Browse
Search
OCPB agenda 011018
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2018
>
OCPB agenda 011018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2018 2:01:51 PM
Creation date
3/14/2018 4:10:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/10/2018
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OCPB Minutes 011018
(Attachment)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
290
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
negative or positive reaction to the request. 221 <br /> 222 <br />Craig Benedict said District 1 has no breaks even though that would be allowed by code. The Master Plan zoning 223 <br />brings forth the variability. Regarding the resident comments, there were some from Davis Road to the southwest 224 <br />and some comments from the northwest. The northwest is on the north side of the interstate, so anything we remove 225 <br />to the south of the interstate isn’t going to impact residents on the north side of the interstate, he said. 226 <br /> 227 <br />Patricia Roberts said it’s interstate. It’s going to take a lot more than 100 feet to reduce that noise. If you live near the 228 <br />interstate, you get used to that noise. She would like to see as much development close to the interstate as possible 229 <br />to keep the rural areas rural. Coming from Durham, there is no development at the interchanges in Orange County 230 <br />and then there is when you reach Alamance County. Our taxes are too high because we don’t have a commercial tax 231 <br />base. 232 <br /> 233 <br />Tony Blake said when I look at the map, it looks like there is additional buffer along parcels 3, 5, 6 and part of Parcel 234 <br />9. He’s inclined to say you could get away with 50-foot buffer on Parcels 3, 5, 6 and maybe the first part of Parcel 9 235 <br />and then have the 100-foot buffer up to the second wet area. It just seems to me like there is compromise here. I 236 <br />agree with Patricia Roberts that this is the place you’re going to want development if you’re going to have any. And 237 <br />Orange County really needs it. 238 <br /> 239 <br />Adam Beeman said there is nothing worse than driving up and down the interstate and not being able to see what’s 240 <br />at the exit. He wants to be able to see where the hotel is. 241 <br /> 242 <br />Michael Harvey said the applicant has one clarification. There will be a 100-foot buffer along the property line that is 243 <br />not along the interstate. The applicant offered additional buffer for the people who live on the other side of that 244 <br />property line, following the District 3 boundary. He said the stream buffer is obviously required to remain in tact. 245 <br />Obviously, there would not be a 100-foot buffer at the road access point. Kim Piracci checked that it would be written 246 <br />down. Michael Harvey said he believes it already is. 247 <br /> 248 <br />Kim Piracci asked whether the trees are old growth. Craig Benedict answered the trees are mostly pines and are 60 249 <br />to 80 years old. 250 <br /> 251 <br />Paul Guthrie asked if most utility corridors will be underground and will they follow transportation routes. Michael 252 <br />Harvey answered obviously Orange County tries to work with utility partners for some semblance of rationality. In 253 <br />some instances, the county is successful. Sometimes you have to take a path of least resistance (for sewer and gas). 254 <br />Electric is dictated where it ties into substations. Utilities are more adept at dictating where they need to go than at 255 <br />taking direction from government entities. 256 <br /> 257 <br />Paul Guthrie said some uses on these parcels could be heavy users of utilities and he wonders how far in advance 258 <br />utilities are planned. Michael Harvey answered utility companies are involved in the reviews early on. Predominately, 259 <br />underground utilities are used for these larger sites. Gas could be a potential issue here because the developer could 260 <br />have to secure easements. Water is secured. The Town of Hillsborough has to sign off on every site plan that there is 261 <br />adequate capacity for both water and sewer. 262 <br /> 263 <br />Paul Guthrie said from my experience, what you say regarding utilities dictating where they go is largely accurate. 264 <br />But if you stand up to the utility, something will happen. Michael Harvey said he has been in Orange County 13 years 265 <br />and he has stood up to a lot of people, but utility companies tend to not back down on where they need to locate 266 <br />utilities. Tony Blake asked if Duke Energy owns the easement. Michael Harvey confirmed. 267 <br /> 268 <br />Kim Piracci said her taxes went up 27 percent this year so she is on board with development. In terms of the buffer, 269 <br />she’d rather see 100 feet because she likes trees. 270 <br /> 271 <br />David Blankfard asked how often the MTC buffer has been reduced to 50 feet. Craig Benedict answered that the 272 <br />county hasn’t had development to use it. Michael Harvey said the county came close to it with the proposed 273 <br />Buckhorn Village development, which didn’t get developed. 274 <br /> 275 <br /> 9
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.