HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93011_1377M
t0
O
Further Consideration of the Draft Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance (Action
needed to Approve the Ordinance: (1) Adoption of the Ordinance & (2) Approval to Submit a
Letter of Petition to the NC Sedimentation Control Commission to Delegate Authority to Iredell
County to Implement the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act and to Implement the Ordinance
with State Requirements): Erosion Control Administrator Selquist again reviewed the draft ordinance
and specifically addressed the following items:
Performance Bond: A performance bond was reviewed, but it was determined this
would not be a reasonable alternative. (It would require an estimate of potential
damage as a result of a particular project and this could be problematic. Secondly,
based on the estimate, a qualified person (engineering background) would need to
be found willing to place his name/seal on the determined cost (estimate).
Measures are in the ordinance for the issuance of stop orders.
2. Removal of control measures prior to a ground cover being, established:
(Specifically a project being built and then sold.) Additional language was
inserted (Section 202. D) under ground cover to remedy this problem.
3. Appeals Process: A measure was inserted into the ordinance that would
require the Board of Adjustment to hear appeals.
Commissioner Johnson referred to Article 11 C (1) "Exclusions from Regulated Land -
Disturbing Activity" that reads as follows:
"An activity, including breeding and grazing of livestock, undertaken on agricultural
land for the production of plans and animals useful to man, including, but limited to ............... ..
Mr. Johnson requested an amendment to the sentence as follows: "An activity, including
breeding and grazing of livestock, undertaken on agricultural land for the production of plants
and animals useful to man for personal consumption or to be sold commercially, including, but
limited to ................ " He said this would remedy the problem for people wanting to have a
garden.
In addition, Commissioner Johnson said that if citizens were caught between the board
and the state officials, then telephone calls would be made to Mr. Selquist, and he would be
charged with resolving the problem with the state and not the property owner.
Selquist said the intent of the ordinance would be to make sure everything ran smoothly.
Commissioner Williams asked what liability would occur if a builder or person built
something while abiding by the staffs recommendations, especially if a 50 -year rain occurred.
He asked if the county would be liable.
Attorney Pope said there was hesitancy to say no, but to some extent the answer was fact
driven. He said anytime the board chose "activity" an increased risk or litigation exposure
occurred. Pope said, however, he didn't see it as a significant risk. He said the county was
insured, but the insurance coverage shouldn't be used unnecessarily. Pope said the risk wasn't
significant enough to deter him from action.
Commissioner Williams mentioned the Harmony School water runoff. He said the
school officials didn't feel they were liable but yet nearby residents were experiencing runoff.
Williams said the school plan didn't work even though it was what the state had presented. He
said the state wasn't accepting liability and neither was the school system.
Pope said the county wouldn't be preparing the plans -- the county would be reviewing
them for compliancy.
Selquist said this was correct, as far as compliance and sufficiency.
Williams asked if the county was accepting responsibility by approving the plans.
17