Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
45 <br />D. The EMC should include in the watershed protection rules a process whereby local governments <br />could prepare a detailed site - specific watershed management study. This study would be the <br />basis upon which the local government could propose to the EMC case -by -case changes to the <br />rules that would satisfy water quality objectives with minimal negative impact. Under this <br />process, EMC approval would subject other watershed jurisdictions to these modified rules. <br />E. The EMC should include in its rules for WS -H and WS -III the ability for local governments to <br />transfer development potential permitted under the "10 percent at 70 percent built -upon" <br />provision to other jurisdictions within the same watershed. <br />F. The Eno River emergency raw water intake operated by the City should not be considered a <br />permanent water supply source, and the WS -IV Critical Area and Protected Area should not be <br />so designated. However, additional discharge restrictions, stream buffers and hazardous <br />materials spill protection measures may be warranted in the watershed. <br />G. The proposed definition of "existing development" should be modified to exclude "zoned land ". <br />The definition should recognize Senate Bill 766, Vested Rights, in order to grandfather existing <br />development only to the extent that development rights are vested in accordance with the <br />procedures established to implement Senate Bill 766. <br />H. The EMC should recognize that some municipalities in the State will be subject to EPA <br />stormwater control requirements and that State regulations should be compatible these. <br />17 <br />