5_1_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 6.5.24 998 999 Chris Johnston: Okay, interesting. 1000 1001 Charity Kirk: And then you took it out? 1002 1003 Cy Stober: Yeah, after discussion with them. 1004 1005 Charity Kirk: So the lawyers approved it both ways. 1006 1007 Cy Stober: That's correct, that wouldn't be inaccurate. 1008 1009 Chris Johnston: You took it out of 12, 13, and then placed it in the Conditional Zoning and that was the 1010 discussion? 1011 1012 Cy Stober: Correct. 1013 1014 Lamar Proctor: And you mentioned the Eno District, I will just say an anecdotal example is when I was at 1015 the Durham DA's office there was one of these stores in West Durham approaching on 70, approaching the Eno, 1016 and there was a homicide in the parking lot amongst young people, teenagers, so the character and quality of 1017 these places is definitely suspect. 1018 1019 Charity Kirk: If the use is much harder to come by, even in 12 and 13, is there the potential of character 1020 and quality to go up? I mean, that's one of the things is like is— 1021 1022 Beth Bronson: You're putting it in an industrial district though. With all respect, I do understand what 1023 you're saying, but you're putting it in industrial district where, again, there are commercial and retail sale, but 1024 there's also an impetus for larger footprint spaces. So in industrial you could have a hundred thousand square 1025 foot building and then you have a 12,000 square foot hemp and tobacco retail, and so then, again, you're 1026 creating this one spot that is off the beaten path for people who would like to go and buy these products without 1027 a lot of other public around, and if you're talking about trying to deter that type of behavior, you're basically just 1028 isolating that to one area of town which, again, could be problematic if you think about where the industrial zoning 1029 is and what residential areas might be near it. That is a consideration, I would think. 1030 1031 Lamar Proctor: To me the only question is,do you want to allow some due process where someone could if 1032 they convince Board of County Commissioners that this was a good thing for the county and was consistent with 1033 Comprehensive Land Use Plans, Conditional Zoning or do you wanna just say,"hey, people are going to do what 1034 they're going to do so let's shove it into 12 or 13 over there with the sexually-oriented businesses, because it's 1035 clearly a vice-oriented business. Me, personally, I would approve it as written, that it should just go under 1036 Conditional Zoning. I don't see how,just given the definition, that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Land 1037 Use Plan, but maybe some future retailer could convince some future board as to how it is.There is a process by 1038 which such a retailer could get approved if they really tried. 1039 1040 Cy Stober: That's correct. 1041 1042 Chris Johnston: Could I put a motion now, that is unpopular and then figure out where we stand from there? 1043 1044 Adam Beeman: Good. 1045 1046 MOTION BY Chris Johnston to submit the proposed amendment with the change where Tobacco and Hemp Retail 1047 is in no Conditional Districts. Seconded by Charity Kirk.