Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19900402 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 2,. 1990 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on April 2, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., Vice-Chair Stephen Halkiotis, Commissioners John Hartwell, Shirley Marshall and Don Willhoit. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Manager Ellen Liston, Senior Citizen Coordinator Myra Austin, Deputy Clerk to the Board Kathy Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly Blythe, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Personnel Analyst I Eleanor C. Green, Purchasing and Central Services Director Pam Jones, and Planning Technician Beth McIver. I. BOARD COMMENTS Commissioner Marshall announced that Governor Martin has.proclaimed this week as Public Health Week. The County is celebrating this in various ways. The public is invited to a reception this Friday from 4--6 at the Health Building. Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to a resolution approved by the Board on Carden's Mobile Home Park. Mr. Stevenson is extremely thankful for the support shown by the County to resolve this longterm problem. Commissioner Hartwell expressed a concern about a report in the Chapel Hill :'Newspaper on a meeting held between the Chamber of Commerce and EDC. County Manager John Link reported that specific ideas were expressed on how the Chamber might be more involved in economic development activity. Those kinds of activities included greater involvement in supporting tourism, and greater support in certain elements of small business development. His impression was that the Chambers were going to be prepared to speak specifically to what they would want to be doing and the amount of funding they might want to carry out those functions. He encouraged the EDC to be receptive to the proposals from the two chambers as it relates to tourism, helping with small business development and helping with recruitment by hosting the contacts as they come into the County and being responsive to present businessmen or potential candidates coming in. IY. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT NONE III. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Add to the agenda a resolution for Earth Day 1990 IV. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chairman Carey announced that those who have indicated a desire to speak to an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. #O?6A B. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Mr. Wayne P. Hoffman, owner of Elite Auto Body Shop, stated he would li'`' to build an addition to his shop. The problem was created in 1981 when zoning was originally applied in Bingham Township. His shop was not put where it is actually located. The lot was drawn incorrectly on the Zoning Atlas. He illustrated this with plats of the area. . Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell seconded by Commissioner Marshall to schedule a special public hearing for May 1, 1990 to consider a zoning atlas amendment to correct the zoning atlas and the problem as identified by Mr. Hoffman. VOTE: UNANIMOUS PUBLIC CHARGE Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. read the public charge. V. ITEMS FOR DECISION--CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as listed below: A. RENCHER STREET CDBG MATCHING FUNDS To adopt the-grant project ordinance amendment and the budget ordinance amendment as stated below: GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT - 1988 Be it ordained by the Board of commissioners that pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina the ordinance adopting the "Community Development Block Grant - 1988" is hereby amended as follows: Section 1. Section 3 of the above mentioned ordinance is amended to read as follows: Community Development Grant $ 600,000 Program Income 300 Transfer from General Fund 85,000 $ 685,300 Section 2. Section 4 of the above mentioned ordinance is amended to read as follows: b Acquisition $ 3,000 Street Improvements 99,925 Sewer Improvements 182,688 Water Improvements 64,718 Clearance Activities 1,700 Rehabilitation of Privately Owned Dwellings 185,128 Administration 81,388. Sewer Improvements-Local option 66.753 $ 685,300 Section 3. Section 8 of the above mentioned ordinance is added to read as follows: #017 This ordinance shall be in effect from date of adoption until June 30, 1991. 'Adopted this 2nd day of April, 1990. ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1989-90 BUDGET AMENDMENTS The 1989--90 Orange County Budget Ordinance, as amended, is hereby amended as follows: BEFORE AFTER AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMENDMENT GENERAL FUND (1) Source: Approp Fund Balance $ 739,722 $ 85,000 $ 824,722 Appropriation: Transfer to other Funds $1,492,210 $ 85,000 $1,577,210 To budget for required County matching funds for the Rencher Street CDBG Project. BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER: 12 B. ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRACT/SECTION 8 CERTIFICATE PROGRAM To adopt a resolution as stated below authorizing the Chair to sign the Annual Contributions Contract for the Section 8 Existing Certificate Program on behalf of ',the County. RESOLUTION AU'T'HORIZING EXECUTION OF AN ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRACT Whereas, the Orange County Housing Authority (herein called the "PHA") proposes to enter into an Annual Contributions Contract (herein called the "Contract") with the United States of America, Department of Housing and Urban Development (herein called the "Government"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the PHA as follows: Section 1. The Contract, numbered Contract No. A-2903, is hereby approved and accepted both as to form and substance and the Chair of Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Contract in triplicate on behalf of the PHA, and the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to impress and attest the official seal of the PHA on each such counterpart and to forward said executed counterparts to the Government together with such other documents evidencing the approval and authorizing the execution thereof as may be required by the Government. Section 2. The County Manager is hereby authorized to file with the Government from time to time, as monies are required, requisitions together with the necessary supporting document, for payment under the Contract. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. C. EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT APPLICATION To authorize submission of an Emergency Shelter Grant Application for additional funds to assist families and individuals who are homeless primarily due to their economic circumstances and to authorize the Chair to sign this application. # 0 J q D. HEALTH DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE FOR COMMUNITY SCREENING SERVICES ' To approve the fees as stated below to be charged to companies and organizations requesting health department community screening services through the heal` promotion and adult health programs. Proposed Fee Schedule for Community Screenings The Orange County Health Department provides health promotion consultation and screening services to Orange County businesses, churches and other groups. The following fee schedule has been developed by (1) surveying other counties who offer similar services to their community businesses and organizations, and (2) by assessing the cost of supplies for the service. Health Risk Appraisal ...............................................................$10.00 Includes computer printout and interpretation. cholesterol (Reflotron) ............................................................. $ 5.00 This fee has already been approved. Blood Pressure ......................................................................$1.00 This fee has already been approved. Hematocrit ..........................................................................$ 3.00 This fee has already been approved. Guaiac (occult blood in stools) ..................................................... $ 4.00 This includes 3 packet kit and follow-up if abnormal. Blood Glucose .......................................................................$ 3.06.: This includes interpretation and educational material. Immunizations: Adult Tetanus/Diphtheria ............................................ $ 1.00 Available to 10 or more in a group. per person Health Promotion Education - Classes .............................................$30.00/hr. This includes lectures, clinic, workshops in the following areas: Smoking Cessation Stress Management Nutrition Information Weight Management Fitness Etc. Cooking classes would require an additional cost for ingredients. Consultant Services ................................................:.........1st hour free; thereafter, $10.00/hr.. E. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ADMINISTRATION To approve the amendment as stated below to the Zoning ordinance to reference that the Board of Adjustment meeting is subject to the Open Meetings Law. All meetings of the Board shall be conducted in compliance with the North Carolina Open Meetings Law, North Carolina General Statutes G.S. 143.318.9 et seq. The Board shall give public notice of its meetings also as provided in the Open Meetings Law. Notice shall be given to Board of Adjustment members as provided in the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Board. F. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL AIRPORT REPORT = CLOSEOUT OF PROJECT To accept the final report regarding the airport proposed in orange County and to authorize the Purchasing and Central Services Director to file the necessary paperwork to close out the project. A copy of this report is in the Commissioners' Library. VOTE: UNANIMOUS VI. RESOLUTIONS/PROCLAMATIONS A. PROCLAMATION OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT WEEK Motion was made by Chairman Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to proclaim April 23-27, 1990 as orange County Government Week and endorse the planned activities as outlined in the agenda abstract. The proclamation is stated below: PROC,I.AMATION WHEREAS, The North Carolina Association of County Commissioners and the National Association of County Commissioners have urged citizens across the state to learn more about the county government's role in lives and. to be more involved as county citizens' and WHEREAS, Orange County government has served the citizens of the county since 1752 and we are responsible for a growing number of services which"have direct impact of local citizens; and WHEREAS, the elected and appointed officials in county government take great pride in serving the citizens of the County and in being directly involved in shaping the future; and WHEREAS, in Orange County the volunteer spirit is still alive and well and the volunteers serve as our partners in progress; and WHEREAS, through their volunteer involvement, citizens learn more about community needs and resources and serve as communications links to the entire community. NOW, THEREFORE, we the Board of Commissioners do hereby proclaim the week of April 23 through April 27, 1990, as Orange county Government Week, and reaffirm our support and appreciation of the valuable contributions of Volunteers in the County. And, further urge all citizens to become more familiar with county government. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. PROCLAMATION FOR SENIOR GAMES Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to proclaim the week of April 23, 1990 as Orange County Senior Games Events Days. The proclamation is stated below: PROCLAMATION Whereas, According to recent population figures, there are almost 14,000 persons over 55 years of age in orange County; and, X20 Whereas, Orange County is concerned about the health, fitness, and social well-being of its older population; and, Whereas, Orange County Senior Games provides a special opportunity for older adults to grow positively in the areas of health, fitness, and social well-being; and, Whereas, Orange County would like to encourage local business and resident support and participation from county residents age 55 and older; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners declares April 23-28, 1990, as Orange County Senior Games Events Days and encourages citizens age 55 and over to participate. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. RESOLUTION FOR EARTH DAY 1990 ?. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by commissioner Marshall to adopt the resolution endorsing April 22 as Earth Day 1990 and designating April 15-22, 1990 as Earth Week. The Resolution is stated below: ORANGE COUNTY EARTH DAY 1990 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Human activities are seriously compromising the earth's ability to sustain life as a result of environmental threats, such as global warming, ozone depletion, acid rain, increasing human and pet populations, declining soil fertility, extinction of species, air pollution, water pollution, and earth pollution; and WHEREAS, Citizens and community leaders are now recognizing environmental protection and resource conservation to be essential prerequisites to sustained prosperity and environmental well-being for all living things; and WHEREAS, Cities and counties have many critical environmental responsibilities, including land-use management, management of transportation systems, solid and liquid waste management, protection of water resources, and much more; and WHEREAS, Almost twenty years ago, millions of Americans joined together on Earth Day to express an unprecedented concern for the environment, and their collective action resulted in the passage of the first significant legislation to protect our air, our water, and the lands around us; and WHEREAS, Citizens and their governments must strongly commit themselves to act to meet the global environmental challenges without delay, and stand together in cities, counties, towns and villages around the world for a week of collective action to declare our shared resolve for the future; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Endorses April 22 as Earth Day 1990, and declares that April 15-22, 1990 shall be set aside for public activities promoting preservation of the global environment. VOTE: UNANIMOUS S. ITEMS FOR DECISION--REGULAR AGENDA Chairman Carey stated that any new information brought forth at this meeting will #021 be referred to the appropriate group for a recommendation that will be considered by the Board of Commissioners at a later time. A. PUBLIC HEARING DATE - TRANSPORTATION THOROUGHFARE PLANS Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Chairman Carey to approve holding a public hearing on May 16, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. in superior Courtroom on' Phase I components of the Transportation Plan. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS - JOINT PLANNING AREA LAND USE PLAN AND JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT Planning Director Marvin Collins stated that this item relates to the University Lake Watershed protection measures and involves proposed amendments to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan and the Joint Planning Agreement. These proposals were presented to public hearing on February 28, 1990. The recommended amendments include incorporating into the Joint Planning Land Use Plan descriptions of the basic strategies for protecting the University Lake Watershed as recommended by Camp Dresser and McKee in their study. Two options are identified. The recommended strategy is one of five-acre minimum lot size zoning. The other amendment includes a Land Use Plan overlay category entitled the University Lake Watershed Area and sets forth development patterns and standards based on the recommended options. The third amendment involves the County's water and sewer extension policy and includes refinements contemplated by the Joint Planning Area jurisdictions. The final amendment involves the agreement itself and deletes the reference to an overlay district entitled "Water Quality Critical Area" and substitutes in its place the new designation "University Lake Watershed Area." Collins reviewed the l...,,comments on the proposed amendments from the Chapel Hill Town Council and the Carrboro ,,:Board of Aldermen. The revisions and additions are listed in the agenda abstract. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Bill Burch presented for the Board's consideration a recommendation for permanent protection of University Lake Watershed and wildlife. The main emphasis was the purchase of open land in the watershed area with a surcharge from OWASA customers. The entire presentation is in the permanent agenda file. Mr. Duncan spoke against the proposed restrictions which do not allow sewer lines or water extensions in the University Lake Watershed for existing lots. He stated that the federal grant for septic lines is unrestricted and that previous agreements to allow sewer connections are not being honored. He asked that the proposal be amended to allow sewer and water connections and to honor previous commitments. Marvin Poythress spoke about the five United Churches of Christ. They are attempting to build low cost housing. There are seventy acres in Chestnut Oaks that have already been surveyed for the Habitat for Humanity. He requested that the County give them a variance or exception to allow a one-acre minimum lot size for affordable housing. Chairman Carey stated that the County is aware of this situation and will work to resolve it. Commissioner Halkiotis suggested forming a citizens group to study the possible sources of funding to buy and protect the land that is in the development area of the University lake Watershed. He suggested that those who live and own land in the University Lake Watershed and those who pay for OWASA water form a group and meet to discuss the situation. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell .to approve the Administration's recommendation as stated below and authorize the Chair to sign a Joint Planning Agreement which contains these amendments and to refer the proposals made by Commissioner Willhoit to the Intergovernmental Work Group for further discussion. The Thirteen Point Agreement will be referred to as the Thirteen Point Recommendation from hence forward. The text of the amendments is listed below: A. Amend Section II Natural Environment by rewriting the subsection entitled "B Water Resources" to read as follows: Residents of southeast Orange County obtain water from two sources: groundwater (wells) or reservoirs. However, the most reliable source of water for urban use is a reservoir. Until recently, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the surrounding areas relied exclusively on University Lake. That source was recognized as inadequate as a long-term water source, and Cane Creek reservoir west of the Joint Planning Areas has been constructed and is now operational. The two reservoirs should provide a raw water supply adequate for the next 20 years. In addition, the Land Use Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan has identified possible future reservoir sites to the north of Chapel Hill. The link between land use planning and water resources in the Joint Planning Area lies in protecting water quality by limiting development in University Lake watershed. In 1988, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority commissioned a study to develop a range of options for protecting the University Lake watershed. The consulting firm of Camp, Dresser and Mckee (CDM), nationally recognized experts in watershed evaluation, completed the study in March, 1989. Because the consultants did not find improving water quality to be a practical objective, they recommend preventing significant future water quality deterioration in University Lake as a primary goal. The CDM report presented two fundamental ways of meeting the University Lake water quality goal. Nonstructural management practices, such as controlling land use through local zoning and subdivision regulations, could reduce the pollution generated from future development by controlling the amount and location of impervious surfaces and other pollution-causing activities. Structural practices, such as stormwater detention ponds, would not reduce the amount of pollution generated but prevent substantial portions of it from reaching University Lake by trapping pollutants near their point of origin. The report recommended nonstructural methods as the preferred approach to watershed protection. Basic elements of the proposed nonstructural plan included large lot (five- acre) residential zoning, limits on impervious surfaces, and the preservation of stream buffers along streams. The advantages of the nonstructural approach included the lower amount of pollution generated and its reduced risk of entering the lake, the elimination of construction and maintenance costs for stormwater devices, and the ability to provide wastewater disposal through individual septic systems rather than risky community wastewater systems. The CDM report did'find that the water quality goal could be achieved through adopted land use plans and regulations (two-acre zoning) and the construction of a significant number of stormwater detention ponds. While the approach would provide for continued growth in the watershed, the high public and private costs associated with a system of 72_ larger regional detention ponds or an indeterminate number of smaller individual-development-detention ponds and intensive on-going maintenance requirements were noted as disadvantages. In addition, there would be no way to convert back to a nonstructural control strategy if a structural program resulted in unsatisfactory watershed protection. B. Amend Section V Joint. Planning Operating Principles by deleting the following wording from the subsection entitled "Initial List of Principles - University Lake Watershed": C. Amend Section V Joint Planning Operating Principles by deleting the table which #02 r: identifies the Joint Planning Area Land use Plan Categories and substituting the following: JOINT PLANNING AREA LAND USE PLAN CATEGORIES Major Land Use Plan class Subclass Cateaorv Resource Protection Public-Private Open Space Suburban Residential Transition Urban Residential TRANSITION Transition I Office-Institutional Transition II Future UNC Development Retail Trade Light Industrial Disposal Use University Lake Watershed Resource Protection RURAL Public-Private Open Space Rural Buffer Agricultural CONSERVATION Rural Residential Retail Trade Extractive Use (The proposed amendment deletes a category entitled "Water Quality Critical Area" and substitutes "University Lake Watershed Area" in its place.) D. Amend Section V Joint Planning Operating Principles by rewriting the last sentence of the subsection "Rural Buffer and Conservation" to read as follows: The Rural Buffer consists of the following Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan categories: Rural Residential; Agricultural; Public-Private Open Space; Resource Conservation; Extractive Use; and the overlay category designated University Lake Watershed Area. In addition, the subsection "Water Quality Critical Area" is deleted and, in its place, the following new subsection is substituted: UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED AREA The University Lake Watershed Area includes all lands which drain into the University lake reservoir. Based on a preferred watershed protection strategy of land use controls as recommended by Camp; Dresser and McKee in the University Lake Watershed Study, only low- density residential uses are permitted. A minimum lot size of five (5) acres and a maximum density of one (1)-unit per five (5) acres is required for any development. Cluster subdivisions with lot sizes of not less than one (1) acre. are also allowed as well as the creation of a limited number (5) of two-acre lots. E. Amend Section VI Future Land Use - Joint Planning Area by rewriting the first paragraph of the subsection "The Rural Buffer Area" to read as follows: Seven categories of Rural Buffer land use have been depicted on the Land use Plan. These categories include Resource Protection Areas, Public-Private Open Space Areas, Agricultural Areas, Rural Residential Areas, Retail Trade Areas, Extractive Uses, and the overlay category designated University Lake Watershed Area. In addition, the subsection "Water Quality Critical Area" is deleted and, in its place, following new subsection is substituted: UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED AREA The University Lake Watershed Area includes all lands which drain into the University Lake reservoir. Based on a preferred watershed protection strategy of land use controls as recommended by Camp, Dresser and McKee in the University Lake Watershed Study, only low- density residential uses are permitted. A minimum lot size of five (5) acres and a maximum density of one (1) unit per five (5) acres is required for any development. Cluster subdivisions with lot sizes of not less than one (1) acre are also allowed as well as the creation of a limited number (5) of two-acre lots. A final change to Section VI innvolved the subsection "Rural Residential" and redrafting the third papagraph to read as follows: To the west of Carrboro, Rural Residential development is also expected in University Lake watershed. However, only low-density residential uses are anticipated. For this reason, residential development will continue to rely on wells and septic tanks for water supply and sewage disposal. F. Amend Section VII Overview of Implementation Strategies by rewriting the last paragraph of the subsection "Sewer and Water Extension Policy" to read as follows: The Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) is the provider of water and sewer in the Joint Planning Area. OWASA policy is to extend water and sewer in accordance with the adopted policies of the applicable local governments. Current Orange County policy is to":" approve water and sewer extensions generally only to recognized Transition Areas, and, outside of Transition Areas, to approve extensions of water or sewer systems only to provide service to an essential public service, such as a school, or to remedy a public health emergency, such as a failing septic tank or failing package treatment plant. Refinements to this policy have.been recommended as part of Joint Planning Area implementation strategies. Under consideration currently is a temporary prohibition on public water extensions in University Lake watershed until a study can be undertaken of the advisability of extending such service. Furthermore, either an out-right prohibition or a temporary prohibition on public sewer extensions appears likely, excepting.sewer service extensions to remedy a public health emergency. If a temporary prohibition is adopted, the provision of sewer service in the watershed would be reconsidered following a study regarding the advisability of such extensions. The amendment to the Joint Planning Agreement is as follows: 1. Amend the definition of "Rural Buffer" in Section 1.2 Definitions by deleting the reference to the "overlay district designated Water Quality Critical Area" and substituting "overlay district designated University Lake Watershed Area". The Administration further recommends that the Board of Commissioners authorize the chair to sign a Joint Planning Agreement containing the amendments referenced above. The revised Agreement will then be forwarded to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro for consideration. A final recommendation is that the following proposals of Commissioner Willhoit and the Planning Board be pursued through the Intergovernmental Watershed Work 0. 2 5 Group: ' 1. Committing to the public acquisition of land and/or the purchase of development rights to reduce future pollutant loading potential; 2. Providing tax incentives for "environmental easements" patterned after agricultural use-value assessments; 3. Determining the location of the majority of two-acre and smaller lots and the-use of structural BMP's in sub-basins serving existing small lot subdivisions; i.e., East Prices Creek (Heritage Hills) and West Prices Creek (Chatham County); and 4. Proceeding with the review and implementation'of the 13--point recommendation. .As part of 14 above, consideration should also be given to lot size averaging alternatives and impervious surface ratio modifications. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to request OWASA to include funds in their 1990-91 and subsequent budgets for acquisition of land. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to request OWASA to include in their 1990-91 budget funds for an engineering study for watershed protection measures for Cane Creek Reservoir. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. PROPOSED AMENDMENT _ ORANGE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by chairman Carey to approve the proposed amendment per the Planning Board recommendation. A copy of this amendment may be found in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. A substitute motion to add the University Lake Watershed as an Orange County Land Use Plan category with a one sentence definition to say "Land that drains into the University Lake Reservoir" was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Marshall. VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION: UNANIMOUS. A substitute motion to table the Land Use Plan Category Description for Water Quality Critical area was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Chairman Carey. VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION: UNANIMOUS. VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION: UNANIMOUS D. 2-1-90 UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED lULW) DISTRICT Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chairman Carey to approve the rezoning.of approximately 15,385 acres from the current classification of Protected Watershed II and Water Quality Critical Area to a new zoning district classification, the University Lake Watershed District. VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS - ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE Marvin Collins explained that the proposed amendments would implement the strategies for watershed protection identified in the final Report - University Lake Watershed Study dated March, 1989, and the basic strategies identified in the proposed 13- point agreement prepared by the Joint Watershed Work Group and dated October, 1989. Two #0Z6 options were presented at public hearing. Option ,fl,.which is the recommended option is based on the land use control strategy recommended by CDM, the consultants who prepared University Lake Watershed Study, and the Joint Watershed Work Group. The most basic provisions of this option include a minimum lot size requirement of five (5) acres and a maximum density of one (1) unit per five (5) acres for any development. Cluster subdivisions with lot sizes of not less than one (1) acre are also allowed as well as the creation of a limited number (5) of two-acre lots. As an alternative to the latter provision, the number of new two-acre lots which can be created may be limited to two (2) in order to maintain higher water quality levels. Development standards for impervious surface coverage; stream buffers; placement of streets, driveways, and buildings; and water supply/sewage disposal facilities are also proposed. The CDM study recommends a four percent (4%) impervious surface limitation for five-acre lots, while the proposed 13-Point Agreement of the Watershed Work Group included a four percent (4%) limit for five acre lots, six percent (6%) for two to five-acre lotsk and twelve percent (12%) for lots smaller than two acres. In addition to the Work Group proposal, a more workable six percent (6%) ratio has been proposed by the orange County Planning Department for five acre lots. To account for lots larger than five acres, existing lots of less than five acres, and the limited number of two-acre lots which may be created, a sliding scale of impervious surface ratios is proposed, ranging from four percent (4%) for six-acre lots to fifteen percent (15%) for half-acre lots. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chairman Carey to approve the staff's recommendation. Commissioner Hartwell offered an amendment to the motion to table action on the amendments as presented to Article 4.2.27 and Article 4.2.28, seconded by Chairman Carey. VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT: UNANIMOUS. Commissioner Hartwell offered to amend section 6.25.5.4 by deleting "or closer than twenty (20) feet to the nearest edge of". This amendment failed for lack of a second. VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION: UNANIMOUS. THE AMENDMENTS APPROVED BY THIS MOTION ARE LISTED BELOW C. Amend Article 4.2..30 Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) District by renumbering the Article to 4.2.31. (This amendment provides space for a new Article 4.2.30 establishing the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District.) D. Amend Article .4 by adding a new Article 4.2.30 University Lake Watershed (ULW) District to read as follows: a. Intent The purpose of the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District is to prevent significant future water quality deterioration in University Lake, a reservoir supplying drinking water to the people of southeastern Orange County. Based on a study entitled Final Report University Lake Watershed Study and dated March, 1989, the lake already exhibits some water quality deterioration. Unless additional protective actions are taken, University Lake is vulnerable to additional pollution from eutrophication (nutrient enrichment), toxicants, and sedimentation. PAGE Z.6A The intent of the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District is to apply a set of regulations involving land use management practices which protect the watershed'by reducing the pollution generated by future development. Since a major source-of toxicants and nutrients are impervious surfaces such as roads, roof tops, and driveways, land use management practices involving minimum lot size and imperious surface restrictions control the amount and location of such surfaces. b. Application Criteria The University Lake Watershed (ULW) district is established as a district which overlays other zoning districts established in this ordinance. The new use of any land or any new structure within the ULW district shall comply with those regulations applicable to the underlying zoning districts as well as the requirements of the ULW district. Where the regulations of the ULW district differ from those of the underlying districts or from other development standards contained in this ordinance, the more restrictive shall apply. 1. This district will be applied to all land located within the University Lake Watershed as designated in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. E. Amend Article 6.15.2 Interim Development Standards Approve d by rewriting subsection a to read as follows: a. University Lake Watershed 1. Area Affected - these standards shall apply to the University Lake Watershed. 2. Nature and Duration of Standards = The following interim development standards shall apply a) Community alternative treatment and disposal systems as well as public water and sewer service will not be permitted in the University Lake watershed except to--address a public health.emergency.as-determined by- the Orange County Health Department. '_. -. - -. b) By April 30;'1991, studies will be conducted to determine the advisability of making public water and sewer services available within the watershed. In addition, a pilot program for monitoring .and.- inspecting alternative treatment and disposal- systems-as_operated by the Orange County Health Department will be evaluated -to determine the advisability of permitting such systems in the watershed. e C) Following receipt and review of the above mentioned studies, a decision will be made regarding the use of alternative treatment and disposal systems and the advisability of public water and sewer services in the watershed. H. Amend Article 6.25 Extra Re uirements for the Major Transportation Corridor MTC District by renumbering the Article to 6.26 G. Amend Article 6 by adding a new Article 6.25 Development Standards for the University ,ake Watershed ULW District to read as follows: PAGE" a 6.25 Development Standards for the Universi.tX Lake Watershed ULW District Within the University Lake'Watershed (ULW) District, significant water quality deterioration may be prevented by land use controls which reduce the pollution from future development. For this reason, the new use of any land or any new structure within the ULW district shall comply with the following development standards: 6.25.1 inimum Lot Size Regulated The minimum required lot size for any use in the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District shall be five (5) acres except as may be permitted in Article 6.25.2 or Article 6.25.3. In addition, no residential development shall exceed a density of one (1) dwelling unit per five (5) acres except as may be permitted in Article 6.25.2. 6.25.2 Existing Lots of Record a. Existing lots of record as of October 2, 1989 can be subdivided to create up to five (5) lots of not less than two (2) acres in size; provided, however, the remaining land shall be developed with a minimum lot size of at least five (5) acres for each lot and at a density not to exceed one (1) dwelling unit per five (5) acres of land area. b. Existing lots of record as of October 1, 1989 that are less than five (5) acres in size and which cannot be further subdivided can be developed by the owner at the current lot size. 6.25.3 Cluster Alternative Cluster developments are permitted, provided the minimum lot size for each lot in the development is not less than one (1) acre, and the overall density of the development, including the land area saved by lot size reductions, does not exceed one (1) dwelling-unit per five (5) acres. All land area saved by lot size reductions shall be-reserved as permanent open space. If cluster open space'is'not dedicated for public -use;'it -shall be subject to approved arrangements sufficient to assure its maintenance and preservation. Such arrangements may include, but not be..limited to, the conveyance of the open space to a local or regional land conservancy or a homeowners association, provided the-subdivider shall record a declaration of covenants and restrictions which prohibits further 'subdivision of the open space as well-as its use for development purposes.' - - If needed to control pollution loadings resulting from the runoff from impervious surfaces in a cluster development, on-site wet detention basins or ponds may be required. Where required, the design of such facilities shall be based on the criteria set forth in the Final Report _ Universi Lake Water Study dated March, 1989. Provision shall also be made for the public inspection and maintenance of such :Facilities. 6.25.4 Impervious Surface Regulated An impervious surface is a surface composed of any material which impedes or PAGE-2.,c. prevents the natural, infiltration of water into the soil. Impervious surfaces shall include both paved and unpaved surfaces, including, but not limited to, streets and parking areas, driveways, sidewalks structures which cover the land, patios, and In order to promote the infiltration of stormwater runoff into the soil and to minimize direct and immediate runoff into streams and University Lake reservoir, impervious surface ratios shall be required as provided in the fable of Impervious Surface Ratios for University Lake Watershed - Section 6.25.4 Impervious surface calculations for an individual lot shall be cumulative, including the original construction and any subsequent additions thereto. The calculation of impervious surface coverage for an individual lot shall also include one-half of the street surface on which the lot fronts or abuts; provided, however, the impervious surface calculation will not include the surface of any street existing on April 2, 1990 unless the street is upgraded to a greater width. In such cases, only the additional width shall be included in calculating the impervious surface coverage. It is the intent of this section that the impervious surface limitations specified herein shall apply to the entire tract to be developed. Therefore, if-the subdivision involves the creation of any street or other impervious surface outside the boundaries of the lots so created, then the total impervious surface allocation may be determined as follows: a. The total area of permissible impervious surface for the entire subdivision shall be calculated, applying the percentage limitations set forth in Table 6.25.4. b. From the total area calculated pursuant to a. above, there shall be subtracted the impervious surface area within streets and other areas outside of the individual lot boundaries. c. Following the calculation. set forth-in-Lb:--above, the-remaining - permissible impervious surface shall be allocated equally to each lot.by-.. the subdivider or as may be approved by the Zoning Officer. -The _ allocation shall be'indicated on a separate document recorded together with the final subdivision plat. For conventional subdivisions=to be developed_:in accordance with th e provisions of Article 6.25.1 and cluster subdivision to be d e eveloped in accordance with the provisions of Article 6.25.3 an' impervious surface limitation of four percent (4%) (or six percent (6%)) shall apply to the entire tract to be developed. For an existing lot of record to be developed in accordance with the provisions of Article 6.25.2b, the full range of impervious surface ratios specified in Table 6.25.4 is applicable. 6.25.5 Stream Buffers Re uired The effective use of buffer zones along streams can increase the overall factor of safety associated with a watershed protection plan. By preventing development from encroaching on steams, buffer zones can help minimize stream channel erosion downstream of development. If properly situated and PAGE-290 kept in undisturbed natural vegetation, buffer zones will receive sheetflow runoff; i.e., runoff which flows slowly in a spread out pattern rather than being concentrated in a swale, from adjoining development and achieve reductions in pollution discharges. Within the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District, an area of land or buffer zone along perennial and intermittent streams shall be required to. remain in its natural state, unless the area is subject to serious erosion, in which case an erosion resistant vegetative cover shall be established and maintained. Perennial streams are those streams shown in solid blue on the USGS quadrangle maps for Orange County. Intermittent streams are those streams shown by broken blue lines on the same maps. 6.25.5.1 Calculation of Buffer Zone Width Width; i.e., distance from the stream bank to the edge of the buffer, is a critical factor in determining the effectiveness of a buffer zone. An equally important determinant in pollutant removal in a buffer zone is travel time; i.e., the greater the time allowed for runoff to travel through a buffer, the greater the opportunities for pollutant removal through sedimentation, filtration, absorption, and seepage into the soil profile. Monitoring studies of highway runoff have shown that pollutant removal in grass swales is at a maximum after a 15-minute travel time. Based on this standard, Table 6.25.5 was derived to provide a sliding scale for buffer zone widths based on slope and vegetative cover. TABLE 6.25.5 REQUIRED BUFFER ZONE WIDTHS ALONG PERENNIAL AND INTERMITTENT STREAMS IN UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED SLOPE 2% TO 4.9% 5% TO 6.9% 7% TO 9.9% 10% TO 14.9% 15% OR GREATER e TYPE OF GROUNDCOVER GRASS ,(,FT) WOODS L 100 50 150 100 150 100 200 100 250 150 The required stream buffer zone shall start at the stream bank and be measured away from the stream for a distance depending upon the slope and the vegetative cover near the stream. The slope shall be calculated by measuring a distance of 250 feet from the stream bank, determining the rise in elevation in that distance, and dividing the rise in elevation by the distance of 250 feet. Based on the resulting slope calculation and the type of vegetative cover near the stream, the applicable buffer zone width may be determined from Table 6.25.5. Slope shall be determined from the USGS quadrangle maps for Orange County, by on-site measurements or by special survey by a registered engineer or surveyor. PAGE2 6 E The required stream buffer zone shall not be limited to one calculation but shall be based on calculations made'at points where topographical and ground cover conditions change based on an analysis of the site. In addition to the buffer zone resulting from the above calculations, a stream buffer shall include any portion of a floodplain as defined in the Orange County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, by special survey by a . registered engineer or surveyor or by alluvial soils as designated in the Orange County Soils Survey. 6.25.5.2 Buffer Zones Included As Part Of Minimum Lot Size Stream buffer zones can be used as part of the required lot area or lot size established as part of these development standards. 6.25.5.3 Existing Ve etation in Buffer Zones Existing forested areas and other vegetation in a healthy condition cannot be removed from or disturbed in a stream buffer zone. Diseased and/or dead vegetation may be removed and replaced with vegetation resulting a comparable stormwater runoff velocity and quantity. 6.25..5.4 Permitted Uses Within Buffer Zones Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Article, no impervious surface shall be located in or closed than twenty (20) feet to the nearest edge of a designated buffer zone, except that the Zoning Officer may authorize the crossing of a designated buffer zone and the presence of impervious surface therein by or for: a. A public or private street where the crossing is perpendicular to the stream and is justified in that:. 1. Without such a crossing, over fifty percent (50%) of the land area would be without access and therefore undevelopable; or 2. It allows a design that would clearly result in less damage to the watershed than would result if the property were developed without such a.crossing. b. Above ground and buried utility lines for the distribution of electricity, gas, telephone, and cable television service where: 1. It is practicably unavoidable if the subject property and adjoining property are to be served or potentially served by a public service, and an alternate design would result in greater damage to the watershed; and 2. The system, as a whole, emphasizes placement outside designated buffer zones; and 3. To the extent practical, the direction of the line crossing is perpendicular to the stream. PAGE Z 6 F 6.25.6 Placement of Streets, Driveways, and Buildings Streets, driveways, and buildings or other impervious structures shall be located, to the extent reasonably possible, so as to take full advantage of the absorption capacity of the soils on which they are to be situated and to avoid the following environmentally sensitive areas: a. Stream buffer zones as required by Article 6.25.5 above; b. Floodplains as defined in the Orange County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, by special survey by a registered engineer or surveyor or by alluvial soils as designated in the Orange County Soils Survey and which are not part of a required stream buffer zone; c. Wetland areas as defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; d. Land with slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%); and e. Natural areas as identified in the Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats of Orange County, N.C. To avoid the creation of lots that will be difficult to build upon in a manner that complies with the standards set forth in this Article, the preliminary plat for the subdivision of land shall show proposed building envelopes and approximate driveway locations for all lots within such subdivisions. Thereafter, no zoning compliance permit may be issued for the construction of buildings.or driveways outside the areas so designated on the preliminary plat unless the Zoning Officer makes a written finding that the proposed location complies with the provisions of this Article. 6.25.7 Water Supply/,Sewage Disposal Facilities Recuired Every principal use and every lot within a subdivision shall be served by a water supply and sewage disposal system that is adequate to accommodate the, needs of such use or subdivision lot and that complies with all applicable regulations of the Orange County Health Department. Notwithstanding the above provisions, water supply and sewage treatment systems shall be limited to individual wells and on-site septic systems or individual on-site alternative-disposal systems. The use of community alternative wastewater disposal - systems_and_public water and sewer-.service is restricted as specified in Article 6.15.2.a of this Ordinance. No new septic,tanks and their nitrification fields shall be located within a designated stream buffer zone or within one hundred (100) feet of a perennial or intermittent stream as shown on the USGS quadrangle maps for Orange County, whichever is the greater distance. F. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS :? ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to approve the staff's recommendation as stated below: a. Univ?er_ situ Lake Watershed PAGE2? G 1. Area Affected - These standards shall apply to the University Lake Watershed. 2. Nature and Duration of Standards - The following interim development standards shall apply: a) Community alternative treatment and disposal systems as well as public water and sewer service will not be permitted in the University Lake watershed except to address a public health emergency as determined by the Orange County Health Department. b) By April 30, 1991, studies will be conducted to determine the advisability of making public water and sewer services available within the watershed. In addition, a pilot program for monitoring and inspecting alternative treatment and disposal systems as operated by the Orange County Health Department will be evaluated to determine the advisability of permitting such systems in the watershed. c) Following receipt and review of the above mentioned studies, a decision will be made regarding the use of alternative treatment and disposal systems and the availability of public water and sewer services in the watershed. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY SUPERVISION REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED PROTECTION STRATEGIES Listed below are proposed amendments to'the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. If adopted, the amendments would supplement proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments to implement strategies for watershed protection-identified in the Final Report -University Lake _ Watershed Study dated March,-1989,-and--the basic strategies identified in the proposed 13- point agreement prepared by the Joint Watershed Work Group and dated October, 1989. For a--..- complete understanding. of the proposals, reference should also-be made to the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendments are being presented at a special-public hearing on February 28, 1990. The proposals involve amendments-to Orange County's Subdivision Regulations and require only the approval of'the Board of-Commissioners. Upon completion of the public hearing, and following receipt of the Planning Board's recommendation, the Board of Commissioners may adopt Option #1, Option #2 or some combination of the two. The specific wording proposed for various sections of the Subdivision Regulations is listed below. 1. Amend Section IV-B-10 Cluster Developments by adding a new subsection g) to Section IV-B-10-b to read as follows: g) Cluster developments in the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District shall comply with the development standards as set forth in Article 6.25 of the orange County Zoning Ordinance. PAGE Z 6 H 2. Amend Section IV-B-10 Cluster Develo ments by rewriting the introductory paragraph of Section IV-B-10-c to read as follows: For lots created as part of a cluster development, minimum lot area, lot width, and" setback requirements as specified in Article 4.1.2 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance may be reduced as set forth below. For lots created as part of a cluster development in the University Lake Watershed (ULW) District, the minimum lot size may', be reduced as specified in Article 6.25 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Amend Section V-C Preliminarry Plat by rewriting subsection V-C-6 as follows: V-C-6 Floodwav and Watershed Data The boundaries for both the floodway and floodway fringe areas shall be designated and labeled on the plat as required by the Orange County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. For subdivisions located within a water supply watershed of regional and/or local importance, the following information shall be designated and labeled on the plat: (a) Impervious surface data as required by Articles 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance; (b) Stream buffers as required by Section IV-B-9-b of this Ordinance or Articles 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance; and (c) Stormwater detention and/or retention sites and undisturbed areas for infiltration purposes as required by Section IV-B-9-c this Ordinance, the Orange County Sedimentation and Erosion Control Ordinance or Articles 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 4. Amend Section V-D Final Plat by rewriting subsection V-D-S-d as follows: V-D-5-d Floodwav and Watershed Data The boundaries for both the floodway and floodway fringe areas shall be designated and labeled on the plat as required by the Orange County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. For subdivisions located within a water supply watershed of regional and/or local importance, the following information shall be designated or referenced on the Final Plat: (a) .Impervious surface data as required by Article 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance shall be provided in a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The Deed Book and Page reference of the document shall be noted on the Final Plat. (b) Stream buffers as required by Section IV-B-9-b of this Ordinance or Articles 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance shall be noted on the Final Plat. Development restrictions within the PAGE Z 4 1 buffer shall be specified in a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The Deed Book and Page reference shall be noted on the Final Plat. (c) Stormwater detention and/or retention sites and undisturbed areas for infiltration purposes as required by Section IV-B-9-c of this Ordinance and/or Articles 6.23, 6.24, and/or 6.25 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance shall be labeled on the Final Plat. Any restrictions or requirements associated with the detention/retention sites shall be specified in a separate document to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The Deed Book and Page reference shall be noted on the Final Plat. G. SCRAP TIRE DISPOSAL FEE Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the resolution as stated below authorizing scrap tire disposal fee and authorizing the Chair to sign said resolution: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SCRAP TIRE DISPOSAL FEE A Resolution authorizing the Landfill Owners Group through the Chapel Hill Town Manager to assess a scrap tire disposal fee of $1 per tire that allows the Orange Regional Landfill to fully comply with the provisions of the North Carolina Scrap tire Disposal Act. WHEREAS, the County of orange supports the provisions of the North Carolina Scrap Tire Disposal Act; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Landfill Owners Group to collect and dispose of scrap tires in an environmentally sound fashion; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that the ,?indfill Owners Group through the Chapel Hill Town Manager is authorized to implement the '-,_.scrap tire disposal fee of $1 per tire and to begin collection of fees upon proper notice to the citizens of Orange County. XI. APPOINTMENTS - Tabled HUMAN SERVICES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - Forest E. Walton XII. MINUTES - None XIV. ADJOURNMENT With no further items for consideration, Chairman Carey.adjourned the meeting. The next'regular meeting will be held on April 17, 1990 at 7:30 in the courtroom of the old Post Office in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Moses Carey, Jr., Chair