Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-01-2010 - 6a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2010
>
Agenda - 06-01-2010 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 06-01-2010 - 6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/3/2015 10:19:00 AM
Creation date
5/28/2010 12:52:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/1/2010
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 06-01-2010
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2010
ORD-2010-048 Upper Eno Watershed Critical Area - Zoning Ordinance
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2010
RES-2010-047a Resolution Amending the 2030 Comprehensive Plan amending boundaries of the watershed critical area overlay districts
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
127
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
40 <br /> 61 sliding scale,if someone has small lots that are freestanding all by themselves,there is a sliding scale that allows them to remain <br /> 62 at the 12%level. <br /> 63 <br /> 64 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Some of those lots may require the house,just because of the way it perks, to be at the back of the lot <br /> 65 which means that a lot of their impervious land will be taken out by the road and driveway and that means the house is getting <br /> 66 smaller. <br /> 67 <br /> 68 Craig Benedict: We have been able to analyze the lots and have done typical plans but take a look at a typical one acre lot and <br /> 69 how much can be done with the driveway or a two acre lot. We are conscious that the driveway can eat up a lot of space on this <br /> 70 and we will be working to have a better scale but here you could have a miniature barn on here plus a house, plus a driveway. <br /> 71 Michael,if you could work with Gienn and Jennifer to get more a scale for this. The numbers are right but the scale is skewed. <br /> 72 <br /> 73 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: I am concerned about those properties where there has to be a long driveway to get to the house and what <br /> 74 are the negatives to allow somebody a higher level of imperviousness. <br /> 75 <br /> 76 Craig Benedict: We have a 1994 line for the watersheds. The 1994 line was something the Board of Counry Commissioners <br /> 77 designated. All they had to do in 1994 by state rules was to put a one half mile buffer around Lake Ben Johnson and half mile <br /> 78 buffer around Corporation Lake. The rest of this dark blue outline was a decision of the Board of County Commissioners. They <br /> 79 decided in 1994 to preserve the buffer,these reservoirs that weren't here yet, West Fork on the Eno, also, Lake Orange, and <br /> 80 another ghost reservoir known as the Upper Eno above McGowan Creek. They also put a buffer around a future reservoir <br /> 81 known as Seven Mile Creek. They didn't,in 1994,have good definitions to explain how this line was created. There were holes <br /> 82 in the definition. <br /> 83 <br /> 84 Larry Wright: What wouldn't have run up? <br /> 85 <br /> 86 Craig Benedict: The ghost reservoir known as the Upper Eno above McGowan Creek. <br /> 87 <br /> 88 Perdita Holtz: Larry,if you look on page 49 of your packet,those resenroirs are shown. <br /> 89 <br /> 90 Craig Benedict: On page 49,the old blue lines were bubbling around where these points of the reservoir came out but if you try <br /> 91 to protect that there would be missing spots there. In October when we had a meeting with the Board of County Commissioners <br /> 92 and this board we spoke about some of the controversy that was coming. It was a decision of the Planning Board to get the <br /> 93 Comprehensive Plan out of the way and move forward with the development of the UDO and make the definitions better in the <br /> 94 UDO. Then I went to the Board of County Commissioners in November 2007, I explained the issue with the watershed lines. <br /> 95 They said we know it is an important issue,do it by sectors based on some small area plan interest and then bring it forward. In <br /> 96 October, we explained this is what is required and this is what we have done extra. The direction we got from the Board of <br /> 97 County Commissioners in October was to make the definitions be about as close as you can get to what the 1994 line was, <br /> 98 which is what our proposal does. It is almost exactly the same as the 1994 line with about an 8%difference. (Explained <br /> 99 sections on map). If you look at the new definitions,we have almost redefined the 1994 lines with a 92%match. <br /> 100 <br /> 101 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Everything in the dark blue line is critical or is it critical and protected? <br /> 102 <br /> 103 Craig Benedict: Critical has a higher level of protection than protected. <br /> 104 <br /> 105 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Beyond the blue line there is also a protected line out there? <br /> 106 <br /> 107 Craig Benedict: Yes. <br /> 108 <br /> 109 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: How far does that go? <br /> 110 <br /> 111 Craig Benedict: This map shows everything outside the critical,this is all protected. Only the white areas are unprotected. <br /> 112 <br /> 113 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Is there a page or section that describes the difference between protected and critical? <br /> 114 <br /> 115 Craig Benedict: The definitions we have for protected are in our zoning code and we are not changing those because we are <br /> 116 saying protected areas as designated by the state watershed,levels 2,3 and 4. We can dig up that reference for you. We can't <br /> 117 really change what the protected classification is. <br /> 118 <br /> 119 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Essentially,the difference in density? <br /> 120 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.