Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
~~ <br />date. At this time, the Alliance wants to identify just one issue <br />however because we think it is a very important one and that is the <br />issue of infill. It's distressing to read in the Joint Planning <br />public <br />information packet that infill as set forth in the 1977 Land Use <br />Plan (that is the Chapel Hi11 plan) should be encouraged. We know <br />planning agencies have a difficult job in planning for today and for <br />trying to predict what will happen tomorrow. But with all due <br />respect we think that a policy of infill as set forth in the 1977 <br />Land Use Plan was based on an incorrect assumption. That assumption <br />was that population would rise to a certain number and stop and stay <br />there and that we could deal with that number as a given so that the <br />only problem would be one of distribution. The 1977 plan projected a <br />population figure of 60,800 by the year 2000. The plan noted that <br />the planning area could contain this population but at low density it <br />would consume all the vacant land. The recommendation was to <br />increase urban density and thus to prevent urban sprawl. To quote <br />from the plan, "by encouraging more dwelling units per acre within <br />the law and high density residential categories, the town would be <br />increasing the density of use on land that is developed while <br />decreasing the amount of land needed to accommodate a given <br />population," but the trouble is we are not dealing with a given. <br />We're not necessarily dealing with a population of 60,800 by the year <br />2000. The. more we increase allowable densities as we did in Chapel <br />Hill in the 1981 Ordinance, the more the populatian will increase. <br />The 1977 concept of infill has given us higher densities without <br />preventing urban sprawl. We think that the way to protect <br />undeveloped land is to deal with it directly by setting aside <br />greenways, park land and recreational space. We hope that you will <br />- be devotin a ood art of <br />g g p your effort to that and will examine the <br />base of assumption of infill. <br />BRUCE BALLENTINE <br />Chapel Hill-Carrboro Design Council <br />Our group is made up of twelve planning architectural and <br />engineering .consulting firms that perform design work in the Chapel <br />Hill-Carrboro area. First, we support the Joint Planning process for <br />the purposes of developing a regional land use plan and for <br />establishing development standards. At the appropriate time our <br />organization is available to assist the County and Towns in <br />developing these construction standards for the Joint Planning Area. <br />However, we recommend that the extraterritorial area lines must be <br />re-established and.that only one planning jurisdiction review and act <br />on each development project. We do not recommend development review <br />by more than one jurisdiction. Thank you. <br />RON STROM <br />I'm commenting tonight in a couple of different capacities. one <br />as a resident of Northwood Subdivision near 86 and I-40 and wanted to <br />express my support for someday not having to shop at Food Lion or <br />drive fifteen minutes across 15-501. Its exciting to know there will <br />be some sort of mixed use development proposed around the activity <br />node around NC85 and I-~0. Its encouraging to know that one day I <br />won't have to shop at Food Lion or drive to Carrboro or 15-501 and a <br />more important note from me personally as a contract owner of the <br />southeast quadrant of 86 and I-40, an area that has been earmarked <br />for office Institutional development, I simply wanted to ask for some <br />