My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1998 01 20
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1998
>
AG 1998 01 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 6:03:50 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:50:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
1/20/1998
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
370
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5. The rezoning is too large for this location in the County. According to maps and the <br />site plan, the proposal would rezone 500+ acres, of which 385 acres would be developed. <br />Under the proposal, the land would contain 55 industrial sites of 7 acres each. Each site <br />would have a building of up to 100,000 sq It, about the size of 3 football fields. Total <br />employment would be somewhere around 10,000. If this were to happen, the site would <br />be larger in size and employment than the cores of either Concord or Kannapolis, several <br />times larger than that of the Concord Mills Mall, and about 22 % of total County <br />employment of 45,000. The transportation planning staff for our area have estimated the <br />traffic load alone at 55,000 trips/day, over 10 times the capacity of Derita Road, and up to <br />20 times the available capacity of Poplar Tent Road. This road is already close to <br />capacity. This proposal would not fit on a 4-lane urban arterial, which typically carries <br />about 40,000 cars/day, even if there were no other traffic. Add in the present traffic, the <br />trucks, and the poor access to the Interstate, and the picture is clear: the site. is un- <br />workable as planned, and would not work even with a 4-lane access. Ironically, if the site <br />were developed as proposed, the traffic would congest the airport area and slow down <br />economic activity. There is also no present sewer service to the site, although a trunk line <br />is planned down Rocky River. <br /> <br />The proposed development has been argued as superior to residential development and <br />having no impact on schools. That is not the case. Part of that argument was based on <br />incorrect traffic estimates, which when corrected showed the site to generate about 4.7 <br />times the traffe that residential land would generate. According to the transportation <br />analysis, the site would generate about 55,000 trips/day if industrial, versus about 12,000 <br />trips/day if residential. Up to 1/3 of these trips would typically be truck traffic, which <br />further reduces the capacity of the small road network. The site's development would <br />block access to the airport and its related industrial development, and the success of that <br />effort would be threatened. <br /> <br />Further, if the site were industrial, where would the 10,000 workers live? Unless we're <br />prepared to argue that none would live in Cabarrus County, then clearly the additional <br />employed families would also add to schools and other County needs. Assuming modestly <br />that only 1/2 of the employment were local, the other new 5000 workers' families would <br />add roughly 2500 children to the County school system. It is just not reasonable to <br />assume that all these new workers come from other counties and are "diverted" to the site <br />from jobs in Mecklenburg, Some will be existing workers, some new arrivals, and some <br />diverted. <br /> <br />6. The site's classification is too intense. The site's proposed reclassification, General <br />Industrial, would create an intense and inappropriate land use surrounded by other less <br />dense land uses, residential and limited industrial. The present subdivisions of Beech Bluff, <br />Mistywood and Twin Creeks, ali of which predate the present land uses by several <br />decades, would be particularly negatively affected. The latter two would be surrounded by <br />industrial development. This proposal violates sound planning principles, in which intense <br />uses are shielded from less intense uses by buffer uses, in graded fashion. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.