ORD-2009-027 Resolution Amending the County Flood Damage Prevention Subdivision Zoning Atlas Ordinance

Browse Search

5 1 Rachel Phelps Hawkins arrived at 8.'01 P.M. 2 3 4 Commissioner Jacobs said that the notices were very difficult to understand. He asked 5 for clarification about whether it would change anything about the property. Craig Benedict said 6 that this is correct. 7 Commissioner Yuhasz asked about the adoption of this ordinance. He said that 8 qualified farms are exempt from zoning regulations under State statute. He noted on the 9 proposed Part 1.5 that the farm exemption is supposedly not in effect with respect to this 10 particular section of the zoning ordinance. He asked about the legal basis for exempting in 11 Orange County certain parts of zoning from the bona fide farm exemption. and the 12 Michael Harvey said that the Planning Department staff had the same concerns a 13 . section was written based on the model of the Wake. County Unified Development Ordinance 14 after review with the County Attorney's Office. 15 Commissioner Gordon said that the notice should have been clearer so that people 16 would not have been forced to dome out to the public hearing to get clarification. 17 18 PUBLIC C-OMMENP. 19 Lynette Hartsell spoke on behalf of the Friends of Lake Orange. She said that she asked for 20 a copy of the letter from -the Attorney General's office that prompted this change. The letter is addressed to the National Flood Insurance Program. It was 21. dated September 14, 2005, and is 22 actually a memorandum. She said that the- letter that she received addressed issues of FEMA, 23 flood maps, and whether the maps can b . e incorporated. The issue addressed in the 24 memorandum was whether or not future maps could be accepted without this kind of public 25 notice. She said that she is confused that this is being moved under zoning. There is nothing in 26 the, letter that she read that you cannot have a standalone flood prevention ordinance. She said 27 that the people in Lake Orange get nervous about these things. She said that the people in 28 Lake Orange are concerned that their rights will be taken away from them. She said that there f that 29 is a lot of distrust that the government will not act in the citizens' best interest She said at 30 there must be meaningful dialog and not just public hearings. She asked the Count ' Y 31 Commissioners to think outside the box and initiate a task force charged to identify problems 32 and find solutions for Lake Orange and reach a binding agreement. - 33 Brent Clayton said that he bought 6.5 acres in 2000 and it was not in the flo.odplain. His 34 property got put in a floodplain in 2007. He originally purchased his property to ?? behind the 35 house that is there now. The flpodplain took almost - three acres of his property, and the 36 property is now useless. He asked how this was helping him. vast 37 Steve Richardson was with the Friends of Lake Orange. He said that there are .38 gaps in the proposal and there, are some State constitutionality questions. He urged the County 39 Commissioners to decline to act on this unnecessary proposal. If the County Commissioners 40 vote on this, he asked that they amend it specifically to honor and grandfather the special, 41 perpetual, contractual rights with the County under the terms by which Lake Orange was gifted 42 to the County 40 years ago, so that nothing within the technical zoning change can be 43* construed as going against those rights in any way. Secondly, the property owners of Lake 44 Orange have endured decades of bad experience with the County and are mistrustful. Several 45 County Commissioners and staff have been welcoming, forthcoming, and*have worked in good 46 faith. He thanked those people. He said that these people were the exception. He said that the 47 assurance that this change would have no effect on properties is not strictly true. He read a 48 resolution that was proposed by the Friends of Lake Orange, as follows: ' An "in the interest of reestablishing mutual trust and good will, eliminating future avoidable f.7 50 misunderstandings that could further divert all involved from their other interests, 51 responsibilities, and duties, as well as p . otential future involvement of remote third parties whose A