HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCPB minutes 060414Approved 7/2/14
1
MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 JUNE 4, 2014 3
REGULAR MEETING 4 5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill 7
Township Representative; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; Herman Staats, At-Large, Cedar Grove 8
Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative; 9
Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Laura 10
Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; Bryant Warren, Hillsborough Township Representative; 11
12 13 MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Vacant-At-Large; 14
15
16 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Patrick Mallett, 17
Planner II; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 18
19
20
OTHERS PRESENT: Terry Boylan, Glenn Futrell 21
22
23 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 24
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 27
a) Planning Calendar for June and July 28
29
30
AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 31 MAY 7, 2014 REGULAR MEETING 32 33 MOTION by Lisa Stuckey to approve the May 7, 2014 Planning Board minutes. Seconded by James Lea. 34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 35 36 37 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 38 39 40 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 41 42 Introduction to the Public Charge 43
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, 44
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development 45
laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and 46
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and 47
future needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that 48
contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB 49
will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services 50
during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. 51
52
53
54
Approved 7/2/14
2
AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 55 56
Pete Hallenbeck: I would like to mention that part of being on the Planning Board is attending the Quarterly Public 57
Hearings. We have had a few close calls. We need to be able to contact you in case we do not have a quorum. I 58
would like Michael to remind us of the ground rules. 59
60
Michael Harvey: The last Quarterly Public Hearing we began to review the Class A Special Use Permit application 61
for a solar facility off Mount Sinai Road. The hearing ran about four and one half hours when it was determined that 62
the BOCC wanted the applicant and the adjacent property owners who were expressing concern over the project to 63
submit additional information. They adjourned that public hearing until the September 8 regular quarterly public 64
hearing. That means the public hearing is still technically open. It has not been closed. Remember that special 65
use permits are reviewed in a quasi-judicial setting which means they are based on sworn testimony and material 66
evidence has been introduced into the records by those in favor or against by public application. There is a 67
prohibition in you engaging in communication meaning you should not talk to anyone about the project. It is 68
reasonable to ask myself or my staff for information that you need. 69
70
Craig Benedict: You are like the jury so that any information that is presented to you is what you base your 71
decision on. 72
73
Pete Hallenbeck: These meetings normally start and stop in one evening. 74
75
Tony Blake: Fortunately, this is the first quarterly public hearing I have missed. What is my position in the next 76
quarterly public hearing? 77
78
Craig Benedict: If you looked at all the evidence in the hearing, you could read the minutes and ask questions. 79
You had to attest that you have read everything that was in the documents to vote. 80
81
Pete Hallenbeck: Quasi-judicial means everyone gets sworn in and give evidence and you will have all the 82
evidence available to read so when you get to the next quarterly hearing, you will have the same as everyone else. 83
84
Craig Benedict: Our Unified Development Ordinance allows someone to provide written documents to the planning 85
board and they can read that script. The reason we ask for written documents is that when it comes back to the 86
BOCC, they see that specific information. 87
88
Buddy Hartley: For the Chair’s information, I was ready and on call if I needed to be there. 89
90
Michael Harvey: The question was asked if members are prohibited from visiting locations where special use 91
permits applications are being reviewed. My opinion is there is no technical prohibition on a member visiting the 92
site after the public hearing is held but you cannot engage, or allow yourself to be engaged in, conversation with 93
anyone. I believe that site visits can be helpful but if you have not done so, I would ask that you don’t. 94
95
Pete Hallenbeck: If you do see the site, you can’t say I saw the site and I think this. 96 97 98 AGENDA ITEM 7: MAJOR SUBDIVISION CONCEPT PLAN: To review and make a decision on an major subdivision 99
concept plan application seeking to sub-divide a 25.33 acre parcel of property into 14 single-100
family residential lots with 16.29 acres of common open space near the intersection of 101
Stroud’s Creek Road and NC Highway 57 in Hillsborough Township. 102 Presenter: Patrick Mallett, Planner II 103 104
Patrick Mallett: Presented a PowerPoint presentation and reviewed abstract. 105
106
James Carter: Where is that fence and will it remain there? 107
108
Approved 7/2/14
3
Patrick Mallett: That was installed by the school. 109
110
Michael Harvey: As covered in our abstract, one of the reasons you are seeing lots of this size is because water and 111
sewer service is being provided. That is the only way this project was allowed to get these smaller lots, which is in 112
accordance with the provisions of Article 7. The other comment is that you will recall previous major subdivisions, 113
applications are typically required to submit a conventional and flexible development options. 114
115
Pete Hallenbeck: There is a power line easement and it goes and disappears. Is there a power line in that easement 116
now? 117
118
Pat Mallett: There is a power line that goes through here and extends north. 119
120
Pete Hallenbeck: Currently the power line does not go through. 121
122
Terry Boylan: It does not go through. That is a tree line from when it did before. 123
124
Pete Hallenbeck: What about the dual water line fees? 125
126
Pat Mallett: They are proposing a fire service line with two hydrants. 127
128
Terry Boylan: There are two different lines. 129
130
Tony Blake: Craig, wouldn’t this be part of Hillsborough’s ETJ? 131
132
Craig Benedict: Just outside of that. 133
134
Tony Blake: By state law they could petitioned to be annexed? 135
136
Craig Benedict: Yes. Most likely as part of the water/sewer agreement. 137
138
Pat Mallett: They are interested in selling water and sewer and not annexation. 139
140
Tony Blake: How large are the houses? 141
142
Terry Boylan: The setbacks will allow 3,600 square foot. 143
144
Pete Hallenbeck: What could the residences do with the light green space? 145
146
Pat Mallett: You have building setbacks on the roadside, 35 foot buffer. There was originally a concept plan that had 147
two lots there. 148
149
Terry Boylan: We have a 100 foot or setback off this property line and that gives us this set back here for lot 14. 150
151
Pat Mallett: I think it is not so much what can be built there but what is held in common. 152
153
Pete Hallenbeck: It seems like a setup for a wonderful neighbor war. 154
155
Herman Staats: Why was the open space left open and not part of Lot 14? 156
157
Terry Boylan: It could conceivably be part of Lot 14. 158
159
Pete Hallenbeck: That is an issue for you as the developer. 160
161
Pat Mallett: Typically you want to see like to like. 162
Approved 7/2/14
4
163
Terry Boylan: That is one reason it is not so much larger than the other lots. 164
165
Glenn Futrell: We, my wetland consultant, we had all the wetlands reevaluated and we received that report last 166
week. We comply with all the setback requirements and we are not changing anything previously to what was done 167
six or seven years ago. 168
169 MOTION by Maxecine Mitchell to recommend approval to the BOCC. Seconded by James Lea. 170 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 171
172
173 AGENDA ITEM 8: COMMITTEE/ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS: 174
a. Board of Adjustment 175
176
177 AGENDA ITEM 12: ADJOURNMENT: 178
179
180
181
_________________________________________
Pete Hallenbeck, Chair