Agenda - 10-06-1997 - 10b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

4 The 1987 Hazen and Sawyer Report recommended that the potential reservoir site for Seven-mile Creek be protected through acquisition and land use restrictions, even if and after a reservoir is built on the West Fork_of the Upper Eno. The study concluded that the West Fork reservoir may not contain sufficient capacity to meet water needs beyond the year 2020, and an additional reservoir may be needed. 2. DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS Commercial and industrial land uses are not allowed. The minimum size of new lots is two acres. There are also limits on impervious surface, and requirements for stream buffers. 3. COMPLAINT OF MR. EFLAND Mr. Efland contends that critical area within one-half mile of Seven-Mile Creek is not needed for the protection of drinking water,and unnecessarily restricts the use of his property. When he appeared before the Board of Commissioners on May 5, Mr. Efland asked that the critical area designation be removed on the basis of changes in run-off patterns after the improvements were made to 1-85 and Mt. Willing Road. However, review of drainage patterns by Warren Faircloth, Erosion, Control Supervisor, revealed no evidence that run-off from Mr. Efland's property had been diverted away from Seven-mile Creek. In the attached letter to the Board of Commissioners dated July 15, 1997, Mr. Efland asked that the Board remove the critical area designation from the property since the Town of Hillsborough will be constructing a reservoir in on the West Fork of the Upper Eno. His letter stated that the Town of Hillsborough has no interest in the Seven-mile Creek site due to the potential impacts of I-85, Highway 70 and the Southern Railroad on the quality of any future water supply at that location. 5. APPROVAL PROCESS Changes to the critical area or its restrictions will require amending the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Atlas, and Zoning Ordinance. Zoning Atlas and Zoning Ordinance text amendments are generally presented for public hearing after adoption of corresponding Comprehensive Plan amendments. However, concurrent consideration has been the practice where atlas or text amendments are needed in order to avoid inconsistency between the Plan and implementing ordinances. For example,previous Land Use Plan and Zoning Atlas/Ordinance amendments for Watershed Protection Overlays and Economic Development Districts have been concurrent. Proposed amendments are presented at a quarterly public hearing(held in February, May, August or November). After the public hearing,the proposal would be referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation. The Board of Commissioners would make its decision after receiving the Planning Board recommendation.