Agenda 06-04-2019 6-a - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application

Browse Search

99 Michael Harvey: I think that the minutes are very clear, and I think they can be read. The mischaracterization of my comments I will address. The first issue that we have is there was a lot of comments at the last meeting that there's existing wells in this area that are already impaired. Individuals that have well concerns or impaired wells need to contact the Orange County health department and address those issues regardless of whether this development is or is not approved. There are issues with wells that were installed inconsistent with current practice that are old and they need to be redrilled. That is a reality for a county that is going to rely on individual wells and septic system to address potable water and the treatment of waste water. With respect to stormwater, developers are required to post sureties to deal with pre and post construction issues. As a developer is constructing the stormwater features for this project, he is obligated and required by the ordinance to post a bond with Orange County erosion control engineering division, so those stormwater features is installed per an approved plan. The second thing to keep in mind is that the developer is responsible for posting what is known as a maintenance bond that exists in perpetuity. As the Home owner's association assumes the responsibility for maintenance of the stormwater on site they're obligated to submit biannual reports demonstrating the viability and continued effectiveness of the stormwater feature because that is the required under the UDO and is part of the requirement of ensuring the perpetual responsibility for maintenance of the stormwater system. If they fail in their obligations to maintain the system,we (the County)cash in the bond and bring the feature back into compliance with applicable standards. Local home owner's associations are obligated by an operations and maintenance plan that is approved (by the County)to abide by the perpetual maintenance and up keep of the stormwater feature. That includes individual property owners who have to get stormwater features on their property to support development of their lot. You are looking at two different systems,the communal system and systems per individual lot. There are mechanisms in place to address concerns over stormwater. As it relates to well and septic or specifically a well, if you already have impaired wells in the area, prior to this development coming online, it's going to be difficult for the County or the resident's to prove it's Fairway Hills that created the problem. I also think that if Fairway Hills were somehow required to go test wells on adjacent parcels,and if the wells are contaminated and have to be condemned,what happens then? The project is not built and the applicant is not responsible for the damage. There is a lot of talk about what liabilities the developer should accept in order to get this project approved. My problem is that if there are already well issues, the liability falls to the current property owner and the applicant for Fairway Hills should not be expected to fix wells that are already broken. Hathaway Pendergrass:You mentioned that in conjunction with the stormwater requirements I think that is what we were talking about earlier. Michael Harvey: I think that one of the things that you had expressed interest in is to make a recommendation that the developers'commit to following to ....... adhering to low impact design practices for stormwater features if the County Commissioners see fit to approve this project. Staff suggested that language be included within the resolution of approval to compel the developer to abide by the various practices he identified during the preliminary plat review articulated in his PowerPoint. You can piece meal this to say your first motion is to say that regardless of what else happens,you are recommended that the developer be held to his offer to incorporate low impact design elements consistent with his presentation at this Planning Board meeting. MOTION by Hunter Spitzer to adopt Michael's statement to require that the developer utilize the low impact design elements he has recommended. Randy Marshall: Seconded. VOTE: 9-1 Passed; (Piracci) Kim Piracci: Well, I understand he was going to do that anyway. He was talking about low impact strategies anyway, so this is almost like going through the motions of something that was already there. David Blankfard:This is more of making sure that they were going to do it. Kim Piracci: They were going to do it. David Blankfard:They weren't required to do it. Kim Piracci: That's what they were talking about. They were planning to do it. David Blankfard: Right,and this way it's written down that they are going to do it.