Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19830328 1• r .a 2. 3. 4* MINUTES 5. MARCH 28, 1983 6. 7. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session 8. Monday, March 28, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. in the Superior Courtroom, 9. Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. 10. Commissioners present: Richard E. Whitted, Chair, and Com- 11. missioners Ben L1oyd, bShirley E. Marshall , Norman Walker and Don 12. Willhoit. . 13• A. BOARD COMMENTS: 14. Commissioner .Whitted suggested that the Board proceed with 15• the scheduled public hearings prior to hearing any audience com- 16, ments. 17, C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1$� 1. REVENUE SHARING 19. Mr. Wallace Harding, Finance Director, told the Board that 20., this public hearing complies with Federal Regulations regarding 21, Revenue Sharing funds. He said the funds were approximately one 22. half of what the County received last year, that is, $250,000, and 23. that the County usually uses this amount for capital projects. 24. An unidentified woman asked Mr. Harding how the funds may be 25. spent; he replied for "any general fund purpose. " 26. Ms. Sharlene Greenae-Pilkey suggested the revenue sharing funds 27, be used to replace the roofs at Stanford Jr. High School . 28. With no further comments from the audience, Commissioner Whitted 29. declared the public hearing adjourned on the Revenue Sharing funds 30• for Fiscal 1983-84. 31. Mr. Griffin, New Hope Volunteer Fire Department, asked to 32. address the Board on a bill now before the General Assembly. The _ 33• Board agreed to hear Mr. Griffin now rather than waiting until all. 34• public hearings were completed. Mr. Griffin said that SB 107 35. (Revise Annexation Laws) was presently before the General Assembly. 36. This bill would permit a municipality to annex up 'to 10% each year 37. of a rural fire department without assuming any of that fire depart- 38. ment's liabilities. This would increase the financial burden on 39. 40. 2 1. 2 , 3,r{ u 3• 4, the remaining members of the fire -district to repay any loans on 5• the purchase of equipment. The New Hope FireiDepartment feels this 6, bill does not go far enough and wishes the Board of Commissioners to write the 7, legislative delegation on their behalf and state the concerns 8. expressed. The Board _agreed to do so. 9, 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TARGET AREA: 10. Mr. Albert Kittrell , CD Director, listed the programs for the 11. Community Development target area, Councilville. 12, Mr. Stan Council , Councilville resident, spoke on behalf of 13, the citizens of Councilville. He said they are very pleased that 14, their community was chosen for this program. 15, Commissioner Lloyd asked what was encompassed in the grant it- 16. self. 17, Mr. Kittrell 'replied, rehab of substandard housing, bringing 18, streets up to DOT standards, installation of a water system, reloc- 19, ation of substandard units and spot clearance of a dump. 20, Commissioner Lloyd asked if the County bought rights-of way? 21. Mr. Kittrell replied that it is in the grant and is a require- 22, ment of the Federal program. : �3, Commissioner Walker said this is a good program but that people 24, shouldn 't charge for the rights-of-way. Both Commissioner Marshall 25, and Mr. Kittrell said this is a requirement of the Federal program, 26, that rights-of-way be purchased. Commissioner Walker said the pro- �7, gram needed to be changed. 28. Mr. Kittrell , replied to a question from Commissioner Lloyd, 29. that the maximum per house had not been determined yet but that he 30, thought it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000 to 31. $12,000 per house. He added that $178,000 was earmarked for paving 32, and that 27 of 30 homes can be rehabilitated. Commissione r-_Lloyd asked who paid the -le g al fees if someone .. 33. 34. refused to sell rights-of-way? Mr. Kittrell replied that the grant 35• would pay. Mr. Council said that problem would not occur in Council- 36. ville; that all residents are anxious, to participate. That if 37. the Board of Commissioners chose not to approve the program for 38- Councilville unless all homeowners ceded rights-of-way without pay- 39- 44. 3 1. 2. 3• ment that in order to get the program for the community, he,, Mr. 5- Council , speaking personally, thought the homeowners would do that. 6. Commissioner Walker said that they, Councilvtlle. residents, were 7. asking for the improvements and asking to be paid for them. Com- 8. missioner Marshall said the Councilville residents were not asking 9. for that; that the County was on their behalf as part of the require- 10. ments for the Federal program. 11. The next public hearing on this program will be April 19th 120 Mr. Kittrell said. 13. Commissioner Whitted declared this public hearing adjourned. 14. 3. MODIFICATION REQUEST FOR CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR RTURAY AIRPORT—JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH PLANNING OARD 15. Planning Board Members present: Logan Irvin, Chair, and members 16. George Allison, Tom Bacon, Alice Gordon, Sharlene Greenae-Pilkey, 17, Steve Kizer, Frank Pearson. David Shanklin, Carl Walters and John 18. Wilson. 19. Planning Board members absent: Saragene Boericke and Nancy 20, Laszlo. 21. Commissioner Whitted announced that this was a special public 22, hearing to hear evidence on a request by Buck Mountain Development 23. to modify the Class A Special Use Permit granted for Midway Airport. 24- (Please see abstract and attachments, attached to and part of 25, these minutes on pages of this book. ) 26. Planning Board member Kizer asked several questions: 1) "Did 27. the Zoning Officer determine if these were major or minor modifica- 28. tions?" 29. Mr. Cannity, Planning Staff, replied that since the "Board of 30. Commissioners remanded this back to us . . .we never made that 31. decision . . . .subsequent to that we /planning staff_] have decided 32. that it's a modification." _ _ Mr. Kizer- "D'i'd you receive an entire new application 34- specifically fulfilling the rqquirements of Article 8.7 and 8.8.8.1? 35. (Mr. Kizer listed those items required by the Zoning Ordinance. ) 36,, Mr. Cannity: replied that those items had not been received. 37. Mr. Kizer: "Do you -know whether the land was posted or not?" 38- 39. 40. 4 �. 341 2. 3• 4• Mr. Cannity: "The land was not posted within the prescribed 5• time limits for modification of the Special Use Permit. " 6. Mr. Kizer: "Did the adjoining landowners receive certified 7• copies, notice by certified mail of this public hearing? 8. Mr. Cannity: "Not within the prescribed time limits. " 90 Mr. Kizer then told Commissioner Whitted that there existed 10. sufficient question as to whether or not this public hearing was 110 being held in accordance with procedures as required within the 12. Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Kizer continued: "Is there any new change Y3- or modification that was presented at the public hearing?" Mr. 14- Cannity said, "There is no new information from the developers. It 15- is a request from the developers for the Board of Commissioners to 169 reconsider imposed conditions on the issuance of the Special Use 17• Permit. " 18. Mr. Kizer said this presented two questions: 1) is it a new 190 application or, 2) simply a request for reconsideration of the 209 same application. He added that the intent of the Planning Board 21. in drawing up the Zoning Ordinance was to prevent continual reap- 22. plication of the same request. 23• Mr. Gedffrey Gledhill , County Attorney, told the Board that 24- due to the notices and land posting not being done within the pre 254, scribed time limits as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance it appears 26* that there are "procedural problems" with holding this public hear- 27- ing. With regard to Mr. Kizer's question pertinent to a one year 28* time limit prior to reapplication, Mr. Gledhill said it was his 29• opinion that a Special Use Permit had been .granted, not denied, 30- therefore, the one year time limit did not apply; the applicants 31- are asking for modification of an existing permit. 32• Mr. John Northen, Attorney for the developer, said his letter 33v-. =. asking. that- three- coedit-ions-.on the .Spe.cial:Us-e- Permit be mod 34* ified was to notify the Board that those conditions could not be 359 met and to request that they be modified. He asked the Board to 36• consider those conditions anyway since the developers had, at the 37- request of the Planning Staff provided certain information which i 38• they are prepared to present tonight. 39. 40. b 1. { 3LX.y L- 3• �• Commissioner Willhoit moved, but withdrew his motion, to re- 5• schedule this public hearing in accordance with the notification 6- required by the Zoning Ordinance. 7• There was a consensus among the Board that this public hearing 8• should be scbeduled in accordance with the notification procedures 9• as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 10• 4. PROPOSED FARM PRESERVATION PROGRAM 11. Ms. Susan Smith, Panning Staff, presented the background 12• information on the proposed Ornage County Farm Preservation Pro- 13- gram. . (See abstract and attachments for specifics .on pages 14• of this book. ) 15• Ms. Ginny Faust, graduate student, provided an analysis of 16• this program with regard to its impact on the taxes of the County. 17• Mr. Kizer asked if there would be associated changes in 18- land values pertaining to non-farmland. Ms. Faust replied there 19e would be some in the next revaluation. 20• An ddidentified man asked if a person with acreage and trees 21- would qualify. Ms. Smith said yes, if there are as many as twenty 22• acres and other portions of the program are met. 23• Ms. Pat Crawford asked if an inactive farmer would qualify. 24• Ms. Smith said yes, based on the income. 25• Mr. Don Cox, Chair of the Orange Soil and Water Conservation 26• District, said his Board had voted on March 15th to support this 27- program and encouraged the Board of Commissioners to adopt its 28- recommendations. As a private citizen, he too, encouraged its 29- adoption, saying i't's in the interest of all Orange County. 30• Commissioner Lloyd asked Mr. Cox if he had read the portion 31• which said it would be of concern to the Cane Creek and Seven Mile 32• Creek and Eno River State Park? 33•. .. Mr-. Cox:, repl ied yes. and. said projects- .need to: be justified; he . 34- has "no problem with that. " 35• Commissioner Walker asked Mr. Cox how much farmland needed to 36- be preserved in light of the Federal government giving farmers 37• grain surplus not to plant their crops this year. Mr. Cox 38- asked how much was being returned to North Carolina farmers. 39• 400 6 1. 3 4 2. 3• He said most of that was going to the Midwest. Commissioner Walker 5.• asked Mr. Cox if he thought it was right to lock farmers into a cer- 6, tain use for their land when they might want to use it for some- 7. thing else. Mr. Cox said his understanding was that the program was voluntary. • A man later identified as Joe Phelps asked who were the members 9. lo. of the Agricultural Task Force Implementation Committee. Ms. Smith 11, named those; she further recited the notices given for the meetings 12, and the percentage of participation in the meetings. Mr. Phelps 13, asked if all people had input. Ms. Smith replied that as many far- 14. mers as possible .wexe involved in this process. Mr. Phelps said 15, he was the President of the Farmer's Bureau and he'd had no-noti- 16. fication of these meetings. Ms. Smith said two letters had been 17. sent to the Farmers' Bureau over the past three months.and said 18. she would get copies of those letters for him. 19. Commissioner Lloyd asked the definition of "critical areas:" -- 20. Mr. Bob Tennant, Soil. Conservation Division, said that this 21. is "that area that takes above normal practices to bring under 22. control . For example, steep banks, any area where there is severe 23. loss of soil ." 24. Mr. Tennant added that 24 tons soil lost per acre was considered 25, critical ; the average was 18 tons/acre/year. 26. Commissioner Lloyd protested the length of the sign up in the 2 7e program and strict adherence to soil conservation practices as cri- 28. teria for participation. He requested that these two requirements 29. be deleted. 30. Mr. Carl Walters, a member of the Implementation Committee and 31, a farmer, read a list of Farmers' Bureau members who were also mem- 32• bers of his Committee. He also noted that the length of the sign 33• up was to discourage someone from just investing in a "holding 34, pattern. " It will not discourage the serious farmer; he noted also 35. there was a payback clause for only partial participation in the pro- 36 9 gram. 37. Planning Board member Irvin: Said the time of participation had 38• been discussed at length. He said as many farmers as possible should 39. 40. 3. 4- be encouraged to participate and these recommendations should 5- be sold to the State Legislature. 6. Mr. Kizer said the 10% payback was too little. 7. With no further comments from the Boards or members of the 8. audience, Commissioner Whitted declared this public hearing adjourn 9. ed. 10. Following a five minute break the Board of Commissioners resumed - 11. deliberations with all members present. 12. A. BOARD COMMENTS 13. There were none. 111.. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 15. There were none. 16. D. BOARD DECISIONS 17, I. JAIL COMPLETION: 18. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 19* to authorize the change orders for $2,273 and proceed with the com- 20, pletion of the jail project. 21. Discussion followed as to whose. responsibility it was for cer- 22. tain items to be done. Commissioner Whitted noted that there had 23. been a change in directors in Raleigh; approval had been obtained 24. from one director which the new director would not okay. 25. Commissioner Lloyd asked that the motion be amended to 26. include the withholding of further payment from the architect un- 27. til he had explained certain items. Commissioner Marshall declined 28. to amend her motion. 29. Vote: Ayes-,' 5; noes, 0. 30. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to 31. withhold further payment from the architect until he had appeared 32. before the Board and reviewed the project with them. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 34- 2. WILD ANIMALS 35. Board members and the Attorney suggested various deletions, 36, additions, amendments to the proposed ordinance. 37- Commissioner Willhoit moved to adopt in principle the ordinance 38- to regulate wild animals utilizing option 3A. He withdrew his motion. 39. 40- S 1. 21 k 3• 4• The Board discussed the possible passage of HB 364,. regulating 5* certain wild animals. Consensus was that this bill did not address 6• Orange County's problem. 79 Commissioner Lloyd felt that owners should be permitted to 8• replace animals.- He also was in favor of an .interim ordinance 9• regulating animals until the State acts. 10. Commissioner Marshall , who favors a ban, disagreed, saying 119 no interim ordinance which would 'require expense on the part of 12• the owners should be adopted. 'That an ordinance, if adopted , to 13• regulate should be on a permanent basis. She added that if the 14• State ordinance is more stringent then we could conform to it. 15• Ms. Lorie Stephenson, said she was angry; she learned that 16. Mr. Greene had registered twenty-four animals in the compound i7• one quarter mile from her home. She said Mr. Greene doesn 't live 18* there but that she does; she has-.no money and can 't move. 3.9• Mr. Greene said the animals were not all there; that he has 20e an associate on the road with a circus .with two Bengal Tiers and 21• six leopards. He said the area where the animals are located 229 belongs to his father and he doesn 't plan:: to build it up. He �3• added that he doesn 't want to be told he can't own the animals. 24• He feels that regulation is the way to go. 25• Mr. Mahler, attorney for Lynn Moredock, said of the thirty- 26* six animals in the County, twenty-four were in one compound. He 27* suggested that the Board make it prohibitively expensive to own 28• a number of animals. He said that the State would enforce its 29• ordinance and that removed the burden from the County. He said 30• the possibility of a civil suit for damages should an animals escape 31• and injure someone is sufficient deterrent. He asked that .-the 32• Board delay resolution of this matter until the State acts. 33. Commissioner- W-i l l hoi t- moved a-do-pt-i-on -af the ordinance to regulate 34• utilizing option 3 A. Motion died. for lack of a second. 35. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to 36• delay adoption of any animal ordinance pending State passage of an 379 ordinance and to put such an ordinance into perspective,. further to 36. 39. 40. 69 2, 3• 4• work with the Legislature to preserve and protect all the people 5• of the County and State. Vote: Ayes, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd and 6, Walker) ; noes, 3 (Commissioners Marshall , Whitted and Willhoit) . 7. Motion failed. 8. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to 9, adopt an .drdioance regulating wild animals, utilizing option 3 C. 10. and to have it prevail until the State enacts its own regulatory 3.1, ordinance and that if 'the State's Ordinance is effective and accept- 3.2. able to the Board of Commissioners that this body will consider 13, deleting its own ordinance from the statutes; . 3.4. Commissioner •Lloyd withdrew the second clause of his motion 15, leaving it to read, to adopt an ordinance regulating wild animals , 16, and utilizing option 3 C. Commissioner Walker's second stood. 17. Vote: Ayes, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd and Walker) ; noes, 3 18. (Commissioners Marshall , Whitted and Willhoit) . Motion failed. 19. There was a consensus among the Board members that "backyard 20, breeding" operations were unsupportable.and that such operations 21, should fall under the jurisdiction of the Zoning Ordinance. 22. Commissi-oner Whitted moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 23, to adopt an Ordinance to ban such animals in Orange County, effective 24. October 1, 1983. Vote: Ayes, 2 (Commissioners Marshall and Whitted) ; 25, noes, 3. (Commissioners Lloyd, Walker and Willhoit) . - Motion failed. 26. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to 2 7. (as subsequently amended and accepted) ban any importation of 28. additional defined animals (those not registered by 5:00 P.M. on 29. March 28, 1983) into Orange County for a period of thirty days 30. following General Assembly action on HB 364 or its adjournment 31. without acting on this Bill and to require the permit application - 32. as defined and subsequently amended on pages 63-64 of the agenda. .33. Discussion and clar. i_fication of the motion continued. 34. Commissioner Marshall moved a substitute motion to adopt an 35. Ordinance to regulate defined animals with option 3 A; Commissioner 36, Whitted seconded the motion. 37. Commissioner Willhoit amended the motion, accepted by Commissioner 38, Marshall , to delete # 13 on page 64 and to substitute wording that 39. 40. 1. 10 2+ u 3• 4+ any incidents regarding escape or injury by the animal to any 5+ person, including keeper, and property be listed and to delete 6+ Section IV, and replace with wording to exempt the University of 7. North Carolina at Chapel Hill . 8+ Commissioner Lloyd moved to amend Commissioner Marshall 's 9+ motion that the Ordinance would be in effect only until the State 10. acts on HB 364. Motion died for lack of a second. 11. Vote:on Commissioner Marshall 's substitute motion: 12. Ayes, 3 (Commissioners Marshall=; Willhoit and Whitted) ; noes, 2 13• (Commissioners Walker and Lloyd) . 14+ Caging standards and inspection fees are to be brought: _ to 15+ the Board as early as possible. 16. This Ordinance will return -for a second reading on April 5, �7• 1983. 18, 3. OLD COURTHOUSE--ARCHITECTS 19. Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 20. to approve the Manager's recommendation- of the James Webb & Assoc- 21• iates Firm ds the architects for the renovation/restoration of the 22+ Old Courthouse with the specific contract to be negotiated at -.a 23* later time. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 24+ 4. SECTION 8 MODERATE REHABILITATION PROGRAM 25+ Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 26+ to adopt the resolution authorizing the execution of an Annual 27+ Contributions Contract for the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation 28. Program. (See page of this book for that resolution. ) Vote: 29. Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 30• 5. SECTION 8 HOUSING PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN 31+ Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 32. to approve the revisions to the Section 8 Housing Program Administra- 339 tive Plan. -(see pages-. of this book for those revisions) . Vote: 34+ Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 35• The Board did not appoint a representative on the Multi-Juris- 36. dictional Board at this time. 37. E. MINUTES 38. Approval of the Minutes was delayed until the next regular meeting. 39. 40. 34 2,, 3• 4* With no further business to come before the Board, Commissioner 5• Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to adjourn. 6. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 7. 8. 9. 10. Richard E. Whitted, Chair 11. ' 12. Paulette Pridgen, Clerk 13. 14. 15• 16. 17, 18. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. 24. 25. - 26. 27, 28. 29. 30. 31. 32• 34- 35. 36, 37. 38. 39. 40.