Agenda - 09-02-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

7 1 Additionally, there was discussion over the proposal by staff to add the "option to mailed notice 2 for large-scale zoning map amendments" (NCGS 160D-602(b) to the UDO (Section 2.8.7(D)(1)). 3 Staff has prepared information (Attachment 4) to help inform discussions on both of these 4 issues. 5 6 Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this item at its April 7, 2021 7 regular meeting and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendments. 8 Materials and links related to the Planning Board's review were part of the May 4 public hearing 9 materials. 10 11 Board of Adjustment Review of Rules of Procedure: The Board of Adjustment (BOA) began 12 review of the revisions to its Rules of Procedure (ROP) at its April 12, 2021 meeting and will 13 continue review at a subsequent meeting. Materials for these meetings are available at: 14 http://orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/Board-of-Adjustment-24. As a quasi-judicial board, 15 the BOA has amendment authority over its ROP. 16 17 Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the: 18 1. Statement of Approval and Consistency indicating the text amendments are 19 reasonable and in the public interest as contained in Attachment 1. 20 2. Amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and 2030 21 Comprehensive Plan as contained in Attachment 2. 22 3. Amendments to the Planning Board's Rules of Procedure as contained in 23 Attachment 3. 24 25 Perdita Holtz, Planner, said this item is to further consider the UDO Amendments 26 needed to conform to a new chapter of the state statute, 160-D. She said a Public Hearing on 27 the amendments was held on May 4, 2021, where discussion focused on revisions to public 28 notice requirements. She said, as a result of the discussion, staff prepared attachment 4 of the 29 agenda abstract. She said depending on the type of review, Orange County's review process 30 includes neighborhood information meetings (not required by state statutes); notices mailed to 31 residents who lives within 1000 feet of a subject property; as well as signs for the neighborhood 32 information meetings; and mailing notices of planning board meetings (not required by state 33 statutes). She said State statute only requires mailed notices for public hearings to abutting 34 property owners. She said there is no staff recommendation to scale back the mailed notices to 35 state required minimums. She said in Orange County, at least two mailed notices are sent out. 36 She said the current proposed revision is to reduce the minimum of 15 days notice to 10 days, 37 in keeping with the statutory language. 38 Perdita Holtz said the second topic is the alternative notice to mailed notice for large- 39 scale map amendments. She said at the public hearing, some Commissioners wanted to 40 include parameters on when the alternative option may be used. She said staff suggested two: 41 first, add language that would allow alternative notices only on County initiated amendments; or 42 second, only if mailing has already occurred earlier in a project process, which would include 43 things like public outreach meetings, neighborhood information meetings, or the planning board 44 meeting. She said the Manager recommends the Board approve the Statement of Consistency, 45 the UDO plan amendments, and the amendments to the Planning Board's Rules of Procedure. 46 Commissioner Bedford said she is willing to let go of newspaper ads versus mailings, 47 and the BOCC can go back and change it if it is not working. She said she does not think the 48 15 days should go down to 10 days, due to possible mail delays. She asked if there is a 49 process reason for this, other than being aligned with state statute. 50 51 Commissioner Dorosin exited the meeting at 7:38 p.m.