Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
75 <br />56 of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and <br />57 harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner, which considers the present and future <br />58 needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to <br />59 and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every <br />60 effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services during our <br />61 deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. <br />62 <br />63 <br />64 Public Charge <br />65 The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its <br />66 citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with <br />67 fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this <br />68 public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual <br />69 regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until <br />70 such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. <br />71 <br />72 Lydia Wegman read the public charge aloud. <br />73 <br />74 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS <br />75 There were no comments. <br />76 <br />77 AGENDA ITEM 7: MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SETTLER'S POINT -To review comments made at the <br />78 November 14 quarterly public hearing, proposed revisions to conditions as a result of comments, and to make a <br />79 recommendation on the proposed revisions concerning an application for an MPD -CZ (Master Plan Development <br />80 Conditional Zoning). The proposed project encompasses approximately 195 acres in the Hillsborough Economic <br />81 Development District (EDD) south of Interstate 40 on both sides of Old Highway 86. The public hearing for this item <br />82 has been extended until January 23, 2018. Additional review of remaining aspects of the application and an <br />83 additional recommendation by the Planning Board is scheduled for the January 10, 2018, Planning Board meeting. <br />84 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor <br />85 <br />86 Michael Harvey directed the board to the abstract on Page 11. He reviewed that this item was heard at the November 13, <br />87 2017, quarterly public hearing. It was referred back to the Planning Board for additional review because there were <br />88 modifications to several conditions and there was additional information on the transportation impact analysis (TIA). It is not <br />89 staff's intention to ask the Planning Board to make a final vote this evening. Staff is asking for votes on direction. The Planning <br />90 Board is not asked to provide a final decision at this meeting because additional discussion is expected on the Major <br />91 Transportation Corridor (MTC) buffer in January. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant to address the comments made <br />92 at the public hearing. He noted that the applicant is represented here this evening. <br />93 <br />94 Michael Harvey reviewed that the transportation analysis addendum is located on Page 20. Staff comments begin on page 41. <br />95 The summary of major questions /responses from the November public hearing starts on Page 62. General information about <br />96 the Conditional Zoning District starts on Page 77. An excerpt of the October Planning Board minutes begins on Page 80. The <br />97 November public hearing minutes start on Page 101. The revised conditions of approval start on Page 123. <br />98 <br />99 Michael Harvey said he planned to walk the board through the revised conditions. <br />100 <br />101 Kim Piracci asked for an explanation of the MTC buffer. Michael Harvey answered it's a 100 -foot buffer for all nonresidential <br />102 development along major highways, so it applies along Interstate 40. A 50 percent break in the buffer is allowed but it is to be <br />103 otherwise undisturbed. <br />104 <br />105 Lydia Wegman requested that any images that would help explain the buffer be displayed. Michael Harvey shared an image <br />106 provided by the applicant. <br />107 <br />108 Paul Guthrie asked if the interstate adjacent to this property has the standard 300 -foot right of way and does the North <br />109 Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) have control of it. Michael Harvey answered that to his knowledge it is under <br />110 control of DOT and it is 300 feet wide. The buffer is obviously wider in areas that have off ramps. And it's in control of the state <br />