Browse
Search
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
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2020's
>
2025
>
Agenda - 02-04-2025 Business Meeting
>
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
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2025 1:32:28 PM
Creation date
1/30/2025 1:34:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/4/2025
Meeting Type
Business
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5-a
Document Relationships
Agenda for February 4, 2025 BOCC Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2020's\2025\Agenda - 02-04-2025 Business Meeting
Minutes 02-04-2025-Business Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2020's\2025
ORD-2025-005-An Ordinance Amending the UDO of Orange County
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
OTHER-2025-005-Acceptance of the Agricultural Growth Zone Grant with the North Carolina Department of Agriculture
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
OTHER-2025-006-CHCCS & OCS Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Approval of Membership and Capacity Numbers
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
OTHER-2025-007-OCS-SAPFO- Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance -Approval of Membership and Capacity Numbers
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
OTHER-2025-015-Statement of Consistency of a Proposed UDO Text Amendment with Adopted Orange County Plans
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
OTHER-2025-016-Statement of Inconsistency of a Proposed Zoning Atlas Map Amendment with the Adopted Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Other ApplicableAdopted Plans
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
PRO-2025-001-Black History Month Proclamation
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Proclamations\2020-2029\2025
RES-2025-010-Motor Vehicle Property Tax Release Refund
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2025
RES-2025-011-Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption Exclusion
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
361
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
258 <br /> Approved 8.7.24 <br /> 453 current AR zoning, however, already permits family care centers without rezoning. The <br /> 454 claim that these centers should be a permitted use that family care homes should be a <br /> 455 permitted use in MPD-CDs to align with state law raises several unanswered questions. <br /> 456 While North Carolina law defines family care homes as a permissible use in all residential <br /> 457 districts, an MPD-CD district provides for nonresidential and mixed-use developments as <br /> 458 well as large scale subdivisions and allows quote "flexibility to accommodate land use <br /> 459 adjustments in response to evolving market trends." It appears from communications <br /> 460 over the past year and a half the planning staff and the developer have been discussing <br /> 461 who staff or developer would request this change to permit family care homes in MPD-CD <br /> 462 zoning. This proposal is part of a wholesale attempt by the developer to re-write County <br /> 463 ordinances and comprehensive planning to benefit a single developer. Please do not <br /> 464 approve this proposed amendment, given that the motivation for it and beneficiaries of the <br /> 465 proposed changes remain unclear. Please note that the analysis and staff <br /> 466 recommendation in the agenda packet referring to healthcare include inaccuracies. The <br /> 467 statement of consistency claims that the development would provide outpatient medical <br /> 468 care and I heard earlier a discussion about a group medical center. This is unfounded <br /> 469 because according to definitions in state law and the health and human services <br /> 470 department, a family care facility does not require skilled nursing or physicians for <br /> 471 licensing and would not provide medical care, outpatient, or inpatient. It's simply a facility <br /> 472 providing personal care for daily living. There would be zero harm in not recommending <br /> 473 the proposed LIDO amendments from Item 8. Not recommending this change would not <br /> 474 harm people seeking to establish a family care home in a residential district because <br /> 475 family care homes are permitted in residential zones, including agricultural residential. <br /> 476 Item 9, rezoning from agricultural residential to master plan conditional would streamline <br /> 477 the application process but only benefiting the developer to the detriment of the <br /> 478 surrounding community. According to the UDO, MPD-CD districts shall be limited to <br /> 479 transition land use categories within the Orange County planning jurisdiction and rural <br /> 480 community nodes. By design, our low-density agricultural residential zone without water <br /> 481 or sewer lines, public transit, or sidewalks, is not slated to support the massive <br /> 482 infrastructure needs of high-density development without depleting limited water <br /> 483 resources and irrevocably transforming farmland, waterways, and woodlands. The <br /> 484 proposed rezoning is wildly incompatible with the surrounding multi-generational <br /> 485 community. Recommending the proposed rezoning and a decade or more of construction <br /> 486 would likely displace existing community members, heritage farms, and young farmers <br /> 487 currently thriving and supporting older relatives who are truly aging in place. The <br /> 488 developer proposes changes that threaten not only this rural community but all of Orange <br /> 489 County's current and future farmers, food economy, consumers of local products, and <br /> 490 open space. The Morrow Mill and Goldmine Loop residents are a model of successful <br /> 491 rural community. We're thriving despite a series of problematic proposals for the area that <br /> 492 have put farms, public health, and the environment at risk. We firmly reject this project <br /> 493 because it threatens an existing community. I want to clarify some key information about <br /> 494 diabase dikes. In 1991, an attempt to site a landfill was defeated because it would have <br /> 495 leached contaminants into ground water based on a rock formation called a diabase dike <br /> 496 on Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road,just up the road from this facility. In 2008, <br /> 497 commissioners learned of the presence of the same diabase dike in the same area <br /> 498 proposed for developing the UNC Airport at the time that was defeated. More recently, <br /> 499 neighbors at the corner of Morrow Mill and Highway 54 have had their wells contaminated <br /> 500 by leakage from a previous gas station. This developer's proposal for massive water <br /> 501 draws and disposal of liquid sewage would further threaten these wells, surrounding <br /> 502 neighbors with a cluster of polluting infrastructure co-located next to them and raising <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.