Agenda - 02-04-2025; 5-a - Applications for Zoning Atlas Amendment, Comprehensive Plan Amendments, & UDO Text Amendments to Realize “Fiddlehead Corner”, a Master Plan Development – Conditional District

Browse Search

257 Approved 8.7.24 403 signed up to speak in June, the numerous community members opposed to the project, 404 who are here tonight hoping to speak, and yet, even if everyone here were to speak 405 tonight, we represent a small fraction of the wider community expected to participate in 406 envisioning County land use policy for the next 26 years. On Highway 54 and Morrow Mill 407 Road, there's a gas station, convenience store, and Piedmont Feed fully consistent with 408 the definition of rural neighborhood activity nodes in the LIDO and comprehensive plan. 409 Seeking rural neighborhood activity node, which I'll call RNAN, designation to add 70 plus 410 acres of mixed use, serving only this proposed private development's residents and 411 visitors is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan's direction to locate RNANs to serve 412 the local agricultural and residential community. Changing policy to allow commercial use 413 with no public benefit on a non-crossroads property would threaten the genuine public 414 interest of local communities of crossroads throughout Orange County. The future land 415 use map includes ten RNAN nodes totaling 1,166 acres and 82 percent of that is zoned 416 agricultural residential, 15 percent of it is R1 residential. By design, these nodes are 417 confined to a small radius. This developer requests adding 70 plus acres to a 125-acre 418 node beyond the circle. The intersection of 54 and Morrow Mill Road, like other nodes, is 419 not in an area marked for transition from rural to urban-type development or infrastructure. 420 This is a significant inconsistency because development standards in the UDO state that 421 MPD-CD districts shall be limited to transition land use categories. If this board were to 422 recommend allowing MPD-CDs in nodes, you would open up ten nodes in non-transition 423 areas to unlimited exponential high-density intrusion into the surrounding low-density rural 424 communities. It's important to note that if you were to rezone a conditional district in a 425 node, there's an exception in which acreage limitations do not apply as they would for the 426 existing small-scale LC1 or NC2 commercial zoning, each of which are limited to a 427 maximum of 5 acres under the existing ordinance. I urge you not to recommend this 428 change to the future land use map and comprehensive plan because there are significant 429 unanswered questions about the rationale for allowing multiple and mixed uses in our 430 node. At the last meeting, the developer stated they would provide no services to outside 431 people, such as restaurants. The full range of proposed commercial uses are unclear in 432 the application packet, but in communications with planning staff and at neighborhood and 433 orientation meetings, the developer has discussed a pub, a coffee shop, and a store 434 exclusively for the development's investors and guests. The developer's proposal is 435 inconsistent with Appendix F stating that a rural neighborhood activity node identifies 436 areas in the county where small-scale commercial uses serving the population in the 437 surrounding area are appropriate and the overlay locational criteria that say serving the 438 local low density rural and agricultural population generally less than 1,000 persons. So, 439 residents of a high-density development cannot simultaneously be part of the node and 440 also be the low-density population surrounding the node. We in the Morrow Mill Road and 441 Goldmine Loop communities make up the surrounding population, and we would not be 442 served. Please do not allow a single developer to re-write County policy to benefit 443 themselves and burden rural communities around all ten nodes with misplaced high- 444 density use in low-density areas without supporting infrastructure. There would be zero 445 harm in not recommending the proposed LIDO amendments in Item 7. Not expanding the 446 node would not harm the public interest because the proposal does not plan uses that 447 would serve members of the public. Not allowing MPD-CD districts and RNANs would not 448 harm local communities because rural communities at these nodes are not seeking high- 449 density mixed-use development that would encroach on farms and rural properties. Item 450 8, 1 urge you not to amend the UDO to allow family care homes in an MPD-CD zoning 451 district. The developer proposes changing UDOs necessary to build these centers and 452 that the rural neighborhood activity nodes designation should change. The parcel's