Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-02-2016 - 5-c - Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment – Motor Vehicle Sales Rental Land Uses - Closure of Public Hearing and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted) 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 2, 2016 Action Agenda Item No. 5-c SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment — Display of Vehicles at Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental Land Uses - Closure of Public Hearing and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted) DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) Yes ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Michael Harvey, Planning, (919) 245-2578 Ordinance Outline Form — Display of Vehicles Craig Benedict, Planning, (919) 245-2592 at Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental Land Uses (UDO/Zoning 2015-06) 2. Excerpt of DRAFT November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing Minutes 3. Excerpt of Approved December 2, 2015 Planning Board Minutes 4. Planning Board Approved Statement of Consistency 5. Statement of Consistency 6. Proposed UDO Text Amendment(s) PURPOSE: To receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a decision on text amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) initiated by the Planning Director to adopt regulations regarding the display of vehicles at motor vehicle sales/rental businesses. BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing (materials available at: http://www.orangecountync.gov/document center/BOCCAgendaMinutes/151123.pdf ). An excerpt of draft minutes from this meeting is contained in Attachment 2. As indicated during the hearing, there has been an increase in the number of automotive sale/rental business operating within the County and staff has begun receiving complaints related to the storage and display of vehicles (i.e. too many cars being displayed, parking over septic fields, parking in required buffer areas, parking in public road rights-of-way, etc.). Currently, the County limits only the total number of cars that can be parked and/or displayed for an automotive sales business located within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2) general use zoning district. Staff is proposing to develop comprehensive regulations designed to limit the overcrowding of automotive sales operations within all general use zoning districts where such land uses are permitted. 2 For additional background information please refer to Section B.1 of Attachment 1. Please refer to Section C.1 of Attachment 1 for a synopsis of additional comments made at the public hearing. Procedural Information: In accordance with Section 2.8.8 of the UDO, as it was in effect at the time this amendment was initiated, any evidence not presented at the public hearing must be submitted in writing prior to the Planning Board's recommendation. Additional oral evidence may be considered by the Planning Board only if it is for the purpose of presenting information also submitted in writing. The public hearing is held open to a date certain for the purpose of the BOCC receiving the Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of proposed text amendment and further recommends approval of the: i. Statement of Consistency, as contained in Attachment 5, indicating the proposed text amendment is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan, is reasonable, and in the public interest, and ii. The text amendment as contained in Attachment 6. Planning Board Recommendation: At its December 2, 2015 meeting, the Board voted 8 to 1 to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency. The Planning Board's signed Statement of Consistency is included within Attachment 4. The Planning Board voted 8 to 1 to recommend approval of the proposed amendment package as contained within Attachment 6. An excerpt of approved minutes from the December 2, 2015 Planning Board meeting are contained within Attachment 3. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Please refer to Section C.3 of Attachment 1. SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goals is applicable to this agenda item: GOAL: ESTABLISH SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE LAND-USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, incomes and educational levels with respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, policies, and decisions. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or policies. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board: 1. Receive the Planning Board's recommendation; 2. Close the public hearing; 3. Deliberate as necessary on the proposed amendments; and 4. Decide accordingly and/or adopt the Statement of Consistency, contained within Attachment 5 and the Ordinance amending the UDO contained within Attachment 6 as recommended by the Planning Board and staff. Attachment 1 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) AMENDMENT OUTLINE UDO /Zoning-2015-06 Amendment(s) establishing regulations for automotive sales and rental business addressing the display and advertising of cars for sale A. AMENDMENT TYPE Map Amendments n Comprehensive Plan — Future Land Use Element Map: From: - - - To: - - - n Zoning Map: From: - - - To: - - - n Other: Text Amendments n Comprehensive Plan Text: Section(s): M UDO Text: fUDO General Text Changes 1UDO Development Standards fUDO Development Approval Processes Section(s): Section(s) 1. 5.2i Table of Permitted Uses, and 2. 5i5 Standards for Automotive/Transportation Related Uses n Other: B. RATIONALE 1. Purpose/Mission In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance Amendments of the UDO, the Planning Director has 1 4 initiated a text amendment to establish regulations governing the development and operation of automotive sales. Staff has seen an increase in the number of automotive sale business operating within the County and has begun receiving complaints related to the storage and display of vehicles being offered for sale, specifically too many cars being placed on a parcel of property blocking or impeding access for both customers and emergency vehicles. In certain instances, cars have been parked in required land use buffer areas killing required landscaping or have been encroaching into adjacent rights-of- way creating additional enforcement problems. Staff is proposing to develop comprehensive regulations designed to limit the overcrowding of automotive sales operations within all general use zoning districts where such land uses are permitted. 2. Analysis As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, 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'. Automotive sales are allowed in the following general use zoning districts as a permitted use (i.e. administrative approval) of property: 1. Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2)with special standards; 2. General Commercial (GC-4); 3. Existing Commercial (EC-5); 4. Existing Industrial (El); 5. Light Industrial (I-1); 6. Medium Industrial (1-2); 7. Heavy Industrial (1-3); 8. Economic Development Eno High Intensity (EDE-2); and 9. Master Planned Development Conditional Zoning (MPD-CZ) district. This use is also permitted within the Economic Development Buckhorn Low and High Intensity (EDB-1 and EDB-2) districts with the review and approval of a Conditional Use (i.e. a rezoning and Class A Special Use Permit) application by the BOCC. Currently, the County limits only the total number of cars that can be parked and/or displayed for an automotive sales business located within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2) general use zoning district. It should be noted that staff has an active code enforcement case against an existing business along Highway 70 within the Cheeks Township. The amendments are necessary to address congestion at automotive sales operations due to too many vehicles being displayed for sale. 2 5 3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives) Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. Land Use Goal 4: Land development regulations, guidelines, techniques and/or incentives that promote the integrated achievement of all Comprehensive Plan goals. 4. New Statutes and Rules N/A C. PROCESS 1. TIMEFRAME/MILESTONES/DEADLINES a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed May 5, 2015 b. Quarterly Public Hearing November 23, 2015 c. BOCC Updates/Checkpoints May 5, 2015 —Approval of UDO Amendment Outline Form September 2, 2015 — Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) November 23, 2015 — Quarterly Public Hearing This item was reviewed at the November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing where the following comments were made: • A BOCC member indicated he believed the proposed limit for vehicles displayed within the NC-2, EC-5, and E-1 zoning districts was too low and should be increased. STAFF COMMENT: Staff has revised the proposed amendment to allow for the display of 32 vehicles on motor vehicle sales/rental businesses within the NC-2, EC-5, and El general use zoning districts. The original amendment proposed a limit of 25 vehicles in these districts. • A Planning Board member asked how this amendment would address the storage of vehicles off-site. STAFF COMMENT: This amendment would not address or impact vehicles being stored on another property or prohibit same. Such storage would be treated as a separate, independent, land use and have to be permitted in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. • A BOCC member asked what the impetus was for the proposed text amendment. STAFF COMMENT: The current limit only applies to motor vehicle sales/rental operations located within the NC-2 zoning district. This limit was established consistent with a petition filled by a property owner and acted 3 6 upon by the County in 2012. Since that time staff has seen an increase in the number of vehicles stored at other operations not bound by the 12 vehicle display limit. This has created access management/parking problems at these sites. Staff determined the limit was too restrictive and saw an opportunity to recommend a modest increase and at the same time extend the regulation to apply to all similar operations in other general use zoning districts. This would address an equity concern staff has had with respect to ensuring all motor vehicle sales/rental operations are treated the same. • A BOCC member asked if vehicles stored on the property, and screened from view, would be counted as part of the display limit. STAFF COMMENT: They would not be counted unless parked within the designated vehicle display area for the property. Staff is providing an option allowing for the storage of vehicles not intended or ready for sale/rental on- site. February 2, 2016 — Receive Planning Board Recommendation d. Other N/A 2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM Mission/Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and Orange County ordinance requirements a. Planning Board Review: September 2, 2015 — Ordinance Review Committee The ORC met and reviewed this item at its September 2, 2015 meeting where the following comments were made: • A Board member asked how prevalent the problem is. STAFF COMMENT: We have approximately 5 motor vehicle sales businesses within the County where we have problems with vehicles being stored and displayed throughout the property. The problem this creates is that required land use buffers, customer parking areas, and septic fields are being used to support the display of motor vehicles. The proposed amendment is designed to assist staff in establishing a methodology to delineate allowable vehicle display areas on properties used to support motor vehicles sales/rental. • A Board member asked how staff came up with the recommended vehicle limits. STAFF COMMENT: The typical display area for a vehicle is 288 sq. ft., which includes the required parking area for said vehicle and the portion of drive isle allowing access. 4 7 Staff then identified the acceptable levels of intensity for the various base zoning districts with respect to the display of motor vehicle sales/rental. Ultimately the recommended numbers were designed to allow for approximately 20% of the property to be used in support of motor vehicle display allowing for the remaining area to satisfy setback, office, customer parking, and required land use buffer development. • Several Board members asked if the proposed text amendment will impact allowable impervious surface area on a given parcel. STAFF COMMENT: Development of such land uses will have to comply with applicable impervious surface limits based on the Watershed Protection Overlay District where the property is located. • A Board member asked is staff could quantify the number of motor vehicle sales/rental businesses operating in the County and if pictures of the vehicle display issues could be provided. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will provide this material at the November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing. The ORC materials are available at: http://www.orangecountync.gov/ORC Sep 2015 Agenda Package.pdf. Meeting notes can be viewed by utilizing the following link: http://www.orangecountync.gov/9 2 15 ORC Notes.pdf. December 2, 2015 — The Planning Board reviewed this item at its December 2, 2015 meeting where the following comments/questions were made: • A Board member asked staff to clarify why this had become a concern. STAFF COMMENT: The County has been receiving complaints related to the storage and display of vehicles being offered for sale, specifically too many cars being placed on a parcel of property blocking or impeding access for both customers and emergency vehicles. Existing regulations impact development of such businesses only within the NC-2 general use zoning district. Staff believes existing display limits ought to be clarified and increased, as proposed, and extended to cover all such operations throughout the County rather than just impact their development within a single general use zoning district. • A Board member indicated they did not think the allowed numbers of display vehicles were enough. STAFF COMMENT: Staff believes the revised proposal increasing the number of vehicles that can be displayed for sale or rent from 25 to 32 for such businesses located within the NC-2, EC-5, and E-I general use zoning districts address concerns expressed at the public hearing. • A Board member asked how staff developed the proposed limits. STAFF COMMENT: The recommended limit was based on a 5 8 determination by staff that it was appropriate to allow for approximately 20% of a parcel of property to be used in support of motor vehicle display. This allows for the remaining land area to satisfy office/building development, septic area (where required), customer parking area, required land use buffer development, and incidental storage in support of the proposed land use. • A Board member asked if this amendment would limit the ability of a motor vehicle sales business to store vehicles off-site. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed amendment would not impact the ability of a motor vehicle sales/rental operation from storing vehicles on another property or prohibit same. Such storage would be treated as a separate, independent, land use and would have to be permitted in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. • Several Board members indicated they believed the revised vehicle display limit was reasonable. • A Board member asked if there was a time limit with respect to how long someone could have a car displayed for sale. STAFF COMMENT: There are no regulations establishing a time limit. The Board voted 8 to 1 to recommend approval of the amendment package as contained within Attachment 6. b. Advisory Boards: N/A c. Local Government Review: N/A d. Notice Requirements Legal advertisement was published on November 11 and 18, 2015 in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. e. Outreach: ▪ General Public: Consistent with NC State General Statutes and Orange County Ordinance requirements. ❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup: n 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 6 9 from FY2015-16 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 The amendment will establish comprehensive regulations governing the number and placement of vehicles being offered for sale at an automotive sales operation in an effort to address overcrowding concerns and eliminate impediments to vehicular ingress/egress from the property. E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE Please refer to Attachment 6. Primary Staff Contact: Michael D. Harvey Planning (919) 245-2597 mharvey@orangecountync.gov 7 Attachment 2 10 Excerpt of November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing Minutes 1 DRAFT MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 3 QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING 4 November 23, 2015 5 7:00 P.M. 6 7 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met with the Orange County Planning Board for a 8 Quarterly Public Hearing on November 23, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in 9 Hillsborough, N.C. 10 11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Earl McKee and Commissioners Barry Jacobs, 12 Mia Burroughs, Mark Dorosin, Bernadette Pelissier and Penny Rich 13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Renee Price 14 COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: John Roberts and James Bryan (Staff Attorney) 15 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley and Deputy Clerk to the 16 Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) 17 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chair Lydia Wegman and Planning Board 18 members, Herman Staats, Paul Guthrie, Laura Nicholson, Andrea Rohrbacher and H.T. "Buddy" 19 Hartley 20 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tony Blake, James Lea, Maxecine Mitchell, Patricia 21 Roberts and Lisa Stuckey 22 23 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. 24 25 2. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment -To review 26 government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO regarding car sales and 27 rental operations. 28 29 Michael Harvey reminded the Board that this is the last item that will be heard under the 30 joint public hearing process. He said the UDO was amended, beginning January 1, 2016, and 31 items will begin in Planning Board Meeting. He said this is the last meeting where an item will 32 be referred to the Planning Board. 33 Michael Harvey noted that page 27 of the abstract provides a background; pages 32 34 through the 37 show some examples of existing automotive businesses; and page 38 shows the 35 proposed text amendment. 36 37 BACKGROUND: 38 Staff has seen an increase in the number of automotive sale/rental business operating 39 within the County and has begun receiving complaints related to the storage and display of 40 vehicles (i.e. too many cars being displayed, parking over septic fields, parking in required 41 buffer areas, parking in public road rights-of-way, etc.). Currently, the County limits only the total 42 number of cars that can be parked and/or displayed for an automotive sales business located 43 within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2) general use zoning district. 44 Staff is proposing to develop comprehensive regulations designed to limit the 45 overcrowding of automotive sales operations within all general use zoning districts where such 46 land uses are permitted. Staff has also provided pictures of existing motor vehicles sales/rental 47 businesses in Attachment 2 to assist in illustrating the concern(s). 48 49 Michael Harvey made the following PowerPoint presentation: 50 51 November 23, 2015 2 11 1 Agenda Item: C-2 2 Public Hearing-Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment 3 Display of Vehicles at Motor Vehicle Sales/rental Land Uses 4 Orange County Planning Department 5 6 Background 7 • 2012 text amendment petition by local property owner limited display of cars to 12 within 8 Neighborhood Commercial (NC-2) district, 9 • Staff has seen an increase in number of vehicles stored on sites throughout County, 10 • Believe there is room to increase number of allowable cars and require property 11 owner/applicant to definitively delineate car display areas on a site plan to avoid 12 confusion. 13 14 Proposal: 15 • Amend the UDO to base number of vehicles stored on property on acreage. 16 — Staff is recommending a limit of 25 cars per acre for property zoned Nc-2, EC-5, 17 E-I to address exiting issues. 18 — Staff is recommending a limit of 45 cars per acre for property in urbanizing areas. 19 • Require mandatory designation of vehicle display area, and 20 • Allow for incidental storage of additional vehicles so long as they are screened from 21 view. 22 23 Example (aerial photo) 24 25 Staff Findings: 26 • Proposed amendments will create a distinction between vehicles displayed for sale and 27 stored for other purposes, 28 • Will help to address existing congestion at automotive sales operations, 29 • The proposal will create a necessary distinction between automotive sales/rental 30 businesses within urban and non-urban areas of the County, and 31 • Firms up language requiring display/storage areas to be properly delineated and 32 screened. 33 34 Recommendation: 35 Recommendation(s): The Planning Director recommends that the Board: 36 1. Receive the request, 37 2. Conduct the Public Hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board 38 comments. 39 3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be 40 returned to the BOCC in time for its February 2, 2016 regular meeting. 41 4. Adjourn the public hearing until February 2, 2016 in order to receive and accept 42 the Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. 43 44 Commissioner Dorosin referred to the aerial photo and asked if Michael Harvey could 45 please explain the difference between the shaded areas, the not shaded areas, and the red 46 area. 47 Michael Harvey said the aerial photo is of an existing site which attempts to show what 48 would be allowable. He said the shaded area would allow for the display of cars, the un-shaded 49 area would be for parking, and the red area would be where cars could be stored. 50 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the road could be pointed out in the photo. 51 Michael Harvey did so. 3 12 1 Michael Harvey said this photo is just a snap shot in time and there may be several 2 options that could meet the requirements. He said the black line on the photo does not indicate 3 a set back. 4 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the cars in the red area would count towards the 25-car 5 limit. 6 Michael Harvey said no. 7 Commissioner Rich said the image on page 32 looks like a lot more than 25 cars. 8 Michael Harvey said yes that is significantly more than 25 cars, which would not be 9 allowed under the proposed text amendment. 10 Michael Harvey said the only zoning district that has a limit on the number of cars that 11 can be displayed is the neighborhood commercial district. He said the example on page 32 is 12 currently acceptable and the proposed amendment would seek to avoid such examples. 13 Commissioner Rich asked if the proprietor of the site shown on page 32 knows about the 14 proposed amendment. 15 Michael Harvey said yes. 16 Chair McKee asked if there is a reason that the limit of land covered by vehicles is set at 17 20 percent. He said it would make more sense to him to have five car lots with 30 or 40 percent 18 coverage, rather than 15 car lots with 20 percent coverage. He said if there is a demand for a 19 certain number of cars, the need could be met by increasing the number of lots or increasing the 20 density on a smaller number of lots. 21 Michael Harvey said there must be a distinction between zoning designations in the 22 predominantly rural areas of the County versus the predominantly urban areas. He noted that 23 45 cars per acre are permitted in the economic development districts in the general commercial 24 district. He said the proposed amendment is a compromise. 25 Chair McKee said there should be equity between the lots. He referred to the two 26 examples in the packet and said it would seem more reasonable to allow a bit more density in 27 the number of vehicles rather than forcing the owner to go through what he would assume is a 28 Class A special use permit process to change a business to a commercial zone. 29 Michael Harvey said a number limit had to be chosen and if the Board would like to see 30 a higher number, it should direct staff and the Planning Board accordingly. 31 Chair McKee asked if there is an existing commercial property designation. 32 Michael Harvey said yes and would require going through the rezoning process. 33 Chair McKee said this is to what he was referring. 34 Michael Harvey said this would require a property owner to petition for a legislative 35 hearing asking the Board to rezone their property as general commercial. 36 Commissioner Burroughs asked if there are challenges that exist with the lots having 37 excess cars, such as emergency vehicle access or parking cars over septic tanks. 38 Michael Harvey said concerns include access, use of required parking spaces for the 39 display of vehicles, adequate buffering and open space, quantity of impervious surfaces, etc. 40 He said it is a balancing act between allowing a business to flourish and insuring that there is 41 adequate area to support the business. 42 Commissioner Burroughs said the question is to find the right number of vehicles. 43 Michael Harvey said it is more about finding the right percentage of land usage for cars 44 that can allow for the business to safely operate. 45 Chair McKee referred to one of the properties in the PowerPoint presentation and asked 46 if the storage area would be screened. 47 Michael Harvey said yes. He said the cars in the screened area would be those that are 48 not yet ready for sale and would allow them to be screened from view. 49 Chair McKee said he accepted the rationale for the screening but does not necessarily 50 agree with it. 4 13 1 Michael Harvey said the goal of the screened area is to provide a space for vehicles that 2 are not counted in the number of allowable allotment of vehicles displayed for sale per site. 3 Commissioner Rich asked if the building on page 36 is a person's home. 4 Michael Harvey said no, it is a commercial business with a residential property next 5 door. 6 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the idea behind this text amendment is that it is currently 7 too difficult to enforce the existing rules to keep people from parking in the right of way or 8 encroaching on neighboring properties. 9 Michael Harvey said no, the problem is two-fold: the first issue is that there is a feeling 10 that the 12-vehicle limit is too arduous; the second issue is to determine what number of 11 vehicles is acceptable. He said staff picked a number that it deemed reasonable which could be 12 more or less. He said a middle ground is being sought. He said it is also important to insure 13 some level of equity across zoning districts. 14 Commissioner Dorosin asked if a complaint came in regarding the number of cars in an 15 area, where is there is currently no regulation on the number of cars, is there an enforcement 16 mechanism by which the County can go out and address the concern. 17 Michael Harvey said yes. 18 Commissioner Dorosin asked if this is being done. 19 Michael Harvey said yes. 20 Commissioner Dorosin asked if it would be easier to have no vehicle limits across the 21 board and simply respond to concerns as they arise. 22 Michael Harvey said easy is a loaded word. He said this idea would help address the 23 equity issue and would be viewed as more reasonable. He said allowing a storage area for 24 vehicles, not included in the permitted amount of vehicles, would also help. He said he feels the 25 Board suggesting that the limit of 25 vehicles may not be viable. 26 Commissioner Dorosin said he is not so interested in the right number but rather 27 understanding the connection between the harms that are seeking to be addressed and this 28 means of addressing them. 29 Commissioner Dorosin asked if these regulations would only apply to commercial 30 businesses. He asked if he were to fix cars at his home, as a side business, would he be 31 subject to these regulations. 32 Michael Harvey said no he would not be subject to these regulations, with one caveat: 33 he said the goal is not to prevent people from selling a car, but there are prohibitions in the UDO 34 that prohibit one from engaging in an automotive repair business from one's property. Thus 35 working on one's own car is not an issue and selling a car on one's property is not an issue but 36 having 30 or 40 cars puts you into a questionably commercial establishment. 37 Commissioner Rich asked if there is currently a limit to the number of vehicles that may 38 be at one household. 39 Michael Harvey said no and the only prohibition is that junked vehicles cannot be stored 40 on one's property. 41 Commissioner Rich asked if one could have 10 cars parked in one's front yard. 42 Michael Harvey said yes, and he said that would not be a land issue, but rather a 43 general ordinance issue should the Board choose to address it. 44 Paul Guthrie asked if there is any distinction in existing zoning regulations between cars 45 for sale on site, cars stored on site for future sale and cars that are stored at another location, 46 but of the same ownership, waiting to be delivered to the original site or shipped out of state. 47 Michael Harvey said the only current regulation regarding display of vehicles is on NC 48 zoned 2 property, and that limit is 12 vehicles. He said if one is selling vehicles, one must be 49 appropriately zoned and display those vehicles consistent with an approved site plan. He said 50 this proposed ordinance memo will establish limits and allowances across the board in every 51 district where car sales are allowed. He said if one is storing vehicles off site, that property must 5 14 1 have been recognized and approved through section 2.5, the site plan review process, to 2 establish a recognized legal land use per the Orange County UDO. 3 Michael Harvey asked if the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) has a specific 4 number of permissible vehicles in mind. 5 Chair McKee said he would like to ask the Planning Board to consider a higher number. 6 He suggested 45 vehicles across the board. 7 8 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to 9 refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned to the 10 BOCC in time for its February 2, 2016 regular meeting and to adjourn the public hearing until 11 February 2, 2016 in order to receive and accept the Planning Board's recommendation and any 12 submitted written comments. 13 14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS Attachment 3 15 Excerpt of December 2, 2015 Approved 1/6/2016 1 Planning Board Minutes 2 PLANNING BOARD 3 DECEMBER 2,2015 4 REGULAR MEETING 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lydia Wegman (Vice Chair), At-Large Chapel Hill Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove 7 Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill 8 Township; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; 9 Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; Herman Staats, 10 At-Large; 11 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township 13 Representative; 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor, Perdita Holtz, 16 Special Projects Coordinator, Meredith Pucci,Administrative Assistant II; 17 18 AGENDA ITEM 9: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT-To MAKE A 19 RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOCC ON GOVERNMENT-INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF 20 THE UDO REGARDING CAR SALES AND RENTAL OPERATIONS. THIS ITEM WAS HEARD AT THE 21 NOVEMBER 23,2015 QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING 22 23 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 24 25 Michael Harvey reviewed abstract 26 27 Laura Nicholson:Why has this become more of an issue? 28 29 Michael Harvey:The County has been receiving complaints related to the storage and display of vehicles being 30 offered for sale, specifically too many cars being placed on a parcel of property blocking or impeding access for both 31 customers and emergency vehicles. 32 33 Patricia Roberts: I don't think the allowed numbers of display vehicles is enough. 34 35 Herman Staats:Where did the number of cars displayed come from? 36 37 Michael Harvey: Ultimately the recommended numbers were designed to allow for approximately 20%of the property 38 to be used in support of motor vehicle display allowing for the remaining area to satisfy setback, office, customer 39 parking, and required land use buffer development. 40 41 James Lea: Does this address the storage of vehicles off-site? 42 43 Michael Harvey:This amendment would not address or impact vehicles being stored on another property or prohibit 44 same.Such storage would be treated as a separate, independent, land use and have to be permitted in accordance 45 with the provisions of the UDO. 46 47 Lydia Wegman: if vehicles stored on the property, and screened from view,would be counted as part of the display 48 limit. 49 50 Michael Harvey:They would not be counted unless parked within the designated vehicle display area for the 51 property. Staff is providing an option allowing for the storage of vehicles not intended or ready for sale/rental onsite. 52 1 16 Approved 1/6/2016 53 Craig Benedict:This is how a typical car lot is set up. (Craig drew a picture on the white board of a typical car lot as a 54 visual example). 55 56 Paul Guthrie: I actually think that vehicle limit is plenty enough, especially considering the few dealerships that are in 57 the County. 58 59 Andrea Rohrbacher: Is there a time limit as to how long someone can have a car waiting to be prepared to sell? 60 61 Michael Harvey: No there is not a time limit established. 62 63 Lydia Wegman:Are there any other comments or questions for Michael? 64 65 MOTION made Paul Guthrie to recommend changes to BOCC. Laura Nicholson seconded. 66 VOTE: 8-1 (Patricia Roberts) 67 68 Lydia Wegman: Can you please explain why you are opposed? 69 70 Patricia Roberts: I don't think the proposed limit for vehicles displayed is enough. 71 2 Attachment 4 17 STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY OF PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT WITH THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Orange County has initiated an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to revise existing regulations governing the display of vehicles at motor vehicle sales/rental businesses. The Planning Board finds: a. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and, b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5, and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section 153A-341 of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds sufficient documentation within the record denoting that the amendment is consistent with the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 1. The amendment is consistent with applicable plans because it supports the following 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives: • Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. • 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. • Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive. c. The amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because it: 1. Establishes uniform standards for the display and storage of vehicles motor vehicle sales/rental businesses. 2. Provides measurable thresholds with respect to the number of vehicles that can be displayed for sale/rent on-site. 3. Requires display areas to be denoted on a plan for staff review and approval. 4. Promotes public health, safety, and general welfare by furthering the goals and objectives of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Board hereby recommends that the Orange County Board of County Commissioners consider adoption of the proposed UDO Text Amendments. 0 \ Lydia#� egman, se-Chair Date 18 Attachment 5 STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY OF PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT WITH THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Orange County has initiated an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to revise existing regulations governing the display of vehicles at motor vehicle sales/rental businesses. The Board of County Commissioners finds: a. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and, b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5, and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section 153A-341 of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds sufficient documentation within the record denoting that the amendment is consistent with the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 1. The amendment is consistent with applicable plans because it supports the following 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives: • Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. • 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. • Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive. c. The amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because it: 1. Establishes uniform standards for the display and storage of vehicles motor vehicle sales/rental businesses. 2. Provides measurable thresholds with respect to the number of vehicles that can be displayed for sale/rent on-site. 3. Requires display areas to be denoted on a plan for staff review and approval. 4. Promotes public health, safety, and general welfare by furthering the goals and objectives of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this Statement of Consistency and findings expressed herein. Earl McKee, Chair Date 1 Attachment 6 19 Ordinance#:ORD-2016-005 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORANGE COUNTY UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE WHEREAS, Orange County has initiated amendment(s) to the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance in order to revise and update regulations for automotive sales and rental business addressing the display and advertising of cars for sale or rent , and WHEREAS, the amendment eliminates existing inconsistencies associated with the permitting and development of such land uses within allowable general use zoning districts, and WHEREAS, the amendment increases the total number of allowable vehicles that can be displayed an automotive sales and rental businesses, and WHEREAS, the amendment represents a reasonable balance of attempting to allow for the development and use of automotive sales and rental businesses while addressing identified impacts associated with the display of such vehicles, and WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the Unified Development Ordinance have been deemed complete, and WHEREAS, pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 153A-341 and Section 1.1.7 of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County has found the proposed text amendments to be reasonably necessary to promote public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the Unified Development Ordinance of Orange County is hereby amended as depicted in the attached pages. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance be placed in the book of published ordinances and that this ordinance is effective upon its adoption. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing ordinance was adopted this day of , 2016. 1 20 I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on , 2016 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2016. SEAL Clerk to the Board of Commissioners 21 UDO AMENDMENT PACKET NOTES: The following packet details staff's proposed modifications to existing regulations associated with the review and permitting of sexually oriented businesses. As the number of affected pages/sections of the existing UDO are being modified with this proposal staff has divided the proposed amendments into the following color coded classifications: • Red Underlined Text: Denotes new, proposed text, that staff is suggesting be added to the UDO • Red Strikethrough Text: Denotes existing text that staff is proposing to delete • Green Bold Underlined Text: Denotes new, proposed text, designed to address comments made at the November 23, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing. • Purple Bold Underlined Text: Denotes new, proposed text, designed to address comments made by the County Attorney's office after agenda review held on January 20, 2016. Staff has included footnotes within the amendment package to provide additional information/rationale concerning the proposed amendments to aid in your review. Only those pages of the UDO impacted by the proposed modification(s) have been included within this packet. Some text on the following pages has a large "X" through it to denote that these sections are not part of the amendments under consideration. The text is shown only because in the full UDO it is on the same page as text proposed for amendment or footnotes from previous sections `spill over' onto the included page. Text with a large "X" is not proposed for deletion. Please note that the page numbers in this amendment packet may or may not necessarily correspond to the page numbers in the adopted UDO because adding text may shift all of the text/sections downward. Users are reminded that these excerpts are part of a much larger document (the UDO) that regulates land use and development in Orange County. The full UDO is available online at: http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/planning_and inspections/UDO MOST CURRE NT updated_120915.pdf Article 5: Uses 22 Section 5.2:Table of Permitted Uses TABLE OF PERMITTED USES—GENERAL USE ZONING DISTRICTS *=PERMITTED USE A=CLASS A SPECIAL USE B=CLASS B SPECIAL USE A=SUB PECIAL STANDARDS GENERAL USE ZONING DISTRICTS USE TYPE RB AR R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R8 R13 LC1 NC2 CC3 GC4 EC5 01 AS El 11 12 13 PID Use may not be permitted as a Conditional Use District; See Section 5.1.4(E) A Allowed as more than one principal use if located on a bona fide farm (see Section 6.2.5) t- . Mobile Home (Use during ..■■-� construction/ins . : .•• of permanent manent residential unit and for 30 days following issu. Certificate of --_-■.. Occu•anc AUTOMOTIVE/TRANSPORTATION Bus Passenger Shelter MMMMo�M©MM_ MIMES©M- Bus Terminals &Garages— -MM-MMM-M--M©-MMMESES©- Motor Freight Terminals— -MMMMMMMMM--IZ--MMIM©- Motor Vehicle Mainte -• - : 'epair(Body Shop)— MMMMMMMMMMM-- • • . �c e Repair Garage — MMMMMMMMMMMM©MMMMM��� Njotor Vehicle Sales/Rental (New& Used) 1 MMMMMMMMMMMMEE MMMMMMM ehicle Services Stations MMMMMMMMMM©M©©MMMMMMM Parking As Prin .•_ se, Surface or Structure MMMMMMMMMM©MMMMMMMMMM Petroleum Products: Storage • ibution — •••••••••• Postal & Parcel Delivery Services MMMMMMMMMMMPiMMMMMMMM Elevated Water Storage Tanks ESESES '_nvESESQES-ESn B I B MOOOM Public Utility Stations&Sub-Stations, Switching Stations, Telephone Exchanges, Water&Sewage A A A A A A A A A A Treatment Plants .irQQ ='�_ Electric, Gas, and Liquid Fuel Transmission MMMMMMMMMM B Mn000M00oM Water&Sanitary Sewer Pum•.• MMMMMMMMMM©M©©MM._MM©© Solar Array L. : MMMMMMMMMM B MnMMM' Mmin • . •rray- Public Utility A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A M A A RAM 1 As we are extending vehicle display standards/limits to all districts there is no reason to single out vehicle sales/rentals in NC-2 anymore. Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 5-10 Article 5: Uses 23 Section 5.15: Standards for Automotive/Transportation Related Uses from the property line. (3) Hours of operation shall be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p. . (4) Site shall have direct access to a major road, as classified in the Ora .e County Comprehensive Plan, and shall use said road as the primary acces., unless approved otherwise in the permit. 5.14.4 Winery, p eduction only (A) Stan. : ds for Class B Special Use Permit or ASE-CZ Zonin• 'istrict (1) I •cated in an AR or RB zoning district, the winery ► st be located on a bona fide .rm. (a) A winery, production only, that is locat=e on a bona fide farm, and which ut es primarily crops produced on-:ite is considered a bona fide farm. g use and is not subject to lining regulations. (b) A winer production only, tha Goes not utilize primarily crops produced on-site, re..rdless of whet -r it is located on a bona fide farm, is not considered a Bona fide f. ing use and is subject to the regulations contained in thi Ordin. ce. (2) If located adjacent to resid-'dally zoned property, all buildings shall be located a minimum of 100 feet fro he Groperty line. (3) Application materials - all inclu._ a comprehensive groundwater study, for facilities expected tP. use more gro 'dwater on an annual basis than an average single family reskence (which uses 2=• gallons of water per day) built at the highest densit he existing zoning distrii would allow. For example, if the existing zon. g district allows a residential Density of 1 unit for 2 acres and the proposed .se is on a six acre parcel (which Nuld yield 3 residences), the propos:: use(s) may use three times the wate sed by an average single family resid- ce (or 720 gallons per day, on an annualiz:d basis) before a co' prehensive groundwater study is required. The ater usage rates of any isting use subject to zoning regulations located on t' - same lot shall be taken into account when determining if a comprehensive groundwater study is required. Said study shall detail: (a) The amount of water anticipated to be used on a daily, eekly, monthly, and annual basis by regulated uses located on the parce e.g., water usage by bona fide farm uses is not required to be include• • (b) An analysis of the amount of groundwater withdrawal consider-• to be safe and sustainable in the immediate vicinity; and (c) An analysis of whether other wells in the vicinity of the proposed use :re expected to be affected by withdrawals made by the proposed use. SECTION 5.15: STANDARDS FOR AUTOMOTIVE/TRANSPORTATION R' ATED USES 5.15.1 Motor Vehicle Sales/ Rental (New & Used) in the NC 2 Zoning District2 (A) Submittal Requirements (1) In addition to the information required by Section 2.5, the site plan shall show the area for the display of vehicles for sale or rental 2 Originally the County adopted regulations establishing a specific limit on the display of motor vehicles for sale in the NC-2 zoning district. This amendment establishes a limit on the outdoor display of motor vehicles offered for sale in every zoning district where the land use is permitted. Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 5-130 Article 5: Uses 24 Section 5.15: Standards for Automotive/Transportation Related Uses (B) General Standards (1) Property shall have frontage and direct access onto a State maintained roadway. (2) Areas of the property desiqnated for the display of vehicles for sale or rent shall be improved with an all-weather surface (i.e. concrete, asphalt, qravel)3 and shall not be used for any other purpose.4 (3) Additional vehicles, other than those offered for sale, rent or staff/customer designated parking as required under Section 6.9 of this Ordinances, can be stored on-site and bshall be screened from view from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way.' Such vehicles shall not be included in the display limit calculation.8 (C) Standards for the NC-2,.EC-5, and E-I Zoning District] { } This use shall only be permitted within the Commercial Transition Activity or Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node land use classifications, a& (1) The display of vehicles outdoors shall be limited to 3210 vehicles per acre of property.11 (D) Standards for GC-4, I-1, 1-2, 1-3, EDB-1, EDB-2, and EDE-2.12 (1) The displa3y of vehicles outdoors shall be limited to 45 vehicles per acre of property.1 3 Staff is recommending the area identified on the site plan as serving as the display area for vehicles be improved (i.e.asphalt,concrete,gravel) is to avoid unnecessary disturbance of property as vehicles are moved in and out of the area. A concern we have is constant moving and parking of cars will result in unnecessary disturbance of the ground, kill vegetation serving as a stabilizing mechanism for soil,and increase sediment runoff from the property in contradiction of our regulations. 4 We have had problems in the past with identified parking areas for vehicles being displayed for sale or rent being used as primary parking areas for customers and staff. This provision will give staff greater ability to prohibit same and ensure there is adequate display area as well as required parking for patrons/staff. 5 Green Bold Underlined text added to address a County Attorney request for clarification on what specific vehicles would fall into this specific provision. The concern is the Ordinance provide specific reference to those vehicles that can be stored on-site only with the development of screening. 6 Green Bold Underlined text added to address a request made at the November 23,2015 Quarterly Public Hearing for clarification purposes. ' In consultation with the Director, it was determined additional storage area could be allowed on-site for vehicles not intended for sale or rental so long as said storage area was screened from view. 8 Green Bold Underlined text added to address a request made at the November 23,2015 Quarterly Public Hearing for clarification purposes. 9 This language is recommended for deletion to address a concern from the Attorney's office with respect to establishing land use prohibitions associated with acceptable land uses on the land use categories contained within the Comprehensive Plan. 10 Green Bold Underlined text added to address a request made at the November 23,2015 Quarterly Public Hearing to increase the number of vehicles that can be displayed at property zoned NC-2, EC-5,and El. 11 A typical display area for a vehicle is 288 sq.ft.,which includes the required parking area for said vehicle and the portion of drive isle allowing access. The proposal would allow approximately 17%of every acre of property to be dedicated to the display of vehicles offered for sale or rent. This regulation does not eliminate the property owner from having to comply with other ratio/dimensional standards contained within the UDO. 12 This includes the GC-4, I-1, 1-2, 1-3,and the Buckhorn and Eno Economic Development districts. 13 The proposal would allow approximately 30%of every acre of property to be dedicated to the display of vehicles offered for sale or rent. This regulation does not eliminate the property owner from having to comply with other ratio/dimensional standards contained within the UDO. Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 5-131