Agenda - 10-06-20; 6-c - Zoning Atlas Amendment – Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for the Research Triangle Logistics Park (RTLP)

Browse Search

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 667 to say if we have any expectation from DOT. They obviously took a prolonged period of time to get us the comment 668 they got us on Friday and we can obviously impress to Mr. Edwards who is our district engineer the need for 669 expediency but I can’t and will not tell you that I can guarantee that within two weeks we’ll have an answer. I can’t 670 guarantee that within two weeks we’ll have an answer. But I think it’s reasonable for us to try if the Board sees fit to 671 adjourn to at date and time certain in two weeks. We’ll do the best we can to address this concern as best we can 672 and I know so will the applicant but I do think it’s also important for me to make clear one think to the Board. It’s been 673 sort of danced around but I think it’s important to say it. One of the, this same issue came up with Settler’s Point, the 674 Department of Transportation is not satisfied with the current condition of service road which parallels (Interstate) 40 675 and they had requested or indicated that in order for Settler’s Point to be developed they had to have secondary 676 means of ingress/egress. At Settler’s Point chose to try and secure access off Old NC Hwy 86 directly. That was a 677 gamble they took and unfortunately it didn’t pay off at the time they had the approval they couldn’t negotiate an 678 access point. I know that this applicant has looked for alternative access points and I’m not telling you this to say, it’s 679 a fait accompli, but I’m telling you this that one of the reasons there’s two access points is because DOT has 680 mandated it from day one. This applicant is obviously proposing Davis Road there’s obviously concerns about that 681 and there’s request for more information and that needs to be processed to move forward but I think the Board just 682 needs to be put back in the loop that the reason there’s two is because DOT is mandating it. 683 684 Michael Birch: This is Michael Birch, the applicant just to reiterate on the timing of DOT responses. We will hound 685 them as best we can to get responses so we can this resolved in advance of a possible meeting on the 19th. 686 687 Randy Marshall: I’m not sure we are going to continue to be productive tonight so I’d like to make a recommendation 688 that we adjourn or postpone or continue the meeting until two weeks from tonight at 7 p.m. 689 690 Hunter Spitzer: Seconded. 691 692 Adam Beeman: I vote going ahead and solving the problem tonight if anybody else is ready to vote. I’m ready to 693 vote. I’m got my choices made so if everybody else wants to shelve it that’s fine but I’m ready to move forward 694 tonight. 695 696 Kim Piracci: I would like to postpone voting but to me it doesn’t make sense to meet in two weeks if we haven’t 697 heard from the DOT though it could be a conditional two weeks from tonight sort of thing. 698 699 Michael Harvey: Kim, let me just interject that it unfortunately can’t be conditional you are going to be adjourning to a 700 date and time certain so there will be a meeting if you all elect to do it this way on the 19th and if we don’t have the 701 response unfortunately we don’t have the response and I hate to say it that way but it’s the truth. The two options 702 you have are to adjourn this meeting matter or table this matter until the September meeting which obviously the 703 applicant I know has a concern with or to say you’re going to attempt to do a special meeting on the 19th. If there’s 704 Board consensus to try that and we don’t have answers, we don’t have answers. That’s the unfortunately blunt way 705 I’m going to have to put it to you. 706 707 Randy Marshall: Part of my thinking was that we still have a number of people who wanted to address this some of 708 them we may have already have heard from and understand what their positions are but there may be others that 709 we’ve not heard from at all and I’m not sure we want to start listening to them at this late time. The other things is 710 we’ve not been able to address the DOT issues and nothing may change as Michael suggests in two weeks but at 711 least in two weeks we will have a little bit more information and can get a little bit more input from the public and 712 make an informed decision at that time. I can vote tonight, I know where I stand but I just want to make sure that 713 everybody feels like they’ve had enough opportunity to get all the information they need or to provide all the 714 information they need. 715 716 David Blankfard: I think that we should postpone it to the 19th. I guess we’ll have to have a motion again. But we’ll 717 wait and until the 19th we can listen to more of the constituents, the public right because they were saying they were 718 not notified this will give them more time to rally their forces and then if the DOT isn’t there, we’ll just listen to the 719 public and if the DOT we can finish it then and there. 720 721 Craig Benedict: Perdita how many people do you have still want to speak tonight? 722 17