Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-26-1995 - IX-A
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1995
>
Agenda - 06-26-95
>
Agenda - 06-26-1995 - IX-A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2014 9:23:06 AM
Creation date
12/9/2014 9:22:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/26/1995
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
IX-A
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19950626
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
Mr . William J. Waddell , Jr. , 38 <br /> Chairman, Orange County Planning Board Page Three <br /> Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 <br /> December 14, 1994 <br /> options when the time comes to sell our properties . <br /> It is quite possible that our homes could be sold and <br /> used as offices , clinics , and even retail shops , but at <br /> least we would have that option. Being in Secondary <br /> Development would greatly restrict our options . Please <br /> consider this point carefully. <br /> 3 . The resale value of our property would not be nearly as <br /> great if we are not included in the Primary I Development <br /> Area . As someone said after the Public Hearing, our <br /> resale value could be cut in half if we are restricted <br /> from selling our properties for retail purposes . This <br /> means a great deal to all of us who are faced with un- <br /> controlled commercial development across the road . <br /> 4 . Quoting from the recommendations of the Economic Devel- <br /> opment Work Group: "The Secondary Area provides a buffer <br /> between Primary I and II Areas and existing residential <br /> neighborhoods and is limited to residential , office, or <br /> institutional uses" . As you can see , this type zoning <br /> would not be appropriate for our properties where no <br /> buffer whatsoever exists between us and uncontrolled <br /> commercial development across the road . <br /> 5 . We landowners understand the concern for having so many <br /> driveways along the road, but we feel confident that <br /> this problem can be controlled to everyone ' s satisfaction <br /> by the Orange County Planning Department and the Economic <br /> Development Commission. <br /> We simply ask that you and the Planning Board please take a long, <br /> hard look at our situation in making your decisions and put your- <br /> selves in our shoes . We urge you to please recommend that our <br /> properties remain in the Primary I Development Area of the <br /> Economic Development District Plan to be voted on by the Orange <br /> County Commissioners at their Jan meeting. <br /> Si cerely <br /> rs . June 9. Haas ,Chairman <br /> I-40/Old NC 86 <br /> Homeowners Association <br /> j jh <br /> cc: Members , Orange County Planning Board <br /> Members, Orange. County Commissioners <br /> Mr. Ted Abernathy, Director, Economic Development Commission <br /> Mr. Marvin Collins, Director, Orange County Planning Department <br /> Members, Homeowners Association , and CorniJallia u; , , - r�..� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.