Agenda - 10-06-20; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

6 1 2 1. We would like to start by pointing out that the roadway perpendicular to the proposed 3 development is a designated NC Scenic Byway and that the proposed development 4 encompasses 6 acres of Natural Heritage Natural Area, which the design proposes to entirely 5 cover over. 6 2. Our next concern is the impact of noise--on the residents, the preschool, and the church, all 7 located within 50 to 1,000 feet of the proposed warehouse complex. According to the developer, 8 the warehouse complex will potentially host between 150 and 200 trucks and cars per hour 9 exiting onto Davis Road and Old NC Highway 86, with the ability for a 3-shift work schedule 10 producing diesel tractor trailer noise at high decibels 24/7. The noise-related long-term health 11 impacts of this proposed activity will be substantial and clearly bear additional study. 12 13 3. Next, the diesel exhaust from these vehicles (mainly trucks), again in close proximity to adults 14 and children of all ages, deserves additional attention due to the potential for serious long-term 15 health impacts, especially for our oldest and youngest citizens. Such emissions-related health 16 impacts clearly bear additional study too. 17 18 4. Next, the vegetative buffers and open space offered by the proposal are not adequate to 19 provide wildlife corridors, nor to decrease the negative visual and auditory impacts on residents 20 in the surrounding area. 21 22 5. Finally, this development proposal does not yet offer appropriate protections for the natural 23 community or for Orange County residents. We stand with the Eno River Association in our 24 concern that a structure built on the headwaters of the Eno River, adjacent to a floodplain, with 25 substantial clear cutting will not protect the water quality and quantity along the 2,500 feet of 26 Cates Creek encompassed within the development that connect watersheds of the Eno River 27 and New Hope Creek. There is of course more to say on this issue--and on stormwater 28 management and mitigation- -but again: further study of the impacts is warranted. The Eno-New 29 Hope Landscape Conservation Plan focuses on the critical importance of habitat connectivity for 30 wildlife in the Eno River and New Hope Creek watersheds that this development encompasses. 31 Please consider this in your questions and considerations of the RTLP proposal. 32 33 Janet Marks read the following comments: 34 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious concerns about RTLP Traffic is an issue you will 35 hear and read a lot about, and there are two main reasons: 36 1. Added traffic from the RTLP warehouse complex will have a major negative impact, and 37 traffic is what will affect the area and the county as a whole the most. As you review the 38 applicant's proposal, pay close attention to how traffic exists today and what it is proposed to 39 look like. According to the Traffic Impact Summary presented on Aug 19, the RTLP 40 development will generate 3,648 vehicle trips per day. 41 • The existing traffic volume on Old NC86 between Davis Rd. and 1-40 is 6,600 vehicles 42 per day. It is projected that 95% of all inbound and outbound trips will utilize Old NC86 — 43 it would now become 10,065, a 53% increase over the current volume. 44 . For Davis Rd. near its intersection with Old NC86, the developer's summary shows an 45 existing traffic volume of 2,100 vehicles per day. Add 15% of all inbound and 90% of all 46 outbound traffic or 1,915 RTLP-added trips --that is an astonishing increase of 91% of 47 vehicles using this twolane, mainly residential and rural area road. Yet in the words of 48 the developer, Impact will be "Minimal". Doubling the current traffic on a narrow road 49 abutted by homes, a church, a preschool --and yet the developer represents this as 50 "minimal"?When you read into the proposal, please ask yourself: Is even a 91%