5-1-24 PB Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

150 Phil Koch: They have actually reported on that the Clearinghouse. It's an old retaining wall. Nobody 151 really seems to know what that was related to but it's not on the Historical Registry and it’s noted in the 152 Clearinghouse that there's nothing of archaeological importance there. This site had been used for agricultural 153 purposes, so, it's possible it was just something from some of that work out there. 154 155 Beth Bronson: And this is by that 25 percent slope? 156 157 Phil Koch: That I'd have to look at again, but it's, it's actually on the opposite side of where the 158 development is going. The stream actually runs between us and that wall, but that wall is on the property. Yes. 159 160 Marilyn Carter: I just wanted to ask about the boundaries of the, the site and just to confirm my 161 understanding. The boundaries are just to the north of that Duke Power easement or do the boundaries extend 162 further north past the Panther Court section? 163 164 Ashley Moncado: This is the existing parcel line, and the Duke Power easement runs here. All the proposed 165 lots and single-family homes are going to be located south outside the utility easement, but the parcel does go all 166 the way up here. This is the area where there's flood, there's 500 Year Floodplain. There is the stream, the 167 80-foot stream buffer is all within that northern area. And there is a little neighborhood here that's off of Panther 168 Court. There's some single-family homes there, and the parcel line is here, and before it heads back north again. 169 170 Statler Gilfillen: Quick question long term. Five years from now you've got this built. Each of those houses 171 are owned by an individual, different family. However, who controls or is responsible for the additional land 172 surrounding each one of the – 173 174 Phil Koch: That, that's all part of the HOA. That's a requirement. There has to be an HOA also from 175 the standpoint of stormwater control measures on this, so that's all rolled into the HOA documents. Those have 176 not been put together and should be coming with the plat. 177 178 Delores Bailey: We received a letter from a young woman who wasn't able to make the meeting tonight, and 179 she was concerned about the safety in this area. Particularly, she said she'd like to urge in an effort toward 180 building community stewardship to consider ways to make these roads safer for all of us. I'd like to urge you to 181 recommend to the developers and Orange County Commissioners that the proposed trail in the Stonewall 182 Development be open to the community and around it. And then the other question she talked about was safety 183 issues as they walk to school. Can you address that for me? 184 185 Phil Koch: Well, in the first instance regarding walking to school, my understanding is they are walking 186 up the roadway now. There is nothing along that roadway. There is no sidewalk – 187 188 Delores Bailey: But I think what she is concerned about is if you put 18 more families there, and they have 189 cars, then it's going to become ever more dangerous. 190 191 Phil Koch: Let me address that from the DOT standpoint real quick. This road currently is limited at 192 10,000 travel trips a day. That's actually in your report. That's your average daily travel. Currently, the road 193 sees 1,600 trips per day, and this development, at best, will put in another 150 trips per day. We're not even 194 coming close to the current standard that this road is listed for capacity from that standpoint. Additionally, in 195 terms of safety, one of the concerns that was raised to us was that they were walking up the roadway. In all 196 honesty, this is the safest part of the roadway. We are actually sitting at the high point, and we have provided 197 additional space back from the roadway, a 30-foot buffer, in order to be able to see better along it, so I believe we 198 have done what's necessary from the standpoint of safety in terms of that. 199 11