|
PAGE 9
<br /> - " "' 6
<br /> .. . _ .... ....._ _ .... . • ._ .. . . . . .
<br /> . . .
<br /> ..:.-•
<br /> • .
<br /> he be allowed to stay in the *GC-4 zoning classifications and be allowed to operate his
<br /> ! business and make a living.
<br /> Ms. Carol Tingley, representing the Division of Parks and Recreation, stated .
<br /> concern about the implications of this proposed land use change. The Eno River State
<br /> Park is'very close to this property. Some of the 25 acres is adjacent to land which
<br /> is proposed for acquisition in the master plan for the Park. Any °type of high-
<br /> 3 intensity:commercial or industrial use at this location could be detrimental to the
<br /> ) park. Facilities which could result in excessive noise, polluted runoff, smoke,
<br /> ) odors, or. tall buildings would significantly reduce public enjoyment of the river and
<br /> I
<br /> the park. ' Although Mr. Kennedy's, plans may not change, changing the Land Use Plan
<br /> leaves the door open to future development of this kind. The County's current Land
<br /> 1
<br /> Use Plan is very clear that this particular quadrant of the intersection should be .
<br /> I : treated differently than the other quadrants because of its proximity to the park.
<br /> The existing'Land Use Plan indicates that the areas including the park and the river
<br /> should be protected from adverse development pressures. In referencing the activity
<br /> ' node at the 1-85 and U.S. 70 interchange, the plan indicates that the Eno River State
<br /> 3 Peek; as well as the flood plain along the Eno River, are located north of this
<br /> ..? interchange and. therefore industrial and commercial development should be confined to
<br /> ) • the area south and east of the interchange. In a letter to the Division of Parks and .
<br /> 1 Recreation last March, the County indicated its commitment to maintain the land-use - .
<br /> ' designation in the Land Use Plan which will provide low density, non-intensive uses
<br /> 3 . around'the-parki Periphery. She asked, that the Land Use Plan not be changed. . •
<br /> 4 ' - However, if this amendment is approved it needs to include a provision to protect this
<br /> _ .
<br /> land from future intensive uses which are not a part of the present proposal but which
<br /> 3
<br /> 'C could be available to a land owner if the Land Use Plan is changed. Examples would
<br /> 7 include a limit on building height;. protections from noise and excessive lighting - -
<br /> , t ,
<br /> 3 :::;,:.:wed:::.:z..:.::.1..:.:,....:.....:::::,....z-.±-,:.::7-,,-:.:....--.....7„..,...,•;,-=. , . ...;.,..,,-.,-..--..:-..,..-,-_-,-..--.7-. .. -; — --• .
<br /> 3 :-...--,:-..:'4 :':-.'.7.:....".;',.• '.:::,''..:::::::•f":::Y-.--.4-.1,-,•-•-',;7-4:'' : : •'''.'":.'---I.."'• ''': "*.---.-'-' - • ' . . •. .. . .. . .. . .. . .
<br /> . . -
<br /> ) -...7.:-7T. Garry W,;-Dean-of ROute.11,::' Dove Creek Road in Orange County spoke in support of .
<br /> iir.-..:; Karnedy:Crequest stating the land was sold to him as GC4 and he should be able :
<br /> 2 -. to use. and maintain-ieas GC4.-- ---... ." :-:. -- * . : • .
<br /> . . .. . -
<br /> . . . -
<br /> ... . .
<br /> . .
<br /> i — TIC PUBLIC HEARING WAS 'CLOSED:- --
<br /> . • •
<br /> . . .
<br /> . ...•• . .. ._ .
<br /> •• ..
<br /> _ _ . . • : . •
<br /> _ . . • .
<br /> , Commissioner Marshall stated that the Board of Commissioners are in agreement
<br /> 7 that when the County makes a mistake it must do everything possible to correct the
<br /> 3 _mistake without hurting the property owner,. The Board of Commissioners did agree on
<br /> 4 another' approach that will be presented later on the agenda that would certainly show
<br /> ) respect for the State Parkland and the Board's commitment to that quadrant.
<br /> , • - - • -
<br /> . . .. • . . .• , . . . . . . .
<br /> . - -..
<br /> - . A motion was made by Commissioner Wilihoit,. seconded by Commissioner HalklotiS;
<br /> 3 . to refer this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be presented to the
<br /> 4
<br /> • Board, of Commissioners no sooner than April 3rd, 1989.
<br /> - - • —
<br /> . • . , . .
<br /> 2 -
<br /> . . .
<br /> ' S • VOTE: UNANIMOUS .... . •• • '
<br /> . . . . •• . • .•
<br /> • .. • • - -
<br /> ; . ---... . c. . LUP-3-89 University Station Associates - (Rural • - '
<br /> 5 . . Residential/Agricultural/Resource Conservation to 10-Year Transition)
<br /> 3 . ' . The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. In summary this item is to
<br /> .
<br /> receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of
<br /> 2 the Comprehensive Plan submitted by University Station Associates. -
<br /> _
<br /> 3 . .
<br /> 4 The property is located south of the Southern Railroad on both sides of Old N.C.
<br /> 5 . .
<br /> . . . . .
<br /> 7 •
<br /> )
<br /> .■
<br />
|