4.5.23 PB Packet - Final - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

26 1095 David Blankfard- I make a motion that we ask the applicant to extend or respond... 1096 1097 Bob Hornik-We are willing to do it if NCDOT says okay because ultimately it is a DOT highway. If NCDOT says it is all 1098 right to do that or wants us to do that,we are willing to do it. 1099 1100 Beth Bronson-You are willing to fund the construction? 1101 1102 Bob Hornik-Yes, ultimately our contractor probably does the work... 1103 1104 Beth Bronson-So if the DOT says of course, you can do it, that would be sufficient for you to make that change. 1105 1106 Bob Hornik- If they approve the design for the 100-foot additional turning lane,we will build it. 1107 1108 Beth Bronson-Would that require resubmission of a site plan? 1109 1110 Bob Hornik- If you made it a condition and then we'd have to amend the site plan,the staff could probably approve that 1111 to show compliance with the condition. 1112 1113 Cy Stober-That condition at this point would be pending DOT approval. It would be a note on the site plan,turn lane to 1114 be extended 100 feet, pending DOT approval. 1115 1116 Beth Bronson-So the approval would not actually make a difference if the DOT said no? 1117 1118 Cy Stober-Yes, correct. Ultimately its their land. 1119 1120 Adam Beeman-Any other questions or concerns? 1121 1122 Statler Gilfillen- I have 4 points here. I've tried to capsulize what I've been hearing all evening. I see this and it's the 1123 same thing when they came before us before.This is a small scale, local community, there are businesses there, like the 1124 market that sells the local produce,that could be put out of business.That affects the local community. Item 2, this 1125 proposal as I see it, does not prove that it meets the immediate community needs. Same issue before, today I haven't 1126 seen any change in that actually presented to me.The 3rd issue, I see an incompatibility with the historic architecture, 1127 which has since come out in the proposal for the scale of local buildings to what they're trying to add into the community. 1128 It affects the urban fabric of the community and as such, I appreciate what the engineers and everybody has done 1129 because there's a substantial cost. I know how much these costs are as an architect that this proposal does substantially 1130 improve the details it expands on many things, answers,the building questions of how you would get it construction, but 1131 it does nothing to change, why we voted on this several months ago? I'm not seeing anything, I'm hearing a community 1132 that this is an incompatible project being thrust in their community, and it's basically the same thing they brought to us 1133 before. 1134 1135 Adam Beeman-One was conventional,this one's conditional, that's 2 different things. 1136 1137 Overlapping conversation 1138 1139 Statler Gilfillen- ...The question is, I'm not sure the issues from the first time, how it affects the community itself, that 1140 there was objection to,were really answered.All I saw was the engineering and the architectural information, all of the 1141 traffic information,yes,that was provided to us tonight,that's good. It would have been nice to see the first time, but I'm 1142 not sure as a member of this board, I've seen anything presented tonight that would change the justification of what our 1143 vote was before. 1144 1145 Randy- If there are no other comments, I'm prepared to make a motion. 1146 1147 MOTION BY Randy Marshall to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency indicating the amendment is 1148 reasonable and in the public interest and the proposed zoning atlas amendment ordinance. 1149