Minutes - 19840827 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

?~ 5 [•is. Evenheis noted that many properties were rentals only until the ovmer's retirement. Kizer noted that the applicant should have the opportunity to responc: to Chapel Hi11's comments. i•Zotion was made by Commissioner whitted, seconded by Chair Taiilhoit to continue the Public Hearing on than item until September 18, lo8d_ Planning Board Chair Gordon felt there would be a problem with a quorum of the Planning Board at the September 18, 1984 meeting. County attorney Gledhill noted that the quorum continued from the original public hearing. VOTE: Ui1ANII10US. G2. pD-3-S4 HAMPTON.1?4Y~Ti~~~.x~c- Scvorn in: Claude Shiver, Anthony & Diane Harris, Larry Goss, Kathy Justice, I4icky Gonzalez, [•7endy white, idaryellen Gass, Candle Everhart, riargareite Cooper. Mike Covington, Beth Johnston, Dan C.L. Sears, Claudia G. Christy, bean T•~hate, Joel Johnston, Marvin Collins The staff presentation was made by Collins. This agenda item is to receive public comment on a planned development request for Hampton Downs far 29.7 acres of land located west of NC Highway 86 and south of the Southern Railroad. The purpose of the request is to allow construction of a 237--unit townhouse project. The property an question is known as part of Lot 4 of Orange County Tax :?ap 45, 13illsb'orough Township. The present zoning designation of the property is R-1 ;?esidential while the requested designation is PD (H) R-8. The property is located in a Ten-year 'Transition Area as designated in the Orange County band Use Plan. That designation permits•a range of residential densities from R-1 (one unit/acre) to R--13 (13 units/acre) provided certain zoning and development standards are met, and a Special Use Permit is obtained before development begins. The proposed Planned Development would allow medium density residential development of the site at a density of 7.98 units per acre. Collins reviewed the application requirements, the specific standads applicable to all special use permits, the specific standards for planned developments and the zoning criteria. Collins cited a letter of opposition. Willhoit stated that at the time trTaldwood Development was being reviewed, it was mentioned that higher density development was being planned far the back side of the property. At that time, T~lillhoit raised the question cahether that was a good concept because traffic from higher density development would have to pass through the residential area. He inquired if this had been discussed with the developer. Collins responded that the developer was aware, since the _.. inception of t~7aldwood, that the initial access would be through a single family residential development; however, later access would be via Oakdale Drive extension which was being considered for inclusion in the central Orange Area Study. If looked at in the overall context of the area study, the layout makes sense; in the more narrow, view it seems tp violate planning . principles. Gordon inquired as to the lalcelihood of Oakdale Drive extension being built. Collins responded that as part of the wildwood approval the right-of-way for Oakdale drive extension is shown on the preliminary plat and the developer should construct the Oakdale drive extension, which should also be a requirement for Hampton Downs. The Nroblem an building the Oalcdale