Agenda - 09-15-20; 5-a - Zoning Atlas Amendment - Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for the Research Triangle Logistics Park (RTLP)

Browse Search

D R A F T Michael Harvey: Chair Blankfard, if I could interject quickly. I’m sorry I know that Ms. Poole lost her internet access if 610 I recall what Perdita said. One of her concerns was more specificity in land uses. In terms of what would fall into this 611 categories and what would not. At least that’s what I have in my notes. 612 613 Hunter Spitzer: If I may say one more thing, particularly to the residents that are listening. A lot of what we’ve been 614 doing over the past hour has been talking about conditions that we would like to request from the developer, that’s 615 the nice part about this master planning conditional zoning is that we can ask for certain conditions to be met and so 616 if you all and I understand that you are all very opposed to this but in the off chance that it can’t be stopped, you do 617 have the opportunity to shape this development through this process and so I encourage you to consider what you 618 might want to put in as conditions if at all possible. 619 620 David Blankfard: I have a huge concern about the traffic being dumped onto Davis Drive. Not just some of the traffic 621 but everything is going to be dumped onto Davis Drive because NCDOT does not want anybody to come out the 622 service road. So I don’t know if anybody else feels that way or if we want to see if the applicant can come up with a 623 better way of getting access to the site. Are we comfortable making a decision now or wanting to wait? 624 625 Hunter Spitzer: I move that we delay a decision on our recommendation until our next meeting on September 2nd. 626 627 Michael Birch: This is Michael Birch, the applicant, I think the outstanding issues that appear to be out there are one 628 responses from DOT but I want to reiterate that whatever DOT comes back with in terms of requested improvements, 629 those will be made. So it’s not really a negation in that respect. Second with regard to some of the comments about 630 Davis Drive, I just think it is not possible for us to prohibit access onto Davis Drive. Third, with regard to some of the 631 comments or requests for the conditions the design of the buildings with intent to accommodate solar, providing 632 some electric vehicle charging stations and no fuel storage adjacent to the flood plain. I am comfortable with we can 633 craft those conditions and extremely short order and so I would respectfully ask but because of the date of the next 634 Planning Board meeting being on the 2nd essentially eliminates our opportunity to get to the Board of Commissioner’s 635 meeting on the 15th. I would ask that the Planning Board please consider meeting or adjourning to a date certain 636 possibly 2 weeks from today on the 19th. 637 638 David Blankfard: I think we could do the 19th to reconvene. 639 640 Adam Beeman: I was going to ask Craig or Michael Harvey, with what Mr. Birch said about whatever DOT comes 641 back and they’re going to rectify whatever DOT says they need to do. Do you guys feel comfortable with moving 642 forward knowing whatever DOT may say or would it be better to meet a date later once the DOT issues have been 643 straightened out? 644 645 Craig Benedict: Let me just give a brief introduction about NCDOT is in charge of the roads within Orange County so 646 they are the ultimate authority on what improvements are made because counties in North Carolina are not in the 647 road business so they take, their recommendations are of prime importance and as the developer said they will have 648 to do whatever NCDOT says. We work with DOT and we will take the comments that we have from tonight and 649 impart them to NCDOT for any alternatives that there may be but NCDOT is also in the business to use taxpayer 650 money to use the roadways to their best ability. My opinion if you want to call it that is that we will be satisfied with 651 what NCDOT suggest as improvements for the project. 652 653 Kim Piracci: I just want to say that it seems to me that the traffic that’s being talked about, even if it could be 654 arranged in such a way that the traffic only comes and goes from 40 to Old 86 and never hits Davis it just seems like 655 an enormous amount of traffic even just for Old 86. Even though I understand there’ll be road expansion and 656 whatnot so I just, I feel like the scope of the project is just too big for this space in Orange County. Maybe smaller 657 warehouses or two instead of three. I don’t know but in any case it just seems like too much. To me it seems all 658 that’s too much. 659 660 Hunter Spitzer: Do you have an expected return date from NCDOT on those comments? An anticipated time? 661 662 Michael Harvey: Hunter, let me jump in and Mr. Birch may be able to also provide some detail. I don’t know if it’s fair 663 to say if we have any expectation from DOT. They obviously took a prolonged period of time to get us the comment 664 they got us on Friday and we can obviously impress to Mr. Edwards who is our district engineer the need for 665 471