Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19860106 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 6, 1986 The orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on January 6, 1986 at 7:3o p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Don Willhoit and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey, Jr., Ben Lloyd and Norman Walker. COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Alice Gordon and members - Chris Best, Barry Jacobs, Peter Kramer, Betty Margison, Margaret Miller, Frank Pearson, Sharlene Pikley, David Shanklin, Carl Walters and Steve Yuhasz. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Kizer. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and William T. Laws, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Administrative Secretary Joanna Bradshaw, Director of Planning Marvin Collins and Planner Susan Smith. A. BOARD COMMENTS ' Chair Willhoit moved item E4 "P & S Sporting Goods, Tnc." from the "Public Hearing" section of the agenda and placed it under the "Items for Decision" section of the agenda. He noted for the record that he ~, accepted on behalf of the Board a certificate of appreciation from the orange County Rescue Squad. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair willhoit announced that those citizens in the audience ,-, why wish to speak on specific items will be recognized at the appropriate time their item is discussed. 2. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA None. C. MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to.apprvve the minutes for November 25, 1985 as corrected. --r, r_ VOTE: UNANIMOUS. The minutes for December 3 were postponed. '~ D. APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION FDR WOMEN Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to appoint Jane de Lissovoy and Kathy Callemyn to the Commission for Women. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. E. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PD_5-85 SCOTSWOOD Staff presentation was made by by Marvin Collins. The purpose of this agenda item is to receive additional public comment and information on a proposed planned development and rezoning request submitted by John W. Graham and A. H. Graham, Jr. This item was submitted to public hearing vn 11-25 -85. The public hearing was continued for the receipt of additional information (See draft 11--25--85 public hearing minutes) . John W. Graham & A. H. Graham, Jr. are requesting a planned develo meet an e d r zonin for 331.12 acr s p g e of land located aloe Hi hwa g g Y \ I 70 Bypass and St. Mary's Road (SR 1002) northeast of Hillsborough. The property is referenced as Tax map 6, Black B., Lots 3 & 4 and Tax Map 22 Block A, lot 17 of Hillsborough Township. The property is located in an area designated as Ten Year Trans- ~, ition and Commercial Transition Activity Node in the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning classification is (Residential 1) R-1. The applicants are requesting 290.03 acres to be rezoned PD-H-R2, 29.50 acres to be rezoned PD-H R5 and 10.43 acres to be rezoned PD-GC4. Approval of the request would allow development of 410 residential lots with a minimum 20,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit 216 attached multi- family dwelling units and a 65,460 square feet of commercial space on 10.43 acres. Approval of the planned development rezoning request and issuance of a Class A Special Use Permit with conditions specified in the attachment. Collins addressed some of the concerns expressed at the November 25th public hearing. One concern was the amount and location of the open space/recreation area of the proposed development. Collins referenced the memo from the Recreation Director, Mary Ann Black, noting that in her opinion, after walking over the area, and that of the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council-, a more appropriate area for active recreation facilities would encompass proposed lots #116-119 and this area should be designated an the Site Plan as "open space/recreation area". Collins reviewed the shift in location of the recreation area on the revised site plan. Collins then referenced a letter from John R. McAdams Company which attempted to address some other concerns expressed at the public hearing. Collins addressed the items where the applicant had requested' , changes in the conditions outlined by Planning Staff. Staff had; recommended a 41 foot pavement cross-section on Graham Drive and Hamilton Road and the applicant is requesting that this be changed to a 37 foot cross-section. Collins indicated the location of these roads an the site plan. Staff had also recommended curb and gutter for all streets in the single family development and the applicant is suggesting that curb and gutter would be appropriate an Scotswood Boulevard, -Graham Drive and Hamilton Way, but that the elimination of this requirement on the remaining roads would be consistent with the road standards of NCDOT and lend to the intent of environmental sensitivity concerning reduction of runoff. The applicant is also requesting that sidewalks not be required on the cul-de~sacs or on streets where curb and gutter are not required. In reference to the proposed traffic light at the intersection of St. Mary's Road and US Highway 70 Bypass, the applicant is requesting that the traffic light be installed by the. Department of Transportation based on their criteria. Collins referenced the memo from Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Officer, outlining his concerns. Faircloth recommended that a condition be added that would require the construction of appropriate stormwater detention devices or other methods to control the rate of runoff due to development on properties downstream of the commercial and multifamily tracts. He also noted that to accommodate the stormwater runoff, the multifamily area would probably have to be constructed first. Commissioner Marshall inquired how the County could control the development of the commercial tract after the multifamily tract to give the Erosion Control Officer the information he needs to put in place for the erosion control plan. Collins responded that the applicant would address the phasing plan. All final subdivision plans would be reviewed by Planning Staff and approved by the Planning Board. The multifamily and commercial development would be strictly administrative approval by the planning staff. If the Board wanted information regarding the development in total or any portion it could be presented to the Board as approved by staff or the Planning Board. Commissioner Marshall continued asking how the development would be controlled to assure it would be built in the proper order. Collins responded that a condition of approval could be added addressing phasing of the development. Collins noted that the Erosion Control Officer felt that as part of his approval he would have to address the rate of runoff and any potential impacts to the south. The facilities designed for the commercial and multi family tracts would have to be designed so as to reduce the rate of runoff. Commissioner Carey inquired if condition #39 would address the concern with stormwater management. Collins responded that the condition does not address phasing specifically. He suggested that phasing of the installation of the stormwater management devices could be addressed by condition or by in- house staff review and approval. Commissioner Walker expressed concern about developing the commercial and multifamily area before the single family area. Collins noted that a ridge line existed between the single family and the multifamily and. commercial area so there would be little stormwater runoff impact by development of one area on the other. Commissioner Walker questioned the 10-Year phasing plan. Collins responded it reflected a desire to address the water crisis, as well as reflecting a 10-Year reservoir construction period. Commissioner Carey noted the applicant had offered a 10-Yeas phasing period at the previous public hearing. Commissioner Carey asked if the stormwater could be controlled without imposing a condition of approval. Collins responded it could be achieved at the staff review level and noted there were many solution options available. Commissioner Marshall expressed concern about specificity in the conditions and an understanding of all parties over time of the conditions imposed. Commissioner Marshall directed staff to add a condition regarding voluntary annexation as requested by the Town of Hillsborough. Barry Jacobs, Planning Board member, requested more specificity regarding vegetation. Collins cited the developer's letter of intention which indicated a willingness to identify specimen trees. Collins noted he assumed a rule of thumb to be the retention of trees 12-18' in diameter. Identifying smaller trees is an enormous undertaking and is generally done by mass identification. Commissioner Marshall inquired about the process that would assure that these objectives would be met. She noted there was not much protection in a "statement". Collins related the information included in the memo located on pages 16 - 166 of these minutes . Sharlene Pilkey, Planning Board member, asked about the policy statement regarding an inwstream Plow rate of "0". Collins responded that emergency flaw rates are determined by the lake level in Lake Orange. Commissioner Marshall inquired iP NRCD had approved such a ~1 "backward" in stream flow policy. She questioned the use of such a provision in the County policy without NRCD's comment. County Manager, Ken Thompson, responded that both the County and NRCD plans call for reduction in flow rates with increasing crises levels, including a "0" flow rate. Horace Johnson, Water Superintendent for the Town of Hillsborough,.,..,;, was sworn in to present evidence that water supply is available to serve the proposed Scotswood Subdivision. Johnson also stated that the Hillsborough water treatment facility is operating at 50% capacity. He noted that figures from the staff's statement were too high, adding that 150 gallons per day per unit is a rule of thumb suggested by the Town to engineers generating estimated use figures. He supported this statement with figures giving the average daily use from a random survey of four sections of the Town for the six-month period from August 1, 1985 through January 1, 1956. He concluded that utilizing actual use records, the projected use figure would be 153,805 versus 249,300 gallons per day estimated by staff. He noted that the rate system must be self-sustaining. Commissioner Carey inquired if developers were required to correct any adverse impacts and Johnson responded that a condition for improvements by the developer is required for service to be extended. Johnson emphasized again that the Tawn of Hillsborough did have the capacity to serve the subdivision and, if there were no new customers, at some point in time he foresaw a rate increase. Chair Willhoit noted that if the pressure problem continued, the Tawn would have no recourse over the developments already approved. Planning Saard member, Chris Best, asked how many water customers were being served by the Town of Hillsborough and Johnson responded 3400. Most of these are residential. There are"a few businesses and _-_- Johnson noted that Hillsborough Textiles recycles water. Commissioner Walker asked if the Town provided all of the area within the Town with water service and Johnson responded yes, except for ~~ a few properties service by wells. John McAdams, agent for the applicant, stated that his firm was basically pleased with the revised Planning Staff conditions. He noted that he still felt that a 41' cross-section on Graham Drive and Hamilton Way was excessive and he was requesting a 37' cross-section. He also cited the request of the applicant that sidewalks not be required an the cul-de-sacs or on streets where curb and gutter are not required. He also noted that the condition requiring a traffic light at the intersection of St. Mary's Road and US 70 needed clarification. This conditions requires action by an "outside party". McAdams expressed concern with the wording of the Erosion Control Officer's memo in regard to the word "phasing". He noted that term particularly applies to the starmwater detention management facilities and not the development of the tract. McAdams continued that phasing of the stormwater facilities might require construction of these facilities to serve areas that are not yet under construction. Erosion Control Officer Faircloth agreed that this warding needed clarification. - McAdams commented that in regards to the water supply issue the applicant had originally suggested the 10-year phasing and is willing to work within the staff recommendation (25% of the units in a 2.5 year period). He continued that in relation to the pacing of development issue, an impoundment ar major changes in agreements affecting raw water ~- supply would help, and if the concerns ceased to exit, that there be wording in the condition which would eliminate the pacing requirement ,.. imposed on the project. Chair Willhoit stated that he was not sure he understood the rationale behind the pacing of the development. He felt if the Town was making a commitment to providing water it made na difference whether it was aLL built in one year or ten. He noted there were no firm prospects to establishing additional reservoirs even in a ten year period. McAdams responded that pacing gives the Town the opportunity to react to needs by either raising tap fees err requiring other conditions to be satisfied. Commissioner Walker noted also that other projects. should perhaps not be approved if pacing was imposed on this project. He expressed a preference for this project as a coordinated development as opposed to many Little projects. Chair Willhoit inquired about the phasing of road improvements on US 70. Larry Meisner stated that he felt the third lane would be added at the same time that the traffic light became necessary. Meisner also. noted that prior to construction of I-85, US 7Q traffic was worse than what is estimated to result from this project when fully built-out. He continued that phasing the development, in addition to the ongoing state thoroughfare planning process, helps future needs to be met through review of the Scotswood development plan. The Scotswood project is now known and incorporated as part of the state planning process. Chair Willhoit asked that Meisner submit the data on the traffic counts cited prior to construction of I-85. This information is included on pagel~C- of these minutes. McAdams noted the provisian of the two additional acres of recreation area. Commissioner Marshall inquired about the process for planting new and maintaining the existing vegetation. She cited the statement ;l regarding retention of specimen trees noting the conditions need to be ': :: clarified to have a meaningful comment. She also questioned the need to ~- have a condition addressing the statement providing for negotiation with additional property owners. She concluded that there is a need to have a process and a known solution to assure that these objectives will be met. McAdams responded that he envisioned the hiring of a Landscape architect to do a reconnaissance of the 100' buffer and to prepare a plan for implementation of a planting schedule which would establish a year round screening buffer and to meet and to come to an agreement with adjacent property owners. Marshall asked that this be added as a condition of approval. Best asked about the change in the staff condition regarding the traffic light. McAdams continued that NC17OT does not want individuals installing the traffic Lights. Best inquired if they would accept payment for the traffic Light. He responded that if the light was warranted for the general public, NCDOT should be the agency to install it. Best asked if any traffic counts and projections were available for New Sharon Church Road and Cameron Street. Meisner responded that the traffic projections generated are within the traffic report. He added that the St. Mary's Road US 70 intersection is the only signalized site warranted. Best asked if Scotswood traffic would impact downtown Hillsborough and Meisner answered yes. Don Cox was sworn in. He spoke as an individual citizen, as chairman of the Soil And WateConservation Berard and as a member of the Eno River Society. He cited potential damage to Strowd's Creek which ~!J would require that all necessary erosion control and stormwater devices be in place and stabilized and be enforceable by phase. He suggested turbidity monitoring upstream and downstream. He recommended that the curb and gutter requirement be eliminated as it does not allow .___~ infiltration. He asked that the project be coordinated with the development of new raw water sources. He expressed a concern with ;r further reduction in in-flow stream levels. '~' Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to continued the public hearing to February 3, 1986 to receive the Planning Board's recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. E'2: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS-JUNKED MOTOR VEHICLES Staff presentation by Susan Smith. The purpose of this agenda item is to receive public comment on amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. The amendments relate to an enforcement action dealing with the removal of junked and/or abandoned vehicles from a parcel in Chapel Hill Township near Calvander. Staff initiated legal proceedings and was prepared to go to court when the defendant's attorney requested a hearing before the judge to determine the County's right to enforce such provisions. The contention of the defendant's attorney was that State regulations preempted the County's authority. The judge ruled that the County could regulate junked and/or abandoned vehicles, but indicated that ordinance revisions were necessary to insure the constitutionality of the provisions. The County Attorney has prepared proposed amendments which address the judge's concerns. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance would allow staff to proceed with enforcement action. -- staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendments. ,y There was no Board comment ar public comment. fa Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to forward the ordinance amendments to the Planning Board for recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. E3: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT-DONNTE CHAPMAN Staff presentation by Susan Smith. The purpose of this agenda item is to receive public comment on a rezoning request to correct an error in the Zoning Atlas. On October 1, 1984, zoning became effective in Cheeks Township. At that time, the property of. Donnie H. Chapman was placed in an EC-5 Existing Commercial zoning category. The land placed in that designation was thought to include those buildings associated with Mr. Chapman's automotive service. Recently, the Planning Staff learned that the buildings are ].orated on an adjacent tract (in the same ownership) zoned AR-Agricultural Residential. The intent of the rezoning is to match the building locations with the appropriate zoning classification (EC-5). Rezoning of the Chapman property would correct the Zoning Atlas. Planning Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request to correct an error in the Zoning Atlas. There was no Board comment or public comment. Motion was .made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to forward the rezoning request to the Planning Soard for recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. F. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA The County Manager recommended the following action be taken by the i Board: 1. ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FROM STATE'S LAND RECORDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Approve a resolution accepting $16,000 from the State's Land Records M~.nagement Program for the production of orthophoto base maps for Orange unty on a matching basis and autharize the Ghair to sign the appropriate 'reement. The resolution is printed below: BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners, under the signature of its Chairman, accepts the 1985-86 Land Records Grant of $16,000 from the State of North Carolina's Land Records Management Program, Department of Natural Resources and Community Development; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Orange County agrees to the conditions and requirements of the grant Agreement hereto attached. 2. OLD COURTHOUSE TIME EXTENSION To approve change orders for Adams/Tilley Electric Co., Inc. and Industrial Maintenance and Supply, Inc. extending the completion date from -January 10 to March 10, 1985. 3_. _ EXPAN$TON__OF_INSURANCE RATED DISTRICT To apprave the expansion of the West Orange insurance fire rated district from 4 road miles to 5 road males. 4. BUDGET AMENDMENTS Ta approve .amending the 1985-86 Budget and Project Ordinance by the following changes: Handica Accessibilit Fund Appropriation - Handicap Accessibility $ 11,440 Source--Transfer from Capital Projects Fund $ 11,400 Capital Projects_•Fund - Appropriation - Transfer to Handicap Access. Fund $ 11,400 Source -Appropriated Fund Balance $ 11,400 5. FEDERAL. LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND _ To approve the final grant application far development of the Fairview Cammunity Park and authorize the 50% funding match from the Community Development Block Grant. The resolution authorizing the development of Fairview Community Park by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Department is as follows: WHEREAS, the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 provides for the making of grants by the National Park Service, Department of Interior of the United Stated Government to States and to local, municipalities in support of Outdoor Recreation projects and Such funds are available after approval, of the appropriate State Agency and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation; and WHEREAS, the State is required to insure that there will be no discrimination against any person of any race, color, sex, creed, or political affiliation; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County realizes that recreation facilities are not adequate to meet the minimum recreational needs of the people of Orange Caunty; and WHEREAS, it is believed that said Board with the assistance of the general public is now in a position to lend full support to the development of a Fairview Community park. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA: (1) That an application be made to the National Park Service, 'partment of Interior of the U.S. Government through the State of North ralina far a development grant of $100,000 which represents fifty percent (50~) of all costs ($200,000) to be completed in the fiscal year 1986-87. (2) That the Recreation and Parks Director of Orange County be authorized and directed to file such application on behalf of Orange County, to provide additional information and furnish such documents as may be .--=-~ required by the National Park Service and the State of North Carolina and to act as the authorized correspondent of orange County. (3) That the director, National Park Service, Department of Interior of the United States Government be, and hereby is assured of full compliance by the applicant with the regulations promulgated pursuant to Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 196.4. 6. AMENDMENT TO THE„ENG~N~,~RING AGREEMENT WITH,HAZEN AND SAWYER_,_ P_C. To amend the engineering agreement with Hazen and Sawyer by $14,000 to allow for necessary surveys. This amendment would raise the Section D ceiling far survey work to $30,000 subject to approval by Farmers Home Administration. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commission Carey that the forgoing action be taken by the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. NEW POL2CY For each item presented by the Planning Department, the planning staff will present the description of the project and their recommendation if different from the Planning Board's •recommendation. Second, a member of the Planning Board will present a report which will include the recommendation. The Planning Board report will be inserted into the record verbatim or by attachment. P & S SPORTING GOODS. INC. Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval a rezoning request of 4.54 acres located south of NC 54 and approximately 550' east of Morrow Mill Raad. The present zoning of the property is Agricultural Residential. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to Local Commercial-1. This request was submitted to public hearing on November 25, 1985. The ~• Planning Staff recommends approval of the LC-1 rezoning request. The County Manager recommends that the request be referred back to the Planning Board for reconsideration pending the resolution of legal issues. raised by members of the Planning Board. Planning Board Chair Alice Gordon, summarized the orange County Planning Board action: Recommendation: The Board was evenly divided between approval and denial with a vote of 5-5. Issues Raised: (The Board was evenly divided on these issues) 1. It was asserted that the original zoning designation for this business was incorrect. On the other hand it was asserted that, since the business already existed, the applicant should be allowed to expand the business in this manner. . 2. The question was raised as to whether the amount of land designated for commercial purposes in a rural activity node has already been exceeded. 3. The question was raised as to whether the market area for this business was confined to the immediate area or whether it served a larger market area. Other information and/or Citations from County Regulations: Section 20.1 of the Zoning Ordinance (Amendments) was cited in the discussion. This section states that the ordinance shall be amended, among other things (1) to correct a manifest attar in the ordinance or (2) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the county generally. It was noted that na error was alleged and that no changed conditions were cited. Dr. Gordon noted that Dr. Kizer, Planning Board Member, has :quested this item be referred back to the Planning Board. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner ~•,arshall to refer back to the County Manager and County Attorney the legal questions on the rezoning of P & S Sporting Goods and request that they present a report at the next meeting. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. PRICE CREEK SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAN Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval the division of Lot #1 in the Price Creek. subdivision, property of Jack P. and Bettye Jo Sanders. The property is located an Damascus Church Road in Chapel Hill Township. Tt is bordered by residential development. The tract is designated as Rural Buffer, Water Quality Critical Area Land Use Plan. The property is also within the Joint Planning Area which requires courtesy review by the.Carrborc Planning Department. Two lots are proposed out of 8.45 acres. Access is provided tc Lot 1B from SR 1939 via an Orange County Private Class "C" road which leads to an Orange County Private Glass "A" raad.. Lot lA has direct road frontage on SR 1939. Planning Board Chair Alice Gordan summarized the Planning Board action: Recommendation: Approval with a vote of 10-0 to include the three staff conditions. 2ssues. Raised: It was noted that the subdivision was located in the WQCA, but no major issues were raised. Motion was made by Commissioner L1ayd, seconded by Commissioner ~a.rey to approve the Planning Board recommendation contingent upon the llowing conditions: (1) indicate the lot sizes excluding the right-of-way far Lot #1B. (2) indicate the distance of the stream buffer from the stream banks, and (3) submission of a Stormwater Management Plan to satisfy the standard requiring infiltration of the fa.rst 1/2 inch. of runoff. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 8. STACY HE__IGHTS -_ SECTION ONE - PR_ELTMINAR.Y PLAN Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval the preliminary plan for Stacy Heights, Section one which is located on Rogers Raad in Chapel Hill Township. The property is bordered by residential development and designated as 20 year transition on the Land Use Plan. The property is within the Joint Planning Area which requires courtesy review by the Carrboro Planning Department. Three lots are proposed out of 3,2 acres. The property is zoned R-~1.. Planning Board Chair Alice Gordan summarized the Planning Board action: Recommendation: Approval with a 10-0 vote with three conditions. The first two conditions are the same as staff conditions #1 and #2, as stated in the Planning board agenda packet. Condition #3 specifies that there shall be a notation on the plat that lots #2 and #3 do not meet Health Department approval for on-site wastewater systems, unless the application can obtain Health Department approval before submission of the final plat. In the latter ~-se final plat approval could include the approved lot(s). Issues Raised: Concern over on-site wastewater systems for lots #2 #3, as indicated in the statement of condition #3. ~~ Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Walker to approve the Planning Board recommendation with the three conditions listed below: (1) Provide a note on the plat which states that access for Lat #3 -,•-~ is to be restricted to Tallyho Trail. (2) Submission of a stormwater management plan to satisfy the standard requiring infiltration of the first 1/2 inch of runoff. (3) Approval, of lots #2 and #3 for on-site wastewater system or combination of the lots to provide approved sites far each lot proposed or natation on plat indicating the unsuitability of the lots far development. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 9. WINDY HILL FARM - PRELIMINARY PLAN Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval the Preliminary Plan for windy Hill Farm. The property is located on University Station Road in Chapel Hill Township. Twenty three lots are proposed out of 80.33 acres. Lots 1-22 range from 1.0 acres to 3.~ acres and lot 23 will be approximately 45.10 acres in size. The property is zoned R-1 and is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. Planning Board Chair Alice Gordon summarized the Planning Board action: ' Recommendation: Approval by a 10-0 vote with the two staff conditions as stated in the Planning Board agenda packet. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve the Planning Board Recommendation with the following conditions: (1) A Homeowners Association documents must be submitted to and approved by the county attorney upon submission of the final ~~`+, plat. , ,; (2) Notation on the plat that access to Lots 20 and 22 is restricted to the proposed roads serving the subdivision. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 10. O.J..SUBDIVISION - C SS ''A" ROAD TO SERVE LOTS 2 AND 5 Planner Susan Smith presented far consideration of approval a request far a Class A private road to serve the subdivisions of Lots 2 and 5 of the O.J. Paris Subdivision. Approval of a Class "A" private road would provide for the submittal of two minor subdivisions for approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve a Class "A" private road to serve the subdivisions of Lots 2 and 5 of the 0. J. Paris Subdivision. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 11. SECONDARY,AMENDMENT TO THE LAND US_E PLAN REQUESTED BY GARY CARLEEN RZCHA~RDSON Planner Susan Smith presented far consideration of approval a proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for a 3.12 acre tract owned by Gary Carleen Richardson. The land use plan amendment request was submitted to public hearing on November 25, 1985 and considered by the Planning Board on December 16, 1985. The applicant cited changed or changing conditions as the reason far the amendment. The proposed amendment would change the Land Use Plan designation of the subject property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Nade making it compatible for rezoning to commercial, or industrial uses. It would also extend the node further south making it possible for the next contiguous property to request , redesignation to node status. The changing conditions in this area were recognized in the Central Orange Area study in 1983 and the node was redefined ~_... . ~~ accordingly: both in terms of size (expanded) and designation (Commercial to Commercial-Industrial.) Planning Board Chair Alice Gordon presented the Planning Board ~.ction: Recommendation: Denial by a 9-0 vote. Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner 4urey to approve the Planning Board recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS: 12. PD--6-85 BRADSHAW'S MOBILE ACRES Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval a planned development rezoning and Class A Special Use Permit request. This item was submitted to public hearing an November 25, 1985. J. Thomas Bradshaw and Beth. Bradshaw are requesting a planned development and rezoning £or 94.30 acres of land located on the west side of White Cross Road in Bingham Township. The property is located in an area designated Agricultural Residential in the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning classification is Agricultural Residential. The applicants are requesting the 94.30 acres to be rezoned to PD--H-AR. Approval of the request would allow expansion of the existing mobile home park. An additional '75 mobile homes would be added to the existing park which contains 26 existing units. Planning Board chair Al~.ce Gordon presented the Planning Board action: Recommendation: first 2q conditions were the wording of #18 was also added condition #2a sight distance. . Issues Raised: ~-.dressed by condition ~2 ' Susan Smith nc andards and all the u~'strict. Approval by a 10-Ovate with 21 conditions. The essentially those recommended by the staff, although revised to specify "public" improvements. The Board which incorporated a DOT recommendation concerning The question of sight distance was raised and 1. No major issues were raised. ted that the applicant did meet all the general specific requirements for the application of the Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, .seconded by Commissioner Marshall that the applicant complies with the general standards for the issuance of a Special Use Permit, the .specific standards governing planned development-housing uses and all applicable regulations and standards of Orange County development ordinances and, therefore, the Board moves for approval of the Planned Development--Housing-Agricultural Residential rezoning and issuance of a Class A Special. Use Permit for Bradshaw's Mobile Home Acres subject to the conditions as specified by the Planning Board and listed below: 1. The grantee of this Special Use Permit shall post with Orange County, in a farm acceptable to the County Attorney, a bond ar letter of credit in an amount equal to the cost of all public improvements plus 10~. The amount shall be determined an the basis of fully executed construction contracts or certification by a registered engineer employed by the grantee of this Special Use Permit. Security far construction of the improvements in this project may follow phasing in the project. Specifically, as improvements are completed in each phase a corresponding amount of money may be released from the security instruments or the security instruments may be renegotiated based on the "yet to do" portion of the improvements. 2. Security shall be provided for the grading, paving and stabilization of all cleared areas, streets and other vehicular travelways; sidewalks and other --~destrian walkways; erection of street signs; utility installation and okups; recreational facilities; landscaping and mulching around all mobile me units. ~~ 3. A11 necessary easements to permit utility (electricity, telephone and cable television by any cable television provider franchised by Orange County to serve this development) installation, servicing and hookups to the development and to each unit within the .develapment shall be provided at na cost to the utility pravider. 4. Roads, parking areas, walkways, street signs, utilities, recreation facilities and sites, landscaping and mulching around units shall be maintained as constructed. All such improvements and facilities shall further be maintained and operated in a safe manner. 5. The grantee shall promulgate rules and regulations governing tenancy in the development which shall restrict accumulation of trash and. rubbish outside of the mobile home units, shall restrict storage. of goods outside of mobile homes and shall further prohibit the storage of junked or unregistered motor vehicles. The grantee shall file with the Orange County Planning Department a copy of the rules and regulations promulgated under this condition and maintain an up-ta-date copy of the rules and regulations in the Orange County Planning Department. 6. A11 roads within the mobile home park including the section from SR 1951 through the existing park shall be hard surfaced in compliance with NC DOT Subdivision Roads P~Iinimum Construction Standards (p.19 E Pavement Design). 7. All roads will be named and the names not duplicate any other names within Orange County. Road name signs to Prange County standards shall be erected at all intersections. 8. Removal of snow and ice from the roads in the development and the sidewalks within the development shall be the responsibility of the grantee. Such removal shall be completed promptly. 9. There shall be at least 2 parking spaces per mobile home unit in the development. 14. Mailboxes which are clustered, shall be provided close to each entrance, but far enough ir~Lo the develapment to prevent traffic problems on White Crass Road, A pull-off shall be provided and the mailboxes set back off the main entrance roads. The entrance road and pull-off shall be of sufficient width to allow three or four cars to stop and get mail while others continue to pass. The mailboxes shall not be located in a place that would require cars to cross traffic, make unnatural turns or go against the flow of traffic. Cluster mailboxes shall be located outside of sight triangles far the entranceway. 11. Prior to the initiation of construction activity, final approval by the State must be abt4iined for the community well system and the spray irrigation wastewater dispa:~al_ facility. 12. The recreation areas shall be constructed as provided in the application and submitted sitr~ 1~lan, with changes as specified below: --~. 1 c,: =may ,, '1 l,~ Concrete ba~~~:.rlaall court shall be constructed at grade level and not elevated above gracic. P4inimum size should be 40 feet "fang" by 42 feet "wide" (regulations caurt:~ are 5o feet wade). "Long" here refers to direction ~~ perpendicular south. Three provided. to the court's baseline. This "long" axis should be north (3) feet of an unobstructed space around the court should be Tat lot shall is 'younger school age periphery as seating should be clean, soft will "hold" this sand often. nclude play equipment sui children, with at least for adult supervision. sand. Defining the tot in and prevent having to table for preschoolers, as well two (2) benches provided on the Surfacing under the equipment lot area with landscape timbers add additional sand material so Trash receptacles must be provided in the tat lot/basketball court areas. The pedestrian paths and nature trail serving the individual units and the recreation areas shall be a minimum of 72" wide and be composed of surface materials xecor~t,r~~nded by the Orange County Recreation Department. A pedestrian path ,~i~,-.i.l be provided to the mailboxes. 13. That all signs be erected in compliance with Article 9 Signs following issuance of a builuing permit and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of .Occupancy for ar~~r unit. No sign may be erected within the sight triangles for the entranceway. ~.= the development.• 14. Grading on ~;~e site shall be kept to a minimum. In lieu of planted landscaping, exis'~.i..:g vegetation shall be maintained between units. 15. All plans fc_~ drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation control shall be reviewed and apla~~:-:~vcd by Orange County. In addition, Orange County sha1.1 -n,spect the inst<~].-! 4~tion of control devices and the on--going work for the !tal project. "1;'~::: project shall at all times meet the requirements of the ,range County So.:i.:;. t:~rasion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. 16. The project must remain in unitary ownership and no lots can be sold to individuals 17. A unit numbering system and corresponding unit location shall be filed with the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any building permit. This system shall-be used in obtaining and issuing any building permit. Any change in the unit numbering system must be filed with the Orange County Planning Department. 18. A final boundary survey of the Planned Development and public improvements shall be recorded by the developer. 19. The final site plan and narrative of the project incorporating all changes, deletions and additions through the final approval of the project are incorporated herein and made a part of this Planned Devel- opment Special Use Permit. A copy of the final site plan and narrative are on file with the Orange County Planning Department. Grading and building permits, upon application; will be issued after approval and recordation of the Special Use Permit. 20. The development shall be built and operated according to the site plan and written narrative supplied by the developer and in compliance with the above conditions. 21. The sight distance looking north shall be improved by cutting back and maintaining the brush on the back slope to the north of the entrance. v~T~: UNANIMOUS. 13. Z-12-85 WILDWOOD SECTI~( N IV Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval a rezoning request submitted by +Nildwood Corporation. This item was submitted to public hearing on November Z5, 195. 1rYildwood Corporation is requesting a rezoning of property located west of NC86 and Sections 1,2, and 3 of Wildwood Subdivision and south of the Southern Railroad right-of-way. The parcel contains 28.8 acres and the property is designated Ten Yer Transition Area. The present zoning of the property is Residential-1. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to Residential-4. The Planning Staff recommended approval of the R-4 rezoning request. .I Planning Board chair ;41ice Gordon presented the Planning Board Recommendation: Recommendation: Approval at R-2 density by a 6-3-1 (one abstention) vote. Issues Raised: (1) Amount of traffic through the development between YVildwood Section IV ~. and NC 86 (earlier phases of Wildwood). (2) Unknown impact of commercial areas already zoned between Wildwood and I-85 on what is still a two lane road (Occoneechee Point I and II). (3) Amount of water available. (4) Hillsborough's recommeddation for R-2 density. Explanation of Dissenting Votes: A preliminary vote to rezone at R-2 density, rather than at R-4 density, passed with a vote of 5-4-1 (one abstention). Therefore in the final vote the three dissenters voted in the negative because they favored the higher density. Other information and/or Citations from County REgulations: Chair's note: See the provisions for amending the zoning ordinance given in Section 20.1 (Applicant does not allege error but cites changing conditions) . Susan Smith noted that the Town of Hillsborough and their Planning Board both indicated that R-2 or R--3 would be more appropriate for this area. tilotion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to apprve the Planning Staff recommendation. VOTE: AYES, 2; NOES, 3 (Chair 1rVillhoit and Commissioners Marshall and Carey) Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the Planning Board recommendation. Commissioner Lloyd noted that R-4 housing would be rnore affordable than the R-2 housing. ~~ Commissioner Walker questioned the rationale of Hillsborough in making a recommendation for R-2 or R-3. Chair Willhoit and Commissioner Marshall agreed that the Board should try to approve, as close as possible, what the Town has recommended since Hill~orough will be serving the area. Also the topography must be considered and the fact that the development will feed into the road system of the existing YVildwood development. VOTE: AYES, 3; NOES, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd and Walker). 14. Z 14-85 JAME$ 1=. HILL - REZON,I.NG REQUEST Planner Susan Smith presented for consideration of approval a proposed rezoning request for 0.57 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of U.S. 70 and NC 751 in Eno Township. The property is located in an area designated Twenty Year Transition Area and Commercial Transition Activity Node on the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning of the property is Rural Residential. The applicant is requesting that the lot be rezoned to Community Commercial III. Approval of the request would allow a community commercial use at this intersection. The Planning Staff recommended denial of the CC--3 rezoning request given that the potential impacts of the uses permitted by right in the district and the constraints imposed an the site by its relationship to the road network suggest a planned development rezoning is more appropriate. Recommendation: The Board was evenly divided between approval and denial with a 5-5 vote. Issues Raised: (1) It was asserted that the applicant should have alleged an error to be corrected by the proposed amendment. (2) It appeared that there were traffic and environmental impacts (Duke Forest) that needed to be addressed. It was asserted that these issued could be more effectively handled in a Planned Development process. ~~ Explanation of Dissenting Votes: Those who were against approval of the rezoning felt that the applicant should go through the Planned Development process. Those who favored rezoning felt that the applicant should not have to go through the application process again and they did not see the value of a planned development on this relatively small tract. Other information and/or Citations from County regulations: Chair's note: See the provisions for amending the ordinance givenin Section 20.1 (Applicant does not allege error or cite chaged conditions). Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the Community Commercial I11 rezoning request as submitted by James Hill for 0.57 acres. VOTE: AYES, 4; NOES, 1 (Commissioner Marshall). 15. P~.,OPOSED ZONIN, G ORDINANCE TEX~A,MENDMENTS (A copy of the approved amendments are in the official Ordinance Bood in the office of the Clerk to the Board). Planning Director Marvin Collins presented for consideration of approval the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance that were submitted to public hearing on November 25, 1985: (a) Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 -Establishment of Dimensional Requirements, Section 5.1.2 -Schedule for Non-residential Development -revisions to the floor area and open space ratios for industrial zoning districts. (b) Zoning Ordinance, Article 8 SPECIAL USES -provision for the issuance of a Class A Special Use Permit to accomodate requests for. modifications of impervious surface requirements for property subject- to the Protected Watershed II (PW-II) overlay zoning district. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to . ', approve the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as outlined above. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 16. JOB TRAINING PA~TIVERSHIP ACT -SERVICE AREA County Manager Ken Thompson outlined two options for consideration in re- designating SDAs for the JTPA program currently functioning in Orange County. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to remain in the current SDA between Durham and Orange. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 17. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT TO SAVE GENERAL REVENUE SHARING County Manager Ken Thompson presented for consideration a request from NACo fora $692 special assessment to'be used in the effort to save the federal General Revenue Sharing program. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 1$. CHARGE TO THE TELEPHONE STUDY TASK FORCE_ Postponed until next regular meeting. H.__ADJOURNMENT Chair Willhoit adjourned the meeting. The next regular meeting will be help on Tuesday, January 21, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in the Courtroom of the old Post Office Building in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Joanna Bradshaw, Administrative Secretary Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk i ~~ _ I .::~ ,y ;Y~: ~ ~'HE JOHN It. McADA1ViS CDIVIPANY INC. CQNSULTING ENGINEERS 200 HAYES BUILDING. GLEN LENNOX CENTER P. O. 80X 2896, CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROL{NA 27515 (919) 967-7079 F:-nuary 2, 1985 Orange County Board of Commissioners IOF, E. Margaret Lane F[.illsborough, North Carolina 27278 Kc: Scotswood Planned Development GHM 8501A Dear Board. Members: [n response to the questions and concerns raised at the November 2Fi public hearing on the Scotswood Planned Development, we~would like to provide additional information and clarification far the upconing continuation of that public hearing. The following items :ire addressed or have been revised on the plans: Specification of existing vegetation types. -The entire tract is densely wooded with both deciduous and coniferous type trees and underbrush. Although a detailed tree study has not been done, all. considerations to preserve specimen trees will be taken during construction. Also,. suppleme~ttal plantings . will be provided to meet all screening requirements and any other conditions affected by the Special Use Permit. -; •.~ i ~1 ~~ ~~ impervious surface ratios. -These ratios were in fact provided in the plan package on the "Preliminary Storm Drainage/Erosion Control Plan". We have included our specific calculations in this package to further clarify. Objection to lots not facing St. Mary's Road and Carolina Avenue. -The lot layout of the project was designed to have the least negative impact on the adjacent properties. The classification and further improvements proposed for St. Mary's Road are not conducive to its use for a multit.ude.of driveway turnouts and we resisted using Carolina Avenue frontage to avoid a traffic impact on the existing Eastwood properties. The developers propose to work with these dissenting land owners and provide a solution using a combination of bufferyard and extensive supplemental planting. .. - - F 1 E~A Orange County Board of Commissioners Page Two Consideration of erosion control measures. -We have met with the erosion Control Officer and discussed the options available in solution to storm drainage and erosion control needs. Prior to the design of detailed construction plans all watercourses and drainage outfalls will be accurately sur-- veyed. The topographic information used for preliminary design was interpolated from United States geodetic maps. Slight revisions to road alignments, drainage easements, or lot lines can be made before approval of the final subdivision plats. In consideration of the proposed long-term phasing of the project, the affects of the run-off from the development of the multi-family and commercial tracts on the downstream property should be investigated when designing detailed construction plans far .these areas. With reference to our discussions with the Erosion Control Officer, we seem to concur that accomodation of erasion control devices can be provided by alternative storm drainage methods. More specific plans and detailed procedures can be approved prior to issuance of grading and construction permits. I Provisions for handicapped parking and ramps. -The site plans have h..:.,~ been revised to note the provision of handicapped parking within °' the commercial tract and multi-family areas and also far access to the recreational areas. Details far the construction of ramps will be included at street/sidewalk intersections. Provisions for recreation area. -We have revised the location of the active recreation space area in accordance with the suggestion of the recreation department. The area provides approximately l0 acres of land along the creek for passive use and 5 acres of land which is at a higher elevation and on more level ground for the active uses suggested. We would also like to request that these changes be made to the conditions outlined in the Special Use Permit: Item 7. -- The design of Graham Drive and Hamilton Raad for a 37' pavement cross-section rather than. the suggested ~+1' would serve both to provide an efficient collector system and to preserve the neighborhood character of the subdivision. Item 9. - We agree that curb and gutter would be appropriate on Scotswood Boulevard, Graham Drive, and Hamilton Way as ' collectors within the street system. However, the elimination of this requirement on the remaining roads would be consistent with the road standards of the 1\orth Garalian Department of Transportation and lend to the intent of environmental 166 r Orange County Board of Commissioners Page Three sensitivity concerning reduction of runoff. Item l0. - The developers request that sidewalks nat be required on the cul-de--sacs or on streets where curb and gutter are not required. Item 20. - We proposed that the traffic light be installed by the Department of Transportation based on their criteria. We hope that we have addressed all o~ the concerns and questions brought up at the previous public hearing and can continue through the upcoming meeting with favorable attitudes. - Please feel free to contact our staff if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, THH J.~O.~fHN R. Mc yA]]1AMoS COMPANY,. INC. Cindee Wolf, RLS CW/dw cc: Mr. Marvin Collins, Planning Director Mr. John W. Graham Mr. A. H. Graham, Jr. 1bC asked if a report had been made on the thoroughfare plan far Hillsborough and if so if a copy could be obtained. Barry Jacobs also asked how much of the 1C0 feet on each side of Yanceyville Creek. is in the 100 foot buffer and Collins•explained that the floodplain in .some places extends beyond the 100 foot buffer as shown and in . otr~er- areas the floodplain ccmes k~ithin the 100 foot buffer. Dn an average, the property takes in the 100 foot flaodplain with tre exception of the southeast portion. Commissioner r~arshall asked why the condition recorr~nended by the Town of Hillsborough with regard to voluntary annexation was not included in the conditions and Collins indicated that since the County is not involved in - annexation that it was more of a municipal policy and as such the County should not be involved. • Comrnissianer Walker asked about the location of the Durham Loop and its affects on the project. Collins indicated that the location of the loop is not known at this time. PRES~NTA7ION_BY THE APPLIC~INT -John McAdams, facility engineer,' presented Larry Meisner, engineer with Kic:ley--corn and kss^,^lateU, Z: e. u:~o ~~ t ; mode a report on the traffic impact. He referred to the traffic impact analysis report which is in the permanent agenda file. He noted the proposed ,..-.``~~ Scotswood development is served by several thoroughfares. Other future road developments that may have an impact on the proposed development would include the widening of 1-85 to six lanes, and x--~i0 which is currently under construction. There i.s a thoroughfare program being studied for the Hillsborough area and Central Grange County.. He mentioned that Highway 'j0 has a 50 foot rigY,t--of-cti~ay that could be used to widen the road. The development wau?d access on US 70 and 5t. tiary's Road. The fatal development would generate 11,100 total trips with 5~ of this fatal traffic occuring during the first phase of the project. The second phase would generate 70~ of the total and the third and fourth phases would generate about 12~ each. In all cases the ex~stirg volume and proposed valun~e would be under the capacity of the road. Regarding the improvements that would be recuired to. accomrodate the traffic, the applicant is in agreement kith those reco:rmendations outlined by tdCDDT. Specifically, (1) that a traffic light be installed at the full buildup of the development, (2) left and 'right turn canes at all tree project er:tr-areas (3) a left turn .lane frcn- St, t•Tary's to 1~igh-aay 70 tdest, and (~1) C~~rol ina AvEnue be changed to a rul-de--sac. Ghair L~1i1]hait asked if First and Second fiversues were paved and 1-:e_kr~er irid_c~.~i.ec+ there are no access to these roads from tie development.