Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
25 <br /> The total acreage of the tract is 12.08 acres. <br /> Ten ( 10) lots are proposed which average 45, 393 <br /> square feet in size. New lots will be served by <br /> individual wells and septic tanks. <br /> The property is located in the Back Creek <br /> Watershed. It is designated as Agricultural <br /> Residential (AR) and Back Creek Watershed in the <br /> Comprehensive Plan. A public road is proposed to <br /> serve eight (8) of the ten ( 10) lots in the <br /> subdivision. The short cul-de-sac would extend <br /> west off Mill Creek Road. <br /> The Concept Plan was approved by the Planning <br /> Board at its September 20, 1993 meeting with two <br /> conditions. Agency comments were received from <br /> Emergency Management, Recreation and Parks, Soil <br /> and Water Conservation, Erosion Control, and <br /> NCDOT. The two conditions and applicable agency <br /> comments have been incorporated into the <br /> Resolution of Approval (an attachment to these <br /> minutes on pages ) . NCDOT was concerned <br /> with the angle of the right-of-way of Mill Pointe <br /> Lane and Mill Creek Road. A condition has been <br /> included in the resolution to address that <br /> concern. <br /> The Planning Staff recommends approval of the <br /> Preliminary Plan for Mill Pointe subject to the <br /> conditions contained in the Resolution of <br /> Approval. <br /> Barrows expressed concern that the impact of <br /> development is creating a negative balance for <br /> the county. She felt the developer should bear <br /> those costs, rather than the remainder of the <br /> county. Willis responded that there is a $750.00 <br /> school impact fee and the payment-in-lieu <br /> parkland payment through the subdivision process. <br /> Barrows continued that the burden should be on <br /> the developer to help pay for the infrastructure <br /> needed for the developments being proposed and <br /> felt there should be an impact fee to help cover <br /> those costs. <br /> Jobsis reminded the Board that the issue of <br /> impact fees had been to public hearing a year or <br /> so ago and was so controversial that it was <br /> temporarily tabled by the Commissioners. She <br /> continued that she felt it is an issue that will <br /> come up again but that it is not something that <br /> the Planning Board can address at this time. <br /> Brown asked about the Impact Fee Analysis. <br />