Minutes - 20050523 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Jay Bryan made reference to Commissioner Cordon's comments and said that it might be helpful if the cities had a better idea of the criteria for compatibility issues. Craig Benedict said that before the information is sent to the joint area partners, the criteria need to be fleshed out a little more. Commissioner Jacobs agreed about fleshing the information out more. He thinks the Board should give the staff direction to proceed. He said that the new Agricultural Economic Specialist, after the position is filled, could help people with site planning. Commissioner Foushee made reference to the timelines and the possibility of having more frequent public hearings to speed up the process. She would request looking at other alternatives for enhancing the process that would not require more public hearings. She thinks this takes away from the process. Commissioner Gordon said that quarterly public hearings are a good idea and not more frequent public hearings. She asked that the staff give the Board a first cut at the major criteria. She pointed out that some farms are already so close to developed residential areas that some of these uses would not fit. Commissioner Jacobs said that sometimes the farms that are the most pressed by suburban development are the ones that most need options to stay in agriculture. He would not want to preclude those farms. Renee Price asked about protection for farmers and what would be in place to enable the farmers to keep up their operations. She asked how long the zoning would be in effect. Geof Gledhill said that the short answer is that the zoning runs with the land. The North Carolina Supreme Court helps also by not recognizing nuisances that would typically be thought as nuisances. Noah Ranells said that this is an opportunity for the Board of County Commissioners to strongly support what staff has done and ask them to take the next steps as aggressively as possible. He noted that this was shared at the Assembly of Governments meeting last year, so it is not new to the municipalities. Craig Benedict said that the recommendations are to proceed with developing the criteria and flesh out the details and present it to the joint planning area partners in the fall. Later the Board will discuss whether to follow the next steps on page 8 of the agenda abstract. 2. Orange County Comprehensive Plan -Land Use Element Update Text Amendments a. Overview of what has been processed to date with stakeholder involvement, what comprehensive questions need to be answered, and what steps lie ahead. b. Outline for the Land Use Element including Introduction, Existing Conditions, Growth Management and Future Land Uses, Goals, Objectives, and Policies, Implementation, and Monitoring Procedures. c. Outline for the Entire Comprehensive Plan and the specific interest areas addressed by each element. 3. Update on Residential Zoning Density and Minimum Lot Size Text Amendments a. Planning Staff will present six (6) options far Residential Zoning Density within the County's rural planning jurisdiction that range from existing zoning density to increasingly resource-based, limited-density plans addressing water and air quality and limiting traffic. No changes are suggested for Urban Transition Areas or Rural Activity Nodes. b. Presentation of a proposal to raise the Minimum Lot Size from 0.92 acres {40,000 sf) to two (2) acres (87,120 sf) to address identified growth challenges in the areas of sustainability, water and air quality, and groundwater recharge.