Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
29 <br /> QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM,CITIZENS: <br /> Mr. Bill Strom, a member of the OWASA Board of Directors, spoke on behalf of the OWASA <br /> Board. He stated that forty counties in North Carolina,contain portions of V1/S-II water supply <br /> watersheds.' Of these:forty, Orange County contains almost twice as much:in both absolute area <br /> and percentage.within its jurisdiction as any other county within the State of North Carolina. It is <br /> therefore appropriate that Orange County's watershed protection requirements are the most. <br /> progressive and proactive in the.State of North Carolina. OWASA staff provided him with a map <br /> showing that aside from certain.critical Class I Watersheds, Class 11 are considered the most <br /> important watersheds to protect. .A copy of that map is in the permanent.agenda file in the Clerk's <br /> . office. In Orange County.we are the stewards of 100% more than any other county in North <br /> Carolina. That is the driving force behind this request for rezoning. A copy of his comments. along , <br /> with the map, in their entirety,. are in'the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. <br /> Ms. Marie Albright, a resident of this area, spoke in opposition to this proposal..She felt that <br /> her land would lose a great deal of its value if this were adopted. She could not give her children <br /> anything. She asked the Board of Commissioners to consider her concerns when making their <br /> decision. <br /> Ms. Joyce Stanford, a resident.of Stanford Road, stated that they have been stewards of this <br /> land for over 200 years. They have defended the property against.the British, the carpetbaggers, <br /> and Yankees. For the last 30 years she has been defending this property.against OWASA. They <br /> have taken her.home, dairy business and land. Now they seek to deny her further use of the land <br /> leftin the watershed by asking-for 5-acre zoning. This is a."taking"from her and her descendents. <br /> The 5th amendment of the Constitutions guarantees no private property being taken for public use <br /> without just compensation. The 5th and 14th Amendments uphold the Constitution.core idea that <br /> man's:life, liberty and property not being subject to uncontrolled power of the state. This is not.a <br /> benefit to her or her property. She asked that the two acre minimum be upheld and that the five- <br /> acre minimum be denied. <br /> Mr.Allen.Spalt,' a Carrboro resident and a member of the Cane Creek.Watershed Study <br /> Committee, stated that that Committee.undertook a thorough, balanced and open study of the <br /> watershed water protection situation. It is too much to expect that everyone agree with the results <br /> but it is fair to.say that people went into this with the expectation that measures substantially <br /> different from those required for University Lake would be required to protect Cane Creek. They <br /> learned when the first phase of the consultants report came back, that although Cane Creek is a <br /> high quality water supply, it is not as high as was originally expected nor is it free from substantial <br /> vulnerability from activities in the watershed both natural and from agricultural and development use:. <br /> There is stratification of the water and high manganese content in the lower water that is somewhat <br /> problematic. There is also the potential for and actuality of algae blooms in the water that make it <br /> such that it requires more protection than was anticipated. When the technical work was done they <br /> .were faced with the situation that instead of being substantially different from University Lake it <br /> turned out to be comparable. The recommendations that are before you, which probably seem <br /> familiar, are comparable to those in University Lake. They have attempted to try to provide <br /> H:\§0CC\N0V2399.MIN <br />