HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-05-2013 - 6cORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 5, 2013
Action Agenda
Item No. 6 -c
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Related to Holding a
Neighborhood Information Meeting for Governmental Uses — Public Hearing
Closure and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted)
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Ordinance Amendment
Outline Form (UDO /Zoning 2013 -03)
2. UDO Amendment Package
3. Approved September 9, 2013 Quarterly
Public Hearing Legal Ad
4. Excerpt of Draft September 9, 2013
Quarterly Public Hearing Minutes
5. Excerpt of Draft October 2, 2013
Planning Board Minutes
6. County Attorney Memo Responding to
BOCC Questions Provided to Planning
Board
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael D. Harvey, Planner III, (919) 245 -2597
Craig Benedict, Director, (919) 245 -2575
PURPOSE: To receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing, and
make a decision on a Planning Director initiated text amendment(s) to the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) requiring a neighborhood information meeting be held prior to the
development of `governmental uses' as detailed within the UDO, and also the renumbering of
existing sections and updating of references throughout the document.
As a reminder, the reconvening of this hearing is solely to receive the Planning Board
recommendation and any additional written evidence submitted since the September 9, 2013
Quarterly Public Hearing. This hearing is not intended to solicit additional input from the public
or the applicant. While the BOCC may ask staff questions related to the review of a given item,
comments from the public shall not be solicited.
BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the September 9, 2013 Quarterly Public Hearing
where staff indicated the anticipated development of a volunteer fire department substation off
of Neville Road has caused local residents to voice concern over a lack of notification or
participation in the process. The proposed amendment will require a neighborhood information
meeting be held for all land uses falling into the `governmental uses' land use category to allow
the general public to be made aware of the project and offer comment.
Agenda packet materials from the hearing can be accessed via the following link:
http:// orangecountync .gov /occlerks /130909.pdf. Please refer to Section C.1 (c) of Attachment 1
for a synopsis of comments made during the public hearing.
2
Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the
proposed UDO amendments based on the following:
The UDO amendments are reasonably necessary to promote the public health, safety,
and general welfare and to achieve the purposes of the adopted 2030 Comprehensive
Plan or part thereof; and,
ii. The UDO amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Board Recommendation: At its October 2, 2013 regular meeting, the Board voted 8 to
1 to recommend approval of the UDO text amendment consistent with the staff
recommendation. Agenda materials from the October 2, 2013 Planning Board meeting can be
viewed at: http: / /orangecountync.gov /planning/ documents /Oct20l3PBPacket- web.pdf.
Please refer to Section C.2 (a) in Attachment 1 for additional information. Minutes from the
October 2, 2013 meeting are contained within Attachment 5.
Attachment 2 contains the ordinance approving the amendment and the proposed amendments
with additions shown in red text and proposed deletions are shown in red StFikethr„ ,ryh text as
well as footnotes documenting the rationale for the proposed modification.
Procedural Information: In accordance with Section 2.8.8 of the UDO, any evidence not
presented at the public hearing must be submitted in writing prior to the Planning Board's
recommendation. Additional oral evidence may be considered by the Planning Board only if it is
for the purpose of presenting information also submitted in writing. The public hearing is held
open to a date certain for the purpose of the BOCC receiving the Planning Board's
recommendation and any submitted written comments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: See Section C.3 in Attachment 1.
RECOMMENDATION: The Interim Manager recommends the Board:
1. Receive the Planning Board's recommendation;
2. Close the public hearing; and
3. Approve the text amendment package contained in Attachment 2.
Attachment 1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENT OUTLINE
UDO / Zoning- 2013 -03
Amendment(s) requiring a neighborhood information meeting prior to the issuance of
a permit allowing for the development of a governmental land use
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
❑ Land Use Element Map:
From:
To:
From:
To:
❑ Other:
Text Amendments
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text:
ection(s):
® UDO Text:
❑UDO General Text Changes
❑UDO Development Standards
❑UDO Development Approval Processes
ection(s): 1. Create a new Section 2.24 entitled Governmental Uses
establishing new procedural requirement(s) for the land use
category.
2. Renumber Existing Section(s) 2.24 and 2.25.
3. Update existing references throughout the UDO.
4. Modify language within Section 5.2.2 Table of Permitted Uses
— Economic Development Districts to ensure uniformity within
the UDO with respect to denoting the `Governmental Uses'
land use category.
1
3
❑ Other:
B. RATIONALE
W
2.
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 require that a neighborhood information meeting be
held prior to any action authorizing the development of a governmental land use
within the County's planning jurisdiction.
The anticipated development of a fire department substation off of Neville Road has
caused local residents to voice concern over a lack of notification or participation in the
process to develop the aforementioned facility.
A volunteer fire department falls within the Governmental Use land use category, as
detailed within Section 5.2 Table of Permitted Uses of the UDO, and is considered to be
a permitted use of property. Permitted uses are handled administratively (i.e. staff
review) with no public outreach required by the UDO.
The Governmental Use land use category includes the following:
a. Government Facilities and Office Buildings
b. Government Protective Services (Police and Fire Stations) Rescue Squads,
Volunteer Fire Departments
c. Military Installations (National Guard and Reserve, Armory)
In order to address a concern over a lack of public involvement with `governmental uses'
the Planning Director proposes to modify the UDO to require a neighborhood information
meeting to allow the general public to be made aware of such applications and offer
comment.
Please note this amendment, as currently written, will not impact those uses listed in
Section 5.1.2 Uses Permitted As a Matter of Right of the UDO. This would include:
utilities (i.e. electric, telephone, gas, cable, sewer, water, etc.), borrow pits associated
with State /federal highway projects, or solid waste collection facilities owned /operated by
a public agency.
Analysis
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the Orange County 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 proposed amendment is designed to address a concern over a lack of notification
and involvement of the general public with respect to the development of governmental
uses throughout the County's planning jurisdiction.
If approved, the amendment will require a neighborhood information meeting prior to any
action by the County to review a development request in the hopes the applicant can
2
M
5
address local property owner concerns.
It should be noted this amendment, if approved, will likely extend the development review
period for such projects by several weeks.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
Objective LU -6 -1: Undertake a comprehensive effort to inform and involve the
citizens of Orange County in the land use planning process.
4. New Statutes and Rules
C. PROCESS
1. TIM EFRAME /MILESTONES /DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
June 18, 2013
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
September 9, 2013
c. BOCC Updates /Checkpoints
June 18, 2013 — BOCC members approved the legal advertisement for the
September 9, 2013 Quarterly Public Hearing.
September 9, 2013 — Quarterly Public Hearing. At the public hearing the
following comments were made:
1. A Planning Board member expressed concern there needs to be additional
thought on what constitutes `governmental uses' and the expense and
logistical issues that might arise for various uses having to hold a
neighborhood information meeting.
Staff Comment: The direction from the BOCC has been that the
development of any governmental use, including office buildings, trails,
parks, etc., should have to go through a public notification process.
Staff included language in the proposal eliminating the requirement for a
neighborhood information meeting in those instances where a public
participation component is involved with respect to the planning of the use.
While staff understands the potential concern we do not share it. It should
be noted State and Federal uses are exempt from this requirement as they
are not subject to local land use regulations.
Please refer to Attachment 6 for additional insight into this issue provided
by the County Attorney's office.
3
2. A BOCC member expressed concern over the imposition of additional cost
on applicants to advertise and hold the neighborhood information meeting.
November 5, 2013 — Receive Planning Board recommendation and render a
decision.
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:
July 10, 2013 — Ordinance Review Committee (ORC).
A Planning Board member expressed concern over the proposed
amendment indicating he believed this was an unnecessary political
reaction arising out of objections to the development of a volunteer fire
department substation off of Neville Road.
Further, it was suggested this amendment would have a negative impact
on local volunteer fire departments who do not have the necessary budget
or meeting facilities to comply with the proposal.
There were no suggested amendments made by members.
Chair Hallenbeck suggested individual members put their concerns in
writing for staff and the BOCC to address at the appropriate time. To date
no written comments have been received.
October 2, 2013 — Planning Board Review.
The Planning Board voted 8 to 1 to recommend approval of the
amendment package contained in Attachment 2.
The dissenting member indicated he was not in favor of the amendment,
believing it was unnecessary, placed a burden on local volunteer fire
departments from both a financial and logistical standpoint with respect to
the scheduling and holding of the meeting, and would unnecessarily
lengthen the County site plan review process.
For more information please refer to Attachment 5.
b. Advisory Boards:
c. Local Government Review:
4
d. Notice Requirements
Legal advertisements were published in accordance with the provisions of the
UDO.
e. Outreach:
❑ General Public:
❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup:
® Other: Letter /e -mail sent to various County agencies (i.e. DEAPR, Asset
Management, Solid Waste, etc.) and other local entities (i.e. local
volunteer fire departments and rescue squads) potentially impacted
by the proposal outlining the amendment and soliciting comments for
inclusion within the QPH package.
An e -mail was sent to various County Departments on June 24, 2013
requested review of the proposed amendment(s).
Responses from DEAPR and Solid Waste expressed concern over a
potential duplication of efforts as there is typically significant public
outreach on various projects (i.e. parks, solid waste convenience
centers, etc.) Staff added language to the proposed amendment
address this concern by eliminating the neighborhood information
meeting requirement in those instances where the project was part of
a `previous planning effort' that included public outreach and review
of a proposed development.
An e -mail was sent on August 5, 2013 to all local volunteer fire chiefs
as well as public safety agencies throughout the County (i.e. Sheriff,
Town of Chapel Hill Police /Fire, Town of Carrboro Police /Fire, Town
of Hillsborough Police /Fire, etc.) requesting comments on the
proposed amendment.
To date no comments have been received.
3. FISCAL IMPACT
Coordination and attendance at the information meeting by staff shall be handled
within existing budgetary outlays. The cost associated with the notification of the
information meeting shall be borne by the applicant.
Additional budgetary outlays to cover the costs of a mailing will be required by any
County department or applicable agency (i.e. volunteer fire department) proposing a
governmental land use.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
s
7
If approved, the development of a governmental use will require
information meeting be held prior to the issuance of a permit. As
this will likely extend the site plan review process by several weeks.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
Please refer to Attachment 2.
Primary Staff Contact:
Michael D. Harvey
Planning
(919) 245 -2597
mharvey @orangecountync.gov
that a neighborhood
previously indicated
I
N.
ent 2
Ordinance #: 2013 -044 Attachm 9
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, governmental uses, including County offices, police /fire stations, and
volunteer fire stations are allowed as a permitted use of property is most general use
zoning districts, and
WHEREAS, the County has determined government uses should be subject to
additional public review, comment, and scrutiny, and
WHEREAS, the County has determined a neighborhood information meeting should
be held prior to the submittal of a formal site plan application to the County proposing the
development of a governmental use in order to inform the public of the project and solicit
comment, and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the Unified Development Ordinance
have been deemed complete, and
WHEREAS, the County has found the proposed text amendments to be reasonably
necessary to promote public health, safety and general welfare and to achieve the
purposes of the adopted Comprehensive Plan, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 153A -341 and Section 1.1.7
of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County
has found the proposed text amendments to be consistent with the goals and policies of
the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the Unified
Development Ordinance of Orange County is hereby amended as depicted in the attached
pages.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance be placed in the book of
published ordinances and that this ordinance is effective upon its adoption.
Upon motion of Commissioner
seconded by
Commissioner , the foregoing ordinance was adopted this
day of , 2013.
I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
10
Board at a meeting held on , 2013 as relates in any way to
the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the
said Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of
)2013.
SEAL
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
11
UDO AMENDMENT PACKET NOTES:
The following packet details staff s proposed modifications to existing regulations establishing a
requirement for a neighborhood information meeting prior to the submittal of a site plan
proposing the development of a governmental land use. The amendment package also proposes
the re- numbering of 2 existing sections, to accommodate the new standards, and updates existing
references throughout the UDO.
As the number of affected pages /sections of the existing UDO are being modified with this
proposal staff has divided the proposed amendments into the following color coded
classifications:
• Red Underlined Text: Denotes new, proposed text, that staff is suggesting be
added to the UDO
• : Denotes existing text that staff is proposing to delete
Staff has included footnotes within the amendment package to provide additional
information /rationale concerning the proposed amendments to aid in your review.
Only those pages of the UDO impacted by the proposed modification(s) have been included
within this packet. Some text on the following pages has a large "X" through it to denote that
these sections are not part of the amendments under consideration. The text is shown only
because in the full UDO it is on the same page as text proposed for amendment or footnotes from
previous sections `spill over' onto the included page. Text with a large "X" is not proposed for
modification.
Please note that the page numbers in this amendment packet may or may not necessarily
correspond to the page numbers in the adopted UDO because adding text may shift all of
the text /sections downward.
Users are reminded that these excerpts are part of a much larger document (the UDO) that
regulates land use and development in Orange County. The full UDO is available online at:
http: / /orangecountync.gov /planning /Ordinances. asp
Article 2: Procedures
Section 2.22: Home Occupations
(here are no changes iral stormwater measures that are designed, constructed and m fined
) roposed on this page. It rdance with the NC DWQ Stormwater BMP Design Manual, ai roved
ting tool, and requirements listed in Section 6.14 will be sunned to meet
s included to provide uired performance standards of Section 6.14. Sui s containing
;ontext for the next page res not designed to these specifications, may be bmproved on a case by
asis provided the applicant provides adequa data and information
ow the deviations meet the requirem s of Section 6.14.
(C) Plan Approval
The Erosion Control Officer i uthorized pprove any Stormwater Management Plan
which is in conformance with the rf ance standards specified in the NC DWQ
Stormwater BMP Design Manual her requirements of this Ordinance.
(D) Approved Plan a Prereq . e
The Erosion Control icer is not authorized to iss any permits for development on
any land that is fined as new development under Se i n 6.14 of this Ordinance
unless and it a Stormwater Management Plan in compli e with the requirements of
this Or ' nce has been approved.
(E) D ign of Permanent Nutrient Export Reduction Structural Stor ter Measures
When a permanent nutrient export reduction structural stormwater measure equired
for new development to meet the requirements of this Ordinance, a North Caroli
registered professional engineer shall prepare the plan with the Engineer's Certificati of
Stormwater Management affixed, signed, sealed and dated.
2.22.1 Application Requirements
(A) An application for a Home Occupation Permit shall be filed with the Planning Director on
forms provided by the Planning Department.
(B) Application forms shall be prepared so that when completed a full and accurate
description of the proposed use, including its location, appearance, and operational
characteristics are disclosed.
(C) An application shall include a plot plan that adheres to the requirements of Sections 2.4.3
and 5.5.3.
2.22.2 Conditions of Approval
(A) If conditions are attached to the approval of a permit, they may address deficiencies in
meeting specific Ordinance requirements or they may address specific impacts which
result from the operation of the home occupation.
(B) If conditions address specific impacts which result from the operation of the home
occupation, the conditions may include, but not be limited to the following limitations:
(1) Hours of operation;
(2) Number of vehicles to be parked on the premises;
(3) The location of an accessory building, storage area or parking on the property.
(C) The Planning Director may require greater setbacks and /or additional landscaping or
screening to adequately screen the home occupation from adjoining properties.
2.22.3 Application Approval
(A) If the application is approved, either with or without conditions, the Planning Director shall
send the applicant a permit letter informing him /her of the approval and of the
requirements of the Ordinance that apply to the home occupation.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -63
12
Article 2: Procedures 13
Section 2.23: Day Care Center in a Residence
(B) The permit letter must be signed by the applicant to indicate his /her willingness to
operate the home occupation in conformance with the requirements and conditions set
forth in the permit letter.
(C) Each permit letter shall be kept on file by the Planning Director and shall constitute the
Home Occupation Permit for the particular use in question.
(D) The home occupation may be operated by the applicant as long as it is operated in
conformance with the requirements and conditions set forth in the permit letter.
2.22.4 Application Denial
If the application is denied, the Planning Director shall notify the applicant of the denial and shall
state the reasons for denial in writing.
2.22.5 Appeals
The applicant may appeal the decision of the Planning Director to the Board of Adjustment as set
forth in Section :2 :25 2.27.'
2.23.1 Application Requirements
(A) An application for a day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children shall be filed with
the Planning Director on forms provided by the Planning Department.
(B) Application forms shall be prepared so that when completed a full and accurate
description of the proposed use, including its location, appearance, and operational
characteristics are disclosed.
(C) An application shall include a plot plan that adheres to the requirements of Sections 2.4.3
and 5.8.1.
2.23.2 Application Review
Upon a determination that the application is complete, the Planning Director shall cause a review
of the application to be made. The review shall determine if the proposed day care center in a
residence for 3 to 12 children conforms with all requirements of this Ordinance. Based on the
review, the application will be approved, approved with conditions, or denied.
2.23.3 Conditions of Approval
(A) If conditions are attached to the approval, they may address deficiencies in meeting
specific chapter requirements or they may address specific impacts which result from the
operation of the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children.
(B) If conditions address specific impacts which result from the operation of the home
occupation, the conditions may include, but not be limited to the following limitations:
(1) Hours of operation;
(2) Location of play area;
(3) Number of vehicles to be parked on the premises;
(4) The location of a storage area or parking on the property.
(C) The Planning Director may require greater setbacks and /or additional landscaping or
screening to adequately screen the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children
from adjoining properties.
Staff is update references based on the proposed amendment throughout the document.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -64
Article 2: Procedures 14
Section 2.24: governmental uses
2.23.4 Application Approval
(A) If the application is approved, either with or without conditions, the Planning Director shall
send the applicant a letter informing him or her of the approval and of the requirements of
this Ordinance that apply to the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children
(B) The letter must be signed by the applicant to indicate his or her willingness to operate the
day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children in conformance with the requirements
and conditions set forth in the letter.
(C) Each letter shall be kept on file by the Planning Director and shall constitute the approval
for the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children in question.
2.23.5 Application Denial
If the application is denied, the Planning Director shall notify the applicant of the denial and shall
state the reasons for denial in writing.
2.23.6 Annual Review
Each day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children approved by the Planning Director shall
be reviewed annually by the Planning Director to assure compliance with the standards of
evaluation for such facilities.
2.23.7 Minor Changes to Approval
The Planning Director is authorized to approve minor changes in the approved day care center in
a residence for 3 to 12 children, provided that the changes are in harmony with the action of the
original approval and provided that any change in the operation complies with the standards of
evaluation as specified in Section 5.8.1.
2.23.8 Changes in Operation
Any change in the operation of the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 children that does
not comply with the standards for evaluation as specified in Section 5.8.1 shall constitute a
modification and shall require the approval of a Class B Special Use Permit by the Board of
Adjustment under the provisions of Section 2.7 of this Ordinance.
2.23.9 Appeals
The applicant may appeal the decision of the Planning Director to the Board of Adjustment as set
forth in Section 2.25 2.27.
2.24.1 Applicability
The following applies to those land uses permitted within the Governmental Uses land use
category as detailed within Section 5.2.3
2 This section will require a neighborhood information meeting for all land uses permitted within the `Governmental
Uses' land use category prior to the formal submittal of a site plan application to the Planning Department if the
project has not been formerly subject to public comment.
3 This section was added at the suggestion of the County Attorney's office to clarify which `governmental uses' the
meeting requirements would apply to. There was a concern utility development, detailed within Section 5.1.2, could
have somehow been interpreted as having to abide by these standards as well.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -65
Article 2: Procedures 15
Section 2.25: Review of Environmental Documents
2.24.2 Neighborhood Information Meeting
(A) If a proposed project has not been a part of a previous planning effort that included the
opportunity for public comment and input, a neighborhood information meeting shall be
held prior to the submittal of a site plan application. The purpose of this meeting is to
obtain surrounding property owner input and comments on the proposed development.
(1) Examples of planning efforts that generally include the opportunity for public
input are: park master plans, small area plans, solid waste management master
Plans, library master plans, etc.
(B) The Planning Department shall assist the applicant with the scheduling of the
neighborhood information meeting.0
C) The applicant shall obtain propertv owner mailina address information from the Plannin
Department, who shall utilize Orange County Land Records data, and shall mail certified
notices of the meeting date, place, and time to each property owner within 500 feet of the
subject property.
(D) The notices shall be mailed a minimum of 14 days prior to the date of the meeting. 6
(E) The applicant shall post a sign on the property advertising the date, place, and time of the
meeting a minimum of 10 days prior to the date of the meeting.
F) The applicant is reauired to submit copies of the certified mail receipts denotina the date
of the mailing as well as a synopsis of comments from the meeting as part of the site plan
application. The applicant shall also provide a written response on what steps, if any,
were taken to address said comments.
(G) A neighborhood information meeting shall not be required in cases where an applicant is
proposing to expand facilities less than 50% of existing floor area.
224 12.25.1 Environmental Assessment
(A) Generally
An Environmental Assessment ( "EA" in this section) may be submitted prior to submittal
of the development application to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement ( "EIS"
in this section) may be required, provided that:
(1) All information necessary to perform the Assessment is provided, and
(2) The project application, when submitted, is consistent with the project described
in the Assessment.
(B) Review Process
(1) The Planning Department shall review the EA for completeness within 5 calendar
days of the date of submittal.
(2) If the EA is found to be incomplete, it shall be returned to the applicant with
notification of its deficiencies.
4 Many County Departments such as DEAPR, Solid Waste, Asset Management, and the Library already do public
outreach meetings for their projects. Staff believes it is unnecessary to duplicate these outreach efforts as part of the
site plan submittal process.
' Planning staff assists all applicants who are required to hold neighborhood infonnation meetings. This includes
those applicants proposing a Major Subdivision, Conditional Use, and Conditional Zoning projects.
6 This is consistent with existing requirements for other neighborhood information meetings required by the UDO.
' Section is being renumbered and references are being updated throughout the UDO.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -66
Article 2: Procedures 16
Section 2.25: Review of Environmental Documents
(3) Upon acceptance of a complete EA, the applicant shall submit 10 copies to the
Planning Department. Additional copies may be required if needed. The EA will
be distributed by the Planning Department to other appropriate departments and
agencies for review and comment.
(4) Final Action on the EA shall occur within 14 days from the date of acceptance, or
such longer time as agreed to in writing by the applicant.
(5) If the EA reveals no "significant environmental impacts ", as that term is defined in
this Ordinance, the Planning Department shall issue a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI).
(6) If significant impacts are identified, the Planning Department shall issue a Finding
of Significant Impact and shall require that an Environmental Impact Statement
be prepared. The decision of the Planning Department shall be reviewed by the
County Manager upon request of the applicant or Planning Department.
(7) The applicant shall be notified if the Planning Department learns of any additional
state or local permits which may be required to conduct the proposed activity.
(8) Agencies the Planning Department has knowledge of potentially requiring
additional permits shall be notified of the proposed activity by the Planning
Department and shall have an opportunity to provide comments.
2.24.22.25.2 Environmental Impact Statements
(A) Review Process
(1) The Planning Department shall review the EIS for completeness within 5 working
days of submittal.
(2) If the EIS is found to be incomplete, it shall be returned to the applicant with
notification of its deficiencies.
(3) Upon acceptance of a complete EIS, the applicant shall submit 10 copies to the
Planning Department. Additional copies may be required if needed. The EIS will
be distributed by the Planning Department to other appropriate departments and
agencies for review and comment.
(4) A notice shall be placed by the Planning Department in a newspaper of general
circulation, stating that the EIS will be available for public review at the Planning
Department for a period of at least 15 days.
(5) If the proposed activity requires a Mining Permit from the State of North Carolina,
or involves the storage of hazardous materials, the EIS shall also be sent to the
State Clearinghouse for distribution and review pursuant to Title I, Chapter 25,
Section .0200 of the North Carolina Administrative Code.
(6) If an EIS prepared for a State or Federal agency has completed the Federal or
State Environmental Review process, including publication in the "Environmental
Bulletin" then the EIS and any required addendum thereto shall be advertised as
available for public review at the Planning Department, but need not be re-
circulated through the State Clearinghouse.
(7) Upon Completion of the advertised 15 -day review period, and upon receipt of
comments from the State Clearinghouse when applicable, all comments will be
compiled and summarized by Planning Staff.
(B) Public Hearing Required
(1) The EIS, along with all comments received during the review period, shall be
presented for public hearing concurrently with the development project.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -67
Article 2: Procedures 17
Section 2.26: Appeals
(2) If a public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners is not required for
approval of the development project, then a special hearing shall be scheduled.
The hearing shall take place no later than 30 days after the close of the public
review period or receipt of comments from the State Clearinghouse, whichever is
later.
(C) Notice of Public Hearing
(1) Notice of the public hearing to review the EIS and receive public comment shall
be published at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county,
stating the time and place of the hearing.
(2) Said notice shall appear in said newspaper for two successive weeks with the
first notice appearing not less than ten nor more than 25 days before the date set
for the public hearing. In computing the notice period, the day of publication is
not to be included, but the day of the hearing is to be included.
(D) Board of County Commissioners Action
(1) The Board of County Commissioners shall receive the EIS and all comments as
information only. The information presented may be used only to determine
compliance with specific development standards established in this Ordinance.
(2) No action shall be taken on the development project until after the EIS has been
presented to the Board of County Commissioners.
(E) Effect on Other Permits and Actions
Construction or installation of any major development project shall not commence until
subsequent to the filing of a Finding of No Significant Impact or acceptance of the Final
EIS by the Board of County Commissioners.
Generally
Appeal applications shall be filed in accordance with Section 2.2 within 30 days of the decision
being appealed on forms provided by the Planning Department, if applicable.
2.25.22.26.2 Planning Director Decisions
(A) Site Plans or Other Decision Pertaining to this Ordinance
Any decision of the Planning Director regarding a site plan application or other decision
pertaining to this Ordinance not listed in (B) through (D) below may be appealed to the
Board of Adjustment according to the provisions set forth in Section 2.12 of this
Ordinance.
(1) An appeal to the Board of Adjustment from a decision or determination of the
Planning Director stays all proceedings in furtherance of the decision or
determination appealed from, except:
(a) Situations that, in the opinion of the Planning Director, a stay would
cause imminent peril to life and /or property.
(b) That the situation appealed from is transitory in nature and, therefore, an
appeal would seriously interfere with enforcement of the Ordinance.
In either instance in (a) and (b) above, the Planning Director shall place in
certificate the facts to support the conclusion.
(B) Exempt Subdivisions
s Section renumbered and references are being updated throughout the UDO.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -68
Article 2: Procedures 18
Section 2.26: Appeals
(1) The decision of the Planning Director regarding an exempt subdivision
application may be appealed to the Board of County Commissioners.
(2) The Board of County Commissioners shall have final approval authority, and,
where applicable, all Final Plats shall contain information and /or conditions
approved by the Commissioners.
(3) The Board of County Commissioners in all such appeals shall make findings of
fact in support of its decision. The subdivider shall be notified, in writing, of the
Board's decision.
(C) Minor Subdivisions
(1) The decision of the Planning Director regarding a minor subdivision application
may be appealed to the Board of County Commissioners.
(2) The Board of County Commissioners shall have final approval authority, and,
where applicable, all Final Plats shall contain information and /or conditions
approved by the Commissioners.
(3) The Board of County Commissioners in all such appeals shall make findings of
fact in support of its decision. The subdivider shall be notified, in writing, of the
Board's decision.
(D) Major Subdivisions — Final Plat
(1) The decision of the Planning Director regarding a Major Subdivision Final Plat
application may be appealed to the Board of Commissioners.
(2) The Board of Commissioners shall have final approval authority, and where
applicable, all Final Plats shall contain information and /or conditions approved by
the Board of Commissioners.
(3) The Board of Commissioners in all such appeals shall make findings of fact in
support of its decision.
(4) The applicant shall be notified, in writing, of the Board of Commissioners'
decision.
2.26.3 Planning Board Decisions
(A) Major Subdivisions — Concept Plan
(1) The decision of the Planning Board regarding Concept Plan Development
Options may be appealed to the Board of Commissioners.
(2) Any notice of appeal shall be filed, in writing, with the Planning Director within 15
days after the date of the Planning Board's decision.
(3) If the appeal involves a plan /map approval, 16 copies of the plan /map shall be
submitted along with the written appeal.
(4) The Board of Commissioners shall have final approval authority, and, where
applicable, all Concept Plan Development Options shall contain information
and /or conditions approved by the Board of Commissioners.
(5) The Board of Commissioners in all such appeals shall make findings of fact in
support of its decision. The applicant shall be notified, in writing, of the Board of
Commissioners' decision within ten days after said decision is made.
2.25.42.26.4 Board of Adjustment Decisions
(A) Every decision of the Board shall be subject to review at the request of any aggrieved
party by the Superior Court by proceedings in the nature of certiorari. The appeal to
Superior Court must be filed within 30 days of the availability of the notice of decision
(2.12.5(A)).
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -69
Article 2: Procedures 19
Section 2.26: Appeals
22552.26.5 Board of County Commissioners Decisions
(A) Quasi - Judicial Decisions
(1) Quasi - judicial decisions made by the Board of County Commissioners pursuant
to the Ordinance shall be subject to review at the request of any aggrieved party
by the Superior Court by proceedings in the nature of certiorari.
(2) The appeal to the Superior Court must be filed within 30 days of the filing of the
decision of the Board of County Commissioners by the Planning Director or the
delivery of the notice of the decision to the applicant, whichever is later.
(B) Legislative Decisions
(1) Legislative decisions made by the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to
the Ordinance shall be subject to review at the request of any aggrieved party by
the Superior Court.
(2) The appeal to the Superior Court must be filed from the date of adoption of said
Ordinance within the prescribed period below:
(a) 60 days in cases involving the appeal of an Ordinance amending the
Zoning Atlas,
(b) 1 year (365 days) in cases involving the appeal of an Ordinance
amendment the UDO,
(c) 3 years (1,035 days) in cases involving an appeal based on an alleged
defect in the adoption process of an Ordinance amending the UDO.
2 25 G2.26.6 Water Supply Watershed Critical Area Boundary Line
Appeal applications disputing the Planning Director's decision regarding the location of a Water
Supply Watershed Critical Area boundary line shall be accompanied by:
(A) A survey prepared by a North Carolina registered land surveyor or professional engineer
depicting the differences between:
(1) The locational criteria in Section 4.2,
(2) The official Watershed map on file in the Planning Department, and
(3) The boundary line the applicant asserts is correct.
(B) A detailed explanation describing the differences in the three boundary lines contained in
(A) above.
22572.26.7 Special Flood Hazard Overlay District
(A) Any property owner who has received an order to take corrective action in accordance
with Section 9.7 may appeal the order to the local elected governing body by giving
notice of appeal in writing to the Floodplain Administrator and the clerk within ten
business days following issuance of the final order.
(B) The local governing body shall hear an appeal within a reasonable time and may affirm,
modify and affirm, or revoke the order.
Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control
(A) Appeal of Erosion Control Plan
Except as provided in subsection (D) below, the appeal of a disapproval, approval with
modifications, or approval with conditions of an Erosion Control Plan shall be governed
by the following provisions:
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -70
Article 2: Procedures 20
Section 2.26: Appeals
(1) The disapproval of, modification of, or conditions of approval attached to any
proposed Erosion Control Plan by the Erosion Control Officer shall entitle the
person submitting the plan to an appeal of the decision to the Orange County
Planning Director.
(2) If the Planning Director upholds the decision, the person shall be entitled to a
public hearing if such person submits written demand for a hearing within 15
days after receipt of written notice of disapproval, modification, or conditions of
approval.
(B) Hearings
(1) Orange County
(a) This sub - subsection pertains to appeals for land- disturbing activities
occurring outside the corporate limits of the Towns of Chapel Hill,
Carrboro, and Hillsborough, and the City of Mebane.
(b) Hearings held pursuant to this sub - subsection shall be conducted by the
Orange County Planning Board within 30 days after receipt of written
demand, as provided for in (A)(2) above.
(c) The Orange County Planning Board shall make recommendations to the
Board of County Commissioners within 30 days after the date of the
hearing on such Erosion Control Plan.
(d) The Board of County Commissioners will render its final decision on any
Erosion Control Plan appeal within 30 days of receipt of the Planning
Board recommendation.
(2) Other than Orange County
(a) This sub - subsection pertains to appeals for land- disturbing activities
occurring within the corporate limits of the Towns of Chapel Hill,
Carrboro, and Hillsborough, and the City of Mebane.
(b) Hearings held pursuant to this sub - subsection shall be conducted by a
designated agency of the appropriate town or city board within 30 days
after receipt of written demand, as provided for in (A)(2) above.
(c) The said designated agency shall make recommendations to the
appropriate town or city board within 30 days after the date of the
hearing on such Erosion Control Plan.
(d) The said appropriate town or city board will render its final decision on
any Erosion Control Plan appeal within 30 days of the receipt of the
recommendations from the said designated agency conducting the
hearing.
(C) Appeal from Local Government's Decision
If the local governing body upholds the disapproval, modification, or conditions of
approval of a proposed Erosion Control Plan following the public hearing, the applicant
shall be entitled to appeal the local government's action to the North Carolina
Sedimentation Control Commission as provided in Section 113A -61(c) of the General
Statutes and Title 15A NCAC 413.0118.
(D) Appeal of Erosion Control Plan if Disapproval Based on Applicant's Past
Performance
The applicant may appeal disapprovals issued under the provisions of Section 2.19.11 of
this Ordinance directly to the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
(E) Appeal of Land - Disturbing Stop Work Order
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -71
Article 2: Procedures 21
Section 2.26: Appeals
(1) The person conducting the land- disturbing activity may appeal a stop work order
to the Board of County Commissioners within a period of five days after the order
is issued.
(2) Notice of the appeal shall be given in writing to the Board of County
Commissioners, with a copy to the Erosion Control Officer.
(3) The Board of County Commissioners shall conduct a hearing at their next
scheduled regular meeting at which the appellant and the Erosion Control Officer
or Inspector shall be permitted to submit relevant evidence, and shall rule on the
appeal as expeditiously as possible.
(4) Pending the ruling by the Board of County Commissioners on an appeal, no
further work shall take place in violation of a stop work order.
22592.26.9 Stormwater Management Plan
(A) Appeals of the Erosion Control Officer's decision on a Stormwater Management Plan
shall be made to the Orange County Planning Director.
(B) If the Planning Director upholds the decision, the applicant shall be entitled to a public
hearing if the applicant submits written demand for a hearing within 15 days after receipt
of written notice of disapproval, modification, or conditions of approval.
(C) The hearing shall be conducted by the Orange County Planning Board within 30 days
after receipt of written demand for a hearing.
(D) The Orange County Planning Board shall make recommendations to the Board of County
Commissioners within 30 days after the date of the hearing.
(E) The Board of County Commissioners shall render its final decision on any stormwater
management plan upon which a hearing is requested within 30 days of receipt of the
recommendations from the Planning Board.
2-.2-g-.142.26.10 Appeal of Stop Work Orders Regarding Stormwater Management Provisions
(A) The person conducting the development activity may appeal a stop work order to the
Board of County Commissioners within a period of five days after the order is issued.
(B) Notice of the appeal shall be given in writing to the Board of County Commissioners, with
a copy to the Erosion Control Officer.
(C) The Board of County Commissioners shall conduct a hearing at their next scheduled
regular meeting at which the appellant and the Erosion Control Officer or Inspector shall
be permitted to submit relevant evidence, and shall rule on the appeal as expeditiously as
possible.
(D) Pending the ruling by the Board of County Commissioners on an appeal, no further work
shall take place in violation of a stop work order.
2-.2-g-.142.26.11 Appeals from Final Decisions Regarding Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Civil Penalties
(A) Appeal from Board of County Commissioners or Other Governing Body Decisions
Appeal from the final decision of the governing body regarding civil penalties assessed
for violations of the soil erosion and sedimentation control provisions of this Ordinance
shall be to the Superior Court of the county where the violation occurred, or in the county
where the violator's residence or principal place of business is located.
Orange County, North Carolina - Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -72
Article 5: Uses 22
Section 5.2: Table of Permitted Uses
5.2.2 Table of Permitted Uses — Economic Development Districts
ECONOMIC .•
A = CLASS A SPECIAL USE B = CLASS B SPECIAL USE C = CONDITIONAL
GENERAL USE ZONING DISTRICTS
USE TYPE BUCKHORN DD ENO EDD HILLSBOROUGH EDD
D- D-
# Shall be noted on Zoning Atlas as "Zoning District' — CU (e.g., EDB -2 -CU)
AGRICULTURAL USES
Animal hospital /veterinarian
C#
C#
Kennel, Class I
C#
Kennel, Class 11
B
B
CONSTRUCTION
Building contractors
Construction (Sector 23) (Hillsborough EDD only;
all activities must be wholly within building)
Plumbing, heating, electrical, and similar trade
contractors
FINANCE
Banks, savings and loans, and credit unions
Credit agencies and institutions
Finance & Insurance (Sector 52)
Insurance carriers and agents
Real estate agents and brokers
Security and commodity brokers, and investment
offices
GOVERNMENT USES 9
Governmental facilities and office buildings
(Including solid waste collection centers
Governmental protective services (Police and fire
stations, rescue squads, and volunteer fire
departments
9 Staff is adding language to make the land use category designation consistent throughout UDO.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 5 -10
Article 9: Enforcement 23
Section 9.5: Enforcement Procedure
(b) State the actions necessary to correct the violation,
(c) Specify a reasonable time period in which the violati ust be
corrected,
(d) e the remedies and penalties au ized herein that the Planning
Direct ay pursue if the viol is not corrected within the specified
time limit,
(e) Invite the allewA,7ioZrtto meet with the Planning Director to discuss
the viol and how it ma corrected, and
(f) ntain a statement indicating that Irm.4ecision referenced within the
notice can be appealed to the Orange Co Board of Adjustment as
detailed within this Ordinance. This statement ghslLinclude language
indicating that the appeal must be filled within 30 days the date of
the initial notice and shall provide the deadline for the sub mi of the
appeal application.
9.5.4 Appeals
(A) Any person aggrieved by the Planning Director's determination of a violation or a
correction order may appeal that determination or order to the Board of Adjustment in
accord with the provisions of Section's 2.27 of this Ordinance, including payment of
the appropriate fee.
(B) Except as provided in Section 22.27, an appeal generally stays all further actions to
enforce a notice of violation, correction order, or Stop Work Order, until the Board of
Adjustment has made a decision concerning the appeal.
(C) Civil Penalty Citations subsequent to the initial notice of violation may not be appealed to
the Board of Adjustment.
(D) As detailed within Sections 2.12 and 252.27, the Board of Adjustment shall hear the
appeal and may affirm, modify, or revoke the Planning Director's determination of a
violation.
(E) If there is no appeal, the Planning Director's determination of the nature and degree of
the violation are final.
5 Timeline for Abatement
The time allotted to abate an identified violation shall be at the sole discretion of the Planni
DA or and shall be based upon what is deemed a reasonable amount of time to aba
identifie"d4iolation. The following standards shall apply"
(A) Within days of receipt of an initial notice of violation, correction er, or Stop Work
Order, the ner of the property on which the violation occur ay submit to the
Planning Direc a written request for extension of the s cified time limit for correction
of the violation.
(B) The Planning Director sha sist individual the preparation of the written request for
extension in cases where an in ' 'dual s /are unable to prepare a written request.
(C) The Planning Director shall dete ine ether the time limit should be extended based
on the information containe n the written raquest for extension. The Planning Director
may extend the time li as reasonably necess to allow timely correction of the
violation.
(D) In cases re an appeal of the notice of violation has bee-mproperly filed with the Board
of A ment, as provided in Section 9.5.4, the 30 day periods II commence upon
eipt of the notice of the Board of Adjustment decision concerning e violation or
correction order.
Following the time limit for correction of the violation, including any stay or exte
thereof, the Planning Director shall determine whether the violation has been c,
Orange County, North Carolina - Unified Development Ordinance Page 9 -3
Article 9: Enforcement 24
Section 9.6: Penalties, Remedies, and Enforcement Powers
this Ordinance for failure to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance or the t ms and
conditions of a permit or authorization granted under this Ordinance.
(B) Any permit, certificate, or authorization mistakenly issued in violation of ate law or local
rdinance, or issued on the basis of misrepresentations by the applic t, owner, or
o er's agent may be revoked without such written determination
9.6.3 Permit Denial otRonditioning
(A) As long as a Nlation of this Ordinance remains uncor cted, the Planning Director may
deny or withhold I&PIProval of any permit, certificate r other authorization provided for in
this Ordinance that Nought for the property onXhich the violation occurs.
(B) The Planning Director mfty,,also condition a ermit, certificate, or authorization on the
correction of the violation an or payme of a civil penalty, and /or posting of a
compliance security.
9.6.4 Injunctive and Abatement Relief in
urt
(A) A violation may be correc d by any approft4te equitable remedy, a mandatory or
prohibitory injunction, Xan order of al -nen s authorized by NCGS 153A -123.
(B) The Planning Dir or shall have the authority to e %me order of abatement if the
violator does comply with such order, and the e execution shall be
recovered a lien on the property in the nature onic's or materialman 's lien.
9.6.5 Criminal Peroties
(A) y person, firm or corporation who violates the provisions of this Or Nance or fails to
comply N y with any of its requirements shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a lass 3
misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than a maximum of $500.00, imp ' onment of
up to 30 days, or both, for each violation, as provided in NCGS Section 14-4.
(B) The Planning Director may refer a violation to the District Attorney for institution of
criminal prosecution of the alleged violator.
9.6.6 Stop Work Order
(A) If a building or structure is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, repaired,
converted, moved or maintained, or any building, structure or land is used in violation of a
Stop Work Order, the Planning Director, in addition to other remedies, may institute any
appropriate action or proceedings to prevent the unlawful erection, construction,
reconstruction, alteration, repair, conversion, moving, maintenance or use, to restrain,
correct or abate the violation, to prevent occupancy of the building, structure or lands, or
to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business or use in or about the premises.
(B) Notice of a Stop Work Order shall be in writing, directed to the person(s) conducting the
violating activity and /or the property owner, and shall state the reasons for the issuance
of the Order, and the conditions under which activity may be resumed. Notice shall be
given by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. A copy of the notice shall
also be sent by regular mail. Service shall be deemed sufficient if the notice by certified
mail is unclaimed or refused, but the notice by regular mail is not returned by the post
office within ten days after mailing. Upon issuance of such Order, and posting of same
on the site of the violation, all work on the site of the violation shall cease, except those
activities necessary to bring the site into compliance with this Ordinance.
(C) The person(s) conducting the violating activity and /or the property owner may appeal the
Stop Work Order to the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Section 2-.242.27 of this
Ordinance.
Orange County, North Carolina - Unified Development Ordinance Page 9 -6
Article 9: Enforcement
Section 9.7: Additional Procedures — Special Flood Hazard Area Overlay District
9.7.1 Actions in Ev-drkof Violation
(A) Identified violatio-TrsQfthe Special Flood Hazard Overlay District shall be sent a
Notice of Violation. ThZNQice shall detai nature of the violation and schedule a
hearing with the Floodplain A_CrRiQLi or to review the situation.
(B) This hearing shall be he ore the F lain Administrator at a designated place and
time, not later tha business days after th to of the Notice, at which time the
owner sha entitled to be heard in person or by c el and to present arguments and
evi e pertaining to the matter.
Following the hearing, the Floodplain Administrator may issue such r to alter, vacate,
or demolish the structure; or to remove fill as appears appropriate.
9.7.2 Order to Take Corrective Action
(A) If, upon a hearing held pursuant to the notice prescribed above, the Floodplain
Administrator shall find that the structure or development is in violation of this Ordinance,
he or she shall make an order in writing to the owner, requiring the owner to remedy the
violation within a specified time period, not less than 60 days.
(B) Where the Floodplain Administrator finds that there is imminent danger to life or other
property, he or she may order that corrective action be taken in such lesser period as
may be feasible.
(C) In the absence of an appeal (see Section 'rzTr 2.27.7), the order of the Floodplain
Administrator shall be final.
9.7.3 Failure to Comply with Order
If the owner of a building or property fails to comply with an order to take corrective action from
which no appeal has been filed, or fails to comply with an order of the governing body following
an appeal, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor and shall be punished in the
discretion of the court.
9.8.1 Infections and Investigations
(A) Inspections
Agents, ficials, or other qualified persons authorized by the my will periodically
inspect Ian - isturbing activities to ensure:
(1) Complianc ith the North Carolina Sedim ation Pollution Control Act of 1973
( "Act" in this Se 'on), this Ordinance, ules or orders adopted or issued
pursuant to this Or i nce;
(2) The measures required in Ian are effective in controlling erosion and
sediment resulting from d- rbing activity.
Notice of the right to ins p shall be include ' the letter of approval of each Erosion
Control Plan.
(B) Authority to er Property and Conduct Investigatio and Inspections
(1) person shall willfully resist, delay, or obstruct an au ized representative,
employee, or agent of Orange County, while that person is i ecting or
attempting to inspect a land- disturbing activity under this section.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 9 -8
25
Article 9: Enforcement
Section 9.8: Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control
punishable by imprisonment not to exceed 90 days or by a fine not to exceed $7 or
by both, at the discretion of the court.
9.8.3 InjuNptive Relief
(A) .vil Action in Superior Court
(1) Whenever the governing body of the Town or County ha eascnable cause to
elieve that any person is violating or threatening to vi ate the soil erosion and
se 'mentation control provisions of this Ordinance any rule or order adopted or
issue ursuant to these regulations, or any ter , condition, or provision of an
approve Erosion Control Plan, it may, either fore or after the institution of any
other actio or proceeding authorized by t i Ordinance, institute a civil action in
the name of t town or county for injun ve relief to restrain the violation or
threatened viola n.
(2) The action shall be b ught in th uperior Court of Orange County.
(B) Order to Cease Violation
(1) Upon determination by ou hat an alleged violation is occurring or is
threatened, the court all enter y order or judgment that is necessary to abate
the violation, to en re that restora n is performed, or to prevent the threatened
violation.
(2) The instituti of an action for injunctive re i f under this section shall not relieve
any part o the proceedings from any civil or iminal penalty prescribed for
violati s of the soil erosion and sedimentation trol provisions of this
Or ' ance.
9.8.4 Restoration Areas Affected by Failure to Comply
/(A)e County may require a person w ho is engaged in a land- disturbing ctivity and failed
ain sediment generated by the activity, as required by N.C.G.S. 11 - 57(3), to
re the waters and land affected by the failure so as to minimize the det ental ts of the resulting pollution by sedimentation.
authority is in addition to any other civil or criminal penalty or injunctive relief orized under this Ordinance.
9.8.5 Revocation of Land Disturbing Permit
(A) Whenever a person conducting a land- disturbing activity is not complying with the soil
erosion and sedimentation control provisions of this Ordinance, the Land Disturbing
Permit, the Approved Erosion Control Plan or any amendments to the Erosion Control
Plan, the Erosion Control Officer may revoke the Land Disturbing Permit for the site.
(B) Notice of Revocation shall be sent by registered or certified mail to the person conducting
the land- disturbing activity. In the event delivery cannot be accomplished by registered or
certified mail, it may be accomplished in any manner provided in Rule 4 Q) of the North
Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
(C) Upon receipt of the Revocation Notice, the person responsible must immediately order all
land- disturbing activities to cease except those which are specifically directed towards
bringing the site into compliance with the soil erosion and sedimentation control
provisions of this Ordinance.
(D) Once the site has been inspected and remedial work approved by the Erosion Control
Officer, the responsible party may reapply for a Land Disturbing Permit and pay the
appropriate fee.
(E) Resumption of land disturbing activities other than those necessary to bring the site back
into compliance with the soil erosion and sedimentation control provisions of this
Ordinance before the reissuance of the Land Disturbing Permit shall constitute a violation
of the Ordinance.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 9 -12
M
Article 9: Enforcement
Section 9.9: Stormwater Management
(F) The person conducting the land- disturbing activity may appeal the revocation of a Land
Disturbing Permit following procedures set out in Section 2-.2-52.27 of this Ordinance.
9.1 Inspections and Investigations
(A) Site Inspections
(1) Agents, officials, or other qualified persons authorized by the County wi
periodically inspect on -site BMPs and illegal discharges to ensure:
(a) Compliance with the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollutio Control Act
of 1973 ( "Act" in this Section), this Ordinance, or rules or rders adopted
or issued pursuant to this Ordinance;
(b) The measures required in the Stormwater Manage5knt plan being
constructed in accordance with the approved plan
(c) The permanent BMPs are not in need of any intenance including, but
not limited to, the following:
(i) Mowing of vegetation,
(ii) Vegetation re- establishment,
(\Manage emoval (especially fro wet detention ponds),
(ization of any erodi areas, and
(ural (pipe, riser, am, etc) repair.
(2) Notice of spect shall ./in included in the letter of approval of each
Stormwaent Plan.
(B) Authority to Enter Property a C on uct Investigations and Inspections
(1) No person shall willfully re delay, or obstruct an authorized representative,
employee, or agent of Or County, while that person is inspecting or
attempting to inspect a r quire on -site BMP.
(2) The Erosion Control fficer shall ve the power to conduct such investigations
as deemed reason ly necessary t carry out the duties as prescribed in this
Ordinance, and f this purpose to en rat reasonable times upon any property,
public or privat , for the purpose of inve tigating and inspecting the sites of any
required on -s' BMP.
(3) No person hall refuse entry or access to an authorized representative or agent
of the C my who requests entry for purposes f inspection, and who presents
appro ate credentials, nor shall any person ob uct, hamper or interfere with
any ch representative while in the process of ca ing out their official duties.
(C) Notice of iolation
(1) f it is determined that a person responsible for constructrQn or maintenance of
any permanent on -site BMP, or removal of any Illegal Disc rge has failed to
comply with the Act, this Ordinance, or rules, or orders ac p d or issued
pursuant to this Ordinance, a notice of violation shall be serve upon that person.
(2) The notice may be served by any means authorized under N.C.G. . 1A -1, rule 4.
(3) The notice shall specify a date by which the person must comply wit the Act, or
this Ordinance or rules, or orders adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, d inform
the person of the actions that need to be taken to comply with the Act, th
Ordinance, or rules or orders adopted pursuant to this Ordinance.
(4) No time period for compliance need be given for encroaching on the riparian
buffer or for obstructing, hampering or interfering with an authorized
representative while in the process of carrying out their official duties.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 9 -13
27
Attachment 3
NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
A joint public hearing will be held at the Department of Social Services, Hillsborough
Commons, 113 Mayo St., Hillsborough, North Carolina, on Monday, September 9, 2013
at 7:00 PM for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or
against the following items:
1. Zoning Atlas Amendment: In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8
Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance Amendments of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), Ms. Maria Keizer and Mr. Ronald Keizer have
submitted a request to rezone a 2.67 acre parcel of property located at 3604
Southern Drive (PIN 9844 -86 -5155)
FROM: Rural Residential (R -1) and Light Industrial (1 -1)
TO: Light Industrial (1 -1)
The parcel is currently utilized to support USA Dutch Incorporated, a sheet metal
fabrication operation that has operated since 1987. Ms. Keizer owns the
property and her son, Ronald Keizer, operates the existing commercial operation.
According to the application, the applicants are interested in extending the
existing industrial zoning over the entire property in order to ensure parking,
storage spaces, access roads, land use buffers, and septic systems are properly
zoned in support of the existing industrial operation.
The property subject to this petition is located within the Commercial Industrial
Transition Activity Node as denoted on the Future Land Use Map of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Urban Designated Area as denoted on the Growth
Management System Map.
Purpose: To review the item and receive public comment on the proposed
amendment.
2. Zoning Atlas Amendment: In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8
Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance Amendments of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), Ms. Maria Keizer and Mr. Ronald Keizer have
submitted a request to rezone 2 parcels of property, totaling approximately 16
acres in land area:
FROM: Rural Residential (R -1)
TO: Light Industrial (1 -1)
The parcels, further identified utilizing Orange County Parcel Identification
Numbers (PIN) 9844 -86 -7573 and 9844 -87 -7368, are undeveloped and without
W
29
an assigned street address. These parcels are east and south, respectively, of
the USA Dutch property located at 3604 Southern Drive.
According to the application, USA Dutch has an offer to purchase both properties
for the purpose of expanding their existing sheet metal fabrication operation. As
a result, they would like to extend the 1 -1 zoning designation in support of the
proposed expansion.
The properties subject to this petition are located within the Commercial
Industrial Transition Activity Node as denoted on the Future Land Use Map of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Urban Designated Area as denoted on the Growth
Management System Map.
Purpose: To review the item and receive public comment on the proposed
amendment.
3. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment: In accordance with
the provisions of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance
Amendments of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Planning Director has
initiated an amendment to the text of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
The proposal seeks to add a new Section 2.24 entitled Governmental Uses,
renumber existing Section 2.24 and subsequent sections accordingly, and modify
the `government' land use category within Section 5.2.2 Table of Permitted Uses
— Economic Development District to add the term `uses'. References to
subsequent renumbered sections occur throughout the UDO and will be updated
including amendments to Section(s) 2.22.5, 2.23.9, 9.5.4, 9.6.6, 9.7.2, and 9.8.5.
The purpose of the amendments is to change the application review process to
require a neighborhood information meeting as part of the site plan review
process for governmental uses. Examples of governmental uses include rescue
squads, fire stations, solid waste convenience centers, governmental office
buildings, and military installations.
Purpose: To review the item and receive public comment on the proposed
amendment.
4. Eno Economic Development District Access Management Plan: As an
implementation measure of the Eno Economic Development District (EDD) Area
Small Area Plan, an access management plan has been developed for the Eno
EDD. An access management plan is intended to provide better transportation
systems and capacities as development proceeds in an area. Formally adopted
transportation access plans are necessary to procure federal and state funding
for projects and to require developer action and contribution in providing
transportation infrastructure consistent with a master plan.
30
The proposed access management study area involves approximately 980 acres
of land in the vicinity of US Highway 70 and Old Highway 10 (near Durham
County).
The draft Access Management Plan is available on the Orange County Planning
Department website at: http: / /orangecountync.gov /planning /SpecialProiects.asp
Purpose: To review the item and receive public comment on the Draft Eno
Economic Development District Access Management Plan.
PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING /OPEN HOUSE
for this proposal
In an effort to better inform interested persons in an informal setting, a Public
Information Meeting /Open House will be held on September 4, 2013 from
4:30 — 6:30 pm at the Shared Visions Retreat Center (historic Murphey
School), 3717 Murphey School Rd., Durham, NC.
5. Town of Hillsborough /Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area
Land Use Plan: Consistent with the Hillsborough- Orange Interlocal Land
Management Agreement (December 2009), the Town of Hillsborough adopted a
Future Land Use Plan in March 2013 for its planning jurisdiction and some
additional areas of County jurisdiction. These additional areas of County
jurisdiction are located within the Town's Urban Service Boundary for its public
water and /or sewer services and are generally located around the Town's fringe.
Orange County staff, Board of County Commissioners, and the public provided
input throughout the Town's planning process.
This public hearing is being held by Orange County on future land uses proposed
for the areas of County jurisdiction located within the Town's Urban Service
Boundary. This is the next step towards completion of a joint Town of
Hillsborough /Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area Land Use Plan.
Additional information including a link to the draft Land Use Plan is available on
the Orange County Planning Department website
at: http: / /www.co. oranqe. nc. us/ pIanninq/ OrangeCountyTownofHiIIsboroughJointPIanning .asp.
Purpose: To receive public comment and receive direction from the Board of
Commissioners as to subsequent steps towards a joint Town of
Hillsborough /Orange County Central Orange Coordinated Area Land Use Plan.
Substantial changes in items presented at the public hearing may be made following the
receipt of comments made at the public hearing. Accommodations for individuals with
physical disabilities can be provided if the request is made to the Planning Director at
least 48 hours prior to the Public Hearing by calling the one of the phone numbers
31
below. The full text of the public hearing items may be obtained no later than August
30, 2013 at the County website www.co.orange.nc.us at the Meeting Agendas link.
Questions regarding the proposals may be directed to the Orange County Planning
Department located on the second floor of the County Office Building at 131 West
Margaret Lane, Suite 201, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. You may also call (919) 245 -2575 or 245 -2585 and
you will be directed to a staff member who will answer your questions.
PUBLISH: The Herald Sun News of Orange
August 28, 2013 August 28, 2013
September 4, 2013 September 4, 2013
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Attachment 4
Excerpt of Draft September 9, 2013
Quarterly Public Hearing Minutes
DRAFT MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING
September 9, 2013
7:00 P.M.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board
met for a Quarterly Public Hearing on Monday, September 9, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at the DSS
Offices, Hillsborough Commons, Hillsborough, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners mark
Dorosin, Alice M. Gordon, Earl McKee Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: James Bryan (Staff Attorney)
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton and Deputy Clerk to the Board
David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Pete Hallenbeck, and Planning Board
members, Maxecine Mitchell, Johnny Randall, Lisa Stuckey, Stephanie O'Rouke, Paul Guthrie,
and Herman Staats
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tony Blake, Andrea Rohrbacher, Rachel Phelps
Hawkins, James Lea and H.T. "Buddy" Hartley
A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR
Chair Jacobs and Planning Board Chair Pete Hallenbeck
B. PUBLIC CHARGE
The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order.
Chair Jacobs reviewed the following handouts at the table:
- PowerPoint for item C1 — Zoning Atlas Amendment
- White sheet for item C1 — Zoning Atlas Amendment
- Map for C1 and C2 - Zoning Atlas Amendment — requested by Commissioner Rich
- PowerPoint for item C2 — Zoning Atlas Amendment
- PowerPoint for item C4 - Eno Economic Development District Access Management
Plan
- PowerPoint for item C5 — Hillsborough /Orange County Central Orange Coordinated
Area Land Use Plan
Green PowerPoint for item E1 — Agricultural Support Enterprises
Chair Jacobs explained that due to the lack of a quorum with the Planning Board the
meeting would start with item E1.
3. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment — To review government -
initiated amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to add a new Section 2.24
entitled Governmental Uses, renumber existing Section 2.24 and subsequent sections
accordingly, and modify the `government' land use category within Section 5.2.2 Table of
Permitted Uses — Economic Development District to add the term `uses'. References to
renumbered sections occur throughout the UDO and are proposed to be updated.
32
33
1 Michael Harvey reviewed the attachments to the abstract. He said the potential
2 development of a fire department substation off Neville Road has caused some concern for
3 local residents. He said staff was directed to initiate a text amendment to require a
4 neighborhood information meeting prior to the approval of any site plans proposing the
5 development of government use.
6 He said this requires the applicant to hold this meeting so that property owners within
7 500 feet can attend the meeting to gather information and offer feedback.
8 He said the applicant has to respond to concerns or suggestions offered at the meeting,
9 and the public must be informed by certified mail of the date and time of the meeting.
10 He noted that this amendment does not alter the current review process for government
11 uses. He said this does not require the Board to hold additional public hearings with respect to
12 the decision to purchase or act on the purchase of property. He said this also does not require
13 County agencies that engage in long range planning project planning to duplicate efforts by
14 holding informational meetings about projects that have already been reviewed and discussed
15 at the public level. He gave the example of a recent park planning project.
16 He said if this is adopted any time a government use is defined, the table of permitted
17 uses will be developed, neighborhood meetings will held, and planning staff will encourage the
18 applicant to address as many concerns as he /she sees fit.
19 He noted that the purpose of this is to insure that local residents are aware of what is
20 happening in the vicinity with regard to government facilities.
21 He said Ordinance Review Committee comments were positive with a few noted
22 changes and input from other departments.
23 He reviewed the staff recommendations as outlined in the abstract.
24 Pete Hallenbeck asked for questions
25 Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to point out the background on the first page,
26 which outlines the fact that a permitted use only requires staff review and action. She said
27 neither the County nor the applicant is required to notify adjacent property owners. She said
28 this is a fire station, which is for the public good. She said that neighbors still had concerns, and
29 she feels that neighborhood meetings and outreach are a good idea.
30 Commissioner Pelissier asked why staff selected that a meeting would not be required
31 unless the expansion was 50% or larger.
32 Michael Harvey said staff tried to use existing standards from the UDO regarding what
33 constitutes expansion. He said staff did not want smaller expansions to have to undergo a
34 formal site plan review process for just a couple of parking spaces. He said that larger re-
35 development of a site changes the nature of the project and demands a planning review. He
36 also wanted to treat the parks the same way.
37 Commissioner Pelissier asked if facilities include parking spaces or just building.
38 Michael Harvey said it includes both.
39 Chair Jacobs said he feels the neighbors in the area of the White Cross substation were
40 taken aback that something had appeared in their neighborhood without any awareness of the
41 process or the impact. He said this is a good way to address that concern. He feels it is
42 important to know and have a say about what is going on in your neighborhood, while balancing
43 the fact that government use has a certain priority. He noted that the White Cross Fire Station
44 is holding a neighborhood information meeting tomorrow night. He said this is a good precedent
45 moving forward.
46 Commissioner McKee said some of the neighbors that he talked to were not upset over
47 the fire station, but were simply upset about the lack of notification.
48 Commissioner Price clarified that if this goes into effect then a volunteer fire department
49 would have to hold an information meeting. She asked if state law supersedes this.
50 Michael Harvey said he is not aware of anything in state law that gives a fire department
51 preferential treatment from compliance with local land use regulations.
52 Commissioner Price said she thought that state law said that the fire stations are
53 permitted by right.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Michael Harvey said this does not change the permitted by right status, but it adds a
layer of requirement to that status by requiring this hearing is held.
Commissioner Price said the Board could have a public meeting and hearing, but plans
will still go forward.
Michael Harvey said yes; however the hope is that the applicant chooses to address as
many of the concerns as possible.
Pete Hallenbeck asked if the County attorney could look into this and have that
information available at the next Planning Board meeting.
Paul Guthrie asked for the definition of governmental usage.
Michael Harvey said it is noted in attachment 1 of the abstract that the County
recognizes that there are state and federal offices that will be exempt because of the nature of
their use.
Pete Hallenbeck suggested that the UDO has the definition of government use, and this
can be looked at during the next meeting.
Michael Harvey said there is not a definition of the land use, but there is a list of
permitted uses in the table, and this can be discussed in the Planning Board meeting.
Pete Hallenbeck said the fire department was scrambling to put in substations because
of the insurance situation, and manners suffered. He said it speaks well that the station is now
having a meeting.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner McKee to:
1. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned to
the BOCC in time for the November 5, 2013 BOCC Regular Meeting.
2. Adjourn the public hearing until November 5, 2013 in order to receive and accept the
Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Attachment 5
Excerpt of draft minutes
DRAFT MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
OCTOBER 2, 2013
REGULAR MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township
Representative; Maxecine Mitchell, At -Large Bingham Township; Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative;
Herman Staats, At- Large, Cedar Grove Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Andrea
Rohrbacher, At -Large Chapel Hill Township; Paul Guthrie, At -Large Chapel Hill Township;
MEMBERS ABSENT: Johnny Randall, At -Large Chapel Hill Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township
Representative; Stephanie O'Rourke, Eno Township Representative; Vacant- Hillsborough Township Representative;
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Special Projects Coordinator; Michael Harvey,
Current Planning Supervisor; Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor; Ashley Moncado, Special Projects
Planner; Abigaile Pittman, Transportation /Land Use Planner; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II
Agenda Item 9: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment — To make a recommendation
to the BOCC on government- initiated amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) that will require a neighborhood information meeting be held prior to site plan
submittal for most proposed governmental uses. This item was heard at the September 9,
2013 quarterly public hearing.
Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor
Michael Harvey: (Reviewed abstract). There were a couple of comments and questions at the quarterly public
hearing. This information is detailed on page 45 of your abstract. Concern was expressed by a Planning Board
member that there needs to be additional thought as to what constitutes government use and the expense of
logistical issues of having this neighborhood information meeting. Staffs comment is essentially that we understand
the concern but the direction we have from the elected officials is that anytime there is a government use, that use is
going to be reviewed by the adjacent property owners in this form and setting to ensure that they understand what is
going on. There are concerns about local volunteer fire departments absorbing this cost and those have been
expressed to the elected officials who have indicated that while they understand the concern, they are moving
forward with this option. Planning staff recommends that you deliberate on this and vote to recommend approval of
the amendment to the elected officials.
Tony Blake: I have a couple of comments. It was expensive and not what the intent of what the fire tax is. It was
several thousand dollars including renting space, printing boards and mailing expense. It was difficult to
communicate to people that this site plan was not approved yet so we didn't have anything concrete to show them.
Paul Guthrie: Do I read this to be that the volunteer fire department is not a governmental function?
Michael Harvey: No sir. It is a government use. In Section 5.2 of the table under the government use category, it is
listed.
Pete Hallenbeck: This is a pain for the fire department and it costs money but can be fairly cheap compared to
upsetting neighbors forever when something is just dropped on them.
35
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
Tony Blake: There were more complainers that lived further away.
James Lea: What are the nuts and bolts of this? It is the cost or the information for the meeting?
Michael Harvey: The issues were the cost of the certified mailing.
Tony Blake: There are costs for the volunteers to do this.
Pete Hallenbeck: The volunteer fire departments are run by volunteers and it is about a $3,000.00 cost. The county
is requiring these neighborhoods to have these meetings.
Michael Harvey: The issue is cost, resources, feelings that the meetings are unnecessary.
Tony Blake: We didn't plan for this cost.
Paul Gutherie: One thing I mentioned is that once you established precedence in this area, the definition of
governmental uses in terms of projects, are there ways to do that communication without sending out thousands of
letters.
MOTION made by Lisa Stuckey to approve. Maxecine Mitchell seconded.
VOTE: 7:1 (Tony Blake)
Tony Blake: I think the certified mailings should be left out and we should identify the affected property owners and
not just the ones within 500 feet.
2
36
37
Attachment 6
ORANGE COUNTY ut"t P.O. BOX 8181
Office of the County 200 S. CAMERON STREET Attorney HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278
TO: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor
FROM: James C. Bryan, Staff Attorney
DATE: October 1, 2013
RE: Proposed Amendment for Governmental Uses Requiring Neighborhood Meetings
This memorandum is written in response to questions raised by the Board of County
Commissioners at the last Quarterly Public Hearing. The Board requested the answers be made
available to the Planning Board during their consideration of the matter.
Is this proposed amendment preempted by state law because the use is designated as
"permitted by right" by the Unified Development Ordinance?
No, the proposed amendment would not be preempted by state law.
Counties are authorized to enact zoning ordinances by NCGS § 153A -340. Through the general
grant of authority and express restrictions (e.g. bona fide farms, manufactured homes, etc.), the
County enjoys significant flexibility in the creation of a local zoning ordinance.
The proposed amendment would not alter the current rights of the property owners. If a
particular use (such as "governmental use ") is proposed, the amendment merely adds
administrative burdens, but does not create a basis for refusal. This would be akin to having an
expanded application or increased permit fee. There would be no opportunity for refusal of the
right other than non - compliance with the administrative process which would include holding the
neighborhood meeting.
State and municipal jurisdictions must comply with the zoning as long as there is any building or
structure involved. See § 153A -347. Vehicular parking areas, passive recreation parks and
wetlands mitigation sites are typical examples of land uses exempt from zoning. Note that this
applies only to general use districts and that land owned by the state may not be placed in an
overlay or special /conditional use district except upon approval of the Council of State. Federal
preemption could apply depending on specific projects.
Are Volunteer Fire Departments otherwise exempt from zoning ordinances?
Volunteer Fire Departments are not otherwise specifically exempted from local zoning
ordinances.
Ell
Page 2 of 2
How would a "governmental use" be defined?
While specified in the Table of Permitted Uses, the UDO currently does not have a definition for
governmental use. As such it would be interpreted by the Planning Director or his designee. See
UDO 1.4.1. The interpretation would be subject to appeal to the Board of Adjustments. See
UDO 1.8.3. There is no legal requirement to create a definition and it is common to leave terms
undefined in order to prevent inadvertent omissions.