Orange County NC Website
Mr. Randy Danzinger, of 212 Dairyland Road, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, commented that he was <br />strongly in favor of the moratorium being adopted. He stated that he is not in favor of the development <br />proposals that Carrboro has presented. He expressed his concern that Carrboro officials do not have the <br />best interests of the Calvander community in mind. This is a particular concern to them because they are <br />not voting members of the Carrboro community. They need to have their concerns taken seriously by the <br />Board of Commissioners as they are the only elected officials that the residents of Calvander have. <br />Ms. Fay Hogan Daniel, a Calvander landowner, expressed her displeasure that Carrboro could <br />make decisions regarding her land but she could not vote for them. She requested that the Board of <br />Commissioners be the decision makers for this area. She strongly supported the moratorium. <br />Mr. Curtis Hogan stated that this land represented his retirement fund. He did not support Carrboro <br />having power over the future use of his land. <br />JEF, a Calvander resident, spoke in support of this proposed moratorium. It is important that there <br />be time to complete the planning process for future development. <br />Mr. Stephen Dear, a Stony Hill Road resident, spoke in support of the proposed Moratorium. <br />Ms. Carol-Ann Greenslade spoke in support of establishing a moratorium. She stated that it would <br />be in the best interest of the community to complete the planning process before allowing future <br />development. <br />Neil Alderman indicated that he was speaking on behalf of one of the property owners and that he <br />did not support this proposal for a moratorium. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Gordon, to refer the <br />proposed amendment to the Joint Planning Agreement to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro for a <br />decision at which time the matter will be referred to the Orange County Planning Board to be returned to the <br />Board of Commissioners no sooner than June 22, 1998. <br />MOTION: APPROVED <br />TOWN OF CARRBORO: <br />JPA-2-98-Facilitated Small Area Plan For Carrboro's Northern Study Area - <br />Mayor Mike Nelson presented a brief history of this item. He indicated that a year ago they engaged <br />in two-day long work sessions on the Small Area Plan. Everyone in this area was invited to attend and <br />there were more than 150 participants at those two meetings. It was led by Randall Arendt and all decisions <br />were unanimous and made by consensus. The plan you see before you came out of that meeting. There <br />were very diverse views from the participants. It was important such a wide range of views and issues <br />could be resolved by consensus. <br />The item was presented by the Carrboro Planning Director Roy Williford for the purpose of receiving <br />public comment on a proposal to amend the Joint Planning Area (JPA) Land Use Plan and Map to <br />incorporate the facilitated small area plan accepted by the Board of Aldermen on August 19, 1997. In <br />February 1992, the Board of Aldermen for the Town of Carrboro determined that a comprehensive planning <br />effort was needed for those areas of the town's jurisdiction which are expected to receive the bulk of any <br />growth and development occurring in the coming years. Population projections at the time indicated this <br />growth was expected to include nearly 12, 000 new residents by the year 2010, and associated civic, <br />business, and commercial ventures. Due to environmental constraints associated with the protection of the <br />University Lake water supply to the south and west of Carrboro, growth was expected to occur primarily to <br />the north and east of the town in areas where public water and sewer service could be extended. The <br />Northern Study Area plan proposes to cluster a bulk of the new residential development by encouraging <br />village-scale development to conserve natural and environmentally sensitive areas, allow density bonuses <br />for affordable housing meeting certain development criteria, and sanction neighborhood and community