Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Memorandum to Orange County Planning Board 45 <br />August 26, 1999 <br />7. What reduction in' impervious area is sought to ensure a certain level of <br />water quality (.agreed-upon quality targets ')? <br />Allowed impervious surface is currently 6 %. That' percentage will <br />remain as the maximum allowable. impervious surface. However, <br />residential uses on five acre lots may not require 6% (13,068 sq. ft.) of <br />the five acres in impervious surface whereas "normal" residential <br />coverage of a two .acre lot will require most, if not all,' of the 6 % <br />(5,227.2 sq. ft.). <br />8. Should the standards be different for the critical area and the remainder of <br />.the watershed? (Is it necessary to implement the same water protection <br />measures in the remainder of the. watershed as in the critical area ?) <br />Per OWASA, the watershed is so small that all tributaries of the <br />reservoir should have the same protection as the reservoir itself.. <br />9. In other down - zoning projects, what compensation methods, if any,, . were <br />employed? <br />The Planning. Department does not know of any down -zoned areas in <br />which landowners received compensation for the loss of allowable <br />density. <br />10. Did OWASA know of water quality needs during the reservoir siting <br />proposal? <br />Per OWASA; during the siting proposal, OWASA was aware that water <br />quality needs would have to be addressed but those needs could not <br />be determined until further study. <br />g:\ txtamend \caneck\pbmem.doc \8- 26- 99\kll <br />