Browse
Search
Agenda - 01-16-1996 - VIII-H
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1996
>
Agenda - 01-16-1996
>
Agenda - 01-16-1996 - VIII-H
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/15/2013 11:39:59 AM
Creation date
10/15/2013 11:39:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/16/1996
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
VIII-H
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19960116
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4 <br /> e <br /> 1 (a) CP-2-95 Charles W. And James L. Davis (Rural Residential to 20-Year <br /> 2 Transition) <br /> 3 This item was presented by David Stancil to receive public comment on a proposed <br /> 4 amendment to the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. A proposal to expand an <br /> 5 existing Twenty-Year Transition Area has been received from Mr. Charles W. Davis and Mr. <br /> 6 James.L. Davis for part of a parcel in their ownership lying between NC 86 and Old Chapel Hill- <br /> 7 Hillsborough Road (Old 86), south of the Town of Hillsborough. The area proposed for re- <br /> 8 designation is a 50-acre portion of a 108-acre parcel on the southeast side of Cates Creek in <br /> 9 Hillsborough Township. The 50-acre portion is currently designated Rural Residential, while the <br /> 10 remainder of the parcel is already designated Twenty-Year Transition. The property is <br /> 11 undeveloped and is adjacent to the 1-40/Old 86 Economic Development District. The <br /> 12 designation of Twenty-Year Transition, if applied, would allow potential rezoning of the property <br /> 13 to higher-density residential uses in the future. <br /> 14 <br /> 15 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR <br /> 16 PLANNING BOARD. <br /> 17 None. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS. <br /> 20 Martin Brown, a resident of Stagecoach Run, mentioned that a small section of <br /> 21 Stagecoach Run abuts the property in question. He requested that the Stagecoach Run portion <br /> 22 be maintained in the R-1 zoning to preserve the neighborhood. Also, the portion of their land <br /> 23 that abuts the Economic Development District has a 100 buffer. He requested that the portion <br /> 24 that abuts the area requesting the 20-Transition designation also be given a 100 foot buffer. He <br /> 25 asked what the highest density zoning was that could be anticipated and would there be an <br /> 26 additional opportunity to review proposed development in the future. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 David Stancil stated that the highest density zoning district is R-13, however, it has <br /> 29 never been used. There are several small R-8 (8 units to the acre) designations and several <br /> 30 R-5 (5 acres per acre) designations. This Public Hearing is about an appropriate change in <br /> 31 designation only. An actual rezoning would require a subsequent public hearing. The issue of <br /> 32 the buffer would also be addressed at that time. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Jean Brooks asked for clarification about the boundaries of the area in question. David <br /> 35 Stancil clarified those boundaries. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Jay Zaragoza, the land planner for the Davis property, indicated that he was pleased with <br /> 38 the staffs recommendation and their support of this change. He stated that the Davis' are <br /> 39 considering the use of a cul-de-sac. The developed lots in Stagecoach Run would then not be <br /> 40 attached to this subdivision. This would eliminate through traffic as a consideration. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Crowther, to <br /> 43 refer this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned no sooner than <br /> 44 January 16, 1996. <br /> 45 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.