Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br /> to it. He said it was shared with the planning consultants as well. He said they are cognizant of all <br /> of the plans in place. <br /> Commissioner Fowler asked if the wildlife corridors and allowed uses are compatible. <br /> David Stancil said yes and gave an example of the connection to the Mountains to Sea <br /> Trail between Riverwalk and Hillsborough. He said that 1-40 is a massive barrier, but people have <br /> been thoughtful to allow some wildlife connectivity underneath. He said they need to think about <br /> different types of connectivity. <br /> Chair Bedford asked about fences creating barriers to wildlife. <br /> Johnny Randall said not all fences are created equal, so you want as much space between <br /> pieces of a fence to move through those. He said it also depends on what the fence is for. He <br /> asked the basis. <br /> Chair Bedford said that along ten acres there is a stream, and she is assuming that a <br /> stream is a wildlife corridor. <br /> Johnny Randall said that is where the land is now because of buffers. He said that upland <br /> connections are important too. He said that is a non-wetland corridor. <br /> Chair Bedford asked if it would be valuable to say do not put a fence in a certain area. <br /> Johnny Randall said that large mammals like deer would jump over a fence. He said that <br /> in fencing up to a road, you need to have protection to funnel wildlife to a genuine corridor that <br /> goes under the road that has an upland area where animals that are not aquatic and also allows <br /> aquatic. He said it is important to keep mammals off the road, which also presents public safety <br /> concerns. <br /> Commissioner McKee said that 1-40 was cited as creating a significant barrier and 540 <br /> has an example along Little Creek in Wake County. He said there is a fence that comes down <br /> along the roadway, but it connects through the creek while leaving it open. He said that one side <br /> is a walking trail, and the other side is natural. <br /> 5. Public Hearings <br /> a. Zoning Atlas Amendment— 6915-UT Millhouse Road, Chapel Hill <br /> The Board held a public hearing, received the Planning Board and staff recommendations, and <br /> public comment, closed the public hearing, and considered action on an applicant-initiated Zoning <br /> Atlas Amendment to rezone +/-10.01 acres (PIN: 9871-50-3254) located at 6915-UT Millhouse <br /> Road, Chapel Hill, within the Chapel Hill Township of Orange County. The proposed rezoning is: <br /> FROM: RB (Rural Buffer) <br /> TO: ASE-CD (Agricultural Support Enterprises - Conditional District) <br /> BACKGROUND: A Conditional Zoning Atlas Amendment application (Attachment 1) from The <br /> Treeist proposes to rezone an approximately 10.01 acres property at 6915-UT Millhouse Road, <br /> Chapel Hill, in Chapel Hill Township. The Staff Report in Attachment 2 contains additional <br /> information, maps, and analysis, including a summary of the applicant's narrative regarding the <br /> proposed use's consistency with County-adopted plans. Approval of a site-specific plan is <br /> required, and binding, agreed-upon development conditions are permitted, for a conditional <br /> zoning district. <br /> Basic Review Process: A conditional district rezoning application requires submission of a site <br /> plan and associated documents, in accordance with Section 2.9.1(C) of the Orange County <br /> Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). Sections 2.8 and 2.9 of the Orange County UDO <br /> require the following review: <br /> • FIRST ACTION —Application is sent for courtesy review. <br /> STAFF COMMENT. This property is located within the Joint Courtesy Review <br /> Area as defined by the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Land <br />