HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19810212-Fi ~rv
~ - -'A..:~ -_ ~bjYR.~-.`~~~`~~Y Fe~~H}Y.~M~S~`.~"=~;2~'!r';yr` - _ -
-
l. „ . _ _
2O
~' ~:
4. MINUTES '~
5. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
6.' FEBRUARY 12,1981
7.
8. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in special session an .
f~: 9• February 12, 1981, at fi:30. P.M., in the Commissioners' Room, Orange County
10. Courthouse, Hillsborough,-North Carolina.
11. Commissioners present: Commissioner Anne Barnes, Chair, and Com- .
12. missioners Norman Gustaveson, Richard Whitted, Dan Willhoit and Norman
13• Walker,who arrived late.
14• The Board of Commissioners convened in executive session to consider
15• personnel matters following which they convened in open session to work on
16• the proposed Zoning Ordinance now before Orange County.
x7. Commissioner Willhoit left to`attend another meeting.
1 ~• Commissioner Barnes presided and reconized those members of the
19• Orange County Board of Education and Orange County schools staff present
0• at the meeting.,. Messrs. Compton, Efland~and Lunsford spoke to four main
~ll• a'r•eas of concern to the schools regarding the Zoning Ordinance: Section
22. 9.1--Schools signs; Section 9.2 Banners and streamers (the County Attorney
~3• expressed his opinion that as governmental bodies the schools would be
~4• exempt from this zoning ordinance); Section 8.18--Portable buildings, Mr.
~5• Lunsford said the buildings added flexibility and temporary space for the
- Z6•
`::: schools (Mr. Polatty said the Board of Adjustment would be the proper agent
~7• for the schools to appeal to in this particular case); and „Section 10.2
Z$• subsections J and L--they presented-vandalism as a real and present problem
29• and indicated that=enforced screening might compound the problem as we11
30• as increase costs of maintaining schools which the schools could little afford
31• to bear at the present time. Mr. Lunsford gave the Board a memo detailing
x-32• the schools' concerns on requirements for parking lots, size and number of _
': ~~33• spaces required. (For a copy of this memo see page 1/S ~ of this book.)
34• The Board instructed the planning staff to check the parking require-
. 35• ments per student at the local high schools and return with this information
'~ 36• to the Board so that they may get a realistic idea of how many parking
37.
• 3g•
`~ 39.
40. -
. ;;:: ~;
•'1~'.~ ` nh+~
_. _. _~._ - -. - __- ... . _~. .~ _-- -- --~~ -.- -~ ._ ~r'
- ! .
2.
r
3 ,. ~ ~
~.• spaces to require at:schools. -
5• Article 11:
6• The Board gave planning staff no directions on this article.
7• Article 20:
8. The Board gave planning staff no directions on this article. ""~
:~
9. Article 21: - J
10. The Board gave planning staff no directions on this article. "
11. Article 22: -
12. Commissioner Willhoit returned during discussion of this section.
13• Commissioner Barnes asked Mr. Cannity of the planning staff if he
14• has received the information the Board.requested regarding the number of
15•~. persons permitted in a group home .according to State standards. Mr.
lb• Cannity said the State was not extremely clear either; the numbers begin '
17~ at about 7and-continue upward from there. He said the Planning Board
lg• had indicated that it wished to retain the definition o.f a group in the
3.4• text .as clarification.
20. The Board expressed an opinion and so directed planning staff to
increase the acreage required in its definition of a bona fide farm to J
22• 10 acres to maintain consistency with the State Statutes.
23• The Board discussed at length Section 22.9.2 and whether or not
24• animal husbandry should be included as a farm use.
~5• Article 23:
26. The Board gave planning staff no directions on this article.
27e Article 24:
28• The Board gave planning staff no directions on this article.
29• Commissioner Barnes presented a "Minority Report" from members of
30• the planning Board (see page ~~ / of this book). The report details their ~'
31• ideas regarding representation on the Orange County Planning Board. The
32. Board of Commissioners expressed a consensus that the wording in the zoning
33• ordinance, Section 2.2.3, should be changed to indicate that "every person °~~ `
34» shall be a resident of Orange County" without excluding those residing within ."
35• incorporated areas.
3~.
37. Commissioner Barnes said the Board had concluded its review of the -
3$. Proposed Zoning Ordinance and would now take under consideration the
39.
~0•
_ .. ..
... ... ..
3•
4•
s•
6.
7.
-- 8.
9.
xo.
11.
12.
13.
~4•
1S.
lb.
17.
18.
19.
^"_'0.
'1.
22.
23.
24•
2$.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
_... 32.
33.
34•
35•
36.
37.
380
39.
~.0.
Proposed Land Use Plan. Commissioner Barnes suggested they review the
LUP in terms of whether ar not the Board had the tools with which to
accomplish its goals, She summarized the issues as follows:
1) An official request from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education
to .require developers to set aside acreage for schools;
2) The possibility of requiring developers to provide either land
for parks or money in~lieu of the land--perhaps a regional park
which could serve several developments;
3) What. provisions are included for the encouragement of low/moderate
income housing".in the subdivision regulations?
Commissioner Barnes said she wanted these issues. addressed at the
proper time in the deliberations by the Board.
Mr. Polatty asked that Board adopt the LUP as soon as possible after
the approved zoning ordinance is adopted. '
The Board set February 16 acid 26 at 7:30 P.M. as .special meetings to
continue the work on the LUP. "Commissioner Barnes declared the meeting
adjourned.
Anne Barnes, Chair.
Paulette Pridgen-Pond, Clerk