|
Approved 2.5.25
<br />Leigh Anne King: Yeah. So, that's definitely something, we're working on the maps right now. We don't have a 601
<br />recommendation to put in front of you, so that's definitely something that we're working to avoid in 602
<br />looking at all of our development areas that might be added to the rural conservation 603
<br />neighborhoods, as well as the economic development areas, we would be evaluating. What are 604
<br />the tradeoffs to allowing for more intensive development in these areas. 605
<br /> 606
<br />Cy Stober: So, I think to that point, there's no proposal at this time unless we hear from this Board or the 607
<br />commissions to touch the critical areas in the Upper Eno Watershed. They were placed there at 608
<br />the pleasure of the County. They weren’t placed there by the state, alongside Seven Mile Creek, 609
<br />at least, and they're there, the town of Hillsborough has not requested their removal. The County 610
<br />has not proposed that they be removed, and the City of Mebane has not asked that they be 611
<br />removed either for that matter. So, there's no intention at this time of doing so, nor did we receive 612
<br />that feedback from the public. There are available utilities in that area. They terminate, basically, 613
<br />at Bushy Cook, and we would prefer that that development happen outside of a water supply 614
<br />watershed, which is everything west of Buckhorn Road and south of West Ten. That makes a lot 615
<br />more sense. You don't have impervious cover limitations, and you don't have a very aggravating, 616
<br />if you're in the erosion control world, there's a very challenging limitation to how much earth you 617
<br />can actually move at a time. That exists in high quality water zones which is a water supply 618
<br />watershed, such as the upper Eno, so we'd prefer that it all happen outside of that watershed, and 619
<br />I think we'll, I'll be very comfortable having a plan that says that much. Unfortunately, nearly all of 620
<br />our economic development districts, for whatever reason, are placed inside of water supply 621
<br />watersheds with the exception of the Buckhorn EDD, west of Buckhorn Road, which is essentially 622
<br />the watershed boundary between the upper Eno and the Haw River. It's not necessarily always 623
<br />true, but it's mostly true, that that Buckhorn Road is the watershed boundary. 624
<br /> 625
<br />Lamar Proctor: Right, I agree with that. 626
<br /> 627
<br />Cy Stober: Well, based on what we've heard, there's the, to date, there's been no desire to expand into the 628
<br />critical area on Seven Mile Creek. 629
<br /> 630
<br />Leigh Anne King: And that was how we modeled it in the alternative as well. We avoided the critical water supply 631
<br />watershed area. 632
<br /> 633
<br />Cy Stober: Even if there is an impervious cover limitation of 6 percent, and there's no 10-70 allocation, so if 634
<br />you're in the protected water shed, you can develop up to 70 percent in certain cases, which 635
<br />happened with Medline and the Thermo Fisher site for that matter. If you're in the critical area, 636
<br />that is not available. Your cap is 6 percent. You can go as high as 9 percent with stormwater 637
<br />control so realistically 9 percent on an industrial project or commercial project, it's not going to 638
<br />happen. 639
<br /> 640
<br />Lamar Proctor: Okay, thank you. 641
<br /> 642
<br />Cy Stober: We may get another Missy's Grill, but they would probably need at least 10 acres to do that. 643
<br /> 644
<br />Beth Bronson: That's crazy, and again, thank you very much. I just want to say, that part that you said, it is a 645
<br />critical watershed at the pleasure of the existing commissioners, or County. Not state, so it can 646
<br />change, and that is the thing that I think we're all talking about, but not talking about is that when 647
<br />we're talking about critical watershed areas versus just watersheds with high quality water, that's 648
<br />more important than define it as a critical watershed because that is a flippant term that can be 649
<br />adjusted, right. So, it's critical to us because we drink it. It is not critical per state guidelines, or 650
<br />state qualifications, and that is the quiet part out loud. That's why I think it's more important to 651
<br />think about how we want to focus on those conservation subdivisions there and not economic 652
<br />development while balancing that fiscal responsibility that the County has to bring in revenue. And 653
<br />I do want to point out that the commissioners have also reduced or have approved to reduce the 654
<br />size of all other economic development districts, except the Buckhorn EDD. So, the Eno 655
|