Orange County commissioners voted 5‑2 Oct. 7 to approve a conditional rezoning for 61.1 acres at 3531 N.C. Highway 54 W. in the White Cross area, allowing a 43‑lot single‑family subdivision with 25 acres of open space and a community well.

The vote followed more than three hours of presentations and public comment focused on groundwater impacts, on‑site septic feasibility, and safety at the subdivision entrance. The developer, represented by attorney Beth Trejos of Fox Rothschild, proposed clustered lots, a community well and privately maintained roads; the project team presented a hydrologic desktop study, well pumping tests and a septic proof‑of‑concept for several lots.

Why it matters: neighbors and several commissioners pressed whether a community well drawing tens of gallons per minute could reduce water available to existing private wells, and whether a left/right turn treatment on high‑speed N.C. 54 could be required and installed before homes were built. Commissioners said they weighed housing needs, protection of primary environmental open space and the technical studies the applicant provided.

The developer’s commitments, included in the submitted conditions, specify a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet (roughly half an acre), an average density of about 1.42 dwelling units per acre when open space is excluded, aggregated open space that totals roughly 25 acres (about 41% of the parcel), and restrictions on maximum bedroom count per home to match septic designs. The developer also committed to request N.C. Department of Transportation approval for a left‑ and right‑turn lane at the entrance and to construct them if DOT approved the driveway permit.

On groundwater and wells, the project team presented two separate pumping tests of a proposed community well; the most recent test reported production on the order of roughly 90 gallons per minute and a steady‑state drawdown interval of approximately one hour during the test sequence, with a 24‑hour total pumping period during one test. Spangler Environmental conducted an impact analysis, including time‑series monitoring of nearby wells and state‑standard modeling, and reported no measurable impact on the monitored adjacent wells from the tested pumping scenarios. McConnell & Associates provided preliminary lot‑by‑lot septic layouts for several of the more challenging lots to demonstrate a proof of concept; the development will use individual septic systems designed to serve up to four bedrooms per house subject to county environmental health permitting.

Speakers from the public and advocacy groups urged denial or changes. Residents raised concerns about variable yields in local bedrock (the presentation described mapped volcaniclastic/High Cove formation substrate and veins that create inconsistent yields), historic flooding in the area, and traffic and safety at the 54 corridor. Carol Rigsby, the property owner, told commissioners she has owned the land for generations and supports the sale and the proposed plan, saying approving the rezoning would allow her “peace of mind to close out this chapter of my life.”

The board discussed and eliminated several developer‑proposed amenity details from the formal conditions (grilling stations, fire pit, trash receptacles, pet‑waste stations, and a requirement for a fixed number of bird‑nest boxes) after the developer agreed in the meeting to remove those specifics and to confirm that change in writing. Commissioners kept requirements that preserve aggregated open space, the concept plan, the community well house design, ADA‑compliant mail kiosk, limits on bedroom counts tied to septic design, and the proposed private trail network.

Outcome and next steps: the board approved the statement of consistency and the rezoning with the amended conditions (vote 5 in favor, 2 opposed). The developer must obtain required permits — particularly the DOT driveway permit — and satisfy county and state permitting (septic permitting by Orange County Environmental Health; public water permitting by state authorities if applicable) before subdivision construction. If DOT declines the proposed turn‑lane plan, the county indicated it would pursue further remedies and could require further review or an appeal to DOT if necessary.

The county attorney and planning staff said the conditional district is site‑specific; any future development on adjoining parcels would require its own review and conditions. The board’s approval does not authorize building permits: those follow separate technical reviews and permitting steps.