Browse
Search
Agenda 05-07-24; 8-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2020's
>
2024
>
Agenda - 05-07-2024 Business Meeting
>
Agenda 05-07-24; 8-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/2/2024 1:50:40 PM
Creation date
5/2/2024 2:12:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/7/2024
Meeting Type
Business
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8-a
Document Relationships
Agenda for May 7, 2024 BOCC Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2020's\2024\Agenda - 05-07-2024 Business Meeting
Minutes 05-07-2024 - Business Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2020's\2024
OTHER-2024-028-Introduction of Bond order authorizing 300 mullion general obligation school bonds subject to voter approval first reading and scheduling of a related public hearing
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2024
PRO-2024-006-Older Americans Month Proclamation
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Proclamations\2020-2029\2024
PRO-2024-007-Apraxia Awareness Day Proclamation
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Proclamations\2020-2029\2024
RES-2024-021-Resolution supporting an application to the Local Government Commission for its approval of a County Financing Agreement
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2024
RES-2024-022-Resolution setting public hearing and authorizing filing of debt statements
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2024
RES-2024-023-Refund-Release Resolution
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2024
RES-2024-024-Refund-Release Resolution
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2024
RES-2024-025-Resolution Supporting the America 250 NC Program and Committee
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
15 <br /> 1 to it. He said it was shared with the planning consultants as well. He said they are cognizant of all <br /> 2 of the plans in place. <br /> 3 Commissioner Fowler asked if the wildlife corridors and allowed uses are compatible. <br /> 4 David Stancil said yes and gave an example of the connection to the Mountains to Sea <br /> 5 Trail between Riverwalk and Hillsborough. He said that 1-40 is a massive barrier, but people have <br /> 6 been thoughtful to allow some wildlife connectivity underneath. He said they need to think about <br /> 7 different types of connectivity. <br /> 8 Chair Bedford asked about fences creating barriers to wildlife. <br /> 9 Johnny Randall said not all fences are created equal, so you want as much space between <br /> 10 pieces of a fence to move through those. He said it also depends on what the fence is for. He <br /> 11 asked the basis. <br /> 12 Chair Bedford said that along ten acres there is a stream, and she is assuming that a <br /> 13 stream is a wildlife corridor. <br /> 14 Johnny Randall said that is where the land is now because of buffers. He said that upland <br /> 15 connections are important too. He said that is a non-wetland corridor. <br /> 16 Chair Bedford asked if it would be valuable to say do not put a fence in a certain area. <br /> 17 Johnny Randall said that large mammals like deer would jump over a fence. He said that <br /> 18 in fencing up to a road, you need to have protection to funnel wildlife to a genuine corridor that <br /> 19 goes under the road that has an upland area where animals that are not aquatic and also allows <br /> 20 aquatic. He said it is important to keep mammals off the road, which also presents public safety <br /> 21 concerns. <br /> 22 Commissioner McKee said that 1-40 was cited as creating a significant barrier and 540 <br /> 23 has an example along Little Creek in Wake County. He said there is a fence that comes down <br /> 24 along the roadway, but it connects through the creek while leaving it open. He said that one side <br /> 25 is a walking trail, and the other side is natural. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 5. Public Hearings <br /> 28 a. Zoning Atlas Amendment— 6915-UT Millhouse Road, Chapel Hill <br /> 29 The Board held a public hearing, received the Planning Board and staff recommendations, and <br /> 30 public comment, closed the public hearing, and considered action on an applicant-initiated Zoning <br /> 31 Atlas Amendment to rezone +/-10.01 acres (PIN: 9871-50-3254) located at 6915-UT Millhouse <br /> 32 Road, Chapel Hill, within the Chapel Hill Township of Orange County. The proposed rezoning is: <br /> 33 FROM: RB (Rural Buffer) <br /> 34 TO: ASE-CD (Agricultural Support Enterprises - Conditional District) <br /> 35 <br /> 36 BACKGROUND: A Conditional Zoning Atlas Amendment application (Attachment 1) from The <br /> 37 Treeist proposes to rezone an approximately 10.01 acres property at 6915-UT Millhouse Road, <br /> 38 Chapel Hill, in Chapel Hill Township. The Staff Report in Attachment 2 contains additional <br /> 39 information, maps, and analysis, including a summary of the applicant's narrative regarding the <br /> 40 proposed use's consistency with County-adopted plans. Approval of a site-specific plan is <br /> 41 required, and binding, agreed-upon development conditions are permitted, for a conditional <br /> 42 zoning district. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Basic Review Process: A conditional district rezoning application requires submission of a site <br /> 45 plan and associated documents, in accordance with Section 2.9.1(C) of the Orange County <br /> 46 Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). Sections 2.8 and 2.9 of the Orange County UDO <br /> 47 require the following review: <br /> 48 <br /> 49 FIRST ACTION —Application is sent for courtesy review. <br /> 50 STAFF COMMENT: This property is located within the Joint Courtesy Review <br /> 51 Area as defined by the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Land <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.