Orange County NC Website
47 <br />• Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be <br />returned to the Board of County Commissioners in time for the April 15, 2014 BOCC <br />regular meeting. <br />• Adjourn the public hearing until April 15, 2014 in order to receive and accept the <br />Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. <br />Perdita Holtz said there is already a similar overlay district along Highway 70. She <br />reviewed the comprehensive plan graphic and said the zoning districts need to be consistent <br />with the comprehensive plan. She said the area where the proposed overlay district is located <br />is a commercial /industrial transition activity node. She said staff is also suggesting a tick mark <br />be added in the other three transition land use classifications, so that any future overlay districts <br />that are contemplated will not require a comprehensive plan amendment. <br />She reviewed the map of the Zoning Atlas Amendment, as well as the Future Land Use <br />Map and the map of the overlay district mentioned earlier. She said the proposed text <br />amendments contain amendments to several areas. She said the current development <br />regulations primarily address development on large size lots. <br />Referring to the slide "Synopsis of Changes (Efland Village Overlay District only ", she <br />noted that varied setbacks along an individual street create a more chaotic feel and look. She <br />said it is good urban design for a village setting to have consistent setbacks. <br />Chair Jacobs asked for an explanation of how all of this came to be proposed. <br />Perdita Holtz said this is part of the Efland Mebane small area plan, which was a plan <br />made up of appointed residents in the area. She said this is a community driven plan, and it is <br />based on recommended standards for achieving good development. <br />Commissioner McKee noted that the Efland Mebane small area plan was brought <br />forward in 2004, and the committee ran for two years. He asked if staff has gone back to the <br />community since 2006. <br />Perdita Holtz said committee meetings were held when the zoning overlay districts were <br />last proposed, and public information meetings were held in 2012. She said these meetings <br />were not held for these changes, as these are substantially similar to what was proposed in <br />2012. <br />Commissioner McKee said, since this was denied by the Board in 2013, it would have <br />been good to go back to the community to get their response before moving forward with <br />another proposal. <br />Perdita Holtz said the amendment outline form for this item specifically stated that there <br />would not be another public outreach meeting and the reason why. She said this was because <br />this has already undergone public comment in the past, but she understands the concern. <br />Commissioner Price asked for an explanation of the rationale behind the fencing. <br />Perdita Holtz said this does not apply to single family houses, but it has to do with the <br />aesthetics of having chain link or other fencing in the front yard. <br />Commissioner Price asked why there is an aversion to chain link fences. <br />Perdita Holtz said the committee expressed concern about this if there was a lot of <br />commercial development. <br />Commissioner Price asked if this would apply to a duplex. <br />Perdita Holtz said you would not be able to have a chain link fence in the front yard. <br />Commissioner McKee asked about the drive - throughs. He asked if drive - throughs along <br />highway 70 on any commercial facility would be banned. <br />Perdita Holtz said that is correct. She said there was a point in the small area plan that <br />these would not be permitted in the Efland Village, but it would be permitted in the interstate <br />district. She said the concern was having a string of fast food restaurants cropping up on <br />Highway 70. <br />