Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
<<O ATTACHMENT 5 <br /> SUMMARY OF PLANNING BOARD ACTION <br /> Subject: Southern Community Park Conceptual Plan Committee Report-Request for Comments <br /> Meeting Date: February 5, 2002 <br /> Recommendation: The Planning Board voted 9-0 to recommend support of the Conceptual Plan <br /> Committee Plan with specific support of the dog park location away from other activities and with <br /> removal of the restroom facility at the dog park location. The Board also agreed to forward the <br /> individual member comments (see below). <br /> Vote: 9 - 0 <br /> Aye: John Hawkins, Scott Radway, Julie Coleman, Coleman Day, Gay Eddy, Nancy Gabriel, <br /> Sally Greene, Bob Reds, Ruby Sinreich <br /> Individual Comments: <br /> 1) Concern was expressed about the extent of clearing of trees for the Frisbee golf area. <br /> 2) The amphitheatre is a good idea. <br /> 3) Concern was expressed about the amount of parking proposed. <br /> 4) Concern was expressed about Dogwood Acres Drive dividing the park. Questions were <br /> asked about traffic calming and speed limit enforcement. <br /> 5) Small picnic shelter areas better than one big picnic area. <br /> 6) How will Southern Village residents arrive at the park on foot? Will trails be provided? <br /> What pedestrian connections are proposed to connect the school to the park? <br /> 7) Frisbee Golf does not interact well with pedestrians. Frisbee Golf may be a "want" not a <br /> "need." <br /> 8) Who will maintain Dogwood Acres Drive? <br /> 9) Why are roller hockey facilities so expensive? <br /> 10) Objection was voiced to the Town providing dog parks. <br /> 11) A concern was expressed about the cost of utility extension for sewer to proposed bathrooms. <br /> It was noted that a bathroom at the proposed dog park may be expensive and unnecessary. <br /> 12) A concern was expressed that performance space downtown doesn't get much use. Why is it <br /> proposed here? <br /> 13) The water play area may be an issue during water conservation periods. <br /> 14) The proposal does a good job of balancing the needs of a diverse population. <br /> 15) Maintain buffer area between the athletic fields and the highway. <br /> 16) Impressive plan and impressive process to develop it. - good community participationlin Put <br /> . <br /> 17) If the athletic fields are multipurpose then a.suggestion was made to not call them soccer <br /> fields. <br /> Prepared by: John Hawkins, Chapel Hill Planning Board <br /> J.B. Culpepper,.Staff <br />