Agenda - 02-03-1997 - 9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

21 12119196 Final Draft 4 impacts may include pollution of air, water, and soil from long-term use of fertilizers, pesticides, loss of habitat and displacement of wildlife, erosion and sedimentation, alteration of the microclimate, changes to the visual environment, and water supply demand for irrigation. These potential impacts are not associated with every golf course. Research completed to date is insufficient to identify widespread problems. The proposed ordinance amendments were not drafted to target a particular problem with existing golf courses in Orange County, but to prevent degradation of the environment from golf course developments proposed in the future. The text of the amendment reflects the philosophy of the task force which was to try to address adverse impacts and safety concerns while leaving aesthetics and style of play to the discretion of the golf course owner. As part of the proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance, in Article 4.3, a golf course would be allowed as a Class A Special Use rather than a permitted use in AR and residential zoning districts. It would no longer be permitted in commercial or industrial districts. Revisions to Article 6 include deleting the four(4) current"standards" for golf courses (6.16.10), prohibiting new golf courses in critical areas of protected watersheds (6.23.1), and allowing trees to be cut in a stream buffer when they block the line of play (6.23.7). The definition of golf course in Article 22 is also revised to remove minimum acreage requirements. A new section of Article 8, Special Uses, is proposed to include standards for components of golf courses such as access, circulation, and parking; landscaping and buffers; habitat areas, maintenance and storage areas, etc. Provisions for activities such as construction, irrigation, stormwater management, maintenance, and pollutant monitoring are proposed as well. Minimum required acreages for courses with nine or eighteen holes were not included because the task force decided that other standards and dimensional requirements such as setbacks, buffers, and habitat protection would have more effect on the quality of site design than a minimum lot size for the use. Furthermore, different styles of course such as regulation, executive, championship, or youth courses have different acreage requirements based on variations in design. Points recommended for further discussion: In their deliberations, the Golf CART discussed (without reaching consensus) other sections of the Zoning Ordinance which may need reconsideration to effectively address golf courses and possibly other similar large scale land uses. Some task force members felt that the civil penalties established in Article 23 to remedy a violation of the ordinance would not be large enough in proportion to the size of a golf course development project to elicit corrective action from a land owner once he or she had failed to respond to a written notification of violation. Other members suggested that a Stop Work Order (also in Article 23) would be more effective when a golf course developer is not in compliance with the terms of a Special Use Permit. Article 8.7 of the Zoning Ordinance contains provisions for changing a Special Use Permit after the original approval. Minor changes may be approved by the Zoning Officer, while modifications that do not meet the ten criteria for minor changes are subject to review at a public hearing before