Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
33 <br /> state required updates to each municipality's Universal Development Ordinances. Changes that <br /> would include much needed verbiage for the regulation of rural development and the removal of <br /> conditional use permits. <br /> The Buckhorn Area Plan will determine the future of 1000s of acres. Economic AND <br /> Residential. As noted earlier, a handful of non-contiguous parcels are already annexed into <br /> Mebane city limits, and the remaining, are a majority agriculture and rural residential parcels <br /> (R1) within county jurisdiction. While I understand this plan does not force the selling, re-zoning, <br /> or annexation of rural residential within this commercial-industrial transition activity node <br /> (CITAN), this area has been under review for decades without much established. Now both <br /> planning departments want to justify extending the scope of prospective commercial <br /> development areas. This is curious, as the plan before you does not incorporate prior <br /> recommendations within existing comprehensive land use or transportation plans. To clarify, I <br /> have, and I know my neighbors have, worked extremely hard to make ourselves familiar with <br /> both municipality's comprehensive guidance documents, plans, and the multitude of land use <br /> maps. <br /> • If plans for this EDD have been in process, why haven't capital improvement projects <br /> such as roadways and telecommunications been at the forefront of these discussions? <br /> • If four out of the 5 growth areas —the primary outcome of the BAP lie mainly within OC <br /> and outside of Mebane's city limits and their ETJ, I hope to understand why Orange <br /> County would not have held the responsibility of reviewing and adopting/recommending <br /> a plan such as this before being presented to Mebane City Council? <br /> The Mebane Planning Board and City Council have been gracious in considering our input of <br /> the Buckhorn Economic Development District. However, as inquiring Orange County residents, <br /> we cannot help but feel discounted in our efforts. Point in fact, that they do not owe us <br /> representation. To Mebane, Orange County is the driver of this expansion because they quote: <br /> "wanted to bring water and sewer out this way," [03Feb21 Mebane Council Meeting] and we <br /> should have expected this when we made our investments. <br /> In every existing future land use map, as current as the 2019 E-B-M AMP, [Efland Buckhorn <br /> Mebane Access Management Plan] this economic development district has been clearly <br /> delineated between commercial use, and rural residential: discouraging commercial <br /> development south of West Ten Rd, citing access to utilities and important watershed <br /> protections. There is an obvious need for both municipalities to incorporate mutually agreed <br /> upon regulation to protect existing and future residents and our surrounding environment. <br /> In the meantime, I look forward to seeing the collaboration of both governing bodies to execute <br /> a growth strategy that is thoughtful about how and why economic development should occur, <br /> rather than simply where. <br /> Chair Price lost connection to the meeting at 10:16 p.m. <br /> Vice Chair Bedford led the meeting until Chair Price was able to return. <br /> Fiona Johann read the following statement: <br /> Hello, I'm Fiona Johann. I live in Mebane and have been an orange county resident for 20 <br /> years. I am speaking today in opposition of the Buckhorn Area plan (BAP) as it stands. I speak <br /> as someone who has been following this plan progress through the Mebane City Planning <br /> Board since the November 9 meeting. <br />