Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-04-2006-5i
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2006
>
Agenda - 05-04-2006
>
Agenda - 05-04-2006-5i
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2008 11:37:39 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 9:24:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/4/2006
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5i
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20060504
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
~$ <br />VOTE: Aye: 9, 1 nay (.Tay Bryan) <br />Jay Bryan: I think there is an issue about location that's addressed by the word "moral". <br />Renee Price-Saunders: Are you saying that we're taking "moral" out? That's not my <br />understanding of the motion. <br />.Tay Bryan: I understood that if DSS wanted to take over the purview of evaluation, the word <br />would be removed and it wouldn't be in the ordinance. <br />Renee Price-Saunders: Then, I misunderstood the amendment, I think the planning office <br />should have some discretion, I thought we were leaving the word in, and,just checking with <br />DSS, <br />Sam Lasris: Yes, we're keeping the word in, and just checking with them, <br />Jay Bryan: Then, I misunderstood the friendly amendment, <br />Sherri Ingersoll: Then, would you like to revote on the issue? <br />Jay Bryan: No, We'll leave it as is. <br />STAFF PRESENTATION ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S ROLE IN VARIOUS WATER RESOURCES- <br />RELATED REPORTS AND INITIATIVES <br />Craig Benedict: This handout is a work in progress. A report was put together of the Water <br />Resources Committee back in 2001 and they had S recommendations, Those 5 recommendations <br />were handed out last month; there is a vaziety of surface water issues groundwater issues, water <br />quality issues, surface water issues, well issues, radon issues. As you can see, it is a multi- <br />deparhnental effort that is necessary to resolve these. This is a form to start the discussions with <br />Environmental Health, ERCD, and Soil and Water. Planning will not be the lead depaztment in <br />these issues; it will be other deparhnents that deal with water resources and water quality, If it <br />deals with the regulatory issues, for example subdivisions should be a different size because you <br />need a larger water rechazge azea, then this Planning Board has a very large stake in the <br />regulatory environment. <br />Brian Dobyns: In this report, it says that the Commission for the Environment is taking a lead <br />role. Is that still happening, or have they backed off ofthat? <br />Craig Benedict: No, the status part is something that I put in this report for now. This is not an <br />edict, On the last page, it shows haw many reports are out there, The first two studies were <br />somewhat independent studies that were asked for by the County. The Water Resource <br />Committee report, the main headings, we can go tt>raugh tonight. There is a Water Resources <br />Initiative which is something new that has been brought forward by ERCD and adopted by the <br />Commissioners in May 2005, which shows where we need to go with these things. In the BOCC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.