Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved 4/3/19 <br /> 447 <br />Alexander Gregory commented that the likes the point that it makes. 448 <br /> 449 <br />Randy Marshall asked whether there was pressure to complete this. Mr. Harvey stated, yes. 450 <br /> 451 <br />Alexander Gregory stated his faith in the attorney’s judgement but questioned if they attorney would make the final call 452 <br />or if it would make a full circle. 453 <br /> 454 <br />Michael Harvey provided the option that they could technically adjourn the meeting to a day time certain reconvene in 455 <br />two weeks in order to get the attorney’s comments. 456 <br /> 457 <br />Adam Beeman asked whether they would have a chance to discuss their concerns with the attorney or just receive 458 <br />comments. Mr. Beeman voiced his desire to have a discussion with the County Attorney. Michael Harvey replied that 459 <br />they could request the attorney be present and reiterated the option of reconvening to March 20th. 460 <br /> 461 <br />Paul Guthrie spoke on burden and stated it could only be valued by the vote of the commissioners. Mr. Harvey replied 462 <br />that Mr. Guthrie was correct. Mr. Guthrie described it as a self-serving definition. Mr. Harvey stated it certainly would 463 <br />be up to the Board of Adjustment members and Board of County Commissioners to determine if that burden had been 464 <br />met. 465 <br /> 466 <br />Paul Guthrie question why it was not said that way instead of the other way around. Mr. Harvey, acknowledged that it 467 <br />was a good question but stated he did not have an answer. 468 <br /> 469 <br />Michael Harvey asked if everyone would be available in two weeks and asked for confirmation that he was hearing that 470 <br />it was the board’s interest to adjourn the meeting to March 20th at 7:00 p.m. in order to ask the attorney to be present 471 <br />to answer questions or if absent, to provide sufficient documentation articulating why burden of persuasion is 472 <br />necessary. 473 <br /> 474 <br />Lydia Wegman clarified that they not only wanted a statement, but an addition to the ordinance clarifying the meaning 475 <br />and why he felt compelled to add it. 476 <br /> 477 <br />Michael Harvey asked whether he was also hearing that the board is interested in modifying the UDO to expand retreat 478 <br />center activities in commercial districts. 479 <br /> 480 <br />Adam Beeman remarked he would motion that. 481 <br /> 482 <br />Lydia Wegman stated she would agree to that. 483 <br /> 484 <br />Carrie Fletcher stated she felt more strongly about the first than the second. 485 <br /> 486 <br />Michael Harvey questioned whether that was the interest of the board members. 487 <br /> 488 <br />Lydia Wegman stated she would support that. 489 <br /> 490 <br />Alexander Gregory stated he agreed. 491 <br /> 492 <br />Michael Harvey asked it there was a motion. 493 <br /> 494 <br />Adam Beeman stated that he motioned that they be allowed in the commercial districts. 495 <br /> 496 <br />Michael Harvey gathered clarification on the motion from the group and noted that the board’s desire to: 497 <br /> 498 <br />1) Adjourn till March 20th at 7:00 p.m. meeting in the Planning Conference Room room 204 to have the County 499 <br />Attorney present and discuss why and potential changes to address the concern of what the term burden of 500 <br />persuasion means. 501 <br /> 502