|
Approved 6.5.24
<br /> 598
<br /> 599 Beth Bronson: And just for me and my perspective, what was the attorney's rationale for not including
<br /> 600 those in LC1, NC2, GC3, GC4, EC5?What was the reasoning for not including that as like with a special asterisk,
<br /> 601 Iguess?
<br /> 602
<br /> 603 Cy Stober: The County does not want them.
<br /> 604
<br /> 605 Beth Bronson: Okay. I mean, retail wise they are quite popular. And I'm not saying that the County is right
<br /> 606 or wrong or the retail purchasers are right or wrong. Just that I would caution,this is creating a very stringent rule
<br /> 607 and isolating one particular type of retail, and so I would just caution against that to Planning Board members as
<br /> 608 we make this recommendation.
<br /> 609
<br /> 610 Charity Kirk: How are adult stores zoned now in general? Why not shove it into that category? Because
<br /> 611 1 remember a long time ago when we were talking about Dollar Stores, there was something about, well, if we
<br /> 612 rezone it, it could have an adult store, but then there's school distances and—so it's 12 and 13.Why not limited to
<br /> 613 12 and 13?
<br /> 614
<br /> 615 Cy Stober: I'll be frank,that was in one of the drafts and Planning staff thought if the goal is to limit their
<br /> 616 presence entirely in the County, that placing it in a Conditional Zoning District would be the way to do that. And
<br /> 617 it was acceptable. But that was drafted, as well, the place to do exactly that.
<br /> 618
<br /> 619 Charity Kirk: So what, what are the pros and cons of 12? It just seems like limiting it entirely, making it
<br /> 620 super difficult, or making it much more limited.
<br /> 621
<br /> 622 Cy Stober: Sure, I mean allowing it in a few zoning districts would make it more difficult to challenge
<br /> 623 that the County's attempting to completely prohibit the use, and so that's the advantage there. But it could be any
<br /> 624 one, I'm thinking particularly in Economic Development Districts where we have zoning for like Economic
<br /> 625 Development Buckhorn, so the whole West Ten area over near Gravelly Hill Middle School you would still have
<br /> 626 the radius restriction, but, for example the properties north of the interstate near the weigh station, I think there's
<br /> 627 some that are zoned for industrial there. They would have to conform with all the other standards, like driveway
<br /> 628 access and so forth. But it would be primarily in the Economic Development District. So, south of Hillsborough,
<br /> 629 east of Mebane and right at the Durham County line would be the areas where you could see that. And I haven't
<br /> 630 done a radius analysis to see if there, what those properties would be that could allow for that but-
<br /> 631
<br /> 632 Beth Bronson: Much less, would a retail space align with the current neighborhood businesses in those
<br /> 633 Economic Development Districts, correct? I mean, those are warehouse, manufacturing.
<br /> 634
<br /> 635 Cy Stober: It would be consistent with the uses in the EDD, in the Durham County line.And it wouldn't
<br /> 636 be inconsistent, I could see it going in over at Buckhorn as well if it could qualify for the radius restrictions. But,
<br /> 637 again, this is the staff presentation. To your point, I think the proposal of restricting to NR-CD makes it bit more
<br /> 638 vulnerable to legal challenge, but I think that we're still permitting the use in the county, we're not prohibiting it,
<br /> 639 we've just required a high burden of responsibility by the applicants to qualify for that use.
<br /> 640
<br /> 641 Chris Johnston: And that was going to be my point. We do have uses in the use chart that aren't allowed
<br /> 642 anywhere. Like there are ones that are not allowed at all. Tobacco Processing, Preparation, Packaging and
<br /> 643 Distribution, as far as I can tell isn't anywhere. Starch, Vegetables, Fats, and Oils Manufacturing, we have use
<br /> 644 cases where they're not allowed anywhere and it's not necessarily a feeling of targeting.
<br /> 645
<br /> 646 Charity Kirk: What is the Health Department planning on doing?
<br /> 647
<br />
|