Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
17 <br /> 1 Michael Harvey said that Orange County Environmental Health will review the proposal, <br /> 2 and staff can provide additional information once it becomes available. He understands that it <br /> 3 will not be an issue to have toilet facilities just for staff use and not for the public. The resolution <br /> 4 of this issue will be provided in writing. <br /> 5 Commissioner McKee said that his only concern is the lack of well water and adequate <br /> 6 bathroom facilities. <br /> 7 Chad Abbott, with Summit Consulting, said that the applicant and staff will reevaluate <br /> 8 this issue and will ask Planning staff to work with him to secure the necessary written <br /> 9 responses. <br /> 10 Commissioner Yuhasz said that part of the property is on the northeast side of Mile <br /> 11 Branch and asked if there has been any investigation of a well/septic system in that 12 acres. <br /> 12 Chad Abbott said that the land does not perk, but there are alternative systems. <br /> 13 Commissioner Hemminger said that she has a lot of concern about the storm water. <br /> 14 She asked what was being proposed. <br /> 15 Michael Harvey said that the initial review of the site plan with Erosion Control did not <br /> 16 turn a favorable response in terms of storm water. The water runoff will be significant. <br /> 17 Chad Abbott said that there has not been time to design the storm water control yet. He <br /> 18 made reference to sheet c-5, which has storm water calculations. He said that the runoff is <br /> 19 proposed to be caught at Mile Branch and NC 57. <br /> 20 Commissioner Hemminger said that she has concerns about needing a well, not just for <br /> 21 bathrooms, but maintaining the aesthetics of the facility, as well as the safety. <br /> 22 Commissioner Gordon requested some additional materials. She made reference to <br /> 23 access to the facility and the turn radius. She has concerns about this. <br /> 24 Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to the buffer and the adjoining property. He said <br /> 25 that the property to the southwest has the same soil characteristics, presumably. He said that <br /> 26 this suggests to him that this property will never be developed as a residential property. He <br /> 27 thinks that it is not necessary to provide this kind of buffer against property that is not actually <br /> 28 going to need it. He suggested showing some flexibility with regard to the buffer requirements. <br /> 29 Commissioner McKee said that the Board should keep in mind that this is an economic <br /> 30 development area. He does not see any issues that cannot be overcome. He agrees with <br /> 31 Commissioner Yuhasz about the buffers. This is not a general use area. He said that the soil is <br /> 32 not very amenable to perking. This property will probably not be used for any use if not this type <br /> 33 of use. His said that this is a proposal for low-impact economic development and it is the type <br /> 34 of business that he would like to attract to these areas. <br /> 35 Commissioner Foushee echoed Commissioner McKee's comments. <br /> 36 Andrea Rohrbacher said that storage areas generate a lot of waste and there needs to <br /> 37 be some mechanism to dispose of things on-site. Secondly, she echoed Commissioner <br /> 38 Hemminger's concerns over the water. She said that units need to be hosed out from time to <br /> 39 time. There should be a mechanism for this and she does not think that a pressure washer is <br /> 40 viable for this. <br /> 41 Larry Wright said that he would like for the applicant to consider looking at an area for <br /> 42 solid waste disposal. He also supports Commissioner McKee's viewpoint. <br />