Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
G `~'~ ~ <br />1 <br />2~III~UTES <br />ORANGE COUNTX 130AFZD OF COP~II~fISSIDNERS <br />SEPTEI~]SER 1$, 1984 <br />The-Orange County Board of Comrr.issioners met in regular session on <br />Tuesday, September 1$, 19$4 at 7:30 p.m. in the Courthouse of the Old Post <br />_ Office Building, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. <br />Commissioners Present: Chair Don TVillhoit, and Commissioners Shirley <br />tlarshall, Ben Lloyd, Norman t•~alker .and Richard 1.7hitted. <br />A, ROAP.D COI~i?~]EA'TS <br />Commissioner ]tiThitted added a brief executive session to the agenda <br />for the purpose of discussing personnel. <br />B. AUDIENCE COj]I"]F,,~TS <br />1, P.9A'1•'TF.R~ Ora THE RINTED ~~,;;~DA <br />Chair G•7illhoit announced that those persons who wish to speak <br />about any items on the agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. <br />2, r~ATTFR~ rvOT ON TH PP,=T7TEj2 _AGENDA <br />None. <br />C. 1,,.]22aUTES <br />Deleted <br />p . - '~.~ <br />1 , HOf•]ESTEAD ROP,~_.APARTA]ENTS (H.V._ r~COY CDj~~ANY)_ PD-6-84 <br />The staff presentation was made by Collins. <br />Collins indicated that Chapel Hill had informed the County that <br />'the Town did not have time on their agenda on which to take action on the <br />proposal. The Town adr:inistrative staff had also informed the County that <br />they were working with the developer to address concerns raised by the Tovan <br />on the proposed project. The Town of Chapel will has, therefore, requested <br />that the public hearing be continued until October 16, 1'84 to allow for <br />• the Town of Chapel Hill to consider the matter again on September 24, 1984. <br />The developer has requested that the public hearing be continued until <br />October 1, 19S4. <br />Chair ti~illhoit clarified that the public hearing had been <br />continued until September 18, 19$4 to receive input from both the Tovm of <br />Chapel Hill and the general public. <br />Mel Rashkis addressed the Board expressing concern about <br />securing speedy approval or dismissal of applications given that contracts <br />are entered into in light of the schedule of public hearings and Bcard <br />reviews. He continued that the courtesy review oppor.tur.ity includes the <br />responsibility to act within the time frame established. He felt that <br />unnecessary delay was proposed by the Town's request for extension of the <br />public hearing. He also felt that courtesy revieva items should be given <br />• some priority by the Towns for consideration. He added tht he had no <br />interest in the development project presently being reviewed. <br />Chair ]•~illhoit noted that the problem occurred with the desire <br />by the Tovan Council to review this project as opposed to just the staff and <br />Planning Board because of critical location. <br />Commissioner willhoit stated that an e:tension of the public <br />hearing to Datober 1, 1984 would expedite the request. <br />• Commissioner t•Iarshall noted that the Tovm Council of Chapel <br />Hill will be meeting prior to October 1, 1984. <br />Commissioner Tuhitted reviewed the requirements that evidence be <br />taken during a rlanned development public hearing, but stated he understood <br />