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

262 Approved 8.7.24 653 you asked some good questions about why the rural nodes were created, and what were 654 the concerns in creating them. I'd like to summarize. Marvin Collins, an Orange County 655 planning director, brought this topic before the Planning Board seeking feedback on the 656 following issues: The initial drafts of the county land use plan and zoning maps did not 657 have a category to recognize the presence of what we now call rural nodes. Unless a 658 change was made by extending zoning, these locations would have become a non- 659 conforming use, and zoning was already a highly contentious issue. The pledge you 660 speak of at the beginning of this meeting came from those meetings, and making these 661 mom-and-pop rural services in the smaller communities and agricultural regions of the 662 county non-conforming was not an acceptable option. On the other hand, there was 663 concern that, without very explicit definition and size limitation on these rural nodes, 664 uncontrolled expansion would become the mechanism through which strip development, 665 spot zoning, and urban sprawl would happen. Significant urban high-density development 666 in the rural areas would also have the effect of putting Chapel Hill's water supply at risk, 667 especially since 54 West extends through our watersheds, and this proposal would 668 change all rural nodes in the county. Uncontrolled rural node growth would become the 669 endline around the rural buffer districts put in place to protect and preserve water quality 670 not only for rural residents but Chapel Hill to avoid urban sprawl and to protect the 671 economic viability of the agricultural operations. As stated in Sections 1.1. 5 and 1.1.7 of 672 the UDO, rural activity node encompasses land focused on designated road intersections 673 within the rural area that is appropriate for small-scale commercial uses and mom-and- 674 pop convenience stores. This use is inconsistent with that goal. 675 676 Sadie Rapp: My name is Sadie Rapp. I grew up at 6819 Morrow Mill Road, and I now run a craft studio 677 and lead adult arts education on my family's property here. I'm also working to shift the 678 pastures on the property into food agriculture so as to better steward this land. I won't 679 have time to get into all of my concerns regarding this proposal, so I've tried to focus on 680 two main points. The proposed amendments hinge, in part, on whether or not this parcel 681 gets the designation of rural neighborhood activity node. These nodes are defined in the 682 comprehensive plan as land focused on designated rural intersections that is appropriate 683 for small-scale commercial uses that serve the public. The intersection of Morrow Mill and 684 54 has had that pink dot over it on the future land use map since the 80's. This identifies 685 the intersection as a place where, essentially, some commercial development may be 686 appropriate. The developer is claiming it is relevant to their application because the pink 687 dot overlaps with the corner of their parcel but fails to contend with the fact that this 688 subdivision as it's currently proposed does not touch an intersection and contains no 689 commercial element. The designation as a rural neighborhood activity node would be 690 wholly relevant to the proposed location and uses. The developer has failed to 691 meaningfully make the case otherwise. Looking beyond the existing ordinances, the 692 Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 effort just released their new issues and 693 opportunities report, which I think serves as an excellent tool for anchoring our discussion 694 today. As I'm sure you all know, last fall, residents and County staff had the chance to 695 share their values and vision for the future of the county and to help guide its conservation 696 and growth efforts through the year 2050. This report outlines key planning themes 697 identified during the first engagement window. The first bullet point is protect critical 698 watershed areas in open spaces and preserve agricultural lands, which I'm personally 699 worried is kind of hard to achieve if we are rezoning agricultural parcels and building 700 subdivisions between streams. Farmland conversion, which is the change of farmland to 701 non-agricultural uses is one of the threats identified in this report. Maintaining farmland is 702 critical, not only to the identity and image of the county, but to our resiliency as a region.