Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 01-17-1995 - VIII-E 1 � 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: January 17, 1995 Action Agenda Item # Vim-E SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT Article 6.23 - Watershed Protection Overlay Districts (subdividing two or more lots of record in University Lake Watershed) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes_X—No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Citizen Request for Amendment Mary Willis Proposed amendment Extension 2583 11/30/94 Public Hearing Minutes (draft) 12/19/94 Planning Board Minutes (draft) TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough-732-8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227-2031 Chapel Hill-967-9251 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow the transfer of dwelling units across common boundaries of adjoining lots of record for cluster subdivisions within the University Lake Watershed. BACKGROUND: Article 6.23.2 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates the maximum residential densities allowed in Orange County's 13 protected watershed overlay districts. The following requirement pertains to residential density in the University Lake Watershed, including its Critical Area "Up to five lots at least two acres in size can be created from a lot of record as of October 3, 1989. Thereafter, each lot shall contain at least five acres, and the density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per five acres." Under current regulations, all of the lots which could be created from a lot of record would be contained within the exact lot boundary in existence on October 3, 1989. This requirement limits design flexibility in cases where a subdivision consists of two or more adjacent lots of record. The proposed amendment was initiated by a citizen after inquiring into possibilities for creating a cluster subdivision on two existing lots in the University Lake Watershed. The proposed amendment was presented for public hearing on November 30, 1994. There were no comments. The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on December 19, 1994 and recommended approval. The vote was unanimous. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment, per the Planning Board recommendation. 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: ZONING ORDINANCE REFERENCE: Article 6.23 -Watershed Protection Overlay Districts (subdividing two or more lots of record in University Lake Watershed) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff Planning Board BOCC x Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: _x High Middle Low PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 30, 1994 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To consider a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow the transfer of dwelling units across common boundaries of adjoining lots of record for cluster subdivisions within the University Lake Watershed. IM[PACTS/ISSUES: Article 6.23.2 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates the maximum residential densities allowed in Orange County's 13 protected watershed overlay districts. The following requirement pertains to residential density in the University Lake Watershed, including its Critical Area: "Up to five lots at least two acres in size can be created from a lot of record as of October 3, 1989. Thereafter, each lot shall contain at least five acres, and the density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per five acres." Under current regulations, all of the lots which could be created from a lot of record must be contained within the lot boundary in existence on October 3, 1989. This requirement can limit design flexibility in cases where a subdivision consists of two or more adjacent lots of record. The proposed amendment was initiated by,a citizen after inquiring into possibilities for creating a cluster subdivision on two existing adjoining lots in the University Lake Watershed. Two separate subdivisions could be created, each of which would contain five two-acre lots with the remaining lots averaging five acres. A single unified subdivision containing the same number of lots, with ten of them containing two acres, could not be created if any more than five of the two-acre lots was to be located on one of the original parcels. Correspondence from the applicant is attached. Below is the proposed amendment as recommended by the Planning Staff. The text of the amendment as submitted by the applicant has been modified for clarity. I EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT: 3 6.23.2 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY Maximum residential density shall be as indicated in the Table below, or as required by the underlying zoning district, whichever is less. DISTRICT MAXIMUM DENSITY UNIV-CA Up t 9 fWe lets at least tv.pe al A--*es ka ski e Pan-b e ep eate d fpem a le t ea Pe eeffd_ -f Q ete ber-g-, UNIV-PW , and the density sh"not e*eeed efie dwe4ingunit (" pef-;:ive Fieres. 1 du/five acres. Lots of record existing on October 2 1989 may contain up to but no more than- five lots with a density of one du/two acres. Contiguous lots of record existing on October 2 1989 may be combined into one parcel for development. The number of two-acre lots and the total number of lots in the combined parcel cannot exceed the sum of the number of two-acre lots and the total number of lots which could be created from each lot of record. CANE-CA CANE-PW 1 du/2 acres U-ENO-CA LITTLE-PW HYCO-PW 1 du/ 40,000 square feet (.92 acre) FLAT-PW U-ENO-PW L-ENO-PW Maximum density is as permitted in the underlying zoning district. HAW-PW Structural BMPs are required in some cases where density exceeds 1 dwelling unit per acre. JORDAN-PW Refer to Article 6.23.3c1. BACK-PW ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: e..r.s., inc. 4 October - 11 . 1994 Mary Willis , Planner 3 Orange County Planning Staff Hillsborough, NC RE: Amendment Water Shed Protection Overlay Districts, Article 6. 23 Dear Mary: Please receive this request to amend Article- 6 . 2.3 of the Orange -County Zoning- Ordinance to clarify and allow adjacent lots of record prior to October 2 , 1989 to -transfer lot quantities . and _size* .across- common boundaries . This will fu.lfill -the- intent of Article 6. 23 . 9 , Clustering, and allow designers th.e -flexibil.ity needed to preserve .open space and reduce the impact of unnecessary impervious surfaces created by long roads ,and. drives. _ The amendment/clarification could be added to Article 6. 2.3 . 2 , Residential. Density, and placed after the' second . sentence - ended .".maximum density" , Thank you for your attention .to this. matter. Please get back to me fo.r any necessary revisions or. suggestions *you might have. Sincere <ey J n D. Ha Suite 205 • 125 Kingston Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27514 . Ofc. 919.942:0077 • FAX. 919.942:0015 John D. Hartley, President/Architect•General Contractors NC License#10362 •Design and Construction of Residential and Light Commercial 5 6.23.2 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY Maximum residential density shall be as indicated in the Table below, or as required by the underlying zoning district, whichever is less. DISTRICT MAXIMUM DENSITY UNIV-CA Up to five lots at least two acres in size can be created from a lot of record as UNIV-PW of October 2, 1989. Thereafter, each lot shall contain at least five acres, and the density shall not exceed one dwelling unit (du) per five acres. However, if Clustering (Article 6.23.9), adjoining parcels of record as of October 2, 1959 may transfer du's across common boundaries as long as the combined total of du's do not exceed the sum of the total du's allowed on each parcel. CANE-CA CANE-PW 1 du/ 2 acres U-ENO-CA LITTLE-PW HYCO-PW 1 du/ 40,000 square feet (.92 acre) FLAT-PW U-ENO-PW Maximum density is as permitted in the underlying zoning district. L-ENO-PW HAW-PW Structural BMPs are required in some cases where density exceeds 1 dwelling JORDAN-PW unit per acre. Refer to Article 6.23.3cl. BACK-PW 6 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD NOVEMBER 30, 1994 1 The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange 2 County Planning Board met on November 30, 1994 in the new County 3 Courthouse, Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, North Carolina, for 4 a joint quarterly public hearing. 5 6 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr. , and 7 Commissioners Don Willhoit, Verla Insko, Alice Gordon and Stephen 8 Halkiotis. 9 COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill 10 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John Link, Planning 11 Director Marvin Collins, Planner Mary Willis and Deputy Clerk to 12 the Board Kathy Baker. 13 COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair William 14 Waddell, and members Karen Barrows, Joan Jobsis, Elizabeth 15 Walters, Cheryl Howie, Kent Scott, Clint Burklin, and Margaret 16 Brown. 17 COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Hoecke, Cherie 18 Rosemond, Virginia Boland and Larry Reid. 19 20 NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE LOCATED 21 IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILES IN THE CLERK'S. OFFICE 22 23 A. OPENING REMARKS 24 Chair Carey opened the meeting and introduced the Planning 25 Board Chair Bill Waddell. 26 27 B. PUBLIC CHARGE 28 Chair Carey dispensed with the reading of the Public Charge. 29 The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. 30 31 C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 32 1. Amendments Related to Watershed Protection Overlay 33 Districts 34 a. Article 6.23.2 - Residential Density 35 This item was presented by Mary Willis in order to 36 receive citizen comments on the proposed amendment to the Zoning 37 Ordinance which would allow the transfer of dwelling units across 38 common boundaries of adjoining lots of record for cluster 39 subdivisions within the University Lake Watershed. 40 41 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR 42 PLANNING BOARD 43 None. 44 45 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS 46 None. 1 A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by 2 Commissioner Insko, to 'refer this item to the Planning Board to 3 be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 4 17, 1995. 5 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 6 7 1. Amendments Related to Watershed Protection Overlay 8 Districts 9 b. Article 6.23 .7b - Permitted Use in Stream Buffers 10 C. Article 6. 23 .8 - Water Supply/Sewage Disposal 11 Facilities 12 d. Article 6.23.10a - Applicability/Existing 13 Development 14 e. Article 6.23 . 10c - Applicability/Existing Lots 15 f. Article 6.23.11 - Administration 16 Items C1 (b-f) were presented by Mary Willis in order 17 to receive citizen comments on proposed amendments which would 18 allow for the reduction of setbacks adjacent to streams and 19 reservoirs to the extent necessary to allow development of an 20 existing lot of record. 21 22 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING 23 BOARD 24 25 Commissioner Willhoit requested statistics on the frequency 26 of pump failures and on the length of time between failure and 27 completion of repairs. The localized effect from leaking tanks 28 and/or nitrification fields needs to be considered. 29 30 Mary Willis indicated that she would request this 31 information from the Health Department and forward to the 32 Commissioners. She commented that current Health Department 33 standards require the septic tank and nitrification field to be 34 100 feet from the reservoir which exceeds the state standards. 35 36 Kent Scott indicated that each pump is equipped with an 37 alarm which sounds when there is a failure. This is intended to 38 immediately advise homeowners of the failure of their system. 39 40 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS 41 42 MOLLIE S. JOHNSON, a Lake Orange homeowner, thanked the 43 Orange County Planning Staff, Health Department and Board of 44 Adjustment for their work on this project. She urged that these 45 amendments be approved. 46 47 GARY LUBARSKY, a Lake Orange homeowner, spoke in support of 48 these proposed amendments. He indicated that on January 1, 1994 49 the existing structures and undeveloped lots on Lake Orange 50 became non-compliant. Property owners were upset about the 51 prospect of being required to use the Board of Adjustment process 52 with the resultant fees included. He believes that these proposed DRAFT 12/19/94 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AGENDA ITEM #9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 8 (5/5/94,5/23/94,6/30/94) a. Open Space/Flexible Development Proposals (This item will be considered at the Planning Board' s January 10, 1995 Long Range Work Session. AGENDA ITEM #10: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING (11/30/94) a. Watershed Protection Overlay Districts ( 1) Article 6.23.2 - Residential Density (2 ) Article 6.23.7b - Permitted Use in Stream Buffers (3) Article 6.23.8 - Water Supply/Sewage Disposal Facilities (4) Article 6.23. 10a - Applicability/Existing Development (5) Article 6.23. 10c -Applicability/Existing Lots (6) Article 6.23. 11 - Administration (Item #10.a. ( 1) will be considered at this meeting. The remaining items will be considered at the Planning Board' s January 10, 1995 Long Range Work Session) . Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow the transfer of dwelling units across common boundaries of adjoining lots of record for cluster subdivisions within the University Lake Watershed. Article 6.23.2 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates the maximum residential densities allowed in Orange County' s 13 protected watershed overlay districts. The following requirement pertains to residential density in the University Lake Watershed, including its Critical Area: "Up to five lots at least two acres in size can be created from a lot of record as of October 3, 1989. Thereafter, each lost shall contain at least five acres, and the density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per five acres. " Under current regulations, all of the lots which could be created from a lot of record would be contained within the exact lot boundary in existence on October 3, 1989. This requirement limits design flexibility in cases where a subdivision consists of two or more adjacent lots of record. 9 The proposed amendment was initiated by a citizen after inquiring into possibilities for creating a cluster subdivision on two existing lots in the University Lake Watershed. There were no citizen comments when the amendment was presented for public hearing on November 30, 1994 . The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. Brown asked why this applies only to University Lake Watershed. Collins responded this was the only watershed with a basic five-acre minimum lot size requirement. Brown asked the reason for not dealing with all of the watershed overlay amendments at the same time. Collins responded that this is a minor technical amendment. The County Attorney had questions following the public hearing about the need for some more precise standards on some of the other amendments and he is continuing to work with Mary Willis on the legal wording of those amendments. MOTION: Burklin moved approval of the recommendation as presented by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Hoecke. VOTE: Unanimous. b. I-40/Old N.C. 86 Economic Development District ( 1) CP-5-94 I-40/Old N.C. 86 Economic Development District (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) (2) Z-5-94 I-40/Old N.C. 86 Economic Development District (Zoning Atlas Amendment)- (3) Article 6.29.3 - Economic Development Districts Design Manual (Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments) Presentation by Marvin Collins. The abstract information is an attachment to these minutes on pages c. Other Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments ( 1) Article 4. 1 - Establishment of Use Regulations (Telephone/fiber optic equipment) Presentation by Marvin Collins.