Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
279 <br /> Approved 8.7.24 <br /> 1502 really enjoy their neighbors and feel like they have that community, and I completely <br /> 1503 understand why Fiddlehead wants that. I think the question is, does that fit in this <br /> 1504 particular area? Does it make sense? Everything I've heard so far about Fiddlehead <br /> 1505 makes it feel like a neighborhood island, and what I mean by that is it feels like it's not <br /> 1506 necessarily supporting the neighborhood in the sense of the rural neighborhood activity <br /> 1507 node is land designated in the comprehensive plan that is focused on road intersections <br /> 1508 within a rural agricultural residential area that is appropriate for small scale commercial <br /> 1509 uses. When I read that, I think of local support and growth of commercial uses that are <br /> 1510 supposed to be supporting the local neighborhood. This feels like it is an amazing and <br /> 1511 wonderful thing, I love the green, I love the solar, all the things about it. Does it fit that <br /> 1512 necessary designation at this point, I don't necessarily think so. So that's where 1 <br /> 1513 currently land with that. That is no dig on Fiddlehead or anything along those lines, land <br /> 1514 is expensive everywhere, I totally understand going above and beyond to try to find a <br /> 1515 place and make it fit. For this particular designation I struggle with that, so that is where <br /> 1516 I'm at right now. <br /> 1517 <br /> 1518 Whitney Watson: So, I'm going to disagree with Chris. I think the most important issue is Item 7, the <br /> 1519 change proposed to the land use map and expanding what is possible within the rural <br /> 1520 neighborhood activity nodes. Because if it happens here, it does mean that it's now <br /> 1521 possible in all the additional 9 activities nodes throughout the county. So, this one change, <br /> 1522 while it may have benefitted a very worthwhile project, it now changes the future for the <br /> 1523 entire county, so for me that's really the crux of why we're here tonight is trying to address <br /> 1524 that. I had some conversation with some of the planning staff and it does help to have <br /> 1525 that history about why the activity nodes don't follow the parcel lines, but in this particular <br /> 1526 instance, perhaps, we could direct that the activity node go back to the parcel line, the <br /> 1527 one that's furthest away from the current AR designation, and ask the applicant to <br /> 1528 propose a project that fits within either the agricultural residential or change that zoning <br /> 1529 from AR to master plan development, because I'm really reluctant to sweep the entire <br /> 1530 history of activity nodes out the door in this one episode. I don't have any problem with the <br /> 1531 family care home, doing that text change and Perdita's right, we're going to have to come <br /> 1532 back at some point and make that change to the table, so no big deal there. <br /> 1533 <br /> 1534 Charity Kirk: I'm going to echo what Chris said. I'm in support of the vision but I think we're talking <br /> 1535 about something that is a much more core or root level here, and it's something that <br /> 1536 would be nice if it is addressed in a comprehensive plan and the comprehensive plan is <br /> 1537 being worked on right now, so doing such a change that seems fairly dramatic for this one <br /> 1538 project where it doesn't meet the current comprehensive plan vision, it doesn't seem wise <br /> 1539 if we are purely trying to use the UDO and the comprehensive plan to make our land use <br /> 1540 decisions. <br /> 1541 <br /> 1542 Lamar Proctor: I think it's a beautiful vision and I love the idea of it, I think I'll just echo the other planning <br /> 1543 board members, my concern is opening up rural activity nodes to master plan conditional <br /> 1544 districts. This was talked about a little, I was looking through the minutes where Cy <br /> 1545 Stober indicated that the intended uses for this project fell out of what would be allowed in <br /> 1546 a rural activity node which is a rural conditional district. So, clearly our entire <br /> 1547 comprehensive land use plan envisions consistent uses throughout the county to match <br /> 1548 the population densities and the existing uses and to give our population consistency and <br /> 1549 security about what's going to be developed around them and people purchase land with <br /> 1550 the idea that they know what the conforming uses are around them, they can see what <br /> 1551 areas are for future development, they know when they buy it, if they buy it next to a <br />