5-a - Zoning Atlas Amendment - Conditional Zoning – Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) Settlers Point

Browse Search

b. The recommended condition was too limiting, specifically there was no 268 wiggle room to allow for other alternative energy vehicles to have access 269 to facilities for fueling purposes within the project. 270 The applicant indicated a preference not to have natural gas or other 271 similar fueling points due to the potential safety hazards and liability issues 272 for tenants. 273 c. With respect to excluding hotels from the condition, the argument was the 274 District as a whole should provide for a minimum of electric charging 275 stations. The belief was that a hotel would provide their own to serve the 276 needs of its clients. 277 Further, Board members indicated they wanted the spaces spread 278 throughout the project and not clustered in one specific area serving a 279 single user. The concern was a hotel use would dominate/monopolize 280 electric charging stations limiting their use by other travelers accessing 281 District 2. 282 d. There were concerns expressed on how such a condition would be 283 monitored/enforced by the staff. 284 The applicant indicated they could agree to a condition requiring 1% of the total 285 parking spaces required for District 2 be reserved/developed to promote vehicle 286 charging station(s). This reservation would be exclusive of any hotel client locating 287 within the district. 288 The Board voted 6 to 5 to recommend approval of the condition as agreed to by the 289 applicant. 290 A local resident expressed concern over the approval of the project indicating it was not 291 appropriate for the area given adjoining rural single-family residential developments and 292 that there was not sufficient detail on what land uses would be developed if the project 293 was approved. The individual expressed concern(s) existing traffic congestion would be 294 exacerbated and that the project would allow for the development of undesirable land 295 uses including a truck stop. This individual suggested the County model this project 296 after Timberline in Chapel Hill as a reasonable development adjacent to an interstate 297 surrounded by residential land uses. 298 Staff informed the Board the Timberline project was, in essence, a strip mall with 299 several outparcels housing professional offices, a movie theater, banks, and 300 restaurants. Development occupied approximately 60% of the land area associated 301 with the project and there was little land use buffers/landscaping present within the 302 project. Settlers Point had mandatory open space requirements, had a much more 303 restrictive limit on the total allowable floor area that could be developed within either 304 district, and had mandatory 100 ft. perimeter buffers separating adjacent land uses. 305 From staff’s standpoint this project, as currently presented, offered the preservation of 306 more open space and preservation of the natural environment that the suggested 307 model. 308 The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project with the 309 imposition of several conditions included within the resolution of approval. 310 89