Browse
Search
Agenda - 09-20-2007-6c
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2007
>
Agenda - 09-20-2007
>
Agenda - 09-20-2007-6c
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2008 3:49:24 AM
Creation date
8/28/2008 10:47:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/20/2007
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6c
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20070920
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
jurisdictions (including Orange County and Chapel Hill), the public hearing <br />process was extended by one month, and concluded on September 14. <br />It is currently anticipated that the EMC hearing officers will report their findings <br />to the full EMC in October, at which time the EMC may begin, consideration of <br />the proposed rules. The current timetable would have the rules forwarded for <br />promulgation by' the General Assembly in the 2008 short session. If the rules <br />are enacted in 2008, local governments will be required to begin feasibility <br />studies in FY 2008-09, with implementation to begin in 2011. <br />The proposed nutrient management strategy will have significant implications <br />for the Upper New Hope Arm jurisdictions in terms of both existing and future <br />development. A number of issues have been raised before and during the <br />hearing process, including: <br />^ Questions about how the nutrient loading reductions will be allocated by <br />jurisdiction (as the land use patterns and projected loading vary <br />considerably between the jurisdictions); <br />^ The fact that many measures to reduce loading have been undertaken <br />since 2001 and are not accounted for in the reduction strategy (which <br />treats 2001 as the base year). This may make it difficult for some <br />jurisdictions to effect further percentage reductions in a "one size fits all' <br />approach; <br />a Questions about whether the proposed strategy will in fact meet the <br />nutrient reductions specified, and <br />^ Questions about the cost of implementation, particularly to address <br />existing development. . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.