ORD-2003-034 - Proposed Zoning Ordinance & Subdivision Regulations Enforcement Procedures Amendments

Browse Search

,o6tZ)- aoc)3 4 I. Proposed Zoning Ordinance & Subdivision Regulations Enforcement Procedures F Z Amendments The Board considered closing the public hearing and considered making a decision on adoption of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations text amendments regarding enforcement and penalties. Commissioner Gordon made reference to page six where it defines zoning officer, and this has been deleted. She asked if this should have been deleted. Craig Benedict said that it was covered in the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Gordon made reference to pages 9 and 16 and the stop work order and pointed out that it never says what the stop work order is. She thinks that the definition was deleted in error. She asked that this be corrected. Commissioner Gordon said that it states that the amount the zoning officer can fine is $500 and she did not know where it stood with the Board of County Commissioners. She said that there were minutes and comments about the amount, but she does not know if it was definitive. In looking through the minutes, it was not clear to her that the County Commissioners had come to any definitive position. John Link said that whether the fine is $100 or $500, the zoning officer is not going to exercise the fine until each issue is addressed. We need to make sure that the individual citizen has been notified in person by a staff person and that they understand the issues involved. Craig Benedict said that it was brought up at the public hearing and they took it back to the Ordinance Review Committee and the Planning Board and the recommendations were unanimous to stay at the $500 level. The emphasis is compliance and they believe that the fine structure will help in discouragement of the violation to start with. Commissioner Jacobs said that he does not think that the money was the issue and he would like to review the minutes before a vote takes place. He said that one of the issues was whether or not there should be an appeal process that did not include a public official. Craig Benedict said that the concerns of the County Commissioners were included in the revision that have the Board involved if there is a time extension to the resolution of the violation. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to table this item until the County Commissioners can review the minutes. VOTE: UNANIMOUS m. Orange County /Hillsborough Courtesy Review Agreement The Board considered a revised Courtesy Review Agreement, including a checklist, with the Town of Hillsborough. Commissioner Jacobs said that he still does not think this is where he thought we were going. He thought that steps 1-4 were followed, then step 11 should be put after step 4, which is "Board of County Commissioners or Board of Town Commissioners may request a joint meeting." Craig Benedict said that step 11 occurred where it is because it was occurring after the Planning Board had a preliminary plan farther along in the process, versus a concept plan. This step can be moved up. Commissioner Jacobs said that the sooner a joint meeting could be held in the process, the better. Commissioner Jacobs said that his only other concern is that either board can request a joint meeting. Craig Benedict said that they could work on an addendum during the summer break. Commissioner Halkiotis said that on NC 57 and NC 86, he saw that there is another subdivision called Cameron Estates and it never came up on the County's radar screen. He hopes that this document will give the County an opportunity to comment. He said that this additional area was annexed years ago to prevent a landfill going in on NC 57. He asked if Hillsborough would be able to approve anything they wanted in this area without input from the County. He said that this needs to be handled through a process. Craig Benedict said that the process in the courtesy review agreement would bring projects on the radar screen quickly. He mentioned that there is a 50 -unit development proposed next to the Planning and Agricultural Center. This will be on a future agenda. The Board agreed to move step 11 to step 5. Commissioner Gordon said that the chart is only from the County's point of view. 9