Agenda - 06-11-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 requirement is to separate the different intensity uses. The Board's function 411 in this process is to determine if the applicant's proposal satisfies the intent for the 100' buffer requirement to an equal or greater degree. You should do that as part of your deliberating process. The applicant is going to demonstrate that their idea is better for the project. With respect to the sight distance requirements and ratio requirements, these may not be modified and, therefore, the applicant must comply. Mayor Nassif questioned how the Boards could proceed with a public hearing if a project was not in compliance with the Ordinance? Gledhill responded that they would have to ask for a waiver of the requirements or the Boards can review the proposal and include compliance or modification as an condition of approval. In this case, the applicant's layout may have led the planning staff to make assumptions about each lot in the subdivision that are not correct. What we are going to determine based on the evidence presented here tonight is whether those two requirements are met by the applicant and to determine if they are not and whether it can be • addressed by imposing special conditions. Mayor Nassif asked if he had a project to present to the County if he could submit the project and not necessarily comply with the stipulations or the Ordinances and still come before the Board and prove that, even though he does not comply, he has a good project. Is that the typical way the County would consider it? Gledhill stated that usually when the applicant does not fulfill all the requirements, the application is returned to the applicant as incomplete. He indicated that the sight distances had likely been an oversight. Collins responded that when the applicant addressed the sight distance requirements in this particular situation, the applicant had reviewed the 410 proposal with the Department of Transportation and the plan was revised to reflect NC DOT sight distance requirements. Staff realizes the applicant has complied with NCDOT requirements. Collins stated the planning staff felt the buffer modification is justified. Discussion followed regarding buffer requirements for the Town of Chapel Hill and their application to future development of adjacent properties. Collins stated he felt a 100' buffer was excessive for this subdivision. Shirley Marshall stated she felt there needs to be a combined Land Use Plan for the Joint Planning Area where the town would have the decision- making capability. Nassif questioned how a determination would be reached as far as which property is going to be the highest density -what if the next proposal comes in with acre lots? Would that one have to give up the 100'? Collins answered no. Development of one acre lots would be at R-1 density and would not have to provide the buffer. Nassif asked who would have to provide the buffer, and whether it was a floating requirement of the County. Collins explained the requirements of the County subdivision regulations noting that if the property adjacent to this was subdivided under the current zoning buffer requirements could be imposed if needed. Alice Ingram questioned if what the applicant proposes would meet Chapel Hill's standards? Is the applicant asking for a total waiver? Collins responded that the applicant has asked for a waiver of the 100' buffer in our jurisdiction, Chapel Hill's 30-50' buffer is adjacent to Sunrise and Weaver Dairy 0 Roads and operates as well along the perimeter in the Town's jurisdiction. Ms. Kawalec stated her concern about the lots along 1-40. Does each of those lots contain 20,000 square feet in addition to the 100' buffer or is the 100' buffer included in the 20,000 square feet minimum of the lots? Collins answered that the Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) buffer is included in each lot size. The lot sizes adjacent to 1-40 vary from 1/2 acre