Minutes 08-27-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Commissioner Jacobs: I have concerns about the remote septic area, and I didn't think Commissioner Yuhasz actually got an answer to his question. His specific question was did you consider something different than a pump system having to pump affluent over a great distance, that question wasn't answered. The answer that was given was based on the legality of the system and the approval process. That's not the same as saying what Ms. Benson was asking. The question was whether the remote septic area is the optimal alternative for the people who live there and the people who live around there. I didn't think that Commissioner Yuhasz got a direct answer to that question. I will say I know what the concern is with that type system. I think the concern was trying to have it more proximate to the houses which would be responsible for maintaining it. Jeff Akin: That's the maintenance issue with the HOA. We felt like this was a good land use plan for this particular site. We thought that it was going to be a nice transition area there. That's not going to be an unsightly area, it's going to be a beautiful mowed meadow. All of the system is below ground. It's going to make a nice green buffer and a transition to the adjoining mobile home park. So we thought it was a really good land use. As far as this tract of land and the testimony about the area in that development, we looked at many properties in this area that are unsuitable for development. There's a tremendous amount of that area that does not work. There are tributaries, the New Hope Watershed, and there are a lot of properties that are not developable. This is really one of the few nice developable tracts. It is mostly not treed. We designed the entire project to have minimal impact on that land. Obviously, economics require us to try to put the maximum allowable number of lots in the project, but we try and meet the code another way. We've put these systems in and there are absolutely no problems with them. They function well. Pumps are absolutely nothing new, they're part of the large percentage of septic systems. They function exactly the same. We'd be happy to address any concerns that come up through the process, but we think this is good land planning and we think we've optimized the site to preserve the trees, to stay away from the creeks, and to have a nice looking neighborhood. We'll make adjustments if we need to. Michael Harvey: We had asked the applicant to provide a sample and they did exactly what we told them to do. There are a few unresolved issues, unfortunately some of which were precipitated by the lateness of which the comments came in from other County departments and other agencies. The Department of Transportation had submitted initial comments. The applicant will provide written responses as they're required to do. Commissioner Yuhasz: I just have to make one comment, and since I probably won't have the opportunity to address this in the future, there is nothing special about a subdivision and I think it's inappropriate for a subdivision to have to go through the time and the expense of this kind of special use permit process, whether it's 20 lots, 24 lots, or 30 lots. It's still just a subdivision. It's still just a body of land to use for development process. I just wanted to raise my objection to this process. Commissioner Jacobs: I have two comments that I'd like to direct to staff and the Planning Board. One is on page 7, just the way in which the material was presented. I would think it would be more clear to separate out land use buffers from open space in cases like this because it confuses what is open space. I think you're saying there is specifically designated open space in the subdivision, then there is space set aside that is required based on our buffer standards. Is that correct? Michael Harvey: Yes sir. It should be remembered that there is technically no independent open space area required for a conventional subdivision, although the applicant is providing some.