Agenda - 10-19-1999 - 9c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

29 QUESTIONS AND /OR COMMENTS FROM. CITIZENS: Mr. Bill Strom, a member of the OWASA Board of Directors, spoke on behalf of the. OWASA Board. He stated that forty counties in North Carolina :contain portions of WS -II water supply. watersheds. Of these.forty, Orange County contains almost twice as much; in both absolute area and percentage.within its jurisdiction as any other county within the State of North Carolina. It is therefore appropriate that Orange County's watershed protection requirements are the most progressive and proactive in the State of North Carolina. OWASA staff provided hire with a map showing that aside from certain. critical Class I Watersheds, Class II are considered the most `.important watersheds to protect. -A copy of that map is in the permanent. agenda file in the Clerk's ti office:. In Orange County we are the stewards of 100% more than any other county in North Carolina. That is the driving force behind this request for rezoning. A copy of his comments along . with the map, in their entirety,. are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Ms. Marie Albright, a resident of this area,. spoke in opposition to* this proposal. She felt that ` her land would lose a great deal of its value if .this were adopted. She could not give her children anything. She asked the Board of Commissioners to consider her concerns'when making their decision. Ms. Joyce Stanford, a resident. of Stanford Road, stated that they have been stewards of this land for over 200 years. They have defended the property against.the British, the carpetbaggers, and Yankees. For the last 30 years she has been defending this property.against,OWASA. They have taken her. home, dairy business and land. Now they seek to deny her further use of .the.land left.,in the watershed by asking-for 5 -acre zoning. This is a "taking" from her and her descendents. The 5th amendment of the. Constitutions guarantees no private property being taken for public use without just compensation.. The 5th and 14th Amendments uphold the Constitution core idea that man's. life, liberty and property not being subject to uncontrolled power of the state. This is not a benefit to her or her property. She asked that the two acre minimum be upheld and that the five- acre minimum be denied. Mr. Allen. Spalt,� a Carrboro resident and a member of the Cane Creek.Watershed Study Committee, stated that that Committee.undertook a thorough, balanced and open study of the watershed water protection situation. It is too much to expect that everyone agree with the results but it is fair to. saythat people went into this with the expectation that measures substantially different from those required for University Lake would be required to protect Cane Creek. They learned when the ' first -phase of the consultants report came back, that although Cane Creek is a high quality water supply, it is not as high as was originally expected nor is it free from substantial vulnerability from activities in the watershed both natural and from agricultural and development use; There is stratification .of the water and high manganese content in the lower water that is somewhat problematic. There is also the potential for and actuality of algae blooms in the water that make it such that it requires more protection than was anticipated. When the technical work was done they .were faced with the situation that instead of being substantially different from University Lake it turned out to be comparable. The recommendations that are before you, which probably seem familiar, are comparable to those in University Lake. They have attempted to try to provide H: \330CC \N0V2399.MIN