Agenda - 05-04-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

O5 , 5 and the application of regulations within areas designated as transition areas. It specifies in the joint planning agreement that the County would adopt the Town development regulations in a transition area. The Town would then handle the permit applications that might come in for land in that area and would be responsible for enforcing regulations within that area. The County, however, would have what is called courtesy review which is a time period in which they could comment on and respond to any permit applications in that area. The transition area may be compared to what is called a rural buffer area. The rural buffer is adjacent to the transition area and is rural in character and is to be maintained in that character at a very low density. In this area, the process used for decision making would be that of the County, including the approval of applications in that area. Permit application and enforcement would be handled by the County but the Town would have an opportunity to comment on any permits that are sought in that area. One question for discussion tonight is where the line should be drawn between the transition area and the rural buffer area. The recommendation from the committee that has been working on this is to see that two basic principles should be observed. First, there should be sufficient area specified for transition areas to ensure that there is no undue pressure on the University Lake watershed and no undue pressure to the developments within the rural buffer area. Secondly, we hope that there could be a permanent line drawn between the transition area and the rural buffer area so that as time goes on we don't see a roll back of erosion of the rural buffer area. We hope that rural buffer could be established with permanent rural development protected for a long time. The committee has therefore recommended that the line be returned to where it had been earlier before the latest change by the County, back to the Bolin Creek watershed line. The reason for this in part is that where you have the Bolin Creek watershed line, there would be no extensions of water and sewer lines across the drainage divide, and OWASA would not provide water and sewer service to the rural buffer area beyond that line. We feel that could be a permanent line observed in the future. There are specific areas which may draw comment from you. One is the Duke Forest area just north of Eubanks Road. There has been some concern that there be adequate buffering around that area. I don't think that the committee has specifically addressed that but I don't see that there would be any objection to a lower density area around that Duke Forest area indicated on the map. I think there may be some questions as Duke has engaged in lumbering on that area now and what approach should be taken. That could be studied within the context of the decision we are talking about tonight. In addition, there has been some question raised about the area between Rogers Road and Eubanks Road and it is not marked in any dark color on your map. Within that area there is a subdivision called Fox Meadows with lots currently at a one unit per acre density. When the county considered going to a two acre minimum lot size within the rural buffer, a great deal of concern was expressed by the residents. It may be appropriate to comment on whether that area, which is developed at one unit per acre, should be included in the transition area. That is the first issue for discussion