Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
'e <br /> Mr. Collins indicated that the quarry and asphalt plant would undergo the <br /> environmental impact review. The applicants would prepare the environmental <br /> impact statement which would then be submitted as a part of the special use <br /> application. Conditions could be attached to the approval of the Special Use <br /> Permit to address specific concerns. He also indicated that asphalt plants are <br /> frequently closely associated with a quarry operation because part of the raw <br /> material comes from the quarry. If the existing quarry were to cease operation, <br /> the asphalt plant would probably be closed at that time. <br /> An unidentified citizen indicated that the problem is that OWASA will <br /> acquire ownership of the new quarry at no cost in return for supporting the <br /> items on the agenda. He asked if OWASA would be in support of this if they were <br /> not going to gain a sizable reservoir once the proposed quarry is mined out. <br /> Commissioner Gordon asked staff to explain to what extent this is a <br /> relocation of a current use and to what extent it is a relocation and expansion. <br /> Is the original quarry operation going to be closed down before the new one is <br /> open? <br /> Mr. Collins indicated that the asphalt plant will be a relocation of an <br /> existing use. The old plant structure will be removed and will be replaced on <br /> the east side of the new road. The quarry itself would be viewed as an expansion <br /> of an existing use. Relocating the road would be the first step. The quarry <br /> operation would expand from where it is now and move in a southeast direction <br /> toward the old quarry. The new realignment of the road would provide for better <br /> site distance along Highway 54. <br /> Ms. Eidenier asked how establishing a Rural-Industrial Activity Node for <br /> an extractive use in this area is different from establishing a Rural-Industrial <br /> Activity Node in other places in the Rural Buffer. Also, is a problem perceived <br /> with the impervious surface ratio in the University Lake Watershed? <br /> Mr. Collins indicated that this is an existing use so there is no <br /> additional intrusion into the Rural Buffer with this operation. It is still in <br /> the same area where it has existed since the mid-1960'x. In response to a <br /> question pertaining to impervious surface, he indicated that American Stone was <br /> advised that they will need to address the issue of impervious surface when the <br /> Special Use Permit application is filed. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANTS <br /> OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. <br /> Mr. Xis Mergner, Vice-Chairman of the Orange water and Sewer Authority <br /> Board of Directors, spoke in favor of this proposal. His written comments are <br /> incorporated herein by reference and may be found in their entirety in the <br /> permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS <br /> Mr. Alfred Perry, a local property owner, spoke against this proposal. Be <br /> indicated that the new road would be near his property. He asked if there would <br /> be a buffer between the road and his property or if this would landlock his <br /> property. Will he continue to have road frontage? He indicated that the plan <br /> would ensure 40 more years of bombing in his area. His trailer park tenants have <br />