Agenda - 03-16-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

32 1 Craig Benedict said if there was pre-zoning, the Planning Department would work with 2 the property owner to see if they were interested. He said no one is forced to sell. 3 Commissioner McKee said he would not anticipate that all of the land in the EDD would 4 be sold, thus it makes sense that contiguous land to the EDD, which scored high, would be a 5 natural step to include. 6 Commissioner McKee said he had several questions, for which he would appreciate staff 7 researching the answers: 8 -How much money has been spent on infrastructure for development? 9 -The investment, to date, which that infrastructure has brought to the County? 10 -How much tax revenue, jobs, and average salary have been generated by the 11 investments made due to the infrastructure? 12 13 Commissioner Greene said there is an overlay map on page 38 in the agenda packet, 14 where one can see the contiguous parcels. She said there is a great deal of information that 15 could be gathered about these parcels, and she would be curious to know what the land south 16 of Route 10 might be worth if it were used for producing crops. She said some of these areas 17 would require significant infrastructure investment in order to develop. 18 Commissioner Hamilton reminded the BOCC of the importance of explaining things like 19 WASMBPA, and its context in County history. She said scoring metrics are weighted, and those 20 weights will influence how one views a property. She said she would like a sense of what types 21 of developments are being considered for these areas, the potential benefits and the potential 22 costs. She said she wants to understand trade offs, and to remember the environment. She 23 said people do look at theses maps, and will make decisions based on them. 24 25 PUBLIC COMMENT: 26 Beth Bronson read the following statement: 27 Good evening County Commissioners, 28 My name is Beth Bronson and I reside in Cheeks Township, the census tract under 29 consideration in The Buckhorn Area Plan. Data used to curate and finalize the Buckhorn Area 30 Plan comes mere months before updated census information is released, and the tightrope 31 process of redistricting begins. The request for fast tracking approval also comes ahead of state 32 required updates to each municipality's Universal Development Ordinances. Changes that 33 would include much needed verbiage for the regulation of rural development and the removal of 34 conditional use permits. 35 36 The Buckhorn Area Plan will determine the future of 1000s of acres. Economic AND 37 Residential. As noted earlier, a handful of non-contiguous parcels are already annexed into 38 Mebane city limits, and the remaining, are a majority agriculture and rural residential parcels 39 (R1) within county jurisdiction. While I understand this plan does not force the selling, re-zoning, 40 or annexation of rural residential within this commercial-industrial transition activity node 41 (CITAN), this area has been under review for decades without much established. Now both 42 planning departments want to justify extending the scope of prospective commercial 43 development areas. This is curious, as the plan before you does not incorporate prior 44 recommendations within existing comprehensive land use or transportation plans. To clarify, 1 45 have, and I know my neighbors have, worked extremely hard to make ourselves familiar with 46 both municipality's comprehensive guidance documents, plans, and the multitude of land use 47 maps. 48 • If plans for this EDD have been in process, why haven't capital improvement projects 49 such as roadways and telecommunications been at the forefront of these discussions? 50 • If four out of the 5 growth areas—the primary outcome of the BAP lie mainly within OC 51 and outside of Mebane's city limits and their ETJ, I hope to understand why Orange