6_5_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 7.10.24 Any other requirements are the requirements for site plan and master plan development submittal, there are no other 406 proposed conditions. The applicant conducted a traffic impact analysis, an environmental site assessment, they've 407 provided analysis on architectural for all non-residential uses and made commitments there, and they've also 408 analyzed the utilities and they have more detail on this, including the proposed wastewater treatment. Those have all 409 been reviewed by the staff on the development advisory committee which includes staff from environmental health; 410 emergency services; solid waste; and department of environment, agriculture, parks, and recreation. The 411 consistency analysis was conducted by staff and I'll note that it was not just current planning and zoning staff, but 412 also our comprehensive and long-range planning and administrative staff, and you'll hear more from Tom Altieri, the 413 senior planner in that division in a moment. And part of the analysis is that family care facilities are not a permitted 414 use in the master plan development conditional district which brings us to Item 8, the proposed text amendments. 415 There are two amendments proposed by the applicant, one is to add family care home as a permitted use in MPD-416 CD district and the other is to rewrite a footnote in Section 3.8 which is the description of the MPD-CD zoning district 417 that corresponds to the proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan that would allow MPD-CD districts in rural 418 neighborhood activities nodes. There was one amendment proposed by staff that is in the abstract for Item 8 that is 419 to bring our definition for family care home into alignment with that of the state. So just a brief analysis and this really 420 is a reiteration of what's in the abstract, it's fairly straightforward. 160D, which is the land use and development 421 statute, determines what a family care facility is for everyone in the state and the definition is provided here. To be 422 clear, a family care home is deemed a residential use of property for zoning purposes and is a permissible use in all 423 residential districts and we shall not limit that use by making it a special use or requiring a variance to require 424 additional burdens for anyone who wishes to have a family care facility on a residential property. Our definition of 425 master plan development, it references unified large-scale subdivisions which are presumed to be residential in 426 nature, as well as mixed use developments, also presumed to be partially residential in nature. And reviewing that, 427 we’ve assessed that all 16 conventional zoning districts that permit residential uses and the two conditional districts 428 that support residential uses already allow family care facilities and therefore, it would be appropriate to bring this use 429 as an allowed use into the MPD-CD district. There is an accompanying amendment in the applicant's text 430 amendment application that addresses, again, that footnote in Article 3 for MPD-CD being permitted in the rural 431 neighborhood activity node, and this corresponds to the application for the comprehensive plan amendment to 432 amend Appendix F to allow the same thing. You are permitted to consider the two amendments separately. Are 433 there any questions on that before we move forward? 434 435 Whitney Watson: Yes, I have a question. One of the notes about the MPD-CD, was that there seemed to be an 436 oversight in the matrix, which is one of the suggestions. I was wondering if perhaps the rural community 437 neighborhood, or rural community activity node, was not the actual mistake where it had allowed the master plan 438 development conditional district as opposed to having been omitted from the other. Because it seems to me that in 439 both the community and the neighborhood activity nodes going into this master plan fundamentally changes the 440 character of those activity nodes, at least according to the definitions in both the UDO and the plan, so could you talk 441 a little bit about how those two nodes, activity nodes are different from each other and how they will be, how it might 442 be corrected by adding. 443 444 Cy Stober: Thank you for the segue, that's the very next thing we were going to get to Mr. Watson, thank you. 445 446 Lamar Proctor: All right, good, and I do want to take an aside. This is unrelated to your presentation, but the sign-447 up sheets, the people who have signed up tonight, that will be the end of the sign-up. If we go into multiple sessions, 448 I just want to make this clear, there won't be an additional opportunity for more people to sign up. Only those who 449 sign up this evening prior to the public comment period will be permitted to speak. 450 451 Cy Stober: Let me rush those back to the sign-in table so folks can sign in if they want. 452 453 Dolores Bailey: Mr. Chair, does that mean that if they haven't signed up tonight that they will be able to sign up? 454 455