Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORC minutes 080118SUMMARY NOTES ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AUGUST 1, 2018 ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE NOTE: A QUORUM IS NOT REQUIRED FOR ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS . MEMBERS PRESENT : Randy Marshall (Vice-Chair), Bingham Township Representative; Kim Piracci, At-Large; Randy Marshall, At-Large; Adam Beeman, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Carrie Fletcher, Bingham Township Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; David Blankfard, Hillsborough Township Representative; Alexander Gregory, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Lydia Wegman (Chair), At-Large Chapel Hill Township Representative; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; MEMBERS ABSENT : Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; Hunter Spitzer, At-Large; STAFF PRESENT : Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Meredith Kern, Administrative Assistant II AGENDA ITEM 1:Call to Order and Roll Call Planning Board Chair Lydia Wegman called the meeting to order at 7:21 p.m. AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – FEMA FLOOD MAPS - To review and discuss proposed amendments to the UDO regarding FEMA flood maps. PRESENTER : Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor, reviewed that in 2017 the county mailed out over 10,000 letters to property owners and 20,000 cards to adjacent property owner because county staff had been tasked with revising flood insurance maps. It is the county’s responsibility to enforce flood damage prevention regulation and also to use the best available flood data. The county and any participant of the National Flood Insurance Program gets Community Rating System points for being more restrictive than the model and doing everything properly. Orange County has a rating of 6, with 10 being a rating for a community that is new to the program and 1 being exceptionally rare, Michael Harvey explained. Michael Harvey reviewed that last year the county took flood map data and turned it into an overlay district, under the advise of the county attorney at the time. Staff wasn’t comfortable with the overlay district. The county’s new attorney is not comfortable with it. So, there is no longer an ordinance for the overlay district but the county still has the data. The advertising of the flood map changes last year cost the county $25,000. FEMA informed the county two months ago that it has tweaked the maps. No property owner in this county has a marked change in the portion of the property in the flood plain but the dates have changed. Everywhere in the ordinance that states Nov. 17, 2017, now needs to state Oct. 19, 2018. Michael Harvey explained that the county does not need to hold a public hearing on the maps or mail out thousands of notifications. The county does have to adopt the text amendment by Oct. 19 or be suspended from the flood program. David Blankfard asked if one article could be added to the ordinance to note the new effective date. Michael Harvey answered that this is a possibility but the planning department erred on the side of being verbose until the legal review is complete and a determination has been made whether to change the date throughout or add an article with the new date. AGENDA ITEM 3: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - To review and discuss proposed amendments to the UDO to streamline and revise provisions related to the Board of Adjustment. PRESENTER : Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor Michael Harvey explained that elected officials have tasked the county attorney’s office with streamlining provisions related to the Board of Adjustment. He reviewed some of the general amendment proposals, starting on Page 8 of the agenda packet. Regarding the changes proposed to 2.2.4B, Lydia Wegman pointed out it doesn’t make sense as written because the applicants would have the application and therefore do not need to be provided with their application. Michael Harvey flagged it for the attorney’s office. Regarding the Neighborhood Meeting section on Page 17, Lydia Wegman said she understands the attorney’s comment but feels the purpose of the neighborhood meeting should not be undermined. Michael Harvey reviewed the purpose of the public hearing is to hear sworn testimony and evidence and the importance of the neighborhood meeting is that the applicant can hear from neighbors and perhaps make modifications that satisfy the neighbors before the public hearing. Lydia Wegman said the neighborhood meeting can be important in that way and she doesn’t want the language amended in a way that doesn’t reflect that. Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict said he agrees that it is important to explain the differences between the neighborhood meeting and the public hearing. Randy Marshall said the language needs to be more descriptive for Neighborhood Information Meeting. It has implied that attendees will receive information but with the removal of the redlined language, it makes it a staff meeting. He suggested two meetings, with one held by the applicant and one by staff. Michael Harvey said there should just be one neighborhood meeting. Some applicants take the reins for these meetings. For instance, the applicants for Settler’s Point chose to hold four neighborhood meetings and staff attended two. Staff attends to explain the public hearing and approval process. Michael Harvey said he would let the attorney know the committee members are concerned with the changes in this section. Paul Guthrie said the following two changes narrows the property owners who are contacted. Michael Harvey said the attorney took out language describing adjacent property owners. He said the logic here is consistency with state law because by contacting property owners whose property is not adjacent, you may be giving people rights they don’t enjoy under the law. Lydia Wegman asked about 1,000 feet. Michael Harvey said 1,000 feet is always the standard. The attorney’s office is making a recommendation contrary to that because currently the county may be giving authority to people who don’t have it. Michael Harvey reviewed 2.79B1, explaining the attorney is concerned the language is too limiting. The county has had issues where it can’t make a public hearing happen because of weather or not having a quorum. By eliminating the words “a regular meeting,” the Board of Adjustment could call a special meeting if need be. Regarding 2.7.11 (A)(2), Lydia Wegman had a question about the language. Kim Piracci noted it’s a triple negative. Both said the language is not clear. Regarding 2.7.13 (A), Lydia Wegman suggested changing the wording so it doesn’t sound like shrinking is happening. Regarding requiring the applicant to provide proposed findings of fact for each of the required findings pursuant to Section 2.10.3, there was discussion that a typical property owner would have trouble providing such a formal document. Michael Harvey explained that the attorney’s office was adding it because it is something the property owner ought to do. Carrie Fletcher raised concern that it puts a burden on property owners to hire an attorney. Paul Guthrie said the community may give negative feedback to the elected officials regarding this. Other committee members felt comfortable with the standard because a template and examples are provided. Paul Guthrie noted a place where the language said “sworn” and could also say “or affirmed.” Michael Harvey said he would share the committee’s comments with Orange County Attorney James Bryan. The committee members requested that the attorney’s comments regarding their comments be shared with them via email. AGENDA ITEM 4 :UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – REORGANIZATION OF TABLES OF PERMITTED USES - To continue review and discussion on proposed amendments to the UDO that would reorganize the Tables of Permitted Uses in response to the Byrd v. Franklin County judicial decision and modify other sections to ensure consistency within the ordinance. Michael Harvey noted this is the third time the committee has seen the revised permitted uses table. He reviewed that staff has been tasked with combining three permitted uses tables into one. He noted the attorney’s office had suggested numbering the land uses. He then reviewed the proposed changes, which are in red. PRESENTER : Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor There was brief discussion that turning gravel into sand is incidental to mining gravel and not a chemical process. Michael Harvey reviewed under short-term rental under Services. He explained the language was borrowed from the City of Wilmington, North Carolina. The ORC concluded its meeting at 9:05 p.m. Lydia N. Wegman, Chair