Browse
Search
OCPB agenda 040115
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2015
>
OCPB agenda 040115
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2018 3:56:44 PM
Creation date
3/7/2018 3:53:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/1/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OCPB minutes 040115
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
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
D R A F T <br /> 109 <br />Michael Harvey updated on issues the County staff is dealing with on impervious surface issues. 110 <br /> 111 <br />Tony Blake: We just went through this with the fire department at White Cross. The water garden required an 112 <br />easement. We didn’t know that until after we had completed everything so we had to pay for a second full survey of 113 <br />the property. My suggestion would be that if you are going to reference BMPs and the DENR in the UDO, you need 114 <br />to make that clear. The second issue was you said something that peaked my interest, what watershed is this 115 <br />property that is complaining? 116 <br /> 117 <br />Michael Harvey: University Lake Protected. It is the most protected watershed in the County. 118 <br /> 119 <br />Craig Benedict: Our rules are more restrictive than the state requires. Discussed the example of Cain Creek. 120 <br /> 121 <br />Tony Blake: When you do this transfer between two lots that has to be deeded? 122 <br /> 123 <br />Michael Harvey: If you are talking about the conservation easement, you have to record the easement deed 124 <br />language in the Register of Deeds formalizing the transfer yes. 125 <br /> 126 <br />Tony Blake: Why isn’t the quarry in here? 127 <br /> 128 <br />Craig Benedict: It may when the operation is complete. 129 <br /> 130 <br />Paul Guthrie: How do you interlock your analysis with waste disposal, septic systems, etc.? 131 <br /> 132 <br />Craig Benedict: We have been looking at that with Environmental Health because part of the water quality that runs 133 <br />off lots is due to the nutrients that come off based on the impervious surface. 134 <br /> 135 <br />Lydia Wegman: Can you help me understand why the County would want to change to the state? 136 <br /> 137 <br />Craig Benedict: You could put more impervious. It would create more tax base. And there are water quality issues. 138 <br />The less the better, impervious surface. 139 <br /> 140 <br />Tony Blake: Isn’t most of the effect downstream? 141 <br /> 142 <br />Craig Benedict: The question you ask may be asked by the BOCC and some of the members of the community. 143 <br />Someone will need to show the benefits. 144 <br /> 145 <br />Tony Blake: The state is not suggesting that you get rid of the more restrictive requirements? 146 <br /> 147 <br />Michael Harvey: The state isn’t mandating we do anything with respect to this item but there has been legislation 148 <br />that has been reviewed at the state level basically indicating local governments cannot be more restrictive than the 149 <br />state allows. The state is also considering modifying its definition of built upon area which translates to impervious 150 <br />surface. State officials are looking to add gravel areas, that are compacted to serve as vehicular access roads, to the 151 <br />definition of built upon area thereby making them count as impervious. 152 <br /> 153 <br />Tony Blake: How does an easement affect this? Does that count against my impervious surface? 154 <br /> 155 <br />Michael Harvey: Yes. 156 <br /> 157 <br />Lisa Stuckey: Is there a social cost in terms of affordable housing, it makes it more expensive. 158 <br /> 159 <br />Michael Harvey: I don’t know if it is the impervious limit in any watershed that creates a higher cost for the 160 <br />development of housing. It is the totality of the regulations. One example would be University Lake. There is a 161 <br />density limit indicating you can only have a specific number of units per acre, specifically 1 unit for every 5 acres of 162 <br />3 <br />7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.