SUMMARY OF PLANNING BOARD ACTION

Subject:                       Review of Town Operations Center Conceptual Plan

Meeting Date:           June 17, 2003

Recommendation:      The Planning Board reviewed the conceptual plan for the Town Operations Center and has the following comments and suggestions:

1. Although this is not an ideal location for a Town operations center, the conceptual plan does an excellent job working within the parameters of the site.

2. The Town should not seek any exemptions to the Land Use Management Ordinance provisions; the Town’s approach should be “above reproach” in not seeking exemptions for items which the Town requires other developers to provide.

3. The Town should provide citizens complete information on the costs of the Certificates of Participation financing the project, including acquisition costs, total indebtedness, and taxing implications.

4. No water or sewer should be extended into the Rural Buffer, and do not allow any use that is not permitted in the Rural Buffer or reduce the standards for what is allowed (see #2 above).

5. The Board supports the concept and philosophy of day care on the site.  The Board notes safety and design considerations should be paramount.  In addition, the Board suggests the Town conduct a needs assessment.

6. Consider transit access and complete a transportation management plan for the site.

7. A need exists for an additional traffic study north, south, and west of the site.  In particular, the intersections of Eubanks Road/ Old N.C. 86 and Eubanks Road/Rogers Road need to be looked at again, and more improvements are needed there if they can be funded.

8. Encourage as far as possible the use of green products and processes in the development of the site.

9. Consider use of methane gas as a fuel; at minimum, plan for potential access to it in the future.

Vote:                           6-0

Comments:.                Thatcher Freund made a motion to include a statement in the Planning Board’s comments that, regardless of technical issues, it is the “spirit” of the Rural Buffer to preserve it from development, i.e., putting any development there does not follow the spirit of the Rural Buffer.  The motion failed for lack of a second.

Prepared by:                 Scott Radway, Chair, Planning Board

            Chris S. Berndt, Long Range Planning Coordinator