Agenda - 11-23-1998 - C3 (a) - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

15t~ In response to citizen concern about the current level of build-out in the watershed, Ed Holland of OWASA indicated that watershed buildout is between 5-10%. Stancil added that 78% of the watershed is agricultural or forest. Following the question and answer period, citizens formed three small groups to further discuss the management proposals. All three groups were facilitated by staff from the Planning Department. Following discussion, planning staff highlighted the comments expressed during the small group session. The concerns of watershed residents are combined by topic and summarized below. Concerns about OWASA's treatment of watershed landowners and the distribution of the cost and benefits of watershed protection. • OWASA continues to come back and ask for more from watershed residents but does not give anything positive to watershed residents. (Group 1) • OWASA is interested in meeting their needs and not those of watershed residents. For instance when they purchase land it is taken off the tax rolls, thereby removing any fiscal benefits for watershed/county residents. (Group 1) • The benefits of water quality protection are accrued to OWASA customers, while watershed residents are bearing the costs, therefore why should we be concerned with protecting reservoir water quality. (Groups 1,2) • Regulation of the watershed robs people of the opportunity to develop their properties as they wish, this is in contrast to Chapel Hill/Carrboro where people can develop as they wish. (Group 1) • Development regulations will restrict who can live in the watershed. (Group 1) Concerns about the performance of watershed management options • Ponds will help reduce runoff, but will OWASA be constructing them? (Group 1) • How stagnant and smelly will the water in the ponds be? (Group 1) • If we develop using cluster in the watershed new developments will not be served by sewer, this could have an adverse effect on groundwater. (Group 1) • What is the difference in property value/acre under the conventional approach vs. the cluster approach. Is the yield higher in one? (Group 3) Community Preferences and Suggestions • OWASA's recommendations are more preferable given that they have the least impact on existing dwellings. (Group 1) • If OWASA chooses to acquire land then residents should receive some type of benefit, such as long-term family ownership. (Group 1) • Mandatory flexible development maybe a more acceptable watershed protection option, given that the watershed is not near 25 % build-out, and since mandatory flexible permits continuation of current development patterns. This will allow a higher lot yield in the critical area than in the protected area. (Group 1)