Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
5 Draft <br /> 1 would need some margin for unforeseen issues, like exact placement of the septic tank and the <br /> 2 pumping tank because, you know, as typically on these lots that are near lakes and with septic <br /> 3 setbacks like this, the septic fields are always above the house, so you've got to pump up, so it <br /> 4 takes another tank. And all those tanks have to have setbacks or offsets from buildings. And then <br /> 5 the other thing is the construction disturbance extents are difficult to know because you have to get <br /> 6 equipment around. And so anyway, that's sort of my introduction. I'm sure you'll probably have <br /> 7 other questions. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 Leon Meyers: Board members, questions for Mr. Cates? <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Beth Bronson: The question that you were speaking about the well, so the proposal for the setback on the septic <br /> 12 would impact your ability to decide where the well goes? <br /> 13 <br /> 14 David Cates: Yes. There's a 50-foot offset from the well, and there's a 50-foot offset from the house. And there's <br /> 15 a, there's a 40-foot offset from property lines, but they will, under circumstances, give you some <br /> 16 relief, but they'll only give you relief down to 10-feet from any property line. There's also a 100-foot <br /> 17 setback from a Class 1 or Class 2 reservoir. So, we're painting ourselves into a corner. There's not <br /> 18 just one reason, but there are multiple reasons why it would really be great to have some flexibility. <br /> 19 But in the interest of portraying to the Board, what is the very closest or farthest we could push the <br /> 20 house from the lake, in all honesty, that's where I had to show the house because once you put the <br /> 21 septic in and then the septic field in and then you put the pumping tank and then the septic tank <br /> 22 and then the 50-foot offset and all those things, that's where the house placement came. But it's <br /> 23 understandable that the homeowner would like to be afforded the same relief that the adjacent <br /> 24 property owners have been given. Not just the adjacent property owners, there are many <br /> 25 properties on the lake that have been afforded this as well. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Beth Bronson: So, am I correct in thinking that many of these properties were grandfathered in because they were <br /> 28 built before '92 or after'92? <br /> 29 <br /> 30 David Cates: There are some. Yes, there are some that are grandfathered in, but there are multiple properties <br /> 31 that have been built within the last 10 years.And the property to the north is going to be built with a <br /> 32 75-foot reservoir setback because it met Planning's criteria for lots that were created. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Beth Bronson: And so, you see that even though this is the site plan, you foresee wanting or bringing the house, <br /> 35 the actual structure, closer to the 75-foot setback? <br /> 36 <br /> 37 David Cates: I don't know that, I mean, that's up the homeowner. That would be the preference, but I don't think <br /> 38 the intention is to push it up to the very limit. But anyway, it just seemed to be from the <br /> 39 homeowner's standpoint, it seemed to be equitable to be given that same option as the other <br /> 40 people have had. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 Beth Bronson: Understandable. I just don't see where else the well would go because of the size of the lot. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 David Cates: Yeah. <br /> 45 <br /> 46 Leon Meyers: Mr. Cates, I'm not familiar with any of the adjacent properties that you refer to. Did you happen to <br /> 47 bring any evidence of where the adjacent properties are located with respect to the lake. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 David Cates: The assistant director of Planning informed me that they had a map showing multiple properties <br /> 50 that are within the 150-foot setback. I don't know if that's available. I thought it was in your packet. <br /> 5 <br />