Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20070521APPROVED 8/21/2447 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS HILLSBOROUGH TO1NN BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (Item A.1 } AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING May 21, 2447 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners, Hillsborough Town Board, and the Orange County Planning Board met for a Quarterly Public Hearing on Monday, May 21, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr. and Commissioners Valerie Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, Barry Jacobs, and Mike Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoff Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, and Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jay Bryan and Members Brian Crawford, Craufurd Goodwin, Sam Lasris, Renee Price-Saunders, Sandra Johnson-Quinn, Judith Wegner, and Jeffrey Schmitt PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Kempinski, Joel Knight, and Bernadette Pelissier HILLSBOROUGH BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens and Members Evelyn Lloyd, Brian Lowen, Michael Gering, and Eric Hallman HILLSBOROUGH BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Frances Dancy 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 The meeting was called to order by Chair Carey at 7:37 pm. He noted that this is the first time that a meeting has been held with these three boards in a very long time. Planning Board Chair Jay Bryan welcomed everyone. Mayor Tom Stevens said that he and his board were delighted to be at the table. B. PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. US 70ICornelius Street Strategic Plan: A joint TownlCounty Task Force worked for the past year to develop a strategic plan far Cornelius Street between North Churton Street and Holiday Park RoadlLakeshore Drive. The area is in Hillsborough's planning jurisdiction, but implementation will require the cooperation of both local governments. Note: The Hillsborough Tawn Board of Commissioners will join the County Commissioners and Planning Board for presentation of this item. Hillsborough Planning Director Margaret Hauth said that it was almost a year ago when the Town invited citizens to an informational meeting about development in this corridor. Some citizens agreed to serve on a task force. Some of the areas of concern were topics for the individual meetings. She gave a PowerPoint presentation. US 701 Cornelius Street Corridor Strategic Plan May 21, 2007 Where we've been May 23, 2006 -Public Meeting June -Charge & Schedule July 8 -Corridor walk July 19 -Transportation . August 23 -Crime Prevention and Cade Enforcement Sept 20 & Oct 18 -Economic Development options November 15 -preview December 14 -open house Transportation Concerns • Volumes - Volumes are not yet sufficient to widen Cornelius - Widening has been requested, but not funded by NCDOT • Turning movements - Left turns impact speed, safety & level of service - Limiting left turns can improve traffic flaw without widening • Speed - Impacts safety and is impacted by congestion • Vehicle mix - This corridor is heavily used by commercial traffic. The long-term implications for safety and enjoyability of the corridor with this commercial traffic was considered Recommendations -Transportation • Widening of US 70/Cornelius Street - Four-lane, median divided cross section with a bikewaylgreenway along both sides for bike and pedestrian use - Greenway option allows all improvements to fit within existing right of way • Adjust some existing road patterns to make safer, more efficient intersections Crime Prevention & Cade Enforcement • Town pursuing Cade Enforcement more diligently than in the past • Property owners have a role in assisting • Lighting, maintenance, design are important factors • More activity, more light, and public improvements all send important statements of commitment and care Recommendations -Crime & Cade • Increase lighting • Increase patrols and enforcement of loiteringttrespass • Public & neighborhood investment in landscaping at key intersections and along the corridor • Initiate Neighborhood watch Economic Development Tools • Consider 4-point approach from the Main Street Program by organizing businesses in corridor • Identify the economic drivers for the corridor • Community Development Corporation • Financial assistance Recommendations - Econ Development • Identify the ideal land uses • Promote local businesses • Business incubator space • Capture relocating Daniel Boone businesses • Establish a CDC with a for profit development arm Ring Analysis - 2000 Census figures Within 2 mites of 70186 • 6,4Q2 residents • 68°~ over 25 • 63.5% of dwellings owner occupied • Average Household income $55,785 • 1.7 vehicles per household • 43.2% blue collar: 56.7% white collar Within 10 miles of 70186 • 76,159 residents • 68% over 25 • 68.6 % of dwelling owner occupied • Average Household income $66,523 • 1.8 vehicles per household • 3Q.5% blue collar; 69.5°~ white collar Preferred Business Types From existing residents • Restaurant (family stylelbreakfast} • Grocery Store • Retail destinations • Barber/Beauty & supply • Small Business Incubator • Doctor/Urgent Care • Public offices From existing businesses • Restaurant (family style/breakfast • Bank • Grocery Store • Administrative offices Recommendations -Land Use & Design • Coordinate development regulations, particularly signage with Churton Corridor recommendations during ordinance re-write • Develop zoning classification for neighborhood scale service & retail uses • Ensure Land Use recommendations in Strategic Growth Plan match redevelopment proposals, including mixed use. Before & After • These are conceptual drawings of what could appear on sites the committee considered underdeveloped. • Property owners of these sites should interpret the plans as support for redevelopment thoughts rather than negative comments on current development. South side Cornelius near Faucefte Mill North side Cornelius near NC 86 Implementation • Establish a community organization that includes residents, property owners, and business owners • Engage the EDC in business recruiting and information campaign • Re-write Zoning Ordinance • Engage the Town Board and staff Establish a community organization that includes residents, property owners, and business owners • Act as catalyst for continued code enforcement • Act as catalyst for improved police patrols • Act as general advocate for corridor for funding requests • Act as introductory organization for CDC creation • Approach neighborhood organization for landscaping improvements or welcome sign • Create a CDC to represent the 70 Corridor community Engage the EDC in business recruiting and information campaign • Promote existing land for sale & buildings far rent • Refer relocating Daniel Boone businesses • Create promotional materials for the 70 Corridor • Provide support to community organization to help it became a CDC • Pursue funding to construct incubator space through publiclprivate partnership Re-write Zoning Ordinance • Access management along Cornelius Street • Neighborhood scale mixed use zoning district • Revise parking requirements for commercial, office, and institutional uses • Streamlined review processes to encourage development along the corridor • Establish requirements for integrating CPTED strategies while still protecting residential privacy • Traffic calming menu of options for development • Standards for bike rack and pedestrian bench installation at commercial and multi-family developments • Pedestrian connectivity requirements • Signage consistent with Churton Street Plan recommendations • Pedestrian walkway options other than concrete sidewalks Engage the Town Board and staff • Pursue outside funding opportunities for implementation of this plan {Joint) • Continue to request the widening of Cornelius/US 70 as part of the TIP funding cycle (Joint) • Assess feasibility and prepare cast estimates for local street network changes (Joint} • Request NCDOT to improve directional signage along the 70 Corridor (Joint} • Encourage bus stop locations along US 70 for both local circulation and regional commuting (Joint) • Develop funding schedule for bike! pedestrian pathways (Joint) • Initiate Phase 2 of the US 701 Cornelius Street Corridor Task Force with the mission of developing plans for the eastern portion of the Corridor within town limits {Joint) She introduced the task force members. Renee Price-Saunders asked about widening to four lanes up to 86. Margaret Hauth said that the transportation plan and the request to NCDOT includes widening for the entire length of US 70 where it runs into the Town's jurisdiction, from river bridge to river bridge. Judith Wegner asked about the possible interest in graduate students helping in a Community Development Clinic. She would be able to assist in this. Kathleen Yarborough was a member of the task force and said that she was also a member of the subcommittee that was working on the viability of a CDC. They have already met with people from Duke on this. She said that they are actively soliciting help and advisors. Renee Price-Saunders asked how much community involvement there has been. Margaret Hauth said that there were 5-7 people on the committee and there have also been periodic mailings to those interested. One of the requests was that there be services far the residents in this corridor so that they do not have to go across town. In a two-mile radius, there are 6,000 residents. Public Comment: Kathleen Yarborough is a resident of the corridor and she also leads the Neighborhood Watch for the corridor. She said that there is very strong citizen participation in the corridor, and they request the Boards' support for this endeavor. Commissioner Jacobs thanked the members of the task force and the Hillsborough staff and elected officials. He said that this was seen as a way to do economic development where it would benefit an existing committee with existing infrastructure. This is a great opportunity to bring development to a community where there is already a road, water and sewer, etc. He said that from the beginning, the community was very involved. He said that there was a mention in the last set of recommendations about seeking outside funding. When he, Chair Carey, and Laura Blackmon met with Congressman Price, they mentioned money for an incubator here. He would suggest that next year the Tawn and the County make a joint written request to Congressman Price if the two boards want to pursue this. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the rewriting of the zone ordinance section and said that it would be a logical next step to convene a joint group to look at access management. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to refer this to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than June 26, 2007 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. NC Hiahway 57 Speedway Area Small Area Plan: A citizen task force, Durham and Person County representatives, and two Orange County Commissioners have spent the past 10 months addressing planning issues fora 900+ acre area in the northeast corner of Orange County. Issues include non-conforming, non-residential land uses, traffic/access management, water quality and quantity, noise and noxious odors, and an appropriate level of residential and non-residential development. The Task Force suggests a zoning overlay entitled Rural Economic Development Area (REDA) be created to facilitate bringing non-conforming activities into compliance. Planning Director Craig Benedict made this PowerPoint presentation. NC HIGHWAY 57 SPEEDWAY AREA SMALL AREA PLAN TASK FORCE REPORT A collaborative effort between the Economic Development Department, Planning and Inspections Department, and Durham County May 21, 2447 Orange County, North Carolina Task Force Members County Commissioners Anita Badrock Moses Carey, Chair Karen Barrows Barry Jacobs, Vice Chair Moses Carey Valerie Foushee Darrell Chandler Alice Gordon Jonathan E. Ruppert Mike Nelson Barry Jacobs Debra Logner Dianne Reid, Economic Development Mac Miller Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director Bruce Peters Kevin D. Peters James Walker Helen Youngblood, Durham County Planning Staff Glenn R. Bowles, Jr. Michael Harvey Presentation Outline • Background Map • Plan Development • Task Force Charge • Planning Principles • Goal Statements • Standards • REDA {Rural Economic Development Area) • Plan Adoption Timeline Map: • 38 parcels • 930 acres • Bisected by NC 57 • Little River Township • AR zoning with 2 small EC-5 zones • Flat and Little River Watershed Plan Development • Inventory and assessment, • Identification of issues and concerns, • Public Feedback through Task Force meetings, and • Process to Review Plan Drafts. Task Force Charge • Issues, concerns, and opportunities and constraints • Focus on / New development / Safety hazards / Outdoor activities / Soils & groundwater / Traffic / Rural character / Nuisances Planning Principles ^ Preservation and protection of area rural character. ^ Minimization of impacts to natural systems and environmentally sensitive areas. ^ Growth/development complement rural character and lifestyle. ^ Maintenance of present service levels. Goal Statements • Augment or enhance the area's rural character. • Aesthetically enhance NC 57 entranceway. • No adverse impact to existing groundwater supplies. • Stormwater runoff shall be maintained on site. • Air quality issues are intricate to any future permit. • Non-conforming uses to be brought into compliance. • The quarry needs SUP to renew NC permits. • Non-residential uses held to specific criteria. • No negative impact to existing infrastructure. Site-Specific Design Standards for: Stone Quarry properties And General Suggested Conditions for: Orange County Speedway and Go-Kart property REDA (Rural Economic Development Areaj • 2-Step Process o LU Map/Text Amendments o Rezoning Application • Only with approved SAP • Conditional Use Zoning • With Review Criteria • Public Review The Plan Adoption Timeline is incorporated by reference. The Small Area Plan could be approved by the Board of County Commissioners by August 2007 and the Zoning Atlas Map Amendment could be approved by the Board of County Commissioners by October 2007. Staff recommends the Board accept public comment on a Small Area Plan and then forward comments to the Planning Board and the Economic Development Commission. Chair Carey recognized the members of the task force. Renee Price-Saunders asked far more specificity on the non-conforming use. Craig Benedict said that presently this section of the County is agricultural-residential on the land use map. Non-residential uses are not allowed in this part of the County. Since the speedway was in existence at the time the zoning went into effect, it was given a legal non-conforming status. In order for it to operate in a different status, the land use and zoning maps must be changed to allow uses of this nature. Commissioner Gordon asked about the differences between the original and amended/revised document and Glen Bowles explained the differences. The changes were on pages 31, 34-37. The specificity was taken out. The taskforce voted to make the changes. Commissioner Gordon asked about the plan for the August public hearing. Craig Benedict said that, concerning the conditional use rezoning planning device that Orange County does not have, this will be brought forward far the August Quarterly Public Hearing. This can be used in a lot of other cases throughout the County and not just this project. Craig Benedict answered several clarifying questions of Commissioner Gordon. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the very last page in the new package, page 51, which was an appendix. This was pulled out by the task force. He said that these might be the kinds of requirements that anon-conforming use would have to meet when it applied for a conditional use permit. He said that the specifics in the first packet became the appendix on pages 51-52. Jeff Schmitt said that he was present when the citizens brought their concerns to the Board. He asked if this plan met the requests that some of the citizens had that would allow them to proceed with the development of the small businesses. Craig Benedict said that the business community has participated in every meeting, and this creates a mechanism by which an expanded business ar different uses can be pursued. The neighborhood is concerned that some of the adverse impacts that exist now do not get worse. The County is trying to strike a balance. The conditional use approval process would allow for those concerns to came out through a public hearing process. Public Comment: Karen Barrows thanked the County Commissioners and the Planning staff that worked with the citizens. She said that there are a lot of conflicting interests in the area. A lot of the neighbors are concerned about damage to their wells from the blasting of the quarry, etc. The noise and increased traffic are also issues related to the quarry and the speedway. Same people do not want any more development in the area. She agrees. She does understand that other people have bought land with the intent to develop it, and those needs should be addressed also. She said that the REDA is a pretty good vehicle to strike a balance. She hopes that it will be adopted. She said that this has to be done properly. Bruce Peters said that he represents same neighbors. He said his comments pertain to the speedway, go-cartlmotocross facilities, and the potential reopening of the asphalt plant. This is a big concern far people that live within a quarter of a mile. He said that if these commercial establishments are allowed to operate without any constraint, mainly noise buffers, the rural residential area will be equivalent to a heavy industrial zone because of the excessive pollution of the air from motors without exhaust systems and the burning of oil and other agents in the production of asphalt. There is also excessive noise pollution. He said that Durham recently adapted a new noise ordinance, in which no construction can take place an Sunday or on weekdays after 6:00 p.m. He said that in the speedway area, the citizens are subjected to excessive noise 7 days a week, since the speedway allows practice every day, including Sunday. He said that many neighbors see no reason to change from the present limited use if these operations da not care about giving the air relief from the overwhelming pollution, especially noise. Lastly, the neighbors do not have a great deal of concern about some of the County's requirements in detail (i.e., landscaping, signage, parking entrances, etc.) because they do not affect the quality of life or the value of the property. Melvin Stanley was representing Orange County Speedway, but as an interested party and not as legal counsel. He said that the speedway property has been operating as a legal non- conforming operation since 1994 when "blanket" zoning was done. He said that he understood that the County would have a rezoning to make the property mare consistent with the existing uses. He said that the interested parties proceeded with the understanding that this was a legal non-conforming use and that it would not be permitted to expand, such has more seats or expanded racetrack. He said that somewhere in this process, they fell through a crack. There was a discussion about the committee that was put together and two of the meetings were held before the speedway representatives knew there was a committee. He said that an application was made to put one member of the speedway staff on the committee, and this was not acted upon. He said that he had proceeded expecting to see some kind of a commercial zoning that would apply that would cover the racetrack. He said that at the last committee meeting, he expressed some fairly strong concerns, in that the specifics that were listed would require that the speedway give up some 70% of the land so that nothing could be done on it. It would also require rebuilding some roads and relighting the facility. He said that this is not economically feasible for the speedway. He asked what would happen if the speedway did not participate in this plan. He said that they do not know what they can and cannot do. He asked for a list of what is permissible and presumed to be permissible with reasonable conditions. He asked if they would be forced to be a part of this plan, or if they could opt out. Craig Benedict said that the new zoning overlay and the conditional use rezoning would be available for someone to voluntarily ask to be included. If an entity wants to remain in its present status with no expansion, then it can do that. He said that the County was not forcing anyone to ask for a conditional use rezoning and be subject to the process. Melvin Stanley asked if there would be a list of potentially permissible uses. He specifically referred to concerts, car shows, and animal shows. He encouraged staff to bring a list that would be sensibly usable, provided that reasonable guidelines are followed. Commissioner Jacobs suggested a word change on goal #5 on page 28. He suggested, "Air quality issues shall be an integral part of any future permit reviewed within the Study Area." He said that, as far as participation in the task force meetings, no one was precluded from speaking. He said that everyone that attended felt quite free to speak. Melvin Stanley said that he did not mean to imply this. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than August 21, 2007. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. Land Use Element Text Amendments: Text Amendments to Section 3.3 entitled "Land Use Plan Categories" to amend the definition of the "10-Year Transition" category and to Section 4.0 entitled "Implementation and Evaluation" to amend the "Land Use Element-Zoning District Matrix." Planner Perdita Holtz made a PowerPoint presentation. Land Use Element TextAmendment Quarterly Public Hearing May 21, 2007 Purpose of Proposed Amendment: To potentially allow non-residential uses in designated 10-Year transition areas in accordance with adopted small area plans and/or zoning overlay districts. ~ Revisions to two (2) sections of the Land Use Element are needed ^ Section 3.3 -Land Use Plan Categories ^ Section 4.1 -Overview of Implementation Strategies • Section 3.3 Proposed Revision -Change the definition of 10-Year Transition as follows: 10~YEAR TRANSITION. Land located in areas that are in the process of changing from rural to urban densities and/or intensities, that are suitable for urban type higher densities and/or intensities and should could be provided with public utilities and services within the first 10~year phase of the Plan update or where such utilities and services are already present or planned. Non-residential uses implemented in accordance with small area plans and/or overlay districts may be appropriate. • Section 4.1 Proposed Revisions -Change the existing "County Residential Transition" category into two (2} categories -one for 20-Year Transition, one for 10-Year Transition. • The County Residential Transition (20-Year Transition} would have no change. • The information for County Residential Transition (10-Year Transition} would be changed to read as follows: COUNTY RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION (10-Year Transition}. Identifies areas changing from rural to urban in form and density. All densities of residential development would be appropriate. Non-residential uses implemented in accordance with small area plans andlor overlay districts may be appropriate. The applied zoning districts include: R-1 (low density); R-2, R-3, and R-4 (medium density); and R-5, R-8, and R-13 (high density) residential uses, and Zoning Overlay Districts. Recommended Next Steps: • Hear any public comments tonight • Refer the proposed text amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation (June 6, 2007 Planning Board meeting) • Return to the BOCC for adoption consideration at the June 26, 2007 regular meeting • Continue with other EMSAP Implementation Recommendations (i.e., Highway 70 Corridor Zoning Overlay District which will require Zoning Text and Map Amendments) Brian Crawford asked about the zoning overlay district and Perdita Holtz said that it is an overlay to the zoning maps for a specified area, where certain activities would be allowed if special standards were met. County Attorney Geof Gledhill said that it also can be an area over which there are additional, more restrictive requirements, so it can be expansive or restrictive. Brian Crawford asked if there were other overlay districts and Perdita Holtz said that all of the watershed protection areas are overlay districts. Each overlay district is different and would have its own specific requirements. Judith Wegner said that she is confused as to why the amendments are being made beforE there is any context with the new comprehensive plan. Perdita Holtz said that this is a fairly minor amendment, and the comprehensive plan update is expected to last at least two more years. In the meantime, there are small area plans where people want to implement the concepts. Renee Price-Saunders made reference to Hillsborough and the orange areas on the map. She asked when the 10 years started for the 10-year transition areas. Perdita Holtz said that technically the 10 years is probably already up because the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1981. She said that these areas were where water and sewer were supposed to be extended, and that has not happened yet. It is a land use category. Jay Bryan said that the Planning Board would have another opportunity to discuss this with the staff. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the REDA and said that there is a critical difference between how the REDA would work here and the way it would work in the County in terms of performance standards. In the 10-year transition area, there is supposed to be water and sewer; whereas in a REDA, there would not be water and sewer. She said that the big issue is whether or not to have non-residential development in the 10-year transition areas. Perdita Holtz said that the Efland/Mebane implementation focus group has been working on a US 70 corridor overlay zoning district text. The boundaries of the overlay district would not be the entire orange area, but would be a portion along US 70. Commissioner Jacobs pointed out that in the REDA, it is specified that no water and sewer will ever be available. This is one of the specific standards. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to refer the proposed text amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the County Board of Commissioners for consideration at the June 26, 2007 regular meeting. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Carey said that he forgot to mention at the outset of the meeting that item C-6 has been removed from the agenda. Commissioner Jacobs recognized Mebane City Council Member Edward Green, who has been working with Orange County on the Efland/Mebane Small Area Plan. 4. Sedimentation and Erosion Control Ordinance: The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources -Land Quality Section has completed a technical audit of the County's Erosion Control program and suggested 15 amendments/changes. Erosion Control Officer Terry Hackett made this presentation. Revisions to the Orange County Soil and Sedimentation Control Ordinance Quarterly Public Hearing May 21, 2007 Orange County Erosion Control • State Delegated Local Program • Conducts Program Countywide • Original Ordinance Adopted in 1975 • Ordinance has been Revised 13 Times • 12 of 13 Revisions Resulted from Changes in the State Model Ordinance Proposed Changes • State Model Ordinance has been Revised • Technical Audit of Orange County's Program Conducted by the State in 2006 • State Subsequently Requested Changes in the County's Ordinance to Match the State Model Ordinance Proposed Changes -Topics • Ground Cover • Intent • Notice of Activity Initiation • Preconstruction Conference • Required Revisions • Civil Penalty Assessment Factors • Notice of Civil Penalty Assessment • Hearing • Final Decision • Appeal of Final Decision • Credit of Civil Penalties • Graded Slopes and Fills • Financial Responsibility and Ownership • Land Disturbing Activity • Area Inspection Section 8 Mandatory Design & Performance Standards B. Graded Slopes and Fills Change requirement to protect exposed slopes with 21 calendar days instead of 3Q working days C. Ground Cover Change requirement to provide ground cover within 90 calendar days instead of 12- calendardays F. Approved Plan Add Item F stating that the land-disturbing activity shall be conducted in accordance with the approved plan Section 9 Stormwater Outlet Protection 4. Intent Add Item 4 requiring stream banks and channels downstream of the land disturbance to be protected from increased velocity of runoff from the site Sectian 18 Sediment and Erosion Control Plans Components of a Complete Plan: Add a requirement that if the approved plan is not working to prevent sediment loss, the plan must be revised to correct the deficiencies Sectian 18 Sediment and Erosion Control Plans F. Financial Responsibility and Ownership Clarify and add language to this existing item requiring an authorized statement of financial responsibility and ownership submitted with erosion control plans J. Notice of Activity Initiation Add Item J requiring notification to OCEC prior to initiating land-disturbing activity K. Preconstruction Conference Add Item K providing for a preconstruction conference prior to land-disturbing activity *OCEC already requires these Sectian 21 Inspections and Investigations Section H. Inspections and Investigations Add language to require self-inspections by the developer, landowner, or financially responsible party* *This is in addition to the inspections conducted by OCEC staff Section 22 Penalties 4. Civil Penalty Assessment Factors Add Item 4 allowing the amount of a civil penalty based on the following: 1. Degree and extent of harm caused 2. Cost of rectifying damage 3. Amount of money violator saved by noncompliance 4. Whether the violation was committed willfully ~. Prior record of the violator with this ordinance Section 22 Penalties 5. Notice of Civil Penalty Assessment Add item 5 to follow NC general statutes in serving notice of civil penalty 6. Hearing Add item 6 requiring a hearing when a civil penalty is issued 7. Final Decision Add Item 7 requiring the governing body to issue a decision within a set nmber of days after the hearing 8. Appeal of Final Decision Add Item 8 providing a process far appeals to be handled by the County Superior Court 9. Credit of Civil Penalties Add Item 9 clarifying that civil penalties collected pursuant to this ordinance are credited to the state Civil Penalty and Forfeiture fund for the benefit of the local school boards as required by the State Constitutions provisions on penalties, fines, and forfeitures. This requirement based on case law for state programs delegated to local authority. Recommendations • Hear public comments on proposed revisions • Refer to the Planning Board for recommendation • Return recommendation to the BOCC no sooner than June 26, 2007 Commissioner Jacobs asked Geof Gledhill about Civil Penalties Assessment Factors and said that there does not seem to be any place for the local government to recover the costs incurred in pursuing the enforcement option. Geof Gledhill said that it is not allowed. The Nortt- Carolina Supreme Court has decided that all fines and forfeitures go to the schools. Jay Bryan asked Terry Hackett if there were enough people to do the work to support the revisions. Terry Hackett said that he thinks so, but there is a little bit of a push. There may need to be additional staff at some point in the future. There was na pubtrc comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to refer to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCG na sooner than June 26, 2007. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5. Orange County Stormwater Ordinance for Lands within the Neuse River Basin: Text amendments to the Orange County Stormwater Ordinance far Lands within the Neuse River Basin to reflect changes in the Nitrogen Reduction Offset payment calculation. Terry Hackett made this PawerPoint presentation. Amendments to the Orange County Stormwater Ordinance for Lands within the Neuse River Basin Quarterly Public Hearing May 21, 2007 County Stormwater Ordinance • Program covers lands within Neuse River Basin only • Adopted State's model ordinance in March 2001 • State Delegated Local Program • Ordinance designed to reduce excess Nitrogen from stormwater runoff • Excess Nitrogen can lead to... • Increased algae • Decreased oxygen • Adverse impacts to aquatic species Reason for Proposed Change • State changed in-lieu fee calculation method last year • New calculation method subsequently rescinded by state legislature • New fee calculation method soon to be issued by state. Proposed Ordinance Changes • Incorporates state fee schedule and calculation method by reference • Eliminates need for frequent and time consuming amendments to County Ordinance Nitrogen Reduction Options • New Development must reduce amount of Nitrogen in stormwater run-off • Reduce Nitrogen On-site by utilizing: • Law density practices and/or • Structural stormwater controls (e.g. bioretention, stormwater wetlands, etc.) • Developers also have option to pay an in-lieu fee to mitigate excess Nitrogen In-Lieu Fee Option • In-Lieu fees paid by developers to NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program {NCEEP} • Fees paid far Orange County development used to help fund NCEEP projects in Orange County • Projects can include stream restoration, riparian buffer restorationtenhancement, or stormwater retrofits Recommendations • Hear Public Comments on proposed changes • Refer to the Planning Board for recommendation • PB recommendation to the BOCC no sooner than June 26. 2007 There was no public comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to refer to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than June 26, 2007. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 6. Orange County Zoning Ordinance: Text amendments to Article 4.3 Permitted Use Table and Article 6.29 Development Standards for Economic Development {E D} Districts. ITEM REMOVED D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. Agricultural Support Enterprises: Planning and Economic Development staff will provide an update on the proposal to create a new process and program for agriculturally related businesses. The process would identify a specific land use(s) based on asite-specific development plan. Agricultural Support Enterprises would be categorized by their level of impact and a complementary review process whether low, medium, or high impacts. Craig Benedict said that Tina Moon of ERCD and Dianne Reid, formerly of Economic Development, have been very active in this project over the last four years. Also, the County Attorney's Office has taken an interest in this to make sure that this future opportunity to have Agricultural Support Enterprises is available to support the farm economy. He made reference to pages 3 and 5 of the agenda materials, which were examples of an Agricultural Support Enterprises Manual and consideration on how to expand farm-related enterprises. Tina Moon said that part of the reason that this process has taken so long is that they tried to do a lot of consensus building upfront. They tried to hand pick farmers who had gone through this process themselves, in an effort to find other farmers that might be interested in doing this. This was brought before the Ag Board and others. There has also been research with other jurisdictions. She said that there has been a lot of homework, and staff now needs the Board's authorization to move forward with the key concepts. One of the authorizations that are needed is for development of a conditional district-zoning program. The second thing is authorization to finish fleshing out the particulars. The big part of this is the performance standards. This will be put together in the form of a manual to make it more user-friendly for the farming community. Finally, the staff would like the Board to begin discussions with the joint planning partners on the future area in the rural buffer. They want to finish this program in the rural parts of Orange County and then consider the rural buffer as an independent and parallel entity. She asked for the Board's endorsement. Commissioner Gordon asked where this stood before. She said that it seemed like the Board asked the staff to ga back and change some things. She would like to see the basic report as revised and the list of uses, location types, and impacts. Laura Blackmon asked if this should come back at a regular Board meeting for discussion. Commissioner Gordon said yes. It was decided that this would be brought back at the June 12th meeting. Commissioner Jacobs said that the Board should tell the staff whether or not to proceed because it has been going on far years. One of the main objections with moving forward was whether or not the rural buffer was included. Staff has decoupled the rural buffer from this discussion, so he thinks that this would simplify moving forward. He said that he also understands that Chapel Hill staff has been directed to consider the issue of essential public services allowed in the rural buffer. He suggested aiming for the October Joint Planning Public Hearing to bring this forward so that the joint planning partners can at least see the concepts. Commissioner Gordon suggested making a decision an June 12th and the Board agreed. E. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting at 9:48 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Donna S. Baker Clerk to the Board