Orange County NC Website
through the federal government. 111 112 <br />Michael Harvey showed an image provided by the applicant that indicates where the100-foot buffer is to be located. He 113 <br />reviewed that the applicant is proposing no breaks in the buffer for District 1. He noted that District 3 had been removed from 114 <br />the proposal completely. In District 2, the applicant is allowed to create visual breaks in the MTC buffer. The developers plan 115 <br />to stick to the 50 percent breaks. The image indicated where the intermittent breaks would be located. 116 <br /> 117 <br />Patricia Roberts asked whether 50 percent breaks is an Orange County law. Michael Harvey answered yes. 118 <br /> 119 <br />Kim Piracci noted the breaks are 50 percent of width (along the border of the property) and not in depth. Michael Harvey 120 <br />affirmed that. He said the Orange County Board of Commissioners has expressed some concern that the applicant is also 121 <br />proposing to do some selective clearing within the MTC buffer for utility infrastructure and roadway networks. This will be 122 <br />discussed more in this review. 123 <br /> 124 <br />Paul Guthrie asked whether there is any knowledge of long-term expansion of I-40 in that area. Michael Harvey said 125 <br />expanding has to occur in the 300-foot right of way unless the federal government procures more land. There is talk of 126 <br />expanding I-40 into three lanes as it is in Durham. He believes that can be accommodated with the existing right of way. 127 <br /> 128 <br />Michael Harvey said on Page 13, the first condition up for discussion is Condition 6, contained in Attachment 7, granting 129 <br />Orange Rural Fire Department denial authority. The applicant has indicated they don’t mind the fire department being a review 130 <br />party but they don’t think the fire department should have power to deny the application. Instead, the applicant suggests the 131 <br />power to deny the application be left to the fire marshals from the Town of Hillsborough and Orange County. The Orange 132 <br />County Board of Commissioners has requested this board’s opinion on whether Orange Rural Fire Department should have 133 <br />denial authority. Typically, fire departments review such applications but do not have authority to deny them, Michael Harvey 134 <br />said. 135 <br /> 136 <br />Tony Blake said the intent was they be included in the review but not have approval or denial. The main thing is they be 137 <br />involved. Michael Harvey asked for a show of consensus to modify the condition to allow Orange Rural Fire Department to 138 <br />have review but not denial authority. 139 <br /> 140 <br />MOTION by Randy Marshall that Orange Rural Fire Department have a review but not action to approve or deny the 141 <br />application. Seconded by Hunter Spitzer. 142 VOTE: Unanimous 143 <br /> 144 <br />Michael Harvey continued with the presentation. He reviewed the next condition to be discussed involves the MTC 145 <br />buffer. The applicant does not propose any disturbance breaks in District 1, which is the industrial district. The 146 <br />applicant had asked for clearing 60 percent of the buffer instead of 50 percent in District 2. The Orange County Board 147 <br />of Commissioners expressed reservation about allowing the additional clearing. The applicant has since submitted to 148 <br />staff that they will abide by the ordinance allowing clearance of 50 percent of the buffer. They have delineated a 149 <br />clearing limited to 50 percent. They are not limited due to the clearing associated with the utility easement. Regarding 150 <br />additional allowances for modifications to the MTC buffer, the applicant has shown a 100-foot buffer going up to the 151 <br />utility easement and then the applicant is asking for a variable width MTC buffer instead of 100 feet. Based on the 152 <br />narrative reviewed at the Oct. 4, 2017, Planning Board meeting and the public hearing, the MTC buffer would be 153 <br />cleared for accesses and stormwater feature construction. The Planning Board is asked to give feedback on the 154 <br />proposed variable width of the MTC buffer, proposed to be 50 feet instead of 100 feet in some places. 155 <br /> 156 <br />Kim Piracci asked for clarification because she is unclear why it’s sometimes 50 feet and sometimes 100 feet. 157 <br />Michael Harvey answered the variable width would be to accommodate an access road, parking and a stormwater 158 <br />feature. 159 <br /> 160 <br />Paul Guthrie asked if the buffer is intended to be a sound buffer and a visual buffer. Michael Harvey answered right 161 <br />now it serves as both but it borders a major highway and there are already significant breaks in the buffer, including 162 <br />the interchange, which allows sound to travel. While the Orange County Board of Commissioners realized allowing 163 <br />50 percent breaks in the buffer would have a sound impact, they also understood that it allowed marketing of the site. 164 <br /> 165 <br />76