Minutes 03-24-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Chair Pelissier said that at the last public hearing the County Commissioners asked staff to write a letter to the towns addressing these concerns communicated to the Board. If this letter does not sufficiently answer the questions, then staff will come to a council meeting to address the concerns. Craig Benedict said that part of that response was a question and answer response. In the UDO as written, there are no changes to any watershed designations, uses, or impervious areas within the document and no changes to any of the uses within the rural buffer or the joint land use plan. Commissioner Gordon said that she does understand the concerns about the UDO. In the old zoning ordinance there was specific language about protecting surrounding neighborhoods and specific language about criteria for approving planned developments. She felt that the language in the new UDO was not the same in critical ways. She said the Board of County Commissioners now has more discretion to approve any conditional zoning districts and conditional use districts. Mayor Kleinschmidt said these were the Town's concerns and exactly why the Council passed the resolution. He asked why the language could not be the same. Craig Benedict said that based on the public hearing, staff came up with four different suggestions that could further tie in rezoning applications through conditional districts and tie it stronger to the comprehensive plan. Additional language was suggested to the Planning Board. Some of it was importing what was from the old code into the new code. The Planning Board has recommended that some of the language is redundant and there are strong enough linkages in two of those areas. Some of the traditional districts are being suggested to be limited to the urban transition areas, and this is a change. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he thinks that six different volumes have been compressed down into one that is still fairly massive. He said that this is an indication of the need to proceed with Phase II and make this document more manageable. He made reference to conditional use and said that by law conditional use is tied to the land use plan. A conditional use decision cannot be made as an elected official that does not involve reflection of the land use plan that underlies all of the development decisions. Commissioner Jacobs said that the County has been discussing for years about the rural buffer and how it can promote some agricultural uses and areas in the rural buffer. Something like Maple View Ice Cream could be argued as something that should not be allowed in the rural buffer, but it has been a success. He thinks that there are some reasonable uses that are consistent with the character in the rural buffer. There is no easy answer to this and there is a division of opinion on this. Commissioner McKee made reference to the evolution of this document over the past year and a half. He said that, as a former member of the Planning Board during that time, the discussion was serious and the members took their responsibilities seriously. They spent a lot of time in a very vigorous debate concerning the changes. The document is still in progress and he thinks it should move forward to Phase II. Jim Ward asked if the County would take advantage of the expertise in the Planning Departments of the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro during Phase II to maintain the rural buffer. Chair Pelissier said that the County has no intention of changing the character of the rural buffer. The County Commissioners would welcome any comments from the Towns. Frank Clifton suggested that the Towns' Planning Departments get a copy of the UDO and start reviewing it right now. Craig Benedict said that in Phase II the County can do better early in the process and get as much activity and outreach as possible rather than wait to the latter part of the process.