Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-07-2013 - 6d
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2013
>
Agenda - 05-07-2013 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 05-07-2013 - 6d
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2015 2:06:28 PM
Creation date
5/6/2013 11:52:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/7/2013
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6d
Document Relationships
Minutes 05-07-2013
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2013
ORD-2013-016 Ordinance approving UDO Text Amendments – Modification of Site Plan Submittal Requirements
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
12 <br />link: htt : / /oran ecount nc. ov/ lannin /documents /PBA endaPacketA ril20l3. df. <br />p g Y g p g g p p <br />b. Advisory Boards: <br />Commission for the Environment <br />(CFE) — January 14, 2013. The CFE <br />had no comments related to the <br />proposed amendment. <br />c. Local Government Review: <br />Courtesy Review — Town(s) of Chapel <br />Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, City of <br />Mebane in November of 2012. As of <br />this date no comments have been <br />received. <br />At the February 25, 2013 Quarterly <br />Public Hearing staff was directed to <br />solicit input from OWASA on the <br />proposed text amendment. <br />OWASA responded on March 21, <br />2013 they have no concerns over the <br />proposed amendment package. <br />This response in contained <br />within Attachment 4. OWASA has no <br />comment on the proposal. <br />d. Notice Requirements <br />Legal advertisement was published on February 13 and 20, 2013. <br />e. Outreach: <br />❑ General Public: <br />❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup: <br />❑ Other: <br />3. FISCAL IMPACT <br />While these proposed amendments are merely designed to incorporate necessary <br />references with respect to complying with established thresholds, and requiring the <br />submission of formal site plans in the event a stormwater management plan is <br />required, staff had previously identified compliance with these new State required <br />standards will impose additional costs for development projects and require <br />additional staff resources. <br />Workload for Current Planning and Erosion Control staff to review and approve <br />stormwater management plans required by the rules is expected to increase. <br />Workload for staff with respect to the inspection of stormwater management <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.