|
201
<br />DRAFT
<br />244 Perdita Holtz: Conditional Use District is completely like Planned Development. The only difference is the MPDCZ is replacing
<br />245 the Planned Development Mixed Use classification and the difference is that it would not require an SUP because an SUP
<br />246 requires a site plan plus we now have this tool of Conditional Zoning Districts where you can place the conditions on the rezoning
<br />247 instead of on the SUP. When PD was developed back in 1988 or 89, conditional zoning was not an option in North Carolina. It
<br />248 did not become an option in North Carolina until 2005.
<br />249
<br />250 May Becker: I'm still not clear on why you need the Conditional Zoning District. In other words, you have Planned Development,
<br />251 you have Conditional Use which you say is a replacement of Planned Development using an SUP for that from what 1
<br />252 summarized two meetings ago, and then we go on to this other Conditional Zoning District which was not under Planned
<br />253 Development, correct?
<br />254
<br />255 Perdita Holtz: There are components of Planned Development in it but it's not a complete replacement.
<br />256
<br />257 May Becker: Right, it's broader, it's more open- ended, its allowing development.
<br />258
<br />259 Perdits Holtz: It's really not more open- ended. It is just a different process of almost getting to the same place in that you place
<br />260 conditions on the rezoning instead of requiring a Special Use Permit that you place conditions on.
<br />261
<br />262 Craig Benedict: Let me talk about targeted areas and answer that question about targeted sites. (using a flap of the Land Use
<br />263 Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan) This map is backed up by the Comprehensive Plan and with every
<br />264 rezoning process that we go through, through those three that we spoke about, General Use, Conditional Zoning, and
<br />265 Conditional Use Rezoning, that is a legislative decision and the Commissioners, during that decision process, looked to the Land
<br />266 Use Element to find out if its in a targeted area and whether what's being asked for makes sense with the map and also makes
<br />267 sense with the text in the Comprehensive Plan and the Goals, Objections, and Policies. Are we targeting areas for certain types
<br />268 of growth? Yes, those targeted areas are noted as Economic Development Districts, Commercial Industrial Nodes, some of the
<br />269 higher density residential potential in and around Hillsborough and Efland. There is some targeted focus that the Commissioners
<br />270 will take into consideration when they make a legislative decision. This is the targeted industry, targeted areas. As Perdita said,
<br />271 Planned Developments married up with Conditional Use could have been requested in some other areas and the Commissioners
<br />272 can say legislatively, yes we like it or we don't like it and whatever other conditions they want to make. There is some criteria for
<br />273 the rezoning process. Another reason not to have an SUP with some projects is because once you agree on fifty conditions with
<br />274 a rezoning, if you take those same fifty conditions with an SUP, the rulings on the Special Use Permit conditions are with findings
<br />275 of fact and that is done in a quasi - judicial proceeding versus the legislative decision. They can make agreed upon conditions
<br />276 with the developer and if you agree to 50, after that if you say you need 100 parking spots and they give you 100 parking spots,
<br />277 you can't turn them down, that's quasi - judicial that's the evidence that they proved there is 100 parking spots there. In a lot of
<br />278 thoughts, this is where Judith was going with her redundancy, its very difficult to deny with a quasi - judicial process 50 conditions
<br />279 that you agreed to. They could very easily prove that they met all the standards, that's why you don't need an SUP process
<br />280 because you have it completely covered. The other reason is people do not know exactly what, in some cases, their site plans
<br />281 are going to be if you encourage office park development. We want to encourage office park development in Orange County
<br />282 because if we get a five acre site for one project and next door is another five acre site plan, another five acre site plan at
<br />283 different times they don't jive together because we don't know what's happening. If we encourage some sort of master plan
<br />284 development, with that master concept plan, we can have somebody look at twenty acres and say how it all works together,
<br />285 where the roads go, where the roads stub out for connectivity, make sure there is a big enough water line to serve other
<br />286 undeveloped properties. It makes sense to develop comprehensively with larger parcels than a piecemeal, unconnected
<br />287 patchwork of small site plans. If we only have that SUP site plan tool, people are not going to buy bigger properties and we get
<br />288 the patchwork approach, that's why wisdom across the United States and in North Carolina put that in the toolkit of options that
<br />289 people can decide if they want to do a more of an office park or business park project or even a retail project with multiple
<br />290 buildings.
<br />291
<br />292 May Becker: I guess it raises more questions really to me. The idea of having a master plan with big parcels of office parks
<br />293 where it's one big development or a number of developers who develop large areas of office parks as opposed to, as you say, a
<br />294 patchwork of an individual who wants have a small office park and another individual and to me its sounds as if, as you point out,
<br />295 if you compare it to other areas in the country and you see what's going on with these huge office parks and you have empty
<br />296 spaces and a homogenous layout of the office park but you just don't have offices coming there and you've got marked vacancy
<br />297 rates so it opens all kinds of questions and thoughts. I wondering about what direction that would take in the future.
<br />298
<br />299 Mark Marcoplos: Its pretty clear to me that which ever way you go, you're not going to meet all the same regulations. I can't
<br />300 think of a loophole. I can't think of how somebody could sneak in through one process something that they can get denied in the
<br />301 other. From that standpoint, add that perspective to the fact that it is more orderly if you can lay out 20 acres versus 3 and 4
<br />302 acres and then try to match the roads and then come up with this hodgepodge design, it is more practical and less time
<br />303 consuming for staff...
<br />304
<br />5
<br />
|