Minutes - 19981123 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

benefits to the people who live there now. The benefits are all going to the consumers of the water supply. Ms. Peggy Ritch, of 4211 Dairyland Road, spoke in opposition to this proposal. She stated that if it was passed, the average person who grew up in Orange County would not be able to afford to live here. This is not fair. Mr. Barry Jacobs stated that the open space option that does allow two-acre lots seems to be forgotten in this discussion. He was told that although the Planning Staff has not found other jurisdictions who have used open space development for watershed protection, he suggested that they should look at Howard County, Maryland and places in California. He asked that this be included in future considerations. He also pointed out that the problems with off-site septic or the County's current flexible development ordinance, can be addressed. Those problems are not necessarily fatal flaws. Ms. Lucy Baldwin stated that her mother's estate is near the watershed. She opposes the five-acre option because it would not be possible to divide for the children. Mr. Lonnie Kirk stated that the majority of these land owners are farmers or have been farmers in the past. This land is the retirement for these people. OWASA is negatively affecting their retirement. He stated that this proposal would take money out of the home owners pockets. These landowners are concerned about the quality of the water but they do not want to give up their retirement income for the OWASA customers. He was opposed to the five-acre minimum lot size. Mr. Patrick Mulkey, a resident of the Cane Creek community, spoke in opposition to this request to rezone this area to a five-acre minimum lot size. He stated that Orange Water & Sewer Authority requested a five-acre minimum lot size for Cane Creek. The Board of County Commissioners agreed to a two-acre lot minimum for the entire 18,000 acre watershed. In the meantime, Orange Water & Sewer Authority commissioned another $100,000 study which has come up with the original recommendation of five-acre lots. He felt that this finding was a foregone conclusion because it was what Orange Water & Sewer Authority wanted in the first place. He referred to a friend of his, Jim Smith, who retired from a career in the water resources field and recently passed away, who reviewed this study. Mr. Smith stated that each Orange Water & Sewer Authority customer could pay $0.10 more each month and get the same amount of protection without changing the minimum lot size. He felt that Orange Water & Sewer Authority has pushed their way into this community and have disrupted the way of life. The farmers are having to get permits to shoot deer on their land because of the explosion in the deer population. In spite of this problem, Orange Water & Sewer Authority does not allow any hunting on their land. They already own 3000-plus acres in Bingham Township and now want another 1,200 acres. They pay no taxes. Although Orange Water & Sewer Authority did offer land to the schools for a park, he felt that they knew it was a sure bet that the offer would not be accepted. There is a great need for a park in Bingham Township; Orange Water & Sewer Authority has land that could be used for a park. He distributed a copy of a memo he sent to Orange Water & Sewer Authority addressing this need. A copy of this memo is in the permanent agenda file in the Q:\19981123.doc®