Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-17-2006-9cORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: October 3,2006 Action Agen a Item No. - G. SUBJECT: Homestead Road Campus Master Plan Approval DEPARTMENT: Purchasing, ERCD, Planning PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Unadopted 1998 SHSC Master Plan 2) 2006 Proposed Master Plan Map 3) Site Pros/Cons 4) Cultural & Archaeological Survey Map 5) Cultural & Archaeological Executive Summary INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones, Purchasing & Central Services, 245-2652 David Stancil, ERCD, 245-2590 Craig Benedict, Planning, 245-2592 PURPOSE: To consider approving a conceptual master plan for the Southern Human Services Center (SHSC) property. BACKGROUND: In 1992, the County purchased 34.1 acres of property at 2501 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill to serve as the County campus in southern Orange County. The most compelling need at the time was the consolidation of County human services departments located in various buildings throughout Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Under an approved Special Use Permit issued by the Town of Chapel Hill in 1994, the County built an approximately 28,500 square foot building and co-located the departments of Health, Social Services, Housing and Child Support Enforcement. The concept master plan presented to the Board previously . indicates that there is an expansion area to the east of this building, sufficient to essentially double the size of the building in a two-level addition. (Attachment #1: Bldg Area #5) Further, there is a smaller footprint to the south of the building for the addition of a Dental Clinic (Attachment #1: Bldg area 6) In 1995, the Interfaith Council (IFC) approached the County requesting land upon which to construct Project Homestart, which provides alternatives for homeless families in transition and battered women seeking refuge. The County granted a 25-year lease for three acres of property in the northwest corner of the site, upon which IFC constructed these facilities. A modification of the County's SUP was approved by the Town of Chapel Hill at the time of this construction. In 2004, the Board considered alternatives in the siting of the Seymour Senior Center on this campus. At that time, the conceptual master plan reflected four potential available building sites. However, during the deliberations regarding the senior center, the Board agreed to establish nature conservation areas in the southwest corner of the site in order to preserve valuable hardwoods (Attachment 1: Former Building Area #1 and #2) This eliminated two potential sites for smaller buildings, thereby bringing the available number of additional building sites to two, plus the area around the residence. The Board ultimately selected one of the remaining two sites as the location for the senior center (Attachment 1: Bldg Area #4) An assessment conducted by ERCD in 2004 indicates that additional construction in the area around the residence of the previous property owner would require that the mature hardwoods around the residence be removed. (Attachment 1: Existing House) Previous studies regarding additional facilities on this campus have recommended that the house be retrofitted and reused in lieu of replacement with a new and larger structure. The sole remaining site is located east of the access drive and between the existing Southern Human Services Center and the new Seymour Center (Attachment 1: Bldg Area #3) The estimated footprint will accommodate approximately 22,000 square feet of ground level building construction. Although no formal allocation of function has been attached to this site, the County's mandated responsibilities to provide court and court related functions has been a focus of previous conversations. At this time, the Town of Chapel Hill allows the use of the Old Post Office on Franklin Street as the location of courtrooms, with the balance of the current court needs addressed by space leased by the County in Carrboro (Public Defender at Carr Mill Mall, other court offices at the Moody Building on Laurel Ave). Presumably, the County would continue to consolidate new buildings for County and court obligations to the Homestead Road site. In summary, the recommended master plan of the Southern Orange Homestead Road Campus would include: • Building Areas #1 and #2 shall remain undisturbed as a nature conservation area on the site; • Building Area #3 shall be reserved to maintain flexibility in the location of future county/court operations; • Building Area #4 is designated for the Seymour Senior Center; • Building Area #5 shall be reserved for the expansion of the current human services building. • Building Area #6 shall be reserved for future expansion of the Health Department, specifically for the Dental Clinic; and • Existing House and the natural areas surrounding it, shall remain undisturbed, except for the renovation/upfit of the existing structure for County use as may be recommended in the upcoming space study update; As a final. note, upon Board recommendation, acultural and archaeological study was conducted on the campus in areas where future construction could occur to ensure that future development would not destroy hidden artifacts that may have been of value. A recently received report, summarizing the findings of the assessment conducted over the summer, indicates no remarkable findings and recommends no further study of the site (Attachment #5: Executive Summary). FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. RECOMMENDATION(S): The County Manager recommends that the Board receive the information, discuss as necessary, and approve the master plan as cited. Unadopted 1998 SHSC Master Plan ~~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ r' N ,-` ~' ,~ .~' ~ ~.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~.. .. .. `~c. ~~s ~ _, ~~ ~-f-~Uch men -t-- i~roposed 200 aster flan southern Human services campus r r .x i TL- Lis ~ ~7~ -.. ~ r } r ~ . r r..! M-. ~.r Project: , , it _ 5~o~t~atei ~ r ` ~Namestart ~_ lF ~- - ~ ',BJV(P'~, ~. ~' ~ ) i ; ~ / ~' Senior Center r .~ ~ "'•_-: "h~ ~ ) ~ ~~j ~ /~ (Under Coristructfon) I -~, ~~~ - l _ L 1 _ 4-~' / ~~ , ~ ~ ~~i ~l: r ti~ j '' ~ 4 Y'r .~'~ bldg Area ~'4 nr ~ -~' Il t1' _ F ~1 1 ~~ ~. .. ~ 3 .~ . ~ F. t ti ~~ a ~.: ~:. ~. r _2; 4y t "1 . ~" .: ~.,~ . ~ ~ r ~, s„ ~ -f ~ Existing House f ,~ <' 1 z / ~~ ~ _ ~ ~~ -- _ - , ~-t~ r y `~ ~ k ~' '- ~~~ )~~ ~ ~ . _ r 4 -{ i 3 '~' `'~ ~ _ = ~ " Bldg ~- ~ 'i ~ Area p;n~ ,,~ ~ ~( _ - - ,. ~- , ~ FaYmer ~ _ '..~ - ~~ ~ ~ ^' ~ iS Hidg Area #~ - ~ %•~ ~ - ~, 1 ~t~. ,X '~'~ b ~ ~ 11(l -. ~ _,.. ~. fir{ f, iyi~ ~i y _ t _ F, ~~ y,~ n~ ~t i~ ,_ _ - BidgAr ~'' ~,~,; alt i ~~~~~ ' ~~' ) ' J % It tip. J I t. .-.. J L '~ t it -`~ - - , - ~ i - flt:rklrl - ~ ~` ,`. ` l ~'''/~~,`, r----- a ~ ~~~ ~ ti t - `. .. _ - - __ `- ~ Fem.,., r - _-- , r , ) -. t ~ (. .. w , _ T ~~ ~~~ -- ", r ~ i u ~4 ~ ~ ~ ~/~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~-Pi (;fns ~ cAYrr ~ +~., ~ ~ ~ - - ~~ e ~ ,,~, _ ~r_l_, -! i~ ~ __ P,tkit~q-~ t / t ~ ':4 ~ ~ ', ~ S .fir , - '. ~' lC r ~a~ ~l a s ''''-i -} ~ y ; ~ ..+ t -l~ 1 ~ ~ _ ...L. F- _ ~~~ r; Orange Cwn:y Ptannin0 6~d InspecUOns Deparsnmt Gt5 Map Prcparod pY Miriam Coleman, Oaoba 12, 2006 P, ojecdon: Na;h Cmdina Sa;e Rane (teeU Catum~ North Amenwn tA43 ' - -'H ~ • ~ ' 1 ~ .L r i r ~ ~ ?, ~ tx ,i t " ~ ~ , . ~ , Sr1 ~ 1 r ~` ~~ ';Legend : °~ - a ' ~` ~ .r . .°° . , , ~ 1 -Potential Sites {--S acres) N '! 2 -.Senior Center Under Construction (-4 acres) ~_.._ v:x i 3 -Existing {--16 acres) -; 4 ~nvMronmental Constraints {~6 acres) %~GiC~tvMCn O Southern Human Services Center Property Homestead Road, Chapel Hill Pros and Cons of Potential Building Sites Former Area's 1 and 2 Pros Cons Site 3 Pros Cons Site 4 Pros Cons • Fairly level topography • Adjacent to existing parking area • .Would not disrupt current on-site traffic pattern • Small size (about 1 acre) • Would encroach on mature hardwood forest located west of site • Would disrupt newly established walking trails • Least environmentally sensitive site (abandoned farm field and young pine trees) • Large size (>6 acres) • Adjacent to existing facilities and infrastructure • Would not be overly disruptive of current on-site traffic pattern • Moderately sloped topography • Slight disruption of vista • Primarily pine trees (would not need to remove mature hardwoods) • Good access and visibility from Homestead Road • Small size (about 1.2 acres) and moderate slope • Would disrupt current on-site traffic pattern (No comments regarding site #5, which is the expansion area for SHSC.) Site 6 Pros Cons Existing House Pros Cons • Level topography • Adjacent to existing facilities and infrastructure • Primarily pine trees (would not need to remove mature hardwoods) • Unusual location; access and visibility would be challenge . . • Level topography • Central location on property • Could expand existing parking area to accommodate this site • Would lose opportunity to reuse former farmhouse as small conference center • Would have to cut down existing mature hardwood trees around the house • Small size (just under 1 acre) 1 `~ Areas far Evaluation southern Human services arnpus ~, , ~, ~ ' `~ ~' ,~ r ~~x` ~ ~~~'_ ,•'~ a5 *tr ` ~ ,~. ~ ` :. ~ S ' ~ ,~ .y.1 .~..~~~~ ~ _. 111 .:> .': ~ y .: .~. .~J . i - +H ',c~11Y ~, ~ -.~_ s, ~ ''' _ k _ ~ r 1 __ _ ~~ ~~ _ I~ - ' °,t =- ;(~ ~~. ~ %r4 _ p - .r ~ _ .. ,_ a '~~.. -_ .u{)t` }~ ~ _ I~ ffl ~ I~ ~ _ __ ~ ~ f ~~~..~ ,_ i ~ ,: t. _ iIr /;..{ - i ~ -. ~ ~i'~ - - ft , Y, y~ ~.., 4. 4 5 -. 2 L~' ~~ ; ~ r ~ =: (:: _; -{ - ~`s,.;~~ ~ I, u - ~.~ ~, y r~ r`_r + ~ ;) _ ~ ~`r r t~ 1 ~t vr7 ~,~,. - t ,1 ,.< - 3 r ~, L ~~ O t t t ~ t I/ f ~",f" _ L -,F -- a ,, c _ r , a cx = _ - :. ,~ _ ., _ ~'=~ ~' ~ ~' I r -; , ,~~,..~ t rrY ~q 7r f ~ L ~1~ ~ ~. I i _ rr_ ~ ` °p ~ {,. j /~ .~ o- i ~ tijc . ~ `- .. ~ ~,rf. , .+a ..1c _ _ ~-~ ~,I i,.. t d ~ t i W - oy--. ~ i! I y' p~ { v ~ ~ 1i ~'~ I 1 l ~ S ~ ~I _ ~ _ _ ~ i ,. •< :: Y _ y I __ _ _ - _'-7'-'- ' M r i, f- ~' s r' r ~ ar t J S J ~ ... ~,~° 1, _ ~~ ::Legend - 'a ~ . ,. __~ f ~- - ' 1 -Potential Sites (^-12 acres) N Grn~u Gc~ntyP~anning enC »cpnarons enwrnar L-..St'ni0r dent@t1J.f1C181"~'iDnStr1lCtI0I3 ~^'~aCfeS~ Gi5 bta;, PrgOa aC CY idnefr, Co~eTan, wqus: v:, :OCfi Pro~aaen Norm Ca~Urna Sate Ra^z il?zq __ ~- EXIStln9 (~12 aGCeS) ~ Dah;m :arr, 0.mxncrn 76H3 _..._ ,. .: 1 1 ,= 4 -Environmental Constraints (~6 acres) A+kdn.~ s L MANAGEIYIENT SUMMARY Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) conducted an intensive archaeological investigation of the Southern Human Services Campus (SfISC), located an approximately 34 acres in Orange County, North Carolina, in August 2005. This investigation was conducted for the Orange County to comply with local policies on County development projects. All fieldwork was designed to comply with guidelines established by the Office of the Secretary of the Interior of the United States. Orange County has proposed to construct additional improvements to the SHSC off Homestead Road, just north of the town limits of Chapel Hill in Orange County, ItiTOrth Carolina, Orange County has requested that an intensive archaeological survey be conducted in the areas of proposed ground disturbance (Areas 1 and 2). In addition, it was requested that ESI conduct a limited field reconnaissance of the remainder of the parcel where no construction is currently planned (Areas 3 and 4). $ackground research was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA). Field investigations consisted of pedestrian investigation and shovel testing. Areas of clear visibility, including eroded or exposed ground surfaces and unpaved roads within the survey area were inspected for historic structures, artifacts, and other. signs of prehistoric or historic cultural activity: All shovel tests (n=25} were approximately 30 centimeters in diameter and dug to sterile subsoil; no shovel testing was conducted outside the project area. Intensive archaeological investigation of Areas 1 and 2 recorded one archaealo~ cal site (310R~84**; Table A). This late nineteenth to early twentieth century domestic site yielded few artifacts and expressed little archaeological integrity. It is recommended not eligible for the National Register. No further work is necessary in Areas l and 2, and it is recommended that work be allowed to proceed in these areas without concern for impacts to significant cultural resources. Table A; Summary of Site Data Site Number Cultural Affiliation Site Type Recommendations 31 OR584** Late 19~`~Early 20~' Cen. Domestic Not Eligible - NF'Vir* *No Further Work A reconnaissance of Areas 3 and 4 found that these areas have a low potential to contain significant cultural resources. A pedestrian inspection of these areas did not observe any cultural resources on the ground surface. Limited shovel testing -did not yield any cultural materials and revealed a thin, partially eroded soil profile. Areas 3 and 4 also encompass previously developed areas, moderately steep slopes, and the headwaters of ephemeral drainages, landforms that do not typically captain significant archaeological sites. It is recommended that no additional archaeological investigations occur in Areas 3 and 4, based an the results of the reconnaissance investigation.