HomeMy WebLinkAboutORC minutes 110415
1
SUMMARY NOTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 NOVEMBER 4, 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; Lydia Wegman (Vice Chair), At-8
Large Chapel Hill Township; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township Representative; James Lea, Cedar Grove 9
Township Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill 10
Township; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; 11
12 13 MEMBERS ABSENT: Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township 14
Representative; Herman Staats, At-Large; 15
16
17
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor, Perdita Holtz, 18
Special Projects Coordinator, Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner, Meredith Pucci, Administrative Assistant II 19
20
21 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 22 23
24
AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS- TEMPORARY HEALTHCARE 25
STRUCTURES AND OTHER HOUSING OPTIONS 26 TO REVIEW AND COMMENT UPON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE UDO REGARDING TEMPORARY 27
HEALTHCARE STRUCTURES AND OTHER CUSTODIAL CARE HOUSING OPTIONS 28
Presenter: Ashley Moncado 29
30
Ashley Moncado reviewed abstract 31
32
Perdita Holtz: Depending on how things go tomorrow night with the public hearing process if that gets adopted the 33
next steps will be different. 34
35
Lisa Stuckey: If I live in a subdivision can I really put a 1,000 square foot unit. 36
37
Ashley Moncado: That depends on if you met zoning requirements. 38
39
Peter Hallenbeck: 350 square feet to start is too small. 40
41
Lisa Stuckey: I agree. 42
43
Lydia Wegman: Why does option B only allow two occupants? 44
45
Ashley Moncado: With option B you have the option of a larger size, so you can go up to the 1,000 square feet, you 46
won’t be limited to the 300 square feet. 47
48
Paul Guthrie: You have up to two people to reside in a temporary facility and you can have five unrelated people to 49
live in a dwelling unit. What if you have five people living in a dwelling unit and had two people living in an unrelated 50
care center. Could those five people use some of the facilities without violating the ordinance? Could you actually 51
have seven people using the facility? 52
53
2
Ashley Moncado: In theory, possibly. If they met the health and environmental standards to put the temporary 54
structure on the property I don’t know if there is anything we could do to enforce it until we receive a complaint. 55
56
Paul Guthrie: I’m not advocating restricting it; I’m just trying to get the definition. 57
58
Ashley Moncado: The session law is a little vague regarding that. 59
60
Andrea Rohrbacher: A person from another state comes to get care here needs to have a North Carolina license 61
provider for prescriptions. How is this going to cover that situation? 62
63
Perdita Holtz: That’s not something we would enforce through land use laws. 64
65
Peter Hallenbeck: It sounds to me like there are two problems. One is the decision to bring someone in and once 66
they get here they are going to find local medical help. I’m noticing in this there is really no protection for somebody 67
using it as a business and there is also no protection for elderly abuse. 68
69
Ashley Moncado: Those were also concerns of ours. To be honest you could have the relationship requirement and 70
then you could have a child abusing a parent. 71
72
Peter Hallenbeck: One would hope with these amendments there might be some accompanying ordinances that 73
would cover it. 74
75
Ashley Moncado: I will be following up with the Department of Aging to see if they came across anything. 76
77
Craig Benedict: Any application we get for this, we could share that with the Health Department, Aging Department, 78
and Social Services. They may want to monitor something. 79
80
Peter Hallenbeck: I think you’re right on the money with working the Department of Aging. With ordinances they can 81
figure out if there is some way to run a background check on them. 82
83
Andrea Rohrbacher: If the area where the structure was to be located happened to be a subdivision that had 84
covenants what happens to the covenants? 85
86
Ashley Moncado: They have to meet the covenants’ restrictions. 87
88
Peter Hallenbeck: It sounds like we are taking it a little bit further in saying instead of just learning how to live with 89
what the State has mandated, let’s see if we can’t solve a bigger problem. 90
91
Paul Guthrie: I think we do what we can do under basically what is our core jurisdiction. Let’s not try to solve the total 92
legal implications. That’s not the role of the Planning Board. Other agencies may need to be brought in but that is not 93
our role and I think we could get in a quagmire if we try to regulate issues we have little to know knowledge of. 94
95
Peter Hallenbeck: I fully agree with that. I think we have done our part as we reviewed the land use and I think we 96
have commented correctly with regard to how critical it is for other agencies to be involved in the process to prevent 97
abuse. 98
99
Andrea Rohrbacher: Is the Health Department involved at all? 100
101
Ashley Moncado: This still needs to go to peer review. Tonight was just to see what option you wanted to go with and 102
then we will send it back out to our county attorneys. 103
104
Peter Hallenbeck: Well the recommendation is simply that we review and comment and I think we’ve done that. 105
People seem to like option B with all the cautions required. 106
107
3
108 AGENDA ITEM 3: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS- AIRPORTS 109 TO REVIEW AND COMMENT UPON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE UDO REGARDING AIRPORT 110
REGULATIONS 111
PRESENTER: MICHAEL HARVEY 112
113
Michael Harvey: Reviewed abstract 114
115
Paul Guthrie: A good significant part of southern Orange County is in a very high air traffic corridor. Is there any 116
reason it isn’t mentioned that it could be comply with all necessary planning to avoid conflict. 117
118
Michael Harvey: That’s why we mention FAA Standards. They are the ones who have jurisdiction over the air travel 119
ways. 120
121
Paul Guthrie: There are at least two places in southern Orange County that have airports but they are not currently 122
operating. Are they grandfathered in? 123
124
Michael Harvey: I would probably argue that they are not grandfathered in unless they are active. What I would also 125
say though is if it’s a private air field remember that the non-conforming section of the unified development ordinance 126
mandates that if you have a legal land use you’re deemed to have your permits. 127
128
Lydia Wegman: Are there many private airports right now in the county? 129
130
Michael Harvey: There is rumored to be about three. 131
132
James Lea: Is that the case on Efland-Cedar Grove Road? 133
134
Michael Harvey: Yes 135
136
Lisa Stuckey: Is the Chapel Hill Airport being used at all? 137
138
Michael Harvey: It is still in use and I think you’re looking at it being there for quite a while. 139
140
Lisa Stuckey: Well they will go away with it if they do Carolina North because the runway is the main street. 141
142
Craig Benedict: Until they get enough funding to get Carolina North moving they will probably keep it open until they 143
foresee the development work. 144
145
Michael Harvey: I’ll just stress obviously the genesis of this was to address the fact that our regulations would not 146
properly regulate a new airport facility because they were outdated and this is an attempt obviously to bring it up-to-147
date. 148
149
Lisa Stuckey: I could see people getting pretty upset if there was a commercial airport nearby. 150
151
Peter Hallenbeck: With regard to the drones for commercial purposes, does that mean if a farmer has a drone that is 152
used to check his crops that he is going to have to fill this out? 153
154
Michael Harvey: No, because farms are exempt from zoning. 155
156
Michael Harvey: As part of this proposal we are recommending that there be a pre-application submittal requirement. 157
Specifically, if someone wants to develop a general aviation air field they have to get a letter to use with sufficient 158
documentation showing where the airport’s going to be and showing the development of the airport. We are going to 159
have an initial public information meeting. This is going to be in addition to neighborhood meeting that is required. 160
161
4
Lisa Stuckey: So by state you mean if the University wanted to establish one that would also be exempt. 162
163
Michael Harvey: The only reason UNC had to come to use is because the general assembly said you have to comply 164
with local zoning regulations. Just so everyone knows we are going before the Economic Development Commission 165
advisory board to talk to them about this. We are going to make a presentation to the Commission for the 166
Environment. 167
168
Peter Hallenbeck: The airport in Alamance probably helps the economic development zone in the Efland area. It 169
probably doesn’t help with the Eno. 170
171
Tony Blake: I’d like to see the commissioners consider higher requirements for the neighborhood information. 172
173
Michael Harvey: There are going to be two neighborhood meetings. 174
175
Lydia Wegman: Is it clear that there are two neighborhood information meetings required? 176
177
Michael Harvey: Yes, on article two under the conditional zoning process. 178
179
Peter Hallenbeck: Unless anyone has anymore comments we have reviewed and commented on the proposed 180
amendment. 181
182 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT 183