Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
23 <br />REPORT: RURAL BUFFER STRATEGY ALTERNATIVES <br />This report outlines the status of Joint Planning Area Land Use <br />Plan /Joint Planning Agreement amendments that were presented at <br />public hearing on August 30, 1990. These amendments would implement <br />the Rural Character Study Committee's Conceptual Guideline for the <br />Rural Buffer. Consideration by the Towns and the County Planning <br />Board have resulted in two different types of recommendations or <br />actions. Alternative actions for the Commissioners' consideration <br />have been identified, with the pros /cons of each alternative. <br />BACKGROUND <br />This report will not attempt to document the consensus- building <br />process that occurred in this diverse committee's work. Nor will it <br />attempt to recount the meetings and sessions from November 1989 to <br />May 1990 where the Conceptual Guidelines.. were formulated and <br />agreed upon. It is important to note, however, that this consensus - <br />building and communication with Rural Buffer residents was <br />achieved. It is this work which yielded the strong chemistry of the <br />Conceptual Guidelines.... <br />The action items at the August 30 public hearing were: <br />1) LUP --4 -90 (amendments to the text of the JPA Land Use Plan), and <br />2) a text amendment to the Joint Planning Agreement. <br />The general purpose of the amendments is to introduce the concept <br />of open -space development options (also known as cluster) into the <br />text of the plan. These are the only amendments that were necessary <br />to implement the recommendations of the committee. The majority of <br />committee's recommendations did not require amendments to the plan. <br />The actions of the Town Planning Boards, Town elected boards and <br />County Planning Board regarding these amendments are documented in <br />fuller detail on the attached Status Report - which summarizes (in <br />chronological fashion) what has transpired since August 30. <br />The deliberations and actions by these boards have resulted in two <br />sets of recommendations: <br />1. The Carrboro Planning Board, Chapel Hill Planning Board, <br />Carrboro Board of Aldermen and Orange County Planning Board <br />have= recommended a version of LUP -4 =90 based on the Rural <br />Character Study Committee's recommendations, as amended by a <br />September 20 addendum. <br />2. The Chapel Hill Town Council on February 25, 1991 adopted a <br />small portion of the September 20 amended package - agreeing <br />to two of the three development options that did not require <br />sewer, and calling for a Joint Work Group to discuss policy <br />issues raised. <br />(It should be noted that the September 20 addendum was designed <br />