Minutes - 19921214 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8 MARK MARCOPLOS stated he lives in Bingham Township approximately fifteen miles from the proposed University Station development. He thanked all the residents in the area for bringing forth additional information on this proposal. He hopes that this doesn't get labeled as a pro anti-development process. This is a situation where people are aware of the choices and aware that there will be development and they just want it to be the best it can be. Just because they oppose the proposed University Station development, it doesn't mean they oppose affordable housing, economic development or anti- development. He feels that the Rural Character Study should be amended and then proceed slowly. ALAN SEIFERHELD made two points on rural character. Because of the type of land that exist at University Station, the property most likely will not support more than 300 homes under the current zoning. University Station is asking for approximately 1100 homes, almost a 400$ increase in the density over what the land will now support. Water and sewer should not be extended into University Station. Extension of water and sewer will invite similar developments. He is opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. ELIZABETH ~POODMAN spoke for Michael Warner. She noted that Mr. Warner has reviewed the Land Use Plan which makes very specific recommendations about what types of development is in the interest of Orange County and where they should be located. She showed on a map the two high density areas of the County namely, Hillsborough and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area. Excluding those two areas, the average density in the County is seven units per 100 acres. the University Station proposal would transform this area from low to high. density and it would climb from seven units to 175 units per acre. The University Station development would constitute the highest density development between Hillsborough and Durham. She stated that the County is being asked to change the Land Use Plan to allow the developers to create this high density development and the third largest town in Orange County right in the middle of an area that matches every definition of rural. She made reference to page 322 of the Land Use Plan and the 22 categories listed. The only category that the proposed University Station development fits is Ten-Year Transition. She stated that the reasons for voting against this proposal include (1) it doesn't fit the Land Use Plan, (2) it creates leapfrog development in the inevitable corridor affect and (3) the process is not about planning but a reaction to what the developers want. She urged the Board of County Commissioners to reject University Station. LINDSAY EFLAND stated that on September 10, 1992, the Economic Development Commission passed a resolution stating their support for master planned developments where a wide range of housing opportunities, adequate open space, commercial activities for residents and support services are included. Based on the review of the concept plan for University Station the Economic Development Commission has concluded that this proposed development offers potential economic benefits for Orange County. They voted to support the proposed University Station village concept. Mr. Efland pointed out that mass transit and recreational space have been identified as long term goals. This proposal does address in some form these two long term goals. It has a diversity of housing styles, a diversity of prices and focuses growth. As present companies grow, they will bring in additional people who will need a place to live. He stressed that the decision before the Board of County Commissioners is very difficult and that it is a time for political leadership. There are many issues that will need to be addressed and they