Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
43 <br />SCS,'-has worked with OWASA in dealing with some <br />cattle crossings in Cane Creek. Collins, as well <br />as Walker, are of the opinion that vegetative <br />buffers accomplish nothing. In order to stop <br />cattle from crossing the stream, a fence would <br />have to be constructed. Such fencing would be a <br />tremendous burden on any farm operation. If <br />buffers are to be required, it is suggested that <br />the State be requested to provide more funding <br />for cost -share programs. <br />Waddell asked about the request for Critical <br />Watershed for University Lake. Collins responded <br />that higher standards could be required than <br />" those proposed by the State. The fear is that <br />following State standards would allow for a <br />change in zoning permitting higher density than <br />the present 5 -acre minimum. <br />Jobsis expressed the concern that fencing could <br />be a tremendous expense. <br />Burklin expressed approval of the statement that <br />existing farms be exempted from compliance since <br />this would seem to address and preserve present <br />water quality which appears to be acceptable. <br />Reid expressed concern that the farmer was being <br />imposed upon and being "run out of business ". He <br />indicated he felt it is not the farm animals <br />creating the pollution, but people. <br />Collins continued that the Planning Staff agrees <br />with the approach recommended by Durham <br />City /County staff to ask the EMC to protect the <br />Eno emergency water intake (in North Durham) in a <br />manner more reflective of its emergency role, <br />i.e. through using buffers in Durham along the <br />section of the Eno immediately adjacent to the <br />intake, rather than WS -IV classification. <br />Staff recognizes that the Commercial and <br />Industrial nodes at Buckhorn Road in Cheeks and <br />NC 49 in Cedar Grove will be affected by these <br />watershed minimums. However, the recommended <br />classification for both relevant watersheds would <br />appear to be able to provide for substantial non- <br />residential development without adversely <br />affecting watershed status or water quality. <br />In terms of the transit corridor along I -85, I -40 <br />and the railroad, the impact of the watershed <br />classifications may be such that the density <br />needed to support the transit system cannot be <br />achieved. This could cause the need to get into <br />