Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
46 <br />Attorney Gledhill stated that this refers only to the area that the County actually <br />regulates. <br />Mr. Yuhasz referred to the conservation cluster option which addresses the length to <br />width ratio of four-to-one. He asked who determines if a specific area is to be designated a <br />wildlife corridor or a neighborhood common? There needs to be guidelines which make this <br />more clear. He mentioned that the issue of using setbacks as open space could be resolved by <br />prohibiting the use of fences.. If the land was not subdivided by fences it would then be <br />contiguous open space area. ~ : <br />Chair Barrows asked Attorney Gledhill if another_ public hearing would need to be held if <br />the wording in the proposed amendments was changed prior to being returned to the Board of <br />County Commissioners. <br />_Attomey Gledhill felt that-would not be necessary, however, he indicated that he would <br />look at that question more specifically prior to the Planning Board's recommendations being <br />retumed to the Board of County Commissioners. If, a# that time, he determined that another <br />public hearing is necessary, he will advise the Board of County Commissioners. <br />Planning Board member Katz stated that the conservation option as it currently exists <br />has been a failure. Side. yards were used by almost all of the developers as open space. The <br />proposal being presented does present -clear conservation areas. Developers using this new <br />options would be creating beautiful open space for recreation. Under the plan in place now it <br />was hit or miss as to whether that would happen. <br />Commissioner Jacobs commented that a logical. solution to this situation is to decide if <br />Flexible Development should be mandatory. He asked staff and the Planning Board to consider <br />this as an option. <br />Mr. Benedict agreed that the new standards are not going to have developers lining, up <br />to use the conservation cluster options, however, it does delete an option. that was <br />dysfunctional. He hoped to come forward with a Flexible Development option later in the year <br />after full consideration of the issue. This proposal will be both feasible, from the development. <br />standpoint, and attractive with regard to the preservation goals. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that if the proposal being suggested. this evening does not <br />generate, even in the short term, more flexible open space application, he would argue that we <br />have gone in the wrong direction. Possibly requiring flexible development in the short term, <br />while the issue is being further researched and improved, might result in some flexible <br />development. <br />Commissioner Brown commented on Commissioner Jacobs suggestion that the <br />Planning Department staff return with more recommendations on flexible development, <br />including making flexible development mandatory. She asked if Mr. Benedict would retum with <br />those suggestions in the fall. <br />