Browse
Search
Minutes - 19930524
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1990's
>
1993
>
Minutes - 19930524
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2017 1:59:11 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 1:14:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/24/1993
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - Agenda
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 1
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 2
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 3
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 4a, 5a, 6a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 4b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 5b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
338 <br /> the bounds of the lot or beyond the bounds of the building but not beyond the <br /> bounds of the zoning district which could include several lots. Commissioner <br /> -Willhoit asked that recycling facilities be mentioned specifically in the <br /> . ?ermitted use table in an effort to encourage that type of industry. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS <br /> STEPHEN RIDDLE, President of the Homeowners Association of <br /> Stagecoach Run, made comments about the I-40/Old NC 86 District. Stagecoach <br /> Run is the major road that runs from New Highway 86 westward into the Economic <br /> Development District. The homeowners are concerned that this road would <br /> become a major thoroughfare. They have specific concerns about the size of <br /> the lots. They are sensitive to the needs of the developer because much of <br /> this area will not perk. He feels that if Orange County wants to lower the <br /> tax base for the residents, they must increase the opportunity for economic <br /> development. <br /> DWIGHT NICHOLS spoke in support of the Economic Development <br /> Districts. He feels the buffer should be 50 feet instead of 100 feet. He <br /> thinks the tax base is needed in Orange County. He suggested using Highway <br /> 10 as the boundary for the I--85/US Highway 70 Interchange: <br /> RUFUS BLACKLEY spoke in support of the I--40/Old NC 86 Interchange. <br /> This area is ready for economic development. He does not want this area <br /> reduced in size. <br /> JOEL SIPRESS, representing the orange County Greens, cited three <br /> reasons to encourage economic development: (1) to minimize the tax burden on <br /> : residential taxpayers, (2) provide jobs for the unemployed and the <br /> underemployed of Orange County and (3) increase the wage levels for the <br /> working people of the County. The Orange County Greens support these three <br /> goals. They ask that the County consider whether traditional industrial <br /> recruitment strategies will achieve these three goals. He asked three <br /> questions: (1) will the employers provide a significant number of jobs for <br /> Orange County residents or will most of the new jobs go to newcomers moving <br /> into the County, (2) will those in Orange County who need or want these new <br /> jobs have the means to_ get- t-o the proposed economic development zones and (3) <br /> will the cost of servicing the new development outweigh the tax revenue <br /> generated. There are studies that indicate that these traditional industrial <br /> recruitment models at best break even in terms of taxes versus services. He <br /> noted that when taking into account the full cost of services to commercial <br /> and industrial development plus the cost of servicing any -new residential <br /> development generated, at best this strategy breaks even. Mr. Sipress made <br /> three proposals: (1) before considering the full scale proposal for economic <br /> development zones, do a smaller demonstration project to see if whether in <br /> fact it works. By doing this the County will see what type of businesses will <br /> locate here, what type of employment these businesses will generate and if <br /> they will employ Orange County people. A study will be able to be done on the <br /> impact of services and revenues. (2) He suggested as a criteria for <br /> participation that businesses submit a local work force development plan which <br /> would include a discussion of how many County residents this business intends <br /> to employ and how they plan to employ them. The plan would discuss what kind <br /> of training they are going to make available so that the people of the county <br /> who need and want work will be able to get jobs with the new .employers and be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.