Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
PLANNING BOARD 3/6/89 MINUTES <br /> 17 . <br /> denying the property owner any reasonable use of <br /> their property. Requiring a 100-foot buffer does <br /> not mean the owner is denied use of that property <br /> for residential purposes such as a yard area. <br /> However, no structures could be placed in the <br /> buffer. <br /> Jacobs noted that the County Attorney was asked at <br /> the public hearing if the buffer constituted a <br /> "taking" and he reserved judgment. Jacobs asked if <br /> that legal opinion would be available to the <br /> Planning Board prior to its voting on the issue. <br /> Collins responded that he would contact Mr. Gledhill <br /> and ask for this information. <br /> Eddleman asked if this was the first instance where <br /> an attempt was made to require a buffer other than <br /> within the Subdivision Regulations. The response was <br /> that there are buffer requirements in the Zoning <br /> Ordinance, the MTC Corridor and the Umstead State <br /> Park. Eddlerdan continued noting that he felt the <br /> maximum impact to adjacent property owners was <br /> created when development roadways run right down the <br /> property lines. <br /> Jacobs noted that these items would be reviewed at <br /> the next Planning Board meeting for recommendation <br /> to the Board of Commissioners. <br /> AGENDA ITEM #7: REPORT - WATER/SEWER POLICY <br /> Collins began the presentation noting that the <br /> revisions to the Water/Sewer Policy were made by a <br /> committee comprised of Commissioner Hartwell, the <br /> County Attorney, the County Manager, the County <br /> Engineer and himself. He stated that the committee <br /> had attempted to take all the comments received at <br /> the public hearings including those from utility <br /> providers, municipalities and advisory boards such <br /> as the EDC which have an interest in the Water/Sewer <br /> Policy. He felt the policy is more simplified, more <br /> to the point but still retains the intent that was <br /> encompassed in the last draft of the policy. <br /> Collins continued reviewing the major changes in the <br /> policy. <br /> Goal 3, previously urban development and now <br /> development patterns, are small changes provided to <br /> indicate an interest not only in urban development <br /> patterns but rural development patterns as well. <br /> This particular goal section is one that has been <br /> condensed a great deal. The sub-section Service <br /> Capability/Capacity/Extension Policies combines <br />