Browse
Search
ORD-1999-015 Text Amendments Development Standards in Cane Creek Watershed
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 1990-1999
>
1999
>
ORD-1999-015 Text Amendments Development Standards in Cane Creek Watershed
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2013 2:53:22 PM
Creation date
9/25/2013 2:52:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/19/1999
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
9c
Document Relationships
Agenda - 10-19-1999 - 9c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1999\Agenda - 10-19-1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
32 <br /> acres. That's without putting in any additional components. He felt that our present zoning is <br /> obtaining the desired result, so why change it? Another question is, is there documented <br /> deterioration in water quality that would lead us to believe that we need to,make some changes. He <br /> stated that Mr..Spalt mentioned.that maybe the water quality was not as good as was anticipated <br /> but he did not say that it was a degradation that was caused by the development that is taking <br /> place. He.merely mentioned that there are chemicals in the water, maybe, that were not known to <br /> be there prior to the study. If that is coming from farm runoff then this acreage change is not going to <br /> have an effect on that. You heard earlier tonight some talk about impervious surfaces and runoff. <br /> Dr. Shy talked about discharges. He felt that those are the sort of things that we should be <br /> concemed.with. He did not fee that five-acres is a magic figure. It may be that two-acres is perfectly <br /> satisfactory. He.asked for some sort of scientific justification for five-acres. Its been mentioned that <br /> that is what has been used over at University Lake. University Lake's development pressures are <br /> highly.different than the development pressures around Cane Creek. University Lake is near town, <br /> adjacent to Chapel Hill and Carrboro with a lot of development pressures. We.are a different <br /> community. .We do not have the water and sewer facilities that are.available in town.. So, to try to <br /> justify five-acres for Cane Creek because they,have it at.University Lake- it is not apples and <br /> apples.- It has been mentioned before, but who should properly pay for clearing up the water? <br /> Should it be the people who use it or should it be the people who, by accident, live in the vicinity of <br /> the water supply. That's an equity issue that he wanted the Board of County Commissioners to <br /> think about too. <br /> Mr. Wes Cook indicated.that he did not live in the Cane Creek Reservoir, but that he did <br /> oppose this request. He is a resident of Little River.Township which is presently zoned for <br /> 2-acre lots.. The Durham County line is approximately % of a mile from his house. That area is <br /> zoned 1-acre lots and is.in the same watershed as his property. Also, Alamance County is 1-acre <br /> lots as well. He mentioned that there is a nuclear power plant at Lake Norman, which is the drinking <br /> source for Charlotte. That area is zoned for one-acre lots. He mentioned-that New Orleans gets <br /> their water from the Mississippi River.. He strongly recommended that this request be denied and <br /> the lots be left at 2-acres. . <br /> Mr. James Thomas, a farmer residing in the Cane Creek Watershed, spoke in opposition to <br /> this proposal. In 1972 he bought a farm that was split by Tom's Creek. He has farmed on that land <br /> since that time. He, and his neighbors have paid in order to provide this water to Orange Water & <br /> Sewer Authority customers, although they do not receive any of the benefits of this water. He felt <br /> this rezoning would cut the value of his farm in half. He asked the Board of County Commissioners <br /> to deny this request: <br /> Mr. Alton Thomas, a local resident, spoke in opposition to this request. He asked the. <br /> Commissioners not to approve this request. He stated that he, and other family members, would be <br /> losing much of the value and use of their land. <br /> .Planner David Stancil stated that if this land is rezoned, parcels that have less than 12 acres. <br /> in size will not see any change. Owners could have five two- acre lots, assuming that the land <br /> perked. He also mentioned that the five-acre option would be only one of the options; another <br /> would be the cluster option with 50% open space and the same number of lots. <br /> H:\B0CC\N0V2399.MIN <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.