Orange County NC Website
016 <br /> DRAFT PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 9-18-85 10 <br /> plan review process has been added along with <br /> requiring a statement of finaal responsibility <br /> and ownership . <br /> The Erosion Control Officer has added a change <br /> to the appeal process that is not requested by <br /> the Sedimentation Control Commission . The <br /> change in Section 19 allows the first appeal of <br /> a denial by the Erosion Control Officer to be <br /> made to the Planning Director instead of first <br /> holding a public hearing on the matter. <br /> The proposed revisicins to the Ordinance along <br /> wth explanatory notes are included in the <br /> 'attachments . <br /> The Planning Staff recommends that the proposed <br /> revisions be sent to the special November 4• <br /> Public Hearing . <br /> Shanklin inquired about the "pollution of <br /> water" referenced in Section 2 Cl ) . Faircloth <br /> responded this covered pollution generated by • <br /> earth moving activities . Gordon noted that <br /> this tracks the State definition . <br /> . ShankLin also questioned Section 4 about the <br /> more restrictive provision . Smith responded <br /> that the enabling legislation is both enabling <br /> and prescriptive . Faircloth responded that <br /> some activities are regulated by the State and <br /> others by the County . <br /> Gordon questioned Section 17 a(2) as to why no <br /> permit is needed for stock piling of raw or <br /> processed sand , stone or gravel . Faircloth <br /> responded this prevents double erosion control <br /> permitting as these activities are already <br /> permitted by the State. He noted that this <br /> probably addresses a problem the State has with <br /> enforcement : Gordon asked Faircloth to check <br /> with State to see if we can require a permit . <br /> Faircloth responded that these permits come <br /> under the State's jurisdiction under a Mining <br /> Act . <br /> Gordon noted in Section 18 f, the reference to <br /> "his" attorney should be his/her attorney. <br /> Gordon questioned Section 22 Penalties , as to <br /> whether the $100 penalty is set by the <br /> Commissioners . Faircloth responded that this <br />