HomeMy Public PortalAbout4.2.1996 Planning Board Minutes and AgendaTown
of
ill
Since 175
AGENDA
PLANNING BOARD
Tuesday, April 2, 1996
6:30 p.m. Town Barn
ITEM #1: Consideration of additions to the agenda.
ITEM #2: Comments from the Chair.
* Committee Reports
ITEM #3: Approval of March 5 and March 12 minutes.
ITEM #4: Review of Preliminary Subdivision plan for River Bend, 5 lots north of Tuscarora
Drive.
ITEM #5: Discussion of options to expedite the site plan review process.
5&1 f 0 P O fr"f� Corte
ITEM #6: Adjourn.
Please call the Planning Department if you cannot attend.
732-2104 extension 228 (this line is connected to voice mail)
101 East Orange Street a P.O. Box 429 a Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
919-732-2104 • Fax. 919-644-2390
MINUTES
PLANNING BOARD
April 2, 1996
PRESENT: John Taylor (chair), Richard Bradford, Ed Gill, Jack Hughes, Louise Long, Chris Quinn,
George Sagar, Doreen Tuell, Quanda Turner
PUBLIC: Wesley Cook, Alois Callemyn, Margaret Hauth
Taylor called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. Hauth asked to add the election of officers
as item 5a and the members agreed.
ITEM #2: Gill reported that the Park & Recreation Board discussed funding needs, potential uses for
town property, and the proposed river park behind the courthouse. Sagar reported that the
Board of Adjustment approved 3 site plans for John Roberts to relocate the Gravely Tractor
sales and service, Frank Frederick to build an office building, and NOW Audio Video to
locate an office/warehouse operation in the Meadowlands. He added that the Conditional Use
Permit for a duplex on Nash Street was denied.
ITEM #3: Bradford noted that he had voted against the motion in item #4 on March 5, not Taylor.
MOTION: Gill moved to approve the minutes of March 5 and 12 as amended. Long seconded.
VOTE: Unanimous.
ITEM #4: Hauth introduced the Preliminary Subdivision plan for River Bend, a five lot subdivision on
the north side of Tuscarora Drive. She said the new road will be Saponi Drive, built to
NCDOT standards. Callemyn explained that the applicant is requesting a reduced east land
use buffer because the 100' requirement makes two lots unbuildable. Hauth explained further
that the Subdivision Regulations require a 50' buffer if the adjacent land is zoned and
developed as industrial, but requires a 100' if the land is vacant and zoned industrial. Cook
said he would prefer a 20' east side buffer and is willing to plant a row of evergreens in the
portion of the buffer that does not have significant existing landscaping. Hughes asked Hauth
her impression of the -likelihood of the adjacent lot being developed. She indicated its
location on the map and the unusual caracteristics of the property that make its development
for industrial purposes unlikely. She added that an industrial developer would be required
to provide a 50' buffer along the same property line.
MOTION: Hughes moved to reduce the eastern land use buffer to 20'. Tuell seconded. Gill made a
friendly amendment that the industrial zoning on the adjacent property by shown on the
recorded plat so potential buyers would be aware. Hughes and Tuell accepted the
amendment.
VOTE: Unanimous.
MOTION: Hughes moved to recommend approval of the preliminary subdivision to Town Board with
the conditions that the stormwater control, water line engineering, and road plans be
submitted and approved. Tuell seconded.
VOTE: Unanimous.
ITEM #5: Hauth introduced the idea of streamlining the review process for non-residential development.
She explained that the Town Board supports this concept both because it encourages
development and the current public hearing process gives, the public a false sense of
participation. She further explained the limited opportunity for the public to influence the
approval of a project because the Board of Adjustment is quite limited in its ability to deny
an application. She added that many neighbors mistake the quasi-judicial nature of the Board
4/29/96, page 2
of Adjustment for the more descretionary hearings on rezonings. Sagar noted that the hearing
process provides an important check and balance in the review process. He added that the
Board of Adjustment has the ability to respond to public comments and integrate concerns
into the plans as well as bringing a fresh perspective to the review. Hughes suggested the
the Board of Adjustment be consulted for their opinion on changes to the review process.
Hauth gave examples of less than smooth site plans reviews during which the public expected
too much from the hearing process. The members discussed some of the options put forward
and expressed concern for removing the public notice or comment from the process. Hauth
said she did not anticipate removing notice. The members agreed that a recommendation
from the Board of Adjustment was desireable and Taylor directed Hauth to seek the board's
opinion.
ITEM #5a: Hauth explained that the Rules of Procedure call for election of officers in April and asked
the members to nominate new officers to keep elections on track.
MOTION: Tuell moved to keep Taylor as Chair and Gill as Vice -chair. Turner seconded.
VOTE: Unanimous.
Taylor adjourned the meeting at 7:45 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
&Udla�14- dtclL
Mixgaret A. Hauth, Secretary