Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 199510021 i~ APPROVED 11/14/95 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1995 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Monday, October 2, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, new County. Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and Commissioners William L. Crowther, Alice M. Gordon, Stephen H. Halkiotis and Don Willhoit. COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Rod Visser and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe (other staff members are identified appropriately below) NOTE: All documents referred to in these minutes are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office. All amendments to County Ordinances are in the Ordinance Book in the Commissioners' Library. All tapes of this meeting including discussion will be kept for five years for further reference. I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Item "O" was removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered immediately following the Consent Agenda. II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair Carey said that all citizens who have indicated a desire to speak to an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. B. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Peter Langan, President of the Wildwood Homeowners Assoc., asked that the County take Oakdale Extension through Wildwood off the Hillsborough thoroughfare plan. He talked about the water and drainage problems that are present and read a prepared statement. He invited the Board of County Commissioners to visit Wildwood to see how an extension would devastate their neighborhood. The Board asked the County Manager to report on these concerns including the drainage problems. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Carey read the public charge. III. BOARD COMMENTS - NONE IV. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT - NONE 2 V. RESOLUTIONS/PROCLAMATIONS A. RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE SITING OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITY Chair Carey noted that Congressman Fred Heineman has requested the Board to consider adopting a resolution against the Low Level Waste site at Holly Springs. Commissioner Willhoit distributed a suggested response to this request in place of the resolution. He said that the request from Congressman Heineman was a typical NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) response and the resolution points to some citizen committees in Chatham who have determined that this is not an adequate site. The State of North Carolina, Radiation Protection Division, has been considering the license application and is well equipped to act on this in a responsible manner. He feels there are some things that Congress needs to do on this and asked that the Board send a letter to Congressman Heineman with suggestions on how Congress can help. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis that the Board send a letter to Congressman Heineman outlining those points mentioned in Commissioner Willhoit's memorandum dated October 2, 1995. Commissioner Gordon suggested holding this item until the next meeting to formulate a reasonable opposition to this specific site. She has previously asked that the transportation of hazardous nuclear waste through Orange County to the Holly springs site be specified and the impact analyzed. Commissioner Gordon made a substitute motion to table this item until October 17, seconded by Commissioner Crowther. VOTE ON THE MOTION TO TABLE: AYES, 2; NOS, 3 (Commissioners Carey, Halkiotis and Willhoit) VOTE ON THE MOTION TO SEND A LETTER WHICH DOES NOT PRECLUDE CONSIDERING A RESOLUTION ON OCTOBER 17: AYES, 4, NOS, 1 (Commissioner Gordon) Commissioner Gordon will work with the Manager to formulate a new resolution. Commissioner Willhoit said that if transportation is a concern that the resolution to be presented on October 17 could include this concern. John Link noted that potential routes to the site will not be considered by the State until after the site is chosen. B. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR INSTALLMENT PURCHASE FINANCING FOR THE JAIL/COURTHOUSE AND SOUTHERN HUMAN SERVICES CENTER A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the resolution as attached to these minutes on pages authorizing the filing of an application for installment purchase financing for the jail/courthouse and southern human services center. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. NATIONAL DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT AWARENESS MONTH PROCLAMATION 3 A motion was made from Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the proclamation as stated below: PROCLAMATION NATIONAL DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT AWARENESS MONTH OCTOBER 1995 WHEREAS, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is the most comprehensive civil rights legislation for people with disabilities; and. WHEREAS, the ADA provides anti-discrimination protection for Americans with disabilities in public and private employment, public accommodations, transportation and telecommunications; and WHEREAS, it is evidenced through the ADA that Americans with disabilities are integral, contributing, productive, and valued citizens; and WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to full compliance and implementation of the ADA; and WHEREAS, Orange County needs the talents, skills and abilities of every one of our citizens, including our citizens with disabilities; and WHEREAS, Orange County cannot afford to lose the contributions that people with disabilities bring, not only to the workplace but also to mainstream community life; and WHEREAS, Congress, by Joint Resolution, has designated October of each year as "National Disability Employment Awareness Month"; and WHEREAS, this month provides the opportunity for all Americans to recognize the tremendous value and potential of people with disabilities, and to recommit and dedicate ourselves to the empowerment, integration, employment, and full inclusion of everyone of our citizens with disabilities. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that October 1995 is National Disability Employment Awareness Month in Orange County. VOTE: UNANIMOUS VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. HUNTING ORDINANCE John Link gave background information that is in the agenda. He noted that in reviewing the ordinance, they have taken into consideration the complaints they have received from citizens, law enforcement and the Wildlife Commission. The comments received tonight will be considered by the Hunting Ordinance Committee which will report back to the Board of County Commissioners with specific recommendations. John Link summarized the eight (8) proposals as listed in the agenda. They are listed below for reference purposes: (1) Encourage hunters to use tree stands while hunting deer. By shooting downward, this would limit the angle and travel distance of the bullets. PROPOSAL: To require the use of deer tree stands, especially in areas near residences. (2) Include rules to regulate the use of center-fired rifles. PROPOSAL: To allow use only if hunter is 8 feet above ground. (This would require the use of deer tree stands.) 4 (3) Limit hunting in areas near highly-populated areas. PROPOSAL: Request the Wildlife Commission to provide hunting restrictions in certain populated areas of the county. (4) Reverse the present posting requirement. Currently, posting of property is required if landowners do not allow hunting on their property. PROPOSAL: To pursue the Wake County approach. Property is posted only if the landowner permits hunting. (5) Option to implementation of #4 - Maintain current practice; however encourage hunt clubs to approach large landowners to post property accordingly. (6) Advocate for continuing education for every hunter. Currently only newly licensed hunters are required to take safety classes; it is optional for long-time licensees. PROPOSAL: To require hunting safety classes for all licensed hunters. (7) Restrict the use of shotgun pellets for deer hunting; instead allow only usage of slugs. PROPOSAL: Request the Wildlife Commission to pursue the appropriate legislation. (8) Although not discussed during the committee meetings, a citizen has requested that there be a restriction placed on the use of dogs while hunting deer. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS MICHAEL HOOD, resident of Eno Township, avid hunter and volunteer instructor for hunter safety courses, does not like the required use of tree stands because people fall from them, drop rifles and shoot themselves. Restricting center-fired rifles might be a good thing around Chapel Hill and southern Orange County because of the close proximity of houses. Northern Orange County is not that populated yet. As far as the Wildlife Commission proposing restrictions around populated areas, he asked how they would set the criteria. With reference to posting, he would rather see the Chatham County regulation for Orange County. It requires the written permission from a landowner for a hunter to go onto their property to use any firearm, bow and arrow, shotgun, etc. He agrees with requiring the hunter safety course for every hunter. He said there is no law regulating the use of slugs or pellets. It is okay with him to not allow hunting dogs. JANE GAEDE spoke about the use of dogs to hunt deer. She and her husband presented their concerns about this matter to the Hunting and Fishing Ordinance Committee in time for them to consider this subject. However, the committee did not discuss their proposal which is the reason she is speaking on this issue tonight. She said that the use of dogs to hunt deer is already prohibited in North Carolina in forty-six counties and parts of four other counties including Orange County south of I-85 (.0109 of the North Carolina Administrative Code). She would like to see this prohibition extended to all of Orange County. According to the Animal Control Ordinance, all animals are to remain on the owners property. Dogs must be on a leash when off the owners property. Hunting dogs used during 5 a legal hunt are accepted but only while the dogs are under the control of the owner or keeper. She feels that hunters can not or~will not control these dog packs. The hunters claim that their dogs can't read the posted signs. She claims that these hysterical dogs pursuing terrified deer are not under anybody's control. Property owners are suppose to be able to control what goes on their property but hunters seem to think this is a Communist country and private property rights don't exist. She stated that they have their property registered with the North Carolina Wildlife Commission as a restricted no-hunting, no-fishing zone. She puts up the required posted signs using the required lettering and at the required intervals. Despite this, they still get reports from concerned individuals reporting groups of hunters sending dog packs through their wooded property to herd deer in range of hunters lining up across their upper field. She feels that if private property rights in Orange County are to have any meaning whatsoever, the use of dogs to hunt deer needs to be abolished countywide and they request that this action be taken. MIKE HANKINS, President of the North Carolina Wildlife Association, said that deer stands would be hard for obese, older and handicapped hunters to use. If this becomes law, he feels that there needs to be an exception for certain individuals. He asked that the distance from residences be specified. He supports item #2. With reference to item #3, he asked for the definition of highly populated areas. He feels that item #4 should not be changed. He supports item #6 and asked if those hunters who have licenses would be grandfathered in or if there would be a specified time for everyone to take the classes. He feels it would take probably five years for everyone to take the course. He suggested that if hunters hunt from the ground that they use a shotgun with buckshot but if they hunt from a treestand, they be allowed to use a rifle pointing down. JOE TAYLOR supports everything said by Mike Hankins. STEVE JAMES said he is from the community where Dr. Gaede is wanting to do away with dog hunting. He is an avid hunter who uses dogs. He feels hunters should abide by all the rules and said that they do not go on Dr. Gaede's property because they know to stay away from this property. They established the Caldwell Hunting Club to control what hunters do and abide by the laws. Everyone in the Caldwell Hunting Club owns property in the community. He does not see anything on the list that they need to be concerned with. There are not a lot of hunters that have dogs. He asked about the committee members and John Link identified those on the committee. ADAM CATES said that there are a lot of people with deer dogs. He asked where all these dogs will go since the Animal Shelter is already full, if dogs are not allowed when hunting. CHRIS ESCHERICH made reference to the shotgun pellets and said that they use buckshot because slugs are twice as dangerous as buckshot. He asked if they outlaw dogs to hunt deer, will the coon hunters be next or 6 the bird hunters or rabbit hunters. He feels it is discrimination. He feels this law will not stop the house dog from going on other property. He was told that the Animal Control Ordinance controls the house dog. He said there are fifty people who have ten dogs each and he asked if the pound could handle all these dogs if they are not allowed for hunting. Their hunting club has a law that they use buckshot only. The hunting clubs are already policing their members. LARRY PRUSS said that one thing that prompted this proposal was a complaint from a person who found an arrow on her property. This person knows nothing about hunting and he can't believe the Board wants to change the laws because of someone like that. He considers tree stands and the use of center-fired rifles only from deer stands totally unfair. He feels hunting will be severely limited if a person must shoot from a deer stand only. With reference to #3, he would like for a separate board to make this determination. He feels that posting property if hunting is allowed is ridiculous. He feels that people should be required to have written permission or not hunt. He feels that nothing needs to be changed. He would consider it a form of harassment if he had to take a hunting course after hunting for 44 years. He feels there should be no restrictions on shotguns, rifles or slugs. The hunters know where the houses are and are not going to shot toward a house. PHILLIP PENNELL said that the hunters bring a lot of money into the County and that two weeks ago they had a world qualifying hunt with 500 hunters from across the country. He does not support any of the proposals although he is not really opposed to #2. He said that slugs are far more dangerous than buckshot. He apologized for the bad hunters. He said that hunters are not all bad. They are trying to keep the youth out of drugs. He asked that the Board get some professional advice before making a decision on these proposed changes. DONNA DUPONT, mother and wife living in northern Orange County, stated that while walking in the woods, they heard a bullet that came within a foot of her son. She doesn't support slugs because they travel a greater distance and are faster. She supports tree stands but noted that people must be careful not to fall asleep. They have no trouble with dogs on her property. Her concern is that their no-hunting signs were sprayed over in gray. When hunting season starts, she has to keep her little boy in the house. She does not believe these are hunters from Orange County but are hunters from other counties. She supports the hunting classes. EARL BROWN said that he feels all the proposals being made are made in the idea of safety but rules and regulations don't make safety. The safety will have to come from the hunters. He does not support #1 or #2. He feels the posting regulations should remain as is. He agrees with the safety classes. He showed a shotgun pellet and a 12-gauge slug. The 12- gauge slug was larger than the buckshot. He stated that the Caldwell Hunting Club has for three years disallowed the use of rifles while dog hunting. The Club was formed in 1979 for the purpose of having organized hunting. A person must live and own land in Caldwell in order to be a member of this hunting club. This means they will not destroy their neighbors' property. People come from Durham and Chapel Hill and they don't care about the people in the area. They are only interested in killing deer with no regard to the landowner. He noted that the club will have a landowners supper in March and have 500 landowners and have a nice family supper for the community. They also raise money for Orange High School and support other activities in the area. He asked the Board to disregard 90~ of the proposal. CLIFF MORRIS said that there are a lot of people who could not use deer stands because of physical or other reasons. He said that the violators are nonresidents who lease property and cross property lines and don't care. These nonresidents are dangerous to the community. He feels that the $50 fine is not enough for people who trespass on other people's property. Posting of the land is good but a larger fine is needed for those who trespass. MAC MCDADE, member of the Hunting and Fishing Committee, said that these proposals were never brought before the Committee. Colonel Breeze and Sheriff Pendergrass both indicated they have not met on these proposals. These were proposals from private citizens. CARL WALTERS said that he has 500 acres on which to hunt and that he is safety conscious. Never once did they have a problem with a hunting club. The problems are with outsiders. He asked for help on the nonresidents who come in and do what they please. Most of them are from Alamance County. EDDIE REMMICK, resident of Cedar Grove, reiterated that a lot of the hunting problem is from out-of-county residents. He feels that in order to make this a safer place to live that something needs to be done about the crack houses which are all over the neighborhoods. Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to the Hunting and Fishing Ordinance Committee and asked if they in fact reviewed these proposals and made the report as indicated in the agenda. He suggested that the process be reviewed to be sure that everything goes through this Committee. He noted that he has found most hunters in this County to be serious individuals. John Link said that they did have a meeting about two months ago. However, some members of the citizens committee were not in attendance when these discussions took place. These are comments and recommendations that came from individual citizens. The Committee has taken no position on these proposals. Chair Carey said that the full committee will take these comments received tonight into consideration when making their final report. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to refer the comments received tonight back to the Committee for them to review and bring back a recommendation. 8 VOTE: UNANIMOUS VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION (CONSENT AGENDA) A motion was made by Commissioner Crowther, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve those items on the Consent Agenda as stated below: A. APPOINTMENTS The following appointments were made: Orange County/Hillsborough Eno Park Work Group William L. Crowther John M. Link, Jr. Youth Services Advisory Commission Mary Bobbitt-Cook, LaRue Cash, Tom Metzguer and Josephone Harris reappointed until September 30, 1998 Domiciliary Home Community Advisory Commission Florence Soltys reappointed until September 30, 1997 B. MINUTES Th rd approved the minutes for August 3, August 28 and September 5, 1995. C. PERSONNEL ORDINANCE REVISIONS - DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING The Board approved the draft revisions to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance to add a new section which provides for Drug and Alcohol Testing. This section is proposed in part to comply with the Federal drug and alcohol testing regulations effective for Orange county on January 1, 1996. D. AGREEMENT FOR EMPLOYEE COMPUTER TRAINING The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign an agreement with New Horizons Computer Learning Center to provide on-site computer training in Microsoft Office software to Orange County employees at a cost of $15,000. E. WILLIAM HENRY JOHNSON - PARTIAL WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAY The Board approved a request by James Patrick for a reduction in right-of-way width from 50 feet to 30 feet. The property is located north of Harmony Church Road. F. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS - LANDSCAPING AND BUFFER REQUIREMENTS The Board approved the proposed amendments as presented to the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations regarding the amount of a financial guarantee for required landscaping. G. MEMORANDUM RENEWAL WITH NORTH STATE LEGAL SERVICES The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the renewal of the Memorandum of Agreement with North State Legal Services, Inc. for the provision of legal counseling and assistance, as required by Title III of the Older Americans Act. 9 H. TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY MIDDLE SCHOOL AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the agreements as presented providing for a vehicle and driver lease to provide transportation for the Afterschool Program operating at the new A. L. Stanback and Stanford Middle Schools. I. CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND THE UNC SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, DEPARTMENT OF OB/GYN The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a professional service contract between the Orange County Health Department and the UNC School of Medicine to provide an OB/GYN consultant for the Maternal Health Clinic. J. HOUSING REHABILITATION CONTRACT AWARDS The Board approved an award for dwelling unit #19 to Taylor Home Improvements in the amount of $7,435. K. RE UEST FOR PROPOSAL AND NEGOTIATION TEAM FOR CABLE TV The Board approved the "Request for Proposal for Cable- Telecommunication Distribution System Infrastructure" and authorized two cable committee members, County Manager, Assistant County Manager, County Attorney and Cable Consultant to represent the County during negotiations with the cable companies. L. REAPPOINTMENT OF ANIMAL CRUELTY INVESTIGATOR The Board approved the reappointment of Amanda Graham as the County Animal Cruelty Investigator under N.C.G.S. 19A with the understanding that, as appointee of the County, the investigator will continue to follow the cruelty investigation protocol as agreed to by the County and APS, and will be subject to County review as is customary for any County appointed representative. M. CONTRACT APPROVAL FOR MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES The Board approved using the services of Gary Merritt, PE for the sum of $10,500 to prepare technical specifications and drawings for the Animal Shelter drain system and the replacement of the water lines at the Northern Human Services Building in Cedar Grove and authorized the Purchasing Director to execute the appropriate paperwork. N. STATE GRANTS PROGRAM APPLICATION The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a grant application for a National Register nomination for the Cedar Grove Rural Historic District for submission to the State Grants Program for Nonprofit Historical Organizations and Local Government Entities. O. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE SECOND READING 10 This item was removed from the Consent Agenda and considered below. VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Commissioner Crowther, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the second reading of the Animal Control Ordinance as submitted with the effective date changed to November 1, 1995. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IX. ITEMS FOR DECISION (REGULAR AGENDA) A. COUNTY INNOVATION AND EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE John Link summarized the information in the agenda abstract. Commissioner Crowther asked about the cost associated with the two committees and John Link said he will provide that information. He also expressed a concern with increasing the workload for County staff if this effort is compressed into too short a time span. Commissioner Gordon would like to discuss the number of citizens for each committee and requested that a charge be developed for the Board to consider at their next meeting. A motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to move forward with the innovation and efficiency study but to wait on the customer service study and to consider the charge and membership at the October 17 meeting. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY CAROLINIANS TASK FORCE Health Director Dan Reimer summarized the information in the agenda. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Carey to (1) authorize the Health Department to participate in funding a contract with the UNC School of Public Health; (2) authorize the development of a contract between the Health Department and the School of Public Health for a part-time project coordinator; (3) allocate $5,000 dollars from the Kellogg-funded, Community-based Public Health Initiative; and (4) allocate $5,000 dollars from the lapsed salary account. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR 1996 Personnel Director Elaine Holmes summarized the information in the agenda. A motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to adopt Attachment 1, Option B which provides for (1) changing the Blue Cross Traditional Plan to a Blue Cross Preferred Provider Plan covering hospitals and physicians, (2) renewing the two Blue Cross Plans (Preferred Provider and Personal Care Plan) through the NCACC Health Insurance Trust, contingent on negotiation of a satisfactory Interlocal Agreement with the Trust and (3) continuing the HealthSource plan. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 11 The Board will consider three items at their work session on October 12. These three items are listed below: 1. health insurance dependent subsidy 2. health insurance waiver option 3. Interlocal agreement with the Trust D. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGN MANUAL Planner Mary Willis summarized the information in the agenda. This amendment would eliminate the requirement of a 100-foot buffer along the perimeter of an Economic Development District (EDD) which abuts an EDD adopted by another planning jurisdiction. The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on September 18, 1995. After considerable discussion, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendment by a 7-5 vote and the Administration recommends approval. In answer to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Ms. Willis clarified that the Primary Development Overlay is a separate area that has been applied only to the area north of Cates Creek which has provisions in addition to those which already apply to a primary area. This amendment is for all Economic Development Districts which have the same intensity -- Primary or Secondary -- adjacent to an adjoining jurisdiction. Commissioner Gordon asked, since there is already a category called "Primary Development Overlay Area" and this is part of the area that is generating these questions, why can't they restrict this amendment to a Primary Development Overlay area so it does not apply to all EDDs. She feels that the problem is with what may happen if another jurisdiction did something different in the future. Mary Willis said that one of the issues that make this more complex is the location in this area. The real issue is the jurisdictional boundary which is what this amendment addresses. Commissioner Gordon asked if it would be possible to restrict this change to the Primary Development Overlay area which would limit the proliferation of this amendment. Mary Willis said that the reason the Primary Development Overlay area was put on the map was the fact that the property was narrow and the uses would be limited. The rationale for creating the Primary Overlay was to address that issue and those specific concerns because of the configuration and shape of that area and the impact of what could be done with it. She noted that even if there were not the same kinds of conditions that are present with this strip, they would still be recommending that this issue not require the double buffer in an area where the boundary of the district is really invisible because it is jurisdictional only. To look at it in terms of Primary Overlay area does not directly address the issue they are attempting to address. Commissioner Gordon suggested that the problem be formulated differently so that the Primary Overlay area would address this specific issue only. Mary Willis will look at this problem to see if it can be accomplished in a different way. However, the proposed amendment was 12 developed so it would cover the same issue if it arises in the future, specifically with regard to the two buffers adjoining each other. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon to refer this back to the Planning Staff to see if this amendment can be limited to the Primary Overlay area and determine if there are any separate regulations that could be implemented to prevent the strip development along the entire area. THERE WAS NOT A SECOND TO THIS MOTION Geoffrey Gledhill said that the Primary District Overlay does not exist across the road so if Commissioner Cordon's suggestion is taken literally, this will not solve the problem. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to continue the discussion of this item to a subsequent meeting. VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. I-40/NC86 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT EXPANSION Planner Mary Willis presented the information as stated in the agenda. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to deny the request to expand the Economic Development District to include the Addison property as Secondary Development Area. VOTE: AYES, 4; NOS, 1 (Commissioner Crowther) A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, that no change be made to the Moren property's current Land Use Plan Designation (20-year Transition Area) and that future requests for expansion of the Economic Development District be made consistent with current Land Use Plan Amendment procedures. VOTE: UNANIMOUS F. HP-1-95 ALEXANDER HOGAN PLANTATION SITE NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION Don Belk, Planner II for Special Projects, presented for Board consideration the nomination of the Alexander Hogan Plantation Site to the National Register of Historic Places and asked for authorization for him to make comments to the State Historic Preservation Office about this nomination. The Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the nomination on September 12. The Commission found that the Alexander Hogan Plantation Site does not meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of historic places. The Commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the State's Historic Preservation Office as well as the Board of County Commissioners comments and recommendations. Commissioner Crowther asked if there was a date that Duke Power installed their power lines across this property. Mr. Belk did not have this information. Judson Edeburn, Resource Manager of Duke Forest, made reference to a letter that was distributed. In addition to that statement, he said that the Hogan Plantation qualified for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under the stipulations of criteria "D" of the National Register Bulletin. This states that properties may be eligible for 13 National Register if they have yielded or are likely to yield information important to create history. For the property and the information it offers to be considered important, criteria "D" stipulates that the site must address current data gaps or present alternative theories that challenge existing ones. He feels that this site will enhance the knowledge known of the past through its archeological remains. He noted that property possessing information potential does not need to recall visually the site's importance. The Hogan Plantation site is important because it is the only well preserved site researched to date that has the archeological potential to answer questions concerning small plantation life in the Piedmont. He feels that to adequately answer these questions, it should be accepted into the Register with the boundaries as designated in the nomination. Randy Daniel, Archeologist, said that the result of the archeology survey and additional work at the Hogan Plantation convinced him that this is one of the County's most significant archeological sites. He feels that the significance of the Hogan site is that it represents an example of a small 19th century North Carolina plantation to span the ante- bellum and post-bellum occupations of Orange County. The site contains well preserved archeological data including structural remains, artifacts, etc. that would contribute greatly to the understanding of daily life of the inhabitants. He said that the Hogan site meets significance criterion "D" for inclusion in the National Register which states simply that archeological properties are significant if they have yielded or may be likely to yield information important in history. He questioned the County's commitment to historic preservation. However, he said that the County's commitment to preserving the past can be reaffirmed by approving the National Register nomination and he asked that the Board do so. Commissioner Willhoit asked if there was a timetable on when this site would be researched and Mr. Daniel was not aware of a timetable. The important part is that the site be preserved. Commissioner Willhoit asked about the other thirteen sites on Duke property that have similar characteristics and Mr. Daniel said that these have not been examined in this detail. Commissioner Willhoit said that what makes this timely is that this area is being considered for a landfill site. Mr. Daniel said that this area being considered for a landfill site is totally irrelevant to whether or not the site is eligible to be nominated to the Register. Commissioner Willhoit noted that if this property is selected for a landfill that it will be easy to work around that site to exclude this from a fill area and he will make a commitment to work with Duke University to make sure that the historic significance of that site is preserved. He feels a timetable is needed. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the narrative in the agenda in which it mentions that this is one of the best preserved sites and asked Mr. Daniel if this is why he feels this is one of the most significant. Mr. Daniel said that preservation is an important characteristics when evaluating archeological sites. If the site is disturbed, it will lose its integrity and therefore would probably be impacted in such a way that it would fail to contain significant information in context that would meet criterion "D". 14 With reference to the power line, Commissioner Crowther asked if the easement belongs to Duke University or to the power company. Mr. Daniel did not know. Commissioner Gordon suggested sending the application forward for review since the Board of County Commissioners will not be making the final decision. She made reference to the article written by Dr. Ward which stresses the importance of sites which meet Criterion D. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to give this application a positive review and to present this nomination to the North Carolina National Register Advisory Committee on October 12, 1995. VOTE: AYES, 2; NOS, 3 (Commissioners Carey, Halkiotis and Willhoit) A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chair Carey to concur with the findings and conclusions of the Historic Preservation Commission which found that the Alexander Hogan Plantation Site does not meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. VOTE: AYES, 3; NOS, 2 (Commissioners Crowther and Gordon) G. REVISED ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES LIST Commissioner Willhoit asked for clarification on widening I-40 to six lanes from I-85 to 15-501 and if the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are included in this request. He would like a commitment up front that the HOV lanes will be used. It was decided that a sentence will be added that Orange County is opposed to any widening unless it is devoted to HOV or mass transit. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chair Carey to endorse the Orange County TIP Local .Transportation Priorities list changing the language to indicate that Orange County is in favor of widening I-40 only if it is for the purpose of HOV or mass transit purposes and to authorize the Chair to sign the cover letter (with attachments) as endorsed by the Planning Board, to be used by NCDOT and the DCHC TAC in the development of the 1997-2003 STIP and MTIP and to receive the Non-TIP Orange County Transportation Projects list as information. VOTE: UNANIMOUS X . REPORT S A. MINIMUM HOUSING CODE ORDINANCE The Board received this report as information. XI. APPOINTMENTS The following appointments will be considered at the October 17, 1995 meeting. Stoney Creek Small Area Plan Work Grou Community Development Advisory Committee Citizen Innovation Efficiency Committee 15 XII. MINUTES -NONE XIII. CLOSED SESSION - NONE XIV. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to come before the Board, Chair Carey adjourned the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 17, 1995 at 7:30 p.m, in the Chapel Hill Town Council Chambers in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk