Agenda - 06-03-2008-5b5c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

i~~ Reasons to Deny Rezonin.~for Buckhorn Village ~' James Carnahan * 122 Oak St * Carrboro, NC 4/26/08 The most important decision to make on the Buckhorn application is whether or not to rezone. Once the rezoning is granted, the SUP details are just that -details. From my perspective they are irrelevant, because the concept embodied in Buckhorn Village is fundamentally flawed and not "twealcable" into something that might work. The key question is whether the rezoning is in the best interest of the people of Orange County - or contrary to them. The argument I and others are making is that it is not in our interest to permit this kind of development, that it would be inconsistent with Orange County environmental and economic goals. It does not represent a project that moves us closer to those goals; rather, it would carry us backward from hard-won progress. In the past few~years significant changes have taken place that call for a serious re-assessment of the means by which we seek to achieve our economic & environmental goals, and what forms of land use best support those goals: In light of the on-going Update of the Comprehensive Plan, and the unfinished COa emissions inventory, rezoning is premature. It is arguable that what is proposed at Buckhorn Village is consistent with the one concept of the Economic Development Districts (EDDs), and entirely uncertain what kind of economic development is the best path.to take in light of the epochal challenges human beings face today. What needs to precede rezoning in the EDDs is, first, the Comprehensive Plan Update; second, completion of the COZ emissions inventory and setting of carbon reduction goals; third, a ` revision of the County's Strategic Plan for Economic Development; and fourth, creation of a master plan and design guidelines for the Buclchorn EDD. Particular issues of concern: 1) Predicted automobile trip generation of 46,000 daily trips to & from Buckhorn represents significant increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled for the County, with the following impacts: a. Greatly increased COa emissions for a county in which transportation is already responsible for sorrie 49% of county emissions b. The County is already an EPA "non-attainment" air quality region for ground level ozone. Buckhom's huge trip generation will only worsen our air quality. 2) County economic, land use & transportation goals & objectives have not been updated to reflect serious challenges of Peak Oil and Climate Change. (See the "Assessing Buckhorn Village in the Context of Global Warming" comments I submitted to the BoCC 2/25/08.) 3) Proposed uses at Buckhorn Village are inconsistent with current County economic goals expressed in the 2005-2010 Strategic Plan: [the Plan called for developing a "consensus for these criteria;" I don't know if that was done.] a. County wants to create "high quality jobs" for residents, jobs that "pay well, offer career advancement potential, and offer good benefits." Retail, hotel & entertainment jobs at Buckhorn will be predominantly low-wage jobs.