Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-28-2011 - C.1
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 02-28-2011
>
Agenda - 02-28-2011 - C.1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2012 10:48:23 AM
Creation date
2/21/2011 10:29:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/28/2011
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
C.1
Document Relationships
Minutes 02-28-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
302
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
214 <br />important document. He asked if the terms within the Comprehensive Plan are the terms that <br />should be used in the UDO also. <br />May Becker said that she agreed with Larry Wright. She feels like the Planning Board <br />has not spent sufficient time on this version of the UDO to figure out if this is really what is best. <br />In particular, she has concerns about several items, including stream buffers, protecting the <br />limited water supplies, and the tree protection ordinance. <br />Commissioner Gordon said that she also has concerns about this most recent version of <br />the UDO document. She made reference to her handouts for the public hearing in which she <br />summarized some sections of the UDO she believed were important, but said that she had not <br />even begun to go through this document. She is particularly concerned about conditional <br />zoning. She is also concerned that this is the only public hearing on this UDO. She said it is a <br />very large document, and it is not easy to understand. It is also more than a consolidation of <br />existing ordinances, and has new sections in it. For example, there is a new section on tree <br />protection. She said when the Chapel Hill Town Council considered its own tree protection <br />ordinance, it took extra time to consider just that one ordinance. She said there needs to be <br />more clarity in the document. She would like the Planning Board to have time to read it and go <br />through it more thoroughly. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that he has pretty much the same background as <br />Commissioner Gordon in that he has been a Commissioner for awhile and he has been on the <br />Planning Board. He has a lot of respect for the Planning Board and the process. He said that <br />he also came tonight aware of the fact that last week the County got an odd, but respectable <br />request from the Town of Chapel Hill to please provide a copy of the UDO. He said that there <br />should be presentations at all four Towns. He said that staff needs to come up with a schedule <br />to inform the towns about this. He would like a recommendation from the Planning Board after <br />the public hearings. He thinks that there are some complicated issues and some departures <br />from what has been done before. He said that it is reasonable to give more time to make sure <br />that everyone understands the changes. <br />Judith Wegner said that there are a lot of areas to be decided. She said that the <br />Planning Board understands that the goal is to have a single document for county ordinances. <br />Brian Crawford said that there are a lot of development ordinance documents and there <br />are also a lot of things in the UDO that the Planning Board does not like. The goal is for the <br />developer to go to one document and figure out how to get things done in Orange County. The <br />goal is to have a unified document. He wants the Commissioners to understand that the <br />Planning Board is aware that there are things in the UDO that are not perfect. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked Craig Benedict if he envisioned a way that the County <br />could adopt the UDO and flag sections that have to be refined. <br />Craig Benedict said that there is a bridge document that notes everything mentioned by <br />the County Commissioners, Planning Board, and the public. These things are flagged. In the <br />existing ordinance, it would be problematic to pull things out. <br />Lary Wright pointed out that there are a lot of cross references from chapter to chapter. <br />Steve Yuhasz said that this is just the first phase. He said that if the UDO is not put in <br />place fairly quickly, then the County will never get to the second phase. He said that it would be <br />a huge step backwards to delay. <br />May Becker said that for the parts that are new, the Planning Board has not had enough <br />time to go through it. The board needs more time to sit down and make an informed <br />recommendation. <br />Commissioner Hemminger said that she has never been on a Planning Board, so it is <br />hard for her to digest. She thinks that there is time to spend on making this a document that <br />works. She would like to hear what the public has to say. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.