HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-21-2001-8bORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 21, 2001
Action Agenda
Item No. $ - ~
SUBJECT: Watershed Best Management Practice Amendment
DEPARTMENT: Planning ~ Inspections
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) NO
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Ordinance Amendment
Draft Planning Board Minutes -July 11,
2001
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Benedict, Director, Ext. 2592
Robert P. Davis, Planner III, Ext. 2580
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel HIII 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To make a decision on proposed language changes to the Orange County Zoning
Ordinance to clarify that Best Management Practices (BMP's) are permitted, but not to allow an
increase in impervious surface coverage for projects. (May 29, 2001 Public Hearing Item)
BACKGROUND:
R_eauest
The two proposed zoning ordinance changes are:
(1) adding the words `impervious surface' in multiple locations in section 6.23.c.1. --
Residential Development - as shown on pages 7 and 8 of this abstract, and also in
section 6.23.c.2 -- Nonresidential Develo,~ment - as shown on pages 10 and 11;
(2) adding a footnote, shown in bold, under each table on pages 7, 8, 10 and 11 that BMP's
mandated by the Neuse River Basin rules are not prohibited under County regulations.
The amendment adds language in the watershed section of the zoning ordinance that clarifies
the existing apparent conflict with the Neuse River Basin regulations and, at the same time,
maintains the current prohibition against BMP's being used to increase impervious surface
ratios. The amendment does not change existing provisions in the zoning ordinance. BMP's, if
built, will be an a_ dd_ed protection to the existing low impervious surface maximums currently in
the County, not an exception.
In summary, this revision allows the use of BMP's under the zoning ordinance language, but
specifies that the use of BMP's does not permit an increase in the impervious surface allowed.
History, and Update
Both the Stormwater Management Program for Lands within the Neuse River Basin and the
Orange County Zoning Ordinance have requirements for BMP's. The BMP's in both cases are
intended to reduce the negative environmental effects of development on the streams and
water supplies within North Carolina. The slight variation in the definition of the term Best
Management Practice in the two ordinances is highlighted in italics below:
Zoning„Ordinance Definition: A structural ornon-structural
used singularly or in combination to reduce non-point sour
order to achieve water quality protection goals. (See also,
Stromwater Controls) (Unless otherwise specified, "BMP",
refers to structural BMP's.)
Neuse River Basin Definition: A structural ornon-structure
used singularly or in combination to reduce non-point sour
order to achieve water quality protection goals.
The Neuse River Basin regulations specify that BMP's shall bE
inputs (i.e. nitrogen) into the streams. The zoning ordinance s
used to satisfy watershed requirements for most residential de
residential development. The zoning ordinance language is in
made structures like detention ponds and other engineered stc
impervious surface ratios as opposed to natural BMP's like bu~
While there is no conflict that the purpose of both ordinances i
watersheds, the language in the zoning ordinance needs to bE
existing restrictive language in the watershed portion of the zo
possibility that development proposals in some of the County':
impervious surface maximums by using the BMP approach. C
not allow engineered BMP's to increase impervious surfaces v
local governments to perform annual inspections and make ar
watershed BMP's. This was an unfunded mandate passed to
potential for State implemented fines on the County for noncoi
Therefore, many jurisdictions, Orange County included, decidE
increasing impervious surface ratios.
Develo ment Process Schedule nd Action
• First Action: Public Hearing held on May 29, 2QQ1; item refer
• Second Action: Planning Board to take action within two reg~
Board meetings, or extension thereof; or if the Planning Boar
time period, application forwarded to BOCC with Planning Bo
recommendations and conditions.
• Third Action: Planning Board recommended Approval of ai
• Fourth Action: BOCC to make decision.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is associated with thi:
RECOMMENDATION(S): ADMINISTRATION recommends
ordinance.
PLANNING BOARD recommend
ordinance.
3
An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of Orange County
Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, that the
Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1: Amend 6.23.3 c 1.Residential Development and 2. Non-Residential Development to
add the words impervious surface in the charts and place a footnote at the bottom of each chart.
*6.23 EXTRA REQUIREMENTS FOR WATERSHED PROTECTION OVERLAY
DISTRICTS
*Amended
1/1/94
Pursuant to requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-214.5 (Chapter 143, Article
21), thirteen (13) Watershed Protection Overlay Districts, as described in Article 4.2.27 of
this Ordinance, have been established for lands within the watersheds of existing or
potential drinking water rivers and reservoirs. These districts overlay other zoning districts
established in this Ordinance and delineated on the Orange County Zoning Atlas. Wherever
standards of the underlying zoning district differ from the watershed overlay standards, the
more restrictive provisions shall apply.
6.23.1 LAND USE RESTRICTIONS
Amended
5/21/97
1 /20/98
All uses and activities allowed in the underlying zoning district aze permitted with the
following exceptions:
DISTRICT LAND USE RESTRICTIONS
UN1V-CA No new landfills are permitted.
UNIV-PW No commercial or industrial uses aze permitted.
CANE-CA No new golf courses aze permitted.
U-ENO-CA
UNTV-CA No residual (sludge) application is permitted.
CANE-CA
U-ENO-CA
CANE-PW No dischazging landfills are permitted.
U-ENO-PW Industrial use is limited to non-hazardous light industrial uses characterized by
HYCO-PW low water use (less than 10, 000 gpd, excluding domestic water (25 gpd per
LITTLE-PW employee) and water used for heating aRd air conditioning.
BACK-PW
FLAT-PW
HAW-PW
L-ENO-P W
JORDAN-PW
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.
*Amended
1/17/95
10/19/99
DISTRICT MAXIMUM DENSITY
UN1V-CA 1 du/five acres.
UNIV-PW Lots of record existing an October 2, 1989 may contain up to, but no more
than, five lots with a density of one duJtwo acres. Contiguous lots of record
existing on October 2, 19$9 may be combined into one pazcel for development.
The number oftwo-acre lots and the total number of lots in the combined
parcel cannot exceed the sum of the number of lots which could be created
from each lot of record.
CANE-CA 1 du/ five acres
A~ed W Lots of record existing on October 19, 1999 may contain up to, but no more
10/19/99) than, five lots as small as two acres in size. Contiguous lots of record existing
on October 19, 1999 may be combined into one pazcel for development. The
number oftwo-acre lots and the total number of lots in the combined pazcel
cannot exceed the sum of the number of lots which could be created from each
lot of record.
U-ENO-CA 1 du / 2 acres
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 densfty exceeds 1 dwelling
JORDAN-PW unit per acre. Refer to Article 6.23.3c1.
BACK-PW
5
6.23.3 STORMWATER INFILTRATION AND DETENTION
As a watershed becomes more developed, the amount of impervious surface increases,
causing a decrease in the rate at which stormwater runoff can be absorbed into the soil.
This results in more stormwater flowing directly into streams and other water bodies.
Because this direct runoff has not been filtered through the soil, pollutants from the air and
land surface enter streams and increase the potential for pollution of drinking water
supplies.
The effects of stormwater pollution on drinking water supplies can be minimized by one of
two general approaches. First, the amount of stormwater runoff which reaches drinking
water supplies can be controlled by assuring that there is adequate ground azea into which
water can be absorbed. This type of non-structural control is achieved through limitations
on impervious surface. A second approach is to collect stormwater run-off in engineered
ponds so that pollutants may settle. The water is then slowly released and contains fewer
impurities when it reaches the water supply reservoir. The watershed protection standazds
adopted by Orange County utilize a combination of these two approaches.
a) Non-Structural Stormwater Control
The first inch of stonnwater run-off shall be controlled to the extent possible
through on-site infiltration and through the use of methods which rely on natural
soil properties for absorption and treatment.
In order to promote infiltration of stormwater runoff into the soil and minimize
direct and immediate runoff into streams and water supply impoundments, the
maximum percentage of the total lot area which may be covered with an impervious
surface shall be specified. This limit is referred to as the "impervious surface ratio".
Impervious surface calculations for an individual development shall be cumulative
far original construction and any subsequent additions. One-half of the width of any
of any existing or proposed road adjacent to an individual lot shall be included as
•impervious surface for that lot, except in the case where an existing road was
contained within a dedicated public right-of--way at the time that the watershed
regulations were first applied to the watershed within which the development is
located.
Infiltration techniques not only remove both suspended and dissolved pollutants, but
they require less maintenance, reduce flooding, promote groundwater rechazge and
help maintain stream flow during dry periods.
Where an-site infiltration methods are utilized, azeas for such purposes shall be
designated on the plat and shall remain undisturbed both during and after
construction. Undisturbed azeas for infiltration of run-off shall also be located
downslope from impervious surfaces and shall not include azeas characterized by
floodplains, highly erodible or impervious soils, steep slopes or previously disturbed
6
areas. Areas designated as suitable for septic tank nitrification fields may not be
used for stormwater infiltration purposes.
Run-off from roads, parking lots, and/or sidewalks shall be directed to undisturbed
areas through use of berms, grassed diversion ditches or swales, or other acceptable
means to reduce run-off velocity and filter out pollutants.
b) Structural Measures
Non-structural methods may not adequately control the first inch of stonnwater
runoff due to the amount of impervious surface proposed to be developed, and other
factors such as soil type, slope, presence of floodplains and erodible soils, and/or
lack of vegetative cover. In such cases, structural detention ponds, which capture
stormwater for slow release through an outlet, are required. Where required,
detention ponds shall be constructed in accordance with Appendix A.
c) Impervious Surface and Detention Pond Requirements
For all protected watersheds, there is a absolute limit on the percentage of lot area
which can be covered with impervious surfaces. In some cases, detention ponds are
required when the proposed impervious surface ratio exceeds a specified percentage,
which is below the absolute limit.
Impervious surface and detention pond requirements are as follows:
Residential Development
Amended 1 /4/94
DISTRICT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE/DETENTION POND
REQUIREMENTS (RESIDENTIAL)
UNIV-CA 6% impervious surface limit.
UNTV-PW EXCEPT for all lots which existed prior to 4/2/90,
which are subject to impervious surface limits as
provided in the following Table (entitled Sliding Scale
for Residential Impervious Surface Ratios).
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed
impervious surface requirements.
CANE-CA 6% impervious surface limit.
CANE-PW EXCEPT for lots smaller than two acres which existed
U-ENO-CA prior to 1/1/94, which are subject to impervious
surface limits as provided in the following Table
(entitled Sliding Scale for Residential Impervious
Surface Ratios).
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed
impervious surface requirements.
LITTLE-PW 6% impervious surface limit.
EXCEPT for lots which existed prior to 1/1/94, which
aze subject to impervious surface limits as provided in
the following Table (entitled Sliding Scale for
Residential Impervious Surface Ratios).
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed
impervious surface requirements.
FLAT-PW 12% impervious surface limit for new and existing
HYCO-PW lots.
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed
impervious surface requirements.
U-ENO-PW ~ 12% impervious surface limit for existing and new lots
BACK-PW outside of Transition Areas as designated in the
Orange County Land Use Plan.
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed
impervious surface requirements.
30% impervious surface limit for developments which
exceed a density 1 du/acre within Transition Areas as
designated in the Orange County Land Use Plan.
Structural BMPs aze required if impervious surface
exceeds 12%.
* BMP's as mandated by the Stormwater Management Program for Lands within the Neuse River Basin are allowed.
DISTRICT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE/DETENTION POND
REQUIREMENTS
(RESIDENTIAL)
L-ENO-PW 24% impervious surface limit with curb and gutter.
36% impervious surface limit without curb and gutter.
BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious
surface requirements.
HAW-PW 24% impervious surface limit.
JORDAN-PW BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious
surface requirements.
~sMr°s as manctatecl by tue ~tormwater Management Program for Lands within the Neuse River Basin are allowed.
SLIDING SCAL
IMPERVIOUS E FOR RESIDENTIAL
SURFACE RATIOS
Lot Size Acres ISR Scare Feet
6+ Ac 5.0
6.0 5.0 13,068
5.9 5.1 13,107
5.8 5.2 13,138
5.7 5.3 13,159
5.6 5.4 13,172
5.5 5.5 13,177
5.4 5.6 13,172
S.3 5.7 13,159
5.2 5.8 13,138
5.1 5.9 13,107
5.0 6.0 13,068
4.9 6.2 13,234
4.8 6.4 13,381
4.7 6.6 13,512
4.6 6.8 13,625
4.5 7.0 13,721
4.4 7.2 13,$$0
4.3 7.4 13,861
4.2 7.6 13,904
4.1 7.8 13,930
4.0 8.0 13,939
3.9 8.2 13,930
3.8 8.4 13,904
3.7 8.6 13,861
3.6 8.8 13,800
3.S 9.0 13,721
3.4 9.2 13,625
3.3 9.4 13,512
3.2 9.6 13,382
3.1 9.8 13,234
3.0 10.0 13,068
2.9 10.2 12,885
2.8 10.4 12,685
2.7 10.6 12,467
2.6 10.8 12,232
2.S 11.0 11,979
2.4 11.2 11,709
2.3 11.4 11,421
2.2 11.6 11,116
2.1 11.8 10,794
2.0 12.0 10,454
1.9 12.2 10,097
1.8 12.4 9,723
1.7 12.6 9,331
1.6 12.8 8,921
1.5 13.0 8,494
1.4 13.2 8,050
1.3 13.4 7,588
1.2 13.6 7,109
1.1 13.8 6,612
1.0 14.0 6,098
0.9 14.2 5,567
0.8 14.4 5,018
0.76 14.6 4,452
0.6 14.8 3,868
0.5 15.0 3 267
1(
2. 1~Io~ Residential Development
Amended 1 /4/94; 10/ 19/99
DISTRICT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE/DETENTION POND REQUIREMENTS
(NON-RESIDENTIAL)
UNIV-CA Same as Residential (See previous Table)
UNIV-PW
CANE-CA S-acre minimum lot size, with potential of up to five lots as small as two acres
for lots of record October 19, 1999 (Amended 10-19-99);
AND
6% impervious surface limit.
* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious surface requirements.
U-ENO-CA 2-acre minimum, lot size
AND
6% impervious surface limit.
* BMPs cannot be used to sans watershed im envious surfacer uirements.
CANE-PW 5-acre minimum lot size with potential of up to five lots as small as two acres
for lots of record October 19, 1.999 (Amended 10-19-99);
AND
SO%ISR for all, fire stations and solid waste collection centers;
AND
12%ISR for all, other non-residential uses;
AND
on-site infiltration of the first inch of stormwater runoff;
AND
a limit of 1.0% of the watershed for non-residential use (139 acres in CANE-
PW).
*BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious surface requirements.
LITTLE-P W 2-acre minimum lot size
AND
SO%ISR for all,fire stations and solid waste collection centers;
AND
12%ISR for all other non-residential uses;
AND
on-site infiltration of the first inch of stormwater runoff;
AND
a limit of 1.0% of the watershed for non-residential use (139 acres in CANE-
PW).
*BMPs cannot be used to sans im envious surface watershed re uirements.
* BMP's as mandated by the Stormwater Management Program for Lauds within the Neuse River Basin are allowed.
U-ENO-PW 70%
BACK-PW ISR in Commercial and/or Industrial Nodes as designated in the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan (high-density option) with structural
BMPs if ISR ~ 12%;
AND
50% ISR for all fire stations and solid waste collection centers outside of
Commercial and/or Industrial Nodes as designated in the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan, with structural BMPs if ISR ~ 12%;
AND
12% ISR for all other non-residential uses outside of Commercial and/or
Industrial Nodes as designated in the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan (* BMPs cannot be used to satisfy impervious surface
watershed requirements);
AND
on-site infiltration of the first inch of stormwater runoff;
AND
A limit of 1,151 acres ofnon-residential use throughout U-ENO-PW (5.0%)
and 163 acres throughout BACK-PW (1%).
HYCO-PW 50%ISR for all fire stations and solid waste collection centers;
FLAT-PW AND
12%ISR for all other non-residential uses;
AND
on-site infiltration of the first inch of stormwater runoff;
AND
a limit of 1% of the watershed for non-residential use (37 acres in HYCO-
PW, 66 acres in FLAT-PW).
*BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious surface requirements.
L-ENO-PW 70% impervious surface, with structural BMPs required when impervious
surface exceeds:
24% (w/ curb and gutter); or
36% w/o curb and tter .
HAW-PW 24% impervious surface limit.
JORDAN-PW *BMPs cannot be used to satisfy watershed impervious surface requirements.
* BMP's as mandated by the Starmwater Management Program for Lauds within the Neuse River Basin are allowed.
3. Modifications of the Impervious Surface Ratio
Modifications of the Impervious Surface Ratios my be requested through one of the
following provisions:
a) Through variance procedures of the Board of Adjustment, as described in Article
6.23.1 lb.
b) Through approval and recordation of a conservation agreement, as provided in
Article 4 of Chapter 121 of the N.C. General Statutes, between Orange County
and a land owner that prohibits development of land in a protected watershec
perpetuity. In such cases, a modification of the required impervious surface rat
may be approved administratively but only to the extent that additional land in
same watershed is conserved or protected from development. In such instan~
the land which will be subject to a conservation agreement must be adjacent to
land proposed for development and for which a modification of the impervi~
surface ratios is sought.
As an example, a person owning a 40,000 square foot lot and subject to a
percent impervious surface ratio would be limited to 4,800 square feet
impervious coverage. If the person's plans called for 5,500 square feet
coverage (a difference of 700 squaze feet), the recording of a conservat.
easement on 5,833 squaze feet of contiguous property would satisfy
impervious surface ratio requirements. (12% of 5,833 squaze feet is 700 squ
feet.)
The conservation easement shall describe the property restricted in a man
sufficient to pass title, provide that its restrictions are covenants that run with
land and, in form, be approved by the County Attorney. The conservat
easement shall, upon its recording, be in the place of a first priority lien on
property (excepting current ad valorem property taxes) and shall remain so un1E
with the approval of Orange County, it is released and terminated. Oran
County shall require the priority of the conservation easement to be certified
and attorney-at-law, licensed to practice law in the State of Narth Carolina
approved to certify title to real property by a lending institution (bank or save
and loan association) doing business in Orange County.
u
1~
o:
o:
Orange County approval of a release or termination of the conservation agreem n'
shall be declared on the document releasing or terminating the agreement. he
document shall be signed by the Orange County Manager, upon approval of e
Orange County Board of Commissioners. No such document shall be effectiv tc
release or terminate the conservation agreement until it is filed for registrat or
with the Register of Deeds of Orange County.
Section 2: This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner ,the foregoin
ordinance was adopted this the 219` day of August 2001.
I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Cazolina,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Boazd at a
meeting held on August 21, 2001 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said
proceedings aze recorded in the minutes of said Boazd.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2001.
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
1 MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD -
3 JULY 11, 2001
4 6:30 p;m.
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Nicole Gooding-Ray (Chair), Lynn Holtkamp (7:30), Barry Katz
Howard
~ ,
McAdams, Rachel Preston, Hunter Schofield, James Selkirk, Bob Strayhorn
8 ,
Maria Tadd, and Theodore Triebel
9
10
11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Craufurd Goodwin, Runyon Woods (both excused)
12 STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Craig Benedict, Gene Bell, Joanna Bradshaw
Robert Davis
13 ,
,
Eddie Kirk, Karen Lincoln, and Tina Moon
14
1 S AGENDA ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
16 Chair Gooding-Ray called the meeting to order.
17
18 AGENDA ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
19 None
20
21 AGENDA ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES -May 2, 2001
22
23 MOTION: Preston moved approval of the minutes for May 2, 2001. Seconded by
24 McAdams.
25
26 VOTE: Unanimous
27
28 AGENDA ITEM #4: COMMISSIONERS' MEETING ACTION REPORTS
29
30 October 3, 2000; October 17, 2000; November 1, 2000; November 21, 2000;
December 4, 2000; January 18, 2001; February 7, 2001
31
32 There were no comments.
33
34 AGENDA ITEM #5: PUBLIC CHARGE
35
36 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public char
e
37 g
.
38 AGENDA ITEM #6: CHAIR COMMENTS
39
40 Chair Gooding-Ray welcomed new Planning Board member Maria Tadd.
41
42 AGENDA ITEM #7: COMMITTEE/ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS
43 a. Board of Adjustment -McAdams reported that there was a meeting in
44 June where a case was heard for an assisted living center. There was
45 opposition from the neighbors, so this case was delayed until July. The
46
47 case was approved in July.
4s b. Agricultural Preservation Board - no meeting
c. Ordinance Review Committee - no meeting
49
50 d. Transportation Task Force -Triebel reported that there was a meeting in
June. This was an informational meeting.
51
52
53
13
14
a. Impervious Structure and Detention Pond Requirements
1) Residential Development
2) Non-Residential Development
4
5 Robert Davis made this presentation.
6
7 BACKGROUND:
8 Both the Stonnwater Management Program for Lands within the Neuse River Basin and the Orange County
9 Zoning Ordinance have requirements for Best Management Practices. The BMP's in both cases are intended to
10 reduce the negative environmental effects of development on the streams and water supplies within North
11 Carolina. The slight variation in the definition of the term Best Management Practice in the two ordinances is
12 highlighted in italics below:
13
14 Zonin Ordinance Definition: A structural or non-structural management-based practice used singularly or
15 in combination to reduce non-point source pollution to receiving waters in order to achieve water quality
lb protection goals. (See also, Detention Pond and Engineered Stormwater Controls) (Unless otherwise
17 specified, "BMP", when used in this Ordinance, refers to structural BMP's.)
18
19 Neuse River Basin Definition: A structural or non-structural management-based practice used singularly or
20 in combination to reduce non-point source inputs to receiving waters in order to achieve water quality
21 protection goals.
22
23 The Neuse River Basin regulations specify that BMP's shall be implemented to reduce negative inputs (i.e.
24 nitrogen) into the streams. The zoning ordinance specifies that BMP's cannot be used to satisfy watershed
25 requirements for most residential development and most non-residential development. The zoning ordinance
26 language is intended to prohibit use of manmade structures like detention ponds, swales, engineered stormwater
27 devices, etc. to raise impervious surface ratios as opposed to natural BMP's like buffers, trees and grass.
28
29 While there is no conflict that the purpose of both ordinances is to protect streams and watersheds, the language
30 in the zoning ordinance needs to be clarified. The intent of the restrictive language in the watershed portion of
31 the zoning ordinance is to eliminate the possibility that a development proposal in certain watersheds could
32 increase the impervious surface maximums of the ordinance by using the BMP approach. One reason that the
33 County did not allow watershed BMF's was the State rule that required local governments perform annual
34 inspections and make annual reports to the State on all BMP's. This was an unfunded mandate passed to the
35 local jurisdictions with the potential for State implemented fines on the County for noncompliance by the
36 property owners. Therefore, many jurisdictions, Orange County included, decided to not allow BMP's for
37 increasing impervious surface ratios.
38
39 This amendment is to add language in the watershed section of the zoning ordinance that clarifies the apparent
40 conflict with the Neuse River Basin regulations and, at the same time, maintains the current prohibition against
41 BMP's being used to increase impervious surface ratios.'
4z
43 Development Process. Schedule. and Action
44 • First Action: Public Hearing held on May 29, 2001; item referred to Planning Board.
45 Second Action: Planning Board to take action within two regularly scheduled Planning Board meetings, or
46 extension thereof; or if the Planning Board fails to act within the specified time period, application
47 forwarded to 8000 with Planning Board minutes and Planning Staff recommendations and conditions.
48 Third Action: BOCC to make decision.
49
50 FINANCIAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is associated with this action.
51
52 RECOMMENDATTON(S): Planning Staff recommends APPROVAL of the attached
53 ordinance.
15
2 This text amendment clarifies that the best management practices in the zoning ordinance cannot by used to
3 increase impervious surface. Davis explained the different types of best management practices.
4
MOTION: Katz moved to approve the ordinance as stated on pages 182-18b in the agenda
packet, which is incorporated herein by reference. Seconded by Selkirk.
VOTE: Unanimous
10 AGENDA ITEM #11: SUBDIVISIONS
11 a. Preliminary Plans
12 (1) Gold Mine Property
13 (9 Lots -Bingham Township)
14
15 Eddie Kirk made this presentation.
BACKGROUND:
Request -Preliminary Plan
Applicant: Dr. Eric Schopler
Location
In Bingham Township on the west side of Gold Mine Road, an existing state maintained gravel road.
Subdivision follows the Conservation-Cluster Option of Flexible Development.
• Minimum lot size is 40,000 square feet.
• Total acreage is 41.90 acres.
Lots Average Lot Size % Open Space Acres Open Space
~
Flexible 9 3.0$ 33.7 ~ ~~ 14.12
Existing and Proposed Conditions
Existing:
• Zoned Agricultural Residential (AR) (min. density = 40,000 sq. ft./ dwelling)
• The property is not in a designated protected watershed.
• Physical Features:
• There is one designated USGS intermittent stream on the west side of the tract.
• The site is wooded with a mixture of pines and hardwoods.
Adjacent Land Use:
• Properties to the west have been subdivided previously.
• Properties to the north, south and west are undeveloped.
Proposed:
Roads:
• The Planning Board approved the Concept Plan with two private roads on December 6, 2000.
• A private subdivision road (Cane Valley Lane) is proposed to extend west off Gold Mine Road.
Open SpaceBuffers:
• 14.12 acres (33.7%) of common area open space proposed.
• 2.1b acres of in-lot open space. MTAR 3.35 on the Flexible Plan.
• Homeowners Association will maintain open space and buffers.
Water-Sewer:
• Individual wells.
• Individual septic systems.
Recreation:
• Bingham District Park (9 lots x $455 = $4,095).
• No dedication is warranted because no county recreation or resource area has been identified at this time. The
payment-in-lieu option is viable.
A enc Comments: