ORC minutes 070616 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

2 development or something of the whole area any future, additional changes for some of these accepted uses inside 54 the area must go through the whole process again to make sure that they are not more than 25% of the area. 55 56 Perdita Holtz: The intent of this was for a cohesive development project overall site plan. 57 58 Paul Guthrie: I understand that, but I think that’s one of my worries through the whole paper. All of this is the initial 59 thing. What’s going to happen ten years from now? Because the natural order of things in development is that you 60 devolve, and then you re-develop, and then you re-develop if you can’t get land outside to do it all over again. And 61 I’m wondering if somehow there could be a clause that the lawyers would accept that at a certain point you have to 62 basically reinterpret this whole original area that was zoned that way and developed in that definition. 63 64 Craig Benedict: When we do a site plan, for let’s say a ten acre site, but they’re only using six acres, but yet that 65 original site was a ten acre site and somebody wants to develop something we call that a site plan modification. So 66 that we’re still including what happened in phase 1 so maybe something along those lines. 67 68 Tony Blake: I’m trying to stay with the overall purpose and background, which is to streamline things. To make it 69 easier to develop and I know a lot of times you guys come up with a conceptual plan for something but the developer 70 wants to move things around and that’s when the real discussions happen. But, if the thing is based on square 71 footage it seems like that’s a cumbersome method of doing it and if you wanted to streamline the process you would 72 make it based on square acres or land or something. 73 74 Craig Benedict: We’ve considered the square footage versus acreage and some projects could use up a lot more 75 acreage by not keeping it to square footage so we don’t want a lot of our economic development zones to have too 76 much residential so the square footage is a value. So for now we’re going square footage and we’ll evaluate this as it 77 comes through. 78 79 Tony Blake: Would food trucks be permitted? 80 81 Craig Benedict: Yes. 82 83 AGENDA ITEM 3: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – HILLSBOROUGH ECONOMIC 84 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (EDD) 85 86 To review and comment upon proposed amendments to the UDO that would modify existing 87 regulations that pertain to the Hillsborough EDD. 88 89 Presenter: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator 90 91 Perdita Holtz delivered presentation. 92 93 Lydia Wegman: What is the difference between EDH-2, 3, 4 and 5? 94 95 Perdita Holtz: The types of uses that are allowed, the development standards that are on the table - lot sizes, floor 96 area ratios, that kind of stuff. And there is an EDH-1 also, but we’re not proposing any changes to that district. 97 98 Perdita Holtz continued presentation. 99 100 Lydia Wegman: Is there any downside, as far as not requiring a Class A SUP, for people who live near it? 101 102 Perdita Holtz: Well there could be, it depends on a person’s point-of-view. As you know the Special Use Permit 103 (SUP) process is pretty involved and when people find out that they need to hire an attorney to represent them they 104 often have a problem with that. 105 106 Craig Benedict: Perdita, is the EDH-1, which we’re not suggesting to change, closer to the residential areas now? 107