Browse
Search
Planning Board - 020321
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2021
>
Planning Board - 020321
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 8:04:28 PM
Creation date
6/15/2021 8:04:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/3/2021
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
D R A F T <br />Craig Benedict: We have noticed that cities have the ability to ask to clean up areas that become eyesores. Counties do 280 <br />not have that ability. We’re going to take a look at 160D which takes Counties and Cities makes them more similar. This 281 <br />something that Michael Harvey and I will take a look at and it would be implemented, if possible, in areas that are intended 282 <br />to have urban or city-like activities. 283 <br /> 284 <br />Carrie Fletcher: I live out in the country and you talk about a nuisance ordinance, trailer parks and old cars and letting 285 <br />properties fall apart is always an issue. I’m not against farmers not being able to keep up with property but still there are a 286 <br />lot of people that don’t want to have the neighbor that has 20 or 30 cars. Are you saying this won’t come out to rural 287 <br />Orange County? 288 <br /> 289 <br />Craig Benedict: We do have certain ordinances about cars, junk cars. There is an ordinance about that. This is more like 290 <br />if the grass is too long or the storage of material becomes what is known as an eyesore. There could be some standards 291 <br />that go to the rural areas but we have to be cautious with that for enforcement reasons. 292 <br /> 293 <br />Perdita Holtz: Just to be clear that 160D has to do with zoning, it does not have anything to do with the nuisance 294 <br />ordinances. Nuisance ordinances are not going to be something that a county can necessarily do outright under 160D. 295 <br />On the last two pages of the agenda materials, there are detailed explanations on these emerging issues and also the 296 <br />work plan. This is just a list on the PowerPoint, the more detailed list is in the packet. 297 <br /> 298 <br />Carrie Fletcher: On the climate change issue, the collaboration between the Commission for the Environment (CFE) and 299 <br />our Planning Board; I would love to see furtherance of those two agencies getting together. I think it could be a lot less 300 <br />disagreement because there are a lot of people on CFE that would like a lot of things furthered in Orange County but I also 301 <br />understand the roles of the commission and of the Planning Board. The Planning Board has a very specific role and I 302 <br />understand the distinction between the two. Maybe if there were more understanding and cohesion between the two it 303 <br />would be something to entertain going forward. 304 <br /> 305 <br />Craig Benedict: We’ll make note of that. 306 <br /> 307 <br />Kim Piracci: I would like to speak out in favor of the nuisance ordinance even though I have eight plus acres out here in 308 <br />the county and I don’t really want people telling me what I can do with it. However, there is a house down the road that 309 <br />basically, uses their yard as a dump and it looks like a dump and it smells like a dump and there is not really anything that 310 <br />can be done about it. While they have the freedom to use their place as a dump, it is affecting my property value. 311 <br /> 312 <br />Craig Benedict: It’s an energized topic, it’s a tricky issue especially for counties that have such a wide range of activities. 313 <br />We’ll keep it on the list. 314 <br /> 315 <br />Perdita Holtz: David, you mentioned something about post-COVID, it sounded like it was something about evaluating 316 <br />changes that emerge post-COVID and respond appropriately. 317 <br /> 318 <br />David Blankfard: Right, based on changing how offices work, how people gather. 319 <br /> 320 <br />Randy Marshall: I’ll second that. 321 <br /> 322 <br />Perdita Holtz: We probably need to get buy-in from the Planning Board on that and on Carrie’s request to work jointly with 323 <br />the CFE on climate change issues. 324 <br /> 325 <br />Carrie Fletcher: To clarify, it wouldn’t be just for climate change issues it would be for collaborative issues regarding any 326 <br />kind of expansion within the County itself. Maybe some kind of collaborative interaction that we could have that would find 327 <br />out about watershed issues that maybe someone more educated in that matter would be good to know prior to voting on 328 <br />things like this. That’s where I was headed with it. 329 <br /> 330 <br />Craig Benedict: We could add it to the list. To talk about collaborative relationships with particular boards. We think there 331 <br />is a need for that. We will move this topic about collaboration with other advisory boards as one of our applied topics. 332 <br /> 333 <br />David Blankfard: Can you put down, for example, the board that Carrie is referring, Commission for the Environment. 334 <br /> 335 <br />12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.