Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
74 <br /> 1 reality for the neighbors from various points of view. These are all things that could be <br /> 2 calculated and known and not spoken of in terms of generalities and double talk. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 Our neighborhood has demonstrated tonight what being in harmony means. And I <br /> 5 suggest that this proposal would only seem to be in harmony with our community and <br /> 6 neighborhood if someone were tone deaf. We have spoken with a unified voice, with a <br /> 7 harmonious voice. We are strong supporters of the idea of progressive good energy for our <br /> 8 community, our nation, and the globe. It is urgent that we do that, but we have not heard here <br /> 9 tonight a good argument for doing it in this way. And, so please hear our voices clearly, and <br /> 10 think about the issue of the harmony of our community and our County and how we should <br /> 11 approach these issues. <br /> 12 <br /> 13 Pete Hallenbeck: Alright, thank you. We'll have one more opportunity here if the <br /> 14 Commissioners have any questions for the applicants. If not, the planning board portion of this <br /> 15 meeting is done. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Chair Jacobs: Well then we at this point could, as I mentioned previously, consider whether or <br /> 18 not we want to continue the public hearing or refer the item to the planning board. If we are <br /> 19 going to continue the public hearing, then the question is, do we want to identify particular items <br /> 20 of information that we request be provided on September 8th, should we continue it to the next <br /> 21 quarterly public hearing. So that, that's the issue before us at the moment. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Commissioner Gordon: Well I'd like to move that we continue the public hearing until <br /> 24 September 8th <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Commissioner Rich: Second. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to <br /> 29 continue to the public hearing to the September 8th Quarterly Public hearing. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 Chair Jacobs: Do we want to articulate. I know there were some things like the storm water <br /> 32 issue and the bonding issue that can just be referred to in the ordinance just for reference <br /> 33 purposes since they have come up as part of an amalgamation of the items that have been <br /> 34 raised this evening. But there are other issues that were raised that would require additional <br /> 35 work. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 And I don't know if you've been keeping a list. I'm sure Commissioner Gordon has been <br /> 38 keeping a list. I have kept a partial list. <br /> 39 <br /> 40 Michael Harvey: Yes sir. The direct answer to your question is the planning staff has been <br /> 41 keeping a list. We also will have the benefit of hopefully having the minutes and the tape to <br /> 42 review. My suggestion to you is going to be what we typically do with all of these types of <br /> 43 projects, where we summarize questions, concerns, and comments; provide them to the <br /> 44 applicant, as well as to Mr. Rooks in this case, the opposing counsel; and indicate which <br /> 45 questions we believe staff is best suited to answer, specifically questions on the unified <br /> 46 development ordinance and what not; and obviously ask them to respond to your concerns <br /> 47 comments and questions in preparation for the September 8th meeting. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Chair Jacobs: And so some of those information requests might require the applicant to do <br /> 50 additional work on specific topics. <br /> 51 <br />