Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
8 <br /> is working on this process. She said Kristen Smith Young is going to be the new Community <br /> Relations person (starting 4/23/19), and will also be a point of contact for the BOCC. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 5. Public Hearings <br /> a. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Table of Permitted Uses <br /> The Board considered holding a public hearing, receive the Planning Board <br /> recommendation, and take action on Planning Director initiated Unified Development Ordinance <br /> (UDO) text amendments to the tables of permitted land uses and other sections as needed. <br /> Specifically, the amendment collapses existing tables of permitted uses as contained in <br /> Section(s) 5.2.1 (general use zoning districts), 5.2.2 (EDD general use zoning districts), and <br /> 5.2.3 (Conditional Zoning districts) into a centralized table in order to clarify permitted and <br /> prohibited land uses consistent with recent court decisions. <br /> Michael Harvey, Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor, presented this item: <br /> PURPOSE: <br /> To hold a public hearing, receive the Planning Board recommendation, and take action on <br /> Planning Director initiated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text amendments to the <br /> tables of permitted land uses and other sections as needed. Specifically, the amendment <br /> collapses existing tables of permitted uses as contained in Section(s) 5.2.1 (general use zoning <br /> districts), 5.2.2 (EDD general use zoning districts), and 5.2.3 (Conditional Zoning districts) into a <br /> centralized table in order to clarify permitted and prohibited land uses consistent with recent <br /> court decisions. The amendment also updates existing regulations and addresses formatting <br /> issues to ensure legal sufficiency. <br /> BACKGROUND: This project was initiated to address the findings of the State Supreme Court <br /> in Byrd versus Franklin County related to the delineation of prohibited land uses. The court, in <br /> rendering its decision, placed the onus on local governments to 'spell out' what land uses were <br /> allowable and prohibited within their respective jurisdictions. A copy of the Court's ruling in the <br /> Franklin County case can be viewed at: https://www.nccourts.gov/documents/appellate- <br /> courtopinions/ byrd-et-al-v-fanklin-county. <br /> Work on the project began in the spring of 2017 with staff focusing on collapsing the existing <br /> tables and creating an `exhaustive list' of permitted and prohibited land uses. This was to <br /> address concerns from the Planning Director, Director of Economic Development, and several <br /> BOCC members over ensuring developers were readily able to `verify' if a proposed land use <br /> was permitted within the County. <br /> In August 2017, the BOCC held a work session with Planning staff and the County Attorney ton <br /> review the status of this project and provided the following direction: <br /> 1. Abandon the concept of an exhaustive list of allowable land uses; <br /> 2. Collapse, where feasible, similar land uses into single categories; <br /> 3. Review existing definitions to eliminate the reliance on `example land uses' with respect to <br /> outlining what constitutes a permitted land use within that category; and <br /> 4. Consolidate and eliminate, where feasible, duplicative references to regulations within the <br /> UDO. <br /> The Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) reviewed this item at several ORC <br /> meetings beginning in January 2017. Agenda materials from these various meetings can be <br />