Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19770531~~~ Commissioner Pinney stated that the Youth Services Needs Task Force needed the Chairman's signature on an application for funding of an Emergency Care Facility through LEAA. The County Attorney was requested to review the application prior to the Chairman's signature. Due to a discrepancy in one area of the proposed budget, it's.pre- sentation was deferred until Wednesday, June 1, 1977, at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was adjourned. i ' i `_~~_ Richard E. Whitted, Chairman Agatha Johnson, Clerk r MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MAY 31, 1977 The Orange County Berard of Commissioners met jointly with the Orange County Planning Board on Tuesday, May 31, 1977, at 7:30 p.m., in the Superior Courtroom of the Courthouse in Hillsborough for th~c quarterly public hearing to discuss planning matters in Orange County. Those present were Chairman Richard Whitted, Commissioners Norman Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker, and Donald Willhoit. Planning Board members present were Vice-Chairperson Marilyn Riddle, Col. William Breeze, Hazel Lunsford, Paul Gates, Art Cleary, Jean Anderson, Andrew Dobelstein, Pat Crawford, and Lindsey Efland. Others present were S. M. Gattis, County Manager, Neal Evans, County Finance Director, Jeffrey Gledhill, County Attorney, Ervin Dobson, Planning Director, Chris Edwards and Hal Minis, memlaers of the Planning Staff and Agatha Johnson, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners. Chairman Whitted called the meeting to order and announced that the agenda consisted of rezoning requests and a review and discussion of the Subdivision Regu-lotions Amendments. He invited those present to feel free to provide any input and that the Planning Board would meet at a later time and make a recommendation to the Orange County Board of Commissioners for final action. Chairman Whitted introduced Ms. Marilyn Riddle, Vice-Chairperson of the Planning Board, who presided. Ms. Riddle stated that Item 1, a rezoning request of Raymond Williams would not be heard tonight, but would be postponed to another time. Item 2 on the Agenda: Price Creek - Request Revision of a Planned Unit Development Plan. This tract is located on Damascus Church Road and is owned by Dr. Samual Putnam. Ms. Riddle recognized Chris Edwards from the Planning Staff. _ Mr. Edwards stated that this is a modification of an existing planned unit devleopment plan which has a number of features which normal sub- divisions do not have. Two years ago, 10 acres of land on Damascus Church Road was rezoned to planned unit development district and at that time the Price Creek Development Plan was approved. Since then, the owners have decided to make some modifications in the plan and the plan with these changes is being presented tonight. Mr. Edwards stated that the reason for .the major change is the relocation of some of the common pro- perty. The original plan showed a swimming pool and several structures located by the creek. The change will move the swimming pool toward the garage located next to the road and the structures will be moved back from the creek. 228 Mr. Edwards presented plats of the original plan and the proposed plan to the Planning Board and the County Commissioners.' Mr. Edwards asked if anyone present had any questions concerning the Planned Unit Development Plan. Mr. Dobelstein asked about the access to the four lots, and Mr. Edwards stated that there was a common garage zone and only one parking facility for all four houses. Dr. Putnam stated that .the reason for the modification is that all of the houses and the swimming pool will be utilizing solar energy. The pool is a vital ].ink in the solar energy system with which the houses will be heated. Commissioner Willhoit stated that the original sketch showed two accesses off of Damascus Chuxch Road and these accesses are not indicated. Dr. Putnam stated that the original houses will access from the common area. Ms. Riddle asked if there were persons who wished to speak in favor of the project. No one came forth. The Chairperson asked if there were those present who wished to speak in opposition to the Price Creek Project. No one came forth. ~ . Itme 3: Subdivision Regulations Amendments. Copies of the Subdivision Regulations Amendments were distributed earlier to members of the audience. Ms. Riddle stated that these amendments were discussed at a meeting held on February 28, 1977, and were also discussed and considered at a number of meetings which were opened to the public and had been attended by many citizens. Also, the amendments were discussed and considered item by item as a special request of the Farmers' Association on April 25, 1977. At the last Planning Board Meeting, the amendments were again discussed and some recommended changes have been incorporated into the Subdivision Regula- tions at the request of citizens. Hal Minis of the Planning Staff reviewed the Subdivision Regulattions pointing out the recommended changes which had been made to the document. Following Mr. Minis' presentation, the Chairperson, at the request of Commissioner Pinney opened the floor for discussion of the proposed Sub- division Regulations. Ms. Riddle recognized Josephine Barbour who spoke to Section 1) on page 8, "The Division of Archieves and History shall review as......" Mrs. Barbour asked if there was such a historic site on your property and you did decide to build, could not the Department of Archieves and History hold up construction for as much as 18 months or longer, until an Environ- ment Statement has been obtained? Ms. Riddle stated that this section applied to a registered historical site, and that the Planning Department would attempt to work with the devleoper or land owner to work out the problem. Mr. Minis stated that the State Department of Archieves and History nominated historical and archeological sites t4 the National Registry of Archives and History of such sites and this list could not be added to. Mrs. Barbour asked if with the proposed Subdivision Regulations that it could take as long as 8 or 9 months before construction could begin. Chris Edwards replied to Mrs. Harbour's question by stating that if the property has many problems, one could expect for approvals to take longer. However, a typical subdivision would take between 2 and 3 months for all approvals. He added that the Planning Board had a maximum of 70 days oz 3 months to make a recommendation to the Commis sinners. The Commissioners have 36 days maximum to make a decision. This is a total of 5 months which is the maximum time. Mrs. T. 5. Coile asked the definition of a unique natural area. Mr. Minis stated that in 1975, a symposium sponso~ced by the State Museum of Natural History, in which scientists from throughout the State com- piled a list of rare or endangered species and this list has been deve- loped, and is available at the Planning Office in Hillsborough. ~~9 Mr. Minis explained that these sites are very small and are not usually large areas, and that the agencies which will review will only make recommendations and there is no State Law which say that approval must be denied of these sites. Mr. Tony Seater asked of the special expertise required which was mentipned on page 8, section 3). The Planning Airector, Ervin Dobson stated that if additional expertise was needed, these people could include local personnel, County agency people local laymen, Soil Specialist in Raleigh, and persons from Region J. He added that the list was left open becuase one might find a unique situ- - ation in a subdivision which would prohibit the Planning Department from getting the needed answers to salve problems. Mr. Seater stated that the way the Ordinance was written, people could eventually lose their freedom of the land. He stated that he wanted to see the section which required agencies' approval stricken from the Ordinance. Mr. C. W. Davis asked why the Subdivision Ordinance was necessary. He added that he had lived in Orange County for 80 years and was not aware of Subdivision Regulations existing in Chapel Hi11 Township or any other part of the County. Ms. Riddle stated that the present Subdivision Regulations covers two townships and have been under:;discussion fa r.the last year to revise these regulations tc make them more workable and to extend the regulations to other townships within the County. She stated that the County was growing in population and it is necessary that the subdivision of land be a matter of public opinion. Land in the County does come under the interest of the public whether it be subdivided and developed in ways that are compatible with the growth of the County. Chairman Whitted stated that the Subdivision Regulations and the Zoning Ordinance were implemented in Chapel Hill Township in 1967, and in 1970 in Eno Township. Mr. Davis stated that he was not in favor of the Subdivision Regula- tions and the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Gera Sykes asked of the qualification of the members of the Planning Board and the experiences they have had in land value. He stated that there should be enough expertise on the Planning Board to know what needs to be done if anything. He stated that he felt people who awned the land knew as much as anyone else as to what needed to be done with the land. James Bennett from West Hillsborough spoke against the Subdivision Ordinance. Susie Pulley, who lives in Northern Orange County, stated that the Ordinance should not be forced upon the people in Orange County. Ben Lloyd read an editorial from the Farm Bureau Newsletter regarding the dangers of excessive regulations imposed by the Federal Government:. He stated that the Farmers and Land Owners Association had appeared before the Board of Commissioners in March and had requested a 90 day extension in order that citizens and Planning Berard member might have more time tc review the Ordinance and Amendments. The Association then came before the Planning Board and recommended certain changes to the Ordunance, and some of these changes were implemented. Mr. Lloyd then proceeded to list the changes which were not granted. Mr. Lloyd spoke of Section TV-B'b. Utility Easements. Mr. Lloyd stated that this section was totally unacceptable and the Association had requested that this section be deleted entirely. Jeff Gledhill, County Attorney asked to speak to the Utility Easement Section. Mr. Gledhill stated that the way that the Utility Easement Section was worked in the Ordinance dealing with the Utility Easements is that is grants power to the County to require Utility Easement. This is different from the deeded easement itself between the land owner and the power company or the utility company. He stated that the way the Ordinance is worded now, it is intended and would be used only in situations where you have urban utility situations, principally water and sewer. These arm ~~~ matters of private concern and are not concerns of the Planning Department, Bob Earl stated that someone in the County Planning Department needed to provide hard planning and associate dates with the planning. George Chockley asked why the entire County should be subject to the Subdivision Ordinance, Mr. Gledhill stated that since Mr. Chockley lived in the rural part of the County, this Ordinance probably would not affect him, however, When his area is no longer rural, but urban, it would affect him. Ms. Riddle recognized Dr. Irvin, Chairman of the Orange County Board of Adjustment. Dr. Irvin stated that he was in favor of the Subdivision Ordinance and the fact that people did not know that the Subdivision Ordinance was in effect in Chapel Hill and Eno Townships was evidences that the Ordinances were working well. Dr, Irvin suggested that there be further clarification as to whether a mobile home is considered to be a structure, Regarding Minor-Subdivision, Dr, Irvin suggested clarification of lot sizes. He stated that the Subdivision Ordinance should be tied into the zoning Ordinance in Chapel Hill and Eno Townships where both already are in effect. Dr. Irvin suggested that under the amendments section of the regulations, the requirement be that SO or more taxpayers submit petitions for amendments to the Ordinance instead of an individual. Mr. Steward Barbour stated that he had problems with page 8 of the proposed regulations, section 4, which required that the Sall Conservation District review and certify as to the soil inventory and evaluation of property. Mr. Hugh Wilson was recognized. Mr, Wilson stated that he~.~~was con- cerned with the vagueness of certain portions of the Ordinance. He stated that the final form of the Ordinance should be to protect the people and requested that the Land Suitability definition be tighten. Andrew Dobelstein, a member of the Planning Board, stated that he felt the Ordinance offered protection to the farmer as well as the entire County. He stated that from comments by Mr. Lloyd he was getting the idea that Mr. Lloyd does not think the Subdivision Ordinance is designed to protect the farmer and the land. He asked Mr. Lloyd to comment on this. Mr. Lloyd stated that the people of the County should have been con- sulted in drawing up the Ordinance. He added that whether or not the regula- tions are good instruments depended on how they were written and who was implementing the regulations, Lucy Liggins stated that whatever is passed in the Ordinance will affect everyone in the County. She suggested that the Ordinance not be adopted. Max Kennedy spoke against the Subdivision Ordinance and stated that he saw the Ordinance as a stripping away of property rights. He added that the Ordinance is completely unacceptable. Other persons spoke against the Subdivision Regulations. Col. William Breeze, a member of the Planning Board ,'stated that the Planning Board is attempting to carry out what they feel should be done in Orange County. He stated that he was in favor of the Subdivision Ordinance. He added that many of the comments made tonight were excellent, however, many comments could have gone unsaid. He asked far constructive criticism of the Ordinance to make the Subdivision Ordinance work. He asked that all people concerned get together to develop some type of land use planning. Dupree Smith was recognized and he spoke of planning in general. He stated that planning could be good and could also do damage. He suggested that some plan be devised that would be workable. Mr. Ben Lloyd suggested that''.the Planning Board investigate the idea of land use planning which would be done on a State basis. Ms. Riddle asked if anyone else desired to speak. No one came forth. 2~1 Chairman Whitted asked if there were any other matters to come before the Planning Board, or the County Commissioners, if not, the meeting stands adjourned. chard Whitted, Chairman Agatha Johnson, Clerk MINUTE`S ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUNE 1, 1977 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met an Wednesday, June 1, 1977, at 7:30 p.m., in the Commissioners' Room of the Courthouse in Hillsborough for the purpose of continuing budget discussions for Fiscal Year 1977-1978. Those present were Chairman Richard Whitted, Commissioners Norman Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker, and Donald Willhait. Others present were S. M. Gattis, County Manager, Neal Evans, Finance Director, Jeffrey Gledhill, County Attorney, and Agatha Johnson, Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order and stated that there were several items which needed to be resolved prior to the beginning of the scheduled work session. Chairman Whitted recognized Jeffrey Gledhill, County Attorney, who will discuss with the Board proposed legislation. Mr. Gledhill stated that General Statute 105-285 provides for dis- covery of property held by an exempt institution if it is acquired by a non-exempt institution between January 1 and July 1. Although the listing period runs from January 1 to December 31, the tax year for which you are listing is July 1 through June 30th. As the law is presently written, it only includes the listing of real property. This proposed act would amend that to include all but business inventories. Mr. Gledhill stated that if the Board of Commissioners endorse this legislation. it would be taken to Representative Hune and Senator Vickery to introduce into the General Assembly. Discussion ensued. Upon motion of Commissioner Gustaveson, seconded by Commissicner Willhoit, it was moved and adopted to endorse the proposed legislation. The Ceunty Attorney was authorized to write a letter to the County's legislative delegates and request that this proposed legislation be sponsored .and introduced. The County Attorney stated that at the last meeting he was requested to review the LEAA Application for funding of an Emergency Care Facility. He stated that he had reviewed the application and that he had no xecom- mendatien as to whether or not the application should be supported, however, Mr. Gledhill did point out that the Resolution which the County had adopted provides that the applicant intends to continue the program at its own ex- pense and to appropriate funds therefore subject Only to budgetary limita- tions. He added that the Resolution stated that there is na commitment from LEAA for funding beyond the first year and that at the end of the first year, there will be a final comprehensive evaluation of the project by the director of the project and the Youth Services Needs Task Force. Mr. Gledhill stated that cost for continuation of this program beyond the first year would probably be between $47,000 and $50,000 per year. Commissioner Pinney stated that it was standard practice of LEAA to ask that the program be continued, however, they cannot require this. He added that Larry Cotton, Director o f the Janus House would provide the administratien of the program, and that the County is committed to fund 5 percent of the monies, at a cost of $2,500 for the first year. Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Walker, it was moved and adopted to authorize the Chairman to the Board to sign the Subgrant Application and that $2,500 be allocated as the County's part for funding of this project. (Far copy of Resolution committing Orange County to 5 percent match see page 235 of this book.)