Agenda - 09-05-2023; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

14 1 At the May 3 meeting,the Board voted 7-3 to recommend denial of the Statement of Consistency 2 and the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment(Attachment 6). The rationale of the recommendation 3 for denial was due to stated inconsistencies with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use 4 Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 3.1, 3.2, and 6.2; and inconsistency with the Mixed Residential Neighborhood 5 description on the Central Orange Coordinated Area joint land use agreement with the Town of 6 Hillsborough because it does not provide walkability on the public road network; and the project 7 does not match the residential character of the local neighborhood. Staff has included several of 8 these rationale for vote to recommend denial in the Statement of Inconsistency provided in 9 Attachment 8. 10 11 Excerpts of the draft minutes from the May 3, 2023 meeting are included in Attachment 6. Agenda 12 materials from the meeting can be viewed at: 13 https://www.co.orange.nc.us/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26. 14 15 Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the: 16 1. Statement of Consistency indicating the zoning atlas amendment(s) are reasonable 17 and in the public interest as contained in Attachment 7. 18 2. Ordinance amending the Zoning Atlas, as well as imposing development conditions, 19 for the identified parcels as contained in Attachment 9. 20 21 Vice-Chair McKee stated that he is an employee of Summit Engineering. He said he 22 works for the Turnpike Authority in southern Wake County on the extension from Holly Springs to 23 1-40. He said there are four levels of separation between his position and the corporate office. 24 He said he works for the Turnpike Authority and they are contracted by NC DOT. He said because 25 of this and changes in state law adding wording about familial and associational relationships, he 26 requested that the County Attorney provide a legal opinion as to whether or not he had a conflict 27 of interest. He said when he had requested this in the past, the legal opinion was that he did not 28 have a conflict of interest. He said that in this case, due to changes in state law, he did have a 29 conflict of interest according to the County Attorney. He read one paragraph from the County 30 Attorney's opinion: 31 "Because there is no clear statutory or case law definition of what constitutes a 32 `business or other associational' relationship, because I believe the legislature 33 intended those terms to be construed broadly, because there is no case directly on 34 point in this situation, and because it is apparent that you have some level of 35 association with Mr. Parker my recommendation is that you ask to be excused from 36 voting on the Project when it comes before the Board for consideration based on 37 your `business or other associational' relationship with Mr. Parker, the apparent 38 owner of the landowner/applicant." 39 He requested that the Board excuse his participation in the decision. 40 John Roberts said that the statute is clear that it does prohibit voting on the matter. He 41 said that Vice-Chair McKee would still be able to ask questions or participate in the discussion. 42 He said there is a prohibition on his voting on the issue. He said he recommended that the Board 43 conduct a vote to excuse Vice-Chair McKee. 44 Chair Bedford asked if the Board should do that immediately or wait. 45 John Roberts said he would suggest that it wait until the actual time of the vote. 46 Chair Bedford reminded the public in attendance about the procedures for making public 47 comments. She said they wanted to be efficient and to honor everyone present. She asked the 48 public not to applaud. She offered other ways for the public to show support of commenters. She 49 asked the public to be respectful and to not shout. She asked Cy Stober, Planning and Zoning 50 Director, and the applicant, Jim Parker, how long their presentations would be.