HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-01-1999 - 9eORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: June 1.1999_,
Action Agenda
Item #-9-e,
SUBJECT: LAWRENCE PARK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN
ACTION BY: June 1. 1999
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X_No
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes X No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk
Resolution of Denial Extension 2582
Resolution of Approval
Application*
Vicinity Map*
4 -1 -98 Planning Board Minutes
4 -7 -99 Planning Board Minutes (Draft)
*Included with abstract for
Lawrence Park Planned Development
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough -732-8181
Durham -688-7331
Mebane -227-2031
Chapel Hill -967-9251
PURPOSE: Consideration of the Preliminary Plan for the Lawrence Park Subdivision.
BACKGROUND: Request
East West Partners Management Company, agent for Meadowmont Farms, LLC,
requests preliminary plan approval to develop:
• Seven (7) lots single family residential lots from 3.275 acres.
• Approximate lot size = 20,000 square feet.
Location
The property is located in Eno Township on the south side of US Highway 70A.
g:\ plandev \pd398 \lawpksub.abs \5- 26 -99\kl
Existing and Proposed Conditions
Existing:
• Comprehensive Plan designation: twenty year transition;
• Current zoning: Rural Residential (R -1)
• Property is not located in a protected watershed.
• Adjacent land uses are residential,
• Adjacent zoning is R -1.
Proposed:
• New public road within the subdivision with access from
US 70A;
• Public water and sewer service from Town of Hillsborough (if application for
Lawrence Park Planned Development is approved.)
Development Process. Schedule. and Action
Planning Board:
• Concept plan approved April 1, 1998 (5 to 3 vote). Minutes from the April 1,
1998, Planning Board meeting are attached.
• Preliminary plan approved April 7,1999, (unanimous vote) subject to
conditions stated in the attached Resolution of Approval.
RECOMMENDATION: Administration recommendation:
• Denial of the Preliminary Plan for Lawrence Park Subdivision.
(20,000 square foot lot size does not meet minimum lot size requirements for
R -1 district.)
THE RESOLUTION OF DENIAL IS ON PAGE 3.
• Approval of the preliminary plat (subject to conditions in Resolution of
Approval on pages 4 - 6) if, and only if both the application for Lawrence
Park Planned Development and the application for the Zoning Atlas
Amendment for the 3.275 acres for the 7 lot subdivision are approved.
g:\ plandev \pd398 \lawpksub.abs \5- 26 -99\kl
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TO DENY
LAWRENCE PARK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT
Date
Name of Subdivision
Owner /Applicant
June 1, 1999
Lawrence Park Subdivision
Meadowmont Farms, LLC
k
The Board of County Commissioners hereby denies approval of Lawrence Park
subdivision for seven (7) residential lots as shown on the preliminary plat, dated
September 28, 1998, and last revised November 13, 1998. The property which
is to be subdivided is zoned Rural Residential (R -1). The 20,000 square foot lots
in Lawrence Park subdivision do not meet minimum lot size requirements
(40,000 square feet) of the Rural Residential district.
g:\plandev\pd398\deny.res\5-26-99\kI
4
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date June 1. 1999
Name of Subdivision Lawrence Park ( R -2 Zoning District)
Owner /Applicant Meadowmont Farms, LLC
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Lawrence Park subdivision preliminary
plat, dated September 28, 1998 and last revised November 13, 1998 containing 7 lots, subject to
the fulfillment of requirements specified herein.
Branning Drive shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to
standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution
authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of
the public generally, the offer of dedication of Branning Drive. This acceptance by Orange
County of the dedication to the general public of Branning Drive shall be without maintenance
responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the owner /applicant until such time as it is
accepted for maintenance by the North Carolina Department of Transportation or some other
governmental body. Before the Final Plat of Lawrence Park Subdivision can be recorded:
A. Sewage Disposal
1. Construction plans for the public water and sewage systems shall be approved by
the Town of Hillsborough and submitted to the Planning and Inspections
Department.
2. Storm drainage facilities shall be approved by NCDOT and the Orange County
Engineer.
B. Roads and Access
1. Branning Drive shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, within a 50' right -of -way, and the construction
shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT.
•
A letter of credit or escrow agreement or other security shall be submitted to
secure construction of Branning Drive to the standards of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be
g:\ plandev \pd398 \lawpksub.roa\5- 26 -99\kl
67
prepared by a certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to
the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect
110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed
to do business in North Carolina.
The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final
Plat shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road
construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT.
2. An erosion control plan for construction of the roads shall be submitted by the
applicant to the Orange County Erosion Control Division for review and approval.
3. Approved street name signs shall be erected at the intersection of streets as
required in Section IV- B- 3 -c -12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations.
Evidence shall be submitted by the applicant that the sign is in place, or a copy of
the receipt for purchase of the sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department.
4. All lots shall access onto the new subdivision road.
C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall be installed or preserved as indicated on the approved
landscape plan, and must be inspected and approved by the Planning and
Inspections Department.
2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape
plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and
requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the
Final Plat.
D. Drainage
Locate drainage easements as required following review and approval of the
Erosion Control Plan.
2. Drainage culverts shall be sized and located as required by NCDOT and the
Orange County Erosion Control Officer.
E. Parkland
1. Cash in the amount of $2,954.00 shall be paid to Orange County as payment in
lieu of parkland dedication.
F. Miscellaneous
g:\ plandev \pd398 \lawpksub.roa\5- 26 -99\kl
P
1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with
Section V -D -2 and V -D -3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations.
2. The following easements shall be shown on the plat:
a. drainage easements as required by D.2. above.
3. Minimum building setbacks shall be as indicated on the Preliminary Plan. The
setback requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document describing
development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and
recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
G. Certifications
1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall
be notarized on the face of the Final Plat.
2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section
V -D -6 -b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner
and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document
describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final
Plat.
3. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Branning
Drive has been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been
approved.
4. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections
Department.
Signature of Applicant
Clerk to the Board
I, , accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, and
acknowledge that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat.
Applicant
g:\ plandev \pd398 \lawpksub.roa\5- 26 -99\kl
Date
0 uJ z
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
APRIL 1,1998
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Barrows (Chair), Nell Andrews, Paul Hoecke, Arnie Katz, Howard
McAdams, Renee Price, Libby Searles, Bob Strayhorn, Elizabeth Walters.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Leo Allison, SA.M. Brooks, James Selkirk - excused.
STAFF PRESENT: Emily Cameron, Eddie Kirk, Slade McCalip, Joanna Bradshaw.
AGENDA ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
Chair presented information on the World Class Region Conference scheduled
for April 24, 1998 and asked that Board members indicate by the end of the
meeting if they wished to attend.
AGENDA ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 5, 1998
MOTION: Katz moved approval. Seconded by Hoecke.
VOTE: Unanimous.
AGENDA ITEM #4: COMMISSIONERS' BRIEFS - Not available.
AGENDA ITEM #5: PUBLIC CHARGE
Chair read the public charge.
AGENDA ITEM #6: CHAIR COMMENTS
None.
AGENDA ITEM #7: COMMITTEE/ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS
a. Board of Adjustment
Barrows reported that the Board of Adjustment approved a request for a Class
B Special Use Permit for a riding stable.
b. Agricultural Districts Advisory Board
No meeting.
c. Historic Preservation Commission
Cameron reported that the Commission held a public hearing to recommend a
National Register nomination, the Arch Jordan House. This has been
reviewed by the State and forwarded to the National Parks and Recreation for
their consideration.
d. Ordinance Review Committee
No meeting.
e. Shaping Orange County's Future
No report available.
L Bicycle Committee
McCalip reported that the committee has begun to plan bicycle routes
throughout the County. The intent is to connect the towns and the rural areas to
the towns. One of the criteria is to select routes that are not on the primary NC
routes and are on less traveled routes. Prior to the next meeting, scheduled for
April 23, each member is to ride at least one of the routes and make a list of the
bicycle improvements that need to be made.
AGENDA ITEM #8: SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
a. Concept Plans
0 (1) Lawrence Road Subdivision
(Eno Township - 249 lots)
Presentation by Emily Cameron.
The property is located in Eno Township on the east side of Lawrence Road
(SR 1709) between Interstate 85 and US Highway 70A. The current zoning
is Rural Residential (R-1) with a portion in the Major Transportation
Corridor. Adjacent land uses are residential, including Colonial Park (R-4)
and Colonial Hills (R-2) subdivisions. The adjacent zoning to the north and
east is R 1. Lawrence Road Baptist Church is located across Lawrence
Road The Rock House, a site listed on the National Register of Historic
Places, is at the southwest comer of US 70A and Lawrence Road
The total acreage to be subdivided is 87.27. It is not located in a protected
watershed. Currently the western half of the property is cultivated as hay
field. The eastern half and the southern boundary is wooded with a mixture
of mature pines and hardwoods including some scattered Shagbark hickory.
Understory is typical for the type of forest with the exception of a few
mature specimen mountain laurels east of the old road bed.
Almost the entire site slopes at gradients less than 7.5 %. Near the center of
the site is a "saddle" in the topography, i.e., a flat area between two ridges
where slopes are near 21/6 or less, resulting in poor drainage and standing
water in places.
All runoff from the site is collected by three intermittent streams. Two of
the streams on the northern half of the property join off site and flow north
approximately 2.5 miles to the Eno River. The stream draining the southern
half of the property flows south under the interstate to form the headwaters
of Stoney Creek which also turns north to meet the Eno.
Of the four soil types shown on the site, two have limitations for
development. Chewacla soils are located along the drainage ways and are
unsuitable due to wetness. Enon soils are found mostly in the southeastern
part of the site and are limited due to low strength and shrink -swell
potential.
Two Concept Plans that are very similar in design were submitted for
review prior to application for rezoning. One Concept Plan is a planned
development with 249 lots (2.8 units per acre) and 25.92 acres (30.5 %)
open space including 6.6 acres of improved recreation area. The alternative
Concept Plan is a cluster subdivision featuring 243 new residential lots
(2.75 units per acre) and 28.38 (33 %) open space. Both plans also show 3.3
acres adjacent to the proposed entrance on US 70A to be rezoned to R -2
and developed in five half -acre lots where neighboring lots are zoned R-1.
New public roads are proposed in each plan with entrances on Lawrence
Road and on US 70A. A traffic impact study has been submitted to
examine the need for improvements to existing roads associated with the
new subdivision entrances. At least one more access point is
recommended, either from Lori Drive or on the east side of the proposed
subdivision to connect with Piney Grove Church Road.
The applicant has submitted a private road justification for two roads
proposed to serve lots that front on the park in the center of both Concept
Plans. The design objective is for the houses to face the park with access
from the private roads at the rear of the lots. The private road justification
and the Planning Staff evaluation of the private road justification are
attachments to these minutes on pages i 8-a Z . Based on the ordinance
criteria, the Staff recommendation is for all the proposed roads in the
subdivisions to be constructed to State standards and maintained by
NCDOT. The applicant's design objective can still be met with public
roads.
Public water and sewer service from the Town of Hillsborough will be
extended to serve the proposed lots. Water service currently exists at
Lawrence Road and US 70A. Sewer lines will be extended from the
Meadowlands development located on the south side of US 70A about one-
half mile west of Lawrence Road.
The Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on March 17. Discussion
among the 30 people in attendance included potential impacts such as
drainage and traffic, the type of housing proposed, infrustructure, and
annexation. A summary of the Neighborhood Information Meeting is an
attachment to these minutes on pages .?3 ^a 4 .
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Concept Plans for the
Lawrence Road Subdivision (pending rezoning), with new public roads,
public water and sewer service, and subject to the following conditions for
each Concept Plan:
Planned Development Concept Plan (Concept Plan review only. Evaluation
of proposal did not include all standards required for a Planned
Development):
O �.'
10
1. Revise the plan and the Traffic Impact Study to respond to comments
from the County Transportation Planner and the NC Department of
Transportation, including provision of at least one additional access
point (copies of these comments are attachments to these minutes on
pager A S— );
2. The ball fields shall be at least 75 feet from the PD district boundary.
Indicate if the fields are to be lighted;
3. Provide landscaping that will create taller and more dense screening
between adjacent residential uses and the entrance on US 70A and the
ball fields;
4. The majority of buffer plantings between the development and
Lawrence Road and the northern boundary shall be 4 to 6 feet in height
at installation;
5. If grading for the recreation areas exceeds 40,000 square feet, submit
an Environmental Assessment in accordance with the Orange County
Environmental Impact Ordinance;
6. Provide a plan to preserve or rescue mountain laurels prior to
construction; and
7. With the planned development application, submit draft forms of
homeowners association documents and restrictive covenants to
address use and maintenance of open space including stormwater
management structures and recreation facilities. The documents shall
designate a back -up grantee in the event the homeowners association is
eliminated.
Cluster Option:
1. Revise the plan and the Traffic Impact Study to respond to comments
from the County Transportation Planner and the NC Department of
Transportation, including provision of at least one additional access
point;
2. The streams and slopes over 15% shall be included in open space;
3. Provide landscaping that will create taller and more dense screening
between adjacent residential uses and the entrance on US 70A and the
ball fields;
4. The majority of buffer plantings between the development and
Lawrence Road and the northern boundary shall be 4 to 6 feet in height
at installation;
5. Provide a plan to preserve or rescue mountain laurels prior to
construction; and
6. With the Preliminary Plan application, submit draft forms of
homeowners association documents and restrictive covenants to
address use and maintenance of open space including stormwater
management facilities. The documents shall designate a back -up
grantee for the open space in the event the homeowners association
eliminated.
Katz asked about the process of a Concept Plan for rezoning and planned
development. Cameron responded that there had previously been only one
Concept Plan prior to rezoning to planned development, University
Station. She continued that planned development is many reviews or
applications rolled into one. It is a rezoning, a preliminary subdivision
approval, site plan approval, and a Class A Special Use Permit. They must
meet all of the Subdivision Regulations at the same time that they meet the
oil
5
Zoning Ordinance requirements. Thus, the Concept Plan is required in order
to move to the next step in the process.
Searles asked about the soils limitations. Cameron responded that the
information on the site analysis is from the USDA Soil Survey. They have
not done specific on -site testing with a soil scientist. The soil survey
provides tables that indicate engineering properties and which soils are
suitable for different kinds of development. For road construction and
dwellings with or without basements, some of the soils have moderate
limitations and some have severe limitations for shrink swell potential
and/or wetness. That usually means that it is not prohibitive for
development but it may require more grading, additional drainage facilities,
and possibly larger footings or foundations.
Barrows asked about the comments from the Town of Hillsborough
regarding public water and sewer. Cameron responded that they have
acknowledged that they have the capacity to serve this area. However, that
approval depends upon review of the actual. construction plans and plans for
installation. Barrows noted that a concern was with the water shortage that
Hillsborough often experiences.
Searles noted that the ordinance requires plantings of six feet, why is staff
recommending plantings four - six feet. Cameron responded that the
smaller plantings from the beginning have a greater chance for survival.
She continued that the types of plantings that are being recommended are
fairly quickly growing and have a good success rate which would provide
the height required in a reasonable amount of time. At the present tune,
the area is an open fiekl.
Katz asked if McCalip, Transportation Planner, had discussed his concerns
with the developer. McCalip responded that information provided by the
developer that afternoon had addressed some of his concerns. Those not
yet addressed are parking at the recreation site and turn lanes on Lawrence
Road. The developer does not feel that turn lanes on Lawrence Road are
necessary but McCalip continued to express the same concern according to
the Subdivision Regulations. (A copy of the memorandum by McCalip is
an attachment to these minutes on pages A(i --? 7.)
Katz noted that a resident at the Neighborhood Information Meeting had
expressed concern regarding the development of a hazardous traffic
situation developing at the intersection of Old NC 10 and NC 86. McCalip
responded that sight distance improvements are needed at the intersection
of Lawrence Road and NC 10.
Searles stated that she felt the only difference between the two plans is the
appearance of the open space. Cameron noted that the cluster plan has a
road which crosses the creek and agreed that there are no major differences
in the two Concept Plans.
Walters asked about the recommended location of the additional access and
Cameron indicated possible locations on the plan. She noted that there is an
existing public right of way on Laurie Drive that comes through the existing
development of Colonial Park and connects with Lannie Drive and goes out
to Lawrence Road. It also may be possible to acquire an easement on the
12
east side to connect with Piney Grove Church Road. She continued that
comments have indicated that sending traffic out the intersection of Piney
Grove Church Road and US 70 would not be an ideal solution. There are
advantages and disadvantages to both of these locations. There is also the
possibility that the developer could find a better location for the additional
access.
Price asked about the actual impact of the trip generations noting that she
felt they could not handle the current traffic. McCalip responded that
NCDOT information indicates current traffic is being adequately handled.
Price continued expressing concern with the volume of traffic that will be
created by the proposed subdivision. McCalip noted that he could provide
copies of the Traffic Impact Study provided by the developer. He noted
that the standard engineering document for number of trips generated per
household was used in preparing the study. According to information
provided by NCDOT, road capacity with or without this development is
still available.
Scott Murray, Landscape Architect with East -West Partners, noted that
Larry Meisner of Kimley -Horn and Associates had prepared the traffic
impact analysis. Mr. Murray continued that Scott Radway of John IL
McAdams Company would respond to questions regarding the
extension of water and sewer offered by the Town of Hillsborough.
Mr. Murray stated that Hillsborough is a part of the larger area, RTP and
the Triangle, that is growing rapidly. This creates a challenge for planners,
developers and approval boards to find ways to accommodate growth.
Developers study the areas that have been determined by boards and
commissions to be those areas suitable for development where public
water and sewer services can be provided and develop a plan such as the
one being proposed as Lawrence Road Subdivision.
Mr. Murray continued noting that the area has been designated as a
Transition Area which is targeted for residential growth as water and sewer
becomes available. Immediately to the east of the proposed subdivision
there is residential development where there are problems with failing
septic systems which is one of the reasons that the Town of Hillsborough is
interested in extending utilities. He noted also that economics determines
the ability to make the extensions, improvements and the recreational
facilities. The price range of the houses is to be from $115, 000 to
$165,000 - $170,000. There is a shortage of housing in that range in
Hillsborough and surrounding areas. Mr. Murray continued, explaining the
plans noting that there was not a lot of difference between the two plans.
He explained how it is expected the recreational areas will be utilized.
In regard to buffer plantings, rather than just have strict linear planting,
the developer is proposing that the entire 100 -foot wide area be reforested
with a variety of trees such as red cedar and pines that would more quickly
become a larger buffer area. However, the linear planting would satisfy the
intent of the ordinance.
Mr. Murray stated that the stubout to the east described by staff is
acceptable to the developer. The developer does feel, however, that it
might be more appropriate to have the stubout in the southeast comer
01;3
7
because there are some parcels in that area that could benefit from better
access. He continued that they did not feel it would be good to stubout to
the south since it is an established residential area and also a very low area
where a retention pond is proposed. He felt a stubout to the east is more
appropriate, particularly since utilities will be extended to the east.
Mr. Murray noted that one of the requests or recommendations was for a
transit stop. He indicated there were several areas that could accommodate
that request. He continued that the request for a 75 -foot buffer and
plantings between the ballfields and the properties could also be easily
accommodated. Mr. Murray spoke to the concern regarding the mountain
laurel. He stated that efforts will be made to preserve that in the recreation
area and they would support a relocation program for the mountain laurel
that falls into roadways and lots. While he was not sure that mountain
laurel would survive relocation, he indicated he would seek assistance from
the Botanical Gardens in Chapel Hill to aid in this project. Efforts will be
made to use the mountain laurel plants on site.
In regard to the concern with parking, he indicated the developer would lace
to see less parking and residents walking to the park. However, they could
do it either way and address staffs concern.
In regard to soil limitations, he agreed with the information provided but
noted that this is an issue that can be overcome with a little more cost to the
developer for construction.
Katz expressed concern with the need for access for the back lots to the
park. Mr. Murray responded that a sidewalk could be constructed to go
around the lots to the park. Katz continued asking if the developer would
consider reserving some lots for houses in a lower price range. Mr. Murray
responded that he would relay this concern to the developer agreeing that it
would make homes available to more people.
Barrows asked if the developer would bear the cost of relocating the
mountain laurel plants and the response was they would be willing to do
what would be considered reasonable to help take care of the relocation.
Andrews asked about the time frame to buildout. Mr. Murray responded
that the development is scheduled to be completed in five phases. Probably
a year of development for each phase and seven to eight years for complete
development.
Searles asked about the response to the concern of turn lanes on Lawrence
Road. Lary Meisner of Kimley -Horn Associates responded to this
concern. He stated that four different intersections were reviewed for the
study: Lawrence Road and 70 Business, 70 Business and 70 Bypass to the
east, Lawrence Road and Old NC 10 and Old NC 10 and NC 86. All of the
intersections are operating at acceptable or good levels of service during
peak hours except for Old NC 10 and NC 86. There is a lengthy delay
turning from Old NC 10 onto NC 86.
Mr. Meisner noted that The Institute of Transportation Engineers figures for
daily and peak hours were used to determine the impact of this subdivision
on the roads and the result was that all of the intersections with the
() 1
14
exception of Old NC 10 and 86 would continue to operate at an acceptable
level of service. By the time this development nears buildout, using the
year 2003, that intersection would either meet or be near to meeting signal
warrants. They also recommended turn lanes on 70 Business.
Mr. Meisner stated that he could understand the reasoning for a left turn
lane since Lawrence Road is designated a major thoroughfare; however, the
projection showed the maximum of fifteen vehicles turning left into the
subdivision during a peak hour. That is only one car per four minutes on
the average, so that does not seem to justify a left turn lane. He indicated
that they would be open to further discussion as they move into the process
and the subdivision review stage.
They did review the two intersections that had accident problems, but,
neither showed that they should be classified as a high hazard intersection.
The intersection of Lawrence Road and NC 10 has a sight distance problem
and they are recommending that be rectified and NCDOT had indicated
they may be able to assist with some of the grading to provide additional
sight distance. The intersection of Old NC 10 and 86 has a congestion
problem and once a traffic signal is in place it is felt that the accident
problem as well as the congestion problem will be alleviated. Most of the
accidents were rear - ended.
Searles asked about future paving and straightening of Lawrence Road near
St. Mary's Road that would create more through traffic. McCalip
responded that is not in the TIP program but is in the Hillsborough
Thoroughfare Plan.
McCalip continued that he felt there would be an impact but a left turn lane
on Lawrence would alleviate some of the impact. Mr. Meisner stated that
he felt it was a difference of professional opinion as to what threshold a left
turn lane is installed.
Price expressed concern about the traffic impact during construction. Mr.
Murray agreed that the trucks involved in the construction would have a
definite impact and would be added to the calculations. He continued
that the impact of construction traffic would be significantly less than the
impact of the development at buildout. Price asked about the impact of
construction traffic with the regular traffic as phases are completed noting
that there are only two accesses. Mr. Murray responded that construction
traffic will be approaching the development from US 70 and Lawrence
Road As phases are completed, the residents will have access to the
interior roads and construction traffic will move to another phase. Also, the
construction traffic will be opposite the daily traffic pattern of the residents.
He noted that the first phase will be the phase accessing from Lawrence
Road and once that is completed, all construction activity will be directed to
go directly to 70A to keep it off the residential streets. Such details are
worked out as the developer completes the plan and schedules construction
of the phases.
James Singleton, resident on US 70A, complimented the design of the
subdivision but felt that the density is inappropriate for Hillsborough. He
continued expressing concern with the traffic on Lawrence Road. He felt
that, with the homes already located in the immediate area, adding 240 or
015
more would create considerably more traffic turning off of Lawrence Road
than was indicated in the traffic study. He also noted that there was a
fatality at NC 86 and Old NC 10 two years ago involving a motorcycle. He
also expressed concern that there was no accident report for Lawrence Road
noting that, even though they were usually not very serious accidents there
are a large number of them.
Mr. Singleton asked about the possibility of lowering the speed limit in the
area and Slade McCalip responded that NCDOT would have to make the
assessment for lowering the speed limit.
Mr. Singleton noted that another important issue is that of inadequate water
pressure and referring to the number of dwellings being proposed. An
independent testing had been done which indicated the highest pressure was
never more than 25 pounds.
Mr. Singleton continued that another major concern is that the recreation
area is inadequate as proposed which indicates to him that the children will
wander the neighborhood and use other residents' yards as playgrounds.
Property value was also an important concern of Mr. Singleton. He felt that
the subdivision as proposed was too many houses on such small tracts of
land. He noted that presently the area is zoned R -1 and while he did not
always expect it to remain R 1, he was hopeful that the zoning would
remain something closer to R 1. Zoning is supposed to protect but he
felt this would be extreme density without proper traffic control and
planning.
Mr. Bill Hendrickson, resident on Lawrence Road, referred to ' Wyngate
Subdivision and the backup of traffic halfway to the Lawrence Road and
NC 10 intersection that is created every afternoon when the school bus
stops at the entrance to Wyngate. He was concerned with the impact on the
schools and school bus traffic from the development. He asked what
comments had been received by the school board and Cameron responded
that the school board receives copies of Preliminary Plans for review and
comment when exact density is known.
Mr. Hendrickson indicated he is in favor of homes in this price range for
the area, however, density is a major concern. He continued that he felt this
tract of land would lend itself to a variety of housing which would help with
the issue of intense density. He referred to a project in Chapel Hill by the
same developers and concerns with the traffic study. He emphasized that
traffic studies must be taken very seriously.
Mr. Hendrickson also expressed concern with the addition of 240 homes to
public sewer. He indicated he had heard comments of inadequate sewer
management and noted that issue should be addressed prior to approval.
He asked whether the recreational area was public or only for this
development and the response was that it would be for this development
and not public. He continued expressing concerns that there should be
access to the recreation area for surrounding residents and this would create
more traffic and parking issues. He also asked that the traffic engineer
consider all of the additional traffic for construction and service vehicles.
016
16
W. Hendrickson concluded that he was most concerned about the schools,
school buses, traffic and density.
Mr. Jim Ray, property owner on Lawrence Road and owner of the
Occoneechee Golf Course, expressed concern with possible runoff,
drainage problems. He asked about the impervious surface area allowed.
Cameron responded that this is not in a Protected Watershed so impervious
surface ratios would not apply. The floor area limits and setbacks may
control impervious surface. He continued that he had concerns about so
many houses in such a small space indicating that he felt the lot sizes would
only be 7,000 square feet.
Cheryl Howard, resident of Colonial Hills Subdivision, stated that Colonial
Hills has public water but not public sewer service. She stated that her
subdivision and Colonial Park has had continual problems with septic
systems and asked if they will be allowed to connect to public sewer lines.
Mr. Ray spoke again expressing concern with fire protection and the fact
that his property will be downstream from the sewer pumping station.
Mr. Murray stated that he understood the concern with impacts but, asked
that everyone remember that the impact will not be all at once. He noted
that municipalities have more strict design details and methods of control of
sewer pump stations. He continued by comparing this project to one
recently done in west Durham County but is inside Chapel Hill City Limits.
He explained how runoff is controlled in that subdivision.
Price expressed concern that this seems to be a very urbanized plan with the
density indicating to her that this would be a small village. She was also
concerned with the impact on the schools and the existing sewer system.
She felt the proposed development is very uniform and confining. She
noted that there is a need for homes in the lower end of the price range. She
expressed major concern that developers seem to be addressing needs of
RTP rather than the needs of Hillsborough and Orange County.
Andrews expressed agreement that the plan looks good on paper but was
not sure that Hillsborough is ready for such development. She expressed
concern with NCDOT and felt they do not have the same concerns that
Orange County has. Traffic and emergency vehicles are concerns
considering private roads within the development. Andrews continued that
water pressure and impact on the schools are also issues that should be
addressed prior to approval of such a project.
Hoecke expressed concern that infrastructure should be in place before such
development is proposed. He felt it was very much "getting the cart before
the horse."
Strayhorn stated that the area is one of the open spaces that is near enough
to have public water and sewer and such places are where density must be if
urban sprawl is to be controlled. He continued that he had many of the
same concerns already expressed by area residents such as management of
the runoff. He also felt that it could be an opportunity for nearby residents
to alleviate current sewer and water problems. He also added that he felt
01
11
the Town of Hillsborough would not approve something for which they
could not provide adequate service. Strayhom continued that he felt the
plan has some pluses as well as negatives. The price range offers
opportunities for young homebuyers.
Searles expressed appreciation for Strayhorn's comments regarding density
and asked about the payback or balance for allowing such density. She felt
that balance must be found before giving away more. Cameron responded
by indicating protected watersheds on a copy of the Land Use Plan. It is a
very small part of the county that is in a transition area. Reviewing the
County as a whole, she felt that some balance is being achieved. It does
meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
Katz asked to what extent does the type of development proposed'
encourage growth rather than respond to it He referred to the comments by
Price and Hoecke regarding having infrastructure in place and directing
density rather than encouraging development all over the county of one-
acre lots.
Price stated that while she did want every property owner to get some value
out of their land, she felt this development would be too dense and was
concerned with all of the other things that would be needed because of such
development.
Strayhom asked if this project is in the Stoney Creek Small Area Plan area
and Cameron responded it was not
Walters noted that the more development that is directed away from higher
density areas, the higher the cost for the infrastructure needed to service the
development. She continued that she felt development is coming, whether
anyone likes it or not, and should be directed to the Transition Areas.
Strayhom stated that all of the concerns presented by area residents and
board members must addressed and Hillsborough would have to determine
their ability to provide water and sewer service.
Price expressed concern whether this was the area where 250 homes should
be placed. Barrows noted that the density issue would be presented at
a public hearing for rezoning.
Andrews reiterated her concern about water pressure. Walters referred to
the new reservoir being currently studied and Andrews stated she would
like to see something in writing from Hillsborough in response to water
issues.
Searles asked how the Planning Board could be assured of , or what kind of
guarantee there is, that all of the issues mentioned will be addressed.
Cameron responded that the project is being proposed as a Planned
Development Class A Special Use Permit and any reasonable conditions
could be attached to assure that the use meets all of the ordinance
requirements and the Comprehensive Plan. She continued that there are
three specific findings, regarding property values, health, safety and welfare
and the Comprehensive Plan, as well as all of the ordinance findings. All
these must be met for approval of the rezoning. It is up to the proponents
01
18
and opponents to present information at the public hearing that proves or
disproves those findings. When a rezoning application is submitted, the
applicant must submit letters from agencies stating that adequate services
are available or can be provided.
Strayhom asked what determines the need for a third access. Cameron
responded in the past, three access points had been required for 40 and 60
lots; therefore 250 units should have at least three accesses to facilitate
emergency and service access while distributing the traffic generated by
the development.
Katz indicated he would be abstaining from the motion and voting due to a
financial arrangement with the developer which might be construed as a
personal financial conflict of interest.
MOTION: Walters moved that the developer be allowed to move to the next step in
the process and provide more information from the Town of Hillsborough
regarding water and sewer concerns/issues. Seconded by Strayhom.
VOTE: 4 in favor (Andrews, McAdams, Strayhom, Walters).
4 opposed (Barrows, Hoecke, Price, Searles).
1 abstained (Katz).
Cameron indicated that the concerns being expressed could and would be
presented and addressed at the public hearing.
Further discussion indicated another vote on the motion.
VOTE: 5 in favor (Andrews, Barrows, McAdams, Strayhom, Walters ).
3 opposed (Hoecke, Price, Searles).
AGENDA ITEM #9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 2/23/98
a. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
(1) PD -2 -98 State Employees Credit Union
Presentation by Eddie Kirk.
This item is to consider a Planned Development and Class A Special Use
Permit for the State Employees Credit Union.
The property is located on the southwest comer of Old Chapel Hill-
Hillsborough Road and Oakdale Drive in Hillsborough Township. It
contains the two corner lots which total 2.07 acres in size. The property is
in the Economic Development Zoning District as well as the property
immediately south and the lot immediately west.
The applicants are requesting a Planned Development- Economic
Development (PD -ED) zoning designation and a Class A Special Use
Permit to construct a 4,837 square foot building.
The Orange County Economic Development Districts Design Manual
requires site plan approval by the Orange County Planning Staff when a use
U1li
DRAFT
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
APRIL 7,1999
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Barrows (Chair), Nell Andrews, Howard McAdams, Jim Selkirk, Bob
Strayhorn, Elizabeth Walters.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Leo Allison, S.A.M. Brooks, Barry Katz, Runyon Woods - all excused.
STAFF PRESENT: Craig N. Benedict (Planning Director), Karen Lincoln, Joanna Bradshaw.
AGENDA ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
None.
AGENDA ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 4, 1999
Walters noted typographical error on page 2, end of line 1 - concerns to him.
Barrows noted error on page 7, paragraph 6, beginning of line 5, inadequate
should be adequate.
MOTION: Strayhorn moved approval with corrections. Seconded by Selkirk.
VOTE: Unanimous.
(Corrections have been made.)
AGENDA ITEM #4: COb [MMIONERS' BRIEFS - Not available.
AGENDA ITEM #5: PUBLIC CHARGE
AGENDA ITEM #6: CHAIR COMMENTS
None.
AGENDA ITEM #7: COMMITTEE/ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS
a. Board of Adjustment
McAdams reported that the meeting was continued to the April 12, 1999
meeting for further discussion on a proposed 190' telecommunications
tower on Mt. Carmel Church Road.
b. Agricultural Districts Advisory Board
Strayhorn reported that several farmers have indicated an interest in
applying for participation in Voluntary Agriculture Districts. He felt that
this interest is due to the Agriculture Summit held on February 25, 1999.
Presentation by Karen Lincoln.
J
20
MOTION:
McAdams moved agreement with Staff findings. Seconded by Strayhorn.
VOTE:
Unanimous.
Article 4 District Statements of Intent and Application Criteria - Neighborhood
Commercial -2 designation.
Article 4.2.9b 1- Site location
MOTION:
McAdams moved agreement with Staff findings. Seconded by Andrews.
VOTE:
Unanimous.
Article 4.2.9b 2 - Uses would serve ....
MOTION:
Strayhorn moved that the finding should be `yes' rather than no as found by the
Staff. Seconded by McAdams.
VOTE:
4 in favor.
2 opposed (Andrews, Selkirk).
Article 4.2.9b 3 - Lot size
MOTION:
McAdams moved agreement with Staff findings. Seconded by Andrews.
VOTE:
Unanimous.
Article 4.2.9b 4 - Maximum amount of land allowed ,
MOTION:
Andrews moved agreement with Staff findings. Seconded by McAdams.
VOTE:
Unanimous.
Article 4.2.9b S - Street Access
MOTION:
McAdams moved agreement with Staff findings. Seconded by Andrews.
VOTE:
Unanimous..
MOTION:
Strayhorn moved denial as recommended by the Planning Staff and that a Small
Area Plan for White Cross be a top priority for the next fiscal year. Seconded
by Selkirk.
VOTE:
Unanimous.
AGENDA ITEM #10:
SUBDIVISIONS
a. Preliminary Plans
(1) Lawrence Park
(7 Lots - Eno Township)
Presentation by Karen Lincoln.
14
The property is located in Eno Township on the south side of US Highway 70A.
Land uses in the vicinity are residential, including Colonial Park zoned (R-4)
and Colonial Hills zoned (R -2) subdivisions. The adjacent zoning to the north
and east is R -1. Lawrence Road Baptist Church is located across Lawrence
Road. The Rock House, a site listed on the Nation Register of Historic Places, is
at the southwest comer of US 70A and Lawrence Road.
The property proposed to be subdivided is 3.275 acres. It is not located in a
protected watershed and is designated twenty year transition in the
Comprehensive Plan. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 7
residential lots. Each lot will be approximately 20,000 square feet in size.
The Plan involves two proposals. One proposal involves a rezoning, planned
development and Class A Special Use Permit with 237 lots, and is being
considered in another abstract. This proposal involves rezoning and subdividing
an area along the new public entrance off US 70A. Four lots are proposed on
the east side and three on the west side of the entrance road
Public water and sewer service from the Town of Hillsborough will be extended
to serve the proposed lots. Water lines exist on US 70A. Sewer service will be
extended to the site from the Meadowlands development.
In a 5 to 3 vote the Planning Board approved the Concept Plan for Lawrence
Park in their April 1, 1998 meeting.
Provided the Planning Board recommends approval of the request for a Zoning
Atlas amendment from Rural Residential (R -1) to Residential -2 (R-s), the
Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Lawrence Park
Subdivision per the Resolution of Approval (an attachment to these minutes on
pages ).
MOTION: McAdams moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded
by Strayhom.
VOTE: Unanimous.
Meeting adjourned 10:05 p.m.
Prepared By
Approved By
Date
Upon motion of Commissioner Jacobs
, seconded by
Commissioner Ha 1 Mot of i s , the foregoing Resolution of the
Orange County Board of County Commissioners to Deny Lawrence Park
Subdivision Preliminary Plat was adopted this the 1" day of June,
1999.
I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
for the County of Orange, North
the foregoing is a true copy of
said Board at a meeting held on
way to the adoption of the fore(
are recorded in Minute Book No.
Board.
Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that
so much of the proceedings of
June 1, 1999 as relates in any
joing and that said proceedings
28 of the minutes of said
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this 4th day
of June 1999,
Clerk to the roard of Co issioners