Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
25 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 1043 shows you how many lots you could have if you built out a property using a conventional layout <br /> 1044 and how many lots you are getting and how much open space you are protecting through a <br /> 1045 flexible development approach.That is a requirement, and it is kind of nestled in the back of this <br /> 1046 section, but it is very useful,and I think it is something we want to bring out and make a <br /> 1047 requirement at the neighborhood meeting, and right now I do not think that is being,that message <br /> 1048 is being told early in the process. Instead, it is just kind of a box that they check towards the end. <br /> 1049 And then again, aligning language as much as we can. Section 2.16 has never been used. It is <br /> 1050 the non-residential subdivision for industrial parks, economic development office parks and so <br /> 1051 forth. It has literally never,ever been used, and our other subdivision standards can be used <br /> 1052 instead. There is nothing particularly useful or remarkable in those standards. And office parks <br /> 1053 are not, are no longer a development type that we see generally. So,we are proposing to delete <br /> 1054 it, and that reflects all of those many, many pages that you have in your package. Everything that <br /> 1055 is in Article 3 that is being amended is just an elimination of a reference to 2.16. So, any <br /> 1056 subdivisions for those zoning types would conform with the major subdivision requirements more <br /> 1057 than likely. <br /> 1058 <br /> 1059 Beth Bronson: This is to say that you would not have, because we have never had a neighborhood in an <br /> 1060 economic development district. <br /> 1061 <br /> 1062 Cy Stober: Yes. <br /> 1063 <br /> 1064 Beth Bronson: Not to say that one could not apply. If it did, it would just be served the same as any major or <br /> 1065 minor subdivision plan. <br /> 1066 <br /> 1067 Cy Stober: Yes. And we have different landscaping standards for non-residential uses that are more <br /> 1068 protective. <br /> 1069 <br /> 1070 Beth Bronson: But if it is a subdivision, it is residential? Or do you mean subdivision for industrial use? <br /> 1071 <br /> 1072 Cy Stober: Correct. Yes. <br /> 1073 <br /> 1074 Beth Bronson: Okay. <br /> 1075 <br /> 1076 Cy Stober: So,we would,we are just eliminating the special category for non-residential subdivisions and just <br /> 1077 say all the subdivision standards apply, and then in our subdivision standards we have different <br /> 1078 standards for non-residential uses already. So,for landscaping and road requirements and so <br /> 1079 forth. <br /> 1080 <br /> 1081 Beth Bronson: Yes. <br /> 1082 <br /> 1083 Cy Stober: So,yes.That is already there, and we are already addressing that. So, having 2.16 there being <br /> 1084 unused did not seem particularly useful and mainly seemed confusing. <br /> 1085 <br /> 1086 Beth Bronson: Do we know when 2.16 was added? <br /> 1087 <br /> 1088 Cy Stober: I do not. <br /> 1089 <br /> 1090 Beth Bronson: Okay. Thank you. <br /> 1091 <br /> 1092 Cy Stober: Yes. And then, Section 7.1,jumping to the subdivision article, is the establishment language, and <br /> 1093 we are aligning that with statutory language for why we subdivide land. And then we are also <br /> 1094 refining the language for exempt and expedited to match the statutory language as well and <br /> 1095 restructuring that section so they go from the least regulated to the most regulated, and trying to <br /> 1096 have that bouncing ball be very logical to follow. The minor subdivisions include expediteds. <br /> 1097 They are a form of minor subdivision. They are just not subject to the minor,to the subdivision <br />