HomeMy Public PortalAbout5.26.1988 Agenda & Minutes Planning BoardTown of Rfllsborou94
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
PLEASE SAVE THIS AGENDA
PACKET FOR YOUR NEXT
MEETING ON THESE SUBJECTS.
AGENDA
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
MAY 26, 1988
7:OOPM
ITEM #1: Warren & Agnes Summey Rezoning Request. Rezone 2.03 Acres
on the south side of Hwy 70 from R-20 to GC (General Commercial)
(attachment #1)
ITEM #2: Lorene Turner Rezoning Request. Rezone 0.62 Acres on the south
side of Hwy 70 from R-20 to GC (General Commercial).
(a tachment #2)
ITEM #3: Text amendment to sections 4.4.6 and 11.6 to reduce the
not fication requirements for Conditional Use Permits, Site Plan
Revi ws, Variances, and Rezonings by notifying property owners
with 100 feet, by eliminating the requirement to post property,
and b reducing the advertising time requirements (attachment #3)
ITEM #4: Text endment to Section 5.11 regarding Stream Bikffers - three
propos is:
a) to clarify the wording of the section (attachment #4a)
b) to reduce the stream buffer requirement (attachment #4b)
c) to eliminate the stream buffer requirement (attachment #40
ITEM #5: To delete section 5.22 which says: "no structure shall exceed
the height of Eno Mountain Ridge". (attachment #5)
ITEM #6: Textdamendment to add section 5.23 regarding the requirements
for fire hydrants - Sections 5.23 through 5.23.8 (attachment #6)
ITEM #7: To amend sections 5.19.2.f and 5.20.2.c to require that the
Fire Chief offer recommendations to the fire protection plan
(Attachment #7)
If you cannot attend this meeting, please notify Janet Rigsbee
at 732-2104 as soon as possible.
MINUTES
HILLSBOROUGH TOWN BOARD
AND
PLANNING BOARD
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
The Hillsborough Town Board and the llillsbor.ough Planning Board met joint]
.in a quarterly public hearing at the Hillsborough Town Hall on Thursday, May 2E
7:00 PM. Those present were Mayor Cates, Commissioners Johnson, Lloyd, Riley
and Kirby. Planning Board members present were Chairman Bob Rose, members
Barbara Page, Dr. Robert. Murphy, Margaret Moore, Robin Coleman, Tarlton Davis,
Cheshire Cole, David Cates, Louise 'Evans and Jim Culbreth. Others present
were Planning Director Janet Rigsbee, Cyrus Hogue, Rocky Roser, A. W. Kenion,
Minerva Kenyon, Norma White, Brian Dodge, Mr. & Mrs. Willie Laws, Mr. & Mrs.
Marri.nan, Clarence Rosemond, .Jack Markan, Scott Bridgham, Jamie Bridgham,
Mr. & Mrs. John Hartwell, Dr. & Mrs. Weis, Phil Post, Michele Eifert, and
Mr. & Mrs. Ben Wall, Brian and Wendy Olson.
Mayor Cates opened the meeting then asked the Chairman to the Planning
Board, Robert Rose to preside. Mr. Rose stated the procedures for the Public
Hearing would be as follows: The Planning Director would explain the item,
questions of clarification would then be permitted, and persons wishing to
speak for or against the item would then be permitted to speak. He added the
Planning Board would make a recommendation to the Town Board and the Town
Board would make a final decision.
Item l: Rezoning request of Warren and Agnes Summey to rezone 2.03 acres
of property .located on the south side of Hwy 70 from JZ -20 to General
Commercial.
Ms. Rigsbee asked that the second rezoning request he considered with
the request of Mr. & Mrs. Summey since both properties adjoin.
Item 2: Rezoning request of Lorene Turn to rezone 0.62 acres on the
side of Hwy 70 from R-20 to Gene.r.al. Commercial.
soutl
Ms. Rigsbee stated that water is available to both properties, however,
sewer service is not available. Commercial use does adjoin the Turner pro-
perty while R-20 is another use in the area. The Summey lot is vacant and
the Turner lot has one residence constructed in 1951 with a 3 bay garage and
driveway. The Town's Thoroughfare Plan does cut across a corner of the Summey
property. Both properties are located in the County's Transitional area.
She read a letter from the Orange County Planning Director who supported the
rezoning request.
Barbara Page spoke of the traffic problem during certain times of day in
that area. She reminded those present that the zoning goes with the land.
She added the area may need. to be rezoned in the future, however., she was not
sure it was needed now.
Willie Laws, a resident of the area and adjoining property owner, stated
he had lived in that area for 60 years and has seen the Hillsborough area grow
lie is in favor of the rezoning to allow for future growth. He asked the Board
to not: take a negetative approach to the rezoning.
Item 3: Text Amendment to Section 4.4.6 and 11..6 to reduce the
notification requirements for Conditional Use Permits, Site Plan
I:eview, Variances, and Rezonings by notifying property owners with
100 feet, by eliminating the :requir--nent to post Property and by
reducing the advertising time requirements.
Ms. Rigsbee stated the changes are being requested by the Board of
Adjustment. The notification of property owner within 100 feet is proposed
to change from 500 feet; newspaper notice requirement would change from 10 days
to 7 clays; and the requirement to post property would be deleted.
A. W. Kenion asked what the General Statutes requirements were and that
they should not contradict. He asked why were the changes being made and
rubi ie Bearing - Page r.wo
May 26, 1988
know of the notification.
Ms. Rigsbee stated many people within the 500 feet area are not interest
in the changes and may at time include a great number of people to notify.
Norma White asked who mades the decision as to whether a project is
important enough to contact property owners?
Robert hose stated the Town Board will make the ultimate decision.
A. W. Kenion added he was concerned about the limit of time to give
notification to property owners, as it would be difficult for people who
apposed the change to get a petition. together. Many people live out-of-state,
lie asked that this proposed change be left as it now reads, that three days
might means a lot to someone who is organizing a protest, but would not mean
a great deal to developers.
Mr. Cates added it could be detrimental to those who support a rezoning
as well.
Item 4: Text Amendment to Section 5.11 regarding Stream Buffers - three
proposals are submitted:
a,. To clarify the wording of the Section - Stating that the stream
buffer shall be measured from the outer edge of the designated 100 year
flood boundary as shown on the official Flood Insurance Rate Map.
On those perennial streams which do not have a designated flood plain,
the buffer width shall be from the edge of the stream bank.
Ms. Rigsbee reviewed the method for calculating the buffers along the
Eno River. She added the maximum required buffer shall not exceed one hundrec
and fifty feet from the outer edge of the flood boundary.
The width of the buffer along perennial streams with or without a
designated flood boundary shall. be fifty feet.
h. To reduce the stream buffer requirement as proposed by Cyrus Hogue
Mr. Rogue's proposal suggested the buffer be calculated by establishing
a point in the center of the river bed and another point established by
measuring away from the river two hundred fifty feet from the first point, thf
the difference in elevation between these two points shalll be multiplied by
four. That result shall then be added to fifty feet to give the total width
of the buffer in .feet. The maximum buffer required shall not exceed one
hundred and fifty feet .from the center of the river.
The width of the buffer along all other perennial streams shall be fifty
feet from the edge of the stream
C. To eliminate the stream buffer requirement from the Zoning Ordinance,
The Town would then operate under the Flood Plain Ordinance established
in 1979. This ordinance permits building within the floodway with certifica-
tion by an engineer.
Cheshire Cole, a member of the Flillsborough Parks Committee, speaking
on behalf of the Parks Committee stated the Committee recommended the buffer
be left at 150 feet.
Norma White asked is fifty feet less than what is required now and the
reply was yes„
Ms. Rigsbee stated that building would be permitted in the flood plain
under Mr. Hogue's proposal but is not permitted now.
Brian Dodge asked if building in the flood plain going to harm things
downstream and does the Federal Ordinance provide any protection? Also does
the Flood Plain Ordinance address teh water quality issues.
Public Hearing - page three
May 26, 1988
written cormuents;
"l.lim ination of the present buffer or its reduction is damaging to the
Town of.. llillsborou,gh.
Elimination of the buffer or its reduction to allow for paved surfaces
such as parking lots or construction of buildings with Large expanses of roof-
tops creates impervious surfaces. Rainfall cannot percolate into the ground,
and increase peak discharges of water result. The end effect is reduced
ground water tables, flooding, and seasonal water shortages.
Continuation of the stream buffer areas has been proven to reduce top
soil runoff and to reduce stream bed erosion. This happens because the tree
roots and roots of small plants bind the soil particles together and keep the
soil frorrr washing away. Continuation of the stream buffer areas allows rain-
fall to penetrate the soil and replenish the groundwater supply for the area,
thus reducing; the shortages of water during dry seasons.
Continuation of the present stream buffer by retaining the existing
natural vegetation reduces the threat of sudden flooding and property damage
downstream.
The above arguments are particularly true for the buffers along the
tributaries to the Eno and those areas zoned Industrial. The intent of the
present zoning ordinance remains valid, especially in light of the concern of
the elected officials to protect and preserve the water resources of the area
Ms. Olsen also submitted excerpts from the "Natural Buffer Area Study
from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources". (See file)
Chandler Cates stated Ire owns property on S. Wake Street which is 150
feet from the River. He said he would be unable to use his property if the
150 feet buffer is adopted. No water has ever flooded his property.
Ms. Rigsbee stated the 150 feet buffer would take away Mr. Cates' pro-
perty except for about 10 feet. The Board of Adjustment could give a variance
to Mr. Cates.
Phil Post stated he was speaking for Anthony and Company and Mr. Bill
France who owns approximately 150 acres of property in the flood plain. Mr.
Post expressed his concern regarding proposal 4'a and supported proposal 4c.
He stated that sometimes buffers can be counterproductive by adversely affect-
ing property owners. A definition of a perennial stream should be made. The
Town might want to annex in the future andrequirements concerning perennial
streams could be a problem for the Town. He stated the Federal Ordinance pro-
tects the flood plain up to the 100 year flood. Specific areas are identified
on the flood plain map.
John Hartwell, County Commissioner, urged the Board to be very cautious
in establishing the buffer requirement. His present home is within the flood
plain boundary and would not be permitted today if being constructed. He
spoke of the symbolic aspect of the buffer and advised any member who owned
property along a buffer to abstain from dealing with the problem. Mr. Hartwel
added he would not be against some of the suggestions in the ordinance, if he
were building today.
Norma White suggested that stream luffer.property owners try to build
where the buffer does not adversely affect their property and where construct
would not adversely affect downstream.
Minerva Kenyon, Chairman of the Tree Board, stated the Tree Board unan
supports the buffer standards as now written. She stated trees support the
river and are important to other aspects of the community.
Mr. Weir who lives on Margaret Lane stated he was in favor or Mr. Hogue's
proposal., stating lie would not be permitted to cut his grass on the back of
his property under the present proposal. He added that requirements should be
reasonable and the Board should have concern for the landowners along the rivei.
He suggested the guidelines be spelled out clearly in the Ordinance.
3'
Public lle.aring — Page four
�4
May 26, 1988
�
v
v
4J
U •a
g
construction takes place in. the buffer area, the river peaks at a higher flow.
4 �
� v
lie urged the Board to do what it can to protect the water resources, the Eno
3
•H
-W
River is important to those downstream
o
4-,
°1
•b
°
W
"
13arbara Page stated she help devise the Ordinance and feels it is fair.
�
0
0
The Eno River needs to be protected. As the buffer. is considered for change,
(n
w
Q,
she asked the Board to think about the future of Hillsborough and the paving
° v
`"
>1
o
41by
and runoff which will effect the Eno. The people in Raleigh will be affected
{°,
3
what the Town does.
Q) w
o4-1
�+
°
i
Q)
°
,-i
a
Cyrus Hogue asked the Board to keep in sight the rights of the landowner.
i
r10
bo
�
He is in favor of a buffer but not as now written which adversely affects
Ca v
a
m
property. His property cannot be used with the present buffer except for
,
�
I public purposes. He stated to start the buffer on the edge of the floodplain
°u u
•k
ro
i is excessive. Ile is in favor of his proposal.
(U
W �
a
a
Commissioner Johnson informed those present of the June 14th meeting I
to discuss the development of Seven Mile Creek Reservoir.
W
T�4
,°�44-,
M
`�
Wendy Olsen added that the U.S.G.S. Study declares the 100 year flood
n
o
o
plan as no .longer valid.
Item 5: To delete Section 5.22 which says: "no structure shall exceed
Ln
the height of Eno Mountain Ridge
� a
o
4j
N
The purpose of the amendment is to permit Piedmont COmmunicatiOns
�'
41
W
a
Company to erect a 300 feet communications tower on top of Eno Mountain and
c
�
�
equipment building 30 feet down from the highest elevation. The tower will j
ua
U
o be
used to provide Cellular Telephone Service to approximately 1,200 users E
r__4
in Hillsborough and Orange County.
U
•rj
u
3
Cj
'd
Mr. Markham, Attorney for Mr. Wall of Piedmont Communication, stated the
tower would extend above the peak of the ridge and would be lighted with
blinking red lights.
Norma White asked how much higher would the tower be than the present-
resenttower
towerand what is the height of the present tower.
It was stated the present tower is 120 feet and the proposed tower would
be 160 feet from its base in three directions.
Ms. White asked why is the tower being relocated and the reply was to
serve a larger area better.
Barbara Page asked about access to the tower and it was stated that a
four-wheel drive would be required about two times each month. In response
to Ms. Page's concern regarding ecology-in the area, Mr. Markham stated there
would be minimum interruption of ecology in the area.
liarvy McIver asked how the guidewires would be anchored?
Mr. Wall stated they would be set 8 to 10 feet deep and set in concrete.
They would be drilled in rock in 2 areas. The small building would be 3 X 3
and 8 feet deep.
Dr. Murphy asked if there would be competition for other towers :in the
area, or for use of this tower?
Mr. Wall stated there could be some competition and another request.
Space could be leased from the proposed tower.
Barbara Page asked the number of miles tho tower would s@rve said the
reply was more than the existing tower or a greater area.
Norma. White asked if the Town would get any monetary assistance from the
tower being there and from nivina awav rha Tnumlc ciohr nr&2,rnat4nn
1't►blic Ilr_,ari_ng Page five.
May 26, 1988
of the West liil.lsborough citizens and its important to protect their view of
the ridge. lie :is not in favor of the amendment and asked the Board to prevent
the Mountain from becoming a pin cushion. I
Item 6: Text Amendment to add Section 5.23 regarding the requirements
for fire hydrants
The amend►nent set standards for Fire Hydrants to be added to Chapter 14
Of the Town Code and be part of the Zoning Ordinance. The amendment will also
amend the Water -Sewer Extension Contract. Ms. Rigsbee stated the Fire Chief
is agreeable to the standards.
No comments were offered regarding this amendment.
Item 7: To Amend Section 5.9.2.f and 5.20.2.c to require that the
Fire Chief offer recommendations to the fire protection plan
It was pointed out that the Engineer will review plans and the fire chief
will make recommendations regarding the plans.
Barbara Page stated the Planning Board does get water poundage infornia-
tion from Chief Gordon now.
The Chairman asked for other continents and hearing none declared the publ
hearing concluded.
The Town Board moved to the Town Hall to continue budget deliberations.
Prior to the meeting, the Town Board scheduled June 2, 1988 at 7:00 as
a budget work session to continue discussion of the budget, and to consider
the Planning Board's recommendations regarding the buffer requirement.
At that meeting, the Board will consider the Southeast Sewer project.
The Town Board scheduled Wednesday, June 1, 1988 at 12:00 Noon as a
meeting to talk with representatives from Stanback and Stanback Attorney Firm.
The Board reviewed the Water. Department budgets.
Respectfully submitted,
Agatha Johnson, Town Clerk