Agenda - 08-26-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH C NORTH CARLI ONA O 5 3 27278 :..q .r ago iiiir37• 'no co.". TO: Marvin Collins, Director of Planning FROM: Gene Bell, Planner 6,43 DATE: August 19,1985 RE: Analysis of Chandler Concrete Land Use Plan Amendment Application (LUP-3-85) I have reviewed- the Chandler Concrete Land Use Plan amendment in accordance with "PROCEDURES FOR AMENDING THE LAND USE PLAN" adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on November 1, 1982, and with applicable portions of the Orange County Land Use Plan. My findings are: —"-`- APPLICATION (Complete, but two minor points to make) ID (1) On page 2 of the application form under REQUEST, the requested zoning classification has been entered instead of the requested land use desig- nation. However, the requested land use designation is stated correctly in the letter of request. (2) In the letter of request, how the amendment would carry out the intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan is not addressed. REASON FOR AMENDMENT The applicant cites "...changed or changing conditions in a particular-area....'" as the reason for the amendment. Several examples of commercial uses coming into being after the establishment of the concrete plant are cited. The applicant is correct In that non-residential development has taken place in the area since the establishment of the concrete plant. A recognition of this prompted the Board of County Commissioners to direct Planning Staff to undertake the Central Orange Area Study which resulted in redesignation of the Commercial Transition Node to Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node.in November, 1983. A point not brought out in the Central Orange Area Study and which has more applicability as a "changed or changing condition" is the recent recognition by the N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development - Division of Environmental Management (DEM) of the undesirable runoff from the concrete plant site. It seems logical to assume that runoff has been. a "condition" associated Ash with the area since the concrete plant was located there in the early 1970's. MP Likewise, the recent recognition of the runoff as a problem by DEM would seem to qualify the runoff as a "changed-or c!iang i ng 'condition.". The applicant cannot adequately deal with this problem on the existing 1-3 site. A "reclaiming" facility on the western end of the 1-3 site has been mentioned as a possibility, but this would only retain slurry from truck washing. There would still be substantial run- off (natural and manmade) which could only be dealt with in a retention/recycling fashion.