Agenda - 06-05-2012 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 5/2/12 23 Maxecine Mitchell: I am going to go with Pete and Mark. I think people should have an option. It an area is set aside and is still workable there should be an option. It is unfair if you had someone to set aside the property for that purpose and it is usable and then say you can't use it. Larry Wright: Thank you, I have nothing new to add. Michael Harvey: If it is the board's pleasure to have the various questions answered and for Kevin to inform residences of what is going on and solicit their input then the motion needs to be made to table this item to the regular May meeting. As you will note from your attachment, the County Commissioners request that you make a recommendation for their May 1 meeting. Part of what staff will have to do is inform the County Commissioners that they will have to continue the Public Hearing until another date and time certain. Kevin Lindley: I think the request was no sooner than April 17. We put May 1 in the document because that was the first meeting we thought we could get on the board's agenda. Mark Marcoplos: It seems to be that we have already fleshed out the options people will express. I don't know why it needs to carry on much longer. Why don't we give it to the County Commissioners and say here is what we said tonight. I don't believe there is any other optional perspective from the public. Larry Wright: Is there any way we can craft that into a motion If I am reading Mark correctly said that we could craft that into a motion and have that presented to the Board of County Commissioners and respond to them by their April 17th deadline. Kevin Lindley: It was no sooner than. It can be later. Michael Harvey: I think the easiest to do is to make a motion to table this so Kevin can respond to the questions been posed and he could solicit input from the impacted property owners and staff will report progress to the County Commissioners on where you are and you will reconvene at the May regular meeting and take the time to review the item. Ed Kielty: I am a new resident of Orange County. An area that I have not heard discussed is, I have purchased a tract of land that is in a development but this tract does not have an easement to public sewer. To get to the public sewer line, you would have to cross other private property homeowners. What kind of allowance is made? Kevin Lindley: The definition of adjacent of that if the sewer line actually crosses the property or you can get to the sewer line without crossing private property. Ed Kielty: A.1c says that if any one (1) of these conditions exist, so it is not that all A, B and C exist but any one of them. Kevin Lindley: Right, so you would not be required to connect. Tony Blake: The key word there is adjacent. In this case, adjacent is defined as one or more. Pete Hallenbeck: Look at 1 C, my property is in a public sewer area, therefore whatever it takes I have got to.... Tony Blake: I see what you are saying. It says one of more. He would be trapped by C and would have to get an easement or something. Kevin Lindley: The public sewer service area was not intending to designate a community like Efland where you are running private sewer to serve most of the existing residences as they are now. It is more to cover areas where you expect broad development where the county is putting sewer infrastructure in. Tony Blake: You could solve the question by moving C to the paragraph above and say the property is within a designated public sewer service area and one or more of the following is true and strike item C. Ed Kielty: My development is a 500 home development, there was a lot they missed, I've got that lot. Everything has been developed, nothing new there.... Larry Wright: I would like to move on with this. We understand his concern and that it is not met by this. If you want to meet with him and adjust this, I would like to move on. E