|
110
<br /> 56 plan also identifies landscaping, parking,water and wastewater utilities which are in conformance
<br /> 57 with the UDO. In addition,the applicant is proposed an off-site easement,which will be located
<br /> 58 along the perimeter of the 11.22-acre tract. This is to provide additional landscape buffering to
<br /> 59 adjacent parcels. Access is provided via two paved driveways or entryways connecting to NC-57
<br /> 60 meeting NCDOT design guidelines and North Carolina Fire Code regulations. The one main
<br /> 61 access is located here,which is clear to see, and the second access actually goes off site north to
<br /> 62 connect to NC-57 north. There is another page to your site plan that identifies that access point.
<br /> 63 Mutually agreed upon conditions can be proposed as part of the conditional rezoning process and
<br /> 64 are binding to the development permitted for the zoning district. As part of the process, the
<br /> 65 applicant proposed 20 total conditions. These conditions were reviewed by staff and revisions
<br /> 66 were recommended in order to provide clarity and consistency with the UDO. The applicant
<br /> 67 accepted the revisions and these are what are contained in your packets,specifically
<br /> 68 Attachments 6 and 8. Again,following the applicant's presentation,we can go through these and
<br /> 69 if you have any questions, staff or the applicant answer to them.At this time I am going to go
<br /> 70 ahead and hand it over to the applicant, to allow him to introduce himself.
<br /> 71
<br /> 72 Justin Chandler: Hey there. My name is Justin Chandler. I have been a resident of Orange County now for about
<br /> 73 20 years. I'm the landowner and I guess driving force with the development here. Back in 2007,
<br /> 74 this small area task force was structured to kind of address some of the ongoing concerns with the
<br /> 75 large speedway, rock quarry, asphalt plant, concrete plant, and go-kart track. At that time, I didn't
<br /> 76 own the property, and to keep it short and sweet, I think Ashley covered most of the stuff here, but
<br /> 77 the four main concerns were ongoing traffic, noise, odors, and then the additional non-residential
<br /> 78 use to the land. All of this was taken into consideration. I've been a member of the community, as
<br /> 79 1 said,for about 20 years. I know the neighbors pretty intimately and have spoken with them
<br /> 80 throughout this project, and as of now it's going on about 3 years in this whole development
<br /> 81 process, and took in a lot of consideration with what they said and not only have I had no
<br /> 82 opposition, I have actually had support for it, and taking down some of these structures that have
<br /> 83 been causing an eye sore and have been dilapidated, and well pending you guys'approval and
<br /> 84 recommendation, I'd like to complete it and kind of get rid of the eye sore up there.
<br /> 85
<br /> 86 Lamar Proctor: Any questions? Okay. We'll start down here and move this way.
<br /> 87
<br /> 88 Meg Millard: I have a few questions.
<br /> 89
<br /> 90 Justin Chandler: Yes, ma'am.
<br /> 91
<br /> 92 Meg Millard: So, I'm curious why you chose to put the storage units on the 11 acres that's currently wooded as
<br /> 93 opposed to where the,the go-kart track was, is?
<br /> 94
<br /> 95 Justin Chandler: It's due to the ease of grading. That patch of vegetation is relatively new. If you actually look
<br /> 96 back in the aerial GIS data, the vegetation there is relatively young. It's probably under about
<br /> 97 15 years old at this point, and it's for constructability purposes mainly.
<br /> 98
<br /> 99 Meg Millard: Okay. Just provide a buffer for the neighbors on the other side as opposed to a very narrow
<br /> 100 buffer. That's what I was wondering about.
<br /> 101
<br /> 102 Justin Chandler: Yes, ma'am.
<br /> 103
<br /> 104 Meg Millard: And then the other questions I had,the wildlife resources commission had some suggestions, and
<br /> 105 1 didn't see that addressed that you were accepting them. It said for the vegetative buffers that
<br /> 106 you said you were going to use native species, but the ones you listed were not native, and then
<br /> 107 they gave some suggestions. Had you considered switching to native species?
<br /> 108
<br /> 109 Justin Chandler: In regard to the grasses, yes. That is consistent, or that would be an issue in terms of the actual
<br /> 110 buffers themselves. Just, again,for being able to maintain it, and the heartiness of the soil there,
<br />
|