Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-17-2001-9ei ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 17, 2001 Action Age da Item No. SUBJECT: Non-Residential Appraval Procedure for Subdivision, Zoning and Economic Development Ordinance Amendments DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) NO ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed Ordinance -Administration Planning Board recommended Ordinance Draft December 12, 2000 Public Hearing Minutes February 7, 2001 Planning Board Minutes INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert P. Davis, Planner III Ext. 2580 Craig Benedict, Director Ext. 2592 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 9fi8-4501 Durham fi88-7331 Mebane (336)227-2031 PURPOSE: To consider the proposed Approval Procedure Amendments for the Economic Development, Commercial and/or Industrial Districts Amendments in the Subdivision, Zoning Ordinance and Ecanamic Development District Design Manual. BACKGROUND: Request • Amend the Approval Procedures and related sections in the Subdivision, Zoning Ordinance and Economic Development Design Manual. • Provides for initial review by the Planning Staff of proposed subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commercial, and/or Industrial Districts. • Requires all subdivisions in these districts to follow the preliminary plan approval process in the Subdivision Ordinance. • Requires all roads in these subdivisions to be public and constructed to NCDOT standards. • Requires dedication of right-of--way and construction of master planned roadways in Economic Development districts. • Promotes service and/or frontage road interconnectivity. • Limits driveways onto major roadways. Location Amendments will apply to the entirety of Orange County lying outside the municipalities and their extraterritorial jurisdictions, if any. Develoement Process, Schedule and Action • First Action: Public Hearing on November 27, 2000 and continued on December 12, 2000. • Refer amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation back to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than January 18, 2001. • Second Action: Planning Board recommended approval 8-1 in the February 17, 2001 meeting. • Third Action: County Commissioners to consider Ordinance Amendment. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with this decision. RECOMMENDATION(S): Administration Recommendation: Approval of the proposed amendments as given in the attached documents. Planning Board Recommendation: Approval of the proposed amendments as given in the attached documents. 2 ,, Administration Ordinance 3 An Ordinance Amending the Subdivision Ordinance of Orange County Bold =Proposed Text = Deleted Text Amend Article III-D APPROVAL PROCEDURES FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS by creating a new section as follows: III-D-1 j Approval Procedures for Subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commercial and Industrial Nodes as identified in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Initial review of all subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commercial and/or Industrial nodes shall be pertormed by the Orange County Planning Staff. Following review by the Orange County Planning Staff all subdivisions shall follow the preliminary plan major subdivision approval procedures as specified in Section III-D-S. All subdivisions shall submit the application in accordance with requirements as specified in Section III-D-3-a. All roads in these zoning districts are required to be public and constructed to North Carolina Department of Transportation standards. Final plat approvals shall follow the final plat approval procedures in Section III- D-4 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that the Ordinance Amendment is approved. Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by Commissioner the foregoing ordinance was adopted this the day of , 2001. I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on 2001 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Baard. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2001. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Administration Ordinance An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County Bold =Proposed Text ~~~;'-°{'~°L~ =Deleted Text Amend Article fi.29.2 DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS as follows: 4 Before any new site development may be undertaken in an Economic Development District, a site plan must be approved and a zoning compliance permit issued in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 (Site Plan Approval Procedures) of this Ordinance. Prior to submission of an application for site plan approval, applicants will be required to meet with representatives of the Planning and Inspections, and Economic Development Departments to identify policies, procedures, regulations, and fees applicable to development proposals. Plans for development proposals in an Economic Development District will be reviewed by the Planning and Inspections Department staff for compliance with the standards contained in the following section. Such review will also be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Article 14:3 (Site Plan Review) of this ordinance. Any proposed subdivision in th® Economic Development District shall follow the approval procedures as specified in section III-D-1~ of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that the Ordinance Amendment is approved. Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by Commissioner the foregoing ordinance was adapted this the day of , 2001. I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on 2001 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2001. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Administration Ordinance 5 An Ordinance Amending the Economic Development Districts Design Manual of Orange County and the Hillsborough Area Economic Development Design Manual Bold =Proposed Text = Deleted Text Amend Part One - A CASE STUDY APPROACH as follows: To assist landowner, developer, and citizen alike in understanding how to use this manual, a local site was selected and "developed" in accordance with the performance standards and design criteria contained in this document. Although the "case study" presents a range of design considerations, it does not attempt to portray every situation. Neither does it represent the only approach to site evaluation and design. Each site is different, and the land owner/developer should discuss his/her ideas with the Planning ~ Inspections Department and Economic Development Commission staff to assure the "best fit" between the site, performance standards, and design criteria. It should be noted as well that this Design Manual is not to be used as the only source of information. All subdivision activity in the Economic Development Districts shall follow the review and approval process as specified in Section III-D-1 j of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Also, Appendix A contains a list of ordinances, technical reports, and other information which must be used in combination with the Manual. In addition, Appendix B contains provisions from the Orange County Zoning Ordinance which explain the site plan approval process. A thorough knowledge of this information will assure the preparation of acceptable plans as well as an expedited approval process. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that the Ordinance Amendment is approved. Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by Commissioner the foregoing ordinance was adopted this the day of , 2001. I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on 2001 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2001. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners A Case Study Approach The Case Study ~ Site Conditions: The basic premise of the "case study" is that a developer has acquired a twa-acre site and wishes to build a small office complex. A prototype plan has been successfully used in other communities, but adjustments must be made far the complex to fit the site. As shown on the following page, the site is a rectangular-shaped lot with extensive frontage (4~0 feet) on a major thoroughfare leading to an interstate highway interchange. Although the site terrain is level, the jloodplain of a drainage tributary flowing through the southwest corner of the property covers almost half the site. Coupled with the shallow lot depth (200 feet) and the presence of a bottomland hardwood forest, the site presents formidable building constraints. To assist landowner, developer, and citizen alike in understanding how to use this manual, a local site was' selected and "developed" in accordance with the performance standazds and design criteria contained in this document. Although the "case study" presents a range of design considerations, it does not attempt to portray every situation. Neither does it represent the only approach to site evaluation and design. Each site is different, and the land owner/developer should discuss hislher ideas with the Planning & Inspections Department and Economic Development Commission staff to assure the "best fit" between the site, performance standards, and design criteria. It should be noted as well that this Design Manual is not to be used as the only source of information. All subdivision aetivity in the Economic Development District sh$11 follow the review and approval process as specified in Section III-D-1-j of the Orange ~ County Subdivision Regulations. Also, Appendix A contains a list of ordinances, technical reports, and other information which must be used in combination with the Manual. In addition, Appendix B contains provisions from the Orange County Zoning Ordinance which explain the site plan approval process. A thorough knowledge of this information will assure the preparation of acceptable plans as well as an expedited approval process. Planning Board Ordinance An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County Bold =Proposed Text = Deleted Text Amend Article 6.29.2 DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS as follows: Before any new site development may be undertaken in an Economic Development District, a site plan must be approved and a zoning compliance permit issued in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 (Site Plan Approval Procedures) of this Ordinance. Prior to submission of an application for site plan approval, applicants will be required to meet with representatives of the Planning and Inspections, and Economic Development Departments to identify policies, procedures, regulations, and fees applicable to development proposals. Plans for development proposals in an Economic Development District will be reviewed by the Planning and Inspections Department staff for compliance with the standards contained in the following section. Such review will also be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Article 14.3 (Site Plan Review) of this ordinance. Any proposed subdivision in the Economic Development District shall follow the approval procedures as specified in section III-D-1~ of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations and have a minimum lot size of 4 acres. In a Plann®d Development master plan of 20 acres or more, pods may contain lots of 2 acres in size. (Signature) Clerk, Board of County Commissioners (Signature) Chair, Orange County Commissioners Date and Seal DRAFT DECEMBER 12; 2000 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES 13 t A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carey to 2 accept the staff and public input into the public hearing record, and to refer item C1d to the 3 Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no ~ sooner than January 1$, 2001. 5 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7 e. Amendments to the Orange County Economic Development District (EDD) Design 8 Manual related to the (-40/Old NC86 and I-85/NC86 economic development district 9 to include abridging and revising the manual to cite more objective standards of -o review in the areas of performance standard, landscaping, buffers, parking t - lighting, setbacks and architecture. These standards would be used in site plan -2 review of EDDII_imited Office Districts as well as future EDD special use zoning l3 districts. t~l Craig Benedict said that this was an abridged version of the existing manual. The 15 volume ratios are deleted and replaced with guidelines about building and parking area volumes. -6 Planning Board member Rachel Preston asked where the tree and shrub list came from. 17 Craig Benedict said that this list is the original list from the 1993-94 design manual. He would be -8 willing to work with someone on this. 19 20 Public Comment z- Scott Radway requested an electronic file of this abridged manual. 22 Vic Knight made reference to area two and asked whose area this was in and Craig z3 Benedict said that area two is within Hillsborough's jurisdiction. The jurisdictional boundary z~l between Orange County and Hillsborough is Cates Creek. 25 Vic Knight asked if the manual that is being discussed tonight will be adopted by the z6 Town of Hillsborough and Craig Benedict said that they are working toward a code that is similar or 27 the same as the County's. Mr. Knight has asked Robert Davis far a copy of the abridged manual. 28 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carey to 39 accept the staff and public input into the public hearing record, and to refer item C1e to the 3o Planning Board far a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no 3 - sooner than January 18; 2001. 3Z VOTE: UNANIMOUS 33 At this time, it was 10:35 p.m. The Board agreed to continue the meeting until 11:00 p.m. 34 f. Non-residential subdivision amendments continued fram November 27, 2000 36 public hearing. 37 Craig Benedict said that this would set standards for non-residential subdivisions. 38 Presently, there are no minimum lot sizes for non-residential subdivisions. The amendments 39 would establish a minimum lot size of four acres in an EDD. If someone brings forth a master plan ~lo of 20 acres or more, they have the ability to have pods that could be two acres in size. 4l a2 Public Comment 43 Vic Knight feels that the current subdivision regulations address this issue. There are ~~ many uses for parcels of property less than four acres. For an office building, afour-acre lot is pis extremely large. He understands the issue with curb cuts but feels that there are other ways to X16 control traffic within a parcel. a7 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Brown to ~8 accept the staff and public input into the public hearing record, and to refer item C1f to the a9 Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no 50 sooner than January 18, 2001. 51 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 52 FEBRUARY 7, 2001 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 9 AGENDA ITEM #9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 1Z/12/00 a. EDD Non-Residential Subdivision Amendment Benedict made the presentation. 7 At this time in the EDDs, there are no minimum lot sizes. Based on the amendments, there will be minimum S lot sizes and requirements that the access is limited to the major roadways. 9 10 b. EDD/Text Amendments 11 (1) Creation of ED-LO-1 District 12 13 The new zoning district would be known as .Economic Development-Limited Office- 1 District. This is a 14 very low intensity district that the County or Hillsborough could use to assign to properties. The rezoning of 15 the property 3a and 3b would eliminate the existing zoning categories and assign the limited office district. 16 Some of the uses in areas 3a and 3b would then be non-conforming. The uses can continue as normal, but 17 there are some criteria. If someone wants to rezone from limited office to another use, they will probably 18 come to the County for a planned development and a special use permit. These standards are very elaborate. 19 The purpose of the EDD task force was to have good presentation at the entranceway into Hillsborough (two 20 I-85 access points and I-40 access point). 21 22 t. EDD Design Manual (Abridged Version) Amendment 23 24 The design manual handles two parts -design standards and special use standards. The moratorium on the 25 700 acres in the EDD will expire on April 18`x. The revised manual will be in effect at that time. 26 27 The task force will now evolve into an EDD Transportation Task Force. They will be addressing issues such 28 as the possibility of bypasses in and around Hillsborough to take the stress off of Churton Street. The task 29 force will meet over the next seven months to come up with a joint Orange County and Hillsborough 30 recommendation to the Metropolitan Planning Organization in Durham. The task force is looking for a 31 representative from the Planning Board to serve. 32 33 The staff needs a recommendation from the Planning Board to adopt the new subdivision standards, create 34 the new limited office district, adopt the new design manual, and recommend rezoning 3a and 3b to ED-LO- 35 1 district. 36 37 Several clarifying questions about the rezoning were answered satisfactorily by Benedict. 38 39 Schofield asked if there had been any discussion about an EDD architectural review board to address 40 continuity. Benedict said that the unabridged version of the EDD manual had a format for development, but 41 no Commission or Planning Board approval. The new process involves a legislative process, allowing for 42 input from the Planning Board and the Board of County Commissioners. He said that architectural 43 guidelines could be implemented in the legislative process. 44 . 45 Schofield asked if there had been any conversation about an affordable housing component as a required 46 provision for this area. He said that an affordable housing component would make sense in this area because 47 it would be in immediate proximity to services and transportation. Benedict said that an affordable housing 48 component has been discussed. He said that the density of housing in this area would be able to 49 accommodate multi-family and affordable housing. Affordable housing will not be addressed in the manual, 50 but with a separate affordable housing policy. 51 10 1 Woods said that he was on the Affordable Housing Task Force and they have not addressed any interfacing 2 with this area at all. The work has been Countywide and not site specific. He will bring a report to the next 3 meeting on the Affordable Housing Task Force. 4 5 McAdams said that there was one homeowner that was for the rezoning and one homeowner that was 6 opposed to it. Also, Chandler Concrete is opposed to the rezoning. He asked if there was any way to leave 7 the one homeowner and Chandler Concrete out so that they do not have to go through an arduous process to 8 be rezoned to their current use. Benedict said that the board could recommend that some properties be left in 9 or out. He said that it was generally not good to spot-zone. to 11 Woods said that he was in favor of 9a, 9b, and 9c. In regards to 9d (listed as l Ob in the agenda), he does not 12 understand why a truck stop is not appropriate at the intersection of I-40 and NC 86. He asked where it 13 would be appropriate to have a truck stop. la 15 There was no public comment about 9a, 9b, or 9c. 16 17 MOTION: Woods moved approval of the proposed amendments as given in item 9a. 18 Seconded by Allison. 19 20 VOTE: Ayes, 8; No, l (McAdams - he thinks four acres is an extremely large lot for 21 a business.) 22 23 MOTION: Allison moved approval of the creation of an Economic Development- 24 Limited Office 1 District in the Orange County permitted use zoning tables 25 as given in item 9b. Seconded by Selkirk. 26 27 VOTE: Unanimous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3S 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 MOTION: Selkirk moved approval of the proposed EDD Design Manual -Abridged Version. Seconded by Allison. Benedict said that, in regards to item 9c, smaller lot sizes are allowed by virtue of rezoning. This is in the planned development standards. VOTE: Unanimous d. Zoning Atlas Amendment far Areas 3a and 3b located at NC 86/I- 85/Old NC 10 Intersection Allison said that there should be some type of "grandfathering" for non-conforming properties that already exist. Benedict said that residential structures could be rebuilt if they are destroyed up to 75% or more of the floor area. No expansion is allowed, but there is an appeal process. With commercial/industrial structures, they could be rebuilt if they are destroyed up to b0% or mare of the floor area. 47 Woods said that he understands that-the intent was that this area (700 acres) would be ahigh-density 48 commercial area totaling 6.6 million square feet. He asked when the Planning Board would talk about the 49 6.6 million square feet of mixed-use development intended for the 700-acre tract. He reiterated his concern 50 about an appropriate place for a truck stop in Orange County. 51 52 Strayhorn asked what an appropriate use would be for the site at Chandler Concrete. Benedict said that an 53 appropriate use would be small office buildings or small retail uses.