Orange County NC Website
<br />2 <br /> 55 <br />Craig Benedict: One other use type is Prohibited Use. 56 <br /> 57 <br />Michael Harvey: Well, in those instances where you don’t see a hash tag, a B, an A, or any designation that means the use in 58 <br />prohibited in that district. So for example, on Attachment 3, Agricultural Processing Facility, you’ll note that there’s nothing 59 <br />checked in the rural buffer, the agriculture residential, the R1 or R2 zoning districts. That means it’s prohibited. You see check 60 <br />marks in Agriculture Services, or AS, I1, I2, I3; those are our industrial districts. Those are the only four general districts you’re 61 <br />allowed to have an agricultural processing facility. You’ll also notice it’s allowed within the AG Service Enterprise conditional 62 <br />zone and the Master Plan conditional zone districts. But, that’s it. Everywhere else it’s prohibited. So if you don’t have a mark, 63 <br />don’t have a note, don’t have squat in the box it’s prohibited. And there’s going to be language added to the UDO clarifying 64 <br />that. 65 <br /> 66 <br />Craig Benedict: And in the past we used to have it not listed at all and we said it’s prohibited, it’s not listed. Now we have to go 67 <br />in there and list it and leave it blank. 68 <br /> 69 <br />Michael Harvey: And I’ll just remind the Board we are not the only community in this predicament. Every town and county in 70 <br />North Carolina is dealing and wrestling with the same issue. So it’s nothing unique or new. Now you can get into a 71 <br />philosophical argument about whether or not we should have always been doing it this way, not Orange County but globally, 72 <br />and that’s a waste of time because I can get ten lawyers in a room and they’re all going to have a different opinion about how 73 <br />the Statute should have been interpreted so we’re beyond that, we’re fixing the problem. 74 <br /> 75 <br />Michal Harvey continued reviewing abstract. 76 <br /> 77 <br />Tony Blake: The one thing I noticed when I read through this was there’s no mention of wedding venues. 78 <br /> 79 <br />Michael Harvey: That’s already covered under the retreat center definition. 80 <br /> 81 <br />Tony Blake: It I covered under the retreat center but it’s not in the AG area. So what I’m wondering is there, given the pending 82 <br />situation, I’m wondering if that is amiss, or is it intentional? 83 <br /> 84 <br />Michael Harvey: I still believe that in fortune of the court, either the court or the general assembly is going to take that out of 85 <br />our hands. 86 <br /> 87 <br />Tony Blake: Ok, but I mean because it’s not listed there it’s permitted by right. 88 <br /> 89 <br />Michael Harvey: No, it’s captured under the definition under retreat center, and because of that you have to be a retreat center 90 <br />to do that type of activity. 91 <br /> 92 <br />Tony Blake: Ok. 93 <br /> 94 <br />Michael Harvey: We’re not going to list. It’s sort of like with recreation facilities; we’re not listing out every recreation facility, it’s 95 <br />captured in the definition section of Article 10. And that is perfectly reasonable to list those uses there instead of just having… 96 <br /> 97 <br />Tony Blake: So that’s like inaudible everything in NAICS code 721, for example. 98 <br /> 99 <br />Michael Harvey: It picks up the uses we feel were necessary to incorporate into the UDO, yes. 100 <br /> 101 <br />Tony Blake: Ok. 102 <br /> 103 <br />Lydia Wegman: Can I go back one second? Do you see any concern with losing the conditional use process? 104 <br /> 105 <br />Michael Harvey: No. It’s never been used in Orange County. It’s a convoluted process to begin with. It was never popular. It 106 <br />was actually created several years ago to counter spot zoning as a hybrid. There were several court cases where it was 107 <br />deemed to be “legal” but nobody, including the Institute government folks who were championing it, liked it. And it was 108 <br /> 6