OCPB minutes 100417 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 11/01/2017 13 recommend approval of District 1 and 2 for this project as they would be consistent with current and anticipating 633 development activity and are consistent with the Future Land Use Map, with a recommendation of delaying action on 634 District 3 until the Water and Sewer Boundary Map (WASMPBA) and Future Land Use Map issues are resolved; 635 recommend denial of the project (Staff is not recommending this option); or recommend approval of the application 636 as submitted, including District 3 (Staff is not recommending this option). 637 638 Kim Piracci said that this is the first time she has heard of Settler’s Point mixed use development and it seems like 639 with very little information, she has more questions than answers. She said that if she moved to approve this, she 640 does not feel like she knows what she is approving. 641 642 Michael Harvey said that part of this process is for the Board to ask questions to get a comfort level. He pointed to 643 the detailed, comprehensive narrative that Staff has provided and maps outlining what the area will look like. This 644 project was originally submitted February/March of 2017 and was then tabled. It was resubmitted in August 2017 and 645 this is the first hearing for the Planning Board to review the project. The narrative provides the standards for 646 developing this project. Since this is a master plan, there are not specifics on where exactly a hotel or a motel or an 647 industrial site will go. Board members are being asked to approve the zoning and regulatory limitations that will 648 govern this project overtime, from setbacks to land use buffers to parking requirements, etc. Staff will utilize the 649 Board’s approval to approve or deny the developer’s site plans as they come forward. This is different than a Special 650 Use Permit application is required to have a site plan showing how the property is going to be developed. Rather, this 651 process is a rezoning process. Design standards and criteria can and are going to be opposed. This criteria will be 652 the basis for approval of site plans as Staff moves forward. 653 654 Kim Piracci asked what Michael Harvey meant at the beginning of his presentation when he told the Board that this 655 was the last time they would see this project. 656 657 Michael Harvey replied the Board would be approving the zoning district. Site plans are going to be reviewed by 658 Staff, subject to permitted uses in the UDO. What he meant was that the Board will not see site plans for this project, 659 unless the concept of the school moves forward. He did note that the school would need a Class A Special Use 660 Permit and that application would go through the Board. 661 662 Tony Blake asked if Staff had received much public comment on this application. Were people concerned? 663 664 Michael Harvey responded the NIM notes that go over concerns and other comments are included Attachment 5 in 665 the packet. Mr. Harvey said that people were concerned about traffic impacts, congestion and congestion 666 management. There is a TIA outlining what external traffic improvements will be required to accommodate the 667 project. There was also some concern that this project could even be served by water-sewer. Staff made the 668 aforementioned conditions regarding this concern. Additionally, there were concerns expressed about the intensity of 669 District 3. There is also buzz in this project because of the economic development interest it brings to the County. 670 Neighbors at the NIMs also expressed concerns about noise and air pollution. There are regulatory standards of 671 which the applicant is aware that will hopefully address these concerns. 672 673 Tony Blake said that he did not get the impression that the public would have more time to comment on this if the 674 Board approves it tonight. 675 676 Michael Harvey said that the public always gets the opportunity to comment on any development project that goes 677 through Orange County, even if the project is permitted by right; and they get to comment tonight and at the BOCC 678 public hearing. However, they cannot influence the outcome. Staff is reviewing and taking action on permitted land 679 uses, most of which could already be developed in this area. From Staff’s standpoint, the benefit of the project going 680 through the master plan process is that it gives a comprehensive approach of developing roadway standards and 681 addressing buffer issues, purposeful utility management in coordination with Hillsborough. The master plan process 682 helps establish a zoning district that addresses some of the applicant’s needs, the Planning Department’s needs, and 683 economic development needs in the County. There could still be limitations that impact this project, just like any 684 project. 685