Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-24-1992
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1992
>
Agenda - 08-24-1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2017 4:46:20 PM
Creation date
11/8/2017 4:39:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/24/1992
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
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.
/
264
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
U. P <br />September 30, 9192 <br />'J I <br />4112 Powder MimRoad <br />Chapel Hill, NC 27514 <br />Mr Moses Carey <br />Orange County Board of Commissioners <br />PO Box 8181 <br />Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br />Dear Mr Carey: <br />We are writing to voice our opposition to the proposed development called <br />University Station, and to request that you vote against changing the Land <br />Use Plan to allow this urban development in our rural residential area. <br />We have been a resident in the Powder Mill neighborhood (on New Hope <br />Church Road) for four years, and a resident of Orange County for 18 years. <br />There are several serious problems with adding 2000 to 3000 people to the <br />corner of New Hope Church and Old NC 10 that I'm sure you will consider - <br />traffic, schools, and other services. The primary issue for us, however, is <br />maintaining this area as rural in nature rather than urban. The proposed <br />development would drastically change the nature of the area from its <br />present state, which is basically rural residential. <br />Designating this area as urban will seriously weaken the idea of a rural <br />residential buffer between Hillsborough and Durham, and will encourage <br />urban development to link the two cities over time. <br />We are not against development, and disagree with Larry Reid that you're <br />"choking development" irr Orange County by not designating an area as <br />urban that has been - planned as rural residential. The area'could be <br />developed more like the present developments in the area (or even higher - <br />up to one house per two acres) and still maintain the rural character of the <br />area. Such density would both be harmonious with present development, <br />and continue to serve as a buffer between the existing urban developments. <br />The Rural Character Study program seems an excellent way to help plan for <br />maintaining the rural character of this area. Approval of this project would <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.