Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
34 <br /> PUBLIC COMMENTS: <br /> Tony Blake said he has concerns about the number of rezoning requests along Highway <br /> 54 and the ongoing updates to the comprehensive land use plan. He said he has concerns <br /> about the RCD designation, which would mean that decisions would bypass the special use <br /> permit and go straight to staff. He asked the Board not to approve the request, because he <br /> believes that zoning is not a patchwork, but a system. He said he has concerns about not <br /> including staff at public information meetings. He said that when a developer controls the <br /> meetings the community is at a disadvantage. He felt that the public information meeting was <br /> not valid. <br /> Andre Ristaino said he owns two parcels that abut 60% of the proposed site. He <br /> described his property and his private road. He said he has tried to balance the growth in the <br /> area with his family's needs. He said the developers agreed to put up a fence along the <br /> property line. He asked if the developers would commit to allow them to tap into the <br /> development if their well goes dry. <br /> Peter Childers said that making a left hand turn out of the development during rush hour <br /> would be difficult and unsafe. He said density destroys quality of life. He described the <br /> developer's plans as "cookie cutter." He listed reasons why people move to low density areas. <br /> He said that the developer will not be taking any risk for the effect on people's wells. He said <br /> that he didn't understand why the amendment was being considered while the comprehensive <br /> land use plan was being updated. He said the land could be developed in a safer way <br /> considering wells, and he asked the Board to deny the request. <br /> Laura Streitfeld asked the Board to deny the rezoning application. She said without <br /> rezoning, the existing R-1 zone allows for development of 20 lots at a minimum of 40,000 <br /> square feet. She said 1 acre lots would limit water use and traffic. She said rezoning burdens <br /> the community with impacts from water use, crowded septic systems, stormwater runoff, and <br /> increased traffic on a blind curve on a highway with a history of fatalities. She said this would <br /> leapfrog past the rural buffer, and would set a precedent for sprawl in the rural county with no <br /> municipal services. She said the developer's well draw down took place in July, after heavy rain <br /> from Tropical Storm Chantal, and the impacts on neighboring wells are unknown. She said the <br /> groundwater recharge rate is less than 400 gallons per day per acre at Cane Creek on Orange <br /> Grove Road. She said this development claims to be a conservation district, but appears to <br /> undermine conservation. She said the proposed development is inconsistent with the <br /> comprehensive plan. She said there are significant inconsistencies with the application. <br /> A motion was made by Chair Bedford, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to close the <br /> public hearing. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> Commissioner Carter asked about the sequencing of the amendment request given that <br /> the comprehensive land use plan is being updated. She said that it is her understanding that <br /> the proposal does not necessarily set precedents that take the county outside the current uses <br /> that are allowed for the property. <br /> Cy Stober said conditional zoning is allowed by state law and is negotiated between the <br /> county and the applicant. He said it provides for a site-specific plan that is custom to each <br /> property. He said the conditional zoning would be site specific, and any new property, including <br /> one next to it would be evaluated by the Board with its own site-specific plan and its own <br /> conditions that are unique to that property. He said that it is not a menu of options, but a narrow <br />