Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
41 <br />Roy Wilson, resident two miles north of Mars Hill Baptist Church on NC <br />57, expressed concerns with the traffic and the current problems getting <br />onto NC 86 during morning and afternoon hours. He indicated he was <br />not against the project, but would like some relief from traffic that is <br />already an issue. <br />Selkirk stated that he felt development in the area is inevitable and he did <br />not feel the evidence of non - compliance was very strong. He indicated <br />he would be in favor of approval of the project moving forward. <br />Strayhom agreed with Selkirk noting that he had clarified his position <br />that it would be done in the best way possible considering the church and <br />the surrounding community. He felt if the school is built, the remainder <br />of the bypass will be moved farther up the priority list. He continued that <br />it would be nice to have schools built before the children come and roads <br />built before the traffic comes but it does not happen that way. <br />Allison stated that there are some things about the proposal that he liked <br />such as the public /private partnerships that are happening, the concept of <br />the school in the neighborhood. There seems to be good efforts to share <br />with the community on the costs of water and sewer and roads. That is <br />something that is not often heard of. He felt it was a good start to what <br />could be some good planning for the area. <br />Brooks expressed appreciation for the comment regarding variety of <br />incomes. She would like to see more efforts for a variety of housing. <br />She also appreciated the willingness to work with residents already in the <br />area. <br />McAdams expressed concern that once the area becomes Ten -Year <br />Transition, since there is no plan, that the door will be open and <br />development that is not favored by the community could be allowed. <br />Barrows reminded the Board that what is being considered is a proposed <br />Land Use Plan amendment and that does not allow stipulations about the <br />plan at this point. <br />Katz again expressed concern with the potential for unintended <br />consequences which could happen every time decisions are made for <br />changes. <br />MOTION: Brooks moved acceptance of the proposed Land Use Plan amendment. <br />Seconded by Selkirk. <br />VOTE: 6 in favor. <br />2 opposed (Barrows, Katz). <br />Barrows expressed concern that the infrastructure is not in place to <br />support the development and the county will be in the position of reacting <br />to growth rather than planning for it. <br />AGENDA ITEM #6: MATTERS PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC HEARING (MAY 24, 1999) <br />a. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT <br />