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

11 55 Michael Harvey: There is nothing in the UDO that would prevent that. All the property owner would have to do is 56 comply with applicable setback standards. 57 58 Michael Harvey: What this amendment does is establish a key date as it relates to the enforcement of the reservoir 59 setback from the West Fork on the Eno. The amendment establishes the date for staff to ascertain what constitutes 60 an existing lot and existing development when enforcing the required structure and septic setbacks. The UDO contains 61 waiver provisions for an existing lot so that property owners who own a parcel established prior to the development or 62 designation of a reservoir site with respect to locating a structure and septic system. Unfortunately this amendment 63 will not address everyone's issues along the Eno. For example we have a property owner who has subdivided his lot 64 several times from 1997 to today. His property will not qualify as an existing lot under this provision. The County staff 65 chose the proposed date that made sense as it relates to the enforcement of reservoir setbacks. February 12, 1997 is 66 the date the West Fork on the Eno reservoir was established as it relates to identifying the point where the 150 ft. 67 structure and 300 ft. septic setback are taken from. 68 69 1 am asking the Board to approve the Statement of Consistency in Attachment 3 and recommend the adoption of the 70 revised Attachment 4,which establishes the key critical date with respect to what constitutes existing development and 71 an existing lot along the West Fork on the Eno of February 12, 1997. 72 73 Hunter Spitzer: Is there a way to amend the proposal to change the dates for what constitutes a legal lot and existing 74 development to a different date? I am concerned there may be some property owners who will not qualify with the 75 February 12, 1997 date and we will make more structures nonconforming. 76 77 Michael Harvey: I am not comfortable with that. The intent of the identified sections is to define what qualifies as 78 existing development and an existing lot as it relates to when a reservoir was established. From the date a reservoir 79 is established,people who subdivide their property are obligated to abide by applicable reservoir setbacks for structures 80 and septic systems. I will remind all parties there is nothing in this section preventing a property owner from seeking 81 a variance from the Board of Adjustment if they believe the strict interpretation of the UDO infringes on their 82 development or redevelopment of their property. 83 84 Hunter Spitzer: That only covers regulated subdivisions correct? 85 86 Michael Harvey: All property, created through the regulated, expedited, exempt subdivision processes, are required 87 to abide by the established setbacks when they develop their property. This is handled as part of the zoning compliance 88 permit process,which is separate from the subdivision process,and would include compliance with the 150 ft.setback 89 for all structures and the 300 ft. setback for all septic systems from a reservoir. You are correct, however, it is likely a 90 property owner engaging in an exempt subdivision will not be aware of the potential impacts of their action as it relates 91 to complying with applicable reservoir setbacks. Unfortunately that is not something staff can address. We can 92 continue to advise property owners of the issue but cannot require they take the consequences into account when 93 deciding to proceed with an exempt subdivision. 94 95 Craig Benedict: Some of these issues hit home for property owners when the Town began clearing property to allow 96 for the raising of the reservoir. It became clearer to those property owners just where the edge of the reservoir was 97 going to be and that led to questions of us on anticipated impacts. 98 99 Patricia Roberts: Will these people have to purchase flood insurance? 100 101 Michael Harvey: There is nothing in the UDO mandating property owner purchase flood insurance. There is existing 102 special flood hazard area along the reservoir. It is typically up to the lending institution if flood insurance will be required. 103 Again I want to clarify this amendment package, in and of itself,does not create the need for flood insurance. I will not 104 bore you with my 20 minute presentation on why you should purchase flood insurance regardless of your property's 105 location within a special flood hazard area. 106 107 Randy Marshal: The aerial photo still shows trees along the reservoir area. Has clearing begun? 108