Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-13-1999 - 2
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1999
>
Agenda - 10-13-1999
>
Agenda - 10-13-1999 - 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/21/2008 4:15:28 PM
Creation date
10/21/2008 4:15:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/13/1999
Meeting Type
Work Session
Agenda Item
2
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19991013
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1999
ORD-1999-012 Ordinance Amending Subdivision Reguulations Section II and Section IV-B10
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 1990-1999\1999
ORD-1999-013 Ordinance Amending Article 22 Flexible Development and Open Space Definitions
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 1990-1999\1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
42 <br />the provision be removed. Homeowners would no longer have on-site conservation land <br />included on their deed in fee simple. Anew approach,' called the conservation cluster <br />approach, would replace the current conservation designation. He presented a visual example <br />of the conservation cluster option which has smallerlots with the land to be preserved being ' <br />clustered in one area. This approach leaves significant amounts of land. undeveloped and <br />available for the community to enjoy for recreation and for its visual effect. The.conservation <br />land would be controlled by a homeowners association, a conservancy or by the county, if the <br />county had a corridor planned in the general area. He indicated that perimeter buffers is a new <br />requirement being suggested in the Flexible Development Standards. This refers to perimeter <br />buffers which would allow more buffer for the adjacent properties. Part of the Flexible <br />Development Standards was an offshoot of the Rural Preservation goals that were completed in <br />1994/1995, Roughly one-half of the property would be in the conservation areas.. The <br />committee also considered where the conservation areas should be located. and agreed that it <br />made sense to locate them along stream buffers, wooded areas and/or meadows which-would <br />preserve. the general character of the area. The conservation areas need to be contiguous so <br />that they can be enjoyed by the majority of the people.. He mentioned that they are now <br />beginning to research the landscape section of the code and will be presenting new landscape <br />requirements to the Board of County Commissioners to help augment the roadside buffers. <br />That section of the code is scheduled to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners <br />sometime in the fall <br />I3 <br />12 <br />s <br />i; <br />Although the estate option has never been used, it states that two acres of each estate <br />could be placed in a conservation -area and two .acres of that area could be used for septic <br />fields. That meant that one acre of the two acre conservation area could be encroached upon <br />for septic fields. It does not seem necessary to encroach-upon a conservation area for this <br />additional 40,000 square feet given that there are already 80,000 square feet on the <br />unencumbered part of the lot. The Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) is suggesting that the <br />encroachment of septic fields on conservation areas be decreased to 25% of what would <br />normally be allowed in the lot. That is being suggested in both the estate option and the <br />conservation cluster option. Currently the code allows a 50% encroachment upon all of the <br />conservation easements. The Planning Staff will continue to research the question of how <br />much encroachment, if any, is actually necessary within the conservation area. ~ Depending on <br />what size lot is being considered, it may be possible to scale the encroachment back even <br />further. <br />The conservation .cluster option is a much smaller lot which results in a high degree of <br />open space. This option would most likely be used in areas where public water and sewer were <br />already available. The lots would be approximately % acre in size and would not be expected to <br />serve a septic field. <br />QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: <br />Commissioner Brown asked if the village cluster approach was going to be discussed. <br />Mr. Benedict stated that they were not suggesting changes to the village cluster <br />approach. This is another approach which would require public water and sewer and there <br />have been no applications requesting this approach. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.