Browse
Search
ORC minutes 070517
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Ordinance Review Committee
>
Minutes
>
2017
>
ORC minutes 070517
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2018 11:51:15 AM
Creation date
8/29/2018 11:51:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
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.
/
12
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
<br />6 <br />details in the Table, it is better to have Construction Offices as a category, and then spell-out storage in the actual Article 5 270 <br />provisions and district standards. So, what is listed in the Table, as the Committee sees it, will be moved to Article 5. The next 271 <br />category for review is Extractive Uses, a topic of much discussion over the years. Michael defined Extractive Uses as taking 272 <br />anything out of the ground, mining anything out of the ground, including gas, rock, ore, whatever. Planning is likely pre-empted 273 <br />from state law from engaging in a lot of regulatory detail with this. It is Mr. Harvey’s considered opinion that after proposing 274 <br />this organizational layout where we listed “no on-site processing,” (not permitted) and “on-site processing” that a better way to 275 <br />lay this out will be for Extracted Uses to be the category, and then Article 5 will state a prohibition of on-site processing, which 276 <br />is what we currently have and will leave as is. 277 <br /> 278 <br />Tony Blake noticed that under the category of Construction, grading, earth-moving and the like are not included. 279 <br /> 280 <br />Michael Harvey responded that while those activities are not specifically listed – 281 <br /> 282 <br />Paul Guthrie asked about Chapel Hill Gravel and Cape Granite gravel pits. 283 <br /> 284 <br />Michael Harvey asked if he meant American Stone off of Highway 54 kind-of-example. 285 <br /> 286 <br />Paul Guthrie responded that no, he was thinking about the one off of Damascus Church Road (Merritt’s Gravel Pit, Inc). 287 <br /> 288 <br />Michael Harvey replied that that is in Carrboro’s zoning jurisdiction, but that it is a good example for this discussion. The best 289 <br />example of what has been permitted in the County is American Stone off of Highway 54, which is allowed to do incidental 290 <br />processing (i.e. the breaking up of rock into smaller rock). The Ordinance does not allow for - and what we want to avoid is - 291 <br />putting in an asphalt plant to take the rock and mix it with chemicals to turn it into asphalt. If you are allowed to get gas, the 292 <br />only option is converting it or using it for some other purpose on-site, other than the gas being mined and then being directly 293 <br />removed. 294 <br /> 295 <br />Paul Guthrie said that this aspect is also regulated in effect, because when the pits are empty, they could become a water 296 <br />supply. He said that we do not want contamination while they are doing their stone work. 297 <br /> 298 <br />Michael Harvey agreed that the goal is that there is no contamination. He pointed to the quarry off of NC Highway 57 which 299 <br />has been there many, many years. He recalled that there was a movement when he first started with the County in 2005 to 300 <br />develop an asphalt plant at the facility. Planning Staff wrote a very long, in-depth letter to not only the applicant but also to the 301 <br />state to say that the Ordinance did not allow for this activity. 302 <br /> 303 <br />Tony Blake asked if the County was sued after this letter was sent. 304 <br /> 305 <br />Michael Harvey responded that no, they were anticipating that they may get sued, but the project never materialized. He 306 <br />thinks that the ultimate goal in this category is to be consistent with the overall purpose and intent of the existing regulation. 307 <br />He acknowledged that there will still be extraction of earth products, but the first condition under Article 5 is going to be no on-308 <br />site processing, with appropriate language to address Paul’s observation that Planning is not trying to prohibit incidental 309 <br />manufacturing of mined product. However, this incidental product will not be allowed to be further processed it into asphalt or 310 <br />another product. Mr. Harvey continued his presentation and discussed the category of Financial Institutions. He said that the 311 <br />following question came-up: Are we really going to prohibit pawn shops, currency exchange, and payday loan? Planning Staff 312 <br />is recommending that these land uses be prohibited. He reminded the Committee that per recent court decision, Planning 313 <br />Staff is obligated to list uses that are prohibited. If a land use category is not listed or somehow not captured within the land 314 <br />use category as Staff defines them, it is viewed and deemed to be permitted by law. 315 <br /> 316 <br />Paul Guthrie asked about currency exchange. What is Staff’s definition? 317 <br /> 318 <br />Michael Harvey defined currency exchange as the conversion of cash by a place that is not a bank. 319 <br /> 320 <br />Paul Guthrie noted that there are several of these places in Orange County, most of which are in city jurisdictions. He said 321 <br />there is a place off of Mount Carmel Church Road, a little old gas station that is now a store. It also advertises the sending of 322 <br />money to various places. He asked if this place of business is what Mr. Harvey was referring. 323
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.