Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
0410 ll <br /> ing if part of that motion was to limit water and sewer <br /> pending the study. <br /> Jacobs responded yes, on the completion of the study. <br /> Kramer stated that as a move to get off of "a stuck spot" <br /> he would consider changing his vote on the original <br /> motion. <br /> Lewis also indicated he would be willing to support the <br /> original motion. <br /> MOTION: Kramer moved to reconsider the original motion. He <br /> indicated concerns that it compromises the Rural Buffer, <br /> but he was swayed by what Walters said as well. <br /> Jacobs noted that there is an option for those concerned <br /> about the Rural Buffer. The whole Bolin Creek Basin does <br /> not have to be transition. Moving the transition back to <br /> the whole Bolin Creek basin is in recognition of <br /> engineering realities. The borders of Transition Area I <br /> are based on population projections. <br /> Hubbard expressed concern that if we cut back on <br /> transition in this area. we' re going to see growth <br /> pressures re-emerge in other areas. <br /> Lewis called the question. <br /> VOTE: 6 in favor (Jacobs. Lewis, Walters. Kramer. Taylor. <br /> Eddleman) . <br /> 4 opposed (Pilkey, Margison, Hubbard. Swann) . <br /> Margison stated that her reaon for opposing the motion <br /> was protection of the watershed. <br /> Pilkey stated her opposition was due to the fact that she <br /> did not see sufficient justification for Carrboro' s <br /> expansion plans. <br /> Hubbard stated he felt that we should have asked for more <br /> related to the watershed and felt they were separate <br /> issues also. <br /> Jacobs indicated the Board still had to vote on the swap <br /> issue. <br /> MOTION: Hubbard moved that the swap not be recommended. Seconded <br /> by Pilkey. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous. <br />