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
4 <br />number of offsite automobile traps which might be diminished. The task is <br />to concentrate development and avoid the inevitable urban sprawl that will <br />ensue otherwise. If this village is going to be successful, it must be <br />successful economically. One of the major objectives here, since this is to <br />be a complete village, is to address housing needs across the market <br />spectrum. It is a middle market village, providing inexpensive housing of <br />various types through up -scale housing circling the golf course. In answer <br />to a question from Gary Maske, Mr. Cogswell stated that construction.o.f.the <br />golf course would take place at the same time they begin building housing of <br />several different market values. Mr. Maske's main concern was that, with the <br />golf course being built first, there will be a lot of traffic on Old ,#10 and <br />that the first houses being built would be the most expensive and affordable <br />housing would be lost or not pursued. <br />ROY ROTH; Stoneycreek resident, presented some traffic calculations <br />based on the number of units proposed for this project. With 1100 units and <br />an average of 1 -1/2 cars per family, these 1500 cars have only three exits <br />from the area. He asked that everyone consider what the traffic impact will <br />be. <br />MARTY FITZPATRICK stated his support for this project. He made <br />reference to the control of storm water and stated that at the intersection <br />of Old NC1.0 that goes underneath the railroad tracks, it floods out quite <br />often. Also, there is a small lake that is contained by an earthen dam. If <br />this area was.ever flooded, it would be a concern for everyone. <br />MICHAEL DROWNS stated that provided the County and the town do not <br />reach a cooperative agreement and this area is still included in the Land Use <br />Plan, then this area falls under the jurisdiction of Hillsborough. He asked <br />if at this point in time the County has a cooperative agreement for working <br />on developments of this size. His concern is that Hillsborough does not have <br />a planning department that would be capable of handling a development this <br />size. His other concern is that if the town should annex this area, it has <br />a wide range of zoning categories that the County does not have. Among them <br />is a category called GC that has 52 different uses. Once this property is <br />taken into the Town of Hillsborough, then the developers have to change their <br />zoning to comply with that of the Town of Hillsborough. In the process of <br />doing that, GC zoning allows anything from adult book stores, churches and <br />schools to the extraction of minerals from the soil. If some of these land <br />uses should happen it could be quite disastrous to the area, depending on <br />what the developer and the town decide. He questioned that if the town and <br />the County reach this joint agreement, how would that be handled as far as <br />the town if they want to annex this area. Will the area still be allowed to <br />be annexed it into the town of Hillsborough. Marvin Collins stated that if <br />the property was approved for transition area and it was open space, <br />Hillsborough could not annex it. If it was left as transition, Hillsborough <br />could annex it, but they would have to meet the General Statute requirements <br />concerning annexation -- either have adjoining property or satisfy the <br />annexation provisions. Mike Drowns asked if the Special Use Permit would be <br />Class A or B, and Marvin Collins stated that it would be a Class A SUP which <br />is one that is approved after a joint public hearing such as this one <br />involving the Planning Board and the Board of Commissioners. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.