Orange County NC Website
28 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 1208 <br /> 1209 Chris Johnston: Us. <br /> 1210 <br /> 1211 Cy Stober: I don't know if we saw any substantive change. Taylor, can you speak to that? I also want to be <br /> 1212 clear, I'm the planning director, but all subdivision applications come through Taylor Perchau's <br /> 1213 office, and through her staff for current planning and zoning. So, she lives this day to day. <br /> 1214 <br /> 1215 Charity Kirk: But, I mean, I think that's our concern from the questions that keep coming up. I know I'm just <br /> 1216 trying to help, but I think that is one of our concerns is that we provide commentary and critique in <br /> 1217 a more educated fashion, because we've been seeing things for a while. With the things that <br /> 1218 have come before us, that aren't the conditional districts or the zoning atlas amendments where <br /> 1219 we have leverage. If we don't have any leverage, has our commentary been noticeably helpful? <br /> 1220 <br /> 1221 Taylor Perschau: So, I would answer specifically for Stonewall and Lawrence Road,the two major subdivisions in <br /> 1222 the past 2 years,there have not been changes based on planning board feedback. So, Stonewall <br /> 1223 came before you all, and actually, in my opinion, gave the false visual that the public had <br /> 1224 comment,that could have impact. And planning staff dealt with ongoing communications with <br /> 1225 frustrated neighbors because of that. Because bringing it to the planning board and the board of <br /> 1226 county commissioners appears as if it's not a regulatory process. It makes it appear like a <br /> 1227 legislative process, and it makes it appear as if both boards have discretion in how the standards <br /> 1228 are applied,which they do not. <br /> 1229 <br /> 1230 Cy Stober: I would also add that Stonewall, to kind of elevate that informal neighborhood meeting, and the <br /> 1231 value of not having staff present. One of those concerned neighbors, is that how they negotiated <br /> 1232 for a second driveway to their house? Through the Stonewall subdivision, and that's fine. That <br /> 1233 has nothing to do with us and it's sort of just kind of oh,you're going to do this? Well, how does <br /> 1234 this affect me? How can I benefit from it, and it's turning out to be a somewhat better project than <br /> 1235 what we initially regulated and it doesn't violate any of our standards. So,they came to us with, <br /> 1236 sort of we came up with a solution to resolve this potential conflict between these two folks, and <br /> 1237 we said that that sounds fine. <br /> 1238 <br /> 1239 Charity Kirk: I think the question here is how can we be helpful and give feedback and the board of county <br /> 1240 commissioners and Cy is saying you can't do anything legislatively, but we want to know how can <br /> 1241 we be helpful and give feedback, and have,where is the sweet spot for us. Because right now, <br /> 1242 we're being completely removed. <br /> 1243 <br /> 1244 Cy Stober: From the subdivision process? So,with regard, and actually spoke with Whitney at length about <br /> 1245 this too, is any land use changes fundamentally require, by state law, the planning of boards <br /> 1246 involvement and guidance to the commissioner, so any rezoning requires the planning board <br /> 1247 direct involvement. The land use plan that established the new principles and goals and <br /> 1248 objectives for the county,and you all talked about this with your work plan should involve the <br /> 1249 planning board, and has involved the planning board, but arguably could have a larger role for the <br /> 1250 planning board moving forward as we progress towards our next engagement window and having <br /> 1251 a plan in the end. There's a lot,there's a huge role in the planning board in that process. In <br /> 1252 administering the ordinance,that is the job of professional planning staff, is to administer the <br /> 1253 ordinance. What the standard should be is a role for the planning board. If there are concerns <br /> 1254 about what are the standards of development, I invite you all to provide feedback on what you <br /> 1255 think we could be doing better about protecting open space,or you've already made it clear, as <br /> 1256 has the commissioners,that they would like those areas that cannot be developed,the steep <br /> 1257 slopes,the flood plains,the stream buffers to be taken off the table, and have that be addressed <br /> 1258 in the ordinance, and I've heard that loud and clear, and we can begin working on that when 1 <br /> 1259 have a little more guidance on whether that's going to be a stand alone, or part of revising our <br /> 1260 flexible development standards period. Are we going to do the whole thing,or do we just want to <br /> 1261 focus on that one element. So, all of that is a huge role,the meat and potatoes of the ordinance <br /> 1262 itself,what is the law of the county? The planning board is to advise the county on what those <br />