HomeMy Public PortalAbout11.15.2007 Planning Board Minutes and AgendaITEM #1
ITEM #2:
ITEM #3:
01994 Town of Hillsborough
Call to order and confirmation of a quorum.
AGENDA
PLANNING BOARD
Thursday, November 15, 2007
7:00 PM, Town Barn
Adoption of minutes from September meeting and October hearing
Additions to the agenda & agenda adjustment
ITEM #4: Committee reports and updates
• Board of Adjustment
• Parks and Recreation Board
ITEM #7: Interview of candidates for current and upcoming vacancies on the Board
ITEM #6: Recommendation to the Town Board regarding public hearing items:
A. Rezoning Request from the Colonial Inn LLC to correct a zoning error and
designate .51 acres on W King St as Central Commercial rather than
Residential 20. (TMBL 4.36.A.4a)
B. Zoning Ordinance text amendment to change 4.14.1.b, the outside play area
requirement for daycare centers to refer to the state requirement.
C. Zoning Ordinance text amendment to delete section 2.15.
D. Zoning Ordinance text amendments to delete section 2.18 and 5.27
E. Zoning Ordinance text amendment to delete "barbershop and beauty salon"
as permitted uses.
F. Master Parks and Recreation Plan revisions
G. Future Land Use Plan/Map
ITEM #7: Review of draft text amendment language for detailed discussion in December
A. Site Plan Process Changes
B. Signage
Please call or email the Planning Department if you cannot attend
101 East Orange Street • P.O. Box 429 • Hillsborough, North Carolina 2 72 78
919-732-1270 • Fax 919-644-2390
MINUTES
PLANNING BOARD
November 15, 2007, 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Matthew Farrelly, Tom Campanella, Edna Ellis, Kathleen Faherty, Neil
Jones, Dave Remington, Toby Vandemark, and Barrie Wallace.
STAFF: Margaret Hauth, Nicole Ard.
ITEM #1: Call to Order and Confirmation of a Quorum.
Mr. Farrelly called the meeting to order at approximately 7:03 and confirmed a quorum
of the Planning Board.
ITEM #2: Adoption of Minutes from the September 20, 2007 regular meeting, and the
October 18, 2007 Joint hearing.
MOTION: Mr. Remington moved to approve the minutes of the September 20, 2007 regular
meeting and the October 18, 2007 Joint Planning Hearing as presented.
SECOND: Ms. Faherty.
VOTE: Unanimously approved.
ITEM #3: Additions to the Agenda and Agenda Adjustments.
There were no additions or adjustments to the agenda.
ITEM #4: Committee reports and updates.
Board of Adjustment: Mr. Remington said in October the main issue was an appeal by
Gregory Glatz regarding a Zoning Officer determination regarding two adjoining lots
along Terrell Road that were nonconforming. He said the determination was that the two
lots were no longer developed lots and therefore was turned down. Mr. Remington said
Mr. Glatz appealed that, and the decision was that since there were still utilities to the
site, that it could be considered developed, so it was granted.
Mr. Remington said at last night's meeting they approved the site plan for Gold Park, and
heard an appeal from Jeff and Kelly Hopper regarding an HDC decision on some changes
they had made to an approved COA. He stated they had accepted the Hoppers' appeal
and overruled the HDC.
Mr. Remington stated they modified a previously approved site plan for Hillsborough
Plumbing on Highway 57, in that a sidewalk that was on the plan was partly in a riparian
zone and was not buildable, so the Board had agreed to modify the site plan to delete the
sidewalk requirement.
Parks and Recreation Board: Ms. Wallace stated they had prepared their vision
statement for their connectivity plan, and since Ms. Trueblood was on maternity leave
they would not meet again until January.
ITEM #5: Interview of candidates for current and upcoming. vacancies on the Planning Board.
Ms. Hauth stated that of the seven candidates, six were present this evening. She said the
Board had two current vacancies created by Eric Oliver and Paul Newton who had both
resigned, and in the new year Ms. Ellis had indicated she did not want to be reappointed
so there would shortly be a third vacancy. Ms. Hauth said the Board could then
recommend appointment to those three seats. She said that Mr. Campanella was up for
reappointment and had indicated his wish to be reappointed.
Dan Barker: Dan Barker stated he was currently Chair of the Hillsborough Water and Sewer Advisory
Committee; he was interested in contributing to the Town; he had experience with various
planning, design, and site work issues; he was the archivist and space tracker for UNC's
Facilities Plan construction group; that he tracked every room and how it was used on the
UNC campus, including satellite campuses across the State and at their satellite campus
in England; he often studied plans as part of his work; he was the address and authority
for the UNC campus; and, the main reason he had applied was because he was interested
in contributing to Hillsborough because he cared about the Town.
Ms. Wallace asked how long had he lived in Hillsborough. Mr. Barker stated since
October 2002.
Ms. Faherty stated his application stated he was interested in serving on the Board of
Adjustment. Ms. Hauth noted they had recently recruited for the Board of Adjustment
and had a number of people respond, but they had been looking for out -of -Town
applicants. She said she had contacted the in -Town applicants to inquire if they were
interested in serving on the Planning Board, and most had responded yes. Mr. Barker
said the answer was yes; he had applied to the Board of Adjustment but was also
interested in serving on the Planning Board.
Ms. Vandemark said his application stated he was interested in bringing reasonable
growth practices to the Town, and asked what he considered reasonable growth practices.
Mr. Barker said maintaining the character of the Town. At the same time, he said, the
economy of the Town needed to grow and thrive and be sustained, and somewhere there
had to be a balance between those two, and finding that balance was part of the effort of
this Board in trying to protect their history and help their future. Mr. Barker said he
would like to be a part of finding that balance and maintaining the character of
Hillsborough.
Brad Williams: Brad Williams stated he had lived in Hillsborough since March of 2001; he lived in
Beckett's Ridge and since January of 2002 he had served on the Board of Directors of the
Beckett's Ridge Homeowners Association along with Paul Newton; through Mr. Newton
he had gotten a glimpse of the kinds of issues the Planning Board dealt with; that in the
past he had only been involved in Town government when it directly impacted his family,
but now realized that everything impacted everyone in Hillsborough; as he had come to
that realization he wanted to contribute as best he could to moving Hillsborough in the
proper direction by maintaining the character of Hillsborough but still growing to keep
the economy viable; that his cousin was the president of a rural Pennsylvania historic
society, and through him had seen the struggles his cousin's town had gone through in
balancing that with the needs of the economy; that he wanted people to want to come here
to live; that in talking with neighbors, people wanted to live here but went elsewhere to
do other things such as shop or eat; and, that he wanted to see more things in Town for
people to do, and believed you could do that without destroying the harmony and
character of the Town.
11/15/07 Planning Board 2 of 11
Mr. Williams said since living here he had looked at the struggle between maintaining the
character and growth, and described areas that had that same struggle but had managed to
thrive and not become compromised in any way.
Mr. Farrelly asked through his observations of Hillsborough, what would he say was the
worst thing that had happened to Hillsborough recently and what was the best. Mr.
Williams said the worst thing was the missing of opportunities. He said that Hampton
Pointe was a nice opportunity to have the sorts of things that people would want to go and
do in the Town, but when you came right down to it, it was a Wal-Mart or a low-end
fashion store, and a nail salon and that disappointed him. Mr. Williams said he saw areas
like Mebane and Burlington and Durham that had so many interesting things for people to
do, and wondered why Hillsborough had none. He said he was sure developers did not
want to put certain things here for various reasons; but, he also wondered if there were
any roadblocks thrown up to prevent them from coming here or any opportunities that
were missed that did not have to be. He said he did not know the answer to that, but
would like to be a part of the group that found the answer.
Mr. Williams said his strongest belief was that you could maintain the beauty and the
character and the history of the downtown area, while still growing. He said
Hillsborough was doing things right, and he wanted that to continue while not throwing
up too many roadblocks.
Mr. Williams said when you come off I-85 and turn right, you see a house of ill repute,
and if you turn left you see a run-down building with an all -girl staff and an abandoned
truck stop that hosts a roving yard sale. He said if you come off the next exit, you see
what you would expect to see — a gas station and fast food restaurants — and then you see
Daniel Boone Village, which was also run-down. Mr. Williams said that none of those
things contributed to the image of the Town, and he believed many of those issues could
be addressed through the right kind of growth. He said the Town would benefit from
that, as well as the historic district.
Dan McGrew: Dan McGrew stated his family had come to Hillsborough in 2004, and spent his time
buying real estate and upgrading it for resale; his interest was in preserving the character
of Hillsborough in the face of growth, which will come; that the entire area between King
Street and US 70 had many acres of mobile home parks with single -wide trailers, and that
property at some point would be developed and the trailers removed; and, there were
many ways such property could be used to meet modern needs such as single-family
homes.
Mr. McGrew stated he had also been a newspaper editor and publisher in various areas of
the country for over 40 years and had sat through thousands of public meetings, and had
been active in his communities; that he felt strongly that the planning commissions and
water and sewer committees would be able to affect the growth of the Town and the
character of the Town just about as much as the Town Board; that the Gateway Center
was an example, noting the one thing he would have liked to see was absolutely no
ingress or egress onto Churton Street; and, that as permits were granted such things could
be addressed, including the impeding of traffic during construction.
11/15/07 Planning Board 3 of 11
Mr. McGrew said his experience throughout his lifetime would allow him to spot those
kinds of issues and contribute his knowledge and expertise to the process; that he had
learned a lot of lessons and learned them well, enough to not repeat them; that he
promised that no one would have to wonder what he thought about an issue; that he was
straightforward and would speak his mind, cast his vote, and move on; that he may
sometimes be a minority of one, because he did not believe a developer, such as the one
proposed to redevelop Daniel Boone, had a right to come into Town and make millions of
dollars in profit and do as they pleased; and, that such developers did not have that right
because they were building on the infrastructure that people had been building,
supporting and paying for, in this case, for hundreds of years.
Mr. McGrew said that developers did not have the right to take a property that was a
"dump" and turn it into a bigger dump but had a responsibility to make something better,
and if they could not do that then they should stay out.
Mr. Farrelly asked how long he had lived in Hillsborough. Mr. McGrew responded he
had moved here in 2004, but had lived in North Carolina since 1962 when he had visited
the Siler City area and fell in love with the Piedmont area and its people. He said the
courtesy of the people here as compared to such places as rural Virginia and others was
awesome, and that was one of the reasons they had moved here. Mr. McGrew said they
had looked at places such as Rocky Mount, Oxford, Sanford, Angier and even Hickory,
but believed Hillsborough was the best place to be. He said this community had so much
to offer, and there were very few places in the country that could match the location with
the airport, hospitals and universities so close by.
Mr. Campanella thanked Mr. McGrew for the information he had provided in his resume,
noting it had been very interesting to read. Mr. McGrew responded that he believed that
your community had to come first.
Brian Perkins: Brian Perkins stated he and his family had moved to Hillsborough 3 years ago today; that
he and his wife were employed a Duke University and conducted clinical drug trials; that
they had two children and lived in the Grandview Subdivision; that they wanted to give
back to the community, and had once been a reporter and attended many meetings such as
this one; that he had many times wanted to be on their other side of the room and
deciding on issues rather than reporting on them; and, at this point in his life he now had
the time to contribute.
Mr. Perkins stated he loved Hillsborough and enjoyed the restaurants, the Last Friday
events and the pub down the street, and believed it was a great place to live.
Ms. Vandemark asked how he felt about growth. Mr. Perkins replied he had read that
within the next 20 to 25 years the prediction was that the Town could go from 7,000 to
22,000 people. He said there were many changes t6 come, and there were some people
who would likely leave the Town if it grew too much. Mr. Perkins said he did not believe
Hillsborough needed to have every amenity since they could be found so close by, but he
did believe growth should fit the needs of the community as well as the style. He said he
did not believe they could keep the Town at 7,000 residents, but they could control it,
adding he believed the Waterstone development would help to change the face of this
11/15/07 Planning Board 4 of 11
community. He said he was in favor of some growth, but did not want every tree torn
down to accomplish it.
Stephen Whitlow: Stephen Whitlow stated he had lived in Hillsborough for 4 years; he was a North Carolina
native; he had served on the Parks and Recreation Board; he had lived in Chapel Hill
while in graduate school and had discovered Hillsborough during that time; and, he
wanted to add service on the Planning Board to his involvement with the Town.
Ms. Wallace asked about his degree. Mr. Whitlow stated he had a degree in City and
Regional Planning.
Mr. Remington stated Mr. Whitlow had come before the Planning Board when the
Belleview Mills project was discussed. Mr. Whitlow responded that was correct, noting
he had been representing his neighborhood group both in negotiations with the developer
and speaking before the Planning Board.
Ms. Vandemark asked how he felt about growth. Mr. Whitlow replied he agreed with
much of what had already been said, noting everyone had spoken to the character of
Hillsborough; that one of the most unfortunate things about Hillsborough was that when
you got beyond the historic district, there was no distinctiveness to it; that in terms of
growth, he would certainly enjoy a few more services that would come with a bit more
growth, but also believed Hillsborough was in a unique position because unless they
found a new source of water they could not grow too much more; that being on the edge
of the Triangle and having that physical restriction on growth put them in a unique
position to put demands on people who did want to developer here to do it in a way that
enhanced that uniqueness rather than watering it down; and, that some of the recent
suburban developments had gone in that direction of enhancing the uniqueness of
Hillsborough.
Elizabeth Woodman: Elizabeth Woodman stated she had applied for a seat on this Board 5 or 6 years ago
but was not offered a seat at that time; that many of the concerns she had then continued
to be of concern; that she had witnessed over the last 9 years she had lived in the
downtown some wonderful changes, such as sidewalk dining that had created vibrancy to
the downtown and brought more people in to support the restaurants and shops and other
businesses; and, the ordinance that allowed living units to go into the second floor of
commercial buildings was also a wonderful change.
Ms. Woodman said one of the greatest opportunities the Town faced was also one of the
weakest areas of the Town, and that was the Churton Street area. She said implementing
the Churton Street Corridor Plan would be a tremendous boon to the community and to
the future of the Town, and would attract many people to the area in a way that would not
necessarily crowd or overtax the infrastructure.
Ms. Woodman stated she was a book editor and was moving into an office in the
downtown; she also lived downtown, and had lived in the Hillsborough area for 21 years;
and, she had witnessed many changes, a lot of it to the good.
11/15/07 Planning Board 5 of 11
Ms. Vandemark asked how she felt about the changes already mentioned. Ms. Woodman
said she believed the Churton Street Corridor Plan was exciting, and there was also a
great opportunity on Highway 70 and improving the gateways to the Town which she
believed were a mess. She said that had been recognized and they were now putting
plans and a vision in place to correct that, and she would very much like to see them
implemented. Ms. Woodman said she would like to the see the Planning Board and other
boards really work toward improving those areas that had been woefully neglected in the
past.
Ms. Woodman said she saw the old Wal-Mart site as a wonderful opportunity, noting it
was now an asphalt wasteland that could be put to great use, and hoped the Planning
Board could participate in resurrecting that area.
Discussion: Ms. Hauth reminded the Board that Bryant Warren was not present, but his application
was under consideration as well. Ms. Vandemark stated she did not believe they could
consider Mr. Warren if he was not present. Mr. Farrelly stated it was a bit unusual
because Mr. Warren had served on the Board with almost all of them. Ms. Vandemark
stated she thought they had a rule. Ms. Hauth stated it was more of a policy than a rule,
noting it would be unusual if it were an applicant that was unknown. She said he had
only been off the Board for about 2 years, and most of the Board members had served
with him.
Mr. Farrelly suggested they could pick two applicants for the current vacancies, and table
the third, or do them all at one time with two appointed now and one held until January.
Ms. Hauth said in making their choices, perhaps the Board could think about where the
applicants lived and how they were distributed around the Town.
Mr. Farrelly suggested passing around a sheet of paper and having each Board member
rank their first, second, and third choices. There was general agreement among the
members.
Mr. Farrelly stated that Ms. Woodman, Mr. Barker, and Mr. Whitlow seemed to have the
majority votes.
MOTION: Mr. Campanella moved to recommend that Elizabeth Woodman and Dan Barker be
appointed to the two current vacancies on the Planning Board, and that Stephen Whitlow
be recommended for the vacancy to occur in January, 2008.
SECOND: Ms. Wallace.
11/15/07 Planning Board 6 of 11
First Choice
Second Choice
Third Choice
Barrie Wallace
Woodman
Whitlow
Barker
Neil Jones
Woodman
McGrew
Barker
Dave Remington
Woodman
Barker
Whitlow
Toby Vandemark
Woodman
Whitlow
Barker
Matthew Farrelly
Barker
Woodman
Whitlow
Kate Faherty
Woodman
Whitlow
Barker
Tom Campanella
McGrew
Woodman
Whitlow
Edna Ellis
Whitlow
Perkins
Barker
Mr. Farrelly stated that Ms. Woodman, Mr. Barker, and Mr. Whitlow seemed to have the
majority votes.
MOTION: Mr. Campanella moved to recommend that Elizabeth Woodman and Dan Barker be
appointed to the two current vacancies on the Planning Board, and that Stephen Whitlow
be recommended for the vacancy to occur in January, 2008.
SECOND: Ms. Wallace.
11/15/07 Planning Board 6 of 11
DISCUSSION: Mr. Remington stated that all the candidates were well qualified and he would be happy
to serve with any of them.
VOTE: Unanimous.
ITEM #6: Recommendation to the Town Board regarding public hearing items:
A. Rezoning request from the Colonial Inn LLC to correct a zoning error and
designate .51 acres on .West King Street as Central Commercial rather than
Tesidential-20 (TMBL 4.36.S.4a)
Ms. Hauth reminded the Board that when the Town Board took action on text
amendments or requests for rezonings, they were required to adopt a consistency
statement when they amended either the map or the ordinance to say that it was consistent
with the plan or something on that order. She said that would mean this Board's
recommendations needed to be more detailed to provide guidance to the Town Board as
to why that recommendation was being made.
Ms. Hauth stated that regarding the Colonial Inn, they had received a valid Protest
Petition, and should the Town Board choose to approve that it would require a super
majority vote, so detailed reasons for recommending approval would be helpful.
Mr. Campanella stated that the request for rezoning was presupposing that a zoning error
was made, and they had heard quite clearly in the public hearing that that was not the case
but in fact had been purposely zoned that way. So, he said, the entire premise of the
request was erroneous. Ms. Hauth said as the application was submitted, that was the
reasoning the applicant had submitted, and that was'the application under consideration.
Ms. Campanella said the fact that the request was still on the table after the public hearing
seemed to prejudice the whole request, because it was standing on "broken legs."
Ms. Ellis stated she had pointed out at the hearing that this was zoned by the County and
by the Town as Residential, and did not understand why the applicant had not known that
when he purchased the property. She said since he had been paying residential taxes he
must have realized that. Ms. Ellis said that the Colonial Inn was a crown jewel in the
Town, and had drawn people to the Town year round. She said she believed the
residential zoning should remain, because commercial zoning would allow many uses for
the property that were likely not desirable.
Mr. Remington said given the unique nature of the property and the issues they might
face; it had been clear in the public hearing that the Town would have more say in what
happened on the property if it remained residential. He said the only argument he could
identify to make the change was that it seemed more consistent with the details of the
map they would be discussing later on tonight, and that he was not sure residential zoning
was inconsistent given the descriptions of the commercial corridors within historic
residential areas. Mr. Remington stated he believed residential zoning would give the
Town the maximum amount of approval over what happened to the property, and
believed it should remain residential. He said he did not think that it would hurt the
owner's opportunities to obtain financing, which was the one argument advanced for the
change.
11/15/07 Planning Board 7 of 11
Ms. Faherty reminded the Board of the remarks made by Barbara Church regarding that
point, in that she stated that rezoning would allow uses that were incompatible with this
residential neighborhood in the historic district, and that CUPs were available to the
owner that would permit him to do a variety of activities under the current zoning. She
said Ms. Church had stated a change to Central Commercial was not necessary nor was
desirable. Ms. Faherty said she believed that said it all, and was loathed to change
something given the very poor track record of the ownership of this property in terms of
following through with plans. She said she was unwilling to make a change to benefit
that, and if the zoning was changed, what implications would that have in the far future
for this property.
Ms. Wallace added that even if the current owner made the Town happy you still had to
consider what future owners might do, so the current owner was irrelevant to this
decision. She said she did not want to give away the power the Town might have to
restore this property to its former glory. Ms. Wallace said the owner could also do what
he needed to do with a CUP.
Ms. Hauth stated that since it appeared the Board would not recommend the rezoning, it
should be backed up with a statement that the current zoning provided the owner with
options, and because of the importance of the structure the need for additional review of
future plans was desired.
Mr. Jones agreed with Ms. Wallace's statements.
MOTION: Mr. Campanella moved to recommend that the Town Board deny the rezoning request
for the Colonial Inn because the current zoning was not an error; that the current zoning
with a Conditional Use Permit allowed productive commercial uses while providing
greater constraints and controls by the Town over this historical landmark and cultural
resource; and, that most surrounding properties were residential.
SECOND: Ms. Wallace.
VOTE: Unanimous.
B. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to change 4.14.1.b, the outside play area
requirement for daycare centers to refer to the State requirement.
Mr. Farrelly noted the Board was very familiar with this issue.
MOTION: Ms. Vandemark moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the text amendment
as written.
SECOND: Mr. Jones.
VOTE: Unanimous.
C. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to delete section 2.15.
Ms. Hauth reminded the Board that this text amendment was for the Planned Unit
Development district that had never been used and did not take advantage of the SUP
provisions.
MOTION: Ms. Vandemark moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the text amendment
as written.
SECOND: Mr. Remington.
VOTE: Unanimous.
11/15/07 Planning Board 8 of 11
D. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to delete section 2.18 and 5.27.
Ms. Hauth stated this referred to the Entranceway Overlay district, which had never been
used and seemed to encourage the use of service roads and other types of development
that the Town was no longer interested in.
MOTION: Mr. Remington moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the text amendment
as written.
SECOND: Ms. Faherty.
VOTE: Unanimous.
E. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to delete "barbershop and beauty salon" as
permitted uses.
Ms. Hauth stated staff proposed this due to the conflict it created and that in these times
of multi -service salons it seemed wiser that these uses be under Personal Services.
MOTION: Mr. Jones moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the text amendment as
written.
SECOND: Mr. Campanella.
VOTE: Unanimous.
F. Master Parks and Recreation Plan revisions.
Mr. Farrelly stated this referred to the revisions made at the Public Hearing. Ms. Hauth
said the Plan was basically updating and expanding the scope of the previous Plan, that
sections were added for active sports, that new annexation areas were included and
proposals made for them, that updates were made to the greenway and walkway sections,
and that the Connectivity Plan would grow from there. She said this was really a
significant update and polishing of the previous Plan.
MOTION: Ms. Faherty moved to recommend that the Town Board approve the Master Parks and
Recreation Plan revisions as proposed.
SECOND: Ms. Vandemark.
VOTE: Unanimous.
G. Future Land Use Plan/Map.
Ms. Hauth noted that Roger Waldon was present this evening. Ms. Farrelly suggested
that he summarize the issues.
Mr. Waldon stated that as the consultant, his recommendation would be that the Planning
Board recommend to the Town Board adoption of the Land Use Plan and Map with
adjustments. He displayed the map and provided the following summary of those
adjustments:
1. That floodplains be shown on the map and designated as natural resources areas.
2. That the Plan designate the Eno River as a national natural resource to help highlight
its status in the national picture of natural resources.
3. That the Ayr Mount property owned by the Classical American Homes Preservation
Trust that was originally left off the map be included.
4. That the Ben Lloyd property designated as low-density residential on the map that
went to public hearing be adjusted to be designated as medium -density residential.
5. The map coded current Town park land as Institutional, and it was suggested that the
land be designated as open space.
11/15/07 Planning Board 9 of 11
6. The two parcels of land with 2 houses shown as red on the map at Gold Park was an
error, in that they should not be Retail but as Mill Village
Mr. Waldon reiterated that his recommendation would be that the Planning Board
recommend to the Town Board adoption of the Land Use Plan and Map with those
adjustments.
Ms. Ellis stated that #1 on the map presented at the public hearing should be referred to as
Ashton Hall on US 70A East rather than by the property owner's name to avoid
confusion.
Ms. Wallace asked when things were designated as natural resource areas and national
natural resources, what would that mean? Mr. Waldon responded that the Land Use Plan
was a statement of the Town's vision and desirable intention for the use of land, and it
was a reflection of existing use, environmental conditions and so on. He said designating
something as a natural area on the Land Use Plan stated that it should be left natural and
should not be developed, although it did not say it can't be because the Land Use Plan did
not have the same force of law as the Zoning Ordinance, for instance.
Ms. Hauth stated they may need a definition added that defined natural resource areas.
She said the designation of the Eno River as a national natural resource was more of a
written note rather than an area designated on a map. Mr. Waldon agreed, noting it was
more an acknowledgement on the map rather than anything like land use policy. Ms.
Hauth said the definition of natural resource areas could contain a sentence that it
included the floodplain of the Eno River, which was a national natural resource. Mr.
Waldon agreed.
Mr. Farrelly said one of the substantive items was the change from low density residential
to medium density residential of the Ben Lloyd property, adding he believed Mr. Lloyd's
comments were compelling and agreed that the change was warranted.
Mr. Remington agreed, noting he could think of no argument against it. Mr. Jones
agreed, noting it was surrounded by medium residential.
Ms. Faherty said it was not surrounded by it, but was across the street from it. She said it
was adjacent to a State park, but believed Mr. Lloyd's argument was reasonable for the
change. Ms. Wallace agreed.
MOTION: Mr. Remington moved to recommend to the Town Board approval of the map with
modifications based on the Public Hearing and subsequent review:
1. That floodplains be shown on the map and designated as natural resources areas.
2. That the Plan designate the Eno River corridor as a national natural resource.
3. That the boundary for permitted open space be corrected to reflect the Classical
American Homes Preservation Trust ownership.
4. That the parcel along the Eno Mountain Road and north of Orange Grove Road be
changed from low-density residential to medium -density residential on the map
because it was bordered by Industrial, Institutional, and Open Space.
5. That the map code current Town park land as Open Space rather than Institutional.
11/15/07 Planning Board 10 of 11
6. That the area shown as red near the Mill Village area be corrected to the Mill Village
category rather than as Retail.
7. That definitions be added for natural resource areas and national natural resources.
SECOND: Ms. Vandemark.
DISCUSSION: Ms. Hauth said regarding the medium density change on the Ben Lloyd property, Mr.
Lloyd owned a couple of properties in that area, and asked if everything in that area was
to be changed with the exception of Carillon. Ms. Hauth pointed out the triangular area
on the map.
Mr. Remington amended his motion to specify the yellow area on the map surrounded by
Industrial and Open Space.
Ms. Ellis said when Mr. Lloyd had come before the Board she had thought the house was
excluded. Ms. Hauth stated the proposals that this Board saw as the Village at
Meadowview incorporated that house into the use as part of the retirement center as office
space, so it would not longer be a residential structure.
VOTE: Unanimous.
ITEM #7: Review of draft text amendment language for detailed discussion in December.
Ms. Hauth stated she wanted to get some of the larger text amendments done before a
stop was put on them for the rewrite of the ordinance, so the two larger issues were the
sign changes and the site plan review changes. She said the sign changes were in the
packet, and the site plan review changes would be ready for discussion at the December
meeting. Ms. Hauth said the procedure as suggested would result in various levels of
review, but because the ordinance was so heavily cross-referenced, it meant a lot of
changes. Ms. Hauth said the Board would be receiving a new Permitted Use Table, a
break-out of requirements for site plan review in one section, Conditional Use Permit in
another section, Special Use Permit in another section, and then all the miscellaneous
things in Section 5 that talked about mobile homes and lighting requirements and other
issues would be put in yet another section. She said it looked like a lot of work, but most
of it would not be new language. Ms. Hauth said it was more of an organizational and
structural issue with the document itself. Ms. Hauth said she would get that to the Board
as soon in advance of the December 20th meeting as possible, and it would likely come
separate from the packet.
A short discussion ensued regarding changing the December 20th meeting to December
13th, but there was general agreement to leave it on the 20th
ITEM #8: Adjourn.
Upon a motion by Ms. Faherty, seconded by Mr. Remington, the Board moved to
adjourn the hearing. The vote was unanimous. The meeting was adjourned at
8:41p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Margar t A. Hauth, Secretary
11/15/07 Planning Board 11 of 11