ORD-2011-013 Unified Development Ordinance and Repeal All Existing Ordinances See ON line Version

Browse Search

~ stands tonight. Attachment 3 includes suggestions from the County Attorney regarding evaluating the members of advisory boards. Also, on page 190, there is a response document to Commissioner Gordon's concerns. Chair Pelissier said that there are also items from the County Attorney. John Roberts said that this is on page 76. This is regarding the advisory board policy. PUBLIC COMMENT: Jeremy Browner is a resident of Carrboro. He offered his support and said that he hoped the Board of County Commissioners would pass this document tonight. The County sorely needs this document to be passed to help with economic development. A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve the Manager's recommendation, with the inclusion of the additional Article 1.6.2 and the addition of Attachment 3-a. 1) Receive the Planning Board's recommendation of approval of the November 2010 Public Hearing Draft of the UDO with the revisions contained in Attachment 2(pp 6- 72). 2) Receive the staff and attorney-recommended revisions contained in Attachment 3 (Pp 74-79). 3) Close the public hearing. 4) Adopt the Resolution of Approval provided at Attachment 1. PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN: Marilee McTique said that she is a 20-year resident of rural Orange County. She said that she made comments at the QPH and she did read this entire document. She supports the UDO adoption. Commissioner Jacobs asked some clarifying questions. On page 10 at the top, #2, and the criteria for reviewing conditional use development application. He asked about "substantial justice" and said that he does not know how he would interpret this. Craig Benedict said that this was some suggested language and it is not substantive. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that, since right after that it says, "ensure equitable treatment," then this language should be used instead of "substantial justice" because it is less confusing. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 12, item d-2, and said that there have been discussions about how in a rural area a 500-foot notice is not adequate. He asked when this will be addressed. Craig Benedict said that this will be addressed subsequently. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 13, PID District Specific Development Standards, #3, and he read, "residential uses are not permitted in this district." He said that he is involved in a foundation that exists around the residential use in a public interest district. He asked if this would apply to this foundation. Craig Benedict said that if it does exist it would be grandfathered in. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 198, Zoning Ordinance Section 7.4.1 where it says, "conditional districts shall be located in proximity to interstate highways, arterial and collector streets or mass transit facilities, and shall be designed to provide direct access to such facilities." He said that you cannot have direct access to an interstate. He asked what was meant by "direct access."