Minutes - 19890905 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

-,~ ~.~ -µ ~~ ~, .~ recommendation that was needed to protect University Lake Watershed was one (1) unit per five (5) acres. It turns out that University Lake is a more fragile body than people thought it was. Even one (1) unit per five (S) acres; does not protect the - water. It results in significant degradation, at least 10$ over a period o£ time, if ~_. its developed according to the plan. This is a health issue, as well as an economic issue. He mentioned that if the hearing had been held in Chapel Hill or Carrboro many people would have attended who are in support of this proposal. The present use value'. taxation justifiably taxes the urban people by allowing legitimate farmers to get taxed at a lower rate. That is not the strongest kind of farm land preservation, nor is it a very good water protection measure but it is the best that has been gotten out of the General Assembly so far. There is a need to work for better measures. People who use well water will not benefit from the degradation of the water supply. Ground water is equally vulnerable from contamination and there will come a time in this county where people will be glad that there are some clean surface water supplies. Tf the ground water supply is contaminated it cannot be cleaned up. Protect Our Water supports these measures far at least the University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds. The people in the Northern end of the county have legitimate concerns. All water supplies need to be protected. However, it needs to be part of a democratic process. He urged adoption of the measures. MARY BUSHNELL; a Carrboro resident, stated that the present population of the county is about 103,000 people. There are projections that by the year 2000 the population could be 153,000. Even if its only 135,000 ar 140,000 people its still a major increase. .She stated that she believes there is a need to look at the development policies and regulations that are presently in place in the County. The interim measures would be a cautious way to proceed for a short periad of time while these questions are decided. She mentioned a need for an overall county plan which would include guidelines.on haw to share the cast of clean water. NANGY JOHNSON spoke in apposition to this proposal. She requested that the restrictions on the farmers be decreased. NANCY MUELLER, of the League of Women Voters of Chapel Hill and. Carrboro, read the following statement. "Thank you for the opportunity of speaking at this Public Hearing. The League of Women Voters nationally has been a strong advocate of conservation of natural resources for more than three decades. Our position has been that the best, most effective, and economical means of maintaining drinking water quality is by protection of the sources of supply. Locally, the League has made statements on several occasions regarding the protection of University Lake watershed, including at the Public Hearing December 16, 1987 of the Environmental Management Commission, regarding granting WSl status to University Lake as a source of drinking water. Recently,~at the February 2nd Public Hearing which was called by the Division of Environmental Planagement, the League urged the Orange Gounty Board of Commissioners to be very conservative in approving development in the watershed until all relevant governing bodies have had time to come to agreement as to the best strategy for total watershed protection. We urge the adontian of interim standards in compliance with the recommendations of the CDM study which would restrict residential development to a minimum of 5 acre lots in University Lake watershed and two acre lots in Cane Creek watershed as well as a ban on community alternative sewage systems in the watersheds". tiTILLIArI HOUSE, of Damascus Church Road, spoke in opposition of this proposal. He asked the Commissioners how he would be able to divide his 7 1/2 acres for his 2 children.