Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout9.5.1985 Planning Board Agenda and MinutesMayor Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Commissioners Lynwood J. Brown Horace H. Johnson Allen A. Llo�-d Remus J. Smith Rachel H. Steventi September 2, 1985 01 own of Rillaborau94 Town Clerk HILLSBOROUGH, NOR'i H CAROLINA 27278 Agatha Johnson Supt. Waley Works James Pendergraph a Street Supt. L. D. Wagoner Chief of Police Arnold W. Hamlett _4 Z Fire Chief AR John Forrest TO: Planning Board and News Media FROM: Myron Martin, Chairman Agenda for the Planning Board meeting on September 5, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. at the Town Hall. Item--l-Approval of minutes for Planning Board meeting held on August 1, 1985. Item 2- Review of a variance request by Ken Chavious, per request of the Hillsborough Board of Adjustment, for property located on the west side of Nash St., the second lot just north of Alma Ave. Applicant is proposing a minor subdivision for Lot 14, Tax Map 12, Block E to place a mobile home on the back half of the lot; front lot has a dwelling unit with driveway access. The Board of Adjustment is requesting Planning Board comments on the proposal, which will require a 15 foot variance from the -minimum lot width requirement of 75 feet. Attached map indicates existing and proposed structures. Item 3- Recommendations on proposed zoning map changes presented at the Public Hearing on August 19, 1985: a. Parker-Chavis Funeral Home, Tax Map 10, Block B, Lot 1. Rezoning from R-10 to 0-I. 1-41b. Powers Inc - Harder Venture Partnership. Tax Map -42, Block B Lot 3. Rezoning northern half, from R-10 to 0-I. c. Park Valley Club, Tax Map 38, Block B. Lot 18A. Rezoning from GC to 0-I. d. Isabelle Wilson Heiis, Tax Map 38, Biock B, Lot 19. Rezoning from GC to 0-I. e. George Mayo, Tax Map 38, Block B, Lot 20. Rezoning from GC to AR. f. William Frances, Tax Map 37, Block C, Lot 11. Rezoning southern half from AR to 0-I. g. Gates Building.Assoc., Tax Map 36, Block E, Lot 18. Rezoning from R-20 to 0-I. �vD i nU c� 2�y( b �b�S�cLT� l TeriTit -( Item 4- Review of Planning Board recommendation to rezone Odie St. area from R-10 to R-20. Item 5- Review of Planning Board recommendation to rezone Carroll Property, Tax Map 31, Block C, Lot 5 from 0-I to R-20. Item 6- Greenways Program Update. Item 7- Overview :of the State Unmarked Human Burial Law and other applicable laws which provide protection for archaeological sites. Planning Bd. Agenda 9/5/85, page two Item 8- Qverview of permitted uses within General Industrial Districts and update on Hillsborough Business Center (Cone Mill property). Item 9- Zoning Violations Report l0 V-7��.t�- MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 5, 1985 PLANNING BOARD MEETING Members present: Myron Martin, Chairman; Barbara Page, Bob Rose, Tarleton Davis, Hilda Brody, Nancy Goodwin, Jim Culbreth, Calvin Ashley, Robert Murphy and Evelyn Poole -Kober. Others: Laura Hill, Zoning Officer, Edna Ellis, Ken Chavious and Frank Coleman The Chairman asked if there were any additions to the agenda. The Zoning Officer asked that Zoning Map errors be added. It was added as A. Page asked to add water resources conservation to the It was added as Item 10. Item 1- Approval of Minutes for August 1, 1985 meeting. Page made a motion to approve the minutes, Davis seconded it. The motion was carried. Item 2- Review of a variance request by Ken Chavious, per request of the Hillsborough Board of Adjustment, for property located on the west side of Nash St., the second lot just north of Alma Ave. Applicant is proposing a minor subdivision to place a mobile home on the back half of the lot; front lot has a dwelling unit with driveway access. The Board of Adjustment is requesting rlanning Board comments on the proposal, which will require a 15 foot variance from the minimum lot width requirement of 75 feet. Mr. Chavious is asking for access to the second piece of property. There is an existing house on the front lot with an existing driveway on the left hand side. Martin asked where he would be asking for the access point to be. CHavious said the access would be facing beyond the left-hand side of the existing house in the front. There is an existing driveway at this time that would go to the back half of the property. The Zoning Officer said there were two issues. First, the Board of Adjustment wanted to make sure that the placement of the mobile home on the back lot met all the setback requirements. They are concerned with the rear part of the lot. It is close to meeting the 20' side yard requirements. Chavious must meet all rear setback (201) and front setback of 25'. The trailer is 12 x 60 feet. The 2nd issue is the access to the lot. The Zoning Officer said she had discussed the private road requirements for subdivisions with the Orange County Planning Staff. This would be classified as a class A private road because it serves less than 2 lots. A class C private road requires a 50' right-of-way. The Planning Dept. has proposed a subdivision amendment which would allow a partial width right-of-way if the applicant meets specific criteria. In order to be granted a partial width right-of-way, the applicant must meet all of the conditions listed. For this application, the property could possibly meet all these conditions. If he is granted the 15' variance on the minimum lot width by the Board of Adjustment, then it will 6o before the Planning Staff of Orange County, to see if it would meet the requirements for a partial might -of -way. If the applicant is not _granted a partial width right-of-way, he would have to get a 5' easement adjacent to the west side of the lot which is owned by Coland Riley. t I Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 2 Page asked if there way any other property behind them that would be developed. Chavious answered no, just the two lots. The Zoning Officer said that if Chavious is granted a variance then it would some back to the Planning board for a more formal subdivision review. At that time, it would be up tot he Planning Board to request to the Orange County Board of Commissioners to approve a partial light -of -way width. Recommendation would come from this Board. The Zoning Officer said that at this time she was not asking for that recommendation, just making the Board aware of the partial width requirements. Martin asked if the steps and stoops had been figured in with the side yard Lequirements. The Zoning Officer said they would be sticking out approximately 31. The applicant has about 231. It will be very close vn the west side of the mobile home. Martin asked if there would be steps on the back side. havious answered no, just those out the front of the mobile home. Martin asked if the County Ordinance requires a stoop on either side. The Zoning Officer said that the Town Ordinance at this time does not require that;The County subdivision regulations uo not mention stoops. -ulbreth asked Chavious if he could get the easement from Mr. Riley. -havious answered that hehas not talked with him yet about the easement. Goodwin stated that the new Ordinance is proposing that driveways should not be in the setback area. Rose asked if that would be the only access to the back lot. Chavious said that he had spoken with David Blaylock (property owner to the north of the property) who has a driveway that goes all the way back. He plans to talk with him again later. Martin asked Chavious if he would talk with Mr. Riley about the easement. Chavious said yes and that he would talk with Mr. Blaylock also. The Zoning Officer said that Blaylock's driveway was adjacent to the property line. Chavious said that the driveway goes back quite a distance and there was a possibility _f access from this driveway. Rose asked how close are water and sewer to the placement of the m -bile home. Chavious said there is no sewer for the front house at all, but that it has a septic system, which would have to be connected to both the house and the trailer. riartin asked the Zoning Officer to send back to the Board of Adjustment the wording of the ordinance about driveways and class C roads. He also -sked her to tell the Board that Mr. Chavious would need an easement of 5' from Mr. Riley or access from Mr. Blaylock's driveway. V I Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 3 Item 3- Recommendations on proposed zoning map changes presented at the Public Hearing on August 19, 1985: a. Parker-Chavis Funeral Home, Tax Map 10, Block B, Lot 1. Rezoning from R-10 to 0-I. Martin said he cuuld not remember anyone speaking against it. yrody made a motion to approve the rezoning, Murphy seconded it. The motion was carried. 3b.b Incorrect Zoning Map Districts/Ellis Petition. In the petition that was proposed by Ms. Ellis, several of the people who signed it refer to their lots as being zoned R-10, but on the Zoning «ap is shown as General Commercial. These include lots owned by Ms. McPherson and Mary Gattis. Ellis said in her opinion it was a map error. She had discussed this with the former zoning officer, Kay Maltbie. Ellis said that Ms. McPherson never knew that her property was zoned General COmmercial. Ms. McPherson signed the petition and so did Mr. Beasley. Martin said the Board voted to send the entire map to the Town Board. The Zoning Officer said she need clarification that McPherson's property was actually zoned R-10 and not General COmmercial. This is what is indicated on the zoning map milar. Goodwin said the 1982 zoning mapwas never officially adopted by the Town Board. There was a discussion by the Board as to which zoning map is officially correct. Goodwin said there is no documentation that the revised map was ever approved by the Town Board. She said she thought both were probably mistakes on the map_ before the map was ever adopted. Ellis said she had discussed this matter with Kay and she also thought it was a map error. Rose asked if McPherson wanted to do something with her property now. The Zoning Officer said she has proposed to replace an existing mobile home With a larger one. Ellis asked how it could be G.C. if she never applied for it. Poole -Kober asked if she was getting GC tax rates. The Zoning Officer answered no , she was getting residential rates. Culbreth said there must be a reason why it was zoned G%C.even if McPherson didn't request it. Goodwin said that it was a mistake which was never caught before the map was approved. Martin asked if the matter should be tabled and let the Zoning Officer bring it back to the next meeting. Rose asked if this matter would ue cleared up if Ms. Ellis request is approved. The Zoning Officer said she was unsure and needed to check with Phil Green at the Institute of Government concerning the procedure for correcting zoning map errors. • 4 Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 4 Goodwin said all we can do is approve the request for a zoning map change.' Ellis stated that if Ms. McPherson stayed commercial and her house was to burn she would have to rebuild within a year, and that if she wanted to sell her property she would not be able to unless she sold it as commercial. Culbreth .rade a motion to table the issue and let the Zoning Officer draft a petition to rezone the property from General Commercial to R-20, Murphy seconded it. The motion was carried. The Zoning Officer asked Ellis if Mary Gattis signed the petition. Ellis answered no, that the lot was not large enough to put a building on, and she never approached her. The Zoning Officer said that if she was to have it rezoned to R-20 it would be non -conforming anyway. The lot would be too small to meet the 20,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size requirement. Her lot would need to be rezoned to R-10 from G.C. Ellis stated that they have already -een to the Board of Adjustment requesting to put a residence on it. The Zoning Officer said the request may or may not be granted pending a resurvey of the area. She said the issue could be tabled until she talked with Phil Green. Ellis said that Mr. Beasley and Mrs. McPherson had already signed the petition because they thought they were already in R-10. Does she need to do anything further? Ellis said she did not think she should have to ask for a zoning change. The Zoning Officer said she thought the change could be made on the petition, which could be restated to say that McPherson's property was zoned GC, and is proposed to be rezoned R-20. she Zoning Officer said that apparently when Kay was here she thought it was a mistake on the zoning map also. :ose made a motion to let the Zoning Officer investigate the matter, and if it is legal, to make the correction on the zoning map. Brody seconded the motion. The motion was carried. 3.b Powers Inc. - Harder Venture Partnership, Tax Map 42, Block B, Lot 3. Rezoning from R-10 to 0-I. Harder has requested that the Planning Board postpone the board's recommendation to rezone the property to 0-I. Harder would like the opportunity to request that the property be rezoned to GC, which he can legally do without a second public hearing. (According to R. Ducker at the Institute of Government, Harder's request would be a part of the public hearing held at the August 19th public hearing). Mayor Sheffield, the Zoning Officer and Ms. Krebs (rep. for Harder) discussed the matter and it was decided that the Planning Board should act on the Office Institutional request as submitted by the Planning Board and all the zoning map changes will be voted on by the Town Board. Between this time and the Town Board's vote, Harder Associates will make a formal rezoning request. Goodwin made a motion to deny the request, Brody seconded it. The motion was carried. Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 5 3.c Park valley Club, Tax Map 38, BLock B, Lot 18A. Rezoning from GC to 0-I. Rose asked if the rezoning request was just for Park Valley. The Zoning Officer said it was her understanding that Kay had already presented the Exchange Club area. She said she thought Kay had already posted the property. Rose said he remembered it being posted. Martin asked hadn't the Board already talked about the Exchange Club area. Rose said he wanted to make sure that it had been voted on and not just posted. Martin said in the Minutes of August 19, Item D, Page 7, reference where a rezoning was requested. There was a discussion as to whether both the Exchange Club and Park Valley Club were included. The Zoning Officer said she just included the Park Valley Club because she thought Kay had presented the other at the April Public Hearing. Poole -Kober said the map was being presented as part of the new ordinance and it will be accepted as part of the new ordinance and that is how it was presented. Martin asked the Zoning Officer is she could go back in the minutes and check it and then they could vote. The Zoning Officer said she had already checked and it did not list it. Martin said they would need to go back and check the tapes. Poole -Kober said it was the intention of the map committee and since the map was presented as part of the ordinance it was voted on as a whole. The Zoning Officer said her concern was that the Ordinance says that the Planning Board shall submit its recommendation on any proposed amendment to the Board of Commissioners within 30 days, after the amendments have been approved by the Planning Board. Martin said it had been presented to the Commissioners. Poole -Kober said when they presented the map they were presenting their recommendations. The Zoning Officer asked if she was speaking about the actual voting recommendations. Martin said it was presented to the Town Board and they would have to go to Public Hearing with it. Goodwin said it went to Public Hearing the first time with proposals for the map. The second Public Hearing was a formality of revoting. Ellis said she had a copy of the May 9th letter which stated that the Planning Board recommends that the Town Board adopt the zoning map changes which went to Public Hearing with the ordinance. Ellis said she thought that would mean all the ma changes u to that time. She said it was within the 30 da p g p y period; that the Public Hearing was held the 21st and 22nd and the letter was dated the 9th. Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 6 Rose made a motion for approval, Davis seconded it. The motion was carried. 3.d Isabelle Wilson Heirs, Tax Map 38, Block B, Lot 19, Rezoning from GC to 0-I. There was no opposition to this request at the Public Hearing. Goodwin made a motion to approve the rezoning request, Rose seconded it. The motion was carried. 3.e George Mayo, Tax Map 38, Block B, Lot 20, Rezoning from GC to AR. Brody made a motion to accept the rezoning request. Culbreth seconded it. The motion was carried. 3.f William Frances, Tax Map 37, Block C, Lot 11. Rezoning souther half from AR to 0-I. Martin said there was some opposition on this request. Coleman said that he had no objections. Page made a motion to accept the rezoning request, Poole -Kober seconded it. The motion was carried. 3.g Gates Building Assoc., Tax Map 36, Block E, Lot 18. Rezoning from R-20 to 0-I. The Planning Board members are concerned that the applicant can exercise any of the options permitted within an 0-I District. A second office building could be constructed on Lot 18 (behind the existing building on Lot 16) instead of the proposed parking lot as presented by the applicant. A second office building on Lot 18 would generate more traffic for S. Churton St. which members were very concerned about. Applicant proposed an additional 1800 sq. ft. to be added to the existing office building on Lot 16. An engineer with NCDOT did not anticipate any problem in handling traffic generated by an additional 1800 sq. ft. of office space. If applicant chose to construct an office building on Lot 18, the amount of buildable area is approximately 2331 sq. ft. NCDO.T was not requested to do a traffic count for a second office building. Davis made a motion to accept the rezoning, there was no second. The motion failed due to the lack of a second. Brody made a motion to deny the request, Page seconded it. The motion was carried. Item 4- Review of Planning Board recommendations to rezone Odie St. area from R-10 to R-20. The Zoning Officer said that at the last public hearing Lots 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 14 were less than 20,000 sq. ft., about 5 were over 20,000 sq. ft. If it was rezoned over half of the lots would be non -conforming. Goodwin suggested rezoning the property to R-15 and make the lots conforming. Culbreth stated all would be conforming but three. The Zoning Officer asked if it would need to go to Public Hearing. Poole -Kober said her understanding was that if the zoning was downgraded then no public hearing was needed. Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 7 nose asked if there was a problem with requesting the rezoning to a non -conforming use. The Zoning Officer said she did not understand the reason for rezoning it that way when half of the lots would be non -conforming. Brody made a motion to rezone Odie St. to R-15, if it is legal to do it that way, Page seconded it. The motion was carried. Item 5- Review of Planning Board recommendations to rezone Carroll Property, Tax Map 31, Block C, Lot 5 from 0-I to R-20. The Zoning Officer talked with Mayor Sheffield, Larry Carroll and Phil Green about the requested rezoning earlier in the year from R-20 to 0-I. She said Phil Green said that the first request is reasonable and that the second request to rezone it back to a non -conforming use is not reasonable. The Planning Board did not approve the rezoning, but the Town Board did on July 19, 1984. The concern with the Planning Board is that if Carroll moved then any other use permitted within the 0-1 district could come in. Page made a motion to rezone 0-I back to R-20, Murphy seconded it. The motion was carried. Item 6- Greenways Program Update Poole -Kober said she thought a committee should be set up to work on the project. Rose made a motion that the Planning Board request that the Town Board allow them to pursue this matter and come back to the Town Board with a greenway program recommendation. Brody seconded it. Page suggested appointing a study group from the Planning Board members for the Greenways Program. At this time Rose withdrew his motion and Brody her second. Brody then suggested that each member bring in information and present it to the Planning Board. The Zoning Officer was instructed to add this item to next month's agenda. Item 7- Overview of the State Unmarked Human BUrial Law and other applicable laws which provide protection for archaeological sites. The Zoning Officer said that Chapter 70 Article 30, "Jurisdiction of Remains" states there is a negotiation period in which the person who discovered the remains and the property owner decide what to do with the remains (i.e. whether to move them or protect them.) The time period for negotiations is 48 hours. Culbreth contacted Doug Johnson's office (Preservation Law), who is the person on behalf of the State to bring suite if the State felt the probation laws were being violated. He did not talk with Mr. Johnson, but made an inquiry as to who would handle the matter. Item 7a- Discussion of Cemetary on Margaret Lane Poole -Kober said she contacted the Attorney General's Office and they suggested that pictures be taken of the cemetery as it is now. They also told her that if anyone is seen cleaning the cemetery other than authorized persons then they should call the police. Planning Board Meeting September 5, 1985 Page 8 She talked with several State divisions in Archives and History. They told her that no one can go in and start defacing the cemetery property. She was told that the people who filed the quick -claim deed may indeed get a legal deed for the property, and if they do they can put a building there, but before they do they must remove all bodies. Item 8- Overview of permitted uses within General Industrial Districts and update on Hillsborough Business Center (Cone Mill Property). The Zoning Officer said to determine what was permitted in the General Industrial for a Mixed Use Development, she took the list given in the zoning ordinance and applied the Standard Industrial code book. A list was passed out to board members for their review. Item 9- Zoning Violations Report Crawford Mobile home park - The Zoning Officer has not been able to get hold of the owner yet. The issue now is whether it is a mobile home park. If it is, it would have to meet the requirements in the Zoning Ordinance. If not, then it would be a non -conforming use. The Zoning Officer reported that there were about 20 violations. The Chairman asked that a list be compiled for their information. Item 10- Water Resources Conservation Page was concerned that there is little or no protection for our water shed for Lake Ben Johnston. She suggested that the members either adopt the County's ordinance or set up a committee and do a study for our own ordinance. She said Mr. Ed Holland, with Resources Conservation with Triangle J, is interested in talking with us as a group if we would like. The Zoning Officer asked that she be allowed to look into this matter and see what has been adopted. Page made a motion that Mr. Holland be asked to speak at one of the Planning Board's regular meetings, Culbreth seconded it. Page then suggested that he be asked to come back for the public and invite the Town Board if necessary. The meeting waw adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Minutes reported by Janet Cole.