Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-17-2009 - 5c
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2009
>
Agenda - 03-17-2009
>
Agenda - 03-17-2009 - 5c
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2009 1:14:57 PM
Creation date
3/16/2009 1:14:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/17/2009
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5c
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20090317
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Approved 2/4/09 14 <br />3. More explanation was requested on how the buffer amendments would be affected, or be complemented, <br />by a staff generated rezoning for the various properties presented at the November 2008 Quarterly Public <br />Hearing, <br />Staff Comment: As staff testified during the hearing, this item and the rezoning will have an impact on each <br />another. <br />The proposed buffer amendments are designed to facilitate the preservation of existing single-family <br />residential structures in an effort to protect the visual attractiveness of the Old NC Highway 86 corridor. <br />The rezoning request, if approved, would essentially have the following impact on these properties: <br />a. Limit the permitted uses to professional office (i.e. attorney, architect, doctor, finance/insurance, <br />etc) <br />b. Reduce the required minimum lot area from two (2) acres to twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. <br />This would mean that majority of the lots would be considered conforming to the minimum lot area <br />requirements of the Ordinance, <br />c. Reduce the required minimum lot width from two hundred (200) feet to one hundred (100) feet, <br />d. Reduce the allowable height of proposed structures from sixty (60) feet to thirty (30) feet, <br />e. Establish guidelines on the hours of operation for non-residential developments that are currently <br />not applicable under the current zoning designation, <br />f. Limit the total gross square footage of structures on the properties to five thousand (5,000) square <br />feet, <br />g. Eliminate a requirement, for properties zoned Economic Development Limited Office, for any non- <br />residential land use proposed for development within two hundred (200) feet of a residential <br />subdivision to obtain a Class A Special Use Permit. <br />It is staffs opinion that in cases where we are preserving, and encouraging, the adaptive reuse of <br />existing single-family residential structures for professional office use the need for a Special Use <br />Permit is not warranted. The scale of the proposed development would• be limited given the <br />preservation of the existing structure's architecture and size. <br />In reviewing this matter with the Planning Director, staff believes there is an opportunity to allow <br />for, and encourage, the adaptive reuse of single-family residential structures by eliminating the <br />Special Use Permit requirement. Staff further believes that additional language maybe necessary <br />to require any new structure, built within two hundred (200) feet of a residential subdivision, to <br />obtain a Special Use Permit to ensure that the scale of the project does not adversely impact <br />existing residential dwelling units. <br />RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Officer recommends the Planning Board: <br />1. Deliberate on the petition and review the various comments made during the public hearing, <br />2. Recommend the amendments be approved as presented by staff, <br />3. Recommend the BOCC direct staff to begin an analysis of existing parking and access <br />management standards in, and around, all EDD districts, Commercial/Industrial Nodes, and the <br />Rural and Community Activity Nodes for future presentation at an upcoming Quarterly Public <br />Hearing. <br />Brian Crawford said as this was a public hearing item if there was anyone in the audience that had any comments on <br />the proposal. <br />Ms. Margo Pinkerton was recognized and allowed to address the Board. Ms. Pinkerton said she was a resident of <br />the Cornwallis Hills Subdivision and expressed concern over reducing any buffer over a large tract of land separating <br />the residential subdivision with Old NC 86. Ms. Pinkerton said she was referring to the large parcel of property <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.