HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19921119MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENT
NOVEMBER 19, 1992
The Orange County Assembly of Governments meeting was held on
Thursday, November 19, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. at the Homestead Community
Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr, and
Commissioners Don Willhoit, Verla Insko, and Alice Gordon.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Stephen Halkiotis.
BOARD OF ALDERMEN PRESENT: Mayor Ellie Kinnaird and Aldermen
Jacqueline Gist, and Francis Shetley.
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Kenneth Broun and
Council Members Julie Andresen, Joseph Herzenberg, Joyce Brown,
Joseph Capowski, Mark Chilton, and Art Werner.
HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Mayor Horace Johnson,
Commissioners Evelyn Lloyd, Allen Lloyd, Bob Rose, and Remus Smith.
INTRODUCTION: Chairman Carey and Mayors Johnson, Kinnaird, and
Brown welcomed the participants and observers to the meeting.
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT GOALS UPDATE: Mayor Broun stated that the
Council is not ready at this time to discuss goals and objectives.
The Council has decided that they need to discuss solid waste
management goals among themselves prior to holding group meetings.
After discussing the possible ways of proceeding with this issue,
it was decided that each unit of government will meet to discuss
the solid waste management goals and objectives. Each group will
decide upon a list of issues and concerns that need to be
addressed. In mid-January a meeting will be held with
representatives of each governmental unit in attendance.
OWASA PRESENTATION:
Impact of New Watershed Protection Rules on University Lake and
Cane Creek Watersheds
Ed Holland discussed the impact of these rules on the University
Lake and Cane Creek Watersheds. He indicated that generic water
supply protection issues were wastewater, spills, animal
operations, cropland runoff, urban runoff, and suburban runoff. He
also summarized the EMC watershed rules. A copy of his
presentation is in the Permanent Agenda File in the Clerk's office.
He indicated that the new regulations address urban and suburban
runoff from new developments. It was found that a higher density
development created less pollutants than a lower density
development. He also indicated that the regulations state that the
EMC can adopt stricter standards if they designate the watershed as
"critical". The "critical" designation is not to be confused with
"water quality critical area" in a watershed.
Marvin Collins asked Mr. Holland to address the effect ors
agricultural uses of the "critical area" designation. Mr. Holland
indicated that the "critical area" designation is a separate issue
from the designation of a Water Quality Critical Area around a
reservoir. The regulatory requirements which are applicable in a
"water quality critical area" do not apply when asking for
"critical area" designation for an entire watershed. The critical
watershed designation applies to development restrictions, not
agricultural restrictions. The major impact for the watershed is
that Governmental jurisdictions could not enact watershed
regulations that were less stringent than those currently in
effect. The towns should be in compliance by July 1, 1993. On
January 1, 1994 the County needs to have adopted local ordinances
which meet or exceed the state standards. Hazardous waste plans
also need to be in place on that date.
CANE CREEK STUDY PLAN: Back up material is in the Permanent Agenda
File in the Clerk's office. This study is similar to the
University Lake study completed several years ago. They will
determine existing pollution sources and recommend best management
practices. Much of the information gathered will be able to be
placed on their own GIS system which will allow less reliance on
paid consultants. The Watershed Advisory Committee will consist of
citizens, particularly Cane Creek landowners, local government
liaisons and technical support from local planners, SCS staff,
University staff, and paid consultants. The proposed schedule
calls for completion of the water quality monitoring program with
2
implementation by late 1993 or early 1994. The completed study
will be forwarded to all local units of government.
Ms. Herring commented that occasionally homeowners in the rural
buffer asked to have the service area extended to their property.
When their property is extremely close to an existing line it is
difficult to justify denying the request. She asked that this
issue be discussed with the intent of establishing guidelines for•
exceptions. It was the consensus of the group to postpone
discussion of this issue until a future date when it would be
possible to have background information available for participants
to read and review.
There being no further items to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.
3