HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-15-2013 - 5hORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 15, 2013
Action Agenda
Item No. 5 -h
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Amendment
Outlines and Schedules for Two Upcoming Items
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Amendment Outline to Establish Two
New Zoning Overlay Districts in the
Efland Area
2. Amendment Outline to Changes to
the Public Hearing Process
1
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Perdita Holtz, Planner III, 919 - 245 -2578
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 919-
245 -2592
PURPOSE: To consider and approve process components and schedule for two upcoming
government- initiated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO), and Zoning Atlas.
BACKGROUND: Two items are currently being prepared by Planning staff for the February
2014 quarterly public hearing. Amendment Outlines for these proposed amendments are
attached for the Board's consideration and approval:
1. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments and Zoning
Atlas Amendments to establish two new zoning overlay districts in the Efland area.
This is a reconsideration of the proposal that was denied by the Board of County
Commissioners on February 5, 2013.
2. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments to change the public
hearing process that is used for Comprehensive Plan, UDO, and Zoning Atlas
amendments and for Class A Special Use Permits.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: See Financial Impact included in each attached Amendment Outline.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Interim Manager recommends the Board approve the attached
Amendment Outlines and direct staff to proceed accordingly.
Attachment 1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENT OUTLINE
UDO / Zoning- 2012 -13
Two New Zoning Overlay Districts in the Efland Area
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
❑ Land Use Element Map:
From:
To:
❑ Zoning Map: Add Two New Zoning Overlay Districts in the Efland Area
From:
To:
❑ Other:
Text Amendments
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text:
Appendix F — Land Use and Zoning Matrix: Add tick marks to potentially allow
a "Special Zoning Overlay District" in all of the Transition land use
classifications.
❑ UDO Text:
❑UDO General Text Changes
❑UDO Development Standards
❑UDO Development Approval Processes
Section(s): Text Amendments to: Sections 2.5.7 and 4.4
Add New Sections: 4.5, 4.6, 6.6.3 and 6.6.4.
Renumber Existing Sections: 4.5, 4.6, and 6.6.3
Reference Changes in Existing Sections: 4.5.1, 6.8.12, and 7.13.2.
❑ Other:
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose /Mission
To reconsider the denial of a UDO text amendment to establish two new zoning
overlay districts in the Efland Area. The BOCC denied the text amendment at its
0
1
3
February 5, 2013 meeting and additional information regarding the proposal can be
found with the agenda materials from this
meeting: http:// orangecountync .gov /occlerks /130909.pdf
2. Analysis
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Planning
Director is required to: `cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based
upon that analysis, prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning
Board and the Board of County Commissioners'. The following information is offered:
The proposed zoning overlay districts are consistent with the recommendations made
in the adopted Efland- Mebane Small Area Plan
(http: / /orangecountync.gov /planning/ documents /Efland PlanADOPTED062706.pdf)
which called for design standards in the "core area" of Efland. The primary purpose
of the overlay districts is to provide for a more village and urban style of development
in an area of the county served, or intended to be served, by public water and sewer
systems. The affected area is also designated as a Commercial - Industrial Transition
Activity Node ( CITAN) on the County's Future Land Use Map. It is pertinent to note
that some of the zoning districts allowed in a CITAN land use classification allow
residential uses "by right." The proposed overlay districts have been written so that
the requirements will not pertain to existing or new single - family detached residential
uses. All other residential uses (e.g., duplexes, multi - family) proposed in the overlay
districts will be required to conform to the requirements of the overlay districts.
Because County development regulations pertain primarily to areas that are not
intended to be served by public and water systems, which tends to result in larger lot
sizes and lower density, some of the County's regulations are not suitable for areas
intended to have denser or more intensive development on smaller lots. For
example, some of the land use buffer requirement in Section 6.8 of the UDO would
be infeasible to meet on a parcel of property that is less than 100 feet in width and
has an area measurement typically referred to in square feet rather than in acres.
However, in areas of the county slated for denser development than the outlying rural
areas, smaller sized lots with buildings closer together is to be expected. Therefore,
development regulations must be modified to reflect these physical differences while
continuing to strive for quality development. The proposed overlay districts endeavor
to encourage development while ensuring quality.
Development will still be required to meet the impervious surface limitations
contained in Section 4.2 of the UDO. Because the impervious surface limitations
stem from State statutes /rules, modifications to the allowable percentages are not
permitted except as allowed in Section 4.2.8.
The primary reason the former proposal was denied was disagreement over whether
sidewalks (publicly owned /maintained) and /or privately owned /maintained connecting
walkways would be required in the Efland Village Overlay District. More information
about this topic is available in the Amendment Form for the former project, viewable
at: http:// orangecountync .gov /occlerks /130909.pdf (also see the link in the former
Amendment Form to the October 2011 work session materials where the BOCC
2
0
discussed and gave direction on "the sidewalk issue."
A map showing the affected area is included at the end of this Form.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
Objective 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. (See also Economic Development
Objectives ED -2.1, ED -2.3, ED -2.10, and Water and Wastewater Objective WW -2.)
Objective LU -3.7:
Ensure that new development patterns in non - residential nodes encourage a
clustered, walkable development pattern and discourage strip development.
Objective LU -3.8:
Develop a process for implementing small area plan recommendations through the
revision of County policies and regulations.
Objective LU -3.9:
Create new zoning district(s) which allow for a mixing of commercial and residential
uses, a mixing of housing types, and creates a more pedestrian friendly development
pattern. New districts should be applied in areas where public services exist or are
planned for in the future, in areas that promote higher intensity and high density uses
on the Future Land Use map.
Objective H -3.6:
Work within the Orange County government system to identify and resolve existing
policies which may be at odds with historic preservation goals, green building
approaches, and workforce and affordable housing efforts. (See also Cultural
Resources Objective CR -3 and Economic Development Objective ED -4.1.)
4. New Statutes and Rules
Not applicable.
C. PROCESS
1. TIM EFRAME /MILESTONES /DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
June 19, 2012 (last year's proposal)
3
0
October 15, 2013 (current proposal)
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
The current proposal is anticipated for the February 2014 quarterly public hearing,
which is the earliest it can be heard and conform to Section 2.2.8 of the UDO
which states that if an application is denied, the same or similar application
cannot be submitted for one year.
The former proposal was heard at the November 19, 2012 joint public hearing.
Meeting Minutes and a summary of the questions /comments made at the
November 2012 public hearing are part of the February 5, 2013 meeting materials
( http:// orangecountync .gov /occierks /130909.pdf).
c. BOCC Updates /Checkpoints
Early February 2014 — approval of legal ad
April 2014 - decision
d. Other
2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
Mission /Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and
Orange County ordinance requirements.
a. Planning Board Review:
December 2013 or January 2014 — special presentation on NC counties ability to
provide /maintain sidewalks (similar to October 2011 BOCC work session)
March 5, 2013 - recommendation
b. Advisory Boards:
The EMSAP Implementation Focus
Group reviewed and commented on the
proposed overlay districts as part of the
prior process. Staff is not suggesting
that the Group be reconvened for this
reconsideration since significant
changes to the former work are not
being proposed.
c. Local Government Review:
Not applicable
F
d. Notice Requirements
Prior to the public hearing, notices will be mailed to affected and adjacent property
owners, legal advertisements will be run, and notification signs will be posted in
strategic areas of the affected area, in conformance with State Statutes and UDO
requirements.
e. Outreach:
® General Public: Because significant changes to the prior materials are
not being proposed, Planning staff is not suggesting a
separate public meeting for these amendments.
An "open house" style public information meeting for the
prior proposal was held on November 14, 2012 at the
Efland- Cheeks Community Center. Ten people and one
BOCC member attended the meeting.
® Small Area Because significant changes to the prior materials are
Plan not being proposed, Planning staff is not suggesting
Workgroup: additional meetings.
As part of the prior proposal, the EMSAP IFG met on August
29, 2012 to review and comment on the proposed overlay
districts. The group decided that additional meetings were
not necessary as the proposed overlay districts were
consistent with the intent of the adopted EMSAP.
❑ Other:
3. FISCAL IMPACT
The prior project required a fairly substantial amount of Planning staff time to
complete and was accomplished by existing staff. Since significant changes are not
being proposed as part of this reconsideration, staff time commitments are not
expected to be significant. The legal advertisements, notification mailings, and signs
will be paid using Planning Department FY13 -14 funds budgeted for these purposes.
Adoption of the two new zoning overlay districts is not expected to impact County
funding needs.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
Adoption of the amendments will mean that new development (other than detached
single family houses) in the affected area will be subject to the requirements of the
zoning overlay district. In some cases, such as required buffering, this is a lessening of
existing regulations to reflect the smaller sized lots that exist in the affected area. In
other instances, such as architectural requirements, the proposed regulations are
slightly more restrictive than existing regulations.
The regulation requirements are consistent with the recommendations contained in the
I adopted Efland- Mebane Small Area Plan and are being proposed in order to encourage
5
7
a more urban style of development in the proposed Efland Interstate Overlay District and
a more urban village style of development in the proposed Efland Village Overlay District
while also promoting good planning /development practices and quality development.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
Will be part of the quarterly public hearing materials. The prior work can be viewed in the
February 5, 2013 BOCC meeting materials: http:// orangecountync .gov /occlerks /130205.pdf
Primary Staff Contact:
Perdita Holtz, Planner III
(919) 245 -2578
pholtz @orangecountync.gov
Is
Proposed Zoning Overlay Districts
4
a,
F
®Proposed Efland Interstate pp�,�yy Efland- Cheeks Highway 70 AR NC2 11
Overlay District viiin Overlay District
R1 EC5 12
aProposed Efland Village Pre- designated 0
Overlay District Commercial Area R3 - EDB -2 El
Watersheds LC1 ® 0 PID
L Major Transportation Corridor AS
E:3
N 1 inch= 1,200 feet
0 1,000
❑ O Feet
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson. 11/1/2012
Attachment 2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENT OUTLINE
UDO / Zoning- 2013 -07
Changes to Public Hearing Process
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
❑ Land Use Element Map:
From: - - -
To: - --
❑ Zoning Map:
From: - - -
To: - - -
❑ Other:
Text Amendments
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text:
ection(s):
® UDO Text:
❑UDO General Text Changes
❑UDO Development Standards
®UDO Development Approval Processes
Section(s): 2.3, 2.7, 2.8, and 5.10.2. Additional sections requiring amendments
may be discovered as staff begins drafting the language.
❑ Other:
B. RATIONALE
• Purpose /Mission
To consider changes to the current public hearing process for Comprehensive Plan,
Unified Development Ordinance, and Zoning Atlas amendments and for Class A
Special Use Permits. The current public hearing process is comprised of joint
quarterly public hearings with the Planning Board and BOCC, which requires a
quorum of both Boards.
9
1
10
County staff and elected officials received comments during development of the
Comprehensive Plan (2008) and Unified Development Ordinance (2011) about the
perceived need to streamline and speed up decisions on applications.
Analysis
The topic of amending the current quarterly public hearing process has recently been
brought up as part of the work on "Agricultural Support Enterprises" (ASE) because
the pre -2010 ASE work included a different approval process for ASE - related
projects. The September 9, 2013 BOCC work session (held at the end of the
quarterly public hearing) materials contain more information about this
topic: http:// orangecountync .gov /occierks /130909.pdf, including staff's concern about
having a different review process for only certain projects. The purpose of the work
session was to obtain BOCC input/direction on the public hearing process, which
staff received. There is not total agreement among BOCC members that the current
process should be changed. However, a majority of the BOCC directed staff to bring
forward proposed changes for public hearing and consideration.
At this time, staff is considering the following changes to the public hearing process:
• End the quarterly hearings and instead have the BOCC designate a minimum of 8
regular meetings per year where Comprehensive Plan, UDO, and Zoning Atlas
amendments and applications for Class A Special Use Permits can be heard. The 8
meetings (minimum) would be designated each Fall when the BOCC approves its
meeting schedule for the following calendar year.
Stop holding the public hearings as joint hearings with the Planning Board. The
Planning Board is an advisory board comprised of volunteers and there are
sometimes issues of having a quorum of members present for hearings /meetings. A
joint hearing cannot occur without a quorum of members from both Boards. Staff
intends to propose that the Planning Board provide a recommendation to the BOCC
after the public hearing. This would allow Planning Board members to either attend
the public hearing or view the hearing on the internet in order to hear public
comments prior to making a recommendation. Flow charts showing the current
process and the process staff intends to propose are included at the end of this Form.
It should be noted that staff is suggesting that the policy of having the BOCC approve
the required legal advertisement would be removed as part of the streamlining effort.
• Staff is researching whether the number of public hearings items and /or anticipated
time required can be limited on any one agenda in an effort to ensure land use /zoning
issues do not dominate a particular BOCC meeting agenda.
As staff indicated at the work session, Orange County's typical review timeframe in
recent years (4 -5 months from application deadline to BOCC decision) compares
favorably to other North Carolina local governments. One of the more significant
differences is that most local governments in North Carolina have a monthly public
hearing cycle rather than the quarterly cycle Orange County adheres to.
It is also notable that the current process was put into place at least 20 years ago
2
11
and one of the purposes was so residents who took interest in the types of matters
heard at the quarterly hearings would know in which months the hearings occur.
Dissemination of information was quite different 20+ years ago when compared to
today. The availability of agendas and hearing information on the internet makes it
easier for interested persons to keep apprised of matters in which they are interested
whereas 20+ years ago, interested people likely had to obtain hard copies of
agendas /materials directly from the County Clerk.
Additional analysis will be included with the quarterly public hearing materials.
• Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open,
efficient, and responsive.
• New Statutes and Rules
N/A
C. PROCESS
1. TIMEFRAME /MILESTONES /DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
October 15, 2013
b. Quarterly Public Hearin
F—February 2014
C.
BOCC Updates /Checkpoints
January 8, 2014 — Planning Board ORC (agenda materials are available to all
interested persons)
Early February 2014 — approval of legal ad for February quarterly public hearing
d. Other
2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
Mission /Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and
Orange County ordinance requirements.
L
a. Planning Board Review:
January 8, 2014 — ORC (Ordinance Review Committee)
March 2014 - recommendation
b. Advisory Boards:
3
12
c. Local Government Review
Proposed text amendments will be
Planning staff will work with the
sent to JPA partners prior to public
County Clerk and Manager's office
hearing and in accordance with JPA
to ensure the proposed public
Agreement.
hearing process will work smoothly
with the agenda processes /systems
used by these Departments.
d. Notice Requirements
Consistent with NC State Statutes —
legal ad prior to public hearing
e. Outreach:
❑ General Public:
❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup:
❑ Other:
3. FISCAL IMPACT
Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the
provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be paid
from FY2013 -14 Departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Planning
staff included in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work required
to process this amendment.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
If adopted, the amendments would change the existing process used by Orange County
to review Comprehensive Plan, Unified Development Ordinance, and Zoning Atlas
amendments and Class A Special Use Permits. See section "B" above for additional
information.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
Will be part of quarterly public hearing materials.
F
13
Primary Staff Contact:
Perdita Holtz, AICP
Planning Department
919- 245 -2578
pholtz @orangecountync.gov
Strongly recommended for all other projects
Application Submittal ' Generally -8 weeks prior to QPH, except
August QPH which has deadline in mid -May
DAC (Development Advisory Staff Representatives of various County
Committee) departments and other agencies, as needed
Review /Comments
BOCC Approve Legal Ad for Generally -3 weeks prior to QPH, except
QPH August QPH legal ad which is approved at
last BOCC meeting in June
)int BOCC /Planning Board ' Normally held the last Monday of the month in
Quarterly Public Hearing February, May, August, and November
Staff can often turn materials around after the
Planning Board
QPH to make the first Planning Board meeting
Recommendation
after the QPH (Planning Board meets on the first
Wednesday of each month). If the QPH reveals
that more staff research must be done, projects
may not be ready until the second Planning
Board meeting after the QPH (e.g., month+
delay).
BOCC Decision
Unless directed to a date /time certain by the
BOCC at the QPH (it is typical to do so since the
public hearing must be adjourned to a date /time
certain in order to receive the Planning Board
recommendation), the UDO states the Planning
Board shall make its recommendation within
three regularly scheduled meetings (e.g., three
months).
Application Submittal
DAC (Development Advisory
I Committee)
Review /Comments
Publish Legal Ad / Mail
Notifications for Public
Hearing
Public Hearing
(BOCC only)
Planning Board
Recommendation
BOCC Decision
Strongly recommended for all other projects
Staff Representatives of various County
departments and other agencies, as needed
The BOCC would not approve the legal ad in
this process.
(It should be noted that dropping the action
of having the BOCC approve the legal ad
could save approximately 3 weeks in the
existing process)
Each year during the process of creating
the BOCC meeting schedule for the
following year, the BOCC would designate
a minimum of 8 meetings where
Comprehensive Plan, UDO, Zoning Atlas,
and Class A SUP matters could be heard.
The rationale for a minimum of 8 per year would
be to designate a meeting in Feb, March, April,
May, Sep., Oct., Nov., and Dec. Doing so would
skip June which is when Budget matters are
dominant and would skip January and August
which tend to be busy agendas since they are
the first meetings back from breaks. Stipulating
8 as a minimum would also allow a future Board
to designate more meetings, if desired.
While the Planning Board would not be required
to attend the public hearing as an official board,
individual Planning Board members could
choose to attend the public hearing or could
view the public hearing on cable or over the
internet.