Zoning in Oriental

And now for some local news.

Last Tuesday evening, at the request of the Oriental Town Board of Commissioners, the town Planning Board recommended some changes to the Growth Management Ordinance, Article XV, Sections 230 - 237 (Amendments).

Some of their recommendations, if adopted, will fix things that need to be fixed.

Some won't. Accordingly, I oppose the present draft.

The proposed draft is on line at the Town of Oriental web site. The agenda packet can be found here. Click on "proposed amendments."

The impetus for amending the GMO was last year's application by developer Sylvan Friedman to change the zoning of a residential (R-3) parcel he owns on Midyette Street to MU. The public hearing (required by law) and action by the Town Board were delayed three times (twice at the request of the applicant). The application was opposed by neighbors during the public hearing. The neighbors submitted a formal petition opposing the measure, thus establishing a requirement for an affirmative vote by three fourths of the Board.

Because of the delays, the Board failed to act within the 65 days required by the GMO, thus effectively denying the Friedmans' request. Some Board members expressed the view that the failure to act should be deemed an approval.

The planning Board recommends extending the period to 95 days from first consideration of the request and changing the rule to stipulate that failure of the Board to act constitutes approval.

There are some who believe the applicant deserves a timely response from the Board. This misses the main point. It's about the public, not the applicant. As the GMO explains: "The Town Commissioners shall not regard the advantages or disadvantages to the individual requesting the change, but shall consider the impact of the proposed change on the public at large."

Other than requiring a public hearing before any amendment is adopted and requiring a three-fourths vote in event of a valid petition opposing an amendment, North Carolina General Statutes do not require the town to act in accordance with the opinions of the public voiced at the hearing. This is a political process - a legislative process, not a quasi-judicial proceding. That means it is not only proper but strongly advisable for Town Commissioners to seek the advice of residents before making a decision.

The public should expect Commissioners to take their views seriously. Accordingly, I believe any action deadline should be tied to the public hearing. For example, it makes sense to require that the Commissioners act within thirty-five days following the required public hearing. That way, the views of the public will be fresh in the minds of the commissioners.

Should the Commissioners be unable or disinclined to act within a deadline, the default position should be to maintain the status quo.

The public should not be penalized for inaction by a Town Board.