Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
10 <br /> VOTE: Unanimous. <br /> AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT AUGUST 23,1999 PUBLIC HEARING <br /> a. Text Amendments Regarding Time Constraints for Development <br /> Review and Other Procedural Changes <br /> (1) Amendments to Orange County Zoning Ordinance <br /> (2) Amendments to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations <br /> Presentation by Robert Davis. <br /> A copy of the abstract information and proposed text amendments are attachments to these minutes on pages <br /> Davis said this item is still in public hearing. This item is back to the Planning Board fora recommendation on <br /> some of the revisions of the time limits and the appeal process in the subdivision and zoning ordinances. At the <br /> public hearing,there was quite a bit of opposition from certain members of the development community with regard <br /> to eliminating any time limits without any time outside parameters for hearing cases. It was recommended earlier to <br /> put in some language that would address any concern on this,but there was still some opposition to removing time <br /> limit constraints from the ordinance. The staff`s comments have been incorporated into the ordinance. In this <br /> proposal the Planning Board hears a case one time and a decision must be made the next time or it would go to the <br /> Commissioners with staff's recommendation.There were no constraints placed on the time limits at the staff level. <br /> He made reference to a calendar in the agenda packet. They have put both the Concept and the Preliminary on that <br /> calendar,and the neighborhood information meeting would only be heard at the Concept level. In each column they <br /> have placed the Planning Board date and then the target dates of all of the events that would happen leading up to <br /> that Planning Board date. A copy of the referenced calendar is an attachment to these minutes on page <br /> Benedict reviewed the calendar. Within this timeframe,there are different actions that have to be done. First of all, <br /> the completeness of the application is checked. Secondly,there is a Concept Plan neighborhood information <br /> meeting to meet with the public and notices must be sent out. The Development Review Committee(DRC)meeting <br /> is something they are making a little more important in the process. The DRC is made up of staff,the Fire Marshall, <br /> someone from the Building Department,and could include the Department of Transportation. During discussions <br /> with a few of the developer agents and the surveyors,they said that they would like to be plugged into the process so <br /> that they can hear the staff comments. The staff's intent is to meet the same day of the DRC meeting with the <br /> developer right afterwards,so there would be a scheduled time for every development application that comes in. <br /> After these meetings,if there are revisions,there is limited time for the developer to come back with the revisions. <br /> The revisions are rechecked and the packet is then mailed to the Planning Board. He said that the important thing is <br /> that they get all the comments from the various agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers or the Department of <br /> Natural Resources. He noted a change in the schedule. At this time,there are numerous submittal periods for <br /> applications. In this ordinance,they have been put into one submittal period and then it is all tracked to a certain <br /> meeting. This will be easier for the staff. <br /> Davis said that they are bringing up for the Planning Board's consideration to allow for staff a one meeting deferral <br /> on all cases. <br /> Benedict said there are no timeframes for staff in the way the original proposed ordinance is written now, and that is <br /> how it was brought to public hearing. They are suggesting putting a restriction on the staff to get the item to the <br /> Planning Board in the first timeframe or within the next meeting. <br /> Davis said there are no time limits on the applicant after they file a case. Another change in the ordinance is that <br /> they are giving a two-year lag between the Concept and Preliminary Plans;now it is only one year. He said that <br /> they are proposing no time changes for the Board of Adjustment. <br /> Chair Barrows pointed out page 64 where it talks about stop work orders. Previously it said,"within 15 days,"and <br /> now it is going to say,"at its next regularly scheduled meeting." She is concerned about saying that the stop work <br /> order will be done at no specified time. She stated that the Board of Adjustment does not meet every month. (If <br /> there is no Board of Adjustment business,the Board does not meet.) Some work could be going on between the <br />