HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-23-1999 - CORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
PLANNING BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
Z -2 -99 JOHNNY C. CATES
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
Application
Vicinity and Site Maps
General Information Memorandum
Certificate of Mailing
Staff Findings
005
Action Agenda
Item No.
PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) YO
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jim Hinkley X2584
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane 336 227 -2031
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed Zoning Atlas amendment requested by
Johnny C. Cates for his property in Cheeks Township.
BACKGROUND:
Request That a 2.8 -acre portion of a 5.18 -acre parcel at 3102 West Ten Road (Tax Map No.
3.45..11 C), owned by Johnny C. and Peggy Cates, be rezoned from AR Agricultural - Residential to
AS Agricultural Service.
Location The proposed zoning lot is located on the south side of West Ten Road (SR 1144)
approximately 2,200 feet east of the Mt. Willing Road interchange with 1- 40/85.
;i. § WIC-1 =--
Existing: The property is a wooded tract upon which the Cates residence is situated.
Plan Designation:
• The property is located within an area designated as Agricultural - Residential by the
Land Use Element of the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
M1
Zoning:
• In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the lot and all surrounding properties lie
within Orange County's jurisdiction and are zoned AR(CANE-CA)(MTC)—Agricultural-
Residential (Cane Creek Watershed Critical Area)(Major Transportation Corridor).
• Because the parcel is located in the Critical Area, a 2 -acre minimum lot size applies,
maximum impervious surface allowed for non - residential use is limited to six percent,
and BMPs (best management practices) are II4f permitted to satisfy watershed
requirements. Please refer to the attached General Information Memorandum to the
Board of County Commissioners and Planning Board of August 4, 1999.
• Because the property is located within the 1 -40/85 MTC Major Transportation Corridor
District, stipulations of Section 6.26 Extra Requirements for the Major Transportation
Corridor (MTC) District of the Zoning - Ordinance, apply. Please refer to the attached
General Information Memorandum.
Proposed: The Cates wish to rezone 2.8 acres of their 5.18a tract from AR to AS in order to
begin a business which would be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and AS provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance.
• The proposed zoning is AS(CANE -CA )—Agricultural Service (Cane Creek Critical
Area).
• Minimum lot size is two acres.
• Permitted use includes rural non -farm, non - residential development which supports
the horticultural, silvicultural, and agricultural uses of AR districts.
• Public Hearing August 23,1999: No decision is made on the proposed amendments by
either the Planning Board or the Board of County Commissioners at the public hearing.
• First Action: Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board has 75 days within
which to prepare and submit a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Failure
of the Planning Board to submit a recommendation within the required time shall be considered
as a favorable recommendation.
• Final Action: Board of County Commissioners to consider amendments to the Orange
County Zoning Ordinance
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Zoning Officer recommends approval of the rezoning.
• The request complies with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
00/
• The proposal meets all dimensional requirements.
• Permitted uses listed for the proposed AS district are appropriate to service the
surrounding agricultural uses. Please refer to the attached General Information
Memorandum.
Administration Recommendation
a
The Administration recommends that the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment be referred to
the Planning Board for recommendations to' be returned no sooner than September 21, 1999.
g:\ jim\ zatlasamend\ z- 2- 99cates\phabstract \8- 13- 99 \jrh
�i
MANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLI ` 009
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT
Date: IV
TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS � ,aft
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA �9/( ))
The_ undersigned do hereby make application to
Orange County as hereinafter requested.
change the Zoning Atlas of
1. The property is Located on the __side of S.R.#
/!44
( Stre,st /Road) between S.R.# 11
and
S.R.# It is kn wn as t(s) _._//0— , Stock
of
Orange County Tax Map R– Township. It has a
,
frontage
of ± feet and a e th of *700f' _feet, and
� 6 square feet
contains
or acres.
2. It is desired and requested that the foregoing property be
rezoned
from ,dam to
3•.. The •.foLLowing information has been _attached in support
of the
application for changing the Zoning Atlas I* – required
on all
app Li cations) .
•a. A fully dimensioned map at ■ mcals of not Less than one (1) inch
equals one — hundred (100) feat nor were than one (1) inch *quota
twenty" 1207 'rest "'showiwsr" the land -which is proposed to be
rezoned.
*b. A lapel description of the Land proposed to be rezoned.
"c. A statement of Justification addressing one or more of the
fo tLowing:
(1) The alleged error in the Zoning Ordinance, if any, which
would be corrected by the proposed amendment with a detailed
0xplanstion of such error in the Zoning Atlas and detailed
reasons how the proposed amendment wilt correct the error.
(2) The changed or changing conditions, if any, in the area or
in the County generally, which make the proposed amendment
rassonably necessary to the promotion of the public health,
safety and general walfars.
`(3) The manner in which the proposed amendment will carry out
the intent and purpose of the adopted Land Use Plan or part
thereof.
t(4) ALL other circumstances, factors and reasons which the
applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment
including, but not Limited to, documentation from service
agencies (e.g. firm, police, rescue and utlLitiea agencies)
assuring services provision capability to the development.
d. A list of alt individuals, firms or corporations owning property
adjoining or within five hundred (5130) feat of the property
s ught for rezoning is attached. The List is current as of
.(Date)
'I certify that all information furnished in this application is accurate
to the best of my knowledge.
Applicent(s) :.tt A,I
Address: O Z W-Lz1- -720
?C. a
Phone: Z• 2173
REZONING REQUES
d.
O
OWNER'S NAME . ,S ADDRESS An `1i Wo5t l P;/i keiy_4
Current
zoning, /� Total number of acres Current land 'use — -ha,(
Type of rezoning requested A � Proposed land use
Tax map #_- /Block # Number of lots l Proposed Water Supply: Public Community.
Individual y Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public Community Individual septic tank
Access onto state road # 11�4 Average daily traffic count on the state road Describe existing
critical areas: Flood prone areas
Streams
Describe land uses in:. General Area
Other sensitive areas
Adjacent parcels of it / /I /T�[,AI /� /_ !�✓Ji�iii��iir��r
Poorly drained areas
Oil
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PROPOSAL
JOHNNY C. & PEGGY CATES
LOCATION: 3102 West Ten Road (Tax Map No. 3.45..11C, PIN# 9854-
14- 8385), Deed Book 270, page 851
REQUEST: To rezone 2.8 arees of the 5.18 -acre Cates property from
AR Agricultural- Residential to AS Agricultural Service
JUSTIFICATION: 1. There is no alleged error in the Zoning Ordinance.
2. Uses permitted in the AS zoning district are
appropriate and supportive of uses in the Agricultural -
Residential areas of Orange County. No amendment
of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan
would be required.
3. The proposed amendment to the zoning atlas will
carry out the intent and purpose of the adopted Land
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan in which the
Cates property is designated as Agricultural -
Residential.
4. The site is located on the south side of Old West Ten
Road (SR 1144) and Old Mt. Willing Road —now a 30-
foot easement. Access to West Ten is between the
Mt. Willing Road and US 70 /NC 86 interchanges of
1- 40/85. The site is readily accessible to emergency
services. Orange- Alamance Water service is provided
to the property. There will be no need for additional
public facilities and services at this location given the
limited uses allowed in the proposed AS zoning
district.
012
/ m Est U& 70
U.6"
MAN VNI \' OAW
85 N0. r:� ► .A
yq r JOHWS 4 4 1
�
y4, 1 v�ao.
iNNOC'13 �
A \ KWU R4
� 1 r
e5
1 NSR C a IROYN
CHO
1136 \ i
IM FA
1
� 1
1
N —?
P7=
JOHNNY C. CATES
Z -2 -99 REZONING PROPOSAL
From AR To AS - -- Vicinity
1" = 4000' 11 N
C'n \
D
�o
J J!
I
� I
I I
I �
I I I
> \ 1 1 I
I
� I I
i I Ij
_ 1 ,
i
- 1 r
' I
I r
I r
1 I
• 1 I r!
r, MT WILLING RQ I r'
I
10 J 1 181 1.1
jGr`1NNY C. CATES
Z -2 -99 ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
REZONING REQUEST
OE ' - • • FROM: AR Agricultural- Resldential
_ TO: AS Agricultural Service
NCDOT RD
ANDREW BENJAMIN LLOYD, JR., ETAL. 33.35 -18A
& MABLE L. GORDON
3.45..18
A43.
AR (CANE -CA) (MTC ).
. �y1. %JME� C�ITfS
S RICHARD
O1a & FAY S JOHNSON
3.45..11F
A8.7
saan \�
COUNTY OF ORANGE
3.4$ »71A '
A53.
2501
NCDOT
3.45..12A
A5.4
MAYES HILL, LTD.
DEWEY S. MAYES
AR (CANE -CA) ( MTC )
3.45 „12
A62.
r
ti i PROPERTY MAP
Selected Parcels
This map contains parcels prepared for the inventory of real property within
^� Orange County, and is compiled from recorded deeds, plats, and other public
Background Info records and data Users of this map are hereby notified that the aforementioned
public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the
OWNER: CATES JOHNNY C information contained on this map The County and Its mapping companies assume
no legal responsibility forthe information contained on this map
N I�
Man An_nie!1' a 2M)l MATT. AA •A__Aw AA.rA.AA TL.__.J...
12 1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
306F REVERE ROAD
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
r` °o
n p
GENERAL INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners and Planning Board
FROM: Planning and Inspections Staff
DATE: August 13, 1999
SUBJECT: Z -2 -99 JOHNNY C..CATES REZONING APPLICATION
The information in this memorandum concerns the request of Johnny C. Cates to
rezone his property on West Ten Road in Cheeks Township from AR Agricultural -
Residential to AS Agricultural Service.
K=1 N =0111 III I L, IM010N
APPLICANT:
Johnny C. Cates
OWNERS: Johnny C. & Peggy Cates
3102 West Ten Road
Efland, NC 27243
LOCATION: 3102 West Ten Road (Tax Map No. 3.45..11 C)
PROPERTY SIZE: 5.18 acres
PROPOSED ZONING LOT: 2.8 acres
EXISTING LAND USE: Wooded; Residence on the proposed residual AR portion of
the property
SURROUNDING LAND USE IN GENERAL AREA: Wooded
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN USE DESIGNATION: Agricultural- Residential (Cane
Creek Critical Area)
EXISTING ZONING: ARCANE- CA)(MTC) — Agricultural - Residential (Cane Creek
Critical Area)(Major Transportation Corridor)
015
016
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Two
REQUESTED ZONING: AS(CANE- CA)(MTC) —Agricultural Service (Cane Creek
Critical Area)(Major Transportation Corridor)
The following definition, statements of intent, and application criteria are quoted from
the Orange County2oning Ordinance, as amended.
Sec. 4.2.24 AGRICULTURAL SERVICE (AS) DISTRICT
DEFINITION
Commercial activities offering goods and services which support production of
agricultural products or processing of those products to make them marketable.
Examples include, but are not limited to, soil preparation, animal and farm
management, landscaping and horticultural services, specialized commercial
horticulture, specialized animal husbandry, biocide services, retail sales of farmlgarden
products, supplies and equipment, equipment rental and repair service, tack shop,
farrier, blacksmith, welding shops, facilities for animal shows, animal sales and
auctions, agriculture-based clubs/meeting halls, storage and processing plants for
agricultural products including wineries and canneries.
INTENT
The purpose of the AS Agricultural Service District is to provide sites in the rural portion
of the County for rural non -farm, non - residential uses which support the horticultural,
silvacultural, and agricultural uses of the AR Agricultural - Residential districts. The AS
district is usually applied where the following conditions exist.
1. The site is within areas designated by the adopted Land Use Element of
the Comprehensive Plan as Agricultural - Residential,
2. Lot sizes for individual uses are appropriate to the method of water supply
and sewage disposal, and
3. Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned AS at any location shall not
exceed ten acres.
Sec. 4.3 PERMITTED USE TABLE (Agricultural Service)
Accessory Uses
P2 Botanical Gardens & Arboretums
P4 Bus Passenger Shelter
P7 Church
P10 Governmental Protective Services (Police & Fire Stations) Rescue
Squads, Volunteer Fire Departments
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board 017
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Three
P17C Stealth Telecommunication Towers - 75 Feet or Shorter*
P25 Water and Sanitary Sewer Pumping Stations
S2 Agricultural Service Uses
S3 Animal Hospitals, Veterinarians
S10 Faun Equipment and Sales
S11 Feed, Seed, Storage and Processing
S13 Greenhouses (No On premises Sales)
S14 Greenhouses (On premises Sales)
S18 Commercial Feeder Operation
S19A Class I Kennels
S48 Sawmills
S49 Stockyards
S50 Storage of Goods, Outdoors
The following uses are allowed with a Class A Special Use Permit.
P11 Land Fills (Two acres or more)
P16 . Public Utility Stations and Sub- stations, Switching Stations, Telephone
Exchanges,
Water and Sewage Treatment Plants.
P1 7B Telecommunication Towers - 200 Feet or Taller
The following uses are allowed with a Class B Special Use Permit:
P12 Land Fills (Less than Two Acres)
P17 Elevated Water Storage Tanks
PI 7A Telecommunication Towers -199 Feet or Shorter
P22 Transmission Lines
S20 Class Il Kennels, Riding Stables
Sec. 4.2.31 MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR (MTC) DISTRICT
Intent and application criteria of the MTC Major Transportation Corridor District as given
in Article 4.2.31 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance
INTENT
It is the intent of Orange County to protect and enhance those natural and
environmental features which constitute important physical, aesthetic, recreational and
economic assets through the provision of special controls of public and private
development along major transportation corridors. The Board of Commissioners finds
as a fact that: 1. Major transportation corridors serve a key function in the orderly
development of Orange County as major traffic movers, as well as serve as entrances
to Orange County from outside the area. 2. These corridors and the character of the
1 t O 1 s
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Four
development which occurs along them establish for visitors and residents alike an
indicator of the quality of life in the County, as well as the efficiency and safety of traffic
movement through the area. 3. In addition, the ability of different areas of the County to
attract and accommodate different types of development depends on the capacity of
the thoroughfare system and the character and quality of development along major
corridors.
The Major Transportation Corridor district is intended to enhance the attractiveness and
orderly development of land adjacent to major transportation facilities through the
provision of a set of development standards and regulations for application to public
and private development of land adjacent to these corridors. The major transportation
corridors include the interstate system as designated in the adopted Comprehensive
Plan.
APPLICATION CRITERIA
The Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) district is established as a district which
overlays other zoning districts established in this ordinance. The new use of any land
or any new structure within the MTC district shall comply with the use regulations the
underlying zoning district as well as the requirements of the MTC district. The
provisions, requirements and restrictions of this district shall not apply to the use of land
within the district for single family or two- family dwellings or to any building or structure
existing prior to the creation of this district unless it is structurally altered to the extent of.
increasing the floor area by fifty percent (50%) or more or is enlarged to any degree to
occupy a vacant lot.
1. This district shall be applied along any interstate highway in the County
designated in the adopted Comprehensive Plan as such and designated
in the adopted Comprehensive Plan as a proposed interstate highway.
2. The minimum length of the district shall be a continuous distance along
the thoroughfare within the County's jurisdiction and outside of the
extraterritorial planning jurisdictions of the Towns of Hillsborough, Chapel
Hill, Mebane, and Carrboro.
3. The minimum width of the district is 1,250 feet from the edge of the right -
of -way measured along a line which is perpendicular to the edge of the
right -of -way on each side of the roadway, except at interstate
interchanges where the District shall extend 2,500 feet from the edge of
the right -of -way on each side of the interstate for a distance of 1,250 feet
from the right -of -way on each side of the intersecting road.
4. The district establishes development standards and a site plan review
process for development within the district.
019
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Five
SPECIFIC ZONING REQUIREMENTS
The AS rezoning proposal has been initiated by the owner to:
• Accommodate the establishment of an agricultural service business permitted by the
Zoning Ordinance; and
• Implement the Land Use Element of the adopted Comprehensive Plan which designates
the property as Agricultural- Residential.
The property is zoned AR. This category pertains to rural prevailing activities (agriculture, forestry)
related to the land in an appropriate location for the continuation of these uses. The proposed
rezoning to AS, therefore, would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. For development of
the subject property, Cane Creek Watershed, AS, and MTC requirements would apply:
• Frontage shall be a minimum of 200 feet.
• The front building setback must be a minimum of .50 feet;
• Side and rear building setbacks must be a minimum of 20 feet;
• 75- to 100 -foot Land Use Buffers adjacent to residential uses are required, depending upon
the use proposed; and
• Maximum impervious surface shall be no more than 6 percent, including all structural
"footprints,„ paved and graveled driveways, aprons, and all compacted outside storage
areas.
• Stipulations set forth in Section 4.2.31 Ma'lor Transportation Corridor (MTC) District of the
Zoning Ordinance must be met when AS development of the property occurs.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, SCHEDULE, AND ACTION
Public Hearing
• No decision is made at this stage.
• Upon the recommendation of the Administration, the zoning atlas amendment request is
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County
Commissioners no earlier than September 21, 1999.
020
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Six
PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS
The application for the rezoning of the tract from AR to AS has been reviewed by Planning Staff.
Findings required by Article 20.3 Procedure for Submission and Consideration of Applications for
Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance follow:
• There was no error made with respect to the property when zoning was adopted for Cheek
Township on October 1, 1994.
• The property was zoned AR in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Rezoning the. property to AS would be compatible with the stipulations set forth
for an Agricultural - Residential plan category use given in the Comprehensive
Plan. The Plan would = need to be amended to accommodate AS zoning.
• Seventeen uses are permitted by right in the AS district. Three require a Class A
Special Use Permit with approval of the Board of County Commissioners, and
five require a Class B Permit with approval of the Board of Adjustment. Any of
these uses, either by right or under special conditions, could be allowed on the
proposed zoning lot. Permitted AS uses are listed above.
Uses permitted in AS not permitted in AR
• Uses Permitted by Right. Garden Center (On Premises Sales); Agricultural
Services Uses; Animal Hospitals; Veterinarians; Farm Equipment Sales; Feed
and Seed Storage and Processing; Sawmills; Stockyards.
• Uses requiring a Class A Special Use Permit. All uses requiring a Class A
SUP within an AS district are also permitted with a Class A SUP in the AR
district.
• Uses requiring a Class B Special Use Permit. All uses requiring a Class B
SUP within an AS district are also permitted with a Class B SUP in the AR
district.
g:\ jim\ zatlasamend \catesMnfomemo \B.13.99\jrh
02.E
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
I, James R. Hinkley, Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Carolina,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT:
On or about August 6, 1999, I sent by Certified Mail, postage prepaid, a Notice
of the Public Hearing to be held on Monday, August 23, 1999, at 7:30 pm in the
F. Gordon Battle Courtroom of the New County Courthouse at 106 E. Margaret
Street in Hillsborough, North Carolina, for the purpose of providing all interested
citizens an opportunity to speak for or against a proposal by Johnny C. Cates to
amend the County Zoning Atlas by rezoning 2.8 acres of his 5.18 -acre property
at 3102 West Ten Road (SR 1144), approximately 2,200 feet east of the Mt.
Willing Road interchange with I- 40/85, in Cheeks Township (Tax Map No.
3.45..11C) from AR Agricultural- Residential to AS Agricultural Service. The
notice was sent to five property owners who hold title to six parcels lying within
500 feet of the Cates property. A list of parcels and their owners is attached.
North Carolina
Orange County
lift,
°� M• GR,
James R. Hinkley, AICP
Zoning Officer
I, Debra M. Graham, a Notary Public, for said County and
State, do hereby certify that James R. Hinkley appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of
the foregoing instrument.
=1®fficial
0,fj9 +aye
ifffffffllll \I \ \\ \ \`\
s my hand and official seal, this the 6th day of August
No Public
expires May 29, 2002.
�M
Z -2 -99 Cheeks Township
AtlasAAmendment Proposal of Johnny C. Cates.
AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS
within 500 feet
Page One of One,
Tax Man Number /Acres
3.45..11A / 53a
3.45..11F / 8.7a
3.45..12 / 62a
3.45..12A / 5.4a
3.45..18A / 3.1a
Property Owners
Orange County
PO Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
James Richard & Fay S. Johnson
1802 Adams Place
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Mayes Hill, Ltd.
Dewey S. Mayes
300 C.C. Hayes Road
Purlear, NC 28665
NC Dept. of Transportation
c/o C.D. Parker
331 W. Main Street, Suite 100
Durham, NC 27701
3.45..18 / 43a Andrew Benjamin Lloyd, Jr. &
Mable L. Gordon
2701 US 70 West
Eflandr NC 27243
STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
PERTAINING TO
APPLICATION: Z -2 -99 ]OHNNY C. CATES
BASED ON APPLICATION MATERIALS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, THE PLANNING STAFF FINDS THAT
THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING:
ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /REZONING ( "Yes" = compliance.; "No" = non-compliance)
PLANNING STAFF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO
FINDINGS a SUPPORT FINDINGS
Ordinance Requirements
The application must comply
with all requirements specified
In Article 20 - Amendments.
Those requirements Include:
20.3.2 a) Map showing affected
property at scale of not less than
1' =100" nor more than 1 " =20'
20.3.2 b) Legal description of
the zoning lot
20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged error,
If any, to be corrected by proposed
amendment
20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if any,
which make an amendment reasonably
necessary to promote health, safety,
and the public welfare.
20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed
amendment will carry out the purpose
and intent of the Orange County
Comprehensive Plan.
X Yes No Site plan submitted at scale
_X—Yes
— of 1" =401
Yes No Legal Description submitted from Orange
County Registry Book 270 Page 851
NA Not applicable
NA
—X—Yes No
Not applicable
No changed conditions.
The property Iles within the bounds
of an Agricultural - Residential area
designated in the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan. AS is an
appropriate zoning classification.
I
4
PLANNING BOARD
FINDINGS
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
C
Cv
V11 I com, in ► u 14,11 IN101 ► L :►► IM ;
Ordinance Requirements
Ordinance Requirements
Article 4.2 identifies the criteria
which will normally be used to
determine the application of a
zoning district designation. The
applicant has applied for an AS
Agricultural Service designation.
The criteria for that district are set
Forth in Article 4.2. 11 and are as follows:
(a) The purpose of the AS District is to
provide sites in the rural portion of the
County for rural non -farm, non - residential
zses which support the horticultural,
dIvicultural, and agricultural uses of
he AR districts.
b) This district will usually be applied
?vhere the following conditions exist:
1. Site is within areas designated by the adopted
comprehensive Plan as Agricultural Residential.
!. Lot size for individual uses would be
appropriate to the method of water supply
and sewage disposal.
1. Normally, the maximum amount of land
coned AS at any location shall not exceed
en acres.
PLANNING STAFF
RECOMMENDED
FINDINGS
X_ Yes
X_ Yes
X_ Yes
X_ Yes
No
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO
SUPPORT FINDINGS
The uses permitted in the AS District
support the horticultural, silvicultural,
and agricultural uses of the AR District.
2
0
PLANNING BOARD IV
FINDINGS �P°
Yes No
No The site is located in the AR Agricultural Yes No
Residential Area designated by the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan
No The area is adequate to accommodate an Yes No
individual well and septic system.
No The proposed zoning lot is 2.8 acres. Yes No
d
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 025
AND
PLANNING BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
Z -3 -99 ERNIE MCBROOM
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
Applications
Vicinity and Site Maps
General Information Memorandum
Certificate of Mailing
Staff Findings
Action Agenda
Item No.
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) u
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jim Hinkley, X2584
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181.
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane 336 227 -2031
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed Zoning Atlas amendment requested by
Ernie McBroom for his property in Cedar Grove Township. -
BACKGROUND:
Request That a 10.01 -acre tract be rezoned from AR Agricultural- Residential to AS
Agricultural Service.
Location The proposed zoning lot is located at 750± Sawmill Road West (Tax Map No.
2.34..51), approximately 4,600 feet east of NC 86 and 3,000 feet west of Wilkerson Road (SR
1507).
Existing: The existing property is a 10.01 a flag lot with access on the south side of Sawmill
Road. The tract currently is fallow cropland.
Zoning:
• The property and all surrounding properties lie within Orange County's jurisdiction and
are zoned AR(LITTLE -PW) Agricultural - Residential (Little River Protected Watershed)
in accordance with the adopted Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
•. The minimum lot size is two acres.
• Permitted uses include agricultural activities, single family dwellings, duplexes on
026 twice the minimum lot size, and those uses which are supportive of residential
development such as fire stations, churches, utilities, etc.
Proposed: The proposed zoning lot meets the 2 -acre minimum lot size. A 12 percent (12 %)
impervious surface limitation for non - residential uses in the watershed will be imposed. BMP (Best
Management Practices) will not be allowed to satisfy watershed requirements.
• The proposed zoning for the 10.01a site is AS(LITTLE -PW) Agricultural Service (Little
River Protected Watershed).
• Minimum lot size is two acres.
• Permitted use includes rural non -farm, non - residential development which supports
the horticultural, silvicultural, and agricultural uses of AR districts.
• Public Hearing August 23, 1999: No decision is made on the proposed amendments by
either the Planning Board or the Board of County Commissioners at the public hearing.
• First Action: Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board has 75 days within
which to prepare and submit a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Failure
of the Planning Board to submit a recommendation within the required time shall be considered
as a favorable recommendation.
• Final Action: Board of County Commissioners to consider amendments to the Orange
County Zoning Ordinance
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Zoning Officer Recommendation
The Zoning Officer recommends approval of the rezoning.
• The request complies with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
• The proposal meets all dimensional requirements.
• Permitted uses listed for the.proposed AS district are appropriate to service the
surrounding agricultural uses. Please refer to the attached Information Memorandum.
The Administration recommends that the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment be referred to
the Planning Board for recommendations to be returned no sooner than September 21, 1999.
g:\ jim\zatlasamend\ z- 3- 99mcbroom \phabstract \8- 13- 99 \jrh
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA'
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT
Date: _27,5 iffl
TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
The-undersigned do hereby make application to change the Zoning At Las of
Orange County as hereinafter requested.
1. The property is Located on the S'ou'# _side. of S.R.a If�-
(.SAVu�u_�►1U U4V Street /Road) between I. #NC. BCo and
S.R. #W, It is known as Lot(s) 2A Block — of
Orange Ca my Tax Map 34 — CrQ&!_QFQV_e_Townahip. It has a frontage
of feet and a' depth of _feet, and contains
pquare feet or 1n.0\ acres.
2. It is desired and requested that the foregoing property be rezoned
from A'¢ -toS
.3•.. The -- foLL.awing. information has been - attached . -in _. support of the
application for changing the Zoning Atlas (�` - required on all
applications].
. *a. A fully dimensioned map at •e waste of not Less than one (1) inch
equals one— hundred (100) feat nor more than one (1) Inch equals
— twenty" 1201 Teet--ehowYtrg' -the Land ••which is proposed to be
rezoned.
*b. A Legal description of the Land proposed to be rezoned.
*e. A statement of justification addressing one or more of the
fo t lowi ng :
(1) The alleged error to the Zoning Ordinance, if any, which
would be corrected by the proposed amendment with a detailed
explanation of such error In the Zoning Atlas and detailed
reasons -how the proposed amendment will correct the error.
C 2 The changed or changing conditions, If any, in the area or
in the.,Caunty generally, which make the proposed amendment
ressonabty necessary to the promotion of the public has Lth,
safety and general welfare.
*(3) The manner in which the proposed amendment will carry out
the intent and purpose of the adopted Land Use Plan or part
thereof.
*(4) ALL other circumstances, factors and reasons which the
applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment
including, but not Limited to, documentation from service
ag- encias (e.g. firs, patios, rescue and utilities agencies)
assuring services provision capability to the development.
d. A List of atL individuate, firms or corporations owning property
adjoining or within five hundred (500) feat of the property
sought for rezoning is attached. The List is current as of
d0ete)
,I certify thatraLL information furnished in this application is accurate
to the Mast of my knowledge.
App Li cant ( s) : F —" t:� UDR �
A d d r e s s• 2too(o Ul"V - RO)hfl
Phone • T3 Z- kf Q — _
REZONING REQUEST CHECKLIST
OWNER'S NAME F-Ywit: viklJiANYN ADDRESS (oO(D 1
Current zoning 4 1k Total number of acres X0.01 Current land use.
Type of rezoning requested Proposed land use
Tax mapIIlock #Number of lots Proposed Water Supply: Public Community
Individual_�proposed Sewage Treatment: Public Community. Individual septic tank
Access onto state road # IS-biT Average daily traffic count on the state road Describe existing
critical areas: Flood prone areas Poorly drained areas
Streams Other sensitive areas
Describe land uses in: General Area-
Adjacent parcels of land.
t
REZONING REGUEST
PROPERTY OF ERNIE McBROOM
PROPERTY TO BE REZONED:
JUSTIFICATION:
Lot E, "Division of Property of Ernie McBr
shown on plat recorded in the Orange Count
in Plat Book 83 page 101.
029
1. No error alleged.
2. The closing of private landfills and the decreasing capacity of the Orange
County Landfill has increased the need for a site where landscape debris
(stumps and tree limbs) can be processed and recycled. This use is
appropriate for the rural areas of the County and would be allowed under an
AS zoning designation.
3. This rezoning would locate a use supportive of horticultural and agricultural
activities in an area convenient to the supported uses.
4. This site is located near NC 86, on a collector road, and would be readily
accessible to emergency services. No need for other public services is
anticipated given the location and limited uses allowed under this Zoning
designation.
-►
030
Z -3 -99 ERNIE MCBROOM
REZONING REQUEST - -- GENERAL AREA
1 " = 4,000' 1 N
032
.... . ......
. .........
ww nn.6Mw.•Yi...+r + w w
Z-3-99 ERNIE MCB11RXIC)OM
REZONING REQUEST--- VICINITY
1 ' = 400' 11 N
----------------------------- -- --------
.. ........... ....
.... . ......
. .........
ww nn.6Mw.•Yi...+r + w w
Z-3-99 ERNIE MCB11RXIC)OM
REZONING REQUEST--- VICINITY
1 ' = 400' 11 N
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�06F REVERE ROAD
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
y
R Q
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD
FROM: Planning and Inspections Staff
DATE: August 13, 1999
SUBJECT: Z -3 -99 ERNIE MCBROOM REZONING APPLICATION
The contents of this memorandum are about the request of Ernie McBroom to rezone
his property on Sawmill Road in Cedar Grove Township from AR Agricultural
Residential to AS Agricultural Service.
L _ --�- &I ZL! &KII
•
APPLICANT:
Ernie McBroom
OWNER: Ernie McBroom, Sr.
2606 Miller Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
LOCATION: 750± Sawmill Road (Tax Map No. 2.34..51)
PROPERTY SIZE: 10.01 acres
PROPOSED ZONING .LOT: 10.01 acres
EXISTING LAND USE: Open and wooded
SURROUNDING LAND USE IN GENERAL AREA: Wooded, open and residential
NORTH Residential, wooded, and open
WEST - Wooded and residential
SOUTH - Wooded
EAST - Wooded and open
033
034
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Two
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Agricultural- Residential
(Little River Watershed)
EXISTING ZONING: AR(LITTLE -PW) — Agricultural - Residential (Little River
Protected Watershed) zoned in accordance with the adopted
Comprehensive, Plan
REQUESTED ZONING: AS(LITTLE -P" —Agricultural Service (Little River Protected
Watershed)
AS DISTRICT DEFINITION, INTENT, AND PERMITTED USES:
Sec. 4.2.24 AGRICULTURAL SERVICE (AS) DISTRICT
DEFINITION
Commercial activities offering goods and services which support production of
agricultural products or processing of those products to make them marketable.
Examples include, but are not limited to, soil preparation, animal and farm
management, landscaping and horticultural services, specialized commercial
horticulture, specialized animal husbandry, biocide services, retail sales of farm/garden
products, supplies and equipment, equipment rental and repair service, tack shop,
farrier, blacksmith, welding shops, facilities for animal shows, animal sales and
auctions, agriculture -based clubs/meeting halls, storage and processing plants for
agricultural products including wineries and canneries.
INTENT
The purpose of the AS Agricultural Service District is to provide sites in the rural portion
of the County for rural non -farm, non - residential uses which support the horticultural,
silvacultural, and agricultural uses of the AR Agricultural - Residential districts. The AS
district is usually applied where the following conditions exist:
1. The site is within areas designated by the adopted Land Use Element of
the Comprehensive Plan as Agricultural - Residential,
2. Lot sizes for individual uses are appropriate to the method of water supply
and sewage disposal, and
3. Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned AS at any location shall not
exceed ten acres.
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Three
PERMITTED USES
Accessory Uses
P2 Botanical Gardens & Arboretums
P4 Bus Passenger Shelter
P7 Church
P10 Governmental Protective Services (Police & Fire Stations) Rescue
Squads,
Volunteer Fire Departments
P17C Stealth Telecommunication Towers - 75 Feet or Shorter'
P25 Water and Sanitary Sewer Pumping Stations
S2 Agricultural Service Uses
S3 Animal Hospitals, Veterinarians
S10 Faun Equipment and Sales
S11 Feed, Seed, Storage and Processing
S13 Greenhouses (No On premises Sales)
S14 Greenhouses (On- premises Sales)
S18 Commercial Feeder Operation
S 19A Class I Kennels
S48 Sawmills
S49 Stockyards
S50 Storage of Goods, Outdoors
The following uses are allowed with a Class A Special Use Permit.,
P11 Land Fills (Two acres or more)
P16 Public Utility Stations and Sub - stations, Switching Stations, Telephone
Exchanges, Water and Sewage Treatment Plants
PI 7B Telecommunication Towers - 200 Feet or Taller
The following uses are allowed with a Class B Special Use Permit:
P12 Land Fills (Less than Two Acres)
P17 Elevated Water Storage Tanks
PI 7A Telecommunication Towers - 199 Feet or Shorter
P22 Transmission Lines
S20 Class 11 Kennels, Riding Stables
orvs
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Four
SPECIFIC ZONING REQUIREMENTS
The AS rezoning proposal has been initiated by the owner to:
• Accommodate the establishment of an agricultural service business permitted by the Zonin
Ordinance; and
• Implement the Land Use Element of the adopted Comprehensive Plan which designates th
property as Agricultural- Residential.
The property is zoned AR. This category pertains to rural areas where prevailing activities
(agriculture, forestry) are related to the land in an appropriate location for the continuation of thes
uses. The proposed rezoning to AS, therefore, would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
For development of the subject property, the following AS requirements would apply:
• Frontage shall be a minimum of 200 feet.
• The front building setback must be a minimum of 50 feet;
• Side and rear building setbacks must be a minimum of 20 feet;
• A 75- to 100 -foot Land Use Buffer adjacent to residential uses is required, depending upon
the use proposed; and
• The maximum impervious surface shall be no more than 6 percent, including all structural
"footprints," paved and graveled driveways, aprons, and all compacted outside storage
areas.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, SCHEDULE, AND ACTION
Public Hearing
• No decision is made at this stage.
• Upon the recommendation of the Administration, the zoning atlas amendment request is
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County
Commissioners no earlier than September 21, 1999.
PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS
The application for the rezoning of the tract from AR to AS has been reviewed by Planning Staff.
Findings required by Article 20.3 Procedure for Submission and Consideration of Applications for
03
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
DATE: August 13, 1999
PAGE: Five
Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance follow:
• There was no error made with respect to the property when zoning was adopted for Cedar
Grove Township on January 1, 1994.
• The property was zoned AR in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Rezoning the property to AS would be compatible with the stipulations set forth
for an Agricultural- Residential plan category use given in the Comprehensive
Plan. The Plan would not need to be amended to accommodate AS zoning.
• Seventeen uses are permitted by right in the AS district. Three require a Class A
Special Use Permit with approval of the Board of County Commissioners, and
five require a Class B Permit with approval of the Board of Adjustment. Any of
these uses, either by right or under special conditions, could be allowed on the
proposed zoning lot. Permitted AS uses are listed above.
Uses permitted in AS not permitted in AR
• Uses Permitted by Right. Garden Center (On Premises Sales); Agricultural
Services Uses; Animal Hospitals; Veterinarians; Farm Equipment Sales; Feed
and Seed Storage and Processing; Sawmills; Stockyards.
• Uses requiring a Class A Special Use Permit. All uses requiring a Class A
SUP within an AS district are also permitted with a Class A SUP in the AR
district.
• Uses requiring a Class B Special Use Permit. All uses requiring a Class B
SUP within an AS district are also permitted with a Class B SUP in the AR
district.
g:\ jim\ zatlasamend \mcbroom\infomemo \8.3.991jrh
038
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
I, James R. Hinkley, Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Carol'na,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT:
On or about August 6, 1999, I sent by Certified Mail, postage prepaid, a Notice
of a Public Hearing to be held on August 23, 1999, at 7:30 pm in the F. Gordon
Battle Courtroom of the New County Courthouse at 106 E. Margaret Street in
Hillsborough, North Carolina, for the purpose of providing all interested citizens
an opportunity to speak for or against a proposal by Ernie McBroom to amend
the County Zoning Atlas by rezoning his 10.01 -acre property (Tax Map No.
2.34..51) on the south side of Sawmill Road (SR 1545), approximately 4,600 feet
east of the NC 86 and approximately 3,000 feet west of Wilkerson Road (SR
1507), from AR Agricultural- Residential to AS Agricultural Service. The notice
was sent to 13 owners of parcels lying within 500 feet of the McBroom property.
A list of parcels and their owners is attached..
,y�
James R. Hinkley, AICP
Zoning Officer
North Carolina
Orange County
I, Debra M. Graham, a Notary Public, for said County and
State, do hereby certify that James R Hinkley appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of
IlUllll4
l -ithe foregoing instrument.
,q
QP R
��' • °• •••« ''•,� ttess my hand and official seal, this the 6th day of August
�(OfiloaL f - rW---
o B r Notiry Public
� expires May 29, 2002.
g:\jhu\zatlasamend\mcbroom\mailcert\8-6-99\jrh
Z -3 -99 Cedar Grove Township
Atlas Amendment Proposal of Ernle McBroom
AFFECTED .PROPERTY OWNERS
withln 500 feet
Page, One of Two
Tax Map Number /Acres Property Owners
2.24..12 63.91 a Melvin Durwood Smith
1009 Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
2.24..12A 5a Audis & Nannie S. Sanderson
607 Orange Heights Loop
Hillsborough, NC 27278
2.24..12E 5a Robin D. Clark & Lisa A. Clarke
803 Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
2.34..18 <1a Eugene Breeze
512 Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
2.34..19A <1a. Mack Leonard Torain
600 Old Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
2.34..19B 0.92a Willie S. & Shirley Cates
518 Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
2.34..19C 0.46a Alphonzo & Dorothy Poteat .
524 Saw Mill Road
Cedar Grove, NC. 27231
039
ti
0410-
Page Two of Two
Tax Map Number/Acres Property Owners
2.34..19F 16.41a
2.34..19G / 5a
2.34..19M / - 10.02a
2.34..21/ 89.87a
2.34.:30 / 31.71a
2.34..31A / 28.98a
Willie L. & Rosetta L. Glover
PO Box 881
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Alfred Roy & Quetta U. Long
624 Sawmill Road
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
James & Carol Wood
5820 Quiet Acres Drive
Cedar Grove, NC 27231
Dennis Roy Walters
405 Hidden Valley Road
Wilmington, NC 28409
Benjamin Earle Bradshear, Jr.
5018 Hurdle Mills Road
Hurdle Mills, NC 27541
Nancy F. Worley
PO Box 3242
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
g:\jim\zatlasamend\mcbroom\maflcert\8-6-99\jrh
STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
PERTAINING TO
APPLICATION: Z -3 -99 ERNIE MCBROOM
BASED ON APPLICATION MATERIALS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, THE PLANNING STAFF FINDS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT
THE FOLLOWING:
PLANNING STAFF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO
The application must comply
with all requirements specified
In Article 20 - Amendments.
Those requirements Include:
20.3.2 a) Map showing affected _X—Yes No Site plan submitted at scale
property at scale of not less than of 111=100,
1' =100" nor more than 1 " =20'
20.3.2 b) Legal description of Yes No Legal Description submitted from Orange
the zoning lot County Registry Book 1158, Page 325
20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged error, NA Not applicable
If any, to be corrected by proposed
amendment
20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, If any,
NA Not applicable
which make an amendment reasonably
No changed conditions.
necessary to promote health, safety,
Yes
and the public welfare.
Yes
20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed
_X—Yes No The property lies within the bounds
amendment wig carry out the purpose
of an Agricultural - Residential area
and Intent of the Orange County
designated in the Land Use Element
Comprehensive Plan.
of the Comprehensive Plan. AS Is an
appropriate zoning classification.
PLANNING BOARD
FINDINGS
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
1
1
F--t
g:\ jim\ zadasamend\ mcbroom \stafffmdings \6 \28 \99 \jrh
'
2
ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST
AND APPLICATION CRITERIA
1.
PLANNING STAFF
►�
Ordinance Requirements
RECOMMENDED
FINDINGS
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO
SUPPORT FINDINGS
PLANNING BOARD
FINDINGS
Ordinance Requirements
Article 4.2 identifies the criteria
which will normally be used to
determine the application of a '
zoning district designation. The
applicant has applied for an AS .
Agricultural Service designation.
The criteria for that district are set
forth in Article 4.2. 11 and are as follows:
(a) The purpose of the AS District is to
_X_ Yes No
The uses permitted in the AS District
Yes No
provide sites in the rural portion of the
support the horticultural, silvicultural,
County for rural non -farm, non - residential
and agricultural uses of the AR District.
uses which support the horticultural,
silvicultural, and agricultural uses of
the AR districts.
(b) This district will usually be applied
where the following conditions exist:
1. Site is within areas designated by the adopted
_X_ Yes No
The site is located in the AR Agricultural
Yes No
Comprehensive Plan as Agricultural Residential.
Residential Area designated by the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan
2. Lot size for individual uses would be
_X_ Yes No
The area is adequate to accommodate an
Yes No
appropriate to the method of water supply
individual well and septic system.
and sewage disposal.
3. Normally, the maximum amount of land
_X_ Yes No
The proposed zoning lot is 10.01 acres.
Yes No
zoned AS at any location shall not exceed
ten acres.
g:\ jim\ zadasamend\ mcbroom \stafffmdings \6 \28 \99 \jrh
ORANGE COUNTY 043
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
PLANNING BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
Action Agenda
Item No.
PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN)
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jim Hinkley X2584
Proposed Zoning Text Amendments
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane (336)227 -2031
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed zoning text amendment requested
by Planning Staff.
BACKGROUND:
Reaues That the Zoning Ordinance text be amended to bring definitions and provisions
for Child Care Facilities into agreement with those of the State.
Existing Case Prospective child care providers face confusing language differences in the
Orange County Zoning Ordinance and respective licensing provisions of the North Carolina
General Statutes. Confusion can be generated by the unlike terminology of the provisions of the
County and State Regulations.
Zoning Ordinance language in Sections 4.3 Permitted Use Table, 6.27 Large Day Care Homes,
8.8.16 Day Care Facilities, Article 10 Off - street Parking and Loading, and Article 22 Definitions is
dissimilar to that found in Article 7, Chapter 110 of the General Statutes, Child Care Facilities, as
amended.
Representatives of the NC Child Care Commission, the state licensing agency for child care, and
staff of the Planning and Inspections Department met in Planning Offices on Wednesday, May 26,
1999, to discuss the difference in language between County and State regulations for child care.
Consensus of the group is that amending the language of the child care provisions and definitions
044
of the Zoning Ordinance would be the appropriate way to deal with this matter.
PROPOSED: To amend Article 4 Establishment of Permitted Use Table and Schedule,
Section 4.3 Permitted Use Table, Article 6, Application of Dimensional Requirements, Section 6.27
Large Day Care Homes, Article 8 Special Uses, Section 8.8.16 Day Care Facility, and Article 22
Definitions of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance to reflect language in Article 7., Chapter 110 of
the North Carolina General Statutes, Child Care Facilities, §110 -86. Definitions. The proposed
amendments are given in attached materials.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Zoning Officer recommends approval of the zoning text amendments.
• Congruity of text with State regulations is desirable to accommodate citizen understanding_ and
implementation of local zoning provisions for child care facilities.
The Administration recommends that the attached proposed zoning text amendments for child
care facilities be referred to the Planning Board for recommendations to be returned no sooner than
November 3, 1999.
g:\ jim \ztextamend \childcare\abstract \8.13.99 \jrh
045
Orange County Board of Commissioners and Planning Board
PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE ORANGE
COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE FOR CHILD CARE FACILITIES'
Public Hearing Date: August 23,1999
Planning Staff Request: That the text of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance
text be amended to reflect definitions and provisions for Child Care in Article 7.
Chapter 110 of the North Carolina General Statutes §110 -86.
The following proposed zoning text amendments update the text of the Zoning
Ordinance and bring it into line with terminology currently in use by the State.
Existing zoning text is printed in italics.
New text looks like this.
NOTE: Proposed amendments quote language in Article 7. Chapter 110
of the NC General Statutes, Child Care Facilities, §110 -86. Definitions.
The following changes are recommended for Article 22. Definitions of the Zoning
Ordinance.
ARTICLE 22
DEFINITIONS
Replace with:
1 Attachment to Public Hearing (August 23, 1999) Action Agenda Item Abstract
for Proposed Zoning Text Amendments: Child Care Facilities
W
Child Care. A program or arrangement where three or more
children less than 13 years old, who do not reside where the care is
provided, receive care on a regular basis of at least once per week
for more than four hours but less than 24 hours per day from
persons other than their guardians or full -time custodians, or from
persons not related to them by birth, marriage, or adoption. Child
care does not include the following:
a. Arrangements operated in the home of any child receiving
care if all the children in care are related to each other or no
more than two additional children are in care;
b. Recreational programs operated for less than four
consecutive months in a year;
C. Specialized activities or instruction such as athletics, dance,
art, music lessons, horseback riding, gymnastics, or
organized clubs for children, such as Boy Scouts, Girl,
Scouts, 4H groups, or boys and girls clubs;
d. Drop -in or short-term care provided while parents participate
in activities that are not employment related and where the
parents are on the premises or otherwise easily accessible,
such as drop -in or short-term care provided in health spas,
bowling alleys, shopping malls, resort hotels, or churches;
e. Public schools;
f. Nonpublic schools described in Part 2 of Article 39 of
Chapter 115C of the North Carolina Statutes that are
accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools and that operate a child care facility as defined
under Child Care Facility of for less than six and one -half
hours per day either on or off the school site;
g. Bible schools conducted during vacation periods;
h. Care provided by facilities licensed under Article 2 of
Chapter 122C of the NC General Statutes;
L Cooperative arrangements among parents to provide care
for their own children as a convenience rather than for
employment; and
047
j. Any child care program or arrangement consisting of two or
more separate components, each of which operates for four
hours or less per day with different children attending each
component.
MM___MIMI
=
- -
- �- WTI
Replace with:
Child Care Facility. Includes child care centers, family child care
homes, and any other child care arrangement not excluded by
G.S.110- 86(2), that provides child care, regardless of the time of
day, wherever operated, and whether or not operated for profit.
a. A child care center is an arrangement where, at any one
time, there are three or more pre - school children or nine or
more school -age children receiving child care.
b. A family child care home is a child care arrangement located
in a residence where, at any one time, more than two
children, but fewer than nine children, receive child care.
Modify:
r "
•
Amended Center for 3 -12 Children Located in a
M Residence - A Day Ca ye child care Pfacility located on a public
publicly state maintained road, which provides 4ay child care for
than five (5) three (3) but , no
more than twelve (12) children, within a residence.
The following changes are recommended for Article 8. Special Uses of the
Zoning Ordinance.
8.8.16 Child Care Center Facility
�.. .�_ •iu- •�
Amended In addition to the information required by Articles 8.2 and 8.8,
1/.3/89 the following shall be submitted as part of the application:
a) Evidence that the minimum requirements to qualify for a
State of North Carolina day can: facility license have been
satisfied.
b) A floor plan of the proposed play -child can: facility, showing
the use and dimensions of each room and the location of
entrances and exits.
8.8.16.2 Standards of Evaluation
amended The following standards shall be used in deciding
113189 on an application for the use:
a) The day care facility is to be located in an area which is free
from conditions dangerous to the physical and moral welfare
of the children.
b) The minimum requirements to qualify for a State of North
Carolina day child care facility license are satisfied. .
c) There is direct access from the property on which the 49y
child care facility is to be located to a State - maintained road
or a private road approved by Orange County.. Where direct
access is to be provided to a 4ey child care facility from a
private road, the Board of Adjustment shall require the
upgrading of the private road to a higher classification,
based on the number of homes currently served by the road
and the projected traffic to be generated by the day care
049
facility. The appropriate road classification shall be
determined according to the Orange County Subdivision
Regulations Private Road Standards.
d) Adequate access to and from the site as well as adequate
space off the road right -of -way, is provided for the safe
pick-up and discharge of children and is provided in such a
manner that traffic generated by the slay child care facility is
not disruptive to'adjacent residentially developed properties.
e) Fencing and/or screening is to be provided which assures
the protection of the children receiving slay child care,
protects adjacent residentially developed properties from
trespass, effectively screens the view of any outdoor play
area, and reduces noise associated with the operation of the
slay child cane facility. Each slay child care facility approved
by the Board of Adjustment shall be reviewed annually by
the Zoning Officer to assure compliance with the standards
of evaluation for such facilities and any conditions attached
to the application by the Board of Adjustment. Any change
in the operation of the facility which deviates from the
original standards and conditions will constitute a
modification and will require the approval of the Board of
Adjustment. In determining whether a change in the
operation of the facility has occurred, the Zoning Officer
shall be guided by the procedures and criteria contained in
Article 8.7 and Article 8.8.16.2.
The following changes are recommended for Article 6. Applications of
Dimensional Requirements.
• -n -Located
~-f z - .��_.s��...�s
Amended :' t
6.27.1 Site Plan Requimments
In addition to the information required by Article 14. 2, the following
shall be submitted as part of an application for site plan approval.
050
b)a) A floor plan of the proposed laF&e day rsam home facility,
showing the use and dimensions of each room and the
location of entrances and exits.
6.27.2 Standards For Evaluation
The following standards shall be used in deciding on an application
for site plan approval for the use:
a) The center for 3 -12 children located
in a residence is to be located in an area which is free from
conditions dangerous to the physical and moral welfare of
the children.
b) The minimum requirements of qualify for a State of North
Carolina IaFye day rmem heme,child care license are
satisfied.
c) There is direct frontage and access on a public state
maintained road.
d) Adequate access to and from the site as well as adequate
space off the road right -of -way, is provided for the safe
pick -Op and discharge of children and is provided in such a
manner that traffic generated by the large day care home is
not disruptive to adjacent residentially developed properties.
e) The site plan shall show how the facilities will be screened
from adjacent properties. A Type A 30 foot buffer shall be
provided around the residential facility
and play area. These buffers will effectively screen the view
of any outdoor play area, and reduce noise associated with
the day child care.
fl Each iaFge day raFe hGme residential facility is required to
provide at least 75 square feet of fenced outdoor play space
for every child in care. This space may not be located in a
required buffer or in an area which is used or reserved for
use as a sewage disposal nitrification field.
Fencing is to be provided around the outdoor space which
assures the protection of the children receiving slay child
care and protects adjacent residentially developed
properties from trespass.
051
6.27.3 Center for 3 -12 Children Located in
Amended a Residence - Application Procedure
1/6/92
No large day care home may be operated in a residence except as
permitted under this Ordinance and only after approval has been
issued by the Zoning Officer.
An application for a IaFge day raFe he we center for 3 -12 children
located in a residence shall be filed with the Zoning Officer and
shall be submitted on forms provided by the Zoning Officer. Such
forms shall be prepared so that when completed a full and accurate
description of the proposed use, including its location, appearance,
and operational characteristics are disclosed.
In addition to the application, the applicant is required to, submit a
site plan of the property on which the IaFge day GaFe home facility is
to be located. The site plan shall show the location of the
residence in which the facility is to be located
in relation to existing property lines and adjacent homes, the
location, number, and means of access to required off-street
parking areas, and the location and type of required landscaping
and/or screening.
Upon a determination that the application is complete, the Zoning
Officer shall cause a review of the application to be made. The
review shall determineff the proposed IaFge day GaFe home facility
conforms with all requirements of this Ordinance. Based on the
review, the application will be approved, approved with conditions,
or denied.
If conditions are attached to the approval, they may address
deficiencies in meeting speck Ordinance requirements or they
may address specific impacts which result from the operation of the
large day care home. In the latter case, the conditions may
include, but not be limited to, limitations on the hours of operation,
location of play area, the number of vehicles to be parked on the
premises, and the location of a storage area or parking on the
property. In addition, the Zoning Officer may require greater
setbacks and/or additional landscaping or screening to adequately
screen the IaFge day GaFe heme facility from adjoining properties.
If the application is approved, either with or without conditions, the
Zoning Officer shall send the applicant a letter informing him of the
approval and of the requirements of the Ordinance that apply to the
. center for 3 -12 children located in a
052
residence. The letter must be signed by the applicant to indicate
his/her willingness to operate the .facility in
conformance with the requirements and conditions set forth in the
letter. Each letter shall be kept on file by the Zoning Officer and
shall constitute the approval for the
gees facility.
If the application is denied, the Zoning Officer shall notify the
applicant of the denial and shall state the reasons for denial in
writing. The applicant may appeal the decision of the Zoning
Officer to the Board of Adjustment as set forth in Article 21 of this
Ordinance.
Each IaFge day GaFe higme center for 3 -12 children located in a
residence approved by the Zoning GffiGe shall be reviewed
annually by MwAe the Zoning Officer to assure compliance with
the standards of evaluation for such facilities. The Zoning Officer is
authorized to approve minor changes in the approved IaFge -day
daFe home facility provided the changes are in harmony with
action of the original approval and provided any change in the
operation complies with the standards of evaluation as specified in
Section 6.27.2 above. Any change in.the operation of the klTe
facility that does not comply with the standards for
evaluation as specked in Section 6.27.2 above will constitute a
modification and require the approval of the Board of Adjustment
under the provisions of Article 8 of this ordinance.
The following changes are recommended for Article 10. Off - street Parking and
Loading.
Each use shall provide the following off - street parking.
USE
REQUIREMENTS
H -1 Day Child Care Facilities, Day Numege s
H -9a Center for 3 -12 Children Located in a
Residence
g: ljim\ ztextamend \childcare\abstractattach \8.13.99 \jrh
MINIMUM SPACE
One space per staff
and one space per five
students: children.
One space per staff
member and one per
five children.
Q43, 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS & PLANNING BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
Agenda Abstract
Item #
SUBJECT: Text Amendments to Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: X Yes No
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes X No
ATTACHMENT (S):. INFORMATION CONTACT:
Text of proposed amendments Robert P. Davis, Planner II Ext. 2595
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane 227 -2031
Chapel Hill 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizens' comments on proposed Text Amendments to the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations and to the Zoning Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
Request
Revise the time limitation sections of the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance.
Amend the appeal procedures for Minor Subdivisions.
Applicability:
Subdivision Regulations: These regulations shall govern each and every subdivision or re- subdivision
of land within Orange County outside the subdivision jurisdiction of any incorporated municipality in
the County.
Zoning Ordinance: The entirety of Orange County lying outside of the municipalities therein and their
extra - territorial jurisdictions, if any.
Existing Text and Proposed Changes:
See attached document for existing text.
Proposed Changes:
• Revises the time constraints in both the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance.
• Amend the appeal procedures for Minor Subdivisions.
G: /roberdtextamed.doc/aug99 /rpd
w
C"54 2
Process. Schedule and Action
• First Action: Public Hearing'.
• Second Action: Planning Board to consider Amendments
• Third Action: County Commissioners to consider Amendments
RECOMMENDATION(S): Planning Staff: Approval of the proposed amendments as proposed
in the attached document
Administration: Proposed amendments be referred to the Planning
Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of
Commissioners no sooner than November 2, 1999.
Note: Amendments to the Subdivision Regulations and the Zoning Ordinance are legislative
decisions (legislative public hearing rules apply).
G: /roberdtextamed. doe/aug99 /rpd
055
Text Amendments to the Subdivision Regulations Regarding Time Limitations
S#ikeett text indicates deletions.
Bold text indicates proposed changes.
Proposed New Language: Amend CONTENTS by re- writing Section I to read Purpose, Authority,
Jurisdiction, Private Property Rights and Applications to be Processed Expeditiously and
inserting a new section 1 — E. Applications to be Processed Expeditiously on page 2 of the
Subdivision Regulations for Orange County, NC to read as follows:
Recognizing that inordinate delays in acting upon appeals or applications may impose
unnecessary costs on the appellant or applicant, the county shall make every reasonable
effort to process appeals and permit applications as expeditiously as possible, consistent
with the need to ensure that all development conforms to the requirements of this chapter.
(page 9 — Subdivision Regulations) Determination of Classification
Section III -13-1 (fifth paragraph)
made, the subdivisieR. All abish appeals FRust be
The Planning Department's determination of classification may 'be
appealed by filing a major subdivision request and following requirements in Section 111 -13
entitled Approval Procedures for Major Subdivisions.
Mill
(page 9 Subdivision Regulations) Concept Plan Submission
Section III -C -1 (fourth paragraph)
(page 1.1 — Subdivision Regulations) Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -C -3 (fourth paragraph)
Wrobedcombtendoc/augWrpd
056 2
(page 12 — Subdivision Regulations) Appeal Procedures
Section III -C -5 (first and second paragraphs)
i�aw . ..... .. ....' �_-.. �. .. - .'.rte........., ...� - .rr.._- ..._.. _.._... -- r. -.__�. _.. ..._ .._... -��.. �.. ... ---• •.7
The Planning Department's decision regarding a minor subdivision application may be
appealed by filing a major subdivision request and following requirements in Section III -D
entitled Approval Procedures for Major Subdivisions.
(page 14 — Subdivision Regulations) Neighborhood Information Meeting
Section III -D -1.d (first paragraph- second sentence)
The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) shall be held
applieatien, and netises a minimum of 14 days prior to the Planning Board meeting at which the
concept plan is scheduled to be heard. Notices of the NIM shall be mailed by first class mail at
least ten (10) days prior to the date of the meeting.
(page 14 — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Department Review Procedures
Section III -D -1-e (first paragraph)
The Planning Department shall submit to the
Planning Board its recommendation, including a written analysis of the Concept Plan; its general
compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and other applicable
codes and ordinances, and the comments of neighboring property owners expressed at the
Neighborhood Information Meeting.
(page 14a — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Board Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -D -1 -f (fourth paragraph)
.��M`tTii�i��
"
=ii'�i'."�" ^._S77Ii�tfIJYi1. -. "
130
Wr •
0101.0 .100
Hi 0.0,
(page 14 — Subdivision Regulations) Neighborhood Information Meeting
Section III -D -1.d (first paragraph- second sentence)
The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) shall be held
applieatien, and netises a minimum of 14 days prior to the Planning Board meeting at which the
concept plan is scheduled to be heard. Notices of the NIM shall be mailed by first class mail at
least ten (10) days prior to the date of the meeting.
(page 14 — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Department Review Procedures
Section III -D -1-e (first paragraph)
The Planning Department shall submit to the
Planning Board its recommendation, including a written analysis of the Concept Plan; its general
compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and other applicable
codes and ordinances, and the comments of neighboring property owners expressed at the
Neighborhood Information Meeting.
(page 14a — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Board Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -D -1 -f (fourth paragraph)
.��M`tTii�i��
"
=ii'�i'."�" ^._S77Ii�tfIJYi1. -. "
- =ft
(page 14a — Subdivision Regulations) Action Subsequent to Approval
Section III -D -1 -g (third paragraph)
From the date of approval of the Concept Plan Development Options by the Planning Board, the
applicant shall have ene (1) yeaf two (2) years in which to prepare and file an application for
G _ /tuber /combtext. doc/aug99 /rpd
057 3
Preliminary Plat approval. If a Preliminary Plat for subdivision has not been submitted within the
specified time limit, the Concept Plan Development Options shall become null and void.
(page 14a — Subdivision Regulations) Appeal Procedures
III -D -1 -h (first paragraph)
The decision of the Planning Board regarding Concept Plan Development Options may be appealed
to the Board of Commissioners. Any appeal. shall be filed within 3 days after the date of the
Planning Board's decision. if appealel,
M1 Ge;�miss`enei;s. The Board of Commissioners shall have
final approval authority, and where applicable, all Concept Plan Development Options shall contain
information and /or conditions approved by the Board of Commissioners.
(page 14c— Subdivision Regulations) Planning Delartment Review Procedures
Section III -D -2 -b (second paragraph)
, The Planning Department shall submit to the Planning
Board a written analysis of the Concept Plan and its recommendation. if the Planning Dente=
(page 14d — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Board Review and Approval Procedures
Section 111 -D -2 -c (third paragraph)
The Planning 13eaFd shall take aetien 9A 010 ff9pesal withiR feFty fiye (45) days ef the meetiFig at
(page 14d — Subdivision Regulations) Action Subseguent to Approval
Section 111 -D -2 -d (second paragraph)
From the date of approval of the Concept Plan by the Planning Board, the applicant shall have efle
(4) ye8F two 12) years in which to prepare and file an application for Preliminary Plat approval. If a
Preliminary Plat for the subdivision has not been submitted within the specified time limit, the
Concept Plan shall become null and void.
(page 14d — Subdivision Regulations) Appeal Procedures
Section III -D -2-e (first paragraph)
The decision of the Planning Board regarding a Concept Plan may be appealed to the Board of
Commissioners. Any appeal shall be filed within 3 days after the date of the Planning Board's
decision. # appealed,
The Board of Commissioners shall have final approval authority, and,
where applicable, all Concept Plans shall contain information and /or conditions approved by the
Board of Commissioners.
G: /rober /combtext.doc/au999 /rpd
058 4
(page 18 — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Department Review Procedures
Section III -D -3 -b (fifth paragraph)
Upon receipt of the comments and recommendations from review officers and agencies, the Planning
Department shall submit to the Planning Board a written analysis of the application and its
recommendation.
(page 18 — Subdivision Regulations) Planning Board Review Procedures
Section III -D -3-c (third paragraph)
The Plaming I39aFd Shall PF9PaF9 hS. Fe8emmeRdatiens within feFty Aye (46) days ef the Fneeting at
(page 19 — Subdivision Regulations) Board of Commissioners Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -D -3 -d (first paragraph)
(page 19 -20 — Subdivision Regulations) Board of Commissioners Review and Approval Procedures
Section Ili -D -3-d (fourth paragraph)
The i3eaFd ef Ge rs shall take aetieR es the pFepeGal WithiR feky AY8 (45) days ef the siese
(page 24a — Subdivision Regulations) Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -D-4 -b third paragraph — second sentence) .
If the Planning Department approves the application with conditions or denies the application, the
reasons for such decision shall be stated in writing to the applicant. withiR ten (49) days aft8F said
deeks-en is made,
(page 24a — Subdivision Regulations) Review and Approval Procedures
Section III -D-4 -b (fourth paragraph)
The PIaRF:iiR@ DepaAF�6M shall take aefieR within " #ve (45) days ef the date ef aseeptaRee 0 the
GJrober /combtext.doc/aug99 /r¢d
059
5
Page 24b Subdivision Regulations) Appeal Procedures
Section III -D -5 (first and second paragraph)
The decision of the Planning Department regarding a Major Subdivision Final Plat application may
be appealed to the Board of Commissioners. If appealed, the application sl" may be placed on the
next regular meeting agenda of the Board of Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners shall
have final approval authority, and where applicable, all Final Plats shall contain information and /or
conditions approved by the Board of Commissioners.
The Board of Commissioners in all such appeals shall make findings of fact in support of its decision.
The applicant shall be notified, in writing, of the Board of Commissioners' decision. within teR (4 0)
(page 79 - Subdivision Regulations) Action Subsequent to the Date of Public Hearing
Section VII -D-4 (third paragraph)
R-eaud- ;-4 GeFnFn196i9ReFs within e (75) days AeF sursh amen'dmeAts have beeR
Text Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Regarding Time Limitations
StFiket#reug + text indicates deletion.
Bold text indicates proposed wording.
Proposed New Language: Amend DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS in the Orange County Zoning
Ordinance by adding Section 1.6 entitled Applications to be Processed Expeditiously, and
inserting under GENERAL PROVISIONS a new section 1.6 Applications to be Processed
Expeditiously on page 1 -2 with the following language:
Recognizing that inordinate delays in acting upon appeals or applications may impose
unnecessary costs on the appellant or applicant, the county shall make every reasonable
effort to process appeals and permit applications as expeditiously as possible,
consistent with the need to ensure that all development conforms to the requirements of
this chapter.
(page 2 -11 - Zoning Ordinance) Board of Adjustment Administration
Section 2.3.3.7 (eighth and ninth paragraphs)
The Board shall act on all applications before it. , with emeeptieR ef appeal ef a St8p MA GFdeF,
The Board shall act on any appeal of a Stop Work Order issued by the Zoning Officer
Appeal. at its next regularly scheduled meeting.
GJrober /combtextdoc/aug99 /rpd
060
C
(page 3 -1 —Zoning Ordinance) Maintenance Responsibility
Section 3.5
The Zoning Officer shall be responsible for entering amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas. S A
eFitAes shall be made within thFee weFking days ef the date ef passage ef sweh amendments,
(Appendix B— Zoning Ordinance (EDD Design Manual)) Approval Procedures /Site Plan Requirements
Section 6.29.3
E. Development Review Meeting
The Development Review Meeting will take place on the scheduled date at 3.99 P:FA- in
Conference Room #1 of the Planning and Agricultural building.
(page 8-4 — Zoning Ordinance) Zoning Officer Prepares Analysis and Recommendation
Section 8.4.3 (first and second paragraphs)
, The Zoning
Officer shall cause an analysis to be made of the application by qualified representatives of the
County and such other agencies or officials as _ appear appropriate in the Comprehensive Plan,
zoning, subdivision, soil erosion and sedimentation, and health regulations, and, based upon that
analysis,, prepare a recommendation for consideration by, In the case of a Class A, Special Uses, the
Planning Board and Board of County Commissioners and, in the Case of Class B Special Uses, the
Board of Adjustment.
(page 84— Zoning Ordinance) Recommendation Submitted to Planning Board or Board of Adjustment
Section 8.4.4
The Zoning Officer shall submit the analysis and recommendation to the &Glt Feg laF ^RaabAg of the
Planning Board, in the case of Class A, Special Uses, or the Board of Adjustment, in the case of the
Class B,-Special Uses,
(page 8 -5 — Zoning Ordinance) Planning Board Action on Class A Special Uses
Section 8.4.6 (first and second paragraphs)
The Planning Board,
Feeemmendatien is shall prepare and submit for the Board of County Commissioners a
recommendation concerning the disposition of the application.
(page 8 -6 — Zoning Ordinance) Action Subsequent to the Board Action
Section 8.5 (first paragraph)
The Zoning Officer shall within cause notice of the disposition of the application to be
sent by certified mail to the applicant and a copy of the decision to be filed in the office of the Zoning
Officer.
G:/mber /combtext.docJaug99 /rpd
061 7
(page 20 -2 - Zoning Ordinance) Zoning Officer Prepares Analysis and Recommendation
Section 20.3.3
The Zoning Officer shall, ,
cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis, prepare a
recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.
siAy (60) days. The 39 day pFeyisien shall net apply )AS fGF ameRdmei:it te the Zening
Page 20 -3 — Zoning Ordinance) Referral of Amendment Application to Planning Board
Section 20.4
The Zoning Officer shall submit any application for amendment to the Zoning Atlas to the Planning
Board for consideration and recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. at the
(page 20-4 - Zoning Ordinance) Action Subseguent to the Date of Public Hearing
Section 20.7.2 (second, third and fourth paragraphs)
The Planning Board shall after the date of the public hearing prepare and
submit for the Board of County Commissioners a recommendation concerning the disposition of any
application submitted by the public:
Amendments initiated by Orange County shall not be subject to time limitations other than those
specified by the Board of County Commissioners during the public hearing process.
The Board of County Commissioners shall not consider enactment of the proposed amendment
sixty (69) days a#eF the fiFst date ef the publie heaFiRg 9 until the Planning Board makes this its
recommendation. , whisheyeF eemes fi In making its decision, the Board of Commissioners shall
consider all relevant evidence presented at the joint public hearing and any new evidence which was
considered by the Planning Board in making its recommendation.
GJrober /combtext.doc/aug99 /rpd
062
ORANGE COUNTY 063
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Orange County Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments
Section IV -13-10 Flexible Development
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Existing Ordinance Provisions with
Proposed Amendments and Staff Notes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Lincoln - Extension 2583
Craig Benedict - Extension 2592
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane (336)227 -2031
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on proposed amendments to the Orange County SubdNision
Regulations , Section IV -B-10 . These proposed amendments were not presented at the May 24, 1999, Public
Hearing.
BACKGROUND:
Request: Amendments to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations, Section IV -B -10 (Flexible
Development), D.1 Estate Lot Option and D.3 Cluster Option (Conservation /Cluster Option) propose
changes to: • provide incentives for developers to use the estate lot option and
• clarify language pertaining to the transfer of density within a cluster.
Proposed revisions to Section IV -13-10, D.1 Estate Lot Option address comments from the May 24,
1999. Public Hearing at which proposed changes to flexible development provisions were heard.
Location: The amendments, if adopted, will apply to the entirety of Orange County lying outside of
the Rural Buffer and outside the municipalities and their extra - territorial jurisdictions, if any.
Existing and Proposed Conditions
Existing: • None of 31 major subdivision concept plan applications accepted by the
Planning Department from July 1, 1996, the effective date for flexible development provisions,
through June, 1999, has used the estate lot option of flexible development
• Language in Section IV -13-10, D.3 Cluster Option (conservation/cluster) allows
transfer of density within the subdivided tract in a cluster development and does not make
clear that such transfers of density may not increase the allowable density within a protected
watershed.
g:l txtamend \flexdev\phaugab.doc\&12 -99Ud
0,64
Proposed: Proposed amendments:
• Reduce minimum lot size from 4.0 acres to 3.0 acres with average lot size of 3.5 acres;
• Provide a 150 ft. buffer along state maintained roads adjacent to subdivision
boundaries;
• Restrict lot access to internal subdivision roads; and
• Clarify that any transfer of density within a cluster development may not increase
density allowed by the zoning ordinance within protected watersheds and their critical
areas.
An attached document giving existing ordinance language and proposed amendments contains staff
annotation for each proposed amendment.
Development Process. Schedule. and Action
• Public Hearing August 23, 1999: No decision is made on the proposed amendments by
either the Planning Board or the Board of County Commissioners at the public hearing.
• First Action: Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board has 75 days within
which to prepare and submit a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
Failure of the Planning Board to submit a recommendation within the required time shall be
considered as a favorable recommendation.
• Final Action: Board of Commissioners to consider amendments to the Orange County
Zoning Ordinance.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Planning Staff Recommendation: Approval of the proposed
amendments as given in the attached document.
Administration Recommendation: Proposed amendments be referred to the Planning
Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than
September 7, 1999.
Note: Amendments to the subdivision regulations are legislative decisions (legislative
public hearing rules apply).
n• \4v4arnen�i \Auvrle�ilnhaunah AnAR- 19_QQX -I
065-
SECTION IV -13-10 FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT
(Amendments proposed by the Planning Board are highlighted in bold underlined;
deletions proposed by the Planning Board are shown in= s#fikethr-ewjh print. Additional
amendments proposed by the Planning staff are highlighted in bold italic print;
deletions are noted by print. Amendments presented at the
May 24, 1999, Public Hearing are shown in (parentheses).
066
067
D.1 Estate Lot Option
For lots created as part of an estate lot development, the following standards apply:
Each estate lot shall have a minimum lot size of at least MUF (ly three (3) acres
with an average lot size of three and one -half (3.5) acres for all lots.
STAFF NOTE:
THIS AMENDMENT AND THE LAST TWO PROPOSED CHANGES IN SECTION D.1 ARE PROPOSED IN
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MADE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AS INCENTIVES TO USE THE ESTATE
OPTION IN APPROPRIATE AREAS OF THE COUNTY. COMMENTS WERE THAT THE ESTATE OPTION
IS TOO RESTRICTIVE AND OFFERS NO REASON FOR A DEVELOPER TO USE IT.
For each estate lot, a building envelope (buildable area) shall be defined of
sufficient size to accommodate a single- family detached dwelling and customary
accessory uses, including, but not limited to, storage buildings and garages,
patios and decks, lawns, and driveways.
• The building envelope of an estate lot may not exceed fifty percent (50 %) of the
total lot area and shall not include designated Primary and /or Secondary
Conservation Areas.
• Only the area outside of the building envelope of an estate lot may be counted
toward meeting the minimum open space requirement. (The open space area
shall be contiguous to open space designated on the adjacent lot(s) and
shall not include required front yard and side yard setbacks unless the
front or side yard contains significant primary or secondary conservation
areas.
STAFF NOTE:
THIS AMENDMENT WAS PRESENTED AT THE MAY 24, 1999.
• A septic system and /or well site may be located outside of a building (enveh4m)
{lot area) provided it does not occupy more than (ha{#)- {one quarter) of the
conservation area nor any part of a Primary Conservation Area.
STAFF NOTE:
THIS AMENDMENT WAS PRESENTED AT THE MAY 24, 1999, PUBLIC HEARING
• Each building envelope on an estate lot shall adhere to the following spacing
standards:
g:l bdamendlflexdev laugamend.doc\8- 12 -99Ud
ti
Proposed Amendments to the
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ORANGE COUNTY, N. C.
SECTION IV -13-10 FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT
Section D DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
DA Estate Lot Option
Building Envelope Spacing Standards for Estate Lots
Minimum spacing between building envelopes on adjacent lots
88 (100) feet
Minimum spacing between building envelope and subdivision
.75 (150 )feet
boundary or off -site public street right -of -way
Minimum spacing between building envelope and on -site public
40- (50) feet
or private street right-of-way
Minimum spacing between building envelope and any other lot
.28 (50) feet
line
Minimum spacing between building envelope and wetlands or.
100 feet
water bodies (lakes, ponds, streams, etc.
STAFF NOTE:
THESE AMENDMENTS WERE PRESENTED AT THE MAY 24, 1999, PUBLIC HERING.
• Provided the arrangement, design, and shape of estate lots is such that lots
provide satisfactory and desirable sites for building; contribute to the preservation.
of designated Primary and /or Secondary Conservation Areas; provide convenient
access for emergency service vehicles; and satisfy all building envelope spacing
standards, (estate lGile may plaifted in aeoeFdamea with fbilewing standa#49;
0 The minimum required lot frontage may be reduced to not less than 20 feet
for flag lots, and lots fronting on cul-de -sacs and "T" turnarounds.
STAFF NOTE:
THIS AMENDMENT WAS HEARD AT THE MAY 24, 1999, PUBLIC HEARING.
• Estate lots shall be restricted against further subdivision through deed restrictions
and /or permanent conservation easements. Primary and Secondary
Conservation Areas located outside building envelopes shall be restricted against
further development through conservation easements and /or deed restrictions.
Estate lot subdivision road(s) shall be designed to provide internal access
to all lots in the subdivision. Private driveways shall not have access to
existing state maintained roads.
g:% bdamendlflexdevlaugamend .doc%- 12 -99Ud
069
Proposed Amendments to the
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ORANGE COUNTY, N. C.
SECTION IV -13-10 FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT
Section D DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
D.1 Estate Lot Option
A 150 foot buffer shall be provided along the frontage of all existing state
maintained roads adjacent to the subdivision boundaries. in areas of
dense mature forests existing vegetation may be used to fulfill the buffer
requirements. If additional planting is required, new plant materials that
satisfy the buffer requirements of Article IV -B -8 -e shall be installed and
maintained in accordance with provisions of Article IV- B -8 -f.
STAFF NOTE:
THESE AMENDMENTS ARE PROPOSED IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE MAY 24, 1999,
PUBLIC HEARING. COMMENTS WERE THAT THE ESTATE OPTION WILL NOT BE USED BECAUSE
THE 4.0 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WITH 50% OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT IS TOO RESTRICTIVE
AND OFFERS NO INCENTIVE TO DEVELOP LAND USING THAT OPTION.
WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 3.0 ACRES, THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEMS WITH LOCATING
SUITABLE SOILS ON EACH LOT FOR A CONVENTIONAL SEPTIC SYSTEM AND REPAIR AREA.
REQUIRED BUFFERS ADDRESS THE APPEARANCE OF THE SUBDIVISION WITH RESPECT TO
MAINTAINING RURAL CHARACTER ALONG COUNTY ROADS
g:l bdamend lflexdevlaugamend.doc\8- 12 -99Ud
070
071
Proposed Amendments to the
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ORANGE COUNTY, N. C.
SECTION IV -13-10 FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT
Section D DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
(D.2 Conservation- Cluster Option)
A (conservation)- cluster subdivision is one in which.building lots are grouped together
through a transfer of allowable density within the subdivided tract provided the transfer
of density within the subdivision does not increase the average density in any
zoning district including overlay districts. Smaller lots than those required in
conventional subdivisions are permitted, provided such lots and subdivisions are
developed in accordance with the following standards:
STAFF NOTE:
THE AMENDMENT 1S NECESSARY TO PREVENT TRANSFER OF DENSITY FROM A MORE DENSLY
ZONED AREA (EG AN AREA NOT IN A PROTECTED WATERSHED) TO A LESS DENSLY ZONED AREA
(EG THE CRITICAL AREA OR BALANCE OF A PROTECTED WATERSHED).
g: \bctamend lflexdevlaugamend.doc\8- 12 -99Ud
ol* 2
August 23, 1999
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Orange County Planning Board
Re: Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Regulations (Agenda Items 2b and 3a)
Dear Commissioners and Planning Board Members:
I am submitting this testimony on the proposed amendments referenced above as a former
Planning Staff member with 12 years of experience administering the Orange County
development ordinances. I am an Orange County taxpayer; however, I do not own
property that is subject to the regulations. Furthermore, I do not have plans at this time to
provide any consulting services for projects submitted to Orange County for review. My
point is that I don't stand to gain anything personally or professionally if the proposed
amendments are not approved.
Simply stated, I remain committed to land use planning in Orange County. I care about
the role of Orange County Government in its service to the residents and to others who
choose to start a business or build houses here. For that reason, I spent one -third of my
life working for the County reviewing proposed developments for compliance with the
adopted regulations. As most of you know, part of my job was to help you, the governing
and advisory boards, craft development ordinances with the intent of protecting resources
while allowing development consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Some parts of the ordinances are considered innovative and have been used as models by
other jurisdictions. Other sections are fairly standard, while some provisions need
updating. I can't say that I agree with every requirement contained in the Zoning
Ordinance and Sub Regs; however, the one single aspect of the regulations that insures
complete applications will be processed equally in an unbiased and timely manner is the
time frames established for each step from initial submittal to final approval or appeal.
The ordinances typically are amended when a need is identified. I don't have any
information on the genesis of this particular recommendation to remove all time frames.
Is there a fear that some nefarious project will slip through and get approved because a
deadline has been reached? I can say from experience that this scenario is not likely.
9
With most types of projects, a pre - application meeting with Staff is required. The
majority of applicants tend to do their homework anyway. Within 5 days of submittal
incomplete applications are supposed to be returned with deficiencies noted. The time
frames as they currently exist are not onerous or burdensome on the Staff. In fact, the
established schedules help the Staff plan their work and publish each year the
submittal /review schedule for incoming projects. Without the designated deadlines,
projects would float between meetings, become backlogged at any point, and remain lost
in what would no longer be a development review "process" because nothing would
actually move forward. This may be the underlying (and not so subtle) reason for the
amendment, but it is certainly not a very realistic goal or one worthy of the Orange
County Planning Department.
If the time frames are removed, and the Planning Staff is asked when a project will be
reviewed, it will be somewhat difficult for a Staff person to look a landowner in the eye
and say with a straight face, "Well..., your application will move forward when we think
it's ready." For subdivisions, the concept plan review procedures were included so that
major design issues could be worked out in advance. If there is disagreement between the
Staff and the applicant on a particular issue, the applicant has a right to present his or her
idea to the Planning Board. Staff is obligated to present the facts and the analysis of how
a proposal does or does not meet ordinance standards and how a project may affect the
public health, safety and general welfare.
One of the earliest and most memorable lessons I learned from the County Attorney was
how the Constitutional right to "equal protection under the law" applied to planning
regulation. How can you as elected and appointed officials guarantee equality and
fairness if the review "process" has no time constraints allowing some projects to drift
indefinitely? I guarantee that applicants who will quickly become frustrated and confused
will want to hear the answer to that question from you.
Current Planning has a professional, thorough staff. They can handle the responsibility of
reviewing and piloting projects and amendment requests according to ordinance standards
including time schedules. Some of the newer staff members may need more time to adjust
to the pace of the review process. Once they are more familiar with the regulations and
the established schedule for review, they should have no difficulty with "the need to
ensure that all development conforms to the requirements" of the ordinances. With only
minor adjustments, the system worked at least during the last 12 years.
In summary, to approve the amendments as proposed would be a gigantic step backwards
for land use planning in Orange County, weakening the credibility of the review process.
If the amendments are approved, please consider the following comments on proposed
test:
a. Section III -B -1 and III -C -5 - Delete the proposed text. Filing a major subdivision
request can in no way be considered an appeal of the decision regarding the
classification of a subdivision;
b. Section III -D -lg and III -D -2d - Why is the effective period of a Concept Plan
doubled from 1 yeaf to 2 years?
c. Section III -D -2e - Three days is not enough time for the minutes of a Planning
Board meeting to be prepared and for the applicant to receive a letter from the
Planning Staff regarding the action of the Planning Board;
d. Section 3.5 - Why should it take longer than 3 days to enter an approved
amendment to the Zoning Atlas (with or without GIS)?
e. If the intent was to remove all time frames from the ordinances, at least one was
overlooked.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Emily C. Cameron, ASLA
200 Cobblestone Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
xc: John M. Link, Jr., County Manager
Geoffrey E. Gledhill, County Attorney
Craig Benedict, Planning Director
Karen Lincoln, Planner III
C 23 99 U5: 44p Hh I 1 l p r✓ost & Hssoc i aoes U t U "U'l 00-ro 1W.1
POST
Er
ASSOCIATES
M E M O R A N D U M
To: Alice Gordon- Chair, County Commissioners
Karen Barrow- Chair, Planning Board
Craig Benedict- Planning Director
From: Phil Post- Philip W-igr &. Acccx:iates
Subject: Changes to Subdivision Ordinance
Date: August 23, 1999
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I learned this afternoon about proposed changes in time limits for action on subdivision
proposals, time limits which have been part of the Ordinance for a number of years. I am
concerned about these changes and the fact that they have come to the attention of the
professional surveying and engineering community in Orange County on the very eve of the
Public Hearing.
I respectfully request that the Public Hearing be extended by at least two weeks; such a two -week
delay would be used by concerned members of the Orange County professional surveyors and
engineers community to meet with Craig Benedict, further understand the problems lie is trying
to resolve anti, possibly, to make some informed, constructive suggestions at a public hearing
two weeks hence.
Is a two -week delay possible'.?
Post -ir Fax Note 7671
Rate lslZ;�
pu of 6. 1
! -_
To �.I A•I- i WR t r-
From -Nc, for
Co10ept.
Co.
PhWe # Ae e . 91l
Phone M *4 —1173
r-a,x ss ! -COOL
r;�x w 413 -&SY6
401 Providence Road. Suite ?00 Chaml Hill, NC 27514 (919) 929-1173 (919) 49:3-` WO FAX (919) 493-654#3
Objectives of the Proposed Review Time Changes
Commission
• ANALYSIS - Allows thorough analysis of proposals without default approvals.
• CERTAIN MINOR SUBDIVISIONS - Discourages developers from seeking
minor subdivision approval in order to avoid major subdivision requirements.
• LESS CONTROVERSY - Increases probability that recommendations will
reach Commissioners without major controversy.
Planning Board
• IMPROVES PB /CC CONSENSUS - Eliminates recommendations going to
Board of Commissioners without. action or conditions.
• APPEALS - Specifies time limitations for filing appeals of Planning Board
decisions.
Staff Objectives
• COORDINATION - Allows all affected agencies sufficient time to review and
work with applicants to reach agreement on specific topics.
• DEFAULT APPROVALS - Eliminates default approvals on subdivisions where
agencies have yet to reach accord with developer on specific topics.
• DEADLINES Sets deadline for Informational Meetings in order to allow
sufficient time to prepare a concise staff report on proposals.
• MINOR VS MAJOR - Amends classification process to require major
subdivision review in cases of disagreement between staff and developers.
G : /robert/timeintn.doc /aug99 /rpd