Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20011126APPROVED 2/5/2002 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING November 26, 2001 G:15 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina on Monday, November 26, 2001 at 6:15 p.m. for the purpose of holding a work session. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Stephen H. Halkiotis and Commissioners Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon and Barry Jacobs COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Jahn M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Manager Rod Visser 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. (1 ~,ganizational Assessment Phase 2 Information Technology SIT} Review -Presentation from IT Review Consultant and Discussion Kevin Fitzgerald, Center for Public Technology, said that this is a status report. He still has other people to interview before writing his final report. His target is to have this report ready for the County Commissioners' retreat in January. Kevin Fitzgerald made a powerpoint presentation. He covered the purpose of the project, methodology and benchmarking. The final report will include recommendations to improve the operation of Information Technology in Orange County. Commissioner Brown asked that Kevin Fitzgerald interview members of the IT staff along with members of the IT Committee, Department Heads, members of other Information Technology staff and others who use the system. In answer to another question Kevin Fitzgerald indicated he was not working with any of the municipalities. However, the Institute of Government does have pertinent information from other municipalities that he will use in his analysis. What he hopes is that he can develop some methodology to da some comparisons. He talked about three sets of generic issues. The first relates to software, hardware, network and architecture, the second is the business side and what it supports and the third is management and what it supports. He noted that the IT budget is very small. When looking at the services that technology supports, it is virtually everything. He is looking at the County as an enterprise - not an individual department or application but as a whole and how services are provided. The software applications have different ages; different staff, different software and they all have to work together which is very difficult. In Orange County the Board of County Commissioners made a decision to replace desktop computers every three years. When he talks about network connections, he is talking about haw the information goes back and forth and gets connected. It has to work in ways that are safe, reliable, and secure and in place when it is needed. This includes the capacity of the County to provide services via applications, networks and software. Architecture is setting out a game plan of what is the equipment, hardware and software that will be supported. It is a plan for the future of how it can be done efficiently. The County is looking at reworking some of their major business systems. When they look at the software, it will be something that will fit with the mainframe and hardware in place. The state of North Carolina has put in a very detailed architecture, which lays everything out. Very few Counties or municipalities have done this because it casts a lot of money. The software and hardware is just one piece of this. The other is Business processes -not the technology itself but what you want the technology to do to run and support the business - it needs to be clear. When business processes are not clear, software is bought and then changes have to be made so that the software can fit. It is important that management knows what they want to accomplish. Commissioner Gordan asked about how best to use the technology and if Kevin Fitzgerald has a recommended process. Kevin Fitzgerald said that when he has had to make a change far something that should be automated - he looks at the requirement and the requirement drives the decision far the software. A big issue is having the capacity in the staff. Staff would need to be hired or it would need to be contracted out. He made reference to Gaal Alignment and asked if the Strategic Plan {which is the technology plan} is taking into consideration where the technology is moving and including the County Commissioners' goals. Performance Measurement looks at what the measures of performance are an the part of technology in response time, problem solution, effectiveness and efficiency. This needs to be built in so that the County Commissioners can see what kind of return they are receiving on their investment. Project Management - IT project management -when the County purchases software, there is always an issue of management, risk and contingencies and if they are followed up. Project Management is essential and critical. Kevin Fitzgerald stressed the importance of strong intergovernmental relationships -County with State and other municipalities. The County serves as an agent of the state by providing services involving child support, health and social services. The State provides services through the County. Therefore, it is important that the County have enough staff that are trained and able to support the technology mandated by the State. Kevin Fitzgerald noted that in Orange County several of the departments have staff designated as technology staff for that department or area of government. He feels that being supportive of technology and technological advances is important. Regarding training and development, staff must be trained as technology changes. Kevin Fitzgerald said that technology can support anything the County wants to do, but a determination needs to be made to be sure it can be cost justified. Also, the departments need to look at what they are doing and ask if this information was moved to the web would it have value to the citizens. It is very important to provide information to the citizens of Orange County via the web that will benefit both the citizens and the County departments. Kevin Fitzgerald made reference to benchmarking and said that what he is doing is talking with the IT directors of different counties. When looking at organizational issues, same IT departments handle cable franchising, computers in the schools, etc. Commissioner Gordon asked Kevin Fitzgerald if he feels he is interviewing enough people in the County and he said that he is interviewing enough people to get an overview and he feels it will be complete enough to identify issues. On organizational issues, he is looking at haw the IT department is put together and who they are reporting ta. He is seeing a variety of organizational frames reporting to different people. Regarding the IT budget, Orange County seems low compared to other counties particularly in terms of positions, (Guilford has 58, Buncombe 46, etc.) His initial take on this is that the way that IT is framed here looks like a small unit in comparison to some of the larger benchmarks. He is looking at the issues with the budget. In Orange County not all the information technology functions go through the IT department. This works in different ways in other counties. In terms of planning practices, looking at the strategic plans and capital planning can project for the next five years what it will cost. In terms of working relationships with other departments, that is a real important piece and that gets to fact that there are islands of technology and staff in other departments of the County. What he is seeing in other counties is that most IT departments are comprehensive. Regarding security practices, it is very important to handle viruses when they occur. Mainframe migration is an issue he would like to talk to Orange County about. Project management is important so that when changes are made to the system, all risks and ramifications are identified and evaluated. Kevin Fitzgerald said that the issues on which he will spend a fair amount of time deal with staffing, budget, business planning-goal alignment, strategic planning, mainframe migration, project management methodology, performance measurement and issues associated with assuring security in the County's system. Commissioner Gordon asked a question about architecture and Kevin Fitzgerald said that there is in place architecture, which is included in the strategic plan. Chair Halkiotis clarified that the most common management of information technology is under one department -not spread out in the various departments. Commissioner Brawn asked how the County system could serve the public. Kevin Fitzgerald said that it would be from the business processes. Commissioner Brown asked if there should be a list of things that should be made available to our citizens. John Link said that the County Commissioners need to hear from focus groups on what functions they would like to have available to the public. Commissioner Carey said that once the areas of business the County conducts are identified, then the County Commissioners would look at the areas we feel the public would like to have access. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the investment made by the County and asked if Kevin Fitzgerald has a recommendation for the cost and he said that this information will be in his next report. His recommendation would reflect the cost. Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement The Board was to consider adoption of the Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement fallowing final review by parties to the agreement. This item was postponed to the December 3, 2001 meeting. Orange County Transportation Priority List for 2004-2010 TIP The Board was to consider Orange County's transportation priority projects for the 2004-2010 Transportation Improvements Program. This item was postponed to the December 3, 2001 meeting. ADJOURNMENT With no further items far the work session, a motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adjourn this meeting. The next meeting will follow this meeting. Stephen H. Halkiotis, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, CMC APPROVED 2/5/2002 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JOINT PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA NOVEMBER 26, 2001 The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board met in joint session on Monday, November 26, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Stephen H. Halkiotis and Commissioners Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon and Barry Jacobs COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Manager Rad Visser and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below} PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Nicole Gooding-Ray, Howard McAdams, Bob Strayhorn, Barry Katz, Maria Tad, Ted Triebel, Rachel Preston, Lynn Holtkamp, and Hunter Schofield NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR Chair Halkiotis welcomed those in attendance. B. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Halkiotis dispensed with the reading of the public charge. C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. Petitioner Initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment Andrew B. and Camelia C. Lloyd petitions to rezone property from Agricultural Residential (U-Eno-CA) to Existing Commercial - 5 (U-Eno-CA}. Planning Director Craig Benedict presented the information for this item. This is a legislative process as opposed to an evidentiary hearing. This property is located at the northeast intersection of Mt. Willing Road and NC 10 West. This is adjacent to the I-4011-$5 intersection. Planner Robert Davis went through the specifics of the application. He presented to the County Commissioners photographs of the existing tract and buildings. This is a rezoning from an AR district to the EC-5 district under the newly adopted procedure. This is a general use petition, sa there should be no mention of the intended use of the property. The petitioner is requesting that a 1.03 acre tract be rezoned to existing EC-5. The original tract was approximately 0.27 acres and the provision in the ordinance that the petitioner is using tonight is a request to reestablish the existing size of the current EC-5 district. The property is in the upper Eno critical area. There is a small wooded area behind the property. The comprehensive plan recommends this area to be agricultural residential in the upper Eno critical area. The zoning for the adjacent parcel is AR. Across Mt. Willing Road, there is another EC-5 parcel owned by Kenan Enterprises. The EC-5 zoning was adapted in Cheeks Township on October 1, 1984. When NCDOT widened Mount Willing Raad, they did a condemnation for an eminent domain procedure on a portion of the property. This was disputed and went to court. A consent judgement and a civil action suit were filed whereby NCDOT obtained the additional right-af-way. Subsequently, there was a procedure where the owner was paid an additional $136,875 aver the $88,125 that was originally paid for the tract. The owner was paid a total of $225,000 for the acquired right-of-way. The new text amendment that went through a year ago has a statement that, "not withstanding the intent and the application criteria and the EC-5 district, an EC-5 district eliminated ar reduced to anon-functional zoning lot as a result of a public entity, condemnation, or partial taking, may be amended by the Board of County Commissioners' legislative action provided the following criteria are met." A) The amended district acreage shall not be increased in size by more than 10% of the existing parcel. The use shall be the same primary use as listed in the EC-5 inventory when the district was originally created. Staff is not recommending the additional 10°l0. The original taking was enough to reestablish should the Board decide. B) The new district shall be contiguous to the existing district. C) Land not rezoned or not included within the new petitioned district shall be petitioned, by the owner, to be returned to the zoning classification of the surrounding land. In the event there is mare than one adjacent zoning district, the tract shall be returned to the lower use category of the surrounding adjacent property provided anon-conforming situation is not created on the subject or adjacent parcels. This does not apply in this case because the land was taken. D) Additional property added to an existing parcel shall be recombined by deed into one zoning lot prior to issuance of zoning or building permits. The property added to the existing parcel will be recombined by deed into one zoning lot prior to issuance of zoning or building permits. E) Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan shall not be mandatory when considering a rezoninglrelocation of an EC-5 district, but shall be evaluated. The EC-5 districts are not mentioned in the comprehensive plan at this time. F) If a condemnation results in less than or equal amount of property being taken for public right-of-way than is specified in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan (transportation element) for typical right-of-way dedication, then this section shall not be used. More right-of-way was taken by NCDOT than was recommended in the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. The staff recommendation is to refer the zoning petition to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than February 19, 2002. The Planning staff recommendation is approval to allow the original sized district to be reestablished with the rezoning. Questions from the Board of County Commissioners Commissioner Gordan made reference to page 009, K and the recommended conditions. She asked why it said, "only the portion of a sign for fuel pricing may be internally eliminated" because we are not supposed to know with respect to the zoning petition what use it will be. Robert Davis said that these criteria would be applied during the building permit, assuming that this is approved. Commissioner Jacobs asked for an explanation of item I and what the EDD standards might be. Craig Benedict said that the EDD standards have to do with architecture, parking lots, and site planning to make sure that there are additional standards that can be garnered from the EDDs to make sure that those higher standards for the reconstruction of EC-5 are used. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the EDD standards would apply to all the EC-5 districts in the County and Craig Benedict said that the EDD standards could only be used where land has been taken by eminent domain. Commissioner Jacobs said that there was a similar instance on Erwin Road and asked where that is in the process and Craig Benedict said that they have worked on this for the last 8-10 months and there are issues with water and sewer. Commissioner Brown asked about the critical area and if the use would be a gas station and if there are ways to detect the runoff. Craig Benedict said that there are a lot of state and federal regulations that will make this type of facility meet higher environmental standards. Questions from the Planning Board In answer to a question from Howard McAdams, Craig Benedict said that the new standards would apply to all of the land that is being requested (1.09 acres). Part of the program of re- instituting the EC-5 use is to have the use of the original site plus the 10% that was requested to be under the new regulations. Bob Strayhorn asked about the setback far the original site. Craig Benedict said that the setbacks were 40 feet in the front yard and 20 feet around the perimeter areas. There are some certain buffer requirements of landscaping in the EC-5. Commissioner Gordon asked if the 10% is needed to meet the higher standards and if they do not get it, what would happen. Craig Benedict said that having the additional 10°~ would allow the applicant to have more impervious area. If they do not get the 10°,6, there might have to be encumbrance of other properties so that the impervious area could be shifted. Public Comment Alois Callemyn was representing the applicant. He asked if the County Commissioners got the rezoning request in writing. He said that Ben Lloyd is a farmer and was raised in this community. Since 1922 there has not been a lot sold on this land other than to a farmer. Obviously this land cannot be used for farming. He appreciates his working relationship with the Planning staff. He said that the site would be held to a higher standard than in 1987 when Mr. Lloyd applied for the building permit. With regard to the 10%, there will be buffers there that will not be used. They are requesting the 10% because the property has right-of-way on three sides. Regarding the 20-foot elevation, he does not believe the elevation will have an impact on the flow of water. He said that they have contacted all the surrounding owners and they have all given Mr. Lloyd their verbal approval of this site. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to refer this matter to the Planning Board far a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than February 19, 2002. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. Renewal of Special Use Permit, Class A Reba and Roses, Inc. requested to renew a Special Use Permit, Class A for property zoned Agricultural Residential. The Clerk swore in 5 people -Jim Boericke, Jaki Shelton Greene, Laura Baldwin, Craig Benedict and Annie Hassell. Craig Benedict said that a corrected abstract was distributed this evening. The Special Use Permit for this property expires on February 12th so it is important that the County Commissioners consider this renewal before that time. The recommendation has been revised to meet this timeline. Craig Benedict made the presentation. This is an existing special use permit, class A, which requires Board review and comment every six years. In 1996, it was originally approved and there was a site plan far a retail shop to sell rases and garden areas and a gift shop. It was approved in 1996 and it has been in operation since then. There were same conditions of approval and all of these were met. Part of the renewal process is an analysis of the site to evaluate if the project has stayed in compliance for the last six years. He referred to page 45, which is the staff analysis. There was another greenhouse added to the property aver the years, and if the Board sa chooses to renew this special use permit, the applicant has stated that they will obtain the necessary building permits to be sure the structure meets the building code. The staff is suggesting that all structures that have not been permitted be permitted appropriately. There was one additional condition regarding a pedestrian scenic walkway along Nancy Hill Creek because of its proximity to Churton Grave. He suggested that this condition not be included at this time. He feels that there can be further discussion with adjacent property owners to evaluate the continuation of public access trails. If at some point in the future there is a need for these pedestrian walkways, it can be considered at that time. Staff is recommending that the similar conditions imposed in 1996 be re-instituted for this property and that the condition regarding the pedestrian walkway be deleted from the recommendation and that this item be forwarded to the Planning Board far decision and recommendation by February 5, 2002 and returned back to the Board of County Commissioners no later than February 12, 2002. Questions from Board of County Commissioners Commissioner Gordon pointed out that this is an existing development and the house has been there a long time and the walkway is very close to the existing house. She feels that there should be some consideration given to the fact that the house has been there a long time and the use already exists. She said that there would be a disruption if the pedestrian walkway were added as proposed. Public Comment Jim Boericke, 153 West Margaret Lane, spoke in support of Reba and Rases and said that this is truly a business that should be encouraged. This is a unique and wonderful place. It is an asset to the County. He feels that this type of business fits really well in an AR zoning environment. There is law traffic volume, na noise, no smells and it is a type of business that fits in this kind of neighborhood. He said that as Orange County is striving to preserve open space and the appearance of open space, this kind of business in this setting meets the requirement by providing a viable, economical alternative that preserves open space. He said that this establishment is really an asset that we should strive to maintain. Laura Baldwin presented pictures of her establishment. She said that her business is an unusual business. The business is at a private home which was a farm. She wanted to keep her land as it was because she is not a farmer. They want Reba and Roses to remain true to the county and environment and still be allowed to support a viable business. They have grown to 25 employees aver the last six years. They sell everything from art from local artists and international artists to plants that are grown on the property and plants that are nat. She understands that there are boxes (categories) that they must fit into, but Reba and Roses does not fit into any of the County's boxes. The property is actually split into 2 parcels. Reba and Roses sits on the 40 acres and her home sits on the 16 acres. This is not a normal development or business. They need the flexibility to grow. Coming to the Board every six years for renewal and approval to grow puts a damper on a small business that struggles every day. She is asking the County Commissioners to think of a new category to put them into so they can grow and so that they will know what they can do. She is against the public walkway because of privacy and security issues. Commissioner Brawn made reference to the 40 acres and asked if it is in use value program and Laura Baldwin did not know. Commissioner Brown said that you could build farm structures using the bona fide farming designation. Geoffrey Gledhill said that the use value taxation program does not mean that structures are not under the zoning requirements or the building permit requirements. They are not related. Building requirements for bona fide farms are different but not because of the use value tax program. There are some farm buildings that can be built without permits, but not all farm buildings. The use value relates to the activity you use the property for and how much money you make from the activity. It has nothing to do with the buildings that are located on the property. Commissioner Carey clarified that the time limit for a Special Use Permit is six years and Craig Benedict said that this applies to all class A, historic property, non-residential uses. Commissioner Gordon said that because of the short timeframe for this Special Use Permit it is important to follow through on this renewal. However, she is interested in finding another category for Reba and Roses to fit. Craig Benedict said that he agrees there is a need to create a category that would better fit Reba and Roses' situation. Commissioner Gordon feels that there should be different requirements or built in considerations for a Special Use Permit for something that already exists. Jaki Shelton Green spoke on behalf of Reba and Roses. She feels that she is one of the largest consumers of Reba and Roses. She read a prepared statement. She lives in Orange County, but has a Mebane address. She lives closer to three large chain garden centers, but her choice of garden centers has been Reba and Rases. She said that the philosophy of Reba and Rases as translated to her has been one of collaboration. She said that Orange County was very blessed to have a community-based modeled business that tends to operate out of its relationship to its consumers, not only for gain, but also for sustenance. She asked the County Commissioners to support and encourage venues like Reba and Roses by modifying processes that are restrictive and punitive. Chair Halkiotis observed that because of field trips made by students to Reba and Roses by some agricultural and horticultural classes at Orange High School, female enrollment has increased dramatically in these types of classes that have welding. These students are making garden sculptures and selling them. Annie Hassell said that she has been in Hillsborough for 2 ~/ years and has had a lot of dealings with Reba and Roses. She thinks that this gives Orange County an opportunity to support small businesses because it is an unusual business and is giving a great deal to the community. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that Laura Baldwin serve on the Economic Development Commission because this task force needs women and small business owners. Commissioner Brown suggested moving ahead on Commissioner Cordon's suggestion to come up with some creative response to this particular situation. Craig Benedict said that staff could do something independent of this and work on a new category. John Link volunteered the Economic Development staff to work with Planning staff to move expeditiously on this. Geoffrey Gledhill said if the County Commissioners change the regulations so that a special use permit is not required for Reba and Roses, then Reba and Roses would be able to operate under that use. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to refer the special use permit renewal to the Planning Board far a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no later than February 12, 2002. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JOINT WORK SESSION A. Presentation by the Plannina Department on Goals for Growth and Discussion The Planning Department made a presentation an goals for growth followed by a discussion. The PowerPoint presentation is incorporated herein by reference. Craig Benedict made the following quote about planning: "The role we have created today as a result of our thinking thus far has problems which cannot be solved by thinking the way we thought when we created them." - Einstein The purpose of this presentation is to discuss the process far amending the comprehensive plan to support the goals of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Development is inevitable in Orange County, so there much be a plan far this growth. The six principles of growth management include harmony with nature, livable built environments, place-based economy, equitable distribution of resources and services, properly mitigated impacts, and responsible regionalism. The goals of quality growth in Orange County are environmental conservation (air pollution reduction, protection of natural resources, open space and wildlife corridor establishment, storm water management, and watershed protection}; economic prosperity (business development, efficiency of public services, farmland preservation, safeguarding of property values, and tax conservation}; and community character (equitable distribution of growth induced benefits, greater regional coordination, historic preservation, rural lifestyle maintenance, traffic and automobile dependence reduction}. He elaborated an each aspect of the goals of quality growth. The next steps include the creation of comprehensive plan elements {land use, transportation, and housing}; objectives; supporting policies and choices, and implementation tools. The staff will be conferring with the County Commissioners and other boards for recommendations in the future. Craig Benedict distributed a survey and explained the details. Several clarifying questions were answered satisfactorily by Craig Benedict. ADJOURNMENT Chair Halkiotis adjourned the meeting. The next meeting will be held on Thursday, November 29, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in the meeting roam of the Government Service Center in Hillsborough, North Carolina. Stephen H. Halkiotis, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, CMC