Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-25-2008- c2
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2008
>
Agenda - 08-25-2008
>
Agenda - 08-25-2008- c2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/10/2008 3:30:05 PM
Creation date
9/10/2008 3:29:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/25/2008
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
c2
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20080825
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
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
Page 1 of 2 <br />lo`l <br />Tom Altieri <br />From: James Carnahan ~carnahan@mindspring.coml <br />Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 11:51 AM <br />To: Tom Altieri <br />Cc: Donna Baker <br />Subject: Comp Plan comments for PB Aug 6 mtg <br />The Village Project has continued to follow the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Upon reviewing <br />the agenda of the Planning Board's July 9 meeting, and notes from that meeting, we became aware of <br />some proposed changes to the text of the Comprehensive Plan Update and would like to make the <br />following comments. We request that these comments be included in the public record of the <br />Comprehensive Plan Update. <br />1) In Chapter 1, "Towards a Sustainable Future," changes have been proposed to the original May 6 <br />language in section 1.3.3 that read: <br />"Identification of growth opportunity areas near transit comdors and along major thoroughfares <br />encourages more public transportation use by County <br />residents." <br />The proposed change reads as follows, including removal of the term "Growth Opportunity Areas:" <br />"Higher residential densities near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares may encourage more <br />public transportation use by County residents." <br />This is a significant change that misses an important point about what comprises "sustainable" <br />development patterns. Higher residential densities alone do not necessarily lead to walkble, transit- <br />supportive development. To ensure walkability and effectively reduce COz emissions and other <br />environmental impacts -and to create neighborhoods with a strong sense of place and community - <br />higher residential density must be accompanied by: <br />* mixed use, including neighborhood shopping and a full range of employment opportunities; <br />* streetscapes and urban characteristics that retain human scale and create solid, affirmative ambience <br />for pedestrians and bicyclists; <br />* public transit in operation or in planning for operation within 2-3 year term; <br />* narrow, lower-speed street grids, designed after turn of the century streetcar neighborhoods, not <br />modern suburban parkways." <br />For further elaboration please refer to the attached file, Smart Growth -- As Seen From the Air by John <br />W. Holtzclaw, former Chair of the National Sierra Club Transportation Committee, that explores the <br />relationship between urban characteristics and reduction of vehicle miles traveled. <br />We support use of a term such as "growth opportunity areas" that is accompanied by a clear definition <br />that would prescribe a fully walkable, energy reducing & open space conserving development outcome. <br />2) This revised language in ED Objective 2.6 was proposed at the July 9 Planning Borad meeting: <br />8/6/2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.