Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
13 <br />"Public" -The West 10 sewer line to schools -does the Comprehensive Plan still call <br />this agricultural residential? Is there a limit to 10 acre lots? <br />Glen Bowles - No, that area would have 1 acre lots or two acre lots depending on <br />location. <br />"Public" -With Mebane growing is there foresight to say go ahead and plan that as a <br />more residential area and make it an economic base for the county? Orange County can <br />still get taxes on it and plan for that. I encourage the board to rethink emphasis of growth <br />on this area because it needs to go somewhere. Growth is going to head north because <br />Chapel Hill is expensive. Plan for the growth towards Mebane <br />Perdita Holtz, Planner II - Loolc at the Efland-Mebane plan on the website. There are <br />water~and sewer boundary agreements in place that would make it difficult to plan for <br />higher density south of West 10 road. That's why the boundary is there. That whole area <br />is slated for growth. <br />"Public" -Mebane is going to do its own thing and annex into Orange County when it <br />wants and we can't stop it. Why not assume it will happen and make the best of it? <br />Ms. Holtz - It is more expensive for Mebane to move east because of the lift stations they <br />have to maintain. <br />"Public" - My suggestion is to reevaluate atax-base opportunity near Mebane. <br />Ms. Lincoln -There is a lot of pressure on municipalities. They are concentrating <br />density too because extending services is more expensive than cheapness of land. <br />"Public" -The future of residential housing is not in single-family homes for density <br />reasons and cost of living. People will locate closer to nodes because gas is too <br />expensive. Suburban life is going. Chapter 4 acknowledges the economic engine of this <br />county is the UNC health care ~systein. How do you anticipate growth along the <br />transportation corridors? Is there a map for this? <br />Mr. Alfieri -There can be no future land use map changes and no rezoning. An example. <br />The 7 mile creels watershed -there is an obj ective that points to evaluation of that area. <br />Following this we could see map changes. Implementation of map changes <br />recommended in small area plans will be on the front burner <br />"Public" -The numbers axen't important. Carrying capacity is not an exclusionary <br />principle. I am concerned that we figure out how we want to accommodate the growth so <br />when it happens the impacts are sustainable. I want a vision of what the outcome looks <br />like. <br />