Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4g
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4g
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2013 10:52:31 AM
Creation date
12/1/2008 4:33:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/1/2008
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
4g
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20081201
(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.
/
68
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
Approved 7/11/07 9 <br />Robin Jacobs: I am from the Eno River Association. 1 wrote the letter. I have real concern that you have <br />heard from many people about this neighborhood. The subdivision ordinance as it written has zoning and <br />regulations In It. If you think what it is written is inappropriate to this area of the County, then that is the <br />question to bring to the Board of County Commissioners to change those rules. If this development <br />meets all the standards, there is an assumption of appropriateness. There is a bigger picture, we have <br />the state of North Carolina and Orange County and additional people who have put literally millions of <br />dollars in a planned park that will have potentially have two tracts of land directly through it. I have a lot of <br />sympathy for the neighbors here. if you would like to contact me with questions, I would be glad to <br />answer them. <br />Kerstin Nygard: I live on the Cole Mill Road extension. The Eno River State park is a green jewel. It was <br />established after many years of volunteer work. A particular concern is .the missing links. it is <br />disheartening that the acquisition of the 20 acre by the state is contingent upon the approval of a dense <br />subdivision. The neighborhood with reservation does acknowledge this subdivision. However, we appeal <br />to increase the lot size to larger. lots. The runoff will potentially harm the river quality. It has good water <br />quality now. Larger lots would make the subdivision more tolerable to the neighborhood. Please <br />consider a revision to larger lots. <br />Amy Spaulding: I am looking forward to more neighbors. My concern is about safety. This land was the <br />homestead of Colonial William Pugh, signer of the US Constitution. Also, William Preston Pugh who was <br />the first president of Duke University. <br />Jay Bryan: In terms of our responsibility and options, we can approve one development option, we can <br />approve on development option subject to conditions or we can deny the development option. <br />Judith Wegner: We need to remind ourselves of the difference of the concept level and the next level. As <br />1-understand it, I would like to make a motion with staff recommendation that this be approved with no <br />more than 33 lots. I don't think we have the authority to say there should be only 20 lots. The staff <br />recommendations and conditions are appropriate. <br />Jeffrey Schmitt: There are six or seven things that heed-to be approved. <br />Glenn Bowies: Essentially, a septic field analysis, open space connectivity, pedestriantbicycle analysis, <br />transportation analysis. <br />Brian Crawford: I think it is important to consider the response from the attorney. The public needs to <br />hear his words. He said there is general language in zoning ordinance in section number whatever <br />stating, that in reviewing subdivision proposals, the Planning Board shall consider the overall design of the <br />proposal in light of the suitability of the land for development to ensure the platting of the development of <br />the subdivision will not create a danger to health, safety or welfare of the Orange County residents. Our <br />state statute clearly states on approval or denial are made with standards explicitly set forth in the <br />Subdivision or Unified Ordinance. There is a zoning ordinance with guidelines and this proposal meets <br />that. Our zoning ordinance does not allow dropping it down to 20. The developer has followed the <br />guidelines to the letter. <br />Sandra Quinn: As citizens, if we didn't questions ordinances and laws, we wouldn't be sitting at this table. <br />If we approve this, we need to send our recommendation to reduce the number of homes and increase <br />the size of the lot. <br />Renee Price: The Historic Preservation Commission doesn't have any objections to the proposal. We <br />wanted to make it clear there are historical features on that property. At some point, they would like the <br />opportunity to review it. <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.