HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-01-2016 - 6-e - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment Outline Form and Schedule for Proposed Text Amendment – Tables of Permitted Uses 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 1, 2016
Action Agenda
Item No. 6-e
SUBJECT: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment Outline Form and
Schedule for Proposed Text Amendment — Tables of Permitted Uses
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Amendment Outline for Modifications to Michael Harvey, Planner III, (919) 245-2597
the Table of Permitted Uses Craig Benedict, Director, (919) 245-2585
(UDO/Zoning 2016-05)
PURPOSE: To consider and approve revised process components and schedules for a
Planning Director initiated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text amendment.
BACKGROUND: At its May 5, 2016 regular meeting the BOCC approved an amendment
outline schedule related to proposed revisions to the existing tables of permitted uses. The
amendments are proposed in response to the Byrd v. Franklin County judicial decision. After
recent conversations with the Attorney's office, as well as work on current text amendments, the
components and schedule for this project need to be modified.
Staff is resubmitting the amendment outline form for the BOCC to review and approve the
revised scope and schedule. In response to comments by the Attorney's office, staff is now
suggesting use of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) land use
classification system throughout the Tables of Permitted Uses. Because of this, staff
anticipates the need for work sessions with the BOCC and Planning Board to review the
particulars of the NAICS code, discuss the expansion of various land use categories, and
review options with respect to the `status' (i.e. permitted or prohibited) of various land uses.
Please refer to Attachment 1 for more information.
As with all text amendments there is an internal staff review/comment period of proposed
language in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.9 Development Advisory Committee of
the UDO, which includes multiple Departments (i.e. Environment, Agriculture, Parks &
Recreation (DEAPR), Solid Waste, the County Attorney's office, etc.).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional
funding for the provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be
paid from FY2016-17 Departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Planning staff
included in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work required to process these
amendments.
2
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: There is no Orange County Social Justice impact associated with
this item.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve the attached revised
Amendment Outline form and direct staff to proceed accordingly.
Attachment 1 3
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMENDMENT OUTLINE
UDO /Zoning-2016-05
Amendment(s) to permitted use tables clarifying permitted and prohibited land uses.
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
n Future Land Use Map:
From:
To:
n Zoning Map:
From:
To:
n Other:
Text Amendments
n Comprehensive Plan Text:
Section(s):
n UDO Text:
MUDO General Text Changes
MUDO Development Standards
fUDO Development Approval Processes
Section(s): Section(s)
1. Article 5 Uses,
2. 5.2.1, 5.2.2, and 5.2.3 Tables of Permitted Uses,
3. Article 10 Definitions
References throughout the UDO will be updated as a result of this
amendment.
n Other:
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose/Mission
In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified
Development Ordinance Amendments of the UDO, the Planning Director is
4
proposing to initiate text amendments to clarify allowable and prohibited land uses
within the various general use zoning districts throughout the County.
These amendments are in response to recent court decisions, most notably action by
the State Supreme Court in Byrd versus Franklin County, placing the onus on local
governments to have sufficient specificity `spelling out' allowable and prohibited land
uses.
This outline form was originally reviewed and approved by the BOCC at its May 5,
2016 regular meeting. Recent discussions between the Director and the Attorney's
office, as well as on-going amendments, have required a reevaluation of the project.
Agenda materials from the May 5, 2016 regular meeting can be viewed at:
http://www.orangecountync.gov/document center/BOCCAgendaMinutes/160505.pdf
2. Analysis
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to:
`cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis,
prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of
County Commissioners'.
In November of 2015 the State Supreme Court in Byrd versus Franklin County
rejected arguments that the mere omission/listing of a particular land use within a
table of permitted uses constituted a prohibition of same. The Court stated: `.... law
favors uninhibited free use of private property over government restrictions'. A copy
of the Court's ruling in the Franklin County case can be viewed
at: https://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=1&pdf=33680.
Originally the amendment was intended to clarify allowed/prohibited land uses,
provide additional specificity, and ensure uniformity. Recently the Director, in
responding to comments from the Attorney's office, determined the scope of the
project needed to change and will now involve:
1. Incorporating the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
land use classification system into the UDO, consistent with text
amendments reviewed at the September 12, 2016 quarterly public hearing
and slated for continued review and the BOCCs November 1, 2016 regular
meeting.
Agenda materials from the quarterly public hearing can be viewed
at: http://www.orangecountync.gov/document center/BOCCAgendaMinute
s/160912QPH.pdf-
Additional information on the NAICS code can be viewed
at: http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/.
2. Expanding the list of non-residential land uses (i.e. agricultural, medical,
recreational, residential land uses) to comply with the findings of Byrd.
3. Collapsing the general use, EDD general use, and Conditional Zoning
district tables of permitted uses (Sections 5.2.1, 5.2.2, and 5.2.3
respectively) into one central table in order to decrease anticipated page
counts and avoid unnecessary duplication.
As a result, the schedule for this item is being revised.
5
Staff anticipates the need for work sessions with the BOCC and Planning Board to
review the particulars of the NAICS code, discuss the expansion of various land use
categories, and review options with respect to the `status' (i.e. permitted or
prohibited) of various land uses.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental
conditions and features and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and
community character.
Land Use Goal 4: Land development regulations, guidelines, techniques and/or
incentives that promote the integrated achievement of all Comprehensive Plan goals.
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open,
efficient, and responsive.
4. New Statutes and Rules
The amendment(s) are in response to recent court decisions, Byrd versus Franklin
County, detailed herein.
C. PROCESS
a. TIMEFRAME/MILESTONES/DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
November 1, 2016
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
September 11, 2017 (expected date, 2017 BOCC meeting calendar not yet
published).
c. BOCC Updates/Checkpoints
November 1, 2016 —Approval of revised UDO Amendment Outline Form
February 1 and April 5, 2017 — Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee
(ORC) meeting (BOCC receives agenda materials)
February and April, 2017 — BOCC work sessions (dates to be determined in
consultation with Manager and Chair/Vice-chair)
d. Development Advisory Committee (DAC)
January 5, 2017 — Initial Review
April 20, 2017 — Final Review
e. Legal Sufficiency Determination
Shall be provided for the specific versions of the amendment package prepared
and reviewed throughout the process as detailed herein.
6
f. Other
N/A
b. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
Mission/Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and
Orange County ordinance requirements
a. Planning Board Review:
February 1 and April 5, 2017 Ordinance Review Committee (ORC)
June 7, 2017 — Recommendation
b. Advisory Boards:
N/A
c. Local Government Review:
Staff shall transmit the proposed
amendment(s) to the Towns of Chapel
Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough for
JPA and courtesy review.
d. Notice Requirements
Legal advertisement for the public hearing shall be in accordance with the
provisions of the UDO.
e. Outreach:
▪ General Public: Staff will schedule an open house meeting to solicit public
comment on the proposal in March of 2017. Advertisement
of this meeting shall be coordinated with the Manager's
office.
❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup:
n Other:
c. FISCAL IMPACT
Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the
provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be paid
from departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Planning staff included
in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work required to process this
amendment.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
7
The amendment will provide additional clarity on permitted and prohibited land uses.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
Available at a later date.
Primary Staff Contact:
Michael D. Harvey
Planning
(919) 245-2597
mharvey @orangecountync.gov