Orange County NC Website
<br />application to remove the deficiency. Regarding the location criteria,-.,h~:-' <br />noted the following: <br />One of the areas which was deficient was the public service/utility <br />area. The plant has access to public water. The property cannot be sub- <br />-divided and sold. It should be deemed to have the same service availability <br />~s the present plant'. The reclamation activity will lessen the water <br />consumption because the plant can reduce the stress on the water system. He <br />added that during the drought .last year, his plant voluntarily switched from <br />public water to a well system maintained for a backup water supply. <br />The existing land use and the population density in question appear to <br />be a subjective evaluation as to whether the area is in or is adjoining <br />higher density area. His contention is that it is in the higher density <br />area. Mr. Chandler continued that these same criteria were in effect in <br />1985 when an application for a secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan was <br />made pertaining to the 1.41 acre tract located between the 0.59 acres and <br />the concrete plant. Recognizing the critical need resulting from the <br />changed conditions and environmental problem, the Land Use Plan amendment <br />for the 1.41 acre tract was granted. Mr. Chandler proceeded with slides of <br />the property in order to show the location of the 0.59 acres and the <br />surrounding commercial uses. There were also slides of the retention ponds <br />and reclamation system. <br />Mr. Chandler indicated that when he submits an application for rezoning <br />and issuance of a Conditional Use Permit he would make a detailed <br />presentation concerning the exact location and the nature of the retention <br />ponds and the recycling equipment `and the effect of such uses on neighboring <br />property. He noted that such a detailed presentation was not appropriate at <br />this hearing. He asked that Phil Post, the project engineer, talk about the <br />conditions which created the necessity of the retention ponds and Tom Cape- <br />well, an appraiser, speak concerning the fact that the secondary amendment <br />to the~Land Use Plan will not create a situation which will result in there <br />;being an adverse effect on the fair market value of the surrounding area. <br />PHIL POST, the project engineer, gave background information regarding <br />the changed conditions, and the technical reasons why the original request <br />was brought to the Board and approved, and added further information about <br />the Planning Staff's questions with respect to the appropriateness of the <br />Land Use Plan change. Post addressed the concern of the existence of public <br />services and utilities. He indicated that there is in place water lines, <br />power lines, and telephone lines. There is an excellent location for the <br />road transportation system and the railroad transportation system as well. <br />Post stated that the surrounding and existing land uses were compatible <br />with what would be a very small expansion of the concrete plant operation. <br />Population density does not seem to be applicable in this case as one of the <br />criteria. The primary impetus for the request is to bring the plant into <br />compliance with the most up-to-date environmental guidelines. He explained <br />how the runoff would be captured by the ponds and recycled to be used in <br />.making concrete. <br />Post reemphasized that. the system required by DEM is in place and <br />operating as intended. This request, if approved, would bring the applicant <br />in compliance with the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The 0.59 acre tract <br />of land would be used as a permanent buffer to bring the plant further into <br />compliance with the buffering requirements that have been added. <br />Planning Board Member Chris Best asked what was being stored on the <br />western end of the property and Mr. Chandler stated that nothing is on the <br />land at this time. Previously, concrete barriers used in the construction <br />~f I-40 were stored in the area. <br />In answer to a question from Best on the location of the ponds, Post <br />Zoted that the present location of the ponds would allow all runoff <br />components to be contained on one site. <br />Chandler explained the process used in washing down the concrete trucks <br />at the end of the day. <br />