Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19780530 Regarding the Maternal Child Health Program, Ms. McClintock stated there are a number of high risk mothers in Northern Orange. The Health Clinic sees between 35 to 50 patients during clinic days. She added that the Health Department makes a telephone call to all mothers of first borned babies in the County, and makes a visit if the mother desires this. A visit is made to all high risk mothers. The present nursing staff is not sufficient to follow up on all the cases in the Maternal Child Health Pro- gram. Ms. McClintock informed the Board of a program known as EPSDT (Early Periodic Screening, Detection and Treatment). Children in this. program are screened four times during their first year of life and once each year thereafter. She stated the County needs to be doing mare of this type of screening. Medicare prevents these children from receiving dental care unless they have had a EPSDT Screening. Additional nurses are needed •• in this program. The Health Director spoke of the great need in the County for School Health. He stated the budget narrative speaks to this need and to the effort the Health Department hopes to make in meeting the need in School Health. Other programs which Mr. Robinson mentioned were School Rental Health, Chronic Diseases, Tuberculosis, Venereal Diseases, vital records, and efforts to be made by the administrative staff. Regarding the Venereal Diseases program, Mr. Robinson stated the Board~of Health hoped to hire a V. D. Control Investigator who will bring to clinic infection_sources for treatment and education on V.D. avoidance. ~- Further, the Department hopes to add additional clinical services. Mr. Robinson informed the Board the budget throughout is bias toward community education in health matters, that the pay off lies in education, when people take control of their lives. Commissioner Gustaveson expressed his appreciation to the Health Board for their concern and their effort. He stated one concern of h.is was whether or not the programs are meeting the needs and are making a dent. He asked if the Health Board is closing the gap in providing needed services. Chairman Whitted explained that he felt the Health Board and Depart- ment had made a good start. He reminded the Boards that this is a tight budget year and asked that the Department help the Commissioners by putting into perspective the priorities which must be provided immediately. The meeting was then adjourned. 'Richard Whitted, Chairman Agatha Johnson, Clerk MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MAY 30, 1978 On Tuesday, May 30, 1978, the Orange County Board of Commissioners met jointly with the Orange County Planning Board for the purpose of con- ducting a public hearing regarding planning matters. The meeting convened at approximately 8:OOp.m., in the Superior Courtroom of the Courthouse. Present were Chairman Richard Whitted, Commissioners Norman Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker and Donald Willhoit. Planning Board members present were Chairman Dr. Robert Bonar, Pat Crawford, Jean Anderson, Lindsa1r Efland, Andrew Dobelstein, Col. ir7illiam Breeze and Art Cleary. Staff personnel present were S. M. Gattis, County Manager, Geoffrey Gledhill, County Attorney, Hal Minis, Acting Planning Director, members ~:, v~.o from the County Planning Department, and Agatha Johnson, Clerk to the Board. Chairman Whitted asked that prior to the meeting convening as a public hearing, that the Board of Commissioners discuss one item regarding the Orange-Person-Chatham Mental Health Center. He informed the Board that at a recent legislative conference, one concern was to support efforts to get 4.25 million dollars restored to the State budget for the coming fiscal year. This recommendation was made by the Secretary to the Department of Human Resources, however, this was left out of the Advisory Budget Committee proposed budget. Funds which were recommended by the Committee were 1.25 million for Mental Health in designated locations. He stated that many counties represented at the conference indicated that they would propose local legislation for additional funding for Mental Health which hopefully would draw to the attention of the General Assembly, the need for addi- tional funding. Mr. Whitted stated he had asked the County Attorney to draw up a local bill for the Board's consideration and a resolution in support of an appropriation of $172,000 for the Orange-Person-Chatham Mental Health Center. Upon motion of Commissioner Willhoxt, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson, it was moved and adopted to approve the Resolution and the Clerk was instructed to forward copies of the Resolution and the Bi11 to the Orange and Person Counties Congressional Delegatien. (For copy of Resolution and Bill, see page 5gp of this book.) Chairman Whitted then turned the meeting over to Dr. Robert Bonar. Dr. Bonar informed the Boards that the rezoning request of Sunmark Industries had been withdrawn. Dr. Bonar then referred to Item #2 on the Agenda: Request of Gurtis Bane. This request is to rezone from Residential to General Commercial 105 acres out of 260.75 acres in Eno Township. Eddie Kirk from the Planning Staff informed the Boards that this pro- perty is located between I-$5 and Old Highway Number 10. Uses generally found in General commercial zones include public and private utilities, sale of farm merchandise, mobile home sales, offices, wholesale and re- tail sales, automobile service stations, and non-residential storage of closed structures. He stated that presently found in the area are businesses of general commercial nature, a mobile home park, church property, and two sub- divisions. Mr. Bane has drawn plans, which will be submitted to the Board at a later time, which indicate his desire to establish a subdivision with approximately 36 lots in the area. Chairman Bonar asked if there were person present who wished to speak in favor of the rezoning request. Mr. Curtis Bane stated he had sought the advise aF professionals of how to manage this property and there is a question in their minds as to whether or not this property could be used for anything other than commer- cial. He pointed out to the Board that utilities lines run through the property as well as railroad tracks. He stated he felt this was an ideal location to serve the growth of the area in coming years. Rufus Caulder, a land planner from Durham, stated in his opinion, this property is ideal for general commercial use, with the accessability to I-$5 and with the railroad tracks located conveniently. Chairman Bonar asked if anyone wished to speak against the rezoning request. An unidentified lady spoke against the rezoning of this property. An unidentified male stated the letter he received stated this pro- perty was located on State Road 1812, when the property actually is situ- ated on State Road 1713. This person further spoke against the rezoning request. Discussin ensued between the two Boards. The consensus of the Boards was that improper notice had been given regarding the location of this property, as it ip~:located on State Road 1713 and not State Road 1812. ~:: ~~ This rezoning request was scheduled to be heard again 4n the third Monday night~in June at the regular meeting; of the County Planning Board. Chairman Bonar referred to the third item on the agenda: Considera- tion of proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations. He referred to the Definitions section of the amendments which amends the definition o£ easement to read as follows: A grant of rights by the property owner to a portion of land for a specified purpose. Dr. Sonar stated it was not the intention of the earlier definitions to provide for public use but for use by the public, a corporation, or persons, He stated this definition makes this point clear. The second item under definitions: Moved the definition of minor sub- division from; page 5 to the definition section. Dr. Sonar asked that the Board discuss the suggested definitions of a manor subdivision as shown on an attached sheet. (1) A manor subdivision is a division of a tract of land into no more than four (4) additional lots with access to be provided either from an existing public street or from a private road as defined in the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. (2) III-C-2: No more than four (4) new lots may be created through the minor subdivision process out of a tract of land in existence at the time of the adopticn of this procedure for review and approval of subdivisions through the minor subdivision process. (3) No more than four (4) lots may be created out of a tract of land by the minor subdivision process within a one year period. Add: Any tract of land which changes ownership may be resubdivided by the minor subdivisiari process. Dr. Bonar stated that two approaches to the use of a manor subdivision process had been made. He asked for comments. Lindsay Efland stated he felt the added provision regarding changing of ownership was a good provision and should be added to which ever pro- posal was decided upon. Purpose, Authority, Jurisdiction Section 1-D: Na provisions o£ this Ordinance shall be construed to grant public access, entry or use of private property without permission of the owner. Ben Lloyd informed the Board the Advisory Subcommittee has suggested an addition to this section which would state that when easements or right of ways are acquired, compensation shall be forthcoming. This is not an the proposed amendment. Mr. Lleyd stated it was also suggested that the party responsible fox compensation be specified. Discussion ensued regarding this item. Commissioner willhoit stated he found problems with this as it is extremely expensive to install sewer lines at a later time an a lot by lot basis. That easements should be given at the initial planning stage. Mr. Lloyd stated he felt developers should have all easements dedicated prior to developing thier property and should pay far involuntary easements. ". .. Mr, willhoit responded by stating this would present problems if every case had to be on a contract basis. That it would be difficult to obtain easements where services are not available. Mr. wall stated there are instances where property owners derive na benefit from granting easements across their property, that many people do not wish to have certain conveniences.' Dr. Bonar stated his concern about compensation for easements is this may be interpreted by subdividers to mean that if they are required to pro- vide easements, for utilities to supply their own development, somebody should pay them for that. He stated the proposed amendment could be read in that sense. ~' '°' .. ~:~. Mr. Lloyd stated he was against granting an involunteer easement to anyone without compensation. Dr. Sonar stated that the point of this amendment was that the County should not be responsible for dictating the terms of easements. Terms should be negotiated between the subdivider and utility company. Further discussion ensued regarding compensation for easements. It was pointed out to the two Boards that some recommendations which had been made by the Advisory Subcommittee had not been included in the proposed amendments. Dr. David Land stated that several portions had been omitted, Hal Minis, Acting Planning Director, inf ormed the Board that two sections of the proposed amendments had been deleted through error. The section regarding Reservation of Space for Utilities,. and the section concerning Buffer Strips. He added these sections were. included in the newspaper advertisement. He asked that this staff be given a few minutes to zerox copies of these two section for distribution. Dr, Land suggested the Advisory Subcommittee felt it best to define an easement clearly and to make a statement at that point regarding appro- priate compensation and then allow the situation to define itself. The two amendment proposals were distributed to those present and Dr. Bonar stated they were available for discussion, Mr. Wall stated he felt the Ordinance should state that the County has no authority to involuntarily take property without due process or without compensation. Dr. Bonar stated he felt this was clear in the Ordinance. Mr. Wall stated further there should be a definition in the Ordinance of agriculture land. The County Attorney informed the Board that Zoning Regulations do not affect agriculture land. Subdivision Reguilations do not speak to agri- culture lands because the laws do not make any distintion as to whether subdividing is, for agriculture purposes or other purposes. If the use of the land is for subdividing purposes, the land is covered by the Sub- division Regulations. Dr. Bonar asked Mr. Wa11 if he was proposing to include a definition of agriculture land and exclude "land used for agriculture" from the pro- bisions of the Ordinance. Mr. Wall replied, "yes, and to recognize that the County has no authority under the General Statutes to involuntarily take property without due process or without compensation. Dr. Bonar asked that Dr. Lang regrite the passage regarding compensa- tion for the Planning Board's consideration at their third Monday's meeting. Dr, Bonar referred to Number 2: Section 2-E, the proposed new section, regarding forms of property restrictions. No comments were made on this amendment. Procedure for plat approval: - two proposals were made. The pro- posal by the Advisory Subcommittee is: Title to land parcels of any size may change hands at any time without being subject to the Subdivision Regulations. The Subdivision Regulations shall come into effect before any improvements certificate may be issued. Landlocked tracts can be so designated on the deed. Subsequent to the effective date of this Ordin- ance, nv development of any land shall take place until a sketch plan, preliminary plan and a final plat have been approved, or a final plat approved throught the minor subdivision process. A secondlpraposal was submitted by the County Attorney. (for copy of County Attorney's proposal see page 591 of this book) .. '.J Mr. Wall stated the Advisory Council recommended that land be exempted from the requirements of this Ordinance until Development was intimate. He added that the Planning Beard had asked the County Attorney to formulate a section which would accomplish this purpose. He stated that some of these items had "been thrown in" which have no relevance. He stated the Advisory Subcommittee has not discussed these amendments. Dr. Lang stated the charge to the County Attorney was to develop some provision to allow for subdivisions without the need for all the sub- division Regulations if the known development was not initimate. This was to be done in the best interest of planning as well as to preserve the rights of individuals to exchange land freely. Dr. Bonar stated he sensed the difference between what Mr. Gledhill has prepared and the Advisory Council is that the Council would like all subdivision regulations be postponed until development takes place. Whereas the section Mr. Gledhill has prepared is a means of exempting some sub- divisions from the regulations until development takes place, whenever that seems appropriate. He added that almost all land subdivided in Orange County is for development at some point. That he feels the Attorney's proposal is appropriate. Mr. Wall stated he would like to see a concise statement of state- ment of procedural matters of how property can be subdivided for develop- ment as well as property where development is not foreseen. Dr. Land stated he did not feel the County Attorney's proposal was necessarily relevant. Dr. Bonar stated he felt the Attorney's proposal was valuable in that there might be situations in highly developed areas where there was not the immediate intention of the subdivider to develop, but nonetheless, the pattern by which he subdivides might be important to the development of the area. In this case, it would not be appropriate to postpone implementa- tion of the Subdivision Regulations. Dr. Bonar asked that the discussion continue to some of the other pro- praposed amendments. Procedure for Review and Approval of Minis Subdivision - Certain portions of this section had already been spoken to, so there was no further discussion of this section. Preliminary Plan Approval - Mr. Wall stated that one unanimous recommendation of the Advisory Council was that the Ordinance provide for the right of appeals. the pro- posal by the Council was. that the County Commissioners serve as an appeal body. He suggested that this be included in the Ordinance. Final Plat - Added: The Planning Board's decision may be appealed by the subdivider to the County Commissioners. Land Suitability - No ccenments were made. Lot Layout - It was agreed that proposal B is more suitable: (B) Amend to read as follows: A building permit may not be issued until the access road has been built as specified for, or appropriate assurance provided, as specified by Section V of this Ordinance. Reservation of Space for Utilities- Dealing with Buffer strips, which had already been discussed. Storm Water Management The question arose of whether a farmer can be prevented from building a pond on this property under the Ordinance. Dr. Bonar stated the Ordinance has no effect on construction of ponds if the construction is under the storm water management plan. Waste Water_Disposal - to be deleted. p':?:-77 v .J varj,~nces - Final appxoval of variance to the Planning Board with the right of appeal to the County Commissioners. Dr. Bonar stated that arguments had been heard tonight regarding the proposed amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning Bcard will review the recommendations and will make a recommendation to the County Commissioners. He stated if the public was not satisfied they could proms pose additional amendments. He asked Dr. Land to re-write the section relating to compensation for easements given, and to submit it to the Planning Staff. He asked the County Attorney provide the Planning Board with his interpretation of what is in the State Law regarding subdivision and zoning regulations and whether State Law defines agricultural land. The meeting was adjourned. ~ ~ %. ~ i i ~ i l%~ ~ ~ ~ L i ~ ~ ~' Richard Whitted, Chairman Agatha Johnson, Clerk e~ ~! -~ i fl i II !,I ~I ~I ~~ ~I I~ ~~ ~.~A BzLL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT TO APPROPRIATE $172,000 TO THE , I' i j ORANGE-PERSON-CHATHAM MENTAL HEALTH CEN'T'ER FOR THE PURPOSE OF i I~~I IMPROVING MENTAL HEALTH SERVXCES. I' II '~~ 'III The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: ~;I Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from the ~, ~~ ~. general fund to the Orange-Pexson-Chatham Mental Health Center II ~~ for the fiscal year 1978-79 the sum of $172,000 to be used as .I it I ~ follows: ~! (1) to provide a 6~ salary supplement to all employees; of the Center, the sum of $111,000. anent services for clients of II (2) to provide in-p i ~~ the Center, the sum of $61,000. ; - ~ 'I ~! Section 2. This Act shall become effective July 1, 1978. r ~.._ RESOLUTION A meeting of the Berard of Commissioners for Orange County, North Carolina, was held at Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting at 7:30 o'clock p.m., on May 30, 7.97 Present: Norman Walker, Richard Whitted, and Donald Ylillhoit_ Absent: None WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, by this resolution, desire to show their support to the adoption by the General Assembly of an Act to Appropriate $172,000 to the Orange-Person~-Chatham Mental Health Center. IT IS HEREBY UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED THAT: The Orange County Board of County Commissioners urge and request the adoption by the North Carolina General Assembly o a bill to be entitled AN ACT TO APPROPRXATE $172,000 TO THE ORANG:., PERSON-CHATHAM MENTAL HEALTH CENTER ... These funds to, provide a 6~ salary supplement to all employees of the Center, in an amount totalling $111,000 and to provide in-patient services for clients of. the Center, in an amount totalling $61,000. xn support of this request, the Board has determined that without such an appropxi.ation, vital Mental Health Center services will have to be reduced or eliminated altogether and that lack of funds for employee salary increases will subject the Center to the risk of losing valuable employees. This resolution is effective upon its passage. ******~r**:t~r~*~r*****~**~r****~***~r*~e***~r********t*~****~r*****~r***** I, Agatha R. Johnson, Clerk of the Berard of Commission :~ for Orange County, North Carolina, DO HERESY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the proceedings of said Board of COLEMAN, BEAIV'HOLZ 4 DICKEA$DN ATTORNEYS AT LAW CHAPEL HILL, N.C. HtLLSBOADUGH, ~.C. ~ ~~ e.~ ~ (M of Commissioners at a meeting held on May 30, 1978, so far as the same relate to the adoption of a Resolution to request the adopti by the North Carolina General Assembly of a bill to be entitled AN ACT TO APPROPRIATE $172,000 TO THE ORANGE-PERSON--CHATHAM MENTAL HEALTH CENTER ..., as such proceedings are recorded in the Minute Book of the said Board. WzTNESS my hand and official seal of said Board, this the 30th day of May, 1978. A a a R. Johnso Clerk of the Board of g I Co issioners f Orange County, North i Carolina ( S E A L ) COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ & DtCKEEiSON ATTORNEYS pT I,AW CHAPEL HILL. N.C. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C.