Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-19-2005-5g
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2005
>
Agenda - 04-19-2005
>
Agenda - 04-19-2005-5g
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2008 1:22:02 AM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:15:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/19/2005
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5g
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />_,,<~sentative of what the Commissioners goals were, the focus would have been water quality <br />and not covering all the other bases. I perceived the Commissioner sharing a message of `we aze <br />happy with what you are doing and go forwazd'. We are going to step up the priority of water <br />quality issues, and I am interested in making sure we don't slack off in the efforts of the <br />Comprehensive Ptan,. <br />Renee Price: Water quality was brought up in the 90's. <br />Hunter Schofield: If we were to only deal with water quality issues, then it should have been the <br />only focus, but it wasn't. This reveals a disagreement by the Commissioners' ideas of emphasis <br />of the Land Use Plan. <br />Craufurd Goodwin: Craig emphasized air quality.. If there are issues in water quality, then we <br />should address that issue. <br />Renee Price: We can continue to comply with the BOCC or address new issues. <br />Sam Lasris: I don't see that maintaining water quality is inconsistent with our other goals <br />.Jay Bryan: We have to make our case to the Commissioners that they may not be on track <br />Hunter Schofield: We would overestimate our role in the process if we thought the Land Use <br />Element was our architecture. It is not ours, but the Commissioners. Even with CPLUC, this <br />wasn't an organic process. There was an agenda that had very specific goals and then a series of <br />tools to satisfy those goals, but none of that was original. All of that was presented by Orange <br />County. We need to bring a case back to the Commissioners that many other issues need to be <br />addressed. Brian Dobyns has been questioning this, and that's what the work group is doing. <br />There is a certain strategic value in emphasizing water quality over rural character. I don't see a <br />shift in the Commissioners' agenda. <br />Noah Ranells: Our' role as the Planning Boazd is being a participant in the process. Regardless <br />of what has gone on, I take pride in the Planning Boazd engaging in the whole process. If the <br />Commissioners would like to go forward with their own agenda and priorities, that is fine. Our <br />role is to provide input. <br />Robert Davis: You may want to read through the section in the Zoning Ordinance where it sets <br />forth the Planning Board's role in the Comprehensive Plan Process. <br />Noah Ranells: I appreciate Jay Bryan for chairing the worltgroup. The Agricultural Preservation <br />involvement in the workgroup is important and the County Commissioner's concern of that.. It is <br />my feeling that from the County Commissioner and Manager level, there was no direction given <br />to the ERCD to partake in the process. That's why it ended up in a Planning Boazd forum. The <br />Agricultural Preservation Boazd would be interested in hearing the resuits. <br />Craufurd Goodwin: When can we expect a report? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.