4_3_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS 5.1.24 447 identifying it as 10, 10 in terms of conservation value that it be an overt consideration in terms of the continued 448 development of the parcel and the open space. Does that make sense? 449 450 Cy Stober: This is the Concept Plan. The Preliminary Plat will be presented to you again at a future 451 date. Is your preference to have that recommendation ride with the preliminary plat to the Commissioners, as an 452 associated recommendation or independent? 453 454 Mr. Proctor decided to retract the motion until the Preliminary Plat stage after discussion of procedure with Mr. 455 Stober. 456 457 Beth Bronson requested clarification from Ms. Moncado on primary versus secondary open space. 458 459 Marilyn Carter: My question is actually of a general nature. Given the potential to take recommendations 46o back to the Board of Commissioners. In doing some reading on conservation subdivisions, the North Carolina 461 State University has a guidebook that actually quotes Orange County and it is an exemplary starting point for 462 these types of subdivisions and open space requirements. I'm curious what are our current open space 463 requirements for these types of conservation subdivisions? 464 465 Ms. Moncado explained current open space requirements and their relationship to the Flexible Development 466 option. 467 468 Marilyn Carter: This particular guide recommends 50 to 70 percent of the buildable land being set aside as 469 open space. I know we have some unique soils challenges here, in Orange County, perhaps, unique geology. 47o But I was just curious why that differential of 33 percent, 50 to 70, and is it the soil's quality or is it something 471 else? 472 473 Cy Stober: No. I think that there's the open space requirements in the LIDO and then there's the goals 474 that are in the Comprehensive Plan, and they're different. So,we have set a lower threshold for regulation than 475 the aspirational goals that are in the Comprehensive Plan and perhaps in another document. Perhaps Land's 476 Legacy. I'm not sure where, exactly those numbers come from right now, and I can do research to get back to 477 you on that, but, I did look at that pamphlet and it's largely still consistent with what we practice. So, those 478 allowances for flexible development and conversation cluster subdivision were contemporary. Then, not much 479 has changed in terms of our process, since then. And that's twelve years. That was around 2010. 480 481 AGENDA ITEM 8: MAJOR SUBDIVISION CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT—To review and take action on a 482 Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat application for a Major Subdivision named Williams Glen. The proposal is for 483 a 15-lot subdivision on approximately 28.17 acres with 35% (9.95 acres)of dedicated open space. The parcel is 484 located on Lawrence Road in the Eno Township, PIN 9883-09-8108. 485 486 Ashley Moncado: The next item is for you to review is a Major Subdivision Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat 487 application for the Williams Glenn Subdivision on approximately 28 acres. The site is undeveloped and located 488 within the Rural Residential zoning district and Lower Eno Unprotected Watershed. Surrounding parcels are 489 zoned as R1, R2 and R4. Parcels to the north and to the east are undeveloped. Parcels to the south and to the 490 west contain single-family homes and there is church directly west of the existing site. The parcels is classified 491 as 20-Year Transition Area in the Orange County Future Land Use Map, and it is classified as Mixed Residential 492 Neighborhood in the Central Orange Coordinated Area Land Use Plan. The applicant is proposing a Flexible 493 Major Subdivision, including 15 single-family homes. The average lot size is 1.12 acres. Based on the 494 Conservation Cluster of Flexible Development Option, they are required to provide, at least, 33 percent open 495 space. The applicant is proposing 35 percent open space or 9.95 acres. The subdivision is planning to meet the 496 setback standards of the R1 zoning district. A 20-foot Type A landscape buffer is being provided along the