Browse
Search
Minutes - 19890522
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1980's
>
1989
>
Minutes - 19890522
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2013 11:52:06 AM
Creation date
8/13/2008 1:00:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/22/1989
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
<br />located in the permanent agenda files in the Clerk's office. The report which was <br />addressed by Mr. Thames has been received by the Planning Staff and they are in the =--~ <br />process of trying to deal with the aspects raised in that report. <br />} <br />CHRIS BEST, Planning Board member asked for clarification on 8.2.4c on page 125. <br />PLANNER MARY SCEARBO stated that the application did not contain information <br />regarding the existing traffic volumes and conditions around the site. <br />BEST questioned whether or not the revised plans requested by NCDOT have been <br />received. <br />SCEARBO stated that there were requirements for site triangle easements at the <br />intersection of Bowden Raad and also site easements within the development. She also <br />indicated that the revised plans have not been received. That is one of the things that <br />needs to be completed. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS. <br />KANI HUROW, President of the League of Women Voters of Chapel Hill/Carrboro, stated <br />that the League has a long history of concern for the conservation of natural resources, <br />especially protection of sources .of drinking water. The League has made many public <br />statements in support of watershed protection. The citizens of Chapel Hill/Carrboro and <br />Orange County are fortunate that Orange County has two watersheds with the <br />classification of WS I. These are wonderful natural resources that must be managed and <br />protected. The University Lake Watershed Study recommends action that must be taken if <br />our drinking water quality is to be protected. The Study rates "community" systems as "~, <br />more risky than septic tanks or sewer extensions and recommends against experimenting ,; <br />with such technology in an environmentally sensitive drinking-water watershed. The ._ <br />League is particularly concerned that approval of the proposed "community Iow-pressure- <br />pipe" wastewater system, with its risk of failure would set a precedence for use of this <br />type of system in a watershed. The League of Women Voters of Chapel Hill/Carrboro urges <br />the Board of Commissioners to chose safe, proven technology and long-term reliability <br />and effectiveness in any decision relating to drinking-waters watershed. She requested, <br />on behalf of the League, that this request for a special use permit for McLennan's Farm <br />be denied because of the risks it would pose to the drinking water for the more than <br />55,000 consumers in Orange County of water from University Lake. <br />MR. DAN JEWELL, a landscape architect from Chapel Hill, spoke on behalf of Leon <br />Todd, the developer of this project. Mr. Jewel indicated that he is the designer of <br />most of this project with the exception of the wastewater system. He stated that the <br />only issue with this project is the "community nitrification field". If it were not for <br />this issue the project would have been approved over a year ago. The nature of this <br />site forced them to go with the system in question. The suitable soils are all lumped <br />into two large areas on the site. The State generally frowns upon multiple field <br />locations in a project so they chose to concentrate on the larger field and use that for <br />the septic disposal system. The design is a dual-alternating system where there are two <br />fields which are alternately dosed and allowed to rest, plus an additional area with at <br />least that. much again, which is called a repair area. The repair area is used as a <br />reserve in the event that the system does develop problems. He stated that 18 months <br />ago they presented what they felt were good arguments and information which under normal <br />circumstances would have been sufficient to show the Board that the system is a viable <br />one. In spite of this, OWASA and the public have indicated that they believe that thF <br />systems have high failure rates, and have too many unknowns. These unknowns are the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.