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

Browse Search

49 608 609 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: You are actually reducing the area for that,the blue line,the pull back. 610 611 Earl McKee: I think that with the two nodes in the upper part,you are able to confine the potential lake within the`94 boundaries 612 without that extension of that area. I don't see any point in having that extension out there and you are abie to confine the lake 613 within the old half mile boundary. On the lower nodes, I don't really have a problem with putting it there, I realize it pulis it back 614 but I don't believe that lake will ever be under any circumstances. 615 616 Craig Benedict: So Earl is saying that he doesn't feel the need.... 617 618 Earl McKee: My question is where do you stop? If we could set back,it will change it to 3/a of a mile but if it is confined within the 619 'h mile boundary we have set, if this lake is ever built and it is confined within the�/z mile boundary and we have set a straight 620 line we should stick with. Otherwise,you are going to follow every creek and every stream. 621 622 Mark Marcopios: The whole discussion has been based on the idea that we are not thinking about the future reservoirs,we are 623 thinking about the water systems we are using now and the proximiry of that stream and that small micro water shed to 624 Corporation Lake and the stream flowing down from the two upper reservoirs is what we are really talking about now. That 625 whole idea of will these ever be reservoirs is a whole other long discussion. We are really talking about how does it affect the 626 system we are using now and you can make a good argument that is significant watershed that is impacting the existing water 627 flow and down from the upper reservoirs and so close to Corporation Lake that would be better to err on the side of caution. 628 629 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: I don't see how we can talk about quality of water without thinking it about it regionally. . I would like for 630 you to speak to the regionality of water because we can't really make a statement of the pretty little area and not think about it in 631 terms of the whole region. I would like for the natural area discussion be pointed out before we zip through all this because 1 632 think the Seven Mile Creek piece is the natural area that is being umbrelied in but I don't know for sure. I would like a little more 633 disclosure. 634 635 Craig Benedict: The regional water discussion wiii be ne� month and I will show how it evolved under connectivity. We 636 definitely, over the last five years have been focusing on that and the comment about the environmental issues, we will put 637 together a littie package for next month to discuss where the natural sites,where the mountain to sea trail and find out do we get 638 a dual purpose with a water quality consideration here that handles environmental issues, you can decide on that. The 639 discussion tonight comes back to this one that we are just talking about four bubbles, if you want to include these two bubbles 640 down here. These bubbles stay within the 1994 description and these wander beyond the 1994. You can see how these pop 641 out more. 642 643 May Becker: My thought is that we should say that if we have standards we have followed since 1994 and we want to keep the 644 same quality,at a minimum,maybe cleaner,it would seem we would want to keep the levei of protection. 645 646 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: We don't even have a baseline for the quality of water we have now so there is no way we could know if 647 we kept it where it is today or got better. 648 649 May Becker: It is clear that if we strengthen the protection we would presumably.... 650 651 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: That is an assumption. 652 653 Larry Wright: I would like to close the discussion and vote on these separately with discussion between the two. I feel there is a 654 difference of opinion on the two that some members may vote differently than the other. Number one is one to the north and 655 number two on the one to the south. Craig, I would like to have you summarize what we are voting on with each one and it will 656 be an up and down. 657 658 Craig Benedict: The northern streams, stream ID 1498 putting a half mile buffer on both sides and the end and on Dry Run 659 Creek putting a half mile buffer on Dry Run Creek and there is one mile from where the enter into the Eno River or the Class I 660 reservoir. 661 662 Larry Wright: All in favor of the top one as it is shown on the map. 663 Vote: Passed(No—Pete Hallenbeck,Mary Bobbitt-Cooke, Earl McKee) 664 665 Larry Wright: Dissenting opinion. 666 667 Earl McKee: Does not conform to the parameters we set around the other two existing lakes,Orange Lake and West Fork. This 668 bubble out does not conform to the parameters of the iwo existing lakes.