ZONING AND FUTURE LAND-USE RECONCILIATION WORKSHEET
Prepared by the Pillar team — 2026-10-17

Manual research record for a homebuilder or land acquisition team.
This worksheet does not determine compliance, rights, approved yield or approval
probability. Read each source and response within its actual scope. Use the
responsible planning office and appropriate professional review for the site.

SITE AND PROPOSED SCENARIO
Review date / reviewer:
Opportunity name:
Scenario version / date:
Parcel list and boundary source:
Housing product / proposed count / source of assumptions:
What decision is this research intended to support?

PARCEL RECORD — repeat for every parcel; do not carry one parcel's answer across
the whole site without supporting evidence.
County / parcel identifier (preserve leading zeros):
Responsible planning jurisdiction / confirmation source:
Boundary match / unresolved extent or jurisdiction question:

CURRENT ZONING EVIDENCE
Official source / URL / saved document reference:
District label exactly as displayed:
Applicable code sections retrieved:
Overlays / affected area / source and relevant provisions:
Site-specific conditions, plans or other linked documents:
Documents not yet retrieved / question needing interpretation:
Access date:
Source revision date, if shown:
Adoption or decision document/date, if established:
Effective date / supporting reference, or unknown:

ADOPTED POLICY EVIDENCE
Plan and map title / authority / URL / document reference:
Designation exactly as displayed / legend reference:
Relevant plan provisions retrieved:
Access date / source revision date:
Adoption record/date / amendments checked and their scope:
Unresolved adoption, amendment or applicability question:

PENDING OR RECENT CASE — repeat as needed, separate from current records.
Case number / source / access date:
Parcels and area actually covered:
Requested change:
Status stated by source / status date:
Decision document/date, if any:
Effective date / evidence, or unknown:
Unresolved question / responsible follow-up:

QUESTION AND RESPONSE — repeat for each question.
Scenario and parcels covered:
Question sent / date / recipient office:
Response document/date / exact scope and qualifications:
What did this response answer?
What remains unanswered or needs another review/application?
Next action / responsible team member / review date:
Team research decision and reason (separate from any agency determination):
Changes since previous version / evidence supporting each change:

Use "unknown", "not retrieved" or "not addressed" when that is the evidence.
An access date is not an effective date. A proposal is not an adopted change.
A policy category is not an approved housing count. A district confirmation is
not a completed assessment of the proposed development. Apply the actual local
rules and process; do not assign universal precedence or a compatibility score.

FICTIONAL COMPLETED EXCERPT — all names, labels, IDs, dates and facts below are
invented. They are not Raleigh/Charlotte codes, records, or an actual site.

Opportunity: Willow Crossing
Review/access date: 2026-10-17
Scenario A: 36 proposed townhouses across EX-01 and EX-02
Count basis: illustrative team proposal; no yield or layout calculation
Jurisdiction in example: fictional Town of Willow Crossing

EX-01 current-map label: Residential-L (invented; no assumed density/use rule)
EX-02 current-map label: Residential-L(C) (invented; meaning needs review)
EX-02 conditions: reference displayed; document not yet retrieved
EX-02 overlay: displayed; affected extent and requirements unresolved
Map revision shown in example: 2026-10-10
Zoning decision/effective dates: unknown; not inferred from access/revision dates

Policy label for both parcels: Neighborhood growth (invented)
Policy adoption date recorded in example: 2026-08-12
Relevant subsequent amendments: not yet checked
Housing scenario reviewed against policy provisions: not yet reviewed

Pending case: Z-EX-7
Coverage: EX-01 only
Status: pending in the fictional docket checked 2026-10-17
Adopted decision / effective date: not established
EX-02 coverage: not shown; do not extend the case to the full site

Next action: acquisition analyst sends both parcel records and scenario A to the
responsible planning office for conditions/overlay documents, case status and
the review needed to assess the proposed townhouse scenario.
Team decision: investigate; do not rely on 36 homes as an approved outcome.

Illustrative later response: staff confirms district labels for both parcels and
supplies the EX-02 conditions document, without assessing scenario A.
Update: close district-identification and missing-document tasks; retain the
document for review. Scenario applicability, overlay requirements and case
questions remain open. No approval inference follows from that limited reply.

Read the guide and its scoped city examples:
https://www.pillar.codes/blog/zoning-vs-future-land-use