June 16, 2011

June 16, 2011

Comments (2)

Comment Feed

Parity

While you mention that there is opposition, to be balanced and fair you should have inserted a quote about WHY people are opposed to it.
For the record, this proposed project can do more damage to the environment than it does right. In fact, I cannot think of one thing it does right.

Henry Lister more than 3 years ago

Aydan Court

As mentioned in your notice, the Aydan Court project was denied in May 2009 when council indicated that they did not feel that the project was right for Chapel Hill. Since that time, Zinn Design Build has made many modifications such as decreasing impervious surface by placing parking underneath the buildings and increasing the exterior buffer. But each change has raised additional issues and requires variances from town ordinances concerning tree canopy, building height, steep slopes and parking.
To date Ms. Zinn has presented only two options – both extremes: one for 17 single family homes and one for high-density condominiums. What about the options in-between?
UNC, which owns two other neighboring properties, has announced that they will modify development plans to further protect the waterfowl impoundment area which will be impacted by Aydan Court and other development in the area.
The unique environmental issues of this property, which existed at time of purchase, require special consideration. Given the current state of the economy and the glut of condominiums in Chapel Hill there is no reason why Ms. Zinn and Town Council shouldn’t continue this discussion in the ongoing Comprehensive Planning process where a variety of options can be discussed.
We all rely on zoning and town ordinances to protect the value of our homes, the livability of our town and sensitive environmental areas. Approving this development, with its record number of variances, sets a precedent for Chapel Hill’s future growth that is disturbing. I’m certain there are other solutions for this property and challenge Ms. Zinn to withdraw the threat of a single-family development which is being used to force council into a “lesser of two evils” decision. Let’s continue the process and find a better solution for this environmentally sensitive gateway property.

jeanne brown more than 3 years ago

Recent Posts

newsletter