Agenda - 06-01-2010 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

47 486 and could be easily serviceabie by public water and sewer because these flow back to McGowan Creek because once you get to 487 this area, it starts flowing toward the Eno so the Efland Mebane plan supported having a cutoff somewhere here and plus this 488 section of Efland,this is a mixed use area and it recommended to go down to I-85. 489 490 Earl McKee: It seems odd to leave that little area because you are pulling it back to West Ten all the way to the access road on 491 70. 492 493 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Earl,I know this area and it is not really a good road. There is that Ben Johnson Road. 494 495 Earl McKee: It seemed odd that it would come down and then cut off. One side of that access road would be as accessible as 496 the other side. 497 498 Pete Hallenbeck: I was part of the Efland Small Area Plan and can explain the thinking was with regards to the big area between 499 the connector and Mount Willing. From here to here,the topology is rolling,if you have gone off the interstate on Exit 60 the land 500 just rises up,there is even a water tank up there then everything drains from this way to this way. Even though it was in a crow's 501 fiy distance, if you start looking at water flow, it wasn't anywhere near. The thinking was why we are taking this 80 acre parcel 502 out of play when water here goes through a substantially longer path than the other protected. This area is the low area that 503 feeds down in the streams between Ben Johnson and I-85 and it was close enough to the flow that it was not clear that it was a 504 good area to develop and also it would be a lot of work to bring water and sewer pump station. Those were the two factors. 505 506 May Becker: In terms of the ground water,very little is known as far as how contaminants move through there so even if studies 507 are done,it may not be until afterwards that one would know what the actual effects of the reservoir are and another point would 508 be that water is a very limited resource and it is a natural resource and so knowing we only have a very limited number of 509 watersheds and potential reservoirs, putting some type of development around that area and weakening the protection doesn't 510 seem to make sense. 511 512 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: It is not weakening anything south of I-85 because that is not how the water flows. In this particular area,it 513 is flowing up so it won't flow down and get into Seven Mile Creek. Also, what you have are citizens that put together the 514 Economic Development Plan for that area and we should be willing to citizens, especially those who live in that area and be 515 flexible about that and take their things into consideration. Finally,Seven Mile Creek flowing on the other side of the I-85 access, 516 the one big area Earl was concerned about,it doesn't lend itself to development so leaving it accomplishes nothing but taking it 517 away won't either. 518 519 Larry Wright: Are we ready to vote. Please tell us exactly what we are voting on. 520 521 Craig Benedict: The vote could be this is the exclusion,excluding this from this critical area on this map.... 522 523 Larry Wright: The vote is....not the vote could be. 524 525 Craig Benedict: This area,Seven Mile Creek,2�/�miles from intake and the Eno River between these two Class I reservoirs,�/z 526 mile buffer on either side,protect that as critical area,excluding this area north of West Ten Road and west of the I-85 connector. 527 528 Larry Wright: All in favor? 529 Vote: One opposed(May Becker) 530 531 Larry Wright: May,do you express a dissenting opinion? 532 533 May Becker: I would like to protect the watershed including,not excluding,the area north of West Ten Road and west of the I-85 534 connector in order not to weaken the watershed protection and in order to protect the area from potential runoff;we shouldn't 535 make an exception for the area north of West Ten Road. Dissenting opinion: I would like to protect the critical area,Seven Mile 536 Creek,2 Yz miles from intake and the Eno River between these two Class I reservoirs,��Z mile buffer on either side, protect that 537 as critical area,including,not excluding,this area north of West Ten Road and west of the I-85 connector. In terms of the ground 538 water,very little is known as far as how contaminants move through these types of systems-- I find it imperative that the water 539 bodies be protected from potential road runoff,etc.,i.e.that the critical line in this area not be weakened,especially considering 540 the potential growth impacting the area and its very limited hydrologic resources. 541 542 Earl McKee: Why was 2'�miles chosen instead of 1 �/z miles or 5 miles. 543 544 Craig Benedict: It matched what was there in 1994. In 2 Yz miles, if a reservoir were put there,it means that would cover that 545 flooded area which is shown in the package. It stili gives you a level of protection, not like you were given with the entire 546 reservoir but at least a partial.