Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-13-2016-13-3 - Information Item - Memorandum - Joint Planning Agreement – Chapel Hill Planning Commission Membership
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Agendas
>
Agendas
>
2016
>
Agenda - 12-13-2016
>
Agenda - 12-13-2016-13-3 - Information Item - Memorandum - Joint Planning Agreement – Chapel Hill Planning Commission Membership
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2016 3:52:53 PM
Creation date
11/1/2017 10:11:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/13/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
13-3
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
2 <br /> Commission within 90 days of a vacancy. To date, the Town has not exercised this <br /> option. <br /> The County Clerk's office has run the normal advisory board member recruitment <br /> process more than once for the positions but, to date, no applications have been <br /> submitted. <br /> The Town of Chapel Hill has continued the public hearing on the proposed LUMO until <br /> January 9, 2017 "to allow time for additional coordination with Orange County staff to <br /> ensure the text amendment meets the spirit and intent of the Joint Planning Agreement <br /> between the Town and Orange County." The Town has not yet adopted the proposed <br /> LUMO amendment so no appointment has been made to the Town's Planning <br /> Commission. In regards to planning commission membership, State statutes require <br /> that the planning commission contain a minimum of three members. Additionally, <br /> statutes require proportional (by population) representation of ETJ residents with a <br /> minimum of one ETJ member. The ETJ member(s) are appointed by the county board <br /> of commissioners. The statutes also provide that if "there is an insufficient number of <br /> qualified residents of the ETJ to meet membership requirements, the board of county <br /> commissioners may appoint as many other residents of the county as necessary to <br /> make up the requisite number." <br /> The JPA provides the opportunity for the County to provide comments or objections to <br /> the Town for all LUMO amendments. Planning staff's response in Attachment 2 <br /> includes this information: <br /> • Adding another position to the Planning Board for a Chapel Hill resident could <br /> result in "dilution" of the voice of ETJ/JPA residents who already feel at a <br /> disadvantage because they do not vote for the political board (e.g., Town <br /> Council) which ultimately exerts land use and zoning authority over them. It <br /> would seem that other solutions to the quorum issues may exist, such as: <br /> o Chapel Hill implementing the language in the Dec. 2015 JPA <br /> amendment which allows the Town Council to [appoint] members to <br /> the board if [a] seat remains vacant for too long. <br /> o Revising the quorum requirement to be, instead of an absolute <br /> number, a majority of seated members. <br /> Attachments (3) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.