Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
exception of adding back in the two conditions that the Planning Board dropped. He said that at <br /> the Planning Board meeting, the developer agreed to put in a walking trail through the open <br /> space. The issue is not whether or not a walking trail will go in there, but exactly how it goes in <br /> and how much area it will encompass. He said that, in general, part of the zoning ordinance <br /> that is being applied here to create this requirement of private recreation space is being <br /> misapplied in subdivisions of this variety. He said that what is being calculated for this <br /> subdivision does not make sense, particularly if what the staff is saying is that none of the open <br /> space that is being provided counts towards that private recreation space area. If that is the <br /> case, then this subdivision is being penalized for providing open space and creating lots bigger <br /> than the minimum: <br /> • Chair Jacobs said that the issue Mr. Yuhasz is referring to is on page 7, items 3 and 4. <br /> Robert Davis said that if the developer provided more open space under this plan, then <br /> recreation space would be less. What drives the number is the 2.8% of the total. <br /> In answer to a question from Commissioner Nelson, Geof Gledhill said that the <br /> Homeowner's Association could prohibit any active use of the open space <br /> requirement in the regulations that says that the recreation must be active. He thinks that it is <br /> not reasonable for the staff to say that the 35% open space cannot be counted as recreation <br /> space. <br /> Geof Gledhill said that the focus is on making sure the property is put into the <br /> Homeowner's Association (HOA) agreement, and that it remains open space. The priority in <br /> regulations with respect to open space is not active recreation. <br /> Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 7, # 3 and #4, and asked if this was <br /> passed, could the HOA put it into the open space. She said that it is not a lot of acreage. <br /> Robert Davis provided some additional information. <br /> Steve Yuhasz said that the developer has already committed to a trail, and the <br /> question is how many trees have to be cut down to make this trail. The developer does not <br /> want to have to make a commitment to cut down an acre's worth of trees to create the trail. <br /> Robert Davis said that only the limbs will be cut. <br /> Steve Yuhasz said that the Planning staff is saying to the developers that they have to <br /> provide 33% open space, but none of it will be counted as recreation space. This does not <br /> make sense, but penalizes them for providing open space. Geof Gledhill said that the issue is <br /> whether the open space will count toward active recreation space. If the open space is only for <br /> visual amenity, it is not active recreation space. He said that one way to get resolution of this is <br /> to have the applicant come back with a plan about what the trail system might look like. <br /> Chair Jacobs said that he does not see anywhere where it says "improved trail". He <br /> said that the whole issue of how to count the open space is something the Planning Board <br /> should look at. He said that there should be some recognition or incentive that the developer <br /> went above and beyond the open space requirement. <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon to refer this back to staff to work with <br /> the developer to resolve the issue about active recreation, open space and the trail system. <br /> Chair Jacobs made reference to page 25 and the DOT letter regarding accepting the roads for <br /> public maintenance. He asked if this had been addressed. Steve Yuhasz said that, as a <br /> general rule, detailed road construction plans are never submitted to DOT until there has been <br /> preliminary plan approval because the road alignment and other things might need to change. <br /> Chair Jacobs asked clarifying questions about the stub out issue. <br /> He said that there is plenty of language in the ordinance that talks about the importance of <br /> connectivity. Chair Jacobs verified that the Planning staff recommended the stub out, but the <br /> Planning Board did not. <br /> Geof Gledhill said that the reason that the administration is ok with the <br /> recommendation about the stub out is not because of ordinance problems, but because of the <br />