Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
'..AFT Q I �J <br /> DRAFT PBM MINUTES 8-5-86 PAGE 13 <br /> 6. Make the following changes in the vicinity of the I- <br /> 40/NC 86 interchange: <br /> a. Change all "Light Industrial " designations to <br /> "Office and Institutional " except for existing zoned <br /> area on Eubanks Road adjacent to railroad . <br /> b . Change designation of area between landfill sites <br /> to "Public/Private Open Space" to reflect Town of <br /> Chapel Hill acquisition and future development of <br /> site, including landfill tracts, for recreation <br /> purposes . <br /> c. Reduce "Office/ Institutional " designation on <br /> triangular are south of Eubanks Road and adjacent to <br /> railroad to encourage "upgrading" of existing commer- <br /> cial use zoned Existing Commercial EC-5 . <br /> 7 . Change designation of area on Homestead Road between <br /> Homestead Road and railroad, and east of railroad, <br /> from "Urban Residential " to "Suburban Residential " . <br /> 8. Retain designation of "Extractive/Disposal " on <br /> landfill site south of Eubanks Road and adjacent to <br /> railroad . Label site as "Potential Landfill - Pending <br /> Further Study" to alert people of potential for <br /> development as a landfill . Actual use of site could <br /> not be commenced until issuance of Class A Special Use <br /> Permit and following public hearing . <br /> Collins stated that it was not included in the agenda <br /> materials, but that the staff was also recommending that <br /> the triangular shaped piece of property south of CHIP and <br /> adjacent to the railroad be designated Office and <br /> Institutional . He said the property currently contained <br /> a non-conforming, sub-standard commercial use. It was <br /> felt that the 01 designation would provide an opportunity <br /> for upgrading to a better type of non-residential use. <br /> 9. Retain proposed "Urban" activity node designation at <br /> Star Point to reflect existing commercial uses . <br /> Collins stated that in retaining the node at Star Point <br /> we were not calling for an expansion of commercial uses, <br /> but rather a recognition of existing uses. <br /> Jacobs said there seemed to be some confusion as to what <br /> was recommended here and asked what the TAC had recom- <br /> mended . Bell referred members to page 95, point 5 (May 8 <br /> TAC minutes) for the TAC position which was reaffirmed at <br /> the TAC meeting on July 30 . The position was that the <br /> area be designated as shown in the January 14 Draft of <br />