The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About12-15-2016 Minutes PB Regular MeetingPlanning Board Minutes December 15, 2016 Page 1 of 4 MINUTES PLANNING BOARD Thursday, December 15, 2016 7:00 PM, Town Barn PRESENT: Chair Dan Barker, Vice Chair Toby Vandemark, Rick Brewer, James Czar, Lisa Frazier, Janie Morris, Doug Peterson, Jenn Sykes, Chris Wehrman STAFF: Planning Director Margaret Hauth ITEM #1: Call to order and confirmation of a quorum Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and confirmed the presence of a quorum. ITEM #2: Consideration of additions or changes to the agenda Ms. Hauth suggested two additions to the agenda. The first was to add a vote to send the updated connectivity plan to public hearing. The Parks and Recreation Board had finished working on it Tuesday night. Those changes will be in the public hearing packet. The second suggested addition is regarding Kidscope. The people who run Kidscope at Hillsborough Elementary are in a desperate need of a new location are present at this meeting. The location they’ve found doesn’t match up with rezoning. Chair Barker advised making Kidscope Item 3A and the connectivity plan Item 3B. There was consensus to do that. ITEM #3: Approval of minutes from November meeting MOTION: Vice Chair Vandemark moved approval of the November meeting minutes. Mr. Peterson seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #3A: Request from Kidscope to amend zoning of General Industrial to include childcare center Linda Foxworth with Kidscope told the Planning Board her organization would like to move to Elizabeth Brady Road to share space with Orange Enterprises. Kidscope provides preschool to children with developmental delays. Orange Enterprises employs adults with developmental disabilities. Ms. Hauth said the property is zoned General Industrial. One might immediately think that a daycare facility isn’t a good idea for that zoning, but when one thinks of the uses on Elizabeth Brady Road and the fact the area is built out, it doesn’t seem terrible, she said. Kidscope plans to construct a small building next to the Orange Enterprises building and house some staff in the Orange Enterprises building. Kidscope serves 27 kids. Ms. Hauth said a text amendment applies generally. There are a couple of other options the board could consider. There is General Industrial and Light Industrial zoning districts. She doesn’t think Light Industrial allows it either. The board could also ask Orange Enterprises to rezone their property. Ms. Foxworth said the Kidscope lease is up at the end of June. There was some talk of timing. The Board of Adjustment meets before the Town Board would normally vote on items from the January public hearing, but the schedule could be adjusted. Planning Board Minutes December 15, 2016 Page 2 of 4 Ms. Foxworth said the new building will be modular. It will be the same as the Headstart building in Fairview. They can build it in three months. Mr. Brewer said rather than aligning Industrial with daycare, which is odd, requesting a Conditional Use to allow this type of symbiotic relationship makes more sense. MOTION: Vice Chair Vandemark moved to send the text amendment to public hearing for a Conditional Use in General Industrial for a daycare center. Ms. Morris seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #3B: Sending Connectivity Plan to Public Hearing in January Chair Barker checked that it includes the future pedestrian bridge over I-85. It does. Mr. Wehrman said the text will include a 10-foot width for greenways instead of 8 feet when needed (in areas expected to be congested). MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved to send it to public hearing. Vice Chair Vandemark seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #4: Discussion of potential text amendment to allow projecting signs lower that the eight foot clearance limit when over a public sidewalk and with limitation s The members accepted Vice Chair Vandemark request to be recused from this discussion due to a conflict of interest. Ms. Hauth said she had received a request from a local business owner to allow signs to be placed lower than 8 feet when they don’t project very far over the sidewalk. Currently, if the sign projects over the sidewalk at all, it has to be placed 8 feet high so that people don’t walk into it. The proposal is for a sign projecting out no more than 12 inches. The thought is there are planters and other obstacles to keep people from walking into lower signs that project out just a little. Having a sign at 8 feet when you’re walking is really above most eyes. If the board could create language that stipulates only 12 inches with a minimal frame to avoid the risk of someone banging a head, perhaps it could be allowed, Ms. Hauth said. Chair Barker asked if it would meet ADA clearance requirements. Ms. Hauth said it shouldn’t be a problem. The town has plans to widen the sidewalks soon. The board thought it sounds reasonable. There was acknowledgement that the sign has to comply with ADA requirements, but Ms. Hauth reminded the board the town doesn’t that code and signs don’t need to get a permit. Mr. Peterson said a planter would solve the problem. Chair Barker said we need to check ADA on this. Ms. Hauth said a planter may be too big. Perhaps a fixed brick. Mr. Peterson said a kid on a scooter may not see the brick. Chair Barker said the 3-foot bottom is not the right answer. There was agreement to send this on to public hearing and let Ms. Hauth research more options. MOTION: Mr. Czar James moved to send this to public hearing. Ms. Morris seconded. VOTE: Unanimous (Vandemark excused) Planning Board Minutes December 15, 2016 Page 3 of 4 ITEM #5: Discussion of potential text amendments to allow accessory dwelling units in more locations Ms. Hauth reviewed the proposed language. She said this would only be allowed in the standard R district (R10, R20, R15) to try to stay out of neighborhoods that might have restrictive covenants prohibiting accessory units. Ms. Hauth said accessory units help provide affordable housing. Because of the density issue, nobody would be able to divide off the granny flat and sell it off. Sometimes it allows people to afford a mortgage because they are getting income from renting out the other dwelling. There was a suggestion to limit the number of cars and then recognition that the number of cars varies greatly from one house to another and one stage of life or family situation to another. Ms. Sykes suggested requiring three parking spaces might be the best number to encourage that type of development. Mr. Czar agrees might be tearing up landscape to build a fourth. Chair Barker suggested requiring one parking spot per 800 SF. MOTION: Mr. Czar moved to send this text amendment to public hearing. Vice Chair Vandemark seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #6: Discussion on interest in text amendment impacting replacement of mobile homes Ms. Hauth said this board has expressed concern about the quality and safety of mobile home units, but she wanted to check in with the board to see if the board wants to say a mobile home can’t be replaced. When they’re damaged, they can still be replaced, but did the board want to address this a little further and limit mobile homes? Ms. Hauth said they could decide an existing mobile home cannot be replaced – it has to be a double wide, a site-built house, or a modular. Or the board could require that the person requesting replacement has to be able to show that it’s been occupied as a dwelling recently (perhaps with a utility bill). Mr. Czar said the impetus was limiting the number of disused mobile homes. Mr. Peterson said there’s one that is just full of junk. Second is whether or not it meets current health standards, but that’s difficult to enforce. The third is whether there’s ever a time to require replacing mobile homes with more permanent structures. Chair Barker said mobile homes fill a need in society so they have to be allowed in some way. Ms. Sykes said the one with junk is right next to another one and is a fire hazard. Two on one lot is different. Ms. Hauth said it’s up to her department to do code enforcement. Tiny homes came up but Ms. Hauth said until they are constructed to meet state building code, our code can’t address them. Mr. Wehrman expressed that mobile homes have a purpose and a need, as long as they are safe. Several board members said they want them to be safe. Ms. Hauth said this gives her some guidance to discuss with the town attorney. Planning Board Minutes December 15, 2016 Page 4 of 4 ITEM #7: Discussion of potential text amendments to regulate temporary commercial uses Ms. Hauth asked whether there was any interest in a broader range of uses. Chair Barker suggested limiting to no more than five 60-day periods a year. Ms. Hauth suggested an alternative of prohibiting a vendor from getting two continuous permits. Mr. Brewer said he’d be ok with limiting three consecutives, thinking about produce stands. There was discussion of trying to limit to holiday shopping. Ms. Hauth said could it could be limited to pumpkins, Christmas trees and fireworks. Mr. Czar suggested not allowing two consecutive permits in the same location. Ms. Hauth said she can look into what others have, work on seasonal permits, and bring back. Mr. Czar suggested asking for a written plan for removing solid waste. Ms. Hauth said a written plan is often beyond the capacity of applicants for these types of permits. Vice Chair Vandemark suggested stating what cannot be there instead of stating what can be there. There was discussion of not allowing produce stands because Hillsborough has local growers and what is sold at produce stands is often not grown locally. Mr. Czar said there’s a legitimate concern there because the produce isn’t tracked by the FDA at that point. ITEM #8: Adjourn MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved to adjourn at 8:22. Vice Chair Vandemark seconded. VOTE: Unanimous Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Hauth Secretary