Agenda - 09-01-20; 6-a - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments – Clarification of Setbacks from the West Fork on the Eno Reservoir

Browse Search

16 31 Michael Harvey said yes, because that is why there is the definition of existing lot and existing development. He said staff has to grant as much leeway as humanly possible, as stipulated by the ordinance. He read the ordinance. Commissioner McKee clarified that this answer would address the resident who spoke of his 300 square foot tiny house. Michael Harvey said Mr. Bush was allowed to take advantage of existing development, when he built his house in 2013. He said he personally processed this request. He said Mr. Bush was allowed to place a house where a mobile home had previously been, because it constituted existing development. He said the septic system was approved with the issuance of a permit by the Health Department in 1987, and also qualifies as an existing development. He said part of the problem Mr. Bush is experiencing is the fact that some of his property has been subdivided and sold to neighbors, which has reduced the overall lot area from 30-acres (in 1979) to a 7-acre parcel currently, with the last recording of an exempt subdivision plat in 2018. Commissioner Greene asked if these lots are now considered non-conforming. Michael Harvey said no. He said if a property meets the definition of an existing lot, or existing development, it is not non-conforming, but rather these properties are subject to the rules and standards within those two sub-sections, but staff does not declare the lot of as non- conforming. He said it was created in compliance with the legal standards that existed at the time, and at the time before the reservoir boundary was set, it meant all applicable criteria. He said the establishment of the reservoir boundary, in the late 1990s, does not make the lot non- conforming, but it is governed by existing development/existing lot under section 4.2. Commissioner Greene said it sounds like the reservoir in non-conforming. Michael Harvey said the reservoir is not non-conforming. He said the reservoir is the reservoir, and its boundary was established with the recordation of plats in 1997 to create the boundary. Commissioner Greene asked if the subdivision predates the reservoir. Michael Harvey said yes, the subdivision was in process before the final boundary of the reservoir was established. Commissioner Greene said that was unwise. Michael Harvey said he is at a loss as to why the staff did not amend the ordinance in 1997. Commissioner Price asked if Mr. Bush were to sell his property, would the new owner be able to build a bigger home on that same property. Michael Harvey said potentially, but he would need to see a site plan first, which would have to demonstrate that it met existing development, or that it is outside of the 150-foot buffer for setback structures. He said the bigger issue is the lack of perkable soil on the property, which may not be able to support a larger house. Commissioner Price said she meant an expansion of the existing footprint. Michael Harvey said yes, there is opportunity for an expansion of the existing residence. Commissioner Price clarified that nothing has been issued about condemnation. Michael Harvey said that is correct, and he has not authored or authorized any letters stating condemnation of any property as a result of this action. He said this reaction is the result of one community member seeking to stir up emotions, and while this is an emotional issue for some, he does not believe the insinuations in the resident's letter have any merit. Commissioner Price asked if Michael Harvey has seen a letter from a resident. Michael Harvey said no. Chair Rich said some residents recently purchased homes, and asked if staff has been discussing this issue for some time. Michael Harvey said yes, since the beginning of 2019. Chair Rich asked if all of the homes around the reservoir were notified.