PB Agenda Packet 3-4-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11 DRAFT 200 of those bodies have acknowledged and have no issues with this proposed amendment, 201 so now we are in step two with no objection from the BOCC or EMC. Planning staff 202 initiated the zoning atlas amendment to update our maps to accurately reflect the ridge 203 line surveyed on site. So again, this is an unaddressed parcel off Dodson's Crossroads in 204 the Bingham Township where amending the watershed boundary between the University 205 Lake protected and the Jordan Lake unprotected, but in my previous slide you will have 206 noted that only the protected and critical are the ones that have regulations explicit to 207 impervious surface and residential density maximums, so we are going to be talking 208 specifically about amending the protected boundary. Current zoning is Rural Buffer. 209 Surrounding zoning is Rural Buffer and Agricultural Residential and on the north side of 210 the property, the property is outlined in black on this slide. On the north is the Jordan 211 Lake unprotected watershed. On the south is the University Lake protected. To the west, 212 southwest you have Cane Creek protected. You'll see this map a couple times, but the 213 black is the property line, the red is the proposed new watershed boundary. The survey 214 work was done on the subject parcel here that's outlined in black. It was also done on this 215 easternmost parcel. There was some property exchange between these two parcels, 216 which is why there was survey work across the two. And then the blue dash line is how it 217 is currently mapped, so we are strictly modifying the University Lake protected watershed 218 boundary line. It's going to end in removing about 4 acres from the University Lake 219 protected and those 4 acres are now going to be in Jordan Lake unprotected, so no 220 change to the underlying zoning. This is the survey that identified that again this dash line 221 up here is what Orange County mapping currently reflects and the survey work identifies 222 the ridge line to the south. So as required under the zoning atlas amendment 2.8.5, the 223 planning director is asked to make an analysis of the application. We offer the following, 224 that the application is complete in accordance with the requirements of 2.8.3. Staff review 225 did include consideration of how the request relates to the comprehensive plan. You'll 226 see that in the staff report available in the packet. We did notify properties within 1,000 227 feet. Staff received multiple phone calls, which we were able to answer all the questions 228 and have no public in attendance tonight. Similarly, the property has been posted. 229 Mailings and postings happened January 21, so as with all zoning atlas amendments, the 230 Planning Board is asked to make a recommendation to the Board of County 231 Commissioners; either an approval, denial, approval with conditions or ask for more time 232 and so after tonight, this item would be scheduled for an April Board of County 233 Commissioners meeting. That's about all I have for you. What questions do you have on 234 the topic. 235 236 Chris Johnston: Okay, let's start at the end. Do we have any questions, Statler. 237 238 Statler Gilfillen: No, I could make a motion we approve this. 239 240 Chris Johnston: Well hold on we want to make sure if we have any questions so we're going to go down 241 the line real quick. 242 243 Statler Gilfillen: I have no questions. 244 245 Charity Kirk: So, this is prior to an actual land survey and now a land survey has been done, so what 246 would happen if we say no? 247