Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-24-2009 - E1ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS And PLANNING BOARD QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 Action Agenda Item No. E.1 SUBJECT: Non - Public Hearing Items DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Section 1.5.2 of Comprehensive Plan Name Phone Number 2. Planning Department's Work Staging 3. BOCC Adopted Small Area Plan Specifics Craig Benedict 245 -2592 4. Unified Development Ordinance Proposal Tom Altieri 245 -2579 5. New Ideas — Ongoing Comprehensive Plan Michael Harvey 245 -2607 Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation Perdita Holtz 245 -2611 6. DRAFT Minutes, 8/5/09 Planning Board Meeting PURPOSE: To present proposed processes for 1) Implementing Small Area Plans, 2) Completing a Unified Development Ordinance, and 3) Ongoing Comprehensive Plan implementation. BACKGROUND: INTRODUCTION The 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes 38 goals and 263 objectives, many of which are lofty and far reaching by design. In some cases goals may reflect an ideal that may never be fully realized but must be continuously chased. Plan objectives will need to be reviewed annually, action strategies identified and prioritized consistent with BOCC goals, and then implemented. In some cases implementation actions may be carried out through the work of a single County department and /or advisory board working independently but in most cases work will need to be coordinated among multiple groups. Plan monitoring and evaluation procedures should be determined to measure progress, guidelines for which are provided in Section 1.5.2 of the adopted Plan (Attachment 1). Tonight the Planning Department will be presenting processes to initiate Plan implementation, monitoring and evaluation -- this is just the beginning. COMMUNICATION WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BOCC) During budget and regular BOCC work sessions held earlier this year, Planning Staff presented its recommendations for beginning Comprehensive Plan implementation. More specifically, staff conveyed the need to organize upcoming efforts in the following three stages: 1. Existing and adopted Comprehensive Plan ideas [i.e. Small Area Plans (SAPs) for Efland /Mebane and Eno EDD and the Orange County/Town of Hillsborough Strategic Growth Plan]. 2. Pursue a Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to create a well organized framework, clarify the development process, and prepare for ongoing Plan implementation amendments. ,2 3. New Ideas- Develop a standard Comprehensive Plan Implementation Strategy Form so objectives from the update can come forward in an organized manner. ADOPTED FY 2009/2010 BUDGET AND ASSOCIATED STAGING OF WORK The BOCC accepted staff's recommendation on the three stage approach as summarized above and included funds in the FY 2009/2010 budget to implement SAPs and complete a UDO, $21,300 and $36,700, respectively. This demonstrates the County's commitment to Plan implementation, particularly during difficult financial times and significant budget constraints. Attachment 2 is provided to illustrate the staging of the Department's work - - small area plans and UDO to be addressed first, followed by annual Comprehensive Plan implementation actions. The schedule provided represents targeted seasons for the completion of work, understanding that unanticipated delays in projects scheduled to be completed first may result in delays to subsequent projects. It should be noted that the processing of SAP recommendations specifically addresses an objective included in the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Furthermore, the repackaging of existing regulations into a well organized UDO will provide a more understandable framework from which to work as the County moves forward with ongoing Plan implementation and associated amendments to regulations. PROPOSED PROCESSES SECTION 1 -- Implementation of Small Area Plans — See Attachment 3, pp. 5 -10. SECTION 2 -- Unified Development Ordinance — See Attachment 4, pp. 11 -21. SECTION 3 -- New Ideas - Ongoing Comprehensive Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation — See Attachment 5, pp. 22 -24. FINANCIAL IMPACT: A total of $58,000 has been budgeted to begin implementation of SAPs and complete a UDO. The following provides an itemized breakdown of anticipated costs: Description Small Area Plans Unified Development Ordinance Postage & Printing $15,500 $4,500 Advertising $3,500 $1,500 Supplies & Mileage $2,300 $700 Contract Services N/A $30,000 TOTAL $21,300 $36,700 RECOMMENDATION(S): Authorize Planning Staff to proceed with processes as proposed in Sections 1, 2, and 3 or with any further modifications that may be required by the Board. 3 Attachment 1 1.5.2. PLAN REVIEW AND EVALUATION The following Plan review and evaluation procedures should be conducted according to the timelines given: 1. A set of evaluation criteria, including a set of sustainability and community building indicators, or metrics, together with specific action statements will be developed for each Plan Element by each Element Advisory Board with assistance of County staff within the first year after plan adoption. The evaluation criteria may include short -term (1 -2 years), medium -term (3 -5 years), and long -term (more than 5 years) measurements. Combined, these evaluation criteria will be used to inform periodic updates of the Plan. The evaluation criteria will serve as a "Report Card" and will describe how and where the County is making progress on implementation of the plan and where additional attention may be needed. 2. Comprehensive Plan Element Status reports to the Board of County Commissioners will be developed by respective Advisory Boards and staff. Status reports will include a review and evaluation of Plan goals and objectives using the evaluation criteria discussed above. The report will be developed every other year beginning one year after adoption of the Plan and will be delivered to the Board for review at its annual retreat. A specific format for reporting will be developed to maintain consistency in reporting. 3. The County Profile Element will be updated after data from the 2010 U.S. Census are available. Regular updates to the County Profile Element should occur to reflect new U.S. Census data in subsequent years. 4. Following the incorporation of 2010 data, a survey of County departments will be undertaken by the Planning and Inspections Department to determine the usefulness of the County Profile Element, and if annual updates would be beneficial. 5. A full review and update of the Comprehensive Plan will occur within 10 years of adoption of the plan, with a preliminary target of 2015. Staging 2009 Summer Fall Winter D-Ch. v a 3 lD rt N 2010 Spring Summer Fall Winter Staff Note: This is not a comprehensive list of the Planning Department's work items. Existing Ideas: A. ACTION PLAN STRATEGIES (Who's involved, outreach, timeline, etc.) 1. Process - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) X 2. Process -SAP Implementation (Efland -Meb., NC 57 Spd., & Eno EDD) X 3. Process - Annual CP Staff /Advisory Board Reporting X 4. Process - Identifying Planning Board's Annual CP Implementation Actions X B. IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS (Formal process, legal notice, hearings, etc.) 5. HIM.= Strategic Growth Plan, Phase II Interlocal Agreement X 6. UDO Development (Framework with minor rewrites) X X X X X 7. HIM.= Interlocal Agreement Implementation (Land Use Plan & Zoning Amendments) X X X X X X X X 8. SAP Implementation (Efland- Mebane, NC 57 Speedway, & Eno EDD) X X 9. Comprehensive Plan Annual Report to BOCC X New Ideas: 10. Process - Comprehensive Plan Evaluation /Sustainabili Criteria ?* ? ? ? ? 11. Annual Comprehensive Plan Implementation Actions ** X X X—► *Must become a BOCC priority /initiative before process is developed. **Will include UDO amendments and other programs as identified and prioritized in future years. Strikethrough (Xxxxxx) indicates completed projects. Staff Note: This is not a comprehensive list of the Planning Department's work items. 5 Attachment 3.1 SECTION 1 -- BOCC Adopted Small Area Plan Implementation Specifics Planning Staff has reviewed the recommendations provided in the Efland- Mebane, Eno Economic Development District (EDD), and NC 57 Speedway Area Small Area Plans and offers a prioritized list on the following page for staging implementation. In the case of the Efland Mebane Plan, staffs list is consistent with priorities suggested by the Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group, which met during 2006/2007. Given the number of recommendations, intergovernmental coordination associated with some, and other significant planning projects that are also part of the Planning Department's work plan, such as the UDO and Hillsborough /Orange County Strategic Growth Plan, staff suggests proceeding with implementation of SAPs as follows. 1) Focus on items shaded in grey, during FY'09 -'10, bringing items to upcoming Quarterly Public Hearings where appropriate and required. 2) Planning Staff and Planning Board to revisit SAP recommendations annually, focusing on items that have not yet been acted upon for prioritization and recommendation to the BOCC. The prioritization process mentioned in item number "2" above is to be initiated in the year 2010 and conducted as part of the annual Planning Board review of the Comprehensive Plan objectives and identification and prioritization of implementation strategies, which is described in Attachment 5. Following is the proposed schedule for reviewing SAP recommendations and identifying implementation actions during 2010. This process would be repeated every year thereafter until all SAP recommendations are fully considered. September 2010 — Planning Staff presents its list of suggested SAP implementation strategies and relationship to goals and objectives to the Planning Board for consideration. The idea is for the Planning Board and Planning Staff to come to agreement on a list to recommend to the BOCC. October 2010 — Planning Board continues discussion and consideration of SAP implementation strategies. November 2010 — Planning Board finalizes its list of prioritized implementation strategies for the upcoming year for recommendation to the BOCC. Any remaining differences in opinion between Planning Staff and Planning Board will be identified for transmittal to the BOCC. December 2010 /January 2011 — BOCC receives recommendation(s) at planning retreat(s). Section 1- BOCC Adopted SAP Cont. Attachment 3.2 *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. all Area Plan Reccommendations Efland- Mebane" Eno EDD L NC 57 Speedway Water (Public or Private) /Sewer Update 1984 Efland sewer plan HIGH priority Need *UHti *Service Agreement with Driarn , x t " (�r R Complete preliminary engineering study for future master plan Educate all residents living near stone quarry of available well testing services Complete OAWS engineering study - HIGH priority Establish well monitoring program Complete water and sewer master plan for area - HIGH priority Encourage stone quarry to bring their property into compliance with zoning ordinance Extend public water and sewer throughout area WSMPBA Map amendment to expand Primary Service Area - MEDIUM HIGH priority NOT E.,Staff to gauge Add partners (Mebane & OAWS) - intetest in;, n Ongoing communications with implementing WSIIAQBA` relatsc Mebane. items at Sept AOG { Mtg, Map amendment if Watershed Critical Area is adjusted (See below ) - MEDIUM HIGH priority Land Use Plan Text To allow mixed uses along US 70 - - COMPLETE Add Eno Mixed Use land use category Add Rural Economic Development Area (REDA) gn- Dee1 0 � me ti`s Combine 10 & 20 -yr Transition to form Efland Transition Area i4cid Efland},Traiti`i o b���a ��_ Ftese � ar�sl hill,, s�� land; use, -, Land Use Plan Map A ply Miicd tist° ,���{ cater 'o ` _ i a tkt�a r�i Change Commercial Node to Eno Mixed Use Add Rural Economic Development Area (REDA) Combine 10 & 20 -yr Transition to Change portions of Economic form Efland Transition Area Develo ment to Mixed Use Appry`EflaticfTr` ition 1rea' k, *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. .Section 1- BOCC Adopted SAP Cont. Attachment 3.2 *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. Small Area Plan Reccommendations Efland- Mebane* Eno EDD NC 57 Speedway ReevaluatelVa #ershednCritica# ,. Area (Seven Mike Creek) ands , amendrf required Change Commercial /Industrial Node to Economic Development Delete Rural_Neightiorhood Lode" ' Zoning Map and/or Develop overlay plan and zoning Amend permitted use tables for Create REDA conditional - zoning. u- "and text district to allow mixed uses along Eno EDD distnct gi deter es US 70 - PART COMPLETE4 s Amend ordinances to prescribe " Add Mixed Use land use category Coordinate zoning text changes with the City of Durham sustainable sustainable roundwater use standards Develop design standards for Require new development or Efland Core Mixed Use area - rezoning approvals to limit HIGH priority groundwater withdrawls to that of a single - family dwelling (480 gpd) Reevaluate Watershe ntical Review the need to develop Area (-a even Nfile'Creek ).antl regulations governing air quality amend if Kequlred{ItG pnoritjr and requiring local air quality T' permits Ordinance amendments to address parking lot design, circulation, and access. Transportation Study road volumes and capacities Limit access near 1- 85/US70 Complete an entry corridor design - County to communicate to DOT interchange manual NOTE, Realign Efland -Cedar Acquire property and develop a Corr►prehensive; Grove /Forrest Ave. /Mt. Willing welcome sign with landscaping T'a sporfat11. Plan , road corridor - County to cu]r�e ttj�,l5em communicate to DOT Bch ay rovide „ snita =se,� o �E �rriple�enfihg�, m�� pf thdse� item "' Connection from Hwy 70E to Interstate connector identified and constructed - County to communicate to DOT Add park -n -ride lot - MEDIUM HIGH priority *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. Section 1- BOCC Adopted SAP Cont. 8 Attachment 3.2 *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. all Area Plan Reccommendations Efland- Mebane" Eno EDD NC 57 S eedwa Bike lanes - County to Evaluate feasibility of bike lanes communicate to DOT along Old NC10 and US70 Sidewalk plan and sidewalks in new developments - HIGH priority Complete a streetscape plan trees - HIGH priority Preserve possibility for a Preserve possibility fora commuter train station - County to commuter train station communicate to DOT Provide bus service to area Provide bus service to area Mace Rd planned to connect through Lebanon - County to communicate to DOT Plan an Interstate pedestrian overpass - County to communicate to DOT Complete a Buckhorn Rd Access Adopt access management Complete an Access Management Management Plan - MEDIUM program for US70 & Old NC10 Plan for NC57 corridor HIGH priority Housing Consider expedited review or Consider expedited review or density bonuses for developments density bonuses for developments offering smaller homes offering smaller homes Require a percentage of new Require a percentage of new homes within a subdivision to be homes within a subdivision to be affordable affordable Examine strategies to preserve Existing residential dwellings shall affordablity through neighborhood not be made non - conforming preservation. under any new zoning designation Determine a percentage or acreage limit on residential uses within Eno Mixed Use area Parks, Rec. & Open Require dedication of small Preserve stream corridors and Initiate dialogue with quarry Space neighborhood parks create public accessible trails among developed areas and Eno operator, Durham City/County, and State to ensure proper end use of River State Park and Duke Forest property Plan and implement a trail system alonq McGowan Creek When Seven Mile Creek Nature Preserve opens, provide a pedestrian /bicycle connection from Efland *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. Section 1- BOCC Adopted SAP Cont. Attachment 3.2 *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. Small Area Plan Reccommendations Efland- Mebane* Eno EDD NC 57 Speedway Monitor space at Efland- Cheeks community center and expand accordingly - Currently being done by Parks & Rec. Dept. Consider branch library at community center Communications Complete a Telecommunications Complete a Telecommunications Plan and achieve cellular wireless Plan and achieve cellular wireless coverage countywide - MEDIUM coverage countywide Work with service providers to Work with service providers to establish DSL and /or cable Internet establish DSL and /or cable Internet service in growth areas - MEDIUM service in growth areas priority Consider asking service providers Consider asking service providers to install generator backup instead to install generator backup instead of battery at cellular switch sites - of battery at cellular switch sites MEDIUM priority Intergovernmental Joint Planning Understanding or Agreement with Mebane -Ongoing communications with Mebane In eNodal Agreement with ity of ' Durham for wader /sewer s rvice anda' neXatro ocess• M- ' °s y! See also water /sewer above *Priorities provided per work of Efland- Mebane Implementation Focus Group. Section 1- BOCC Adopted SAP Cont. 10 Attachment 3.3 Hillsborough Strategic Growth Plan /lnterlocal Agreement Next Steps Following is an ordered list of tasks to be completed in regards to the Hillsborough Strategic Growth Plan and the lnterlocal Agreement between the Town and County: 1. Reconcile the differences between the version of the lnterlocal Agreement adopted by the Town and the version adopted by the County. Status: Staff is currently coordinating the changes for Town of Hillsborough adoption consideration. 2. Complete and adopt a Joint Land Use Plan. Status: This project will occur after both parties sign the lnterlocal Agreement. Staff of both jurisdictions will work together on the plan and will coordinate with the Planning Boards of each jurisdiction. Public outreach /input will also be an aspect of this project; the exact methods /process is still to be determined. Additionally, the joint land use plan will have to go through the formal adoption process that includes at least one formal public hearing. 3. Adjust Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (relinquishment and extension). Status: Work on this task is expected to occur concurrently with the joint land use plan to streamline public participation in both actions (land use plan and jurisdiction adjustment). Additionally, State statutes regarding ETJ matters must be followed. 4. Town and County develop and adopt zoning and subdivision regulations applicable to ETJ area and Urbanizing Areas (including Zoning Atlas changes). Status: Staff of both jurisdictions need to discuss whether staffing levels are sufficient to work on regulatory changes concurrently with the joint land use plan or whether regulatory changes will need to be completed after the land use plan and ETJ changes are adopted. 11 SECTION 2 -- Unified Development Ordinance Work Program Attachment 4.1 INTRODUCTION: The work program identifies the process that will be utilized by the Orange County Planning Department for the development of a Unified Development Ordinance (hereafter 'UDO'). During the budget process the development of the UDO was discussed and it was determined that a general reformatting and the creation of a better framework and some minor rewrites would be possible given budget and staff constraints. The ultimate goal is to complete everything noted below but it will be done in phases. PURPOSE AND GOAL: The overall purpose and goal of the project is to: 1. Make existing land use regulations more customer - friendly and easier to understand, 2. Eliminate existing contradictions and inconsistencies within the various development definitions and review standards, 3. Combine all existing land use regulatory standards into one (1) central document (i.e. Zoning, Subdivision, Economic Development, etc), 4. Note where we could streamline and enhance the development review process, 5. Update outdated graphic examples of development principles /concepts, 6. Begin to modernize the zoning districts and permitted land uses, and 7. Revise existing development regulations to encourage redevelopment in targeted areas that is consistent with the County's planning and development goals. One of the most frequently cited concerns raised by property owners, developers, and County staff is that the current land use development regulations (i.e. Zoning, Subdivision, Economic Development District, Erosion Control, etc) are difficult to understand and not very customer friendly. One major issue is that the County's existing zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations are separate documents but make continuous reference to various development standards /limitations that are contained within each document. This creates frustration for those attempting to review all relevant regulations impacting a development project, as they have to continuously refer back and forth to both documents in order to ensure compliance. The modern thinking, and preferred trend among local governments, is to combine zoning and land development regulations into one consolidated development code. Most communities adopting this approach find a unified document that organizes all relevant procedures and development regulations in an intelligent and logical format makes the rani iintinnc more customer - friendly. Attachment 4.2 Section 2- LIDO Continued WORK PROGRAM: 12 In developing a UDO, the Planning Department shall utilize the following three (3) tiered work program: A. Project Initiation and development of annotated outline, B. Development of initial working draft of the UDO, and C. Preparation of final draft of the UDO and scheduling and holding of a public hearing. Each task will require staff to conduct meetings with local stakeholders and interest groups to report progress as well as solicit feedback on various findings. The ultimate goal is to foster a greater understanding on how the final document will be organized and promote a greater understanding on the various regulatory guidelines, and their impact, on land development within the County. The County has budgeted approximately $36,700.00 for the project, which will need to cover costs associated with advertising and holding the necessary community outreach meetings and public hearings on the project as well as pay for consultant services to update existing graphics and forms. Prudent fiscal management will be essential to complete the project, as proposed under existing financial constraints. The following is a detailed breakdown of the work program that will be utilized in completing the project: Section 2- UDO Continued 13 TASK ONE — PROJECT INITIATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF OUTLINE: Attachment 4.2 Under this Task, the Planning Department will implement a community outreach and educational program intended on informing the general public on the overall scope and purpose of the project as well as begin the process of working with various County departments, our planning partners, the Planning Board, and advisory boards where there is joint interest (i.e., Commission for the Environment and landscaping standards). Under this Task, staff will also develop a final outline for the proposed new UDO. Staff anticipates that there will be sections proposed for development within the new UDO framework that will not be developed within this work plan. Several 'placeholders' will be developed to reserve sections of the UDO to allow for additional development regulations to be implemented overtime. Under this task, staff will engage in the following: I. Obtain approval/authorization from the BOCC to initiate the project and associated work program as detailed herein (To be completed in August/September 2009) II. Finalize proposed outline of new UDO (August/September 2009) III. Conduct community outreach meetings to begin the process of educating members of the general public on the overall purpose and intent of a UDO and this planning process. Staff anticipates holding two (2) community outreach meetings under this portion of the project (To occur in October of 2009) IV. Meet with various County departments, local planning partners, and applicable advisory boards to explain what this first phase of UDO development will be (For consistency, a joint advisory board meeting may be utilized). Existing contradictions and deficiencies within the existing land use regulations will also be addressed. (To occur in September and October of 2009) V. Develop a Request for Proposals (hereafter 'RFP') for a consultant to provide staff support for the project. This task will include identifying and formalizing any and all assistance that can be provided by an outside vendor, A. Identify what work could be completed by a consultant, B. Develop the methodology for the selection of a outside vendor to complete work on the project, C. Develop a formal work plan for the project, specifically: i. Identify what work product would be generated by a outside vendor for the project, ii. Develop a methodology for reviewing and approving all work product generated for the project, iii. Establish the criteria for payment of accepted work product, and iv. Establish a formal timeline for the delivery of all required elements for review, approval, and incorporation into the revised Ordinance. D. Finalize the timeline for the submittal of development proposals with a set deadline, and Section 2- UDO Continued 14 E. Establish the timeline for the review and selection of an outside vendor to complete the project. (To occur in September 2009) VI. Advertise /distribute RFP (October 2009) VII. Report findings to the BOCC and solicit approval of the annotated outline of the proposed UDO. (Anticipated for presentation at the BOCC November 5, 2009 regular meeting) TIMEFRAME: Task One (1) should take approximately two (2) months from approval of the work plan by the BOCC to the report of our findings on November 5, 2009. STAFF INVOLVEMENT: From an organization perspective, the following planning staff shall be working on the completion of Task One (1): Staff Member: Involvement/Task: Time Commitment: Craig Benedict, Planning 1. Administer /participate in outreach Approximately Director meetings, five (5) hours a week 2. Administer /participate in meetings with for the first Task. planning partners /advisory boards, 3. Draft RFP, 4. Develop staff report/findings Michael D. Harvey, Planner III 1. Administer /participate in outreach Approximately meetings, ten (10) hours a week 2. Administer /participate in meetings with for the first Task. planning partners /advisory boards, 3. Draft RFP, 4. Develop staff report/findings Tom Altieri, Planner III 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning five (5) hours a week partners /advisory boards, for the first Task 3. Assist with the drafting of the RFP Perdita Holtz, Planner III 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning five (5) hours a week partners /advisory boards, for the first Task. 3. Assist with the drafting of the RFP Tina Love, Administrative 1. Prepare agenda packets, Approximately Assistant 2. Compile information handouts, ten (10) hours a week 3. Assist with the scheduling and advertising for the first Task. of community meetings, 4. Assist with the coordination of meetings with planning partners and County departments. DELIVERABLES: At the conclusion of this I asK, staff anticipates paving the touowmg elements completed and /or approved by the County Board of Commissioners: 1. The outline for the proposed LIDO, 2. The RFP selecting a consultant to provide services to the County to assist in the completion of the LIDO framework distributed in October 2009, 3. Staff reports detailing recommendations /findings on a revised UDO from community and local stakeholder meetings. Section 2- UDO Continued Attachment 4.3 15 TASK TWO — DEVELOPMENT OF DRAFT UDO: Under this task, staff will begin identifying revisions to existing development regulations based on the comments made by identified stakeholders and begin the process of developing the draft UDO. (Please note that these are only minor rewrites at this time and other ideas will be reserved for future action and will tie in to Comprehensive Plan implementation). In beginning this process, staff has already identified the following regulations that are in need for an update: 1. Modification of existing development standards, specifically: a. Article Nine - Signage, b. Article Ten - Parking, c. Article Twelve - Landscaping, and d. Article Six — Dimensional Requirements including, but not limited to: Section 6.31 Lighting and Section 6.27.11 Stream Buffers. 2. Revision of the Orange County Subdivision regulations to incorporate recent changes to State law and eliminate identified inconsistencies, Staff will also be requesting authorization to begin the process of developing and implementing the Conditional Use /Conditional Rezoning review process, which has been previous discussed at both the advisory and County Commissioner level. Under this task, staff will engage in the following: I. Advertise /distribute RFP (October 2009) II. Notification of consultant being selected to work on project. This will include finalization of contract(s) and approval of timeline for completion of tasks that will be approved by the BOCC (Anticipated for December 15, 2009 meeting) Ill. Begin revising the various regulations identified by staff and local stakeholders as needing revision (To be completed in November 2009 through January 2010) IV. Solicit courtesy review comments on the proposed revisions from County staff, planning partners, the County Attorney's office, and applicable advisory boards (To be completed in December 2009 through February 2010) V. Begin working with consultant to perform various tasks associated with the completion of the UDO (December 2009 through February 2010) VI. Conduct community outreach meetings to outline revised sections and annotated outline. Staff anticipates holding two (2) community outreach meetings (February 2010) VII. Present revised regulations to the Ordinance Review Committee of the Planning Board at its regular February 2010 regular meeting VIII. Report findings to the BOCC (Anticipated for presentation at a February 2010 BOCC regular meeting) TIMEFRAME: Task Two (2) should take approximately four (4) months. STAFF INVOLVEMENT: From an organization perspective, the following planning staff shall be working on the completion of Task Two (2): Canfinn 7- l inn Continued 16 Staff Member: InvolvementlTask: Time Commitment: Craig Benedict, Planning 1. Administer /participate in outreach meetings, Approximately Director 2. Administer /participate in meetings with five (5) hours a week planning partners /advisory boards, for this Task. 3. Re -write Ordinance sections, 4. Review consultant work product, 5. Develop staff report/findings Michael D. Harvey, Planner III 1. Administer /participate in outreach Approximately meetings, twenty (20) hours a 2. Administer /participate in meetings with week for this Task. planning partners /advisory boards, 3. Re -write Ordinance sections, 4. Review consultant work product, 5. Develop staff report/findings Tom Altieri, Planner 111 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning fifteen (15) hours a partners /advisory boards, week for this Task. 3. Assist with the re -write or Ordinance sections Perdita Holtz, Planner Ili 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning fifteen (15) hours a partners /advisory boards, week for this Task. 3. Assist with the re -write or Ordinance sections Shannon Berry, Planner 11 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning fifteen (15) hours a partners /advisory boards, week for this Task. 3. Assist with the re -write or Ordinance sections Jennifer Leaf, Planner 1 Assist with the re -write or Ordinance sections Approximately ten (10) hours a week for this Task. Tina Love, Administrative 1. Prepare agenda packets, Approximately Assistant 2. Compile information handouts, ten (10) hours a week 3. Assist with the scheduling and advertising of for the first Task. community meetings, Assist with the coordination of meetings with planning partners and County departments. It should be noted that this Task will require the review of the proposed revised Ordinance sections from other County departments and stakeholders in the process. The identified timeline will only work so long as various participants can commit their resources to completing various tasks. DELIVERABLES: At the conclusion of this Task, staff anticipates having the following elements completed /approved by the County Board of Commissioners: 1. A draft UDO, and 2. Staff reports on progress and consultant costs to the BOCC. Section 2- UDO Continued Attachment 4.4 17 TASK THREE - DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL DRAFT OF THE UDO /SCHEDULING OF PUBLIC HEARING: In completing this Task, staff will develop the draft of the proposed UDO for review and discussion. This will be the final draft document intended to identify problem areas or inconsistencies that will need to be addressed prior to scheduling the public hearing to review the document. I. Develop a final draft of complete UDO (February 2010) II. Conduct community outreach meetings to outline revised sections and annotated outline. Staff anticipates holding two (2) community outreach meetings (March 2010) III. Solicit courtesy review comments on the proposed revisions from County staff, planning partners, the County Attorney's office, and applicable advisory boards (February through April 2010) IV. Finalize work with consultant (March 2010) V. Report findings to the BOCC (Anticipated for presentation at an April 2010 BOCC regular meeting) VI. Schedule Public Hearing — slated for presentation at the May 2010 Quarterly Public Hearing. TIMEFRAME: Task Three (3) should take approximately three (3) months. STAFF INVOLVEMENT: From an organization perspective, the following planning staff shall be working on the completion of Task Three (3): Staff Member: Involvement/Task: Time Commitment: Craig Benedict, Planning 1. Administer /participate in outreach Approximately Director meetings, five (5) hours a week 2.Administer /participate in meetings with for this Task. planning partners /advisory boards, 3. Complete draft UDO, 4. Review /revise consultant work product, 5. Develop staff report/findings Michael D. Harvey, Planner III 1. Administer /participate in outreach Approximately meetings, twenty (20) hours a 2.Ad m in ister/partici pate in meetings with week for this Task. planning partners /advisory boards, 3. Complete draft UDO, 4. Review consultant work product, 5. Develop staff report/findings Tom Altieri, Planner III 1. Participate in outreach meetings, Approximately 2. Participate in meetings with planning ten (10) hours a partners /advisory boards, week for this Task. 3. Complete draft UDO, Section 2- UDO Continued Staff Member: InvolvementlTask: Time Commitment: Perdita Holtz, Planner III 1. Complete draft UDO Approximately ten (10) hours a week for this Task. Shannon Berry, Planner II 1. Complete draft UDO Approximately ten (10) hours a week for this Task. Jennifer Leaf, Planner 1 1. Complete draft UDO Approximately ten (10) hours a week for this Task. Tina Love, Administrative 1. Prepare agenda packets, Approximately Assistant 2. Compile information handouts, fifteen (15) hours a 3. Assist with the scheduling and week for the first advertising of community meetings, Task. 4. Assist with the coordination of meetings with planning partners and County departments. It should be noted that this Task will require the review of the proposed revised Ordinance sections from other County departments and stakeholders in the process. The identified timeline will only work so long as various participants can commit their resources to completing various tasks. DELIVERABLES: At the conclusion of this Task, staff anticipates having the following elements completed /approved by the County Board of Commissioners: 1. A final draft UDO for presentation at the May 2010 Quarterly Public Hearing, 2. Closeout documents on the consultant end of the project for review and approval by the BOCC, and 3. Staff reports on progress and consultant costs to the BOCC. The final draft UDO would be forwarded to the Planning Board for its final review over the summer with an anticipated return to the BOCC for a final review and decision in August/September 2010. Attachment 5.1 19 SECTION 3 -- New Ideas — Ongoing Comprehensive Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation 1. Ongoing Implementation Consistent with Section 1.4.3 of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (excerpt below), Planning Staff proposes to partner with the Planning Board to develop their list of prioritized implementation strategies for BOCC review and consideration at its annual planning retreat(s) each year. Planning Staff has developed a Comprehensive Plan Implementation Strategy Form (handout to be used during the process to help convey anticipated key facets to the BOCC such as: • Principle /Goal /Objective • Public Involvement • Lead Department/Related Process/Timeframe Dept(s). • General Action Plan • Advisory. Boards • Fiscal Impacts • Monitoring /Feedback Loop It should be noted that this proposal does not include any "grand" prioritization of implementation strategy recommendations that may also be coming forward to the BOCC from other County departments and advisory boards. However, Planning Staff is hopeful that, together with the Planning Board, it can begin to institutionalize a process that could be expanded in the future to include other departments /advisory boards or be replicated in some fashion by them. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Excerpt, Section 1.4.3, Recommended Process for Setting Priorities Advisory boards and staff should review Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives on a regular basis and develop specific ideas on implementation strategies for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners. Setting priorities will be guided by the feasibility of accomplishing the strategies within a given year. Implementation strategies that are presented to the Board of County Commissioners should identify the following: • The corresponding Comprehensive Plan goal(s) and objective(s); • Estimation of fiscal impacts and staff resources required to implement the strategy; • Identification of responsible department and advisory board(s) and any contributing department(s) and advisory board(s) that will be engaged in strategy implementation; and • A timeline for implementation of the strategy. The Board of County Commissioners will consider implementation strategies submitted by advisory boards, consider fiscal constraints and opportunities, and provide guidance to the County Manager on priorities for implementation. Attachment 5.2 SECTION 3 -- New Ideas — Ongoing Comp Plan Continued 20 Proposed Steps Following are proposed steps for development of the Planning Board's prioritized Comprehensive Plan implementation strategies each year for BOCC review and consideration at its planning retreat(s). September — Planning Staff presents its list of suggested implementation strategies and relationship to goals and objectives to the Planning Board for consideration. The idea is for the Planning Board and Planning Staff to come to agreement on a list to recommend to the BOCC. October — Planning Board continues discussion and consideration of implementation strategies. November — Planning Board finalizes its list of prioritized implementation strategies for the upcoming year for recommendation to the BOCC. Any remaining differences in opinion between Planning Staff and Planning Board will be identified for transmittal to the BOCC. December /January — BOCC receives recommendation(s) at planning retreat(s). 2. Monitoring and Evaluation The 2030 Comprehensive Plan recommends development of a set of evaluation criteria, including a set of sustainability and community building indicators, for each Element of the Plan. In addition, status reports to the BOCC are suggested to take place every other year beginning one -year after the adoption of the Plan. Developing evaluation criteria and providing status reports will each require coordination and participation among multiple County Departments but the latter to a lesser degree. For this reason, Planning Staff is suggesting it lead an effort to provide Comprehensive Plan status reports before any commitment is made to coordinate development of evaluation criteria for each Element of the Comprehensive Plan. If the BOCC desires specific and measurable evaluation criteria, it is Planning Staff s recommendation that the Board identifies it as one of its priorities in the future and a process can be developed at that time for the Board's consideration. Adoption of a process could establish a clear purpose, scope, and timetable, as well as the roles of departments, advisory boards, and the public. Planning Staff has already started preparing for the first Comprehensive Plan status report to the BOCC. The following has been completed: • Held a staff meeting among select department heads and key staff (Element Manager's) to share and discuss implementation and reporting ideas; • Developed a standardized form for departments /advisory boards to report accomplishments to the BOCC (to be collected by the Planning SECTION 3 -- New Ideas — Ongoing Comp Plan Continued 21 Attachment 5.3 Department and conveyed along with a summary, "State of the Comprehensive Plan" report); and Developed a table or "matrix" that identifies all of the linkages among Plan goals and objectives on a single sheet. This matrix will be used in the future to identify areas for coordination and can be color coded to distinguish objectives that are being addressed through current implementation actions from those that are not or may already be complete. Proposed Next Steps Following are proposed next steps towards the first status report to the BOCC: September — Departments and advisory boards complete reporting forms and return to Comprehensive Planning Division October - Planning to compile completed forms and prepare a State of the Comprehensive Plan Report November — Planning presents State of the Comprehensive Plan report to the BOCC, which may include information that is helpful going into BOCC planning retreat(s) that occur later in the year and /or early the next year. This would also be an opportunity for the BOCC to provide feedback to improve future reports. Post - Months — Upon BOCC request, a process for developing specific and measurable Comprehensive Plan evaluation criteria can be developed for its consideration. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 DRAFT 23 Attachment 6 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AUGUST 5, 2009 REGULAR MEETING MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Crawford, At -Large Eno Township (Chair); Mary Bobbitt- Cooke, Cheek Township Representative; Mark Marcoplos, At -Large Bingham Township; Earl McKee, Little River Township Representative; Larry Wright, At -Large Cedar Grove Township; Tommy McNeill, Eno Township Representative; May Becker, At -Large Chapel Hill Township; Rachel Phelps Hawkins, Hillsborough Representative; Peter Hallenbeck, At -Large Cheeks Township; Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township; MEMBERS ABSENT: Samantha Cabe, Chapel Hill Township At- Large; Judith Wegner (Vice- Chair), Bingham Township; STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey, Zoning Enforcement Administrator; Shannon Berry, Special Projects Planner; Karen Lincoln, Transportation Planner; Tom Alfieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL AGENDA ITEM 2: ADOPTED SMALL AREA PLANS - STAFF REVIEW To receive information on the Eno EDD Area Small Area Plan. (Time constraints at the July meeting did not allow us to get to this item). Presenter Perdita Holtz Perdita Holtz reviewed a Powerpoint presentation on the Eno EDD Area Small Area Plan and answered questions regarding the plan. AGENDA ITEM 3: ADJOURNMENT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a) Next Regular Planning Board meeting scheduled for Wednesday, September 2, 2009 b) Planning Calendar for August and September c) Memo regarding Highway 57 /Speedway Area Small Area Plan d) Legal Advertisement for the August 24 Quarterly Public Hearing Craig Benedict: There is a Quarterly Public Hearing on August 24th. We will be calling or emailing to check on quorum. The work plan discussion for the coming year will be very important. We will discuss more of the content of that meeting later tonight. Jeffrey Schmitt: I thought we killed this TDR issue three separate times. Here it appears again. Brian Crawford: The Planning Board tried to kill it but it seems the Board of County Commissioners doesn't want it to die just yet. Larry Wright: It was my understanding it was tabled. Craig Benedict: The comments from the Planning Board were forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners. They agreed it was not the time to pursue this while you were in the midst of the Comprehensive Plan update. Their motion was to delay it and readdress it after the Comprehensive Plan is complete. This is part of our readdressing process. Perdita Holtz: The action at the Quarterly Public Hearing to the Board to accept the report so that we can close out the consulting contract. The consult contract has been sitting in limbo for two years. It doesn't mean that they are going to implement a TDR program. Jeffrey Schmitt: In laymen's language, what does that mean? 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 DRAFT 24 Attachment 6 Perdita Holtz: The consultant wrote the report that I believe you have seen, you'll be getting it in your Quarterly Public Hearing packet. The report will be presented for the Board of County Commissioners to accept the report and say the consultant's work is done. Craig Benedict: Similar to a Small Area Planning document, these types of plans discuss the research that has been done, case studies, what we should do in the future, but they really do not create an implementation action (e.g. a specific zoning ordinance text or map amendment) at that time. The Commissioners could say staff prepare what you believe, work with the Planning Board on what you think the next steps are to do something with that study or Small Area Plan. That's when the Board can reexamine the idea and do something with it or not. AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 1, 2009 Regular Meeting MOTION made by Larry Wright to approve minutes. Seconded by Mark Marcoplos. VOTE: Unanimous AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA Brian Crawford: I would like to introduce you to our new Planning Board member, May Becker. Introduction are made May Becker is sworn in as a Planning Board member. AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and future needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS Brian Crawford: I will waive my comments. AGENDA ITEM 7: COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN STATUS UPDATE To receive information on the status of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and upcoming presentation to the BOCC and to discuss Planning Board involvement in the process. Presenter: Karen Lincoln, Planner II Karen Lincoln: I am the transportation planner. The purpose of this item is to update you and bring you into the loop on the process that we are going through to develop a comprehensive transportation plan for Orange County. This is one the objectives in the recently adopted Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the County. This plan will not be an implementation plan but a long range, multi-modal plan to serve present and future needs of the County. It will be a minimum of a 20 year horizon and will probably be a longer horizon than that. It will consist of four maps and a technical report, the highway plan, bicycle plan, transit plan (rail and bus) and a pedestrian map. The plan is being developed in coordination with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), the transportation planning branch, the Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro (DCHC) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) which is the regional planning organization that is federally mandated as the transportation decision makers. Orange County is about half in the metropolitan boundary. The rest of the County is in the DRAFT 25 Attachment 6 Rural Planning Organization (RPO) and ours is the Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization or TARPO. This is where it gets complicated, even though we are making every effort to bring this to the public as a comprehensive transportation plan for Orange County, the part of Orange County that is in the Metropolitan Planning Organization will be adopted and is actually developed and adopted by the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The part that lies outside of that is the part that Orange County will adopt. I think it is ok for Orange County to adopt the whole plan but we are developing it with the MPO. Jeffrey Schmitt: Which is in and which is out? Karen Lincoln: If you come down 57, is sort of the dividing line and it goes around Hillsborough to the 70 -85 connector and then comes back and encompasses most of Chapel Hill Township. Jeffrey Schmitt: Everything east of 57 and down through Chapel Hill in the jurisdiction of? Karen Lincoln: The Metropolitan Planning Organization. We've had a little committee together to start the process. We have a representation MPO, a representative from RPO, a subcommittee of the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) that has been working on that. The initial timeline is on page 25 and this is what we are anticipating. This whole process should be complete by next June. We have already done some of this. We have already established our goals and objectives as part of the Comprehensive Plan, the transportation element. Currently we are conducting a needs assessment. A lot of this data has been connected with the MPO which has just recently completed their 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) which is different from this as it is financially constrained plan. You have to show in that plan how you are going to pay for improvements that you need and then you have to show that the plan is going to satisfy the air quality requirements because we are in a ozone maintenance area. Jeff Schmitt: To whom does the MPO report? Karen Lincoln: They work in conjunction with the NCDOT (North Carolina Department of Transportation). The MPO was a federal construct. They have to work in coordination with NCDOT to get items approved. For example the implementation plan for the transportation projects is called the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), the State Board of Transportation adopts the TIP each MPO has to adopt a metropolitan transportation program and the first three to four years of the Metropolitan Transportation Program and the State's transportation program have to be the same. Craig Benedict: (shows on map) The MPO goes from the Carrboro Chapel Hill area into the northern part of Chatham County and includes Hillsborough and includes all of Durham County it is called the Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization DCHC MPO. There is another regional called the Capital Area MPO also known as CAMPO which handles the Wake, Cary and those perimeters just think of those two big MPO organizations and then as Karen said they have to come up with their program of priorities that they submit to DOT to go into that Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Larry Wright: Is the Eno Development District included in the MPO? Craig Benedict: Yes. The Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization is about four to five years old that covers the other rural areas of Orange County and we are in partnership with sections of Chatham, Lee and down to Moore County. Alamance County happens to be in a different MPO and different RPO. Karen Lincoln: A portion of that is the Burlington Graham MPO comes in from Mebane that is in Orange County. Anything there (Mebane portion of Orange County) has to be approved by them. We have asked them to our Steering Committee meeting. They have said that it looks like what we have done so far is ok with them. They will have to adopt anything we propose that is within their boundary. When we go the public there will be one map and whatever is being proposed, the routes being continuous which is why they have to be coordinated. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: They don't answer to anyone such as the Board of County Commissioners? Karen Lincoln: They are made up of the elected officials of all those places so they answer to themselves. Mary Bobbin- Cooke: Our Board of County Commissioners are on the MPO? Karen Lincoln: Commissioner Gordon is our representative and she is a member of the Technical Advisory Committee JAC) which is the decision making body of the MPO. Larry Wright: You said there would be one map and then you said there were four maps? DRAFT 26 Attachment 6 178 179 Karen Lincoln: One map of Orange County and one for each of the plans so there will actually be five maps. 180 181 Mark Marcoplos: Sounds like there are elected representatives from Durham, Chapel Hill, etc. all part of this. Can any one 182 representative hold up the process? 183 184 Karen Lincoln: Things are decided by the whole Board. They could delay things certainly. The Board usually respects the 185 wishes of their members. 186 187 Mark Marcoplos: They don't work on consensus so if it comes to a vote at a certain point.... 188 189 Karen Lincoln: Yes, what will happen they will be updated periodically. NCDOT will probably have finished their deficiency 190 analysis before being presented to the Board of County Commissioners. To start this off, we anticipate a presentation to the 191 Board of County Commissioners in September. The presentation will be from NCDOT and members DCHC and a member from 192 TARPO will be part of the presentation. This is being developed in coordination with the other organizations. At that meeting, the 193 part of that is to instruct them on what the process is, what they can anticipate and to gain their approval to continue from there. 194 We have a survey we have been developing. The website is www .surveymonkey.com /orangecounty. None of the responses 195 will be counted until after it is presented to the Commissioners so they can see the survey. If you would like to take the survey 196 and send comments to me that would be fine. 197 198 Larry Wright: What is data collected? 199 200 Karen Lincoln: The way the data is usually gathered is called Transportation Analysis Zones and those are defined by the 201 Census. We look at population and employment or other places like shopping centers. You look at how many people are there 202 that are going to be moving around and how many places are there that people will be coming to and they have models that they 203 calibrate to known data. They are not perfect they are just models. It is an indication, by calibrating them to existing data, you 204 know what the average annual daily traffic is on all the major roads and when you set up your models, you run them and come 205 up with a formula that basically replicates closely the observed traffic on these roads. The model is used to project based on the 206 local land use plans and how we with the population will be and where and where the business is going to be. They project 207 what they think the traffic will look like on existing road systems 20, 30, etc. years down the road. When they get that type of 208 traffic, they can tell whether the roads can handle it or whether there is a shift in the pattern. 209 210 Larry Wright: I think I understand. 211 212 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: Roads define how you will grow. When the MPO and the RPO sit down and they look at what the planning 213 department has put together where the economic zones are and such and they also look at where growth is now, I am just 214 wondering if these Boards really are going to define our growth over the next 20 years. But they do have to look at what the 215 economic development wants; what our infrastructure is planning to be? 216 217 Karen Lincoln: They look at the local land use plans to determine what the population densities will be how many people will go 218 here and here. 219 220 Larry Wright: What is the public workshop? 221 222 Karen Lincoln: Did anyone attend the workshop that Hillsborough held for the trading station. That was an open house. We are 223 trying to do something like that. There were two presentations. One started at 4:00 PM and went on until 10:00 PM. There were 224 surveys, maps, a short presentation and people available to answer questions. There will be a presentation on the process, 225 what we are trying to do, and the kind of input they are looking for. 226 227 Larry Wright: Kind of like a public hearing and a work session too? 228 229 Karen Lincoln: It is a workshop to gather information. 230 231 Larry Wright: Will there be any public hearing? 232 233 Karen Lincoln: Yes. There will be a public hearing at the Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization and 234 the Board of County Commissioners will have to hold a public hearing. The goal is to have a public workshop then develop 235 alternatives and during that time I intend to have interaction with this Board. 236 DRAFT 27 Attachment 6 237 Earl McKee: Once this plan is developed and adopted, if there is a conflict between plan recommendations or regulations 238 adopted through this plan and County regulations, which would trump? 239 240 Karen Lincoln: The County will be adopting the plan. This is a County plan and it is used by DOT. It has to be on this plan to 241 get money for it. 242 243 Earl McKee: This money comes through state or federal? 244 245 Karen Lincoln: Both. We will develop a recommended plan and at that point we will have another public workshop and it will be 246 presented to the advisory Boards and we will develop a final plan. Then we will start endorsing and adopting the final plan. 247 Orange County will adopt its Comprehensive Transportation Plan, the MPO will have to adopt the CTP in the area of Orange 248 County that is in the MPO and they will endorse the rest of the plan. TARPO will endorse the plan for the part of the County that 249 is outside. NCDOT has to adopt the CTP and it has to adopt the MPO's CTP. This plan will become part of the State 250 Comprehensive Transportation Plan. 251 252 Brian Crawford: Will we have an official role or expect something to come out of this body? 253 254 Karen Lincoln: There are several ways to participate. You have a member on the Orange Unified Transportation Board and that 255 Board is working with this. She can relate any progress or updates with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. If you have 256 issues you can relay those to the Orange Unified Transportation Board. 257 258 Brian Crawford: The purpose of the presentation was to get our presentation. I want to know if this is an official participation to 259 form some sort of subcommittee or can we go through you. I think I would be much happier if you would handle that for us. 260 261 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: I can update you what I hear at the OUTBoard meeting. I am not sure what I will take back to them. 262 263 Karen Lincoln: When we start developing the alternatives I thought the OUTBoard and the Planning Board could have a joint 264 meeting. The other way is that someone would like to be a member of the steering committee but we meet every third 265 Wednesday at 10:00 AM in the morning. 266 267 Larry Wright: On the survey through Survey Monkey, when is it targeted to go out now? 268 269 Karen Lincoln: We have not endorsed the final version and run it by the Board of County Commissioners. We were trying to get 270 it done before the Board of County Commissioners meeting in August. 271 272 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: Did this Board look at it or was it the OUTBoard? 273 274 Karen Lincoln: The OUTBoard looked at it and made some changes. 275 276 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: I remember some of the very important comments were that the reading level was very high and in order to 277 get good participation it should be less technical and more user - friendly. 278 279 Karen Lincoln: That is why I would like comments on the survey. The DCHC MPO will develop their comprehensive plan with a 280 similar timeline. 281 282 Brian Crawford: For now, Mary, you will be our liaison, information gatherer and chief and report back to us? 283 284 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: Yes. Again, I don't know what to tell them from you. Karen, you gave a lot of information. 285 286 AGENDA ITEM 8: REVIEW AND COMMENT ON UPCOMING PLANNING ITEMS 287 To review and comment on items on the non - public hearing portion of the upcoming Quarterly Public 288 Hearing agenda. Items include the proposed processes to be followed in regards to Comprehensive 289 Plan and Small Area Plan implementation measures. The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) will 290 also be discussed. 291 Presenter: Tom Altied, Planner III and Michael Harvey, Planner III 292 293 Craig Benedict: I will give an introduction. The agenda package contains the cover sheet and then the draft agenda item 294 abstract for the August 24 Public Hearing. At the Quarterly Public Hearing, there are two formal items. One item deals with the 295 outdoor lighting standards with outdoor rural lighting. The other deals with a strategic growth and rural conservation study. The DRAFT 28 Attachment 6 296 non - public hearing items deal with the work plan for both Board of County Commissioners priorities that they adopted for the 297 2009- 2010 fiscal year, items that were noted within the Comprehensive Plan update during that process and how we intend to 298 do it. So tonight I am going to let Tom Altieri, the comprehensive planning supervisor, go through what was anticipated post 299 Comprehensive Plan adoption and a little about the priorities set by the Board of County Commissioners that the Planning Board 300 has a significant role in. There is one other sheet handed out which is a draft that, after discussions with the Chair, about what is 301 on the plate of the Planning Board and staff over the next year and can we get it done. This is an attempt to line out what needs 302 to be done and the proper sequence of events. A special note, the Board of County Commissioners did, through the budget 303 process, offer some incentive packages for retirement. We will have three planners in the department avail themselves of that 304 package and we have a part time employee that is moving to another jurisdiction to have a full time position. We are likely to be 305 losing 3.53 people in the next few weeks. Robert Davis is leaving tomorrow, that is a supervisory position. We are trying to 306 come up with something reasonable and feasible to accomplish with partial rehiring. I will meet with the interim County Manager 307 on what rehiring may be necessary and how we can compensate for these positions. 308 309 Tommy McNeill: How will affect the citizens of Orange County? 310 311 Craig Benedict: Tom Altieri, Perdita Holtz and Michael Harvey are key staff, there has to be some shifting of duties. We want to 312 preserve the ability to respond our citizens whether it is in economic development proposal or subdivision. We will have to have 313 people multi- tasking more in the future so that they can address what ever ebb and flow of activity there may be with a new 314 project that is presented to us. 315 316 Brian Crawford: If you remember at the beginning of the year, there was the whole list of things to do and we had to prioritize. 317 We did that and the next step is to cut staff. Now you have a situation as to which priorities are they going to work on for the 318 Board of County Commissioners and whatever items that comes from this Board. I am concerned whether this can get done. 319 Does that mean more work for the Planning Board or staff? We may need to help the Board of County Commissioners adjust 320 their priorities in terms of some of the things we want to do. For me, the UDO is not as much a priority as the Small Area Plans 321 because we have done all this work on the Small Area Plans and there are people in the Small Area Plans waiting for them to be 322 implemented. The Board of County Commissioners may see the UDO as a priority. We have to have a continuing dialogue with 323 the staff. 324 325 Jeffrey Schmitt: How much of a percentage of your staffs time is taken up by normal, in the door, everyday duties, contractors, 326 permits being issued, etc? 327 328 Craig Benedict: In the planning area, we are focused more on a long term planning related function and not a subdivisions, 329 rezoning and special use permits driven function. We are probably 30 to 40 percent responding to the development applications 330 and 60 or 70 percent doing Small Area Plans, changing regulations, and looking at the long term planning related coordination 331 between departments. 332 333 Brian Crawford: How many of those planners wear two hats? 334 335 Craig Benedict: Our intent was that subdivision activity has decreased and we will shift them over to implement these Small 336 Area Plans. It happens those retirees were the ones we were going to shift over to do this work. Someone mentioned that we 337 have to lobby for more people and I had said at the meeting that it is not my mode of operation to have advisory Boards take an 338 overly vocal role in this. I understand it is your work plan too. This isn't a case where we can just not do it. In the case of a lot of 339 our planning services we have to be able to respond to the citizens and task forces. 340 341 Mary Bobbin- Cooke: Is it your plan to post these positions and fill them as soon as possible? 342 343 Craig Benedict: They are actually frozen for twelve months, which is the policy, unless I can prove otherwise. 344 345 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: To the County Manager? 346 347 Craig Benedict: Yes. When we get to the August 24 meeting, we will explain what we think we can do if I have a replacement of 348 three people for the 3.5 missing, we can do x amount. If only get two or three people, we can do only y or z amounts. 349 350 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: To what degree does the Board of County Commissioners know about your situation? 351 352 Craig Benedict: They don't know specifically. They knew when they offered this package; they were hoping to save $375,000 353 from the retirement and even more money from people who leave and whose position is frozen. The Board of County 354 Commissioners' priorities for 2009 -2010 amounted to fourteen, ten of those have this department and Planning Board's DRAFT 29 Attachment 6 involvement. I think we should have a reasonable amount of success for partial rehiring. In times where there is a lull in development activity, that's the time to plan for the next onslaught of activity that will usually come after and already in the building department we are starting to see return of activity from levels of 10 permits a month for single family to 24 per month. It is two and a half times what it was a few months ago so we are starting to see some activity and there is some important planning that we need to implement. That's why I think we need to keep our nose on these SAPs and UDO development in the short term so when the development activity return does happen this management will be in place. Tom Altieri: Our objective is to give you a preview of these three processes that will be discussed on August 24. It is complex and we wanted an opportunity to get it in front of you to present the material, why it's been formatted this way, and to begin answering questions you may have. These three processes are based on the assumption that we will replace the staff we are losing. In the event that does not happen we will have to adjust the proposal. This is really in three parts. In the introduction, we are trying to make the point that implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is not going to occur overnight. There are 38 goals and 263 objectives in the plan and implementation, in many cases, will be ongoing. We have tried to give a snapshot of the various planning projects coming forward and how they fit together which is provided on Attachment 2. The first four items are these processes that we need feedback on from this Board and the Board of County Commissioners to preceed. We have also completed a strategic growth plan for Orange County with the Town of Hillsborough and are in the process now of trying to establish a joint planning agreement. We are also going to be doing a joint land use plan as a result of that agreement and subsequent zoning and land use plan amendments. That is a major project. We have the UDO, that's been discussed, and the implementation of the Small Area Plans. Finally, concluding the abstract with some more specifics about how we could begin implementation of these Small Area Plans, how we can complete a Unified Development Ordinance, and a process for implementing the plan over time, reviewing objectives, monitoring and evaluations. Earl McKee: On the UDO, how far along are you on that? If something has to not to be done, would it be better not to do this and continue with some other work that is further down the line? Tom Altieri: There are components of the Unified Development Ordinance that have been studied over time. For example, staff has been asked to work on Landscaping Standards. While we were working on the Comprehensive Plan, about a seven year process, we held off on a lot of amendments to finish that Comprehensive Plan. For quite sometime, we have not been tweaking regularly. Rather than making large scale changes to regulations as part of the Unified Development Ordinances, we have decided to take what we have now and packaging this into the new format, eliminating inconsistencies, minor improvements, maybe new regulations. That would provide us with a starting point or a more workable document. We will move onto Small Area Plans on page 35. We have reviewed these recommendations and shaded some items in gray. Those are the areas we think we should focus our attention first over the next the course of the next 12 to 18 months. Then establishing a process by which this Board can come back to review this table periodically and reprioritizing for the next year. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: The Board of County Commissioners will look at this and will they agree with your sense of the priorities? Tom Altieri: I do not know. In the case of the first column, the Efland Mebane Small Area Plan, there was an implementation focus group that met on a number of occasions to review those recommendations after the plan had been adopted and prioritized. What you have here is consistent with what that focus group has put together. I would think the Board of County Commissioners would take that into consideration. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: When you put this together was it with the idea that you would be down 3.5 FTE? Tom Altieri: It is not. Brian Crawford: This is good. Is this particular piece going to be made available to the public? Tom Altieri: Sure. There may be a way we can post things to our website. You can see how this could be used as a tool as we continue implementing these Small Area Plans. We have similar idea for tracking this ongoing Comprehensive Plan Implementation where we have an 11x17 matrix with all the objectives in the Comprehensive Plan to track the progress. Brian Crawford: This is so the people who have worked so hard on this plan can see their progress. Michael Harvey: My purpose for being here this evening is to review the draft work plan for the development of a Unified Development Ordinance for the County. I will call your attention to Attachment 4, which begins on page 43 and ends on page 52 of the abstract for the specifics of the draft plan. Let's begin by expanding on some questions that were raised earlier about why we are doing this. The development of a Unified Development Ordinance is not just a priority to the Board of County Commissioners but also to staff. Over the last several years, we have identified several major inconsistencies within Subdivision DRAFT 30 Attachment 6 414 and Zoning texts that have to be corrected. This Board has seen several draft versions of amendments to sign ordinances, 415 landscaping ordinances, parking regulations, stream buffer regulations, etc. over the last four years. We have several other 416 projects that we need to begin work on implementing as well, most notably, beginning to implement existing Small Area Plans 417 that have been adopted. I will admit that this work plan is very ambitious. Our ability to complete this project will be based on 418 the Department's ability to retain staff. Our ultimate goal is to make this document more user - friendly and easily understandable. 419 This process will not just involve making cursory changes to the zoning regulations. This process will involve making potentially 420 major modifications to zoning, the Economic Development Design Manual, which is a component of the Zoning Ordinance and 421 Subdivision ordinance in an effort to combine them into one central document and make the existing regulations more uniform. It 422 would also ask staff to identify and incorporate new development regulations. If I can ask you all to begin reviewing the 423 information on page 46. 424 425 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: I have a question. According to the information I am seeing you estimate the need to spend 10 hours a 426 week to ensure this will get done. It suggests that you just completed a project and now you have 10 hours available now or you 427 will work 10 hours a week more. There is a lot of time carved out of people's work life. 428 429 Michael Harvey: We have all wrestled with that problem; my answer would be this has to be done. We have attempted to 430 identify what our time commitment will be. Again, this is somewhat ambitious. If we don't have staff resources, this may need to 431 be revised. Our catch 22 is that we have several provisions that have to be revised and new regulations incorporated to 432 accomplish what we have been directed to do by the BOCC. 433 434 Brian Crawford: I have lived the LIDO situation in Durham. Are you saying in Orange County, there are inconsistencies such in 435 or Development Ordinances that it is embarrassing or just that it is not efficient in its presentation. My experience with the 436 County next door was an attempt to try to make a pretty document was my interpretation. I didn't see this LIDO help the 437 development process. 438 439 Michael Harvey: I will answer that question as follows, first this is an attempt to make it more user - friendly and address 440 presentation issues. But more importantly we have to eliminate some major inconsistencies through all of the existing regulatory 441 standards. For example, in the Sign Ordinance, I have three different sections that basically give contradictory standards on how 442 a free standing sign should be developed on your property. Finally, we would like to begin implementation of the previously 443 adopted Small Area Plans. 444 445 Mark Marcoplos: You have three conflicting standards; you will go with the most restrictive, why can't you just delete the other 446 two? 447 448 Michael Harvey: It would not be hard to delete the two conflicting sections but that is just one example. The ordinances is 449 replete with similar problems. There are regulatory changes that we believe are essentially necessary. 450 451 Earl McKee: I understand you to say that it would probably take as long to pinpoint and eliminate each item as to work on 452 Unified Development. 453 454 Michael Harvey: If we can do it comprehensively in one shot and we could identify what is being changed and why, everyone 455 would be able to track the proposed modifications, at least in my opinion. We have been authorized to correct the 456 inconsistencies and mold the two documents together. 457 458 Craig Benedict: We are talking basically about reformatting documents that have an understandable numbering system, etc. to 459 at least create a framework so as we make these amendments in the future, it makes sense where they plug in to the master 460 document. 461 462 Michael Harvey: Referring back to the abstract on page 48, under Task Two, staff will actually work closer with the consultant to 463 begin revising existing graphic representation of our standards. Most notably, the subdivision ordinance, we have a lot of 464 outdated design guidelines and elements. 465 466 Larry Wright: When you do have this contractor come in, is there going to be a concerted effort to make sure that all this is 467 coordinated through the Comprehensive Plan? You could end up with the same problem. 468 469 Michael Harvey: Our goal is to clean up the current ordinance we have problems with, initiate the Small Area Plans and make 470 sure we are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The consultant will be hired to begin working with us to provide better 471 graphics. 472 DRAFT 31 Rachel Phelps Hawkins: Has the money for the consultant been budgeted? Attachment 6 Michael Harvey: Yes. Continuing on with the review of the abstract I ask that you look with my on page 51, Task Three, when we finalize the Draft of the UDO, the advisory Boards get to comment on it and give direction. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: Who are the other advisory Boards? Michael Harvey: We kept it nebulous because we may be asking several different advisory Boards to participate. Tom Alfieri: Next, we are going to talk about new ideas. Beginning on page 53, we have outlined how the planning staff and this Board will work together on a regular basis. Larry Wright: You are talking about a Strategic Plan with respect to the Comprehensive Plan? Tom Altied: These would be a list of measurement tools that need to be developed. Craig Benedict: Could you mention in the Comprehensive Plan about the cross referencing for goals and advisory Boards and how things come forward to create that coordination in the future. Tom Altieri: Each element in the Comprehensive Plan has a list of objectives followed by a section of the objectives that have linkages to other plan elements. Those objectives are noted. As ideas come forward to the Board of County Commissioners on plan implementation and how it correspondents to a particular objective in the plan, it will be easy to identify in this matrix. Brian Crawford: Comprehensive Plan implementation is all in you department so if there is an element the Housing Advisory Board has to get to or is part of their work, who is pushing them to start that? How does you department jump start the work they do to the Comprehensive Plan? Tom Alfieri: When we developed the Comprehensive Plan, there was a structure put in place. There was a process and roles were identified and this Board was put in more of a leading role or organizing role for all the plan elements to prepare the plan. Those roles have not been identified for the implementation process. As it stands now, you will have the Affordable Housing Advisory Board bringing items to the Board of County Commissioners independent of what we are doing. They may identify they need planning's help but there is not the bringing together all these ideas from the various advisory Boards and trying to produce a grand prioritization of what can be done. If we develop a process and it works with this Board and the Board of County Commissioners likes it, it may gravitate towards bringing the others in. Brian Crawford: The reason I ask is that we had one in 1981 and nothing happened. My fear is that after we have done all this work and nothing will happen. We have the nice document there but is no one to give it a kick. Tom Altied: Staff will help with the Planning Board prioritizing each year. We will come to this Board with some ideas and try to put it together in some format so you can see, in our opinion, what the priorities are we should be working on and how they relate to the Comprehensive Plan. You will be given the additional material of all the objectives that you can review and come with your own ideas. We have already heard a report on the Comprehensive Transportation Plan so you already have another advisory Board that is out working toward completing one of the objectives. Craig Benedict: On the last attachment of Tom's item is a sort of a Comprehensive Plan Strategy form. This is where we would say the Planning Board has identified that we want to do Transportation Objective 2.1, we think the OUTBoard is involved and there should be two outreach meetings and the Board of County Commissioners agrees. It is clear up front as to who is involved and; what type of outreach mechanism will be used so we don't finish the process and say you forgot the ABC Board. That form will be important because that is the form we can get in front of them and they say this becomes our priority list and work plan. Earl McKee: This may be your most important form otherwise you may end up with a pretty document with players that don't want to play. Jeffrey Schmitt: Brian, you made a great point, too many false plans and no starts. I don't think, when you say we, that we can go back to the public and not show something demonstrateable in the next 18 months. To that degree, I heard you say that this Board, if it chooses, could get involved in the prioritization of the 38 goals in the Comprehensive Plan. Are we ready to step up to the plate on that? If we do that and the Board of County Commissioners says that sounds good, here is numbers one through five is everyone going to line up behind that and everyone agrees. DRAFT 32 Attachment 6 532 Brian Crawford: We still need someone out there to push this forward. 533 534 Jeffrey Schmitt: I agree. 535 536 Larry Wright: Aren't the Board of County Commissioners the driving force? And the County Manager? 537 538 Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: When I was recruited to be on this Board, I was told this is time for us to implement. 539 540 Brian Crawford: I would rather be shot down than for the Board of County Commissioners to say "no that is not within your 541 purview", rather than we not do anything. 542 543 Jeffrey Schmitt: I absolutely agree. 544 545 Brian Crawford: What I heard from Tom is that when you come staff will give us some ideas. They have the plan in front of 546 them. We can say that sounds good, let's use the Strategy Initiative Form and ask the Housing Board to work on this. That may 547 be something they already want to work on but at least we know we are looking at the plan comprehensively and we know we 548 have 2030 down the road and we would like to move it along. 549 550 Craig Benedict: The colored form that talked about project, the first column, "2009 -2010 BOCC Priorities" with a number by each 551 one. Those are priorities the Board of County Commissioners had in front of them in the budget session this year and had . 552 determined that is what they want us to do. 553 554 Brian Crawford: Are those parts of the Comprehensive Plan? 555 556 Craig Benedict: Some of them, like Intergovernmental Coordination, yes, to work with your local governments and develop a 557 joint planning area agreement. This is our marching orders as much as we can do. One of them is doing a UDO framework so 558 that is a priority and try to implement a Small Area Plan. Even though we were just finishing a Comprehensive Plan update and 559 they were in the middle of the budget process, we tried to say let's get these things out of the way. I think there will be a new list 560 each year. 561 562 Brian Crawford: All these documents we have worked on, it should be a minimum mission of every Planning Board member that 563 is here is to make sure those documents continue to move. We have spent so much time on the plans. 564 565 Earl McKee: That is what drove my original questions. I knew there had not been a lot of work and a lot of work to be done and 566 when I see this and not as many people, I could not figure out how we could do this much work with this many people, even with 567 a full staff. 568 569 Perdita Holtz: In some of those colors, the yellow, the salmon and the fuchsia, identify those projects that will be delayed or not 570 even worked on if we are not able to rehire staff. 571 572 Earl McKee: I had no idea how much had been done but I knew that would be a long way to go. Is this process at the 573 beginning, the middle and the end? 574 575 Craig Benedict: One thing about the Unified Development Ordinance, it is important because that will be the framework on 576 development we hang all these implementation ideas from the Small Area Plans and new process and standards. 577 578 Peter Hallenbeck: I want to try to summarize just to make sure I have it correct. There has been a deferred maintenance on the 579 existing codes and plans in anticipation of the Small Area Plans and the UDO over the past few years. You now have public 580 input and the details are ready to be worked out and you find yourself with staff reductions that will delay getting the Small Area 581 Plans and the UDO going. It seems the delay of those plans will affect how the economic recovery, when it comes, happens 582 because we will have poor execution of construction because of old plans or projects delayed because you don't have the UDO 583 and these new and united plans and codes are important to overcoming this perception that Orange County is against all growth. 584 So Orange County could miss out on this inevitable recovery unless the Small Area Plans and UDOs are updated in a timely 585 manner and your timeframes show that this could happen by mid -2010 which is roughly one year and that deadline is pretty 586 important if you want to try get in on the new priority list and the new development. When I look at that I agree because I don't 587 want to be sitting here at Orange County a year from now and everyone says, we have money coming back, Durham and 588 Alamance, let's stay out of Orange that is nothing but trouble. Seeing all that, it seems that has to wait from your perspective. 1 589 don't see how you can take that plan and put a whole lot of time into it when the focus should be getting the Small Area Plans DRAFT 33 Attachment 6 and the LIDO going. What you just said about the UDO being the framework almost reinforces that because with that framework, it would probably be easier to do than the Comprehensive Plan. Craig Benedict: That is a very good synopsis. Brian Crawford: The only thing I would quibble is the notion the 2030 plan should be put on a slower pace. Peter Hallenbeck: This group can start working the 2030 plan but it is hard to get a lot of staffing resources because they will be on something else. Brian Crawford: The only thing about the 2030 plan is that here we have a plan the whole County worked on and there was a lot of time put into this by this group and staff. That is why I don't want to sit somewhere and catch dust. If it means we have to get do a little and just keeps it moving towards the 2030, 1 think we need to do that. There will always be a priority over this but we can't let that 2030 go away. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: As I see this, the LIDO and Small Area Plan, are part of the 2030 plan so movement on these things is movement within that plan. It may not be as big as we want it to be. Brian Crawford: We have to pay attention to it as a Board. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: I was looking forward to this as a responsibility but I am concerned about the lack of staff. Craig Benedict: I will be working with the manager's office in the next couple of weeks. Hopefully I will have an indication before the agenda goes out. I will let the Board know if things look optimistic because we are going to have to give them some indication at the August 24 meeting. Brian Crawford: You obviously need to abdicate for your staff but also the Planning Board is in a position to express concerns as a Board because we know what we have been tasked with these leadership roles and moving this plan ahead so we can mention it to the Board of County Commissioners. Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: I don't think it is inappropriate to have private conversations with Board of County Commissioners and the ones we know. There are four or five that have served on this Board. Larry Wright, Mark Marcoplos, Jeff Schmitt left meeting AGENDA ITEM 9: COMMITTEEIADvISORY BOARD REPORTS a) Board of Adjustment b) Orange Unified Transportation Mary Bobbitt- Cooke: Karen covered the big picture of what the OUTBoard is working with, the MPO and RPO. I sat through the presentation, I did leave a little early because I didn't feel well but it really made me wonder what the OUTBoard was supposed to do. It seemed a little like a duplication. But I did walk away with was, in spirit of the community that was coming from the OUTBoard and other groups, the staff know what they are doing. Your staff as well as the Durham and Alamance staff that have to work together with the Department of Transportation are really talking and communicating so I wasn't concerned about our role but I did want to say that if the OUTBoard can communicate via Karen the concerns we have, which is a fabulous group of people, they certainly will. I do want you know that the staff is really carrying that ball. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Mary Bobbitt-Cooke made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Earl McKee. VOTE: Unanimous