The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 10-01-1996 - 8d 1 1 r ORANGECOUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: October 1, 1996 Action Agenda Item# 9�4 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT Section IV-B-5-e(Lot Layout) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED Yes–X—No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Proposed Amendment Mary Willis 8/26/96 Public Hearing Minutes(draft) Extension 2583 9/4/96 Planning Board Minutes(draft) TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough-732-8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227-2031 Chapel Hill-967-9251 PURPOSE: To considbr a proposed amendment to clarify Section IV-B-5-e by substituting the word"divided" for the word"separated". BACKGROUND The proposed amendment would provide more clarity in the text. It would not result in a substantive change to any regulation. The amendment was presented for public hearing on August 26, 1996. There were no comments. The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on September 4, 1996 and recommended approval. The vote was unanimous. RECOMMENDATION: Close the public hearing and receive the Planning Board recommendation. The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment.. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Z r REFERENCE: Subdivision Regulations Section IV-B-5-e (Lot Layout) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff Planning Board BOCC Public X Other: County Attorney EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 26, 1996 Purpose of Amendment: To clarify Section IV-B-5-e by substituting the word"divided" for_the word"separated". Impacts/Issues: The proposed amendment would provide more clarity in the text. It would not result in a substantive change to any regulation. EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE TEXT: *IV-B-5-e. All lots created after the effective date of this provision shall be composed *Amended of contiguous land area, and that area shall not be separated divided by 10/3/88 street right-of-way or other lots. A private road easement may SP14 divide 10/18/94 a new lot only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. the land underlying the easement ja in the same ownership as the remainder of the lot; and 2. the proposed easement contains an existing road or driveway which is to be used for access to new lots; OR the proposed easement}s if located along a I property line whieh has will have an irregular shape; and 3 3. the minimum lot area requirement can be met on one side of the road easement but not both sides. Those lots with land area sepal divided by a public right-of-way prior to the effective date of this provision shall not be further subdivided in a manner which creates any additional lots with sepaFated divide area. ********************************** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: 7/3/96 PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: Sept . 4 , 1996 4 Planning Board Minutes (draft) 5. Shorten the cul de sac by approximately 100 feet,shift house sites southeast, and provide a larger buffer adjacent to the curve in Moorefields Road; 6. On the Preliminary Plan,indicate the entrance to Moorefields National Register Historic Site and the stream channel for Rocky Run;and 7. With the Preliminary Plan,submit draft forms of homeowners association' documents,restrictive covenants,and septic easement documents which contain development restrictions and maintenance requirements for open space and buffers. AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 8/26/96 a. Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments (1) Section IV-B-5-e Lot Layout Presentation by Mary Willis. This item is to consider a proposed amendment to clarify Section IV-B-5-e by substituting the word"divided"for the word"separated". The proposed amendment would provide more clarity in the text.It would not result in a substantive change to any regulation. The amendment was presented for public hearing on August 26, 1996. There were no comments. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. (Copy of the proposed amendment an attachment to these minutes on page ) MOTION: Barrows moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Katz VOTE: Unanimous. (2) Section IV-B-9 Cluster Developments Section III-D Approval Procedures for Major Subdivisions Section V-A Specifications for Plat Drawings (Concept Plans in Rural Buffer) Presentation by Mary Willis. This item is to consider a proposed amendment to re-adopt cluster subdivision provisions and Concept Plan application and approval procedures in the Rural Buffer. DRAFT 1 8/26/96 Public Hearing Minutes 5 2 3. Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments 3 (a) Section IV-B-S-e Lot Layout 4 This item was presented by May Willis to consider a proposed amendment to clarify 5 Section N-B-S a by wbstituting the word'divided'for the word'separated'. The proposed amendment would 6 provide mom deft in the tact. It would not result in a substantive change to any regulation. 7 8 COMMENTS ANDIOR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF C01111111SSiONERS -None 9 10 COME=AND/OR QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD -None 11 12 COMMENTS AND/OR OLIF.913ONS FROM CITQENS -None 13 14 A motion was made by Commissioner VAhoit,seconded by Commissioner Gordon,to refer the proposed 15 amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no 16 sooner than October 1.1996. 17 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 18 19 (b) Securing Subdivision Improvements 20 1)Section III-E(new)Improvements(was V-D-8) 21 2)Section III-C-2s Application Requirements(Minor Subdivisions) 22 3)Section Ilt-D-2-a.(7)Application Requirements(Preliminary Plat) 23 4)Section III4)-3a Application Requirements(Final Plat) 24 This item was presented to receive citizen commen(on proposed amendments 25 to the Subdivision Regulations to relocate provisions regarding required improvements from Section V,'Plat 26 Specifications.'to Section III,'Application and Approval Procedures,'rewrite the section for clarity and to add 27 language regarding construction costs estimates and financial guarantees. 28 29 COMMENTS ANDIOB QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS-None 30 31 COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD -None 32 33 MUMENTS ANDMR QUESTIONS FROM CITIZENS -None 34 35 A motion was made by Commissioner VW#xgt,seconded by Commissioner Crowther,to refer the proposed 36 amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no 37 sooner than October 1,19%. 38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 39 (c) Cluster Subdivision Provisions 40 1)Section IV-8-9 Cluster Developments 41 2)Section 111-0 Approval Procedures for Major Subdi tsions 42 3)Section V-A Specifications for Plat Drawings 43 This item was presented to consider a proposed amendment to re-adopt duster 44 subdivision provisions and Concept.Plan application and approval procedures in the Rural Buffer. The flexibte 45 development provisions are applicable in aY residential zoning districts except the Rural Buffer. Deleting the 46 previous cluster reguhalons and Concept Plan application and approval procedures had the unintended result 47 of erunina*V those provisions in the Rural Buffer. The Planning Staff recommends that tl»previous provisions 48 be readopted to apply to that district only. 49 rat COMMENTS A &QUMMNS FROM THE BOARD OF C01111NIMSIONERS-None S1 52 CONNIMM A it QLMSMMS FROM THE PIANNING 90AEM -None 53 54 COME u 11 AND/OR QUESTIONS FROM GI T123943 -None 55