Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-23-1994 - C-6 (b) s ` 103 OR AN G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 23, 1994 Action A enda Item is �(b) SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT Section IV-B-3-d-1 ROADS (Private Road Justification Criteria) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Proposed Amendment Mary Willis Sketch of Example Subdivision Extension 2583 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough-732-8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227-2031 Chapel Hill -967-9251 PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations which would include, as justification for a private road, the preservation of site features which preserve or enhance special or unique characteristics of the immediate area surrounding a proposed subdivision. BACKGROUND: On March 20, 1994, the Planning Board considered an appeal of the Planning Staff decision regarding a requirement for a private road in a Minor Subdivision. The Planning Board acknowledged that maintaining a gravel road would be more in keeping with the unique characteristics of the property and the surrounding area than would a paved public road. The property is located adjacent to a church and cemetery and there is concern by the church that the access to the cemetery by a paved public road would encourage trespassing by youths, which has been a problem in the past. A sketch and description of the subdivision is attached. The private road justification criteria of the Subdivision Regulations do not include any criteria which would allow unique characteristics of the property and its surroundings to be taken into account. The Planning Board requested that the Ordinance Review Committee consider an amendment which would allow for specific characteristics of the neighborhood to be considered in determining whether a subdivision road will be public or private. The amendment is not proposed solely to address the subdivision discussed above. The 104 subdivision does, however, provide an example of a situation which the Staff believes is not, but should be, addressed in the existing private road justification criteria. RECOMENDATION: Section VII-D-3 of the Subdivision Regulations requires that proposed amendments to the text of the Subdivision Regulations be presented at a joint public hearing involving the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board. It is at that time that the Planning Staff's recommendation is presented. Planning Staff Recommendation Provided that the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners find in the affirmative, the Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed text amendment. No decision is made on the proposed amendments by either the Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public hearing. Instead, the Planning Board has 75 days within which to prepare and submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners. Failure of the Planning Board to submit a recommendation within the required time shall be considered a favorable recommendation. Administration Recommendation The Administration recommends that the proposed amendment be referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 8, 1994 . M cTAM E5 L • OLALDCX 10 AC- 5. 1 qqwaT Pat JAAW wPW go AC- doe owe 1�2 v,\ 1 owMlf Ao5n� SCATMEDVM9 EXC, P' LF.-DAMON ROAD 6p j L A.CA I KDICATC 5D D v 106 • 107 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REFERENCE: ARTICLE IV-B-3-d-1 ROADS (Private Road Justification Criteria) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff X_ Planning Board BOCC Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: X High Middle Low Comment: PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 23, 1994 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To- include, as justification for a private road, the preservation of site features which preserve or enhance special or unique characteristics of the immediate area surrounding a proposed subdivision. IMPACTS/ISSUES: On March 20, 1994, the Planning Board considered an appeal of the Planning Staff decision regarding a requirement for a private road in a Minor Subdivision. The Planning Board acknowledged that maintaining a gravel road would be more in keeping with the unique characteristics of the property and the surrounding area than would a paved .� public road. A sketch of the subdivision is attached. A total of five lots are proposed to be created from two existing lots. The property currently contains four mobile homes. Two of the proposed lots each contain one mobile home, and one lot contains two mobile homes. if approved, the subdivision would allow the placement two additional residences. The property is located adjacent to a church and cemetery. The- church owns about 1/3 of the land underlying the existing private road easement. The church is opposed to the use of a public road because it would provide unlimited public access to the cemetery, where problems with unauthorized access by youths has occurred in the past. r 10S The existing road continues beyond the proposed subdivision and beyond the cemetery to serve six additional lots. Because surrounding property has been developed, the existing road will not be extended. The six lots range in size from 1.3 to 1.95 acres, none of which could be further subdivided and meet minimum lot size requirements outside of the right-of-way. Foxfire Lane could not be constructed as a public road beyond the subject property due to its sharp curvature around the existing cemetery. However, the private road justification criteria of the Subdivision Regulations did not include any criteria which would allow these characteristics to be taken into account. As a result, the Planning Board upheld the Staff decision requiring dedication of a public road. If the applicant wishes to continue to pursue subdivision approval, the subdivision will be presented to the Board of Commissioners through the Major Subdivision approval process. The Planning Board requested that the Ordinance Review Committee consider an amendment which would allow for specific characteristics of the neighborhood to be taken into account in determining whether a subdivision road will be public or private. The amendment is not proposed solely to address the subdivision discussed above. The subdivision does, however, provide an example of a situation which the Staff and Planning Board believes is not, but should be, addressed in the existing private road justification criteria. The Planning Staff and the Ordinance Review Committee discussed the proposed amendment on April 6, 1994. V 109 EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: IV-3-3-d-1. Roads - Public roads are generally required in all subdivisions and will be required where it is found that: 1. The subdivision roads would be accepted by the State for maintenance . . . . ; or 2. The subdivision roads extend existing roads which are public; or 3. The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan; or 4 . A proposed road is designated as an arterial . or collector on an approved Thoroughfare Plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan; or 5. The subdivision roads are part of a non- residential development . . . . . However, private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where, in the judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision with respect to other development and the Comprehensive Plan are such that a private road is justified. In determining whether to permit private roads in subdivisions, the following design features will be considered: 1. The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through: a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines significantly greater than required by ordinance provisions. . . . . . Compliance with this standard is assured; and/or b. The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads, maintain a wooded or forested character, maintain scenic views, or preserve wildlife, botanical, historic, archaeological Ito and/or recreation sites; and/or C. The preservation of site features which directly enhance the special or unique cultural, historical, archaeological or biological characteristics of the immediate area. 2 . The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirements. 3. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical, wildlife, historic and/or archaeological sites, are to be dedicated and/or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts significantly greater than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication. 4 . Significantly larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and/or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. 5. Topographic and environmental features, such as streams, steep slopes, or watersheds, that would be adversely affected by the use of roads constructed to State standards because of factors such as significant amounts of earthwork (cut and fill) that would contribute to increased run-off of stormwater and siltation. 6. The site is already developed to 100% of the capacity which could be achieved after approval of the subdivision and some or all of the non-conforming aspects of existing development on the site will be made more conforming as a result of the proposed subdivision, and all conforming aspects of the development will remain conforming. 7. There is only one subdivision road proposed. Its length does not exceed 3501 , it serves no more than five (5) lots, its grade does not 111 exceed 9%, and the land being subdivided is not connected to or part of another subdivision required to be served by public roads. In addition, the average lot size within the subdivision is at least 40,000 square feet. ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCONXITTEE: April 6, 1994 PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: � n � 112