OCPB agenda 020415 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

D R A F T 2 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS Pete Hallenbeck: Just to clarify, when we have a guest speaker come to speak to us it is for our information and not to create a public forum, that is not the purpose here. We will strike a compromise tonight and allow Bonnie to ask a few questions. Pete Hallenbeck: Keep in mind that due to open meeting laws, when members email each other back and forth those emails are public record and as such will be part of the record or minutes. Pete Hallenbeck: In the meeting the BOCC had with advisory board chairs, I asked about the preference for information in the minutes and the consensus was that going around the table is helpful and concise and the open back and forth discussion can become confusing and hard to follow. We will try to get away from that some and especially if something has been discussed at length. AGENDA ITEM 7: OVERVIEW OF COUNTY’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES: To receive an overview on the County’s economic development activities, as requested at the November 5th Planning Board meeting. Presenter: Steve Brantley, Economic Development Director Steve Brantley gave an in-depth review of the economic development department and its efforts to attract business and the challenges faced in Orange County. Tony Blake: They broke ground on Chatham Park yesterday, in one sense I’m a little afraid of over building, there seems to be a lot of competing dollars and projects going on, is there a concern that we might try to over build? And not be competitive? Steve Brantley: How could we over build? We can run 4 million dollars’ worth of water and sewer to serve industry that takes these sites whether they are marginal sites with poor topography and eye sores, whatever but the water sewer boundary agreement says you cannot have that industry that would rather be on the other side of the road and connect to utilities, it cannot happen. From there south all the way to the rural buffer to Chapel Hill/Carrboro it is rural. When you factor in watershed protection issues, and the water and sewer boundary agreement, the rural buffer you have multiple overlapping restrictions that won’t allow industry or a Tanger mall type of development to be anywhere other than just along the highway. Paul Guthrie: We’ve been looking for years at a unified water system, Durham, Cary, Raleigh, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. There are some connections but there is not a straight way in. One of the long range development plans that needs to be undertaken is a serious look at the long range needs for water and wastewater disposal. Aren’t those some common projects for multiple municipalities? That is a real key to give you tools but will also protect this whole area from long term droughts. Steve Brantley: I wish that certain sites that border the existing EDDs, even though outside the water and sewer boundary agreement, could be incorporated. If that’s what it takes to get that big project which would otherwise walk and go to Alamance County, I’d like to be able to have that as an option. Secondly, what I personally consider the best land in Orange County to attract business is where 85 and 40 come together in Efland. There is watershed and water and sewer boundary issues that keep all that land off limits to what actually would be the most successful to develop with big projects. It has rail, it has visibility, it is not encumbered with topography, housing, etc. Tony Blake: I am really more of a representative of Bingham, and what they want is small community/organic business. What is stopping that is the land doesn’t perk and there is no way to support sewer, however, I’ve seen two instances in my immediate area where there is a technology call AdvanTex. We put it in in the fire department. UNC is using it at their animal research facility. What I’m wondering is there a way to bring in a private organization 10