HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD-2012-031 Ordinance Amending the Zoning Atlas - Woods Rezoning 40-it - Zcti-8--1 1
Ordinance #.•2012-031
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ATLAS
WHEREAS, Orange County has received and processed a petition seeking to amend the
Orange County Zoning Atlas, as established in Section 1.2 of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO.), and
WHEREAS, This petition seeks to rezone approximately 0.55 acres of land on two parcels
of property off of US Highway 70 owned by Mr. Ronald Woods identified further with the Parcel
Identification Numbers (PINS) 9874-68-9326 and 9874-78-1414 from Rural Residential (R-1)
to Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2), and
WHEREAS, the portions of property to be rezoned are identified further as follows:
BEGINNING at a mathematical point at the southwest corner of Lot 4 Plat Book 50,
page 179 referenced above in the northeast right of way line of US 70 Bypass; thence
leaving the right of way line of US 70 Bypass and running along a line bounded on
both sides by Orange County Zone R-1 S. 77° 17' 00" W. 59.88' to a mathematical
point in the centerline of US 70 Bypass; thence along and with the centerline of US 70
Bypass bounded on the southwest by Hillsborough zoning and bounded on the
northeast by Orange County Zone R-1 N. 46° 07' 30" W. 59.90' to a mathematical
point; thence leaving the centerline of US 70 Bypass along a line bounded on the
northwest by Orange County Zone NC-2 and bounded on the southeast by Orange
County Zone R-1 N. 77° 17' 00" E. 59.88' to a mathematical point in the northeast right
of way line of US 70 Bypass; thence leaving the northeast right of way line of US 70
Bypass and continuing along a line bounded on the northwest by Orange County Zone
NC-2 and bounded on the southeast by Orange County Zone R-1 N. 77° 17' 00" E.
175.00' to a mathematical point in the southwest line of Lot 3 Plat Book 50, page 179
referenced above; thence continuing along a line bounded on the northwest by
Orange County Zone NC-2 and bounded on the southeast by Orange County Zone R-
1 N. 77° 17' 00" E. 247.08' to a mathematical point in the northeast line of Lot 3 Plat
Book 50, page 179 referenced above; thence along and with the northeast line of Lot
3 Plat Book 50, page 179 referenced above bounded on both sides by Orange County
Zone R-1 S. 47° 10' 00" E. 60.63' to a mathematical point at the southeast corner of
Lot 3 Plat Book 50, page 179 referenced above; thence along and with the southeast
line Lot 3 Plat Book 50, page 179 referenced above bounded on both sides by Orange
County Zone R-1 S. 77° 17' 00" W. 248.40' to a mathematical point at the southeast
corner of lot 4 Plat Book 50, page 179 referenced above; thence along and with
southeast line Lot 4 Plat Book 50, page 179 referenced above bounded on both sides
by Orange County Zone R-1 S. 77° 17' 00" W. 175.00' to a mathematical point in the
northeast right of way line of US 70 Bypass the place and POINT OF BEGINNING and
being all of an area to be re-zoned from Orange County Zone R-1 to Orange County
Zone NC-2 containing 0.55 Acres.
1
William H. McCarthy, Jr., Professional Land Surveyor, License Number L-3248, Summit
Design and Engineering Services, 504 Meadowland Drive, Hillsborough, NC 27278-8551
developed this legal description, which is based on data found in Plat Book 50, page 179 and
zone line data scaled from Orange County GIS and does not represent an actual field survey,
and:
WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
have been deemed complete, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 1.1.5 and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section 153A-341 of
the North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds that the rezoning will carry out the intent
and purpose of the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan or part thereof including, but not limited
to, the following:
a. The Future Land Use Map.
b. Principle 7,: Promotion of Economic Prosperity and Diversity.
c. Economic Development (ED) Overarching Goal: Viable and sustainable
economic development that contributes to both property and sales tax revenues,
and enhances high-quality employment opportunities for County residents.
d. Objective ED-2.5: Identify lands suitable to accommodate the expansion and
growth of commercial and industrial uses.
e. Land Use Overarching Goal: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and
designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities
sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy
consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives.
f. Obiective LU-1.1: Coordinate the location of higher intensity / high density
residential and non-residential development with existing or planned locations of
public transportation, commercial and community services, and adequate
supporting infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer, high-speed internet access,
streets, and sidewalks), while avoiding areas with protected natural and cultural
resources. This could be achieved by increasing allowable densities and
creating new mixed-use zoning districts where adequate public services are
available.
and
WHEREAS, the Board has found the proposed zoning atlas amendment to be reasonably
necessary to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the Orange
County Zoning Atlas is hereby amended to rezone the property as described herein to
Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2).
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED THAT this ordinance be placed in the book of published
ordinances and that this ordinance is effective upon its adoption.
om
fJ
Upon motion f C missioner seconded by
Commissioner the foregoing ordinance was adopted this
9
day of 2012.
1, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on 7,1 2012 as relates in any way to the
adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the said
Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of Jj
elz
201�;
E
Clerk t6--fhg(Board of Commissioners
�=ozr � r Z
d�fJ- �Zol�-U3 / � �►
C. Amendments to Unified Development Ordinance Text— Dimensional and Ratio
Standards (UDO/Zoning 2012-11)
Perdita Holtz, Planner with Orange County Planning Department, said this item was to consider
adopting of UDO text amendments that would amend some of the dimensional and ratio standards in
certain zoning districts applicable in commercial transition activity nodes and commercial industrial
transition activity nodes. These new ratios would allow for greater intensity of development in areas of the
county that are to be served by water and sewer systems or already are served in certain circumstances.
These amendments were heard at the May 29th quarterly public hearing and the Planning Board considered
its recommendation at the Planning Board's July 11th meeting. The Planning Board unanimously
recommended the BOCC adopt the amendments. The Manager's recommendation tonight is for the BOCC
to receive the Planning Board's recommendation of approval, to close the public hearing, and to decide
accordingly. If BOCC adopts the amendments, the ordinance that would do so is attached in the Board's
packets under Attachment 2.
There were no public comments.
Commissioner Jacobs said he had questions regarding local commercial and neighborhood
commercial. He referenced page 3-20 and 3-22 and said it noted the setbacks adjacent to residentially
zoned land shall be equal to the required side or rear setbacks in the adjacent residential district. He does
not know what those are but for local commercial, which is typically a neighborhood or rural area, and
where they're increasing the height of the building, a 35 foot high building is as tall as the tree line. He is
concerned if it is at the back of a property adjoining residences it will be like a wall that blocks them off from
whatever they have in their neighborhood that they may have wanted to be part of.
Ms. Holtz stated she did not have all the setback requirements for all the residential zoning districts
with her but most are at least 20 feet. There are not many side and/or rear setback requirements in
residential zoning more than that.
Commissioner Jacobs said he would not oppose this but suggested they have some drawing
demonstrating what a 35 foot high building would look like against a 20 foot setback with a normal
residence so they can get an idea of what the impact would be. Ms. Holtz said they could provide that.
Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to understand the rationale. When they went through the
first ones like I-C-1 and NC-2 and CC-3, looking at the column approximately halfway down, they keep a
distinction between RCU and NRCU. However, when they get to GC4, it appears they get rid of the NRCU.
She understands this was done because it's no longer necessary to differentiate between those categories
and it is okay to have one number. Ms. Holtz referred the Board to the zoning matrix in the comprehensive
plan on page 30 of their packets. She said I-C-1 and NC-2 zoning districts are allowed in a rural community
and rural community activity node whereas GC-3 and CC-4 are not. Therefore, these are treated differently
in the dimensional standards. Commissioner Gordon thanked her for the clarification.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger, to close the
public hearing and adopt the ordinance contained in Attachment 2 which authorizes the text amendments.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Zoning Atlas Amendment—Woods Rezoning
Michael Harvey with the Orange County Planning Department stated their request was to change
the zoning on a parcel on Highway 70 owned by the Woods from Rural Residential (R1) to Neighborhood
Commercial (NC2). He referenced a map on the overhead which was also a part of Attachment 2 in the
packets. This showed the abstract of the area to be rezoned. This item was presented at the May 291h
public hearing where the Staff informed them the property is currently in a split zone with some zoned Rural
Residential and some zoned NC-2. The problem this creates for the property owner is that technically,
setback landscape buffer requirements, parking requirements, and septic setback requirements, are all
taken from the zoning lot line. The huge problem is having these two properties conform to applicable
setback and development standards. As was articulated at the quarterly public hearing, this was done
based on an interpretation of former County Attorney and former Staff to only zone those areas of property
technically utilized to support commercial activities. The installation use of septic systems, the preservation
buffer, and also the parking, are components of the commercial activity, and the entire property should be
zoned appropriately to insure the protection of the preservation required buffers. It would also insure
adequate land areas to support the development consistent with the parameters of the UDO.
Mr. Harvey indicated the applicant and engineer consultant were present for questions.
Mr. Harvey also stated a couple of comments were made at the quarterly public hearing concerning
this item and that information was on page 2 of the abstract. The Planning Board reviewed this item at their
June 6th meeting and voted unanimously to recommend approval. The Planning Department finds it
consistent with the comprehensive plan and believes it's consistent with the goals and policies as
articulated by this Board for trying to address similar issues. He noted they have had numerous rezoning
cases to address this and will probably have several more.
Mr. Harvey reiterated the Board was being asked to receive the Planning Board's recommendation,
discuss the matter if any discussion is necessary, to close the public hearing, and to approve the zoning
request as articulated in the ordinance in Attachment 3.
Frank Clifton, Orange County Manager, said he'd had discussions with the owners of this property.
The issue is trying to get the line straightened up with the property boundaries versus the zoning
boundaries and related issues. It has been an expensive process for the owners due to having to have the
entire property surveyed and the Orange County processing fees. Mr. Clifton suggested they challenge the
Staff to look at areas where the zoning boundary and property boundary are off by some amount and
initiate rezoning of those properties to correctly fix this type of situation and to help landowners avoid the
expense and time involved in correcting these types of problems in the future.
Chair Pelissier said they discussed this in agenda review and she was also concerned about these
costs and the length of time of the process given there are a number of other properties. After making a
motion for this, she said she would entertain a motion from the Board to direct the Manager to do what he is
suggesting.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Foushee, to close the
public hearing and receive the Planning Board's recommendation, and to approve an owner-initiated Zoning
Atlas Amendment to rezone approximately 0.58 acres of land on two parcels of property from Rural
Residential (R1) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC2) in accordance with the provisions of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) as contained in Attachment 3.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Jacobs said he would support the idea the Manager articulated. He suggested,
however, that before Staff identifies specific parcels, they come back to the Board with parameters of what
the parcels are and what they're going to be doing. Anytime someone gets a notice the County will be
messing with something on their property, even if it's to help them, they need to be in agreement on what
that is and what will be required because in many cases the property owner will still need a survey. He said
they did not want to mislead or alarm people but does believe they should be proactive.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to direct the
Manager and Staff to review similar properties to this item for amendment and to come back with