HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCPB minutes 100318Approved 11/7/2018
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
OCTOBER 3,2018
REGULAR MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT :: Lydia Wegman (Chair), At-Large Chapel Hill Township Representative;
Randy Marshall (Vice-Chair), Bingham Township Representative; Kim Piracci, At-Large; Adam
Beeman, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township
Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno
Township Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill
Township; Alexander Gregory, Chapel Hill Township Representative;
MEMBERS ABSENT :: David Blankfard, Hillsborough Township Representative; Buddy Hartley,
Little River Township Representative;
STAFF PRESENT :Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor; Nishith Trivedi,
Transportation Planner; Meredith Kern, Administrative Assistant II
OTHERS PRESENT :Wynell Lowery; Brenda Allen; Richard Bright; Carolyn Hicks; Walter Bright;
JoAnn Hoyler; Amanda High; Steven Ramarge; Howard Whitfield; Margaret Jones; Sonny
Jones; Kristen Marbais; Larry Castle; Robert Riley Jr.; Carolyn Wilson; Robert Jones; Barry
Paulcen; Cheryl Paulcen; Debra Elmore; Julie Laws; Peggie Murray; Jean Forrest Brooks; Cy
Stober; Doug Efland; Beverly Stokes; Nikki Mayer; Laura Mayer; Marcella Sweeney; Gabriel
Santander; Phil Holland; Audie Carter; John Bannon; Doug Efland; Fatima Hernandez; Dough
McAdoo; Paul Fredrick; Ben Lloyd; Cray Lloyd; Dillon Holland; Corey Walton;
AGENDA ITEM 1:CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Lydia Wegman (Chair)called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM
AGENDA ITEM 2:INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
a.Planning Calendar for September and October
BOCC Public Hearing on October 16 for UDO Text Amendment
regarding the FEMA Flood Map date (Planning Board members are
encouraged to attend public hearings for items the Planning Board has
reviewed)
Tentative BOCC Public Hearing on November 1 regarding the Efland-
Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan
AGENDA ITEM 3:APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 5, 2018, Training Session Notes
September 5, 2018, Regular Meeting Minutes
MOTION by Randy Marshall to approve the September 5, 2018, Training Session Notes, and
September 5, 2018, Regular Meeting Minutes.Seconded by Laura Nicholson.
VOTE:: Unanimous
AGENDA ITEM 4:CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA --NONE
Approved 11/7/2018
AGENDA ITEM 5:PUBLIC CHARGE
INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General
Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land
development laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and
accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner,
which considers the present and future needs of its citizens and businesses through
efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and
welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of
responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions,
and recommendations.
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board
asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the
Board and with fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any
citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave
the meeting until that individual Approved regains personal control. Should decorum fail
to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine
commitment to this public charge is observed
AGENDA ITEM 6:CHAIR COMMENTS
There were no comments
AGENDA ITEM 7 :EFLAND-BUCKHORN-MEBANE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN - To
review and comment on draft updates to the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management
Plan
PRESENTER : Nish Trivedi, Transportation Planner
Nishith Trivedi thanked the Planning Board for allowing him the opportunity to present the
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan and explained he is seeking their
recommendation at the end of the presentation. Mr. Trivedi then went through the presentation
explaining what the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management plan is, the background
behind the plan, process used to update the plan, public involvement process, next steps, and
the recommended action to be taken by the Planning Board.
Lydia Wegman asked for Nishith Trivedi to explain why only portions of land would be able to be
developed.
Nishith Trivedi explained that various environmental conditions would prevent portions of land to
be developed as well as setbacks and other zoning regulations.
Lydia Wegman welcomed members of the public to speak on the item presented.
JoAnn Hoyler asked about how the plan will affect Bush Cook Rd and West Ten Rd in Efland.
She advised that this is the first letter she has gotten regarding the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane
Access Management Plan
Approved 11/7/2018
Nishith Trivedi explained that there is no actual design for the area questioned, and that in order
to get any road improvement done on West Ten Rd the Planning Department would need to
submit a feasibility study to NCDOT and would then need to go through the MPO. He further
explained that NCDOT has their own public outreach process and would be the ones to contact
the land owners if road improvements were to happen.
Robert Jones raised concerns about the various historic churches near Buckhorn Rd. on the
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan.
Nishith Trivedi explained that this area is in the Mebane CTP and the plan is to widen Buckhorn
Rd although just because this is on the Mebane CTP, it doesn¶t mean the road improvements
will actually happen.
Cy Stober, City of Mebane Development Director, explained that the Buckhorn Rd improvement
described is not currently funded or planned and that plans for that area have taken into
consideration the churches and historic sites in that area as well. He further explained that the
City of Mebane does not have a history of eminent domain and they have no interest in starting
to do so.
Beverly Stokes wanted to confirm that there are no plans for property to be taken via eminent
domain and that none of the historical buildings will be displaced.
Nishith Trivedi explained that the plan has no construction or funding involved and that historical
landmarks were taken into consideration during the 2017 study.
Debra Elmore expressed concerns about lack of communication in Orange County from the City
of Mebane
Lydia Wegman explained that there are certain requirements regarding public notification on the
County¶s behalf and recommended that Cy Stober take back Debra Elmore¶s comments to the
City of Mebane.
Steven Ramarge asked if Orange County has received any plans from developers for the
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane area
Tom Altieri explained that there have been no development proposals to date in the area
mentioned and if a developer comes in with plans for that area that there would be an
opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed development and any road
improvements.
John Bannon had questions regarding the 100ft MTC buffer requirement for property that is
adjacent to the interstate and the requirements of being a developer in relation to the Efland-
Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan.
Tom Altieri advised that the issues raised involve the current planning division and existing
requirements that go along with what may be an application submitted by John Bannon.
Lydia Wegman suggested that a subsequent meeting happen between John Bannon and the
Planning Department.
Jean Forrest Brooks objects to the plan because she has concern for property she owns and the
people who will be displaced from the plan
Approved 11/7/2018
Randy Marshall explained that unless Jean Forrest Brooks choses to sell her property to a
developer her property will not be touched
Julie Laws also expressed her concern for those who may become displaced if some road
improvements mentioned in the plan do occur.
Hunter Spitzer explained that he doesn¶t believe it achieves economic objectives 2.2 and 2.3
which state that the plan encourages mixed use projects that support walkability, public
transportation, alternative modes of transportation, and encourage carpooling. He further stated
that according to the exhibits provided, there does not appear to be many sidewalks and roads
that support bicyclist. He objects to those objects as being cited as completed by this plan.
Nishith Trivedi explained the NCDOT road improvement requirements and guidelines and asked
if referencing those guidelines in the plan would help address the goals.
Hunter Spitzer asked that a corridor be identified where staff would intend the potential traffic to
go for the non-motorized users and access to the corridor from Mebane and from Efland.
Nishith Trivedi said that they will include the proposed changes suggested by Hunter Spitzer in
the revisions to the updates.
Paul Guthrie explained that he does not find the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management
Plan helpful in explaining what triggers the possible outcomes of the plan. He doesn¶t believe
that the plan details enough, what kind of changes could happen to the area just that change
may happen and that there needs to be more clarification about what the plan is.
Nishith Trivedi stated that staff will work on providing more clarification during future
presentations of the plan.
Lydia Wegman suggested adding an introduction that provides in greater detail, what the plan is
and how it interacts with future planning and development activities.
Julie Laws had questions about the possibility of a road being able to go through property on
Center St.
Nishith Trivedi explained that the property in question is zoned local commercial and that if a
future owner of the property wants to make changes and go through the development review
process, the UDO and Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan would come into
place.
Lydia Wegman explained she would like to go over what changes the Planning Board has
suggested for the motion on the item.
Nishith Trivedi restated that a suggestion by Hunter Spitzer is to reference NCDOT standards
and guidebook to show how this plan is going to meet economic development objectives 2.2 and
2.3.
Lydia Wegman also restated Paul Guthrie¶s suggestion to add more clarity and background to
the introduction in the plan.
Approved 11/7/2018
Paul Guthrie further explained that there is a total misunderstanding among some of the public
of what this plan is and to avoid having the same meeting over and over again, more
background needs to be provided. He thinks long term planning is important, but this plan
doesn¶t explain what the community will look like in the future. Paul believes a prologue needs to
be provided in order to address those concerns.
Doug Efland asked if a property owner could adjust or abandon their dedicated right-of-way if a
different plan was to come into effect.
Nishith Trivedi explained that the lines on the plan are subject to change and that right-of-ways
can be abandoned if determined unnecessary in the future.
MOTION by Randy Marshall to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Efland-
Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan be approved with:
the Planning Director¶s recommendation of revisions as mentioned earlier
the addition of a prologue as recommended by Paul Guthrie and
Hunter Spitzer¶s recommendation to include NCDOT standards and guidebook to show
how this plan is going to meet economic development objectives 2.2 and 2.3.
Seconded by Adam Beeman
VOTE::8-2
Paul Guthrie and Hunter Spitzer voted against.
Planning Board Meeting ended by consensus at 8:58 PM
Lydia N. Wegman, Chair