Loading...
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.