Orange County NC Website
~uloooa <br />~ r:. ~ r <br />~:~~~:_ <br />6. Subdivision Activity in the Watersheds: Commissioner Willhoit said that <br />at one of the Water Resources Task Farce meetings Planning Staff had presented two <br />versions of a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance based on one of the <br />recommendations in the Task Force Report. He said it involved the exemption of minor <br />subdivisions from some of the requirements of the PW-T District. Commissioner -. <br />Willhoit said Planning Staff had data from the three watersheds in the County <br />looking at the number of parcels and parcel size in the watersheds. Commissioner <br />y <br />Willhoit had a graph which displayed two curves; he noted that the upper curve <br />"was the number of parcels as function of parcel size and 'the bottom curve was <br />total acreage as function of parcel size." Taking the University Lake Watershed <br />as an example, Commissioner Willhoit said, "that 82% of the land was in parcels <br />that are 10 acres or .larger, and this accounts far only about 20% of parcels. And <br />that 60% of the parcels account for about 8% of the acreage and are in 3 acres. or <br />less and have a rather limited-potential for further subdivision." Commissioner <br />Willhoit said that "several assumptions could be made, starting in ~uly.of '77 ~_ <br />with the adoption of the-new State 5oi1 Evaluation .legislation. ..that the <br />minor subdivisions...had been limited to the better soils. in the County." He <br />said that when the lots were carved out.af the larger parcels that sites were <br />chosen which perked and became the minor subdivisions while larger unsuitable <br />building sites were carved out around the minor subdivisions; he added that most <br />parcels in a minor subdivision were well over an acre or more. Consequently, <br />Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, to lift the <br />moratorium on development in the Upper Eno and University Lake Watersheds for <br />minor subdivisions. During the discussion, Commissioner 4lillhoit said that the <br />restrictions on minor subdivisions had proved a hardship in some cases, particularly <br />those involving family land. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. <br />Buffer requirements in the Zoning Ordinance are to be maintained, as Commissioner <br />Willhoit clarified. <br />Commissioner Willhoit further suggested that the Planning Staff draw up amend- <br />ments to the Zoning Ordinance which would exempt minor subdivisions from the lot <br />size requirements. The Attorney said that since the proposed amendments were <br />less restrictive than those advertised far the public hearing scheduled for May 24, <br />1982, there would be no problem considering those arr~ndments at that Public Nearing. <br />Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, that Planning <br />