Minutes 11-01-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

a written response as to how this got buried within the consent agenda, given that this is a really big change. Bonnie Hauser said that it appeared that the proposed Rural Economic Development Conditional District was partly driven by the desire to develop the NC 57 area in Caldwell. She said that the hope is that Orange County would meet with the local community to update the small area plan before any changes would be considered. She said that there is no basis to believe that a conditional district that allows commercial or industrial applications to come to the rural community is needed or desirable. She said that it is a waste of time and taxpayer money to pursue any further work on conditional district for rural economic development areas. This issue was decided last spring. She asked the Board to remove item 6 from the agenda item. She asked about the process to discuss or agree on the priority for UDO enhancements. She asked if the public missed an important discussion on Phase II of the UDO. Chair Pelissier said that in general the County Commissioners did set economic development as a priority for modifications to the UDO. She asked Planning Director Craig Benedict to remind the Board about this conversation. Craig Benedict said that each year the Orange County Board of County Commissioners does meet with the Planning Board and last year, they discussed the priorities for the coming year. One of the priorities is the implementation of the small area plans— Efland-Mebane, Eno Economic Development, and NC 57/Orange County Speedway. These small area plans were adopted in 2006, 2007, and 2008. The Rural Economic Activity Node ok n f n it is antici ated that this will be im lemented in areas where there are small wass e oad p p P area plans that have been approved and adopted by the Board. He said that this is not necessarily Phase II of the UDO, but these are some leftover small area plan implementation recommendations. Commissioner Gordon said that she had similar concerns and they are listed below: All, Here are my questions and comments for the November 1, 2011 BOCC meeting. 1. Item 5-h. Comp. Plan and UDO amendment outline. I have concerns about two specific sections for this item. , a. Section 1 is of concern, mainly because of the changes to 5.1.4. Which exclusions will be changed? What is the specific language proposed for the amendments in this section (EDB-3 and sec. 5.1.4)? b. Section 6 (REDA conditional zoning district) is also of concern, because it seems to propose intensive economic development in rural areas. What is the specific amendment language being proposed? Staff Response: Item 5-h: The purpose of the forms is for the BOCC to be aware of upcoming government-initiated public hearing items (in this case, for February 2012) that staff is working on and to approve the process components (i.e., the schedule and any proposed outreach). The specific language is not yet available since this item is "step 1" of the process (e.g., the BOCC directing staff to work on these items). If an item is proposed to go to the Planning Board's Ordinance Review Committee (ORC), draft language would be available by the ORC meeting date. The proposed draft language for