Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Code Amendments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cumberland County staff outline zoning and code amendments including multifamily, erosion-control and noise fixes

Cumberland County Planning Commission · September 16, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County planning staff told commissioners they will draft amendments to allow triplex/quadplex housing and mixed-use zoning in village centers, update erosion-and-sediment controls to match state code, revise board-of-zoning-appeals language, and correct a textual error in the noise ordinance—each to require public hearings.

Planning staff briefed the Cumberland County Planning Commission on a package of proposed code amendments that would change how some housing and land uses are regulated.

Unidentified Speaker 2, speaking for planning staff, said the most significant proposal would amend Chapter 74 of the zoning ordinance to explicitly allow triplex and quadplex residential buildings (three- and four-unit multifamily dwellings) and to create multi-use zoning in village-center areas so that, “the First Floor be business use and then have maybe the Second Floor be, residential use.” The staff presentation framed the change as enabling small-scale multifamily housing and ground-floor commercial uses in appropriate village locations.

Staff also described other proposalsa: clarifying the difference between commercial and agricultural kitchens, updating the county’s erosion-and-sediment-control ordinance to comply with recent changes in the state code, and revising the board-of-zoning-appeals code to meet state-code requirements. A separate, textual fix was noted for the county’s noise ordinance: staff said an incorrect internal cross-reference (an erroneous citation such as “34-37” instead of “34-7”) must be corrected; because the correction alters ordinance text, it will go through public hearings.

A commissioner asked whether the pending code amendments are drafted by staff or initiated elsewhere; staff replied these are staff-prepared amendments that will be researched, checked for state-code compliance, reviewed by the county attorney and then brought to the planning commission for public hearing. No formal motions or votes on these amendments were taken during the meeting.

The next procedural step, as described by staff, will be drafting the amendment language, circulating it for legal review and scheduling required public hearings before the planning commission and Board of Supervisors if necessary.