Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Recommendation #12: <br /> • Luce cited the Council minutes in the agenda packet and distributed <br /> the Cedar Grove and Eno Township Advisory Council minutes. <br /> Crawford inquired about the temporariness of Carrboro's five acre <br /> minimum in the watershed. Luce explained the source and status of <br /> that action. Shanklin expressed concern that the County with 98% of the <br /> area in the watershed had followed in the footsteps of Carrboro with <br /> 2% of the area. <br /> Cleary responded that Ca.rrboro merely had acted faster. Polatty indicated <br /> Carrboro's action came after County discussion on a 5 acre minimum. <br /> Shanklin expressed concern that a moratorium was an inadequate method and <br /> that it would be preferable to continue to allow growth as management <br /> means are developed. <br /> Crawford asked about whether a two acre lot could economically provides <br /> for stormwater measures. Luce responded that it was possible though <br /> better applicable to large sites where controls are worked into the over <br /> all plan. <br /> Gordon asked about one acre lots of record. Luce responded that if they <br /> precede the water quality amendments to the zoning ordinance, they would <br /> be exempt. <br /> Friedman asked how the figures 2 and 5 acres were arrived at. Luce responded <br /> that it was not a magical number, but reflected appropriate levels of <br /> development or a continuim of protection. He noted the subdivision lot <br /> size averages for each township. Friedman asked what assurance there was <br /> that these were sufficient. He felt the numllers were arbitrary and capricious <br /> unless evidence could be provided to substantiate them, noting that such <br /> evidence was not in the Report. Crawford asked if he had a recommendation. <br /> Friedman responded that a monitoring alternative activity should be pursued. <br /> Don Cox cited the results of the Triangle J, Pollution Source Study and <br /> other:4udies as the source of comparative data.. He noted that these numbers <br /> represented the concensus of the Task Forces that these were politically <br /> defendable, if not ideal lot sizes for water quality protection, adding <br /> that they reflected a serious compromise. <br /> Lunsford noted Brian Dodge's comments in the Hillsborough TAC minutes. <br /> Dodge reindicated his concern what a minimum lot size may be unnecessary <br /> if appropriate storm water protection measures were developed. <br /> F <br /> Gordon moved approval of the recommendation, Harris seconded the motion; <br /> all others for the motion passed. Opposed Lunsford and Shanklin. <br /> The Board moved to the next agenda item and noted that if time remained <br /> at the completion of the agenda they would return to discuss recommendation <br /> #13 in the Water Resources Task Force Report. <br /> -6- <br />