Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 199405051 APPROVED 6/6/94 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JOINT MEETING MAY 5, 1994 MINUTES and the Orange County Planning 1994 at 7:30 p.m. in Superior the purpose of holding a joint The Orange County Board of Commissioners Board met in joint session on Thursday, May 5, Court Room, Hillsborough, North Carolina, for public hearing. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and Commissioners Alice Gordon, Verla Insko, Stephen Halkiotis and Don Willhoit. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair William Waddell, and members Margaret Brown, Elizabeth Walters, Virginia Boland, Karen Barrows, Cheri Rosemond, and Clint Burklin COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John Link, Clerk to the Board Beverly Blythe, Planning Director Marvin Collins and Planner Mary Willis. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR Chair Carey welcomed everyone to the meeting. B. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Carey read the public charge. C. PUBLIC HEARING 1. CP-2-94 PROPOSED OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT AREA LAND IISE PLAN CATEGORY 2. CP-3-94 UNIVERSITY STATION These items were presented by Planning Director Marvin Collins for the purpose of receiving citizen comments on proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. The specific proposal is to create a new land use plan category entitled "Open Space Development Area." The second item to be considered is the application of that category to the University Station project. In December, 1993 the Board of Commissioners and the Hillsborough Town Board met to discuss various items related to the cooperative planning effort between the two jurisdictions. A Work Group was established to concentrate on issues relating to the University Station project. The Town of Hillsborough was considering whether to annex the University Station property or to leave it in the County's jurisdiction. In January, 1994 the Work Group met to consider a draft resolution which called for the formation of a Small Area Planning Group with a specific charge for dealing with University Station. After further consideration, both Boards adopted resolutions containing charges to that work group. Both jurisdictions committed to the principle that areas designated open space would generally remain non-urban, contain low density residential uses and allow for the extension of town water and sewer into designated open space areas serving 2 large developments or combinations of small ones which set aside significant open space. The County charge also included the statement that such projects would conform to adopted Rural Character Study guidelines. The Charge called for at least 30$ of the buildable area to be set aside as open space. "Buildable area" was defined as the total tract area, less any rights-of-way for streets, railroads or utility lines. This 30$ did not include unbuildable, natural, or cultural resources such as wetlands or steep slopes. The County resolution also stated that no more than two units per acre could be established on the buildable acreage. The Charge adopted by Hillsborough indicated that the 30~ buildable space applied to the total tract, without consideration of unbuildable areas or rights-of-way. They also indicated that no more than two units per acre would be applied to the remaining 70$. The Work Group held an organizational meeting and then participated in a design workshop. A set of recommendations was presented to the governing boards. The basic issues before the Work Group were how much open space to recommend, exactly what is open space, how much density should be allowed and how would it be applied. Also, issues surrounding water and sewer services were discussed. In February two teams were formed. The Hillsborough team was comprised of the Town Board members and the developer's representatives. The County team consisted of the County Commissioners and the neighborhood representatives. Both teams presented a plan. The neighborhood also presented the "Arendt Plan". Each of these proposed plans resulted in a recommended primary conservation area of 151.9 acres; however, the secondary conservation areas varied greatly. Hillsborough's plan suggested 248.8 acres. Orange County's plan suggested 309.7 acres and the Arendt plan suggested 523.4 acres. Charts showing how these figures were reached are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. A chart called "Summary of open space and development characteristics for the University Station site" indicated the number of allowable units for each of these plans. The Hillsborough plan allowed 1,082 units, the Orange County plan allowed 930 and the Arendt plan allowed 464. The Work Group reached consensus on the issue of providing public utilities. They agreed to limit public utilities to the University Station project and stressed the importance of that limitation being enforceable. The density would be limited to 946 individual units, however, the density impact would be addressed by the County as part of the public hearing process. Also, the level of density could be adjusted subject to the monetary advantages of land conservancy to the developers. Intensive discussion focused on the use of the 160 acres between Old NC 10 and the railroad tract. Although, initially consensus was reached, it was decided that further discussion was needed to define an option which establishes for this area an appropriate mix of open space, elements of the golf course, wildlife corridor, and/or necessary number of housing units. Various options are being presented for citizen comments at this meeting. A new Land Use Plan category called "Open Space Development Area", was presented at this Public Hearing. The Board of Commissioners are scheduled to receive a report on May 17th on the Rural Character Strategies. On May 23rd, at the regular Quarterly Public Hearing, another public hearing will be held relating to this issue. Zoning Standards and a new Zoning District, entitled Open Space Development, will be presented for citizen ,comment. That 3 Zoning district and the standards associated with it, seek to implement a planning category that is being proposed tonight. Without those standards in place, the project being presented would not be in a position to be evaluated. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD In response to a question from Commission Insko, Marvin Collins indicated that the Board could request that the comments received at this meeting be considered as part of the public record for the May 23rd meeting. Collins indicated that if developers donated a certain amount of open space to a conservancy and they were able to obtain tax credits or other financial benefits, it might be possible to reduce the density based on the open space that was preserved. The other possibility is that they might be compensated by a conservancy or other organization for this open space, which they could apply to the project cost. This would result in reduced density. In response to a question, he indicated that the Lacefield property contains 176 lots. Also, he indicated that the 120 acre plot west of the wildlife corridor drains toward the stream. Roger Bernholtz, an attorney representing Arthur Cogswell and Amerivest, Inc, the developers who are requesting that these amendments be adopted, said that this proposal is actually a rural village. The land is currently zoned R1 which would allow development of residential structures, approximately 1 per acre, with septic tanks and wells. The plan is to create an area where the land is protected with large areas of open space. The amount of open space would be at least 30~. He feels that this proposed development is the best choice for the land. To the west of this land is the 10 year transition area which has been designated in the Land Use Plan for the expansion of water and sewer. To the east of this site is a trailer park. He said that this land is particularly suited for the category that is being proposed. It would create a slightly higher density development area than the rural buffer. The open space category states that 30$ of the gross land area of the tract be set aside as open space. That is a reasonable and progressive amount of set aside land. He indicated that it is important to create a development category that will allow for the development of water and sewer for this project. He feels that managed and controlled growth for residential development using water and sewer is the best approach. The density needs to be established by using a formula. That formula would subtract the amount of open space from the total amount of gross land area with the application of a maximum density of two units per acre. He also indicated the need for a variety of zoning categories in the land use designation. A rural village development concept needs to be a possibility. Local or community commercial areas will be necessary in this type of area. Open space normally includes all areas which cannot be built. He suggested that open space include vegetative recreation areas, buffers, setbacks for utility easements as well as other areas which by their nature must be left open. The goal is to create unified areas of open space. THE PUBLIC BEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS 4 Michael Warner, an Orange County resident, indicated that he supports the need for open space. However, the real issue is density. He opposes allowing two units per acre which would quadruple the present density allowances. He feels that this proposal would destroy the rural character of Orange County. He indicated that the typical density in rural Orange County is approximately 7 houses per 100 acres. The density in the Town of Hillsborough is 71 units per 100 acres. The density in the Town of Chapel Hill is 147 houses per 100 acres. He indicated that the current proposal would allow up to two units per acre which is 200 houses per 100 acres. If the 30$ was subtracted from the 100 acres it would allow 200 houses on 70 acres. He suggested a proposal be adopted that requires open space and allows septic systems using the present Land Use Plan. Robert Grill, architect and planner from Greensboro, indicated that the roads in the rural portions of the County are currently underutilized. The proposed development will not appreciably impact these roads. It will increase traffic, however, the roads are certainly able to handle it. There will be left turn lanes added to help traffic move along. He indicated that current traffic counts indicate that approx 1500 to 2000 cars a day travel on Old NC 10; approximately 1000 to 1500 on New Hope Church Road; and approximately 400 on University Station Road. He indicated that additional traffic resulting from this development would be 5000 to 6000 cars each day. They estimate that 3000 of those cars will travel south on New Hope Church Road or Hwy. 86; an additional 25~ would travel east on Hwy. 10; and, 15~ would go west on Hwy 10. Dr. Leon Lucas, with N.C. State University, addressed the issues of turf grass and open space. He commented that the majority of turf grass is used in home and golf courses. Turf grass stabilizes soils, improves water infiltration, removes sediment from water, and cools surrounding areas. He indicated the State has established many regulations in the use of this turf grass in order to avoid sedimentation. Tests have shown that when fertilizer and pesticides were applied according to best management practices, no problems were detected. Turf grass is considered to be an excellent biological filter system. He stated that he feels that well-maintained golf courses should be considered as open space. Roy Roth, an Orange County resident, spoke against this proposed amendment saying that it would negatively impact the school system, increase automobile traffic, devastate rural open space and increase the tax burden of Orange County residents. His comments in their entirety are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Robert Griffin, a resident of the Town of Chapel Hill, asked that the open space designation be based on long term planning rather than on the short term development interest. He requested that a small group of scientifically trained citizens be appointed to study this issue before any development is started. Martha Lorantos, a resident of Orange County, spoke in support of long range planning. She does not support the Land Use Plan which is being considered. She spoke in favor of using the Arendt plan as a first choice and 5 the current zoning if the Arendt plan is not adopted. Jan Halle, an Orange County resident, spoke against the extension of water and sewer from Hillsborough. Open space and cluster development is the answer for the rural area; however, developers need to be required to adhere to the current zoning. The average perkability is approximately one unit per two acres; quadrupling the density does not provide the answer to more open space. She felt that open space needs to be properly defined as river and stream beds, agricultural lands, and contiguous wildlife corridors. Diane Bloom , an Orange County resident, stated that there are 24,000 acres in Eno Township and 20,000 which could be developed. A long range planning process is vital in order to protect a unique and rich blend of wetlands and woodlands. She suggested as a requirement for open space cluster developments, under a yield plan, 50% of the buildable land be set aside for agricultural, preserved woodlands or active recreation. That would preserve the beauty and be economically beneficial. Callie Warner, an Orange County resident, spoke against this proposal and presented the following petition signed by 70 residents. She also presented slides which showed the proposed University Station area and the natural beauty of that area. "This petition is a formal request to the Board of County Commissioners by the undersigned citizens of Orange County. We would like to participate in a small area planning process in the rural-residential section of Orange County. The area under consideration would encompass approximately 3000 acres bounded to the West by Old 86, to the East by Highway 70, to the North by Hillsborough's Transition Area and to the South by the Rural Buffer. This area would include the proposed University Station site. Many property owners in this region are willing to engage in a pro- active process for long-range planning. Due to the tremendous growth in this part of the county, and a common goal to preserve and protect significant ecological and rural features, we feel the small area planning process is the only appropriate approach. This is not an unprecedented request. The southern part of Orange County (in the Chapel Hill Planning Jurisdiction) has already engaged in one small area planning process which led to a successful conclusion. We would appreciate your prompt attention to this request and we feel confident that, as our elected officials, you will support a process that encourages citizen participation." Julie Andresen, an Orange County resident, spoke as a member of the Citizens for Livable Communities committee. She indicated that it is important to apply the principles of sustainable development to the land in Orange County. One of those principles is to conserve and preserve natural resources. Another is to encourage local empowerment and participation. Also, it is necessary to apply zoning based on a vision created by the people 6 in the community. A plan needs to be implemented which is not a direct response to an individual development. Developers must be required to pay for the impact of their development. The current proposal would create an urban development with a demand for urban services which will put a tax burden on the current residents. Development follows water and sewer and should not be used to solve all of the problems related to failing sewers in the rural areas. It is very expensive and not necessarily the appropriate answer in the rural areas. She feels that non-municipal alternative systems can be made safe and function very well. Gwen Cagle spoke in opposition to this proposal. As a land owner in close proximity to the proposed University Station development, she feels that the quality of life would be greatly harmed if this was approved. Sandy Stallings, a resident of Orange County, indicated that the rural character of the area has changed dramatically in the last 25 years. She said that long range goals, not development options, need to be used in making zoning decisions. If water and sewer is extended into the rural residential area, as well as the rural buffer, land values will rise which will prevent small scale, low impact, development. This proposal will encourage urban sprawl. Cluster development with open space is the solution but must be based on the carrying capacity of the land with fifty (50~) open space, excluding the unbuildable areas. She suggested appointing a committee of biologists and concerned citizens to study and define how open space preservation should be determined. Ilene Siegler, a resident of Orange County, spoke against this proposed amendment saying that the rural buffer and rural character both need to be preserved. Dennis Boucher, small business owner in Hillsborough and an Orange County landowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed land use amendment. He suggested that only long range planning be permitted based upon 50$ open space, including the unbuildable areas, and adopted into the Comprehensive Use Plan. He feels that water and sewer needs to be prohibited in the rural residential and rural buffer areas. He asked that citizens be included in a small area planning process. Barbara Robertson, a resident of Old NC 10, spoke in opposition to this proposed amendment. In particular she supported the comments made by Callie Warner. Her neighbors are worried about the University Station proposal. Affordable housing is an issue not addressed by this proposal. Long range planning needs to be done with citizen participation. Dan Kenan, an Orange County resident, spoke in opposition to this proposal. He is in favor of open space development but feels that the amendment being considered would create urban sprawl. Changes to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan regarding open space needs to be handled by a small area planning group. No amendment should occur until such a plan has been completed. He mentioned that the Cooperative Sanctuary has stressed environmental education aimed at the golf course management industry. This program receives endorsement and financial support from the U.S. Golf Association, Club Managers Association and the PGA Tour. The standards established by the Cooperative Sanctuary program needs to be applied as the minimum standards for all new golf course construction. A copy of his full statement is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. John Hartwell made reference to when the water and sewer policy was initially established. He pointed out that this policy was intended to discourage the extension of water and sewer to other areas. At that time the Board of Commissioners had reservations about whether water providers could be prevented from allowing tap-on's, even with stipulations, if the lines were already in place. He suggested that the current prohibitions be maintained. If cluster development is allowed in the rural buffer it will be necessary to provide water and sewer. Lester Ray, an Orange County dairy farmer, commented that his family has farmed in the County for 7 generations. He spoke in opposition to the open space category. The average age of the Orange County dairy farmer in 60 years old. This indicates that much land will change hands in the next 10 years. There is not currently an option for preserving farm land. The transfer of development rights and the purchase of development rights needs to be studied and implemented in the County. Bob Hall, an Orange County resident, spoke in opposition to this amendment. The definition of Open Space is vague and must be more clearly defined. He stated that the zoning districts being presented do not actually apply to the University Station request. He indicated that some of the language in the proposal uses words like "may" be rather than "shall or must be." This proposal offers incentives for heavy development in areas where that type of development should not happen. He read from the Concept page (pg. 3.2) as follows. "To minimize existing energy efficient and land consuming patterns of rural sprawl, the land use element is premised on two basic strategies: Creating activity nodes and maximizing in-fill development. The in-fill development is premised on the desirability of encouraging development to occur first within the corporate limits of the town, then where appropriate, within the areas surrounding the towns in the transition area from rural to urban. "To achieve this goal requires a combination of incentives and disincentives to development activity, which include but are not limited to allowing higher densities and intensity of land use within the urban and urbanizing areas and allowing only low intensity uses outside of these areas." In his opinion the County Commissioners have a legal basis to reject this amendment. A copy of his complete statement is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Genie Kamirues spoke about the addition of a land use element category of Open Space Development Area. She feels that an open space development plan must exist to protect the land. She asked that 50$ buildable land be protected as open space. The preservation of a wildlife corridor to link major tracts of protected land must be maintained. Also, the maximum number of units should be based on the carrying capacity of the land itself which would allow for the use of alternative systems. Public water and sewer must not be allowed. A small area plan should be developed for each area in Orange County. She stated that the proposed zoning change from R-1 Residential to 8 Open Space Development Area is unacceptable as written. However, if it included 50$ of the buildable land as open space, it would be more acceptable. Rex Bentley, a resident of the New Hope Church Road community, mention several communities which have 50~ of their land set aside as open space. He spoke to planners in Livingston County, Mich., Montgomery County, Penna., and Graffin, Mass. The Open Space Ordinances were well received, even by developers, after they were in place. Two of these Planners suggested not allowing substantial density bonuses for cluster development. They said that the ordinance must be density neutral. They also felt that 50$ open space is necessary to effectively preserve .the rural character. He stated that the densities allowed in this proposal are unacceptable to him. Bob Harrell, a member of the University Station Work Group, stated that this group started with an established set of criteria and then developed plans based on this criteria. If 30~ open space is the only requirement, he felt that the effect of open space would be lost. Marty Mandell, an Orange County resident, spoke in opposition to this proposal. She read from the minutes of a Carrboro Board of Alderman meeting where they directed their Planning Staff to draft an amendment which requires 50~ open space. She feels the density is already too high and that it is important to let the countryside survive for future generations. Stanley Robbing, an Orange County resident, spoke in support of the Arendt Plan and requested that the Board of Commissioners study and consider it carefully. Allen Seiferheld, a resident of Orange County, spoke in opposition of allowing the extension of water and sewer into the open space development area. Lee Rafalow, an Orange County resident and member of the University Station Planning group, spoke in support of small area plans. He asked if open space is designed to preserve rural character or is it designed to promote urban sprawl. It is well documented that extending water and sewer causes urban sprawl. Density allowances must be such that water and sewer is not required. He feels that a small cluster development can be supported by alternative systems and large clusters cannot. Open space must be defined as preservation of the existing rural character. Larry Bohs, an Orange County resident, lives north of the proposed development. He feels that it is important that the County proceed thoughtfully with future growth preserving at least 50~ of the buildable land and that developments should provide their own water treatment facilities. A small area plan should be completed before any changes to the Land Use Plan is considered. He thinks that development in Orange County can be provided for while continuing to preserve the rivers, forests, farms, and wildlife. He feels that the Stony Creek area would be irrevocably changed if this development is approved and that high density development and a golf course would cause an unnatural amount of runoff to occur which would greatly damage the creek and surrounding areas. A copy of his complete statement is in the 9 permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Meg McKean, an Orange County resident, spoke in favor of Open Space preservation. She stated that incremental zoning changes and variances to Comprehensive Planning needs to be rejected as a way of planning for the future growth of Orange County. She supported a set aside of at least 50~ of the buildable land based on the Arendt plan. David Obenshain, a resident of the Strayhorn Hills area, spoke in support of well planned growth in Orange County. He mentioned that the services currently provided to him as a resident and employee of Hillsborough are less than adequate. That situation needs to be corrected prior to increasing the need for additional services from the Town of Hillsborough. *END OF CITIZEN COMMENT Letters received and made a part of these minutes by reference are listed below: Elizabeth Woodman is against the proposed University Station project. She asked that the Board reject the radical high-density University Station golf course development and open discussion on high-quality growth being promoted by her family and many others in this community. John Prater of New Hope Drive stated his opposition to the proposed zoning changes which he feels will drastically alter the rural character of the County. He would like for the County's Land Use Plan to disallow any form of high density development. He asked that golf courses not be considered as open space. Jennifer Miller of Mt. Sinai Road said in her letter that public interest and infrastructure concerns should steer the Board away from the proposed University Station high density development. She feels the effects from this proposed development will be devastating to the environment, schools, roads, public safety and health. She feels the open space amendment should follow the rural character study effort. She asked that the Board put public interest before private fortunes. Robert Cantwell of Cascade Drive feels the County needs a combination of the "Arendt Plan" and economic incentives such as development rights purchase programs. He feels that open space, as much as clean air and clean water, is esential to the general welfare. *END OF WRITTEN COMMENTS DISCIISSION BY THE BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Gordon asked if the Board could continue to discuss this matter and also refer it to the Planning Board. Commissioner Insko asked for clarification on what could happen to this area using the current zoning during the next several years if a small area planning process was adopted? Would the Board of Commissioners have any control over requiring open space for this area under existing zoning regulations? Another option to consider would be to stop this process and use existing zoning until the Rural Character process is completed. She asked 10 what would be the shortest possible time frame for annexation by Hillsborough? How will the analysis of the impact proceed? Commissioner Willhoit indicated that the Planning Board and staff will decide if the traffic impact data is relevant. Commissioner Gordon raised the possibility of not sending this to the Planning Board until after hearing the Rural Character Study recommendations. John Link suggested that the responses to questions raised tonight be presented at a joint meeting between the Board of County Commissioners and the Planning Board on May 31st. The report from the Rural Character Study Committee will be presented to the Board of Commissioners at the regular meeting on May 17th. Commissioner Willhoit indicated that he agreed with many of the comments made about long range planning. He restated the reason the County initially entered into this process. A developer was making this proposal and the Town of Hillsborough was considering annexation. This was a modified small group process. The purpose was to attempt to reach a consensus which was accomplished with many of the issues. The Planning Board needs to answer the question "is the proposal, as submitted, or modified by the Planning Board's recommendation, preferable to the alternative that may occur?" He asked that this issue not be contingent on the Rural Character Study recommendations because it is unlikely that the County Commissioners will reach a consensus on the rural character issue by May 17th. The question is does the Board approve this development now or take a chance on the alternatives? Staff was requested to report on the impact of the following options: -annexation, -a two to three year long small area planning process, or -developing the area using the existing zoning. Commissioner Willhoit commented that he would like to see the Rural Character Study Committee's recommendations and systematically adopt what can be adopted and fine tune the remaining harts. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Insko, to adjourn this meeting to the May 17, 1994, meeting for decision. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Moses Carey, Jr., Chair