Agenda - 10-13-1999 - 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 additional written comments before the hearing record is closed." A copy of this letter , in its entirety, is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office. Ms. Barrows introduced Planning Director Craig Benedict and asked him to present Items C1 and C2. Mr. Benedict introduced the newest member of the Planning Department's staff, Robert Davis of Kernersville, North Carolina. Mr. Davis has ten years of experience in municipal engineering. 9 ~ C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 10 1. ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS 11 (a) SECTION IV-B-10 FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT 12 (1) Section C.3 Ownership of Open Space. 13 (2) _ Section D.1 Estate Lot Option 14 (3) Section D.2 Conservation Option 15 (4) Section D.3 Cluster Option 16 2. ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT 17 AMENDMENTS 18 (1) Flexible Development 19 (2) Open Space 20' Planning Director Benedict indicated that the Flexible- 21 Development Standard regulations are in two sections of the Code. One has to do with 22 subdivision regulations and the other has to do with zoning regulations. The Flexible 23 Development Standards have been reviewed since December of 1998 and the Ordinance 24 Review Committee (ORC) of the Planning Board has discussed the pros and cons of these 25 regulations in depth. For example, the intent of the Flexible Development Standards is to 26 preserve open space and to orient open space in certain locations. However, when the 27 developers use the regulations they sometimes use them in a way that does not align itself with 28 that vision. The objective over the next year is to look at the regulations and make sure that 29 they are used as guidelines for implementation in a way that does align with the vision of the 30 Board of Commissioners. He said that he intends to present the regulations as they currently 31 exist and. explain the suggested changes. There are four issues that are being reviewed. - 32 33 The first issue is the four different approaches for flexible development. They are 1) 34 conventional, 2) conservation, 3) cluster and 4) estate. Beginning with the estate approach he 35 stated that this is a four acre lot minimum which would cause a subdivision to be divided into 36 lots four acres in size. For example, a 100 acre subdivision would: be divided into twenty-five 37 4-acre lots. There have-been no estate requests in the time that Flexible Development 38 Standards have been in existence. A modification is being suggested to this option. However, it 39 is obviously not the most critical area to address due to lack of interest in this. type of 40 development. He stated that, at this meeting, the conservation and cluster approaches would be 41 focused upon. The problematic point concerning the conservation approach is that the area 42 being designated for the conservation area was included on the buyer's deed in fee simple. 43 Property owners then felt that they could build as they wished on the entire lot, when in fact, 44 part of that land was in a conservation area. That is the biggest undesirable effect of the 45 conservation approach.. In order to monitor the use of the conservation areas. it would require 46 an extraordinary amount of independent work on the part of county staff. Because of this 47 concern the Planning Board and Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) have recommended that