Minutes - 19820308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

IAy.v.. .m v i are meant to be changed with sufficient reason and he felt his reasons were sufficient. in reference to Article 8.2.2.a, Mr. Wl-filer said they don't believe urban services will develop beycarnd this site, nor does he believe that additional development will be encouraged. He feels that commuters from this area, Hillsborough, Chapel- Hill will use the services. He feels that other develop- ment will be discouraged because of watershed problems. and water and sewer Problems, which.they've solved. He feels that preoedernt was set when Adam & i Eve ope-ned p;- this did not encourage additional development. For ,Particle- - - 8.2.4, solid waste,disposal will be cared for by the owners. For the Fire II Deparbyant conditions, all were accepted. The developer is willing to change the road access to whatever DOr wants. With regard to the designation and request for a Planned Development--Office Institutional, M. Mahler said he I had shown this because the Planning Department had told him to use that desig- nation after changing its mind several times. i Mr. Mehler said he did not understand why under Artile 7.16.2 a motel./ restuarant is not/are not permitted uses; he said this is a support,service. For Artilce 7.16.3, he said it was a semantic question; for Article 7.16.5 Mr. Mehler said this was the first time he had seen this particular require- ment for setbacks and he felt it should be discussed. For Article 7.16.6, Mr. Mehler said they will conform; for the screening which wasd't sham, he said the site plan shown was "conceptual. in .nature" aa4 he didn't know how YOU could determine what was enough screening. He said individual site plans for each building would be submitted at the time it was planned to be built and that site plan would indicate screening. He added that under (b) walkways would be shown on large site plans. In regard,to 7.16.4, he feels that Planning Staff had made an inappropriate response. Mr. Mehler then responded to Planning Staff's reasons for r ecommending denial of the request for the Class A Special Use Permit for the Aixpark= #1--Mr. Mehler said the developer was asking for an exception to the land Use Plan. #2--No response. #3--It will not encourage development, due to watershed, lack of water/ sewer in the surrounding areas, and due to the expense involved. Plus the Adam & Eve development experience did not encourage I development; he believes the development level encompassed by the Midway A!,prk and Airport is so high that no one else could afford to do it. #4--This is in response tothe 0-1 designation which Mr. Mehler feels he has already covered; this is a PD not an 0-1.