Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-19-1986
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1986
>
Agenda - 08-19-1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2016 12:13:13 PM
Creation date
9/26/2016 11:29:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/19/1986
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
219
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
pGQ . <br /> JPA DRAFT MINUTES 4-17-86 PAGE 21 <br /> whose families had for generations lived in the area and <br /> wished to keep it residential. Using the maps, Ms. <br /> Bristol indicated locations of individual properties and <br /> explained the need for preservation of the forest lands <br /> and homelands. She expressed concern that property owners <br /> like herself wished to leave the homes to their families <br /> and have the community remain as residential. <br /> Larry Reid noted that he had the same serious concerns <br /> regarding the landfill which had already been expressed by <br /> previous speakers. He stated that he would like for the <br /> public to note that alternative methods of handling <br /> garbage, rather than use of landfills, need to be found. <br /> Mr. Reid continued, "The second item I would like to speak <br /> on is the possibility or the proposal that Carrboro and <br /> the Town of Chapel Hill has had about dividing my <br /> community by using Rogers Road as a dividing line for the <br /> municipalities to create their jurisdictional range. I <br /> wish that that line be drawn through an area that would <br /> not break a community in half. " Mr. Reid expressed a <br /> concern that plans were being made for properties without <br /> input from the owners and that "officials were elected to <br /> represent, not dictate". <br /> Bob Sonar, resident of New Hope Church Road community, <br /> stated that he wished to present a petition with 19 names <br /> to add to those previously entered, and noted that he was <br /> pleased that the rural buffer is to be retained for the I- <br /> 40/New Hope Church Road interchange. Mr. Sonar noted that <br /> with the substantial amount of environmentally sensitive <br /> areas and lack of water and sewer, it is hard to <br /> understand why this area was chosen for <br /> office/institutional and industrial uses. "it appears <br /> that the only reason it was chosen is because 1-40 is <br /> there." He stated he felt it is very important "now and <br /> in future years that the County consider other aspects of <br /> the appropriateness of the land around I-40 and its <br /> interchanges, that we not automatically assume that <br /> because DOT put the highway through this particular point, <br /> we must therefore have non-residential uses. You do not <br /> expand improved tax base by designating an area for non- <br /> residential use when it is not really suited for that <br /> purpose. " <br /> Gary Saleeby stated he felt it is clear that light <br /> industrial use that allows such things as rock quarries at <br /> New Hope Church Road interchange would be inappropriate. <br /> He also felt that a rural buffer around this interchange <br /> is inappropriate as well. He felt this was a reaction <br /> based on fear. He felt a balance of uses would be <br /> appropriate such as office/institutional, light industrial <br /> (specify carefully what this could be) for the convenience <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.