Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Attachment 3 269 <br />FUTURE PHASE SUGGESTIONS RECEIVED TO DATE <br />September 20, 2010 <br />The list below are ideas Planning staff received as part of the UDO review process or is <br />aware of because the idea was raised during the 2030 Comprehensive Plan process. At <br />this time, these ideas are not being incorporated into the LIDO as they exceed the scope <br />of work with which staff was approved to proceed. <br />1. No mention of Town of Hillsborough interlocal agreement. Add a footnote or a new <br />section. [Staff note: references to the Orange County - Hillsborough Interlocal <br />Agreement should be added when Zoning /UDO- related items are formally adopted. <br />At this point, a neither a joint land use plan nor joint development regulations have <br />been adopted]. <br />2. Where we have electronic means to notify the public, we should add. <br />3. Differentiate between urban and rural character -- applicable to signage and <br />subdivision impacts on transportation. <br />4. Not applicable if flexible development option used -- Section 2.15.2 (C) (5) <br />5. Need language that will differentiate between the different types of residential zoning <br />districts. <br />6. Regarding Impervious Surface Ratios and Sliding Scales, the two tables should be <br />combined into one. Need to understand ramifications of any proposed changes -- <br />Section 4.2.5. <br />7. Some home occupations are permitted but not associated storage? This needs <br />clarification. <br />8. Kennels and Riding Stables should be addressed separately. Should they require a <br />Class A or Class B Special Use Permit? <br />9. How open space areas of golf courses are counted towards meeting ordinance <br />requirements. <br />10. Change to Class "A" Special Use Permit, which would require BOCC approval rather <br />than Board of Adjustment -- Section 5.9.5 <br />11. Include hours of operation. Lighting comes to mind -- Section 5.14.2 (A) (1) <br />12. Add no fault well repair to requirements. <br />13. Is there any limit to building height? Flag for future. <br />14. Different landscaping standards may be needed for EDDs. <br />15. Need to revisit private road standards. <br />16. There's a lack of land use criteria for reserving school sites. Need some general <br />guidelines (i.e. not in wetlands or on slopes greater than X). Consult County School <br />Joint Construction Standards. <br />17. Relation to adjacent properties is not addressed -- Section 7.13.3 (C) (1) <br />18. Mention Water and Sewer Management and Planning Boundary Agreement. Any <br />system should be designed, planned, constructed and maintained by the responsible <br />entity as assigned through the Agreement -- Section 7.13.4 (C) (1) (b) <br />19. Are there provisions for shared driveways? It may be useful in certain cases (i.e. <br />along highways /major roadways). <br />20. Many places in the UDO have a restriction on the height of a building. While <br />residential structures tend to have 9 to 12 feet per floor, commercial structures can <br />have as much as 15 feet per floor. As the structure covers more area, the roof can <br />have a substantial amount of height to it if it is not a flat roof. Architectural details <br />such as facades and cupolas can affect the height. <br />21. My comment is this: Would it make more sense to specify the number of occupied <br />stories as a limit on the structure? An occupied story would not include attic space <br />