Orange County NC Website
19 <br /> cif <br /> The Planning Staff recommends that the <br /> Preliminary Plan for Southern Winds be approved <br /> through the Resolution of Approval (an attachment <br /> to these minutes on pages ) . <br /> Dorothy Scoggins, representing the applicant, <br /> stated that the easement indicated on the tax map <br /> extending south from Phelps Road was not an <br /> easement but an old road bed. Efforts had been <br /> made to obtain this easement but the applicant's <br /> request was denied. <br /> Best indicated he had voted against the concept <br /> plan because he preferred the stubouts be left in <br /> the plan. He referred to a copy of the <br /> Hillsborough Thoroughfare Plan and noted the <br /> location of this subdivision in relation to that <br /> Thoroughfare Plan. He felt that, in order to <br /> plan for future traffic concerns, providing an <br /> easement for possible future travelway which may <br /> connect NC 86 and Phelps Road is a logical step. <br /> MOTION: Best moved approval as recommended by the <br /> Planning Staff. Seconded by Jacobs . <br /> Yuhasz stated that the same discussion had <br /> occurred when the concept plan was presented. He <br /> felt the Planning Staff's recommendation ignored <br /> the sentiment of the majority of the Board from <br /> the previous discussion that it was inappropriate <br /> to have a through road at this location. Thus, <br /> he would be opposed to this motion. <br /> Burklin noted that he could understand the <br /> applicant's concerns with through traffic on a <br /> Class B road. Best responded that his concern <br /> was to plan for future development. <br /> Yuhasz stated that he felt an easement would <br /> certainly encourage through traffic but would not <br /> be of any benefit to the Southern Winds <br /> Subdivision. <br /> Eddleman noted that he felt lots which range in <br /> size from three to seven acres would be purchased <br /> with the idea of privacy. He continued that he <br /> felt property owners would be opposed to a <br /> through road which would destroy that privacy. <br /> Cantrell noted that she felt it would be a very <br /> pronounced burden on the owners of Lots 5A and 5B <br /> to provide such an access. <br /> • <br />