Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
c. The applicant has not provided sufficient details on proposed land uses. Local <br />residents have expressed concern(s) they will not have a voice is recommending <br />denial of specific tenants; <br />d. Action on the application will result in illegal spot zoning subjecting the County to a <br />court challenge. Specifically the parcel along Davis Road is within the Rural <br />Residential land use category, as defined in the County’s Comprehensive Plan, <br />and was never intended to support high intensity economic development projects; <br />e. The request is inconsistent with various goals and policies of the adopted 2020 <br />Comprehensive Plan including but not limited to: <br />i. Allow for intensive non-residential development in an area of the county <br />designated as a rural and/or protected area, <br />ii. Will not result in adequate protection of the natural environment, <br />iii. Will not be in harmony with surrounding land uses. <br />f. Will negatively impact rural neighborhoods in and around Davis Road due to the <br />proposed driveway allowing vehicular access to and from the development. The <br />driveway will generate too much traffic on the road creating a public safety hazard. <br />Further, commercial vehicles will make use of existing, rural roadways (i.e. Old NC <br />Highway 86, New Hope Church Road, Orange Grove Road); <br />g. The project does not provide enough protection for existing environmental features <br />(i.e. streams, floodplains, and identified hardwood forests), will have a negative <br />impact on Cates Creek, and will impair the health of the Eno River; <br />h. Development will negatively impact and displace local wildlife; <br />i. Insufficient safeguards are proposed addressing stormwater runoff and impacts on <br />adjacent property owners; <br />j. Development of buildings with a maximum height limit of 60 feet will dominate the <br />local landscape; <br />k. Truck traffic will create health hazards for residents due to increases in diesel <br />exhaust/fumes. Further, noise created by these trucks will negatively impact local <br />residents and will constitute violation(s) of applicable noise regulations; <br />l. The applicant has been inconsistent in the number of jobs the project will <br />generate; <br />m. The submitted traffic impact analysis is contradictory with the application narrative. <br />As previous indicated, there are numerous recommended conditions designed to address the <br />anticipated impacts of the project. <br /> <br />Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this item on August 5 and 19, <br />2020. The Board voted 6 to 4 to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency <br />(Attachment 2) and the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment (Attachment 3) as proposed by staff. <br />Those voting against the project cited the following 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 />b. Board members expressed concern over anticipated traffic impacts on Davis Road; <br />3