HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-15-2005-5iORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: February 15, 2005
Action Agenda
Item No. 5-;
SUBJECT: A Resolution Establishing the Intent of Durham County, Durham City, and
Orange County To Cooperate With Regard To Planning Issues in Certain
Defined Areas
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. A Resolution Establishing the Intent of
Durham County, Durham City, and
Orange County to Cooperate with
Regard to Planning Decisions in
Certain Defined Areas
2. January 7 Letter from Moses Carey
3, January 18 Letter from Ellen Reckhow
4, Project Review Farm
5, Schedule for 21-Day Comment Period
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Benedict, ext. 2592
Dianne Reid, ext, 2326
Karen Lincoln, ext. 2594
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: Ta consider a Resolution Establishing the Intent of Durham County, Durham Gity,
and Orange County to Cooperate with Regard to Planning Issues in Certain Defined Areas
(Attachment 1).
BACKGROUND: As follow-up to the Orange County BOCG discussion on December 14, 2004,
the Chair wrote the Mayor of Durham and Chair of the Durham County Board of Commissioners
requesting clarification an the issue of 21 days versus 45 days for review (Attachment 2).
The Chair of the Durham County BOCC responded in a January 18 letter (Attachment 3) that 21
days was consistent with the timeframe contained in existing agreements with Cary, Chapel Hill,
Morrisville, Raleigh, and Wake County, The letter also emphasized that it was not anticipated
that all site plans and plats would come before the governing board, with some requiring only
administrative approval by the Planning Department, For items requiring governing body
approval such as plan amendments, re-zonings, use permits, and major site plans, the time
frame was longer and Orange County would have additional time for review (although a
maximum time was not specified).
As backgrcund to the above, in .June 2004, planning staff presented a proposal to establish a
courtesy review process and agreement with the City of Durham and Durham County for an
area of mutual interest in the I-85/US 70 corridor.. Courtesy Review is a process where the
respective Planning Staffs share development proposals taking place within certain designated
2
areas of their jurisdictions and provide written comments, Attachment 4 provides an example of
standard comment subject areas.
The courtesy review agreement would provide an opportunity for Orange County planning staff
to review and comment on development proposals within the Joint Review Area in Durham
County, and forward any major development applications (rezoning requests, major
subdivisions, major Special Use Permits, major site plans) and annexation proposals to the
Board of Commissioners for its comments,
Items proposed for inclusion in the review process include:
1. coordination of future land use plans and development of comparable zoning districts
and design standards;
2, review and comment on development proposals;
3. creation of a conceptual utility master plan for the Orange County portion of the area;
and
4, enhanced annexation notification procedures when the City annexes into Orange
County.
The BOCC voted to bring the resolution back on the consent agenda with changes to include a
minimal 45-day review time frame,
Orange County Staff discussed revising the draft agreement to incorporate a minimum 45-day
time frame far reviewing applications with Staff from the Durham .Joint City-County Planning
Department, Durham staff responded that consistent with prior Governing Body direction, the
agreement provided for coordination in review procedures so long as it did not have an effect on
previously established schedules (21 days in this case),
The Durham City Council, on November 15, 2004, and the Board of Durham County
Commissioners, on November 22, 2004, endorsed A Resolution Establishing The Intent Of
Durham County, Durham City, And Orange County To Cooperate With Regard To Planning
Issues In Certain Defined Areas that contains language to "coordinate with each other on a
timely basis within the current framework and schedule of the local development review
process".
It should also be noted that Orange Count Planning and Economic Development staff plan to
begin discussions with City of Durham regarding the land use and master utility plans for the
Orange County Economic Development District. focal property owners have expressed
interest in this effort.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The financial impact associated with this decision will be additional staff
review time of proposals in Durham and transmitting and processing of information to interested
County commissions, boards and departments, Presently, current planning staff can
accommodate this additional workload, Attachment 5 proposes a schedule for accomplishing
courtesy review within 21 days.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the attached
resolution.
Attachment 1
DRAFT
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE INTENT OF DURHAM COUNTY,
DURHAM CITY, AND ORANGE COUNTY TO COOPERATE WITH
REGARD TO PLANNING ISSUES IN CERTAIN DEFINED AREAS
WHEREAS, the governing bodies of Durham County, NC; the City of Durham, NC; and Orange
County, NC desire to foster good relations; and
WHEREAS, all three governing bodies and their staffs wish to engage in a process of mutual
dialogue to obtain a better understanding of the needs and goals of each community; and
WHEREAS, all tluee governing bodies seek to have appropriately planned development for
their respective areas; and
WHEREAS, all three governing bodies currently carry out established public review processes
on planning activities that provide an opportunity for public review and comment from citizens
as well as from other,jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, al] three governing bodies acknowledge the urbanization potential of properties
neaz the Orange/Durham County line in the vicinity of I-85/US70 and consequently the need to
coordinate land use and transportation, development, and service delivery issues that arise in this
general vicinity; and
WHEREAS, cooperation amongst neighboring,jurisdictions will foster and maintain a system of
sound land use planning and regulation which can be relied upon by the public and private
owners of land as a basis for investment decisions, the protection of the environment, and a
climate conducive to the healthy economic and social growth and development of the tluee
,jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that
1) The administrative staffs of each,jurisdiction shall coordinate with each other on a
timely basis within the current framework and schedule of the local development
review process, in order to provide an opportunity for review and comment on
rezoning requests, special use pern~its, subdivisions, site plans, and azmexations
proposed for land within the .Joint Review Area near the Orange/Durham County
Line, as shown in Attaclnnent A,
2) A. The administrative staffs of each,jurisdiction shall pursue cooperative efforts to:
1, Coordinate future land use plans and develop comparable zoning districts with
design standards to implement the general intent of the land use plans;
2, Provide an opportunity for review and comment on a timely basis and within
the established project schedules for land within the .Joint Review Area;
3. Create a conceph~al utility master plan for the Orange County portion of the
.Joint Review Area; and
4
4 Provide enhanced amrexation notification procedures when the city amiexes
into Orange County.
2) B. The objectives of this cooperation are to:
1. Seek compatible uses of land and natural resources;
2. Achieve a smooth transition between areas of development within each
,jurisdiction;
3. Provide arr appropriate entryway into each,jurisdiction from the other; and
4. Encourage orderly development and the efficient delivery of urban services,
which will maintain and enhance property values in each jurisdiction.
3) This resolution shall be effective upon its adoption by all of the above jurisdictions;
4) Any signatory ,jurisdiction may rescind their agreement with this resolution by
subsequent resolution of its governing Board..
Adopted by Orange County:
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Date:
Donna Baker County Seal:
Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners
Adopted by the City of Durham:
William V. Bell, Mayor
City of Durham
Date:
Clerk, City of Durham City Seal:
Adopted by the County of Durham:
Ellen W. Reclchow, Chair
Durham Board of County Commissioners
Board Clerk, Durham Cowrty
Date:
County Seal:
6
Cooperative Courtesy Review Area
GIS map prepared by Miriam Coleman, Orange County Planning Department, October 27, 200d
!-III~G~Yren~
MOSES CAAEY, .1R, CHAIR ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
BARAY JAGOBS, VIDE CHAIR ppST OFFICE BOX 81 8 ~
VAfFRIE P. FOUSHEE
9UGEM GOADON 200 SOUTH CAMERON STREET
YAHEN H. HADOOT/S
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
January 7, 2004
William Bell, Mayor of Durham
101 City Hall Plaza
Durham, N.C. 27701
Ellen Reckhow, Chair, Durham County Board of Commissioners
Durham County Administrative Complex
200 East Main Street
Durham, N.C, 27701
Dear Maypf'Bell and C~afr Reckhow,
®~n~aC 1 Ea4,? ~'/
it s_
a
~~"~h ~uti°~`c
I am writing you in follow-up to my recent telephone contact with each of you
regazding the proposed Durham City/Durham County/Orange County Courtesy Review
agreement, The Orange County Boazd of Commissioners discussed this item at its
December 14, 2004 regular meeting, and the Board was informed at that time by staff that
both the City of Durham and Durham County had declined Orange County's proposal for
a 45-day courtesy review period. Based on discussions between Orange County staff and
Durham's,joint city-county planning staff, it is our understanding that Durham did not
want to extend the review period for any time longer than would be necessary under your
current development review period, which we understand is 21 days.
I would like to request some further feedback from you on this issue, Our
Commissioners asked if your boazds had specifically discussed the issue of the 21-day
versus 45-day courtesy review period, We were not certain whether the 21-day period
had been a staff formulation or if it had been reviewed and discussed by the governing
boazds. We would also like to receive comments from you on how you perceive a 21-day
review period would work logistically, Orange County has a similar courtesy review
agreement arrangement with the Town of Hillsborough, and with the elected boazds'
meeting schedules and deadlines for agenda packages completion, we have found it very
difficult to review projects, formulate our comments, and finalize them for submission to
Hillsborough. We are concerned that incorporating a 21-day period into this proposed
agreement would create similar practical difficulties.
WIMN CO.ORANGE. NC. US
PROTECTING AND PRESERVING -PEOPLE, RESOURCES, QUALITY OF LIFE
ORANGE COUNTY, NDRTH CAROLINA -YOU COUNT.I
(91.9) 245-2 >.:30 • FAX (979) 644-0246
Januazy 7, 2004
Page 2
In closing, Orange County appreciates you and your staff's efforts to help
coordinate our activities and actions as they relate to growth and development. We look
forwazd to hearing your thoughts and to moving forward in this cooperative effort. If we
can provide any additional information, please feel free to contact me at your earliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
~~~~
oses Carey, Jr., Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
0
cc: Orange County Boazd of Commissioners
John Link, Orange County Manager
Ellen W Reckhow
Chuirrnnn
I I Pine Top Place
Durham, NC 27705
Email: ereckhow@aol cum
Becky M. Heron
Uce-Chairman
4425 Kerley Road
Durham, NC 27705
Email: bmheron@codurhamnc,us
January 18, 2005
COUNTY OF DURHAM
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
The Honorable. Moses Carey, Jr. Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
P.O. Box 8181
200 South Hillsborough Street
Iiillshoroug~h,~~N~C X27278
Dear Con ~,~ n r Carey:
Lewis A. Cheek
5105 Copper Ridge Drive, ;k308
Durham, NC 27707
Email: Icheek@co. dmham. naus
Philip R. Cousin Jr
509 Wellingham Drive
Durham, NC 2771.3-7501
Emait: prcousin@ear[hlinknet
Michael D. Page
702 Basi] Drive
Durham, NC 2771.3
Email: mpage@codurham nc us
RE: Durham/Durham County/Orange County Courtesy Review Agreement
I am in receipt of your letter of January 7, 2005 questioning the timeframe for the review
agreement that Durham and Durham County each approved to ensure that we are sharing
information with Orange County in the area along I-85 which is of mutual interest. You
are correct that the timeframe established in the agreement as approved by Durham and
Durham County was 21 days rather than the 45 days that Orange County staff proposed,
The issue of the timeframe that would be considered for these agreements was first raised
when we entered into a similar agreement with Raleigh and Wake County. At that time,
the City was adamant that they would only enter into such agreements if they did not
extend the review period at all. This reflected numerous complaints from the
development community that Durham's processes were signincantiy longer than the
processes in any other community in the Triangle. Accordingly, Durham's City-County
Planning Department was directed to ensure that, in any courtesy review agreements, the
time period for comments from sunounding .jurisdictions was received in the same
timeframe that comments from other agencies was required - 21 days. This time period is
reflected in the agreements with Cary, Chapel Hill, Mosisville, Raleigh, and Wake
County. It reflects a fundamental Smart Growth principle, certainty in the process,
ensuring developers that they will receive comments in a timely fashion so that they may
modify plans to address concerns in an expeditious fashion.
J
Durham County Administrative Complex, 200E Main Street, Durham, N.C. 27701 (919) 560-0027 Fax (919) 560-0013
Equal Employment/A,~nrmtireAction Emp(oyeri~ebsite~ http.//unmrco.dt~rrhatn..naus/
During the discussions with Orange County staff, Durham staff repeatedly acknowledged r 0
the timing issue that the City had directed them to incorporate in any of these agreements,
Orange County staff indicated that they understood this requirement.
Durham staff acknowledged the requested different timeframe requested by Orange
County in presentations to Durham's Joint City-County Planning Committee and both the
City and County elected boards, as well as in the agenda materials associated with the
agreement. Based on past direction and our existing agreements with other,jurisdictions,
we maintained the 21 day timeframe that has been committed to our development
community.
Irr setting these timeframes, we have never assumed that every site plan or plat would be
presented to elected officials. The agreement that we approved, just as our agreements
with other jurisdictions, covers all development proposals within the area that would
require an apl;roval t',uough the Planning Department. This would include miner cite
plans that are approved by staff as well as snore substantive proposals that w°ould have to
go before a governing body, Those items that would go before a governing body (plan
amendments, rezonings, use permits, and major site plans) would require a longer
timeframe before the item could get on a City or County agenda; for those items, Orange
County would be able to take advantage of the longer timeframe required for our
respective agenda processes to give the Board of Commissioners an opportunity to
formalize comments that would go back to the other governing body. On those cases
where the issues are purely administrative (addressing technical compliance with
ordinances), however, we do not anticipate that the item would require review by an
elected body in which case we do not see that the 21 day review period should be an
issue.
We continue to want to coordinate our planning efforts in this corridor that is important
to all of our ,jurisdictions. Ihope that this letter helps explain the position taken by the
City and County of Durham in approving the courtesy review agreement with the
timeframes that we did.
Sincerely,
tA~/ Y~~~u""v
Ellen Reckhow, Chairman
Durham County Board of Commissioners
xc: William Bell, Mayor, City of Durham
Durham County Board of Commissioners
Mike Ruffin, Durham County Manager
Frank Duke, Durham City-County Planning Director
11
Attaclunent 4
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROJECT REVIEW FORM
Date Submitted
Notification Deadline
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1) Jurisdiction
3) Contact Person
4) Addess
2) Annexation
Proposed Yes: No:
5) Phone Number
6) Email Address
7) Description of
Proposal
S) Location
9) Zoning
11) Total Acreage
B. APPROVAL PROCESS
1) Approval By
2) Summary of
Process
12) Average Lot Size
C. TRANSPORTATION ISSUES
t) Right-of-way width
2) Connectivity Issues
3) Pedestrian/Bike
Improvements
4) Traffic Impact
Study Yes No
10) Minimum Lot Size
6) Public Transportation
Opportunities
~2
Attachment 4
Opportunities
D, ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
1) Open Space Proposed Yes No 2) Acreage
3) Analysis/Comments
4) Water Features (check all that apply)
5) Wetlands 6) Streams
9) Neuse River Basin
11) Storm Water
Management Plan
12) Impervious Proposed
E. UTILITY PROVISIONS
1) Water:
2) Public
5) Sanitary System
6) Public
F. PUBLIC SERVICE PROVISIONS
1) School 1) Orange
District: County
3) Elementary
6) Fire District
8) Police Protection (town/county)
G. LAND USE ISSUES
1) Surrounding Land Uses
2) Economic Development Potential
3) Comments:
7) Floodplain
10) Cape Fear Basin
8) Ponds
3) Private
13) Impervious Allowed
4) Community
7) Private 8) Community
2) Durham Public
Schools
4) Middle 5) High
7) Distance to Station
Yes:
No:
13
Attachment 4
H. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Joint Meeting Requested Yes No
14
Attachment 5
SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES FOR TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY COMMENT PERIOD
DURHAM/ORANGE COOPERATIVE COURTESY REVIEW AREA
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
RECEIVED BY COURTESY REVIEW
ASSOCIATE (CRA)
CRA FORWARDS APPLICATION TO
COUNTY WITHIN TWO (2) DAYS
ORANGE COUNTY STAFF
PREPARES PRELIMINARY
COMMENTS WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS
ORANGE COUNTY EMAILS
PRELIMINARY COMMENTS &
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY TO
CLERK WHO FORWARDS TO THE
BOCC REQUESTING COMMENTS
BOCC RESPONDS WITH
COMMENTS TO ORANGE
COUNTY STAFF/CLERK
WITHIN SEVEN (7i DAYS
BOCC MEMBERS HAVE NO
COMMENTS WITHIN SEVEN
(7) DAY REVIEW PERIOD
ORANGE COUNTY STAFF & BOCC
COMMENTS (IF ANY) FORWARDED TO
CRA WITHIN TWO (2) DAYS TO BE
INCLUDED IN APPLICATION PACKET TO
DURHAM CITY/COUNTY BOARD