Agenda - 12-04-2000-9d - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11 1 AGENDA ITEM #9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING (AUGUST 28, 2000) 2 3 a. Zoning Ordinance Amendments 4 (1) Proposed Stream Buffer Amendments 5 6 Davis made the presentation. He said that this item was referred back to the Planning Board at the public 7 hearing for a recommendation. It was brought to the Ordinance Review Committee to make a 8 recommendation to the Planning Boazd. 9 10 The ordinance restricts the amount of unencumbered lot space on lots. In other words, there would have 11 to be a minimum lot size that could be built on for a particulaz lot. For any lot between 40,000 squaze feet 12 and 1.99 acres, there would have to be a usable area of 30,000 square feet. For any lot that is two acres 13 and greater in size, there would have to be a usable area of 40,000 square feet. The definition of a usable 14 lot area is the portion of a lot unencumbered by stream buffer, conservation easements, drainage 15 easements, public or private rights-of--way, access easements, and utility easements. It also includes the 16 portion of a lot unencumbered by slopes greater than 20 percent and wildlife corridors, ponds, lakes, and 17 other bodies of water. The stream buffer has also been clarified to be from the edge of the floodplain. 18 19 On page S8, under "Method A -Stream Buffer Based on Slope and Groundcover" the Ordinance Review 20 Committee recommended same changes. The width of the buffer shall be "a minimum of SO feet. For 21 slope values less than 7.5 percent, the Ordinance Review Committee recommended that only an 22 additional 1 S feet should be added to the 50-foot buffer. For slope values 7.5 percent and greater, the 23 Ordinance Review Committee recommended that only an additiona130 feet should be added to the 50- 24 foot buffer. 25 26 Regazding Section 8, which reads, "This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption," the Ordinance 27 Review Committee recommended that lots with building permits would be vested, septic system repair 28 areas would be vested, and any existing structures that are in the buffers would be vested. 29 30 Benedict said that if a FEMA floodplain is modified by the federal government, a rebuilding probably 31 would not be allowed. 32 33 Davis said that the Ordinance Review Committee agreed unanimously to recommend the ordinance 34 amendments to the Planning Board. 3S 36 There was a question about the last sentence of the definition of "lot, usable", and it was changed to say, 37 "Usable lot also excludes all azeas within lots having slopes greater than 20% and all areas within wildlife 38 corridors, ponds, and lakes." 39 40 Barrows asked about the definition of a wildlife corridor. Davis said that it should have been included in 41 the document to say, "a5 designated in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Flan." 42 43 McAdams asked if all of the people that would be affected by the ordinance amendment were notified of _____- .- . _ .44- _ _the change and Davis said that they were not notified individually, but through the legal advertisement. 45 The main issue has to do with new lots that aze encumbered and not usable. 46 _ __ _ _ - 47 Woods asked about farming activities in the floodplain and said that they should be exempt. Bazrows 48 disagrees because of passible pesticides being used near the water. 49 50 Davis said that bona fide farms were exempt from zoning ordinances according to state rules. 51 52 Strayhorn would like it stated in the document that farms would be exempt. 53