Browse
Search
ORD-2006-100 - Upper Eno Critical Area Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2000-2009
>
2006
>
ORD-2006-100 - Upper Eno Critical Area Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2013 11:26:51 AM
Creation date
9/22/2010 4:28:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/20/2006
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
C3
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
DRAFT <br />15 <br />138 Jeff Schmitt: If I were doing this, I would suggest %2 mile or the ridgeline if farther than %2 mile <br />139 from where it drains into it. I would make it more onerous than the way it's been interpreted <br />140 here. What has to happen if either the map or language is changed? <br />141 <br />142 Craig Benedict: If you change the zoning text and leave the map the same, you would have to <br />143 have a Public Hearing to change the text. You would not have to notify the residents besides a <br />144 newspaper advertisement. If you do a map change, then you have to notify individuals, which <br />145 would be extensive since there are 34 miles of boundary just around this one watershed. This <br />146 problem exists in other watersheds too. <br />147 <br />148 Michelle Kempinski: Shouldn't the map be a reflection of the text? <br />149 <br />150 Craig Benedict: That was my determination. I went by the text. For the next meeting, I can <br />151 make a report on the implications and choices for changing the text, or if the map should be <br />152 changed. Changing watershed lines was a challenge in 1994, and we're uncertain if they (the <br />153 BOCC) are willing to address that again. <br />154 <br />155 Judith Wegner: How do the other counties do their interpretation? Do they use historical maps <br />156 that may be inaccurate or the new maps that are available? <br />157 <br />158 Robert Davis: Many used the centerline roads near ridgelines and the State definitions, rather <br />159 than ridgelines so they do not have this issue.. <br />160 <br />161 Craufurd Goodwin: Regarding the owners in the Seven -Mile Creek area; if it's rejected, why are <br />162 we being buffered? <br />163 <br />164 Craig Benedict: This came up in the Efland -Mebane Small Area Plan Task Force. <br />165 <br />166 Craufurd Goodwin: The land valuations will change with any map changes. <br />167 <br />168 Brian Dobyns: Where the boundaries are must be accurate. Will we be asked to clarify the <br />169 definition? <br />170 <br />171 Craig Benedict: It could be wrapped into a work product by this Board. <br />172 <br />173 <br />174 <br />175 <br />176 <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.