Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
19 <br />Motion: Allison moved to accept the Planning Staff's recommendation and approve <br />the Concept Plan for Woodgreen Subdivision and incorporate all of the <br />concerns expressed by Planning Board members with the Preliminary Plan. <br />Katz stated that he would lice one of the conditions to be that the developer <br />and neighbors meet to develop a specific list of issues and that the Planning <br />Board see the result of that meeting with the preliminary presentation. <br />The developer asked that any additional concerns, other than those already <br />presented, be provided to Emily Cameron and then allow the developer to <br />work with her to completely address all of the concerns. <br />Price suggested that Cameron facilitate a meeting between the developer <br />and neighbors and on issues where the developer cannot completely <br />appease the neighbors. Cameron could help mediate toward a compromise. <br />Brooks expressed concern that the Planning Board may be putting the <br />neighbors and developers in an awkward position, particularly since the <br />plan will be coming back to the Planning Board in Preliminary Plan. The <br />Planning Board will then be able to review again and determine if all <br />concerns have been addressed <br />Barrows felt that it may not be fair to the developer if so many concerns are <br />left unresolved prior to the Preliminary Plan. <br />Cameron suggested that there be another Neighborhood Information <br />Meeting once the final approval is issued by the Health Department. <br />Then conditions can be included in the Resolution of Approval and <br />.addressed on the Final Plat. <br />Andrews agreed that Health Department final approval was needed in order <br />to know how many lots could actually be approved. <br />Strayhorn stated that he was uncomfortable mandating more things at this <br />stage particularly since the developer has met the requirements of the <br />ordinance. <br />Allison indicated that condition #3 would cover the other concerns <br />expressed by Board members and asked that this be added to his motion. <br />Strayhorn seconded the motion by Allison. <br />VOTE: 7 in favor. <br />4 opposed (Katz, Price & Searles - wanted definite solutions to the issues; <br />Barrows - density does not fit). <br />_ -,- - AGENDA ITEM #9: PLANNING BOARD ITEMS <br />a. Wildlife Habitat Study <br />Presentation by Mary Willis: <br />