Minutes - 19890227 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~~ Yuhasz raised a question about clearing 4 acres of land for a horse pasture and Collins again indicated that he believed it would not require an assessment, however, '~"} the specifics would need to be considered. Yuhasz asked Collins to clarify whether or not the "Application for Environmental Assessment" was apart of the Ordinance. He questioned the necessity of the three questions on noise/vibrations, traffic impact and visual impacts as they have no direct impact on the environment. Collins indicated that it was merely a form developed by the staff to assist people going through an assessment. The questions lead them through step-by-step. He stated that the assessment form is a carry over from the initial public hearing. There could be some significant impacts related to traffic, noise and vibrations which might cause the staff to request an environmental impact statement. It would have to be a very significant impact. In response to a statement from Steve Yuhasz that there is no provision within this ordinance to allow the staff to make that judgment, Collins stated that the Ordinance is structured to determine if a project has a significant impact and items on the form under subsection #3 (noise, traffic and visual impacts) probably should not be included. Yuhasz asked how this Ordinance would be amended as there is no provision in the Ordinance for creating amendments. Collins replied that the county is granted, through the General Statutes, what is entitled General Ordinance Making Power. Whatever provisions the Statutes call for in terms of conducting Public Hearings for the purpose of amending Ordinances or deleting them entirely, are contained in those Statutes. There were none contained within this specific Statute dealing with the Environmental Review Procedures, so it would be dealt with by the General Ordinance Making Powers that are granted to cities and counties. Yuhasz asked if a Public Hearing would be required to amend the Ordinance and Collins indicated it would not be necessary. Gledhill stated that the enactment of this Ordinance does not require a Public Hearing and any amendment or repeal of this Ordinance would not require a Public Hearing. However, it has become the practice, almost the policy, of the Soard of Commissioners to hold Public Hearings on all amendments to its Ordinances. Commissioner Marshall suggested that all public hearing items state whether a public hearing is required or not. Planning Board Chairman Barry Jambs stated that 2.2:7b indicates that one of the assessment concerns would be sites identified in the Inventories of Natural Areas or the Cultural and Historic sites. These sites, which might be impacted by adjoining development and therefore traffic, vibrations, and visual impact would seem to be applicable in those circumstances. He questioned Carrboro's comments on page 59 regarding public hearings and implementation in the requirements for a project. Collins referred to the issue of incorporating Carrboro's comments into the County's development application approval procedures and stated that the basis far the Ordinance, or enabling legislation, in the first place was to make this information available to the public. The second point was to utilize this procedure to work with the developers to get them to mitigate the impact of their projects on the environment. However, it would not be used as an attempt to deny projects. If that is what Carrboro is alluding to in terms of incorporating .it into its design review approval procedures, these concerns cannot be addressed unless the focus of the Ordinance is changed. If it is only a matter of design and review, we would hope that