Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
25 <br /> 6 and 7. If the Planning Board does decide to recommend approval as proposed,the <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval per the Resolution of Approval(copy an <br /> attachment to these minutes on pages <br /> Brooks asked who owned tract 3. Steve Yuhasz,surveyor,responded that Doug <br /> Bivins owned tract 3. He originally owned this entire tract and subdivided. Brooks <br /> continued asking if there could be any way to get a perc site on it for lot 7. Yuhasz <br /> responded that when the property was last subdivided,lot 3 was very large due to the <br /> fact that only one perc site was located. <br /> Jobsis asked what the rationale was for the Planning Board to approve the concept <br /> plan. Willis indicated she was unsure. <br /> Allison asked if the lots,as presented,were in violation of the ordinance. Willis <br /> responded that,from the Planning Staffs viewpoint,they are not consistent with the <br /> Subdivision Regulations. Staff feels that such remote systems are the same as septic <br /> easements. Allison continued asking if this is the only issue and Willis responded <br /> yes. <br /> Barrows asked if the landscape waiver was for the bus shelter or if it was really a <br /> setback. Willis responded that the setback requirement of forty feet must still be <br /> met. Barrows continued that she was opposed to this design at concept plan stage <br /> and still felt the same. She noted that she felt this property speaks to the use of <br /> clustering or alternative design. There are suitable soils on one side of the road and <br /> unsuitable on the other side. Given the soils,it does not seem to be the best design <br /> for this property. There is sufficient property to allow plenty of leeway for a better <br /> design. <br /> Brooks asked if the areas with suitable soils are for three or five bedroom <br /> construction. Steve Yuhasz responded that they are for a minimum of three. Some <br /> are four and others may be three or four. Brooks continued asking the possibility of <br /> mixing homes and thus giving everyone something,creating a tradeoff. She <br /> also expressed dissatisfaction with the remote septic lines. <br /> Strayhorn indicated he felt the lot lines could be better drawn and clustering could <br /> possibly allow more houses to be built. Willis responded that the soils are limited; <br /> even with a cluster design a significant increase in the number of lots may not be <br /> possible. Strayhorn continued asking the rationale behind not allowing sewer <br /> easements in watersheds. Willis responded that there was a lot of discussions on this <br /> issue when watershed standards were being adopted The Planning Staff had <br /> recommended that the prohibition of septic easements in the watersheds not be <br /> included in the watershed provisions;however,they were adopted with that <br /> prohibition. She continued that part of the rationale was the concern that the septic <br /> system would be more removed from the house and the possibility of problems with <br /> a system not be realized for a longer period of time. Strayhorn noted that the <br /> systems he was more familiar with were pump systems and he felt failure of such a <br /> system was more noticeable and Jobsis stated that had been the opinion of former <br /> Planning Board member Larry Reid. Thus,Strayhorn felt that argument had no <br /> merit. <br /> Price shared the concern with the remote septic system and asked what could be <br /> done with the property if they did not have the remote systems. Willis responded <br /> that the worst case scenario would be that they would have five lots instead of seven <br />