Minutes - 19890905 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~__~ ANNE NEVILL WILLIAMS, a resident of Old Greensboro Highway, spoke in . opposition to this proposal. She specifically mentioned the five (5) acre restriction which she felt would cause. it to be impassible to give their Fhildren and r grandchildren property and still be able to farm the land. - CLAUDIE WILLIAMS, a resident of Old Greensboro Highway, spoke in opposition to this proposal. A.R. R~TBIN,.a resident of Chapel Hill, read from a paper which was presented at the Individual On-site Wastewater Treatment Conference in Ann Arbor, Mich., by Robert Southport and Allen Hayes from EPA. He read that "alternative processes and techniques are defined as proven methods that provide for reclaiming and reusing water, particularly recycling of wastewater constitutants and energy recovery." He stated that his concern with the proposal was that it minimizes potential for utilization of alternatives that are proven and demonstrated technologies that will allow to better protect the water resources in the county. He urged the $oard to look carefully at the adoption of alternative technologies. ANN .70YNER, a resident of Cedar Grove, asked for evidence from the Commissioners that this proposal ~s the best solution to the problem of water qualify. She requested that the Commissioners contract for an independent review of the county's needs. She stated that the effect on the University Lake watershed would be that one lot, of five acres would cost $46,500. Using developer industry rule o£ thumb this should have a value of $188,000 for house and land package. To afford a $188,000 package a downpayment o£ $37,600 would be needed. At a 10~ interest rate and a. 30 year mortgage, the monthly payment would be $1,450. According to Hillsborough Savings and Laan this would require an income of $65,000. Eighty-five (85~) percent of current county residents cannot qualify to live in the University Lake watershed if this proposal is implemented. ;~ _ _... ~, GEORGE CHOCKLEY, from Cedar Grove Township,. spoke in opposition to this proposal. FORREST HEATH, a landowner in the University Lake watershed, spoke in apposition to this proposal. He stated that. if OWASA cannot take the water that is coming into University Lake and adequately treat it to provide clean water,~than representatives need to be sent to Fayetteville and Wilmington to see how they are cleaning up the water from Jordan Lake to meet Federal standards. LEE BIGGER, a resident of Carrboro and a real estate appraiser, stated that property values are not going to go up because of lower density. He indicated that there has been same speculation about land outside Washington where the land values went up. We will not be a parallel situation. He has three (3) lots which are each two (2) acres in the University Lake watershed. If this goes into effect, he will raise his prices because there will be no competition. Pete Thorn made the point of development costs of five acre vs, three acre lots. The land, if it is zoned five acres, will be developed at five acres, but the road is going to cost the same. The finished lots will draw only so much money, so you pay £or the road, you pay the profits and then that is the basis upon which you start negotiating the land prices. The land values will be critically affected. WAYNE RIGGINS spoke in opposition to this proposal. A motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the