Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout04-20-2017 Minutes BOC PB JPHDraft Minutes Joint Public Hearing Hillsborough Board of Commissioners and Planning Board 7 p.m. April 20, 2017 Town Barn, 101 E. Orange St. Present: Planning Board — Chair Dan Barker, Rick Brewer, James Czar, Lisa Frazier, Janie Morris and Doug Peterson Board of Commissioners — Mayor Tom Stevens and commissioners Mark Bell, Kathleen Ferguson, Evelyn Lloyd, Brian Lowen and Jenn Weaver Staff: Planning Director Margaret Hauth, Town Attorney Kevin Hornik Item 1: Consideration of additions or changes to the agenda There were none. Item 2: Open the public hearing Mayor Stevens opened the public hearing at 7 p.m. and explained the public hearing process. He then passed the gavel to Planning Board Chair Dan Barker. Item 3: Unified Development Ordinance text amendments to Section 5.2.9 to change some requirement for accessory dwelling units and allow the units in more locations (continued from January). Ms. Hauth explained this was the first item that evening because many of those who planned to speak during the January public hearing, a long meeting, grew weary and left. The item had been scheduled later in the agenda during that meeting. Ms. Hauth explained that a dwelling has a kitchen, bathroom and living facilities. If a structure only has two of the three facilities, it is considered a suite in someone’s house. Accessory dwelling units refer to both efficiency apartments and a freestanding building, including an apartment over a garage. Both are currently allowed. Ms. Hauth explained the town is proposing that efficiency apartments within a house continue to be allowed in any house where they are not restricted by a neighborhood covenant; however, the size of such units cannot exceed 800 square feet or 50 percent of the size of the main house, whichever is smaller. For both in-home and freestanding accessory dwelling units, the town is proposing requiring a total of three parking spaces. Two parking spaces are for the main house, and one is for the accessory dwelling unit. Applicants would have to show staff where they plan to keep the solid waste and recycling containers. Ms. Hauth said a number of other requirements would apply to both types of accessory dwelling units. For freestanding accessory dwelling units, the town currently requires that the lot be twice the minimum zoning size. For example, a homeowner living in an R10 zoning district, which implies 10,000-square-foot lots, would currently need to have a 20,000-square-foot lot to build an accessory dwelling unit. In Hillsborough, it is uncommon for the lot to be twice the size of the minimum zoning. Ms. Hauth estimated that about two dozen accessory dwelling units are scattered around town. The town does not have a list of such dwellings. Ms. Hauth reviewed that the town is considering removing the requirement that lots be double the minimum size to have a freestanding accessory dwelling unit. With the requirement’s removal, an owner of any lot zoned R10, R15 or R20 Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 1 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 in town limits which can meet all other requirements — including setbacks, parking, a place for trash and recycling receptacles — could build an accessory dwelling unit up to 50 percent of the size of the main house. Ms. Hauth said the Planning Department looked into how many additional lots could then qualify for a freestanding accessory dwelling unit and estimated about 1,000. Staff does not expect every homeowner to pursue building such a unit but estimates 10 percent of homeowners would eventually take the opportunity to build an accessory dwelling unit. This proposed zoning amendment would not apply in the extraterritorial jurisdiction or in any place with a well and septic tank. It also would not apply to newer neighborhoods in a special use district. The Board of Commissioners asked staff after the last public hearing to make extra effort to seek public comments on the proposed changes. In response, the Planning Department created a short survey and encouraged people to share it through social media. There were 101 responses. Of those, 80 respondents indicated they live inside the town limits and gave the name of a neighborhood in which they live. Ms. Hauth explained she then created graphs to depict the information gained from the 80 town residents. She reviewed the results: 25 respondents live in the Historic District, 22 in West Hillsborough, 11 in Cornwallis Hills and 6 in Beckett’s Ridge. She shared bar graphs depicting the responses to the questions. Generally, 47 of the 80 respondents agreed or strongly agreed that freestanding accessory dwelling units should be easier to build, 12 did not have a preference either way and 21 thought the units should not be allowed. There was a little more support for attached units. A total of 52 respondents agreed or strongly agreed that attached accessory dwelling units should be easier to build, 11 respondents did not have a preference and 17 disagreed or strongly disagreed. In response to the statement that freestanding accessory units would work well in the respondent’s neighborhood, 37 responded they agreed or strongly agreed, 9 responded that they did not care and 34 responded that they disagreed or strongly disagreed. Responding to the statement that attached accessory dwelling units would work well in the respondent’s neighborhood, 42 agreed or strongly agreed, 13 did not care and 24 disagreed or strongly disagreed. Responding to the statement that the respondent was interested in having an accessory dwelling unit on the respondent’s property, 31 agreed or strongly agreed, 15 had not given it much thought and 34 disagreed or strongly disagreed. Ms. Hauth then reviewed graphs showing responses specifically in the four neighborhoods from which she received responses. Ms. Hauth then answered questions from the board. The 800-square-foot limit for an attached accessory dwelling unit would be the total square footage and not just the square footage of the roof. Mayor Stevens asked Ms. Hauth to explain the rationale for proposing these changes. Ms. Hauth explained that increasing the opportunity to build smaller units is often thought to contribute to affordable housing. The town cannot regulate the rent for these units, but increasing the variety of housing stock across the town is thought to be one mechanism that does not involve a public subsidy which can increase the amount of affordable housing available. The dwelling units are most likely to be built in the Historic District and in West Hillsborough, which are more densely populated, compact, closer to downtown and more walkable. There is no guarantee about affordability, Ms. Hauth said, but no one is building small houses in the new neighborhoods, so the percentage of smaller homes in town is dwindling. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 2 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 In answering questions from the commissioners and Planning Board members, Ms. Hauth confirmed that proposals to build such units in the Historic District would be subject to review by the Historic District Commission. Also, the town does not enforce restrictive covenants. Those are private agreements among residents in the neighborhoods that have such an agreement. The proposal does not allow mobile homes as accessory dwelling units. Anything that is built to the one- and two-family home building code would be acceptable, so it is possible that an accessory dwelling unit could be a modular home. Modular homes are considered to be stick-built in a factory. Commissioner Weaver asked whether there would be a measurable effect on water usage if 100 of these units were built. Ms. Hauth answered that the town has a spreadsheet which addresses water commitment. From her perspective, if 100 to 200 accessory dwelling units were built over time, it would have a small effect on the water demand. Chairman Barker said the water capacity model overestimates how much a household uses. Ms. Hauth agreed and said it takes into account a Stage 5 drought and peaking of use — such as many households flushing toilets at the same time. The town has not committed the additional water that will come with the Phase 2 expansion of the West Fork Eno Reservoir or the allocation the town has from Jordan Lake. So, there are another 2 million gallons of water that the town has not allocated. Mr. Peterson, a Planning Board member, asked whether the town would consider 100 to 200 units to be coming to town if this amendment were approved just as it would take into account the expected units in an approved development. Ms. Hauth answered no, but the Board of Commissioners always has the ability to change the ordinance to be more restrictive. Ms. Hauth said this amendment is also not proposed with any type of limit on the number of such buildings throughout town. Commissioner Bell said perhaps the town would want to track such buildings in a general tally of units in both development tracking reports and the water capacity analysis. Ms. Hauth said she could currently work that into both documents if the commissioners would like. Ms. Hauth added that such units cannot be allowed in one neighborhood and not allowed in another. She said there is not a provision in the code that one of the units has to be occupied by a property owner. Other municipalities have such a provision, but it is difficult to enforce. Nancy Taylor addressed the board. She lives in an 800-square-foot efficiency on West Orange Street. She pointed out that her neighbors include a 90-year-old resident who has a house with a two-bedroom apartment reserved in case she needs live-in care and a homeowner with a 400-square-foot freestanding accessory dwelling unit that was rented until recently. Ms. Taylor said she does not think many people realize there are several accessory dwelling units on her street. She believes the units have no impact on the neighborhood. For her, the availability of accessory dwelling units meant she could sell her house in Chapel Hill and retire early. Ms. Taylor said she volunteers on an advisory board and at the Burwell School Historic Site. She thinks expanding the possibility for people to build both types of accessory dwelling units is a very good idea and a good way to fit people in who can’t afford to outright buy a home of their own. Jackie Stonehuerner said she is supportive of the amendment to help people to afford live-in care. She is still concerned about the water situation until the reservoir expansion is completed. She thinks that Hillsborough is overcommitted on high-density dwellings. She thinks the town cannot have more than 3,000 dwelling units for all time and the town has already committed 2,700. She would like to see the number of accessory dwelling units limited. She thinks a limit should be 100 accessory dwelling units until the reservoir is filled up and maybe another 100 after the reservoir is full. She would like to see the town set up an application process. She thinks the people who need an accessory dwelling the most are the least likely to check the town website and the town should put information or an application in the water bills. Also, she would like the main dwelling to be occupied by the owner if there is to be an accessory dwelling unit as well. Someone in her neighborhood rents out several houses and she worries this man might add a dwelling unit onto every house he owns. She thinks it is difficult to have someone decide on the aesthetics of the dwelling unit. She would like for neighbors within 500 feet to be notified in all neighborhoods if an accessory dwelling unit is proposed. She would like for the town to suggest that an applicant proposing to build such a unit meet with the neighbors. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 3 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Jay Zaragoza shared copies of his comments with the board. He does not live in Hillsborough but owns a house at 215 E. Queen St. He said his remarks are limited to the freestanding structures. He has a background in real estate and town planning. He is in favor of the proposal but asked to limit any freestanding structure to one-bedroom units. He said the fair housing regulations stipulate you can have two adults per bedroom. If someone builds an accessory dwelling unit with two bedrooms, there could be four adults living in the unit and they would likely each have a car. It would then not be in keeping with the neighborhoods. He asked to consider stipulating that freestanding accessory dwelling units be between 750 and 1,000 square feet and limited to 75 percent of the square footage of the existing primary residence. That would be an additional limitation on the size of the house. Nancy Rosebaugh lives in the Historic District. She said she doesn’t understand why the Historic District has a policy of notifying neighboring homeowners of an addition or exterior change to homes while other neighborhoods do not. Ms. Hauth answered there’s a requirement for the Historic District Commission to convene a meeting and consider an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. That is the process under state law. None of the other neighborhoods has that sort of process, so there is no need to give notice because there is no venue for providing comment. Commissioner Ferguson asked whether the state legislature had passed new laws on prohibiting notifying neighbors. Ms. Hauth answered that towns have lost the ability to require houses outside an historic district to have any particular characteristics. The town cannot regulate how a house looks outside the Historic District. Ms. Rosebaugh thanked the board for the answer and asked how aesthetics would be determined outside the Historic District. Mr. Czar answered that a property owner has the right to build as desired outside the Historic District unless the owner lives in a neighborhood with a restrictive covenant. Jack Bernhardt said he has thoughts to share about intergenerational housing. He said he and his wife and his wife’s parents live on Mitchell Street and designed their home with handicap accessibility to also house his wife’s parents and their caretakers. He said his father-in-law has a wheelchair and mother-in-law has a walker. They have two buildings in one. They did not put a stove in the parents’ house. He said a limit of 800 square feet is too little for the accessibility needed to turn a wheelchair around, and wider doors consume more space. Ms. Hauth told Mr. Bernhardt that because his home does not have a second kitchen, it is not considered two dwelling units. Chairman Barker said the issue Mr. Bernhardt raises about accessibility requiring more space is interesting to him. He thinks it is a point well taken. Mr. Bernhardt asked whether a main home and an accessory dwelling unit can be connected with passable doorways so that caretakers and those for whom they are caring can move between the two spaces. Also, the restriction to one bedroom would limit family visiting from out of town. A guest room with a guest bathroom is a consideration. Micah Intrator said he represents a local tiny house committee. His parents are aging and he helps care for his father, who has Parkinson’s disease. The group he represents is interested in creating community through eldercare and affordable housing. He is thinking of creating a group of small homes where residents try to live sustainably and help one another. He asked a clarifying question and Ms. Hauth answered that units are not accessory dwelling units unless they have a bathroom, kitchen and bedroom. Ms. Hauth said what Mr. Intrator is considering would be handled under a different provision in the ordinance. Mayor Stevens said there is a provision for creative dwellings in the ordinance. Chairman Barker said as soon as you go beyond two dwellings on one parcel, you are in a different area of the ordinance. Chairman Barker suggested Mr. Intrator talk to town staff and see how his ideas fit with what is in the ordinance. Mr. Intrator also asked if there would be a secondary stormwater fee. Ms. Hauth said there would be one stormwater fee. Allison Dennis said she is a business owner in Orange County and has placed a deposit on a tiny home on wheels. She is looking for a place to park it for nine months a year. She believes she keeps meeting blocks in her plan. She wants to open the discussion in Hillsborough. Chairman Barker said state housing code is probably a big part of the challenge she is facing. Ms. Hauth explained that tiny dwellings on a chassis have not been classified by North Carolina. Some communities have classified them as recreational vehicles. Ms. Hauth said she would be attending a conference the Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 4 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 following day to learn more about tiny houses. Her understanding is they do not meet state building code and she has heard there is resistance among tiny home owners for their homes to be classified as a recreational vehicle. The code under discussion at this public hearing does not address tiny houses. Orange County is considering text amendments that could address tiny houses. Chairman Barker advised Ms. Dennis to talk to her state representative. Ms. Stonehuerner asked to speak again. Regarding Mr. Zaragoza’s suggestion of a minimum freestanding structure size of 750 square feet, she does not know why the town should not allow a minimum of 400 square feet if that is what an occupant wants. Ms. Taylor invited everyone to come see her small home. Mr. Zaragoza said he picked 750 square feet out of the air, but he said it is hard to fit in everything in 400 square feet. Item 4: Special use permit modification for 515 North Churton condominium project to request changes to the roof height (OC PIN 9874-08-2893, 9874-08-3907, 9874-08-2790 and 9874-08-2790.001through .008). Ms. Hauth was sworn in and noted that all speakers on this item need to be sworn in. Ms. Hauth reviewed there are two proposed changes to the roof height, which requires the special use permit modification. There is a change to the building floor plan, but the overall change in square footage is not at the threshold that requires modification to the permit. The developer is lowering the number of units by one, from 24 to 23 units. There are not significant changes to the site plan except to add 1,500 square feet. That is a 4.3 percent change in the overall square footage of the building. Ms. Hauth said the planned peak of the high part of the roof has changed by 4 feet. Any change in building height requires a special use permit modification. The roof changes are minor to the Historic District Commission, so the height modification is not likely to be reviewed by that advisory board. Chairman Bell checked that the roof height modification would be classified as a minor work for the Historic District Commission. Ms. Hauth answered affirmatively. Chad Abbott, land development manager for Summit Design and Engineering, was sworn in. Mr. Abbott made his presentation. He explained the height issues are solely related to design and not to gaining extra space. The developers lost a unit. They are not placing the building closer to residents on the south side. The building is extending further on the back side, which is also the west side. The new plans reduce the patio space to accommodate this change in footprint. Ms. Morris said she does not understand how at this late stage the developers decided an additional 1,500 square feet was needed. Mr. Abbott answered the additional space was determined after figuring out all the mechanical elements and the actual square footage of each room in the units. Mr. Czar asked for confirmation that the parapet height change was to accommodate mechanical systems and the shed roof height change was to accommodate the elevator. Mr. Abbott agreed and said this additional height is set back on the building in the shed portion. Mr. Abbott asked if the approval process could be shortened to the next meeting. Ms. Hauth answered no, the Planning Board needs to meet and make a recommendation and the May work session of the Board of Commissioners is focused on the budget. Mayor Stevens added that this special use permit modification is part of a quasi-judicial process and, therefore, the process has to be carried through all the right steps. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 5 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Sherry Appel was sworn in. She lives on West Orange Street and said she was one of 12 people who met with Mr. Abbott the previous week. Ms. Appel said she understands that the development is a done deal. She had suggestions about the ingress/egress. She would like a pedestrian crosswalk across Churton Street at Orange Street. Also, as the building is demolished, she wants to be sure pieces are put in dumpsters carefully and does not want insulation blowing down the street again. Ms. Morris asked if there is asbestos in the old building. Mr. Abbott said Orange County inspections and the fire marshal inspected the old building and some hazardous materials were removed. There is a contractor overseeing that process. Chairman Barker said that is not part of this application. Chairman Barker asked how the height of parapet was chosen. Mr. Abbott said it was decided to be 2 feet at one time and is now proposed at 18 inches. It is screening, but he does not know exactly what it is screening. Item 5: Special use permit modification to update the approved special use permit for Habitat for Humanity to construct 24 townhouses on College Park Road (OC PIN 9873-25-7526). Ms. Hauth reminded the boards that Habitat for Humanity of Orange County has acquired the property from Community Home Trust. A few waivers are needed on this site, including one for parking. Hillsborough requires two parking places per bedroom. These are small units, and there will not likely be multiple cars per unit. Habitat is asking to not have to build two parking spaces per unit. Also, Habitat does not yet having a lighting plan but expects to comply with the Unified Development Ordinance, except that Habitat would like to use 25-foot poles even though such poles are taller than needed for the single-story dwellings. Habitat is also requesting a waiver regarding grading restrictions because some steep slopes were created through the grading of the site. Commissioner Weaver checked that the proposal before the board that evening proposed an entrance from within Waterstone Terraces and College Park Road but that connection would not continue through the interior the Habitat development site. Ms. Hauth confirmed that was true. Tony Whitaker — president of Civil Consultants, the planning and engineering consultant on the project — was sworn in. He reviewed that Habitat is planning on a senior affordable housing unit with restrictions for residents ages 55 or older. The proposed number of units has not changed. He said the strong pedestrian connection without the vehicular connection is a positive change. The parking lot would be connected with The Little School parking lot. He believes there is no degradation of public safety. Commissioner Ferguson asked for confirmation that there is no degradation for first responder access in the northern section of units. Mr. Whitaker said the distance meets the fire code and emergency code requirement for a dead-end driveway. Commissioner Ferguson said she wanted to make sure that residents in the northern section would get an emergency response as quickly as southern residents. Mr. Whitaker said that is not a criterion we deal with in a formal way. He believes there is very good access to the area. Also, the plan maintains some nice trees in the center of the property by not having a driveway that cuts through the development. Chairman Barker asked Mr. Whitaker to explain the reduced parking request. Mr. Whitaker said these are one-bedroom units. Some have an area that could accommodate a daybed. Habitat is expecting these to be mostly occupied by single adults. Habitat thinks the 48 spaces required by the Unified Development Ordinance are more than what is needed. Habitat is proposing 1.8 spaces per residential unit instead of two. Ms. Morris asked if there are wider doors and wheelchair-accessible bathrooms. Mr. Whitaker said he could not speak for the architect, but knowing that each unit is designed for seniors, every feature like grab bars and handrails may not be installed initially but could be installed. Doorways would be wide enough, but add-ons might not be there initially. The units will be purchased homes. People will have the flexibility to add those features. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 6 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Mr. Peterson asked whether the requirement that the potential Habitat homeowner participate in the building of houses might be waived for this project, and he asked whether the units would be built by volunteers. Mr. Whitaker answered that Habitat for Humanity of Orange County Executive Director Susan Levy can speak to the first questions and that yes, the dwellings will be built by volunteers. Mr. Whitaker shared there is a covered porch for each unit. The building will not be articulated – have varying depths across the front of the attached units – because it adds cost. Chairman Barker checked with Ms. Hauth that the articulation requirement only applies to commercial buildings. Mr. Whitaker reviewed that Habitat is asking for a building setback of 15 feet along College Park Road rather than 30 feet to allow the design to work, which keeps a stand of canopy trees on a different part of the property. Habitat is asking for an encroachment waiver to have the driveway to The Little School. Habitat is proposing additional landscaping to make up for encroaching into the buffer with the neighboring property. Mr. Whitaker said the lighting is intended to be consistent with what already exists in the neighborhood, which is lighting on 25-foot poles. Mr. Whitaker reviewed the four findings of fact. He said that Habitat has given heightened attention to safety and welfare. The parking spaces will be wider than the minimum requirement, 10 feet instead of 9 feet. All front parking will not have a curb to the front door to remove the trip hazard. Chairman Barker asked where the trash collection would be and where bins would be stored. Mr. Whitaker answered each residence would have individual carts that residents would need to bring to the streets once a week just as Waterstone Terraces residents do. All the trash carts will be stored in a gated area six days a week. Recycling will be contained in tote bins stored in the units or on back patios. The tote bins will need to be set out for curbside collection by residents. Chairman Barker asked if there is sidewalk access to a curb. Mr. Whitaker answered there is no sidewalk on the back side. He thinks the recycling bin would be taken off the back patio, through the unit, out the front door and to the street for collection. Chairman Barker asked if there is a homeowners association for this development. Mr. Whitaker answered yes, it will be a subset of the existing Waterstone Terraces Homeowners Association, with the same structure and same rules but a lower amount of dues. Mr. Whitaker continued that he believes Habitat has met the second finding of fact. With the granting of the waivers, the development would be in full compliance with the town, he said. Mr. Whitaker said regarding the third finding of fact about not detracting from the value of the existing neighborhood, he said the affordable housing project was approved and has always been anticipated as part of the existing neighborhood, so Habitat believes there is no degradation of existing property values. Regarding the fourth finding, Mr. Whitaker said the development conforms with the town’s plan for the area. The project complies with the Future Land Use Plan, which calls for attached housing; complies with zoning; complies with the Waterstone master plan; and complies with the current special use permit, which is for 24 attached housing units. Mr. Whitaker said the expectation is to begin the construction drawing process and contract for site infrastructure this year. Next year would be vertical construction. Ms. Morris asked if people would be living there while construction is going on. Mr. Whitaker said construction access must be along College Road, so there would not be construction traffic moving through Waterstone Terraces. There would be a temporary driveway through one of the two southern-most buildings. The plan is to build the two northern buildings first and then move southward over time after the northern units are occupied. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 7 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Ms. Levy was sworn in. When asked, she answered that the Habitat senior housing units would be kept affordable in perpetuity. She said the existing sweat equity requirement will have to be reexamined with other options for those who are not able to work on their own home and their neighbors’ homes. Commissioner Ferguson said grab bars are important. Ms. Levy said the units will be equipped with grab bars. Ms. Levy said the mortgage does not represent the full sales price. She explained that the Habitat model is that 25 percent of a Habitat homeowner’s income goes toward the mortgage. There are second and third mortgages that only come due upon sale. Mr. Czar asked if there are similar properties in Orange County. Ms. Levy said they have built some attached housing but nothing this small and not age restricted. Mr. Czar asked if there is some methodology on the number of parking spaces suggested. Ms. Levy answered that Habitat is proposing 1.8 parking spaces per unit. When Habitat conducted focus groups, people were not concerned about parking. Mr. Czar said people will need caregivers. Ms. Morris asked if the exterior siding will be HardiePlank. Ms. Levy answered the townhouses nearby have vinyl siding so that is what is proposed for this development. Stuart Clode was sworn in. Mr. Clode said he and his wife are new residents of Hillsborough, but if they had known about this affordable housing project they would not be living in Waterstone Terraces. He said there is no awareness among the neighboring townhouse residents of this development. He also did not know about the fire station that will be built. He said the Ashton Woods website depicts this affordable housing area as green and owned by Ashton Woods. He said he recognizes the “not in my back yard” reaction is natural and human. There are hundreds of trees on the Habitat lot. The children at The Little School play there all the time. It’s delightful for he and his wife as it is. When he looks at the site plan, he sees five trees retained. He is wondering whether it could be better. He is wondering whether more trees could be retained on the east side. Also, in the large area between the northern and southern buildings, more trees could be retained. He thinks heavy machinery would not be needed to build this, so a maximum number of trees could be retained. Also, he wonders how people with walkers can take garbage and recycling containers out to the road. He likes Habitat and is upset with Ashton Woods for not sharing these plans. Bob Locke was sworn in. He said he didn’t know about the development either. He pointed out relatives would need parking spaces when they come to visit. In some cases, live-in help would be needed. He is not confident that the Habitat plans include enough parking. He said there is not enough parking in Waterstone Terraces, especially for the homes with a single garage. If you do not have enough parking within a development, cars are parked alongside the roads. Also, the trash and recycling is a problem for the Terraces. It should be thought through more for these homes. Karin Clode was sworn in. She is concerned about elderly people taking garbage to rollout containers kept at the end of the block in a gated area, especially in inclement weather. Also, is it mandated that no one else can come and live in this home beside this one resident? If there is more than one person, then there is more than one car. She wonders if cars will be parked on the street in front of her home. Mayor Stevens said it is not just one spot per one bedroom but 1.8 per unit. So of the 24 units, 20 would have two spaces and four would have one space. Ms. Clode asked Ms. Levy if Habitat stipulates who can live in these homes. Ms. Levy answered the homes would be age-restricted units and would have to abide by Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. She also said reporting has to take place twice a year through the homeowners association. Anyone 19 years old and younger would be prohibited from staying overnight more than 90 days per year. Ms. Levy does not know whether there will be a restriction in the mortgage document. Habitat will sell each housing unit to a single adult or couple. She does not think it is likely someone will sneak someone in because the units are very small. Jennifer Adams was sworn in. She is the executive director of The Little School and said she was at the hearing in support of the project. The benefit of seniors connecting with children far outweighs concerns, she said, saying she sees it as an incredible enhancement of her daycare program. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 8 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Marie Dowle was sworn in. She agrees with everything her neighbors have said so far. She added that she thinks the northern entrance to this development will have a slower emergency response time because Waterstone Drive is a divided roadway in front of that entrance. Kathleen Lezama was sworn in. She asked why the plan called for 104 townhouses in Pod 3A but Waterstone Terraces consists of 114. Ms. Hauth said it probably happened at the time of construction drawing. Staff can approve up to a 10 percent increase in dwelling units. Ms. Lezama said 98 are under contract. Most of the unassigned parking spaces are always full. Parking spaces by the pool are full. People are parking on the streets. She thinks the entrances proposed for this affordable housing area will create more parking issues. Chairman Barker asked Ms. Hauth what parking standard was used for Waterstone Terraces. Ms. Hauth said it was approved before 2010. It could be the developer counted the garage as a parking space. Ms. Lesama said the single garage means one car in driveway and one in the street. Steven Kinsella was sworn in. He echoed his fellow neighbors who reside on Monarda Way. He said he wonders whether three turns into the northern parking lot is necessary. He thought it would be better to connect directly to College Park Drive. Laura Eastwood was sworn in. She lives in Waterstone Terraces in the unit closest to Habitat’s development. She believes her view is the most affected because she will be looking at the back of the Habitat units. She wonders whether her appraiser knew this when her home was appraised. Mr. Whitaker said he is distressed to hear about the lack of notice from Ashton Woods because he had a different impression from his interaction with Ashton Woods for the last year. Habitat has presented different layouts to Ashton Woods for the past year. Some of the layouts were outright rejected with the statement, “This is not what we’ve advertised to our residents.” Mr. Whitaker said he thinks Habitat has good answers to many of these concerns. There are many more than five trees being preserved. By North Carolina Forestry standards the lot is a moderately dense wooded site. The five trees noted on the site plan are significantly large enough to be noted on the drawing. Chairman Barker asked if the green cloud on the map is a tree protection zone. Mr. Whitaker answered yes and what you do not see on the plan is utilities like storm drainage. Those require some clearing. Habitat has taken some pains to minimize tree loss. Mr. Whitaker said regarding trash removal, older people get their garbage to the street. They do that all around town. On collection day, the homeowners association management entity will police to make sure cans are not left at the street too long. He said we have thought about the issue of some people not being able to get their can to the street. We think it will be a tight-knit community and residents will help one another. Also, Orange County and private entities have additional costs to pick up trash cans for individual residences if they can’t get it to the street. Mr. Kinsella spoke again. He said Habitat will make these homes available for those who qualify. Is there any mechanism to preclude their relatives from moving in when they die? Ms. Levy answered there will be a buy-back provision when Habitat sells the home. The home would come back to Habitat. The relatives of the deceased homeowner might get some cash equity but not the physical house. Mayor Stevens said there will be easy pedestrian access. It is a general desire in Hillsborough to have open neighborhoods for walking. Ms. Levy said they hope there will be a lot of interaction. She is pleased about the excitement that The Little School has brought to the project. Chairman Barker said there is sidewalk connectivity. On a similar project, we made sure there would be no restriction on access to only homeowners association members, he said. He expects Hillsborough will do the same here. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 9 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Chairman Lloyd said the fire station will be close to Old N.C. 86 and residents might not see it or know it is there unless they need it. Mr. Clode asked what the next steps would be. Ms. Hauth said if the public hearing were to be closed that evening, then the Planning Board will go through the details the third Thursday in May. The Board of Commissioners will receive the recommendations at its meeting in June. Chairman Barker reiterated that after tonight, the public comments period would be closed. Mayor Stevens said if there are questions after the meeting is closed, staff would be able to answer technical questions. He said we are very glad people came out tonight. It is very important. This is what we believe in. There’s information on the town website, www.hillsboroughnc.gov, about other projects happening in town. He said we share the distress that residents of Waterstone Terraces did not know about the plans for affordable housing units here. Item 6: Unified Development Ordinance text amendments to add Section 5.1.5 to describe seasonal uses and to establish permitting requirements. Ms. Hauth said the Planning Board spent two meetings on the proposed text amendments to address seasonal sales. The board wants to tie the amendments to a season or celebration and keep a tight time limit on such sales. The board expressed concern about certain types of items for sale like produce when the town already has two farmers markets. Types of items for sale did not end up as a restriction, but the Planning Board did add requirements that sales could not last more than 60 consecutive days and that no more than three permits could be issued in a year. There are sales that seem nearly permanent at the moment. Ms. Hauth said the produce seller on South Churton Street expressed interest in speaking tonight but is not here now. Commissioner Ferguson said this would mean Avon sales would not be permittable nor would anything that looks like a yard sale. She added that the pop-up produce stands serve a purpose on the northern side, where people could walk to them if they did not have a car. Ms. Hauth said the proposed amendments are an attempt to not have the pop-up stands detract from the commercial district. Commissioner Lloyd asked if churches could have sales outside. Ms. Hauth answered a one-day church bazaar would not be regulated. Item 7: Unified Development Ordinance text amendments to amend Section 6.17.2 to clarify when sidewalk construction is required. Ms. Hauth explained that as the ordinance is written, a sidewalk has to be built if land is subdivided, even if the applicant did not plan to build anything. She said that was not what was intended. Item 8: Unified Development Ordinance text amendments to amend Section 6.7.2 to clarify when design standards for new non-residential construction apply. Ms. Hauth explained this proposal would add a provision to try to capture larger commercial projects to ensure Hillsborough’s design standards apply to these larger tracts. Mr. Czar advised thinking of some word other than pedestrian in the amendment. Item 9: Unified Development Ordinance text amendments to amend sections 6.18.12 and 14 to increase the square footage of wall-mounted signs allowed in the central commercial zoning district and to clarify references in the location of freestanding signs section. Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 10 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017 Ms. Hauth said staff has looked at this for a while. There is a stipulation that a sign can be no larger than 3 percent of the area of the front wall. That is usually a very small area. Staff proposes changing this to 32 square feet. The Historic District approves those that are in the commercial district within the Historic District. Motion: Commissioner Lowen moved to close public hearing for all items. Mr. Peterson seconded. Vote: Unanimous Item 10: Adjourn Motion: Commissioner Ferguson moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 p.m. Commissioner Bell seconded. Vote: Unanimous Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Hauth Secretary Joint Public Hearing Minutes April 20, 2017 11 of 11 Approved: June 12, 2017