Minutes - 19780501 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~~ Item 9: Mr. Edward P. Pizer, representing Eastowne Office Park, to discuss a civil penalty imposed by the Berard of Commissioners for violation of the County Erosion Control Ordinance. Mr. Pizer stated that he received notice of the civil penalty on the 22nd of March after compliance had been implemented. The project was brought into compliance by two workmen working about 30 minutes to anchor silt fences. Mr. Pizer stated that Eastowne had attempted to do as the Sediment Control•Officer had requested, however, because of bad weather this winter and the particular low spot in which Eastowne is located, work has been slow and difficult. He added that contact had not been made with the proper persons to get the desired results. Mr. Pizer requested that the County Commissioners rescind the civil penalty imposed against Eastowne. Regarding the pond located an the Eastowne property, Mr. Pizer stated that efforts were being made to preserve the pond and he did not want the pond to fill with sediment. The County Attorney informed the Board that they had every right to impose a civil penalty, however, they also have the right to reconsider the penalty if they so desire. Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson it was moved to rescind the civil penalty imposed by the Board of Commis- sioners. Commissioner Willhoit stated he felt the penalty could be reduced but not rescinded, that the violations began in February and there have been numerous attempts to get the owners of the project to comply, but to no avail until the penalty was imposed. Further discussion ensued. Commissioner Pinney called for the question. The Chairman called for the vote an the motion. Voting aye were Commissioners Pinney, Gustaveson, and Whitted. Voting nay was Commissioner Willhoit. The motion was declared passed. The County Manager reported to the Board that it was aware that cer- tain sections of the Sediment Control Ordinance were not designed to obtain compliance in an effective way, in that the Erosion Control Officer has little authority to enforce the Ordinance. The consensus of the Board was that the County Attorney, Erasion Con- trol Officer, Planning Director and the County Manager meet and review the Ordinance, and then present to the Board recommended amendments. The Ordinance should also be presented to the State Erosion Control Office for approval. Ray Freeman, Erosion Control Officer, informed the Board that Brendle's Inc. had made some improvements regarding their violation, however, they are not in compliance. They. have been given another deadline. Item 6: Mr. Z. G. Holleman, Director of Durham-Orange Employment Training Service, will present a resolution proposing a one year extension of the current Consortium Agreement. The Chairman recognized Mr. Holleman who requested the Board to approve a resolution extending the Durham-Orange Employment Training Ser-- vice Consortium Agreement from October 1, 1978 to September 30, 1979. Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, it was moved and adopted to extend the Consortium Agreement from October 1, 1978 to September 30, 1979. For copy of resolution extending the Consortium Agreement, see page 576 of this book. Mr. Holleman informed the Board that he anticipated some decrease in Public Services monies due to a change in the formula which set the amount allocated counties. Item 16: Petitions £or Rezoning These petitions were heard jointly by the Board of County Commissioners and the County Planning Board on February 27, 1978.