|
18
<br /> DRAFT
<br /> 601 Leigh Anne King: Yeah. So, that's definitely something,we're working on the maps right now. We don't have a
<br /> 602 recommendation to put in front of you, so that's definitely something that we're working to avoid in
<br /> 603 looking at all of our development areas that might be added to the rural conservation
<br /> 604 neighborhoods, as well as the economic development areas,we would be evaluating.What are
<br /> 605 the tradeoffs to allowing for more intensive development in these areas.
<br /> 606
<br /> 607 Cy Stober: So, I think to that point, there's no proposal at this time unless we hear from this Board or the
<br /> 608 commissions to touch the critical areas in the Upper Eno Watershed. They were placed there at
<br /> 609 the pleasure of the County. They weren't placed there by the state, alongside Seven Mile Creek,
<br /> 610 at least, and they're there, the town of Hillsborough has not requested their removal. The County
<br /> 611 has not proposed that they be removed, and the City of Mebane has not asked that they be
<br /> 612 removed either for that matter. So, there's no intention at this time of doing so, nor did we receive
<br /> 613 that feedback from the public. There are available utilities in that area. They terminate, basically,
<br /> 614 at Bushy Cook, and we would prefer that that development happen outside of a water supply
<br /> 615 watershed,which is everything west of Buckhorn Road and south of West Ten. That makes a lot
<br /> 616 more sense. You don't have impervious cover limitations,and you don't have a very aggravating,
<br /> 617 if you're in the erosion control world, there's a very challenging limitation to how much earth you
<br /> 618 can actually move at a time. That exists in high quality water zones which is a water supply
<br /> 619 watershed,such as the upper Eno, so we'd prefer that it all happen outside of that watershed, and
<br /> 620 1 think we'll, I'll be very comfortable having a plan that says that much. Unfortunately, nearly all of
<br /> 621 our economic development districts,for whatever reason, are placed inside of water supply
<br /> 622 watersheds with the exception of the Buckhorn EDD,west of Buckhorn Road,which is essentially
<br /> 623 the watershed boundary between the upper Eno and the Haw River. It's not necessarily always
<br /> 624 true, but it's mostly true,that that Buckhorn Road is the watershed boundary.
<br /> 625
<br /> 626 Lamar Proctor: Right, I agree with that.
<br /> 627
<br /> 628 Cy Stober: Well, based on what we've heard, there's the,to date,there's been no desire to expand into the
<br /> 629 critical area on Seven Mile Creek.
<br /> 630
<br /> 631 Leigh Anne King: And that was how we modeled it in the alternative as well. We avoided the critical water supply
<br /> 632 watershed area.
<br /> 633
<br /> 634 Cy Stober: Even if there is an impervious cover limitation of 6 percent, and there's no 10-70 allocation, so if
<br /> 635 you're in the protected water shed, you can develop up to 70 percent in certain cases,which
<br /> 636 happened with Medline and the Thermo Fisher site for that matter. If you're in the critical area,
<br /> 637 that is not available. Your cap is 6 percent. You can go as high as 9 percent with stormwater
<br /> 638 control so realistically 9 percent on an industrial project or commercial project, it's not going to
<br /> 639 happen.
<br /> 640
<br /> 641 Lamar Proctor: Okay,thank you.
<br /> 642
<br /> 643 Cy Stober: We may get another Missy's Grill, but they would probably need at least 10 acres to do that.
<br /> 644
<br /> 645 Beth Bronson: That's crazy, and again,thank you very much. I just want to say, that part that you said, it is a
<br /> 646 critical watershed at the pleasure of the existing commissioners, or County. Not state,so it can
<br /> 647 change,and that is the thing that I think we're all talking about, but not talking about is that when
<br /> 648 we're talking about critical watershed areas versus just watersheds with high quality water,that's
<br /> 649 more important than define it as a critical watershed because that is a flippant term that can be
<br /> 650 adjusted, right. So, it's critical to us because we drink it. It is not critical per state guidelines, or
<br /> 651 state qualifications, and that is the quiet part out loud. That's why I think it's more important to
<br /> 652 think about how we want to focus on those conservation subdivisions there and not economic
<br /> 653 development while balancing that fiscal responsibility that the County has to bring in revenue.And
<br /> 654 1 do want to point out that the commissioners have also reduced or have approved to reduce the
<br /> 655 size of all other economic development districts, except the Buckhorn EDD. So, the Eno
<br />
|