Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-21-2011 - 7d
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 06-21-2011
>
Agenda - 06-21-2011 - 7d
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2011 2:25:42 PM
Creation date
6/20/2011 2:25:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/21/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7d
Document Relationships
Minutes 06-21-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
ORD-2011-023 Ordinance Amending Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment - Office/Institutional (O/I) Zoning District and Other Related Sections
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
Attachment 3 <br />ORA~tC;E COUNTY PLANNING & IPI~PECTIONS DEPARTMENT <br />Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director <br />@f'1'1 O <br />ro: Planning Board <br />Board of County Commissioners <br />1=rankW. Clifton; Jr., County Manager <br />From: Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Planning Director <br />gate: June 1-, 2011 <br />Re: Office/Institutional_(O/I) UDO Text Amendments and Orange County Municipalities <br />In response to a request by the Board of County Commissioners at the May 23, 2011. <br />Quarterly Public Hearing (QPH), staff has researched- the development standards the <br />Towns of Catrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, and the City of Mebane utilize wi~hin their <br />Offrce/Institutional .(O/I) (or similar) zoning districts. <br />It is important to note that the municipalities and the County are separate governing bodies- <br />and.many of the zoning districts, uses, development regulations, etc., contained within each- <br />set ~f land use regulations differ, making an "apples to apples" comparison -not possible. <br />However, following ar-e brief summafions of-each municipa[ities' standards to compare to the <br />O/I zoning district standards proposed for modification in-the UDO text amendments item on <br />the May 23, 2011 QPH-and the June 1, 2011 Planning Board agendas. <br />Town of Carrboro <br />0 Office/Assembly_-(O/A) zoning- district similar to Orange County's Office/Institutional <br />(O/I) district <br />^ Does not establish Floor Areas Ratio (FAR) or Pedestrian/Landscape Ratio (PLR) for <br />zoning districts <br />^ Open space requirements for residential uses only <br />Town of Chapel Hill <br />^ Office/Institutional (O/1-1, <br />County's O/f district <br />^ Maximum FARs: <br />o O/I-1 & O/I-2:.264 <br />o O/I-3: .566 <br />o O/I-4: N/A <br />O!I-2, O/I-3 & O/I-4) zoning districts similar to Orange <br />15 <br />~~~n4c • ~u p` p <br />Administration 131 W. Margaret Lane <br />(919:} 245-255 ~ ~ Suite 201 <br />(919) 644-3002 n=qx) P O Box 8181 <br />www.co.oranae.nc.us ~;'r~ ~a~~''~ Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.