HomeMy Public PortalAbout06-20-2019 Minutes PB Regular MeetingAssistant Town Manager/Planning Director Margaret Hauth
101 E. Orange St., PO Box 429, Hillsborough, NC 27278
919-296-9471 | margaret.hauth@hillsboroughnc.gov
www.hillsboroughnc.gov | @HillsboroughGov
Planning Board Minutes | 1 of 4
Minutes
Planning Board
7 p.m. June 20, 2019
Town Hall Annex Board Meeting Room, 105 E. Corbin St.
Present: Chair Dan Barker, Lisa Frazier, Chris Johnston, Doug Peterson, Jenn Sykes, Scott Taylor, Toby
Vandemark and Chris Wehrman
Staff: Planning Director Margaret Hauth and Public Information Specialist Cheryl Sadgrove
1. Call to order and confirmation of quorum
Chair Dan Barker called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Planning Director Margaret Hauth confirmed the
quorum.
2. Agenda changes and approval
Hauth added an item regarding noise and outdoor performances. Member Toby Vandemark added an item
regarding downtown “Edison” lights as Item 6C.
3. Minutes review and approval
Minutes from regular meeting on May 16, 2019.
Member Doug Peterson requested that the minutes reflect that he asked the applicant for the 515 North
Churton discussion whether Summit Design and Engineering had previously met with the adjacent property
owners regarding the lighting and the fence and that the representative from Summit had said Summit had
met with adjacent property owners before construction.
Motion: Vandemark moved approval of the minutes as amended. Member Lisa Frazier seconded.
Vote: Unanimous
4. Discussion and direction to staff regarding waivers in the Special Use Permit process
Hauth said staff has observed an increase in waivers requested after projects are built. The Planning Board is
being asked to discuss whether after-the-fact waivers should be allowed.
The Planning Board discussed that in the recent examples of this practice there have been different reasons
for the after-the-fact requests. For instance, a retaining wall in the Elfin’s Pond development was
inadvertently built 1.5 feet into the buffer. That was a survey error the developer brought to town staff. A
different example briefly acknowledged was a light pole that was not moved at the 515 North Churton
condominium project. The light was simply not moved and the developer chose to ask for a waiver rather
than pay money to have it moved. It was also discussed that the location of the Duke Energy utility box was
changed without the developer first seeking a waiver because it was an on-the-spot decision when a Duke
Energy employee was on site to install the box.
Planning Board Minutes | 2 of 4
Barker said the Planning Board should require developers to testify that the after-the-fact waiver is an equal
or superior change. He noted the quote provided from the Unified Development Ordinance required this
finding, but it has rarely been reviewed in that manner. He added that Planning Board and Town Board should
determine whether a waiver would make a project better.
Hauth said options include limiting from which sections a waiver could be requested. She added that what is
happening is once a developer identifies one waiver needed, the tendency is to then pile up many waiver
requests.
Member Doug Peterson asked Hauth whether she sees long-term negative consequences of granting a
waiver. Hauth said granting waivers degrades the integrity of the ordinance. If a developer can get whatever
the developer wants, why have the ordinance? Hauth added that most of the time developers could have
built the project without the waivers, it’s just cheaper or more expedient to request waivers when they are
easily granted. Also, the waivers are not being used to generate creativity, which is one of the qualifications
for waivers in the ordinance.
Member Chris Wehrman asked if the town has special requirements that make developers more likely to
request waivers in this jurisdiction. Hauth answered no, but some of the requirements go against what
retailers want. For instance, retailers want parking right outside the door; the ordinance requires a
landscaped strip between the building and the parking.
Wehrman said the town either needs to relax the standards or hold developers to the standards.
Barker said the reason for the waivers is typically to make things easier, faster or cheaper for a developer.
Hauth said staff can inform developers to prepare in-depth, good arguments for waivers. She added that staff
can keep track of requested waivers and note where situations would arise if no waivers were allowed and
report back to the Planning Board.
Barker said the veterinarian office at Hampton Pointe made an excellent presentation for waivers with expert
testimony and a one-page explanation for each waiver. Those waiver requests could be a helpful example for
staff to share with other developers who need to prepare waiver justifications.
Barker asked if the town could charge per waiver. Hauth said yes, but the Fiscal Year 2020 budget has already
been approved.
There was brief acknowledgement that the current climate is such in which developers are not hesitant to
request waivers after a project is already built.
5. Discussion of possible amendments for the July public hearing
A. Lighting
Hauth said lighting complaints and issues are generally from neighbors who experience light trespass through
the trees rather than from neighbors wanting darker skies.
Hauth added that building code insists on some aspects of lighting, such as having to install a light next to
each outside door. She does not want to specify a type of light fixture at single family residential doors
because it is unenforceable.
Planning Board Minutes | 3 of 4
Hauth reviewed possible amendments to the maximum light levels allowed in Section 6.11.5 of the Unified
Development Ordinance. She told the board that she had sent the language to Duke Energy for comment but
had not received comment yet.
Hauth reviewed lighting plans of several establishments to show the board the differences and similarities and
overall effect. The board looked at the lighting plans for The House at Gatewood Restaurant, Leland Little
Auctions and Advance Auto Parts and noted there are no extreme ranges in the foot-candle measurements on
these plans.
The board then looked at the lighting plan for the 515 North Churton condominium project and noted there
are many more light fixtures on this plan. The light fixtures are spaced close together, making some parking
spaces brighter than they need to be so that other spaces meet the minimum light requirements. It was noted
that there are places at this project which have light measurements of 14 foot-candles, whereas the other
projects did not have any measurements over 4 foot-candles.
Hauth reviewed amendment language that would specify backlight, uplight and glare ratings, also called BUG
ratings. She noted that she would be seeking comment from Duke Energy on this area as well. Barked noted
that the University of North Carolina uses this rating system. Hauth said that “full cut-off” is an outdated term
now and BUG ratings are used instead.
The board then discussed Item 5C before 5B.
B. Buffers
Hauth reviewed proposed amended language to Section 6.5.2 regarding buffers.
Peterson wondered whether small trees could grow well under a large shade tree. Hauth said that it would be
good to ask an arborist to review the proposed language to inform staff and the board whether it was
possible to plant large trees and understory trees at the same time.
Hauth said the proposed Table 6.1.1 regarding buffer type requires buffer width, minimum number of
plantings, structure type and height requirements. This would increase specificity for staff, which would help
staff ensure compliance with the ordinance.
Barker said his first thought is that more shrubs should be required.
Hauth said she has in mind to ask a retired urban forester to review the buffer text amendments to be certain
the town is asking for the right amount of plant material in a buffer. It was noted that there is a standard
landscaping book architects typically use as a reference.
Hauth said these text amendments regarding buffer are not ready to be sent to public hearing.
The board would like plan drawing of buffers and even a side view. Hauth said she is not sure she can draw a
side view. The board also would like an expert to determine whether plants can survive at the density
proposed in the amendments.
C. Downtown lighting
Vandemark said the Hillsborough/Orange County Chamber of Commerce has been working with businesses
on creating a solution that would increase light on the sidewalks and make it more obvious that restaurants
and shops are open in the evening. She said one idea is to string Edison lights along the tops of the buildings.
Another idea is to install decorative streetlamps. She asked the board for general feedback.
Planning Board Minutes | 4 of 4
The board said that Edison lights along the tops of buildings is not likely to cast much light on the sidewalk.
The board suggested that lighting the tops of the outdoor dining barriers and the windows of shops and
restaurants would better accomplish the goal.
Hauth pointed out that if the chamber bought all the lights, then each establishment would have the same
intensity of light and the same color.
Vandemark asked if color is in the ordinance. Hauth answered that color is not specified.
6. Housekeeping text amendments for July public hearing
A. Rewrite of Section 5.2.25.2 — requiring existing mobile home parks to get new conditional use permits.
Mobile home parks have been made by-right uses.
Hauth said this is to clean up some language that was overlooked. Creating a mobile home park no longer
requires a Conditional Use Permit in a mobile home park district, so a Conditional Use Permit is no longer
required when a mobile home park owner wishes to expand.
Motion: Sykes moved to send this amendment to the July 18 joint public hearing. Vandemark seconded.
Vote: Unanimous
B. Outdoor performances and noise associated with bars and restaurants
Hauth said Section 5.2.2.1, which lists standards of evaluation for restaurants, was written before the town
addressed noise at restaurant establishments. The current language makes reference to a Special Event
Permit and a noise permit, but there is not a noise permit. Hauth explained that if there is a complaint about
noise, the Hillsborough Police Department measures the decibels of noise on the property line and advises
the establishment’s owner or manager if the reading is too high.
Hauth reviewed the proposed amended language with the board.
Motion: Johnston moved to send the amendment to the July 18 joint public hearing. Sykes seconded.
Vote: Unanimous
Hauth said that the joint public hearing was likely to be short and she would like for the Planning Board and
Board of Commissioners to plan to stay after the public hearing to talk about the process for amending the
Vision 2030 Plan.
7. Adjournment
Motion: Sykes moved to adjourn at 8:44 p.m.
Vote: Unanimous
Respectfully submitted,
Margaret A. Hauth
Secretary