HomeMy WebLinkAboutNS ORD-1996-043 Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Temporary Events r
ORANGECOUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 2, 1996
Action Agenda
Item# l:__
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
Article 8.8.14 Special Uses-Temporary Events(NEW)
Article 4.3 Permitted Use Table
Article 6.16.17 Additional Requirements for Certain Permitted Uses
(Temporary Events)
Article 22 Definitions
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED Yes X No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Proposed Amendment Mary Willis
8/26/96 Public Hearing Minutes Extension 2583
11/6/96 Draft Planning Board Minutes
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough-732-8181
Durham -688-7331
Mebane -227-2031
Chapel Hill-967-9251
PURPOSE: To consider a citizen request to create a new use category called "Temporary
Events" which would be allowed by right in commercial zoning districts, and
with approval of a Class B Special Use Pen-nit in residential districts.
BACKGROUND: The proposed amendment creates a commercial/service use category called
"Temporary Events". Examples of this kind of use are commercial craft
shows, small festivals, concerts, medical or veterinary clinics, and outdoor
social events hosted by a business such as a restaurant or caterer.
Temporary events such as those described above would not be considered a
principal use when they take place at a site normally associated with the
2
activity. For example, a festival held at a park, a reception or picnic held on
church grounds, or a veterinary clinic conducted outside an animal hospital,
would be considered accessory uses to the principal use on the site and
would not require approval of a Special Use Permit.
This item was presented at the August 26, 1996 public hearing as a
request by Paul and Patricia Tripodi, owners of a catering business, who
proposed to host wedding receptions on their residential property located
on Dairyland Road.
The amendment was previously prepared by the Planning Staff to be
presented for public hearing on February 28, 1996. There were
concerns raised by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners as
to how such events would be defined, to assure that events such as
horse shows, and church and civic events would not become subject to
Special Use Permit approval. Due to the concerns raised, the Board of
Commissioners did not include the item on the February public hearing
agenda.
The Tripodi's paid applicable fees and requested that the amendment be
presented at the August public hearing. The request did not include
any suggested changes to address the concerns which had been
previously raised, and thus the text which was presented at the August
public hearing was the same as that which was originally proposed
The Ordinance Review Committee reviewed the proposal on July 3, and
suggested addressing some of the concerns by explicitly excluding events
which did not meet a specified threshold of people present at any given
time during the event, events of a personal nature, (such as family
reunions or large parties), and events of an institutional non-profit
nature (such as church or civic activities).
Public Hearing Comments
Four citizens, including the two applicants, spoke with regard to the
proposed amendment. Each of the speakers supported the amendment to
the extent that it would allow the specific use proposed by the applicants.
The applicants suggested that the amendment be revised to exclude
larger events that could have a greater impact on surrounding areas.
On September 17, 1996, the Planning Staff received revisions proposed
by the applicant. These revisions to the proposal which was presented at
the public hearing are attached, in a crossout (deleted)/underline (added)
format. The following changes are proposed by the applicant:
3
1) The maximum attendance at any single event would be the lesser
of 150 people, or 30 people per acre of the tract;
2) The site plan would not be required to be drawn to scale; and
3) The site plan would be approved by Environmental Health, the
Sheriff's Department and the Fire Marshal for the use as
described in the Special Use Permit, including maximum number
of participants. Notification prior to each individual event would
not be required.
In addition, there are changes proposed by the Planning Staff(underlined
and italicize to address issues raised by the Ordinance Review
Committee.
If approved, the propose amendment would allow the applicants to apply
for a Class B Special Use Permit to host wedding receptions. Special
Use Permits for similar types of activities in residential districts could
also be requested. The amendment would also allow Temporary Events
by right in commercial zoning districts, subject to the same application
requirements and evaluation standards in the course staff review.
The Planning Staff finds that the limitations proposed in the applicant's
revisions will result in minimal adverse impacts on adjacent areas.
However, the Planning Staff also recognizes that the proposed
amendment is closely tailored to address a specific need, and does not
utilize the opportunity to address a wider range of possible uses, such as
events which may occur less frequently but will attract more people.
Planning Board Recommendation
The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on November
6, 1996 and recommended approval of the attached revisions proposed
by the applicant and staff, with the following changes:
1. that the Site Plan be drawn to scale,as required in Article 14 of the
Zoning Ordinance;and
2. that the definition of Temporary Event be expanded to explicitly
exclude events of a personal, or non-profit nature, as well as all
events attracting no more than 20 people at any given time; and
4
3. That the definition of Temporary Events be revised to exclude
carnivals, and to specify "small" festivals in the list of examples.
The amendment was recommended by an 8 - 1 vote. The opposing vote
was based on concern with the appropriateness of such uses in
residential areas, and the narrow scope of the amendment. (See attached
minutes).
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that if it is the desire of the Board
of Commissioners to narrowly define the temporary events special
use permit category so that commercial events attracting more than
150 persons could not be considered, that the proposed amendment
be approved per the Planning Board recommendation.
5
PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
Article 22 Definitions
l Temporary Event (NEW ) A commercial activity attracting at least 20
I neonle at aniven time that typically does not involve permanent
structures, and does not occur more frequently than seven (7) days in a
thirty (30)-day period or more than fifty (50) days per year. Examples of
temporary outdoor events are craft shows, ems, small festivals,
concerts, medical or veterinary clinics, and sites operated by businesses
engaged in hosting outdoor social events such as picnics or receptions
I sponsored by a restaurant or caterer._ Events Qf a personal or non�Vroftt
nature such as amily reunions and church activitie s are not included
Article 4.3- Permitted Use Table
(attached)
Article 8.8.14 Temporary Events (NEW)
(less thfin 300 veepk-� st more than 150 goo_nle-Class B Special Use
300 people or- Class ,► Speeial Use)
8.8.14.1 Additional Information
In addition to the information required by Subsection 8.2 and 8.8, the
following information shall be supplied as part of the application for
approval of this use:
a) A written description of the exact type of event planned, the
maximum number of participants, the frequency of the event,
anticipated dates and hours of operation, method and adequacy of
sewage disposal, recycling and waste disposal, access, parking,
lighting,and signage;
b) A site plan dFa A to sea showing the boundaries of the area to be
used for the events, the locations of access points, parking, service
areas, activity areas, restrooms, solid waste disposal/recycling
facilities,lighting,and signage;
6
C) Written comments from the Orange County Health Department,
Division of Environmental Health regarding the adequacy of plans
restroom facilities and food pieparation/handling arrangements;
d) Written comments from the Orange County Fire Marshal and
Sheriff's Department regarding the adequacy of parking, access, or
other factors related to public safety.
8.8.14.2 Standards of Evaluation
+4) Lot size shall be adequate to accommodate all proposed activities,
including safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation, and the
maximum number of participants for any single event The permit
shall be limited to activities for a specified maximum number of
participants for any single event not to exceed a maximum of thirty
30) Participants for each acre in the tract or 150 participants
whichever is less.
b) The proposed activity will occur no more frequently than seven
days in a 30-day period, and on no more than 50 days per year.
c) Signs associated with the use are allowed only while the event is in
progress and shall not exceed one sign per event with a maximum
area of sixteen (16) square feet, and a maximum height of six (6)
feet. Other standards of Article 9 shall also apply.
Itl The
£ itleWi ,.F «.:...+.0 be rreSeFAed to 4he Planning Depa�
a
4-. EfiviFeffisen 14eaM Koval- o€ t „l„ .,i I
65x1;
2 A eepy of neti fisa ieno of flea,, a g v epA ..n.+nt to--the Fir I
11 4 e*reed pammeteFs sueh as hours of
the Speeial Use Peanit.
The site plan shall have the written approval of the Orange County
Division of Environmental HeaIth regarding the adequacy of the
water sup121v and wastewater disposal for the specified maximum
7
number of participants for any single event and the written approval
of the Orange oun Fire Marshal and Oranges Cony Sheriff s
Department regarding the adequacy of parking. access or other
factors relating to public safety.
e) The Special Use Permit shall be valid for no more than one year.
Article 6.16-Additional Requirements for Certain Permitted Uses
6.16.17 Temporary Events
a) The application shall include a written description of the type of
event planned, the number of participants for any single event, the
frequency of the events, the anticipated hours of operation, the
potential dates for the events, and the method and adequacy of
sewage disposal, recycling and waste disposal, access, parking,
lighting,and signage;
b) The site plan shall be accompanied by written approval from the
Orange County Division of Environmental Health regarding the
adequacy of the water-supply and wastewater disposal;
C) The site plan shall have written approval from the Orange County
Fire Marshal;
d) The applicant shall submit a copy of notification sent to the Orange
County Sheriffs Department stating the type of events, number of
participants, date(s) and hours of operation, and emergency contact
information. A location map must be attached to the notice provided
to the Sheriff;
e) Lot size shall be adequate to accommodate all proposed activities
including safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation;
f) The proposed activity will occur on no more frequently than seven
(7) days in a thirty (30)-day period, and on no more than 50 days
per year;and
g) Signs associated with the use are allowed only while the event is in
progress and shall not exceed one sign per event with a maximum
area of sixteen (16) square feet, and a maximum height of six (6)
feet. Other standards of Article 9 shall also apply.
Amendments: (1) 4-1 -05
(2) 1 -18 -96
O) 1 -5 -87
(4) 10 -5 -87
(5) 5 -16 -89
(6) 10 -1 -90 1
17) 4-1 -91
(0) 3 -1 -94
S45 Deleted (5)
546 Deleted (5)
S41 Deleted (5)
.c.
1 S48 Sawmills
N
S49 Stockyards
S50 Storage of Goods, Outdoor
S51 Storage of Warehousing: Inside Building
SSIA Studio (Art) (6)
S52 Haste Hanagement Facility; Ilasardous 4 Toxic
S51 Wholesale Sales
554 Historic Structures Non- Resldentlal /Hixed
Use (l)
555 Assembly and Packaging Operations Including
Hall Order Ilouses, But Excluding On- Pramises
Retail Outlets (2)
i
A 556 Crematoria (4)
S57 Golf Driving and Practice Ranges (7)
� � I
b6 Tempor¢rl..` Ev ntS \
cte:� rr,a,, 3ae� -Y
i - PERMITTED USE
A . CLASS A SPECIAL USE (ARTICLE 8)
B . CLASS B SPECIAL USE (ARTICLE 81
RU
AR
RI
R2
R3
R4
R5
R8
R13
LC1
HC2
CC7
GC4
EC5
OI
EI
It
12
13
AS
ED
PIDI
PIDII
�ro
A
n1l
0
-
i
f
A
•
•
A
i
F-
A
A
A
A
A
•
i
i
f�
l
A
A
A
ro
—_
4
•
A
f
•
•
i
ro
A
A
A
N
A
•
A
A
�v
f0
a
A
It
A
M
—
_ly
B
A
•
f
N
RD
An
RI
R2
Rl
84
R5
R8
B13
LC1
HC2
CC7
GC4
EC5
OI
EI
I1
I2
I2
AS
ED
PIDI
PIDII
MAAMAAAMNAAAA .
11� I
00
: 0
00111 S
SMOOMMI
11� I
00
r1.
9
h
errac
ism
Yooxp�
�0/y,
A4-X�
j.
P&trlz-�
.Z/
1920 Uairyland Road • Chapel HIll, NC 27516 • (919) 933.9407
09/17!1499. 17:08 9199670411
10
REM#ON TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT
Ar"22 Whildws
Tempveary Event (NBW) A commercial activity that typically does not
involve permanent stcuctum, and does not occur more frequently than
seven(7)days in a thirty(30)day period or more than fifty (50) days per
Year. Examples of tmnp xvey outdoor events are craft shows, festivals,
medical or veterinary elinim and sites operated by businesses engaged its
hosting outdoor events such as picnics,parties or receptions sponsored by
A IestatUMt Or Cated'Cr.
Ardde 4.3 - Ponukted Use Table
(attached)
Ardd W4 Thy two 1�+V
(tat awe duo ISO - (m B S1a►" Use)
W4.1 Addidonutllotlormtdws
in addition to the information required by Subsecdon 8.2 and 8.8, the
.following information dash be supplied u part of the application for
approval of this use:
a) A written deswipdoo of the type of events planned, the maximum
number of participator for any single event, the frequency of the
events,the anticipated howl of operation,the potential dates for the
events,and the method and adequacy of sewage disposal.recycling
and waste disposal. access,panting, lighting and signage:
b) A site plan showing an botmdaries of the arcs to be used for the
events, the local s of access points, parking, service areas,
activity areas, rostrooms, solid waste disposallrecycling facilities,
lighting and signage;
c) Written comments from the Omnge County Health Department,
Division of Bnvha mtintal Health rogan ing the adequacy of plans,
resnoom facilities and food pteparationAmodling arrangements. and
d) Written comments ft m, the Change County Fire Marshall and
Sheriffs Departownt regarding the adequacy of parking, access,or
ocher facmrs relating to public safety.
89/17/199F i7:pg 919967eai1
_2-
W4.2 5tatneiat a eat Evaiwtion
a) Lot site WW be adequate to accommodate all proposed activities
imCluding safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation and the
maximum number of pettticipauts for any single event. The permit
shall be ftdted to aedvitin for a specified maximum number of
participants for any single event,not to cxecW a maximum of thirty
(30)participants for each acre of laud comprising the lot.
b) The proposed acdvity will occur no more frequently than seven(7)
days in a thirty (30)day period and no more frequently than fifty
(50)days per yea.
c) Signs associated with the use as allowed only while the event is in
progress and dull not exceed one sign, per event with a maximum
area of dxteeet (16) square feet, and a maximum height of six (G)
feet. Other standards of Article 9 deal[ also apply.
d) The sitie plan shall ltav+e dm wrio n approval of the Change County
Health.Degarauem Division of Brtvitojmental Health regarding the
adequacy of the water' supply and wastewater disposal for the
specified muirmni mmabetr of participants for any single event and
the writen approval of the Orange County Fire Marshall aid
Orange County Sheriffs Depattaruat regarding the adequacy of
parldng, access or other factors relating to public safety.
e) The special an permit shall be valid for no more than one year.
Amide 6.16 — Ad t { Resatri C_e!W EU24 Useg
aj The: Vpligaa &W iaclude a written description of the type of
events planned,the:Modmum nuMI tsr of participants for any single
event, the ftlttettcy of die ovcna, the anticipated hours of
operation, the potgntW dater for the e:vc.nts, and the method and
adequacy of wwaxe disposal,recycling and waste dispowl,access,
parking, lighting and sigatage,
b) Tito site plan shill its atxompanied by written Approval from the
oraoge ()Mty lriealth Department, Division of Environmental
RWth regarding the Mwquaey of the water supply and wastewater
disposal.
C) MW site ow shall have cite written approval from the Orange
OMWry Pine Marshall;
09/17/1996 17;013 9199670411
12
no applicant shall submit a copy of notification wt to the Orangc
County Sheriffs Departtnant stating the type vt events, maximum
number of participants.dates and boon of operation,and emergency
cxr u at infomation. A location map mat be attached to the notice
provided to tits Shwiff:
e) Lot size shall be adequate to accommodate all proposed activities
including safe vehicular and wdestriaa circulation;
f) 71e proposed activity will occur no more hNuently than seven(7)
days in a thirty (301 duty panW and no mote frequently than fifty
(30)days per YMA attd
S) Signs associaNd with the use are allowed only while the event is in
progress agad shall not exceed one sign per event with a maximum
no of sixtew (16) mpme feet, and a maximum height of six (6)
fret. f)dw standards of Article 4 shall also apply.
1 8/26/96 Public Hearing Minutes DRAFT 13
2 Dean Lategan,a resident of Stage Coach Run,spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment change
3 as they would effect Lots 1.2.4 and 5 in Section A and lot 1 in Section B. He stated that those lots are actually
4 a part of Stage Coach Run. He did not believe that Mr. Davis has the right to exclude any lots from the
5 subdivision without permission from the Homeowners Association. The Association is willing to take this matter
6 to court if necessary. They are opposed to rezoning the lots which were originally a part of Stage Coach Run.
7 They do not have an opinion on the other lots.
8
9 Geof Gledhill mentioned that if the lots are a part of the subdivision,the restrictions apply unless
10 changed by the Homeowners Association.
11
12 Arthur Cogswell, the project planner,stated that the density of development for these lots is not an issue
13 for them. They have not formulated plan at this time,however,they intend to work with the community. They
14 will be in communication when they do develop a plan.
15
: 16 Mr.Charles Davis stated that the lots in question were originally sold to Center Point and were
17 reclaimed by him when Center Point went bankrupt He did not want to take them back but did not have a
18 choice. The lots were eliminated from Center Points plan in tho..1980s. The County Tax Maps do not show
19 these lots as a part of Stage Coach Run. He also mentioned that the lots are not subdivided and are,in fact,
20 one tract
21
22 Mary Willis stated that there was originally an area that extended to where those lots were platted.
23 However,a large area was recombined and put back into one tract.
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Crowther,seconded by Commissioner Willhok to reftr this Item
26 to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than
27 October 1,1996.
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 2. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
31 (a) Efland Setback Overlay District
32 1)Article 4.2.26 District Statements of Intent and Application Criteria
33 2)Article 624 Efiand Setback Overlay District
34 This item was presented by Mary VViilis to consider the creation of a new
35 Overlay Zoning District which would allow lesser setbacks than generally required in the underlying zoning
36 district and to apply the new Overlay district to Ten and Twenty-Year Transition Areas in the Efland Area.
37 These proposed overlays would allow setbacks of 24 feet from road right-of-way and 8 feet fmm side and rear
38 property lines,with provisions for zero-lotline development in the interior of a subdivision. The proposed
39 setbacks are comparable to the setbacks currently allowed in the R-5 zoning districts.
40 This item was presented along with Item 1.a.
41 The motion was made in item La above as restated below.
42
43 A motion was made by CommWsioner Gordon,seconded by Commissioner Crowther,to refer this item
44 to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than
4S October 1. 1996
46 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
47
48 (b) Temporary Events
49 1)Article 8.8.14 Special Uses(Temporary Events)
50 2)Article 6.16.17 Additional Requirements for Certain Permitted Uses
61 3)Article 4.2 Permitted Use Table
52 4)Article 22 Article 22 Definitions
53 This item was presented by Mary VVIM to consider a citizen request to create a
54 new use category called''Temporary Events'which would be allowed in residential districts with approval of a
55 Special Use PermIL Examples of this kind of use are dal craft shows.carnivals,festivals.concerts,
56 medical or veterinary clinics,and outdoor social events hosted by a business such as a MS%unmt or caterer.
DRAFT 4 14
1 Temporary events such as those described above would not be considered a principal use when they take place
2 at a site normally associated with the activity.
3
4 COMMENTS ANDiOR QUE TIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS,
5
6 Commissioner Gordon asked which residential districts were included in this request.
7
8 Mary Wigs indicated that all districts up to R-13. She indicated that this was being proposed for a
9 Special Use Permit so that issues such as parking availability could be looked at for each request Also,there
10 would be a Public Hearing required for each request
11
12
13 comMENTC ANnmR QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD - None
14
15 commEmTS ANDIOR ouESTIONS NS
16
17 Paul Tdpodi,an Orange County resident stated that he was applying for permission to hold small
18 outdoor events,such as wedding receptions. He was not interested in any of the larger scale events mentioned
19 in the presentation. They would never have events that lasted several days or evening events which would
20 require outdoor righting. He has been working with the State and County Health Departments to determine what
21 needs.to be done to meet health requirements and water availability.
22
23 Commissioner Gordon commented that although there does not appear to be off-site impact at this
24 particular location.that might not be true of other applicants. At Issue here is the essence of a residential area
25 and whether or not this would generally be an appropriate residential enterprise.
26
27 Mary Willis commented that this was not considered a'home occupation because it would have an
28 impact greater than that expected from a horse business, For that reason,staff developed the'Temporary
29 EverrW category.
30
31 Ann Peterson,a friend of the Tripodi's,asked that the Board grant the Tripod?s request She mentioned
32 that the Temporary Event category is much broader than that which was requested. The Tripodre main concern
33 is the Inconvenience and time problems associated with having to apply for a Special Use Pem-it for each of
34 these events.
35
36 Jim Glover,also a friend of The Tripodr s,asked the Board of County Commissioners to approve their
37 request to hold small catered weddings on their rural property. Most of the allowed activities in this'temporary
38 EvenC category are much larger than anything that the Tripodi's would ever schedule.
39
40 Patti Tripodi mentioned that there are several horse farms,a dairy farm and a brick mason in the
41 immediate vicinity. She felt that their area was actually more commercial than residential. She asked that the
42 Board of County Commissioners approve their request
43
44 Commissioner Gordon felt that it was very important to pay dose attention to anything that would create
45 a non-residential impact in a residential community.
47 Commissioner Willhoit asked the County Attorney if it would be possible to tindt this type of event by the
48 number of acres km*ed. For example.3 people could be allowed for each acre.
49
50 Geoff Gladh6 replied that he would research the Legality of this way of detern"ng how many people
51 would be allowed.
53 A motion was made by Commissioner WiLihoit,seconded by Commissioner Crowther.to refer the
54 proposed amendments to the Planning Board far a recommendation to be returned to the Board of
55 Commissioners no sooner than October 1. 1996. The Planning Board is also requested to consider how they
56 would deal with offsite impacts such as density,number of vehicles and setback&
57 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
November 6 , 1996 Planning Board Minutes 15
extended from La Mesa Lane to serve the new lots in Phase III. Lot 31 will have
direct access to La Mesa Lane.
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for La Mesa,
Phase III,with public roads built to State standards and subject to the conditions
contained in the Resolution of Approval(copy an attachment to these minutes on
pages ).
Katz asked for clarification regarding item B4 in the resolution that all lots shall
access onto the new subdivision roads noting that this is inconsistent with lot#31.
Cameron responded that La Mesa Lane is considered a subdivision road and the
intent is that there be no exterior access outside the subdivision.
Katz continued,asking about the setback requirements under item F3. Cameron
responded that they are the standard setbacks in the Zoning Ordinance and are
required to be noted on the final plat. This makes it clear that for comer lots,the
front setback applies on both sides.
MOTION: Allison moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by
Walters.
VOTE: Unanimous.
AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 8/26/96
a. Zoning Ordinance Teat Amendments
(1) Temporary Events
(a) Article 8.8.14 Special Uses-Temporary Events(NEW)
(b) Article 4.3 Permitted Use Table
(c) Article 6.16.17 Additional Requirements for Certain Permitted Uses
(Temporary Events)
(d) Article 22 Definitions
Presentation by Mary Willis.
This item is to consider a citizen request to create a new use category called
"Temporary Events"which would be allowed by right in commercial zoning
districts,and with approval of a class B Special Use Permit in residential districts.
The proposed amendment creates a commercial/service use category called
"Temporary Events". Examples of this kind of use are commercial craft shows,
carnivals,festivals,concerts,medical or veterinary clinics,and outdoor social events
hosted by a business such as a restaurant or caterer.
Temporary events such as those described would not be considered a principal use
when they take place at a site normally associated with the activity. For example,a
festival held at a park,a reception or picnic held on church grounds,or a veterinary
clinic conducted outside an animal hospital,would be considered accessory uses to
the principal use on the site and would not require approval of a Special Use Permit.
16
This item was presented at the August 26, 1996 public hearing as a request by Paul
and Patricia Tripodi,owners of a catering business,who proposed to host wedding
receptions on their residential property located on Dairyland Road.
The amendment was previously prepared by the Planning Staff to be presented for
public hearing on February 28, 1996. There were concerns raised by the Planning
Board and Board of Commissioners as to how such events would be defined,to
assure that events such as horse shows,and church and civic events would not
become subject to Special Use Permit approval. Due to the concerns raised,the
Board of Commissioners did not include the item on the February public hearing
agenda.
The Tripodi's paid applicable fees and requested that the amendment be presented at
the August public hearing. The request did not include any suggested changes to
address the concerns which had been previously raised,and thus the text which was
presented at the August public hearing was the same as that which was originally
proposed.
The Ordinance Review Committee reviewed the proposal on July 3,and suggested
addressing some of the concerns by explicitly excluding events which did not meet
a specified threshold of people present at any given time during the event,events of
a personal nature,(such as family reunions or large parties),and events of an
institutional non-profit nature(such as church or civic activities),
Four citizens,including the two applicants,spoke with regard to the proposed
amendment.Each of the,speakers supported the amendment to the extent that it
would allow the specific use proposed by the applicants. The applicants suggested
that the amendment be revised to exclude larger events that could have a greater
impact on surrounding areas.
On September 17, 1996,the Planning Staff received revisions proposed by the
applicant. These revisions to the proposal which was presented at the public hearing
are attachments to these minutes on pages in a crossout
(deleted)/underline(added)format. The following changes are proposed by the
applicant:
1. The maximum attendance at any single event would be the lesser of 150 people,
or 30 people per acre of the tract;
2. The site plan would not be required to be drawn to scale;and
3. The site plan would be approved by Environmental Health,the Sheriff s
Department and the Fire Marshal for the use as described in the Special Use
Permit,including maximum number of participants.Notification prior to each
individual event would not be required.
In addition,there are changes proposed by the Planning Staff,(underlined and
italic mo to address issues raised by the Ordinance Review Committee.
If approved,the proposed amendment would allow the applicants to apply for a
Class B Special Use Permit to host wedding receptions. Special Use Permits for
similar types of activities could also be requested.
The Planning Staff finds that the limitations proposed in the applicant's revisions
will result in minimal adverse impacts on adjacent areas. However,the Planning
Staff also recognizes that the proposed amendment is closely tailored to address a
17
specific need,and does not utilize the opportunity to address a wider range of
possible uses,such as events which may occur less frequently but will attract more
people.
For example, in 1993 the Planning Staff received an inquiry from a group interested
in holding an arts and crafts-oriented Renaissance Festival for a one-week period
each year. A formal request was never made due to the lack of specific provisions in
the Zoning Ordinance to provide for such a use. The potential applicants considered
proposing an ordinance amendment at that time,but chose instead to look elsewhere
for a site.
The Planning Staff recommends that if it is the desire of the Planning Board to
narrowly define the temporary events special use permit category so that larger
commercial events could not be considered,that the Planning Board recommend
approval of the proposed amendment as revised by the applicant with the following
exceptions and additions:
1. that the Site Plan be drawn to scale,as required in Article 14 of the Zoning
Ordinance;and
2. that the definition of Temporary Event be expanded to explicitly exclude events
of a personal,institutional or non-profit nature,as well as all events attracting no
more than 20 people.
Barrows expressed concern with the number of people,it is not known how many
would attend. Another concern is that this seems to address the Tripodi's problem
but eliminates many others that should be addressed by such an amendment. She
also had the same concern as Commissioner Gordon in having this in a residential
district. Willis responded that,in any case,it would require the Special Use Permit
approval process which requires that all the property owners are notified. There are
some uses that would not be appropriate and findings must be met. It would be on a
case by case basis.
Strayhom asked what would happen at this point in time if someone chose to have
such an event and did not make the request of the Planning Department. How would
it be prevented. Willis responded that many things are done in violation of the
ordinance and are only discovered when a complaint is made and an activity is then
monitored by the Planning Department. The Tripodi's came to the Planning
Department to ask if they could have such an activity and the answer was no so they
pursued an ordinance amendment.
Brooks asked if the category could be broadened by having Special Use Permit,
small,medium and large. Willis responded that there had been efforts to have a
small and large by having less than 300 and more than 300 categories.
Price asked if reunions would be required to have a permit. Willis responded if the
Tripodis were hired to cater a family reunion on their property then it would meet
the criteria for a Special Use Permit. Private reunions would not be events which
would require such a permit.
Katz asked about the definition of a commercial activity attracting at least 20
people. Willis responded that this was to address the Ordinance Review
Committee's concern that a lower threshold be set. She continued than any number
is somewhat arbitrary. However,she chose 20 as the number for the lower threshold
18
because the rule of thumb used for traffic generation from residences is 10 trips per
day and the assumption of 2 people per vehicle. This is the equivalent of what one
single family residence would generate in a day's time.
Katz continued asking about other impacts such as noise noting that perhaps that
should read"20 people at the same time".
Strayhorn noted that the larger the tract of land,the less impact there would be.
He continued that he felt there will be great opportunities for pick-you-own fruits
and vegetables in Orange County and asked if those activities would be exempt
because of being agriculture. Willis responded that those activities would be
exempt.
Price asked if something such as a block party for an entire subdivision would
require a permit. Willis responded that such a party would not be a commercial,for
profit activity,and would not require a permit.
Brooks asked if this amendment is approved,could the Board revisit the amendment
and make changes/adjustments at a later date. Willis responded yes,there is always
the opportunity for further amendments to the ordinance.
Price expressed concern with carnival and festival and suggested that it be,changed
to read"small carnival". Willis suggested that carnival be eliminated and instead
use craft shows and small festivals.
MOTION: Strayhom moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff with the
suggestion of Willis to eliminate carnival and change the 20 people to 20 people at a
time. Seconded by Brooks.
Strayhom noted that he felt that this issue will have to be revisited at some point and
the County would be called upon to help property owners with large tracts of land
find some ways to generate income or else there would be more subdivisions.
Katz asked if the amendment as proposed with the changes met the needs of the
Tripodis and they agreed that it would.
VOTE: 8 in favor.
1 opposed(Barrows-still had the concerns that she had mentioned at the beginning
of the discussion).
AGENDA ITEM#10: PLANNING BOARD ITEMS
1 A. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT -TEMPORARY EVENTS
2 Planner Mary Willis presented background information as stated in the agenda. The
3 proposed amendment creates a commercial/service use category called "Temporary Events".
4 This amendment was requested by Paul Tripodi of Tripodi's Catering to allow the hosting of
5 wedding receptions on their property, He was available to answer questions.
6 Commissioner Gordon asked what zoning district this was in and it was determined that it was
7 Rural Buffer (RB). She said that this is a large change to a residential district and suggested that
8 specifications be added to require that all parking be on site and that there be minimal off-site noise
9 impacts. She would like the site plan to be to some scale to indicate specifics. She feels that the sign
10 should be smaller-- maybe 6 square feet.
11 Chair Crowther feels that parking on site is important.
12 Commissioner Brown expressed several concerns which she feels could be added to the
13 amendment. She feels that off-site noise impacts should be minimum. Planner Mary Willis indicated
14 that this could be a condition attached to the Special Use Permit.
15 Commissioner Brown made reference to farm events and feels that it is not clear to the public
16 that there are no limitations to events on farms and she would like to see this included. An example of
17 this would be horse shows. She asked about the cost to the applicant for a Special Use Permit and
18 Mary Willis said that it is about$200. Commissioner Brown asked about notification to neighbors and
19 Mary Willis said that with any Special Use Permit there is a notification of any property owner within 500
20 feet. In answer to Commissioner Brown's question about the inclusion of auctions, Mary Willis said that
21 it is a matter of looking at the activity to make a determination if it is a bonafide farm use which would be
22 exempted from the zoning regulations. Commissioner Brown said that she could not support this
23 amendment unless it specifically exempted auctions which are very traditional activities in the County.
24 Commissioner Gordon asked about the courtesy review by Chapel Hill or Carrboro and Mary
25 Willis said she received no comments back from either one.
26 Mary Willis clarified that if a farm auction is a commercial activity it would fall under the
27 "Temporary Events" regulation. A livestock show at Orange Grove would be nonprofit.
28 Mr. Tripodi said that they have agreed to provide onsite parking.
29 Commissioner Brown emphasized that her concern is that this does not interfere with any
30 traditional activities that have gone on in the County.
31 Mary Willis said that the biggest concern expressed at the Planning Board meeting was how
32 to define the events precisely enough so that they catch the type of uses they want to catch but still
33 exclude those that they don't want.
34 Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to a listing of facilities in Orange County that are
35 offering to host social functions. He feels that some of these places could not hold the number they have
36 advertised.
37 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to table
38 this item until the next meeting.
39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
40
41 Commissioner Gordon said that if they want to do this they want to get it right. Maybe the
42 minimum lot size should be considered and larger lot sizes be used. Some events would be great in
43 some places and some would be disasters.
44
45 Mr. Trapolli said that they have worked with the County for two years. They have included the
46 Orange County Health Department and the State Environmental people and are trying to do this right.
47 He said that the main concern is how the food is handled and the water served.
48
49
50 B. UNIVERSITY MANOR PHASE I APPROVAL OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT