HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-24-2014 - C365
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND
PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: February 24, 2014
Action Agenda
Item No. C.3
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Related to Setbacks for
Class II Kennels Developed in the EDE -2 General Use Zoning District
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Application for UDO Text Amendment
2. Staff Review Comments
3. Map of Subject Property
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael D. Harvey, Planner III (919) 245 -2597
Craig Benedict, Director (919) 245 -2575
PURPOSE: To hold a public hearing on an application submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Donald and
Donna Easterlin proposing a text amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
altering required setbacks for Class II Kennels developed within the Economic Development
Eno Higher Intensity (EDE -2) general use zoning district.
BACKGROUND: Mr. and Mrs. Easterlin (hereafter `the applicant') operate a Class II Kennel at
5908 US 70 East, the majority of which is zoned EDE -2.
Class II Kennels are a permitted use of property within the EDE -2 zoning district subject to the
issuance of a Class B Special Use Permit (hereafter `SUP') reviewed and acted upon by the
Orange County Board of Adjustment. The facility operates under a previous approved SUP
issued on March 10, 1986.
In 2006 the applicant was informed they had expanded their operation beyond what was
originally approved by the County in 1986. They were required to either eliminate the
unpermitted expansion or seek a modification of the existing SUP to allow the expansion,
specifically additional fenced in exercise yard /dog duns, to remain.
One of the Ordinance requirements enforced at the time the permit was approved, as well as in
2006 when staff informed the applicant there had been an unpermitted expansion, was a 150
foot setback requirement for `buildings, structures, runway or riding arena in which animals are
housed or exercised' from all property lines. Staff had interpreted this language as including
dog runs /outdoor play areas as these are areas where these animals were `exercised'.
It should be noted in January of 2012 the BOCC adopted a UDO text amendment package
modifying and updating regulations governing the development of Class II Kennels. This
included modifications to the aforementioned setback language, now contained in Section 5.6.5
(A) (2) of the UDO, reading as follows: ` No part of any building, structure, dog run, pen, or
M
exercise yard in which animals are housed or exercised shall be closer than 150 feet from a
property line, except property occupied by the owner /operator of the kennel'. This new
language incorporated previous staff interpretations as to what, exactly, had to meet the 150
foot setback.
As previously indicated the applicant expanded their existing kennel facility and were required to
seek a modification of their existing SUP to allow for the expansion to remain. Unfortunately the
expanded exercise area is located within required setbacks, as interpreted and enforced in 2006
and as now contained within Section 5.6.5 (A) (2) of the UDO.
The applicant is seeking to reduce required setbacks for Class II Kennels, developed within the
EDE -2 zoning district only, to 25 feet. This is the existing, typical, required setback for
structures developed within the district. Approval of this amendment will not eliminate the
requirement for the applicant to modify their existing SUP. Approval of the text amendment will,
however, reduce the required setback they have to observe.
Attachment 1 provides the applicant's recommended language.
Staff Analysis: Per Section 2.8.5 of the UDO the Planning Director shall analyze the application
and prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the BOCC. In
reviewing this application, the Planning Director would like to offer the following comment(s):
1. The application has been deemed complete per Section 2.8.3 of the UDO.
2. If approved, the text amendment will only impact Class II Kennels developed within the
EDE -2 zoning district. It will not be applied in other general use zoning districts.
3. Impacts generated by a kennel operation are universal and are not mitigated just
because said operation is located within a non - residential general use zoning district.
The question here is what constitutes an appropriate setback for a kennel in an effort to
address potential impacts on adjacent property.
4. There is nothing inherently significant about the EDE -2 general use zoning district
mandating kennel operations be allowed to observe a `different' setback requirement
from other non - residential general use zoning districts throughout the County.
5. Staff believes reducing the proximity for outdoor exercise areas, or buildings housing
kennel operations, may limit the marketability /development potential of adjacent property
as concerns over noise /odors will be more prevalent.
For additional information please refer to Attachment 2.
Notification Procedural Requirements: Legal ads for the public hearing were placed in a
newspaper of general circulation in the County in accordance with Section 2.8.7 of the UDO.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This request has been reviewed by County departments who have
determined that the approval or denial of the request would not create the need for additional
funding for the provision of County services.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Planning Director recommends the Board:
1. Receive the proposed amendments to the UDO as detailed in this abstract and
attachments.
67
2. Conduct the public hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board comment on
the proposed amendments.
3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned
to the BOCC in time for the April 15, 2014 BOCC regular meeting.
4. Adjourn the public hearing until April 15, 2014 in order to receive and accept the
Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments.
6DDec 20 13 10:55e -
(3 UUC) 1-U Attachment 1
+= Orange CO-11W Planning and Inspections Department
APPLICATION FOR
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
molar h 0180 °Q TEXT .AMENDMENT
APPLICANT INFORMATION:
Date: _2 " � , -a
Applicant: TbN . gi n FA~,-rCPkt -ir-i Phone:
Address: Dc- yc,,,s P-x> .
Cell Phone:
E-mail:
Section(s) of UDO proposed for amendment: J
General Amendment Request:
SUBMITTAL INFORMATION (Section 2.8 of the UDO):
1) A copy of the section(s) of the UDO proposed for modification,
2) A written statement describing in detail:
a) A description of the proposed changes sought by the applicant,
b) The revised text as requested by the applicant,
c) How the proposed amendment is consistent with, or carries out the intent and purpose of, the Orange County
Comprehensive Plan,
d) in accordance with Section 2.8.3 (c) of the UDO, the alleged error (if applicable) that would be corrected by the
proposed amendment,
e) In accordance with Section 2.8.3 (d) of the Ordinance, the changing conditions within the County, if any, that make
the amendment reasonably necessary to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and
f) In accordance with Section 2.8.3 (h): ` All other circumstances, factors, and reasons' that the applicant offers to
justify approval of the request
3) The filing fee per the adopted Orange County fee schedule in affect as of the date of the application.
I (we), the undersigned, have been made aware of the process for the review and action associated with a UDO Text Amendment
application and understand that only completed applications, containing all information required by the Orange County UDO shalt
be reviewed and acted upon by the County. Further I (we) understand that any assistance t (ive) may receive from County staff in
preparing this application in no way guarantees a favorable recommendation by staff on the merits of this proposal nor does it
guarante n approval of the proposed text amendment by the County.
l ` 222z--
Appliett Date:
% to
Applicant Date:
P. 1
Dec 20 13 10:55a
r.� /r'i /-T
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORANGE COUNTY UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE TO REDUCE FROM 150 FEET TO 25 FEET THE SETBACK
REQUIREMENT APPLICABLE TO CLASS II KENNELS W14ERE BOTH THE KENNEL II
SITE AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY ARE ZONED EDE -2.
THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subsection 5.6.5(A)(2)(b) of the UDO is amended to read as follows:
(b) Except as otherwise provided in the remaining_provisions of this subsection no part of
any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals are housed or exercised
shall be closer than 150 feet from a property line, except property occupied by the
owner /operator of the kennel.
(i) The 150 foot setback established b this section Thee -ff��� shall
not apply if all portions of the facility in which animals are housed are wholly
enclosed within a building. Nor shall this setback appl two do training activities
where each dog is under the immediate control of its trainer owner or other
responsible individual
The minimum setback established by this subsection for aqy building. structure
dog run pen or exercise yard in which animals are housed or exercised shall b_e
25 feet rather than 150 feet where the Kennel II site is zoned EDE -2 and the
property line of the Kennel H site adjoins other property zoned EDE 2
(iii) The minimum setback established by this subsection for an buildin structure
dog; run, pen or exercise and in which animals are housed or exercised shall be
25 feet from the right-of of U.S. 70 where the Kennel LI site is zoned EDE -2
Section 2. All provisions of any County ordinance in conflict with this ordinance are
repealed.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
P-3 69
Uec 20 13 10:57a
NARRATIVE IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY DON AND DONNA
EASTERLIN REQUESTING AN AMENDAMNT TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE
The applicants submit that the attached amendment to the text of the Unified Development
Ordinance should be approved for the following reasons:
1. The applicants own and operate a "doggie day care" and boarding business known as
Sunny Acres Pet Resort at 5908 U.S. 70 Business in Orange County. The zoning of
II"
the existing business is EDE -2. The applicants' business is categorized as a "Kennel
Muse under the UDO.
2. The setback requirement for property zoned EDE -2 is generally 25 feet. However,
with respect to Kennel Il uses, Subsection 5.6.5(A)(2)(b) establishes a 150 foot
setback from any property line (except property occupied by the owner or operator of
the kennel) for "any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which
animals are housed or exercised."
3. While this 150 foot setback requirement may be appropriate when a Kennel H use
adjoins property that is not zoned EDE -2, it is not warranted when both the Kennel II
business and the adjoining property are both within the EDE -2 zoning district
4. The 150 foot setback unnecessarily burdens and restricts the use of property for
Kennel It purposes within the EDE -2 district, which is counter to the economic
development objectives of that district.
P'6 70
71
Attachment 2
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
�, VW ° 'Vol
Current Planning 131 West Margaret Lane
(919) 245 -2575 1 P O Box 8181
(919) 644 -3002 (FAX) Hillsborough,
www.co.orange.nc.us ry North Carolina, 27278
V
MEMORANDUM
TO: Craig Benedict, AICP — Planning Director
FROM: Michael D. Harvey AICP, CFO, CZO
Current Planning Supervisor — Planner III
CC: Michael Talbert —County Manager
John Roberts — County Attorney
James Bryan — Staff Attorney
DATE: January 29, 2014
RE: ANALYSIS of proposed UDO Text Amendment Related to Required Setbacks
for Class II Kennel Operations
Please accept this memorandum as the initial staff review of a proposed text amendment to the Orange
County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) slated for presentation at the February 24, 2014
Quarterly Public Hearing.
BACKGROUND: A request has been submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Don and Donna Easterlin,
who operate an existing kennel operation at 5908 US Highway 70 East (PIN 0803 -11- 5662), to
amend Section 5.6.5 (A) (2) (b) of the UDO to change required setbacks for Class II Kennel
operations. The property is currently split zoned Economic Development Eno Low Intensity
(EDE -1) and Economic Development High Intensity (EDE -2) and is located within the Lower
Eno Protected Watershed Protection Overlay zoning district.
Class II Kennels are a permitted use of property within the EDE -2 zoning district subject to the
issuance of a Class B Special Use Permit (hereafter `SUP'). The operation of the
aforementioned kennel was authorized through the issuance of a SUP on March 10, 1986. It
should be noted the Easterlin's purchased this kennel operation from the original owner, who
was responsible for obtaining the SUP.
Section 5.6.5 (A) (2) Standards of Evaluation Class II Kennels of the UDO reads as follows:
72
(a) The site is of adequate size to protect adjacent properties from adverse
effects of the kennel.
(b) No part of any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which
animals are housed or exercised shall be closer than 150 feet from a
property line, except property occupied by the owner /operator of the kennel.
These minimum distances shall not apply if all portions of the facility, in
which animals are housed, are wholly enclosed within a building.
(c) Any kennel, including primary enclosures or runs, which is not wholly
enclosed within a building shall be enclosed by a security fence at least six
feet in height.
(d) The site plan shows parking, access areas and screening devices for all
buildings and animal boarding facilities existing or proposed for the
property.
(e) The site plan shall be reviewed by the Orange County Animal Services
Department, and found in conformance with the Animal Control Ordinance.
( Building plans for all kennel facilities shall be reviewed and approved by
the Orange County Animal Services Department prior to issuance of any
building permits.
(g) A sign clearly visible from the ground shall be posted at the main entrance
to the facility and shall contain the names, addresses, and telephone
numbers where persons responsible for the facility may be contacted at any
hour of the day or night. The sign shall comply with dimensional
requirements as set forth within this Ordinance.
(h) A Class II Kennel Permit shall be obtained from Orange County Animal
Services within the first 30 days of occupancy. Failure to obtain and
maintain a valid Class II Kennel Permit or other related permits which may
be required by the USDA or Wildlife Resources Commission will result in
revocation of the Special Use Permit.
Kennel operations (i.e. outdoor runs, buildings, etc.) are required to observe a 150 foot setback
from all property lines. This operation was required to observe this setback as part of its
approval in 1986.
ISSUE: Portions of the existing kennel operation, most notably fenced in exercise runs, have
been expanded into the required 150 foot setback in violation of the SUP and UDO.
The proposed text amendment would reduce the required setback for Class 11 Kennel operations
located within the EDE -2 zoning district to 25 feet, which is the required setback for the district,
to address this problem.
73
STAFF COMMENT: In reviewing this request staff would like to offer the following:
1. A completed application, including required review fee(s), has been submitted in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8 of the UDO.
2. The Easterlin's are represented by an attorney, specifically Mr. Michael Brough of the
Brough law firm.
3. The amendment is in response to a Notice of Violation issued by staff related to the
illegal expansion of the kennel operation in violation of the SUP and UDO requirements.
4. Class 11 Kennel operations are allowed within the:
a. Rural Buffer (RB)
b. Agricultural Residential (AR)
c. Rural Residential (R -1)
d. Community Commercial (CC -3)
e. General Commercial (GC -4)
f. Agricultural Services (AS)
g. Economic Development Buckhorn High Intensity (EDB -2)
h. Economic Development Eno High Intensity (EDE -2)
general use zoning districts as a permitted use of property subject to the issuance of a
SUP reviewed and acted upon by the Board of Adjustment in accordance with Section
2.7 of the UDO.
The UDO currently does not distinguish/differentiate between the development of a Class
11 Kennel within a residential (i.e. RB, AR, R -1) or non - residential (i.e. CC -3, GC -4, AS,
EDB -2, EDE -3) general use zoning district. Development standards, including required
setbacks, and review processes are the same regardless of the zoning designation.
5. The rationale for the setback appears to be an effort by the County to provide sufficient
separation for adjacent property owners so they are not impacted by the noise (i.e.
barking) or odors associated with the operation.
6. From staff s perspective impacts generated by a kennel operation are universal and are
not mitigated just because said operation is located within a non - residential general use
zoning district.
The question here is what constitutes an appropriate setback for a kennel in an effort to
address potential impacts on adjacent property.
7. Staff is concerned reducing the required setback to 25 feet will increase `complaints'
related to the operational characteristics of a kennel and its impacts on adjacent property
development /redevelopment.
8. Staff is not convinced the 25 foot setback currently required for `permitted land uses'
within the EDE -2 general use zoning district will provide sufficient separation from a
kennel operation and adjacent properties to ensure protection from `adverse impacts' as
required under Section 5.6.5 (A) (2) (a) of the UDO.
74
9. Staff is concerned the proposal is inconsistent with several provisions of the adopted
2030 Comprehensive Plan, including:
a. Land Use Goal 3 — a variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program
and pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character,
minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced
transportation system.
Staff does not believe an affirmative recommendation is warranted for this proposal.
ATTACHMENT 3 - VICINITY MAP - EASTERLIN PROPERTY: 75
RGB
Red: Band-1
® Green: Band _2
Blue: Band-3
N
1 inch = 130 feet
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
02/11/2014
76
of
%
"w/r/
00"
01
r V
0/ A/00/l/