Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-7-24 PB Agenda Packet 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 131 W. MARGARET LANE, SUITE 201 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 9;nngt Cory a r, AGENDA ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD WHITTED MEETING FACILITY 300 WEST TRYON STREET, SECOND FLOOR I-IILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Wednesday, February 7, 2024 Regular Meeting — 7:00 pm No. Page(s) Agenda Item 'I. CALL TO ORDER 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 4 -5 a. Planning Calendar for February and March 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6 - 33 January 3, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes 4. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 5. PUBLIC CHARGE Introduction to the Public Charge The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB)to uphold the written land development laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and future needs of its residents and businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. Public Charge The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The Board asks those attending this meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner toward each other, County staff, and Board members. At any time should a member of the Board or the public fail to observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. The Planning Board asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate. Please be kind to everyone. 6. CHAIR COMMENTS 2 No. Page(s) Agenda Item -1: 7. 34 - 79 UPDATE ON COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN (CLUP)—To receive a presentation from Clarion Associates, the County's consultant preparing the Land Use Plan update. Members of several other County advisory boards have been invited to this meeting to hear the presentation. Members of these boards will have the opportunity to ask questions, with up to one (1) hour allocated to questions by other advisory board members. Presenter: Leigh Anne King, Director, Clarion Associates H. ADJOURNMENT Sign up to receive a notification when Planning Board agendas are posted Interested persons can sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx to receive a notification when agendas are posted. (Scroll down to the "Agenda Center" category and choose Planning Board). Monthly Planning & Inspections Newsletter Sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx?ListlD=408 to receive the monthly communication on happenings in the Planning & Inspections Department. Written Comments Interested persons who cannot attend the meeting in-person are invited to submit written comments on agenda items to the Planning Board via email at planningboard .orangecountync.gov no later than 3:00 p.m. on the afternoon of the meeting. Please include in the Subject line of the email the title of the agenda item your comment pertains to. Emails sent to this address are viewable on Google Groups: https://groups.google.com/g/ocplanningboard Written comments can also be dropped off at the Planning Department's offices at 131 W. Margaret Lane, 2nd floor, Hillsborough, NC during normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday). Written comments will be scanned and sent by staff to the email address indicated above. Review Process The Planning Board is an appointed volunteer advisory board which makes recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (the elected officials). The Board of County Commissioners holds a formal public hearing and makes decisions. Section 2.8 of the County's Unified Development Ordinance contains a flowchart depicting the review process for rezoning and text amendment applications. Planning Board Member Potential Conflict of Interest It is the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances of conflict. Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with respect to matters 3 before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict and refrain from undue participation in the matter involved. As a reminder, NC General Statute § 160D-109 establishes the following standard: Members of appointed boards shall not vote on any advisory or legislative decision regarding a development regulation where the outcome of the matter being considered is reasonably likely to have a direct, substantial, and readily identifiable financial impact on the member. An appointed board member shall not vote on any zoning amendment if the landowner of the property subject to a rezoning petition or the applicant for a text amendment is a person with whom the member has a close familial, business, or other associational relationship. If any Planning Board member has any concern about a possible conflict related to an agenda item, please notify Planning staff and get in touch directly with a member of the County Attorney's staff before the meeting time to determine whether a conflict exists— and if so, how best to handle the potential conflict. 4 • 1 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 Notes: *Planning Board Member Attendance Required Planning Board meetings are held in room 230 on the second floor of the Whitted Building located at 300 W.Tryon St., Hillsborough, NC 27278 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BOCC Planning Board Business Meeting Meeting 7:00 pm* 7:00 pm Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 BOCC Work Session 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Ctr 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 BOCC Business Meeting 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Ctr 25 26 27 28 29 5 Sunday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 Notes: *Planning Board Member Attendance Required Planning Board meetings are held in room 230 on the second floor of the Whitted Building located at 300 W.Tryon St., Hillsborough, NC 27278 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ELECTION Planning Board BOCC Meeting Business 7:00 pm* Meeting 7:00 pm Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 BOCC Work Session 7:00 pm Whitted Bldg. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 BOCC Business Meeting 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Ctr 24 25 26 27 28 I 30 6 1 MEETING MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 3 JANUARY 3,2024 4 REGULAR MEETING 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Adam Beeman (Chair), Cedar Grove Township Representative; Lamar Proctor(Vice- 7 Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large Representative; Beth Bronson, At-Large 8 Representative; Marilyn Carter, At-Large Representative; Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Chris 9 Johnston, Hillsborough Township Representative; Liz Kalies, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Steve 10 Kaufmann, Bingham Township Representative; Charity Kirk, At-Large Representative; Melissa Poole, Little 11 River Township Representative; Whitney Watson, At-Large Representative. 12 13 MEMBERS ABSENT: 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; David Stancil, Environment, Agriculture, Parks & 16 Recreation Director; Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director— Development Services; Taylor Perschau, Current 17 Planning and Zoning Supervisor; Ashley Moncado, Planner III; Lauren Coffey, Planning Technician. 18 19 OTHERS PRESENT: Craig Nlshlmoto; David Ricks; Katya Perstova; Amanda Whitton. 20 21 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 22 The meeting began at 7:00 PM. 23 24 AGENDA ITEM 2: ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR FOR 2024 25 Nominees for Chair were Adam Beeman and Delores Bailey. Board members voted three in favor of Ms. 26 Bailey (Liz Kalies, Marilyn Carter, and Delores Bailey) and nine in favor of Mr. Beeman (Lamar Proctor, Beth 27 Bronson, Statler Gilfillen, Chris Johnston, Steve Kaufmann, Charity Kirk, Melissa Poole, Whitney Watson, and 28 Adam Beeman). 29 30 Adam Beeman was elected Planning Board Chair for 2024. 31 32 Lamar Proctor was nominated for Vice-Chair, with a unanimous vote in favor. 33 34 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 35 December 6, 2023 Regular Meeting Minutes 36 December 6, 2023 Training Session Notes 37 38 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to approve the minutes. Seconded by Delores Bailey. 39 40 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 41 No additions. 42 43 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 44 45 INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE 46 The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General 47 Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land 48 development law of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and 49 accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner 50 which considers the present and future needs of its citizens and businesses through 7 51 efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and 52 welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of 53 responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, 54 and recommendations. 55 56 57 PUBLIC CHARGE 58 The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks 59 its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board 60 and with fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail 61 to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the 62 meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, 63 the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public 64 charge is observed. 65 66 67 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 68 None. 69 70 AGENDA ITEM 7: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT(CONDITIONAL DISTRICT)—To review and make a 71 recommendation to the BOCC on an applicant-initiated zoning atlas amendment to rezone a 10.01 +/-acres 72 parcel from RB (Rural Buffer)to ASE-CD (Agricultural Support Enterprises Conditional District). 73 74 The parcel's address is 6915-UT Millhouse Road, Chapel Hill, within the Chapel Hill Township (PIN 9871-50- 75 3254). This item is scheduled for BOCC public hearing on March 7, 2024. 76 77 PRESENTER: Ashley Moncado, Planner III 78 79 Adam Beeman: We're going to review and make a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on an 80 application initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment to rezone on the 10.01-acre parcel from Rural Buffer to 81 Agricultural Support Enterprises- Conditional District. The parcel's address is 6915-UT Millhouse Road, 82 Chapel Hill within the Chapel Hill Township. This item is scheduled for a vote of County Commissioner public 83 hearing on March 7th, 2024. 84 85 Cy Stober: Good evening, Mr. Chair. Well, you won't hear from me very long. Our Planner III, 86 Ashley Moncado, will be presenting the findings by staff, but I did want to just remind you of the,just the kind 87 of framework of Conditional Zoning. A Conditional Zoning case is a negotiation between the applicant and the 88 County and requires a site plan. It requires conditions as appropriate be provided for review by both the 89 Planning Board and the Commissioners. The site plan is site specific, so it is binding. Any major modifications 90 to the site plan would have to come back to the Planning Board and the Commissioners for reapproval, 91 essentially as a new zoning application. This allowance in Conditional Zoning is enabled by a general statute 92 and is reflected in our Ordinance. The Conditional Zoning District before you tonight, Agricultural Support 93 Enterprise, is an older Conditional District that the County has had, but frankly, this is the first time it's being 94 utilized in the County's history. Some of that has to do with some of the liberalization of state law for farm 95 uses, and some of that has to do with having quality applications to present to the County, but I'm very pleased 96 to be bringing an Agricultural Support Enterprise - Conditional District zoning case to you. I'm happy to answer 97 any questions, but we have gone, and especially for Ms. Carter, our newest member, if there are any specific 98 questions, this is all covered in orientation. We we went through this at length with the Lawrence Road 99 Conditional District case, but if there are questions about the Conditional Zoning process, which is significantly 100 different from standard Conventional Zoning, which takes one piece of land from a menu of uses to a different 8 101 menu of uses, while this is site specific, use specific, and limited in its entitlement. I'm happy to answer them at 102 this time. Otherwise, I'm very happy to turn the mic over to Ashley Moncado to present the findings by staff. 103 104 Ashley Moncado: Good evening. I am Ashley Moncado, Planner III with the Planning Department. Cy kind 105 of already went ahead and introduced the item, so I'm just going to jump right into it. The parcel related to this 106 rezoning request is located in the Chapel Hill Township approximately 1/4 mile from Millhouse Road. It's 107 identified with the red star there on the screen in front of you. The parcel is approximately 10 acres in size. 108 Currently, the parcel is zoned as Rural Buffer. The applicant is requesting to rezone to Agricultural Support 109 Enterprises- Conditional District to allow for Agricultural Services which are a permitted use in this zoning 110 district. The purpose of this is for them to locate their tree, care, and consulting service business on this site. 111 Parcels to the north, east, and west are all zoned as Rural Buffer and located in Orange County's planning 112 jurisdiction. The parcel to the south is located in Chapel Hill's planning jurisdiction and is zoned as Rural 113 Transition. The Future Land Use Classification for this parcel is Rural Buffer. No amendments are being 114 proposed to the Future Land Use Map related to this request before you tonight. As stated, part of the 115 Conditional District Rezoning application requires submission of several documents in accordance with 116 Section 2.9 of the UDO. The applicant has provided these documents, and they are contained in Attachment 1 117 of your packets. As part of their application process, they are required to submit a formal site plan. The 118 applicants have provided a plan featuring two office buildings, which are labeled here in front of you, a 119 residential structure for an onsite caretaker, parking, outdoor storage, and equipment staging area. The site 120 plan documents also identified stream buffer, landscaping, and stormwater control measures. A Class B 121 Special Use Permit was permitted for this site in 1994 for the existing telecommunication tower and equipment 122 building that are also identified here on the site plan. The existing SUP does not prohibit the use of the 123 property for other purposes provided both uses are addressed in the Conditional Zoning application process. 124 One item, I'd like to note is more so regarding the southern portion of the site and the areas that are labeled as 125 wood storage areas. Based on the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance, those are classified and 126 would be defined as Outdoor Storage which are required to be a 100 feet setback from property lines. As you 127 can see here, and it might be hard to see, the applicant is proposing to locate these areas about 42 to 46 feet 128 away from the southern property line. They have submitted a condition requesting a decrease in that setback 129 standard. I'd also like to note that their outdoor storage areas are proposed to be screened with a 6-foot fence. 130 Access to the site is being proposed along an existing gravel access way located across Orange County- 131 owned property. As you can see here, it will cross and then head east to connect to Millhouse Road. There 132 are some minor improvements that they are proposing including paving at the stream crossing as well as 133 paving at the entryway connecting to Millhouse Road. The applicant is providing for a second access on the 134 southeastern portion of the site. The reasoning for this is based on a request from conversations with DEAPR 135 and the concern that the existing access way may be lost or may need to be relocated in order to 136 accommodate the future Millhouse Road park site. A grant of easement and assignment of lease for the 137 existing access easement within the property was recorded in 2008 with the current owner at the time and 138 Crown Castle. Attachment 5 in your packets includes a letter detailing the applicant's legal right to the access 139 easement which cannot be confirmed by staff. Crown Castle has not provided comments on this application, 140 and the existing offsite access easement is located on property owned by Orange County. In response to the 141 proposed use of the existing easement as a commercial driveway to serve the applicant's use, DEAPR 142 requested a condition of future access road construction through this property from the applicant, and the 143 applicant has not agreed to this request. DEAPR's request and the applicant's response are also contained in 144 Attachment 5. And just a follow up from what Cy was saying earlier, based on Section 2.91 of the UDO, 145 mutually agreed upon conditions can be imposed as part of the Conditional Rezoning process, and agreed 146 upon conditions are binding to the development permitted for the zoning district. As part of the process, the 147 applicant did submit conditions. The proposed conditions were reviewed, and revisions were recommended 148 by staff for clarity and consistency with the UDO. The applicant accepted the revisions, and these are what 149 were contained in your Attachment 2 and Attachment 8 of the Ordinance and are provided on the slide here for 150 you. We can go back to the slide and discuss when we to the recommendation and discussion part of this 9 151 evening, and you might have questions, and we also have other staff here to help answer with those. At this 152 time, I'm going to hand it over to the applicant for them to do their presentation, and then I will come back up, 153 and we will go over the staff analysis, recommendation, and answer any questions you all may have. 154 155 Statler Gilfillen: I am unclear of something that you just said about the access road in there. 156 157 Ashley Moncado: Yes. 158 159 Statler Gilfillen: Is there a conflict between this proposal and the County about the road? Did I hear that? 160 161 Ashley Moncado: We can answer that question now, but that might be to after the applicant speaks. 162 163 Statler Gilfillen: I'll put it on the table. You can answer it later. 164 165 Ashley Moncado: Yes. We have conditions, and we also have David Stancil, who is with Orange County 166 DEAPR is also here to discuss and answer questions for you this evening. 167 168 Adam Beeman: Good evening. Just to let you know, we have a time limit for your presentation. Do you 169 think that's possible? 170 171 Craig Nishimoto: Yes. Okay, I'm going to deviate from what I had planned. I, in my mind, envisioned more 172 public, so, less experts, but I want to address it as much as possible to you guys now and give you time to 173 pepper me with questions maybe later, because ultimately what I'd like you guys to leave with is feeling 174 confident that you can write to the Board of County Commissioners. There's the cell tower from the road. 175 That's where we're building the property. It's not along the road. It's quite far away. Most of my argument is in 176 the documents. That's where you're going to find all the meat. It's not going to be in this presentation, but the 177 detailed narrative is where I lay it all out, my case. It provides the fullest account of what we are doing and 178 why. It argues that there's a strong alignment between our proposal and the County's 2030 Comprehensive 179 Land Use Plan, which I understand is supposed to be guiding these decisions. That document shows that an 180 advance would be made on 14 separate County goals and 34 separate County objectives, and the arguments 181 for why, and then, possibly most importantly, it directly addresses the concerns related to the use or use of the 182 Rural Buffer. My understanding is this is somewhat precedent setting for the Rural Buffer, and so we want to 183 focus on making sure people are comfortable with that. You might be surprised the ASE-CD agricultural 184 zoning, my argument for why this is appropriate is there. Another precedent setting thing. 185 186 Charity Kirk: Can rather than continuing to refer to the document, I strongly suggest you assume that 187 we have skimmed the documents. We haven't fully read every single page. I would just make that assumption 188 that not all Board members have done that, so you might want to elaborate your conversation a little bit with 189 us. 190 191 Craig Nishimoto: Well, we can start here. Although I can imagine going in so many different ways now if 192 we haven't done the background reading. If I want to focus, knowing that we have limited time, what is the 193 most important? Are you concerned about ASE-CD zoning, or should we skip that? 194 195 Adam Beeman: Are you concerned about the agricultural designation? If you have an issue with 196 agricultural designation, that's what he's going to discuss. If not, we can move on with, to the next part of his 197 thing. So, at the end of the day, there was a discussion in the paperwork about whether or not the lumber 198 work, lumber, the tree work that you do actually qualifies as agricultural or not. That was the potential 199 discussion? Am I correct? 200 10 201 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah, and I would say through our concerns, two options. We can address it now or hey, 202 there's a paper written on this. 203 204 Adam Beeman: So I guess that's the question is does anybody have any concerns about this being 205 labeled as an agricultural district? If we don't have any discussions about that, then we can move forward with 206 the presentation. 207 208 Statler Gilfillen: I will ask one question just to clarify, and it's minor here. The storage is strictly for the cut 209 trees, lumber, and agricultural waste products that are stored on your site? It is not other possible retail uses 210 or selling fruit or anything else from this site? We are strictly dealing with this as your company? 211 212 Craig Nishimoto: It is largely the byproducts of the tree work that we do in town, so that's wood chips, that's 213 millable saw logs, and that's the little cut-in pieces where you can't do anything with. Maybe firewood is the 214 best thing, these kind of things, but the big goal is all these mountains of wood chips and these logs that are 215 otherwise going to waste. 216 217 Adam Beeman: I will say I have read the entire thing, and it is, it takes longer than a half an hour to go 218 through it, so I guess if you can just give us a quick summary of what the biggest points you want to hit in that 219 detailed summary, I understand it was detailed. Like I said, I read the whole thing. If you just, if you just want 220 to give the Board some of your quick highlights of this is what we're doing. "We're a tree company. We're 221 trying to eliminate having the equipment in the town area." Just those quick highlights, I think that'll help bring 222 everybody on board, and then we can kind of get into a more detailed discussion 'cause, like I said, it took 223 longer than half an hour to read through the whole packet. 224 225 Craig Nishimoto: Let me, let me just go through the bullets that I have at the top, and they kind of 226 foreshadow everything that is there. The basic idea is that we're going to make advances on some important 227 objectives for the County here in allowing us to do what we want. The town needs that we are addressing is 228 the increasingly disruptive noise pollution caused by the industrial tree processing equipment in the town. We 229 are trying to address that problem with this proposal. Countless tons of wasted natural resources from the tree 230 maintenance and tree removal services, all these mountains of wood chips, and these logs that are getting cut 231 up and not used, the rising cost of tree ownership compromising the goals of a flourishing and equitable 232 canopy coverage. If you do nothing in Chapel Hill, or trees will grow. If you stop mowing, trees will grow, and 233 then, so it's not just the really wealthy communities that have tree problems. It's everybody, or they get rid of 234 them because they know that the cost of trees will be too expensive. We are trying to make tree work efficient 235 and bring quality tree service to everybody. Then there's the challenge of attracting, training, and providing 236 local jobs to highly-skilled arborists. We're good at this. We're good at making climbing exciting and a career 237 option for people. Getting out of college, or even the most talented arborists from out of state, the west coast, 238 are coming to work with us, and we think one of the best things we can do for the trees of this community is 239 bring really talented arborists here. The need to increase tree and tree care literacy among local property 240 owners. Every week, on average, we get 75 requests from people in this area to ask for a consultant to come 241 talk to them about their trees. 80 or 85 percent of those things are free consultations,just free advice, and we 242 have our arborists are, they're all arborists, they're all tree assessment qualified, and they're not on a 243 commission. They're first and foremost giving good advice, and then if they need tree services, guess what? 244 We can also help them with that. We have the emeritus professors of botany among our clients, so we can't 245 tell them much, but we can tell them about some things about what would happen if that tree landed on your 246 house and what we can do and how much it would cost. And we have people that just moved here and don't 247 know anything about trees, but every time we go there, we move them from wherever they are to knowing a 248 whole lot, a little bit more, and we think that's the best thing that we can do for the trees and the tree care in 249 this community. And then there's the challenge of providing responsive emergency tree services to this area 250 and the populations centers. We are first responders. If you go to the County and say, "what do you do if 11 251 there's an emergency?" Their emergency page, prominent, the biggest illustration is trees. Tree emergency is 252 storms. They're all about tree problems here, and the County, the public will only help you out if it's on public 253 property or on the wires. Everywhere else, and that's where most of the trees are, it's tree services you need, 254 and when the storm comes, and we've been lucky in the last three years not, there hasn't been a major storm, 255 but when there is, you're either dependent on outside companies—and we can tell you horror stories about 256 what happens when that happens—or we're here. We need a central location to be able to handle this. We 257 operate 24/7 all the time. 258 259 Charity Kirk: So, we make land use decisions, so can you just summarize why this property in 260 particular and what your plans are for this property. 261 262 Craig Nishimoto: I think the best way to make this point is to think about a similar situation that the Town of 263 Chapel Hill was in in the year 2000. In the year 2000, the Town of Chapel Hill had a big problem. They knew 264 that their lease on the UNC's property for their public works was expiring, and the UNC did not want to renew 265 it. They had to find another place for their public works. What is that? That's all their trucks, all their gravel 266 storage areas, all their asphalt storage areas, all their employees to park. Really similar to what we're doing 267 here. They had a big budget, $52 million to spend on this problem. They, I can only imagine, had a bunch of 268 dedicated planners working on this problem. They had a lot of resources, other assets and holdings and they 269 knew the area really well and they cared about the future of this decision and what it would do to the Rural 270 Buffer, for example. It is telling where they chose to locate their Public Works of a something that's just quite a 271 bit larger in scale than what we're doing, but largely the same. They put it in the Rural Buffer on Millhouse 272 Road, but actually a whole lot, 5.7 times closer to residents than where we are. So, three years ago, we are 273 running out of space. We know that where we're currently at, it's just a matter of time before somebody 274 complains and shuts us down. We are desperate to find another location. Instead of watching Netflix, instead 275 of doing anything, scrolling on Twitter, I am looking at real estate listings all the time. It is hard to find places. 276 And then I came across something that said 10 acres for sale in Chapel Hill"for$100,000. 1 was sure it was a 277 mistake, but I looked it up. It was mis-listed. It, the PIN wasn't right, but after a night of searching on this, 1 278 found out who was responsible, who I could contact about this, and they said "oh, yeah, yeah, here's where 279 the property is." I got Katya, my wife, in the car. We ran out there. We looked at it. We said "oh, this is ideal." 280 No neighbors. There's a dump, the old landfill. There is Duke Forest. County property. There's a cell tower 281 here. Nobody wants this property, and no one's going to complain, so we called the guy. He says, "well, 282 here's how it works. This is a bidding process, blind bidding, and it ends at noon tomorrow, tomorrow 283 morning." So, I called David, my business partner, and I said, "hey, I've never seen something like this, a piece 284 of property like this. This is perfect for us. This is what we need." So, we double the asking price, more than 285 doubled the asking price and say no conditions, we'll take this property. I didn't think we'd see another 286 property like this come and come around, and we got it. I didn't know about all this. This is something 1 287 learned, and luckily I think we have a good case for this. I've read that 530-page Comprehensive Plan. I've 288 spent a lot of time with the UDO, 670-some-odd pages. I even read the Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. 289 That's 700-some pages. I respect what you guys do. You guys are volunteers. This is amazing. I didn't know 290 anything about local government. I'm learning, but it's taken a lot longer than I thought, and it's more 291 expensive and time consuming, but I think we have a good case. 292 293 Statler Gilfillen: Just so I can understand the business that you're doing. You can go to a site, groom, 294 correct the trees, whether it's after or a storm or not. You will then haul that material that is rubbish at that 295 point, or scrap, to your site. Some of it could be a 20-foot long oak tree. Now, do you do any milling on the 296 site? 297 298 Craig Nishimoto: No. 299 12 300 Statler Gilfillen: Or all of that type of wood, which is an industrial use, is sent, if it's usable, will be sent to a 301 mill, right? 302 303 Craig Nishimoto: Yes. 304 305 Statler Gilfillen: And you might store some of that on the site, but you don't do any work on it, right? 306 307 Craig Nishimoto: That's correct. 308 309 Statler Gilfillen: Okay. So you're limit is a place to take the natural products you're taking care of. You 310 need a place to store them. Now, once you've stored them on your site, what do you do with them then? 311 312 Craig Nishimoto: Okay, so it depends on what it is. But saw logs, for example, we need to wait until we 313 have sufficient quantity, and we need to stage them. This is pulp wood, this is high grade, white oak, Randall 314 we'll use at Fireside Saw Mill, or these are pine logs that will go somewhere else, or these are veneer logs or 315 something like this, but what we haven't been able to do is, because of these small loads and mixed loads of 316 what we get here and there, is bring them to any good use, so we stage them temporarily. When there's 317 enough white oak logs, for example, we can put those in the back of a truck and then take them to the highest 318 possible use, typically very local. 319 320 Statler Gilfillen: If I understand what you've just said and what I've read, then you are, basically, that's 321 staging recycling area where the products, the natural waste, at this point is brought to, and then distributed 322 from this site? 323 324 Craig Nishimoto: Correct. 325 326 Statler Gilfillen: It's a recycling center in a sense for the natural? 327 328 Adam Beeman: If you call it recycling center, it might draw a lot of big alarms like we're— 329 330 Statler Gilfillen: It might be perceived as industrial. That's not— 331 332 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah. It's not, it's—We, we got some wood chips here. 333 334 Adam Beeman: So, I guess the question is, before we start questioning him, are you satisfied with your 335 presentation? Do you want to wrap it up and open the floor to questions? Typically, I would like you to finish 336 your presentation, then we'll open the floor, and we'll go around in an orderly fashion so we're not playing 337 popcorn question or- 338 339 Craig Nishimoto: Let me go through what I think will be valuable, skipping a lot of stuff. When we had the 340 Neighborhood Information Meeting, two things came up that were what seemed like this is valuable. One, we 341 need to explain what we do and how we operate because there was like, "what is a tree service?" We're not a 342 logging operation. We're not these big land clearing operations. That's an entirely different industry. And then 343 the other concerns was the concerns about noise and traffic, so I wasn't prepared at the NIM, but I'm now 344 prepared to answer those things, so that's what I have a further addressed. And then "what is the Treeist." 345 Now, this I think I'm going to skip over because it's more storytelling that you guys are too serious to want to 346 worry about. 347 348 Adam Beeman: I guess the biggest thing, if you just want to tack down your day, like you have a couple 349 offices, the residence, what the residence is for, how many trucks you expect to roll in and out,just kind of a 13 350 day in the life of Treeist, and then we'll probably get the gist of what you're looking to do on the property from 351 that. 352 353 Craig Nishimoto: So, what we imagine is there's a lot of trucks that need to be parked there, so that's one 354 thing, but we also have a small office operation, the people that are there to take phone calls, to do the 355 scheduling. It's not a big thing, but we need to have it, and we're working out of a little metal building right 356 now, and it's hard to attract the top talent to work in here when they can take jobs anywhere else in nice, cushy 357 offices. We need to do something about that. We also are really into training people, and we see this as a 358 perfect industry to start an apprenticeship program, and for that we need a multipurpose room that can offer a 359 classroom sort of setting, something indoors and we can give good lectures and presentations to. That is part 360 of the day. We might even start the apprentices in there and then go out and join field and the crews. A lot of 361 tree services are really hard on equipment, so we have a full-time mechanic who is always fixing a track on 362 this machine, doing something, welding this or welding that, so there's a shop where he can take these things, 363 work on a chipper or something like this. And these guys work really hard. This is one of the most physically 364 laborious industries, and it's high adrenaline when they're working because they know they can get hurt 365 anytime, so I always think that the most dangerous time for our guys and gals that are working on the tree 366 crews is after they drive back to the shop, get in their personal vehicles, and then drive home. I, when I was 367 doing it, it was just like, "this is where I get killed because I'm going to fall asleep here." I would love to just 368 have a place for them to relax, lockers, shower, sharpen your chainsaws in this nice lighted area, and then hop 369 in, maybe spend time in town before you drive home, and that also is to attract the best workers. Even Town 370 of Chapel Hill Public Works, they have better than we have. I'd like to at least offer something like that to our 371 guys. Questions about that? 372 373 Adam Beeman: No, I mean, like I said, once you're done, we're going to open up the questions, then we'll 374 get more out of you as far as questioning. 375 376 Craig Nishimoto: I think what's critical is the noise and traffic issues. I mean, look at these aerial photos 377 first. 378 379 Statler GiIfillen: I'm trying to draw a distinction here. I asked the question about would you sell anything 380 on the site. Now, if you have a dozen oak trees, and you chip them up— 381 382 Adam Beeman: Hey, can we hold this off until he's done with his presentation? 383 384 Statler GiIfillen: —are you going to be selling some of that from there on a retail basis? 385 386 Adam Beeman: We'd like him to finish the presentation then we can ask the questions. Please wait. 387 388 Craig Nishimoto: Part of my slide that I wanted to impress upon everyone here is how big a need there is in 389 this area. If you look at any aerial photos, I look at our neighborhoods that we work in, and we want the trees, 390 we need houses, but we really want trees, and so what happens is this. You look just about anywhere. You 391 see these neighborhoods. This was built in the '60s, and all the trees have grown up around the houses. It's 392 not like grass where you can just mow it. You need people to climb up there and do work. In Ridgefield, 393 there's this Long Leaf, Willow Drive, Emory neighborhood. A lot of these places, and when they built the 394 houses, they just clear cut everything, but now you go back there, and it's what? You see Loblolly Pines and 395 Sweet Gums everywhere, way too dense, and then there's going to be problems, so we're managing that. 396 Even if you love trees, some of them, they're just too crowded together. It's just going to get worse. Lake 397 Hogan Farms, this is really a recent development for trees, but they're Willow Oaks that were planted, and 398 some of them are already this big. They grow super fast, and everywhere you look, this is just fairly random 399 sampling of what it looks like from the air. What you notice is trees right up against houses everywhere. 14 400 That's everywhere. Carrboro, '90s and 70s,just enormous trees, and even if you didn't clear cut and you just 401 had the houses, and you're trying to infill like some of these more historic areas, we're seeing huge problems 402 of people killing the old trees from that, from construction and trying to build an accessory dwelling unit. We 403 have 19 climbers. This is what you need because a lot of things you can't do. What people associate with tree 404 work is these bucket trucks, but that's because you're going down the street and seeing them work on power 405 lines. We're working in backyards, and we need to train these guys to climb. We have 19 of them. We're not 406 using the big machines that are used for clearing site development that people see when they get upset. We 407 have to get into people's backyards. We're using compact machinery like this. These are the wood chippers. 408 They make a ton of racket and people's noises, and because we can't bring it, this wood anywhere, we have to 409 process it all on site, and that is horrendous. You go down any neighborhood, you can just listen. "Well, 410 there's some tree work going on." Our dump trucks are not huge. This is our dump truck because, again, 411 we're getting into neighborhoods. All our work has to be compact. That as some of the concern of the 412 neighbors. Like, "you're driving giant machines." We're not. Our biggest machines are really specialized like 413 this type of crane that reaches out 112 feet and then grapples and cuts, and then a bucket truck, but they don't 414 go out with every crew. You can learn more about us on the websites: Instagram, 12,000 posts plus; YouTube 415 videos, David's putting a lot of drone footage; online reviews, great places. Every one of these places. If it's a 416 star rating, we have five stars, never a negative review. Ask your neighbors. Ask the local tree savvy places, 417 "who's tree savvy around here?" North Carolina Botanical Garden, New Hope Audubon Society. Ask anybody 418 there, ask about us. Noise concerns, what we've done here is, we're really far away from people. But 419 occasionally, let's say we're doing training for our new employees with chainsaws. We're gonna fire off these 420 gas chainsaws. Chainsaws are loud. The neighbors might be rightfully concerned "is that gonna wake me 421 up." I know they're concerned about the dogs that are already up there, so is this gonna cause them another 422 problem? I didn't know at the Neighborhood Information Meeting whether that would be a concern, so we 423 actually went out and tested it. One person at the location near the cell tower, where we would fire up the 424 chainsaw and then another of us went to the listening places. We shot video of it. You can see it. You can 425 compare it and listen in. You cannot hear. You cannot hear a chainsaw, even the loudest chainsaw that we 426 have, 170 decibels, they say. Cannot be heard and we have, we put together a video on this. Town of Chapel 427 Hill Public Works, what are we doing? We're staging stuff, so there's gonna be some loading and unloading of 428 logs and stuff like that. Not as loud as unloading gravel or dumping gravel into a metal bed, but we are far 429 away. You're not gonna be able to hear that. This is the Town of Chapel Hill Public Works, that Rural Buffer 430 site. They are 350 feet. They're doing that and you can see from aerial photos, they have big diesel loaders 431 out there. We are 5.7 times that distance away from the nearest residence that might complain. So, here's 432 that video. The link is there. The proof is there. We, he's great at editing videos. I am pretty proud of this 433 little video because it shows not only the chainsaw, but the Marine air horn and the woodchipper going at full 434 blast. But let's, we, we can get back to that. Traffic concerns, again, there's a little misrepresentation in the 435 packet that you got. It overcounts by a factor of two of how many trucks we'll have. Even in our biggest 436 aspirations, we're probably at 140 trips per day. Trips per day is kind of misleading and I think it alarmed 437 people because a trip to the grocery store is going to be two trips, not one, because it's the trip up to and the 438 trip back. So, our crew, if they come in the morning with their personal vehicles, leave with company vehicle, 439 come back with company, that's four trips per crew member. So, it adds up quickly. But what is helpful is 440 comparing it to other usages. Emerson Waldorf School, you're looking at like over a 1,000 trips per day. 441 Chapel Hill Public Works, if they have as many employee vehicles as it looks like in that aerial photo, from just 442 that parking lot, you're looking at 500 trips a day. The Soccer Complex, you're looking at like a 1,000 trips per 443 day on a game day. We are a drop in the bucket. And what's better is our peak traffic times are totally 444 harmonious. We start at 7:00, which means our employees are getting between 6:30 and 7:30. That's when 445 the traffic is coming. That's before Town of Public Works. That's before Emerson Waldorf. We are out, and 446 even if on that far edge of our guys leaving at the latest and the earliest arrivers, we're going in different 447 directions. This is awesome. And then later in the day, we're ending earlier because an 8-hour day for us 448 ends at 3:00. And it's staggered at the end of the day. Our guys finish when the job gets done, not when the 449 clock runs out, so it's staggered. Vehicle routes are harmonious. We're probably going south. When we turn 15 450 south, we're just going by nonresidential properties. This is all commercial properties or Town properties. In 451 the broader perspective, if this doesn't happen, it doesn't mean there's a lack of tree service needs in the area. 452 It just means that to fulfill those tree service needs, you're gonna be having to travel from a lot further away. 453 Maybe same trips per day, but those trips will take three times as long and that means three times as much 454 road use. More traffic intersecting back and forth through the Rural Buffer. Already a problem. This just adds 455 more to that. 456 457 Adam Beeman: If you, if you want to give your summary, you've got two minutes left. If you want to give a 458 wrap-up and a summary, we've got questions for you, so you're gonna have plenty of time to answer them. It's 459 just your chance to say your last bit before we dive in here. 460 461 Craig Nishimoto provided a summary of his personal history and background. 462 463 Adam Beeman: So, I'm going to start the questions and work our way around. 464 465 Whitney Watson: I have three questions for you. One is about working with North Carolina Forestry. I know 466 they offer some of the same tree literacy programs that you are, and so I'd been interested in how you work 467 with them or how you might increase the way in which you work with those groups. 468 469 Craig Nishimoto: Whenever I present to a crowd like a public library or some, a gardening club, I point to 470 North Carolina Forest Service as an offering. If you call the County Ranger, they will send someone out to 471 look at your trees, and it's a pretty good deal because it's free and sometimes, during COVID, they were even 472 sending two guys out, but it takes a long time. You might have to wait a month or two to get out there. This is 473 what I hear from clients. Sometimes their write-ups are excellent. In fact, one time a client showed it to me 474 and it looked like he copied the things that I was saying, telling the client. Other times they're not as good 475 because they have a different skill set. If you became a registered forester or licensed forester, you would 476 have to learn a lot of things that are totally irrelevant to the urban forest interface, you know, trees growing 477 near houses. And what we get to see is trees on houses all the time. We're looking for particular trees and 478 particular elements of this tree, not the health of this big Loblolly Pine tract. I think if everyone started calling 479 them, they just wouldn't have the capacity to do 75 visits a week, for example. 480 481 Whitney Watson: Okay. So that sort of backs into the notion that you're going to have some kind of training 482 program at your site? So, if you're not working with the local forest ranger, then it seems like there's a 483 disconnect between what you do and what they do and the customer, the potential client is losing out, so you 484 might consider about that educational aspect. 485 486 Craig Nishimoto: So, where I think the forest service is strong is on big, managing 20 acre properties or 10 487 acre properties, land management. That's where I think they have a lot to offer. When it's what particular tree 488 and how to deal with its hazard, that's where they fall short, so even though there's something called urban 489 forestry, they mainly just do standard forestry. 490 491 Whitney Watson: Next question, so there's a residential property or residential unit going to be on the 492 property for a full-time caretaker or will they also be working during the day? 493 494 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah, so it's basically our security system needs to have someone there. I could imagine 495 somebody, some eco-terrorist just doesn't like the fact that we cut down a tree coming to destroy all our 496 machines. It's kind of way tucked away, so people could do that. But I got this guy that has worked with me 497 for years and he's a young guy. He would love nothing more than to do the Henry David Thoreau thing. A 498 little cabin out there with his dog and living the life, and that's what we'd like to build for him. 499 16 500 Whitney Watson: The last question which I think Cy intimated about was the access road issue. Can you 501 elaborate on what you see as the best possible outcome for that? 502 503 Craig Nishimoto: We had a meeting earlier today about that, and Maribeth Carr came up with a wonderful 504 solution to this problem. She found that there was a potential route north of the current road that would no 505 matter what they did with the Soccer Complex, it should stay out of their way, and then drop down and we 506 could potentially use the same stream crossing. Apparently, the stream crossing is a big deal as far as the 507 regulatory system goes, so if we could use the same, she thought that would be a big win, and we're not going 508 through as much rough terrain. So, the idea is that, well, we don't know when this plan is going to get concrete 509 enough to say, "oh, we definitely want the road there instead of here," but we think we can accommodate this. 510 We think we can accommodate this in a really neighborly way, namely, let's spend minimal money on this 511 current road. It almost, with a few small improvements, would serve our needs for the next two years maybe. 512 Give the County time to develop its plan of where exactly they might decide "no, it doesn't work that way," but 513 give them time to decide on that, and whatever we would have put into our road improvements that we 514 eventually would have to if they decide to do nothing, we can put to contributing to the development of the new 515 road, and we're perfectly happy to do that. I'm also happy to chase down Crown Castle to get them on board. 516 They've been the most difficult. 517 518 Cy Stober: Just an administrative point, you should all have before you a letter from Craig Nishimoto 519 and Treeist regarding that condition. That basically provides the current status of the condition. It is still under 520 negotiation. There's some details that need to be determined, but David Stancil and the Department of 521 Agriculture, Parks and Recreation on behalf of the County have offered this condition to Treeist. Treeist is 522 agreeable, but I do want to note that the negotiation is not finalized. There are some specifics that need to be 523 determined, but in general, what the LIDO requires and what State Law requires is that we have written 524 consent from the applicant, which we do have for you today with regard to the general road layout and the 525 shared use of that road. 526 527 Statler Gilfillen: A question then. If we approve this, can it be conditional based on the final resolution 528 before the County Commissioners would approve it? 529 530 Cy Stober: Yes, so the now six conditions that the applicant agreed to, or is offering as part of their 531 application, is the package that you have before you. Your options this evening are to vote to recommend as 532 presented, which would include those six conditions, vote to recommend with additional conditions, vote to 533 deny, or vote to continue the meeting to a date later for more time to make a recommendation to the 534 Commissioners. 535 536 Chris Johnston: My question's actually probably closer to you. So, in regards to compelling the landowner 537 to do something in the future, what is the limit on something like that? It sounds like the plans from the County 538 could be years in advance, and it sounds like the applicant would have to hold on to some amount of funds in 539 order to maintain a road or make changes that could potentially be in '28, '29. Are we allowed to make that 540 kind of stipulation? 541 542 Cy Stober: Yeah, the law's written with the qualifier that it needs to be a reasonable accommodation 543 and a reasonable condition that's related directly to the land use, so providing safe access in harmony with the 544 adjacent land use, I believe that the Attorney's Office and the County have found that to be a reasonable 545 connection to this proposed use. We do not at this time have a timeline attached to that condition. 546 547 Chris Johnston: I mean, is that something that needs to be attached? It just sounds like that could be a 548 plan that potentially moves on and moves on. The applicant mentioned how this particular plan for a soccer 17 549 field has been in development for a while now, and I'd hate for them to have to hold on to something for 10 550 plus years or whatever the case may be. Like, is there a plan to attach a timeline stipulation to it? 551 552 Cy Stober: So as I said, negotiations are still ongoing. What I can do is defer to David Stancil, the 553 Director of DEAPR or to Craig Nishimoto regarding that point, and that could be a consideration that you all 554 make in your motion on this matter. 555 556 Whitney Watson: And if I could go back, one more question. The condition we'll be voting on says that this 557 is anticipated to generate significant noise and operate during evening hours in the Rural Buffer. Is that 558 accurate? 559 560 Craig Nishimoto: The only time I foresee operating in the evening hours would be in the event of a storm or 561 the direct aftermath of a storm. We start early, we end early. I imagine at some point wanting to have some 562 crew working and available on call on the weekend at least, but we're pretty silent after 3:00. Now there may 563 be one crew that gets back late, but it's not making a hurricane of noise. It's parking a truck, maybe dumping a 564 truck, and leaving with personal vehicle. 565 566 Chris Johnston: If I could continue just, while we have the representative here, Mr. Stancil, regards to the 567 plans moving forward, I guess I come back to just the discomfort I have on timelines and stipulating things that 568 could happen far out in advance. In terms of the negotiations and that sort of thing, if we were to approve 569 something like this, I'd like to have an idea or understanding of where that's headed in terms of requirements 570 for the applicant. 571 572 David Stancil: Our current Capital Investment Plan envisions that we will begin master planning for this 573 long-awaited soccer center for southern Orange County probably in the next year or so. We have a number of 574 sketches that we've done to date. We've owned the property since 2005 and originally it was envisioned to be 575 constructed as a joint project with the Town of Chapel Hill as primarily a soccer facility, but also some other 576 recreational uses in the middle of the last decade, but there were redirection of resources so ultimately, it's 577 been pushed back in the CIP, but we do currently have an adopted CIP that says we will begin engineering 578 drawings, constructions drawings in 2027, construction underway in 2028. 1 can tell you that I have been in 579 contact with the Town of Chapel Hill recently as well to make sure that this is still a priority project that's still in 580 their Capital Investment Plan and it is. I can also tell you that we have been in contact with a large soccer 581 organization in the last several months that is interested in jump-starting a few fields out there. That's a 582 conversation that's ongoing. I don't know exactly what that would mean right now in terms of how many fields, 583 how much parking would be needed and where the entry would be, but so I guess this is a long-winded way of 584 saying that I believe the intention is that this project is something that's three to four years out. I certainly hope 585 that it doesn't get pushed back another five to ten years because that's already happened once. Every year the 586 Board of Commissioners looks at the Capital Investment Plan every spring, and there are changes made every 587 year, so certainly, it could happen. 588 589 Beth Bronson: Just to clarify, those soccer fields, theoretical soccer fields, are they adjacent County 590 parcels? 591 592 David Stancil: Yeah. I don't know if we have a map yet. If you look at the property to the north, and the 593 property to the south of this site is the old landfill, and that's owned by Orange County, but it's not really usable 594 for anything other than low-impact recreation, possibly someday. But we're talking here about the property in 595 this map it would be the property that you see labeled as Orange County to the east, or the right, and then the 596 property to the north. So, we own 79 acres in total. We bought it back in 2005 and the idea at that time—this 597 was shortly after the 2001 bond referendum—was we have a soccer center, a soccer complex in Efland. We 18 598 need one in the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area. Chapel Hill and Orange County would like to jointly develop one. 599 So that's the property we're talking about. 600 601 Beth Bronson: And the entrance to the east of those are privately owned, or there's a railroad track 602 there? 603 604 David Stancil: I think the Town of Chapel Hill owns the property that's further to the right of the two 605 Orange County labeled properties on this map, and then you're at Millhouse Road and the railroad tracks. But 606 as you can see, the concern that we addressed, and I hope that we found a solution to, you can see on this 607 map that the existing access road that was done years and years ago for Crown Castle to be able to access 608 their tower severs 20 acres of our site from the rest of it, and I can count on my hands the number of times I've 609 seen a Crown Castle truck go back to the cell tower. So, that's not really been an issue for us, but if that were 610 to become something that was much more frequently used, and we had parking or soccer fields, for example, 611 we don't want kids crossing a commercial driveway to go back and forth between future fields and parking. 612 And so that was the concern that we expressed in our memo. We looked at the possibly of diving down to the 613 southern boundary line adjacent to the grey area on this map. Not a great solution, but as mentioned earlier 614 we had a meeting today. We did identify the fact that there is another access easement on the northern part of 615 the property. This is the way in for the Crown Castle tower which is being proposed for use here. We had, in 616 our letter, suggested diving down and not separating this 20-acre section from the rest of the park. But, as of 617 today, I think we have a potential solution which will use this easement and wrap around the back side of the 618 soccer fields and the future facility. We haven't done a master plan yet because it wasn't time to build the 619 park. We've stopped doing those because we ran into situations where we had an adopted master plan and 620 10 years later, we were getting around to the construction, and things would change. So, we try to do master 621 plans now closer to the point of construction, and that's why we envision doing that in the next year or two for 622 this currently planned construction. But, what we have always envisioned is back here, backing up to Duke 623 Forest, this part of the property has nice hard woods, and is much more like Duke Forest than the rest of the 624 property. These areas in the front were former farm fields. This was the old Julia Blackwood farm. And so, 625 what we would like to do, and what we have talked today, and I think is a possible solution, is come around the 626 back side of the fields. 627 628 Beth Bronson: You don't anticipate development to the west? 629 630 David Stancil: No, this, I think, would be trails and hard wood buffer to Duke Forest. So, the anticipated 631 area of development of this property is in this area here. 632 633 Beth Bronson: Duke Forest does not have anything that backs up to those properties? 634 635 David Stancil: Duke Forest has access, their area actually goes right off the map to the south and to the 636 east. 637 638 Beth Bronson: They have separate access on that Orange County property? 639 640 David Stancil: No, they do not. There was originally a continuation of this easement that I've talked 641 about already that goes to the Duke property, but I'm not, without getting into some legal territory that I should 642 not get into, it's not clear to us whether this part of that easement continues to exist. But suffice to say, that 643 Duke has the ability to access this property from a number of other directions. This is also,just so you know, 644 this is a part of Duke Forest, the Blackwood Division of Duke Forest, that has the NASA research equipment 645 on it, so it's not one of the areas that's active for recreational purposes. There are not a lot of trails here. In 646 fact, they're kind of discouraged for that purpose because there is a lot of scientific research going on back in 647 this part of the property, so there's not a lot of access need in that area. 19 648 649 Beth Bronson: Yeah, I just wanted to know if they had an easement with Orange County or not. 650 651 David Stancil: No, the only one that might exist would be the one that we've been talking about already, 652 whether it continues past this property now. Making a long story short, we're very much familiar with this 653 property as well. We looked at it when we purchased the property, and there are some maps in the final years 654 of the many access easements that have been done that may seem to indicate that this part of the access 655 easement no longer exists, but again, I'm getting into quasi legal territory, which I'm not— 656 657 Liz Kalies: I just want to say I appreciate the attention that you pay to diversity, equity inclusion, and 658 justice issues in your application, and obviously in your business practices and related to land use. It was 659 really nice to see. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about educational opportunities that you would 660 plan to be providing at this new site for the community. 661 662 Craig Nishimoto: David, you want to address some of that? David is my business partner, and he is all 663 about the training and community involvement. He's got a lot of dreams, and a lot of big dreams for this, and 664 he spent the last year doing quite a bit. 665 666 David Ricks: The educational opportunities that we are doing currently are Tree ID, Understanding 667 Tree Risk. We teach chainsaw classes and hand saw classes for the community. So, we have folks that use 668 our services or hear about us, and they say, "hey, I want to do some tree work," and we'll show them how to 669 use their tools safely, and we'll talk to them about their trees and help them decide whether that's something 670 that can be done. For example, we have a chainsaw class this weekend that's from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 1 671 encourage you guys all to come if you're not confident running a chainsaw, and it's free for the public. We had 672 45 people sign up, but it's free, so when something's free, we might have 15 people there. But those have 673 been going on very regularly. That's one of our most popular classes. Another class is tree climbing—that we 674 give that's free. Craig and I, we came to this later in life, so we've had other careers and professions. And we 675 choose to do this. Most of the people at The Treeist can do other things. They choose to work among the 676 trees for the community being first responders. But climbing trees is intrinsically interesting, and we believe 677 that it should be as ubiquitous as riding a bike here. I have a video encouraging people to sign up for our free 678 classes because, if they have trees in their yard, they have extremely valuable recreational opportunities, and 679 we want to show them how to do that safely because I'm sure all of you have climbed a tree back in the day 680 without ropes or harnesses. And so that's one of the things that we want to bring to the community. The cost 681 of a kayak, to go down the Eno River, for that cost you could build a tree-climbing kit for your entire family, and 682 go out to your backyard and enjoy your trees, and so we need an opportunity to do that in a safe spot to save 683 trees for folks. So, that class is on the 20th. That's the example of our next class that we have. So, we 684 encourage you guys— it's free—to come to that one as well. We also have folks that—and this is really 685 important and near and dear to our hearts because we're lucky to be alive with the lack of training we received 686 early on in our career— next week, on the 10th, I'm training a gentleman from Johnston County to do tree work 687 professionally. He started with his business partner there, and so we're having him out to our facility and 688 showing him the best practices for our industry. And so, we offer that for the community as well. Most of the 689 folks that take us up on that are tree-care professionals that have worked for the company that Craig described 690 when he first started and was lucky to be alive. So, that one is an industry-only offer, but the educational 691 opportunities, we want to expand on them. For example, since 2016 we've given Tree ID classes, we've given 692 how mechanical advantage works for folks. We've given tree climbing. We have taught the folks that work at 693 the UNC Botanical Garden how to access their trees. We have taught folks that work at the Arboretum how to 694 access their trees to install equipment or to do minor tree work. And it's around that kind of thing. The 695 gentleman that recently left, Sam, he is one of our consultants, and he gives presentations weekly that serve 696 two purposes: they educate our team, but they also educate the community—they are on YouTube—on how 20 697 to spot issues with trees, but also how to understand the natural world. So, we really want to bring people in to 698 be able to teach them that in a safe environment. 699 700 Craig Nishimoto: I also pulled up this picture. Those aren't actually all our climbers. I'm not going to say 701 which companies they are from, but they're coming and we're teaching other companies in the area how to 702 climb trees safer and with the health of the tree in mind. We have done training for NC State. We're getting 703 asked by Elon University because there's not a lot of arborist companies. And fire fighters, aerial rescue 704 training, how to rescue people in trees. 705 706 David Ricks: And one fun thing that we've been working really hard on is we are offering a tree climbing 707 summer camp for kids with the Woods Charter School. They actually approached us from folks that have 708 come to our free events and wanted to make this an offering to give the students there, or the kids who go 709 there, K-12, a more challenging environment to connect with the natural world. So that's two to three weeks a 710 summer. But we're excited to have a more robust facility for things like that. We're doing one class for 1 week 711 for 6 to 9-year-olds, and then the next week is going to be from 10 to 14-year-olds. 712 713 Steve Kaufmann: I don't have any questions, but I really appreciate the package that you put together. You 714 really did your research, so I appreciate it. 715 716 Melissa Poole: I don't really have any questions,just one. It's addressed, and I did read, but just for 717 purpose. What's the nearest resident? 718 719 Craig Nishimoto: The nearest resident is the owner of Green Beagle Lodge. We met directly with him. 720 Amanda and I met with him and told him what we're doing and asked if he had any concerns because even 721 though he's about 1,800 feet away from where we would be doing the staging of the materials, he's still by far 722 the closest residence. Everyone else is beyond 2,000 feet, and he was a thumbs up, good luck. 723 724 Lamar Proctor: Where are the majority of your clients? Are they in residential Chapel Hill or...? 725 726 Craig Nishimoto: I would say 90 percent of our clients are private,just homeowners, and I would say 90 727 percent are in Chapel Hill, but in Chapel Hill Township, I would say maybe 70 percent. There are some big 728 trees in Durham, and for some historical accident, I started doing work up there, and the neighbor started 729 talking, and we're doing a lot of work up there too in the big Willow Oaks and what not, and of course, 730 Hillsborough and North Chatham County. There's just not a lot of people west in the real rural parts, but we do 731 a lot of work out in the rural parts and work with climbers with big property, and we'll find a way to just give 732 them discounts if they want to use their tractor as well. 733 734 Lamar Proctor: So the majority of the traffic from your side is gonna go south on Millhouse to Eubanks 735 and either east or west depending on— 736 737 Craig Nishimoto: I mean worst case scenario, we have a client on Woodfield Road or Mount Sinai, and 738 there's that intersection on 86 and Mount Sinai. If it's anywhere near school hours, that's just a log jam. So, 739 even in that case, I would imagine we'd still turn south and get onto Eubanks Road and then go from there. 740 741 Lamar Proctor: I guess this is a question for you and Mr. Stancil. There's a great need for athletic fields in 742 our county, and so I'm really kind of concerned about anything that's going to cross paths with that, because 743 that's an ongoing issue. Do you think that your business would be interfering with athletic field use? Why or 744 why not? And then I guess the secondary question to Mr. Stancil, do you think that this use can still 745 accommodate athletic fields in the vicinity? 746 21 747 Craig Nishimoto: I think it's completely harmonious. One: because County athletic fields, when are they 748 used? They're used on weekends or well after school lets out. We are not there. We're done unless it's a 749 storm or an emergency when the soccer fields are probably not gonna be used anyways. So, you're just not 750 going to see our trucks, or you might see our trucks, but they're not gonna be very many of them. So, I don't 751 think this is a problem. I think there's plenty of land out there. There's 74 acres or whatever it is. I'm hoping 752 they can build all six soccer fields and a bunch of baseball fields as well. 753 754 David Stancil: I have to be a bit careful in how I answer this. I should've said this at the beginning when 755 1 first got up here, but this is a very odd position for Orange County to be in because we are both the regulator, 756 the Planning Department and staff. And you, the Planning Board, the County Commissioners, will be 757 considering the regulatory matter of this rezoning. I'm here wearing the hat of Orange County's adjacent 758 landowner, and an adjacent landowner that has plans for development of the property. So, there certainly is a 759 great need for additional soccer fields and other playing fields in our community. We have already seen. 1 760 don't know how many of you go by Cedar Falls Park and Chapel Hill and see the one sole artificial turf field 761 that is used all day long in almost any weather. So, it's heavily used. The demand is certainly there, and that 762 is gonna continue to be the case, and the idea of having a soccer center for Southern Orange County has 763 been a very high priority of ours and, I think, of the town Chapel Hills for some time now. But the nature of this 764 rezoning request and what is being proposed, I really can't speak to the appropriateness of that, except to say 765 that we do think that the northerly access route that we've come up with and talked about today is certainly far 766 preferable to anything that would separate part of our property from the rest of it because the current access 767 road is in a location, unfortunately, where it keeps some of the land that's gonna be used for the soccer center 768 separated from the rest of it, and so something that gets us away from that is preferable to us. But in terms of, 769 you know, the agricultural sport as it applies to zoning category in this particular request, I have to stand mute 770 on that. 771 772 Beth Bronson: Can you describe one more time for us why the southern expansion was no longer 773 considered preferable? 774 775 David Stancil: Well, it requires a stream crossing that is wider and further east. So, it would create more 776 of an ecological concern by crossing the stream at that point than the way it is currently planned and the 777 location that the applicant has planned for in this new arrangement is still gonna be the same place because 778 we would wrap around and come in at the same point. That's the main reason. 779 780 Beth Bronson: I'm thinking that it would require therefore more further east, but if you were thinking about 781 expanding into a complete new— like if you had plans for all the surrounding parcels, even though you don't 782 have a master plan ready, would you not consider going in southern and making a larger more expansive 783 entryway for a soccer pavilion location? I mean I'm just thinking about like the soccer.com fields. That's quite a 784 driveway. And just why wouldn't you have a plan to do that with this one as well? 785 786 David Stancil: Again, my comment there was solely about access to this property. Yes, you're right. 787 When we do a master plan for this facility, we will need to have a fairly significant ingress and egress for how 788 that facility's gonna work, but we're not in a place right now to say it would be here on Millhouse Road or it 789 would be to the north. The issue of the southern route, it's also longer. I didn't mention that as well, but it's a 790 longer route as well, so that's the reason we think the northern approach that we've come up with today is 791 preferable to us. 792 793 Adam Beeman: So, if you follow the north path and you come down, where you would come down in your 794 potential, is that wooded or is that open field where you would come through? Because I'm understanding that 795 the southern route is heavily forested, so there's a lot of trees to remove and all that. So, would you have all 796 that going northern, or is that just gonna come through field and you're just cutting a driveway? 22 797 798 David Stancil: Yeah. A lot of it is going to go through Sweet Gum and Pine, that kind of succession 799 forest that we see, a lot of that area is former farm fields that is now in succession and has Sweet Gum and 800 Pine. So, it avoids the heavier, nicer hardwoods that are further to the west. 801 802 Cy Stober: Just because I feel that it's relevant to this point, any plans that the County would wish to 803 do on that adjacent property would have to be reviewed by the Planning Department, conform with our Unified 804 Development Ordinance, and be reviewed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation for a driveway 805 permit to ensure safe ingress, egress. So, all of those details would be determined with submittal of a site plan 806 and review by both our staff and state staff at the DOT. So, I just want to remind you all of that. We don't have 807 any plans in hand today. We can't comment upon any of that, but when that day hopefully comes, we would 808 be able to review that. But, again, we don't have anything in hand to review. 809 810 Statler Gilfillen: But this is something based on tonight, that is potential in the future, maybe, soccer fields 811 are not there. Now, are we asking that he be involved in helping to finance the change of road later on and if 812 maybe, and how do you handle that when you write a proposal? 813 814 Cy Stober: I believe there's reference to that in the Treeist letter, but we don't have a resolution on 815 cost share for road provision as detailed in the condition offer by the Treeist this evening. So, as I stated 816 before, negotiations are ongoing between the County and the applicant. That certainly can be something you 817 consider in your vote. 818 819 Statler Gilfillen: So we can put in something to the effect that we could approve or disapprove this, or if we 820 approve it, pending your organization and him reaching a final agreement. 821 822 Cy Stober: You may if it's reasonable and tied to the land use. I want to remind you that the 823 Commissioners under state law do have powers regarding the public interest and reasonableness that the 824 Planning Board does not. So, I want to make sure you're focused on the land use question. So, you may want 825 to make comment on that, but please stay focused on the land use. 826 827 Adam Beeman: So, day in a life, you're sending out a dump truck and a chipper, or just a dump truck? 828 829 Craig Nishimoto: Oh, so the way the typical crews operate, the standard crew would have three people. 830 One would drive a chip truck with a chipper behind it, one would drive a pickup truck towing a mini skid steer, 831 and then if needed, depending on the job, there might be a dump truck going with them, a small dump truck. 832 833 Adam Beeman: So, you're chipping the debris, like small branches and debris, on site and bringing home 834 large limbs and tree trunks. Is that what I'm understanding? 835 836 Craig Nishimoto: Almost all limbs get chipped because the chippers nowadays, they'll take big pieces. But 837 when it's a big, ugly stump or something like that, it goes in the back of a truck. 838 839 Adam Beeman: But you're bringing the small stuff up in the neighborhood, or that's coming back to your 840 business? 841 842 Craig Nishimoto: So, I described how we're working now. How we would like to work and what we're 843 working on even now is getting rid of that pickup truck so it's only two vehicles going out per crew. You've 844 probably seen these trash grapple trucks that they go by and pick up limbs for the Town of Chapel Hill like 845 Carrboro. We would like to invest in those kind of machines. They would be rear mounted, but a similar size 846 because we still have to get in to these communities. They would be tandem axle in the back, so if we load it 23 847 full of logs, it wouldn't break, but those things would go around and instead of sending dump trucks 848 everywhere, they could pick up logs. They can even pick up brush. So, in some cases, we might even 849 eliminate a chipper on site. That's a big thing in some areas of the country where they just get rid of chippers. 850 It's not yet been done here, so we know that our streets won't be able to handle the biggest storm chaser 851 trucks that you would see in Florida, but we do think that this is the way to go and what people are gonna want 852 more and more as they realize your chippers are way too loud. 853 854 Adam Beeman: So, if you move down to the truck and load your debris, you're bringing it back to your site 855 and shredding it, chipping it, at your site with the debris? I just want to make sure beacuse I understand the 856 logs. I get you're gonna pull off good logs and stack them to sell them. I get all that. I'm more interested in 857 what happens to the pile of wood chips because there's a house up here off of 86, logging company, that 858 they've been dumping wood chips in the yard for probably a good 20 years, and they've raised a grade from 859 where it was to 7 feet of wood chips. So, I see the pile, and if we give you the reduction in the buffer, I just 860 don't want to envision a 60-foot-tall pile of wood chips because there's nowhere to go with them, and you just 861 keep stacking them up. So that's why I'm asking. Like you're coming back to the shop. The guy's got a load 862 of stuff, and someone's sitting there actually processing material, taking it off and shredding stuff, or you're not 863 gonna be shredding on site? You're just more or less sorting? 864 865 Craig Nishimoto: Sorting is the key. So, you bring this truck back. Now, we can even do it without that 866 truck, but let's imagine the big plan is to have these grapple trucks unload the debris. They're rear mounted, 867 so you could take your logs over here, your brush over here, your trash wood over here, and then logs get 868 sorted by a loader to wherever they belong. And then if you have brush, then you take a big pile of brush back 869 in that and take it out to, for example, Coley Road where they have a green waste processing place. 870 871 Adam Beeman: So, you're not actually processing the material on site, maybe occasionally, but not— 872 873 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah, that's not the plan. I noticed that the Planning Department's write-up suggested 874 that we would be processing. That's not part of our plan, but it might be a good idea to leave it open as a 875 possibility rather than close it off because from these tests, if we put just a little berm, you would not be able to 876 hear it anywhere from the residential properties, and the County cannot serve tree services right now. They 877 can't take anything over 12 inches in diameter, and I asked those guys, "why don't you change this? You guys 878 basically only help landscapers with shrubs. What do we do with this wood?" The only places that are 879 operating are way out. They're 150 feet from residential place, and they're having these big horizontal grinders 880 there. This is a big problem. It might be nice just to leave that open if we do work later and say, "let's set up a 881 horizontal grinder in here." They're probably not as loud as the lightweight chippers that we bring and put in 882 somebody's driveway, but then we could help, but that's not part of this plan right now. I would love to leave it 883 open because I think it makes a lot of sense as a possibility, but these grinders might cost a million dollars too, 884 and we're just not ready to do that. We have no plans to start a mulching operation, but we do things with this 885 pile of wood chips. This is biofuel, if we can't do anything else with it. One, if we had a pile and a loader, we 886 could give it away, but we'll saturate that market of just giving it away to homeowners or little farms and stuff 887 like that. But ultimately, the way to get rid of it may be to put them in tractor trailers and take them up to 888 Southern Virginia where they use them as an alternative to coal. It's biofuel. 889 890 Patrick Mallett: So, we just looked it up and that's expressly prohibited in ASE-CD and in the Rural Buffer. 891 So, you can have the wood piles, and I understand the brainstorming pioneering thought. 892 893 Adam Beeman: So there's no processing allowed. 894 895 Patrick Mallett: It's black and white. You can stock pile wood chips. It's no grinding. And that's chipping. 896 24 897 Adam Beeman: We might have another meeting to change that. My other question, because I saw 898 something about some hazardous sites not too far away at the dump below, what's your concern about your 899 groundwater and how you're gonna go about that? I can get you can do some septic dealing, but drinking the 900 water and your future potential, I'm just curious to know what your thought process is on that. 901 902 Craig Nishimoto: So, what the residents in this area do is frequent testing, and they do have some test sites 903 there right at the perimeter of the landfill. So, we would always want to get information from their latest test, 904 and then I talked to their engineers a while back, and they described to me the underground geology, that 905 water apparently flows away from you, and I pressed him with that question. I was like, "I see water on top of 906 the ground. You're talking about under the ground?" And they said yes. So, now, of course, I don't know for 907 sure. It is, apparently, unlined. We don't know what they were dumping way back when, but it's not the end of 908 the world. We're not putting the subdivision there. My little Walden guy, we can give him bottled water, which 909 is what we're doing now. 910 911 Delores Bailey: You mentioned earlier, I want to make sure I heard this right, that your current site is too 912 small? 913 914 Craig Nishimoto: Yes. 915 916 Delores Bailey: Is that because you want to expand or is that because you've already outgrown that site? 917 918 Craig Nishimoto: We have already outgrown the site. We're squeezed. 919 920 Delores Bailey: Okay. And so how much more land is this going to be for you than where you are right 921 now? 922 923 Craig Nishimoto: Well, so, my current land is adjacent. We bought a small house, less than 1,000 square 924 feet, on a 2-acre lot, and then we started as a home occupation there, and then we needed more land. So, 1 925 called the guy who owned just a wasteland of 3 and a half acres, and we bought that from him, and then the 926 same guy owned a little 1-acre commercial property on Highway 54, and we bought that from him. We're so 927 close, I have good relationships with all of my neighbors, but I just don't want to push them any more. Our 928 operations are just too big for this area. For being right up against a bunch of residential houses. 929 930 Delores Bailey: Right now, you're about 6 acres, and you're going to...? 931 932 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah. But that 6 acres, it's not like this 6 acres. The 6 acres that we're now on has a little 933 pond that's shared with a neighbor. It's not all commercial. We can't really use it. So, we've got basically 1 934 acre of commercial property, and then I'm using a lot of my personal property too. So, maybe we have, 935 combined, maybe 3 acres of usable space there. We're going to a place with 10 acres that's wide open. 936 937 Delores Bailey: Have you imagined how long it will take you to outgrow that space? 938 939 Craig Nishimoto: That's the beauty of this place. I think we can, between what we have now, our current 940 location would be great for tree healthcare. A division of our company. The planting of trees. The little raised 941 beds where we're growing little seedlings, and tree healthcare, which doesn't require big trucks, and would be 942 compatible with that location, and then if we had this just dedicated to core tree service, I don't think we would 943 ever outgrow it. Why? Because I think we could put enough in there that we would saturate, geographically, 944 the market. 945 946 Delores Bailey: But you'll continue to use both spots? 25 947 948 Craig Nishimoto: That's what I foresee. Yeah. There comes a point when you're traveling more than 30 949 minutes away to do tree work where you lose efficiency, and you better open up a satellite or just let 950 somebody else have that work, and so we really think we are serving this local area. 951 952 Delores Bailey: And my second question was, I thought I heard you mention that you were close to the 953 landfill. Do you have a picture of that? Can you locate that? 954 955 Craig Nishimoto: And then the landfill is this, and you can see it's a big hill that's been sealed and covered, 956 and now it's just a hill of grass, but that's the first part. That's where they were first doing their landfilling 957 activities, and now, if you go farther south of there, then you have the grinding operation, the Recycling Center, 958 and if you go across Eubanks Road, that's a new part of their landfill that has recently shut down, I think. 959 960 Marilyn Carter: So, Dr. Nishimoto, your package was incredibly well done. I'm not an expert on the UDO 961 nor the Comprehensive Plan. We have some other folks who are here, but it read extremely clearly. You 962 addressed almost all of the questions I had. And so I just want to commend you on an excellent job in your 963 packet. I do have a couple of questions. You mentioned, and you addressed this in your packet, the 964 precedent of why the Rural Buffer. And misuse of this land use is a precedent, but it's not a concerning 965 precedent, and briefly can you briefly cover that? 966 967 Craig Nishimoto: This would be Section 9 of my detailed narrative. I'm glad you asked because I think this 968 is the crux of the issue. This is why this is an issue. I would say there's about five related arguments, and 969 they're very brief, and the first is that if we look at the Comprehensive Plan with a fine tooth comb there are 970 three places where it talks about limiting development in the Rural Buffer. The first thing that we notice is that 971 even if we took those three things as invaluable laws, like 10 Commandment-level laws, what we are doing is 972 not in conflict with them. The wording does not prohibit them. Secondly, building on that point, it would have 973 been very easy to have rewritten those so that it would have prohibited what we're doing by just making the 974 language a little stronger. If it just changed a couple words, it would have prohibited what we have done. It 975 looks intentionally meant to build in flexibility. Why? Because the Comprehensive Plan, it is known that not all 976 of these goals and objectives are compatible with each other. They acknowledge there's going to be conflicts. 977 There's going to have to be tradeoffs. There's built into these goals and objectives, room for judgment. So, 978 then the third, the argument would be if it were the case that what we're trying to do is in conflict with these 979 three sort of statements about the Rural Buffer, then many of the other things that are permitted would also be 980 in conflict, or conversely, if some of the things that are expressly permitted are accepted, then ours should be 981 as well. So, you can imagine why should a large facility solar array be allowed in the Rural Buffer if that 982 violates the intensive non-residential uses? Well, that's permitted, but it's certainly not more intensive than 983 anything that we are planning to do. One of the principles here about the Rural Buffer is to encourage a 984 separation of urban and rural land uses. Well, then why should they allow these government facilities and 985 office buildings like the Town of Chapel Hill Public Works, but it's not permissible for us to build an office space 986 to accommodate our clerical staff? Then the third example is the objective in these principles is to maintain the 987 rural low density land as Rural Buffer. Then why would it be permissible to build kennels, care facilities, 988 recreational facilities, artificial turf and lights, artificial lights. Why is that consistent with rural land but not for 989 us to create an indoor and outdoor facility to train future tree workers? And then fourth, there's a burden of 990 proof problem here. We have, like I said, listed a lot of things that we are totally in alignment with. We are 991 solving County problems, County needs, and these things don't prohibit us. You got to just not say that, "Oh, 992 there's a little tension in between three of these things." You've listed dozens of things where you are helping 993 the Comprehensive Plan or you're in line and you're advancing it's programs and its goals, but there's a little 994 tension between three of these statements. Well, then show us how that problem overrides all of the positive 995 things we're doing. I think it's a burden of proof problem. And then finally, and I think this is crux. If the Board 996 of County Commissioners allows what we're doing, this does not, in any way, open the flood gates for more 26 997 incursions into the Rural Buffer. Anybody who wants to follow this is going to have to stand before the 998 Planning Board and make similar arguments. They're going to have to argue like I did, and it's not going to be 999 the case if you want to make a discount retail store in the Rural Buffer, that you're going to be able to produce 1000 the same kind of arguments that I've produced. I'm so glad that I'm not arguing for a Dollar Store. 1001 1002 Marilyn Carter: Well, thank you for that. I appreciate it. And second question is a hypothetical that we 1003 may be getting closer to, which is if the Planning Board were to ask you and Mr. Stancil to go back and write a 1004 condition that addresses the item that is currently under negotiation, would that put either of you in an 1005 untenable position? Or is that something that this Planning Board could ask you to do with a motion? 1006 1007 Craig Nishimoto: So, I think that's a good question. Where we're at, where DEAPR is at in this early stage 1008 of envisioning what they want to do, I think we've come to enough of agreement to where it's as much as we 1009 should come to before putting either of us in a straitjacket of what to do next or wasting money for something 1010 that may not be of any good use, like rerouting a road now. It may turn out that the current road is perfectly 1011 compatible with what they're planning to do. It's just now that you can imagine that they want to put a soccer 1012 field or a grouping of soccer fields to make the lighting more efficient. They want to put them exactly right 1013 where the current access roads goes. Then it is entirely reasonable for us to work together and reroute. That 1014 just seems like totally reasonable. In all interactions with DEAPR, they've struck me as reasonable neighbors. 1015 We can come to a solution on this. What would be a problem is if suddenly they were saying, "Craig, you've 1016 got to build a southern route on your own dime before we allow you to do anything." It would break us. We're 1017 already sticking our neck out far in this. We couldn't afford that, but I just don't see that as being a reasonable 1018 recommendation. I think I would rely on argument to fight against that, and I think we'd come up with a 1019 reasonable solution. 1020 1021 Marilyn Carter: And just to clarify, a southern route and having you, as you've described in your response 1022 to Mr. Stancil, having to foot the bill for a southern route would be something that you'd push back on but not 1023 necessarily on continuing the negotiations. To clarify, what would happen with that northern route? 1024 1025 Craig Nishimoto: Well, the northern route, not only is it less expensive to build, but because it is also useful 1026 for maintenance crews, for the County's own work, or just access to the trails, if they can find a way to also 1027 jointly use it, then they can argue that we can also jointly fund that road, and then we can put our resources 1028 together and cooperate on that road. That would be just a perfect solution, I would think. If it comes to that. 1029 1030 Statler Gilfillen: On Page 119, is the recommendation from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources 1031 Commission, and they are talking about native plants and how you will treat the land itself. I assume your 1032 intention is to try to coordinate and follow up with what they have said? Do you see any conflict in what they 1033 have suggested? 1034 1035 Craig Nishimoto: No. There's a big stream riparian area that we just aren't going to touch. There's some 1036 beautiful hardwoods in there that we'd like to try to preserve. I mean, even for our own interests, we want 1037 trees to climb on, and practice on, and train on. There's other areas that are Ash trees that are dying and 1038 whatnot. 1039 1040 Charity Kirk: So, Marilyn asked one of my Rural Buffer questions, but I was wondering, on Page 75, the 1041 staff comments, this is more for you, Ashley. The staff comment is, the proposed ASE-CD zoning district for 1042 an arborist and tree processing center is consistent with the Rural Buffer rural land use classification, then you 1043 mentioned Appendix F, relationships between land use classifications and zoning districts. I don't understand 1044 that appendix end table. Could you explain why it is consistent according to that table? Because that is the 1045 crux of the question to me is, how much does this differ from the Rural Buffer current zoning? 1046 27 1047 Ashley Moncado: Staff looks at the Future Land Use Classification, and this is kind of what we really rely on 1048 as planners, is this table. When they did first come to staff, I think that initial feedback was what would be 1049 supported, or would it be allowed in that Future Land Use Classification would be ASE-CD, and then also in 1050 NR-CD. 1051 1052 Charity Kirk: So, the reason why they can't just do what they want in the Rural Buffer is the commercial 1053 nature of it? 1054 1055 Ashley Moncado: Yes. The Agricultural Services use is not permitted in the Rural Buffer zoning district. 1056 That's what kind of started this. But that Agricultural Service use is permitted in the NR-CD and the ASE-CD 1057 district. 1058 1059 Charity Kirk: Are there currently any ASE-CD districts? 1060 1061 Ashley Moncado: No. This would be the first one within the county. 1062 1063 Charity Kirk: And it's already encouraged in the Comprehensive Plan to allow rezoning to it? 1064 1065 Ashley Moncado: Yes. 1066 1067 Charity Kirk: Then my other question is if this business goes out of business, we are then stuck with 1068 the current land use that is suggested here. Right? And if anything is going to change with the plans or how 1069 this land is— what buildings and the parking structures and everything, then someone has to come back here? 1070 1071 Cy Stober: That is 100 percent correct. With the exception of the Special Use Permit that prevails on 1072 the property and will be unaffected by this for the telecom tower. So, that permit persists in that the cell tower 1073 operator has the right to the property for that specific use under their Special Use Permit in perpetuity. If they 1074 want to modify that, they would have to go to the Board of Adjustment for the permit modification as well. 1075 1076 Charity Kirk: What would be a looser rezoning of this that would allow future changes? Just out of 1077 curiosity. 1078 1079 Cy Stober: Oh, sure. Any of the Conventional Districts. We would determine if it was a Commercial 1080 use or a Light Industrial use, or if it would be more intensive than the Agricultural Residential uses, so an AR or 1081 residential zoning district would not be appropriate, but we would have to get around the table with Treeist to 1082 determine if it's a commercial use or a Light Industrial use, and from there forward,we'd make a 1083 recommendation to both Planning Board and the Commissioners on that Conventional District. But you go 1084 back to the Table of Permitted Uses in that case, and you look at the menu of uses in that, say, Light Industrial 1085 or GC4 district, in any one of those uses could be allowed if somehow you could extend water and sewer. 1086 Under GC4, you could have fast food there. 1087 1088 Charity Kirk: Okay. This ASE-CD fits very nicely with the current Rural Buffer because the 1089 Comprehensive Plan is already pointing you to it, and it is very limiting in the other potentials of Commercial 1090 and Light Industrial. Like, it will not eventually be in the future get more removed from the Rural Buffer. 1091 1092 Cy Stober: No. What you have before you is a site-specific plan, and I believe Ashley's analysis also 1093 reflects that consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the harmony of land use with the surrounding land 1094 uses, all but one of which, arguably two with the kennel, are publicly owned, and if there's any major 28 1095 modifications to the proposed site plan, they'll have to come back before this board, they have to go back 1096 before the Commissioners for reapproval for any major modification. 1097 1098 Charity Kirk: So, with the road, how do we approve this? I mean, it is an easement, right? And it's not 1099 even on this property, and it's not a land use, per se. What do we do to say, "Please work with the County." 1100 1101 Cy Stober: Sure. That's an offsite commitment that is reasonably tied to the land use. So, let's go to 1102 a different case, and one that I think this body was frustrated by, the Lawrence Road case, and the impact to 1103 the surrounding road network that were going to be potentially created by the charter school that was going to 1104 go on that project, that ultimately was denied. If we were allowed to consider traffic commitments, the 1105 intersection improvements, or the turn lanes, or the widening of any of those roads, they're not on the property. 1106 They're off the property. They would be tied to the developer in that case would have been obligated to make 1107 some or all of those improvements based upon the decision of the Commissioners and the recommendation of 1108 the Planning Board. So, similar in this case, the access road, essentially a long driveway, through another 1109 property, owned by another party, in this case, the County, must be made through negotiation between those 1110 two parties in order to realize the use as proposed on the site plan that you have before you tonight. So, is it 1111 reasonably tied to this proposed use and, as the negotiations proceed, what does the Planning Board feel that 1112 its role in making recommendation on what they feel is reasonably tied to the proposal should be? Does that 1113 make sense? 1114 1115 Charity Kirk: Can we say, "we approve this as long as you work with the County to deal with the road 1116 within a 5 year limit?" How can we proceed with this road that's currently unsettled? 1117 1118 Cy Stober: I'll give you the answer I shouldn't, which is the direct answer, but perhaps one that steps 1119 on legal toes, which is yeah. That would be a reasonable request. When you start getting into the nickels and 1120 dimes of what that should be and exactly where on the road, in your lay opinion, Treeist obligation ends and 1121 the County's begins, that starts getting outside the bounds of reasonable, but that general statement, I think, is 1122 a reasonable recommendation as tied to the Treeist application. 1123 1124 Melissa Poole: But isn't that addressed in the letter we discussed? 1125 1126 Cy Stober: It is. It would be the new Condition 6 that's offered by the applicant. 1127 1128 Melissa Poole: If we were to make the recommendation to approve with the conditions outlined, it's 1129 already outlined. 1130 1131 Cy Stober: Yeah. 1132 1133 Patrick Mallett: I just want to throw in one crumb. Unlike almost everything you've ever seen, Orange 1134 County is also the adjacent property owner. So, the applicant is going through a zoning process, there's also 1135 negotiations with an adjacent property owner. That's an added layer to this. So, you can take that for what it's 1136 worth. 1137 29 1138 Adam Beeman: I would be inclined to leave the easement alone because we're only making a 1139 recommendation, and the Board of County Commissioners would make that final determination. So, I would 1140 say it's better suited to be dealt with by them or potentially the applicant gets it solved before he gets to the 1141 Commissioners, if we approve it. But other than that, I don't know about putting some sort of recommendation 1142 or condition on easements because, ultimately, at the end of the day, nothing has been settled other than what 1143 he has here. 1144 1145 Charity Kirk: Would you just say, "we approve the package including this letter?" 1146 1147 Adam Beeman: Yes. I just wouldn't try to create new easement conditions, I guess, is what I'm trying to 1148 say. I'm more than happy to move forward with this letter that he's submitted, where he's basically saying, "I'm 1149 willing to work with the County," but there's no definitive what that means, let them hash that out. I don't know 1150 that we need to stick our nose in that portion of the process. That's just my opinion. 1151 1152 Beth Bronson: I did have a few questions. On Hatch Road, are you not already in the Rural Buffer? 1153 1154 Craig Nishimoto: We are in the Rural Buffer. Yeah. 1155 1156 Beth Bronson: Okay. I mean, that's okay. I guess I just want to point out currently that the company 1157 operates within the Rural Buffer. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 1158 1159 Craig Nishimoto: Maybe I need to clarify. My house is Rural Buffer, zoned Rural Buffer. The 1-acre 1160 commercial lot is some sort of weird business Carrboro zoning. 1161 1162 Beth Bronson: So, it's already a Conditionally Zoned within the Rural Buffer probably because of 1163 grandfathering laws, as in it was a business before the Rural Buffer existed. 1164 1165 Craig Nishimoto: It was zoned business before. Yeah. 1166 1167 Beth Bronson: Which is why it would be grandfathered. And then I guess, I have another question of 1168 would you accept tree recycling and reuse from any other companies? Do you do that now, currently? 1169 1170 Craig Nishimoto: We don't do it now. We don't have the room for it, but I imagine if we get these grapple 1171 trucks, we would be really the only company with those grapple trucks. For example, if a company was 1172 offering it to me now to pick up the logs, and I didn't have to bring a dump truck to site, I would pay them a lot 1173 of money to do that, and I foresee being able to offer that to other local tree services. To pick up their logs, 1174 that way they don't have to cut them up into firewood and throw them into the back of the truck or dispose of 1175 them. We can grab them for them and then add them to our piles. That would probably be in everyone's 1176 interest, and we are great networkers with other tree companies. 1177 1178 Beth Bronson: Obviously. Okay. And then do you grade and sell the mill wood? 1179 30 1180 Craig Nishimoto: No. That's another industry all together. Randall Williams is the guy who I most look up 1181 to and admire in this. He would really be the guy to ask about this, but we basically send it to him or operators 1182 like him. 1183 1184 Beth Bronson: You subcontract that, or just be the liaison in between...? 1185 1186 Craig Nishimoto: We give it away or we sell it to- 1187 1188 Beth Bronson: I was gonna say give it away as well too. I'm very fascinated by the training you could 1189 offer and the education opportunities that you would have to work in the community. That would further 1190 enhance, this whole purpose of the development within the Rural Buffer and why something like this 1191 Conditional Zoning District would be beneficial for the area. As somebody who has grown up around tree 1192 service, I do know that dealing with the waste is a large problem, and I've seen plenty of houses, not just with 1193 wood chips, but with logs and logs and logs, and I do know that byproduct can become the worse problem. 1194 Then actually what to do with it. It's what to do with the decaying of debris. What does the turnover look like at 1195 your current establishment? 1196 1197 Craig Nishimoto: It's a mess. We try to get rid of it as quickly as possible, and we're next to Brockwell 1198 Trucking on Calvendar, but they're over capacity, and some winters they'll just say, "No more. We can't take 1199 any more." And then we take some to a place down by Jordan Lake where they bury the stuff, and then 1200 sometimes Gorilla Materials. If the guys are working up in Durham, but it's a mess. 1201 1202 Beth Bronson: Thank you. And then I may have missed this. I see four conditions in the packet, and 1203 then I see the roadway condition of which, I'm glad to hear that you're excited to work with, you're optimistic 1204 about working with the County to create a better entry point for a place of business, like around a municipal 1205 field, should the County decide to move forward with that. Ideally, it would be awesome if they had a master 1206 plan that incorporated your driveway and a new easement. That's obviously very complicated. Getting an 1207 easement for a cell tower versus a business, well, the easement is the same thing. It's two completely 1208 different pieces. 1209 1210 Craig Nishimoto: Yeah. There's also power lines running through there too. So, you can't really put power 1211 lines through your soccer field. Or maybe you can. 1212 1213 Beth Bronson: You definitely can't. I guess as an agricultural enterprise versus, as we were talking 1214 about, the restrictions on that agricultural, obviously we want your business as it stands applying for the 1215 application. Right? Versus having grappling trucks or what in 5 to 10 years. Because that may be a different 1216 thing. It may be a different evolved business by then. Right? You may want two or three buildings to add 1217 onto or something like that. 1218 1219 Craig Nishimoto: I don't know that we would be able to do that. This is- 1220 1221 Beth Bronson: No, I'm just— It is not up to us to speculate on how your growth is going to go. 1222 1223 Craig Nishimoto: No. No. What I mean is, I think we're locked into this site plan. 31 1224 1225 Beth Bronson: You absolutely are. Yes. I guess that's what I mean about these discussions about the 1226 roadways, easement, and things like that, as well as the site plan itself effecting future business. I think we 1227 were just getting very speculative about some of this. It's just that I'm thinking about it as what you have now 1228 moving into it, and huge component of the education and your opportunity to be more of a community leader in 1229 that area because there are a ton of arborists. 1230 1231 Craig Nishimoto: On that, on that recreational stuff, we think it's absurd that people are into rock climbing in 1232 Chapel Hill. Why? There's not rocks. There's a lot of trees. We think it's absurd that when you go into REI, 1233 there's a rock climbing section but no tree climbing section. We want everyone, when they go camping with 1234 their kids, to bring tree climbing gear. We can teach them to do that. So, that's kind of the vision. We're at the 1235 cutting edge. 1236 1237 Beth Bronson: For the 100 foot setback, the moving it to 40 feet, is this on the southern border? 1238 1239 Craig Nishimoto: Yes. 1240 1241 Beth Bronson: Okay, of the Superfund site? 1242 1243 Craig Nishimoto: There are no neighbors there. 1244 1245 Beth Bronson: No. It says it's zoned as residential. 1246 1247 Craig Nishimoto: Well, wait a minute. Let me correct that. Because if you look at the site plan, there's a 1248 place where it's probably within 100 feet on the Duke Forest side too. So yeah. You're right. The Duke Forest 1249 is zoned Rural Buffer, and we might be incurred within that 100 feet. It's just not residential. It never will be. 1250 1251 Ashley Moncado: I can pull the conditions up. Those were the five that were provided in your packet, and 1252 I'm not sure if we're looking at adding a sixth or we would be revising Condition Number 5? 1253 1254 Melissa Poole: The letter was the sixth. 1255 1256 Ashley Moncado: There was the potential to have the BOCC considering an addition of six or that the letter 1257 is a response to five. 1258 1259 Cy Stober: Correct. Ashley is correct. The letter would replace Number 5. 1260 1261 Melissa Poole: So, we've got five. This is a procedural question because when you throw all these at us, 1262 we get mixed up when we've got to make a motion. So, are we doing Attachment 6, the Statement of 1263 Consistency, do we have to do all these individually, or can we put them all together? 1264 1265 Cy Stober: In the statement? 1266 1267 Melissa Poole: In the motion. 32 1268 1269 Cy Stober: I think Ashley has it laid out for y'all. 1270 1271 Lamar Proctor: Can I make a comment real quick? I just wanted to thank you because this is exactly the 1272 kind of business that I've been hoping for since I've been on the Planning Board. Something that's organic, and 1273 by organic, I mean it evolved locally, it evolved from a local need, it provides a local service, it's unique, it's 1274 consistent with the land use. You're not Dollar Tree, or you're not a particular corporation from another local. 1275 So, I just want to commend you and I think we need more of that. I just want to say that. 1276 1277 Statler Gilfillen: Can we get a proposal then to approve this? 1278 1279 Adam Beeman: As long as no one else has any other questions. Then I look for a motion. 1280 1281 Marilyn Carter: May I just ask for clarification, and maybe that's part of the motion making, of the 1282 conditions? Because we're going one, two, three, four, and then five with the letter. 1283 1284 Adam Beeman: Correct. So, with the statement, we're going to have to specify that this letter supersedes 1285 Number 5 on the conditions. 1286 1287 Cy Stober: So, the actions before you are you can vote to recommend as presented, which would 1288 include the five conditions Ashley already showed you. You can vote to make a recommendation with new 1289 conditions, which would include a modification to the conditions before you. So, you could- 1290 1291 Melissa Poole: Hold it. I already got it. You answered my question. That's all I needed. 1292 1293 Cy Stober: And then we also need a recommendation on the Statement of Consistency or 1294 Inconsistency. 1295 1296 Melissa Poole: That's what I was asking before. Is that separate? 1297 1298 Cy Stober: And you don't have to read the entire statement. No. 1299 1300 Melissa Poole: I greatly appreciate that. Okay, I make the recommendation to approve the applicant's 1301 proposal as presented with the exception of Condition 5 being replaced with the conditional approval outlined 1302 in the letter that states there will be ongoing collaboration between the applicant and the County regarding the 1303 access road to the property. That's it. And then we're going to do Statement of Consistency separate. 1304 1305 Delores Bailey: You said, "I make the recommendation," are you making a motion? 1306 1307 Melissa Poole: I make the motion. 1308 1309 Cy Stober: You can make one motion that addresses both or you can separate them. Either way is 1310 fine. 1311 33 1312 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to recommend the approval as presented with the exception of replacing Condition 5 1313 as outlined with the letter included this evening, and also including the Recommendation of Approval with the 1314 Statement of Consistency, Attachment 6. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. 1315 1316 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 1317 1318 AGENDA ITEM 8: ADJOURNMENT 1319 1320 MOTION BY Melissa Poole to adjourn meeting. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. 1321 1322 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 1323 1324 The meeting adjourned at 9:23 PM. 34 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 7, 2024 Action Agenda Item No. 7 SUBJECT: Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Memo from Clarion Associates with Tom Altieri, 919-245-2579 Attachments Cy Stober, 919-245-2592 PURPOSE: To receive a presentation from Clarion Associates with other County advisory board members invited to attend. BACKGROUND: The Planning Board received presentations from staff at its June 7 and November 1, 2023 meetings, the latest of which included an update on consultant deliverables completed to date, staff highlights from the first public workshop, and next steps. At the December 6, 2023 Planning Board meeting, following staff's announcement of upcoming community meetings, the Board suggested that other County advisory boards receive an invitation to attend tonight's meeting to hear the presentation and to allow some time for questions. Members of the following advisory boards have been invited to attend: • Affordable Housing • Historic Preservation Commission • Agricultural Preservation • Parks and Recreation Council • Commission for Environment • Orange Unified Transportation • Economic Development Tonight's presentation will be the Planning Board's first from Clarion and will include, among other items, a review of community engagement outcomes to date and project deliverables. Please see Attachment 1, Memo from Clarion Associates, for additional information (referenced deliverables also attached for convenience). At its November 9, 2023 Work Session, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) received a project briefing from Clarion Associates. The briefing included preliminary outcomes of the first community workshop; overview of additional opportunities for the public to provide input during Community Engagement Window-1; progress on technical analysis and Community Policy Profile; and next steps. Following is a link to the agenda materials from this meeting: http://server3.co.orange.nc.us:8088/WebLink/0/doc/71190/Pagel.aspx Summary of Project Scope 35 The project schedule spans a little over two years from kick-off to Plan adoption and includes the following phases: Phase 1: Launch Project (COMPLETED) Phase 2: Identify New Issues and Opportunities, including 1st Outreach Window (NEARING COMPLETION ) Phase 3: Evaluate Planning Influences (HAS BEGUN) Phase 4: Develop the Plan (2nd and 3rd Outreach Windows) Phase 5: Adopt the Plan (Public Hearing) Community Meetings and End of Community Engagement Window-1 At the Planning Board meeting, Clarion will present preliminary outcomes from the workshop conducted on October 26, 2023 and community meetings held on January 19 and 20, 2024. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The approved and amended consultant contract to complete the Land Use Plan 2050 is $211,954. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Planning Director recommends the Board: 1. Receive the presentation, 2. Ask any questions and provide any feedback, and 3. Provide the opportunity for any guest County advisory board members to ask any questions. 36 CLARV) h Clarion Associates 919.967.9188 101 Market Street, Suite D Chapel Hill, NC 27516 www.clarionassociates.com MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Altieri, Senior Planner, Long-Range Planning and Administration, Planning & Inspections Department FROM: Leigh Anne King, Director& Emily Gvino, Project Planner, Clarion Associates DATE: December 29, 2023 RE: First Comprehensive Land Use Plan Project Briefing to the Orange County Planning Board This memorandum outlines the Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 project presentation and discussion that will be conducted at the February 7, 2024, Orange County Planning Board meeting to brief the Planning Board on the project. 1. The first objective of the meeting is to brief the Planning Board on project progress. The presentation will provide an overview of Phases 1 and 2 work completed and the Phases 2 and 3 work that is underway. The graphic below provides an overview of the Land Use Plan 2050 phases. I � Phase 1: Phase 2: P - Phase 5: Launch Identify New Evaluate Develop the Adopt the Project Issues and Planning Plan Plan Opportunities Influences Month Months Months Months Monlrs 1 2-7 3-8 9-20 21-2Meeting#1,in-person Community Community Public Adoption Reconnaissance Erigagemert W.indow Major Meetings: Meetings, Deliverables:�`Setatf Meeting Staff Working Group Staff Working Group Staff Wcrking Group Staff Working Group Staff Working Gro L'p Meetings#2-#5 Meeting#6 Meetings#7-15 Meeting#16 Tour #1 Fact Book #2-#3 Major Deliverab es: Stakeholder Interviews Major Deliverables: L -A Major■ ,Draft of DraftsMajor Deliverabi Current Policy Proffle Staff,Staff Working Plan Project Maragernent Community Group, Public Final Adopted Fla n Engagement Window Review - Context Mapping #1 presentation and Comprehensive Plan Lard Use Plan and Project Branding materials Public ergagemert Transmittal of Final summary of Summary of materials for Source Files �. Summary of Phase 4 Public Input Results Planning I Zoning&Land Use Sustainability&Resiliency Page 1 37 2. The second objective is to brief the Planning Board on the preliminary outcomes of the first Community Engagement Window: Confirming Community Aspirations. This will include outcomes from the Community Workshop conducted on October 26, 2023,and community meetings conducted on January 19 and 20,2024.A summary of publicity efforts, workshop participants, engagement activities, and a list summarizing outcomes from the meeting will be shared in a full report,called the New Issues and Opportunities Report. 3. The fourth objective is to share with the Planning Board progress made on technical analysis and preparation of the Fact Book. 4. The fifth objective is to share two project deliverables available on the project website: a. The Stakeholder Summary Report:summarizes inputs collected from stakeholders interviewed during Phase 1 of the project.These insights were used in the development of the Community Engagement Window#1 activities and polling questions. b. The Community Policy Profile: an existing policy summary document that synthesizes the policy guidance included in relevant plans. 5. The fifth and final objective is to share with the Board the next steps for completing Phases 2 and 3 work. Si I ' * *110 Planning I Zoning&Land Use I Sustainability&Resiliency Page 2 ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN 2050 Phase 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary Report V. AL x�t . E x - � xj¢, '�` �gy<A. � 1, `� � .• ��. •. ��„ - . _. V M a J.. t g Or it Arf ONGE COVNTY • MR, AND USE PLAN • Zoso Guiding Our Future Prepared by: • Associates November 2023 39 TABLE OF CONTENTS About the Summary Report ..............................................................3 List of Stakeholder Interviews.........................................................................................3 Approach for Interviews....................................................................................................4 Stakeholder Interview Themes .........................................................4 Continue Land and Water Conservation Efforts and Address Climate Concerns..................................................................................................................................5 Increase Local Employment Opportunities and Improve Fiscal Health.........6 Facilitate Development of Affordable Housing.......................................................9 Grow Transit Service........................................................................................................ 10 Enhance Rural Area Assets............................................................................................ 11 Plan with Jurisdictional Partners................................................................................. 11 Community Engagement Recommendations ............................. 13 Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 2 40 ABOUT THE SUMMARY REPORT This document summarizes inputs collected from stakeholders interviewed during Phase 1: Project Launch. The purpose of this summary is to share the key takeaways from these inputs with the County's project management team. These insights were used in the development of the Community Engagement Window#1 (CEW#1) activities and polling questions. List of Stakeholder Interviews Throughout July and August, the Project Team conducted kickoff interviews with 57 people, in small groups or individually. In addition, email surveys were shared with stakeholders who could not attend in person or virtual interview appointments. Approximately 45% of those invited to participate completed an interview, and the remaining 55% were invited to participate in the email survey. In-person or virtual interviews included the following: Elected and Appointed County County Partners and Utility Providers Representatives • Board of County Commissioners • Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools • Planning Board • Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors • Affordable Housing Advisory Board Bureau • Agricultural Preservation Board • Carrboro Planning Department • Economic Development Board • Chapel Hill Planning Department • Commission for the Environment • Chatham County Planning Department • Parks and Recreation Council • Durham Planning Department • Historic Preservation Committee • Mebane Planning Department • County Department Leadership . Hillsborough Planning Department • Community Relations • Hillsborough Utilities • County Manager • Mebane Utilities • Emergency Services . OWASA • Economic Development . Orange County Public Schools • Planning and Inspections • Sheriff • Solid Waste Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 3 41 Approach for Interviews Each interview lasted between forty-five minutes and two hours. During the interviews, the Project Team asked stakeholders questions about their perspective and opinions on: • The role of their organization or agency, • Key long-range opportunities and challenges facing Orange County and the Triangle Region, • The current comprehensive plan and their organization's/department's use of it in day- to-day work, • How current land use decisions impact their organization/department and its mission, • Desires for what ought to be included in the new comprehensive plan, • Long-term infrastructure needs, • Public engagement strategies, education opportunities, and relevant "hard-to-reach" contacts, • Other key plans/strategies/documents that would be important for the Project Team to see, and • Areas of common interest/opportunities for collaboration (with partner agencies). Stakeholders were encouraged to be candid with their responses to provide the most granular possible understanding to members of the project team. STAKEHOLutK INTERVIEW TN tivl tzi The following is a general, topical summary of interviews that provide the key themes from these discussions. Its intent is to provide an understanding of the state of the County as it stands in 2023 from the perspective of stakeholders, and to identify an initial list of key policy issues that need to be addressed during this effort. These themes will help inform the community engagement approach to include community members in the processdeveloping the plan that will govern land use in Orange County for the next twenty-five years. Six themes, presented here in no priority order, emerged from the interviews: • Continue Land and Water Conservation Efforts and Address Climate Concerns - Rural and farmland conservation and environmental protection is strongly supported in Orange County, particularly as it relates to watersheds. More can be done to prepare for severe weather events, reduce the county's carbon footprint, and support sustainable development. • Increase Local Employment Opportunities and Enhance Fiscal Health- Increasing economic development, local job opportunities, and the local tax base are important Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 I Stakeholder Interviews Summary 4 42 objectives that can lead to more living wage jobs for residents and maintaining a healthy fiscal future for the County. • Facilitate Development of Affordable Housing - There is strong concern over the lack of affordable housing for the workforce and residents and that limited land and infrastructure available for development further challenges this issue. This includes housing for lower-income households that hold many jobs in the county as well as the growing challenge for middle-income households to find affordable housing. This is a regional issue that no local government jurisdiction can tackle alone. • Grow Transit service - Tied to affordable housing is the need to create better transit options that connect workers to employment and other destinations, in and between towns and rural areas. This includes creating "last mile" connections to transit by providing walkable and bikeable developments that provide access to transit. • Enhance Rural Area Assets - There is interest in providing more assets to rural residents, such as broadband, living-wage employment opportunities in the county, accessible daily service needs, and better road connectivity. • Plan with jurisdictional Partners - Interjurisdictional planning is likely needed in areas of common interest near jurisdictional boundaries to ensure common visions are being developed and successful outcomes are achieved. This also offers the opportunity for partnerships to leverage shared resources, particularly related to land conservation, transit service and transportation planning generally, economic development, and affordable housing production. The following sections provide more detail on the insights shared during interviews that led to development of the themes. Continue Land and Water Conservation Efforts and Address Climate Concerns • While many people move to Orange County because of UNC/UNC Health, many come for other reasons, predominant among those being the natural beauty and rural character of the county (especially relative to surrounding counties). • The Rural Buffer is seen by many environment-focused stakeholders as the primary facilitator of preserving Orange County's rural character outside Chapel Hill/Carrboro, and the main reason why Orange County doesn't resemble Chatham, Wake, or Alamance counties. • There are worries that Mebane's growth eastward, if not managed, will cause unmitigated growth into Orange County and endanger the environment. • Progressive environmental regulations in Orange County helps further land conservation and have allowed for continued watershed protection. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 5 43 • Chatham County (and potentially others) could be regional partners in providing recreational facilities, habitat protection, and conservation efforts. • Environmental justice issues are important, especially because historically minority populations have been subjected to worse environmental conditions than their more advantaged counterparts. The historically Black Rogers Road community, for instance, was located next to an active landfill by virtue of that community having less political voice. Making sure that all populations receive equitable health outcomes, as well as access to natural spaces, which can be key to maintaining and improving mental health, was mentioned by many stakeholders as a key agenda item for the upcoming Plan. • Making sure that there are more opportunities for passive recreation in the environment (or low-impact transportation, like bicycling) is important. • There is a strong need to start monitoring and reducing PFAS and PFOA pollution. • Climate change is seen as a real threat by almost all stakeholders, but there is debate as to whether the county is doing enough to mitigate and adapt to climate change or whether it is doing too much and neglecting some of its other responsibilities, such as economic development. • Agricultural landowners who are interested in maximizing the return on their land are concerned about zoning limitations and environmental protections that restrict development potential. This problem is especially notable around the Rural Commercial Activity Nodes (RCANs), where much of the surrounding property is currently agricultural or owned by farmers, and the current comprehensive plan projects for commercial development that is difficult to develop. • Similarly, schools, sanitation services, and utilities can find it difficult to find property to locate their services on by virtue of that land being reserved for conservation purposes or required for set aside by environmental regulations. • The County could be doing more to support climate action, resiliency, and sustainable development on public and private lands. One concern is being prepared for severe droughts exacerbated by being at the headwaters of the Neuse and Cape Fear River basins. Increase Local Employment Opportunities and Improve Fiscal Health • Businesses typically gravitate to Alamance and Chatham Counties because Orange County is seen as less business friendly. Some are concerned that the County does not do enough to change this narrative, which results in businesses exploring other communities in the Triangle. Concerted marketing efforts and clearer regulatory structures that inform businesses of what they should expect when they come to partner with Orange County are important if this narrative is to change. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 6 44 • Of the four municipalities in Orange County, Mebane is the only one that is actively pursuing larger-scale economic development. While some stakeholders view this as a threat, others consider it to be a good model for how development could look in the county at large. • Some stakeholders do not believe Orange County is responding competitively to development opportunities throughout the Triangle and Triad regions. Continued industrial development in Chatham and Siler City provides opportunities for Orange County to pursue recruitment of businesses that will be crucial in the supply chains for those industrial hubs. If these businesses locate in Orange County, it is possible that the county would see significant job growth, which would further diversify the economy. • Emphasis was placed not on Orange County "becoming like Alamance or Chatham counties" but on defining clearly what "valuing conservation" means to businesses. A business that only hears "valuing conservation" might be discouraged from locating in Orange County. If those values are spelled out, then a business can develop plans that comply with those rules, rather than anticipating sunk costs and inevitable rejection. • Neither UNC nor UNC Health (two of the county's largest employers and landholders) pay property taxes; however, these entities have provided funding in the past to local governments in Orange County to offset development impacts on services. Limited funding from these institutions impacts the fiscal health of the County government. • The historical economic center of the Triangle is moving west as Wake County and Cary grow, which could potentially make Chapel Hill/Orange less important overall in regional conversations. However, there is also significant economic growth occurring in Chatham and Alamance, which may result in Orange County finding more economic opportunities in relation to western and southern neighbors with a draw towards the Triad. • The Rural Buffer (especially along the NC-86 corridor and the area between I-40 and I- 85) is one of the primary inhibitors to outward growth in the county and would be extremely in-demand if there was opportunity for commercial development along those corridors. The stretch of 1-40 between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill through the Rural Buffer is one of the last undeveloped (and without utilities) stretches of interstate between the western Triad and the eastern Triangle. • Development permitting (environmental, especially) in Orange County makes it more challenging to locate a business in Orange County, especially when similar benefits can be derived from locating the same business in Chatham or Alamance counties with fewer requirements. Stakeholders used the Walmart just south of the Chatham County line and Buc-ee's pivot to locating in Alamance as examples of this phenomenon of mixed sales tax revenues. • Economic development is often contingent on the provision of adequate utilities. Since sewer is typically the most expensive and challenging utility to provide, and since much Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 7 45 of unincorporated Orange County is not connected sewer lines, any future economic development in the county must either require a utility company's partnership and agreement to extend their service or have minimal wastewater needs allowing the business to operate on septic. It has resulted in much of the county's economic development occurring in the west along 1-85 and 1-40 and producing uses that don't require significant utility service, such as warehousing and distribution, which does not in turn provide a significant amount of new, higher paying jobs. • Relatedly, there have been various discussions with the City of Durham's water/sewer utility about developing the easternmost economic development area (Eno EDD), but the costs to install gravity mains in areas with significant slopes and challenges related to interjurisdictional goals led to a breakdown in discussions between the county and city. Consequently, it now looks like this EDD will no longer be developed, reducing Orange County's total functional EDDs to two. However, it may be possible for current elected officials and staff to start discussions anew. • Agritourism (and other local agribusinesses) offer a new way to make farms economically resilient in a modern era where small-scale farming is not as profitable. These uses are supported by the broader county community (generally) and many serve as landmarks in Orange County. Furthermore, these alternative uses of agricultural property allow for their owners to keep those properties in their family, rather than being pushed out by rising property values. • Economic development stakeholders do not feel like their interests are given as much consideration by decisionmakers as those of environmental groups. • While the County (and the region) have good jobs for individuals with higher educations, individuals from lower-income, typically minority backgrounds have a harder time finding work, and an even harder time finding work a reasonable distance from affordable housing. Focusing only on technology and research jobs in terms of economic development (instead of industrial or infrastructural labor) can potentially create jobs only for new transplants to the county rather than for the people who already live here. • The County remains a highly desirable place to move to but has comparatively high taxes relative to other places in North Carolina. Rising taxes could discourage wealthy residents, whose residential property taxes currently make up the largest portion of the County's revenue, from continuing to move to Orange County. Anecdotally, some residents move to Orange County for a time and then move to more affordable areas, in the region, such as Chatham County. This could be exacerbated if taxes continue to rise. • If wealthy residents left Orange County and started "voting with their feet", the burden of paying for services would fall more to lower-income individuals who might not be able to pay those taxes and would thus also have to leave after a period of paying those higher taxes. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 8 46 • Nevertheless, people moving from the northeast United States to Orange County do not actually find the cost-of-living as high as people who are from the southern United States. These residents are generally happy to pay the "higher" tax rate since it is lower compared to the tax rate from where they are moving. • Historically, tax assessment has not been equitable across racial groups of landowners. White residents' properties are often undervalued, and Black residents' properties are often overvalued. Assessors have been working to correct this inequity. • A solid commercial tax base allows for a more diverse revenue base and does not put as much pressure on residents to provide tax funding for services. Commercial property taxpayers are also typically more capable of weathering price shocks, like a tax hike caused by debt servicing a utility system overhaul or upgrade. • Funding public schools is the County's largest expense. Based on continued growth in parts of the County, decisionmakers should anticipate having to build (and fund) new schools. • Environmental stakeholders (and those interested in protecting community character and aesthetics) often oppose economic development that is not compatible with their vision for the county. This often includes chain retail, dollar stores, and other non-local businesses or businesses that do not themselves seem interested in conservation. • The Buc-ee's proposed development along 1-40 in Mebane is seen as a key example of environmental groups thwarting significant economic development because of a business' mission being out-of-step with the mission of major county stakeholders. Facilitate Development of Affordable Housing • Rising housing costs have made it difficult for service industry workers to be able to live in Orange County. This has created worker shortages for various businesses in the county (especially in Hillsborough). In some cases, businesses have shortened their workweeks to account for employee unwillingness to drive from their homes in other counties to businesses in Orange County. • Rising home values raise property tax rates and can make even lower priced housing unaffordable. • Development of affordable housing in the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area might be more difficult because the Rural Buffer limits available, affordable land and Chapel Hill/Carrboro regulations do not allow for the level of density that would be necessary to offset the limitations created by the Rural Buffer. • Recent UNC graduates do not have the money to stay in Orange County after graduation. Rising tax rates and limited affordable housing choices do not create any further incentives for them to do so. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 9 47 • While finding housing for students is important, there are strong worries that any affordable housing in the county will immediately be leased by student renters who do not themselves have an income but who have parents who are willing, able, and have the right credit mix for an expedited renting process. Making sure that there is affordable housing not just for UNC students but also for community members who are experiencing housing insecurity and do not have as much of a social safety net is especially important. • One affordable housing idea is to reinvigorate the Mobile Home Task Force to support the protection of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) and look for ways to support these households to stay in their homes. • Chatham County is now working with the Community Home Trust through its Housing Department. This presents a potential opportunity for regional affordable housing partnerships. Grow Transit Service • Regional transit to major employment centers where residents work and to employment centers in Orange County where workers living outside travel to is limited. Improved and new services could alleviate traffic congestion and reduce VMTs. • Lack of/inadequate/slow public transit disproportionately affects lower income individuals who find it difficult to afford personal vehicles. This is especially poignant with school buses, where parents who have the ability are dropping their children off at school while those children whose parents cannot have hour-long (or longer) one-way commutes, and even get to school late. This is partially due to transportation infrastructure but is also a symptom of a labor shortage for school bus drivers. • Hillsborough is planning to start construction on a train station in 2027. This station will connect into the Amtrak's Piedmont rail network and is slated to be the anchor for a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) in Hillsborough, which will likely create a sharp increase in service and utility demand due to the increased population. • Development in Chatham County has sparked discussion about bus rapid transit between Chatham Park and Chapel Hill, partially to reduce congestion along 15-501. There is much interest on the part of both communities to support this service. • Bicycling is very popular in Orange County and quite unsafe in the rural areas due to the lack of dedicated bike infrastructure. No dedicated bike lane/easement exists between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill/Carrboro, which requires individuals to share the road with vehicles often going over 50 miles per hour. • Similarly, pedestrian infrastructure between the two urban cores is nonexistent, forcing individuals to walk on the shoulder of the road, which is often muddy or narrow. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 10 48 • Hitchhiking is also common at rural nodes like Calvander. The County has historically .not been in the business of sidewalks." Enhance Rural Area Assets • Broadband expansion and reinforcement of broadband infrastructure offers an opportunity for opening up rural parts of the northern county to development and for taking advantage of telecommuting opportunities. However, increased services (broadband or otherwise) to historically rural areas could raise property values to the point that current residents no longer being able to afford their homes. • Community septic systems typically face strong regulatory scrutiny, further limiting alternative development and rural density. These regulatory, inspection, and process hurdles often prevent landowners from building accessory dwelling units (ADUs) which are critical to maintaining multigenerational communities and allowing long-time County residents to age in place. • Many residents living in northern Orange County do not shop in the county but instead shop near where they work or in Roxboro or Durham, where it is easier to access and has less traffic congestion than Hillsborough. • Connectivity in rural areas of the county is not strong. A road blockage on one road can create a 20+ minute detour because of a lack of cross-streets between large rural "blocks". This creates problems for school buses and emergency services vehicles. • Large local service delivery vehicles have trouble navigating/fitting vehicles on narrow private rural roads. A discrepancy between the fire code and the zoning ordinance as to proper road width is one of the sources of this conflict. Plan with jurisdictional Partners • The DRCHO Work Group— Durham/Chapel Hill/Orange was a regional planning group that formerly met and discussed topics of relevance across jurisdictional boundaries. This model could be considered for other neighboring jurisdictions that share common interests (regional transit, road infrastructure, land use planning in edge areas, utility service across boundaries, etc.) • With the exception of Mebane, utility limitations and growth management controls limit the amount of potential development in the municipalities. Planning for the remaining developable areas to achieve the highest and best use is paramount. • The Rural Buffer and the joint Protection Agreement was built to last. Getting the four jurisdictions (Hillsborough, Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro) back to the table to discuss whether or not it should be revised is perceived by almost all stakeholders to be nearly impossible. Nonetheless, several stakeholders identified opportunities within the Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 11 49 Rural Buffer and just outside that should be reconsidered when updating the County's Future Land Use map: o NC-86 Corridor between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill, New Hope Market could be a successful mixed-use node o Northeastern most "triangle" of the Rural Buffer between Chapel Hill and Durham (north of 1-40 and including Mt. Moriah Road) —would have impact on Arrowhead area in Durham o Southeastern most "triangle" between Chapel Hill ETJ and Chatham County line o Millhouse at railroad tracks (County-owned land outside of USA and OWASA service area) o White Cross and Rural Industrial Activity Node o Greene Tract (ongoing effort to be coordinated with) • Stakeholders from Mebane who understand attitudes in Mebane have a much more reserved stance on development than stakeholders from Chapel Hill/Carrboro and Hillsborough seem to think. While Mebane is likely more friendly to development than other jurisdictions, it is not an "approve anything"Jurisdiction. Encouraging communication between the traditional three Orange County municipalities and Mebane will be critical to maintaining (and exploring) an identity for the county over the horizon of the plan. • Limited utility service areas or service capacity is having an impact on economic development and affordable housing production in the county. o Hillsborough's sewer utility is at capacity, likely to shrink, and without extra funding. It is also 10-15 years away from any new expansion by virtue of needing to dedicate any revenue surpluses to maintaining an aging, complex (60+ pump stations for less than 20,000 customers) system. Additionally, since Hillsborough drains its effluent into the Neuse River Basin, it is required to comply with the regulatory authorities governing Falls Creek Reservoir. If the effluent is even more tightly governed than it is now, the utility will likely need to invest in a stronger treatment plant, which will require even more investment that would not otherwise go to assisting new development. o Water-wise, Hillsborough does have a substantial allocation from Jordan Lake that it is currently unable to use and would likely require a partnership with Durham's water utility to use that water allocation. Other than that allocation, and the water presently drawn from the Eno, there is not much more available water for use in Orange County because of the county's unique hydrology and water table. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 12 50 o Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) is not at capacity, but, per the terms of the Joint Protection Agreement, cannot run services through the Rural Buffer, thus limiting OWASA's ability to provide services to parts of the county outside of Chapel Hill/Carrboro. o Mebane Water and Sewer and Orange-Alamance Water supply water to some of western Orange County. The remainder of the unincorporated portions of the county are served by on-site septic systems. • Many different organizations would like to be included before a development proposal is nearing approval. Utilities companies, partner jurisdictions, various committees, etc., especially those who have a say in whether or not a development occurs, feel like they are often left out of these discussions, and that a lot of time gets wasted pursuing projects for which the resources do not exist to make them happen. • The State government is not viewed as a partner but as a hindrance to County objectives. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Provided here are insights from stakeholder interviews regarding public engagement approaches that should be used in the planning process. To the extent possible, specific DEI groups identified during stakeholder interviews were included in the DEI database and will be notified and encouraged to share planning engagement opportunities with their communities and members. • Stakeholders mentioned many different community groups that the project team should reach out to because of the unique perspective they would bring to the planning process. These included the Chapel Hill/Carrboro NAACP and Northern Orange NAACP branches, the Burmese immigrant community, the Eubanks/Rogers Road community, the Efland community, the Hispanic/Latino communities in Chapel Hill and Hillsborough and El Centro Hispano, and the Marion Cheek Jackson Center which does a lot of work with Black community members, etc. • Indigenous Occaneechi tribe members exist and do not want to be forgotten about in conversations regarding their ancestral lands. • Stakeholders also emphasized that while racial equity is important, there is a substantial portion of low-income white residents in the county who have challenges and need representation in the process. • The Handy Andy's northeast of Schley is a key gathering point in the northern part of the county for a lot of rural residents. This is an important location for advertising community events. Orange County, North Carolina - Land Use Plan 2050 1 Stakeholder Interviews Summary 13 ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN 2050 i COMMUNITY POLICY PROFILE - A'J yR f- r • s .--i. -�P S ORANGE COUNTY ' LAND USE PLAN ' 2050 Guiding Our Future Prepared •y: Clarion Associates November 2023 52 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Documents Included in the Community Policy Profile.........................................................................................................................................................3 SpecialTopic Plans...............................................................................................................................................................................................................6 OrangeCounty Climate Action Plan........................................................................................................................................................................................6 One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework..............................................................................................................................................................7 Environment,Conservation,and Hazard Mitigation........................................................................................................................................................8 Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan............................................................................................................................................................................8 Stateof the Environment............................................................................................................................................................................................................9 Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation Program Report........................................................................................................................................9 Land Use,Development,and Infrastructure.....................................................................................................................................................................11 Master Telecommunications Plan Map...................................................................................................................................................................................11 BuckhornArea Study.................................................................................................................................................................................................................12 Eno Economic Development District Water and Sewer System Project Master Plan Report....................................................................................12 OrangeCounty 2030 Comprehensive Plan..........................................................................................................................................................................13 Eno Economic Development District Area Small Area Plan..............................................................................................................................................14 NCHighway 57 Speedway Area Small Area Plan...............................................................................................................................................................15 Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan..............................................................................................................................................................................................16 Investigation of Ground-Water Availability and Quality in Orange County, North Carolina....................................................................................16 StoneyCreek Basin Small Area Plan.......................................................................................................................................................................................17 InterlocalAgreements and Plans.......................................................................................................................................................................................18 GreeneTract Interlocal Agreement........................................................................................................................................................................................18 Central Orange Coordinated Area Land Use Plan..............................................................................................................................................................19 Mebane-Orange County Utility Service Agreement...........................................................................................................................................................19 Hillsborough-Orange County Strategic Growth Plan.........................................................................................................................................................20 Water and Sewer Management,Planning and Boundary Agreement...........................................................................................................................21 jointPlanning Agreement.........................................................................................................................................................................................................21 jointPlanning Land Use Plan...................................................................................................................................................................................................22 Transportation.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................23 OrangeCounty Transit Plan Update......................................................................................................................................................................................23 Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan........................................................................................................................................................24 Orange Grove Road Access Management Awareness Project&Report......................................................................................................................25 Parksand Recreation.........................................................................................................................................................................................................26 BlackwoodFarm Park Master Plan..........................................................................................................................................................................................26 Little River Regional Park&Natural Area Master Plan.......................................................................................................................................................27 Eno-New Hope Landscape Conservation Plan....................................................................................................................................................................27 2030 Parks and Recreation Master Plan,Orange County.................................................................................................................................................28 Orange County Mountains-to-Sea Trail(MST)Route........................................................................................................................................................29 New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan.....................................................................................................................................................................29 Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 2 53 INTRODUCTION The Community Policy Profile is a product of the Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 planning process. For more information about the planning effort, go to https://www.orangecountylandusepIan.com� This report summarizes land use policy guidance from Orange County plans and other policy documents. These documents provide the foundation of adopted policies which the Land Use Plan 2050 will build upon. This guidance is organized into seven categories: 1. Special Topic Plans 2. Environment, Conservation, and Hazard Mitigation 3. Land Use and Development (Unincorporated Orange County) 4. Interlocal Agreements and Plans 5. Transportation 6. Climate Action and Infrastructure 7. Parks and Recreation The report contains brief descriptions and summaries of each of these documents and highlights the key policy topics addressed in the reports. The documents used in preparing this report are listed below. Documents Included in the Community Policy Profile Special Topic Plans Document Date Geographic Area Orange County Climate Action Plan 2023 Orange County Orange County Climate Action Plan One Orange Countywide Racial 2022 Orange County Equity Framework One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework Environment, Conservation, and Hazard Mitigation Document Date Geographic Area Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation 2020 Orange County and surrounding counties Plan State of the Environment 2019 Orange County Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 3 54 Strategic Growth and Resource 2009 Orange County Conservation Program Report Land Use, Development, and Infrastructure Document Date Geographic Area Master Telecommunications Plan 2020 Orange County Map Buckhorn Area Study Buckhorn Economic Development District Eno Economic Development District 2013 Eno Economic Development District Water and Sewer System Project Master Plan Report Orange County 2030 Comprehensive 2008 Orange County Plan Eno Economic Development District 2008 Eno Economic Development District Small Area Plan NC Highway 57 Speedway Area Small 2007 Orange County near the Orange County Area Plan Speedway Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan 2006 Orange County near the Mebane ETJ Investigation of Ground-Water 2001 Orange County Availability and Quality in Orange CountyM" Stoney Creek Basin Small Area Plan 1996 The triangle created by 1-85, NC-86, and the railroad Interlocal Agreements and Plans Document Date Geographic Area Greene Tract Interlocal Agreement 2021 Greene Tract Central Orange Coordinated Area 2013 Area within Hillsborough's Urban Service Land Use Plan Boundary Mebane-Orange County Utility 2012 East Mebane and nearby unincorporated Service Agreement Orange County Hillsborough-Orange County 2006 Hillsborough and nearby unincorporated Strategic Growth Plan Orange County Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 4 55 Water and Sewer Management, 2001 Orange County, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Planning and Boundary Agreement Hillsborough Joint Planning Agreement 1987 Joint Planning Area (just outside the ETJ of Chapel Hill and Carrboro) Joint Planning Land Use Plan 1986 Joint Planning Area Transportation Document Date Geographic Area Orange County Transit Plan Update 2022 Orange County Ef land-Buckhorn-Mebane Access 2019 Area along 1-85/1-40 between Efland and Management Plan Mebane Orange Grove Road Access 2003 Orange Grove Road corridor Management Plan Parks and Recreation Document Date Geographic Area Blackwood Farm Park Master Plan 2023 Blackwood Farm Park Little River Regional Park & Natural Little River Regional Park and Natural Area Area Master Plan (Appendices) Iff New Hope Corridor Open Space 2019 The City of Durham, Durham County, Orange Master Plan County, and The Town of Chapel Hill 2030 Parks and Recreation Master 2018 Orange County Plan (Appendices) Orange County Mountains-to-Sea 2018 Orange County Trail (MST) Route(Progress Reports) New Hope Corridor Open Space 1991 The City of Durham, Durham County, Orange Master Plan County, and The Town of Chapel Hill Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 5 56 SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS Document Date Geographic Area Orange County Climate Action Plan 2023 Orange County One Orange Countywide Racial 2022 Orange County Equity Framework Orange County Climate Action Plan Date Published: November 2023 Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County ., _ Purpose: Guide greenhouse gas reductions in County operations ,.+TION and community-wide. PLAN Key Objectives: Unify existing climate work under one strategic framework to equitably transition Orange County to a low-carbon, climate-resilient community. Top 10 Things the County Should Do: 1. Expand County funding to include climate expenditures and additional full time sustainability and grant administrator staff 2. Integrate sustainability as a framework within the overall County's planning process 3. Identify and prioritize actions targeted to vulnerable populations within the County 4. Be prepared for climate emergencies 5. Decrease vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 30% from a 2019 baseline by 2050 6. Increase community EV adoption to 50% by 2035 and 100% by 2050 7. Achieve 50% emission reduction target of all Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2030 and 100% by 2050 using a 2005 baseline 8. Achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2050 in municipal operation and community-wide 9. Increase community-wide solar capacity by 25% by 2035 to 33.66 MW 10. Complete an electrification study and establish a long-term implementation plan (Phase 1 and Phase 2) by 2025 This plan emerged as a result of an extensive review of both environmental state mandates, the commitments of local and regional jurisdictions, and existing public private partnership structures. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 6 57 Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Natural hazards resilience • Regional collaboration • Preserving natural resources • Multimodal transportation One Orange Countywide Racial Equity ONE ORANGE Framework CPRRBORO-CHAPEL HILL-HILL580R000H-ORANGE COUNTY Date Published: 2022 The plan centers five major pillars of: Geographic Area: Orange County 00 Training fivillik Prepared By: Orange County, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Community Hillsborough Racial Equity Index Purpose: Uncover and address implicit biases in OrangeNox Racial Equity County to ensure that race no longer can be used to predict life outcomes in the Orange County community. Eachpirlsdiction will usu this hanneworks as guidance tv take aclion on a county and jurisdictional level.Infofmation an be used to track 0 1 sparity,inform strategies,9 rani app licamons,service previsionc or Key Objectives: Ogr data,much like other jurisdkiiom shows that people of color The plan has five pillars, which jurisdictions use as a are ha sl rig different experiences across systems. foundation for local action. The five pillars are: training and organizational capacity, community engagement, racial equity index, racial equity assessment lens, and evaluation and accountability. The Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 engagement process can embody the community engagement pillar by engaging residents and employees of color as subject matter experts. As part of the One Orange effort, Orange County collaborated with Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough on the Racial Equity Index. The Racial Equity Index, in the form of a dashboard, can be used to provide awareness, track disparity, or inform strategies, grants, and services. The dashboard includes statistics on public health, education, economic opportunity, living conditions, infrastructure, and voting. Planning Topics: • Diversity, equity, and inclusion • Regional collaboration • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Employment opportunities Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 7 58 ENVIRONMENT, CONSERVATION, AND HAZARD MITIGATION Document Date Geographic Area Eno-Haw Regional Hazard 2020 Orange County and surrounding counties Mitigation Plan State of the Environment 2019 Orange County Strategic Growth and Resource 2009 Orange County Conservation Program Report Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan low , ­ Date Published: September 2020 Geographic Area: Orange County, Alamance County, Eno-Haw Regional Durham County, Person County (including the Hazard Mitigation Plan municipalities and unincorporated areas) Prepared By: Orange County, Alamance County, Durham County, Person County Purpose: Ensure all jurisdictions in the Eno-Haw region remain eligible for federal disaster assistance from the �� Federal Emergency Management Agency, including the Sepce b6 r2020 wood. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program. Key Objectives: Perform a risk assessment and capability assessment to evaluate the potential impacts of hazards within the region and assess the participating communities' existing capability to reduce disaster losses. Identify policies, actions, and activities to reduce the impact that future natural hazard occurrences will have on people and property in the planning area. This includes long-range mitigation goals and short-term mitigation actions. Planning Topics: • Natural hazards resilience • Regional collaboration • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 8 59 State of the Environment2019 ' " Date Published: 2019 STATE OF THE Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County Commission for the Environment Purpose: Research key issues affecting land, water, and air/energy resources and recommend related actions for the Orange County government and decision makers, including newthe Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), as well as Orange County residents. Reflect on and recognize the County's environmental achievements, review environmental indicators, discover knowledge gaps, and think creatively on policies and actions for the future. Important Notes: Recommendations include developing a tree policy across all County-owned property, expediting efforts to reduce the county's carbon footprint, setting new goals for land protection, and considering a conservation land acquisition bond to expand the Lands Legacy program. Planning Topics: • Preserving natural resources • Growth management • Future land use and community character Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation Program Report (Orange County Transfer of Development Rights Feasibility Orange County Transfer of Development Rights Study, Phase III Report) Feasibility Study Phase Report Date Published: 2009 Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County Purpose: Formulate a complete implementation plan for a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation Program, and «� Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 9 60 address how program performance should be measured and tracked. Key Objectives: Establish the legal, administrative, design, and economic considerations of a strategic growth and resource conservation program in Orange County. A traditional transfer of development rights (TDR) program was determined to require additional authority from the state of North Carolina, so this program was developed to achieve similar objectives while relying on existing County authority. Program recommendations include: designated growth areas, designated conservation areas, conservation points, development intensity bonus, and design requirements. Address and provide recommendations on several issues critical to the feasibility of a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation Program in Orange County. The goals of this program are rural preservation, strategic urbanization, and monitor program performance. Planning Topics: • Growth management Future land use and community character • Preserving natural resources Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 10 61 LAND USE, DEVELOPMENT, AND INFRASTRUCTURE Document Date Geographic Area Master Telecommunications Plan 2020 Orange County Map Buckhorn Area Study 2020 Buckhorn Economic Development District Eno Economic Development District 2013 Eno Economic Development District Water and Sewer System ProJect Master Plan Report Orange County 2030 Comprehensive 2008 Orange County Plan Eno Economic Development District 2008 Eno Economic Development District Small Area Plan NC Highway 57 Speedway Area Small 2007 Orange County near the Orange County Area Plan Speedway Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan 2006 Orange County near the Mebane ETJ Investigation of Ground-Water 2001 Orange County Availability and Quality in Orange County Stoney Creek Basin Small Area Plan 1996 The triangle created by 1-85, NC-86, and the railroad Master Telecommunications Plan Map Approved Master Telecommunications Plan Map Date Published: October 2020 Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County Planning and Inspections Purpose: Show existing, proposed, and approved _ telecommunications tower locations. Key Objectives: r Identify fifteen tower locations for telecommunications. Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Community infrastructure Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 11 62 Buckhorn Area Study Date Published: December 2020 (Draft) Geographic Area: The Buckhorn Economic Development District and surrounding area, near 1-40 and Buckhorn Road Prepared By: City of Mebane and Orange County ; e Purpose: Identify properties that could be zoned for nonresidential purposes and support economic development. Key Objectives: BUCKHORN Le�axe Perform a technical study of future land use and potential AREA PLAN - utility services. m DRAFT Determine parcels most suitable for development within the study area. Provide necessary information for Mebane to amend its comprehensive plan to include the Medline site and other areas previously not within its Future Growth Area boundary line. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Employment opportunities • Community infrastructure Eno Economic Development District Water and Sewer System Project Master Plan Report Date Published: 2013 CITY OF DURHAM& IJ Geographic Area: Eno Economic Development District ORANGE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT WATER AND SEWER (Orange County near the Durham County line, along US-85 SYSTEM PADIEET and near the Eno Rock Quarry) Prepared By: City of Durham and Orange County Purpose: Construct the backbone of a water and sewer system within the Eno Economic Development District that will promote an effective growth pattern in the County with respect to location and phasing. Key Objectives: Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 12 63 Develop water demand and sewer flow projections. Determine the appropriate size and location for sewer infrastructure. Develop conceptual opinions of probable cost for the recommended improvements. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Employment opportunities Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Date Published: 2008 , Geographic Area: Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Prepared By: Orange County Purpose: Guide the County's future policy decisions related to " growth and development through 2030. Key Objectives: ADOPTED Address a wide range of interrelated planning areas, including economic development, housing, land use, natural and cultural systems, parks and recreation, services and community facilities, ,_ ., and transportation. Promote sustainability within Orange County— develop a community that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Important Notes: Economic Development Overarching Goal: Viable and sustainable economic development that contributes to both property and sales tax revenues and enhances high-quality employment opportunities for County residents. Housing Overarching Goal: Opportunity for all citizens of Orange County to rent or purchase safe, decent, accessible, and affordable housing. Land Use Overarching Goal: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 13 64 Natural and Cultural Systems Overarching Goal: A sustainable balance and appreciation of natural, cultural and agricultural resources. Parks and Recreation Overarching Goal: Regionally coordinated park facilities that provide healthy opportunities for recreation and exercise for all citizens of Orange County, and that preserve important cultural and natural resources. Services and Community Facilities Overarching Goal: Growth consistent with the provision of adequate and sustainable County services and facilities while managing the impacts upon the environmental infrastructure and effectively protecting the County's natural and cultural resources. Transportation Overarching Goal: An efficient and balanced transportation system that uses multiple motorized and nonmotorized modes of transportation. Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Housing affordability, diversity, and accessibility • Preserving natural resources • Recreation opportunities • Multimodal transportation • Employment opportunities Eno Economic Development District Area Small Area Plan Eno Economic Development District(EDD)A rea Date Published: 2008 Small Area Plan A C°Ilab°ralrva plan by G°mmuairy ReprasenGri�es_Ela d pftpls, Geographic Area: Orange County near the Durham County line, a°❑sl°fl D—,p° ""�a""�9°°r—CI°ra I-1 �❑n❑�m Development oeaaemem a"❑ournam clbrcoumv w®""m9 along US-85 and near the Eno Rock Quarry ne.��m anZk Prgwree Fmn Lane Ilaa app Prepared By: Orange County and Durham County Purpose: Evaluate the existing Land Use Element of the County's Comprehensive Plan, as it pertains to the Eno EDD area, and offer ,' local perspective on whether the existing Land Use Element Map , and roadways are adequate to address changes that are occurring Adopted June 24,2008 Amandee February 3,]OOB in the area. Key Objectives: Address land use, infrastructure, and local government jurisdictional issues. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 14 65 Make recommendations relating to water and sewer, land use and zoning, transportation, housing, and intergovernmental/community issues. Goal: "In the future, the Focus Area should be well served by reliable infrastructure to accommodate orderly, planned growth. An efficient multi-modal transportation system will operate in the area and commercial and light industrial uses will provide job opportunities to area and County residents." Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Multimodal transportation • Employment opportunities NC Highway 57 Speedway Area Small Area Plan Date Published: 2007 Geographic Area: The Northeastern corner of Orange County near the Person and Durham County lines, along NC 57, near the Orange County Speedway Prepared By: Orange County and Durham County Purpose: Make recommendations for future land use in the area. Key Objectives: Analyze existing conditions and make recommendations regarding acceptable development trends and land uses within the area, the need for additional community services, and transportation issues and concerns. Maintain the rural character and high environmental quality of the area. The four planning principles of this report are: preservation and protection of rural character and nature, minimization of negative impacts to natural systems/environmentally sensitive areas, restrict growth and development so that it complements the rural character and lifestyles, and maintenance of present service levels for existing infrastructure. Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Preserving natural resources • Community infrastructure Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 15 66 Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan Date Published: June 2006 Efland-Mebane Small Afea Plan Geographic Area: Orange County near the Mebane ETJ; roughly north of West Ten Rd, south of Lebanon Rd, west of Buckhorn Rd, and east of the 1-85/US-70 connector Prepared By: Orange County Planning Department and Efland/Mebane Small Area Plan Task Force OgeCounty Planningn Department Purpose: Evaluate the existing Land Use Element of the County's Comprehensive Plan as it pertains to the Efland/Mebane area. June 2006 Adopted June 27,2006 Key Objectives: Envision future land use and make recommendations relating to water and sewer, land use, transportation, housing, economic development, and intergovernmental/community issues for the planning area. The vision for this area includes a core village area, an efficient multi-modal transportation system, commercial and light industrial uses, a mix of housing types and sizes economically accessible to a broad spectrum of working people, and a system of parks and greenspace connected by greenways. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Housing affordability, diversity, and accessibility • Recreation opportunities • Multimodal transportation • Employment opportunities Investigation of Ground-Water Availability and Quality in Orange County, North Carolina Date Published: 2001 Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: U.S. Geological Survey Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 16 67 Purpose: Provide County managers and planners with critical information on the availability and quality of groundwater. Key Objectives: Quantify groundwater availability, determine the quality of the groundwater, and estimate the susceptibility of groundwater to contamination from the surface and shallow subsurface. Present the results of this investigation and describe the methods used. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Community infrastructure Stoney Creek Basin Small Area Plan Date Published: 1996 Geographic Area: The triangle created by 1-85, NC-86, and the railroad (southeast of New Hope Church Road) Prepared By: Orange County Purpose: Prepare a land use plan, including implementation recommendations, for the planning area. Key Objectives: Identify levels of land-use intensity to help protect key resource areas. Recommend implementation strategies like Flexible Development Options (density bonuses to preserve the Stoney Creek Basin Area). Goals: preserve landowners' right to receive a fair return on investment for their property, and protect the area's "rural character." Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Preserving natural resources Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 17 68 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS AND PLANS Document Date Geographic Area Greene Tract Interlocal Agreement 2021 Greene Tract Central Orange Coordinated Area 2013 Area within Hillsborough's Urban Service Land Use Plan Boundary Mebane-Orange Count, Utility tility 2012 East Mebane and nearby unincorporated Service Agreement Orange County Hillsborough-Orange County 2006 Hillsborough and nearby unincorporated Strategic Growth Plan Orange County Water and Sewer Mana,eg ment 2001 Orange County, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Planning and Boundary Agreement Hillsborough Joint Planning Agreement 1987 Joint Planning Area (just outside the ETJ of Chapel Hill and Carrboro) Joint Planning Land Use Plan 1986 Joint Planning Area Greene Tract Interlocal Agreement Gr ..pact Munity Map Date Published: June 2021 Geographic Area: Greene Tract (104 acres jointly owned by Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro, 60 acres owned by Orange County); in Chapel Hill's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) Prepared By: Orange County, Town of Chapel Hill, Town of Carrboro Purpose: Agree upon future land uses and next steps for the w' Greene tract. Key Objectives: Provide for the future land uses of the Greene Tract, including affordable and mixed-income housing, a school site, recreation, and environmental preservation. (Commercial uses were notably not included in this agreement.) Express intent to initiate a development agreement and set forth parameters for development regulations. Important Note: Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 18 69 For more information, see the Greene Tract project page on the Planning & Inspections department website or the Greene Tract StoryMap. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Preserving natural resources • Recreation opportunities Central Orange Coordinated Area Land Use Plan Date Published: 2013, amended 2016 Geographic Area: Area within Hillsborough's Urban Service Boundary Prepared By: Hillsborough and Orange County Purpose: Create a tool to determine the consistency of any proposed rezoning request with the Town's and County's future land use visions. Key Objectives: Develop land use policy direction through future land use classifications for the area within Hillsborough's Urban Service Boundary. Produce a map showing these future land use classifications. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest Mebane-Orange County Utility Service Agreement Date Published: July 2012 Geographic Area: East Mebane and nearby unincorporated Orange County Prepared By: Orange County and Mebane Purpose: Expand the area to which Mebane will provide water and sewer services. Key Objectives: Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 19 70 Provide assurance that Orange County would construct the water and sewer lines and would then transfer ownership to Mebane, which would provide the water and sewer service. Delineate the area to be serviced by this agreement. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Community infrastructure Hillsborough-Orange County Strategic Growth Plan H111,b gh and Orange C.-tf,NC Date Published: December 2006 STRATEGIC GROWTH PLAN Geographic Area: Hillsborough and Orange County in the immediate environs of the Town Prepared By: Hillsborough and Orange County Purpose: Create a recommended land use pattern and a recommended structure for an Interlocal Agreement. , Key Objectives: ectives: ' ° " Identify the desired type, rate, timing, and location for future growth occurring over the next 20 years within and around the Town of Hillsborough. Create the framework to define and implement an Urban Services Area within which public water and sewer services will be expected to be available, and outside of which the expectation would be for low-density residential and/or agricultural uses. Important Notes: Goals are: 1) Preserve and enhance the Hillsborough core area, 2) Preserve significant cultural and natural resources, 3) Coordinate growth with water/sewer availability, 4) Grow in a fiscally responsible way, 5) Keep existing businesses healthy, and 6) Assure continuity in public service provision. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Preserving natural resources Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 20 71 • Community infrastructure Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement Date Published: 2001 Geographic Area: Orange County, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough Prepared By: Orange County, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, Orange Water and Sewer Authority Purpose: Provide a comprehensive, County-wide system of service areas for future utility development and identify solutions to challenges of private water and wastewater systems in areas without public water and sewer service. Key Objectives: Facilitate predictable long-range water and sewer capital improvement planning and financing and provide for limitations on water and sewer service. Lay out procedures for the provision of service and limitations on service. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Regional collaboration • Community infrastructure Joint Planning Agreement Date Published: Adopted September 1987, most recently amended December 2015 Geographic Area: The Joint Planning Area (area within the rural buffer and transition areas, outside the ETJ of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, designated on the Joint Planning Area Land Use Map) Prepared By: Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro Purpose: Provide procedures and clear jurisdiction over land use decisions in thejoint planning area. Key Objectives: Place limitations on the ability of the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro to annex within the Rural Buffer areas and within each other's Transition Areas. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 21 72 Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character ORANGE COUNTY-C-R MILt-CARRRORO Joint Planning Land Use Plan JOINT PLANNING LAND USE PLAN Date Published: Adopted October 1986, most recently amended December 2015 Geographic Area: The Joint Planning Area (area within the Rural Buffer and Transition areas, outside the ETJ of Chapel Hill � � ed �� and Carrboro, designated on the Joint Planning Area Land Use MN�I9,°F�R g R,IIAIR Map) m.�s Prepared By: Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro �- Purpose: Establish future land use for the joint planning area. Key Objectives: O3 Designate Rural Buffer areas, transition areas, and general land uses for Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County. The four major elements of the Land Use Plan development phase are natural environment, infrastructure and public services,joint planning operating principles, and sociological characteristics. Planning Topics: • Growth management, annexation, and ETJ • Future land use and community character • Preservation of natural resources • Community infrastructure Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 22 73 TRANSPORTATION The County is currently undertaking development of a Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) that will assess all transportation plans that affect Orange County. The information and recommendations included in the forthcoming CTP will be considered and used in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2050 planning process. Document Date Geographic Area Orange County Transit Plan Update 2022 Orange County Ef land-Buckhorn-Mebane Access 2019 Area along 1-85/1-40 between Efland and Management Plan Mebane Orange Grove Road Access 2003 Orange Grove Road corridor Management Plan Orange County Transit Plan Update Date Published: 2022 Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County Purpose: Allocate Orange County's Transit Tax District revenues over the next 20 years based on the community's needs, values, and priorities. 202-1 Key Objectives: orange county transit plan update Project selection was guided by five values: equity, environmental "-1-1,1 "­e9 °"°°°""" 11°,""°° DCHC sustainability, economic prosperity, affordable & attainable quality of life, and transportation & access for all. The plan recommended several capital projects: Crossing and shelter improvements at US 15- 501 at Ephesus Church Road, Fordham/Manning queue jump and shoulder running improvements, and additional funding for the North-South BRT. The plan also recommended service improvements for the CW, HS, and NS bus routes and mobility on-demand service expansion for Orange County Public Transportation. The Plan ensures that public transportation investments support those most reliant on transit service, and that public transportation investments support resilient, sustainable, and attainable land use and development. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 23 74 Planning Topics: • Multimodal transportation Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan Date Published: March 2019 Access Management Plan Geographic Area:4.25 square miles along 1-85/1-40 between Efland and Mebane and is bounded by the following US Highway 70, West Ten Road/Bowman Road, 1-85/US-70 Connector, and Ben Wilson Road. Prepared By: Orange County Planning Department Purpose: Serve as a long-range transportation vision for the area, illustrating roadway alignment and corridor width necessary to serve future land uses and address traffic impact as development occurs. Key Objectives: Maintain and improve the functionality of the transportation network as the Efland-Buckhorn- Mebane (E-B-M) Study Area develops. Assist the County in promoting economic development through its development review process by encouraging developers to dedicate rights-of-way necessary for future roads. Use the 2017 Transportation Report to renew and replace the original 2011 Ef land-Buckhorn- Mebane Economic Development District Access Management Plan. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Multimodal transportation Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 24 75 Orange Grove Road Access Management Awareness Project & Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AccelwMaviagem Aware w1w Date Published: March 2003 Profect&Reporrt orcugvGwv�ftoaa, Geographic Area: Orange Grove Road corridor from Churton Street to New Grady Brown School Road, includes areas bounded by 1-40, 1-85, and Oakdale Drive Prepared By: Town of Hillsborough and the Board of County Ito Commissioners, Orange County, NC 7 nofNill bnmxgh and Purpose: Provide recommendations to alleviate unsafe om 8 Coa 0"-hC.-fi� conditions and to manage potential congestion from future March,2003 development in the Orange Grove Road corridor. Key Objectives: Pursue funding to implement recommendations in this study. Provide pedestrian facilities along Orange Grove Road. Implement recommendations into local plans and regulations. Pursue future studies as recommended in the plan, including a Feasibility Study for South Churton Street and the Oakdale Drive corridor. Planning Topics: • Growth management • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Multimodal transportation Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 25 76 PARKS AND RECREATION Document Date Geographic Area Blackwood Farm Park Master Plan 2023 Blackwood Farm Park Little River Regional Park & Natural 2021 Little River Regional Park and Natural Area Area Master Plan (Appendices) New Hope Corridor Open Space 2019 The City of Durham, Durham County, Orange Master Plan County, and The Town of Chapel Hill 2030 Parks and Recreation Master 2018 Orange County Plan(Appendices) I Orange County Mountains-to-Sea 2018 Orange County Trail (MST) Route(Progress Reports) New Hope Corridor Open Space 1991 The City of Durham, Durham County, Orange Master Plan County, and The Town of Chapel Hill 91ackwood Farm Park Master Plan Date Published: May 2023 r` Geographic Area: Blackwood Farm Park Prepared By: Orange County Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks & Recreation �> Purpose: Show planned layout of uses in Blackwood Farm Park. Key Objectives: - p a Adopt Ian for future structures and uses at Blackwood Farm Park. Planning Topics: • Preserving natural resources Blackw^oeary„Park Master Plan• • Recreation opportunities Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 26 77 Little River Regional Park & Natural Area Master Plan R° Little River Regional Park Date Published: October 2021 &NaturalArea Geographic Area: Little River Regional Park and Natural Area MASTER PLAN ("Little River Park,) AAA-/0-9,(ou Pot—Mp Prepared By: Durham County and Orange County Purpose: Establish a 20-year vision for the park and provide guidelines for its land management and any future developments ® ORANGE counm for continued public use. Key Objectives: Guide future park improvements, like expanding the paved loop trail, increasing areas of pollinator habitats, adding a "natural playground", and renovating park infrastructure. Serve as tool for public presentations and applications for outside funding. Goals fall into the categories of protecting and conserving nature, connecting with nature, providing recreational experiences, and collaboration and cost-effective management. Planning Topics: • Future land use and community character • Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest • Preserving natural resources • Recreation opportunities Eno-New Hope Landscape Conservation Plan Date Published: December 2019 Geographic Area: Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake watersheds (including portions of Chatham, Durham, Orange, and Wake Counties; the City of Durham; and the towns of Apex, Carrboro, Cary, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough) Prepared By: Eno-New Hope Landscape Conservation Group; this was a Partners for Green Growth project funded by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Orange County, and administered by the North Carolina Botanical Garden Foundation Purpose: Provide an actionable plan for ensuring wildlife habitat connectivity across the landscape of the Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake watersheds in North Carolina Key Objectives: Identify and map priority wildlife habitat and corridors Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 27 78 Review existing land protection, wildlife habitat, and corridor conservation priorities, policies, and ordinances Develop recommendations to inform land protection, land use, and transportation decision- making Important Notes: Recommendations include committing to landscape conservation and wildlife habitat corridor protection; using Green Growth Toolbox guidelines; prioritizing and incorporating landscape corridor protection into local land conservation programs and initiatives; incorporating landscape corridor protection into planning documents to increase the likelihood of implementation and funding; and coordinating with other jurisdictions, government agencies, conservation partners, and funding entities in pursuing landscape conservation and corridor protection goals. Planning Topics: Growth management, annexation, and ETJ; Regional collaboration; Planning in multijurisdictional areas of common interest; Preserving natural resources 2030 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Orange County 2030 Date Published: November 2018 Parks&Recreation Orange County,Noah Carolina Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County Purpose: Guide the future of Parks and Recreation in Orange County. Key Objectives: - Synthesize relevant reports, studies, surveys and needs assessments. a .emhe, Project community needs and desires into a vision for the future that ensures a legacy of parks and public open spaces for current and future generations. Make recommendations based on the findings identified in the master plan, including building the planned future parks, formalizing and building a support structure for multi-partner capital facilities, and developing a master plan for the Orange County segment of the Mountains to Sea Trail (MST). Important Notes: Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 28 79 Overarching Goal: Regionally coordinated park and recreation facilities that provide healthy opportunities for recreation and exercise for all citizens of Orange County, and that preserve important cultural and natural resources. Planning Topics: • Preserving natural resources • Recreation opportunities Orange County Mountains-to-Sea Trail °°°° °�� ••�•°,. ,° �•°°°� �� (MST) Route r Date Published: January 2018 yc. Geographic Area: Orange County Prepared By: Orange County `, • ' ' ° ' Purpose: Show existing and proposed portions of MST - -- route in Orange County Key Objectives: Adopt a conceptual route for the MST in Orange County. Planning Topics: • Recreation opportunities New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan Date Published: April 1991 Geographic Area: Area along potions of New Hope Creek, Dry Creek, Mud Creek, and Sandy Creek in eastern Orange County and western Durham County Prepared By: Town of Chapel Hill, City of Durham, Orange County, and Durham County Purpose: Create an open space corridor linking Eno River State Park, New Hope Creek, Corps Lands, and Durham and Chapel Hill Key Objectives: The plan recommends protection of these creeks and adjacent areas and proposes phases of corridor acquisition and trails and access areas construction. Planning Topics: Future land use and community character, Preserving natural resources, Recreation opportunities Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 1 Community Policy Profile 29