Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved 10/7/20 <br /> 1 SUMMARY NOTES <br /> 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD <br /> 3 SEPTEMBER 2,2020 <br /> 4 ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE/TRAINING SESSION <br /> 5 <br /> 6 NOTE: A quorum is not required for Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee meetings or Training Sessions. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Due to current public health concerns, the ORC meeting/training session was virtual. Members of the Planning <br /> 9 Board and staff participated in the meeting remotely. <br /> 10 <br /> 11 MEMBERS PRESENT: David Blankfard (Chair), Hillsborough Township Representative; Adam Beeman (Vice-Chair), <br /> 12 Cedar Grove Township Representative; Kim Piracci, Eno Township Representative; Susan Hunter, Chapel Hill <br /> 13 Township Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Randy Marshall, At-Large <br /> 14 Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large Representative; Alexandra Allman, At-Large Representative; Melissa <br /> 15 Poole, Little River Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township Representative <br /> 16 <br /> 17 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey, <br /> 18 Current Planning Supervisor; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant III <br /> 19 <br /> 20 OTHERS PRESENT: Daniel Arneman; Jon Lorusso; Janet Marks; 1 caller <br /> 21 <br /> 22 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER <br /> 23 <br /> 24 AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENTS-"160D" LEGISLATION-To receive <br /> 25 an overview on upcoming amendments related to State legislation that is referred to as 160D <br /> 26 (a reference to the statute section). The expected timeline for the Planning Board <br /> 27 recommendation and BOCC public hearing has not yet been determined, but is expected this <br /> 28 fall. <br /> 29 PRESENTER: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator <br /> 30 <br /> 31 Perdita Holtz presented a PowerPoint Presentation on proposed amendments to the UDO due to new legislation <br /> 32 referred to as "160D" <br /> 33 <br /> 34 There were concerns expressed regarding the sole use of print media for notification of large-scale map <br /> 35 amendments. Perdita explained that it would be an option in certain instances and that the word could get out via <br /> 36 other means, such as social media, rather than through mailed notices to potentially thousands of people. She <br /> 37 discussed times in the past when FEMA flood maps were updated, necessitating mailed notices to several <br /> 38 thousand people within 1,000 feet of affected parcels when the amendments were required to be made and had no <br /> 39 or limited impact on adjacent property owners. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 The Planning Board members were asked if they would like to see the 300+ pages of changes come back to the <br /> 42 ORC review prior to going to a Regular Planning Board meeting with the understanding that there will be limited <br /> 43 ability to make changes required by the State. If it goes to a regular meeting it could be continued but if ok with the <br /> 44 300+ pages, a recommendation could be made that night. <br /> 45 <br /> 46 Jon Lorusso addressed the Board about notifications of projects and pointed out that newspapers are not the best <br /> 47 way to advertise the legal ads as readerships are down two thirds. He would have liked to have heard about the <br /> 48 RTLP sooner, he did not receive a letter. He said the Planning Board site is not adequate, it's too much text, it's not <br /> 49 organized very well and he thinks the public needs to be engaged in a better way. He didn't want to say the <br /> 50 Planning Board or County is trying to hide information but thinks the County would want to keep the public informed <br /> 1 <br />