Agenda - 12-11-2012 - 5h - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date:December 11, 2012 Action Agenda Item No.5-h SUBJECT:Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development OrdinanceAmendment Outline/Schedule for UDO Text Amendments to Revise Requirements Related to Schools Adequate Public Facilities DEPARTMENT:Attorney / Planning and PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N)No Inspections ATTACHMENT(S):INFORMATION CONTACT: Comprehensive Plan and Unified John Roberts, County Attorney, 919-245-2318 Development Ordinance Amendment Craig Benedict, Planning Director,919-245- Outline Form (UDO/Zoning-2013-01)2592 PURPOSE: To consider and approve the process components and schedulefor text amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text, currently scheduled for the February 25, 2013Quarterly Public Hearing. BACKGROUND: In August 2012 in the case of Lanvale Properties v. Cabarrus County, the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down Cabarrus County’s adequate public facilities ordinance(“APFO”).Although the majority focused on the fee aspect of Cabarrus County’s ordinance, the Courtstruck down the entire ordinance, which included provisions for delaying construction until school facilities could meet development demand. In striking down the ordinance, the Court held “Without expressing an opinion on the policy merits of APFOs, we stress that absent specific authority from the General Assembly, APFOs that effectively require developers to pay an adequate public facilities fee to obtain development approval are invalid as a matter of law.” This holding appearstoleave room for APFOs that do not impose a fee but rather delay development until such time as there are adequate school facilities to support the development. However, the Supreme Court refused to consider a petition arguing that fact and asking the Court to modify its holding by severing the fee provision of the Cabarrus County APFO and allowing the other provisions to stand. The attorneys for Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Orange County met to discuss the Court’s holding and the ramifications of the Court’s refusal to consider the petitionto modify its decision. At thatmeeting the consensus among the attorneys was that theSchools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (“SAPFO”) and its accompanying memoranda should be amended to remove the enforcement provisions, but that it could be left in place as a policy document. This would involve eliminating the possibility that a Certificate of Adequate Public School Facilities (“CAPS”) would be denied. The existing process would remain in effect; however, there would