Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 Chair Jacobs asked about why streams are being considered as a buffer. Bob Sallach <br /> 2 said that streams probably have wooded areas adjacent to them. As the site is developed, <br /> 3 there would be water quality considerations incorporated into the design from the standpoint of <br /> 4 erosion control and water quality. <br /> 5 Chair Jacobs asked that buffer areas with trees be given a higher ranking. Bob Sallach <br /> 6 said that it is built in, but they can adjust the ranking to reflect trees with a higher ranking. <br /> 7 Chair Jacobs made reference to#11 and Impact on Historical or Cultural Features and <br /> 8 several people made the point of relating it back to#6 and using a measurement instead of <br /> 9 saying, "abut." <br /> 10 Nancy McDermott made reference to#5 and the proximity to schools, churches, and <br /> 11 recreational sites. She wants to make sure that the potential of the St. Paul AME Church that is <br /> 12 being built on Rogers Road is being considered. <br /> 13 Chair Jacobs said that these things will be considered, as long as they have been <br /> 14 proposed. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Chris Heney made reference to#1, Environmental Justice, and asked why it does not <br /> 17 include age or disability. Also, on #2 and the air quality, he said that if this criterion is used, <br /> 18 which rates the increased road miles translated into increased emissions, he wonders about <br /> 19 those areas that already have a high base rate of heavy traffic. He said that the reduction of <br /> 20 road miles traveled can be weighted highly in terms of low emissions, but the number of trucks <br /> 21 going to a certain area could lead to high emissions. <br /> 22 Chair Jacobs made reference to the last line of the definition of Environmental Justice and <br /> 23 suggested adding "industrial traffic and governmental and commercial operations." <br /> 24 Commissioner Gordon said that she wanted to address the weighting of#3. The rest of <br /> 25 Board wants to keep#3 and #10 at a weight of 5. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Chair Jacobs said that, with the understanding that the Board will see these changes <br /> 28 come back for the meeting on June 24th, he would suggest adopting the Technical Criteria with <br /> 29 amendments based on public comment and Board comment. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Carey <br /> 32 to approve the Technical Criteria as amended based on public comment and Board <br /> 33 comment <br /> 34 <br /> 35 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 36 <br /> 37 '7. Approve Manager's Recommendation to Adopt Community-Specific Criteria, <br /> 38 incorporating any additional changes as the BOCC may desire <br /> 39 Chair Jacobs said that this motion should have the same caveat. <br /> 40 A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to <br /> 41 approve the Manager's recommendation to adopt Community-Specific Criteria, as amended. <br /> 42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 43 <br /> 44 8. Review Transfer Station Siting Process Timeline <br /> 45 Chair Jacobs suggested that Olver send this timeline to the Board of County <br /> 46 Commissioners. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 9. Open Public Comment Period <br /> 49 Stan Cheron said to incorporate the comments and changes and that there is only a week <br /> 50 to post this on web. He asked that this be done as soon as possible. <br /> 51 <br /> 23 <br />