN STAFF: Town Manager Jack Meadows, Assistant Town Manager Kimberly Pickard, Public
Works Superintendent Dillon Dispennette, Finance Director John O’Keefe, Chief of Police Brian
Regan, Downtown Manager Sara Martin, Parks & Recreation Director Treiston Burnette, Parks
and Recreation Administrative Support Specialist Krissta Gallimore, Planning and Community
Development Director Timothy Garner, Town Attorney William Morgan, and Town Clerk Briana
Martinez.
CONSENT AGENDA

A motion to approve the agenda was made by Commissioner Hauser, seconded by
Commissioner Alston and unanimously approved.
A motion to approve the consent agenda which includes 3.1. May 4, 2026, Minutes, 3.2. 2026.19
Budget Amendment Water & Sewer Debt Service, and 3.3. Parks and Recreation Proclamation
July 2026 was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Alston and
unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARING
Town Manager Jack Meadows informed the Board of Commissioners that the budget process
began in February and included budget retreats, as well as two work sessions held in March and
April. Meadows stated that the proposed budget was presented during the May 4, 2026 Regular
Meeting and included the budget ordinance, Manager’s Budget Message, and two fee
schedules. Meadows further stated that the budget complies with state law and reects a
disciplined approach to aligning revenues, expenditures, and strategic priorities while
maintaining nancial stability and operational efficiency.

Mayor Matthews and the Board of Commissioner proceeded with the public hearing, accepted
public comment, and conducted all required hearing procedures.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by Commissioner Hauser, seconded by
Commissioner Bray and unanimously approved.

Prepared By Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

Page 2 of 47

TOWN OF SILER CITY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MAY 18, 2026
PAGE 2 OF 4

Commissioner Hauser commented on the proposed 2026/2027 Fee Schedule vendor pricing
for the Spring Chicken Festival. Hauser requested that all vendors be charged the same fee and
suggested implementing a refundable deposit. Hauser proposed charging each vendor a ftydollar fee along with a one-hundred-dollar refundable deposit. Parks and Recreation Director
Treiston Burnette explained to the Board of Commissioners that the primary goal of the Parks
and Recreation Department was to improve the event from previous years and encourage
greater community diversity. Commissioner Hauser stated that the proposed changes would
create additional opportunities for diversity while lowering vendor costs. Hauser further stated
that the proposal could be implemented for one year and reverted back if it was unsuccessful.
Hauser added that the Town would only lose approximately two thousand ve hundred eighty
dollars in revenue from nonprot and for-prot vendor fees. Mayor Matthews asked Finance
Director John O’Keefe about the Town’s estimated overtime costs associated with the festival.
O’Keefe stated that overtime costs are estimated at approximately seventy dollars per hour per
officer and noted that the Town already loses money on the Spring Chicken Festival. O’Keefe
explained that reducing vendor fees could increase the Town’s nancial loss due to overtime
expenses for Police, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation staff. Commissioner Hauser also
conrmed with Town Manager Jack Meadows that the permitting for the accessory units had
been corrected.

A motion to approve the Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Budget was made by Commissioner Brown,
seconded by Commissioner Bray and unanimously approved.
MANAGER’S REPORT
Town Manager presented the monthly nancial report to the Board of Commissioners as
prepared by Finance Director John O’Keefe. Meadows concluded by providing the Board of
Commissioners with several important upcoming calendar dates:
-

May 19 (Tuesday) County Budget Public Hearing
May 21 (Thursday) Run for the Wall
May 23 (Saturday) 1st Annual Memorial Day 5k Run/Walk
May 26 (Tuesday) Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torce Run
May 27 (Wednesday) Chatham County Yardbirds vs Carolina Yankees
May 29 (Friday) Chatham County Yardbirds vs. Raleigh Red Oaks
May 31 (Sunday) Chatham County Yardbirds vs. Sanford Spinners
June 1 (Monday) Chatham County Yardbirds vs. America Legion Post 305
June 2 (Tuesday) Chatham County Yardbirds vs. Carolina Pirates
June 1 (Monday) Siler City Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting
June 11 (Thursday) Opioid Settlement Community Meeting
June 22 (Monday) Joint Meeting with County, Pittsboro, Goldston
June 27 (Saturday) Chatham Celebrates America 250

Prepared By Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

Page 3 of 47

-

TOWN OF SILER CITY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MAY 18, 2026
PAGE 3 OF 4

July 20 (Monday) Siler City Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting

Assistant Town Manager Kimberly Pickard asked Mayor Pro Tem Patterson or Mayor Matthews
to read aloud the following statement:
“Over the past two weeks, members of the Town of Siler City leadership team have had the
opportunity to participate in valuable learning, networking, and team-building opportunities
focused on strengthening local government and continuing to move our community forward.
Last week, Mayor Donald Matthews, Mayor Pro Tem Travis Patterson, Town Manager Jack
Meadows, Commissioner Michael Feezor, Town Clerk Briana Martinez, Assistant Town Manager
Kimberly Pickard, and Finance Director John O’Keefe attended CityVision in Raleigh hosted by
the North Carolina League of Municipalities. The conference provided an opportunity to learn
from municipal leaders and communities from across North Carolina while sharing ideas,
discussing challenges, and exploring innovative approaches to local government operations and
community development.
During the conference, Mayor Matthews, Town Manager Jack Meadows, and Assistant Town
Manager Kimberly Pickard were honored to receive the Certicate of Municipal Achievement
from the North Carolina League of Municipalities in recognition of their commitment to
professional development and municipal leadership.
This past week, Mayor Donald Matthews, Mayor Pro Tem Travis Patterson, Commissioner Michael
Feezor, Commissioner Cindy Bray, Assistant Town Manager Kimberly Pickard, and Town Clerk
Briana Martinez also attended the Economic Development Summit in Washington, D.C.
The Summit provided a valuable opportunity to hear from state and regional leaders about the
exciting growth, partnerships, and economic development initiatives taking place across North
Carolina. It was inspiring to see the innovative work communities are doing to strengthen local
economies, invest in infrastructure, and create opportunities for their residents.
Beyond the educational and networking opportunities, both events also served as important
opportunities for team building and collaboration among Town leadership. Spending time
together outside of regular meetings allowed elected officials and staff to strengthen working
relationships, share ideas, and continue building a unied vision for the future of Siler City.
Our Board remains committed to working together respectfully and collaboratively to move Siler
City forward. While there may be differences in perspective from time to time, we are united in
our shared goal of doing what is best for our community and continuing to build a stronger future
for Siler City.”

Prepared By Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

Page 4 of 47

TOWN OF SILER CITY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MAY 18, 2026
PAGE 4 OF 4

GOVERNING BODY COMMENTS
Commissioner Hauser encouraged the public to review the proposed new Unied
Development Ordinance (UDO) and provide feedback during the review process. Hauser
emphasized the importance of public input in ensuring the ordinance reects the needs and
interests of the community. Hauser stated that he had several suggestions and
recommendations he would like to submit to Planning and Community Development Director
Timothy Garner for consideration as the review process continues.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to discuss, the Board of Commissioner adjourned at 6:32 pm..

________________________________
Donald Matthews, Mayor
_________________________________
Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

Prepared By Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

Page 5 of 47

Town of Siler City
TO:
Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem
Board of Commissioners

Memorandum

REFERENCE: Town Manager 2nd
Employment Agreement Addendum

FROM:
Kimberly Pickard
Assistant Town Manager
[email protected]
919-726-8620
DATE: 5-29-2026

Background
On October 7, 2024, the Town entered into an Employment Agreement with Town Manager Jack
Dudley Meadows establishing an annual salary of $130,000.00.
Subsequently, the Board approved a First Addendum to the Employment Agreement on February
2, 2026, providing a 3.1% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) effective October 1, 2025,
resulting in an annual salary of $134,030.00.
As part of the Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Budget and compensation adjustments approved by the
Board of Commissioners, staff has prepared a Second Addendum to the Employment Agreement
providing an additional 3.1% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) effective July 1, 2026.
The proposed adjustment increases the Town Manager’s annual salary from $134,030.00 to
$138,184.93.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the attached Second Addendum to Employment Agreement
between the Town of Siler City and Town Manager Jack Dudley Meadows reflecting the
approved compensation adjustment effective July 1, 2026.
Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact associated with this adjustment has been included within the adopted Fiscal
Year 2026-2027 Budget.

Requested Action:

Consider approval of the Second Addendum to Employment Agreement
between the Town of Siler City and Jack Dudley Meadows, Town Manager.

Page 6 of 47

SECOND ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SECOND ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into
by and between the TOWN OF SILER CITY, a North Carolina municipal corporation, acting
through the TOWN OF SILER CITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (hereinafter referred to
as the “Town”), and JACK DUDLEY MEADOWS (hereinafter referred to as “Meadows” or
“Town Manager”).
WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Employment Agreement dated October 7, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Town Manager’s original annual salary under the Employment Agreement was
ONE HUNDRED THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($130,000.00); and
WHEREAS, the parties previously entered into a First Addendum to Employment Agreement
approved February 2, 2026, increasing the Town Manager’s annual salary by 3.1% effective
October 1, 2025, resulting in an annual salary of ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-FOUR
THOUSAND THIRTY DOLLARS ($134,030.00); and
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners has approved an additional 3.1% Cost of Living
Adjustment (COLA) effective July 1, 2026;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements
contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Compensation Adjustment
Effective July 1, 2026, the Town Manager’s annual salary shall be increased by an additional
3.1% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA), increasing the annual salary from ONE HUNDRED
THIRTY-FOUR THOUSAND THIRTY DOLLARS ($134,030.00) to ONE HUNDRED
THIRTY-EIGHT THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FOUR DOLLARS AND NINETYTHREE CENTS ($138,184.93).
2. Ratification of Remaining Terms
Except as specifically modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the October 7, 2024
Employment Agreement and prior addenda thereto shall remain in full force and effect.
In the event of any conflict between this Second Addendum and the original Employment
Agreement or prior addenda, the terms of this Second Addendum shall control.
Should any provision of this Second Addendum be determined invalid or unenforceable, the
remaining provisions of this Second Addendum and the Employment Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect.

Page 7 of 47

The foregoing Second Addendum to Employment Agreement, together with the October 7, 2024
Employment Agreement and First Addendum thereto, is hereby acknowledged and approved by
the Board of Commissioners of the Town of Siler City, North Carolina.
THIS the ____ day of ____________________, 2026.
TOWN OF SILER CITY:
__________________________________
Donald A. Matthews, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________
Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

_________________________________
Jack Dudley Meadows, Town Manager

Page 8 of 47

Town of Siler City
Cover Sheet

TO:
Mayor Matthews, Mayor Pro Tem Patterson,
Siler City Board of Commissioners, Town
Manager Jack Meadows, Assistant Town
Manager Kimberly Pickard

REFERENCE: Siler City UDO Update (TA26-001)

FROM:
Tim Garner
Director, Planning & Community Development
[email protected]
Phone: (919) 726-8628
DATE: June 1, 2026

REQUEST
Hold a Public Hearing to review the draft Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
Due to size of the document the draft UDO will be sent digitally by email and can also be viewed by going to
the UDO project website at: https://silercityudo.com/
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Report
2. Document Organizational Changes
3. Summary of Changes
4. Steering Committee Roster
5. Planning Board Consistency Statement
6. Public Comments Received
7. Draft Ordinance
STRATEGIC PLAN
This request meets the following Goals and Strategies of the Siler City 2026-2029 Strategic Plan:
Goal: Economic Development
1. Guide orderly, sustainable growth that aligns with the community’s long-term vision, adopted plans,
and infrastructure capacity.
2. Ensure development standards and code enforcement support safety, quality, and community
character while maintaining consistency across all areas of the Town.
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Siler City Planning Board reviewed this request at their May 11, 2026, meeting and voted 7-0 to
recommend approval to the Board of Commissioners. The Planning Board found the amendment consistent
with the 2024 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
Make a motion to APPROVE the proposed text amendment, TA26-001, adopting a new Unified
Development Ordinance, and that the ordinance is reasonable, in the public interest, and consistent with the
goals of the Siler City Comprehensive Plan.
Make a motion to DENY the proposed text amendment, TA26-001, adopting a new Unified Development
Ordinance, and that the amendment while consistent with the Siler City Comprehensive Plan is not
reasonable and in the public interest because [STATE REASON FOR DENIAL]
Make a motion to TABLE the proposed text amendment, TA26-001, to obtain additional information
needed to decide.

Requested Action:

Hold a Public Hearing to review UDO update (TA26-001)

Page 9 of 47

Town of Siler City
CONSISTENCY STATEMENT
UDO TEXT AMENDMENT TA26-001
UDO Update/Rewrite
HISTORY
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

The current Unified Development Ordinance was originally adopted on August 1, 1993
Since that time there have been numerous text amendments including major updates
when the NC General Statutes were amended to merge municipal and county
development regulations.
The 2024 Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted in August 2024 with included
goals to update the Unified Development Ordinance to ensure quality development.
In December 2024 a Request for Proposals was advertised for the UDO update/rewrite
and Municipal Services, Inc, was selected to assist with the project.
A UDO steering committee was created, and members were appointed by the Board of
Commissioners to assist with the review and development of the updated language
based on their background in the community.
The Steering Committee met seven times over the last year to review existing UDO
language and provide input on proposed changes provided by Municipal Services and
Planning Staff.
The last step prior to Board review and adoption was holding a joint workshop of the
Board of Commissioners and Planning Board on March 11, 2026. This workshop
provided an opportunity for each Board to receive an update on the process and
propose changes and offer any feedback or comments

PLANNING BOARD
•
•
•

The Siler City Planning Board reviewed this request at a Public Meeting held on May
11, 2026.
There were no comments presented by the public during the public comment
period.
The Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the draft UDO language.

INITIAL PROJECT SCOPE

The initial scope of the UDO update/rewrite was to:
•
•
•

Incorporate goals and objectives from the 2024 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Reorganize the existing UDO to be more user friendly
Identify and modify existing language for conformance with NC General Statute

Requested Action:

Hold a Public Hearing to review TA26-001 – New UDO Update

TA26-001 – Staff Report – UDO Update/Rewrite

Page 10 of 47

2024 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN
Planning Staff have identified the following goals and objectives where the proposed text
amendment is consistent:
1.1.a

Encourage infill and redevelopment in commercial corridors and near downtown.

1.3

Update the zoning ordinance to ensure quality development and redevelopment.

1.3.b

Ensure adequate street width for internal and collector roads in new subdivisions that
factor in lot width and size to maintain emergency vehicle access.

1.2.c

1.3.a

1.3.c

Review residential dimensional requirements in infill areas to provide options for
utilization of vacant properties.

Update standards and submittal and approval processes for residential development

Encourage open space, sidewalks and landscape buffers for new residential
developments, especially when located adjacent to existing lower density development.

1.3.d

Review allowances and define standards for pocket neighborhoods, attached
residential and multi-family development.

1.3.f

Establish enhanced commercial design standards for certain uses and/or areas
including the US 64 area, storage units, etc.

1.3.e

1.4.a
2.1
2.2

2.2.c

2.2.e
2.3
8.8

Review and update parking requirements to remove barriers to local investment.
Update subdivision design standards related to open space, buffers, stormwater and
road standards.

Promote a mix of residential housing types, including single-family homes on a variety
of lots sizes, multi-family homes, townhomes, apartments, and senior housing.
Update zoning code allowances to encourage new and innovative housing types.

Consider establishing an option and standards for pocket neighborhoods (see the call
out box on the following page for more info on pocket neighborhoods).

Review current limitations on accessory dwelling units to allow additional flexibility
with standards.
Update design standards in ordinance to include open space requirements and
improved street standards for residential developments.

Improve standards for subdivisions to encourage and promote open space and
recreational areas.

Page 11 of 47

MUNICIPAL SERVICES, INC.

Chapter
Number

Town of Siler City UDO Update Phase 1
Proposed Organizational Structure
March, 2026
Chapter Title in New
Provisions to Bring Over from Current UDO
Ordinance

Chapter 1

General Provisions
Legal provisions, reference
to adopted plans, rules for
interpretation and
conflicting provisions.

•

Article I – General Provisions

Chapter 2

Administration
Board of Commissioners,
Planning Board, Board of
Adjustment, Technical
Review Committee, Staff

•
•
•
•
•

Article III – Administrative Mechanisms
Section X - Board of Commissioners
Section X - Planning Board
Section X - Board of Adjustment
Section X - Technical Review Committee (NEW)

Chapter 3

Enforcement
Violation descriptions,
enforcement and remedies

Article VII - Enforcement

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Procedures
Review and approval
processes for all
development approvals in
one place

Zoning
Zoning districts, lot and
setback dimensions

•
•

Article IV - Part I – Zoning, Sign, and Special Use Permits
Article V – Appeals of Administrative Decisions
Article VI- Evidentiary Hearing Procedures for QuasiJudicial Decisions
Article XX - Zoning Text Amendments, Zoning Map
Amendments and Conditional Zoning
Modifications (NEW)
Appendix J – Permit Choice and Vested Rights Ordinance

•
•

Article IX – Zoning Districts and Zoning Map
Article XII – Density and Dimensional Regulations

•
•
•
•

1451 South Elm-Eugene Street • Greensboro, NC 27406 • Phone: (336) 553-9696 Ext. 401

Page 12 of 47

Chapter 6

Development Standards
Applicable to All Uses
Signage, landscaping,
parking, lighting,
nonresidential design
standards, utility standards

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Article II, 19 – Lots Divided by District Lines
Article XIII – Recreational Facilities and Open Space
Article XVII – Sign Regulations
Article XVIII – Parking and Driveways
Article XIX – Screening and Trees
Appendix E – Guide for Landscaping
Article XV – Utilities

Chapter 7

Land Use
Table of Permitted Uses,
standards specific to
several uses

•
•
•
•
•

Article X – Permissible Uses
Article X – Supplementary Use Regulations
Appendix F – Sexually Oriented Businesses
Appendix G – Landfill Ordinance
Appendix I – Manufactured Home Park Ordinance

Chapter 8

Subdivisions
Kinds of subdivision,
design, streets, approval
processes, procedures for
final acceptance, HOA.

•
•

Article IV, Part II – Major and Minor Subdivisions
Article XIV – Streets and Sidewalks

Chapter 9

Nonconforming
Situations
Nonconformity for lots,
uses and structures. When
is nonconformity legal?

•

Article VIII – Nonconforming Situations

Chapter 10

Definitions

•
•

Article II – 18, Definitions
Article IV, Part 41 - Definitions (Subdivisions)

•

Chapter 11

Water Management
(NEW)
Floodplain, Watershed,
Stormwater

•
•

Article XVI – Flood, Drainage, Erosion and Watershed
Protection
Appendix H – Watershed Protection Ordinance
Appendix K – Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance

Appendix A

Plan Submittal
Requirements

•
•

Appendix A – Information Required with Applications
Appendix B – Development Approvals

Appendix B

Traffic Impact Analysis

•

Appendix L – Traffic Impact Analysis

Appendix C

Design and Construction
Guidelines

•

Appendix C – Specifications for Street Design and
Construction

1451 South Elm-Eugene Street • Greensboro, NC 27406 • Phone: (336) 553-9696 Ext. 401

Page 13 of 47
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE SILER CITY UDO April 12, 2026
Town Planning staff, an appointed Steering Committee, and the consulting firm Municipal
Services Inc. Recommend these changes to the Siler City UDO.
Overall
• Reorganized the structure of the UDO for easier reading and reference. As an
example, requirements for screening dumpsters from residential areas was in the
Utilities article with water and sewer requirements.
Chapter 1 General Provisions. This chapter includes Legal provisions, reference to
adopted plans such as the Land Use Plan, rules for interpretation, conflicting
provisions.
• Added new section Adopted Plans and Studies to comply with statute
• Added new section “Rules of Construction” to consolidate and clarify
measurements, computation, conflicting language, meaning of words.
• Added statement that reminds the reader to look for requirements. “All development
within the zoning jurisdiction of the Town of Siler City must meet the requirements of
this Ordinance, including but not limited to this Chapter; Chapter XX, Standards
Applicable to all Uses; and Chapter XX, 7 Standards Applicable to Particular Uses.”
Chapter 2 Administration. This chapter describes the makeup, responsibilities and
authority of Board of Commissioners, Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, and
Technical Review Committee. It also describes staff responsibilities and authority. The
Administrative Chapter describes the various review and approval authorities and
how they conduct business. Chapter 4 is the processes that various authorities are
responsible for, with a matrix of application vs. authority.
• Created Zoning Administrator to align with statutory language and regulation.
• Created TRC
• Delete section Article 3 Part II Chapter 29 (a) (3) that sets 5 members of Board of
Adjustment since membership is the same as the Planning Board.
• Add powers and duties of Board of Commissioners
• Remove section 28 Advisory Committees from Planning Board administrative
mechanisms. It could dilute the responsibilities of this small group to assign them
committees. The Planning Director should coordinate with subject matter experts,
inviting them to Planning Board meetings as guests when and if appropriate.
• Moved Development Agreements, Vested Rights, Permit Choice from admin to
procedures. Moved fees from admin to procedures
• Moved quasi-judicial proceedings out of board of adjustment section into
procedures
Chapter 3 Enforcement. This chapter describes what constitutes a violation,
enforcement procedures and remedies
• Replaced with clearer language for what constitutes a violation.
• Re-wrote civil penalties from $100/day to: $100.00/day per day for the first ten (10)
days, $250.00/day starting day 11, and $500.00/day starting day 21. Each day of
noncompliance is a separate violation.

Page 14 of 47

Chapter 4 Procedures. This chapter describes the review and approval processes for
all types of development approvals. (Alternately, Chapter 2 describes the various review
and approval authorities and how they conduct business)
• Moved zoning amendment procedures from existing Article XX.
• Added a requirement for a Neighborhood Meeting prior to rezoning applications.
• Re-wrote this chapter for statutory compliance, simplification, and ease of
understanding. Example: Processes for special use permits and zoning permits
were in the same section but special use permits require quasi-judicial
proceedings.
• Added section that clarifies which permits are not required
• Added section on performance guarantees to apply to all development and require
guarantees for landscaping add completeness review for application submittals
• Added section for criteria to apply for deciding conditions. Include criteria for
conditions meeting G.S. 160D-703.
• Added generalized Transportation Analysis to be done at the time or rezoning.
Detailed Transportation Impact Analysis is to be done for each phase of site plan
application.
• Added more detail to modifications section, separated dimensional modification
from modifications to approved development
• Moved language related to land use from Article XV (Utilities)
Chapter 5 Zoning. This chapter establishes and describes zoning districts and
dimensional standards for lots
• Removed limit of 40% impervious coverage for single family detached lots in
residential districts. Watershed rules will still apply.
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Dimensional Requirements
Reduced minimum lot widths to allow more flexibility without changing minimum lot
sizes. Removed minimum lot size from the G-C district in favor of regulating building
size.
Removed requirement to increase lot sizes for 2-family dwellings.
Reduced R-20 lot width from 100’ to 80’ to differentiate from AR
Reduced R-10 lot width from 80’ to 60’ to differentiate from AR
A-R and R-20 setback is 30’, all other residential setbacks now 20’
Expanded cluster development section and removed minimum lots sizes and
setback to allow for the flexibility to create true cluster subdivisions.
Consolidated dimensional requirements into a single table.
Removed separate alternative setback language in place of an average setback
provision applicable to all districts.
Added placeholder for Hwy 64 Overlay District
Removed Landfill as a district (LF-1). There are no such districts. Add it as a use with
standards.
Removed individual PUD districts and replaced with process for any PUD. Too many
restrictions will limit flexibility.
Created and added new map for the DSCD.

Page 15 of 47
•

Removed 175 since administrative modifications are allowed up to 10% for density,
other provisions will be covered under other sections eg Chapter 6 for open space:

Chapter 6 Standards for All Uses. This chapter includes standards for signage,
landscaping, parking, lighting, nonresidential design standards, utility standards. These
standards apply to all uses in all zoning districts.
• Added lighting standards
• Added standards for pervious paving
Signs
• Removed specialized language for the Alston Bridge Road Business Directory sign.
This sign should be regulated by the requirement for a sign permit. Removed
Language for “Certified Site Sign”. Added separate category for signs in the O-I
district with greater than 10 acres in size and over 500 feet of road frontage.
Maximum sign area is 200 SF.
• Changed maximum area for signs that are currently limited to 16 SF:
• Directional signs and town gateway signs proclaiming noncommercial
messages do not require a permit (all directional and incidental signs are
changed to a maximum area of 8 SF) and do not require a permit
• Hospitals, clinics, (nursing care, intermediate care, handicapped care,
infirmary care, child care, and mentally ill institutions), physician offices,
dentist offices, and other medical treatment facilities directional signs (based
on zoning district instead of use: O-I, G-C, H-C: 110 SF)
• Individual projecting wall signs
• Shopping Center, Mall, and Unified Business Establishment Sign (The signs
shall not exceed four (4) square feet in the C-C zone, and sixteen (16) square
feet in the H-C, G-C, and O-I zone. (based on zoning district instead of use: CC: 40SF, O-I, G-C, H-C: 110 SF)
• Billboards – to have or not to have? Committee decision to follow existing regulation
prohibiting billboards.
• Removed permit requirement for murals that are not signs. Murals with commercial
content will require a permit for the portion that contains the content.
• Combined/removed some of the current sign categories to make them more
readable.
• Simplified the maximum freestanding sign area to 40 sf (A-R, R-20, R-10, R-6, R-3, RMH, C-C, and B-1), 110 sf (L-I, H-I), and 110 sf except that sites greater than five (5)
acres in size with at least 400 feet of road frontage on a minor or major thoroughfare
may have a maximum area of 150 square feet per sign face (O-I, G-C, and H-C)
• Removed zoning permit requirement for restaurant menu boards. Sidewalk signs
still require a permit.
• Removed current provision that signs set back from a major road by 200' or more get
a 10% increase in area, plus 10% for each additional 50' of setback after that, up to
100'. Replaced with a rule that any freestanding sign in a commercial district on a
site of 5 acres of more with 400' of frontage could have 150sf per sign.
Parking and Drives

Page 16 of 47
•
•
•

•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Removed parking requirements from the C-C (Central Business) district to support
walkability and on-street parking. New projects downtown will provide parking to
meet market demand.
Revised parking lot landscaping standards to make them clearer to understand
Changed parking requirements to “recommendations” in light of HB765 which
would eliminate the ability of local government to regulate parking outside of ADA.
Development will be reviewed by the TRC in light of what is reasonable rather than a
specific standard.
Simplified off-site parking and allowed residential uses and convenience stores to
use an off-site parking allowance: Off-site parking shall be located within walking
distance to the facility it serves, via a sidewalk or all-weather surface, except that
satellite parking with shuttle service shall be exempt from this requirement.
Replaced separate Siler City ADA parking calculation table with reference to the
State Building code.
Removed existing parking table and replaced with a version more in line with their
existing UDO.
Added bike parking requirements for commercial development.
Added new section “Pedestrian Walkways Within Parking Areas”
Added option for pervious pavers, with language to exempt certain uses and
intensities from paved parking.
Added requirements for temporary parking for special events (added to use
standards).
Added regulation for drive-through stacking lanes
Added cross-access requirements
Added loading and unloading area regulations with table of thresholds by use

Landscaping
• Used performance guarantees instead of complicated language about when to
install landscaping buffers for undeveloped subdivisions.
• Modified bufferyard composition requirements for clarity. There are still three
bufferyard types with descriptors that will help with alternate landscaping plans.
• Rewrote section on tree preservation to support voluntary preservation of existing
trees rather than mandatory.
• Added streetyard standards (as opposed to bufferyards along the street) to soften
land uses without hiding them.
• Added screening requirements for dumpsters, outdoor storage areas.
• Replaced tree species list with reference to NC State University expertise
• Replaced street buffer requirements with streetyard requirements to soften
development rather than hide it.
• Based landscape buffers on zoning district rather than specific land uses.
Categorized districts into single family residential, multifamily, low intensity
commercial, high intensity commercial and industrial with buffer requirements
based on adjacency of categories.
• Removed buffer requirement between high and low intensity commercial districts.
This will be covered by using districts to establish buffer requirements. Buffers,
parking lot landscaping, street yard trees, new design standards, cross access,
pedestrian and bike friendly, interior drives will prevent situations where a big-box

Page 17 of 47
store steals charm from locating next to a local business. Development will be more
cohesive if blended rather than separated.
Open space
• Based multi-family open space requirements on number of units and type of open
space appropriate to this type of development.
• Replaced minipark standards with passive, active, and urban open space
requirements.
• Increased open space requirement from 5%, to 10% (R-3, B-1, G-C, and H-C) or 20%
(cluster developments in the A-R, R-20, R-10, R-6, and R-MH) “of the total land
area….preserved and dedicated as open space”.
• Added Nonresidential and Multi-family design standards for all but Industrial
districts. These will apply to overlays until a more detailed overlay regulations are
written for downtown, and/or Hwy 64.
Utilities
• Subsection 6.7 Utility and Infrastructure Standards will refer to the Sanford
regulations for water and sewer.
Chapter 7 Use Specific Development Standards. This chapter lists uses permitted in
each zoning district and additional standards for some uses.
• Consolidated all regulation related to land use in this chapter. Moved permitted use
table from zoning to here.
Permitted Use Table
• Listed all zoning districts in a single table
• Simplified the language to focus more on land use and building type.
• Distinguished uses as permitted by right or permitted with a special use permit to
align with statute. Approval authorities are distinguished in the procedures chapter
with categories of intensity such as zoning approval, major vs. minor subdivision,
major vs. minor site plan.
• Added Duplex, Townhome, Bungalow Court, Pocket Neighborhood with standards.
• Added Mixed-Occupancy use
• Added Amusement Facility, Indoors
• Removed Planned Residential Development in favor of using PUD districts
• Apply the use Mixed Occupancy to allow residential uses in a greater variety of
districts.
Specific Uses
• Added standards and definition for data centers
• Added a requirement for temporary dwellings to be removed within 60 days of the
principal dwelling becoming habitable.
• Changed the maximum size of an ADU from to 1,000 SF to 1,500 SF to align with
common practices.
• Changed meaning of temporary RV from 90 days to 180 days to align with current
county practices.

Page 18 of 47
•

•
•
•
•
•

•

•

Added table of Supplementary Standards for Multifamily Dwellings to nuance the
scale of multifamily development in each zoning district, ensuring its context
sensitivity and therefore allowing multifamily to be compatible in more districts.
Used 10' per story plus 10' for roof for as a standard for building height. Based
densities on transect zoning principles.
Removed requirement for the front of a manufactured dwelling to parallel the street
on lots less than 1 acre in size.
Limited convenience stores to 4,000 square feet of gross floor area.
Removed Minor and Major utility station as separate uses. Minor utility station is
addressed in Chapter 6 standards applicable to all uses.
Removed section on junked vehicles from residential standards. Already included in
general municipal code
Airport: Removed specific setback requirements. Reduced the separation distance
from 500 to 300 and used the term "residential uses" instead of “residentially zoned
properties.”.
Single Family Residential parking standards: These standards have not been
revised, however the concept is under discussion with recently contracted
enforcement services.
Vehicle Towing and Storage Lot: Added regulation that no storage area shall be
permitted within 100 feet of any residentially zoned property for.

Chapter 8 Subdivisions. This chapter includes regulations for the design of subdivision
lots and streets, approval processes, procedures for final acceptance, and
homeowners’ associations.
• Re-wrote requirements for road access and added an option for flag lots.
• Added language and criteria for continuation of streets
• Replaced clearcutting regulations with simpler: Clearcutting within any
development or on any vacant parcel larger than one (1) acre in size shall be
prohibited in accordance with Section XX [chapter 6, clearcutting provisions].
• Strengthened language for required improvements prior to acceptance of final plat
Chapter 9 Nonconforming Situations. This chapter describes what constitutes a
nonconformity for lots, uses and structures. When is nonconformity legal
(grandfathered).
• Re-wrote this chapter for clarity and simplification
• Eliminated provisions for non-contributing property owner
Chapter 11 Definitions
• Added several missing definitions to align with new uses with standards, and with
changes in other chapters. We deleted a few definitions that are no longer relevant
as a result of changes made in other chapters.
• Changed the definition of Gross Floor Area to exclude storage and mechanical
rooms and elevator shafts.
• Added definition for NPDES Phase II Stormwater Program
• Changed definition of nonconforming use to align with Chapter 10
• Changed definition of development to align with NC160D

Page 19 of 47
Appendices - Consolidated current appendices into 4 new appendices with better
organization
•

Appendix A Information Required With Application
▪ Add all plan types listed in Chapter 4, Procedures and Incorporate
as new Appendix A

•

Appendix B Development Approvals
▪ This appendix concerns development agreements and has been
incorporated into Article 4 Procedures. Updated definitions to
comply with statute.

•

Appendix C Specifications for Street Design and Construction
▪ Incorporated into new Appendix C Design Guidelines

•

Previous appendices and addendums:
Appendix E Guide for Landscaping
▪ Now included as part of Chapter 6
Appendix F Sexually Oriented Businesses, Appendix G Landfill Ordinance, and
Appendix I Manufactured Home Park Ordinance
▪ F, G, and I now incorporated into Chapter 7 Use Standards as uses
Appendix H Watershed Protection Ordinance and Appendix K Flood Damage
Ordinance
▪ Now incorporated into a new Chapter 11, Water Management
Appendix J Permit Choice and Vested Rights Ordinance
▪ Now incorporated into Chapter 4, Procedures
Appendix L Traffic Impact Analysis
▪ Now included as new Appendix B
Addendum – Town of Siler City Utilities Extension Policy
▪ Parts now incorporated into Chapter 6 Development Standards
▪ The UDO will refer to TriRiver regional utility for specifications

New Chapter 11 – Water Management
• Added several definitions and changed others to align with the UDO
• Increased the civil penalty for violations from $100 to $250.
• Changed the Watershed Review Board from Planning Board to Technical Review
Committee and assigned duties.
• Deleted the requirement for a separate Watershed Occupancy Permit.
• Deleted the subdivision regulations as they are already included in Chapter 8.
Chapter 8 refers to this chapter.
• Added separate provisions for riparian buffers in high- vs low-density development.

Page 20 of 47
•
•
•

Added a provision for Vegetated Setbacks vs Riparian Buffers for high-density
development.
Added 50’ vegetated setback requirements for high-density development along
intermittent streams.
Reduced the riparian buffer requirement from 100 to 50 feet for low-density
development.

Page 21 of 47

Town of Siler City

Planning and Community Development

Unified Development Ordinance Update
Steering Committee
Travis Patterson, Mayor Pro Tem

Bill Haiges, Planning Board Chairman
Brandon Blakely
Miles Boling

Garrett Frank
Scott Harris

Caroline Hudson
Municipal Services
Carrie Spencer

Rodger Bardsley
Kirk Ericson

Special Thank You
Tom McKay

To advance a framework for our success through balanced governance, dynamic partnerships, and an engaged community.

Page 22 of 47

Page 23 of 47

Page 24 of 47

TA26-001 – Public Comments Received
•

•

•

•

•

5.2.6 – Special Districts
o PUD - Change 5 acre minimum to 2 acre. There are plenty of infill
opportunities with smaller lots and we want to take advantage of those
opportunities. It should make it easier to have more diversity in town
regarding things to do, places to shop, live, etc. Ultimately, the BOC will
approve these under section 7.3.1, so let us allow other opportunities to
arise by lessening the minimum lot requirement size from 5 to 2 acres.
5.3.2 – Table of Zoning District Dimensional Requirements
o Related to PUD, the minimum acre size states 3, which conflicts with policy
set in 5.2.6. Am I missing something here? Recommend going to 2 acres,
again.
5.3.2 – Maximum building height.
o The last sentence that reads “The permit issuing authority” should be erased.
It is too vague and I am concerned for subjective interpretation – policy
should be as explicit as possible. I am recommending that the parapet wall
requirement be eliminated in the CC district, too, because of the additional
costs to property/business owners.
6.2.4 Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements.
o We should add a section that addresses this section for only large retail. It
could be something like if your parking lot if less than “x” spaces, then
section 6.2.4 is not required. What do you think about 25 spaces and below
are exempt form these rules?
o Section needs to be added that does not allow non-native trees. This would
ensure compatibility with our new strategic goals.
 There are Bradford Pear and Crepe Myrtle trees all over Siler City and
they are non-native.
o Only natural mulch to be used on landscape islands. No colored mulch due
to environmental concerns.
o Remove requirement for large tree mandate. It appears that large trees need
well over 400 sq ft to survive and there would be a major trade off for reduced
parking. Small and medium trees would be a good compromise.
 Remove Section F.
o Do we want to consider adding a minimum disturbed soil depth of 36” to
maximize tree life?
6.2.16 – Mechanical Area Screening

Page 25 of 47

•

•

•

•

o Eliminate this redundant regulation. The only thing to be screened should be
generators in the CC district.
6.4.4
o Section B – Active Open Space.
 #2 – Change play surfaces to sand or natural non-colored mulch.
Only natural materials should be used for playgrounds. This will also
be more compatible with some of the things that were added to the
strategic goals earlier this year.
6.6.1 Building Materials:
o Add metal as a potential material to be used – many buildings are metal and
have a partial brick veneer on the front. For example, the new Fire House will
have that design, but it may be in Light or Heavy Industrial and would
therefore be except from this rule. A better example would be Cowboy Café
that would be illegal with this ordinance change. We do not want to add
expenses to anyone trying to conduct business in SC and subsequent loss of
tax revenue, less options for consumers, less potential for those trying to
conduct business, etc. This is still included.
o Eliminate cohesive wall sheathing material requirements. This is still
included.
o For CC Zoning:
 Eliminate the requirement for covering of HVAC units with parapet
walls. To my knowledge, there are no RTUs currently covered on any
roofs in DT Siler City. I do not think it is a good idea to add this
regulation due to the increased cost to entrepreneur/building
owner/etc. This is still included.
 Eliminate the requirement to cover meters and transformers.
Generators could stay because they are rather large and potentially
unsightly. The difference is that they are not common; this differs
from the other things that do not necessarily have to be covered. This
is still included.
6.6.1
o Section G #7 – Eliminate HVAC screening requirements. This is also included
in 6.6.1.
7.3.3
o 7.6 Permitted Principal Uses.
 Firearm Sales and Service:
• Change from S to P for G-C and H-C. Why are we including a
special use permit for anything gun related? These additional

Page 26 of 47









processes are going to potentially discourage these operations
or at a minimum, add additional costs. The process of getting
an FFL is already very rigorous. Is there any reason why the S
cannot be changed to P?
• Add it to B-1 as P, too. Even though most people will not
choose that business in that district, we should not restrict
its ability to exist if the market demands it.
Community Garden and Outdoor Parks:
• Why are we not allowing these as uses in R-MH? Please add
“P”.
Outdoor commercial recreation:
• Why is R-20 included for outdoor shooting range? Is this for
larger parcels in residential areas? Please explain.
• Why are we including a special use permit for anything gun
related? These additional processes are going to potentially
discourage these operations or at a minimum, add additional
costs. Is there any reason why the S cannot be changed to P?
A good rationale for eliminating the special use permit is the
incentive structure set by the insurance companies will keep
these operations safe for other citizens in Siler City.
o If they also sell firearms, that means that they have an
FFL and have gone through a very rigorous application
with the federal government. Can we not further
burden?
Shooting Range indoor:
• Why are we including a special use permit for anything gun
related? These additional processes are going to potentially
discourage these operations or at a minimum, add additional
costs. Is there any reason why the S cannot be changed to P?
o If they also sell firearms, that means that they have an
FFL and have gone through a very rigorous application
with the federal government. Can we not further
burden?
Solar Farm:
• Permitted in zoning areas that are less than 10 acres, which is
minimum stated size in page 7-43. Shouldn’t this be
corrected?

Page 27 of 47

•

7.3.4
o #1 – Above ground liquid storage tanks.
 Would this apply to people catching rain water from their gutters for
watering? Do we need to clarify that?
o #11 – Animal husbandry.
 I think we should reduce down to 1 acre minimum. I have done some
additional research into this (I know we talked previously about it) and
1 acre can be sufficient for many homesteading operations like a
single large animal or several smaller animals. We could have a rule
such as 1 horse, or 1 cow, or 4 goats/sheep on parcels from 1-2 acres.
Possibly leave it to owner discretion beyond 2 acres, but keep
limitations on smaller parcels to mitigate potential neighbor
complaints. Would that allow people in the city limits who live in
residential areas to keep livestock if they have larger parcels? For
example, 423 Dowd St (I am currently renting here) is a 5 acre parcel. I
am not asking for myself, but others who may wish to homestead and
make use of the value of their land by different means.
o #19 – Car Wash and Automobile Detailing.
 The requirement for a 6 ft opaque fence is not compatible with current
existing businesses in this category (car wash at N Fir Ave and W 2nd
St) and it adds additional cost to business. A type II bufferyard is a
reasonable requirement and would not cost thousands of dollars. If
we wanted to add additional regulation concerning screening, change
the type II bufferyard to a type III.
o #29 – Data Centers.
 There is so much on this one that I think it should be openly
discussed in public.
o #38 – Firearm Manufacturing.
 What is the rationale for mandating a 500 ft minimum between this
type of business and residentially zoned property?
o #39 – Firearm sales and service.
 Remove Section B. That is very common in the industry to allow the
range to be used as a service/sales combo.
o #59 – Manufactured Dwelling.
 Section F – We need to include vinyl underpinning as an option, too.
“Continuous, permanent masonry curtain walls or approved non-

Page 28 of 47

o

o

o

o

o

reflective skirting must be installed under the home, unpierced except
for ventilation and access.” A large percentage of manufactured
homes do not have a brick veneer foundation.
#60 – Manufactured Dwelling Park.
 Section B – Is there any specific reason to restrict minimum size to 5
acres? 3 acres could provide many additional homes for Siler City’s
inventory.
 Section E – Does a maximum of 9 unit/acre conflict with Section L,
which states a minimum of 6,000 sq ft per home? I also need some
help understanding Section 5.3.2, which discusses dimensional
requirements. Can you illustrate an example of the dimensional
requirements related to these manufactured dwellings with a quick
sketch, please?
 Section N – If we add a requirement for paved internal streets, this will
add substantial costs to smaller manufactured dwelling projects.
Why is gravel not an option? This would be very helpful in future small
mobile home parks.
 Section Z – We can clarify that rule once I have an understanding of
the things mentioned in Section E.
#81 – Retail, Bulky item.
 Is Tractor supply violating Section A as written in new UDO? They
have all those landscape materials in the front of their parking lot that
are just fenced in and no necessarily “screened” from public view. I
think it is good, but I just need confirmation.
#83 – Salvage or Automobile Junkyard.
 Section A – If we are saying a minimum of 10 acres and current
junkyards are not meeting that criteria, are they going to be
exempted? Does the town even have an actual auto junkyard besides
Marsh?
 Section C – Do current junkyards (if any in town) have a fence?
#88 – Outdoor Shooting Range.
 Police Chief Regan is reviewing this matter now. I needed clarification
about this being listed in the old UDO – was this regulation in the old
UDO?
#93 – Solar Farms.
 Change minimum from 10 acres to 5 acres. We do not want
unintentionally discourage additional power generation by limiting lot
size requirements for solar farms.

Page 29 of 47

o #94 – Sports Facility, Outdoor.
 Is there any rationale for the minimum lot size being 5 acres? A lot
can be done with a 2 acre parcel (badminton, pickleball, tennis,etc).
These options would potentially be eliminated. I would recommend a
minimum lot size of 2 acres.
o #101 - Utility Substation.
 Section A. Remove the opaque fence requirement. Generally,
substations use chain link fence, which is sufficient for safety
concerns. The idea of opaque is irrelevant given a height of 6 ft and
transformers that are 15 to 20 ft high from the ground.
o #102 – Vehicle Painting/Body Shop. Section.
 Section A - Are there any existing body shops that would not meet this
distance requirement?
 Section C – This is not compatible with any current businesses in the
auto industry. Please remove.
 Section D – Same as section C.
 Section E – Remove. Mechanics/Body shop technicians should have
the ability to work on the vehicles outside the shop.
o #103 – Vehicle Repair and Servicing (Without Painting or Bodywork).
 Section A – Remove these requirements. Many existing businesses do
not meet these criteria for various reasons, especially the air
compressor location.
 Section C – This is incompatible with every car garage in town. Please
remove.
 Section D and E – please remove.
 Many of the same problems with Body Shops apply to car garages.
o #109 – Self-Storage Facilities.
 Section C – this needs to be removed. Outdoor storage should be
permitted in non-enclosed structures or no structures at all.
 Section D – Metal cladding needs to be included as a optional
material as outlined in 6.6.1.
 Section I – Remove opaque requirement. I do not understand why
opaque fences are required in so many instances. Chain links are
sufficient; the owner can utilize whatever fence type they deem
necessary.
 Section E and F – Remove. Many storage buildings are much wider
than 75 ft and they should not have to conform to any kind of

Page 30 of 47

•

•

architectural requirements (especially ones that are used for boats or
RVs). Can we add an exclusion for these building types under 6.6.1?
7.4.2 Table of Permitted Accessory Uses
o Can you please explain the rationale of not allowing manufactured home
communities to have detached accessory dwelling units? I would like to
understand this further. If space allows, why not grant them this liberty, too?
7.4.3
o Accessory Dwelling Unit Attached
 #3 – Remove the maximum size requirement of 1,500 sq ft; 50% rule is
sufficient. If the home was 4,000 sq ft, a 1,600 sq ft attached dwelling
unit would not be a big deal.
o Accessory Dwelling Unit detached.
 Eliminate #3. If they wish to build another dwelling (essentially a
small home) that is larger than 50% of their principal dwelling, we
would be contributing to higher housing costs by keeping this
regulation. Eliminating this allows many multi-generational families
to stay together, which is also good for the community, and reduces
competition in the scarce housing market. This regulation also makes
tiny homes illegal because many of them are well below 500 square ft.
 Eliminate #4. This is arbitrary and not needed.
 Eliminate #5 because it is contingent upon #3.
 Modify #8. Travel trailers and campers should be able to be used by
home owners with certain requirements: only allowed in driveway,
back yard, or side yard. We should not allow in the front yard or street
parking. Many people could use this freedom to assist their elderly
parents in the instance that they need additional living space due to
life-changing events. It could be used for multi-generational families,
too.
o M. Home Occupation
 Eliminate #1. Residents do not need to ask their government
permission to conduct business in their own homes. For example,
many people do home day cares for a few kids of their friends and
would be unknowingly violating this regulation. Another example
would include people who cut hair – what relevance does government
have in these scenarios?
 Eliminate #2. If residents wish to conduct multiple businesses within
their own home and it does not change the outside residential
character, then we should grant them that liberty.

Page 31 of 47

Eliminate #4. This is arbitrary and not needed.
Eliminate #6. If it doesn’t change the essential residential character
of the dwelling, then the sq ft maximum requirement is not relevant.
o Q. Solar Energy System
 Can you clarify whether or not this is applicable to the ETJ and larger
parcel sizes? If so, why would we want to limit the size of the solar
energy system relative to principal structure square footage?
7.5.2 Table of Permitted Temporary Uses
o Regarding food trucks: there is a food truck that is always visible by the gas
station near Mt. Aire. Is that food truck permanently parked there? If so, how
do we ensure that they can continue operating in this fashion? It may not be
considered an actual “truck”, but rather something else. Can we clarify this
so that we can differentiate between the two?
7.5.3
o E. Portable Storage Container
 Is the temporary use permit free? If it is not, can we change that? I
understand the need for the permit as an educational tool.



•

•

Page 32 of 47

Town of Siler City
ADOPTING A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE FOR SILER CITY, NC
WHERAS, the Siler City Board of Commissioners recognizes the need to consolidate, clarify,
and modernize land use and development regulations to promote orderly growth and development
within the Town; and
WHEREAS, on May 11, 2026, the Siler City Planning Board unanimously recommended
approval of the draft language for a new UDO for the Town of Siler City and its extraterritorial
jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds this request to amend and replace the Unified Development
Ordinance in full, is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan adopted on July 15, 2024, in that
it addresses several plan recommendations contained within the Plan.
WHEREAS, the Siler City Board of Commissioners finds that the adoption of the Unified
Development Ordinance will enhance the Town’s ability to manage land use, improve quality of life,
ensure environmental protection, support economic development, and promote an equitable approach to
land use management for all current and future residents of the Town of Siler City.
NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners of the Town of Siler City,
in the State of North Carolina as follows:
1. The Unified Development Ordinance attached hereto and incorporated by reference is hereby
adopted as the official land development and zoning regulation document for the Town of Siler
City and its extraterritorial jurisdiction.
2. The Unified Development Ordinance adopted on August 1, 1993, and all amendments thereto are
hereby repealed.
3. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
Adopted, this 1st day of June 2026, by the Siler City Board of Commissioners.

ATTEST:
__________________________
Briana Martinez, Town Clerk

_____________________________
Donald Matthews, Mayor

Page 33 of 47

Town of Siler City
TO:
Mayor Matthews and Board of
Commissioners
REFERENCE:
Town Code Sec 15-149, 15-150 Parking
restrictions amendments

Memorandum
FROM:
Dillon Dispennette

Public Works Superintendent
[email protected]
919-726-8655
DATE:
6/1/2026

During the week of April 6, 2026, Mayor Matthews and Town Manager Jack Meadows received
concerns regarding parking conditions along E. Cardinal Street adjacent to Jordan-Matthews High
School. In response, the Town Manager, Chief Regan, and Public Works Superintendent reviewed
Sections 15-149 and 15-150 of the Town Code and conducted a site visit with the principal of
Jordan-Matthews High School and a representative from NCDOT.

During the review of existing on-street parking along E. Cardinal Street, staff identified several
sight-distance concerns at multiple intersections that are not currently addressed within the Town
Code. Utilizing the measurement standards outlined in Appendix C-3(b) of the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO), evaluations were completed at the following intersections and access points:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Central Avenue

White Oak Drive

Unnamed access serving 721–825 E. Cardinal Street
Unnamed access serving 116 White Oak Drive
Matthews Street

Jordan Matthews Drive
Jet’s Way

Based on these findings, staff is recommending amendments to Sections 15-149 and 15-150 to limit
parking near the corners of the intersections listed above in order to improve visibility and overall
traffic safety. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance revisions identifying the recommended
parking restrictions.
Additionally, staff reviewed the current student drop-off and pick-up traffic pattern for JordanMatthews High School. Traffic circulation currently routes vehicles from Matthews Street to Jordan
Matthews Drive and back onto E. Cardinal Street. Section 15-150 presently restricts parking on the
south side of E. Cardinal Street from the main school entrance extending approximately 547 feet
west from the intersection of Central Avenue to the bus parking lot entrance as a “No
Parking/Loading Zone” between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m.
Following additional discussions with school administration, Jordan-Matthews High School staff
requested that the existing loading zone remain in place and be extended from Jordan Matthews
Drive to Jets Way. School staff indicated that maintaining and extending the loading zone would
enhance overall school safety by keeping the front of the school open and unobstructed to the
street, and maintain access for emergency vehicles during school operations and emergency

Requested action: Approve the amended sections for Section 15-149 and 15150 of the Town Code

Page 34 of 47

situations. The proposed extension would also provide a safer environment for student drop-off
and pick-up operations during peak school hours.

Town staff support this recommendation and has incorporated the proposed changes into the
attached ordinance revisions and parking layout exhibit. Public Works staff will perform the
restriping and installation of updated signage in accordance with the approved layout during the
month of June.

Requested action: Approve the amended sections for Section 15-149 and 15150 of the Town Code

Page 35 of 47

Page 36 of 47

Sec 15-149 Locations Of Restricted Parking
1. Restricted parking regulations are hereby established in the locations enumerated below:
Location

Parking Restriction

On East Cardinal Street:

(1)

The first parking space running east of the intersection with Central Avenue
(approximately 36 feet from the corner); the first parking space running west of the
intersection with Central Avenue (approximately 36 feet from the corner); the first
parking space running east of the intersection with White Oak Drive (approximately
36 feet from the corner); the first parking space running west of the unnamed
No parking here to corner
street segment that accesses 116 White Oak Dr (approximately 20 feet from the
corner); the first parking space running east of the unnamed street segment that
accesses 721-825 Cardinal St (approximately 36 feet from the corner); the first
parking space running east of the intersection with Matthews St (approximately 36
feet from the corner); the first parking space running west of the intersection with
“JM Drive (approximately 42 feet from the corner); the first parking space running
west of the intersection with “Jet’s Way” (approximately 72 feet from the corner)

(2)

On the south-side of East Cardinal Street from “JM Drive” moving east to “Jets
Way”

No parking—Loading zone
7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.

(3)

On the north side of East Cardinal Street from the corner of White Oak Dr to a
point extending west approximately 102 feet

No parking anytime

Page 37 of 47

(4)

Along both sides of North Chatham Avenue (SR 1108) from a point 140 feet
No parking anytime
southeast of East Third Street (SR 1107), northwards to East Third Street (SR 1107).

(5)

Along the east side of North Chatham Avenue from a point 180 feet north of its
intersection with East Seventh Street moving north 150 feet.

No parking 7:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.

(6)

On the west side of South Chatham Avenue from a point 329 feet north of Dolphin
Avenue moving north 142 feet.

No parking anytime

(7)

On the east side of North Evergreen Avenue between West Fourth Street and West
No parking
Third Street

(8)

On the east corner of the intersection of Martin L. King Boulevard and North Third
Avenue moving east approximately 50 feet.

(9)

Along both sides of Martin L. King Boulevard from the intersection of Martin L. King
Boulevard and South Second Avenue, eastward to the intersection of Martin L. King
Boulevard and North Fifth Avenue; then northward from the aforementioned
No truck parking anytime
intersection to the intersection of Martin L. King Boulevard and West Eleventh
Street (U.S. 64).

No parking anytime

Along both sides of East Fifth Street from the intersection of North Second Avenue
(10) moving west approximately 350 feet to the intersection with North Chatham
Avenue.

No parking anytime

Along both sides of West Fifth Street from its intersection with North Chatham
(11) Avenue moving west approximately 3,100 feet to its intersection with North Ivey
Avenue.

No parking anytime

Page 38 of 47

(12)

On the north side of West Fourth Street moving east 70 feet from its intersection
with North Ivey Avenue.

No parking

(13)

On the north side of West Fourth Street moving west 48 feet from its intersection
with North Holly Avenue.

No parking

(14)

On the south side of West Fourth Street moving east 70 feet from its intersection
with North Ivey Avenue.

No parking

(15)

On the south side of West Fourth Street moving west 48 feet from its intersection
with North Holly Avenue.

No parking

(16)

On the west side of North Holly Avenue moving south 26 feet from its intersection
with West Fourth Street.

No parking

On the west side of North Holly Avenue from a point 46 feet south of its
(17) intersection with West Fourth Street, moving south 26 feet and lying between two
(2) private drives to Chatham Hospital, Inc.

No parking

(18)

On the south side of East Raleigh Street at its intersection with South Third Avenue
No parking anytime
moving west 36 feet.

Along the east side of North Second Avenue 350 feet north of its intersection with
(19) East Second Street along the east side of North Second Avenue, 355 feet north of
its intersection with East Third Street.
(20)

On the east side of South Sixth Avenue at its intersection with East Dolphin Street,
moving south 75 feet.

No parking anytime

No parking here to corner

Page 39 of 47

On the north side of U.S. 64, from the intersection of Raleigh Street with U.S. 64
(21) moving west approximately 1320 feet to the intersection of East Third Street and
U.S. 64.

No parking

On the north side of U.S. 64, from the intersection of Raleigh Street with U.S. 64
moving east approximately 950 feet to the corporate limits.

No parking

On the north and south side of Martin Luther King, Jr., Boulevard beginning at the
intersection with North Third Avenue moving west ninety (90) feet and the north
(23)
side of Martin Luther King, Jr., Boulevard at the intersection with North Third
Avenue moving east ninety (90) feet.

No parking

Along both sides of SR 2110 (Alston Bridge Road), from SR 2208 (South Second
(24) Avenue) eastward to a point sixteen hundred (1600) feet East of SR 2208 (South
Second Ave.)

No parking anytime

(22)

(25)

Along the south-side of SR 1107 (East Third Street) extending seventy-five (75) feet
east and seventy-five (75) feet west of the North Sixth Avenue intersection.

No Parking Anytime

2. Persons found to have violated the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine
of five dollars ($5.00) for each such violation.
(Code 1969, § 25-90.2; Ord. of 12-3-90; Ord. No. 1995-9, § I, 9-5-95; Ord. No. 1998-2, § I, 6-29-98; Ord. No. 2001-7, § 1, 8-6-01)

Page 40 of 47

Sec 15-150 Locations Of Restricted Parking In The Central Business District
1. Restricted parking regulations are hereby established in the locations enumerated below within the central business district:
Location

Parking Restriction

(1)

On the east and west side of South Chatham Avenue moving north 267 feet from
its intersection with Beaver St.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday

(2)

On the east and west sides of North Chatham Avenue moving north 680 feet from
its intersection with Raleigh Street.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday

(3)

On the west side of North Chatham Avenue beginning at a point 132 feet north
from its intersection with West Second Street and moving north 51 feet.

No parking, loading zone,
7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

(4)

On the north side of East Raleigh Street moving east 441 feet from its intersection
with North Second Avenue.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday

(5)

On the north side of East Raleigh Street moving east 800 feet from its intersection
with Chatham Avenue.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday

Page 41 of 47

(6)

On the north side of East Raleigh Street moving east 128 feet from its intersection Two-hour parking, 8:00
with North Chatham Avenue and from a point 211 feet east of its intersection with a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
North Chatham Avenue moving east 148 feet.
through Saturday

(7)

On the north side of East Raleigh Street from a point 128 feet east of its
intersection with North Chatham Avenue moving east 33 feet.

No parking, loading zone,
7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

(8)

On the north side of East Raleigh Street from a point 189 feet from its intersection
with North Chatham Avenue moving east 22 feet.

No parking anytime

(9)

On the south side of East Raleigh Street moving east 542 feet from its intersection
with Chatham Avenue.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday.

(10)

On the south side of East Raleigh Street from a point 142 feet east of South Second No parking, loading zone,
Avenue moving east 22 feet.
7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Two-hour parking, 8:00
On the south side of East Raleigh Street from a point 164 feet east of South Second
(11)
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
Avenue moving east 228 feet.
through Saturday.
(12) Saved for future use

(13)

On the south side of East Second Street beginning at a point 115 feet east from its
intersection with North Chatham Avenue and moving east 75 feet.

No parking, loading zone,
7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Page 42 of 47

(14)

On the south side of West Raleigh Street from a point 119 feet west of its
intersection with Chatham Avenue moving west 21 feet.

Handicapped parking

(15)

On the west side of South Chatham Avenue extending north 24 feet from the
intersection of Beaver Street and South Chatham Avenue.

Handicapped parking

On the south side of West Second Street at a point 140 feet west of the
(16) intersection of West Second Street and North Chatham Avenue extending 30 feet
in a westerly direction.

15-minute only parking
8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Saturday.

(17)

Along the east side of South Birch Avenue from a point 144 feet south of its
intersection with West Raleigh Street moving south 25 feet.

No parking, loading zone
7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

(18)

On the east side of South Chatham Avenue beginning at a point 20 feet south from Reserved parking doctors
its intersection with East Raleigh Street and moving south 20 feet.
only

(19)

On the south side of East Beaver Street beginning at a point 102 feet west of its
intersection with South Third Avenue and moving west 25 feet.

No parking, loading zone,
7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

(20)

On the north and south side of East Raleigh Street beginning at the intersection
with North Third Avenue and moving west seventy (70) feet.

No parking

(21)

On the south side of West Dolphin Street extending west eight hundred (800) feet
from its intersection with West Raleigh Street.

No parking

(22)

On the east side of South Fir Avenue extending 1065 ft. from its intersection with
West Raleigh Street to West Elk Street.

No parking

Page 43 of 47

(23)

On the west-side of North Chatham Avenue from a point 55 feet south of its
intersection with E. 2nd Street extending south 20 feet.

Handicapped parking

(24)

On the west-side of North Chatham Avenue from a point 29 feet north of its
intersection with E. 2nd Street extending north 20 feet.

Handicapped parking

On the south-side of East Cardinal Street at the main entrance to Jordan Matthews
No parking—Loading zone
(25) High School extending west 547 feet from its intersection with Central Avenue to
7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
the bus parking lot entrance.
15-minute parking 6:00
On the south-side of West Raleigh Street at a point 48 feet west of the intersection
(26)
a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
of West Raleigh Street and Cedar Avenue extending 65 feet in a westerly direction.
Monday—Friday
2. Persons found to have violated the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine
of five dollars ($5.00) for each such violation.
(Code 1969, § 25-90.3; Ord. No. 1990-2, § I, 4-16-90; Ord. No. 1991-5, § 2, 8-5-91; Ord. No. 1991-6, §§ 1, 2, 9-3-91; Ord. No. 1992-1,
§§ I, II, 4-6-92; Ord. No. 1993-5, 6-21-93; Ord. No. 1994-3, § I, 5-24-94; Ord. No. 1994-5, § I, 6-27-94; Ord. No. 1995-10, § I, 9-5-95;
Ord. No. 1996-2, § I, 9-3-96; Ord. No. 1997-1, § I, 4-7-97; Ord. No. 2003-1, § I, 2-3-03; Ord. No. 2003-3, § I, 9-15-03; Ord. No. 2006-3,
§ 1, 3-6-06; Ord. No. 2007-2, § I, 8-6-07; Ord. No. 2009-1, § I, 4-6-09; Ord. No. 2011-2, § I, 3-21-11)

Page 44 of 47

Town of Siler City
Cover Sheet

TO:
Mayor Matthews, Mayor Pro Tem Patterson,
Siler City Board of Commissioners, Town
Manager Jack Meadows, Assistant Town
Manager Kimberly Pickard

REFERENCE: S26-001
Road Renaming Request

FROM:
Tim Garner
Director, Planning & Community Development
[email protected]
Phone: (919) 726-8628
DATE: June 1, 2026

REQUEST

Discussion of a request by Mayor Donald Matthews to rename Hill Street to McClain Street.
If the Board would like to move forward with the name change a Public Hearing will be
scheduled for July 20, 2026, to solicit public input and review the request.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Report
2. Location Map
3. Signatures of affected property owners
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If the Board moves to schedule the public hearing, staff will proceed with the following steps in
preparation for the public hearing:
•
•
•

Publish the notice of Public Hearing in the Chatham News and Record for two (2)
consecutive weeks within the required 10–25-day timeframe.
Mail notice of the public hearing to all affected property owners abutting Hill Street.
Post a notice of closing and public hearing in at least 2 places along the street.

SUGGESTED MOTIONS
Make a motion to schedule a Public Hearing on July 20, 2026, to consider the request to
rename Hill Street to McClain Street
Make a motion to deny the request to hold a Public Hearing on July 20, 2026, to consider the
request to rename Hill Street to McClain Street.
Make a motion to table the decision to a later meeting to obtain additional information on the
request.

Requested Action:

Discussion of request to rename Hill Street to McClain Street

Page 45 of 47

Town of Siler City
STAFF REPORT
CASE: S26-001 – Rename Hill Street to McClain Street

Background
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Hill Street is located off Martin Luther King Jr Blvd just north of intersection of E
Eleventh Street (US 64)
Hill Street is maintained by the Town of Siler City and is not part of the NCDOT
road system
Hill Street is approximately 926 feet in length
There are 18 properties that have access from Hill Street (13 property owners)
Two (2) of the properties are currently addresses off Hodge Street and will not
be affected by the name change
There are 9 properties currently improved with Hill Street Addresses
Petition for name change included 10 of the 18 property owners and 6 of the 9
that are currently addressed off Hill Street.

Street Renaming
•
•
•

Chatham County E911 has confirmed that the proposed name, McClain Street, is not
a duplicate and is available for use.
If the name change is approved by the Board the change will be delayed allowing
time for residents to make any necessary changes on any services they receive
(banks, driver’s license, etc.) – proposed effective date of January 1, 2027.
Planning Staff will send records of the name change to Chatham County, US Postal
Service, and all relevant emergency management departments.

Fiscal Impact
•

Three (3) road name signs will be required to be replaced at a cost of $63.05
each (Total $199.15)
•
•
•

•
•

Sign 1 – Intersection of Hill Street and Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Sign 2 – Intersection of Hill Street and Hodge Street
Sign 3 – Intersection of Hill Street and Alston Avenue

Signs will be replaced by Siler City Public Works
Individual property owners will be responsible for expenses for any address
changes for their property such as drivers’ license, bank accounts, utility services
etc.
Staff Report – S26-001 – Request to Rename Hill Street to McClain Street

Page 46 of 47

Page 47 of 47