HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-04-2006-5iORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 4, 2006
Action Agenda
Item No. Cj - ~
SUBJECT: Child Day Care Facilities Zoning Text Amendments
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Ordinance Amendments
2. Letter from Nancy Coston, Director of
Ccunty Department of Social Services
and March 17 Memo from Gwen Harvey
3. Portions of the Draft Minutes of
November 21, 2005 Quarterly Public
Hearing
4, Portions of the March 1, 2006 Planning
Board Meeting Minutes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Benedict, Director, 245-2592
Glenn Bowles, Planner II, 245-2577
Note: The November 21, 2Ql)5 Public Hearing is open until fhe Planning Board
recommendation returns to the Board of County Commissioners for decision.
PURPOSE: To hear and make a decision on the Administration and Planning Board
recommendations for proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments regarding child day care
facilities.
BACKGROUND: State administrative laws and regulations regarding child day care facilities
have continued to evolve and change since the BOCC last amended its zoning regulations in
1991. Planning staff met with representatives of the North Carolina Division of Child
Development in May 1999 and again on July 21, 2005 to discuss the differences in language
between Orange County and State child day care regulations. Consensus of the groups is that
amending the language of the child care provisions and definitions of the Zoning Ordinance is
needed to provide consistency in laws for day care providers, for users of day care facilities and
for the general public. The attached zoning text amendments bring the definitions and
provisions for Child Care Facilities in Orange County into agreement with those of the State.
Language differences in the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and respective licensing
provisions of the North Carolina General Statutes result from use of unlike terminology and
standards, Zoning Ordinance language in Sections 4.3 Permitted Use Table, 6.27 Large Day
Care Homes, 8,8,16 Day Care Facilities, Section 10.4 Off-Street Parking Requirements, and
Article 22 Definitions are dissimilar to those found in Article 7, Chapter 110 of the North Carolina
General Statutes, Child Care Facilities, as amended.
At the November 21, 2005 Public Hearing, the BOCC referred this item to the Planning Board
and to the Department of Social Services to determine if there may be any unintended
consequences of these proposed actions on County services. Nancy Coston, the Director of
the Orange County Department of Social Services, reviewed the proposed zoning ordinance
revisions. (Please refer to the attached letter from Ms. Coston to the Planning Director) As per
her attached letter, Ms, Coston does not see any negative consequences associated with the
revisions, and feels the revisions will serve to create common language between the zoning
regulations and the state licensing standards her department must enforce.
PROCESS AND ACTIONS:
Proposed ordinance amendments were presented at the November 21, 2005 Quarterly
Public Hearing and referred to the Planning Board and the Department of Social
Services for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC.
The Planning Board held its regularly scheduled March 1, 2006 meeting and made a
recommendation to the BOCC. The Planning Board issues were:
What discretion the Zoning Enforcement Officer would use in determining a disrupticn
to residential neighborhoods,
This is a requirement in the current ordinance; historically there has been no problem
or issues with this provision.
• What is the knowledge and qualifications of the Zoning Enforcement Officer to
determine the "moral welfare" of the children, as the existing ordinance now requires.
Social Services staff maybe befter qualified to make this determination and the
Zoning Enforcement Officer would refer any questionable performance to the
appropriate departments.
Discussed whether gates to play areas should be self-closing and self-latching.
This is a new recommendation in the proposed ordinance.
The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed
text amendments provided that Sue Russell, Director of Child Care Services, and
Michelle Rivest, Director of Smart Start, be in accord with Nancy Coston's letter.
Assistant County Manager Harvey provided a memorandum to address concerns of the
Planning Board regarding consultation with Ms. Russell, Director of Child Care Services
and Ms. Rivest, Director of Smart Start. (Refer to the attachment)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No County financial impact at this time with human resources being
used from existing department staffs.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Administration recommends the Board close the public
hearing and APPROVE the attached ordinance consistent with the Planning Board
recommendation.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO BOCC
May 4, 2006
Italics= New Language
~trikethreug# = Existing Language Deleted
An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County
Be it ordained by the Board of Conunissioners of the County of Orange, North Carolina,
that the Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1. ?.mend Section 22, Definitions. (Page 22-6) Delete Bayer-n;-~,4..~-
r..,,.., r,:,. ,,...., r,,,.,,o t,.,.,e..,,,,.,,. ,.a,.,.. ~r,.,,, r,:...,..ro.,... ..«.,,,,r,,.,.a,,.~ .,,,,,rte ~,.,,.ie~
~~a~.,..~ , u,....~, ,...~..,s,
Replace with:
Child Care -Apr°ogran: or' arrcarrgenrerrt udrere three or° more children less than 13,years
old, who do not r°eside inhere the car°e is provided, receive cm•e on a regular basis of at
least once per week for mw•e than, four horns per day, fi°an persons other than their°
guardians or° fidl-time custodians, or° from per sons not related to them by birth, mm r iage,
or adoption. Child care does not include the follownrg:
a. Arrangements operated in the home of any child receiving car°e if all the children
in care are related to each other or• rro more tharz hvo additional children are in
cm e,
b, Rea~eational programs operated for less ihan,foza consecutive months in a yem;
c. Specialized activities or instruction such as atTrletics, dance, art, music lessons,
horseback riding, g7nnnastics, or organized clubs for children, such as Boy
Scolds, Gir°l Scozrts, 4-Hgr•oups, or boys and girls clubs
d. Dr°op-in or° short-term care provided while parents par°ticipate in activities that
are rrot emploannent related and rovlrer-e the parents are on tl:e premises a•
otherwise easily accessible, such as drop-in or° short-tem care provided in Trealth
spas, bowling alleys, shopping malls, resort Trotels, or clrur•ches
e. Public schools
f Non public schools described in Part l of Ar°ticle 39 of Chapter I15C of the North
Carolina Statutes that are accredited by the Souther°n Association of Colleges and
Schools arrd that operate a child care, facilit)~ as defined under Child Care
Facility of for less than sic and one-half hours per day eitlrer° on or off the school
site;
g. Bible schools conducted dzuzng vacation periods;
h Cm•e provided by facilities licensed zurder Article 2 of Chapter 112C of tlae Nortlr
Carolina General Statutes,
4
Cooperative arrmagwnents among parents to provide care for their children as a
convenience rather than for enzploymetrt; and
Any child care program or arrangement consisting of ttivo or more separate
components, each off which operates for, fotn hours or less per day n~ith different
children attending each component.
Section 2. Amend Section 22, Definitions. (Page 22-6) Delete
c\
t~ °«;.,^
, r..a:.,°«t,° ° .n«°..+n..,.t,~„t n° ^a ^t,:ta.°„ ,.,,,ar.. -47, °rt_
_ ~_o
_
i
~ ~
~ o o..
~ .:
R
v b
t,aa..°., „
., ^,t,.t4 ^ .. 4r, n., .. .,la w° .,°...,,;+.
~fi °,t : ^ n n a.n«° a
•u mot, u ~~ . U.u... °°.,^°,t
,...,.,~ .... ,.°„4
........ °,•
...
..fi'«i,°«:., .,f .7 ,. ,.i ,. ..71 .. ..fi...b° 41, -41, .~,:: i ce. ^«~
~O °~
ypbQ~,~,
•'D...la~:
mt,° ~n°...:.,° cnn;r«: ~-are ne~iil^r,.a°a:.,..wrn n..t,°els-13~se-13eels-wlaetlrer-er
. b
nl 1. :.]., .+f ....,1O 'z'a~dil°v-¢z`cvrfi'~•dvac
biiV ,
cmzo ctcicdivriiV •• A, , 41,. ° /4\ . °lm A. n4: •,~', Hd-C-00[3BEati~iC
b a
b '
Replace with:
C/tild Cm•e Facility - I~zchtdes child cure centers, and mry other child em•e m rangement
not excluded by General Statute 110-86(2), that provides child cm e, regardless of the
time of day, rovlrerener operated, and tivhether or trot operated for proftt.
a. A child cm°e center is an arrangement where, at any one time, there are three or
more pre-school children or° nine or Wrote scTtool-caged chilcb en r°eceiving child
care.
b. A fmnily child care home is a child care m ratrgenrent located in a residence
where, at arty one time, more than two children, but fex~er° than nine children,
receive child care.
Section .3. ?.mend Section 22, Definitions. (Page 22-6) Revise Buy-~n~2-T~T~a.~.
warge Center in a Residence for 3 to I2 Chi[drert - A ~~ residence in which
child care is provided, tvJziclz is-€aEi#ty located on a public state maintained road, and
which provides dad child care for more than €rve-(3~ three (3) but-fin°.•^°~~'•^~,~~z :'~)
c-k~d~en; no ma~e than twelve (I Z) children, ^ ~"'•~^ ^ ^°^~~'^^^°
Section 4. .Amend Section 22, Definitions. (Page 22-6) Add Fruni[y Day Care
Home - A residence in wlriclr childccne is provided, tvhiclr provides child care, for° no
more than three (3) clrildt°en.
Section 5. Amend Section 6.27, Large Day Care Homes. (Page 6-49) as follows:
6.27. es Center iu a Residence for 3 to I2 Children
6.27:1 Site plan requirements.
In addition to the information required by Article 14.2,
1 °'~°° •°°'•°°°''°°~~ ~°''~s. A floor plan of the proposed day child care
hexie-facility, showing the use and dimensions of each room and the location of
entrances and exits, a fenced, orttdoor play space, evidezzce that tTre mininnnn
requiz°ements to qualify for a state Center in a Residence for 3 to 12 Children
license have been satisfied.
6.27.2 Standards for evaluation
The following standards shall be used in deciding on an application for site plan approval
for the use:
a. The'°~'°~nn~d~a~-hon=e center in a residence for .3 to 12 clzildr•en is Co be located
in an area, which is free from conditions dangerous to the physical and moral
welfare of the children.
b. The minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North Carolina hrrgeday-Fare
kerns child care license are satisfied.
c. There is direct frontage and access on a public state maintained road,
d. Adequate access to and from the site, as well as adequate space off the road right-
of-way, is provided for the safe pickup and discharge of children and is provided
in such a manner that traffic generated by the{ar-ge-day-ease-kerns center in a
residence foz° .3 to I2 children is not disruptive to adjacent residentially developed
properties
e. The site plan shall show how the facilities will be screened fiom adjacent
properties. A type A .30-foot buffer shall be provided around the'°~'°~~.ti
tterxe center in a residence, for 3 to I Z chi[dr°erz and play area. These buffers will
effectively screen the view of any outdoor play area, and reduce noise associated
with the day child care.
f: Each'°~b ~'°~~ °°~°'~^~,° center in a residence.for 3 to IZ children is required to
provide at least 75 square feet of outdoor play space for every child in care. This
space may not be located in a required buffer or in an area, which is used or
reserved for use as a sewage disposal nitrification field.
g. Fencing is to be provided around the outdoor space, which ensures the protection
of the children receiving day child care and protects adjacent residentially
developed properties from trespass.
h. All gates shall be self-closing and self-latching.
6.27..3 i ^ ^ "^^'-'^~^ u^-~^ Application procedure
No center in a residence for 3 to 12 children maybe operated in a residence except as
permitted under this Ordinance and only after approval has been issued by the Zoning
Officer.
An application for a'°~'°~^~nome center irr a residence for- 3 to IZ children
shall be f led with the Zoning Officer and shall be submitted on forms provided by
the Zoning Officer. Such 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,
In addition to the application, the applicant is required to submit a site plan of the
property on which the'°••^~a.-~d~-oar~hm.=o center in a r'esiderrce for 3 to 1? children
is to be located. The site plan shall show the location of the residence in which the
'~~^° a°~• ^~~°'~^•r° center in cr residence for 3 to I,l childr°en is to be located in
relation to existing property lines and adjacent homes; the location, number, and
means of access to required off street parking areas; and the location and type of
required landscaping and/or screening.
Upon a determination that the application is complete, The Zoning Officer shall cause
a review of the application to be made. The review shall determine if the proposed
'°••^~a~d~y-~a~~l.o::.~ 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.
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'~•-^~ a~• ~°••°'~^~°° center irr a residence for .3 to Il children. In
the latter case, the conditions may include, but not be limited to, limitations on the
hours of operation, location of play area, the number of vehicles to be parked on the
premises, and the location of a storage area or parking on the property. In addition,
the Zoning Off cer may require greater setbacks and/or additional landscaping or
screening to adequately screen the'°°°n~ ate"" °~°'-~mmu center in a residence fa•.3 to
I2 children from adjoining properties.
Tf the application is approved, either with or without cwrditions, the Zoning Officer
shall send the applicant a letter informing him or• her of the approval azrd of The
requirements of the chapter that apply to the center in a residence for .3 to I2 clrild~°err
' ••^~-I:erne. The letter must be signed by the applicant to indicate his or her
willingness to operate the'°°^°~1•o:;=e center in a residence for 3 to 12
c/rildrerr in conformance with the requirements and conditions set forth in the letter.
Each letter shall be kept on file by the Zoning Officer and shall constitute the
approval for the'~•-^~ a°•• ~°~°'•°•~~° center in a residence for 3 to I2 children in
question.
If the application is denied, the Zoning Officer shall notify the applicant of the denial
and shall state the reasons for denial in writing. The applicant may appeal the
decision of the Zoning Officer to the Board of Adjustment as set forth in Article 21 of
this Ordinance.
Each'° bar--~~ centez• in a residence for .3 to 12 childr•erz approved by the
Zoning Officer shall be reviewed amrually by the Zozzing Officer to ensure
compliance with the standards of evaluation for such facilities. The Zoning Officer is
authorized to approve minor changes in the approved'°~~° a°•• a°~n'~n•rn center° in a
residence for 3 to Il 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 6,27.2 above. Any change in the operation
of the ~^~~n a°•• n°~n'.,..,,n center in a residence fora to 12 children that does not comply
with the standards for evaluation as specified in Section 6.27,2 above will constitute a
modification and require the approval of the Board of Adjustment under the provisions of
Article 8 of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Amend Section 8.8..16, Day Cal°e Facilities. (Page 8-18p) as follows:
*8.8.16 ^^~~~-~R~:'..'-y~ Child Care Facilitlz
*8.8.16.1 Additional information
In addition to the information required by Articles 8.2 and 8.8, the following shall
be submitted as part of the application:
a) Evidence that the minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North
Carolina day care facility license have been satisfied.
b) A floor plan of the proposed day childcare facility, showing the use and
~ dimensions of each room and the location of entrances and exits.
I
*8.8.16.2 Standards of evaluation
The following standards shall be used in deciding on an application for this use:
a) The day childcare facility is to be located in an area, which is free fiom
conditions dangerous to the physical and moral welfare of the children.
b) The minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North Carolina day
childcare facility license al°e satisfied.
c) There is direct,fiontage and access frern-tl3e-prep~~'•• n., .°',:n', 4'•° a°•. ,.n~°
r n:"~ty~:-sta-'ae--}seated-te on a pczblic State-maintained road er-a-pr~i~=ate-read
tl. n.i: nF41, n4a
'
''
i
' d
ti
m
~a~,
-zv
av
v-~
n .• .+..41.• n •n.l }..r 41~~. .... n.7 n
i
'
'
°
1
nF e
-oi~-
ic
e
..A 41.n .~ on4oA h.-n FA.n 4n 1...
rRl9$1
ivi
r
tc
.
3..r
-vr
,a~oe,-,,,;.,.,,a .,,.,.,.,.,a:,,,, ,,, n.....,,.., n,,.,.,.., c„wa:..:,.:,,., v,,,..,i.,.:,,.,,. nom..,..,,
u b b nv¢..c
1'cV xs~'SJti~t'f~'Rt~.
d) Adequate access to and from the site, as well as adequate space off the road
right-of--way, is provided For the safe pick-up and discharge of children and is
provided in such a manner that traffic generated by the day childcare facility
is not disruptive to adjacent residentially developed properties.
e) All child pick up and dr°op offs shall be on site, with proper vehicle stacking
area egzrivalent to three cars.
fl The site plmr shall show born the, facilities will be screened from adjacent
properties. A q~pe A .30 foot buffer shall be provided ar•ourrd childcare
building and play area. These buffers tivill effectively screen the view ofany
outdoor play area, and reduce noise associated with the childcare.
g) Eaclr childcm•e is required to provide at least 7.5 square feet of outdoor play
space for every child in cm°e. This space nra,y not be located in ca required
buffer or in mr area, rovhidr is used or reserved for use as a sewage disposal
nih-ification ftelcL
h) Fencing and/or screening is to be provided which ensures the protection of the
children receiving ~ childcare, and protects adjacent residentially developed
properties from trespass, eoF
i) All gates shall be self closing and self-latching.
j) Each day childcare facility approved by the Board of Adjustment shall be
reviewed amrually by the Zoning Officer to ensure compliance with the standards
of evaluation for such facilities and any conditions attached to the application by
the Board of Adjustment. Any change in the operation of the facility, which
deviates fi-om the original standards and conditions will constitute a modification
and will require the approval of the Board of Adjustment. In determining whether
a change in the operation of the facility has occurred, the Zoning Off cer shall be
guided by the procedures and criteria contained in Article 8.7 and Article
8.8..16.2.
Section 7. Amend Section 10.4,Off-Street Parking Requirements. (Page 10-3) as
follows:
10.4 Off-Street Parlcine Requirements
Each use shall provide the following off
USE
REQUIREMENT
H-1 Oa-y Child Care Facilities, Bay
,.,,.
H-la Center in a Residence for .3 to 12
Children
street parking
MINIMUM SPACE
One space per staff and one space per
fve s#rdents children.
one space per staff menzher mrd one per
eve ehtldren.
Section 8. Amend Section. 4.3 Permitted Use Table (Page 4-11) as follows:
H1 lay-Childcare Facilities, ^~'•~~ "•°~~ r ., ., r,..,. r.,..~ u^.,,,. (1) (5) (6) (10)
Hla "~~ ~'~•-~ °^~°~, ' ~•~~-~ Center in a Residence for° 3 to 12 Children
Section 9. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this the _
day of , ?006, upon motion of Connnissioner ,seconded by
Commissioner
10
PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO BOCC
May 4, 2006
An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County
Be it ordained by the Board of Connnissioners of the County of Orange, North Carolina,
that the Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows:
Child Care - A program or arrangement where three or more children less than 13 years
old, who do not reside where the care is provided, receive care on a regular basis of at
least once per week for more than four hours per day from persons other than their
guardians or frill-time custodians, or from persons not related to them by birth, marriage,
or adoption. Child care does not include the following:
a. Arrangements operated in the home of any child receiving care if all the children
in care are related to eaah other or no more than two additional children are in
care;
b. Recreational programs operated for less than four consecutive months in a year;
c. Specialized activities or instruction such as athletics, dance, art, nnrsic lessons,
horseback riding, gymnastics, or organized clubs for children, such as Boy
Scouts, Girl Scouts, 4-H groups, or' boys and girls clubs;
d. Drop-in or short-tens care provided while parents participate in activities that are
not employment related and where the parents are on the premises or otherwise
easily accessible, such as drop-in or short-tem care provided in health spas,
bowling alleys, shopping malls, resort hotels, or chtuches;
e. Public schools;
f. Non-public schools described in Part 2 of Article .39 of Chapter 115C of the North
Carolina Statutes that are accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools and that operate a child care facility as defined under- Child Care Facility
of for less than six and one-half hours per day either on or off the school site;
g. Bible schools conducted during vacation periods;
h. Care provided by facilities licensed under Article 2 of Chapter 1120 of the North
Carolina General Statutes;
i. Cooperative azrangements among parents to provide care for their children as a
convenience rather than for employment; and
j. Any child care program or arrangement consisting of two or more separate
components, each of which operates for four hours or less per day with different
children attending each component.
Child Care Facility -Includes child care centers, and any other child care arrangement
not excluded by General Statute 110-8C(Z), that provides child care, regardless of the
time of day, wherever operated, and whether or not operated for profit.
a. A child care center is an arrangement where, at any one time, there are three or
more pre-school children or nine or more school-aged children receiving child
care.
11
b. A family child care home is a child care arrangement located in a residence
where, at any one time, more than two children, but fewer than nine children,
receive child care
Center in a Residence fm• .3 to 12 Children - A residence in which child care is
provided, which is-located on a public state maintained road, and which provides child
care for more than three (3) but, no more than twelve (12) children.
Family Day Care Home - A residence in which child care is provided, which provides
child care for no more than three (.3) children.
6.27. Center in a Residence for .3 to 12 Children
6.27.1 Site plan requirements.
In addition Co the information required by Article 14.2, a floor plan of the proposed child
care facility, showing the use and dimensions of each room and the location of entrances
and exits, a fenced, outdoor play space, evidence that the minimum requirements to
qualify for a state Center in a Residence for :3 to 12 Children license have been satisfied.
6.27.2 Standards for evaluation
The following standards shall be used in deciding on an application for site plan approval
for the use:
a. The center in a residence for .3 to 12 children is to be located in an area, which is
free from conditions dangerous to the physical and moral welfare of the children.
b. The minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North Carolina child case
license are satisfied.
c. There is direct frontage and access on a public state maintained road..
d. Adequate access to and fiom the site, as well as adequate space offthe road right-
of-way, is provided for the safe pickup and discharge of children and is provided
in such a manner that traffic generated by the center in a residence For 3 to 12
children is not disruptive to adjacent residentially developed properties.
e. The site plan shall show how the facilities will be screened from adjacent
properties. A type A .30-foot buffer shall be provided around the center in a
residence for 3 to 12 children and play area. These buffers will effectively screen
the view of any outdoor play area, and reduce noise associated with the child care.
f. Lach center in a residence for :3 to 12 children is required to provide at least 75
square feet of outdoor play space for every child in care. This space may not be
located in a required buffer or in an area, which is used or reserved for use as a
sewage disposal nitrification field.
g. Fencing is to be provided around the outdoor space, which ensures the protection
of the children receiving child care and protects adjacent residentially developed
properties from trespass.
h All gates shall be self-closing and self-latching
12
6.27.3 Application procedure
No center in a residence for 3 to 12 children may be operated in a residence except as
permitted wider this Ordinance and only after approval has been issued by the Zoning
Officer.
An application for a center in a residence for 3 to 12 children shall be filed with the
Zoning Officer and shall be submitted on fornis provided by the Zoning Officer. Such
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.
In addition to the application, the applicant is required to submit a site plan of the
property on which the center in a residence for .3 to 1.2 children is to be located. The
site plan shall show the location of the residence in which the center in a residence for
3 to 12 children is to be located in relation to existing property lines and adjacent
homes; the location, number, and means of access to required off=street par}cing areas;
and the location and type of required landscaping and/or screening.
Upon a determination that the application is complete, the Zoning Officer shall cause
a review of the application to be made. The review shall determine if the proposed
center in a residence for .3 to 12 children eonfonns with all requirements of this
Ordinance. Based on the review, the application will be approved, approved with
conditions or denied.
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 center in a residence for .3 to 12 children. hi the latter case, the
conditions may include, but not be limited to, limitations on the hours of operation,
location of play area, the number of vehicles to be parked on the premises, and the
location of a storage area or parking on the property. In addition, the Zoning Officer
may require greater setbacks and/or additional landscaping or' screening to adequately
screen the center in a residence for .3 to 12 children from adjoining properties.
If the application is approved, either with or without conditions, the Zoning Officer
shall send the applicant a letter informing him or her of the approval and of the
requirements of the chapter that apply to the center in a residence for 3 to 12 children.
The letter must be signed by the applicant to indicate his or her willingness to operate
the center in a residence for 3 to 12 children in conformance with the requirements
and conditions set forth in the letter. Each letter shall be kept on file by the Zoning
Officer and shall constitute the approval for the center in a residence for 3 to 12
children in question.
If the application is denied, the Zoning Officer shall notify the applicant of the denial
and shall state the reasons for denial in writing. The applicant may appeal the
13
decision of the Zoning Officer to the Board of Adjustment as set forth in Article 21 of
this Ordinance.
Each center in a residence for .3 to 12 children approved by the Zoning Officer shall
be reviewed arniually by the Zoning Officer to ensure compliance with the standards
of evaluation for such facilities. The Zoning Officer is authorized to approve minor
charges in the approved home 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 specif ed in
Section 6.27.2 above. Any change in the operation of the center in a residence for .3 to
12 children that does not comply with the standards for evaluation as specified in
Section 627,2 above will constitute a modification and require the approval of the
Board of Adjustment under the provisions o[ Article 8 of this Ordinance.
*8.8.16 Child Care Facility
*8.8.16.1 Additional information
In addition to the information required by Articles 8.2 and 8.8, the following shall be
submitted as part of the application:
a) Evidence that the minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North Carolina
day care facility license have been satisfied.
b) A floor plan of the proposed child care facility, showing the use and dimensions
ofeach room and the location of entrances and exits..
*8.8.16.2 Standards of evaluation
The following standards shall be used in deciding on an application for this use:
a) The child care facility is to be located in an area, which is free from conditions
dangerous to the physical.
b) The minimmn requirements to qualify for a State of North Carolina child care
facility license are satisfied.
c) There is direct frontage and access on a public State-maintained road.
d) Adequate access to and from the site, as well as adequate space off the road right-
of-way, is provided for the safe pick-up and discharge of children and is provided
in such a mamrer that traffic generated by the child care facility is not disruptive
to adjacent residentially developed properties.
e) All child pick up and drop offs shall be on site, with proper vehicle stacking area
equivalent to three cars..
f) The site plan shall show bow the facilities will be screened from adjacent
properties. AType-A, :30-foot buffer shall be provided around child care building
and play area These buffers will effectively screen the view of any outdoor play
area, and reduce noise associated with the child care.
g) Each child care is required to provide at least 75 square feet of outdoor play space
for every child in care. This space may not be located in a required buffer or in an
area, which is used or reserved for use as a sewage disposal nitrification field.
14
h) Fencing and/or screening is to be provided which ensures the protection of the
children receiving child care and protects adjacent residentially developed
properties from trespass.
i) All gates shall be self-closing and self-latching.
j) Each child care facility approved by the Board of Adjushnent shall be reviewed
amrually by the Zoning Off cer to ensure compliance with the standards of
evaluation for such facilities and any conditions attached to the application by the
Board ofAdjustment. Any change in the operation ofthe facility, which deviates
from the original standards and conditions will constitute a modification and will
require the approval of the Board of Adjushnent. In determining whether a change
in the operation of the facility has occurred, the Zoning Officer shall be guided by
the procedures and criteria contained in Article 8.7 and Article 8.8.16.2.
i
10.4 OY'f Street Parlcine Requirements
Each use shall provide the following off-street parking:
USE REQUIREMENI MINIMUM SPACE
H-1 Child Care Facilities, One space per staff and one space per
fve children.
H-1 a Center in a Residence for 3 to 12 One space per staff member and one per
Children fve children,
Section. 4.3 Permitted Use Table
H1 Child Care Facilities, (1~5~(6) (10)
Hla Center in a Residence for 3 to 12 Children
Section 9. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this the
day of , 2006, upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by
Commissioner
I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North
Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the
proceedings of'said Board at a meeting held on , 2006 as relates in
any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the
minutes of said Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this _day of
2006.
Clerk of the Board of Commissioners
15'
Orange County Department of S~scial Services
P,O. BOX 8181, 300 W. TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
2501 HOMESTEAD ROAD
CHAPEL HIL,L,, NORTH CAROLINA 2'1516
DIRECTOR
Nmcy Coemn
February 6, 2006
Mr. Craig N, Benedict
Orange County Planning Director
Post Office $ox 8181
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27516
Dear Mr, Benedict:
7elee~~pppphone: ~~''
}~~,Itsbamvgh pflicc 732 936E 73y$i b I
Chapel Hill O(Rce 968.2000
I have reviewed the proposed ordinance changes related to child day care and believe these to be
consistent with the standards used by the North Cazolina Department of Health and Human Services,
Division of Child Development, Therefore I do not see any negative consequence of making the
proposed changes, Most of the changes will serve to create common language between the Orange
County ordinance and the standards used by the Division of Child Development.
Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns,
Sincerely,
,~~ 4'.
Nan Coston
Director
Cc: Gwen Harvey
15a
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 17, 2006
TO: Craig Benedict
Planning Director
FROM: Gwen Harvey
Assistant Cou
RE: Child Day Care Facilities Zoning Text Amendments
Rehabilitative, Group, and Family Care Facilities Zoning Text
Amendments
The County Manager asked that I facilitate a meeting with Planning staff and Nancy
Coston, Social Services Director, and .Iudy Trvitt, OPC Area Director to discuss proposed
zoning text amendments before consideration for final adoption.
On January 10, the two Directors and I met with Robert Davis, Glen Bowles, and
Michael Harvey from Plaruring to review the proposed amendments and raise any
questions or concerns about possible impacts/unintended consequences for' human service
delivery systems within the county. Both Directors were appreciative of the opportunity
tc have a full discussion of the proposed amendments and agreed to take the information
back to their staffs most involved in day care or group home operations for further review
and comment.
Their review would cuhninate in a formal memorandum from each to your Department
expressing either general support or an opportunity to reconcile any adverse impacts
perceived. Part of the DSS and OPC departmental review would encompass
conversations with community parhrers and stakeholders, i.e., Child Care Resources, Inc.,
Smart Start, Partnerslip to End Homelessness, Cluysalis Foundation and others.
Nancy Coston has submitted her departmental response on child day Gaze facilities (copy
attached). Judy Truitt should also respond on rehabilitative, group, and family care
facilities in sufficient time for your Department to schedule appropriate action. However,
at the January meeting she did shaze a letter to the Mayor of Cazrboro when the Town
was reviewing its existing group home ordinance in 2005, by way of background (copy
attached.)
If additional information is required, please advise.
Cc: Iohn Link, County Manager
Nancy Coston, DSS
.Iudy Truitt, OPC
Attaclunents
16
APPROVED 2/21/2006 MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING
November 21, 2005
7:30 pm
The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board
met for a Quarterly Public Hearing on Monday, November 21, 2005 at 7:30 p,m. in the F.
Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey and Commissioners Barry
.Jacobs, Valerie Foushee, and Alice M. Gordon
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Stephen H. Halkiotis
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoff Gledhill
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., and Deputy Clerk to
the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jay Bryan and Members Brian
Dobyns, Michelle Kempinski, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price-Saunders, Ted Triebel,
and Jeffrey Schmitt
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Craufurd Goodwin, Sam Lasris, Sandra
Quinn, Hunter Schofield, Nicole Graysmith
3. Orange County Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
b. Child Day Gare Amendments
Consideration of amendments to amend the child day care provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance to establish consistency with State standards and terminology far day care
providers, users of day care facilities, and the general public,
Glen Bowles presented this item. He said that these definitions were created back in the
1980's and have not evolved. The State's definitions have evolved and are continuing to
evolve. He showed a map of licensed facilities in the County. Several people have made
suggestions. Specifically, Lanier DeGrella, Technical Assistance Director of Child Care
Services Association wrote an emaih He would like to make this email part of the record.
He said that most of the changes proposed have to do with definitions, The exceptions
are on page 8 and the proposed changes are in italics. He read the changes, A Family
Day Care Home would be one or two children. 'The next category is a Day Care Home
with between 3 and 12 children, which would be reviewed by staff with a site plan,. If
there were more than 12 children, it would be a Day Care Facility and would require a
Class B Special Use Permit, The only real change is the definitions.. The Planning
Department has definitions that do not quite fit. He said that they would welcome any
opinions from the Board and others..
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the letter from the Technical Assistance
Director of Child Care Services and said that she refers to an attached document, which
was not included, Glen Bowles said that the document was the ordinance and he has
made the changes that she pointed out, He will share these with the Board and the
Planning Board.
Commissioner Gordon said that she finds this unsettling and that they do not have the
final document that will be referred to the Planning Board, She is not able to make
helpful comments yet.
17
John Link said that the directors of these organizations need to sign off on this io make
sure these changes are what they expect. This would be Sue Russell, Director of Child
Care Services; Michelle Rivest, Director of Smart Start; and Nancy Coston, Director of
Social Services, He wants to make sure the language is correct and that it is a very
straightforward process,
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation and
returned no sooner than January 24, 2006.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
18
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
MARCH 1, 2006
REGULAR MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jay Bryan, Chapel Hill Representative (Chair); Theodore (Ted) W. Triebel (Vice-
Chair); Craufurd Goodwin, Hillsborough Representative; Michelle Kempinski, Cedar Grove Township at
Large; Sam L.asris, Cedar Grove Township At Large; Renee Price-Saunders, Hillsborough Township at
Large; Sandra Johnson Quinn, Eno Township; Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township at Large; Little
River Representative; Brian Dobyns, Cheeks Township Representative; Bernadette Pelissier, Bingham
Township
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor;
Robert Davis, Current Planning Supervisor; Glenn Bowles, Planner II; Sherri Ingersoll, Administrative
Assistant II
AGENDA ITEM #I: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
AGENDA ITEM #2: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
.Tay Bryan: Please note the Planning Calendars for Mazch and April. With regard to the meeting
on April Soh, based on our conversation, I asked Charles Daniel to come and tallc about water
issues, and I believe he said "yes". Could you please verify that, Sherri? I'd like to ask the
Board what they think about including Rosemary Stumners, Director of the Health Depaztment.
She approached me and knew that Charles Daniel was coming, and she would like to come and
talk about water from the health perspective, including groundwater protection, surveillance of
well and septic systems, built environments, relationship to health, etc.
Brian Dobyns: Ron Holdway also said that he would be interested in coming to speak to us if
we'd like.
Renee Price-Saunders: What's on the schedule for next meeting?
Craig Benedict: You have the discussion about the land use plan.
.Tay Bryan: What does the Board want to do?
Renee Price-Saunders: Since water is a driving force for the Land Use Element, I think we need
to hear what they have to say,
Sam Lasris: Since water is a main consideration, the more that we know about the water, the
better we could evaluate the land use plan.
Renee Price-Saunders: Do we want to devote an hour if we want to have two or three people
speak?
Jay Bryan: We would need at least an hour.
1~
Ted Triebel: 1 believe that something was said at the start of the group that this study was going
to be done without expanding the existing water and sewer capacity fields, Rather, they were
going to work with the existing system and what's on line.
Craig Benedict: They are going to include Phase 2 of the reservoir.,
Ted Triebel: I understood him to say that this was part of our restrictive requirements when we
go about developing the alternatives.. We ai e not going to recommend the placement of
additional sewer lines,
Craig Benedict: They will be analyzing the existing lift station locations they have now and find
out if relocation of those stations can pick up more areas efficiently, and if they're not going to
stretch the sewer system beyond capacity, They are going to try to create an urbanizing
environment with water and sewer systems marred, This will be matched to the Water and
Sewer Planning Map and Boundary Agreement. There is clarity that the coverage area is
oversized, and they will not be able to service the entire area with the current system.
Craufurd Goodwin: Is there a target date for the report?
Ted Triebel: In about a yeaz. The only target date thrown out was that by this fall they will have
a draft available for public inspection and presentation.
AGENDA ITEM #8: CONSIDERATION OF CHILD DAY CARE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS
Glenn Bowles: Mr, Chairman, I appreciate your keeping this item on the agenda. I gave up my
.35th anniversary to be here, Back in November, we had a Quarterly Public Heazing at which
time the subject was brought up about making revisions to the zoning ordinance relating to child
care facilities. It was referred back to Staff to contact Nancy Coston, Director of Social Services
for the County, to get her input to make certain that there weren't any unintended impacts or
aspects of what we are trying to do that might affect the provision of services. Now, Ms. Coston
has given us a letter stating that she has found nothing wrong with what we were trying to do.
The chart here summarizes what has happened, We aze redefining family day care homes, day
care homes and child care facilities using nomenclature that the State is now using. As you can
see, our standards right now for a day care home is between 5 and 16 children on site. We will
be changing that to between 3 and 12, Two or less children will essentially not be regulated,
Anything more than 13 will be a day care facility, which we define as anything over 5 children.
So, as you can seek there is some ambiguity in the differences in numbers between what people
see when they go through the State licensure procedures and when they get licensed in Orange
County. We aze not necessazily talking about the same numbers, and it causes some confusion,
We felt that if we changed our regulations to be more consistent with the State, then it will make
the process a little simpler for the people who will want to become providers. The biggest part
of the changes are just the definitions, and that throughout the text there were references to day
care facilities or lazge child care facilities, and now we have changed those, One minor change
is on p. 5 of your handout; there aze some small changes in the design. For example, we want to
require that all gates be selfclasing and self latching, We also want to see that the pickup and
delivery of the children should be on-site.. Right now there are no provisions for that; they could
20
essentially stop at the street and have the kids run across the road to get into the day care, Also,
we are asking for a Class A landscape buffer to separate the required outdoor play area from the
adjacent residential properties.
Jay Bryan: Are there any questions?
Renee Price-Saunders: Will these changes put a lot of existing child caze facilities out of
compliance?
Glenn Bowles: No, the average of the smallest lot and the smallest regulated lot in the County is
40,000 square feet, with 30' of frontage lot width. That would mean that .30' on either side; you
still would have 70' of play area in the back yard. The average lot is often 2 -3 acres in size.
Ted Triebel: Of the ones that you know about.
Glenn Bowles: Of the ones that aze licensed, Not every day care facility in the County in
licensed,
Renee Price-Saunders: So, those that are licensed already have a buffer and screenings so the
kids aren't visible?
Glenn Bowes: There is at least some existing trees and bushes out there. We would not go back
in and retrofit any facility. If they're in business right now and they don`t have 30 feet, they're
grandfathered.
Sam Lasris: Will the drop off provision also be grandfathered?
Glenn Bowles: If they're licensed, they will need to do that any way.
Jay Bryan: Is that a State regulation?
Glenn Bowles: I believe so. We aze trying to bring up our regulations to the State level. The
State is not going to allow someone to pazk across the street and have the kids cross to get to the
day caze.
Sam Lasris: Are these facilities in residential areas now? Are these regulations going to change
that?
Glenn Bowles: Not really. Right now our regulations cover from 5-16 children and we're
bringing them back so that the day care facilities in residences have no more than 12 children.
Sam Lasris: What would the child care drop off area look like when you have 12 kids at one
time?
Glenn Bowles: It could be a small, like, drive through; it could be a large driveway and be able
to park in a side area, then be able to back out into the driveway and pull out into the roadway.
Z1
Sam Lasris: This says "stacked up to 3 cars". That seems like a lazge area, How much on the
lookout aze you for' licensed facilities? What if'they don't comply with this?
Glenn Bowles: We're not out looking for violations; when we're out doing something else and
notice something strange with a licensed facility, the Zoning Officer may check it out, More
often, the Department receives a complaint from a neighbor which we check into.
Robert Davis: We have been asked to notify Social Services if we see anything with licensed
facilities. They are very concerned with this,
Glemr Bowles: Unlicensed facilities are difficult to find, and we only deal specifically with
licensed facilities, With an unlicensed facility, you would have to know that something is
wrong.
Brian Dobyns: I have a child who is in day care now, and have some questions, On p. 3,
"receive care on a regular basis of at least once per week for more than four hours." What if the
facility offers part-time Gaze; do these regulations apply?
Glenn Bowles: That's a good question. I'm not certain,
Brian Dobyns: Regarding the self latching and self closing gates, what if the gate is locked
during business hours, and there is no means of egress from the play area. Does that need to be
self-closirrg and self-latching?
Glenn Bowles: If it is not used and locked, that would be covered, We're trying to address those
gates that are regularly used. We don't want a child to be able to easily get out of the play area.
Brian Dobyns: We talked about 75 squaze feet per child that the child day care should have, and
some childcazes have three shifts of children of different ages. If you add those children up,
there's no way they can meet the square footage regulation, They never occupy the same play
area at the same time. Is there a provision where children use the play area in shifts aze counted
differently?
Craig Benedict: If they use shifts, and no shifts are in the same play area at the same time, it is
only considered per shift that is on the playground at one time.
Ted Triebel: On page 01.3, it says that the Commissioners said that they wanted the directors of
these three organizations to sign off on this to make sure that the changes are correct and
straightforwazd, We have only heard from one of the three, I'm wondering that if Jahn Link
said that was what we were going to do, why are we making a recommendation without these
responses? It seems that it is incomplete from what the County Manager directed,
Glenn Bowles: The draft minutes came verbatim from their meeting, In the eazly part of
January, one of the Assistant Managers called a meeting with Ms. Coston and Ms. Truitt of
Social Services, and these other ladies were not involved, This meeting was at the Manager's
22
request. Robert, Michael Harvey and I attended the meeting, and we got Nancy's response. 1
believe the others were noted as possibilities for review letters.
Ted Triebel: I'm not going to vote on anything if the County Manager said who should be
contacted, and we don't have their response.
Glenn Bowles: We were at that same meeting when this was requested, and the subsequent
meeting was at the direction of John Link. Since Ms. Coston was the only person who was
included in the meeting, I presume that the others either didn't need to come or' the Manager
didn't feel that they needed to be there.
Ted Triebel: We need to sort that out, so that when we come back to the BOCC, they don't say,
why did the Planning Board approve this without all of the information? Have they been pulsed
or not?
Glenn Bowles: No, they have not.
Ted Triebel: Then we need to confirm with John Lirilc that that is OK.
Craig Benedict: John Link referred this issue to Gwen Harvey the Assistant County Manager,
who is in charge of human services and Gwen is the intermediate supervisor to Nancy Coston
and all human services. Gwen pulled together the people that she thought, under the direction of
John Link, who should be included. We can clarify from Gwen that it was her decision that
these other two people were not necessazy and Ms. Coston's responses was sufficient.
Ted Triebel: On p. 0.3, g, "bible schools", What vacation period are we talking about?
Glenn Bowles: Summer vacations,
Ted Triebel: Different schools, such as year round schools, wouldn't count under this. Year
round schools have different vacation periods at irregular times.
Glenn Bowles: It states non-public schools.
Ted Triebel: But we're also talking about public schools.
Glenn Bowles: This is from the State regulations.
Ted Triebel: P. 005, "free from conditions dangerous to physical and moral welfare of the
children." Is that our language?
Glenn Bowles: Yes, It is our present zoning language,
Ted Triebel: I'm not sure what that means, Seems like a slippery slope as to what is moral
welfare, and who defines it.
J~
Glenn Bowles: They don't want prostitutes living in the same house where children are being
cared for,.
Robert Davis: That's a part of the problem, We don't regulate this type of thing. Social
Services regulates it, They get into the details of how it is run,
Ted Triebel: We're being asked to make a recommendation ou this. I understand how nasty
things can affect the children, Last question, p, 007, "Zoning Officer review annually to
ensure.,." How is that documented? Is there a checklist?
Glenn Bowles: I have not seen a checklist,
Ted Triebel: I would think that it would be important before we approve something that if the
Zoning Officer is reviewing something annually, we know what is being reviewed,
Brian Dobyns: I believe that the Zoning Officer does have a checklist. I have seen this being
done.
Robert Davis: When it says that the Zoning Officer will do an annual review of the facilities, we
review the outside zoning requirements. We aren't in the position of defining moral welfare.
That is done by Social Services, We aze asked to check the standards of evaluation, but also the
Fire Marshal and Social Services do different determinations,
Ted Triebel: With this language, you're being asked to do it, Should we make a change to that
effect, since you don't deal with those issues.
Robert Davis: We believe it is better to have qualified people to make that determination. We
can make a determination on the outside facilities, such as if there is adequate square footage and
self latching gates. .
Ted Triebel: Before we approve another document, we should have the correct information
included. If you don't like something included, it should be removed,
Robert Davis: We can look at it again in terms of what things are being reviewed by other areas
as part of their change, as opposed to the zoning issues.
Renee Price-Saunders: Yeazs ago I worked on child care ordinances in urban azeas to ensure the
safety of the children, and zoning was not determining what was happening inside the building, it
was what was around it. For example, in Rochester, NY we didn't allow a child caze facility to
be located across from a liquor store or house of prostitution,
.Tay Bryan: It does say ` rn the area", That's helpful to understand.
Brian Dobyns: To follow up, I think that while Social Services is involved, the parents are very
vigilant about the care of their children. Parents will typically question the facility owners if
they have a question to keep a check on the moral questions.
24
Michelle ICempinski: On p. 007, "child care facilities located in residential areas", Are facilities
only locatedrn residential areas?
Glenn Bowles: The large facilities are almost exclusively in commercial zones, but the majority
of the smaller facilities are in residential areas.
Michelle Kempinski: So, they're located in commercial zones?
Glenn Bowles: The larger facilities are.
Michelle Kempinski: If they're not necessarily located in a residential area, do we have to keep
the word "residential" in?
Glenn Bowles: Even the commercial sites are in residential areas. Removing the word wouldn't
change the intent if it were the Board's wishes,
Robert Davis: We can remove the word.
Sam Lasris: Who do the people complain to about problems, and what kind of problems are you
referencing? Traffic back ups, litter in the yard?
Glenn Bowles: It is handled when a complaint is sent to the Department, and it is referred to
Michael Harvey, our Zoning Enforcement Officer who looks into it and takes action.
Sam Lasris: So it is still a planning issue if someone has problems with parking or traffic
backups?
Glenn Bowles: Yes. It is handled by Planning staff
Jay Bryan: Do you want to have more definition?
Sam Lasris: There should be some definitions, and what would be remedies to complaints.
What rights do property owners have?
Glenn Bowles: The definition of "disruptive" is very subjective to each person, It is interpreted
differently and is extremely subjective based on the complainant. We need to look back at the
standards, and are they violating a standard? Is there not enough drop off space, are there
landscape buffers?, etc. We need to look at the standards before making any determinations.
Sam Lasris: I don't know what authority you really have over these facilities,
Glenn Bowles: Michael would probably be in contact with the State consultants who deal with
licensing to check on compliance.
zs
Jay Bryan: These are also,just standards for evaluating an application. You don't know what the
situation will be. It is just speculative, My opinion is that if I were a neighbor, I would want to
be able to argue anything if I wa~lted to, rather than being specific, If you want to bring some
examples, feel free to bring some back and we can look at those.
Renee Price-Saunders: With regard to residential properties, most of the centers are small
residences. So, the way this is written, it is correct,
Glenn Bowles: Yes, but some of the child care facilities can be large facilities in commercial
areas.
Renee Price-Saunders: So, this pertains to all types of centers. When you refer to adjacent
properties, that opens a whole arena of problems, because what is disruptive to a residence is
different that what is disruptive to a convenience store. I also have a question about recreational
programs operational for four or more months in a year; so that means that a place offers only
summer care does not have to be covered,
Glenn Bowles: Correct.
Renee Price-Saunders: On P. 6, the Zoning Officer may require lazger setbacks. How does he
determine that? Are we setting someone up fox trouble by arbitrarily allowing the Zoning
Officer to decide when additional setbacks are needed and it's not specifically stated in the
regulations?
Glenn Bowles: The Zoning Officer would have to have reasonable cause.
Renee Price-Saunders: Would he have to go before the Boazd of Adjustment? I noticed that
none of this would go before the Planning Board,
Glenn Bowles: Depending on the type of facility, it might have to go to the BOA anyway. If
Staff has suggestions for additional space, it would be addressed with the Special A permit, If
they are coming in after the fact, after it has been developed, I don't see how that can happen.
Renee Price-Saunders: So would the Boazd of Adjustment approve this first? Can the applicant
file for an appeal?
Glenn Bowles: For the lazger facilities, yes, approval by the BOA would be needed, Staff would
determine the applications for smaller facilities,
Renee Price-Saunders: That's where my concern is; that the Zoning Officer would require
additional buffers without cause, This maybe sufficient,
Glenn Bowles: It could mean,just shifting over the fenced area,
Renee Price-Saunders: But what if the applicant didn't agree with the recommendation?
26
Robert Davis: That has never been a problem, This language has been here for a long time, and
no one has questioned it.
Glenn Bowles: The only way it could happen is if there was rocky or sandy soil, which might be
dangerous to the children.
Renee Price-Saunders: I'm,just concerned about the arbitrary decision.
Glenn Bowles: It may seem to be arbitrary to someone on the outside, but staff closely looks at
this and it is obvious why the recommendation was made,
,Tay Bryan: They can make an appeal to the Board of Adjustment.
Renee Price-Saunders: I know,
Jay Bryan: Sam, when you were making your point about "disruptive", were you refemng from
the point of view of the neighbors?
Sam Lasris: Or the potential neighbors. I,just don't know where neighbors who learn about the
possibility of facility, where they can raise their issues or rnake a complaint, and what are the
standazds of the complaint process.
Jay Bryan: What is the process?
Robert Davis: Complaints come into the Deparhnent, and are reviewed by the Zoning Officer
and members of the department. Complaints frequently come in, and we handle them. Zoning
stays outside, and the State regulates the inside of the facilities, along with the Fire Marshal,
Renee Price-Saunders: On p. 004, should that say "day care", or "child care home"?
Glenn Bowles: I must have missed one.
Jay Bryan: In section 8, the BOA approves those applications, so a person who is concerned
about issues could address them to the Board of Adjustment.
Renee Price-Saunders: But not all of the facilities go before the BOA.
Robert Davis: Section 8 deals with lazge facilities, Section 6 relates to general zoning categories
which is staff approval„ Large facilities are where the BOA is involved with the Special Use
Permit process,
Renee Price-Saunders: Not all facilities get approval.
Jay Bryan: I think it has been an issue in Carrboro, with centers being fumed down by the BOA.
It's an important issue.
z~
Craufurd Goodwin: Be sure to make corrections on your table before it goes to the BOCC, to
use the proper names.
Jay Bryan: Is there a motion?
Brian Dobyns: Can we make a motion for approval with a couple of conditions, such as Ted's
concern about others being consulted? I'm not as concerned about the term `residential' as
others are, but I'm concerned about the locked gates issue.
Glenn Bowles: We can insert some language about permanently locked gates.
Brian Dobyns: Motion to approve with the condition that a response from people previously
noted by the County Manager.
Michelle Kempinski: Wasn't there a question about the Zoning Officer dealing with the issues
of moral welfare?
Ted Triebel: I,just wanted to make certain that they (Planning Staff) were comfortable with
leaving the words `moral welfare' in the documents, since they aze responsible for enforcing it,
If a change is desired now, let's make it.
Robert Davis: I don't think that a change is needed now, We know that we look at the outside
azeas, and know how to regulate that, Irr terms of moral welfare, I'm not sure who is responsible.
Ted Triebel: That's my point.
Renee Price-Saunders: So, you wouldn't mind making a determination of an undesirable
situation?
Jay Bryan: We have a motion on the table. Is there a second?
Seconded by Craufurd Goodwin.
Jay Bryan: Would you like to make a friendly amendment?
Renee Price-Saunders: No.
Craig Benedict: Since we will be tallting with Social Services again, we'll ask if they will take it
under their purview to evaluate the moral standards. Let's keep the language in for now.
Ted Triebel: That can be added as a friendly addition to the motion for the Planning Staff to
check with Social Services to take this under their purview.
Brian Dobyns: I have no problem with that,
Jay Bryan: So if they aze willing to take this under their jurisdiction, we're OK with that?
~$
VOTE: Aye: 9, 1 nay (.Tay Bryan)
Jay Bryan: I think there is an issue about location that's addressed by the word "moral".
Renee Price-Saunders: Are you saying that we're taking "moral" out? That's not my
understanding of the motion.
.Tay Bryan: I understood that if DSS wanted to take over the purview of evaluation, the word
would be removed and it wouldn't be in the ordinance.
Renee Price-Saunders: Then, I misunderstood the amendment, I think the planning office
should have some discretion, I thought we were leaving the word in, and,just checking with
DSS,
Sam Lasris: Yes, we're keeping the word in, and just checking with them,
Jay Bryan: Then, I misunderstood the friendly amendment,
Sherri Ingersoll: Then, would you like to revote on the issue?
Jay Bryan: No, We'll leave it as is.
STAFF PRESENTATION ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S ROLE IN VARIOUS WATER RESOURCES-
RELATED REPORTS AND INITIATIVES
Craig Benedict: This handout is a work in progress. A report was put together of the Water
Resources Committee back in 2001 and they had S recommendations, Those 5 recommendations
were handed out last month; there is a vaziety of surface water issues groundwater issues, water
quality issues, surface water issues, well issues, radon issues. As you can see, it is a multi-
deparhnental effort that is necessary to resolve these. This is a form to start the discussions with
Environmental Health, ERCD, and Soil and Water. Planning will not be the lead depaztment in
these issues; it will be other deparhnents that deal with water resources and water quality, If it
deals with the regulatory issues, for example subdivisions should be a different size because you
need a larger water rechazge azea, then this Planning Board has a very large stake in the
regulatory environment.
Brian Dobyns: In this report, it says that the Commission for the Environment is taking a lead
role. Is that still happening, or have they backed off ofthat?
Craig Benedict: No, the status part is something that I put in this report for now. This is not an
edict, On the last page, it shows haw many reports are out there, The first two studies were
somewhat independent studies that were asked for by the County. The Water Resource
Committee report, the main headings, we can go tt>raugh tonight. There is a Water Resources
Initiative which is something new that has been brought forward by ERCD and adopted by the
Commissioners in May 2005, which shows where we need to go with these things. In the BOCC