OCPB minutes 040115 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 7/1/2015 4 Lydia Wegman: There is no provision for neighborhood information meetings, is that correct? 163 164 Perdita Holtz: There is if you are doing a special use permit application or rezoning application which is a 165 requirement. It is in Section 2.7. 166 167 Lydia Wegman: On page 25, Base Zoning Districts, on the ASE-CZ, is there a definition of compatibility, and then it 168 says thus ensuring and I think that should be en and not in, is there a definition of compatibility, continued 169 conservation, building values or appropriate use of land. 170 171 Perdita Holtz: There is not but the applicability section was taken from existing language in others. It is a legislative 172 decision as to what is compatible. 173 174 Lydia Wegman: Is there any history to what the BOCC would consider? 175 176 Perdita Holtz: Not that I can speak to off the top of my head. It is a case by case. 177 178 Pete Hallenbeck: It is so hard to get everything down in English. A lot of these compatibility issues means if it is a 179 close call it is at the discretion of the BOCC. When we look at all these changes I like to look at th e rules and format. 180 What are the rules and then there is the content. Is the general setup and format acceptable in terms of rules and 181 are there specific things in the table of permitted uses I don’t like and use that as a way to clarify. 182 183 Lisa Stuckey: On page 14, the towns recommended the four uses that we deleted from the rural buffer. What was 184 their thinking? 185 186 Perdita Holtz: I went to seven meetings with the Town of Carrboro for this discussion. It came down to some of them 187 wanted to vote for something and they wanted this to go forward and so they asked their colleagues what their 188 reservations were and that is what they came up with. 189 190 Pete Hallenbeck: It would be interesting to get a current inventory of any agricultural facilities within the rur al buffer 191 that have buildings over 5,000 square feet which would address your setbacks. Another one would be a scatter plot 192 of lots to see how many 100 and 200 acre lots that someone could turn into a farm. 193 194 Paul Guthrie: Is there any language in what you have been working on relative to a piece of property that is 195 legitimately classed as agricultural and wants to begin processing that is now currently under tax leniency? Is there a 196 requirement that the tax be paid before the permit is issued? 197 198 Perdita Holtz: To qualify for the tax value program, if they don’t meet the requirements of the tax value program, they 199 will probably drop the tax value for that portion of the property. 200 201 Lydia Wegman: Do you know of any farmers interested in these activities? 202 203 Perdita Holtz: We have had a few inquiries. 204 205 Pete Hallenbeck: I like the fact that the APB is involved. I like the rules on the format. There will always be 206 differences of opinion. 207 208 MOTION: Made by Buddy Hartley, seconded by Tony Blake 209 VOTE: (7-1) Lydia Wegman opposed. 210 211 Lydia Wegmen: I support some of the uses, but have concerns with a community meat processing facility and why it 212 should be included in the Rural Buffer. To me the Rural Buffer should remain rural and a place to come and relax, 213 enjoy the country. A meat processing facility does not fit into my view of the Rural Buffer. 214 215