Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNS ORD-1996-018 Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Article 8.8.24 - Historic Structures Non Residential Reuse/Mixed Use 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: June 26; 1996 Action Agenda Item SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT Article 8.8.24 Historic Structures -Non Residential Reuse/Mixed Use (Class A Special Use) DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: X Yes No BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk Extension 2582 Proposed Amendment TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 227-2031 Chapel Hill 967-9251 PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to include historic property as well as structures in the consideration of Special Use Permits for the non- residential use of historic structures. BACKGROUND: The non-residential use of historic structures is permitted in the AR,R1 and RB zones provided a Class A Special Use Permit is obtained from the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Standards that must be complied with are specified in Article 8.8.24 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment would clarify that the historic nature of the property as well as the structure may be considered in the Special Use Permit approval process. RECOMMENDATION: Article 20 of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that the public hearing is the time scheduled for presentation of the Zoning Officer's recommendation regarding proposed amendments to the ordinance. 2 Zoning O,fficer Recommendation Provided that the Planning Board and the Board of Commissioners find in the affirmative, the Zoning Officer recommends approval of the proposed text amendment to Article 8.8.24 of the Zoning Ordinance. Administration Recommendation The Administration recommends that the proposed amendment be referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 5, 1996 3 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REFERENCE: ZONING ORDINANCE-ARTICLE 8.8.24 Historic Structures-Non Residential Reuse/Mixed Use (Class A Special Use) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff Planning Board X BOCC Public Other: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 26, 1996 Purpose of Amendment: To include historic property as well as structures in the consideration of Special Use Permits for the non-residential use of historic structures. Impacts/Issues: The Orange County Zoning Ordinance requires an applicant to obtain approval of a Class A Special Use Permit from the Board of Commissioners for the non- residential use of an historic structure. In some cases,the use of historic structures may not only involve the historic structure itself,but also the surrounding property associated with the structure. The proposed amendment will clarify that Article 8.8.24 applies to the site on which a historic structure is located, as well as the historic structure itself. EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE TEXT: 8.8.24 HISTORIC STRUCTU SITES -NON RESIDENTIAL REUSE/MIXED USE(CLASS A SPECIAL USE) 8.8.24.1 Additional Information In addition to the information required in Subsections 8.2 and 8.8,the following shall be supplied as part of the application: a), The site plan,prepared by a North Carolina registered land surveyor or engineer, shall also contain the following: 1) Location, width, and type of all internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation. 2) Location and dimensions of all on-site signage. 4 3) Boundaries of the site and distance to nearest residential structures. b) Description of the proposed use(s)of the site and the buildings thereon, including the following: 1) Amount of area allocated to each use. 2) Number of full and part-time employees. 3) Number of clients and/or occupants expected to use the facility. 4) Proposed hours of operation for non-residential uses of the site and within buildings thereon. C) Building plans for all existing or proposed structures to include floor plans,elevations, and sections showing restoration/rehabilitation proposed. Description of how the historical style and character of the building and/or property is to be enhanced. d) Landscape plan,at the same scale as the site plan, showing existing or proposed trees, shrubs,-ground cover and other landscape materials. e) Statement from the appropriate public service agencies concerning the method and adequacy of water supply and wastewater treatment for the proposed uses. f) Statement from the appropriate public service agencies concerning the provision of fire,police and rescue protection to the site and structures. g) Evidence that the property is listed on the National Historic Register or recognized by the State of North Carolina as places of historic interest. h) The proposed development schedule for the site. 8.8.24.2 Standards of Evaluation The following specific standards shall be used in deciding on an application for this use: 5�. a) The site plan submitted meets all requirements specified in sub- sections 8.8 a)and 8.8.24.1 a). b) Proposed uses and facilities are complementary and compatible with surrounding area, and appropriate in the location proposed given character of surrounding development. The proposed use of the historic structure shall be of such a nature so as to preserve the historic character of the site and the building. Development of the site as proposed would have no adverse impact beyond the building except for appropriate parking facilities. C) Structural alterations of historic structures shall be of such a nature as to preserve the historic character of the building(s) and site. d) Fire,police and rescue services and water supply and wastewater treatment methods are adequate to serve the proposed uses and facilities. e) Recreational areas, service areas,parking and screening are adequate for the proposed use(s). f) The site is served by direct access to a State-maintained road. g) Internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation is adequate for the proposed use(s). h) All applicable requirements of Article 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12 have been satisfied. This use is to be a Class A Special Use Permit in the following districts: AR-Agricultural Residential R1 -Residential-1 This Class A Special Use Permit, if approved, shall be valid for six(6) years. Ordinance Review Committee: Apri14, 1996 Planning Board: BOCC: orAju - Z9�Ib - v� z VI for his leadership and dedicated and distinguished service to our community as Executive Director of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority and extend to him our best wishes for a long and well-deserved retirement. VOTE: UNANIMOUS VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD Chair Carey presented the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award of the Government Finance Officers' Association to Budget Director Sally Kost and Budget Management Analyst Donna Dean. He commended them for their dedication and for receiving the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting for the sixth consecutive year. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT_ARTICLE_6.16.6 HOME OCCUPATIONS Planner Mary Willis presented for citizen comment proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance provisions relating to home occupations as presented in the agenda. The existing home occupation regulations are contained in Article 6.16.6.1 through 6.16.6.4. In answer to a question from Commissioner Gordon about setbacks, Mary Willis said that what they tried to do was to keep the same set of standards without breaking things up according to just the lot size. They had encountered previous problems with the provision that accessory buildings must be 30 feet further from the road than the residence on larger lots. The setbacks, in most districts, would be 20 feet from the side and rear property lines and 40 feet from the front. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT Max Kennedy, General Contractor with a home occupation permit, made reference to the agenda materials and commented about several of the proposed changes. He said that at present the most floor space usable in an assessory building is 2,000 feet and the greatest number of feet available in a storage facility is 1,000 feet. This is on property with more than 200,000 square feet. He made reference to the list of home occupations which are presently legal in Orange County and said that there are a number of these which do not use any outside buildings because they are completely contained within a home and a number which occupy a considerable amount of space. The smallest being 1/4 acre and the largest being 232 acres. He disagrees that one size fits all. He does not feel the impact would be the same in every case. The proposal is that there be one requirement regardless of lot size and he does not feel that is realistic. It also requires that any building approved in the future have a residential appearance. This does not take into consideration a number of farm buildings that will be available as farmers cease to farm and have barns they could utilize for a very productive home occupation. He disagrees with this proposed change. Max Kennedy noted he disagrees with the reference to the size of the vehicle that can make deliveries. In his particular case, he has enough room for larger trucks to make deliveries and egress safety. He asked the County Commissioners to leave the Home Occupations portion of the Zoning Ordinance as it is. Mary Willis said that with regard to the use of existing barns or farm-type buildings in the future, that would be permitted under C-4. She said that what they are trying to do with this amendment is to assure that if someone is going to build a new building, an accessory building, for the Purpose of conducting a home occupation, that it be 1,000 square feet and that it take on a residential appearance to try to blend in with that area. There are provisions for existing buildings that may be converted to home occupations in the future regardless of the appearance of the building. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to refer this amendment to the Orange County Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than August 5, 1996. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT_ARTICLE 8.8.24 HISTORIC STRUCTURES Planner Mary Willis made this presentation. All background information is in the agenda. This proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would be to Article 8.8.24 to include historic property as well as structures in the consideration of Special Use Permits for the non-residential use of historic structures. Commissioner Gordon asked how this amendment would apply in the context of a modern house with historic outbuildings. THERE WERE NO PUBLIC COMMENTS A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to refer this item to the Orange County Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than August 5, 1996. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT -ACTION SUBSEQUENT TO SUBDIVISION APPROVAL Planner Mary Willis made this presentation. This technical amendment would delete the requirement in the Subdivision Ordinance that a Planning Staff member be present each time a final plat is recorded in the Register of Deeds Office. The purpose of this provision is to insure that all required auxiliary documents, such as Road Maintenance Agreements and Declaration of Restrictions are recorded with the plat. Register of Deeds, Betty June Hayes indicated she does not endorse this amendment and that she will submit her comments in writing which will be included in the agenda when it is returned to the County Commissioners for consideration of approval. THERE WERE NO CITIZEN COMMENTS A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than August 5, 1996. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION ON 501_ WEST FRANKLIN FINANCING John Link summarized the information in the agenda. Purchasing Director Pam Jones made reference to the supplemental information. She summarized the steps taken to purchase the building. She gave an overview of the environmental assessment, the physical inspection of the property, the programs that will be offered and the upfit that will be necessary with related costs. Commissioner Gordon expressed a concern that the Environmental Assessment be done by professionals and that there be enough money for the upfit. John Link indicated that the programming schedule for the facility will be presented to the County Commissioners for their consideration in August. Finance Director Ken Chavious reviewed the bids which had been received as a result of his request for financing proposals. On May 14, 1996, the County Commissioners authorized him to seek funding for the purchase of 501/503 West Franklin Street through private placement and to submit an application to the LGC. NationsBank option #3 at$283,131.04 is the lowest responsible bidder. Other bids received are listed below: First Union $ 299,142.00 NationsBank Option#1 $ 312,996.00 NationsBank Option#2 $ 423,108.00 BB&T $ 311,700.10 Wachovia $ 286,632.33 THERE WERE NO CITIZEN COMMENTS A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chair Carey to close the public hearing.