HomeMy WebLinkAbout6_5_24 Planning Board MinutesApproved 7.10.24
MEETING MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 JUNE 5, 2024 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor (Vice-Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township 6
Representative; Marilyn Carter, At-Large Representative; Steve Kaufmann, Bingham Township Representative; 7
Charity Kirk, At-Large Representative; Chris Johnston, Hillsborough Township Representative; Whitney Watson, At-8
Large Representative; Liz Kalies, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large Representative; 9
Beth Bronson, At-Large Representative. 10
11
MEMBERS ABSENT: Adam Beeman (Chair) 12
13
STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Tom Altieri, Senior Planner – Long Range Planning & 14
Administration; Ashley Moncado, Planner III; Lauren Coffey, Planner I; Jack Moran, Planning Technician. 15
16
OTHERS PRESENT: Edwin Cox, Scott Radway, John Felton, Kevin Davidson, Mareah Steketee, Peggy Craft, Clare 17
Steece Julich, Ralph Warren, Dan Eddleman, Sadie Rapp, Laura Streitfeld, Greg Rapp, Betty Lou Whitford, Kathy 18
McHugh, Ann Simpson, Aadra Bhatt, Anna Hatcher, Joshua Setzer, Carol Mellon, John Kizer, Suzanne Moore, 19
Steckley Lee, Mary Latham, Colin Austin, Alan Julich, Bryna Rapp, Wilson Lamb, Susan Houck, Mike Hatcher, 20
Miriam Cowan, Tom Chirk, Christopher McGee, Bland Simpson, Isa Cheren, Stephen Stiebel, Linda D. Smith, Aditi 21
Watson, Ron Rouster, John Vogel, David D’Agostino, Jean Eddleman. 22
23
24 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 25
The meeting began at 7:03 PM. 26
27 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS 28
29
Lamar Proctor: My name is Lamar Proctor, I am the Vice-Chair of the Orange County Planning Board. I want to 30
thank everyone for being here. Do we have a quorum? Mr. Stober has indicated we do have a quorum, so we can 31
go ahead and proceed. As for informational items, let me pull that up, and I'm just going to ask for everyone's 32
patience tonight. There are three agenda items on our agenda related to the Fiddlehead Corner Development 33
applicant and the application for rezoning. We are going to discuss openly and transparently as a board as to how to 34
proceed in order to make the most efficient use of our time. I will tell you about our local rules, our meetings end at 35
10:00 p.m., so I anticipate that this meeting and these agenda items will probably extend over multiple sessions, so 36
we meet on the first Wednesday of the month and so my agenda items are still loading but I can tell everyone that 37
our next meeting, and correct me if I'm wrong, is July 3rd. 38
39
Chris Johnston: July 10. 40
41
Lamar Proctor: July 10th, excuse me. Mr. Proctor reviewed the Calendars included in the agenda packet. 42
43
AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 44
45
Lamar Proctor: Do I have a motion to approve the minutes from our May 1st of 2024 regular meeting? 46
47
MOTION BY Marilyn Carter to approve the Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. 48
49 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 50
51
Approved 7.10.24
AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 52
None. 53 54
AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 55 56 INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE 57
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, 58
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development 59
law of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and 60
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner, which considers the present and 61
future needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that 62
contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB 63
will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services 64
during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. 65
66 67
PUBLIC CHARGE 68
The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its 69
citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with 70
fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this 71
public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual 72
regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting 73
until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. 74
75
76
Lamar Proctor read the public charge. 77
78
PROCEDURAL ISSUES. 79
Because the three agenda items are interrelated the Board discussed procedural issues. 80
81
Lamar Proctor: Generally speaking when we have an agenda that includes multiple items, we address them each 82
separately; however, in this unique circumstance, I would entertain a motion to consolidate Items 7, 8, and 9 on the 83
agenda for the staff and the applicant presentations, as well as public comment, so I would welcome a motion or 84
entertain a motion at this time as to that or any discussion prior to. 85
86
MOTION BY Charity Kirk to combine the agenda items. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen 87
88
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 89
90
Lamar Proctor: By our stated policies, we give the public 3 minutes per agenda item, given that we have 91
consolidated those, I would like some discussion from the board given the large number of people who want to 92
speak, any idea or discussion as to public comment and time limits thereon. I looked at the sign-in sheets which are 93
still being filled out, there are multiple people for each agenda item, some in excess of 10 or 11, so roughly we got at 94
least by our rules about 2 hours of public comment, at least, so we can either have speakers present and do 3 95
minutes on the agenda item and they can just state the agenda item on which they would want to present. That 96
would be my idea on how to proceed, but, I would welcome any discussion about that. 97
98
Marilyn Carter: Mr. Chair, point of information. Will the public comment precede the presentations by the applicant 99
or follow. I see by meeting process it follows, is that right? 100
101
Approved 7.10.24
Lamar Proctor: The meeting process is there’s a staff presentation on our items, the applicant presents, then there 102
are questions that will be entertained in sequential order from the Planning Board, and then we take public 103
comments, and then our deliberation and recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners following that 104
process. Since we have consolidated the items, we will, in essence, be discussing all three agenda items at once, so 105
we have to be very careful because, and I want to be clear, Mr. Stober, there’s Agenda Item 7 is to review and make 106
recommendations to the BOCC on applicant-initiated amendments to the comprehensive plan to amend the FLUM, 107
the Future Land Use Map to expand a rural neighborhood activity node and to amend the text of Appendix F Land 108
Use and Zoning Matrix. That’s the first item. Is that correct? 109
110
Cy Stober: That is correct. 111
112
Lamar Proctor: And so that would be to consider expanding, making conditional zoning that is under consideration 113
in this case applicable to the rural activity node. 114
115
Cy Stober: So the staff presentation will detail our analysis, yes, at present the zoning application is 116
inconsistent with the Future Land Use Map as well as Appendix F, and we have a fairly thorough presentation on our 117
analysis on the existing inconsistency and the applicant’s proposed remedy to it. 118
119
Lamar Proctor: Okay, and the Agenda Item No. 8 is review and make recommendation to the BOCC on the 120
applicant-initiated amendments to the UDO pertaining to family care homes. And No. 9 is to review and make 121
recommendations to the BOCC on the zoning atlas amendment to rezone this particular parcel essentially from 122
Agricultural Residential to MPD-CD Master Plan Development Conditional District. 123
124
Cy Stober: That’s correct. On Item 8 there’s a staff recommendation on this submitted application to resolve 125
some statutory inconsistencies or some inconsistencies of our UDO with general statute that are independent of the 126
applicant’s proposed amendments. 127
128
Chris Johnston: Mr. Chairman, I would request that, you know, just looking at our meeting process, we have the 129
applicant presentation that’s going to take place, ‘we’re going to have the questions from the board and the public 130
comments, I would say if we can keep the questions from the board concise and not repeat each other and then for 131
the public comment request that the public listen to what everyone’s saying and if someone is about to repeat what 132
’you've already said, in the interests of everyone here, if you have signed up to speak and that item has already been 133
covered, please state that you are reiterating what someone has already said, that will help us understand and gauge 134
where we are that will help move the process along and make sure that everyone can be heard. I would ask that we 135
not necessarily limit people to a lesser amount of time, but as long as we can all understand and work towards that, I 136
think that’ll move this process along. 137
138
Lamar Proctor: Okay, thank you. Any other comments? 139
140
Marilyn Carter: Mr. Chair, I would also recommend following the process that the Board of County Commissioners 141
uses for public comment’, I believe it’s 1 hours in a given meeting. They typically do it up front at the beginning of 142
their meetings, but we're allowed 1 hour to tonight and if we find that as we may that we're going to reach our 10 p.m. 143
time limit for the meeting that we follow into the next meeting with continued public comment and our deliberations. 144
145
Cy Stober: So, Ms. Carter and the board, that is for general public comments that are addressed to the board 146
on unspecified agenda items or topics. For agenda items, and particularly for those going to public hearing, which 147
this would, there’s no limit on the number of comments or the duration of the comment period. 148
149
Marilyn Carter: Okay, in that case, in keeping with the policy then, I would agree. 150
151
Approved 7.10.24
Charity Kirk: I would suggest, it sounds like from my reading of Item 8 is that we are bringing things in line with 152
the state. 153
154
Cy Stober: In part, there are two amendments one will bring our UDO under compliance with the general 155
statute. 156
157
Charity Kirk: So my suggestion is we give each person 6 minutes, 3 minutes on each item because I think Item 158
8 is probably a little less contentious and that will try and keep it shorter, so 6 minutes total, 3 minutes per each item, 159
so if they only want to talk about one item, it’s only 3 minutes that they get to talk. 160
161
Lamar Proctor: Well, I do think that the sign-in sheet accurately reflects which item and the name of the person 162
who wants to speak, so given that I think we’re all accepting of the fact that this is going to be a multi-session 163
meeting, I think we should just be cognizant of the time and call those up in order in the order in which they signed up 164
and I would ask the public if you feel that your position has been stated, I don’t want to cut anyone’s time, but if you 165
feel that someone else has said what you wanted to say and it would be duplicative, then you’re welcome to just let 166
us know you agree with someone else or I would just ask the public to be mindful of the time. we’re not going to cut 167
anybody’s time short because this is a public hearing and you all have the right to have your voices heard. So, what I 168
would propose is that we just follow our normal meeting process and be cognizant of the time and give each 169
individual as they have signed up on the list their 3 minutes. Once the buzzer goes off, we're not trying to be rude, 170
we're just trying to be efficient about time, so when that buzzer goes off the 3 minutes is up, and you’ll be asked to 171
step away from the podium to keep things moving forward. There is one additional request that has been made by 172
Preserve Rural Orange which is a community group who has asked for additional time. Before we get into that, does 173
everyone agree as to the process on individual comment on the sign-up sheet, does anyone have any further 174
thoughts. 175
176
Charity Kirk: Suggesting 3 minutes per topic? 177
178
Lamar Proctor: I think the individuals who have signed up have listed their name and the agenda item on which 179
they want to speak, so they should just be called up in order. If a particular individual wants to comment for 3 180
minutes on 7, 8 and 9, well, first we hear the comments on 7, then we'll hear the comments on 8, then we'll hear the 181
comments on 9. I don’t see any other way to proceed that doesn’t get confusing or lead to people feeling that their 182
time has been cut short and that they haven’t had the opportunity to address each item as per our explicit rules. 183
184
Charity Kirk; So a 3-minute limit per person to talk about all agenda items. 185
186
Lamar Proctor: Per agenda item, that is our, unless you want to make another motion. 187
188
Charity Kirk: 3 minutes per person per agenda item, so 9 minutes maximum. 189
190
Lamar Proctor: If they signed up for 7, to comment on 7, 8 and 9, and we will do them in the order in which they 191
signed up. 192
193
Charity Kirk: That’s fine. 194
195
Lamar Proctor: As per and in sequential order of the agenda items. 196
197
Chris Johnston: I think that makes sense because if we didn’t have that we were going to smush them together. 198
199
Lamar Proctor: Right. 200
201
Cy Stober: So to be clear, there will be no deviation from the rules of procedure? 202
Approved 7.10.24
203
Lamar Proctor: No, I ’don’t think, I think that would just create confusion and lead to the possibility that people ’feel 204
like their voice isn’t being heard completely. So that being said as Chair, that is the way we'll proceed on public 205
comment. There is one additional request, like I said, from Preserve Rural Orange, who has asked for additional 206
time, so I welcome any comment about that. I will just say as Chair, I believe that since Rural Orange is essentially 207
addressing each agenda item and we have consolidated this, that they would be entitled to 9 minutes. They’ve 208
asked for 12 but I welcome any motions or any discussion about that. Given they are in kind of a unique situation in 209
that they represent a group rather than just an individual. 210
211
Marilyn Carter: I'll attempt a motion Mr. Chair, so the motion is consistent with the procedural rules for time that 212
each person coming to speak will speak for up to 3 minutes on the item that they have identified. If they have 213
identified more than one item, they will speak for an additional 3 minutes for each of those items up to 9 minutes 214
total, and so we'll hear from one individual who would like to address us for 9 minutes on all three items. 215
216
Lamar Proctor: And I think we can keep track of that. I think if we have the list and an individual has signed up for 217
7, 8 and 9, if that could be noted when they come up to speak and so I don’t know if you guys want them to only talk 218
on 7 and then hear all the people who want to talk about 7, and then move to 8 or have one individual who is signed 219
up for 7, 8, 9, just talk about 7 and 8 and for 9 minutes straight. 220
221
Steven Kaufmann: Just that one individual? 222
223
Lamar Proctor: Well, anyone who has signed up, ’I haven’t seen the sign-up sheet, so I ’don’t know if individuals 224
signed up for all three, or two out of the three, or one out of the three. 225
226
Charity Kirk: What does the sign-up sheet look like? Are they one and a name where they say what they’re 227
signing up for or is there a sign-up sheet for 7 and a sign-up sheet for 8 and a sign-up sheet for 9? 228
229
Cy Stober: They’re separate sign-up sheets. We have 7, 8 and 9. 230
231
Charity Kirk: Okay, so why ’don’t we just do 3 minutes for 7 and 3 minutes for 8 and 3 for 9, follow the sign-up 232
sheet. 233
234
Lamar Proctor: Okay. 235
236
Statler Gilfillen: May I just ask this? The Preservation Organization represents a broader group of individuals, 237
more than one person. Can we just not, with that group give them the 12 minutes they've asked for, 3 minutes 238
difference and be done with it. 239
240
Lamar Proctor: So that's your motion, do I have a second? 241
242
Steve Kaufmann: I second. 243
244
Lamar Proctor: All right, all in favor of allowing that one individual to get 12 minutes, all in favor raise your hand. 245
246
Chris Johnston: And everyone else gets 3 minutes per agenda item. 247
248
Charity Kirk: So 9 minutes total. 249
250
Lamar Proctor: If they signed up for all three agenda items, ’but we're going to do it sequentially as they're listed, 251
so we're going to hear everyone who wants to comment about 7, then everyone who wants to comment about 8 and 252
Approved 7.10.24
everyone who wants to comment about 9. So’ that's how the individuals on the sign-up sheet and then as to this 253
motion for 12 minutes for Preserve Rural Orange, I did have a second all in favor raise your hand. Okay. 254
255
Lauren Coffey: Could you please clarify any opposed? 256
257
Lamar Proctor: Yeah, any opposed? 258
259 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to allow 12 minutes for Preserve Rural Orange. Seconded by Steve Kaufmann 260
261
IN FAVOR: Statler Gilfillen, Marilyn Carter, Steve Kaufmann, Lamar Proctor, Charity Kirk, Whitney Watson, Liz 262
Kalies, Dolores Bailey, Beth Bronson 263
OPPOSED: Chris Johnston 264 MOTION PASSED 9 TO 1 265
266
Lamar Proctor: Okay, so the motion passes, so Preserve Rural Orange will get 12 minutes. As to their placement in 267
this process, I will entertain any discussion about their placement in the public comment section. 268
269
Chris Johnston: I make a motion that we place them before the public comments, right after the questions from the 270
board. 271
272
Lamar Proctor: Okay. 273
274
Statler Gilfillen: I'll second that. 275
276
Marilyn Carter: I missed that, what'd you say? 277
278
Chris Johnston: The motion is to put them before the public comments and directly after questions from the board. 279
280
Lamar Proctor: Now I heard a second, do you need discussion? 281
282
Charity Kirk: The other option is just at the start of agenda Item 9 since I believe that's probably what you're 283
talking about. 284
285
Lamar Proctor: We could put them at the beginning of public comment, we could put them after 7 is done, we 286
could put them after 8 is done, we could put them after 9 is done. 287
288
Chris Johnston: I have my motion and a second. 289
290
Dolores Bailey: Question. Is there a reason why you think they should go first. Why shouldn't they just go in order 291
to how they signed up, where they signed up? 292
293
Chris Johnston: To move the process along. 294
295
Lamar Proctor: Are they signed up on a particular agenda item or they signed up on all three. 296
297
Cy Stober: They were the first individual signed up on Agenda Item 9. 298
299
Chris Johnston: I amend my motion to be the presentation at the beginning of Item 9. 300
301
Lamar Proctor: And they'll be the first presenter on Agenda Item 9. All right, all in, do I have a second on that? 302
303
Approved 7.10.24
Statler Gilfillen: I second it again. 304
305
Lamar Proctor: All right. All in favor? All opposed. 306
307
MOTION BY Chris Johnston to place Preserve Rural Orange’s public comments first for Agenda Item 9. Seconded 308
by Statler Gilfillen 309
310 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 311
312
Lamar Proctor: I guess we are ready with that understanding to move forward in the agenda and the process to the 313
staff presentation. 314
315 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 316
None. 317
318
319
AGENDA ITEM 7: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) AND TEXT AMENDMENTS – To review 320
and make a recommendation to the BOCC on applicant-initiated amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan to 321
amend the FLUM to expand a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node (RNAN); and to amend the text of Appendix F: Land 322
Use and Zoning Matrix. The BOCC public hearing date is “to be determined.” 323
324
AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT – ADD FAMILY CARE HOMES AS 325 PERMITTED USE TO MPD-CD ZONING DISTRICT AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS – To review and make a 326
recommendation to the BOCC on applicant-initiated amendments to the UDO pertaining to Family Care Homes. The 327
BOCC public hearing date is “to be determined.” 328
329
AGENDA ITEM 9: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT (CONDITIONAL DISTRICT) – To review and make a recommendation 330
to the BOCC on an applicant-initiated zoning atlas amendment to rezone 90.133 acres (PIN: 9739-72-0339) located 331
off Morrow Mill Road at Gold Mine Loop, within the Bingham Township. The proposed rezoning is from AR 332
(Agricultural Residential) to MPD-CD (Master Plan Development – Conditional District). The BOCC public hearing 333
date is “to be determined.” 334
335
Cy Stober: So, Mr. Chair, we have a number of administrative procedural slides just to discuss what we're 336
doing here generically before we even get into the specifics of the item. I'll just note the Efland Ruritan Club was 337
presented at the last meeting on May 1st, and were approved by the commissioners, by the way, last night and that 338
was a conventional zoning application, so they applied for general commercial 4, had 52 permitted uses in general 339
commercial districts, what we're here tonight is to consider conditional zoning. Conditional zoning is use-specific with 340
individualized development conditions and standards. These conditions must be agreeable both to the county and to 341
the applicant. All conditional zoning requires a site-specific development plan. In this case as the Master Plan 342
Development, the site-specific plan is a master plan which has some liberties but also additional responsibilities in its 343
drafting and how it is to be constructed. So, a conditional district, according to North Carolina General Statutes 344
160D-703, as I said, they are permitted, they are allowed through the legislative process rather than the quasi-judicial 345
process. Additional conditions may be negotiated, and you'll see this in the motions that are available to you when 346
you do make a motion on the zoning case that's presented to you this evening if it is agreeable to the applicant and 347
they agree to it in writing by the time we get to the end of the public hearing. Again, you’re making a recommendation 348
to the Board of Commissioners tonight, this is not a public hearing, but it will lead to one, and oh, this is very 349
important, rezoning decisions are based on the determination of whether that request is consistent with the purpose 350
and intent of the principles, goals, and objectives of the adopted comprehensive plan. That is per statute. So the 351
process that led us to today, the application was received by the County, it was reviewed by our development 352
advisory committee several times, there was a neighborhood information meeting hosted by the applicant per our 353
ordinance requirements, we are at this point this evening where the planning board is considering the matter and will 354
Approved 7.10.24
be making a recommendation to the commissioners. You also will be making recommendations to the 355
commissioners on a related text amendment application and two amendments to the comprehensive plan, one to the 356
Future Land Use Map and the other to Appendix F. So this is just to drive the point home, the enabling legislation is 357
160D-703, this is reflected in Section 2.9 of the Orange County UDO, and some guidance from the statute is that all 358
zoning regulations should be made in accordance with the comprehensive plan and the intent of that is to promote 359
the public health, safety and general welfare and something that should be considered when changing the zoning is 360
the character of the district, it's particular suitability for particular uses and with a view to conserving the value of 361
buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of the land throughout our jurisdiction which is countywide. 362
Additionally, in 702 it identifies what may be regulated through conditional zoning, what cannot, and this is at the very 363
bottom and was clarified in the regulatory reform text amendments that were also heard by this board in May is that 364
we are not permitted to regulate the appearance, architecture or aesthetics of any buildings covered by the North 365
Carolina Residential Code, so that's single-family dwellings, duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes. And then this just 366
reiterates that we are empowered to regulate conventional zoning districts as well as conditional zoning districts by 367
statute, and that we are permitted to do so per statute in a negotiation with the applicant, and that these conditions 368
should be limited to those that address the conformance of the development and use of the site to local government 369
ordinances or the impacts reasonably expected to be generated by the development or use of the site. So, what is 370
the applicant's responsibility? They must establish the use type, this evening we're considered a master plan 371
development. They must provide a formal site plan or in this case a master plan according to our UDO and the 372
application is subject to conditions of approval both those that are included in the application which, in this case is the 373
master plan, as well as any other conditions the board or the board of commissioners wishes to negotiate with the 374
applicant. So just a remainder, the comprehensive plan according to 160D and our UDO is the principal guiding 375
document for all land use decisions in Orange County and any jurisdiction, but ours relates to our county. The 376
Unified Development Ordinance is the laws that dictate how land is used and what development occurs in Orange 377
County. Of course, construction is dictated by the building code. Any changes and what is permitted on a piece of 378
land, the zoning, must be consistent or at least must be analyzed where it is consistent with the adopted 379
comprehensive plan. I will remind you that 160D also makes it clear that the County can make decisions that are 380
inconsistent with our comprehensive plan and thereby amend our comprehensive plan through a zoning decision. 381
They do not have to necessarily be consistent, but the actions of the elected officials can be inconsistent with our 382
adopted plan and thereby amend the adopted plan to reflect the actions of the board. The principal guidance for land 383
use decisions in our comprehensive plan is the Future Land Use Map that is proposed for amendment as well this 384
evening and we will have details on that in a moment. And just a reminder that this is where we are in the process, 385
this has been a lengthy process, the application was first received by the county last year and has been under review 386
for over a year. So, the objectives tonight, just to reiterate, is to hear from the staff and our analysis, the applicant 387
and to take public comments to discuss the analysis and the recommendations and to make a recommendation on 388
the zoning application, but also the text amendment and comprehensive plan amendments to the Board of 389
Commissioners for their consideration. And with that, I do thank you for the motion to consolidate the matters, we're 390
going to begin with the zoning atlas analysis and then you'll see we will lead right into the text amendment and then 391
into the comprehensive plan amendments, and the current inconsistencies that the applicant proposes to remedy and 392
what the impacts of those may be to the county. So where is the property in question? It is in Bingham Township 393
near the intersection of 54 and Morrow Mill Road, more specifically at Gold Mine Loop. It is an unaddressed 394
property, it was formerly the Cheeks Farm, but the property was subdivided about a year ago to create this parcel of 395
land that was purchased by Hands Four Development. Its current zoning is agricultural residential. The requested 396
zoning is master plan development conditional district and the proposed use is for 150 residences in a variety of 397
housing types, a community center, two family care facilities, and recreational amenities to serve the residents of that 398
community. Additionally, as you'll see in a future slide there is a principal stem road that will be partly DOT 399
maintained and access to both Morrow Mill Road and Gold Mine Loop. The surrounding zoning is a mixture of 400
principally agricultural residential and then on North Carolina 54 you have commercial zoning that is adjacent to the 401
property. This is the site-specific master plan, and you can see the different housing types here. You'll see in the 402
middle the kind of center of the community with the non-principal non-residential uses. Just to orient you, this is true 403
north, so this is how the layout that's in the plans, but if we are to get our bearings, this is north, and North Carolina 404
54 is just north of this orientation. To the west is Gold Mine Loop. If you're just trying to think about where you're at. 405
Approved 7.10.24
Any other requirements are the requirements for site plan and master plan development submittal, there are no other 406
proposed conditions. The applicant conducted a traffic impact analysis, an environmental site assessment, they've 407
provided analysis on architectural for all non-residential uses and made commitments there, and they've also 408
analyzed the utilities and they have more detail on this, including the proposed wastewater treatment. Those have all 409
been reviewed by the staff on the development advisory committee which includes staff from environmental health; 410
emergency services; solid waste; and department of environment, agriculture, parks, and recreation. The 411
consistency analysis was conducted by staff and I'll note that it was not just current planning and zoning staff, but 412
also our comprehensive and long-range planning and administrative staff, and you'll hear more from Tom Altieri, the 413
senior planner in that division in a moment. And part of the analysis is that family care facilities are not a permitted 414
use in the master plan development conditional district which brings us to Item 8, the proposed text amendments. 415
There are two amendments proposed by the applicant, one is to add family care home as a permitted use in MPD-416
CD district and the other is to rewrite a footnote in Section 3.8 which is the description of the MPD-CD zoning district 417
that corresponds to the proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan that would allow MPD-CD districts in rural 418
neighborhood activities nodes. There was one amendment proposed by staff that is in the abstract for Item 8 that is 419
to bring our definition for family care home into alignment with that of the state. So just a brief analysis and this really 420
is a reiteration of what's in the abstract, it's fairly straightforward. 160D, which is the land use and development 421
statute, determines what a family care facility is for everyone in the state and the definition is provided here. To be 422
clear, a family care home is deemed a residential use of property for zoning purposes and is a permissible use in all 423
residential districts and we shall not limit that use by making it a special use or requiring a variance to require 424
additional burdens for anyone who wishes to have a family care facility on a residential property. Our definition of 425
master plan development, it references unified large-scale subdivisions which are presumed to be residential in 426
nature, as well as mixed use developments, also presumed to be partially residential in nature. And reviewing that, 427
we’ve assessed that all 16 conventional zoning districts that permit residential uses and the two conditional districts 428
that support residential uses already allow family care facilities and therefore, it would be appropriate to bring this use 429
as an allowed use into the MPD-CD district. There is an accompanying amendment in the applicant's text 430
amendment application that addresses, again, that footnote in Article 3 for MPD-CD being permitted in the rural 431
neighborhood activity node, and this corresponds to the application for the comprehensive plan amendment to 432
amend Appendix F to allow the same thing. You are permitted to consider the two amendments separately. Are 433
there any questions on that before we move forward? 434
435
Whitney Watson: Yes, I have a question. One of the notes about the MPD-CD, was that there seemed to be an 436
oversight in the matrix, which is one of the suggestions. I was wondering if perhaps the rural community 437
neighborhood, or rural community activity node, was not the actual mistake where it had allowed the master plan 438
development conditional district as opposed to having been omitted from the other. Because it seems to me that in 439
both the community and the neighborhood activity nodes going into this master plan fundamentally changes the 440
character of those activity nodes, at least according to the definitions in both the UDO and the plan, so could you talk 441
a little bit about how those two nodes, activity nodes are different from each other and how they will be, how it might 442
be corrected by adding. 443
444
Cy Stober: Thank you for the segue, that's the very next thing we were going to get to Mr. Watson, thank you. 445
446
Lamar Proctor: All right, good, and I do want to take an aside. This is unrelated to your presentation, but the sign-447
up sheets, the people who have signed up tonight, that will be the end of the sign-up. If we go into multiple sessions, 448
I just want to make this clear, there won't be an additional opportunity for more people to sign up. Only those who 449
sign up this evening prior to the public comment period will be permitted to speak. 450
451
Cy Stober: Let me rush those back to the sign-in table so folks can sign in if they want. 452
453
Dolores Bailey: Mr. Chair, does that mean that if they haven't signed up tonight that they will be able to sign up? 454
455
Approved 7.10.24
Lamar Proctor: No, that means, they will not. If you don't sign up tonight, even if we go multiple sessions, if we go 456
to July, you can't sign up to speak at the public comments section in July. These agenda items are what were 457
started, and this sign-up sheet is the totality of those who have signed up for public comment. Regardless if we go 458
June, July and August. 459
460
Dolores Bailey: And are you going to give an opportunity for a member of the public who sits there and then 461
decides they want to sign up to sign up? 462
463
Lamar Proctor: No, once we start the public comment portion, and I think that's fair, unless anyone disagrees, to 464
leave the sheets out until we begin the public comment portion and then we'll take them up and then we'll begin 465
hearing public comment, the sign-up will be closed at that point. 466
467
Beth Bronson: Acknowledging that there is another public comment period during the BOCC's public hearing. 468
469
Lamar Proctor: Right, this is not the final answer on this project. We make our recommendation and it goes 470
forward to the Board of County Commissioners. 471
472
Marilyn Carter: Mr. Vice Chair, my point of view is that someone may hear something in comment and then have a 473
point of view about it. 474
475
Statler Gilfillen: Can we do it this way? If they are here this evening, can they sign up to the end of tonight to 476
speak, even though it may mean that the next time instead of censoring it or stopping it right before anybody speaks, 477
just be flexible. 478
479
Lamar Proctor: Well, I think for efficiency purposes, because we collect the sign-up sheets and begin the process, I 480
think people during the presentation if they hear something that they want to comment on, they can sign up for that 481
item but once we begin, my plan as Chair would be to take up the sign-up sheets once we begin the public comment 482
portion. 483
484
Charity Kirk: You're welcome to pass on your sign-up on speaking too, if you don't have anything to talk about. 485
We don't mind. 486
487
Dolores Bailey: So after we're done talking about 7 we can't talk about it again, that's what you're saying. 488
489
Lamar Proctor: Yeah, I mean, that'll be it, once we collect the sign-up sheets at the beginning of the public 490
speaking portion, that's it, so I just want the public be aware that they need to sign up now if they want to be heard as 491
to these agenda items, because we will not have an opportunity to sign up again in July or in August if this goes into 492
multiple sessions. And that has been our general practice just so everyone knows that this has been our rule is that 493
those who sign up when we begin the agenda items are the ones who are permitted to speak, you can't come in 494
halfway through the process and then sign up. 495
496
Chris Johnston: Returning to the staff presentation, to confirm on Item 3, the proposal brings the Orange County 497
UDO in conformance with the intent of NCGS 160D, we're just aligning the state definitions, correct, so really, there's 498
not a whole lotta discussion there. We have to follow the state requirements for family care facilities, correct? 499
500
Cy Stober: So, the application brought this to light, that we were not in conformance with the statute, and to be 501
fair, the statute was adopted in 2021 so it's still fairly recent, and this was a new update. 502
503
Marilyn Carter: Just a point of information in our process, if the board is in agreement with an item earlier versus 504
later and perhaps once we get to the point of staff's presentation completing, would that be something we would vote 505
Approved 7.10.24
on as first, in other words, at what point if there's general agreement of the board, that we should vote on accepting 506
this particular amendment, the one amendment. 507
508
Lamar Proctor: I think we need to go through the process as stated, hearing from staff, hearing from the applicant, 509
questions from the board, public comment, deliberation, and then we will take each item separately. 510
511
Marilyn Carter: Okay, very good, thank you. 512
513
Cy Stober: So, this was not a staff-initiated amendment, it was an applicant initiated amendment, so the 514
applicant needs to speak to the matter before any action should be taken. 515
516
Lamar Proctor: Yes, and I had a quick question and tell me if this is the next part of your presentation, the 517
difference between rural community and rural neighborhood activity nodes and why MPD-CD zoning was applicable 518
to RCAN, but not RNAN if there's some explicit reason. 519
520
Cy Stober: Tom and I will do our best to try to read the minds of folks in 2006 and make that determination. 521
But yeah, that's where we're heading. 522
523
Lamar Proctor: All right, thank you. Any other questions before we proceed, okay, thank you. 524
525
Cy Stober: So, the Future Land Use Map designations for this property are agricultural residential in green. 526
The definitions that are applied to the two Future Land Use Map designations can be found here on the slide. The 527
other is rural neighborhood activity node which covers the intersection of Morrow Mill and North Carolina 54. And 528
then the applicant has proposed to amend here in the hashing the activity node to extend to the limits of the property. 529
And with that, I will ask Tom to come up and address Item 7 which he conducted the analysis on. This is Tom Altieri, 530
Senior Planner. 531
532
Tom Altieri: Yes, thank you Cy, good evening. So, the purpose of this item is to consider two applicant-initiated 533
amendments to the comprehensive plan, the first being to the Future Land Use Map to expand the Rural 534
Neighborhood Activity Node and the second a text amendment to Appendix F of the Comprehensive Plan which is 535
the land use and zoning matrix. I have about 13 slides so a couple of them will look similar to what was provided in 536
the zoning atlas amendment deck so I'll go through those quickly. The proposed amendment is to expand the rural 537
neighborhood activity node by approximately 71.6 acres from the land use classification agricultural residential to 538
rural neighborhood activity node. And the text amendment again to Appendix F as I mentioned. This particular slide 539
includes a vicinity map of the Future Land Use Map and it shows how the adjacent properties or local properties are 540
classified on the Future Land Use Map. The classifications that you see here include agricultural residential, the 541
node that we have mentioned several times, rural residential, rural community activity node, and then the rural buffer, 542
and on the next slide it's a little bit better view of the area here. Just to kind of orient, the reverse C shape in the 543
middle of the map there, that is the property in question. Just to the north is the rural neighborhood activity node. 544
The rural community activity node at White Cross is further to the east there. It's a little less than 2 miles, about 1.8 545
miles, from the central portion of the neighborhood node to the central portion of that community node. The 546
boundary of the rural buffer is further to the east you can see it there on the map where University Lake watershed is 547
labeled there, but predominantly agricultural residential which is the lighter of the two green shades on the map. In 548
Mr. Stober's presentation he reviewed the definitions of the agricultural residential and rural neighborhood activity 549
node. I'll get to the community node in just a bit. But there's also an overlay in this area and that is the resource 550
protection area overlay that is land designated as primary conservation area which includes wetlands and flood 551
plains, steep slopes, natural areas, wildlife habitats and corridors, and significant historic and archaeological sites. 552
There is a very small portion on the property all the way in the lower right-hand corner where you see the dark green 553
area, that is the area of resource protection overlay. There is a letter in your packet, really all of this information is in 554
your packet, but I know you can't read the letter that's here on the screen, but it is from the county's Department of 555
Environment, Agriculture, Parks, and Recreation, and it speaks specifically to those resource protection areas that 556
Approved 7.10.24
are shown on the map. It does identify flood plain, wetlands, bottom land, hardwood forests and soils of importance 557
that are of conservation value, so that has been noted in that letter in that section. The letter, I believe is Attachment 558
5 as part of the zoning atlas agenda item, you can find it there. These flood plains, wetlands, hardwood forests, soils 559
of importance, that reflects what's included in the letter. Just a little bit of analysis of the neighborhood node. So, this 560
is the node at Morrow Mill and centered at NC 54. The node is a quarter mile radius and based on an assumption, 561
what we've tried to do here is try to make some determination of, well, how much of that existing node is developed 562
versus undeveloped, and in order to do that you have to make an assumption, and the assumption that's used here, 563
the areas that are shown in darker blue as developed, the assumption is if there's a structure on a lot that's 20 acres 564
or greater in size, we're saying that's developed, so again, it's up to individual property owners choices. There may 565
be some development potential that's left on those lots that are 20 acres or less in size that we're calling developed, 566
but, generally that's the assumption that we've made here. You change that assumption and the map here would 567
look a little bit different. So based on that assumption, approximately 37 percent of the acreage within the node is 568
developed. Just a little bit about land uses in the area, we do have some non-residential uses, the PSM Food Mart, 569
the Piedmont Feed and Garden Center, and the UNC Chapel Hill facility there as well. There are also 16 single 570
family homes located within the node. So, there's been reference to Appendix F in the comprehensive plan. The 571
amendment is to add MPD-CD, Master Plan Development Conditional District as a compatible use within the rural 572
neighborhood activity node. The matrix does provide that linkage, that connection for consistency between the future 573
land use classifications on the map with zoning districts that are part of the zoning atlas and this amendment would 574
establish that consistency between the comprehensive plan and the applicant's request for its rezoning and with this 575
matrix the only change is highlighted in that red box, adding a diamond there at the rural neighborhood activity node. 576
Noting that, in the rural neighborhood activity node, the only conditional district that is not currently consistent is 577
MPD-CD, so there are three other conditional districts that are permissible within that node. The applicant's request 578
for amendments is based on the premise that changes have occurred and are occurring in the county. The changes 579
are reflected in the letter of request from the applicant, that's Attachment 1 in your packet and just very generally, it's 580
more detailed in the letter, but that letter speaks largely to changing demographics in the county, the growing senior 581
age population, those age 65 and over, and the need for housing and neighborhoods to meet their needs. Staff has 582
put together this slide and the subsequent slide to provide some land use-related information about all of the rural 583
neighborhood activity nodes countywide. If that matrix were amended to include that MPD-CD, then it would also be 584
permissible in the other nodes that are throughout the county, so that brings me to this slide. There are ten 585
countywide, including the node at Morrow Mill and NC 54, totaling a little over 1,100 acres based on the same 586
assumption used previously about the 20-acre lot size being developed with a structure on it, 48 percent of the 587
neighborhood nodes countywide could be considered developed noting that this does not represent the actual 588
impervious development footprint, it's just based solely on lot size. These nodes have been included as part of our 589
land use element on the Future Land Use Map since it was originally adopted in 1981. The same applies with our 590
rural community activity nodes, as well, those have been on the map since the original plan, as well, and were carried 591
over in the 2006 comprehensive plan that we're currently discussing today. Staff analysis as required under UDO 592
Section 2.3, the planning director is to cause an analysis to be made in the application and prepare a 593
recommendation. The planning director has acknowledged that the application is complete, that Appendix F is 594
supportive of the principals, goals and objectives outlined in the comprehensive plan, the proposal does speak to 595
changing demographic conditions in the county and that the proposal establishes consistency between the 596
comprehensive plan and the requests for the rezoning. The MPD-CD zoning district was originally established to be 597
a mechanism through which innovative proposals could be considered. I will add here that I have not listed on this 598
slide the consistent goals and objectives and principles, those are all listed specifically in your abstract, I just didn't 599
want to take up this time and the space on this slide here, but those are in your packet within the abstract. And then, 600
finally, the text amendment application features a complementary amendment to Article 3 MPD-CD standards 601
regarding the future land use classifications that support MPD-CD. So that concludes the presentation. I will just 602
address the one question to the extent that I am able, those nodes were established in the original 1981 plan. There 603
is a little bit of information in the plan regarding the definitions of those areas and I didn't provide the definition for the 604
rural community activity node in the slide deck, this was the larger node that was located at the intersection of NC 54 605
and White Cross, and as defined, a rural community activity node is land focused on designation road intersections 606
which serve as a nodal crossroads for the surrounding rural community and is an appropriate location for any of the 607
Approved 7.10.24
following uses: church, fire station, small post office, school or other similar institutional uses and one or more 608
commercial uses. And then again, just to hear them back to back, the rural neighborhood activity node is defined as, 609
land focused on a designated road intersection within the rural areas that is appropriate for small scale commercial 610
uses, characteristic of mom and pop convenience stores and gas stations. I do know that part of the rationale for the 611
location of the community nodes was that they correspond with historic crossroad communities in the county and so 612
in addition to White Cross, there's Cedar Grove, there's Carr, there's Caldwell and Schley which are four rural 613
community nodes that are all in the northern part of the county. As far as why MPD-CD was left out of one node and 614
not the other, I just won't venture to guess, I would say I would do the same thing that the board and others might do 615
is try to read the definitions there and try to maybe guess at what may have been the original intentions. We did 616
have previously, before conditional districts, there was a planned development district and so there were some 617
changes when the code was updated to include conditional districts and that may have been, the time in between the 618
original establishment of those nodes and the creation of the original matrix from 1981, when a change was made to 619
the matrix. So, I will stop there. I hope that helped some. 620
621
Lamar Proctor: All right, any questions of Mr. Altieri? 622
623
Chris Johnston: I do have one quick question. The rural neighborhood activity district, they're all circles and so my 624
question would be in regards to how often they expand outside those designated circles that they have? They all 625
looked pretty standard still, and so was this the first one that has tried to venture outside of its designated zone since 626
1981? 627
628
Tom Altieri To my knowledge I believe this would be the first expansion of one of those nodes. There are a 629
couple going back, again to the original plan that aren't full circles, that were like little slices of circles, and there are a 630
couple of those in different areas of the county. Having read a while back the 1981 plan, these things were located 631
where there were existing uses on the ground at that point in time, so my guess is where there's a slice and not a full 632
radius they were trying to cover maybe one corner of an intersection and make sure that there was a consistent land 633
use classification. 634
635
Chris Johnston: Sure, and I guess my follow-up question then is in regards to why they picked a circle versus, I 636
mean, I don't want to get into the logistics there, but why they picked a circle instead of following the existing parcels 637
or anything along those lines. It just feels like it belabors itself to having to be expanded one way or another if it were 638
to follow that. 639
640
Cy Stober: If I may, that is a consistent frustration of staff with our Future Land Use Map. The failure to follow 641
property lines presents some challenges. 642
643
Chris Johnston: So, it's not unreasonable to expand it because the circle just seems to have been pulled out of – 644
645
Tom Altieri: Correct. And so again, going back to 1981, well before geographic information systems we had 646
paper copies, I wasn't here then, but paper copies of the zoning maps with the parcel lines, literally blue lines. 647
There's been a lot of changes in technology and so yes, with our update to our plan we do see it being more parcel 648
based than what we have now. 649
650
Chris Johnston: Okay, thank you. 651
652
Marilyn Carter: Thank you for the presentation and the history. I do have a question about MPD-CDs and whether 653
any rezonings have taken place under that classification with the rural community activity node over time. Have we 654
had an MPD-CDs yet in the county? 655
656
Tom Altieri: There have not been. 657
658
Approved 7.10.24
Lamar Proctor: Can you briefly sum up the difference between RNAN and RCAN node, rural community rural 659
neighborhood? 660
661
Tom Altieri: Not any more than I did by reading those definitions of the two. 662
663
Beth Bronson: Chair, I apologize, I have a question. But if you would like to go first, please. 664
665
Cy Stober: The only thing that I would have to add is that when they were assigned, the rural 666
neighborhood activity node was to serve a population of 1,000 people or less and the rural community activity node 667
was to serve a population of 1,000 to 5,000 people. Tom covered everything else. 668
669
Lamar Proctor: Okay, Ms. Bronson. 670
671
Beth Bronson: Thank you, and just because you did clarify the definition of the RCAN and the RNAN, the 672
neighborhood activity node would be more for like the mom and pop convenience stores, this idea that there were 673
local farmers that were coming together at this historical crossroads and provided a service, versus a rural 674
community activity node that would be focused on where that 1,000 to 5,000 would come for, I guess congregation or 675
there would be a fire station and or a post office or a school, something, it would be an institution. So, to be clear, the 676
proposed amendment is asking to change it from a rural neighborhood activity to a rural community activity. Would 677
that be accurate? 678
679
Tom Altieri: No, all but the last part, so we're talking about expanding the existing rural neighborhood 680
activity node at Morrow Mill and NC 54 to cover the balance of the property, a portion of the property on the north 681
does have some of the neighborhood node within it. So it would be to expand that node to cover the entire property 682
and then for consistency purposes, that's where you get to the matrix and add in the diamond there to allow for that 683
zoning district within the rural neighborhood activity node. It's already allowed in the rural community activity node. 684
685
Beth Bronson: Got it, now that said, does the rural neighborhood activity node have a limit on the acreage 686
that can be designated? 687
688
Tom Altieri: Not in the comprehensive plan, no. 689
690
Beth Bronson: Okay, and I only ask this because a couple of meetings ago we had a conversation about the 691
rural community activity node reaching its limit of rezoned parcels from agricultural residential to general commercial 692
and there was a discussion about whether or not that hit a threshold for what was allowable, not to say that that can't 693
be changed or that can't be amended, but I just wanted to clarify if that would create the same type of limitation. 694
695
Tom Altieri: So, I believe the standard or the threshold that you're referring to is in the unified development 696
ordinance, I don't have that section off the top of my head, but given time I think I could find it. There was at one 697
point a threshold there that applied to how much acreage within the node could be rezoned. 698
699
Beth Bronson: And to be clear, when we were speaking about that, that was the rural community activity 700
node, not the neighborhood, so I don't know, we haven't discussed if there is an actual threshold to the rural 701
neighborhood activity node, so I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. 702
703
Lamar Proctor: Ms. Kirk and then Statler. 704
705
Charity Kirk: I'm hoping that the applicant will present, but since we're asking questions now, why does the 706
whole parcel need to be converted to a rural activity node? Is it because an agricultural residential parcel doesn't 707
support multi-family dwellings? 708
709
Approved 7.10.24
Tom Altieri: So the zoning district they have applied for, the MPD-CD is not a permissible district, it's not 710
consistent with either the agricultural residential land use classification that applies to the majority of the property or 711
the rural neighborhood activity node that's on the northern portion. 712
713
Charity Kirk: So, it's potentially easier to bring it into consistency with the rural activity node than agricultural 714
residential. 715
716
Tom Altieri: Yes. 717
718
Charity Kirk: Okay. 719
720
Lamar Proctor: Statler? 721
722
Statler Gilfillen: In your opinion, as I understand, we are being asked to potentially approve a change to the 723
code which may expand the existing situation of what can be done at these nodes. As a professional who has 724
reviewed this, do you have any feelings about what the impact 10-20-30 years of this expansion could be, both 725
realistically and perhaps hypothetically? What would this do to change the county? 726
727
Tom Altieri: I wish my crystal ball was that good, I do have one, but I think the question that you're asking 728
is really more of that countywide question, you know, if the MPD-CD were permitted in all of the rural neighborhood 729
activity nodes countywide, what impact would that have, would it be a catalyst for more requests for MPD-CD zoning 730
within those nodes, I think that's what you're asking and I just, I don't have an answer to that question. It certainly 731
offers additional opportunity if this is made consistent and was not previously. There was the question about the rural 732
community activity nodes which do currently allow MPD-CD, how much has been rezoned in those nodes because 733
they have been on the map since 1981. That answer is there have been none. 734
735
Lamar Proctor: Okay, thank you and just for the public’s clarification, we're asking questions to staff so that we 736
fully understand going forward the foundational elements because the unified development ordinance which controls 737
planning and zoning and all rules in the county is very complex, so we want to make sure we have a full 738
understanding before the applicant presents and before we hear public comments so thank y'all for that. 739
740
Whitney Watson: So one other question, if this becomes MPD-CD, does become permitted in the rural 741
neighborhood networks, what will be the distinction then between the community activity nodes and the 742
neighborhood activity nodes. How will staff move forward or the public move forward trying to know which zoning 743
they're in and what their limits or permissions might be available. 744
745
Tom Altieri: I don't have any answer to that question specifically; however I can say that we are currently 746
about a third of the way with an update to our comprehensive land use plan that will include a review of the Future 747
Land Use Map and these classifications and so how those nodes are defined, whether they remain in circles, 748
parcels, is all going to be up for review and discussion and input in public meetings as we update that map. 749
750
Cy Stober: If I may add, it is a very difficult analysis to perform and right now I think that the guidance, the 751
best guidance we have is actually what Ms. Bronson already identified which is that the community activity nodes are 752
intended for larger institutional uses that would draw people from outside that area to that institution, so a fire house, 753
library, post office, etc. But it really is that nuanced in terms of making that determination, as well as the immediate 754
population served, that 1,000 or 1,000 to 5,000 population. 755
756
Beth Bronson: If I may just add on that to Chris's point on why the circle and not a square, why it doesn't 757
follow the parcels, the idea that it is a radius from a point, right, is this idea that there was no guidance or there was 758
no federal guidance for a comprehensive plan, or comprehensive land use plan in 1981, and, in fact, Orange County 759
being one of the first counties, I could be wrong, but definitely in the state, but potentially in the country to implement 760
Approved 7.10.24
a comprehensive land use plan that was to span and to provide guidance to not only planning boards, but to 761
legislative commissions to make sure decisions. Is that correct? 762
763
Tom Altieri: Certainly within the State of North Carolina, yes. 764
765
Beth Bronson: Okay. 766
767
Lamar Proctor: Any other questions of staff before we move to the applicant presentation? 768
769
Charity Kirk: When talking about the MPD-CD or CD whatever you want, it states in the unified 770
development ordinance that it shall be limited to a transition land use categories. What are transition land use 771
categories? 772
773
Tom Altieri: It's a broad category distinguished from rural land use categories based on the availability of 774
public utilities primarily water and sewer utilities, so transition from rural to urban with those utilities. 775
776
Charity Kirk: So agricultural residential is not a transitional land use category. 777
778
Tom Altieri: Correct. All of the transition and that's a broad land use classification of transition, all of those 779
classifications are adjacent, near our municipalities so none out in the rural areas. These are areas that by and large 780
are served by private wells and septic tanks and that's the distinction there between the rural land use classifications 781
and the transition classifications. 782
783
Charity Kirk: So if we like this project we need to turn it into this rural activity node, we can't leave the 784
activity node the way it is. 785
786
Tom Altieri: Mr. Stober had mentioned that the pleasure of the planning board recommendation and the 787
Board of County Commissioners, per state statutes, they do have the ability to approve a rezoning request that is 788
inconsistent with the plan and therefore the plan shall be amended. 789
790
Charity Kirk: That would mean agricultural residential then would be allowed to have conditional zoning 791
districts applied to it. It would be a permanent mark in the comprehensive plan or something else. 792
793
Cy Stober: So that requires a UDO text amendment and the applicant has proposed a text amendment so 794
there's two amendments, one is for the family care facility, the other is to that exact language that you're referring to 795
for the transition area and the rural community activity node which is footnote No. 1 under the MPD-CD standards, 796
and to include rural neighborhood activity node as one of the other allowable future land use classifications. 797
798
Charity Kirk: But if we don't want to touch the rural activity node, then we would have to touch agricultural 799
residential. 800
801
Cy Stober: Or propose a different type of node to be placed there. 802
803
Charity Kirk: Okay, thank you. 804
805
Lamar Proctor: Okay, any other questions of staff? All right, I think we're ready for the applicant presentation. 806
Thank you very much. 807
808
Marilyn Carter: Is there a limit on the applicant's time? 809
810
Lamar Proctor: 30 minutes. 811
Approved 7.10.24
812
Edwin Cox: I think we would like to be able to use a little bit more time to get the display of information that addresses 813
your questions up. 814
815
Charity Kirk: So I think it's in your notes that you have to officially request it. 816
817
Edwin Cox: We officially request it. 818
819
Lamar Proctor: At the beginning of your presentation our Rule E sub a says should an applicant anticipate 820
needing more than 30 minutes to present their applicant's, the applicant shall state their requested time allocation at 821
the beginning of their presentation and the planning board shall determine by a majority vote whether additional time 822
be allocated. 823
824
Charity Kirk: So how much time do you want? 825
826
Edwin Cox: An additional 15 minutes, 45 minutes. This is a very complicated proposal. 827
828
Charity Kirk: Oh, we know, we've been through complicated proposals before, that's why we set these 829
rules. 830
831
Chris Johnston: I make a motion to accept the additional 15 minutes. 832
833
Beth Bronson: Second. 834
835
Lamar Proctor: Any discussion? 836
837
Dolores Bailey: I do want us to remember that we stop at 10 no matter what so we're cutting the public off if we 838
give them the extra 15 minutes. 839
840
Lamar Proctor: Right, as we stated, I anticipate this will take multiple sessions so the public will get an 841
opportunity to speak if not tonight then at the next session. So, any other discussion about expanding the time from 842
30 to 45 minutes. 843
844
Whitney Watson: Mr. Proctor, I think that since this information was available in advance that the applicant 845
should have known that they had 30 minutes. I am reluctant to shortchange the public , however, we may continue 846
this discussion to a future meeting. We have practical experience where the second and sometimes third meetings 847
are not as helpful as when we have everybody here, so I really advocate for holding to the 30-minute limit. 848
849
Lamar Proctor: All right, any other discussion? 850
851
Statler Gilfillen: I would respectfully differ with the gentleman. I spent 432 pages, I got this yesterday and I 852
spent most of today reading through this. It is very easy to miss a single detail like that. In all the documents, all the 853
proposals and all the legalese, I'd like to, even though it means extends, and I want to hear the public, don't get me 854
wrong, but I don't want to shut off this organization for 15 minutes or a half an hour longer so that they can make their 855
presentation fairly also. 856
857
Beth Bronson: With that said, would you consider including your motion to extend the meeting until 10:15? 858
859
Lamar Proctor: So we have a seconded motion to extend the applicant's time to 45 minutes, any further 860
discussion before I take a vote? I'm hearing none, all those in favor of extending the applicant's presentation to 45 861
minutes raise your hand. All those opposed raise your hand. Okay, I believe it's opposed, you have 30 minutes. 862
Approved 7.10.24
863 MOTION BY Chris Johnston to extend applicants presentation time to 45 minutes. Seconded by Beth 864 Bronson 865
866
IN FAVOR: Statler Gilfillen, Chris Johnston, Liz Kalies, Beth Bronson. 867 OPPOSED: Marilyn Carter, Steve Kaufmann, Lamar Proctor, Charity Kirk, Whitney Watson, Dolores Bailey 868
MOTION FAILS 6 to 4 869
870
Edwin Cox: Thank you, my name's Edwin Cox, I'm the president of Hands Four Development Cooperative. 871
That's the applicant. So we're going to have to speed things up a bit, we will refer to Hands Four as H4D through our 872
presentation. The name of our development's Fiddlehead Corner and the application's a group of coordinated 873
proposed amendments that you've heard about to the UDO, the Future Land Use Map and the comprehensive plan, 874
and approval of this set of amendments would allow our organization to create an intentional community for people 875
who share a common interest in the arts. There's a strong emphasis in this community on senior living and aging in 876
place, as we'll talk about later. So to tell you more about how this came about, I'm pleased to introduce Mareah 877
Steketee who is the president of our sister organization, Triangle Traditional Music and Dance Retirement Society. 878
879
Mareah Steketee: Thank you for the opportunity to present tonight. We're hoping to share a lot of information in 880
a short period of time, shorter than expected. 2T, H4D and Fiddlehead Corner are three related organizations, 2T is 881
a nonprofit that was established formally in 2014. It is primarily an educational and social organization now. We have 882
offered formal orientations about aging and aging in place, what does it take to end life gracefully for over 300 people 883
to our orientations. Of those 300 people, a hundred are now 2T members, Hand Four Development was developed 884
or established in 2023, it's a cooperative, a business entity, there are 34 members who are contributing financially 885
and of their time. This is all based on volunteer work done with a great team of professionals which you'll hear from 886
tonight. Fiddlehead Corner, as you know, is our hope to be able to live together, age in place, senior living, has a 887
number of different core interests that we hold all in high value. Reasonably priced housing is a bit of a conflict for us 888
because we're hoping, planning to provide a significant number of amenities for people, including a large common 889
house which will become a living room and activity areas, shared spaces, and so it makes it more difficult along with 890
a family care home, two family care homes if the community is built out, to hold costs down. We're very cognizant of 891
costs, we're also an environmentally sensitive group. We dance, we're creative individuals, dance, play music, sing, 892
carry on and have a lot of different commitments to each other. We've done care teams for many, many years, about 893
20 years of care teams and I could talk more about that, but our professionals are here, Scott Radway, John Felton, 894
Mike is in the audience, Kevin Davidson will speak. We've continued to use, as you can read in the very long 895
application, a number of different professionals that have guided us along the way. I'm going to turn this over to Ed 896
again. Thank you. 897
898
Edwin Cox: Thank you Maria. As we set the goal for ourselves as an intentional community for living as 899
we aged, we wanted features that would allow us remain in the community as our abilities declined. And from the 900
experience of our parents and others that we knew, we recognized the pitfalls of trying to live in our own home, so we 901
concluded that some sort of communal living was our best solution. We knew about CCRCs and you're familiar with 902
them, as well. They're a good many positive attributes, there's independent living but step up care as your needs 903
increase. Assisted living, skilled nursing and memory care. But a lot of activities and social interaction as well. The 904
negative attributes are the complex licensing and financing requirements, steep entry fees, often nonrefundable, high 905
monthly costs, and long waiting lists. I don't know if you've tried to think ahead and get on Carol Woods or Carolina 906
Meadows, you've got to think well ahead. Our approach has been to take the best features of the CCRCs and leave 907
the rest behind, so we wanted a variety of housing that was right sized and had universal design, we wanted 908
clustering to be close so mobility would be easy for all people of all abilities. We wanted activities planned and 909
managed by the creative community of residents, a continuum of care, care teams to look after one another, family 910
care home, inclusive governance, ownership with equity and no special licensing other than the family care homes. 911
So in order to implement this, we had the idea of two complementary characteristics, one is to have a compact 912
community that would facilitate interaction and mobility as I discussed earlier, and it would develop on a small portion 913
Approved 7.10.24
of the land and we would then conserve a large percentage of the remaining land and undisturbed forests. This type 914
of development embodies the ideas contained in the flexible development conservation cluster in section 7.12.5B of 915
the UDO. We mentioned these synergistic aspects, the compactness of the developed area and maximizing 916
conserved acreage to our master planning, John Felton who you'll hear from just now, and he started work on the 917
project and he'll tell you about what he came up with. 918
919
John Felton: Thank you, good evening, my name's John Felton, architect and senior designer at Cline. 920
We're a landscape and planning and architectural firm. So in our web sessions the group gave us great opportunities 921
and a lot of feedback. What they wanted was really in line with either a TND development or a compact 922
neighborhood. Compact neighborhoods are really just shrinking the built, creating sort of shared spaces, celebrating 923
common spaces, preserving natural topography and space and de-emphasizing the car. We looked at the TND 924
model which basically is an alley loaded street front for this group and how they wanted to live, the idea of a pocket 925
neighborhood basically and Ross Chapin, you're seeing some examples of his work. He practices in the Portland/ 926
Seattle area, fantastic work and you can see from the images that the car is minimized, the car is still on the street 927
but it's on the back side of the living space. These small cottages and small homes really, the front porch is to a 928
natural environment with rain gardens and decomposed gravel walkways so there's less impervious surfaces, and it's 929
a place that celebrates what they want to celebrate which is each other and so they didn't need a big yard, a big lot, 930
they don't want that. They want to live closer together in a place that allows them to celebrate each other and their 931
life and then also multiple or different living opportunities so that they can age in place and not be forced to, when 932
they're too old to maintain that house, to have to leave and leave their friends. So, it's a purpose built idea and what's 933
great about it is that when you're driving along the roads you'll never see it, you'll have an entry, you'll have two 934
entries and then the development is compactly located inside the property. It's a great group and really, I think we've 935
come up with a wonderful way to put housing on this property. Thank you. 936
937
Scott Radway: Good evening, Scott Radway, planning consultant. I have lived here in Orange County since 938
1989 and have followed many of their projects through the process for Orange County and also for Hillsborough and 939
one of the projects I worked on was the Waterstone project and figuring out how to blend the sort of edge of urban 940
and the edge of I would call rural, which it had been. First I want to talk about the environmental framework for the 941
project to get it towards the design and what defined the design and how we got together, streams and regulated 942
buffers, slope, drainage analysis, water supply, soil suitability and many of the documents the County has and others, 943
it talks about the ability to use public water, public wells, and private water systems and to use collective wastewater 944
treatment areas in areas where the soils and other aspects are appropriate and we believe this is one. Within the 945
packet, you have a number of reviews by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, which is another 946
layer above the County and those pieces of information are there. This is the property; I think it is the image that you 947
see as clear as the one I see up on the wall. 948
949
Beth Bronson: It is. 950
951
Scott Radway: Okay. What we have here is the property that's outlined and four photographs of the types of 952
streams that run through the site. The streams corridors, and the streams are identified by the county stamp so 953
we've been working with that information as a core piece of our activity. These two images present almost the same 954
information. On the left is the piece of property we're talking about and is adjoining properties. Immediately to the 955
east is the flood plain, the stream corridors are identified but we've identified on here are the stream corridors and the 956
buffers that are required for them. Some cases they're 85 feet and some cases they're 60 feet, you don't see it on 957
the screen so well but there's an additional 25 foot drip zone or critical root zone buffer area outside of this specific 958
distance buffer. The property is really a pretty gentle piece of property, 95 percent of the property is less than a 15 959
percent slope which you can see on here. A25 percent slope, which make up less than 1 percent of the site, and 960
they are, as all know in Orange County, they are part of the stream corridor alignments most of the place, and then 961
there's 15 to 25 percent slopes. What you see in the middle, it looks like a whitewashed area basically between 0 962
and 15 percent slopes and that's 96 percent of the property and it's a pretty gentle piece of property. Of course what 963
we were looking at was also geological formations for water supply and then for wastewater there is the soils. And I 964
Approved 7.10.24
did want to make one comment about the question that was asked about how this might affect the rest of the county 965
and just what we have gone through here. This is in the Haw River watershed, we've got stream buffers, we've got 966
roadway connection pieces and we've got a number of things. I would be absolutely flabbergasted if there was 967
another identical piece of property and that is just to say that looking as the staff has talked about into what might be 968
in other places in the county, you really have to be looking at a specific analysis of what's that watershed, whether it's 969
a protected watershed and some other things like that. And that just, expands on the work they have to do. Thank 970
you. 971
972
Edwin Cox: Very briefly on the water, we had a hydrogeologist cross the property back and forth, back and 973
forth with a magnetometer and generate this map that you see before you. The red areas are areas of high magnetic 974
strength that represent iron, that is in formations called diabase dikes and they were looking specifically for diabase 975
because it is highly correlated with a very good source of water, typically 40 gallons per minute or more in the wells 976
that are drilled in the areas of diabase. There has also been a U.S. Geologic Survey of 600 wells in Orange County. 977
It was published around 2000 but correlated the area in Orange County with the amount of well yield and in this 978
particular location in the county, the average well yield was 50 to 75 gallons per minute, so we're pretty confident that 979
we've got water down there and it's in cracked, fractured rock, it's not in sedimentary rock so the probability of 980
interference between wells our geologist tells us is very low. And this is the man telling you about the wastewater 981
system, Kevin Davidson. 982
983
Kevin Davidson: My name is Kevin Davidson, I'm a wastewater engineer. I'm here with my colleagues Jasmine 984
and Chris. We are AWT engineers and soils scientists, we're a local company that's been around for quite a while. 985
We routinely help out residents in Orange County. We work with many folks here, are vested in it, been here a long 986
time, matter of fact we're still working with the local fire station. We will be the ones that help out the development for 987
the wastewater system. We have looked at the soils and we will continue to look at that. We also will put together the 988
conceptual plan which is a plan that we have worked with many times throughout North Carolina, the fundamental 989
part of is called the step system to treatment with ultimately drip dispersal, and we've done that throughout North 990
Carolina. We've had very good success with it. During the question and answer time, I'd be glad to discuss any 991
particular components or how we have helped the residents of Orange County and how this system and the 992
experience that we have with this system, be glad to answer any questions that you, that you may have. 993
994
John Felton: I guess I could read this, but I'd rather get to the other images, but if you have any questions, 995
let me know on this. Well, I guess the information here, 150 dwelling units, that’s in 3 phases, 1.66 dwelling units per 996
acre, all ownership dwellings, 90 single family dwellings, 60 multi-family flats, 300 maximum bedrooms, 260 to 285 997
estimated residences, internal road construction is to NCDOT standard and three development phases, as I said, 998
essentially equal, so 50, 50 and 50. This is the overall master plan and you see the development is nested at the top 999
of the site along the upper stream buffer with two access points, one Gold Mine and one off the Morrow Mill. And 1000
Morrow Mill, the added left and right turn lanes will be added to those two entries and then internal road construction 1001
to NCDOT standards, so that's a loop road inside. This shows the phase, the proposed phasing for the project. You'll 1002
see Phase 1, P1, that includes the entry drive for Morrow Mill to the P1 phase and then that loop road extends to the 1003
first phase of the waste treatment plant and to the recycling center, they're all in the blue color. In Phase 1 and we 1004
may get to this, but in Phase 1 the community building would be started, in Phase 2, and that's in the yellow color, 1005
you will have additional single-family residences, townhouses and stacked flat buildings. You'll also have the 1006
community gardens, storm water management at that point and by the end of that phase we'll need to do Well No. 2 1007
to comply. Also, in Phase 2 you'll have the completion of the internal loop road out to Gold Mine. And then in Phase 1008
3, if you can see the colors here, Phase 3 is over on the left-hand side, that'll be the final phase of 50 units, they'll be 1009
30 single family houses and 20 multi-family with additional storm water control. 1010
1011
Scott Radway: Four or five slides here that really reflect elements of what's required as information from the 1012
applicant that fits within the MPD-CD and all of the various layers that are in that. Our requirement is to identify what 1013
uses are in what pods on the site and what uses are not in what pods on the site, and so what we have here is Pod 1014
A1 which has all of the residential development, it has the community buildings, it has the family care facilities, two 1015
Approved 7.10.24
buildings that are six persons each as a maximum. It has open space and recreation and if you look at the plans that 1016
have been provided whether they're small scale or large scale, you can see some of the detailed information. Pod 1017
No. 2 is about an acre to an acre and a quarter in size and that's where the wastewater treatment would be, but it's 1018
also where solid waste and recycling collection would be and it's also where we would use to maintain maintenance 1019
equipment, maintenance vehicles, things like that. Pod 3, 11 acres, this would be the area that would be the primary 1020
area for the wastewater distribution, that's subsurface, and it would also include a repair area and that is for the full 1021
complement of the 150 or so dwellings, plus the community buildings that are there. Pod 4 is 7 acres and Pods 5 is 6 1022
acres, they are proposed to be retained in their existing treed character. Pod 3 would retain most of its tree character 1023
even though the drip system can wind through the trees and that's part of the elements of what's required to be 1024
submitted. There's a hierarchy of roads that might not have been so easy to see in the lesser plans. These are all to 1025
be built to NCDOT constructions standards. There's loop roads, they've been reviewed for emergency vehicle 1026
access, FedEx, UPS and all of the other things that we now get delivered at home on a much more regular basis. 1027
Tree preservation and landscape plan. It's not really possible to see what's on here at this scale but in the large 1028
scale drawings we have, it includes information, the ordinances require street trees, yard buffer trees, parking lot 1029
trees, parking lot shrubs and then in the perimeter buffer which is a 100-foot buffer or 75-foot buffer that goes around 1030
the complete site, there is a requirement for how many trees of what type and what size are in those buffers. We're 1031
going to retain these natural buffers and augment them as needed in order to meet those requirements. 1032
1033
Dolores Bailey: Mr. Chair, can we do a time check? 1034
1035
Lamar Proctor: I have them until 8:50. 1036
1037
Scott Radway: 8:50? Okay, I'll use one more minute then. This shows you essentially what is going to be 1038
green on the site when we're completed, the perimeter buffer, the stream buffers, the treed areas, within the 1039
development area which has the residential development, there's a lot of area that will not become impervious, in 1040
fact, the site right now as we have it designed and laid out and measured it as we can at this level of detail, we're 1041
about 19 percent for the entire site. My 1 minute's up, thank you. 1042
1043
Edwin Cox: You've heard from Mr. Altieri and Mr. Stober about what changes are needed in detail, so I’ll 1044
just summarize them here for you to look at a moment. Future Land Use Map amendment to classify our entire 1045
parcel as a rural neighborhood activity node, comprehensive plan amendment to link MPD-CD and RNAN. The 1046
zoning atlas amendment to rezone the parcel to MPD-CD and the UDO text amendment to put in some text where 1047
it's required. I thought it was important to emphasize that you can't just apply for these changes to the 1048
comprehensive plan and the Future Land Use Map and say, it's because I want it, it requires justification in terms of 1049
the objectives of Orange County as defined in the comprehensive plan, so our justification is that if the changes are 1050
approved the success of our project beneficially addresses a number of objectives outlined in the master aging plan. 1051
And these specifically are housing Goal three, choices, quality and affordability of housing. We will have houses, 1052
duplexes and condos, so those are our choices. Universal design that will allow people of all abilities to use any of 1053
the residential areas and it'll be high quality construction. Social interaction, Goal 1; there will be buildings and 1054
spaces for that purpose, that will be our community center, our walking trails, community garden. There will be 1055
mobility options. We will have short distances from residences so that wheelchairs and mobility devices such as 1056
scooters can get to the places they need to go. There will be participation in engagement through activities led by 1057
the creative community, health and wellbeing resources, we have a continuum of care with care teams that are being 1058
planned and a fitness center and there will be communication and information to meet Goal 8, a high speed Internet 1059
connectivity and volunteer engagement. So Fiddlehead Corner will help fill the gap in support that is expected by the 1060
tsunami of new aging adults in Orange County over the next few years and I did also want to mention sustainability. 1061
Environmental sustainability is a high priority among our members and we, many of us have been engaged in local 1062
and state sustainability efforts, the conservation cluster master plan design will preserve two-thirds of our land in 1063
open space. We will have solar energy to generate electricity and energy efficiency in building design and Kevin 1064
didn't get to tell you about our reclaimed water, but we're going to have the ability from this advanced secondary 1065
treatment system to use the water for things like toilet flushing and therefore, save a lot of clean water that we 1066
Approved 7.10.24
otherwise would use for those purposes. Thank you for your time and attention. We'd ask our H4D members who 1067
are in the audience to stand up and show you who we are. 1068
1069
Lamar Proctor: Thank you for that presentation. If it's any consolation to the applicant, this particular board is 1070
very robust in its questioning so I imagine that any information you feel you didn't get an opportunity to present you 1071
will get to explore with this board, so is the board ready to move to the question portion for the applicant? 1072
1073
Chris Johnston: Will we be following our normal procedure going down the line? 1074
1075
Lamar Proctor: Yes. All right, so Statler if you'd like, do you have any questions? 1076
1077
Statler Gilfillen: I do have one, and going through all the information, and I see a lot of good in your proposal, 1078
but the schedule is there, the numbers of units, can you give me some idea of what the estimated budget when this is 1079
completed will be? What is the financial impact in Orange County for this, approximately? 1080
1081
Edwin Cox: I estimated the total budget is between 60 and 75 million for full build out to the 150 units but 1082
it's going to be in phases so that will be comparably less for each phase. 1083
1084
Statler Gilfillen Thank you. 1085
1086
Lamar Proctor: Ms. Carter? 1087
1088
Marilyn Carter: Mr. Chair, I have several questions, so I don't mind deferring to the other end of the table to 1089
come back my way. 1090
1091
Lamar Proctor: Let's stick with the normal protocol, because you may ask questions that others are planning 1092
to ask that will get answered. 1093
1094
Marilyn Carter: Okay, thank you. Well, first off, thank you for the extensive preparation. Your packet, I think it 1095
made for a lot of very good reading for all of us over the last number of days. I really appreciate the time that it takes 1096
to put something like this proposal together and of course the staff's time as well. Because we do look at the 1097
comprehensive plan very closely, I have a question about future land use in the comprehensive plan that I'll ask in a 1098
moment. I did want to, I have several questions, one has to do with a why, in terms of the consideration for the 1099
conservation cluster, and it may be Statler to chime in here, but with respect to the proposal and the MPD-CD 1100
designation, was there a compelling reason why a structure like that, such that was approved recently for the 1101
Stonewall project, which was also a conservation cluster using AR zoning, I believe, is there a compelling reason why 1102
that wasn't pursued in this particular zoning request? 1103
1104
Cy Stober: So, I can speak to our analysis, which is two-fold. One is any subdivision creating more than 1105
20 lots is required to pursue some sort of rezoning. So, the recommendation in the UDO is residential conditional 1106
district; however, master plan development, because it's a large complex subdivision featuring multiple housing 1107
types, the definition of master plan development includes large subdivisions and multi- and mixed-use developments. 1108
The incorporation of the community center and the family care facilities, and my interpretation, and this was, Tom can 1109
attest to, a subject of robust discussion among the staff, my interpretation was the MPD-CD was the most 1110
appropriate zoning district to be applied to what Hands Four was proposing. 1111
1112
Marilyn Carter: Okay, thank you. 1113
1114
Charity Kirk: What were the other options? 1115
1116
Approved 7.10.24
Cy Stober: Well, because the other option would've been residential conditional district, but that doesn't 1117
include the nonresidential features, because there's several outparcels that have primary uses that are completely 1118
nonresidential. And when you are involving more than one primary housing type - so they have detached single 1119
family homes, attached single family homes, which are also known as townhomes, and multi-family structures - the 1120
Master Plan Development, just definition or description, lends itself exactly to that type of community, or that type of 1121
conditional district. 1122
1123
Marilyn Carter: So just a quick follow-up then to confirm, if the community didn't have those mixed types of 1124
housing opportunities, then it would be more appropriate to consider an agricultural residential cluster subdivision. Is 1125
that correct? 1126
1127
Cy Stober: If it was entirely single-family residential homes with no nonresidential components or maybe 1128
an incidental outparcel for a pool or something like that, then yes, this would be an R-CD application. 1129
1130
Marilyn Carter: Understand. So, a follow-on question has to do with family care facilities, and as someone 1131
who is a primary caregiver for an elder, I'm very interested in your proposal in terms of all the aspects and the 1132
comprehensiveness of it. But family care facilities can take a number of different forms under statute, and so I'm 1133
curious about whether the family care facilities are targeted to be family care homes, which would be, I imagine, in 1134
single family or multi-family up to six residents, or whether you're envisioning something larger under the flexibility 1135
provided by the MPD-CD designation. 1136
1137
Edwin Cox: No, we'd be going for six residents in a facility and up to two facilities. We'll build one and if 1138
we need more capacity, the second. And it would be for assistance with activities of daily living and possibly for 1139
cognitive problems. 1140
1141
Marilyn Carter: Thank you. 1142
1143
Cy Stober: And if I may, Ms. Carter, that was the substance of the slides and the primary motive for staff 1144
to recommend the definition update because 160D-907 limits the number of inhabitants to a family care facility to six 1145
individuals. So, we would regulate that use to be limited to no more than six per structure. 1146
1147
Marilyn Carter: Thank you for that clarification. Question about the septic system, and it may be that 1148
Mr. Davidson might be able to, or the team, might be able to answer, but it has to do with the nature of the primary 1149
treatment. And some of us have heard about issues in other neighborhoods that are tied into the MBR approach for 1150
handling the solid waste treatment. So, what type of system are you proposing in that up-front stage of treatment? 1151
1152
Kevin Davidson: Okay. Appreciate the question there. So, what we're proposing for the whole development, 1153
the first piece of primary treatment is called a step tank, and it's very similar to a septic tank that many of us have that 1154
are on septic systems at our house, a traditional septic tank. You collect the waste from the building, and in a step 1155
tank - step is S-T-E-P, and it stands for Septic Tank Effluent Pump - and in that tank, we're going to collect those 1156
solids, that waste, that comes from, whether it's a house, a row of houses, a community building. We're going to 1157
collect it in that first initial tank. That tank serves as a traditional septic tank in the sense that we're settling the solids, 1158
we're letting any scum layer float to the top and - I apologize, this is my day-to-day thing, so when we deal with solids 1159
and scum, that's normal septic conversations for us poop people - so we deal with that. And so, we settle those 1160
solids, we let that scum layer rise. In the outlet side of the tank - and there was a slide, and I believe it's in your 1161
packet there; it shows a schematic of a STEP tank - we have a pump vault unit, and inside that pump vault unit is a 1162
high-head turbine pump very similar to a well style pump. That filter in that pump vault protects that pump from any 1163
solids, and we're trying to draw through the clear zone of this tank. So, if you picture those solids are down low, the 1164
scum layer is high, and essentially as clean as I can be is that center of that tank. We're drawing water through that 1165
clear zone of that tank through that filter and into that pump. Now, that pump, as I said, it's a high-head pump. We're 1166
able to send that filtered effluent - it's not wastewater at this point; it's filtered effluent - we're able to send that quite 1167
Approved 7.10.24
some distance if we need to and also at some elevation if we need to. This collection system now is also small-1168
diameter pipe, so it's very unobtrusive in terms of how we put in the collection. We're able to follow the contour, 1169
follow the roads. And John and I actually had gone through the development, and we had located where we would 1170
put several of these STEP tanks to serve maybe a row of houses, one of the care facilities that Ed was just talking 1171
about or larger versions of that same style tank to serve each of the multi-family units. In the end, we can bring those 1172
lines together, and that was another detail that's there. It's called a STEP connection detail, and think about it almost 1173
like a reverse water system. So, everybody's house that's on a community or municipal water system, that main 1174
water line comes down through the road, and then we all have our water taps that feed into our individual house. 1175
That's how they charge us, right? They go look at that meter. This is almost the same idea in the reverse. And so, 1176
we have the STEP tank at the house, small-diameter line that goes to a STEP connection system, which is a back 1177
flow, some ball valves, and now we have a common line. Again, generally, it's small-diameter, 2-, 3-inch-diameter, 1178
generally not any larger than that. And we take that line, we bring it together and then we bring it over to our 1179
treatment system. You referenced, ma'am, a MBR system, Membrane Bioreactor. Well, we're using on this, or 1180
proposing, it's called a recirculating media filter. The actual product is called AdvanTex. I started designing with 1181
AdvanTex back in, I think, 2006, 2007, somewhere in that ballpark. It has been permitted in North Carolina for use 1182
since early 2000, about 2001. The AdvanTex technology is developed and manufactured by a company called 1183
Orenco Systems that is out in the west coast, in Oregon. It's a very strong company. They're international. They've 1184
got projects all over the place. Very, very large number of them are in North Carolina. We've worked with hundreds 1185
of them in North Carolina. There's many of them, the same technology, in Orange County. We have designed, 1186
permitted, helped to install, certified, we operate several systems with this same technology throughout Orange 1187
County, throughout North Carolina, and we've even done some work in Virginia. But the technology is proven. It's a 1188
great system for residential style waste, and it very, very much allows, when you have the ebbs and flows that come 1189
with domestic waste products, houses, this type of system works very well with that. And part of the application is 1190
actually a report that we had done several years ago, where we actually went in - and I will admit, I'm sometimes 1191
skeptical of - I get sales people come to my office and say, Kevin, we see you do a lot of waste water work; we'd like 1192
you to design with our system. And so, one of my first questions is, well, let me see your data. Is your system going 1193
to work? Oh, yes, we have all this data from Utah, California. We have data from North Carolina, stuff that we have 1194
operated that I have installed ourself. It's a recirculating media filter. It's an entirely different technology than an 1195
MBR. 1196
1197
Marilyn Carter: Thank you, Mr. Davidson. I just wanted to understand if it was different from an MBR and that 1198
doesn't mean MBRs, or the membrane bioreactors are bad. It just means that there are certain considerations that 1199
we've all heard about in the public about the concerns about those kinds of systems in neighborhoods like Briar 1200
Chapel and others that did not apply here. Is that correct? 1201
1202
Kevin Davidson: We are not using that system here. My colleague, Chris, knows even more about that system 1203
than I do. 1204
1205
Marilyn Carter: All right. Thank you for that clarification, and I have another question, but I'm going to pass on 1206
because I suspect my other question might get asked by someone else. Thank you, Mr. Chair, thank you. 1207
1208
Steven Kaufmann: I'm going to pass. 1209
1210
Lamar Proctor: Okay, I think it would be helpful if you could go back from my questions to the land-use pods 1211
slide. I thought that was a very helpful diagram of proposed uses. If we can find it. 1212
1213
Scott Radway: There we go. 1214
1215
Lamar Proctor: So, my question in the center area where it's not designated that just says land-use pods. 1216
What's the intention on that area of the property? 1217
1218
Approved 7.10.24
Scott Radway: It's not their property. 1219
1220
Lamar Proctor: It's not y'all's property? 1221
Scott Radway: It's not part of this application. The person who owns that could speak to that if you want that 1222
as an answer. I can say how the pieces of property fit together in a fashion. 1223
1224
Lamar Proctor: Sure. 1225
1226
Scott Radway: One point that may have gotten lost in the process is, the staging process, which we have one 1227
here, goes and fits with some of the ordinances that the County has and some of the considerations about 1228
emergency services and other things. So, you have Phase 1 in Pod 1, which you saw. We have an entry from 1229
Morrow Mill Road that comes into that, and along that edge, there is a contract agreement to provide an opportunity 1230
to connect from the center property to that property, and there is a relationship buffer that you can't quite see in here 1231
of a set back from the property line, and that's part of a contract agreement with that property owner. 1232
1233
Chris Johnston: One of those slides does show the Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 with the colors. 1234
1235
Scott Radway: Sorry, I'm trying not to page through too many slides. So, Phase 1, 50 dwelling units relates to 1236
a well and it relates to traffic volume, and it relates to a number of other things. Phase 2, which is another 50 units, 1237
relates to emergency service needs and where, at that point, you need two entrances for emergency services to the 1238
site. So, that brings us to the point where we have primary entrance on Morrow Mill Road. We have a secondary or 1239
minor entrance, if you will, on Gold Mine Loop Road that needs to be active for the third phase to be started. So, that 1240
needs to be connected at that point in time. You see a funny setback of the property line over there. That's actually 1241
a strange, but perfectly functional form, of having a wider right of way along that road so that the property owner that 1242
owns the remaining 35 acres here in the center can have individual lots in areas that have good soils, and they can 1243
have access to this secondary entrance or this roadway where we anticipate substantially less traffic in and out, even 1244
at full completion. The property's zoned AR. It's a bona fide farm at this point. It can do all the things that a bona 1245
fide farm can do with its property, or it can develop residential, and so that's sort of the relationship. One is to be 1246
compatible, connective, and still let the property owner from whom this larger piece was bought do what he wishes to 1247
do for his family and his children in the future. 1248
1249
Lamar Proctor: And the applicant's proposed amendment will expand RNAN through the crescent-shaped 1250
property that's the subject of tonight, correct? 1251
1252
Scott Radway: Yeah, correct. 1253
1254
Lamar Proctor: And so, any future zoning of that is a separate question and would be, if it was brought into 1255
MPD-CD zoning, it would have to go through the same process. 1256
1257
Cy Stober: Yes, absolutely. To be frank, it was included in the initial application but due to its bona fide 1258
farm use and the limitations zoning might place on that versus the existing AR zoning and its farm status, my 1259
recommendation to the applicant was to remove it from the application. 1260
1261
Lamar Proctor: Okay, thank you. There was also a small portion that was in the resource protection overlay in 1262
one corner of the property, so I was wondering how that was addressed or how that was taken into consideration into 1263
the site plan. 1264
1265
Scott Radway: Does it show up on this slide, or is it in the one that's the more environmental slide? 1266
1267
Lamar Proctor: It's in our overlay on the future land use map. 1268
1269
Approved 7.10.24
Scott Radway: Okay, I think I know what you mean. The piece it's in, I think you're speaking about the 1270
environmental piece that sticks in the tiny corner of the property. 1271
1272
Lamar Proctor: Correct. 1273
1274
Scott Radway: So, this was the east side, flowing from west to east, the northern piece, and its various stream 1275
channels in here flowing, again, west to east getting into this higher-level stream, which also then has a flood plain, 1276
so it's a FEMA flood plain and regulated. Where we overlap is like 8,000 square feet or so out of 90 acres in an area 1277
that's protected by your stream buffer ordinance and the state's regulations also. So, one of the review comments 1278
from the state was it's there, make sure it's dealt with, and that's sort of a recommendation both to us and to you as 1279
the County. What we haven't shown on here, is we have ended our buffers at our property line because we don't 1280
want to be presumptive and draw a buffer on somebody else's property line. It may not be a buffer on their property 1281
line based on their use in the future, and so we've tried not to get fingerprints on something and 5 years from now it 1282
gets interpreted incorrectly. 1283
1284
Lamar Proctor: I guess my question, generally, is it seems like the site plan is consistent with preserving the 1285
rural character to the degree that you can. I was just wondering if you want to comment a little more about 1286
preservation, and green spaces, and protection of the stream buffers on this property and how that fits into the overall 1287
design. 1288
1289
Scott Radway: Well, as you heard Ed talk about, who's a principal, and the members of H4D and 2T, the sort 1290
of marching orders was, this looks like a piece of property that's gentle to build on, it does have environmental 1291
pieces, they want a lot of trails and want a lot of other things for active adults, not necessarily baseball fields. But, in 1292
looking at the property, then the challenge to John Felton and to 2T and working on this together was how do we, in 1293
essence, be invisible to the public, if you will, on the roads. What we have is one roadway entrance that'll come from 1294
Morrow Mill Road and come into the site and except as you go past it and probably have a 60-foot-wide opening in 1295
what’s now treed land; you will notice that it's anything other than we have to provide turning lanes for NCDOT's 1296
evaluation. The entrance character on Gold Mine will even be a lesser impact because it can be really simply, it's 1297
going to be a 20-foot-wide paved surface because that's what emergency services needs. But, it goes through a 1298
forest on a pass where we're trying to use the existing logging road that was in there from many, many years ago, 1299
and so we're trying to have it as little at the edge of the property that somebody would see. If you like speed limit 1300
kinds of considerations, or if you like baseball and know how far a ball can go at a hundred miles an hour, and how 1301
many feet in how many seconds. People driving by those entrances will have about 3 seconds to notice that they're 1302
there. And, that's sort of a sales pitch, but it's also real. 1303
1304
Lamar Proctor: And you talked about you were going to incorporate solar and minimize any light pollution. I 1305
was wondering if you could just comment on those things. 1306
1307
Scott Radway: I can. Solar, the layout, I'm not going to go back to the layout in detail, but the layout with what 1308
you can see on here and, obviously, we have 24, 25 acres in this area that's going to be disturbed, and some of it will 1309
be tree removal, and that's part of what your ordinance addresses for the number of plantings and trees we have to 1310
put back in. But what you see in here in what are the single-family or the townhouse rooftops, there's also a 1311
detached garage. So, you have a 1,200 to 1,500 single-floor, two-bedroom house with a detached garage space, or 1312
two-parking spaces. The roofs and the roofs of both of those, a separate garage and a separate house, can be fit 1313
with a roof line that will go whatever direction it needs to go to capture the sun as the sun rotates through the site. 1314
So, a part of the ability to work with solar and part of the ability to do some of the other pieces is because the building 1315
model is going to be one in which the flexibility to change the shape of a garage, or not necessarily the shape of it, 1316
but the roof orientation of the garage, is possible for every piece of property in here so each piece of property can get 1317
an orientation that does that, and that's the level of detail that the H4D and the 2T people charged John with figuring 1318
out. 1319
1320
Approved 7.10.24
Lamar Proctor: Okay, thank you. 1321
1322
Charity Kirk: Okay, I think I have some questions for Cy too. I don't find the R-CD in the UDO. Can you 1323
point me to the page where that conditional district is detailed – 1324
1325
Cy Stober: In the UDO? I have to use my phone because I've been kicked off the Wi-Fi. 1326
1327
Beth Bronson: Is anybody else having an issue? 1328
1329
Charity Kirk: No, it's down. 1330
1331
Tom Altieri: Page 3-61 has the list of all the conditional districts. 1332
1333
Charity Kirk: But is there, you know how all the other zones have their own multi-page spread of what's 1334
allowed? 1335
1336
Cy Stober: Yes, it should be right before MPD-CD if you'll just give me a moment. I apologize for the 1337
delay. 1338
1339
Charity Kirk: And I ask because it seems like the crux of the issue is where do we want multi-family housing 1340
and where is multi-family housing allowed. I don’t feel like the rural neighborhood activity note is meant for a 1341
residential area? It seems like it's very much into local small businesses and sort of providing a community hub, and 1342
this is not that, and the only reason why it's being put in that is because there's multi-family housing here. 1343
1344
Beth Bronson: The MPD-CD district is what they're applying for. 1345
1346
Charity Kirk: Yes, but you can't put a conditional district in agricultural residential. You can put one of these 1347
MP things in agricultural residential, so you have to move it into a rural neighborhood activity node in order to allow 1348
for the multifamily housing and the other amenities. Is that right? 1349
1350
Cy Stober: Yes and the nonresidential components of the principal uses, primary use of the community 1351
center, the family care facilities, by my analysis, would have necessitated an MPD-CD zoning as well and that would 1352
be my recommendation to both the applicant and the board, and the analysis, because it's not exclusively residential. 1353
1354
Charity Kirk: Right, so the question for the board, I think, is where do we want multifamily housing and 1355
some of these other amenities, so the question is how many of these multifamily units, how many units are in a 1356
building? Like what size are these multifamily housing units? 1357
1358
Beth Bronson: 150. 1359
1360
Charity Kirk: And that's a total of total families in the whole development. 1361
1362
Beth Bronson: One hundred fifty residences. 1363
1364
Charity Kirk: Yeah, but some of them are single family. 1365
1366
Beth Bronson: Three hundred bedrooms. I apologize. 1367
1368
Scott Radway: We're planning, in the full build out, three buildings, each building has 20 units. 1369
1370
Approved 7.10.24
Charity Kirk: Okay, so in the county, where are other large-scale apartment buildings or apartment buildings 1371
like this located? It seems like they're located much more, like if you look at R-2, R-2 was talking about being closer 1372
to cities, it seemed, for me. So is there a precedent for a development with these multifamily housings further in the 1373
county? Are there any examples you can think of? 1374
1375
Cy Stober: The only one that comes to my mind, and I'll defer to Tom given his experience with the county 1376
will be much longer than mine, but Settlers Point included some multifamily in it but that was being served by Town of 1377
Hillsborough Water and Sewer. That's at the present location of RTLP, south of the interstate. But otherwise, to my 1378
knowledge, multifamily has not been permitted through zoning by the county in recent history. We do a lot of 1379
duplexes by right. We see a limited number of those in the county. They're oddities, I'd say. But not, nothing more 1380
dense than duplexes. 1381
1382
Charity Kirk: So, if we want to allow this, the easiest way to allow it is to go into this rural neighborhood 1383
activity node and sort of pull it, pull all the land. Because that's where we can do the MPD-CD. 1384
1385
Cy Stober: So those are the corresponding amendments to the comprehensive plan and the UDO as well. 1386
The amendment to the MPD-CD along with the future land use classifications where MPD-CD is allowed, which is 1387
both the UDO amendment and the Appendix F amendment to the comprehensive plan, and then expansion of that 1388
node in the Future Land Use Map. So at present, no, you can't, that cannot be done. It would require these other 1389
amendments that have been applied for by the applicant to be approved. 1390
1391
Charity Kirk: So to the applicant, why should we allow this new and novel thing so far out into the county, 1392
this development that doesn't have a precedent? 1393
1394
Scott Radway: I don't want you to take this personally, but this kind of a design is not new and it is not novel, 1395
but it is – 1396
1397
Charity Kirk: I know the design isn't, it's just the location in our particular county. 1398
1399
Scott Radway: I want to make it, without offending anybody, make it clear that this is a compact neighborhood 1400
and it's designed to have single-family detached housing opportunity, front house which is attached unit opportunity 1401
and multifamily, and we're looking at multifamily opportunity, that's three buildings. And I'll get to your point, and from 1402
Cy, you've heard some zoning aspect pieces of it, but it's not a new and a novel, it's not a new and a novel design. 1403
You can tell from the discussion tonight that it's been very, very difficult to figure out how to do something that has 1404
been proven to be successful in many places in North Carolina, as well as many places in the United States, within 1405
the zoning ordinances and land use plan, for Orange County and in many discussions back and forth, the issue of 1406
the Master Plan Development CD, is the zoning district which provides the type of requirements and standards 1407
under which you could do this type of a district. It happens that there's a piece of property which is identified as 1408
being supportive of a rural neighborhood activity center that has part of it within that and I think you are right. The 1409
question is whether you, as a County, and whether you, as a board, look at this and see it as saying this is a location 1410
which, and forgetting the site itself and its character for a second, this is a location where the addition of 280 more 1411
people towards your comprehensive plan identification piece of 1,000 people might support the existing retail uses 1412
that are already there, not bring new competition to it, and to do so in a way that is practically invisible from the road 1413
and from the neighbor's property, and so these are the pieces that we have been putting together in this to look and 1414
say is this an appropriate place. As the applicant, we believe it's an appropriate place to do that and what we're 1415
asking you is to think with us along the way and if you think this has the benefit of being the type of community that 1416
you'd want, figure out how to do it so it's as good as what we've drawn or even better. 1417
1418
Charity Kirk: I mean me, personally, I like the vision, but we've dealt with this before where the vision was 1419
good but the location wasn't the right location and, right now, I feel like we're slotting this in, in a very awkward way to 1420
Approved 7.10.24
try and make it happen, so to me, the question is how much do we want it and where do we want multifamily housing 1421
of this size. 1422
1423
Scott Radway: It's a great question. Maybe it's the central question and the issues about whether it's the right 1424
place or not, let's take a look at the population that it's proposed for. It's an older population. Forgetting what's 1425
inside, it's an older population which has, through NC 54 down to Carrboro and Chapel Hill, immediate access to 1426
probably the best health care services you can get in the State of North Carolina and practically anyplace else in the 1427
U.S. 1428
1429
Charity Kirk: No, I understand that but we're land use. I have to make land use decisions. That's what 1430
we're charged with. So thank you, I think those are my questions. I would probably have a follow-up question but I 1431
don't have it now. 1432
1433
Scott Radway: I would hope that we can continue to talk. 1434
1435
Cy Stober: So Ms. Kirk, to your first question, I finally have an answer which is Page 203 of the UDO. I 1436
believe that's correct, Page 203 or 3-69, residential conditional district, that's were you can find that. Non-residential 1437
district is on Page 205. And the only thing I would add from a staff perspective and regarding our analysis of this 1438
project and the process that's brought it to you this evening, should the comprehensive plan Appendix F amendment 1439
be approved, this same process would apply to any new applications for MPD-CD that would be received by the 1440
County, so there would be a planning board review and a public hearing to determine if it is appropriate for that 1441
location and if it is appropriate and in the public interest of the county to allow a new MPD-CD district in Orange 1442
County, so that would not change. 1443
1444
Charity Kirk: Why don't we just modify agricultural residential, rather than the rural activity note? 1445
1446
Cy Stober: I'm happy to have that conversation. I don't want to take away from the questions but we 1447
would also have to amend the definition of agricultural residential, I believe, in order to accommodate that. 1448
1449
Chris Johnston: My question is in regards to who is eligible to partake in these units. So, I'm 35 and I think this 1450
is a really great idea and I'd love to move in. I love solar and I think the way we separate our refuse waste is exciting. 1451
1452
Edwin Cox: Glad you're convinced. We have deliberately decided to have no age restriction. 1453
1454
Chris Johnston: Okay. So the reason I bring that up is this did come up in some of the email-related things and 1455
what I wanted to bring out with that was if this is in related to, for instance, the master aging plan and that sort of 1456
thing, if there are no age restrictions, I could move in there and I wouldn't necessarily be fulfilling those goals for 1457
mobility or participating in engagement or health and well, I mean, I really didn't see so much as I'd be enjoying those 1458
different benefits, but it wouldn't necessarily be the aging in place that maybe is necessary for this to fit within that 1459
mold. Does that make sense? 1460
1461
Edwin Cox: I don't think this would be particularly attractive to you unless you like to live among – 1462
1463
Chris Johnston: – I mean I would push back in that and say that my preferences are my own but I guess what 1464
I'm saying is if we're making a determination in regards toif this fits within, the goals of the comprehensive plan, does 1465
that fit the mold if this is open and again, I love the idea of sustainability and conservation and that sort of thing but in 1466
regards to the master aging plan and the components within that, without that requirement, a unit goes up for sale, I 1467
purchase it because I love the idea and I'm in there, I don't necessarily know if that fits the aging in place idea. 1468
1469
Edwin Cox: So as a cooperative, we have a process whereby people apply to become members of the 1470
cooperative first. And only then will they be eligible for living there. And we have a process by which people 1471
Approved 7.10.24
understand our goals, among them, aging in place and to have provisions specifically for seniors and part of the buy-1472
in, or whatever you want to call it, is in relation to supporting those services. They're going to be small units which 1473
are most suitable for people who are downsizing and would not be supportive of families or not attractive to families, 1474
because it wouldn't have enough bedrooms. So I think for all these reasons, our goal of being a place for aging 1475
adults is going to be met organically. 1476
1477
Chris Johnston: Okay. The cooperative I think is the only thing that would keep me from respectfully 1478
disagreeing, so, and I apologize to keep harping on this in regards to master aging plan, but could you help me 1479
through the cooperative decision making process for determining whether someone is eligible to live in this 1480
neighborhood. Because it sounds like in order to live in this neighborhood, you have to be a member of the 1481
Cooperative. I would like to know what the requirements to being in the Cooperative are in regard to that seems to 1482
be the barrier of entry to this particular land. 1483 1484
Edwin Cox: So we do not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, religion, or any other factors that relate 1485
to fair housing. It has to do more with the person who's applying educating themselves about what our goals are for 1486
the community and agreeing to those goals, and once they have completed that process of going through it, we have 1487
a membership committee. Then their identity is opened up to the entire Cooperative for anyone to come forward if 1488
they know of any particular objections they might have. And that's generally pretty straightforward and then they're 1489
allowed in. So, Peggy. This is Peggy. 1490
1491
Chris Johnston: Hi Peggy. 1492
1493
Peggy Craft: Hi. 1494
1495
Chris Johnston: Hi, Peggy. And I apologize. I don't mean to make a stink about this, but part of our 1496
determination is in regards to, how does this fit, and how does this fulfill the goals of comprehensive plan and the 1497
master aging plan component seems to be a large part of it, and I just want to make sure I fully understand. 1498
1499
Peggy Craft: I get that. 1500
1501
I am secretary of H4D, I'm also head of the membership committee and had the difficult task of doing exactly what 1502
you're asking. Being a Cooperative requires us to have this acceptance approval process, so what do we want that 1503
to look like. I'm a contra dancer, I said, if they can't dance, you know, I'm not sure. Joking. Joking. Absolutely 1504
joking. We couldn't do that. We don't want to do that. What we want is for it to be a community. A community of 1505
people who share in our belief in the culture of active participation physically and governmentally. We want it to be 1506
run in a cooperative manner. We want people who appreciate and take part in traditional music and art and dance 1507
and nature. So when I talked to people, we've going through this process with several people and it's sort of like you 1508
got to understand who we are trying to be, and if you don't like banjo music, you're not going to be happy here, you 1509
know. It's just we are traditional music and dance people. And that's what the community is intended to be. We 1510
don't care if you're 35. I'd be quite happy to have you. 1511
1512
Chris Johnston: I do apologize, and I just want to keep unpeeling this onion a little bit because I don't have a 1513
whole lot of experience with Cooperatives, but in regards to how you determine who is appropriate to be within the 1514
Cooperative. And I'm going to be that guy, and I do apologize. How many members have you turned away. 1515
1516
Peggy Craft: None. 1517
1518
Chris Johnston: Applicants, excuse me, applicants. 1519
1520
Peggy Craft: None. 1521
1522
Approved 7.10.24
Chris Johnston: You've had none. 1523
1524
Peggy Craft: We've turned away no applicants. 1525
1526
Chris Johnston: So an applicant has gone through the process, expressed an interest, and you have not turned 1527
anyone away. 1528
1529
Peggy Craft: Correct. 1530
1531
Chris Johnston: Okay. All right. I just want to make sure. And then, again, I don't know how to ask this again 1532
without being inappropriate, and I do apologize. In regards to your mention of race and religion, the diversity of your 1533
group. 1534
1535
Dolores Bailey: Ask about the demographics. 1536
1537
Chris Johnston: Yes, I do have to be uncomfortable and ask about the demographics of your group. Is it 1538
something where if we allow this, is it something that is going to be open to everybody or is it going to be 1539
demographically stilted? 1540
1541
Peggy Craft: We'd love for it to be open. 1542
1543
Chris Johnston: Open. Okay. 1544
1545
Peggy Craft: And we're doing what we can. So, yes. We understand it's a problem. 1546
1547
Chris Johnston: And I just want to make sure that I'm clear that I'm not accusing anyone or saying anything 1548
along those lines, but I would not be doing my job if I didn't bring it up. 1549
1550
Peggy Craft: No, it's a reasonable question. 1551
1552
Chris Johnston: Okay. Thank you. 1553
1554
Peggy Craft: For the aging part, I will say, I understand the aging part as well. I'd love to have more 1555
younger people there. We didn't want to make it a 55 plus because we don't want to discriminate. Why can't you 1556
come in if you're 40. That'd be great. But I think it is true that the people who are interested in living in that kind of 1557
environment, and living communally are more likely to be the older people. 1558
1559
Chris Johnston: Wonderful. Thank you for your clarification. I appreciate it, Peggy. Thank you. 1560
1561
Peggy Craft: Thank you. 1562
1563
Whitney Watson: So I have a couple of questions. Some of them are perhaps not the purview of this board, but 1564
they're interesting to me, and one of them is the governance style. You referenced that in a couple of statements, so 1565
how are you going to govern this intentional community. Like as in is it a democracy, or a sociocracy, or. 1566
1567
Edwin Cox: We have a board of directors that are elected democratically, and that is an annual process. 1568
We have bylaws that specify all these conditions, and our goal is to have unanimity whenever possible, and we work 1569
very hard, so it's moving in the direction of sociocracy without adapting a whole cloth. We are a group of people who 1570
believe in working very hard to achieve unanimity whenever possible, and if we find even a single person is opposed 1571
to a particular action that we are proposing, we continue to work until we have satisfied everybody to the greatest 1572
extent, so that is our ethic, and we've worked very hard. Let me say about where the idea of the Cooperative came 1573
Approved 7.10.24
from. There are senior housing cooperatives that are really becoming very popular in the upper Midwest and 1574
Minnesota and Wisconsin. There are about 150. It's become an industry, and these are typical high-rise buildings 1575
with 60 to 100 residents, but after a developer creates the building, it's sold to the people who have moved in there, 1576
and they govern it as a cooperative, and it's a democratic structure. It's an operated cost structure, so there's no 1577
pecuniary benefit to the cooperative from their actions, and it seems to work very well up in those states, and that 1578
was our inspiration for trying to do that model here. 1579
1580
Whitney Watson: So who would actually own the dwelling unit? Would the individual or family and therefore 1581
they have the right to sell it to whoever they please? Or does the Co-op own the building? 1582
1583
Edwin Cox: In a full Cooperative model, the Cooperative owns all the buildings, all the units. The person 1584
buying the share in the Cooperative has the right to live there as long as they want and play by the rules and, you 1585
know, are current on their fees. And when they go to sell, though, they are able to sell it to anyone with the provision 1586
that that person first has to become a member of the Cooperative. 1587
1588
Whitney Watson: Okay, so this will be a full Cooperative? 1589
1590
Edwin Cox: We haven't determined that. It's possible that some of the units will be fee simple, and others 1591
might be under Cooperative model, but that's still to be determined. 1592
1593
Whitney Watson: Okay. Other questions I have. Looking at the other businesses in this neighborhood activity 1594
node, they provide services and resources for the broader community. How will Fiddlehead add to the mix and 1595
continue to enhance the existing activity node? And I really note it is kind of a cheap shot, but you talked about 1596
zipping past the entrance to the community in 3 seconds, so clearly, you're not really encouraging the broader 1597
community to come in. 1598
1599
Edwin Cox: I want to make it clear that this is not a commercial activity in the sense of offering any kind of 1600
services to outside people such as having a restaurant where they could come in and eat. There won't be anything 1601
of that type, so no commercial activity that would be part of an activity node. 1602
1603
Whitney Watson: But your narrative also mentions events and having parking for events though. There is an 1604
assumption there that people will be coming to this development from outside the community, and you are reaching 1605
out to a broader community, so to say, well, we're not really providing that for other people is perhaps disingenuous. 1606
1607
Edwin Cox: They would be coming as friends. 1608
1609
Whitney Watson: So there'd be no publicity that anybody would see anywhere else. No social media 1610
publications, no… 1611
1612
Edwin Cox: But it's possible it could be on social media but not advertisements as such. No, it would not 1613
be an event like that. There could be things like house concerts. A lot of people in our group host house concerts. 1614
And they charge a fee to pay the musicians and so something of that type is a possibility, but to have a public dance 1615
where there's an admission charge or something like that, I think that would not be the case. 1616
1617
Whitney Watson: Okay, so back to my question. So what will Fiddlehead do to enhance this activity node given 1618
the other businesses and residences that are in that area already? 1619
1620
Edwin Cox: I don't know that we have really made any determination on that. I can see some possibilities. 1621
We're going to have an energy resiliency strategy where we provide for our residents in terms of power continuity 1622
when the utility power goes out, and I think we can serve as a resource for education in the surrounding community 1623
Approved 7.10.24
to share the knowledge that our engineers have provided to help others keep their power on. That's just an example 1624
that came to mind. 1625
1626
Whitney Watson: Okay. What for me was missing in the narrative are ways in which public transportation or 1627
other kinds of transportation will be addressed or provided for the residents. I get that it's only a few miles down 54 1628
to Chapel Hill and Carrboro, but if somebody's got a medical appointment it can be tricky, and they're still shopping, 1629
so I guess I'm sort of questioning perhaps the assumptions of the traffic analysis in saying, oh no, there won't be any 1630
increase in traffic or virtually none. 1631
1632
Scott Radway As I heard the question before about what Fiddlehead might add to or support within the rural node 1633
is there is existing gas station and mini mart and the nursery, Piedmont, and other things that are in there, and I know 1634
for a fact that already we do that as we individually and as other members. So I think what you're doing is putting 1635
purchasing power in for some of the neighborhood's things that frankly you don't find anyplace else in the county 1636
within a half a mile of where you live. So if that was the question about what might be the impact on those 1637
businesses I would think it would be positive. The transportation piece, we had conversations with NCDOT and we 1638
had conversations with the County and with the transportation department and other things like that. We are very 1639
interested in being able to have bus service out this far in the county. What we don't have yet is a route structure and 1640
a number of other things that don't usually happen unless there's actually people there to do something for, and so 1641
one of the reasons that we are excited about that, there's an opportunity out here that with 285 or 300 people over 1642
the time of the project, that will provide enough mass at one location, and specifically we've talked about having a 1643
bus entrance or a bus stop that would be in location right at the entrance point which then is accessible to other 1644
people. We've talked about how to do a park and ride when there would be a demand and an opportunity within the 1645
bus system to get there, how to do a supportive use like a park and ride. There's a minimal impact around there. 1646
The other part of it is we have designed a location within the center of the development as specifically designed 1647
around the dimensions and requirements of what the County now has as the busses that are used for a call in and 1648
pickup dial-a-ride and things like that, so this is just one of the many things that you got to ask the questions to us 1649
because the information is, it's in there, but it's buried pretty far. Not because we want it to be buried but because 1650
there is so many different things. 1651
1652
Whitney Watson: So one of the things that showed up often in the narrative was this comment about affordable 1653
housing, and we've heard a project budget, but what do you anticipate an individual dwelling unit might go for? 1654
1655
Scott Radway: Well I guess the best answer for that is 2 years ago, if I had guessed the answer it would be 1656
wrong. But what we're looking for in the process is a dwelling unit's about 1,200 to 1,500 square feet, two bedrooms, 1657
small footprint, single floor as possible and other things like that and so all of those are pieces that are to reduce the 1658
cost of development in what we now see from national builders which are two stories, and they want four bedrooms, 1659
so they've got to have so many feet on the ground floor to support four bedrooms and that kind of stuff, so we're 1660
looking at a housing product that can be downsized into and it can be done with not all of the extra corners and 1661
windows and all of the other things that go into houses that are two and three stories and are $600,000. That's not 1662
an answer. The answer is we don't know for sure what it will be because we're looking at being out there about 2 1663
years if the project gets approved, getting the wells approved, getting the wastewater treatment approved, going 1664
through all of the preliminary site work which includes identifying – we have to do the tree survey and doing a lot of 1665
other things. I'm not trying to avoid the question or avoid the answer. It's just not quite possible to do that, but we do 1666
know that two-bedroom houses on one floor are going to be more affordable than four bedroom houses and two 1667
bathrooms on two floors, and so we're aiming at that piece. We've talked with the County about affordable housing 1668
and how that mechanism can come into place or not, and we have not figured out if it can be done through the 1669
budget process and through the funding of affordable housing. So, it's two pieces. One is how to reduce the cost for 1670
the people who are going to move there, which is one aspect, and the other is in a broader sense of what's affordable 1671
housing, and we don't have an answer for that yet. 1672
1673
Approved 7.10.24
Whitney Watson: So the only other question I have has to do with management of all the activities happening 1674
and you mentioned the board of directors and committee but also where is the staffing going to come from for some 1675
of these activities and facilities and predictably the healthcare? 1676
1677
Scott Radway: I think overall what you're looking at, in a bigger sense, is for some items, it's the same kinds 1678
of things that a homeowners' association takes care of: storm drainage ponds in the streets and other things like 1679
that. And so really, you're importing that same set of procedures. You're just importing a board and a management 1680
system that's not called a condominium association. It's called a coop association. For the other services, I guess as 1681
we've talked about things, solid waste collection, for example, which is something to pick up and store and work with 1682
the County, and we have a plan for that. Somebody will be required onsite and so that's a service that you either fill 1683
with somebody that's in your community already who would like to do that, sometimes that's a volunteer. Often it's 1684
not volunteer, it's paid or have others come who do that as a business. So, I guess I would say there's movement 1685
back and forth in the different kinds of services. 1686
1687
Whitney Watson: To be more specific and transparent, so my parents went into a continuing care facility in 2017 1688
and they very quickly came to depend on staff to help with their medications even though they were in independent 1689
living. And when they went to assisted living, they had the same kind of staffing issues. So, where is that staffing 1690
going to come from because it can't just be volunteers? 1691
1692
Scott Radway: Let me have Mareah answer that specific aspect. 1693
1694
Mareah Steketee: That's a great question. Family care home as a licensed facility has to be operated by 1695
licensed individuals and so that is part of the cost of living in the community and we'll cover it in whatever way we 1696
can. A lot of it will be single payer. If I need care, I need to be prepared to pay for that. Medicare may cover some 1697
things. Medicare is now covering a bit more than it was before, but it doesn't typically cover day-to-day, assisted 1698
living sort of care but that home will be licensed by the state, will be operated by an official operator. So, does that 1699
answer your questions? 1700
1701
Whitney Watson: Yeah. 1702
1703
Lamar Proctor: All right, thank you. Elizabeth? 1704
1705
Elizabeth Kalies: I just want to follow up on some of Chris' questions and wonder if you could speak to any sort 1706
of diversity, equity, inclusion plans that you have in place? I think they alluded to we're working on it, but are there 1707
any really firm commitments you're making beyond we're looking into affordable housing, we're looking into, you 1708
know, how are you hoping to really achieve those goals? 1709
1710
Mareah Steketee: We're hoping to achieve those goals by continuing to not only educate ourselves but reaching 1711
out to the broader creative community. We've been in consultation with Carol Woods in terms of their outreach 1712
program. The basic trend for many families, black and brown families, is that they take care of their elders in their 1713
own homes. That's a potential changing pattern. We don't have a formal plan right now. Our bylaws are inclusive of 1714
all individuals and we'll do whatever outreach we can. It's an open community. Our dance community, our music 1715
community, is inclusive of all people so we don't have a formal plan. It's something that I've been talking about for a 1716
long time. 1717
1718
Dolores Bailey: I know we only have a few minutes. 1719
1720
Cy Stober: So, yes, two points. Just one acknowledging the time and that two board members haven't 1721
had an opportunity to ask questions. And the other just a reminder to all board members that ultimately the 1722
applications are with regard to land use and development or preservation and your decisions ultimately must be 1723
based upon the land use and the applications before you. 1724
Approved 7.10.24
1725
Lamar Proctor: Thank you for that reminder and I would like to keep things moving, but I don't want to limit 1726
board members' questions too much. With that caveat from Mr. Stober that we need to focus on the land uses, do 1727
you think if we extended the meeting by 15 minutes we could get everyone's questions in? 1728
1729
Charity Kirk: I just want to clarify that we are supposed to evaluate whether or not this development would 1730
fit with the character of the zoning request. 1731
1732
Cy Stober: That is absolutely correct. 1733
1734
Charity Kirk: Okay. Just checking. 1735
1736
Cy Stober: Yeah, the character of the community, the character of the activity node, and also the 1737
principles, goals, and objectives of the comprehensive plan, many of which speak to equity. You are correct. 1738
1739
Lamar Proctor: So, my question is do you think if we extend the meeting by 15 minutes we could get the 1740
remaining board members' questions so we could finish that portion of the program? If not, that's fine. We'll just pick 1741
up where we left off. 1742
1743
Beth Bronson: I just need 2 minutes. 15 minutes for questions will be just fine. 1744
1745
Dolores Bailey: Three? 1746
1747
Chris Johnston: I make a motion to extend by 3 plus 2 is 10 minutes. 1748
1749
Beth Bronson: Nope, 15 minutes. 1750
1751
Chris Johnston: Okay, 15 minutes to finish out the board query and so that we can start the meeting fresh with 1752
public comment. 1753
1754
Marilyn Carter: Second. 1755
1756
Lamar Proctor: All in favor? All opposed? Okay. We'll extend it 15 minutes for the purposes of finishing out 1757
board member questions so we can begin with public comment at the next meeting. 1758
1759
MOTION BY Chris Johnston to extend the meeting by 15 minutes. Seconded by Marilyn Carter 1760
1761 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 1762
1763
Dolores Bailey: So, as I was saying, I get what you all are trying to do. I am a board member of Carol Woods 1764
Retirement Center, been a board member for a while. So, I am confused with what this is trying to be. Are you trying 1765
to be a retirement center? Are you trying to be a cooperative? 1766
1767
Mareah Steketee: We are a cooperative. 1768
1769
Dolores Bailey: Okay. So, are you asking us to change the land use only so that you can create a separate 1770
community for this coop? 1771
1772
Mareah Steketee: It is a community that will be guided by principles of cooperative living that really wants to 1773
incorporate aging in place. We’re not building walls to separate from other people. We are welcoming to those 1774
people. I mean, we often joke that it would only be appropriate to join this community if you can live with a banjo. 1775
Approved 7.10.24
1776
Dolores Bailey: That’s not a problem for many of the people I serve. I provide affordable housing and in 1777
Orange County there’s a 1,900-unit gap of people who are looking for housing. And seniors in particular, and black 1778
and brown seniors in particular. And Carol Woods has a 1,600 person wait list. And there’s not much diversity on that 1779
list. 1780
1781
Mareah Steketee: Correct. 1782
1783
Dolores Bailey: So Carol Woods has not figured out how to provide diversity. I am saying this because if 1784
you’re getting ready to build a community like this, you really must look at that. And let me just give a comment on 1785
something you said. The African-American community is no longer able to keep their families at home. They 1786
absolutely want and need places like this but often when they are created, like what this sounds like to my ears, is 1787
exclusive. It does not include everyone and so what I think I heard was that we need to change the zonings because 1788
you want to put in a facility for aging. You’re going to put in a family center but you don’t want to be seen. 1789
1790
Mareah Steketee: No, we think that others don’t want to see us, ma’am. 1791
1792
Dolores Bailey: That is so not true. The need for housing in Orange County is so desperate for everybody. 1793
1794
Mareah Steketee: It is. Yes, it is. 1795
1796
Dolores Bailey: As Chris said, if he could live in this community, he would, too. It’s a wonderful-sounding 1797
community. So, if you are not going to restrict it to 55, if this is not a retirement center which we need more of in 1798
Orange County, we do, there’s no place for people to age which is why this sounded good to me because it sounded 1799
like you were creating another Carol Woods but that’s not what you’re doing. So, I am confused. 1800
1801
Mareah Steketee: Well, the confusion probably comes because the CCRCs that you are familiar with, Carol 1802
Woods, etc. are enormously expensive. Many of our community members could not afford to live there and so we’re 1803
looking for an alternative that is between, that isn’t age restricted. In fact, there’s a person who’s interested in the 1804
community who says I have a disabled daughter who needs her own home. Can she live in this community? We say 1805
absolutely yes. We’re not restricting. We need to do a better job at reaching out, right? A lot of our interested 1806
parties right now don’t want to commit because they don’t want to do it before zoning. They’re more risk averse. We 1807
have a lot of outreach and marketing to do yet. We’re at the beginning of that. Even though we have 34 people who 1808
say I want to live there and 100 more who are interested and many more in the background, yes, we can do a better 1809
job of being inclusive. We have not said tonight that we’re affordable housing because we have tried very hard to 1810
meet that bar and with a family-care home, two family-care homes, and the expense of a common house and health 1811
facilities, it’s very difficult to keep the cost down. That has to be spread across all the people in the community and 1812
once we’re established there may be an opportunity to provide some options for people with lower income, but we 1813
don’t want to be exclusive in terms of background. 1814
1815
Dolores Bailey: When you mention the affordable side of it, normally we base that on people’s income, and if 1816
we’re talking about seniors I am convinced there’s not going to be a whole lot of really high incomes that are out 1817
there. You talk about exclusivity, you mention the family center and needing caretakers. Will the caretakers be able 1818
to live here? 1819
1820
Mareah Steketee: We’ve talked about it. 1821
1822
Scott Radway: Dolores, we’ve known each other and gone through a lot of affordable housing wars on the 1823
same side. And I wanted to make one comment about what people are talking about and some of the questions are 1824
about is anybody could live there that’s under 55 and some other things like that. Some of you may have experience 1825
with age 55 or age 62 age-restricted residential developments, and some with CCRCs, and some with assisted living 1826
Approved 7.10.24
and some other things, and one of the specific reasons not to do those is because all of those were established 1827
exactly to create discrimination against younger folks and go on down the line. And some of the operating 1828
procedures of what you can do and what you can’t do to become a member of the community are flatly outright 1829
racist. And so, part of the effort to trying not to have to be pushed into one of those models is to set up a different 1830
kind of model, which has worked successfully elsewhere, see if can be done here. I guess the biggest thing about it 1831
is, John mentioned this to me and so I’ll mention it, one of the things that was part of the design process is the three 1832
buildings of 20 dwelling units. And one of the reasons that it’s very useful is because that’s an easy place to be able 1833
to provide services to people in their dwelling units. It’s also one of the places on the property that is going to cost 1834
the least to build the dwelling units. So, we’re looking at this on that model of trying to make it possible to relocate to 1835
this community from a bigger house. I’m not saying the work is done. You know that, but some of the component 1836
pieces are just really difficult to put together, and what we haven’t really said tonight, but Maria said it a little bit, 1837
which is a lot of the things you can’t get somebody excited about until you’ve actually got what they think is a project 1838
that’s real. And so, one of the steps in this process has been get to the planning board, get further along in the 1839
process on those types of things. We’ve been asked a question about well, what do you know about this financing 1840
and that financing. Well, I’m not sure I know anybody doing their own house or doing something else that can go into 1841
the bank and say give me a mortgage for $800,000, I’m thinking about building a house. So, we are in the process of 1842
doing these steps and we hope we’re doing them right, and we hope we gain some good input which we have. 1843
1844
Dolores Bailey: Scott, you said it was going to be a $65 to $75 million project over the full haul and you know 1845
how many square feet you’re going to put into this thing. The way we normally calculate is figuring out how much 1846
we’re talking about per square foot for building. 1847
1848
Scott Radway: It’s a slightly different model for the costing of this than I would say an individual building or an 1849
individual structure. 1850
1851
Beth Bronson: Do a ballpark. You can do a ballpark. 1852
1853
Scott Radway: We can do a ballpark. We can bring it back to you. What the pieces in the ballpark look like 1854
are wastewater system. We don’t have tap fees like you do if you’ve got public water. We don’t have those kinds of 1855
things but we do have another cost. So, we can’t give you specific numbers that are going to be realistic probably a 1856
month after we give them to you but they’re going to be ballpark. Kind of these are the pieces that go into it. This is 1857
how the cost gets looked at. It’s not necessarily something that you might ask, but in a lot of places wouldn’t ask, MI 1858
Homes or Toll Brothers or something about it, they’d just say okay, you’ve been in business a long time. We think 1859
you’re good. We’ve got to get to that step to prove it. 1860
1861
Dolores Bailey: My question, and I know you guys can’t answer tonight, about affordability is who’s going to be 1862
able to afford it. 1863
1864
Beth Bronson: Thank you very much and to that point, if you’re going to have 150 residences and you project 1865
it’s going to be $60 million, it’s roughly $400,000.00. I’m, I’m just letting anybody know who’s saying that this master 1866
plan that they’re applying for is for 150 residences and in the application, I understand it’s 300 bedrooms. Is that 1867
correct? 1868
1869
Scott Radway: Yes, we’re asking for an upset number on dwelling units, 150 and an upset number on 1870
bedrooms as 300. 1871
1872
Beth Bronson: And what I kind of want to clarify because of the master plan development application is that 1873
when you are applying for that, you are required to provide, and this may be specifically with conditional zoning, but 1874
any master plan is conditional, right? So, you are required to provide this level of detail, this level of thought and 1875
output into what would be the plan. Any deviation from that plan would need to come back to the planning board, to 1876
my understanding, if you’re going to deviate from the master plan as being approved on whatever conditions they’re 1877
Approved 7.10.24
being approved. So, if we were to say that, like, how many parking spots you could have, we could put a condition 1878
on that to say, you know, or that your community center couldn’t be more than 10,000. It’s very arbitrary. I’m just 1879
pointing out that the master plan development is conditional on what is being submitted in the application. And that’s 1880
more for, I think, public knowledge than it is for the applicant, per se. I did see four different lift stations for the septic 1881
plan and not to say that’s not feasible, but as somebody who’s going through that permitting process myself, 1882
understanding how much to do the STEP system might incur and how much land disturbance might be required to 1883
accommodate all of this. Because I think what’s very critical is that while it’s an activity node, there are no utilities 1884
available at 54, right? So, there is no fire hydrant. There is no septic. There’s only volunteer fire departments. So, 1885
when we say first responders, that I think would be the concern that I would have in my line of questioning, and I 1886
realize we’re at 10:10 and to those that are asking about banjo music my friends and I have, and I’m a millennial, 1887
we’ve been talking about doing this for about a decade. So it’s not that, you know, 55 and younger don’t want to. It’s 1888
that it’s a non-attainable thing that a lot of people who are 35 to 45 think oh, I can find a plot of land in a community 1889
that I feel accepted in and then age in place until I’m 70 or 80 or 90. And that is very much, I think, what you guys 1890
have put there as this community, as this coop. I think is is a very ambitious goal and I think it is very much in line 1891
with Orange County, with this aging in place. I don’t have to know the very specific goals to know that what’s 1892
intended is absolutely aligned with that idea. Whether or not it is prudent of this planning board to recommend that or 1893
not is completely separate of how I personally feel about it. 1894
1895
Scott Radway: Can I have half a minute of the 1 minute that’s left, maybe, to answer or make one comment? 1896
1897
Lamar Proctor: There will be an opportunity for debate and discussion amongst the board, so if we can get to the 1898
questions then we can finish. I’m not trying to cut you off. 1899
1900
Beth Bronson: No, I get it. Everybody else had their time. And maybe what we can do with this remaining 1901
time is make this motion to continue, and are we going to be creating a special session or are we going to be meeting 1902
in July? And I apologize if I was late and did not hear about this in the beginning, but we do need to decide whether 1903
or not we are meeting before our next scheduled planning board meeting. 1904
1905
Lamar Proctor: Well, if you’re done with your questioning of the applicant, then I can move onto that. 1906
1907
Beth Bronson: Oh, no. I only have 2 minutes and we’re supposed to stop so that’s why I figured it was 1908
necessary. 1909
1910
Lamar Proctor: Okay. My intent was to just resume through the normal process at the July meeting on 1911
July 10th, just continue with this agenda. 1912
1913
Beth Bronson: Okay. 1914
1915
Lamar Proctor: And I will welcome suggestions from staff. 1916
1917
Cy Stober: Well, point of order is we have two applications that have a due process need to be completed 1918
in July so we’re going to need to talk about agenda composition and how they are ordered. One is a by-right 1919
subdivision that you’ve already reviewed as a concept plan for the Stonewall subdivision and the other is a down 1920
zoning for the Common Ground project on Frazier Road. 1921
1922
Charity Kirk: Both of those you want in July? 1923
1924
Cy Stober: They have a right to be heard in due time, so they need to be scheduled at some point. So, I’ll 1925
probably need to speak with Mr. Beeman and Mr. Proctor about it, and the staff attorney, James Bryan, about how 1926
we process these, so they are able to get their due process and get to a public hearing in due time. 1927
1928
Approved 7.10.24
Marilyn Carter: You would like them in July? 1929
1930
Cy Stober: They’re tentatively on the schedule. The first available hearing date is not until September so 1931
conceivably it could be August. 1932
1933
Lamar Proctor: So, I welcome staff to help us. 1934
1935
Cy Stober: We’ll need to discuss more offline. So, if you schedule this, the date certain is the next 1936
scheduled board meeting. That’s fine but then we also have several text amendments. You’re going to have a busy 1937
summer. 1938
1939
Charity Kirk: Would you suggest we schedule a special session? 1940
1941
Cy Stober: It would help the staff to a degree. I’ll be on parental leave so those folks over there may want 1942
to kill me but, you could schedule a special session, or we just need to ensure that those other applications are heard 1943
prior to September. 1944
1945
Statler Gilfillen: Can we just take a moment to schedule a special session based on what you’ve said. 1946
1947
Cy Stober: And I can discuss with the chair and vice chair offline but if you would like to schedule this to 1948
the date certain being July 10th, that’s fine and it’ll just affect how we have this conversation about the other 1949
applications that we have in the queue. 1950
1951
Lamar Proctor: Well, I can also entertain a motion if the board wants to continue this on June 19th. 1952
1953
Chris Johnston: June 19th is Juneteenth. 1954
1955
Cy Stober: It’s a holiday. 1956
’’ 1957
Lamar Proctor: Oh. That’s right. June 26th. 1958
1959
Statler Gilfillen: I’ll make a motion that we do this and continue it on June 26th. I’m trying to get us out of here. 1960
1961
Chris Johnston: I second. 1962
1963
Lamar Proctor: All in favor of having a special session to continue this agenda on June 26th. 1964
1965
Beth Bronson: I’m not available so I vote no. 1966
1967
Steven Kaufmann: Well, I have a comment on that. Between now and 4th of July is like major vacation time. And 1968
I would be in favor of staying with our schedule but then possibly having other meetings in July after that date 1969
because I think we’re going to be missing a lot of people. 1970
1971
Chris Johnston: Having a special session for the two other items because we need to finish this one out. 1972
1973
Cy Stober: Yeah, we can figure that out. 1974
1975
Lamar Proctor: So, I had a motion for June 26th with a second so I’m going to – we had some discussion so 1976
I’m going to take another vote on whether to continue this on June 26th. All in favor, raise your hand. All opposed 1977
raise your hand. So, can we get a count on that? 1978
1979
Approved 7.10.24
Charity Kirk: Five. 1980
1981
Cy Stober: It’s a split vote. It fails. 1982
1983
MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to hold a special meeting on June 26th. Seconded by Chris Johnston. 1984
1985
IN FAVOR: Statler Gilfillen, Charity Kirk, Chris Johnston, Whitney Watson, Liz Kalies 1986 OPPOSED: Marilyn Carter, Steve Kaufmann, Lamar Proctor, Dolores Bailey, Beth Bronson 1987
MOTION FAILED 5 TO 5 1988
1989
Lamar Proctor: Thank you. 1990
1991
Beth Bronson: I would just say, if Wednesday has to be the day, if there was an availability for everybody on 1992
the 13th or the 20th. 1993
1994
Charity Kirk: So, it fails so we're going to have it on July 10th? 1995
1996
Lamar Proctor: Yeah. It would be July 10th. 1997
1998
Cy Stober: Yes, the next scheduled regular meeting is Wednesday, July 10th due to the 4th of July 1999
holiday. 2000
2001
Lamar Proctor: So, just so the record is clear, we will continue this session on July 10th and we will finish with 2002
any follow-up questions briefly from board members and move as quickly as possible into public comment. Does 2003
anyone have any discussion about that plan? Okay. So, that will be the next date to continue this agenda. Thank 2004
you. Do I have a motion? 2005
2006 AGENDA ITEM 10: ADJOURNMENT 2007
2008
Chris Johnston: I make a motion to adjourn for the night. 2009
2010
Steve Kaufmann: Second. 2011
2012
Lamar Proctor: All in favor? Any opposed. All right. Thank you. 2013
2014
MOTION BY Chris Johnston to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Steve Kaufmann 2015
2016 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 2017
2018
The meeting adjourned at 10:18 PM. 2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026