Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />In response to a new opinion issued by the N.C. Court of Appeals in July 2014, the <br />• Planning Board has provided a written recommendation to the BOCC addressing plan <br />consistency (Attachment 5, pp. 24 -25); and <br />• The BOCC must also approve a consistency statement (Attachment 6, pp. 26 -27). <br />Manager's Recommendation <br />• Receive the Planning Board Statement of Consistency and recommendation of <br />approval. <br />• Close the public hearing. <br />• Adopt the BOCC Statement of Consistency (Attachment 6, pp. 26 -27). <br />• Adopt the ordinance (Attachment 7, pp. 28 -29) approving the zoning atlas amendment. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to: <br />1. Receive the Planning Board Statement of Consistency and recommendation of approval; <br />2. Close the public hearing; <br />3. Adopt the BOCC Statement of Consistency (Attachment 6); and <br />4. Adopt the ordinance (Attachment 7) approving the zoning atlas amendment. <br />Commissioner Dorosin said he will vote against this for same reasons stated in the <br />previous motion. <br />VOTE: 6 -1 (Commissioner Dorosin) <br />c. Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment — Public Hearing Process <br />Changes — Interim Report and Closure of Hearing <br />The Board opened the public hearing, received the information contained in this abstract <br />and attachments, and closed the public hearing on a Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) <br />text amendment that proposed changes to the public hearing process (presented at the <br />September 8, 2014 Quarterly Public Hearing). <br />Perdita Holtz said this item was heard at the September 8th quarterly public hearing and <br />was referred to the Planning Board. She said this has been discussed extensively, and the <br />flowchart in attachment 2 outlines a new process for legislative items. She said this process <br />captures what the Planning Board discussed in October. <br />Perdita Holtz said last night the Planning Board discussed a potential new process for <br />quasi - judicial items, and although there is no flowchart, this would generally follow the cadence <br />of the attachment 2 flowchart. <br />She said the reason for the recommended closure of the public hearing is because the <br />proposed public hearing is likely to change enough to necessitate re- advertising it for a new <br />presentation at a future public hearing date. <br />Commissioner Rich asked if any members of the public were in attendance while the <br />Planning Board discussed this. <br />Perdita Holtz said no. <br />Commissioner Rich said she does not feel that there has been enough outreach to the <br />public regarding this process. <br />Chair Jacobs noted that the discussion is not ending, just being deferred to another <br />date. <br />Commissioner Rich asked for an explanation on the reason for deferring it. <br />