ORD-2007-201 - Planning -Land Use Element Text Amendment – 10-Year Transition Areas 08-21-2007-4u

Browse Search

Attachment 3 10 Renee Price: I think the notion of 10 -year transition should go away and be eliminated. We are trying to make a vision for Efland- Mebane, which I think is fine, but what if what we propose now has nothing to do with where things would be later with zoning categories. Perdita Holtz: The Land Use Element definition would change but there would be no way that someone outside the overlay district could apply for something non - residential. Jay Bryan: There is a difference opinion or concern about these issues. If we did not approve this, how long would it take the Efland Mebane plan to be implemented in a way that allows what has been recommended to occur? Perdita Holtz: If the Planning Board recommends non - approval, it would go to the Board of County Commissioners anyway. If they voted it down, we would work with County Management to see how they want to proceed. We may be able to do a map amendment. Craig Benedict: At the August meeting, we will discuss some of these implementing items that are part of the Efland Mebane SAP that will be on the August Quarterly Public Hearing. Let us try to plot out some options. I think you could make a decision tonight on this issue but give us some time to sketch out our thought process. Jay Bryan: Could you create a transition area with its own definition for Efland Mebane area? Perdita Holtz: It would require a Land Use Element map amendment because the map has it as a 10 year transition area. Craig Benedict: We are suggesting a zoning overlay. Jay Bryan: I don't think that is a concern but more about the implications of other areas. MOTION made by Brian Crawford to accept the Proposed Amendments to the Text of the Land Use Element on page 69 -70. Bernadette Pelissier seconded. VOTE: (6 Ayes; 3 Opposed (Jay Bryan, Renee Price, Craufurd Goodwin)