Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MAY-10-1994 14:49 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO PLANNING <br /> 11 <br /> 8 <br /> 1 mayor tracts of protected land must be maintained. Also, the maximum number <br /> 2 of units should be based on the carrying capacity of the land itself which <br /> 3 would allow for the use of alternative systems. Public water and sewer must <br /> 4 not be allowed. A small area plan should be developed for each area in Orange <br /> 5 County. She stated that the proposed zoning change from R-1 Residential to <br /> 6 open Space Development Area is unacceptable as written. However, if it <br /> 7 included 504 of the buildable land as open space, it would be more acceptable. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 ROx Bentley, a resident of the New Hope Church Road community, mention <br /> 10 several coamunities which have 5o% of their land not aside as open .space. He <br /> 11 spoke to planners in Livingston County, Mich. , Montgomery County, Penna. , and <br /> 12 Graffin, Mass. The Open Space Ordinances were well received, even by <br /> 13 developers, after they were in place. Two of these Planners suggested not <br /> 14 allowing substantial density bonuses for cluster development. They said that <br /> 15 the Ordinance Gust be' density neutral. They also felt that 504 open space is <br /> 16 necessary to effectively preserve the rural character. He stated that the <br /> 17 densities allowed in this proposal are unacceptable to him. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 Bob Harrell, a sexber of the University. Station work Group, stated that <br /> 20 this group started with an established set of criteria and then developed <br /> 21 plans based on this criteria. If 304 open space is the only requirement, he <br /> 22 felt that the effect of open space would be lost;. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Marty Mandell, an Orange County resident, spoke in opposition to this <br /> 25 proposal. She read from the minutes of a Carrboro Board of Alderman meeting <br /> 26 where they directed their Planning Staff to draft an amendment which requires <br /> 27 504 open space. She fools the density is already too high and that it is <br /> 28 important to let the countryside survive for future generations. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Stanley Robbing, an Orange County resident, spoke in support of the <br /> 31 Arendt Plan and requested that the Board of Commissioners study and consider <br /> 32 it carefully. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Allen Saiferheld, a resident of orange County, spoke in opposition of <br /> 35 allowing the extension of water and soarer into the open space development <br /> 36 area. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Lee Ralalow, an Orange County resident and member of the University <br /> 39 station Planning group, spoke in support of small area plans. He asked if <br /> 40 open space is designed to preserve rural character or is it designed to <br /> 41 promote urban sprawl. It is well documented that extending water and sewer <br /> 42 causes urban sprawl. Density allowances must be such that water and #ewer is <br /> 43 not required. He feels that a small cluster development can be supported by <br /> 44 alternative systems and large clusters cannot. Open space must be defined as <br /> 45 preservation of the existing rural character. <br /> 47 Larry Bohm, an Orange County resident, lives north of the proposed <br /> 48 development. He fools that it is important that the county proceed <br /> 49 thoughtfully with future growth preserving at least 504 of the buildable land <br /> 50 and that developments should provide their own water treatment facilities. <br /> 51 A small area plan should be completed before any changes to the Land Use Plan <br /> 52 is considered. He thinks that development in Orange County can be provided <br />