Orange County NC Website
7 <br /> 2. As I'm sure you are aware by now. The applicant's proposal talks at length about <br /> manufacturing, R&D, etc., in addition to warehousing, when referring to the scope of the RTLP <br /> project, but then it states in the environmental assessment that "no production will take place on <br /> these parcels." Further, the Traffic Impact Analysis calculates added traffic based on a land use <br /> code of LUC 150, specific to warehousing. Keep in mind, this code results in one of the lowest <br /> rates of estimated traffic for this type of development. So the numbers I stated before and those <br /> which are listed in the application are the MINIMUM. Any business use that actually is in line <br /> with manufacturing, mixed use, etc. will greatly increase the amount of traffic this site would <br /> create. The Staff's response to the developer of June 30th even states: "As there will be a <br /> myriad of other development occurring within the Project - staff is concerned the Traffic analysis <br /> does not adequately anticipate and define impacts." One cannot `cherry pick' the data they use. <br /> You have to be consistent. This area will be developed in some way—we understand that— it is <br /> a highway intersection. The question is, why do we keep trying to ram a square peg into a round <br /> hole? Why do we try and change the whole area to accommodate a plan? Why don't we work <br /> within the parameters of this area and find the right fit--one that generates tax dollars, creates <br /> jobs AND fits in with the landscape? We know there are traffic concerns around what the <br /> Service Road can handle, and we know this plot of land backs up to residential and rural areas— <br /> but that doesn't mean it can't be developed in an appropriate way. The highway interchange at <br /> 1-40 and "new 86" (Exit 266) is the same layout, but the distance there between 1-40 and <br /> Eubanks Rd. is actually LESS than the distance at Exit 261 from 1-40 to the Service Road, and <br /> yet the new Carraway development is looking like a successful project. There is a compromise <br /> to all of this. <br /> • Take the 12-acre Davis Road parcel and its driveway off the table. This idea was <br /> actually proposed by David Blankfard, Chair of the Planning &Zoning Board! <br /> • Do not approve the zoning change; then <br /> • Work to develop the parcels that are already in the Economic Development area and <br /> have been zoned with a size and scale and a use that keeps the industry and traffic on <br /> the service road and close to the highway. You can create a bigger tax base and <br /> balance it with the nature of the area around it; we just need to stop trying to jam that <br /> square peg in a round hole. Work with the people in the county--not against them. <br /> Chair Rich advised Janet Marks to send emails to the BOCC email group. <br /> Rena Mitchell read the following remarks: <br /> I'm part of Save Hillsborough and I have serious concerns about RTLP. Growth is great and <br /> good. I don't want my town to look like it did in 1776 or 1876 or even 1976. <br /> 1 love seeing changes to our town, from Hillsborough BBQ to the new UNC Hospital. But this <br /> warehouse development is a poor fit. It's out of character with the rest of the district, has the <br /> potential to damage a significant watershed, and will absolutely increase flooding in the local <br /> neighborhood. But the poorest fit of all is the proximity of the development's main exit to a <br /> church, preschool and cemetery. <br /> Let's consider Orange County's plan to guide growth and development: the Orange County <br /> 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan addresses issues ranging from land use to economic <br /> development, to housing, to public facilities, to environmental protection and beyond. As stated <br /> in the Plan, an underlying theme is the County's vision of becoming a more sustainable <br /> community. To encourage desirable economic development, the Plan set aside 2,450 acres of <br /> land in 3 areas along 1-85 and 1-40 known as the Buckhorn, Hillsborough, and Eno River <br /> Districts. <br />