ORD-2000-131 Stream Buffer Zoning Ordinance Amendments

Browse Search

wildlife corridors, ponds, lakes, and streams. This item will be going back to the Planning Board with a recommendation back to the Commissioners no earlier than October 3rd. The Ordinance Review Committee will also review these amendments. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the statement on page four, Section 7, "Usable lots for parcels between 40,000 square feet and 1.99 acres in size shall be either 30,000 square feet or 40% of the total zoning lot, whichever is greater. Zoning lots two acres and greater shall have a minimum usable lot area of at least 40,000 square feet." She asked if some kind of usable lot area could be settled on and required for everybody instead of stepping it up. Robert Davis said that the 40% was added because there was quite a gap between 40,000 and two acres. Commissioner Gordon said that her point was that the amount of square footage should be justified. Her question is why more should be added to the justified amount. Craig Benedict said that 30,000 square feet was the definite minimum because it would accommodate the house site, driveway, septic area, and repair area with a margin for some accessory structures. With zoning lots of two acres or more, the people who are going to have a two-acre lot would most likely have other accessory structures that would need additional usable area. He agrees that the 40% is not critical on the smaller lot size. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that it would be nice to include an illustration on the definition of a steep slope. He asked about Section one and the Usable Lot. He asked about conservation easements. Craig Benedict said that they were definitely not trying to discourage conservation, but that stream buffers or conservation easements should not be included in the accomplishment of the minimum lot size. Rachel Preston asked if there was any verbiage on what a homeowner could do to streams and vegetation. Craig Benedict said that it was handled by the Erosion Control and Sedimentation Ordinance, which says that natural water courses are not supposed to be diverted. There is encroachment to some degree but changing water courses is limited in the majority of cases. If there is any disturbance of this nature, there has to be some kind of mitigation. Commissioner Brown asked if this establishes a 30-foot buffer and Craig Benedict said that it did establish a 30-foot buffer in areas that are not part of the protected watershed. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Joe Phelps said that he did not know that his subdivision request would cause so much work and so many drastic changes in the rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. He feels that the changes in the rules and regulations are very drastic. He feels that most of these amendments are not necessary. He questioned why the County Commissioners would want to put stream buffers in areas that are in the non-protected watershed. He supports affordable housing and thinks that with these new rules on development, no one could afford to buy land in Orange County. His main concern is what is being taken away from present landowners with regard to the 33% of required open space with no compensation. He said that these new regulations would greatly reduce the number of people coming into Orange County in the next 30 years. Scott Radway had some questions on what was meant by the proposals. Section 1 - Usable Lot Area -steep slopes (i.e., greater than 15%). He prefers a 25% grade. Wildlife Corridors - as identified by whom, when, where, and for what purpose Section 2 -Stream Buffer-who identifies the floodplains Minimum buffers that are not in protected watersheds -why 30 feet and not more Section 6 - Minimum Usable Lot Areas - should say minimum usable lot area for lots that utilize ground absorption 30,000 or 40,000 square feet lot- much easier to say 30,000 or 40,000 and not 40% Bobby Nichols said that he has stream buffers on his land that he is concerned about. He made reference to page three, section two, which says, "must remain undisturbed in its natural state," and asked for a definition. Craig Benedict said that if someone owned land that was within the floodplain and wants to have any type of agricultural production or forestry, they are exempted by the majority of state laws.