Agenda - 01-14-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

- I • it Pr. Alice Gordon 1 Orange County Planning Board Chair - see Attachment "A". ROBERT REEBER I would just like to make a point. Living in the small triangle to the southeast part here of Orange County, it seems like we are a conduit to get into Chapel Hill and like everything else, you have joint planning and that is Chatham County over there and I live on Clearwater Lake Road. Chatham is right there but that road is the only access directly into Orange friars Chatham County and there is just a lot of building in that area and I think we really ought to ', consider the access, the road structure and the old age hoarse that going to be relatively high density and they are all going to be going into Chapel Hill so some how or other we need to negotiate a little with Chatham County to maybe consider the density increase may be a little faster than people realize it and maybe try to plan some open space and greenways and other things in that corner. Thank you. D Spoke on behalf of the Parker Road/Laurel Hills Neighborhood Association. See Attachment "B". FVERE'S BXLLINGSLEY Executive Director of ONAASA - see Attachment "C". ATE Representative of Economic Development Commission - see Attachment "D". PATTY KREBS Representative of the Chapel Hill Alliance of Neighborhoods. We are very pleased to have this opportunity to take part in the public hearing. We are interested in the number of issues that arise in joint planning and plan to submit a full report on them at a later date. At this time, the Alliance wants to identify just one issue however because we think it is a very important one and that is the issue of infill. Its distressing to read in the Joint Planning public information packet that infill is set forth in the 1977 Land Use Plan (that is the Chapel Hill plan) should be encouraged. We know planning agencies have a difficult job in planning for today and for trying to predict what will happen tomorrow. But with all due respect we think that a policy of infill as set forth in the 1977 Land Use Plan was based on an incorrect assumption. That assumption was that population would rise to a certain number and stop and stay there and that we could deal with that number as a given so that the only problem would be one of distribution. The 1977 plat pjecatnied a population figure of 60,800 by the year 2000. The plan noted the d P ng area could contain this population but at low density it would consume all ''the vacant land. The recommendation was to increase urban density and thus to prevent urban sprawl. To quote from the plan "by encouraging more 'dwelling units per acre within the low and high density residential categories, the town would be increasing the density of use on land that is developed while decreasing the amount of land needed to accommodate a given population but the trouble is we are not dealing with a given. We're not necessarily dealing with a population of 60,800 by the year 2000. The more we increase allowable densities as we did in Chapel Hill in the 1981 Ordinance, the more the population will increase, The of infill has given us higher densities without preventing urban sprawl.concept think that the way to protect undeveloped sprect. by setting aside green�l s, °� l� is to deal with it directly by setting be aside Y park land and recreational space. We hope that you will f assumption aIgood part of your effort to that and will examine the base umption of infill.