Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-15-2014 - 6a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2014
>
Agenda - 04-15-2014 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 04-15-2014 - 6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/11/2014 11:44:56 AM
Creation date
4/11/2014 11:43:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/15/2014
Meeting Type
Budget Sessions
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 04-15-2014
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
41 <br /> 1 <br /> 2 Perdita Holtz reviewed the land use map and said this amendment applies to all of the <br /> 3 areas outside of the rural buffer and outside of the municipalities, which includes: Bingham <br /> 4 Township, Cheeks Township, Eno Township, Hillsborough Township, Cedar Grove Township <br /> 5 and Little River Township. <br /> 6 Referring to the slide titled, "Permitted Outright vs. SUP or Conditional Zoning", she said <br /> 7 "permitted outright" means that approvals are done by staff. <br /> 8 Referring to the slide titled "Conditional Zoning District (ASE-CZ)", Perdita Holtz said <br /> 9 projects can be considered on a case by case site specific basis. She said this is still a <br /> 10 legislative process, which includes a public hearing; however it does allow Commissioners to <br /> 11 have more discretion on whether projects are approved or not. <br /> 12 Perdita Holtz said the proposed change in the groundwater usage standard language is <br /> 13 a result of comments made at the public information meeting held last week. She said the new <br /> 14 wording attempts to clarify that groundwater usage is being looked at on an annual basis, and to <br /> 15 account for the fact that some areas of the County do not allow a density of one unit per acre. <br /> 16 She said there is a "for example" included in the language in an attempt to be as clear as <br /> 17 possible. She said the change from "will" to "are expected to" comes from conversations with <br /> 18 the consultants who would be doing the groundwater studies. <br /> 19 She said, in response to input requested by the Board regarding possible removal of the <br /> 20 more intensive uses, the agricultural preservation board felt that there are places in the County <br /> 21 where the more intensive uses might be acceptable, and that the conditional zoning or special <br /> 22 use process would allow for any issues to be addressed. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 James Bryan, County Attorney, said he has advised staff, and he would like to advise <br /> 25 the Board that the attorney's office has found that this is legally insufficient, and parts of it would <br /> 26 be unenforceable. He said if the Board adopts it and there is litigation, there is a high likelihood <br /> 27 of an unfavorable outcome. <br /> 28 Chair Jacobs asked how this got all the way to a public hearing before this was <br /> 29 discovered by the attorney's office. <br /> 30 James Bryan said there was agreement to disagree. <br /> 31 Perdita Holtz said there was a meeting back in August regarding his concerns about <br /> 32 some of the definitions of non- farm use of farm equipment. She said staff asked if James <br /> 33 Bryan would provide some legally sufficient language, but the attorney's office did not want to <br /> 34 interject into policy. She said she and Michael Harvey have discussed this and both feel that <br /> 35 proper discretion goes a long way in enforcing what is an obvious business use, versus a farmer <br /> 36 who grades one road a year. She said this is where the County's attorney had concerns. She <br /> 37 said there is some discretion allowed in enforcing this. <br /> 38 Chair Jacobs said it is insufficient to have this come up at a public hearing, and this <br /> 39 needs to be fixed. <br /> 40 Commissioner Gordon asked for the specific areas James Bryan is referring to. <br /> 41 James Bryan said it is not that he does not want to inject policy. He said this is purely a <br /> 42 legal issue and his legal advice is to pull these definitions. He said there are three definitions <br /> 43 related to permitted-by-right, and these are: non-farming use of farm equipment, meat <br /> 44 processing and the farm stand. He said all of these definitions say it has to be on a bona-fide <br /> 45 farm. He said the state statutes about bona fide farms are very lenient. He said there is no line <br /> 46 at all in this, and it is not statutorily correct. <br /> 47 Commissioner Gordon asked about the PowerPoint and the use specific standards on <br /> 48 the bottom of page 4. She asked if, in the ASE-CZ, there are any uses in which all of the <br /> 49 standards are eliminated and it is entirely a case by case basis. <br /> 50 Perdita Holtz said no. <br /> 51 Commissioner Gordon asked if the standard for major roads is ever eliminated. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.