Orange County NC Website
2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />Purpose <br />• To receive the Planning Board's recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a <br />decision on a County initiated amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land <br />Use Map <br />• Amendment assigns County land use classifications to properties that were removed <br />(Oct. 1) from the Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). <br />• Affects approximately 500 -acres (22- parcels) located generally near the Eno River <br />between US 70 W and 1- 85/1 -40 in Cheeks and Hillsborough Townships <br />• This item is companion to Action Agenda Item No. 5b, "Zoning Atlas Amendment." <br />September 8th Public Hearing <br />• No members of the public spoke. <br />• The BOCC had primarily one question -- "Why is staff recommending Agricultural <br />Residential versus Rural Residential ?" <br />• For consistency with the FLUM classifications applied in general area (Attachment 2, <br />FLUM Hillsborough surrounds). <br />• Minor variation in Population Density Locational Criteria (Attachment 3, Table) <br />■ For consistency with existing land uses (Attachment 4, Aerial Photos and Table). <br />In response to BOCC, the noted attachments were provided to the Planning Board and are <br />included in tonight's agenda packet. <br />Planning Board Recommendation <br />• Considered at is October 8, 2014 meeting. <br />• Reviewed the differences between Rural Residential and Agricultural Residential, as <br />well as existing land uses and character of the amendment area. <br />• Recommended unanimously that the BOCC approve the amendment as presented at <br />public hearing (Attachment 5, Draft PB Minutes). <br />Manager's Recommendation <br />Receive the Planning Board's recommendation of approval. <br />Close the public hearing. <br />Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 6, pp. 19 -20), which approves the amendment. <br />Commissioner Dorosin asked if there is a reason all of these areas are recommended to <br />be zoned exactly the same way. He said some of the areas appear to have different uses on <br />one side versus the other. <br />Tom Altieri said these will be future land use map classifications, and there are primarily <br />two land use classifications that apply to rural areas without public water and sewer. He said <br />the choice is limited to agricultural residential or rural residential, and the reasons for <br />recommending agricultural residential have been provided. <br />Commissioner Dorosin questioned whether the entire northern piece or the entire <br />southern piece has to be the same classification. <br />Tom Altieri said it does not all have to be classified the same, but this is what the team <br />has recommended. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to <br />close the public hearing; and adopt the Resolution contained in Attachment 6, which approves <br />the amendment. <br />