Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19851202 MINUTES 000312 ORANGE COUNTY BMRD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 2► 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on December 2, 19851, 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners' Room of the Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. COMMISSIONERS EMSENT: Chair Don Willhoit, and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey, Ben Lloyd and Norman Walker. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and William Laws► Director of Finance Gordon Baker► Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Director of Planning Marvin Collins► Erosion Control Officer Warren Faircloth► Director of Purchasing Pam Jones, Sheriff Pendergrass► Planner Susan Smith and Financial Analyst Donna Wagner. A. BOARD CANTS Commissioner Marshall requested that item F2 - Resolution of Appreciation for Chris Hogan and Robert Hogan, Jr. be postponed until the December 17, 1985 meeting. Chair Willhoit announced that a joint meeting will be held between the Orange County and Chatham County Boards of Commissioners on December 19 at 6:30 at the Western Steer in Cole Park Plaza in northern Chatham County for the purpose of a work session on the location of the county line and other items of mutual interest. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. M=MS ON THE PRIMPED AGENDA Chair Willhoit announced that those citizens in the audience who wish to speak on specific items will be recognized at the appropriate time their item is discussed. 2. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA None. C. MINUTES Notion was made by Commissioner Marshall► seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve the minutes for the special meeting held on November 4► 1985 as circulated. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the minutes for November 4, 1985 as circulated. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve the minutes for November 191, 1985 as circulated. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. D. BOARD ORGANIZATION The Board reelected Don Willhoit Chair until December 31 1986; the vote was: Don Willhoit, 3 (Commissioners Carey, Marshall and Willhoit) ; Norman Walker, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd and Walker) . The Board reelected Shirley Marshall Vice-Chair until December 3. 1986; the vote was: Shirley Marshall, 3 (Commissioners Carey, Marshall and Willhoit) ; Ben Lloyd, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd and Walker) . E. APPOINTM M 1. MANAGER 000313 Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Carey to reappoint Kenneth R. Thompson County Manager. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 2. CLERK TO THE un Motion was made by Commissioner Lloydr seconded by Commissioner Marshall to reappoint Beverly A. Blythe Clerk to the Board. VM: UNANIMOUS. 3, CODNI'Y AMMM Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to continue the County's association with the firm of Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill and Hargrave for services as the County Attorney. VIOM: UNANIMOUS. 4. OTHER APPOINPMEM MENTAL HEUn BOARD Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to reappoint Frances Douglass, John Woodson and Jan Pinney to the Mental Health Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. F. RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - MRS. MARY BACON It was the consensus of the Board to present to Mrs. Mary Bacon a resolution of appreciation as printed below: RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR MRS. MARY BACON WH MEAS each citizen of Orange County has a profound and continuing interest in maintaining the public safety and welfare at its highest level of accomplishment and response, and WHEREAS each citizen of Orange county is concerned personally for the safety and welfare of each family member and for the property possessed by each, and WHEREAS each citizen observes the increased growth in Orange County and wishes that that growth not be accompanied by increased damage to person and property► and WHEREAS the Sheriff of Orange County has promoted the formation of community watch programs in our communities, and WHEREAS, the residents of the communities have joined in these programs, keeping their eyes and ears open, observing suspicious vehicles and persons and reporting all such suspicious observations to the Sheriff's Department, and WHEREAS Mrs. Mary Bacon assumed the presidency of the Community Watch Association and has served two terms in that capacity► and WHEREAS during those two terms Mrs. Bacon by displaying outstanding leadership and organizational qualities has overseen the formation of a vigorous Community Watch Association composed of 120 active community watch programs, NOW, THEREFORE the Orange County Board of Commissioners commends Mrs. Bacon for her tireless efforts and firm example. We thank Mrs. Bacon for her continued support, 000314 cooperation and promotion of the welfare and safety of each County citizen. FINALLY, we recognize and applaud the contribution the Community Watch Association under Mrs. Bacon's leadershipr has made to the Sheriff's Department as it seeks both to provide efficient and effective patrol response coverage and to reduce the opportunity of criminal attach against persons and property. . RESnTJ1 ON OF APPRECIATION - CHRIS HOGAN Alm ROBERT MGM JR. Postponed until next meeting. 3. HOME CARE WEEK PROCLAMATION Motion was made by Commissioner Marshallt seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the proclamation as printed below: HOME CARE WEEK WHEREAS, in a time of greater awareness of the cost of medical care, more attention is being placed on home health care; and WHEREAS, with the provision of special follow-up carer earlier discharge from institutions is possible for many; and WHEREAS, through teaching in the home setting,, the patient and family learn to attain maximum independence; and WHEREAS, patients are usually happier at home in a familiar place where the patient feels secure and contentment usually results in a better recovery; and WHEREAS, home health agencies provide skilled nursing care and other professional health services under a physician's supervision and may reduce the need for a more costly long term institutional care; now THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby proclaim the week of December 1 through December 7, 1985 as, HOME CARE WEEK in Orange County, and encourage all citizens to recognize the importance of home health care being provided to many elderly and disable individuals in their homes,, not only by professionals, but also by their families and loved ones. VC E: UNANIMOUS. G. REPORTS 1. BOARD OF EDUCATION Orange County Board of Education Chair Norman Haithcock gave opening remarks. He expressed appreciation for the hard work and unanimous support of the Board of Education and the Board of Commissioners for the future construction projects which are scheduled for completion in 1987. Superintendent Dan Lunsford presented a status report on the Orange High School renovation/expansion project. He first reviewed the designed development drawings as done by the architectural firm of J. Hyatt Hammond Associates, Inc. of Greensboro. He pointed out on the drawing the proposed parking lots for buses and students and the traffic flow to and from these lots. On the larger drawing Dr. Lunsford pointed out the new square footage areas of the actual facility. Some of the , large classrooms are being redivided to get the most economical use of space. He pointed out the areas that will be renovated and noted that most of the renovation will be done on the main floor where the guidance, media and office areas are insufficient to 000315 serve the number of students attending the school. Since the science labs are grossly inadequate► the proposed renovation will provide a new physics and chemistry lab. The new construction will be adjacent to the gymnasium wing, and be composed of regular classrooms and a science lab. There will be an auxiliary gymnasium, which will be a nonspectator gym for physical education and athletic purposes, a new economics lab and classrooms. The cafeteria expansion will connect to the vocational wing and be new construction. One major air conditioning unit is proposed that will accommodate either the cafeteria or the auditorium depending on what is in use but not designed to cover both at the same time. The walkways between buildings will be covered but not enclosed. In a letter to the Board of Commissioners► Dr. Lunsford indicated the next phases necessary to meet a timeline of summer► 1987 include: (1) Complete construction drawings and specifications in early 1986. (2) Advertise for bids and let contracts in March► 1986. (3) Begin construction soon after contracts are awarded. Dr. Lunsford pointed out that although the project has changed somewhat from the original discussion it has remained true to the concept of going forth with a 9-12 facility. Hopefully► the project can be accomplished within 15-16 months and the new facility occupied in the summer of 1987. The current project cost is $2,800►000 plus 8 percent (5 percent for bid variance ad 3 percent for project contingency) . The project is designed to have full payout in July► 1987. Before actual contracts can be awarded, it is necessary for the Board of Education to have a legal authorizing resolution to award actual construction contracts that extend over more than one budget period. Dr. Lunsford emphasized that the project at Orange High is first priority and the roof replacement program is the second priority. New construction of either a middle or elementary school would need to begin in 1987 or 1988. Chair Willhoit requested that the site selection criteria for any new school construction be available for review by the Board and Dr. Lunsford concurred. Dr. Lunsford informed the Board that reroofing was completed at Cameron Park Elementary and Central Elementary. All roofing projects for phase I have been completed. Phase II projects will cost between 5400400 and 5560400. The clear priorities include the reroofing of Stanford Junior High, Buildings 100 and 300 and Building 100 and the cafeteria at A. L. Stanback. He requested, on behalf of the Board of Education, an authorization from the County Commissioners► in the form of a resolution, that will allow the necessary specifications to be prepared► the request for bids and the contracts to be let. Ken Thompson indicated that the Board still needs to address the financing of the priority II roofs. Dr. Lunsford emphasized that time is a factor and a decision is needed in January, 1986 in order for the roof work to begin in the summer. Notion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to request the County Manager prepare for the next agenda the resolution of authorization for the high school project, along with an outline of funding resources for the project through fiscal 1988, an update of the five year capital plan, and as soon as possible provide some cost projections and funding resources on the second phase of the roofing program. 000316 Commissioner Marshall requested thate in the futurer figures be provided with the distribution of the agenda when appropriate on any item presented to the Board. School Board member Max Kennedy mentioned that growth projections will be studied and available very soon. When I-40 is opened the area will grow and the need for an elementary or middle school will be very evident. School Board member Lindsay Efland expressed appreciation to the Board for the commonality of goals expressed. J. M. Murfreer member of the School Merger Task Forcer referred to the Basic Education Act and questioned the requirement of providing basic swimming skills at the high school level. Dr. Lunsford stated that a staff member serves on the aquatic study commission which is reviewing the issue. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 2. MINLMUM HOUSING CODE REPORT (a copy of the report is in the permanent agenda file) The housing code became effective July 1, 1984. To date. the County has received twelve minimum housing code complaints. Another report will be forthcoming outlining ways in which the Section VIII surplus funds may be used. Assistant County Manager Albert Kittrell summarized the report. All 12 complaints were complaint triggered. Commissioner Marshall pointed out that at the time the public hearings were held on the housing coder various departments and service related agencies in the County emphasized the need for the housing code, yet the departments have not referred any complaints. Commissioner Carey questioned the need for the code and if so why it is not working in the way it was intended. After further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey that a report be done for the January 21 meeting which would indicate why those in County Government departments who supported the housing code and expressed a need for such a code are not using it. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. I. ITEMS FOR DECISION 5. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION TO RECEIVE QkMSA C TT Ta TEXT AMENDMENTS 7 (b) and 5 Patrick Davis, Assistant to the Executive Director of OWASA, made comments on the proposed modifications to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance which were on the agenda for the Joint Public Hearing of November 25, 1985. He specifically spoke on those proposals affecting the control of development activities within University Lake and Cane Creek public water supply watersheds. One alternative for consideration would be to adopt some procedures which would allow the County to consider certain development activities on a case-by-case basis. This would maintain intact the present water supply protection program but would also provide the flexibility needed to address a limited number of cases where an alternative approach may be acceptable. With reference to Article 5, Pat Davis noted that this article would not only increase the amount of "permitted gross floor area" but would also increase the volume of traffic and the associated non-point source pollution. The associated adverse impacts are not limited to the building space. If permissible development intensity is increased for the EI and I-1 00031'7 districtst there should be some corresponding measures for assuring the protection of water quality. With reference to Article 6 for dimensional requirements. OMM generally agrees and supports the intent of this provision. He pointed out that some provisions need to be added to assure that a proper balance will be maintained throughout all areas of the watershed. The way it is written implies there may be trade-offs that would be permitted in one concentrated sub-basin of a watershed and the trade-offs would apply to development activities in another sub-basin of a watershed. You could have overdevelopment in one particular area of the drainage basin and that could lead to some degrade of water quality. Consideration should be given to limiting transfer opportunities only to existing developments and also that off-site transfers should be required to be within the same sub-basin and preferably from an adjoining property. With reference to Article 8 for Special Use Permit issuance for variances of the impervious surface limits, he noted the possibility of addressing that concern under the trade-off of the impervious surface limits rather than having an additional special use process. THERE BEING NO FURTHER CC NTS► THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to refer the proposed ordinance amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. (After disallowing additional testimony, Commissioner Lloyd changed his vote to NO.) E. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CMI= AGENDA The County Manager recommended the following action by the Board: 1. MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT - EN9RGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE To approve entering into and to authorize the Chair to sign a mutual aid agreement regarding Emergency Medical Services in the State of North Carolina which would (1) allow for response to calls which cannot be handled by a local provider, (2) allow a provider to respond to calls where there are questions about geographical lines or boundaries, and (3) allow for assistance during disasters in which widespread injuries may occur and cannot be responded to by local providers. 2. ARCHIT0TURAL CONTRACT FOR CHR ASSOCIATES--CAM BUILDING RENOVATION To approve the contract with CHR Associates for architectural services of the Carr Building on an hourly basis with the total cost not to exceed 515460 and authorize the Chair to sign. 3. BIDS FOR COMM AND ASSOCIATED PERIPHERALS To accept the bid from Infocel and approve the contract for computer equipment and peripherals in the amount of $76,974 and authorize the Chair to sign. 5. EXAMINATION OF OFFICIAL BONDS To approve the bonds at their present level for the following officers, employees and agents as in accordance with G.S. 109-5: 1. Sheriff 2. Register of Deeds 3. Finance Officers 4. Tax Collector 5. Any officer, employee or agent of the County who handles or has in his custody more than $100.00 of the County's funds at 000318 any time or who handles or has access to the inventories of the County. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloydr seconded by Commissioner Carey that the forgoing action be taken by the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. (Commissioner Walker was out of the room and did not vote) 4. BUDGET AMENDMENTS Commissioner Carey questioned the status of the remapping project and Ken Thompson explained that the 50% funding from the State has instead amounted to only 516400 leaving a considerable amount outstanding. The utility companies, municipalities, area colleges, etc. have been approached for additional monies for the project. Not all replies have been received. A report will be given at the December 17 meeting of the Board. It was decided to postpone this item until that time. 6 COVIRPM APPRln7AL FOR TJWSPQRrAT ON PI.ANNTNG GRANT Ken Thompson explained this plan is required as a condition for transportation funding from the State. The federal government makes this a requirement for the receipt of funds. It is a five year plan and will allow the County to be considered for future vehicle replacement funds. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to authorize $940.00 local match for Transportation Consulting Services and execute the forthcoming contract with DOT. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. CONTRACT APPROVAL WITH CARTER GOBLE ASSOCIATES, INC. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to award and authorize the Chair to sign the contract with Carter Goble Associates for a maximum of $9,400 subject to the approval of NCDOT and with the proviso that that portion of the contract dealing with termination from default be rewritten by the County Attorney so as not to change the substance of the contract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 8. rFM�AL LIABILITY AND AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COVERAGE Purchasing Director Pam Jones notified the Board that the County received notice on October 14 that the County's auto liability would not be renewed and a few days later was notified that the general liability coverage would not be renewed. The only bid received was from Charter House. After extensive discussion, Chair Willhoit requested that the question of self-insurance be pursued through the Manager's Association and through the County Commissioners' Association and also request these associations and the State to consider liability limits for local governmental entities. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve the bid from Charter House for general liability and automobile insurance coverage in the amount of $173,684. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. I. ITEMS FOR DECISION 7 PROPOSED SEDIMENTA3'ION AND EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS (The amendments are listed on pages 321-�asof these minutes. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to approve the proposed amendments to the Sedimentation and Erosion Control Ordinance subject to consideration and approval of the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission. VCyI'E: UNANIMOUS. 2. ED JOYNER'S CREEK - PRELIMINARY 0003x,0 Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval the preliminary plat for the Ed Joyner's Creek Subdivision, property of George Brumley located on Orange Grove Road in Bingham Township. Four lots are proposed out of approximately 21.0 acres. The Planning Board recommended approval of the preliminary plat as submitted. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshallr seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the recommendation from the Planning Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 3. CANBARRA SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval the preliminary plat for Canbarra Subdivision located in Eno Township off of Walker Road. Six lots are proposed out of 7.3 acres. On October 21. 1985 the Planning Board recommended that the subdivision be redesigned to provide better site distance as identified by the Department of Transportation. The Planning Board recommended denial of the revised preliminary plat. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshallr seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the recommendation from the Planning Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 4. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT ANENIDMEM Planner Susan Smith presented for decision the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments to Article 22 DEFINITIONS (Farm, farming) as submitted to public hearing on May 28► 1985. Item was postponed for the receipt of additional information from Mecklenburg County. 6. OLD COURTHOUSE CHANGE ORDERS Motion was made by Commissioner Marshallr seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve change order G.03 and authorize the transfer of $3,307.17 from the capital improvement fund to the old courthouse project account. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR JANUARY 6, 1986 (see the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office for a complete narrative of the two items) Director of Planning Marvin Collins presented for consideration of approval a request for a special public hearing on January 6. 1986 to consider two items: (1) correction of an error in the Zoning Atlas which was made at the time Cheeks Township was zoned. and (2) proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would allow the Planning Staff to proceed with an enforcement dealing with the removal of junked and/or abandoned vehicles from a parcel in Chapel Hill Township near Calvander. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to schedule a public hearing for January 6, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners' Room, Orange County Courthouse, for the purpose of receiving public comment on the above two items. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 9. FALLS-JORDAN STEERING CCrMUTTEE (See permanent agenda file for a copy of the local action plan matrix for the Jordan and the Falls Watersheds) . Chair Willhoit presented for informational purposes an update regarding actions taken by the Falls-Jordan Steering Committee concerning watershed protection action plans. It appears that Orange County has not incorporated those actions as recommended by the State for protection to the Falls Lake and Jordan Lake watersheds. Ken Thompson stated there is still some confusion on what was being requested by the State of Orange County and what was done at the May 6 Board meeting. 000320 Marvin Collins indicated that following the State action plan, the 1/2" stormwater requirement, the 50 foot stream buffer and the 6, 121, 30 impervious surface limits were reviewed. In accordance with the State plan, the 6% and 30% impervious surface limits are not applicable because the County does not have any portion of the critical areas within the Falls or the Jordan in Orange County. Because of the minimum lot size requirement of one acre the 12% impervious surface limits are being implemented by the State. Within the Zoning Ordinance the watershed standards are aimed at locally designated watersheds. A recent amendment to the Subdivision Regulations, which applies county-wide, requires that all new subdivisions comply with the 1/2" stormwater requirement and the 50-foot stream buffers. It is the feeling of the Planning Staff that the County is in compliance with the State Action Plan. 8. EXTENDED AREA 2YI12HCNE SERVICE BEMEW CHAPEL HILL, DURHAM AND HILLS (The complete narrative is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office) . Three years ago a vote was taken to determine the level of citizen interest in extended area service. Hillsborough subscribers voted to accept the proposal, while Chapel Hill and Durham voted to turn it dawn. Because of the further linkage between the three communities since the vote, efforts to establish an extended toll-free area need to be renewed. Chair Willhoit suggested that two groups be formed. The first would be technical and deal with the service-related problems with Centel and a second group would include consumers and representatives from the other telephone companies located in Orange County. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to establish a technical task force and an extended area service task force. V=: UNANIMOUS. J. ADJOURNMEIar Chair Don Willhoit adjourned the meeting. The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 17, 1985, 7:30 p.m. at the old Post Office on Rosemary Street in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk 000321 APPROVED CHANGES TO THE ORANGE COUNTY SEDIMETTI'ATION AND EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCE SECTION 2 Section 2 Purposes This ordinance is adopted for the purposes of: (1) Regulating the clearing► grading► excavation► filling and manipulation of the earth and the moving and storing of waters in order to: control and prevent accelerated soil erosion and sedimentation► prevent the pollution of water► prevent damage to public and private property► maintain the balance of nature► prevent the obstruction of natural and artificial drainageways► inhibit flooding and reduce the undermining of roads and other transportation facilities. NOTE: The underlined portions of the paragraph above will be added to the Ordinance. SECTION 3 Section 3 Definitions Act - means the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 and all rules and orders adopted pursuant to it. NOTE: This definition will be added to the Ordinance. Person Responsible for the Violation - as used in this Ordinance means: (a) the developer or other person who has or holds himself/herself out as having financial or operational control over the land disturbing activity; and /or (b) the landowner or person in possession or control of the land when he/she has directly or indirectly allowed the land-disturbing activity or has benefited from it or he/she has failed to comply with any provision of this Ordinance► the Act► or any order adopted pursuant to this Ordinance or the Act as imposes a duty upon him/her. NOTE: This definition will be added to the Ordinance. Person Conducting Land-disturbing Activity - means any person who may be held responsible for a violation unless expressly provided otherwise by this Ordinance, the Acts, or any order adopted pursuant to this Ordinance or the Act. NOTE: This definition will be substituted for the definition of Person Conducting the Land-disturbing Activity in the Ordinance. Siltation - means sediment resulting from accelerated erosion which is settleable or removable by properly designed, constructed, and maintained control measures; and which has been transported from its point of origin within the site of a land-disturbing activity; and which has been deposited► or is in suspension in water. NOTE: This definition will be added to the Ordinance. Sedimentation - means the process by which sediment resulting from accelerated erosion has been or is being transported off the site of the land disturbing activity or into a lake or natural watercourse. NOTE: This definition will be substituted for the definition of sedimentation in the ordinance. Working Days - means days exclusive of Saturday and Sunday during which weather conditions or soil conditions permit land-disturbing activity to be undertaken. 000322 NOTE: The word "days" has been added along with the phase "or soil conditions" to this definition. NOTE: The letter designation before each definition in the Ordinance will be deleted and the entire section reorganized with the terms listed in alphabetical order. SECTION 4 Section 4 Scope and Effect Whenever conflicts exist between federal, state or local laws, ordinances, or rules, the more restrictive provision shall apply. NOTE: Note this paragraph will be added at the end of Section 4. SECTION 8 Section 8 Mandatory Standards for Land-disturbing Activity No land-disturbing activity subject to the control of this ordinance shall be undertaken except in accordance with the following mandatory standards: NOTE: The word "mandatory" will be added before "standards". d. Design and Performance of Control Measures - erosion and sedimentation control measures, structures, and devices shall be so planned, designed, and constructed as to provide protection from accelerated erosion and sedimenta- tion from the calculated peak rate of runoff from a ten-year frequency storm. NOTE: The words "protection from" will be substituted for "control of" in the Ordinance. e. Prior Plan Approval - No person shall initiate any land-disturbing activity if more than 20,000 square feet is to be uncovered unless, thirty or more days prior to initiating the activity, an erosion and sedimentation control plan for such activity is filed with, approved by, and a Grading Permit obtained from the County. NOTE: The above paragraph will be added at the end of Section 8. SECTION 9 Section 9 Permanent Downstream Protection of Stream Banks and Channels b. (i) the velocity as determined from the table of permissible velocity for stormwater in 3) , or NOTE: This section has been revised to correctly refer to the table of permissible velocity contained in this section of the Ordinance. SECTION 13 Section 13 Responsibility for Installation and Maintenance During the development of a site, the person engaged in or conducting the land-disturbing activity shall be responsible for installing and maintaining all temporary and permanent erosion and sedimentation control measures and facilities as required by the approved or revised Erosion Control Plan. The responsibility for maintaining all permanent erosion and sedimentation control measures and facilities after site development is completed shall lie with the land owner except facilities and measures installed within road or street right-of-way or easements accepted for maintenance by a government agency. NOTE: Section 13 will be expanded to include responsibility for installation as well as maintenance and rearranged for clarity. The paragraph above will be substituted for the one in the Ordinance. SECTION 15 Section 15 Existing Uncovered Areas b. The Erosion Control Officer will serve upon the landowner written notice 000323 to comply by registered or certified mail► return receipt requested► or other means. NOTE: The requirement concerning registered or certified mail is being added to the first sentence in "b". d. This rule shall not require ground cover on cleared land forming the future basin of a planned reservoir unless the disturbance and length of time of the exposure prior to the filling of the reservoir will result in erosion and sedimentation of the downstream channel. NOTE: "d" will be added to Section 15. The condition concerning the time of exposure before filling the reservoir has been added to prevent situations where the site may be left disturbed for long periods if there was a delay in filling the reservoir. SECTION 17 Section 17 Permits a. No permit is required for the following activities: 1. For the purpose of fighting fires. 2. For the stock piling of raw or processed sandr stoner or gravel in material processing plants and storage yards► provided that sediment control measures have been utilized to protect against off-site damage. 3. For disturbances that do not exceed 20►000 square feet in surface area: In determining the arear contiguous lands under one or diverse ownership being developed as a unit will be aggregated. NOTE: This paragraph will be added to Section 17a to specify what activities do not require permits. SECTION 18 Section 18 Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans c. Failure to approve or disapprove a complete erosion and sedimentation control plan within 30 days of receipt of the complete plan shall be deemed approval. Denial of a plan must specifically state in writing the reasons for denial. The county must approve or deny a revised plan within 15 days of receipt, or it is deemed to be approved. If► following commencement of a land disturbing activity pursuant to an approved plan. the County determines that the plan is inadequate to meet the requirements of this ordinance► the County may require such revisions as are necessary to comply with this ordinance. In order to be considered complete, a plan submitted for approval must contain the proposed erosion control plan, the completed application, the statement of financial responsibility and ownership, and the plan review fee. The 30 day review period begins when all of the components of the complete plan are received. NOTE: Section 18c will be expanded to include the two paragraphs above. e. If the Erosion Control Officer, either upon review of the Erosion Control Plan or on inspection of the job site, determines that a significant risk of accelerated erosion or off-site sedimentation exists, revisions to the plan will be required. Pending the preparation of the revised plan, work shall cease or shall continue under conditions outlined by the Erosion Control Officer. NOTE: The paragraph above will be added to subsection a of Section 18. f. Erosion Control Plans shall be accompanied by an authorized statement of financial responsibility and ownership. This statement shall be signed by the person financially responsible for the land-disturbing activity or his/her attorney in fact. The statement shall include the mailing and street addresses of the principal place of business of the person financially responsible and of the owner of the land or their registered agents. 000324 NOTE: Paragraph "f' will be added at the end of Section 18. g. A copy of the approved Erosion Control Plan and any amendments and required revisions shall be kept on the job site at all times. NOTE: Paragraph "g" will be added to Section 18. SECTION 19 Section 19 Appeals a. The disapproval or modification of 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. If the Planning Director upholds the denial► 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 or modification. NOTE: The underlined portion of paragraph "a" will be added to the Ordinance. This change is being added to allow a reasonable appeal prior to holding a public hearing on the denial. d. In the event that the local governing body upholds the disapproval or modification of a proposed erosion control plan following the public hearing, the person submitting the erosion control plan shall be entitled to appeal the local governments action to the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission as provided in Section 113A-61(c) of the General Statutes and Title 15 NCAC 4B .0018(b) . NOTE: The paragraph above will be substituted for paragraph "d" in the Ordinance. It has been revised to refer appeals to the Sedimentation Control Commission instead of the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. SECTION 21 Section 21 Inspections and Investigations b. If, through inspection, it is determined that a person engaged in land disturbing activity has failed to comply with the approved plan, a notice of violation shall be served upon that person by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or other means. The notice shall set forth the measures necessary to achieve compliance with the plan, specify a reasonable time period within which such measures must be completed, and warn that failure to correct the violation within the time period will result in the assessment of a civil penalty or other enforcement action. If the person engaged in land disturbing activity fails to comply within the time specified, enforcement action shall be initiated. NOTE: Section 21b of the Ordinance will be replaced with the paragraph above.. SECTION 22 Section 22 Penalties a. (1) Any person who violates any of the provisions of this ordinance or rules or orders adopted or issued pursuant to this ordinance, or who initiates or continues a land-disturbing activity for which an erosion control plan is required except in accordance with the terms, conditions, and provisions of an approved plan, shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $100. No penalty shall be assessed until the person alleged to be in violation has been notified of the violation by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or other means. The notice shall describe the violation with reasonable particularity, specify a reasonable time period within which the violation must be corrected, and warn that failure to correct the violation within the time period will result in the assessment of a civil penalty or V�i�eJ�:rJ other enforcement action. Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under Section 22(a) (1) . NOTE: The underlined portion of Section 22a (1) will be added to the Ordinance. a. Civil Penalties (2) The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall determine the amount of the civil penalty to be assessed under this subsection and shall make written demand for payment upon the person in violation, and shall set forth in detail a description of the violation for which the penalty has been imposed. In determining the amount of the penalty the Board of Commissioners shall consider the degree and extent of harm caused by the violation and the cost of rectifying the damage. If payment is not received or equitable settlement reached within 30 days after demand for payment is made the matter shall be referred to the county attorney for institution of a civil action in the name of Orange County, in the appropriate division of the General Courts of Justice for recovery of the penalty. Any sums recovered shall be used to carry out the purposes and requirements of this ordinance. NOTE: The underlined portion of Section 22a (2) will be added to the Ordinance.