HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-18-2009 - C1dRANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF CQI'~I~ISSIaNERS AND
PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
II41Ileeting Date: lVlay S, X009
Action Agenda
Item NQ. C»~
SUBJECT. Zoning ordinance Text Amendment relating to the Required Commencement
of Construction Activities for Planned Developnnents
DEPARTI~ENTw Planning and inspections PUBLIC HEARIN~~ ~YlN~ Yes
ATTACHNIENT~S~: INFt~RI~ATIC~N Ct~NTACT:
~ . ordinance Amendment Resolution Name Phone Number
Craig Benedict, Director X45-Z59Z
~licl~ael D. Harvey, Planner ~4~~~~41
PURPC~SE~ To hold a public hearing on a staff generated Zoning ordinance Text Amendment
to modify existing regulations concerning the required timeline on the commencement of
construction activities for Planned Development projects.
BACKGR~UND~ The Grange County Zoning Ordinance thereafter `the ordinance'}~ specifically
Section ?'.2.8, establishes requirements concerning the commencement of construction activities that
reads as follows:
Constructr'an of the punned development must start and proceed at a reasonable
rate within Twelve ~~2) months of the approval of the permit. If na construction
has slaved within the staled lime frame the permit becomes null and of no effect.
7~he owner can request only one (~) six~mon~h extension from the Board of
Gaunty Commissioners upon the favorable recommendation of the Planning
Board if the request is received before the permit expr'res.
No changes shall be made to the conditions of approval. Approval of a lime
extension shall be based on evidence presented by the applicant showing Thal
permits have been pursued in a timely manner, end that delays have resulted from
factors beyond the control of the developer
During the review of a recent project, there was general discussion on existing regulations
relating, to the established timeline far the commencement of construction activities. In
reviewing these requirements, staff determined that there are potential issues with the existing
language, which are as follows:
~. For large scale projects there is a potential problem in adhering to the twelve ~~~} month
requirement relating to the need to secure local, State, and Federal permits to allow
developlment to occur. For instance, staff has been informed "by a local developer, who
recently received approval of a Planned Development project, that securing the
z
necessary permits from the North Carolina Department of T'ransportatian and possibly
the Federal government to allow for roadway improvements will take approximately two
~~} years. This permitting process is longer than existing allowances or the, allowable six
~~} month extension
2. The ordinance does not contain any standard outlining how a decision can be made
relating to the approval or denial of an extension request. .
3. The process necessary to review extension requests is not clear and is open for
interpretation.
Staff believes there is an opportunity to modify existing regulations to establish clear standards
relaying to the evaluation of an extension request, specifically spell out the process by which
they are reviewed, and take into account the necessary process to obtain the necessary permits
Pram local, State, and Federal agencies to allow far the commencement of construction
activities.
PRUPOSAL~: Staff is proposing to amend Section ?.2.5 Time Limi! orr 5lar~ of Cons~ruclior~ of
Planned ~evelopmen~ as follows:
~. Establish a differentiation between single-use and multi-use planned development
projects approved under the master plan option detailed within Article Seven ~7} of the
ordinance,
~. Limit single~use projects to a twelve ~~ ~} month construction timeframe,
3. Allow up to forty~eight X48} months for multi-use projects approved under a master plan in
instances where the applicant is required to secure~permits from multiple local, State, and
Federal agencies.
,Language would be included within the ~3rdinance requiring the applicant o demonstrate
on an annual basis their progress in obtaining all permits thereby allowing far the permit
to continue to be considered valid,
4. Provide language within the t~rdinance detailing standards to be utilized to determine the
approvab~lity of an extension request,
~. Continue to allow for a six ~G} month extension for single-use projects, and .
8. expressly detail the review and, approval procedure for such extension requests.
It should be noted that these proposed amendments will only allow for a one ~~ }time extension
for a given project. For. example, with a multi»use projeot mere is only a single forty~eight X48}
month extension granted for the entire project. if this extension period expires, and the
developer has not initiated required construction activities, the permit is subject to being
rescinded in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance.
F[NANC[AL [[PACT: This request has been reviewed by various County departments who
have determined the approval of the request will not create the need for additional funding for
the provision of County services.
N~T[F[CAT[oN PROCEDURAL R~QU[R~[~FNTS. As detailed within ,Article Twenty X20}
Amendmenls Section 20.6 of the ordinance staff is required to cause a:
lVolice of the public hearing sha!! be gr'ver~ ~y publisl~r"frg said' notice a!
lean Twice in a newspaper of genera! circulation in the County, slafr`ng fhe
3
trine and place of such hearing and the substance of the proposed
amendment. This notice sha11 appear in said newspaper for two
successive weeks within the first notice appearing not Less than ten ~~4~
days nor more than twenty-five (~5) days before the date set far the public
hearrngr
Staff has caused an advertisement to appear ~vithin the News of orange and the Ghapel Hill
Herald on May C, 2oD9 and May 13, 2DD9 in accordance with this requirement.
IR~CC~IMIM~:NDAT~~JN: The honing officer recommends the Board:
. Receive the staff initiated coning text amendment proposal including staff's report and
presentation materials,
2. Ganduct the Public Hearing and accept comments from all interested parties,
3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned in time for
the August 18, 2DD9 B~]GG meeting,
4. Adjourn the Public Hearing until August 8, 2009 in order to receive the Planning Board's
recommendation.
y
Attachrnent ~
5
A RESOLUTION AMENDING
THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED BY TIDE BOARS GF GGI~IMISSIGNERS ~~ GRANDE
COUNTY, NGRTH GARO~INA, hereby amends the Gunge Gounty Toning Ordinance
by adding vindicated by double underlined language} and deleting vindicated by stricken
through language} as ~ollo~rs:
PART 1. That Section 7•~.S be amended as follows:
kith res ect to the com~m.encem.ent of construction for an a roved
Manned Develo :ment the followin standards shall a I :
1. bite ~~ec~~c ~cveto~~.ent: to instances where an _ap~~~ant is
ro osin the develo rnent of a s ecific land use on a s ecific
arcel of ~•a ert construction shall commence and roceed at a
reasonable ~•ate within twelve 1 Z months from. the date the e~•rnit
is a ~•oved b the Count ~3oa~•d of Commissioners.
The a licant ma receive a sin le six ~ month extension from.
the Zonin Officer extendin the timeline for the com~n.encem.ent
.of construction activities if tl~e a licant can rovide evidence
indicating that:
a. The a licant has in ood faith. ursued in a timel
manner an and all ermits associated Frith the
comrnencernent of construction activities for the ro' ect
b. That the need for the re uest is based on an a encies
zevie~l rocessin of a erznit a lication and
c. That the re uest is not the result of the inabilit of the
a licant to submit the re wired ern~.t a lications and
that the need for the extension results frorn factors be and
the a licants control.
Onl one ~ extension re uest shall be ranted on an sin le PD
ro' ect. ~n the event construction has not con~enced within the
allotted timeline the PD shall become null and void as detailed
here..
~. Master P~.ned I~eve~o ~en~: ~n instances where an a licant is
ro osin lar e~scale multi le individual land uses on a iven
arcel of ro erg throe h an a roved Master Plan construction
shall com.n~.ence and roceed at a reasonable rate within twelve
~ Z months from the date the erm.it is a roved b the Count
Board of Comrnissioners.
The a licant m.a receive an extension from the Zonin Officer
extendin the timeline for the commence~.ent of construction
activities for u to fort =ei ht 48 months if the a licant can
rovide evidence indicatin that.
a. The a licant has in ood faith ~~rsued in a tirnel
manner an and all ermits associated with the
commencement of construction activities for the ro' ect
b. That the need for the re uest is based on an a envies
reviewl rocessin of a ermit a lication and
c, That the re nest is not the result of the inabilit of the
a licant to submit the re aired er~.it a lications and
that the need for the extension results from factors be and
the a licants control.
Onl one ~ extension re nest shall be ranted on an sin le PD
ro"ect. n the event construction has not commenced within the
allotted timeline the PD shall became null and void as detailed
ere~n.
Tt should be noted that no extension re uest shall be a raved if such
re ue~t re resents an alteration to the
conditions of approval for a Planned Develo ment ro' ect. ~r-ev~e~'-a
. • . r
.
7
Jpan rr~otion of Commissioner ,seconded by
Commissioner ~ the foregoing caning
ordinance amendments v~ere adopted this the day of ,
2009 and shah become effective upon adoption,
donna Baer, Cter~, Grange County Comn~.~ss~oners
g