Browse
Search
Agenda 12-09-2025; 8-a - Minutes for November 6, 2025 Business Meeting and November 11, 2025 Work Session
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2020's
>
2025
>
Agenda - 12-09-2025 Business Meeting
>
Agenda 12-09-2025; 8-a - Minutes for November 6, 2025 Business Meeting and November 11, 2025 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/4/2025 3:13:38 PM
Creation date
12/4/2025 3:17:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/9/2025
Meeting Type
Business
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8-a
Document Relationships
Agenda for December 9, 2025 BOCC Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2020's\2025\Agenda - 12-09-2025 Business Meeting
ORD-2025-038-Fiscal year 2025-26 budget amendment #4
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
ORD-2025-039-North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
ORD-2025-040-Award of bid for installation and replacement of booths at Solid Waste and recycling centers
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
ORD-2025-041-Fiscal year 2025-26 budget amendment #5
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
ORD-2025-042-Transit scheduling and dispatch software agreement approval and approval of budget amendment #5
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2020-2029\2025
OTHER-2025-107-Performance Agreement Between Orange County and Citel America
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2020 - 2029\2025
RES-2025-065-Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases Refunds
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2025
RES-2025-066-Property Tax Release Refund
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2020-2029\2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
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
12 <br /> 1 Cy Stober said there is a lot of redundancy between the activity nodes. He said that due <br /> 2 to lack of build out, changes in state laws, particularly with agricultural industrial uses, and <br /> 3 consistency and harmony with the surrounding land uses, the proposed consolidation is largely <br /> 4 for commercial uses. He said they are not recommending enabling industrial uses in the rural <br /> 5 parts of the county. Her said the specific uses in the industrial activity nodes are not being <br /> 6 recommended by staff or the consultant. He said it is consolidating those uses that are permitted. <br /> 7 He said the chart in slide#17 is from the land use plan. He said it is the cross reference between <br /> 8 zoning districts, which are regulatory and law, and county activity nodes and future land use <br /> 9 classes, which are guidance. He said there are not a lot of unique zoning districts that are <br /> 10 permitted in activity nodes except for the master plan development, which is only permitted in the <br /> 11 rural community activity node, and industrial 1, which could be omitted in the new plan. He said <br /> 12 industrial uses are generally not compatible with a lot of rural uses. He said if they are agricultural <br /> 13 in nature, they would generally be allowed by right without zoning regulation due to the state law <br /> 14 as a form of bonafide farm use. <br /> 15 Commissioner Greene said the sense she got from the development of the 1981 land use <br /> 16 plan was that the rural activity nodes were to acknowledge the stores that existed at the time in <br /> 17 order not to grandfather them out of existence. <br /> 18 Cy Stober said they reflect the land use at the time. He said the adopted plan should <br /> 19 guide the county in the future. <br /> 20 Commissioner Greene said she agreed. <br /> 21 Commissioner McKee said that they are deciding for 2050 and they should they not limit <br /> 22 the possibilities. He said if you are going to have commercial activity, they need to be sited on <br /> 23 major transportation routes. He said if they want to have things easily accessible, we need to put <br /> 24 in place something that will allow it. <br /> 25 Chair Bedford clarified that Commissioner McKee was ok with combining nodes, but did <br /> 26 not want to eliminate those three or four industrial uses. <br /> 27 Commissioner McKee said yes, because they don't know what industry will look like in <br /> 28 2040 or 2050. <br /> 29 Chair Bedford asked if the Treeist application from a few years earlier was light industrial. <br /> 30 Cy Stober said it was agricultural support enterprise. <br /> 31 Commissioner Greene said that was a qualified use in the rural buffer. <br /> 32 Chair Bedford said she could see a similar business working elsewhere in the county. <br /> 33 Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification if Commissioner McKee's preference was to <br /> 34 keep the industrial nodes as industrial. <br /> 35 Commissioner McKee said he would like to keep the option for industrial. He said it is <br /> 36 only three nodes. <br /> 37 Cy Stober said there are three plus the mine. <br /> 38 Commissioner McKee said it allows something in a specific area that could open a door <br /> 39 in the future. <br /> 40 Chair Bedford said if two are combined and one left alone, then there wouldn't be industrial <br /> 41 in all nodes. <br /> 42 Cy Stober said yes, and he did not see the value in keeping community and neighborhood <br /> 43 nodes separate. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.