OCPB agenda 080217 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11 Randy Marshall: It seems like to me we need to be specific as possible because there’s nothing that fires up neighborhoods 538 any faster than somebody proposing a drive through anywhere within five miles of them. 539 540 Michael Harvey: Well, to be honest, there’s nothing that fires up one or two of our elected officials like the term drive through. 541 We actually proposed a text amendment 2008 and Craig and I went to meetings for two years on establishing drive through 542 standards and the issue was prohibit them everywhere, regulate them as follows, only allow them for certain uses, and we had 543 to go through the Economic Development Commission, County Commissioners, this Board, and after two years we didn’t have 544 an ordinance. 545 546 Randy Marshall: So it’s just easier to put them into different commercial categories as opposed to inaudible as a major 547 category? 548 549 Michael Harvey: More or less. 550 551 Michael Harvey continued reviewing abstract. 552 553 Kim Piracci: So the way this is written now they would be able to frack in the county? 554 555 Michael Harvey: Well this way this is written now, legally, somebody could go in through with a SUP process and engage in a 556 fracking operation. Right now it’s allowed. State law preempts us from having a regulation that is deemed to be overly 557 prohibitive to say you can’t do it. And that’s probably what somebody would argue and we’d probably lose. 558 559 Kim Piracci: Quick and easy, there are places in California localities define more senior. 560 561 Michael Harvey: The only saving grace is that when you actually look at deposits, we’ve got nothing. 562 563 Craig Benedict: Michael, the quarry that does some processing on site, we took that through… 564 565 Tony Blake: I was going to ask about American Stone because does that qualify as processing when they’re making? 566 567 Michael Harvey: No, because all they’re taking rock and making small rock. They’re not turning it into asphalt. 568 569 Randy Marshall: But there is an asphalt plant. Is it grandfathered in? 570 571 Michael Harvey: Not at American Stone on 54. There used to be one on 57 going towards Person. That burned down and for 572 the last 12 years every three years we send a note to the State telling them that there cannot be an asphalt plant at that facility 573 because it’s inconsistent with out ordinance. 574 575 Randy Marshall: Well I seem to recall when I was on the Town board that there was an asphalt plant. There was a lot of 576 concern about it. Just outside of Carrboro’s jurisdiction. 577 578 Craig Benedict: That was closed down and not able to be re-opened. 579 580 Michael Harvey: And we actually cover asphalt plants differently elsewhere on this. Now also remember though that under 581 state law and even under our own ordinance there are uses permitted by right in every zoning district. One of them is listed in 582 article 5, section 5.1 2. Uses permitted as a matter of right, bona fide farms is one, barrow pits… I actually thought there was 583 something in here about bash plant concrete plant associated with a highway project. 584 585 Michael Harvey continued reviewing abstract. 586 587 Randy Marshall: Is that where your recycling centers would come in? 588 589 Michael Harvey: Yes. That’s our convenient centers. And there’s also a recycling land use category in this document. Any 590 questions on that one? 591 15