Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Memorandum to Orange County Planning Board 45 <br /> August 26, 1999 <br /> 7. What reduction in impervious area is sought to ensure a certain level of <br /> water quality ("agreed-upon quality targets')? <br /> Allowed impervious surface is currently 6%. That percentage will <br /> remain as the maximum allowable . impervious surface. However, <br /> residential uses on five acre lots may not require 6% (13,068 sq. ft.) of <br /> the five acres in impervious surface whereas "normal" residential <br /> coverage of a two acre lot will require most, if not all, of the 6% <br /> (5,227.2 sq.ft.). <br /> 8. Should the standards be different for the critical area and the remainder of <br /> the watershed? (Is- it necessary to implement the same water protection <br /> measures in the remainder of the.watershed as in the critical area?) <br /> Per OWASA, the watershed is so small that all tributaries of the <br /> reservoir's houId have the same protection as the reservoir itself.. <br /> 9. In other down-zoning projects; what compensation methods, if any,, .were <br /> employed? <br /> The Planning_ Department does not know of any down-zoned areas in <br /> which landowners received compensation for the loss of allowable <br /> density. <br /> 10. Did OWASA know of water quality needs during the reservoir siting <br /> proposal? <br /> Per OWASA, during the siting proposal, OWASA was aware that water <br /> quality needs would have to be addressed but those needs could not <br /> be determined until further study. <br /> g:t damend\caneck\pbmem.doc\8-26-99Ud1 <br />