Minutes - 19870310 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

;~ '`:i use value. Chapel Hill Town Council Member, R. D. Smith asked what the regula- tions were governing non-conformities in the Rural Buffer and how many lots would be nonconforming under this regulation. Collins responded that Article 11 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance addresses nonconforming lots. He indicated that of the 4500 lots in the Rural Buffer approximately half of them would be nonconforming. However, those lots would only constitute 5 to 10~ of the total acreage in the Rural Buffer.` Nir. Smith continued asking the consequences of having a nonconforming lot. Collins responded that the nonconforming status stayed with the land until such time as the ordinance is amended to make it conforming or the property owner acquires additional land or takes whatever steps necessary to make the lot conforming. Roger Waldon, Chapel Hill Planning Director, presented Chapel Hill's perspective on Rural Buffer issues, Waldon began his presentation by commending the Orange County Planning Department on the Rural Buffer Study document. He indicated that he felt the policy analysis is one of the key points of the Rural Buffer Study which discusses the key issues and offers some good policy recommendations. He stated that from a staff perspective, Chapel Hill is in support of the recommendations as presented by Collins and that adoption of those recommendations would achieve the successful implementation of the Rural Buffer concept. Waldon stated that the Chapel Hill Land Use Plan and the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan have as a foundation the concept of a fixed urban. area surrounded by a low-density rural buffer. He indicated that such a concept would encourage urban development to occur in areas which can be most easily served by the urban services it will require. Such plans preserve the low-density nature of Central orange County. Waldon listed four points in answer to the question of "Why a 2-acre minimum lot size?" 1) when water and sewer are extended, development at urban type intensity occur; 2) the concept of a low-density rural buffer demands that water and sewer not be extended into the Rural Buffer; 3) a two-acre minimum lot size will insure that water and sewer are not extended, that the character of Central Orange County will be preserved and that ample land would be available for individual wastewater disposal systems now and in the future; 4) a minimum lot size requirement of one-acre would create a sprawling development pattern at such a density which would demand urban services. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mary Ellen Priestly stated that she and her husband had been property owners and taxpayers in Orange County since 1972. She noted appreciation for being able to live in a rural setting with trees and wildlife. She expressed concern with the impact that will be created by the opening of I-40. She encouraged maintaining the rural atmosphere of those rural areas of the county. She continued citing examples of the lass of rural communities she had witnessed in other areas. She encouraged the control of growth and she felt that the creation of the Rural Buffer and the two-acre minimum lot size to be a goad step forward in this effort. ,~ I i John F. Sharron asked that the reduction of the minimum lot size