Minutes - 19890828 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

u :~ `.~;) ~+ (~1) Article 23.2 Penalties ~ ~` ~ - ~, In summary this item was presented to recei~~e citizen comment on the proposed amendment to the Zonin; Ordinance to authorize issuance of Stop ~'orl: Orders for alleged violatior-s of the Zoning Ordinance. A bill to amend G.S. 1~3A-1r3 to authorize _ a County to issue Stop pork Orders for ~•iolations of land use ordinances has been ratified. The legislation allows a Zoning Officer to issue s Stop ~rorl; Order if it is determined that irreparable injury would occur if the alleged ~~iolation is riot terminated immediately. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance is needed before the new legislation can be implemented. c. Site Plans (1) Article 19 - Site Plan Approval Procedures (2) Article 8.8 -- Regulations Governing Special Uses In summary this item was presented to receive citizen comment on a proposed section to the Zoning Ordinance which would establish a set of standards for site plan applications, as well as a proposed amendment to Article 8 in~-olring site plans for Special Uses. Site plan approval is required in order to obtain a zonin; permit for most non-residential development and for multi-famil~• residential projects. Currently` there are no standards in the Ordinance for preparation and evaluation of site plans for permitted uses. The proposed Article I4 will list specifications for drawin;s as well as criteria for evaluations of projects. Article 8.8 lists additional information required for Class A and Class B Special Use Applications including items to be shown an the site plan. The proposed amendment will make reference to the more detailed site plan specifications listed in Article 1~1. The staff is recommending that the time limit be ~5 days rather than 10 days to alloh time for sufficient comment b~* the agencies reviewing these site plans. As a result, Special Use Applications will haze the same type of site plan information as permitted uses, but in more detail than is currently required. CDMMISSIONER MARSHALL asked tih3 the process could not start earlier. She indicated that she s. as concerned that time ~.ss being added to the process and this is one of the principle objections of the developers and builders. CRUDUP indicated that the staff could horl; hitli 30 da~•s rather than ~5 days. However, in certain cases, for example Duke Power and D.O.T., these documents ha~~e to be sent. to the Regional office which takes additional time. COMMISSIONER HALKIOTIS suggested that those companies focus on service to their customers and that the amount of time be set at 20 dat-s and nv mare. CHAIRbLAN CAREY requested that 1.2.2- on page 139 ask for a more specific number of copies. Requiring "no less than ~" is vague. CRUDUP indicated that the purpose of this wording is because these requirements are not in writing. The zoning and dimensional requirements are scattered throughout the ordinance. This brings the question of hog: to prepare and submit a site plan to;ether so that citizens will know ahead of time what will be required. For an addition to a church ~ copies would be enough but for a large industrial structure more could be needed. COMMISSIONER MARSHALL asked hoF a citizen hill I:now what to do if it is not clearl~- stated and Crudup explained that often the number of copies needed is not known until after the process was begun.