Browse
Search
PB Agenda Packet - Feb 5 2025
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Ordinance Review Committee
>
Agendas
>
2025
>
PB Agenda Packet - Feb 5 2025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/3/2025 4:19:04 PM
Creation date
2/3/2025 4:16:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/5/2025
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
15 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 438 Tom Altieri: And then we met at the Jones Grove Missionary Baptist Church which is just a little bit north of <br /> 439 town here, the American Legion, Gravelly Hill and then Voices of Efland Cheeks helped us with <br /> 440 the meeting at the Efland Cheeks Community Center. So,we mixed it around and if you recall <br /> 441 during our first engagement window,we did have a meeting down in Chapel Hill at Southern <br /> 442 Human Services Center. So,we are trying to move it around a little bit. <br /> 443 <br /> 444 Leigh Anne King: Have different locations for each of the rounds of engagement. <br /> 445 <br /> 446 Tom Altieri: And there has been a request during the next window that we have another meeting in Chapel <br /> 447 Hill, and that was made by the County commissioners. <br /> 448 <br /> 449 Dolores Bailey: Thank you. <br /> 450 <br /> 451 Beth Bronson: I wasn't sure if we were going to go around. I guess to that point, to Adam's original, initial <br /> 452 question encouraging density where they don't have jurisdiction. But then also that would lead you <br /> 453 to think that the policy that they developed is what they do have control over which is the <br /> 454 unincorporated areas that are bordering municipalities. <br /> 455 <br /> 456 Leigh Anne King: Right. <br /> 457 <br /> 458 Beth Bronson: And did the commissioners have any kind of comments on those? <br /> 459 <br /> 460 Leigh Anne King: Yes. I think there's still support for the fundamentals of the current policies that are in place, but <br /> 461 this idea of providing some approaches to encourage conservation subdivisions to happen in <br /> 462 unincorporated Orange County that could provide both the protection of important lands as well as <br /> 463 development of different housing and potentially and hopefully different housing choices to, kind <br /> 464 of, increase the housing stock across the County. That was really the new idea brought to the <br /> 465 table and encouraged, supported by the Board with respect to what they can do within the <br /> 466 unincorporated areas and are willing to provide some support for. <br /> 467 <br /> 468 Beth Bronson: Okay. And to that question, did the applicant for the housing conservation subdivision on 54, did <br /> 469 they go to the commissioners already? I don't know if you know this question. <br /> 470 <br /> 471 Leigh Anne King: I don't know that question. <br /> 472 <br /> 473 Cy Stober: Right now, the tentative hearing date is February 4. <br /> 474 <br /> 475 Beth Bronson: Okay. <br /> 476 <br /> 477 Cy Stober: And that's what we're planning on. <br /> 478 <br /> 479 Beth Bronson: I wasn't sure if that had happened or not. <br /> 480 <br /> 481 Cy Stober: And that was the applicant's request. <br /> 482 <br /> 483 Beth Bronson: Makes sense. And you're saying about the conservative subdivisions over the idea of providing <br /> 484 municipalities with denser housing options by ceding unincorporated land into the County,or into <br /> 485 the municipalities, right? Like annexation? <br /> 486 <br /> 487 Leigh Anne King: I think that the idea was that the more dense housing choices being provided within the <br /> 488 municipalities based on what the current planning areas are of those communities. So, as <br /> 489 modeled we made some adjustments to Hillsborough's to reflect their current comprehensive plan. <br /> 490 They actually shrunk their growth area in a few places so that's reflective there. Mebane has a <br /> 491 larger study area, so there could potentially be annexation as part of that.And then Chapel <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.