HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 01-24-2012 - 5o1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: January 24, 2012
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ - (~
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance Amendment Outline and Schedule for
Upcoming Item
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Michael D. Harvey, Planner III, 245-2597
Ordinance Amendment Outline Form Craig Benedict, Director, 245-2575
(Zoning 2012-09)
PURPOSE: To consider and approve process components and the schedule for a Planning
Director initiated item for the February 27, 2012 Quarterly Public Hearing.
BACKGROUND: One additional item is currently being prepared by Planning staff for the February
27, 2012 Quarterly Public Hearing. Other items for consideration were approved at the November 1,
2011 regular meeting.
This item seeks to modify tower heights approved under the Class A and B Special Use permitting
process consistent with the discussion that occurred at the November 21, 2011 dinner meeting
between the Planning Board and BOCC members. The proposed amendment also seeks to
address identified inconsistencies and contradictions within existing regulations governing the
permitting and review of telecommunication towers.
Please refer to Section B of the attachment for additional information.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Please refer to Section C.3 of the attachment.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve the attached
Amendment Outline and direct staff to proceed accordingly.
2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENTOUTLINE
UDO /Zoning-2012-09
Amendment(s) addressing the permitting and regulation of telecommunication
support structures
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
^ Land Use Element Map:
From: ---
To: ---
^ Zoning Map:
From:- --
To:---
^ Other:
Text Amendments
^ Comprehensive Plan Text:
Section(s):
® UDO Text:
^UDO General Text Changes
®UDO Development Standards
®UDO Development Approval Processes
_ _
_ _. __ __
Section(s). Section 5.3 Table of Permitted Uses;
Section 5.10 Telecommunication Facilities of the UDO
^ Other:
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose/Mission
__
.. ___.__.........._. ............ .
......_. _ ....................._...............
In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified :.
Development Ordinance Amendments of the UDO, the Planning Director has
initiated a text amendment to modify existing language governing the erection of
__ _ __ _ __
_ _ __
__ _ _ __
1
3
telecommunication support structures.
At the November 21, 2011 dinner meeting between the BOCC and the Planning
Board a discussion ensued over the need to modify existing permit review processes
for telecommunication support structures (hereafter `Tower').
Specifically a recommendation was made to modify the maximum allowable height of
a Tower reviewed under the existing Special Use Permit processes.
Currently the Ordinance requires an applicant proposing a tower over 75 feet but
under 150 feet in height to apply for a Class B Special Use Permit, which is acted
upon by the Board of Adjustment. Towers over 150 feet in height are reviewed by
the BOCC through the submittal of a Class A Special Use Permit application.
The proposed modification would allow towers over 75 feet but under 200 feet in
height to be processed as Class B Special Use Permit while towers 200 feet and
higher would be processed as a Class A Special Use Permit.
The changes were recommended to coincide with lighting requirements enforced by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and to foster additional tower development
opportunities in an effort to address communication needs in the County.
In reviewing the proposed change staff noted the following issues:
1. Existing regulations and development standards contained within Section
5.10 of the UDO are contradictory and confusing thereby exacerbating the
permitting review and approval process,
2. `Submittal Requirements' for permits are unnecessarily repeated in several
different sections of the UDO, and
3. A general lack of cohesion amongst the various sections regulating Towers
leading to the confusion of the reader.
Staff determined that a comprehensive reassessment and re-organization of existing
regulations was necessary to address these concerns.
2. Analysis
The amendment is necessary to address suggested modifications with respect to
tower heights and clean up existing redundant, confusing language contained within
Section 5.10 of the UDO.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Obiectivesl
This is a house keeping item to address comments made by Planning Board and
BOCC members as well as to address identified inconsistencies contained within the
UDO.
These modifications are supported in the following portions of the Comprehensive
Plan:
__ _ _ __.
2
4
Land Use Overarching Goal: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and
designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities
sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent
with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives.
Objective LU-1.1:
Coordinate the location of higher intensity /high density residential and non-
residential development with existing or planned locations of public
transportation, commercial and community services, and adequate supporting
infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer, high-speed Internet access, streets, and
sidewalks), while avoiding areas with protected natural and cultural resources.
This could be achieved by increasing allowable densities and creating new
mixed-use zoning districts where adequate public services are available. (See
also Economic Development Objectives ED-2.1, ED-2.3, ED-2.10, and Water
and Wastewater Objective WW-2.)
4. New Statutes and Rules
___
__
N/A
C. PROCESS
1. TIMEFRAME/MILESTONES/DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
_. _.. _.
__ __ _ _
anuary 24,_2012
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
February 27, 2012
c BOCC Updates/Checkpoints
February 7, 2012 -approval of legal advertisement
April 17, 2012 -receive Planning Board recommendation
d. Other
2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
__ __.
Mission/Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and
Orange County ordinance requirements
a. Planning Board Review:
3
__
January 4, 2012 -Ordinance Review Committee
March 7, 2012 (recommendation)
__
__
__
__ _ ___
b. Advisory Boards:
c. Local Government Review:
d. Notice Requirements
Legal advertisement will be published on February 15 and 22, 2012.
e. Outreach:
^ General Public: Consistent with NC General Statutes and Orange County
requirements
^ Small Area Plan Workgroup:
^ Other:
3. FISCAL IMPACT
Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the
provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be paid
from FY2011-12 Departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Planning
staff included in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work required
to process this amendment.
D. AMENDMENT.IMPLICATIONS
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Planning
Director is required to: `cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon
that analysis, prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and
the Board of County Commissioners'.
The amendment will eliminate existing redundancies concerning the processing of
telecommunication support structures and provide additional opportunities for such
development throughout the county in an effort to address local telecommunication
needs.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
Proposed language will be available prior to the quarterly public hearing.
4
5
__ ___ 6
..__._ __ .............__.........
.._..._.........____........_._... .
__
Primary Staff Contact:
Michael D. Harvey
Planning
(919) 245-2597
m harvey@co. orange. nc. us