HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-25-2013 - C221
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND
PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Action Agenda
Item No. C.2
SUBJECT: Amendments to Unified Development Ordinance Text— Modify or Remove
Regulations Related to the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Comprehensive Plan /Future Land Use
Map and Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) Amendment Outline Form
(UDO /Zoning- 2013 -01)
2. Amendment Packet
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) Yes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Roberts, County Attorney, 919 - 245 -2318
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 919- 245-
2592
Perdita Holtz, Planner III, 919 - 245 -2578
Michael Harvey, Planner III, 919 - 245 -2597
PURPOSE: To hold a public hearing on Planning Director initiated text amendments to the
Unified Development Ordinance to incorporate changes to regulations related to the Schools
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO).
BACKGROUND: The County Attorney, through discussions with the attorneys for Carrboro,
Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough, and a review of the recent Supreme Court decision in Lanvale
Properties v. Cabarrus County, which struck down as unauthorized by law Cabarrus County's
adequate public facilities ordinance, has determined that development regulations related to the
Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in Orange County and its municipalities should be
amended.
In August 2012 in the case of Lanvale Properties v. Cabarrus County the North Carolina
Supreme Court struck down Cabarrus County's adequate public facilities ordinance ( "APFO ")
Although the majority focused on the fee aspect of Cabarrus County's ordinance they struck
down the entire ordinance, which included provisions for delaying construction until school
facilities could meet development demand. In striking down the ordinance the Court held
"Without expressing an opinion on the policy merits of APFOs, we stress that absent specific
authority from the General Assembly, APFOs that effectively require developers to pay an
adequate public facilities fee to obtain development approval are invalid as a matter of law."
This holding appears to leave room for APFOs that do not impose a fee but rather delay
development until such time as there are adequate school facilities to support the development
(which is how orange County's ordinance is written) . However, the Supreme Court refused to
consider a petition arguing that fact and asking the Court to modify its holding by severing the
fee provision of the Cabarrus County APFO and allowing the other provisions to stand.
22
The attorneys for Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Orange County met to discuss the
Court's holding and the ramifications of the Court's refusal to consider the petition to modify its
decision. At the meeting, the consensus among the attorneys was that the Schools Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance ( "SAPFO ") and its accompanying memoranda should be amended to
remove the enforcement provisions but that it could be left in place as a policy document
primarily to monitor development activity and develop enrollment projections to assist in school
CIP planning. This would involve eliminating the possibility that a Certificate of Adequate Public
School Facilities ( "CAPS ") would be denied. The existing process would remain in effect
however there would be no possibility of halting development based on lack of a CAPS. Rather,
in situations where there was not adequate capacity in the schools, the school board would
approve CAPS and would report to the local government partners that capacity had been
exceeded and new school facilities are needed to meet demand.
Attachment 1 contains additional information and analysis on these amendments and Attachment 2
contains the proposed amendments in a "track changes" format ( for proposed additions and
red strikethrG gh for proposed deletions). Unless otherwise noted on a page, only pages with
proposed changes are included.
Notification Procedural Requirements
Legal ads for the public hearing were placed in a newspaper of general circulation in the county
in accordance with Section 2.8.6 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: See Section C.3 in Attachment 1.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Director recommends the Board:
Receive the proposed amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance as detailed in
this abstract and attachments.
2. Conduct the public hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board comment on
the proposed amendments.
3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned
to the BOCC in time for the April 9, 2013 BOCC regular meeting.
4. Adjourn the public hearing until April 9, 2013 in order to receive and accept the Planning
Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments.
Attachment 1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ FUTURE LAND USE MAP
AND
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO)
AMEN DMENTOUTLINE
UDO / Zoning- 2013 -01
23
Modify or remove regulatory requirements in the UDO related to the Schools Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO)
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
❑ Land Use Element Map:
From: - --
To: ---
F-1 Zoning Map:
From-
To----
F-1 Other:
Text Amendments
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text:
ection(s):
❑ UDO Text:
❑UDO General Text Changes
❑UDO Development Standards
❑UDO Development Approval Processes
Pection(s)- 2.14.1, 2.15.5, 6.19, and 7.14.3
❑ Other: Schools Adequate Public Facilities Memorandum of Understanding
(need to amend is currently being evaluated by legal staffs; will be done
later in 2013 if necessary)
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose /Mission
To remove the remove the ability of the school districts to deny a Certificate of
Adequate Public Schools (CAPS). The County Attorney, through discussions with
the attorneys for Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough, and a review of the recent
Supreme Court decision in Lanvale Properties v. Cabarrus County, which struck
1
down as unauthorized by law Cabarrus County's adequate public facilities ordinance,
has determined that development regulations related to the Schools Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance should be amended.
2. Analysis
As required under Section 2.8.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Planning
Director is required to: `cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based
upon that analysis, prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning
Board and the Board of County Commissioners'. The following information is offered:
These amendments are necessary in order to ensure Orange County's regulations
comply with recent case law made by the N.C. Supreme Court.
3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives)
[The mSchools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance is addressed on page 8 -42 of the
prehensive Plan. Objective E -1 also pertains to the SAPFO.
4. New Statutes and Rules
Lanvale Properties, LLC and Cabarrus County Building Industry Association v.
County of Cabarrus and City of Locust, 731 S.E. 2d 800 (2012).
C. PROCESS
1. TIM EFRAM E/MILESTONES/DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
December 11, 2012
b. Quarterly Public Hearing
February 25, 2013
C.
BOCC Updates /Checkpoints
February 5, 2013 — Approval of legal ad
April 9, 2013 — receive Planning Board recommendation
d. Other
2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
Mission /Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and
Orange County ordinance requirements
a. Planning Board Review:
March 6, 2013 (recommendation)
2
24
b. Advisory Boards:
N/A
c. Local Government Review:
This item was briefly discussed at the
Assembly of Governments meeting on
December 6, 2012.
The SAFOTAC (a committee
comprised of planning directors and
school staff) discussed the issue at its
January 28, 2013 meeting.
d. Notice Requirements
The schools system superintendents
were provided this information via
communication from the County
Attorney in January 2013.
25
Legal advertisement published on February 13 and 20 in the News of Orange and
The Herald Sun.
e. Outreach:
❑ General Public:
❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup-
❑ Other:
3. FISCAL IMPACT
Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the
provision of County services. Costs for the required legal advertisement will be paid
from FY2012 -13 Departmental funds budgeted for this purpose. Existing Legal and
Planning staff included in the Departmental staffing budget will accomplish the work
required to process this amendment.
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
Approval of this amendment will remove the Certificate of Adequate Public Schools
(CAPS) denial provision as part of the development approval process when school
capacity is exceeded.
E. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE
See Attachment 2. Proposed additions are shown in red text and proposed deletions are
shown in red stFokethmu g-1 text.
Primary Staff Contact:
John Roberts, County Attorney, 919 - 245 -2318
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 919 - 245 -2592
3
Attachment 2
2.13.1 Generally
Article 2: Procedures 26
Section 2.13: Exempt Subdivisions
(A) P ons proposing divisions of land that do not constitute a subdivisi0 ust request a
deter ation of an exempt subdivision status with the Planning i ctor. Activities that
do not co Mute a subdivision are found in Section 7.2.1.
(B) One copy of the al mylar plat and three paper copie the plat shall be submitted with
the request for a de ination for an exempt sub i sion.
(C) Exempt subdivisions shall ply with all a cable non -plat requirements of this
Ordinance.
2.13.2 Review and Action
(A) Following receipt of a re est for a determina of an exempt subdivision status, the
Planning Directors make a determination of th nd division's exempt or nonexempt
status.
(B) If the Pla ing Director determines that the proposed land di ion does not constitute a
sub sion, the Planning Director shall certify the proposed land ision as exempt and
ude the necessary statement on the plat certifying same.
(C If the Planning Director determines that the proposed land division constitu a
subdivision, the applicant shall be informed of such in writing and shall be requi to
submit the appropriate Subdivision application.
2.14.1 Review and Decision Process Flow Chart
Review and approval of Minor Subdivision applications shall adhere to the process detailed
herein. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards contained in
Article 7 of this Ordinance.'
Staff is modifying the language to eliminate reference to the `School Board' issuing a CAPS certificate. School
system staff have been, and will continue to, issue the appropriate documents as required by the UDO.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -39
2.
Article 2: Procedures 27
Section 2.14: Minor Subdivisions
Minor Pre - application Meeting submittal
Subdivisions of Concept Plan Application
Review of Concept Plan Application by Orange
County Development Advisory Committee
Initiation of Final Plat Application Process
Issuance of Completion of Completion of
Septic & Well Required Final Plat
Improvement Improvements Application &
Permits (road, drainage, Survey
etc.)
Installation of 199„Am..e Qf CARS
Required by SGhnni Reard
Landscaping Issuance of CAPS
by School System
Submittal of Final Plat
Application
Recordation of Plat and
Development Agreement at
Orange County Register of Deeds
Concept Plan
Th plicant shall prepare a sketch plan of the proposed subdivision and schedul n
appoint nt with the Planning Department for initial review and consultation. ring this initial
meeting the nning Department shall advise the subdivider or his /her a orized agent of the
regulations perta to the proposed subdivision, of any obvious c ges required in order to
comply with the provi ' s of this Ordinance, and the procedure o be followed in the preparation
and submission of the Con t Plan.
(A) Application Requireme
(1) Applications shall be su t on forms provided by the Planning Department in
accordance with Sectio 2 his Ordinance.
(2) Applications sha i clude:
(a) T copies of the scaled Concept drawn to the specifications
outlined in Section 7.14.1.
A vicinity map showing the location of the sub i ion in relation to the
existing street or highway system.
(c) A soils classification map for the property.
(d) A topography map of the property.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -40
Article 2: Procedures 28
Section 2.15: Major Subdivisions
(c) Deny the application.
(4) If the Planning Director approves the application with conditions, such con tions
shall be reasonable and shall seek to insure compliance with applicable
regulations.
If the Planning Director approves the application with conditions or nies the
application, the reasons for such decision shall be stated in writin to the
applicant.
(F) Action Subsequent to Approval
(1) If e application is approved or approved with conditions he applicant shall
sub it a reproducible mylar original of the Final Plat to e Planning Director for
endor ment within one year of Final Plat approval.
(2) The Plan ing Director shall obtain all required ce ication signatures and shall
endorse a roval of the approved Final Plat on e reproducible mylar original
after all othe certification signatures have bee obtained. The Planning Director
shall prepare t Declaration of Restrictions
(3) The Planning Dir for shall notify the app/cant when all required certification
signatures have be obtained and Co ty Attorney review is complete. The
applicant shall then Xvedpla appoint ent with the Planning Director to have the
approved plat and aiated currents necessary to assure conformance
with regulations recohe ice of the Register of Deeds. The approved
plat and any associants must be recorded within 90 days after the
Planning Director's ent of approval.
(4) The Planning Directcc pany the applicant to the Register of Deeds
Office to ensure the pla nd any required documents are recorded in
the correct order anthe bo and page references, where applicable.
Documents shall be d in the der they are to be recorded. The order is
as follows:
(a/Any d plat,
(baintenance Agreement, if r\'red, (c) ion of Restrictions,
(dners /Property Owners' Asuments, if required, and
(er associated documents.
(5) the Final Plat is not recorded within the specified time p \ded e Final Plat is
void.
(6) The Planning Director may extend the deadline for recordrovided the
applicant can demonstrate a good faith effort to comply weadline, but for
reasons beyond his /her control, fails to meet the requirem cOrdation
within the specified period.
(7) All Final Plats shall conform to drawing specifications and tion
requirements for Final Plats contained in Section 7.14.3 ordinanc (8) Recordation of the approved final plat, and an y required document ion
shall be with the advice and consent of the Planning Dire
2.15.5 Certificate of Adequacy of Public School Facilities
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -54
Article 2: Procedures 29
Section 2.16: Subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commercial, and /or commercial - Industrial Nodes
A Certificate of Adequacy of Public School
Facilities (CAPS) shall be issued by the relevant School District in accordance with Section 6.19
for major and minor subdivision projects.
A) All subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commercial and /or Commercial- dustrial
Nodes, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, shall submit an application in
accordance with the requirements specified in Section 2.15.3(B).
(B) Initial review of all subdivisions in the Economic Development, Commerci I and /or
ommercial- Industrial Nodes shall be performed by the Planning Dep ment.
(C) Fo wing review by the Planning Department all subdivisions shall How the major
subd ision preliminary plat approval procedures specified in Sec n 2.15.3.
(D) All road in the Nodes identified in (A) above are required to b public and constructed to
North Car 'na Department of Transportation standards.
(E) Final plat app vals shall follow the final plat approval pr edures in Section 2.15.4.
(F) Additional Requi ments for Hillsborough Economic D velopment District:
(1) When a M -CZ rezoning petition is appr ed, and the tract that is subject of
said rezoning i proposed to be subdivid d, all provisions of Article 7 shall be
satisfied.
(a) The applic t may obtain proval of the subdivision simultaneously with
the approval f the rezo i g if sufficient information (i.e. lot lines, lot size,
etc) is shown o the si plan or at a later time.
(b) The subdivision s be consistent with the terms of the MPD -CZ and
Special Use Per lass A (as applicable) that is approved along with
the rezoning pe ion.
(c) If the Maste Ian and Sp cial Use Permit, Class A (as applicable) that is
approved ong with the M -CZ rezoning petition establishes density,
floor are , impervious surfac or similar limitations on the tract that is
rezon or any portion thereof, e subdivision final plat that creates lots
out any portion of the tract so e cumbered shall indicate on the face of
th plat with respect to each lot suc limitations or restrictions as are
ecessary to ensure compliance with e Master Plan and MPD -CZ
rezoning approval.
(i) For example, if the Master Plan as ciated with a MPD -CZ
approval shows a ten -acre portion o e tract approved for retail
development with a maximum floor are of 100,000 square feet,
then if that ten acre area is subdivided, e h lot so created shall
show on the face of the plat the maximum ilding area that can
be constructed on that lot.
2.17.1 kenerally
(A) Lots Unsold
The owner of a parcel subject to an approved plat may vacate the plat at any ti\bore any lot in the plat is sold. The plat is vacated when a signed, acknowledged ins
2 As a CAPS now has to be issued, and cannot be denied, there is no need for language within the UDO requiring the
issuance of said document before approval of a project.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 2 -55
C
6.19.1 Purpose
The purpose of this Section is to ensure that, to the maximum extent practical, approval of new
residential development is coordinated with the construction of new school facilities will , r begA ^m°
offe,. +; „e GRIP Whe„ it Rably he e e te,� so that adequate public school facilities will be
available to accommodate such new development.
6.19.2 General Provisions
6.19.3
(A) Memoranda of Understanding
(1) There are two Schools Adequate Public Facilities Memoranda of Understanding,
hereafter referred to as "the MOUs” or "the MOU" as the context requires, each
relative to one of the two school districts in the County.
(2) Parties to the two agreements are as follows:
(a) Chapel Hill - Carrboro School District- The Town of Chapel Hill, Town of
Carrboro, Orange County, and Chapel -Hill Carrboro City Board of
Education.
(b) Orange County School District- Town of Hillsborough, Orange County, and
Orange County Board of Education.
(B) For purposes of this Section, the terms "building capacity" and "school membership" shall
have the same meaning attributed in the MOUs.
(C) The Chair of the Board of County Commissioners or any member temporarily acting as Chair
may, in his or her official capacity, administer oaths to witnesses in any hearing before
the Board of County Commissioners concerning a special exceptions appeal Gf
(A) The provisions of this Section shall apply to the entirety of the County lying outside of the
following:
(1) The municipalities therein,
(2) The extraterritorial planning jurisdiction, if any, of the municipalities therein and
(3) The Joint Planning Area Transition Area, if any, of the municipalities therein.
(B) The Chapel Hill - Carrboro School District and the Orange County School District are each
declared an overlay district in order to implement Schools Adequate Public Facilities as
prescribed in this Section. Within the Chapel Hill - Carrboro School District Overlay District
and within the Orange County School District Overlay District, the provisions of this
Section apply.
6.19.4 Service Levels
(A) As provided in the MOUs, adequate service levels for public schools shall be deemed to exist
with respect to a proposed new residential development if, given the number of school
age children projected to reside in that development, and considering all the factors listed
in the MOU, projected school membership for the elementary schools, the middle
schools, and the high schools within the School District w41--should not exceed the
following percentages of the building capacities of each of the following three school
levels:
31
6.19.5 Certificate of Adequate Public School Facilities
(A) Subject to the remaining provisions of this Article, no approval of a site plan, special use
permit, a major subdivision preliminary plat or a minor subdivision final plat for a
residential development shall become effective unless and until a Certificate of Adequate
Public School Facilities (CAPS) for the project has been issued by the School District.
(B) A CAPS shall not be required for a general use or special use rezoning or for a master land
use plan. However, even if a rezoning or master plan is approved, a CAPS will
nevertheless be required before any of the permits or approvals identified in subsection
(A) of this section shall become effective, and the rezoning of the property or approval of
a master plan provides no indication as to whether the CAPS will be issued. The
application for rezoning or master plan approval shall contain a statement to this effect.
(C) A CAPS must be obtained from the School District. The School District will issue Q;- ^
CAPS in accordance with the provisions of the MOUs.
(D) A CAPS attaches to the land in the same way that development permission attaches to the
land. A CAPS may be transferred along with other interests in the property to which such
CAPS is issued, but may not be severed or transferred separately.
6.19.6 Expiration of Certificates of Adequate Public School Facilities
A CAPS issued in connection with approval of a site plan, special use permit, a major subdivision
preliminary plat or a minor subdivision final plat shall expire automatically upon the expiration of
such permit approval.
6.19.7 Exemption From CAPS
(A) In recognition of the fact that some new development will have a negligible impact on school
capacity, a CAPS shall not be required for the following:
(1) Residential developments restricted by law and /or covenant for a period of at least 30
years to housing for the elderly and /or adult care living and /or adult special
needs;
(2) Residential developments restricted for a period of at least 30 years to dormitory
housing for university students.
(B) If the use of a development restricted as provided herein changes, then before a permit
authorizing such change of use becomes effective, a CAPS must be issued just as if the
development were being constructed initially.
6.19.8 Previously Approved Projects and Projects Pending Approval
(A) Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of this Section shall only apply to
applications for approval of site plans, special use permits, major subdivision preliminary
plats or minor subdivision final plats that are submitted for approval after the effective
date of this Section.
(B) The provisions of this Section shall not apply to amendments to site plans, special use
permits, major subdivision preliminary plats or minor subdivision final plats issued prior to
the effective date of this Section so long as the approvals have not expired and the
32
proposed amendments do not increase the number of dwelling units authorized within the
development by more than 5% or five dwelling units, whichever is less.
(C) Special Exceptions
(1) The Board of County Commissioners shall issue a special exception to the CAPS
requirement to an applicant whose application for approval of a site plan, special
use permit, a major subdivision preliminary plat or a minor subdivision final plat
covers property within a planned unit development or master plan project that
was approved prior to the effective date of this Section, if the Board of County
Commissioners finds, after an evidentiary hearing, that the applicant has:
(a) Applied to the School District for a CAPS and the application has been
denied,
(b) In good faith made substantial expenditures or incurred substantial binding
obligations in reasonable reliance on the previously obtained planned
unit development or master plan approval, and
(c) Would be unreasonably prejudiced if development in accordance with the
previously approved development or plan is delayed due to the
provisions of this Section.
(2) In deciding whether these findings can be made, the Board of County Commissioners
shall consider the following, among other relevant factors:
(a) Whether the developer has installed streets, utilities, or other facilities or
expended substantial sums in the planning and preparation for
installation of such facilities which were designed to serve or to be paid
for in part by the development of portions of the planned unit
development or master planned project that have not yet been approved
for construction;
(b) Whether the developer has installed streets, utilities, or other facilities or
expended substantial sums in the planning and preparation for
installation of such facilities that directly benefit other properties outside
the development in question or the general public;
(c) Whether the developer has donated land to the School District for the
construction of school facilities or otherwise dedicated land or made
improvements deemed to benefit the School District and its public school
system;
(d) Whether the developer has had development approval for a substantial
amount of time and has in good faith worked to timely implement the
plan in reasonable reliance on the previously obtained approval;
(e) The duration of the delay that will occur until public school facilities are
improved or exist to such an extent that a CAPS can be issued for the
project, and the effect of such delay on the development and the
developer.
(3) The decision of the Board of County Commissioners involving a special exception
application under Section 6.19.8(C) is subject to review by the Orange County
Superior Court by proceedings in the nature of certiorari. Any petition for review
by the Superior Court shall be filed with the Clerk of Superior Court within 30
days after a written copy of the decision of the Board of County Commissioners
is delivered to the applicant and every other party who has filed a written request
for such copy with the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners at the time of
its hearing on the application for a special exception. The written copy of the
decision of the Board of County Commissioners may be delivered either by
personal service or by certified mail, return receipt requested.
33
6.19.9 Information Reauired From Applicants
(A) The applicant for a CAPS shall submit to the School District all information reasonably
deemed necessary by the School District to issue a CAPS under the provisions of the
MOu.
(B) An applicant for a CAPS special exception shall submit to the Board of County
Commissioners all information reasonably deemed necessary by the Board of County
Commissioners to determine whether a special exception should be granted as provided
in Section 6.19.8(C).
(C) A copy of a request for a CAPS special exception shall be served on the superintendent of
the School District. Service may be made by personal deliver/ or certified mail, return
receipt requested.
(A) The .JiGant far a CADS MAi..h 06 denied by +he C..hnnl Di StFi..+ M within 39 days
of the .fete of the de..ial al the dpnmel to the Rveo rnissioners J `. ..`. w
(B) The appeal shall be heaFd by the Board Of COURty Gem misr-in-Rens at ;;-.n evideRtiary hearing
CADC ;;nrl the v.d.Je....e it relie.J a R de...d.... the CAPS. The a .JiGaRt appealing-t4&
denial R; preGent its r ;.ih y the CAPS a pliGa +in.. should have On 46 View, been
a 19 1n Inf4armation Required rm.. m App!mGant& Formatted: English (U.S.)
.Jvew.e.J .. by the C..heel r1i +ri.. + +., .Jv +e rw.i.,e whe ther a !'`ADC F;heWLJ he
Article 7: Subdivisions 34
Section 7.14: Specifications for Plat Drawings
This certification is not an Improvement Permit or an approval for septic
system on any of the lots. Subsequent changes to the lots may affect
the ability to obtain Improvement Permits and /or Construction
Authorizations."
S8GFetap Attest Date
SEAL
{#}(g) All certificates and endorsement signatures on the Final Plat, except
those of the County Manager, Planning Board Chair, Planning Director
and Environmental Health Officer shall be notarized by the statement of
a Notary Public entered on the Final Plat. The Notary Public statement
shall be shown in substantially the following form:
"North Carolina County
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing certificate. Witness my
hand and seal this day of , 20_
"Seal or Stamp Notary Public
My Commission expires
Certificate of Improvements
If the required improvements are completed prior to submission of
the Final Plat, then one of the following certific shall be shown on the
pt.�nd followed by the County Manager' ignature:
"The Cou anager hereby ce i i s that all improvements required by
the Orange CoGrAv Subdivi i Regulations have been installed as
specified by the a
Subdivision and
specificati .
Manager:
Preliminary Plat for
said i ovements comply with Orange County
s This provision, presented at the November 24, 2003 Quarterly Public Hearing and approved by the BOCC in
February 2004, was added based on a staff generated amendment in an attempt to ensure there was documentation
that a CAPS had been issued by the appropriate school system on the actual plat. There is no requirement within
SAPFO or the MOU's relating to the issuance of CAPS requiring the `school system' to sign plats indicating same.
From our standpoint it is not necessary given the fact there is a CAPS certificate issued by the appropriate school
system. It should be noted the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro do not require the school system to sign a plat.
From our standpoint this is not a necessary requirement and only serves to delay and unnecessarily complicate the
recordation process.
Orange County, North Carolina — Unified Development Ordinance Page 7 -72