Minutes - 19890227 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

original plan. ~~_._~ ~; Jesse Summers, a landowner on the Eno River, spoke in opposition to the Buffer. His well and garage are in the 100 foot buffer zone and he indicated a strong stand against it being in a buffet zone. Gordon Brown addressed the concept of the PID on behalf of his mother. The idea of the PID is being expanded to include the reservoir areas. His family owns l60 acres of land in Orange Gaunty at Seven Mile Creek. It abuts to the south some of the land Orange County acquired. The proposal is to make this a PID-I because it is associated with a Reservoir and he opposes this action. The Agricultural Zoning, Watershed Protection, and Water Quality Critical regulations all apply to this area. A PID is totally unnecessary. Another problem is that the language is confusing. It indicates it will be applied on a voluntary basis only. He asked if this means it is voluntary for the people within the PID area itself or does it mean Orange County is the only party to whom the decision to designate this land a PID district is voluntary. Since there is an overlap of a 100 foot buffer, would this mean all the parties affected by it would also have to consent. That is not addressed in the Ordinance. If all the parties have to consent, the Brown family will not. He asked if "land associated with a public reservoir" means a reservoir on the drawing board or one that is built? He asked if it applies since a reservoir site has not been selected. Also will it mean a reservoir built by the County or a venture between Hillsborough and the Orange-Alamance Water people. The PID zoning setback is only 50 feet, yet a l00 foot buffer is imposed on adjoining land owners which is not equal. He suggested cutting back on the extent of the buffer. Another reason he is against -'~~ this proposal is that the voluntary nature of opting into a zoning classification is foreign to him. This may be zoning by consent. He feels it may be spot zoning and therefore illegal. He emphasized that the PID-I designation is ,just not needed for land that is within a water quality critical area. This 100 foot buffer appears to be a taking. If the shore line of the Seven Mile Creek azea is 10 miles you might have a prospective taking of a strip of land that is 10 miles in length and 50 feet wide. That is 60 extra acres that the County may have to purchase. The Water Quality Critical Area already addresses so many of the problems the buffer is also addressing. It is unnecessary. Joe Wittman, member of Save Duke Forest and an Orange County resident, commented that as the proposal applies to Duke Forest there seems to be a wide disparity between PID-I and PID-II. These lands need to be protected for more than five years. He proposed that Class II lands be designated for 20 to 25 years. He opposed residential and/or commercial use of PID-II or PID-I lands. He reminded the Commissioners that Duke could change their plan at any time and that lands publicly designated are more difficult to change. He asked that the Board adopt a Land Use Policy consistent with Dukes' own proposal and vision foz the use of land in Orange County. Myrtle Boyce, an Orange County landowner, stated that on three and one-third sides her land is surrounded by Duke Forest. She spoke in opposition to the 100 foot buffer proposal. Marvin Couch, an Orange County resident spoke in opposition to the buffer zone. He spoke for his brother John Couch, and sisters Irene Godwin and Lucille King. He asked how this Iand is going to be taxed if the buffer goes into effect and if taxes will go down on Iand that had the buffer requirement. The land he is concerned about