Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-04-2017 - 8-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2017
>
Agenda - 12-04-2017 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 12-04-2017 - 8-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2017 7:30:04 AM
Creation date
12/1/2017 7:54:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/4/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8a
Document Relationships
Minutes 12-04-2017
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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
12 <br /> 1 development on the rural and residential neighborhoods that immediately surround it. <br /> 2 At the very least, the law of unintended (or overlooked) consequences will very likely <br /> 3 change the ambiance of this semi-rural community. Drastically. <br /> 4 The proposed development of District I will have a tremendously negative impact on the tree <br /> 5 buffer that now exists for the benefit of rural and residential properties along Davis Dr. to the <br /> 6 west of Old NC 86 because the proposed development abuts these properties. Clearing the tree <br /> 7 buffer will assault these residents with noise from the 1-40 corridor that this district will flank. A <br /> 8 vegetative buffer of bushes intermixed with trees (as proposed) may lessen the daytime visual <br /> 9 impact of warehouses, but what about nighttime light pollution? In addition, a short vegetative <br /> 10 buffer will in no way lessen the aural impact that this development and the now-exposed <br /> 11 highway will have on these residents. In sum, it will permanently diminish the quality of life that <br /> 12 our community currently enjoys. <br /> 13 <br /> 14 The proposed development of Districts II and III (albeit III has been delayed) will also assault <br /> 15 the senses with a landscape stripped of trees and thus will increase the visual and aural <br /> 16 pollution that will result from doing so. As previously mentioned, vegetative buffers do not a <br /> 17 "sound-blocking forest" make, nor will they acceptably mitigate the unwanted sights and sounds <br /> 18 from 1-40 that will result from these actions. <br /> 19 <br /> 20 The proposals for Districts !! and III make no mention of the privately-owned properties that <br /> 21 have not yet been purchased by the proposed development. These properties, which can be <br /> 22 clearly identified on the development maps, will become completely isolated, and they will either <br /> 23 be orphaned as their surroundings are up-zoned and developed beyond recognition, or their <br /> 24 owners will be forced to sell their homes and find residence elsewhere. Again, we have people <br /> 25 whose lives are likely to be permanently changed for the sake of a developer's anticipated profit. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 The developers have not specified what exactly they will be bringing to our community. To me, <br /> 28 professional offices that serve the nearby hospital and thus the town of Hillsborough <br /> 29 complement our future needs. However, once the properties have been up-zoned, the <br /> 30 possibilities are endless and not all positive. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 The town does not need more fast-food restaurants or businesses that serve only transient 1-40 <br /> 33 traffic. Hillsborough already has a corridor full of such businesses. And a large-capacity hotel to <br /> 34 be placed in the middle of a rural buffer? These types of development provide only low-end jobs <br /> 35 and big profits to the franchises that will swarm these properties if given the chance, as well as <br /> 36 increased profit for the developers who will no doubt be tempted by them. This type of lease-out <br /> 37 will not serve the immediate community and only harm its current ambiance. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 The commissioners have not fully determined what would be "defined and specific uses" of this <br /> 40 proposed development. This seems to be the only way that our community can influence or <br /> 41 control what goes into the development as it is leased. Therefore, I urge the commissioners to <br /> 42 delay rezoning of Districts II and III until a comprehensive list of desired uses is completed and <br /> 43 made public so that our community can be properly informed. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 The requested changes in zoning assume that adequate resources, specifically water, will be <br /> 46 made available for the development. Although Hillsborough currently has adequate water <br /> 47 resources for its residents and has made provisions for recently approved projects, how much <br /> 48 water is left to provide for this proposal?And will its water needs stymie other better-planned <br /> 49 needs for Hillsborough? We do not want to choke off wiser choices in development so that <br /> 50 another fast-food restaurant or three can be erected along 1-40. <br /> 51 <br /> 52 Many of us who live in the immediate community understand that development is a part of our <br /> 53 future. However, we want wise development that will serve Hillsborough and enrich the quality <br /> 54 of life that we enjoy in Orange County, wise development that complements our anticipated <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.