Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
the time it was suggested that it was essential to bring the existing regulatory standards in line <br /> with general statute requirements. The proposal is to amend Article 7 and modify how <br /> conditions are proposed for planned development projects. Essentially the change would <br /> require that any condition proposed be initially agreed to by the Board of County Commissioners <br /> and the applicant through the public hearing process. The staff is asking the Board to allow the <br /> Planning Board to review this and make a recommendation no later than May 7, 2008. <br /> Commissioner Gordon asked what happens if conditions are proposed and the applicant <br /> does not agree, then could the project be denied. Michael Harvey said that if the Board of <br /> County Commissioners wishes to impose a condition for set reasons based on the information <br /> provided during the quasi-judicial process and the applicant refuses, and the Board of County <br /> Commissioners believes that the condition is vital to addressing a component of complying with <br /> local regulatory or policy requirements, then that would be a basis for recommending denial. <br /> Geof Gledhill agreed and said that he would recommend that it be handled at the <br /> rezoning decision level and that the Board has in place all of the conditions necessary for this <br /> project to work and that there be concurrence with the developer on these conditions. If there is <br /> not concurrence, then the answer would be to delay the rezoning decision. This only applies to <br /> conditional use zoning or special use zoning. It does not apply to the run of the mill special use <br /> permits, where you still have authority to impose reasonable conditions. <br /> Chair Jacobs said that one of the changes is removal of public, health, safety, and <br /> welfare for approval or denial. Geof Gledhill said that except in specific ways in which its <br /> addressed in the process. <br /> Renee Price asked if this means that the applicant has no room to appeal. <br /> Geof Gledhill said that, if we all do it right, the appeal will be to a legislative decision. <br /> In answer to questions from the Planning Board members, Geof Gledhill said that the <br /> issue in a planned development special use process, hopefully the appeal is not going to turn on <br /> the denied condition or the condition that is not agreed on, but whether or not the decision to not <br /> change the rezoning was wrong. <br /> Jeffrey Schmitt said that the Planning Board is not limiting the opportunity for a plaintiff of <br /> this case to appeal, it's just to whom the case is appealed. Geof Gledhill said that it is not to <br /> whom, it's the nature of the decision that is being appealed. <br /> Chair Jacobs said that what the attorney is saying is that he wants the County to work so <br /> that if there's an appeal, Orange County wins. <br /> Jay Bryan asked if Geof Gledhill could outline his suggestions concerning the overlay of <br /> conditions regarding the application with regard to the rezoning. He also asked about the <br /> language. The way the statute reads is that the conditions are designed to address <br /> conformance of the use of the site to County ordinance and an officially adopted comprehensive <br /> or other plan and those that address the impacts, etc. He also asked about the word "policies." <br /> He is wondering if it is not correct to include under the proposed amendment part 4 7.5.5 that <br /> the County Commissioners may grant the application in accordance with PD and other County <br /> regulations, the Comprehensive Plan, any other plans, and County policies. <br /> Michael Harvey said that under section 7.5.5, the conditions refer back to section 7.2.4, <br /> which is where the language is about the Comprehensive Plan and County regulations. He said <br /> that the Comprehensive Plan is the ultimate policy guide for the County. He said that he could <br /> throw something in 7.5.5 if it would address the concern, but he believes it has been addressed <br /> already. <br /> Jay Bryan asked that the language match in 7.5.5 and 7.2.4. <br /> PUBLIC COMMENT: <br /> NONE. <br />