HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.6.23 Planning Board Minutes Approved 1-3-24
1 MEETING MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 DECEMBER 7,2023
4 REGULAR MEETING
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Adam Beeman (Chair), Cedar Grove Township Representative; Lamar Proctor
7 (Vice-Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Melissa Poole, Little River Township Representative;
8 Marilyn Carter, At-Large Representative; Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Beth Bronson,
9 At-Large Representative; Chris Johnston, Hillsborough Township Representative; Charity Kirk, At-Large
10 Representative; Whitney Watson, At-Large Representative; Steve Kaufmann, Bingham Township
11 Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large Representative (arrived at 7:35 PM).
12
13 MEMBERS ABSENT: Liz Kalles, Chapel Hill Township Representative.
14
15 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director— Long Range
16 Planning &Administration; Lauren Coffey, Planning Technician.
17
18 OTHERS PRESENT: None.
19
20 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
21 The meeting began at 7:00 PM.
22
23 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
24 November 11, 2023 Regular Meeting Minutes.
25
26 MOTION BY Beth Bronson to approve the Meeting Minutes with amendment to line 264 to specify"that our
27 listening events need to take place within those communities whose members we don't always hear from."
28 Seconded by Melissa Poole.
29
30 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
31
32 PUBLIC CHARGE: Not read.
33
34 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS
35 Perdita Holtz discussed the Planning Calendar for December and January. Ms. Holtz informed the Board of
36 future Orange County Land Use Plan meetings and the current engagement opportunities. The February
37 Planning Board meeting will include an update by the consultant.
38
39 AGENDA ITEM 3: PLANNING BOARD ANNUAL REPORT AND WORK PLAN
40
41 Cy Stober provided an overview of the work the Planning Board has done in 2023, including four different
42 zoning cases and revision to the rules of procedure.
43
44 Mr. Stober updated the Board that with changes to State law,there will be Ordinance revisions to be reviewed
45 by the Board in the coming months.
46
Approved 1-3-24
47 Mr. Stober emphasized that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan will guide future objectives of the
48 Board.
49
50 The Board was provided with an overview of updates to previous Board objectives.
51
52 Board members discussed the Lumos Project as it relates to current rollout of infrastructure and areas of
53 coverage. Melissa Poole discussed lowering the rank of the objective of wireless and broadband expansion,
54 since the project is moving along successfully. Ms. Holtz clarified that the work plan objectives were not
55 ranked.
56
57 Chair Beeman brought up Objective 4, asking what the innovative water and sewage disposal method would
58 be moving forward. Mr. Stober explained there have been conceptual ideas of decentralized wastewater
59 systems, though they pose challenges. Beth Bronson noted that it should be a focus of the County to see
60 how to go about the process and to monitor case studies.
61
62 Marilyn Carter: There's an item about describing the collaboration relationships with other advisory
63 boards and commissions and knowing that the Climate Action Plan was just approved, and I'm thinking "plan"
64 here refers to some potential collaboration areas or issues where there would be collaboration.Are we at the
65 moment now when we would have a sense of what those boards might be that we would be collaborating with
66 on the Land Use Plan in 2024?
67
68 Cy Stober: No, not at a staff level. I mean so the problem is that we feel disconnected from that
69 because we have a staff working group so we're working with 12 other department heads on the
70 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. What their board, the questions their boards are asking them about that, 1
71 don't know. I do know there has been some general interest from the Ag Preservation Board, so that's why
72 the Comp Plan is going to be the plenary session at the Ag Summit in February. So, that will be the
73 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Clarion will be presenting at that Summit. Otherwise, I'm not aware at this
74 time. That's a good question just to ask the other departments as a homework item. If there are boards that
75 need to be briefed on this or brought into the mix, who those are and when.
76
77 Marilyn Carter: Thank you and just a quick follow up. The Climate Action Plan comes to mind and all of
78 the resiliency. It seems like it would be a logical area but there's likely other areas. Because the Climate
79 Action Plan is so robust. There's so much in it that that might be an area where we might have boards or
80 advisory boards that we would work with. And it looks like we're going be hearing from them pretty soon, 1
81 imagine.
82
83 Cy Stober: We can. There is no board that is designated to manage the Climate Action Plan. The
84 Commission for the Environment, I think, reviewed it, but Amy Eckberg is the coordinator. She has one
85 part-time staff member and that is the climate action staff for the County at this time. She also works closely
86 with the manager. She's working in partnership with the executive office of the County. So, it is a
87 commissioner priority and we'd be happy to have a briefing or a presentation on the Climate Action Plan, if
88 that's of interest.
89
90 The Board discussed transportation projects in the County, including the Hillsborough train station, which
91 staff were not able to comment on, and the South Churton Street widening, which NCDOT is currently
92 receiving public input for.
93
Approved 1-3-24
94 Statler Gilfillen requested clarification on how the Town of Hillsborough and Orange County interact with each
95 other on planning-related matters. Beth Bronson asked about the connection between Orange County as a
96 landowner within the Hillsborough town limits. Mr. Stober clarified that the County as a landowner would not
97 be involved with the planning of the Town of Hillsborough.
98
99 Cy Stober: We do have in our local agreement with the Town of Hillsborough, the Central Orange
100 Coordinated Area, this came up during the Lawrence Road conditional zoning case about whether that
101 application was consistent with the COCA, as it's called and the interlocal agreement. But beyond that, we
102 very respectfully stay out of Hillsborough's way unless it's within one of those joint coordinated areas. We
103 certainly talk to them. We've got good communication with them. We are joint partners on Lake Orange and
104 which does, they're a downstream water user of the headwaters that drain from Lake Orange and we
105 coordinate on erosion control because we do all the inspections for the Town of Hillsborough, including fire
106 inspections, and we perform all the erosion control regulation as well. We're very well acquainted with their
107 planning staff in a regulatory capacity, but it's very much functional or administrative.
108
109 Charity Kirk: I think is all fine, but you mention the UDO and for several years now, every once in a
110 while, there's a desire among board members to review notifications for the various projects going on. So, I
111 would make a request that sometime this year we kind of have a meeting where we review notification
112 ordinances and we consider the distances that we want, because that's come up multiple times. I request
113 staff come with a summary of what it is and then we can have a board discussion and maybe give some input
114 as we do.
115
116 Cy Stober: Part of that problem is that DOT controls a lot of that stuff. So, we're stuck dealing with
117 their rules and regulations for signs alongside the street. That's something that we've come up against a
118 couple of times and we've discussed signs, sizes, and all that other stuff. Not to say we can't discuss it. I'm
119 just saying that's one of the challenges and the DOT does not answer to us,so we have to take what they say.
120 So just bear that in mind, that you might not get the answer you're looking for.
121
122 Charity Kirk: I'm not interested in an answer per se. I'm just interested in having a discussion since it's
123 come up with mailing with a certain amount of radius and time ahead of mailings.Just kind of having a review
124 since it has come up multiple times in the past and also part of it would be summarizing what is allowable by
125 the DOT providing that if staff could provide that to us.
126
127 Cy Stober: Happy to provide a summary report. Just a reminder that should you all wish to initiate
128 an amendment, that does have to be approved by the Commissioners before staff can take any action to do
129 further research.
130
131 Adam Beeman asked if there are any changes coming from the State. Mr. Stober explained that the session
132 is over, but there were some significant changes to the Building Code and the Environmental Health Code,
133 with minimal changes in terms of zoning.
134
135 The Board discussed Item 3, relating to stormwater and water quality, and the proposed amendment to the
136 Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement(WASMPBA). Beth Bronson asked for
137 information on local water providers. Ms. Bronson and Mr. Stober discussed OWASA's involvement in utility
138 provision. Perdita Holtz clarified that the term "long-term interest area" in WASMPBA does not mean there
139 are plans to extend service there, but rather it refers to the first responder in a public health emergency.
140
Approved 1-3-24
141 Mr. Stober updated the Board that a rezoning to an Agricultural Support Enterprise — Conditional District for
142 an arborist and tree processing in the Rural Buffer will likely be coming in January and materials can be found
143 on the Active Development Page of the Orange County Planning and Inspections website.
144
145 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to approve the Work Plan to be presented back to the Board of County
146 Commissioners with no comments. Seconded by Charity Kirk.
147
148 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
149
150 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to adjourn meeting. Seconded by Beth Bronson.
151
152 The meeting adjourned at 7:58 PM.