HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-03-1996 - IX-C 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: June 3. 1996
Action Agenda
Item #
SUBJECT: NORTH HILL SUBDIVISION -PRELIMINARY PLAN
ACTION BY: July 18, 1996
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: Yes_X—No
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes X No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Cameron
Resolution of Approval Extension 2580
Application
Vicinity Map
Preliminary Plan
Fiscal Impact Analysis TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
5/20/96 Draft Planning Hillsborough- 732-8181
Board Minutes Durham - 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 967-9251
PURPOSE: Consideration of the Preliminary Plan for North Hill Subdivision.
BACKGROUND: The property is located in Chapel Hill Township between Whitfield Road (SR
1731/1730)and Interstate 40 in the Rural Buffer. Adjacent land uses include
Stoneridge and Sedgefield subdivisions and undeveloped tracts to the east. The
tract is zoned Rural Buffer and Major Transportation Corridor. It is not located in a
protected watershed. In 1994 the average daily traffic count for Whitfield Road was
3800 and 3900 at the eastern end near Erwin Road. Whitfield Road is designated as
a collector.
The applicant proposes to subdivide a total of 75 acres into 19 new residential lots
that average 3.78 acres in size. The lots will have access to Whitfield Road from
one entrance leading to two new public roads each ending in a cul de sac. Each lot
will have an individual well and septic system.
i
2
Lots 2, 3, 18, and 19 will have easements on other lots for sewage disposal. The
easement areas have been sized and located to accommodate conventional septic
systems. The average distance between the house site and septic field in an
easement is comparable to that of the on-site systems for lots 9-14. The Orange
County Division of Environmental Health has given preliminary approval to the
proposed subdivision layout. The easements shown for lots 2 and 3 will be
reversed so that they will not cross each other.
A 100-foot land use buffer is required adjacent to the interstate right-of-way. Five
feet of additional right-of-way and a 30-foot land use buffer are indicated adjacent
to Whitfield Road. No buildings or structures are allowed in the buffers; however,
driveways, utilities, wells, and septic systems are permitted. Installing the septic
line connecting lot 2 to its drainfield will not require significant clearing in the
buffer along Whitfield Road.
The Preliminary Plan for North Hill was reviewed by the Planning Board on May
20. The vote was 8 to 3 in favor of the proposal. Planning Board members who
were opposed had concerns with the easements for sewage disposal, the location of
the entrance on Whitfield Road, and affordable housing. The dntrance is not
aligned with the access points for Stoneridge because those intersections have poor
sight distances and/or would require considerable fill to construct.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for North Hill
Subdivision with public roads built to State standards as per the attached Resolution
of Approval.
3
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date June 3. 1996
Name of Subdivision North Hill
Owner/Applicant Pika Develo rs
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves North Hill subdivision Preliminary Plat, dated 5/8/96 and
containing 19 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 North Hill
Drive and Pika Road. This acceptance by Orange County of the dedication to the general public of North Hill
Drive and Pika Road 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 North Hill can be recorded:
A. Sewage Disposal
1. Each residential lot except lots 2, 3, 18, and 19 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. Septic easements shall be provided for lots 2, 3, 18, and 19 by lots 3, 4, 14, 15, 16, and 18 as
indicated on the Preliminary Plat. The easements and their conditions shall be contained in
documents to be approved by the County Attorney and recorded with the Final Plat. A reference
to the easement documents shall be included in a document describing development restrictions
to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
4. Label the easements connecting source lots with their respective drainfields as `septic line and
access easements." These easements shall be reserved for installation, monitoring and repair of
remote septic lines and drainage fields.
5. Where the septic lines for lots 18 and 19 cross under North Hill Drive, the pipes shall be
contained within ductile iron sleeves.
B. Roads and Access
1. North Hill Drive and Pika Road shall be constructed to 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.
4 •
OR
A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction of North
Hill Drive and Pika Road 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. 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.
3. A 10' by 70' sight triangle shall be shown at the entrance of the subdivision.
4. 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.
5. 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. 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.
2. A 30-foot Type A Land Use Buffer shall be provided along the new right-of-way line for
Whitfield Road. A 100-foot Land Use Buffer shall be provided adjacent to the Interstate 40
right-of-way. The buffers shall 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.
D. Drainage
1. Indicate a 30-foot drainage easement along the lot line between lots 3 and 4. Locate additional
drainage easements as required following review and approval of the Erosion Control Plan.
E. Parkland
1. Cash in the amount of$8645($455 per lot) shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of
parkland dedication.
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. The following easements shall be shown on the plat:
a. septic line, septic field, and access easements for lots 2, 3, 18, and 19; and
5
b. 30-foot drainage easement between lots 3 and 4.
3. A setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the edge of right-of-way of Whitfield
Road, North Hill Drive, and Pika Road. Side yards shall be a minimum of 20 feet, and rear
yards a minimum of 20 feet, except where larger land use buffers apply. 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. Certif;cations
1. 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 an easement has been identified for
each of the lots 2, 3, 18, an 19 of sufficient area for sewage disposal and repair and that all
other residential lots contain sufficient area for sewage disposal and repair.
4. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that North Hill Drive and Pika
Road 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.
Applicant Date
APPLICATION -OR PRELIMINARY PLAI`" 4PPROVAL
MAJOR SUBDIVISION 6
8/93
ORANGE COUNTY
DATE: `'�
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) LF11EK L'
1 1�
SUBDIVISION NAME: �`,o n1,1 n t 1,
LOCATION: k1k)N
OWNER/DEVELOPER: 1 p�__T)rV 9 L��PE�t
ADDRESS: JTELEPHONE NO.Alq 313-71q6
nk, JC ;-7
o S
TELEPHONE NO.:AGENT/CONTACT: U %)C ,M_3-/]2 2
A. SUMMARY INFORMATION:
Orange County Tax Map (4 A Block Lot(s) c7 Township`k-1(-wy� OIL,-
Zoning District(s): 'o ,.fir,n
Total Number of Acres: 7 G ,3 S .Phases:
Total Number of Lots: _Average Lot Size: 3:.S Minimum Lot Size: ^ 2, f yam_
NumberfType of Structures: (existing) C7 (proposed) %9 t14 ,ES
Lineal Feet in Streets: aZ a 0 O Acres in Open Space: D
Water Supply:-1.19L L_ Public (specify) Community Individual
Wastewater Disposal: !ifpT I c Public (specify) Community Individual
School District: Cu. 119 1 w Fire'District: 6 P!
General Land Uses in Area: _ 151 D Fart#16.
Critical Areas: stream/drainageways U flood prone areas
watershed (specify) O historic sites
other (explain) O
Is the property to be subdivided currently under "farm use value taxation'?.Yes_No c/If "yes',
please contact the Orange County Tax Office. Subdivision of the property may require payment of
deferred taxes under 'farm use value taxation%
B. All plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two-hundred feet (1'=2001 and
no larger than one inch equals twenty feet (1"=20') and must contain the following*information:
subdivision name _fit_. 2NL zoning of tract and adjacent.
��!�y name & address of owner(s) / properties
_y 777 name &address of subdivider y building setback lines by notation
(if other than owner) or typicaf lot layout
>+ >w"' > name of surveyor, engineer, _/ <: v' location ano width of existing and
c landscape architect or architect, proposed easements (drainage,
O address, registration # and seal utilities, roads, etc.)
as
(title) existing, proposed and adjoining
tle) Preliminary Plan
D scale, north arrow rights-of-way including dimensions
(D �_ r; date (including revision dates) and street names and state road
N
township, tax map-block-lot numbers. Lineal feet of road
E •,� 't ?=
references centerlines and approximate
� w
0 f Parent Parcel Identification # acreage of new street rights-cf-
.) 0 .i l deed book and page # of property way
y w to be subdivided '(?' existing and proposed utilities,
m
—4 M 1", boundary described with bearings including type, sizes, hydrants,
0' W and distances / valves, manholes
O M f 54 total acreage of the tract and _ existing and proposed curbs,
U acreage of lots, including and gutters and culverts, including
U -00 excluding area within rights-of- J sizes and grades
C» ,Nay J "'"' location and width of alleys,
control corner sidewalks, bike lanes, transit
systems, and bus stops
(please complete reverse side)
proposed lot lines v"h dimensions typicr'--treat cross-sections and
—,7 lot & block numbs. inters on details including
phasing lines design and width of travelway and 7
topography at ten foot (10) / shoulders
—� intervals horizontal alignment and general
C curve data (public roads)
o � _ water bodies, streams, floodway �. „.�,
Q) / and floodplains centerfine radius on all proposed
stream buffers streets
location and size of parcels permanent features such as
:n U dedicated for public use, buildings, cemeteries, historic
0) w recreational use or reserved in landmarks
�4 p common, with purpose noted ' adjoining lot layout names of
impervious surface data (if located adjoining property owners. If
�
w in water supply watershed) subdivided, subdivision plat name,
o +✓ >; vicinity map showing general plat book & page number, and
4 o
E Q)location of subdivision with streets perimeter lot numbers.
o co
and roads identified by State road location and size of lots of
number and name restricted development potential
Y landscaping and buffer and notation on plat regarding
y M requirements same
L r
township, corporate and extra- ... stormwater detention and/or
—7— territorial planning jurisdiction lines retention sites and undisturbed
which cross the property areas for infiltration purposes (if
located in water supply
watershed)
C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Twenty-five (25) copies of the preliminary plat.
2. One full size copy of an Orange County Tax map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked in
pencil).
3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat indicating
Health Department soils analysis approval/denial for each tot shown thereon.
4. Where a private road is proposed a written statement by the applicant or his/her authorized
representative which sets forth the justification for a private road (see Section IV-6-3-d-1 of the
Orange County Subdivision Regulations).
5. Auxiliary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section VL of.this Ordinance
which assure completion and/or maintenance of improvements required by this Ordinance.
Such documents may include, but not be limited to, a private road maintenance a0rnsment, and
articles of incorporation and restrictive covenants pertaining to a homeowner's association.
These documents may be required as necessary as evidence that the ordinance requirements
are being.met.
5. Fee - $350.00 plus $5.00 per lot (1 fee for prcfiminary and final plat).
7. If the subdivision contains 10 lots or more the following information shall be submitted with the
application:
a. Number of years to buildout. 2 go,,•r
b. Number of houses to be built during each year to buildout. to ^
C. Average price of houses including lots for eacf�year to buildout.
144 !700 000
1, the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate.
r ,
�J r
A PLICANT'S SIG ATUR WNE` 'S SIGNATURE
DATE DATE
FEES: Amount t Data Paid 4 -1:!– g(p Receipt # (0
4�5 00
r, = NORTH HILL SUBDIVISION
i s
'100 Applicant: Pika Developers
Zoning. Rural Buffer/MTC
_ y JPA Land Use Plan: Rural Buffer
• + Scale: 1 inch = 1000 feet
�2 6J 4 1'fott�'N
c '► 1 `
Jt
7S' f
r 1
we Ivan _•
•• • s � !6 i• � was•f:
am
as
UP am
IAL
lk
. - a , e•- 1 1 C
M � ti L ti ti� r •
' N '
man
law
GmAr
O -- ---- s see ties,b ,,..
on"At
ap
1.
w / ri � �1•e 1 I.rw
-i 1 Mr ,
1
r 1
1•.� 1 O 1 iN •
of arr ar ► / �' s t Iowa • , ; �
fal•Ira• f !u, -
raaoat aufIv aJ w !� 1 �� Ina•1 � • ` �
bin
QQ I 1.
9
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR NORTH HILL
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE STANDARD APPROACH
Prepared by
The Orange County Planning Department
May, 1996
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
North Hill is a proposed 19-lot subdivision located in Chapel Hill Township. The lots are
accessed by two new private subdivision roads which provide access to Whitfield Road.. The
current zoning is RB - Rural Buffer The average lot size is approximately 3.5 acres. All lots will
be served by individual wells and septic systems. Four lots contain easements for sewage disposal.
Project build-out is estimated at two years. Housing units will be constructed, beginning in
1996, with completion of the project scheduled in 1998. Units will consist of detached
single-family homes, and the applicant estimates the average sales price to be $500,000, including
the lot.
METHODOLOGY
Fiscal impact analysis is a projection of the direct, current, public costs and revenues
associated with residential and non residential growth in the jurisdiction in which the growth is
taking place. Fiscal impact analysis considers only direct impact in that it projects only the primary
costs that will be incurred and the immediate revenues that will be generated. It calculates the
financial effect of a planned development or new subdivision by considering the current costs and
revenues such a development would generate if it were completed and occupied today. Fiscal
impact analysis does not consider the private costs of public action.It is concerned only with public
(governmental)costs and revenues.
The method used in preparing the fiscal impact analysis is the Service Standard Approach.
While only gross expenditures by service category are derived from the Per Capita Method, the
Service Standard method determines the total number of additional employees by service function
that will be required as a result of growth. This method employs average county government costs
per person, average school costs per pupil, an employee to population ratio, and average operating
expenses per employee for each service category and school district. The number of new
employees are projected and multiplied times the average operating expenses (includes personnel,
operating and capital costs)per employee. These average costs are then weighed against per capita
and per pupil revenues to project the total net fiscal impact of the development.
RESIDENTIAL FISCAL IMPACT TEMPLATE: SERVICE STANDARD METHOD
Bureau of Economic&Business Research-University of Florida 10
Modified 3/15/95-Orange County,NC Planning Department
SECTION 1 -PROJECT DATA: ENTER THE FOLLOWING DATA FOR EACH PROJECT:
PROJECT: North Hilt
TOWNSHIP: Chapel Hill
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD:
Beginning Year: _ 1996
Ending Year: 1998
Inflation Rate: 2.90%
CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS:
Persons/House: 2.22
Children/House: 0.29
°!°Non-Elderly:. 100.00%
HOME SALES DATA:
Average Distribution
Number of Saks Price of Units
Year Homes (S) by Year
1996 10 51)0000 5163%
1997 9 500000 47.37%
1998 0.1 0 0.00 0/0
1999 0 0 0.00%
2000 4 0 U00/0
2001 0 0 0.00%
2ED2 Ii 0 0.00°r°
2003 0 0 0.00%
2004 f} 0 Q.00%
2005 0 0 0.00%
SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA: ENTER"I"IN( )BESIDE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN WHICH PROJECT IS TO BE
LOCATED TO GENERATE STUDENT DISTRIBUTION BY SCHOOL TYPE.
School District: School Attendance:
Orange County { 0 ) Elementary School 48%
Middle School 24%
Chapel Hill 1 ) Hi School 28%
SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN/HOUSEHOLD ENTER NUMBER OF UNITS BY HOUSING TYPE TO
GENERATE NUMBER OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN.
Children School Age
Housing Tye Units Per House Children
Single-Family 19 029 6
Duplex/Triplex/Quadplex 0 0 0
Apartment/Condominium 0 0
Town House 0 0 0
Totals 19 019 6
SECTION 2-LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA 11
BUDGET YEAR: 1994-9
COUNTY POPULATION: 102894
SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT POPULATION: 7580'
COUNTY EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER CAPITA
General Government - 110.08 0:0411
Public Safety 138.75 0.0013
Public Works 50.00 0.0005
Human Services 253.38 0.0025
Education(School District) 936.41 0.0091'
SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER STUDENT
Total 936:41 0:1235'
COUNTY PER CAPITA REVENUES ($): REVENUES PER CAPITA
Taxes-Other Than Property 4387997 42.65
_ .
Intergovernmental 9053572 87.99
Service Charges 2775491 26.97
Miscellaneous 1089416 10.59
COUNTY PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURES PER CAPITA
General Government 6532710 63.49<
Public Safety 6350477 61.72
......... ............... ... . .
Public;Works 2739666 26.63
Human Services 16618148 161.51
Education(Recurring Capes) >
750000, : 7.29?
Non-Departmental _ 2787882 27.09
COUNTY PER EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURE ($): EXPENDITURES PER EMPLOYEE
General Government 6532710 59347.81
Public Safety 6350477 45769.20
Public Works.. 2739666 54793.32
Human Services _ 16618148 65587.17
Education(Recurring Capital); 750000 800.93
SCHOOL DISTRICT PER STUDENT EXPENDITURES (S): EXPENDITURES PER STUDENT
County Government 109985$0 1451.00
School District 4653911 613.97
State 22856567 3015.38:
SCHOOL DISTRICT PER EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURES PER EMPLOYEE
County Government 10998580 11745.47
School District 4653911 4969.95
State 22856567 24408.72
TAX DATA: ENTER APPLICABLE ASSESSMENT RATIO AND ELDERLY EXEMPTION:
County Tax Rate ($) 07460 Per.$1(X3 Assessed Valuation
School District Tax Rate ($) 0.1544 Per$100 Assessed Valuation
Assessment Ratio
100.00
Elderly Exemption 0 $11,000 Where Applicable
SECTION 3-DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS BASED ON PROJECT DATA 12
YEAR 1996- 1997 1998
1999 2000
HOUSING UNITS 10 19
POPULATION 19 19 19
22 42 42 42 42
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary 1
Middle t i 3 3 3
High School 1 : 2 2
TOTAL 3 6 2 2
6 6 6
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES
General Government Q.Q 0.0 o.a
Public Safety 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Public Works 0.0 0.0 Q.Q
Human Services 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.t
TOTAL 0.1'. 0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
SCHOOL DISTRICT 0.2 0.4 0,4
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES •0.4 0.4
YEAR 2001 2002 2003'
2004 2005
HOUSING UNr1 S 19 19 19
POPULATION 19 19
42 42 41 42 42.
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary
Middle i 1 1 3 3
High School 1 1
TOTAL 6 6 2:::
2 2
6< 6 6
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES
General Government Q.Q 0.0 O.a
Public Safety 0 0 0.0
Q 1' 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1.
Public Works 0.0 0 0 0.0
Human Services 0 0 Q.0'
Q.1< 0.1 01 ' 0.1 0.1
TOTAL 0.2
0.2 0.2 0.2
SCHOOL DISTRICT 0.4 0.4 0.4
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES 0.4 0.4'
SECTION 4-PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF PROJECT ON COUNTY GOVERNMENT 13
' YEAR 1996 1997 1998 1999
2000
TAX BASE($1000) 5000 9645 9925 10213 10509
REVENUES($)
Property Tax 37300 71952 74038 76185 78395
Other Taxes 947 1851 1905 1960 2017
Intergovernmental 1953 3819 3930 4044 4I61
Service Charges 599 1171 1205 1240 1276
Miscellaneous 235 460 473 487 501
TOTAL($) 41034 79252 81550 83915 86349
EXPENDITURES($)
General Government 1409 2756 2836 2918 3002
Public Safety 1370 2679 2756 2836 2919
Public Works 591 1156 1189'' 1224 1259
Human Services 3585,' 7010 7213 7422 2638"
Education 4370 8543 8791 9046
Non-Departmental 9308
602 1176 1210 1245 1281
TOTAL($)
11427. 23319 23996
24691 25407
NET FISCAL IMPACT($) 29,107 55933 57555 59224
60941
YEAR 2001 2002 2001' 2004
2005
TAX BASE($1000) 1(f813 11127 11450' 11782 12123
REVENUES($)
Property Tax 80668, 83008 :. 85415 87892 90441
Other Taxes 2075! 2135 2I 97 2261
Intergovernmental 2327
4282 4406' 4534! 4665 4800
Service Charges 1313 1351 1390 1430 1472
Miscellaneous 515 530 546 561 578
TOTAL($)
88853 91430 94081 96809 99617
EXPENDITURES($)
General Government 3089` 3179 3271 3366 3464
Public Safety 3003, 3090 3180 3272 33671
Public Works 1296 1333 1372 1412 1453'
Human Services 7859' 8087 8322! 8563 8811
Education 9578 9856 10142< 10436 10739'
Non-Departmental 1318:' 1357 1396. 1437 1478'
TOTAL($)
26144 26902 27683 28485 29312'
NET FISCAL IMPACT($) 62709 64527 66398 68324 70305
SECTION 5-PROJECTED FISCAL,IMPACT OF PROJECT ON SCHOOL DISTRICT 14
YEAR 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000
REVENUES($)
County 4370 8543
School District 8791 9046 9308
State
7720 14892 15324 15768
8745 17097 16225
17592 18103 18628
TOTAL($) 20834 40532
41707 42917 44162
EXPENDITURES($)
County 4370 8543
School District 8791 9046 9308
1781 3481 3582 3686 3793
State 8745' 17097
I7592` 18103 1.8628
TOTAL($)
.: 14895: 29121
29965 30834 31729
NET FISCAL EWPACT($) 5939 11411
11742 12082 12433
YEAR 2001 2002 2003''
2004 2005
REVENUES($)
County 9578 9856
School District 10142 10436 10739
16696 17180:
State 17678: 18191 18719!
19168 19724 202961
20884 21490
TOTAL($) 45442: 46760
48116 49511 50947
EXPENDITURES($)
County 9.578 9856
10142: 10436 10739
School District 3:903 4016 4132
State 4252 4376
19168: 19724 2fl296! 20884 21490
TOTAL($) 32649: 33596 34570 35572
36604
NET FISCAL Il"ACT($) 12793 13164 13546
13939 14343'
SECTION 6-SUMMARY OF PROJECTED DEMOGRAPHIC/FISCAL IMPACTS 15
YEAR 1996 1997 1998! 1999 2000
HOUSING UNITS 10 19 19 19 19`
POPULATION 22 42 42 42 42
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary l 3 3 i 3 3
Middle 1 1 Y 1 1
High School 1 2 2 2 2
TOTAL 3 6 6 6 6i
COUNTY EMPLOYEES 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2'
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0,4!
TAX BASE($1000) 5000 9645 9925 10213 10509
COUNTY BUDGET($)
Revenues 41034 79252 81550! 83915 86349
Expenditures 11927 23319
239961 25407'
BALANCE 29107 55933 57555 59224 60941`
SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET(S)
Revenues 20834 40532 41707! 42917 44161
Expenditures 14895: 29121 29%51 30834 31729
BALANCE $939 11411 11742' 12082 12433<
COMBINED BUDGETS(S) '
Revenues 61868 119784 123257 126832 13 0510'
Expenditures 26822 52440 53961 55526 51136'
BALANCE 35046.1 67344 69296' 71306 73374
YEAR 2001' 2002 20031: 2004 2005
Housnvc uxrrs 19 19 19 19' 19
PorulaTloN 421 42 42 42 42
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary 3 3 3 3 3
Middle
High School 2: 2 2 2 2:
TOTAL 6
6 :1
6' 6 6
COUNTY EMPLOYEES O.Z. 0.2 0,2' 0.2 0,2
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES 0.4! 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4'1.TAX BASE($1000) 10813 11127 11450' 11782;' 121231
COUNTY BUDGET(S)
Revenues 88853< 91430 94081 96809 99617
Expenditures 26144! 26902 27693: 28485 29312'
BALANCE 62709 64527 66398: 68324 - 70305`
SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET(S)
Revenues 45442 46760 48116 49511 50947!
Expenditures 32649 33596 34570 35572 36604!
BALANCE 12793 13164 13546 13939 14343
COMBINED BUDGETS($)
Revenues 134295' 138189 142197 146321 150564
Expenditures 58793 60498 " 62252' 64058 65915
BALANCE 75502 77691 79944' 82263 84648
t
16
SECTION 7- SUMMARY OF PROJECTED PUBLIC SCHOOL CAPACITY IMPACTS
SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA: ENTER"I"IN( )BESIDE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN WHICH PROJECT IS TO BE
LOCATED TO GENERATE STUDENT DISTRIBUTION BY SCHOOL TYPE.
School District: School Attendance:
Orange County ( T ) Elementary School 500/0
Middle School 23%
Chapel Hill-Caaboro ( 0 ) High School 27%
YEAR 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary 1;' 3 3 3 3
Middle
High School I; 2 2 2 2
TOTAL 3' 6
6! 6 6
YEAR 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary 3 3 3 3
Middle
High School 2 2 2 2
TOTAL 6' 6 6 6 2
SCHOOL CAPACITIES-ALL SCHOOLS CURRENT ENROLLMENT-ALL SCHOOLS
Elementary :! 2838 Elementary 2767
Middle 1232 Middle 1290
High School
15A, High School 1505
TOT'S 5588 TOTAL 5562
YEAR 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT
Elementary 2768. 2770 2774< 2770 2770
Middle 1291 1291 1291: 1291 1291
High School 1506 1507 I507 1507 I507
TOTAL 55651 5568 5568' 5568 5568
YEAR 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT
Elementary 2770: 2770 2770_ 2770 2770
Middle 1291 1291 1291 1291 1291
High School 1507 1507 15Q7 1507
1507
TOTS
5569 5568 5568 5568 5568
o
D 17
5/20/96, P"AIA UA14 boeev H(A(UTE'S
Price asked about development on the other side of the walkway. Cameron
responded that there is agriculture to the north,and other surrounding tracts are
large. Price asked if it was active agriculture and Mr.Pagano responded that
agriculture is dwindling in the area. Price continued expressing concern regarding
residential development next to agricultural use and potential problems. Mr. Pagano
responded that he felt it would be more of a benefit because of the open fields and
woodlands nearby. He continued that the farming activity in the area is decreasing
he felt that the area would soon be mostly residential. The pedestrian easement
around the subdivision provides an additional buffer. The lots are very deep,so the
property owners will be able to build their homes near the center of the°lots,ifthey
wish to,which allows them to buffer themselves.
Brooks asked about lot 9 which is a flag lot. Cameron responded that it is on a cul-
de-sac and the minimum required lot width is twenty feet. There is an exception
when the entire frontage of the lot is on the bulb of the cul-de-sac.
MOTION: Rosemond moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by
Hoecke.
VOTE: Unanimous.
(3) North Hill
(19 Lots-Chapel Hill Township)
Presentation by Emily Cameron.
The property is located in Chapel Hill Township between Whitfield Road(SR
1731/1730)and Interstate 40 in the Rural Buffer. Adjacent land uses include
Stoneridge and Sedgefield subdivisions and undeveloped tracts to the east. The tract
is zoned Rural Buffer and Major Transportation Corridor. It is not located in a
protected watershed.In 1994 the average daily traffic count for Whitfield Road was
3800 and 3900 at the eastern end near Erwin Road. Whitfield Road is designated as a
collector.
The applicant proposes to subdivide a total of 75 acres into 19 new residential lots
that average 3.78 acres in size. The lots will have access to Whitfield Road from one
entrance leading to two new public roads each ending in a cul de sac. Each lot will
have an individual well and septic system.Lots 2,3, 18 and 19 will have easements
on other lots for sewage disposal.The easements shown for lots 2 and 3 will be
reversed so that they will not cross each other.
A 100-foot land use buffer is required adjacent to the interstate right-of-way.Five
feet of additional right-of-way and a 30-foot land use buffer are indicated adjacent to
Whitfield Road.No buildings or structures are allowed in the buffers;however,
driveways,utilities,wells,and septic systems are permitted. Installing the septic line
connecting lot 2 to its drainfield will not require significant clearing in the buffer
along Whitfield Road.
The Concept Plan for North Hill was approved on October 16, 1995 for 21 lots with
public roads.
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for North Hill
Subdivision with public roads built to State standards and the conditions contained in
the Resolution of Approval which is an attachment to these minutes on pages
�U a 18
3h0/9& PLdaUIWC� �OQRD NI�tIUTES
Barrows noted that there were already subdivision roads accessing Whitfield Road
She expressed concern that another is being added and none will line up with
existing roads. Cameron responded that the location of this subdivision road was
chosen because of the steep hill and curve. She also noted that it has been approved
by NCDOT. Hoecke also responded that site distance at this location is much better.
Brown asked which lots have septic easements. Cameron responded lots 2,3, 18&
19.
Brooks asked if the systems are all to be conventional systems. Mr. David Morris,
one of the developers, responded that they are to be conventional systems. Brooks
also asked about the number of bedrooms and the response was five.
Brown asked about the expected buildout time and the response was two years. She
also asked about price range and the response was$500,000.00.
MOTION: Hoecke moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by
Allison.
VOTE: 8 in favor.
3 opposed(Barrows-concerned with off-site septic easments and the entryway,
Brooks-disappointed that more effort was not made toward affordable
housing,Rosemond-also concerned with off-site septic systems).
AGENDA ITEM#9: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING 2/26/96
a. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
(1) Article 8.2 Special Uses
Presentation by Mary Willis.
This item is to consider a proposed amendment to Special Use provisions related to
expiration,validity,and approval actions for Special Use Permits.
In a letter dated December 18, 1995,the County Attorney recommended several
changes to the Zoning Ordinance provisions pertaining to Special Uses.
It is proposed that the following standard requirements be explicitly stated in each
Special Use Permit.
that the permit will become null and void if any of the conditions are
held invalid or void;and
that the permit will automatically expire within 12 months of
approval if the use has not commenced or if construction has not
commenced and proceeded,unless a time extension is approved.