Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
27 <br />Developer Concerns At Churton Grove <br />Violations of County Ordinances and/or Special Use Pearmit Conditions <br />1. Sequencing and Timing for Constructing Churton Grove and Braddock Park <br />a) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that the commencement of Phase III and the commencement of Phase <br />IV prior to the completion of Phase II-B in its entirety is not a modification to condition #37 of the Special Use <br />Permit? <br />b) Furthermore, is it the legal opinion of Orange County that authorization for the commencement of Phase III and <br />the commencement of Phase IV prior to the completion of Phase II-B does not require action by the approving <br />board according to Orange County Ordinance 50-237? <br />c) Additionally,~to the extent the county believes the sequencing of Phases III and IV are unaffected by the <br />completion of Phase II-B please comment on the relevance of a letter dated May 22, 2002 from the Orange <br />County Planning & Inspections Department to Churton Grove LLC which states that "condition number <br />37...requires each phase to be platted, constructed or bonded in the phasing order as listed." <br />2. Non Satisfactory Completion of Phase I, II, and III Elements <br />a) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that all elements of Phase I, II, and III "aze deemed satisfactory in <br />relation to the total development" in accordance with Orange County Ordinance 50-199(a)? <br />b) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that any further permit requiring work can proceed within Phase IV in <br />compliance with Orange County Ordinance 50-199(a) despite the concerns documented (in this document and <br />in other homeowner correspondence with the county)? <br />3. Inadequate Amount of Open Space <br />a) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that recorded and proposed site plans for the 329.96 acres covered <br />within the Special Use Agreement, and the subdivisions therein, comply with the open space composition, <br />accessibility, shape and size requirements as set forth in section 46-82 of the Orange County subdivision <br />regulations, generally; and in 46-82(c)1 specifically? <br />b) To the extent that a reduction in total amount of required open space was approved due to "special <br />circumstances," what is the county's legal opinion regarding the amount of said reduction and the total acreage <br />of open space required for the 329.96 acres covered within the Special Use Agreement as it relates to <br />requirements set forth in section 50-197(4)a pf the Planned Development District regulations? <br />c) When developer abandoned Phase 2, "Open Space C" and established in its place residential Lot 118 (per Book <br />91, Page 22) did county require or did developer establish a separate open space parcel elsewhere within the <br />development to replace open space acreage lost by "Open Space C?" <br />4. Use of Off Site Conservation Areas to Meet Open Space Requirements <br />To the county's knowledge have any Developers (past or present) sought the use of off-site primary conservation <br />areas to meet the mandatory minimum open space requirements of section 46-82 of the subdivision regulations? <br />5. Pool Inadequately Sized for Build Out of 800 Families <br />a) Is it the opinion of Orange County that the swimming pool located on the parcel with the legal description <br />"LEASE AREA PH 2 CHURTON GROVE" (PIN #9875815631), having an approximate surface area of 4000 <br />squaze feet and thus able to serve approximately 150 individual swimmers according to Orange County. <br />Ordinance 46-79b(4), is sufficiently sized to serve the leisure needs of approximately 260 single family homes <br />in Phases I, II, and III; approximately 140 single family homes in phase 4; approximately 175 multi-family units <br />in Braddock Park; and 250 "Patron Memberships" as specified in an AMENITIES AGREEMENT. registered <br />with Orange County (Book 2255, Page 14)? <br />