Agenda - 02-16-1993 - III-F - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

25 8 1 MARK MARCOPLOS stated he lives in Bingham Township approximately fifteen 2 miles from the proposed University Station development. He thanked all the 3 residents in the area for bringing forth additional information on this 4 proposal. He hopes that this doesn't get labeled as a pro anti-development 5 process. This is a situation where people are aware of the choices and aware 6 that there will be development and they just want it to be the best it can 7 be. Just because they oppose the proposed University Station development, 8 it doesn't mean they oppose affordable housing, economic development or anti- 9 development. He feels that the Rural Character study should be amended and 10 then proceed slowly. 11 ALAN SEIFERHELD made two points on rural character. Because of the type 12 of land that exist at University Station, the property most likely will not 13 support more than 300 homes under the current zoning. University Station is 14 asking for approximately 1100 homes, almost a 400% increase in the density 15 over what the land will now support. Water and sewer should not be extended 16 into University Station. Extension of water and sewer will invite similar 17 developments. He is opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. 18 ELIZABETH WOODMAN spoke for Michael Warner. She noted that Mr. Warner 19 has reviewed the Land Use Plan which makes very specific recommendations 20 about what types of development is in the interest of Orange County and where 21 they should be located. She showed on a map the two high density areas of 22 the County namely, Hillsborough and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area. Excluding 23 those two areas, the average density in the County is seven units per 100 24 acres. the University Station proposal would transform this area from low 25 to high density and it would climb from seven units to 175 units per acre. 26 The University Station development would constitute the highest density 27 development between Hillsborough and Durham. She stated that the County is 28 being asked to change the Land Use Plan to allow the developers to create 29 this high density development and the third largest town in Orange County 30 right in the middle of an area that match every definition of rural. She 31 made reference to page 322 of the Land Use Plan and the 22 categories listed. 32 The only category that the proposed University Station development fits is 33 Ten-Year Transition. She stated that the reasons for voting against this 34 proposal include (1) it doesn't fit the Land Use Plan, (2) it creates 35 leapfrog development in the inevitable corridor affect and (3) the process 36 is not about planning but a reaction to what the developers want. She urged 37 the Board of County Commissioners to reject University Station. 38 LINDSAY EFLAND stated that on September 10, 1992 , the Economic 39 Development Commission passed a resolution stating their support for master 40 planned development where a wide range of housing opportunities, adequate 41 open space, commercial activities for residents and support services are 42 included. Based on the review of the concept plan for University Station the 43 Economic Development Commission has concluded that this proposed development 44 offers potential economic benefits for Orange County. They voted to support 45 the proposed University Station village concept. Mr. Efland pointed out that 46 mass transit and recreational space have been identified as long term goals. 47 This proposal does address in some form these two long term goals. It has 48 a diversity of housing styles, a diversity of prices and focuses growth. As 49 present companies grow, they will being in additional people who will need 50 a place to live. He stressed that the decision before the Board of County 51 Commissioners is very difficult and that it is a time for political 52 leadership. There are many issues that will need to be addressed and they