Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
24 <br /> 988 Lamar Proctor: We have however many ayes,three opposed. The ayes have it, so it,the statement of approval is <br /> 989 passed with that modification. <br /> 990 <br /> 991 Cy Stober: Typically, in a split vote,we have a reason for the opposition, so we can document that for the <br /> 992 board. <br /> 993 <br /> 994 Beth Bronson: I just do not find there would be a need for it. <br /> 995 <br /> 996 Jonah Garson: I don't find there to be a need for it either and I just don't feel it's appropriate. <br /> 997 <br /> 998 Charity Kirk: What is it? <br /> 999 <br /> 1000 Beth Bronson: The change. <br /> 1001 <br /> 1002 Jonah Garson: The grammatical change. <br /> 1003 <br /> 1004 Dolores Bailey: And the same for me. <br /> 1005 <br /> 1006 Chris Johnston: Thank you. To confirm,the problem is with the amendment, not with the process of amending, in <br /> 1007 other terms is it changing the word protect or the entire process? <br /> 1008 <br /> 1009 Dolores Bailey: In the word protect. I don't think there's any reason to change it from protection of to protect. <br /> 1010 <br /> 1011 Jonah Garson: And,for me, it's the same, but also, I do think we should be having motions on amendments. <br /> 1012 <br /> 1013 Beth Bronson: There was no motion on the statement of consistency I didn't think. <br /> 1014 <br /> 1015 Jonah Garson: I think we need two. I think I would like to see going forward two separate motions. <br /> 1016 <br /> 1017 Lamar Proctor: Didn't you tell us before we needed to incorporate those into one motion? <br /> 1018 <br /> 1019 Cy Stober: You have either option. Historically,we've done the latter where they've been incorporated. <br /> 1020 <br /> 1021 Lamar Proctor: Right,that's been the practice. Jonah is recommending that we split that for clarity purposes. <br /> 1022 <br /> 1023 Statler Gilfillen: I mean if we can in the future, I would agree with that. <br /> 1024 <br /> 1025 Venkat Yendapalli: I think maybe, Jonah,you're looking at like do we even need it. Do the rest of the board support <br /> 1026 that amendment. Right? <br /> 1027 <br /> 1028 Lamar Proctor: Yes. All right. So,this will have to be slightly modified? <br /> 1029 <br /> 1030 Cy Stober: Yes, and until it is adopted at the hearing to up to that second. All of this, even though it is <br /> 1031 informed by federal and state regulations, can be modified without the whole process. We're <br /> 1032 already ready in the process, so if there are other comments you wish to make,you're welcome to <br /> 1033 make them in the interim to the board or to me. <br /> 1034 <br /> 1035 Lamar Proctor: Sorry for any confusion. I'm trying to incorporate the planning board's input. I know that you all <br /> 1036 worked a long, hard time on this stuff, and I know it's very specialized.And that's a nit-picky thing, <br /> 1037 but future generations when they read that ordinance won't get offended by that grammatical <br /> 1038 indiscretion. <br /> 1039 <br /> 1040 AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT—RESIDENTIAL SOLAR ARRAYS-To <br /> 1041 review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on Planning Director-initiated amendments to <br />