Agenda - 02-22-1999 - 1a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

10`7 besides the two he mentioned above. Anyone interested in knowing what all of them are could get a printout from the Planning Staff which would include the staff/Es recommendation regarding each one. If the Board of Commissioners reach the determination that the property should be rezoned to R -3 or to any other zoning district other than what it is now, then they will.have to get to the point of making the findings that the Special Use Permit process requires. Chair Brown also asked for a complete understanding of the Homeowner Association responsibilities. What those responsibilities would be and how they would be responsible for maintaining all of the infrastructure. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b) Z-4 -98 James and Patricia LaTorre This item was .presented by Planner Karen Lincoln for the purpose of receiving evidence and public comment on the proposed rezoning from Primary Economic Development to Secondary Economic Development of a 19.96 acre lot located in the 1 -85 /Buckhorn Road Economic Development Activity Node, and identified on Tax Map 44, Cheeks Township, as parcel 2A. Th subject property is owned by James and Patricia LaTorre and is locate on the north side of West Ten Road approximately 1.25 miles east of Buckhorn Road (SR 1114). The owners are requesting Secondary Development area designation for the property. This designation is intended to provide a 6step -down6 or land use buffer between Primary Development Areas and residentially zoned or developed properties. A limited number of residential and office uses are allowed within Secondary Development Areas. Where residential development is contemplated, moderate densities ranging from two to four dwelling units per acre are permitted. Adjacent properties to the west, north and east are within the 185 /Buckhorn Road EDD; properties south of West Ten Road are in the R -1 Rural Residential Zoning District. The entire area is within the U- ENO -PW Upper Eno Protected Watershed Overlay District. A Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) Overlay District extends southward 1,250 feet from 1 -40 & 1 -85 right -of -way and covers the northern third of the subject property. Use of land within the MTC Overlay District for single family and two- family dwellings is not subject to the provisions, requirements and restrictions of that overlay district. QUESTIONS AND /OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: None. QUESTIONS AND /OR COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD: None. QUESTIONS AND /OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS: Ms. Mabel Allison, a resident of West Ten Road in Efland, owns property on the East and North side of this property. She feels that changing the zoning of this property will effect their land. They are concerned and opposed to the rezoning of this property. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned no sooner than February 2, 1999. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. Zoning .Ordinance Text Amendment a) Cane Creek Watershed Overlay Districts 4. Subdivision Regulations Text Amendment a) Flexible Development in Cane Creek Watershed These items were presented together by Planner David Stancil for the purpose of receiving citizen comment on proposed text amendments to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations to implement new development standards for Cane Creek Watershed. Changes are proposed to Section 2.2 (Definitions) and Section 6.23 (Extra Requirements for Watershed Protection Overlay Districts) of the Zoning'Ordinance to implement new watershed protection measures for Cane Creek watershed. These changes, along with the companion amendments to the Subdivision Regulations, result from a three -year study of Cane Creek Watershed conducted by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority ( OWASA) and subsequent recommendations by the OWASA Board of Directors in October, 1997. The amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would offer two sets of development standards for protecting water quality. The first option would change the minimum lot size for new development in the watershed from two acres to five acres, with a provision allowing up to five lots as small as two acres in size for all lots of record. A second option is available for Flexible Development in Cane Creek watershed. In this special option, new major subdivision development could occur at the current