HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-19-1996 - 9a 1
ORANGECOUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 19. 1996
Action Agenda
Item#-9. Q,
SUBJECT: University Manor Phase II- Preliminary Plan
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes_x—No
BUDGET AMENDMENT Yes x No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
(Additional attachments and Preliminary Plan Mary Willis
included in 1114196 Commissioners agenda.) Extension 2583
Resolution of Approval TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Concept Plan(sketch) Hillsborough-732-8181
9/7/96 Draft Planning Board Minutes Durham -688-7331
11/4/97 Draft Public Hearing Minutes Mebane -227-2031
Comments from Recreation and Parks Director Chapel Hill-967-9251
Comments from Applicant re: Park Site
Comments from Environmental Health re: potential for individual wells
DEH Approval of Well Site
Well Permits from Environmental Health
PURPOSE: To consider the Preliminary Plan for University Manor Phase II.
BACKGROUND: On May 20, 1996 the Planning Board approved a four-phase revised/consolidated
Concept Plan for 595 acres in the Stoney Creek Basin, in the vicinity of NC 10,New
Hope Church Road and University Station Road. The Concept Plan,known as
University Manor, replaced six previously-approved Concept Plans. The previous
Concept Plans were consolidated because a single developer, Sanford Bailey, was
interested in the entire area.
The consolidated Concept Plan included a total of 281 residential lots,a 30-acre park
site to be dedicated to Orange County, and 167 acres to be preserved through
conservation easements. The total area encompassed by the Concept Plan is 595 acres.
The overall density of development is one dwelling unit per 2.12 acres.
2
Phase I (99 acres, 47 lots)received Preliminary Plan approval on December 19, 1995.
Phase I is generally bounded by NC 10, New Hope Church Road and Stoney Creek.
The applicant is preparing to submit the Final Plat. Grading for roads and installation
of a community water system is underway.
Phase II contains 118 acres and is located south of Rigsbee Road,west of University
Station Road and the Southern Railroad. It encompasses lots 13 and 13C,and a
portion of lot 12 of Tax Map 3, Chapel Hill Township. Sixty-one residential lots are
proposed. Two open space lots,each containing a site for a community well, are
proposed to be owned by the homeowners association.
The zoning district is R-1 Rural Residential and Lower Eno Protected Watershed. The
Land Use Plan designation is Rural Residential.
WASTEWATER DISPOSAL
Individual on-site septic systems are proposed. Environmental Health has indicated
that each of the proposed lots contain soils suitable for septic disposal.
WATER SUPPLY
A community water system is proposed. The Preliminary Plan shows the location of
two well easements. Both of the wells are located within common open space area to
be owned by the homeowners association.
Community wells are regulated by the Public Water Supply Section of the NC
Division of Environmental Health(DEH), which administers the NC "Rules
Governing Public Water Systems". These rules include regulations pertaining to both
surface water and groundwater withdrawals, and apply to all public water systems (e.g
Town of Hillsborough and OWASA), and to all community water systems with 15 or
more connections.
Procedural Requirements
Community wells must be operated by a private operator certified by the North
Carolina Water Treatment Facility Certification Board.
State and local procedural requirements related to community wells are summarized
below.
Prior to Preliminary Plan Approval
• Well sites must be approved by DEH, and a utility plan for the proposed
storage and distribution system must be prepared. Documentation from
DEH indicating approval of the well sites is attached. The Utility Plan was
included as an enclosure in the November 4, 1996 Commissioners agenda
packet.
3
Prior to Final Plan Approval
• The well must be drilled. Environmental Health inspects and approves the
well construction. A permit to drill the community wells for Phase II has
been issued by Environmental Health.
• After the wells are drilled, the water must be tested. DEH criteria relating
to water quality and quantity must be met. Requirements pertaining to water
quality include disinfection,bacteriological testing and chemical analysis.
With respect to water quantity,the combined yield of the well to be included
in the system during a 12-hour period must equal at least 400 gallons per
connection. The two wells must produce at least 18,800 gallons in 12 hours
for the proposed subdivision.
• If the well passes water quality and quantity tests, DEH must approve the
engineering plans for the water distribution and storage system.
• As required in the attached Resolution of Approval,the water system must
be constructed prior to Final Plat approval.
Documents Recorded With Final Plat
• Easements for the area within 100 feet of each well and for access to the
storage and distribution system must be granted to the private utility
company.
Alternatives in the Event of Community Well Failure
A major concern which has been expressed regarding the use of community wells is
the provision of water in the event of well failure in the future. There are several
means by which that situation could be addressed.
• The Resolution of Approval requires that the private utility would be granted the
right to drill replacement community wells in the common open space, in the
event of a failure. This requirement was included in the Resolution of Approval
for Phase I. Because changes in rock strata affect water supply, a replacement
well located only a short distance from the failing well may provide an adequate
safe yield
• Another option would be for individual wells to be drilled on the individual lots.
The attached memorandum from Environmental Health indicates that an individual
well could be sited at to comply with setback and separation requirements,
including a 100-foot septic systems, for each lot except lots 39 through 61.
Because the septic system in the area of those lots are sited avoid the use of pumps,
Y
4
only one-half of the lots could be served by wells located at least 100 feet from
septic systems. However, Health Rules allow for the separation between
individual wells and septic systems to be reduced to 50 feet. Most of the
remaining half of the lots should be able to accommodate a well and septic system
if that becomes necessary. Another option would be to relocate the septic systems
on the lots in question. However,relocation of the septic systems would require
the use of septic pumps. (See attached letter from Environmental Health Also,
the possibility exists for owners of adjoining properties to share wells through
private agreements.
• In the unlikely event that replacement community wells or individual wells were
not found to be adequate, public water lines could be extended in accordance with
the Water and Sewer Policy,which permits such extensions to serve emergency
situations.
COMMON OPEN SPACE
Approximately 7.9 acres within Phase II is designated as open space to be owned by
the homeowner's association. The open space area is contained in two separate areas,
as shown on the Preliminary Plan, each of which contains a community well site. The
area included in Phase II does not contain any of the wetland or floodplain areas
associated with Stoney Creek.
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
The Preliminary Plan indicates easements affecting lots 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17,
21,22, 23, 26, 27,28, 31 and 32. The Resolution of Approval requires that the
drainage easements be 30 feet in width. Additional drainage easements may be
required following review and approval of the Erosion Control Plan.
ROAD ACCESS
Beverstone Drive, which is proposed to intersect with the south side of Rigsbee Road
about 400 feet west of University Station Road,provides the main access through
Phases II and III, and will eventually connect with NC 10. The portion of Beverstone
Drive in Phase II also intersects with the western end of Rigsbee Road,providing an
additional means of access into the development.
Rigsbee Road is an existing State-maintained gravel road about .4 mile in length
which begins at the west side of University Station Road and dead-ends at the
northeast boundary of Phase II. According to the current priority list, the paving of
Rigsbee Road by the NC Department of Transportation(NCDOT) is anticipated
during fiscal year 1998-99. The priority list will be re-evaluated by NCDOT in the
Spring of 1997. The number of new lots approved on a road is one factor considered
in the re-evaluation,and could result in the road being paved sooner.
5
Access to all lots would be provided by new public subdivision roads. Comments
from NCDOT are attached. Most of the comments relate to road alignment and design,
and must be addressed by the applicant in order to receive approval of road design or
construction by NCDOT(which is required prior to recording a Final Plat). Where
applicable, recommendations are incorporated in the attached Resolution of Approval.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
A Traffic Impact Study may be required for Preliminary Plans which include 80 or
more lots. A Traffic Impact Study was not required for Phase I, which contains 45
lots, and was approved before the consolidation of the previous Concept Plans.
Summary recommendations of a study performed by Paul D Cribbins, P.E. for the
entire development area included in the consolidated Concept Plan are attached.
The traffic impact study recommendations include left turn lanes on NC 10, at
University Station Road,Beverstone Drive,New Hope Church Road and Old NC 86,
and on New Hope Church Road,at NC 10 and Chilmark Circle (Phase I).
The Planning Staff(Transportation Planner)recommended that left turn lanes also be
provided on University Station Road at Rigsbee Road, and on New Hope Church Road
at Westcott Court(Phase I). Construction of left turn lanes on University Station
Road at Rigsbee Road is included in the attached Resolution of Approval. The
remaining improvements will be recommended with the Preliminary Plans for Phases
III and IV. Also recommended was that some provision be made for pedestrianand
bicycle access on the main collector(Beverstone Drive)through Phases II and III.
This recommendation has been incorporated in the attached Resolution of Approval, as
a requirement that such access be incorporated into the design of Beverstone Drive.
A copy of the study was also sent to NCDOT,but no comments were received.
PARKLAND DEDICATION
On July 11, 1995, the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council (RPAC)received an
informational report from the Planning Staff concerning seven individual Concept
Plans which had been approved in the vicinity of NC 10,New Hope Church Road and
University Station Road. The Recreation and Parks Master Plan calls for a community
park in the vicinity of the project area. RPAC indicated general support for the
potential dedication of parkland in the area provided that it contain at least 25 "high
and dry" acres.
Dedication of a 30-acre park site on the north side of NC 10 at New Hope Church
Road was included in the consolidated Concept Plan. The proposed park site is
bounded on the north side by the Southern Railroad and on the south side by NC 10.
The depth of the lot ranges from a minimum of about 200 feet to a maximum of about
800 feet. The railroad track is located about 100 feet from the boundary of the site,
within a 200-foot right-of-way. A subdivision road which provides access to eight
lots between the railroad and Stoney Creek forms the eastern boundary of the park site,
6 ,
and could be used for access. To the east of the subdivision road is floodplain and
wetland area associated with Stoney Creek.
The attached letter form the Recreation and Parks Director indicates that the site could
be developed with all amenities suggested for the University Station Area Community
Park in the Master Recreation and Parks Plan.
The land slopes upward from NC 10 to the railroad. In an attached letter,the applicant
indicates that the slopes generally range from 6%to 8%. The slope at three
representative locations across the parcel were calculated by staff and are shown on the
attached topographic map.
Dedication of the park site more than satisfies all dedication or payment-in-lieu
requirements for the entire area included in the Concept Plan, as indicated in the tables
below
1!!II1�iI M PAR1Q AA"]l►ED1C. ATI4N REQUIRED
Minimum
Land Type Acres Percent of area No. lots Dedication
(based on Required
% area) per lot No.
acres
Floodplain, and 96 16.2 46 1/20 ac 2.3
Slopes> 15%
Other 499 83.8 235 1/57 ac 4.1
TOTAL 595 l{IQ°a� 2811 64
A� PAYNIENVE LIEU.OF.DED CATIaN
No. Lots Payment per Lot Total Payment
281 $422 $118, 582
COMMINATION DEDICATION/PAYMENT
6.4 acres X$10,000 credit per acre= $64,000
credit for dedication of minimum required area is less than payment-in-lieu requirement.
and payment of the difference
($54,582) would be required.
30 acres X$10,000 credit per acre=$300,000
credit for dedication of 30-acre site exceeds the payment-in-lieu requirement and no
additional payment is required.
7
Approximately 12 acres of the park site is proposed to be dedicated with the Final
Plat.for Phase II. This initial dedication satisfies dedication or payment-in-lieu
requirements for both Phase I and Phase II. The remaining 18 acres will be
dedicated proportionally with Phases III and IV. The Recreation and Parks
Advisory County (RPAC)recommends acceptance of the offer to dedicate 12
acres of the proposed park site with Phase II,anticipating that the remainder of the
30-acre site will be dedicated with Phases III and IV. (See attached memorandum
from Bob Jones, Recreation and Parks Director.)
COMMENTS FROM COUNTY ATTORNEY
Comments from the County Attorney are included in the November 4 agenda packet.
The issues mentioned are addressed on the Preliminary Plan(which has been revised)
and/or in the attached Resolution of Approval.
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board considered the Preliminary Plan on October 2, 1996, and
recommended approval by a 7-3 vote. Concerns expressed by some of the Planning
Board members included use and design of a community well system, and the
cumulative impacts of developing the entire area encompassed by the Concept Plan on
traffic, schools and groundwater. (See attached minutes.)
A traffic study for the entire Concept Plan area was submitted as part of the
subdivision application for Phase H Improvements applicable to Phase II
recommended in the Study, as well as those recommended by the Orange County
Transportation Planner, are included in the attached Resolution of Approval.
The fiscal impact analysis performed for Phase I indicates a positive net fiscal impact
of $43,640 in the estimated year of completion (1998). The fiscal impact analysis
performed for Phase II indicates a positive net fiscal impact of $68,231 in the
estimated year of completion (1998). School impact fees ($750 per residence))for
Phases I and II, based on the 108 lots included in the Preliminary Plans, will total
$81,000 upon buildout.
The Water Resources Committee is developing information regarding groundwater
quantity and quality in Orange County. An early step in this process, a pilot project
being undertaken with the U.S. Geological Survey, will produce generalized basin-by-
basin rates ofgroundwater recharge. Future steps will result in more focused
information. However, the ability to ultimately predict groundwater yield on a site-
by-site basis is not expected.
The two wells drilled for Phase 1(4 7 lots)produced yields of 58 gallons per minute
(gpm) and 18 gpm, at a depth of 500 feet and 540 feet respectively. The minimum well
yield required by the Division of Environmental Health is.56 gpm, or 25.2 gpm for a
47-lot development.
8
NOVEMBER 4, 1996 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
The Board of Commissioners considered the Preliminary Plan on November 4, 1996.
Additional information on the following issues was requested. Responses are
summarized below.
1. Appropriateness of proposed park site for a County recreational facility and
Plans of the Recreation and Parks Department for the possible use of the site.
The Recreation and Parks Advisory County (RPAC)recommends acceptance of
the offer to dedicate 12 acres of the proposed park site with Phase II, anticipating
that the remainder of the 30-acre site will be dedicated with Phases III and IV.
(See attached memorandum from Bob Jones, Recreation and Parks Director.)
2. Alternative areas which could be dedicated as a park site.
No alternative areas which could be dedicated by the applicant have been
identified within the boundaries of University Manor. The proposed park offers
the following advantages:
• The railroad,NC 10, and floodplain area of Stoney Creek will all function as a
buffer between the park and the area to be developed for residential use(with
exception of one lot located adjacent to northeast boundary of the park).
This location will minimize potential neighborhood impacts from the park,
including noise and lights. Such impacts could be further mitigated through
reforestation of a portion of the site to provide passive recreation areas. The
Master Recreation and Parks Plan calls for about one half of community park
sites to provide for passive recreation such as hiking and picnicking.
• The site is located in the area designated for the University Station
Community Park in the Master Recreation and Parks Plan. The attached map
of the area included in the Stoney Creek Basin Area Plan indicates parcels
containing a minimum of 25 acres. Most of those parcels are located adjacent
to residential areas which could be impacted by lights and noise. In other
areas,particularly north of the railroad, access is limited, and would have to
be provided through exisitng residential neighborhoods.
• The service area to which recreation payments-in-lieu for the University
Station Community Park site is applied is based on a 2-mile radius from the
intersection of New Hope Church Road and NC 10. If the park site is shifted
to a different area, fees which have been collected to date would have to be
redistributed based on the new location of the park.
• The area to the east and south of the park is within the floodplain and wetland
areas associated with Stoney Creek. The Concept Plan calls for this area to be
preserved. The applicant has indicated a willingness to offer the land for
dedication to Orange County, or to grant conservation easements to Orange
9
County. The location of the park as proposed creates an long-term
opportunity to develop interpretive facilities and nature programs associated
with the wildlife corridor.
3. Requiring dedication of all of the park site with Phase II.
The 30-acre area offered for public dedication exceeds the 6.4 acres which could
be required for dedication based on the number of lots proposed. The applicant
has indicated in the attached letter that he would not be opposed to dedicating the
entire park site at this time if the Commissioners could bind themselves to
approve the remaining phases of the development, if submitted in compliance
with ordinance requirements. The applicants attorney has advised him not to take
that financial risk, since the Board of Commissioners cannot make a binding
commitment.
4. The degree to which individual wells could be cited on individual lots in the
event of failure of the community well system.
See preceding text under"Water Supply".
5. The frequency of trains on the Southern Railroad adjacent to the proposed
park site.
The tracks are used by two Amtrak and four freight trains each day.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the attached Resolution of
Approval for the University Manor Phase II Preliminary Plan.
10
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date November 19. 1996
Name of Subdivision University Manor Phase II
Owner/Applicant Sanford Bailey
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the University Manor Phase II Preliminary Plan,dated
September 18, 1996 and containing 61 residential lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified
herein.
All roads shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to standards of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange
County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally,the offer of dedication of
Beverstone Drive, Sherbon Drive,Bardon Hill Court,Abercorn Springs Court,Talford Court and Amble Side
Court as shown on the Preliminary Plan. This acceptance by Orange County of the dedication to the general
public of Beverstone Drive, Sherbon Drive,Bardon Hill Court,Abercorn Springs Court,Talford Court and
Amble Side Court shall be without maintenance responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the
owner/applicant until such time as they are accepted for maintenance by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation or some other governmental body. Before the Final Plat of any phase of University Manor Phase
II can be recorded:
A. Sewage Disposal and Water Supply
1. Each residential lot shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair area, approved
by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health.
2. Disclosure that the septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements
shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently
with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regarding the tentative
location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department,Division of
Environmental Health.
3. Final documents granting easement rights for the operation and maintenance of the community
water system by a private utility company shall be submitted to and approved by the County
Attorney.
4. Construction plans for the community water system shall be approved by the NC Division of
Environmental Health and the Public Water and Sewer Branch of the NC Division of
Environmental Health.
11
5. The community water system shall be constructed and the final construction approved by the
North Carolina Division of Environmental Health.
B. Roads and Access
1. Bardon Hill Court, Abercom Springs Court, Talford Court and Amble Side Court shall be
constructed to local roadway standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation,
within a 50-foot right-of-way, and the construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT.
: OR
A letter of credit or escrow agreement shall be submitted to secure construction of Bardon Hill
Court,Abercom Springs Court,Talford Court and Amble Side Court to the standards of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be
prepared by a certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and
Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110%of that estimate and be
issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina.
The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state
that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected
and approved by NCDOT.
2. Beverstone Drive and Sherbon Drive shall be constructed to collector roadway standards of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation,within a 50-foot right-of-way, and shall include
provision for pedestrian and bicycle access. The construction shall be inspected and approved by
NCDOT.
OR
A letter of credit or escrow agreement shall be submitted to secure construction of Beverstone
Drive and Sherbon Drive to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Beverstone Drive shall also include provision for pedestrian and bicycle access. An estimate of
the construction cost must be prepared by a certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and
submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect
110%of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business
in North Carolina.
The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state
that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected
and approved by NCDOT.
3. The intersection of Rigsbee Road and University Station Road shall be designed to accommodate
a left turn lane on northbound University Station Road to the satisfaction of the NCDOT, and
construction of the turn lane shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT.
12
4. At all intersections,the adjoining roads must have at least 75 feet of 90-degree tangent length
before a curve. -
5. At all intersections, right-of-way must be dedicated for standard 10' x 70' sight triangles.
6. At all intersections, road design shall include a 50' taper as required by NCDOT.
7 The waterline for the community water system must be located on the edge of the road right-of-
way or in a separate easement outside of the road right-of-way.
8. An erosion control plan for construction of the roads shall be submitted by the applicant for
review and approval by the Orange County Erosion Control Division.
9. All lots shall access onto the new subdivision roads. This restriction shall be stated in a
document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff
and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
10. Approved street name signs shall be erected at the intersection of streets as required in Section
IV-B-3-c-12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Evidence shall be submitted by the
applicant that the sign is in place or a copy of the receipt for purchase of the sign shall be
submitted to the Planning Department.
C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall be installed or preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan,and
must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections Department.
OR
The applicant shall secure landscape requirement installation and preservation through a letter of
credit or escrow agreement. An estimate of the cost for required preservation,plantings and
their installation must be provided. The financial guarantee shall reflect 110%of the estimate
and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina.
2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be
included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by
Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. A Type A Land Use Buffer shall be provided along Beverstone Drive and Sherbon Drive. The
buffer shall be 30 feet in width and provide sufficient vegetation to meet the standards of Section
IV-B-8-e of the Subdivision Regulations. Said buffer shall be so noted on the plat, and described
in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning
Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
13
D. Drainage
1. Impervious surface may not exceed 36% of the area within the subdivision. These provisions
shall be specified in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
2. Stormwater detention/retention sites/undisturbed areas for infiltration shown on the approved
Stormwater Management Plan shall be labeled on the Final Plat. Use restrictions or other
conditions shall be specified in a document describing development restrictions and requirements
to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. Provide 30-foot drainage easements on lots 1,2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17,21,22,23,26,27,
28, 31 and 32, as shown on the Preliminary Plan. Additional drainage easements may be
required following review and approval of the Erosion Control Plan.
E. Parkland/Open Space
1. Final documents, including plat, conveying 11.5 acres of the 30-acre park site on the north side
of NC 10 at New Hope Church Road, as shown on the Park Dedication inset on the Preliminary
Plan, shall be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney, and shall be recorded concurrently
with the Final Plat for Phase II.
2. The entirety of the open space within Phase II to be shown on the Final Plat(s) shall be owned by
the homeowners association for recreation/open space use by residents of the subdivision. The
deed shall be submitted to and approved by the County Attorney.
3. The right to drill replacement wells and construct water lines within the common open space
shall be granted to the utility company, in the event of failure of the initial well system.
F. Miscellaneous
1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section V-D-2 and
V-D-3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations.
2. An encroachment easement for the existing shed located partially on lot 35 shall be reviewed and
approved by the County Attorney,and shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. A driveway easement across easternmost open space lot for access to existing residence on
property owned by Josette Johnson Mack shall be reviewed and approved by the County
Attorney, and shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
4. The following easements shall be shown on the plat:
a. Well and waterline easements dedicated to private utility company.
14
b. Drainage easements on lots 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 21,22, 23, 26, 27,28, 31 and
32, as shown on the Preliminary Plan, as well as other locations which may be required
following review and approval of the Erosion Control Plan.
C. Encroachment easement for existing shed on lot 35.
d Driveway easement across easternmost open space lot for access to existing residence on
property owned by Josette Johnson Mack.
5. A setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the edge of right-of-way of
Beverstone Drive, Sherbon Drive,Bardon Hill Court,Abercorn Springs Court,Talford Court and
Amble Side Court. Side yards shall be a minimum of 20 feet,and rear yards a minimum of 20
feet. These setback requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document describing
development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded
concurrently with the Final Plat.
G. Certifications
I. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall be notarized on
the face of the Final Plat.
2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V-D-6-b of the
Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the
face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded
concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that each lot contains a suitable area for
septic disposal.
4. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Beverstone Drive, Sherbon
Drive, Bardon Hill Court,Abercorn Springs Court, Talford Court and Amble Side Court have
been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved.
5, A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department.
Signature of Applicant Clerk to the Board
I, accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval,and acknowledge
that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat.
` Mehl
to
pr
to
Ut
•±"y"P to
t
N
r �
r
v1►1W.STAnot4
ee G ev
t'D
W too
s Y N •'d a *r'
.0
s,
• a o
�� q a• r4
s
C
1
16
NORTHEN, BLUE, ROOKS, THIBAUT, ANDERSON & WOODS, L.L.P.
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
100 EUROPA DRIVE
SUITE 550
JOHN A. NORTHEN CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27814 MAILING ADDRESS:
J. WILLIAM BLUE,JR.
P.O. BOX 2208
DAVID M. ROOKS, 111
CHARLES H. THIBAUT CHAPEL HILL,NC 27513-2208
CHARLES T.L.ANDERSON
JO ANN RAGAZZO WOODS
CAROL J. HOLCOMB November 6, 1996 TELEPHONE(919) 968-4441
JAMES C. STANFORD TELEFAX(919) 942-6603
CHERYL Y. CAPRON E-MAIL: nblawonetpath.net
.ARLENE D.HANKS
Ms. Mary Willis
Orange County Planning Department
306F Revere Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Re: University Manor Phase 2
Dear Mary:
I write on Mr. Bailey's behalf to confirm his agreement to extend the time for action on
this application through the November 19 Commissioners' meeting. I also write to respond to
the questions raised by the Commissioners at their November 4 meeting when they asked (i)
whether the park could be moved to another location in the development and (ii) whether Mr.
Bailey would dedicate the entire park now instead of on a prorated basis as he has proposed.
Some background would be useful in answering the first question. In July 1995, before
Mr. Bailey became interested in the University Manor development, the Recreation and Parks
Advisory Committee (RPAC) reviewed the concept plans approved for the area for the former
University Station developers and expressed a strong interest in obtaining a 25 acre park on
"high and dry" land on the north side of N. C. 10 at its intersection with New Hope Church
Road. The Planning Staff advised Mr. Bailey's representatives of the RPAC's interest in the
park site and the probable adoption of the Flexible Development standards at the outset of the
approval process. Although he was not required to do so, Mr. Bailey undertook to design an
economically feasible development which met the 33% open space requirement of the Flexible
Development ordinance and located the park at the desired site. The consolidated Concept
Plan, which actually increased the total park area to 30 acres, is the result.
The proposed park site has 6 to 8 percent slopes which are typical of the topography
found within the more upland areas of the development. There are large areas of the
development with slopes in excess of 15% which would not be suitable for active recreation
uses. It would be possible to install athletic fields on the proposed site with routine grading
which is not true of many parts of the development. Given the relatively favorable topography
of the proposed site and the other open space commitments he has made, Mr. Bailey does not
think it would be economically feasible to relocate the park.
17
NORTHEN, BLUE, ROOKS, THIBAUT, ANDERSON & WOODS, L.L.P.
Ms. Mary Willis
November 6, 1996
Page 2
Mr. Bailey would not be opposed to dedicating the entire park tract now if the
Commissioners could bind themselves to approve the remaining phases if submitted in
compliance with all requirements of the ordinance. However, since the Board cannot make a
binding commitment along these lines, I have advised Mr. Bailey not to take the financial risk
inherent in dedicating the entire park tract in advance of the approval of the balance of the
development.
I hope the Commissioners do not interpret the phasing of University Manor as lack of
commitment on Mr. Bailey's part to complete the development. Rather, the phasing is the
product of the logistics of preparing and processing an application for preliminary plat
approval. As you know, the Planning Staff encouraged Mr. Bailey to phase the project just to
make the project more manageable and he agreed to do so. However, Mr. Bailey fully intends
to submit the remaining phases for approval as evidenced by his substantial expenditures to,
date for soil studies, engineering work and traffic studies covering the remaining phases of
the development.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Davi 1I. Rooks, III
DMR/hos
cc: Mr. Sanford Bailey
Mr. Geoffrey Gledhill
Mr. Harry Mitchell
�peF'E t•"r a°. 18 r
y �
N c Orange County Recreation and Parks Department
` P.O.Box 8181 •300 W.Tryon Street•HiUsborough,NC 27278
'to eat
TELEPHONES
AREA COOK 919
TO: Mary Willis, Orange County Planning Department 73181
967.9251
688.7331
FROM: Bob Jones , Director (910)227.2031
NIGHT:644.9010
DATE: November 13 , 1996 FAM 644-1042
RE: University Manor Phase II - Advisory Council Review
The Recreation and Parks Advisory Council reviewed the
preliminary plan for University Manor Phase II at the October
1 meeting. The Council recommended acceptance of the 30 acre
park site following a lengthy discussion as to the types of
amenities that could be developed in the park.
To address concerns that the Board of County Commissioners
raised at the November 4 meeting, RPAC again discussed the
park site at the November 12 meeting.
Recommendations and Comments:
- The 30 acre site includes more acreage than the minimum
dedication requirement and has relative high ground with
good drainage.
- The open fields will locate 2 soccer fields, 2 softball
fields and a multi-purpose field requiring grading with
little tree or stump removal .
- The old house location will be the main receiving area
for park patrons and will be the site for a nature
interpretive center and park office. The old dairy barn
may be renovated for this purpose.
- The 2 large silos will remain on the site and will be
coordinated into the scenic theme of the park.
- Age specific playground areas will be- located near the
main receiving area.
- Picnic areas will be located throughout the park.
- A large picnic shelter that will benefit meetings and
arge group outings will be constructed near the receiving
and parking area.
- The main entrance to the parking area will come off of
the proposed cul-de-sac road coming off of Highway #10 .
- Walking trails with occasional fitness stations will go
through-out the park and will also be used for
maintenance vehicles .
- Since the site is located near wetlands and open space
and is a good wildlife corridor, a boardwalk with
observation overlooks will facilitate nature interpretive
programs.
19
- Buffers: The park site is bounded on the north by the
railroad and undeveloped wooded property beyond. On the
south side of Highway #10 is proposed open space and
wetland area. The active athletic fields will be lighted
and any light pollution will not interfere with proposed
residential lots . Fencing and grass berms will provide a
buffer along the railroad and the right of way of Highway
#10 .
- Master Park Plan: This 30 acre park site will facilitate
all amenities that were suggested in the adopted Master
Park Plan for the University Station Area Community Park.
The site even includes a 2-3 acre pond that may be used
for fishing or irrigation.
- Concerns addressed:
- The 30 acre park site is not proposed to be
dedicated in its entirety but will be phased in.
The Advisory Council understands the costs related
to the developers and recommends the acceptance of
the 12 acres to be dedicated with Phase II and
anticipates the remaining acreage dedication.
- Sewage: Recommendations were made to identify perk
sites . RPAC was informed that there were several
perk sites located on the property.
- Water: Well sites will be located on that site for
drinking water, sewer systems, and irrigation.
Please call if you have questions .
F
20
� :i ••\' Via; �` ��' ^ a � 1
�-l.. Cry � .�, ♦ +�t ,
' + a•, as 1 \
t
. `
UC-
co
it
OD
VIA
ql
t.
e �+
.S
1
Y 4s
r
SIN/ �����► I/� s -a ,
P low
, ..... - ,, ,.. � � _• ,�yy..� .� nor
.. 4.. •.
Aft
two
i �•atmnuunll�i
//III�IIItti��tttt_
�, �!IIIIIIIIIU�Illlt►� �-:.� ��"�=����� Y"
fiW` r'
�c
Ilia r
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, 22 ,
Health and Natural Resources ` •
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt,Jr., Governor p E �--- N R
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
November 6, 1996
Mr. Sanford Bailey
c/o Cotesworth Downs Utilities, Inc.
Post Office Box 99412
Raleigh,North Carolina 27624
RE: Well Site Investigation
University Manor Phase 11
Well Sites#3 and#4
Dear Mr. Bailey:
This letter will confirm my investigation of the proposed well sites to serve the above referenced public
water system.
Well Sites#3 and#4,as located on the plat provided by Bass, Nixon,and Kennedy, Inc.dated March
6, 1996,for University Manor Phase 11 of Orange County,and are further described as follows:
Well Site#3 is located east of Lot#1,south of property boundary owned by William Green and Dorothy
B.Cagle,adjacent to Beverstone Drive and Bardon Hill Court.
Well Site #4 is located west of and adjacent to Lot#10, east of Lots #11 and #12, adjacent to
Beverstone Drive,and south of the future phase lot.
The above described well lots are approved in accordance with Section .0203 of the Rules Governing
Public Water Supplies, Title 15A, North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 18(c) by the Division of
Environmental Health with the following provisos:
1. The system owner must provide proof of recorded ownership or control of the well lots(100
feet radius)at the time of plans and speafications submittal.
2. The lots must be graded and sloped,if needed,so that surface water is diverted away from
the wellheads.
3. The mintinum horizontal separation between the wells and potential sources of pollution shall
be as follows:
a. 100 feet from any sanitary sewage disposal system,sewer, or a sewer pipe unless the
sewer is constructed of water main materials and joints,in which case the sewer pipe
shall be at least 50 feet from the well;
b. 200 feet from a subsurface sanitary sewage treatment and disposal system designed'
for 3000 or more gallons of wastewater a day flows,unless it is determined that the
well water source utilizes a confined aquifer,
C. 300 feet from a cemetery or burial ground;
d. 500 feet from a septage disposal site;
3800 Barrett Drive,Sulte 101, FAX 919-571-4718
Raleigh,North Carolina 27609 N%0 An Equal Opportunity Afflrnnative Action Employer
Voice 919-571,4700 50�recycled/10%post-consumer paper
l
23
Mr. Sanford Bailey
Page 2
November 6, 1996
e. 500 feet from a chemical or petroleum fuel underground storage tank without
secondary containment;
f. 500 feet from the boundary of a ground water contamination area;
g. 500 feet from a sanitary landfill or non-permitted non-hazardous solid waste disposal
site;
h. 1000 feet from a hazardous waste disposal site or in any location which conflicts with
the North Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Rules cited as 15A NCAC 13A;
and
L 100 feet from any other potential source of pollution.
4. The gully where#4 well is located shall be filled after the trees are removed. The
location of the well site shall be brought up to elevation with the surrounding terrain
of six to eight feet,with backfill.
Any surface runoff from uphill shall be diverted so as not to use the gullies inside the
100"radius as drainage channels.
Failure to comply with the above fisted provisos may result in the revocation of this approval.
Acceptance of the wells as sources of public water supply will be based on,in part,satisfactory"new
well"inorganic and bacteriological analysis.
Prior to drilling you should contact the Groundwater Secfion,of this Department,and the County Health
Department concerning the necessity of the issuance of well construction permits. Upon receipt of this letter
and well construction permits from the appropriate agency,you may proceed with drilling operations.
Upon completion of the construction of the wells, a 24-hour well yield test must be conducted in
accordance with requirements of the North Carolina Well Construction Regulation and Standards. Copies of
the well construction records,water analyses,24-hour well yield test,and three(3)copies of documents and
exhibits as outlined in the"Guide for Obtaining Approval of Public Water Supply Systems"must be submitted
to our Plan Review Branch,Public Water Supply Secfion,Division of Environmental Health in Raleigh for review
and approval.
Until the plans and specifications for the wells have been reviewed and approved by the Division of
Environmental Health,no interconnection to the system is to be made. The plans and specifications must be
prepared and sealed by an engineer licensed to practice in the State of North Carolina.
i
24
Mr. Sanford Bailey
Page 3
November 6, 1996
If any additional information or assistance is desired from this office, please do not hesitate to call us
at(919)571-4700.
Sincerely,
r
Bryan Phelps
Environmental Technician III
Public Water Supply Section
BP:ncp
cc: Michael L.Douglas
J.C. Lin
J.Wayne Munden
Orange County Health Department
1
25
Daniel B. Reimer, MPH, Director
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DMSION t•�•rr 'r°'. Betty Borland Ron Holdvony.RS
P.O.Box 8181-306C Revere Rood k�` '� Jim Brwrn,RS Jan Jackson,RS
Hillsborough,NC 27278 + Perry Bums,RS Tom Konaler,RS
FAX S 9194644-3008 rr st Grog Grimes,RS Barbara Patterson
David Hecht,RS Jerry Stimpson,RS,CPSSC
Ron Hedrick,RS Wendy Thigpen,RSI
f3 l•ce%
Hillsborough Chapel Hill Mebane Durham
919-732-8181 919-968-4501 910-227-2031 919-688-7333
November 6, 1996
To: Mary Willis, Supervisor, Current Planning
From: Jerry V. Stimpson,Licensed Soil Scientist �YY
RE: Siting Individual Wells in University Manor Subdivision
Generally, siting of wells on each lot in the above referenced subdivision is not a problem, however, half of
the lots numbered 39-61 may have a problem after houses are built and septic systems installed.
These lots share rear boundaries and because of topography some will have systems installed in the rear and
others in the front. This is necessary to avoid the use of pumps.
The setback requirements for wells are 50 feet from structures, 10 feet minimum from property lines and if
possible 100 feet from septic systems, but no closer than 50 feet. Even though siting will be a problem,with
very accurate measurements most of these lots should be able to accommodate a well and septic system if it
becomes necessary.
f
ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 26
REFERENCE NUMBER DATE PIN MAP REFERENCE
fiL 24,96. 9882-57-5039 7, 3, - 13
OWNER:
_
APPLICANT: BRUMLEY GEORGE W 111
7416 CJ-iAPEL HILL Rr—Lg3l
t?c�LE3�•� f'•fC ��£+t>Zf 2$12 NEW f-4£1PE Cs.�s#.t?�•4.c ,rt,D CJ49PEL HILL 27514
TELEPHONE: '
SPECIFICATIONS: LOT SIZE/ACREAGE: DESIGNATED WETLAND? YES
q3�5 NO
DRILL
LOCATION/DIRECTIONS:
rtNt-Ti EPSITY STPT3C7J%f -?CmD
{ FEE: RECEIPT: SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT:
tip 3��q��G
CONFIRMED BY PLANNER: PLANNER j DATE CLERK
TYPE SIZE ------ DEPTH ------ CASE.DEPTH ------
GROUT ------ 'YIELD ------ LE;JEL ------ I+ATE'R�ZMAE ------
CMITRACTCR` ------------------ DRILLER: ----------------------------
REMARke5z --•----------------------------------..--------------.------------•------
1
vrea shed bc/1 as sti►•II 'M el r " Unr,�uS`�
d zed m4k,4 a
ov*L a8 SuAtowl 1-►
vveU 6T CS Loc6W Ar McAfts?'
.S lnler'b�r+
I
i
DATE.. 3 SSUED —,J Ea— ENV HEALTH SPEC _-- — — , - --Q�=----
DATE.APPl M-1ED EP J HEALTH SPEC ---------
SEE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON THE REVERSE SIDE -
ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 27
REFERENCE NUMBER DATE PIN MAP REFERENCE
+-�?;'3�7+ri idEi.l_ vFC?1�13T 11Z�:24-'3 SE RE —6.6--—80.1 7_ 3. 13C
APPLICANT: OWNER:
PASS 1VIXmt e .K,E!�t iErny SCOTT PHILL IP n
7416 c4-JAPEL HILL POJgD -
RALE I C+l J%JC 27607 PC BOX ;2w I
TELEP"ME: $=1-4422 DURHAM PIC i 7 70Z
SPECIFICATIONS: LOT SIZE/ACREAGE: DESIGNATED WETLAND?
YES
DRILL Aleell A19-= NO
LOCATION I DIRECTIONS:
I UN r V pSI?'v STATI MI RftAD
FEE: RECEIPT: SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT:
li= 113530
CONFIRMED BY PLANNER: PLANNER DATE CLERK
TYPE ------ SIZE ------ DEPTH ------ CASE,DEPTH ------
GROUT ------ YIELD ------ LEIJEL ------ 3,LgTER.ZMJE
CMITRACTCR: ------------------------ DP.ILLERi -----------------------------
RERHS-- ---------------------------- --------------------------------------
wal slnoarl 1�e. o ds s6wv4 an �idt' "t�n►v�.ri•'h, Allmor P�„i�.`•
4ekevl 11scd 1•&$-y6
We
�l Vt� �o i' �S OJr'�Gw�e�1" � p'�ai� 4't/�s 1�G or.I fSor�► l�7Vl Cotiv��'
DATE, ISSUED _1J_J2_9f7------ EJ(+iV HEALTH SPEC _ --- -----------
DATE,APPROVED OVED Ei%ol HEALTH SPEC ---------
---------- ----------------
SEE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON THE REVERSE SIDE
NOV-12-1996 1502 SOCC/MANAGER 9196443604 P.02/a 2$
yyyEREAS, in Region J funds in the amount of$48,015 will be used to carry out the economic development
plan approved by the COG Board of Delegates and especially to improve the economy of the counties and
towns of the Region by strengthening ties to and consequently benefits of the Research Triangle Park.
NOW.THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that Orange County requests the release of its$7,123.60 share of
these funds to the Triangle J Council of Governments at the earliest possible time in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 324. House Bill 229, section 9.4 of the 1995 Session Laws.
VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS
g ITEMS EM QEClS10N_ GU AGENDA
IL. New H.�Springs. Section Two•Amended in Plan
Planner Emily Cameron presented for consideration of Board approval a revised phasing plan for
New Hope Springs Subdivision Section Two. The Preliminary Plan for New Hope Sprini jSection Two was
approved by the Board of County Commissioners on September G. 1994. In accordance with the provisions
of Section ill-D-2-f of the Subdivision Regulations, the Planning Department re-approved the Preliminary Plan
in September 1993, since neither the subdivision design nor any condition of approval had changed. The
administrative re-approval expired on September 12, 19%. The applicant is now requesting an amendment
to the Phasing Plan to allow additional time for completing road improvements and recording final plats for
four(4)phases In Section Two.
A motion was made by Commissioner Crowther, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to
approve the amended phasing plan for New Hope S"Section Two as stated below:
Phase A to be completed by September 30, 1997
Phase B to be completed by September 30, 1999
Phase C to be completed by September 30, 2001
Phase D to be completed by September 30,2003
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Iii Umveraft I%=Phan 11 Prelmnanr MW
Planner Mary Winis presented for consideration of Board approval the Preliminary Plan for
University Manor Phase 11. On May 20,the Planning Board approved a four phase revised/consoGdated
Concept Plan for 595 acres in the Stoney Creek Basin,In the vicinity of North Carolina 10, New Hope Church
Road and University Station Road. The consolidated Concept Plan included a total of 281 residential lots,a
30-acre park site to be dedicated to Orange County,and 187 was to be preserved through conservation
easements. Phase If mains 118 acres and is located south of Rigsbee Road west of University Station
Road and the Southern Railroad. Sbdy-one residential W are proposed.
Diswssion ensued on the location of the park and its proximity to the ralilroad tracks. It was
darified that the park does fall within the Master Recreation and Parks Plan. Mary Willis noted that this is not
a designated area for mass transfi.
Commisaioner Gordon questioned the type of recreational activities that could be provided since
the sits is not f tat. The developer kxka ed that the slope is about 3%.
Mary Wills said that the School Board indicated they were not interested in this site for a school.
The estimated cost per dwelling is$275,000 with .33 children projected per house.
For the record,Commissioner Crowther does not feel that the park site is located appropriately
next to the railroad. I `
Since it wu evident that additional arifoti oft i was needed about the park and the slope of the
land.the developer gave his Consent to carry this`forward to the next meeting. This will allow time for the
Recreation and Parks Ditactor to walk the site. Also.the County Commissioners want to know 0 there is
another site that would be more appropriate for the park away from the railroad.
Commissioner Gordon expressed a concern about the provision of water. Additional information
we be provided on the number of lots which wig perk and suitable for wells_ She also asked if the pariciand
-- !- lion could be done at one time instead of waiting until the end of the time when all the lots are
developed.
Commissioner Winnoit also wanted to know how many trains run on these tracks per day.
TOTAL P.02