HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19890406G 1
PAGE 1
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
APRIL 6, 1989
The Orange County Board of Commissioners, the Chapel Hill Town Council, the Carrboro
Board of Aldermen, and the Orange County Planning Board met in joint session on Thursday,
April 6, 1989 at 7:30 p.m.. in the Guy B. Phillips Junior High School Auditorium, Chapel
Hill, NC for the purpose of hearing public comments on items in the Joint Planning Area.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Garey, Jr., and Commissioners Don Willhoit, Shirley
Marshall, Steve Halkiotis and John Hartwell.
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem David Pasquini, David Godschalk, Joe
Hertzenberg, Julie Andresen, Nancy Preston and Roosevelt Wilkerson.
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN: Mayor Pro Tem Hilliard Caldwell, Randy Marshall, Jay Bryan,
Frances Shetley, and Tom Gurganus.
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD: Chair Barry Jacobs, Mike Lewis, Chris Best, Sharlene Pilkey
and Virginia Boland.
STAFF PRESENT: County Manager, John Link, Planning Director Marvin Collins, County
Attorney Geoff Gledhill, Planners Gene Bell, David S~ancil, and Mary Scearba, Clerk to the
Board Beverly Blythe and Deputy Clerk to the Board Kathy Baker.
A. BOARD COMMENTS - Nane
B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Chairman Carey announced that all citizens who desire to speak will have an
opportunity at the appropriate time when the item appears on the agenda.
C. PUBLIC CHARGE
Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. read the public charge.
NOTE: Chairman Carey presided over the meeting. All items were advertised in accordance
with the procedure as outlined in the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The background
information for all items is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office. Stated
below each item will be a brief summary of the presentation with the citizen comments in
more detail.
D. PUBLIC HEARING
1. a. LUP-4-$9 ENVIROTEK,_ INC.
The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. In summary this item is to
receive citizen comment on the proposal to create a 159-acre County Commercial Transition
Activity Node, along with a 265-acre Agricultural/Residential area. The proposed
designation would allow the introduction of non-residential land uses, higher residential
densities, and public water/sewer services to a Rural Buffer area intended for very low-
density residential development relying on wells and ground absorption systems far water
supply and sewage disposal. The current designation of Rural Buffer permits single-family
residential on lots of two acres or more in size.
- - :::,
-~-. -.- ,
PAGE 2
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS.
MICHAEL MA.7ESKI of Envirotek of Raleigh clarified that Envirotek is a firm of
architects and engineers, not developers, that have been acting as agents for the
individual property owners who have requested the land use change. He painted out on a
map that the site is critically located between Chapel Hill and Hillsborough,
approximately half-way. He illustrated on the map existing conditions which show that the
site itself is predominantly Rural Residential. He clarified that their application was
originally based on changing conditions only. He believes that there has been an error in
policy that caused the plan to come into existence in the first place. The present plan
violates fundamental principles of planning by not providing for a variety of residential
services available to the residential areas that are developing in the area. The plan
does not allow for orderly provision of services to support desired residential usage of
the area. The further away from I-40 the mare desirable the land becomes and there is
really no support. The present plan failed to recognize the negative impact of the
interstate highway on the adjacent properties and allow for reasonable, acceptable usage
of these negatively impacted properties. In other words, the land immediately adjacent to
the interstate is not useful for residential purposes. Another reason for the change in
the Comprehensive Plan is that I-40 will allow for a commezcial center to exist at the
interchange and traffic that would serve the center would not necessarily have to pass
through any residentially developed areas. What is proposed is an innovative way to
establish a buffer between I-40 and the surrounding community. Giving not only those
buffers required, but additional buffers. This is not a zoning case but it has some
similarity. The issue of utilities could be a determining factor in the densities that
could occur. -
"~ TOAD ZAPOLSKI, a developer, spoke about the Teer property in its context as a
developable piece of property. The location has a lot of merit for certain uses. It is
not a practical development for residential property because of the highway, as well as
the site conditions of very poor soil. The topography and the access make it very
difficult to be used for residential.
MR. ZAPOLSKI answered a question from Reggie Rall stating that next to the highway,
in its current use, it is definitely not developable. The zoning would have to be changed
far it to be a developable site.
In answer to a question from the audience, Marvin Collins stated that if the Land Use
Plan designation was changed to agricultural residential, an application could be made far
one of two options: (1) a straight agricultural residential zoning which would require a
special use permit for a quarry or (2) a planned development, which would address zoning
and the special use permit for the quarry in one process.
WAYNE PHEARS, a representative of the Nello Teer Company, spoke principally to the AR
designated portion of the property. He explained that Envirotek has been the coordinator
for a group of people who are separate property owners in that area but who have filed a
plan far an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Envirotek is not the developer. They
are the coordinator. There is no overall developer at this time, because there is no re-
zoning application at this time. He gave a brief history of the property from Teer's
stand point. Nello Teer purchased this property in 1984 for approximately $440,000.00.
At the time it was purchased Teer planned to operate a crushed stone quarry on the
property because mining was a permitted use with a Special Use permit at that time. This
is all pre-rural buffer. Nello Teer spent a lot of money and time drilling on the
property, doing other exploratory research, and getting to the point where they could file
an application with the Orange County Government for a special use permit. He stated that
~ -.
PAGE 3
unknown to Nello Teer, a moratorium on mining permits was passed in February of 1985.
Nello Teer was unaware of the moratorium and were continuing to develop their mining °~`~'?.
permit. During February and March, Nello Teer spoke with the Orange County Planning ;;
Department about developing its mining permit. In March of 1985, Nello Teer set up an
appointment with the Planning Department to go over their Special Use application and were
given an appointment for April 2. At the meeting of the Board of Commissioners an April
1, mining as a permitted use in the Zoning Ordinance was deleted from same districts and
permitted as a special use in AR, Il, I2, and I3 districts. At the meeting with Nello
Teer on April 2 they was advised that the .joint Planning process was underway and that the
site had been designated as a Rural Industrial activity note. A Comprehensive .Plan was
produced that showed this area as a Rural Industrial activity node. Because of apposition
it was deleted from the plan and the property became classified not Rural Industrial
activity node but rural buffer. In his opinion it went fronn one of the more permissive
categories in the plan to the most restricted category in the .plan. What Nello Teer is
trying to do is to develop an innovative way to cure the problem they are faced with. The
plan that was adopted in 1987 does not permit a reasonable use of their property. In a
constitutional sense the property cannot be used for anything. While it may be nice to
have a buffer or greenbelt along the interstate, the problem is there are people who own
that greenbelt, .including his client, and who think that they ought to have some
reasonable use. of their property. This hearing is to talk about a Comprehensive Plan
change--to put a crush stone quarry an that property. That is why the request has been
made to rezone this property AR. The .reason this area has been chosen is that there is
roughly 40 million tons of aggregate reserves on that property. That is a substantial
amount of money. Those are valuable, natural resources--natural resources that everyone
uses everyday. They are like gold and diamonds to Nello Teer and they desire to mine
those valuable natural resources but cannot do so under the current classification.
Chairman Carey requested that Mr. Phears limit his discussion and comment to the
applicability of a land use change in that particular location.
MR. PHEARS continued emphasizing that he wanted to make it clear for the public
record why he was here. He stated there is no reasonable use for~the property from the
Teers standpoint. The noise readings in the RS are at levels in excess of 80 decimals.
The Federal Highways Administration Environmental Impacts Study for I-40 indicates that
the noise footprint, the 70 decimal noise footprint, is 500 feet wide on each side of the
right-of-way, That eliminates a substantial portion of the Teer property. The EIS tells
you that under federal highway guidelines that's an intolerable level of noise for
residential development. In addition to the noise, the property has topographic features
which include very wet areas, difficult soils to work with, and no water and sewer. Other
environmental impacts o£ I-40 deal with noise, visual impact, the general indesirability
of it, as well as the concern that everybody has as to what will happen in that corridor.
The question is who would spend, what will be 2 to 3 hundred thousand dollars to build out
there, because of the development cast and the type of house that has to be put with it,
so that they can live next to an interstate with na local services, an intolerable level
of noise, no water and sewer, and a drive of S miles to get a loaf of bread. Ne11o Teer
believes that the original classification was an error and that the policy underlying the
classification ought to be changed. The conditions are such in the area that the
Comprehensive Plan had to be changed. He also stated that he is aware that Orange County
fought I-40 through that corridor because it was of the belief that I-40 would have
adverse environmental impacts. When it became pointless to fight, the property was
designated Rural buffer to be the buffer far everyone else.
In answer to a question from an unidentified citizen Mr. Phears stated that the
Blackwood property was purchased for the purpose of additional buffer for this plan. The
i
PAGE -~
majority of the property will be used for a land application system because of the absence
of water and sewer. Nello Teer was optimistic that if a good plan was put together they
would need the Blackwood property for a land application system.
In answer to another question Mr. Phears stated that the noise limits that would be
applicable to a quarry are lower than what is presently there. There is a Special Use
permit process that requires a buffer two and a half times what the interstate requires.
In answer to a question from Spense Dickerson, Mr. Phears stated that Orange County
and Nello Teer have been engaged in an extensive analysis of the perkability.of the land,
but it's a lot more complicated than just perkability. In addition to perkability for
septic tanks, there are slope issues because slopes beyond certain gradation cannot have
septic tanks in them. If you have an area that is consistently wet for example, the
Health Department, as I understand it, does not approve septic tanks in it, and then in
addition you have the soil issues. Avery high percentage of the lots that perk are the
very lots which border the interstate. Further away from the interstate on this property,
the soils are poor sa that the more desirable residential locations have poor soils.
SPENSE DICKIN50N commented that he is developing property that is half that size with
just the same kinds of problems. Only about a third of it perks and its on Blackwood
mountain so he is dealing with the same kinds of slopes. He is the same distance from the
interstate. He stated he does not believe that there is no use for that property other
than a quarry.
JACK TAPP spoke representing his family. He lives on I-40 and since I-40 has been
built there has already been a big change. Where it was once a quiet farming area, he
must now drive three and a half miles to get around to the other side. It's like the
Chinese Wall. Not only is there the noise of the interstate but the noise of trucks
rolling when they start about 4:00 in the morning. Also all the motorists that break
down, people that are lost, etc., come to use the phone, day and night. The best use of
the land at this time in these areas is to plan it well, plan it in advance, and to
provide an asset to a community. If it's only usable for an urban type area or a
commercial node so be it. It is zoned at this time one dwelling for two acres which has
no value. Part of this property won't perk for dwellings. The desirable property that
would perk and the desirable home sites are right on the shoulder of the 60 and 70 foot
cuts on the side of I-40. He wants this rezoning because at this time he does not want to
stay there. They are being moved because of the atmosphere which has been brought on by
I-40. He asked the Boards to take into consideration the situation that has been created
by I-40 for the people who live there.
CLINT BURKLIN spoke representing the Stonycreek Neighborhood Association. The
Stoneycreek Neighborhood Association met and wish to express some concerns. They are
surprised that this Public Hearing is being held to consider these changes to the Land Use
Plan.. The three governing boards and the community worked together for almost three years
to craft a Land Use Plan that guarantees the organized and logical development of southern
Orange County. The citizens expected this plan to be a zoning guideline for at least 5 or
10 years. Now in less time than it took to craft the original plan, changes are being
considered. If the plan is going to be changed so quickly for small pocket interest, then
it ceases to be a Land Use Plan and simply becomes a zoning process. He also addressed
the specific land use changes proposed for the Rural Buffer at the I-40 -New Hope Church
Road interchange. The Rural Buffer is, in the Association's opinion, a bold and brilliant
component of the Joint Land Use Plan. The County hired consultants to find ways to
strengthen and enhance the Rural Buffer and the rural character of the community. Any
changes proposed far the Rural Buffer should be designed to strengthen and enhance it.
PAGE S
However, the changes proposed tonight do not strengthen the Rural Buffer. They punch a
hold in the middle of it, right at one of its most vulnerable spots. If approved, there `-"`?
is a danger that these changes would be the initial leak that would destroy the dike. If ;~
the fabric of the Rural Buffer is threatened, it should be for the sake of an urgent c
requirement that benefits a significant portion of the County and it can be located
nowhere else. However, the changes that have been presented tonight fall way short of
being urgent or of benefiting a significant portion of the County or cannot be located
elsewhere. The members of the Stoneycreek Neighborhood Association urge the Board to
consider two points. (1) Only change the Land Use Plan on a five to ten year cycle. With
any mare frequency it ceases to be a plan. (2) Don't punch a hole in the Rural Suffer that
everyone has worked so hard to establish for the sake of trivial uses easily located
outside of the Rural Buffer. Burklin presented far the record a series of letters that go
with the statement submitted by members of our neighborhood. He Hated that he lives
adjacent to that intersection and does not feel deprived of commercial conveniences. If
you have to drive five miles for a loaf of bread you have passed up a lot of good stores
like the Blackwood Station. (These letters are part of the record by reference and are
located in the Permanent Agenda Files in the Clerk's Office).
Chairman Carey stated that a number of letters have been received and will be
included in the record.
MS. PRIOLI read a letter into the records which is as follows, "Ta the Orange County
Commissioners, we support the present Land Use Plan which governs the node of the
intersection of New Hope Church Road and I-40. This node is zoned Agricultural. We do
not support changing the Rural Buffer in any way with commercial, or industrial type
businesses. We do not want the zoning at this node changed or even partly changed. We
live in north Orange County because we like the agricultural atmosphere and scenery and w ?~'~;
want to remain that way". ,
MR. SWENBERG stated his land is on New Hope Creek adjacent to that land being
proposed for the change. He commended the Orange County Planning Staff for their
recommendation far denial of this change. He purchased this land approximately two years
ago after the decision was made that this would not be a commercial node. He did so
because he wanted the rural character of the land. There have been negative impacts of I-
40 but he does not want to trade that for having commercial activities and a rock quarry
right up the road. If a rock quarry goes in there, there would be 80 to 1OO trucks a day
going down that road in addition to what's already there. That would be a very negative
impact. Currently there are approximately 18 Canadian honkers that fly aver at least 4
times a day. They are probably going to be diverted if this commercial use goes through
here because they'll not want to go past shopping centers. They have a wonderful creek
there that does not need disturbed further. He asked that this proposal be denied.
MS. JENNIE SELLARS spoke representing her family and the heirs of Benjamin Neville.
She asked about the location of her property to that under consideration far rezoning.
This was not the item Ms. Sellars wanted to speak to. She will speak later.
JOHN BLACKWOOD, who lives on New Hope Church Road, stated he lives on the property
that is in question here tonight. He indicated he was representing himself and other
Blackwaods, brother, cousins, and etc, that own this property. He painted out that this
property came from a grant from the King of England. The highway saw fit to come through;
the state saw fit to put I-40 through and disturb the property considerably. They
somewhat dictated what could be done with the property by putting an interchange right a
that particular point. He stated the. present land use devaluates his property
considerably. He feels that the people have the right to get the highest and best use out
of their property. With that in mind he requested that a change in the land use be
approved allowing for a different use of this property.
DICK HELWIG, chairman of the Orange County Democratic Party, made reference .to the
platform of the Orange County Democratic Party which has been in existence for a number of
years, and has been amended many times and most recently adopted at the County Convention
on April 9, 19$$. Last year this platform was revised over a period of years with a lot
of people throughout the County .participating in that revision. The platform was divided
into eight major areas. The preamble starts out with a sentence that says "The Orange
County Democratic Party believes the purpose of government is to guarantee the greatest
possible freedom for all people." There is a section on human rights. Section IZ under
Planning, Development, and Growth, speaks quite often of County and municipal cooperation.
He read a few selected pieces from there, that he felt relevant. "The Orange County
Democratic Party supports Municipal, County, Regional and State planning to meet the
challenge of population growth and. economic development in the coming years,.while
maintaining the unique quality of life in Orange Gounty. We support balance and
appropriate economic growth to provide jobs and increase tax base." Under the section
Local, item A, it reads "County and municipal governments should adhere strictly to Land
Use Plans in improving development projects to insure minimum disruption to existing
neighborhoods." Item F under local--County officials continue to support the Orange
County Planning Staff's proposals to control development along the I-40 route. Section
III under environment reads "The Orange County Democratic Party supports policies which
guarantee clean water, clean air, and other elements of this safe and attractive
environment. We expect our elected officials to insure that industrial, commercial,
agricultural, and residential development do not lower the quality of the environment. We
support research for public and private institutions into the causes and cures of
j pollution." Under local there are two sections. (a) the County municipal government
should identify and preserve natural open spaces for scenic, educational and recreational
pleasure, and (b) the County municipal governments should set aside natural habitants fox
the protection of wildlife and plant Iife. The most relevant of these is Item (a) under
Local, under Planning, and under Development Growth, which urges county municipals
governments to adhere strictly to Land Use Plans in approving development projects. It is
understood that those Land Use Plans are developed with broad public input aver a broad
period of time and should stand for quite some time.
MR. TRAWICK lives along the Gulfcreek a short distance upstream from the proposed
development. He indicated he was speaking on behalf of the neighbors that live along his
street. He expressed objection to the proposal because the area along New Hope Church
Road is currently, rapidly developing in the direction of low density residential use. He
understands that this was the original intent of the establishment of the Rural Suffer.
Today from Arthur~Minnis Road to the west all the way over to Old NC 10 is a mix of houses
that blend into the surrounding countryside. In ,the nine years he hats lived out there the
population has probably inereas.ed by 10 to 20 fold. Sut the only evidence today of that
population increase are mailboxes and small gravel driveways that connect the houses. to
the main road. In fact, this new growth is going to be serviced, or is planned to be
serviced, by what will be a model elementary school located less than a mile from the
intersection of I-40 and New Hope Church Road. He pointed out that things are going fine
out there now. There is development, but it has been managed development and the growth
is managed. He stated that to say that low density residential development is
inconsistent with I-40 is to ignore some of the recent house construction along the
interstate between New 86 and 15-501 exit. In fact, one of the biggest houses he has ever
seen abuts the I-40 corridor just a few hundred feet from New 86 so this is an
inconsistent form of logic. He stated that there xs an exit two miles to the south and
another two miles to the north, both of which are already zoned and willing, capable, able
and wanting the kind of development that is proposed for New Hope Church Road interchange.---.,
Having the development focused an New Hope Church Road instead of these other two
alternatives he finds totally incomprehensible. He asked that the Commissioners and the
Planning Board members continue their program of manage growth. It is his desire to
continue to have the environment and natural setting that was anticipated when he moved
out into the neighborhood.
MR. MORLEY o£ the Foxlair development which joins the area that is being considered
for rezoning; stated he chose Foxlair to live because of the wildlife that's there. There
are wild turkeys, foxes, and deer. There is a stream and the virgin forest. If this is
approved for the rock quarry, there will be noise, pollution, and increased traffic.
Chairman Carey pointed out that the specific use of the property is not under
consideration and he asked that comments be limited to the appropriateness of change in
the land use.
MR. MORLEY continued by saying he doesn't think a rock quarry is appropriate. His
concern would be the environmental impact and the argument for the convenience of the
local needs.
MR. .TOLLY stated he was pleased with the Planning staff recommendation. The nature
of his work requires that he travel a great deal around the country, and he has probably
seen just about every state. One of the things that surprised him is how much traveling
has improved his appreciation for the quality of life in Orange County, far the unspoiled
nature of environment. He expressed grief for people like the Tapps and the Blackwoods.
He understands their problem and regrets it sincerely. He expressed concern that
commercialization of the land above and below will result in sprawl and will result in an
increased center of commercialization all around this area. He built a new house within
1100 feet of the interstate just last year. He acknowledged that the interstate noises
are not particularly desirable but they do not make it an uninhabitable environment. He
is very pleased with his purchase and he enjoys very much the quality of life there. He
spoke in strong opposition to this plan. The Land Use Plan is brilliant. It is what sets
this state apart from other areas of the country, and he would strongly encourage public
opposition to the rezoning.
.TAY ZARAGOZA stated he knows something specific about the site because about two
years ago, he tried to buy 13 acres of which was owned by the Girl Scouts at that time.
It was a terrific piece of property and highly desirable from where he lives. He knew the
highway was coming but still wanted to own this land for his home. He asked that there be
consistency not only with the plan but with what's happening throughout this area and the
southern part of Chapel Hill where these multi-use nodes, as they call them, are under
siege right now. 'Whatever happens here tonight will have an effect elsewhere.
SPENSE DICKINSON, owner of a store at Blackwood Station, stated he put a little
petition up at his store which read "Protect our Rural Buffer, we strongly support the
town and the County zoning which provides for and preserves the Rural Buffer." He
presented the petition with 94 signatures. He stated we live in a community that people
like the Tapps and Blackwoods have protected for many, many years. It's because people
like the Tapps and the Blackwoods have held on to their land that this area is still a
really nice place to live. It was their land this interstate went right through and
they're the people that have preserved it for us, and now they are the ones that are
suffering. His main concern is how to compensate those people who are right there at that
intersection. Another concern is when will this issue come up again. It will come up
again and it will keep coming up until one day it will slip through because half of the
citizens are not present. Part of what he sees is just people trying to get free land--
how they can get this Rural Buffer and not have to pay for it. How can this be enforced
an the Blackwoods and the Tapps without having to pay for it. He sugges~oder~atthat can
Triangle Land Conservancy be contacted. He stated they are purchasing p p y
help maintain the quality of this community and would be the people who would approach the
Blackwoods and the Tapps. It is important to find an organization or a group that will
not develop this, but will hold onto it and preserve it. If it doesn't get into the right
hands then this issue will keep reoccuring. He suggested doing a bond and buying this
property. There are people who have moved into the community that he is developing have
come from places like Knoxville, Tennessee. They say uncontrolled development has ruined
that town. He ended by thanking the Tapps and the Blackwoods for contributing to the
specialness of this community. He asked how can this area be preserved and how can they
be compensated?
MARY ELLEN PRIESTLY who lives on Cheyenne Drive off of 86 stated her property was
split by I-40 so that the property around the house is to the east. of 40 and the property
west of..40 is just north of the Bingham property which is part of the area being
discussed. She stated she was pleased no one has asked to buy her property because they
are conservators of the forest. They are conservators of wildlife and came here because
of the rural area and because of the University which was close by with all the cultural
activity there. They built a family home. She stressed she was rather shocked and a
little angry that she must come to try to defend this Rural Suffer again and hopes it's
not again and again. The ink is hardly dry on a document which everyone wanted. The
majority of the people in this County wanted to have a Rural Buffer. She explained she is
skeptical of a name such as Envirotek, because environment is good, environment sounds
good, but hearing what they plan feels that this is a wolf in sheep's clothing. To have a
quarry plus a commercial node is not needed. Our garbage is taken 5 miles and they
compost as much as possible. It's not far to the Sunrise Market; it's not far to
Hillsborough or to Timberlyne to buy anything needed so far as groceries are concerned.
More gas stations or stores are not needed nor are single-family homes, or apartments, or
condos, especially in the middle of the Rural Buffer. John Falls, a real estate analyst
from Raleigh, recently spoke to the Homebuilders Association of Durham and Chapel Hill.
He said the market for all single-family homes is overbuilt. This is due to the fact that
employment has stabilized in the Triangle Area. He predicts that the demand for single-
family homes will drop about 50~ by 1990. There is a need to do what the Tapps and the
Blackwoods have done in the past. She intends to stay where she is and will keep trying
to preserve this land in spite of the noise from I-40. She stated there is a need to
think globally and nationally and work at a grass roots level in preserving open space,
forest, clean air, and clean water or our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren
won't be able to breathe in this area. She appealed to the Commissioners, Planning Board,
and Mayors who represent the majority of the people in this County, to say N0, NO, NO to
this rezoning proposal.
JOHN MACKOWIAK lives slightly west of the area along New Hope Church Road on Walnut
Grove Road. He spoke in opposition to the change in the plan. He asked that this issue
not be looked at over and aver. One of the major reasons why he and a number of other
neighbors oppose it is because it doesn't seem to be needed at this point in time.
There's areas to the north and to the south and those points have already been made. He
noted he bought a home in the area and understands how much $440,000.00 is. Nello Teer
may be able to afford that $440,000.00 a little bit more than the damage it may do to the
people in that neighborhood. There is a lot there and the people in that area would like
to protect what they have. It would be good if the County can work with the other
Planning Boards to find some way to implement the suggestion of Spense Dickinson so that
these people who have been impacted and have borne the brunt of this can be compensated
fairly for their land. He thinks that's very important and would support that in anyway ,,,,,~w
he could. He asked that the County look into that suggestion and work with the land
conservancy or whoever so that everyone will benefit. He expressed thanks to the many
people for a tremendous job of two or three years of effort in putting together the buffer-`
zone plan and expressed hope that the people that put this together can keep it together.
CHET CAVALLITO, spoke on behalf of himself and a few neighbors in the area just to
the east of Old 86 and west of the area. This proposal is not just changing a node.
There's a whole gerrymandering stretch there, which without much extension will extend
from the northern edge of Ghapel Hill to almost the southern edge of Hillsborough, There
are a total of three so-called nodes or intersections in that area. In regard to the
changes proposed who knows what might be necessary 10 years from now or even less. As of
now, nothing needs to be changed other than possibly making some adjustment to those
people directly impacted by this proposed change. The joint planning groups that were
involved in creating this plan certainly are to be commended and supported to the extent
that is feasible and reasonably possible. He appreciated hearing from the gentlemen
representing Teer that they have an investment here. Considering it was purchased in
1984, perhaps that should be categorized as a speculation rather than as an investment
since the direction of this was quite evident. Gertainly living in proximity to the
highway is noisy. The other thing is trading highway noise for blasting noise. Highway
noise, for the most part, travels through the air, blasting noise travels through the air,
and through the rocks.
Mr. Phears emphasized that the property in question is property situated on the
interstate right-af-way. It runs roughly a mile, 4 to 5 thousand feet, a little short of
a mile, down the interstate. He stated that the noise level on the property doesn't meet'^,~~,
Orange County's own noise standards for residential property much less the noise standardw..
propagated elsewhere. He made reference to the acreage size and stated that a tremendous;,;,;;
amount of this property is committed to the land application sewage system which is a ~"~~
spray system they use on golf courses. Roughly 100 acres would be used for this system.
Two Hundred Four acres are in the agricultural residential zoning for the rock quarry. A
major portion o£ that actually remains undeveloped and remains forested in terms of land
conservation. In terms of land conservation, Nello Teer is actually much better at
leaving some open spaces in those areas. In Durham, Nello Teer has roughly 500 acres, 100
acres of which are being used. The balance of it is in buffers and woodlands. The
Blackwood property was purchased to be used as buffer and woodland. He clarified that the
staff report treats these as one big application but they view them as an AR application.
He asked that the record show that they have separate applications. There is a statement
in the staff report that this property could be rezoned to AR, without having a land
exchange. Ha asked Mr. Collins if that was correct at the present time?
Mr. Collins stated that there is within the land use plan, what is called a land use
plan zoning district matrix. The question that Mr. Phears asked is whether or not the
property could be rezoned to AR at this time. Based on that matrix, there are two zoning
districts which are lined with the rural buffer classification. That is AR far
Agricultural Residential and R1, so rezoning is possible at this time. He pointed out
that a public hearing was held back in February of this year for the very purpose of
changing that matrix, so that the only zoning district that would be permitted within the
rural buffer for Land Use Plan designation would be the rural buffer zoning district. The
Board of Commissioners, will in all probability, consider the change in that matrix at
their first meeting in May.
- --- -..}
Mr. Phears stated for the record that that pending amendment has created some
uncertainty on their part in connection with the application. He requested that the Teers
AR application be treated as a request to rezone.
Jim Swenberg suggested working with the Department of Transportation to build some
natural barriers far sound to reduce these problems for those people who are impacted and
those people that live in that area.
1. b. LUP-5-89 CAZWELLL INCORPORATED
The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. In summary this item is to
receive citizen comment on the request to redesignate a 1.45 acre parcel from the current
Rural Buffer category to Ten Year Transition. The Durham County lots in the subdivision
average 30,000 square feet in size. The Rural Buffer has a minimum lot size of two acres.
The proposed amendment would allow the 1.45 acre portion, in Orange County, to be
subdivided in a manner consistent with the rest of the subdivision.
THE HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS
CAROL ZINN, President of Cazwell Development, which is developing Montvale gave some
history about Montvale. It is currently a 27 lot subdivision that went through the
approval process in the city of Durham. It is served by Durham City sewer, individual
wells, and public service gas. Tt is bordered on the west by Curly Road. $ecause of a
freak of geography, the County line which divides Orange and Durham counties does not
follow Curly Road. Montvale backs up onto Curly Road but the County line kind of
straddles that road. Therefore, a tiny sliver of Orange County crosses the four lots in
Montvale. Each of these four lots have a portion of land in Orange County, but most of
the land is in Durham County. The entire Montvale subdivision has only 6~ in Orange
County, while 94~ is in Durham County and Durham City. Lot 27 as shown on the final plat
'~_:._ is over 60,000 square feet while the other lots are approximately 30,000 or more square
feet. Tt's twice as large as the other Montvale lots. It was intended, originally, that
this be 2-30,000 square foot lots--Lot 27 and lot 28. $ecause of the fact that this line
straddles Modville, a very small portion of what was to the part of lot 28 is in the rural
buffer. Therefore, they had to originally plat the subdivision with 27 lots to go through
the Durham city approval process. That is how the subdivision was platted and filed. In
late summer 1988, a variance application was filed with the Orange County Board of
Adjustment so that Lots 27 and lots 28 would be consistent with the remainder of the
subdivision. The variance was denied. The County Attorney and Planning Director
suggested that this be rezoned which is the reason they are here tonight. Montvale is
caught in a situation where the municipalities have not considered what to do when
projects cross boundary lines. A rezoning is a sensible, practical, and appropriate way
to deal with these problems. She expressed agreement with the Planning Staff's
recommendation that it would create the consistency that is the intent and purpose of the
joint planning area Land Use Plan. She supports an inter-local agreement to deal with
situations such as this, and believes that it is necessary. It was hoped that this be
considered a minor adjustment or fine tuning of the rural buffer and not something that is
major. The inter-local agreement is something that could actually take several years to
come about and not something that could address this problem right now. This sliver of
Orange County goes through four lots. It only slightly effects three of these lot but
goes through almost half of that lot 27. If this rezoning is approved one lot would be
gained. The lot would be developed consistent with the rest of the. subdivision which has
30,000 square foot lots. The Town of Carrboro, the next item on the agenda, has requested
that a 400 foot rural buffer area located between Carrboro Transition Area II and Duke
Forest be removed and that the area be designated as Transition Area II on the joint
- planning area Land Use Plan. When it comes down to practicality there needs to be some
-,
fine tuning and Carrboro recognized that. She asked support from the elected officials
and support of Joint Planning in moving ahead with their effort to fine tune the Land Use~~~~~';
Plan.
In answer to a question, Carol Zinn stated that if lot 28 is separated from lot 27,
than it would be mostly in Orange County with some of it in Durham County-Durham City.
The school district is Durham.
In. answer to another question, Carol Zinn stated that the tax map shows a much
smaller portion of this lot was in Orange County. It didn't look like any problem at all.
When it was finally surveyed they found out that it was larger. They were told initially
by the Planning Staff and Orange County that it was an administrative matter. They went
through the whole approval process with Durham City believing that and then right near the
end found out that it was a larger problem than they anticipated.
The question of this becoming a noncomforming lot if approved was addressed by Marvin
Collins. He stated that there are two different definitions of a lot within the County's
zoning ozdinance. One is called a zoning lot which would be that portion of lot 27 that
is in Orange County. It would be a zoning lot zoned rural buffer and from that standpoint
would be noncomforming. By looking at it from the Durham County side, they do have a
buildable portion in Durham County and they could build there and not have. any conflict
whatsoever with the Orange County rural buffer provisions.
CATI~Y KLING spoke in support of keeping the rural buffer. She stated that she
believes that the people who border this Montvale development would appreciate that extra ~~
space as open space and she thinks the citizens will be back and back again to defend the
rural buffer as it slowly gets nibbled away. `'?
.TEF spoke in support of this fine tuning because it shows that the plan itself is ''_~_
flexible enough to be used by the people who own the land. If there are more of these
lots that are straddling the jurisdictions all around Orange County each one will need to ~,
be considered individually. There is not a formula for addressing these questions. This
is a real valid use of time to not only amend the plan but to show the flexibility in all
of the jurisdictions as they grow. There will not be a zoning designation which is a
dinosaur. The rural buffer will be nibbled away slowly and that's what it was designed
for. Eventually Orange County is going to grow in all directions including through the
rural buffer. That was in the plan when everyone labored over it for many years.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLDSED
1. c. LUP-d-89 TOWN OF CARRBORO
Tha presentation was made by Ray Williford, Planning Airector for the Town
of Carrboro. In summary this item is to receive citizen comment on the proposal which
would redesignate the buffer area from its current Rural Buffer classification to Carrboro
Transition Area II. The designation would allow residential densities at one dwelling
unit per acre, .whereas the existing Rural Suffer density allows one unit per two acres.
The change is proposed to eliminate administrative difficulties for properties split by
the buffer area. He explained that the term Rural Buffer .would be the area which
surrounds Duke Forest. Duke Forest is within the Rural Buffer so it's the southern edge
of the Rural Buffer. The primary reason for this request is not for the elimination of
the Rural Buffer pez se, but the Rural Buffer is creating a jurisdictional boundary which
surrounds existing lots all along the boundary of Duke Forest. In order to remedy that
situation Carrboro is requesting that the Rural Buffer be removed and that many of the
features along Duke Forest be, such as the set back, retained.
I
-~
In answer to a question from a citizen Mr. Williford stated that there are two
issues: (1) to amend the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan--to remove the rural buffer and
then to extend the transitional areas and (2) zone that area the designation which all the
other transition areas will be currently zoned, which would be RR. In this. case, that
would be one unit per acre, so it would be a density change. It would add an additional
67 units on 135 acres, Another zoning classification would need to be created far the
watershed. This change would not honor existing lot boundaries whereas the other
designations of the Rural Buffer have pretty much honored existing lot boundaries, It's
just a set distance,
Commissioner Willhoit suggested that this change be delayed until the larger
questions of the FID and designation of the Rural Buffer have been decided, Those
properties in the Hickory Forest area would be affected by this change.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER GOMMENTS THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED
Chairman Carey stated that concludes all of the Land Use Plan amendment proposal.
These will be referred to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro and to the Orange County
Planning Board for decision no sooner than June 5.
2. a. Z-3-89 TOWN OF CARRBORO
The presentation was made by Roy Williford, In summary this item is to
receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to the Orange County Zoning Atlas which
would incorporate a proposed change to the Town of Carrboro's Zoning Map. The proposal
would rezone the aforementioned 400-foot buffer area adjacent to Duke Forest from its
current Orange County zoning designation of Rural Suffer (RB) to the Carrboro zoning
designation Rural Residential (RR). The Rural Residential district represents the zoning
classification shown for all properties within the Town of Carrboro Transition Area II as
shown on the Joint Planning Land Use Plan and allows one residential unit per acre of
land..
THERE WERE NO COMMENTS
2, b. Z-4-89 TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
The presentation was made by Roger Waldon, Planning Director for the Town
of Chapel Hill, In summary this item is to receive citizen comment on a proposed
amendment to the Orange County Zoning Atlas that would incorporate a proposed change to
the Town of Chapel Hill Zoning Map, The proposal would rezone a parcel located in the
Chapel Hill Joint Development Area as identified on the Orange County-Ghapel Hill-Carrboro
Joint Planning Land Use Flan. The property is currently zoned R-1 Rural Residential by
Orange County. Under the terms of the above-referenced Joint Planning Agreement, the
property would be assigned a Chapel Hill zoning designation. The Chapel Hill Town Council
adapted a resolution calling for this property to be zoned Rural Transition (RT). Chapel
Hill's RT district is intended to be applied to land which is used for agriculture, very-
low intensity residential, or open space uses, but which is projected in the Comprehensive
Plan for conversion to more intensive urban uses at such time as community services are
available and community needs for such uses are present, The minimum lot size requirement
in the RT district is 100,000 square feet.
Chairman Carey emphasized that the zoning of this parcel is not a decision to locate
or not locate a landfill on this property. Anything located on this property would have
to have permits applied for and granted, and a special use permit applied for with public
hearings and ample opportunity for citizen comment, Again, this action is not an action
..._.. ~-~'..1
to authorize a landfill on this site.
r...,1
In answer to a question from an unidentified citizen, Weldon responded that having a
zoning designation of R1 that doesn't permit a landfill when there is a distinct ~`.
possibility that it may be used as a landfill, would be more misleading than zoning it RT.
RT is more appropriate and is the least misleading because it indicates that it may be
used as a landfill. It may not but there is the possibility.
SILL ELLIOTT spoke representing the Northwest Chapel Hill Neighborhood Association,
which is a group of about 50 residents in the area south of the Green tract. He stated
they feel that RT is inappropriate for this piece of land because, first of all it is
surrounded by residential zoning. There is no logical reason to have different zoning for
this piece of land other than for the purposes of a landfill. Since that decision has not
been made, it doesn't seem reasonable to go ahead and rezone it to allow that to happen
before the decision has been made. It is also in the urban services district of Chapel
Hill which was specifically put in to encourage higher density, efficient use of land and
public facilities, sewer lines, etc. There is a big hole in the urban services district
which is, even with the very large lots, not consistent with the rest of the area. There
is no reason for it at the present time. To allow a landfill in an area where people get
their water from wells is very dangerous and unreasonable. There is a lot of anger among
the people that are present. Part of his anger has to do with the time that is being
spent on this issue. The consultant hired by the Solid Waste Task Force has said that
this is not a good site. The Chapel Hill Planning Board has said that this is not a good
site. The Planning Staff originally, before the Manager essentially overrode them, was
going to recommend R-1 for this. Yet, time is being spent an this rather than on finding
alternative sites. This area will be in the town limits within the next 5-10-15 years.
To have a landfill right in the middle of a residential development makes no sense. To
push this forward at this time is inappropriate and difficult to understand. He said tha~
people wonder what the motive is for pushing this forward and not putting more energy into _
finding a better solution and a better site. .
In answer to a question from Mr. Stroud, Chairman Carey stated that if a landfill is
proposed for this piece of property, there will be public hearings held on it, because a
Special Use permit will have to be obtained by those who wish to use it as a landfill,
i.e. the County and the two Municipalities that own the property. Questions will be
answered at that time. At the time that a permit is issued, the appropriate protections
will need to be in place.
A citizen spoke who owned property near the proposed landfill commended the task
force created by the Mayor a year or so ago. They have been working very diligently in an
attempt to salve the problem. People need to realize that they are all part of the
problem and they all are going to have to be apart of the solution. He stated he
believes that if everyone continues to work hard, that this county and these governments,
with the help of the citizens, can solve this problem through a combination of recycling,
composting or whatever is finally recommended.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS THE PU$LIG HEARING WA5 CLOSED
Chairman Carey referred Item 2 (a) to the governing board of the Town of Carrboro and
2 (b) to the governing board of Chapel Hill and bath items to the Orange County Planning
Board for recommendation to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than .Tune 5th, 1989.
- „ '1
- With no further item for consideration, the Joint Planna.ng Public Hearing was adjourned.
Moses Carey, Jr., Ghair
Beverly Blythe, Clerk
L