Browse
Search
Minutes 02-27-2012
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Minutes 02-27-2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/24/2015 10:47:22 AM
Creation date
5/17/2012 2:51:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/27/2012
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Agenda
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C1
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C2
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C3
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C4
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C5
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C6
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C7
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C8
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C9
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012-C10
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
ORD-2012-005 Ordinance approving Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget Amendment #6
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Nutrient loading limits <br /> • Very restrictive for Falls and UNHA of Jordan <br /> Offset payments <br /> • A portion of the nutrient load can be offset <br /> • Must meet on-site requirements first <br /> Implications <br /> ➢ For Development: <br /> ➢ Longer review time ' <br /> ➢ Increased design and construction cost <br /> ➢ More land needed to construct stormwater controls <br /> ➢ Individual residential lots may require formal plan, calculations, and controls <br /> Implications <br /> ➢ For Staff: <br /> - More projects requiring review <br /> - Increased review time per project <br /> - Post-construction inspections and tracking <br /> ➢ Currently analyzing staff resource needs <br /> Recommendation <br /> 1. Receive the proposed amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance as detailed in <br /> the abstract and attachments. <br /> 2. Conduct the public hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board comment on <br /> the proposed amendments. <br /> 3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be <br /> returned to the BOCC in time for the April 17, 2012 regular meeting. <br /> 4. Adjourn the public hearing until April 17, 2012 in order to receive and accept the <br /> Planning Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. <br /> Commissioner Yuhasz asked what happens if the County does not do this. Terry <br /> Hackett said that he does not know. <br /> Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to page 14, 1-C and that the new development is <br /> part of a larger common plan. He asked if this referred to a new subdivision or an existing <br /> subdivision. He asked if new development would apply to those existing lots in an old <br /> subdivision. <br /> Terry Hackett said that it applies to new subdivisions. <br /> Terry Hackett answered clarifying questions of Commissioner Yuhasz and <br /> Commissioner Jacobs. <br /> Commissioner McKee made reference to page 18 regarding the restrictions. He said <br /> that this is in place to ensure that a future owner would not keep the best management practices <br /> in place. He asked about enforceable restrictions and what kind of penalties there would be. <br /> Terry Hackett said that it would be on a case-by-case basis. <br /> Commissioner McKee said that the requirement for Falls Lake is not attainable. This is <br /> his opinion. <br /> Craig Benedict said that it will be problematic for higher intensity development. There is <br /> some discussion of transfer of nutrient rights where developers that want to develop intensely in <br /> some of the economic development zones may have to trade the nutrient percentages into an <br /> area. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.