Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Jeffrey Schmitt: We had a motion, it was seconded. The person who made the motion has the opportunity to accept 40 <br />or not accept the suggestion. <br />Judith Wegner: Right. But first of all there has to be a second. <br />Clarification- Mary seconded Samantha's motion; May seconded Judith's friendly amendment. <br />Earl McKee: This appears to have the affect of the Planning Board writing ordinance and regulation which I don't think <br />is in our scope of work because we are, with this amendment, setting further conditions above and beyond what the <br />County has set. Once you set it for this situation to apply for this devolvement, it becomes precedent for another <br />down the road. My main concern is it seems we are exceeding our scope of work by writing ordinance and <br />regulations. <br />Judith Wegner: Just so you know that what I was trying to say the outset consistent with the ordinances. I was trying <br />to ensure that we were giving direction to staff to the extent there is authority that they need to check further and that <br />in my mind I would like to have a nailing down indication I don't know for this know that mitigation is complete until <br />there has been enough time go by to really see it in the really sensitive area how that would be so I wanted to be sure <br />we weighed in. I do think by framing in terms of what is permissible under the ordinance, I am trying not to write the <br />ordinance afresh. It seems this is really quite a sensitive area and the degree that would be an indication that what <br />ever normal should be handled with care. I try to consider that where there are permits someone can sell and <br />someone else can pick it up. <br />Samantha Cabe: I would like the Planning Board to vote on the amendment and not because I am not rejecting it but <br />it is something everyone should have a voice on. <br />Mark Marcoplos: I will support it because it appears to meet on the regulations. I am disappointed in the process <br />because I don't think it is more than five or six people in this room that even know what we are discussing. This is <br />such an incredible eco-system there we should have more information, pictures, environmental analysis from <br />someone in the County, to make a conscious decision with a full set of facts. I hope in the future, when land is under <br />our consideration, we could be more informed about it. <br />FRieNO~v AMeNOMeNr MorioN: Made by Judith Wegner to add item 6 on page 65 "to the extent under Orange County <br />ordinances, the applicant/ownershatl provide bonds sufficient to ensure the adequate protection of water qualify within <br />the law for a period of time that ensures that adverse effects have been mitigated. Seconded by May Becker. <br />Vore: 4-6; (Judith Wegner, May Becker, Mark Marcoplos, Samantha Cabe) No (Mary Bobbitt-Cooke, Jeffrey Schmitt, <br />Earl McKee, Pete Hallenbeck, Brian Crawford, Rachel Hawkins) <br />Amendment Failed <br />MOTION: Made by Samantha Cabe to accept staffs recommendation to send this to the Board of County <br />Commissioners and recommend approval. Seconded by Mary Bobbitt-Cooke. <br />Vore: Passed 9-1 (May Becker) <br />Motion Passed <br />