Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20021125APPROVED 2/4!2003 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JOINT PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 25, 2002 7:30 P.M. The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board met in joint session for a public hearing on Monday, November 25, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Caurtroam in Hillsborough, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacabs and Cammissianers Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon and Stephen H. Halkiotis COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill and S. Sean Borhanian COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Nicole Gooding-Ray and Vice Chair Hunter Schofield, Jay Bryan, Barry Katz, Craufurd Goodwin, Ted Triebel, Rachel Preston, Howard McAdams, Jay Bryan, Maria Tadd, and Renee Price PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:. NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR Chair Jacobs asked for any comments from any of the County Commissioners. Commissioner Gordon said that the Caunty Commissioners are going to have to make comments on the Long Range Transportation Plan. She is assuming that no one else has anything more to input, but if they do, they should let her know. Chair Jacobs turned the meeting over to the Planning Board Chair. B. PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Planning Board Chair Nicole Gooding-Ray chaired these items. (C.1. a-e and C. 2. b -Orange County Subdivision Regulation Text Amendments and Orange County Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments) Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict went over the items in the agenda abstract. He gave a history of each item. He said that these items will not be voted an this evening because this is a public hearing for public input. The primary topic is the issue of growth management techniques far subdivisions. ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS a. Amend Section III-D-1 to require notification of adjacent property owners, pasting of a sign on property proposed for major subdivision development and a Neighborhood Information Meeting for all Concept Plan applications for major subdivision development including the Rural Buffer. Craig Benedict explained some maps. Presently there are certain processes for subdivisions. Before a major subdivision comes forward in Orange County's jurisdiction outside of the rural buffer, there is a neighborhood information meeting. The purpose of this amendment is to standardize what occurs in both sections of the County, so there is equity in the rural buffer and Orange County jurisdiction areas. The suggested amendment is a sign on the property when major subdivisions came forward. The sign will notify people of the Planning Board meeting to consider the subdivision. Chair Jacobs asked about where the sign has to be located and Craig Benedict said they will be visible from the public road. There was no public comment on this item. b. Delete the entire text of Section III-D-2 and reserve far future use. c. Amend Section III-D-3 to require Class A Special Use Permit in addition to Preliminary Plat Approval for Major Subdivisions creating 20 or mare lots or involving 20 or more acres. Craig Benedict said that, presently, a major subdivision goes through the process of a concept plan where developers bring in a conventional plan and a flexible option plan. This is brought forward to the Planning Board and the board decides which plan is the best. The developer then brings forward a preliminary plat. The Planning Board makes a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners and the County Commissioners make the decision. The purpose of the new process is to be able to more comprehensively review the preliminary plat part of the subdivision and put it in a special use process. He described the different standards far subdivisions. The Planning Board is discussing the traffic impact study for subdivisions. Presently, a traffic impact study is required for an 80-lot or above subdivision. This could be changed, depending on which road the subdivision is proposing. Other issues include fire protection, mitigation for resource damage, drainage and storm water management, solid waste management, irrigation, open space maintenance, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, etc. These aspects can be added to the subdivision review process during the preliminary plat stage and the special use class A stage. Before final adoption, there needs to be adequate public input. The County Commissioners and the Planning Board have discussed the threshold for the special use process being 20 lots. It could also be 20 acres. Commissioner Gordon asked if Craig Benedict was recommending all of the standards if the project is large enough. Craig Benedict said that they have discussed this with the Planning Board and the County Commissioners in detail. They thought that it would be best for this meeting to have the all inclusive list of the different options and then pare this down or have a phase one or a phase two investigation. Commissioner Gordon said that this would probably need some fine tuning because that is a lot of standards for a small developer. She is especially interested in groundwater availability. Some of the standards should apply to all subdivisions. Commissioner Carey said that if the threshold would be 20 acres rather than 20 lots, then he is concerned. If there is a small project, it could be very daunting. Craig Benedict explained the different densities an a map. Commissioner Carey would like to hear from the public about the thresholds. He encouraged the staff to look at some differentiation in the criteria for different levels of projects and maybe even looking at increasing the acreage. Chair Jacobs asked if it was possible to da the acreage sa that you differentiate based on the underlying zoning. Far example, if it is one-acre lots, 20 acres might work; whereas, if it is two-acre lots, maybe 40 acres might work. Craig Benedict said that they could go in this direction. Jay Bryan made reference to the standards and said that the board considering the project has to make sure that the use will maintain or promote public health, safety, and welfare and will enhance the value of contiguous property, and that the character of the use will be in harmony with the area. He said that the standards said that the board can deny the application if it finds that the use will not maintain or promote public health, safety, and welfare. In Carrbora, the way the ordinance is phrased, the board can deny an application where it is Shawn that the use will not maintain or promote public health, safety, and welfare. He asked if the standards could be changed to make it more flexible that would be in keeping with the present standards. Craig Benedict said that these general standards are used far the other 28 special uses that are out there -both class A and class B special uses. He said that the special use process is aquasi-judicial findings of fact process. The standards are not subjective. Geoff Gledhill said that he does not know how Carrboro does it, but the standard in all of these evidentiary questions is going to be a greater weight of the evidence. Regarding the general standard about maintaining or promoting public health, safety, and welfare, the ordinance has a special provision that implies that it would. In order for a project to be turned down because it fails to maintain or promote public health, safety, and welfare, the burden shifts to those who oppose it to prove that in some specific manner by substantial evidence, the use does not maintain public health, safety, and welfare. It would require specific evidence that there is a specific problem. Some examples are traffic problems. Barry Katz asked if the County would be responsible to remedy a problem that may arrive if all of the bodies approve a subdivision and it turns out that there are public health failures. Craig Benedict said that sometimes a problem would come back to the local government if the project was already completed. Barry Katz made reference to the notification and said that 500 feet from the project is too small for a project that is going to impact people in a greater area. He asked for consideration of 1,000 feet. He made reference to page three, number 11 and irrigation. He asked if there were any standards for how irrigation systems can be approved or not approved. Craig Benedict said that there are certain building code requirements if it is from public water and sewer. They are trying to tie this in with the conservation ordinance. Geoff Gledhill said that the irrigation standard is in the draft. The system has to be designed and can be operated according to a water conservation plan described in the Resource Management Plan. Barry Katz asked about borrowed open space that is referred to in the document. Craig Benedict said that borrowed open space is where, instead of everybody having athree-acre lot and having their own open space, there would be a 1.5-acre lot and the extra space is put into some kind of common area. Rachel Preston said that the North Carolina Landscape Contractors Registration Board is the licensing board and anyone doing landscaping has to have a license and has to go through a rigorous exam. She asked far some type of reference to this. She said that this should be enforced. Craig Benedict said that he agreed that we need to look at the landscape standards. He said that they have added the concepts of xeri-scaping, which is using native trees and low water use trees to reduce overall water consumption. Rachel Preston said that there are nurseries in the area that provide plants native to Orange County and non-native plants that are not invasive. She suggested putting in phrases that encourage people to purchase plants within Orange County - both native and non-native. Commissioner Brown asked about setbacks from creeks. Craig Benedict said that storm water, drainage, and erosion control refer back to the stream buffer requirements that are in other sections of the code. There are very good standards in this area. There is a minimum of 50 feet on either side of the stream. In the Neuse River Basin, there are additional requirements. The hope is to use these rules in the Cape Fear Basin. Chair Jacobs made reference to landscaping and Orange County becoming a non-attainment area for air quality. He said that maybe we could take a leadership role with landscaping requirements to be more energy efficient. Commissioner Brown asked if the ordinance will actually protect open space in terms of design. She asked how this ordinance would affect design in terms of open space. Craig Benedict said that in the analysis, we define primary and secondary conservation areas. Primary conservation areas are stream buffers, wildlife corridors, etc. Secondary conservation areas could be a wooded area or an open field. This amendment will ask developers to do a more elaborate analysis of an inventory of a native tree area and an open space analysis. Commissioner Brawn said that a smaller developer is going to need assistance in understanding what this says. Craig Benedict said that there is an example that will be used for the general public and property owners that is called Above and Beyond. It will be air photos showing how subdivisions fit or do not fit into the landscape. Also, it will show what happens over time to inappropriately placed open space areas. This was a very good study of things that happened in the Vermont/New Hampshire area. Discussion ensued about open space design in subdivisions. Chair Gooding-Ray said that she did not see anything about light pollution. Craig Benedict said that it is in the ordinance. He said that there is a Dark Skies initiative coming forward. There was no public comment on this item. d. Amend Section IV-B-10.B to allow all Flexible Development options except the village option in the Rural Buffer. Craig Benedict said that this amendment is to allow flexible development within the rural buffer. He referred to the County map. Presently, in the rural buffer, there is only the conventional plan allowed. The amendment is that any developer within the rural buffer would provide two plans. In the rural buffer, it is suggested that flexible development standards be identical to all other areas in County jurisdiction. Developers could either bring in an estate option (four-acre lots) or a conservation cluster option, which would be at least 33°~ open space. This is an effort to have the rules be similar, both in the rural buffer and in other sections of the County. Commissioner Brown asked about the village option and Craig Benedict said that it is an option of flexible development. It is a very dense development. It is more appropriate for transition areas. Commissioner Brown would like this addressed at some point to make sure that it is only an option that is available in public water and sewer areas. Barry Katz asked the Board of County Commissioners to review the village options. He said that the only place where a village option would make sense would be where there was access to municipal services or public water and sewer. Geoff Gledhill read from section 8.8.29.1, subsection `d' as follows: "If the residential lots are proposed to be served by a community water and/or sewer system, proof that the systems will be operating either directly or through a contract with the water and/or sewer provider whose service area ar interest area as defined in the Water and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement include the subdivided land." This is attempting to open the door to these community systems if the utility provider would be responsible far them. Commissioner Gordon said that the provision on page nine deserves further scrutiny. She does not believe that this says what Geoff Gledhill explained. It needs to be said more clearly somehow. Craig Benedict will work with Geoff Gledhill on this. Commissioner Gordon agreed that the village option should have public water and sewer. Renee Price is concerned about cost and the impact this has on others. She asked who would pick up the tab for running the line. There was no public comment on this item. e. Amend the Subdivision Regulations to make major subdivisions of land creating 24 or more lots or involving 24 or mare acres a Class A Special Use Permit. This is addressed in item 2-b. These items (1 a-e and 2b) have similar subdivision and zoning issues and the recommendation from staff is to refer them to the Planning Board and return to the Board of County Commissioners no later than January 21St for review. Item 2b is as follows: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to make major subdivisions of land creating 24 or more lots or involving 24 or more acres a Class A Special Use Permit. A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Brown to refer items 1 a-e and 2b to the Planning Board to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no later than January 21, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2, ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS a. Amend Article 6.18 to allow development of a "Master Telecommunications Plan' which identifies sites within the County where an applicant may construct a wireless telecommunications facility by seeking issuance of a building permit in accordance with the specifications set forth in the Plan. Craig Benedict said that this is something that the Board of County Commissioners has heard to amend our telecommunications ordinance. Earlier this year, there was asix-month moratorium an telecommunication towers. There was a placeholder in the regulations that refers to a Master Telecommunications Plan, which can identify sites in the County that can be used by the industry that would limit the amount of total sites that could be used for future tawers. During the moratorium, there were meetings with other departments to find out if there were any County properties that could be involved in the plan. These plans are normal in North Carolina and in other states. He spoke about why a Master Telecommunications Plan (MTP) is reasonable. The County can develop a significant amount of non-tax revenue from towers being located on local government property. This plan is a decision of the Board of County Commissioners and if the Board does not want to participate, then that element can become inactive, but it will not affect the other parts of the ordinance. The plan must be approved through the public hearing process, but this will not be done tonight. Commissioner Brown asked if all of the adjacent property owners of a proposed tower would be notified. Craig Benedict said that in order to be on the MTP, everyone within the 500 foot radius around the proposed site would be notified and would have the ability to make public comment. Craig Benedict then described the process the staff went through to develop the Master Telecommunications Plan. Each pale should provide far at least four carrier locations. Other areas included in the plan are voluntary agricultural districts. Most of these areas have poor coverage, so they would be ideal for tower locations. All of the potential locations far the public/quasi-public sites have been narrowed down to 10-15 sites. Some of the sites include the Lee Miller Voluntary Ag District, the Tate Voluntary Ag District, Cedar Grove Fire Station, Cedar Grove Ruritan Club, some property owned by Robert Nutter, White Cross Volunteer Fire Station, and some Duke University property. Craig Benedict said that there have been six or seven meetings with department heads and stakeholders and all have received this plan positively. Renee Price asked about notification of neighbors and making the area 1,000 feet. Craig Benedict said that 500 feet is the present number. He said that if they proceed with the MTP, then they will advertise in the paper about the potential sites and give citizens a chance to speak about the sites. Renee Price asked about the review process every year. Craig Benedict said that there would be a review process if someone wants to add something to the MTP. Chair Gooding-Ray asked about identified school parcels with these sites. Craig Benedict said that most of the schools were in the urban area coverage, and the coverage there was reasonable. Chair Gooding-Ray said that the staff needs to look at the health issues concerning the tawers, especially regarding children. Commissioner Brown asked about the original plan to have one meeting and then the change to four meetings a year. Craig Benedict said that they will still have one annual meeting. But applicants can still came in twice a year. For a Class A, there will be a meeting in December to find out what the applicants are going to do within the next year and then it will be plugged in to two quarterly public hearings. The Board of Adjustment wants the Class B applicants to come in on a regular basis. This board did not want a lot of applications coming in all at once. Public Comment Carl Walters said that he is not asking for a cell tower on his property line, but he would like to offer some options. He would like for a conservation farm to be considered first, if it is next to a fire station. The income generated for the farm by having a tower could extend the life of the farm. There was no one else signed up to speak. Craig Benedict said that the staff is asking the Board whether they should proceed with another public hearing in the first quarter of 2003 to bring letters of intent to the 10-15 property owners. There would be notification of everyone within 500 feet of the property. They would like to proceed in the first quarter of 2003. Commissioner Gordon asked far Craig Benedict to list the sites again. There are two sites on the Walters' property that are voluntary ag sites. Lee Miller is another voluntary ag site. Orange County has some possible sites - NC 86 (possible Public Works site}, Lake Orange. OWASA has some sites outside of the critical area. White Cross Fire Station is a possibility as well as Oak Grove Baptist Church. The property owners need to sign a document saying that they are definitely interested in being a part of the MTP program. Commissioner Gordan asked if preference would be given to a voluntary ag site. Commissioner Carey asked about property beside a County site and a conflict of interest. Craig Benedict said that they could not push preferences far any sites. He said that the process that the County will go through to offer the land for telecommunication purposes will be the same process that a private entity can use. Chair Jacobs asked about how to advertise that these opportunities are available. He asked how we would let people in the agricultural community knave that this is a passibility. Craig Benedict said that if someone wants to enter the voluntary ag system in the coming year, the MTP can be adjusted to add their property. This incentive can be sent to the Ag Preservation Board and ERCD. He said that they also sent notices out to all of the fire stations. John Link said that as the staff is notifying joint owners, they will share the information with the Planning Board and the Board of County Commissioners first prior to sending it out. Chair Jacobs asked about hiring a consultant to refine this plan. He asked if that would be part of a subsequent process ar this process. Craig Benedict said that they need a consultant to respond to the applications that come forward. The fee structure in the amendments will pay for the consultants. When the consultant is hired, they can be used to refine the MTP. A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to accept the Administration's recommendation to approve the pursuit of finalization of the Master Telecommunications Plan and to direct staff to prepare the Plan for formal adoption through the public hearing process and to bring back in the first quarter of 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Amend Article 6.29.3 to create a Secondary Development Area south of I-85 in the I-851Buckhorn Road Economic Development District tEDDj. Craig Benedict said that the entire EDD was considered a primary development area (retail, industrial, manufacturing, etc.). The suggested change in the secondary development area would allow for some banking and institutional uses and also same residential uses. The residential uses would be multi-family and not single- familydetached. The suggestion is that animal houses and kennels, construction, and manufacturing would not be allowed in the secondary development area. Commissioner Gordon asked about the impetus for bringing this forward at this time. She thinks that this is the most appropriate place for this type of development and not secondary development. Craig Benedict said that there has not been any activity in the non-residential sector in this sector at all. If there can be a lead use to spur infrastructure, it might open up the entire area that could lead to a water and sewer system. Commissioner Gordan did not understand why the whole area was being considered for this. Craig Benedict said that they want some of the mixed use development opportunities, and there are none in this EDD. Commissioner Gordon said that the part that is near I-4011-$5 could remain primary and then the part that is residential could be secondary. There are not very many places in the County where you are allowed to have these uses. She would like to think about it before eliminating the possibility. Craig Benedict said that they could look at a step-down approach and came up with some more primary uses that would be compatible with the secondary uses. Commissioner Gordon does not want to cut this area in half and give upon it. She would like to keep the I-4011-85 corridor a primary use. Chair Jacobs referred to the permanent use chart and said that it seems that the primary precludes mixed use. He said that no one could live and then walk to their place of employment. He said that this is counter to what we are trying to achieve. He thinks it needs more analysis. He agreed with Commissioner Gordon. Commissioner Brown agreed with Commissioner Gordon. She does not understand what the impetus is to change this. Craig Benedict said it came up three years ago with a rezoning, and he, Paul Thames, and Dianne Reid have been working on this to figure out what could be done in this area. He said that having one use in this area was not beneficial. Commissioner Brown asked why we would want this to be a condo or apartment area. This is a huge switch from an economic development area. She recalls that when this was approved, there was a notion that this had been set aside for long term economic development. She said that when the Leture rezoning came up, there became insecurity about why it was not being developed. She said that it was supposed to be a set aside for long term economic development. She thinks there needs to be a really good design. Discussion ensued about the mixed use possibility in this area. Commissioner Brown said that she has not bought into the idea that people want to live where they work. She thinks that people want to take public transportation to work. Commissioner Carey said that he does buy into living and working in proximity and he thinks we should consider mixed use options. An example of this is the area around UNC-CH. He said that if density is placed here, then it can be prevented in other areas that we want to preserve. He agrees with the step-down approach. Commissioner Gordon said that there needs to be a lot of thinking about the concept behind what we want in these economic development districts and how high- density residential would fit in. Commissioner Halkiotis said that there was a similar discussion when this district was created. He remembers there being a split vote when the districts were created. He would like to see the staff bring back as many options as possible. He is not an advocate of the huge multi-family complexes. He has not had a 10-15 year vision for this place because nothing has happened in this area for years. He is still upset about the people that got left behind in the small mobile home park because they could not connect to the sewer line that Hancor controlled that the County helped to finance. There area some issues in this area with affordable housing and economic development. He said that there needs to be a work session about this issue. Chair Jacobs agreed with Commissioner Halkiotis. This item was left open until the next quarterly public hearing. 3. ORANGE COUNTY BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN a. Amend the Orange County Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to include New Grady Brown School Road as a Secondary Priority Route DEFERRED 4. Other Items a. Establish Commercial and Residential Plans Review Fees There was no public comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Brawn, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adopt the commercial and residential plan review fee schedule after the close of this public hearing and to set an effective date of January 1, 2002 for implementation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM Orange County Comprehensive Plan -Land Use Element To receive as information DEFERRED A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Brown to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker Clerk to the Board