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

Browse Search

13 1 The county goes to great economic lengths to attract development and business, but there is no 2 mechanism to mitigate material monetary impacts on the use and enjoyment of one's home 3 when a high-density economic development is inserted into one's rural residential community. 4 As it stands, it seems as though these potential financial impacts will simply be considered 5 collateral damage. What can we do to ensure that these potential financial impacts will be 6 mitigated for the dozens of surrounding residents? 7 8 And speaking of collateral damage --what will be the impact on the Church and Pre-school 9 across the street on Davis Rd? What will happen when parents pull their kids out of the 10 preschool because their driveway is potentially blocked by a long queue of diesel trucks? The 11 Church relies on the revenue from the preschool to stay afloat; so, will the church and preschool 12 also end up as collateral damage? I urge the commissioners to seriously consider these impacts 13 when making their decision, and to strongly consider eliminating the use of the Davis Road 14 parcel as part of this development. 15 16 Additional Issue to consider: NOISE: Orange county Noise ordinances state: "It shall be 17 unlawful for any person to make, create, permit, or to continue any source of unreasonably loud 18 and disturbing noise in Orange County." Orange County doesn't allow noises above 60 decibels 19 during the day and 50 decibels in the evenings at residential properties. The noise generated 20 from a diesel truck is between 96 and 104 decibels, 42 times louder than the ordinance allows in 21 the evenings. Additionally, diesel trucks typically use engine braking that creates an extremely 22 loud machine gun-like noise, up to 105 decibels. There are residents whose property is as close 23 as 30 feet to the proposed driveway. (This distance is taken from the Orange County GIS). With 24 only 5 trucks in the queue, the resident immediately beside the proposed access point on Davis 25 Rd will experience 81 decibels of sustained noise, the equivalent of standing next to a lawn 26 mower 24/7, and loud enough to cause hearing damage at 2 hours of exposure according to the 27 CDC. Orange County also specifically prohibits the use of lawn equipment after 9 pm. How can 28 they possibly allow diesel trucks operating overnight, creating noise more than 5 times louder 29 than gas powered lawn equipment? It seems impossible that this development could comply 30 with Orange County noise ordinances, and yet the developer has not provided a noise analysis. 31 The county must act to prevent the potentially massive disruptions to the sleep, hearing, and 32 peace of the dozens of residents, church, and preschool children in the surrounding area. 33 Please do not allow the rezoning of the Davis Rd parcel. The use of this land as the primary 34 access point will cause irreparable harm to the surrounding residents. It may take some effort 35 and/or creativity, but the developer can and should find alternative methods of dealing with their 36 traffic load. NCDOT has already laid out potential improvements that could be made to allow for 37 a full movement interchange at Service Rd and Old 86, but the developer has declined to 38 pursue this path. Rather, it seems they have chosen the path of least resistance and lowest cost 39 to them, at the great expense of the surrounding residence and community. 40 41 Jessie Kaufmann said the Orange County Schools Board of Education released a letter 42 imploring that Broadband Internet be provided. She asked the BOCC to consider using the 43 proposed land for broadband. She asked if the BOCC would wait to make a decision about the 44 land until after the presidential election. She said she is not in favor of the proposed project. 45 46 Justin Mitchell said he owns several acres of land on Davis Road, adjacent to his family, 47 where he one day hopes to live. He said the appeal of that dream will disappear if this 48 proposed project goes ahead. He said water runoff is of great concern, as there is already 49 excessive run off in this area, and the proposed project would only increase this problem. 50