AG 2000 09 18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DRAFT ordinances. These d/fferencee ~nvolved :he follow~ng~ Supplemental use re~ula=ione; parkin~ regu~a~ione~ landscapin~ requ~rements~ si~n ordinances~ Overlay Dis~ric=s; and adequate public facilities prov~eions. Also, Mr. Mar~hall s~a~ed there would be a change in zoning die~r~c=s =o re~lec~ new zoning categories. However, he explained there would not be a change ~n the overall concept and =he zoning chan~ee would be as close a change from existing districts ~o dis=rices under =he new ordinance. Mr. Marshall reiterated that the UDO would be continually under review and outlined process that =he Cou/lty and ~he local munic~pali=ies would follow ~n amending the ordinance after ~s adoption. Finally, Mr. Marshall pointed out proposed UDO includes no~ only =h~ Zoning Ordinance bu~ also =he Subdiv~ston RegulaC~ons, Mobile Home Park ordinance and the Se~imen=ation and Erosion Control Ordinance. Chairman Fennel arrived a~ 8:05 p.m. and preside~ over =he remainder of =he meeting. He apologized for h~s late arrival due to a flat Staff responded =o a number of ques~on~ r~garding the proposed UDO. Specific ~ssu~s discussed by the Board and =he Planning and Zoning Commission ~ncluded the following= (1) Preparation of landscape plans~ (2) in an Agriculture zon~ (3) Development of a minor subdivision& (~) Review and input by =he Real Estate and Bu~ldin~ Indus=fy Coalition of Charlotte and representatives of =he Cabarrus County Building Indus=fy Association in development of =he UDO~ (S) Es=ablishmen~ and responsibilities of Homeowner's Assoctations~ (6) Failure of a package =rea=men= plant in ~he Poplar ~enC area an~ respone~bili=y for maintaln~ng such plants~ {?) Enforcement of covenants for existing subdivisions; (8) Upcoming vote on the Midland incorporation issue and related zoning issues in that community; (9) Lack of public participation at scheduled public meetings to review and discuss the proposed UDO; {10) Amount of land that is currently deferred for agricultural use; (11) Potential impacts of adoption of the UDO; (12) Adequate public facility provisions; (13) Recent Texas court case concerning exclusionary zoning and adequate housing issues; and (14) Continuing review of the UDO upon its adop~ion. Commissioner Barnhart left the meeting at 8:30 p.m. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed UDO with the condition that the Planning and Zoning Commission's agenda each month would contain an update section concerning the UDO. There being no further business to come before the Board, Chairman Fennel adjourned the mee=ing at 8:50 p.m. Clerk to the Board