Browse
Search
Agenda - 09-15-20; 5-a - Zoning Atlas Amendment - Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for the Research Triangle Logistics Park (RTLP)
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Agendas
>
Agendas
>
2020
>
Agenda - 09-15-20 Virtual Business Meeting
>
Agenda - 09-15-20; 5-a - Zoning Atlas Amendment - Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for the Research Triangle Logistics Park (RTLP)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/10/2020 3:28:37 PM
Creation date
9/10/2020 3:14:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/15/2020
Meeting Type
Business
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5-a
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.
/
575
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
d. Objective LU-1.1: Coordinate the location of higher intensity / high density <br />residential and non-residential development with existing or planned locations of <br />public transportation, commercial and community services, and adequate <br />supporting infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer, high-speed internet access, <br />streets, and sidewalks), while avoiding areas with protected natural and cultural <br />resources. This could be achieved by increasing allowable densities and creating <br />new mixed-use zoning districts where adequate public services are available. <br />e. Economic Development Objective ED-2.1: Encourage compact and higher density <br />development in areas served by water and sewer. <br />f. Economic Development Objective ED-2.10: Extend public water and sewer into all <br />three Economic Development Districts. <br />3. The applicant has provided a basic environmental assessment as part of this submittal. <br />Staff has reviewed and determined there ought to be no significant environmental impact <br />from this project based on existing conditions; <br />4. Staff has determined that the proposed development is consistent with existing and <br />anticipated development within the area and the various land uses associated with the <br />project are compatible. <br />Neighborhood Information Meeting: An on-line neighborhood information meeting for the project <br />was held by the applicant on July 15, 2020 in accordance with Section 2.9.2 (D) of the UDO. A <br />synopsis of comments made at the meeting can be found within Attachment 7. <br /> <br />Public Notifications: In accordance with Section 2.8.7 of the UDO: <br />• Notices were mailed via first class mail to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the subject <br />parcels providing the date/time of the public hearing where the proposal is to be <br />reviewed. These notices were mailed on August 28, 2020, 18 days before the meeting. <br />• Staff posted the subject parcels with signs indicating the date/time of the public hearing <br />on September 4, 2020, 11 days before the meeting; <br />• Staff caused a legal ad advertising the date, time, location, and purpose of the BOCC <br />public hearing to run in the News of Orange and the Durham Herald-Sun on September 2 <br />and 9, 2020. <br />For more information, please refer to Attachment 9. <br /> <br />Courtesy Review: This request was submitted to the Town of Hillsborough as part of the <br />courtesy review program. To date, no comments have been received other than there are no <br />concerns over the proposed zoning atlas amendment. <br />Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board began its review of the zoning atlas <br />amendment at its August 5, 2020 regular meeting, which was adjourned to August 19 to <br />continue discussion. At this meeting the Board voted 6 to 4 to recommend approval of the <br />Statement of Consistency (Attachment 10) and the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment <br />(Attachment 11) as proposed by staff. Those voting against the project cited the following <br />concerns: <br />a. The Board wanted the applicant to provide the specific tenants (i.e. names, <br />operational characteristics, etc.) within the project for ‘review and approval’ prior to <br />action being taken on the zoning atlas amendment request; <br />11
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.