Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
8 <br /> already been addressed through the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. It is <br /> simply a matter of pulling those together into a policy on expedited review. <br /> Barrows asked why this should be considered by the Planning Board at all until all <br /> concerns could be addressed. Bell responded that if the request for the Commissioners <br /> to approve two additional meetings was held until the fast meeting in August, the <br /> process would be even"farther behind". <br /> Rafalow expressed concern that between the time Flexible Development goes into effect, <br /> July 1,and the time the Small Area Plan is adopted,someone could bring forward and do <br /> something that is inconsistent with the work the group has been doing for a year. He <br /> asked that the Planning Board act on the parts that the Planning Group is in agreement on <br /> and bring back in October the conclusions on the village option,expedited review and <br /> density bonuses. <br /> Discussion followed regarding changes to ordinances that would have to be made. Bell <br /> indicated he would have to talk with the County Attorney regarding a possible need for <br /> public hearing on ordinance amendments consistent with Planning Group <br /> recommendations on implementation. <br /> Katz stated that he was becoming more confused about the process for possible changes <br /> to ordinances. Bell emphasized that he felt what the Commissioners' have asked for <br /> in the charge to the Planning Group("recommendation for implementation")should go <br /> back to them prior to asking for directive for implementation. <br /> Strayhom emphasized again that if this is an unfinished product,the Planning Board <br /> should not be discussing or making recommendations. <br /> Rafalow stated that his concern was that the integrity of the area be protected while these <br /> other issues are being considered. <br /> Strayhorn stated that the New Hope Community had been established for many years and <br /> he did not feel anything as destructive as foreseen by Mr.Rafalow would happen in such <br /> a short period of time. <br /> Barrows stated that as long as the Land Use Plan is in place,that is what the Planning <br /> Board is ruled by. Strayhorn responded that it is a voluntary plan;we are not giving up <br /> a thing that we have today. Rafalow responded expressing concern if a plan for a village <br /> is submitted and it would not meet the intent of the Small Area Plan. <br /> Barrows asked for Bell's suggestion. Bell responded that the Planning Board could <br /> forward its endorsement of the Draft Land Use Plan as presented at public hearing and <br /> request additional meetings as suggested by the Planning Group to address the issues of <br /> expedited review and the village option. <br /> MOTION: Brown moved to recommend adoption of the Stoney Creek Plan and all <br /> recommendations except those highlighted in the July 5 memo and that the Planning <br /> Group reconvene to address the issues identified in the memo. Seconded by Hoecke. <br /> Katz expressed concern that the Planning Group needed permission from the <br /> Commissioners to meet. Bell responded that something needs to go back to the <br /> Commissioners on this issue. The process can continue without concurrence of the <br /> Commissioners,in a sense it is a courtesy thing,we have gone this far and we need to go <br /> this much farther to work out all details. Bell continued that he felt the Commissioners <br />