Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout02-16-2017 Minutes PB Regular MeetingPlanning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 1 of 8 MINUTES PLANNING BOARD Thursday, February 16, 2016 7:00 PM, Town Barn PRESENT: Dan Barker, Rick Brewer, James Czar, Lisa Frazier, Carolyn Helfrich, Janie Morris, Jenn Sykes, Chris Wehrman STAFF: Planning Director Margaret Hauth, Town Attorney Bob Hornik ITEM #1: Call to order and confirmation of a quorum Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Ms. Hauth confirmed the presence of a quorum. ITEM #2: Consideration of additions or changes to the agenda There were no changes. The agenda stood as presented. ITEM #3: Approval of minutes from December meeting and January public hearing Ms. Hauth noted Jenn Sykes was spelled incorrectly. Mr. Barker noted a word (enforced) was dropped under Item 4, paragraph 3. Ms. Hauth noted in the same paragraph that the signs don’t get a “building” permit. MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved approval of the December minutes with the noted corrections. Ms. Sykes seconded. VOTE: Unanimous Regarding the January minutes, Ms. Morris said the summarization of her comments in the minutes didn’t clearly reflect her questions and concerns raised at the January public hearing. She read a statement which highlighted that on p. 5 of the minutes, she would like it noted that she asked the Caruso Homes team whether they have previous experience with the type of topography found in Collins Ridge that requires so much grading and that the team answered yes and that all the easy- to-build upon real estate properties have already been developed. MOTION: Ms. Sykes approved the January minutes with the noted corrections. Ms. Frazier seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #4: Recommendation to Town Board regarding Community Connectivity Plan update Ms. Hauth reviewed the highlights were presented at the public hearing mainly updating what had been constructed in the last couple of years and focusing on recommendations that had to do with safety. MOTION: Ms. Morris moved to recommend approval by the Town Board. Ms. Sykes seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #5: Recommendation to Town Board regarding public hearing text amendments: A. Section 6.18.15 to allow projecting signs lower that the eight foot clearance limit when over a public sidewalk and with limitations Ms. Hauth said she changed the standard from 3 feet to 27 inches to meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standard for someone to detect it with a cane. There were no comments at the public hearing. MOTION: Mr. Czar moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the text amendment. Mr. Brewer seconded. VOTE: Unanimous B. Table 5.1.6, Use Table for non-residential districts, to list child day care as a conditional use in the General Industrial district Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 2 of 8 Ms. Hauth reviewed that this came about because KidSCope, which is a preschool for developmentally disabled children and currently located at Hillsborough Elementary, would like to co-locate with Orange Enterprises. Mr. Czar acknowledged he missed a meeting but said he had a general reaction that there’s not good reason to put a daycare in a general industrial setting. He expressed concern about not being able to delineate childcare from general industrial zoning. He added that leaving it to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) is kind of a cop-out. He noted the operators would have to be concerned about what their neighbors were doing and how they operated with no ability to impact those operations. Mr. Brewer agreed it’s not optimal and it doesn’t preclude them from looking elsewhere. Ms. Helfrich said she has a problem with housing children with disabilities in an area where other children would not be housed. Ms. Sykes said this is an integrated childcare so not all the children have disabilities. She asked if Orange Enterprises and the daycare might move in the future to a parcel zoned differently. Ms. Hauth answered that Orange Enterprises needs the industrial zoning. The daycare only had 4 months to find a new home. Ms. Hauth noted that when the request was made, all acknowledged it was not ideal or best practice. Chair Barker asked wouldn’t it be appropriate for a business to offer daycare on a general industrial site. Mr. Czar said no. Ms. Sykes asked because that would be secondary, it wouldn’t come back before this board. Ms. Hauth answered that if Vietri tried to open a daycare for their workers, it would not be allowable as the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) stands. Ms. Sykes asked if there a way that we can strongly encourage them to look for a new site and give them a time limit. Ms. Hauth answered no. Mr. Hornik answered no that would constitute a “use variance” which is prohibited under state law. Ms. Hauth said not unless they come to us and say we’re only going to be here for 2 years. They have not indicated at all that this would be a short- term fix. Mr. Czar said his sentiment is not to recommend this but it’s valid to not vote unanimously. Mr. Wehrman thought it would be possible to approve this with a special use permit, one time only, not changing the guidelines. Ms. Hauth answered that wasn’t possible with the timeframe the applicant has. Chair Barker said we talked about it and it would be a 6-month process. Ms. Hauth said it wouldn’t be one-time only for this person but it would be a higher standard. Ms. Frazier asked about the Sportsplex’s zoning because there is childcare there. Ms. Hauth answered it is not zoned general industrial. The Sportsplex is allowed to have a daycare. Ms. Hauth said a lot of our industrial uses don’t feel that industrial. While they could absolutely change and be more dangerous for children, right now ours are a lot more truck-based. Particularly on Elizabeth Brady Road, the businesses aren’t particularly industrial. Ms. Morris said she was in favor of it because it’s connected to Orange Enterprises and it seemed like an extension. It seemed like it fit. Mr. Brewer said there’s a symbiotic relationship between the two. Mr. Hornik said once the ordinance is amended, it could theoretically be applied to other situations. MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved to recommend the Town Board approve the amendment as written. Ms. Sykes suggested emphasizing that this is not an ideal situation and seconded the motion. Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 3 of 8 Ms. Sykes added it would be appropriate to send a note to say that it’s a hardship situation. Ms. Hauth said the board is aware of the situation but may not have considered all the implications. Chair Barker said it would be nice to sunset it. Mr. Czar said even if you sunset this amendment, you will still have developmentally disabled children in an industrial setting in perpetuity until KidSCope ceases operation. Ms. Sykes said which is why it would be ideal to encourage them to move but we don’t have any teeth to do that. Chair Barker asked whether any language would do that. Ms. Frazier said with Hillsborough expanding, more childcare will be needed. If we have one allowed in an industrial setting, I’m kind of torn because there will be others. Ms. Sykes said we should look at sun-setting it at the June meeting. Chair Barker this was a friendly amendment to have a sunset attached to the amendment. Mr. Hornik said I think the BOA could pose the condition to limit the time. Mr. Czar checked that the BOA could say this usage would no longer be valid. VOTE: 6-2 with Czar and Helfrich voting no ITEM #6: Recommendation to Town Board regarding Master Plan amendment and Special Use Permit for a portion of Collins Ridge proposing 326 apartments, 152 townhomes, and 196 single family detached lots on 100 acres located behind Daniel Boone Village and accessed from Orange Grove Street (part of OC PIN 9874-10-9993). The request includes changes to conditions approved in the master plan. Ms. Hauth reviewed that during the public hearing the project and waivers were discussed. Comments presented in writing are in the packet including from the county planning department, Ms. Trueblood’s public space manager statement, the Orange County Schools statement and two similar emails from Rachel Hawkins. In the Planning Board packets, in addition to the waivers, there are four topics or other items/conditions to talk about. And there is a staff list that includes making the greenway 10 feet wide, noting that the transit stops aren’t located yet and some other conditions that carry over requirements from the master plan to special use permit so they don’t get inadvertently lost. Ms. Morris said she had general comments and then read a statement that contained several questions. She asked about the plans to have the CASA apartment units together rather than interspersed. Ms. Hauth answered that CASA specifically requested the site proposed and indicated they would develop on compact site to serve their tenants more efficiently. Ms. Morris raised concern that perhaps the CASA units wouldn’t be built with universal design. It was clarified that the advocacy for universal design at the public hearing was in general and not regarding the CASA apartments. Ms. Hauth noted the Caruso said they would offer universal design if buyers wanted it. Ms. Morris asked if the Planning Board can advise the Hillsborough Town Board to scale back the number of dwelling units permitted. Mr. Hornik answered the master plan allows the developer to build that many. She asked whether the Planning Board can advise the Town Board to require two entrances. Mr. Hornik said the second access point can happen sooner but we can’t compel it to be built sooner. Ms. Morris asked whether the Planning Board and Town Board can ask for a range of pricepoints. Mr. Hornik said we can’t require it but can encourage more information. Chair Barker pointed out the economy can affect those projections. Ms. Morris said she’s confused how Daniel Boone fits in. Is a second entrance possible? Ms. Hauth answered it doesn’t affect the application before us. Ms. Hauth explained the entity that is Daniel Boone owns at least 4 areas of land. Two are under contract. The area known as Daniel Boone and the ice skating rink are under contract. It’s roughly 57 acres. Ms. Morris checked that Caruso Homes has the land under contract for potential sale in April 2018. Ms. Morris asked if part of Daniel Boone will be commercial. Ms. Hauth said we don’t know yet. We don’t have an application. Ms. Hauth added that conversations to date have indicated the redevelopment will be under the current zoning. Ms. Morris said my understanding is Caruso Homes does not develop commercial property. Ms. Morris said even though it’s under contract and they’re going to buy it, we don’t know who is going to develop it. The answer is that’s correct. Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 4 of 8 Ms. Morris said Tom Magnuson talked about the old roadway that runs through the property. She wondered whether the Planning Board and Town Board can require the developers to photograph the old roads and indicate where they are. Chair Barker said there are old roads through many developments and we didn’t require them to do so. Ms. Hauth said we required some preservation at Waterstone. Ms. Morris read a statement noting that Caruso Homes said they’d come back for each pod and now they say they need to develop multiple pods at a time. Ms. Hauth acknowledged the Planning Board was reviewing 3.5 pods this time. Mr. Brewer said we passed the master plan and then allowed discussion of things that have already been passed, which muddies the water. Ms. Morris said I think there are residents in Hillsborough who don’t have any idea about what’s coming. Chair Barker moved the board on to the list of waivers. There was agreement to discuss the waivers one by one. Waiver 1--This is regarding the perimeter buffer adjacent to the interstate and the railroad and to some extent the western side. The applicant is asking for encroachment to accommodate utilities and stormwater and they would replant after the work is done. Randy Sexton, with Caruso Homes, said the reason we’re asking for that is there are connections that need to be made to the existing sewer outfall and the existing waterline. Also, the 10-foot wide walking trail around the perimeter of the property is inside the buffer. We’ve got the name and number of the folks who did Riverwalk and we’re asking them for a proposal to use their special cutting machine to limit the amount of interference in the forest. Mr. Sexton said the trail will go around trees of 24-inches or larger. The property was actually commercially timbered approximately 6 years ago. There’s not a lot of large trees to save but what we can save, we will try to. Mr. Wehrman asked if this is an encroachment of the distance of the buffer or the density. Ms. Hauth answered it’s a distance and performance (density of landscaping material) encroachment. There was consensus that this is acceptable. Waiver 2—This is regarding the diversity of lot sizes for single-family dwellings. In 2011, we put some language in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), trying to replicate our more traditional neighborhoods that weren’t built all at one time and have different lot widths and sizes. We developed that in a vacuum without asking any developer whether they can meet that standard. This is the first developer and they are saying we don’t want to do that or we can’t do that. They are saying they have diversity of housing stock across the neighborhood. Ms. Hauth said it would be great to comply with this UDO requirement, but she doesn’t feel it’s reasonable. Chair Barker said the thought behind it was that it would encourage a more diverse sales price per street. That is something I really think we should strive for. Ms. Hauth said we’re trying to replicate something that was done in 1940 and it’s 2017. Even my neighborhood, which was built in the 1950s, has all lots the same. You can’t replicate the historic district. Ms. Sykes said Caruso Homes is offering single-family homes and townhomes and yet they are clustered. Why can’t you encourage town homes and single-family homes mixed instead of developed in two clusters, she asked. Mr. Sexton answered that when Caruso Homes presented this over a year and a half ago, his team was told this is what the town wanted in the Vision 2030 Plan. We showed the bubble plan and we were told this is what the town is looking for. No front-load garages. Chair Barker said what we’re talking about does not contradict this. He asked how consistently sized are your lots? Mr. Sexton answered they will offer 40-something lots and 50-something lots. It’s not going to be cookie cutter. Jeff Caruso said there are 40-foot and 50-foot lots. They can have side setbacks as small as 3 feet or 6 feet. That means 34-foot, 32-foot or 30-foot wide houses on 40-foot lots. We have front-loaded lots and rear-loaded lots and different elevations. There would be a couple different house types for each width of house. He showed map. Barker said each block has its own. Caruso pointed out where 50-foot lots are across from each other. Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 5 of 8 Chair Barker asked is there a reason to not have a 50-foot lot and 40-foot lot on the same block. Mr. Caruso answered there are different builders on those two lots sizes. Mr. Czar said I think the ordinance was well-intentioned but is not practical for a development of this size. I’m not sure I agree with the thinking behind the ordinance. We’ve encountered our first test. My inclination is I don’t think you’d see a difference between a 40-foot lot and 50-foot lot. I think it’s arguing for the sake of arguing. Mr. Brewer agreed. He leans toward granting the waiver. He agrees it would be good for the Planning Board to take another look at this ordinance. Mr. Wehrman asked is there a way to intermingle single-family and apartments more. Ms. Sykes agreed. Ms. Sykes said having more variation between 40- foot and 50-foot lots is having houses that have more yard. We are in track development but we can encourage economic diversity. Ms. Hauth read the language in the ordinance. Josh Decker with McAdams said we do many developments and the monotony issue is always an issue. The intent is to offer a variety of products. The apartment developer has to develop the apartments. Sometimes townhomes can be broken apart but you have to have a number to make it marketable and profitable. The houses with alleys has a downtown feel. On the perimeter, you have the more traditional front-loaded product. Even block to block you are getting much variation. Chair Barker checked that the townhomes will have a separate HOA from the single-family. Mr. Sexton answered there will be a master association then an HOA for townhome, an HOA for single homes. Mr. Caruso said I don’t know that we can guarantee at this meeting how it’s all going to work. Lawyers are involved in creating the HOAs. Ms. Hauth reminded Chair Barker that CASA will be rental apartments. Ms. Sykes spoke in favor of pushing for the diverse lot sizes. She understands it’s not as profitable but she thinks it’s a solid principal to stand by. Mr. Czar said I can understand the sentiments behind the UDO but I think what it would produce would be unaesthetic. It would look like an odd duck. Ms. Frazier said she doesn’t have a problem with granting the waiver. Chair Barker said we have enough consensus. Waiver 3 – The developer wants to use some on-street parking for visitor parking for the apartment complex. There were no concerns or comments. Waiver 4 – There are a number of code provisions about not grading steep slopes and not more than 10 acres at a time. The developer wants to mass grade it. Ms. Hauth said at least in this case it’s not a significant amount of tree loss. Chair Barker asked for the greatest change in elevation. Ms. Morris asked whether the entire development would be flat. Mr. Sexton answered no, rather they will cut the steepest area at the top of the hills where the community center will go and create a gentle roll to the land rather than a steep hill. Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 6 of 8 Mr. Sexton pointed out there’s a long distance between the high point and the low point. Fred Boone, engineer with McAdams, showed the existing grades. He said the high point is somewhere around 698 feet and will become around 650 feet. Mr. Caruso said there will be some deep cuts, so you need a large area in which to work or it would be dangerous. Waiver 5 – The street design standards speak to traditional grids for front-loaded streets. Once you put alleys in, you go over the maximum number of intersections. No questions or concerns. Waiver 6 – Tree coverage, tree preservation. Ms. Hauth said the ordinance provides fairly broad percentages. You can’t hold it constant and still develop anything. For this site, the majority of the trees are on the perimeter buffer. There were no concerns. Waiver 7 – Reduction on western boundary of 40-foot buffer to 20 feet. Ms. Hauth reviewed that Daniel Boone is zoned high intensity commercial and Caruso Homes has a contract on the property. They certainly intend to develop it more uniformly. They’re just not ready to take on those acres just yet. Mr. Wehrman asked what the grading is like in that area. Ms. Hauth said it’s equal with the Collins property. Mr. Wehrman asked about grading and the buffer. Is it flat or does it slope away (does it affect the buffer). Mr. Boone answered the topography rises tremendously from Churton up. Mr. Hornik asked whether to the west on the Boone property does the elevation continue to fall. The answer was yes. Mr. Boone said we’re trying to get as much of the sewer down as possible. Ms. Sykes said I get the justification but there are other ways to get around the sewer problem. I’m not for it. Mr. Brewer said I don’t know what the other alternatives would be. With the same logic, I’d be for it. Mr. Caruso said it changes a lot. Mr. Sexton said we’d have to look at building a lift station with a force main if we can’t get the gravity. Chair Barker said I think we’d be ok with allowing it for the sewer but is it also to give you an extra lot on each street? Mr. Sexton answered no. He pointed to the map and showed where he doesn’t get extra lots by this request. Ms. Sykes said she would still like to see the buffer preserved. She would rather protect anyone moving in to the redeveloped Daniel Boone property. Other items and suggested conditions: Public versus private streets: Ms. Hauth said the applicant has indicated a willingness to do either one. When staff looked at the project initially, traditionally townhome developments are done on private streets with no town trash pickup. I think it’s a problem that they are paying the same taxes but don’t get trash pickup. That concern isn’t shared universally across town government. Chair Barker said there will be one block of single-family homes facing townhomes. That would be an odd situation (regarding this topic). Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 7 of 8 Mr. Czar said his opinion is to recommend they be public streets. It’s a matter of equity. We require them to be built as public. And Caruso Homes has the best intentions to sell to responsible homeowners but homeowners have to set aside money to repave. If they don’t’ repave, the roads will deteriorate. It’s unequitable to make people pay taxes and not receive the same services. Ms. Sykes said she agrees with Mr. Czar. Chair Barker asked if the HOA has to maintain alleys. Ms. Hauth said she assumed so. Mr. Boone said alleys are public access easements. Next condition – Ms. Hauth said Duke Energy doesn’t like people walking under their high powered lines. Can we be flexible if we need to move the greenway if Duke Energy wants it moved. Next note – Staff encourages connections to Street D and cul-de-sac one. These are two streets that go toward Daniel Boone Village. Ms. Hauth said staff would like to encourage stub-outs in case it becomes a desirable connection. Ms. Hauth said I’m not saying force them to provide the right of way but have them be mindful of it as they work on the development of Daniel Boone. It’s up to the board how much you want to encourage it. Ms. Morris said I think there should be as many ways as possible to get in and out. Chair Barker asked if the developer would be ok with allowance to connect in the future. Mr. Hornik said we could say reserve the right of way to the property line. This would be similar language used for the landing pad for a bridge to cross I-85 and would have language that at some point it ends if the town doesn’t use it. Chair Barker decided to ask for a show of hands for the waivers and conditions. Granting waivers: Perimeter buffer waiver – 8-0 Second waiver yes -- 6-2 Third waiver off-street parking – 8-0 Fourth waiver grading the big hill – 7-1 (nay: Helfrich) Fifth waiver – 8-0 Sixth waiver – 8-0 Seventh waiver – 4-4 Eight waiver (transferability of open spaces between phases) – 8-0 Special recommendation –public streets for townhomes, private alleys, private apartment areas (public streets for everything except apartments) – 8-0 Recommendation of greenway near powerlines – vote not needed Encroachment to allow connections – agreement from developer to allow stubs and thrus as shown, similar the language for the crossing over I-85 so at some point it ends – 8-0 Recommendation that plans reflect everything the Parks and Recreation Board requested – Ms. Sykes said dog parks are always a good thing. It’s on the list. Chair Barker checked that Special Conditions. A, B, C are crossed off? Ms. Hauth said I think these are covered. D – Ms. Hauth said it’s referring to which materials are being approved, we always specify which plans from the applicant are approved. Chair Barker asked do we need to go through this. Planning Board Minutes February 16, 2017 Page 8 of 8 Ms. Hauth said in G, she calculated half the dwelling units in each pod to say that’s when recreational facilities have to be in. The developer is OK with that. The board is OK with that. Mr. Brewer asked, referring to the detailed email with the buses and would they provide places for the buses, did anyone look at this outside this board. Ms. Hauth said it will be in the Town Board packet and discussions are underway between the engineers and the school board. Mr. Hornik said the language tonight is approval of the special use permit and master plan amendment with the conditions as discussed. Ms. Morris said she’d like to abstain. Ms. Hauth explained Ms. Morris has no financial investment in the property so she can’t. Also, abstaining would likely count as a “yes” vote. MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved to recommend the Town Board approve the special use permit and master plan amendment with the waivers and conditions as discussed. Ms. Frazier seconded. Mr. Czar said are we going to pass on there was some dissension with the waiver. Ms. Hauth answered the votes will go to the Town Board. Mr. Brewer said it’s a big step for Hillsborough and it’s upsetting to some folks, but he will vote to approve. VOTE: 5-3 approval (nays: Carolyn Helfrich, Janie Morris, Jen Sykes) ITEM #7: Staff updates & upcoming work -outreach efforts for Accessory Dwellings -topics for discussion - amendments in March -interviews & elections Ms. Hauth thanked Mr. Brewer for gathering information about other communities that already have it. Ms. Hauth is thinking about doing a survey monkey poll and then distributing it to the 700 folks that subscribe to the website and then specific folks she knows use Nextdoor. It would be totally nonscientific, require a yes or no answer and highlight where you get more information and the April public hearing. Ms. Hauth said there were people who were at the public hearing early for that topic and left. Ms. Hauth said development in west Hillsborough is still not ready to come in. There will probably be interviews next month for Rick Brewer’s seat, and it will be time for elections. Ms. Morris said the Collins Ridge community meetings were few and were held at times when people were generally away (spring break and summer). Ms. Hauth said it carried over two town public hearings. Developers choose when to hold community meetings. It’s not under the control of the Planning Board or the town. Mr. Czar said I think the problem is how you get the message out. Ms. Sykes said she knows a lot of people who have heard about Collins Ridge. There was brief discussion about encouraging people to sign up for emails from the town and to use the town website. ITEM #9: Adjourn MOTION: Mr. Brewer made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 p.m. Ms. Sykes seconded. VOTE: Unanimous Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Hauth Secretary