HomeMy WebLinkAboutORC minutes 090215Approved 10/7/15
1
SUMMARY NOTES 1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2
SEPTEMBER 2, 2015 3
ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE 4
5
NOTE: A quorum is not required for Ordinance Review Committee meetings. 6
7
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township 8
Representative; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Herman Staats, At-Large, Cedar Grove 9
Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township Representative; 10
11
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lydia Wegman-At-Large Chapel Hill Township (Vice Chair); Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large 12
Bingham Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township 13
Representative; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; 14
15
STAFF PRESENT: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner; 16
17
AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 18
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS 19
CAR SALES/RENTAL OPERATIONS 20
To review and comment upon proposed amendments to the UDO regarding car sales and 21
rental operations. 22
23
Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 24
25
Michael Harvey presented the item and reviewed handouts. 26
27
Lisa Stuckey: To me this hard to imagine without being able to drive by and count the cars. 28
29
Michael Harvey: I would encourage you to do that, but I can also provide pictures from various examples in the 30
county. 31
32
Lisa Stuckey: That would be helpful to see what the problem is. 33
34
Pete Hallenbeck: Are these showing an example of where vehicles are parked in the setback area or too close to the 35
road? 36
37
Michael Harvey: Yes 38
39
Lisa Stuckey: If you go to page 9, I think it would be helpful if you explained what .17 and .24 is referring to. 40
41
Michael Harvey: That is referring to an acreage ratio. That can be addressed. 42
43
Herman Staats: How did you arrive at the .17 and .24? 44
45
Michael Harvey: I took a typical one acre lot and figured out required buffers, septic requirements, the minimum 46
building size allowed in the district, which is another ratio standard, and tried to figure out what would be fair to allow 47
open space, separation, and building size. 48
49
Tony Blake: That is in the footnote? 50
51
Michael Harvey: Yes. 52
53
Tony Blake: How would this impact or affect impervious surface? Seems like you could go over your allotment. 54
Approved 10/7/15
2
55
Michael Harvey: You could, but in the urban areas of the county you have the capability to do more impervious with a 56
storm water feature. 57
58
James Lea: Is there a way to find out how many businesses this will affect in the rural area? 59
60
Michael Harvey: Sure 61
62
James Lea: And to know what these businesses will be faced with? What changes they will have to make? 63
64
Michael Harvey: Any existing motor vehicle business in operation legally doesn’t have to comply with this ordinance 65
and can continue to operate subject to Article 8, Non Conformities, of the UDO. Business owner will be not penalized, 66
however, if they expand their business it would need to be brought into compliance at that time. If one goes out of 67
business and another opens, they would have to comply. I can get a list of businesses. 68
69
AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS 70
SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES 71
To review and comment upon proposed amendment to the UDO regarding sexually 72
oriented businesses. 73
74
Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 75
76
Michael Harvey presented item and background information. 77
78
Michael Harvey: On page 27 it states no sexually oriented business shall be located in a building or on a premises 79
where alcohol or alcoholic beverages are sold or in a building or on a premises that allows alcohol or alcoholic 80
beverages to be consumed. 81
82
Tony Blake: Where is the case law for this? 83
84
Michael Harvey: The State Law granting us the authority to regulate sexually oriented businesses specifically 85
mentions that we have the ability to modify ABC permitting requirements. The County Attorney’s office will review the 86
case law and you will be updated if it is removed. 87
88
Tony Blake: What about the existing business on Highway 86? 89
90
Michael Harvey: Closed. In fact we are about to issues letters to two businesses that they have been closed for more 91
than 180 days and as a result they have lost their nonconforming status and cannot open as a sexually oriented 92
business. 93
94
Lisa Stuckey: Were those the only two in the county? 95
96
Michael Harvey: There was also Dixie’s Truckstop, but that is also closed. 97
98
James Lea: Currently there are no zoned properties in Orange County that would allow this? 99
100
Michael Harvey: There are no I-2 or I-3 zoned properties, but there are several Eno Economic Development District 101
properties that would allow this use. 102
103
Tony Blake: Will there be issues with proposing this use in the Eno Economic District? 104
105
Michael Harvey: Due to the proposed use, it would face opposition in every district. When you look at the current 106
makeup of land uses allowed in the Eno Economic District, there are more industrial uses and less residential uses 107
compared to existing uses in the Buckhorn Economic District. 108
Approved 10/7/15
3
109
James Lea: What is the economic development impact to the county from this use? 110
111
Michael Harvey: To some it is like a night club or video store. There is also an aversion that people and businesses 112
do not want to be near it because of perceptions and would not want to see it. 113
114
Lisa Stuckey: Is this use considered blight in other communities where it is regulated? 115
116
Michael Harvey: It can be depending on how it is regulated and maintained. 117
118
AGENDA ITEM 3: ADJOURNMENT 119