Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 29 <br /> • Attachment 4—Excerpt of Draft <br /> BOCC November 25, 2013 <br /> 1 DRAFT Quarterly Public Hearing Minutes <br /> 2 MINUTES <br /> 3 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br /> 4 QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING <br /> 5 November 25, 2013 <br /> 6 7:00 P.M. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board <br /> 9 met for a Quarterly Public Hearing on Monday, November 25, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at the DSS <br /> 10 Office, Hillsborough, N.C. <br /> 11 <br /> 12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Mark <br /> 13 Dorosin, Alice M. Gordon, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich <br /> 14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Earl McKee <br /> 15 COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: John Roberts <br /> 16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Michael Talbert and Deputy Clerk to the <br /> 17 Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) <br /> 18 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Pete Hallenbeck, and Planning Board <br /> 19 members Maxecine Mitchell, Lisa Stuckey, Paul Guthrie, Herman Staats, Tony Blake, Andrea <br /> 20 Rohrbacher, and H.T. "Buddy" Hartley <br /> 21 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Johnny Randall, James Lea, Stephanie O'Rouke <br /> 22 <br /> 23 3. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment—To review government- <br /> 24 initiated amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to incorporate recent <br /> 25 changes in State law with respect to items reviewed and acted upon by the Orange County <br /> 26 Board of Adjustment. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Michael Harvey referred to page 87 of the packet. He reviewed the attachments and the <br /> 29 following session law changes: <br /> 30 <br /> 31 • Changing the votes necessary for the Board to approve a Special Use Permit application from <br /> 32 4/5th of members to a simple majority, <br /> 33 • Clarifying the procedure(s)for requesting and issuing of subpoenas, <br /> 34 • Clarifying the appeals timeframe for Board of Adjustment decisions to be submitted to <br /> 35 Superior Court, and <br /> 36 • Clarifying notification requirements with respect to who is notified of a Board decision. Voting <br /> 37 Procedures changed <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Michael Harvey said the language regarding issuance of subpoenas is now detailed in <br /> 40 the code. <br /> 41 He said the appeals timeframe allows 30 days from the filing of a decision to the filing of <br /> 42 an appeal. <br /> 43 He said these changes are intended to create consistency with state law, and there is no <br /> 44 modification of the operational characteristics of the Board of Adjustment. He said the voting <br /> 45 change for special use permits brings it in line with existing County Commissioner's <br /> 46 requirements. <br /> 47 Commissioner Gordon referred to page 102, section 10.3 and asked why these are <br /> 48 necessary. She read the following section: "It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the <br /> 49 absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property." <br />