Browse
Search
ORD-2000-143 Stream Buffer Zoning Ordinance Amendments
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2000-2009
>
2000
>
ORD-2000-143 Stream Buffer Zoning Ordinance Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2015 9:13:36 AM
Creation date
4/9/2013 3:24:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/4/2000
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Resolution
Agenda Item
9d
Document Relationships
Agenda - 12-04-2000-9d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2000's\2000\Agenda - 12-04-2000
Minutes - 12-04-2000
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
^ ' <br /> 2 16 <br /> ' i with a recommendation back to the Commissioners no earlier than October 3rd. The Ordinance <br /> 2 Review Committee will also review these amendments. <br /> 3 Commissioner Gordon made reference bo the statement on page four, Section 7, <br /> 4 "Usable lots for parcels between 40,000 square feet and 1.99 acres in size shall be either 30,000 <br /> 5 square feet or 40%of the total zoning lot,whichever is greater. Zoning lots two acres and greater <br /> 0 shall have a minimum usable lot area ofet least 4O.00O square haet." She asked if some kind of <br /> 7 usable lot area could bm settled on and required for everybody instead cf stepping itup. Robert <br /> 8 Davis said that the 40%was adde'd because there was quite a gap between 40,000 and two acres. <br /> 9 Commissioner Gordon said that her point was that the amount of square footage should <br /> lO be justified. Her question ia why more should Ue added to the justified amount. <br /> I Craig Benedict said that 30.OD0 square feet was the definite minimum because it would <br /> l% accommodate the house site, driveway, septic area, and repair area with a margin for some | <br /> � <br /> 13 accessory structures. With zoning lots of two acres or more,the people who are going to have a <br /> 14 two-acre lot would most likely have other accessory structures that would need additional usable <br /> 15 area. He agrees that the 4096 is not critical on the smaller lot size. <br /> 10 Commissioner Jacobs suggested that it would nice boinclude an illustration onthe <br /> 17 definition mfm steep slope. He asked about Section one and the Usable Lot. Ha asked about <br /> l& conservation easements. Craig Benedict said that they were definitely not trying bodiscourage <br /> ig conservation, but that stream buffers or conservatio6 easements should not be included in the <br /> 2O accomplishment of the minimum lot size. <br /> 31 Rachel Preston asked if there was any verbiage on what a homeowner could do to <br /> 22 streams and vegetation. Craig Benedict said that it was handled by the Erosion Control and <br /> 23 Sedimentation Ordinance,which says that natural water courses are not supposed to be diverted. <br /> 24 There io encroachment to some degree but changing woteroournes\o |bnitedintbamajority of <br /> 25 ueaea. If there is any disturbance of this nature,there has to be some kind of mitigation. <br /> 26 Commissioner Brown asked if this establishes a3O-foot buffer and Craig Benedict said <br /> 27 that it did establish s3O-fomt buffer in areas that are not part ofthe protected watershed. <br /> 28 Bob Strmyhomm and Runyon Woods mfthe Planning Board made comments, but <br /> 29 they were not speaking into the microphone,so8could not hear them. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> 32 Mr. Joe Phelps said that he did not know that his subdivision request would cause so <br /> 33 much work and sP many drastic changes inthe rules and regulations ofthe Zoning Ordinance. He <br /> 34 feels that the changes in the rules and regulations are very drastic. He feels that most ofthese <br /> 35 amendments are not necessary. He questioned why the County Commissioners would want toput <br /> 36 stream buffers on areas that are in the non-protected watershed. He supports affordable housing <br /> 37 and thinks that with these new rules on development, no one could afford to buy land in Orange <br /> 38 County. His main concern is what is being taken away from present landowners with regard to the <br /> 39 3396of required open space with nocompensation. He said that these new regulations would <br /> 40 greatly reduce the number of people that would ba coming into Orange County|n the next 30 <br /> 41 years. <br /> 42 Scott Radway had some questions on what was meant bvthe proposals. <br /> 43 SectionmI -UsabUe Lot Area-steep slopes(ie.. greater than 1S%). He prefers a25Y6 <br /> 44 grade. . <br /> 45 Wildlife Corridors-as identified by whom, when,where, and for what purpose <br /> 46 Section 2~Stream Buffer-who identifies the floudp|aina <br /> 47 Minimum buffers that are not in protected watersheds-why 30 feet and not more <br /> 48 Section 6-Minimum Usable Lot Areas-should say minimum usable lot area for lots <br /> 49 that utilize ground absorption <br /> 50 30,000 or 40,00@ square feet lot'much easier to say 30.00Oor4O,DOO and not 4096 <br /> 51 � <br /> 52 Bobby Nichols said that ha has stream buffers on his land that he is concerned about. <br /> 53 He made reference bn page three, section two, which . ^nmuotnammain undisturbed in �enatural <br /> 54 etate.^ and asked for ade�ndUmn. Craig ReMadi` �' idthmtifn#nmeonmowned |andthotm/aom/ithin <br /> - - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.