HomeMy Public PortalAbout6.2.1988 Agenda & Minutes Planning Board(Town of litfllaborouo4
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
PLEASE BRING YOUR PUBLIC
HEARING AGENDA PACKET.
AGENDA
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 2, 1988
6:30PM
ITEM #1: Consideration of additions to the agenda.
ITEM #2: Approval of the minutes of the April 7 and May 5, 1988 minutes.
ITEM #3: RECOMMENDATIONS ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
3A S4-re&w+ Bo£?C r-
#3-1:
#3-1: Warren & Agnes Summey Rezoning Request. Rezone 2.03 Acres
on the south side of Hwy 70 from R-20 to GC (General Co���mercial) .
(attachment #1)
#3-2: Lorene Turner Rezoning Request. Rezone 0.62 Acres on the south
side of Hwy 70 from R-20 to GC (General Commercial).
(attachment #2)
#3-3: Text amendment to sections 4.4.6 and 11.6 to -reduce the
notification requirements for Conditional Use Permits, Site Plan
Reviews, Variances, and Rezonings by notifying property owners
within 100 feet, by eliminating the requirement to post property,
and by reducing the advertising time requirements (attachment #3)
#3-4: Text amendment to Section 5.11 regarding Stream Buffers - three
proposals:
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 #4c)
#3-5: To delete section 5.22 which says: "no structure shall exceed
the height of Eno Mountain Ridge". (attachment #5)
#3-6. Text amendment to add section 5.23 regarding the requirements
,for fire hydrants - Sections 5.23 through 5.23.g (attachment #6)
#3-7: 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)
ITEM #4: Discussion on the revision to the Land Use Plan.
In order to ensure that a quorum will be present, please
notify Janet Rigsbee at 732-2104 if you will be unable to
attend.
a
MINUTES
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 2, 1988
MEMBERS Bob nose (Chair), Tarleton Davis, Margaret Moore, Jim Culbreth,
PRESENT: David Cates, Robin Coleman, Cheshire Cole
MEMBERS Barbara Page, Ida Louise Evans, Dr. Robert Murphy
ABSENT:
OTHERS: Mr. & Mrs. Ben Wall, Jack Markham, Virginia Forrest, Mr. & Mrs.
Willie Laws, Mr. A.W. Kenion, Commissioners John Hartwell &
Don Wilhoit, Rocky Rosen, Eileen Eifert, Janet Rigsbee
ADDITIONS: Item 3-4 is moved to the first item for consideration.
Rigsbee asked for the addition of a discussion by the Board of
a Special Use Permit to be added to the Zoning Ordinance for
hardship cases.
ITEM #2: Davis moved to approve the minutes of the April 7 and May 5
meetings.
Ashley seconded.
Unanimous.
ITEM #3A: Rose stated as a preface to the consideration of the Stream Buffer
amendment that the Town Board has under consideration a large
pump station on Eliz. Brady Rd. and it is in a floodplain area
so they would like this considered early on the agenda. Rose
went on to explain the difference between the floodway which is
that area that water rushes in when it floods and the floodplain
which is that area in which the water rises slowly during a flood.
Rose explained that the Town does have a Flood Plain Ordinance
which deals with the construction of buildings in the flood plain
but what is under consideration tonight is the stream -buffer section
of the Zoning Ordinance which at this time is $rohibiting any
construction in the flood plain plus up to 150 beyond the flood
plain.
Rigsbee went over her revised, prepared amendment which took the
comments from the Public Hearing into account. (attached)
4
Rose said he felt that there was a problem with gardening activity
in the buffer as people do not use chemicals wisely.
The Board felt that landscaping in the buffer breaks the integrity
of the buffer.
Ashley moved to recommend approval of the amendment presented by
Rigsbee with the deletion of 5.11.3.e (landscaping) and the addition
of 5.11.5.c which should read:`the use of pesticides, herbicides,
or chemicals is not allowed in the stream buffer except with the
prior approval of the Zoning Officer.'
Moore seconded.
Unanimous.
June 2, 1988
Page 2
ITEM #3-1 Culbreth moved approval for Items #3-1 and #3-2,the rezonings of
& #3-2: Summey and Turner.
Davis seconded.
In discussion, Moore said that the impact on residential must be
considered that the commercial growth is like a cancer.
Rose said that this is an area proposed for growth and it shows up
as such on the Pantry Area Study.
Cates said from an engineering standpoint with the proposed
Thoroughfare Plan if the right-of-way would be dedicated or reserved
then there should be no problem with developing the Summey tract.
Vote 8 in favor 1 opposed.
ITEM 33-3 The amendments to reduce the notification requirements was discussed
The consensus of the Board was to keep the notification requirements
as they stood except for posting the property. They felt that it
is the function of government to inform citizens of activity in
the Town and it is best to notify many persons. Culbreth said that
perhaps there is a need to raise the notification fee and this shoul
be studied in the future.
Culbreth moved to recommend that the ordinance be amended only as
it regards the deletion of the requirement to post property.
Coleman seconded.
Unanimous.
ITEM #3-5: Rigsbee pointed out that the applicant for the ordinance amendment
to delete section 5.22 which says: "no structure shall exceed the
height of Eno Mountain Ridge" has asked for a change that would
say "no structure except for observation and communication towers
shall exceed...."
Culbreth said that that is the type of amendment he would have
proposed.
Moore said this proposal doesn't limit the amount of towers allowed.
Rose said it appears if one is allowed all should be allowed. Cates
pointed out that the potential for other towers is high. Rigsbee
noted that all towers must go through the Conditional Use Permit
process. It was noted that the ordinance could be amended in the
future.
Murphy moved to recommend approval as modified by the applicant.
Culbreth seconded.
Vote 6 in favor 3 opposed with Cates, Moore, and Ashley opposed
with Ashley saying that it could descrate the area.
ITEM #3-6 Coleman moved to recommend approval of the two ordinance amendments
and #3-7: regarding fire protection.
Murphy seconded.
Unanimous.
June 2, 1988
Page 3
ITEM #4: Culbreth asked the members how their windshield survey was coming
along and the response was that it was almost finished except for
the narrative. Culbreth read his narrative and said that he would
take the other narratives and compile them. He will write a
draft and would like the narratives in by June 7th.
ADDITION: Rigsbee said that there have been 2 different situations in Town
where a mobile home was not allowed on the property because of the
ordinance and the Mayor was wondering if there would be any way
that a hardship provision could be added to the ordinance.
Culbreth said that the word hardship is a misnomer because to say
hardhsip could mean that an incinerator would not be allowed for
a business downtown. Poore said she was afraid that this could
become a Town of hardships.
Davis said that he was on the OCIP9 Board and was familiar with one
of the cases of which Rigsbee spoke and the family was offered a
different lot but they wanted to go on Odie St. He said that
Board members should not overrule the wishes of the people.
Rose noted that the ordinance was developed to protect existing
adjacent property owners.
Culbreth said that there had been many long discussions regarding
mobile homes. He felt that our ordinance was fair and was a
compromise of 2 different groups of thought. He said that we do
have a hardship provision in the ordinance for illness.
The Planning Board agreed that they think the ordinance should
remain as is because it is fair and works for all citizens
across the board. If the Town Board would like to recommend a
change they would review and work with it.
,axd X-Je�
net V. Rigs e, Secretary
AN AMENDMENT TO THE HILLSBOROUGH ZONING ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 5.11
(Stream Buffers)
Se,_cion 1 The Board of Commissioners of the Towr. of Hillsborough ordains:
Section 2 Section 5.11 shall be amended and rewritten as follows:
5.11 Stream Buffers Im ervicus Surface Ratios, and
Infiltration
5.11.1 Intent
In order to minimize sedimentation and pollution of the
perennial streams within the planning jurisdiction of
the Town, stream buffers shall be provided along all
such streams. Undisturbed natural areas along streans
act as a filter for sedimentation control and as a
stabilizing agent for the stream banks. In addition,
these areas filter storm water run-off which may carry
significant amounts of bacteria and heavy metals into
the streams. The buffer areas, along with controls on
impervious surfaces, provide a good measure of water
quality protection for the Eno River.
5.11.2 Calculations for Width of Stream Buffers
a) The width of the buffer along the Eno River shall be
the floodway as shown on the FLOODWAY MAP from the
National Flood Insurance Program plus 50 feet. However,
in no case, shall the stream buffer exceed the outer
line of the floodplain as shown on the FIRM Flood
Insurance Rate Map of the National Flood Insurance
Program.
b) The width of the stream buffer along perennial streams
shall be 50 feet measured from the edge o� the Srream nanir
4
5.11.3
Permitted Uses within Stream Buffers
It is the intent of this Section to restrict the use
of land adjacent to perennial streams in order to
reduce sedimentation and pollution. The following
uses are permitted within a buffer. All other land
uses are prohibited.
a)
Above ground and buried utility lines for
distribution of natural gas, electricity, telephone,
and cable television service, plus accessory and
appurtenant apparatus such as poles, guy wires,
transformers, meters, and switching boxes.
b)
Public water distribution and sewage collection
facilities, not to include private in -ground sewage
disposal facilities.
C)
Public and private streets, bridges, and railroad
rights-of-way. Where it is necessary to construct
streets, bridges and railroad lines across buffer
areas, they shall enter and exit the area as nearly
perpendicular to the streams as possible.
'P[ann;n "3odfj d)
Public parka.
ltn
d e--� Gfes `
n2CC�d an scap ng, a mrd-recre-at-kona1
f)
Archeological research and excavation.
g)
Existing structures which encroach on the buffer may
remain and may be repaired and replaced so long as
the encroachment is not enlarged.
5.11.4
Stream Buffer and Minimum Lot Area Requirements
The stream buffer may be used in meeting the
required minimum lot areas set forth in this
Ordinance.
5.11.5 Existing Vegetation and New Vegetation in Stream
Buffers _
0) With the exception of moving, existing vegetation
shall not be disturbed within a stream buffer
without prior approval of the Zoning Officer.
Existing vegetation may be augmented within the
buffer if the Zoning Officer approves the plans. Any
work done in the stream buffer must have the
probability of increasing the infiltration
capability of the buffer and reducing the velocity
of storm water run-off.
�) In the situation where the buffer has erosion
problems the Zoning Office shall require that the
buffer be planted so that it will function as a
sediment and pollution trap. In the case of new
construction such planting shall be completed prior
to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
and treatmei
G)�
Ct YS Y1 N h 67- ..C/� /w•rr
boa VJ „�,," • '
a d d s,
5.11.6 Impervious Surface Ratios and Infiltration
a) The developer shall take action to control the first
one-half (z) inch of run-off from new development that
abuts a stream buffer area.
b) New development shall be limited to six percent (6%)
impervious coverage in the Lake Ben Johnston watershed.
Section 3. All provisions of any Town ordinance in conflict with this
ordinance are repealed.
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.