Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
7 <br /> Chair Jacobs said that he sympathized with the residents in the neighborhood. He <br /> heard the concerns about how this would impact the community. He believes that the County <br /> should look at the way in which traffic impact is calibrated in rural areas. He said that schools <br /> used to be a part of the rural community, and schools can provide a good, supportive part of a <br /> rural community. He hopes that people will come to look at this school and what it is trying to <br /> do in the same way. <br /> Commissioner Gordon agreed and said that she read through the Planning Board <br /> minutes and there was some discomfort with this, but the applicant did meet all the standards. <br /> She said that the Planning Board's recommendations were unanimous on everything. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 6. Regular Agenda <br /> a. Buckhorn Village PD/SUP (Rezoning/Special Use Permit) Action <br /> The Board considered taking action on the application(s) for a rezoning and Class A <br /> Special Use Permit for the Buckhorn Village Planned Development submitted by Buckhorn <br /> Road Associates LLC on December 22, 2007. <br /> Planning Director Craig Benedict said that this item is a little different than the previous <br /> item because it also requires a rezoning as a prerequisite to the special use permit. The public <br /> hearing has already been closed for verbal testimony. There were questions from the meeting <br /> of September 16th from the County Commissioners. The abstract on page two includes the <br /> highlighted questions. The questions were related to the conditions of approval. <br /> Condition `L' - The applicant has agreed to set a maximum height to the signage <br /> structure at 50 feet with the top of the sign being at 40 feet. <br /> Condition `R' - The applicant has agreed to a 15% affordable housing provision. The <br /> staff has worked with the Attorney's office to make sure that there is at least a 99-year <br /> affordability provision. <br /> Condition `T' —This has to do with the `free' fee simple dedication of one acre of land <br /> for purposes that the County can determine on-site within District 3. The applicant has agreed <br /> to that. <br /> Condition `U' —There were questions concerning the LEED standards (Leadership in <br /> Energy and Environmental Design). In condition `U' it is specified what aspects of the LEED <br /> standards that the applicant could adhere to at a minimum. <br /> Two other discussion points have to do with condition `P' — Open Space Perimeter <br /> Buffers and condition `S' — Drive-thrus. <br /> In condition `P', originally the applicant had asked for 60% visibility breaks along 1-85/I- <br /> 40. The applicant has modified the original request to 50% openings, which will include low- <br /> level vegetation. In the case of retention areas, the low-level vegetation will be some aquatic <br /> species to help with water quality. The other 50% would be natural vegetation that includes <br /> Neuse River Buffer and Orange County standards to maintain the mature trees in that area. <br /> Staff believes that this is a reasonable solution to the buffers along 1-85/1-40. <br /> Regarding condition `S', the applicant had asked for (pp. 108-110) five drive-thrus on <br /> the 128 acres and unrestricted lane uses to be connected with that such as five banks, or five <br /> restaurants, or five drug stores, etc. In speaking with the Attorney, staff thought that having a <br /> maximum to the type of drive-thrus would be more appropriate. Staff recommends that <br /> restaurant drive-thrus be limited to two, and then the other three uses would be non-restaurant. <br /> In addition, as some sort of compensation, additional tree plantings and shrubs will be put in <br />