Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved May 21, 2008 <br />103 <br />104 <br />105 <br />106 <br />107 <br />108 <br />109 <br />110 <br />111 <br />112 <br />113 <br />114 <br />115 <br />116 <br />117 <br />118 <br />119 <br />120 <br />121 <br />122 <br />123 <br />124 <br />125 <br />126 <br />127 <br />128 <br />129 <br />130 <br />131 <br />132 <br />133 <br />134 <br />135 <br />136 <br />137 <br />138 <br />139 <br />140 <br />141 <br />142 <br />143 <br />144 <br />145 <br />146 <br />147 <br />148 <br />149 <br />150 <br />151 <br />152 <br />153 <br />154 <br />Karen Barrows: What became of the bonds issued for sewer expansion for Efland? - The bond money is still there <br />but the sewer system project cost more than expected. The first public hearing for the sewer expansion project took <br />place at the April 1st BOCC meeting. (Per federal grant guidelines requirements.) The second public hearing will be <br />on the May 1st BOCC agenda. <br /> <br /> Paul Guthrie asked for further clarification of the sewage treatment facility: if transportation of waste collection would <br />be needed. The sewer expansion is only to expand the existing lines in the Efland area. Orange County has an <br />agreement with the Town of Hillsborough for wastewater treatment. There are not plans for the county to do its own <br />waste treatment facility. The (water and sewer system service to) EDD area is in a separate watershed basin. <br />Frazier Road is the basin dividing line. In 2004 the County entered into an interlocal agreement with the City of <br />Mebane to provide water and sewer services to the EDD area. <br /> <br />Perdita Holtz reviewed the Land Use recommendations, making note of areas not currently within the water and <br />sewer boundary agreement (pointing to map). There is a recommendation in the Plan to amend that agreement to <br />include Orange Alamance Water Service and the City of Mebane. The Plan recommends that the Commercial <br />Industrial Node on the west side of Buckhorn Road north of West Ten Road be changed (zoned) to the Economic <br />Development District and that the area north of Bowman Road (outside Mebane’s municipal limit) adjacent to the <br />expanded EDD be developed as mixed use. The Plan recommends that the economic development land use <br />definition be amended to include potential for high density multifamily. <br /> <br />Alice Gordon asked what is the intent regarding when these designations are going to be changed, and where are <br />the recommendations coming from. The recommendations are coming from the Efland/Mebane Small Area Plan <br />Task Force and the intent is to bring them forward after Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan is finished. <br /> <br />Nancy Cole Baker asked what would be the advantages to a business of locating in the EDD as opposed to the <br />commercial node. The economic development area is zoned EDD and most of the commercial industrial nodes are <br />zoned R1, which is low density residential. The zoning is not congruent with the land use plan. <br /> <br />Nancy Cole Baker asked where the proposed density in population is for Efland and if there would be a town center <br />or town hall. Will there be places where people can walk? It would be hard to have a high-density community in this <br />location. <br /> <br />Perdita Holtz answered there’s not a central focus point but a lot of people consider the area of Efland-Cedar Grove <br />Road and Hwy 70 the core. This is an unincorporated area. One of the recommendations is to develop design <br />guidelines for the mixed-use core area and that would be the urban design component. There’s an implementation <br />focus group that works with us on this. <br /> <br />Paul Guthrie asked if the Buckhorn Village development is compatible with this plan. Does the plan intend building <br />a centralized core community (in the Efland area)? The area of the proposed Buckhorn Village is designated as <br />EDD and retail has always been a component of the EDD. The implementation focus group looked at 7500 acres. <br />The recommendation in the Plan is to amend the EDD definition for land use to include high density as a potential <br />use. <br /> <br />Nancy Cole Baker stated that we like this vision and hope that the new shopping center will not derail any of it. <br /> <br />Jan Grossman asked why do you feel that you needed to expand the area and to bring water to those areas. <br /> <br />Perdita Holtz answered that when you start looking at where water and sewer lines run it makes sense to service that <br />area and hold the line to the southern boundary of West Ten. <br /> <br />Alice Gordon stated we don’t have very many economic development areas in the county and if you ever try to add it <br />into the residential area people don’t want you to mix it in. If you have an economic development district that allows <br /> Page 8 of 6