Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
• Proposed amendments make existing regulations easier to follow/understand what is <br /> required. <br /> • Proposal provides appropriate references to stormwater standards. <br /> • Contradictions are eliminated. <br /> RECOMMENDATION: <br /> 1. Receive the proposed amendments. <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 May 7, 2013 BOCC regular meeting. <br /> 4. Adjourn the public hearing until May 7, 2013 in order to receive and accept the Planning <br /> Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. <br /> Commissioner McKee asked about a possible scenario. He said that if a four-lot <br /> subdivision was approved this past year and two of the lots were built upon and did not have to <br /> meet this requirement, then next year the other two lots were built upon, he asked if the other <br /> two lots would have to absorb the entire disturbed area or just for their lots and Michael Harvey <br /> said that it would be just for their lot. This is handled on a lot-by-lot basis. <br /> Commissioner Rich asked about the additional cost for surveying and Michael Harvey <br /> said $500-1,000. <br /> Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 12 and Section 2.4.1 and said that she <br /> would not consider option `c' because she would not wish to change the protection for University <br /> Lake Watershed. <br /> Michael Harvey indicated the proposed amendment would not impact existing <br /> development regulations enforced in the University Lake Watershed Overlay district. The <br /> proposal would only potentially eliminate the requirement for the submittal of a professionally <br /> prepared site plan based solely on a parcels location within the district and link its submittal to <br /> existing stormwater management thresholds instead. Michal Harvey asked if there was any <br /> preference for option `a' or V. <br /> Chair Jacobs said that he was deferring his opinion until he heard the questions from the <br /> Planning Board. <br /> Maxine Mitchell said that she would reserve her comments until this came back to the <br /> Planning Board. <br /> Commissioner McKee said that his preference would be option `a'. He is concerned <br /> about people that would be trying to build homes for family members, etc. He also does not <br /> want to increase costs to landowners. <br /> Chair Jacobs made reference to the Haw River watershed and said that this has been <br /> identified as something that the County needs to address. He said that he would like for the <br /> Planning Board to consider options `a' and V. He would also like to solicit options from <br /> OWASA, Hillsborough, and Mebane. <br /> Commissioner Pelissier said that she prefers option V. <br />