Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
25 <br /> Article 6.23.7 requires that new structures be <br /> located at least 150' from a reservoir, or <br /> outside of the stream buffer, whichever is <br /> greater. Article 6.23.8 requires that septic <br /> systems be located at least 300, from a reservoir <br /> or outside of the stream buffer, whichever is <br /> greater. <br /> Application of these setbacks may render some <br /> existing lots unbuildable. The remedy available <br /> at this time is for the property owner to seek a <br /> variance of the setback requirements to the <br /> extent necessary to develop the property in a <br /> reasonable manner. <br /> The proposed amendment would allow a reduction in <br /> the septic and building setbacks on lots which <br /> were created prior to January 1, 1994 to the <br /> extent necessary to build on the property, <br /> provided that septic system and structures remain <br /> outside of stream buffers, and the septic system <br /> remains at least 100, from the reservoir as <br /> required by the State mandate. <br /> Citizen comments both for and against the <br /> proposed amendment were received at the public <br /> hearing on February 28, 1994 <br /> The Orange Water and Sewer Authority were opposed <br /> to the relaxation of any watershed protection <br /> standard, particularly when applied to the Cane <br /> Creek Watershed. <br /> Several citizens also spoke in favor of the <br /> amendment because a number of existing lots, <br /> particularly those surrounding Lake Orange, are <br /> rendered unbuildable by -the setback requirements. <br /> Willis provided information on the subdivisions <br /> around Lake Orange and the number of lots which <br /> are still undeveloped which is a part of the <br /> Staff Response (an attachment on page ) . <br /> She reviewed the lots that would be unbuildable <br /> due to present requirements/restrictions. <br /> Willis reminded the Board that these lots <br /> preexist the current regulations and the owners <br /> have a right to build on them. If they cannot <br /> be built on, that could constitute a "taking of <br /> property" . She further indicated that such <br /> situations are the reasons for the existence of <br /> the variance procedures. It is unlikely that a <br /> variance would be denied if the effect of that <br />