Town Approves Zoning Amendments By Frank Ruggiero The Boone Town Council approved five zoning amendments from the winter quarter public hearing at last Thursday’s regular meeting. The first case was a Boone Tree Board request for a text amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance that would incorporate ANSI (American National Standards Institute) 300 National Standards relating to correct tree pruning practices, as well as language for more effective enforcement of incorrect pruning. The amendment was adopted unanimously. The second case dealt with a town-proposed text amendment to clarify the current definition of “sign.” At December’s council meeting, council members requested development service staff to prepare a UDO amendment to broaden the definition of “sign” to include anything that attracted attention to a business, including balloons, streamers and air-driven objects. Spear said the definition had been expanded to include a number of examples of objects, letters, figures, symbols and display devices the town considers signs, as well as examples the town doesn’t consider signs, such as flags and scoreboards. The language passed mostly as written, as the Boone Area Planning Commission had recommended adding balloons to the list and changing “illumination” in the language to “illuminated.” Town attorney Sam Furgiuele suggested the council modify the language to be more comprehensive by including “not limited to” in the definition list. The amendment was adopted unanimously. To align the UDO with the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Update, the town proposed a text amendment to encourage libraries, museums, art galleries and similar historic and cultural land uses within the town of Boone. At the public hearing, Spear said planning staff was concerned that libraries, museums, galleries and art centers currently require a special use permit (SUP) to be developed in numerous zoning jurisdictions. However, such centers with gross floor area less than 3,500 square feet require a SUP, while projects with larger floor areas are permitted uses by right. The use of a SUP would still be required for such use in residential zoning classifications. Per suggestion of council member Rennie Brantz, the planning commission recommended replacing “art center” with “cultural center.” The amendment was adopted unanimously. In aligning the UDO with the comprehensive plan, the town proposed an amendment seeking to encourage bed and breakfast land uses to promote a well-balanced tourism trade in accordance with the comprehensive plan. At the public hearing Spear said language in the plan’s economic development section mentions attention to a variety of services in town, including attractions and accommodations. However, bed and breakfast establishments are not on the list, while the town encourages numerous miscellaneous rooms or rent situations, be it hotel or vacation rental. At the public hearing, council members and planning commissioners sought to amend language, which states bed and breakfast establishments must be owner-occupied, to include owners and managing agents. This would also change the language’s definition of bed and breakfast. The planning commission recommended approval with several modifications, the first being to strike “owner-occupied” from the definition and add “shall be occupied by the owner or managing agent during the time the bed and breakfast is open for business.” The language was also rewritten to say a maximum of one nonresident may be employed on a full-time basis, while another change. The amendment passed unanimously. The last case dealt with special use permits, with the town proposing a text amendment that would modify a considerable amount of uses on the table of permissible uses, ensuring a SUP is only required when project approval needs special care in control of location, design and the methods of operating. For instance, colleges, universities, community colleges and associated facilities (dormitories, office buildings, athletic fields) are currently approved at staff level for B-1, B-2, and B-3 business districts, and planning staff determined such development should require SUPs. The planning commission had recommended a couple changes, one being to allow carry-out and delivery service, drive-in service, service or consumption outside fully enclosed structures to be permitted by right under B-3 (general business), and the other for open-air markets, such as craft, flea and produce markets, to require SUPs for use in R-A (residential-agricultural) and B-1 and B-3 business districts. Referring to use 5.130, which, as amended, would require university uses and associated facilities to obtain a SUP for B-1, B-2 and B-3 districts, council member Lynne Mason said she’d like to bar university uses in B-1 and B-2 districts. Council member Dempsey Wilcox objected, saying, “A lot of the uses ASU would have would not be objectionable If you build a dorm there, that’s one thing; an office is another thing. I don’t know why we need to make ASU jump through a hoop more than any other applicant.” Another change to the table would see publicly-owned and operated outdoor recreational facilities allowed in every zone by right except for U-1 (university) districts. Out of respect for neighborhoods, Mason said she’d like to see a provision to allow for public input, which a SUP could provide through the Boone Board of Adjustment. Wilcox said there are plenty of avenues for public input, apart from the board of adjustment. “I don’t like having another body able to overrule our decision,” he said. “Then the board of adjustment has the power to say we can’t put a park there.” Wilcox was bothered by the fact that board of adjustment votes require a super majority, meaning that only two negative votes can shoot down a request. Wilcox was also concerned that there was not enough notification on the matter, considering the amount of recommended changes to the table. He said the published advertisements in the newspaper did not adequately describe the extent of the changes. “I’m not a fan of the special use process for several reasons, and I think the change for permitted by right to special use permit is a substantial and serious change,” Wilcox said. The council opted to discuss the matter further at its next public hearing. However, the council unanimously chose to exempt the changes to 6.220 for residential zones, meaning SUPs will still be required. “I am voting for this, but I think we would have been better served to the public to do these as separate cases,” Wilcox said. “I don’t like the special use permit process except in cases of buildings with very large impact on neighborhoods and communities in the area, but I think we should always stay away from these kinds of sweeping changes with this little bit of public notice given.”