Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
197 <br /> SUMMARY OF CEDAR GROVE TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL <br /> MEETING HELD AT THE CEDAR GROVE RURITAN CLUB ON <br /> OCTOBER 27, 1987 <br /> ATTENDANCE <br /> TAC MEMBERS : Michael Muller, Chair <br /> Melvin Beasley <br /> Daryl Clayton <br /> Rocky Hall <br /> Elizabeth Walters <br /> PLANNING STAFF: Gene Bell <br /> Eddie Kirk <br /> OTHERS : See attached attendance sheet <br /> A quorum was established at 7 :30 and the meeting began. Bell <br /> announced that the purpose of the meeting was for the Township Advisory <br /> Council (TAC) to formulate a recommendation to the Planning Board on <br /> the DRAFT Cedar Grove Township Land Use Plan scheduled for public <br /> hearing on November 23, 1987 . <br /> Bell began by giving a brief ` review of the planning process and <br /> what had been discussed at previous township meetings. He then briefly <br /> discussed the 1981 plan and what it meant for Cedar Grove Township. In <br /> particular, he discussed the nodes and what they implied and the Upper <br /> Eno Water Supply Watershed and Water Quality Critical Area. <br /> He then shifted the discussion to the Draft Plan. First, he <br /> pointed out the additional areas designated as water supply watershed. <br /> He stated that these designations were in direct response to the Back <br /> Creek Reservoir in Alamance County and the Little River Reservoir in _ <br /> _ Durham County. Next, he pointed out the resource protection areas and <br /> indicated that they were composed of flood prone and steep slope areas. <br /> Agricultural areas were then addressed. Bell stated that showing <br /> agricultural areas on the plan did not imply that the areas would <br /> remain agricultural or that the County had any means of making them <br /> stay that way. He stated that protection of agricultural areas was a <br /> basic premise of the plan and that by Identifying such areas on the <br /> plan the impacts generated by-.developing -adjacent lands could be more <br /> - -- adequately addressed. <br /> _ -_ Next, Bell identified the activity nodes and indicated they were <br /> . the same as the 1981 plan and that proposed uses in them were unchanged <br /> from 1981 . Finally, he identified the arterial and collector road <br /> system and their importance in the determination of activity nodes. He <br /> then stated he would like to address TAC questions/concerns and after <br /> 4 that, any questions or concerns of the general public. - - <br /> There were no immediate questions by TAC members so the floor was <br />