Minutes - 19980824 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

an error or omission in the Plan, and in response to a change in policies or principles governing the plan. The applicant's letter does not specifically address these reasons for amending the plan, and instead notes the plans of Duke University to sell this property because it does not have significance to the forestry program at Duke. This is consistent with a 1988 Duke University Study that classified the University's land holdings into four categories. This parcel was identified as Class IV - Residual Endowment Land, which was "'no longer to be considered part of Duke Forest" and should be used to generate financial return for the University." Staff has evaluated this proposal against the locational criteria for both current and proposed categories in the Plan (shown of pages 15-16 of the agenda). The property complies generally with the criteria for both categories. Of particular note is the finding that this and adjacent properties were identified in the Triangle Land Conservancy's 1988 Inventory of Natural Area and Wildlife Habitats as part of a suggested wildlife corridor connecting the Eno River and other important natural areas. If this amendment is approved, a request for rezoning to Agricultural Residential could be submitted. With the Upper Eno Watershed Critical Area overlay remaining in place, AR zoning could allow residential lots of two acres in size, along with ancillary uses such as greenhouses, some kennels and telecommunication towers (with a special use permit). Orange-Alamance Water Systems request that the County be aware of their interest in ensuring high quality water from Corporation lake, and of plans to raise the lake dam four feet in the future, which might make this property adjacent to the lake itself. The County Planning staff recommendation is that this amendment be tabled. First of all, based on the locational criteria and reasons for amending the plan, there appears to be no compelling reason for the amendment at this time - and a change in ownership is not a reason for amending the plan. The property generally meets criteria for both Public Interest Area and Agricultural Residential, and no changing conditions, errors in the plan or changes in land use policies are cited by the applicant, nor is staff aware of any. Also, second, there is insufficient information from the applicant or existing documentation to determine whether there are sites of natural, cultural or archaeological significance, or whether there are viable forest research opportunities on the property. The 1988 Inventory of Natural Area and Wildlife Habitats does not show a site on this property, but there is one on the adjacent Duke University lands. The 1988 Inventory is incomplete, and it is possible this site may have been overlooked. Finally, while the Inventory of Natural Areas did not mention a site on the property, it does show the proposed wildlife corridor containing this site as an important conduit to the Eno River to protect flora and fauna. Staff recommends that further research be undertaken to assess whether any sites of natural, cultural or archaeological significance exist here. Since forest research is only one of the permitted uses in Public Interest Areas, they also recommend that research be gathered in the following areas: ¦ Possible implications for the Eno River and Corporation Lake ¦ The strategic significance of the wildlife corridor on this property ¦ An assessment of any historic or archaeological sites ¦ An assessment of flora and fauna on the property Finally, staff recommends tabling the proposed amendment because of insufficient information currently available to evaluate the status of natural and cultural resources present on the site. Further research into this question is recommended. QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: None. QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD: None. QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS