Browse
Search
ORC agenda 020117
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Ordinance Review Committee
>
Agendas
>
2017
>
ORC agenda 020117
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2018 11:55:16 AM
Creation date
8/29/2018 11:37:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/1/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
125
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
proposing to initiate text amendments to clarify allowable and prohibited land uses <br />within the various general use zoning districts throughout the County. <br />These amendments are in response to recent court decisions, most notably action by <br />the State Supreme Court in Byrd versus Franklin County, placing the onus on local <br />governments to have sufficient specificity ‘spelling out’ allowable and prohibited land <br />uses. <br />This outline form was originally reviewed and approved by the BOCC at its May 5, <br />2016 regular meeting. Recent discussions between the Director and the Attorney’s <br />office, as well as on-going amendments, have required a reevaluation of the project. <br />Agenda materials from the May 5, 2016 regular meeting can be viewed at: <br />http://www.orangecountync.gov/document_center/BOCCAgendaMinutes/160505.pdf <br /> <br /> <br />2. Analysis <br />As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to: <br />‘cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis, <br />prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of <br />County Commissioners’. <br />In November of 2015 the State Supreme Court in Byrd versus Franklin County <br />rejected arguments that the mere omission/listing of a particular land use within a <br />table of permitted uses constituted a prohibition of same. The Court stated: ‘…. law <br />favors uninhibited free use of private property over government restrictions’. A copy <br />of the Court’s ruling in the Franklin County case can be viewed <br />at: https://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=1&pdf=33680. <br />Originally the amendment was intended to clarify allowed/prohibited land uses, <br />provide additional specificity, and ensure uniformity. Recently the Director, in <br />responding to comments from the Attorney’s office, determined the scope of the <br />project needed to change and will now involve: <br />1. Incorporating the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) <br />land use classification system into the UDO, consistent with text <br />amendments reviewed at the September 12, 2016 quarterly public hearing <br />and slated for continued review and the BOCCs November 1, 2016 regular <br />meeting. <br />Agenda materials from the quarterly public hearing can be viewed <br />at: http://www.orangecountync.gov/document_center/BOCCAgendaMinute <br />s/160912QPH.pdf. <br />Additional information on the NAICS code can be viewed <br />at: http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/. <br />2. Expanding the list of non-residential land uses (i.e. agricultural, medical, <br />recreational, residential land uses) to comply with the findings of Byrd. <br />3. Collapsing the general use, EDD general use, and Conditional Zoning <br />district tables of permitted uses (Sections 5.2.1, 5.2.2, and 5.2.3 <br />respectively) into one central table in order to decrease anticipated page <br />counts and avoid unnecessary duplication. <br />As a result, the schedule for this was revised. <br /> 7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.