Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Excerpt of Minutes <br />Approved 10/1/08 <br />33 <br />1 O 1 private party but if we've got the review within the County before doing this, we'll have represent who can get allowed <br />102 if they don't do the job right. I'm convinced by what Geoff said that you can't have an SUP because you can't get the <br />103 quasi judicial deliberation when it's your own project at stake. This may be a policy review issue. It seems to me it <br />104 would be appropriate for the Board of County Commissioners to have an internal review. It seems there are other <br />105 ways to do this. <br />106 <br />107 Brian Crawford: It creates the appearance by the citizens that Orange County has not played by the same rules. <br />108 Government changes and now we have a government that is friendly towards environmental issues and that may not <br />1.09 always be the same. I can image one day that we could have a Board of County Commissioners that would be <br />110 arbitrary about how we select a site so if there is any appearance that the county has two sets of rotes; I could see <br />111 that as a problem. <br />112 <br />113 Judith Wegner. I# ft is in the ordinance, I don't understand who wilt enforce iL <br />114 <br />115 Brian Crawford: At least the citizens wiEt be able to hold them accountable. The way it is now, the citizens have to <br />116 say now you get th do what you want because you are the Board of County Commissioners. <br />117 <br />118 Bernadette Pelissier. The whole issue of environmental responsibilities goals, part of the whose thrust behind that <br />119 was that the county should be a model. If you want the citizens 13o do things that are energy efficiency, water <br />120 efficient, etc. The county should be the first one to model this behavior. <br />121 <br />122 Michael Harvey: Until the Comprehensive Plan is adopted and the Board of County Commissioners direct staff on <br />123 haw to implement these goals, we are not sure how that is going to be addressed. We have recommended adoption <br />124 of goals and objectives and we have existing goals and objectives but from an implementation standpoint, there have <br />125 been no direction from the Board of County Commissioners on haw #o address this issue. <br />126 <br />127 Bernadette Pelissier. I was talking about the environmental responsibil'diestind goals. <br />128 <br />129 Michael Harvey: I have no clue from an implementation standpoint because we have not been given direction. <br />130 <br />131 Bernadette Pelissier: That answers that question. <br />132 <br />133 Michael Harvey: The reason I brought up the Artic~ 8 issue was because the question posed to me at the last <br />134 meeting, could we require the county to adhere to the submittal requirements, as part of the normal site plan review. <br />135 My comment was that would at least address some of the concerns about the inconsistency of a submittal _process <br />136 and that would address that point. These projects still have to go through. <br />137 <br />138 Zany Wright: I agree that the county should set the standard of the way this should be handled. Who is the one that <br />139 checks the checker? <br />140 <br />141 Larry Wright: Right now, it is Environmental ~Heafth and the state to ensure the systems is insta{led adequately. If <br />142 you have a group of Board of County Commissioners that is not conducting themselves in accordance with the <br />143 wishes of the community, they are voted out of office. <br />144 <br />145 Craufurd Goodwin: it seems we can recommend to the Board of County Commissioners and the County Manager <br />146 that the process be devised to replicate the process required of the public. How that is implemented, I don't think we <br />147 can decide around this table but we should recommend it. <br />148 <br />