4_3_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS 5.1.24 150 151 Phil Koch: They have actually reported on that the Clearinghouse. It's an old retaining wall. Nobody 152 really seems to know what that was related to but it's not on the Historical Registry and it's noted in the 153 Clearinghouse that there's nothing of archaeological importance there. This site had been used for agricultural 154 purposes, so, it's possible it was just something from some of that work out there. 155 156 Beth Bronson: And this is by that 25 percent slope? 157 158 Phil Koch: That I'd have to look at again, but it's, it's actually on the opposite side of where the 159 development is going. The stream actually runs between us and that wall, but that wall is on the property. Yes. 160 161 Marilyn Carter: I just wanted to ask about the boundaries of the, the site and just to confirm my 162 understanding. The boundaries are just to the north of that Duke Power easement or do the boundaries extend 163 further north past the Panther Court section? 164 165 Ashley Moncado: This is the existing parcel line, and the Duke Power easement runs here. All the proposed 166 lots and single-family homes are going to be located south outside the utility easement, but the parcel does go all 167 the way up here. This is the area where there's flood, there's 500 Year Floodplain. There is the stream, the 168 80-foot stream buffer is all within that northern area. And there is a little neighborhood here that's off of Panther 169 Court. There's some single-family homes there,and the parcel line is here,and before it heads back north again. 170 171 Statler Gilfillen: Quick question long term. Five years from now you've got this built. Each of those houses 172 are owned by an individual, different family. However, who controls or is responsible for the additional land 173 surrounding each one of the— 174 175 Phil Koch: That, that's all part of the HOA. That's a requirement. There has to be an HOA also from 176 the standpoint of stormwater control measures on this, so that's all rolled into the HOA documents. Those have 177 not been put together and should be coming with the plat. 178 179 Delores Bailey: We received a letter from a young woman who wasn't able to make the meeting tonight, and 180 she was concerned about the safety in this area. Particularly, she said she'd like to urge in an effort toward 181 building community stewardship to consider ways to make these roads safer for all of us. I'd like to urge you to 182 recommend to the developers and Orange County Commissioners that the proposed trail in the Stonewall 183 Development be open to the community and around it. And then the other question she talked about was safety 184 issues as they walk to school. Can you address that for me? 185 186 Phil Koch: Well, in the first instance regarding walking to school, my understanding is they are walking 187 up the roadway now. There is nothing along that roadway. There is no sidewalk— 188 189 Delores Bailey: But I think what she is concerned about is if you put 18 more families there, and they have 190 cars, then it's going to become ever more dangerous. 191 192 Phil Koch: Let me address that from the DOT standpoint real quick. This road currently is limited at 193 10,000 travel trips a day. That's actually in your report. That's your average daily travel. Currently, the road 194 sees 1,600 trips per day, and this development, at best, will put in another 150 trips per day. We're not even 195 coming close to the current standard that this road is listed for capacity from that standpoint. Additionally, in 196 terms of safety, one of the concerns that was raised to us was that they were walking up the roadway. In all 197 honesty, this is the safest part of the roadway. We are actually sitting at the high point, and we have provided 198 additional space back from the roadway, a 30-foot buffer, in order to be able to see better along it, so I believe we 199 have done what's necessary from the standpoint of safety in terms of that.