OCPB agenda 050416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Craig Benedict: We could allow that as an accessory use. We’ve had mini warehouses where they wanted an on-site 55 resident and you could accommodate that as not a primary use but as an incidental and secondary use. And we can 56 make sure that’s allowed for big factories there might be some residential or over night component to it. 57 58 Paul Guthrie: It just occurred to me that if you barred that completely it could give you a problem. On the other hand, 59 if you allowed it then I think somebody could attack the whole principal on the basis. 60 61 Craig Benedict: We’re allowing hotels and motels, and someone might say that’s residential but that’s a commercial 62 use. 63 64 Michael Harvey: I would make the argument that’s not a residential land use. The principal use of the property would 65 be X and it’s up to the applicant to justify, “I need this for this reason” and again I know we shouldn’t be fixating on 66 the examples, but in that example that’s what I would say; that it’s not functioning as a residential development, there 67 is a component, but it’s in support of the principal use which, let’s say, is this research manufacturing unit. 68 69 Lisa Stuckey: So if I drove through this, what would it look like? 70 71 Craig Benedict: These would be more of a corporate park but, corporate parks and business parks and industrial 72 parks have changed over the last 15-20 years. Our zoning, as evidence by office institutional, was very regimen. This 73 is where you put your Class A office building, and then somewhere else you put your warehouse, and somewhere 74 else you put your manufacturing, and somewhere else you have R&D. Now they don’t do that anymore, they put 75 everything in the same place. They’ll have their clean office, they’ll have their R&D Park they’ll put it all together. This 76 district will allow office, and research, manufacturing, and distribution. So, the buildings could be from 20,000 to 77 100,000 square feet. So you could see a few of those buildings in there that have multiple activities. And by the 78 secondary uses that are allowed means that somebody could come in with a business and say, “I don’t see enough 79 restaurants around here, how about if I bring as part of my master plan a Chili’s with me?” and that’s a bonus. When 80 we were looking at another retail site, Cabella’s, even though that was all retail they brought a hotel with them and a 81 restaurant. We’re definitely not having this as a retail focus, we’re listing this stuff as secondary uses in there so we 82 can keep that prime use as job based light industrial manufacturing. 83 84 Lydia Wegman: Have we heard of any companies that are interested in this particular kind of land use? Or this is just 85 to make us attractive to companies if one is interested? 86 87 Craig Benedict: This is just to make us attractive. When the candy factory came, they were designated 88 Office/Institutional, and it did say manufacturing was okay. I’d say it’s a relatively small fix, as you were mentioning 89 some of the economic development zones; we need to go into there and take a look at the way the uses are 90 fashioned in there too. The next project that you’ll hear from Perdita Holtz, probably in the next month or so, is in the 91 Hillsborough Economic Development. Because we have a joint agreement with Hillsborough we’re trying to align both 92 our joint land uses and the zoning categories that can go within that land use. And right now, they’re all over the 93 place. 94 95 Tony Blake: I have a question. I read through this and I read the column and what it allows and accessory use and all 96 that stuff and I came down to the automotive/transportation and because I’m sort of passionate about the way we’re 97 doing our transit and thinking that BRT is a good rapid transit solution. I noticed that it would allow a bus passenger 98 shelter, which I view as one of these little cubicles by the side of the road, but not a bus terminal or garage. And Bus 99 Rapid Transit has a raised platform appeal, especially in an area where there’s a concentrated number of transit 100 people. Would that be allowed in this zone? 101 102 Craig Benedict: Well, we can make it. It does make sense. I think what they were thinking about was kind of a simple 103 city bus terminal, so we can make sure that our bus stops and level platforms and all stuff could be allowed. Because 104 we do have our bus service that is going very close to this zone, if not through it, and if we get some employment 105 concentrations we will modify that transit system. 106 107 6