Minutes - 19981123 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Clerk's office. He asked the Board of County Commissioners if they were going to become a party to this injustice or stop this injustice now. Mr. Edward Mann, of 8525 Stanford Road, stated that his wife is a Stanford, and they own some property which will be affected by the proposed change in the zoning ordinance. He served for 8 years on the Orange Water & Sewer Authority Board of Directors. He does understand the need for water protection - water quality protection. He served on the Orange Water & Sewer Authority Board when they acquired the property and began construction of the Cane Creek Reservoir and is very familiar with some of the issues involved in that acquisition. He has lived on Stanford Road since 1970. He goes to church in the community and has become friends and neighbors with a number of farmers who have a lot more at stake in the proposed rezoning than he does. As he said, he owns some property that would be affected but he and his wife are not developers and have no plans to do any developing. Their concern is creating the proper and needed and justified controls on water protection. The five-acre standard has become a standard without justification. He and his wife attended some of the meetings with the Orange Water & Sewer Authority Board when this notion was first introduced and a number of possible solutions were suggested. He asked some questions at that time, that he still has not gotten satisfactory answers to; are there trends in the development in the water shed that have lead us to believe that we need to put some controls in at this time? Information that was presented at some of those meetings was that there has been some accelerated development in the Cane Creek Watershed. Average landmass per dwelling is about 5-acres. That's without putting in any additional components. He felt that our present zoning is obtaining the desired result, so why change it? Another question is, is there documented deterioration in water quality that would lead us to believe that we need to make some changes. He stated that Mr. Spalt mentioned that maybe the water quality was not as good as was anticipated but he did not say that it was a degradation that was caused by the development that is taking place. He merely mentioned that there are chemicals in the water, maybe, that were not known to be there prior to the study. If that is coming from farm runoff then this acreage change is not going to have an effect on that. You heard earlier tonight some talk about impervious surfaces and runoff. Dr. Shy talked about discharges. He felt that those are the sort of things that we should be concerned with. He did not fee that five-acres is a magic figure. It may be that two-acres is perfectly satisfactory. He asked for some sort of scientific justification for five-acres. Its been mentioned that that is what has been used over at University Lake. University Lake's development pressures are highly different than the development pressures around Cane Creek. University Lake is near town, adjacent to Chapel Hill and Carrboro with a lot of development pressures. We are a different community. We do not have the water and sewer facilities that are available in town. So, to try to justify five- acres for Cane Creek because they have it at University Lake - its not apples and apples. Its been mentioned before, but who should properly pay for clearing up the water? Should it be the people who use it or should it be the people who, by accident, live in the vicinity of the water supply. That's an equity issue that he wanted the Board of County Commissioners to think about too. Mr. Wes Cook indicated that he did not live in the Cane Creek Reservoir, but that he did oppose this request. He is a resident of Little River Township which is presently zoned for Q:\19981123.doc®