Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
12 <br /> Link to currently adopted Comprehensive Plan: <br /> https://www.orangecountVnc.gov/1238/Comprehensive-Land-Use <br /> Link to Master Aging Plan: https://www.orangecountVnc.gov/203/Master-Aping-Plan <br /> Link to Consolidated (Housing) Plan: <br /> https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/l 0806/Orange-County-NC- <br /> Consolidated-Plan-FINAL?bid Id=) <br /> Staff has reviewed the options presented in the Application and recommends that Family Care <br /> Facility be added as a permitted use in the MPD-CD zoning district by adding an asterisk (*) <br /> to the appropriate column on the line for use #44 (Family Care Facility). In reviewing the <br /> application, staff discovered the definition of "Family Care Facility" in Article 10 (Definitions) <br /> of the LIDO contains an outdated reference to a State statute. Therefore, staff is <br /> recommending an update to the definition as shown (red text is the proposed amendment <br /> language): <br /> Family Care Facility <br /> A facility which meets the definition of a family care home in NCGS 1 F� 160D-907. <br /> Staff does not recommend the applicant's proposal to require additional use standards (by <br /> adding a delta [A] symbol), as the State deems Family Care Facilities a permissible use in all <br /> residential districts and discourages additional requirements beyond those in place for similar <br /> residential uses. Family Care Facility is a permitted use (*) in all other Orange County zoning <br /> districts that allow the use, and to introduce additional standards exclusively for the MPD-CD <br /> is not recommended. <br /> Staff review of the amendment to UDO Section 3.8 regarding consistency with the <br /> Comprehensive Plan only determined that the Board of Commissioners must act in <br /> coordination with its action regarding the presented Comprehensive Plan amendments. The <br /> UDO text amendment is unwarranted without the corresponding amendments to the <br /> Comprehensive Plan. <br /> PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION <br /> The Planning Board reviewed this application at its regular meetings on June 5 and July 10, 2024 <br /> (Attachment A5). The Planning Board made three motions, all recommending the Board of County <br /> Commissioners vote to deny the applications. The text amendment application was voted upon <br /> 8 — 1 to recommend denial, with the dissent being related to the need to bring the UDO into <br /> alignment with NC General Statutes. The Planning Board voted unanimously (9 — 0) to <br /> recommend that the BOCC vote to deny the 2030 Comprehensive Plan amendment because the <br /> extension of the MPD-CD zoning district to rural activity nodes is inconsistent with the <br /> comprehensive plan. The Planning Board also voted unanimously (9 — 0) to recommend denial <br /> of the Zoning Atlas amendment application due to its present inconsistencies with the County's <br /> adopted comprehensive plan and nonconformity with its adopted LIDO, as reflected in the <br /> Statement of Inconsistency (Attachment A8). <br /> PLANNING DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> The consistency of the Zoning Atlas Amendment with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan relies, in <br /> part, on the Comprehensive Plan Amendments, [Attachments B1 — B7 (MA23-0004)]. As <br /> discussed herein, the amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan's FLUM and Appendix F are <br /> necessary for a consistency finding on the zoning action, as required by NCGS 160D-605. <br />