7-10-24 PB Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

17 557 are shown on the map. It does identify flood plain,wetlands, bottom land, hardwood forests and soils of importance 558 that are of conservation value, so that has been noted in that letter in that section. The letter, I believe is Attachment 559 5 as part of the zoning atlas agenda item,you can find it there. These flood plains,wetlands, hardwood forests,soils 560 of importance,that reflects what's included in the letter. Just a little bit of analysis of the neighborhood node. So, this 561 is the node at Morrow Mill and centered at NC 54. The node is a quarter mile radius and based on an assumption, 562 what we've tried to do here is try to make some determination of,well, how much of that existing node is developed 563 versus undeveloped, and in order to do that you have to make an assumption,and the assumption that's used here, 564 the areas that are shown in darker blue as developed,the assumption is if there's a structure on a lot that's 20 acres 565 or greater in size,we're saying that's developed, so again, it's up to individual property owners choices. There may 566 be some development potential that's left on those lots that are 20 acres or less in size that we're calling developed, 567 but, generally that's the assumption that we've made here. You change that assumption and the map here would 568 look a little bit different. So based on that assumption, approximately 37 percent of the acreage within the node is 569 developed. Just a little bit about land uses in the area,we do have some non-residential uses, the PSM Food Mart, 570 the Piedmont Feed and Garden Center, and the UNC Chapel Hill facility there as well. There are also 16 single 571 family homes located within the node. So,there's been reference to Appendix F in the comprehensive plan. The 572 amendment is to add MPD-CD, Master Plan Development Conditional District as a compatible use within the rural 573 neighborhood activity node. The matrix does provide that linkage,that connection for consistency between the future 574 land use classifications on the map with zoning districts that are part of the zoning atlas and this amendment would 575 establish that consistency between the comprehensive plan and the applicant's request for its rezoning and with this 576 matrix the only change is highlighted in that red box, adding a diamond there at the rural neighborhood activity node. 577 Noting that, in the rural neighborhood activity node, the only conditional district that is not currently consistent is 578 MPD-CD, so there are three other conditional districts that are permissible within that node. The applicant's request 579 for amendments is based on the premise that changes have occurred and are occurring in the county. The changes 580 are reflected in the letter of request from the applicant, that's Attachment 1 in your packet and just very generally, it's 581 more detailed in the letter, but that letter speaks largely to changing demographics in the county,the growing senior 582 age population,those age 65 and over, and the need for housing and neighborhoods to meet their needs. Staff has 583 put together this slide and the subsequent slide to provide some land use-related information about all of the rural 584 neighborhood activity nodes countywide. If that matrix were amended to include that MPD-CD,then it would also be 585 permissible in the other nodes that are throughout the county, so that brings me to this slide. There are ten 586 countywide, including the node at Morrow Mill and NC 54,totaling a little over 1,100 acres based on the same 587 assumption used previously about the 20-acre lot size being developed with a structure on it,48 percent of the 588 neighborhood nodes countywide could be considered developed noting that this does not represent the actual 589 impervious development footprint, it's just based solely on lot size. These nodes have been included as part of our 590 land use element on the Future Land Use Map since it was originally adopted in 1981. The same applies with our 591 rural community activity nodes, as well, those have been on the map since the original plan, as well, and were carried 592 over in the 2006 comprehensive plan that we're currently discussing today. Staff analysis as required under LIDO 593 Section 2.3, the planning director is to cause an analysis to be made in the application and prepare a 594 recommendation. The planning director has acknowledged that the application is complete,that Appendix F is 595 supportive of the principals, goals and objectives outlined in the comprehensive plan, the proposal does speak to 596 changing demographic conditions in the county and that the proposal establishes consistency between the 597 comprehensive plan and the requests for the rezoning. The MPD-CD zoning district was originally established to be 598 a mechanism through which innovative proposals could be considered. I will add here that I have not listed on this 599 slide the consistent goals and objectives and principles, those are all listed specifically in your abstract, I just didn't 600 want to take up this time and the space on this slide here, but those are in your packet within the abstract.And then, 601 finally, the text amendment application features a complementary amendment to Article 3 MPD-CD standards 602 regarding the future land use classifications that support MPD-CD. So that concludes the presentation. I will just 603 address the one question to the extent that I am able, those nodes were established in the original 1981 plan. There 604 is a little bit of information in the plan regarding the definitions of those areas and I didn't provide the definition for the 605 rural community activity node in the slide deck,this was the larger node that was located at the intersection of NC 54 606 and White Cross, and as defined, a rural community activity node is land focused on designation road intersections 607 which serve as a nodal crossroads for the surrounding rural community and is an appropriate location for any of the