Agenda - 11-05-20; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

27 1 i. Allow for intensive non-residential development in an area of the county 2 designated as a rural and/or protected area, 3 ii. Will not result in adequate protection of the natural environment, 4 iii. Will not be in harmony with surrounding land uses. 5 6 f. Will negatively impact rural neighborhoods in and around Davis Road due to the 7 proposed driveway allowing vehicular access to and from the development. The 8 driveway will generate too much traffic on the road creating a public safety hazard. 9 Further, commercial vehicles will make use of existing, rural roadways (i.e. Old NC 10 Highway 86, New Hope Church Road, Orange Grove Road); 11 g. The project does not provide enough protection for existing environmental features 12 (i.e. streams, floodplains, and identified hardwood forests), will have a negative impact 13 on Cates Creek, and will impair the health of the Eno River; 14 h. Development will negatively impact and displace local wildlife; 15 i. Insufficient safeguards are proposed addressing stormwater runoff and impacts on 16 adjacent property owners; 17 j. Development of buildings with a maximum height limit of 60 feet will dominate the local 18 landscape; 19 k. Truck traffic will create health hazards for residents due to increases in diesel 20 exhaust/fumes. Further, noise created by these trucks will negatively impact local 21 residents and will constitute violation(s) of applicable noise regulations; 22 I. The applicant has been inconsistent in the number of jobs the project will generate; 23 m. The submitted traffic impact analysis is contradictory with the application narrative. 24 25 As previous indicated, there are numerous recommended conditions designed to address the 26 anticipated impacts of the project. 27 28 Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this item on August 5 and 19, 29 2020. The Board voted 6 to 4 to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency 30 (Attachment 2) and the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment (Attachment 3) as proposed by staff. 31 Those voting against the project cited the following concerns: 32 a. The Board wanted the applicant to provide the specific tenants (i.e. names, 33 operational characteristics, etc.) within the project for `review and approval' prior to 34 action being taken on the zoning atlas amendment request; 35 b. Board members expressed concern over anticipated traffic impacts on Davis Road; 36 c. The project was deemed to be too intensive for the area. 37 38 Excerpts of the minutes from these meetings, as well as the Board's signed statement of 39 consistency, are included in Attachment 1. Agenda materials from the meetings can be viewed 40 at: https://www.co.orange.nc.us/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26. 41 42 43 Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the: 44 1. Statement of Consistency indicating the zoning atlas amendment(s) are reasonable 45 and in the public interest as contained in Attachment 2. 46 47 STAFF COMMENT: This presumes the land use designation of the 12 acre 48 parcel (PIN 9862-99-8894) is changed from Rural Residential to Economic 49 Development Transition Activity Node as detailed herein. If the aforementioned 50 FLUM is not approved, the staff recommendation will have to be revised.