Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
SEP-09-1994 09:46 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO PLANNING P.06/07 <br /> 8 <br /> 1 Commissioner Willhoit requested that staff consider this request in terms of <br /> 2 the principals for sustainable communities.unities. Construction rubble being buried, <br /> 3 rather than reused, is worrisome. EPA promotes the reuse of construction <br /> 4 materials. <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Clint Burklin requested information contrasting Orange County's and the <br /> 7 Federal Government's erosion control programs. Ms. Willis indicated that she was <br /> 8 not familiar with the differences, but the staff person in charge of Orange <br /> 9 County's erosion control program could cane to a Planning Board meeting and report <br /> 10 on this program. <br /> 11 <br /> 12 Commissioner Gordon asked how the reclamation could be enforced if this was <br /> 1.3 a use by right? <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Ms. Willis indicated that if the borrow pit was not reclaimed, it would no <br /> 16 longer be a use by right and. would require a Special Use Permit. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 John Link stated that the County has no authority where D.O.T. pursues the <br /> 19 borrow pit process through their own right of way. This proposal would allow <br /> 20 D.O.T. to save the tax dollars necessary to purchase the right-of-way if they <br /> 21 agree to reclaim the land. If they do not follow through with the reclamation, <br /> 22 the county could delete this provision. D.O.T. would then be required to purchase <br /> 23 the property. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 26 Halkioti.s, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a-recommendation to be <br /> 27 returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than October 5, 1994. <br /> 28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 29 <br /> 30 4. Other subdivisiaa Ordinance Text Am et inents <br /> 31 a. Lot 'Boundaries (Public Rights-of-Way) <br /> 32 This it was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of <br /> 33 receiving citizen comment an a proposed ame cinent to the Subdivision Regulations <br /> 34 which would require that property lines for individual lots extend only to the <br /> 35 edge of a public road right-of-way and that the area within private road easements <br /> 36 be included within lot bones. <br /> 37 b. Lot Layout (Land Hooks) <br /> 38 This item was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of <br /> 39 receiving citizen cement on a proposed amendment which would allow, in same <br /> 40 circrmet ces, a new lot to contain land area an both sides of a private road <br /> 41 easement <br /> 42 . Private Road Standards Curve Radius <br /> 43 This item was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of <br /> 44 receiving itizen comment on a proposed amenarrent to the Subdivision Regulations <br /> 45 to allow for modification of the 125-foot curve radius for subdivisions served by <br /> 46 existing private roads which have a lesser radius. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 QUESTIONS AND/OR cmonyrs PROK BOARD OF CO MISSIONS AND PLANNING BOARD <br /> 49 <br /> 50 Ms. Willis indicated that the proposed amendment to allow a new lot to <br /> 51 contain land area 'on both sides of a private road easement is necessary to deal <br /> 52 with the occasional unusually shaped property. Currently adjustments to the <br /> 53 location of the road or property line are required in order to meet the technical <br /> 54 requirements. The technical requires do not always appear appropriate or correct <br />