HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board - 020520 Agenda PacketORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
131 W. MARGARET LANE, SUITE 201
HILLSBOROUGH,NORTHCAROLINA27278
AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
NOTE MEETING LOCATION!!
WEST C AMPUS OFFICE BUILDING
PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE R OOM
131 W. MARGARET LANE,2ND FLOOR
HILLSBOROUGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27278
Wednesday, February 5, 2020
Regular Meeting – 7:00 pm
No.Page(s)Agenda Item
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. 3 - 3 ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-C HAIR FOR 2020
a.Term Expiration Dates and Reappointment Eligibility, by
Member
3. 4 - 5 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
a.Planning Calendar for February and March
4. 6 - 9 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 4, 2019 Regular Meeting Minutes
5. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
6. PUBLIC C HARGE
Introduction to the Public Charge
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute,
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development
laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and
future needs of its residents and businesses through efficient and responsive process that
contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB
will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services
during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.
Public Charge
The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The Board asks those attending this
meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner toward each other, County
staff, and Board members. At any time should a member of the Board or the public fail to
1
No.Page(s)Agenda Item
observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it
become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will recess the
meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
The Planning Board asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and
computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
Please be kind to everyone.
7. CHAIR C OMMENTS
8. 10 - 25 UNIFIED D EVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS –WEST
FORK ON THE ENO RESERVOIR -To make a recommendation to the BOCC
on proposed amendments to the UDO pertaining to the West Fork on
the Eno reservoir to address concerns over reservoir setbacks. This
item was introduced at the November 6, 2019 ORC meeting and is
scheduled for BOCC public hearing on March 10, 2020.
Presenter:Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor
9. ADJOURNMENT
IF AN EMERGENCY OCCURS ,OR IF YOU ARE RUNNING LATE FOR THE MEETING,PLEASE LEAVE A VOICE
MAIL FOR PERDITA HOLTZ (919-245-2578).
2
Orange County Planning Board
Membership and Term Information
Name Term End Date
(March 31)
Eligible for
Reappointment?
Date First
Appointed
Randy Marshall 2020 Y 3/7/17
Susan Hunter 2020 Y 3/31/20
Lydia Wegman 2020 N 5/20/14
David Blankfard 2020 Y 3/7/17
Carrie Fletcher 2021 Y 3/8/18
Patricia Roberts 2021 N 11/5/15
Melissa Poole 2021 Y 4/16/19
Hunter S pitzer 2021 Y 12/12/17
Giovanna Mollinedo 2022 Y 9/17/19
Adam Beeman 2022 Y 12/12/17
Hathawa y Pendergrass 2022 Y 4/16/19
Kim Piracci 2022 Y 3/22/16
3
February 2020
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
BOCC Meeting
Whitted
Building
7:00PM
Planning Board
Meeting
WCOB 204
7:00PM*
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Board of
Adjustment
Meeting
Whitted
Building
7:00PM
BOCC Work
Session
Southern
Human
Services
Center 7:00PM
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
BOCC Meeting
Southern
Human
Services
Center 7:00PM
OUTBoard
Meeting
WCOB 204
6:30PM
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Notes:
* Planning Board member attendance required or encouraged
WCOB = West Campus Office Building (131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough)
4
March 2020
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Planning Board
Meeting
WCOB 204
7:00PM*
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
BOCC Meeting
Whitted
Building
7:00PM
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
BOCC Work
Session
Southern
Human
Services
Center 7:00PM
OUTBoard
Meeting
WCOB 204
6:30PM
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
BOCC Meeting
Southern
Human
Services
Center 7:00PM
29 30 31
Notes:
* Planning Board member attendance required or encouraged
WCOB = West Campus Office Building (131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough)
5
M EETING M INUTES1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD2
DECEMBER 4,2019 3
REGULAR M EETING4
5
6
M EMBERS PRESENT : Lydia Wegman (Chair), At-LargeRepresentative;David Blankfard (Vice-Chair), Hillsborough 7
Township Representative; Adam Beeman, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Hathaway Pendergrass, At-Large 8
Representative; Kim Piracci,Eno Township Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill Township Representative;9
Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; 10
11
12
M EMBERS ABSENT :; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham TownshipRepresentative;Melissa Poole, Little River Township 13
Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large Representative;Randy Marshall, At-Large Representative;Gio Mollinedo, 14
At-Large Representative;15
16
17
STAFF PRESENT : Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Tina Love, 18
Administrative Assistant III19
20
21
AGENDA I TEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL22
Chair Lydia Wegmancalled the meeting to order 23
24
25
AGENDA I TEM 2: INFORMATIONAL I TEMS26
a. Planning Calendar for Decemberand January27
28
29
AGENDA I TEM 3: APPROVAL OF M INUTES30
November 6, 2019,Training Session Notes31
November 6, 2019, Regular Meeting32
November 6, 2019 ORC Notes33
34
Lydia Wegman: Are there any changes or corrections?35
36
MOTION byHathaway Pendergrassto approve theNovember 6, 2019 Training Session Notes,Meeting Minutes and37
ORC Notes.Seconded by David Blankfard. 38
VOTE: Unanimous39
40
41
AGENDA I TEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA. 42
43
There were none44
45
46
AGENDA I TEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE47
48
INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE49
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, 50
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development law of 51
the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and 52
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner, which considers the present and future 53
needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to 54
6
and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. T he OCPB will make every 55
effort to uphold a vision of responsivegovernance and quality public services during our 56
deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.57
58
PUBLIC CHARGE59
The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its 60
citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with 61
fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this 62
public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual 63
regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting 64
until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.65
66
67
AGENDA I TEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS68
69
There were none70
71
72
AGENDA I TEM 7: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT –EROSION CONTROL PERMITS -To 73
make a recommendation to the BOCC on proposed amendments to the UDO pertaining to the lifespan of an erosion 74
control permit. These amendments are scheduled for BOCC public hearing on January 21, 2020.75
76
PRESENTER:Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor77
78
Michael Harvey reviewed the abstract and proposed changes to theUDO. 79
80
Craig Benedict: I’ve asked Michaelis to have the fee structure related to the hours of service, before it wasn’t a 81
direct relation. Now that the projects are done to a certain level and they pick up 20% of the project that is left 82
(Collins Ridge) the amount of the fee and the amount of hours staff m onitors that project will be closely reflected.83
84
Lydia Wegman: Is the fee linked to the amount of land disturbance that occurs?85
86
Craig Benedict: Yes it is.87
88
Michael Harvey: It will be, not yet.89
90
Craig Benedict: This handles one of the matters, permit renewal, there will be another activity which Michael and I 91
are coming to terms with that will probably be in the next few months. It will be about howthe initialfees are 92
calculated. 93
94
Lydia Wegman: So the fee structure is likely to change?95
96
Craig Benedict: Yes.97
98
Michael Harvey continued the review99
100
Michael Harvey: It is hard to ask a homeowner to give us electronic copies when they may not have the wherewithal 101
to do it, it is easy for an engineering firm to give us an electronic copy but not a homeowner. We are trying to provide 102
some level of flexibility and my staff wants to look at physical plans so they can make their note on them. We do 103
scan approved plans so they are always available electronically. We are trying to get to the electronic age. There 104
was at one point, draft text amendments from the Attorney’s Office that wanted to turn this into a totally electronic 105
submittal process. That may come up again. Therewere concerns to the ability of some to submit.106
107
Lydia Wegman: This does require an electronic copy.108
7
109
Michael Harvey: It does but if someone doesn’t have the ability we take it to our scanner and scan it.110
111
Craig Benedict: You’ve heard Michael referenceerosion control plans and stormwater plans and you may think they 112
are almost the same, the erosion control plan is during the construction phase where you are trying to keep sediment 113
from leaving the site. In most cases now, these erosion control devicesare turned into stormwater devices to treat 114
the water quality after construction. They’re very similar and in some cases we have control over how that 115
conversion occurs. 116
117
David Blankfard: Where is the date of the preconstruction conference, is that written down?118
119
Michael Harvey: It’s now written down, it occurs once the land disturbance permit is issued, we coordinate meeting 120
with the contractor on site. 121
122
David Blankfard: So there’s a record of it.123
124
Michael Harvey: Yes, there has to be. You don’t sign the permit until the day of the precon meeting. That’s when 125
the five years starts.126
127
Michael Harvey: There is one modification to the recommendation, strike the “approve with modifications”.128
129
MOTION by David Blankfard to approve the statement of consistency, and the text amendment as amended by 130
staff. Seconded byHathaway Pendergrass.131
VOTE:Unanimous132
133
Michael Harvey: Very quickly to talk about a couple of other things, Lydia, you asked about the fee schedule. There 134
are a lot of things we have to do with the existing erosion control ordinance. These are things that have been 135
identified and some are to address changes in state law. Staff is now completing the text amendments. We are 136
moving forward with fixing the UDO as it relates to changes we want to make to erosion control and stormwater 137
standards. We are still waiting on the state to determine what they want to do with regulations on nutrients. Some 138
will involve the Neuse. 139
140
Craig Benedict: We just repealed our nutrient standards in this and Jordan Lake because the state said we had to or 141
they could take away our whole program. We had to sacrifice the nutrient rules.142
143
Michael Harvey: We don’t know what direction they are going to go yet. Our hope is they have uniformity between 144
the Neuse and Cape Fear. It is easier.145
146
Craig Benedict: One initiative they’re talking about is alternative approach to how to achieve these things that maybe 147
there are state guidelines instead of state rules and they say they’ll make a determination if the method of 148
implementation meets certain goals and then they would give some latitude back. This is the only thing that we’ve 149
seen recently, in nine years, that has let it shift back a little bit to some more latitude by the local governments. 150
We’ve never been recognized for what we’ve been doing for 20 years. Some of the other fee things, some of our 151
other projects have been smaller scale and our fee schedule was not tailored for the larger ones like Collins Ridge 152
and Carraway Village so the numbers are coming up quite high. We need to relate our staff time and the project 153
fees. 154
155
Michael Harvey: We will report to m anagement on the fee schedule and the elected officials. The next step is to go 156
back in and clean up some inconsistencies with our existing erosion control standards and stormwater rules. We are 157
going to have to tackle the bonding requirement for all stormwater control measures and waiting to see what the state 158
is going to do on nutrients. We’ll keep you in the loop but you can anticipate it in 2020, a lot of erosion control and159
stormwater stuff. We’re still waiting on to see what they do on stream buffers.160
161
162
8
163
AGENDA I TEM 8: ADJOURNMENT164
Meeting was adjourned by consensus165
166
167
168
169
Lydia N. Wegman, Chair170
9
ORANGE COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date:February 5, 2020
Action Agenda
Item No. 8
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments – Modification of
Regulations Associated with Setbacks from the West Fork on the Eno Reservoir
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Aerial Photo of the West Fork on the
Eno Reservoir
2. Excerpt from November 6, 2019
Ordinance Review Committee (ORC)
Meeting
3. Statement of Consistency
4. UDO Text Amendment(s)
Michael D. Harvey, Planner III (919) 245-2597
Craig Benedict, Director (919) 245-2575
PURPOSE:To review and make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners
(BOCC) on a Planning Director initiated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text
amendments revising existing guidelines associated with the enforcement of reservoir setbacks
for structures and septic systems.
Specifically the amendment seeks to formally establish the effective date for the expansion of
the West Fork on the Eno reservoir when determining required reservoir setbacks. This item
was first presented at the November 6, 2019 Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) meeting.
BACKGROUND: Section 6.13.4 Minimum Buffer Widths for Watershed Protection Overlay
Districts of the UDO establishes a 150 ft. wide setback around reservoirs. This area is intended
to be left in an undeveloped state. Section 4.2.9 Water Supply / Sewage Disposal Facilities of
the UDO establishes a 300 ft. setback for septic tanks and their nitrification fields from a
reservoir as well.
Section 4.2.2, specifically subsections (F) through (I), of the UDO establishes the applicability of
the various County watershed protection standards. These sections establish the criteria
utilized by staff defining those properties (developed and undeveloped) considered to be
‘grandfathered’ and outlines what standards they are allowed to adhere to with respect to
demonstrating compliance with applicable buffer (i.e. stream and reservoir) standards.
In the 1990’s The Town of Hillsborough began the necessary permitting processes at the State
level to construct a reservoir, specifically the West Fork on the Eno, within the Cedar Grove
Township of the county. This work has been broken down into 2 phases, with Phase 1 including
the Town purchasing property to begin the process of expanding the actual reservoir. At the
10
writing of this memorandum the anticipated normal pool elevation of the expanded reservoir will
be 643.9 ft. Attachment 1 contains maps of the existing reservoir boundary, based on 2017
aerial photographic data, denoting the aforementioned 150 ft. and 300 ft. setback areas.
Phase 2 of the project will involve the actual clearing of property and expanding the existing
‘normal pool’ elevation of the reservoir. The Town has begun portions of Phase 2 of the project
by increasing the elevation of the dam. Clearing/grading of property to accommodate the
additional water storage will not commence until work on the dam is completed.
While the Town purchased sufficient property to accommodate the approved expansion of the
actual reservoir, the required reservoir setback will still potentially impact adjacent parcels of
property. Property owners adjacent to the waterbody have expressed concern the UDO does
not specifically reference the expansion of the reservoir thereby making their properties
potentially non-conforming to applicable watershed management regulations (i.e. the required
reservoir setback).
In an effort to address this concern staff is proposing a text amendment (Attachment 4) to
reference the expansion of the West Fork on the Eno, from the date the Town began legally
securing property to allow for the approved expansion, in terms of defining what constitutes
existing development. Specifically, this is February 11, 1997 (i.e. the date plats were recorded
within the Orange County Registrar of Deeds Office denoting the Town’s purchase of property
along the West Fork of the Eno allowing for the expansion of the reservoir).
Property owners are still required to abide by the applicable setbacks per Section(2) 4.2.9 and
6.13.4 of the UDO but will have greater latitude in demonstrating compliance with applicable
standards. This amendment will not necessarily allow for additional development of structures
closer to the actual reservoir. It will, however, recognize the conforming status of existing
development and not arbitrarily make same non-conforming. The status can be important with
respect to property transactions and mortgage applications.
As previously indicated, this proposal was reviewed at the November 6, 2019 Ordinance Review
Committee (ORC) meeting. Notes from this meeting are contained within Attachment 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’.
The amendments are necessary to address current inconsistencies within the UDO relating to
the definition of what constitutes ‘existing lots’ and/or ‘existing development’ with respect to
compliance with applicable reservoir setbacks. This amendment should likely have been
completed in 1997 when the Town was purchasing property to establish the reservoir in the first
place.
Planning Director Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the
Statement of Consistency, as contained in Attachment 3, and the UDO Text Amendment, as
contained within Attachment 4.
11
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding
for the provision of County services. Existing staff, included in the Departmental staffing budget,
will accomplish the work required to process this amendment.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Planning Director recommends the Planning Board:
1. Review the proposed amendments to the UDO,
2. Deliberate on the proposal as desired,
3. Consider the Planning Director’s recommendation(s), and
4. Make a recommendation to the BOCC on:
a. The Statement of Consistency for proposed UDO Text Amendment(s) (Attachment
3), and
b. Proposed UDO Text Amendment(s) (Attachment 4).
in time for the March 10, 2020 Public Hearing.
12
USGS Stream
Soils Survey Stream
OC Updated Stream
Parcels
Streets
Water BodyLONESOMILLCREEKRDGOVERNOR
SCOTT
R
D
GOVERNOR UMSTEAD CIRBELLECHASE RD
APPLE
TREE
RD EFLANDCEDARGROVERDGOVERNOR HOLT STGOVERNOR HODGES STCARRSTORERD
GOVERNORCHERRYCIRGOVERNORSANFORDSTGOVERNORMARTIN ST
G
OVER N O R HUNTSTE L IJ A H P O O L E DR
WESTGATE RD
G O VE R N OR
M O O R E
STGOVER N OR
BROUGH T ON ST
D U NBARLNGOLDENMAPLE B RICEWOODLNB LUE JAY WAY
TRO
T
T
I
N
GTRLTRIPLECREEKDRPARCJARDINDRRIMMER RD
MOSSYTIM BER R D G SUNNYLNLEES C HAP EL RD
Multiple Properties
Town of Hillsborough
1,400 0 1,400700 Feet
1 inch = 1,187 feet
.
13
Attachment 1
Red lines denote the
property purchased by
the Town of
Hillsborough allowing
for the expansion of
the reservoir.
Properties were
purchased in 1997.
14Attachment 1
15
16
17
SUMMARY NOTES1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD2
NOVEMBER 6,20193
ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE4
5
6
NOTE:A QUORUM IS NOT REQUIRED FOR O RDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS . 7
8
9
M EMBERS PRESENT : Lydia Wegman (Chair), At-Large Representative; Randy Marshall, At-Large Representative; 10
Kim Piracci, Eno Township Representative; Melissa Poole, Little River Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, 11
Bingham Township Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Gio Mollinedo, At-Large12
Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large Representative;13
14
15
STAFF PRESENT :Craig Benedict, Planning& InspectionsDirector; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; 16
Tina Love, Administrative Assistant III17
18
19
AGENDA I TEM 1:Call to Order 20
21
22
23
AGENDA ITEM 3:WEST FORK ON THE ENO RESERVOIR - Tobegin review and discussion on proposed amendments to 24
the UDO pertaining to the West Fork on the Eno reservoir to address concerns over reservoir setbacks. The 25
expected timeline for the Planning Board recommendation and BOCC public hearing hasnot yet been determined.26
27
PRESENTER:Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor28
29
Michael Harvey reviewed the proposed amendments to the UDO regarding reservoir setbacks and provided 30
background information. 31
32
Carrie Fletcher: How many residents does it affect? 33
34
Michael Harvey: A couple dozen. 35
36
Patricia Roberts: Wouldn’t you have to buy their house if did penalize them? 37
38
Michael Harvey: Hillsborough would, in my mind, have to buy their house but that’s me saying that. 39
40
Craig Benedict: Hillsborough should have bought all the way up to that 150’ from their future pool area, 41
I think they were trying approximate that 150’ area but it should have been from their phase II reservoir 42
not their, possibly phase I reservoir pool area. 43
44
45
ORC was adjourned through consensus46
47
Attachment 2 18
STATEMENT OF APPROVAL AND 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) establishing the effective date for the expansion of the West Fork on the Eno reservoir
when determining required reservoir setbacks.
The Planning Board hereby approves the proposed text amendment and 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:
x Land Use Goal 4 - Land development regulations, guidelines,
techniques and/or incentives that promote the integrated
achievement of all.
These amendments are consistent with this goal and
objective by establishment of the effective date for the
expansion of the West Fork on the Eno reservoir when
determining required reservoir setbacks thereby ensuring
consistent application of development regulations.
x Land Use Goal 6 – A land use planning process that is transparent,
fair, open, efficient, and responsive.
These amendments are consistent with this goal and
objective by eliminating confusion with respect to the
enforcement of setbacks from the West Fork on the Eno
reservoir thereby ensuring transparency in the development
review process.
c. The amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because it:
1. Ensures legal sufficiency by formally establishing what constitutes existing
development and/or an existing parcel as it relates to the enforcement of
reservoir setbacks associated with the expansion of the West Fork on the
Eno reservoir.
By establishing this reference date staff will be better suited to
working with property owners abide by applicable regulations.
The Planning Board hereby adopts this Statement of Approval and Consistency as well
as the findings expressed herein.
______________________ ________________________
Chair Date
Attachment 3
19
UDO AMENDMENT PACKET NOTES:
The following packet details staff’s proposed modifications to the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) designed to establish appropriate references to the effective date for the
expansion of the West Fork on the Eno reservoir when determining required reservoir setbacks
involving the following Section(s).
¾4.2.2 Applicability – Watershed Protection
As part of this amendment, package:
x Red Underlined Text: Denotes new, proposed text that staff is suggesting be
added to the UDO
x Red Strikethrough Text: Denotes existing text that staff is proposing to delete
Only those pages of the UDO impacted by the proposed modification(s) have been included
within this packet. 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 or footnotes from
previous sections ‘spill over’ onto the included page. Text with a large “X” is not pr oposed for
deletion.
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.
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://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8305/Unified-Development-
Ordinance-PDF
Attachment 4
20
Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 4-1
ARTICLE 4: OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS
SECTION 4.1: GENERALLY
4.1.1 Description, Standards, and Conflicts
(A) Overlay districts are supplemental to general zoning district classifications and are
applied in combination to address special situations or to accomplish specific planning
and land use goals.
(B) Unless otherwise expressly stated, all applicable regulations of the underlying district
apply to property in an overlay district.
(C) Unless otherwise stated, all applicable standards of this Ordinance apply to property in
an overlay district.
(D) When overlay district standards conflict with standards that otherwise apply in the
underlying district, the regulations of the overlay district always govern.
SECTION 4.2: WATERSHED PROTECTION
4.2.1 Purpose and Intent
(A) The purpose of the Watershed Protection Overlay Districts is to prevent significant future
water quality deterioration in existing or potential future drinking water reservoirs which
receive stormwater runoff from land within Orange County.
(1) Protection of all water supplies within the State in accordance with minimum
standards was mandated by NCGS §143-214.5.
(2) The quality of water in drinking water reservoirs can be affected by human
activities including farming, construction of highways and roads, subdivision
development, industrial development, and other land-disturbing activities. Types
of water pollutants resulting from these activities include sediment, bacterial
contamination, heavy metals, synthetic organic compounds and low-level
radioactivity.
(B) The intent of the Watershed Protection Overlay Districts is to apply a set of regulations
involving land use and, in some cases, structural best management practices which
protect the watersheds by reducing the pollution from future development which enters
drinking water supplies.
(1) Land use management practices involve minimum lot size and impervious
surface restrictions, since impervious surfaces such as roads, roof tops and
driveways are a major source of pollution.
(2) Structural best management practices allow for more intensive land use by
providing for temporary detention of stormwater runoff so that pollutants may
settle.
4.2.2 Applicability
(A) The Watershed Protection Overlay Districts as established herein overlay other zoning
districts established in this Ordinance. The new use of any land or new structure within
any Watershed Protection Overlay District shall comply with the use regulations
applicable to the underlying zoning district as well as the requirements of the applicable
Watershed Protection Overlay District.
(B) A Watershed Protection Overlay District shall be applied to the Orange County portion of
watersheds which have been classified as WS-II, WS-III or WS-IV watersheds by the
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission in its implementation of NCGS
21
Article 4: Overlay Zoning Districts
Section 4.2: Watershed Protection
Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 4-2
§143-214.5. In accordance with the State Mandate, 13 Watershed Protection District
Overlays, as listed in the table in subsection (D), are hereby established.
(C) Areas designated as “Critical Area” under the Orange County designation are hereby
established using the following criteria:
(1) The land area in the Upper Eno watershed (straight line distance) within one-half
mile of the normal pool elevation (NPE), or nearest available contour line used
for the calculation, of an existing Class I or Class II reservoir or proposed water
supply reservoir designated for protection, or the ridgeline of the sub-watershed,
whichever is less; and
(2) The land area within one-half mile on each side for an upstream distance of 2.5
miles (straight line distance) of any fifth order or higher stream flowing into a
Class I reservoir, or the ridgeline of the sub-watershed, whichever is less; and
(3) The land area within one-half mile on each side of a fourth order or higher stream
flowing between any Class II and Class I reservoir; and
(4) The land area within one-half mile on each side for an upstream distance of 1.5
miles (straight line distance) of a third or fourth order stream flowing directly into
any Class I reservoir; and
(5) The land area within one-half mile on each side for an upstream distance of 1.0
mile (straight line distance) of a third or fourth order stream flowing into a fourth
order or higher stream that is within 1.0 miles (straight line distance) of a Class I
reservoir; and
(6) Any isolated areas within the overall critical area boundary that drain into any of
the streams listed above.
(7) Areas designated as Transition Areas on the Land Use Element Map of the
Orange County Comprehensive Plan are excluded from designation as a Critical
Area, except for land areas located within one-half mile from the normal pool
elevation of a Class I reservoir.
(8) The land area north of the centerline of West Ten Road and west of the
centerline of the Interstate 85/U.S. 70 Connector is excluded from designation as
a Critical Area, except for land areas located within one-half mile from the normal
pool elevation of a Class I reservoir.
(D) The designation of “Protected” applies to areas of watersheds classified as WS-II, WSIII,
or WS-IV outside of areas designated as “Critical Area.”
(E) General Locations of Watershed Protection Overlay Districts
TABLE 4.2.2.E: WATERSHED PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS
DISTRICT GENERAL LOCATION
UNIV-CA University Lake Critical
Area
One-half mile from the normal pool elevation of University Lake, or to
the ridgeline of the watershed, whichever is less.
UNIV-PW
University Lake
Protected Watershed
Overlay District
The portion of the drainage basin of University Lake not covered by
UNIV-CA.
CANE-CA Cane Creek Critical Area
Overlay District
One-half mile from the normal pool elevation of Cane Creek Reservoir,
or to the ridgeline of the watershed, whichever is less.
CANE-PW
Cane Creek Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The portion of the drainage basin of Cane Creek Reservoir not
covered by CANE-CA.
U-ENO-CA Upper Eno Critical Area
Overlay District
One-half mile from the normal pool elevation, or to the ridgeline of the
watershed, whichever is less, of the following Class I reservoirs:
Corporation Lake (538’ actual NPE, 540’ contour line used) and Lake
Ben Johnson (515’ NPE and contour line used). One-half mile (straight
line measurement) from the normal pool elevation, or to the ridgeline
of the watershed, whichever is less, of the following Class II
22
Article 4: Overlay Zoning Districts
Section 4.2: Watershed Protection
Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 4-3
TABLE 4.2.2.E: WATERSHED PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS
DISTRICT GENERAL LOCATION
reservoirs: Lake Orange (615’ NPE and contour line used) and West
Fork on the Eno (643.9’ NPE, 6440’ contour line used)1; and the land
area within one-half mile (straight line measurement) on each side of
other streams designated for protection. These protected streams
include portions of: Eno River, Seven Mile Creek, West Fork of the
Eno River, East Fork of the Eno River, Rocky Run, Stream ID 1625,
Stream ID 1498, Dry Run Creek, Crabtree Creek, and Stream ID
2109. (Source of elevation data: Atlantic Technologies Ltd., 1998
planimetric project approved by Orange County GIS).
U-ENO-PW Upper Eno Protected
Watershed Overlay
The portion of the Upper Eno drainage basin not covered by U-ENO-
CA.
L-ENO-PW Lower Eno Protected
Watershed Overly
The Orange County portion of the Eno River Watershed within ten
miles of the City of Durham Emergency Water Intake east of US 501
(Roxboro Road).
LITTLE-PW
Little River Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The portion of drainage basin of the Little River Reservoir which is
located in Orange County.
BACK-PW
Back Creek Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The portion of the drainage basin of Back Creek which is located in
Orange County.
HYCO-PW
South Hyco Creek
Protected Watershed
Overlay District
The portion of the drainage basin of South Hyco Creek which is
located in Orange County.
FLAT-PW
Flat River Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The portion of the drainage basin of the Flat River which is located in
Orange County.
HAW-PW
Haw River Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The portion of the drainage basin for the Haw River which is located in
Orange County
JORDAN-PW
Jordan Lake Protected
Watershed Overlay
District
The Orange County portion of the Jordan Lake Watershed which
extends five miles from the normal pool elevation of the impoundment.
(F) Existing Development
The following residential or non-residential structures shall be considered existing
development for the purpose of determining compliance with or applicability of Sections
4.2 and 6.13.3, 6.13.4, 6.13.6, 6.13.8, 6.14.4, 6.14.10, 6.14.11, and 6.15.7(B)(3):
(1) Was either constructed prior to, or constructed in accordance with a valid building
permit issued prior to, or was included as part of a Site Specific Development
Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to January 1, 1994;
or
(2) Was either constructed prior to, or constructed in accordance with a valid building
permit issued prior to, or was included as part of a Site Specific Development
Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to February 11, 1997
with respect to the Town of Hillsborough purchase of property associated with
expanding the West Fork of the Eno reservoir; or2
1TheUDOmadereferencetowhatwasidentifiedasthenormalpoolelevationofthereservoir.Basedonrecent
informationfromtheTown,theexpansionofthereservoirwillresultinanormalpoolelevationof643.9ft.Staffis
tweakingexistinglanguagetoreferencethecorrectnormalpoolelevationandidentifythemethodologystaffwill
utilizetomapthenewboundaryofthereservoirforregulatorycompliancepurposes.
2ThislanguageisconsistentwithhowtheUDOcurrentlyreferenceswhatconstitutes‘existingdevelopment’.
WhattheproposaldoesisformalizewhatconstitutesexistingdevelopmentasitrelatestotheWestForkonthe
Eno.
23
Article 4: Overlay Zoning Districts
Section 4.2: Watershed Protection
Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 4-4
(2)(3) Was either constructed prior to, or constructed in accordance with a valid building
permit issued prior to, or was included as part of a Site Specific Development
Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to October 19, 1999
with respect to the October 19, 1999 amendments related to the CANE-CA and
CANE-PW districts, or
(3)(4) Was either constructed prior to, or constructed in accordance with a valid building
permit issued prior to, or was included as part of a Site Specific Development
Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to September 19,
2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments, or
(4)(5) Was either constructed prior to, or constructed in accordance with a valid building
permit issued prior to, or was included as part of a Site Specific Development
Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to May 20, 2003 with
respect to the Stream Classification Amendments, or
(5)(6) Had otherwise established a vested right under North Carolina Zoning law prior
to January 1, 1994, or October 19, 1999 with respect to the October 19, 1999
amendments related to the CANE-CA and CANE-PW districts, or September 19,
2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments, or May 20, 2003
with respect to the Stream Classification Amendments.
(G) Existing development is hereby deemed to be conforming with respect to requirements of
Sections 4.2, 6.13.3, 6.13.4, 6.13.6, 6.13.8, 6.14.4, 6.14.10, 6.14.11, and 6.15.7(B)(3) of
this Ordinance. Periodic updates to FEMA maps may affect structures located within the
special flood hazard area of specific streams.
(H) Redevelopment
(1) The rebuilding or replacement of residential or nonresidential structures which
are defined as existing development according to subsection (F) above is
allowed, provided that the rebuilding or replacement does not result in an
increase in the amount of impervious surface, and does not encroach any farther
into stream buffers or setbacks from reservoirs than the previous development.
(2) A structure which is rebuilt or replaced in accordance with these provisions is
deemed conforming with respect to setbacks from streams and reservoirs
required by Section 6.13 of this Ordinance.
(I) Existing Lots
(1) An existing lot, for the purpose of determining compliance with Sections 4.2 and
6.13.3, 6.13.4, 6.13.6, 6.13.8, 6.14.4, 6.14.10, 6.14.11, and 6.15.7(B)(3), is
defined as:
(a) A lot which was created prior to January 1, 1994, or
(b) A lot within the Upper Eno watershed which was created prior to
February 11, 1997 with respect to the Town of Hillsborough purchase of
property associated with development of the West Fork on the Eno
reservoir; or
(b)(c) A lot within the Cane Creek watershed which was created prior to
October 19, 1999, with respect to the October 19, 1999, amendments
related to the CANE-CA and CANE-PW districts, or
(c)(d) Non-conforming lots of record.
(2) Stream buffers as required by Section 6.13, and setbacks for septic systems as
required by Section 4.2.9 may be reduced to the extent necessary to allow
development of the lot, provided that all of the following criteria are met:
(a) The septic system is sized to serve no more than four bedrooms; and
(b) The septic tank, drainfield and repair area (where required) can be
accommodated on 20,000 square feet of area or less; and
24
Article 4: Overlay Zoning Districts
Section 4.2: Watershed Protection
Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 4-5
(c) The Orange County Planning Department, in consultation with Orange
County Environmental Health and/or the Orange County Staff Engineer
has determined that encroachment of the structure into the stream buffer
and/or encroachment of the septic system or repair area into the stream
buffer or reservoir setback is necessary in order to provide adequate
area for septic disposal and repair while maintaining required
separations between wells, septic systems, structures and property lines;
and
(d) The Orange County Planning Department, in consultation with Orange
County Environmental Health and/or the Orange County Staff Engineer,
has determined that the relative locations of the well, septic system and
structure maximize the amount of watershed protection that can be
achieved while allowing development of the lot. Generally, an exception
to setbacks for repair area is preferable to an exception for the initial
septic system, and encroachment of structures or gravity septic systems
into the setback is preferable to the installation of a septic system pump.
(e) The amount of encroachment into the stream or reservoir buffer is the
minimum amount which can be obtained while meeting the criteria in (a)
through (d).
4.2.3 Land Use Restrictions
All uses and activities allowed in the underlying zoning district are permitted with the following
exceptions:
TABLE 4.2.3 LAND USE RESTRICTIONS
DISTRICT RESTRICTIONS
UNIV-CA
UNIV-PW
CANE-CA
U-ENO-CA
No new landfills are permitted.
No commercial or industrial uses are permitted except for commercial development, in
accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance, located within established Nodes as
detailed within the Orange County Comprehensive Plan.
No new golf courses are permitted
UNIV-CA
CANE-CA
U-ENO-CA
No residual (sludge/biosolids) application is permitted.
CANE-PW
U-ENO-PW
HYCO-PW
LITTLE-PW
BACK-PW
FLAT-PW
HAW-PW
L-ENO-PW
JORDAN-PW
No discharging landfills are permitted. Industrial use is limited to nonhazardous light
industrial uses characterized by low water use (less than 10,000 gpd, excluding domestic
water (25 gpd per employee) and water used for heating and air conditioning).
4.2.4 Residential Density
Maximum residential density shall be as indicated in the Table in this subsection, or as required
by the underlying zoning district, whichever is less.
TABLE 4.2.4 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
DISTRICT MAXIMUM DENSITY
25