OCPB minutes 100417 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 11/01/2017 8 371 Michelle Dickson/Dixon said that she inherited her property from her husband, the late Mitchell Dickson/Dixon. Based 372 on the new maps, her property will no longer be in a floodplain. She wanted the Board to know that in 1998 there was 373 a permit granted to put a road in right through the identified floodplain. Unfortunately, even though there was a road 374 built, it was not built through the property and now Ms. Dickson is landlocked. She is concerned that the Planning and 375 Inspections Department has an inaccurate permit on file for the road, which was built around the floodplain, not 376 through the property as originally described when the permit was granted. Now the issue is that she cannot access 377 the property and the changing floodplain area does not help the long-standing problem. 378 379 Lydia Wegman asked if Michael Harvey or Craig Benedict would be able to address the speaker’s concerns. She 380 said that the Planning Board would not be able to change the situation. 381 382 Michael Harvey said that the Planning Department has a flood development permitting process that allows for 383 development in a floodplain, roads being the biggest example (or utilities). If this type of development provides the 384 only viable legal access to someone’s property, the department would not be able to prohibit that outright. Mr. Harvey 385 asked Ms. Dickson to make an appointment with him so that he can look into the matter more directly. 386 387 Tony Blake asked if it is possible for someone to be landlocked out of their property due floodplain. 388 389 Michael Harvey said that roadways are allowed to be developed in a floodplain, otherwise a property owner would be 390 landlocked and the land would lose value. 391 392 Tony Blake said that there would be different requirements for development a road. 393 394 Michael Harvey replied that the County and the state FEMA office would have certain requirements for this 395 development. There would have to be a “no rise” certification meaning that the development of the road would not 396 cause an increase in floodplain. 397 398 Lydia Wegman noted that in the case of Ms. Dickson, the floodplain decreased. 399 400 Michael Harvey said that he would need to look at the specifics of her case. 401 402 Michelle Dickson noted that the property still floods and that she would talk to Mr. Harvey about the issue further. 403 404 Lydia Wegman asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak on this matter. Hearing no one else, she 405 thanked members of the public. She then asked Mr. Harvey to remind her of the recommendation. 406 407 Michael Harvey repeated the recommendation (see motion below). 408 409 Tony Blake asked if the recommendations should be made in individual motions. 410 411 Michael Harvey suggested that the Board could approve the Planning Director’s recommendation in total. 412 413 MOTION by Tony Blake to approve the Planning Director’s recommendation in total - to approve the Statements of 414 Consistency for proposed Zoning Atlas Amendments in Attachment 3, the ordinance amending the zoning atlas in 415 Attachment 4, the Statement of Consistency for proposed UDO Text Amendments in Attachment 5, and the proposed 416 UDO text amendments in Attachment 6. Seconded by Randy Marshall. 417 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 418 419 Lydia Wegman thanked Michael Harvey. 420 421