Agenda - 03-08-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

are meant to be changed with sufficient reason and he felt his reasons were sufficient. In reference to Article 6.2.2.a, Mr. Mehler said they don't believe urban services will develop beyond this site, nor does he believe that additional development will be encouraged. He feels that conmuters from this area, Hillsborough, Chapel Hill will use the services. He feels that other develop- ment will be discouraged because of watershed problems, and water and sewer problems, which they've solved. He feels that precedent was set when Adam & Eve opened upt this did not encourage additional development. Fbr Article- - 8.2.4, solid waste disposal will be cared for by the owners. For the 'tire Department conditions, all were accepted. The developer is willing to change the road access to whatever DCT wants. With regard to the designation and request for a Planned Development--Cffice Institutional, Mr. Mehler said he had shown this because the Planning Department had told him to use that desig- natinn after changing its mind several tines. Mr. Mehler said he did not understand why under Artile 7.16.2 a motel/ restuarant is not/are not permitted uses; he said this is a support service. For Artilce 7.16.3, he said it was a semantic question; for Article 7.16.5 Mr. Mehler said this was the first time he had seen this particular. require- rent for setbacks and he felt it should be discussed. For Article 7.16.6, Mr. Mehler said they will conform; for the screening which wasn't shown, he said the site plan shown was "conceptvP1 in hature" and he didn't know how you could determine what was enough screening. He said individual site plans for each bnilding would be subnatted at the time it was planned to be built and that site plan would indicate screening. He added that under (b) walkways would be shown on large site plans. In regard.to 7.16.4, he feels that Planning Staff had made an inappropriate response. Mr. Mehler then responded to Planning Staff's reasons for recorrnending denial of the request for the Class A Special Use Permit for the Airpark: l--Mr, Mehler said the developer was asking for an exception to the Land Use Plan. 2--No response. #3--It will not encourage developnent, due to watershed, lack of watf.r/ sewer in the surrounding areas, and due to the expense involved. Plus the Adam & Eve development experience did not encourage development; he believes the development level encompassed by the Midway Airpark and Airport is so high that no one else could afford to do it. #4—This is in response tothe 0-I designation which Mr. Mehler feels he has already covered; this is a PD not an 0-I.