Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19861006~~~ MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS QUARTERLY JOINT PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 6, 1986 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in joint session with the Planning Board to hold the quarterly public hearing which was conta.nued from August 25 and September 15 and to hold a regular meeting on October 6, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dan Willhoit and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey, Jr., Ben Lloyd and Norman Walker. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Carl Walters, David Shanklin, Tim Hubbard, Chris Best, Prince Taylor, Peter Kramer, Michael Lewis, Sharlene Pilkey, Betty Margison and Steve Yuhasz. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers William T. Laws and Albert Kittrell, Director of Planning Marvin Collins, Planners Gene Bell and Brad Torgan, Administrative Secretary Joanna Bradshaw and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS b. Article 6.21.1 Existin or New Mobile Home Parks - Deletion of retroactive application of design standards and report on public safety requirements for parks Collins began by reviewing the history of the Mobile Home Ordinance to this particular point. In March of this year the Board of Commissioners adopted an ordinance which would require existing mobile home parks to comply with new standards for mobile home parks. On April 7, the Board of Commissioners placed a moratorium on the enforcement of the new standards as they applied to existing mobile home parks. The moratorium was placed into effect pending a review of the standards by the Planning Board. The Planning Board Ordinance Review Committee conducted a public meeting on July 31, 1986 for the purpose of receiving public comment. Two issues emerged at the Committee meeting: (1) the "retroactive" nature of the ordinance; and (2) the standards. Spokesman for the group present asked that the provisions - Article 6.21.1 a) 2) - be rescinded. The Ordinance Review Committee of the Planning Board as well as the full Planning Board recommended that a public hearing be held this date to consider deletion of Article 6.21.1 a) 2) of the Zoning ordinance. The provision requires each mobile home park to be improved in accordance with Subsection 7.20.4a) which contains the new design standards for mobile home parks. The design standards include a 10,000 square foot space per mobile home unit, setbacks for each mobile home unit from lot lines of that mobile home space which are 25' on the front with a 180 square foot patio or deck and also improvement of the actual space on which the mobile home would sit. ~~~ The deletion of Article 5.21.1 a) 2), if approved, would provide a "grandfather situation" for existing nonconforming mobile home parks; they could exist .as they are with units being removed and replaced provided the overall number of units do not increase and the mobile home park itself is not expanded. Collins noted that if .this ordinance amendment is approved, there will be a study of existing mobile home parks and the standards which have been adopted to determine whether or not they are fair and equitable in their application. There has been a report submitted to the Board of Commissioners. Additional information has been distributed tonight which was received from the Sheriff's Department regarding the number of calls received from mobile home parks in the last four years. Collins noted that this report indicated that approximately 5~.of all calls received by the Sheriff's Department were from residents of mobile home courts and parks and that il% of the housing in Orange County is mobile homes. It is the .desire of the Planning Staff to develop an ordinance which is satisfactory to Orange County, the mobile home park owner/operators and the residents of the parks. The emphasis of the study would be on the health and safety issues and what standards, if any, should apply to new and existing mobile home parks. Chair Walters noted that the proposed amendment to Article 5.21.1 a) 2) would, in effect, delete the requirement that each mobile home space in an existing mobile home park be improved in accordance with subsection 7.20.4 a) that contains new design standards regarding space size (10,000 sq. ft.), setbacks, patios/decks, etc. Jim Cole, attorney representing mobile home park owner/operators, spoke. He indicated that the citizens in attendance had already attended several meetings and had expressed their desire to have Article 6.21.1 a) 2) deleted. He addressed the following paragraph from the agenda abstract: "The deletion of Article.6.21.1 a) 2), if approved would provide a 'grandfather situation' for existing nonconforming mobile home parks during a period in which mobile home park owner/operators would work with the Planning Department/Board in developing standards for new/existing parks. The standards would then be brought back to public hearing at a later date." He stated that the desire. of the park owner/operators is to delete the Article and keep the existing standards for existing mobile home parks and have the new standards for new mobile home parks. He continued inquiring why mobile home parks were "picked out" for an investigation into health and safety standards rather than such an investigation being conducted for all of Orange County housing. He indicated that 2/3 or more of the people living in mobile home parks own their own lot and that those citizens do not feel such an investigation is needed. He suggested that there are apartment projects in orange County which present health and safety hazards and are not being investigated. Mr. Cole continued, expressing the feeling that mobile home park owner/operators as well as mobile home park residents were being legislated out of existence simply because the aesthetics were not what some Board members would desire. Cheryl Moody noted that her mobile home park has been in existence for thirty years. She continued that she is a teacher, a professional, ~~~ and that this professionalism is carried over into mobile home park. She continued, expressing the feeling that t: income housing was being provided and noted some advantages that were available to residents of the indicated the feeling of pride and accomplishment park which the ordinance would take away. the operation of the ne service of moderate of the services and mobile home park. She in her mobile home Joey Colclough read from a newspaper article dated March 22, 1985 which quoted Don willhoit, Chair of the Board of County Commissioners as saying "It appears that we are well on our way to becoming the mobile home capital of North Carolina." He expressed concerns that orange County is trying to take away "rights" which had been previously granted by the Constitution. He noted the desire of the manufactured housing communities is to be left alone to continue the right of enjoyment and the operation of the legal business of mobile home parks. Jimmy Freeland, operator of J & J Mobile Home Park, stated that in fourteen years of operation he had never called the Sheriff's Department to his mobile home park. He indicated he felt he would be unable to maintain his business if he had to make the improvements indicated by Article 6.21.1 a) 2). Curtis Bane, Jr., owner/operator of Euglina Junction and Stonegate Mobile Home Park, indicated that at times when a mobile home is replaced changes may need to be made in the set up and utility lines may need to be moved. If the mobile home is set in stone this could be very difficult. He also expressed concern with the requirements for storage buildings. He indicated that any changes should be moderated by State standards. James Ban, mobile home resident, be able to afford his mobile home indicated by Article 6.21.1 a) 2). expressed concern that he would not if he had to make the improvements Louis Berini, mobile home park owner in Eno Township, referenced a letter asking for comments on the proposed mobile home standards. He expressed concern interpreting the words "improvements" and "development" noting that these words are_the key to the change in the zoning ordinance. He noted that Webster's Dictionary gives the definition of "improve" as "to make, as land or real estate, more profitable by cultivation or construction". He noted as an example the betterment of a road means the resurfacing of it not the destruction of it simply to resurface it. He stated further that the definition of "development" is "the gradual growth of advancement to progressive changes from an embryo state until maturity". He felt that in real estate this would mean the beginning of the plan, the actual construction and the completion of the project. Mr. Berini continued that his interpretation of improving a mobile home park would not include the destruction of the facilities of the adjacent space as he felt the zoning amendment would require the park owner to do in order to meet the higher level of amenities. He continued that zoning should not require condemnation and destruction of the use of a lot, and he felt this was unconstitutional. Mr. Berini asked that the Board members place themselves in the position of the mobile home residents and park owners and consider how they would desire the decision on the amendment to be made. He reminded the Boards that regulations in effect at the time the parks were built had been met. -~ ~~ J. S. Stinson, owner of a mobile home park on Route 2, Mebane, stated he had been having problems since December, 1985 with Orange County concerning the placement of an additional mobile home in his park. He expressed much dissatisfaction with current regulations and felt there was no need for further regulations. Beth Bradshaw, mobile home park owner, stated that her mobile home community was built in such a manner that surpassed regulations and requirements. She noted that there xs always a waiting list for a space in her park. She continued expressing the concern that any retroactive amendment would be illegal. She noted that retroactive legislation was not needed and urged the Boards to go forward with the knowledge that had been gained and initiate regulations for new mobile home parks only. Ronald Gammon, mobile home owner, expressed dissatisfaction with the retroactive amendment. He asked the Boards how they would react if they were told to make considerable improvements to their homes which they did not want or could not afford. Ronnie Hester, a four-year resident in a mobile home in Orange County, expressed concern that more was being required of residents than they wanted or could afford. He also noted that for many residents, a mobile home is a stepping stone to owning property and a home. Katherine Mercer, a mobile home resident, expressed concern that facts about mobile home parks had been distorted. She indicated that she felt the mobile home park owner/operators deserved a grandfather clause without qualifications. She felt this would take care of discrimination against mobile homes. She noted that she is well pleased with the lot she has in a park. Joseph B. Supeano, mobile home owner/property owner, stated that he had moved to North Carolina from Connecticut and is well pleased with his home in Joppa oaks. He noted that restrictions in North Carolina were not as strict as those in Connecticut nor is the tax base in Orange County as high. He expressed concern with the possibility of new restrictions being placed on existing mobile home parks. Forrest Heath, owner/operator of Ridgewood Mobile Home Park, stated that his park was begun in 1965 before zoning in orange County. He noted that his park was approximately 25~ completed when zoning was enacted. Three-fourths of the property of his park was zoned residential with only one- fourth being zoned mobile home park district. He explained the process. he pursued to obtain a zoning change. He also reviewed the actions taken by the Board and explained the court proceedings which he had to engage in to obtain the zoning change. He expressed concern with "retroactive" amendments, especially with the court process he had had to go through. Collins indicated that many valid considerations had been presented in regard to the standards. He noted that these represent the real reason that he is recommending further study of the standards. He noted that EMS and the Sheriff's Department had expressed concern with the lack of a numbering system in the parks and the width of some of the travelways. He stated that these considerations indicate to him that the Planning Board and Planning Staff and mobile home park owner/operators need to work together on standards which are realistic and equitable. Emily Bane Villinova expressed the concern that placing more ~7~ restrictions on mobile homes would affect their affordability. She encouraged the Board of Commissioners to listen to the comments from mobile home park owner/operators and act accordingly. - Bart Walters stated that he has been a mobile home park dweller for over five years and was only moving now due to the fact that he had been able to save money to purchase property of his own. He indicated he felt the mobile home parks should be able to continue operation under the standards which were in effect at the time they were built. It was asked from the audience that the amendment be read in its entirety. Collins responded that there is not a text amendment per se in written form. If something is deleted from the text it is not written, it is simply taken out of the ordinance. He continued reading Articl-e 6.21.1 a 2) and noting that the phrase "that the space be improved in accordance with Subsection. 7.20.4a) of this ordinance" is the phrase which requires existing mobile home parks to comply with the ne~;~ standards. By deleting this phrase, a grandfather situation would be created. 1. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS a. Z-7-86 Allen and Doris Turner Continued from 8-25-86 The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to receive public comment on a proposed rezoning request submitted by Allen and Doris Turner. Allen and Doris Turner are requesting rezoning of a 14.97 acre tract located on a gravel access road partially maintained by NCDOT. The access road connects to U.S. 70 at the southwest intersection corner of U.S. 70 and Interstate 85 in Eno Township. The property is known as Lot 77 and 77A of Tax Map 25. The property is located in an area designated Twenty Year Transition and Commercial- Industrial Transition Activity Node in the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning classification of the property is Rural Residential (R- 1). The applicant is requesting the lot be rezoned to General Commercial-4 (GC-4). Approval of the request would allow development of the full range of commercial uses at this location. Properties to the east and west of the tract are zoned GC-4. Rezoning of the property would allow for the development of the site as a single commercial project or, alternatively, the subdivision of the property into individual lots for commercial development. Collins indicated information has been received that has to do with a letter submitted by the Division of Environmental Management concerning noncompliance with NC General Statutes regarding wash water and discharge of oil. Collins continued that Mr. Turner has come into compliance with DEM's notice of non- compliance. Due to the nature of this business and the closer review needed, Collins stated that Planning Staff is recommending denial of the request with resubmission as Planned Development. A Planned Development is a more suitable approach for rezoning of this property in that it would not only allow the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board to consider the specific request again but it would also allow them to look at a specific site plan for the development of the project. At that time conditions could be attached to the approval which would address any .~. concerns that resulted from the review o Because of the size of the property, generation of traffic. This would also Development request. f the site plan of the request. there could be considerable be addressed through a Planned .Commissioner Lloyd .inquired why Planning Staff would recommend Planned Development when the applicant met all the criteria for a straight rezoning. Collins responded that the rezoning process is a more open-ended process in that the Commissioners have more latitude in making a determination as to whether or not to approve or deny the request. The Special Use or Planned Development process is more closed in that if certain findings-of-fact are made, then the Commissioners must issue the permit. Through the straight rezoning process the County loses the ability to mitigate any negative impacts that result from the project whereas a Special Use Permit or Planned Development approach would allow the County to address those impacts while at the same time allowing the citizen to use the property as he wished. Collins submitted photographs showing the present condition of the property. Ken Embree, attorney representing the Turners, indicated he had more information regarding the. letter from DEM concerning the non compliance. He stated that Mr. Turner did receive a notice of the violation in May. When the investigator came out and pointed the violation out to Mr. Turner, he stopped washing the heavy equipment immediately in such away as to cause the discharge and has refrained frc~~ doing so since that time. Mr. Embree continued that there is a special type of collection basin that can be constructed under design specifications from DEM to prevent the discharge from occurring again. He noted that Mr. Turner will comply with those regulations in order to request a permit from DEM; this would enable Mr. Turner to address the concern noted by Collins. Embree continued that before Staff knew about the discharge violation, they had recommended approval of the rezoning request. Embree indicated on a map .that there are areas surrounding this property that are zoned GC-4 (General Commercial-4) near the intersection of US 70 and I-85. This is the only tract on the south side of the access for US 70 which is not zoned GC-4. Embree continued that Turner has submitted an Erosion Control Plan which has been approved and has also submitted a site plan. which shows the see_d_ing of the property and the planting of trees. Mr. Embree noted that Mr. Turner had responded to all the regulations as he was informed and encouraged the straight rezoning of the property. Commissioner Lloyd inquired why, with the problem of discharge solved, did Planning Staff not go back to its original recommendation of straight rezoning. Collins responded that the size of the tract and the potential for development and traffic generation were concerns of staff. Collins continued that the ~.etter from DEM added to the concerns for potential for impacts with the development of the site, particularly if the major part is to be developed for the paving company. Yuhasz inquired if the traffic impacts from this property would be any greater than that from the adjoining properties currently zoned GC 4. Collins responded that they may be lesser than or greater than but there is little that can be done about those tracts already zoned GC-4. Pilkey inquired about the 50' buffer. Embree responded that a landscaping plan has been submitted and approval has been given. Most of the area will be reseeded and trees planted according to the landscaping plan. He noted that the planting will be done when it ... rains. Margison inquired about drainage fields. Embree responded that the existing system has been approved by the Orange County Health Department. He continued that no activity could take place on the tract until such time as the retention basin is in place and a permit is issued from DEM. Commissioner Marshall inquired about the additional permits Embree had referenced and the landscaping plan. Embree responded that the property was within the Major Transportation Corridor, that a landscape plan had been approved, and that a letter of credit posted for the improvements. ~b. Z-8-86 ROBERT FAIRCLOTH AND R. B. BARLOW JR. CONTINUED FROM 8-25-86) The presentation was made by Collins. This agenda item is to receive public comment on a proposed rezoning request for the property ,of R.S. Barlow, Jr. and Robert Faircloth to correct an error in the Zoning Atlas. The Planning Department initiated the request following a complaint about the nature of the use (auto repair shop) on Lot 11 of Tax Map 30 ,. , in Cheeks Township. An adjoining lot, Lot 10, was incorrectly '-.:.~ designated Existing Commercial (EC-5) at the time Cheeks Township was zoned (October 1, 1984). Lot 10 ~-is a vacant, wooded lot and is 0.98 acres (42,511 square feet) in size. Lot 11 is 0.72 acres (31,188 square feet) in size and contains five (5) buildings - a 26'x28' residence, store building, trailer, 9'x13' shed and a 31'x35' garage. Both lots front on US Highway 70 and are situated between Frazier Road (SR 1310) and Redman Crossing (SR 1399). At the time Cheeks Township was zoned, Lot 11 was occupied by Tyndall's Gas and Grocery, and Lawn Mower Repair Shop. Both lots are designated Ten Year Transition and Water Supply Watershed in the Land Use Plan. The present zoning of Lot 10 is Existing Commercial (EC-5), while the proposed zoning classification is R-1 Residential. The present zoning of Lot 11 is R-1 Residential, while the proposed zoning is Existing Commercial (EC-5). Approval, of the request would correct an error in the Zoning Atlas made at the time Cheeks Township was zoned. A complaint has been filed concerning the nature of the use on Lot 11 - an auto repair shop. The complaint has addressed concerns about the excessive noise both during and after normal working hours, the unsightly nature of the operation, and travel safety since cars are parked within the right of-way of Highway 70. The 1984 traffic count on US Highway 70 was 5,700 trips per day. Article 6.14.2 of the Zoning ordinance sets performance standards 6J"~6~ ~~Q7 in regard to permitted noise levels. For properties zoned EC 5, noise levels cannot exceed 50 decibels between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. or 45 decibels between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. For purposes of comparison, the noise level on a busy urban street is 90 decibels, while an accelerating motorcycle is rated at 110 decibels. The racing "of automobile engines on Lot 11 would fall within the same general rating. The Sheriff's Department has a decibel meter with which to determine if performance standards are met. The obvious problem of enforcement is that noise levels could be decreased at the time deputies appear to take measurements. A similar problem already exists in that automobile noise ~.evels are increased after deputies have warned the occupants of the site that they are disturbing neighbors. The Planning Department recommends approval of the rezoning of Lot l0 from EC-5 to R-l. The Planning Department recommends that Lot 11 be left in an R- l classification. Nonresidential uses on that site would become nonconforming and subject to the provisions of Article 11.9. Basically, that use would be allowed to remain and continue to operate as a nonconforming use as long as it did not cease to exist for a period of more than six months. If it were replaced with another use, that use would have to be one that is permitted in the R-1 district. Due to the nature of the complaints and the current use of the property, staff feels that this would be the best long-range solution. Commissioner Carey inquired EC-5 tracts across the street. Robert Faircloth, owner of had talked with the operators of them that the noise must cease the premises. if there had been complaints about the Hollins responded no. the property in question, indicated he auto repair shop and had stressed to or he would have to ask them to vacate Sob Snyder, owner of the adjacent property stated that he had not seen any reduction in activity and the noise had not decreased. Yuhasz inquired if there were performance standards for non conforming uses as related to noise. County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill responded that there are no noise standards for residential developments in the Zoning Ordinance. Collins stated there is a Noise Ordinance which could be enforced in this situation. Bob Snyder, owner of property across the street from the Faircloth property (Lot #11). He stated that the operators work on domestic vehicles as well as race cars. He noted that he filed a complaint with the Orange County Planning Department on August 7, 1986 with Gene Bell. He read from the original complaint noting traffic hazards created by autos being parked on the right-of-way on either side of the road as well as excessive noise during and after business hours. He noted that much of the work was done on race car engines which have no mufflers which would reduce the the noise to an acceptable level. Numerous requests have been made of the garage operators to stop or at least decrease the volume of noise generated after regular working hours with no success. He noted that complaints have been filed over the last twenty months with the Sheriff's Department. When the deputies leave the site, the noise level increases rather than decreases. Deputies have also informed Mr. Snyder that there are no ordinances which they c~~~ can enforce to stop the noise at any time. Mr. Snyder disagreed; there are ordinances which, when enforced, can stop the noise. He urged the Board of County Commissioners to determine the accuracy of wording and the validity of application of the ordinance to the above mentioned ~. garage. The following petition was read by Mr. Snyder: , "We the property owners and interested parties hereby petition you, the Board of Commissioners to not allow the error in zoning to invalidate any applicable ordinance or affect the enforcement thereof based solely on the technicality of such and not to allow any change in the zoning status of 3.3011 regardless of how or when i.t was zoned without first making a thorough inspection of the premises and all pertinent facts and making a determination as to the suitability of subject property for any use as provided in all applicable ordinances." Snyder continued that the disturbance from this property began in January 1985 and has caused unnecessary hardships and much mental anguish. He asked that the Board of Commissioners to administer and enforce all applicable .ordinances fairly to all interested parties. Yuhasz inquired what use was on the property in 1984. Snyder responded that Mr. and Mrs. Tyndall operated a small grocery and gas station prior to their deaths in 1983. Between 1983 and January 1985, a small engine repair shop was on the site. Joe Atwell, resident directly across the street from the garage, commented that even though Mr. Faircloth may have talked tv the operators of the garage, the problem has not been corrected. Mr. Faircloth stated that he desired to see the zoning error corrected to EC-5 but if the problem continues he will ask the tenants to vacate the garage. 2. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS a. Inventor of Sites of Cultural and Geolo ical Si nificance Presentation was made by Planner Brad Torgan. This agenda item is to receive public comment on proposed text amendments to the Land Use Plan. Orange County contains many sites of cultural, historical, recreational, biological and geological significance. Section IV-B-2, Land Suitability , of the Subdivision Regulations contains a mandate to the Planning Board to consider the overall design of a subdivision in light of the suitability of the land for development. Land suitability includes an investigation of historic sites and unique natural areas. Although information has been available through a variety of local and State agencies, it has never been compiled in one source, making it difficult for the Planning Department and the Planning Board to adequately assess the impact of subdivision proposals on such resources. Furthermore, similar mandates are not present in the Zoning Ordinance. In May of 1986, an inventory of cultural, historical, recreational, biological and geological significance was completed. Incorporation of ~~ the document into the Land Use Plan represents an important first step in insuring the protection and/or preservation of significant natural and cultural resources. If approved, specific mechanisms such as incentive zoning, density transfers and cluster development can be developed and/or utilized through which to achieve this goal. In addition, public and private agencies and organizations can be contacted for assistance in maintaining and managing significant areas. As development pressures mount in Orange County, protection of sensitive areas becomes even more critical than in the past. Astable and varied natural environment, along with an appreciata.on of historical, cultural, and. community resources are essential to a healthy society. Current development patterns in the triangle suggest that the natural environment is part of the high quality of life which attracts new development and residents. The County has already stated some commitment to the protection of significant natural resources through policy statements and the identification of some natural areas in the Land Use Plan, Floodway and Streamway Building Regulations, and Public Interest District Zoning. In the face of rapid growth, however, commitment to protection, and the potential levels of protection need tv be expanded. Current definitions of sites significant to the natural and physical environment, along with rationales for protection, are deficient when confronted by a doubling of the County's population in the next 20-30 years. Additionally no comprehensive data base of sites important to the natural and physical environment exists. This proposed text amendment and accompanying appendix are designed to remedy that situation. Currently, the Land Use Plan speaks primarily to the protection of large public and quasi-public holdings such as Eno River State Park and Duke Forest. A recognition of the need for protection on large private holdings or small sites of biological significance is much less evident, even though the Triangle Land Conservancy and N.C. Natural Heritage Program have identified over two dozen such sites in orange Caunty that are home to endangered or threatened species and exemplary geologic formations. The County also has no record of private lands placed in reserve for wildlife generation (such as wildlife renew areas or the Continental Timberlands site in Bingham Township) or passive recreation (such as hiking trails in the Morgan Creek easements). As for man-made additions to the environment, the Land Use Plan speaks only to the protection of state or federally registered historic buildings and archeological sites, ignoring literally hundreds of other sites important to the history and culture of orange County. Cemeteries, which as a group are currently unrecognized in the Land Use Plan, offer a wealth of historical data on county resident and early history. For early county residents it may be the only record as vital records registration was not mandated until this century. State law offers some protection from desecration but the laws cannot be enforced if locations are not recorded. The intent of establishing cemeteries in the Land Use Plan as historically significant sites is not to preserve them at all costs. Rather, it seeks to prevent past abuses, the using of gravesites as dumping grounds for building construction or plowing under without ~~~ recordation of the site. It asks that the integrity of the County's cemeteries, many of which date back to the 1700's be respected and, if authority of law exists to disinter, that its data be fully recorded. Sites of historical. significance is also broadened to encompass more than buildings and cemeteries. It includes dams, functional or destroyed but still evident, at mill sites that once provided for the economic well-being of the County. Tt also includes sites of commemorative markers either placed by the state (such as that identifying the site of the hanging of the regulator leaders) or by private citizens, such as that memorializing the site of the old Elm Grove School in northern Chapel Hill Township. -Churches and rural community centers, including recreational sites, should be acknowledged in the Land Use Plan as important to the County and its planning process. Their existence imparts a cohesion and identity to rural communities. Even though the church buildings may be new and not of historical value, the same is not true of the communities and congregation, some of which have already. celebrated their bicentennial. The majority of material within the appendix was taken from current registries provided by state agencies including the Division of Archives and History and Archeology blanch of the Department of Cultural Resources, the N.C. Wildlife Commission, and the N.C. Natural Heritage Program. The inclusion of other data, especially that concerning cemeteries and mill sites, required extensive fieldwork and relied upon every available source for clues, from 90 year old maps and minutes of Baptist Association meetings to handwritten fieldnotes of members on the Chapel Hill Historical Society which are on file in the Registrar of Deeds Office. One note as to entries--the entries for archeological sites are as cryptic as they are because the Archeology Branch has asked that they be presented that way. Although complete data on sites, including location, is now on file in the Planning Department, there is a fear that public disclosure of exact locations will invite disruption of the sites. New measures of protection that may arise from this work will depend entirely on whether any new protection beyond the status quo is warranted. Potential measures could range from Zoning Ordinance amendments to simply informing a .state agency responsible for a particular site's protection that development is proposed for that site to no new measures at all. What new measures or simply new awareness that might arise from this work stems from its basic premise, orange County's natural heritage should not be compromised, its cultural heritage not forgotten. Planning Staff recommends approval of amendment to the text and incorporation of inventory as appendix to the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Marshall noted this was an impressive study and one which was needed but questioned, under the religious area of the study, if Black Baptist was a specific denomination. Tongan responded that the document he had to work with was the Orange County Directory which was put together in 1952 and that directory made the distinction between White Southern Baptist Churches and Black Baptist Churhes. Marshall suggested that this not be listed as if it were a ...~ W denomination. Planning Board member Hubbard inquired if this were a final inventory or if it were to be updated periodically. Tongan. responded it would be updated as more information becomes available. Commissioner Walker stated that a study had been done fairly recently and that a copy of this study should help considerably. Jo Barbour indicated that a Mrs. Ingstroin had information that should be incorporated in the study. Tongan responded that those notes prepared by Mrs. Ingstrom are reportedly missing. Pearson Stewart, Triangle Land Conservancy, encouraged the Boards to amend the Land Use Plan to include this inventory and supported the suggestion to continually update the inventory as more information becomes available. 3. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS a. Article 10 Off-Street Parkin and Loadin The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. No requirement exists in the Zoning Ordinance for the provision of handicapped parking facilities. such facilities are currently provided through the attachment of conditions of approval on subdivision plats, planned developments and special use permits, or through the application of the NC State Building Code requirements. The proposed ordinance amendments would require spaces to be a minimum of 13 feet in width and 20 minimum of two (2) handicapped spaces or one (1) f~ parking spaces would be required. Spaces must be handicapped use and must be within 100 feet of a Curb cuts or ramps must also be provided for each adjoining walkways. handicapped parking feet in length. A ~r every 20 standard clearly marked for building entrance. space for access to 'The NC State Building Code currently requires one (1) handicapped parking space in each 50 standard spaces but recommends twice that amount. Planning Staff recommends approval of the amendment. There were no comments or questions. 4. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS a. Section III-E Final Plat - Ma Sheet Dimensions The presentation was made by Collins. This agenda item is to receive public comment on proposed text amendments to the Subdivision Regulations. Changes have occurred in the North Carolina Uniform Plat Law which ~~~ establish minimum and maximum dimensions for subdivision plats - no smaller than 8-1/2"x11" or greater than 21"x30". Margin dimensions are also established - 1-1/2" on the left border and 1/2" on all other borders. The current Subdivision Regulations allow either (a) 21"x30", (b) 12"x18" or (c) 18"x24" plat sizes. The amendment would eliminate confusion between the regulations/requirements administered by the Planning Department and the Register of Deeds and Land Records Departments. The ,Planning Board recommends approval of amendment. There were no comments or questions. 5. INSPECTION FEE-SCHEDULE The presentation was made by Collins. This agenda item is to receive public comment on proposed amendments to the Inspection Fee Schedule. On July 8, 1986, an updated schedule of fees for planning, erosion control and building inspection services was adopted by the Board of Commissioners. Since adoption of the schedule, it has become apparent that revisions are necessary to clarify certain fees and other "miscellaneous" schedules which were not foreseen earlier. --, The proposed amendments would clarify the application of fees to certain types of construction and plan review/approval procedures. In °~ addition, the provision regarding "Late Fees" would be incorporated again, and all schedules containing fees ending in $.50 would be rounded off to be consistent with the computerized permit system program. The proposed amendments would also add fees for various "miscel- laneous" inspections such as the moving and demolition of buildings, commercial and campaign signs, swimming poo7.s and radio/TV towers. Fees would also be established to provide for the reimbursement of Town of Chapel Hill Engineering Staff inspecting streets, storm drainage, and water and sewer facilities constructed to Town standards. Commissioner Carey inquired about the "Change of occupancy/Use (Existing Building)". Collins responded this item is related to a requirement in the North Carolina State Building Code where different classes of occupancy are defined such as retail, office, etc. Carey noted the need for .clarification and Collins agreed that this could be changed to read "Change in Class of Occupancy". Commissioner Lloyd asked for clarification on campaign signs and inquired how it could be enforced. Collins responded that the present Sign ordinance allows campaign signs and specifies locations and sizes of the signs. Marvin Collins explained that there has been no real effort, until recently, to enforce campaign sign provisions. When the current fee schedule was adopted by the Board in July, no fees were listed for campaign signs or other identification signs. What is proposed is that a fee be charged per candidate requiring the identification of each sign by tax map, lot and block number. The signs also have to be located on private property instead of DOT or any public or private right-of-way. Commissioner Marshall noted the County should not do something that is not enforceable. Commissioner Lloyd expressed disagreement with the entire concept of paying a fee before campaign signs can be put in place. Planning Board member Sharlene Pilkey asked if the municipalities fine people if the signs are not taken down within a certain period of time, and Collins indicated that it varies in accordance with the ordinance in these municipalities. Steve Yuhasz asked about the charge per acre in the erosion fee schedule and if this charge per acre is per disturbed acre, and Collins indicated it was. Yuhasz questioned the enforceability of a number of fees on the schedule. Collins noted that while some of the fees would be difficult to enforce they are set up to be self-policing. Collins made two corrections to the fee schedule: (1) the fee for prefab utility building apply to those over 500 square feet. (2) under signs - delete, in the section dealing with business identification and billboards .involving construction, the word "not" before the word "involving". Collins clarified that a demolition permit is essential when -- utility systems serving a building must be disconnected. One reason for the inspection is to insure they are disconnected correctly. With reference to woodstoves, the inspection would take place if a woodstove is added to an existing house. Normally, most insurance companies require that if a person has a fireplace or woodstove installed, the installation be inspected by the building inspector to certify it has been installed properly. In an answer to a question from the audience about fees in the Joint Planning Area, Collins indicated that the County can either perform the inspection by using County staff, hire a consultant or contract with the municipalities to do the inspections. Commissioner Lloyd requested that this item be continued to the first meeting in November for receipt of additional citizen comments. Josephine Barbour made comments about the size regulations for campaign signs and expressed disapproval of charging a fee for such activity. She asked that the sign regulations pertaining to campaign signs be reviewed. 6. FIRE DISTRICT BOUNDARY CHANGE Director of EMS Bobby Baker presented for consideration of approval the request for removal of a portion of the White Crass Fire District adding it to the South Orange Area District. All state requirements which provide for changes in fire districts have been met. NO ONE SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CHANGE. THERE BEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~~ Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to refer public hearing items one through four to the Planning Board for their recommendation and continue the public hearing on these items to November 3, 1986 for receipt of the Planning Board recommendation. VOTE:. UNANIMOUS. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to continue the public hearing on the Inspection Fee Schedule to November 3 for receipt of additional citizen comments. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. Motion was made by Commissioner .Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to approve the change in fire district boundaries for the White Cross Fire District and the South Orange Area District. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. E. REPORTS .. 1. AUDIT REPORT 1985-86 Finance Director Gordon Baker made introductory remarks about the 1985-86 audit report and introduced Rex Price and Deborah Sackie, the auditors from Touche Ross & Company. They indicated that the audit went smoothly. The report is long and has a lot of detailed information. There were no questions. 2. TEEN NETWORKYNG TEAM Michelle Cotton presented information about TNT and outlined overall goals of the group in an effort to postpone young parenthood, encourage teens to finish their education and to help prepare teens for and help them find suitable and satisfying employment. She emphasized that the problems of teenagers need the attention of all the citizens of Orange County. She referred to the problem as a plague that will grow if something is not done. Russell~Dula, the second speaker for TNT, explained Fall Teen Fest in which teens would be brought together and involved in a talent show as well as a fashion show. By supporting this Fall Teen Fest the citizens of orange County can express to the teens in Orange County that they are concerned about their problems and willing to help reduce them. He explained the program and associated costs of $950.00. TNT hopes to continue with smaller projects and group meetings where teen problems can be discussed. They hope to find ways to instill a more positive attitude in teens and encourage them to become involved with the community and helping others. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to fund the request of $950.00 and encourage the County Departments to assist with the program as possible. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. A. BOARD COMMENTS Chair Willhoit announced a joint meeting with the Town of Hillsborough to discuss (1) the thoroughfare plan, (2) water and sewer plan, and (3) development south of Hillsborough. The meeting will be held on October 27 in Hillsborough. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA None. 2. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Mark N. O'Neal, Co-trustee Matthews 150 acre track located on Mt. Sinai Road zoning change which increases the lot size Trust, made reference to a and noted that the proposed from 40,000 square feet to 80,000 square feet be waived because of a hardship on the family. emphasized that the zoning regulation is not needed because the topography of the land will limit most lots to 2-5 acres. He requested an exemption from this proposed zoning. Chair Willhoit referred this request to the County Manager far further study. POLYCY A motion was made by Chair Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to reaffirm the policy that any previous applications that had received preliminary plan approval as of the effective date of the adoption of the revised Land Use Plan should proceed under the review and development procedures of the regulations in effect at the time the application was received. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. C. PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL EMPLOY THE HANDICAPPED WEEK Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adopt the proclamation for National Employ the Handicapped Week. . VOTE: UNANIMOUS. PROCLAMATION NATIONAL EMPLOY THE HANDICAPPED WEEK WHEREAS, physically and mentally disabled people have been tireless in seeking out employment opportunities and in overcoming vocational, economic, educational and additional barriers; and WHEREAS, disabled people have demonstrated to their employers and their community high standards of performance and dedication to their professions; and WHEREAS, disabled people aspire to equality in the work force, self direction and self-determination in their lifestyle; and WHEREAS, employers, both public and private, can and do readily testify to the credentials and value of disabled employees; and WHEREAS, everyone has the right to employment at the highest levels of which they are capable and this right is not to be abridged by reason of physical or mental disability; and WHEREAS, despite past and present efforts of employers to hire people with disabilities, the unemployment level. of disabled people continues to be unnecessarily high; NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Soard of Commissioners do hereby proclaim the week of October 5-11, 1986 as NATIONAL EMPLOY THE HANDICAPPED WEEK in Orange County and urge public and private employers to take this opportunity to determine how the employment skills and the employment needs of disabled persons can best be utilized to further the public/private good. F. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA The county Manager recommended the following action by the Board: 1. ADDIT70N TO STATE ROAD SYSTEM To approve a petition for addition of Governor Burke Road in Wilkerson Acres Subdivision - Section II and Section III to the state maintained secondary roads system. 2. CHANGE ORDER FOR CARR BUILDYNG To approve a change order for the Carr Building to permit the ..•~., removal of the which is one inch higher than the existing floor at a `1 cost of $334.00 and authorize the Chair to sign. 3. APPRAISAL SERVICES CONTRACT To award an appraisal services contract to Kathy Buck at a total not to exceed $5,000 and authorize the Chair to sign. (Efland Sewer Contract) Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall that the forgoing action be taken by the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. NOTE: The next item was removed from the consent agenda for separate consideration. 4. PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENTS Motion was made by Commissione Commissioner Lloyd to amend the 1986-87 following General Fund amendments: Appropriation - Aging Source-CAT Transp. Lease Fees, Appropriation - Aging Source - State Discretionary Funds Appropriation - Health Source - governor's Waste Management Appropriation - Social Services Source - Emergency Food and Shelter r Marshall, seconded by Budget Ordinance by the $ 20,68Q 20,680 5,500 5,500 5,000 5,000 5,098 5,098 Appropriation - Agricultural Extension Department 10,811 Source -- Special Agricultural Extension Contingency Account 10,811 VOTE: UNANIMOUS. G. ITEMS FOR DECISION 1. INSPECTION FEE SCHEDULE No decision on this item because the public hearing was cont~.nued to November 3, 7.986 for additional citizen comments. 2. FIRE DISTRICT BOUNDARY CHANGE Decision was made above in item D-6. 3. SUNSET RIDGE - PRELIMINARY PLAN The Preliminary Plan for Sunset Ridge Subdivision was presented for consideration of approval. The property is located in Cheeks Township along the south side of West Lebanon Road (SR 1306) between Mill Creek Road and Doe Run Road. Fourteen lots are proposed out of 14.76 acres. The property is zoned Rural Residential and is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan subject to the lot lines being shifted to obtain the minimum road frontage required for lot #3. The Planning Board recommended approval subject to the Planning Staff recommendation and the condition that all lots get access from Sundown Drive. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to approve the Planning Board recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 4. PROPERTY SURVEYED FOR ANTHONY RICHARDS - PRELIMINARY PLAN The Preliminary Plan for the property of Annie Belle Richards was presented for consideration of approval. The property is located in Cheeks Township on the east side of Frazier Road (SR 1310). one lot is proposed out of 15.4601 acres with a lot size of 1.229 acres. The zoning of the property is Rural Residential with an overlay zoning designation of Upper Eno Protected Watershed. The Planning Board recommended approval of the Preliminary Plan on September 15, 1986. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the Planning Board recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. J..d~~ 5. GRAMPIAN HILLS ~- SECTION THREE - PRELIMINARY PLAN The Preliminary Plan for Grampian Hills, Section Three Subdivision, property of Mrs. Y. Z. Cannon was presented for consideration of approval. The property is located in Chapel Hill Township on the south side of Bowden Raad (SR 1946). Two lots are proposed out of 4.54 acres. the zoning of the property is Rural Residential with an overlay zoning designation of University Lake Protected Watershed. The Planning Board recommended approval of the Preliminary Plan contingent upon two conditions:. - (1) Indicate the tax map and lot references on the plat. (2) The spelling of Grampian must be changed to provide con- sistency for all three sections. Harold Cannon asked that consideration be given for permitting two driveways instead of a joint driveway. Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to approve the Planning Board recommendation with the two conditions as stipulated and to allow separate driveways. VO'T'E : UNANIMOUS . 6. RE UEST FOR AUTHORIZATION. TO INITIATE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to authorize the County Attorney to initiate legal proceedings fora zoning violation on property owned by Charles and Marilyn McLamb to bring the property owner into compliance with the Orange county Zoning Ordinance. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. CABLECASTING BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETINGS Ken Thompson presented a overview summary of the benefits and costs for cablecasting the Board of Commissioners meetings. Motion was made by Commissioner-Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to request The Village Companies hold open their offer until .Tuly, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 9. CONTRACT PROPOSAL TO STUDY AND EVALUATE ADDITIONAL WATER SUPPLY IN ORANGE COUNTY Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, .seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve a contract proposal from Hazel and -Sawyer to conduct a water supply development feasibility study in Orange County at at cost of $40,000 for phase I and $20,000 for phase 2. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 8. SCHEDULE OF VALUES STANDARDS AND RULES After a short explanation from Kermit Lloyd and questions which were satisfactorily answered, motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the schedule of values as submitted by the Tax Supervisor and authorize that the schedule of ~~~ values be held open in the office of the Tax Supervisor for ten days from the date of publication upon which time the schedule of values will become official unless appealed. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 10. DRAINAGE EASEMENT BY TOWN OF CARRBORO Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve a request from the Town of Carrboro for a drainage and curb easement across a lot located at the intersection of Broad and Hill Streets. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 11. TAX REFUNDS AND RELEASE REQUEST Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve 10 requests for refund and/or release of tax bills. Zinn Group, Acct. #99298 $ 1,087.47 Ray W. Queen, Acct. #60914 252.60 Larry E. Squires, Acct. #5007 6.p5 Estate of Enita Stokes, Acct. #104677 1 105.17 .- Liesch, Herman R. & Doris M., Acct. #727302 , 603 34 Liesch, Herman R. & Daris M., Acct. #727320 . 195.31 Tarheel Dining Concepts, Inc., Acct..#96275 206.85 J & E, Inc. Acct. #37380 992.66 Larry W. Melton, Acct. #11916 428.60 John Lewis Bradshaw, Acct. #102708 37,62 VOTE: UNANIMOUS. H. APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION FOR WOMEN Motion .was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded Commissioner Carey to appoint V. Kay Scurlock and Loretta T. Coble. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. PRIVATE INDUSTRIAL COUNCIL Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded Commissioner Carey to reappoint Phyllis Lotchin and Irving P. Nach. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. - SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded Commissioner Carey to appoint James Edwards. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. CHAPEL HILL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Motion w d by ....`~' I by by as ma a by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to appoint Kenneth .Bagwell as an alternate on the Chapel Hill Board of Adjustment. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. I. MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the minutes of the September 16, 1986 meeting as corrected. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Board, Chair Willhoit adjourned the meeting. The next meeting will be held on Monday, October 6, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Joanna Br~richaw- Aran„n ~_