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
8 <br />unnecessary duplication of effort. <br />3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives) <br />This amendment is designed to provide additional references to existing <br />development standards already contained within the UDO. <br />4. New Statutes and Rules <br />This amendment is designed to reference compliance with recently adopted <br />modifications to the UDO related to stormwater management and nutrient reduction <br />standards consistent with the following State regulations: <br />• 15A NCAC 2B. 0277 Falls Lake Stormwater New Development Rule <br />• 15A NCAC 2B. 0265 and Session Law 2009 -484 Jordan Lake Stormwater <br />New Development Rules <br />C. PROCESS <br />1. TIMEFRAME /MILESTONES /DEADLINES <br />a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed <br />November 8, 2012. The BOCC voted unanimously to authorize staff to proceed <br />with the amendment. Board members also requested staff present the proposed <br />amendment to the Commission for the Environment (CFE) for its input. Staff <br />presented this item to the CFE at its January 14, 2013 regular meeting. The CFE <br />had no comments or concerns related to the proposal. <br />b. Quarterly Public Hearing <br />. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br />February 25, 2013. During the hearing the following comments were made- <br />............ <br />1. A BOCC member asked staff to clarify the difference between impervious <br />surface and land disturbance limits. <br />STAFF COMMENT: Land disturbance limits identify the total <br />amount of land area that can be disturbed /cleared without the <br />benefit of a formal erosion control or stormwater management plan <br />being approved by the County. <br />Impervious surface limits establish the overall limit of `development' <br />that can occur on a given parcel (i.e. driveway, house, shed, etc.) <br />based on its designated Watershed Protection Overlay District. <br />You can disturb more land area than you can actually develop. <br />Ultimately both regulations are an attempt by the County to address <br />water quality issues through limiting the overall amount of <br />`impervious' surface placed on a parcel and requiring stormwater <br />management devices in those cases where they are necessary. <br />2. A BOCC member expressed concern over the potential for increased costs <br />to be incurred by property owners seeking to develop single - family <br />residences with the submittal of a professionally prepared site plan. <br />F. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.