Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - 5-d - Zoning Atlas Amendment Conditional Zoning – Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) Harts Mill - Closure of PH and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted)
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2015
>
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - 5-d - Zoning Atlas Amendment Conditional Zoning – Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) Harts Mill - Closure of PH and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2015 9:56:19 AM
Creation date
10/30/2015 9:05:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/5/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5d
Document Relationships
2015-593 SOC of Proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment to rezone property allowing for development of a village style residential community
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Contracts and Agreements\General Contracts and Agreements\2010's\2015
Minutes 11-05-2015
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2015
ORD-2015-030 Ordinance Amending the Orange County Zoning Atlas
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
3 <br /> Overlay District allowing for a density of 1 dwelling unit for every 40,000 sq. ft. <br /> (0.92 acres) of property. <br /> The property is also located within the 20 Year Transition Area as denoted on the <br /> Future Land Use Map and is designated as being Urban on the Growth <br /> Management System Map indicating urban densities are permitted. <br /> This could result in a total of 112 dwelling units being developed on the property <br /> based purely on the size of the parcel and not taking other factors into <br /> consideration (i.e. adequate soils for septic, road access, permitting process, <br /> presence of stream and other environmental features, etc.). <br /> If approved the project would only allow for 1 dwelling unit for approximately every <br /> 3.2 acres of property and 34 dwelling units. <br /> 5. A Planning Board member asked if additional dwelling units could be added in the future. <br /> STAFF COMMENT: The plan could be modified through the submittal and <br /> processing of a new Conditional Zoning District petition. This would require <br /> holding a new neighborhood information meeting and a public hearing to review <br /> the proposal. <br /> 6. A BOCC member asked if the applicant was being asked to extend road access to <br /> adjacent parcels. <br /> STAFF COMMENT: It is not practical to extend the proposed roadway to the east <br /> due to the presence of streams and floodplain. There is no perceived benefit in <br /> requiring connection with adjoining subdivisions as this could create traffic <br /> concerns for adjacent neighborhoods. <br /> 7. A BOCC member asked the applicant to provide additional detail on the proposed 6 inch <br /> water line serving the project and if the line would be adequate to support water for both <br /> consumption and firefighting capabilities. <br /> STAFF COMMENT: Please refer to Attachment 3 of the abstract for the <br /> applicant's response. <br /> In consultation with the Fire Marshal and Orange County Emergency Services <br /> staff is recommending a condition requiring the final size of required waterlines to <br /> be determined at time of permitting with the review and approval of the Orange <br /> County Fire Marshal. <br /> 8. Several BOCC members asked for clarification on the proposed septic system for the <br /> project. <br /> STAFF COMMENT: Please refer to Attachment 3 of the abstract for the <br /> applicant's response. <br /> 9. Planning staff indicated the applicant was asked to provide additional detail on proposed <br /> landscaping in and around individual residential structures. <br /> STAFF COMMENT: Please refer to Attachment 3 of the abstract for the <br /> applicant's response. <br /> At the July 1, 2015 Planning Board meeting the following additional information was requested: <br /> a. A Planning Board member asked if there were any marketing materials available <br /> for the project and, if so, if copies could be provided. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.