Orange County NC Website
4 <br /> i <br /> �".�(N: Si1rfn lin noved that :the prelindnary plat fear jams-- <br /> Bennett be approved with the stipulation that the <br /> .road neet minirmn county standards. Wilson seconded. <br /> The nntion carried unanimausly. <br /> AGENDA ITEM 8: Wa thdra m <br /> AGENDA I° M 9: Taw bb=i,tt - Dzoaing cane ty described the rezoning <br /> request stating that a neighborhood cxm mrcial - II <br /> (NC--2) district was being reTmsted for a zming lot of <br /> 44,250 sq.- ft. 'phis lot is located on Highway 70 near <br /> the intersection of state mad. 1002 (Saint Mary's Road) <br /> and U.S. 70, in the Orange %Wal. Fie District. The <br /> property is Sham on Hillsborough Tomship Tax Map 22 <br /> Block @ part, of lot #l. ' `nm traffic counts in this <br /> area are 6250 daily trips on Hi.gt way 70 and 1600 trips <br /> on Saint Mary's Road. He addIed that Health Department <br /> approval had been given.. Cami.ty told the Board the <br /> Windex of the lot would be zoned R-1. Kizer express- <br /> ed concern about controlling the number of garb cuts. <br /> MXTON: Kizer moved approval. of the Ttwy M arri.tt Rezo ing re- <br /> quest. Bacon seconded. <br /> t1 lie motion was unaniamusly approved. <br /> AGENDA ITEM 10: Paul. Kempa - Darning at the intersection of US 70 and <br /> Pars hove Church Road. Car i.ty described the <br /> proposal explaining that there was a possibility of two <br /> separate lots being created :tc the property. Mike <br /> Parker, Keaa's representative, passed out Naps showing <br /> nearby ca mercial. uses. He told the Board that op- <br /> position to the ]rezoning voiced at the hearing was <br /> based on the belief that the intersection has a high <br /> :rate of tmffic a=idents. Parer presented a emgmter <br /> printout f=m DOT that listed one major accident at the <br /> intersection in the last 3 years. He added that other <br /> intersections along U.S. 70 East have higher accident <br /> rates. Per told the Board that the developers has <br /> no irm 3iate plans for the property until an alternate <br /> waste system is approved. Boeri.cke asked if 5 acres <br /> was the raci a R n total for cxacrcner,.Lal. deve.lopnmt with- <br /> in the node. Cmnity gold the Board that zcn..ing lots <br /> had been created arotmd the other uses, but that the <br /> Kernpa rezoning wiaul.d take up most of the renaining acres <br /> allotted for the node. A mm firm the audience told the <br /> Board that acne erosi cn damage had been caused by trees <br /> be cut drawn on the property. Cm-Lnity stated that <br /> until the st=V were ramoVed or the lot cleared the <br /> c',cnmty could not enforce the erosion control ordinance. <br /> S umUin ren=ked that if the PmP=rt3' was' reed sm'e <br /> erosican stabilizaticn would be dome by the req ;xed. <br /> Polatty told the Board that the nsjghbors Had not opposed <br /> the land use plan designation of a acrmexci.al node at the <br /> intersection during the land use plan hearings. <br />