12-4-24 PB Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

19 DRAFT 658 of the meetings or possibly have some type of spreading at that meeting. They usually have a lot 659 of folks that come out. 660 661 Tom Altieri: Yeah, I've been working with a pastor and that's one of the groups he has mentioned. Thank you. 662 663 Adam Beeman: Thank you. 664 665 Tom Altieri: And Clarion will be here at your December 4th meeting if you didn't pick up on that. So, thank 666 you. 667 668 Perdita Holtz: While Tom is closing out, I just want to chime in that he has really gone above and beyond all 669 summer in attempting to form these relationships that the county really doesn't have. He's really 670 hit it out of the ballpark. Thank you. 671 672 Tom Altieri: Thank you. I've been given the time and the trust to get out there and give it my best shot, so 673 that's what we're doing. Thank you. 674 675 Adam Beeman: Perdita, you're all set. It's all yours. 676 677 AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT—Landscaping Standards— 678 To review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on Planning Director-initiated amendments to the UDO 679 pertaining to landscaping standards. This amendment was reviewed at the April 3, 2024, ORC meeting and is 680 scheduled for BOCC public hearing in October. 681 Perdita Holtz: Landscaping amendments for the unified development ordinance. Before us tonight is a packet of 682 proposed amendments to the unified development ordinance pertaining to landscaping. The 683 purpose of the amendments is to clarify language, some of the language that's currently in there 684 can be difficult to interpret or enforce; to incorporate current best practices and standards;to 685 resolve some concerns that were addressed in a lawsuit that the county was involved in; and to 686 hopefully have better achievement of county goals. You may recall that this was presented at the 687 April 3rd ORC meeting. It has been a little while ago since then, so I am going to walk you 688 through with a bit more detail than we might have done had this been last month and it was more 689 fresh in your heads. There are minor updates in Articles 3 and 5. Basically,these are just section 690 reference updates and an update to the type of buffer. The meat of the amendments, if you will, is 691 going to be in Section 6.8,which is landscaping, buffers, and tree protections. Several of the 692 proposed amendments in the packets do have footnotes to explain the rationale, so I hope you're 693 able to take a look at those. First up in Section 8.2,we are looking to clarify that exempt and 694 expedited subdivisions are not subject to the standards. This is not a change; it's to clarify the 695 language so that it is more clear to everybody reading that exempt and expedited subdivisions do 696 not have to conform to the standards in Section 6.8. In Section 6.8.4,we're looking at some 697 language refinement for improved enforcement through the plat or plan review, and then we're 698 also looking at adding some standards for tree protection fencing. This is the fencing that you 699 often see on construction sites around trees-it's usually orange-to help protect trees during 700 construction. In Section 6.8.5,we're looking to clarify standards and also incorporate best 701 practices to modernize some of the language, and there is also a relocation of standards from a 702 different section that have been relocated into this section to hopefully flow a little better and make 703 a little bit more sense on where they're located. In the landscape buffer section,we're looking to 704 refine language to better distinguish the purpose and placement of these required buffers between 705 different land uses, also amending a table to exclusively focus on buffering between different 706 zoning districts, and then amending a table that would eliminate one of the type of buffers,Type 707 C,which is currently required in only four instances. There is also a creation of a table,street 708 trees and planting requirements,to require buffering on public and private streets, and this table is 709 one that the amendments of the table that I just spoke of, it took streets out of it and made it its 710 own separate table. I do want to point out on this one that I discovered an error in the numbering, 711 and you'll see here on the screen that it's 6.8.7.D is crossed out. The correct numbering is