Agenda - 05-03-2005-9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11 T Staff would welcome the opportunity to work with local birding (and other related) organizations regarding possible habitat areas on site within the master plan. However, the locations for these activities would likely occur in future phases of the park or after development. The potential for stormwater wetlands will be part of the CUP process. Conditional Use Permit/Development Standards (4 5 6 8 9 10 11 14 16 17) 4. The method of curb and gutter and road pavement will ultimately be a matter for the Town of Carrboro, whose development standards would apply, However, Town staff has already indicated an interest in using low-impact design(LID) standards for the connector road, and the County has a long history of preference for the use of swales and on-site infiltration of stormwater. Staff plans to propose similar arrangements (to the degree they are feasible and the Town is willing to receive them) as the CUP application and construction drawings are prepared. Staff would propose to explore LID standards further with the Town, as the CUP is prepared and submitted. 5. The idea of involving advisory board members in formal negotiations with the application approval process is unprecedented, and staff feels it would be inconsistent with longstanding County policy (and potentially add cost and time to the process) to insert parties other than staff and the elected boards at this level of negotiation. Additionally, there are other advisory boards that have been more involved in the Twin Creeks process (the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council and the Commission for the Environment) that would likely also be interested in being part of an expanded negotiation and application review process as well. 6. The Joint Planning Agreement specifies that development applications in the Transition Area of the Joint Planning Area would have the County Planning Board receiving courtesy review of development applications. The Conditional Use Permit application will include substantial levels of detail, including some drawings at or near construction detail. The Planning Board would have the right to review and comment on the application to the Board of Commissioners. After approval of the CUP, final construction drawings would be developed and the project would be bid,resulting in a contract award by the Board of Commissioners. Advisory boards have not been involved in this level of approval of internal detail in projects, and staff feels that such involvement here (and again, the RPAC and CfE might have similar interests if roles were expanded)would be inconsistent with longstanding County policy. Staff would be interested in receiving the courtesy review and comments of the Planning Board (and other advisory boards) of the CUP application, as per Joint Planning procedures, which may capture much of the desired detail. 8. The number of parking spaces is an estimate on the master plan, and the exact number of spaces would be subject to determination by the Town staff and addressed in a more exact way in the CUP. The general number of spaces reflected in the master plan is consistent with initial readings and discussion of the Town's development standards.