Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-06-20; 6-c - Zoning Atlas Amendment – Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for the Research Triangle Logistics Park (RTLP)
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2020's
>
2020
>
Agenda - 10-06-20 Virtual Business Meeting
>
Agenda - 10-06-20; 6-c - 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
10/1/2020 2:20:28 PM
Creation date
10/1/2020 2:58:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/6/2020
Meeting Type
Business
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6-c
Document Relationships
Agenda 10-06-20 Virtual Business Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2020's\2020\Agenda - 10-06-20 Virtual Business Meeting
Minutes 10-06-2020 Virtual Business Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2020's\2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
Approved 9/2/2020 <br /> <br />Geoff Sebesta: My name is Geoff Sebesta, I’ll be very brief. The first is the NTSBNHTSB released a study long ago 1062 <br />that showed that the damage to a road increases by the fourth power of the size of the vehicles. That’s the square of 1063 <br />the square. These vehicles which will be on historical road will destroy your road. You’ll pay a lot of money fixing 1064 <br />and upgrading your road. This is completely unavoidable, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it, if you put 1065 <br />this traffic on this road, you will be paying a lot to fix this road. Now the second thing I have to say is that in 2008, I 1066 <br />had the pleasure and privilege of being involved with the city councils of both San Diego California and Lexington 1067 <br />Kentucky as they both considered proposals from businesses that did not want to reveal the sources of their funding 1068 <br />or their eventual tenants. San Diego took one look at the proposals, said if you’re not revealing your tenants this is a 1069 <br />joke. Lexington was not so wise, they got involved in something called the Center Point fiasco, you can look it up. 1070 <br />It’s destroyed the downtown of Lexington Kentucky to this day. If they’re not willing to reveal who the tenants are, it 1071 <br />is not a serious proposal, it should not be seriously considered. Finally, I will say that although I thank everyone for 1072 <br />staying up so late, it’s 10:40 at night and there’s not been one single resident yet who has spoken in favor of this 1073 <br />proposal. The Planning Commission is there as the representative of the people of Hillsborough, many people have 1074 <br />mentioned that they don’t have enough time to speak, I thinks it’s odd that the Planning Commission is limiting the 1075 <br />time of people to respond when they are not limiting their time after all you there, are you not, to represent these 1076 <br />people? You should take this seriously, you should look at the fact that absolutely no resident appear to be in favor 1077 <br />of this at all. You should consider that, thank you very much for your time. 1078 <br /> 1079 <br />Jean-Francois Provost: My name is Jean-Francois Provost and we just moved in last July on Old 86, we are south of 1080 <br />Davis Road. I have several things to say, first we have {inaudible} of trucks coming into our driveway and a truck 1081 <br />coming right angle you have to go in other lane so we had to stop the traffic on Old 86 to have some trucks on our 1082 <br />property, that’s the first thing. When we bought the land a few months after we got invited to a public hearing 1083 <br />because there was already a project, that actual project is bigger than the previous one but it was just one project out 1084 <br />of three projects so there was commercial zone on Old 86 near the exit of I-40 and there was a third one very close 1085 <br />{inaudible}, so the traffic, the lady who explains that the traffic is going to be ok, she doesn’t take account the next 1086 <br />project which is coming maybe. If there is three projects, the traffic impact created by this project, why we came 1087 <br />tonight, is also two other projects so increase the traffic significantly. So we have to take account not only this project 1088 <br />but the whole amount around the perimeter. Thank you for listening to me. 1089 <br /> 1090 <br />Jon Boxter: Good evening, thank you for your time, we really do appreciate you giving each of us an opportunity to 1091 <br />share our feelings. I’m a middle school teacher and my wife, Shannon, is an ICU nurse, we live on Old 86 3 houses 1092 <br />from Davis Road with our 3 year old son, we’re one of the handful of houses in 1000 feet of the development that 1093 <br />received the original notification letter. We live along the 3500 feet of linear road that has been quoted, the back of 1094 <br />Building C as currently planned, would be highly visible from the Duke Utility road that runs beside our property 1095 <br />where we watch our son and our neighbors children play every single night. The staggering amount of 200 vehicles 1096 <br />that would be routed onto Davis Road during peak hours as has been quoted, would then pass directly in front of our 1097 <br />home. So that’s effecting, at least surrounding us on three sides. My family and I unequivocally disapprove of the 1098 <br />actions being proposed, our opinion has been shaped not out of a hard line “NIMBY” attitude towards development of 1099 <br />the area as many other people have pointed out, we bought our home with the understanding and tacit expectation 1100 <br />that the area north of us would inevitably be developed as zoned. However, this sheer lack of adequate 1101 <br />infrastructure surrounding this particular project make is impossible to support. The addition of Davis Road as a 1102 <br />second access point has been admitted to be done after the fact in order to satisfy NCDOT. Anyone who lives near 1103 <br />Old 86 has noticed the increase in traffic over the past few years. That road along with those that feed into it despite 1104 <br />what cherry picked traffic study suggest about specific intersections we’ll have trouble handling the number of cars 1105 <br />and trucks that are being estimated. From a safety standpoint, it will be disastrous for those of us living along the 1106 <br />route. After crossing under I-40 you pass that service road that’s been repeatedly mentioned by a number of houses 1107 <br />on both sides, you come a slight hill and there is essentially a blind curve that the utility line overpass, my home as 1108 <br />well as two are located right after the Duke utility road. I find myself looking multiple times in each direction and 1109 <br />saying literally a prayer before pulling in and out of my driveway. I signal a ¼ mile before I even turn so that cars 1110 <br />don’t rear-end me or side swipe my vehicle as I exit. Almost daily, horns honk, cars lock up their brakes as they 1111 <br />speed south on Old 86 before coming upon a car turning past the blind curve in a driveway or onto Davis Road. It’s 1112 <br />incredible that more accidents don’t already occur here and adding further traffic and stopped cars is a literal disaster 1113 <br />waiting to happen if this plan goes forth as presently constructed. A red light is going to do little more than to cause 1114 <br />those cars to slam on their brakes and cause bigger issues. I say all this to reaffirm my opposition to this plan as 1115 <br />currently proposed. It makes no sense from an infrastructure standpoint to utilize Davis Road purely more that out of 1116 <br />necessity or that portion of Old 86 for heavy truck traffic. Unless this can be remedied and a more logical solution 1117 <br />38
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.