Agenda - 04-22-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 09'i ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 22, 1986 ACTION AGENDA ITEM VII SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS 11 ***************************************-******************************** DEPARTMENT: PLANNING/RECREATION PUBLIC HEARING: X YES NO *********************************************************************** ATTACHMENTS: CONTACT: MARVIN COLLINS PROPOSED RECREATION STANDARDS MARY ANN BLACK TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 967-9251 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 227-2031 ********************.*************************************************** PURPOSE: To receive further staff reports on administration of the payment- in- lieu provisions of the proposed Subdivision Regulation amendments pertaining to recreation standards. NEED: At the February 24, 1986 public hearing, specific concerns were identified involving the method and amount of payments- in-lieu, accumulation of disparate (widely separated) parcels, the applicability of the standards to multi-family and single-family projects, and the relationship of the recreation space requirements to the Land Use Plan . The Board continued the public hearing on the proposed recreation standards until April 7 to allow the Planning and Recreation Staffs to contact other jurisdictions regarding their experience in administration of similar provisions. At the April 7 meeting, staff recommended continuation of the public hearing until this meeting in order to meet with the Triangle J Land Conservancy Council . The purpose of the meeting was to determine if that organization would hold recreation/open space lands in trust until such time as the County is ready to develop/maintain recreation areas. IMPACT: Staff has met with the Triangle J Land Conservancy Council and with the Recreation Directors of Cary and Chapel Hill , both of which are administering similar ordinances. Staff has also reviewed the ordinances of nine other jurisdictions. Based on the meetings and staff research, a number of changes are being considered. While changes to individual sections are not significant, the overall number of changes is substantial in relation to the advertised proposal . For this reason, staff feels that the proposal , including recommended changes, should be readvertised to insure compliance with General Statute provisions regarding ordinance amendments.