Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
ro <br />Planning Staff Notes of Board of County Commissioners Comments -- First Draft UDO, Aug. 11, 2010 6 N <br />1) Incorporated; 2) For further BOCC discussion; 3) Implementation Bridge — Possible future phases; 4) Suggesting no action 10/8/2010 <br />Received <br />Section <br />Comment Received <br />Staff Note <br />90. <br />9/1712010 <br />6.8.4 B 2 <br />May be too broad. Definition of Primary Tree Protection Area. <br />4 <br />91. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.4 B 4 <br />Heritage tree? Delete. <br />1 <br />92. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.4 (B) 11 <br />How about gravel within the drip line? <br />1 <br />93. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.5 <br />Different standards may be needed for EDDs. <br />3 <br />94. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.5 A 3 <br />Incomplete sentence. To provide a look? <br />1 <br />95. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.5 A 7 <br />Where can CPTED standards be found? <br />1 <br />96. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.5 (C) (3) (e) <br />Mixing of "Shrub" Species? Why would we want to prohibit a hedge? <br />Consult the County's Open Space Design Specialist in this area. <br />1 <br />97. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.5E 2 <br />Regarding "at any time ", time should be limited. <br />1 <br />98. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.6E 2 <br />Need definition of Critical Root System. <br />1 <br />99. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.6 F 1 <br />Enforceability of five year enforcement questioned. <br />1 <br />100. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.7 D 2 a i <br />This conflicts with section dealing with pa vin within a root zone. <br />1 <br />101. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.10 (C) (1) <br />If proposing a subdivision, one may not know the location of the <br />things re quested here. <br />1 <br />102. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.8.10 C) 5 <br />Four inches is not appropriate. <br />1 <br />103. <br />9117/2010 <br />6.8.12 C 8 <br />Check tree caliper for consistency throughout. <br />1 <br />104. <br />9/1712010 <br />6.9.10 D 4 <br />Check for consistency with ADA requirements. <br />1 <br />105. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.12.5 (N) (4) & (5) <br />Can't limit political signs more than other signs. County attorney to <br />review. <br />1 <br />106. <br />9117/2010 <br />6.12.5 N 7 <br />"seven" days not constitutional. Attorney recommends 21 days <br />1 <br />107. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.12.6 G <br />Do we want to prohibit all three - dimensional signs? <br />1 <br />108. <br />9117/2010 <br />6.12.11 <br />Formatting issue. Item (A) (6) should become "(B)" and item (B) <br />should become "(C)". <br />1 <br />109. <br />9/17/2010 <br />May need sign standards that are different between urban and rural <br />areas. <br />3 <br />110. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.13.3 A <br />500 -year flood elevation could be less than the Count, 's buffer <br />requirements in some cases. The greater of the two may be more <br />pRpropriate. <br />1 <br />111. <br />9/17/2010 <br />6.13.6 (C) <br />Consider allowing natural materials or recyclables such as crushed <br />lass. 1 <br />4 <br />1) Incorporated; 2) For further BOCC discussion; 3) Implementation Bridge — Possible future phases; 4) Suggesting no action 10/8/2010 <br />