Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19911125 t _ f APPROVED 1-6-92 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REGULAR QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 25, 1991 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Joint Session with the Orange County Planning Board for l Public g the regular Quarterly Hearing on November 25, 1991 at 7: 30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, new County Courthouse, Hillsborough, p Y , sborough, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, ommissions Verla Insko, Stephen Halkiotis and Alice Gordon. Jr. ,' Commissioners BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Commissioner Don Willhoit. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty Eidiener, Chair, and James Gray, William Waddell, Jr. , D. Kent Scott, Paul Hoecke Cantrell, Joan Jobsis, ' Amanda , Clint Burklin, and Larry Reid. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Delores Ramsey, Jean Hamilton and Virginia Boland. ' COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John Link, Assistant County Manager r Rod Visser, County Engineer Paul T hames, Planning Director Marvin Collins (arrived at 8:30) , Planners Eddie Kirk and Mary Scearbo at 9: 05) , Public � r'Y arbo c Works Director Wilbert McAdoo, Deputy Clerk to the Board Kathy Baker, Clerk p Y Y , to the Board Beverly A. Blythe and Economic Development Director Ted Abernathy. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIRMAN: Chairman Carey welcomed everyone and made introductory Y B. PUBLIC CHARGE: Chairman Carey read the public charge g NOTE: All documents referred to in these minutes are located in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office.a C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 1. Extended Area Telephone Service John Link gave a brief summary of the history of Orange County's efforts to obtain extended area telephone service. It is proposed that the Utilities Commission be asked to reconsider their decision and let the citizens vote on EAS. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR COMMENTS/QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND/OR CITIZENS. r r Commissioner Insko asked for clarification concerning the differences in proposed telephone charges. She was assured that this issue would be clarified during this public hearing. Ms. Ar ianna Hoffman, a student at New Hope Elementary School, spoke in favor of EAS. She stated that she is required to call her parents collect if she is ill at school or needs to talk to them. Also she and her classmates are often not allowed to call each other because they live in different calling areas. Being able to call friends and talk for extended periods of time is important to children her age. She asked that the Utilities Commission take her comments into account. Ms. Miriam Murdock stated that her phone is on the Mebane exchange although her address is Chapel Hill. This phone system divides the members of her church, volunteer groups and friends into toll calls and non-toll calls. The League of Women Voters and the Extension Home Makers Club, to which she belongs, also have members in each calling area. She can not call her Congressman without making a toll call. Lastly, she feels that the homebound aged are the most severely affected by this phone system. They simply cannot afford to call for business or pleasure. Mr. Ava Ferrell indicated that government employees should consider the amount of time they spend on the telephone and the expense created by a divided telephone system. Mr. C. E. Squires, a Mebane resident, spoke against EAS. He indicated that he has no interest in calling anyone outside of his calling area and is not willing to pay an increase in order for others to have this privilege. Mr. Alois Callemyn spoke in favor of EAS. He indicated that he owns a local business with customers in Hillsborough and Chapel Hill. He indicated that this fragmented system is a great hinderance to his business. Hillsborough Mayor Horace Johnson spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated that it is important to the citizens that the phone system step out of the dark ages. It is important to be able to call from the northern to the southern part of the county. A phone call to a homebound person often means more to them than the prescription that their doctor writes. These antiquated phone systems divide the citizens of Orange County. Mr. Ralph Warren, Chairman of the Orange County School Board, spoke in favor of this proposal. The effect of having many phone systems in Orange county is that students, teachers, and school volunteers have difficulty in reaching each other. Many phone calls are simply not made and the ones that are made are often cut short because of the expense. Ms. Rebecca Clark spoke in favor of this proposal. She LIIMMIIIIMMENIMMINIMEMINE=1.11MEMIMMIIII indicated that the elderly Orange County residents need this extended area service and they would be willing to pay the small increase. She asked that all phone calls be toll free. Mr. John Hartwell spoke in support of this proposal. This is something that the County needs in order to encourage a modern center of employment in this county. He mentioned several documented cases of how the telephone system influenced potential businesses to locate in another area. An improved telephone system will help to attract modern business to this county to replace some of the jobs lost in the last decade. He also indicated that there is a lot of difficulty for Mebane residents because directory information does not list all local numbers. Mr. Hartwell pointed out that as new technology is discovered the price decreases. It should be the same with utilities. All calls should be toll free. Ms. Helen Nowak stated that she supports this proposal. The present situation is hindering the efforts of volunteers. Schools are experiencing a greater need for volunteers. The need to pay for local calls places an additional hardship on those who volunteer with the schools. County, church and civic groups attract volunteers countywide and toll calls limit the amount of communication these individuals are able to afford. Many times a volunteer is not kept informed because of the expense of long distance calls. Ms. Mary Fox spoke in support of this proposal. She indicated that she has business and personal phones in her home and that the expense is exorbitant. She also stated that this area with its many universities and hospitals should not be burdened with such an antiquated phone system. Ms. Gloria Williams, Executive Director of the Joint Orange Chatham Community Action Agency and Co-Chair of the Extended Area Telephone Service Task Force, strongly supports this proposal. Poverty is escalating in our nation and the Utilities Commission needs to be aware of the hardship the toll charges are placing on low income citizens. She stated that JOCCA has a mandate to serve the impoverished and they desperately need to be connected to their community through the telephone system. Hillsborough Town Commissioner Bob Rose stated that this proposal is not a toll free proposal. He indicated that the Town of Hillsborough twice rejected supporting the expanded telephone service proposal. However, he does not believe that they are opposed to a unified telephone service for Orange County. The Town Board rejected the proposal because of the cost and the manner in which the proposal was presented. He stated that the cost of this proposal to Chapel Hill/Carrboro would be approximately $43,920. The 732 and 644 exchanges would incur expenses in the amount of $277, 115.0 0 for private citizens and $108,519 for business. Mebane Home would incur approximately $107,081 in increased fees. The citizens need to remember that they are going to pay for these calls through higher monthly rates. ` r Dr. Greg Smith, a Mebane resident, spoke in support of EAS. He mentioned that he, as well as hundreds of other people, are not even listed with the Hillsborough telephone directory assistance, nor are people routinely told to try the Mebane Home Phone Company directory. He presented petitions signed by 2000 citizens supporting this proposal. He asked that the citizens be given an opportunity to vote on this proposal. Mr. D. M. Brown spoke in favor of extended area service. However, he believes that this plan is not inclusive enough to benefit the northern Orange County area. This proposal needs to include the Durham area. He mentioned that he spent two days with the N.C. Utilities Commission in 1971 attempting to get extended area service for this area. Ms. Deborah Schledorn spoke in support of this proposal. She stated that the limited calling area has a negative impact on her family in all areas, including school, volunteer, work, home and business. She believes that the western part of Orange County is becoming a bedroom community for Chapel Hill and RTP. This extended area service is critical for that development. Mr. Henry Whitfield spoke in favor of extended area service. He stated that he did not want to pay 50% tolls. He indicated that he contacted AT&T, which is the grandparent company of Bell South, and was informed that they have paid a dividend each year since 1881. AT&T and Bell South pay a larger dividend each year. It is clear that the phone companies are making a profit and could afford to go to an extended area calling plan. Ms. Kathleen Oakley spoke against this proposal. She stated that most of the people she contacted did not even know that this was being proposed. Also, this proposal will include only that part of Mebane which is in Orange County. She feels this is an increase in the toll charge will not lead to an increase in the service to most of the Mebane residents. Dr. Greg Smith stated that all 2000 o f the citizens who signed his petition were, in fact, aware of the increase in tolls. Mr. Vic Knight, Co-chair of the Extended Area Service Task Force and President of the Chapel Hill Board of Realtors, stated that the Board of Realtors, in a unanimous decision at their last meeting, passed a resolution in support of the county's request that this issue be put to a vote by Orange County residents. He mentioned that Orange County has been pursuing extended area calling for over 20 years. They are asking that this issue be put to a vote by the citizens of Orange County. Mr. A. W. Kenion spoke against this proposal. He does not make long distance calls and does not want an increase in his bill. Mr. Ken Miller, a resident and business owner in Mebane, , indicated that he is in favor of this proposal., He is ' for the State P I� a candidate House in 1992 in the 25th District. He wants to see this issue put to a vote in Orange county. Y Ms. Doris Ray spoke in favor of this proposal. She lives in the White Cross area. Neighbors who live on different ends of the same road are on different phone exchanges. She and her husband are active volunteers in their local area. Communicating with these groups to coordinate volunteer g r activities is a financial burden on those who are assigned the task of callin g others. Mr. Lindsey Efland, business owner and member of the EDC, spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated that he believes the future of Orange County depends on area wide calling. Reg ional ties and economic develop g p re quire that everyone be able to communicate with each other. This needs to be put to a vote. Ms. Rachel Edwards, a citizen of Orange County, spoke in favor of this proposal. She mentioned that her family, family, church famil and friends all support this proposal. Many of her family members including her 8 9 year old father, Y � y ather, live in Mebane and she must limit her telephone calls because of the expense. She indicated that her yearly phone bill is more than $2000. Mr. John Seeley asked if the change in billing will affect the cost to the county in terms of calls made? Mr. Link indicated that the county would also incur savings. He indicated that he was in support of this proposal. Mr. Sim Efland suggested putting a franchise tax on each of the telephone companies in Orange County. Ms. Kay Drake spoke in favor of E.A.S. She indicated that as an Orange County teacher it is very expensive to communicate with parents of her students. She does make these phone calls but it is a financial burden and she hopes that this proposal is put to a vote so that she can exercise her right of choice. Mr. Ted Abernathy, Economic Development Director, spoke in favor of this proposal. He indicated that this antiquated phone system is a monumental drawback to attracting new business to Orange County. Mr. Kevin Mitchell spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated that something must be done about the fact that he can call across the country for less money than he can call Durham County. Y Ms. Barbara Palmer, Director of the Hillsborough Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of this proposal. She indicated that although this plan is not free, or perfect, it is a g ood plan. Hopefully this proposal wi l l be implemented and then the County can look to enlarging the extended area further. Mr. Jimmy Smith spoke in favor of this proposal. He is a resident of Mebane Oaks Road and his phone bills are in excess of $2000. 00 a year. All of his calls to businesses, church and friends are toll calls. Ms. Daryl McGuire spoke in favor of this proposal and she indicated that this is not a toll free system. However, it is a much improved option. She asked for the privilege of being allowed to vote on this proposal. Ms. Pat Carstaton spoke in favor of this proposal. She asked to be allowed to vote on this issue. Mr. Norm Gustaveson spoke in favor of this proposal. He mentioned that although he had heard several people speak against the increase in the base rate he had not heard anyone oppose the calling plan itself. Although there are citizens who are opposed to the rate increase, there have not been any comments indicating opposition to the plan itself. Ms. Joan Jobsis spoke in favor of this plan. She indicated that she is a resident of Efland and most of her neighbors also support this plan. The phone system in the Efland community is creating a hardship for the residents . Mr. Wayne Rogers indicated that he could not support this proposal unless changes were made in assigning cost increases. Mr. Marvin Collins, a resident of Mebane, spoke in favor of this proposal. He indicated that this phone system was a real hardship when his son was in high school and dating girls who lived in Orange County but had long distance phone numbers. He hoped that he would be given an opportunity to vote on this issue. Mr. Dick Helwig spoke in support of this proposal. He asked that it be put to a vote. He indicated that the inequity in rates is partly that Chapel Hill is already paying approximately $2.00 more per month than Hillsborough and Mebane. He also indicated that Hillsborough and Mebane are receiving a much greater increase in the number of lines to which they will be connected than Chapel Hill is under the proposed plan. Dr. Harold Murdock spoke in favor of this proposal. He asked if the meeting with the Utilities Commission could be held in Orange County. This would make it much easier for a large number of people to attend. Mr. Wayne Watts Director of Business Affairs with the Orange County School System, spoke in support of this proposal. He indicated that an additional teacher's salary could be paid for if the money was not going to pay local, long distance charges. Mr. Jim Ray spoke in favor of this proposal. He asked that Durham, Alamance and Wake counties be included in this proposal. Letters in support of this proposal were received from the Chapel Hill Board of Realtors, Inc. , Mebane Packaging Corporation, Hillsborough Area Chamber of Commerce and the following citizens: Denise Robinson, Carl and Eva Shy, Kevin and Jeanne Mitchell and Gail Walker. These letters are located in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED 2. Planned Development Applications a. PD-1-91 Stonegate Mobile Home Park The following people were sworn in by Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board: Mr. Billy Seasoms, Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, and Mr. Eddie Kirk. This item was chaired by Chairman Carey and presented by Eddie Kirk. In summary this is a proposed modification to the existing Planned Development for Stonegate Mobile Home Park. The applicant is requesting a modification of the existing Planned Development (PD-H-R4) for Stonegate Mobile Home Park. Stonegate was approved with 114 mobile home spaces on October 4, 1982 . Sewage treatment was to be provided by a package treatment plant. The applicant is proposing to remove ten (10) mobile home spaces and change the type of sewage treatment from a package plant to a spray irrigation system, thereby adding 19.86 acres to the park. The applicant also proposes to limit the number of bedrooms in the park to 208, relocate the well and recreation sites, and to delete a proposed boat storage area, car wash, and laundry facilities. The property is located on Mount Herman Church Road (SR 1713) north of the Norfolk Southern Railroad and south of Interstate 85. The property contains 56. 36 acres and is specifically described as part of Lot 35 of Tax Map 26 in Eno Township. The current zoning designation of the property is PD- H-R4 (Planned Development Housing - Medium Intensity Residential) . The proposed zoning designation is the same. The state Division of Environmental Management has reviewed, approved and issued a permit for the proposed spray irrigation system. The County Engineer has indicated his concern about easements and building setbacks that should be recorded around the proposed spray irrigation fields and lagoon. A condition of approval has been added to address this concern. The spray irrigation system has been approved by D.E.M. with a 25,000 gallon per day capacity. Using the figure of 12❑ gpd (gallons per day) per bedroom, pursuant to DEM standards and the Orange County Health Department, the park would use a capacity of 24,960 gpd. In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Planner Eddie Kirk indicated that the number of bedrooms has not been limited for previous applications. The maximum capacity of the wastewater treatment system is determined (i.e. 25, 000 gals) and then divided by the 12❑ gallons per day required for each bedroom. Mr. Larry Reid asked if the number of units can be increased by increasing the capacity of the system at a later date. Mr. Kirk indicated that they would have to increase the size of the spray irrigation system to increase the capacity. In response to a question from Commissioner Halkiotis, Mr. Thames indicated that there are some continuing problems with septic systems in mobile home parks. However, the state is getting tougher with these situations which is alleviating the problem somewhat. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT Mr. Billy Seasoms, representing the applicant, presented the history of this project. He indicated that work stopped on this project when Mr. Bains disappeared in 1985. He indicated that the only change in this request is that they hope to use a spray irrigation system which DEM has suggested. He also mentioned that Mrs. Bain's children have operator licenses and they will be qualified to operate this system. In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, it was explained that a pump station with a force main would be used. The sewage from the trailer park will flow into a main location. It is then pumped to the treatment plant which is located on the 19 acre tract. A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992 . VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments a. Large Day Care Homes (1) Article 6.27.3 Application Procedure This item was chaired by Planning Board Chair Betty ' Eidenier and presented by Planner Eddie Kirk. In summary this proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance will provide a process for administrative approval of minor changes in approved large day care homes. Under the current ordinance provisions any change in the operation of a large day care home will constitute a modification and require approval of the Board of Adjustment. The proposed amendment would provide a process where minor changes in approved large day care homes may be approved by the Zoning Officer. The standards for evaluation of large day care homes are specified in Section 6.27.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. In many cases minor changes may continue to comply with these specific standards. The proposed amendment would allow minor changes that comply with requirements in the Zoning Ordinance to be approved by the Zoning Officer. All changes that do not comply with large day care home requirements will require approval of the Orange County Board of Adjustment. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by • Chairman Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Infrastructure Facilities (1) Article 6. 16. 12 Telephone Exchanges, Subscriber Loop Huts, Pressure Regulator Stations, and Water/Sewer Pump Stations This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance will modify development standards for certain utility facilities. Article 4 . 1 of the Zoning Ordinance lists ten types of uses which are permitted by right in all zoning districts. Several of these are related to infrastructure facilities which are essential to the distribution of services. Because they are part of a larger infrastructure network, there may be limited choice for their location. Specific standards are applied to some of these facilities, including water and sewer pumping stations, electric substations, and County greenbox sites. These standards relate to design, screening, lot size, and other provisions which assure compatibility with surrounding residential areas. The proposed amendment modifies development standards which apply to water and sewer pump stations, and telephone exchanges. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMI S S I DNS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chairman Carey to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992 . VOTE: UNANIMOUS 4. Subdivision Ordinance Text Amendments a. Utility and Drainage Easements (1) Section III-C-3 Minor Subdivision review/Approval Procedures (2) Section IV-B-2 Land suitability (3) Section V-C-5 Utility/Drainage Data for Preliminary Plats (4) Section V-D-5-c Utility/Drainage Data for final Plats This item was chaired by Betty Eidenier and presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this amendment to the Subdivision Regulations will incorporate specific provisions for requiring drainage easements. All subdivisions are reviewed by the Erosion Control Division to determine if the drainage characteristics are such that each lot is suitable for development. Drainage easements are routinely recommended along streams, swales, or other channels if needed to assure that development of a lot will be safe and protected from damage caused by stormwater run- off. There are currently � Y n ntly • no provisions fin the Subdivision Regulations which refer specifically to drainage easements as a means of rendering a lot suitable for development in the event that reservation of drainage easements are recommended by the Erosion Control Division. The proposed � p posed amendments add text which specifies and clarifies this existing and historical practice used by the Planning Department to meet site suitability Y w• ultability requirements with respect to drainage. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Insko, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992 , VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Standards for 10+ Acre Lots (1) Section III-B Classification of Subdivisions (2) Section II Definition of Minor Subdivision (3) Section IV Required Minimum Design Standards This item was chaired by Betty Eidenier and presented by Planner Mary Scearbo. In summary these amendments to the Subdivision Regulations will provide design standards for subdivision lots larger than 10 acres. GS 153A-335 provides in the definition of subdivision. A list of land divisions which are not considered subdivisions. The provisions of the Subdivision Regulations do not apply to land divisions created under one or more of these exemptions. One of the exemptions is "the division if on of land into parcels greater than 10 acres if no street right-of- way dedication is involved" . This provision has been interpreted to mean that all of the p lots on a plat exempted under these provisions must be larger than ten acres. If even one of the lots fall below the 10 acre minimum, then all lots, including those larger than 10 acres, are subject to subdivision regulations. The proposed amendment clarifies the standards which would be applied to large lots which are included in a subdivision. The Ordinance Review Committee discussed the proposed amendment on October 3, 1991. There was concern that some of the standards, particularly those pertaining to road maintenance, may be a disincentive for including the larger lots on a subdivision plat. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Halkiotis, to refer d er this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. Environmental Health Endorsement (1) Section V-D-6 Certificates of Endorsement/Final Plat This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations will revise the current language of the Environmental Health Certificate for subdivisions. The Environmental Health Division of the Orange County Health Department is required to endorse all subdivision Final Plats certifying that the proposed lots are approved for surface sewage disposal systems provided public utilities are not available. In conjunction with the Environmental Health Division the Planning Department determined that the current endorsement is too general. The proposed amendment would provide more explicit information regarding the issuance of septic system permits. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chairman Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Mapping Requirements of G.S. 47-30 (1) Section V-D Final Plat (2) Section II Definition of Subdivision (3) Section V-D-6 Certificates of Endorsement/Final Plat This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary these proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations will incorporate changes in Final Plat mapping and recordation provisions, as required by a recently ratified amendment to G.S. 47-30. An amendment to G.S. 47-30 was ratified by the General Assembly on June 12, 1991. The changes went into effect on October 1, 1991. The statute pertains largely to the recording of plats in the Office of the Register of Deeds. There are also some provisions within the subdivision Regulations which relate to this legislation. The proposed amendment provides consistency with G.S. 47-30 as amended. The revisions address the size of plats, the materials on which plats may be drawn, survey information, certifications and attachments to deeds or other instructions. Mr. Jerry Davis spoke in support of this mapping requirement. A letter he sent Mary Scearbo was entered into the record. Mr. Alois Callemyn spoke in support of this amendment and entered a letter from the North Carolina Society of Surveyors into the record. Commissioner Gordon requested a complete cost and impact analyses when this is returned to the Board. Ms. Scearbo agreed to handle this. l t ' A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, Chairman Care to kiotis, seconded by Y■ refer this item to the Planning Board for recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting ' ng was adjourned. Moses Carey, Jr. , Chair Beverly A. Blythe