Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Orange County supervisors back targeted zoning-ordinance update, not a full rewrite
Summary
Supervisors directed staff to pursue a focused 6–8 month revision to resolve inconsistencies between the zoning and subdivision ordinances and improve user-friendliness, allowing A1/A2 district language to be drafted without immediately remapping county land.
The Orange County Board of Supervisors directed staff to pursue a targeted update of the county zoning ordinance rather than a two-year full rewrite, aiming for a focused 6–8 month effort to fix inconsistencies and improve clarity.
Staff planner Ted (Speaker 10) told the board the choices were a complete rewrite, which could take roughly two years and involve broad public engagement, or a technical, targeted amendment that could be completed in roughly four to eight months if limited to specific corrections and updates. Several supervisors said the shorter approach offered a better chance of producing usable, timely improvements.
Supervisor Speaker 11 argued the board should "get this thing wrapped up in the next 4 months" for the focused items, while Speaker 6 supported targeted fixes to avoid a lengthy process that can become contentious. Speaker 8 emphasized the need for clearer, user-friendly language, describing the current policies as "like an old house with secret passageways" and urging elimination of hidden or unclear provisions that confuse citizens and staff.
The board also asked that proposed A1/A2 agricultural district language be prepared and included in procurement as an option the consultant can deliver, but that any countywide zoning map changes remain separate. Staff and county counsel explained that creating A1 and A2 text in the ordinance does not itself rezone land; applying those designations to parcels would require separate map amendments, notice and hearings. Speaker 12 recommended that a consultant do the holistic text work up front to avoid future patchwork amendments that create the very inconsistencies the board wants to avoid.
Supervisors asked that planning commissioners be involved in the process; several board members said they wanted a mix of staff-led technical work and measured public engagement so the ordinance is easier for residents and developers to understand. The board’s consensus was to proceed with the shorter, focused revision with flexibility on schedule if additional work proves necessary.
The next step will be issuing procurement that includes the option for A1/A2 text drafting and engaging a consultant to prepare the technical amendment and public outreach plan. The board did not take a formal vote to adopt final language at this meeting.
