Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-29-2012 - C5
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Agenda - 05-29-2012 - Budget Work Session
>
Agenda - 05-29-2012 - C5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2015 11:06:03 AM
Creation date
5/21/2012 11:22:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/29/2012
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
C5
Document Relationships
Minutes 05-29-2012
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
A7 -TAc- vt m,-;v r �' <br />Eno Economic Development District (EDD) <br />Neighborhood information Meeting <br />February 25, 2012 <br />Citizen Comments <br />1. Stoney Creek Basin EDE -1 vs. EDE -2 <br />The EDE -2 is suggested by staff because of the frontage along 1 -85 and its relative <br />isolation between the interstate, Mt. Herman Church Road, railroad tracks, and high <br />voltage primary electric transmission lines. The opposite side (east) of the road is <br />also presently EDE -2. Also to the east is Existing Commercial zoning (EC -5). <br />2. Resource Protection Areas (RPA) <br />RPAs are a layer of the land use plan and are still operational in the Unified <br />Development Ordinance (UDO) to protect environmental areas (i.e. stream buffers, <br />steep slopes, etc.). <br />3. What is light industrial; compare Orange County and Durham County? <br />The uses were discussed during the Eno EDD SAP meetings and comparability was <br />achieved. Uses are not of the higher impact industrial. List of specific uses were <br />added to webpage. <br />4. Why now public utilities? <br />This area has been noted as an urban growth land use since 1981 and reconfirmed in <br />1994 and 2008. Recommendations in the Eno Small Area Plan suggested an <br />agreement with the City of Durham which was accomplished in January 2012. Orange <br />County is facilitating the proposed land use pattern since any one small or large <br />business could not afford to build infrastructure. Job growth is more important than <br />ever in designated areas. 84% of the county is rural and only 16% including cities and <br />along interstates is designated as Urban. <br />5. Annexation <br />These land use and zoning amendments do not create annexation programs. If a <br />new business or resident wants public water and sewer, they will sign a voluntary <br />annexation form and if the City of Durham decides the petition meets state law and is <br />fiscally feasible then it may be annexed. (See annexation monograph from City of <br />Durham) <br />6. Why are there two plans Orange County and City of Durham? <br />There are two land use plans (Orange County and City of Durham) and one zoning <br />plan (only Orange County). The area is within Orange County which has a land use <br />and zoning program. If a city also has an area of county within its future urban growth <br />boundary (UGB) then they also have a future land use plan map. Land use <br />comparability is key in these urban but non - extraterritorial jurisdictions (non -ETJ). <br />7. Mobile Home Parks <br />The northern mobile home park is being rezoned to EDE -2 which has frontage on 1 -85. <br />The southern mobile home park will remain Planned Development HR 4 zoning since <br />its approval contains special `Planned Development' conditions until such time a <br />different project is proposed. The future land use and existing zoning would allow <br />residential to remain and /or be upgraded. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.