Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD-2003-033 Amend Subdivision Regulation Regarding Street Access for Major SubdivisionsORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 27, 2003 0 AqD - 9OZ)3r - -62.3 Action Agenda Item No. C.2.c SUBJECT: Amend Subdivision Regulations Regarding Street Access for Major Subdivisions DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): Ordinance Amending Orange County Subdivision Regulations PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) Yes INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Benedict Ext. 2592 Karen Lincoln Ext. 2594 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough Chapel Hill Durham Mebane 732 -8181 968 -4501 688 -7331 (336)227 -2031 PURPOSE: To receive cifizen comment on a proposed amendment to. the Orange County Subdivision Regulations, IV-B -3 Streets, IV- B -3 -b. BACKGROUND: Orange County Administration proposes changes to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations to require that major subdivisions access paved public roads. Currently, subdivision regulations require that "All subdivisions shall have at least one street which intersects with or joins a public, municipal street, or a public, State maintained street." Not all State maintained roads are currently paved. A major consideration in reviewing subdivision proposals is land suitability. The road providing access for the subdivision should be considered as part of the suitability of a parcel for subdivision since moderate to large developments can have a significant impact on the public transportation infrastructure. Orange County Subdivision Regulations (Appendix A) require paved public roads in subdivisions having more than 12 lots. To ensure a safe and coordinated street system, the road providing access to the paved subdivision road should be at least comparable to the same standard of construction as the subdivision roads. A public road that provides access to a major subdivision (six or more lots) should conform to current State standards for public roads, which includes being paved. Development Process, Schedule, and Action • Public Hearing May 27, 2003: No decision is made on the proposed amendments by either the Planning Board or the Board of County Commissioners at the public hearing. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item. 2 RECOMMENDATION(S): Planning Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed Amendment. Administration recommends referring the proposed amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than August 19, 2003. Public Hearing Ordinance Fi Bold Text = Proposed Language StFike +hre anti = Existing Language Deleted An Ordinance Amending the Subdivision Regulations of Orange County Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners of the County of Orange; North Carolina, that the Subdivision Regulations are hereby amended as follows: (page 27) Amend Section IV -B -3 (Streets) subsection IV- B -3 -b. of the Orange County, NC Subdivision Regulations to read as follows: *IV- B -3 -b. *Amended 10/16/90 (eff. 12/3/90) 11/19/01 All subdivisions shall have a coordinated street system with public or private streets that access a public, municipal street or a public, State maintained street. All major subdivisions shall access a paved public, municipal street or a paved public, State maintained road. A coordinated street system shall consider the following: (a) Public street rights -of -way shall abut adjacent properties as necessary to provide connectivity to the countywide transportation network; and (b) Lot access to streets serving the subdivision shall be limited in the case of streets that provide a link between two or more roads designated in the Comprehensive Plan as arterials or collectors. All subdivisions shall have at least one street which intersects with or joins a public, municipal street, or a public, State maintained street. GAComprehensive Planning Div\GENE\2003 Public Hearings \May 27\ IV- B- 3- b \IV- B- 3- b_ordinance.doc 1. �r Public Hearing Ordinance NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that this Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Amending the Subdivision Regulations of Orange County" be adopted. .Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this the day of , 2003. I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on , 2003 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. 2003. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , SEAL Clerk to the Board of Commissioners GAComprehensive Planning Div \GENE\2003 Public Hearings \May 27 \IV- B- 3- b \N- B- 3- b_ordinance.doc o,oe4> - ?,6 4 Y - -x�t *40e-117- A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis c- A_Q1 to refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than August 19, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. Orange County Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments a. Amend Sections 11, IV and other related sections to define and regulate the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris associated with the development of subdivisions. This item was addressed above. b. Amend Section IV-1340. Flexible Development -Section C, Open Space Standards to require that at least 76% of residential lots in a proposed development be contiguous on one or more sides to the system of open space. Craig Benedict said that this is a requested amendment to the subdivision requirements related to flexible development. Presently, the requirement for open space is 33% if the flexible development option is used. The proposed amendment is an effort to explain more about the functionality of the open space and the characteristics of ft. He gave some examples of subdivisions in the County and the configuration of the open space. The intention is not to reduce the amount of lots, but to increase the accessibility of the open space. Commissioner Gordon asked about the 50-foot easement. Craig Benedict said that this would just be open space and a 50-foot, corridor would make the open space accessible and would not encroach upon the adjacent properties. Commissioner Gordon asked how big the path would be. Craig Benedict said that this is not a requirement for a path to be put in. Commissioner Gordon pointed out that the language says "pedestrian access paths". Craig Benedict said that this language could be changed. The subdivision applicant will decide, with direction, what the 50-foot area should look like. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the side yard setbacks and Craig Benedict said 20 feet. Commissioner Jacobs said that this is an improvement to the open space provisions. He suggested on page 11 - C2 - Open Space Functionality, "maintenance of wildlife habitat." He also suggested putting some of the language in more understandable terms for the public. Hunter Schofield said that some high-density developments such as affordable housing might come into conflict with these amendments. He said that we might need to look at how we use our open space standards to help or hinder some other County priorities. Renee Price asked about the setback requirements and open space and the impact it would have on lower and moderate-income housing. Craig Benedict said that they would accent this about the impacts as they move forward. He said that in some cases the open space adds to the value of the lots and it also supports clustering lots and could make them more affordable. Richmond Hills in Efl'and is a good example of affordable housing and open space working together. Craufurd Goodwin asked about open space in primary conservation areas and if it was open to the general public. Craig Benedict said that there is no mandate for it to be open to the general public. If it is a primary conservation area and it is dedicated to the public, this will be determined during the subdivision process. Commissioner Gordon asked about the 300 feet or less from the open space access point and 600 feet or less. She asked Craig Benedict how he came up with these numbers. Craig Benedict said they looked at existing subdivisions over the last four years and which ones had good' access and ones that were not meeting the goal of connectivity. He said that they would elaborate more on some of the examples of the standards. Commissioner Gordon just wants the staff to think about it and what it means. Commissioner Jacobs said that since the 300 -foot and the 600 -foot standards are arbitrary numbers :. based on previous experience, he suggested having some flexibility without sacrificing the intent. Craig Benedict agreed that flexibility is important. Public Comment - none A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to accept the Manager's recommendation to refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC'no sooner than August 19, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Amend Section IV -13-3. Streets, IV -B-3 -b to require that major subdivisions have access on a paved public road. Craig Benedict said that this ;amendment has to do with major subdivisions that are five lots or more, having access to a paved road and not just a dirt road. This would not be affecting the small subdivisions. He said that sometimes major subdivisions encroach upon a rural area that is not prepared for development. This provision would say that the major subdivision does not go forward until the right -of -way is available. Public Comment - none A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to accept the Manager's recommendation to refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than August 19, 2003, VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. Orange County Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance Regulations Text Amendments a. Amend Sections 3, 6, 6.1, and 7 and other related; sections to define and regulate the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris associated with permitted activity. This item was addressed above 4. Orange County Telecommunications Plan a. Article 6.18.6, Master Telecommunications Plan ("Plan"), of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance allows for the development of a "Master` Telecommunications Plan. A tower may be constructed upon issuance of a building permit and after meeting Zoning Ordinance requirements for construction of telecommunications towers. Providers electing to participate in the Plan shall submit required information and filing fee to the County for review by a contracted consultant to verify site necessity. Modifications to the Plan will be considered annually in February of each year. Applications to participate in the Plan are due prior to December 16 of each year. Withdrawals from the Plan are allowed upon notification to the County. Craig Benedict said that this has to do with telecommunications tower regulations. There have been some changes to the class A -and class B requirements for towers and to the notification requirements. The purpose of the Master Telecommunications Plan (MTP) is to develop a public safety network to enhance the communication ability of the County and the public service providers. The MTP would allow the public to participate in a pre- identification process to offer their site to allow a tower to come on their property. This proposal is to allow pre-identified sites to be put on the map; It does not mean that towers will definitely go on the sites, but that the sites are possible locations for towers. There is no special interest to these sites and these sites will still have to go through the same public hearing process as other sites. The list also includes some potential tower sites owned by the County. There have been about 20 private property owners who have expressed interest in allowing their properties to be used as well as OWASA and several voluntary agriculture districts. He said that the MTP would work in conjunction with the existing telecommunications ordinance. As the MTP is adopted, it can be amended each Year, Commissioner Jacobs asked how many cell tower applications were pending and Craig Benedict said three by AT&T Wireless. One is in Bingham Township near Bradshaw Quarry Road, one is in Cedar Grove Township near Pentecost Road, and the third is off Lake Orange Road Commissioner Jacobs asked about the going rate for a private property owner that has a tower on their land. Craig Benedict said that it is very unique. Some information is proprietary, where the applicant does not want their competitors to know how much they are paying for leasing. There is a potential revenue stream for the County by using County owned sites for towers. Commissioner Jacobs said that he understands that there is no procedural advantage for these properties compared to other undesignated sites, but having a map with sites implies that the sites are preferred. He is concerned that there should be a clear component that Craig Benedict said that they would accent this about the impacts as they move forward'. He said that in some cases the open space adds to the value of the lots and it also supports clustering lots and could make them more affordable. Richmond Hills in Efland is a good example of affordable housing and open space working together. Craufurd Goodwin asked about open space in primary conservation areas and if it was open to the general public. Craig Benedict said that there is no mandate for it to be open to the general public. If it is a primary conservation area and it is dedicated to the public, this will be determined during the subdivision process. Commissioner Gordon asked about the 300 feet or less from the open space access point and 600 feet or less. She asked Craig Benedict how he came up with these numbers. Craig Benedict said they looked at existing subdivisions over the last four years and which ones had good access and ones that were not meeting the goal of connectivity. He said that they would elaborate more on some of the examples of the standards. Commissioner Gordon just wants the staff to think about it and what it means. Commissioner Jacobs said that since the 300 -foot and the 600 -foot standards are arbitrary numbers based on previous; experience,, he suggested having some flexibility without sacrificing the intent. Craig Benedict agreed that flexibility is important. Public Comment - none A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to accept the Manager's recommendation to refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than August 19, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Amend Section IV -63. Streets, IV -B3 -b to require that major subdivisions have access on a paved public road. Craig Benedict said that this amendment has to do with major subdivisions that are five lots or more, having access to a paved road and not just a dirt road. This would not be affecting' the small subdivisions. He said that sometimes major subdivisions encroach upon a rural area that is not prepared for development. This provision would say that the major subdivision does not go forward until the right-of-way is available. Public Comment - none A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to accept the Manager's recommendation to refer the proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC no sooner than August 19, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. Orange County Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance Regulations Text Amendments