Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board minutes - 030321 Approved 4-7-21 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 Approved 4-7-21 57 Kim Piracci: I made it clear that I wasn't in favor of that and on line 377 there was a motion made to approve the Planning 58 Board Annual Report and Work Plan as amended. I think originally, that change, correct me if I'm wrong, originally that 59 change in procedure was going to be included in that and before I voted, I wanted to make sure it wasn't included. I feel 60 like that should be .... 61 62 Craig Benedict: I said It's up to the Planning Board to set its agenda on what you would like to do as far as that internal 63 policy of how to bring up suggestions when there is an opportunity to bring up recommendations. That is between 64 members to determine the time of the year to discuss how best to accomplish that. 65 66 David Blankfard: There's nothing written down that says we have a procedure. 67 68 Kim Piracci: Precisely. 69 70 David Blankfard: So you want a procedure? 71 72 Kim Piracci: Well, it's not up to be but it does make sense to have a procedure, actually. It's just that I thought that that 73 change was going to be in the work plan. 74 75 David Blankfard: Right now we don't have a procedure 76 77 Kim Piracci: Right, and Craig suggested a change and I was against, didn't like it. 78 79 David Blankfard: So we didn't approve of a change. 80 81 Perdita Holtz: I think something was put into the work plan and I don't have access to it right now. If someone has the 82 work plan I emailed out it would be on one of the very last pages. 83 84 Kim Piracci: I did see it there, it's something for future work. 85 86 Perdita Holtz: So the work for coming up with that procedure was added to the work plan. 87 88 Kim Piracci: Ok,all right. So other people don't seem to think that,the fact that is wasn't included in this vote is .... 89 90 Perdita Holtz: Well, it's as amended and there were several things that were added to the work plan so when you look on 91 line 377, Randy Marshal approves the Planning Board Annual Report and Work Plan as amended, there were several 92 things added to the work plan as a result of the January meeting. It's not customary that we list all of those in the minutes. 93 94 Kim Piracci: Ok. 95 96 David Blankfard: So, what I understand this to mean is there no set procedure and it's up to the Board to decide what we 97 want to do. There's not a procedure. 98 99 Kim Piracci: But there was going to be a procedure. 100 101 David Blankfard:There was a suggestion of this kind of work the last time and do we want to continue that and there was a 102 lot of debate about that and it was not unanimous, it was not agreed upon. 103 104 Craig Benedict: In the coming year, I think everybody has the right to put it on an agenda and discuss it more thouroughly. 105 106 Melissa Poole: I would suggest that with the changing or switching out of members that April would be a good time to 107 have this discussion. 108 109 David Blankfard: I agree, do we need a second? I think we should definitely come to a consensus that we will take this up 110 at a later time. 111 112 The Planning Board members came to a consensus to have a future procedural discussion. Approved 4-7-21 113 114 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 Approved 4-7-21 169 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 Approved 4-7-21 225 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. Approved 4-7-21 281 282 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