Agenda - 01-24-2017 - 6-g - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments - Subdivision Regulations and Processes

Browse Search

6 Commissioner Jacobs clarified that a 12 lot minor subdivision would be different. 1 Patrick Mallett said that is a valid point. He said staff routinely sees family land being cut 2 up into minor subdivisions, and he said this needs to be a bit more controlled. He said the other 3 scenario is two minor subdivisions, with five homes each, which have no public involvement. 4 Commissioner Jacobs said there should be a way to consider the feelings of the 5 neighbors when these minor subdivisions are created. 6 Michael Harvey said the motion could be amended to require a neighborhood meeting 7 for any subdivision proposing more than five lots. 8 Commissioner Jacobs said he is not trying to make things more difficult, but Michael 9 Harvey’s proposal would satisfy his concerns without adversely affecting a developer’s 10 streamlined process. 11 Patrick Mallett said theoretically there could be a neighborhood informational meeting in 12 the middle of the process, when a schematic plan can be shared. 13 Commissioner Pelissier said this proposal is a great step for the County, and helps 14 preserve rural character. 15 Commissioner Pelissier said she is reluctant to say that open spaces must connect with 16 existing streets. She said houses may be clustered in certain areas, and existing or planned 17 streets may be way on the other side of the open space. She would not want to see a road 18 going though the open space just to connect it to an existing road. 19 Patrick Mallett said a flexible development gives the connotation that it is a case-by-case 20 basis, and there can be a reasonable solution that does not force a situation that requires 21 connecting to a road that may or may not be appropriate or used. 22 Commissioner Jacobs said he did not take Commissioner Rich’s comments to refer to 23 roads. He said he was not commenting on roads either, but rather contiguous open spaces. He 24 said he agreed with Commissioner Pelissier about roads. 25 Commissioner Price agreed with Commissioner Pelissier. 26 Commissioner Price referred to page 198, with additional submittal requirement and 27 scenic vistas. She asked if this is even enforceable, and, if not, why is it included. 28 Discussion ensued. 29 Chair McKee said most of these developments will be in isolated areas in rural Orange 30 County and on family lands. He said the Board does not want to make this an onerous process 31 for residents. 32 Patrick Mallett said one of the outcomes of the community outreach was that much of 33 the land is family owned, with ancestral ties. He said most families do not want to “sell the 34 farm,” but rather want to carve out a portion of it to perhaps give to a relative. He said there can 35 be phasing done, which would allow some flexibility for the landowner to give land to relatives or 36 sell some land. 37 38 PUBLIC COMMENT: 39 Jay Zaragosa from Hillsborough said much of the County has overlay districts to deal 40 with impervious surfaces, and asked if this process could be explained within a cluster 41 development. 42 Patrick Mallett said subdivisions have a gross area, and there is an impervious surfaces 43 allocation based on the watershed. He said part of the subdivision process is to develop a set of 44 declarations, where allocations are made in the gross area to each individual lot, or to some 45 amenities in the open space. He said smaller lots do not need long driveways, and thus the 46 average impervious surface would go down. 47 Tom Heavner said this is a great proposal that preserves open space. 48 49 14