Minutes - 19771004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

T'. .- 4 ., 25,000. Mx. Jennings showed on a map the existing planning azea of the Town of Chapel Hill which is about 19.8 square miles, and of that about 10 square miles is in the corporate limits. This existing planning area was established in 1955 and has been in effect for 25 years to this date. The effect of this extension would permit the Town of Chapel Hill in its planning far this area, to implement zoning and subdivision regula- tions. This action would not be an annexation of the area. People in this area would not pay any additional taxes. The people living in this area would receive representation on the Town's Planning Board. Mr. Jennings presented a map of the proposed area to be extended. He stated that one hope of the Town of Chapel Hill is to provide for a Green Belt around the developed areas of Chapel Hill. .- Chairman Gustaveson then asked Ervin Dobson, County Planning Director, to speak of the County's Land Use Planning for this area. Mr. Dobson explained that dura.ng the past year, the County Planning Staff has been working with the Chapel Hill and Garrboro Planning Staffs and various community groups to devise a Land Classification System, which was adapted by the County Board of Commissioners this past Spring. He stated that this plan was a broad blue print for sound land manage- ment and not a mechanism for zoning. Mr. Dobson pointed out the developed areas in Chapel Hill Township, the transision areas, which are capable of becoming urbanized over a l0 year period. This area should be provided with urban services within the next year., This is an 8.6 square mile area. He pointed out the community areas which are cluster of rural develo~• ments. Water and sewer would not be available for these areas, but a variety of uses which would compliment each other for this rural setting. Mr. Dobson pointed out the rural transistion areas on the map. He stated that these areas could possa.ble become urbanized over the next 20 years. Therefore, there .is a need to have good coordination of roads, utilities, and etc. in terms of subdivision development. He last of all pointed nut the green belt areas of Chapel Hill Township. He stated that this land was classified as conservation land used for recreation, and scenic re- - Sources. All streams in the Township should be treated as critical areas. Mr. Dobson pointed out the rural areas on the map and stated that these _ areas would be low density, residential/farm living. Chairman Gustaveson turned the meeting over the Gounty Planning Board Chairman, Dr. Robert Bonar. Dr. Bonar stated that the meeting would be open for public input and that the Board would hear from the proponents first. He asked if there were those persons who wished to speak in support of the extension. No one came forth. Dr. Bonar asked if there were those who wished to speak in apposi- tion to the extension. B. B. Olive, a resident of Mt. Sinia Rcad, spoke against the exten-- Sion. He stated that he spoke in two capacities. (1) As a resident of the Mt. Sinia Road Community and (2) as coordinator in opposition to the X-40 alternate through Orange County. Mr. Olive stated that not many cf the residents of his area were aware of the public hearing tonight, and he wondered if the meeting had been well advertised. He stated that he was unsure of whether it was wise at this point in time to shift the land use control o£ this area, which is directly related to I-40, from _ the Orange County Planning Department to the Chapel. Hill Planning Depart- ment. He stated that he felt he must object to the extension on the grounds that the shift is unwise at this particular time. Dr. Jane Gaede spoke against the extension request of Chapel Hill "since Chapel Hill has discriminated against individual mobile homes by banning them from its entire twenty square miles of planning area". She asked that "the Gounty Commissioners reject Chapel Hill's proposal until Orange County receives an absolute iron-clad guarantee from the Town of Chapel Hill that all individual mobile homes on individual lots in the extended zoning area will be treated as conforming single-family dwellings, and that all future individual mobile homes located on individ- wally owned lots will be allowed in all the extended district as are to permit site-built single-family residence.