Browse
Search
Agenda - 09-06-2012 - 6a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Agenda - 09-06-2012 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 09-06-2012 - 6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2016 3:29:08 PM
Creation date
9/11/2012 10:34:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/6/2012
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 09-06-2012
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2012
ORD-2012-036 Ordinance Amending the Zoning Atlas - Eno Economic Development District (EDD) Area Land Use
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
ORD-2012-037 (Not Approved) An Ordianance Denying Amendment to the Orange Co8unty Zoning Atlas for EDD
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-075 Resolution Amending the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-077 Resolution Concerning Statement of Consistency of a Proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment with the Adopted Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-078 NO ACTION - Resolution Concerning Statement of Inconsistency of a Proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment With the Adopted Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
Attachment 5 <br /> Eno Economic Development District (EDD) <br /> Neighborhood Information Meeting <br /> February 25, 2012 <br /> Citizen Comments <br /> 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.