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
7 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 113 they tend to get clogged over time. They get compacted and then they turn into impervious pavement. A lot of times they refer <br /> 114 to the 57 stone option for areas that are not traffic loaded. <br /> 115 <br /> 116 Whitney Watson: When I see extremely long driveways,would that have required a permit. <br /> 117 <br /> 118 Chris Sandt: Yes,that's a common problem when there is a larger lot,when there is a long,deep lot and someone wants to <br /> 119 build at the back. For the developer,there are limits and it varies by zoning district but you have impervious limits and you can <br /> 120 only put so much pavement down and that includes the driveway. <br /> 121 <br /> 122 Whitney Watson: How are farms treated in regard to stormwater control? <br /> 123 <br /> 124 Chris Sandt: We get that question a lot. If they have bona fide farm status they are subject to the state's interpretation and yes <br /> 125 they can allow sediment to leave the site and they are not held to that higher standard that we would hold a residential or <br /> 126 commercial project,We are an agricultural state. However, if they put a residential property on the farm,that residential portion <br /> 127 of the farm is subject to the UDO. <br /> 128 <br /> 129 Randy Marshall: So all these homes and farms that have long driveways are probably all grandfathered in because they <br /> 130 preexisted these ordinances and what you are really talking about is new development. <br /> 131 <br /> 132 Chris Sandt: Yes sir. <br /> 133 <br /> 134 Statler Gilfillen: We are seeing large developments being proposed,you are describing a process that is an insurance that a <br /> 135 developer will pay long-term and short-term to make sure the public interest is best protected. Do you have a sense in the <br /> 136 development process of that percentage that costs a developer? <br /> 137 <br /> 138 Chris Sandt: That's not something I can put a number on. These developments vary but yes it does induce a cost. We have <br /> 139 bigger buffers in this county than the state minimum. For stormwater and erosion control we can't ask to go above and beyond <br /> 140 state minimum. <br /> 141 <br /> 142 Cy Stober: I think the best that we can do to represent that is to say more about the amount of land that could be consumed by <br /> 143 a development for standard, residential subdivision without utilities, I think it would be fair to estimate that 40 to 50% of the land <br /> 144 is going to be dedicated to either stormwater management or septic treatment. I think that is conservative and fair. <br /> 145 <br /> 146 Chris Sandt: And buffers. <br /> 147 <br /> 148 Lamar Proctor: Is there anything in these LIDO text amendments that changes substantively the older, previous version of the <br /> 149 LIDO that impacts the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Something that is substantive and substantial? <br /> 150 <br /> 151 Chris Sandt: My first answer would be no. Essentially we are clarifying a lot of things in conformance with the ordinances. It's <br /> 152 really getting our definitions up to current state model ordinance definitions and the performance guarantee clarifications. <br /> 153 <br /> 154 Lamar Proctor: Do we have any other questions or comments? <br /> 155 <br /> 156 MOTION BY Whitney Watson to adopt the Statement of Approval and Consistency that is attachment 1 and finding that the LIDO <br /> 157 text amendments are consistent with our Comprehensive Plan as well as consistent with North Carolina General Statutes. <br /> 158 Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. <br /> 159 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY <br /> 160 <br /> 161 The Planning Director and Planning Board members held a discussion on holding future Planning Board meeting in the Whitted <br /> 162 Building. The consensus was to make that change through the calendar year and potentially beyond. <br /> 163 <br /> 164 AGENDA ITEM 8: ADJOURNMENT <br /> 165 Meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. <br /> 166 <br /> 167 <br /> 168 Adam Beeman, Chair <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.