HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD-2000-130 Amendments to Orange County Private Road Standards Subdivision Regulations cv,
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSISONERS
AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 15, 2000
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Amendment to Orange County Private Road Standards
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Proposed Amendments to the Orange County Karen Lincoln Ext. 2594
SubdAdsion Regulations Craig Benedict Ext. 2592
2. Draft February 28, 2000 Public Hearing Minutes. TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
3. April 5, 2000 Planning Board Minutes.
4. May 4, 2000 Planning Board Minutes Hillsborough 732-8181
5. Ordinance Amending Subdivision Regulations Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane (336)227-2031
PURPOSE: To decide on proposed amendments to the Orange County SubdAdsim Regina dons,regarding
private roads(Section IV-B 3-d—1 and APPENDIX A ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS).
BACKGROUND:
Request Orange County Administration and Planning staff propose changes to Secfion
IV-B-3-d-1 and Appendix A ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS t7.
• clarify criteria for private road justification;
• reduce to 10 (from 25) the maximum number of lots allowed on a private road;
• delete the provision for a Class C Private Road; and
• require that a NC Professional Engineer approve the construction of the private
road in accordance with sound engineering practices (delete provision allowing a
Professional Surveyor to certify private road construction).
Location The amendments, if adopted, will apply to the entirety of Orange County lying outside
the municipalities and their extra-territorial jurisdictions and the Chapel Hill and Carrboro Joint
Planning Transition Areas.
Existing and Proposed Conditions
Existing: Section IV-B 3-d-1
• Seven criteria "considered" for justification of private roads;
among those criteria,
• provision of"significantly greater" (than required by ordinance):
o lot sizes and building setbacks;
o dedication or preservation of recreation, open space containing significant sites;
o in a protected watershed, increased stream buffers & reduced Impervious surface.
2
Existing and Proposed Conditions (cont.)
Existing: Appendix A. Private Road Standards
• 1 to 3 lots or du allowed on a Class C Private Road (8 ft. travelway).
• 4 to 9 lots or du allowed on a Class B Private Road (12 ft. travelway).
• 10 to 25 lots or du allowed on a Class A Private Road (18 ft. travelway).
• > 25 lots allowed on private road if road is built to NCDOT standards.
• Professional engineer or surveyor certification of road construction.
Proposed: Section N-B 3-d—1
• Criterion 1.a (increased lot size) and at least two other criteria must be met to justify a
private road; no private road justification needed for minor subdivisions of 3 lots or less;
• minimum lot size:
zoning district min. lot size for
min. lot size private road
40,000 s . ft. or less 80,000 s . ft.
87,120 s . ft. 2 ac. 130,680 s .ft. 3 ac.
87,120 s . ft. —flexible development 87,120 s . ft. 2 acres
All other cases 1 5 acres
• building setbacks (all districts) at least twice those required by Zoning Ordinance.
• 50% dedication of land if containing sites referenced in "An Inventory of Sites of Cultural.
Historic, Recreational,_ Biological, and Geological Significance in the Unincorporated
Portions of Orange County",
• within protected watersheds:
stream buffers increased 25%.
Impervious surface decreased by 15%.
Proposed: Appendix A. Private Road Standards
• Class B Private Road (12 ft. travelway) required for 1 to 5 lots (Minor Subdivisions) or
dwelling units.
• Class A Private Road (18 ft. travelway) required for 6- to 10-lot Major Subdivisions (or
dwelling units).
• No exception for>10 lots on private road.
• Professional engineer certification of road construction.
Implications
Pros: . Long-term reduced maintenance costs for citizens;
• Better planning for long-term development of property (discourages "piece-meal"
development);
• Investment in better infrastructure for future subdivision;
• Better response time for emergency access.
Cons: . Minor increases in costs for minor subdivision development;
Development Process Schedule and Action
• Public Hearing February 28, 2000: Major comments:
o No flexibility for private roads to protect natural resources or rural character; and
o Cost of private road certification will increase for small subdividers.
The Board of County Commissioners referred the proposed amendments to the Planning Board
to return a recommendation no sooner than May 3, 2000.
First Action: Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board considered 3
amendments and revisions based on comment from the February 28, 2000, Public Hearing and
recommended further revisions be made and brought back to the May 4, 2000, Planning Board
meeting:
o Delete provision allowing exceptions for more than 10 lots on a private road;
o Firm language dealing with private road justification to more specific criteria; and
o Delete provision requiring paved private roads to meet NCDOT standards for paving.
May 4, 2000, the Planning Board voted five (5) to three (3) to approve the amendments. Board
members voting against the amendments cited their disapproval of the provision requiring
greater building setbacks in order to justify having a private road.
• Final Action: Board of Commissioners to consider amendments to the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION(S) Planning Board Recommendation: Approval of the proposed
amendments as given in the attached document.
Administration Recommendation: Approval of the proposed amendments as given in the
attached document.
I
I PR
OPpgEO AMENpMENT
Text Proposed S To SUBp/V 1 SI pN RE'
sed to be delete GV�ATI pNs
Amend orange Count d is printed in bell
g%ENO Y Sub'yivision Regulations format.THE PR►VgTE ROAD JU ° Section text proposed to be ,
sTiFic n IV_g-3-d-� inserted Is 4
1 %-Ounr ATION SECTION TO Rom as foNo printed in b-°d underlined
Cf C°un y CO roads may be a READ AS F ws: erlined format
missio flow or.�pWS. rmat
omprehensive pla Hers, it is allowed In a subdivisio
Plan are found that the n where
A rivate h that private nature and , In the Judgment of t
S
a road is ' d location he Plan I'll more road Justifie , of the sub Wing Board
' ranted for @e ots b In eemeq •ustifie division and
d for with res with the a
number of a oN,an ad scent otsubdivis+o for sub Pect to other deVproval°f the
1'', an access to ns, a ny division r elopment and subdivision of °ints a�--.. access the ate access esultin in no the
re uire arcels a Ublic r a rivate ro easement Staff
menu for --_.of su -d The i a'd in order ma be would not oche mm+m u lot--- Cent aC -n#@/?#°f to This
re uire n+vise b s/2e or a e to this rovis o duce the prOVide for the -provision densi meat�._� e-�er►nitte a"-=a-a-per d1,v @llin me @t 2On+n n is t� w acres)a bdivision o f �°f private roads
1 d
re uire a. as follows tl cause he su _ $unit ordinance )into small for:
s stem• ment for and when the subdivisio where r►vate we mini
dD e For an•-- -.--a ubli_ _-,._a the n ca a oa allo din 3 lots o f +nu Mess than 7
ufient to other use road to subdivision 1 co I d 21ots °f district;and 2)
be r @C- fi lot size
funher''�-- orded of this rovi aces te d _would not with district fo minimum sub
dey@lo with the sio ►nto the_ meet la lot si2e allowed of
rocegsed as meat o f an heal 1 n, the fnah to m n i fa Y Members for wed i
a ma• resultin a# shall con# . tat and i � mil mbers 0arac t o f n
i °r subdivision lots � example,
MCludin a/n a Sts e a se arate .Hole, for
meet Hers),
a,pare,—r=t, sha/tan pr��e ant: Provisions f .
j
Board a.p ---b8 The or •to are not s or Justifying
dinance do pacific eno
and the Board�sid that c Ugh.
subdivns -i an +neasu a not give standards
cOnsid @r the l ' '`• compliance to the s�which of Co Por all other sue
un of sta ffand /eaves
rivate roa followinl d staff in f°mm►ssioners sUbd/visions th de bJec#ive
ds•n sub-_' es+ n featu he case of /n the case—�.Pl�nnl Response: Staffsionmakers,JudBement
s bdivision divisions r @s wh /t2inor of Ma'or reinforce priv proposes to
wW. __meets standar f a Minimum @n deterntMin subdivisions re ate r°a clan
j d s °f 1.a and a rivate r-- whether shall quirements d justification fy and
�---a-�ast tiro oadma�be --tO erm+t as follows•
' Other deli n features d'-��f tfi
stores listed
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
5
1 The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through:
a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines significantly greater than required by the underlying zoning
district including any overlay district requirements according to the following standards
• For zoning districts having a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet or less, all lots In the subdivision
must be at least 80,000 square feet:
• For zoning districts having a minimum lot size or per dwelling unit area requirement of 87,122 square eet (two acres), all lots must be at least 130,630 S 1MI feet except
for subdivisions
developed as flexible development subdivisions;
• For clustered subdivisions developed as flexible development subdivisions preservincl at least 33%
of the land in o n s ace, in a zoning district h ving a minimum -lot size or peill"', dwellin unit area
requirement of 87,120 sal,111111re feet (two acres) or !greater, all lots must be at least 87,120 square feet
(two acres) and the over illllR!2��
s -uare feet(three acre-1- lion must not exceed one dwellin unit or 430,680
• For all other cases, all lots must be at least five acres. SoGn
et"Affd is as GY siGns-----GenqA#anee-wdh_tJws
*31
1eF0___4 Stlbl".. pr-evid a
in-uni Fequired let'si �0_;W12_ —, - -.-..-e
WWIN....N%gffTT-TIGMIWivd4et-size.i:il��j ,j:j!I
W_W1 eaeh4GWff4ho
lot SJXA _"e""w"4hemWW"""uwed
• I OF e*ample, if the _ lot G -a"eam
fGUF aGFGS, eeffiplia"-- "- assuFed; andie mtakw
• Building setbacks in all districts must be at least twice those required by Orange County Zoning
Ordinance.
b. The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the
subdivision from public roads, 'maintain a wooded or forested character, maintain scenic views, or preserve
wildlife, botanical, historic, archaeological and/or recreation sites; and/or
C. The preservation of site features which directly enhance the special or unique cultural, historical, archaeological
or biological characteristics of the immediate area as referenced in "An Inventory of Sites of Cultural,
Historic, Recreational, Biological, and Geological S I
1i nificance in the Unicorporated Portions of Oran e
County}} or . for historic sites, if the site is deemed eligible by the State Historic Preservation Office for
inclusion in the Natronal Re aster of Historic Places.
2. The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State
standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirements.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
6
3. At least fifty percent (50%) of the site is to be dedicated and/eF preserved throuh
contains Rrecreation and/or open space areas-, . - R9 of g restrictive covenants and significant botanical, Be, historic
and/or archaeological sites as referenced in "An Inventory of Sites of Cultdral, Historic-, Recreational, iological,
and Geol•olCad Significance in the Unincorporated Portions 18! S.-
ns of Orange , aFe-te
even ants �C
r-11,1111 11.1k
4. nifli ew
b fe
paw e" In sSubdivisions to be located In a Protected Watershed as designated thosetre ran County
Comprehensi'vePlan, stream buffersare increased bv twenty-five erce r2510 I I 6.23 of the Orangijj� above quireg by Article
.the..............
11 ounty ZonI`i`ii`i`:l Ordinance and ................impervious surface allowed is decrease,,d by fifteen
ercent 15% to lei duse
a amou 4 el 1M.—
runoff to prevent the Pollution of water supply reservoirs. eause _allow jrea�ter infiltration of storm water
5. The site contains T-t9pographic and environmental features, such as streams, steep slopes, or waters
adversely affected ds, that would be
y e of roads constructed to State standards because of factors such as significant amounts of
ccied b-the-use
(cut and fill)that would contribute to increased run-off of stormwater and siltation.
6. The site is already developed to 100% of the capacity which could be achieved after approval of the subdivision and some
or all of the non-conforming aspects of existing development on the site will be made more conforming as a result of the
proposed subdivision, and all conforming aspects of the development will remain conforming.
I I orm
7. There is only one subdivision road proposed. Its length does not exceed 350', it serves no more than five (5) lots, its grade
does not exceed 9%, and the land being subdivided is not connected to or part of another subdivision required to be served
by public roads. sqtaFe4eet-.
Ol
i
i'ROPpSEp AMENDMENTS To SV BD/U1 SI p
(Text proposed to be del N REGUt-ATI p
Amehd deleted is printed in NS
Or Count
Y Subdivision Rego!
at'ons, APPEND format; text proposed t°
AMEND THE
FOURTH iX A pRA be .
The Standards ' D FIFTH H P E inserted is prints 7
sub s AR,q��, NG COUNTY PRI UA d+n bo/d
d'visions ins pecificatio HS tN THE underline
required d6 in Orange County s far Private Road, apply Require ATE ROAD STANDAR p d f°rrnatI
A on the nu r and the ads apply to +Hants SECTioN To S as follows
Class B road mbar of lots se Class READ AS F
Of ro Comma o<<o
a Class A oad styes —4. tog rV ed by the road a si merit: The regulations Ws:
' s-n to
o 1p lot or dwe►►in property that ant natural resource ns do not allow
9 units might b han for fle
s
or Wellin 0 and road; regu/atio or rural xibillty to
• 9 units. private road ns should alloed by having characteristic Protect
mal°r(five or All w for More gt private vs• of a
Board Private Response. han �� public
Subdivision°f Corn lots) subdiv- R roes ot
on Can missioners quire the ads in a roads.
Pr/v Rural ch s °n a
and be r Befor a a ate aracter
approved ecorded, the a the final approval of attractive private roads are ors not Presery
ins#cost 0 recorded the a Private Road plat of the Cooperation of ndards as flan not Maintained through
With the pplicant must be pro all land n'a/rate ntaine Private
the Cast of c°nst County in must post built kept The C Owners nance • d to safe ate
intended #o serve Ong the roads amount that wo security pt clear o f °ncern /s using the is depe fe and
constructed lots or C►ass s uld cover distance obstac/es that the road for acc ndent on
ruC#ed to dwelling units B Private Road area ) and that (lncludin public access to their
Inspected
Orange before recorange Count are not re u ads rr�i of land to Public rOa g vegetati '°f'waY
lotion of Y Standards g fired to n'rr,um ti be clears d Construction that b/o must be
built to these recO the final private roa S 00t Cks sight
acres standamends that these CI plat. or to be and $�'ft') right. rivals road squires a greater
s, especially standards in order ass C g o°wever, adequate drains sub f way is °nstructio star
the clearanceS Y for emergency to provide ade u be rights„°f`wa ge and grade division road required fo n• A
and turn areas shot vehicle qua#e Y for both r oth
s whir Comment. h the amount s• TO Provide
b
wn on the specii nsire De roads types o f roads is bas rid cleared d for
ation that pers rally the Within
°f existing ame.
substantial,The ac Sf re lots may� 9 Subdivisions s -
tantiaii to u
Res Y increase the C°Sdt a oaddfo od without upave an
inade°rase' These amend °the small developer. o /o s may
piace•quacY of eXistin9 roads are irate
s whe intend to
n future Subdivision division takes
NJ
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS 8
Private road construction must be inspected and the Comment: The cost for professional engineer
construction certified in writing to the Orange County Planning certification of private road construction may create a
Department by a North Carolina Professional Engineer OF a—Neah hardship to the small (family) subdivider.
Carolina Register-ed Land SuFveye . Also, the location of the
travelway within the right-of-way must be certified to be within the Response: A surveyor's professional certification does
platted private road right-of-way. The road must be inspected during not require knowledge of engineering standards for
construction so that any changes or improvements necessary to insure roads. A Professional Engineer can certify road
approval can be made before the stone,is placed and the shoulders construction using recycled roadbed materials. If
and ditches are seeded and mulched. In order for this to happen, the engineering certification is not required, then the Board
subdivider or representative must inform the professional making the should amend the ordinance to limit private road
certification prior to the start of construction and at intervals during standards to only those standards that can be certified
construction when inspections are needed so that they can be by the certifying agency.
scheduled.
NOTE: The cost of the professional engineer
certification depends more on how well the road has
been constructed and the quality of the road plans than
on the length or type of road that is being built. The
cost is related to the number of times that an engineer
must inspect the road; therefore, if the road does not
meet standards, the engineer must inspect the road a
second (or third) time to see that the deficiency/ies
has/have been corrected. Road inspection fees range
from $500 to $1,500 for most minor subdivisions. Road
inspections for larger projects (10 lot subdivisions)
may run from $1,000 (with good design specifications)
to $2,000. If the same firm designs and constructs the
road, the firm will certify its work, and the road
inspection certification would be included in the
construction costs.
00
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS To SUBDI
AmEtqI ITEM 9 VISION REGULATION
UN')ER THE GENERAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND PRIVATE
GENERAL Sue ............
............ -1111111111
-..........
9. u 1 V I'S"I ON APPROVAL AND PR/VATE ROAD.........."............. ONS 9
Have a Professio a .. . ........ ........................
I.111,iliiW -1111''1 111111111''. 1 1..... ........................... ..... A
construction M In I engineer III ".'1 1 I 'll 11 l. 11111,CONSTRUC7-1OAI ISE 7`RUCTION
the right_Of W.meets the ro fired QUENCE
Y in FOLLO
it WS
n
wilting hePlann an that travel certify that
ing an way is A
AMEND d In in NI .I
S-TANDARDS Ins Departrn with* the registered land surveyor M
ent. travelway is
TA 'SurveYorfs within the ay certify that
QARD,S-1-zOR knowledge Professional right-of.
........... OA certification way, but a
TE R
A
FOR PRIVA rE ROADS Certification Of Con Of engine
P PRIVATE do', not require
The 7'0 RIEAD AS FOLLOWS: er'ng standards for roads.
RR 11 xV/AA
re standards described herej
responsible for determining n are the M- -
meet NCDOT that these mini
criteria. No road . standards are set forth by the Counll Certification Of Constnjc will be accepted for maintenance or appropriate f . Orang-
tion Intenance or Vw Count
les uses by landowners
A pro by NCDOT un Y has not determine
Professional engineer s Or until N ' astand d, and is not
eXisting, CDOT standa- rds also and certi upgraded, or n% 'F�ruct" ids re met.
fled: VIY constructed May not
must c
ucted meet standards certify
the t, s the stan in writing to the Planning Depart ent that a Private 2. the p avelway is Within the platted Hght_ Of the required class for the
3. loper material has be subdivision. M v
theshOulders are the en Of-way; (this The following ate 'load either
4. used in the tra
id WWI and it is built to must be ins'
Prop Pected
ditches are correct w th and the
5 the road is on the er grade; i criteria May be certified by a
6. in place where the requ-
needed storm - necessary typical cross section is in Place; 'red Widt registered Ia.
sound en I 1� - Pipes of Proper s- to Provide adequate h and thickness;
7• 911 disZ. fineerin IZe,
111 disturbed :--�"Iractice. Materials and drainage, in
8. areas a
the required are in accordance
quate turn
d; With sOund en ineerin •
9. an are uire road sign propel stabilized; Place and energy diss' a
e sign is in Place;
10. required -around dissipaters insta
11. propeF vertical Is in Place ractice,
and horizontal at the end Of the road, It d, in accOrd
sight distance and cons clearance is Provided;and
truction at the intersection with a Public road has been a
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
AMEND THE FIRST PARAGRApij 10
Surface Mat OF$TANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ADS
Surface Materials
TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
AMEND
A4 7STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS Minimum
CUrvee radius of less Radius
ess than 125 feet ma (SECOND PARAGRApH,
9. Y be approved ITEM 4) TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
The road if all Of the following conditions are met:
2. existed Prior to the adoption Of subdivision reg 1
required andlor the - r0a pp
inability to reco f
structures, wells or septic systems; -n Igure the t feasible due to the extent Of earthwork
Reconstruction Of the existing d to meet a 125,curve regulations or was a s Part Of an earlier subdivision;
ms; radius is no
3^ existing right-of-
would be
Standards Pertaining to road way location due to Ownership or the location Of existing
4• The width and grade Will be met, which
subdivision can be approved With a
5* Documentation is received from the Clas Erosion -(W Class 13 Private road;
s C
6. vehicular access and circulation; Control Division that the Proposed curve radius would provide equate
Documentation is received from the Department Of Emerg
Provide access for the largest emergency Vehicle, which would ency Serroa ices
Id Use the d stating that the I P Posed curve radius would
Approved May 3, 2000
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
February 28,2000
The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board met on Monday,
February 28, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. in the Judge Gordon F. Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr. and Commissioners Margaret W.
Brown,Alice M. Gordon, Stephen H. Halkiotis, and Barry Jacobs
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Karen Barrows and members Barry Katz, Howard
McAdams, Theresa Nicole Gooding-Ray, Onie Lea, Lynne Holtkamp, Runyon Woods, Rachel Preston, Leo
Allison, James Selkirk, and Robert Strayhorn
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Planning Director Craig Benedict
and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe(all other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ALL RECORDINGS OF THE MEETING WILL BE
KEPT FOR 5 YEARS.
A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR
Chair Carey welcomed everyone t9 the meeting. He said that Planning Board Chair Karen Barrows
would be introducing each item on the agenda.
B. PUBLIC CHARGE
Chair Carey dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. Oran-go County Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments
Planning Director Craig Benedict said that these items have been proposed by the staff based
on Board of County Commissioners'goals and Planning Board discussions over the last six months. He said
that at every quarterly public hearing additional steps would be taken for the preparation of the County's
comprehensive plan by bringing forth regulations that go with the comprehensive plan. He said that tonight's
public hearing would address two general areas: subdivision regulations and transportation issues of the
comprehensive plan. He said that the staff is in the process of creating a unified land development code so
that ail of the information about zoning, subdivisions, and economic development districts will be in one book.
a. Section III-B,Classlflcation of Subdivisions
b. Section fill-D-1 Concept Plan Approval in all Zoning Districts Except the Rural Buffer.
c. Section 111-0-2 Concept Plan Approval in the Rural Buffer.
d. (non-Vehicular Access).
e. Section 11 DEFINITIONS.
f.
Appendix A Orange County Private Road Standards
Craig Benedict made reference to private road standards and said that the staff is suggesting a
decrease in the amount of lots that are allowed on a private road from a 25-lot maximum to a 10-lot
maximum. He described the negative things that have occurred as a result of the 25-lot maximum regulation
for private roads.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to the Orange County private road standards and asked
what would happen to existing private roads if someone wanted to put a house on an existing lot or split the
lot into two lots.
Craig Benedict said that each of the subdivisions that have private road standards has
something in their homeowner's association documents that address additional lots being subdivided on the
road. In some cases, the cost is borne by the subdivision.
12
Geoffrey Gledhill said that the upgrade of the road ha required toservice the new subdivided lots.
Once the upgrade is done, then all of the lots in the subdivision are jointly responsible for maintaining the
road to the upgraded standard.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the-18-foot travel way and asked if that included the
swells orif|t was just the actual road surface.
Craig Benedict said that 18 feet was just the actual road surface and that the impermeability that
comes forward from both public and private roads still is counted as the entire roadway. After the swell goes
up to the 50-foot area, then there is a certain amount of impervious that would be counted in the remaining
50 feet.
Commissioner Jacobs asked ifit was the same amount of shoulder that must bacleared
regardless of whether itioa public or private road.
Craig Benedict said that typically there is the surface course, a four-foot swell down and a four-
foot swell up and then whatever can be preserved after that.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference b»page 13 and read the first paragraph which says,
"Private roads serving more than 10 lots or dwelling units may be permitted only if constructed to NCDOT
public road standards,"and said that this contradicts everything which has gone before it.
Craig Benedict said that this statement could bedeleted.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to Class A versus Class B private roads and asked if the
staff has looked into the cost of hiring o professional engineer.
Craig Benedict said that the staff has checked into the costs for engineers and the determination
of one road over the other is negligible in cost because it is the engineers time to go out and see if the road
meets the standards. He said that one of the most important things is if the County is going to continue to
have private roadways, the hazards of living on a private road should be reduced as much as possible by
having the road certified hn the standards. He said that drainage io the key for private roads, and that is
where the biggest failing is.
Commissioner Jacobs said that DOT had set up a committee to work on subdivision standards
and he is concerned that the County is locking themselves in and not allowing any flexibility. He is
concerned that there would be no allowance if there were some significant natural resource or rural
characteristic nfthe property that might be enhanced by having a private road om opposed toopub|icroad.
He questions eliminating flexibility in the concept plan amendments. He would prefer that the plan ba
presented for comment to the Planning Board and the County Commissioners before the staff makes a
ruling.
Craig Benedict said that some of the language could be changed to allow for some flexibility.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he would like to have incentives for people to do things the way
the County would want them to, not making i%aa a right, but a privilege.
Commissioner Brown asked if the Planning staff could specify the reasons for modifications of
the regulations.
Craig Benedict said that a checklist could be implemented and reviewed to be sure the private
road standards meet the goals of the Boaod'of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Brown said that she would like the consumer, the one buying the lots, to be
protected bv the quality of road that io being constructed. She asked for more information on the process pf
getting an engineer hm evaluate the road standards and Craig Benedict described this process.
Chair Carey asked if there were some procedural problems if the processfor the concept plan is
changed and the County Commissioners approve the concept plan.
Geoffrey Gledhill said that it is not uncommon in administrative law to do this kind of process.
He thinks the objective of the Planning staff is to move non-advisory functions of the Planning Board to the
County Commissioners.
Chair Carey said that he feels that the Planning Board staff should review the project andnotthe
Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to the private road justification and asked if there is
something along that line for emiebn ado. She said that this regulation could result ina loss of trees which
would not be the best thing for the County.
Craig Benedict said that he would work with the Attorney on language to address the issue for
existing roads.
Commissioner Ha|hiptissaid that he fails to see anything wonderful about roads that are gravel
where everything ie covered with dust. He asked if there was any County staff that could certify the roads oa
meeting state standards.
Craig Benedict said that for private roads, there is not any qualified staff to certify the roads. He
said that DOT is now coming to the Development Review Committee on a biweekly basis to discuss the road
standards.
13
Chair Barrows made reference to the subdivision approval and said that it sounds like the
Planning Board is Uaklg eliminated at the concept stage, but would be brought i at the preliminary stage.
Craig Benedict said that the Planning Board would definitely ke brought inat the preliminary
stage.
Chair Barrows said that it seems like the Planning staff is taking charge of the plans and that it is
a big change from the current process.
Commissioner Gordon said that if the intent isho make the standards go precise that itisa
matter of determination only, it could beo good thing.
Commissioner Jacobs said that if something is missed in the concept plan stage and the first
time that any policy maker sees itimst the preliminary level, itis too late. He would like to see a policy-
minded body review the plan, either the Planning Board or Board of County Commissioners.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Scott Radvvoy said that he strongly supports going from two years bo ten years for the minor
subdivisions. He made reference to the 50-foot right of way and said that right now with any roadway width,
if no curbs are used, 42 to 47 feet have already been used when everything is counted. He said that the 58-
foot envelope ia pushed with the swell system. He made reference bm the process of the plan approval and
said that the County should be really careful in the language for this process. He explained the buy right
process.
Geoffrey Gledhill said that ha did not know whether this proposal would eliminate the buy right.
He said that right now the developer has the option of choosing either the flexible ur the conventional plan.
Commissioner Brown said that it was her perspective that the hope was bmQo more and more
toward flexible design standards.
Bob Strayhorn said that he is concerned about the process of waiting another ten years to
subdivide. He asked if there was a list of people who have benefited from minor subdivisions and not
abused them.
Craig Benedict said that the minor subdivision process would stil be available as long as it did
not.amcead five lots ina ten-year period. He said that about 38%of the lots that are subdivided inOrange
County are minor subdivisions.
MOTION
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to refer the
proposed amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of
Commissioners no sooner than May 3.2O00.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
2 MINUTES
3 APRIL 5,2000
4
5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Leo Allison(Chair),Karen Barrows,Nicole Gooding-Ray,Crauford
6 Goodwin, Barry Katz,Howard McAdams,Jr., Rachel Preston,James
7 Selkirk,Bob Strayhorn,and Runyon Woods
8
9 MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Holtkamp, Onie Lea(excused)
10
11 STAFF PRESENT: Craig N.Benedict(Planning Director),Planners Robert Davis and Eddie
12 Kirk,Christina Moon, Karen Lincoln,and Administrative Assistant
13 Joanna Bradshaw
14
15 AGENDA ITEM#1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
16
17 Chair Allison called the meeting to order.
18
19 AGENDA ITEM#2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
20
21 There were no additions to the agenda.
22
23 AGENDA ITEM#3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES-March 1,2000
24
25 MOTION: Strayhorn moved approval of the March 1,2000 Orange County Planning Board
26 minutes. Seconded by Barrows.
27
28
29
30 a. Orange County Private Road Standards
31
32 Lincoln made the presentation. The proposal is to reduce the maximum number of lots allowed on private
33 roads. Currently,the maximum number of lots allowed on a private road is 25, and the staff would like to
34 reduce it to ten. There are three classifications of private roads-C has one to three lots,B has four to
35 nine lots,and anything over ten is A. The staff is doing away with class C,and is proposing that class B
36 have one to five lots. The staff is also proposing to lower the travel way width from 12 feet to ten feet.
37 Class A would have six to ten lots and would be an 18-foot travel way. More than ten lots would be
38 allowed on the private road if some natural resource or rural characteristic was enhanced.
39
40 Barrows asked whom the developer would go to in order to contest the ruling. Lincoln said that the
41 developer would go to the boards.
42
43 Benedict said that the maximum number of lots on a private road has been addressed clearly in the rural
44 preservation standards. The approval process would be the same as it is currently. He said that after ten
45 lots on a private road,there would have to be some significant natural feature enhanced by the private
46 road to allow any additional lots.
47
48 Strayhorn said that he does not totally agree with making exceptions.
49
50 Lincoln read the list of exceptions for justifying a private road with more than 10 lots.
51
52 Allison also has a problem with making exceptions and reducing the travel way for a class B road.
15
2 Barrows made reference to page 110 and the surface materials on a private road and asked why the paving
3 Would make a difference if it was a private road,
4
5 The Board agreed that the portion about surface materials of private roads would be deleted.
6
7 MOTION: Strayhom moved to extend the meeting past 10:30. Seconded by Katz.
8
9 VOTE: Unanimous.
10
11 The Board agreed to leave the class B private roads at 12 feet.
12
13 Gooding-Ray clarified that the right-of-way of the class B private roads would remain the same.
14
15 Barrows noted that the document had "significantly greater",and suggested that the document list
16 amounts. Benedict suggested having a sliding scale for these amounts.
17
IS Gooding-Ray suggested asking the Planning staff to come back with all of the changes for the next
19 meeting.
20
21 The Board agreed to receive the changes from the Planning staff at the next meeting.
16
1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
2 MINUTES
3 MAY 4,2000
4
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Leo Allison(Chair), Rachel Preston,Bob Strayhorn, Crauford
7 Goodwin,Karen Barrows, Howard McAdams, James Selkirk,
8 Nicole Gooding-Ray
9
to MEMBERS ABSENT: Runyon Woods,Barry Katz, Lynne Holtkamp, Onie Lee - all
11 excused
12
13 STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Craig Benedict,Planners Robert Davis, Eddie
14 Kirk, and Jane Garrett,Tina Moon, and Administrative Assistant
15 Joanna Bradshaw
16
17 AGENDA ITEM#1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
18 Chair Allison called the meeting to order.
19
20 AGENDA ITEM#2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
21 None.
22
23 AGENDA ITEM#3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES -April 5, 2000
24
25 Barrows said that Lynne Holtkamp was absent from this meeting. The minutes indicated that she
26 was present. The correction was made.
27
28 Barrows clarified what she was trying to say on page 12, line 44 noting that she was asking who
29 the developers would go to if they wanted to contest the ruling by staff.
30
31 MOTION: Selkirk moved approval of the minutes for April 5, 2000 with the
32 corrections as stated above. Seconded by Strayhorn.
33
34 VOTE: Unanimous.
35
36 (These corrections have been made.)
37
38 ..
39
40 AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING(FEBRUARY 28,
41 2000)
42 ~ a. Orange County Private Road Standards
43
44 Karen Lincoln made the presentation. She said that the purpose of this item was for the board to
45 make its recommendations to the County Commissioners regarding proposed amendments to the
46 Orange County Subdivision Regulations concerning private roads. The amendments were
47 presented at public hearing in February and forwarded to the board. The Planning Board
48 reviewed them at its April meeting and made several comments and requested revisions. These
17
i revisions have been made and incorporated into the proposed amendments. One of the changes
2 presented at the Board's April meeting was that there must be increased lot size and at least two
3 of the criteria must be met in order to justify a private road. The Board had asked staff to revise
4 language in the ordinance provisions concerning private road justification by making the criteria
5 more specific. Criteria La,which requires significantly greater lot sizes and building setback
6 lines, now specifies minimum lot sizes of 80,000 square feet,three acres or five acres depending
7 on the minimum lot size of the zoning district with setbacks twice those required in each zoning
8 district.
9
10 Regarding the criteria that deals with significantly greater amounts of land of historical or
11 environmental significance, the language would be tightened to say, "At least fifty percent of the
12 site is to be dedicated and preserved through restrictive covenants as ref6renced in'An Inventory
13 of sites of Cultural,Historic,Recreational,Biological, and Geological Significance in the
14 Unincorporated Portions of Orange County"'.
15
16 Regarding criteria that deals with significantly greater stream buffers and reduced impervious
17 surface for private road subdivisions located in a protected watershed, the amendments propose
18 the stream buffers to be increased by 25%and impervious surface decreased by 15%. Another
ig revision that has not been previously presented is that no private road justification would be
20 required for minor subdivisions with three or less lots.
21
22 Discussion ensued about the person who wants to subdivide on Lebanon Church Road,
23
24 Benedict said that a private access easement is acceptable to access the adjacent lot, and this
25 language could be added in the ordinance.
26
27 The board agreed to put the language about the private access easement into the ordinance.
28
29 Strayhorn would prefer that the setback requirements not be increased. Chair Allison agrees that
30 the setbacks should not be increased.
31
32 Barrows said that she hopes these proposed amendments make things clearer in regards to
33 private roads.
34
35 MOTION: Gooding-Ray to accept the proposed amendments with the change
36 to the private road justification,and to add the language about
37 allowing the private access easement to access the adjacent lot.
38 Seconded by Selkirk.
39 The setback is still as recommended by the staff.
40
41 VOTE: Ayes, 5;Noes, 3 (McAdams, Selkirk, and Strayhorn-disagree
42 with setback increase)
43
44 Adjournment time being reached,the Chair asked for a motion to
45 extend the meeting to complete the agenda.
46
18
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORANGE COUNTY
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
SECTION IV-B-3-d-1. ROADS AND
APPENDIX A. ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY ORDAINS:
ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, SECTION IV-13-3-D-1. ROADS, BEGINNING THE
MIDDLE OF PAGE 30-a REGARDING JUSTIFICTION OF PRIVATE ROADS, IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
A private road shall be deemed justified for a minor subdivision resulting in no more than
three lots. In such subdivisions, a private access easement may be granted to allow an
adjacent lot to access the private road in order to reduce the number of access points on
a public road. The intent of this provision is to allow subdivision of parcels of sufficient
acreage to meet zoning ordinance requirements for minimum lot size or area per dwelling
unit where a private road would not otherwise be permitted because the subdivision
cannot comply with requirement 1. a. as follows and where the subdivision would not
meet the density requirement for a public road to be accepted into the state maintained
system. For any other use of this provision, the final plat and a separate document to be
recorded with the final plat shall contain a statement that any further development of any
resulting lots, including the parent tract, shall be processed as a major subdivision
For all other subdivisions the Planning Board and the Board of County Commissioners (in
the case of major subdivisions) and Planning staff(in the case of minor subdivisions) shall
consider the following design features when determining whether to permit private roads
in subdivisions. At a minimum, a private road may be justified if the subdivision meets
standards of 1.a and at least two other design features listed below.
1. The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves
the rural character of the County through:
a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines significantly
greater than required by the underlying zoning district according to
the following standards:
1) For zoning districts having a minimum lot size of 40,000 square
feet or less, all lots in the subdivision must be at least 80,000
square feet.
2) For zoning districts having a minimum lot size or per dwelling unit
area requirement of 87,120 square feet (two acres), all lots must
be at least 130,680 square feet (three acres) except for
subdivisions developed as flexible development subdivisions.
3) For clustered subdivisions developed as flexible development
subdivisions preserving at least 33% of the land in open space,
in a zoning district having a minimum lot size or per dwelling
unit area requirement of 87,120 square feet (two acres) or
greater, all lots must be at least 87,120 square feet (two acres)
and the overall density of the subdivision must not exceed one
dwelling unit per 130,680 square feet (three acres).
19
4) For all other cases, all lots must be at least five acres.
5) Building setbacks in all districts must be at least twice those
required by Orange County Zoning Ordinance.
b. The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering
of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public
roads, maintain a wooded or forested character, maintain scenic
views, or preserve wildlife, botanical, historic, archaeological and/or
recreation sites; and/or
C. The preservation of site features which directly enhance the special
or unique cultural, historical, archaeological or biological
characteristics of the immediate area as referenced in "An Inventory
of Sites of Cultural, Historic, Recreational, Biological, and Geological
Significance in the Unicorporated Portions of Orange County" or , for
historic sites, if the site is deemed eligible by the State Historic
Preservation Office for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
2. The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are
such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be
accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State
requirements.
3. At least fifty percent (50%) of the site is to be dedicated and preserved
through restrictive covenants and contains recreation and/or open space
areas of significant botanical, wildlife, historic and/or archaeological sites as
referenced in "An Inventory of Sites of Cultural, Historic, Recreational,
Biological, and Geological Significance in the Unincorporated Portions of
Orange County"
4. In subdivisions to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated in the
Orange County Comprehensive Plan, stream buffers are increased by
twenty-five percent (25%) above those required by Article 6.23 of the
Orange County Zoning Ordinance and the impervious surface allowed is
decreased by fifteen percent (15) to allow greater infiltration of storm water
runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs.
5. The site contains topographic and environmental features, such as streams,
steep slopes, or watersheds, that would be adversely affected by the use of
roads constructed to State standards because of factors such as significant
amounts of earthwork (cut and fill)that would contribute to increased run-off
of stormwater and siltation.
6. The site is already developed to 100% of the capacity which could be
achieved after approval of the subdivision and some or all of the non-
conforming aspects of existing development on the site will be made more
conforming as a result of the proposed subdivision, and all conforming
20
aspects of the development will remain conforming.
7. There is only one subdivision road proposed. Its length does not exceed
350', it serves no more than five (5) lots, its grade does not exceed 9%, and
the land being subdivided is not connected to or part of another subdivision
required to be served by public roads.
21
ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, APPENDIX A ORANGE COUNTY
PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS, IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF LOTS
ALLOWED ON A PRIVATE ROAD FROM 25 TO 10; TO DELETE THE PROVISION FOR A CLASS C
PRIVATE ROAD; AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION FOR PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR TO
CERTIFY ROAD CONSTRUCTION.
THE FOURTH AND FIFTH PARAGRAPHS IN THE SECTION TITLED GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ARE
AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
The standards and specifications for Private Roads apply to subdivisions in
Orange County and the class of road required depends on the number of lots served by
the road. A Class B road serves 1 to 5 lots or dwelling units, and a Class A road serves
6 to 10 lots or dwelling units. All Private Roads in a major (five or more lots) subdivision
require the approval of the Board of Commissioners. Before the final plat of the
subdivision can be recorded, the Private Road must be built and approved, or the
applicant must post a security instrument with the County in an amount that would
cover the cost of constructing the road. Class B Private Roads intended to serve 2 lots
or dwelling units are not required to be constructed to Orange County Standards or to
be inspected before recordation of the final plat. However, Orange County
recommends that these Class B roads be built to these standards in order to provide
adequate access, especially for emergency vehicles which require the clearances and
turn areas shown on the specifications.
Private road construction must be inspected and the construction certified in
writing to the Orange County Planning Department by a North Carolina Professional
Engineer Also, the location of the travelway within the right-of-way must be certified to be
within the platted private road right-of-way. The road must be inspected during
construction so that any changes or improvements necessary to insure approval can be
made before the stone is placed and the shoulders and ditches are seeded and mulched.
In order for this to happen, the subdivider or representative must inform the professional
making the certification prior to the start of construction and at intervals during
construction when inspections are needed so that they can be scheduled.
ITEM 9 UNDER THE GENERAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND PRIVATE ROAD
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
GENERAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND PRIVATE ROAD CONSTRUCTION
SEQUENCE
9. Have a professional engineer certify that construction meets the required
standards and that travelway is within the right-of=way in writing to the Planning and
Inspections Department.
22
STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS, Certification of Construction SECTION IS AMENDED
TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS
The standards described herein are the minimum set forth by the County. Orange
County has not determined, and is not responsible for"determining that these standards
are adequate or appropriate for all uses by landowners. The standards also may not
meet NCDOT criteria. No road will be accepted for maintenance by NCDOT unless or
until NCDOT standards are met.
Certification of Construction
A professional engineer must certify in writing to the Planning Department that a
Private Road, either existing, upgraded, or newly constructed, meets the standards of the
required class for the subdivision. The following must be inspected and certified:
1. the travelway is within the platted right-of-way; (this criteria may be certified by a
registered land surveyor);
2. the proper material has been used in the travelway and it is built to the required
width and thickness;
3. the shoulders are the correct width and the typical cross section is in place;
4. the road is on the proper grade;
5. ditches are in place where necessary to provide adequate drainage, in accordance
with sound engineering practice;
6. needed storm pipes of proper size, materials and construction are in place and
energy dissipaters installed, in accordance with sound engineering practice;
7. all disturbed areas are properly stabilized;
8. the required road sign is in place;
9. an adequate turn-around is in place at the end of the road;
10. required vertical and horizontal clearance is provided; and
11. sight distance and construction at the intersection with a public road has been
approved by-NCDOT.
THE FIRST PARAGRAPH of STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS, Surface Materials,
REQUIRING THAT PAVED PRIVATE ROADS MEET NCDOT PAVING STANDARDS, IS DELETED.
STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS, Minimum Curve Radius (SECOND PARAGRAPH, ITEM
4) IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
A curve radius of less than 125 feet may be approved if all of the following
conditions are met:
1. The road existed prior to the adoption of subdivision regulations or was
approved as part of an earlier subdivision;
23
2. Reconstruction of the existing road to meet a 125' curve radius is not
feasible due to the extent of earthwork which would be required and/or the
inability to reconfigure the existing right-of-way location due to ownership or
the location of existing structures, wells or septic systems;
3. Standards pertaining to road width and grade will be met;
4. The subdivision can be approved with a Class B private road;
5. Documentation is received from the Erosion Control Division that the
proposed curve radius would provide for adequate vehicular access and
circulation;
6. Documentation is received from the Department of Emergency Services
stating that the proposed curve radius would provide access for the largest
emergency vehicle, which would use the road.
AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HELD
ON AUGUST 15, 2000, UPON MOTION BY AND
SECONDED BY THE FOREGOING DOCUMENT WAS ADOPTED.
AYES:
NAYS:
Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Date
Commissioner Jacobs asked for a definition of a type 'T buffer. Craig Benedict said that
this would be a 100-foot buffer with a small amount of vegetation.
Commissioner Jacobs would like more of an elaboration on the buffer types in the future.
Commissioner Jacobs asked about the cul-de-sac and whether this leaves the possibility
of extending to the property line from the cul-de-sac toward Whitfield Road. Craig Benedict said
that the properties to the north of the project were developed and there would be no need for a stub-
out to the north from this project.
A motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Brown to table this item
to the next meeting.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Staff will contact the County Commissioners to be sure all questions are answered
before the next meeting.
Im.. Orange County Stormwater Pro-gram for Lands within Neuse River Basin
The Board considered an ordinance designed to improve water quality in the Neuse
River basin and to comply with N.C. Administrative Code Section 15A NCAC 213-0235.
Commissioner Brown asked what this program meant. Craig Benedict explained that
North Carolina passed rules two years ago that every county and local jurisdiction would have to
develop their own rules that would handle any properties within the Neuse River Basin, which starts
in Orange County and goes to the coast. There are two parts of the program - rules that have to do
with subdivisions, and rules that have to do with farms. The Planning and inspections Department
will only be handling the rules that deal with subdivisions. The rules that have to do with farms are
handled by state agencies. He said that the staff has taken the state's model ordinance, made
some minor modifications to fit Orange County's profile, and tonight's action would be to transmit
this ordinance to the state for their review over the next two months. The state will send some
comments back to see if it conforms to their model. The Commissioners will be able to examine the
ordinance and then a formal ordinance will be passed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
adopt an ordinance designed to improve water quality in the Neuse River basin and to comply with
N. C. Administrative Code Section 15A NCAC 213.0235.
Commissioner Gordon asked if this ordinance would affect the land use planning. Craig
Benedict said that this ordinance would strengthen and support all stream buffer requirements.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
o. Acceptance of Buy Recycled Grant
The Board considered a formal grant in the amount of$4,500 from the N.C. Division of
Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance to promote the use and purchase of goods with
recycled content by local governments and other public agencies.
Commissioner Jacobs asked if this was an educational effort. it was answered that one
part of the grant would be educational and the other aspect would be some policies about buying
recycled products.
Commissioner Jacobs suggested including Mebane, the Animal Protection Society and
other organizations that are heavily funded by the County including the Research Triangle Regional
Partnership. He suggested asking staff to come back with a proposed resolution by the Board to
make it a formal policy to buy only recycled products. This will be brought back on August 30'h.
Commissioner Halkiotis said that he feels that a discussion between entities on bulk
purchasing needs to take place to reduce the cost of recycled products.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to
accept a grant in the amount of$4,500 from the N. C. Division of Pollution Prevention and
Environmental Assistance to promote the use and purchase of goods with recycled content by local
governments and other public agencies.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
9. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA