Browse
Search
Minutes - 19850910
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1980's
>
1985
>
Minutes - 19850910
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2008 12:40:32 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 12:45:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/10/1985
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
aoo~~~ <br />Collins then cited the findings and noted that where noncompliance was <br />found. conditions of approval were included which seek to address that element <br />of noncompliance with a specific standard. <br />Chair Willhoit inquired about the stub-out of Bradleq Drive to the right- <br />of-way in condition ^14. Collins responded this right-of -way exists. There <br />was a desire on the part of the Tawn of Chapel Hill to initially limit access <br />far this project to this egiating 60 foot right-of--way. The two staffs working <br />together felt that. given the arrangement of the properties to the north of <br />Chandler's Green subdivision and if Sweeten Creek Road were developed as a <br />principal access, over a period of time this 60-foot right .of way needed to be <br />eliminated. The reason for the stub-out was to allow future access to the <br />properties to the north and at that time the existing 60 fast right-af-way <br />could be closed. Collins continued that this was a stipulation of the Town of <br />Chapel Hill's staff. <br />Roger Walden. Chapel Hill Planning Director. stated that the reason for <br />the closing of the right-of -way was to prevent access onto two roads. thus <br />preventing double-frontage lots. <br />Commissioner Marshall asked if the dam should break how much water and <br />how many houses would be involved. She noted that all safety standards should <br />be met. Collins responded that he was not sure how much water would be <br />released but that 4 or 5 lots would be affected. Marshall continued that <br />public safety is a matter. the Planning Board should consider. She also pointed <br />out that there is a Bradleq Road in Chapel Hill and perhaps the name of this <br />road should be changed. <br />Commissioner Carey asked again for explanation of the options for <br />compliance with the floor area ratio. Collins responded that the applicant had <br />proposed a total floor area of 287,OOD square feet. One option would be to <br />decrease the size of some dwellings and perhaps increase the size of others <br />within this maximum area. Another option would be to establish a floor area <br />ratio of 2,660 sq. ft. for each dwelling. He noted this would be monitored by <br />the County through the issuance of building permits. <br />Commissioner Marshall noted this could create problems with the last few <br />houses built. Collins agreed, but responded that the progress of the <br />subdivision as a whole could be tracked and the developer informed how fast he <br />was using up the maximum floor area allotted. the developer could be provided <br />with projections as to what the usage might be if the development was continued <br />along the same lines. <br />Chair Willhoit inquired what would occur if at some later time a resident <br />wanted to add to his/her home. Collins responded the only waq this could be <br />done would be to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance or the <br />developer could return to the Board of Commissioners and Town Council to <br />request for a reconsideration of a condition of approval. <br />David Godschalk inquired about the practical affect of condition ^23 on <br />the plan which requires the 100' perimeter open space. Collins responded that <br />one part of the buffer is related to the Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) <br />and another part to local requirements. Staff recommendation was previously for <br />a waiver of the buffer requirement. but after looking at the lot sizes and <br />comparing them to adjacent property densities, this recommendation was changed <br />to require the 100' buffer in accordance with the ordinance which was very <br />specific on this point. He noted this did affect the number of buildable lots <br />and that at least 2 lots would be lost. Gordon noted that the 100' buffer <br />requirement was one that had been consistently applied in Orange County for <br />other planned developments. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.