Browse
Search
10.5.22 Planning Board Packet
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2022
>
10.5.22 Planning Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2022 2:20:57 PM
Creation date
9/29/2022 2:13:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/5/2022
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
10.5.22 Planning Board Minutes
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
6 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 57 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS <br /> 58 There were none <br /> 59 <br /> 60 AGENDA ITEM 7: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENTS—EROSION&SEDIMENTATION CONTROL, <br /> 61 STORMWATER AND PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE PROVISIONS—To make a recommendation to the BOCC on <br /> 62 proposed amendments to the LIDO pertaining to provisions for erosion &sedimentation control,stormwater, <br /> 63 and performance guarantees. This item was introduced at the August 4, 2021 ORC meeting, reviewed at the <br /> 64 May 4,2022 Planning Board meeting and is scheduled for BOCC public hearing on October 3,2022 <br /> 65 PRESENTER: Chris Sandt, Staff Engineer <br /> 66 <br /> 67 Chris Sandt reviewed the item and presented a short PowerPoint Presentation then answered questions. <br /> 68 <br /> 69 Beth Bronson: So there is no easement over stormwater runoff on private property if it is included within the plan? <br /> 70 <br /> 71 Chris Sandt: We do require easements and as part of the Stormwater Management Plan (SMP)approval,staff ensures the <br /> 72 developer has recorded an access easement to get to the Stormwater Control Measure (SCM). There is a difference between <br /> 73 us being able to access it to inspect it or going and actually making improvements on private property without the proper legal <br /> 74 instruments in place. <br /> 75 <br /> 76 Cy Stober: Stormwater performance is arguably covered by a potential Notice of Violation (NOV)item that we could enforce <br /> 77 through the enforcement tools of Article 8 as an agreement because we will have an agreement with that device holder. We will <br /> 78 have legal enforcement tools to address it. They are more protracted and less immediate than what would be allowed under a <br /> 79 maintenance guarantee but the maintenance guarantees and the long-term holding of assurity of some form presents <br /> 80 challenges for the legal department,the planning department but also the finance department. We are pursuing that. It is <br /> 81 largely dealt with in general statute by watershed protection rules as opposed to the erosion and sediment control statutes and <br /> 82 the stormwater statutes. We also have to open a different can of worms to start addressing that but we can continue enforcing <br /> 83 them under Article 8 and we will. <br /> 84 <br /> 85 Lamar Proctor: Where it says it will eliminate County requirements for Stormwater Control Measure maintenance guarantees, is <br /> 86 that eliminated from the UDO? <br /> 87 <br /> 88 Chris Sandt: The existing LIDO has a reference to maintenance securities for SCMs but there isn't much meat to it and it was <br /> 89 causing a lot of confusion. It was put in the LIDO back in 2012, 1 believe, and was kind of a placeholder. It wasn't being <br /> 90 enforced as well as it should have been because of the logistics of managing that money,there isn't enough staff to do that. <br /> 91 We've essentially removed that reference to the SCM maintenance guarantee. It will no longer be in the LIDO. <br /> 92 <br /> 93 Lamar Proctor: I understand,that would be a complicated issue to hold money or bond. <br /> 94 <br /> 95 Beth Bronson: If there were to be a change, in NC Statute Article 15 Section 4,since we have to follow the state guidelines, if <br /> 96 the state guideline were to be updated past the time your permit is given but construction is not completed, is there any <br /> 97 requirement they would have to update those plans based on new information? <br /> 98 <br /> 99 Chris Sandt: One of the key things we've put into this UDO text amendment because of that issue, because the state is <br /> 100 constantly updating,we have clarified language within Section 6.14 and 6.15 to defer to the most current general statute. It is <br /> 101 worded in a way we won't have to go in and update the UDO every time the state changes terminology or issues a new rule. <br /> 102 <br /> 103 Statler Gilfillen: If a developer has gotten through all the approvals and they start work and the state makes a major change to <br /> 104 the laws, is that developer grandfathered in with those approvals or he is bound be the new law that would upgrade it? <br /> 105 <br /> 106 Chris Sandt: That happens a lot in planning. They are grandfathered,you are obligated to meet state rules and regs at the time <br /> 107 of submittal. If you want to expand a project then the new work is subject to current rules. <br /> 108 <br /> 109 Whitney Watson: Is there something in the UDO that encourages the use of permeable surface for parking areas. <br /> 110 <br /> 111 Chris Sandt: We accept those types of applications, however,they are kind of treated like an SCM but it has to be designed <br /> 112 and sealed by an engineer,you need an operational maintenance agreement—that's the big thing with those types of surfaces, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.