|
34
<br /> DRAFT
<br /> 219 with your situation here. So that we are changing a setback number,which sounds scary;we're
<br /> 220 making it go from 150 to 75, but we have found that, No. 1,we're already over the state
<br /> 221 minimums. No. 2,our Upper Eno Critical Watershed,which is one of those 13 watersheds,that's
<br /> 222 that blue that I showed you. We have thousands of acres more than state minimum requires, so
<br /> 223 we are,the county can be proud of our buffers there. The fact that all the homes around Lake
<br /> 224 Orange are already built,they were built before these rules were here. We're trying to make it
<br /> 225 less burdensome for staff and our constituents that want to come in and renovate a house that's in
<br /> 226 a location that's not jiving with law. So that's it. It's specific to Lake Orange. The buffers around
<br /> 227 the buffer would obviously hold, and there are no other reservoirs in that watershed. It's just Lake
<br /> 228 Orange and WEFR. So, it's specific to Lake Orange, but it's something that we as staff have been
<br /> 229 talking about for a while, and we're going to see these trends continuing. So,the goal is to take
<br /> 230 that reservoir buffer setback, change it from 150 foot to 75 feet, and then those folks don't have to
<br /> 231 go through the time-consuming and somewhat can be expensive rezoning process.
<br /> 232
<br /> 233 Chris Johnston: Yeah, quick question. Are all the lots developed around Lake Orange, or would this potentially
<br /> 234 open up newer ones?
<br /> 235
<br /> 236 Christopher Sandt: From memory, and I've got it almost memorized,there's about 130 plotted lots, and I think 95 or
<br /> 237 so have homes on them. So, it's tough when folks come in. They want to build, and we say
<br /> 238 you're subject to a 150-foot reservoir setback. Well,what about these other 90 houses that are
<br /> 239 here. So, it's a grandfather-type subdivision we look at. This lessened reservoir buffer would
<br /> 240 apply to new development because we're allowing existing lots to do it.
<br /> 241
<br /> 242 Cy Stober: Chris, how many of those existing homes would,you've done the evaluation, how many of those
<br /> 243 existing homes are in the 150-foot reservoir buffer already?
<br /> 244
<br /> 245 Christopher Sandt: Oh yeah, so I'd mentioned about almost 70.Almost 70 homes are already within that.
<br /> 246
<br /> 247 Chris Johnston: I just didn't know if by doing this,we're opening it up. You know, the 150, is that what we want?
<br /> 248 And then does this open up those additional lots to then developing in that 75-foot zone where
<br /> 249 maybe we don't want them? It sounds like we're already above and beyond, even with the 75,
<br /> 250 though, so is it a consideration, concern, anything along those lines?
<br /> 251
<br /> 252 Cy Stober: I don't want to speak for Chris, but yes,we've reviewed this thoroughly. There are nearly 80
<br /> 253 homes, so 70 and some change,that were built prior to Chris or myself being here. They were
<br /> 254 constructed within this 150-foot buffer. We don't have an explanation for that, but they're there.
<br /> 255 And this is a water supply reservoir, but it's an unusual water supply reservoir in that there's no
<br /> 256 intake directly on the reservoir. It's not like University Lake. The intake is downstream, but we
<br /> 257 protect the water quality on the reservoir for that downstream water quality. We have not noted,
<br /> 258 nor has Hillsborough noted any decline in water quality over the years. And the variances that
<br /> 259 have been presented to the Board of Adjustment have not found opposition nor any findings by
<br /> 260 the BOA have determined that there are any safety or welfare risks to the public from allowing
<br /> 261 encroachment into the 150-foot buffer. Chris, in his professional opinion as county engineer, and
<br /> 262 Victoria Hudson,as the director of environmental health, have agreed that a 75-foot buffer is more
<br /> 263 protective than the state and, in their professional opinion, is a buffer that is comfortable for
<br /> 264 protecting the public and environmental health of Lake Orange and the downstream communities.
<br /> 265
<br /> 266 Chris Johnston: Thank you.
<br /> 267
<br /> 268 Lamar Proctor: Thank you, Cy.
<br /> 269
<br /> 270 Cy Stober: But it would,to your point, Mr.Johnston, open the door,yes,to more by-right development without
<br /> 271 having to apply for a variance. But the variances have all,the four that have been applied for
<br /> 272 have universally been determined to be allowed. This buffer being a hardship to development that
<br /> 273 is unreasonable and imposed by the county.
<br />
|