HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-06-2021; 5-a - Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Zoning Atlas Amendment – Richardson (MA20-0006) 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 6, 2021
Action Agenda
Item No. 5-a
SUBJECT: Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Zoning Atlas Amendment — Richardson
(MA20-0006)
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Application Package Michael D. Harvey, Planner III, (919) 245-2597
2. Current County Zoning Map and Future Craig Benedict, Director, (919) 245-2592
Land Use Map
3. Central Orange Coordinated Area
(COCA) Land Use Map
4. Staff Review Letter Dated January 6,
2021
5. Staff Review Comments
6. Excerpt of Draft March 3, 2021 Planning
Board Minutes and Signed Statement of
Consistency
7. Certification of Mailing
8. Statement of Consistency
9. Ordinance on Rezoning
PURPOSE: To hold a public hearing, receive the Planning Board/staff recommendation and
public comment, close the public hearing, and consider action on applicant initiated
amendment(s) to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Zoning Atlas for a
parcel within the Hillsborough Township of Orange County.
Specifically, Ms. Gary Carleen Richardson is seeking to rezone an approximately 2.72 acre
parcel of property, further identified using Orange County Parcel Identification Number (PIN)
9873-54-6387:
FROM: Rural Residential (R-1); Stoney Creek Basin Overlay District (Higher Intensity
Development Area)
TO: General Commercial (GC-4); Stoney Creek Basin Overlay District (Higher
Intensity Development Area)
As part of this proposal, the applicant is requesting modification of the FLUM changing the
parcels current land use designation from Rural Residential to Commercial Industrial Transition
Activity Node (CITAN).
BACKGROUND: The basic facts concerning this application (Attachment 1) are as follows:
Applicant: Ms. Gary Carleen Richardson
2
PO Box 4186
Burlington, NC 27215
Parcel Information: A. Parcel and Size: PIN 9873-54-6387. An approximately 2.72 acre
parcel.
B. Township: Hillsborough.
C. Current Zoning: Rural Residential (R-1) and Stoney Creek
Basin Overlay District (Higher Intensity Development Area).
STAFF COMMENT: The parcel is not located within a
Watershed Protection Overlay District.
D. Requested Zoning: General Commercial (GC-4).
STAFF COMMENT.- Action to approve this request will not
affect the parcel's location within the Stoney Creek Basin
Overlay District.
The potential rezoning of the parcel to GC-4 is not
inconsistent with the purpose and intent of this Overlay
District.
E. Current Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Designation: Rural
Residential land use category. Please refer to the maps
contained in Attachment 2 for more information.
STAFF COMMENT: Applicant has requested the FLUM
designation for the property become Commercial Industrial
Transition Activity Node (CITAN), which is necessary to
approve the rezoning request.
As detailed in Attachment 2, the parcel to the north is located
within the CITAN while property to the west, across NC
Highway 86, is located within the Economic Development
Activity Node, as detailed on the FLUM.
Parcel(s) to the south and east are located within the Rural
Residential land use category.
F. Growth Management System Designation: Rural Designated.
G. Existing Conditions/Physical Features: The parcel is currently
undeveloped and heavily wooded with varying topography.
H. Roads: The parcel has approximately 360 ft. of frontage along
NC Highway 86 to the west.
I. Water and Sewer: Development of the property will rely on
individual well and septic systems. The Property is not in an area
served by public water/sewer.
Surrounding Land Uses: North: 4 acre parcel zoned General Commercial (GC-4)
supporting a self-storage business;
South: An undeveloped 2.7 acre parcel zoned Rural Residential
(R-1);
3
West: NC Highway 86, parcels ranging in size from 2.6 to 30
acres in area zoned Economic Development Hillsborough
Limited Officer (EHD-2). The 30 acre parcel is developed
and utilized to support a single-family residential land use;
and
East: An approximately 235 acre parcel zoned Rural Residential
(R-1) owned by Duke University School of Forestry.
Development Process, Schedule, and Action: The typical cadence for the review of a General
Use Rezoning and Zoning Atlas amendment is:
• FIRST ACTION — Submission of a General Use Rezoning application with required
supporting documents by the property owner.
STAFF COMMENT: Ms. Richardson provided required document(s) on
November 6, 2020, supplemented in January of 2021 with additional information
providing support for the requested change in the FLUM designation.
• SECOND ACTION — The Planning Board reviews the application at a regular meeting
and makes a recommendation to the BOCC.
STAFF COMMENT: The Planning Board reviewed this item at its March 3, 2021
regular meeting where members voted unanimously to recommend denial of the
request(s).
• THIRD ACTION — The BOCC receives the Planning Board recommendation and
makes a decision at a previously advertised public hearing.
STAFF COMMENT: Scheduled for April 6, 2021.
Consistent with State legislation regarding virtual/remote meetings, there is a 24-
hour waiting period required before a decision becomes effective. The purpose of
the 24-hour waiting period is to allow for submission of written comments.
General Use Rezoning: Zoning promotes development of land uses that can co-exist in
proximity to one another consistent with the promotion of the public health, safety, and general
welfare. Regulations establish opportunities/constraints associated with land development in an
attempt to ensure one person's `reasonable use' of property does not affect another person's
ability to make reasonable use of their property.
This request involves a property owner seeking to change the zoning designation of their
property from a residential general use zoning district (R-1) to a district allowing for the
development of non-residential land uses (GC-4). In acting on this request, the County is
unable to impose conditions and the applicant is not required to define what type of
development (i.e. permitted use category) is anticipated. If rezoned, all land uses permitted
within the GC-4 general use zoning district are suitable for development on the property once
compliance with applicable regulations is demonstrated.
General Use Rezoning applications are processed in a legislative manner (i.e., does not require
sworn testimony or evidence) and decisions are based on the BOCC's determination the
request is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
4
Proposal: Applicant requests the general use zoning designation of the property become GC-4
arguing:
... changing this (property's) zoning to General Commercial (GC-4) will be more
in line with the Character of the area. There is a shopping center approximately
one mile down the road that includes a Walmart, Home Depot, and various other
chain stores and fast food restaurants. On the other side of the road from the
shopping center is a newly built Sheetz, which also has space to have another
tenet beside them.
The request also involves changing the future land use designation for the property from Rural
Residential to Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN).
STAFF COMMENT. This change is necessary to approve the rezoning request.
The applicant argues current development trends along NC Highway 86, as well as existing land
use designations on parcels to the north and west, support changing the designation of the
subject property to CITAN.
Other pertinent information concerning the property is as follows:
• Comprehensive Plan: The subject parcel is currently located within the Rural Residential
land use category.
Per Appendix F, "Relationships Between Land Use Categories and Zoning Districts
Matrix" of the adopted Orange County Comprehensive Plan, GC-4 is not an allowable
general use zoning category for property located within a Rural Residential land use
category.
The GC-4 general use zoning district is permitted within the Commercial-Industrial
Transition Activity Node (CITAN).
Per Appendix G Land Use Classification and Overlay Locational Criteria of the
Comprehensive Plan, CITAN is located in areas meeting specific criteria including, but
not limited to:
o Areas currently, or could be reasonably and efficiently, served by centralized
public services and utilities;
o Located at the intersection of arterial and/or collector highways or in proximity to
other major transportation networks;
o In areas near major transportation routes that could be provided with public water
and wastewater services, which are appropriate for non-residential and higher
density residential uses.
As detailed by staff (Attachment 5), the subject parcel is not located in an area currently
or planned to be served by public utilities (i.e. water and/or sewer).
In order for the property to have access to public utilities, the Town of
Hillsborough/Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area (COCA) Land Use Plan
and Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA)
would need modification first.
For more information on the definition of CITAN, and to review the allowed zoning
designations permitted within same, the Comprehensive Plan is accessible at:
http://www.orangecountVnc.gov/1242/2030-Comprehensive-Plan.
5
• Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Designation: The FLUM can be accessed at:
http://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4054/Future-Land-Use-Map-PDF.
• Growth Management System Map Designation: The property is Rural Designated.
STAFF COMMENT: The Growth Management System Map is a tool utilized by
staff to identify permit review thresholds for residential (i.e., subdivision) projects.
• Town of Hillsborough/Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area (COCA) Land
Use Plan: COCA is a joint land use document defining locations of `future land use
categories' to achieve desired and coordinated pattern(s) of development.
Implementation of the COCA Land Use Plan is achieved through consistency with the
County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, application of County zoning, and a
coordinated approach to rezoning.
The subject parcel is outside of the Town's Urban Service area.
Consistent with COCA, the Town may not extend utilities outside the service area. The
applicant approached the Town in 2012 about moving the Urban Service boundary to
include this parcel. In recommending approval of COCA, Hillsborough's planning board
supported the concept of amending the boundary but did not take action to do so. COCA
can be accessed at:
https://www.orangecountync.qov/DocumentCenter/View/l4011/Central-Orange-
Coordinated-Area-COCA-Land-Use-Plan-PDF.
Please refer to the map in Attachment 3 for more information. As previously indicated,
COCA modifications are necessary to extend the Urban Service Area allowing the
property to qualify for utility service.
• Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary greement (WASMPBA):
Property is located within the Town of Hillsborough Long-term Interest Area. Public
utilities (i.e. water and sewer) are available only if the property owner seeks voluntary
annexation into the Town and the WASMPBA Primary Service Area boundary is
amended to include the parcel. The WASMPBA agreement can be accessed at:
http://www.orangecountVnc.qov/DocumentCenter/View/4190/Water-and-Sewer-
Management-Planning-and-Boundary-Agreement-PDF.
• Environmental Assessment (EA): Per Section 6.16.2 (A) of the UDO, the application is
exempt from the Environmental Assessment (EA) requirement. Once a formal
development proposal (i.e. site plan) is submitted, it will be evaluated for compliance with
the provisions of the UDO. Please note, an environmental assessment application is
typically required only for projects exceeding two acres of proposed land disturbance.
Analysis: As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to:
`cause an analysis to be made of the application' and provide analysis to the reviewing body. In
analyzing this request, the Planning Director offers the following:
1. The application is complete in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.8.3 of the
UDO;
2. The Rural Residential land use category is defined within the adopted Comprehensive
Plan as:
6
Land in the rural areas of the County which is appropriate for low intensity
and low-density residential development and which would not be
dependent on urban services during the plan period.
3. The Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN) is defined within the adopted
Comprehensive Plan as:
Land near major transportation routes that could be provided with public
water and wastewater services and is appropriate for retail and other
commercial uses; manufacturing and other industrial uses; office and
limited (not to exceed 25% of any Node) higher density residential uses.
4. The property is not eligible for service by public water and wastewater services based on:
a. The Town of Hillsborough/Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area
(COCA) Land Use Plan; and
b. The Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement
(WASMPBA).
As a result, extension of CITAN is not viable at this time as the parcel is ineligible for
public water and wastewater services;
5. The request, while potentially representing a logical extension of the CITAN land use
category along NC Highway 86 as well as the GC-4 general use zoning district, is
inconsistent with applicable planning document(s) are detailed herein;
6. Existing agreement(s) between the County and the Town of Hillsborough do not identify
this property as being suitable for high intensity residential and/or non-residential
development. These agreements would have to be modified to allow the request to
receive a favorable recommendation.
Public Notifications: In accordance with Section 2.8.7 of the UDO, notices were mailed via first
class mail to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the subject parcel providing the date/time of the
BOCC public hearing where the proposal is to be reviewed on March 18, 2021, 19 days before
the meeting. Staff also posted the subject parcel with a sign indicating the date/time of the
public hearing on March 22, 2021, 15 days before the meeting. For more information, please
refer to Attachment 7.
Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this request at its March 3,
2021 regular meeting where the following comments were made:
• A Board member asked if another future land use designation that would be appropriate
for the property. There was discussion on the merits of extending the Economic
Development Transition Activity Node, west of the property across NC Highway 86, as an
alternative to CITAN.
STAFF COMMENT: According to the Comprehensive Plan, the GC-4 general use
zoning district is only permitted within the:
➢ Commercial Transition Activity Node, and
Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN).
Based on surrounding land use designations, and the applicant's wishes, CITAN
was the only option.
Unfortunately, the area is not suitable for non-residential zoning/development
based on existing agreement(s) between the Town and County. Until these
7
agreement(s) are modified, neither CITAN or Economic Development Transition
Activity Node could be extended onto the subject property.
• Board members acknowledged receipt of two emails from adjacent property owners
requesting the application be denied due to anticipated traffic impact(s) from non-
residential development and extension of `urban development intensities' into what they
perceived to be a `rural' area of the county.
• The applicant did not speak at the Planning Board meeting.
After discussing the request, and reviewing staff's recommendation, Board members voted
unanimously to recommend denial of the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 8) and the
proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment (Attachment 9). Excerpts of the minutes from the meeting,
as well as the Board's signed statement of consistency, are included in Attachment 6.
Agenda materials from the meeting can be viewed at:
https://www.co.orange.nc.us/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26.
Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends the request be
denied due to the following:
a. Extension of the Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN) is not viable at
this time as the property cannot be provided with public water and wastewater services;
b. The requested rezoning (i.e. R-1 to GC-4) cannot be approved without the extension of
CITAN;
c. The requested rezoning is inconsistent with the current policies of the adopted County
Comprehensive Plan, the Town of Hillsborough/Orange County Central Orange
Coordinated Area (COCA) Land Use Plan and the Water and Sewer Management,
Planning and Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA);
d. Existing agreement(s) between the County and the Town of Hillsborough do not identify
this property as being suitable for high intensity residential and/or non-residential
development.
If amendment(s) to COCA and WASMPBA occur, specifically making the subject parcel suitable
for service by public utilities, staff could make an affirmative recommendation on requested
future land use map and rezoning amendments. These amendments would have to occur
before such a recommendation could be made.
Effect of Denial or Withdrawal: In the event the rezoning application is denied or withdrawn, it
should be noted that Section 2.2.8 of the UDO states that no application for the same or similar
amendment, affecting the same property or portion thereof, may be submitted for a period of
one year. The one year period begins on the date of denial or withdrawal.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Various County departments have reviewed the request and determined
its approval or denial would not create the need for additional funding for the provision of County
services. Costs associated with advertising, including the public hearing notice and mailings,
were paid by the applicant in accordance with the adopted Orange County Fee Schedule.
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goal is applicable to
this item:
8
• GOAL: ESTABLISH SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE LAND-USE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES
The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, incomes
and educational levels with respect to the development and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, policies, and decisions. Fair treatment means that no
group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental
consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or
policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: There is no Orange County Environmental Responsibility Goal
impact associated with this item.
RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends the Board:
1. Receive the request;
2. Conduct the public hearing and accept the Planning Board recommendation and
staff/public comment(s);
3. Close the public hearing
4. Authorize the acceptance of written comment(s) via e-mail to the Board at
ocbocc@orangecountync.gov or by delivery to the Planning Department's office at 131
West Margaret Lane, 2nd floor, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278, until 9:00 a.m. on
Thursday April 8, 2021;
5. Schedule a vote to take action on the:
a. Statement of Consistency (Attachment 8), and
b. Zoning Atlas Amendment (Attachment 9)
at the Board's April 20, 2021 Business meeting as recommended by the Planning Board
and Planning Director. No additional public comments shall be received on this item
at the April 20, 2021 Business meeting.
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
r
ORANGE COUNTY APPLICATION FOR
NORTH CAROLINA ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
GENERAL USE REZONING REQUEST
APPLICANT INFORMATION:
Date: / (� e4� / �(�f
Applicant: Phone: ��1 �� - U T
Address: r ��� Cell Phone:
E-mail:
PROPERTY SUBJECT TO REQUEST:
Parcel Identification Number(PIN):
Address of property:
Owner of property:
Future Land Use Designation for Property:
Current Zoning Designation:
Requested Zoning Designation:
** If Applicant/Owner are different people, include a signed, notarized, statement indicating that the
owner has authorized the applicant to submit the request. In cases where there are multiple property
owners, please attach an additional document containing their signatures authorizing the submission
of the application or other legal documentation establishing the applicants right to file on their behalf.
**
SUBMITTAL INFORMATION - Section 2.8.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
1)A Map, at a legible scale, showing the property(s) subject to the request. A map may be procured
at the Planning Department for a fee in accordance with the adopted Orange County Fee Schedule
2)A legal description of the property(s) proposed for rezoning
3)A list showing the names and addresses of all adjacent property owners within 1000'feet of the
subject property.
4)A detailed narrative denoting the following:
a. The alleged error in the Zoning Atlas (if any) that will be corrected by the proposed request.
b. The changed, or changing, conditions (if any) that makes the proposed amendment
reasonable necessary to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
c. How the proposed amendment is consistent with, or carries out the intent and purpose of, the
Orange County Comprehensive Plan,
10
5) The filing fee per the adopted Orange County fee schedule in affect as of the date of the
application.
I (we), the undersigned, have been made aware of the process for the review and action associated
with a LIDO Zoning Atlas Amendment application and understand only completed applications,
containing all information required by the Orange County LIDO shall be reviewed and acted upon by
the County. Further I (we) understand that any assistance I (we) may receive from County staff in
preparing this application in no way guarantees a favorable recommendation by staff on the merits
of t 's proposal nor does it guarantee an approval of the proposed atlas amendment by the County.
Appli an Date:
Applicant Date:
C O U N T Y , N C
2017 Imagery
---- ---------- ----
I
I
'1 x
I
---- it
t r.
FLETCHER RD � ,�' u'
3
, - - - - - - - - - - - - -� I
y � I
- I I
I - I
_ ,7
wlt
Or
E a,
a--- - 60
N 1 in=too feet
tAN V t meet
PIN 9873-54-6387 oUNTY
Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
Parcels 1/4/2021
Misc\9873-54-6387\9873-54-6387.aprx\2017Imagery
GRAN c ,12
Zoning
I
I
I
I
I
l I
FLETCHER RD
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
86 ■
■
■
9873546387
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
I
r : PIN 9873-54-6387
Stoney Creek Basin Overlay
EDH-2
FA G C4 N
/ ,in=,00 feet
ORANGE iP D-O I Feet
EE / couNrr
a ,aa
R 1 NJ Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
,14/zoz,
i
Mi sc�9873-54-638719873-54-6387.a prx\Zoni ng
Future Land Use 13
I
I
I
I
FLETCHER RD
■
■
■
■
86 ■
9873546387
PIN 9873-54-6387
Rural Residential �, N tin=too feet
ORANGE k Feet
Commercial-Industrial Transition SaIM o too
Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
Economic Development Transition 1/4/2021
Misc\9873-54-6387\9873-54-6387.aprx\Future Land Use
14
Rezoning Narrative
Gary Richardson is requesting her property which is currently zoned Rural Residential (R1) to be changed
to General Commercial (GC-4). This property is located to the South of Wood Brothers Storage.The
Parcel Identification number(PIN) is 9873-54-6387. Ms. Richardson believes that changing this zoning to
General Commercial will be more in line with the Character of the area.There is a shopping center
approximately one mile down the road that includes a Walmart, Home Depot, and various other chain
stores and fast food restaurants. On the other side of the road from the shopping center is a newly built
Sheetz, which also has space to have another tenet beside them.
15
RICHARDSON REZONING — JUSTIFICAITON FOR REQUESTED ATLAS
AMENDMENT AND CHANGE IN COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE MAP:
1. The parcel has frontage on NC Highway 86, a heavily travelled State roadway.
In my opinion, residential development on this 2.7 acre parcel is not the highest
and best use of the property;
2. There are parcels north and west of this property zoned to allow for non-
residential development. According to the County zoning atlas, the parcels are
zoned:
a. General Commercial (GC-4); and
b. Economic Development (lot across NC Highway 86).
1 believe the area is already zoned to allow for non-residential development and
my request is consistent with this existing classification/trend for the area with
respect to existing development to the north and anticipated development to the
west;
3. As I understand it, there will also have to be a change to the land use category
designation of my property based on the County's Comprehensive Plan.
Staff has explained that my parcel is located within a Rural Residential land use
category, which is intended to promote/allow for residential development
activities. The GC-4 commercial zoning is not allowed within this land use
category.
Based on the maps provided to me, the parcel to the north (developed as a self-
storage business) is within a Commercial Industrial Node, which is how the
parcel to the north was able to be zoned GC-4.
Given current development trends in the area, and the high volume of traffic on
NC Highway 86, 1 believe my property is better suited for commercial
development. I also think it is appropriate to expand this Commercial land use
category to include my property as the parcel to the north is already located
within this land use category.
I should also point out, according to the Comprehensive Plan, property to the
west of my parcel are within an Economic Development Transition Node, which
also allows for commercial development. I am, effectively, surrounded by
property classified as being suitable for commercial development activities.
As part of my request, I respectfully ask that my parcel's future land use
designation be changed from Rural Residential to Commercial-Industrial
Transition as I believe commercial development is the most appropriate land use
for this property;
4.
16
PIN OWNERI_LAST OWNERI_FIRST OWNER2_LAST OWNER2_FIRST
9873432226 HARMONY AT WATERSTONE TOWNHOMES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC
9873435958 DRYSDALE STEVEN M DRYSDALE CYNTHIA R
9873435965 OMOLE DEJI
9873437743 TERRY MARY
9873445041 ALCID ROMEO HERMINIO JR
9873445246 FLOWERS SYLVIA DENISE
9873445276 TOMFOHR JOHN KARL
9873445296 DIAZ CAROL DIAZ DAVID
9873445477 HOUSTON SARA
9873445497 OATLEY MARGARET C TRUSTEE
9873445708 DONOVAN TERENCE E
9873446426 BENJAMIN SAMUEL
9873447724 BULLOCK WAYNE THOMAS BULLOCK NANCY H
9873449629 WHITTEMORE AUDENRIED
9873455195 NESBIT SAMUEL PAUL NESBIT LINDA RUTH
9873457193 SIMEONSSON RUNE SIMEONSSON NANCY E
9873458459 SALLARD BENJAMIN W JR MARLES CANDACE A
9873459190 RIDDLE STEPHEN KELLER
9873459438 CONRAD RITA MAE
9873533681 WOODS ERIC L
9873534207 WOODS ERIC L
9873536772 WOODSEDGE PROPERTIES LLC
9873537326 WOODSEDGE PROPERTIES LLC
9873541969 DISHNER LYNN MARIE ANDERSON
9873543114 LYNN SUSAN R ETAL MCGUIRE GARY W TRUSTEE
9873546064 WOODSEDGE PROPERTIES LLC
9873546387 RICHARDSON GARY C
9873547960 WOODS BROTHERS INC
9873550926 CARTER JASON P CARTER RENEE M
9873551405 SCHNEIDEWIND BRIAN C SCHNEIDEWIND EMILY M
9873551494 HARPER BRIAN S HARPER KATHLEEN A
9873552457 WOODS BROTHERS INC
9873552485 MAYHEW KAREN FOREHAND MAYHEW STEVEN B
9873553062 WOODS BROTHERS INC
17
9873553638 MANDAL ANIRBAN
9873554336 WOODS BROTHERS INC
9873554432 CENTEX HOMES RALEIGH DIVISION
9873554509 SMITH JODY D
9873554566 FLOYD JANE E
9873555556 HALL KEITH
9873556425 NGUYEN CHINH T
9873556587 MALONEY MARY E
9873556614 GASSEN ANKE M
9873557414 NEWBY WILLIAM ANDREW NEWBY SHARON S
9873557567 LEMMERMAN MARC D LEMMERMAN DEBORAH S
9873558615 EDWARDS GEORGE E
9873646782 JONES RICHARD W JONES THELMA W
9873656477 PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORP
9873727869 DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF FORESTRY
18
ADDRESSI ADDRESS2 CITY STATE ZIPCODE
4112 BLUE RIDGE RD STE 100 C/O ELITE MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL INC RALEIGH NC 27612
625 GREAT ENO PATH HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
629 GREAT ENO PATH HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2909 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
382 CURRY AVE ENGLEWOOD NJ 7631
178 WALKING PATH LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
212 5TH AVE#20B NEW YORK NY 10010
186 WALKING PATH PLACE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
181 WALKING PATH PL HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
185 WALKING PATH PL HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
727 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
189 WALKING PATH PL HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
809 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
821 FLETCHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
800 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 2.73E+08
PO BOX 1120 HILLSBOROUGH NC 2.73E+08
2804 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
814 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 2.73E+08
2806 BECKETT'S RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
P 0 BOX 1882 ALBEMARLE NC 2.8E+08
P 0 BOX 1882 ALBEMARLE NC 2.8E+08
909 OAKDALE DR BOX 38 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
909 OAKDALE DR BOX 38 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
828 FLETCHER RD Hillsborough NC 27278
2571 LOVETTE LANE GRAHAM NC 27253
909 OAKDALE DR BOX 38 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
PO BOX 4186 BURLINGTON NC 2.72E+08
2707 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2808 BECKETTS RIDGE DR Hillsborough NC 27278
2810 BECKETT'S RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2812 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2707 NC HWY 86 S Hillsborough NC 27278
2814 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2707 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
19
2520 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2707 NC HWY 86 Hillsborough NC 27278
1225 CRESCENT GREEN DR STE 250 CARY NC 27518
2615 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2614 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2612 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
242 AURORA DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
1203 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2610 WADE HAMPTON HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
2821 BECKETTS RIDGE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
1205 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 2.73E+08
1204 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 2.73E+08
1642 COSMOS DRIVE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
PO BOX 1179 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
324 BLACKWELL ST STE 850 DURHAM NC 27701
GRAN c 20
Zoning
I
I
I
I
I
l I
FLETCHER RD
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
86 ■
■
■
9873546387
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
I
r : PIN 9873-54-6387
Stoney Creek Basin Overlay
EDH-2
FA G C4 N
/ ,in=,00 feet
ORANGE iP D-O I Feet
EE / couNrr
a ,aa
R 1 NJ Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
,14/zoz,
i
Mi sc�9873-54-638719873-54-6387.a prx\Zoni ng
Future Land Use 21
I
I
I
I
FLETCHER RD
■
■
■
■
86 ■
9873546387
PIN 9873-54-6387
Rural Residential �, N tin=too feet
ORANGE k Feet
Commercial-Industrial Transition SaIM o too
Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
Economic Development Transition 1/4/2021
Misc\9873-54-6387\9873-54-6387.aprx\Future Land Use
■
1
— �» �1�1 � - _ - � ;,fir ����►�.
l_l� � +L � ■�1
r
r L I
• �� ;� _ �� 'ry:: .�ir■ter
MOM
OMNI
affi
Natural Resources
Urban Service Boundary
Attached Residential
Light Industrial
Employment
Education
Medium-Density Residential
Mixed Residential Neighborhood
Mixed Use
Neighborhood Mixed Use
Permanent Open Space • • r' r r r r r • • ■ • r •. • .r r • r • r r r r r
Retail Services
_ Rural Living
.. .
_Small Lot
Suburban Office
Town center
rr r r rr • -• r .• .
Urban
- 'rr r -r r :■
Working Farm
•-. r .. • . . C• 1 . 1
23
PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
Current Planning 131 W. Margaret Lane
(919) 644-3002 FAX ORANGE COUNTY P. O. Box 8181
www.orangecountync.gov NORTH CAROLINA Hillsborough, NC 27278
Am
®. ® Ale
JAW
January 5, 2021
Gary Carleen Richardson
PO Box 4186
Burlington NC 27215
Re: STATUS and PROCESS — Review of General Use Rezoning request
MA20-0006: Rezoning of property on NC Highway 86 S
(PIN 9873-54-6387)
Dear Ms. Richardson:
On or about October 8, 2020 staff received an incomplete application and check
associated with a proposed zoning atlas amendment for a parcel of property off NC
Highway 86 within the Hillsborough Township of Orange County.
At the time, staff informed you the submittal package was deemed incomplete as
the required narrative outlining the justification for the request was not included.
On or about November 6, 2020, a narrative outlining your justification for the
request was submitted to this office for review. Staff began processing the request over
the following 2 weeks, and on December 4, 2020 formally accepted same for
processing. The delay was caused by staffing shortages and the Thanksgiving Holiday.
The request involves rezoning a 2.5 acre parcel of property, further identified
utilizing Orange County Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 9873-54-6387:
FROM: Rural Residential (R-1)
TO: General Commercial (GC-4)
The parcel is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded, with approximately 360
ft. of frontage along NC Highway 86. There is an existing GC-4 zoned parcel,
developed as a self-storage center, to the north, property zoned Economic
Development Hillsborough Limited Officer (EDH-2) to the west, and parcels zoned R-1
to the south and east. The parcel is located within the Rural Residential Land Use
Category, as defined within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Please refer to Attachment
1 for maps denoting the subject parcel (hereafter 'the Property').
24
In reviewing your submittal, staff has the following comment(s):
1. REZONING — REVIEW PROCESS:
a. The Planning Board will review your request at its February 3, 2021
regular meeting and make a recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC);
b. The BOCC will be required to hold a public hearing to review the request,
which at this time the earliest hearing date would be March 2, 2021.
Due to the COVID pandemic, advisory board and elected official meetings are
being held virtually. You should verify you have the ability (i.e. have a computer
with reliable internet access) to attend each meeting and be prepared to
participate in the review of your request.
As with all zoning atlas amendment requests, the applicant has the burden to
provide an argument/documentation on the `changing conditions' justifying
approval of the request.
2. COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
a. As part of this request, the future land use designation of the Property will
have to change in order to allow the requested rezoning to be approved.
The requested zoning designation is inconsistent with the Property's
current land use designation of Rural Residential;
b. The request appears to represent the logical extension of an existing
Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN), located north of
the Property, defined within the Comprehensive Plan as:
Land near major transportation routes that could be provided
with public water and wastewater services and is appropriate for
retail and other commercial uses; manufacturing and other
industrial uses, office and limited (not to exceed 25% of any
Node) higher density residential uses.
c. CITAN allows for the rezoning of property to GC-4.
Your application will need to be modified to include a request to change the land
use designation of the Property, ideally to CITAN. This modification will need to
include your argument(s) supporting the request.
3. PROVISION OF UTILITIES:
a. The parcel is outside of the Town's primary utility service area as depicted
on the Water and Sewer Management, Planning, Boundary Agreement
(WASMPBA), which can be accessed utilizing this link:
https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/l 3804/Water-
and-Sewer-Management-Planning-and-Boundary-Agreement-PDF.
As a result, the parcel is currently not able to be served by Town utility
services (i.e. water and sewer);
b. Successful rezoning of the property to a County non-residential general
zoning district designation does not guarantee provision of utility services;
25
c. According to Town of Hillsborough staff, the Property will have to be
formally annexed in order for utility services to be made available. Once
annexed, the property would be zoned in accordance with the Town's land
use regulations and policies.
As you may already be aware, provision of utility services east of NC Highway
86, including your Property, have been reviewed by the Town. Provision
services, however, will require modification of several existing plans/agreements
to change the primary utility service area boundary for the Town. At this time,
there is no timeline on initiation of these required modification(s).
If your ultimate goal is to market and/or develop the Property with the ability to
connect to utilities, it might be prudent for you to pursue annexation/zoning with
the Town rather than continuing with the currently submitted zoning atlas
amendment through Orange County. Absent the extension of utility services,
development of the Property will be served by private utility systems (i.e. well and
septic system).
Staff is concerned you are, effectively, paying to rezone the Property twice if you
continue with the process through Orange County given the Town will have to
formally annex and rezone the property for utility services to be provided.
4. Presuming successful rezoning of the Property, development will need to be
consistent with applicable land use regulations as detailed in the County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) including, but not limited to:
a. Preservation of an undisturbed 100 ft. vegetative land use buffer along
with western and southern property lines, adjacent to R-1 zoned property,
consistent with Section 6.8 of the UDO.
Staff will, of course, be more than happy to continue processing the request and
is available to offer guidance on how you can prepare for the aforementioned meetings.
Unfortunately, we are unable to make arguments on your behalf to either the Planning
Board of BOCC.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. I can be
reached via email at mharvey@orangecountync.gov or my direct line at (919) 245-2597.
Sincerely,
l�
Mi ha- H y AICP, CFM, CZO
Current Planning Supervisor
Orange County
CC: Craig Benedict, Director
James Bryan, Staff Attorney
Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor
Margaret Hauth, Town of Hillsborough
File
26
Attachment 1 2 017 Imagery
u
A
4 i
FLETCHER RD
A
86
z 9873546387 " a'
i
a
- t
r
,t
I
v N t in=too feet
PIN 9873-54-6387 '\NGE Feet
vuf\ETY o too
a _ Planning and Inspections Department(BQ
Parcels 1/4/2021
M i sc 19873-54-638 A9873-54-6387.a p"x;',
27
C
Zonin
--- -------- --
r
FLETCHER RD
I
86 ,
9873546387 -
r i PIN 9873-54-6387
a N M
® Stoney Creek Basin Overlay
EDH-2
® GC4 N 1 in=ioo feet
ORANGE A Feet
EM PD-OI COUNTY
o ioo
Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
R1 i/4/zorn
28
Future Land Use
i
i
--
FL TC►HE= R
ss
9873546387
PIN 9873-54-6387
Rural Residential ,,. N 1 in=ioo feet
ORANGE Feet
Commercial-Industrial Transition COt1"'r'; o too
__ Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
Economic Development Transition 1i4i2021
_ � Misd.9873-Sq-63�7A9879-54-n;87_ap.
29
•
February 19, 2021
Michael D. Harvey AICP,CFM, CZO
Orange County Current Planning Supervisor
PO Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
RE: Courtesy Review comment(s)-General Use Rezoning request
Dear Michael:
Thank you for sharing this request, although it is below the threshold necessary under our courtesy review agreement.The
provision of water and sewer service seem somewhat central to this application.
The Hillsborough-Orange Interlocal Land Management Agreement for the Central Orange Coordinated Area adopted in 2009
placed this parcel (and the east side of NC 86) outside the town of Hillsborough's Urban Service area. Under that agreement
the town may not extend utilities or annex properties outside the service area.
The town developed the Future Land Use Map to be consistent with the interlocal agreement and reflect the Urban Service
area.That service area is also memorialized in the Water and Sewer Boundary and Planning Area agreement approved by the
three municipalities,the county and Orange Water and Sewer Authority.
As the map was being developed in 2012, Ms. Richardson approached the town about moving the boundary to include
properties on the east side on NC 86. In their motion to recommend plan approval,the planning board supported the concept
of amending the boundary.The final action by the town board to adopt the map in 2013 did not move the boundary.
No direction has been provided to staff to amend the boundary, despite two subsequent boundary adjustments in 2017 and
2020.The town is updating models to understand its water and sewer capacity at the present time. Extending the boundary
prior to the completion of those studies is not in the town's best interest.
The Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (paraphrasing) indicates that water and sewer service should be available
at the time of rezoning, made available at the time of development, or the lot should be sized to accommodate the needed
on-site services.The referenced agreements prevent this property from meeting the first condition.The other two conditions
are uncertain as no development is proposed at this time.
The town has not been recently or formally approached by Ms. Richardson to adjust the boundary in this area.
While the property and decision are wholly in Orange County's jurisdiction,this request does appear to conflict with long
standing and adopted interlocal agreements.
Sincerely, AJL)
A"Alij
Margaret A. Hauth,AICP
Planning Director/Assistant Town Manager
919.296.9471
margaret.hauth@hillsboroughnc.gov
30
Michael Harvey
From: Tom Altieri
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 11:59 AM
To: Perdita Holtz; Craig Benedict; Michael Harvey
Cc: Elaina Cheek
Subject: CP Locational Criteria, Appendix G -- RE: Ready for Craig's Review - Richardson
rezoning - March 3, 2021 Planning Board
I have reviewed the application, abstract and materials as well and have added a comment to the Abstract on S:
I find the info Michael has provided to be accurate and I agree with his assessment and conclusion. Michael, if you wish
to add my name to the Abstract,feel free. I am not sure I feel strongly either way but I think you are looking for
indication that I have reviewed and that there is concurrence. While a Memo as an attachment to the materials could
do that,the Comp Planning Division is internal to the Dept and obviously, not an outside agency or other County
Dept. Just thinking that it is the Abstract that show's that Craig's Dept is speaking of one voice. Anyway, trying to
provide you with what you need in a way that makes sense to me. I'm open to ideas and this email is me thinking out
loud after reviewing the rezoning request and how best to offer input. Feel free to call me, if I can be more helpful.
Following are the pertinent aspects (yellow highlight) of the Comp Plan to which I have made note on the Abstract and
have included here for Craig's benefit and to help inform his PD Recommendation:.
Appendix G:Land Use Classification and Overlay Locational Criteria
The land use classifications and overlays are determined by a set of locational criteria specific to each classification.
i
31
■ Land/Slope: Located on land with slopes of less than 15%grade. Where
slopes of 15%or greater are present, protection shall be provided through
proper site design and construction practices.
■ Hydrology: Located outside of 100-year flood areas as identified by Corps of
Engineers. Where special flood hazard areas and wetlands exist, protection
shall be provided through proper site design and construction practices in
accordance with County, State and Federal requirements.
■ Flora and Fauna: Located away from sites that would, if developed, create a
threat to unique or endangered species as identified by the state or federal
government.
■ Soil Conditions: Located in areas where general soil conditions are suitable
for urban uses because of good drainage characteristics and load bearing
capacity for site development.
Commercial-Industrial ■ Public Services/Utilities: Located in areas which are or could be reasonably
Transition Activity and efficiently served by centralized public services and utilities.
Node ■ Transportation System: Located at the intersection of arterial and/or
collector highways or in proximity to other major transportation networks.
■ Energy Use: Located within less than a 10 minute commute from an Urban
area.
■ Placement: Located in areas near major transportation routes that could be
provided with public water and wastewater services, which are appropriate
for non-residential and higher density residential uses.
■ Agriculture and Forestry: Located away from areas where development
would have a detrimental impact on productive agricultural uses and
managed forest land.
■ Population Density: Located in areas with moderate to high population
densities.
■ Historic and Cultural: Located away from areas where development would
have a detrimental impact on state or federally acknowledged historic-
cultural sites or County identified Public Interest Areas.
Thank you,
Tom
From: Perdita Holtz<pholtz@orangecountync.gov>
Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 9:28 AM
To: Craig Benedict<cbenedict@orangecountync.gov>
Cc: Elaina Cheek<echeek@orangecountync.gov>;Tom Altieri <taltieri@orangecountync.gov>; Michael Harvey
<mharvey@orangecountync.gov>
Subject: Ready for Craig's Review- Richardson rezoning- March 3, 2021 Planning Board
Craig,
The abstract and available materials on the GC-4 rezoning are available for your review on the S: drive. Please complete
your review no later than noon on Monday, Feb. 22.
Thanks,
Perdita
z
32
DRAFT
1 MEETING MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 MARCH 3,2021
4 REGULAR MEETING
5 (Due to current public health concerns,this meeting was held virtually.
6 Members of the Planning Board, staff and public participated remotely)
7
8
9 MEMBERS PRESENT: David Blankfard (Chair), Hillsborough Township Representative; Adam Beeman (Vice-Chair), Cedar
10 Grove Township Representative; Kim Piracci, Eno Township Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill Township
11 Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Randy Marshall, At-Large Representative; Alexandra
12 Allman, At-Large Representative; Melissa Poole, Little River Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham
13 Township Representative;Whitney Watson,At-Large Representative; Charity Kirk,At-Large Representative
14
15 MEMBERS ABSENT:GIo Molllnedo,At-Large Representative
16
17 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey, Current
18 Planning Supervisor; Tina Love,Administrative Support
19
20 OTHERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor, Drew Wilgus, MotoE5plus
21
22
23 Perdita reviewed the technical processes and rules for the virtual meeting
24
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
27 Chair David Blankfard called the meeting to order.
28
29
30 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS
31 a. Planning Calendar for March and April
32 b. Acknowledgement and thanks to Patricia Roberts as she finishes her second term and rotates
33 off the Board effective 3/31/21
34
35
36 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
37 January 6, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes
38
39 Kim Piracci: It didn't state anything about Craig's suggestion, when we voted to approve a basket of things. I wanted to
40 make sure that it reflected that Craig suggested a different procedure for the Board to use when asking and making
41 requests of developers. I remember that I asked if that procedure change was in the packet and he said no, or somebody
42 said no, so I voted yes to approve the work plan and that isn't in the meeting minutes. I would like that to be in the meeting
43 minutes. That change isn't in there.
44
45 David Blankfard: We said we would circle back on that issue. It's not in the annual report going to the BOCC so there is
46 no procedure for how we ....
47
48 Kim Piracci: I know, I just want that we did vote yes on everything and originally the procedure change was in that. I want
49 it noted.
50
51 David Blankfard: It's not in there.
52
53 Kim Piracci: I know it's not in there and I want that noted. I did bring it up.
54
55 Perdita Holtz: Kim there's something on page 11 of the packet, line 238 that I think addresses what you're talking about.
56
33
DRAFT
113
114 MOTION by Adam Beeman to approved the January 6, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Melissa Poole.
115
116 ROLLCALL VOTE:
117 Charity Kirk Yes
118 Randy Marshall: Yes
119 Susan Hunter: Yes
120 Kim Piracci: No
121 Adam Beeman: Yes
122 Carrie Fletcher Yes
123 Whitney Watson Yes
124 Melissa Poole: Yes
125 Alexandra Allman Yes
126 Patricia Roberts: Yes
127 David Blankfard: Yes
128 MOTION PASSED 10—1
129
130 Kim Piracci: I'm going to say no because I still want it documented that that procedure wasn't included in the vote even if
131 it's not customary to include all amendments.
132
133
134 AGENDA ITEM 5: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA.
135
136 There were none
137
138
139 AGENDA ITEM 6: PUBLIC CHARGE
140
141 INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE
142 The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, appoints
143 the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development law of the County.
144 The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and harmonious development.
145 OCPB shall do so in a manner, which considers the present and future needs of its citizens and
146 businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety,
147 and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive
148 governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.
149
150 PUBLIC CHARGE
151 The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to
152 conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At
153 any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will
154 ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should
155 decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment
156 to this public charge is observed.
157
158
159 AGENDA ITEM 7: CHAIR COMMENTS
160
161
162 AGENDA ITEM 8: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT(GENERAL USE DISTRICT)—To review and make a recommendation to the
163 BOCC on an applicant-initiated zoning atlas amendment rezone 2.72 acres from Rural Residential (R-1)
164 to General Commercial (GC-4). The Parcel (PIN 9873-54-6387) is located on the east side of NC Hwy 86
165 (no physical street address)across from Fletcher Road and south of an existing self-storage business,
166 within the Hillsborough Township. This item is scheduled for BOCC public hearing on April 6, 2021.
167 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor
168
34
DRAFT
169 Michael Harvey Presented the Abstract and Application found in the Planning Board packet to the Planning Board.
170
171 Kim Piracci: Is there something between Residential and Commercial that this could be rezoned to?
172
173 Michael Harvey: When you look at the appendices of the Comprehensive Plan (Appendix F),there is a chart listing out the
174 allowable land uses, general use zoning districts and various land use categories we are obligated to follow when
175 considering atlas amendments. Unfortunately,you will note from our abstract that within the Rural Residential Land Use
176 category there is not a commercial zoning designation that applies. As a result there is no commercial option available in
177 the current future land use category for the subject parcel. There has to be a future land use designation change to this
178 property in order to accommodate a commercial or non-residential general use zoning district.
179
180 Kim Piracci: Is there any other alternative between this and commercial?
181
182 Michael Harvey: This is the request we have received from the applicant. If an alternative land use designation is to be
183 studied,that request needs to come from the applicant. This is a conversation the staff has had with the applicant on at
184 least four separate occasions. This is the zoning designation she believes is most viable and I will say there can be no
185 zoning of the property to a non-residential zoning designation without the future land use category on the property being
186 modified. I would also say that given the existing Future Land Use categories in the area, there is no other designation
187 that makes sense other than the Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node(CITAN)or the Economic Development
188 Activity Node which would also require access to public water and sewer in order for it to be changed. As a reminder,the
189 larger issue here is that the parcel is not viable for being placed in either of these future land use categories due to several
190 joint planning efforts we are party to with the Town.
191
192 David Blankfard: How close is water and sewer to this property?
193
194 Michael Harvey: I'm not sure where existing utilities lines are but this property is not listed as being viable for service by
195 public water and sewer by any of the planning documents we mentioned. As noted by the memorandum provided by the
196 Town of Hillsborough, on page 41, Margaret Hauth,the Planning Director for the Town of Hillsborough, has indicated they
197 (the Town) have no plans to provide water and sewer service to this property. The Water and Sewer Management,
198 Planning, and Boundary Agreement(WASMPBA) map would have to be amended and the Central Orange Coordinated
199 Area (COCA) Future Land Use map would also have to be amended indicating this parcel is viable for water/sewer and I
200 would say the Town would require annexation in order for it to be served.
201
202 Charity Kirk: To clarify,to actually convert this to commercial,you first have to get it approved for future water and sewer
203 use? Which is not in our realm, is that something that Hillsborough has to do. The other option, is if she had a plan for
204 commercial that didn't require water and sewer, it could potentially be rezoned?
205
206 Michael Harvey: The Comprehensive Plan requires that CITAN be extended or placed on properties that could be served
207 by water and sewer. This property can't be served by water and sewer based on current plans the County is party to. You
208 are correct, that extending water/sewer to this property requires a modification of two external documents the WASMPBA
209 and Town of Hillsborough Orange County Coordinated Land Use Plan (COCA). During development of COCA,Town staff
210 and advisory boards chose not to extend water and sewer services to the eastern side of NC Hwy 86 to serve these
211 parcels. You will note from Ms. Hauth's memo, the Town has not expressed an interest in pursuing extension. If the
212 applicant wanted to pursue it, they could but I think the Town would require annexation of this parcel into the corporate
213 limits of the Town of Hillsborough for water and sewer to be extended. We and the Town have made Ms. Richardson
214 aware of this potential.
215
216 Craig Benedict reviewed areas of the COCA map on screen and some of the history of the process when created
217
218 David Blankfard: Could the applicant put in their own line and connect to the sewer and water?
219
220 Michael Harvey: I think if the applicant approached the Town of Hillsborough and requested voluntary annexation,they
221 would then be able to spend the appropriate amount of money to extend water/sewer to serve this property but it would be
222 developed in accordance with the Town of Hillsborough's Land Use Regulations and Comprehensive Plans versus the
223 County. Could the applicant go through the existing separate processes with the Town and with the WASMPBA partners-
224 Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough and OWASA-and amend the various planning documents allowing
35
DRAFT
225 this parcel to be served by public utilities? Yes, she could and that would make this property viable for the extension of
226 CITAN. I think the applicant is rezoning the property to begin marketing it for sale. I don't have a path forward for the
227 applicant and the other concern is that if this applicant were allowed to proceed,we would inadvertently be setting her up
228 for a couple of years'worth of work and effort because if the property were marketed for commercial purposes,
229 development would not be practical until two planning documents were modified through separate processes that they
230 require in order for utilities to be extended, unless annexed which is a separate process. I don't dispute the applicant's
231 assertion this is, in many cases, a logical extension. The problem is it doesn't meet the requirements of the
232 Comprehensive Plan which is why the Director and I have had to complete the analysis as we have and make the
233 recommendation that has been made.
234
235 Charity Kirk: What would happen if we voted to approve this?
236
237 Michael Harvey: The Planning Board can make their recommendation, the staff's recommendation would still be to deny
238 based on the inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. You can make your own recommendations based on your own
239 reasons, I don't want to give the impression that you have to follow staff but the staff can't change its recommendation.
240 We have to maintain the consistency of the Comp Plan.
241
242 Charity Kirk: I understand that,what would happen if we voted yes?
243
244 Michael Harvey: The County Commissioners would get your recommendation separate from the staff recommendation
245 and the abstract presented to the County Commissioners say the Planning Board has recommended you approve this
246 request and here's our rationale. Staff would have a separate recommendation with a separate rationale. The County
247 Commissioners, upon holding the public hearing,would then make a determination as to the best way forward.
248
249 Craig Benedict: Exactly,the Planning Board is an advisory board they can recommend for or against with the rationale
250 and in any event it proceeds to the Commissioners for public hearing and then their final action on the item,which could be
251 approval or denial also.
252
253 Adam Beeman: What would it take to change all those documents for future growth on 86? With Virginia legalizing
254 marijuana and Danville getting a casino it is going to become a very busy place.
255
256 Craig Benedict: Usually every 5 to 8 years we reanalyze our joint cooperation agreements with our local governments to
257 see if areas have been built out in the areas that are intended for growth and if there need for additional areas. The
258 dialogue would begin with a joint meeting with the planning directors and myself or Michael Harvey with the applicant to
259 say are there conditions showing that it is appropriate at this time to start expanding the urban growth area of Hillsborough.
260 In our conversations with Hillsborough,they do not have any interest at this time to expand their growth boundary. I think
261 it's a timing issue. As Waterstone and other areas expand out and undeveloped properties become built this can be
262 reanalyzed in the coming years.
263
264 Whitney Watson: I appreciate that the staff has been thoughtful about trying to find a way forward for Ms. Richardson and
265 respecting all the planning work that has gone on into creating the underlying documents. That's how I do feel that this
266 staff recommendation is what it is. I also understand that the property owner wants to see their greatest realization from
267 sale or development of that piece of property but as I looked at the map and saw, moving south on 86,those parcels
268 become smaller and smaller making them less desirable as areas for development and since they back up onto Duke
269 Forest, unless Duke University is willing to sell part of that,there is no real opportunity to extend commercial areas to the
270 east. Perhaps the applicant could be encourage to think about how that area could be developed for residential and the
271 idea that it backs up to a forested area with rich habitats and opportunities for nature encounters would seem to be a
272 natural marketing advantage for high end homes in that area. I would hate to see us continue to land lock or lock up Duke
273 Forest and make it even less accessible.
274
275 MOTION by Randy Marshall to take the Planning Director's recommendation and that the request be denied because the
276 extension of the Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node is not viable at this time as the property cannot be provided
277 with public water and wastewater services; the requested rezoning cannot be approved without the extension of CITAN;
278 the requested rezoning is inconsistent with the current policies of the adopted County Comprehensive Plan,the Town of
279 Hillsborough/Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area (COCA) Land Use Plan and the Water and Sewer
280 Management Planning and Boundary Agreement(WASMPBA). Seconded by Melissa Poole.
36
DRAFT
281
282 Charity Kirk Yes
283 Kim Piracci: Yes
284 Melissa Poole: Yes
285 Randy Marshall: Yes
286 Susan Hunter: Yes
287 Adam Beeman: Yes
288 Carrie Fletcher Yes
289 Whitney Watson Yes
290 Patricia Roberts: Yes
291 Alexandra Allman Yes
292 David Blankfard: Yes
293 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
294
295
296 AGENDA ITEM 10: ADJOURNMENT
297 Meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:46 p.m.
298
299
300
301
302 David Blankfard, Chair
37
STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY
OF A PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT
WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
An applicant-initiated amendment to the Zoning Atlas to rezone a parcel as follows:
Parcel Owner of
Identification Township Record Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
Number (PIN)
• Rural Residential • General Commercial
(R-1); (GC-4);
Ms. Gary . Stoney Creek Basin
9873-54-6387 Hillsborough Carleen • Stoney Creek Basin
Richardson Overlay District Overlay District
(Higher Intensity (Higher Intensity
Development Area) Development Area)
The Planning Board finds:
1. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and,
2. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5 and 1.1 .7 of the UDO and to Section(s) 1060D-604(d) and
160D-605 of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Planning Board finds sufficient
documentation within the record denoting that the amendment is not consistent with
the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan based on the following
a. The General Commercial (GC-4) is not an allowable general use zoning
designation within the Rural Residential land use category as defined within the
adopted Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has sought to change the land use
designation of the property from Rural Residential to Commercial Industrial
Transition Activity Node (CITAN), which would allow for the parcel to be rezoned
to GC-4.
The CITAN is defined within the adopted Comprehensive Plan as:
Land near major transportation routes that could be provided with
public water and wastewater services and is appropriate for retail
and other commercial uses; manufacturing and other industrial
uses; office and limited (not to exceed 25% of any Node) higher
density residential uses.
b. Per Appendix G Land Use Classification and Overlay Locational Criteria of the
Comprehensive Plan, CITAN is intended for location in areas meeting specific
criteria including, but not limited to:
i. In areas which are currently, or could be reasonably and efficiently, served
by centralized public services and utilities;
Staff has determined the subject parcel is not located in an area currently or
planned to be served by public utilities (i.e. water and/or sewer).
38
As a result, the parcel is not suitable for location within CITAN at this time as it
does not comply with locational criteria.
The Planning Board hereby adopts this Statement of Consistency and the findings expressed
herein and recommends the Board of County Commissioners consider denial of the proposed
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) modification and Zoning Atlas Amendment as proposed by the
applicant.
03.11 .2021
David Blankfard, Chair Date
39
PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
Administration 131 W. Margaret Lane
(919) 245-2575 Suite 201
(919) 644-3002 (FAX) ORANGE COUNTY P. O. Box 8181
www.orangecountync.gov NORTH CAROLINA Hillsborough, NC 27278
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING AND SIGN POSTING—
Board of County Commissioner Public Hearing
MS. GARY CARLEEN RICHARDSON
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) CHANGE: CHANGING
PARCEL FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION
ACTIVITY NODE (CITAN)
AND
GENERAL USE REZONING:
RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC-4)
PIN 9873-54-6387
I, Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor with Orange County, North Carolina,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in accordance with the provisions of Sections 2.8.7 of the
Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), I mailed/caused to be mailed a
notice of a public hearing being held by the BOCC on April 6, 2021.
Specifically, staff sent a public hearing notice to property owners within 1,000 feet of the
subject property (PIN 9873-54-6387), providing:
• A summary of the applicant's FLUM and Zoning Atlas Amendment requests;
• The date/time of the public hearing, and
• The process by which interested parties can participate within the virtual public
hearing.
As required by the UDO, staff utilized Orange County Tax Records to obtain address
information for those property owners within 1,000 feet. Staff sent the public hearing
notice through first class mail to surrounding property owners, and via certified mail to
the applicant/property owner, on March 18, 2021 (19 days before the public hearing).
Staff posted a sign on the subject parcel indicating the date/time of the public hearing
on March 22, 2021 (15 days before the meeting).
WITNESS my hand, this 22nd day of March, 2021.
-1 kLi�
w
Mich el Harvey, PJICP, CFM, CZO
Planner III/Current Planning Supervisor
40
Attachment 8
STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY
OF A PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT
WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
An applicant-initiated amendment to the Zoning Atlas to rezone a parcel as follows:
Parcel Owner of
Identification Township Record Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
Number (PIN)
• Rural Residential General Commercial
(R-1); (GC-4);
Ms. Gary • Stoney Creek Basin
9873-54-6387 Hillsborough Carleen Stoney Creek Basin
Richardson Overlay District Overlay District
(Higher Intensity (Higher Intensity
Development Area) Development Area)
The BOCC finds:
1. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and,
2. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5 and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section(s) 1060D-604(d) and
160D-605 of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Planning Board finds sufficient
documentation within the record denoting that the amendment is not consistent with
the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan based on the following
a. The General Commercial (GC-4) is not an allowable general use zoning
designation within the Rural Residential land use category as defined within the
adopted Comprehensive Plan. The applicant requested the land use designation
of the property be changed from Rural Residential to Commercial Industrial
Transition Activity Node (CITAN) allowing the parcel to be rezoned to GC-4.
The CITAN is defined within the adopted Comprehensive Plan as:
Land near major transportation routes that could be provided with
public water and wastewater services and is appropriate for retail
and other commercial uses; manufacturing and other industrial
uses; office and limited (not to exceed 25% of any Node) higher
density residential uses.
b. Per Appendix G Land Use Classification and Overlay Locational Criteria of the
Comprehensive Plan, CITAN is intended for location in areas meeting specific
criteria including, but not limited to:
i. Areas currently, or could be reasonably and efficiently, served by
centralized public services and utilities (i.e. water/sewer);
Staff has determined the subject parcel is not located in an area currently or
planned to be served by public utilities (i.e. water/sewer).
41
As a result, the parcel is not suitable for location within CITAN at this time as it
does not comply with locational criteria.
c. Denial of the request is reasonable and in the public interest because it:
i. Ensures consistency with applicable location criteria as detailed in
Appendix F of the adopted Comprehensive Plan; and
ii. Achieves the desired/coordinated pattern(s) of development consistent with
existing inter local agreements and adopted joint land use plans between
the County and the Town of Hillsborough.
The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this Statement of Consistency and
findings expressed herein.
Renee Price, Chair Date
42
ORD-2021-008
Attachment 9
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ATLAS
WHEREAS, Orange County has received and processed a petition submitted by
Ms. Gary Coleen Richardson (hereafter `the Applicant') seeking to amend the Orange
County Zoning Atlas, as established in Section 1.2 of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO); and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning consists of the following; and
Parcel Owner of
Identification Township Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
Number (PIN) Record
• Rural Residential • General Commercial
(R-1); (GC-4);
Ms. Gary , Stoney Creek Basin
9873-54-6387 Hillsborough Carleen . Stoney Creek Basin
Richardson Overlay District Overlay District
(Higher Intensity (Higher Intensity
Development Area) Development Area)
hereafter`the Property'; and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed
complete, and
WHEREAS, the proposal has not been found to be consistent with the 2030
Orange County Comprehensive Plan, and
WHEREAS, the Board has not found the proposed zoning atlas amendment to
be reasonably necessary to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the
request to amend the Orange County Zoning Atlas is hereby denied.
43
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED THAT this ordinance be placed in the book of
published ordinances and that this ordinance is effective upon its adoption.
Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by
Commissioner , the foregoing ordinance was adopted this
day of , 2021.
I, Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a
meeting held on , 2021 as relates in any way to the adoption of
the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the said Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of
2021.
SEAL
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners