Minutes - 19890831 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

s assessments, bond issues, special district use taxes, etc. One of the things that this study has made very-clear is that there is not a simple solution to these prol;lems. . Also, the different townships perceive different problems for their cam:.;.inities which necessitates different strategies to solve those pr•ol;lems. F•:endig stated that in some of the communities they were able to ascertain a clear idea of the direction that needed to be taken. The solution in other communities was not as cl~arls established. ~,t this point, input is needed from the groups assembled so that a clear direction can r•e decided upon i'or the next phase of this project. Hs point.erJ out that each counts l~,as many different kinds of community and rural character. Each one of the towns and townships can be divided up into areas of different characters. Some townships may decide on onlti• one character. Others may chose to hate all of the characters. ,fit this time, the staff is doing an analysis of existing characters. He referred to the map wllieh indicated the different characters in Orange Countti-. :1t this point I;End; g presented a brief' summary of the districts which are .being recommended initially. Those districts are Rural Agricultural, Rural Countryside, Estate-Countryside; Rural Eoundar~-, neighborhood Conservation, and Suburban Estate. A copy of this presentation is attached. He also presented a brief summary of the major poiic~* issues which are (1) Easiness Aevelopment near the Rural T;uffer, 12) Sewer :'alternatives for the Rural areas, and (3) Rural Roads. In response to a question from Dolly Hunter, liendig stated that in the horse and buggti* days it might have made sense for the hamlets to be located directlt at an .ntersection. However, it now makes more sense to have it near, not at, the --'intersection. Todaz• there needs onls* to be easy access. He also stated thst there needs to be some criteria for location. so that hamlets would not be located in inaccessible locations simple far the finat,cial gain of the cri;ii:al property owner. kirk pelland stated that it is his understandi,:g tizat if a person has a hamlet of 500 acres only 50 acres would be developed and the other X50 would not be. l~er-dig stated that that was correct. ?.gricultural use or farestrz° use would be the eptions after the initial ;,0 acres was de~-eloped with the exception of indi~•idual situations where an additional house could be located on a large tract. roe exaTM~wle, one house on a 40 acre lat. l~iichael 'duller stated that he was surprised by the ?0 to 25 acre minimum lot size as he did not believe that this size lot actually existed in the Counts. liendig indicated that the proposal was recommending future options not what was actually happening in the County at the present time. These are suggested zoning requirements. He also mentioned that the color blue on the map meant that the existin; community character is what thet* would call Countryside. Country*side could ha~~e a ~•ariety of zoning standards within it. In response to a question ~s to whether the plan was to expand the existing water and sewer network or create and oversee treatment facilities Iiendig stated that the Land Treatment Plan was basically foolproof with only two moving parts, a pump and an air blower. For that reason the Land Treatment Plan is the method they recommend. kitl'i this si*stem there is a 21 to 30 day minimum storage capacitt~. There could be a two dot- power outage and the s~•stem ~:ould still work. There would be time to identify and solve a problem should one come up because the sewage woes from the Land Treatment S~-stem to the storage facility which ;lees arather EO dsys buffQr. He also indicated there is very little possibility of this type of system being designed or built incorrectly.