HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-18-2016 - C1 Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment - Mailed Notifications 2
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: February 18, 2016
Action Agenda
Item No. C.1
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment — Mailed Notifications
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Comprehensive Plan/UDO Amendment INFORMATION CONTACT: (919)
Outline Form (UDO/Zoning 2016-01) Perdita Holtz, Planning, 245-2578
2. Statement of Consistency Craig Benedict, Planning, 245-2592
3. Proposed UDO Text Amendments
4. Draft Planning Board Minutes — January
6, 2016
5. Signed Planning Board Statement of
Consistency
PURPOSE: To hold a public hearing on Planning Director initiated Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) text amendments regarding mailed notifications, receive the Planning Board's
recommendation, and consider the course of action on the proposed amendments.
BACKGROUND: The "Amendment Outline Form" (Attachment 1) for these amendments was
approved by the BOCC at its January 21, 2016 regular meeting. The purpose of these
proposed amendments is as follows:
• Correct omissions in Sections 2.7.5, 2.9.1, and 2.9.2 of the UDO that should have been
part of the materials adopted on November 5, 2015 which revised the public hearing
process.
o Specifically, the requirement for certified mail for Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) notifications is proposed to be revised to use first class mail.
o The notification distance was increased from 500-feet to 1,000 feet in these
sections in November 2015 and the intention was to use first class mail for the
notifications but the adopted materials did not reflect the use of first class mail for
the NIM notifications.
• Update mailed notice requirements in Sections 2.15 and 2.24 which relate to the required
Neighborhood Information Meeting for Major Subdivisions (2.15) and Governmental Uses
(2.24).
o Specifically, the mailed notification boundary is proposed to be increased from
500 feet to 1,000 feet.
o Also, for governmental uses, the requirement for certified mail is proposed to be
revised to use first class mail.
o These sections were not contemplated for modifications in 2015 but staff is
suggesting that notification distances and mailing types should be consistent in
the UDO.
Please see Section B of Attachment 1 for additional background and analysis.
3
Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of
proposed text amendments, including the:
i. Statement of Consistency contained in Attachment 2, which indicates the proposed
text amendments are consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan, are
reasonable, and are in the public interest, and
ii. The text amendment as contained in Attachment 3.
Planning Board Recommendation: At its January 6, 2016 meeting, the Board voted (9-1) to
recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency and the amendment package. Minutes
from this meeting are included in Attachment 4 and the signed Statement of Consistency is
Attachment 5.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Existing staff will complete the necessary work required for this
amendment. Adoption of the proposed revisions is not expected to cause significant financial
impacts (negative or positive).
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following social justice goal is applicable to this agenda item:
GOAL: ENABLE FULL CIVIC PARTICIPATION
Ensure that Orange County residents are able to engage government through voting and
volunteering by eliminating disparities in participation and barriers to participation.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Administration recommends the Board:
1. Receive the proposed amendments to the UDO as detailed in this abstract and
attachments.
2. Conduct the public hearing and accept comment on the proposed amendments.
3. Close the public hearing. (Note that, because this is a legislative decision, additional
comments at a later date are permitted).
4. Decide on one of the following options:
a. Adopt the proposed amendments by approving the Statement of Consistency
(Attachment 2) and Ordinance (Attachment 3).
b. Defer a decision to a later BOCC regular meeting date.
c. Refer the item back to the Planning Board for a specific purpose.
Attachment 1 4
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENT OUTLINE
UDO /Zoning-2016-01
Mailed Notification Requirements
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
n Land Use Element Map:
From: - - -
To: - - -
n Zoning Map:
From: - - -
To: - - -
n Other:
Text Amendments
n Comprehensive Plan Text:
Section(s):
n UDO Text:
fUDO General Text Changes
fUDO Development Standards
UDO Development Approval Processes
Section(s): 2.7.5, 2.9.1, 2.9.2, 2.15.2, 2.24.2
n Other:
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose/Mission
• Correct omissions in Sections 2.7.5, 2.9.1, and 2.9.2 of the UDO that should have
been part of the materials adopted on November 5, 2015 which revised the public
hearing process.
• Update mailed notice requirements in Sections 2.15 and 2.24 which relate to the
required Neighborhood Information Meeting for Major Subdivisions (2.15) and
1
5
Governmental Uses (2.24).
2. Analysis
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, 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'.
While updating the Unified Development Ordinance to incorporate amendments
adopted on November 5, 2015, staff discovered inadvertent omissions in three
sections: 2.7.5, 2.9.1, and 2.9.2. Text in these three sections was changed to
increase the mailed notification distance from 500 to 1,000 feet but was not updated
to modify the type of mailing from certified to first class mail, as was done in other
sections and which was the intent of this aspect of the November 5th amendments.
Additionally, staff has analyzed other sections of the UDO that were not part of the
November 5th amendments to determine if additional modifications are warranted as
a result of changing the mailed notification boundary from 500 feet to 1,000 for
certain types of review processes. Staff is recommending that the mailed notification
requirements for the Neighborhood Information Meetings that are held for Major
Subdivisions and Governmental Uses be updated to change the notification
boundary from 500 feet to 1,000 feet and, in the case of governmental uses, to
require first class mail rather than certified mail. Having consistency throughout the
UDO in regards to distance requirements and the type of mailing should result in less
potential confusion.
Staff notes that Section 5.10.8(2) requires a neighborhood information meeting in
conjunction with a balloon test for telecommunication facilities. The current
(unchanged in 2015) mailed notification distance for this type of facility is 1,000 feet
and applicants are required to mail the notice via certified mail. Staff is not
recommending a change to this particular process because a non-governmental
entity is responsible for the mailings.
As detailed in the abstract, the Planning Director recommends approval of the text
amendments.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open,
efficient, and responsive.
4. New Statutes and Rules
N/A
2
6
C. PROCESS
1. TIMEFRAME/MILESTONES/DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
January 21 2016
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
February 18, 2016 — also possible decision
c. BOCC Updates/Checkpoints
January 6, 2016 — Planning Board meeting (agenda materials are available to all
interested persons)
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:
January 6, 2016 —the Board recommended approval of the proposal.
b. Advisory Boards:
c. Local Government Review:
Proposed text amendments were sent
to JPA partners (Towns of Chapel Hill
and Carrboro) on December 28, 2015
in accordance with the JPA
Agreement since any project in the
Rural Buffer would be subject to the
amended sections. On December 30,
the Town of Chapel Hill responded via
e-mail that they have no concerns with
the proposal. No comments were
received from the Town of Carrboro.
d. Notice Requirements
Consistent with NC State Statutes — legal ad prior to public hearing
e. Outreach:
❑ General Public:
3
7
n Small Area Plan Workgroup:
❑ Other:
3. FISCAL IMPACT
Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the
provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be paid
from FY2015-16 Departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Planning
staff included in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work required
to process this amendment.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
If adopted, the amendments would update the mailed notification requirements for
neighborhood information meetings that take place for the type of project
review/approval process in the amended sections.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
See Attachment 3.
Primary Staff Contact:
Perdita Holtz, AICP
Planning Department
919-245-2578
pholtz @orangecountync.gov
4
8
Attachment 2
STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY
OF A PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Orange County has initiated an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) to modify mailed notification requirements.
The Planning Board finds:
a. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and,
b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5, and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section 153A-341 of the
North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds sufficient documentation within
the record denoting that the amendment is consistent with the adopted 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
1. The amendment is consistent with applicable plans because it supports the
following 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives:
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair,
open, efficient, and responsive.
c. The amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because it:
1. Corrects inadvertent omissions in amendments adopted on November 5,
2015.
2. Provides consistency in mailed notification requirements among the various
types of review procedures that require mailed notification, thereby
minimizing potential confusion.
The Planning Board of Orange County hereby recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners consider adoption of the proposed UDO text amendment.
Chair Date
9
Attachment 3
Ordinance # ORD-2016-006
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF ORANGE COUNTY
Whereas, Orange County has initiated amendments to its Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
to modify mailed notification requirements.
Whereas, on November 5, 2015, Orange County adopted amendments to its UDO which revised
various aspects of the public hearing process for Comprehensive Plan-, UDO-, and Zoning Atlas-
related amendments, and
Whereas, staff has determined there were omissions in Sections 2.7.5, 2.9.1, and 2.9.2 that
should have been part of the amendments adopted on November 5, 2015, and
Whereas, staff has reviewed the UDO to determine that sections that were not contemplated for
amendments in 2015 should be amended at this time to keep notification requirements consistent
between the various processes that require mailed notification, and
Whereas, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the Unified Development Ordinance have been
deemed complete, and
Whereas, the Orange County Planning Board has recommended approval of the proposed text
amendments, and
Whereas, the County has held the required public hearing and has found the proposed text
amendments are 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
, 2016.
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 Board at a
meeting held on , 2016 as relates in any way to the adoption of the
foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the said Board.
10
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2016.
SEAL
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
11
Amendment Package for Mailed Notification Requirements
Notes
The pages that follow contain the amendments necessary to the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) text to ensure public notification requirements are consistent among the
various procedures for mailed notifications. Amendments adopted on November 5, 2015
expanded the mailed notification distance from 500 feet to 1,000 feet for several types of actions
and call for notifications to be mailed via first class mail. Staff has evaluated all procedures in
the UDO that require mailed notifications to ensure requirements are consistent throughout the
UDO. Staff recommends procedural consistency in order to avoid potential confusion.
Staff notes that Section 5.10.8(2) (not included in this package) requires a neighborhood
information meeting in conjunction with a balloon test for telecommunication facilities. The
current (unchanged in 2015) mailed notification distance for this type of facility is 1,000 feet and
applicants are required to mail the notice via certified mail. Staff is not recommending a change
to this particular process because a non-governmental entity is responsible for the mailings.
Proposed additions/changes to existing UDO text are depicted in . 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
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.
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. Text with a large "X" is not proposed for
deletion; proposed deletions are shown in red ctrikethrough text.
Article 2: Procedure!
Section 2.7: Special Use Permits
(6) A list of all parcels located within 500 feet of the subject parcel and the name and
address of each property owner, as currently listed in the Orange County t
records.
(7) Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development.
�) For Class A Special Uses 26 copies and for Class B Special Us: 10 copies of
the Environmental Assessment and/or Environmental Impact . atement, if
required by Section 6.16.
(9) -thod of disposal of trees, limbs, stumps and constru on debris associated
wit the permitted activity, which shall be by some m= od other than open
burni
(10) Statemen rom the applicant indicating the an ipated development schedule for
the build-ou if the project.
(11) Statement from •e applicant in justificat an of any request for vesting for a period
of more than two y--rs (five years m. mum).
2.7.4 Staff Review
(A) The Planning Director shall cause a alysis to be made of the application by qualified
representatives of the County and the .gencies or officials as appropriate.
(1) Applications for agricu ral suppor -nterprise uses located within the Rural
Buffer land use clas: fication, as depi -d on the Future Land Use Map of the
adopted Comprer-nsive Plan, shall be • warded to the County's Agricultural
Preservation Bard for review and comme
(a) Th- Agricultural Preservation Board sh: I have 30 calendar days to
ovide comments. If comments are not r- eived within this timeframe,
the application review process shall not be .: ayed.
(b For purposes of this subsection, agricultural sup..rt enterprise uses
shall be defined as those permitted in the ASE-CZ inning district, as
detailed within Section 5.2.3 of this Ordinance.
(B) T'e Planning Director shall submit the analysis to the Board of County Co• missioners
.nd the Planning Board, in the case of Class A Special Uses, or the Board o A djustment,
in the case of Class B Special Uses.
The appropriate Board reviewing the application shall receive and enter the analyse into
evidence during the public hearing. The analysis shall be subject to examination by a
interested parties and the Planning Director shall be subject to cross-examination
regarding the analysis.
2.7.5 Neighborhood Information Meeting
(A) Before a Public Hearing may be held for a Special Use the applicant is required to
schedule a minimum of one neighborhood information meeting. The purpose of the
meeting is to obtain surrounding property owner input and comments on the proposed
development project and allow staff an opportunity to explain the review process
associated with the request.
(B) The applicant shall obtain property owner mailing address information from the Orange
County Planning Department, which shall utilize Orange County Land Records data, and
shall mail certified notices of the meeting date and time via first class mail to each
property owner within one thousand feet of the property for which a Special Use has
been requested.
(C) The applicant shall mail notice of the Neighborhood Information Meeting a minimum of 14
days prior to the date of the meeting.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-18
Article 2: Procedur 9
'Section 2.9.1 - Conditional Use District (CUD) I Section 2.9: Conditional Districts
Applications to establish a CUD shall be submitted to the Planning Director and shall •-
processed in accordance with the procedure(s)for:
(1) Zoning Atlas amendment (Section 2.8),
2) Class A Special Use Permit (Section 2.7), and
(3) The provisions of this Section.
(C) Submi al Requirements
(1) In .edition to the CUD application form, an applicant sha also submit the
folio g information:
(a) A .,ite plan prepared in accordance with th= provisions of Section 2.5
incl ling the following:
(i) detailed description of the roposed use of property including
an outline of the propose. operational characteristics of the
propo ed development
(ii) A detaileo raffic survey, regardless of the estimated number of
trips per da , •ree.red in accordance with all applicable North
Carolina Depa , ent of Transportation (NC DOT) requirements
or standards .s :II as Section 6.17 of this Ordinance,
(iii) The appropriate envir. mental document prepared in
accor. nce with Section •.16; and
(iv) A I dscape plan showing t : location of on-site significant
ees; proposed screening, buf': s, and landscaping; and any
proposed treatment of any existine atural features.
(b) A - mmary of utility services, including proces •ng of wastewater.
(c) A schedule of construction of all elements of the p ••osal; and
(d) Any other information identified during the pre-applica 'en conference
deemed essential to demonstrate the project's complianc: with these
regulations.
(2 26 copies of the application package required in (1) above shall be sub •tted by
the applicant.
(3) The Planning Board and/or Board of County Commissioners may request
additional information in order to evaluate and properly process the application
for a CUD.
(D) Neighborhood Information Meeting
(1) Before a Public Hearing may be held on an accepted application for a CUD, the
applicant is required to schedule, with the assistance of the Planning
Department, a minimum of one neighborhood information meeting. The purpose
of this meeting is to obtain surrounding property owner input and comments on
the proposed development project.
(2) The applicant shall obtain property owner mailing address information from the
Orange County Planning Department and shall mail certified notices of the
meeting date and time via first class mai to each property owner within one
thousand feet of the property for which a CUD has been requested.
(3) The notices shall be mailed a minimum of 14 days prior to the date of the
proposed Neighborhood Information Meeting.
(4) 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.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-29
Article 2:
'Section 2.9.2 - Conditional Zoning District (CZD)I Section 2.9: Conditional Districs
(2) Site plans (Section 2.5) for CZDs that require a site plan, and
(3) The provisions of this Section.
(C) Submittal Requirements
In addition to the CZD application form, an applicant shall also sub• it the
following information:
a) A site plan prepared in accordance with the provisio-s of Section 2.5 of
this Ordinance, except for MPD-CZ applications -e (C)(2) below).
(b) A detailed description of the proposed use of . operty including an
utline of the proposed development.
(c) A d- .iled traffic survey, regardless of -e estimated number of trips per
day, p :.ared in accordance with all applicable North Carolina
Departm-st of Transportation (NC NOT) requirements or standards as
well as Sec' •n 6.17 of this Ord.'ance.
(d) The appropriate . nvironme► al Document prepared in accordance with
Section 6.16.
(e) A landscape plan sh.,'. g the location of on-site significant trees;
proposed screenint, buff- , and landscaping; and any proposed
treatment of any -xisting na'. al features.
(f) A summary . utility services, in ding processing of wastewater.
(g) A sched e of construction of all ele -nts of the proposal.
(h) Any • er information identified during the ire-application conference
deemed essential to demonstrate the proje 's compliance with these
'-gulations.
(2) In li; of the requirements in (1)(a) above, an application b a Master Plan
D- elopment (MPD) CZD shall include the requirements in tion 6.7. The
equirements of(1)(b)through (1)(h) above are applicable for 9-CZ
applications.
26 copies of the application package required in (1) and (2) above sha se
submitted by the applicant.
(4) The Planning Board and/or Board of County Commissioners may request
additional information in order to evaluate and properly process the application
for a CZD.
(D) Neighborhood Information Meeting
(1) Before a Public Hearing may be held on an accepted application for a CZD, the
applicant is required to schedule, with the assistance of the Planning
Department, a minimum of one neighborhood information meeting. The purpose
of this meeting is to obtain surrounding property owner input and comments on
the proposed development project.
(2) The applicant shall obtain property owner mailing address information from the
Orange County Planning Department and shall mail notices of the
meeting date and time via first class mail to each property owner within one
thousand feet of the property for which a CZD has been requested.
(3) The notices shall be mailed a minimum of 14 days prior to the date of the
proposed Neighborhood Information Meeting.
(4) 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.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-32
Article 2: Procedurig
Section 2.15: Major Subdivisions
15.2 Concept Plan
(A) Pre-Application Review
To promote better communication and avoid unnecessary expense in the desig of
acceptable subdivision proposals, each subdivider is encouraged to meet with e
Planning Department staff prior to submitting an application for Concept Pla approval.
The purpose of this informal meeting is to introduce the applicant to the pr. isions of this
Ordinance and discuss his/her objectives in relation thereto.
(B) o n-Site Visit
(1) Prior to submission of a Concept Plan application, the appli .nt shall schedule a
mutually convenient time to walk the property with the Pla r ing Director. The
•urpose of this visit is to familiarize the Planning Directo ith the property's
•ecial features, and to provide an informal opportunit o offer guidance to the
ap,licant regarding the tentative location of Seconda, Conservation Areas,
potential dwelling locations, and potential street ali. ments.
(2) Prior to cheduling the on-site visit, the applican hall have prepared the Site
Analysis ap as required in Section 7.14.2(A) and shall submit the Site
Analysis :• to the Planning Director when t,e on-site visit is scheduled.
(3) If the on-site .sit is not scheduled before bmittal of the Concept Plan
application, it s' .11 occur prior to the Nei. borhood Information Meeting.
(C) Application Requiremen
(1) Applications shall be ubmitted on f%rms provided by the Planning Department in
accordance with Secti•1 2.2 of this Ordinance.
(2) Applications shall include:
(a) An Orange County a-ographic Information Systems(GIS) Map showing
the location of the 'ar•-I to be subdivided.
(b) 25 copies of a Concept .n of the proposed major subdivision prepared
in accordance i ith the spe. fications for Concept Plan drawings as
contained in section 7.14.2(• of this Ordinance. A Concept Plan shall
include the ollowing:
(i) Site Analysis Map;
(ii) A Conventional Developme Option; and
(iii) A Flexible Development Optio
(3) In lieu of: three-part Concept Plan, one Concept -Ian may be submitted if the
applic. t is seeking approval only of a Flexible Dev:opment Plan. The applicant
may . so combine the Site Analysis Map and the Fle •le Development Option
into single plan, provided the information required in -ction 7.14.2(A) is
di splayed in a clear and legible form. If an applicant choo--s this option, he/she
all comply with the provisions for determining density co fined in Section
7.13.7(A).
(4) A comparison of the impacts of the Flexible Development Optio to those that
would result from the Conventional Development Option.
5) A checklist identifying consistency with applicable design guidelines :s contained
in Section 7.13.7.
(6) Number 10 (business)sized envelopes with first class postage affixed ad. essed
to each owner of property within 500 feet of the property proposed to be
subdivided. The names and addresses of property owners shall be based on e
current listing as shown in the Orange County Land Records System.
(D) Neighborhood Information Meeting
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-49
Article 2: Procedurebs
Section 2.15: Major Subdivisions
(1) Upon acceptance of a Concept Plan application, the Planning Director shall
schedule a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) and mail notices of the
meeting to each owner of property within 598 one thousand feet of the property
proposed to be subdivided.
(2) Notices of the NIM shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten days prior to the
date of the meeting.
(3) The Planning Director shall place a sign on the affected property indicating the
total number of lots proposed, the date, time, and location of the NIM; and the
Planning Department telephone number. The sign shall be posted on the
affected property at least seven days prior to the NIM. The NIM shall be held a
minimum of 14 days prior to the Planning Board meeting at which the concept
plan is scheduled to be reviewed.
(4) At the NIM, the applicant shall be available to answer questions about the
proposed subdivision, and to receive comments from neighboring property
owners for the purpose of improving the proposed subdivision design.
(5) The Planning Director shall explain the subdivision approval process and shall
identify meeting dates of the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners at
which neighboring property owners may speak with regard to specific concerns
and/or issues.
Planning Director Review Procedures
(1) The Planning Director shall prepare and submit a recommendation to 'e
Planning Board which shall include the following:
(a) A written analysis of the Concept Plan;
.) The Concept Plan's general compliance with the re. irements of this
Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and other ..plicable codes and
ordinances; and
(c) •e comments of neighboring property o 'ers expressed at the
Neighborhood Information Meeting.
(d) Which •:velopment Option Plan is --commended for eventual
Preliminar -lat processing.
(2) The Planning Director shall be permi ed to defer the application and
recommendation for one -eting -yond the Planning Board meeting at which
the application is scheduled '. .- heard.
(F) Planning Board Review and Appr•val ° ocedures
(1) After receiving the Pla 'ing Director' eport and recommendation, the Planning
Board shall consider e Concept Plans : d take action on the proposals.
(2) The Planning B.:rd shall base its action on findings as to the conformity of
the proposals - ith all applicable regulations an. shall:
(a) A .rove one Development Option;
(b) Approve one Development Option subject to co•s itions; or
( Deny the Development Options.
(3) The Planning Board shall vote on whether the development sho d proceed as a
Conventional Development Option or as a Flexible Development O. ion.
(a) If that vote approves the Development Option recommended b the
Planning Director, the vote by the Planning Board is the final deci '.n on
whether the development proceeds as a Conventional Development
Option or as a Flexible Development Option.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-50
Article 2: Procedure
Section 2.24: Governmental Uses
(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 child -n
from adjoining properties.
2.23.4 Ap• ication Approval
(A) the application is approved, either with or without conditions, the Pla ing Director shall
s-,d the applicant a letter informing him or her of the approval and o he requirements of
this o dinance that apply to the day care center in a residence for • to 12 children
(B) The lett- must be signed by the applicant to indicate his or he willingness to operate the
day care c- ter in a residence for 3 to 12 children in confor •ance with the requirements
and condition set forth in the letter.
(C) Each letter shall :- kept on file by the Planning Direc or and shall constitute the approval
for the day care cen -r in a residence for 3 to 12 c dren in question.
2.23.5 Application Denial
If the application is denied, the Planni e Director s'all 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 fo to 12 c dren approved by the Planning Director shall
be reviewed annually by the Planni Director to as re compliance with the standards of
evaluation for such facilities.
2.23.7 Minor Changes to Approv.
The Planning Director is .uthorized to approve minor changes i he approved day care center in
a residence for 3 to 1 hildren, provided that the changes are in h: mony with the action of the
original approval a . provided that any change in the operation come 'es with the standards of
evaluation as sp- ified in Section 5.8.1.
2.23.8 Changes in •peration
Any charge in the operation of the day care center in a residence for 3 to 12 chile en that does
not c• ply with the standards for evaluation as specified in Section 5.8.1 shall cons ute a
moo fication and shall require the approval of a Class B Special Use Permit by the Bo. d of
ijustment under the provisions of Section 2.7 of this Ordinance.
2.2 • Appeals
The applicant may appeal the decision of the Planning Director to the Board of Adjustment as set
forth in Section 2.27.
SECTION 2.24: GOVERNMENTAL USES
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.
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.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-69
Article 2:
Section 2.25: Review of Environmental Documens
(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.
(C) The applicant shall obtain property owner mailing address information from the Planning
Department, who shall utilize Orange County Land Records data, and shall mail certified
notices of the meeting date, place, and time via first class mail to each property owner
within 598 one thousanc, feet of the subject property.
(D) The notices shall be mailed a minimum of 14 days prior to the date of the meeting.
(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 required to shall submit copies of the certified mail receipts written
certification that the notices were mailed in compliance with the requirements of this
subsection. The written certification shall denote 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.
SECTION 2.25: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
2.25.1 vironmental Assessment
(A) Generally
A' Environmental Assessment ("EA" in this section) may be submitt-. prior to submittal
of th- development application to determine if an Environmental I -'act Statement ("EIS"
in this tion) may be required, provided that:
(1) All i .rmation necessary to perform the Assessm t is provided, and
(2) The proj application, when submitted, is c.'sistent with the project described
in the Asses ent.
(B) Review Process
(1) The Planning Depart -nt shall r- ew the EA for completeness within 5 calendar
days of the date of subm al.
(2) If the EA is found to be in in ete, it shall be returned to the applicant with
notification of its defici-'cies.
(3) Upon acceptance e a complete EA, - applicant shall submit 10 copies to the
Planning Depar ent. Additional copies •-y be required if needed. The EA will
be distribute. .y the Planning Department . other appropriate departments and
agencies .r review and comment.
(4) Final ction on the EA shall occur within 14 days fr., the date of acceptance, or
s • longer time as agreed to in writing by the applica
(5) If the EA reveals no "significant environmental impacts", as dat term is defined in
this Ordinance, the Planning Department shall issue a Finding . No Significant
Impact (FONSI).
(6) If significant impacts are identified, the Planning Department shall issu- a Finding
of Significant Impact and shall require that an Environmental Impact State-dent
be prepared. The decision of the Planning Department shall be reviewed by •-
County Manager upon request of the applicant or Planning Department.
Orange County, North Carolina—Unified Development Ordinance Page 2-70
Excerpt of Draft Minutes Attachment 4 19
1 MINUTES
2 PLANNING BOARD
3 JANUARY 6,2016
4 REGULAR MEETING
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lydia Wegman (Vice Chair),At-Large Chapel Hill Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township
7 Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township;
8 Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Laura
9 Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; Herman Staats, At-Large; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township
10 Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative
11
12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative
13
14 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor, Perdita Holtz,
15 Special Projects Coordinator, Meredith Pucci,Administrative Assistant II;Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner
16
17 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
18
19 Lydia Wegman: Opened the meeting by making sure everybody was there that was coming.
20
22
23 AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT-To make a recommendation
24 to the BOCC on government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO regarding
25 mailed notifications.This item is scheduled for the February 18, 2016 quarterly public
26 hearing.
27 Presenter: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator
28
29 Perdita Holtz reviewed abstract.
30
31 Paul Guthrie: How do you plan to confirm that the applicants have filed by first class mail? I know in certified mail you
32 would have a postal receipt, how are you planning to be able to confirm that if there's a challenge to lack of notice?
33
34 Perdita Holtz:The planning department is actually involved in the mailed notifications and we do a certificate of
35 mailing that you've seen in amendment packets. Whichever staff person is in charge of the mailing signs it to certify
36 it was done as stated.
37
38 Paul Guthrie:We don't need to do any language in here to make sure that happens?
39
40 Perdita Holtz: Correct.... In the case of governmental uses,which those are most likely going to be your fire
41 departments,we are asking that whoever is heading up that effort for the fire department would give us a statement
42 that certifies that they mailed it when they said they mailed it.
43
44 Paul Guthrie: But you're going to monitor private individuals who are asking for an action that are required to mail?
45
46 Perdita Holtz:Yes,we actually do the mailing.The planning department does the mailing; they just pay for them.
47
48 Tony Blake: But you guys make a copy of everything that's sent out anyways, right?
49
50 Perdita Holtz:Well,we have the mailing list of property owners and the actual letter that goes into the file.
51
52 Lydia Wegman: Other comments?
53
1
20
54 Tony Blake: I had one from people that have called me, my phones lit up when they heard a story about the airport,
55 and a couple of people were thinking that a broader notification should go out, in light of an airport. Or something that
56 has significant impacts like noise or what have you. So I wanted to float that idea and I wanted to get that in the
57 minutes so that the County Commissioners read it as well.
58
59 Andrea Rohrbacher: I can't remember what the outcome of this point was, it seems that at one meeting we discussed
60 putting some sort of lettering on the outside of the envelope to indicate that it had to do with development so that
61 people wouldn't think that it was junk mail.
62
63 Perdita Holtz: Right, and that is in there under the public hearing portion that it's going to say, "Notice of Hearing"on
64 the outside of the envelope.
65
66 Lydia Wegman: Other comments, questions?
67
68 Paul Guthrie: I have one other. Someone who doesn't receive notice but hears about the project,will they just come
69 directly to the planning organization and say, "Hey,we heard this was going on.What's going on?"
70
71 Perdita Holtz:Yes, because there's still the sign that's posted on the property so anybody seeing that sign could
72 contact us.
73
74 Paul Guthrie: Because there are certain things that affect well beyond 1000 feet or 500 feet. So you're able to
75 accommodate that without any problems?You don't need anything in the code to help you do that?
76
77 Perdita Holtz: No.
78
79 Paul Guthrie: Okay.Thanks.
80
81 Craig Benedict: Perdita,can you explain to the Board the new process a little bit that's going to be occurring in this
82 amendment that they're making recommendation and consistency before the public hearing?
83
84 Perdita Holtz: I hit on it earlier tonight, it's the first time that we're doing this new process and tonight is making a
85 recommendation in time for the February 18th quarterly public hearing so, it's the same types of actions, they're just
86 occurring in a different order than they used to.
87
88 Craig Benedict: So these do not get referred back to you unless the commission determines.
89
90 Lydia Wegman: So the commission could vote in February to approve this and we would not see it again?
91
92 Craig Benedict:That's correct. So there's some streamlining that we just accomplished as one of our goals for certain
93 things that are more housekeeping items like this.
94
95 Lydia:All right, any other comments or questions?
96
97 Lisa Stuckey: Okay, so I move approval of the statement of the consistency which is attachment 2 and the proposed
98 amendment package which is attachment 3 and that they be forwarded to the County Commissioners from the
99 Planning Board.
100
101 MOTION made by Lisa Stuckey to approve the text amendment. Seconded by Laura Nicholson
102 VOTE: Passed 9-1 (Tony Blake)
103
104 Tony Blake: I'm opposed. I'm opposed because I think that there's room for other notification in the event of a major
105 enterprise or undertaking, such as an airport.
106
107 Lisa Stuckey: It occurs to me that that could be part of the airport amendments.
2
21
108
109 Tony Blake: Sure,well I don't know so it's not clear to me that you could amend the airport thing and have it
110 supersede this or what.That I'm not clear on. It's my way of highlighting it.
111
112 Lisa Stuckey: I think that's not a bad idea.
113
114 Lydia Wegman:Yeah. Craig or Perdita, any comments on that?
115
116 Perdita Holtz:That's something that can be looked at when we go forward with the airport regulations, that the ORC
117 looked at in November.
118
119 Paul Guthrie: I just want to follow up on that. I think that's right for the point that he's making. I think there are some
120 issues beyond that that we could stumble into that you may at some point want to give yourself a background policy
121 to help you carry that out and don't hit them blind without any resource other than the fact that the rules didn't say we
122 had to do it. I can think of lots or monster projects that don't take up a lot of ground that could have a great deal of
123 interest in the County as a whole, and so I think you need to think whether you need some kind of framing that will
124 give you the latitude to move ahead and not get stopped with procedural issues at the beginning.
125
126 Perdita Holtz:Well, there have been instances in the past, Paul,when there have been major actions that we've
127 gone out and done informational sessions and stuff like that,and that's done on a case by case basis depending on
128 what the action is. It's just,we haven't done anything like that for the past 2 or 3 years because there haven't been
129 major actions, but there is precedent that we've done stuff like that.
130
131 Lydia Wegman:And I'll just add if I could, that it seems to be that those are projects that would come up as
132 independent or individual projects where it might come up, as opposed to something that would easily generally
133 define in the UDO text amendment.
134
135 Perdita Holtz:Yes, and that's just something that the County can undertake as part of their discretion in being a
136 government, particularly with the County'as the instigator. As you know, it gets dicier if it's a SUP.
137
138 Craig:When we submit to the commissioners say, an amendment outline form, they ask us to do something and we
139 develop this form to say, "this is how we think we can accomplish it, this is what Boards may be involved, maybe the
140 environmental board is part of the amendment process." And we also suggest public outreach that may be beyond
141 what the code says and that would be an opportunity for the commission to say, "Well,we think there should be a
142 broader outreach meeting beyond 1,000 feet. So that can occur, especially when it's government initiated.
143
144 Tony Blake:Yeah, the SUP case I was thinking of is the guy who builds the subdivision with 10 or 15 houses and a
145 runway and everybody's got their own little hangar; is that a public airport? Is that a private airport?And then if it's a
146 SUP and you only have to notify people within 1,000 feet that landing and taking off could extend quite a bit beyond
147 there.That's the just of my concern.
148
149 Lydia Wegman: Okay,great, thank you.
150
151 Patricia Roberts: Is there any airport planned?
152
153 Craig Benedict: No, there are no airports planned.We are in the process of updating our airport regulations. Some of
154 our outreach meetings were occurring around the holidays so it was decided to move it to a less busy time to
155 evaluate the new regulations.The best time to update your regulations is when there are no proposals out there. So
156 we will begin again,we're going to speak with the commissioners in a work session about the process and the
157 parameters of some of the updates and it probably will not come back until later this year.
158
159 Lisa Stuckey: I think all the schools I dealt with were in the cities of Chapel Hill or Carrboro, their jurisdictions. But
160 typically,we went way beyond 1,000 feet and there was a community meeting and there was a lot of use of various
3
22
161 media to get the word out because you don't want to build a big thing like that and then have all these people angry
162 later.So you know what to incorporate.
163
164 Tony Blake:Yeah, and it may be something that's already been considered and non-issue. I just couldn't find it
165 anywhere and I couldn't find anywhere where this could be superseded by a SUP.
166
167 Lydia Wegman:And the school would be a governmental use,wouldn't it?
168
169 Perdita Holtz: Schools actually come under a different section but,there's outreach you have to do.
170
171 ***************************************
4
23
Attachment 5
STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY
OF A PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Orange County has initiated an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) to modify mailed notification requirements.
The Planning Board finds:
a. The requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and,
b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5, and 1.1.7 of the UDO and to Section 153A-341 of the
North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds sufficient documentation within
the record denoting that the amendment is consistent with the adopted 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
1. The amendment is consistent with applicable plans because it supports the
following 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives:
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair,
open, efficient, and responsive.
c. The amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because it:
1. Corrects inadvertent omissions in amendments adopted on November 5,
2015.
2. Provides consistency in mailed notification requirements among the various
types of review procedures that require mailed notification, thereby
minimizing potential confusion.
The Planning Board of Orange County hereby recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners consider adoption of the proposed UDO text amendment.
(r 11 ikv
C Oir Date
vl 4 -
■A) 47 ery\ovv,_