Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19870601_~),4,~ MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUNE 1, 1987 REGULAR MEETING AND MAY 26, 1987 CONTINUED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on June 1, 1987, 7:30 p.m., Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, North Carolina to hold their regular meeting and to continue the Joint Public Hearing from May 26, 1987. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Shirley E. Marshall, and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell and Don Willhoit. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: .Chair Barry Jacobs, Planning Board Members Chris Best, Peter Kramer, Mike Lewis, Betty Margison, Brenda Swann, Prince Taylor and Steve Yuhasz. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and William T. Laws, Planner Gene Bell, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Administrative Secretary Joanna Bradshaw, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Planner Brad Tongan. A. BOARD AND MANAGERS COMMENTS Chair Marshall asked that the third floor renovations be put on the agenda for the July 6 meeting. She announced that the line item detail will be delivered tomorrow to the Board members. Commissioner Willhoit indicated he would need to leave the meeting early because of an early flight. He informed the Board he would be out of town from July 3 until after the NACo Conference and asked that adoption of the budget be targeted this month if possible. Chair Marshall assured that if at all possible the budget would be adopted June 30. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair Marshall stated that those citizens who have signed up to speak will be recognized at the time that item is discussed. 2. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Peggy Walker, President of orange Congregations in Mission (OCIM) accompanied by Susan Gladin, Executive Director of OCIM distributed a letter to the Commissioners and briefly detailed the situation. She stated that a single mother with a six year old child came to OCIM today for assistance. She has been laid off since December and is facing eviction from her apartment. She has been living with no electricity, no lights and no water. In two weeks she will be eligible for unemployment and food stamps. However, today this person has no food and no lights and OCIM had nothing to give this person. Ms. Walker reported that in the first five months of 1987, OCIM already has spent 78% of its 1987 Sumaritan Relief budget which does not include the $13,000 that was given for the Saratoga workers. OCIM will have no funds available for the month of June. The membership of oCIM instructed Ms. Walker to request from the~County's contingency fund an additional $10,000 to be placed into the General Assistance fund to provide housing, utility and other emergency needs for families in Orange County. The request is supported by the Inter-Faith Council and Ms. Marti - -.~, Cook, Director of Social Services. ~.-~., Chair Marshall suggested and it was the consensus of the Board that because of the low balance in the County's contingency fund that this request be reviewed during the budget session. This would be-the General Assistance line item in the Social Services budget C. MINUTES Consideration of the March 24, 1987 minutes was postponed to the next meeting. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Marshall read the "Public Charge" as approved by the Board and as contained in the rules of procedures for the Board. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued from the May 26, 1987 Meeting) 1. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS -- LITTLE RIVER TOWNSHIP COMPONENT Staff .presentation was made by Gene .Bell. The presentation was made in three parts: the process; the existing plan; and the proposed plan and related issues. I. The Process The process began with the reactivation of TAC's in March 1986. _ Since that time there have been eleven meetings. in Caldwell dealing with the Plan and related issued. Plannins Staff identified four basic steps in updating the Land Use Plan: (1) A determination of existing conditions; (2) Analysis of trends; (3).Development of organizing concepts or guiding principles; and (4) Compilation of the Draft Plan. The four step process was typified by the following questions: (1) Where are we? (2) Where are we going? (3) Where do we want to go? (4) How do we get there? Having identified the steps in the process, Bell elaborated as follows: (1) Existing Conditions a) The staff conducted a survey of existing land use in Little river township in December 1986. The results of the survey are tabulated on the botton of page 16 of the agenda. (Attachment to these minutes on page ) b) Existing conditions also identified and evaluated included the natural environment and constraints or opportunities posed by the conditions to growth. These areas included: - flood prone areas - steep slopes (15~) _~ ~ `' - poor soils severe percolation problems shallow depth to groundwater or bedrock poor load bearing capacity high plasticity (shrink/swell) c) Existing population patterns were determined by a count and identification of the location of dwellings in the land use survey. For this purpose, the township was divided into four parts using the main roads as dividing lines. The proportional distribution of dwelling unit distribution is as follows: North = 15~ South = 42~ East = 17$ West = 26$ (2) Trends Bell. summarized development trends within the Township. Housing stock increased by almost one-third (576 units to 763) during the period 1980-85. Subdivided lots less than .ten acres in size equaled 144 with an additional 84 lots in 1986. The distribution of these lots is north 11~, south 52~, east 21~ and west 16~. During the period 1981-85, 15°S of the land under Agriculture Use Value Taxation south of NC ~ 57 and Guess Road was ; ~~~~ withdrawn from the program. Population increase from 1980-85 was 477 people or a 32~ increase over 1980. The 1990 projection is slightly over 2300 residents in Little River Township or a 57~ increase over 1980. This indicates that residential development has been the dominant form of development in Little River since 1980 and the majority of this development has been concentrated in the southern part of the township. (3) Residents Preferences Concerns In an effort to determine the preferences and concerns of township residents; a questionnaire was distributed in December 1986. Returns were low (only 9) so an effort was made again in January 1987. The final tally was only 22. returns which was insuffic~.ent to base hard and fast assumptions on, but the results were used as much as possible. Those concerns identified as problems by 2/3 or more of the respondents and used when drawing up the Draft Plan were as follows: Growth of Durham to the northwest Loss of agricultural land Too much residential development Soil erosion Development in environmentally sensitive areas (4) Preparation of the Draft Plan f the Draft Plan, alternative forms the Plan In preparation o could take were discussed. The following issues were focused on: 1) Protection of environmentally sensitive areas, i.e, assuming there is going to be more residential development, where is the best place for it given the environmentally sensitive areas discussed earlier. 2) Development Trends - Whale eoulusede toandeterminekenew development trends residential areas? 3) Citizen preferences -Using the responses from the questionnaires, where would residential and commercial areas be? Considering the existing plan. along with the foregoing issues, Staff endeavored to use the best features of each to produce the Draft Plan. II. Existin Plan The following organizing concepts were used in doing the 1981 Plan. _ (l) Agricultural operations in the Township should be protected ~~ ~ against disruption due to non-farm development. Residential development should be directed away .from prime farm lands. (2) The rural, low-density residential character of the Township should be maintained. (3) The Caldwell and Schley areas exhibit the characteristics of a crossroads community within the Township, a character which should be enhanced. (4) A need for some commercial and industrial activities, especially agricultural support services, exists and should be accommodated. In the existing Plan, there is a large Rural Residential area designated along the Guess Road Corridor to Caldwell. There are also five activity nodes: two Rural Community Nodes (1/2 mile radius) at Caldwell and Schley and three Rural Neighborhood Nodes (1/4 mile radius) at Berry's Grove, Harris Crossroads and Underwood's Store. There is also a large area designated Agricultural Residential. III. Draft Plan The same organizing concepts were used as in the 1981 plan with the addition of the following: Existing water supply watersheds in the Township should be developed in a way that will minimize impacts on water quality and not conflict with agricultural uses. Bell noted concerns from questionnaires and indicated they were incorporated in the Plan as appropriate, considering the limited .-, -~~_~~ response. Bell explained the Plan beginning with the Rural Residential designation. He indicated it was scaled down in size -from the 1981 Plan, and there are two primary areas. one is the southeastern part of the township which reflects historical development and the trends discussed earlier. The second is the central township area south of Caldwell and is based on the lack of environmental constraints, development trends previously discussed, and the general lack of agriculture. Yn both cases, the Staff .has tried to orient Rural Residential on arterial highways to provide. good access to Hillsborough. and Durham and also around encroachment on the agricultural areas. Both of the areas are in general conformity with the questionnaire results. The Agricultural Residential areas are interspersed in existing agricultural areas. The primary use is residential although the lot size often exceeds ten acres. Some examples include the Worth Lutz property, Little River Ranches and Little River Farms. The agricultural areas are not so much a designation as a reflection of existing conditions. The areas shown as Agricultural on the Plan were identified through a combination of field survey and review of agriculture use value taxation files and include managed forest lands. Protection of agricultural lands in the Township is the first operating principle. By identifying them on the plan, it is ~` easier to assess the potential impacts when adjacent areas are proposed for residential or other development and, at least to ;; some extent, try to mitigate the potential impacts on the agricultural areas. Resource Protection Areas are composed of two limiting environmental features - flood prone areas and steep slopes (those more than 15~). There are 1230 acres in flood prone areas and 470 acres with steep slopes in the Resource Protection Area, representing a total of 1700 acres (5~ of the Township). The arterial and collector road system serving the township has also been identified. The arterials include NC 57 and 157. Collectors include Guess Road, New Sharon Church Road, Schley Road and Little River Church Road. The road classifications have been shown because they serve as a guide in determining the location of Activity Nodes and Rural Residential Areas. Little River Township lies in two water supply watersheds. The northern part of the Township lies in the Flat River Watershed which flows to Lake Michie, the primary water supply for the City of Durham. The southern 80~ of the Township lies in the Little River drainage basin which flows into the Little River Reservoir in Durham County. Sell indicated that Mr. Tom Bruce of the Water Resources Department for the City of Durham was available to address this item in more detail later in the meeting. Activity Nodes are the same as 1981 except for Harris Crossroads. _: . A project that has generated a great deal of discussion and concern is Treyburn in north central Durham County. It is a 5200 acre mixed-use development. Over the next 20 - 25 years, a range of 20,000 to 40,000 jobs in Treyburn has been estimated. Approximately 4000 dwelling units are also proposed as part of Treyburn. The only use currently under construction at Treyburn is the Organon Teknika Plant to be fully operational by early 1988. It will initially employ 400 - 500 people and by 1998 should have around 2000 employees. Construction is just beginning on the first 60 residential units which are on 80,000 square foot lots with public water and sewer. Durham Research Properties estimates that ten years from now all residential development at Treyburn will. be completed and there will be 10,000 - 15,OOA jobs. Further development Eno Waste Treatment all improvements st+ line in 1991. The environmental impact correct. at Treyburn Plant. The ~y on sched~ plant is statement, is contingent upon upgrading the current capacity is 2.5 MGD. If ale, a 10 MGD plant could be on currently the subject of an thus the 1991 date might not be "- The best source for determining where residential demand generated by Treyburn will be strongest is the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Kimley-Horn & Associates of Raleigh. Their projections for traffic into and out of -Treyburn are: north 20°s, south 55~, east 10~ and west 15%. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the amended text and map and incorporation into Section 3.7 of the Land Use Plan. Following this hearing, the Little River TAC will meet to formulate a recommendation to the Planning Board. The Planning Board will meet on June 15 to consider TAC comments and formulate a recommendation to the Commissioners for their meeting on July 6, 1987. Tom Bruce of the City of Durham Department of Water Resources, stated that his department is responsible for the development, operation and maintenance of Durham's water supply, water treatment and waste treatment facilities. He indicated that the City of Durham looks to the three rivers of the Upper Neuse Basin (Eno River, Flat River and Little River) for its water supply. Due to droughts in 1921 and 1922, a dam was constructed on the Flat River which formed Lake Michie and has served as Durham City's and Durham County's primary water supply since 1926. He noted that in 1974, the City began planning for a reservoir on the Little River. He indicated that this project was nearly complete, and plans were to begin impounding water by late July of this year. In 1984, the Durham City Council passed a Watershed Protection Ordinance for the protection of the Falls and Jordan Lakes as well as providing for the protection of Little River Reservoir and Lake Michie. Mr. Bruce continued that in December of 1985, the Durham City Council passed a resolution requesting that the Division of Environmental Management reclassify the Flat River and Little River to the highest ~~. ~~' possible level of the new stream classification system which is WS-I and WS-II. The success of this request depends upon actions of Orange County, since most of these watersheds are located in Cedar Grove and Little River Townships. The reclassification is pending an investigation by the Division of Environmental Management. Mr. Bruce presented the request~~~,:~ that Orange County designate the Flat River and Little River Watersheds in Orange County as water supply watersheds and provide the same level of protection currently provided for Lake Orange, Corporation Lake, Lake Ben Johnson, Cane Creek, University Lake, and Seven Mile Creek. This would be in the best interests of Durham and Orange Counties. The Durham water system already serves Orange County along US 70 as well as having provided emergency water in Chapel Hill for OWASA. He continued that there is a potential interconnection with Hillsborough to serve Orange County citizens, and there may also be potential for separate water supply reservoirs on the north and south forks of Little River to serve Orange County directly. The City of Durham is cooperating with Durham County on the development of a watershed--wide study of the Lake Michie and Little River watersheds. One of the major inputs into the study will involve Orange County's long range plans for these watersheds. He asked that orange County cooperate with Durham County as they move forward with this watershed- study, noting that all information developed would be of interest to both Durham and Orange Counties. Commissioner Hartwell stated that he felt it would be in the best interest of orange County to help Durham protect its water supply, particularly if Durham is going to reciprocate and make a long-term (longer than ten years) commitment to supply water. He continued- that he also felt it would not be good for Orange County to agree to protect that watershed in perpetuity and Durham set only a ten-year limit on water provision to orange County. He indicated that was the status of the negotiations now with the Town of Hillsborough. He stated the two counties should work together and asked that the paper reflect that concern. Mr. Bruce indicated agreement with Commissioner Hartwell, noting that he had not been involved with the negotiations with the Town of Hillsborough so he did not know what had transpired thus far between Hillsborough and Durham. Planning Board member Peter Kramer asked the County Attorney to explain the process for implementation of the Township Plan. Gledhill responded that the Plan would be implemented through the Subdivision Regulations and the Zoning Ordinance when zoning is applicable in the township. Kramer continued, asking about watershed protection. Gledhill responded that there are some watershed protection measures that are in the Subdivision Regulations, however, watershed protection measures must be implemented primarily through zoning regulations. Commissioner Hartwell spoke to Marvin Collins, Planning Director, indicating he wished to go on record publicly as being critical, of the center at Underwoods, noting that he .felt it was a disgrace to Orange Caunty. He continued, stating that there was nothing in this Land Use Plan which helps deal with such a situation as Underwoods. Collins concurred. Hartwell continued, asking if there is anything in place at this time which could help deal with the situation, noting that he felt it is a threat to the health and safety of the community. Collins responded that there are no ordinances currently in place which the Planning Department enforces which would give Staff any means- of addressing that situation. He continued that short of having a specific ordinance which addresses nuisances, there is nothing that could be done at this point. Barry Jacobs, Planning Board Chair, asked Gene sell how closely the growth -~ - :, -, in Little River Township between 1981 and the present adhered to the Larz'd-~" Use Plan that was adopted in 1981. Bell responded that growth was predicted in the 1981 plan to occur at about 7.5~ annually. The actual growth rate is slightly over 5~. Bell explained the growth rate, indicating there were fairly large lot sizes. Jacobs continued, asking what the gap was between the Subdivision Regulation and the Zoning Ordinance in regard to watershed protection. Bell responded that in the Subdivision Regulations, there are requirements for a 50 foot buffer on any perennial stream. In the Subdivision Regulations, there are no restrictions on uses of land in an unzoned area. A Zoning Ordinance would include a permitted use table and any uses not listed would not be permitted. Specific portions of the ordinance address watershed protection. Jacobs asked how density was regulated through the Subdivision Regulations. Bell responded that in the Subdivision Regulations, a lot in an unzoned township is required to have an area of 40,000 sq. ft. Also, if this area were zoned, it would be zoned Protected Watershed. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner- Carey to refer the Little River Township Plan to the Planning Board for a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on July 6, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - PD-1-87 FLOWERS MOBILE HOME PARK _ Staff presentation by Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to receive citizen comment on a proposed Planned Development -~ Mobile Home Park. Flowers Mobile Home Park is an existing park located in Eno Township ``-`' on the west side of Mt. Hermon Church Road (SR ].812). The proposed Planned Development -Mobile Home Park would be an expansion of the existing park, involving the addition of 25 mobile home spaces to 43 existing units. The tract on which the park addition is to be located consists of 25 acres west of and adjacent to the existing park. The property is currently zoned Residential--1 (R-1) and is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. The property is also located in the Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) adjacent to I-85. The requested designation is PD-MHP-R-1 which requires the approval of a Special Use Permit and compliance with specific development standards for mobile home parks and planned developments in general. The application is the first to be considered which employs the new mobile home park standards. adopted in March, 1987. Article 8.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance states that where a preponderance of evidence indicates compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use, and that the use complies with all required regulations and standards, the application must be approved unless it is found, in some specific manner, that: 1_. The use will not promote the public health, safety and general welfare if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted; 2. The use will not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; or A:~~. 3. The use is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical development of the county as embodied in these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Orange County Soard of Commissioners. :~•-~:. The burden of proving one or more of the above findings is on those.,. opposing the application. The proof must also be in the form of competent material and substantial evidence. No information has been received which would establish grounds for making one or more of the above .findings. The Planning Staff has reviewed-the application, the site plan and supporting documentation and found the-applicant in general compliance with the standards, specific rules and required regulations. The Planning Staff has made, however, negative findings with respect to certain required standards and/or regulations. These negative findings may be addressed through conditions of approval attached to the Special Use Permit. For this reason, the Planning Staff recommends approval of the request with the conditions as attached on pages of these minutes. Collins stated that since May 26, the applicant has submitted a revised site plan and additional information which addresses some of the recommended conditions. Conditions addressed on the revised site plan ._-~inc],ude:• #6, #9, #10, #13, #1$, #19, #20 a & b, #21 and #22 and may be deleted. The other 17 conditions are still applicable. Commissioner Hartwell inquired if the existing mobile home park was: required to meet the new mobile home park standards. Collins responded that the existing park was a pre-existing nonconforming use and is not ';; required to meet the new standards. Jacobs inquired of the status of the -State review of the community water system. Collins responded that neither the Division of Health Services nor the Division of Environmental Management will offer any comments on a preliminary plan. They will only review and approve a formal application for a permit for either community water or community sewage disposal system. No application has yet been submitted so no State comments are available. The applicant did submit materials which indicated that the Orange County Health had checked the soils for suitability for a community low pressure system and had indicated that the soils were satisfactory for such a .system. The well sites as indicated on the plan are also in compliance with Health Department requirements. Jacobs asked if the State reviews a preliminary plan or a final plan. Collins responded that the State reviews a finax plan that includes all construction details as well as information supplied by the -applicant and the Orange County Health Department. Jacobs asked about information on traffic counts and impacts at the intersection of US 70 and Old NC 10. .Collins indicated that projected traffic counts were in the packet and that trips per day were. estimated to be approximately 120 trips per day (25 units at 4.78 trips per unit- znstitute of Traffic Engineers estimate for a mobile home unit). An impact assessment was not done for the intersections because of the low volume of traffic that the use would generate. Commissioner Carey inquired if the .17.3 acres shown as being left-~in~` its natural state is the area outside that needed for the septic system. Collins responded that was his understanding and that the septic system was designed to accommodate the additional 25 units only. The design thus serves as a built in density control. Philip Post, the engineer who prepared the plan, stated that the travel surface of I-85 is well over 100' from the edge of the right--of-way -which would make the first mobile home location almost 300 feet to I- 85. Post indicated there would be the absolute minimum grading and clearing needed for the mobile home spaces and roads. He noted that the area shown as remaining in .its natural state would remain under the unitary ownership of the entire tract. There is grazing of horses at various times in existing pastures. He indicated much work had been done to present the best possible planned development. Post also stated that this project will be .under control of the State Health Services for water and sewer services and that agency will not review an application as a preliminary matter but. only as a final plan with all details presented. Mr. Post stated that the site distance at the park entrance is B50 feet to the north. He noted that the traffic count of 125 trips per day on Mt. Hermon Church Road is only a l~ increase. The capacity on this road is 7,000 - 9,000 vehicles per day. Jacobs asked if there was any opportunity within the tenants' associa- -.tion agreement for the handling of tenants grievances. Post responded that the existing agreement as written would not address such grievances but noted the closing sentence of the agreement asks for and welcomes suggestions from the tenants. Jacobs indicated that tenants from other mobile home parks were concerned about the lack of legal mechanisms to address grievances, and he would be interested to see how this would be handled in this situation. Commissioner Halkiotis stated that in some mobile home parks which he had recently visited the opportunity to address grievances is a pro- blem. Commissioner Carey stated suggestions for solutions of tenant problems could come from meetings being held with Planning Board members, .mobile home park owners and tenants. He continued, asking who is responsible for the maintenance of Phase I of Flowers Mobile Home Park. Post responded the park owner maintained the public areas and the tenants were responsible .for the areas around their mobile homes. Post indicated this system would continue in effect for the addition to the park. Trash pick-up was discussed, and Post indicated there would be individual trash cans at each unit and be picked up. Post indicated all these items could be addressed through mobile home park regulations. .. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to refer the application to the Planning Board for recommendation. The recommendation is to be presented to the Board of Commissioners on July 6, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. -"~ 3~:`~~ ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS - Z-2-87 WILDWOOD - SECTION IV Marvin Collins made the staff presentation. This agenda item is to receive citizen comment on a proposed request -,~~-,~ by Wildwood Corporation to amend the Orange County Zoning Atlas. Collins displayed a map showing the. entire Wildwood project. Wildwood Corporation of Hillsborough has requested rezoning of 28.80 acres or 1,254,528 square feet of land. The property is located west of the present Wildwood Subdivision off NC 86 in Hillsborough Township. The property is designated Ten Year Transition in the Land Use Plan. The present zoning of the property. is Residential-2 (R-2). The applicant is requesting that the zoning classification be changed to Residential-4 (R-4) . A similar request (R-1 to R-4) was made by the applicant in November, 1985. In response to a Town of Hillsborough recommendation (either R-2 or R-3), topographic constraints and traffic concerns, the Board of Commissioners approved changing the zoning designation from R-1 to R-2. Development of the tract will have impacts on water and sewer facilities, and the ability of streets to handle projected traffic volumes. The Planning Staff recommends rezoning of the property from R-2 to R-3 for,. the following reasons: 1. Projected pump station capacities- permit additional units to be developed. 2. The change from R-2 to R-3 is consistent with a "step-down" approach to zoning in the area, with higher densities near NC 86 and lower densities further removed. 3. Streets within Wildwood Subdivision are capable of handling additional traffic. The Planning Staff further recommends continuation of the public hearing until the Board of Commissioners June 1~, 1987 meeting at which time the recommendation of the Town of Hillsborough may be entered into the record. Planning Board member Best asked what the Planning Staff's recommendation was when the applicant requested a rezoning to R-4 in November 1985. Collins responded that Staff had recommended the change to R-4. There was a considerable amount of land between the Wildwood tract and Old NC 86 and if the "step-down" in zoning density that occurred was too immediate, there would be a sizable land area midway between Old 86 and New 86 in a low density area that would probably be served by Town of Hillsborough water and sewer in the future. The recommended zoning at that time was consistent with what had been developed previously. Collins continued that the current Staff evaluation was more detailed. Slopes greater than 15~ had been identified, and it was found that a cluster subdivision would be better suited for this site. Traffic impacts were reviewed much closer this time as well. Best continued, asking about the location of Oakdale Drive Extension. _ Collins indicated the location on the. map. The developer has to build Oakdale Drive Extension before Section III of Wildwood is completed. Commissioner Hartwell commented that Dakdale Drive Extension was=-~ important for the Hillsborough Thoroughfare Plan. He felt the roads needed to be in place as Wildwood was being completed. Chair Jacobs asked if any accident reports were available 'for the portions of Wildwood which feed onto NC 86. Collins responded that information could be provided if the hearing is continued until June 16. Jacobs asked what the changed conditions are which justify the rezoning request. Collins responded that it was not essential that there be changed conditions. The only condition that has changed is the depth of the staff analysis. Collins noted the previous Town of Hillsborough recommendation, either an R-2 or R-3 designation. The Staff recommendation is consistent with that recommendation, particularly since the Town will assume responsi- bility for services in the future. Jacobs asked that a Homeowner's Association representative be present at the public hearing if it is to be continued. Fritz Brunsen, representing the developer, stated that the R-3 zoning for clustering would allow for a greenway between the existing housing and the proposed housing. He indicated that the developer is willing to accept staff's recommendation for an R--3 classification instead of an R-4. Sandra Riley, a resident of Wildwood living on George Anderson Drive, presented concerns about existing drainage problems. She indicated efforts to contact the developer, Mr. Freeland, had been in vain, and he had made no attempt to correct current drainage problems. She complained of three to four foot deep ditches which held water constantly. She also indicated stumps and other debris were in the ditches. She urged the Board to have the developer correct these drainage problems before allowing him further "development privileges. - Tom Wilkie stated that he lived on John Breckenridge Drive and would feel the greatest impact of traffic from development of the tract in question and feared runoff problems as related to his property. He presented photos showing ditches with standing water which constituted mosquitos breeding and other health hazards for the residents. He indicated there were springs throughout the development which caused constant drainage problems for many residents. Chair Marshall asked for a report from the Manager on these issues. County Manager Ken Thompson indicated that a previous problem had been with water standing under a house due to a spring. He noted that problem had been investigated and corrected by having the developer go back and pipe the water out. Mr. Wilkie indicated he had no desire to deny anyone the opportunity to develop his property, but he did desire to have all these drainage problems corrected before more development is allowed. Chair Marshall asked for a full report from the Manager regarding the problems presented but reminded the Planning Board that its consideration of the request must be separate from the problems presented. Commissioner Carey asked if it was known whether springs are present on the section being presented for consideration. The response was that it was not known if springs were on this section. Jacobs asked why this request was not presented as a Planned Development. Collins responded that Staff felt that the Subdivision .. Regulations were sufficient to address staff concerns particularly since cluster provisions are contained within the Subdivision Regulations. Commissioner Carey asked that an investigation for springs be conducted on Section IV of Wildwood to avoid more of the same problems. Commissioner Halkiotis expressed concern and discomfort that the developer had not yet corrected problems but was requesting more development. Motion was made by Chair Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell that the hearing on Wildwood Rezoning Request be continued to June 16 to receive "the County Manager's report on the drainage problems, the Town of Hillsborough recommendation, and a report from the Wildwood Homeowner's Association. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 4. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS a. Article 5.1.1 - Schedule for Residential Develo ment Marvin Collins made the Staff presentation. Article 5.1.1 of the Zoning ordinance contains the minimum gross land area and building height requirements, and the required "- minimum land use intensity ratios for floor area, open. space, liveability space and recreation space in Planned Developments. The Article currently does not contain minimum required recreation space ratios for Planned Development - Mobile Home'; Parks. It also does not contain land use intensity ratios for Planned Development - Mobile Home Parks in.RS, R8 and R13 zoning,. districts. The proposed amendment will correct these deficiencies by adding minimum required recreation space ratios for RB, AR, Rl, R2, R3 and R4 zoning districts. Furthermore, minimum gross land area, building height and land use intensity ratios will be added for R5, R8 and R13 districts. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments. The Planning Board will prepare a recommendation on the proposed amendment at its June 15, 1987 meeting. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposal for decision on July 6, 1987. There were no questions or comments. Motion was made by Chair Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Carey to refer the amendment of Article 5.1.1 of the Zoning ordinance to the Planning Board for recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on July 6, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. b. Article 2.3.5 - Board of Ad'ustment Administration Staff presentation by Marvin Collins. Procedures for public notification for amendments to various County ordinances vary from ordinance to ordinance. To reduce confusion by the general public and to insure consistency, the public notification procedures have been reviewed to identify inconsistencies. The proposed amendment to Article 2.3.3 would require that property for which a Class B Special Use Permit or variance has been requested must be posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing date. The amendment would provide uniformity between "posting requirements" in Article 2.3.3 and Article 20 (Zoning Text/Atlas Amendments). Currently, the property must be posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the meeting date. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. Jacobs asked why 10 days rather than 15 days is being proposed is being proposed as the uniform standard. Collins responded that the General Statutes require that an advertisement for a public hearing be advertised for the first time not less than 10 days or more than 25 days prior to the hearing and the 10 day standard is a minimum standard. Complaints have been received that there are so many variations between the administrative procedures and mechanisms of the Board, there needs to be more uniformity. Therefore, Staff felt. that posting requirements for public _, hearings should be consistent throughout. There were no public comments. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer this amendment to the Planning Board"for recommendation -' to the Board of Commissioners on July 6, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 5. Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments a. Section III-B-3 - Sketch Plan Review Staff presentation by Marvin Collins. Section III-B-3 of the Subdivision Regulations contains the procedure for Sketch Plan review of subdivisa.on proposals. Unlike review provisions for Preliminary Plans and final P].ats, no time limit is set for the validity of Planning Staff review of .sketch Plans. To prevent Planning Staff review of Sketch Plans from being considered a permanent approval, a revision of the regulations is proposed. The proposed revision places a time limit of one (1) year on the validity of the Planning Staff Sketch Plan comments and clarifies language in the regulations regarding the significance of the comments. Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. There were no questions or comments. 7 Y .f Motion was made by Commissioner refer this amendment to the Planning of Commissioners on July G, 1987. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. Carey, seconded by Chair Marshall, to Board for recommendation to the Board b. Section VIII-B - Amendments Staff presentation by Marvin Collins. Procedures for public notification for amendments to various County ordinances vary from ordinance to ordinance. To reduce confusion by the general public and to insure consistency, the public notification procedures for amendments to ordinances have been reviewed to identify inconsistencies. The proposed amendment to Section VIII-B would require that the first advertisement of a notice of public hearing regarding a proposed ordinance amendment appear in a~newspaper not less than ten (10) and not more than twenty-five (25) days prior to the- hearing. The amendment would provide uniformity between advertisement requirements in the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Regulations. Currently, the first advertisement must appear in a newspaper not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. --- The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. There were no questions or comments. MOTION; Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to, refer this amendment to the Planning Board for recommendation to ,~ the Board of Commissioners on July 6, 1987. VOTE: Unanimous. D. RESOLUTIONS OR PROCLAMATIONS 1. RAPE PREVENTION MONTH IN ORANGE COUNTY Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by commissioner Carey to approve the proclamation as stated below: WHEREAS, rape and sexual assaults are violent crimes committed against females and males of all ages and economic groups; an WHEREAS, rape in Orange County has been one of the fastest growing violent crimes in recent years, with an average of 60 sexual assaults per year reported to the Orange County Rape Crisis Center; and WHEREAS, during 1.986, 70 sexual assaults were reported in Orange County; and WHEREAS, rapes have been most frequently reported in the late summer months and are reported to be increasing on the college campus; and WHEREAS, there are precautions that-can be taken to lessen the likelihood of sexual assaults, and the Rape Crisis Center, law enforcement and other social service agencies are providing training in self-protection; now THEREFORE, We, the. Orange County Board of Commissioners in full recognition and appreciation of the efforts for the prevention of rape and sexual assault in Orange County, do hereby proclaim the month of June 1.987 as RAPE PREVENTION MONTH TN ORANGE COUNTY i North Carolina and do urge all citizens to seek preventive informatic~i~ and to educate their children as well. We urge all citizens and county, local and state agencies and organizations involved in the criminal justice system to devote special attention to the prevention of these crimes and to the needs of the victims. We urge all other agencies and organizations to join in the redoubling of efforts to make the system of care in Orange County more responsive to the needs of victims of sexual assault. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. F. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA 1. BUDGET AMENDMENTS Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to amend the 1986-87 Budget Ordinance as stated below: GENERAL FUND - Appropriation - Social Services $ 4,502 Source -Emergency Food and Shelter $ 4,502 VOTE: UNANIMOUS. G. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA 1. SUNSET RIDGE SECTION II - PRELIMINARY Planning Director Marvin Collins presented for consideration of approval the Preliminary Plan for Section 11 - Sunset Ridge Subdivision. The property is located in Cheeks Township south of West Lebanon Road between Mill Creek Road and Doe Run Road. Thirty eight lots are proposed out of 45.02 aces. The property is zoned Rural Residential and is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. The Planning Board recommended approval with the attachment of 5 conditions. The County Manager recommends approval with the attachment of 4 conditions. After further discussion by Manager and County Attorney motion seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to allow additional time for receipt of Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. the Board and input from the County was made by Commissioner Carey, postpone action until July 6 to comments from the Mebane Planning 2. ADDITION OF SHAMBLEY DRIVE TO STATE MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM . Marvin. Collins presented for consideration of approval a petition from NCDOT for the addition of Shambly Drive in Perry Hills Subdivision to the State maintained Secondary Road System. The Manager recommends approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the manager's recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 3. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM ORDINANCE (A copy of the Ordinance with the proposed amendments is in the permanent agenda file . ? ~ .= -r .... .. -- ,- ~- ~ .. County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill stated that some of the changes are due to changes in the law and some of the changes are substantial in that they will impact the way that the cable companies will operate in the County. - ° ~_~ Randall Roden, attorney for Carolina Cable, questioned whether or not amending the Ordinance would automatically amends the franchise under which Carolina Cable is operating. He stated that a cable company is not a utility that can be regulated by a County. It is a media of expression. The only .law in North Carolina authorizing counties to control cable television is a provision which permits counties to grant franchises on reasonable terms. There are two parties to a franchise and it can't be changed by one of the parties but must be agreed upon by both parties. If a county amends an ordinance, it does not automatically impose upon Carolina cable whatever changes are made in the franchising ordinance because it has not been,accepted,by the existing operators. He noted that the current franchise requires the payment of 3; on certain revenues as a franchise fee. The current ordinance changes the ~3~ fee to 5~. Roden stated that increasing this fee is unfair and beyond the power of a County to do. Ryden indicated that~the ordinance reflects a major change in the policy regarding cable television for Orange County. The line extension policy was originally limited to areas with 30 homes per mile on an average from the point where the extension would be made. This allowed the cable company to expand as the population increased. He disagreed with the technical requirements as outlined in the Ordinance. This would mean that a new company would nat be required to have two way communication but at the same time does not relieve Carolina Cable from the requirement in their franchise to provide two--way communication. He supports equal terms for all cable providers and the continuation of maintaining the high standards as originally set forth. He-indicated a problem with the definitions as contained in the Ordinance -and asked that these definitions be clarified. In summary, Mr. Roden asked that the problems the Ordinance is designed to address be reviewed before the Ordinance is approved. In answer to a question from Commissioner Hartwell, Mr. Roden stated that the revision in the overbuilt requirement would not be an incentive for Carolina Cable to pay an additional fee. Discussion ensued on the extension of the trunk cables as proposed in. the Ordinance. There is no provision in the ordinance or a timetable for the building of this cable. Commissioner Hartwell assured Mr. Roden that all cable companies in the County would be treated equal. Gledhill expressed disagreement with the statement that the County cannot charge Carolina Cable 5$ and stated that the franchise fee is not critical to the decision to be made at this time. The two-way capability amendment incorporates the recommendation from the Cable Television Advisory Committee. They felt there was little demand for the two-way capability and felt that it should not be required by the County. The two-way communication system was offered by Village in their proposal and was simply accepted by the County. It was not a requirement of the County but the acceptance had. to be incorporated into the franchise ordinance. To treat both companies equally, this requirement could either be deleted from the franchise held by Carolina Cable or added as a requirement in the Ordinance. With regard to the trunk cable, the issue is whether or not the County wants to impose a timetable for the building of this trunk cable. Gledhill stated that the County could grant a franchise to another cable operator in Orange County without requiring that company to have two-way capability. Jim Medlin from Greensboro and representing Alert stated agreement with the proposed Ordinance and urged its adoption. Discussion ensued on the two-way capability requirement. It was decided that several issues need to be addressed. One issue is that the franchise for Alert should have a builtin timetable for trunk cable for ..-~ ~. i areas of Orange County that have 30 homes a mile. The definitions of"--'~ trunk cable, feeder and overbuilt in the Ordinance need to be clarified and the question of the two-way capability requirement needs to be decided. Either release Carolina from the requirement or impose this - requirement on Alert. Chair Marshall indicated that since Carolina proposed the two- . way capability that this should not be a requirement for Alert Cable. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adopt the Cable Television System ordinance on the first reading. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 4. PROPOSED ALERT CABLE ORDINANCE FRANCHISING AMENDMENTS - FIRST READING 5. PROPOSED CAROLINA CABLE ORDINANCE FRANCHISING AMENDMENTS - FIRST READING It was decided that additional information on the two-way capability was necessary before a decision could be made on the franchise amendments. It was the consensus of the Board to ask Norman Vogl, Chair of the Advisory Committee, to provide additional information for the next meeting scheduled for June 16. The two Cable companies will be requested to provide an estimated cost of providing an active-two-way system. 6. BID AWARD FOR THE FLASHBOARD SYSTEM AT ORANGE LAKE Two bids were received for the flashboard system at Orange Lake: Crain. and Denbo, Inc. $ 2~,,g78 _.,.. Crowder Construction Company $ 29,850 Motion was made by Comri~issioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to award the bid to Crain and Denbo, Inc. for a sum of $21,978 for construction of a flashboard (spillway) system at Orange Lake and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. BUDGET WORK SESSION SCHEDULE The following budget work session was adopted by the Board: (all meetings pertaining to the budget are listed) June 8, 7:30 p.m., Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough for the purpose of holding a public hearing June 15, 4:00 p.m., Board of Commissioners' Room for the following departments: Sheriff Emergency Services Fire Districts Public Works June 16, 4:00 p.m., Lincoln Center for the following departments: Personnel Elections Purchasing and Central Services June 17, 7:30 p.m., Schools June 22, 4:00 p.m., Multipurpose Center of the Southern Orange Human Services Complex, - 5-year Capital Improvement Plan y_ •~, ~i' June 22, 7:30 p.m., Lincoln -Center for the following departmentss . Health ~: Mental Health ~ _ Social Sexvices HSAC officers June 24, 4:00 p.m. in the Commissioners' Room for the following departments: Planning Recreation and .Parks - Aging Library June 24, 7:30 p.m. - Schools June 25, 4:00 p.m. in the meeting room in the Tax and Records Building on Cameron Street, Hillsborough for the following departments: Data Processing Register of Deeds Land Records June 29, 7:30 p.m. at Lincoln Center for a public hearing June 30, 7:30 p.m., in the Courtroom of the Old Courthouse, --- Hillsborough, North Carolina, - special meeting to adopt (interim) budget 8. EFLAND SEWER BIDS Ken Thompson stated that on April 9, bids were received. On June 9, the bid bond .will expire. The low bidder agreed to hold the low bid except for the cost of pipe beyond the June 9 deadline. He reported that the House version of the Senate 2 Bill passed last Monday and it is before a Senate subcommittee. Commissioner Hartwell has offered to send a letter to the Chair of the subcommittee and a letter will be sent to Senator Royall and Senator Ralph Hunt. No official action was taken by the Board. Geoffrey Gledhill expressed concern that the material cost as stated by the low bidder seems low and that perhaps the engineer should review these costs. H. APPOINTMENTS The following reappointments were made by the Board: BOARD OF HEALTH Anne Gross Ruth Royster Winifred Prysock COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS BOARD Henry Atwater TRIANGLE J EMS COUNCIL - Victor Germino G. Kenneth Morgan ~1 I. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to adjourn the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on June 15, 1987 at 7:30 "°'~' Chapel Hill, North Carolina.m~ in the Courtroom of the old Post Office; `- Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Shirley E. Marshall,_ Chair Joanna Bradshaw, Administrative secretary MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUNE 8, 1987 8:00 a.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in special session on Monday, June 8, 1987 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board of Commissioners Room, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina for the purpose of awarding the bid for the Efland Cheeks Sewer Project. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Shirley E. Marshall and Commissioners Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell, and Don Willhoit. BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Moses Carey, Jr. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers William T. Laws and Albert Kittrell, Finance Director Gordon Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Deputy Finance Officer Ken Chavious and Purchasing Director Pamela Jones. y~-~ ~~,..~r~nyr ~rw~x ~'RVJECT (See attached bid tabulation which is made a part of these minutes) ~T3 ~ -~ Ken Thompson reported that the revenues for the Efland Cheeks Sewer Project had been secured. These revenues will cover the portion of the line that had to be redesigned for Hillsborough. The total project cost will be 1.5 million. The total cash available for the project is 1,571,087 leaving a surplus of $56,072. Thompson noted that there is a "rock clause" in the contract where the bidders had to take full responsibility for any rock encountered in the Efland area. This was based on the County providing the contractor with a survey showing where the rock is located and the amount of rock present. He stated there should be no change orders due to rock. Thompson reference the bid tabulation and explained the alternates as listed on that chart. Alternate 1 is a force main size of 8" which covers just the flow that would result from the immediate construction. Alternates 3 and 4 are sized to accommodate the Efland area as it was originally planned and option 4 would include additional areas. Commissioner Hartwell asked about the increased capacity in going from an 8" pipe to an 10" pipe. Kevin Carter, Engineer for Hazen and Sawyer, explained that to pump 535 gallons per minute through an 8" force main requires 167 foot of head which is the limit that the type pumping system will take. A 10" force main would drop the flow rate from 535 down to 89 because portions of the 10" force main would be gravity driven. In power cost there would be a savings of approximately $25,000 or $27,000 over a ten year period. A 12"