Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Excerpt of Approved Minutes <br />Attachment 3 <br />11 <br />1 MINUTES <br />2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD <br />3 APRIL 1, 2009 <br />4 REGULAR MEETING <br />5 <br />6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Crawford, Eno Township At -Large (Chair); Mary Bobbitt- Cooke, Cheeks <br />7 Township; Nathan Chambers, Cheeks Township At- Large; Rachel Phelps Hawkins, .Hillsborough <br />8 Township; Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township; Earl McKee, Little River Township; Mark Marcoplos; <br />9 Bingham Township At- Large; Larry Wright, Cedar Grove Township At- Large; Peter Hallenbeck, Cheeks <br />10 Township At -Large <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 MEMBERS ABSENT: Samantha Cabe, Chapel Hill Township; Judith Wegner, Bingham Township; Tommy <br />14 McNeill, Eno Township <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director, Robert Davis, Planner 111; Michael Harvey, Zoning <br />18 Enforcement Officer, Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator, Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II <br />19 <br />21 AGENDA ITEM 8: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ARTICLE 6 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH <br />22 REGULATIONS FOR DRIVE -THRU FACILITIES <br />23 <br />24 To consider a recommendation to the BOCC regarding this item heard at the February <br />25 23, 2009 Quarterly Public Hearing <br />26 <br />27 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Zoning Enforcement Officer <br />28 <br />29 Michael Harvey: Good Evening once again. As the Board may recall, at the February Quarterly Public <br />30 Hearing we presented an ordinance amendment with two options on the possible regulation of drive - thrus <br />31 and the use of drive -thrus in the County. The two options are as follows, we amend Article 6 to ban them <br />32 or amend Article 6 to adopt some regulations to address-the negative side impacts that are generated from <br />33 their use. The County Commissioners, after conducting the Public Hearing, were unable to come to any <br />34 consensus to provide staff or the Planning Board any direction. We have provided you with both options. <br />35 We are recommending that the Planning Board consider adopting regulations amending the operational <br />36 characteristic of drive - thrus and we hope we've come up with some standards that would address the <br />37 concerns that have been expressed by both Planning Board and County Commissioners over their <br />38 development for the County. Attachment one is the proposed ordinance amendments for both options for <br />39 this Board to consider, options one and two. Attachment two has several articles and/or web pages and <br />40 general information dealing with drive - thrus. <br />41 <br />42 Brian Crawford: Michael, I would just like to take a moment to complement you on this abstract, there's <br />43 some good information in here and I thought it was fairly balanced on pros and cons. Thank you good <br />44 information. Are there any questions? <br />45 <br />46 Larry Wright: I would like to, first of all say that this is a very good package, I'm really concerned about the <br />47 study of the Sierra Research. The first thing about the study is that they are comparing two different <br />48 regions of California, one is in the high mountains and the other is lower California. There are two things <br />49 they omitted here, the first is what really hits our pocketbook and that's ozone. We pay for that because <br />