Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 05-28-1985
• • • ORANGE,COUNTY BOARD OP COMMISSIONERS AND • PLANNING BOARD AGENDA QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, May 28, 1985 Orange County Courthouse Superior Courtroom Hillsborough, North Carolina 7:30 P.M. A. BOARD COMMENTS B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS • • PAGE # C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS H 1. Lm'-2-85 Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. (Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition and Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Nagle) 16-34 2.. Z-7-85 C. D. Hogue for George Horton (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Office Institutional and Industrial-1) 35-57 3. Z-8-85 Scotswood. (Rezohitg . from Residential-1 to Residential-2, Residential-4 and: General- Commercial-IV) 58-74 4. Z-9-85 James L. Freeland (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Residential-4) 75-139 5.. PD-3-85 West Ten Mobile Park (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Planned Development Residential-1 with Class A Special Use Permit) 140-149 6. Stbdivision Regulations Text Amendments 150-161 7. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments D. ADJOURNMENT • 001 0 R, ANGE COUNTY BOARD OP COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date MAY 28, 1985 Action Agenda Item # 4C-I SUBJECT: SECONDARY AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE PLAN REQUESTED BY CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING No Attachment(s) Information Contact: GENE BELL SUMMARY SHEET . APPLICATION MATERIALS VICINITY MAP COMPARISON SHEET AGENCY & OTHER LETTERS CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 ' PURPOSE: To receive public comment on proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for 4,34 acres of a 5.81 acre tract located on the south side of Old N.C. 10 (SR 1710) about one-half mile from its intersection with New N.C. 86. NEED: Chandler Concrete has requested a secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for a recently merged portion of Lot #32, Tax Map #45, located in Hillsborough Township and containing 4.34 acres. IMPACT: The proposed amendment would change the Land Use Plan designation of the property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node making it compatible for commercial or industrial rezoning. RECOMMENDATION: The planning staff recommends denial of the request. • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TrILTSBOROUGYI NORTH CAROLINA 27278 • ve 6:1 _ ga*ts REFERENCE: LUP-2-85 APPLICANT: CHANDLER CONCRETE TYPE OF REQUEST: SECONDARY AGENT: T. E. CHANDLER SPECIFIC REQUEST: TEN YEAR TRANSITION/ STAFF ASSIGNMENT: GENE BELL COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION NODE PUBLIC HEARING DATE: MAY 28, 1985 *************** VERIFICATION OF APPLICATION AS COMPLETE The applicant has submitted the required application materials which include: a, application forms - completed b. fully dimensioned tax map with parcel to be redesignated highlighted c. letter of request - narrative LQ.CAT (..T._.V._,UtP_PBAC212TIDN The property is located on the south side of old N.C. 10 (SR 1710 about one- half mile from its intersection with new N.C. 86. It is referenced as tax Map 45 Lot 32 Hillsborough Township. The tract to be redesignated contains 4.34 acres. It was merged with the existing Chandler Parcel (1.47 acres) on October 3, 1984. Total parcel acreage is now 5.81 acres. ISSUES This application raises the following land use issues for consideration: 1. Appropriateness of area for industrial uses and implications of rezoning. 2. The relationship between the application and the overall Land Use Plan and policies for the County. 3. The relationship of this request to the Town of Hillsborough's annexation plans and the willingness of the Town of Hillsborough to annex the site. 4. Impacts of the use on SR 1710. RECOMMENDATION The Planning staff recommends denial of the request. -- , 2"Ilamsaw4le=wwimwmavAm2"°°"""2""'""1"713 00100 . e. 1/4. ..)::,..\r01.)1/4). , LUP-1211§5-: 1-- . 1 frj ...ii.S.,ii.flit-tlit ir .„0 ct • d. APPLICANT: Chandler Concrete Co. -4401 41011.- REQUEST: Secondary Land Use Plan iiim of i a t a- .„.a i ih ■, - , . '71.t..-20°Z.L F. ' • Amendment • Wr---- CURRENT :11111..\ °4*•;4.' 4 il" "' A( URRENT DESIGNATION: Rural Residential r . KCX Pi I k '7. REQUESTED DESIGNATION: Ten Year Transition/ .a.,.....-40,.„...4 . _ -,......,,, 1 1...002.4War..r(0....zeill. ' ( - '• I . , . Commercial-Industrial rammia,. .77. ---- , ,---.■•- "e-''. • 1 'y , . Nia" i IA/ Scale: 1" = 4001 - Transition Node •Eke ur RD. ..r. . s U.S.70 1 4,..................,,,,,,Tsar........--,-..,,,-,o.sr.,, ,=....,, ,..-....,—„,,,....a.-.. um* or? I 41 AC • ----- -- .....,_ es -----...._ / . . 70 I ..„,....., ---.,_ -6,ora CATE• .A1114.i „ , -... 8159 •/ .., - - • ", /4;•,, - V%.* ' - Tr /*Pt 911111:•&14 1/ . i• .cam \'f19 ■ ' W I I 1 511.121° C*ALTERS RO. , , , ri-c •• ii 1724 CI . . ..tk. / / i' / 1 it I . Z ' - A elte.' 1 c\\ 05 ..71:i • ,, % I• ''\ ...L.. c-•,. ; / -6,°9° .. , \ - .....---.,) X /1.1 \.., \\-- --.• 1 1/44 . ■\ \ ,,33 ./r II I / .c-, 1 --. ..........: 1 - I 1 19 \ • II 1 . - v... . .. - 7575\ # 1 .... - .• .1 . • \ i 13.82 AC. I i 1 10'o''' -2;453 /..oc,ATI ott/ mpc 4 III 1 I.`..1 (oRANse . 3,. .., 4 . / 0 -, A.;‘ --- ..,... / - -- i .ib COURr, i .... ro-610106 AC \\ r.A. , \ , ../.:-.‘ - I- N 838,coo 1.37 AC. i\.._.: , 19AA05..----- -------...1 82-'! --1.62 AC. „ .- '////,. limmi. / 1695e - -- :---... - */ /../• -' , \1 ----LIR A114.:3-4-1RCC-L7:44-2-A 6-.:C..I 1_1978,A,C::s :-- ..., -2' //.../.:: -L., ------- -,-;;-7-2■ '; 4; Vez_k<s) --• i ' 2-51 AC.CAL. A, i om. 1 n6.56 I ' 0 ,------- -, ' .49 .•\ • 74 / - ' r., . • . / I 1-- I • Ilk,\ , 707 c7"• / i \ \ AC ,/,_`••• / q ' I 1 I 1 4.04AC i - SEE I MAP 45A 1 1 `9111111111PAil • i WOPPA aturs , 116.10PFX10,4K41,; MWRiaelKS,SEC.5, C115\ • _ ..53: i! .\\\,\\ /- / . , 1 IAC / / - SEC:I) •u, g i SEC-21 i 42 I il I . ' 1 1 tt. . 11 il I I . 1 I 1 I I I I 2 4 AC ....V\9•9 .\ k 5 21.. °• %.*:',...,',N9 N. N All: • . :::::0/././1/.///fy53538 iii 117 AC. /...... : il 1 I , \ . _ . • I ,..,, 1 1 II • 13 .7309' - \X \ - V.'',-..84AC.• „ • \ .....-,. I 3.94 AC. CAL . 7.442 „ - 1 1 1 — 1 I Q4),1.195 ■ -5a6I LANE I 1 - , - ---, 6./OPPA OAKS, - I : 186 _ _2 .__AC-__ _ _ _ _ .—.,..,''Pi...- !,:53.6,000 D I AC- SEC.31 SEE ; ; MAP 45E3 ; 'i -16F 1--257-1. -2-0.1- t- - i i - i I 1 :I C."Al i sc \. i (7". ‘..,-, i -V / r ORANGE COUNTY- PLANNING DEPARTMENT . 004 IILLLSBOROITGE NORTIii CAROLINA. 27278 ."7.111161.N. (1Y 447* 400 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT • APPLICATION - All persons requesting an amendment to the Land. Use Plan of Orange County are required to complete the- following.application as completely as possible: • — . OFFICE USE ONLY REQUEST #LUP- 2. DATE RECEIVED: -/7 - STAFFPERSON(S)•RESPONSIBLE:-..G-EW ELL GENERAL DATA:. Chandler Concrete Co . , Inc . • Property dvner(s) Name: V • Mailing Address: V V P. 0. Drawer 1239, Burlington , N. C. 27216 Burl - Phone: 919(Home) 226-1181 Work) m_soro 919-732-8121 • Agent(s) Name V Thomas E. Chandler, President Mailing Address: P . 0. Drawer 1239, BOrlington , N. C. ?7216 Phone: 919 226-1181 • SPECIFIC DATA: Tax Reference: Township Hillsborough Tax Map 11-5 Block V Lot 32 Public/Private Road Name: State Rd- # 1710 Lot Size: Acreage 4.34 Square Footage Lot Frontage- 975.30 ft . Lot Depth ••- 269.. 03 ft. • REQUEST AUP-11- 005 SPECIFIC DATA; (continued) : Current: Plan Category Designation(s) : General Rural Residential Activity Node: Watershed Joint Planning Area Describe Land Uses In the General Area: u * . - , - - . Trailer park, Convenience Store, Mini Whse. On Adjacent Parcels of Land: . Ready Mixed Concrete Plant Hwy # 1710, Southern Railroad and a manufactered home. • REQUEST • Land Use Plan Category Designation(s) Requested: Commercial Industrial ,.. Type of Amendment: Primary Secondary RBI'- * * * * * * * * * * * This application should be submitted with the following materials: Fully dimensioned tax map on which is highlighted the parcel, or portion thereof, in question. Legal description of the- parcel, or portion therof. ' Letter of request to include: o the tax reference, general location and owner of the parcel o thercurrent and requested land use plan category designation(s) o a: narrative stating the manner in which the proposed amendment will carry-out the intent and purpose of the adopted - - comprehensive plan or part thereof o a statement of any other circumstances, factors and reasons which the applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment o statement of the changed or changing conditions in the area, or in the County generally, which make the proposed amendment • reasonably necessary. I *oh the undersigned, certify that all statements furnished, in this application are true to the best of -my (war) knowledge and that the application as submitted is complete. - • • e. . NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SIGNATURE- OF APPLIUNT6) DATE • • CHANDLER CONCRETE CO., INC. 001i READY MIXED CONCRETE POST°Mot Cornwell!' 1230 OURLINGTOK NORTH CAROLINA 27215 WO 2264181 April 16, 1985 Orange CountY Planning Department Hillsborough , North Carolina Re: Hillsborough Township Map # 45 , Lot 32 Dear Sir: Our company is the owner of the above referenced property. It is located on state road 1710 and bounded by our plant on the west , state road 1710 on the north, Southern railway- to the south and a danufactured home to the east. The current use of the land is rural residential and we request it be changed to commercial /industrial transition node. We have recently graded this property and would like to use it to park our vehicles and for any water run off from our property. We received a grading permit from the county and have bordered the prop- erty on the east with trees . The grading of this property also allows better visability for our trucks entering highway 1710 and elimated some risk for accidents . We have owned the adjoining property since 1972 and we were able to purchase this property in 1984 after the estate of J . B . Rhine was settled. Our request is based on the procedure for amending the Land Use Plan adopted by the Board of Orange County Commissioners , 11/1/82 under the category of secondary amendments item "B" which reads , "extension of any plan area where the additional area is contiguous with the existing area and does not increase the existing area by more than 100 acres . The land adjoining our property has been designated commercial/industria and is currently being used for this purpose. Our company therefore requests approval of our plan to change the designation of our re- cently acquired property. Very truly yours , CHANDLER CONCRETE CO. , INC. 1 .„,ii. e57/74,.„414_,/ T. E. Chandler TEC:nd President • 007 •••• a/s pasal ,o a Grantee Mail Tot WAR' a s • Form WD•601 Printed and for sale by James Williams&Co.,hir..YadkimrBk.N.C. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,_ ) •t•- ORANGE County. THIS DEED,Madedtis c2i.aJ day ofaa7rprurts r 19 84 .by and between JACK I. FREELAND (single} and JAMES LANDON FREELAND (single) of Orange Cooney • red mace of North Catolbu,heeeinalvs tolled Grantor.nod CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY, INC. _of Counry and State of North Cuoiine,hereinafter ailed Grantee.whose permanent mailing address is_ P. O. Drawer 12.39- DME1-1 .g on r North CaroLinn 27215 WITNESSETH:That the Grantor.for and in consideration of the sum of –T – Dollars nd ocher good and valuable considerations to him in hand paid by the Grantee.the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,has given,granted,bargained,sold nil convoyed,and by these presents does give.grant.bargain.sell.convey and confirm unto the Grantee,his heir andlor successors and assigns,premises in ENO Township, nRAtx;F County,North Carolina.described as follows: 9873-8 -s'sq 4.dS-.•35' VWeek sea 9873-8'?-3614 4•1.s. Consisting of 4.34 acres as shown on the plat entitled 'property Surveyed for Chandler Concrete Company", dated September 19, 1984, by Steve F. Yuhasz, Registered Land Surveyor, (a portion of which survey is attached as Exhibit A) lying on the Southwest aide of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 (known-as old N. C. 10) and described particularly as follows: BEGINNING at a control iron set in the Northwestern property line of Lot B of BEECHWOOD BEND at the Southwestern right-of-way line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 and running thence South 54 degrees 41 *mutes 03 seconds West 222.13 feet to a point in the center line of the right-of-way of Southern Railroad; thence North 28 degrees 09 minutes 55 seconds West 276.02 feet to a paint; thence in a Northwescwardly direction 483.27 feet along the arc of a circle with a radius of 1,845.feet (the chord of the said circle running North 35 degrees 40 minutes 09 seconds West 481.89 feet) to a point iu the Eastern line of property now belonging to Chandler Concrete Company, Inc., and running thence North 09 degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds East 311.34 feet to an iron in the center line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710; running thence with the center line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 South 35 degrees 18 minutes 57 seconds East 975.3 feet to an iron set in the center • line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710; thence South 54 degrees 41 minutes 03 seconds West 30 feet to a control iron, the point and place of the BEGINNING. This property is to become a part of the property located on the Westernmost line which presently belongs to Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. There is no subdivision intended by the conveyance of this lot. • • The above Iand was conveyed to Grantor by .See Book No. ,Page TO HAVE AND TO HOLD The above described premises,with all the appurtenances thereunto belonging.or in any wise appertaining,unto the Grantee,his .tiro andlor successors and assigns forever. And the Grantor covenants that he is seized of said premises in fee,and has the right to convey the same in fee simple;that saw:premises are free from en. umbrances(with the exceptions above stated.if any);and that he will wa r r e n t and defend the sad title to the same against the lawful claims of all persons ,homsoever. When reference is made eo the Grantor or Grantee,the singular shall include the plural and the masculine shall include the feminine or the Tuner. WWHE OF.Th ntr hereunto set hu hand and seal,the day and y'ear,L{ust above weij°n, (SEAL) ✓4$211-6C,taLiChn$1:10.4'W/C.1 (SEAL). • (SEAL) c/ (SEAL) TATS QE NORTH CAROLINA - _ COUNTY. ;1NE J0043,.... I. w"Anr1 C �a rC C ,a Notary Public of said County,do hereby ter•'` ell al ;Jt - r: - ;motor,personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing deed. Witness my hand and notarial seal,c the 4y Commission Expires: ,Da tins xl� �I\M L. ''a+1�11tiiaiari:il•P�-���j � I Ii FATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, . ._ COUNTY. s • L—Rrt- ,,,S..^--.�.v� a Notary Publk of said County,do hereby certify„t,. Ot JAMES LANDON FREELAND (sin:le) ;rancor.personally appeared before me this day and acknowkdged the execution tithe ongoing deed. NOTARY Women my hand and notarial l L._.p is,th/e day of +� F Isrp .ty Commission Expires:_ 101-7�0/1P;y, ) .ia�at11�Y/' �'_�1✓1 TATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, COUNTY. /Y�F,I!�•�, The foregoing cadfcate(s)of s(am)certified to be corcem.This instrument was presented for registration this day of ,19_, A.M„P.M..and duly recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds of Cary, inreb Carolina,in Book ,Page._, 1316 the day of ,A_D_,19 / r p • Register of Deeds ihrmenr,,0eputy'1 ter a Deeds This Deed mum by c.6 D._Hogue. III. HOGUE & STRI,' t, P 110 t1 Marggret L?ne Hillcbor ug}.., NC 9792g. AMOR • ,,..T... ... ..v..nr. nc4l ucni IHL. WI an 10-Z0 YEAR TRANSITION S COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION NODE COt+ GIdL-111DUs t O U 8 RURAL RESIDENTIAL -u AND T E*T ! AR TAN3I ON 1 TRANSITION ACTIVITY No R -•d Slam. Located on Land Slave. Ho sixntficant Land Slope. Located on --d with an overall slope or topography problem land etch slopes of less lope of less than 15% that would unreasonably La- than 15% grade. -e- crease the cost of extending water and sewer lanes. EYdz'olo . Located out- .Located out- side of 100-year flood ide of 100-year flood Eyd_ro1a¢,r. Located outside prone areas as identified rove areas as identified of 100-year flood prone by the Corps of n neers. . y the Carps of Engineers. areas as ident:tried by the- Corps of Engineers. Flora and Fauna. Located _ora and Fauna. Located away from sites that would, ay from sites that would, Flora and Fauna.. Located if developed, create a t developed, create a away arc= sires that would, threat to Unique or endan treat to unique or andan- if developed, create a gered species as i , -red species as identified threat to unique or en-• • by the state or federal .red •y the state or rederai dangered species as identi- government. - vernment. tied by the state or - federal government. Sol Conditions. Located oil Conditions. Located in areas where genera/ soil areas where general soil Soil Conditions. Located conditions are suitable for oxidations are suitable for to areas where general soil urban uses• because of good s- a sewage disposal conditions are suitable for d.-di.a ° urban uses because of oad bearing drainage charaeteristi,csod for Site de o t. -ublic Services/Utilities. and load bearing canac•!ty for �. ca_ea an areas that wall site development. ?ublio Services/Utilities. i .of require urban-type �/_ iocated an areas orixicb, are ervices. Public Serv-ices/UtilLties. or could be reasonably and - - . .• Located in areas which are effectively served by cen- or could be reasonably and tralized public services and effeclently served by cep,- utilities. tralized public services and utilities. - -. __ ______i soortation System. No Transnortation System. Located -mrnsaertation System. Focus- . evaluation. '. areas that have very good , or. the intersecuian of arteri-' road access, as well as service - and/or collector cigtsways and nerdy Use. Located in areas - by rail. lines. These areas at least 5 ma..-�utes oo utia^- should have the Bost complete extending rsect .5 =-s beyond suc ° transportation network in the intersections er or fate i one time from an activity node. County's at { in mile of an interstate Inver- time planning lurisd_at_on. change and within 1000 feet o , misting Land Use. Located in rail Lines. association wits other low- •ensity rural. :-esidential uses CnergY Use. Located within Energy Use. Located within in general proximity to developed less than a 5 mute commuting •r developing,. activ_ty Hades. tame from small-scale commercial mu`angbtime Crow an Urban uses and a 5-Lo minute commutin yea. griculture and. Porest:r. ,o_ tine from ma,+,vr. c adreial uses cared away ;_am areas ::sat or an Urban area. oted, if developed, have a xisting Land Use. Located. et:yenta?, +fact on. produc- =xlsti�i Land Use. Located in within ieentit led Ten or ive agricultural. and managed areas which, are an trarsitiorL Twenty-Year Transition areas. forest land. from or or low-density uses Agriculture and Porestr7. La- ghe_ density uses. cared away from om areas �vr:e:e eooulation :e»sit . Located development would have a detri- • areas of rural population Agriculture and Fcrestz`„1. ashy, generally one dwelling Located away from areas where mental impact on productive . t per acre. development would have a detri-. agricultural uses and managed mental impact on productive forest land. agricultural uses and managed ?emulation Density. Located forest land. in areas wick moderate to high ?ovulation Density. Located population densities. In areas wic: moderate to - high population densities. - , Fistoric and Cultural. Located away fro= areas where development would have a detrimental impact on state or federally acknowledged historic-cultural sites.or County identified ?ublic 'Interest Areas. 009 1 CHRONOLOGY OF EvEms± CHANDLER CONCRETE LAND_ usz_eLmummiym, (LUP-2-85) 10-3-85 Chandler Concrete merged undeveloped 4.34 acre tract to 1.47 acre tract containing their concrete plant. 1-7-85 Orange County Health Department and N.C. Division of Environmental Management (DEM) officials visited Chandler's new tract in response to citizen complaint about wastewater runoff. 1-10-85 Mr. J. C. Tuttle of Chandler Concrete advised by letter from DEM that they (Chandler) were illegally discharging wastewater and that a permit was required. DEM requested written plans by 2-1-85 for management of wastewater either by recycling on-site or treating and discharging. 1-17-85 Application forms sent to Chandler by DEM for discharge and on-site management of wastewater. 1-30-85 Chandler responded to DEM and indicated intent to comply with DEM requirements. 2-8-85 MTC site plan submitted to Orange . County Plahning Department. 2-13-85 Chandler received permit from Orange County Sedimentation & Erosion Control Division to clear and grade new site. In conjunction with clearing and grading site 2 retention ponds were constructed. Chandler's plans were to recycle water from lower pond back through concrete plant by use of pumps. This was an option suggested by DEM but Chandler did not obtain required state permits. 2-14-85 MTC site plan approval issued by the Planning Department in conjunction with grading and clearing activities permitted by Sedimentation and Erosion Control Division. 3-25-85 Citizen complaint received by Orange County Planning Department concerning Chandler's use of new tract for washing and parking concrete trucks. * This reflects main events and does not include all correspondence/phone calls re opponents and Chandler and Health Department etc. 010 2 4-9-85 Chandler officials met with Planning Department and were advised that their use of the new tract was non-conforming since the use was an extension of their existing 1-3 operation and the new site was zoned R-l. Washing and parking trucks and run-off retention were both non-conforming uses. They were advised to apply for Land Use Plan amendment and, if successful, rezoning. They were warned against • further use of property until it was brought into compliance with zoning ordinance. 4-17-85 Application for amendment of Land Use Plan received from Chandler. 5-8-85 Chandler Concrete notified by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine of pending legal action if non-conforming uses not terminated. 5-16-85 Complaint filed with Orange County Planning Department by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine. 5-17-85 Chandler barricaded new driveway connecting site to Old NC 10 and ceased non-conforming use of property 5-20-85 Planning Department met with DEM to discuss project history, options, enforcement action etc. and conduct site visit. •5-20-85 Chandler formally notified by Orange County Planning Department that all non-conforming uses of 4.34 acre tract must cease immediately until such time as properly zoned. E RUE Iambs 300 W.Tryon Street 011 ip F011sborough.N.C.27278 732.8181 732-9361 ex 305 Chapel Hit be 967-9251 HEALTH DEPARTMENT 96E14501 Mebane kne 227-2032 Durham line 688.7333 688-7331 Carr 1W9 Mall,Suite 225 100 N. Greensboro Street Carrboro.N.C.27510 942-4168 - Jerry Robinson, M.P.A. MEMORANDUM Director • TO: Jerry Robinson FROM: Tony Laws DATE: May 7, 1985 • SUBJECT: Land Use Plan Amendment Applications (Chandler Concrete) In an April 26 memo from Gene Bell to Jerry Robinson, the mention is made that Chandler Concrete Company has requested a redesignation of land use for some recently purchased property adjacent to their exist- ing I assume that they are planning to expand their concrete Sometime ago (maybe 3 months), we received a complaint from a neighbor across the railroad tracks saying that Chandler was washing down their concrete delivery trucks with some kind of acid and that the runoff was comming onto their property. I checked out the complaint and found that this was true and that a lot of sediment was being deposited in the ditches and streams in the area as well. • I contacted the Orange County' Erosion and Sedimentation Control Depart- ment and the State Department of Natural Resources and Community Devel- opment, Division of Environmental Management. i accompanied Ms. McCaskill and Mr. Adkins of DEM to the plant where the local managers and the Production Manager acknowledged that they were using muriatic acid to wash down the trucks and agreed to present the Division of Environmental Manage- ment with plans for containing the substance on the property and for proper disposal. To my knowledge that situation has not been corrected. Before the operation is allowed to expand, I feel that the runoff problem needs to be appropriately addressed. If I can be of further assistance please let me know. Thank You. • TL:sm 4Tiva .14.1-6 A4.,77,4rA =h, (ft:zjA-Act 4,-.1.714 • es744 "SC split4, vi 3cm....<42 wtoktez-A Vi•nel".41 4, .‘") .1:10;1 • <5-141 (t5 anturt /if E ( ,E RUE U 14 e {®mt=wit: Mayor . Town Clerk Frank H.Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Commissioners Supt. Water Works Lynwood J. Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd ♦♦ma L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith � r Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens *r Arnold W. Hamlett it:# w Fire Chief John t 4�r 5 May 8, 1945 Gene Bell Planner Orange County Planning Department 106 B. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Dear Gene: The Hillsborough Planning Board considered the information on the Land Use Plan amendment application submitted by Chandler Concrete Company which you sent at their May 2, 1985 meeting. Their recommendation to the Orange County Planning Board and Orange County Commissioners- is as follows: The Hillsborough Planning Board recommends that this application by Chandler Concrete Company for a change to Ten Year Transition and to Commercial--Industrial Transition Node for an additional 4.34 acres on Old N.C. 10 be turned down due to the following reasons: . 1- Pollution of the surrounding waters, is expected to continue and increase. 2- This expansion of almost three times the existing use which is 1.47 acres is not appropriate due to the residential housing nearby including a mobile home sz park across the road as well as a mobile home park.and housing to the east. 3- The narrow road is not appropriate for this expansion. The trucks are now a hazard. Expansion would increase the hazards. 6- There are no sewer lines in the area. The Town has no plans to expand sewer into the area. II If you have any questions about this recommendation, please let me know. S erely� //�J11�Q , a.'f;,7L' - Ka Maltbie 2 ing Officer s• . -" 11110ECEIIVIEM i m , 171...444;" 013 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JAMES G.MARTIN Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 GOVERNOR April 30, 1985 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMESEHARRINGTON SECRETARY Mr. Gene Bell, Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Mr. Bell: This has reference to your recent letter concerning a Land Use Plan Amendment submitted by Chandler Concrete Company on SR 1710 in Orange County. This is to advise that we do not have any comments concerning this application. Sincerely, 7 J. W. Watkins • DIVISION ENGINEER -- JWW:mdj cc: Mr. S. H. Jones An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 014 To: Oriange County Planning Dept From: Robert E. Rhin 106 E. Margaret Lane Mexico City Plant. G.M.C. Wt., N Ill l lsborough, N. C. 27278 3-2.20 C. M. Bldg. Detroit. MI 48202 � o i+ May 16, 1985. Re: Rezoning of Land on South Side of old N.C. #10 and East of Existing Chandler Concrete Co. (4.34 Acres) • Dear Sirs: In the matter referred above I would like to make the following comments: 1. I expect to retire on 1JULY1985 and build and live in Orange County on the land just east of Lawerence Road and north of Old N.C. #10 on a part (Tract 3) of the homestead passed to me by my parents, Dr. Mrs. J. B. Rhine who bought. the land in 1952. The land I own is very close to the 4.34 acres now in question and owned by Chandler Concrete Co. 2. On 5 July 1984, I listed with Apple Creek Realty, represented by Mr. James Rae Freeland, Tract , #4 of "Portion of J.B. Rhine Estate" of 19.78 ac. which was sold to James J. Freeland and wife, Maxine H. Freeland -(PIN 9873L86-4833) who later apparently sold the 4.34 acres in question to Chandler Concrete Co. 3. At the time I listed the property for sale on 5 July 84, I spe- cifically questioned the zoning and use of the land in the future, and I was advised that it would have to continue as residential. I accepted the answer and perhaps unwisely did not propose to add any restrictions or covenants in the selling agreement to insure continued residential use (if such restrictions are legal). 4. My interest in the future use of Tract 4, especially the part between the railroad and old N.C. #10 was and is based on the following: A. Tract #2 of J. B. Rhine Estate, is directly across (North side) N.C. #10, contains a beautiful. l.ake built by my father and many fine trees. This tract now belongs to my sister, Dr. Sally Rhine Feather, and I would certainly not want to see her land value or beauty harmed by industrial development. B. Tract #1 of J. B. Rhine Estate is also directly across (on north side of) N.C. #10, and contains among other things, the old farm house bought by my parents in 1952 (their home for over 30 years) and many beautiful trees. This tract now belongs to and is the home of (since 1952) my sister, Ms. Betsy E. Rhine. I certainly would not want to see Betsy's 015 - 2 - home place, either value or beauty harmed by industrial development. C. As mentioned earlier, I own and plan to retire and build on Tract 3, just east of Lawrence Rd. and on north side of N. C. #10. I do not want any increased development other than residential near my retirement home. 5. A few other points: A. It appears that Orange County existing zoning has been violated. B. It appears that grading, filling, and removal of trees and bushes has taken place, perhaps in violation of ordances. C. Expansion of the concrete operation will mean more heaUy trucks, more noise, more pollution, more wear and tear on the secondary roads, more spilled concrete and gravel on the roads (fast look at intersection of N.C. #86 and old N.C. #10) , reduced value, and reduced positive environmental aspects of living in rural Orange County. Accordingly, I ask the Planning Department and County Commissioners not to approve any change in the zoning, havetheareacontinueas • residential , and fruther at your discression consider., orderijr--" that the land be restored to its .earlier condition; the last to serve notice to all that Orange County Zoning Regulations are not to be violated, but are to be respected. Will our Orange County enforce zoning (N.C. Law G.S. 153A-123)? Please let the answer be "yes!". 0/;4111/ Thank you, V\ °) Robert E. Rhine. • cc: Ms. Betsy E. Rhine, Route 5 Box 690, Hillsborough, N.C. 27278. rE)ECEIVEridi Orange aunty commissioners c/a Planning Department Hillsborough, N.G. Dear Sirs: I em against lettin- Changer Concrete Company expand along old at. 10. I have had repeated trouble with their trucks, which, when turning from at. 10 onto N.C. 86, have come onto my property again and wain, making a deep trench in my driveway and obstructing my mailbox. When I spoke to Dir. Chandler about it he said nothing could be done. In desperation we then put bricks and boards with nails in Wincx1riveway. After that the trucks didn't come onto my land again until some time later when someone I didn't see took the bricks and boards away. With more trucks my problem with Chandler Concrete would get worse. Please do not let this happen. • Sincerely, Lz' Ada Nichols -r-- • 4ide . . . _ - • _ . Joppa Oak Homeowners Assoc.,Inc. .esw. P.O.Box 1054 H&borough.NZ.27278 ECEIV cd6-eg.-e, Orange County Planning Department 106 mast Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 May 16, 1985 Dear Members of the Planning Department, The Joppa Oaks Homeowners' Association wishes to protest the rezoning of Lot 32 on Orange County Tax Map #45 for Hillsborough Township . We feel that rezoning of this property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition and Commercial-industrial Transition Activity Node is ill-advised for several reasons. Chandler Concrete Company does not have a. positive record of concern for the physical environment surrounding their immediate property. They have demonstrated this disregard for nearby property owners by willfully dumping dangerous chemicals and waste in such a manner as to pollute not only their own property but the property of other citizens of Orange County. Environmental impact studies need to be conducted concerning the damage this company may have already done to residential property in the surrounding area. It is important that these tests be conducted to measure not only the ground and water pollution problems associated with Chandler Concrete Company, Inc . , but also the possiblility of a very real threat of air pollution and consequent breathing disorders to the inhabitants of the surrounding residential areas because of the constant dust generated from Chandler's operations. Chandler's operations have increased in scale and activity recently. With these increases have come increases in both noise level and traffic congestion. What is in store for nearby residents when this operation expands even more? Has anyone in the Planning Department been near a large concrete company and seen first hand what happens to the surrounding Areas? Perhaps statements from residents of people who live in similar areas need to be taken into consideration? There are many other ways an industry of this sort lowers the general quality of life of the area in which it is located. For example , Chandler has taken wooded property which was zoned Residential and stripped it of all trees. No consideration was given to the people who must look at this scalped and desolute land. A buffer zone of trees would have made the environment at least LOOK more pleasant. For these and other reasons, The Joppa Oaks Homeowner's • • Association asks that the Orange County Planning Department deny the rezoning request of Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. • Sincerely, • Lee Ricketts • • President Joppa Oaks Homeowners' • Association , Inc. • as• Orange County Planning Department,: 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough , NC 27278 May 23, 1985 • Dear Members of the Planning Department , As residents and property owners in Joppa Oaks we wish to protest the rezoning of the new Chandler Concrete Company property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition and Commercial-industrial Transition Activity Node. We think that allowing this rezoning to take place is NOT to the benefit of the surrounding community of residential property owners for the following reasons. We feel that Chandler Concrete Company has clearly shown its lack of regard for the safety and welfare of nearby property owners by carelessly dumping corrosive chemicals and waste products not only on their. own property but also on that of others. For example , in order to dispose of acid waste , Chandler recently polluted several lots in Joppa Oaks as well as a stream which runs through our property. One resident's lot was literally submerged in muriatic acid / concrete waste - -for several months before Chandler took corrective action--and only then because of a complaint to the Orange County Health Deartment and the County Manager's Office. It has also been • reported to us that this pollution caused a fish kill where the stream empties into a private lake in Byrdville . Has anyone in the Planning Department looked into this matter? • Also, we and our neighbors have noticed a good deal of dust coming from Chandler's operations and floating over Joppa Oaks. This has become all the more noticeable since the roads in Joppa Oaks have been recently paved. ) For these reasons, we feel that the Planning Department should have environmental impact studies conducted concerning this sort of damage by Chandler's latest expansion . Only then do we believe the Department will have the facts upon which to base a rational decision concerning the industrialization of what has traditionially been a • residential area in Orange County. In the absence of such • studies, the Planning Department would be authorizing a change in the planned development of this area which would almost definitely (given Chandler's lack of environmental awareness) have negative consequences for the surrounding community. • • Aside from the major complaints already mentioned, we feel we can look forward in the near future to other inconveniences. Chandler's expanded operations and activities would no longer classify as a light industry. We are not protesting against the expansion of a corner drug store or some other small commercial establishment. The constant roar of the concrete trucks and other heavy machinery wakes us almost every weekday. The general noise level and traffic congestion surrounding Chandler Concrete Company is already anything but residential . What else do we have to . look forward to when this operation expands even more? If any member of the Planning Department or one of the County • Commissioners was a residential neighbor of Chandler, we doubt that this rezoning would be likely. Specifically, as regards the property Chandler wishes • rezoned, we think we have a fair indication of the company's - • concern for the well—being and property values of this neighborhood. Even before any rezoning had been brought up, • the land was stripped of all vegetation and a large pit dug to store environmentally unsafe waste . So this property, which . is still zoned residential , has been deliberately used as an industrial waste disposal site. This action seems highly irregular and perhaps illegal . We think the public has a right to know who in the Planning Department allowed such de facto rezoning to occur BEFORE a public hearing could take place . If this is standard praCtice , why have a public hearing at all ? Part of the responsibility of the Planning Department is to PLAN development for all the citizens of Orange County and not just to cater to a local industry. For these reasons, we would like to ask that the Orange County Planning Department deny the request of Chandler Concrete Company. Property values will be lowered; hazardous wastes will be generated; and the neighbors will have to endure the inconveniences listed above if Chandler is allowed to expand its operations onto residential land. Since we will be unable to attend the public hearing in person, we would appreciate it if the Planning Department would make copies of this letter available to those who do attend. Sincerely, _ • ijkL141.- .°77. 12361114`a—I RECEIVEI@ trimiimci221 I am the owner of the land directly across Vighway 10 from the 4.34 acres in question. Hy parents, Dr, and hrs. J. B. Rhine, bought all of this land as part of a larger tract back in 1952, as a sanctuary where the, air was clean and there was some peace and quiet from the traffic and noise of nearby Durham. It was painful for them to endure the noise and air pollution which Chandler Cement Company brought into this area during their later years, but they were too old and feeble to battle this industrial intrusion so near to their residence. Now, we three Rhine children who own the land feel that it is time to stop the further expansion of Chandler Cement Company in our own backyard. As the owner of 40 wooded acres and a sizeable fishing lake within a stone's throw of Chandler's new land, I am particularly sickened by the expansion of this loud and ugly neighbor. I am scared by the operating tactics they have already displayed, by the surreptitious manner in which the land was begun to be used for industrial purposes while it was clearly zoned residential. I am worried about how their water use and waste dis- posal might be affecting our ground water and I am very glad that my two grandchildren live several miles away from that ominous pit with the sickly green liquid which even as I write this is sitting right out on this land with no protectibe barrier. When I acquired my land last summer I immediately had it' registered as a N.C. Wildlife _tefuge and placed it in a forest management program with the U.S. Forest Service. Both of these efforts were to help protect and preserve the land to keep it an attractive location for the home that I plan to build back in the woods overlooking the lake, as well as for possible --:;= other home sites that I mif:ht wish to develop. If Chandler is allowed this expansion, it would be a personal asaster for me, and I think would ruin this land for any high-quality residential use. But in addition to my personal concerns, I think there is a larger issue involved. If the existing land-use plan can be so easily disregarded, I think it is a clearcut negative message being given to present and prospective tax-paying residents of Orange County. While I know that we need to plan for expanded industrial development in Orange County parti- cularly as Highway 40 enters our county, is this the way we want it to come--haphazardly by the backdoor? If so, then Eno Township and Orange County will not be safe for any of us. In fact, speaking of safety, if any of you have recently driven down the narrow corridor between this coet land in question and my lake and narrowly missed being hit by one of Chandler's ever-increasing number of big trucks, you will know quite graphically how unsafe it already is. e, Sally Rhine ?eather, Ph.D. i I,, . llc-I ks)oc..\../ i 0 /./. '' S n-A'-eili/•., '.' P /!•:-i._..,•r,. €....7 ....._/-- - .• • ;' ./`�~'✓rte=.--► l�T! , _.r'rL+,t ✓ '. �. J t"-j-'3 ''7. 'i 'i r J Y ►.... l!_3`4 -GYv..,_,- . . i tic,--r-r./ ► _- _.__ . Sv !- "2.. r'"-l.-P cr . Q)t.... i'-'','c.- -- ` ._ �: _ - --.__-_-- • __�.__..__ _:.___._....__ .... _ J ._ Nom.-..� ... ......__�._ __.. . ._ -w-.. ._.. /_..0... .Yt`7 - -T f vtis t.?Z.o iv.. .g.fi. !y!mac!- lE . -1-`v'-G--x,. erej -.4--v-t-1 L„.),'. �`..,+^ :r 1 -a.. fit; _ t I .. .....---._.: ,. . 14►.. .0,R. r _ ._.eaF- _ . /'rPi0C.%C.-1-' l'?r . s *- A-/ + ,;. ,i • • �... . ii. 1 iE • i.. Et! . • is ii, -v P 001 • 1 CHRO OL'.OG OP E Irk: - T CANDLER CONCRETE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT (LUP-2-85) 10-3-8, L/- Chandler Concrete merged undeveloped 4.34 acre tract to 1.47 acre tract containing their concrete plant. 1-7-85 Orange County Health Department and N.C. Division of Environmental. Management (DEM) officials visited - Chandler's new tract in response to citizen complaint about wastewater runoff. 1-10-85 Mr. T. C. Tuttle of Chandler Concrete advised by letter from DEM that they (Chandler) were illegally discharging wastewater and that a permit was required.. DEM requested written plans by 2-1-85 for management of wastewater either by recycling on-site or treating and discharging. 1-17-85 Application forms sent. to Chandler by DEM for discharge and on-site management of wastewater. 1-30-85 Chandler responded to DEM and indicated intent to ICcomply- with DEM requirements. 2-8-85 MTC site plan submitted to Orange , County Planning Department. 2-13-85 Chandler received permit from Orange County Sedimentation & Erosion Control Division to clear and grade new site. In conjunction with clearing and n 9 radi 9 site 2 retention ponds were constructed. Chandler's plans were to recycle cl Y e water from lower . pond back through concrete plant by use of pumps. This was an option suggested b DEM but Chandler did not obtain required state permits. 2-14-85 MTC site plan approval issued by the Planning Department in conjunction with grading and clearing activities permitted by Sedimentation and Erosion Control Division. 3-25-85 Citizen complaint received by Orange County Planning Department concerning Chandler's use of new tract for washing and parking concrete trucks. * This reflects main events and does not include all correspondennce/phone calls re opponents and Chandler a Health Department etc. and 010 4-9-85 Chandler officials met with Planning Department and were advised that their use of the new tract was non-conforming since the use was an extension of their existing 1-3 operation and the new site was toned R-1. Washing and parking trucks and run-off retention were both non-conforming uses. They were advised to apply for Land Use Plan amendment and, if successful,. rezoning. They were warned against further use of property until it was brought into compliance with zoning ordinance. ( ) - 4-17-85 Application for amendment of Land Use Plan received from Chandler. 5-8-85 Chandler Concrete notified by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine of pending legal action if non-conforming uses not terminated. 5-16-85 Complaint filed with Orange County Planning Department by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine. 5=-17-85 Chandler barricaded new driveway connecting site to Old NC 10 and ceased non-conforming use of property 5-20-85 Planning Department met with DEM to discuss project history, options, enforcement action etc., and conduct site visit. 5-20-85 Chandler formally notified by Orange County Planning Department that all non-conforming uses of 4.34 acre tract must cease immediately until such time as properly zoned. ,•''' . .. ,, . .. . •?, f. ,.? . . .. . . _.. .. . • . ., • . ;•, • - . -7.'-:-. :: -7---C.-ir.1—g .• '',• e_..v i4 s -. , ,J 3.. ____ Pro c..telit. -k_o -,.- y--. ",-1z----i..."% -;?—: '.-:. . .:-.?. . 1 y--0---.0.--%70.... .. ...re0v7 . , . . ck.,,,..0 .41...,,...... • - -:. lif-€:-IL,_ 0--,-7.3L. ..; . -•• •-- - . -- ...... ., , .. ,., ..(..g). __69,--r„,_*,...--z_._ P-" ,) .. .q-A.r.-7--.-= ...C.).?. . 'C7.'4-e'.---v.6-et-11 ..fe*•?`4-2 . l'-f-A/7-4-71''' C"'" , _....0v7 . &.--," .e,./1.- .co6 ..-""4"■..,.__-.._ _i_.. . , .... c)--..-. .r.,. ,... .,...,,' ,. IA... • , : ..______.____. „...._.c:4_,...)___,,t,,-____.-1".E..-420.r_:_■:..r__,C.____._f_)'.. ______P_N___.IP,.... ... .. ..;.-tte.,..,-,...._.,105•_ .f._Lii.A-q„._te4re... , - - • . ...... - -.)-2---?1*-- , . ... 0,g--r",.--te_4 . . .0..-1.--e}. .. ....tCG-1: -.h.e,e.._ :G.--.4r.,'-e. ... _._ --____-_-................ . ... 04J.j..-I2,3. . . 1-44e./.1 • . _ ---b_. ____+-1:;:.R.-_. i J.: :./..-.1-zoi.4171 4_,..,,sk.._ . ._.._..__ . _.._. . . '.---)---1.--e... ... 1.----.0 . o'< _ .___.0 vet...t_ii....4.,_....r....--,Q 'Y'4"--r-v-C//rt-e. -1-1-34. . _ . CP-A-4,---r1U-26 iov.- ir...52.-Px. .. tp.- --.-- ...__ . . 4---6.-•' ! (9 -- • ' - • ., .. I - .. .. - •• • • . . 1 1 . . • . . ! , • -7; 4D--4-2" ;•.----1- r--ir:Asc--1.-R.,_ -'3 . r I 11^No r 11 o . __e ..--v 1 I 1. ....e-4.-"A_.. I ..?"---a----zo-• ../- ... '1'.. ' • I- • A ' ; • . . • -r>q: `.q I' • -- . '_ f 4- /1^; -1--Ps2 (.. ci iLy.iA^_..- . C. 17 !4- C.%,. r.,- --°-,. i 7 , . ti[ -� . .... 1- S / -'-'.f •yy. .,$ e.-2-g_ __e-c2 ,r",- ►r . - -----.. . I ••-c;7 -- "-- 14- e./:.c'ri � Z- _ -2_0( CQ.f . _ :E.. a, I 1 P r , i -- .-..._ .. . ._..-_.__Irk 'fa.-W.. T,?. f.T%P. ._. i..,--.•_.. --1'--4/_.. . .,;, --_.-c► i-'zF • ..V i�„J�. s- i F$ 1I' V t'W v9-'V'1 r , 1�ir�.s^_/- W"`-t d'-'Y? C�'1r i . r• -- ... II I . _- r -2l-ls, a J ,y. ,--1.. `y ,S-9r-„-:-oi. 4,- . . Ill . , I! I o 04.,,,. - �- ' 01-r. .-rL l?/ .. . ' . i 0_ ..e�- �I; i;; s I;ii .7/- -, -PY Orr-. - -1.3 l✓ o..,-r.,A . e,--e..SS'rr-/ -u'.rr -✓(`zTr✓.t r. 1 ; , p ' :!COS % v-0-c-vt . � --k 7t” 1" g 'e-4-4-e-' --' -'7- I'� '� f" il 1 ii lii '1 . • 1 - - „ --- ..._. ._ 42 C. ....- I..b._ - C>'^-Y-9-.e....1_,_: . -'T /`--a1..v-4- _ . .__.-_----•-- _----- l . .. - NAY ..4"..rov. ,tom _-. ...._Ct?.v.�)/5..---•.--•— _._.... . _ W/^Po'e>Gi Wes • _...._. — - .___ ___ ..Y` .- . .A.i ----•__. . . . .. 4.. --.:✓! -A-:•—------.tom-x.,?P--v__Y _ _.41,p Tn,.1-.4-1._f 2._ �,,a O 0 Imo! 4.4 C,-. 1 0 A I to c !i; A OYv•- . v ufe OY 1 p tr. .- c�(;�.A-.-.?1.•j via-P-4..._ -tv GLr b o�,,,.N iii 2 , ._. vi G/sue C,, _ 1 ,� i '-&, '1 , 21 I' V _S" -""• Cam--✓-��. r� i . t::•..4,,. .,...n, " , • - : ii . . • .;:-.„: 1 .. . .- • . . • . • • . • • ..,.,. ..,,-.,. i . • . • • • IL! - . . . • r r•'. 7.„2- ,.- .-r--,.....,v-9,' /0,„y--(..„,„,4? ' c...,- 14.e...r . : ts,7 %,-. 10 ;:.: • i.. ___-,... . ..._.. ...... _. .....__. . . . , * t "::.::' .._________._____:__..-____.±0__.__ _e..o/2-A4 .,...1 . . '/L._2it-,a-4-7(1--z• '.., C(rA4 .04. Z"N.... ...4...7. . .A .C.A.Sal OCA b---L...t..1" 1 .0‘,..,r....._.e...9‘.. „..d--, _____L:t-., ._„: .r,,-...1k....._. _ _ .L. rip„...yeek... . • c...-7t-iz 00-ellA t4A,Y ' . ...____.... .. .. • - Av- ,:- _....._______..„_...„.7.)-2,Nut -,4 71....._...._I--.-2-4--AA- , 714 K „'..: .. ...___... __,.... .1-e A- . ,c o-,-R-_. ....q-4.. .. • •. ._ -;t,--. ... •I.P. Y-sz-7-(4v.... . : 1-P-..4-r-xf frfla l' 1 ::; - - - - ----- - ---Q4■CAlta--. .1-e7-5—_. . _. • - . .,. _ . . . . '1,, .... .... . .. .. . ._ ______•___. _.....69. ...'*:-. .?.?-ci.. t,„, t 'Ft - ,• ' ••- • ••• • •• .- I jk■-s74-(xii. .".1/1:-.• 'El 4-?. _ C •kJ,t.-,(12At:P-!.Y.._ ..,/...,o' ...r-Pf” N .. . . 1 , 1 . _.. . . . . . ...... ..... ...__ _._ ._ . . . 1 I - . . ... I . . ._. , . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . • . I . . , • . I . ' . . . . . .. • • . . . IIII:• . . . . . . 1;1 . . . • . :.1 . Ili . . . . i.. • . , it-■ • — • 4,... id 1 I I 'II . - Ili• • . . • - . . . . . . • -•••- . • _Tr,;'.; tc ---. c-o for.e ivt) r-Tiov _ . . 1--„,„.. . .. .. • . ,5_ ,- ,c-p-R... ,-, 1. , 0,.,, . , . ... . •. .. • ---• - •• 1 .. -:---(4- ..,,c).e-r-r-sik___ .,.„. .._...4:.-- ,-71,,,,,-6,6 . . ..--12:.".-:_..._1.:4.. ____ ov.-y-• . _. . __ . _..•._. ___ ._ 46„,p:le\..t'kr". _....+.te-r+ .. P21-12=1-. 0.-..."'".e-e..." _. . _ 4,/'... , . . ,.___.Pew—io .__ :7-i_.1) -4?•.. I.A.,i.y,.. 's I 1 ' • ' •L. ._.-..._01?"'_. .__... go.e-,.-1. .„1... ______. • __ . _C,(re:Are-d-_1y.__. .cLr....44.-A-2,11 -1 __._a-.1,___. ._/_2'._ (1_.±_ifft_-_-_._.e.-___ .:F_ID...c11-4?,eril ..______-_.- . I .- - - .:1:: ,L,,,--v-- ,± • t.,_.2 F- - -e---t-- , .. . . Rd . , • I._ • ki,,-......_ ___ _ -.--k-ri.. . c...,,,--4-L.,' L,c2..,r.a...e.",_.. ... t.,-. . iii_l_p_ . . :t, i,.... ..,.._. „„.............,„).- - -,- . --- • . 0 111 II , 1 1 , . _.,• __. .... tfloZt.-___ (r:t..S . .17-1.-‘--. 0 pparJ4-1-_.;-.\ ...., 4.- . . _ _ 1: 5..,,..--)..tfa_v....7.7r.J.),--0 wir, p,p....,A),-. 0,,,,,f....,,--:s- 0,..e.„-.44,-,,,,i)\ . ._..-7,..._ _._ . • ... . II II , I. '--cr-.?)2-7---v--,A-r).....,, 1 r...,_„_,.._ y-0_,--...) .„....9-7-1-i-v•p_„-.--.---A--..-' orpoz-2 r1-2....t/V-‘ i -• • . i-1-0-.......-2.... 0,--R, --1.-°---- - 0, C . 1-1P,-},71-^7--- ,IV-m-rfi./... t u,-7/(..-• , e e .- ' <--1.-.C3 y"l'o e."1-,..-/ , I'' • - • . .. • . - . .- 1 I i I:1 :i • i. . • ..:. ' . . . 016 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OP COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE MA 28, 1285 Action Agenda Item #CLa.. SUBJECT: Z-7-85 GEORGE HORTON DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes L No Attachment(s) Information Contact: EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION • SITE PLAN VICINITY MAP • AGENCY LETTERS TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH PLANNING BOARD COMMENT MAY 17, 1985 COUNTY ATTORNEYS LETTER STAFF COMMENT Terephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To receive public comment a proposed rezoning request scheduled for George Horton. NEED: C. D. Hogue is requesting a rezoning for George Horton on 86.51 acres out of 103 acres of land located along Highway 70 Business southeast of Hillsborough. The 16.49 acres remaining will not be changed from present R-1 zoning designation. The property is referenced as Tax Map 40 Block A Lots 11 and 14 of Hillsborough Township. The property is located in an area designated as Ten Year Transition and Commercial Industrial Activity Node in the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning is R-1. The applicants are requesting 26.65 acres to be rezoned to OI and 59.86 acres to be rezoned I-1. IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow Office-Institutional uses on the 16.65 acres and Industrial-1 uses on the 59.86 acres. A 1984 traffic count on Business 70 indicated 1200 trips per day. On N.C. 86 between Business 70 and Valley Forge Road (SR 1200) a 1984 traffic count indicated 4200 trips per day. If the 59.86 acres proposed to be zoned I-1 were developed approximately 3,137 trips per day could be generated. If the 26.65 acres proposed to be zoned 01 were developed, an additional 3,866 trips would possibly be generated. Unless some other type of access is obtained, all of this traffic would be directed to U.S. 70 Business. 017 Z-2-85 GEORGE HORTON PAGE TWO MAY 20, 1985 According to the Department of Transportation U.S. 70 Business is presently classified at service level C or better. At the current speed limit of 45 mph and given a 20' traveiway, the capacity of U.S.70 Business at service level C is estimated to be 5,770 trips per day. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends denial given potential traffic impacts and demands on public water and sewer facilities. • f I 1 t \ �- _ .0 _1 _4 ! eDnt`qtr;1�.UrE _ h f1� f'/0 q! AC. 7N SAG, 4c0o la AC 3 — 10A rO31.uHAr Set Ac 37AC ' 4A . / "..�• q� t , IAL. ;(r�•� 62 \\ry T 4192 1 Sis z `51 4 + �'P.y 2`%1 ; a e 4 3110 •424 AC �. \r?At_� 6 82 1.01 0a 7A, to t� '� Jane as 4984 33,12 ! 3AeAC !0 jig I z' AC .0 AC AC 0815 3't65+.� \ 3 �—� 1 1 ! i �.• 3AC �4468� } ] ! + �1 t + + t `�/�G• t f 3 O t3 5.65 1 1� 6414 ` i- ` 2.1,77 AG. ( ,,•� 1, ! . , ' ! , 12 Z 3 l.t AC, ti 1 i � D 13AC.CAt. (!2) 14` !AC !.5 AC. luA,: '40928 — 5913 T- \\ - \�`L �� �2Q} ]fly ti• 76 3.08 AC 1704 '� AC. 1 6683 1� r l ! 20 t ./ 17 16 t GEORGE HORTON Applicant: C.D.Hogue•for George Horton Zoning: R-I - Requested Zoning: 26.65 acres O-1, �• ,'� 59.86 acres T- i - I _UP Designation: 10 yr Transition � fy — i I o j ann• Commercial l Indus trial I 1 �10 t #� Transition Activity Node F _ j icale: V= 400' , ! xrwtJ • Nary:sm Plat"raa C•RW1/7rrino rarm.OY R.v.A'raaard-Nar/o,1Dl6- '�4/ta "BAhXl.EAD f0+4Etr"P81/•7D ^ -j!, .°COLON/At NIiLS•SIPAlDQ6'-P8 d6/1t0 ti ;' ti'+,••"^J a.`• - "PrardrJr of rfXACO,/nr,"8r Grorad ford-F•i0 t8•N64-P8 13 O . 8• ��� . ��• . . � . Cam . ' a.r..�• o o •tar AE•OQA�Ssipr�lPlYAStIRUYLr/YLrFpfD�4 m y t� a d�'� ' "e�` �O'e� NlitSBtiIPOK/sl/71M4 W..4,wr ca 1WRM CAR"m 1 t$r Y fifsdGitRY Z4 loss •� ( i t ba y A�'eic / "P!r O rr ri � 'r• /' _, y� r : 'tr' MM;ate ...r,•• .. 11 . 6 `$ � L .. r y y ' 4;r ��' ' a•ra '1 s••-a? Sv •� Itair�� E •�� Jyc.ra a r v _ _. .- i`'r rit ! T { �r rte/ •! �'' •t a t} D/rtn r�� fir s� i ..'.-'.�.5;`. '-! _�L� ,. t 1 ..'• { •.q•!rb'vTi - i (. �'AOM \ F ((�ij�iy'/.��T 46 ��s� r�'r•*..r , 3/ l ry • ' �� dD1 � 1f .. . Jy• t` 1 too SCALE t"`w, daO 1 �' + 9 • ids' Y A%W P/N str ox stu/r£str - --+— ExisraYO COW# a �— CoNe mows£Nrstr IX/SUNO CVNC MON ' �••' r MATN£MAr/CAt Pmr ••�'•'�' ••a .' ." 'J 'fa ;. ♦dr.fr•en d. t ej'° a oo•sa•acr ,TrOPIAMAP$MOT ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT ) HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 .„6:11111:e% ft Ei:IF:77, At 'rb 604 MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: EDDIE KIRK, PLANNER DATE: MAY 13, 1985 SUBJECT: Z-7-85 C.D. Hogue III for George Horton GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: C. D. Hogue III for George Horton 110 West Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 LOCATION: Highway 70 Business REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of a rezoning from R-1 to OX for 26.65 acres and R-1 to I-1 for 59.86 acres. 16.49 acres of the 103 acre tract will remain zoned R-1. PURPOSE: To allow Office-Institutional use of the 26.65 acres and Light Industrial-1 use of the • 59.86 acres. LOT SIZE: 103 total acres with. 86.51 requested to be rezoned. EXISTING LAND USE: Farm tract with two houses, various • buildings and a pond. SURROUND LAND AND ZONING: The property in question is zoned R-1 and located in the Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) . Zoning designations are identified below for surrounding property. NORTH - R-1 zone across U.S. 70 Business with one small EC-5 zone SOUTH - Interstate -85 1)2 Z-7-85 C.D. HOGUE III FOR GEORGE HORTON MEMORANDUM PAGE TWO EAST - R-1 zone and Colonial Hills subdivision zoned R-2 WEST - R-1 zone, Hines Liner Company zoned 1-2 and Carolinas Activities Antiques zoned GC-4 LAND USE PLAN: Designated 10-year Transition and Commercial- Industrial Transition Activity Node. FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION: ` -z=7-85 George Horton BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS S.UBMiTTED, THE PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING {"Yes" indicates compliance; "No" indicates Noncom pliance PLANNING STAFF PLANNING FINDINGS BASED ON BOARD SUBMITTED APPLICATION EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS RECOMMENDED Ordinance Requirements FINDINGS The application must comply with all requirements speci- fied In.Article 20 - Amend- . ments. Those requirements i ncl ude: 20.32 a} Map showing affected Yes No Site Plan provided at scale of Yes No property at scale of not less 1�'mI00' than I '= 10011 nor more than 1'= 20' 20.3.2 b) Legal description of Yes No Description provided with application Yes No property 20.3.2 c} Expl'an`ation of alleged X Yes No No error alleged Yes No error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if X Yes No The 1-1 property Is Located next to the Yes No any, which make amendment reasons- � interstate and other property'•zoned 1-3 biy necessary to promote public and•&C-4. TheOI prbperty•would -be buffered from health, safety and general welfare. the present 1-3 zone by-the 1-1 -and located along ' U:S. 70 Business. 20.3.2 e} Manner in which proposed X Yes No. .�.,YPs• The property is located in a Ten Year . �o amendment will carry out purpose ' Transition Area and Commercial Industrial and Intent of adopted Comprehensive Transition Activity Commercial Plan. � - iti? ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Planning Staff Planning Bo Ordinance Requirements findings - EVldence Submitted�to Suppasrt FindtnAS Findinas Article 4.2 Indentifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has . applied for a • 01 designation. The criteria forjhat district are set forth in Article 4.2.3 and are as follows: f" a} Site is located in areas desig*_ X Yes �No Applicant has -Indicated- the, property is Yes_ No ed by the adopted land Use Plan as in'a Ten-Year Transition area and Commercial/ Commercial Transition or Industrial - industrial- Transition Activity Node. Activity ibdes. b) Generally, these areas should have : Yes __LNo Applicant has submitted a Yes No water and sewer mains existing at site or to be made available during the letter concerning water & sewer extension development from the Town of Hillsborough. This tetteris' not p process. assurance of extension of water and sewer • _ services. ' 4 c) Vehicular access must consist of X Yes N° Applicant -does have direct access to a Yes No direct access to a street c•lassifled with street classified as an arteriai. arterial or collector av des•Ignated by the adopted-Land Use Plan. d})Site would provide a buffer'or ? X Yes No Site Is not located in a Neighborhood Ye step down In Intenslty'.of land use s lb In a Neighborhood or Community or Community Activity Node. "" Activity Node e} Narmaily the maximum amount of Yes • X No Applicant Is requesting. 26.65 acres land zoned to this 0/•I classification shall _ Yei ND not exceed five acres. zoned 01. PfiBfimli�i ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Planning Staff Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Findings Evidence• Su6fnitted to Support Findings' Findings Article 4.2 indentifles the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning-district designation. The app l.i cant has . applied for a I-1 designation. The criteria for that district are set forth in Article .4.2.3 and are as follows; a) The site is located outside of X Yes No Applicant has indicated the property Yes No the Chapel Hill Joint Planning Area is in a- Ten-Year Transition area and r-- and within an Industrial Transition Commercial/industrial Transition Activity Activity Node or a Rural Industrial Node. Activity Node. b) Lot size for Individual uses Yes No Applicant has submitted Yes No shall be appropriate to the method of% a letter concerning water & sewer extenslo� water supply and sewage disposal. from the Town of 'Hillsborough.and has Indicated that public services will be utilized. The- or000sed lot size exceeds-ren+•liremPnts fir yes No c) Access would consist •of direct ..X....Yas .�..,� op site septic systems. vehicular access to streets designated Site has direct access to a either arterial or collector by the . street classitied as an arteriai .Oral comments Land Use Plan. Access to rail service received from NCDOT Indicate that site access is desireable but 'not required. and road improvments for US 70 be carefully considered during drivewa rmit process and recommends that the a p� cant prepare an origin-�destination study to provide information on these matters. 0 025 APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION • DATE April 26, 1985 The Honorable Board of County Commissioners • Orange County,. North-Carolina • - ROMMISSIONERS: The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number 4p Block number A , Lot number 11&14 , Shown on'the accompanying plat, which is presently in a R-1 . District be rezoned to' I-]. and for the' following reasons: • SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM TO ZONING REQUEST on approximately 103 acres known as "THE BEARD TRACT" • • • • Signed: Address: 01 17 110 West MargArt C. D. HOGUE, III Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 ,•■••••••••■••MIMb.MI.ON ■■■■•••• MM. 026 ADDENDUM DE C.E IiVIE TO ZONING REQUEST r1/:G �70 ON APPROXIMATELY 103 ACRES KNOWN AS "THE BEARD TRACT" Proposed amendment to the zoning atlas is reasonably necessary to promote public health, safety, and general welfare, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zoning changes to I-1 as shown on the map in the application would allow for high quality industrial development which could not have any adverse impact beyond the immediate space occupied by the building. 2. The major transportation corridor overlay lies across most of this his this property and all site plans will have to be approved before any building can begin. 3. A large portion of this property is not sought to be rezoned. This is an order to provide a scenic overlook at the lake for most of the complex, to also to provide possible recreation facilities later on for the industries that locate on the property, and to buffer the residential housing on Highway 70. 4. In order to attract high quality office use, we are seeking to buffer the office institutional property from Hines Liner Company which is presently an I-3 zoning and from the Interstate. The offices institutional request will not result in higher volume traffic office use but would be suitable for attracting such uses as central clearing houses for insurance companies, pension companies, and mortgage bankers. • This proposed amendment will carry out the intent and purpose of the adoptive comprehensive plan because it lies within an industrial transition node. It is further to be noted that while the requests of the rezonings do. not require water and sewer hook-up, we will seek to to provide the same in order to get quality occupants. This results in increasing revenue for the Town of Hillsborough and allowing its water and sewer plant to come closer to capacity, and also results in the extension in sewer and water lines that will be available to other parcels in the County. We requested from the Town of Hillsborough a letter as to availability of water and sewer but as we were unable to obtain the same by the application deadline date we cannot be certain that they will supply water and sewer service. Other circumstances and factors in reasons which support the proposed amendment are: 1. The recent close downs in textile industry in the area which have produced unemployment in the blue collar ranks. 2. Many national companies are looking to relocating in the triangle area and this plan offers good transportation facilities, adequate utilities on an exceptionally beutiful site. 3. This rezoning could greatly increase the tax base for both the County and the town of Hillsborough. t REZONING REQUEST -MCKLIST OWNER'S NAME { ADDRESS ' e77o Tgtal cumber of acres Current laud use Current zoning , l� � ,../r.�,r ------ Type of rezoning requested Proposed land use Tax map M Block __, _,_Number of late •Proposed Mater Supplyt Public Community_______,_. Individual Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public ' Community Individual aseptic tank Access onto state road # Average daily traffic'count on the state road Describe existing critical areas: Flood prone areas �:�1 — Poorly draine4 areas _ N GG j0ther�,. ' ensitiva areas Streams -Describe land uses in_ eneral Area Adjacent parcels of land u,C al+rcualmai.aly 103 ac:a®a►. iu• LuLa i aual do s,41liacl a° tulluoom; TRACT I: BEGINNING at an existing corner in the• southern right-of-way of U. S. 70 and being the Northwest corner of Carter as shown on the plat entitled °PROPERTY SURVEYED FOR.-GEORGE. A. BOSTON, III" dated February 20, 1985, and revised April 1, 1985, by Alois Callemyu, Registered Land Surveyor, and running - thence along the property line of Carter South 04° 33'. 05' Wesc 305.94 feet to as existing corner; thence. North. 76° 05' 57` West 516.27 feet to as existing corner; thence South 66° 57' 33" West. 711.24 feet to an iron pin set; thence South 36° 18' 10' West 100.00 feet co an existing corner; thence in a. northerly direction along the arc of a circle with a radius of 420.00 feet, a distance of 573.51 feet to an iron pin set; thence in a. northeasterly direction along the are of a circle with a radius of 891.66 feet, a distance of 318.15 feet to an existing corner; thence in a counterclockwise direction along the arc of a circle with a radius of 369.60 feet a distance of 305.85 to an iron pin sac in the southern right-of-'way line of U. S. 70; thence with the southern right-of... way line. of U. S. 70 South 66° y 121 36 East 801.29 feet to a mathematical point; thence South 67° 17' 15" East 224.35 feet to the point and place of. Beginning. This Tract consists of 16.02 acres as shown on the aforesaid p/at. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid plat for a more particular description of the property. • TRACT II: BEGINNING at an. iron pin set in the southern right-of-way line of U. S. Highway 70 and the northwest corner of the property known a the Beard Tract and running thence- with. the southern. right-of-way line of U. S. Highway 70 South 66° 12' 36" East 825.00 feet- to an iron pin sat; thence in a southwesterly direction counterclockwise along. the arc of a circle with the radius of 36940 feet a distance of 305.85 feet to. an iron pin set;. thence in a. southwesterly direction counterclockwise along the arc of a circle with the radius of 891.66 feet a distance of 318.15 feet to an iron pin set; thence • North 650 27' 33" West 355.18 feet to an existing corner in the southwest corner of the property belonging to B. J. Johnson on the plat hereinafter described; thence North 00° 00' 50" West 613.03 feet to the point and place -of . • the Beginning. This Tract consists of 7.67 acres. This description is taken from. the plat entitled °PROPERTY SURVEYED FOR GEORGE A. GORTON, III dated February 20, 1985, and revised April 1, 1985, by Alois Callemyn, Registered Land Surveyor. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid plat for a more particular description of the property. TRACT III: BEGINNING at an iron stake an existing corner in the southwest. corner of the property belonging to B. K. Collins as shown on the plat entitled "PROPERTY SURVEYED FOR GEORGE A. HORTON, III° dated February 20, 1985, and revised April 1, 1985, by Alois Callemyn, Registered Land Surveyor, and running thence North 00° 53' 49"'West along the aforesaid property of B. K. Collins a distance of 414.64 feet to an existing corner; thence North 00° 33' 17° .West 654.79 feet to an existing corner; thence South 65° 27' 33° East 355.18 feet to as iron pin set; thence Southwardly in a counterclockwise direction along the arc of a circle the radius of 420.00 feet a distance of 573.51 feet to an existing corner; , thence South 53° 41' 50' East 625.00 feet to an existing corner; thence in a counterclockwise direction along the arc of a circle with a radius of 825.54 feet eastwardly an arc distance of 1058.71 feet to an existing corner; thence South 68° 57' 13" East 783.74 feet to an existing corner; thence South 5° 10' 50" West 982.00 feet to an iron pin set; thence North 87° 541 10" West 78.00 feet to an iron pin set; thence South 00° 55' 50" West 49.78 feet to an iron pin set; thence North 660 31' 56" West 1042.98 feet to an existing concrete monument; thence South 25° 57' 22" West 19.71 feet to an existing concrete monument; thence North 66° 30' 41" West 897.16 feet to an existing concrete monument; thence North 59° 05' 45" West 350.61 feet to a mathematical puiut; theucu North S1° 37' 26" West 523.00 feat co the point and place of the ____Bes>.innias._._.T.his. Tract__consists.of__52.19_ cres._,as_shown.on _*1:Q. �ai~°.sesaisi�laz_ 029 Mow gabon. at Ibillobaraugb Zito crank rwnl H.ShoiteW.Jr. Johniest Craaattstiraeert HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA V 8 L)•awuud J.Ntua ri it M edt C.E.Rois t�ad Hutr\e H.Juhtqun 1'��'T t r;. • Stylist Sive: Allca A.Uu!V r L 0.Wypepa. Remus J.Smith ICY� • Cd>ie/'alPolies R uhr111.Swim s ∎' 4144/4411,1P- April 30, 1985 Mr. George. Horton c/a Cyrus .Hogue III Attorney at Law 110 W. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 • Dear Mr. Horton: • This is to advise you that the Town of Hillsborough is willing to permit the owners of the Beard property to connect to the Town's water- . sewer system; provided, however, that all necessary requirements of. the Town and, where necessary, the State are met. • in the event that existing lines or other components of the Town's system are inadequate to accommodate any proposed development, the • owner or developer is responsible for upgrading such lines or components, either individually or in cooperation with other developers.. The Town of Hillsborough assumes no financial responsibility for the upgrading or improvement to any line or system component, nor for the extension of lines between the Town's system and the proposed development. As part of your preliminary planning for the development of this • property, the Town will need an approximate estimate of consumption far both water and sewer. Peak daily and average daily demands should be • indicated. If I can assist you *further, please advise. • • Sincerely, -i0)404620. fal).110t447}1.... Horace Johnson, Commissioner in charge of Water-Sewer aj • f. WLEMON34ERNHOLZ, DICKERSON. 1 a BERKHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ATTORNEYS AT LAW. HO CHURTON STREET HILLSBOROUGH.N.C.27278. 919-7M-Mik 919-942-8000 L p.., EC/4,, in ,.... • CHAPE HILL OFFICE stiTe 20.FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E.FRANKLIN STREET May 17, 1985 CHAPEL HILL.X.C.2751:1 919.929412 ALONZO B.COLEMAN.JR. • . STEVEN A.BERNHOLZ DONALD R.DICXERSON ROGER B.BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL Eddie Kirk DOUGLAS HARGRAVE . MARTIN J.BERNHOLZ ' Planner RICHARD J.SNIDER.JR. JANE G.do LISSOVOY Orange County Planning Department 0.NICHOLAS HERMAN 106 E. Margaret Lane LYNN A.ANDREWS Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 of Caustic! BONNER D.SAWYER (1902-1972) Re: Hillsborough Review of Water and Sewer Connections , . Dear Eddie: The two letters accompanying your May 8, 1985 letter to me • contain almost exactly the same language as that contained in the ' February 25, 1985 letter regarding Dr. Weng's property. That letter was insufficient to satisfy the County's Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance because it fails to satisfy the zoning ordinance and Subdivision requirements as set forth in my letter to Marvin Collins dated February 13, 1985 on this subject. - •... The Town does not certify or officially approve a sewer and water system by stating that property owners can connect provided that all necessary requirements of the Town...and State are met.' The • approval by the Town occurs when those requirements are met. I have enclosed copies of both of the letters I received with the problem areas highlighted. The letter In McAdams, of course, contains additional limiting language which makes the letter even less of an "approval" by the Town. Very truly yours, . '(.../ y E. alqdhill GEG/lsa Enclos ures cc: Marvin Collins _ Susan Smith\/ Ken Thompson Don Willhoit 1 • APIMIRO 031 Xourtt of ilittisboroug# •Mayor Town Ckrit Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA'27278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners • James Pendergraph Lynwood J. Brown Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd L. D. Wagoner P P, Chief of Police Remus J. Smith - - r • Rubel H. Stevens Arnold W. Hamlett L, Lulu . Fire Chief John Forrest May 20, 1985 To: Orange County Planning Staff, Orange County Planning Board, and Orange County Commissioners ' From: Hillsborough Planning Board Courtesy Review Comments on the following: Faucette Mill Road, Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 25 containing 1.5 acres requested to be rezoned to R-4. The Planning Board has recommended that the area'not be rezoned to any greater density than R-2. Most of the Town zoning in the area is R-20 (20,000 square feet per lot) and the County's zoning is R-1. Information from the Town Clerk and the Water-Sewer Commissioner is that the lines for water at this location of Faucette Mill are unapproved lines; the plans for which are at the State and are under review. There is no way of knowing when the ' plans might be approved. Horace Johnson said that he would have to review the plans from the developer's engineer to determine whether the developmtt would . need to wait on the water improvements to that area of town. r- Rezoning to any density lower than R-1 should be based on access to water and sewer. The Hillsborough Planning Board recommends R-2 only if water and sewer can be provided. Graham request for rezoning to GC-4, R-4 and R-2 for 330.66 acres on Highway 70, S.R. 1002 and 1555. The Hillsborough Planning Board was concerned that a stream through the property is part of the headwaters for the Eno River and is concerned about the impact of this development on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board.recommendation is that an Environmental Impact Study be done to determine what the impacts of this development would be on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board would like to make comments after the Environmental Impact Study is done. Also they would like to get comments from the Eno River State Park Association. • George Horton Property on Highway 70-A: Planning Board recommends approval with the following recommendations: 1- Obtain DOT estimates for minim= Anti maximum traffic projected to come from a d#z 032 Mayor Z1� tt LI 1z bUrUUgh • • yo r Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Commissioners Supt. Water Works Lynwood J. Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd i° L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith - a w +� a Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens - Arnold W. Hamlett .� ,a• - Fire Chief 5+40 John Forrest g.�As development of this size. 2- Obtain DOT projections for improvements needed to 70-A and 86 as the development occurs. 3- That there be no negative impacts on surrounding areas. 4- That water and sewer system lines and residual flow from water lines-be reviewed closely as an ongoing process as the development-occurs. The recommendations from the Planning Board on the Horton Property were made to the Town. Board:.of Commissioners who•are reviewing those recommendations on May 20, 1985 at their- meeting. ` • • • • • • rx; . } fiM1 Yr [at, �.t to • • 033 • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION May 22, 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan J . Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Dear Ms. Smith , This- is in reference to - several proposed developments in Orange County. Preliminary access to the developments has been reviewed and we offer the following remark's. George Horton Property on U570 -Business East of NC86 The vertical and horizontial alignments on US70 Business consist of hills and curves along this, parcel ' s frontage. Although the • posted speed limit is 45mph , the average running speed is higher and sight distance from any proposed drive should be calculated for 55mph along US70 Business. Driveway locations will need to be selected to assure adequate sight distance.- The need for additional lanes on US70 Business will need to be considered as part of driveway permit process. • Scotswood on US70 Bypass and SR1002 (Saint Mary' s Road) East of Hillsborough US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road are both major thoroughfares on Hillsborough' s 1967 adopted thoroughfare plan . Traffic generated by proposed development plus existing volumes will probabily justify improved sections on both roads. Saint Mary' s Road is also a cross county connector between Hillsborough and Durham County. - Driveway access to US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road needs to be reviewed closely in light of future traffic demands. Mr. Ed Johnson of the NCDOT Thoroughfare department has been contacted and requested to give a brief overview.of future needs in Hillsborough area. The south terminal of Carolina Loop (SR1586) intersects . Saint Mary' s Road at US70 Bypass . This creats an intersection which • E ; • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 034 will be more difficult to control as traffic on. Saint Mary' s Road increase. It is recommended that deadending Carolina Loop at Saint Mary' s Road be investigated. - James L. Freeland Property on SR1323 (Faucette Mill Road). • Faucette Mill Road is curvy and drives should be placed to insure adequate sight distance. West Ten Mobile Park on SR1144 (West Ten Road) It is recommended that development be served by one drive opposite SR1145. Sight distance is adequate and should not be a problem. If we can be of any further help please advise. Sincerely, . JA. Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/mm - cc: Mr.. Ed Johnson . Mr. D.B . Kelly . j4 Y, art 1 ECEIIVE...... g-28- " �y mss; !9� .�". t..- 19 : 47.4 4...% ./241,u4,• , klieceez"-- E I�TYZ- � .G�- fi, .r,,,,,.. ,- alt t q A � /j�l JAIL J ./ (L� iMi"✓ / +�/� t� /rte If r� 1 / 4/4"-ef4'-',iiii.,,,,, , Al .a'aftvi le o'''' W (97fg- ‘4.4.01 - 27'4 4,2,41freoe, ....e3A. / , -0,7 e. , vi --4-2-e'- ..4,-.7, ,,,,„,,,,," „2.4 „ix,,,,,..,z7,, adelea-4--- L---L., ....4,74 ..,,,, .-, 7,,, , ,e,-... - -0- 0,-. Ice..2g-~" 4 Deef... .9- / --e- • / / 1 42 .4ZJS"LC .4 A ,02..44,„ ,I4 P I 111,4w. I rr d e0*a■ AZ a.e:/,, E 0 077‘4 445a..W 6 Of ""0 r r "gf- . v'z.. , _ ,o. c,2 7.0 78- `73 I • 035 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May 2$. 1,85. Action Agenda Item #e„.3 SUBJECT: Z-8-85 (REZONING REQUEST) SCOTSWOOD DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No Attachment(s) Information Contact: EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION SITE PLAN/VICINITY MAP AGENCY LETTERS MAY 17, 1985 COUNTY ATTORNEY'S LETTER TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH PLANNING BOARD COMMENT STAFF COMMENT • Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To receive public comment on a proposed rezoning request for John W. and A. H. Graham. NEED: John W. Graham & A. H. Graham, Jr. are requesting a rezoning for 330.7 acres of land located along Highway 70 Bypass and St. Mary's Road(SR 1002) northeast of Hillsborough. The property is referenced as Tax map 6, Block B., Lots 3 & 4 of Hillsborough Township. The present zoning classification is (Residential-1) R-1. The applicants are requesting 296 acres to be rezoned R-2, 22.3 acres to be rezoned R-4, and 12.4 -acres to be rezoned GC-4. The property is located in an area designated as Ten Year Transition and Commercial Transition Activity Node in the rT' Orange County Land Use Plan. IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow a density of 20,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for the 296 acres proposed to be zoned R-2, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for the 22.3 acres proposed to be R-4 and a General Commercial-4 area of 12.4 acres. A 1981 traffic count on St. Mary's Road indicated 2000 trips per day. On U.S. Bypass 70 a 1984 traffic count indicated 7900 trips per day just east of NC 86 and 6600 trips per day just west of Lawrence Road According to the Department of Transportation, both US 70 and St. Mary's Roads are classified at-service level C. At the current 45 mph speed limit and aivRn a 191 ,_.L_ 036 capacity of DS 70 at service level C is estimated to be 7,500 trips per day. At the current 45 mph speed limit and given a 20' travelway, the capacity of St. Mary's Road at service level C is estimated to be 5,770 trips per day.. If the 296 acres proposed to be zoned R-2 were developed approximately 3,966 trips per day would be generated. If the 22.3 acres proposed to be zoned R-4 were developed approximately 598 trips per day would generated. If the GC-4 zone were developed, this would add approximately 5,361 trips per day. A total of 9.925 trips per day could be generated, the majority of which would be directed to D.S. 70. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends denial on the basis that the criteria for application have not been satisfied and given the potential traffic impact of development of the site. fi II :r4Tg, . • . • . . • . '• r•:5.‘, . • „. .., . • ;.;:•: .. • • . . _ :y.f.,•,-, . . . . . • - .. . . . •:.,.•.,:. . .. .. . _ . . -4-i l':.:.: 1 . • . - . ... ..... .... ... . . .. . • . ... . ... . .. . . - . • - , •-..„ .... . . .„,.... - s . . . . . .•ii.. . . . : . . . ... .. • .... . ... . .„:„... ; . .7...h....L..e• . .. . . ."',.'. • . - . . . ; . - • 41 . . . ,...-.. • II . , e......._ X . • ...--- .,. . .--.1.---. .... • T,E.J • :: ' . . • .44/......-...• ...., .. . • ,:,,,-,„ ., . . . ..._.......... ....,ss4, • ,ta. 1,,,,,.., . . • tILCS .7..'"••••••• ••• •••• •••• . SIIAT .'. • * øw 4 .. . i • = -3 - - i ,,,,::::.: • . .. ,. • ; p ___ V' • .. _ • , r.,:•,., II 1-----.. Ibirrg• ' . .,-,;.- • .......----•-'-'...- ••1 .. • . - • • I • — ......--- ..........- i• • ' . • .. . . : - U6 • 4*/ •:,.',. i :: . . . *..... . ........--. . • .. 70 _.,...._,,......................,....; ... - - ,-; . to . . . •. ... _ .• ..,...sop& . ....-- .... . ...•••.' .. : . • / . . 1 . . . . ...•...... . . /. • . • „,..',, • ■ .., . . , , , • a .• . ..,••••••• . .. . . . . .. .. • . . • • . • ,. is. . . . . ... . r-...-"...„ .% .. . .. . , . .• 4.,-... ,, . ::. . '.. • . , _ - -t • P---.,...,.......-„ ,,,,,,,.. , ...........,„_____,,,.... . ,T.' s ......./ . - 4 i \•.t. . • . • :, • . • : 4....., - . . 4...,..,i r- ; .,. . ” •. S4'...1*. ..... . . . . ..: . .,. . •... . I ,.. Ns..... . . or" &. . . ‘\ . 4: . . . . . . --.- , ... . . - . ....4.„.....,..=......,........." .4,.: i , .....- -""•••••••• - . . . • . . . . „ .... ., 1;.;' • . .. ' ....-..-....--.....-.....—- . . _ . t .APP.°CAT1 0 W FAA.. • .. . . . • t . ... . „ z..,... . . ., . 5cors- wcort • • . . . . . ,.. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . .:;, . . . ...................... • r i t .. � sx.,11,,,..x Hi}teat t� �,t� rk 1'sp IV 141. i 4ubdlvislon It •'N 0 �� 'a.• �S•' tsty� ' , 1 N 9 i 3r[-Q7a'rin,.r ' • r ApJ r.+m nH t ra n '•"��` ••. 296.0$ AC. / Asq-tid Imn,M—as s•2, soft t1 Z r iaaerrun CC-* iff tmlddoa Ca..nawl Lmutbn >• \. .Itbly Node ~_ 22.3± AC. \ �I•. .... ,�„�. .... ANVIL 2=4 n..i I•wt N.••IM 1 u. ..••ilk:� •••. ��� •~_\ /. ry.•r..n1•••t • I..IIWri�w•IM..I.11 Nl:i ' •�'•�Y[f ddilA �. .... ,__��...�-..�� •\ 1 u....•rr•a....n �.ww`..w.• -•>!, ��„ �•1—_ ~-I \ wr.11•.n•.w•..•.If1r1••'iVltin~ 2.4# AC.r r Eastwood!5ubdlvision I :' ”" \` SCOTS WOOD a� .�s''•' � $ f` i �� ZONING MAP . Am a A.H.arof-w of if, _ •.J•r .________.._.r__.__-�J '�.�—�...----�t.�G_�...�_.�lota- �•""'�•� P.a Am ldM � I1111N{1.t+k'.11taMS 4 1.iAIN,1Nl:IM ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 .64,01011. * Y, MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: EDDIE KIRK, PLANNER DATE: MAY 10, 1985 SUBJECT: Z-8-85 (Rezoning Request) Scotswood GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: John W. Graham & A. H. Graham, Jr. 400 Wacovia Building • Durham, N.C. 27702 LOCATION: Highway 70. Bypass and St. Mary's Road (SR1002) REQUESTED ACTION: Approval as a Rezoning from R-1 to R-4 for 22.3 acres, from R-1 to R-2 for 295 acres, and 12.4 acres from R-1 to GC-4. PURPOSE: To allow higher density residential development than one per 40,000 sq. ft. for the two residential requests and to allow commercial development of the 12.4 acre tract. LOT SIZE: 330.7 total acres . EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant, wooded tract • SURROUNDING LAND AND ZONING: The property in question is zoned R-I. Zoning designations are identified below for surrounding property. NORTH Undeveloped wooded land zoned R-1 and AR. SOUTH - Residential subdivision development zoned R-1 EAST - Rural undeveloped property zoned AR WEST - Hillcrest subdivision zoned R-20 in the 10111Mommosos Town of Hillsborough's jurisdiction and Colfax Furniture zoned NC-2. LAND USE PLAN: Designated 10-Year Transition. Commercial Transition Activity Node. • FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION.. Z-8-85 Scot:swood BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS SUBMITTED, THE-PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ("Yes" Indicates com ) lance• "No" indicates Noncom l i ance PLANNING STAFF PLANNING BOARD FINDINGS BASED ON SUBMITTED APPLICATION EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT'FI NDI NGS FI FINDINGS Ordinance Requi cements The application must comply with all requirements speci- fied in Article 20 - Amend- ments. Those requirements include: X Yes No Site Plan provided at scale of Yes No 20.32 a) Map showing affected ,--•„ l��-iO0' """- • property at scale of not less than l '= 100" nor more than 1 '= 20' X Description provided with •appl icat.lon Yes. No 20.3.2 b} Legal description of Yes No R property 20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged Yes No No error alleged Yes No error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment 20.3.2 d} Changed conditions, if X Yes No The property is-located next to Hillcrest Yes No Sdbdivlsion which is zoned R•-20 in the Town of any, which make amendment reasona- Hillsborough's Jurisdiction. The commercial site would be biy necessary to promote public consistent to the uses of other properties .along U.S. 70. health, safety and genera) welfare: ..3.2 e} Manner in which proposed X Yes No The property is located In a Ten-Year Yes No 20 amendment will carry out purpose Trains i tion area and Commercial'.Trans i tion Acti v I ty HodeW and intent of adopted Comprehensive as designated in the adopted Land Use Plan, R-2,9-4, And Plan. GC-4 are permitted zoning districts in this area. ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA G Ordinance Regul cements ►�"� Article 4.2 indentifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant.has . UC applied for a " designation. The criteria for t at district are set forth in Articie.4.2.3 and are as follows; ' a. Designated by the adopted Land :� Yes No 'The properly is located within a Commercial Yes No Use Plan as either Commercial Or Transition Activity Node. Industrial Transition Activity Node in Eno or Hillsborough Townships. _ b. Water and sewer mains must- exist Yes .X. No Applicant has submitted a letter f o the Yes too . . at the site or are to be made available r as part of the development process or. the. 7�+�1 of Iii 1 lslaorough regarding wader aril sewer.- lot size for individual uses are sor. the. However•, letter does not consittute assuranc& of installation. to the method of water and sewage disposal . . Yes No Applicant does have direct access to .a Yes No c. All property to be designated for new development under this c,lassi- streets classified as arterials. fication shall have direct access to major collector streets, as designaated by the adopted Lnad Use Plan. ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS *OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Ordinance Requi rements Article 4.2 Indentifies the criteria which will normal ly be used to determine the application of a zoning -district designation. The applicant has . applied for a R-2 and R-4 designation. The criteria for that district are set forth In Article -4.2.3 and are as follows; a) Designated by the adopted Land X- Yes No The property Is located within an area Yes No Use Plan as a Transition Area, _.__ designated Ten-Year Transition. which can reasonably be expedted t annexed by a municipality in the ensuing 10-20 years. b) water and sewer lines should . Yes X No Applicant 'szas submitted Yes No exist at site or be assured of a letter from the Town of Hi ilsborough installation as part of the stating that water and sewer Is available: development process. However, letter does not consthtute assurance of installation. c) Vehicular access must consist X Yes No Applicant does have direct access to yes No of direct access to a street streets.classified as arterials. Oral classified as either arterial' comments received from NC DOT Indicate that or collector as designated both roads ire major thoroughfares designated on by the adopted Land Use Plan, the adopted 1967 thoroughfare Milan for the Town cf HlllshrorouPh. �-th access restriction acid road improvements need to be- considered during the development review process. ,= - - . . 044 . . APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION • • . - DATE April The e Honorable Board of County Commissioners . Orange County, North Carolina . - - . ; . 9,0MMISSIONERS: . - • ' - . . • _ . The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number 6 5. Block number B , Lot number 3 & 4 , Shown on-the accompanying plat, which is presently in a R-1 (Residential) District be rezoned to - R-2, R-4 & GC-4 • - . . for the following reasons: . we propose to develop the site, already determined to.be within a planning. tran- sition area and activity node for the Town of Hillsborough; for residential and accompaning commercial uses. The commercial site is proposed along U.S.. Hwy. 70 • . . . and would be consistent to the uses of other properties along that road. The Iwo...* . Multi-fPmily area would act as a transition between the commercial site and the.""' single-family residential development. The R-2 (Residential) zoning would be more • , consistent to development with proposed public sewer and water facilities. . . . . . . . . . • . . - . . . • •. . • . • Signed: Address: . John If. Graham and . 4.. ,.. ,. . : ' . • ... . . r- -. Jr. - • e ' ._puraNc2QA_22ham North arolin 2 02 :...1. • 4.IN ATM'11 Ir (919) 682-5671 ''f 1, Nly Jr-orr'oori, ir•••-•4 . / / - - . , • ...................... amalgam REZONING REEBST-CIMCKLIST OWNER'S NAME A. x• ;Yr. And John Wt (3rekbo t ADDRESS. .' . 400 Vachy#a bldg.� Aurham, North Carolina 27702 � Current zoning A-1 Total number of acres 330':•66 Current land use Vacant Ls1 Type of rezoning requested (fee QhAxt kelaw) Proposed land use ($ee chart•below) Tax map „ ---Block Number of lots 3S.A. -proposed Water Supply: Public X Community___._„_ _ Individual Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public X_ ' Community Individual septic tank O�S,Ktcrx 70t Not prevently Access onto state road #1 S.g.�QQ2 s Average daily traffic count on the state road g av tlabie Describe existing 1555 critical areas; Flood prone areas N(A Poorly drained areas N/8 Streams Nancy Nt11. Creek Other.-sensitive areas •Describe land uses in: General Area n11 c.rP4-j- al hatu 'nod SvhdJ-jJ S ,nn,Colfax Furn ” 1rP Adjacent parcels of land Hilicrest Subdivision, Eastwood sukgyjsion, Colfax Fx%rniture ftopGped Zon�,ng. prey used Tend tt e R-2 (Re@ jdentiaJ J 296;9 'x t5 ngl eTf Am ly•lots R--4 (Mul.t�-;Epp"y Residential) 22.3 t (Townhouse unstop) GC-4 (General Commerctal) 12:4.• (gtxip shopp.Fng center) Total, area 330.7 AG.:: z , • PROPOSED R-2 ZONING AREA: 046 BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION BEGINNING at a point on the northern line of St. Mary's Road (60' R/W) , said point being approximately 4085 feet from the intersection with O.S. Hwy. 70 (100' R/W) , and running thence with the road right-of-way: South 59° 48' 00" West, 336.62 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve having a radius of 1553.04 feet and length of 285.51 feet to a point South 65° 04' 00" West, 285.11 feet along a chord; thence, South 70° 20' 00" West, 928.43 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve having a radius of 4656.85 feet and length of 199.13 feet, to a point South 71° 33' 30" West, 199.11 feet along a chord; thence, South 72° 47' 00" West, 16.05 feet to a point on the eastern line of Second Street (60' R/W) ; thence, North 16° 54' 00" West, 755.84 feet to 'a point on the northern line of Carolina Avenue (60' R/W) ; thence, South 73° 06' 00" West, 1470.00 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve having a radius of 464.96 feet and length of 426.58 feet, to a point South 46° 49' 00" West 411.78 feet along a chord; thence, North 69° 28' 00" West, 250.00 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve having a radius of 714.96 feet and length of 655.95 feet, to a point North 46° 49' 00" East, 633.18 feet along a chord; thence, North 16° 54' 00" West, 400.00 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve having a radius of 1400.00 feet and length of 916.76 feet, to a point North 46° 36' 49" West, 900.46 feet along a chord; thence, North 87° 00' 00" West, 300.00 feet to a point; thence, North 03° 00 ' 00" East, 1769.32 feet to a point at the northeast corner of the Hillcrest Subdivision; thence, South 88° 25' 00" West, 291.00 feet to a point on the eastern line of Greentree Drive (60 ' R/W) ; thence, North 01° 35' 00" West, 60 feet to a point on the northern line of Woodlawn Drive (60 ' R/W) ; thence, South 88° 25' 00" West, 360.00 feet to a point on the eastern line of Miller Road (60' R/W) ; thence, North 01° 35' 00" West, 137.40 feet to a point; thence, North 07° 08' 00" East, 146.40 feet to a point; thence, South 84° 30 ' 00" East, 133.00 feet to a point.; thence, South 76° 55' 00" East, 133.60 feet to a point; thence, North 810 39' 28" East, 387.49 feet to a point; thence, South 63° 34' 30" East, 2638.63 feet to a point; thence, North 32° 02' 20" East, 2156.02 feet to a point; thence, South 81° 40' 45" East, 967.55 feet to a point; thence, 3 '047 South 020 53' 54" West, 3506.34 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 293.13 acres more or less. BEING a part of the property conveyed by A. H. and Kathleen L. Graham and all of the land conveyed by Florence H. Styers' to John W.and A. H. Graham, Jr. by deeds dated June 18, 1973 and October 31, 1977 respectively. These deeds acorded among the land records of Orange County, North Carolina in Deed Book 242 at Page- 1985 and Deed Book 279 and Page 34. Also reference Plat Book 21 and Page 71. • 4 048 PROPOSED R-4 ZONING AREA: BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION BEGINNING at a point on the western property line of the Graham property, said point being 607.48 feet along the line from U.S. Highway 70 (100' R/W) and running thence: North 01° 42' 00* East, 161.65 feet to a point; thence, North 030 00' 00" East, 1040.00 feet to a point; thence, South 87° 00' 00" East, 300.00 feet to a point; thence, Along a curve with a radius of 1400.00 feet and length of 916.76 feet, to a point South 46° 36' 49" East 900.46 feet along a chord; thence, South 16° 54' 00" East, 400.00 feet to a point, thence, Along a curve with a radius of 714.96 feet and length of 655.95 feet, to a point South 46° 49' 00" West 633.18 feet along a chord; thence, North 69° 28' 00" West, 713.10 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 23.73 acres more or less. BEING a part of the property conveyed by A. H. and Kathleen L. Graham to John W. and A. H. Graham, Jr. by deed dated June 8, 1983 and recorded among the land records of Orange County, North Carolina in Deed Book 242 at Page 1985. Also reference Plat Book 21 at Page 71. 2 049 PROPOSED GC-4 ZONING AREA: BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION BEGINNING at a point at the intersection of the north line of St. Mary's Road (60' R/W) and the eastern line of U. 70 (100' R/W) and running thence with the right-of-way of� said highway: Along a curve with a radius of 5904.76 feet and length of 764.77 feet, to a point North 56° 24' 29" West, 764.23 feet along a chord; thence, North 03° 32' .16" East, 559.04 feet to a point; thence, North 01° 42' 00" East, 48.45 feet to a point; thence, South 69° 28' 00" East, 963.10 feet to a point on the northwestern line of Carolina Avenue (60' R/W) ; thence, South 20° 32' 00" West, 724.62 feet to a point on the northern line of St. Mary's Road; thence, South 74° 45'' 00" West, 48.80 feet to a point and place of beginning, containing 13.1 acres more or less. II BEING a part of the property conveyed by A. H. and Kathleen L. Graham to John W. and A. H. Graham, Jr. by deed dated June 8, 1973 and recorded among the land records of Orange County, North Carolina in Deed Book 242 at Page 1985. Also reference Plat Book 21 at Page 71. 1 050 Mayor Tatou o 3iUbotoub Tower G3er Frank H.Sheffield.Jr. Agatha Johnson Gon ON= HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 2TZ76 Supt, fimr works C.E.Rosamond Lynwood J.Brown � Street Supt Horace H.Johnson { y L.D.Wagoner Allen A.Lloyd `�7► Remus J.Smith *Y� "4 Chief of Police Rachel H.Stevens Arnold W.Hamlett April 16, 1985 • Mr. John R. McAdams, P. E. The John R. McAdams Comp,, Inc. Post Office Box 2896 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Dear Mr. McAdams: This is to advise you that the Town of Hillsborough is willing to per- mit the owners of the proposed Scotswoods Development to connect to the Town's water-sewer system; provided, however, that all necessary requirements of the Town and, where necessary, the State are met. In the event that existing lines or other components of the Town's system are inadequate to accommodate the proposed development, the developer is responsible for upgrading such lines or components, either individually or in cooperation with other developers. The Town of Hillsborough assumes no financial responsibility for the upgrading or improvement to any line or system component, nor for the extension of lines between the Town's system and the proposed development. It should be noted that this letter does not speak to capacity or pre- . ssure for this proposed development. The Town has requested a feasibility study for the northern Hillsborough area be performed by the Town engineer. The study should be completed by the middle of .May and any problems in con-.. necting this development Would have to be resolved to the satisfaction of the Town Board, based on the recommendation of the Town Engineer. If I can assist you further, please advise. Sincerely, orace John n, Water Commissioner COLEAIE tERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ATTUR'NEYS AT LAW no CRURTON STREET flIUSBOROUGH.N.C.27278 OW-732-2196 E 819-94 -8000 Maga CHAPEL mu.orrice serve 20.FRAKLIN' BUILDING 137 E.FRANKLIN STREET IVIay 17, 1985 CHAPEL HILL,N.C.27514 SE..929-715i ALONZO IL COLEMAN,JR. STEVEN A.BERNHOLZ - DONALD R.DICHERSON ROGER B.BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL Eddie Kirk DOUGLAS HARGRAVE MARTIN J.BERNHOLZ Planner RICHARD tl.SNIDEa,JR. JANE G.de LISSOVOY Orange County Planning Department G.MCHOLAS HERMAN 106 E. Margaret Lane LYNN A.A.VDREWS Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 e,Courted BONNER D.SAWYER (19C0-19/2) Re: Hillsborough Review of Water and Sewer Connections Dear Eddie: • The two letters accompanying your May 8, 1985 letter to me contain almost exactly the same language as that contained in the February 25, 3985 letter regarding Dr. Weng's property. That letter was insufficient to satisfy the County's Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance because it fails to satisfy the zoning ordinance and Subdivision requirements as set forth in my letter to Marvin Collins dated February 13, 1985 on this subject. The Town does not certify or officially approve a sewer and water system by stating that property owners can connect provided "that all necessary requirements of the Town...and State are met." The approval by the Town occurs when those requirements are met. I have enclosed copies of both of the letters I received with the problem areas highlighted. The letter to McAdams, of course, contains additional limiting language which makes the letter even less of an "approval" by the Town. Very truly yours, z y GEGilsa Enclosures cc: Marvin Collins Susan Smith\) Ken Thompson - Don Willhoit • [[��jryry�� 052 r Iu�i4 Mayor i¢ r ' Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield. Ir. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt, Water Works Commissioners Lynwood I Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd qty - L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith a w s. . r_ t Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens z ?+ G _ Arnold W. Hamlett • Fire Chief ' S+4wf John Forrest .rr #--'( A .y. May 20, 1985 To: Orange County Planning Staff, Orange County Planning Board, and Orange County Commissioners From: Hillsborough Planning Board • Courtesy Review Comments on the following: Faucette:Mill Road, Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 25 containing 1.5 acres, requested to be rezoned to R-4. ' The Planning Board has recommended that the area'not be rezoned - to any greater density than R-2. Most of the Town zoning in. the area is R-20 (20,000 square feet per lot) and the County's zoning is R-1. Information from the Town Clerk and the Water-Sewer Commissioner is that the lines for water at this location of Faucette Mill are unapproved lines; the plans for which are at the State and are under review. There is no way of 'knowing when the plans might be approved. Horace Johnson said that he would have to review the plans from the developer's engineer to determine whether the developm r-t would - • need tb wait on the water improvements to that area of town. Rezoning to any density lower than R-1 should be based on access to water and sewer. The Hillsborough Planning Board recommends R-2 only if water and sewer can be provided. Graham request for rezoning to GC-4, R-4 and R-2 for 330.66 acres on Highway 70, S.R. 1002 and 1555. The Hillsborough Planning Board was concerned that a stream Ili through the property is part of the headwaters for the Eno River and is concerned about the impact of this development on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board recommendation is that an Environmental Impact Study be done to determine what the impacts of this development would be on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board would like to make comments after the Environmental Impact Study is done. Also they would like to get comments from the Eno River State Park Association. - George Horton Property on Highway 70-A: Planning Board recommends approval with the following recommendations: 1- Obtain DOT estimates OT far minimum and maximum traffic projected to come from a 4c3 aouirt of .3IhttatinrnugIi • • Mayor Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners James Pendergraph Lynwood J. Brown Horace H. Johnson Street Supt.' ). 8 Allen A. Lloyd L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith �d%_'Pr t • Chid/'of Police •Rachel,H. Stevens r �`! Arnold W. Hamlett • may, 4. Fire Chief 0.4 John Forrest development of this size. 2- Obtain DOT projections for improvements needed to 70-A, and 86 as the development occurs. 3— That there be no negative impacts on surrounding areas. • 4- That water and sewer system lines and residual flow from water lines. be • reviewed closely as an ongoing process as the development•occurs. • The recommendations from the P1 ann n g Board on the Horton Property were made • to the Town Board:.of Commissioners who"are reviewing those recommendations • ?:= on May 20, 1985 at,their Meeting. • • • • • • • • • • tF ,frYs ! Yt 054 **tit • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION May 22,- 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan J . Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Dear Ms .. Smith , This is in reference to . several proposed developments in Orange County-. Preliminary access to the developments has been . reviewed and we offer the following remarks. George Norton Property on US70*-Business East of NC86 The vertical and horizontial alignments on US70 Business consist - of hills and curves along this, parcel ' s frontage. - Although the - posted speed limit is 45mph , the average running speed is higher and sight distance from any proposed drive should be calculated for 55mph -along US70 Business. Driveway locations will need to be selected to assure adequate sight distance. The need for additional lanes on US70 Business will need to be considered as part of driveway permit process . Scotswood on U570 Bypass and SR1002 (Saint Mary' s Road) East of • Hillsborough US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road are both major thoroughfares on Hillsborough' s 1967 adopted thoroughfare plan . Traffic generated by proposed development plus existing volumes will probabily justify improved sections on both roads . Saint Mary' s Road is also a cross county connector between Hillsborough and Durham County. Driveway access to US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road needs to be reviewed closely in light of future traffic demands. Mr. Ed Johnson of the NCDOT Thoroughfare department has been contacted and requested to give a brief overview. of future needs in Hillsborough area. The south terminal of Carolina Loop (SR1586) intersects Saint Mary' s Road at US70 Bypass . This creats an intersection which . • r„0_, ulme, u • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer IMI■■■■■■■■■ • 055 will be more difficult to control as traffic on Saint Mary' s Road increase. It is recommended that deadending Carolina Loop at Saint Mary' s Road be investigated. James L. Freeland Property on SR1323 (Faucette Mill Road) Faucette Mill Road is curvy and drives should be placed to insure adequate sight distance. West Ten Mobile Park on SR1144 (West Ten Road) It is recommended that development be served by one drive opposite . SR1145. Sight distance is adequate and should not be a problem. If we can be of any further help please advise. Sincerely, M . Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/mm • cc: Mr. Ed Johnson Mr D.B . Kelly • • 05t3 .4t> N • c (Orange elmmtg Staudt=sub Parka Department .0.4111hrt''' ti,Ve " Z 300 West Tryon Street, 4i0 r 4Plet4%Tr- HILLSBOROUGH,N.C.27278 _ Life.Be--/Lnit. MEMORANDUM TO: Susan Smith, Planner FROM: Mary Anne Black, Director%070 DATE: May 23, 1985 RE: Development Projects -- Review of Planned Recreation/Open Space Areas As indicated by your memo dated May 3rd the following four (4) development projects are subject to courtesy review and comment by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council: - Scotswood (A. H. and J. Graham) - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2 and Residential - 4. - James L. Freeland - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 4. - Chandler's Green - planned development/rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2. - West Ten. Mobile Home Park - planned development - housing (Residential - 1) _ Also indicated in your memo, recreational requirements for straight re-zonings (the Scotswood and Freeland projects) are applicable at densities of five (5) or more units per acre. These two (2) projects are thus not subject to requirements providing for recreational space facilities. I also understand that Chandler's Green and West Ten Mobile Home Park are planned developments (housing) and are subject to recreational requirements for recreational space. I feel it is important that the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council be apprised of these proposed developments and their plans for provision of recreational space facilities. The Council, however, does not hold its next monthly meeting until Tuesday, June 4th, one week after • the May 28th public hearing. As I have only recently begun my position as Director of Orange County Recreation and Parks Department, staff comments • concerning the recreational concerns of these two (2) proposed developments are limited: Chandler's Green -.Accessibility • Developer seems to have considered appropriate central location of the recreation area and has proposed adequate pedestrian pathways to recreation facilities. These pathways should be compacted, "rock dust" material, laid 4-6", approximately 72" in width with no more than the maximum slope requirement for handicapped purposes/ access. Staff also recommends extension of the proposed pathway, 1 • Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 057 to entwine throughout the recreation site providing for leisure , pursuits supplemental to just entrance/access walkways (i.e. nature/ jogging/bicycle trail loop, extending beyond picnic shelter area). - Other Amenities Park benches located at tot lot area and strategically placed along the pathway should be considered. West Ten Mobile Rome Park • - Accessibility • Developer seems to have considered appropriate location of the recreation area and has proposed adequate pedestrian pathways to the rec facilities. Pathways should be of material, width and slope as noted above. - Other amenities Park benches strategically located along jogging/nature path should be considered.. Please be advised that these two proposed developments will be addressed at the next- Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council meeting, June 4th. I would request that any specific concerns/comments of the • Council be considered as conditions of final approval by the Planning Board. MAB/pbl CC: Lorraine H. Parker, Chair, Advisory Council Brian E. Cox, Supervisor, Southern Service District D. Lynn Toreson, Supervisor, Western Service District FlP II THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 100 HAYES BUILDING,GLEN LENNOX CENTER,CHAPEL HILL P.O. BOX 2896,CHAPEL HILL NORTH CAROLINA 27514 (919)967-7079 May 24, 1985 Mr. Don Wilhoit, Chairman of County Commissioners Mr. Ken Thompson, County Manager The County of Orange 106 East Margaret Lane • Hillsborough, NC 27278 Re: 300 acre Scotswood Tract US 70 at St. Mary's Road AHM 8501 Gentlemen: On behalf of Mr. A.H. Graham and Mr. John Graham, owners of the "Scotswood" tract of land on US 70 at Saint Mary's Road, we respectfully request that the Scotswood rezoning request be removed from the May 28 public hearing agenda. • The reason for our request is that we have just learned the County administrative staff has formulated a negative recommendation on this request, based on the staff's opinion that the letter for water and sewer service we procured from the Town of Hillsborough is inadequate. Unfortunately, we learned of the negative recom- mendation only yesterday, after the project had been advertised for public hearing. We desire to have additional time to address the utilities matter and any other concerns the staff might have. We believe the rezoning request had considerate merit, and we prefer to go into the approval process in a posture-of agreement with the administrative staff. We will be present at the public hearing to make our request for delay in person. Thank you. Sincerely, THE JOHN R. ,retAMS COMPANY, INC. )11P11 BY: 1 4 0 I I Jo. R. McAdams, P.E. Pr.sident JRM:p cc: Mr. A. H. Graham Mr. John Graham '.1:„-SY�':•s^i•�y:R`�=tom �,^,,:t:�., _ PM ATHE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY INC.Cha el Hill,North Carolina 27514 e �`'!4�`� � U 1!I �� ti t�ya'a� �9 P� ' � rt' ` iE898i5 }y i Mr. non Wilhoit, Chairman of County Commissioners Mr. Ken Thompson, County Manager The County of Orange 106 East Margaret bane .Hillsborough, NC 27278 058 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May 28. 1985 Action Alrda Item # C2. SUBJECT: Z-9-85 (Rezoning Request) James I. Freeland DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes L. No Attachment(s) Information Contact: EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION SITE PLAN/VICINITY MAP AGENCY LETTERS TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS STAFF COMMENTS Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Bill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To receive public comment on a the proposed zoning request for James L. Freeland. NEED: James L. Freeland has requested a rezoning for 1.5 acres of land located along Faucette Mill Road (SR 1328) north of Hillsborough. The purpose of the request is to permit higher density residential development than is presently allowed. The property in question is Lot 25 Block A of Orange County Tax Map 5, Hillsborough Township. The present zoning classification is (A-4 ) Agricultural-Residential, while the requested designation is R-4, 4 residential units/acre. The Land Use Plan for this property was amended on January 7, 1985. The designation was changed from Agricultural Residential to Ten Year Transition. IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow a density of 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit instead of the 40,000 sq. ft. that is presently allowed. A 1984 traffic count on Faucette Mill Road indicated a traffic count of 500 trips per day. If this 1.5 acres is developed at an R-4 density an additional 40 trips per day would be added to the road. DOT has indicated that driveway access should be determined in compliance with sight distance requirements. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends denial on the basis that the criteria for rezoning have not been satisfied. ..................... 1"+ AC r ISB}^ 1 I , lhA 4J +di.Y'. 8242 t ►Ia,1� 4 AC. 4 (31Y. 1 •I"it ALL' ; 1 i 1 t .A4•�� l.Af3 t' •.iC 7176 A C!1 ?' 4 Ar: I , .L u� , 1, At: Lr1 2 t IF31 / — 1 At. ?. Y T8A :t!'•ftrl' 1tlSlb'lY + L l_'`�t}rtA:ea�( )- . tau + , �29 7625 t --- - - °— :r 85►P• 5594 IRJAC fit 7 9.9 X32) 6547 I�) 169 / 213H At I Ar•• - r ,. y 1 Lr,•, tJ 1• -i1Pi• j ion)• �28 (2 2) 614 4 fi9A} �y 7 27r Sao»' 3_AC_._ , r.:11 ti r .`, 2fIFi tA�r,ta T• I M31 r- I r21 9035 t LI 'S'r+Lt• r 11; ., �,,,, ii �{§j f ,•�' •-• _ ies.eo,__,+xan _ -S.�: r q. IAA:• e,� 67ap (1995 '1 8D�• n 4 AC(!1) 23AI �s2D A j ?.J v ?t?t t 's t'�� :• ,F+N. �7� tR' x11 �4._ Ir. '' • % • 4 6} 9716 (SC 1 r, 2.5 T AC w • lag .6 ' tb4fi:• p711 « AC �+ 1 r It �(r') ti7D S 1 t I-10 AC, i nc -tea'-•. i ; AC. lCi 0459 -.•_.. ; C 4.7AC T4' l Ire 3AC 20A• l31F reed `3f�R7454 !1 fl}1 !'Jj a! 71:RI 4x147 11 86 AC. 1l __ I ORAi� 7 Applicant: James L. Freeland -2 j Zoning: A-R Requested: R-4 LUP Designation: 10 yr Transition , 8 0 Scale: V = 400' . O CA ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6 u HILLSBOROITGEt NORTH CAROLINA. 27278 ‘000,01 ft,41/40 MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: EDDIE 'URN, PLANNER DATE: MAY 10, 1335 SUBJECT: Z-9-85 James L. Freeland GENERAL INFORHATION: • APPLICANT: James L. Freeland P.O. Box 896 Hillsborough, N.C. 27279 LOCATION: Faucette Mill Road (S.R. 1328) REQUESTED ACTION: Approval as a Rezoning from A-R to R-4. PURPOSE: To allow higher density residential development than one per 40,000 sq. ft. LOT SIZE: 1.5 acres or 63,340 sq. ft. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant, wooded tract SURROUNDING LAND AND ZONING: The property in question is zoned A-R. Zoning designations are identified below for surrounding property. NORTH - Vacant, wooded tract coned A-R SOUTH - One residence zoned R-20 in Town of Hillsborough jurisdiction EAST - Vacant property zoned A-R NEST - Vacant wooded land zoned A-R LAID USE PLAN: Designated 10-Year Transition. FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION: Z-9-85 JAMES L. FREELAND BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS SUBMITTED, THE-PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ("Yes" Indicates compliance; "No" indicates Non comp II ance PLANNING STAFF PLANNING FINDINGS BASED ON BOARD SUBMITTED APPLICATION EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT•FINDINGS RECOMMENDED Ordinance Requirements FINDINGS The application must comply with all requirements speci- fied in Article 20 - Amend- ments. Those requirements include: 20,32 a) Map showing affected X Yes No Site Plan provided at scale of Yes No property at scale of not less than 1 '- 100" nor 'more than I'- 20' 20.3.2 b) Legal description of X Yes No Description provided with application Yes No p roper ty 20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged X Yes No No error alleged Yes No error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if X Yes- No Property immediately adjacent is .located Yes No any, which make amendment reasona- in the Town of Hillsborough's zoning jurisdiction and • bly necessary to promote public zoned R-20. Lots In, the county!s jurisdiction range• from health, safety and general welfare. . half-acre in size to several acres. 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed X Yes No Property is located in a Ten-year Trans'i- . . Ye;•.__LNo amendment will carry out purpose tlon area as designated in the adopted.'Land Use I'Ian, and intent of adopted Comprehensive R-4 is a permitted zoning district In this area. C Plan. ....................... . ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Ordinance Requirements Article 4.2 indentifies the- criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has applied for a R-4 designation. The criteria for that district are set forth in Article -4.2.3 and are as fo 1 I ows: a) Designated by the adopted Land X Yes Ito The property Is located within an area _Yes Ito Use Plan as -a Transition Area. - � designated Ten-Year Transition. which can reasonably be expected. to beannexed by a munl ci pal l ty In the ensuing 10-20 years. _ b) Water and sewer lines should . Yes X No Applicant has not obtained a letter from the Yes No exist at site or be assured of Town of Nilisb @rough applicable to development installation as part of the of this prgperty at R-4 densities. development process. c) Vehicular access must consist Yes X No rq-ov, i can z noes not have direct access to a Yes No of direct access to a street street classified as either arterial or collector. classified as either arterial* Faucette Mill Road, by definition. of the Zoning or collector as designated Ordinancetwould be considered a subdollector based on the by the adopted Land Use Plan. number of trips per day and the number of'units served. The 1984 count on this road Indicated 506 trlps per day. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DUPARTHRNT 063 33172.815012017GE • NORTE CILIZOLUTA. 27278 •_ • . - .4000, a Erp711 4,1 <4±1 C E 1h/1ED riVg REQUEST FOR Amzimmzsr2Y3 THE ZONING ATLAS We (I), the undersigned, do hereby make application to change the Zoning Atlas- of Orange County as hereinafter requested: • It is desired and requested that the property described below be rezoned from A/R to R-4 The property is located on the North side of State Road # 132A which is named jaucette MiI1 Rd. • The property is located in 2bralsh1Pr Tar Map 5 Block A Tot PA • It .has 4 frontage of 289 feet and a depth of 1,11:4q1,10 feet, and contains 1.5 acres. Applications for a change to the Zoning Atlas shall contain the following: a. A fully di'llenqioned map at a scale of not less than one hundred feet to the inch nor more than twenty feet to the inch showing the land which is proposed to be- rezoned. b. A legal description of the land. c. The alleged error in the Zoning Ordinance, if any, which would be corrected by the proposed amendment with a detailed explanation of such error in the Atlas and detailed reasons how the proposed amendment will correct the error. d. The changed or changing conditions, if any, in the area or in the County generally, which make the proposed amendment reasonably necessary to the promotion of the public health, safety, and general welfare. • e. The manner in which the proposed amendment will carry out the intent and purpose of the adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. • f. All other circumstances, factors and reasons which applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment. N We (I), the undersigned, certify that all statements furnished in this application axe true to the best of our (my) knowledge and that the application as submitted 1 is complete. NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT(S) P. 0. Box 896 Hillsboro h / N. C. 27273 4/18/HF 732-6151 or 732-8053 --- DATE ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF.APPLICANT(S) i REZONING REQUEST •CHECKLIST James L. Freeland 4. . • O OWNERS NAME ADDRESS :.P.. 'O. Box 896 1lillsborouoh, N. C. 2727! o� Current zoning ._ ASR Total number of acres'. 5 land use none .Type of rezoning requested R-4 Proposed land use ' Tax map # 5 -Block . A • Number of lots 6 '.proposed Water Supply: .Public - X Community_____,_- Individaal . Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public �;,g' "� Commc:nifiy Zndivictual septic tank Access onto state road* # Average daily traffic...count on the state road. Describe existing critical areas: Flood prone areas none Poorly drained areas none Streams- none Other;sensitive areas~ none ' Describe land uses. ins. General-Area R-20.R-10 &I, Adjacent parcels of land R-20 R-1 i': i-j. U U ) APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION DATE — 6),-6 S751 The Honorable Board of County Commissioners Orange County, North Carolina COMMISSIONERS:. The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number 5'. Block number A , Lot number 5-7 , Shown on the accompanying plat, which is presently in a ihjAhrIrvjerk) 7R-1 District be- rezoned to 441 for the following reasons: ib ibt .a..11"t r a r- in 4 Y.N.• Cr•O YY\ \ ler 1•■ . Signed: V Address: : L ci-ee land Us fl . 13-2'4-sic • 066 . Beginning at a point in the center of the new Public. Road (leading from Hillsborough to Mason Hall) and running thence North 1°30' East 192 feet to an irnn and painter in Old Road; thence with the center of said Old Road North 610 West 310 feet to stake and pointers; running thence South 2° West 247 feet to a point in . the center. of new Public Road, a new ..corner; running thence with the center of said Road, a new line, South 71° East 289 feet to the beginning, containing 1.50 acres, more or less, according to survey and plat of J. Ralph Weaver, Registered Surveyor.- This property has water and sewer and it is located in an area which is in transition from rural or low dengity uses and adjacent to property within the town of Hillsbot,oughs zoning jurisdiction which is already developed at urban or high densities. It is located away from areas where development would have a negative impact on productive agricultural uses and managed.forest lands. ----- - - • . ,..' , • 067 • ko b.... .., - x ,1 • . 1 sv 11 ... —• 411k 1 .‘kil T 10 - ‘Q ''t ,N, • ri• Z'\• tb 4 • \ . \ :\ Nt •Nj i NV 0 1, cv 1 til rik 14. kvk)) w NT. k ' •... Zi . I 1 y, . • y, / • ce ..L 0 P d) 0 ki J■ks '-ii ti 4\ /I "st t IN . . /1\ : / .---4e--c-- . ....<:: . . 1 Zke / / : • • ._..........._._...._._._...../...ez_.____so.gv'/fr' . • enaisuemmoneate S. 0 6 8 MillUtt of IlitUsborougti Mayor Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Commissioners Supt. Water Works Lynwood J. Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson iourirr Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd 4*. L. D. Wagoner 1!.• Remus J. Smith Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens Arnold W. Hamlett st - Fire Chief 01"5.0 John Forrest 41 April 24, 1985 CE IVEI Orange County Planning Department Orange County Courthouse Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 • Dear Sir: The purpose of this letter is to state that both water and sewer utilities are available to property owned by James L. Freeland and shown on Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 25. If you have further questions, please advise. Sincerely, 94o44.91,.. AgetbM Johnson, Town Clerk a pi:_ii 6 42 (d) , r r... illi! ' • Xttiun of Eillishinaugli - _ 4,4 Mayor Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA/7278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners James Pendergaph Lynwood J. Brown .,_ Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. .‘„) .11114,1„, . D. Wagoner Allen A. Lloyd . L .y. Remus J. Smith '4 ,.,.4 ' or *1 - Chief of Police r.n. • .,---_ I, . . mt."V E ' ' Rachel H. Stevens Arnold W. Hamlett 9I1 -s - ... Fire Chief - ' 7 1r r.. John Forrest T-xs ,. May 20, 1985 -.7 To Orange County Planning Staff, Orange County Planning Board, and Orange. County Conaaissionera ' - From: Rillsborough Planning Board Courtesy Review Comments on the following: Faucette-M111 Road, Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 25 containing 1.5 acres, requested to -,- be rezoned to R-4. - The Planning Board has recommended that the area not be rezoned to any greater density than R-2. Most of the Town zoning in the area is R-20 (20,000 ',. square feet per lot) and the County's zoning is R-1. Information from the Town Clerk and the Water-Sewer Commissioner is that the lines for water at this location of Faucette Mill are unapproved lines, the plans for which are at the State and are under review. There is no way of knowing when the plans might be approved. Horace Johnson said that he would have to review the plans from the developer's engineer to determine whether the developm " would 1' need to wait on the water improvements to that area of town. . 0 Rezoning to any density lower than R-1 should be based on access to water and sewer. The Hillsborough Planning Board recommends R-2 only if water and sewer can be provided. Graham request for rezoning to GC-4, R-4 and R-2 for 330.66 acres on Highway 70, S.R: 1002 and 1555: The Hillsborough Planning Board was concerned that a stream through the property is part of the headwaters for the Eno River and is concerned about the impact of this development on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board recommendation is that an Environmental mpact Study be done to determine what the impacts of this development would be on the Eno River State Park. The Planning Board would like to make comments after the Environmental Impact Study is done. Also they would like to get comments from the Eno River State Park Association. . . - ' . - ' • . . . . . . _ .. .. _ . .. George Horton Property on Highway 70-A: Planning Board recommends approval, with the following recommendations: 1- Obtain DOT estimates for minimum and maximum traffic projected to come from a Mayor ' f w Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners James Pendergraph Lynwood J. Brown - Horace H. Johnson , . Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd N.- ?y L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith - b +� 3 Chief of Police onr Rachel H. Stevens yII r Arnold W. Hamlett F• Q Fire Chief ** John Forrest 1 T. development of this size. 2— Obtain DOT projections for improvements needed to. 70-A aryl 86 as the development occurs. . - 3- That there be no negative impacts on surrounding areas. 4— That water and sewer system lines and residual flow from water lines'be reviewed closely as an ongoing process as the development occurs. The recommendations from. the Planning Board on the Horton Property were 'made to the Town Board_.of Commissioners who are reviewing those recommendations on May 20, 1985 at their meeting. • • • • fir CS" • 4+ 4, flf ."4•,‘ 071 .11. 1!ggP STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION May 22, 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR • DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan J . Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Dear Ms. Smith, This is in reference to several proposed developments in Orange County. Preliminary access to the developments has been reviewed and we offer the following remarks. George Horton Property on US70 -Business East of NC86 .- The, vertical and horizontial 'alignments on US70 Business consist of hills and curves along this parcel ' s frontage. Although the posted speed limit is 45mph , the average running speed is higher and sight distance from any proposed drive should be calculated for 55mph along US70 Business. Driveway locations will need to be- selected to assure adequate sight distance. The need for additional lanes on US70 Business will need to be considered as ' part of driveway permit process . Scotswood on US70 Bypass and SR1002 (Saint Mary' s Road) East of Riirsborough US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road are both major thoroughfares on Hillsborough' s 1967 adopted thoroughfare plan . Traffic generated by proposed development plus existing volumes will probabily justify improved sections on both roads. Saint Mary' s Road is also a cross county connector between Hillsborough and Durham County. Driveway access to US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road needs to be reviewed closely in light of future traffic demands. Mr. Ed Johnson of the NCDOT Thoroughfare department has been contacted and requested to give a brief overview . of future needs in Hillsborough area. The south terminal of Carolina Loop (SR1.586) intersects Saint • Mary' s Road at US70 Bypass .' This creats an intersection which • ,E V r ;jIJi An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • 072 will be more difficult to control as traffic on Saint Mary' s Road increase. It is recommended that deadending Carolina Loop at Saint Mary' s Road be investigated. James L. Freeland Property on SR1323 (Faucette Mill Road) Faucette Mill Road is curvy and drives should be placed to insure adequate sight distance. West Ten Mobile Park on SR1144 (West Ten Road) ' • It is recommended that development be served by one drive opposite SR1145. Sight distance is adequate and should not be a problem. If we can be of any further help please advise. Sincerely, • JR . Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/mm cc: Mr. Ed Johnson Mr. D.B . Kelly Life.Bewut. 73 N c 4?)00" (Orange Tauntg Recreation an Parks Department Tryon Street HILLSBOROUGH,N.C.27278 MEMORANDUM oa. goo Lau- 1;17.14. r -Avs, Life. TO: Susan Smith, Planne:WesiT PROM:' Mary Anne Black, Directorin0 DATE: May 23, 1985 RE: Development Projects -- Review of Planned. Recreation/Open Space Areas As indicated by your memo dated May 3rd the following four (4) development projects are subject to courtesy review and comment by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council: - Scotswood (A. H. and J. Graham) - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2 and Residential - 4. - James L. Freeland - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 4. - Chandler's Green - planned development/rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2. - West Ten Mobile Home Park - planned development - housing (Residential - 1) Also indicated in your memo, recreational requirements for straight re-zonings (the Scotswood and Freeland projects) are applicable at densities of five (5) or more units per acre. These two (2) projects are thus not subject to requirements providing for recreational space facilities. I also understand that Chandler's Green and West Ten Mobile Home Park are planned developments (housing) and are subject to recreational requirements for recreational space. I feel it is important that the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council be apprised of these proposed developments and their plans :::s provision of recreational space facilities. The Council,not hold.its next monthly meeting until Tuesday, June 4th, one week after the May 28th public hearing. As I have only recently begun my position as Director of Orange County Recreation and Parks Department, staff comments concerning the recreational concerns of these two (2) proposed developments are limited: Chandler's Green --Accessibility Developer seems to have considered appropriate central location of the recreation area' and has proposed adequate pedestrian pathways to recreation facilities. These pathways should be compacted, "rock dust" material, laid 4-6", approximately 72" in width with no more than the maximum slope requirement for handicapped purposes/ access. Staff also recommends extension of the proposed pathway, Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 074 to entwine throughout the recreation site providing for leisure pursuits supplemental to just entrance/access walkways (i.e. nature/ jogging/bicycle trail loop, extending beyond picnic shelter area). - Other Amenities Park benches located at tot lot area and strategically placed along the pathway should be considered. West Tea Mobile Home Park - Accessibility - Developer seems to have considered appropriate location of the recreation area and has proposed adequate pedestrian pathways to the me facilities. Pathways should be of material, width and slope as noted above. - Other amenities Park benches strategically located along jogging/nature path should be considered. Please be advised that these two proposed developments will be addressed • at the next Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council meeting, June 4th. I would request that any specific concerns/comments of the . Council be considered as conditions of final approval by the Planning Board. MAB/pbl CC: Lorraine H. Parker, Chair, Advisory Council Brian E. Cox, Supervisor, Southern Service District D. Lynn Toreson, Supervisor, Western Service District 075 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting. Date May 28. 1985_ Action Agenda Item IL, C-5 SUBJECT: PD-3-85 WEST TEN MOBILE PARK DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH VICINITY MAP FINDINGS OF FACT NARRATIVE SUBMITTED NEWSPAPER ARTICLES RULES OF TENANCY AGENCY LETTERS SITE PLAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (REDUCED) AND NARRATIVE Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 • Chapel Hill. - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To receive public comment on a proposed Planned Development- Housing/Special Use Permit (R-1) application for Darrell Garrett and Waylon McFarland. NEED: The applicants, Waylon McFarland and Darrell W. Garrett have requested a Planned Development-Housing (PD-H-R-1) designation for 37 acres of land located on NC 10 (SR 1144) in Cheeks Township. The purpose of this request is to permit construction of a 40 unit mobile-home park. The property in question is known as Lot 55 of Tax Map 28 in Cheeks Township. The property is located within an area designated Twenty Year Transition and Commercial-Industrial Transition on the Orange County Land Use Plan. That designation permits single-family residential housing. The present zoning classification of the property is Residential-1 and Protected Watershed-II. The requested designation is PD-H- R-1. Certain development standards must be met and a Special Use Permit must be obtained for the development to proceed. IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow a 40-unit mobile home park to be constructed on the site. 076 Kcz'; RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval with the following _.- conditions: . - - - f' Article 8.2.2 states that where a preponderance of evidence indicates compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific ue, and that the use complies with all required regulations and standards, the application must be approved unless it is found, in some specific manner, that: - 1. The use will not promote the public health, safety and general welfare if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted; 2. The use will not maintain or enhance the value of cointigous property; 3. The use is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical development of the county as embodied in .these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. The burden of proving one or more of the above findings is on those opposing the application. The proof must also be in the form of competent material and substantial evidence. No information has been received which would establish grounds for making one or more of the above findings. The Planning Staff has reviewed the application, the site plan and all supporting documentation and has found that the applicant does comply with the general standards, specific rules, and required regulations with the exception of the 1/2" stormwater runoff infiltration standards. Staff recommends approval of the request. The Planning Staff does, however, recommend the attachment of conditions to any approval which are specified in the abstract and which are as follows: 077 REDCOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The grantee of this Special Use Permit shall post with Orange County, in a form acceptable to the County Attorney, a bond or letter of credit in an amount equal to the cost of all public improvements plus 10%. The amount shall be determined on the basis of fully executed construction contracts or certification by a registered engineer employed by the grantee of this Special Use Permit. Security for construction of the improvements in this project may follow phasing in the project. Specifically, as improvements are completed in each phase a corresponding amount of money may be released from the security instruments or the secruity instruments may be renegotiated based on the "yet to do" portion of the improvements. 2. Security shall be provided for the grading, paving and stabili zation of all cleared areas, streets and other vehicular travelways; sidewalks and other pedestrian walkways; erection of street signs; utility installation and hookups;recreational facilities; landscaping and mulching around all mobile home units. 3. All necessary easements to permit utility (electricity, teleph one and cable television by any cable television provider franchised by Orange County to serve this development) installation, servicing and hookups to the development and to each unit within the development shall be provided at no cost to the utility provider.. 4. Roads, parking areas, walkways, street signs, utilities, recreation facilities and sites, landscaping and mulching around units shall be maintained as constructed. All such improvements and facilities shall further be maintained and operated in a safe manner. S. The grantee shall promulgate rules and regulations governing tenancy in the development which shall restrict accumulation of trash and rubbish outside of the mobile home units, shall restrict storage of goods outside of mobile homes and which shall further prohibit the storage of junked or unregistered motor vehicles. The grantee shall file with the Orange County Planning Department a copy of the rules and regulations promul gated under this condition and maintain an up-to-date copy of the rules and regulations in the Orange County Planning Department. 6. A single entrance way shall be provided. The entrance shall be located and designed according to Department of Transportation recommended road connection standards. 7. Al]. roads within the mobile home park shall be hard surfaced in compliance with NC DOT Subdivision Roads Minimum Construction standards (p.19 E Pavement Design) . 8. All roads will be named and the names not duplicate any other names within Orange County. Road name signs to Orange County standards shall be erected at all intersections. ye'.85 {j�� $ 07 8 f= ' 9. Removal of snow and ice from the roads in the development and the sidewalks within the development shall be the responsibili ty of the grantee. Such removal shall be completed promptly. 10. There shall be at least 2 parking spaces per mobile home unit in the development. 11. Cluster mailboxes shall be provided close to each entrance, but far enough into the development to prevent traffic problems on West Ten Road. A pulloff shall be provided and the mailboxes set back off the main entrance roads. The entrance roads and pull-offs shall be of sufficient width to allow three or four cars to stop and get mail while others continue to pass. The mailboxes shall not be located in a place that would require cars to cross traffic, make unnatural turns or go against the flow of traffic. Cluster mailboxes shall be located outside of sight triangles for entranceways.. 12. A stormwater management plan which satisfies the 1/2" stormwater runoff infiltration standard must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of the Special Use Permit. 13. Prior to the initiation of construction activity, the Orange County Health Department final approval of the well and septic systems must be obtained. 14. The recreation areas shall be constructed as provided in the application and submitted site plan. ti The pedestrian paths and nature trail serving the individual units and the recreation areas shall be a minimum of 72" wide. and be composed of surface materials recommended by the Orange County Recreation Department. A pedestrian crossing shall be provided to the nature trail at the north ease corner of the residential cluster. 15. That all signs be erected in compliance with Article 9 Signs fllowing issuance of a building permit and prior to the issuance of a Certificat of Occupancy for any unit. No sign may be erected within the sight triangles for the entranceways to the development. 16. Grading on the site shall be kept to a minimum. In lieu of planted landscaping, existing vegetation shall be maintained between units. 17. All plans for drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation control shall be reviewed and approved by Orange County. In addition, Orange County shall inspect the installation of control devices and the on-going work for the total project. The project shall at all times meet the requirements of the Orange County Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. 18. The project must remain in unitary ownership and no lots can be sold to individuals. 19. A unit numbering system and corresponding unit location shall be filed with the Planning Department prior to the issuance of ay building permit. This svfii-am ah 11 i.., ....-� =- - 079 - • issuing any building permit. Any change in the unit numbering system must be filed with the Orange County Planning Department. 20. A final boundary survey of the Planned Development and improvements shall be recorded by the developer. 21. The final site plan and narrative of the project incorporating all changes, deletions and additions through the final approv al of the project are incorporated herein and made a part of this Planned Development Special Use Permit. A copy of the final site plan and narrative are on file with the Orange County Planning Department. Grading and building permits, upon application, will, be issued after approval and recordation of the Special Use Permit. 22. The development shall be built and operated according to the site plan and written narrative supplied by the developer and in compliance with the above conditions. • • Opp) 3 e�sa 14 4 2AQ j 17 NIATtt lI_f" - /31 At 419. Q 7 AC O?p 17. j A.1 AC _ s gi86 (4 - — 38 IQ 17.17 AC. .uy s f f M Ac. 23.76 AC. CO m 64.74 AC 22 � y 1 f� i +Q286 61L { % 15 3708 AQ CAL.MT 29 32 AC 0C I�6j04 1 Bft 12.2$AC f 9 1,64 AC i ( r t 3 y , oW ,s• 2 57 At;CAL. • ,'1621 '� .�--'�•�'- � f _ OAKWOOD ESTATES JPD-H) Applicant: Chuck Sneed 23 9728• ro.sAC. Zoning: A-R 7,.iA 3 LUP Designation: Agricultural/Residential e d Scale: l doo'_ N I 00133 = � 12 308 j" 30 '3166 (` •\ p d g1 2336 + . it 40 AC }} r 1i 41 i6 Aga62 y+yr,, {. , I B tA6 1 • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGU NORTH CAROLINA 27278 ft 700, MEMO Jo DUM TO ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: NAY 14, 1985 SUBJECT: PD-3-85 WEST TEN MOBILE PARK GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANTS: Darrell W. Garrett Waylon E. McFarland Route 1 Route 1 Murphy School Road Murphy School Road Durham, NC 27705 Durham, NC 27705 LOCATION: North of West Ten Road (SR 1144) in Cheeks Township REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of Planned Development-Hous,ing (PD-B-R-1) and Special Use Permit PURPOSE: To allow construction of a 40 unit mobile home park LOT SIZE: 37 acres or 1,611,720 square feet EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant tract SURROUNDING LAND USE: North- clear-cut, vacant parcel of land East- wooded parcel with single residence South- . West Ten Road (SR 1144) West- 10 unit mobile home park LADD USE PLAN: Designated Twenty Year Transition and Commercial- Industrial Transition in the West Orange Area Study ZONING: The property is - zoned Residential-1 and Protected Watershed-II. A mobile home park with this density is permitted in the Twenty Year Transition Plan category and Residential-1 and Protected Watershed- II zoning districts provided that certain criteria are met and a Special Use Permit approved and issued. FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION PD-3-85 WEST TEN MOBILE PARK Planned developments must comply with general and specific standards as set forth in Article 8 •for Special Uses a$ well as tho; set forth in Article 7 for Planned Developments. Article 8.2.1 b) requires written findings certifying compliance with the following: (1) Specific 'regulations governing individual Special Uses as set forth In Article 8.8 These regulations are divided Into two (2) sections which include: (a) Application-components; and (b) Specific standards for Planned Developments (Article 8.8.23 refers to Article 7 standards) and Special Uses (Article 8.2.4) . (2) Other requirements as set. forth in the Zoning Ordinance, Including the provisions of Article 5 (Dimensional Requirements) and Article 6 (Application of Dimensional Requirements). Listed below are the findings of the Orange County Planning Department regarding the application in question. The findings have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Planning Board In Its deliberations. , ARTICLES 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ("YES" Indicates compliance; "NO" Indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Suhmi,tt2d ,Application Evidence Submitted•to'Support'Findings Recommended Findings 8,6 - Application submitted on Yes No Yes No Application, narrative and legal description forms providing full and accurate provided. Site .plan Includes-site plan, __.... description of proposed use, utilities plan, grading & drainage plan,stormwater including location, appearance management plan, erosion control plan and a and operational characteristics f notification map. 8.8 a) Twenty--six copies of the X Yes No 26 copies of site plan provided. Yes No site plan prepared by a registewed ,Prepared by Philip Post Associates., P.E. �-- N.C, land surveyor or engineer containing: 1. North point, scale and date 9 Yes No Shown on site plan. Yes No 2. Extent of area to be developed X Yes No Shown on site plan. Yes ' No 3. Location and width of all ease- ments and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the site X Yes No Shown on site plan. Yes No Ile • .. C • p0 ARTICLE 8.2.4 SPECIFIC STANDARDSlALL SPECIAL USES ("Yd's" indicates compliance; "No" Indicates noncompliance) Q Planning Staff Findings Based on U� P.ltanhing Q,tiard Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findir Article 8.2.4 requires the applicant to address the following; a) Method and adequacy of provision Yes No Applicant- indicates that the devblopment .�es No for sewage disposal facilities, Is to be served by (4) Low Pressure Pipe .� solid waste and water service: (LRP) systems each seryIng 10 homes. The letter of approval by the Health Dept. for this system is included in the application narrative. Four individual welts and associated water distribution systems .are proposed. Solid waster will be placed in Individual trash cans at each home and collected by a' private contractor. b) Method and adequacy of police, _Yes No Fire protection will be provided by the Yes No fire and rescue squad protec- Efland Volunteer Fire Co. ; rescue service by , . i �� tion the Orange County Rescue Service; and police. ' protection by the Orange County Sheriff's Dept. (See attached correspondence) c) Method and adequacy of vehicle X Yes No The Orange County Planning Staff has pro- Yes No access to the site and traffic Jected 216 vehicle trips per day from the conditions around the site site. This projection is based on 40 proposed dwelling units times a multiplier of 5.4 vehicle trips per dwelling unit per day. The most recent traffic count on West Ten Road is 1981 with 600 vehicle trips per day at the intersection of Suckhorn Road and West Ten Road and 410 trips per day at the intersection of Mt. Willing Road and West Ten Road. 'NCDOT recommends a single entranceway With 5 Squires Road. . SO ARTICLES 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS (Continued) ; Planning Staff Planning Board Findings Based on Recommended Findings Ordinance Requirements -Submitted itte_d Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings of all existing or pro X Yes No Plans, show 40 mobile home sites. Yes No b, Location — posed structures on the site Location of all areas on the site X Yes No There are no flood prone areas on the Yes.+.N° 5. -- site according to the FIA Flood Maps. subject to flood hazard or Inunda- tion as shown on flood maps or , soil. maps 6. Location of all water courses X Yes No A stream which crosses the northern section Yes No . of the site In an easterly direction is on the site, including the shown on the site plan. It is classified as an direction of flow intermittent stream. 4—yes No Topography is shown on the site plan. Yes No 7. Existing topography at a contour interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level datum No Parking facilities for the individual Yes HO $. Proposed or existing fencing, X Yes , gates, parking, •sites and recreation facilities are shown. screening, No.fencing, screening, gates, service or service and storage areas storage areas are proposed. Yes No 9. Access'.to site*includi•ng;site X Yes No Access to the site via West Ten Road distances on all roads used for and proposed private 20' road is shown. access . -� .. . Yes No ical mobile home units are described lO. Elevations of all structures X Yes o Typ proposed to be used in the on site plan and icy narrative. development. Yes No 11 . Names and addresses of owners X Yes No Provided in application. and applicants — Yes No 12. A fee, as set by the N o $x+90.00 applic ation fee paid. Board of X Yes .__._. County Commissioners ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff , Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findings Article 4.2 identifies the Lei criteria which will normally , be used to determine the appil- cation of a zoning district designation. The applicant Property is presently zoned Residential-1 has applied .for a PD-N-R-1 designation, (R-1) . Zoning application criteria are The criteria for that district not applicable. are set forth in Article 4.2. and are as follows: a) Yes No Yes No b) Yes No Yes No C) Yes No Yes No d) Yes No Yes No e) Yes No Yes No ARTICLE 8.8.23 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Article 8.8.23 indicates that the application shall comply with the applicable sectlons of Article 7 - .Planned Development ARTICLE 7 - .SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ("Yes" indicates compliance; "No" indicates noncompliance Planning Staff ' Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted' To Support Findings Recommended Findings Article 7.4 indicates the applica- tion must first comply with all -- -• • • requirements specified In Article 20 - Amendments. Those requirements Include: 20.3.2 a) Map.:showing affected X Yes No Site plan provided at scale of 111-1001 Yes No property at scale of not less than 1" - 1001 nor more than I" = 201 . 20.3.2 b) Legal description of X Yes No Description provided with narrative. Yes No property 20,3.2 c) Explanation of alleged Yes No No error alleged. . Yes No error, If any, to be corrected by proposed amendment 20,3.2 d) Changed conditions, If Yes No Changed conditions not alleged Yes No any, which make amendment reasona- ab.ly necessary to promote public health, safety and general welfare 20.3.2 e} Manner in which proposed Yes No Property Is located In an area designated _Yes No amendment will carry out purpose Twenty Year Transition which allows single ...... and intent of adopted Comprehensive family residential development at the proposed density under- Plan lease arrangements provided certain criteria are met and a Special Use Permit is obtained. G 00 CTs mom ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Ordinance Requirements I F'end'ing$"Based•ors• Planning Board 0 Submitted Evidence Submitted To Support Findings ._&commended"FLgd Article 7.4 then indicates the application must comply with certain specific requirements common to all Planned Develop- ments. These include: 7.4.1 so located with respect to X Yes No Direct access is provided via West Yes No major streets and mass transit Ten Road (SR 1144) . west Ten Road is facilities and designed so as not a state-maintained road .cliassifTed' to create traffic on minor streets as a collector road, . No minor in residential districts residential streets will be affected by this project as designed. 7.4.2 so located with respect to X Yes No Applicant proposes (4) LPP systems Yes No water, sewer, and storm drainage and (4) individual well and water dis- faciiities that enlargement or tribution systems to serve the site. extension will not result in Cost of installation is to be borned by' higher net public cost or earlier the applicant. Incursion of public cost and So located with respect to X Yes No Letters regarding adequate service pro- Yes No polIce,fIre and rescue services, vision have been received from police, and schools and parks so as to fire and rescue services. The service have access in the same manner level will not change as existing zoning/ as permitted under the existing density Is not proposed to change. zoning 7.4.3 Site suitable for develop- X Yes No Soil survey/topographic/flood maps Yes No- ment without hazard from flooding, indicate small stream crossing site. erosion, and soil subsidence or Applicant proposes a 30' drainage slipping easement along the stream and two grassed swales to direct runoff away from the recreational facilities. ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) -Planning Staff ' Findings based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings :.Recommended Findings Article 7.14.3 sets forth "site planning" standards with which ' an applicant must comply. Standards regarding "external relationships" are as follows: 01 . Access points provided to `X Yes No All traffic will obtain access to the Yes No encourage smooth traffic site via West Ten Road (SR 1144). Topography flow with controlled turn- along the property frontage Is flat and sight ing movements and minimum distance Is good. Applicant proposes two hazard to vehicular or entrances to the site and an internal looped pedestrian traffic. Use of • 20' private road. Proposed entrances to the minor streets by substan- site are separated by 270' and separated from tial traffic is discouraged. the nearest state-maintained road, 'Squires Road (SR 1145)by 360' .. No minor streets are affected by_ a)2, Safe and convenient routes X Yes No the proposed developmdnt. . Yes No provided for pedestrians Applicant has Indicated safe pedestrian rimes and motorcyclists. Crossings through and to open and recreation space. safely marked, located and Pedestrian crossings are Indicated on the site controlled. plan. Staff recommends that pedestrian crossings be provided to the nature trail at the northeast corner a}3. Visibility provided at inter- X Yes No of the residential cluster. Yes No sections (pedestrian and vehicular) In accordance with Art€cle 6.8. Visibility atiintersecitions complies with Section 6.8. a)4. . 100-foot open space provided X Yes No Applicant has shown a 140-foot yard Yes No along pert€meter of. PD-N district. ..__ setback along the property perimeter. Adjacent Recreational use and off-street property is similarly zoned and may be developed to parking set back at least 75 feet the lot lines In accordance with the setbacks for the of district boundary. district. a)5. Yards, fences, walks or X Yes No Applicant proposes to retain as much Yes No vegetation provided to screen ____ existing natural vegetation within the off undesirable views, light 100' iyard setback as possible and proposes to re-landscape. ing, noise, etc. Parking/ area after construction of LLP systems.' Individual loading areas and refuse collec- parking spaces and refuse collection Is proposed with tion/storage areas screened. no specific screening required or provided. C OU". ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATI.ON/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS {Continued} Planning Staff C, Findings Based on Planning Board 00 Ordinance Requirements 5ihmitted'Annllcation "Evidence'Subrititted To Support Findings ,aecommended FindingsC Article 7.14.3 standards continued: a).6. Maximum building X Yes No Maximum building height in R-1 district Yes No height complies with is 25 ft. Building height proposed by standards set forth applicant is 13 feet. in Article-6.12.3 and Article 5.1 .1 a)7. Signs to be erected In Yes No Sign location and size is indicated Yes No accordance with Article 9. '— on the site plan. Standards regarding- "internal , relationships" are as follows: b) 1 . Streets, drives and parking X Yes No Site plans indicate that streets, drive- Yes No areas provide safe and con- .� ways and parking areas provide safe and venient access for dwellings convenient access for dwelling units and and emergency vehicles, emergency vehicles. A private 20' two land and do not create small - gravel road built to NCD0T crosssection and block sizes. treated with a bituminouslsurface Is proposed. b}2. Vehicular access controlled Two entrances are proposed off West Ten Road. NCDOT recommends that a single entranceway be provided as follows: aqd aligned with SR 1145 Squires Road. a) Streets serving 50 or X Yes No Y'es No less dwellings provide direct access to parking/ service areas. Private drives serving each unit are shown on- the site plan. b}2, b) Streets serving greater = Yes No Not applicable. Yes ' * No than 50 dwellings provide access to parking areas so located, designed and controlled as to channel traffic without interruption. b)3. Walkways form safe, con- X Yes No Pedestrian walkways are designed to provide Yes No venient system of access to a safe, convenient and well marked system dwellings, facilities and of access to dwellings andlii.nternal facilities, off-site designations. Staff recommends that the pedestrian walkways Maximum walking distance be continued to form a loop system and to provide between dwellings and parking; access to the mailboxes and bus shelter. delivery and refuse collection areas does not exceed 100 feet.. ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPNENTS IContinued) Planning Staff ; Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements �s ,�bmlrred A_o ire icatinp ' Evidence Submitted To"Support Findings. R ,mm,nded Findin" -Article 7.14.3 standards continued: Walkways used as play Yes No See comment on 7. 14.3 a)2 and b)3 Yes No areas or school routes by children located and designed to minimize contact with vehicular traffic. Crossings appropriately marked and safeguarded. 04. Protection of visibility- See a?3. and b)3, above. b)5. Open space and spacing between buildings See Article b standards. .0 ..... ...... . rninuo rrr um nomir�muom ARTICLE 5 - DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ("Yes" indicates compliance; "No" indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board to Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted-Jo Support Findings RecoMmended Finding; Article 5 lists standards for minimum lot size, lot width, front, side and rear setbacks, maximum building height and lot coverage-, and development intensity. The applicant has applied for a PD-H-R-1 designation, The stan ards for that district are set forth In Article 5. 1 . 1 and are as follows: a) Minimum lot area per Yes No Appltcarit°,has •clustered units. Yes No dwelling unit - t, o Total lot area provides! for 40,000 sq. ft. q' per unit. b) Minimum lot width - Yes No Not Applicable Yes No N/A sq. ft. C) Required front setback - Yes No Not Applicable .. Yes No ft. d) Required side and rear " ' Yes — No Applicant provides a 100' perimeter ,_.. Yes No setbacks - N/ ft. yard setback. e) Maximum building height - Yes * No Maximum buildin hei ht of an Yes No 9 9 Y Proposed 25 ft. structure li: 13 feet, '.ompliance with lot coverage and development intensity ;tandards is addressed in- lrticle 6. ... .... .... ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ("Yes" indicates comoltancei "No" indicates noncom liance) Planning Staff . Findings Based.on. . .... ... _. , _.. _.. _.. .._ _.. .... Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted- Application Evidence Submitted To $4pLort Findings Recommended findings •r++..wr�.w.r..ra.... rr..r tirMr�iwi r.a�+..'�:... Article 6 lists specific standards which apply to various types of development applications. Article 6.12 contains those development intensity standards which apply to group developments controlled by the Land Use Intensity (LUI) system. a) Minimum gross land X Yes No Applicant's site contains 37 acres Yes No area -80,000 sq. ft. or��l;611,72O square feet. r b) Maximum gross land Yes No Not applicable Yes No area - N/A sq. ft. c) Maximum floor area ratio - X Yes No Applicant proposes a maximum floor Yes No •058 area of 28,800 square feet or 30% of Maximum floor area the maximum floor area permitted. permitted - 94,794 sq. ft. d) Required minimum open X Yes No Applicant proposes 1 ,582,970.4 square Yes No space ratio - 84 feet of open space or 15% more than the Required minimum open ~` minimum open space requirement. space - 1 17�1.2sq. ft. e) Required minimum pedestrian Yes No Not applicable landscape ratio - C Required minimum pedestrian C� landscape area - squard fde t; Note: See Appendix A for "Definitions". ARTICLE, 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQ!lIREMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board -Ordinance Requirements. Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Suo ort Findings Recommended Findings Article 6.12 standards (continued) f} Required minimum live- X Yes No Applicant proposes 1,445,320.8 square feet Yes No ability space ratio - satisfying liveability space requirement, .75 . Required or 18% more than the minimum liveability minimum liveability space - space requirement. 1225,778.4 sq, .ft. g} Required minimum recreation X Yes No Applicant proposes 60,112.8 square feet Yes No' space ratio - .019 �' of recreation space, or 95% more than the Required minimum recreation minimum recreation space requirement, space - 30,927.6 SR.% ft. h} Required minimum open X Yes No space adjacent to Applicant proposes a minimum of 65' between( Yes No .building walls units. Primary walls 15 ft. Secondary walls 4.2 ft. Tertiary walls N/A -ft. !ote: See Appendix A for "Definitions". Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements. Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findings Article 6.23 contains those standards applicable in the PW-I1 Protected Watershed 11 district. These standards include the following: a) Stream buffers required X Yes No The .stream shown on the site plan along perennial streams as shown on USGS quad- is an intermittent stream. rangel maps. b) Inpervious surface area X Yes Na The maximum impervious surface requirements are satisfied. Maximum impervious surface area fora 37 acre tract is ratio for the zoning district 96,703 square feet. Applicant's R-i Is 6.0%. submittal proposes a total Imper- vious surface area of 79,225 square feet, Including structures and roads. c) Minimum lot size requirements X Yes No This is 18% less than the maximum allowed are satisfied. The minimum for the district. lot size for the proposed The applicant proposes to cluster his use is 40,000 sq. ft. units on the site. Total lot area provides 40,000 square feet per unit. d) Proposed industrial use Yes _ No Not applicable is classified as a light Industrial use, characterized as a user/producer etc. of hazardous and .toxic sub- stances in excess of EPA limits. C Ca Planning Staff p Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support (Findings Recommended Fingln�c e} The first 112 inch of Yes X No Applicant has submitted a stormwater runoff from all stormwater management plan which meets the impervious surfaces shall be st rmwa er a a ement t nd rd a lied 1 infiltrated on-site UnQvers t a�.egWatersRe� t �-oug�pthe Seairpentcl- tion and rot ion Control Or nance. The plan does not satisfy he different to mwate manggp- ment standard app icab�e through tne .Zonfng. Inc in PW-11 dlstri The former standard fj Undisturbed area shall be Yes X No con 'ro s te st hrmw er scharge to a rat provided as necessary to a rox ma in a sch rg the sa e � �io o td v �o TOT satisfy the maximum impervious o runo�ft�ro10RAT �m�eorvi$ustsur�acis� on �i�e. surface area and infiltration requirements. No less than The applicant complies with the impervious . 50% of a lot used for non- surface limitation, but has not provided residential uses shall remain information to satisfy the infiltration standard undisturbed. requirement as it relates to the retention of undisturbed areas. III RTICLE 6 - APPLICATION-OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS .{Continued} Planning Sfaff Findings Based on '. Planning Board rdinance Requirements --_-__._Submit.te_d_ Application Evidence Subktted.To Support Findings Reggomended Ffnding rticie 6.24 contains those tandards applicable in the = IC-Major Transportation orridor district. These ; tandards include the .,.M. Following: �. a} Minimum of 25% of total. X Yes No ' P�'oposed s i'te con ta.i ns •t.,6}i',j20 Yes No lot area shall remain 'square-feet.-.: 25% of th4 s;te• (s. uncovered -by structures 'park in*g, '402,930..sq4arO 'feet.- Appl i-cant•-proposes ' loading and storage areas. that 62,4$5'square ; feet.:.or `15.5 v ,`the mex i•mum:perms teed-.'sha 1;1 •be -cohered with .- 3) 100-foot buffer Yes No structures; parking�,•'etc. ' • -• Yea No required adjacent to edge of Interstate Not.- applicable highway right-of-way. Kept in natural state or landscaped in accordance with approved landscape plan. Front, rear, and X Yes '. No ' All proposed residehtl.al units are located Yea No side yard setbacks �'- ' a minimum of 140 feet from the property lines. required as follows: No recreational structure is located closer thqn 100 feet to ,the property 1Ihe. 1. 100 feet adjacent to Interstate right- of-way. 2. 50 feet adjacent . to -other property . Lines. ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings Recommended FipW ngs Article 6.24 standards (continued) d) Off-street parking and loading shall conform with the requirements of Article 10. The off- _Yes No Not Applicable Yes No street parking standard ' for the proposed use is as follows: Application of the standard results in a requirement of spaces. The off-street loading --Yes NO Yes No standard is: •Appl i-catldn of the standard results In a requirement of spaces. e) Signage shall conform Yes - No Applicant has submitted sign details which Yes No with the requirements of conform with the requirements of Article 9. Article 9. ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings Reg mmended Finding! Article 6.24 Standards (Continued) e) 3. No more -than 10 Yes No Not Applicable Yes No parking spaces allowed in a con- tinuous row without division by land- scaped median strip. Every fourth row of Yes No Yes No parking separated by 8-foot median with at least one tree for each 60-feet of median length. 4. Type screen is Yes No Not Applicable ` YLs No required. Standards for that type include the following: ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff . Findings Based on. Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings Recommended F_ i�ngs Article 6,24 standards • (Continued) f) The development shall conform Not Applicable. with the requirements of Article 12 - Landscaping and Screening. These standards are as fo 1 l ows: 1. Street frontage land- Yes No Yes No scaping must include —' a 10-foot landscaped area planted with one tree per 40 feet, a hedge or other du rab 1 e landscape material at least 3 feet In height, and , and grass or ground cover. 2. Peripheral landscaping Yes 'NO Yes No must include a 10-foot ____ landscaping area planted with one tree peg` 60 feet, a hedge or other durable landscape material at least 3 feet In height, and grass of ground cover. 3. Interior landscaping must Yes' No Yes No provide coverage of at least 5% of any other vehicular use area. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPART1&ENT 100 B LL68OROUGB NORTE CAROLINA 27278 w. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OF ORANGE COUNTY, N. C. Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter 153A, Section 323 and Section 343 , Article 20.5 and Article 20.6 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and Section VIII of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations-, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina on Tuesday , May 28, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or against the adoption of proposed amendments to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Atlas and Subdivision Regulations . - The amendments under consideration are as follows : PD-3-85 WEST TEN MOBILE PARK The property in question is located north of N. C. 10 (SR 1144) in Cheeks Township. It is known as Lot 55 on Orange County Tax Map #28 for Cheeks Township. It contains 1 ,611 ,720 square feet or 37 acres . The present zoning of the property is Residential -1 (R-1) . The applicant is requesting a Class A Special Use Permit for a Planned Development-Housing (PD-R-1) to allow the construction of a 40 unit } mobile home park. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard. Changes may be made in the advertised proposals which reflect debate, objections and discussions at the hearing. Citizens unable to att'gnd the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning Department, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough . North Carolina, 27278.. For your concerns to be fully considered, they must be received by the Planning Department prior- tothe public hearing. • Questions regarding the proposals should be directed to the Orange County Planning Department . Copies of the proposed full amendments are available in the Planning Department for public review. The Planning Department is located in the New Courthouse, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough . Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5 :00 p. m. , Monday through Friday. MARVIN COLLINS , PLANNING DIRECTOR s q4 } • • Ptiy �• • _ ,/ }.�Sour � 'wrq• 'ra"" L"'"" "" , - Ilti eti . •r TEN .. z. ���� RD II••• woes • r . •:. — --�''�'� •Ya1 VICINITY MAP . tlagat • • 102 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS/SPECIAL USE PERMITS Only those uses authorized in the zoning district to which the Planned Development request corresponds shall be permitted. No planned development shall be permitted except pursuant to the issuance of a special use permit. A Special Use Permit is issued where a particular land use is permitted in a district under specific provisions of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. These provisions authorize the Board of Commissioners to issue the permit when it makes the general and specific findings stipulated for the specific request. The Board is also authorized to attach conditions to the special use permit, conditions which may • require the installation of certain improvements, place time limitations on the permit, etc. In the public bearkig process pn this item, sworn, evidence will be taken. Following the close of the public • hearing, only evidence presented at the hearing will be examined by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners to decide if the evidence presented enables the Boards to make the required findings. If the evidence supports the findings, the Board of Commissioners must issue the ,special use permit. The applicant has the burden of establishing by evidence • the facts and conditions required to support approval of the application. However, the burden is on those opposing the request to establish, by competent material and substantial evidence, the specific manner in which, the proposed use does not satisfy the general standards on grounds that the use: will not promote the public health, safety and welfare - will not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property - is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical development of the county. Evidence must be factual and may require the testimony of an expert in such matters as impacts on the public health, safety and welfare and property values. The above procedures responsibilities are provided in Article 8 Special Use permits, Section 8.2 General Standards of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. • /c3 • • Land Development Application Special Use Permit Planned Development - Housing West Ten Mobile Park A Residential Mobile Home Development • in Cheeks. Township, Orange Co.. , N.C. • • Project No. 52504' • Prepared for - Garrett & McFarland Route 1, Murphy School Road Durham, N.-C. 27705 Prepared By Philip Post & Associates, Inc. Engineers/Planners/Surveyors 100 Eastowne Drive, Suite 208 Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514 (919) 929-1173 - • • • 104 #52504 April 18, 1985 ,• I Project: West Ten Mobile Park • A 40 unit residential mobile home development on a 37 acre tract in Orange County off NC 10 (SR 1144) . Cheeks Township, Orange County. Applicant: Garrett & McFarland Route 1, Murphy School -Road Durham, N.C. 27705 (919) 383-5249 Statement of Justification ' The .applicant believes that this statement, along with the - plans, drawings, maps, data, documents and filing fee presented as part of this application indicate compliance in every respect with the letter and spirit of general standards and rules for a Special Use Permit - Planned Development - Housing as defined in Articles 4,5,6,7,8 and 20 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the applicant offers the following evidence regarding the findings of fact to support the issuance of a Special Use Permit. I. Finding #1: That the development will promote public health, safety and general welfare. A. Location and Size: The 37 acre site is located on NC 10 (SR 1144) dust east of Cheeks Crossroads. The tract lies • wholely in Orange County. The developer proposes 40 mobile home • sites on the property. The proposed tract is bounded on the: • west - by a 10 space mobile home park north - by a clear cut parcel of land east - wooded parcel with one residence south - NC 10 CSR 1144) The proposed tract is primarily open pasture land.' B. Traffic Considerations: The proposed site has approximately 1033 feet of frontage along NC 10. Within this frontage two private two-lane entrances are proposed. Within the development, the applicant proposes 20 feet private, gravel-paved roads which will be built to the typical NCDOT cross-section and which will exceed the Orange County private road specifications. • 105 • Page 2 • Parking for each home site will consist of 30 feet by 20 feet gravel driveway with drainage pipes and concrete 'headwalls. A 4-space parking lot will be provided for the recreation and picnic area. C. Services: Utilities will be private, on-site systems: 1. Water - Four (4) separate wells and water distribution systems will be provided con- ' L slating of well, pressure tank, and distri- - • bution lines. 2. Sewage disposal - The proposed development will be served by four (4) Low Pressure Pipe (LPP) systems each serving 10 homes. Collec-. • for lines will be used to pipe waste water through a septic tank and into a pumping 'chamber. From the pumping chamber the efflu- ent will be pumped to the LPP drain field. • 3. Refuse collection will be provided by a pri- vate contractor. 4. Electrical service will be provided by Pied- mont Electric. • • D. Drainage and Topography The site is traversed by a small spring fed stream flowing west to east. The majority of • the runoff from the site flows into this stream. All off-site storm flows entering the site are via the same small stream. The small stream will be protected by a 30 feet drainage easement. This stream is surrounded by 13 acres of recreational and open space and the nearest homesite to the stream is 200 feet. • Other drainage structures will include driveway pipes in the ditchline of the private drive, culverts under the . private drive to exhaust the inside ditch lines, and culverts. under the entrances in the northern ditchline of NC 10. A grassed drainage swale will be used to route stormwater away from the recreation and picnic areas. All piping will be reinforced concrete and will be provided with rip rap velocity controls at the outlets. • . Buffers and Open Space: One-hundred (100) feet • buffers will be provided around the periphery of all mobile home lots. The private road will be more than three-hundred, fifty (350) feet from the nearest property line. Approximately 13 acres of natural open space will be provided in the northern section of this tract. Within this area the existing stream will be protected along with the proposed recreation amenities including basketball court, horseshoe pItch, Jogging/nature trails, and picnic areas. • Page 3 106 L 5 • The area to be developed in private streets and home sites will constitute less than 306 of the total site area. Any existing natural vegetation within the one-hundred (100) feet buffer and within the open space will be preserved as much as is possible. After construction of the GLP systems, tees and shrubs will be planted in the buffer zones to enhance their effectiveness. F. Floodway: No part of the project is located within a designated floodway or fringe area. • ZI. Finding #2: That the development will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. A. Zoning: The site is now zoned AR CR-1) . Mobile home development is a permitted use in AR CR-1) . The surrounding parcels are described as follows: ° west - 10 space mobile home park north - clear cut area on same parcel as large flea market. east - wooded area of approximately 35 ac. south - (SR 1144) - NC 10, 60' ROW. There are no municipal utilities within any reasonable distance of extension to this tract. The only developed parcel contiguous to the site is a 10 space mobile home park. The proposed mobile home development will be a iiell-managed restricted park. Demand for such home sites in this area is great. The proposed development will be in - 1... complete harmony with the development pattern in this section of Orange County. B. Orange County Zoning Ordinance and Standards: The proposed design conforms to all, known standards and regulations, in letter and in spirit. C. Recreation Space: Recreation space is provided in the form of a basketball court, a horseshoe pitch, Jogging/nature trails, and picnic areas. Off street access to the recreation area will be provided by pedestrian paths. The proposed recreation and open space exceeds the required minimum space by 95F . A four (4) car parking lot will be provided for the convenience of users of the recreation area. • 711 . Ending #3: That the use is in compliance with the gefteral plane for the County. A. Provosed Use: The proposed use as a planned mobile aomedevelapment will constitute a clustering of dwelling units within the site, at the same overall development level that A- could have been achieved by planning single family lots. The ' r-luetered aevelopment enables one-hundred (100) feet buffers to • Page 4 107 .._ be ?reserved, large areas of open space, and provides a more economical distribution of water systems and sewage systems. The cluster develoments require on-site recreation facilites which are not required on single family lots. With mobile home dwellings adjacent to this development it is apparent that this _ development is consistent with the County's development plans and actual patterns of development in this area of the County. 1.... S. Site Design: The site design achieves the r provisions of significant buffers, large open space, and various recreational facilities. The open space and recreation space somewhat protect the spring fed stream crossing the northern end of the property. Along the property lines within the buffer :one, trees and shrubs will be planted to make the buffer more effective. _ r , C. Drainage: Natural drainage patterns will not be - disturbed. Only wooden walk bridges will be built over the existing stream. D. Vistas: The entire southern boundary of the proposed development fronts NC 10 where there will be two - -_ entrances into the project.. The closest dwelling unit to NC 10 will be approximately 150' from the northern right-of-way - boundary. Plantings of trees and shrubs will accompany the buffer areas. . E. Togograghy: The topography on the site is moderate. The slopes average 4 percent and slope northerly and southerly toward the stream. All units will be placed parallel to contours. No unit will be closer than two-hundred (200) feet • from the stream centerline. The private road is designed to run • perpendicular to the contours to ensure positive drainage and require a minimum amount of excavation. F. Access: Access will be provided by a twenty (20) . feet gravel-paved road built to NCDOT cross-sections. The intersections with NC 10 provide adequate sight distance and are safe.. The entrances to the park off NC 10 will be NCDOT epp:.oved. IV. Cher Factors A . Solid Waste: Will, be placed in individual trash cans at each home and will be collected by a private contractor. . B. Fire Protection: Will be provided by EL land Volunteer 'ire Co. , Inc. C. Police Protection: Will be provided by the Orange County Sheri-E:f . _ . . . . Page 5 108 . . D. Rescue Services: Will be provided by the Orange •Jaunty Rescue Squad, Inc. E. Schools: Will be provided by the Orange County School System, Hillsborough: Elementary - Efland Jr. High School - Hillsborough High School - Hillsborough . . 6 109 Page 6 r- ; Land Use Sdhedule Development Notes • 1. Subject property is not located within a designated Flood - Plain. • 2. Minimum mobile home size is 12' X 60' . ' S. Orange County Tax Map 28, Parcel 55, Cheeks Township. L. Land :Jae Information Current Zoning = AR Reguired/Std. Provided 1. Net Land Area 37 ac. 2. Gross Land Area 1.84 sc. 37.52 sc. - - S. Min. Lot Area Per DU 40,000 SF 40,293 SF 4. Max. No. of DU 40.86 DU 40 DU 5. ' LUI Rating 22' 22' 6. Max.. Floor Area (0.058) 94,794 SF 28,800 SF 7. Min. Open Space. (0.84) 31.52 sc. 36.34 ac. 8. Min. Liveability Space 28.14 sc. 33.18 ac. (0.75) 9. Min. Recr. Space (0.019) 0.71 ac. 1.38 etc. • 10. Max. Building Height 25' 13' 11. Number of Parking Spaces 80 . 84 12. Zoning - AR PD-H --•• _ •- 110 Page '7 CHECK LIST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (PD) L All applicants requesting approval of plans for a PD are required to complete the check list as completely-as possible and submit it along with all 'required plans and supporting • L 'acumen Ca tion. '- APPLICATION NO. DATE: April 18, 1985 . .. PROJECT NAME: West Ten Mobile Park LOCATION: N.C. #10 (SR 1144) , _ ' r . Tax Map 28, Parcel 55, Cheeks Township . • • • ZONING DISTRICT: AR , • . stirs Am: 37 Acres • t OWNER/DEVELOPER: .Waylon -McFarland .and Darrell Garrett, Route 1 Mur'h School Road . - • Durham NC. 27705 SURVEYOR oR LAND MANNER.: - - . Phi Ti' Post and Associates Inc. • , . 0$ astowne 'rive, Suite $8 ENGINEER: Phil Post and Assod4tes. ' ' Chapel Hill; • N.C. 27514 • • . , ' Phone (919)92G-1173 or (919) 493-2600 A. Special Use Requirements -. . 1 - 1. Method and adequacy of provision of sewage disposal facilities ' Yes X No BO solid waste, and water. , 2. Method and adequacy of police, fire and — — resche squad protction. les X No--N/A • • -- - 3. Heihod and adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic Yes X .N0 conditions around the site. . 4. .Laven (7) copies of the Site Plan. Yes X V9 . ' • 5. North point scale and date. • - Yes X No . ----- 6. Extent of area to be developed. Yes X IT0 . 7. Locations and widths of all easements and rights of way within . Yes iX No . or adjacent to the site. X 8. Location of all existing or proposed structures on the site. ' Yes No 9. Location of all, areas on the site subject to flood haiard or Yes X NO N/A inuadation as shown on flood maps or soils maps. 10. Location of all water courses on the site, including direction Yes_X No N/A of flow. ten 11. Existing topography at a contour interval of limb feet based Yes X Ao on mean sea level datum. 12. Proposed or existing fencing, screening, gates, parking, service Yes X No and storage areas. 13. Access to site including site distances on all roads used for les X No access. 14. Elevation of all structures.proposed to be used in.the development. Yee X No 15. Names and addresses of owners and applicants. Yes X No 16. A fee, asset by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. - Yes X No - _ . . Page 8 rt iii B. Planted Development Housing BPD-H) Requirements __ ! 1. Does the application contain the intensity and is it located in accordance with the Comprehensive- Plan and the Zoning Atlas. Yes X No ^- 2. Are accessory uses (sale of convenience goods, eating & drinking 1-: establishments and professional and personal service establisheents) proposed in the PD-H district. Yes No X' ! 3. Is a Planned Shopping Center proposed iit the PD-H district. Yes No X (,.. 4. Is the site plan designed. to encourage smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movements and minimum hazards to vehicular ' ror pedestrian traffic. Yes' X No 5. Is access for pedestrians and motor cyclists entering or leaving the district .by safe and convenient routes. ' Yes X No 6. Is there protection of visibility for automotive traffic,' X cyclists and pedestrians. Yes No 7.. If the PD-H district adjoins a single family district without intervening permanent open space, as a 100 foot width buffer • . provided. Yes X No - . 8. Are there yards, fences, walls or vegetative screening at the edges of the PD-H district. Yes_X_No N/A 9. Are areas for extensive off-street parking, service areas for 1 I loading and unloading and areas for storage and collection of . -. Yee X No refuse and garbage screened. ;-- 10. Are maximum height of building requirements met as set forth in Article 5 and Subsection 6. Yes X No,._.-. 11. Do all proposed signs comply with Article 9. Yes X No r- .12. Does the street or portion thereof serve fifty or less dwelling. _. units. Yes X No • • 1. 13. Is the maximum walking distance in the open between dwelling - units and parking areas, delivery areas and refuse and garbage storage areas, one hundred feet or less. Yes X No • 14. Are requirements for the maximum floor area complied with. Yes X No N/A rtr - 15. Are requirements for the minimum open space complied with. Yes X No • N/A - . 16. Are requirements for the mi.nimdm liveability space complied with. Yes X No N/A 17. Are requirements for the minimum recreation space complied • . with. Ye:: X No N/A;_ • • . . i • • • . i Page 9 � --r. ;7d7E 7P� /?'. 'r?el Estate ``.-�' 112 ~• xtaz raa 4. P.e.ii22 FILED tiacmOm508 PeaE#28 tx - • MAR 27 123 PH15 - 5C-11.•Jhc t:..f.:. .. - RECiSTER OF SEEDS ,:•' ORANGE COUNTY.N.C. 11/5 Pr+,e5-.l.50 590K 508 I;(iE 28 - arose Tau Recording Time.Boot and Page l - Tax Lot Nc. 3.28..55 Parcel Identifier N .9.834-55»9472 • Verified by -. County on the. day of- _...._..__.... ,19•by .._.. - -_.._............. • ..................................- Hail after recording to grantee r -. ... .... _ .._.. _... ri This instrument was prepared by..Balls. 9P13.....Adam.r.,.. cgyl..ou3h 6.-.Aeard,,...RA.n-.15ox...3.6.9.s....11,0.1.ei8- NC Brief description for the Index • • NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED made this 3,4thday of .6.a.rc.h .10 65 .by and between GRANTOR GRANTEE PCX, Inc. Darrell W. Garrett and wife-, P. 0. Box 2419 Joyce S. Garrett Raleigh, NC 27602 /Z,,fe /, 41 'ap/,y .5... laed Al 17,,c hA rri NC. -2 7 C`.5— . Entrr in appropriate black for each party:aaaseh,address.sod.if approPit4 character of entit7,e.q.eorpmallon or parteesahip. The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs,successors,and assigns,ant shad intiudc singular, plural,masculine,feminine or neuter as required by context. rz. 1%ITNESSETHI that the Grantor. for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is herein - acknowIedg.d. has and by Pleas Dresents does grant. rain, sell and convey unto the Grantee in,fee simple all the- an undivided • one-halt bargain, reerest as tenants by the entirety curtain Eot or parcel of land shunted in the City of. , ..Cheeks Township Oran•;e . . County.\urth Carolina and more particularly described as follows: EE3INNING at a stake in the center of Hillsborough Road • (Formerly NC Highway No. 10) in W. L. Hatch's line, and J rt::-._inC thence North 10° West 1,518.00 feet to an iron pin .:c-:ciet:y a stake); • u,-iing thence North 86° Bast 1,033.00 _ lea, to a rock (rbc`r branch); running thence South 10° . Eta., 1,543.08 feet tS the center of said Hillsborough Road, . evicenceti by Nit iRin pin on the North edge of said road; • :'1-:sing the to with the center of said road South 86° West os c, 1.:;;;N.30 fctlrt to t1 ti BEGINNING, containin g 37 acres. - r" Y,::r ,':Ship ib re se4-v0i made January 5, 1955. a m r OZ r G rn •it ,- C, 7-':• 174-v' IV • • en ..7... . N.C.Mr MM..W1. Or I.hrc.Kryca tort. • l .s•4;e. `t ^::;i';i::�' . _ Page 10 • FILED amipmggc.508P4SE1126 NAB Zi 12 35 PH'A'S • c NM:JEN OF OECDS utiOK5 8 ( !.0 ORANGE COIINTY.N.C. • ais Pet d 2 ' - Excise Tax Recording g Time.Book and Page - Tax Lot Nu...... 3.,..?9 -0.`5...._. Parcel Identifier No..,.`r`-$•/_4-55—g4.72. .Q Verified by... County on the •-_ _ _-__day of _._ .19.___-• by _._............ _.._..__. .... ..._ _.. .... r— Mail after recording to ...grantee ..-.••»..............._....».». .»......... ..».. .._.... This instrument was prepared by Goof,-o_fd.....1ldams.....M.cCu)lo.urJh•-•A•••11e.ar�L....P.._A._...9ox..3,84.,_.RaYeiyt • f NC Brief description fur the Index . NORTH.CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED TIllS DEED nude this... !t.t h.,day of... Marc}t...»........._........ ._.... ,19..0.1....,by and between • GRANTOR GR ANTEE • • FCX, Inc. Waylon E. McFarland '.-. P. 0. Box 2419 (unmarried) Raleigh, NC 27602 cif.e. ! /Cr,tciatrAy Sc.f,cY•G• Real • t_ • enter In approprlalr block cur each party:name,addrea,and,If appropriate.character of entity,en.corporation or partnership. The desisnativr: Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs,successors,and assigns,and shall incluc:. sins:tier, piurul, masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context. tt'LTNESSF.TII, that the Grantor, for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is hereby acknotcleiy;ed. has r.:i by these presnnta does grant,bargain,sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple,-all that an tin iY• ded one—half interest a}{ee s Township, certain lot or is cei••C:and situated in the City of --••. Q± -^.c;e - •.County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows: • LE3INNIIIG at A =take in the center of Hillsborough Road • CP:m ierly NC Highway No. 10) in W. L. Hatch's line, and • rt:nnint; thence Nlt- 't 10° West 1,518.00 feet to an iron pin .± e•,ly a stake); rnnirg thence North East 1 035 00 • ; to a rock (nt•"I,• branch); running thence South 10° a:.t 1.5:3.08 feet the center of said Hillsborough Road, = ir" by rtn 'r ;4piri on the North edge of said road; , 1:::»•''-r.E rn thenre with ;re center of said road South 86° West G"a •}1::_u0 feet tti i';t_ BEGINNING, containing 37 acres, ••- c7 r?ifi 'l? r tij e; inedeJanuary 5, 1955. - _ rn • lV Y.C.nor Arne.rest t...:a„r•K:itrid'"•T' now p, rr • • • • • ) NOTICE OF APPEAL TO ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Page ..1 • OR REQUEST SPECIAL USE PERMIT - • • . ' Notice is hereby given the Board-of Adjustment and the zoning Officer of an appeal from the ruling of the Zoning Officer on the day of • 19 p • -- which ordered that . .— . . - ..- • V V - :: • ,•4.••••,•.-.14';,-;-, or i request a Special Use Permit as provided for in Section Article 7 _ for Planned Development Housing, Special Use Permit for 40 UnitMobireHome Community. in 'range Count . " % - - I _ premises located Tax Map 28 Lot 55 Cheeks Township ..-c.i.F. said premises being within the area of jursidiction of a Zoning Ordinance for Orange ..e County as applied to • • . '. . - miwnship , adopted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Title for this property is in the name of Waylon McFarland .& Darrell Garrett, Route 1, Murphy School Road, Durham, N.C.. 27705 - . _ The grounds for this appeal are as follows; . I - • • I sm...04•■•■■••■•••■•••••••••■•■• ' " • . 1.700.■04100. I ''' • • ''• • • • • ' • April 18, 1985 ------- Date --- .......tiormeer,/,' ...... ignature o q)pellant - V Route 1, Murphy. School Road Durham., N.C. 27705 •• Address - - -. . . • - If title to above mentioned property is not in the name of the applicant and appeal is or behalf of such property, attach a letter from the owner signifying his approval. _ Appeal must be accompanied by a small scale vicinity map, showing exact location of of property with respect to existing streets, street numbers and size of lots, nature of adjacent property uses, and other important features, within and contiguous to _ the property. The names of the owners of all lots within 500 feet in all, directions from the Property will be shown. - - A tax map must also accompany this appeal. • Page 12 115 • LINDY PENDERGRASS OFFICE PlIoNli Sheriff of Orange Coma)? L % L?" 7324243i HILLSBOROUGH.NORTH CAROLINA RES.IHONE 929.5585 ClIAPEL 942-saeo April 4, 1985 • To Whom It May Concern ' The Orange County Sheriff's Department has received the request by Mr. • Garrett in 'reference to necessary security to be provided to.proposed West Ten Mobile Home Village. The Department will be able to provide security as needed. The Department projects that on a ratio the calls for the proposed • village will be approximately 7 per year and necessary paper service by this Department will be 6 per year. This proposed Mobile Park will not cause any drastic law-enforcement hardships. Sincerely, 441,4.44.4-1r9 Landy Pend rass, Sheriff • LP/m1 Page 13 . • 116 - • • LOTangz e uac4 goo. 261 S. Cutnrrort ST., EXT. HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 April 5, 1985 Garrett & McFarland Route 1, Box 264 Murphy School Road Durham, N. C. 27705 Dear Sirs, The Orange County Rescue Squad will certainly provide the same efficient and courteous service to West End Mobile Home Park as we • afford other residents in our call district. We would 'greatly appreciate any assistance you might render in obtaining a map or diagram of this park. Please include the numbering system which will be used so that we may locate the proper residence quickly in the event of a medical emergency. Thank you, f- 1-tello.41 044 1 - Richard Bradford Deputy Chief, OCRS RB:dc • . . • • • • Page 14 11'7 EFLAND VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. P.O.Box 39 Efland. N.C. 27243 1— .� M6-5- i /+-e -2-e- /10-, . ato 0 Id- a---c- 16°,-f-' ea " 51/' C-00 kei- fio g -r c+: - el6:1 4.*°*':4-0 efe • Page 15 118 - • 300 W.Tryon Street Hitisborough,N.C.27278 732.8181 732.9361 ext.305 - HEALTH DEPARTMENT Chapel Hill tine 967-9251 228-2032 Mebane line 227.2032 Durham tele 688-7333 • 688.7331 Carr Mal Mall. Suite 225 100 N.Greensboro Street t-_ Carrboro.N.C. 27510 942-4168 March 25, 1985 Jerry Robinson, M.P.A. Director • • ' Mr. Waylon McFarland Rt.l, Box 264 • Durham, N.C. 27705 I • Dear Mr. McFarland: I have reviewed your proposed mobile home park layout for Cheeks Township,. Tax Map #28, Lot #55. The layout properly identifies the areas • r - that have been approved by this department for your on—site sewage disposal systems. Plans and specifications will have to be supplied to us for any final approval of these systems. • If 1 can be of further service, please let me know. Sincerely, • 647/ • C.A.Laws, R.S. Environmental Health Supervisor • • I . I " I • Page 16 . . C 119 NOTIFICATION PLAN Cheeks Township: (AC) Tax Map Lot # Owner ' Lot Size 28 54 Mr. Franklin G. Hurley 35.35 3002 Davie Drive Durham, N.C. 28 20 Orange County Investors Partners 137.00 1008 North Main Street . Anderson, S.C. 29621 r 28 56 Lelia B. Tate .50 Route #2, Box 65 A Mebane, N.C. 28 57 Maude. J. Hatch 10.21 ' Route #2 Mebane, N.C. 28 58 Wesley T. Simmons 2.0 Route #2 Mebane, N.C. 43 22 David Squires, Sr. 11.0 Route #2 Mebane, N.C. 43 23 C.E. Squires, Jr. 3.80 Route#2, Box 66 Mebane, N.C. 43 23A Larry E. Squires 3.88 Route #2, Box 66 Mebane, N.C. 43• 24A . David T. & Linda Squires, Jr. 8.36. 24B Route #2, Box 70 .64 Mebane, N.C. 43 36 David Thomas Squires, Jr. 1.00 37 Route #2, Box 70 3.95 Mebane, N.C. 43 38 Piedmont Egg Ranch 52.50 Kent Mann Route #1 Mebane, N.C. .• $ EECEIVE = 120 "PROPOSEIY' RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTS OF WEST TEN MOBILE PARK r _ EPLAND,NORTH CAROLINA 4 } 1. Applications will be limited to married couples with or without children, maximum of two (2) children. 2. Applications must be accompanied by a deposit of $100.00 ($50.00 security deposit and $50.00 underskirting deposit). No application will be considered until the deposit is paid. If application is denied, the entire deposit will be returned. Deposit is above and beyond rent due. 3. All homes will be no older than eight (8) years from the year of application and shall be no less than 12' x 60' in size. 4. Rent is due and payable on the first day of each month,in advance or no later than 12:00 noon on the 10th of the month. Rent not received by 12:00 noon on the 10th of the month is deemed late and a late fee of $15.00 will be added to rent. =-`- Rent paid after the 10th of the month will be charged the $15.00 late fee, plus $1.00 per day. REPEATED LATENESS IN PAYMENT OF RENT SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR. EVICTION FROM PARK. Late fee and a service charge of ($15.00) will be added to any bad check given in payment of rent. 5. All mobile homes must be PROFESSIONALLY underskirted within four (4) months (120 days)of day the home is moved into park. Underskirting is to be done in aluminum materials (of a type approved by Management) and is to enclose the entire home. The job must be PROFESSIONALLY done and must be approved by manager before underskirting deposit will be returned. Any home currently in the park and not meeting this underskirting requirement, which if sold and remains in the park, must be re-underskirted to meet this requirement. 6. The $50.00 underskirting deposit will be returned ONLY upon completion of underskirting provided the underskirting meets with requirements of Rule 4 above. Failure to complete underskirting within the sixty day period or to use approved materials will result in loss of deposit and will be grounds for eviction from the • park. 7. A mailbox for each lot is provided at the entrance of the park. The Management asks that each tenant check their box periodically (whether it is used or not for mail) for any notices put out by Management. 8. Tenant-is responsible for upkeep of own lot and must keep lawn mowed and in sightly condition at all times. Upon failure to do so, Management may have the work done and charge tenant the cost thereof to be added to the next month's rent. 9. Trash dumpsters are located at rear of park in a well lighted and marked area. No garbage is to be placed outside the home in paper or plastic bags to be exposed to weather or animals. Garbage will be picked up early on Friday mornings. 10. House pets ONLY are allowed and all pets MUST be confined to mobile home. NO £; DOG PENS ARE ALLOWED. Repeated complaints about a pet will result in tenant being asked to dispose of pet. All pets must be listed on tenant's application - even those pets obtained after moving into the park. 11. No tenant shall take in another person as a roomer, or otherwise, without written permission from Manager. 12. The $50.00 security deposit is required to cover any damage to yards, water and sewer lines, or electrical connections. This deposit shall be returned to tenant if all is in satisfactory condition (to include lot cleaned up) after and ONLY after lot has been vacated and cleaned up (including yard mowed) by tenant and inspected by Manager. 13. Tenant must give the Management a thirty (30) day written notice before moving unless a shorter time is agreeable with Manager. 14. No fences will be erected on any lot unless they are neat and decorative in appearance and are approved in writing by Manager prior to erecting. _ - - t 121 Page 2 15. No mobile home shall be used for immoral or illegal purposes. This includes unmarried persons living together. 16. No tenant may erect buildings or additions to home or plant shrubs or trees on lot without written approval of Manager prior to such work being done. 17. All shrubs,trees and concrete work become the property of the park and are not 1- to be removed without the written approval of the Manager. 18. All oil tanks must be erected at the rear of the mobile home on a neatly f- constructed mounting out of sight from the street. 19. Only umbrella type clothes lines will be permitted and must be located toward the rear of the lot and out of sight as much as possible. 20. No mobile home or space may be assigned or subleased by any tenant. Only the Park Manager has the right to lease any space within the park. 21. Tenants shall be responsible for any damage done by their children. FAILURE TO CONTROL CHILDREN SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR EVICTION FROM PARK. Play area has been provided; however, the Management shall NOT be held liable or responsible in case of accident. 22. Each lot is provided with space large enough for two (2) vehicles, except in the case of the courts. There will be no parking of vehicles or boats or other objects on the i . streets. NO PARKING ON THE LOTS WILL BE ALLOWED EXCEPT ON THE PARKING PADS. No junk, non-operating or unlicensed vehicles are to be parked in the Park at any time. No overhauling of vehicles is to be done anywhere in the park. 23. No pleasure riding of mini-bikes,motorized bikes, go-carts i etc., is allowed on park I ' streets at any time. 24. A maximum speed of 20 MPH shall be observed on the park streets by all tenants and their visitors. The Management asks that all persons driving on park streets exercise extreme caution at all times because of children playing in the streets. 25. The primary objective in the establishment of these rules and regulations and in .... asking that all tenants obey them is to make the park as nice and pleasant a place to live as possible. The cooperation of all tenants is absolutely necessary if this is to - be accomplished. 26. Failure or refusal to conform and abide by any and/or all the above stated rules shall - be grounds for immediate eviction from the park. _ 27. All lot rentals are on a monthly basis only. Management reserves the right to terminate the rental agreement with any tenant who fails to obey the park rules and regulations or for other just cause. Termination shall be accomplished by a thirty _ (30) day written notice to the tenant. : 28. Management further reserves the right to modify any existing rule or to issue such new rules as may be deemed appropriate. Tenants will be notified by written notice placed in each tenant's mailbox at the entrance to the park. Tenants are again reminded to periodically check their mailbox for such notices as may from time to time be sent out. The placement of such notices in the mailbox of each tenant shall be deemed by Management as sufficient notification. No other notification will be • _ made to tenants. 29. All tenants are requested to notify the Manager of their phone number as soon as they obtain a phone. If the number is unlisted, tenant should so indicate and that number wUl not be given out. , `4 , - , u.u.a ima4s4 d I • moom1447,— u 1162. -1.-•"17 4.2.3-`1 I-01—P =12 a.= • a sans" Qui kaga z•-.p.TT 04-— •ecie „, • ,tudi 9-4-sx „1.="stmiza 14,,,21.:',.'/e=g-r-c2—...— • •ffei r,0,3 +am* ale • • a 0 §0_— — g '-aBz.etsr 0—v,a•=3..* 4.gZt.,gests B.Z.o.= -e•= g. or,;•=0Er. or. mi 11/) = 'Its) 111 '3`4 d■B s;2";B:1—tE> 1.0 iN a.21 ta„g iiL = ear .4trai 100 rif2- maz :zza.8213a04.14921.424).-.41ais-an .11**e'r,B*01 Ic2122.1§7.r.f.71, .r.t•Tir - . Cia* Cif2 -0-ptio-gr,•11 E-0-9.6ph— 102,11,>,!..1„-talleink-,1 ,,00,erAtT4:,,,t.1.4-.,; Ins at), ie 821 uzu o est.*.110. 11, aa're 400 41) P11.1110 .a?' vw pio fa) "mu •a 4.g 1Y.— ../st-,0 s 04. -s f.13 014 Ei et 2.se.:.;_11 — - . . cr..s . cal E5.o.o=rista. 66-534.:4"z.oc=.==atv2=6.=1..cf..*'ci..i' e`33/SEE.130.4 f.Eass..5.▪ .4.1cr.A"c.J= 4 . 3 - . : - E - .-- • - e• . - 5 , • ; , _ • - - a 017;•:,r, _. .a • • - g — 5 • ' -r ••• 114f;„.1 ' • Am. . sky''? r • r X51, :LL •-. , .-.. i M'•S W a.:2,-.y. mJF liy ••� ? > -17;710 ; • ' ; �- �4 k _ �-: . >. .7Y�. "SF iR�5' i ;:� .iK h lk k z # #z3 w ` +e- a. hay 2 E " l. ' £�� Y� -i b N �T$S s. d'..."1:1f7"-s k es ,,. .- G • - xs�9 -� 1 w,- z'. .eye'. s c" 3 ry� 3,� C y "i� i Kw %' .� ;t�itc �"�*a' i ° (.rI..•`,''`-, :. ` !: �.:E '',..:.yv,: , '�• .. '•',+�: x v::a'- .. "Era !:x...7 7 •'`„g�.a'..� � + 'f. y P _ TA/ F� • !, �f, 7 < E, e x•^°e ' s aka Kd.r ,16f* :< •�•9 3 .�r. NY 4 <.�f „as ' w _YS 'F � emx,_4'4- c.:N R, dr . • &:.. a "•t� .. � � :*:�' , � ; +w '�4z`' � : . 1 � u i x_ .: 1ti. - , ::n , 3 * d t r 1�:,x;.rwy.Y { �C 4.s •: 'i- :%,..L.'11-.;:= r' s T Ip7.4.:� P ' - " i :x r : f y_ ' °7a ? !E: �. c -a. .b l �` r x.%�e a r;�. v4 ;. is;i z `"mo, �. ,,x....:-^4d 1. i 1 ._.� t�k8 � k c ., � k <;•:: Sr- . 6tee rx v.-s ` ? r"� " sv.a •i' ;■ .A• A .t _ am.•. . ..- : F '; rf *�{ �" a " t= . F ; � : - , r o K ]r 4 >.�'^ � 4, 7i . S 174::€:1';',g-7 x� yr- r.- .v i •tL'iAli'-it&i*);vi 'A', jMsC 3'''',,.x°4-i:1��"..c,::R�,�.�• 4-".a. Kris. ' -Y ;. i 0:`:'k ,xs: '- t;yK9 .: r. .._. �•, ,.a�'�'rzv�'«+s.» +iie -yam.F �.1;,. ?� :fir. ;:,s>. M, .. F. 1,911:,:.,;`: '. .�, x t#'b�€4 -'., ,.>,.-. cr,`'i ') ._J}t,::�,Y.. ♦'s'N., ..'K�".,-sal'...• �::�- ._hc.;�'L �,c",�?,o,'��-Xx. ^Y �.i �' �'Y� .h;:: � ��.j Lf ti's. w:r. L. , :q&''x;ft 'itaaxsr,..ti i 4g i rs ,t• �..ea a.•; sts :it : ' o '"' .Ai ..T :' ty a. `y�r 'Y�-, •.nom?X9@3 wt' e*?ise�es: _ '{ ,:n ? mow.. S A ,fi - ... ..v..• � �py� f • - S � .� .t.» -,ax�_ `'� cif :'t dl54...4„ e: °?,:: :- o�a' t x.•G `Nara yy y, :p. f- A`=f7fi 3;�` ��.� .;:- .:. �.. '.. :.. .,.' :.. .. :...•>:-fiatiFr - ss:'�` '":� .. G'- ',��-.-;�`� I,, �dr�.<:E.A>;.. sr. ..!�.. ..... "141 wrc-s• :+L:_�''� 2•,. '^ ,. G",•a' .'.t r.e.:4U%� k imp t. $k3's '"- ''''' :. .... .. .2>,�,..,,.ockl......,: :::-Le.•: -T`?Y '• FA :liT-. '?ry �,L; oh'>-'i'• a: w�'e l+lr •k..f'r",f �t ,. 5> i s s5, t , • • Industry s udy .profiles -typical buyer, • vex - - The typical purchaser of amulti-section manufac- Among multi-section homes, 8 percent are placed in �' E., 1t :yr tared home in North Carolina is 34 years old, has a rental communities, 82 percent are placed on private •• family income of $24,447 and pays $28,566 fora land, and 10 percent go into subdivisions. 1307-square-foot-home. The average monthly payment for a single-section The buyer of asingle-section name is 32 years old,has home is $230.90, a slight increase over the previous ' a family income just under $20,000 and purcb ases a year. However, the average monthly payment for a • home with 884 square feet which costs$17,541. multi-section home, now $323.50. is down slightly. These are some of the findings of the annual Profile According to the NCMHI survey,most purchasers of -. of Manufactured Housing Homeowners in North a single-section home had previously lived in another Carolina, conducted each year by the North Carolina manufactured home,with their parents, or in an apart- Manufactured Housing Institute. meat. Among multi-section buyers, over two-thirds The survey of North Carolina retailers, conducted previosusly lived in a manufactured home. Burin November 1984,revealed that the averse selling More than half of both si "`' during g ngle- and multi-section price of a single-section manufactured home increased homes were finned with finance companies. The by $148 over the previous year. The price of a multi- survey showed a decrease in the number of homes '�' section home was up$383.The average per-square-foot financed through VA/FHA and a sharp increase in the ' cost of a new single-section home is now$19.84 and the number financed with savings and loan associations. cost of a multi-section is $21.85. l eth figures are up The percentage of multi-section homes financed by slightly from a year earlier. S&L's grew from zero the previous year to 6 percent, . The survey reveals that 51 percent of single-section and the number of multi-section Names financed by homes are placed in"rental communities, 45 percent go S&L's grew from one percent to 13 percent.Most homes on•.private-land, and 4 percent are in subdivisions. in both:categories are'fihanced`foi`"aitire than 15 'ears. - i v` it : x24 forkk - - , a O. ., tn . 4, t. T C.rU ' .. ef ... Y V .y t" .O.•4‘,.1..w'�... 4. taw 0 Y w ,. � n ��3a'3"' jill .* ,..; CM rY. i3 + .0 n m a Y� III �w Kt. � Y • , ...3,L :3- • f-�... w E•• ea b e v q e` T -C a ..,C r t•r`n. E.2 p Q ' v C M ..:„„,:;-,k,........,Ai i t M 0 C = v C = t yr Y ^ G -,O r w...Ito . .. CO .aPr• x ` z we o Y :v1 / 0 twYT , _ -m oqCt:Cpp ? Oli 2Y • ? � i r H v Y •y• C L. � -c }•A. E X 4 ID° W.* S • - r .as 44. 05,014 Y am.a r QT� ' .• !. . J� C'QCA� CC • `'-+sue -,.t$ � d S'17vYa13.V$'•E GY + v'ua y C C O ,b � .la . Y o +Q —Q s Y s Y C —'. C C , ∎a o ,-, I. :• V tr •Q V •C en E o l—.E Y `. -- E f,.; a to 0 o . ,- qr ° y o . � .�� -- w a .0 a.. .. pC ; wa.:.•c•d b tO. Trt u4.13^'•co o—,s1-r L. .1 p^°�•O'7.4+ y 04 b .C �4) =� 8 u I= inr C � A .t. u { e ., b'r+ to u C ma.,� w � Cg ▪.0 qa Y Q!r � � , Y "C . y G1 $ ` a g.0 E C Y .QhG ill i :s ....L 0.0= C C O , .5: 3.C•V H R O .+a C -"V O 1 x!w.lr_. S 65 0 V W C' '0^ Tp.�pp l. '°` Yw '°3....1 C o eo �.`� .OeC O � U E.. 21 E = a Z a m '.q. II p"' o C 1 o G S0 ywq E;'w E r E E, Y s. q gYVr X :; C }7• :- µ. T Y CYaCYyb G jHHI e 2 � .�: roC0wYOOt+�Y w4 � = cmi„ x.= vGawoQi •aaOUbC wwp� ps.. ta �2(.0 YYCY7CSyS ' . .yOYSx'0t0 . � w 801 V .:0 'C 0 e.t.a O w w 0 •s C4 . C'T�V C. C- Y 8O‘s•0 moo QQ py0 C y^.t'r„Z u .. _wYCO S 0 ,� co 7Z+ �' _ O CC .”"rY:�O > 2;$ p 00...0(...00.-0 V_ 0 G Y C "C' . i. ., -- w � O. = t"T C U N 4,3 C+ .. U m Y tr.o E cu.= j . _CO V ' 4. tJ 6 ai c ......';.F....:•.7-^'. •-".W w 0 CO�.a1 lioe rA r.:1 spill .3 •3 2.3,•11 0e .t.. •• Yq • — . costal ` S�cC EY e vO ew G a r,p OZ 1aw E r > > :ti:.c:' L Y �� '� -'_ r 2 , 'c oVx= � � ;--=•-•.----• • ai g O E • = = .© 3 Ce �o Y C OS x -se.... p• Gi t o •- iEop , pw ea-=:i3 - y ? 1e� —..5.c— & OL�c. E_ vO V tpu4,,.i Y . F-......:.=u: i v.�.Cf q0 C v a S V.� G , . X. g • • . -. - .-...... , . 125 . - . • , . • ,•-• .. . a a 14 *5'4'41 .41,--- • 'I' - .**'4:4-.•...T.L.:. ''.‘;*. '. -.' .5* E-a-"I'ri 5 • :".. • 't ::- *ea i'..'r -::::::.° . " '-.;. g 2...ticl 'ft''l `; -.',s :•;T: . ' 2figei I.i ".. • :;..f....- .'''''..' : . • ;:".. . •-... • :.• • - -.. et- .'6...2.11:1-7.! ' • .. .... 643.i. x:.!;.. - .'-.--. , .-- • Li:5'11s- . . .':',_ 2 3 p„.1.1!............ j •,....-:.:: . , ...:: iii m- •• :."ri : ••••': '.• • ., -y., 1522.=g -) • - -_,. , 4....4-.A.,•:-...,... ..•,.,. fi•IMIIIIIbr• ' ...".'...•:-...-:',.'....::%.*-7:':::r...',- :*;.";:,.:' 'id 2 ,::;: ,),;';.-..',3t:?.1.-0-!:'-'i-.,e'rl: 4 1--.115-26-..,4•. _., .....„_1-.....,„: ; ..,...-. 4.,r;:. i.:,4:, ,,T, . '; ..,....r.,... ,..,. A ...... • ••••t......„_,-.,, „••,.:. ,...• ...._. ..„, . ,........ . • . . ........ .-„,. . ,...,,.......„.„.„,„,.,... . ...: 441,'--....,:,i'''•:• a" : - - ' IP .••-. . , .,- :•'.4'...:.4-,J. f, . .. • .. e.i..: ..::--.,..- • ,--,'-. ,,....:.1:-.4 '.i.,t 1. .---tr. - .- - - •L -• • ,Z:45P ..W. V di U..'a.Cri4.+I • : • ". 11 - --• :''''7.' ".r.-..iit".• . 2:1-ke*.1_4:4 !CI. ..ilq.g.17:Z a . - :,,,, s' •.14111.6..„ t • -- -.i. 03- -.11"`"" --'' .-..:-..":',.---'„ '(4.:-!-.2i.•.."-4.1,:lf.,-AA,'" fra j,9 co e.,d...d 4. ' 145 ...:- ....1.- .. '..xi.',:;:-;:i4C.,,i'fiv .'7:-... E g•ol gE g''- aP- . .. . . ,,............:.:.....,;..An=;&...:. ..... , :La u....e.=0, ' ' ' • ' '''''''.011.11ktz.i..:''-'..3 = .x3".- g,-g.r., )...-Pi""kte..e. - '-'-,-zs,,ti...-.--;,.,:,......ic.- - -- • ...t--:!..T.::.- -t,---..,,,..;••,.4.-4,-4 0 i.,..-- "r•-..0 4 . '-'3-41.4.1.,:.9,: .?7:;•;'..;'`.17..'''MII f :.-,?:'':.',,z--_ ,,:t-, -4.!•.:-!-.„ E e P.Es 5...ET, - •tr. , : : ,..- .;:....,.::. ... F. e. •t..,.. ..3k.--:'"e-.'"..*=.----..,z-:--: - --.C!......r..i.-%'''.1:....::-4-:;; ti. -0-1-„;,r,,y.a A.''.1.?„4,2:4:s*4-4*-. 2 .u.;;II""c;'•)*11 tCe' . ..... ....• *-•7....,,,• :"-,j',."... ,.., 7.-= .c.)=E= ,t, . • .1-:ne.....7,1,.. :.?.•,7,-.'_--; [.• .,„ , ' 'f=.,..-7. •...1:1,,:',7.--'4-1■-,"*.k.....7%ti.7.7."??..." z 0=..*a . al • .. *: l. , '.i :;E:4!..7:11+•''''',O'e_.''etlit'e-11-::,r ;a1 '''.."144.b.2,1-11 '.:._-.. -'.;.'.. . -41i; . .... .....,#: .:, ..,_____. ___... ,1,;y: 7/,•...:•;..*:::...... ---:14.-N,..f.,...;-7.„ ,,,f- *ifTa,7,gl*1,1 (''. ... '•-!:::- . 111111111,1r.':,.-. '.:',.4•%... - 1-71' .1.-;41 >.1 f..g g i 1-1.e ..... • 1...: ..1-4./4.4g., ,,,: =ffiz-, :-....,.1 •,..;.,...if,i ,',.,1,... ,•,,c,...,‘,;,"7.; z i,,,, .....,tz 44 g . -0. ..,, ,..4. ' ''.-,"..774.71 r , j .r.,,.`. ....,-.'....-;::',. .4,t,'::., -1" . ..,..;.:•••'-7. .T.i.c,;`,4-.4.iiii-;41 4 <1;11 31-54 . ..e.- ....,, ,...z,,•<.---.:.q.•:,,,i:-..t,::::::,:zi .' . . :•.',5.....E...riL'Fsf.. .'4,i.P.-4 c E.g.=.1= ,,,,r,.......-...„4,....,...,-.....--. ..-..z.-...... ...... 4. - ...........--,...-wat-•.4 ,,,g ill.=41 xta.a. : , 2" "r'g tt"a•P 13`4'7,r■--tr.&1-9-4°3 3 • .• ' * Fo" - 5 i .• _._. 01 g.; -• , * I g=.2e....ciee.i.e3c, 4-cc'e c■••• 1 = 411) 0 •-..--e‘a.e.-u.- ueux3,0e,.. ix , 7. r•l't"°I"". 871,-80. =--...2g.002..... ;3 1 _ ugg1uEsco--=-°.4-gui-E7,.20,„g •1 411) granaff4 ' :- - ;g°400,0 - _— . • 0.'74E'.4z, E- -- ..• . .191211 .. - "a y... ,„; - a 11 0 az..•e a t's el/ ••-• a yi " •' 020 .a S ••• .. Iti=4 ••• .0.... ,,,.....,442 I; a ev• ==5 to.71 w e-Z-741z eaga.=a..,'..4 E: c... e- 133 z.='r....r..-..3..c7,-,•"..:....!=,.,......-o .- • u Cln 0 Cs) 2 liO f'34•117.. •-• .4 N'S'6.&°_,L.,;4 6 r;%I t i.2 - . E A giI12:71uR g:a:ilifiel,11 .3 ti ._ „,...,rOl 0 4.• it....rg; .,.?. S ..1)..}...g a.°= g'S.;■14 .°V:g2,7"1.""*al'i :,. -13 . f=EJ•E E.:4..1..E-8 5"•61 ., E., .. ,.... ,..... ,,. ., 17 = oft° ! tig - E-E .2T•i---'...t.g.-7- au..,--a .,.7,,,, ,,,.....g...11-='z 4.iz g 2-2 l':.-2"°' r '-' . x f 40 Pali ilami * ."9- it..-..... • -A.: • 4 . ;3 • . . _ . . .. • .. __.-- • • - . _. •,• , . • . .. 4:4 the 126 - � money, - '':Y ,,: - quality of life seen 3 -�'• as better by many • r ,,,r 3'i.'y t., Caatlatred from Prilf 64 r.. .,:::. ' home costs.Others believe 4-b -75 mw ptp ��*ith v.j `='.. that t they can enjoy a lief- 102t of square TeotM�is t quality of life for the priced approxigiaiefy •• money a mobile home 5l8.000. which'is 7ra7 community. And others per square foot' uy determine to avoid F. Y fur void the nishcd."• upkeep Cost of convert- "True,homes •' tionai housing. , more •� g• Many expensive, but t the retirees•enjoy the Cori- h y —':i7.... � mutiny and social aspects desires of the buying - '•• ,. of mobile home livi buyers r ] 4!" "In Public and manufaenj a :Pei• 'In some of the fast have been able to offset • growing cities of the west, increased costs by attire ^r•'.- there is no alterative to advanced technology and • ,� . «., mobile home living due to manufacturing • the extremely h' x expertise. 1,Ft : ,• ' . Y tEh costs of The most exerting new 14,d.„-ey•.`: conventional home development in thetnobik - mg materials and the home Indust Shirk ;, - 4x._f t;.•'. - • lack of adequate labor. said."is the advent of the .% _ . , t ofd$mac-ptttwh7 bno man Finans flexible govcr_ simply enjoy mobile home offered by the programs 1 living and prefer it to any Administration and the • 1 other life style." What Federal Housing Admiai- • about the current costs of stratdoa." • r:. mobile homes? • !^ Shirk said • ld that per square foot CDC leaders wlplace the max-ha not r ;fi'- + In 1953,a home 8 foot $47,5001aan amount at by 40 foot could be par- limits qty,own these chased for$4,995, which is about S15.60 per square single 50 0 on home and foot.The current $35,000 on a multi- . ulti- t a home is now higher than section. A multi-section. • unit can be financed for I are in the 1950's,but families twenty years and the single ing a section term wassracreasert much �� home with from 12 to 15 years." M quality. Too- Shirk noted that the fit FHA mobile home lending -program has also been revised'within the last }k year. "MWri-sections can now be financed for a . maximum of$47,500 for a • r term of 20 years and single • sections can be insured fa the maximum amount of 82Z.500 for 15 years." "It is interesting to see xi the difference in the United States in the pro- duct mix between single section units and multi- section units. Buyers in California. for example, . prefer the multi-section units in 80 purchases. In the Rocky Mountain West, per- cent of the buyers prefer multi-section units. In• Texas, the largest-mobile home f ales state in rite • • u e, only 12.4 • percent prefer multi. section homes. This s demonstrates that the a•` mobile home industry has • the flexibility to supply any type of home rrle that the i R buying public desires." a Shirk said,"Homes had a maximum of 14-foot- . wide sections. a y • of these eeetio nsnsware ,, wide as 16 to 18 feet."Tri. ple wide horins are now being produced that bare as much as 2,000 square feet, • I _ 127 • •L. r STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT • . FOR- SITE 1-0F` • WEST TEN MOBILE PARK WEST TEN- ROAD (SR-1144) • • CHEEKS TOWNSHIP -.ORANGE COUNTY-; :N.C., • e(d • MAY 1985 JOB 40. 52504 • • PREPARED FOR: . 'DARRELL GARRETT & WAYLON McFARLAND ROUTE 1- MURPHY. SCHOOL ROAD DURHAM,. N.C. 27705 • ,44tH//Iryr��. ,; .,.......,,8 ,% .•;/* ooh, 3 1. k�y .. rrrr��1i ■`% itlrt 4 t e t t Nt,a PREPARED BY: PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. ' ENGINEERS/PLANNERS/SURVEYORS °: . CHAPEL HILL, N.C. --■—•■••••■••••■■■■•..... q?‘'- ,--.. - ..,.„ • _ . 12.8 . . . • f.-• :. . . - g . . n--------.-------e-_.____. -P . . . /.....6 q 0 - • e ...................................... ..„. ... ,/". .--) . ..------------ -- -../' . .„:. _,,..r. :?:•?.,.- , /7,,,---- _,.....----7„/„..--",....."':■-:- - --- ---r-----.....0,. ...........,„,.. m. ..- ....,•-/--. .,. /j2///7r. ,----,..4< - , wausinanuri..■- ........■ . 4. ,.. ..,. ... -----.... ....■<'---. . . . ::.,-7- .er "...i.-'--- ,........■*"."."' N. .............'". OA goNINIIII.."--..,. .,,,, ■• 1 ,......°.'".. I.....'..7...-' -7 • .....-------- . , . Asa . iMMIlr'_-,...0 iiiii 0111011011111111r4- --............ • am .... ' . ------- .....„ •. , = = : .i ! ,..., ,....._, ,./. . .......■°' 1 e „.„13t----- . .,... ,.:., ,,,- ... = ..--- = 1== -1 ;•-. .•. __. Ea i ........._, S I, I •,.. ,.. .., ==r = "11 ,....1 i .......„...--'"., i ! .................a= ....4 = =9.....r.r.r... . ■.1.:: no ' • .... ... , e ; b .0 ... .,. ... ....._ ,...,1:4- =..., =,....„--- • .. ,.. ................ . e = = ... r i ..""-...-"".."- q.'"- SU e • = =a 2 , =. _. .....- • ,.... al , a 0 ,.... . — .- . ... 1 = 4........0 711 . ill .../^".. . = 1111 = = 4 I = _.. ....„----7-- . . i : ... ,- -....= ;,., 1 i , i . m : „.-------- 1 I ...----------- . . . . .....„--- , — MIX PIPIC Miliellailmie, .......r...." ............. ............ -.......-- Elar .....■•■=yre......, / I .. 1 % 1'./ .."...KC. t 0.................. •.....,—. ..-..."* "."*7.". .".L....r.,■". 16" • 1 f .e ..•''''...*...'". . - •''.' , S•V" • • 844101 elailM •,.., 3/07//s6- • . . ____ , .. ..... ..., -:-----.------T---7_,..,......,.....„_._.___ ..___ ';•': — • JOB - ,'; • PHIUP POST& ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO. I OF _ . _ Engineers/PlanneSurveyors 100 Eastowne Drive.rs/ Suite 208 - CALCULATED BY. 13 DATE kit A'..f -.11, 1' g5- CHAPEL HLL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 CHECKED BY PNP DATE ...X0-131' ' • (919)929-1173 4932600 — i 1 i I i i • 1 i 1 i i i I 1 i ' ,. • • i " L - I. 1 I II I I 1 1 1 i I Il i 1 1 i 1Ti_ ^t" P 4.4.-rui. -I 1111 I 1- i I . . ! .1 _ I I.- . I . I i I :li 1 r-1- ,. -1- 1 -1.. - I 1-. 1 I . I hi: •- - 1 - -) - , . e- 1 i k)-A'-r-I I I 1 ,,,,. ' ,,<'t7 i ! r_-_ 'aeepee'A.', • i2—.. ' 1 I i 1 . f I 1 , I .- .1,,.c. 1...s.ir i 11 1 i i I 1 i eke.,%Knit. T 1 1-1 I ' - AL CF = driss, ' R-6.4_,I....r 1 ,.4 1k74-c-- Li _1._._sla_Pis-ils.. - LJ,›I' '1 Alila" 14`cir Elg*,-T-4- 1 . , 11111 -144 r...\!1E.% is46..b. ! 4_ 1D1 , 11,Abe.,-r : lo ri--- L I(41 ipe'it,)11 041 e_,:. I ÷=e11.11rdt..1 .1' I 41-1\1.1., I kli = 1 •i 1 I 1 i. 1 i._,,— - itv" - ' - I *7 i Mr I oF I I • , - I I I I i I 1 f_ I 1 I : I- 1 1 !..1*1 t+.ee71I-' .71.-.Gvi. r i.-7 tz 10-r J I ' 1 • 1 - I , 1 r , .1 i 1 1 • I 1 r 1 _ I .. 1 till 1 , t..D9, it-i _ .L...ev i #.7- CP 0 -1PTI - ' 11111111 I I . I 1 . [ . I I Le4.16E4 1E1 ',. - 1-- .-I i). 1s1) I - 1 I • 1 1 1 i 1 , I •.1. • il ' iiiiiii 1 i , , 1 , - . 1 i i , i WI 1 i P.ii Fro 7 OF 1. rgi r. ,.__16°6?"6.`77•T? 1 lA, 7., •el iPole. 7-14 ie-pi i lir 4,1 Ilv.41[11 A__ 1134' I . ___ 1, 1 1 - I r iil I , I 1 -1 • i -- i I -tAca •I Li i.... I... a. r ---- • I i i I : 1 • • I • ' I I 1 . • ...•c4 - 1 ' ,, -0 1 I i , , . . • -r" . . . I I 1 7 l' 1_j_.j& • -1 i . Ili: 14,11,,,6 p.4 .... ,1141_ I ! , ,, e • . . %,,,Liati...1_14.5- if.,z 'i ,.1 icp0 1. A orri 1- it oi ipv- WI a. I - i I ! 2 1 1 , I , i I : __ . i. i 1 1 1 • i i 1 i i ; :. . ' 1 ! ! i; . _ -________ ? i 1 I .•—. i ; 1 ; _ I 1 . r — 1 , _... II .• _ ...—_—__ .... • • , — ------"— • i : . -- 1 — : - • • • • ..__. i ., , , . , , , - ---- , i __ '----. .-- ----1-- I - ' : . . i . .i . I ii I i I ----7-- - !- -1 . 1— • - ' i — ! ! ---`'.---1- i .--1-----f."-- i . i : 1 . I I : I I • I- I I I Paz=am tA.22,41..00tta euri.CIN71. • - 480110/ • 2. 113111.1P POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. sii-wr NO 41. E1111: ngineers/Planers/Sunreyers . . Kik 04 t11 65 DrivnceARSouitueNA20287514 CALCULATED BY DATE-1a-17P - CHA °°HILL CHECKED BY f/VP . (919)929.1173 '03-2900 0 - 11111 . 1111, 1' iliii ; ' --- I Iiii.-.4 I i 1 1 I - 1 i 1 1 1 t I i I I 1 l ' • 1 i :•':•:,:: ' i C. • IrPFEC.-,:r7 ! e?_! --1 • eq.i -1 4.0 tr1s._1._____tekl.L.!..1,_..pf gi, ; i! . ? 1 , , i - '1•:.'!', — 1 i - 1 I I I I i 1 Id I . !1 , 1.. . -i , 1 - ' • -• 114.,. 1 - 1 - 11111 : : • , ..IL ....1 _ . . - raic :ri.1. 1 czlitikifi ' ri../iF t . _AL 145, 1 I M,r„. ed_?... ": , i i tafrfP MI 6-14- ej. + IT"d 1175cie-6-14 fri-i- I 1 , iiii11 . 11 1 , 1 11 , 1 -... 1 ,.. , 11.-0- wt i • !c i 1 --.R.1.1".1 1.41.—, ezi......4. - IIIiilitlii ! 1 ; ! , 1111 ililli 1 i 7 I or : e....01. al.AF.--. , 1 .. . , . 1 .1 1 1 1 . 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1 . = = , 1 - itill .. : 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 111 I . 6- 1 JIM ig c,71 I 1 '... ___. ._'#._L,l' I 1 - 1 I 1. , i 1 1 i__J 1 , i = =sc, 44. , 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 II i 1 LI 1 1 CI 1 I I i , H ; : i : H - 1 :-. 1. 1 i 1 . 1 t i . i i• i CI., Igai ?-110oF1 r...4, - ic.I.I .R-4-ri -i D'IG)421- 1 c 1 -ii ' . 111 . 1 ,. i 'lli ' 1 ill I 'll -. 1iiii 111. 1I1111. 11 1.-4)•14'7,1) ''''1•:-: ' I I I -'=i :-.. .A.L1 I i4.- I il- '. H 1 4 i i = 1 • Iiii 1 . 1 I ,, 1 1 1 1 . (tu,Ii4 dr/ipf-ti et r-1 C.--"4-o.t RI:2.1/„.1714 '.• ....;r 1 .., . I. 5* i 1 _• - iLiiiiiiiii1 ' iii • irliti 1 I lit itli _i 1 I 1 i ' = . i - . , , i i• Iiiii 1 I 1 I A 1- I A re.Aci ii,!. i v.../. .1 4.11-_1-___ - I ig____!: _-e-,. 1 1 1 1 1 I. I I - I 1 . 1 :: 1 1 I : . I 1 I 1 I LI 1 .1 I ' I HI _ 1 . II I - 1 1 1 1 - I ! Ii- Iii 1 : 1 i • ' , L. -prl- I .,...t.aiq tic,A.T1 oe,-.2 1 (-.M ThD 11- i. i 1 1 till 11111: 11111111. Ili IIIIIIiI :.::-; • 1 i r i . ,,.. • - .1 _4,... . , ' ., ' ' ; \ 1 i ! _,..1 L— 1 1 ,' .1,- ' ! d ! . ii11 1 1 I I. , 1r 1 i i 1 i 1 ,,Z I:-. 1 •.4 Alt. L.,..„,_#_±.4. COT:el 2 .__a,,, .. ":=VKA,,,y,g,1,...,.1 li I 1 I I , I i 1 1 I I ; i 1 I - li i 1 I I :;•-; I I ! . 1 I 1 i 1 I I 1 1 . I I I 1 . „ . 1 ! . . 1 1 I 1 I I. I ' 1 "I 1 A le !I't 1•I'ZI.... 14,ep t:i i • I F3 Z. 1 I 1, I , - ' 1, 1 ' 1 ' I I, 1 : i 1.' 1; -T— i ! 1 14.,111; IL 01001 ii .1 1 ' i 1 I I 1 ! ; 1 ."', • i ; If. 111 ! ! i , ilt i I i , Ilit : i . 1 ! ! ! 111 : 1 ••::!. iiii , 0" I i 1 : i i 1 1 ,.,i -o 1 . ., - I-z %.eC/I .41 t -1 - c--.1 7- •-•- " ,, ; • 1 —ii ; / 11 i 1 • ; ;. I , , • 1 -• AO _i- 5 tAiik.it -I ,-,I__:6,,5.• I .A. ..FI5 ti÷f,'y ei , •• .. i : , 1111- : , , • , ; . : . • ; .; : : ... , .! _ • .-., ...._, : i I . • . • i • i ; . ; . ,.4 .P1:rag_ .*.. ...b-14.1-. _-_Sw.. .___ .., C.1 1 1 .,._____. i 1 I I ,1.•, - • .- - • •'• --••-•.----:- --1-- /'; : • : ti ! ! , -------; .----1 — • 1 ; : ; • ; ; ; • i CI ,g'.!s :,,„::_-_,.„, tp. 3 ; ! FP,g_M„P lit-L..,c !:?\.i.E......7,/ , 4,N1.4 b../!, i r!'. _. ! ill ii• iii , : _: ili : i ; : i : i i - ! ; ; , 111 : ; ; , • -, -, ! : 1 , ; ! . 1 , ---r— I :.--- 4,14 ..r AL‘stgui_tt-X-0.-It-6.‘),1- -A4,2._ _ , , 1 i I I . i : : ; ; . i i ; i i : . ! , . I L -, • ; —-i- ; !-.. : ....-4- 1 -1-4s.4.-4P-1 17›..1, _2_ .-, .1"*Ic_:*.u-iM..1, allk.. ..._*_, e4.7r-i___.19._r_7____4......__;._.. i - . • 1 . 11 : ; i : , : i : , :::::. • i • i.• 1 i I I 1 i 170V '1.--04P.1,1\ .),..trr'''': 1 : 1 : : : 1 •; r I „ . ____.: , !:-:!! JSITY1122111nr,12.1f MOW al alt -• .oa 1µl=.`)T I o h'O Ell L P FI -g I 13i' . PHILIP.POST & ASSOCIATES, INC_ SHEET NO. -' OF ?r Engineers/Planners/Surveyors 100 Eastowne Drive Suite 208 ' CALCULATED 8Y Pdr"17 DATE M Pe( 11119.6g CHAPEL HILL NQRTH CAROUNA 27514 (919)9294173 493'2600 • CHECKED Dr. Ale DATE 3 20•�'1 soo E- . W • M. P. 1 ilk w L 1- o {s.r 1= mot" 7,::; ' i k,04 I r ' w t ; ! e 1-F E I r-' + I in i f 4-0 1i•T.— u 1� 1 a€--si _-c-'44-e 0 tz.►V 4- € i . 1 1the ra '- F's( 5r - - r i; _ , 1 -1 r 1 i { -role E i4 L.f-ov414 J TA.e?1.,-� I ( i . :,r ! i I II.null .14 '� -1 I f 1 f I _ � _4(1.14•L' --rl I - I _ I ' ' aI 1 1 f I1 1 • ' i I 1 I 1111 I till ' 4 {1 I i € i !� { I ! j i i € 1 I ' a....:.. • I i'0:., 14‘r_[__' I 1 . MI s 1.31" i • _ 1 , 1 , 4 1 . 1 1 r 1 . i €' I . ( 1 ( � { i ii 1 ' j { i 1 I t f i 1 i _ 1 �j d - j 1 1 i I i 1 { !-1,- s s[!�i"7 i y� 't.,- i 1. G7 I�. . , ea ,SI 1 I -•1 � I i I I 1i`'' -1I._ ' { I . I . 1 ` ' I 1 1 { { > �O .2. I C i.(e•F; ( (J 01:'7 i I I 1 _ I i ii I I e { i � � 1 1 I 1 ` � !• { i 1 ts'Ab AI •D I ' 1 4;4- �1© 1 € os.341 I� Z18 I I 1 i i E 1 * i I .I,o• 32�i 1 . 1 1 I i 1 i 1 1• ' i [ •; 1 1 1 I 1 ' 1 I i E l 1 t t I i € i I 1 1 = S i € j 1 1 1 I ' i i 1 i 1 it . ? ( E 1 T� G�M''el ii { d 0NE• { ,-4-s• ;rrsr'1 - 17 'ELi'a(114"Win..1 r1 i I 1 d L1�1 -+ 1 1 ;v. s4€. i I i i i i F ': 111 : 1. illii 1 1 ! � i 1 I 1• •i l 1 1 1 1 { i i 1 I i i 1 1 i 1 I .i i . - , I i ' € , • i i 1 i I , I I i 'i € r=t��i.=vu t nil GI iT'A1 r e?t;S G� i € I t i _ (` G�'-�cl 1.4: -..d) 1 ivts.L_k/l 51 =& ..- t rip r1 1 ' Ivi I 1 • 1. 1 1 1 1 i i i € I i 1 1 ; l {.. 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 • I ill ''L �tf.l 40 rig 0►Flr i € :uR `i1 j tt, IN[tF2�, • i t., f�Afi) 1G' �.F`� 1 PLE-EDP 61..�PMEMT1 i O,i �• i • (e..5j i I 1 17.0 . --'i 7Z i ( ` 1 terra 1/; -v i t r.1 �1 a21 331 1 ` Ga•S 1 1 I .7' 9 ' _ ' 7 4'P-.. I i i i i i 1 € i ; i € ' 1 i ill 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i 1 € L € 1 • I ..—__3__. i i . • 1 1 1 ; ' i 1 .1 I ._.�__ 1 1 I I 1 1 € t 1 1 I 1 1•_•._-T I ,1- i _1 1 ! i r _ i i I i , _ _ . i !?; -_ter L';r I 1 1 Vju. .l--Ian'P___11.5! A. .4 P.. .< _. �:-bo_r1t.�_,Q Z, g'- I• • I 1 14'11 C'e- A 1. .J�; -r','z? ¢ ,._.�' ce lC _F Lo ad o`'F._. 7`�1 4-p�4 , jrYl4.,1*..'�+E'V i t i i 1 1 I T ikel y-D 1 .-..'__._ .{____.?? _1.r4rL�=> #' ; 1 147. ._ '•�[� cW -r1 • F+� .t`i T -- t cr_A ...--.t'' ._ �._ i J ca tai I i i ! . . ;` I i f i I t € , i i 1 i . i i . i .1 i. I 1 1 i . �-s '.'',. - PARK 2PH/NNWS/ac.Cam.Wn,VOL . . ,, _ 132 JO , E PHILIP-POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. oNErr No 4- - . OF g. . • .. Engirteers/Ptanners/Sunreyors 100 Eastowrie Drive Suite 208 • CALCULATED 8Y_ 5T1, " DATE I`A 4%1' iftEiro • CHAPEL FILL,NORTH CAROUNA 27514 CHECKED BY PrOe DATE (919)929-1173 493-2600 • . se,AtE - VV Poi P • - I r 1111111111111111tH_Ljii _LI- 1 1 . i liiiiii I I i t 1 1 .1 ! it iiit , t , ., • 111 . -__ ...0 If-r-kr?'1 ,..4 .._ a.k4 p.21 0, .._. !. . b_g_N.e..S,W.A .R.I.. 0 . '. . - i o N. I I • ; . Ilill - Ii _iiiiLiiIiji I 1 .. I rt .1 1 1 1, _ 1 . 1 1 r . . 1 -1., , : , 1 _. .1 ,. I. - !. .1 -• ._ .. -- - - A..5 r".• a.. :- 1,., I - ; 1 Kir • ii, I - 1 -1-'..:' : i. --T-..A j I .. 14 ! 1 4 rZiLt tilt;•FOr - -i 1 I 1 1 . 1 Jr - I -''a i. 4..v...,. , I 1 . it i . , .1. ,r_ ! Am0.0i-41-1. - I I flit I 1 . Lai i 1 7 — 1 . I I __.1 . i .ir. - .i.__....- _ _4_, ....prt.g.3_-_-_,LE-t› .,,,/touLi -t", • _. .. , • ___c_11..x... . ..r>1 b,_e_j, t,Ilt...d...0q444.: I li I 1 1 1 1 - I I . i i . I I - i 1 iv 1 - 1111. 1 • 11i1 [ 1 .1 : 11 . Ill I . l i il i 1. 11f111 . 1 1 I ' 1IIII1 . . . Ve$1.-1.k.r•AIE I .=.- I I.' -'71*•-. qtylis- 1. .er 1 I___:,..L..41,1,42LA,s, • : s 14 = I -,..•0 -__ - lilt 1 I 1 1. I I- I i 1 ; 1 • ! 1 i I f • i I I • 1;7: 1 I I;47 * TA ZI *1 ly.60 I I, 1 I , i 1 f i I ■ . ■ -I 1-rn i 1 1 . 1 • I- I I- I , 1 I i I I 1 1. 1. 71 I 1. 1 I . 1 I I 1 I 1 : ... • 1 i i Ii -Iii ! il !.: il . ill• ! ! - 1 . ' ri1 i ‘ P991.-.1:1$1 T ?IiI.i sAFf• •. I, , - f. I • Wilk14'OD 1 i•- -&."-' fr;4:111-4 I T1 &-tis I 4o i..t.), .E v4 L„, .- : i ij 1 .. i 1 III 11 ... I -1 I- ! i I 1 . 1 . .. . - III . . i . i ; L.. , 4 1 - til 1 . 4. 1 I -, 1. 5.1' I- i . i I . i 1 I i I • , , 1 it 1 ji. ,11 ,. .,,, I J -,ri ; x I Pm P i j - cl. 4- 1 I . 1 II " ci Cilep-1.t.g' 17'...-,144 r pig 1 i Orr,N r.2..t.r.kg.&vrr- F ,. --: 4,1r0c-Irtimm I v-4. di,..47 1 Es,*.- I 4,c I v i- 40-ric.i. v.4.1a.litz. 1- fri...r,..4.1 'm 0 _• . . tir-71 ;-, t4,- E I Ikki it I tp;kii-! 14*. 1, 1;7.4,...,1_1/.41 11 ' -4:Wei 1 rig4p_4:__-ri.......1 it,•.-1 :.. - .,tr-ggc-tru , v...y...ii.. 15. 1 Lir,Perob-ir ,,, v -r-1,. tO P t4-1 ...L.I t-Kp N+4,‘ titi - iiiiiii . ci I. j, - ' 1 .e,-4,rraL.... ,! .ee.r __rfrz.g5#',..,s.._o:rp. I. 1 ,,„ sr- 1 1 • I ii -iiiii 1111 1 , 1 III ! j , ; • 1 , i 1 1 IIII .,, , , i_i ill ! , •Til-G I pen're-44 Ti 0414_ 1: .6.1"`->41-% NX.__4k.,,t„_L., 1 U4.11- /Z,--- _.fl'i- 4111 , 1Iiii I i • I 1 1 - I So -Pk i Al P 4'tZ132Ng 1 41-IA..e4.--rk t.i...f _ lls ! -0 pl i-t- , iiiiiiIii. , -r Dal* I- -rg*_-n..)R 5._, ..44 Ist7. 4(z01',4 E FP' i To 1 me;E:) ,4 , ! iiiii ! 1 , -, Trvi-- • 1 i''- _ .... ...tr;%i !F.Lo v••••/ ; 6'1 i A- 1 r A-Irg" I cs' F liZi..)^4 1 1-,rrizi _M _ci, ..F.1 A. igj 1-of -- 1 ; 1 1 gr.E.,34g. ii..1-rr, ! og*j_01,4 iik.1 IT yj cii 4i. .i:C__,_i__1___;) _±.1,1-4 1_5__Iti.a■ c..-rio r4E., . I -ri-ti- i -4i =•• i i , : iilif ! " 1 ! ----Z,2-ae-F14...0 li /1!_q2i.EV.);: .. ..__L. i Z-1 L ! .t* ; t-.0. __.,5! i .06,..,,,1 6, • -.0-‘4.-.*), iiii , 111 , 11 ! - : : ; , , , ; , , 0, f :_,t-m•-, _Jr • „'.1/4., Lk.,„14.. ! s_' .4IF.117::::_=.___iza.4F, , , ; I 11111, 1111i 'i ,....___I ! •111 . .2. I 1 i -- i i "--T-1 1-- ; I 1 1 , 1 I I 1 II 1 i1 1 i ; : , I . ! . I !• c , r. -----r. IIIIIHM I : • ! I. ; ,1 i ; ..1,_:........ • :_ 1, f_____,_____,...._; i ; - 1, it ill 1._...1 I 1 i i -I l• ! i --”. Piala2044 INEEMPIlr.kb,.ma'am. . ,. ,- _ '• PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO. S / 33 Engineers/Planners/Surveyors OF ` •- 100 Eastow ne Drive Suite 208 CALCULATED BY S"3'1'-1> pATE vtit:t. ?._O, 11, ,5 -CHAPEL HOB.,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 CHECKED BY (pie DATE -g 1(" (919)929.1173 or 493-2600 I I I i j 9CAtC `7. W• M �', I 1 i 1 i - t •1 .-•- , I i j ` � 1 i ! I ; j ! i• I r 1 I It If. IC . C1LVI.IbS11� I , I f I 7. - I 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1 1 I 1 1 f � _ L. i ' ! ! I. 1'3: t ' '� I _ r ; 1'.1 I - ! I sJ I 5`1,15.*.' r M r E r�j'- - 1 1 A- { I i t t 14 i � , 1 aak•c-� = I mu �F� �E raw i L . , ! . , I . ! ! rlf ` ' r H I. •( I I I II I { , { 114,4 C!.L tJ d ,�,� f__1 f7 r �"t-L• A'S I,.ig ., '.« , ` ' r•' f j 1 t o Y It"' F..1 1a. . - 1 T 4#i"'G 1 € - V.C- t.) ° r l� ! 'e—, .s9 rG 'i"''1•,k' • •i p` _ 1 r • I . , I I ! I ► I r ; ; r ! I � ! � l1jili ! i i 1 I•. t. { t I ' 1 I I j I I I I . T F IALI .-! i • {., A.,► I .ENV "AAa 1 ,�._«1 •_ I Ihenr 1 ,_ - I i I , .L' _ 1 t• I 1 4 K •1 PL4 �1 .1 I—Ni Gji ti.tE i !1� � f • t I• i! i I i i I - 1 i r ! I 1 i 1 1 . ...r I ( fa [ ! 1. I I _ .� i I I t ! P _ _ I I , ( i I i ; � ; . — 1 I i 1 ' ? • ' # 1 !. ! . ! i •! ( 1 1 f E i ! II i I ' _ I i 1 I I i i I 1 I r 1 I I I '' ! - •I I r I I 1 } t I -1 ri i ' . ..._- 1■ I ` 1 , , { 1 I , _`-- 4 i 1"--1-' I i i ! I I I I I i *j. I f I I i - . , _-1 i I i I if i j I i I I - i -t- 1_.—...r._.....E..«._--- _I_—....F---. , i i . i • ; i :_ t c I , t I - --.. . , • i , j i j 1 - i i-�— ;. . —._ . 1--4-------1----1--- .-- t ... .i , I i i t F t I • , — — , 1 r z � I 1 t 1 ' I { # i I t I i r { ; F II I i 1 I i l ; ( r _-r___�____...., _.,_... _.—.. I. —' I -- 1 i I� I ' .t-_._r-- 1__ i t I t 1 I I i ! I r _i i i ", t I J. I - 1 r i : i 1 1 ..- ! { , I• mesanw(n aavjtr..,wan,am OWL - ,..,.- rcr" : if ---;,,,..) ) /4/ v.i\ .. . s.- 1 . .-e...._ ,,,,,___.„,. .,., . , ..._.,4—.. . ...... , ., , oot Ili; I.':r- :,.. . , .• -• . „..t 1 • "t • • "'''----:,...— , 1■• • .• '' , •• " ■ ,AIIP.--1, ;t1 -. A,:'''' ''''. ■ . • .4: / __Allilit11.11111111- ', , il I • ; ( ;i. „.„,,w.- r.--# _I E ,, •.- ;:,. , 4:11,,,. .. ,,',a__ _____ -_ ,,, • g...• .-.-4. ..„....1„, •T _ •,i , ,q's„,,,....Ia..' ..•....„4.tot,i, _ _____ ___-----;.:14" ... ..- •11 "s 1 : t.-,,../-..'J.I I , i - T.",:tit . — 1 i' __-- --- I/ Adilli ____! --—-;------. ...7,,ei ■ ,4----—, I p\„ I fl 1_ ----- `01 4,000,_,....101-giffi,Ailf. op _, - *,4 CI(") . ----L----- , ,I ,• ,Ii• . •/f — ).,„. II • ‘`\.11''' 1•:'- re--",".-7 I( ,e,_—_,......-- 1---- rrif -1, ti s , "t!" I u? "' o • . Vitki i( " . ./ 111,------7._-______ ,10-,-1----cc,,,ria,J, ii, • . tr-- , .. •• . . .. . . L : .......,,44..z ... n ii- . i •,../-9..„As - -, __L-0.-"--P---------17 q - -..:, - " -,-r z.,/ • ... : .— • . , • ; ...,, 44 -.. ...,_.'' :/:;-.7 I. ----s-'..— .1 r! ----.7-- ,...--• -7- \ ,,, ' 9 .,. .. , I r•E . , . ,„=,,r.:..=–,.„,.... .. • . • . /lb) i . . •-.10 •li. : (-',,, ),____,_______.:,,, ,-, ' \ " • • brdpf ill . /V .• • - . 4 t Il u • _ .„.. ) i 1 . 0 I •• 1, . (111 .1-4.. dift• ..,:_...,...- - :.: •, -, ika A .;_ .. )11 ) It;1!1 it 7E• \ ik:: ' ' 1 i I . . "--.1 - • . , . ; :,„,,,,-- • op' .) ''.--41 -it - -.. a • , .. .k. :. " . 1 • '.e.. '"r: : er ■'St., i4 ..../...• 1 k---.el - ;II • rN. 1 1 1 . . no 1 • ..• • .! I , \ .' I / ,,. ,, i' Aii. r_N i, •- .;\ \....-- -71i t r. , .`"*..1.1'. ' * :• ... % 0 rn ''''''' • PI ,,', CY CP NI "1/ . 0 ' I ' • ,, • „9- 0 1. 0-0 1,.. 1 , r • g, ..... _ . . -- ‘... en _1 .J ■ • al irk . ,.... . . ..... 0 , tal " (i) c ° .. .• ... ... : . cn c•.: < ,-•• .,.. I . ! 4, ( . , 101 ' p.t au (I) ..-1 •ik,, I• ■ A e ..,:i. 1$, Iv) ,/ - '. 4 I ,. . ,c ..., 4? ro o 61 3 ,, ' 'Th,•:-----•'" , .. –,id 7-1 ' ''' '• C*. -.),:l. . 0 w - , , P ., le'ry v • • , - • r) (z1...\:,,,,l'V,\TI ■ -,r1,. ,,,,,,,,, , .„,,,ss ,,,....... .: , ........ ,i, ,4„, ,• . . ., • ,. \ , . ,. :.„.,., ,-,,. g?..) ,, , •vc.". •-...* :r'' - 14 • 't 1! ‘-•--i ■ J v J\ 0 al .,.._ .,60 )1 ,,-,...--: ("‘ 'Nf -) d..... 4, • 0 C • j% .t.- . ---_, i i ; ,__./-, / r ...1 1 . • ,.,_,-.17.----;,1 , • 1 ""'''''s, .1 , E...'..'-. .2--.t__,_,'..:'_..v--(;-.ir---7-& '-'t •.-—.i i ',..„.: .1-. 1: ,:'4" * I \•• ‘111------4;-- 14,0 ,--3. 1 ., .--1...y.....j, .7214' ..; : •; . 11 r -li --- '‘....:4r- -• I --• ' - I a,N _____.--,--c°...„,- ------c-e,,=F_-='"--...-...;:- ..; . ' ..0 Ill s''''- •T'""-t:T( :I t Z. 111 ... • . .. , ......._ : 0 ,F: •-f r„•-•::_,) -)I- .• .. \?) ' . • 9107.---:' 11 •' 7 q ----, -\:-..., ,A,. 1 .::,..t:11.1: ,, -'4''''''N ',To i -;---' ...• I I ''',. 1-7. ,, . . „ L.--!,,,,r7 o ... d.,:: (7 ., ,7, i, ) t.... t .. : 1 iv 1 .<.. ...e...,,_• 1 .._,_..... . . f.' \ ' ----,=:----"Wi' lli .(77.-7,-) p.- . di 4 T1 .='''! i `-', 1 i‘i .. . ‘). 1":1,1.. .__:. )1 ' -..;;11' ''\‘ ."i Lk ‘,/ r•-• • . ...— –--- - - 3.. ,.:.*,_.--.," '9'. .---Y–r-/ N.0 az, ,. ,., , 0 %, ' r- -.----Y. '`.-1 v ---1..,'-iti: '1 M- 0„;;,i ri.g7j.--.-.1 4, -7,,,---'''',,-,-;-'-•--•,-.-----,,';!--.-) . ■• i \i r---4- ' - .., .. ,\,('-- c, ,‘, —a.//(--------..i ::------/-------■_. .1* )--, r ' 0 0, .1) ,/ ,•-•'.--i ,i\. (--,. gr, -. .._ t., . i ■ ,,--.--.. -o,too 111).."1,,<;-.. \) .• • A:\ --.'' -:"----'',....;-7% - ° \\k I R\ , . ', i % I i ; k-o- u.1 • 'Li"----' ( ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT i 3:, FILTSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 .401o1 ar e.... (...,,„_:_. --A r14 111 71t Zati" MEMORANDUM TO: Susan Smith, Orange County Planning FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control OfficerOF SUBJECT: Erosion Control Plan and Stormwater Management Plan for West Ten Mobile Park. DATE: May 23, 1985 I have reviewed the Preliminary Erosion Control Plan for this project and find that it is adequate and appropriate for the site. If this proposal is ap- proved, a final Erosion Control Plan must be sub- mitted, approved and the appropriate fees paid prior to the start of construction. The Stormwater Management Plan submitted does not address the zoning requirements for this site. The submitted plan proposes a detention pond to control the peak rate of runoff for the ten-year storm as required under the Erosion Control Ordinance for University Lake watershed. The Zoning Ordinance I . requires that the first half-inch of runoff from this site be infiltrated, a very different standard than the one addressed in submitted plan. c: Phil Post & Associates Darrell Garrett & Waylon McFarland - , . • . • ,,e.wi.,- .:,.4.4014W ,4',..* 4., al 4•m 136 • • :...4. .,,,,I I, .:1A.. • gE$1.1 .-'41,01 • . • '' .,Nrio ,FigO . ,.....„1,1, ..„,,,,,,,,•;,„_:„...,„.. . STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION . ' . - ' May 22,.. 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN • GOVERNOR . . . DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS . . JAMES E.HARRINGTON • . SECRETARY • . 1.. . Ms. Susan J . Smith • Planner Orange County Planning Department • Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 . . - • Dear Ms. Smith ,. I This is in reference to - several proposed developments in Orange County . Preliminary access to the developments has been reviewed • . and we offer the following remark-s. . . George Horton Property on US70 -Business East of NC86 . . . - The vertical and horizontial -alignments on US70 Business consist . - -of hills and curves along this, parcel ' s frontage. - Although the - posted speed limit is 45mph , the average running speed is higher and sight distance from any proposed drive- should be- calculated . for 55mph ,along US70 Business. Driveway locations will need to • be selected to assure adequate sight distance. The need for - additional lanes on US70 Business will need to be considered as part of driveway permit process. Scotswood on US70. Bypass and SR1002 (Saint Mary' s Road) East of - Hiiisborough . US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s Road are both major thoroughfares on Hillsborough' s 1967 adopted thoroughfare plan . Traffic generated by proposed development plus existing volumes will probabily justify improved sections on both roads. Saint Mary' s Road is also. a cross county connector between Hillsborough and Durham County. Driveway access to US70 Bypass and Saint Mary' s _ • Road needs to be reviewed closely in light of future traffic demands. Mr. Ed Johnson of the NCDOT Thoroughfare department has • been contacted and requested to give a brief overview - of future needs in Hillsborough area. . The south terminal of Carolina Loop (SR1586) intersects Saint Mary' s Road at US70 Bypass . This creats an intersection which , EFE V . , Elkeiro6 il) . • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 1.37 will be more difficult to control as traffic on Saint Mary' s Road increase. It is recommended that deadending Carolina Loop at Saint Mary' s Road be investigated . James L. Freeland Pro. ert on SR1323 Faucette Mill Road Faucette Mill Road is curvy and drives should be placed to insure adequate sight distance. West Ten Mobile Park on SR1144 (West Ten Road) It is recommended that development be served by one drive opposite . SR1145. Sight distance is adequate and should not be a problem. If we can be of any further help please advise. Sincerely , • • JA . Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/mm tc: Mr. Ed Johnson Mr. D.B . Kelly • N . c (Orange anunni attreatirin and Parks Department 4,te 300 West Tryon Street r ■•"-s- , • .31.4770,4 HILLSBOROUGH,N.C.27278 MEMORANDUM TO: Susan Smith, Planner FROM: Mary Anne Black, Director...177A • DATE: May 23, 1985 RE: Development Projects -- Review of Planned Recreation/Open Space. Areas As indicated by your memo dated May 3rd the following four (4) development projects are subject to courtesy review and comment by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council: - Scotswood (A. H. and J. Graham) - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2 and Residential - 4. - James L. Freeland - rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 4. - Chandler's Green - planned development/rezoning from Residential - 1 to Residential - 2. - West Ten Mobile Home Park - planned development - housing (Residential - 1) Also indicated in your memo, recreational requirements for straight re-zonings (the Scotswood and Freeland projects) are applicable at densities of five. (5) or more units per acre. These two (2) projects are thus not subject to requirements providing for recreational space facilities. I also understand that Chandler's Green and West Ten Mobile Home Park are planned developments (housing) and are subject to recreational requirements for recreational space. I feel it is important that the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council be apprised of these proposed developments and their plans for provision of recreational space facilities. The Council, however, does not hold its next monthly meeting until Tuesday, June 4th, one week after the May 28th public hearing. As I have only recently begun my position as Director of Orange County Recreation and Parks Department, staff comments concerning the recreational concerns of these two (2) proposed developments are limited: Chandler's Green - Accessibility Developer seems to have considered appropriate central location of the recreation area and has proposed adequate pedestrian pathways to recreation facilities. These pathways should be compacted, "rock dust" material, laid 4-6", approximately 72" in width with no more than the maximum slope requirement for handicapped purposes/ access. Staff also recommends extension of the proposed pathway, Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 • ° 14- PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES ENGIUEERS/PLANNERS/SURVEYORS #52504 24 May 1985 Ms. Susan Smith Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Re: Stormwater Management Plan for West 10 Mobile Park Dear Ms. Smith: ' The Stormwater Management Plan that we recently submitted to you for West 10 Mobile Park, is of the format and detail required for pro- tected watershed basins in the University Lake Watershed. We realize that this project lies within a protected watershed and that the format of the submitted Plan does not address all of the requirements of sec- , tion 6.23 of the County Ordinance for Watershed Areas classified as 5 - - PW-II. We further understand that infiltration of the first one-half • inch of stormwater runoff from impervious areas is the intention of Stormwater Management Plans for PW-II Basins. We are currently working to revise the submitted plan to meet the requirements of the Ordinance for PW-II Watersheds. The revised ° • plan will emphasize infiltration of stormwater runoff into the ground and not peak flow reduction. We are uncertain how Orange County pro- ' poses surface water will infiltrate into soils in the County in view of the predominence of heavy clay soils throughout the County. In this respect, we need assistance from the staff on how the Ordinance can be met at this site or any other site in the County. Upon completion of the revised Stormwater Management Plan, we will forward the Plan to the Planning Department. We anticipate finishing the revised Plan by Friday, May 31, 1985. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, 0A0/2/ctri 44/feerVid5 B. Thomas Dixon, Pr jest ager Cy. to: Darryl Garrett BTD/dht (919)929-1173 m 100 EASTOWNE DRIVE le POST OFFICE BOX 2134 CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 OFFICIAL COPY MINUTES APPROVED 9/3/85 mums ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMISSIONERS JOINT PUBLIC HEARING MAY 28, 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners net in joint session with the Orange County Planning Board for the purpose of a Joint Public Hearing on May 28, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. in the Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, North Carolina. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Don Willhoit, and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey, Ben Lloyd and Norman Walker. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Alice Gordon and members Chris Best, Valerie Greenberg, Peter Kramer, Betty Margison, Frank Pearson, Sharlene Pilkey, David Shanklin, Carl Walters, and Steve Ybbasz. STAFF PRESENT County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Director of Planning Marvin Collins, Planners Susan Smith and Gene Bell, Director of Economic Development Sylvia Price, Planning Secretary Joanna Bradshaw and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe. 1. LUP-2-85 Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. (Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition and Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node.) Presentation was made by Gene Bell. This request by Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. is for a secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan (LUP) for a 4.34 acre tract of land on the south side of Old NC 10 (SR 1710) about 1/2 mile from the intersection of new NC 86 referenced as Tax Map 45, Lot 32 in Hillsborough Tbwnship. It is currently classified Rural Residential with R-1 zoning. Mr. Chandler is requesting the designation of Ten Year Transition and Commercial Industrial Transition Mode. The tract is adjacent to a 1.47 acre • tract of land which contains Chandler's existing reedy-mix concrete operation and is zoned 1-3. The main events that led to this request were listed as follows: • CRAWLER CCVCREIE - SECONDARY AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE PLAN 10-3-84 Chandler Concrete merged undeveloped 4.34 acre tract to 1.47 acre tract containing their concrete plant. 1-7-85 Orange County Health Department and N.C. Division of Environ- mental Management (DEM) officials visited Chandler's new tract in response to citizen complaints about wastewater runoff. 1-10-85 Mr. J. C. Tuttle of Chandler Concrete was advised by a letter from DUI that they (Chandler Concrete) were illegally discharging wastewater and that a permit was required. DEM requested written plans by 2-1-85 for management of wastewater • either by recycling on site or treating and discharging. • 1-17-85 Application forms were sent to Chandler by DIM for discharge and on site management of wastewater. • 1-30-85 Chandler responded to DEM and indicated intent to comply with DEM requirements. 2-8-85 Major transportation corridor (MC) site plan was submitted to Orange County Planning Department. 2-13-85 Chandler received a permit from the Orange County Sedimentation & Erosion Control Division to clear and grade new site. In con- junction with clearing and grading site, two retention ponds were constructed. Chandler planned to recycle water from lower pond back through concrete plant by use of pumps. This was an 2 option suggested by DEM but Chandler did not obtain required state permits. 2-14-85 MTC site plan approval was issued by the Planning Department in conjunction with grading and clearing activities permitted by Sedimentation and Erosion Control Division. 3-25-85 A citizen's complaint was received by the Orange County Planning Department concerning Chandler's use of new tract for washing and parking concrete trucks. 4-9-85 Chandler officials met with the Planning Department and were advised that their use of the new tract was non-conforming since the use was an extension of their existing I-3 operation and the new site was zoned R-1. Washing and parking trucks and run-off retention were both non-conforming uses. They were advised to apply for a Land Use Plan amendment and, if successful, rezoning. They were warned against further use of the property until it was brought into compliance with zoning ordinance. 4-17-85 Application for amendment of Land Use Plan received from Chandler. 5-8-85 Chandler Concrete was notified by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine of pending legal action if non-conforming uses not terminated. 5-16-85 Complaint filed with Orange County Planning Department by attorney for Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine. 5-17-85 Chandler barricaded new driveway connecting site to Old NC 10 and ceased non-conforming use of property. 5-20-85 Planning Department met with DEM to discuss project history, options, enforcement action, etc., and to conduct site visit. 5-20-85 Chandler was formally notified by the Orange County Planning Department that all non-conforming uses of the 4.34 acre tract must cease immediately until such time as properly zoned. is * This reflects main events and does not include all correspondence or tele- phone calls regarding Chandler Concrete, State Agencies and opponents to the rezoning request. Bell stated that as of May 20, 1985 DEM still had not received necessary a Pp licat o n materials f ro m Chan dler. DEM also noted that they had not advised ed Chandler to go off site with the retention facilities; in fact, they had suggested they use the western portion of their tract which was being used to store concrete barricades at the time. The procedures for amending the LUP states three reasons for which the LUP may be amended. These are: (1) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or areas of the County; (2) to correct an error or omission in the Plan; (3) in response to a change in land use policy. In response to the first test, Staff contends that this area has been undergoing changes and that the Central Prange Area Stud adopted in November adequately addressed these changes. y p ovember In response to the second, staff maintains that no errors or omissions regarding the Chandler property were made in the Central Orange Area Study. . _ 3 In response to the third test, there has been no change in land use policy that would justify an amendment. Applying the Locational Criteria contained in Section 3.4 of the LUP, staff finds that the site meets all requirements of Rural Residential except Energy Use which states that Rural Residential areas should be at least five minutes commuting time from an activity node. This site is closer than five minutes. With regard to the Locational Criteria for Ten Year Transition, staff finds it does not meet the test for Public Service/Utilities which states: Located in areas which are or could be reasonably and efficiently served by centralized public services and utilities. There are Tbwn of Hillsborough water lines which serve surrounding properties. However, these lines suffer from flow and pressure limitations. Providing sewer to the area would be costly because of topographic limitations which would require the use of pump stations. Locational Criteron for Transportation System states: Located in areas that have very good road access, as well as service by rail lines. These areas should have the most complete transportation network in the County's planning jurisdiction. This site does have direct access to rail lines in that the western boundary of the property is Southern Railway. However, the road system is somewhat limiting. Frontage is on Old NC 10 (SR 1710) which is classified as a collector. The Locational Criteron for Existing Land Use states: Located in areas which are in transition from rural or low density uses to urban or higher density uses. Staff contends that the tract in question is located adjacent to such areas, but not in them. The final Locational Criteron for Ten Year Transition is Population Density, which states: Located in areas with moderate to high population densities. Once again, staff contends that the tract in question is located adjacent to such an area but not in one. The Locational Criteria for a Commercial Industrial Transition Node are basically the same as those for Ten Year Transition except the Existing Land Use criteria states: Located within identified Ten or Twenty Year Transition Areas, which the site currently is not. The Planning Department recommends denial of the request. The tract was properly classified in the Central Orange Area Study. Their opinion is that the area delineated by 1-85 to the north, Orange Mobile Home Park to the west, and Southern Railway to the south is correctly classified as Rural Residential per the Locational Criteria previouslyemumerated. Bell further noted that staff recieved many letters of opposition on this amendment request. Copies of these letters were included in agenda packets or distributed at the meeting tonight. Most of the opposition has come from surrounding property owners. Orange County Health Department and Town of Hillsborough Planning Board have also expressed opposition. Tom Chandler, President of Chandler Concrete Company, made the following presentation: His operation has been in Hillsborough since 1972. At that time, other surrounding businesses and mobile home parks were not in the area. Be was contacted in August of 1984 about the availability of land adjoining his tract. He noted that be was led to believe that the property was already in the Land Use Plan as commercial property. Nothing was done with the property until January 1985. At this time, representatives of DEM visited the site and informed Mr. Chandler that they had received a report that acid was being used and present in the runoff from this property. DEM did find high acidity levels and from that point on, Chandler was told to take steps to control the flow of -----....--a- '1':',. 4- the water that was coming from the washing out of the trucks. Chandler asked for assistance from DEM and forms were sent to apply for permits. These permits have been filed with DEM in Raleigh. A permit was issued by Soil and , Erosion for grading and clearing of land and a firm was hired to do this grading, slope the land and put in the ponds. At the time Chandler was notified that the property could not be used for the purpose of parking the vehicles, so parking was stopped. Mt. Chandler continued that when he put the grading plan into effect, a gravel drive was constructed that comes out onto SR 1710. This drive would give much better visibility and safer access due to the fact that the current exit is in a curve. This new entrance has been blocked and is not being used in accordance with ruling by the Planning Department. - Chandler felt justified in applying for the amendment to the LUP by % several factors as follows: The criteria given to him when he first talked to Planning Department Members indicated justification for asking for the amendment because: 1. there was adjoining land and the company would not be expanding the use more than 10 acres; 2. company has been in area for 13 years, belonging to the Chamber of Commerce and felt that they have been good corporate citizens in , their support of area projects such as school projects and United May, 3. company has 18 employees and 15 ready-mix trucks; which have brought payroll taxes and sales tax and property tax into Orange County. Mr. Chandler continued by addresing the runoff problem. He explained that the concrete remover used to clean the trucks does contain muriatic acid but when mixed with concrete dust will be neutralized. If he is allowed to continue to use the ponds on the property he can set up the reclaiming system he needs to separate the sand and stone from the slurry. The lime would then settle out and could be used for application to agricultural lands. : Gordon inquired if Mr. Chandler would like to address the Locational ' Criteria as referred to by Bell. Chandler responded that he felt the land was well suited to the Utz' Year Transition plan, there was water to the property, it is not in the 100-year floodplain, the land slopes are no problem, it has good access both by road and railroad, is only a few minutes from center of Hillsborough, it is no threat to plants or animals, with no bad effect on forestry or agriculture and it is already in the transition area between urban and rural areas. Gordon inquired about changing conditions. Bell explained this step again. Chandler's response to this was the changes were commercial as the mini-warehouses and a convenience store have come into being since Chandler Concrete Plant was put into effect. Harry Harkins, attorney representing Dr. Sally Feather and Ms. Betsy Rhine, spoke in opposition stating that his clients felt that this request went to the very essence of why Orange County needs the Land Use Plan. It would destroy the buffer zone between the concrete plant and the residential area. Harkins noted that Chandler did not acquire this land from the Rhine heirs. The property was sold to a real estate agent who later sold it to Chandler Concrete, The Rhine heirs would never have sold this property for commercial use. Laura Feather, daughter of Dr. Sally, Feather, then read a letter (A copy of the descriptive narrative is in the permanent agenda file in the office of the Clerk to the Board) from Dr. Sally, Feather in opposition of the amendment to the LUP. Ms. Feather continued, speaking in her own behalf. She felt the concrete company had shown a lack of regard for the well-being of the residents in the area. She continued that she felt it had been misused as an industrial waste disposal site and that it did jeopardize comfort, health and safety of the neighbors. She also expressed concerns with traffic safety given the number and size of vehicles and the narrow road. The concern for screening and buffer area was again expressed. y , • • 5 Betsy Rhine, whose home is directly across the road from Chandler Concrete Co., then spoke. She stated that from her driveway she could view the entire project. She noted the lack of trees and stated that this helped to magnify the noise from the project. She stated that last summer the property was divided among the heirs and her brother went to Apple Creek Realty to talk to Mr. James Rae Freeland about the possibility of selling his property and Mr. Freeland assured him that the zoning would remain Residential-1. Her brother, with this reassurance, sold the land to James Freeland in late August of 1984. In early March 1985, she noted the property was completely cleared and stripped of all vegetation and it was evident that Chandler Concrete was expanding its operation. Ms. Rhine noted that she then contacted the Planning Department. She indicated it was two weeks before work was stopped on the site. She continued that the applicant had continued to use the land for cleaning the concrete trucks and emptying out into the pits. A petition was circulated among residents and she noted that almost everyone had complaints. She cited a letter from Ada Nichols expressing concern over the destruction of her driveway by the trucks. Gordon reminded citizens at this point, that this was only a request for a LUP amendment. If the amendment was implemented, then a request for fi rezoning would come forth. A real estate appraiser from Chapel Hill, P. H. Craig, was retained by the Rhines and he presented the following findings; He referenced maps regarding potential homesites and noted that they would look straight across to the pits and the lake precludes effective screening; all topsoil has been stripped and pits are easily visible. All frontages on SR 1710 will be adversly effected by the use or rezoning. He felt the whole 46 acres would suffer about $30,000 damage. M. C. Allison, a resident in Strayhorn Hills since 1978, spoke for residents of his immediate neighborhood. He noted damage done to vehicles due to rocks being thrown by concrete trucks. There were places where the cement had been emptied on the side of the road. Willard Cates, resident of Byrdsville for 12 years, expressed concern with traffic problems, debris and concrete spillage on sides of the road and near stop sign. 2. Z-7-85 GEORGE uORTON REZ0NIj v The presentation was made by Director of Planning Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to consider a rezoning request for George Horton. C. D. Hogue is requesting a rezoning for George Horton on 86.51 acres out of 103 acres of land located along Highway 70 Business southeast of Hillsborough. The remaining 16.49 acres will not be changed zoning designation. The property is referenced as Tax Map 40 Block p.4 Lots R11 and 14 of Hillsborough Township. The property is located in an 'area designated as Ten Year Transition and Commercial Industrial Activity Node in the Orange County Land Use Plan. The present zoning is R-1. The applicant is requesting q i 26.65 acres rezoned to 0-I and 59.86 acres to � es to be be .. rezoned I 1. Approval of the request would allow Office-institutional uses on the 16.65 acres and Industrial-1 uses on the 59.86 acres. A 1984 traffic count on Business 70 indicated 1200 trips per day. On N.C. 86 between Business 70 and Valley Forge Road (SR 1200) a 1984. traffic count indicated 4200 trips per day. If the 59.86 acres proposed to be zoned I-1 were developed approximately 3,137 trips per day could be generated. If the 26.65 acres proposed to be zoned 0-I were developed, an additional 3,866 trips, would possibly be generated. Unless some other type of access is obtained, all of this traffic would be directed to U.S. 70 Business, According to the Department of Transportation (DOT), U.S. 70 Business is presently classified at service level C or better. At the current speed limit of 45 MPH and given a 20, travelway, the capacity of U.S. 70 Business at service level C is estimated to be 5,770 trips per day. 6 The Planning Staff recommends denial given potential traffic impacts and demands on public water and sewer facilities. Collins reviewed the criteria for rezoning as required by the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the finding of the Planning Staff was that the applicant has not complied with the criteria in that water and sewer mains are not presently available to serve the site. A letter from the Town of Hillsborough has been received stating that the Town is willing to permit the owner to connect to the Town water system providing all necessary requirements are met. County Attorney, Geoffrey Gledhill, indicated to the Planning Department that such a letter does not assure the connection to the Town of Hillsborough water and sewer system in that it is not approved on the part of the Town of Hillsborough. He also stated that the Ordinance specifies that the area zoned 0-I shall not exceed 5 acres. Applicant is requesting 26.65 acres be zoned 0-I. The criteria for I-1 has been met. Walker inquired of the reasoning for a Planned Development since traffic _£ and water/sewer problems would still exist. Collins responded that Planned Development would require a Special Use Permit and under the special use process, the planning staff, Planning Board and Commissioners could address the adverse impacts of excess traffic generation, needed thoroughfare improvements and assurance that water and sewer lines are adequate to serve the property. Walker asked if this condition could be added. Collins responded that conditions could not be added to a general rezoning. Collins noted that the County would lose all control over the area if the property were zoned now. Collins noted that DOT had traditionally relied on local government to set down conditions to address traffic impacts. Walters inquired if the Commercial Industrial Activity Node surrounding the 1-85 NC 86 interchange covered this property. Collins responded yes. It is clear in the LUP that this area is suitable for commercial and/or industrial development. Planning Staff felt that a Planned Development would give the County more control. Frank Pearson, Planning Board member, inquired if this property was in the MTC corridor and Collins responded yes. Pearson asked if the district provisions could not address the concern. Collins noted that the only thing that could be addressed through the MTC requirements was the provision for 1001 buffer adjacent to I- 85. The landscaping and screening apply to any commercial/industrial activity of this type. requirement would Collins noted a letter had been received in opposition from Bob Perera, adjacent property owner. Horace Johnson, Water Commissioner for the Town of Hillsborough, asked to clear up misconceptions on water and sewer for this project. He noted that he would personally endorse this project for the economic benefits and the increase in z the tax base for the Town of Hillsborough. The Town has a checklist of 14 steps to go through in installing lines. Water pressure is good in this area and available less than 1000 feet from the project. Also, less than one mile away is a force main which can hook onto the waste treatment system. If there are situations that need correcting, developer takes care of all of these to be able to connect to the system. The water pressure in this area is much greater than in any other Hillsborough. He noted there were y part of present there is a moratorium in that area. problems north of town and at are . Gordon asked a if the Town can confer with the County and reach an agreement on a stronger letter about the availability of water and sewer service. Mr. Johnson referred again to the checklist and Gordon asked if it would be possible to get an idea how well the developer could meet the checklist. The water superintendent and Mr. Johnson go over the checklist with the 7 developer and after he has met all the conditions, plans are sent to the State for approval before approval by the Town Board. Mr. Johnson noted that the Town Board fully endorses this project. George Horton, applicant, stated that he is a developer of residential property and that he moved to Hillsborough from New Jersey in June 1984. He has been working with Sylvia Price and all of the people involved and wants to develop this unique property in a way so that as much as possible will be preserved. He is aware of the traffic problem and has hired Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. of Raleigh to do a traffic analysis and report of potential traffic problems. At the present time, it is not known just what the'market is and flexibility is needed to present to potential customers building designs to fit their needs. He continued that he felt the only way the site could be developed is through a rezoning. He sees extreme difficulties in trying to adhere to a Planned Development. The development would be a multiple of buildings. He also is aware that sewer service could be a problem, but sewer lines could not be brought to the site until Horton is sure he has a project. The traffic problems would vary due to the types of industry locating in the project. Mr. Horton expressed desire to have quality development, preserving as much of the site as possible. Rufus Colter, planner for Mr. Horton, expressed the thought that the industrial park concept prevailing throughout the project is what is desired by the applicant. He felt this type development would sustain the high value of the site and be profitable to the Town of Hillsborough. Planning Board Chair Gordon reminded citizens that the issue seems to be whether to go for straight rezoning or planned development. She explained the differences in the two approaches. Lynn Moredock, of NC Museum of Science, spoke regarding plant rescue and requested that the pond site be preserved for the sake of the wildlife area around it. Michael Drown expressed concerns regarding traffic and basic supply of water for the area. He also had concerns with buffer zones. He noted that Mr. Horton had gone out of his way to meet approval of local residents and listen to their concerns. Drown also expressed the desire for a Planned Development. Mayor Sheffield spoke in support of the Horton rezoning for the Town Board by reading the recommendation from the Board. (A copy of the descriptive narr- ative is in the permanent agenda file in the office of the Clerk to the Board.) He noted he would be in favor of Planned Development only if the desired flexibility can be retained for the Industrial Park. He felt straight rezoning was the best way to go and that the water/sewer extension is under control. Traffic needs to be addressed and DOT assistance can help stay ahead of this problem. He expressed confidence in Mr. Horton to provide and assure a high quality development. Nelson Butts owns property adjoining the Horton track and he feels more confident in the kind of project Mr. Horton is proposing than others he has seen. Traffic, in his opinion, is a major problem. Sylvia Price, Economic Development Commission Director, reviewed the reasons for which the Board of County Commissioners created the EDC. The EDC was given the mission to provide job opportunities for the citizens of Orange County and to expand the tax base. This can be done in three ways: (1) help existing firms; (2) encourage new start-ups; and (3) attract suitable firms of the right type to move into Orange County and give us the diversification of new jobs we need. To do all, three, even to help existing firms which have outgrown their existing locations, you need a place to put them. First, the planning process has identified sites as suitable for this type of development. The Land Use Plan guides me in determining where I would look for a suitable site. Second, you need good access, particularly interstate access. The firms want it and you do not need to funnel traffic through back • 8 roads. It happens that most of the sites designated in the Land Use Plan have it. Third, you need sites that are zoned because when you are trying to attract industry it is competitive. Everyone else has zoned sites; Orange County needs zoned sites. We have a few zoned sites in Orange County. These are individual sites. We need to provide a range of facilities that will make firms look at Orange County. One approach to this is an industrial park. Some firms want indi- vidual sites to develop in their own style. Two good examples of these are Brady Company and Wilmore Electronics. Both are a credit to the community. Other firms want to move into an image by buying into an area with a good image and where they will fit in. We need both. Last year the EDC decided to promote the establishment of quality indus- trial parks to complete the package of what we have to offer. However, we need both isolated individual sites and the park-type setting. All of these are to be located in correct areas in respect to the Land Use Plan and in taking account of the environment. Again, we need a choice because Orange County is on the fringe of the Research Triangle Park. Research Triangle Park is basic- ally for research and research applications. Things associated with it tend to locate around the edges of the park, particularly in industrial parks located on the fringe. If a company is looking for a park location, they do not look at Orange County because we have no industrial park. Therefore, we need both individual sites and industrial park sites and we need them properly zoned. Competition requires this. The kind of companies we want are choosy. We need to be able to offer them the choice to get them to look at Orange County so we can look them over too. We are choosy too. We want non-polluting, high quality, good paying jobs and a range of skills. We can be choosy on who we accept. But, we need to attract them so we can be as selective as possible. She indicated that the Horton project met all the criteria of the Land Use Plan and the needs of the area, including quality development. She urged the Boards to support this rezoning so that the County can go after the type of industry she described for northern Orange County. Cormann Drumm, NC Dept. of Commerce, stated that industrial parks, with restrictive covenants, are becoming popular within the state. Industrial parks, when properly graded, preserve the aesthetic value of the property. He cited some parks around the state that are good examples of quality developme nt. He stated that he feels rezoning is mandatory. If the zoning is not available, prospective clients do not even consider an area. Businesses looking for industrial parks go to the State for guidance. This, too, would help assure Orange County that unsuitable industry would not be directed this way. Valerie Greenberg inquired if Mr. Drumm felt that would hinder the goals that EDC had mentioned. Drumm responded that he felt that a planned development of this type is very difficult when you don't know all the types of industry that may be interested in development in the area. Sylvia Price also was asked this question of planned development versus straight rezoning. She responded that this was not like a subdivision. You do not know the exact size, shape, and number of buildings. Basically, you need to be able to tell clients you will build to meet their individual needs. Walker noted the question of whether planned development would be detrimental had not been answered. Price responded that in a project such as this you could not do an accurate or adequate planned development. If the clients didn't want the kind of building shown on the plan, the whole process, which kills client relationships, would have to be worked through again. Wilihoit noted that the EDC had been concerned for a long time with having land that was prezoned. He understood the Planning Board's desire to have planned development applications so that many of the features of development mummamomagemsor 9 F:+ can be reviewed and so that it can be determined if it is the type of devel- opment the County wants. ,.' Given that the request was presented as a straight rezoning and granted that approval cannot be given conditionally the County has, however, been presented witha lot of information that goes beyond what we might ordinarily get in a rezoning request. He assumed that the EDC has worked closely with Mr. Horton in terms of the concept and, recognizing the importance of the parcel at the entry to Hillsborough, that there is a desire to make it a model type development which will really set the pattern for future economic development. He continued that the Planning Board needs to take a look at planned devel- opments, noting the four major parts of a planned development include: access (roads); screening; building and parking; and landscaping, though there may be other things considered also. Willhoit continued that there may be an intermediate step in prezoning where it may be a rezoning, but also a planned development that would at least address access and screening. He understood that that may not be practical in this case. Price responded that the criteria mentioned would have to be met prior to actual development of the site. She noted that potential clients would not look at sites that were not zoned. Willhoit continued that landscaping depends on the type of buildings proposed. But, it was clear that this project was not at the stage of recommending buildings and that appears to be the reason why a planned development is not proposed. Sylvia Price again stated that clients will not look at Orange County unless the sites are zoned. They then want to know the requirements for development of the site. She continued that they want to know if they can actually do the deal and are looking for a reason to scratch Orange County off their list of potential sites. Willhoit clarified that he was trying to suggest that a way to look at planned developments in the future for industrial parks would be for the planned development to deal with access and screening questions which are independent of the type of development that goes on within the tract of land. Perhaps for industrial parks that would be sufficient if we address those and perhaps some limit on the number of vehicles or square footage without specifying design of individual buildings. Price noted that at the moment she was operating in a vacuum. Willhoit noted that perhaps planned development standards do not fit well with industrial park type development, but were oriented more for other types of development. Marshall noted that it may be worthwhile for the Board to look at what it could do to facilitate this development, particularly when it's in a major transportation corridor. The group of regulations may not be complete, but there will still be some control over the rezoning, rather than just looking at industrial parks alone. Price urged the rezoning and monitoring the development closely. John Gastineau, chairman of EDC, spoke of the need for industrial parks. This site has been identified as the best choice for the first park in the County. He feels the Horton project meets all the important criteria for quality development of the kind Orange County is seeking. Henrietta Auman, an adjoining property owner, stated she had lived in this area for forty years. She expressed concern with the buffer zone and she asked for assurance of supervision once the work begins. 1. Z-8-85 AgOTSWOOD (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Residential-2, Residential-4 and General Commercial-IV.) The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. • �x�x 10 { Collins expressed a staff preference that development of this property be pursued as a planned development. Collins cited the comments of George Vaughn received by phone in opposition to the project. Sharlene Pilkey inquired about the traffic counters near the site. Susan Smith responded that the counters were being used to provide data for the Secondary Roads Improvements Program. Valerie Greenberg inquired about the letter from the Town of Hillsborough. Collins reviewed the letter. Greenberg asked if there was a guarantee of a solution to the water pressure problem. Collins responded that no solution had been received in writing. Alice Gordon asked if the site was in the Hillsborough problem area, citing the connection moratorium. Mr. Johnson of the Town of Hillsborough clarified that the problem in this specific area is the flow from the hydrant and the low pressure due to a small 6" line size. He reviewed the history of expansion of the system in this area. Steve Yuhasz inquired what would likely result from approval without assurance of public water and sewer availability. Johnson responded that there would be no development without such approval. He noted Hillsborough was requiring 8" pipe for all new development. He also noted that the state must give approval for expansion of the Town system. Gordon noted that the project could otherwise be developed on well and septic system. Pilkey inquired where the nearest 8" line is located. Johnson responded that a 6" line along St. Mary's Road is 12 miles away. He again indicated the state would be requiring 8" lines. Commissioner Walker asked if there was a problem with larger lines feeding tx: smaller lines. Johnson responded it would be likely that parallel lines would be run. John R. McAdams, representative for the applicant, made a presentation. He asked for a continuation of the public hearing noting that he and his client were not aware of any problems with the application until last week and would like an opportunity to address these problems. He noted that the rezoning has merits and that he was not aware of the staff recommendation of a planned development; however, he maintained that staff had directed them to pursue a straight rezoning early in the discussion on the project. He indicated his client was not in a rush on this project. McAdams continued that he was not aware of any capacity problems along U.S. 70 and that though the letter regarding water and sewer from the Town was cautionary, there was no real problem cited.. He described the property and noted it was in a transition area. Reid Roberts indicated that neither he nor C.D. Smith nor Jery Van Webster were notified of the public hearing. Planning Staff member Susan Smith responded that all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property were notified and that in the case of Scotswood, labels for certified, return receipt notices were prepared by Data Processing. McAdams expressed a desire to negotiate with staff and receive futher imput. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey seconded by Commissioner Marshall to continue the public hearing until July 1, 1985. Attorney Coleman advised the Board to readvertise the public hearing and renotify adjacent property owners. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 4. Z-2-85 jAME$ L. 'RERL.AND (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Residential-4.) The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. Barbara Page;representive of the Hillsborough Planning Board, noted that the public water and sewer lines for this area were unapproved and subject to a connections moratorium. There were no further comments on this item. 5. PD- ..85 WEST TEN M0BIL PARK 11 (Rezoning from Residential-1 to Planned Development Residential-1 with Class A Special Use Permit.) The presentation was made by Susan Smith. Smith introduced the May 24, 1985 letter from Philip Post and Associates into the record and introduced five photos submitted by the applicant of existing parks comparable to the proposed ,= park. Six people were sworn in. Vickie Bledsoe, property owner along Squires Road, expressed opposition to the project, specifically addressing each of three general findings. She cited concerns with traffic, outdated trip data and compatibility with existing uses. She submitted an appraisal comment prepared by John W. Sharpe. She also entered into the record five photographs of the site area and one photograph alleged to be of the mobile home park owned by one of the applicants. She continued addressing general finding #3 indicating that if the project is in compliance with the Land Use Plan then she is not supportive of the plan citing aesthetics inconsistencies with a stable neighborhood; lack of site vegetation and screening/landscaping details; desire for reduction of the number of units to one per five acres; and a desire to redesign the park to locate the units further back on the site. Darrell Garrett, applicant, made a presentation on the project. He described the site and adjacent development. He rebutted Bledsoe's comment that the submitted photo was a photo of a mobile home park owned by his partner. He noted he had - visited all adjacent property owners within 5001 except two he could not reach, citing that he had not utilized a back door approach to the project. He noted there is a strong need for well-planned mobile home parks in the County. He continued that the park proposed would be subject to restrictions/rules of tenancy; all homes would be new, including replacements over time; that he had surveyed local mobile home dealers to determine need and type of homes feasible; that units for sale or over eight • years old must be removed from the park; that a cluster method was utilized which resulted in a 250' buffer on three sides and a 100' buffer in the front; that an improved recreation area of 12-14 acres was proposed; and addressed traffic on West 10 Road, noting traffic was light. Garrett submitted two letters from individuals living near mobile home parks stating they had no concerns regarding the parks and submitted a photo of an existing park typifying the park he was proposing. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the rules of tenancy. Garrett responded that he had developed them through incorporating the best park rules he could obtain and adding some of his own. Commissioner Carey asked if the pictures he submitted were of a park he owned. Garrett responded no, but were examples of his intentions with this development. He noted he would not like to disturb the back side of the property, Commissioner Lloyd asked if the picture submitted by Bledsoe was of a park owned by the applicant. Garrett responded it was not adding that the park that his partner owned was built in the 1960's and that some occupants had been there 25 years and that their units were old. Commissioner Willhoit noted the site was an open field and inquired of the applicant's intentions to landscape the project. Garrett responded he intended to landscape the front side with the largest trees which could be physically planted with a backhoe for the earliest possible growth; he intended to fence and plant shrubs and cedar trees along the sides, noting he cannot plant trees within the drainage fields. Willhoit asked how wide a visual buffer was proposed. Garrett responded in the front 100' and the sides 20'. C. E. Squires, Jr. indicated he did not understand the standards cited on page 102. He questioned possible area devaluation; cited road hazards and speed limits on West Ten Road; expressed his concern that this project was not 12 in the best interest of the neighborhood; and asked that if approved the Health Department would investigate the park within thee months. David Squires, Jr. expressed concerns regarding traffic impacts and childrens activities in the area; about the quality of people likely to reside in the park, and the quality of water supply in the area. Michael Chiorazzi expressed concerns regarding the sketchy plans, site slope and visual problems, traffic, and the nature of the present community to be changed by the park. Kent Mann indicated he felt this was a better approach and provided more control that individual lot or subdivision development. Garrett questioned the appraisal submitted, noting it was a guess and questioned the materials made available to the appraiser. He expressed concerns with not being able to question the appraiser. He noted the appraiser needed access to drawings and plans and cited landscaping plans he had that Tom Squires was given access to, but that he had not received a request for from the appraiser. Bledsoe responded that the appraiser had access to everything she had received from staff. A.......mmunsiox REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS PRIVATE ROADS The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. Carl Walters cited the problem encountered by his neighbor in subdividing property. Alton Cummings described his concern and inability to subdivide his land to give his sons homesites with a 30' right-of-way versus a 60' right-of-way. Commissioner Wilhoit asked if a variance could be granted. Smith responded there were no variances granted to Subdivision Regulations. Commissioner Carey questioned the 60' right-of-way. Susan Smith responded 50' was required. Cummings noted the land was to be used for family only. Commissioner Lloyd asked how planning staff could address this. Smith responded staff had proposed this amendment to address similar problems. Lloyd asked Cummings to contact planning staff to see if what is being proposed will allow him to subdivide his land. Henry McDonald noted he is presently unable to subdivide a lot so as to receive a building permit on land he purchased by deed as he is unable to secure additional access beyond a 12' right-of-way. NATERSHEp STANDARDS The presentation was made by Marvin Collins. Yuhasz questioned the difference between the Town proposal which applies the stream buffer standard from the stream versus the County proposal which applies it from the edge of the flood plain. Collins responded staff proposed that current County Standards dictate. Yuhasz expressed concern with utilizing United States Geological (USG) maps for applying this standard as they are not intended for this purpose. Commissioner Lloyd noted that this could result in restricting use of many acres of land in certain areas. Yuhasz expressed concern with unnessarily restricting uses allowed under the current floodplain ordinance from occurring and that these proposals are not thought out well. 7- ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS-EDUCATIDN4 QOOPERATIVES The Presentation was made by Planner Susan Smith. Willhoit questioned regulating toxic materials. Smith responded it was a provision desired by the Planning Board. Chris Herndal described the needs of the Health Sciences Consortium. Willhoit asked the relationship between use of the facility for staff versus a retreat facility. Herndal responded 20 - 30 full time staff were proposed with some use of the facility for training purposes. No formal presentation was made nor comments received on the remaining public hearing items: Amendments to Article IV-Establishment of Permitted Use 13 Table, Article VIII-Special Uses, Article flu -Definitions, Article XI Non comformities, Article VI Application of Dimensional Requirements, Article XX Definitions of the Zoning Ordinance and Section IV-B-3-C-2 Partial widths, Section IV Required Minimum Design Standards of the Subdivision Regulations. p. ADJOURNMENT Chair Willhoit adjourned the meeting at 12:20 a.m. The next regular meeting will be held on June 3, 1985 in the Commissioners' room in the Court- house in Hillsborough, North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Joanna Bradshaw, Admin. Secretary