Minutes 09-06-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

To: Craig Benedict; Bernadette Pelissier; Pam Hemminger (External); Valerie Foushee; Alice Gordon (External); Barry Jacobs; Earl McKee; Steve Yuhasz Subject: BOCC Agenda Item- Eno Economic Development District Dear Orange County Commissioners, As a citizen of Orange County who lives along Old NC-10, I would implore you NOT to accept the current Eno Economic Development District zoning and land use proposals which will be discussed tomorrow night. You have heard from numerous residents who live along Old NC-10, which is a beautiful rural residential road, protest against the possibility of non-residential entities tainting our neighborhood. The current Land Use Classification AND Zoning is "Rural Residential". Based on negative public input, the planning board proposes to retain rural residential zoning, but still desires to change the Land Use Classification from rural residential to EDE-1, which allows a number of non-residential entities. This would negatively impact our neighborhood in many ways (increased traffic on two-lane road, dangerous underpasses, depress home values, etc). Further, the Zoning and Land use classification would not be consistent, which will create conflicts later. Finally, the Durham plan keeps this entire area as residential in their urban growth plan. Thus, the Orange County and Durham plans will not be consistent. I would strongly urge the board not to approve this proposal. The land use classification should either remain residential or the region around Old NC-10 should be removed from this economic development district. Sincerely, Chris Kelsey 208 Weldon Ridge Court Durham, NC 27705 Letter from Phillip Gunter: Dear Commissioner Pelissier: Thank you for your service to the citizens of Orange County. As I have noted in previous letters, because of the diversity of land use and interests among your constituents, your job must often be a daunting task. Regarding the rezoning issue in the Eno District, I remain concerned about the proposed changes. I attended the last meeting of the Planning Board (August 1, 2012). The revised proposal was approved, but not unanimously. Two board members in attendance voted against the proposal. They asked some good questions. At that meeting, I heard no good answers to those questions and concerns. My original concerns that I expressed to you in my letters of February 19, 2012; May 11, 2012; and May 21, 2012 remain: 1) storm water runoff; 2) noise pollution; and 3) air pollution. Since then, a letter written to you by Dr. Jon Arvik addressed in detail the well-defined and scientifically documented health dangers and risks caused by open-air grinding, crushing, and shredding of trash and construction debris. This activity is already "permitted" by Orange County on Mount Hermon Church road.