Agenda - 06-04-2024; 8-h - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application

Browse Search

35 APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS 5.1.24 51 Plan. We can see the 15 lots, the lot lines, possible building location footprints. Wells are identified by the 52 blue dots. Potential septic areas are identified by the green polka dots at the rear of the lots. We can also see 53 the 50-foot public right of way that is being proposed to provide access to all the proposed single-family 54 homes, and that does include an 18-foot travel way that will be in that public right of way. Finally, there is also 55 20-foot wide pedestrian access corridor, which will be connected to the cul-de-sac, running north to connect to 56 the northern parcel, which would be the future home of the recreational facilities that were affiliated with SUP 57 that was approved by the Board of Adjustment. We have the Preliminary Plat, which you'll notice is very 58 similar to the Concept Plan on the last slide. Again, we can see the lot lines. We can see the setbacks that 59 are being proposed based on the R1 zoning district. Landscape buffer is being identified on the western side, 60 as well as the southern side of the parcel. Stream and stream buffer and stormwater control measures are 61 being identified here with circles, on the Preliminary Plat. The Preliminary Plat also identifies 20-foot-wide 62 drainage and access easements along the northern part of the parcel here. It kind of cuts between these two 63 lots along the southern side of the proposed lots. The Concept Plan for this application was presented at the 64 January 18th DAC. The Preliminary Plat was presented at the February 15th DAC. Comments are provided 65 in your agenda packets. The Neighborhood Information Meeting was coordinated by the applicant and held on 66 February 13th. The NIM report is in your packets as well. This is where we kind of get a little different from 67 the last application and what Taylor hinted at earlier this evening. Tonight, you will receive and review the 68 Concept Plan; approve the Flexible Development Option; and then you'll be looking at reviewing the 69 Preliminary Plat and providing a recommendation on the Preliminary Plat to the BOCC. The Planning Director 7o recommendation in front of you tonight, is to receive and discuss the Concept Plan application; approve the 71 Flexible Development Option contained in Attachment 1; and then receive the Preliminary Plat application and 72 recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat, as submitted. 73 74 Statler Gilfillen: I am the Eno Village representative to the Planning Board. Lawrence Road is a street. 75 It's one of the only bypasses of Hillsborough, and we're all aware of the traffic congestion and the problems 76 that we have. Each time that you add a new access to Lawrence Road, you begin to control or potentially 77 even make it more dangerous going up and down Lawrence Road. I have some serious qualms, not with the 78 development itself, with providing two immediate accesses to Lawrence Road. When I look at this, as a 79 licensed architect, with over 40 years of experience in planning and design, why it is really necessary to design 80 this to have two accesses that close together, with individual cars coming out of each one of those streets will 81 slow and congest the traffic along Lawrence Road? I have serious problems with the design as it's presented, 82 not the concept of what he's trying to do. Thank you. 83 84 Phil Koch: So I'm very familiar with layout from the SUP, as well as from this, and the two things are 85 actually separate items, and the DOT has required turn lanes for the access that's above, that's going into the 86 ball field area, play area, all of that that is involved in the athletic association and a separate entrance here. 87 And they have reviewed this entrance. They are in agreement that this is the best spot for the entrance. I have 88 looked at it with them out on the site. They have actually stated this, I believe, even when the SUP was going 89 through that this was an acceptable entrance, and now they've come back, and they've met with us in the field 90 and said this is where they want the entrance to be. It is near where the church entrance is, and they did not 91 want these lots coming out on to the roadway north. They did not want it to tie to the one for the ball field. 92 93 Statler Gilfillen: What's their logic for that? 94 95 Phil Koch: They wanted to go ahead and bring out to Lawrence Road. 96 97 Adam Beeman: Do you know if the road for the athletic fields, is that a private road or public? I believe it's 98 private, but I'm not positive. 99