Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Commissioner Brawn said that one important issue is that it needs to be clear where the <br />expensive housing is located and the staff should obtain some good information from the tax office. <br />This document will came back revised an February 14tH <br />d. Proposed Public Hearing Advertisement -February 28, 2000 <br />The Board considered approving an advertisement far the February 2$t" quarterly public <br />hearing. <br />Planning Director Craig Benedict said that this public hearing would involve a series of <br />amendments that would further the County Commissioners' goals from June 1999. Some of the goals <br />are watershed protection, environmental protection, efficient urban services, soil and land holding <br />capacity, rural character, and sustainability. Mare specifically, the public hearing will address issues of <br />density reductions in the upper Eno watershed and development of a functional roadway classification <br />that is consistent with the DOT standards. <br />Commissioner Gordon said that it would be helpful to have the actual text of what would go to <br />public hearing. <br />Craig Benedict said that he could provide background information well in advance of the <br />public hearing. <br />Commissioner Jacobs questioned Craig Benedict on the goal of efficient urban services. He <br />thought the goal should be efficient provision of services. It was decided to change this goal to read <br />"efficient public services". <br />Commissioner Brown made reference to the Cane Creek cluster option and said that she <br />thought this idea and concept of clustering was going to be brought back to the Commissioners to <br />discuss at a work session. <br />Craig Benedict said that there was some confusion about the issue of clustering the last time <br />it was discussed by the County Commissioners. <br />Commissioner Brown said that she would like to see the pros and cons of clustering. She <br />would like for the County Commissioners to discuss clustering and what it really means before it is taken <br />to public hearing. <br />Geoffrey Gledhill pointed out that when the Cane Creek changes were approved, the County <br />Commissioners did Hat approve any changes to the clustering regulations so the existing regulations are <br />still in place. <br />The County Commissioners decided that the Cane Creek clustering option would be <br />discussed at a work session and brought back to a future public hearing. <br />Commissioner Halkiotis pointed out that this situation is an example of how the Board needs <br />to improve internal communication. <br />The Board decided to table the decision an the public hearing advertisement until the work <br />session on February 8t". It was the consensus that Craig Benedict would get the full text of the public <br />hearing agenda to the County Commissioners as sawn as possible. <br />e. Procedures for Boards and Commissions -Ethics Guidelines <br />The Board considered ethics guidelines for town advisory boards and commissions. <br />Commissioner Carey disagreed with the second paragraph of the Ethics Guidelines that if a <br />member has a conflict of interest, the advisory board or commission should vote on whether ar Hat to <br />excuse the member. <br />Geoffrey Gledhill said that the board or commission votes on whether or not to excuse the <br />member because some people will abstain from voting on a controversial issue. <br />Commissioner Brown had problems with the third paragraph, which indicates that, a board or <br />commission member may seek the counsel of the County Attorney on questions regarding the ethics <br />guidelines. It was suggested to replace "County Attorney" with "Staff" in the third paragraph. <br />After ensued discussion and suggestions for changes, it was decided that this would be <br />brought back an the Consent agenda at a later meeting. <br />10. REPORTS <br />a. Annual Report -Voluntary Agricultural District Program <br />