The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About9.1.1992 Agenda & Minuets Planning BoardITEM #1: ITEM #2: ITEM #3: Of of RtfllaborourA HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Tuesday, September 1, 1992 6:30 p.m. Town Barn Consideration of additions to the agenda. Comments from the Chair. 101 E. Orange Street P.O. Box 429 (919) 732-2104 Approval of the minutes of July 7 and August 4, 1992 meetings (attachment). ITEM #4: Update on Town Board decisions concerning Public Hearing items: a) Walker Rezoning b) Correction of Zoning Map error c) Residential uses text amendment ITEM #5: Discussion of possible text amendment to create and define "Extended Care Facility" as a use in the OI and GC districts (attachment). ITEM #6: Discussion of possible text amendment to allow some non-residential uses in historic houses in and outside the Historic District (attachment). ITEM #7: Continued discussion of uses within existing commercial districts (attachment). ITEM #8: Consideration of membership status of Ken Chavious (attachment). ITEM #9: For Information: Update on Cooperative Planning. There will be two public information meetings: Monday (8/31 - OC Planning Conference room) and Thursday (9/3 - New Hope Elementary School) both are from 7-9 pm ITEM #10: Adjournment It is essential to have a quorum present at this meeting. Please call the Planning Department if you cannot attend. 732-2104 or 732-2106 after 5 pm MINUTES PLANNING BOARD September 1, 1992 MEMBERS Wayne Tilley (Vice -Chair), Cheshire Cole, Louise Evans, Sam Jones, Margaret Moore, PRESENT: Wendy Olson, Quanda Turner, Kendall Abernathy (Alternate) MEMBERS Bill Crowther (Chair), Ken Chavious, Leif Deetjen, Robert Murphy (Alternate) ABSENT: OTHERS Ray Gronberg, Margaret Hauth PRESENT: Tilley called the meeting to order at 6:35 pm ITEM #1: Olson asked to add three addition items to the updates in Item 4 and to add Item 9a, reports from subcommittees and the members agreed. ITEM #3: Olson noted a minor amendment to Item 9 of the July minutes. MOTION: Olson moved to approve the minutes of both meetings, as amended. Abernathy seconded. VOTE: Unanimous. ITEM #2: Tilley briefly discussed why he did not abstain from the vote on the Walker rezoning. He noted that his wife has a small interest in a nearby property, but he had not realized it was close to the Walker property. He added that his wife's part ownership had no influence on his decision and that his decision was based on the facts of the case. ITEM #4: Hauth provided the following updates: a) Walker rezoning unanimously denied. b) Zoning Map correction unanimously approved. C) Residential uses in OI district text amendment unanimously approved. d) Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance amendments would be revisited when current projects (commercial districts & historic house uses) were completed. e) Kennel definition would be revisited after a Code Enforcement Officer is hired which should be by the end of September or early October. ITEM #5: Hauth introduced the proposed text to create and define "extended care facility" as a permitted use in the GC and OI districts. She noted that her proposed language would close and existing "hole" in the Ordinance between a group care facility (1-15 persons) and a hospital (undefined). She added that the timing is related to the up -coming request of Triangle Hospice to locate in the Meadowlands. Moore asked whether drug rehabilitation facilities or homes for the mentally handicapped would be included in this definition. Hauth indicated she thought they would, unless specific language excluded them. She noted that halfway houses were specifically excluded from the group care facility definition. Olson asked where group care is currently allowed. Hauth said they are a conditional use in all residential districts. Planning Board Sept 1, 1992 page 2 Members discussed what exactly would be allowed under this definition and what would be considered a hospital. There was consensus that a specific definition for hospital be considered to avoid confusion. Hauth agreed to prepare further text for October. ITEM #6: Hauth briefly presented the first draft of text allowing non-residential uses in historic houses. Olson remembered two additional criteria: the CU2 would expire upon destruction of the house and proof showing that the house is no longer suited for residential use. Abernathy questioned the ability of anyone to clearly make a decision as to whether it is economically viable for a house to remain a residence. Members also discussed the true intent of the amendment, whether to restrictions and requirements of proof made it impossible to issue the permit, and whether the availability of the permit was too limited. Jones noted that the current wording seemed quite restrictive. There was consensus that clarification and polishing of the wording was necessary. Hauth said a final draft would be prepared for October. ITEM #7: Hauth briefly introduced the study of uses within the non-residential districts. She noted the existing intent sections were provided as well as Crowther idea of how the new districts may look. Olson asked where the current NB districts are and what would be done with them if the NB district is eliminated. Hauth noted that the lots would be rezoned to the less intense commercial zone or possibly the conditional uses could be expanded to address specific situations. Hauth pointed out some of the NB districts on the map. Jones asked if it would be more difficult for people to get commercial zoning if the NB district is removed. Hauth said it would require a rezoning hearing in either case or possibly a Conditional Use hearing. She added that it would not necessarily be harder, but the same amount of time would be required. Tilley noted that this process would require a wholesale rezoning of all commercial districts. Hauth confirmed this and noted that property owner consent would probably be necessary. The members agreed to study and discuss this further in October. ITEM #8: Members discussed the status of Ken Chavious. Hauth noted that she and Crowther had talked to him, but he has made no specific mention of wishing to continue or discontinue his membership on the Board. Members directed Hauth to speak to Chavious and learn his intentions. They were in consensus that he should be removed from the Board if cannot or will not attend meetings more regularly. The members agreed that the position should be opened for appointments at the next Town Board meeting, if necessary. The members also agreed that Abernathy should be promoted to full member and have the new appointment be for an alternate position. ITEM #9: Hauth announced the public information meeting schedule for the Cooperative Planning Agreement with Orange County. She noted it might be a good review for those members not directly involved with the work group. Planning Board Sept 1, 1992 page 3 ITEM #9a: Olson said that status reports from different committees and subcommittees were needed for the Board to make more informed decisions. Jones noted that it had always been required that subcommittees make reports, as well as the Board of Adjustment representative. Hauth noted that this tradition must have been lost in the recent staff turn- overs. MOTION: Olson moved to require reports of the Board of Adjustment representative as well as the Parks and Recreation Task Force, Entranceway Committee, Transportation Advisory Subcommittee, and the Cooperative Planning Work Group. Jones seconded. VOTE: Unanimous. Hauth said she would add these reports as a standing item and incorporate them with the Chair's comments. Tilley adjourned the meeting at 7:35 pm Respectfully submitted, Margaret 1k. Hauth, Secretary