Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
199 <br />p.b-68, Objective IVA-lb: <br />This has much more to do with protecting the viability of working lands than the environment. This <br />objective belongs with agricultural objectives, not NA objectives. <br />p.b-69 (River Basins) <br />"The Neuse River begins .east of Orange County, emerging from Falls Lake in Durham and <br />Orange counties" <br />should read "emerging from Falls Lake in Wake County" as the river is the subject of the sentence, not <br />the lake <br />p.6-72 (Watersheds) <br />Is it worth noting that all Neuse watersheds ultimately flow into Falls Lalce, which serves hundreds of <br />thousands of Wake County residents? <br />p.6-77, line 5 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) <br />"Minimum lot size limits help achieve the goal of limiting human impacts and is a broad tool that is <br />widely in use.." This tool is increasingly being recognized as outdated and ineffective because it means <br />that per-capita impervious cover is HIGHER. Smart Growth is now much more widely recognized in <br />watershed circles as the best "land use" measure for watershed protection. The EPA has even issued a <br />report "Protecting Water Quality with Smart Growth" documenting how low-density development is <br />inferior to compact, mixed-use, smart-growth type development for water quality. <br />p.b-77, line 6 (Historic and Current Dafa -Surface Wafer) <br />'This sentence needs to be recast: <br />"Accompanying limits on the amount of land that can be impervious cover to water infiltration <br />helps maintain infiltration of precipitation into the soil and reduce sheet flow surface runoff into <br />streams and encourage infiltration into the'soil." <br />p.b-77, lines 5-27 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) <br />The first three paragraphs on this page are not about data or trends; the County's approach to watershed <br />protection should be dealt with in a separate section. <br />p.b-77, lines ]5-i'8 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) <br />It is erroneous to say that "in most cases, stream buffers are X". The stream buffer is only applied to <br />NEW development DURING the development process, so what you're talking about here is a <br />requirement placed on development proposals. Unless County has not undertaken a study to determine <br />how wide stream buffers actually ARE, this statement is without factual basis. <br />p.6-77, -ine 24 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) <br />Where the term "100-year" flood is being abandoned in favor of the "1% annual chance flood" please <br />include the former term in parentheses as an explanatory term (e.g., `also known as the "100-year flood"') <br />p.b-77, lines 20-27 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) <br />Paragraph on floodplains seems too basic. There are data and trends to report on flooding, are there not? <br />p.b-77, line 43 (Surface Wafer Quantity) <br />This section is erroneously titled. This section is about "Surface Drinking Water Supplies," unless you <br />expand the topic to include quantities outside of drinking water supply reservoirs, e.g., stream base flows <br />and peak flows <br />The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 ~ Carrbaro NC 27510 ~ 914-942-6114 d wwwthevillageproject.com 9 <br />