Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Agenda Packet 2-4-26 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 131 W. MARGARET LANE, SUITE 201 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 f 17 52 Am Q Cato AGENDA ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD WHITTED MEETING FACILITY 300 WEST TRYON STREET, SECOND FLOOR I-IILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Wednesday, February 4, 2026 Regular Meeting — 7:00 pm No. Page(s) Agenda Item 1. CALL TO ORDER 2 ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR FOR 2026 4 Term Expiration Dates and Reappointment Eligibility, by Member 3. 5 - 6 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. Planning Calendar for February and March 4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7 - 21 December 3, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes 5. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 6. PUBLIC CHARGE Introduction to the Public Charge The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB)to uphold the written land development laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and future needs of its residents and businesses through efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. Public Charge The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The Board asks those attending this meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner toward each other, County staff, and Board members. At any time should a member of the Board or the public fail to observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. The Planning Board asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and 2 No. Page(s) Agenda Item .7 computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate. Please be kind to everyone. 7. CHAIR COMMENTS 8. 22 - 50 ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT) - To review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on a County-initiated zoning atlas amendment to amend the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line on one unaddressed —19.4 acre parcel (PIN: 9851-43- 3215) off Dodson's Crossroads in Bingham Township. This item is scheduled for BOCC public hearing on March 5, 2026. Presenter: Taylor Perschau, Current Planning & Zoning Manager 9. ADJOURNMENT Sign up to receive a notification when Planning Board agendas are posted Interested persons can sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx to receive a notification when agendas are posted. (Scroll down to the "Agenda Center" category and choose Planning Board). Monthly Planning & Inspections Newsletter Sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx?ListlD=408 to receive the monthly communication on happenings in the Planning & Inspections Department. Written Comments Interested persons who cannot attend the meeting in-person are invited to submit written comments on agenda items to the Planning Board via email at planningboard(oorangecountync.gov no later than 3:00 p.m. on the afternoon of the meeting. Please include in the Subject line of the email the title of the agenda item your comment pertains to. Emails sent to this address are viewable on Google Groups: https:l/groups.google.com/g/ocplanningboard Written comments can also be dropped off at the Planning Department's offices at 131 W. Margaret Lane, 2nd floor, Hillsborough, NC during normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday). Written comments will be scanned and sent by staff to the email address indicated above. Review Process The Planning Board is an appointed volunteer advisory board which makes recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (the elected officials). The Board of County Commissioners holds a formal public hearing and makes decisions. Section 2.8 of the County's Unified Development Ordinance contains a flowchart depicting the review process for rezoning and text amendment applications. 3 Planning Board Member Potential Conflict of Interest It is the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances of conflict. Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with respect to matters before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict and refrain from undue participation in the matter involved. As a reminder, NC General Statute § 160D-109 establishes the following standard: Members of appointed boards shall not vote on any advisory or legislative decision regarding a development regulation where the outcome of the matter being considered is reasonably likely to have a direct, substantial, and readily identifiable financial impact on the member. An appointed board member shall not vote on any zoning amendment if the landowner of the property subject to a rezoning petition or the applicant for a text amendment is a person with whom the member has a close familial, business, or other associational relationship. If any Planning Board member has any concern about a possible conflict related to an agenda item, please notify Planning staff and get in touch directly with a member of the County Attorney's staff before the meeting time to determine whether a conflict exists— and if so, how best to handle the potential conflict. 4 Orange County Planning Board Membership and Term Information Name Term End Date Eligible for Date First March 31 Reappointment? Appointed Delores Bailey 2026 Y, but not seeking 2/17/22 reappointment Chris Johnston 2026 Y 3/21/23 Jonah Garson 2026 Y 3/18/25 Vacant position 2026 Vacant position 2027 Lamar Proctor 2027 N 4/1/21 Charity Kirk 2027 N 2/16/21 Meg Millard 2027 Y 10/15/24 WhitneyWatson 2028 N 2/16/21 Statler Gilfillen 2028 N 5/18/21 Beth Bronson 2028 N 4/5/22 Venkat Yenda alli 2028 Y 3/18/25 5 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BOCC Planning Board Business Meeting Meeting 7:00 7:00 pm* pm Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 BOCC Work Board of Session Adjustment 7:00 pm 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Whitted Bldg. Ctr. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BOCC Business Meeting 7:00 pm Whitted Bldg. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Notes: * Planning Board member attendance required Planning Board meetings are held at Whitted Human Services Building - Donna S. Baker Meeting Room 2nd floor 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 6 March • Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Planning Board BOCC Meeting Business 7:00 pm* Meeting 7:00 pm Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 BOCC Work Board of Session Adjustment 7:00 pm 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Whitted Bldg. Ctr. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BOCC Business Joint Meeting Meeting w Mebane 7:00 PM 7:00 pm Southern Human Sery Whitted Bldg. Ctr. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Legislative Breakfast 8:30 am Whitted Bldg. 29 30 31 Notes: * Planning Board member attendance required Planning Board meetings are held at Whitted Human Services Building - Donna S. Baker Meeting Room 2nd floor 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 7 DRAFT 1 MEETING MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 3 DECEMBER,3,2025 4 REGULAR MEETING 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor(Chair) Cheeks Township, Chris Johnston (Vice-Chair) Hillsborough Township, 7 Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Meg Millard, Little River Township Representative; 8 Venkat Yendapalli, Cedar Grove Township Representative;Jonah Garson,At-Large 9 Representative;Whitney Watson,At-Large Representative; Delores Bailey,At-Large 10 Representative. 11 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Charity Kirk,At-Large Representative; Beth Bronson,At-Large Representative; Steve Kaufmann, 13 Bingham Township Representative. 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director—Long Range Planning 16 &Administration; Jack Moran, Planner 1 17 18 OTHERS PRESENT: None 19 20 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 21 22 The meeting began at 7:03 PM 23 24 Lamar Proctor: All right. I am going to call this meeting to order. I think we do have a quorum since we did have 25 a resignation from the board, so we have called to order. 26 27 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEMS 28 29 Lamar Proctor reviewed the upcoming Planning Board and Board of County Commissioners meeting calendars. 30 31 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 32 33 Lamar Proctor: Let us see, approval of the October 1 st meeting minutes. Do I hear any motion for any 34 amendments to those minutes? Hearing no motion to amend, do I have a motion to approve the 35 minutes from the October 1st meeting? 36 37 Statler Gilfillen: I will make a motion to approve them. 38 39 Lamar Proctor: Statler moves. Any seconds? 40 41 Venkat Yendapalli: I make the second. 42 43 Lamar Proctor: All right. Venkat makes the second. All in favor, raise your hands or say aye. 44 45 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to approve the October 1 meeting minutes. Seconded by Venkat Yendapalli. 46 47 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 48 49 Lamar Proctor: So that is unanimous. 50 51 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS To AGENDA 52 53 Lamar Proctor: Any motions for additions to the agenda? Hearing none, I will move on. 54 55 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 8 DRAFT 56 57 Lamar Proctor: I am going to, in my discretion,decline to give that since there does not appear to be any 58 members of the public. 59 60 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 61 62 Lamar Proctor: As to chair comments, I just would say that the Board of County Commissioners seems to be 63 taking note of attendance requirements for all the advisory boards, so I just remind everyone that 64 our requirements are that you not miss three meetings in a row or four meetings in a year. I think 65 that does make you subject to removal by the Board of County Commissioners. In discussing it 66 with staff, I think it is just the Board of County Commissioners wants to make sure that their 67 advisory boards are fully staffed so that there is no delay in moving the work through, especially 68 our work in terms of planned development projects,which are running on schedules with budgets 69 and timed approvals for permits, etc., so I just remind everyone to make as many meetings as 70 they can and keep staff informed when they are unable to make a meeting. I do not think any of it 71 is personal, I think the Board of County Commissioners are just wanting to make sure that they 72 have fully functioning advisory boards. 73 74 Delores Bailey: Mr. Chair? 75 76 Lamar Proctor: Yes, ma'am. 77 78 Delores Bailey: Is there a way to check our attendance? 79 80 Perdita Holtz: Jack keeps the attendance. He can email it out. 81 82 Delores Bailey: Thank you. 83 84 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So, if we want to check our attendance we just email Jack about can you tell me what 1 85 have missed or what have you. 86 87 AGENDA ITEM 7: PLANNING BOARD ANNUAL REPORT AND WORK PLAN—To review and approve the annual Input 88 form which informs the BOCC of the past year's activities of advisory boards/commissions and 89 assists in overall County work planning. 90 91 Lamar Proctor: The next item is seven, Planning Board Annual Report and Work Plan. This is to review and 92 approve the annual input form which informs the BOCC of the past year's activities of advisory 93 boards, commissions, and assists in overall county work planning. I think that requires me to 94 present to the Board of County Commissioners at some point. 95 96 Perdita Holtz: It does,yes. 97 98 Lamar Proctor: Do you know when that meeting will be? 99 100 Perdita Holtz: It is going to be either February or March depending on how they split them up. They do half of 101 the advisory boards one month and then half the next month. Do you remember what you did last 102 year? 103 104 Lamar Proctor: Yes. 105 106 Perdita Holtz: I think it was February. I think Planning Board might be February. 107 108 Lamar Proctor: Yes. I think I did okay and survived. 109 110 Perdita Holtz: You are still here. 9 DRAFT 111 112 Lamar Proctor: I am still here. I was not removed so, I must have done something okay. All right. Is staff going 113 to give a presentation as to the work plan? 114 115 Perdita Holtz: I am going to talk about it. I do not have a PowerPoint, so hopefully you will indulge just hearing 116 from me.This is the annual report and work plan. We do it every year and have for a number of 117 years now.And it is due to the Clerk's Office by January 16th. There is a slightly new format to 118 the actual work plan that begins on page 40 of the agenda packets in that there is now a strong 119 linkage that is identified to the county's strategic plan. I wanted to point out on page 41 of your 120 packet that there is a list of all of the work items the Board reviewed in 2025, and it is fairly 121 extensive. We did five conditional district rezoning reviews,and reviewed and made 122 recommendation on three different UDO text amendments, also reviewed and made a 123 recommendation on one major subdivision preliminary plat, and there were also briefings and 124 input on the Orange County Land Use Plan, a briefing on the Hazard Mitigation Plan, and in ORC 125 the Board reviewed the UDO text amendment pertaining to subdivision processes,which we are 126 hoping to bring forward in early 2026. On page 43 of the agenda packet,there is a list of the five 127 main work points the Board is expected to be involved in in 2026. Orange County Land Use Plan 128 is a big one. We are definitely spending a lot of staff time on it. I know that things do not come to 129 you on a monthly basis or anything but there is a lot of work being done behind the scenes by 130 staff. Most of you know that there were a series of work sessions and educational sessions all 131 through the fall for the BOCC to learn more about various matters that they wanted to be educated 132 on. There are also UDO text amendments. Both ones that we expect regarding conversation 133 subdivisions and then also any legislatively induced LIDO text amendments that come about due 134 to actions of the legislature. And then there may also be any priorities that emerge at the 2026 135 BOCC retreat which is in January of next year,January 16th if I recall correctly. Then following 136 further down on page 43,there is a list of seven concerns or emerging issues to highlight for the 137 Board of County Commissioners. Some of these are included in the ongoing land use plan 138 update, and I hope that you all had a chance to look through this, I guess it is five pages or so, 139 five-page document before this evening. You will note that on page 39 of the packet the 140 recommendation for tonight is to discuss any member's ideas about additional activities that you 141 would like to work on in 2026,subject to staff availability of course, it is not everything you might 142 possibly want to do, or any additional issues that you want to be brought to the attention of the 143 BOCC, and then either approve the annual report and work plan form as it is in your packet, or 144 ask staff to incorporate the results of any discussion into the annual report and submit the form 145 directly to the Clerk's Office or you can ask staff to incorporate the results of any discussion and 146 then bring it back in final form to the January 7th meeting in order to meet the January 16th due 147 date. And with that I will open it up for questions and discussions. 148 149 Chris Johnston: So, I have one question if it is all right. In regard to Item Number 3, most important 150 accomplishments during the report period. We listed you the things that we have worked on and 151 so on and so forth. One of them was the reviewed and made recommendations on the following 152 UDO text amendments. Are there any outcomes that have come from those changes? Like is 153 there anything that we can point to that says since we have made this change,we have seen 154 additional telecommunication facilities,work requests,or since doing so anything along those lines 155 in the outcomes beyond just we have made the change? 156 157 Perdita Holtz: There have been new applications for telecommunication facilities. We would have to check 158 zoning compliance permits to be able to speak to residential solar arrays and whether there was a 159 noticeable uptick. 160 161 Chris Johnston: Okay. 162 163 Perdita Holtz: And the impervious surface was just adopted by the BOCC like 2 weeks ago so that one is way 164 too new to say anything. 165 10 DRAFT 166 Chris Johnston: Perfect. The reason I ask, I know in the telecommunications facilities there was a lot of interest, 167 there was a lot of recommendations and changes that were made. We brought in a lot of 168 interested parties and I just did not know if that then moved the needle in some of the needs that 169 we have in this area or anything like that. If there was a pent up need that has been addressed or 170 if that still needs additional work for instance. 171 172 Cy Stober: We have one application on file. I do not know it is status. It has not been approved yet but 1 173 mean,we are working through it at this time, but we have only seen one come through since we 174 made the change. 175 176 Chris Johnston: Okay. Thank you. 177 178 Perdita Holtz: Part of the telecom facilities was really the need to update it to reflect current practices and current 179 federal law. 180 181 Lamar Proctor: Statler? 182 183 Statler Gilfillen: I have a question. I do not know if it fits exactly in this format right now but Randall Arendt,A-R-E- 184 N-D-T,Arendt spoke very eloquently. He was down from, I believe, Maine. National Expertise. Is 185 there any follow up on his discussions and what he presented? 186 187 Perdita Holtz: Well, he just presented the Friday before Thanksgiving so there really has not been yet, but I am 188 sure we are going to be hearing from commissioners as we,you know,what they thought about 189 that, and what we might incorporate in Orange County. I mean, it is worth noting that Orange 190 County's flexible development standards are pretty similar to what Randall Arendt talked about. 191 You know,the big differences are that Randall Arendt has, I should tell you flexible developments 192 were based on something Randall Arendt used to espouse 25 years ago,and so he now 193 espouses something slightly different and something that preserves even more open space with 194 even smaller lots. So, I mean you are still getting the same density, you are getting the overall 195 number of houses being the same, they are on smaller lots and you are preserving 50 percent of 196 the parcel. You know, in Orange County it is pretty much a 33 percent minimum open space 197 preservation requirement. There are differences in how Orange County counts some unbuildable 198 lands as open space. There are reasons for that. You know, private well and septic are big 199 issues in the development here and a lot of what Randall talked about and even espoused 20 200 years ago kind of assumed that it was public water and sewer, and it makes huge differences in 201 the type of development you are going to get if you have public water and sewer versus private 202 well and septic, even if it is a community septic system, there are still differences. 203 204 Statler Gilfillen: Is there an expectation that we may be doing some things and that he may be back down here 205 again? 206 207 Perdita Holtz: At this point we do not know, Statler. 208 209 Statler Gilfillen: Okay. I will express this, as an architect I started at least a dialog with him and we have been 210 following this up with some emails. I have some common interests in this. It is nothing 211 professionally that I am doing over here except it is my professional background,and I found what 212 he had to say to be very interesting and very positive and useful here, and I have chosen to follow 213 up with that. If that is something I should not do as a member of this board, please tell me later. 214 215 Cy Stober: I think that is fine. I mean,we are following up with him too about potential next steps, but we have 216 no direction from the board at this time, but we will see what happens. 217 218 Statler Gilfillen: It is really two professionals talking about ideas and planning is really what this discussion is 219 about, but I would rather be very public about it and express that. 220 11 DRAFT 221 Perdita Holtz: Well,we cannot tell you who your friends are going to be,so. 222 223 Cy Stober: I can tell you we are not paying him to talk to you. 224 225 Statler Gilfillen: Absolutely not.And I am not paying him either. It is a discussion between two professionals. 226 227 Perdita Holtz: I am sure he is happy to talk to whoever wants to listen. 228 229 Lamar Proctor: So, I think focusing on No.8 on Page 43 in Concerns or Emerging Issues, that has generally been 230 the most fertile ground for our discussions about what to look for in terms of what we are 231 interested in developing and areas we want to explore. So,this kind of goes into No. 1. Has there 232 been any movement towards integration of planning between Mebane and Orange County in 233 terms of meetings or some sort of agreement? 234 235 Perdita Holtz: So, at this time,there is a joint meeting between the two boards in March of 2026 on the schedule. 236 They have been canceled in the past. But right now, there is one on the schedule. I would not 237 hold your breath for an agreement with Mebane. 238 239 Lamar Proctor: Okay. 240 241 Perdita Holtz: Verbally and practice-wise,they might be open to things. But historically,they have not been 242 willing to sign something that is going to remove any types of rights that they have as a 243 municipality. 244 245 Lamar Proctor: Okay. I would not view it as them losing rights, more just, like, being good neighbors. 246 247 Perdita Holtz: That is not how they view it. They might be willing to be good neighbors on a handshake. 248 249 Lamar Proctor: Yeah. And then one area is that the, and the name escapes me, but it is the economic, kind of, 250 planning district on East 70 going into Durham. Has there been any changes in Durham's 251 infrastructure that would allow us to do something or explore possible ways to encourage 252 economic development in that area? 253 254 Perdita Holtz: So,there has not been at this point. That is not to say there would not be in the future. But you 255 will notice that there are industrial uses out there that do not require public water and sewer. I 256 mean, there are uses that can go places where they can exist on a private well and septic system. 257 It just depends on what the specific use is. 258 259 Lamar Proctor: I remember from my time on dealing with this issue that the primary thing was Durham not being 260 able to expand water and sewer or not willing to expand water and sewer into that area. 261 262 Perdita Holtz: So,the problem is that further down the sewer shed, they have a capacity problem with a pump, 263 and it is a multi, multi, multi-million dollar fix to get more capacity for that pump. 264 265 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So there really has not been any change on Durham's end that would open up water and 266 sewer in that area for expansion by them the way that Alamance and Mebane have opened up 267 water and sewer in Mebane? 268 269 Perdita Holtz: There has not been, but that is not to say that there might not be. There have been discussions 270 among the board as part of this educational process with the land use plan on the possibility of 271 reopening talks with Durham. 272 273 Lamar Proctor: And I feel like the broadband access No. 3 that there was a big push, and there was a lot of 274 development. Is that still ongoing? 275 12 DRAFT 276 Perdita Holtz: It is ongoing. My understanding is that there was a contract agreement and there will be a few 277 hundred fewer houses served as a result, and it still was, it was never going to be 100 percent of 278 houses served by Lumos, but there was even going to be slightly fewer. I am thinking it was 279 around 400 if I recall correctly, and I do not remember what the actual number of houses served 280 was for that. 281 282 Lamar Proctor: Well, I will just say it was expanded in my area, in Efland Cheeks, and it is a huge difference, so 1 283 applaud those efforts, and not having to rely on DSL in 2025 is a huge benefit,and I think it does 284 open up opportunities for people to expand their entrepreneurial efforts and to facilitate their 285 working from home, and their general life well-being and access for that to continue to be 286 expanded, so I think that is still a continuing issue, and so I am glad that it is still part of our 287 emerging issues and concerns. I would invite the board to,we can talk about anything that we 288 would like to see added. One thing that I would like to somehow incorporate is some sort of 289 meeting between us and the Board of County Commissioners themselves. I feel like we serve an 290 important function in advising them and diligently going through and giving them another set of 291 eyes, but it would be nice to interact with them at least once or twice over the year to get their 292 personal perspectives because not all of us can go to Board of County Commissioners meetings 293 and see the follow up, but just to generally get their ideas so that when we give an advisory 294 opinion, that we have some foresight into how the Board is going to look at it. I do think we serve 295 an important function as volunteers to give our individual perspectives and the perspectives for 296 our geographic areas or at-large as the case may be, but I think it would be nice if we got to meet 297 with the Board of County Commissioners for some period of time to get involvement with them to 298 understand their way of thinking and their approaches individually to the same issues that we 299 address. 300 301 Statler Gilfillen: I had a comment here. At our last meeting,there was a proposal, I believe it was approved by the 302 Board of a development north on 86. 1 will stand corrected on this but I believe the County 303 Commissioners turned it down 304 305 Perdita Holtz: They did. 306 307 Statler Gilfillen: We approved it and they turned it down. Can any comments be made, and I think that fits exactly 308 what you are talking about here about that. 309 310 Chris Johnston: Well, that was the same one that, originally,we were either at a standstill or it did not approve, 311 yeah,split it.And then the following meeting it turned into more of an approval thing. 312 313 Delores Bailey: I think it would be important to know what happens to things that we sent to the Board. 314 315 Chris Johnston: Yeah. 316 317 Delores Bailey: I agree. That is a good example. 318 319 Statler Gilfillen: I think that is a perfect example you are talking about here. 320 321 Lamar Proctor: Yeah, and that was kind of the impetus when we were talking was that and just specifically that 322 project or that application. So,yeah, that is something I would like to see incorporated into the 323 work plan. 324 325 Perdita Holtz: Sure. Yeah. And it should probably be fairly high up. Maybe Number 2 of Subsection 8. 326 327 Statler Gilfillen: I think related to that,there is a separate issue in this, may be a little bit political but after we have 328 passed on a comment, and we approved it even if it might have been controversial between that 329 period of time and the time the county commissioners have responded. I sense that there were a 330 number of individuals or groups that approached the county commissioners with a different point 13 DRAFT 331 of view that may have influenced their decision between when it met with us and it meant to the 332 county commissioners. I just would like to see that part of the discussion a little bit. That is part of 333 the system. That is people's rights to speak freely. 334 335 Cy Stober: You can't infringe upon that so the commissioners are welcome. It is a legislative matter. It is not 336 quasi-judicial. They are welcome to talk to you,your colleagues, anyone else, someone in favor 337 of the projects, someone opposed to it,the applicant,the daughter of the person selling the land 338 who is totally opposed to it,you know,their partner, their husband,their wife who has thoughts on 339 it. That is completely okay, and we cannot do, I think John Roberts or James Bryan would say we 340 cannot step on the toes of the commissioners to consider all of the feelings and emotions about a 341 zoning case. 342 343 Statler Gilfillen: I could not agree more. I just would like to be positive when it is free speech, and if there are 344 things that can be better understood, how to make it more positive I think that is part of the 345 discussion. 346 347 Cy Stober: Make no mistake. I think that a more regular dialogue between this Board and the commission 348 should be helpful,whether it is the land use planner's zoning cases, but I just want to be clear that 349 the commissions have a lot of latitude to have conversations about legislative matters as they 350 wish, and they do not have to disclose any of that unless they wish to. 351 352 Lamar Proctor: And, as it relates to the land use plan, remind me the Board of County Commissioners kind of said 353 whoa, hold on and delayed that, right? 354 355 Delores Bailey: Just a second. Are we finished sharing what other kinds of things we were interested in next 356 year? 357 358 Lamar Proctor: Oh no, no,we are not done. 359 360 Delores Bailey: Okay. So, is your question about that too? The LIDO question because I have a suggestion. 361 362 Lamar Proctor: No. Go ahead. 363 364 Delores Bailey: Okay. So, one of the things that I know I missed was the whole discussion on the sewer and the 365 sewer tanks, and I know we did a special thing for the commissioners about the sewer. 366 367 Perdita Holtz: Well,yeah. There was a half-day retreat where they heard from outside experts on both water 368 wells and sewer information. Well, I should say community systems. 369 370 Delores Bailey: So,we had such a discussion here when one of the presenters talked about the sewer and septic 371 systems. Is there any way we can have that presented to us too? 372 373 Perdita Holtz: Well, not by the same people because there were costs involved in that. 374 375 Delores Bailey: Okay. Okay. 376 377 Perdita Holtz: And we hired consultants to do that. 378 379 Delores Bailey: Can we use staffs understanding of that, and have it explained to us as a group? 380 381 Lamar Proctor: Well was that presentation recorded? 382 383 Perdita Holtz: The retreats were not. Well, audio recorded,yes. 384 14 DRAFT 385 Cy Stober: So I forwarded the audio recording and all the slides to the Board after that meeting, I think it was 386 Tuesday of that week before Thanksgiving week. And I am going to do the same with Randall 387 Arendt's presentation. So,you will have,there is 170 slides so be ready. We will forward that as 388 a PDF along with the audio recording from the clerk, but what we do not have is the video 389 recording that sometimes comes with us. 390 391 Delores Bailey: Once you guys get that to us,can we have a discussion about sewer systems,or whatever you 392 are calling them,as a Board. 393 394 Cy Stober: What we can do is we can, I think, echo back what those speakers said. But we are talking about 395 the regulatory program or like the engineering dynamics of it at all, then that really is an 396 environmental health program,and they are the experts, and they are the regulatory, they are 397 regulators for the county on that. I think I am comfortable summarizing what was said and what 398 the conclusions were, but I think if you have the 2 hours to,4 hours really, to sit down and listen to 399 the audio recording,you can skip ahead. Well, I would not though because the presentations 400 were good. It is worth your time. Yeah. I know that is a huge investment of time, but it is worth 401 the time. 402 403 Jonah Garson: There was something,a concern brought up by Mayor Bell that I heard about subsequent to our 404 Planning Board discussions that I barely comprehended in my conversation with him, but it 405 sounded, his arguments related to that concern with respect to certain discharge of X into Eno 406 River. Sounded credible to me. I did not fully understand it but the gist of it was that Hillsborough 407 in meeting its development goals that it has in the mayor's view, done a very good job at meeting 408 so far, and running its own growth plan is going to take up a good chunk of this sort of Eno River 409 discharge quota. I would like to know more about what that is because the 60 percent of his 410 remarks that I understood sounded credible and grounded and real information. 411 412 Perdita Holtz: It has to do with what is called surface discharge,which is discharge into streams usually, and 413 subsurface discharge. The community systems that we are talking about are subsurface 414 discharge. They are regulated in a whole different way by a whole different state agency. Surface 415 discharge is what Mayor Bell was talking about, I presume from what you have just described, and 416 there are limits within all watersheds on how much surface discharge can go into any type of river. 417 But he is of course concerned about the Eno River. 418 419 Jonah Garson: And it was his position that there could be development done in the county that inhibits 420 Hillsborough from running its growth plan. That was his argument, and I want to make sure I fully 421 understand that argument. 422 423 Perdita Holtz: So, package treatment plants are surface discharge, so if the county were to allow package 424 treatment plants, those would inhibit Hillsborough's discharge. But we have been talking about 425 community systems that are subsurface and have no bearing on Hillsborough's discharge 426 amounts. So, if you just think about it as surface and subsurface. Surface is different. Package 427 treatment plants are not what we have been talking about as a way to maybe have different 428 development types than what we see. We have been talking about community systems,which 429 are basically shared septic systems on a grander scale. 430 431 Cy Stober: To get to that point, the assistant town manager and the town engineer presented, at a work 432 session on October, I think it was October 9th, and there is a video recording of that. I can 433 provide the link to you. And it is a deep dive into that whole concern, and that whole conversation, 434 and they specifically get at the nutrient discharge and their allocation, and how any package 435 treatment with any surface discharge, to Perdita's point,would compromise that, and they would 436 have come out in political opposition to any allowance for any new surface water discharges in the 437 upper Eno River Basin, because it would restrict their development potential. But we can provide 438 the link so that you can go through that. Again, it is a 2-hour commitment. It is a deep dive, and it 439 is worthwhile. 15 DRAFT 440 441 Lamar Proctor: And that is the recording of Hillsborough town planning presenting that information? 442 443 Cy Stober: No,town deputy manager. 444 445 Lamar Proctor: Town deputy manager, but is that part of that same,that Delores referenced and recording of the 446 sewer presentation. 447 448 Perdita Holtz: No, but it was one of the one of the educational sessions that we did. 449 450 Lamar Proctor: Okay. A different one. 451 452 453 454 Jonah Garson: I am going to watch this video and watch it avidly and learn something. But just so I fully 455 understand, it is then Mayor Bell's argument about the 86 development was, did he have a apples 456 and oranges misunderstanding? 457 458 Perdita Holtz: I have no idea.And I do not really want to comment because I do not know what he said. 459 460 Cy Stober: Without knowing what he said, I cannot comment. 461 462 Jonah Garson: Understood. 463 464 Lamar Proctor: I mean,would it be worth it to have the Hillsborough town planning manager come talk to us about 465 their concerns? 466 467 Cy Stober: What the request was from our commissioners,which Tom Altieri shared that whole list with you 468 back in September I think, or in the summer, about what we were preparing to do, and then we 469 had another kind of briefing in August or September about what we were going to do this fall. The 470 request for that is why can't Hillsborough grow more? Why can't they provide more utility 471 services. So that was the question that the town was there to answer. There was a bit of a deep 472 dive on the engineering of wastewater discharge and nutrients and so forth, as well as I think 473 obvious questions about like,well,what is going on with your recovery from Chantal. I mean Matt 474 Efrid was very blunt, and I think his candor was very helpful. He said,you know,we have about 5 475 more years of approving projects and then we are done. We just do not have the sewer capacity 476 unless we can renegotiate with the state on how they regulate nutrient discharge into the Upper 477 Eno. I mean, again, Perdita and I can summarize what was said, I think, and so can Tom, but 1 478 mean beyond that I think they have already made their presentation. And that is the second time 479 they made their presentation to the commissioners this calendar year. So, I just ask you to take a 480 look at the video if you can. 481 482 Lamar Proctor: Yeah, and so for us to do our,the information is there if we want to, and probably should, review it 483 and understand it to see how it all integrates. 484 485 Jonah Garson: On that note, I would love to do a little CLE on my own time,and if these links to these videos and 486 other material could, even if it is slapped onto a Google sheet or one place instead of sort of 487 individual emails be helpful for me, and I think the CLE would be useful. 488 489 Cy Stober: Yeah, so we have,we have the calendar that Tom put together back whenever he put that 490 together,and then we have been tweaking it ever since we have had to rearrange the schedule, 491 so what we can do is we can just link all of those topics to the videos or the audio recordings and 492 slide decks, except the only ones that do not have the video recording are the retreat materials,so 493 those 2,4-hour meetings and half of last week's meeting was next steps, and we will have more 16 DRAFT 494 information about next steps in the new year. When we have that info,we kind of can wrap our 495 brains around what our next steps are, but we are far from the end. 496 497 Jonah Garson: I would really appreciate that. 498 499 Lamar Proctor: And,for those of you wondering what a CLE is, it is continuing legal education, and so it is 500 something lawyers have to do. We have to go and do informational presentations about changes 501 in the law, and we are required to do so many hours every year. In fact, I owe the North Carolina 502 state bar about 14 hours by the end of February. Thanks for bringing that up. 503 504 Cy Stober: Well,we can take care of half of that for you, Lamar. 505 506 Chris Johnston: One other thing that I have noticed, and I think would be, I do not know if it is viable or helpful or 507 useful or anything along those lines, but,we see projects that come forward to us, and they are 508 very similar to previous projects, and I do not know if it is viable or reasonable to say, hey,we 509 have this application coming forward. It is very similar to this one that we did 6 months ago, 12 510 months ago,a year ago,whatever the case may be, and here is the high and dry of what 511 happened last time or whatever, right? As board members,we are here for a temporary amount 512 of time. Staff is here in the long term. You all have the vision of this is what has happened and 513 what previous boards have decided and why and that sort of thing, and this is similar to something 514 that you have seen before, and here is what kind of shook out. Is there any kind of historical this 515 looks a lot like that kind of deal? Does that make sense? 516 517 Perdita Holtz: Only in my brain. Well, and I mean, every project is going to be different. They are located in 518 different areas of the county. You know, it is,what did they say about real estate? Location, 519 location, location. You know, there are differences. Different water sheds. 520 521 Chris Johnston: We had two from the same developer that had the same community sewer that had the same, you 522 know the neighbors were sitting there telling us that,you know,X, Y, and Z. In some ways,they 523 were very similar, right? 524 525 Venkat Yendapalli: Community sewers? 526 527 Chris Johnston: Community well. Well, excuse me, community well. Fiddlehead had a community septic system. 528 529 Lamar Proctor: We did not approve. 530 531 Chris Johnston: The county commissioner did not approve. 532 533 Perdita Holtz: Well, I do not think you all recommended either for— 534 535 Chris Johnston: Oh, did we not? 536 537 Perdita Holtz: I do not think so. 538 539 Cy Stober: The recommendation was to deny. I think it was 9-3, something like that. 540 541 Perdita Holtz: Yeah. 542 543 Venkat Yendapalli: Is there any change in the acceptance of that system? Like you got a package planned after the 544 recent presentation,was there any warming up to those ideas for community, you know, package 545 units or community septic systems? 546 547 Cy Stober: So, to Delores's point, if you would like us to kind of summarize the takeaways maybe in February 548 or something like that,we could do that. The overall takeaway, I would say, is there is more 17 DRAFT 549 acceptance that these can work. I think the skepticism that they will fail as the default opinion may 550 no longer be, but whether they are appropriate for Orange County, I have no clarity on whether or 551 not they have been deemed to be appropriate for Orange County, but I think that Randall Arendt 552 did a very effective job of arguing that you cannot have conservation subdivisions without some 553 sort of community wastewater treatment. It is just not possible. Because you need, especially if 554 you are going to achieve a net density or you allow half acre or smaller lots in exchange for 555 protecting 80 percent, you know, 50 to 80 percent of the entire property. 556 557 Venkat Yendapalli: Yeah, Chatham County is doing that already. I participated in some meetings. 558 559 Cy Stober: And, again,we can talk a lot more about this, but Tom has done a ton of research, Chatham is 560 mostly on package plants actually, so well,we can provide an update on all that. We were 561 surprised. We thought there would be a lot more community septic, but it is almost entirely 562 package plants, and they have community water,which is a game changer in terms of you have 563 solved 1l2 of the utility question in terms of introducing density and development and whether that 564 is appropriate, again,for Orange County, but they made a huge investment in water infrastructure 565 in Chatham County. 566 567 Perdita Holtz: Yeah,to be clear, it is community water. It is like mostly county wide. I mean, like most of 568 Chatham County is served by a water system, but now it has actually merged with the one in 569 Sanford, and it is called Tri Rivers Water, so it is actually, Lee, and Sanford's in Lee County for 570 those of you who may not know, so it is a cross-county type of thing. To speak really quick, Chris, 571 about, if staff were to summarize similar projects and what happened, it is really not fair to the 572 applicant standing there with the application that is unique to them. 573 574 Chris Johnston: Compare it to something that had either did not go through or something along those lines maybe 575 putting a finger on the scale. That is fair. Thank you. Sometimes it feels like we are having the 576 same discussions over and over again on similar topics, and so a unifying threat, I guess, is what 1 577 was looking for, but you are right. I mean, the moment you say,well, this one did not go through, 578 and here is this one we are going through the process with,wink, wink, you know, that is tough. 579 580 Perdita Holtz: Right. I mean, people have a legal right to file applications and get their due process,and go 581 through, and get a decision. 582 583 Lamar Proctor: So, it sounds like in No. 8 for concerns we have identified additional education about septic and 584 package, community septic and package and then more connection with the board of county 585 commissioners. 586 587 Perdita Holtz: Was the additional education on the wastewater systems to be added to concerns or emerging 588 issues or was that just something that you all were requesting staff do next year? 589 590 Lamar Proctor: That is kind of why I mentioned it, so I mean,what do you all think? I mean, I am happy with just 591 leaving it. 592 593 Perdita Holtz: How about if I add on No. 4 up above where it says continue training for Planning Board members 594 and say including on wastewater. Was it just wastewater? 595 596 Meg Millard: It seems like also the community wells are important and what is his name,Arendt,the,from 597 Maine.This whole discussion about conservation subdivisions because that all ties together. 1 598 mean, it could all be one training or one discussion. Because they really tie together. I mean,we 599 could just give everybody Chapter 19 of his book to read. It is not that long, and that is what he 600 basically talked about was Chapter 19. 601 602 Cy Stober: I have it, and I can make copies of Chapter 19. 603 18 DRAFT 604 Delores Bailey: I will take a copy, Cy. 605 606 Lamar Proctor: Is this"Rural by Design"? 607 608 Meg Millard: But the one chapter is not that long, and it is about conservation subdivisions, so it would be at 609 least,everybody could read the same material and then have a discussion. 610 611 Venkat Yendapalli: I think there is some YouTube videos as well. I was just looking up his name. 612 613 Lamar Proctor: Oh. All right. And so, he is like the guru of rural planning? 614 615 Perdita Holtz: He is one of them. I mean, he has been around for a while, and he has really stuck to his ideas 616 over the decades. 617 618 Lamar Proctor: Okay.Yeah. This is interesting. I feel like a whole new world is opening up for me. 619 620 Cy Stober: His emphasis as opposed to an urban traditionalist or a neo traditionalist is more on how do you 621 keep the rural areas rural, but also build,you know, allow people to live in them, not a 622 preservationist, rural preservationist, but a rural designer. 623 624 Lamar Proctor: I was just going to say, so we did add just the connection with the board of county commissioners 625 to No. 8, and so I was just asking if there were any other areas of concern that the board wanted 626 to discuss of adding into our work plan. 627 628 Statler Gilfillen: I have one. I believe, and I will stand corrected on this,that Orange County is probably one of the 629 largest property owners both in size of area, buildings, and value of any owner of real estate in the 630 county. When it comes to maintenance of the buildings, asset management is involved in them, 631 but when it comes to the planning of how this property that Orange County actually owns right 632 now,there seems to be a lack of any sense of formal planning, understanding how this property 633 might be used for the future,for example, I was asked to study the old jail at one time, and did a 634 formal study for asset management several years ago. I believe what the county did in building a 635 new jail was totally appropriate; however, sitting in the center of Hillsborough is an old building, 636 the jail, empty,4 1/2, 5 years later. No plans, no reviews on even that or other buildings in 637 Orange County and how they will integrate or affect the future development of our county have 638 been undertaken. I think this may be something between asset management and us and the 639 county commissioners to look at for the future or in best use for the future and the county. I do not 640 see anything being done about that, so I raise that as an issue to put on the table. 641 642 Lamar Proctor: I guess that raised in my mind what, are there buildings owned by the county that are not in use 643 that are kind of like ripe for redesign or redevelopment. 644 645 Statler Gilfillen: The Whitted building is empty. 646 647 Perdita Holtz: This is the Whitted building. 648 649 Statler Gilfillen: Or not the Whitted building, the Link Center. 650 651 Perdita Holtz: Which you may or may not realize this, but there is in fact, asset management has an inventory of 652 all the buildings, and there have been various studies through the years, and I am really not sure 653 that it is the purview of the Planning Board to comment on County buildings in Hillsborough's 654 jurisdiction, but leave it up to you to, if you want to add that as an emergent issue, I will put it in 655 there. 656 19 DRAFT 657 Statler Gilfillen: I think it is an issue that we may not be involved individually. That may be asset management as 658 you suggest. However,as a board trying to promote the long-term use of the county and having 659 the proper studies done, I think,would be very valuable. 660 661 Perdita Holtz: I think if there was an unlimited amount of money that the county would be all over doing that kind 662 of stuff, Statler,and every year,there are budget struggles on how to spend money for, on county 663 buildings,and so, I mean, I think, it comes down to money, right? Most precious resource that the 664 county government has. 665 666 Cy Stober: Well, to be clear,the LIDO,well our job is to administer the LIDO and the comprehensive plan. 667 They are not design documents. We do not design properties. We regulate them. That is the job 668 of the staff, and that is the job of the board is to review those regulations and how we may modify 669 them on a case-by-case basis,so that really is what we are here to do, so in addition,very few of 670 those assets are outside of a municipal jurisdiction. Nearly all of them are either in the town of 671 Hillsborough or the town of Chapel Hill, so we would be outside of our lane in terms of as a 672 regulatory staff and providing that guidance or input, so that is my thoughts on that matter. 673 674 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Any other discussion about the work plan? Any other suggested comments or input? So, 675 hearing that, I would recommend that we just revisit the issue on the January Th with a revised 676 work plan for approval. Do I need to take a motion on that? 677 678 Chris Johnston: So,just to communicate, there are going to be edits and changes made, and then it is going to be 679 resubmitted. Is that accurate or are we just making the changes right now and submitting that? 680 681 Perdita Holtz: Well,we can do either. In past years,we have just made the changes right now, and you all have 682 entrusted me to put in the gist of what you all wanted. 683 684 Chris Johnston: I want to confirm if we can, I think maybe we just make the changes. 685 686 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Well, I will entertain a motion to approve the work plan with the suggested changes as 687 discussed, this evening. 688 689 Perdita Holtz: I need to know whether there is consensus on the incorporation of the annual meeting,and the 690 county owned properties, particularly the old jail, and, I mean, I just need to know there is 691 consensus about the educational components. The three main issues we talked about be added. 692 693 Chris Johnston: What are the three main issues as they are listed here? 694 695 Perdita Holtz: Okay. So, let us, let us go one by one in the order, so there was Lamar's idea to incorporate an 696 annual or a biannual meeting before, between the board, BOCC and Planning Board with some 697 additional information that it would be beneficial to meet with commissioners to get to know their 698 approaches and perspectives on issues that the Planning Board addresses, and I might say it a 699 little differently than that, but that is the gist of it.And then there was adding to No.4 in the first list 700 about continuing training for Planning Board members to make sure that we specifically talk about 701 wastewater issues, community wells, and conservation subdivisions. And then the third thing was 702 to add to the emerging issues or concerns the county owned properties, particularly the old jail 703 and the need for plans for future use. 704 705 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So, I will take them individually. So, I will make a motion to add as an emerging issue the 706 desire to do a BOCC annual or biannual meeting with the county commissioners. All, do I hear a 707 second? 708 709 Jonah Garson: Second. 710 20 DRAFT 711 Lamar Proctor: All right. Second, Jonah is seconding it. All in favor of incorporating that into the work plan raise 712 your hand or say aye. 713 714 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to amend the work plan. Seconded by Jonah Garson. 715 716 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 717 718 Lamar Proctor: Just note that that is unanimous. As to the second item, I will make a motion to add an additional 719 directive to No.4 to add training on community wells and septic systems. Do I hear a second? 720 721 Statler Gilfillen: I will second. 722 723 Meg Millard: And conservation subdivisions. 724 725 Lamar Proctor: And conservation subdivisions, so it is wells, septic, conservation subdivisions. Statler you 726 second.All in favor raise your hand or say aye. 727 728 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to amend the work plan. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. 729 730 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 731 732 Lamar Proctor: Unanimous, and then as to adding to emerging issues,the review of county owned buildings, so 733 do you want to make that motion to add it? 734 735 Statler Gilfillen: If we can. 736 737 Lamar Proctor: All right,so I need a motion, and then a second for it to be considered. 738 739 Statler Gilfillen: I would, can you help me with how you think the wording of that should be done? 740 741 Lamar Proctor: You just move to add that as an emerging issue that you want to add it to the work plan. 742 743 Statler Gilfillen: That we promote the... 744 745 Lamar Proctor: You make, so I will make the motion for Statler so that, I think what you are suggesting is a motion 746 to add to the emerging issues the review of the county planning and management of county 747 owned buildings? 748 749 Statler Gilfillen: Yes. 750 751 Lamar Proctor: Okay. 752 753 Statler Gilfillen: Properties and buildings. In fact, any asset that could impact the future development of the county. 754 755 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So, I made the motion. Do I hear a second? 756 757 Statler Gilfillen: I will second it. 758 759 Lamar Proctor: All right. All in favor of adding that raise your hand or say aye. Okay. All opposed? 760 761 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to amend the work plan. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen. 762 763 MOTION FAILS 1-7: Chris Johnston, Meg Millard,Venkat Yendapalli,Jonah Garson, Delores Bailey,Whitney Watson 764 and Lamar Proctor opposed. 765 21 DRAFT 766 Lamar Proctor: All right,so one for,and the rest were against,so that is not going to be added to the work plan. 1 767 do think it is a concern. I do agree with Cy,that it is kind of outside the purview of the UDO and 768 comprehensive plan. I do think it is an important issue though. 769 770 Venkat Yendapalli: I agree. I agree with the concern, but it is outside our area of responsibility. 771 772 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So,with that, I will make a motion to approve the work plan,the annual report and work 773 plan with those amendments. I will make that motion. Do I have a second? 774 775 Whitney Watson: Second. 776 777 Lamar Proctor: All right. I hear a second from Whitney, and all those in favor of approval. Raise your hand or say 778 aye. 779 780 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to approve the work plan with the amendments. Seconded by Whitney Watson 781 782 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 783 784 Lamar Proctor: Unanimous, so that is approved, so we do not need to revisit it on January 7th. 785 786 Perdita Holtz: And I will send you the electronic copy of what I send to the clerk's office. 787 788 AGENDA ITEM 8: ADJOURNMENT 789 790 Lamar Proctor: All right. Thank you. Do I have a motion,seeing that we have done all the business of the regular 791 meeting, do I have a motion to adjourn. 792 793 Jonah Garson: So moved. 794 795 Lamar Proctor: Jonah moves. I will second. All those in favor say aye or raise your hand. 796 797 MOTION BY Jonah Garson to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Lamar Proctor. 798 799 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 800 801 Lamar Proctor: We are adjourned. 802 803 The meeting adjourned at 7:59 PM 22 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 4, 2026 Action Agenda Item No. 8 SUBJECT: Zoning Atlas Amendment — Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 9851433215, Bingham Township DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Staff Report Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and 2. Application Zoning Manager, (919) 245-2597 3. Notification Materials and Certification Cy Stober, Planning Director, (919) 245-2592 4. Development Advisory Committee Memo 5. Statement of Consistency 6. Draft Ordinance PURPOSE: To review and make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) on a County-initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment to amend the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line on one unaddressed parcel totaling approximately 19.4 acres (PIN: 9851-43-3215). BACKGROUND: Orange County Planning staff informed the Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) of the watershed boundary change at their March 18, 2025, business meeting. At that time, the Board approved an amendment to the University Lake Protected and Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed boundary line and authorized the initiating a Planning Director to initiate a Zoning Atlas Amendment. The March 18, 2025 BOCC agenda item materials can be found at this link: http://server3.co.orange.nc.us:8088/WebLink/O,0/doc/74970/Pagel.aspx. Please note that the PIN referenced in those materials is different than the PIN used for this application as the subject property has been subdivided (as documented in Orange County Register of Deeds PB 129/53) and new PINs were assigned to the resulting lots. On December 10, 2025, the Orange County Planning Director initiated a Zoning Atlas Amendment application (Attachment 2) proposing to amend the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line. The Staff Report in Attachment 1 contains additional information, maps, and analysis. The Narrative contained in Attachment 2 provides additional background information related to this request. Requirements: As detailed within the Zoning Atlas Amendment application package (Attachment 2), and Section 2.8 of the UDO, rezoning submittals are required to contain: 1. A completed Zoning Atlas Amendment application; 2. A map, at a legible scale, showing the land proposed for rezoning; 3. A detailed narrative; and 4. Plan review fee(s) consistent with the adopted Orange County Fee Schedule. [Note: As a County-initiated action, no review fees were collected] 23 Basic Review Process: A rezoning application for an overlay district amendment requires submission of a detailed area map and other documents, in accordance with Section 2.8.3(A) of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). A site-specific plan is not required for overlay district amendment applications and conditions cannot be applied to an approval action, but the BOCC-approved sealed survey detailing the watershed boundary correction is featured in Attachment 2. The typical cadence for the review is as follows: • FIRST ACTION — Staff holds a Development Advisory Committee Meeting. STAFF COMMENT. The Development Advisory Committee Meeting was held on December 18, 2025, at 9:30 a.m., via Microsoft Teams. Comments received from this review are available in Attachment 4. • SECOND ACTION — The Planning Board reviews the application at a regular meeting and makes a recommendation to the BOCC. STAFF COMMENT: The Planning Board will review this application at its regular meeting on February 4, 2026. • THIRD ACTION — The BOCC receives the Planning Board and staff recommendations at an advertised public hearing and makes a decision on the application. STAFF COMMENT. The public hearing will be scheduled following the issuance of a recommendation from the Planning Board. Public Notification: In accordance with Section 2.8.7 of the UDO, notices of the Planning Board meeting were mailed via first class mail to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the subject parcel. These notices were mailed on January 21, 2026, 14 days before the meeting. Staff also posted the subject parcel with signs on January 21, 2026, 14 days before the meeting. See Attachment 3 for the notification materials. Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the Statement of Consistency, indicating the amendments are reasonable and in the public interest, contained in Attachment 5 and the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment Ordinance contained in Attachment 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This request has been reviewed by various County departments who have determined that the approval of the request would not create the need for additional funding for the provision of County services. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Director recommends the Board: 1. Receive the rezoning application, 2. Deliberate on the proposal as desired, 3. Consider the Planning Director's recommendation, and 4. Make a recommendation to the BOCC on the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 5) and the proposed ordinance (Attachment 6) for BOCC consideration during a public hearing to be conducted for review of this request. Staff Report Attachment 1 �+ ORANGE Zoning Atlas Amendment COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Parcel Information ' 'uu' Watersheds Parcel Address An unaddressed parcel C ------ ----- off Dodsons Crossroads ^ Hy.. S rthe l Creel i. - flat River „creek {p r t 7) (protectetl) Parcel Identification 37 Number (PIN) 9851-43-3215 Little River (protected) i Back Creek »4ztFrk ti Orange County " En° '. Applicant Name (p teCied) rt NPEbg3r aPE6rsg Nel R gel B and Address 131 W. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC upper Eno - �} (critical) Lower.Eno '- Upper Eno - (protected) n „ ' ri Lower Eno V.W cF. ar s''rs (protected) ;Raw Creek u , D a'. y Amendment Area 0 Watersheds Cane C k �, - ' River Basin Boundary (protected, Railroad JL-HM Development, LLC r % Jordan Lake WaterB°das Property Owner 1710 E. Franklin Street ' -Cane —Streams ` Creek l Municipal Jurisdiction Name and Address Unit 1237 nr-nnclr(dr ) Water Supply Watersheds protected Chapel Hill, NC 27514 1 N f U iversity Lake ORANGE Raw River (protected) COUNTY -. are sa . (Haw, 'i r University oko ••e.A maa nv+.a.a�.rou9�io,. Lakero�=� -- _ - (cri[icaq Jortlart Laker ors aw•a ae,m�=P -- --- 1 (protected)', :omuceauasie.d=:mn.secun,oa.zozanpn Zoning Atlas Amendment Overview Orange County has initiated a Zoning Atlas Amendment to modify the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line. State-designated Critical and Protected watersheds located in Orange County are regulated as Watershed Protection Overlay Districts. Based on Article 4, "Overlay Zoning Districts", the Watershed Protection Overlay District applies to the Orange County portion of watershed which have been classified as WS-II, WS-III, or WS-IV by the State of North Carolina. The Zoning Atlas Amendment will bring this overlay district into alignment with the State- recognized watershed. No amendments are proposed to the base zoning district or Future Land Use Map. Additional background information regarding this request is contained in the Narrative (Attachment 2). In acting on this request, the County is unable to impose conditions. Overlay district rezoning applications are processed in a legislative manner (i.e., does not require sworn testimony or evidence) and decisions are based on the Board of County Commissioners determination the request is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 1 Proposed Zoning Application Description Current Zoning RB, Rural Buffer District Requested Zoning N/A Proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment District Jordan Lake Requested Zoning District Consistent with Appendix F of Comprehensive N/A Plan aaoENEs,a,e . Jordan Lake Unprotected ___ _ Watershed Protection ,�' � �� "'' 9851433215 Existing Zoning _ Overlay District a '•• o� Overlay Districts University Lake Protected Watershed Protection Pa Overlay District Cane Creek a University Amendments La Protected mProtected Proposed for Overlay Districts Yes pp�aE" (Y/N) Q Proposed New Watershed Boundary Existing WatershedBoundary Interlocal Yes Q PIN 9851433218 Zoning -.- AAR Agreement Orange County— Chapel RB (Y/N) Applicable Hill — Carrboro Joint RB Planning Land Use Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning North All lots are zoned RB South (Rural Buffer) with single- East family residential uses or West are currently undeveloped or in agriculture use. 2 2030 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis 26 Parcel Size +/- 19.4 Notification Map Future Land Use r Map (FLUM) Rural Buffer Designation R MNHI5 Hn FLUM Overlay(s) N/A - Growth r I; 1 Management Rural ;; 1 Jordan Lake System Designation i;Eao Rural Buffer- Land PR'` Definition of FLUM adjacent to an Urban or ; Designation Transition area which is B, (from Article 10 of rural in character and which should remain rural, ti 0,.. �N STA_T Unified F,N�sAa�—so- contain very low-density = �___ - - Development 5851,433215 Ordinance (UDO) residential uses and not Cane Cr ek Protected I, require urban services `w during the plan period. P Rural Residential - low- density areas consisting of single-family homes Univer ity Lake o ted situated on large lots with cm JPA LUP a minimum lot size of twoPINs 3 Q 00 Foot Nuti 5 Designation acres, except when part 1.°°oFoaiNm�g�iio^Area Water Supply MAemheds of a cluster subdivision Zoning A° and then adhering to a oAR A density limit of 1 unit for oR3 every 2 acres of property. Existing Conditions/Physical Features The parcel is currently undeveloped. There is an application on file (SUB25-0089) with Planning and Inspections for a proposed 4-lot regulated minor subdivision. Arden Estate Court (private road) is located along the northern portion of the parcel. There is a separate subdivision application on file affecting the parcel immediately north of the subject parcel (SUB25-0090). Both of these subdivision applications were submitted by Jason Maslow of JL-HM Development, LLC. Should both subdivision applications be approved and recorded, Arden Estate Court would serve a total of 8 residentially zoned lots. Existing Roads North Arden Estate Court South N/A East N/A West Dodsons Crossroads 3 21 Review Milestones Application Submittal Date December 10, 2025 Orange County Development December 18, 2025 Advisory Committee (DAC) Review Note: the DAC is a staff/agency committee, established in Section 1.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance. Courtesy Review Jurisdiction Date Sent Comments Received (Y/N) Towns of Chapel Hill and December 18, 2025 Yes Carrboro Analysis Staff Analysis 1. The application is complete in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.8.3 of the UDO. 2. Staff review of the application included considerations for how the request relates to the Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The following analysis outlines elements of the Plan which staff identified as application and relevant to the consideration of this request. Chapter 2 — Planning Principles 2. Sustainable Growth and Development: Growth and development within the county should occur in a pattern, location, and density that is sustainable over the long-term. 4. Natural Area Resource Preservation: Protection of the County's natural areas, including forests, wildlife habitat, and other important open spaces should be a priority. The County should work with regional and local organizations, the towns, and private landowners to promote and achieve preservation of the County's important natural resources. 5. Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern: The County's rural areas are a cherished component of the County's character. Future development should preserve and enhance the county's rural landscape. 6. Water Resources Preservation: The County has finite water resources to provide to future populations. The protection and management of the County's water resources should be a high priority. Chapter 5— Land Use Element, Section 5.6 Goals a. Land Use Overarching Goal: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives. 4 28 b. Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. c. Land Use Goal 3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced transportation system. d. Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive. e. Natural and Cultural Resources Overarching Goal: A sustainable balance and appreciation of natural, cultural and agricultural resources. Staff Comment Professional survey work completed in March 2024 on behalf of the owner revealed a discrepancy with Orange County's mapped watershed boundary lines, which are based upon the State's delineation of water supply watershed boundaries. As a matter of policy, the State advises delegated programs such as Orange County to notify the elected body of the watershed boundary change for formal recognition. Orange County Planning staff informed the Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) of the watershed boundary change at their March 18, 2025, meeting. At that time, the Board approved an amendment to the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line, and authorized the Planning Director to initiate a Zoning Atlas Amendment. Based on staff review and coordination with the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (NC DEMLR) Water Supply Watershed Protection Coordinator, the sealed professional survey represents the most recent and accurate data and should be recognized as the true ridgeline and watershed boundary on the parcels. Staff has notified NC DEMLR and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) of the change. This Zoning Atlas Amendment request will bring this overlay district into alignment with the State- recognized watershed. No amendments are proposed to the base zoning district or Future Land Use Map. The existing RB (Rural Buffer) zoning is consistent with Appendix F, Relationships Between Land Use Classifications and Zoning Districts of the Orange County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Any future development would be subject to regulation under the County's stormwater and water supply watershed regulations. Staff has reviewed and determined no significant environmental impact is expected from this request to amend the Watershed Protection overlay district. The Orange County staff has notified the public regarding this application, as required by Section 2.8.7 of the UDO, including mailings to neighboring property owners and posting of the property. Additionally, staff have provided all application documents on the Active Development Projects webpage. 5 Attachment 2 29 Orange County Planning & Inspections Department ORANGE COUNTY 131 W. Margaret Lane, Suite 200, Hillsborough, NC 27278 NORTH CAROLINA 919-245-2575 or planningapps .orangecountync.gov Zoning Atlas Amendment — Rezoning Application Please check all applicable boxes and complete the required documentation. Additional information and submittal requirements are contained in Sections 2.8 and 2.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). If completing by hand, please use black or blue ink. * Please fill out all required fields Date: December 10, 2025 Rezoning Request: ❑J Conventional District ❑ Conditional District Contact Information* Property Owner(s): JL-HM Development, LLC (Jason and Lindsey Maslow, managing members) Mailing Address: 6017 New Jericho Road Phone: Email: jlhmdevelopmentllc@gmail.com Applicant (if different than property owner): Orange County Mailing Address: 131 West Margaret Lane, Hillsborough Phone: 919-245-2575 Email: Property Information* Parcel ID Number (PIN): 9851-43-3215 Total Acreage: 19.4 Address: unaddressed parcel off Dodsons Crossroads Future Land Use Map Classification: Rural Buffer Current Zoning Designation: RB, Rural Buffer Requested Zoning Designation: Amend the University Lake Protected and Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed boundary line If applicant/owner are different people, include a signed, notarized, statement indicating that the owner has authorized the applicant to submit the request. In cases where there are multiple property owners, please attach an additional document containing their signatures authorizing the submission of the application or other legal documentation establishing the applicants' right to file on their behalf. Other Submittal Requirements* Conventional District Rezoning Application Based on Section 2.8.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO): ❑ A map, at a legible scale, showing the property(s) subject to the request. A map may be procured at the Planning Department for a fee in accordance with the adopted Orange County Fee Schedule. ❑ A legal description of the property(s) proposed for rezoning. ❑ A list showing the names and addresses of all adjacent property owners within 1000-feet of the subject property. ❑ A detailed narrative denoting the following: i. The alleged error in the Zoning Atlas (if any) that will be corrected by the proposed request. Page 1 of 2 30 For amendments to a Watershed Protection Overlay District, the following additional submittal materials shall be required. ❑ Scaled exhibit/survey denoting the property owner's requested watershed boundary line amendment — prepared and sealed by a professional surveyor licensed in North Carolina. The exhibit shall clearly identify existing contours, the existing "incorrect" watershed boundary line, and the surveyed "correct" watershed boundary line. Conditional District Rezoning Application Based on Section 2.9.2 (C) of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO): ❑ A site plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.5 of the UDO. Applications for a Master Plan Development (MPD) Conditional District (CD) shall adhere to the site plan preparation requirements outlined in Section 6.7 of the UDO. ❑ All CD applications, regardless of type, shall include a detailed landscape plan showing the location of on-site significant trees; proposed screening, buffers, and landscaping; and any proposed treatment of any existing natural features. ❑ A detailed description of the proposed use of property including an outline of the proposed development. This will include a detailed summary of proposed utility services. The utility service plan for applications for a Home Park (HP) CD shall specify if the proposed services are temporary or permanent connections. ❑ A detailed traffic survey, regardless of estimated daily trips, prepared in accordance with North Carolina Department of Transportation requirements and Section 6.17 of the UDO. ❑ The appropriate environmental document(s) prepared in accordance with Section 6.16 of the UDO. ❑ A schedule of construction of all elements of the proposal. ❑ Other information identified during the pre-application conference deemed essential to demonstrate the project's compliance with these regulations. ❑ The filing fee per the adopted Orange County fee schedule. If applicant/owner are different people, include a signed, notarized, statement indicating that the owner has authorized the applicant to submit the request. In cases where there are multiple property owners, please attach an additional document containing their signatures authorizing the submission of the application or other legal documentation establishing the applicants' right to file on their behalf. Certification and Signatures (we), the undersigned, have been made aware of the process for the review and action associated with a UDO Zoning Atlas Amendment application and understand only completed applications, containing all information required by the Orange County UDO, shall be reviewed and acted upon by the County. Further I (we) understand that any assistance I (we) may receive from County staff in preparing this application in no way guarantees a favorable recommendation by staff on the merits of this proposal nor does it guarantee an approval of the proposed atlas amendment by the County 14/`'1_ + ""_,� caner Signature(s) Applicant Signature (if different from owner) 1/07/2026 Date Date Page 2 of 2 -4ftsig-00-1 31 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA PLANNING and INSPECTIONS Cy Stober,AICP,Director I cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 27278 1919.24S.2S7S Project Narrative Property owners Jason and Lindsey Maslow hired Donald E. Robinson, PLS, in 2024 to survey the parcel for the purpose of subdivision. The survey work included topography and identified a discrepancy with Orange County's mapped watershed boundary lines, which are based upon the State's delineation of water supply watershed boundaries. This Watershed Boundary Location Survey was subsequently recorded with the Orange County Register of Deeds on September 23, 2024 (PB128, PG26). As a matter of policy, the State advises delegated programs such as Orange County to notify the elected body of the watershed boundary change for formal recognition. Orange County Planning staff informed the Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) of the watershed boundary change at their March 18, 2025 meeting. At that time, the Board approved an amendment to the University Lake Protected and Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed boundary line and authorized staff to initiate a Zoning Atlas Amendment. The BOCC agenda packet can be found at this link: http://server3.co.orange.nc.us:8088/WebLink/O,0/doc/74970/Pagel.aspx The Zoning Atlas Amendment includes the following parcel: PIN 9851-43-3215 Location An unaddressed parcel of Dodsons Crossroads Acreage +/- 19.4 acres Property Owner JL-HM Development, LLC (Jason and Lindsey Maslow listed as managing members Legal Description 3 JASON L MASLOW & LINDSEY H MASLOW P 129/53 Zoning RB Rural Buffer Watershed University Lake Protected and Jordan Lake Un rotected Future Land Use Rural Buffer Classification Based on staff review and coordination with the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (NC DEMLR) Water Supply Watershed Protection Coordinator, the sealed professional survey represents the most recent and accurate data and should be recognized as the true ridgeline and watershed boundary on the parcels. Staff notified NC DEMLR and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) of the change. The change was reviewed and approved by the state on October 3, 2025. Orange County Government I www.orangecountync.gov 1 919.732.8181 32 Protected Watersheds within Orange County are part of the County's delegated Stormwater Management Program, as reflected in the adopted Orange County Watershed Boundary Map. These watersheds are also adopted Zoning Overlay Districts in the Unified Development Ordinance. The Planning Director-initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment will bring this overlay district into alignment with the State-recognized watershed. No amendments are proposed to the base zoning district or Future Land Use Map. Orange County Government I www.orangecountync.gov 1 919.732.8181 33 C Zoning Report 34 Parcel Data Streams,Water Body,Floodplain Buffers Parcel Identification Number(PIN):9851433215 Stream/Water Bodies:80 ft. Size:19.4 acres Floodplain:N/A Relevant Documents for Register of Deeds Land Disturbance Thresholds Plat Book/Page:3 JASON L MASLOW AND LINDSEY H MASLOW P129/53 Erosion Control:20,000 sq.ft.for Jordan Lake Unprotected;10,000 sq.ft.for University Other Relevant Documents:N/A Lake Protected Stormwater Management:43,560 sq.ft.for residential uses;21,780 sq.ft.for non- Zoning Information residential uses Base Zoning District:Rural Buffer(RB) High Quality Water Zone(Y/N):Yes Min Lot Size:87,120 sq.ft. Disclaimer Min Lot Width:130 ft. This report contains documents prepared for the inventory of real property within Orange Max Density:1 dwelling per 87,120 sq.ft.for portion of property in Jordan Lake County,and is compiled from recorded deed,plats,and other public records and data. Unprotected Watershed;1 dwelling per 5 acres for portion within University Lake Protected Some of these documents are private agreements.Users of this report are hereby notified Watershed that the aforementioned public primary information sources should be consulted for Overlay Zoning District(s):Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed,University Lake Protected verification of the information contained in this report.The county and its mapping Watershed companies assume no legal responsibility for the information on this report. Max Impervious Surface:N/A for portion within Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed;6% Please contact staff at 919-245-2575 if you have floodplain,High Quality Water Zone,or for portion within University Lake Protected Watershed(6%of-7.7 acres=20,124 sq.ft.) wetlands indicated on this report. Max Building Height:25' Building Setbacks:Front 40',Side 20',Rear 20' 656 fp ' ` �•. _� Z.—''/ — !Si. r I i ► � •\;, rCj� 11 . - -- '�'�v6`4 '�•- co / /�:i i i �:`:'�_. • •�,;\� % y4,,./'" I--t"j i i '► :;�\:`'�� 6' ` i,�`:;�s- �'. '�'�,s Soil: GeC i j i ;` ' �� `✓k' 63_2; �''�, ` So/ .iI IHrC' 646 -- .,• —, ..,�,\'♦'�`. \ `,`.'\ k . �/� , Soil.G ts7 eB I! / r; i ,y - � .\. ♦ `. Soil: Clime' _..'' .' ♦— ' i'.\`, ,`\ 1 ` . .•\\�•;\\ __ -�:;.� �:. •-� — Jordan.Lake. �• , '� —�:\ `,'111 �:;: '► , \.;� •�``�\, _ --___ '� `*U n rotected% •,`� `•`.;`, �,�:_;;�,_ ,: : ;�`��' \\'\�;-_--: Watershed. '-�•, ,i. w ' ;'►'►�' . , 6'`�'r�� \ '•. I�♦.',;t'�'♦`\• ♦ `. ; jSoil:GeC Z.,;` ` L:: �. . i?' 9A'I i \..�, ,` .\ :�' ! � '� -- :,'��\' - '`~:�:��:�'.���''� '♦ \ 63 Soil•'GeB`-- ::: ,�. .t'. i ! ♦C�;! ` Panel:• \ \ `,w ::'� - 63 �, ♦'\` '--. I�, ( '\ ._ `I \ . . ►1 6,i►C. 668 "�� ► '�► ;9857J ; ca i�� , \ i O i. ., `''�,..:' 632 '•.a \ I• 00 co* 110­ `Soil GeB.' o ♦ ` ' ` i 1 % i ii i ' I All.I/,4 •',. / ,\ !SoiL•rEn6/ i' / .� �,. • 1� o� ,i i i i ► ;1 i i i'ii./';�; ��/!,/� j.i i I Air �o�FOi ti l ;li'�i i/"i i.%;j� CO�ry' /!''' _ -. \.''I```, j�---�.��� O- rle Creek '' ��/,' / •!,:; ;','' . ,�. " '/` / .Z' - 61 rotected;,--- ate'rshed University.Lake_ i ! '�! Protected ----- - - '68&��� fir' ,: i 1w�/ . /.', .',• %�- Watershed ''-- •' �' :� % ..-- ---� — /' Soil:Or • "� �6A /,��!/,�'/ /�',,//i, '��' ' /,i h ___` - � ' 0 i, Data shown on this map is obtained from Orange County �_ --'\ `--' ,•/ �' /, ' ,�,/ '•G!•-�'' / ' , ---'- , �, , /GIS and is for reference only. ' -`. '/•'' Q ,!;! //'•�'r� / % /i /' /'40 ; /•-—-.`-- ./�,.' ,'' ,, ' Exact locations and boundaries should be verified. '/ . i (� , 6 /, Wetland information represented of an does not /, /, / ;. ,/.Soil•GeB / /' �� i p ( v) /, ,6�, , } ,'.�.'/, ,/� ,' /__—--_,. �^ i, i' constitute a jurisdictional determination of exact location of 6V6\ ,�_,�';/,• ',�/�•• //,,,,,' /',/'�� / ��••• ,� ,% wetland features. Map prepared by Orange County Planning&Inspections. Zoning USGS Stream — 2'Contours(NCDOT) Parcels —•—' Soils Survey Stream �._..; FIRM r .. Road Easement Water Body Stream Buffer 80ft Soils ® Watersheds fin=3o4feet ®Feet 0 150 Attachment 1 I,Donald E Robinson,certify that this map was drawn under my NOTES: ZONING: RE ZONING: AR LEGEND supervision from on actual CPS survey made under my supervision, 1.Distances shown a e horizontal ground distances in International Feel. EIP Existing Iron Pipe G� from information found in Plat Book 126,page 112,end other 2.Onl evidence of easements o structures thereto which are readil t from a casual above YARD SETBACKS YARD SETBACKS IRS Iron Rod Set o OJ references shown hereon;that the boundaries not su e d are y iew re r y apparen Q, *SHIE ry ye ground v of premises a shown. From Right-of-Way-40' From Right-of-Way-40' p Colculeted Point,not set .0 indicated 0 broken lines obtained from information shown hereon; 3.The premises shown end described hereon a subject to any existing a menu,right-of-ways, Sides&Rear-20' Sides&Rear-20' Center Line YS� and that this map meets the requirements of The smnaeras of restrictions and setback lines whether or letr shown on the plat hereon or whether or not recorded in From Right-of-Way-40' From Right-of-Way-40 R property Line Practice for Land Surveying in North Carolina(21 NCAC the public records. UP Utility Pole o D 56.1600).Class of survey:C 4.No title search was performed for this sury y.The fled survey is based upon plats end/or tleetls. ANC Anchor Positional ac uracy:0.02'(0.006m) 5.There is no Special Flood Hazard Afeo(SFHA)located within boundary of the parcel shown hereon,per EP Edge of Pavement o Type of CPS c field procedure:Static&Real-time Kinematic& FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Mep(FIRM)No.3710985100K,R-e.d Date 11/17/2017.Flood bountleries R/W Right-of-Way 10 N Online Position User System are subject to change based on periodic amendments to flood maps. Determination is based on PIN Property Index Number od oC ORO Dotes f survey:03/13,14.19,20/2024 current,best avoilable data. -OU- Overhead Utility Line Po C�RO Datum/Epoch: NAD83(2011)(Epoch:2010.0000) 6.The parcel,shown hereon,was previously surveyed by this s rveyor,end a Plat w s recorded in Plot tp Published/Fixed-control u Book 127,page 106 and 128,page 26.of the Registrar of Used.Office,OrangeoCounty,North DESIGNATIONT s T Carolina. DURH(CORS ers) N 35°59"46.1294" W 78'53'58.0365" 76,687.77' 7.The wathetl boundary lines were derived from a Computer Aided Design(CAD)flow model using am NCBU(CORS) N 36'05'29.5861" W 79'26'12.1761" 91,054.57' 2-foot contour shapefiles obtained from Orange County via the NC OnsMap web.ite. U Oo NC' L(CORS) N 35'46'52.4964" W 79'02:03,9278" 82,657.06' / SNFD(CORS) N 35'28'24.6778" W 79-09 28.9845" 186,085.48' / p NCRX(CORS) N 36'23'28.0561" W 78-59'54.4190" 155,298.60' NOW OR FORMERLY ` CEIOD Model: 18 STELLA ANNE BOSWELL Combined grid f e 0.99992539 Units:International Fe Feett EIR &CRAIG STEPHEN HEI442 VICINITY MAP S D.B.6123,PG.442 Wilnew y hand and seal this 6tN tlay of January,2025 A.D.. � 0 4pS 28 P.B. 123,PG. 10 Mar TO scryN d!�-ybl y. PARCEL DATA NOW OR FORMERLY 39p'6j" EIP • •�•�r•r�f w.xzsoo•.:..ir.moo VIRGINIA LEE GODFREY 'off a L-4497 p•�--0'r o LINE BEARING DISTANCE p•:¢O �' Q. w�." D.B.6536,PG.444 e,r L1 S 683631"W 0.65' O2 CPS OBSERVATION .'.T�Q. ��',d� P.B.81,PG.21 L2 S 683631"W 30.00' 3FLT- y� NAD83(2011) EIP — L3 N 21'06'02"W 65.92' • PIN: TOTAL AREA) N: 814,617.908 L-4997 �� (TOTAL AREA) E: 1,955,451.538 L4 N 69'08'5 1"E 30.00' O•�ji O;'2= L5 N 69'O8'51"E 0.45' 1,761,798 Sq.Feet '� NAVD88(GEOIDI8) 41 ASN(Y44Ae... EIP= AV 655.29' L6 N 14'30'43"E 98.51• "•�t�•E•RO$•'" 1,973 Sq.Feet L8 N 14°50'39"E 108.88' •�'••••.•.••••• 0,045 Acres L9 N 20°40'36"E 122.87' (NET 77 92 8 AREA CPS OBSERVATION L10 S 04'30'59"W 50.47' 1,759,824 Sq.Feet NAD83(2011) om 111 N 8737'35"W 60.68' N: 14,1 .1 40.400 Acres 1.a M L12 N 21-59'44"E 54.22' E: 1,954,]29.303 ,-N L13 S 68'44'34 E 35.07' cn�cqunoxs NAVD88(GEOIDI B) = L14 S 8T31'21"E 102,55' ELEV:633.37' 3 NOW OR FORMERLY 0 EIP o� DERB S.CARTER L15 S 8T31'19"E 102.55" SET 8"SPIKE ANN D.CARTER Lib S 24'OS'43'"E 67.34' L17 S 8T36'13"E 36.64' '"'SStc• �j'q o D.B. 1560,PG.97 mo o P.B.70,PG. 118 EIP e° e I s og I FIR EIPJ e Mel EIP NOW OR FORMERLY I NOW OR FORMERLY DAVID ROSE SHIRLEY ANDREWS HERRIN \\ &SHERRI ROSE I D.B.2511,PG.41 ' 462.33' EIP US i D.B.2557,PG.352 �30 E S N 87'28'04"E N 82700'S1' E \ EIP P.B. 126,PG. 112 6ryy;A,EIP 85'39'43"E 332.8]' EIP 193.92' EIP \ �A S e]'30'47"E 858.19' N �58 EIP IP v G �Z L\ c nxc N 8]'31'19W ]29.1]' EIR L15-®EIP m (TIE) o s) O ,(NOW OR FORMERLY _JORDAN LAKE WATERSHED 2 LYNNE JAFFE (UNPROTECTED) ZONING RB o 11-E-286 q pm \m `� L13 z (PER ORANGE COUNTY CONTOU�(�AD MODEL)) EIP S B]'31'21"E (TIE) �.._.. ..i.._ JOl70gN C�F a, •—+� r L12 EIP 213.94' EIR L74 i' (s E Nor[s r w e) �'�'_ -_ Uk �pcAO \\ '•��'\—EI _�_,.,,� UNIVERSI PROTECTEDIKE )ERSHED - (�O ANGE�Cr))SNED N 02'30'�5"E is HNOTE NESr- OF(PER ORANGE COUNTY CONTOUR(CAD MODEL))•� UNNEgsf�CppN�G1S y v J \•EIP 13].2y' p.s.n pc.se (6%IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LIMIT) •� lqk \ ) \ J (PER O ANGEE 0 NO,GIs� GIS EIR o \ 1 EIP 250.14'l IP �• S 86'37'30"W 369.74' (TIE) N 87'36'13'"14/ N 87°30'25_W 5]2.44' EIP L11 IF N 87'28'E5`W 526.88' S 86'35'39"W 625.64' EIP NOW OR FORMERLY (TIE) II CPS OBSERVATION EIR �- NOW OR FORMERLY NAD83(2011) NOW OR FORMERLY STEPHEN M.DONN NOW OR FORMERLY 1 MICAH COPELAND N: 813,138,376 ROSS POORE &MY M.DUNN &LISA COPELAND E: 1,953,219.562 PETER MOYERS,TRUSTEE D.B.51fi3,PG.352 D.B.6020,PG.455 D.B.6850,PG.691 &DEBORAH PEARSON-MOYERS,TRUSTEE NAVD88 8.53' I8) P.B.49,PG.e] I P.B.61,PG.194 P.B. 127,PG. 106 ELEV:698.53' D.B.. 111 PG. 1 47 P.B. 111,PG.50 0' 180' 360' 540' 2 - WATERSHED BOUNDARY LOCATION DESCRIPTION: FOR Being all of Lot 2,as shown in Plat Book 127, page 106,entitled E—pt Recombination far Anthony G. J L—HM DEVELOPMENT,LLC Denoble&Mery E.Denoble,recorded in the Registrar of Deeds Office,orange County,North Cero line. BINGHAM TOWNSHIP,ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA REFERENCE: SCALE: 1"=180' DATE:03/13,14,19,20/2024 Used Book 6844,page 1184 Itending in the na es of Jason L.Maslow DONALD E.ROBINSON LAND SURVEYING and spouse,Lindsey H.Maslow 2132 Neese Road Grehem,NC 27253 b Plat Book 127,page 106 Once(336)229-5977•FAX(336)525-6311 gtlersurvey®att.net 36 FZ`STATE 3 tio� 37 JOSH STEIN _- n Governor D.REID WILSON Secretary WILLIAM E.TOBY VINSON,JR NORTH CAROLINA Director Environmental Quality October 3, 2025 Orange County Planning and Inspections Department Attn: Christopher J. Sandt, PE, County Engineer via email: csandt@orangecountync.gov Subject: DEMLR-Stormwater Approval -Orange County Water Supply Watershed Protection Boundary Change Request, Maslow Property(PIN 9851-43-7477) Dear Mr. Sandt, The Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (DEMLR) Stormwater Program received Orange County's Water Supply Watershed Protection boundary change request information for the subject property via email originally on April 16, 2025. On March 18, 2025,the Orange County Board of County Commissioners approved Orange County to submit the Water Supply Watershed Protection boundary change request. DEMLR approves the submitted boundary change request in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-214.5 and North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0100, .0200, .0620-.0624. 1 sincerely apologize for the delay in the response to your request. We appreciate the efforts of Orange County to help protect the vital public water supplies of this state. Please contact me at shelton.sullivan@deg.nc.gov or (919) 707-3639 should you have any questions or need assistance. Sincerely, Shelton Sullivan Water Supply Watershed Program Coordinator ec: Bill Denton, PE, Regional Engineer - DEMLR Raleigh Regional Office North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Energy,Mineral and Land Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 11612 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1612 NORTH CAROLINA - geaemmemmE Imnme qml� r 919.707.9200 38 Attachment 3 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA PLANNING and INSPECTIONS Cy Stober,AICP,Director I cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 272781919.245.2575 CERTIFICATION OF MAILING ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I,Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Manager with Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8.7 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance I have mailed, or have caused to be mailed, a Notice of the Planning Board Meeting to be held regarding a rezoning application proposing to amend the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Overlay District boundary line on one parcel (PIN: 9851-43-3215) on January 21, 2026. The owners were identified according to the Tax Records, as required by Section 2.8.7 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance. The mailed notices specified the date, time, place and subject of the Planning Board Meeting. WITNESS my hand,this 27th day of January 2026. i• T- MA�� Taylor Perschau Current Planning and Zoning Manager Orange County Planning •r. � 39 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA PLANNING and INSPECTION S Cy Stober,AICP,Director i cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 27278 1919•245•2575 January 21, 2026 NOTICE OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING Dear Property Owner: This notice is to inform you of the February 4, 2026, Planning Board meeting, at which an application to amend the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Protection Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Protection Overlay District boundary line on one parcel (PIN 9851433215) will be reviewed. The subject property is an unaddressed parcel located off Dodsons Crossroads at Arden Estate Court, within the Bingham Township. This notification is occurring in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance Amendments of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). You are receiving this notice because you own property located within 1,000-feet of the parcels requested for rezoning. YOUR PROPERTY IS NOT PROPOSED FOR REZONING. Property Information Parcel ID Number(PIN) 9851433215 Owner JL-HM Development, LLC Applicant Orange County Location n unaddressed parcel off Dodsons Crossroads at Arden Estate Court Acreage +/- 19.4 acres Current Land Use Rural Buffer Designation Current Zoning RB, Rural Buffer Proposed Zoning N/A Watershed Designation Jordan Lake Unprotected and University Lake Protected Professional survey work completed in March 2024 revealed a discrepancy with Orange County's mapped watershed boundary lines, which are based upon the State's delineation of water supply watershed boundaries. The County Initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment will bring the overlay districts into alignment with the State-recognized watershed. No amendments are proposed to the base zoning district or Future Land Use Map. This amendment request will be reviewed by the Orange County Planning Board at a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., February 4, 2026, at the Whitted Meeting Facility (300 West Tryon Street, Hillsborough, NC). All interested persons are invited to address the Planning Board with their comments regarding the application. The Planning Board is an advisory board comprised of appointed volunteers that makes recommendations to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) regarding land use and zoning matters. The Planning Board must recommend one of the following four actions at their meeting, 1) Approval, 2) Denial, 3) Approval, but with specified changes, or 4) that the Planning Board be given extended time to consider the matter. 40 Planning Board Meeting Information Date February 4, 2026 Time 7:00 p.m. Place Whitted Meeting Facility Address 300 West Tryon Street, Hillsborough, NC Taylor Perschau Assigned Planner Current Planning and Zoning Manager 919-245-2597 or tperschau@orangecountync.gov A formal public hearing on the proposed amendment will be held by the BOCC. The date of the public hearing has not yet been determined. You will receive another written notice about the public hearing at a later date. If you cannot attend the Planning Board meeting and the website does not answer your questions about the applications, you may call (919) 245-2575 during regular business hours and you will be directed to a staff person who can assist you. Sincerely, Cy St ber Planning and Inspections Director Additional information is available on the Orange County Planning Department's website: https://www.arcg is.com/apps/dashboards/16e9edd5de724468aed69571 dd 1 d9e70 L ' '[,Mj 41 PIN OWNERl_FIRST OWNER3_LAST OWNER2_FIRST OWNER2_LAST ADDRESSI CITY STATE ZIPCODE 9851433215 JASON L MASLOW LINDSEY H MASLOW 6017 NEW JERICHO RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 9851222022 WILLIAMIL BRYANT PATRICIA CUMLER BRYANT 137 RAT MILL HILL RD MTVERNON ME 04352 9851246368 JOSEPH BUNDY BRITTANY GRIFFIN 607 CHALCEDONEY CT DURHAM NC 27703 9851326230 MARNIESILVERSTEIN METZLER WRANMICHAEL METZLER 3639 PASTURE RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851345764 SHIRLEYANDREWS HERRIN 7510 STRATFORD PLACE BIRMINGHAM AL 35242 9851520708 STEPHENM DUNN AMYM DUNN 103 HARVEST CT CARRBORO NC 27510 9851219847 WILLIAMI BRYANT PATRICIAC BRYANT 137 RAT MILL HILL MTVERMON ME 04352 9851538817 DERB S CARTER ANN D CARTER 3234 WOOD DUCK LANE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851541129 JASON L MASLOW LINDSEY H MASLOW 6017 NEW JERICHO RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 9851627668 SARA B HOWARD CHRISTOPHER W HOWARD 3220 WOOD DUCK LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851652286 SHERI MULLIGAN NUTTER RANDELL 2104ARTHUR MINNIS ROAD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851247163 JOSEPH BUNDY BRITTANY GRIFFIN 607 CHALCEDONY CT DURHAM NC 27703 9851621939 ALDEN BYRD TRUSTEE POWELL <Null> <Null> 3224 WOOD DUCK LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851622001<Null> BANDIT FARMS III LLC <Null> <Null> 7203 UNION GROVE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 9851630520 LYNNE JAFFE <Null> <Null> 3228 WOOD DUCK LN Hillsborough NC 27278 9851313809 RUSSELL DEAN SEIBERT KELLYANN SEIBERT 6600 DODSONS CROSSROADS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851331442 MICAH COPELAND LISA COPELAND 6314 DODSONS CROSSROADS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851342098 DAVID ROSE SHERRI ROSE 6200 DODSONS CROSSROADS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851420811 PETER W R TRUSTEE MOYERS DEBORAH 1 TRUSTEE PEARSON MOYERS 3609 PASTURE RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851422133 JEFFREYB MESSINGER MARYK MESSINGER 3636 PASTURE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851642141 COLLEEN EVERHART MASSIE DAVID MASSIE 3239 WOOD DUCK LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851123000 SONKE JOHNSEN CAROLEL CALDER 6319DODSONSXRD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851229568 WILLIAMIL BRYANT PATRICIA CUMLER BRYANT 137 RAT MILL HILL RD MTVERNON ME 04352 9851240174 KATHYHAWKINS CAMPBELL <Null> <Null> 6115 DODSONS XRDS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851249655 DANNYCARL ALLEN <Null> <Null> 6114 DODSON CROSSROADS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851325988 ROSS POORE <Null> <Null> 6400 DODSONS CROSSROADS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851339526 JASON L MASLOW LINDSEY H MASLOW 6017 NEW JERICHO RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 9851428323 NATHAN DAVID MONTGOMERY STEPHANIEA MONTGOMERY 3604 PASTURE LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851459388 VIRGINIAL GODFREY <Null> <Null> 2500 ARTHUR MINNIS RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9851643619 STELLAANNE BOSWELL CRAIGSTEPHEN HEINLY 111 LAKE RIDGE PL CHAPELHILL NC 27516 42 43 Attachment 4 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA PLANNING and INSPECTIONS Cy Stober,AICP,Director I cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 27278 1919.245.2575 January 2, 2026 Faith Way Road Rezoning Application Case #: MA25-0006 PIN: 9851433215 An unaddressed parcel off Dodsons Crossroads on Arden Estate Court Re: Development Advisory Committee Report (per UDO Section 1.9.5) On December 18, 2025, the Orange County Development Advisory Committee (DAC) met for a final review and discussion of the overlay district rezoning application Case #MA25-0006 for PIN 9851433215. The Orange County Development Advisory Committee has no objections to the approval of the zoning atlas amendment so long as the items in the attached DAC memo are addressed. The application package features an abstract and staff report that provide the foundations for my recommendation regarding this application and request. Sincerely, Cy Stober Director, Planning and Inspections Department Orange County Government I www.orangecountync.gov 1 919.732.8181 44 �1 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA PLANNING and INSPECTIONS Cy Stober,AICP,Director I cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 27278 1919.245•2575 Development Advisory Committee (DAC) Comments DAC review comments and recommendations do not constitute plan or permit approval for this application and/or replace any other plans and permits that may be required by other County departments and State agencies. Project: MA25-0004 (Maslow) Count-Initiated Zoning Atlas Amendment Location/PIN: 9851433215 Applicant: Orange County Staff Planner: Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Manager DAC Meeting Date: 12-18-2025 Addressing and Britney Pendleton Land Records Date: 12.10.25 Staff: brpendleton(a-_)orangecountync.gov 919-245-2576 1. The addressing team has added in GIS the E911 street for Arden Estate Court per P129/53. Visible at: https://gis.orangecountync.gov/orangeNCGIS/default.htm Its street sign should be posted when the road is constructed, if it is not already. - BP James Bryan Attorney's Office Date: Staff: jb rya n orangecountync.gov 919-245-2319 1. None received. Building Michael Rettie Inspections Date: Staff: mrettie(a_)orangecountync.gov 919-245-2604 1. None received. Chris Hirni DEAPR Date: Staff: chirni orangecountync.gov 919-245-2514 1. None received. Environmental Date: Staff: Health 1. No comments to report. Tyler Sliger Erosion Date: 12/11/25 Staff: tsliger(a orangecountync.gov Control 919-245-2582 1. No comment for moving the watershed boundary. 45 [Fire and Life Stephen Smith Safety Date: 12/17/25 Staff: stesmith(a_orangecountync.gov 919-245-6151 No comments to add. David Genwright NCDOT Date: 1217/2025 Staff: digenwright(a-)ncdot.gov 336-570-6833 1. NCDOT does not have any comments for this amendment. Driveway Permit D071-068- 25-00066 has been issued for access to this subdivision. For this proposal, no NCDOT action or permisslion is required. Taylor Perschau Planning Date: 12/18/2025 Staff: tperschau(a)orangecountync.gov 919-245-2597 Current Planning Comments 1. This zoning atlas amendment application follows a March 18, 2025 BOCC action to authorize Planning staff to initiate the amendment. Watersheds are adopted as a Zoning Overlay District in the Unified Development Ordinance and the County's adopted Zoning Atlas. As such, any revision to the boundary necessitates an amendment to the zoning atlas. 2. The subject watershed boundary being amended is that between University Lake Protected and Jordan Lake Unprotected and is limited to the boundary as it is mapped on Orange County PIN 9851433215. The parcel referenced in the March 2025 BOCC documents and October 2025 DEMLR letter has been subdivided (documented in PB 129/53, July 2025), which is why there is a change to the subject PIN. 3. The application package is subject to courtesy review and was provided to Town of Chapel Hill and Town of Carrboro Planning staff on 12/18/2025. Long Range Planning Comments 4. See Comprehensive Plan checklist in DAC project folder. Matt Taylor Solid Waste Date: Staff: mtaylor(a_orangecountync.gov 919-918-4905 None received. Stormwater Christopher Sandt Management Date: 12/18/25 Staff: csandt orangecountync.gov 919-245-2583 1. No comments regarding request to revise the Watershed Protection Overlay District boundary; all required steps by the applicant have been completed. Transportation Darlene Weaver Services Date: 12/10/25 Staff: dweaver(a_orangecountync.gov 919-245-2002 1. No comment Attachment 5 46 STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY OF A PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A County-initiated amendment to the Zoning Atlas has been reviewed to amend a zoning overlay district as follows: Parcel Owner of Proposed Identification Township Record Current Zoning Zoning Number (PIN) ■ RB, Rural Buffer ■ Jordan Lake Change to JL-HM Unprotected Watershed Watershed Protection Protection 9851433215 Bingham Development, Overlay District LLC • University Lake Overlay Protected Watershed District Protection Overlay boundary District The Planning Board hereby finds: a. The requirements of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance Amendments of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) have been reviewed and deemed complete; and, b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5 Statement of Intent - Amendments, and 1.1.7 Conformance with Adopted Plans of the UDO and to Section 160D-604(d) Planning Board review and comment— Plan Consistency and 160D-605(a) Governing Board Statement— Plan Consistency of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds sufficient documentation within the record denoting that the amendment is consistent with the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. c. Professional survey work completed in March 2024 revealed a discrepancy with Orange County's mapped watershed boundary lines, which are based upon the State's delineation of water supply watershed boundaries. As a matter of policy, the State advises delegated programs such as Orange County to notify the elected body of the watershed boundary change for formal recognition. Orange County Planning staff informed the Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) of the watershed boundary change at their March 18, 2025 meeting. At that time, the Board approved an amendment to the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Protection Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Protection Overlay District boundary line and authorized the Planning Director to 47 initiate a Zoning Atlas Amendment. Based on staff review and coordination with the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (NC DEMLR) Water Supply Watershed Protection Coordinator, the sealed professional survey represents the most recent and accurate data and should be recognized as the true ridgeline and watershed boundary on the parcels. Staff has notified NC DEMLR and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) of the change. This Zoning Atlas Amendment request will bring the overlay districts into alignment with the State-recognized watershed. No amendments are proposed to the base zoning district and Future Land Use Map. Accordingly, the proposal is consistent with goals/objectives outlined within the Comprehensive Plan concerning development, including: Planning Principle 2, Sustainable Growth and Development Growth and development within the county should occur in a pattern, location, and density that is sustainable over the long-term. Planninq Principle 4, Natural Area Resource Preservation Protection of the County's natural areas, including forests, wildlife habitat, and other important open spaces should be a priority. The County should work with regional and local organizations, the towns, and private landowners to promote and achieve preservation of the County's important natural resources. Planning Principle 5, Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern The County's rural areas are a cherished component of the County's character. Future development should preserve and enhance the county's rural landscape. Planning Principle 6, Water Resources Preservation The County has finite water resources to provide to future populations. The protection and management of the County's water resources should be a high priority. Land Use Element Overarching Goal Coordination of the amount, location, pattern, and designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives. Land Use Goal 2 Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. 48 Land Use Goal 3 A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced transportation system. Land Use Goal 6 A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive. Natural and Cultural Resources Overarching Goal A sustainable balance and appreciation of natural, cultural and agricultural resources. The Planning Board hereby adopts this Statement of Consistency and the findings expressed herein and recommends the Board of County Commissioners consider adoption of the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment. Vote: For Against Lamar Proctor, Chair Date Attachment 6 49 Ordinance#: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ATLAS WHEREAS, Orange County has initiated an application seeking to amend the Orange County Zoning Atlas, as established in Section 1.2, of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), and WHEREAS, this petition seeks to modify the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Protection Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Protection Overlay District boundary line on PIN 9851433215, hereafter `the Property'; and WHERAS, professional survey work completed in March 2024 revealed a discrepancy with Orange County's mapped watershed boundary lines, which are based upon the State's delineation of water supply watershed boundaries; and WHEREAS, Zoning Atlas Amendment to modify the boundary will bring the overlay districts into alignment with the State-recognized watershed; and WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete; and WHEREAS, the Board has found the proposed zoning atlas amendment to be reasonably necessary to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the Board has found the proposed zoning atlas amendment to be consistent with the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan and reasonable and in the public interest. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the Orange County Zoning Atlas is hereby amended to modify the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed Protection Overlay District and University Lake Protected Watershed Protection Overlay District boundary line, as detailed within the submitted application. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED THAT this ordinance be placed in the book of published ordinances and that this ordinance is effective upon its adoption. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing ordinance was adopted this day of , 2024. I, Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on , 2024 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of the said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of 2024. 1 50 SEAL Clerk to the Board of Commissioners