Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
11 <br />The Board will consider three items at their work session on October 12. <br />These three items are listed below: <br />1. health insurance dependent subsidy <br />2. health insurance waiver option <br />3. Interlocal agreement with the Trust <br />D. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT <br />DISTRICT DESIGN MANUAL <br />Planner Mary Willis summarized the information in the agenda. <br />This amendment would eliminate the requirement of a 100-foot buffer along <br />the perimeter of an Economic Development District (EDD) which abuts an EDD <br />adopted by another planning jurisdiction. The Planning Board considered <br />the proposed amendment on September 18, 1995. After considerable <br />discussion, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed <br />amendment by a 7-5 vote and the Administration recommends approval. <br />In answer to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Ms. Willis <br />clarified that the Primary Development Overlay is a separate area that has <br />been applied only to the area north of Cates Creek which has provisions in <br />addition to those which already apply to a primary area. This amendment is <br />for all Economic Development Districts which have the same intensity -- <br />Primary or Secondary -- adjacent to an adjoining jurisdiction. <br />Commissioner Gordon asked, since there is already a category <br />called "Primary Development Overlay Area" and this is part of the area that <br />is generating these questions, why can't they restrict this amendment to a <br />Primary Development Overlay area so it does not apply to all EDDs. She <br />feels that the problem is with what may happen if another jurisdiction did <br />something different in the future. <br />Mary Willis said that one of the issues that make this more <br />complex is the location in this area. The real issue is the jurisdictional <br />boundary which is what this amendment addresses. <br />Commissioner Gordon asked if it would be possible to restrict <br />this change to the Primary Development Overlay area which would limit the <br />proliferation of this amendment. Mary Willis said that the reason the <br />Primary Development Overlay area was put on the map was the fact that the <br />property was narrow and the uses would be limited. The rationale for <br />creating the Primary Overlay was to address that issue and those specific <br />concerns because of the configuration and shape of that area and the impact <br />of what could be done with it. She noted that even if there were not the <br />same kinds of conditions that are present with this strip, they would still <br />be recommending that this issue not require the double buffer in an area <br />where the boundary of the district is really invisible because it is <br />jurisdictional only. To look at it in terms of Primary Overlay area does <br />not directly address the issue they are attempting to address. <br />Commissioner Gordon suggested that the problem be formulated <br />differently so that the Primary Overlay area would address this specific <br />issue only. <br />Mary Willis will look at this problem to see if it can be <br />accomplished in a different way. However, the proposed amendment was <br />