Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Discussion <br /> 1) Envirotek: At the hearing on April 6, the Planning <br /> Staffs of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County recommended <br /> denial of this request. Reasons for the recommendation included <br /> the fact that the requested change was of a scale that would <br /> serve to damage the Rural Buffer Concept, and therefore be in <br /> " conflict with adopted plans and policies. The Planning Staffs <br /> suggested that there was no justification for the requested <br /> change. . <br /> Comments at the hearing focused on what use might be made of this <br /> property (approximately 424 acres) if the land use plan were <br /> changed as requested and the property were to be . rezoned. <br /> Concerns about traffic, environmental degradation, and noise were <br /> expressed. The applicant stated that low-density residential use <br /> was not suitable for this property, and that the change should be <br /> approved. • <br /> Planning Board's Recommendation: At its meeting of . April 18, <br /> 1989, the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that Town Council <br /> deny the request. <br /> Manager's Recommendation: We recommend that the Council' adopt <br /> Resolution 3B, denying the requested change to the Joint Planning <br /> Area Land Use Plan. (Same as staff recommendation presented at <br /> April 6, 1989 hearing) . '-.- <br /> Adoption` of the alternative,- Resolution - 3A,-• would. approve the <br /> request. . <br /> 2) Caz well: At the hearing, the three Planning Departments <br /> recommended approval of request. Reasons included the fact that <br /> this 1.5 acre parcel is a fraction of a 25 acre parcel, most of <br /> which is located in Durham County; -• the 1.5 acre parcel is on the <br /> outer edge of the Rural Buffer, adjacent to the Durham Urban <br /> Growth Area; the larger parcel has been approved for a subdivi- <br /> sion by Durham City and County, with sewer to be provided by <br /> Durham; and the fact that most of the 1.5 .acres, if this request <br /> is approved and zoning adjusted accordingly, will be used as back <br /> yards for lots that are mostly in Durham County. <br /> Comments at the hearing-- focused on . the, question of whether <br /> ' granting this request would damage the concept. or integrity of . <br /> the Rural Buffer. - _ • <br /> ' Planning Board's Recommendation: -. Adoption of the - alternative, <br /> Resolution 4B, would deny the request. • At. its meeting of April <br /> 18, 1989, the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Town <br /> Council approve the request. <br /> Manager's Recommendation: We recommend- that the Council adopt <br /> Resolution 4A, approving this request. We believe the circum- <br /> stances of this .case are such that approval of the request is <br /> reasonable, and can be accomplished without damage to the concept <br /> III <br />