Browse
Search
Minutes 02-27-2012
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Minutes 02-27-2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/24/2015 10:47:22 AM
Creation date
5/17/2012 2:51:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/27/2012
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Agenda
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C1
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C2
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C3
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C4
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C5
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C6
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C7
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C8
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012 - C9
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
Agenda - 02-27-2012-C10
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-27-2012 - Quarterly Public Hearing
ORD-2012-005 Ordinance approving Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget Amendment #6
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
Todd Orr spoke against the pian to rezone the area north of Old NC 10 and south of the <br /> railroad to ECE-1. It is inconsistent with the current residential character or undeveloped character of <br /> this area. He said that this area is proposed by Durham to be low-density residential. He does not <br /> understand why Orange County would be proposing a more intense development of that area. <br /> Chris Ke�sey said that the maps are very confusing. He suggested that the maps be clearer. <br /> He said that he moved into Orange County to be in a more rural environment. He suggested limiting <br /> the amount of industry. <br /> Commissioner McKee asked for an answer to a question about forced hookups to water and <br /> sewer. Craig Benedict said that no lines would be extended to specific properties in the residential <br /> neighborhoods. There will be a policy similar to the City of Durham's sewer policy. <br /> John Roberts said that several people mentioned annexation as a concern. He said that <br /> annexation is not a County function. He said that the General Assembly has made annexation a little <br /> more difficult for cities to do involuntarily. Cities now have to provide notice to counties when they <br /> cross county lines. Property owners do have the ability to some extent block involuntary annexation. <br /> For the most part, cities will only annex on a voluntary process. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs asked if the western portion of what is being proposed beyond where <br /> it was recommended by the Eno EDD group. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the westem portion was not within the original Eno Economic <br /> Development boundary. When the Durham interlocal agreement was brought forward, it was found <br /> that there was an urban growth boundary outside of the Eno and it was suggested to bring forth land <br /> use plan amendments to backfill the urban growth boundary. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that last week when the Board considered the advertisement for <br /> this public hearing, he specifically asked if this exactly followed what the Eno EDD Work Group <br /> recommended and Craig Benedict said yes. He said that this is, in fact, not true, but it is an <br /> amplification to match what Durham put on the map of Orange County. It is not what the EDD work <br /> group recommended to the Board of County Commissioners. <br /> Craig Benedict said that aspects within that Eno Economic Development zone, especially <br /> around Whispering Pines,were within the district. That part is correct. There were areas outside of <br /> that, and if he was not as clear,then he apologizes. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that he started on the Planning Board in 1985 and this is one of <br /> the most poorly presented proposals that he has seen. There was a small area plan in which the <br /> Board of County Commissioners had no presentation and members of the public had to bring it up at <br /> the community meeting. There is still no copy. The maps are very confusing. There was not one <br /> word mentioned by staff about environmentat impacts. There was not one word mentioned by staff <br /> about rural character impacts. There was barely a mention of neighborhood impacts. He said that <br /> this is a County where these are the values (applause). He does support economic development <br /> and he has worked on virtually all of the small area plans, but to rush to do something without doing it <br /> thoroughly and openly is a mistake. He suggested getting some written responses from Durham <br /> about what happens when the water tine crosses individual properties. All of the issues of <br /> annexation need to be in writing. He wants to be honest with people that they will be in the City of <br /> Durham at some point. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.