Orange County NC Website
• - _ <br /> Mr. Marvin E. Collins <br /> May 3, 1989 <br /> Page 3 <br /> Clustered development could also achieve the same goals without <br /> structural devices, provided that: <br /> • Clustered subdivisions are located in areas of the watershed <br /> where public sewer extensions are most feasible; or, if served <br /> by community wastewater systems, the facilities are publicly <br /> operated and maintained; <br /> • 85 percent of the total development site remains as permanent, <br /> natural open space; <br /> • 0.5 acre minimum lot sizes are set for clustered projects; <br /> • Maximum imperviousness is restricted to 4 percent of the total <br /> project area, including streets. <br /> The CDM report clearly recommends that any development more <br /> intensive than 5-acre single family residential (or the 5-acre, <br /> cluster equivalent, described above) be served by publicly <br /> maintained stormwater devices. The report also states: "In the <br /> event that Orange County elects to rely upon the structural BMP <br /> approach, it is recommended that a 6 percent imperviousness limit <br /> be established for areas zoned for 2-acre single family lots." <br /> The proposed McLennan's Farm project (37 acres/14 lots = 2.64 <br /> acres/lot) is almost twice the recommended 5-acre lot density. The <br /> proposed impervious cover of 11.9 percent is almost 3 times greater <br /> than the 4 percent recommended for projects with no structural <br /> stormwater controls, and twice the recommended limit for projects <br /> where publicly maintained structural devices are provided. No <br /> permanent stormwater control structures are included in the <br /> McLennan's Farm application. <br /> 1 <br /> OWASA Recommendation <br /> OWASA staff recommend that the Orange County Board of Commissioners <br /> deny the application for a Planned Development Special. Use Permit <br /> for McLennan's Farm on the basis that the proposed use will not <br /> promote the public health, safety and general welfare if located <br /> where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as <br /> submitted. Specific findings to support this recommendation <br /> include: <br /> 1. The availability of substantially more technical information <br /> and policy consensus than existed when the application was last <br /> reviewed (Hazen and Sawyer, August, 1988; Camp Dresser & McKee, <br /> March, 1989; and Orange County Water & Sewer Policy, April 3, <br /> 1989); <br />