Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 09-18-2001 - 9b ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 18, 2001 Action Ageqdq, Item No. '7-b SUBJECT: Stream Buffer Zoning Ordinance Amendments DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) NO ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Ordinance p 3-6 Robert P. Davis, Planner 111, ext. 2580 Attachment A p 7 Craig Benedict, Director, ext. 2592 Minutes— Planning Board Nov. 2, 2000 p 8- TELEPHONE NUMBERS: 10 Hillsborough 732-8181 Public Hearing Ordinance p 11-12 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Minutes of August 28th Public Hearing p 13-15 Durham 688-7331 Attachment B - Watersheds p 16 Mebane 336-227-2031 Continued from December 4. 2000 meeting for Planner/Attorney review of the vesting language PURPOSE: To make a decision on the proposed Stream Buffer Amendments. BACKGROUND: Rogues This amendment modifies sections of the Stream Buffer section in the Zoning Ordinance. The bullets correspond to associated sections of the attached ordinance. Section One: • Adds new definition in Zoning Ordinance for Federal Emergency Management Agency • Adds new definition in Zoning Ordinance for Lot, Usable Section Two: • Amends the current definition of Stream Buffer to include FEMA floodplains and to identify how the measurement of the stream buffer will be performed if a water body is present Section Three: • Provides precise language to allow for consistent calculation of stream buffers countywide • Establishes minimum 50-foot (each side) stream buffers for perennial (blue line) and intermittent (dashed blue line) streams outside of Watershed Protection Overlay Districts (Attachment B (p. 16)—White areas in the County are not required to have stream buffers now) Section Four: • Sets minimum usable area (newly created lots)that cannot be encumbered by stream buffers, transmission line easements, water bodies, or a portion of wildlife corridors Section Five: • Applicability section of stream buffer ordinance amended to incorporate existing development for vesting purposes 2 • This zoning text amendment does not affect bona fide farming operations. N.C. General Statute 153A-340 specifically exempts bona fide farms from zoning regulations. Stream buffers enforced through zoning ordinances will not apply to bona fide farms. As a contrast, the Neuse River Basin rules are not enforced through zoning and therefore do apply to bona fide farms. Location Amendments will apply to the entirety of Orange County lying outside the municipalities and their extraterritorial jurisdictions, if any. Development Process. Schedule and Action • First Action: Public Hearing was held on August 28, 2000 • Question raised as to whether these regulations will apply to farm operations • Bona fide farm exemption (N.C. General Statute 153A-340) applies as long as the County regulates stream buffers under the zoning ordinance; this amendment does not affect Bona fide farming operations • Referred amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation back to the Board of County Commissioners • Second Action: Ordinance Review Committee on November 2, 2000 reviewed and recommended unanimously that the Planning Board approve the stream buffers amendment • Third Action: Planning Board on November 2, 2000 recommended approval of the proposed amendments to County Commissioners • Recommended a maximum 65-foot stream buffer in situations where the average slope is 0.00 - 7.50% over a distance of 250 feet • Recommended a maximum 80-foot stream buffer in situations where the average slope is greater than 7.5% over a distance of 250 feet • Recommended vesting procedure for three existing situations • 1) Lots with existing building permits • 2) Septic system repair areas for existing systems • No new septic system or repair areas in stream buffers • 3) Existing structures within the stream buffer • Clarified that the new, revised FEMA maps will not vest structures or situations within the new floodplain cross-sections • Fourth Action: Action continued at the December 4, 2000 meeting for attorney review of the vesting language in the proposed ordinance • Fifth Action: Returned to BOCC for decision FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct, public financial impact associated with this decision. RECOMMENDATION(S): Administration Recommendation: Approval of the attached Ordinance. Planning Board Recommendation: Approval of the attached Ordinance. Ordinance 3 An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY ORDAINS THAT THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: Bold = Proposed Text StFiketheuo = Deleted Text Section 1: Amend Article 22 DEFINITIONS by creating two new definitions as follows: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—An independent agency of the federal government. Lot, Usable—The portion of a zoning lot unencumbered by stream buffers, drainage easements, public and private rights-of-way, access easements, and utility easements transmission lines. Lot, Usable also excludes all areas within lots having slopes greater than 20%, all bodies of water including, but not limited to, ponds, lakes, reservoirs and the area within wildlife corridors (as defined in the Land Use Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan) up to a maximum width of 150 feet total or the width of the stream buffer, whichever is greater. Section 2: Amend Section 6.23.7a and Article 22 DEFINITIONS of Stream Buffer to clarify that the stream buffer is not to be included within the floodplain. Stream Buffer— a stream buffer is an area of land adjacent to perennial and intermittent streams or FEMA identified floodplains, whichever is greater, which, except as permitted in Article 6.23.7 of this Ordinance, must remain undisturbed in its natural state. Perennial streams are shown as solid blue lines and intermittent streams as broken lines on the USGS Quadrangle maps. The stream buffer shall extend around the perimeter of all water bodies including ponds, lakes and reservoirs if any portion of the stream buffer of a perennial or intermittent stream touches the water body. Section 3: (page 6-41 —Zoning Ordinance) 6.23.7d. Calculating the Width of Stream Buffer Those streams identified by FEMA as having floodplains shall have stream buffers calculated from the outside edges of the floodplain. 1) How to Calculate Slope (See illustration attached) a. Draw aline 250' length perpendicular to the GtFeam lines, at 200-foot horizontal Intervals along the entire length of the outside edges of 3 r p Ordinance 4 the stream, te the stream, or the outer edge of the FEMA floodplain, whichever is greater. b. Determine the elevation at either the stream bank itself(1) or the outer edge of the FEMA floodplain, whichever is highest, and at the point 250' from the stream or FEMA floodplain, whichever is applicable, along the perpendicular line (2). c. Subtract (1) from (2). d. Divide c. by 250. e. Multiply d. by 100. f. Perform this calculation for both sides of the stream or floodplain. (See Attachment A for example of how the calculations shall be performed) Hereafter, the number derived in e. will be referred to as "slope value". 2) Method A— Stream Buffer biased on Slope and Groundcover The width of the buffer shall be a minimum of fifty (50)feet from each edge of the floodplain. , In addition to the fifty (50) foot buffer, an additional 15 feet shall be added to the 50-foot buffer (65 feet total) where the slope value is less than 7.5%, as measured 250 feet from the edge of the floodplain. For slope values 7.5% and greater, as measured 250 feet from the edge of the floodplain, an additional 30 feet shall be added to the 50-foot buffer (80 feet total). These calculations shall be made from each side of either the stream bank or floodplain, whichever is greater. Section 4: Amend Detailed Table of Contents Section 6.24 to read as follows: Additional Requirements for Lots Outside of Watershed Protection Areas Create new Section 6.24.1 to include a minimum stream buffer for areas outside of Orange County Watershed Protection Overlay Districts to read as follows: In areas not identified on the Official Zoning Atlas as Watershed Protection Overlay Districts, a stream buffer a minimum of 50 feet in width shall be established along both sides of perennial streams and intermittent streams, or along the FEMA identified floodplains, whichever is greater. Perennial streams are those streams shown as solid blue lines, and intermittent streams are those streams shown as broken blue lines on the USGS Quadrangle maps for Orange County. The stream buffer shall extend around the perimeter of all water bodies including ponds, lakes and reservoirs if any portion of the stream buffer of a perennial or intermittent stream touches the water body. 4 Ordinance 5 Create new Section 6.24.2 to read as follows: Minimum Usable Lot Area for Lots that Utilize Ground Absorption Wastewater Systems The usable lot for parcels between 40,000 square feet and 1.99 acres in size shall be a minimum of 30,000 square feet. Zoning lots two acres and greater shall have a minimum usable lot area of at least 40,000 square feet. Create new Section 6.24.3 to read as follows: Applicability and administrative provisions of Section 6.23 shall apply to this section. Section 5: Amend Section 6.23.10 APPLICABILITY to read as follows: a) Existing Development For the purpose of determining compliance with or applicability of Article 6.23 of this Ordinance, existing development is defined as a residential or non-residential structure which 1) was constructed prior to January 1, 1994 (October 19, 1999, with respect to the October 19, 1999 amendments related to the CANE- CA and CANE-PW districts and September 19, 2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments); or 2) was constructed in accordance with a valid building permit issued prior to January 1, 1994 (October 19, 1999, with respect to the October 19, 1999 amendments related to the CANE-CA and CANE-PW districts and September 19, 2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments); or 3) was included as part of a Site Specific Development Plan approved by the Board of Commissioners prior to January 1, 1994 (October 19, 1999 with respect to the October 19, 1999 amendments related to the CANE-CA and CANE-PW districts and September 19, 2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments); or 4) had otherwise established a vested right under North Carolina Zoning law prior to January 1, 1994 (October 19, 1999 with respect to the October 19, 1999 amendments related to the CANE-CA and CANE-PW districts and September 19, 2001 with respect to the Stream Buffer/Usable Lot amendments). Existing development is hereby deemed to be conforming with respect to requirements of Article 6.23 of this Ordinance. Periodic updates to FEMA maps may affect structures located within the floodplain of specific streams. The zoning ordinance text amendments dated September 19, 2001 only affect the Stream Buffer section of the ordinance and are not meant to supersede any FEMA regulations or requirements. 5 Ordinance 6 Section 6: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that .... Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing ordinance was adopted this the 18th day of September 2001. I, Beverly A. Blythe, 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 September 18, 2001 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2001. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners 6 7 t� 100 YEAR N FLOOD b - 260' A Elevation �N�'Water B Floodplain 2500 A CALCULATION B CALCULATION a. 250' LINE a. 250' LINE b. 130' FLOODPLAIN b. 130' FLOODPLAIN c. 140 - 130 = 10 c. 150 - 130 = 20 d. 10/250 = 0.04 d. 20/250 = 0.08 e. 0.04 X 100 = 4 % SLOPE VALUE e. 0.08 x 100 = 8 % SLOPE VALUE SLOPE VALUE LESS THAN 7.5% = SLOPE VALUE GREATER THAN 7.5 % _ STREAM BUFFER = 50' + 15' = 65' TOTAL STREAM BUFFER = 50' + 30' = 80' TOTAL (TO BE ADDED TO EXISTING FLOODPLAIN) (TO BE ADDED TO EXISTING FLOODPLAIN) Created by Bettina Brinkley ATTACHMENT A Orange County Planning 8 1 2 3 MINUTES 4 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 5 NOVEMBER 2,2000 6 7 8 MEMBERS PRESENT: Leo Allison(Chair),Crauford Goodwin,Karen Barrows,Howard 9 McAdams,Nicole Gooding-Ray,Runyon Woods,Rachel Preston,Bob 10 Strayhorn,Barry Kart 11' 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: James Selkirk(out of town-excused)and Lynn Holtkamp(unexcused) 13 ' 14 STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Craig Benedict,Carla Bateman,Joanna Bradshaw, 15 Eddie Kirk,Gene Bell,Robert Davis 16 17 AGENDA ITEM#1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 18 Chair Allison called the meeting to order. 19 20 AGENDA ITEM#2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 21 None 22 23 AGENDA ITEM#3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES-October 4,2000 24 25 MOTION: Katz moved approval of the minutes from October 4,2000 of the Orange . 26 County Planning Board. Seconded by Gooding-Ray. 27 28 VOTE: Unanimous 29 30 AGENDA ITEM#4: COMIVIISSIONERS'MEETINGS ACTION REPORTS 31 (September S,2000.and September 19,2000) 32 33 AGENDA ITEM#5: PUBLIC CHARGE 34 Chair Allison read the public charge. 35 36 AGENDA ITEM#6: CHAIR COMMENTS 37 None 38 39 AGENDA ITEM#7: CO ./ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS 40 a. Board of Adjustment-no meeting 41 b. Agricultural Preservation Board-Straybom reported that five new 42 members had been added to the board. 43 c. Ordinance Review-Chair Allison reported that they discussed--- - ------_. 44 stream buffers and this would be dealt with later in the agenda. 45 d. Report an Comprehensive Plan Update-no report _ 46 47 AGENDA ITEM#8: SUBDIVISIONS 48 a. Concept Plans 49 50 1)Whisper Ridge 51 (Cheeks Township 15 Lots ConservatiadCluster 52 17 Lots Conventional) 53 9 i� AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING (AUGUST 28,2000) 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 Board. 9 10 The ordinance restricts the amount of unencumbered tot space on lots. In other words,there would have I 1 to be a minimum lot size that could be built on for a particular lot. For any lot between 40,000 square 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 58,under"Method A-Stream Buffer Based on Slope and Groundcover"the Ordinance Review 20 Committee recommended some changes. The width of the buffer shall be"a minimum of"50 feet. For 21 slope values less than 7.5 percent,the Ordinance Review Committee recommended that only an 22 additional 15 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 additional 30 feet should be added to the 50- 24 foot buffer. 25 26 Regarding 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. 35 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 areas 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,"as designated in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan." 42 43 McAdams asked if all of the people that would be affected by the ordinance amendment were notified of .44- _she 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 are encumbered and not usable. 46 ­47 Woods asked about farming activities in the floodplain and said that they should be exempt. Barrows 48 disagrees because of possible 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 lice it stated in the document that farms would be exempt. 53 f 10 1 Gooding-Ray is opposed to exempting all#arms because of the pesticides in the water. 2 3 It was decided that the document would,remain silent about the exemption of farms. 4 5 Goodwin is concerned about the wildlife corridor and that 330 feet on either side of themajor waterways 6 is not usable. 7 8 Woods said that he supports a minimum usable lot size,but he thinks it is a bad idea to not count 330 feet 9 on either side of the major waterways. 10 i 1 Barrows said that people should be notified enough to come to a public hearing if they are going to be 12 affected. Davis said that for text amendments,people are not notified. 13 14 Benedict said that the wildlife corridors could be similar in width to the stream buffers. ' 15 16 The board agreed that along streams the wildlife corridor would be the same width as the stream buffer. 17 In areas where the wildlife corridor is not along a stream,it will be reduced to a total of 150 feet. 18 19 MOTION: Katz moved approval of the proposed Post Public Hearing to Planning 20 Board Ordinance as given in the Stream Buffer Zoning Ordinance 21 Amendments as revised above. Seconded by Woods. 22 23 VOTE: Unanimous 24 25 AGENDA ITEM#10: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 26 27 a. Planning Calendar-November 28 b. Next Planning Board Meeting-November 16,2000®6:00 p.m. 29 30 Chair Allison reminded the board that he would not be at the public hearing on November 27,2000. 31 McAdams will be sitting in for him. 32 33 Benedict indicated what would be on the quarterly public hearing-American Stone Company quarry 34 zoning and special use permit,school impact fee ordinance(Orange County system only),School 35, Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,and subdivisions of non-residential land. The items on the 36 Economic Development District moratorium and the Pathways Preserve were taken off the agenda by the 37 Commissioners. 38 39 AGENDA ITEM#11: ADJOURNMENT I 40 41 With no frurther items to discuss,the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. 42 43 Leo Allison,Chair 44 45 Becky Butler,Minutes Preparer 46 11 Public Hearing Ordinance An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County Section 1: Amend Article 22 DEFINITIONS by creating a new definition as follows: Lot, Usable—The.portion of a zoning lot unencumbered by stream buffers, conservation easements, drainage easements, public and private rights-of-way, access easements, utility easements. This definition also includes areas in lots affected by steep slopes, (i.e. greater than 15%), wildlife corridors, ponds, lakes and streams. Section 2: Amend Section 6.23.7a and Article 22 DEFINITIONS of Stream Buffer to clarify that the stream buffer is not to be included within the floodplain. Stream Buffer— a stream buffer is an area of land adjacent to perennial and intermittent streams, or identified floodplains, which, except as permitted in Article 6.23.7 of this Ordinance, must remain undisturbed in its natural state. Perennial streams are shown as solid blue lines and intermittent streams as broken lines on the USGS Quadrangle maps. Section 3: (page 6-41 —Zoning Ordinance) 6.23.7d. Calculating the Width of Stream Buffer d. Calculating Width of Stream Buffer Those streams identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps to have floodplains shalt have stream buffers calculated from the outside edges of the floodplain. ' 1) How to Calculate Slope a. Draw a-liee 250' length perpendicular lines, at 100-foot horizontal intervals along the entire length of the outside edges of the stream, to the m, or the outer edge of the FEMA floodplain, whichever is greater. b. Determine the elevation at either the stream itself (1) or the outer edge of the FEMA floodplain, whichever is highest, and at the point 250' from the stream or FEMA floodplain, whichever is applicable, along the perpendicular line (2). c. Subtract (1) from (2). d. Divide c. by 250. e. Multiply d. by 100. f. Perform this calculation for both sides of the stream or floodplain. Hereafter, the number derived in e. will be referred to as "slope value. L} 12 Public Hearing Ordinance Section 4: Amend Detailed Table of Contents Section 6.24 to read as follows: Stream Buffers Outside of Watershed Protection Overlay Districts Section 5: Amend new Section 6.24 to include a minimum stream buffer for areas outside of Orange County Watershed Protection Overlay Districts to read as follows: In areas not identified on the Official Zoning Atlas as Watershed Protection Overlay Districts, a stream buffer a minimum of 30 feet in width shall be established along both sides of perennial streams and intermittent streams, or along the FEMA identified floodplains, whichever is greater. Perennial streams are those streams shown as solid blue lines, and intermittent streams are those streams shown as broken blue lines on the USGS Quadrangle maps for Orange County. Section 6: Amend Detailed Table of Contents Section 6.25 to read as follows: Minimum Usable Lot Area for Lots on Ground Absorption Wastewater Systems Section 7: Amend the new Section 6.25 to set minimum usable lot area when Ground Absorption Wastewater Systems are used to read as follows: The usable lot for parcels between 40,000 square feet and 1.99 acres in size shall be either 30,000 square feet or 40% of the total zoning lot,whichever is greater. Zoning lots two acres and greater shall have a minimum usable lot area of at least 40,000 square feet. Section 8: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. (Signature) (Signature) Clerk, Board of County Commissioners Chair, Orange County Commissioners Date and Seal t 13 1 MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 3 AND a ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 5 August.28,2000 6 7 The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board met on Monday, 8 August 28, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. in the Judge Gordon F. Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina 9 10 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Stephen H. Halkiotis and Commissioners 11 Margaret W. Brown,Alice M. Gordon,and Barry Jacobs 12 COUNTY CO MISSIONER ABSENT: Chair Moses Carey,Jr. 13 ILL ANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENI: Leo Allison, Chair and members Runyon Woods, Bob 14 Strayhom, Crauford Goodwin,Karen Barrows, Howard McAdams,Barry Katz, and Rachel Preston 15 COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT,) Geoffrey Gledhill 16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT; County Manager John M. Link,Jr., Planning Director Craig Benedict 17 and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe(all other staff members will be identified appropriately below) 18 19 NOTE: I DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTE„g an IN I E PERMANENT 20 AGENDA Fite IN KE CLERK'S OFFICE. ALL RECORDINGS OF THE MEETING VALL BE 21 KEPT FOR S YEAR& 22 23 A. QPENING REMARKS FROM Iff VICE-CHAIR 24 He announced that Chair Careywas out of town and that he, Commissioner Halkiotis, would 25 be chairing this meeting along with Leo Allison, Chair of the Orange County Planning Board. The 26 Board of Commissioners agreed to address item C5 first•Shaping Orange County's Future 27 Report. 28 29 B. PUBUC CHARGE 30 Commissioner Haikiotis read the public charge. 31 32 NOTE: Planning Board Chair Leo Allison chaired Items C1 and 4 33 Commissioners'Vice-Chair Stephen Halldotis chaired items 2, 3, and 5 34 . 35 C PUBLIC HEARINC8 T� IBS 36 1. Orange Counft Zoning Ordinance TW Amendm2nli 37 a. Article 22 Deflnitians for lot; Usable 38 b. Article 22 Definitions of Stream Buffer 39 c. Section 623.7 Stream Buffers 40 d. Detailed Table of Contents 41 e. Section 634 Stream Buffers Outside of Watershed Protection Overlay 42 Districts 43 f. Section 6.23 Usable lot areas when using Ground Absorption Septic Systems 44 45 Planner Robert Davis summarized this item. He said that these text amendments were 46 coming forward to dears up a section of the ordinance for better interpretation and to consistently 47 interpret what the stream buffer section means. He said that right now there was not a stream 48 buffer requirement unless the land was in a watershed. He explained a map showing the stream 49 buffers and the edge of the flood plain. On the calculation of the width, the ordinance indicates that 50 only a perpendicular line across the stream should be drawn, but it does not say how many times 51 this should be done along the stream. He said that the minimum feet that the staff is 52 recommending is 140 feet along the horizontal area. Also, the definition of a Usable Lot has been 53 clarified as, "the portion of a zoning lot unencumbered by stream buffers, conservation easements, 54 drainage easements, public and private right-of-ways, access easements, and utility easements." 55 The definition also includes areas affected by steep slopes, which are slopes greater than 15%, 56 wildlife corridors, ponds, lakes, and streams. This item will be going back to the Planning Board IF7 2 14 with a recommendation back to the Commissioners no earlier than October 3"'. The Ordinance 2 Review Committee will also review these amendments. 3 Commissioner Gordon made reference to the statement on page four, Section 7, 4 "Usable lots for parcels between 40,000 square feet and 1.99 acres in size shall be either 30,000 s square feet or 40%of the total zoning lot,whichever is greater. Zoning lots two acres and greater 6 shall have a minimum usable lot area of at least 40,000 square feet" She asked if some kind of 7 usable lot area could be settled on and required for everybody instead of stepping it up. Robert 8 Davis said that the 40%was added because there was quite a gap between 40,000 and two acres. 9 Commissioner Gordon said that her point was that the amount of square footage should 10 be justified. Her question is why more should be added to the justified amount. 11 Craig Benedict said that 30,000 square feet was the definite minimum because it would 12 accommodate the house site,driveway, septic area, and repair area with a margin for some 13 accessory structures. With zoning lots of two acres or more,the people who are going to have a 14 two-acre lot would most likely have other accessory structures that would need additional usable 15 area. He agrees that the 400A is not critical on the smaller lot size. 16 Commissioner Jacobs suggested that it would nice to include an illustration on the 17 definition of a steep slope. He asked about Section one and the Usable Lot. He asked about 18 conservation easements. Craig Benedict said that they were definitely not trying to discourage 19 conservation, but that stream buffers or conservation easements should not be included in the 20 accomplishment of the minimum lot size. 21 Rachel Preston asked If there was any verbiage on what a homeowner could do to 22 streams and vegetation. Craig Benedict said that it was handled by the Erosion Control and 23 Sedimentation Ordinance,which says that natural water courses are not supposed to be diverted. 24 There is encroachment to some degree but changing water courses is limited In the majority'of 25 cases. If there is any disturbance of this nature, there has to be some kind of mitigation. 26 Commissioner Brown asked If this establishes a 30-toot buffer and Craig Benedict said 27 that it did establish a 30-foot buffer In areas that are not part of the protected watershed.' 28 Bob Strayhorn and Runyon Woods of the Planning Board made comments, but 29 they were not speaking into the microphone, so 1 could not hear them. 34 . 31 EUBLIC COMMENT 32 Mr. Joe Phelps said that he did not know that his subdivision request would cause so 33 much work and so many drastic changes in the rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. He 34 feels that the changes in the rules and regulations are very.drastic. He feels that most of these 35 amendments are not necessary. He questioned why the County Commissioners would want to put 36 stream buffers on areas that are In the non-protected watershed. He supports affordable housing 37 and thinks that with these new rules on development, no one could afford to buy land in Orange 38 County. His main concern Is what is being taken away from present landowners with regard to the 39 33% of required open space with no compensation. He said that these new regulations would 40 greatly reduce the number of people that would be coming into Orange County in the next 30 41 years. 42 Scott Radway had some questions on what was meant by the proposals. 43 Section 1 -Usable Lot Area-steep slopes(i.e., greater than 15%). He prefers a 25% 44 grade. 45 Wildlife Corridors-as Identified by whom, when,where, and for what purpose 46 Section 2-Stream Buffer-who identifies the floodplains 47 Minimum buffers that are not in protected watersheds-why 30 feet and not more 48 Section 6-Minimum Usable Lot Areas-should say minimum usable lot area for lots 49 that utilize ground absorption 50 30,000 or 40,000 square feet lot-much easier to say 30,000 or 40,000 and not 40% 51 52 Bobby Nichols said that he has stream buffers on his land that he is concerned about. 53 He made reference to page three, section two, which says, "must remain undisturbed in its natural 54 state," and asked for a definition. Craig Benedict said that if someone owned land that was within 3 15 1 the floodplain and wants to have any type of agricultural production or forestry, they are exempted p2b y the majority of state laws. 3 With no further public comment, Chair Allison closed the public hearing. 4 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to 5 refer the proposed zoning text amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be 6 returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than October 3, 2000. 7 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 8 9 2. ORANGE COUNTY TELECQMMUNiCATiONS TOWER APPROVAL 10 REQUiREMENTS AND PROCE S 11 Craig Benedict made a correction to the agenda abstract that this item was a public 12 hearing. The abstract indicated that it was not a public hearing. 13 Craig Benedict made this presentation. He said that it had been four years since the 14 inception of the telecommunication rules in Orange County. A lot of improvements have been 15 made since that time. He explained in detail the following issues and suggestions. A section of 16 definitions could be added that describes the different types of antennse.arrays that can be on the 17 towers. He explained the possibility of putting towers on existing structures such as hotels, etc. is One of the suggestions is for the County to put together a master plan where the County has more i4 involvement in the placement of telecommunications towers. Another suggestion is allowing 20 telecommunication facilities to be in electrical transmission lines. Another suggestion is the 21 development of utility corridors across the County. There are minimum standards that can be 22 augmented within the County's code to promote more co-location and multi-use. At this time,the 23 standards for telecommunications towers is that anything 200 feet and above Is a Class A Special 24 Use and it goes to both the Planning Board and County Commissioners, If it is 189 feet, it is a 25 Class B and just goes to the'Board of Adjustment. The staff provided the County Commissioners 26 with a report over the last year, and all of the towers were Class B with a height of 195 feet and 27 above. He said that the County Commissioners could change the height at which the tower would 28 requires Class A Special Use Permit. He said that there were other counties and towns that were 29 putting together master telecommunication plans. The reaction to these plans has been favorable 30 so far. He said that the Commissioners did not have to make any decisions tonight. 31 Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 7, Telecommunications Facilities, and 32 asked Craig Benedict why the facilities would be permitted as an accessory use in parks and 33 recreation greater than 1.25 acres and in community facilities. Also, at the top of page 9, Section 34 C, it says"it shall not be permitted within 200 feet of any residential district or residential portion of 35 a PUD unless a property is designated as part of the special utility overlay district. She asked If 36 that could sometimes negate the placement in parks, recreation areas, and community facilities. 37 Craig Benedict said that, in regards to the parks and community facilities,they were zoning 38 designations that may or may not be on the zoning map at this time. He said that there was 39 enough latitude in the regulations so that there were no conflicting provisions. 40 Commissioner Gordon said that community facility needed to be defined. Craig 41 Benedict said that in his previous experience,towers were located in parks where there were I 42 lights. He said that towers could be incorporated in parks and could sometimes reduce the cost of 43 sports lighting poles. 44 Commissioner Jacobs suggested having a differential fee structure,which would 45 encourage people to do the things that the County prefers, such as co-location. Also, regarding 46 the issue of the height of the poles, he would like for the County Commissioners to review all of the 47 applications. He said that if the requests for towers were going to the Board of Adjustment,then 48 the County Attorney should be present at the meetings. Craig Benedict will do some research with 49 the present ordinance and look at the rationale for the height number,which causes the application 50 to go to the Board of Adjustment instead of to the County Commissioners. Commissioner Jacobs 51 made reference to the$4,000 application fee and asked if the County's legal representation was 52 included in that Craig Benedict will take a look at the fee structure, County staff time, attorney 53 time, etc. 54 Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to co-location and said w 6 Is MAP �r M .. JAw - 1 J1},-��1 • �, r _