Browse
Search
Planning Board minutes 040319
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Minutes
>
2019
>
Planning Board minutes 040319
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/10/2019 3:29:13 PM
Creation date
9/10/2019 3:28:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/3/2019
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
Approved 5/1/19 <br />Randy Marshall said he understood a bond was not prudent or legally permissible, but wanted to make sure there 204 <br />was an answer on the record of this fact.205 <br />206 <br />Michael Harvey indicated Mr. Phil Vilaro of Orange County Environmental Health was in the audience and would like 207 <br />to address the Board concerning well and septic issues.208 <br />209 <br />Phil Vilaro spoke to Board to address concerns about well safety and water table issues. He reassured the Board 210 <br />that it standard practice to have wells on multiple lots similar to the size proposed within this project and that it is not 211 <br />an issue in his mind to have 20 individual wells created to serve these lots. M. Vilaro did not believe development of 212 <br />this project would impact water pressure or the water capacity of surrounding wells. Mr. Vilaro reminded the Board 213 <br />Orange County does not have a true aquifer/water table. This is why you have such a disparity in well depth, water 214 <br />quality, and generated gallons per minute from property to property in any given area. In discussing surface water 215 <br />contamination he expressed the rarity of that happening in Orange County because of the standards required by the 216 <br />County for every new well drilled. Mr. Vilaro said County requirements, with respect to the drilling and installation of 217 <br />wells, were amongst the strictest in the State. Mr. Vilaro agreed older wells, installed prior to the adoption of local 218 <br />comprehensive regulations in the mid 1980’s, were indeed subject to potential impacts from runoff given how they 219 <br />were constructed (i.e. depth, casing, etc.). Such wells need to be replaced as they are not suited to address such 220 <br />contaminant issues. 221 <br />222 <br />Craig Carter thanked Mr. Vilaro for his explanation and provided some history on the well his grandparents installed 223 <br />on their property to provide additional context on his concerns with respect to well impacts and contamination issues.224 <br />The well was constantly providing ‘muddy’ water and there were issues with contaminants at times.225 <br />226 <br />Phil Vilaro indicated he believed Mr. Carter and suggested part of the problem was the well was not installed deep 227 <br />enough to avoid subsurface silt runoff and contamination. Current practice requires wells to be dug deep to address 228 <br />this issue and to be properly incased/grouted to protect the integrity of the well. Mr. Vilaro reminded the Board 229 <br />approximately 80% of the County was intended to be served by private wells and septic systems as there were no 230 <br />plans by the County to extend/develop public utility systems.231 <br />232 <br />There was lengthy discussion amongst the Board and Mr. Vilaro on septic and well permitting.233 <br />234 <br />An unknown individual asked if there was an opportunity for this project to tie into public water from the Town of 235 <br />Hillsborough. Pat Mallet indicated the property was not in a designated public utility service area, which meant there 236 <br />was no opportunity for the project to be served by public utilities.237 <br />238 <br />Patricia Catto indicated she had the same concerns about stormwater runoff and well contamination as previous 239 <br />speakers and further expressed disappointment in the notification process for this project. Ms. Catto indicated 240 <br />property owners need to be kept notified whenever a development is proposed in the Town of Hillsborough so they 241 <br />can have a voice in the process.242 <br />243 <br />Michael Harvey indicated the County had the most rigorous notification requirements in the region, well exceeding 244 <br />State requirements. Mr. Harvey reminded the Board a neighborhood information meeting was held for this project, 245 <br />with property owners within 1,000 feet of the parcel being notified of the date and time of the meeting via letters sent 246 <br />first class mail. Staff posted signs on the property advertising the neighborhood meeting 10 days prior to the event.247 <br />248 <br />Michael Harvey said the agenda for this meeting was advertised in 2 local newspapers and additional notice was 249 <br />sent to adjacent property owners of the meeting date and time via first class mail. Information on the project was 250 <br />also posted on the County website with a detailed explanation of what the project entailed. Staff also posted signs on 251 <br />the property advertising the date and time of this meeting where the Concept Plan was to be reviewed. Mr. Harvey 252 <br />said he could not address Ms. Catto’s concerns about other projects in the Town of Hillsborough as the County did 253 <br />not manage the Town’s planning program and suggested she make contact with the Town to address her issues.254
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.