HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board minutes - 040721 Approved 5.5.21
1 MEETING MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 APRIL 7,2021
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 MEMBERS PRESENT: David Blankfard (Chair), Hillsborough Township Representative; Adam Beeman (Vice-Chair), Cedar
9 Grove Township Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Lamar Proctor, Cheeks Township
10 Representative; Randy Marshall, At-Large Representative; Alexandra Allman, At-Large Representative; Melissa Poole,
11 Little River Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township Representative; Whitney Watson, At-Large
12 Representative; Charity Kirk,At-Large Representative
13
14 MEMBERS ABSENT:Glo Molllnedo,At-Large Representative, Kim Piracci, Eno Township Representative;
15
16 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey, Current
17 Planning Supervisor; Tina Love,Administrative Support
18
19 OTHERS PRESENT: Fiona Johann, Beth Bronson
20
21
22 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
23 Chair David Blankfard called the meeting to order.
24
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS
27 a. Planning Calendar for April and May
28
29
30 AGENDA ITEM 3: INTRODUCTIONS—WITH THE ADDITION OF NEW MEMBERS TO THE BOARD, EACH PLANNING BOARD MEMBER
31 Will Be Asked To Introduce Themselves With A Brief Summary.
32
33 Each of the Planning Board members present introduced themselves to each other and gave some background
34 information
35
36
37 AGENDA ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
38 March 3, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes
39 March 3, ORC Meeting Notes
40
41 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to approve the March 3, 2021 Regular Meeting Minutes and ORC meeting notes. Seconded by
42 Randy Marshall.
43
44 ROLLCALL VOTE:
45 Lamar Proctor Yes
46 Susan Hunter: Yes
47 Charity Kirk Yes
48 Adam Beeman: Yes
49 Randy Marshall: Yes
50 Whitney Watson Yes
51 Alexandra Allman Yes
52 Melissa Poole: Yes
53 Carrie Fletcher Yes
54 David Blankfard: Yes
55 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
56
Approved 5.5.21
57
58 AGENDA ITEM 5: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA.
59
60 There were none
61
62
63 AGENDA ITEM 6: PUBLIC CHARGE
64
65 INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE
66 The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, appoints
67 the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development law of the County.
68 The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and harmonious development.
69 OCPB shall do so in a manner, which considers the present and future needs of its citizens and
70 businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety,
71 and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive
72 governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.
73
74 PUBLIC CHARGE
75 The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to
76 conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At
77 any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will
78 ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should
79 decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment
80 to this public charge is observed.
81
82
83 AGENDA ITEM 7: CHAIR COMMENTS
84
85 There were none
86
87
88 AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENTS—"160D"LEGISLATION —To make a
89 recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on UDO text amendments related to State
90 legislation that is referred to as 160D(a reference to the statute section).The amendments are also
91 require changes to Appendix F of the Comprehensive Plan and to the Planning Board Rules of
92 Procedure. This item is scheduled for BOCC public hearing on May 4, 2021.
93 Presenter: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator
94
95 Perdita Holtz reminded the Board that the item was reviewed at the March 3, ORC meeting and at the conclusion of that
96 meeting the Board decided they did not need to see the presentation again. She reviewed the recommendations for the
97 Planning Board to consider.
98
99 Charity Kirk: I have a question about how you notify people; a half a page ad in a newspaper seems potentially ineffective
100 in this day of people not having newspapers subscriptions. I was wondering if you could talk about why that was chosen.
101
102 Perdita Holtz: We are not necessarily, choosing to do this. Currently, before 160D and for many years, statutes allowed
103 for local governments to place a half page ad in a paper for large scale amendments. Orange County never adopted that
104 provision. We have always done mailed notifications. However, our County Attorney's office feels that we need to include
105 the option in the UDO so that we are in conformance with the State regulations that allow local governments to do this.
106 We don't really anticipate that something like that would be used unless it's for a project that already had a public
107 participation component leading up to amendments so that people would be informed,they would already know that
108 something was going on.
109
110 Lamar Proctor: In terms of that notice, are these things put on the Orange County website? The notice in the newspaper
111 ad or the signage that appears next to parcels where there's a zoning amendment or letters, do those reference back to
112 the website. I have the same kind of concern that Charity has. I've looked at 160D and I know that it's an option for the 50
Approved 5.5.21
113 parcels or greater that you can do that with the newspaper. I guess the legislature thinks that people still get newspapers.
114 1 was wondering in terms of informational purposes whether we put that kind of stuff on the website.
115
116 Perdita Holtz: The Planning Department has a section on the website called Current Interest Projects where we put
117 projects that are currently being considered, not only for rezonings but also for Special Use Permits and things like Major
118 Subdivisions. When the notification letters go out, information is included in the letters on accessing the website to learn
119 more. Sometimes depending on the scope of the project, things go out in the weekly email that our Public Information
120 Officer does or depending on the scope of the project, he might also post something on Facebook.
121
122 Lamar Proctor: In terms of the days of notice, it's not more than 25 days and not less than 10. My concern is why can't
123 we just do 25? I've seen several examples of a 10 day notice for letters or whatever it is, it gets mailed on a Friday, postal
124 service has issues, people get it on a Thursday and then it references a meeting on a Monday or Tuesday. If they take a
125 long weekend then it's sorry, they don't know. I've seen examples in our community where people find out about things in
126 passing amongst neighbors and interested parties by a hair's breadth. So was there any talk or consideration of making it
127 the maximum that you are allowed, 25 days, to give people proper notice.
128
129 Perdita Holtz: We do almost always send out notices well in advance of 10 days. I think the County Attorney's office would
130 have a concern about saying we will do 25 days because statutes allow you to do 10 and they feel that our UDO should
131 conform to the language in the statutes. I also want to point out that Orange County sends out notices for the Planning
132 Board meeting which is not required by statutes,we send out meetings to property owners within 1000 feet of a parcel and
133 statutes require only abutting property owners be notified so Orange County already goes far beyond what statutes require
134 for notice. There would also be concerns about saying we are going to do 25 when we normally send them out about 15
135 days in advance because of the way our cycles work. There might be instances where an applicant is still trying to get
136 some things worked out and to hold up the notice because they were a day late from 25 days, as you suggest,would add
137 another month to the process.
138
139 Lamar Proctor: Personally, I'm looking at this as a community member, I would love to see it be at least 15 days. I think
140 the general language is notice shall be posted or mailed a minimum of 10 days prior. It's kind of permissive language,
141 meaning you can do it more. There were other notices,weren't there for 15 days?
142
143 Perdita Holtz: Yes, you can do it more than 10 days but it can't be more than 25 days in advance. Yes, I believe there
144 was one either for the Comp Plan or SUPs that required 15 days. We are now standardizing it all to be in conformance
145 with State statutes.
146
147 Lamar Proctor: I understand the conformity and I think the uniformity within our own UDO is to notice so you don't have to
148 say, it's 15 for this and 17 for that, 12 for that. That's ridiculous. My position is that I would like the minimum to be greater
149 than 10 days because I think there are instances where people don't get proper notice because of the timing of things.
150 That's one thought I had. My other concern was the exclusions being removed on page 158, 1 don't understand the history
151 of those exclusions. When I read about a non-residential Conditional Use District that is really a blank slate,other than
152 some limitations within the Rural Buffer,that combined with removing exclusions, makes me think that there could be a
153 Conditional District approved for a crematorium in somebody's backyard or something that clearly fell within the exclusions
154 previously and is now going to be game on for anything, anywhere other than what's specifically excluded in the NR-CD
155 list.
156
157 Perdita Holtz: I understand the concern but there's also another piece to the puzzle which is Appendix F of the
158 Comprehensive Plan that shows which land use classifications that NR-CD can be applied to. That is found on the very
159 last page of the amendment packet, page 348. NR-CD would be allowed for consideration in all of the land use
160 classifications because currently the Conditional Use District also is allowed for consideration in all those classifications. 1
161 understand that it is correct that you could now apply for these uses where previously,you could not. When Conditional
162 Use Districts were set up, at least in the'90s if not earlier,the people who set them up said we don't want these uses to be
163 considered.
164
165 Lamar Proctor: When I read this and I think about worst-case scenario, I see a 10-day notice requirement for a zoning
166 change with an NR-CD or Conditional District that allows anything. Anything is on the table unless it's in the Rural Buffer.
167 If there are a few landowners that are abutting or its homeowners that aren't concentrated around a parcel,they miss it
168 and they are out of luck.
Approved 5.5.21
169
170 Perdita Holtz: Conditional Districts, as they are now called, require a Neighborhood Information Meeting so there are
171 multiple steps that happen before notices for a Planning Board meeting or a Public Hearing ever goes out. For instance,
172 on page 68 there are the requirements for a Neighborhood Information Meeting for Conditional Districts. Notices for
173 Neighborhood Information Meetings are sent out 14 days prior and it is a 1,000 feet requirement and a sign is also
174 required to be posted on the property.
175
176 Lamar Proctor: My concern is notice, there are plenty of spots where notice gets sent but they seem to be shrinking under
177 these amendments. Is there a mechanism when there is an application for a zoning amendment that would include an
178 informational meeting in front of the County Commissioners prior to the Planning Board considering it? It feels like these
179 applications go out and come through the Planning Board and then we get surprised or even they get surprised at what is
180 being put in front of them. Is there any mechanism that could be initiated or put in place where there is an application and
181 then there is an informational session with the Board of Commissioners at a Public Hearing that says this is a zoning
182 change that's being applied for,the process has starting and we're letting you know this is coming and we are following the
183 process next where the Commissioners are put on notice and the public is put on notice. I feel like things kind of popped
184 up and then interested parties hear about them by word of mouth and I want to make sure the public is getting the proper
185 notice. Most people don't get newspapers anymore so those are some of my concerns regarding notice.
186
187 Michael Harvey: When an application is submitted, staff has five business days to determine sufficiency. Once it's
188 sufficient and formally accepted, that's when our internal clock for the LIDO starts. There is an internal review by Planning
189 Department staff and other County staff through our Development Advisory Committee(DAC),we then schedule the
190 Neighborhood Information Meeting. With Conditional District applications,the Neighborhood Information Meeting is
191 required to occur in a set timeframe before Public Hearing. Notices of the Neighborhood Information Meeting are sent to
192 property owners within 1,000 feet. The notices have to be sent 14 days prior to the date of the Neighborhood Information
193 Meeting and we post signs on the property. After the Neighborhood Information Meeting it then goes to the Planning
194 Board and there is a separate mailing required for Conditional District applications before the Planning Board, not required
195 by State law but something the County is going to continue to do. After the Planning Board, there is a Public Hearing with
196 a separate advertising component. There are three public meetings, Neighborhood Information Meeting, Planning Board
197 meeting and Public Hearing with three separate advertisings for each application.As for an initial public review, at last
198 night's meeting,there was a petition submitted by a County Commissioner to study whether or not we need to amend the
199 Unified Development Ordinance to create a concept plan meeting where a conditional application would be reviewed by
200 the County Commissioners before a Neighborhood Information Meeting is scheduled to offer comments to the applicant.
201 That is in an infant stage in terms that we haven't been given formal direction by the BOCC to investigate that process but
202 it is something that is being discussed. It was looked at several years ago but we were not authorized to submit the formal
203 procedure to amend the UDO to include it but it is something the BOCC is tinkering with having us look at again.
204
205 Craig Benedict: It did come up last night and it will be referred to BOCC Chair/Vice-Chair to be discussed and will include
206 the County Manager/Deputy Manager and myself on what modifications could be necessary to have such a process. The
207 reason it wasn't followed through with before was in the interest to have as much technical input on an application to offer
208 to the applicant before someone looks at an application that might not be fully vetted. It may be part of our process that
209 after all the various departments, NCDOT, Emergency Services, Fire, everybody makes their comments, and we let
210 everybody know that we are looking at the aspects of an application. Then maybe there's another opportunity for the
211 public to see it sooner rather than later. It might not—they thought having an un-vetted project by all those different
212 internal agencies would make it look like the work was not being done.
213
214 Lamar Proctor: Board of Adjustment is appealed to Superior Court and does not go before the County Commissioners?
215
216 Perdita Holtz: Correct.
217
218 Lamar Proctor: The minimum 10 days and the removal of the exclusions is a huge deal and I question that. It seems to
219 be something that is part of the history of our UDO and now it's wide open and those exclusions are removed. Those are
220 my concerns.
221
222 Perdita Holtz: Maybe it would help you to know, all of these uses are allowed somewhere already they just weren't going
223 to be allowed as a Conditional Use District but they are allowed in certain Zoning Districts if you look in the Table of
Approved 5.5.21
224 Permitted Uses. It's not like these uses were not allowed anywhere, all of these use types occur in the Table of Permitted
225 Uses as allowed somewhere.
226
227 Lamar Proctor: For some specific zoning, all of it is allowed?
228
229 Perdita Holtz: Correct. These were not prohibited Countywide uses.
230
231 Lamar Proctor: I saw on Special Use Permits,the Planning Director is allowed to modify those by,there's a list,for minor
232 changes and I think that's under 2.7.14; how many times can an applicant come back for a minor modification like that?
233
234 Perdita Holtz: There isn't a limit to how many times they can come back but I will say, it's exceedingly rare.
235
236 Craig Benedict: In my 22 years, less than five times. It is exceedingly rare because our SUP conditions that are approved
237 are very finite and specific to the project.
238
239 Lamar Proctor: Asking directly about the 10 days, could we just make it 15 days? Is that crazy?
240
241 Perdita Holtz: The Planning Board could vote to recommend that it be 15 days and it could go to the Board of County
242 Commissioners as the Planning Board's recommendation.
243
244 Lamar Proctor: The exclusions used to apply to Conditional Districts and the new LIDO would remove that exclusion list,
245 correct?
246
247 Perdita Holtz: It used to apply to Conditional Use Districts which no longer are allowed to be a zoning mechanism in North
248 Carolina. The whole construct of Conditional Use Districts is gone.
249
250 Lamar Proctor: Under 1.6.2 that whole section was stricken and I think the footnote says it's in policy documents, does
251 taking that out of the UDO change it in substantive way?
252
253 Perdita Holtz: No, unless you consider that changing it would currently require a UDO text amendment whereas changing
254 it in the future would only require an amendment to the Planning Board Rules of Procedures.
255
256 Craig Benedict: When the UDO was developed there was no separate policy mechanism for the advisory boards and over
257 the last 10 years the Commissioners and Attorneys' Office have put together policies for each of the advisory boards.
258
259 Lamar Proctor: Who can make the Planning Board amendments? If it's just a policy?
260
261 Perdita Holtz: It could start with staff,the Planning Board, or BOCC but the BOCC has to approve it.
262
263 Lamar Proctor: I would love to see that 10 days become 15 days, that's a motion by me. Instead of a uniform 10 days
264 make it a uniform 15 days.
265
266 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to require 15 days instead of 10 days for mailings. Seconded by Alexandra Allman.
267
268 Lamar Proctor Yes
269 Charity Kirk No
270 Adam Beeman: No
271 Carrie Fletcher No
272 Whitney Watson No
273 Randy Marshall: No
274 Susan Hunter: No
275 Alexandra Allman Yes
276 Melissa Poole: No
277 David Blankfard: No
278 MOTION FAILED 8—2
279
Approved 5.5.21
280 Whitney Watson: I want to go back to the notice question, especially any kind of posted signage,while the LIDO had
281 plenty of places where it's very prescriptive, I'd like to add one more. Signage that's posted in a yard or the right-of-way
282 needs to meet standards for legibility and readability just like we expect billboards to be able to be read when someone is
283 driving by at 35 mph. There are a number that pop up around that western side of Orange County that I just can't read. If
284 that could somehow be specified. I'm sure the DOT folks could tell you how big the letters need to be to be seen at various
285 speed limits.
286
287 Perdita Holtz: If I could address that, the County does attempt to put a lot of information on those signs. I don't know if
288 you have seen other places in North Carolina where you'll see an 8'/2 x 11 yellow sign that just has a Z on it,which means
289 zoning, and it has the phone number for the planning department. That is how a lot of places advertise that something is
290 happening on the property. We could go to something like that. Having a sign with all the information that we attempt to
291 put on it could result in a 4 ft. by 8 ft.sign and staff puts those up and staff does it in a County vehicle or personal vehicle
292 and that would be pretty big to fit into those vehicles. If there is a general feeling that the sign needs to be larger,we
293 would need to take a look how much we actually try to put on the sign and whether we should try to emulate the Z signs
294 that so many other places use.
295
296 Craig Benedict: Maybe with a website address and a phone number and then with the big Z. That is what people are
297 using now for information gathering.
298
299 Adam Beeman: Maybe not even a bigger sign but taller poles to stand it on so it isn't so low to the ground. That may help
300 visibility.
301
302 Whitney Watson: I would be in favor of less information that is more readable and getting it up higher would be great.
303
304 Lamar Proctor: I agree with Whitney and I think this dovetails into my initial question about putting stuff on the website. 1
305 think it gives better notice to people to have a big Z and say look there's something going on, go here and you can read
306 about it. You're trying to put as much information as you can and I think the big point of the sign is to put people on notice
307 that something is going on. They are not going to get the details from their car but they will get the notice if it's a larger Z
308 than if it's a small signer that could be easily be confused with a work permit or something.
309
310 Perdita Holtz: Understood, the current way it came to be is because people complained that there wasn't enough
311 information on the sign and they had to go somewhere else.
312
313 David Blankfard: Can you also put the date of whatever is going to happen, like on April 10, 2021 and then people will
314 know something is happening that day and go find out what it is.
315
316 Michael Harvey: Just to remind the Planning Board that there are statutory minimum requirements you have to post the
317 date,time, location and nature of a public hearing. The problem is getting all that on a sign that the Department of
318 Transportation won't rip down. In the 16 or so years I've been here,we have attempted numerous different sign options
319 and as Craig and Perdita can attest,we've had several sign taken by the North Carolina Department of Transportation
320 over the years. We even had signs removed as part of the Efland Station project because the Department of
321 Transportation said they were too high or were too large and violated their sign policy. We have multiple avenues for
322 information being provided to local residents on the numerous projects that are reviewed by both the Planning Board and
323 the County Commissioners. We've been tasked with studying the issue again and we will do so. I'm not sure we can
324 come up with accommodations that will address everybody's concerns.
325
326 Carrie Fletcher: Since we have a lot of new members, can we go back to having the pre-meeting training sessions to help
327 get people more information on the conditional, non-conditional and some of the new terminology. Those kind of pre-
328 meeting instructional programs for people to learn some of the idiosyncrasies of the Planning Board.
329
330 Perdita: Holtz: Yes,what I did was a series of training sessions which I was planning to start again since we do have new
331 members. That's something that I'll look at doing,as soon as the 160D amendments are adopted. I want be able to give
332 the correct information.
333
Approved 5.5.21
334 MOTION by Whitney Watson to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency,the LIDO Amendments and the
335 Amendments to the Planning Board Rules of Procedure. as proposed by Planning Staff to forward to the Board of County
336 Commissioners for review and consideration. Seconded by Randy Marshall.
337
338 Lamar Proctor Yes
339 Charity Kirk Yes
340 Adam Beeman: Yes
341 Carrie Fletcher Yes
342 Whitney Watson Yes
343 Randy Marshall: Yes
344 Susan Hunter: Yes
345 Melissa Poole: Yes
346 Alexandra Allman Yes
347 David Blankfard: Yes
348 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
349
350 Craig Benedict gave the Board information about the Joint project with the City of Mebane on the study done by the
351 Piedmont-Triad Regional Council of Governments for the Buckhorn Area Plan to examine if there is viability for additional
352 Economic Development Zones and/or the viability of the existing zones. There will be upcoming meetings and an
353 outreach program that is likely to be scheduled for May 2021.
354
355 Randy Marshall: The Feds are thinking about changing zoning procedures because they felt in the past they have been
356 exclusionary to some and I didn't know if there was anything there that might filter down to us that we would need to take
357 into account of if you are familiar with it.
358
359 Craig Benedict: We'll monitor,we have heard chatter about the regulations both at the State level and the Federal level.
360 When they become law,we'll have to address how it affects our LIDO.
361
362 Whitney Watson: I was looking at a project being proposed around Mebane recently and it in there was information where
363 the Planning Department had considered the availability of sewer and water. With the current emphasis on broadband, it
364 seems like this would be a good opportunity for the Planning Department to ask the proposed developer how will they
365 provide access to broadband for all the residents within a new development and perhaps even adjacent properties.
366
367 Craig Benedict: The County has a program to try to get broadband penetration in rural areas and I agree that we should
368 work with developers too. They can help plug the holes that our master plan does not. I'll get a report about what we are
369 doing in the rural areas and then tie that into our interest to have the development community assist in that expansion. 1
370 think that is a good comment and I agree.
371
372
373 AGENDA ITEM 10: ADJOURNMENT
374 Meeting was adjourned by consensus at 8:17 p.m.
375
376
377
378
379 David Blankfard, Chair