OUTBoard minutes 041608 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved May 21, 2008 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 171 172 173 174 175 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 high density residential those people don’t want adjacent uses that are commercial industrial and then you have a problem. That’s why the major EDD’s are along the interstate. Karen Barrows stated Paul’s point is very germane the Plan predates the development going in on Buckhorn Road. Why do we need this, most of this will be included in the Buckhorn plan. The County has always envisioned the EDD to be developed. Sam Lasris stated that in talking with some of the people on the board I think they were envisioning being able to live and have your business in the same area. Perdita Holtz stated the EDD’s don’t allow residential. But the potential change would allow high density residential. There could still be limits. This is just a general recommendation but the implementation measures get more to the intent of what you are looking for. There are two other EDDs in the County. There is an EDD south of Hillsborough, and there is the Eno EDD. V. Approval of Minutes of February 20, 2008 meeting 170 MOTION made by Jan Grossman. Seconded by Paul Guthrie. VOTE: 7 approved. 1 opposed, Bryn Smith. The board agreed to postpone approval of the March 19 meeting minutes, as the minutes were not completed for the board’s review. VI. Buckhorn Village Planned Development Class A Special Use Permit (PD-ED SUP) 176 Sam Lasris shared several concerns: that the developer’s vehicle count is off, and that there are stream buffer requirements and the stream has been left off the transportation map. There are setback requirements. Can they run a road across the stream? Sam asked Karen if NCDOT would make recommendations. Karen Lincoln answered that the Transportation Impact Analysis is currently under review by NCDOT and this will include the proposed transportation improvements and access points to the road system proposed by the developer. NCDOT must approve access and any work to be done within the NCDOT right-of-way. The DOT may have additional requirements that will have to be met before they (DOT) can approve the plans for the driveway connections. DOT may also have requirements regarding the internal circulation with respect to access management to the secondary road system. Sam Lasris asked if this development could be approved without having the DOT requirements. The County can approve the development, but as far as the connections with any of the public right-of-ways, interchange widening, etc., NCDOT will have to approve those plans and may have other conditions with which the developer must comply before those improvements can be constructed. DOT can only require improvements to the degree that this development is causing the need for those improvements. Jan Grossman asked if DOT makes the recommendation that there needs to be a light or a traffic circle. There must be an analysis that indicates the location meets warrants for a traffic light in order for NCDOT to approve a traffic signal. Karen Lincoln noted that the handouts are preliminary conditions that have been compiles by staff to give the OUTBoard some ideas of the types of conditions the board may wish to request that the Planning Board consider recommending for this development. Alice Gordon stated this is a lot of information to absorb and she would like everyone to think about how some of these conditions could be accomplished. There are many possibilities; including offering incentives to businesses to encourage employees to ride public transportation. Recommend the best transportation system for this development. Page 9 of 6