Agenda - 04-22-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

IP- : -7 f-2a ?. -•1111/4' gt_M- 0 93 • 10 PRESENTATION BY STAFF Director of Planning Marvin Collins referred to agenda items 5o and 6a and 6b. Article 5.1.1 is the schedule 'for residential development and refers to the required minimum recreation space ratio. The proposed amendment to the Subdivision regulations would require the dedication (or provision) of recreation facilities or a payment in lieu. The proposed amendment contains a formula for the computation of required recreation and/or open space area. The reason for the proposed amendment to the Zoning ordinance text is that in the AR, R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts there are no recreational space requirements. There are recreational space ratios for planned development. Recreational space ratios have also been added for non-residential uses in residential areas. These were based on the that already exist in the zoning ordinance. Marvin Collins summarized the proposed changes that would provide for recreation space and school sites in new subdivisions, and establish guidelines for the creation of homeowners' associations. The determination to accept payment-in-lieu would depend upon the existing recreation area in the area in which the subdivision is to be built. If there are already activities within an area, then the payment in lieu may be advisable. However, if the subdivision was of substantial size, then recreational improvements may be required within that development. If the development was not of substantial size, then the option of payment-in-lieu would be available. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD Commissioner Walker indicated he understood these amendments would only apply to multifamily dwellings. Steve Kizer noted that basically the amendment is to levy a recreational tax as a way to . equally distribute between all new dwellings and indicated there must be an easier formula to apply. He asked if it had been considered for the tax office to determine the value and set the rate accordingly. Marvin Collins indicated this as a possibility. Commissioner Marshall asked for clarification on when the Board would be requested to make the decision on whether it would be payment in lieu or dedication or if the developer would always have that choice. Marvin Collins indicated the decision would be made by the Board of Commissioners. Planning Board member Carl Walters asked about the relationship in property values and Collins indicated if there are any at all it would be based on location. A person in Chapel Hill or Caxrboro may be making a larger payment in lieu than someone in a rural area. Walters feels that mobile homes should be placed under the same regulations. Commissioner Marshall noted that the developer should be able to decide on the payment in lieu or dedication choice. Director of Recreation and Parks Mary Anne Black ask for additional time for the Recreation and Parks Council to consider these proposed amendments and have an opportunity for further comments. 7. FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS a. ARTICLE 4 -- FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION - FLOOR ELEVATIONS b. ARTICLE 4 - FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION - NON-RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE CERTIFICATION c. ARTICLE 4 - FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION - ANCHORING AND ELEVATION REQUIREMENTS (A complete narrative of the proposed amendments is on file in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office) .