Planning Board Special Meeting minutes 032019

Browse Search

Approved 4/3/19 MEETING MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 MARCH 20, 2019 3 SPECIAL MEETING 4 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lydia Wegman (Chair), At-Large Chapel Hill Township Representative; Kim Piracci, At-Large; 6 Adam Beeman, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township Representative; Patricia 7 Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Randy Marshall, Bingham 8 Township Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large; David Blankfard, Hillsborough Township Representative; 9 10 MEMBERS ABSENT: Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; 11 12 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning & Inspections Director; James Bryan, Staff Attorney; Michael Harvey, Current 13 Planning Supervisor; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant III 14 15 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 16 Chair Lydia Wegman called the meeting to order. 17 18 AGENDA ITEM 2: PUBLIC CHARGE 19 Chair Lydia Wegman waived the reading of the Public Charge 20 21 AGENDA ITEM 3: CHAIR COMMENTS 22 23 AGENDA ITEM 4: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – REORGANIZATION OF TABLES OF 24 PERMITTED USES – To continue review of and make a recommendation to the BOCC on proposed amendments to the 25 UDO that would reorganize the Tables of Permitted Uses in response to the Byrd v. Franklin County judicial decision and 26 modify other sections to ensure consistency within the ordinance. These amendments are scheduled for BOCC public 27 hearing on April 16, 2019. 28 29 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 30 31 Michael Harvey: I’m going to make a very brief summary. So obviously, you have an abstract outlining why we are here 32 this evening. There are tweaks that have been made to the packet and I want to review them very quickly. You also have 33 a revised attachment one that spells out the changes that have occurred within the proposed table. At your last meeting 34 there were concerns over the term burden of persuasion and what it meant. There were questions asked which I 35 forwarded to the attorney’s office. I’ll let Mr. Bryan speak to those in a moment. There was also a request to allow retreat 36 centers in additional non-residential zoning districts as permitted use, so you’ll note from the abstract we’ve allowed them 37 within the neighborhood commercial, community commercial, general commercial, Economic Development Buckhorn low 38 intensity, Economic Development Eno low intensity, Economic Development Hillsborough office retail districts at the 39 request of the Planning Director. There are tweaks to Section 2.10.3 and this is where we start getting into the discussion 40 on modifications adding language associated with an applicant’s burden of proof. As pointed out at the last meeting the 41 sentence reads as follows, ‘applicants shall have the burden of establishing by competent material and substantial 42 evidence in the form of testimony, exhibits, documents, models, plans and other materials, that the application meetings 43 the requirements for approval of a Variance it’s application meets’. So that is in Section 2.10.3 and 2.11.3 what I would 44 like the Board to do before we get into the discussion of burden of persuasion, because regardless of whatever happens 45 with burden of persuasion, I’d like there to be a motion to accept the amendment to Section 2.10.3 and Section 2.11.3 46 replacing meetings with meets. 47 48 Randy Marshall: So moved 49 50 MOTION by Randy Marshall to accept the amendment to Section 2.10.3 and Section 2.11.3 replacing meetings with meets. 51 Seconded by Carrie Fletcher. 52 VOTE: Unanimous 53 54 Michael Harvey: I would also like there to be a motion acknowledging and accepting the changes to the Table of 55 Permitted Uses that you saw last month to include Retreat Centers in the districts I named. 56