Agenda - 01-23-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

14 1 2. Conduct the Public Hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board comment on the 2 proposed amendment. 3 3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned 4 to the Board of County Commissioners in time for the January 23, 2014 BOCC regular 5 meeting. 6 4. Adjourn the public hearing until January 23, 2014 in order to receive and accept the 7 Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. 8 9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 10 11 12 13 148. 3. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment—To review government- 15 initiated amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to incorporate recent 16 changes in State law with respect to items reviewed and acted upon by the Orange County 17 Board of Adjustment. 18 19 Michael Harvey referred to page 87 of the packet. He reviewed the attachments and the 20 following session law changes: 21 22 • Changing the votes necessary for the Board to approve a Special Use Permit application from 23 4/5th of members to a simple majority, 24 • Clarifying the procedure(s) for requesting and issuing of subpoenas, 25 • Clarifying the appeals timeframe for Board of Adjustment decisions to be submitted to 26 Superior Court, and 27 • Clarifying notification requirements with respect to who is notified of a Board decision. Voting 28 Procedures changed 29 30 Michael Harvey said the language regarding issuance of subpoenas is now detailed in 31 the code. 32 He said the appeals timeframe allows 30 days from the filing of a decision to the filing of 33 an appeal. 34 He said these changes are intended to create consistency with state law, and there is no 35 modification of the operational characteristics of the Board of Adjustment. He said the voting 36 change for special use permits brings it in line with existing County Commissioner's 37 requirements. 38 Commissioner Gordon referred to page 102, section 10.3 and asked why these are 39 necessary. She read the following section: "It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the 40 absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property." 41 Michael Harvey said the statute no longer permits this. He assumes this is because 42 people found it difficult to prove no reasonable use of the property. He said applicants now 43 simply have to claim that the desired use is being impeded. 44 Commissioner Gordon referred to item 10.3 C. 45 Michael Harvey said this is direct language from the state law. 46 Commissioner Gordon referred to page 10, and conditions of approval. She said the 47 public health safety and general welfare language has been eliminated. 48 Michael Harvey said that language has been removed from the statute. 49 Commissioner Gordon asked if this means the public safety and general welfare could 50 then be not protected.