Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e e e [Music] to order um we have our roll call good evening Commissioners I'll call the rooll Mariah Bishop Ralph Carson here Philip Jefferson here Jan Hodes here Ben Mills here Sherry Phillips here Michael vand here that's six members present thank you so much um we can now move to our invocation Miss Phillips let us pray dear God thank you

for allowing us to wake up this morning thank you for allowing us to thank thank you for watching over us today God lord we ask that you allow us to make the right decisions for our beloved town of Garner and that whatever decisions we make that is pleasing to you these and all things we ask in your son Jesus name I pray amen amen thank you thank you so much um we are now at the adoption of our agenda are there any items that need to be added or changed before we move to review that no do we have a motion to adopt our agenda as written I'll make the motion second okay we have a motion in a second there's a motion on the floor to adopt the agenda I'll call the vote Mariah Bishop oh sorry she's not here Ralph Carson hi Caleb Jefferson hi Gian Hodes hi Ben Mills hi Sher Phillips hi Michael vand hi that's six eyes the agenda is adopted thank you we have adopted our agenda um we now come to our time to review our meeting minutes um from our uh February 10th meeting um are there any items that need to be revised or amended um per you seeing none is there a motion to approve our meeting minutes from February 10th I'll moove that second thank you Mr B thank you Mr Carson we have a motion in a second there's a motion on the floor to approve the minutes and I'll call the vote Ralph Carson hi Philip Jefferson hi Jan Hodges hi Ben Mills hi Sher Phillips hi Michael vand I that's six eyes the minutes are adopted thank you we have approved our meeting minutes thank you so much commission uh we now move into our old and new business um a new old and new business of ZTA uh 24002 um storm water requirements for nitrogen control and we'll turn it over to our town

engineer all right good evening Planning Commission um Leah Harrison engineering director it's been a little while since I've been here with you all so good to see everybody um so what we have before you tonight is a text Amendment uh related to our nitrogen control program uh this one should be fairly straightforward but we'll go through a little bit of background just to understand where it's coming from um so as you probably are all aware there are a number of state and local programs that are delegated delegated to the town for enforcement when it comes to storm water and um The Noose rules for nitrogen control is one of those uh the town of Garner is within the New River Watershed and that Watershed is identified as having um nutrient issues so there's too much nitrogen basically within the water of that of that River so it is required that anything within that Watershed comply with the State's new rules for nitrogen control to try to manage that that problem um and this is this has been the case since um the 80s the town of Garner um storm water program from nitrogen control was first adopted in 2001 and then was updated in 2023 um to remain compliant with the state's program and this entire um program for nitrogen control is currently included in our unified development ordinance as an attachment so it's included by reference because it is a long document um there are several elements of it one of those elements is uh for post constru post construction site runoff controls um whereas others also have to do with review and approval um of new storm water devices um things like illicit and illegal discharges so making sure nothing should be is getting

into the water that shouldn't be as well as public education um so the items that we're speaking to tonight have to do with the post constru ruction runoff controls and so these are four elements that are current they're already in the the nitrogen control program um what we are seeking to do with this amendment is to duplicate some of that language directly in the Udo because that aids our uh Town attorney with enforcement of those measures by having being able to directly reference them as a section in the Udo as opposed to just being within the n program um so you have the ordinance and it's up here as well I won't read those elements to you or btim um but just to overview what they are talking about U the first basically says that when a new storm water control measure is built with new development it has to be reviewed inspected and accepted by the town and then will be turned over to the owner for Perpetual maintenance um and that is something that is already part of our process before close out of a of a project or issuance of the certificate of occupancy we review as builts for those structures we do physical inspections and we require that um an engineer provide a certification saying yes this is built the way it should be and it is going to provide the benefit that that it needs to so that is the first element the second is that for every storm water control measure and operation and maintenance agreement and a memorandum of agreement must be completed and recorded So This is a document that says we are building this type of device these are the operations and maintenance items that need to be completed on this device regularly to keep it operating the way that it needs to

operate and so that along with a memorandum of agreement where the owner is basically saying yes we um agree to to doing this long term that document is signed and that's recorded at the reg at the register of deeds so that is a document that allows for those maintenance responsibilities to be recorded with the property in perpetuity um because of course all of these devices can be built exactly the way they're supposed to be built but if they're not maintained they do not continue to provide those water quality benefits the third is that um every on an annual basis all storm water control measure owners must must have that device inspected by a qualified third party and submit the annual inspection reports to the town for review um if there are maintenance issues that come out of that report that need to be done we will follow up and make sure that those are completed otherwise we just um document that it was inspected and is functioning the way it needs to to function and that's due on an annual bases the last item is that for every storm water control measure we require that a public access and mainten maintenance easement be recorded basically from a public rideway to that device and around the device so that allows the town as well as um any entity performing maintenance to legally get to the device to do inspections and maintenance for the future so those are the four elements um as I mentioned these are things that we are doing now they are listed in our nitrogen program we are just duplicating them directly within the Udo for um better enforcement of those items and I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have okay thank you so much uh does Planning Commission have

any uh any questions for staff from Miss Harrison on this Mr Carson um just a uh on both the ordinance sheet and the planning memorandum subsection o and I'm looking at the ordinance sheet first uh just at the top of the page where it talks about review and approval I would like to see an insert there after approval and put four compliance with approved plan design so that it doesn't continually get re-engineered every year as different people look at it so you go back to the original design okay uh and and make that same change on the planning memorandum uh down in subsection Q um I think we got a little redundancy there it talks about uh or in in the second second line uh or any maintenance that is needed with a maintenance plan for that maintenance can we just strike that first maintenance just say plan for maintenance I make those changes on both of those it's just a comment the last question I have um and I'm interested to hear what commissioner Mills has to say on this but is there a reason that they want to do this annually because there's significant costs to do inspect not not just inspections but the maintenance and and some sems if they have the biof filters and things you have to do that every year some you don't and I'm I'm just wondering from the engineering department is there a reason that it's annually versus every two years sure um so the the inspection is done annually and that's to be compliant with

the um with the new rules um all of the maintenance activities have varying frequencies so that should all be lined out outlined in the operations and maintenance plan that's mentioned in P um so for every activity that is required on that device you know some may need to be done more frequently right some devices we have that need to be mowed regularly that's going to be done more frequently than annually um something like if you have a pond and occasionally you may have to go dredge some sediment out of it that's not going to be done annually that's probably several years in between um so the inspection is annual to to make sure that those maintenance activities are being completed and the device is still functional but each activity itself will have its own frequency um which would be specified in the plan and those all come from um the best practices and maintenance suggestions or recommendations that come from the state so so the news Bas and they actually are the ones that stipulate the annual this is kind of marrying up to match what they require I guess is what you're correct okay okay that's fine okay that's all I had I just had those couple additions on there for wording and okay yeah we'll take a look at that and we can provide some suggested word revisions thank you Mr Carson anyone else have any questions for staff for comments yes make a comment um director Harrison on uh believe you mentioned you know any inspection by a qualified professional um can you elaborate on who would that be and I know there's some municipalities would uh say some people are more qualified than others for inspection like a PE certification uh we don't require that

they have to be PE certified but they do have to have um been trained so we accept like um the SC inspection and maintenance program that NC State does that is a certification basically um that's the level of qualified that we're looking for it doesn't necessarily have to be a registered professional engineer okay and um to comment earlier yeah inspecting the SCS annually is a is a good idea just because um if you do it by anually or every three years or something like that uh a lot of property managers or HOAs just won't maintain it they'll go to the two-year Mark and then just say all right I'll get my notes and I'll fix it here and we'll regularly maintain it throughout the year and sometimes I can become an ey sore too it's a very visible spot along a road or park or something like that good question thank you for that I think that helps to clarify that um anyone else Mr vland M hodin uh my only question is um with the operation um maintenance agreement if the property sells that transfers to the new owner correct of the property and maintenance right it's recorded with the property so it will if the property is sold it stays with the property as opposed to with the individual I just have one more question maybe a clarification um subsection R where it talks about public access and maintenance easement MH is that maintenance easement drivable accessible for equipment or just it's an easement and if you drive through the grass you got

to fix it when you're done uh it needs to be drivable as far as um like no super steep slopes um but it can be grassed and if it was torn up then it would have to be fixed so it's not it's not like a maintenance Road um just an area that you know we wouldn't want it to be on where a structure is going to be no structures in that um and the the state's maximum slope for those easements is 6% um so we want those to be no steeper than that at a minimum to provide access okay thanks good question great question um okay there are no other questions from staff or from commission to staff I guess I have to do this officially we have any public comments anybody in a for or against this amendment change for our Udo seeing none um hope you won't have anyone on line but uh so if there's any other discussion or no other discussion um do we have a motion to approve our oh Mr Carson has a question I just wanted to ask a question those couple verbiage changes will we vote on that or we leave that up to the discretion of the engineering department to review that later um I would say that is that's up to you if you want to include that as part of your um motion but we can draft the specific language changes uh before it goes back to Town Council for approval yeah I think that's reasonable for engineering to do that review that themselves okay well that being said do

we have a motion to approve our text changes I'll make the motion with the suggested changes and if they elect not to put that in that's fine um just those two changes um so I'll make the motion on that okay thank you that's for subsection o and subsection Q thank you Mr Carson do we have a second for this I'll second that Mr B okay thank you we have a motion in a second so we have a motion in a second to accept the consistency statement and recommend approval with u Mr Carson's suggestions um and I will call the vote um Mr Carson hi Mr Jefferson hi Miss Hodes hi Mr Mills hi Miss Phillips hi Mr vand hi at six eyes the motion passes thank so much we have um approved our motion for Udo text changes so thank you all for bringing this to us um I think it's really important for us as town to be aware of um with all the development happening um you know how we control this even though we already do it but making sure that it's actually listed in our udio so it's easily accessible we have to go to a whole other document to find it I think that makes it much more accessible for us to review thank thank you thank you all for that um and planning director reports saying none are there any CH any report from the commission that we'd like to share new record Mr Bo yeah I I have a question um in the March 6

memo it was raised that uh councilman Dillinger brought up the topic of perhaps going to a 100e storm sure um I meant to mention that in and I didn't want to bring it up as we considered because I understand the the reasoning given by the department not to include it now but that has been discussed at least once before here with certain projects among the Planning Commission and my understanding is that Chapel Hill has already made that decision what's the Outlook of that happening um so it's something we're taking a look at along with um a lot of other potential I would want to say changes but maybe enhancements that we could make to our our storm water requirements um right now as it's written we require the 110 and 25e storms to be detained um and when we say detained we're requiring the the peak flow doesn't exceed the predevelopment peak flow um we do have in our in our Udo that the 100-year storm can be required on any development at the discretion of the Town engineer here um so we currently could without changing anything require it on everything if that's what we decided was appropriate um how we've used that up until now is by identifying areas that we know have Downstream flooding concerns and anything that's flowing to those areas then we also require the 100-year storm to to Aid in those um concerns Downstream um the thing that's a little bit tricky um is that not every area needs exactly the same type of storm water control right so um there is also some concern um there's some studies where you can see that over Detention of

water and using some of these really large ponds for example is actually causing problems in some of the streams because it it really changes the flow patterns compared to a natural flow pattern so rather than you know just naturally if you had something that was non-developed it's normal for us to have a very heavy rain and you get that wash of water through a stream and then it subsides and when you're catching everything in a pond and then letting it trickle out slowly you lose some of that um natural flow pattern in a stream so there we we don't want to apply something universally that is going to cause a new problem either um really what we're what we're looking toward is um you've seen this reflected in our comprehensive plan as well it starts to talk about use of greenstorm water infrastructure um and low impact development practices and research is showing as well that that's really the healthiest thing for the ecosystem and the streams also is to get as much of that water as possible back into the ground where it normally you know would be if it was allowed to naturally infiltrate um to be able to mimic those those natural patterns um the hard thing about adding that to our requirements is there aren't necessarily standards yet for for example um a lot of the the greenstorm water infrastructure measures that would be great to implement but in the state programs they're not directly given credit for like nitrogen removal um and so it would be something that development would have to do above and beyond what meets the the current dictated requirements so we're looking at you know there ways that we could potentially incentivize those things um and this is something that Council has brought up as well and so there's an interest there to start incorporating

some of those measures and so I think we do have an opportunity to develop somewhat of a I would call it like a toolbox that um you know engineering could potentially come up with some examples of measures for different situations that would probably be helpful for that specific place within the Watershed and the specific Watershed that it's in and look at requiring um some of those as opposed to just a unilateral 100-year storm requirement so it's it's something that's on the table I think we want to look a little more comprehensively what are some enhancements that we can make um okay no good answer yeah I appreciate that sure yeah yeah I agree that that's a really um I think that's a really you know valuable response so that it kind of give us all a good answer anybody ask us that ourselves um and it makes a lot of sense that especially in natural flow patterns I mean you know in some ways our streams kind of clean themselves they move where they need to and they move sent where it needs to to kind of rebuild itself and yeah when we do that it doesn't do that that's a really good I love the idea of the toolbox like if then if this then this then we can has options on top of right you have options for the right thing in the right place right because it's not all going to work the same everywhere so that's that's our goal and something we're working on so I would anticipate as we move forward with that we'd likely be coming back to you all again to present that information as we have anything a little more concrete great I like forward to that for sure thank you Mr ban that was a great question one more one more yes Mr B has one more for John hares um John regarding the cuts to the VA at the national level should we be concerned about the clinic opening uh good evening Commissioners uh

we have not received any word um of any changes to the planned opening um we have not had any uh contact uh in the last couple of weeks but we had been working with the leadership there on some of the things that they were working on to to get the clinic open so nothing that we've been made aware of thank you right that's good to hear any other commission question statements comments for staff one more time from staff nothing here okay going on going twice I call me J [Music]