Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 03-14-2000Approved April 17, 2000 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 14, 2000 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, March 14, 2x00 at 7 30 p. m. in the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr. and Commissioners Margaret W. Brawn, Alice M. Gordon, Stephen H. Halkiotis and Barry Jacobs COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr. and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe (all other staff members will be identified appropriately below} NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ALL RECORDINGS OF THE MEETING WILL BE KEPT FOR 5 YEARS. 1. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA -NONE 2. CITIZEN & AUDIENCE COMMENTS a. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters were considered as the Board addressed the items on the agenda below.) b. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Mr. Roger Barr spoke about the telephone service in Orange County. He said that in Orange County there is every possible different jurisdiction and the bill for local services is hard to understand. He said that this seems out of place in a county as technologically advanced as Orange County. He requested that the County Commissioners put emphasis on this issue, saying that he would be greatly appreciative. Commissioner Brown asked that staff write a letter to the Utilities Commission to see if there have been similar complaints about this and if the phone bills could be made more understandable. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Carey read the public charge. 3. BOARD COMMENTS Commissioner Halkiotis said that this Thursday evening the Hillsborough Planning Board and Town Commissioners are having a joint meeting with Mr. Vogle and his development team about a proposed project along I-40/Old NC 86. He reminded the Board that he and Commissioner Jacobs attended a couple of sessions with representatives from the Hillsborough Tawn Board, Planning Director, and Manager along with Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict and Economic Development Director Dianne Reid. He felt some significant progress was made. He invited any of the other Commissioners to attend this meeting in his place. He said that he and Commissioner Jacobs tried to get this meeting postponed until the small work group completed its work, but it had already been scheduled. Commissioner Halkiotis said that after he left the State of the Economy Breakfast this morning he talked with some citizens. He suggested that the Board ask the Manager to look into whether or not sales taxes are being collected at the Buckhorn Flea Market. Commissioner Halkiotis thanked the Health Department on the update on the Rubella situation in Orange County as well as the quick work on the hepatitis situation at a local restaurant. He noted that the first reported case of rabies in the year 2000 came from his house. The dog brought a dead raccoon to the back door and his stepdaughter touched the dog. The raccoon tested positive for rabies and the child has received the five shots. He feels that rabies is still extremely active and suspect animals should be reported to Animal Control. Commissioner Halkiotis asked that the Board consider empowering the Manager and staff to begin a very open and public search for land for a firing range for law enforcement, which has the support of every law enforcement agency in this County. Commissioner Jacobs asked Commissioner Halkiotis if there should be some criteria for this search for land and he said yes. The Manager will came back with a recommendation on the criteria for a land search. Commissioner Jacobs asked County Manager John Link about the water and sewer in the Buckhorn area. He asked to receive a report on the process from Mebane's viewpoint. He asked if something like this is on Mebane's agenda. John Link said that he is meeting with the Mebane Town Manager tomorrow and will be able to report back to the Board by the end of the week. Commissioner Jacobs commended those who worked an the housing summit. He said that he and Commissioner Brown originally envisioned the establishment of two task forces as a major outcome of the summit. One task force would involve the university, the municipalities, and the County. The second task force would make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on issues such as refining evaluation criteria and assuring long-term affordability. He said that Commissioner Brown suggested aiming for the April 11t" work session to get the report from the Dispute Settlement Center and develop the charge for these two task forces. Chair Carey asked if the second task force would include those agencies which provide affordable housing and Commissioner Jacobs said yes. Commissioner Jacobs mentioned the high school site that was cleared on New Grady Brown School Road. He said that there is no clarity on who is going to pay to replace the buffer area that was cleared. He asked that the County Commissioners see the transportation plan before it is cast in stone. With regard to the high school construction standards, he said that there is not much specificity about existing vegetation or protection of buffers. He said that it does nat seem, in some cases, that local ordinances apply to school construction projects. He said that there needs to be some clarity on what ordinances are going to apply so that the government in Orange County meets the same high standards that is required of other developers. Commissioner Halkiotis and Commissioner Jacobs will meet with the Mayor of Durham City next week. They will discuss transportation, solid waste, recreation, and open space. Commissioner Gordon announced that she is on vacation this week but would be interested in a summary of the housing summit. She said that stakeholders for the one task force should also include citizens. She made reference to the meeting with the Mayor of Durham and asked that Commissioners Jacobs and Halkiotis discuss with Durham City courtesy review of developments, especially large developments that may have implications for transportation. Commissioner Brown said that the hero task forces from the housing summit should be defined. She suggested that it be brought formally to the County Commissioners. She feels it would be a good idea to discuss affordable housing at the work session on April 11t" and then decide where to go from there. Chair Carey asked the Board if the County Commissioners want to be involved with the IFC task force regarding the relocation of the homeless shelter from downtown Chapel Hill. He said that the Town of Chapel Hill would like to reconvene this task force. The IFC is searching for land. A meeting of the task force has been scheduled for March 21St at 4:30 p. m. He thinks the Board should ask the IFC to clarify its priorities for any sites that they are considering. Commissioner Brown asked if there was actually a group of people who went out and searched for land. Commissioner Gordon said that she would find out that information and report back to the Board. Commissioner Gordon said that she would go to the IFC Task Force meeting on March 21 St 4. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT -NONE 5, RESOLUTIONS/PROCLAMATIONS -NONE 6, SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS -NONE ~, PUBLIC HEARINGS -NONE 8, ITEMS FOR DECISION-CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the item on the consent agenda as stated below: a. CJPP Grant Proposal FY 2000-2001 The Board approved submission of the grant proposal to continue implementation of the Criminal Justice Partnership Programs (CJPP) for Orange and Chatham Counties and authorized the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 9. ITEMS FOR DECISION-REGULAR AGENDA a. Solid Waste Matters -Greene Tract and Revisions to Interlocal Agreement John Link said that at the last Board of County Commissioners' meeting, the Board discussed the interlocal agreement as it relates to the Greene Tract and the rezoning of the Greene Tract. The Board instructed the staff to continue with the analysis of the Greene Tract and, since that time, David Stancil and the Environment and Resource Conservation Department have conducted the assessment and will present the acreage on the entire tract that is best suited for parks, etc. He said that the Board also asked that the change in language of the interlocal agreement reflect that the request for rezoning of the Greene Tract was being withdrawn. Geoff Gledhill is going to speak to this. Environment and Resource Conservation Director David Stancil said that the final report on the biological survey was received. He said that there are not many things worthy to note in terms of changes from the interim report. He showed some maps that indicated the two historic sites and the primary habitat areas that are in the northern and southeastern regions of the tract. He said that there are a number of areas that would be suitable for parks, active and low-impact recreation. As noted in the report, some of the more developable areas, the less ecologically sensitive areas, are in the west central portion of the tract. He noted two areas that would be suitable for development. He said that the group took an additional step to look at ways the entire tract could be used. He said that there are some ways to configure this tract to accommodate all uses. Commissioner Brown asked about the location of water and sewer and County Engineer Paul Thames said that there is no sewer available in close proximity to the site at this time. The gravity sewer lines would be laid in the drainage areas that run to the northwest and southwest. However, there is no place for the lines to ga in either direction. To receive sewer from the site, the sewer would have to be extended crass-country, ar pump stations would have to be built. He said that the water would come along Purefoy Road. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the dotted lines on the map and David Stancil said that these are potential roads for access to the property. He asked if David Stancil took into account the type of grading that would be required for roads and power lines. David Stancil said that the findings were conceptual based on the typography, the lay of the land, the points of access, and the less ecologically sensitive areas. Commissioner Brown asked if there were larger maps to show this property in relation to the adjacent property that is contiguous to this 1 Q9 acres called the Greene Tract. She also asked about the greenways that were proposed by Chapel Hill. She noted that in talking with Mayor Waldorf, Chapel Hill would like to make the two developments form a significant greenway from the Greene Tract over to Homestead Park. Commissioner Brown asked to see the area in a larger context. Chair Carey said that he hopes that the Board can identify the most preferable 60 acres that could be transferred to the County. He would like to go ahead and identify the 60 cares as soon as possible rather than segmenting the transfer and the identification of the 60 acres. Mr. R. D. Smith said that the County Commissioners are in the same situation the County was in thirty years ago - no land for a landfill. Two weeks ago he was in Princeville and there was a swarm of about 2,000 blackbirds on the ground and in the trees. He wonders what the County Commissioners would da if they were faced with that many birds atone time. He wonders what other sites are under consideration far along-term basis rather than on a short-term basis. He said that the Commissioners should be thinking long term instead of chart term. He asked what would be the entrances and exits on whatever sites are chosen. Chair Carey clarified that the 60 acres that Mr. Smith is referring to as part of the Greene Tract that would eventually be transferred to the County would not be used for burial of any waste materials. Mr. Robert Campbell said that he sees the same thing happening now that happened in the early 70's when the landowners in the landfill area were promised that the land would eventually be turned into recreation or used for affordable housing. He feels that someone needs to make a commitment to the people in the landfill area about the safety of the water and asked when the residents would receive water. He said that his understanding was that the landfill was never tested for MTBE. He said that the wells were tested for MTBE and the newspapers received the results before the residents received the results. He spoke about the number of trucks that come down Rogers Raad to the landfill. He talked about the smell from the landfill and how it gets into their homes. He suggested that the County Commissioners find another place to put the solid waste recovery facility. He said that atone time asphalt was used as a covering for the landfill. He thinks that the MTBE in the well water may have come from the asphalt that was once used. Chair Carey clarified that the Towns and the County have already agreed that a public water system is going to be extended out to the Rogers Raad community. He said that the County is going to take aver the responsibility for making sure the lines are extended. There is an 18-month timeline for this water line extension. John Link said that from the date of the transfer of solid waste management to the County, the next day OWASA could be authorized to submit request for proposals to run the major water lines to this area. From that date, OWASA expects that those major water lines would be in the ground between 12 and 18 months. He said that the only thing outstanding was an agreement between the County and the other jurisdictions on how to fund the lateral lines. Commissioner Jacobs said that the Board has been very clear in saying that they understand what the residents of the Rogers Road neighborhood are saying. He said that the process is taking longer than the Commissioners originally thought. He clarified that a proposed agreement from OWASA would be forthcoming within a month. Health Director Rosemary Summers said that the wells in the Rogers Road neighborhood have been tested twice for volatile organic chemicals, including the MTBEs. The wells will be tested quarterly. The wells at the landfill have not been tested for MTBEs, but it is in discussion at this time. Commissioner Halkiotis said that he feels it is important to get a report back indicating that it is passible that there are MTBEs coming from the landfill. Commissioner Brown asked about CDBG grant money and the possible availability of that for the Rogers Road neighborhood. Jahn Link said that the staff would explore that possibility again, but as the County Commissioners recall, Orange County does not rate very high in terms of eligibility for septic or sewer systems. The chances of Orange County receiving federal funding for this are slim because of the needs of the flood victims in the eastern part of the state. Rosemary Summers said that in reference to the reports of the well testing, there was no intentional delay. This was only a miscommunication. Mr. Gary Carver made reference to the public hearing with Chapel Hill about the rezoning of the Greene Tract. He said that the meeting was very interesting and informative. The information was not new information, but was the same information that the citizens have been saying for years. He does not know how the County Commissioners felt about that meeting because there was not a vote. He said that the presentation tonight centered mostly on identifying which 60 acres of the Greene Tract are of interest to the County. He said that the amendment to the interlocal agreement accomplishes the same thing as rezoning the Greene Tract for a materials handling facility and he feels that this is not right. He said that one of the major complaints at the public hearing was that it was a foregone conclusion. He understands that there is no burial intended on the Greene Tract, but the other facilities that are proposed in that area are just as bad. He feels that the extension of the water lines to Rogers Road should not be tied to the effective date of the interlocal agreement because it is a continual delay. He stressed the importance of finding the source of the MTBEs in the wells. Chair Carey said that the responsibility of constructing the water lines is tied to the effective date of the transfer of responsibility because prior to that time no one knew who was responsible. Once the responsibility of solid waste management is transferred to the County, the County will take over that function. Commissioner Gordon said that she has a proposal for the 60 acres. She referred to the map in the packet. The 60 acres would be at the northern and northeastern part of the Greene Tract. She would hope that the 60 acres could stay undisturbed. She would also hope that the other 109 acres could be left as open space with some affordable housing. She proposed that the Board ask the staff to figure out the appropriate 60 acres. Discussion ensued about the passible configurations of the 60 acres. Commissioner Jacobs clarified that the 60 acres would be an asset of the solid waste operation. Chair Carey said that it would be a solid waste asset and anything done with that property would compensate the solid waste fund. Geoffrey Gledhill said that if nothing was done with the 60 acres, it would remain an asset of the landfill. Commissioner Jacobs said that if Chapel Hill and Carrboro used the 109 acres as a park, he thinks that it is important for the Board to decide the portion of the 60 acres where other functions could be provided in the future (i.e., affordable housing, school site, County facilities, a MRF). He would rather protect the most sensitive 60 acres. Commissioner Jacobs asked Commissioner Gordon that, in using part of section iwo (from the map), since it has limited access by road, if she perceived that as a place for other functions. Commissioner Gordon said that it is contiguous, but first of all, this sixty acres would remain undisturbed. However, as an asset of the system, if someone in the future wanted to use it for something else, then the area to the east is considered developable. Her preference is to leave the 60 acres undisturbed. Chair Carey thinks that the conceptual line developed by Commissioner Gordon does preserve most options for a contiguous piece of land. He said that the Board should ask the staff to bring a more concrete recommendation back at the next meeting. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the staff could analyze what the environmental affect would be of having any development on section two compared with section one. Commissioner Brown wants to be sure that as much of the hardwoods as possible are included in the 60 acres. John Link said that there should bean adequate buffer around the historic site and the County needs to exclude this buffer because it is assumed that all jurisdictions want to preserve that area. Commissioner Gordon asked if staff could set the map in context so that the Board could see where the other green space is and the 109 acres. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Brawn to suggest that the 60 acres as defined on the map in the agenda abstract be the conceptual plan for the 60 acres, including all of the information requested by the various Commissioners. VOTE: UNANIMOUS REQUEST OF THE ATTORNEY TO REVISE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Geoffrey Gledhill said that he has recommended changes as outlined in the abstract. The first change is in part one of the agreement, in the Acquired Property section. He added a section, verbatim from the letter that was written to the mayors, the language as follows: "The Parties acknowledging and support the County's position, that as operator of solid waste operations it may, despite diligent efforts to explore alternatives, settle upon the area on and proximate to the existing closed landfill site on Eubanks Road as the location far additional solid waste facilities." The second change was to rewrite the effective date, eliminating altogether the linkage between the effective date and the rezoning of the 60 acres of the Greene Tract, and saying that the effective date of this agreement and the County's taking over of the solid waste responsibilities inOrange County would follow the last of two events -the approval of this amendment to the interlocal agreement and the agreement on the boundaries of the 60 acres that will be transferred to the County. He linked the effective date to pay periods so it could be handled administratively. The third change was in part five, which relates solely to the Greene Tract. Particularly, he eliminated all linkage to the rezoning of the 60-acre portion of the Greene Tract to the interlocal agreement. There is still agreement to put deed restrictions on the deed to the 60 acres, which will prohibit burial on that 60 acres. The net effect of this change is that the 60 acres will not be available under present zoning regulations for any solid waste activity that involves a structure. Also, the deed restriction would not permit any burial of solid waste on the site. Lastly, he recommended some clean-up changes regarding the advisory board. He said that the reimbursement concept that is in the agreement relates solely to the 109 acres. Commissioner Brown made reference to the advisory board and asked if elected officials could serve on the Solid Waste Advisory Board and she was told yes. She does not think that elected officials should be allowed to serve on the advisory board. Commissioner Jacobs clarified that there was no provision within this proposal that would in any way presuppose that solid waste operations would take place on the 60 acres. Commissioner Gordon questioned point number one in the effective date and asked if "governing board" was referring to the County or if it should be plural. Geof Gledhill said that the governing board of each owner must both approve and execute the agreement. Commissioner Gordon questioned point number four, "by amending the date in the first paragraph of Part 7" and suggested saying, "one month after the effective date of this agreement." Commissioner Gordon made reference to the point raised by Commissioners Brown and Jacobs about having elected officials on the SWAB and said that she does not feel that an elected official should be on this advisory board. Commissioner Jacobs suggested asking the Chair when he meets with the mayors to see if they have any objection to changing this part of the agreement to eliminate appointing elected officials to the advisory board. Commissioner Halkiotis said that he feels that if there is any elected official on any board that wants to serve on this Board that they should be allowed to do so. Chair Carey does not have a problem with having an elected official on the advisory board. A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adopt the changes to the interlocal agreement and include the change regarding one month after the effective date of the agreement. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Text Amendments to Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance Planning Director Craig Benedict made this presentation. He said that the text amendments that are being addressed in the ordinance refer directly to an item that was on the public hearing agenda on August 23, 1999 and involve the timeframe in which decisions must be made for both subdivisions and zoning. The original item that was brought before the public hearing removed all timelines for staff, Planning Board, and the County Commissioners. There were no deadlines on which decisions would have to be made. Based upon comments made at the public hearing, the staff sent notices out to the participants of the public hearing and sent additional notices out to another 20 developers and representatives in the area and met with them in October. Of the 30 notices that were sent out, only three showed up for discussion about the timelines. The staff then took the information to an ordinance review committee with the Planning Board to discuss the timelines. As the proposal came forward to the Planning Board, there were guidelines placed on the decision process for the staff and the Planning Board. One of the differences is that if a decision is not made within the timeframes, the item is considered approved without conditions. He said that the amendments now state that the item still moves forward, but with the original staff recommendations and the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Board explaining why a decision could not be made within the time period. The item must be heard by the County Commissioners within 90 days after the Planning Board hears it. The County Commissioners are allowed to table the item fora "reasonable amount of time." In addition, the language for an appeal has been modified to give a 15-day period of time for an appeal. Commissioner Brown clarified that the "reasonable amount of time" was not allowing the Board to put off the decision, but to ask legitimate questions and actually work on making a decision. Craig Benedict pointed out that the Planning Board recommends that after the item is placed on the Board of County Commissioners' agenda, the decision is to be made within 60 days. This is on the last page of the agenda abstract. This is not his recommendation, but the recommendation of the Planning Board. Commissioner Jacobs thanked the staff for giving the Board three proposals. He suggested that on the bottom of page 30 the wording should be clarified to say, "during deliberations and consideration of the application, the Board may defer consideration at any point to pursue additional analysis and review." Also, on page 27, section 4, the wording could be clarified to say, "The Planning Department shall notify the applicant of its action in writing." Commissioner Jacobs said that he does not agree with the Planning Board about having a 60-day deadline on the Board's decision. He made reference to the appeal of the preliminary plan of minor subdivisions and said that the Planning Board is saying that it should come back to them and the administration is saying that it should come back to the Board of County Commissioners. He asked if there was a difference between matters of interpretation of the subdivision regulations and policy issues related to the subdivision regulations. He does not think that the County Commissioners need to be involved in the appeal process unless it is a policy issue. Geoffrey Gledhill said that most of the appeals have to do with public versus private roads. Since staff is in tune with the County Commissioners on that issue, rarely is the staff denying a private road where it is justified under the regulations. Ne clarified that the Planning Board's role is as an advisory board and not adecision-making body. Commissioner Gordon asked if something is referred to the County Commissioners without a Planning Board recommendation would it be reasonable to refer it back to the Planning Board. Geoffrey Gledhill said that it would be reasonable. On page 33, section 30, about the application being sent by certified mail, she feels it should be left as certified mail so there is a receipt indicating that the application was sent. The Board agreed that the application should be sent by certified mail. Craig Benedict said that the staff has reviewed some of the State laws on advertising and they are suggesting, as they go through the comprehensive plan in the future, that there will be some very thorough and elaborate advertising guidelines. He would like to find other means of communication (i.e., Internet, newspaper, etc.). He said that he would move the statement back to certified mail. Commissioner Brown feels it is important that the citizens are well served by these revisions. She would like to see something come back to the Board about public notification of development. She is concerned that there is not enough time for citizens to respond to development proposals. She made reference to section nine and asked why the concept plan was extended from one year to two years. Craig Benedict said that this would be a benefit to the developer because after a concept plan is received, there would be a longer time period to resubmit the preliminary plan. A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to accept the administration's recommendation for text amendments to subdivision regulations and the Zoning Ordinance with the addition of changes to the language from Commissioners Jacobs and the addition of sending applications by certified mail. VOTE: UNANIMOUS START HERE 10. REPORTS a. Reports - "A New Consensus for Farmland Preservation" -Stakeholders Listing David Stancil said that this complies with the Commissioners' goals for this year. This is the first of three check-ins on the development of a new consensus for farmland, which is a program to develop a farmland preservation plan by the end of the calendar year sa that the County would be in a position to request grant funds from the Farmland Preservation Trust Fund. He said that initially the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board came up with a large list of stakeholders and found it was impossible to list every civic organization related to farming. The Ag Board eventually pared the list down to nine sectors of stakeholders. The staff is asking the Board if they wish to add to or delete from this list of nine sectors. Commissioner Brown suggested adding the people who have already participated in protecting easements on their property to the list of stakeholders. This could be added in the land owners category. Commissioner Jacobs asked if there was a limit to the amount of stakeholders. David Stancil said that he hopes they could attract around 5D-60 people. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that part of the farmland preservation program look at the agricultural districts and how those might be strengthened. Also, he would like to work with the Economic Development Commission and try to generate some figures on what percentage of Orange County agriculture is locally based versus out-of-county sales. Commissioner Gordon said that the Aesthetic/Environmental category should be split into two categories. The Board agreed on this change. 13. CLOSED SESSION The Board was to go into closed session "to consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee;" NCGS 143-318.11(x)(6). The Board decided to postpone this issue to a future meeting beginning at 5:30 p. m., before the meeting instead of afterwards. The Clerk will poll the Board and find a suitable date in the near future to discuss this important matter. 14. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to discuss, a motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:2D p. m. The next meeting will be held on March 21, 200D at the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Moses Carey Jr., Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk