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 R A F T <br /> <br />somewhat of a trend being driven by some of those types of users, if there is that type of use there, I would expect 276 <br />them to be there but I think not knowing who the users are going to be or what type of user there is going to be, I 277 <br />don’t think we can commit to that as a condition. 278 <br /> 279 <br />Hunter Spitzer: Are you anticipating any fuel storage on the premises, gasoline, diesel or otherwise for backup 280 <br />generation or vehicle fueling? I’m not sure where the nearest gas station is immediately to this but I imagine if you 281 <br />are expecting a lot of traffic it wouldn’t be unreasonable. 282 <br /> 283 <br />Michael Birch: There might be some diesel storage for backup generation but that’s really all that is anticipated. 284 <br /> 285 <br />Hunter Spitzer: This is more of a question for the planning staff. There are UDO regulations to control that correct? 286 <br />Fuel storage. 287 <br /> 288 <br />Michael Harvey: It’s actually regulated by the North Carolina State Fire Code, not necessarily by zoning. In terms of 289 <br />distance from structure, how stored, how protected, and how maintained it’s actually going to be addressed through 290 <br />compliance with the fire code and what I want to remind everybody that site plans that are submitted have to go 291 <br />through the development review process with Orange County, which requires the fire marshal’s office to sign off on 292 <br />them. That is going to be a component of any and all review. So this will come up at the appropriate time by the 293 <br />appropriate entity if proposed. 294 <br /> 295 <br />Hunter Spitzer: Can I simply request that the developer agree as a condition not to put fuel storage adjacent to their 296 <br />vegetative buffer of the flood plain. 297 <br /> 298 <br />Michael Birch: Yes, we can agree to that. 299 <br /> 300 <br />David Blankfard: This is a question for Michael, is the building height determined by how tall the fire department can 301 <br />raise their ladder? 302 <br /> 303 <br />Michael Harvey: So Mr. Blankfard let me answer that question this way, obviously there are height limits enforced 304 <br />under Orange County General Use Zoning Districts and 60 feet is the potential building height that would be allowed 305 <br />(for this MPD-CZ). You are correct that building height is usually determined by available … or I should say one of 306 <br />the factors in determining allowable building height … is available infrastructure to fight fire. I think that without 307 <br />putting words in the applicant’s mouth or stealing their thunder, one of the reasons this site has so much traction is 308 <br />because of the availability of water and sewer service and the potential for sprinklered buildings addressing some of 309 <br />these concerns as well. There’s also, in their narrative discussions about the potential to allow for water towers on 310 <br />the property that might be used in addressing that very particular issue as well. 311 <br /> 312 <br />David Blankfard: Is there any requirements for high beams on the trucks and cars spilling over our property line? 313 <br />Something similar to what happens in parking decks? 314 <br /> 315 <br />Michael Birch: I think that’s likely addressed through the vegetated buffer around the perimeter. I think largely, I 316 <br />think Michael Harvey can correct me if I’m wrong, largely the County’s Lighting Ordinance with regard to site lighting 317 <br />but again I think we anticipate that vegetated buffer around the perimeter of the site would mitigate those headlights. 318 <br /> 319 <br />Michael Harvey: Chair Blankfard, this is Michael Harvey, Mr. Birch is correct our lighting regulations particularly 320 <br />address outdoor lighting, building security lighting and whatnot they don’t address or they are not designed to 321 <br />address lights from vehicles. 322 <br /> 323 <br />David Blankfard: Would the developer be willing to try to mitigate those high beams? 324 <br /> 325 <br />Michael Birch: I think we’re trying to through the use of those perimeter buffer yards and also one, the vegetation 326 <br />and two the distance and also the location of where our parking area are or anticipate them to be. I think it would be 327 <br />hard for us to articulate an objective standard but just to answer your question more broadly, I think yes we will try to 328 <br />mitigate that but it’s hard for me to think of an objective standard that we could apply as a condition. 329 <br /> 330 <br />Melissa Poole: So you don’t have actual companies going into this location into this space yet, is that correct? 331 <br />465
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.