Agenda - 08-19-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

C/N TAC MINUTES PAGE 6 ,- 09� density and Frances Shetley echoed this sentiment by stating that she felt the main threat to water quality was runoff from development and road construction . Dr. Gordon made the following motion which was seconded by Dr. Bennett: Members of the TAC have two comments about allowing sewer lines in the University Lake Watershed . a) All agreed that a major problem was any encouragement of high densities of develop- ment in the watershed . The TAC members believe that densities should not exceed densities currently specified In the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. b) In addition, three members (Dickinson, Gordon, Gwyn) do not believe that sewer lines should be allowed in the University Lake Watershed because sewer lines tend to increase the density of development with a . resulting detrimental effect on water quality. The other three members believed that the statement in (a) above concerning • density was sufficient. The TAC members agree with the other statements in point 4 concerning developer payments and the requirement for water and sewer in transition areas. The vote was unanimous . Prof . Gwyn and Frances Shetley left at this point and there was no longer a quorum. Gordon made the following motion, seconded by Pelland, on points 5, 6, and 7: Point 5 - No comment Point 6 - Agree Point 7 - No Comment The vote of the remaining members was unanimous. Gordon commented concerning point 7 that she believed that there should continue to - be a differentiation between the categories of suburban residential and urban residential . Concerning point 5, she commented that the major point of a rural buffer should be that it is developed only at low densities and that whether the development is clustered is not an essential distinction . - Attention then shifted to the recommendations sent to the Orange County Planning Board on May 19. Recommendations 10