OCPB agenda 050218 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT AGENDA ITEM 7:UNIFIEDDEVELOPMENTORDINANCE(UDO)TEXTAMENDMENTS–SUBDIVISIONREVIEW150 PROCESS - To review government-initiatedamendments to the text of the UDO that will modify subdivision review 151 processes, in accordance with Session Law 2017-10. 152 153 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 154 155 Michael Harvey presented this item, which is on Page 54 of the agenda packet. He said neighborhood meetings give 156 the public an opportunity to ask questions. It also gives staff an opportunity to review and discuss at length the review 157 and approval process(for a given project). There are different requirements for neighborhood meetings in Orange 158 County. Staff is recommending keeping the neighborhood meeting for Major Telecommunications Tower Class A 159 (Special Use) Permits at 77 days before the public hearing. Staff is recommending bringing the other neighborhood 160 meetings into uniformity at 45 days before any meeting(public hearing). For conditional use districts, conditional 161 zoning districts and certain subdivisions, the datefor the meetingwill now be measured from the date of the 162 anticipated Planning Board meeting (where the project is slated for review) so that residents have time to prepare for 163 the Planning Board meeting. This creates a longer time period, separating the meeting dates out, so that residents 164 can articulate concerns. It also eliminates inconsistencies in the code. Staff is recommending that Class B 165 Telecommunications Tower Permits also be 45 days before the Board of Adjustment public hearing for uniformity. It 166 is now 42 days. 167 168 Hunter Spitzer asked why staff recommends keeping the 77-day requirement for the Class A Major 169 Telecommunications Tower Permits. 170 171 Michael Harvey answered those applications tend to be more controversial and require more information as well as 172 FCC approval and lighting of the tower, so it makes sense to require that neighborhood meeting be held further out. 173 174 Craig Benedict asked Michael Harvey to explain the difference between conditional use and conditional zoning, for 175 the benefit of new members who may not know. 176 177 Michael Harvey explained a conditional use district in the county’s code and under state law is a situation where 178 someone wants to build a gas station on property zoned residential and the county may like the gas station use(on 179 that property) but may not want the otherland uses that could be allowed if the property was rezoned(to a new non-180 residential general use zoning district). The property owner could request that the property be rezoned for that 181 specific use(development of a gas station). In a quasi-judicial setting, the property owner would show that he or she 182 complies with the code. Through the conditional use district process, only expert testimony is consideredand 183 decisions are made on said expert testimony. Under conditional zoning, the threshold for competent testimony is not 184 as high in that it does not require expert testimony. 185 186 Michael Harvey said for conditional zoning, the applicants seek approval for exactly how they plan to use the 187 property, including setting the setbacks, etc. And the board then votes to approve or deny the proposal. 188 189 190 191 192 193 Lydia N. Wegman, Chair194 9