Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-03-2005-9a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2005
>
Agenda - 05-03-2005
>
Agenda - 05-03-2005-9a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2016 2:03:07 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:19:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/3/2005
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
9a
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20050503
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2005
Twin Creeks District Park and Educational Campus Master Plan - 5-3-2005, Item 9a
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Historical Information\Historical Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
10 <br /> Staff Review of Comments from Area Citizen <br /> ("Jay Bryan —Comments on Twin Creeks") <br /> April 29, 2005 <br /> Jay Bryan, a landowner near Twin Creeks has submitted a series of 19 comments on <br /> Twin Creeks. On April 14"i, staff was asked to assess these comments and provide a <br /> response. <br /> In general, these comments may be grouped into four categories: <br /> • Natural Resource Protection <br /> • Conditional Use Permit/Development Standards <br /> • Park Construction <br /> • Other <br /> The comments are addressed below,by category(and by Mr. Bryan's numbering <br /> scheme): <br /> Natural Resource Protection (1,2,3,7) <br /> 1., The lands described are planned to be left in a largely natural state as per the <br /> Master Plan. At this time, pending further analysis, the rhyolite quarry area (the <br /> hilly portion of the site to the west along Old 86) is not proposed for any facilities <br /> beyond unpaved rustic trails in a possible future phase. While the County is very <br /> much an advocate of conservation easements as a preservation tool, staff feels that <br /> a conservation easement(which would involve the creation of a legal document, <br /> survey of the areas to be covered and possibly a subdivision of the property—as <br /> well as a third party to hold the easement and an interest in the land)would be <br /> cumbersome and not warranted, and that the lands in question will be protected as <br /> part of the park and the adopted Master Plan. <br /> 2. All trees of 18-inch caliper and greater were identified in the topographic survey <br /> conducted in 2002. Further, evaluation of species of significance on the property <br /> has been addressed through two different biological and botanical assessments. <br /> Staff expects that further evaluations may occur through the CUP process. Some <br /> clarification of what constitutes a"special or native"tree would be needed, as <br /> there are several possible definitions. However, an additional walk of the site to <br /> look again for botanical significance could be useful, and staff would propose to <br /> do so with the Resource Conservation Manager, Open Space Design Specialist, <br /> Park Services Director and members of the Biological Resources Committee of <br /> the Commission for the Environment who have training in this area, to see if there <br /> are any additional species of significance that have not yet been identified. Other <br /> persons with specialized training could also be invited to participate in this walk. <br /> 3. Staff feels the idea of boardwalks along Jones Creek and Buckhorn Branch is <br /> worthy of further consideration, and should be explored in future phases of the <br /> park, when detailed drawings of the exact locations for future trails would be <br /> finalized. No such trails are planned for Phase I of the park. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.