Orange County NC Website
Attachment 3 10 <br />Renee Price: I think the notion of 10-year transition should go away and be <br />eliminated. We are trying to make a vision for Efland-Mebane, which I think is <br />fine, but what if what we propose now has nothing to do with where things would <br />be later with zoning categories. <br />Perdita Holtz: The Land Use Element definition would change but there would <br />be no way that someone outside the overlay district could apply for something <br />non-residential. <br />Jay Bryan: There is a difference opinion or concern about these issues. If we <br />did not approve this, how long would it take the Efland Mebane plan to be <br />implemented in a way that allows what has been recommended to occur? <br />Perdita Holtz: If the Planning Board recommends non-approval, it would go to <br />the Board of County Commissioners anyway. If they voted it down, we would <br />work with County Management to see how they want to proceed. We may be <br />able to do a map amendment. <br />Craig Benedict: At the August meeting, we will discuss some of these <br />implementing items that are part of the Efland Mebane SAP that will be on the <br />August Quarterly Public Hearing. Let us try to plot out some options. I think you <br />could make a decision tonight on this issue but give us same time to sketch out <br />our thought process. <br />Jay Bryan: Could you create a transition area with its own definition for Efland <br />Mebane area? <br />Perdita Holtz: It would require a Land Use Element map amendment because <br />the map has it as a 10 year transition area. <br />Craig Benedict: We are suggesting a zoning overlay. <br />Jay Bryan: I don't think that is a concern but more about the implications of other <br />areas. <br />MOTION made by Brian Crawford to accept the Proposed Amendments to the <br />Text of the Land Use Element on page 69-70. Bernadette Pelissier seconded. <br />VOTE: (6 Ayes; 3 Opposed (Jay Bryan, Renee Price, Craufurd Goodwin) <br />