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 16 <br />Samantha Cabe said she was in favor of the proposal due to the fact that it would represent a viable solution to the <br />problems created with smaller lots within the Hillsborough EDD being re-developed for non-residential use. <br />Rachel Phelps Hawkins asked if one (1) of the houses along the corridor was for sale. Michael Harvey said there <br />was a residence along the corridor; approximately two hundred (200) feet north of the Cornwallis Hills subdivision <br />entrance, was for sale. Rachel Phelps Hawkins asked if this structure was going to be used to support a commercial <br />operation. Michael Harvey said the interested buyer wanted to use the structure as a legal office. There was general <br />discussion on this point. <br />Brian Crawford asked how this. proposed amendment came about. Michael Harvey said it was developed in <br />response to the potential hardships that would be faced by a developer attempting to redevelop smaller parcels <br />within the Hillsborough EDD for non-residential land uses. There was general discussion on this point. <br />Larry Wright said he was unclear as to where the Board was with respect to the review of this item. Larry Wright said <br />he was extremely concerned about reducing the buffer given the impact it might have on adjoining property, and <br />property to the south, relating to stormwater runoff. Larry Wright said by reducing the required landscape and buffer <br />areas we would be eliminating the natural area that captured runoff and contributing to a flooding problem to the <br />south along Old NC Highway 86. Larry Wright said he took issue over the large parcel in front of the Comwallis Hills <br />subdivision not being totally within the flood plain. Lany Wright said he had drive through the area after storm events <br />and the property in question was always flooded. Larry Wright said he was concemed with any proposal that was <br />increase the likelihood that flooding would be prevalent within the area. Michael Harvey said this proposal would not, <br />in his opinion, have a demonstrative effect on the parcel of property Larry Wright was referring to and suggested that <br />if Larry Wright had a concern then he could make a motion relating to requiring that developers address stormwater <br />runoff issues when redeveloping property. There was general discussion on this point. <br />Jeff Schmitt said he wanted clarification on the impact this proposal would have. Michael Harvey reviewed the <br />impacts of the Ordinance. <br />Mary Bobbitt-Cooke said the amendment, if approved, would require a twenty (20) foot landscaped buffer along each <br />side of an existing structure. Michael Harvey said yes. <br />Jay Bryan asked how many properties this amendment would impact. Michael Harvey said there were approximately <br />five (5) existing parcels that had residential structures upon them. Mr. McNeil asked where these structures were <br />located. Michael Harvey said that four (4) of them were along Old 86 and one (1) of them was located on New <br />Highway 86. <br />Jay Bryan said he agreed with some of the points originally made by Jeff Schmitt in that there appears to be little to <br />preserve within the corridor but that this proposed amendment seemed to provide some measure of flexibility to <br />ensure what was still in existence could stilt be preserved. There was general discussion on this point. <br />Jay Bryan said he did not want to jump ahead but asked how this proposed amendment would be impacted by Item <br />Fourteen (14) on the agenda, specifically the rezoning of several properties within the corridor to ED-LNR. Michael <br />Harvey said this amendment was independent from the rezoning in that it applied to any adaptive reuse of a single- <br />family residential structure zoned to any of the existing Hillsborough ED designations. Michael Harvey said that Mr. <br />Davis would be explaining the rezoning request. <br />Brian Crawford asked if there were any other questions or motions relating to this item. <br />MOTION by Samantha Cabe to approve the proposed amendment as presented by staff. Samantha Cabe said she <br />felt the amendment was reasonable and would only apply in instances where an individual proposed to reuse an <br />existing single-family residence for non-residential purposes established appropriate safeguards. Seconded by Mary <br />Bobbitt-Cooke. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.