Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
happening in this area in the near future that would be inconsistent with this area. She does <br /> not think that a small area plan could be completed in the near future. <br /> Chair Foushee agreed with Commissioner Pelissier. <br /> Commissioner Hemminger asked if this sets a precedent with other nodes in a <br /> watershed. Michael Harvey said that the only other node in a watershed is a rural industrial <br /> node and it is currently supporting a quarry operation. It is covered by a special use permit. <br /> Upon closure of that quarry operation, the rural industrial node disappears altogether. <br /> Craig Benedict said that if the Board of County Commissioners allows commercial <br /> development in this industrial node, it will come back to the Board of County Commissioners as <br /> a legislative item — a special use permit for rezoning. <br /> Commissioner Yuhasz said that he agreed with much of what Commissioner Pelissier <br /> said and that he is hesitant to add more to the Planning staff's workload. He said that he <br /> would be in favor of staff's recommendation. <br /> Commissioner Gordon restated her motion: Receive the Planning Board <br /> recommendation, deliberate on the petition as necessary, close the public hearing, and do <br /> NOT adopt the Ordinance amendment recommended by staff contained within Attachment 2 of <br /> this abstract, and direct staff to develop a plan and timeline for a one-step small area plan in <br /> this area. Commissioner Jacobs seconded this motion previously. <br /> VOTE: Ayes, 2 (Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Gordon); Nays, 5 <br /> MOTION FAILED <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to <br /> receive the Planning Board recommendation, deliberate on the petition as necessary, close the <br /> public hearing, and adopt the Ordinance amendment recommended by staff contained within <br /> Attachment 2 of the abstract. <br /> VOTE: Ayes, 6; No, 1 (Commissioner Jacobs) <br /> 6. Regular Agenda <br /> a. Update and Recommended Actions — Solid Waste Transfer Station Site <br /> Selection <br /> The Board received an update on several issues and considered actions for moving the <br /> site selection search process for a Solid Waste Transfer Station in Orange County to a <br /> conclusion. <br /> Frank Clifton said that this item has been studied for many years and efforts have been <br /> pursued and the County Commissioners have narrowed the choices down to four options. The <br /> County has spent several hundred thousand dollars on consultants and analysis and this does <br /> not include staff time. He went through the options: <br /> Option A. Highway 54 site — If the BOCC is prepared to move forward on this site then: <br /> 1) Authorize the County Attorney and County Management to initiate negotiations to <br /> acquire the Hwy 54 site, up to a total of 150.87 acres (142.87 main acreage; 8.0 access <br /> acreage). The appraised value is $935,000. <br /> 2) Authorize Solid Waste Management to issue an RFP for an engineering firm to conduct <br /> the design/development of the Solid Waste Transfer Station facility at Hwy 54 or any <br /> other selected site; including authorization to retain a secondary engineering firm <br />