Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19920803_;;_ _ 1 APPROVED 10/592 - MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 3, 1992 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on ,August 3, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the Courtroom of the Old County Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and Commissioners Stephen H. Halkiotis, Alice M. Gordon, Verla C. Insko and Don Willhoit. ATT(TRNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Rod Visser, Clerk .to .the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Planning~Director Marvin Collins, Personnel Director Elaine Holmes, Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass, County Engineer Paul Thames, and Solid Waste Coordinator Beth Wickham. NOTE: ALL ITEMS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERKS OFFICE I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE PRINTED AGENDA - NONE II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair Moses Carey announced that those citizens who want to speak to an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. B. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA - NONE PUBLIC CHARGE Moses Carey, Jr. read the Public Charge. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon., seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve those items on the Consent Agenda except item "B" as listed below: A. 1991-92 ANNUAL TAX SETTLEMENT (pages of these minutes) The Boar d accepted the tax settlement as listed below: Total taxes collected for Orange County $ 36,634,411.03 Total taxes collected for Chapel Hill 10,840,902.19 Total taxes collected for Carrboro 2,528,105.83 Total taxes collected for Hillsborough 730,012.16 Other Revenue 324,387.07 B. PERSONNEL ORDINANCE REVISION - TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS This item was removed and considered at the end of the Consent Agenda. 2 C. SEWER EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH HILLSBOROUGH To alleviate the problem of surface discharge of stormwater .and sewerage spraying out of the manhole located on the west side of Stillhouse Creek directly behind the Tax and Records Building, the Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the easement agreement which will allow for the construction of a new sewer line from the overflowing manhole to its Eno River interceptor-line which lies approximately 150 yards to the south on the north side of the Eno River. The route for the new sewer line is proposed to move southwest from the existing manhole, cross Stillhouse Creek, turn south along and parallel to the west (rear) property line. of the Orange Family Medical Center and extend straight on to the existing interceptor line. D. PROPOSED SL#~HI~,~SION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT SECTION V-D-6-b CERTIFICATES QF DEDICATION AND MAINTENANCE The Board approved the text amendment to the Subdivision Regulations as stated below: V-D-6-b Certificates of Dedication and Maintenance (1) The following certification shall be printed on the Final Plat and shall be followed by the signature of the owner(s) of the property being subdivided .acknowledged by a notary public: "The undersigned hereby certifies that the land shown hereon is owned by the undersigned and is located within the subdivision regulation jurisdiction of Orange County and hereby freely dedicates all rights-of-way, easements, streets, recreation area, open space, common area, utilities and other improvements to public or private common use as noted on this plat, and further assumes full responsibility for the maintenance and control of said improvements until they are accepted for maintenance and control by an appropriate public body or by an incorporated neighborhood or homeowners association or similar legal entity." Owner: Date: E. BELLECHENE EAST - PRELIMINARY PLAN The Board approved the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East Subdivision. The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east side of Eno Cemetary Road. The property is not zoned, however, the tract is designated Agricultural Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Comprehensive Plan. It drains into Lake Orange. Thirty new lots are proposed with an average lot size of 1.04 acres. Three phases are proposed with Phase I containing four (4} lots, Phase II containing eight (8) lots and Phase III containing eighteen (18) lots. - 3 F. VOLUNTARY AGR__ICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION - WALTERS FARM The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the conservation agreement,-after review by the County Attorney and the Land Records Manager to assure that the description of the property in Exhibit A is proper, which designates the property of Victor Carl-Walters, Sr., Lucille Walters, Victor Carl. Walters, Jr., and Elizabeth T. Walters as a voluntary agricultural district. G. .VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION- CRUTCHFIELD PROPERTY The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the conservation agreement, after review and approval-by the .County Attorney and the Land. Records Manager to assure that the property owners and/or representatives, and the-description of the property in Exhibit A are proper, which designates the property of Crutchfield Heirs as a voluntary agricultural district. H. IDENTIFICATION SIGN - VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT The Board approved the design for an identification sign announcing the location of a voluntary agricultural district. VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEM REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA B. PERSONNEL ORDINANCE REVISION - TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS (This amendment has been placed in the Personnel Ordinance located in the Clerk's Office) . Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to approve the draft revisions to Article II, Section 5.2 and Article I, Section 4.37 as they relate to temporary positions. The temporary employment category will continue to exist and there will continue to be temporary employees. Temporary appointments will not continue beyond one year except as specified in the .policy. The use of temporary employees on a continuing basis beyond one year to work 20 hours or more each workweek will end. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IV. RESOLUTIONS/PROCLAMATIONS A. ACCESS TO POTENTIAL LANDFILL SITES County Manager John Link presented for the Board's consideration of approval a resolution and interlocal agreement between Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill that authorize the Town of Chapel Hill to act on behalf of the jurisdictions comprising the Landfill Owners' Group in exercising the statutory authority granted to each jurisdiction to conduct testing of potential sites for a sanitary landfill. The Landfill Site Search Committee (LSSC) has identified four potential landfill sites that will require subsurface testing for further evaluation of the suitability of each site. The results of this testing would permit development of preliminary engineering plans .and cost estimates. These would allow the LSSC to compare alternative sites along the lines of social implications, capital and operating costs, and environmental effects. The County has authority under GS 40A-11 to enter upon lands specified for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient in 4 selecting a site for -a future landfill. Property owners can receive compensation for damages that occur as a result of required testing.. At the May 19, 1992. Board of County Commissioners meeting, the Board deferred a decision on exercising that statutory authority pending a detailed report on the landfill site search process. The staff of the Landfill Owners' Group and Joyce Engineering presented that report to the Board of Commissioners at its most recent meeting on June 29,.1992. The resolution authorizes the County Manager to sign the interlocal agreement as presented in the agenda allowing the Town of Chapel Hill to carry out this activity on behalf of all three jurisdictions. John Link stated that he has requested that the Health Department staff be on location at the time the boring holes are filled to affirm that they are filled appropriately so that there will not be any damage to the property at a future date. The test pits would require a 25 foot setback from the leach .lines for future development. CITIZEN COMMENTS Vic Knight expressed concern about what the testing may do to the Fox Hill Farm. He distributed additional information to the Board members. He explained that he is trying to determine the impact on what they may want to do with the development of Fox Hill Farm. He referred to a letter from Bob Cheek, head of the groundwater section for NCDEM, which outlined the necessary process for anyone going on site to do any exploration for a future. landfill. The test borings fit the definition of a well. He referred to a letter dated July 7 to Gayle Wilson from Mark Taylor of Joyce Engineering which indicated that they had contacted the Orange County Environmental Health Department about the setback requirement and the potential effect and site disturbance on the future septic systems. This letter indicated that setback requirements apply only to water wells and not to monitoring wells and definitely not to soil test borings. This was confirmed with Bob Cheek. Vic Knight noted that he has had conversations with Tony Laws and Bob Cheek who both stated that the setback requirements do apply if the engineers don't abandon it and abandon it properly. Knight's concern is that these people will go on the site, do some intrusive activity that will permanently affect the site which will remain even if the site is not chosen. No where does it say that these borings will be abandoned properly. John Link noted that the governing jurisdictions can instruct the Environmental Health staff to confirm when each soil. boring has been abandoned appropriately. They will be at every single boring and also when they fill the hole to be sure it is done correctly. Mark Taylor stated in the letter that "with the test site density proposed, roughly one test site per 100 acres, Tony Laws saw no reason not to proceed with the planned activities. In fact, he was quite comfortable with Joyce's plans for backfilling and site restoration." Vic Knight stated that neither Tony Laws or Bob Cheek have ever talked with Joyce Engineering. He feels this is deceptive. Knight continued stating that the current state regulations strictly applied do require that bore holes be grated or abandoned by some other means through variance. According to the state regulations, there is no such thing as a variance as to whether they abandon it or not. The proposed rules referred to on the second page of this memo to Gayle Wilson are only proposed and have not been submitted to DEM for their review. He feels it disturbing to make statements that are not substantiated. They talk 5 in terms of three intrusive activities that take place on the site. First is clearing. trees, second is drilling holes and the third is digging test borings. Most of site 11 is heavily wooded. He feels there will be a lot of permanent damage. He asked that the Board take into consideration the problems he will have to deal with later on when the testing is finished. Vic Knight _clarified for Commissioner Halkiotis that if anyone called Tony Laws, the person never identified himself as}being from Joyce Engineering and having any interest in trying to get answers to landfill issues. Also, Bob Cheek stated he has not spoken to anyone in Orange County concerning landfill issues in over two months. John Link stated that Tony Laws met with Joyce Engineering on July 30. The letter indicated they had met on July 7. Rod Visser -noted that they met with Joyce- Engineering specifically because of the letter and .other questions they had.... Commissioner Halkiotis stated for the record that it hurts the credibility of Joyce Engineering if in fact a letter-was. written with false information. Reggie Gillespie referred to information they have previously provided to the Board about the landfill. He is against the geotechnical work that is proposed. He suggests that the appropriate approach is to identify the best site that has the likelihood of being selected as the landfill and only be intrusive on that site. He understands it is necessary to get technical and scientific information but feels there are other ways to get this information that will not subject the landowners of the four sites to the intrusive and invasive geotechnical investigation that Joyce Engineering has proposed. He referred to a letter dated August 3, 1992 to him from Aquaterra. The letter explained the prospecting geophysical method from which useful information can be used to select appropriate sites for further investigation. One procedure is the magnetic prospecting method. He summarized the four key advantages of using this method with the most important being that it is not invasive ---the site will not be disturbed as far as cutting trees, clearing land, cutting roads or drilling the land. The cost is significantly cheaper than other methods. Another approach is the electrical resistivity soundings which can identify the vertical extent of a site being evaluated for a possible landfill. Another way to identify the vertical extent of a site is seismic refraction technique. This technique uses information gathered of the arrival times of seismic compressional waves to determine depths and competency of definite geologic units. The last technique is the electromagnetic method where a remote transmitter is used as an energy source with frequencies varying between 15 to 30 kilohertz. In conclusion, he feels that the geophysical methods can be a successful screening tool as part of a landfill siting study. The non-invasive approach with low cost and ease of implementation can be very useful to screen a number of prospective sites to a more manageable number for more detailed evaluation. He urged the Commissioners to not approve a technique that will be invasive. Scott Franklin spoke in support of drilling four sites - not necessarily these .four sites but four legitimate sites. He asked that they review the sites again. It is not enough to make a decision by using topographic maps. He is also concerned about the landowners who serve on the Site Selection Committee and their conflict of interest. 6 Dan Zipple referred to the November meeting, of the Site Search Committee and noted that there was a long di.$cussion of seismic refraction as an alternative to drilling on maybe eight or nine sites instead of 4 sites. There is a geologist on the committee and a decision was made that seismic refraction would not provide enough information to justify the extraordinary cost. of pursing this on even four sites. With this. method, the type of soil on top of the bedrock will not be determined. At best, this method would reduce the ..number from four sites to three. The most they could: gain with seismic refraction is that all these sites are equally good. They would still rneed to drill to find out what kind of soil is there. He encouraged the Board to give an endorsement to the citizens' committee to go ahead and do the drilling and whatever testing is necessary to select the site.. He noted that it takes a lot of courage for elected officials to proceed with the testing that is.necessarp. Mark Marcoplos questioned why the County is-trying to site a large landfill. In answer to a question from Commissioner Insko, Marcoplos indicated that he has heard conflicting descriptions of the size of the site. One was 300 to 500 acres needed for a period of 20 to 40 years. He feels that the question of how large a landfill site is needed based on waste reduction projections and the current rate of consumption and the 40% reduction as required by state law by the year 2001 have not been brought together. His point is that the County can do with a 250 acre landfill and it would save a lot of pain and expense. His impression is that the entire size of the lots under consideration will be made into a landfill. Commissioner Insko noted that it seems that what they want is a site that is about 300 acres and if they explore in a 1200 acre site, they have a better chance of finding a 300 acre site somewhere within that acreage rather than just picking 300 acres. She feels there is an assumption that just because the County is testing a 1200 acre site that the County will site a landfill that large. She understands they are looking for 300 acres which would be buffered and last approximately 30 to 40 years depending on the amount of recycling that takes place. Commissioner Willhoit noted that 200 acres was purchased in the early 70's. If they were using it at two acres a year, this 200 acres ought to last for 100 years. In the near future, they will be moving south of Eubanks Road where there is 70 acres. This is currently projected to last until the year 2000. In siting a landfill, consideration must be given to buffers and land within the fill area that may not be usable because of streams, rocks, outcropping, etc. The site selection criteria called for looking for a site from 300 to 500 acres which would provide a life expectancy of 20 to 25 years. but that was with no assumptions for volume reduction. The site should last much longer because the County expects to achieve significant volume reduction. He feels it is necessary to find the largest landfill that is consistent with the sites that are available. The acreage listed for each of the four sites is the total acreage of the parcels that are touched by the ameba and not the size of the potentially usable area. He would like to see the engineers reduce that figure to the area that is most likely to come out of the search rather than use the total acreage. One reason for stating the total acreage is because one approach to acquisition of land would be to purchase the entire tracts that are affected instead of negotiating for just the portion that is needed. 7 Commissioner Halkiotis stated that he has some serious concerns with respect to_the letter from Mark Taylor to Gayle Wilson dated July 7, 1992 and the implications that-are not true. He feels that if the County can save money and go the less intrusive route that it should be considered.. He stated that the County needs mandatory recycling. The County .Commissioners have a responsibility to the rural citizens on the issue of the landfill and recycling. He strongly supports a composting operation. He will fight to protect people's property so that it is not damaged but will not be responsible and pay for any damage-done to private property. He is against drilling on people's land. Commissioner Willhoit agrees with a composting operation. He is also-concerned about the inconsistencies in the letter and would like to have this cleared up. His understanding of the difference between the test pits and the test borings is that if the borings are grouted correctly, it would not present a-permanent impediment to the development of the land, whereas the test pits and the required setbacks by the .state health regulations are less certain. He suggested that they nat authorize the test pits until that can--be~ verified. He suggested that the Hoard meet with the Landfill Site Search Cammittee because in this entire process there must be a transfer of ownership from the Landfill Site Search Committee to the consultants to the Board. He feels that a lot of the questions have been discussed and the Board members can get a lot of their questions answered at such a meeting. One question is why was site 10 taken off and site 11 left on when they have similar characteristics. Another question is whether the committee process possibly overlooked a site. Chair Carey expressed his concern about the information in the letter that appears to be untrue. His biggest concern is with the impact of the testing and the excavation on the property. He doesn't feel that they have enough information to select just one site for testing as suggested by someone in the audience. He supports a less-intrusive way of testing before using the more intrusive testing that must be done. He would like to be able to exclude some sites before doing more intrusive type testing but he needs more information. Commissioner Insko stated she favors doing less invasive type testing if possible. This may not lead to the elimination of any of the sites but it may. She feels that the Board should take every step possible to get additional information in an effort to eliminate one or more sites. Commissioner Gordon still questions if these are the proper sites to test. She has questions about the process and understanding the criteria used. She questioned the location and -the size. Also, she questions if these are the proper testing procedures and, if not, which procedures should they use. She asked if there is adequate protection for the landowners and should there be compensation for damage. She favors a work session of the Commissioners. She feels it is complicated enough to ask the staff to develop a recommended process for the Commissioners' input in deciding whether it would be helpful to have the Landfill Site Search Committee involved. Commissioner Insko favors a work session with the Landfill Site Search Committee. She would like additional information on how they selected the four sites as well as other information. She would like to have the difference between site 10 and site 11 explained to her. She does not want to take the process away from the Landfill Site Search Committee. There does 8 need to be a process where the ownership is transferred but this committee has done a lot of work and invested a .lot of time in the process. She feels strongly that site 9 is not feasible. She questions how trucks would reach site 9 without going down Churton Street. It would be difficult to put trucks on little country roads to go around Hillsborough and would increase_ the amount of drive time .which is not reasonable. Site 11 has some of these same problems. Chair Carey feels it very important to have these questions answered. There seems to be a consensus that the less invasive type testing w is preferable at this point. It was decided that a meeting Grith the Landfill Site Seareh Committee-would be held before the testing-would proceed. The LOG will be invited to participate as well as the elected officials of ~' Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. At this meeting there will be a review of the technology of testing, information about-the sites that were chosen and those that were not, and the criteria for-the size of the lots. John Link suggested that the work session be arranged so that the other elected bodies are invited to attend as well as the LOG, and the LSSC. He feels that they should articulate the questions they have that relate to -ownership and concerns they have so that the other governing bodies will know that the Board of Commissioners. has thoughtfully pursued the questions and still has other outstanding questions that need to be resolved. He understands the questions to be (1) the process itself, (2) the techniques being recommended as they pursue the final site, (3) the Taylor-Wi-lson letter and what was intended, (4) compensation for landowners, and (5) realistic size of landfill site. V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - NONE VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PD-1-92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL Planner Emily Cameron stated that this item is to consider a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which is an existing private school. A public hearing was held on May 26. No citizen comments were received. The hearing was held open to receive the Planning Board recommendation which is included in the findings in the agenda abstract. If positive findings are made, the administration recommends approval with the added conditions to the Special Use Permit. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to make positive findings on pages eight through eighteen as included in the agenda abstract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to make positive findings on the three items as listed on page nineteen of the agenda abstract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Insko and seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School subject to the additional conditions listed below which will be placed on the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. 9 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Resource Center, submit final- grading/erosion control plans and storm drainage calculations .for review and approval by Orange County Erosion Control;. 2. Revise .the site plan to: a. Remove parallel parking along the east side of the driveway between the basketball court and the creek. All proposed parking must be at least 75 feet from the lot boundaries; b. Indicate clearing limits and tree protection fencing for the expansion of the Upper School access, parking and the Resource Center. Provide a detail of the method-of tree protection and _add a note which states that no storage of construction materials or vehicles is to occur beyond the clearing limits; and c. Show the boundaries of lot 7.6..2. VOTE: UNANIMOUS VII. REPORTS A. ORANGE COIINTY SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS John Link noted that in January, 1992, the Board of Commissioners established the Orange County Solid Waste Committee with a specific charge as outlined in the agenda abstract. Rod Visser recognized the committee members present. He stated that this committee formed four sub-committees. The Collection Options sub- committee has been discussing alternatives for solid waste collection. In their report they presented three recommendations: 1. To develop the Ferguson Road Solid Waste Collection Center as a staffed site, using the compactor collection center model. 2. To work cooperatively with the community to identify two additional solid waste collection center sites in northern Orange County. 3. To associate the closure of existing greenbox sites with development of new solid waste sites. Rod Visser noted that in order. to develop a compactor collection center at the Ferguson Road site, the County would need to pursue one of two options. They could purchase additional land at Ferguson Road or ask for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. He asked that the staff be directed to pursue these two options. Commissioner Halkiotis spoke in support of this recommendation. He asked about the cost of manning the sites and Wilbert McAdoo stated that for eight months the total operational cost will be approximately $65,000. Woodhall Stopford, Chair of the Orange County Solid Waste Committee stated that the committee has accepted as their charge to meet the state requirements to reduce the amount of waste being landfilled by 25~ and 400 by 1996. This is just the first set of recommendations for meeting that to goal. .Their ultimate goal is to eliminate the need for a large amount of land for a landfill. They are also charged with making this a cost effective system. They will make recommendations on how to finance: this in an equitable way. They agree there is a need _f or recycling. However, in conserving land they will need to consider everything that-goes into the landfill. He emphasized that the committee is working hard and will be reporting to the Board of County Commissioners on a regular basis. The Board endorsed the recommendations in the report. B. COUNTY INTER-OFFICE WASTE REHUCTION Wilbert McAdoo gave> a brief report .on the current. inter office "Paper Back" waste reduction program and plans for. enhancement of the program. He stated that the Count~t~and Orange Regional Recycling staff will be developing,a-plan of action for waste redaction in the Orange County School System: C. JAIL INSPECTION REPORT The jail inspection report for July 1, 1992 was received by the Board. Corrective action is being taken as required. VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA A. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TENET AMENDMENT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as stated below: ARTICLE 2.2.14.3 "Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in~February; provided, however, if a principal amendment is scheduled by the Board of Commissioners for other than the February public hearing, it shall be scheduled during one of the quarterly public hearings held in May, August, and November." VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. INTRODUCTION OF BOND ORDER AND SWORN STATEMENT OF DEBT The Bond Order was introduced by Chair Moses Carey, Jr. Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit to approve the Bond Order as presented in the agenda and as read by the Chair. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to authorize the Deputy Finance Director to file the "Sworn Statement of Debt", set the public hearing date for August 18, 1992 and instruct the Clerk to publish the Bond Order and public hearing notice by August 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 11 Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit. to approve the form of the bond question to be posed on the November 3, 19'9'Z ballot and authorize any County Commissioner to revise it and send to Brown and Wood. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. ADVERTISEMEPIT - AUGUST 24, 1992 OUARTER~Y_PUBLIC HEARING Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the advertisement for the August 24, 1992 public hearing as submitted with the addition .of a definition for ten-year transition. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. Z-2-92 P & S SPORTING` GOODS, INC. - ZONING.~ATLA3 AMEND~+IENT The property in question is located on the south-side of NC Highway 54 between Morrow-Mill Road and Orange Grove Road. The total area proposed for rezoning contains 3.98'acres and is described as part of Lot 28 of Tax Map 26 in Bingham Township. .The current zoning is Agricultural Residential. The zoning districts proposed are 2.06 acres of Local Commercial-1 and 1.92 acres of Neighborhood Commercial-2. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the Zoning Atlas amendment from AR to LC-1 and NC-2 based on the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. FEATHERWOOD PHASE II - PRELIMINARY PLAN This property is located at the southeast corner of Piney Grove Church Road and U5 70 Business in Eno Township. The property is zoned Rural Residential (R-1?. Eight lots are proposed out. of 10.24 acres. The average lot size is 1.29 acres. The Planning Staff has evaluated the request for a private road and, due to the location, size of lots, and private road criteria, recommends a public road. The Planning Board recommends approval with a Class B private road and the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to approve the preliminary Plan for Featherwood Phase II with a public road built to state standards based on the Planning Staff findings contained in Section IV-B-3-d-1 of the Subdivision Regulations and subject to the conditions contained in the attached Resolution of Approval. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IX. BOARD COMMENTS - NONE X. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT - NONE XI. APPOINTMENTS PROGRAM COMMITTEE FOR THE NEW HIGH SCHOOL Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Commissioner Verla Insko to serve on this committee. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 12 CHAPEL HILL PLANNING BOARD Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Chair Carey to reappoint Marianna Chambliss for a term ending June 30, 1995 and to appoint Tim Ream to a term ending June 30, 1994. VOTE: UNANIMOUS HUMAN-RELATIONS COMMISSION Motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Insko to appoint Susan Kim Furtney for a term. ending December 30, 19.94. VOTE: UNANIMOUS NURSING HOME COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Lane Beauchamp to a term ending_June 30, 1993. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XII. MINUTES Motion was made_by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the minutes for the June 29, 1992 Regular Meeting as corrected. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - NONE XIV. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to consider, Chair Carey adjourned the meeting at 10:45. The next regular meeting will be held on August 18, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the OWASA Meeting Room in Carrboro, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk