Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCFE minutes 100818Attachment 1 Orange County Commission for the Environment Meeting Summary October 8, 2018 Southern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill Present: Bradley Saul (Chair), Bill Newby, Bill Kaiser (Vice Chair), Alan Parry, Kim Piracci, Bill Ward, Jim Eichel, Jeremy Marzuola, Jody Eimers, Lynne Gronback, Matt Crook, Will Stanley, Laura Doherty Absent: Carrie Fletcher, Emily Mixon Staff: Brennan Bouma, Tom Davis I. Call to Order – Saul called the meeting to order at 7:30. II. Additions or Changes to Agenda – Bouma notified the CFE of a BOCC request that the CFE will be discussing during the November meeting. It was decided to discuss this briefly before the break for Committee Meetings. III. Approval of Draft Minutes from September 10th, 2018 – The minutes were approved unanimously following a motion to do so as offered by Marzoula and seconded by Eichel. IV. Review of Advisory Board Member Roles and Responsibilities Saul lead a discussion of CFE meeting Ground Rules and member responsibilities in response to questions during the September meeting related to attendance and lobbying activities. Ward continued to express interest in exploring the potential for his approval to lobby in person representing the CFE or the County on the state level. It was agreed that this approval was unlikely based on the staff’s reading of the CFE Member Roles and Responsibilities. The discussion then turned to exploring a way for the CFE to influence the annual legislative message. Staff will ask the Clerk’s office in what ways the County communicates its priorities and/or attempts to exert influence on the state level. Staff offered to bring this information back to the CFE for discussion during the next meeting. V. Rural Buffer Research Proposal Saul led a discussion concerning the proposed study of the environmental impact of the Rural Buffer. The group discussed various ideas related to graduate or undergraduate UNC students researching the environmental impacts of the rural buffer. Attachment 1 Kaiser had a question about what the ETJ is and what the difference was between that and the rural buffer. Staff will research the different areas that make up the map outside of municipal jurisdictions: ETJ, transition areas, and will email the entire CFE with the description. Davis pointed out that most of the requested description can be found in Chapter 5 of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Saul reminded everyone that the central question focuses on the environmental impacts of the low-density area, for instance in water quality and environmental justice. Eimers said that she’d also recommend “environmental services” to be added to the list of considerations, exploring the functional and aesthetic value of the area. Students might be able to model the impact of urbanizing this area. Marzuola asked if there were common comparison counties that could serve as a starting point for comparison. Bouma mentioned that the Community Viz model used by regional transportation planners may be a useful tool for this analysis. A motion was made by Marzuola for staff to contact the UNC Department of City and Regional Planning and to mention the possible connection to the Community Viz model. This was seconded by Kaiser, and passed unanimously. VI. Committee Meetings Prior to the start of committee meetings, Bouma described the BOCC discussion on including a section showing the environmental impact of every action they take in their April meeting. This would be included as part of each BOCC agenda abstract along with the current sections discussing financial impact and social justice impact. This was referred to staff recently by the County Manager and some initial ideas have been generated. Ward suggested a comprehensive questionnaire similar to a medical office. This would expose staff to a list of specific and relevant potential impacts of their proposals. Marzuola asked that example agenda abstracts be brought to represent the spectrum of topics these documents cover and to test how the proposed environmental impacts framework might be applied to each. Staff will forward the message containing the three initial ideas and will bring example agenda abstracts to the November CFE meeting. CFE Committees met to discuss the 2019 State of the Environment report. Committees discussed their indicator issue selections and assigned them to specific committee members who will focus on researching and developing indicators related to these issues. Attachment 1 VII. Updates and Information Items Brief updates were provided on the following items:  Divestment Resolution Update – will be on the November CFE agenda  Idle Reduction Petition Update – Staff is moving forward with ordering “No Idling” signs VIII. Adjournment – Saul adjourned the meeting at 9:09 following the unanimous approval of a motion to adjourn the meeting which was offered by Ward and seconded by Parry.