Agenda - 11-24-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Inc. , and Mrs. Edna C. Harville. 4 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS OF CLARIFICATION Several members of the audience asked questions of clarification. These were answered by Marvin Collins. In answer to a question from Commissioner Lloyd, Collins explained that the 6% impervious ratio has no real relationship to the Rural Buffer. It would apply indirectly for Planned Developments through application of the open space ratio. It does not apply to individual lots. Collins explained that if there is a planned development in the Rural Buffer whereby cluster units are proposed, the two- acre minimum would still apply in terms of overall density. Collins explained that any plan that has not received preliminary plan approval or sketch plan approval in the case of phased developments where at least one phase has received preliminary plan approval, will be required to meet the two-acre minimum lot size if within the AR and R1 district. Several in the audience expressed the fact that they knew nothing about any of the informational meetings or public hearings that were held or the issues being discussed. Marvin Collins explained that what is being presented for public comment is a proposed zoning district designation. It has not existed before and the dimensional requirements that are being proposed have not existed before. The two acre minimum lot size standard was approved as a part of the Joint Planning Area Plan. Marvin Collins explained that the extension of water and sewer will be controlled by the two acre minimum lot size requirement in that such extensions are cost prohibitive for such large lots. COMMENTS +UESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS In answer to a question from Commissioner Lloyd, Collins stated that the extension of water and sewer into the Rural Buffer will be prevented from reaching that area. If water and sewer were allowed in the RB, there would be a great deal of pressure to develop and the very low density area that would be achieved by this change would be lost. Collins explained that if a person owned three acres and wanted to subdivide, that each lot would need to have 1.6 acres or 80% of the two acre minimum lot size requirement. It would have to meet the 200 foot width requirement - 80% of which would be 160 feet. Chair Don Willhoit made reference to the number of lots that would be made nonconforming and asked if it was absolutely required that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to be consistent with the Land use Plan in that regard or could it be just a part of the Land Use Plan and applied prospectively to subdivisions. Collins indicated it could be done but there would forever be a contradiction in the standards contained in the two ordinances and the