HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-05-2011 - 9a. GRANGE COUNTY
BOARD 4F COMMISSIGNERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 5, 2011
Action Agenda
Item No. q ' C~
SUBJECT: Unified Development ordinance UDC -- Im lementation Brid a Re ort
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: ~YIN~ No
ATTACHMENT~S~: INFGRMATIGN CGNTACT:
Implementation Bridge Report
Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director,
245-2592
Tom Altieri, Planner III, 245-2579
Perdita Holtz, Planner III, 245-2578
Shannon Berry, Planner II, 245-2589
Michael D. Harvey, Planner 111, 245- 2597
PURPOSE: To receive a Unified Development Ordinance UDC} -Implementation Bridge
Report from Clarion Associates.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the Implementation Bridge Report is to document land use
ordinance issues and ideas collected during Phase I UDC public outreach and convey the
consultant's recommendations for subsequent phases of UDC amendments. The
recommendations are not binding but offer a third party perspective on various issues. The
consultant's recommendations were shaped based an experience gained through participation
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan preparation process and input received then and now through
UDC outreach and hearings from all parties public, staff, advisory boards, and elected board}.
Staff anticipates that once the UDC Phase I is adopted that a new scope and process for
Phase II will be developed by the County. The next phase can be informed by this report. The
BCCC has set previous priorities awaiting this UDC framework} that included Small Area Plan
implementation and economic development processes and uses.
The Consultant's report is provided as Attachment 1. The Board is scheduled to further
discuss this report and next steps at the April 12, 2011 regularwork session.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The BCCC allocated $32,600 in the 2009-2010 budget, Departmental
Contract Services Account, to complete the UDC and Implementation Bridge Report. The
costs of consulting services, as outlined in the executed contract, are not to exceed $30,000.
The additional $2,600 was budgeted for advertising, copying and printing expenses.
Additionally, planning staff time on the project has been significant.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board receive the Implementation
Bridge Report from Clarion Associates in preparation for further discussion at the April 12
BOCC work session.
~~~y~~ ' ~1s~g ~
I ~
d: z"r
v ~
Content
A. INTRgDUCT14N AND PURPOSE rrarrr^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,r,rrrrrrr~
What is an Implementation Bridge? rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr~
How Should This Document be Used? .rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr3
B. RELATIONSHIP T~ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .,.,,,,...,rr..r..r..r......r,rr........r.4
overarching Goals of the Comprehensive Plan ......................r...rr..r.r.............r.r.4
Specific Goals of the Comprehensive Plan rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr^rrr^^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr5
How the New UDQ Implements the Plan rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr^rrrrrr^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrarrrrrJ
C. IDEAS RAISED DURING THE UDC PROCESS............r...r.rrrrr...........rr.rrrr 10
Economic Development Ideas,..rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.....rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr lo
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Provisions.rrrr....rr,rrr.......r....•••..•.,rr...r........ 14
Incentives .rr.........• .............••.•••r•....rr••••rr•rr•rrrrrrrrrrr...•....•r..••••.r.rr•r.•rr•.r.rr.r.• 11
Economic Development Districts....• ................•........r•••rrrr.rr......•••..••••..•..• 11
Permitted Uses and Standards Ideas ..r.......r.r.r..rrrrr....r.r.....rr.r.........r..r...r.......r 11
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Provisionsrr.rrrr.rrrr........•.•.....•rrrrrrrr....•....... 11
Suburban-Rural Edge Differentiation ......................••.•rr.rrrr.............rr..rrrrr 12
Uses rrr.rrrrr•...s••r•...••....••....•••......••.••.•.•••r•••rrrr.rrrrr..rrr•r...••..•....•rrrrr.rr....••... •.. 12
Standards •••••..rr.r.•.rrrrrrrrrrrsrr•.rrrrrr...........• ................•.....r.•rr.r.•. ,.••••.••.•..rrrrr 12
Environmental Ideas.......r.r..r.rr.r.,rrr..rrrrrs.rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr^rrrrr^rrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 13
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Provisions,,,,.,....rrr..r............••.rr..r ............. 13
Stormwater Management and Groundwater....•..•.....,r.rrrrrr............•....r... 13
Transportation ,.r..•....• ...........................•..••r••r•.rr.rr.......r...•.......rr•rrr.•...r..... 13
Procedural Ideas rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 14
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Provisions.......•.........•....rr.rrrr........•....•r.r.rr 14
Streamlining rrrrrr.rrr.....r......r....•..r..........• ..............rrrrr.................rrrrr..•........ 14
Communication......rr ...............................•.......r•r.rrr,.,........•.•......rrrr.r.r....... 14
Formatting / Clarificativn.r...r..r•rrr...r..r...r.r .............•......•.rrr.rr..............•••.•. 14
D. REC~MMENDATE~NS.......,..^rrrrrr,rrrrr,rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 15
Recommended Phased Consideration of Amendments ......r.r.r.r ..............r.rr....15
1. Issues Repeatedly Raised During Consideration of the UD4..........rrr.. 15
2. Issues That Are Particularly Compelling orTime-Sensitive .................. 16
Recommended Next Steps........r..........r.r..r.rr.rr..rr...rrr.r.rr.......r.r...r..........r......r.17
Appendix rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,rrrrrrrrrrrr^rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,r,rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 18
A. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
What is an Implementation Bridge?
Orange County has been working to develop a Unified Development Ordinance ~UDO~.
This project was initiated in fall, 2009, to consolidate existing County land use
regulations into a central document where all regulations governing the development
and use of property would be located. This new UDO includes regulations currently
contained within the following documents:
• Zoning Ordinance
• Subdivision ordinance
• Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control ordinance
• Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
• Environmental Impact ordinance
• Stormwater Ordinance for Neuse River hands
Benefits of placing all development regulations into one central document include
making existing land use regulations more user~friendly, and eliminating existing
contradictions and inconsistencies. The County's 2430 Comprehensive Plan supports
the development of a UDO.
on August 24, 2449, the Board of County Commissioners authorized County planning
and zoning staff to.
^ incorporate land use development regulations into a central document;
^ Correct identified inconsistencies,
^ Begin modification/updating of existing development standards ~i.e, signage,
parking, landscaping, lighting, stream buffers, etc};
^ Update graphics/tables; and
^ Develop Conditional Use/Rezoning regulations.
The process of creating the UDO was intended to be incremental. work to initially
create the document would be Phase I, focusing on structure, organization, and the
specified adjustments noted above. It was anticipated at the beginning of this initiative
that ideas for other substantive changes to the County's [and use regulations would be
offered during the process of creating the UDO. Accordingly, the concept of an
"Implementation Bridge" was introduced: An inventory of these ideas vuould be
maintained, and at the end of Phase [ a report would be prepared documenting public
comments and providing a synopsis of possible future UDO amendments that would
fo{low in Phase I[ and beyond. This [mplementation Bridge is that report. It is intended
to be a summary of issues, comments, suggestions, and concerns, along with strategies
for addressing these.
1 is e
This Implementation Bridge is intended to be a reference and repository of ideas.
During public review of the initial drafts of the Unified Development ordinance, many
comments and suggestions were offered by citizens, stakeholders, and Board members.
The substantive comments that suggest future ordinance amendments as part of Phase
II of this initiative and beyond have been collected, and appear as an Appendix to this
report. This document also includes recommendations far priorities and strategies in
pursuing subsequent amendments to the UDO as Phase II and beyond. The comments
that have been received are summarized here, grouped into the following categories;
economic development ideas, use and design ideas, environmental ideas, and
procedural ideas.
orange County's main policy document addressing land use issues is its 2a3o
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan sets forth goals and objectives for the
future of orange County, and serves as a blueprint and guide far decision~making.
Development of the Unified Development ordinance is called for in the Comprehensive
Plan, and the UDO has been drafted within the context of the goals and objectives
articulated in the Plan. Consideration of Comprehensive Plan principles and guidance is
paramount in the development and subsequent adjustment of the new Unified
Development ordinance, Accordingly, the goals of the Comprehensive Plan are
reiterated below, for reference and consideration as work proceeds on the UDO.
This Implementation Bridge concludes with recommendationsfor proceeding into Phase
II and beyond - -suggestions for priorities in considering a sequence of amendments to
the new UDo.
~#tiM ""a
;i;.
Z~~:: s~.bfri ..
B. RELATIONSHIP TO
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
Overarching Goals of the Comprehensive Plan
Qrange County's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in November, DDB, fallowing an
extensive process of discussion and citizen engagement. The Plan was written and
adopted with the intent of being a blueprint document to guide future policy decisions
far the County through the year 2D3D. Eight dead Advisory Boards provided leadership
and directionforthe Plan:
^ Planning Board
^ Economic development Commission
^ Affordable Housing Advisory Board
^ Commission for the Environment
^ Agricultural Preservation Board
^ Historic Preservation Commission
^ Parks and Recreation Advisory Council
^ grange Unified Transportation
A point of consensus in Orange County that emerged during preparation of the Plan is
that the County needs to move toward becoming a sustainable community. The
Comprehensive Plan includes a focus on implementation that is designed to link the
economy, the environment, and social equity.
There are seven overarching Goals highlighted in the Comprehensive Plan, as follows:
1. Economic Development: Viable and sustainable economic development that
contributes to both property and sales tax. revenues, and enhances high„
quality employment opportunities for County residents.
~. Fousin : opportunity for all citizens for grange County to rent ar purchase
safe, decent, accessible, and affordable housing.
3. hand Use: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and designation of
future land uses, With the availability of County services and facilities
sufficient to meet the needs of Grange County's population and economy
consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives.
~X~~t. { ~:.~y
~t ... ~f+
~.
~~ ~~;°
4.
5.
6.
Na_tura! and Cu1~,ural Systems: A sustainable balance and appreciation of
natural, cultural, and agricultural resources.
Parks and Recreation: Regionally coordinated park facilities that provide
healthy opportunities for recreation and exercise for a!l citizens of Qrange
County, and that preserve important cultural and natural resources.
Services and Facilities: Growth consistent with the provision of adequate and
sustainable County services and facilities while managing the impacts upon
the environmental infrastructure and effectively protecting the County's
natural and cultural resources.
7. Transportations An efficient and balanced transportation system that uses
multiple motorized and non-motorized modes of transportation and far
which the planning, design, and implementation will be guided by the
fo{lowing overarching qualities:
A. Protects air quality, water quality and quantity, soil quality, and
biological resources.
B. Promotes public health and safety.
C. Encourages sustainable economic development.
D. Providesequal accessto all users.
E. Is highly modally and inter--modally integrated and connected.
F. Fosters sustainable and efficient use of resources, including
financial and natural resources.
G. Protects the County's natural and cultural heritage.
H. Uses creative and well-designed infrastructure.
I. is attractive, user-friendly, and easy to understand because of
factors such as signage, brochures, and web pages,
J. Respects privacy and citizen rights.
These overarchinggaalsformthefoundation and structureforthe Comprehensive Plan.
Each of these topics has its own Element in the Plan, each of which includes specific
goo{sand objectives.
is
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan then goes on to build on these seven overarching goals
and identifies individual specific goals as paints of focus and direction for the future.
These individual goals are policy directives; as implementation strategies are brought
forward as ordinance amendments in future phases of the UDt~ process, these
individual goals will offer guidance on proposed regu{atory changes. Fo{lowing are the
specificgoals inc{uded in the Plan:
~~uY~~`4 ' ~~oy~~v.
`?!{
.y ~
Economic Deveio ment Goais
Economic Develo ment-~.: Public-private sector partnerships that create a stronger
business climate.
Economic Devela meat-~~: Infrastructure thatsupports desired development.
Economic Development-3: Effective systems to train and support residents and those
wha work in Urange County.
Economic Development-4: Partnerships that ensure the County remains a great place
in which to live and work.
Housin~Goals
Housing-~.: Awide range of types and densities ofquality housingaffordable toall inall
parts of the County.
Housing2: Housing that is usable by as many people as possible regardless of age,
ability, orcircumstance.
Housing-3: The preservation, repair, and replacement of existing housingsupply.
Housing-4: Development ordinances and incentives that promote inclusionary practices
and housing options for all income levels.
Land Use Goais
i_and Use-1: Fiscally and environmentally responsible, sustainable growth, consistent
with the provision ofadequate services and facilitiesand ahigh qualityof life.
Eand Use -2: Eand uses that are appropriate to on--site environmental conditions and
features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and cammunity
character.
hand Use-3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern
that limits sprawl, preserves cammunity and rural character, minimizes land use
conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced transportation system.
hand Use-4: hand development regulations, guidelines, techniques and /or incentives
that promote the integrated achievementof all Comprehensive Plan goals.
k * ~~Y
4$ .E
A'~r ~ ~{ ~
~~ ~~5
Land Use-5: life, health, and property safe from hazards.
hand Use-G; Aland use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and
responsive,
Natural and Cultural systems Goals
u i iniii iii ilia ii.uiriirniiu ii inriirnri iirnrrrirrrrrrrn
Natural and Cultural Systems-1: Energy conservation, sustainable use of non-polluting
renewable energy resources, efficient use of nonrrenewable energy resources, and
clean air.
,Natural and-Cultural Systems-~: Economic viability of agriculture, forestry, and
horticulture and their respective lands.
Natural and Cultural Systems-3; Infrastructure and support systems for local and
regional agriculture.
Natural and Cultural Systems-4: Preservation of historic, cultural, architectural and
archaeological resources, and their associated landscapes.
Natural and Cultural Systems-5: Awareness and appreciation of the diverse cultural
history and heritage of orange county and its residents.
,Natural and Cultural Systems-5: Sustainable quality and quantity of ground and surface
Water resources.
Natural and Cultural Systems-7: A balanced and healthy diversity of native plant and
animal populations.
Natural and Cultural Systems-8:, Networks of protected natural, cultural, and
agricultural lands.
Parks and Recreation Goals
Parks and Recreation-1. Adequate parks and recreational facilities for all citizens within
the County, regardless of age, gender, race, or disability.
Parks and Recreation-~: A partnership among regional recreational providers and
facility owners/managers, including the appropriate co~location and sharing of school
facilities, that meets the County's recreation needs.
~st~~`'E s..~r.$y~fi....
Y.
of :Z
,~*r~ ~"b~4t~
Parks and Recreation-3: Recreational facilities available far the public use in a manner
that is multi-generational and accessible to all County citizens at both the countywide
and community levels,
Parks and Recreation-4: Healthy lifestyles, quality of life and community building
through the provision of a variety of affordable recreational facilities and chaise of
leisure activities, while responding to the changing needs and interests of County
residents.
Parks and Recreation-5: Park and recreational facilities that are environmentally
responsible, and where cultural and natural resources and open space within these sites
are protected,
Services and Facilities Goals
Services and Facilities-1: Efficient provision of public water and sewer service systems
which are consistent with the Land Use Plan and which abide by the current water and
Sewer Management, Planning, and boundary Agreement, the existing Orange County-
Chapel Hill-Carrboro Jaint Planning Agreement and Land Use Plan, and future
agreements to be negotiated among the County and public and private service
providers.
Services and Facilities-2: Adequate, safe, and healthy groundwater withdrawal and
wastewater disposal systems with minimal impacts upon water and land resources.
Services and Facilities-3: High quality educational facilities that support our diverse and
growing population and present opportunities for life-long learning.
Services and Facilities-4: High quality library facilities that support our diverse and
growing population and present opportunitiesfor life-long learning.
Services and Facilities-5: Efficient and effective drainage, stormwater, floodplain
management, and erosion control systems.
Services and Facilities-6: less solid waste per capita with cast effective and
environmentallyresponsibledisposal and management.
Services and Facilities-7: Efficient and effective public safety including police, fire,
telecommunications, emergencyservices, and animal services.
Trans ortation Goads
Transpa,rtation-1: An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that
protects the natural environment and community character.
TrTransportation-~y A multiMmadal transportation system that is affordable, available,
and accessible to all users and that promotes public health and safety.
Transpo~tatio,n-3: Integrated land use planning and transportation planning that serves
existing development, supports future development, and is consistent with the County's
land use plans which include provisions for preserving the natural environment and
community character.
Trans ortation-4. A countywide and regionally~integrated, multi~madal transportation
planning process that is comprehensive, creative and effective.
How the New UDO Implements the Plan
one o the main mechanisms available to orange County to pursue achievement of
these goals is enactment and enforcement of County ordinances. It is in pursuit of the
implementation of these Comprehensive Plan goofs that the Unified Development
ordinance initiative was undertaken. The Comprehensive Plan is and should be
referenced throughout the UDO. Decision making procedures articulated in the UDo
specifically include, wherever legally authorized, determination of consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan as one of the criteria for approval of land development proposals.
C. IDEAS RAISED DURING THE
UDO PRt1CESS
Uvhen the Orange County Board of Commissioners initiated this UDD process, it was
made clear that the intent was to first coordinate, combine, and restructure the array
of existing ordinances. The objective was to eliminate redundancy, make the
ordinances mare user-friendly, incorporate recent changes in State enabling legislation,
and make minor adjustments. It was clear from the outset that there were many
objectives in the Comprehensive Plan that warranted consideration in the form of
ordinance changes, It was also expected that in the public review of a new draft UDa
there would be many ideas and suggestions for substantive changes offered by citizens
and advisory boards. Accordingly, arrangements were made early on to collect these
comments and ideas, and organize them into an "Implementation Bridge" at the end of
the UDn process. The key point was to not lose any of the ideas that would be offered.
That, as stated earlier, is the reason for preparation of this document: to organize the
collected comments that suggest UDD revisions so that the comments can be carefully
considered, with suggested priorities and anassessment oftime-sensitivity.
Following is a summary of the comments that were offered and presented during public
events and in individual correspondence, as communicated to the County by the public,
advisory board members, and Board of County Commissioners. This summary
categorizes and organizes comments by topic not in any priority order, and prefaced by
references to Comprehensive Plan goals. Ideas are summarized here. A fuller
description of the ideas and comments received is included in the Appendix to this
report, presented in the same order as appears here. There is na attempt in presenting
this list to evaluate the comments.
it 1
Ideas were offered during the UDC review process that suggest adjustments to better
encourage economic development~related activity,
Relevant Com rehensive Plan Provisions
General Economic Develo ment Goal: The County seeks to attract and promote the
types of businesses suited to grange County, businesses that will provide jobs to local
residents and provide a more balanced revenue structure that relies Tess on the
generation of private property taxes.
~1~ °fi.
d< i
-,~r ~~ ~t
~~ ~~5..
There was strong support during the process for consideration of incentives to
encourage economic activity and job creation of the type envisioned for Orange County,
and for increased attention to provisions relating to the County's Economic
Development Districts,
Incentives
• Streamline proceduresforEconomicDevelopment Districtsand commercial
development applications. Consider expedited processing for such
applications.
• Studywhatlocal private businesses need in orderto expand and thrive, and
consider what regulatory changes could contribute to that objective.
Economic Develo ment Districts
• Consider different standards for application within Economic
Development Districts to encourage commercial development.
• Create a predictable process for consideration of development
applications within Economic Development Districts.
• Develop regulatiansforRural Economic DevelapmentAreas.
sus to r e s
Ideas were offered during the UDD review process that suggest further attention to
what land uses are permitted where, to design standards.
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Provisions
1- I __-Il illlllllll-11111111i~l 111 A~.1..11.I.M11.1~
Genera! land Use Gaal: Mixed-use is actively encouraged, and locations for new mixed-
use centers are being identified, providing live-work-shag opportunities that minimize
travel needs.
,Housing*Goal-1: A wide range of types and densities of quality hauling affordable to a!I
in al! parts of the County.
,Nousin,~ Goa[-4: Development ordinances and incentives that promote inclusionary
practices and housing options forall income levels.
land Use Goal-~: Land uses that are appropriate to onmsite environmental conditions
and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community
character.
hand Use Goal-3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and
pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use
conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced transportation system.
Services and Facilities Goal-1: Efficient provision of public water and sewer service
systems which are consistent with the hand Use Plan and which abide by the current
water and Sewer Management Planning Boundary Agreement, the existing Orange
county-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Agreement and .and Use Plan, and future
agreements to be negotiated among the County and public and private service
providers.
There was strong support during the process for further consideration of the
differentiation between suburban and rural areas, for review of what land uses are
permitted where, and consideration of design standards that are applied to new
development.
Suburban-Rural Edge Differentiation
^ i iiu i.r u~mnirwrui.~~~
• Differentiate between suburban and rural character, and adjust regulations
relating to required features such as signing and transportation
improvements.
• Review and adjust notification requirements to make mare appropriate to
rural vs. suburban areas. ~E.g., rural rezonings may require larger areas of
notification.}
Uses
• . Rev~s~t Cond~t~onal District provisions to consider restr~ct~ng locations in
which they can be applied.
• Revisit home occupation rules.
• Exclude government ar municipal uses from residential zoning.
Stanr~arrlc
• Add back language about required findings that was formerly included far
Planned Developments in the existing Zoning ordinance.
Differentiate between urban and rural character for regulations such as
signage and subdivision standards.
• Review the full range of design standards that are currently included in the
UDC, to determine if adjustments would help to promote Countygoals and
objectives. Note: the Appendix contains 22 specific suggestions for review
of standards such as bui{ding height, lighting, signs, adult entertainment
uses, rand and driveway requirements, hours of operation, and airport
zoning.
it l
ideas were offered during the UDO review process that suggest additional attention to
regulatory provisions aimed at environmental protection and preservation.
RelevantCom rehensive Plan Provisions
General Natural and Cultural S stems Gaal: The goal is to provide a network of
protection for natural, cultural, and agricultural lands, protecting natural areas, prime
forests, and wildlife habitats. Preservation of working farms is a key theme, along with
protection of historical character. Energy efficiency and use of alternative fuel and
power generation options are encouraged.
land Use Goal-2: hand uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions
and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community
character.
Natural and Cultural S stems Gaal-4: Preservation of historic, cultural, architectural
and archaeological resources, and their associated landscapes.
There was strong support during the process particularly for consideration of regulatory
provisions related to stormwater management, water quality, and transportation.
Stormwater Mana ement and Groundwater
• Revise definitions and references to wastewater treatment systems to
avoid opening possibilities for extension of sewer service into areas where
the hand Use Plan contemplates no public sewer service.
• Consider criteria for locations of sampling stations under the Pollutant
Monitoring Program.
• Consider establishinga mechanisrnfarnutrienttrading.
Transportation
• Adjust Section 7.8.2 to encourage roads to be laid out ~n a manner that
avoids significant natural features.
• Develop guidelines far Transit Oriented Development.
I ~~ ~` rf r•
~: s
~ zi
a
~d~ ... , zl ..
C~~r . ~3.;~''.
r l
ideas were offered during the UDO review process that suggest additional attention to
the procedures that are spelled out in the ordinance, to further enhance the
effectiveness of the UDO.
Rei_evant Comprehensive Plan Provisions
• • ~ • I I I III ^.i~.i.. I.I~UI..PI.141~
hand Use-6: Aland use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and
responsive.
There was strong support during the process far consideration of changes that would
streamline processes and enhance communication with citizens. There were also
suggestions related to formatting in the UDO, and requests for clarification of certain
provisions,
Streamlining
• Explore ways to shorten review and approval processes.
• Include metricsforapproval timeforeach process.
• Review telecommunication towers process.
• Revisit roles and responsibilities of Planning Board vs. Board of
Commissioners for approvaldeclsions.
Communication
• where we have electronic means to notify the public, we should add
thane as required notification mechanisms.
• Reconsider public notification requirements for differences between
rural versus suburban locations din terms of distance for notice
requirements.
• Consider new ideas for public notification.
Formattin Clarification
• Include more cross-references, on-line search mechanisms,
• Mention the Orange County /Town of Hillsborough Interlocal
Agreement.
• Develop more guidelines far selection of school sites.
• Mention the Uvater and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary
Agreement,
• Incorporate references to Animal Control Ordinance, align definitions.
• lnclude language to better differentiate between the different types of
residential coning districts.
® Reconsidertreatingwithdrawal ofan application as a denial.
a~~}~ ;' ~~o~ .
~~' ~~.
I ;~a.
``'pr ~;~?i~
x3'i ,~b>
s e~ ti ~
All of these ideas cannot be considered or pursued at once. Since both the
Comprehensive Plan and this Implementation Bridge offer numerous ideas, Orange
County needs a framework that gill allow the County to take action in a dynamic,
orderly, and timely fashion. orange County has a strong culture and tradition of
carefully and purposefully examining public policy proposals, Accordingly, this
Implementation Bridge concludes with suggestions for priorities and phasing for next
steps. All the ideas should be considered; but since all cannot be considered
simultaneously in ineffective andtime-~efficientmanner, identification of priority topics
would be useful.
There are two categories of topics to highlight: (1) Issues that repeatedly were raised in
public comments about Orange County's development regulations; and (2) Issues that
are particularly compelling ortime-sensitive.
It would be reasonable to construct a phased approach to pursuing amendments to the
new UDC, once it is adopted, based upon the two priority categories described above.
A preliminary list of prioritytopicsfollows, and it would be reasonable to schedule work
and consideration of these as amendments to the new UD4 as soon as possible
following adoption. Consideration of the balance of issues that have been raised should
take place as time and workloads permit,
1. Issues Repeatedly Raised During Consideration of the UDO
Ad'ust Pro osed Conditional Districts: The most common issue brought forward during
Board and citizen comments, and by the jurisdictions of Carrboro and Chapel {ill, was
concern about potential widespread use of Conditional Districts throughout the rural
portions of Orange County. Concerns were both about lack of restrictions on locations
for use of these districts, and about Planned Development language in the existing
Zoning Ordinance that was not carried over explicitly into the new UDC. Orange County
staff and Planning Board each responded to these concerns by proposing adjustments to
the UDQ to be included prior to final adoption, The Planning Board's recommendation
for approval of the UDC includes these adjustments. 1f the Board of commissioners
n~a~es these recommended adjustments in the UDO that is enacted, the issue is
addressed. If the Board of Commissioners decides that this issue needs f urther study
and adapts the UL~Q without these adjustments, consideration of the adjustments
should lead the list of next steps.
Promote Economic De~ela meat: orange County has had Economic Development
Districts in place for 20 years, with only small amounts of activity, Citizens and Boards
repeatedly mentioned need for further adjustments to the UDC to help in promoting
needed economic development activity. In addition, there were non-UDD issues raised,
such as attention to extension of water-sewer service in strategic locations, and
technology improvements such as increased areas of available Internet access.
Streamline the Process: Numerous comments focused on procedures, and on
opportunities to streamline regulation. opinions were offered suggesting shorter
review processes and an efficient system for review of proposals by advisory boards,
commissions, and elected officials,
Adjust locationwSpeci~ic Standards: Concerns about preservation of rural character
were expressed, along with requests for further refinement of standards promoting
targeted density and mixed use patterns. "Edge" issues were raised, focusing on the
relationships between low-density, protected areas and activity centers. It would be
helpful to further study the locational components of density and mixed use standards,
with particular reference to existing and forthcoming Small Area Plans, to determine if
further refinement or calibration is warranted.
2. issues That Are Particular! Com elfin orTime-Sensitive
Review Procedures: There were many comments offered about procedures that are
included in the new UDD, summarized above and listed in the Appendix to this
document. It would be prudent in any case to schedule a review and potential
adjustment to procedures 3-G months fallowing enactment of the new UDa, with the
benefit of drawing from initial experience in administering the regulations to highlight
adjustments that Would improve usability. During that review process, it would be
desirable to consider each procedure( suggestion that has been made and compare
suggestions with the early experiences of using the UDa to decide if adjustments are
warranted.
Consider Deli n Standards that ma further Com rehensi~e Plan Goals: Revisit the
standards included in the new UDC, with particular attention to locational differences in
character between rural and suburban areas, and hove standards might be adjusted or
developed to reflect those differences.
Kt~~1~£.' ~'R~$fiy
I
5` ;7r.
~~,'Gy~°
~1 '~ S
As always, and as is appropriate, guidance from the Qrange County Board of County
Commissioners is needed to provide direction for next steps As the new UDQ
approaches the paint of adoption, it is desirable far the Board of Commissioners to set
priorities for staff and Planning Board work an Phase II of this initiative - -the first set of
amendments/adjustments to the new UDQ - -and also to identify topics for
consideration in subsequent phases following Phase II.
The priority areas suggested above can serve as the starting point for this discussion of
phased work on amendments. If the Board of Commissioners finds this suggested list
for adjustments to this list as decided by the Board} to bean acceptable "game plan,"
the Board may choose to refer the list to staff to come back with a specific process and
schedule for consideration of these amendments The Board of Commissioners could
also decide to refer this list to the Planning Board for recommendation prior to giving
direction to staff, to seek the Planning Board's advice regarding priorities for Phase II
work and additional issues that should be given early attention,
~.~E ' ~`o
~tt~. p~r~
~, .
;i'~
;f~~ tt~~
dg :.;~3~"
Appendix
This Appendix consists of three components, all suggesting areas for further/additional
consideration of UDC provisions. This compendium of suggestions forfuture ordinance
amendments Was cvmpiied from input received during pubiic review of the new Unified
Development ordinance.
The first section is entitled "future Phase Suggestions," and is a collection of comments
that have been collected and grouped by topic. The second section offers two
resolutions that were adopted and forwarded by the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill.
The third section is "Excerpt Alice Cordon's Comments Pages 1-3 of ~4~page i=ax}."
These materials follow, beginning on the next page,
23
APPENDIX: FUTURE PHASE SUGGESTIONS RECEIVED TO DATE
March 2, 2011
Listed below are ideas that the Orange County Planning staff received as part of the 2009-201 D
Unified Development ordinance review process, or are aware of because the idea was raised
during the 2030 Comprehensive Plan process. At this time, these ideas are not being
incorporated into the UD4 as they exceed the scope of work with which s#aff was approved to
proceed. They are collected and listed here as a resource for consideration of future
amendments to the UDa.
The comments are fisted as submitted by citizens, stakeholders, and Board members, without
evaluation. They appear below grouped by category of comment. The ideas are numbered
sequentially and continuously throughout this Appendix for ease of reference.
COMMENTS RELATED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEED FAR INCENTIVES
1. The size of a farm should be considered. organic farmers, which seem to be the trend,
10 acres in order to be called a farm is a bit large for an organic farm. Considering farm
income as a requirement to be a farm is difficult because prices can vary so much from
year to year that one year a farmer can produce 300 bushels of corn and hardly break
even because prices are law and the next year the same farmer can produce 120
bushels and make a lot because prices have gone up substantially.
2. Agricultural Support Enterprises regulations need to be written.
3. Incentives for commercial development expedited processes, etc.}.
4. Focus on the greatest value for the greater good of the entire county with purposeful
philosophy and policies to achieve the economic resiliency and community diversity we
desperately need and require at this time.
5. Examine what our local private businesses need in order to expand and thrive.
6. Examine why successful businesses left Orange County, such as Smith Breeden, Rho,
Contact and BlueCross BlueShield's expansion, and determine what we need to do to
have helped them grow here.
7. Economic development projects in the Economic Development Districts should have a
predictable and expeditious approval process. Economic development projects in other
appropriate areas should have a similar approval process.
8. Economic development approval processes and standards should be revised by local
business and planning professionals in conjunction with UNC's Planning, Business and
Law Schools.
A- ~
24
9. An Economic Development Uvorkgroup consisting of the BCC, Planning Board and
Economic Development Commission should meet SpringlSummer 2011 to examine
expediting approval, targeting industries, permitted uses, specialized zoning district by
SAP subarea and revised standards.
10. Agricultural Support EnterpriseslRural Economic Development Area, Speedway Small
Area Plan and Transit Qriented Development are important initiatives using Conditional
Use District structures should be important 2011 BCCC goals.
11. Examine Durham's American Tobacco Campus and American Underground to create an
Orange County campus that is walk-able, diverse and attractive far mixed use including
affordable space for incubation and Startup businesses.
,TARGETING ,,, ,,,,,.,,,._ ,,, S
„ECONOMIC,,,,,DEVEL~PMENT DISTRACT
12. Different landscaping standards may be needed for EDDs.
13. Rural Economic Development Area (REDA) regulations need to be written.
COMMENTS RELATED TO USES AND STANDARDS
SUBURBAN~RURAL EDGE AND DIFFERENTIATION
14. Differentiate between urban and rural character -- applicable to signage and subdivision
impacts on transportation.
15. Public notification requirements for public hearings and other procedures that are more
appropriate rural versus suburban uses/districts (i.e., rural rezonings may require larger
area of notification).
16. Cluster development standards for suburban versus rural developments.
PERMITTED LAND USES
17. Need updated Airport Regulations.
18. Regulating adult entertainment uses and nuisance related events at these uses.
19. Airport zoning, possibly as conditional zoning district.
20. Review telecommunications towers process.
DESIGN OF DEVELOPMENT
21. Section 2.5.3, No mention of lighting, natural areas inventory, solid waste, or centralized
recycling in requirements for information as applications are submitted. Should be
added.
22. Include hours of operation. Lighting comes to mind -- Section 5.14.2 (A) (1)
23. Add no fault well repair to requirements.
A~2
25
24. Need to revisit private road standards.
25. There's a lack of land use criteria for reserving school sites. Need some general
guidelines (i.e. not in wetlands or on slopes greater than X). Consult County School
Joint Construction Standards.
26. Relation to adjacent properties is not addressed -- Section 7.13.3 (C) (1)
27. Is there any limit to building height? Flag for future.
28. Are there provisions for shared driveways? It may be useful in certain cases (i.e. along
highways/major roadways).
29. Many places in the UDO have a restriction on the height of a building. While residential
structures tend to have 9 to 12 feet per floor, commercial structures can have as much
as 15 feet per floor. As the structure covers more area, the roof can have a substantial
amount of height to it if it is not a flat roof. Architectural details such as facades and
cupolas can affect the height.
30. My comment is this: Would it make more sense to specify the number of occupied
stories as a limit on the structure? An occupied story would not include attic space or
utility rooms- it would be space occupied by people working in the structure. Page 3-44
and page 4-18 are examples of where this specification occurs. Note that the height
limitations that change with additional setback could be used as a maximum height such
that either a (for example) 3 story limit _OR_ the maximum height based on setback
would be the height limit for the building. An example of this setback based number is
found at the top of page 6-2. I would also add in (not sure where) than any building
whose height exceeds the apparatus or ladder height restrictions of the fire departments
which would respond to a structure fire would be required to be sprinklered.
31. There are various metal vapor lights, the most common being Mercury and Sodium
vapor. It would be nice to know why Mercury is being singled out. In particular, is it the
presence of Mercury (i.e. environmental) or is it the use of a specific type of fixture such
as the yard lights utilities sell that is the concern. If the concern is environmental, then
would it not also apply to all fluorescent lights which use mercury?
32. We have incandescent, metal vapor, fluorescent which is mercury and a phosphorous},
and LED. Each has a different lumens per watt rating. If light is being regulated, lumens
should be the standard. Also, be aware that any light with a reflector will put out mare
light in a certain direction than a light with no reflector. As such, lumens is still a weak
measure of light output but it is what is on the packaging for all lights and is easier to
work with than getting into the amount of light energy per unit area type measurements
candles}. As a rule of thumb, incandescent runs 5 to 30 lumenslwatt, and LEDs run 60
to 110 lumenslwatt.
33. The limits under section ~c} "General Operations" and fie} "Use of Accessory Structures"
severely limit what a home occupation can do.
34. Somewhere in the Standards for Residential Uses or Development Standards there
should be a section that specifies minimum residential driveway sizes of 12 feet wide by
14 feet vertical clearance (already stated in 7.8.5 (B) (15) on page 7-32) for fire
apparatus. This is the cleared width of the driveway, not the width of gravel or paving.
35. The travel-way width for Class B with 2 lots should be specified as 12 feet of cleared
space, no standard for width of gravel or hard surface.
A-3
26
36. Under (5) (b): 16 feet should be 18 feet so that a passenger car can be passed by fire
apparatus. For Class B roads with 3 or more lots, there should be an area 20 feet wide
by 50 feet long every 1500 feed to that fire apparatus can pass each other.
37.4n ~I}, remove the word "incandescent" since LED lights are now often used for holiday
decorations. Low wattage is not defined, but a typical nightlightlbig Christmas tree bulb
is 7 watts so you could say any wattage under 10 watts. It would make more sense to
use a lumen rating, such as less than 150 lumens. ~n ~J}, first off this should be a lumen
limit, not watts. As the limit reads, this looks like a total lumens for any given motion
activated switch. The lumens looks like it was derived from two incandescent ?'5 watt
bulbs, probably flood lights. Nate that if this is the case, the maxim lumens should be
2400. There are many motion activated systems where a sensor can turn on multiple
light fixtures. So I would re-word this to have a 2400 lumen limit per light fixture
controlled by the sensor. Finally, on this max lumens per fixture, there are standard
outdoor floodlight fixtures that take 3 bulbs. For those fxtures, a reasonable max
lumens would be around 3600. You could also add a limit of no one bulb can exceed a
rating of 2100 lumens ~a 120 watt equivalent} if the intent is to avoid the larger single
bulb fixtures -- Section 6.11.3. This is where a definition of "mercury vapor luminaries" is
needed. As written, this could mean that any standard fluorescent or compact
fluorescent light could not be used, since they are amercury-phosphorous based light.
38. ~C}~1 } Some floodlight fixtures do not cover the bulb, the stop just after the threaded
base. I'd just stick with the 45 degree from vertical. ~c} ~2} the "it will shine" is vague,
Perhaps something like "no more than 5% of the luminous energy shall shine towards
roadways, onto adjacent residential property or into the night sky". ~C} ~3} Same
vagueness- what is the "main beam"? Do you really want to say that no portion of the
bulb shall be visible from adjacent properties or the public street right-of way? From an
enforcement point of view, a "Can't see the bulb" is easy to verify for both the owner and
the inspector. Note that this is the approach taken on page 6-97, 6.111 ~3}.
39. All existing and proposed public transportation services and facilities within A RADIUS of
one mile of the site shall be documented ~ leave out "also"} -- Section 6.17~B} #~4}.
40. This whole section should be looked at with respect to goals and objectives in the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Commissioners' goals and
objectives. County policies do not always support the land development ordinances,
particularly with transportation issues. This is too vast a task to address at this time, but
I wanted to "tag" this Section for future study -- Section 7.8
41. Move towards intense use of sites to save more of the site in open space -~ cluster
subdivisions. Cluster subdivisions require community wastewater systems. Falls apart
on political side. Commissioners very wary due to system failures 20 years ago. Is
there a way to put this in the Qrdinance `by right" if designed to specific cri#eria? Take
political part out.
42. Need to update Lighting Standards. Height requirements for outdoor light poles and
potential impacts on County recreational facilities is one of the areas that should be
revisited,
A-4
27
COMMENTS RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION
STDRMwATER MANAGEMENT AND GRDUNDUVATER
43. In the section concerning golf courses, Pollutant Monitoring Program, 1 would suggest
some thought be given to the locations of the sampling stations for surface water,
groundwater and sediment. Perhaps the intent is to establish upgradient sampling
locations as well as sampling locations dawn-gradient of some potentially contaminating
source or specific location?? I think this section needs a bit of discussion as to what the
objective is. In addition, under ~3} Parameters for Sample Testing- I think that some
description of approved analytical methods and minimum detection limits would be
helpful. I am not familiar with the EPA HAL thresholds described in this section but 1
would be willing to look into this. There are various NC soil, water and groundwater
limits that may be worth considering forthis section.
44.5~b} of this section- Management Response to Pollutant Monitoring- I would recommend
that the responsible party also be required to contact appropriate state regulatory
officials if thresholds are exceeded, not just 4C do so. I also recommend that the
phrase "for thresholds" be removed from this sentence -- Section 5.5.
45. Compare Durham's ordinance requirements far environmental review of subdivisions
with Qrange County's environmental review process.
46. Nutrient trading.
47. Low impact Design ~L1D}.
48, Review thresholds and processes associated with the permitting of wastewater
treatment facilities.
TRANSPORTATION
49. Section 7.8.2, Public roads need to be laid out in a manner that avoids significant natural
and cultural features.
50. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) regulations need to be written.
COMMENTS RELATED TO PROCEDURES
STREAMLINING
51. Will staff be making recommendations to shorten any of the processes?
52. There is an unusual threshold requirement in the Subdivision Regulations -the 21st lot
of a subdivision kicks you into an Special Use Permit (SUP) process. Needs to be
looked at again -make part of future changes. Planning Board should be able to
approve 20 lots or less (without BOCC involvement).
53. Are there metrics and stats for approval time for each approval process?
54: After staff and advisory board review, project went through County Attorney review.
A-5
28
Lengthened the process. Why didn't County Attorney review occur concurrent with staff
review? Streamline.
55. A time-line chart for each land-use review process (re-zoning, subdivision, permits,
landuse amendments etc.) should be made showing who reviews each step and when.
56. Identify time lags and the reason -such as delays caused by review board's schedules.
57. Identify how approval processes can be simple, efficient, and short.
58. Examine other review and approval processes such as Durham's Development Advisory
Committee (DAC) and Design District Review Team (DDRT) which are efficient and
streamlined.
59. The members of the above DAC and DDRT are similar to Orange County's
Development Advisory Committee (DAC) but have Rules of Procedure, meetings,
minutes and quorum requirements consistent with state Statutes. This could replace our
current review approval processes when a rezoning application meets all applicable
standards.
C4MMUNICATI4N
60. Where we have electronic means to notify the public, we should add this as an
expectation or requirement.
61. As people become accustomed to this new document it will be important to provide
different kinds of helpful guidance for users to find the sections of the document that are
pertinent tv their needs. The "Comparative Table" is quite helpful, and is an example of
the guidance that will be needed during the transition. Having some kind of on-line
search mechanism would be helpful. Perhaps that is already under development.
62. At what point in time will we define metrics of whether the UDC is succeeding?
63. [t would be really nice if the final document could be accessed and indexed electronically
rather than printed, a hyperlink format. For instance, clicking on a term and the definition
pops up.
64. Identifying Comprehensive Plan policies that relate to UDC updates
FORMATTING l CLARIFICATIGN
65. No mention of Town of Hillsborough interlocal agreement. Add a footnote or a new
section. [Note: references to the grange County~Hillsborough Interlocal Agreement
should be added when ZoninglUD4-related items are formally adopted. At this point,
neither a joint land use plan nor joint development regulations have been adoptedj.
66. Section 1,6.2 ~A}, Is a 1-year hiatus long enough?
6'l. Section 1.7.2, "Agriculture" should be mentioned somewhere within the discussion of
elements.
68. Section 2.2,1 ~C}, Why treat withdrawal of an application as denial?
69. Section 2.2.8 ~A}, Shouldn't have to wait a year if withdrawn. 5-months far withdrawal
and 1-year for denial?
A-6
~~
70. Section 2.15.3 (C) (4).- There is no deadline for agencies to respond.
71. Section 2.15.2 (C) (5) -Not applicable if flexible development option used.
72. Section 2.17, Need a process other than that of a major subdivision for recombining
existing lots.
73. Need language that will differentiate between the different types of residential zoning
districts.
74. Regarding Impervious Surface Ratios and Sliding Scales, the two tables should be
combined into one. Need to understand ramifications of any proposed changes --
Section 4.2.5.
75. Some home occupations are permitted but not associated storage? This needs
clarification.
76. Kennels and Riding Stables should be addressed separately. Should they require a
Class A or Class B Special Use Permit?
77. Clarify how open space areas of golf courses are counted towards meeting ordinance
requirements.
78. Change to require a to Class "A" Special Use Permit, which would require BOCC
approval rather than Board of Adjustment -- Section 5.9.5
79. Mention Water and Sewer Management and Planning Boundary Agreement. Any
system should be designed, planned, constructed and maintained by the responsible
entity as assigned through the Agreement -- Section 7.13.4 (C) (1) (b)
80. As I suspect you know, the County's Animal Control Ordinance includes kennel
definitions and a permitting process for Class I and Class II Kennels. The County's
Zoning Ordinance also includes kennel definitions and process for a kennel (or stable) to
obtain a special use permit (which requires one or possibly both of the permits issued
Animal Control).
81. There is a need to better coordinate (and dare I say, unify) these ordinances. Some of
the issues in regard to kennels include:
82. Different definitions of Class I and Class II permits
83. A lack of clarity as to whether a special use permit is required for Class I as well as
Class II kennel
84. A lack of clarity as to whether a special use permit is required for Class I under the
Animal Control as well as the Zoning Ordinance
85. Possible process improvements in the permitting process for kennels requiring a
special use permit.
86. Also, I think we should consider whether site plans for "riding stables/academies" should
be subject to review by Animal Control. One concern is the availability of staff expertise
in this area. Another concern is that there are no specific stable standards in the
County's Animal Control Ordinances. By contrast, there are such standards for kennels
which require permitting.
87. Clarify provisions for Outdoor events/activities, festivals, etc.
88. Review language regarding Principal Uses and Principal Structures (Anti
A-7
31
The following resolution was introduced by Alderman Coleman and seconded by Alderman
Haven~0'Donnell:
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
(UDO) FOR ORANGE COUNTY
Resolution No. 78/2010-11
WHEREAS, revisions have been proposed to the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance JUDO}, and under the Orange CountylChapel HilllCarrbora Joint Planning
Agreement, Carrboro is to give comments on these revisions to the Orange County Board of
Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, Orange County Planning Staff made a presentation to the Carrboro Board of
Aldermen on January 1 S, X011, at which time staff described proposed changes as essentially a
consolidation of several Orange County Ordinances, with no significant changes in wording; and
~wHEREAS, nonetheless, with the incorporation of existing ordinances into the new UDO,
important changes have been introduced in the new UDO, and although public presentations
have explained certain aspects of the UDO, certain aspects remain unclear as the document is
8~0 pages and is not quickly understood; and
WHEREAS, these particular areas have been identified as of concern to the Carrboro Board of
Aldermen:
The Conditional District BCD}: This "floating zoning district" is a new construct for
Orange County and it refers to a district that is not mapped until a rezoning application is
approved. The new warding for the CD district leaves out important text, which
specifically ties any rezoning to compliance with the underlying Comprehensive Plan.
what is missing, for example, is language utilized for the original Planned Development
BPD} district that explicitly refers to protecting the character of the surrounding
neighborhoods and seeking opportunities for neighborhood scale mixed use; and
Certain provisions for the University Labe watershed Overlay District: the Conditional
Districts should be prohibited in the University Labe watershed Overlay District, and
For the Cane Creek and Upper Eno Protected and Critical watershed Districts though
outside of the Joint Planning Area, the conditional use district should be prohibited; and
Certain provisions for the Rural Buffer; the original language in the existing .zoning
ordinance specifies that development is for low densities and relies an ground absorption
systems for sewage disposal, The new UDO text changes the disposal method to
wastewater treatment facilities, which seems to imply the use of package systems.
WHEREAS, it is important to understand these mayor changes to the UDO, because these could
have an unintended effect an the way development occurs in Orange County;
32
NOw THEREFORE, BE ~T RESOLVED that the Carrboro Board of Aldermen asks the Orange
County Board of County Commissioners to look further into these areas of concern explained
above, in order to head off passible consequences unintended by the Board.
The foregoing resolution having been submitted to a vote received the following vote and was
duly adopted this 22nd day of February 2011;
Ayes: Dan Coleman, Sammy Slade, Lydia Lavelle, Mark Chilton, Jacquelyn Gist, Randee
Haven-O'Donnell
Noes: Nerve
Absent or Excused: Joal Hall Broun
33
Additional Mat~riafs ~-council ~~~ition
~~~l~~~NC~ ~~~ ~]~N~~ C~~I~T~ ~Z~~ ~~~2-281~.w4.1~
~~~T~~.EAS, the Chapel dill Town Council is can~mitted to uphaldin~ the stipn.latio~~s o#'the
Grange Cnunty-Chapel dill-Carrbox-a ~a~nt P~annin~ A,~•ee~nen~ ~.ipA~} an~~ ~o ~naintail~in~ the
integrity of tl~c Rr~ral l~uf~`er (RBA; and
wld~r~.E~.~, Grange County has proposed a Uni~Ced Develaprr~ent C~rdxnancc ~~J.C~~}, and a~ one
of the pa~~:ners to tl~e ,laznt plana~ing Ag~ree~~.ent, the Council may provide comments on the UDa
to the Or~.ngc Cc~u~~ty Board of Ca~nmissioncrsa a~~d
w~El?EA,~, the C.1~~ihcd Develol~Tnent ~rdinanCC has been described ~ a cansalidatiol~ o~
se~cral Orange County ordinances, with na signi:~ca~~t changes in wording; and
wHEI~E,A~, nonetlaeless7 with the incarporatian of existing ardin.ances into the new 1JDQ,
important changes have been intracluced in the new ~~TDO, so that certain aspects remain unclear
as the dacnn~ent is 8~(~ pages and is not quickly understood.; and
wl IER~a,~~, the ma~ar concerns about tl~e proposed tJnihed Development C~rdi~~~.nce ~UD~~ are
~'acr~sed on rcvisio~7s that appea~~ to change the regulatory approach at~d the uses which were
estal~lashcd i~l the ax•aginal ordinances, in ways that are not concert with tl~e prc~visl4ns of the
Rural Suffer and other sections oftl~e point planning A~reenxent; and
w~lE.l~.l~1~S, it is impa~~tant to undcrsta~~d these ~aajar changes to the ~U.D{~} because they could
have an t~nintci~ded effect on the way deveiaprnent occurs in Orange County;
1~10'~v, 'l~l~~~Rl~r~~~, l~l~ YT I~~Olr,~r~D by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the
following areas have been identified as of particular conce~~ to the Chapel :bill Tawn Council,
~~~ Cal1C~I~l~ ~"~~~.~~~ ~4 "Condzt~4nal D1~t~iCt" ~~~~
rl'h~s "floating ~oning d~stt~~ct" is a new canstr~ct far Ora~7gc County and it refers to a dastraCt that
is uat rnappcd u~~tzl a rezcrr~ing appllcatian is appravec~. This new CD distract replaces the
l~lanncd l~e~relot~~ncnt Distract in th:e current zoning ordinance. lr~owcver, the wo~-dii~g foi• the
new CD district leaves out important text frazx~ the ax•iginal ordi~~ance which spccif ally tics any
CD rezonYng to conformance with the underlying Comprehensive flan, including the la~~d use
categories in that plan. what is missing, for example, is language utilised in Che origit7al
ordinance that explicitly refers to protecting the character of surrounding ~eighborlxaods,
Zn the ~JI~O there are two binds of Conditional Districts proposed; "Conditional use Districts"
and "Conditional ~aning Districts."
The language for the Conditional use District states thata except for ~ 1 exclusions, any use
peri~~itted in the Table of permitted I~ses can ga almost a~aywhe:re in grange Cc~~tnty's planning
jl~risdictian.
34
with respect to Conditional caning Districts, these floating coning districts can be placed in any
of the general use zoning districts, according to the regulations associated with each district.
Also, in contrast to the arigin~al Orange County zoning ordinance, no special use pcrn~it is
required, #hus eliminating the need for a quasi judicial process with a decision based an
con~petent~ substantial evidence presented at a public bearz~~g.
~~) Concerns related #a the Rural Buffer and the point Planning Agreement
Some of the proposed new language in the UDO changes essential features of the Rural Buffer
~RB~. Tl~ie original language in the existing ordinance specifies that development in the Rural
Buffer is far !ow densities and relies on ground absorption systems far sewage disposal,
l~owevery one of the prapased new development standards for the ~tB district would substitute
the term "wastewater treatment facility" and use that te~.n instead of the term "ground absorption
systems," for approved Cau.ditianal districts.
The def nitian of a wa.stevva#er treatment facility includes a system that discharges to surface
waters, and indeed any other system as nay be permit#ed by the Health Depa~ent or the State
of~orth Carolina, That is a signxfrcant difference, and the original language should be restored.
Conditional districts should not be allowed in the Rural Buffer. instead they should only be
placed. ~ the Economic Develapm,ent districts and other areas with specifically identified land
use categories s~ that they are compatible Frith the Comprehensive Flan and surrounding land
uses.
Concerns articulsted above are relevant to the watershed Overlay f?is#ricts, Accordingly the
conditional districts should be prohibited in the University Labe watershed Overlay I]istrict. In
addition, though outside tl~e scope of the Joint Planning Agreemen#, conditional districts should
be prohibited. in the Cane Creek and upper Bna Protected and Critical watershed Overlay
Districts.
BB lT Et~RTHER REOLVEr~ that the Chapel dill Town Co~tnci! asks the orange County
Board of Commissioners to look turther into the areas of concern. explained above, in order to
head affpassible consequences unintended by the Board; and
BE 1T p'l~.TI~~R RESOLED that, because of these concerns, it does not seem prudent to
adopt the UDO far the sections of the ordinance identified above until the prapased language is
clarif ed, or substantively changed where necessary, ~! some cases the orignna! language of the
existing ordinances should. simply be restored,
This the ~8t~ day of February, ~~I l .
Mar O2 11 07;14 Alice Gordon 9~9-967-383 35
1~
~1~CR~4~D~~ ~ ~ ~~. ~ ~ ~~~~~~
T~: grange Jaunty ~lanni~ng ~~ard
Fr~r~: Cow~~issiorter Alioe ~~rd~n
~r~ otl Unifed De~rel~prnent ~rdinance~ - Ga~n~en~ and Sug~e~ted
Re. p
Changes
Date: March ~, 2D~~
As re uested on Februa~r fig, # am submitking carnrnen and suggested changes
to the proposed Unified Develapr~ent Ordinance ~UI~O~.
In the two da s since the (~u~arterly Public 4~earirrg, I have written this document
Y
Frith the cam~ments and suggested changes that !can make at the present #~rne.
' a~ue not hid time to reexamine the entire U~, ~ am sure there are other
since ! h ~ ~e used
' t at are deservi of pare study. Also, I should ~ent~an that i ha
~ect~ons h ~
me of the sub~n~tked written cemments ~n the docurnent~ but have
the language of s~
nor had the time to farmal~ provide a citation.
Dyne of these corn~nents and changes suggest that Conditional districts be
S
restricted to certain areas of the County. if that is not posy:b#e right now far
'onal Use Districts CUDs~, they might instead have certain criteria attached
Cond~ti ~ ~
'ch have the effec# of restnciing hem to certain meas. !n same cases, I ha e
why
su ested same criteria. Far Conditional Zoning Districts ~GZDs~, ~t ~s rn~
g9 t 'cted to certain areas of the County.
understanding that thay might be yes n
This ~a~ument bas the ~oli~~ir~g major oampanents.
This Cover l~lernarandum
RC?PCSEC~ UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE JUDO}
~ ,
Comments and Prap~csed Changes from Camrntss~oner Gordon
March ~, 2a1~
' an of CQNDiTIONA~ DISTRICTS in the Prc~vsed Unified Development
Cam~par~s
v~ith PLANNED DEWELOp~lENT DISTRICTS in the Ex~sfing Grange
Qrd~nance
County Zoning Ordinance. .
Sec. ~.? CONDITIONAL D1~tR1~~'S
Article ~ - ~AS~ ZONING DISTRICTS
' Sec. ~.7 - ADDIT#ONAL STANDARDS FC~R ~iPD~C~
and Article ~,
~DDITIONA~. SEDTI~NS TO BE REIliEWED
far our consideration of these comtnants and suggested changes.
Thank you y
Mar o2 11 Q7;14p Alice Gordon 919-967-383 36
~~
pl~~pO~~D ~J~YIFI~p- DEVELOP1ViEidT ORQINAt~ICE 4UD0)
comments ~ncl Proposed Changes from Commissioner Gordon
MarcFr 2, ~~11
1. ~ocatior~ of Donditiana~l DisfriGts
.. l districts and in the Economic Development Districts ~EDCs~ ar~d
Allow cand~t~ona y
the I~fland-Cheeks Dver~ay District.
uidin rind le far future discussion, ~anditiQnal Districts ~CQ$~ should vnl~r
Asag gp P
he allowed in rev'rvusly identified land use categories and located sa that they acre
P
cony atible with the Camprehensi~re Plan and surraund~ng land uses. CDs are
p
mast a ra riots in areas which have public water and sewer for in transition
pp' P ,
real and which ha~re other defining characteristics such as locatror~ slang maiQr
a ~
highway ~arridors.
~. Linki Conditional ~~sfi ~s to the Cpreh+~nsive Pin ,
~ ed Devela ment D~strects
Reinstate the pr~erar~hing, guiding language of'Plann p
' ai links the Canditianal Districts to the Campreheasive Plan,
which spec~f~c ~
' Land Use Cate pries of the plan; and links the re~.an~r~g to the
~nclud~ng the g .. .
' • i of a ra riots infrastructure such transportation fac~l~t~es and utilities.
availab~l tY pP p ,
attachment which rovtdes changes far referenced sectrans~ Also change
See the p
any other sections as needed to reinstate the language.
ial D$e Permit in the Canditianal Zoning Dish {CZDs}
3. Spec .
e Permit is re wired now far Planned Develaprner~ Districts, and
A Special Us q
should be required for CZ~~ c n e
ent which ravides changes far referenced sect~ans. Also ha g
Seethe attachm p
an ether sections as needed to reinstate the language.
~K Supermajo~itY naval of
rma'ori of the Commissiane should be squired far the app
~ sups ~ tY The number re wired for
Conditional Districts, with certain e~ceptivns ~e.g. EDDs~. q
a su erma~arity and the process remains to be defined.
~ ~
~, bsor flan s s~ms~" and "wastewa~r treatrn+~nt facitrttes"
~. C row nd a „~` ~ ~ and eliminate the use of
f~estore the term ground ab~arpttan systems to the text
~~ ent facili "as a assibil~ty in cond~t~onal disfr~cts in the !~~
wastewater treatrr~ tY k .~ cal Puffer.
. water treatment f ac~l~t~es should not be located ~n the Ru
d~str~Gt. V~aste
"~n-astewater treatment facili#j-" is true for the Agricultural
the same issue about
Residential District. flans. Also char e
meet which ravides changes far feferenc+ed ~ 9
See the attach p
`ons as needed to reinstate the requested i~ngu~9e.
ar~y other sects
• to the Rural ~ufferand faint Planning Agrment
~• Fame ~seues related n addressed
re some of the issues Identified. Other Issues have bee
The following a
Mar 0~ 11 07;14p Alice Gordon 919-9G7W38~3 37
I C,
elsewhere in this dacurnenY.
a. N~ ~ar~dit~ana! aistric ~n the Rural duffer
~anditional districts should not be allowed in the Rural Buffer.
fee at~achm~nt which provides Changes for referenced sections. Also change any
other sedans as needed #o modify the language.
b. ~a ~ondlt~+~na! districts M~ the watershed overlay !]istri~~.
Accardinglyy they should be prohibited in the university Lake and Cahe Creek
1I1~atersheds. The same issue is relevant far the'~pper ono area.
See the attachmen# which provides changes for referenced sectior~S. Also change
any other sections as needed to modify the language"
ce C+vndlt~onal Dist~c~ in Phase Z
if conditional districts bath Chas and the ~UQ} are to be discussed for the Rural
Buffer and Watersheds, change the language referencing the Rural Buffer to
specifically limit the uses. f~nly uses that are suitable far service with wells fvr
domestic water supply and ground absorption systems fvr sewage disposal are
allowed. In no circumstances should wastewater treatment facilities, except far
ground absorption systems, be allowed in the Rural Buffer.
~w ~h~~9`irs ~h~~ IlaM4 ~~IR~ ~~y~d~~ ~~ dl~~~Y~~
Issue: f~einstate text from the original ordinances that went beyond BCC
directives. If than es are desired, they should ga into Phase 2. Two examples;
9 F ru
a. Restore the language specifying quarterly hearing dates far eb a~,
flay, August, November.
See the attachment which provides changes for referenced sections, Alsa change
any other sections as needed to reinstate the language.
b. Public Interest District should remain a general Ilse honing district.
See the attachment ~uhich provides changes for referenced sections. Also Change
any other sections as needed to reinstate the language.
~~ Land Use Categories and the ~omprehenslve Pin
izen Carnrnent: A citizen made the fallv~wing point about grange County which
Cat
is paraphrased below;
" i sue which n~a never have been pointed out is that our County has
pne big ~ y
xcellent and detailed Land use categories identified and approved Thereforet . .
e
rezanin should neat be a prerequisite for mast development acttv~r. And when ~t ,s
g
necessa it should only require small changes to the zoning designations, This
rY~
'tizen went an to say that we da not need a lot of floating districts, and that it is
tterto utilize eneral use zoning districts which have been reviewed and
be g
approved after careful deliberation and community input.
This is most clearl ;Ilustrated in "Appendix F -Land use and caning Ma#rix" of the
Y
om rehensive Plan. Review that appendix to see haw to see how sand use
G p
cafe cries are ex licitly lined to the general zoning districts.
g p