Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
27 <br /> to property lines. <br /> VOTE: 6 in favor. <br /> 5 opposed (Allison & Katz - reasons already <br /> stated, Brown - saw no need for expansion of EDD <br /> at this time, Hoecke - felt incentives should be <br /> provided for developers or it would become less <br /> of an Economic Development District, Walters - <br /> felt the undeveloped portion should be a buffer <br /> area. <br /> MOTION: Jobsis moved to accept the Planning Staff <br /> recommendation that the Moren property not be <br /> included in the EDD. Seconded by Katz. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous. <br /> MOTION: Rosemond made a motion to extend the buffer to <br /> match the northern line of the property. Seconded <br /> by Katz. <br /> Rosemond stated that this motion was made in <br /> response to Howie's concern about buffers and to <br /> be consistent with what has already been done on <br /> the property. <br /> Waddell noted that he was concerned about the <br /> buffering for Cornwallis Hills properties because <br /> there were pre-existing residential properties. <br /> Allison felt this would set a bad precedent and <br /> buffers would have to be determined for each <br /> subdivision when reviewed by the Planning Board. <br /> Price expressed concern with the lack of <br /> protection all along NC 86. <br /> VOTE: 5 in favor (Rosemond, Katz, Brown, Hoecke, <br /> Price) . <br /> 7 opposed (Barrows, Howie, Allison, Reid, Jobsis, <br /> Walters, Waddell) . <br /> Motion failed. <br /> (3) Article 6.29.3 EDD Design Manual <br /> (Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment) <br /> Presentation by Mary Willis. <br /> This item is to consider a proposed amendment to <br /> eliminate the requirement for a 100-foot buffer <br /> along the perimeter of an Economic Development <br />