HomeMy WebLinkAbout7_10_24 Planning Board MinutesApproved 8.7.24
MEETING MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 JULY 10, 2024 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Adam Beeman (Chair), Cedar Grove Township Representative; Lamar Proctor (Vice-Chair), 6
Cheeks Township Representative; Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Steve 7
Kaufmann, Bingham Township Representative; Charity Kirk, At-Large Representative; Chris 8
Johnston, Hillsborough Township Representative; Whitney Watson, At-Large Representative; Liz 9
Kalies, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Beth Bronson, At-Large Representative. 10
11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Marilyn Carter, At-Large Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large Representative 12
13
STAFF PRESENT: Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director – Long Range Planning & Administration; Patrick Mallett, 14
Deputy Director – Development Services; Tom Altieri, Senior Planner – Long Range 15
Planning & Administration; Lauren Coffey, Planner I; Jack Moran, Planning Technician 16
17 OTHERS PRESENT: Edwin Cox, Clare Steece Julich, Stephen Stiebel, Joan Shui, Betty Lou Whitford, Meg 18
Sorrell, Deborah Chestnutt, Francine Warwick, Wendy Curtis, James Curtis, Mark Mason, 19
Lisa Clark, Robin Rosenthal, Margret Mueller, Anna Myronova, Robin Royster, John 20
Kizer, Carol Kizer, Jamal Tomlinson, Elley Schopler, Susan Houck, Debra H., Andrew 21
Shauer, Mitch Renkow, Beth Williams, Debbie Stanford, Jim Mellon, Pat Gingrich, David 22
Ikenberry, Colin Austin, Dean Herington, Ron Royster, Aadra Bhatt, David D’Agostino, Robert 23
Dalton, Mary Deb Enslung, Carol Mellon, Cynthia Suggs, Mike Fox, Cheryl Fox, Whitney Fry, Bob 24
Gingrich. Linda Ikenberry, Dan Eddleman, Margaret E. Craft, Mareah Steketee, Norma Stanley-25
Bibbey, Tom Cheek, Doug Shier, Ralph Hinkel, Ellen Lohr-Hinkel, Rose Etheridge, Gregory Rapp, 26
Bryna Rapp, Sadie Rapp, Chris Martin, Virginia Callghan, Kevin Davidson, Jasmine Bauer, Peter 27
Childers, Vicki Childers, Bree Ralb, Ralph Warren, Barbara Warren, Jean Eddleman, Alan Julich, 28
Scott Radway, George Gurley, John Felton, Kathy McHugh, Jason Pickard, Laura Streitfeld, 29
Susan Zimmerman, Beth Thompson, Daniel Mason, Chelsea Payne, Aviva Enoch, Roberto 30
Romeno, Coy Isaacs, Miriam Cowan, S. Shahin, Laura Walter, Sarah Thompson, YB Howard. 31
32 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 33
The meeting began at 7:02 PM. 34
35
Adam Beeman: I'm going to call this meeting to order. Before we get started, I have Tom Altieri with a few 36
informational items. 37
38
AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS 39
40
Tom Altieri: Yes, thank you. Just about a 60 second announcement before you get started, I'm Tom 41
Altieri, Orange County senior planner. I wanted to announce that the County is currently 42
working on a process to update its land use plan. The project is called Land Use Plan 43
2050. We will be kicking off our second window of community engagement in late 44
September and it will span through October. We have a kickoff meeting that's scheduled 45
at Gravelly Hill Middle School on September 25th. That will be from 6 to 7:30 p.m. Maybe 46
more so for the benefit of the group here this evening, we'll also be holding a meeting on 47
the plan update in the White Cross area at the American Legion Post facility off of NC 54. 48
I do not yet have a date for that meeting, but that will be in October. We have not started 49
the notification process yet, but we will certainly be doing that and getting the word out for 50
those meetings as well as some others in the county to be scheduled, but I wanted to 51
make that announcement this evening. If people, tonight, are interested and want to sign 52
Approved 8.7.24
up for updates on the project, they can do that. It's a website 53
orangecountylanduseplan.com, and I welcome you to do that, and I'll be back to the 54
Planning Board for your September meeting with a more detailed update on the process. 55
I have a few links to the website, notification brochures, that I'll leave on the back table 56
here for any members of the public that might want to pick that up on their way out. 57
58
Charity Kirk: Do you know when the draft version of the plan is going to be out for discussion? 59
60
Tom Altieri: We'll have a draft version for our third wave of outreach, which will be late this year, 61
possibly early in the new year, and then that will precede a public hearing process to 62
occur later, probably after our summer meeting break next year, so ball parking around 63
the September, October timeframe for a potential county commissioner hearing and, of 64
course, a planning board recommendation that would precede it. 65
66
Charity Kirk: Thank you. 67
68
AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 69
None. 70
71 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 72
73
INTRODUCTION TO THE PUBLIC CHARGE 74
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, 75
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land 76
development law of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish 77
coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers 78
the present and future needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive 79
process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall 80
County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and 81
quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. 82
83
PUBLIC CHARGE 84
The Planning Board pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks 85
its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board 86
and with fellow citizens. At any time, should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to 87
observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting 88
until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair 89
will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is 90
observed. 91
92
Adam Beeman read the public charge. 93
94
Adam Beeman: I don't have any other comments. As of the last meeting, the staff had done their 95
presentation and the applicant tonight has 5 minutes to get up there, and he has an 96
update to something that he was adjusting from comments, so he's going to have 5 97
minutes to speak, and then the board has two people that have left to question the 98
applicant, and then we'll go to public comment. As far as public comment is concerned, if 99
you weren't here and did not sign up to speak in the June meeting, unfortunately, you will 100
not be allowed to speak tonight. There is an avenue through Google docs where you can 101
submit your comments to us. There's an avenue through Google docs where you can 102
Approved 8.7.24
submit your comments to the board of county commissioners, and you can also go to the 103
board of county commissioners meeting and have your public comments heard there 104
when this application gets to them. With nothing else, we're going to give the applicant 105
his 5 minutes to update us on what he had changed and then we're going to move on to 106
questioning and get onto the public comment. 107
108
Edwin Cox: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good evening, everyone. I'm Edwin Cox. I'm the president 109
of Hands Four. We've heard some comments at the June 5th meeting to the effect that it 110
was not clear that we were fully committed to be a community of elderly residents and that 111
we needed, or it would be advisable for us to provide, some sort of very credible indication 112
that that is the case, and we took that to heart. We went back and became more fully 113
informed about what it means to be a community of persons 55 and older. That is 114
enshrined in the law and a very specific terminology. It brings very specific criteria for 115
being such a community. I won't go into those now for the lack of time, but we studied 116
that very carefully and became more informed, and we took it to our community, our 117
cooperative, and as a cooperative we have now decided that we will declare ourselves to 118
be a community for persons 55 and older. I can explain more about that in response to 119
questions later in the meeting, but that's what we have to say at the moment. 120
121
AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 122
123
Adam Beeman: Thank you very much. I also had to approve the minutes from last month. Do I have a 124
motion to approve last month's minutes? 125
126
MOTION BY Chris Johnston to approve the meeting minutes. Seconded by Lamar Proctor 127
128
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 129
130
Adam Beeman: All right. Beth? You're up if you have any questions for the applicant because you didn't 131
get a chance to finish. 132
133
Beth Bronson: Thank you. The last time I was up here, I asked about the utilities and emergency 134
services, I believe that was where we left off. I guess that my question for the applicant 135
would be what kind of integration or communication have you had with the county's 136
emergency services or the volunteer fire departments, first responders, as to how you 137
would handle an emergency in the rural area for the group medical centers? 138
139
Scott Radway: Thank you for the question. I don't have a graphic up here yet or available to show that 140
as deep in all the other material that's in there, but for a quick answer, let me do the 141
emergency responder person issue first. Orange County requires that residential 142
developments that have more than 100 dwelling units have two ways in and out to the 143
property and that's what we have on the plan, a primary entrance on Morrow Mill Road 144
and what we believe will be an emergency vehicle service entrance only from Goldmine 145
Loop. We have worked with them at a number of meetings and gone through the various 146
pieces of fire protection that are needed, police protection, vehicles, how they get in and 147
how they get out, how they work within the internal road system, and then connected that 148
also with what happens for fire service, which was a portion of the question, and for fire 149
service, there's different layers for the proposed three multi-story, three-story buildings. 150
Those all have to be sprinklered. So, part of the system that we will be putting in place, 151
the wells and the public water system regulated by the state, will be lines of sufficient 152
Approved 8.7.24
pressure and sufficient capacity and storage so that all of those buildings will be 153
sprinklered according to building code, which is State code and County code also. There 154
will also be a public, if you will call it, water system, although it's not a public like county 155
owned or city owned, that will be lines that provide distribution water to all of the 156
properties, all the homes, all the buildings, and those will also be operated just as if they 157
were a municipal utility providing water from all of the water quality requirements, all of the 158
water pressure requirements, all of those things. Again, that is reviewed and approved or 159
criticized and resubmitted and approved by the state. The County also has a role in that 160
you don't directly approve those pieces, but I think as Cy noted at the last meeting, the 161
County has a direct obligation to make sure that those rules and that this proposal actually 162
are copacetic and do work together, and so there are overlaps of looks at that. The water 163
distribution will go basically along the street system that's internal, just like it would in a 164
city structure with water pipes, and the same for collection for wastewater, which would go 165
to a treatment plant, and then which goes through a treatment level and out, so that's sort 166
of the basic structure, that organization, of how those pieces fit together. 167
168
Beth Bronson: Thank you, I saw the proposed water assessment and having the four main wells, and 169
then I also saw from the department of environment quality that where those wells were 170
located were also in protected areas, buffer zones for the existing protected waters that 171
were there, either the streams or ephemeral streams – 172
173
Scott Radway: You saw that they were or were not? 174
175
Beth Bronson: They were within the areas of where the stream buffers would be. 176
177
Scott Radway: No, they are not. Those wells are located outside the buffers required by both the State 178
and the County, and there is an additional dimensional feature in there in addition to just 179
buffers of how far you have to actually be from the stream. And so, of the wells we have 180
proposed and all that we would ever get permitted, none of them can be within a buffer 181
and the ones that are showing on our plan are not within any buffers or any protected 182
stream areas. It's hard when you're looking at a small drawing of a big map to be able to 183
decipher all of those pieces. 184
185
Beth Bronson: I was looking at Attachment 1, Page 206, but it was where those four wells are proposed 186
and you are correct, well C does not look like it and they do not look like they are near the 187
buffer area but thank you very much for addressing those concerns. I guess I did not see 188
in that report that there was a proposal for any kind. You have worked with emergency 189
services to make sure that you've required this, but that is depending upon the pipes 190
being to pressure at all times or there'd be a reservoir for the sprinkler system? 191
192
Scott Radway: There's a minimum pressure you have to have all the time in the fire sprinkler system. In 193
addition to that, if a sprinkler head comes on, there is a pressure that you have to have 194
and that has to be maintained in the system and it's based on time. So, you'd have to 195
have that to operate for a number of minutes. There’s two overlaps here as it fits in within 196
the county's volunteer fire structure, which is, the most important pieces are don't let 197
damage happen or absolutely minimize the damage until the fire protection services can 198
get to the property with their equipment and so we have not run a time structure test on 199
this yet in order to size the tanks and to work on the pressure, but before we get 200
approved, we anticipate we will have the fire company out there, from the cooperating 201
agreements with Carrboro and others, Hillsborough agreement, for service for aerial 202
Approved 8.7.24
trucks also that we will have worked out what is the time period for which we will keep that 203
pressurized system in place. I've done one of these before in Orange County for a 204
neighborhood of single-family houses, and we couldn't get permission until we absolutely 205
satisfied the State on the time periods. 206
207
Beth Bronson: Understandable. So, just to be clear that the three-story buildings that have a care facility 208
in them, those will have the sprinkler systems, or the community center would have them, 209
but then all of the 150 homes that are proposed would not, and they would be specifically 210
reliant on the emergency services that were available in that district? In Bingham? 211
212
Scott Radway: The three-story buildings for multifamily would have sprinklers. The other 90 dwellings 213
that we've proposed are single family houses sort of side-by-side, attached single family, 214
and then three together townhouse or triplex, realtor language differs from regulatory 215
language, but those can be sprinklered. They don't have to be sprinklered by building 216
code, and being the location that's pretty accessible, so we have some time response 217
things, so I think working advantage of this location. 218
219
Beth Bronson: I did drive by there today and did a time trip from the intersection at Morrow Mill and 54 220
down to the hospital, the emergency department basically, and it was 15 minutes. It was 221
interesting to see because I grew up in that area, and so I know kind of how far out of 222
town it is, but you forget how close and yet how far away as well. 223
224
Scott Radway: I did that trip 2 weeks ago myself. 225
226
Beth Bronson: Oh my. I hope there were no potholes. 227
228
Scott Radway: Thank you for your questions. 229
230
Adam Beeman: For expediency, I'm just going to go right to the public comments unless anybody else has 231
any other questions. 232
233
Beth Bronson: If I had a comment that was pending, I do not have it anymore. 234
235
Adam Beeman: Anybody else on the board have any follow-ups? 236
237
Statler Gilfillen: I just would like a clarification of the first gentleman that spoke. You made the comment 238
that it is declared that it would be for people over 55. Is that meant that you are declaring 239
it as a legal issue to include in the final documents so that that is binding? Declared 240
doesn't tell me. Is it legally binding? That's all. 241
242
Scott Radway: That's a great question and it pushes us into the weeds on some issues. If you're an age 243
55, there's three types of descriptions you can say that HUD finds, or the federal register 244
has found in its definitions to be acceptable for this community. One is it's senior housing, 245
one is a retirement community, or one is its age 55 plus and you have to advertise and go 246
through a whole bunch of legal steps, and if you don't advertise correctly of what you are 247
and other things, you're subject to a number of penalties. You can, we can, an applicant 248
can, but somebody will declare that they are an age-restricted, age 55-plus community 249
and then there's, we talked a little bit about it last month, there is the split between how 250
many households have to be occupied by people that are 55 and older and how many 251
could be occupied that are 54 and younger, and as a community or as an entity you can 252
Approved 8.7.24
choose. The minimum you can do is you have to be at least 80 percent senior housing 253
occupied by 55 and older. The mechanisms for enforcement of that are some are civil, 254
and they go with people who are residents of that development. If they don't think it's at 255
the right balance, they can bring a complaint, and they can go to court and adjudicate it in 256
that fashion. The most likely way to make it a binding agreement would be that the 257
applicant offers that it will be this kind of a community to the county commissioners. They 258
agree that that's a good thing, and with both parties in agreement, it could then be put into 259
the zoning approval. 260
261
Adam Beeman: What he's asking is, are you guys proposing that as a condition for the zoning package, 262
so in the zoning package, the condition would be a 55 and older community. I think that's 263
what he's trying to get to here. Are you guys willing to put that in writing as a condition 264
right now as part of our consideration, pretty sure that's what he's asking. 265
266
Scott Radway: We are proposing, yes, that it will be age 55 community. 267
268
Adam Beeman: And that is a condition? 269
270
Statler Gilfillen: Put it in writing so that it's a legal binding issue. That's all. 271
272
Scott Radway: We can't do that at this time. We can put it in writing what we're proposing. It doesn’t 273
become legal until the board of county commissioners would do something with it. For 274
our intent with you, yes. 275
276
Adam Beeman: Right, this is the back and forth. We can negotiate, like if we wanted to say oh, we want 277
you to put up solar panels on everybody's building, you say no. Well, we can go back and 278
forth and have that discussion. And so, in that same step that you guys are proposing, the 279
55 and older, then that would be a condition in the zoning where that's a 55 and older 280
community period. 281
282
Scott Radway: I thought the question was more about at what point is it possible to insert that as a legal 283
condition within the zoning approval process. 284
285
Adam Beeman: If that's what you are guys are saying is a condition, then that will be part of our approval if 286
we do approve it at the end of the night, it will be included in our verbiage that it's a 55 287
and older community, so if you guys are in agreement, then we’ll move forward from there 288
and get the public comment. 289
290
Lamar Proctor: Just a follow-up question to that, what you’re saying is if you use that specific verbiage, 291
then that puts you under federal regulations to that 80 percent, at least 80 percent of the 292
housing has to be sold to or owned by persons 55 and older? 293
294
Scott Radway: Not precisely that. It has to be occupied by somebody 55 or older, so I could buy it for my 295
mother, or I could own it for my mother to be in it and there are, if you want to read the full 296
set of federal register regulations from 1999, I'll be glad to forward them to you. 297
298
Lamar Proctor: So, 80 percent of the occupants? 299
300
Scott Radway: Eighty percent occupancy by household that's got one 55 or older person and you have to 301
do an annual census of the residents and the dwelling units in the property and have that 302
Approved 8.7.24
record available any time somebody wants to look at it. One of the things that I think Pat 303
and I talked about is an aspect of reporting that information back to the County. The 304
County is left out of that process. Local government is left out of that process via the 305
federal regulations, but it's a piece of information for follow up to verify that the 306
development is doing what it says it was going to do, and so that's another mechanism of 307
making sure that it happens. 308
309
Adam Beeman: Thank you. 310
311
Beth Bronson: The only other condition I would discuss is basically you were explaining about the first 312
responder, you referred to the Goldmine Loop entrance as an emergency vehicle only 313
entrance. 314
315
Scott Radway: Yes. 316
317
Beth Bronson: And is that the original intention and is that an okay condition for the approval? 318
319
Scott Radway: I would say the original intention when we did the first concept, no it wasn't based on 320
where dwelling units were in initial concepts and as they evolved we reached the point 321
where it became apparent that most of our development was going to go out to, and the 322
application you have with the location of dwelling units, neighbors across the street on 323
Goldmine Road, Mr. Fox and his family and their neighbors, when we met with them two 324
times at least, discussed the issue of traffic coming out and being on that road, and so we 325
did explore what mechanism is there for doing an emergency services access entrance 326
only, and so again, back to talking to emergency services and go through all of the other 327
pieces that have to go through there, and as a County, you already have standards for the 328
kind of gated emergency vehicle access that could be used, and so there is both the 329
standard and a model in many places already in the county for that kind of gate piece to 330
occur. We have thought about where it might be, along that entrance road, how it would 331
make possible for somebody who makes a mistake to get into the site and turn around 332
safely, so the gate might not be right at the edge of the property. It might be internal to 333
the property some distance, but the goal and the effect would be to keep all of the 334
Fiddlehead Corner traffic going out onto Morrow Mill Road. Back to your back and forth 335
and the discussion among yourselves and with the community, is if you think that's 336
inadvisable with the issues around the neighborhood, I'd suggest that you put that within 337
your recommendations. 338
339
Beth Bronson: Thank you very much for providing those responses and clarification. 340
341
Adam Beeman: So, we're going to head to public comment. There's a time of 3 minutes. We have one 342
person that was granted 12 minutes to speak. She will speak first. I'm going to call three 343
names. If you guys just want to come up, stand in the line and we can move through this 344
because if everybody here speaks we have 3 hours of public comment. I need to ask that 345
if it's redundant and repetitive, please just say I agree with so and so and we can kind of 346
get through this. I'm not trying to strip you from your time, but to hear you say it over and 347
over again it's going to be a long night. 348
349
Charity Kirk: Should they clarify the topic they're supposed to be speaking about. 350
351
Adam Beeman: We're just going to let them have their 3 minutes. 352
Approved 8.7.24
353
Charity Kirk: But it's 3 minutes per item. 354
355
Adam Beeman: Correct. 356
357
Charity Kirk: So, which item are you? 358
359
Adam Beeman: Item 7 is the first one up. So, comprehensive plan, future land use map, and text 360
amendments, but before we start that, Laura Streitfeld has the floor for 12 minutes. 361
362
Statler Gilfillen: Can I just make a comment. I think we all remember that one of the greatest speeches in 363
American history about one of the most complex things ever said was the Gettysburg 364
address. Lincoln condensed it down into 2 minutes. You have each got 3½ minutes. 365
Thank you. 366
367
Chris Johnston: I apologize, so to confirm we have re-split up the 3-minute speaking time for someone 368
based on – 369
370
Charity Kirk: I thought it was 9 minutes total. 371
372
Adam Beeman: Based on what I have, I'm going to read your name and if you happen to be on another 373
page, you're going to get your name and you come back for another 3 minutes and if 374
you're on another page, I'm going to read your name again, you're going to come up and 375
get your third 3 minutes. That's the way that this has been labeled. 376
377
Chris Johnston: All right. Does there need to be a clarification of what the speaker is talking about when 378
they come up to speak. 379
380
Charity Kirk: I thought it was just 9 minutes total and all at once. 381
382
Adam Beeman: Nope. Because, technically, you signed up to speak on that particular amendment, and if 383
you don't, you're not talking about that topic, then it's kind of just tough. I'm just going to 384
let everybody have their time and we're going to listen to what everybody has to say. 385
386
Charity Kirk: I would, I would rather not have people repeat the same thing 3 minutes, 3 minutes, and 3 387
minutes. 388
389
Adam Beeman: Correct, that's why I asked to not be redundant. Just stand up and agree with the 390
previous person if that's what you do, make it strong. The floor is yours. 391
392
AGENDA ITEM 7: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) AND TEXT AMENDMENTS – To 393
continue review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on applicant-initiated amendments to the 2030 394
Comprehensive Plan to amend the FLUM to expand a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node (RNAN); and to 395
amend the text of Appendix F: Land Use and Zoning Matrix. The BOCC public hearing date is “to be 396
determined.” 397
398
Laura Streitfeld: I'm Laura Streitfeld, and I live on Morrow Farm Lane off of Morrow Mill Road in Bingham 399
Township. I'm speaking first about Item 7. According to the planning director, until this 400
application no developer has asked to change the county's comprehensive plan, which is 401
guided by robust public participation. This meeting is continued and although some of us 402
Approved 8.7.24
signed up to speak in June, the numerous community members opposed to the project, 403
who are here tonight hoping to speak, and yet, even if everyone here were to speak 404
tonight, we represent a small fraction of the wider community expected to participate in 405
envisioning County land use policy for the next 26 years. On Highway 54 and Morrow Mill 406
Road, there's a gas station, convenience store, and Piedmont Feed fully consistent with 407
the definition of rural neighborhood activity nodes in the UDO and comprehensive plan. 408
Seeking rural neighborhood activity node, which I'll call RNAN, designation to add 70 plus 409
acres of mixed use, serving only this proposed private development's residents and 410
visitors is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan's direction to locate RNANs to serve 411
the local agricultural and residential community. Changing policy to allow commercial use 412
with no public benefit on a non-crossroads property would threaten the genuine public 413
interest of local communities of crossroads throughout Orange County. The future land 414
use map includes ten RNAN nodes totaling 1,166 acres and 82 percent of that is zoned 415
agricultural residential, 15 percent of it is R1 residential. By design, these nodes are 416
confined to a small radius. This developer requests adding 70 plus acres to a 125-acre 417
node beyond the circle. The intersection of 54 and Morrow Mill Road, like other nodes, is 418
not in an area marked for transition from rural to urban-type development or infrastructure. 419
This is a significant inconsistency because development standards in the UDO state that 420
MPD-CD districts shall be limited to transition land use categories. If this board were to 421
recommend allowing MPD-CDs in nodes, you would open up ten nodes in non-transition 422
areas to unlimited exponential high-density intrusion into the surrounding low-density rural 423
communities. It's important to note that if you were to rezone a conditional district in a 424
node, there's an exception in which acreage limitations do not apply as they would for the 425
existing small-scale LC1 or NC2 commercial zoning, each of which are limited to a 426
maximum of 5 acres under the existing ordinance. I urge you not to recommend this 427
change to the future land use map and comprehensive plan because there are significant 428
unanswered questions about the rationale for allowing multiple and mixed uses in our 429
node. At the last meeting, the developer stated they would provide no services to outside 430
people, such as restaurants. The full range of proposed commercial uses are unclear in 431
the application packet, but in communications with planning staff and at neighborhood and 432
orientation meetings, the developer has discussed a pub, a coffee shop, and a store 433
exclusively for the development's investors and guests. The developer's proposal is 434
inconsistent with Appendix F stating that a rural neighborhood activity node identifies 435
areas in the county where small-scale commercial uses serving the population in the 436
surrounding area are appropriate and the overlay locational criteria that say serving the 437
local low density rural and agricultural population generally less than 1,000 persons. So, 438
residents of a high-density development cannot simultaneously be part of the node and 439
also be the low-density population surrounding the node. We in the Morrow Mill Road and 440
Goldmine Loop communities make up the surrounding population, and we would not be 441
served. Please do not allow a single developer to re-write County policy to benefit 442
themselves and burden rural communities around all ten nodes with misplaced high-443
density use in low-density areas without supporting infrastructure. There would be zero 444
harm in not recommending the proposed UDO amendments in Item 7. Not expanding the 445
node would not harm the public interest because the proposal does not plan uses that 446
would serve members of the public. Not allowing MPD-CD districts and RNANs would not 447
harm local communities because rural communities at these nodes are not seeking high-448
density mixed-use development that would encroach on farms and rural properties. Item 449
8, I urge you not to amend the UDO to allow family care homes in an MPD-CD zoning 450
district. The developer proposes changing UDOs necessary to build these centers and 451
that the rural neighborhood activity nodes designation should change. The parcel’s 452
Approved 8.7.24
current AR zoning, however, already permits family care centers without rezoning. The 453
claim that these centers should be a permitted use that family care homes should be a 454
permitted use in MPD-CDs to align with state law raises several unanswered questions. 455
While North Carolina law defines family care homes as a permissible use in all residential 456
districts, an MPD-CD district provides for nonresidential and mixed-use developments as 457
well as large scale subdivisions and allows quote “flexibility to accommodate land use 458
adjustments in response to evolving market trends.” It appears from communications 459
over the past year and a half the planning staff and the developer have been discussing 460
who staff or developer would request this change to permit family care homes in MPD-CD 461
zoning. This proposal is part of a wholesale attempt by the developer to re-write County 462
ordinances and comprehensive planning to benefit a single developer. Please do not 463
approve this proposed amendment, given that the motivation for it and beneficiaries of the 464
proposed changes remain unclear. Please note that the analysis and staff 465
recommendation in the agenda packet referring to healthcare include inaccuracies. The 466
statement of consistency claims that the development would provide outpatient medical 467
care and I heard earlier a discussion about a group medical center. This is unfounded 468
because according to definitions in state law and the health and human services 469
department, a family care facility does not require skilled nursing or physicians for 470
licensing and would not provide medical care, outpatient, or inpatient. It's simply a facility 471
providing personal care for daily living. There would be zero harm in not recommending 472
the proposed UDO amendments from Item 8. Not recommending this change would not 473
harm people seeking to establish a family care home in a residential district because 474
family care homes are permitted in residential zones, including agricultural residential. 475
Item 9, rezoning from agricultural residential to master plan conditional would streamline 476
the application process but only benefiting the developer to the detriment of the 477
surrounding community. According to the UDO, MPD-CD districts shall be limited to 478
transition land use categories within the Orange County planning jurisdiction and rural 479
community nodes. By design, our low-density agricultural residential zone without water 480
or sewer lines, public transit, or sidewalks, is not slated to support the massive 481
infrastructure needs of high-density development without depleting limited water 482
resources and irrevocably transforming farmland, waterways, and woodlands. The 483
proposed rezoning is wildly incompatible with the surrounding multi-generational 484
community. Recommending the proposed rezoning and a decade or more of construction 485
would likely displace existing community members, heritage farms, and young farmers 486
currently thriving and supporting older relatives who are truly aging in place. The 487
developer proposes changes that threaten not only this rural community but all of Orange 488
County's current and future farmers, food economy, consumers of local products, and 489
open space. The Morrow Mill and Goldmine Loop residents are a model of successful 490
rural community. We're thriving despite a series of problematic proposals for the area that 491
have put farms, public health, and the environment at risk. We firmly reject this project 492
because it threatens an existing community. I want to clarify some key information about 493
diabase dikes. In 1991, an attempt to site a landfill was defeated because it would have 494
leached contaminants into ground water based on a rock formation called a diabase dike 495
on Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road, just up the road from this facility. In 2008, 496
commissioners learned of the presence of the same diabase dike in the same area 497
proposed for developing the UNC Airport at the time that was defeated. More recently, 498
neighbors at the corner of Morrow Mill and Highway 54 have had their wells contaminated 499
by leakage from a previous gas station. This developer's proposal for massive water 500
draws and disposal of liquid sewage would further threaten these wells, surrounding 501
neighbors with a cluster of polluting infrastructure co-located next to them and raising 502
Approved 8.7.24
potential issues of environmental justice. Now, on a parcel just up the road, the applicant 503
has touted the benefits of the same diabase dike rock formation as a positive sign that the 504
wells will run massive water draws of 36,000-plus gallons per day. Unfortunately, altered 505
or fractured diabase dikes can allow contaminants to pass unfiltered down into ground 506
water. According to Dr. Paul Fullagar, a former chair and emeritus faculty of UNC's 507
Geology Department and a resident of Morrow Farm Lane and my neighbor, the dikes are 508
unlike sandstone and limestone which filter out contaminants. The applicant's own report 509
acknowledges water capacity is unpredictable, but it fails to disclose that the combination 510
of diabase dikes and sewage disposal on 22 acres of the property as a significant risk of 511
contaminated wells. Fullagar notes that anyone who thinks they know they can get a high 512
volume of water from a diabase dike is fooling themselves. He says that that location is 513
particularly risky for every well in the area as well as for the developers themselves 514
because disposal of 36,000-plus gallons a day of liquid sewage with a drip septic system 515
may allow contaminants to go directly down into ground water. The project risks depleting 516
ground water for surrounding neighbors and farms. For residences alone, the proposed 517
development would use 36,000 gallons a day, but that doesn't count water for other 518
facilities, fire suppression, sprinklers, landscaping and irrigation with no requirement prior 519
to rezoning to prove there's water available. Thirty-six thousand gallons of water a day 520
draws would far exceed the ability of the ground water to recharge itself, according to the 521
developer's own report citing a nearby location on Orange Grove Road at Cane Creek 522
where the recharge rate is less than 400 gallons per day per acre. Massive water draws 523
would strain our very limited water supply. An informal survey of neighbors surrounding 524
the property finds wells ranging from 1 to 5 to 8 gallons per day. Many nearby properties 525
also have diabase dikes. I ask you to make your decision based on protecting the water 526
supply for all of Orange County. This project is inconsistent with guidance in the land use 527
element directing development away from rural areas in order to prevent pricing out 528
farmers from their own land. The comprehensive plan cites the potential for complaints 529
and legal actions against farmers if more urban residents were to assert that farm 530
operations are incompatible with subdivision residents. The developer's proposal is 531
incompatible with existing and future farms, and it also threatens the watershed. The 532
applicant proposes locating wastewater fields along streams that lead into Collins Creek, 533
which flows into the Haw River and drinking water supply in Jordan Lake. There would be 534
zero harm in not recommending the proposed changes to the future land use map and 535
comprehensive plan in Agenda Item 7. While the request claims to meet the future needs 536
of a so-called tsunami of aging people in Chapel Hill who need affordable housing 537
options, this claim is unfounded. The proposal would not address the local need for 538
housing because, according to the applicant's statements at the neighborhood information 539
meeting and their orientation meetings, they've recruited a network of out-of-state people 540
who are waiting to purchase units. Not recommending these proposed changes would 541
not harm seniors because the developers are not restricting sales by age. Not 542
recommending this project would not harm people seeking affordable housing because 543
the proposal offers no plan for income-based affordability or for recruiting or subsidizing 544
lower-income residents and because banks do not give mortgages for cooperative 545
housing, meaning that any potential buyers would need to pay cash. Not recommending 546
this project will not harm diverse communities because the proposal offers no plan for 547
recruiting diverse residents. At the last meeting, the developer said that someone driving 548
by would not see this site in a flash of a second when they drove by the entrance. 549
However, the developer has been contacting Orange County asking for guidelines about 550
purchasing a sign and installing a sign similar to the one at the American Legion that's 551
electronic and illuminated. Given the presence of large signs, a widened roadway, turn 552
Approved 8.7.24
lanes, sidewalks, bus stops and three-story buildings with lighting that would extend into 553
the community, I believe that people would see this site from the road, and it would differ 554
from what's out there. Thank you so much for your time. Appreciate it. 555
556
Adam Beeman: So, let me just clarify. The first item up is the comprehensive plan, future land use map, 557
and text amendments. I'm going to call your name up, you come up, give me your 3 558
minutes on this amendment, and then you can sit down, and if you're signed up for 559
another one, you can come up and give me your 3 minutes on the next amendment, and 560
we'll go through all three amendments. I apologize if I butcher your name. Some of your 561
handwriting is tough to read. Kevin Davidson, Clare Steece Julich, and Ralph Warren. 562
563
Patrick Mallett: Sir, as they come up if they could just clearly state their names so we can get the 564
transcription correct. 565
566
Adam Beeman: Okay. 567
568
Edwin Cox: Kevin Davidson is a member of our development team, so, he's not going to make a 569
public statement. 570
571
Adam Beeman: Okay. So, Claire, Ralph Warren, and Dan Eddleman. 572
573
Clare Steece Julich: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the Planning Board. I'm Clare Steece Julich. I 574
live out in Bingham Township on 9 wooded acres. I've lived out there with my husband 575
for over 35 years. I'm a member of 2T and Hands Four Development Cooperative, and I 576
hope to be a resident of Fiddlehead Corner. There are many Fiddlehead Corner 577
supporters here this evening tonight, and I'd like them to raise their hands now. Thank 578
you all. I live across from Sykes Dairy Farm in Bingham Township. I'm 7 miles from the 579
Fiddlehead Corners property. I've observed the changes that have occurred to the rural 580
qualities of the county over the past 3 decades. I've been pleased by the efforts of our 581
county leadership to promote sustainable growth and development that balances the 582
social and environmental needs and the economic factors. This kind of growth can serve 583
the needs of the people for housing while maintaining natural systems in a fiscally sound 584
way, and it's described in Page 1-7 of the comprehensive plan. The June 5th Planning 585
Board meeting packet has an analysis starting on Page 37 in which the planning director 586
states that the applicant's proposal is supportive of the following principles, goals, and 587
objectives outlined within the comprehensive plan and goes on to cite nine specific 588
examples. The last of those is promote clustering of residential development and 589
dedication of large areas of undisturbed land for low-impact recreational use by residents 590
and for wildlife habitat. He concludes the proposal establishes consistency between the 591
comprehensive plan and the applicant's request for MPD-CD zoning as part of the 592
Fiddlehead Corner development proposal. The UDO follows this theme of conservation 593
cluster development in Section 7.12 addressing flexible development. The purpose of 594
flexible development, it says, is to preserve agriculture and forestry lands, natural and 595
cultural features, environmentally sensitive areas and areas with potential for maintaining 596
the character of the community that might be otherwise lost or marginalized with the 597
conventional development. If Fiddlehead Corner proposed for a conventional residential 598
district or even a residential conditional district, its design is exactly what the planners in 599
the earlier boards of commissioners had in mind as an ideal type of development that 600
fulfills the vision for sustainable growth in Orange County. The type of project we are 601
proposing can be an antidote to the creeping sprawl that is occurring in many parts of our 602
Approved 8.7.24
region. We hope you, the Planning Board, will keep these considerations in mind as you 603
deliberate. Thank you. 604
605
Ralph Warren: Good evening and thank you for this opportunity. My name is Ralph Warren. My spouse 606
and I own land on the eastern boundary of the application, and we've lived on our land for 607
50 years. We're in a neighborhood of four households within one hundred and nine acres 608
of land. I have lived in Orange County since 1954, with the exception of 7 years of 609
Raleigh residency. My spouse moved to Chapel Hill in 1944. These speakers are here to 610
address incompatibility of this application with existing County ordinance and planning. I 611
want to offer a view of the affected surrounding community as a need to understanding 612
our community and its land use. I have used GIS information to identify the landowners 613
and the acreage of properties that form a continuous land area bounded by Six Mile 614
Road, NC 54, Morrow Mill Road and Goldmine Loop Road. Each of these properties has 615
frontage on one of the listed roadways. The land area within this Bingham Township 616
segment is six hundred and sixty acres, and there are 18 households currently occupying 617
those adjoining lands. That total includes the 90 acres under discussion tonight. If the 618
requested classifications were to be granted, one hundred and fifty residences would be 619
added within 30 acres of those six hundred and sixty acres. The incompatibility of the 620
proposed high-density urban housing development is obvious on paper as well as my 621
drive through this area. Part of our community population is made up of families who 622
have lived a rural lifestyle on their land for multiple generations. Those of us newcomers, 623
whether 50-year or 30-year or recent residents, chose to locate here in order to join and 624
continue the existing lifestyle. We do not fit the conventional description of a 625
neighborhood, but we do form a strong community. Our members have come together on 626
many occasions to successfully protect our rural character as prescribed by consecutive 627
land use plans and successive boards of Orange County commissioners. This application 628
plan would attract residents drawn to an inward focus as opposed to those wishing to 629
meld with the longstanding lifestyles and values of the surrounding community. Dense 630
placement of the 200 or more residents together in an area with more expanded services 631
will be an open invitation to rapid commercial development. Granting the changes 632
requested by the current application would ease the path for such incompatible growth 633
both here and across the county. Our community residents are not opposed to 634
development that maintains the rural nature of our area. A long succession of Orange 635
County Boards of Commissioners and their land use plans have specified and maintained 636
rural agricultural zones in Orange County, including our area. So, we, as residents, ask 637
that you reject this current application, and thank you very much for the opportunity to 638
speak. Thank you for your time. 639
640
Dan Eddleman: My name is Dan Eddleman, adjacent landowner, senior citizen, aging in place in Bingham 641
Township, agricultural and multi-generation community for the past 45 years. My past 642
service to the county was as a member of the Bingham Township Advisory Council, 643
Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, and was a strong advocate for the extension of 644
zoning into all of Orange County. The above experience was during this era commented 645
on in the first meeting of the County to our planning agreements with Chapel Hill, 646
Hillsborough for water supply planning protection, for municipal throughfare planning, and 647
for development of best management practices for growth, where it should and should not 648
occur. The rural buffer zone serves as a bit of a demarcation of the types of development 649
that good land use planning would dictate be close to, or within the municipalities, and of 650
what is permissible and not permissible in the areas outside of the rural buffer. Rural land 651
node classification and zoning is an integral part of this question. In the June 5th meeting, 652
Approved 8.7.24
you asked some good questions about why the rural nodes were created, and what were 653
the concerns in creating them. I'd like to summarize. Marvin Collins, an Orange County 654
planning director, brought this topic before the Planning Board seeking feedback on the 655
following issues: The initial drafts of the county land use plan and zoning maps did not 656
have a category to recognize the presence of what we now call rural nodes. Unless a 657
change was made by extending zoning, these locations would have become a non-658
conforming use, and zoning was already a highly contentious issue. The pledge you 659
speak of at the beginning of this meeting came from those meetings, and making these 660
mom-and-pop rural services in the smaller communities and agricultural regions of the 661
county non-conforming was not an acceptable option. On the other hand, there was 662
concern that, without very explicit definition and size limitation on these rural nodes, 663
uncontrolled expansion would become the mechanism through which strip development, 664
spot zoning, and urban sprawl would happen. Significant urban high-density development 665
in the rural areas would also have the effect of putting Chapel Hill's water supply at risk, 666
especially since 54 West extends through our watersheds, and this proposal would 667
change all rural nodes in the county. Uncontrolled rural node growth would become the 668
endline around the rural buffer districts put in place to protect and preserve water quality 669
not only for rural residents but Chapel Hill to avoid urban sprawl and to protect the 670
economic viability of the agricultural operations. As stated in Sections 1.1. 5 and 1.1.7 of 671
the UDO, rural activity node encompasses land focused on designated road intersections 672
within the rural area that is appropriate for small-scale commercial uses and mom-and-673
pop convenience stores. This use is inconsistent with that goal. 674
675
Sadie Rapp: My name is Sadie Rapp. I grew up at 6819 Morrow Mill Road, and I now run a craft studio 676
and lead adult arts education on my family's property here. I'm also working to shift the 677
pastures on the property into food agriculture so as to better steward this land. I won't 678
have time to get into all of my concerns regarding this proposal, so I've tried to focus on 679
two main points. The proposed amendments hinge, in part, on whether or not this parcel 680
gets the designation of rural neighborhood activity node. These nodes are defined in the 681
comprehensive plan as land focused on designated rural intersections that is appropriate 682
for small-scale commercial uses that serve the public. The intersection of Morrow Mill and 683
54 has had that pink dot over it on the future land use map since the 80’s. This identifies 684
the intersection as a place where, essentially, some commercial development may be 685
appropriate. The developer is claiming it is relevant to their application because the pink 686
dot overlaps with the corner of their parcel but fails to contend with the fact that this 687
subdivision as it's currently proposed does not touch an intersection and contains no 688
commercial element. The designation as a rural neighborhood activity node would be 689
wholly relevant to the proposed location and uses. The developer has failed to 690
meaningfully make the case otherwise. Looking beyond the existing ordinances, the 691
Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 effort just released their new issues and 692
opportunities report, which I think serves as an excellent tool for anchoring our discussion 693
today. As I'm sure you all know, last fall, residents and County staff had the chance to 694
share their values and vision for the future of the county and to help guide its conservation 695
and growth efforts through the year 2050. This report outlines key planning themes 696
identified during the first engagement window. The first bullet point is protect critical 697
watershed areas in open spaces and preserve agricultural lands, which I'm personally 698
worried is kind of hard to achieve if we are rezoning agricultural parcels and building 699
subdivisions between streams. Farmland conversion, which is the change of farmland to 700
non-agricultural uses is one of the threats identified in this report. Maintaining farmland is 701
critical, not only to the identity and image of the county, but to our resiliency as a region. 702
Approved 8.7.24
To grant the developer their proposed changes would be to rob the neighbors, as well as 703
Orange County more broadly, of our vision for our own growth by circumventing the land 704
use plan process. It would negatively impact the ability of Morrow Mill and Goldmine 705
residents to build the future that serves our collective needs. It would shake the trust in 706
County procedure if a developer were able to usher in such significant policy changes that 707
are so inconsistent with the surrounding area and county-wide goals. The scale and 708
location of this proposal is not in line with the 2050 Land Use Plan with current County 709
policies and ordinances and isn't worth jeopardizing our natural resources over. I ask you 710
to please vote against recommending. Thank you. 711
712
Gregory Rapp: Hi, my name is Gregory Rapp. At the start of last month's meeting, we were told by the 713
planning director that, quote, "The MPD-CD zoning district was originally established to be 714
a mechanism through which innovative proposals could be considered. Innovation, 715
essentially, is the key that unlocks the door to overriding established zoning rules." I was 716
expecting the next sentence to be something like we, the planning staff, believe this 717
project to be innovative because of A, B, C and D, but we just sort of moved on as if it was 718
assumed that this project must be innovative. I looked for anything in the application that 719
spoke to this but found nothing. So, what do we see in the application? We see an 720
applicant that is seeking to upend decades of thoughtful planning for a self-serving 721
subdivision; an applicant who has professed no experience in the fields of real estate 722
development, real estate management, senior care, water management, or sewage 723
management. If approved, this would be their very first development. This applicant is 724
asking to build 150 units, the largest development in the history of the county, without any 725
legitimate justification for this outlandish scale; an applicant who has been planning an 726
intentional community for over a decade and still can't make their intentions clear. Their 727
application targets seniors as their primary audience without mention of any other type of 728
residents; no families, no children, no teens, while at the same time, their articles of 729
incorporation registered a year prior with the secretary of state say their development will 730
be multi-generational with no mention there at all of seniors or aging and, now, tonight, we 731
just learned that it's a 55 and up residential development. So, we're not sure what it is. 732
An applicant who may not know that the banks don't write mortgages for cooperative 733
homes. Since the residents don't own their homes, there's no collateral for the bank. Any 734
resident would have to pay in full, up front, putting this out of reach for people of modest 735
means and making affordability pure fantasy. An applicant who was unable to articulate 736
the membership criteria for their cooperative, let alone how a resident could cash out. 737
You can't sell your place on the open market because the cooperative owns your home. 738
You would have to wait until all of the other members agree to admit a new member. 739
What is the cooperative's obligation to even let you leave? And, even if they let you 740
leave, how will they calculate the value of your membership? To my ears, this sounds like 741
a financial trap, and it frightens me to think of how this could play out for seniors or any of 742
our aging loved ones whose health status and needs can change overnight. There's 743
nothing new about targeting a vulnerable group. Is this the kind of innovation the planning 744
department has in mind? Is this the kind of innovation that opens the door to sweeping 745
zoning changes? I, for one, certainly hope it is not. Thank you. 746
747
Betty Lou Whitford: Good evening. My name is Betty Lou Whitford. I'm a Hands Four co-op member. I 748
want to emphasize just one aspect of Fiddlehead Corner, so it isn't overshadowed by the 749
complexities of the zoning proposal. That aspect is how Fiddlehead Corner can be a 750
leading-edge model for Orange County, one that is right within your grasp. To appreciate 751
its importance as a model, one only need picture conventional subdivision development. 752
Approved 8.7.24
The 90 wooded acres in our proposal could be developed without regard to conservation 753
resulting in de-foresting of most of the land with large houses, lots with required septic 754
fields without regard to natural habitats. Fiddlehead Corner is significantly different. It is 755
what some call a conservation subdivision. It clusters modest housing on only 30 of the 756
90 acres leaving most of the land, 60 acres, minimally disturbed. I currently live in a 55-757
plus community that is part of a large subdivision in Chatham County. Development 758
meant significant destruction of natural habitats that come with clear cutting and scraping 759
off the topsoil to enhance profitability. Trees were planted, but it will be many years 760
before they replace what mature trees provide, natural habitat, and also shade for the 761
residents walking the neighborhood streets. In contrast, Fiddlehead is a conservation 762
cluster design. The clustering of homes will face green spaces rather than streets, a 763
design that, according to a North Carolina State University report on conservation 764
subdivisions, cuts down on paving cost and reduces the percent of impervious surfaces 765
by 31% on average. This approach is highly consistent with the conservation values of 766
Orange County land use further supporting the County's leadership in the state with an 767
approach that allows needed innovative development while avoiding suburban sprawl. 768
Quoting from the planning document analysis, Page 37 of June's agenda, I'm not sure 769
about tonight's, Fiddlehead Corner "offers a procedural and creative template that future 770
applicants might use for reference and guidance.” Such creativity also appears to be 771
consistent with the direction of the revision of the Land Use Plan 2050. I urge you to 772
embrace this innovative application, because it is a both/and rather than an either/or. It 773
combines serving the needs of people with conserving Orange County's natural 774
resources. Thank you. 775
776
Kathy McHugh: My name is Kathy McHugh. I'm a member of 2T, a local resident and a schoolteacher. I 777
strongly support approval of the zoning that would allow Fiddlehead to be built. I hope to 778
live many years to come, but I'm definitely getting older. I know from watching older 779
family members and friends that challenges come as we age. Physical problems that limit 780
mobility and independence and waning of cognitive abilities. It's a bit scary to think about 781
how I would be able to deal with these challenges if I live long enough to encounter them. 782
Moving into a continuing care retirement community is one possible answer, but as I look 783
at my finances and compare them to the costs of the CCRC, they just don't match up. To 784
live in an unfamiliar rental unit, like the ones that are springing up all over, isn't very 785
appealing to me. I wonder if there would be anyone there who shares my values and 786
interests, and who would come to my aid when I encounter rough patches. That's why 787
Fiddlehead Corner is so appealing to me. I know I would be among long-term friends 788
there. My favorite activities, such as contra dancing would be right there where I can walk 789
to them. When friends need help, I'll be there to help them and vice versa. And without 790
all the overhead costs that one pays in a CCRC, I think it will fit in my budget. It's just 791
amazing how this plan for Fiddlehead has gradually been developing from the first spark 792
of an idea now to a full master plan. It's heartening that a small seed of an idea has 793
grown so much. We will be hunkered down in a compact campus in the woods where we 794
can easily get to the community center and to one another and to gorgeous surroundings. 795
I urge you to approve this application that will allow Fiddlehead Corner to become a 796
reality. It's a win-win-win for Orange County. 797
798
Aadra Bhatt: Good evening. Thank you so much for giving me a chance to talk. I don't think I could 799
summarize all my thoughts as eloquently as my neighbors. 800
801
Chris Johnston: I'm sorry, your name. 802
Approved 8.7.24
803
Aadra Bhatt: Oh, yes, sorry. My name is Aadra Bhatt. I live on Labrador Lane adjacent to the planned 804
subdivision. Sorry, thank you for clearing that up. As I was saying I couldn't really speak 805
any more eloquently than my neighbors, Dan Eddleman, Ralph Warren, Laura Streitfeld 806
and the Rapps have already done. So, I just would like to share two major points with 807
you. I'm a microbiologist by training, and I've submitted my written comments via email to 808
the board. I'm really concerned about the risk for potentially contaminating our ground 809
water for existing residents who already live there, while managing the sewage that is 810
generated by the 300 units that are being proposed to be put up. According to the 811
presentations at the neighborhood information meeting in April, as well as meetings with 812
H4D at our neighbor the Warren's home, we shared the seed of the idea that we all found 813
so charming and wonderful. The proposed development was initially conceived by a 814
group of well-meaning individuals as an intentional community for 34 locals. Along the 815
way they've been advised to go big to spread out the cost of construction and 816
infrastructure, and as it stands today, the proposed project has been moved to a 817
subdivision with we learn today of maybe a 55-age limit. But that proposes to house 300 818
or more residents. When asked who would purchase the remainder units, one of the 819
investing members has shared that they anticipate more buyers coming from individuals 820
around the country. So, I'm not sure whether this plan really addresses the needs of 821
aging members of the Orange County community. I want to stop here and I want to just 822
close up with some numbers. The times the word senior appears is in the application 823
packet is 52. The times that the word senior appears in the Fiddlehead developers' 824
website is 0. The number of senior services that the planning department will actually 825
hold the developer for putting on to Fiddlehead Corner is 0. The number of times the 826
Orange County Advisory Board on Aging refers to this development as affordable is 2. 827
The total area of farmland in Orange County threatened by proposed changes to the 828
unified development ordinance, the comprehensive plan, the future land use map, and the 829
zoning map is more than 53,000 acres, thank you. 830
831
Anna Hatcher: Good evening, my name is Anna. I live on Morrow Mill Road at 5802, and this is Chelsea, 832
my next neighbor, 5811. So, up until today we heard about this age restriction, I was 833
against all of this project because it had like, we're going to get all the low-income 834
darkness of Durham right in my back yard. I don't want to have any teenagers selling 835
drugs to all our kids which live in our expensive, fancy houses, okay? Today when we 836
heard about 55-plus, I would say I probably will welcome this project with a few 837
restrictions, no, few adjustments, which we will ask to review and add to the list of 838
concerns. As it's going to be a community of 55-plus, we will need to have traffic lights, 839
we will need to have walking paths. We already have an issue of the people on the 840
bicycles which are extremely, you know, impacting our traffic and there is not really like a 841
side, or a pass for them to drive safe. So it has to be in the first 3,000 feet on Morrow Mill 842
Road when they get off Highway 54. It has to be at least in the requirements to the 843
developers to manage it somehow, maybe widen the road and have a narrow pass for 844
bicyclists because it's a problem on this road already. And these people are going to be 845
out to ride. I also have 77-years-old grandpa in my own house and I'm not sure that we 846
will have challenges with all the bicycles, which we love so much to ride in our street. 847
Another concern which I have is they want to put the entrance and access, the main one 848
on Morrow Mill Road. I'm against this entry and exit as the main one. I think it has to be 849
on Gold Mine Loop because there at least it's slow, less traffic and they can safely enter 850
and exit. If this enter and exit is going to be on Morrow Mill Road, first of all people just 851
take off from Highway 54, and they are already on high speed at my mailbox. And we 852
Approved 8.7.24
need to slow down traffic to, I don't know, 15 miles in that area. So, all this entry and 853
exiting of people will not hit, , I don't want to have so many crashes in my front yard. And 854
it's going to impact my neighbor, Chelsea. She has five kids and they want to put an entry 855
and exit right in her gate. I'm not comfortable with that, I'm not too happy with that, 856
especially if she has the young special child, and I think this has to be reviewed and entry 857
and exit has to be on Gold Mine Loop, not on Morrow Mill Road because it's going to 858
create lots of crashes. 859
860
Carol Mellon: I'm Carol Mellon, I live at 6410 Goldmine Loop with my husband Jim, and I just wanted to 861
say that our area is not zoned for high density development. We purchased our property 862
with existing zoning in mind because we desire to live in a rural area with a rural lifestyle 863
away from the noise, pollution, and congestion that we have experienced living in cities or 864
suburbs. Some of neighbors continue to find properties that their families have owned for 865
generations. We do not need another rural Fearrington Village type development in our 866
area or yet another party barn or entertainment venue with events disruptive to the lives of 867
nearby residents. Nor do we need a multistory apartment building. That's just out of 868
character with our area. And I would just like to say that most of us, even those of us who 869
are newcomers, bought properties that were appropriately zoned for our own plans and 870
now the applicant comes in and wants to change the character of the neighborhood and 871
we feel that that's unfair and we hope that you will reject their proposal, thank you. 872
873
John Kizer: John Kizer is my first name, but Steve Kizer is what I go by. And my home and property 874
are located about 600 yards from the proposed urban development. At the last meeting, 875
several board members wondered what the original framers of the land use plan, zoning 876
ordinances were thinking specifically about the contour of the rural nodes. I'm standing 877
here as a relic of that time. I was chairman of the board of adjustment and a member of 878
the planning board when they put zoning in place in Orange County, and at that time, we 879
developed the land use plan with several considerations. For example, the rural nodes 880
that you asked about, had we followed the parcel boundaries in defining the nodes, we 881
would have codified a commercial monopoly on a select few properties, an outcome that 882
neither we nor the community desired. The nodes were circular to provide a crude area to 883
which we could apply the principal zoning, avoiding any preference to a given landowner. 884
The philosophy charged to us by the county commissioners in those days of developing 885
the zoning ordinance was twofold. Number one, prevent urban sprawl and direct intense 886
urban development to the cities of Hillsborough and Chapel Hill where urban services and 887
utilities were available. Preserve the rural character of the county and prevent strip 888
development, that was threatening transportation quarters in and out of the county. As an 889
incentive, the selling of zoning to a wary and skeptical county population was based on 890
the promise that once enacted and approved, exceptions and variances to the ordinance 891
would be few and difficult to obtain. Thereby providing permanence to the county 892
structure. I have a few comments about the proposed project. Number one, water. The 893
proposal lists a minimum of 150 living units. According to the EPA, the average water 894
usage per day for an adult is about 85 to 100 Gallons. Assuming two persons per living 895
unit, the daily water needs of this development would be upwards of 30,000 gallons of 896
water a day. At the meeting, it was stated a well on the property could produce 40 gallons 897
per minute. This is an unrealistic estimate. And notwithstanding, it is not plausible that 898
one could pump 30,000 gallons daily from this relatively small parcel of land. In our area 899
wells usually produce no more than 5 to 6 gallons per minute; moreover, wells also run 900
dry in drought conditions in our area. For example, several years ago my neighbor had to 901
sell off his dairy herd as his wells ran dry. Wastewater, number two, assuming a closed 902
Approved 8.7.24
unit, the project would generate a bit more than 30,000 gallons per day of sewage. The 903
project proposes a high-tech solution to provide onsite waste management. Such 904
solutions are not free from failure. If the sewage system of the project should fail, the 905
company would have to condemn the existing drawings and provide water and sewer to 906
the outreaches of the county. 907
908
Adam Beeman: Thank you, unfortunately, time is up. 909
910
Colin Austin: Thank you, my name is Collin Austin. I'm the chair of the advisory board on aging here in 911
the county. We sent a letter to the planning department outlining our support for this 912
project. Our board supports this project because it was created by seniors for seniors, 913
and in response to many of the goals in our county master aging plan. I'd just like to 914
highlight three aspects. First, it increases accessibility for people regardless of age or 915
disability, incorporating wide doorways, handrails, level entries. Only a small fraction of 916
the housing stock in Orange County currently meets this criteria. Second, the 917
development enhances social interaction for older adults; has walking trails, outdoor areas 918
for recreation and events, community garden; and third provides a continuum of care in 919
the community to ensure that the needs of the community are covered and that would 920
allow community members to age in place with their increasing care needs rather than 921
forcing them to leave the community. We believe this is an important proposal, seniors 922
helping seniors age in place, instead of seniors living in isolation or being relocated to 923
facilities with little or no connection to any community. Thank you very much. 924
925
AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT – ADD FAMILY CARE HOMES AS 926
PERMITTED USE TO MPD-CD ZONING DISTRICT AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS – To continue review and make a 927
recommendation to the BOCC on applicant-initiated amendments to the UDO pertaining to Family Care 928
Homes. The BOCC public hearing date is “to be determined.” 929
930
Adam Beeman: Thank you. So, this next item is the UDO Text Amendment referring to the family care. If 931
you have comments on that, we're going to go through this group right now. 932
933
Dan Eddleman: This agenda item is based on the premise that the entire region encompassed by Orange 934
County has no provision for family care homes and that the rural neighborhood activity 935
nodes located throughout the county ought to be exploited to permit such use. My first 936
speaking to you about rural activity nodes states why that's inconsistent to use that kind of 937
rural activity node for this. Here is why. The assertion that the Orange County region has 938
no provision for high density family care homes and is an omission needing correction is a 939
mistaken assertion. By design, the UDO mandates that high density residential housing is 940
to be where water and sewer, transportation, and other infrastructure is in place and in 941
fact accommodated in the municipalities by the use of R5 and other zoning categories. 942
Chapel Hill and Hillsborough have accommodated many variations of such facilities, some 943
for the most advanced healthcare needs, some for 55-plus senior living facilities, and a 944
number with specific requirements for affordability. Examples are, as many recent news 945
articles point out, these reports include the Legion Road Residential Community Priority 946
Conditional Zoning that was approved for such use. Other similar facilities are located in 947
Chapel Hill where the required infrastructure is in place and make frequent use of R5 948
zoning. Just to quote a little bit about the Legion Road from Chapelboro.com, the Chapel 949
Hill Town Council unanimously proposed a resolution for the project at 1708, 1712 Legion 950
Road Development that will provide affordable housing property to accommodate 951
affording housing units for, and over the age of 55 and that is a legally binding 952
Approved 8.7.24
requirement. I've read that zoning permit and classification, it's legally binding in there. 953
They know what they're doing in permitting these kinds of facilities. And where certain 954
people earning at or below 60% of the average median income. That the land chosen is 955
uniquely suitable for providing affordable housing with this walkable proximity, things like 956
grocery stores, access to public transportation, things at the residential frontage of the 957
property, residents will benefit from and needed for an age-restricted site because of the 958
proximity to those amenities. Overall to say, this was a perfect site. The council 959
approved a conditional zoning request, the residential community conditional zoning 960
permit, a process that started in November 1992 just for these facilities. The core 961
problem with this proposal, it's located in a wrong part of the county. All the things about 962
cost, infrastructure, etc., etc., by incorporating themselves where it’s already provided will 963
help improve the affordability of these facilities, thank you. 964
965
Alan Julich: I'm Alan Julich, thanks for the opportunity to speak. I am a member of 2T, and Hands 966
Four Development. I live near by the proposed Fiddlehead Corner just off Bradshaw 967
Quarry Road. I want to address the family care home that's being proposed, because it's 968
a basic feature of our planning since we first envisioned our community. And I have 969
personally been part of the research to see what a family care home would look like and 970
how it would operate. Fortunately, in Chapel Hill, we've had the resource of the Charles 971
House Association, that is a resource for those with family physical or mental faculties. 972
They own and operate Winmore, a residential family care home off Homestead which is 973
identical in concept to what we expect to do at Fiddlehead. I was with the group that 974
visited there, observed the staff, and we talked extensively with Paul Cleaver, who I'm 975
sure a lot of you know, to get ideas for how our planning for our family care home should 976
go. It's difficult to overstate what a tremendous resource this will be at Fiddlehead to 977
allow residents to remain in familiar surroundings and get some of the care they need 978
when they encounter physical and cognitive challenges. This resource is one of the many 979
reasons why so many of our members are convinced that Fiddlehead is the place they 980
want to live. However, for various reasons the family care home with the family care 981
facility is not currently linked with MPD-CD in the UDO even though it does meet with 982
other residential districts including the RCD. We've gotten advice from the planning staff 983
that if we want this to happen, then we need to take the step, which we do and are 984
requesting, a text amendment to the UDO, and we've done that. And I hope you agree 985
that this will benefit not us, but others in the future because this type of family care facility 986
just doesn't make sense that it could not be part of an MPD-CD. Thank you very much. 987
988
Bryna Rapp: My name is Bryna Rapp. I am an architect and a resident of Morrow Mill Road for 989
34 years. I've designed many homes on this road and my neighbors have become my 990
extended family. We welcome these new folks to our neighborhood. All we ask is that 991
they abide by the planning and zoning ordinances the rest of us have respected for 992
generations. At the information meeting, the developer said they tried to find land close to 993
town, but it was too expensive to build there. So, they had to look further out where the 994
land is cheap. The reason this land is more affordable is because those of us already 995
living here have made thoughtful choices about how we live. Choices that respect the 996
long-term development goals of the County which seek to preserve farmland and protect 997
the watershed. What does this look like in practice, it means we put one or two homes on 998
a lot. We carve off a couple of acres for our kids or our aging parents. We rent parcels of 999
pasture to local farmers for a nominal amount so they can raise the produce that fills our 1000
award-winning farmers' markets. If you currently live in town, rural Orange is literally your 1001
breadbasket. Changing the UDO affects the whole county and threatens all of that. Most 1002
Approved 8.7.24
people are unaware that dozens of Morrow Mill landowners including us have voluntarily 1003
put restrictive covenants on their properties requiring 10-acre minimum lot sizes so that 1004
their land can be protected from development for future generations. These restrictions 1005
go far beyond what the County requires in the unprotected watershed. It may be hard for 1006
a developer to understand, but those of us who live here do not have a transactional 1007
relationship with this land. We know that once agriculture and forested land is lost, you 1008
don't get it back. Playing by the County’s rules has meant that our property values have 1009
not increased the way property values close to town have. Though we may not get rich 1010
selling our land to a developer one day, this stability serves a greater good. It means that 1011
folks can still find smaller lots and homes that are affordable and young farmers have a 1012
chance of holding on to their inherited land because tax values are not sky high. It is only 1013
because the rest of us have played by the rules that this developer can now see our land 1014
as cheap and ready to be exploited for their suburban development. This project is 1015
unnecessary and unneighborly. I say unnecessary because without changing a single 1016
ordinance, they can build enough homes for all of the current members to live side by 1017
side, sharing resources and supporting one another like the rest of us do. I ask the 1018
planning board to respect the wisdom of the UDO and the vision outlined in the Land Use 1019
Plan 2050 and reject this proposal because it is wholly inconsistent with both, thank you. 1020
1021
Carol Mellon: Yes, first I'd like to say, I've had to make a lot of changes to my notes because, we were 1022
first told that there would be an assisted living center on the campus of the proposed 1023
development and it has since been changed to family care home. This seems like kind of 1024
an effort to shoe-horn this proposal into or toward approval, but let me continue. Our area 1025
does not have the infrastructure to support a large community of people needing frequent 1026
medical care. We are served by a volunteer fire and rescue squad that is not equipped to 1027
transport residents to relatively distant hospitals on a frequent basis and along a hilly, two-1028
lane highway with infrequent passing zones. Those needing skilled care would have to go 1029
elsewhere in any case since the planners of this community will not have any provision for 1030
that. Even if everything goes as planned from a financial point of view, a high-density 1031
staff intensive development will not only increase environmental pollution nearby, but will 1032
definitely increase the amount of traffic, air pollution, and noise. As one of our previous 1033
residences was adjacent to an assisted living center, we know that the required staff will 1034
be working around the clock as well, coming and going at hours that are now reserved for 1035
peace and quiet in our area. Again, I ask that you reject this proposal, thank you. 1036
1037
Anna Hatcher: So, for me personally, because of the concerns about the traffic which is going to grow, I 1038
don't know, probably three times more than we have originally, I think that one of the 1039
requirements for this neighborhood is they will go ahead and build a public bus station 1040
because people in age sometimes have challenges with driving good and paying 1041
attention, especially when it's getting dark. I think it has to be a requirement a public bus 1042
station, something like that. Next concern is the construction hours. I don't want to live in 1043
hell for the next 10 years, right? I came to this country from the huge city Kyiv in Ukraine 1044
5 years ago. I know what construction is, and at least it has to be mandatory that after 1045
5:00 p.m. no noisy construction work. It has to be documented. If you don't want us, with 1046
Chelsea to pull out my truck and block the entrance and exit and makes strikes and 1047
revolution which I know how to do revolutions trust me. And you don't want to have it in 1048
the county, right? So, no construction after 5:00 p.m., no noisy construction activities on 1049
weekends. It has to be documented and be a requirement to these people. Also, we 1050
would like to have and see a backup from this group, like a backup plan. Because they 1051
are in respected age, right? If they aren’t able to perform in 3 years, what's next steps. 1052
Approved 8.7.24
We don't want to end up with what we expected before this 55 plus, they will just dump it 1053
for, instead of $1 million or how much they spent on the land, for $5 million and then 1054
another black neighborhood from that will come and build cheap condos. So, we want to 1055
see the backup plan, what if they are not able, because they have zero experience, they 1056
don't have enough funds maybe something can happen, age, you know. We want to see 1057
a documented plan for this community, what it's going to be if they are not able to perform 1058
what they wish, thank you. 1059
1060
AGENDA ITEM 9: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT (CONDITIONAL DISTRICT) – To continue review and make a 1061
recommendation to the BOCC on an applicant-initiated zoning atlas amendment to rezone 90.133 acres (PIN: 1062
9739-72-0339) located off Morrow Mill Road at Gold Mine Loop, within the Bingham Township. The proposed 1063
rezoning is from AR (Agricultural Residential) to MPD-CD (Master Plan Development – Conditional District). 1064
The BOCC public hearing date is “to be determined.” 1065
1066
Adam Beeman: This is the one we’re all here for. 1067
1068
Clare Steece Julich: Thank you, I'm Claire Steece Julich. As indicated earlier, my husband and I have lived in 1069
Bingham Township for over 35 years on 9 wooded acres. We're both retired, 68 years old 1070
and members of the 2T and Hands Four Cooperative. We have no children and no 1071
immediate family living nearby that can help us in our senior years. As we age, it's 1072
becoming more challenging to physically care for our home and property and each other. 1073
I know there are many others in our situation. One solution would be for us to move to a 1074
smaller affordable home in town, but those properties have become rare. We can't afford 1075
to move to a CCRC like Carol Woods, and even if we did qualify for one there’s a waiting 1076
list of 10 years or more. Our cooperative did an exhaustive search over several years for 1077
property to purchase for our development in an area that was closer to city limits, but 1078
nothing suitable was available. Living at the Fiddlehead Corner community would provide 1079
us and other senior citizens a place in which we can age in place comfortably, safely, and 1080
in a beautiful walkable environment with neighbors, activities, and support services 1081
nearby. Fiddlehead Corner will be less expensive up front and on a monthly basis than 1082
our local CCRCs. I appreciate Orange County Department of Aging’s strong work to 1083
promote the needed senior housing that our people require. I know that there is a 1084
pressure in our county for development and response to our increasing population. A 1085
large percentage of them are will-be seniors. Please support the zoning changes needed 1086
to allow Fiddlehead Corner to happen, thank you all very much. 1087
1088
Miriam Cowan: Good evening, planning board. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm married to Tom 1089
Cheek who is the landowner who sold the land to 2T. He and I got married 20 years ago. 1090
1091
Adam Beeman: I'm sorry, what is your name? 1092
1093
Miriam Cowan: I'm sorry, my name is Miriam Cowan. I attended Davidson College and Antioch School of 1094
Law, worked for 10 years in Washington, D.C. for a big law firm and learned a lot about 1095
politics. Decided I didn't like it so much and moved back home with my two children after 1096
a divorce when I met Tom, and this wonderful and kindhearted person. He introduced me 1097
to this farm. This farm is spectacular. It has beautiful, wooded streams. It is just a real 1098
haven. So, my first instinct was wow, this would be great to share with other people. 1099
Because I'm one of those people that likes to share. Tom and I always talked about 1100
developing this land and his idea of developing differed from mine, but we both wanted to 1101
preserve the integrity of the land by having people that really cared about what was going 1102
Approved 8.7.24
out there. There were three things we could do. We could create a land conservation 1103
easement, but we would only have netted 50% of the fair market value, and this is our 1104
retirement income, because we don't have anything else. This second thing was to sell 1105
this land to a developer for a fair market value and have multiple lot owners do whatever 1106
they want with their lots, clear cut the trees, watch the building of more mc-mansions with 1107
true green lawns, and use of herbicides and pesticides. I have a degree in viticulture and 1108
enology. I built a vineyard there. I also have another degree in organic agriculture. So, I 1109
am adamantly opposed to anything, pesticides, herbicides, true green, uh-uh, no, not for 1110
me. So, the third option was to find a like-minded group which came to us in the form of 1111
2T. That group has pledged to keep the trees, not use pesticides or herbicides and 1112
preserve the integrity of the land. The other thing that nobody has mentioned here is that 1113
these people are also going to preserve our cultural heritage by the use of contra dancing 1114
and developing the folk dancing. This type of heritage is vital to the preservation of our 1115
society. It was brought over here by the Scots who founded North Carolina in the 1700s. 1116
It's a part of the English and French traditions as well. So, I am definitely for this 1117
development. 1118
1119
Tom Cheek: As I walk up here, I see my friends and neighbors. I see a lot of people who I hope will 1120
soon be my friends and neighbors. 1121
1122
Adam Beeman: Can you identify yourself, please? 1123
1124
Tom Cheek: I am Tom Cheek; I am the landowner. Let me give you a bit of background. My paternal 1125
line has been in Orange County for 150 years. My family has been here for a long time. 1126
I'm the sixth generation to grow up. In 1957 my family bought this property when I was 6 1127
years old. This is where I've grown up. This land is in my blood. I knew at an early age I 1128
wanted to be a builder. Found out God did not want me to be a chemist, so I went into the 1129
building trades. I am a licensed commercial general contractor and a civil engineering 1130
technician. It has always been my intent to divide this land and build residential on it. I 1131
had a horrific car accident in 2005 which prevented me from doing that. I realized I 1132
needed to partner with someone who would fulfill my vision for the land. These folks 2T, 1133
are the best answer for that land. I believe in what they're doing and having the 1134
construction background that I have, has allowed me to see that the way they are doing it 1135
is adequate, beyond adequate, admirable. Usually when we have people move into our 1136
neighborhood, we don't know what their character is like. This time is different. About 2 1137
years ago we had a monthly meeting scheduled but the 2T participants were late, about a 1138
half hour late. I found out that they had stopped to help my elderly neighbor who had 1139
gone down to her mailbox and fallen and was lying in the driveway. This is the character 1140
of the people who would be our neighbors. I ask you to pass this, thank you. 1141
1142
Stephen Stiebel: All right, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm Stephen Stiebel, I've lived on 1143
Henderson Field Road just off Morrow Mill Road for 22 years. I'm speaking in favor of this 1144
rezoning amendment. I'm a member of Hands Four and a longtime member of the dance 1145
community. I have a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering and in that 1146
career, I have managed construction projects and I was involved in the startup of two 1147
facilities. More recently, I owned and operated a construction-related business for over 20 1148
years. I have served on the board of directors of the Orange Durham Chatham County 1149
Home Builders Association. During my involvement with 2T and H4D, I have been 1150
impressed by the care, thoughtfulness and professional approach of this community. 1151
Importantly, I have been impressed with the planning taking into account to minimize their 1152
Approved 8.7.24
impact on the surrounding community. I have been involved in the contra dance 1153
community for 25 years and I know personally that the social fabric of this community is 1154
extremely important to the physical and mental health of its members. Over the years, I 1155
have personally been involved in care teams to support members of the community in 1156
need. Recently, I injured my shoulder and now have a new shoulder. My dance 1157
community put in place a care team and I was supported until I was able to be on my own. 1158
We want to be able to continue these activities as we age. We want to incorporate this 1159
social glue into the Fiddlehead community so that it isn't necessary for any one person to 1160
carry the load. We can all pitch in. Over the years, I have hosted house concerts and 1161
dances and it's a gift and joy to share my home with this community. We have given an 1162
enormous amount of time and attention, all those volunteers, to how we would structure 1163
our continuity of care at Fiddlehead. We have nurses, doctors, and healthcare 1164
professionals among us thinking through how medical issues would be addressed. But 1165
there is so much more to well-being than just going to the doctor. Being fit and active is 1166
such an important aspect of staying healthy and avoiding the healthcare system in the first 1167
place. But when that need for care comes into the picture, it's important to have a plan. 1168
That's what Fiddlehead is planning for. People caring for one another, a mutual care 1169
community. That approach relieves a lot of planning and expense from the county's 1170
resources. Fiddlehead has so much to offer Orange County seniors, but Fiddlehead can 1171
only become a reality if this master plan development conditional district zoning is 1172
approved allowing Fiddlehead to be located in an appropriate setting. A compact campus 1173
where all abilities can easily get to its facilities, I urge you to approve this application. 1174
Thank you for the time. 1175
1176
Linda Smith: My name is Linda Smith. I'm a 2T member and live about 2 miles from the Fiddlehead 1177
Corner location. Having grown up on a tobacco farm in eastern North Carolina, I moved 1178
to that area for the very reason that most of the people are speaking about here. I love 1179
rural North Carolina. I lived in this area for 16 years and over off of Dodson's Crossroads 1180
prior to that for 18 years. I joined 2T because after I built my house by the Haw River my 1181
husband passed away. He and his daughter and I took care of him during that process 1182
and so I know what it's like to need help while you're in those aging and last years. Now 1183
I'm in a position where I'm going to need some help eventually myself, as many of us in 1184
this room will. I am one of the neighbors already, and I think 2T and H4D is a wonderful 1185
community. I'm a singer and I've been dancing with these folks for a long time, I'm really 1186
excited about the possibility of sharing a neighborhood with all of them and everyone else 1187
in this room. I already shop at Bravos Market, at Fiesta Grill, and at Piedmont Feed and 1188
what used to be Feed and Seed, it's now Feed and Garden Center, and believe the White 1189
Cross community is a wonderful place. I think the people I know in Hands Four will be a 1190
fine addition to this community, and I'm looking forward to the support that we can offer 1191
each other through our support network. Some people describe Hands Four Cooperative 1192
as a closed group, but it's not. H4D is a cooperative, not an exclusive club. Co-op 1193
members value being good neighbors beyond the boundary of Fiddlehead Corner as 1194
you've just heard mentioned and share a common desire to preserve the environment. 1195
Everyone is welcome to join, anyone is welcome to join who meets the basic 1196
qualifications, and I will try to describe a few important ones. A potential member needs 1197
to understand and agree with the philosophy of cooperative living and of aging in place. 1198
Fiddlehead is oriented towards people who are downsizing and happy to live in smaller 1199
homes. It's for people who want to have close relationships and who are eager to 1200
participate in a wide range of activities and stay as active as possible for as long as 1201
possible. Potential residents will have to meet conventional mortgage income 1202
Approved 8.7.24
requirements for the housing they choose. The leadership is working hard to keep costs 1203
under control so that living at Fiddlehead is financially attainable for those of us of modest 1204
means. The plan provides for a variety of housing sizes, including studios and one-1205
bedroom units, which is in line with that goal. Up to now, news about H4D has spread 1206
entirely by word of mouth and through educational orientations. It's a grass roots effort, 1207
people empowered, and not a big developer. I urge you to approve it, please. 1208
1209
Aditi Watson: My name is Aditi Watson; I also go by Atula. Thank you for giving me a chance to speak. 1210
Me and my family moved here from Northern California, small town, and the place we 1211
were living in California was high land taxes and very high market for real estate so we 1212
were searching for a community that we could fulfill our dreams of homesteading and 1213
living sustainably and coming to North Carolina and finding the little place on Goldmine 1214
Loop and Morrow Mill Road was exactly everything we had been envisioning for a decade 1215
of searching, and we found that the like-minded neighbors and the whole area suited 1216
exactly our vision. For the past 3½ years we've been living homesteading, our farm 1217
gardens. I am concerned about this project greatly, because it affects so many aspects of 1218
our life on Goldmine Loop. For one, Goldmine Loop is a beautiful setting for bike riding, 1219
taking walks, I’ll even meet my neighbors along the way and it's just a beautiful place to 1220
be and live, and I really would be sad to see the whole lifestyle of the rural community 1221
jeopardized by this project and everyone, all my neighbors have spoken so well and so 1222
good, so I don't really have so much more to say, but I'm wholly against this development, 1223
thank you. 1224
1225
David D’Agostino: Hi, I'm David D'Agostino, I live on Labrador Lane, with my partner, Audra Bott, and I'm 1226
neighbors with Dan Eddleman and Ralph Warren and I completely agree with everything 1227
they say, and I'm against the development. I do feel like they're not really giving us 1228
straight answers and, I would love to see an age in place community for 35 people which 1229
was originally presented to us. That's a lot different now and there's really no confirmation 1230
that this is going to be a place for people over 55. That’s all I have to say, thank you. 1231
1232
Carol Mellon: Hi, I'm Carol Mellon and I'd just like to say that agricultural and forested lands are 1233
precious finite resources that should not be permanently marred by developments that will 1234
be redundant within decades. This isn't the 1980s when birth rates were still high. 1235
Demographic trends, including the two upcoming so-called academic cliffs or sharp 1236
declines in the number of college age persons and the coming decline in the number of 1237
55-plus persons due to the aging of the baby boomer generation, will result in a multi-unit 1238
housing surplus in communities like Chapel Hill. They will drive a projected surplus of 1239
rural housing of any kind since the infrastructure and amenities of cities will continue to 1240
attract the majority of home seekers. Retirement communities such as these are highly 1241
leveraged with a relatively high default rate. The Wall Street Journal has reported that 1242
they have become less popular in recent decades and particularly since the start of the 1243
pandemic. The power of retirement community borrowers to issue federally tax-exempt 1244
bonds, however, creates a perverse incentive for investors chasing yields to put money 1245
even into projects that simply are not viable over the long term. Many planned retirement 1246
communities have had to open their doors to the general public due to lack of interest 1247
from their target population and I think we may have seen that here or have had to greatly 1248
increase planned fees to compensate for the increasing costs of labor that is now in short 1249
supply. Others have been purchased by hospital corporations, effectively becoming 1250
healthcare centers. Were this to happen in our area we fear that the nearby land would 1251
Approved 8.7.24
be subject to seizure through eminent domain, further reducing the supply of farmland, 1252
and I would urge you to reject this proposal. Thank you. 1253
1254
Ron Royster: Hi, my name is Ron Royster. I moved to Morrow Mill Road 30 years ago and I love my 1255
community. When I first heard about this development, I was kind of excited because I 1256
have some friends who are part of it, but after hearing all the details, I'm very concerned 1257
about all the ramifications and if we go forward with it, there's no turning back, and we 1258
would be stuck with it forever. I would urge you to say no, thanks. 1259
1260
Jean Eddleman: My name is Jean Eddleman, I'm a resident landowner residing on property directly 1261
abutting the eastern boundary of this proposed subdivision. My husband and I built our 1262
home and have lived here for over 45 years with plans to continue to age in place. We 1263
have a deep and abiding respect for the land, the native flora and fauna with which we 1264
share the space. We are mindful that our water supply is not unlimited and conservation, 1265
especially in times of drought, is needed. We have built and maintained our living space 1266
to achieve a soft footprint on the environment out of respect for all of our neighbors and 1267
our native wildlife here in southwest Orange. That said, I have great concerns about the 1268
proposed rezoning and the proposed large scale amendments to the Orange County 2030 1269
Comprehensive Plan, to wit: No. 1, to amend a future land use map to expand a rural 1270
neighborhood activity node and RNAN in an agricultural residential area and 2, to then 1271
expand and amend the text of the land use and zoning matrix to allow master plan 1272
development conditional districts, that’s the MPD-CD, into proposed enlarged RNAN 1273
which is in a non-transitional land use classification. These proposed changes have the 1274
potential to negatively impact the current and future land use zones in all of rural Orange 1275
County. Of note, there's an important difference between the 10 and 20-year transitional 1276
areas close to municipalities and services, and areas in the non-transitional areas located 1277
in rural Orange. Therefore, the lack of the intersection between the non-transitional 1278
RNAN and the MPD-CD was intentional, it was not an oversight, to prevent poorly 1279
controlled sprawl in infrastructure poor areas in Orange County. Among the many 1280
concerns I have about these two zoning changes is the direct potentially negative impact 1281
on long-term availability of water for members of the existing residential and agricultural 1282
community and the entry of treated sewage effluent into the area water tables, as well as 1283
into the unprotected Haw River and Jordan Lake watersheds. Of interest, OWASA states 1284
in their long-range water supply plan dated 7/12/2022 that water from Jordan Lake will be 1285
required by Chapel Hill in the future due to growth and limitations in the Cane Creek 1286
Reservoir capacity. 1287
1288
Anna Hatcher: So, I would like to highlight again that my status with Chelsea changed because of 55-1289
plus, we all heard it right. We believe in happy, dance and sing and people in retirement 1290
age and if at some point we will see that this was dropped and it's not going to be 55-plus 1291
but 30 years or people who can afford the cost, I don't know, 150 grand, we will be not 1292
happy and we will definitely strike, so 55-plus happy, retirement grandmas and grandpas, 1293
we are fine with it. I want Chelsea to record. Also, my neighbor Deborah, I talked about 1294
the darkness of Durham, I didn't mean skin color, absolutely. The darkness of Durham, I 1295
was working for 2 years in Durham, on Miami Boulevard in Toshiba. The darkness of 1296
Durham is not in colors, but she took it and she got pissed, that I thought darkness of 1297
Durham. Darkness of Durham is in the drugs on the street, in pawn shops, you know what 1298
is pawn shops, right? Where people bring stolen rings or something to get cash. This is 1299
the darkness of Durham. The favorite teacher of my own child is a black person, he's 1300
incredibly educated cool guy. My personal manager in Toshiba, she's a black lady. I'm 1301
Approved 8.7.24
not American, okay? It has nothing to do with are you black, Spanish or Jewish or 1302
whatever, Mexican, Ukrainian, American. I'm talking about people which we are working 1303
hard all life long, build their retirement plan and, just a normal life without riding my 1304
motorcycle or ATV at night when I'm asleep. Darkness of Durham is not about skin color. 1305
My neighbor, which left us and got pissed, took it wrong. I didn't mean color of skin, I 1306
meant pawn shops, drugs, alcohol, its crazy parties; I don't want just people which are 1307
young people, just not willing to work hard are looking for the cheap condos, that's what I 1308
don't want to have next to me. So, I hope Deborah will get it and understand. Her front 1309
yard is always perfect, clean, I don't know if it's perfection, not always, a hundred out of a 1310
hundred, I wish my yard looked as perfect as hers. So, she took it wrong, and darkness 1311
of Durham is not in color, come on, I'm not even American, I’m Ukrainian Jewish. So, it's 1312
not about color, it's about lifestyle. Thank you. 1313
1314
Margaret E. Craft: Thank you for being here and for all you do, my name is Peggy Craft, I have lived in this 1315
area for a long time, worked as a high school teacher and I am on the H4D board and 1316
have been working for many years really hard to come to this point, and I'm very excited 1317
about the progress we're making. Everyone has said most of what I wanted to say and 1318
I'm not sure what your process is, but I do want to point out that the first speaker was 1319
inaccurate in a number of ways, so if I should address that now I will. For example, yes, 1320
people can get loans to live and buy property. There are banks that specialize in co-op 1321
loans so that was incorrect. We want a modest sign, no one's wanting glitter, I don't know 1322
where that idea came from. And also, a lot of comments were about we're going to lose 1323
farmland. We don't have farmland, ours is a forested area. Tom Cheek retained the 1324
farmland that's in the middle of our big plot, so just a few things. I have a lot of sympathy 1325
for the concerns about water, but I also have a lot of faith in the planning staff of Orange 1326
County and they have looked this stuff over really well, so if they've done something 1327
wrong, fine, let's talk about it, but I'd like you to understand that we've spent a lot of 1328
money and hired experts and it's gone through the Orange County process, so, a little 1329
faith there would probably be a good idea. I want to point out that Orange County has 1330
been pressured to do a lot of development lately because of population growth. When the 1331
growth spilled over into the rural areas, primarily what we're seeing are these 1332
checkerboard, chop, cut down all the trees, put up a bunch of houses, developments. Not 1333
good for anybody, not good for the trees or the streams or the animals, and it's certainly 1334
not sustainable. Hands Four is doing it differently, we will be concentrating our growth as 1335
you heard on 30 acres, leaving 60 free to the animals and the plants and the people who 1336
want to enjoy that. The Orange County commissioners have created in the unified 1337
development ordinance incentives to do this kind of flexible development. No developer 1338
has taken them up on it yet, our cooperative is interested in rising to that challenge, 1339
planning a conservation subdivision with a master plan that preserves contiguous areas of 1340
the forest for the animals and the plants to thrive. Orange County has consistently 1341
chosen to place environmental concerns on an equal footing with economic and social 1342
considerations and therefore, I urge you to take a strong stand and your commitment to 1343
sustainable development in Orange County by approving our application. 1344
1345
Adam Beeman: Mr. Eddleman will be the last speaker of the night for the public. 1346
1347
Perdita Holtz: Mr. Chair, I have something that I needed to say about that. Earlier I think you were 1348
informed that Mike Fox was erroneously crossed off the lists and should have been called. 1349
1350
Adam Beeman: You're correct, I apologize. 1351
Approved 8.7.24
1352
Dan Eddleman: Mr. Stober, our planning director, reminded us sternly at the first meeting here that is 1353
about land use, not intent. You've heard a lot about intent, but the bottom line is you have 1354
to judge this on what the footprint is on the ground and what you see in this plan is a large 1355
development R5 zoning category which, again, the land use plan specifically states where 1356
those areas are perfectly acceptable. This approach and their intent could have been 1357
applied to those areas. Mr. Gilfillen made a comment about quick speeches and one that 1358
came to mind to me is, "We hold these truths to be self-evident". And it is in the land use 1359
planning principles 5 and 8, preservation of rural land and rural character, future growth 1360
and development should occur in a manner that preserves and enhances the existing 1361
character of the county, its townships and rural crossroads. Land use goal three, a variety 1362
of land uses that are coordinated within a program that limits sprawl, preserves 1363
community, rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an efficient and 1364
balanced transportation system, discourages urban sprawl, this is Land Use LU-3.1, 1365
discourages urban sprawl, encourages separation of urban and rural land use and direct 1366
new development into areas where community facilities and services exist. To coordinate 1367
land use, this is LU-3.4, coordinate land use patterns that facilitate the expanded use of 1368
non-automobile transportation modes. This is NA-17, maintain and protect land that 1369
contains valuable productive water, productive resources such as prime farmland, prime 1370
forest land and directing incompatible development away from these areas. We hold this 1371
to be the truth in this matter. Let me read something quickly here from the 2022 long 1372
range OWASA land use plan for water. While we, this is OWASA speaking, have plenty 1373
of water in the most circumstances, Cane Creek Reservoir is vulnerable to extended 1374
drought or back-to-back droughts. It was designed to maximize storage which is 1375
generally good and provides a higher yield; however, it has a relatively small drainage 1376
area for storage volume and can take a long time to refill. University Lake refills quickly, 1377
but it doesn't hold enough water for our daily needs. Cane Creek Reservoir can take over 1378
a year to refill under these weather conditions. Chapel Hill's water supply is these 1379
agricultural, low population density land contains small creeks and tributaries that feed 1380
into the reservoir. This is about Chapel Hill's water supply. I'm surprised that Chapel Hill 1381
doesn't have the opportunity to speak on this matter, so I think that's why it should be part 1382
of the comprehensive plan in the future. 1383
1384
Mike Fox: Mike Fox, thank you for allowing me to speak. I have until 10, is that correct? I’m kidding. 1385
I'm opposed to the rezoning. Alan, Maria, Scott, they've all been in my house, we live right 1386
across the street from this proposed development. Our property, 20 acres, my daughter's 1387
property, 2½ acres, could probably not sit more directly right in front of where this land is. 1388
If I would have had any idea, I did a couple years ago, that Tom was going sell his 1389
property, I would have done my best to purchase it myself or get people around us to 1390
purchase it, because we just love the 90 acres of trees there. My daughter lives right next 1391
door, I have her two horses right there on Goldmine Loop. I don't like the horses, but I 1392
don't want them spooked all the time with the noise. Very concerned about all this. 1393
We've been meeting with them for 2 years, went into the meeting very open-minded 1394
because initially you're like, okay, well, this is something that's never heard of this before, 1395
I left the last meeting proud of myself that I learned what a rural activity node was. So 1396
now that I've learned all this, and I see what's getting ready to happen here, this is totally 1397
inconsistent with why we moved out there, Tom said he's been there for six generations, 1398
Gaston Pierce has been there 3-4 years, generation farmers, right next to this 1399
development. This is a massive project, so Fiddlehead Corner they say that they're going 1400
to blend in with rural Orange County. There's no 3-story building within miles of where 1401
Approved 8.7.24
this development is on Morrow Mill and Goldmine Loop. Emergency road is going to 1402
come out right in front of my daughter's house and my soon to be fourth grandchildren. 1403
Come out and please drive down Goldmine Loop, it still has gravel on it, it's still a gravel 1404
road in places. So, we moved out there to be in a rural area, rural community, and all 1405
those people along Goldmine Loop. They're going to put 300 people on 30 acres and no 1406
offense to them, but they're saying that the other 60 acres, two-thirds of this is going to be 1407
less forested. We all know that cannot happen. You cannot put a road in there, you 1408
cannot put sidewalks in there, berms in there, storm water drainage, and if they can dig a 1409
well there that gets 40 gallons a minute, they need to go into the well drilling business, 1410
because I've never heard of that before, that's not happening out there. I was not 1411
opposed to this initially; I just was listening with an open mind. Thanks for listening. I'm 1412
not as eloquent as all these other people but this is going to affect our lifestyle, 10 years 1413
of construction, please, 10 years. Thank you. 1414
1415
Adam Beeman: Thank you. That concludes the public conversation, we're going to close the public 1416
comments and discuss amongst the board and see if we can't hash this out. Elizabeth, 1417
do you have any questions or concerns? 1418
1419
Chris Johnston: What are we doing here? 1420
1421
Adam Beeman: Work your way through, we have a motion one way or the other. 1422
1423
Beth Bronson: Have any comments on the public comments, maybe we'd like to discuss any of this. 1424
1425
Chris Johnston: Sure, I do want clarity real quick, because it was brought up in the previous meeting. Item 1426
8, in regard to how it, and I'm sorry, I'm used to looking at Cy and then Cy looks back at 1427
me, who am I looking at here today in terms of talking about Item 8? This is the one 1428
where we need to be in alignment with state law. Is that an accurate representation or is 1429
that an inaccurate representation? 1430
1431
Charity Kirk: The family care, care facilities and, and master planning district. 1432
1433
Lamar Proctor: It's Agenda Item No. 8. 1434
1435
Perdita Holtz: So, the UDO text amendment, it's in the abstract. When we were researching it, we 1436
determined that state law requires that you cannot discriminate against family care homes 1437
if they're allowed in any residential area, they need to be allowed in all the residential 1438
areas or in a zoning district that allows residential, which MPD-CD does. It was an 1439
oversight when MPD-CD was created back in 2010 to not have the little star there 1440
indicating that you can apply for that. So, even if that text amendment does not get 1441
approved at this point, at some time staff will be back to add that tick mark to that. 1442
1443
Chris Johnston: But to confirm, tonight, this is in front of us, to put us into alignment with state regulations. 1444
One way or another this has to occur unless we do what? There is no unless we do what, 1445
correct? 1446
1447
Perdita Holtz: The text amendment, that stipulation, has multiple parts in the UDO. The part that I just 1448
described about having a little star in the table of permitted uses is the one thing that will 1449
have to occur at some point, whether it's part of this action or whether it's part of a future 1450
action initiated by staff. 1451
Approved 8.7.24
1452
Chris Johnston: And I apologize, could you, just for my own personal clarification, break it out a little bit 1453
more so that star specifically means that we need to… 1454
1455
Perdita Holtz: The star in the table of permitted uses means that it's a permitted use. When you get to 1456
the conditional districts, what it means is that it's a use that can be applied for as part of a 1457
conditional district. So, it would just mean that somebody can apply for that to get 1458
approved as part of their conditional district application. 1459
1460
Charity Kirk: Can we approve just that Amendment 1 in Item 8, right now? 1461
1462
Perdita Holtz: You could recommend that that go forward if you didn't want to approve the other parts. 1463
1464
Charity Kirk: Do we have to do them together or can we just get that done with right now? 1465
1466
Perdita Holtz: It would probably be unlikely since this is a bundled application that staff is going to just 1467
take forward one thing that's not part of this whole bundle of applications. We'll come 1468
back in the fall with this one amendment if things did not go forward at this point. 1469
1470
Chris Johnston: I apologize, I just hate arguing about things that we don't have any control over, that's 1471
what I want to make sure that we're not doing necessarily, like if this is something that is a 1472
state regulation. 1473
1474
Perdita Holtz: I would recommend that you not take out just that one part. We'll come back with a text 1475
amendment, if necessary, in the future. 1476
1477
Adam Beeman: Any other questions or concerns? 1478
1479
Chris Johnston: I have general thoughts and comments and that sort of thing, but are we at the point 1480
where we're summarizing our thoughts or are we still asking questions of the public? 1481
1482
Adam Beeman: I mean, we're looking for a motion so if you're ready for a motion or someone wants to 1483
discuss things, let’s have it. 1484
1485
Chris Johnston: I'm still putting together Agenda Item 8 and I apologize, I thought that that was a little bit 1486
more bundled than it turned out it was, so I need to do a little bit of additional digging 1487
there. In regards to Agenda Item 7, which is essentially growing the pink dot, right? 1488
We're talking about expanding the rural neighborhood activity node. That makes sense 1489
based on the comments that were brought before by the previous planning board, why 1490
they didn't do it by parcels, that makes complete sense now. They didn't do it by parcels 1491
because, and if I misunderstand, I apologize, but they didn't do it by parcels because if 1492
they did then there would be no growth, it would just be whoever is there is there, so this 1493
makes sense in that regard insomuch as if someone comes in, they may be outside that 1494
dot, extending it makes sense to make it in compliance or whatever the case may be. If 1495
I'm misunderstanding that also, please correct me. But the key question here on is 1496
Agenda Item 9, right? Agenda Item 9 is the proposal by the applicant, and I think that 1497
everyone agrees with what Fiddlehead is trying to do there, they are trying to age in place, 1498
they want a community of like-minded individuals who have kind of fun with their 1499
neighbors, they can grow together and have that community, and I think that community 1500
actually in some ways already exists at Morrow Mill, right. There are people there who 1501
Approved 8.7.24
really enjoy their neighbors and feel like they have that community, and I completely 1502
understand why Fiddlehead wants that. I think the question is, does that fit in this 1503
particular area? Does it make sense? Everything I've heard so far about Fiddlehead 1504
makes it feel like a neighborhood island, and what I mean by that is it feels like it's not 1505
necessarily supporting the neighborhood in the sense of the rural neighborhood activity 1506
node is land designated in the comprehensive plan that is focused on road intersections 1507
within a rural agricultural residential area that is appropriate for small scale commercial 1508
uses. When I read that, I think of local support and growth of commercial uses that are 1509
supposed to be supporting the local neighborhood. This feels like it is an amazing and 1510
wonderful thing, I love the green, I love the solar, all the things about it. Does it fit that 1511
necessary designation at this point, I don't necessarily think so. So that's where I 1512
currently land with that. That is no dig on Fiddlehead or anything along those lines, land 1513
is expensive everywhere, I totally understand going above and beyond to try to find a 1514
place and make it fit. For this particular designation I struggle with that, so that is where 1515
I'm at right now. 1516
1517
Whitney Watson: So, I'm going to disagree with Chris. I think the most important issue is Item 7, the 1518
change proposed to the land use map and expanding what is possible within the rural 1519
neighborhood activity nodes. Because if it happens here, it does mean that it's now 1520
possible in all the additional 9 activities nodes throughout the county. So, this one change, 1521
while it may have benefitted a very worthwhile project, it now changes the future for the 1522
entire county, so for me that's really the crux of why we're here tonight is trying to address 1523
that. I had some conversation with some of the planning staff and it does help to have 1524
that history about why the activity nodes don't follow the parcel lines, but in this particular 1525
instance, perhaps, we could direct that the activity node go back to the parcel line, the 1526
one that's furthest away from the current AR designation, and ask the applicant to 1527
propose a project that fits within either the agricultural residential or change that zoning 1528
from AR to master plan development, because I'm really reluctant to sweep the entire 1529
history of activity nodes out the door in this one episode. I don't have any problem with the 1530
family care home, doing that text change and Perdita’s right, we're going to have to come 1531
back at some point and make that change to the table, so no big deal there. 1532
1533
Charity Kirk: I'm going to echo what Chris said. I'm in support of the vision but I think we're talking 1534
about something that is a much more core or root level here, and it's something that 1535
would be nice if it is addressed in a comprehensive plan and the comprehensive plan is 1536
being worked on right now, so doing such a change that seems fairly dramatic for this one 1537
project where it doesn't meet the current comprehensive plan vision, it doesn't seem wise 1538
if we are purely trying to use the UDO and the comprehensive plan to make our land use 1539
decisions. 1540
1541
Lamar Proctor: I think it's a beautiful vision and I love the idea of it, I think I’ll just echo the other planning 1542
board members, my concern is opening up rural activity nodes to master plan conditional 1543
districts. This was talked about a little, I was looking through the minutes where Cy 1544
Stober indicated that the intended uses for this project fell out of what would be allowed in 1545
a rural activity node which is a rural conditional district. So, clearly our entire 1546
comprehensive land use plan envisions consistent uses throughout the county to match 1547
the population densities and the existing uses and to give our population consistency and 1548
security about what's going to be developed around them and people purchase land with 1549
the idea that they know what the conforming uses are around them, they can see what 1550
areas are for future development, they know when they buy it, if they buy it next to a 1551
Approved 8.7.24
transition node this is some sort of industrial transition node, that, hey, this may be coming 1552
your way. And if they buy something in the middle of the rural buffer or agricultural 1553
residential areas, they would not expect that kind of dense development. As this is 1554
presented, to ask that we change the entire planning scheme to allow for MPD-CD zoning 1555
within rural activity nodes, I think is too far of a stretch. I wish this had been presented as 1556
somewhat a more consistent residential conditional district, but for whatever reason that 1557
was not how this is presented. I think what Cy said is that the anticipated uses and the 1558
vision, the big picture and the grandeur of this vision, there were uses that the developer 1559
and the applicant are looking to put in that couldn't conform with residential conditional 1560
district zoning. 1561
1562
Charity Kirk: I think it was the large-scale multi-family housing. 1563
1564
Lamar Proctor: Right, that's just where I am. I love the vision. I just think expanding MPD-CD zoning into 1565
rural activity nodes, given the history of it, given the consistency of the uses and within 1566
entire comprehensive land use scheme is inconsistent for me. 1567
1568
Steve Kaufmann: I guess I just don't feel comfortable with the plan, especially given the feedback from all 1569
the neighbors. It just doesn't seem to fit in that particular place. Even though the vision is 1570
great, the neighbors really don't want it, and it doesn't fit with the culture there, so for that 1571
reason I would not support it. 1572
1573
Beth Bronson: I think that we should be supporting a diverse kind of housing opportunities within the 1574
county and countywide. I think that the idea that more residents over the age of 55 will be 1575
coming to the area or aging in place in the area is only going to grow, but as is the rest of 1576
the population in this county, both for manufacturing, as well as for jobs that are outside of 1577
the county, and so it's well known that the rural buffer area has long been wanting to be 1578
preserved with agricultural residential and farmland. There are efforts to preserve 1579
farmland in the area; however, that doesn't stop owners from wanting to develop on their 1580
land and wanting to do a novel thing on their land. The master plan development 1581
conditional district is not something that I would find conducive to be adjacent to 1582
agricultural residential, and much less that far from community services such as public 1583
utilities and emergency services. I would find that there's a lot more questions that 1584
remain, and to go with a master plan development I feel like that would be shortchanging 1585
the precedent that this would be setting, so that's kind of where I'm at with this. The 1586
couple of conditions that we've discussed I think might be a good start, but I'm also 1587
wondering if anybody with Hands Four Development or anybody from planning staff 1588
brought the Economic Development Department into the discussion around this 1589
cooperative development or project. 1590
1591
Patrick Mallett: Well two things, so I would encourage you if you get into the part where you're crafting 1592
conditions you be very specific as you normally do with conditional districts and word 1593
them out item by item as part of your recommendation. Cases go through a process and 1594
a calendar and that starts with an internal analysis and then the items are also shared 1595
with various other departments. Economic Development is part of a development 1596
advisory committee. 1597
1598
Beth Bronson: So, the DAC saw it? 1599
1600
Approved 8.7.24
Patrick Mallett: That's right. They see it and are able to comment or not comment on any given project. 1601
For this specific case. In many cases they don't chime in. 1602
1603
Beth Bronson: I want to say they had no comment but let me just double check that real quick. 1604
1605
Patrick Mallett: That's my recollection. 1606
1607
Beth Bronson: I do not actually see them on here. 1608
1609
Patrick Mallett: So, they get the information, they attend the meeting, but they may not put in a comment. 1610
Or provide a memo. Most of the other departments, we ask for a specific memo because 1611
they have a very technical application and integration into the request. 1612
1613
Beth Bronson: And so when this was originally provided, I want to say that if there was proposals going 1614
back as far, and this is probably for the applicant, but proposals going back as far as 2020 1615
and 2019, was the Economic Development Department ever consulted or did you guys 1616
ever approach them about how to work with the County on creating this type of co-op 1617
environment so far away from municipality and doing that in rural county development 1618
land? 1619
1620
Scott Radway: I think all of us working on the project and H4D members and 2T members realize the 1621
complexity of the overlaying of these many issues that are here. The proposal itself, 1622
which is, there's some statements that have been made that aren't accurate. The 1623
proposal itself is completely a residential development. It does not have any non-1624
residential components. 1625
1626
Statler Gilfillen: I'm sorry. That differs with what you said about the medical facilities and other things that 1627
will be there. When you say it's only residential, but you've been telling me the opposite 1628
of that, so that's why you're getting that response. 1629
1630
Scott Radway: Well, I think that's incorrect. The medical piece which is state law as Perdita talked 1631
through and gone through and to this item that's No. 8 is that when we start, as applicants 1632
doing due diligence on property and uses, we started going in detail to what did it mean to 1633
be in X, Y, or Z district. What did it mean to be a flexible development within the existing 1634
zoning? What did it mean to be a residential conditional district? This application could 1635
have been brought forward in almost all or any of those districts, and it could have in fact 1636
been brought forward without requiring any rezoning component to it. It could have been 1637
brought forward in the agricultural residential district with one exception, which is the fact 1638
that there are multi-family dwelling units in this rather than all single family or all single 1639
family and duplex, and that's an important distinction, but the assisted living or the family 1640
care centers are governed by state statute. Part of the activity, it was referenced that 1641
there was a lot of back and forth between the applicant and the County. I took that to 1642
imply that somehow there was collusion someplace in there, but, in fact, when we tried to 1643
find that out and did some research, and the County did that research, looked at it and 1644
discovered that the state statutes and the definitions in the UDO were not matched. So, a 1645
simple piece in this is get the right definition in the right place, that's technical. The other 1646
part is should it be here, and that's obviously a bigger discussion, but state statute 1647
establishes, as was said, that all districts that permit single family or residential 1648
development, actually in any form, can have what is now called a family care home, 1649
defined correctly according to the state statute, which can have a maximum of six people, 1650
Approved 8.7.24
it’s licensed by the state and it’s further distinctive piece in here is that it has to be by a 1651
licensed provider within that piece of property, and so what's in the application is for a 1652
maximum of two single family homes, as defined by the state, that would have a 1653
maximum of six residential occupants within those. That's not, with due respect to some 1654
conversations at the last meeting and other things, that's not a non-residential use as 1655
defined by the state. Now we can all argue about whether it ought to be or whether it 1656
shouldn't be. 1657
1658
Beth Bronson: And I can appreciate that. Thank you for clarifying that there is no commercial 1659
component. 1660
1661
Scott Radway: There is no commercial component, and as such, this application could have come 1662
forward as a residential conditional district or, in some ways, as a flexible development, so 1663
if I can, before Patrick comes up and swats me, if I can say one thing. There's a lot of 1664
overlaps in the design that are pieces that are required by the ordinance. For example, 1665
there was a comment about signs and a lot of back and forth as we were trying to figure 1666
out signs. Well, in fact, to make the application we have to design a sign and submit it 1667
with the application. So, the back and forth on many of these items is not conspiracy in 1668
any fashion. It's trying to find out what we have to submit in order to begin the process. 1669
The second piece that we've heard about things that don't match up is the zoning districts 1670
for this require a perimeter buffer around the property on all sides; buffers against what's 1671
across the street, buffers against the adjacent properties. This project, if brought forward 1672
as a flexible development, in the subdivision process would not have to provide any of 1673
those buffers around to any properties, so the claim that this is a village that's put into the 1674
woods and hidden from everything is, in part, just because your ordinance requires it to do 1675
that, so parts of these are elements of how to build a community, and they're the elements 1676
of how to bring forward and have a good discussion about this, and I think it would be 1677
helpful to have Cy be able to comment on some of these things from this meeting that 1678
happened at the first meeting too. I don't get to make that choice, but it's my 2 cents. 1679
1680
Adam Beeman: Correct me if I'm wrong, Patrick, but the community buildings is why they can't use those 1681
residential districts? 1682
1683
Patrick Mallett: Yeah, in short, they've been working on this for quite some time, and they kind of came to 1684
the point of let's talk about what we need to do and what our vision is and which 1685
category, which way do we go with our request, and I think that a lot of the considerations 1686
with where the category they ended up with were based in, or, what is our best 1687
opportunity to be consistent as best we can or a path towards consistency with our plans, 1688
our goals, our objectives. Also knowing that this board reviewed a residential conditional 1689
district recently, Eden View, 30 plus units, and that is a fairly simple design because 1690
you're talking about just single-family homes on public or private roads. This group is 1691
contemplating more than just single family in a sense that single family, duplex, triplex, 1692
town homes, family care facility, like a multi-family, so the difference from a design 1693
perspective, I think that there was, and I'm not trying to speak for them or weigh whether 1694
that's good or bad, but the reality is once you cross that line you start to get into building 1695
and design commitments. With a master plan there is some very limited flexibility to that. 1696
If you go to an RCD and/or, let's just say theoretically to accommodate their other uses 1697
other than the residences, you start to get into where are the dumpsters, where is the fire 1698
lane, exactly where is the ADA accessibility space, where's the route? It's a higher level 1699
of design, and so I think that there was an obvious choice, like we know a lot about what 1700
Approved 8.7.24
we want to do. Do we know definitively where the dumpsters are going to be and the 1701
ADA. I'm not speaking for the applicant. I'm just saying that that is a reality and a 1702
distinction between those two zoning categories. 1703
1704
Beth Bronson: And I think that makes complete sense that you would need a master plan conditional so 1705
that you could obtain approval and then make those changes necessary as you go 1706
through. 1707
1708
Pat Mallett: Then you're diving into more of the details in the design of the site plans and construction 1709
drawing-type documents. 1710
1711
Beth Bronson: Correct. And in the final site plan, if you are awarded a master plan conditional district, 1712
that final plan that gets submitted with the first land distributing permit is that plan and 1713
cannot deviate from that plan. Is that correct? 1714
1715
Patrick Mallett: It has to be consistent, yes. 1716
1717
Beth Bronson: Okay. And if anybody wants to see, this is the general statute for family care homes. 1718
This is the one that they're referencing. They're speaking to about being consistent with 1719
general statute language. Quite simply, it makes a ton of sense. 1720
1721
Charity Kirk: I don't have a problem with the family care homes. I have a problem with the rural 1722
neighborhood activity node getting enlarged so much and it not being consistent with what 1723
they want, but the family care homes I'm fine with. 1724
1725
Beth Bronson: And so, to my original questions that brought you up there to explain so much, it would've 1726
been so helpful to this application had the Economic Development Department been 1727
involved in the construction of this or in the development of this idea in setting this 1728
precedent. There would've been so many more questions that could've been addressed 1729
that the community would've had. 1730
1731
Charity Kirk: And why? Why would it have been more helpful? 1732
1733
Beth Bronson: Because what they're proposing doesn't have a precedent in the area. It is a stark 1734
change to the comprehensive land use plan and the future land use map, and so, if there 1735
were something like that that they have been working with the County on for years, I 1736
thought that it would be beneficial because the Economic Development Department would 1737
be able to help quantify and qualify all of these different elements that would help 1738
preserve that natural rural character while also allowing innovation to occur. So, that's 1739
just my comment. Thank you. I do also wonder if the reason for the amendment cannot 1740
include the multi-family standards. To what we were talking about earlier, this is an 1741
extremely complex project, and so, the idea that it's going to be so far from any westward 1742
expansion of a municipality, that there are no municipalities that could expand north of it 1743
or south of it, I have a real concern just about going forward with a recommendation that 1744
is going to be taking such a chance on this rural development. So, that's kind of where I 1745
stand, and I realize that that's not very eloquent, but it does, I think, address the 1746
neighbors, as well as the concerns of the residents and for the members of H4D. Again, 1747
it's not that I, and I echo what you guys are saying, it's not that this is a bad plan. It's a 1748
very good plan. It's just understanding what that's doing while we're in the middle of 1749
reviewing the comprehensive plan for 2050, and it does bring a lot of questions up for 1750
Approved 8.7.24
what does that look like as far as continuity of the neighborhood in line with the rural 1751
neighborhood activity network, which a mom and pop store would it not be, and so, at the 1752
same time, if that's a requirement just to get this land to be able to have this site plan on 1753
it, it's a convoluted way of going about it, and I think that there's better ways to approach 1754
this. 1755
1756
Chris Johnston: I want to make sure that we have the time for Statler's questions as well. 1757
1758
Statler Gilfillen: I'll try to keep mine short. I think we are watching democracy, as it should be, at its best. 1759
I appreciate both sides and what you've said. What I have listened to is a developer 1760
whose goals and intentions, I think, are excellent. I think they are needed in this county, 1761
but I've also listened to the neighbors, the people there, and when I look at the logistics, 1762
which are the water, the sewer, the transportation issues, that are still fairly undefined, 1763
and I'm concerned about them, and as an architect, there are issues of the design that 1764
this is much more of a scaled down subdivision in the layout than it is actually a village, 1765
and there's a difference. That's an architect speaking. And listening to the neighbors and 1766
the people that are surrounding this, I have to raise serious questions if this particular 1767
location is appropriate for this scale of a development being put in. I'll keep it short, and I 1768
think that's enough. 1769
1770
Adam Beeman: So, the pieces for me is that you want to change the activity node, and that's to benefit the 1771
public, but your statement from several members in the literature is we want to be left 1772
alone and be invisible to the community. So, you want the benefit of a public rezoning, 1773
but the public doesn't get any benefit from your property. I kind of find that weird. Like 1774
everybody else said, I think the development itself is a great idea. I think it's just trying to 1775
shoehorn in the wrong place. So, with that being said, I'm just going to cut if off there and 1776
say that I'm not for this proposal the way it's proposed. I don't think that any of these 1777
things, if we change this, we're going to open a can of worms that I don't think the 1778
county's ready for. If we are ready for it, then we should do that in the comprehensive 1779
plan because I've been to those meetings, and the community in every one of those 1780
meetings say that we want rural, rural, rural, keep the woods, keep the nature, keep the 1781
animals, keep the wildlife, and this yes, it is stuffed in. If you did a normal development, 1782
you could put 90 homes on that 90 acres. You want to put 60 additional homes on a third 1783
of that 90 acres. To me, that's just a wrong place. We're not in the city. We're not 1784
anywhere close to those metropolitan areas, and while I get the point, you want to have 1785
concerts. That’s not really something that your neighbors get a benefit of, but they’ll have 1786
to hear it. You want to have all those other things, and the traffic, they'll have to deal with 1787
it, but they don't get any benefit of it. So, if you want to use something that's benefiting 1788
the public, then I think you should benefit the public. Otherwise, go back and figure out 1789
how to do it with an appropriate zoning where you don't have to jump through all these 1790
hoops to make it happen, because it's like twisting an arm to make it happen for you, and 1791
then the next guy that comes along, we’ve got to twist an arm to make it happen for him, 1792
where it should just happen at the County level and the UDO. So, I would say if you want 1793
that to happen, go advocate with the Board of County Commissioners and see if we can 1794
make that happen in the 2050 comprehensive plan because we're currently working on 1795
that. But until that gets changed, I really don't see how this whole thing works. I'm going 1796
to leave it at that, and I'm going to leave it for the Board to any other questions or 1797
comments or motion. I'm open for it all. 1798
1799
Approved 8.7.24
Chris Johnston: I would make a motion, and this is to put a flag up. The motion is to reject the three 1800
agenda items as presented and submit to the County Commissioners as such. 1801
1802
Statler Gilfillen: Will second that. 1803
1804
Beth Bronson: Each one of these needs to be an individual motion? 1805
1806
Adam Beeman: Perdita is going to clarify for us. 1807
1808
Perdita Holtz: It would be good if you could do three separate motions, and if you could use the words 1809
approve or deny instead of reject. 1810
1811
Chris Johnston: Okay. I make a motion to deny Agenda Item 7 and submit that to the Board of County 1812
Commissioners. 1813
1814
Statler Gilfillen: Second that. 1815
1816
Chris Johnston: All of these seemed tied together, so, just to confirm, we're doing this three separate 1817
times? 1818
1819
Perdita Holtz: You need to, for a couple of them state why you're doing it, not for the comp plan, but for 1820
the rezoning. You have to state why you're doing it. There’s a statement of consistency 1821
and such. 1822
1823
Chris Johnston: Sure. Of course. 1824
1825
Beth Bronson: So, before you finish with that motion, because I think you're on the right track, I would 1826
like to make a motion to extend the meeting time. Like 15 minutes, if needed be, up to 1827
10:30. Just making sure because we have three different motions to go through. 1828
1829
Chris Johnston: I was planning on doing all three in tandem because I think all three of them depend on 1830
each other. 1831
1832
Adam Beeman: If we get to 10:00 here we'll vote on a push out. 1833
1834
Patrick Mallett: Just to clarify, we'll do them in succession, but they're different applications that have 1835
different case numbers, so we could do them in rapid succession, but they really do need 1836
to be three separate items. And ’its approval or denial on all, as Perdita said, on the 1837
zoning case, you need to have a statement of inconsistency or consistency. 1838
1839
Chris Johnston: Lamar, would you mind handling that now? You are so much better at this than I am. 1840
1841
Patrick Mallett: You need to articulate why. 1842
1843
Adam Beeman: We'll start with 7. 1844
1845
Lamar Proctor: Does 7 need a statement of inconsistency? 1846
1847
Perdita Holtz: No, it does not. 1848
1849
Approved 8.7.24
Patrick Mallett: The zoning is the only one. 1850
1851
Perdita Holtz: Well, the UDO text amendment also. 1852
1853
Patrick Mallett: Yep, sorry. 1854
1855
Adam Beeman: 7, we don't need a statement of consistency. 1856
1857
Lamar Proctor: 8, do we need a statement? 1858
1859
Perdita Holtz: You need to give your rationale on why you're denying a text amendment. 1860
1861
Lamar Proctor: Okay. And then 9, obviously we do. Got it. I make a motion to deny the application as to 1862
Agenda Item 7. 1863
1864
Chris Johnston: I second that motion. 1865
1866
MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 7. Seconded by Chris Johnston 1867
1868
IN FAVOR: Adam Beeman, Lamar Proctor, Charity Kirk, Chris Johnston, Whitney Watson, Liz Kalies, Steve 1869
Kaufmann, Statler Gilfillen 1870
1871
OPPOSED: Beth Bronson 1872
1873
MOTION PASSES 8 TO 1 1874
1875
Lamar Proctor: All right. I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8, that it is 1876
inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of 1877
inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department. 1878
1879
Perdita Holtz: There isn't a statement of inconsistency for 8. Just give a rationale on why. 1880
1881
Lamar Proctor: So, I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8. Part of that is to 1882
codify on which future land use classifications MPD-CD may be applied. So, the rationale 1883
would be that extending MPD-CD zoning to rural activity nodes is inconsistent with the 1884
comprehensive land use plan. 1885
1886
Adam Beeman: Do I have a second? 1887
1888
Chris Johnston: Seconded. 1889
1890
MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 8. Seconded by Chris Johnston 1891
1892
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 1893
Lamar Proctor: I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 9 with the statement that it 1894
is inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of 1895
inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department and its attachment. 1896
1897
Adam Beeman: Do we have a second? 1898
1899
Approved 8.7.24
Beth Bronson: I will second that motion. 1900
1901
MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 9. Seconded by Beth Bronson 1902
1903
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 1904
1905
Beth Bronson: And I just wanted to make sure, I'm making a comment now that this recommendation is 1906
denied, but this is still going to the Board of Commissioners for a public hearing. 1907
1908
Patrick Mallett: It has to. That is the end of the process. 1909
1910
Beth Bronson: It’s their ultimate decision on whether to accept or reject the proposed amendments. 1911
1912
AGENDA ITEM 10: ADJOURNMENT 1913
1914
Adam Beeman: Do I have a motion to adjourn? 1915
1916
Chris Johnston: I make a motion that we adjourn. 1917
1918
Steve Kaufmann: Second. 1919
1920
Adam Beeman: All in favor? Adjourned. 1921
1922
MOTION BY Chris Johnston to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Steve Kaufmann. 1923
1924
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 1925
1926
The meeting adjourned at 9:54 PM. 1927
1928
1929