Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
34 <br /> 1 • Eliminating the option for a "Conditional Use District" (CUD) from the UDO. Processing <br /> 2 CUD applications are reviewed using a mixture of legislative and quasi-judicial <br /> 3 processes, which can result in much confusion. Eliminating this type of process was <br /> 4 one of the impetuses for the modernization of the statutes. In the 2000's, the NC <br /> 5 General Assembly amended the statutes to allow for"Conditional Zoning Districts" <br /> 6 which, arguably, negated the need for CUDs. (As a note, "conditional zoning districts" <br /> 7 are now called "conditional districts" as a result of the terms used in NCGS Chapter <br /> 8 160D.) <br /> 9 o Staff proposes to add two new Conditional Districts to the UDO to replace the <br /> 10 CUD — a residential conditional district (R-CD) and a non-residential conditional <br /> 11 district (NR-CD). <br /> 12 o Elimination of the CUD will result in a reorganization of how major subdivisions <br /> 13 are defined in Article 7 and the review process followed, but the review and <br /> 14 approving staff/boards remain the same. <br /> 15 • Having just one class of Special Use Permit (SUP) and having SUPs heard and decided <br /> 16 upon only by the Board of Adjustment (BOA) as the BOA is best suited to conduct <br /> 17 quasi-judicial matters. <br /> 18 oThere are currently Class A and Class B SUP uses. Class A uses are heard by <br /> 19 the Board of County Commissioners (with a recommendation by the Planning <br /> 20 Board) and Class B uses are heard by the BOA. <br /> 21 o Instead of having the BOCC conducting quasi-judicial matters, uses that currently <br /> 22 require a Class A SUP would instead be approved via new conditional districts, <br /> 23 which are legislative decisions. The BOCC would still be the decision-maker <br /> 24 for these uses, with review and recommendation by the Planning Board, only <br /> 25 the review process is different. <br /> 26 ■ The one exception to this is for "Short Term Rental, Large — Host <br /> 27 Occupied" <br /> 28 • Current Class A SUP use in AR & R-1 proposed to remain a SUP <br /> 29 use in these districts. These potential uses are defined as <br /> 30 providing more than three guestrooms for up to one week of <br /> 31 rental or lease. The host-occupied nature of the use does not <br /> 32 seem to warrant discontinuation of an SUP option in the AR & <br /> 33 R-1 districts. Review/decision would change from BOCC to <br /> 34 BOA. <br /> 35 • Additionally, could be reviewed via a conditional district which <br /> 36 would be reviewed by the BOCC. (As a note, many uses have <br /> 37 more than one way to be approved, as denoted in the Table of <br /> 38 Permitted Uses [Section 5.2 of UDO]). <br /> 39 oThe draft PowerPoint presentation in Attachment 6 includes charts listing the <br /> 40 uses that currently require Class A and Class B Special Use Permits. <br /> 41 o Note: This is an aspect of the amendments that is not strictly required by Chapter <br /> 42 160D but is a best practice in North Carolina and recommended by the <br /> 43 County's legal staff. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 As noted above, amendments to Appendix F of the Comprehensive Plan and to the Planning <br /> 46 Board's and Board of Adjustment's Rules of Procedure are necessary as a result of the UDO <br /> 47 amendments. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are included in <br /> 48 Attachment 2 while the Planning Board's Rules of Procedure amendments are in Attachment 3. <br /> 49 <br /> 50 Joint Planning Area (JPA) Review: In accordance with the Joint Planning Agreement with the <br /> 51 Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, the amendment package was sent to Town staffs on <br />