Agenda 05-21-19 8-a - Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

10 1 project fact sheet, including frequently asked questions, concerning the impacts of this 2 amendment package. 3 4 Analysis: As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to: `... 5 cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis, prepare a 6 recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of County 7 Commissioners'. 8 9 The amendments are necessary to address the legal sufficiency of the UDO with respect to the 10 findings of Byrd versus Franklin by spelling out allowable and prohibited land uses. Staff is 11 eliminating the unnecessarily repetitive, and often confusing, delineation of allowable land uses 12 by creating a central table of permitted uses and has combined similar land uses into single 13 categories to ensure uniformity with respect to application of development criteria and 14 permitting. 15 16 Planning Board Recommendation: The Board began review of the finalized amendment 17 package at its March 6, 2019 regular meeting, with continued discussion at a special meeting 18 held on March 20 to allow for additional review on Attorney recommended language associated 19 with the burden of persuasion for certain processes (i.e. variances, interpretations, and special 20 use permits). The Attorney prepared a memo for Board review, which is contained in 21 Attachment 4. 22 23 At the March 20 special meeting, the Planning Board voted 7-1 to recommend approval of the 24 amendments with the elimination of language in Section(s) 2.10.3, 2.11.3, and 5.3.2 25 establishing a `burden of persuasion' for those applying for a variance, interpretation, or special 26 use permit. In recommending approval, members indicated they were not comfortable keeping 27 language referencing an applicant's `burden of persuasion' as they were unpersuaded by the 28 County Attorney's arguments the language was necessary. An excerpt of the minutes from the 29 March 3 and 20, 2019 meetings, as well as the Planning Board's approved Statement of 30 Consistency, are contained within Attachment 5. 31 32 Planning Director Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the 33 Statement of Consistency (Attachment 6) and the Ordinance amending the UDO (Attachment 7 34 including 7-a, 7-b and 7-c) which includes the language within Section(s) 2.10.3, 2.11.3, and 35 5.3.2 establishing a `burden of persuasion'. Staff is recommending keeping language, as 36 recommended by the County Attorney, concerning the `burden of persuasion' in Section(s) 37 2.10.3, 2.11.3, and 5.3.2. 38 39 The Director believes the language is necessary to ensure the legal sufficiency of the UDO, as 40 indicated by the County Attorney, by spelling out an applicant's obligations when applying for a 41 variance, interpretation, and special use permit. 42 43 It should be noted that Attachment 7 consists of three parts, with Attachments 7-a and 7-b 44 attached to this abstract and also available electronically at: 45 http://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7012. 46 47 Attachment 7-c containing the Strikethrough/Delete/Underlined/ Highlighted Text 48 Amendments pages from the UDO are only available electronically at 49 http://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenterNiew/7012.