Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2$4B <br />adopt the proposal resolving the differences between earlier <br />recommendations. <br />Council Member Smith asked that Orange County take into <br />consideration the extension of services to the Homestead Road <br />area prior to allowing massive development in the area. <br />Council Member Pasquini asked why the County was recommending <br />to keep part of the area north of Eubanks Road as Industrial. <br />Mr. Collins responded that the area had been zoned industrial <br />prior to the joint planning agreement and that the industrial <br />development in the area had established a land use in the area. <br />Council Member Pasquini also questioned why the County was <br />recommending urban residential for the area north of Duke Power <br />offices. Mr. Collins said this was in an attempt to keep the <br />types of designations consistent with uses in the area. <br />Council Members Preston and Andresen asked if the zoning map <br />could be changed to a lower density for that area even if the <br />land use plan had it designated as urban residential. Mr. <br />Collins said the Town could propose zoning designations for the <br />area in a manner consistent with the land use plan and that the <br />County would in all probability adopt the zoning designation <br />recommended by the Town. <br />Council Member Andresen urged coordination of the zoning map <br />with the adopted Land Use Plan. <br />COUNCIL MEMBER GODSCHALK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER <br />HOWES TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 86-10-13/R-1. <br />Council Member Pasquini sand he could not vote for the <br />resolution as proposed because of the urban residential <br />designation for the area north of Duke Power offices. He said <br />he felt the area should be designated suburban residential. <br />COUNCIL MEMBER PASQUINI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER <br />ANDRESEN TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DESIGNATE THE AREA NORTH OF <br />DUKE POWER OFFICES IN THE PROPOSED AREA 4 (HOMESTEAD ROAD/NC <br />86) AS SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL INSTEAD OF URBAN RESIDENTIAL. THE <br />MOTION CARRIED, (6-3), WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GODSCHALK, HOWES, <br />AND THORPE VOTING AGAINST. <br />THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, (9-0). <br />COMMISSIONER MARSHALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LLOYD TO <br />ADOPT RESOLUTION 86-10-13/R-1 AS AMENDED AND ADOPTED BY THE <br />CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, (4- <br />0) . <br />The resolution, as adopted, reads as follows: <br />RESOLUTION ADOPTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR UN-DESIGNATED <br />AREAS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY-CHAPEL HILL JOINT PLANNING AREA LAND <br />USE PLAN (85-10-13/R-1). <br />WHEREAS on July 14, 1986, the Chapel Hill Town Council adopted <br />a recommendation endorsing a Land Use Plan for the Joint <br />Planning Area; and <br />