Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2.98 <br />Approved 10/1/08 <br />165 Jay Bryan: The last comment is a response to Ms. Hunter's request to reinstate an old table in the water resources <br />166 chapter, on ground water recharge conversion to lot size. The department's comment, they recommend that it not be <br />167 reinstated. <br />168 <br />169 Bernadette Pelissier: It was discussed at the CFE meeting Monday too, I might note. It was discussed with the <br />170 water resources people including the new water resources specialist. <br />171 <br />172 Jay Bryan: Was there general agreement that the table not be. <br />173 <br />174 Bernadette Pelissier: Yes, that it would be misleading and we need to work on this in the future to come up with how <br />175 we translate recharge rates into lot size. <br />176 <br />177. Board was in consensus that there would be no change. <br />178 <br />179 Jay Bryan: Ok, on page 20, parks and recreation element, chapter 7, are there any comments or changes? Page 21 <br />180 <br />181 Craufurd Goodwin: Technical and grammatical corrections, under 3, it should be changed to "and future <br />1.82 agreements" instead of "of future agreements". Number 5 should be "of water" instead of "to water'. <br />183 <br />184 Jay Bryan: Are there any other comments or revisions on pages 1 through 24? <br />185 <br />186 Renee Price: The last line in this, it seems a little strange to me. It seems like an odd fit. <br />187 <br />188 Craufurd Goodwin: The whole tone of the section is that the poor citizens of Orange County have to work in another <br />189 county. We've got to reduce that so we've got to bring in new jobs to Orange County, that we have to create new <br />190 jobs so they won't have to work in Durham County. For the 5,000 or so Duke employees who live in Orange County <br />191 this is nonsense. They aren't suffering from low wage inout-of-county employment. The policies being proposed in <br />192 this section, which are to bring in things like Buckhorn with low income jobs attached are likely. actually to make this <br />193 County less appealing to people living here now. It may be a tangled argument, but I think it's an important one in <br />194 the issue. <br />195 <br />196 Renee Price: I don't know if I'm in agreement with that but its fine with me. <br />197 <br />19$ Jay Bryan: It's not so far out of my comprehension that I would feel strongly one way or the other. <br />199 <br />200 Renee Price: On page 10 of 24, I just suggest rewording this a little bit, looks like you want rehabilitation of <br />201 community development programs the way it reads. <br />202 <br />203 Jay Bryan: Assist in the rehabilitation of affordable housing and in the development of community development <br />204 programs is that what it means? I see what you're saying, you can't rehabilitate a program. <br />205 <br />206 Bernadette Pelissier: Put a comma. To make sure it's not modifying the community development programs. That <br />207 it's a separate issue. <br />208 <br />209 Renee Price: But it's to assist in the rehabilitation of affordable housing and development of community development <br />210 programs? Or assist the programs? <br />211 _ _ __..__ <br />_. _.. <br />212 Craufurd Goodwin: The ur ose it to sa that ou don't focus articular) on one 1 strate That the ob'ective is <br />P p Y Y .p Y O 9Y• J <br />213 larger than the one(1) strategy. <br />214 <br />215 Renee Price: I think it's just a matter of a comma here or there. <br />216 <br />217 Jay Bryan: Modifying <br />218 <br />219 Larry Wright: Promote community development <br />