Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2 <br />As stated during the public hearing, staff does not believe the County intended to restrict non- <br />residential development within the Cedar Grove Rural Community Activity Node and that the <br />prohibition, as outlined within Section 6.23.1 of the Ordinance, was intended to prevent <br />wholesale non-residential development throughout the aforementioned critical or protected <br />watershed(s). <br />During the hearing, the following general comments were made relating to the proposed <br />amendment: <br />1. Board members agreed that it was not the original intent of the County to restrict <br />development within the Cedar Grove Rural Community Activity Node when <br />comprehensive watershed regulations were adopted, <br />2. A Board member expressed concern that we needed to be careful in what was permitted <br />within any portion of a critical watershed and that wholesale non-residential development <br />would be inconsistent with the goals of the County, <br />3. A Board member indicated there ought to be a comprehensive evaluation of acceptable <br />land uses within the various Nodes and that development regulations ought to be tailored <br />to promote the development of these various uses. <br />PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: The Planning Board reviewed this item at its July 1, 2009 <br />regular meeting. <br />There was extensive discussion on the need to begin reviewing each individual Node and begin <br />the Small Area Plan process to identify acceptable non-residential land uses for each. Some <br />Board members expressed concern over the proposed amendment without first initiating the <br />Small Area Plan process. <br />After deliberating on this item, the Planning Board voted six (6) to one (1) to recommend that: <br />A. Section 6.23.1 be amended to only allow the properties at the intersection of Carr Store <br />and Efland Cedar Grove Road within the Cedar Grove Rural Community Activity Node to <br />develop non-residential land uses consistent with the provisions of the Ordinance, and <br />B. That the County Board of Commissioners authorize the development of a Small Area <br />Plan for the Cedar Grove Rural Community Activity Node and that upon completion of <br />that study, the entire Node be allowed to support non-residential development consistent <br />with the provisions of the Ordinance. <br />STAFF COMMENT: In addressing the various comments made by the BOCC and Planning <br />Board, staff would like to offer the following: <br />1. While staff agrees that there ought to be a comprehensive evaluation of acceptable land <br />uses within the various Nodes, staff does not believe that it is necessary to delay this <br />proposed amendment to allow such a study to occur. This assessment might be possible <br />through the completion of Small Area Plans for each Node as future work plans are <br />prioritized. <br />2. Staff does not believe the Planning Board recommendation can be achieved given the <br />lack of any documentation or rationale justifying exempting the properties at the existing <br />road intersections from the existing prohibition on allowing non-residential development <br />within a critical watershed overlay district. <br />