Mebane City Council & Planning

12/11/23, 12/05/23

meb_CC_231211_Intro

Welcome to Ultraground. We document development for you.

General Code | 12/04/23

  • Stormwater Bonding Requirements

Planning Board | 12/11/23 | Approved

  • 32-Acre Buc-ee’s Travel Center | Denied

You saved: 3h 25m
Code Title png

City Council 12/04/23

meb_CC_231211_GeneralCode

Amendment of Stormwater Bonding Requirements

Citywide | Approved

The City Council adopted an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance reducing the amount developers must bond or provide cash bond for proposed stormwater management facilities from 40% down to 10% of the certified cost.

The change was required to bring the UDO in alignment with recent changes to state legislation capping municipal stormwater bonding requirements at 10%. The new law specifies that developers have 5-10 years to accumulate the 10% bond amount in a segregated account not payable to the city.

Previously, the 40% bond helped ensure developers installed adequate stormwater systems. Now under the 10% rule, the City has less recourse if systems fail in the future. The City will still require engineers to certify the cost and stormwater plans but has less financial protection if developers don't follow through.

This change could financially benefit developers in the area who will now only have to bond 10% rather than 40% of stormwater costs. For a $100,000 stormwater facility, the developers' bonding requirement would decrease from $40,000 to $10,000. But the City has less assurance the full facilities will actually get built to standard.

Commercial Title png

Planning Board 12/11/23

Buc-ee’s Travel Center

Southwest Mebane | 32 Acres | Denied

The latest rezoning request in Mebane is 32 acres of land to allow for the construction of a Buc-ee's travel center, which would include a large convenience store, fueling stations, and parking. City planning staff gave a presentation explaining the details of the proposal and the review process so far. The applicant and their development team, including engineers and other experts, then gave their extended presentation making the case for why the project should be approved.

The Planning Board members had a lengthy question and answer session with the applicant and their team to clarify aspects of the proposal and better understand potential impacts. Issues discussed included:

  • Site layout, driveways, pedestrian access.

  • Underground fuel tank location and safety measures.

  • Signage requests needing deviation from city rules.

  • Traffic impacts and required road improvements at the interchange.

  • Environmental issues like stormwater, streams, floodplain.

  • Employment and local tax revenue benefits.

After the applicant's presentation, there was an extended public comment period with over 30 speakers. There was passionate opposition voiced by residents concerned about issues like traffic congestion, environmental threats, public safety, noise and light impacts on surrounding homes, etc. Some spoke in favor, noting potential jobs and tax revenue for the city.

In the end, after deliberation, the Planning Board voted 3-6 to recommend denial of the rezoning request to the City Council. Without the rezoning approval, the special use permit request was also essentially denied. The proposal will still move forward to City Council for a final decision at their January 8th meeting. Board members encouraged additional public input to the Council as part of that process.

Developer: Buc-ee’s
Thank you Title png

Thank you for being a part of Ultraground.

How was this report?

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.