Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-19-1987
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Agenda - 05-19-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2016 4:19:00 PM
Creation date
9/29/2016 11:56:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/19/1987
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
318
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
07 ' <br /> 7 <br /> Collins explained that for each individual property within an <br /> area there 1s a value placed on those development rights which <br /> may be on an acreage or per lot basis and the value is <br /> assigned by the County working with the individual property <br /> owners. The rights are then transferred to another portion of <br /> the County. Receiving areas are identified. He noted that <br /> this had been an successful program in Montgomery County, <br /> Maryland in relation to agricultural preservation. He also <br /> noted it had been successful in the Pinelands of New Jersey <br /> for environmental protection as well as agriculture <br /> preservation . <br /> 9. Amend Cluster Development provisions to encourage its use. <br /> Collins stated that this would promote the provision of open <br /> space In the Rural Buffer. <br /> 10. Collect additional data on : <br /> a. environmentally significant areas; <br /> b. septic system failures; <br /> c. techniques to maintain visual quality. <br /> Collins indicated a more in-depth study should be done to more <br /> accurately determine the situation with septic tank failures. <br /> The need for an inventory of environmentally sensitive areas <br /> in Orange County has also been indicated. <br /> Planning Staff also feels the need for a study to ascertain <br /> the visual characteristics of the area and what design <br /> standards could be implemented in order to maintain that <br /> visual quality. <br /> Commissioner Hartwell asked If a mechanism was in place to tax the <br /> :roperty .owner at a lower tax rate after having sold development rights. <br /> :ollins responded that the impact aspect would be reviewed as a part of the <br /> iuthorizat,i,on to prepare an implementation plan. Hartwell indicated that <br /> orsyth County has an implementation plan whereby only the County Is <br /> flowed to purchase development rights and the property owner 1s taxed at <br /> se value. <br /> Chapel Hill Town Council Member, R. D. Smith asked what the regula- <br /> -ions were governing non-conformities -in - the Rural Buffer and how many lots <br /> .ould be nonconforming under this regujetion. Collins responded that <br /> ,rticle 11 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance addresses nonconforming <br /> ots. He indicated that of the 4500 lots in the Rural Buffer approximately <br /> elf of them would be nonconformin uld n <br /> onstitute 5 to 10% of the total acreage inHthevRuralhBuffer Qts would only <br /> Mr. Smith continued asking the consequences of having a nonconforming <br /> ot. Collins responded that the nonconforming status stayed with the land <br /> ntil such time as the ordinance is amended to make it conforming or the <br /> roperty owner acquires additional land or takes whatever steps necessary <br /> o make the lot conforming. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.