Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 08-26-1985
ORANGE COONEY BOARD cr CCMMISSIONERS • PLANNING BOND AGENDA MrARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING Monday, August 26, 1985 Orange County Courthouse Superior Courtroom • Hillsborough, North Carolina 7:30 P.M. A. Baba° CatiENra B. AUDIMCB CaelERTS PAGE # C. PT3BT,IC HFAR/ G ITEMS 001 1. SUP-1-85 Bingham School Inn 049 2. Secondary Amendment to the Land Use Plan Requested by Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. 065 3. PD-4-85 Chandler Concrete Company 107 4. Z-2-85 (Rezoning Request) Dr. Khye Weng Ng and wife alat Chang Ng (Continued from 2/25/85 Public Hearing) 133 5. Z-3-85 (Rezoning Request) Robert A. & Rachel S. Scholar (Continued from 2/25/85 Public Hearing) 160 6. Z-10-85 (Rezoning Request) Cornwallis Hills 191 7. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Arrendirents D. ADJOUR1140711 - : [i . • . . - Ii• • f . --. .:„...". • . .. _. /.....,_._. ,.._. t I- .i‘lcZ:Lt 44.4.(ttiff_g • ...-4, 'at "K,1"., . "V. ,,..... . . . ...._. _#-2. ol- 3 tt......'r _ . / 711 / / 01. .1.1... %) 1," -• 1 . „....;-' .. • /4-1-../, J..: , ... ,t... ', __... _ . a a- 7-.3 . ......,.. . ...57: .i v 7. , A!IL17,n.... r77 ,..v/... . . yi.-J. ir...... ._ 040 9°. if, ..._ • ... . ..• __ . . ....__.. .. . . .. .. ._._ _... . .. .. .._ . . . ._. . _. . . . . . . . .. ...... . .. . .. . . ., . . __..__.___. __.•__ i 1 .. . , •••• - — • ••- .-• — . ..—. . - --- --..... -- —. -- ...— .---- ——— — ' —— • ._ ._ . .--. .._ . _ — . . .. . _. .. .. . ....._ — _— _ _— _. . _.. . .. . • 7: .. . , __ .- . —.. . ..— __ . _ . . .. .. . . .. . . — : . . . . .. . . . - . '• • • •s • • • . . . • _ . .... - . . • 001 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date AUGUST 28 , 1985 Action gda Item #� en, SUBJECT: SUP-1—B5 BINGHAM SCHOOL INN • DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes _...- No Attachments] Information Contact : SUSAN SMITH APPLICATION AND NARRATIVE VICINITY MAP SITE PLAN FINDINGS OF FACT AGENCIES' LETTERS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Telephone Numbers Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hill — 960--4501 RPOSE: To receive public comment on a requestffor a Class sriA Sppecial Use Permit for the non—residential School . NEED: The applicants Robert M . and Jane B. a Kelly have Class A Special Use Permit commonly Use/Reuse of an Historic Structure for the pioplrtytec at the known as the Bingham School . The property northeastern corner of the intersection of NC 54randcoMebane Oaks Road (SR 1007 in Bingham Township . The property e of the g ,g$ acres or • 434,728 .$ square development ofTaebeduandsbreakfast request is to allow for the country inn . The property is known as Tax Map 17rL Lot de9iinatengAaricowts ip- The property is located within a n Residential . That designation allowstttheinconsideritionuraf development application • for uses p Residential and Agricultural Services zoning districts . Thl present zoning classification of the property as proposed ,Residential (A—R) . The use of the property , requires the issuance of a Class A Special. Use Permit . Certain 002 SUP-1-85 BINGHAM SCHOOL INN AUGUST 26, 1985 PAGE 2 410 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 for the use of Bingham School for commercial purposes as a bed and breakfast facility for a maximum of twelve occupants . RECOMMENDATION : The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request with conditions (See Attachment) . 410 IIM 003 isle 8.2.2 states that where a preponderance of evidence indicates mpliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use , 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 enhande the value of contigous 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 . a 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 . Staff recommends approval of the request . The Planning Staff does, however, recommend the attachment of conditions to the approval as follows: 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 . As improvements are completed in each phase a corresponding amount of money may be released from the security instruments or the security instruments may be renegotiated based on the "yet to do" portion of the improveme nts . 2. Security shall be provided for the grading , and stabilization of all cleared areas , streets and other vehicular travetways; sidewalks and other pedestrian walkways ; utility installation and hookups; recreational facilities; and landscaping . OG4 3 . ALL necessary easements to permit utility (electricity , telephone and cable televisian by any cable television/1k provider franchised by Orange County and/or Chapel Hill to serve this development) installation , servicing and hookups to the development shall be provided at no cost to the utility provider . Final utility plans shall be approved by the County Manager end/or applicable utility company prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit , ALL Lines shall be underground . 4. That a driveway permit be obtained. from NC Department of Transportation prior to issuance of the Special Use Permit . S. Roads, parking areas, walkways , utilities; recreation facilities and sites and Landscaping shall be maintained as constructed . All such improvements and facilities shall further be maintained and operated in a safe manner . S . That all signs be erected in compliance with Article 9 Signs following issuance of a building permit . No sign may be erected within the sight triangles for the entranceway to the development.. 7 . Grading on the site shall be kept to a minimum . In Lieu of planted landscaping , existing vegetation shall be maintained between units . B. Supplementary base planting shall be installed within the parking area around the existing specimen trees . • 9 . That all structures be erected in compliance with applicable building codes following submittal for and issuance of building permits . 10 . A final boundary survey of the Planned Development and improvements shall be recorded by the developer . 11 . The final site plan and narrative of the project , incorporating all changes, deletions and additions through the final approval of the project, are to be incorporated herein and made a part of this Planned Development Special Use Permit . Copies of the final site plan and narrative are to remain 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 . 12. 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 . ■rd CZ 1 rj • . ../ 14 0 0 5. ... Cr)Q \. . u..,. u.. N 0 . ••••••• --** .... ••••. s.... ... ....,N.. I.. 7... ..r. ....., .. wl Y.t 0. 41 < cs4 2 :S.1 . ..-•- . ./•''''''''''' .4 ...., ...N. -..- ..... ... ...... ...- ..te .... 0 %. "... ' , •e, s: , C\i -.3 .... \ r. o• , '...:.'; . CO , Ct 443 • Cia 4r \'./., ./'.../1 <. 1,... t \..... : * ‘,....r,..... Itt \ . .....,. • ./// Trl \ • %. ..r4: : _— --- ,/* gr• , ,,' - -- —... ..... ...... --.. ../ • . —.... --.... . - ......." \ . --.....--. .,.... ..-- -?.. ........ ) • ..--- --• e-- -•—.. 1 -- ..— / ■ ..... ....::: ..,,, 4,. I • ./c, •,e, 4-'\/ \ '' -.• / If • k ,‘ . . %. "5, %. -./ - „.......„ 'el',• s, (...) .7 '• .:• / ./ ...• • 0 • (0 s• ••■*•• CY. \\ . 7......; in /// CS Pt i‘•/, r '...••-"--"A -"•''..-- 4. Z Z. ./...... C") ‘•• ........;. , .:j ' / ,v,,,< ID Z "''' •< 1.1\ c...") %. ... ....:3.,, ""`• .... t.it . re: "2..,. •, a = .•1 • • 0,,,‘,„ / .1.•••4"-• 'Of fel 1 • . CiL‘. /Z. —=*---`4"." A • ... - '• SA : C.$ .../// ■ •.••ti 1 It 1• PM .1 k ..... ....0. . i e 5 ' •,' =,I ..• =I i , '• I — ..„ : C.:- • 1' ..• ..... ,• *, • ..... ......, . 1 ......., • . . 2.1 I Ci.1• ' g . "-CV. NI 0 f■ 0 LI . acc'.:2;212—• 1 .• • a 1 wt. - • I k . ./. • I".•I '1 / 0 ‘,4■01 ''' In Vol, .4 X I• ; e,4.. • ,.' SP ....--•**1. ,i ,,,o,.,‘"\''•• 4' Cir''' -01*1/ lif rn , . :..1 ...4 Mt , ■0' a \,\-• ..7 /".• ,..i = .*R• . 731:•1 4 . ,.. '''''• **.S72 •", • 0 0% . c \ -"••, . .. T„.......„ - • . I 4 I ‘,....../ \ • . I 2 ....-- ;:....z -A..... r....1 ...-. Z i . irt ....C.:• :.,S" t..""Trit", "7"."*"... "."'" Fel I.' N 1W...1 '. ' S...........—•--""1:-.7 .1 ,... c : ; 4...• -■ •SON110117-'%- ' ----"----1A1 -....!• • 1 ...... .,.. An...■■■,...„„.„„......;ft• 0 . , ,,•-• ,_ . == , -... ,. • 4 , .1.• .• 006 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT IEILLSBOROITGII NORTE( CAROLINA • 27278 /4$4iiN Pit1/4- r14. 4'71 7■11 ewe MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: SUSAN SMITH , PLANNER DATE: AUGUST 12, 1985 SUBJECT: SUP-1-85 BINGHAM SCHOOL INN GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANTS: Robert M . and Jane B. Kelly Rt. 2, Box 3330 Mebane, NC 27302 LOCATION : North—east corner of NC 54 and Mebane Oaks Road (SR 1007) REQUESTED MOTION: Approval. of Class A Special Use Permit for Non—Residential Mixed Use/Reuse of an Historic/Structure . PURPOSE: To allow the development of a bed St- breakfast country inn in the Bingham School. LOT SIZE: 9 .98 acres or 434,728 .8 square feet EXISTING LAND USE: Residential Use of Bingham School property and agricultural uses . SURROUNDING LAND USE: NORTH — Agricultural and residential EAST — Agricultural and residential SOUTH — Agricultural and residential WEST Agricultural and vacant LAND USE PLAN: Designated AgriculturaL—Residential in the Land Use Plan . 41/ ZONING: The property is zoned Agricultural—Residential . i FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION SUP-1 -05 BINGHAM SCHOOL INN Development must comply with general and specific standards as set forth In Article 8 for Special UseA., as follows: (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 (2) Other requirements as set forth in the toning Ordlnancer Listed below are the findings of the Orange County Planning ©epartiment regarding the application in uestion. have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Board In its deliberations. 9 The findings ARTICLES 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ("YES" Indicates cam Hance; "NO" Indicates noncompllance) Planning Staff Ordinance Regis l refiient s z d Planning Board ugmin ed Evidence Submitted to Support -Findings Recommended Findings 9.6 ' Application submitted on X Yes No Forms providing fill and accurate � � Application narrative and site plan `Yes No leseription of proposed use, provided by applicant. ncluding location, appearance and operational characteristics i.8 a) Twenty-six (26) copies of the X Yes No Ite plan prepared by a 26 copies of the site plan provided by applicant. •C, land survoyor or engineer' ngin ertcoet aining: Site plan was Yes No F prepared by ENT Land Stirveyors, Inc.'- . North point, scale and dale X Yes No -,-*— Shown on site plan. Extent of area to be developed X Ye, No Yes No _..._ Shown on site plan. Location and width of all ease- Yes No Q ments and 1-19111.5-of-way within p Of adjacent Lo the site X Yes No Shown on site plan. ____. Yes No KTICLES 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Planning Bo ;d i Evidence Submitted pp Findin s Based on bmid to Support Findings Recommened endings rdinance Requirements Submitted Applcation Location of all existing or pro- X Yes No Shown on site plan. Applicant proposes to Yes No posed structures on the site utilize existing structures for bed & breakfast facility. Location of all areas on the site X Yes No There are no flood prone areas on the site Yes No subject to flood Hazard or inunda- according to the FLMA-FIA maps and soils 00 tion as shown on flood maps or maps. soil maps Location of all water courses X Yes No No water courses present on site. Yes No on the site, including the direction of flow 1. Existing topography at a contour a—Yes No Topography at five foot contours is shown _Yes No interval of five ('S) feet based on the site plan. on mean sea level datum B, Proposed or existing fencing, X Yes No Parking area, fencing and screening are Yes No screening, gates, parking, indicated. No other service areas are service and storage areas aroposed. Access to site Includipg sight X Yes No Access to site is off Mebane Oaks Road. Yes No distances on alI roads used far (SR 1007) distances are indicated on plat.—" access ElevaLlons of all structures X Yes No Development summary describes existing Yes No proposed to be used in the buildings. No new structures are proposed. deveIopine11L . A1attaes and addresses of owners XYes No Provided on application. Yes No and applicants Ye No . A fee, as set by the Board of XYes No $184.00 application fee paid. County C*ss1 one rs gi ARTICLE $ 2 t SPECIFIC ' . � STANDARDS/At.f_ SPEC f AL USES + ("Yes!' indicates corn (lance• "No" Indicates noncom fia Planning Staff rice) Ordinance Reguiretuent's Findings Based on -- Submitted A lication Evidence Submitted to Su ort Findings Planning Board BeC Article 0.2,11 requires the applicant --°- ="wed F n i to address the following: a} Method and adequacy of provision X Yes f for sewage disposal facilities, No Letter from Health,Department addressing solid waste and water service, adequacy of facilities for proposed use Yes No provided. Facilities serve a 2 bedroom residence and a 4 bedroom boarding house, b} Method and adequacy of police, fire and rescue squad % Yes -_..No Letters from police, fire and rescue tiara q protec- services provided. Yes Na C) Method and adequacy of vehicle access to the site-and traffic X Yes No Access to site is by private conditions around the site Mebane Oaks Road (SR 1007). Thelproposed _Yes No use will generate 38.32trips per day (9.58 per occupied room). WC DOT 1981 traffic data for this area is 500 trips per day. This count was taken immediately north of the intersection of NC 54 and Mebane Oaks C Road (SR 1007) Q C SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/ HISTORIC S3'RUCTURES-NON-RESIDENTIAL tL- Ethe/MppiDi -USE : 0 ARTICLE $.$.21f q t tied as iD Article $.$.24.1 Indicates that the following information is required o be submi P O Planiiing Board Planning Staff ort Findings Recommended Finding Findings Based on Evidence Submitted to Supp l�ratlOn_ Ordinance Requirements �,n�tted Anr� a. site plan containing the following: YES NO ])location, width, and X YES No Details provided on site p lan. type of all internal vehicular and pedestrian ci rcul atlon plan and in NO NO Details provided on site p _ YES 2}location and dimensions X YES narrative. of on-site signage NO 3}boundaries of site and X YES NO Details provided on site plan. — YES distance to nearest �- residences b. description of proposed uses of site and structure including the following: NO 1)amount of area allocated X YES NO Details provided in narrative. YES to each use Details provided in narrative. Site YES NO full/part-time 2)number of X YES NO will employ two full-time and one part- -- employees time employees. Details provided in narrative. Number of YES _ NO Ni? _- 3)number of clients/ occupants X YES applicants will not exceed l2 guests. X YES � NO Site will be occupied 24 hours per day. 4)proposed hours of operation YES NO Details provided in narrative. YES NO C. building plans including X NO • description of impact on historic features X YES NO Details provided on site plan. YES _ NO d. landscape plan *CLE 8.8.24 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS (continued) Planning Staff Ordinance Requirements 1!ind'n s Based on , -- Submit ed Application Evidence Submitted to Su Planning BctarQ Support Findincts Recommended Fxndinga e. service agencies X YES NO Letters submitted with application. comments on adequacy YES NO of water/was tewa to r system proposed f. service agencies X YES NO Letters submitted with application. comments on fire, YES NO police and rescue protection g. listed on National X YES NO Letter of authorization submitted with Historic Register or application. Recognized by NC Dept. of YES NO recognized by N.C. Cultural Resources commencing in 1941. as place of historic Recognized in National Register since 1978. in teres t h. proposed development X YES NO Described in narrative. schedule for s i to YES NO 0 ARTICi_E 8.8.2 +.2 STANDARDS OF EVALUATION ("Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates noncom li'ance) J O Article 8.2.24.2 indicates that the following standards of evaluation be used in deciding on an application W Arti . for this use: Planning Staff Planning Board Findings Based on Ordinance Requirments Submitted Application. Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Fines es a. , site plan meets x YES NO Site plan meets all requirements as specified. YES NO requirements of 8.8 and 8.8.24- YES NO Proposed bed & breakfast country inn YES NO b.proposed uses and in Bingham School?presently utilized as a facilities are complementary and residential structure does not conflict with compatible with agricultural/residential uses of area; preserves wurrounding 'area; the historic character of the site; and generates use preserves historic no adverse inpact except the provision of parking character of site and facilities which will be screened from the road building; development and adjacent properties. has no adverse impact beyond building, except for parking facilities c.historic character of x YES NO Historic character of building is preserved YES No building is preserved as evidenced in narrative and photographs. d.protective' and water/ X YES NO Proposed services are adequate as evidenced YES NO wastewater services by letters documenting service- capability are adequate issued by the servicing agencies. e.recreational/service/ YES NO Proposed recreational/service/parking and YES NO parking areas and screening facilities are adequate. screening are adequate y - ARTICLE 5 WDIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ("Yes" Indicates compliance; "No" Indic , ates noncompliance) lie Planning:;Staff Findings Ordinance Requirements Submitted edApplication Evidence Submitted .To Support Findings RecommendedaFindings 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 Class A SUP - AR designation. The standards for that district are set forth in Article 5.1. 2 and are as follows: a} Minimum lot area per use X Yes No Site contains 9.98 acres. 40,000 Yes No sy. ft. — b} Minimum lot width - X Yes No Lot ranges from 355 to 1100 feet in width. 150 sq. ft. - Yes No c} Required front setback - Yes No There is no setback requirement for N/A ft. '— — a planned development. Yes No d) Required side and rear Yes No There is no setback requirement for setbacks - N/A ft. a planned development. Yes No e) Maximum building height - X Yes No Applicant is proposing no new structures. 25 ft. —' Yes No Existing residential structure is 35' in height. :ompliance with lot coverage and development intensity standards is addressed in irt•icle 6. C) 1—+ W .............___....... ARTICLE '4' . 'ESTABLISHMENT• OF'PERMITTED-USE TABLE AND SCHEDULE ("Yes" indicates compliance; "No" I noncompliance Planning Staff Planning Boar¢ Findings Based On ' Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to'Supp ' Recommended Findings oet ,Findlrlgs Ordinance Requirements p, 4W Article 8.8.24.2 indicates the application must comply withal I requirements specified in Articles 4,5,6,8,9,20 and 12. u Article 4.3 Permitted Use Table Use is a permitted use or requires the issuance of a special use permit Site is located in area designated to locate in the A-R K Yes _ No Agricultural-Residential and zoned district. Agricultural-Residential. 1p ARFICLE 8.8.24.2 STANDARDS OF EVALUATION Ti N {continued} Planning Staff Findings Based on Ordinance- Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Planning Findings f, siCe is served by - Site has direct access via private drive direct access to through property to Mebane Oaks Road (SR 1007). a state-maintained road X Yes No g. internal vehicular/ Internal vehicular and pedestrian pedestrian circulation circulation is adequate. adequate X Yes No h, all applicable , requirements of All requirements of the referenced Articles 4,5,6,8,9, articles have been satisfied. 10 and 12 have been satisfied. X Yes No Q CA RTICLE 6 - APPLICATION Of DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS {"Yes" Indicates com fiance• "No" Indicates noncom dance Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board 1) rdinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings ,Recommended Findings H rticle 6 lists specific tandards which apply to arious types of development pplications. rticle 6.12 contains those evelopment intensity tandards which apply to roup developments controlled -y the Land Use Intensity LUI) system. k) Minimum gross land X Yes No Site contains 9.98 acres or Yes No area - 80,000 sq. ft. .� 434,728.8 square feet. Gross land area is 442,539.24 square feet. ,} Maximum gross land Yes No Not applicable to Planned Developments _Yes No area - N/A sq. ft. in this district. :) Maximum floor area ratio - X Yes No Yes N4 .058 Applicant proposes 11,000 sq. ft. of Maximum floor area floor area or 43% of the maximum allowed. permitted - 25,667.28 sq. ft. } Required minimum open X Yes No Yes No space ratio - .84 Applicant proposes 432,000 sq. ft. or Required minimum open space -371,732.96 sq, ft, 16X more than the maximum requirement. } Required minimum pedestrian � Yes No Not applicable to planned developments landscape ratio - NIA within this district. Required minimum pedestrian landscape area - NSA square feet t } ARTICLE 9 - SIGNS (!'Yes" indicates compliance; "No" Indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findin Planning Board gs Recommended Findings a. sign If erected X YES NO Sign is to be attached to gate post at YES NO outside of sight entrance to private drive. preservation triangles b, sign area does not X YES NO Proposed oval sign is 36" x 24". YES ' exceed 16 square NO feet c, signage Is limited X YES NO A single double-faced sign is proposed. YES NO to one single or double-faced sign d, sign does not .exceed X YES NO Proposed sign is three feet in height. YES NO six feet in height and installed on gate post. d ARTICLE l0 OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING ("Yes" indicates compliance; "No" indicates noncompliance) a Planning S aff 00 Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application EVIttence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findings Off-street parking X YES NO Applicant proposes 4 parking spaces YES No shall conform with within a gravel parking area, which is the requirements of designed to allow parking for an additional 16 vehicles. Article 10. The off-street parking standard for the proposed use is as follows:. 1 space per loding unit Application of the standard results in a requirement of 4 spaces. one space per bedroom lCLE 12 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING J"yes" Indic com liance• "No" Indicates noncompliance-) Planning Staff Findings Based on Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted Planning Board to Support Findings Recommended Findings The development shall conform with the requirements of Article 12 - Landscaping and Screening. These standards are as follows: I. Street Frontage land- X Yes _No Applicant s caps nc� must Include "'- PP proposes to screen the parking facilities from Mebane Oaks Yes No a 10-foot landscaped Road utilizing a board fence and area planted with one American Boxwoods. Remainder of the tree per h0 feet, a IO' landscape strips to be hedge or other durable P P grassed or landscape material at mulched. least 3 feet In height and grass or ground cover. 2. Peripheral landscaping X Yes (lo must include a IQ-foot '-"-' --- Applicant Proposes to screen the parking facilities from adjacent ---Yes No landscaping area planted properties utilizing an existing, with one tree per 60 feet, Multiflora Rose hedgerow and a hedge or other durable American holly trees. Remainder of landscape material at of the 10' landscape strips to be least 3 feet In height, grassed or mulched. and grass or ground cover. 3. Interior landscaping must X Yes No provide coverage of at --- Existing vegetation satisfies requirement. least 5% of any Supplementary base plantings are recommended. Yes No vehicular use area. G7 1.4 ARTICLE 12 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING (continued) a . C3 Pja q,in taff Planning. Board. Fine ingg Based on ordinance Re uirermenxs Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings' *_ Itecomm ndeci Findings No mote than to X Yes No Applicant proposes only 4 fixed parking stalls. Yes No No landscaped medians are required. parking spaces allowed in a con- tinuous row wi thout division by land- s Gaped medl an strip. ' Not Applicable Yes No Every fourth row of Yes No parking separated by 8-foot inedi an with at least one tree for each 60-feet of median length. Not Applicable Y:;s No 4. Type screen is Yes No required. Standards for that type include the following: - - . NOTICE OF APPEAL TO ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • - OR REQUEST '- • • . • SPECIAL • • USE. - ice is hereby given the Board'of Adjustment and the Zoning Officer of an appeal the ruling of the zoning Officer on the 14 . .day of July , 19 _ which ordered that .. -- .-- -.. • --'-'—.7**.utt'-'-`.7" . . . 41...0•■■■■■•...000■•■••■••••■■=m1 . . . .1.•■•••■.• ;:.Lif,47:••••tw V.A..... •414.,0,...47 6.4 ,.' ;7 or I request a Special Use Permit as provided for in Section, InisJILLAJA_:=:-... „ for Historic-Structure-Non-:- ',.. , '. !-- - :- .. * -. - ' ---- ---, ' Class A •- '1 . - - -•-• -• " • ..- . ...1.t.:-L.4;--,•=.--'• . . premises located Tax Ma. 17 • • , Corner.-NC5-4-.& tifibane-1. . : •• 9.98 -acri'.77g:•'etY1-.,'...*:;- *T-,i'il said premises being within the area of jursidiction of. a Zoning Ordinance for Orange ..e . • _ . County as applied to , adopted by the Orange County . - - -- - Board of Commissioners. Title for this property is in the name of . • - . . :: ::.. Jane B. and Robert MyKelly . . •' . - :... .-- • • The grounds for this appeal are as follows: - ATTotli non residential use df a --::... . . . . Historic Structure'. ' • • - --• . - -- . . . - - - = • • . . - - . . S • . . . . July 19,-1985 - - -- . Date • ea. 74 ZC-11/ • -• • ogOtA' "rt3r4Q.Q.,. ' •- Sign ture of -Appella t • . , . . . . . • Rt-.2,Box.330, Meba•ne-, NC -27.302 - - • Address . . • . . _. . ' " . . • " - .- ■I•lowe goo•it ypq'memo"NI/1■1044001.0 . • 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 <.proval. • Appeal must be acoompanied 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 he 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. • • 51/Mil I jg} , • ..., . . -------022 _._ _ . . ::. .. ..,..r 4 Hi. :4 _...... ). T., 1 ,..-, i . ' il 0 • 2 • _,..„.... . dr.s'1 !• . 5 . ' • . . • ,, \• ‘• /.7•••.••..•'/s, ..,........,.......-..-...'"."".."....n...■........•..................W O,•=.r1OgOe.SS,.'. .C-...1....._ _.._•-_• _C_.r-e'f.''_''' •-. • 1,.\... --•. ., ,.•.-1'... s t;X•'-'•1 ■ // i . / /7 / Li .1 , ..,-/ . 1....._ ,.., It 5 ' / 7 / f, ., ... r.' i .•:•.• , .. a. e• "//t') 51* it.- ..... :- ..-1- • .•,....,,....„,... .„..„, . :........ L ., , ..., N 1 i...a..._.., .. ^1"'...*:•M..•.44" o r ,t,..• t ;,.,• .., .1.,. :".... ."., ..."At,•• ..2.' / k • .;7,6 t''.'3.* .7,g" .)!'.\": t;.. '.:-1:vo,.. r•.. -: '-'':^3 1:,-Plii64'_:...".-aa.' - ---1..1- -! ..,...-?!.,.c"...7J.- ,.._ Alt .7 ,.--- -----4‘..,..,.- ......... .!•!•Z.;. P. :. ::'-,... . 5 , 2 2 " 4 t tr. LI .r. v. I. = 2 ..." , .•/ • . •—fr,P" 1 .g iz. ..., / I i 1 & ,...=, • la d *. ,r, 4". 0 ..0' SI t';" I i -,1 Z:t Off. , i vs 0 e. F / at ti:, / t.11 / f / , Lu ra g q b; i .-.1 / e = t T., t:3(' ....11 .. a f 4. . 1W1 ir4 \ t 7 i:4: i 'At! - . /1 1 Itil . ,o.„,I 1 p.,.,1 / ..... (,00;:s, 7:07.vp..07,47.117.... -1-1- • •-----5- W. .. ... ...,....,_____ ... . .1 (,..Pc 1.1 7 •.,, • • . . v . I • • . ,/ ' AL• NW _ _ . _ .. ___ - . . ..... . . ... ........................ .. 023 July 18, 1985 Project: Bingham School Inn Historic Structure-Non-Residential Restoration NE Corner of NC54 and SR1007 (Mebane-Oaks Rd.) ainghamr Township,. Orange County, NC Subject: Tree Varieties Types. Number Walnut 1,. 14 Cedar 2 Maple 5, 7, 10, 12, 14 Pecan 3, 4, 8,. 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25 Oak 5 Elm 22 024 • 411 HISTORIC STRUCTURES - NON-RESIDENTIAL REUSE/MIXED USED (Class A Special Use) BINGHAM SCHOOL INN A BED AND BREAKFAST COUNTY INN DEVELOPMENT in Bingham Township, Orange County, North Carolina 411 Prepared for: Robert M. & Jane B. Kelly Route 2, Box 330 Mebane, North Carolina IIF 025 July 18, 1985 III Project: Bingham School Inn Historic Structure-Non-Residential Restoration NE Corner of NC54 and SR1007 (Mebane-Oaks Rd.) Bingham Township, Orange County, NC Applicants: Robert M. & Jane B. Kelly Route 2, Box 330 • Mebane, NC 27302 Statement of Justification The applicants herein state that the following plans, drawings, data, maps & illustrations presented with this application complies in every aspect to the intent of the standard established by Article 8.8.24 covering Historic Structures-Non-Residential Reuse/Mixed Use (Class A Special Use). The applicants tender the following evidence of finding of fact as support of issuance of Special Use Permit. I. Finding #1: That the property being restored has been designated and duly marked as a Historic site by the state of N. C. Department of Cultural Resources Division of Archives and History duly noted as such commencing in 1941. Findinq #2: That the property being restored has been designated in the National Register of Historic Places since January 18, 1978. (Entry #513). Entry in the National Register of Historic Place opens the site for Public visitation, thus promoting historical education. Finding_#3: The importance of the site is emphasized in the Statement of Significance outlined in the attached National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. ' Findinq #4: Additional historical materials have been uncovered as restoration has progressed. Case at hand concerns the discovery of the site of the Bingham School confirmed by a dig by the Historical Archeologist of N. C. Department of Archives and History. In addition, a site has been uncovered of a building that pre-dates any existing late 18th century remaining. It is the intent of the applicants to make these sites available for public viewing. II. Finding #1: Site Plan A. Site Plan attached, prepared by ENT Land Surveys, Inc. of Hillsborough, NC. 410 B. On-site signage to. be a modest oval approximate 36" x 24" held by a hand-forged iron frame extending 3' above a 5' gate post - no illumine- 026 2 tion planned. 411 C. Boundaries of the site are fields in cultivation. Finding #2: Proposed Use of Site'and Buildings A. The entire area to be used for the previously stated purpose. B. The site will 'employ two full and one part-time employees. C. The number occupants will not exceed 12 guests. D. The site will be occupied 24 hours per day. Finding #3: Building Plans A. Floor Plan attached. B. Photographs attached showing exterior and interior views of restoration and rehabilitation of buildings and site. C. Extreme care has been exercised in the preservation of original style and character leaving all original features untouched. This has been done with guidance from both the N. C. Department of Archives and History and the Historical Preservation Society of NC which is duly noted on the property deed. D. Water supply and wastewater treatment - Orange County Health Department letter attached. E. Public Service Agencies - Appropriate letters attached. F. Development Schedule - Completion date scheduled for August 15, 1985. III. Finding #1: Development promotes and preserves a historical site and structure. A. Location: The site of 9.98 acres is located at NE corner SR1007 (Mebane-Oaks Rd.) and NC 54. On the N, E, & S the site borders farm land belonging to heirs of Harmon McIver. B. Traffic Considerations: Entry to the site is made on E/S of SR1007. Traffic circulation on the site is a loop road with gravel surface. Parking is within a fenced lot maintaining the original esthetics of the site. IV. Finding #1: Restoration and limited use will enhance the adjacent property. A. Zoning: The site is now zoned for farming-residential coded AR and RI. 411 027 3 8. Orange County Zoning Ordinance and Stardards: The development of this property conforms in every way to all known standards and regulations as specified in subsections 8.8 a) and 8.8 24 la). C. The Applicable Requirements of Article 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12 have been satisfied. • } 028 ENTRIES IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER STATE NORTH CAROLINA Date Entered vhn 1 K 11478 14 fi J Name Location Bingham School Oaks Orange County • • e Also Notified Hon. Jesse A. Helms • Hon. Robert B. Morgan Hon. L. H. Fountain . tat ib fh � United States Ifflepartment of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE WASHINGTON, MC. 2(290 IH ki.l•LY ML►RN 14: The Director of the National Park Service William J. Whalen is pleased to inform you ttat the historic property listed on the enclosed sheet has been nominated by the State Historic Preservation Officer responsible for your State's implementation of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1466, P.L. 89-665 (80 Stat. 915), as amended. It has accordingly been entered in the National Register of Historic Places. A leaflet explaining the National Register is enclosed for your information and convenience. ' CD M GQ Enclosures ,. . • • --a-,.. • . • --i • 0.141 • .1.1041017 1 030 . . • kiwo• UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR NPS USE ONLY NATIONAL PARK SERVICE :W4V-IkkOAKAP.:VrOtSargq.WAZIA!'1.i".i.i'L'f ; ' iii11404MOSW:41. g. Aft :TIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES I S • •••-:::,-;,,.;,,, :,,,:•,::7trt.94,:vgi.•.,:e:if.::::,,, ,:;!• :,...::?... -:...-,,,:::•:.:,,,..„,---A,::f•.:1::::-:-..y,:,: .:,:Ns v..•:,..-...:•,,•::,;)::-•,-,;::::,..:, -,.:.: INVENTORY—NOMINATION FORM DATE'ENTERED,;:,VA .,:-..,,;5..j;':?::::;:‘:.-:.47:::.t:),4f.4.,:i'',..,•';;..f.:t.:7. - , SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOW TO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES--COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS alP.M.11•1111.Mmall■ El NAME " • . HISTORIC " Bingham School . • AND/OR COMMON • . ' • ' . , • LOCATION -3 . STREET&NUMBER NE corner N.C. 54 and. SR 1007 --NOT FOR PUBLICATION CITY.TOWN . CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT • Oak •• ___AnciNme OF 2nd STATE CODE COUNTY CODE - : North Carolina 37 Orange 139 3 CLASSIFICATION • CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE -.DISTRICT -PUBLIC .-OCCUPIED -AGRICULTURE -MUSEUM X-BUILDINGIS) X.PRIVATE X-ONOCCUPIED -COMMERCIAL _PARK --STRUCTURE . _BOTH _WORK IN PROGRESS -EDUCATIONAL -X-PRIVATE RESIDENCE ...SITE PUBUC ACQUISITION . ACCESSIBLE -.ENTERTAINMENT -REUGIOUS _OBJECT ' -JN PROCESS -YES:RESTRICTED _GOVERNMENT -.SCIENTIFIC -BEING CONSIDERED , -...YES:UNRESTRICTED -INDUSTRIAL -TRANSPORTATION - - X.NO --MILITARY ....OTHER: V.d....1■.101.41140. 411•1141.•■1111P SOWNER OF PROPERTY oitjA criodui: (hi... E.-44;A, Ci-Lid 1 4-111'1dIA'1"' . ( e.)45 CAsu....7."1-1 C-12...td..,L.- en. . 1 nx.,-...) A am".,.N"`■cs.. NAME 2.84-to 0 • (also, see attached list) STREET&NUMBER • I. CITY.TOWN STATE Charlotte VICINITY OF North Carolina 28207 LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION El COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDSiETC. Orange County Courthouse STREET&NUMBER , • CITY.TOWN STATE • • _ . • • ,...... ,..rear.,C2,11111 ............ 1 REPRESENTAIION IN EXISTING SURVEYS .. TITLE . --- DATE -FEDERAL _STATE -COUNTY _LOCAL DEPOSITORY FOR I SURVEY RECORDS CITY.TOWN STATE ■ — ' i 031 - : -arm No.10-300e :Rev.10.74) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR . , FOR.NPS ue ONL:r NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECEIVED- OTIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY--NOMINATION FORM OATEENTEREO. . . CONTINUAT1ONSHEEt ITEM NUMBER 4 PAGE i OtmerS, cont. Mr. Charles W. Stanford c/o Mrs. Evelyn M. Brownscombe 408 Hermitage Court Charlotte, NC 28207 Mr. Harmon M. Greene c/o Mrs. Evelyn M. Brownscombe 408 Hermitage Court Charlotte, NC 28207 Mr. Johnny P. Greene c/o Mrs. Evelyn M. Brownscombe 408 Hermitage Court Charlotte, NC 28207 • • I • .DESCRIPTION V• CHECK ONE CHECK ONE • • 0!,?� CONDIT{ON _,pRIGiNALStTE DETERIORATED X UNALTERED EXCELLENT . -ALTERED _MOVED DATE. ]I:GOOD -,RUINS . .. ,FAIR ._UNEXPOSED DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL IIF KNOWN)PHYSICAL APPEARANCE • The Bingham School complex includes a number of buildings from several eras: a large, expansive, multi-stage house, a contemporary smokehouse and well house, and several later outbuildings. The L-shaped house e vernacular Greek reeimaincsectitns: the large two-story block, facing northeast, a small board-and batten office attached at thesoutwst (rear) orn of ; and saal long of one-and-one-half-story ell at the southeast(rea r), itself construction. Uniting the main block and all is an impressive en emeapea colonnade or porch facing a pleasant courtyard created by the L-shaped g The oldest portion of the house is the rear ell, which antedates Bingham ownership and appears to date from the early nineteenth century. This consists of a logs structure to the northeast and a frame structure to the southeast,t linked by yta shed dormers. The interior chimney and united by weatherboarding and g with both ers. log structure appears to be the oldest. Fenestration is irregular, our-truc- over-four sash (probably the original) and six-over-six sash present. The log The tion is visible from a kitchen later attached to the eastns ee oft restructure. with exterior finish is like that of the entire ell, throughout four panels,.plain weatherboarding, and a simple narrow midxni- _neteenth(century moldings.) this section have two or four panels and rather Within, the single room on the first floor is finished with flush sheathing with remnants of a chair rail. An enclosed stair rises in the northeast corder.h On the southwest wall a square fireplace opening is framed. by a large mantel, . to ed•by a shelf. ' Flanking the mantel 'are door- . posed simply df 'a 'three-part molding pP In the corners ways, each with a two-light transom,'framed by a two-part molded frame. are built-in corner• cupboards with glazing above and a paneled door below. The second-st ery=rciom' is' 'in:i.shect- iwtha'flush sheathing and lit by the shed dormers. The'reartabst'section nit' the all is of frame construction, -and:'its age relative to the log section is uncertain; it seems to be also of early ni;nelteentb century;or'gin and may have''been a freestanding structure for a time or may have been constructed originally as an addition to the log oft his section, exterior the log structure. The west facade side, each single four-over-four sash window and, at the south end, two doors side by having four panels, but with slightly different configuration and slightly different moldings. The north door leads into th aibasementrwhichroom, i.sthe reached by one brick the$tepsir. This section has a brick foundation over leading down from the rear (east) porch. Unfinished massive posts said to be crepe myrtle carry the rear porch roof. On>.ndows occur aondthehsouth side and the gable is sash windows and no door. Similar windows Lnished with a beaded tapered rake board. Within, this section is plastered upstairs and down, except for the stair, which is finished lG orgh n flush form plain baseboards occur. style ones. The first- floor ormman mantel floor mantel features a molded frame and four rectnigut�reelaae 1s�sA number of shelf, curioi and that one the second floor is similar nvest3.$ation if thaphouse is renovated. One features occur, which will bear further g • Form No.10.300a O3 a (Rev.10-74) . U NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE •FOR NPS USE ONLY'• TIONAL REGISTER RECEIVED= :�"-_ . - _ • ,,, OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY•-NOMINATION FORM DATE ENTERED CONTINUATION SHEET ITEM NUMBER 7 PAGE 1 • of these is the presence of what appears to be brick Hogging in the south wall at the first level. It does not extend to the second level, and it cannot be determined whether it occurs anywhere else at the .first level. . The front section of the house, the two-story Greek Revival block, was probably built for the Binghams. It follows a center-hall plan one room deep, and the finish is a curious combination of rather elegant paneling on doors and some wainscots and beautiful marbleizing, and other features--mantel, stair, and other elements--of very plain vernacular character. Whether this reflects the work of different crafts- • men, the combination of some elements brought into the house and others made on the site, or what, is not known, but the variation in sophistication is marked. The house, three bays wide and two deep, is covered with plain weatherboards and carries a gable roof. It rests on brick piers, a brick foundation, and a partial basement. Doors and windows are framed by simplified Greek Revival moldings, consisting of boards grooved to resemble symmetrical molding or fluting, accented by-plain corner- 'ocks. Windows are unusually large, with twelve-over-twelve sash• at the first level MU eight-over-twelve at the second. The double doors centrally located front and back are very handsome, with a simple transom and three plain raised panels on each leaf of the door, expertly woodgrained. A front shed entrance porch lacks base and columns. Exterior chimneys of brick laid in one-to-five common bond, with single stepped shoulders rise at either end. At the east end, the house has been extended a few feat, reusing old materials, so that it is flush with the chimney. The interior is essentially unchanged, and features sheathed ceilings and walls plastered above a wainscot. In the hall and west first-floor parlor, the wainscot is quite handsome, with a double range of flat panels outlined with a heavy molding. The panels are subtly arranged to fit precisely the length of each wall, and in the parlor a single range only appears beneath the large windows. Wainscots in the other rooms are flush sheathed. Doors, too, are quite handsome, with the same rich moldings around their six flat panels, which are expertly wood-grained. Door and window frames are plain symmetrically grooved ones with plain cornerblocks, and at the windows descend to the baseboard to frame the panels beneath the window. The baseboard, which is marbleized, is absolutely plain. Mantels without: exception are unsophisticated post-and-lintel compositions with simple shelves, of vaguely Greek Revival character. Some marbleizing is present. The stair, which rises back-to-front in the hall, features slim balusters square-in-section and square posts with molded cap, which carry a robust rounded handrail, an inverted U-shaped in section. Risers are marbleized. The office, featuring board and batten walls, has a broad frieze beneath the heavy overhang of the hip roof. Details are of typical mid-nineteenth century ' •racter, including two-panel, woodgrained doors. • 1 o vn Na 10.300a 034 Rev.10.741 VV UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR NPS USE ONLY ' ., NATIONAL PARK SERVICE •`` RECEIVED r M NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ;:. ::'' ' INVENTORY--NOMINATION FORM _DATE ENTERED.'• CONTINUATION SHEET' ITEM NUMBER 7 PAGE 2 One of the most interesting and unusual features of the house is the beautiful shaded courtyard bordered on tvo.sides by the colonnaded porch that carries along the rear of the 'two-story section and the front of the ell. A shed roof is carried on sturdy columns of Doric character, constructed of wedge-shaped bricks and stuccoed; - these unusual masonry columns are seen also at the rear porch of the Ruffin-Roulhac House in Hillsborough. The raised floor of the porch is surfaced with square paving TM; bricks, and the ceiling of the porch is lathed and has traces of plaster. The enclosed feeling of the porch and courtyard is intensified by the presence of the office and by a wooden partition linking the front section of the house and the ell. To the rear of the house is a small well-house, a frame gable roof structure of _d-nineteenth century date whose gabled overhang, sheltering the well, is carried on ..aund brick columns like those of the porch. To the east of the house is a smokehouse of traditional heavy timber frame construction. . Several other outbuildings of uncertain or later data exist as well. • • t w: • 4101 • 7 . CC •0 3 J • PERIOD i 1• • AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE--CHECK AND JUSTIFY BELOW 1 PREHISTORIC _4ACHE0IUGY-PREHI5TORIC .,,COMMUNITY PLANNING 1400.1499 ..ARCHEOLOGY•HISTORIC -tANOSCAPEAACHITECTURE _RELIGION ._CONSERVATION _LAW .1500.1599 _AGRICULTURE -ECONOMICS -..SCIENCE •1899 -MILITARY -SCULPTURE X:ARCHIT£CTURE X.-EDUCATION _..MILITARY 700.1799 _IIRT, _.ENGINEERING -S AL/HUMANITARIAN X.1800•1899 COMMERCE -MUSIC _THEATER ' _EXPLORATIOWSETTLEMENT ,PHILOSOPHY •._1 -COMMUNICATIONS _tNOUSTRY" - TRANSPORTATION ' :PdUTtCS/GOVERNMENT _OTHER(SPECIFY) _INVENTION SPECIFIC DATES 1845-1864 ' SUILDER/ARCHITECT STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The Bingham School at Oaks is an interesting complex of buildings from several eras located in a pleasant rural setting in the rolling Piedmont farmland of western Orange County. The complex includes an L—shaped house composed of small early nineteent century buildings and the more ambitious mid nineteenth century Greek Revival house h probably built for the Binghams, plus several outbuildings. This was the site of the Bingham School from 1845 until 1864, one of a series of•North Carolina locations of a school established by William J. Bingham in Hillsborough and continued by his sons and grandsons, .which.gained a.statewide reputation,for.academic .excellence. The Bingham School property at Oaks, North Carolina, is a group of buildings used by William James Bingham and his sons as a school for boys y Bingham to and during ow, t the Civil War. Bingham was the son of the Reverend William James Bingham of Glasgow, the founder and first headmaster of the first Bingham School, located in Pittsboro in iltG1793. The Reverend Bingham gave up his school from 1801 to 1805, when he taught Latin reeklat' the new University of. North Carolina at Chapel. Hill,.-where William James born. According.to his grandson Robert, writing in Ashe's,•$idgra 1hidal-Histor . of North Carolina, the Reverend Bingham left the University o P school in2Hillsborough because the boys who came o,the tUni.versit reopened his private prepared. He thus afforded his sons and grandsons an opportunity tore rt_ cipate in what the Asheville Cititen•Times of 1921 referred to as "the only institutioneof. learning of any grade in the United States which has been administered continuously from grandfather to gradson. by three successive generations of headmasters so as to touch three centuries." The school was relocated at Mt. Repose, eleven miles'northwest of Hillsborough, about 1810, where it remained until the Reverend Bingham's death in 1826. His son William James administered the school in Hillsborough until 1845, when he moved the school t yet another location twelve miles southwest of Hillsborough in an area w ' Oaks. It is on this site that the only buildings associated with the school at o q of its many locations are still in existence. William James purchased the Oaks bounded by Cane Creek and the Hillsborough eRoad,1from Alexander Morrowyin70 acres. ?aid Morrow twenty—five hundred dollars 1844. He there may have. been at least one structure 2alrreadyronhit. Mety, which suggest 1345 recalled that they "reached the y buildings arrivals toggle area in community, passed the Binghams' newly acquiredsfarm ndra adembuilding the the III y buildings on the left l • - - - - • 036 Porn No.10.30C. 10-74) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR NPS USE ONLY; :. ' NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECEIVED NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY•- TE NOMINATION FORM IOATE ENRE1....•• • • CONTINUATION SHEET ITEM NUMBER 8 PAGE 1 "6 and crossed the road that led to the University at Chapel Hill. Bingham's purpose in moving the school to Oaks from Hillsbor9ugh was to rear his sons and teach his students away from the distractions of a town. The Bingham circular of the 1850s said little of the Oaks environment except that boys were to go th church on Sundays and not make accounts at business houses. However, students had the run of God's great gymnasium in their free hours, and they engaged in a variety of vigorous enterprises: hunting, fishing, trapping and games, including skinny, a rustic version of field hockey. Bingham's was an outdoor school. Charles Lee Raper, in his Church and Private Schools in North Carolina, wrote that the second headmaster of Bingham School raised both the nobility of the teaching profession and the reputation of his school in a short time: "He increased tuition fees from $20.00 to $150.00 a year. He limited his number to 30 students and his school had such a reputation §11 over the country that he bad to refuse admission to 300 pupils in a single year." The esteem in which Bingham and his school were held by North Carolina families was remarkable, since tuition had to be paid in gold, never paper money, and the .discipline was strict. Sawney Webb remembers from his days at the Oaks school that "Old Bingham" did not spare the rod: "When a boy missed declining a word, he thrashed him. • • He wasn't mad. He thrashed a boy, all the 0,0 time looking nice and sweet like he was doing the nicest job he ever did in his life. ' In 1857, William James' sons, Robert and William, join il their father in running the school, which then became Willi. T J. Bingham and Sons. They increased the facilities and accepted up to 60 students. Many of these students were board with nearby families, since there were no living quarters at the Oaks location. Robert's tenure with the school was interrupted, by the Civil War, and in 1861 he raised a company and left the operation of the school to his aging father and elder brother William. With his group of recruits, Company G of the Forty-Fourth North Carolina Troops, Robert saw igntinuous service until the surrender and was present at Appomatox Courthouse. William, unlike his brother, could not fight in the war because of frail health but served with distinction in the local militia. It was under his leadership that - the school continued during the difficult years of the war, because his father virtually retired from the principalship in 1863. In deference to the war effort, William incorporated the school as a military academy in 1864, and that was the character of the school at its subsequent locations at Nabanesville and Asheville. One distinguisehd North Carolinian has written of the school following the transition: 411 "Colonel Bingham introduced the military discipline at Oaks while I was in school. The boys were drilled every evening, and a regular guard was maintained at night. He yessisenam'ON . . . . 037 . . .. ' • . . • . . . . . . • R.N.-m.0u 1Rev-10441 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTER IOR FOR NPS USE ONLY : . -...... - . -- ---. ...-.• . NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECEIVED';..:.!.';:-- '-'.''..::-:: ::-..: '-' . .-.-- :*--•''':?:.-"*. OVTIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ... . •. : - . - -,• INVENTORY...NOMINATION FORM DATE ENTERED .:. . • ' - -. • . . - CONTI NUATION SHEET -- ITEM NUMBER 8 PAGE 2 -------„„„----------...----,,,------- ,---------------...---------------..—........„„,„......,-,---- , had the commanding presence of a soldier, and every boy instinctively felt his influence.'' Each principal thereafter was given the rank and title of Colonel by the sate. William became headmaster in 1865, and his famous father died in February, 1866. ''' The move of the school to Mebanesville came in December, 1864. The war had made it increasingly. difficult to obtain provisions at Oaks, which was ten miles from the railroad at Hillsborough. The school was moved to a site which lay ona spur of the Southern Railroad at Mebansesville station, in the northwestern corner of Orange County. Old William James Bingham was violently opposed to the move ayg ordered the family slaves to disregard his son's requests to prepare for the move. His will, written in August, 1864, stipulated that if his sons did not continue the school at Oaks, the academy buildings and grounds should becomelpe sole possessions of his widow and not be jointly owned by William and Robert. Nevertheless, the'Binghan School was moved from Oaks and .prospered _at its new Allocation. In 1873, the principalship of the school passed to Robert Bingham upon the ath of his brother William. In 1891, Robert decided to move the school to Asheville following two destructive fires that swept the Mebanesville buildings in 188i0and 1890. The school continued in Asheville until 1928, one year after Robert's death. 1' _ . • After the removal of the Bingham School to the Mebanesville location, William James' 'widow Eliza Alves -Bingham continued, to live at the house at Oaks and maintain the lands surrounding it. She also inherited other property in the county, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough which William James Bingham had acquired during his long and prosperous life. She made several sales of land over the years 1871 to 1881. Included , in these transactions were two parcels that had been part of the original tract which Bingham purchased from Alexander Morrow in 1844. The first parcel of 46 acres directly in front of the Bingham house was sold to D. F. Morrow in 1874 for twelve hundred 1 and fifty dollars ($1250). The second parcel was sold to S. S. Webb in 1880 in a complicated exchange that included. a third party, Abner Conklin, to wham Eliza A. Bingham had promised to sell 20 and 1/2 acres during his lifetime. This parcel wa9 bordered by Caterpillar Creek and the lands of Lizzie Morrow and Sarah Crawford. I i • i _ Eliza Bingham died in 1885 and her will, written in 1877, stipulated that all of her property was to go to her daughter Mary Bingham with bequests of books to be made to her other daughters Mrs. J. W. Montgomery, Mrs. P. T. Penick,. their husbands — and children. There is a local tradition that Nary Bingham maintained a school in the old home until the 1880s, however, this is not substantiated by any existing records. There are deed transactions by Mary which show herAelling land just north of the Eingham.house to William G. Stafford as late as 1888. One written statement ir4ilige.in 1954 by Mrs. Emma Harward Monk gives the history that her cousin Lucy thersbee "who had conducted a private school in Chapel Hill for some years, moved . ' 1 Oaks, N. C. and opened a school in theeld Bingham home." She further states that . 4une Webb was' farming the Bingham land. ' . . , . . . -300a 038 From 10.74) 0 U NITED STATES DEPA RTIOENT OF THE INTER IOR 'FOR NPS USE ONLY • - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE " . RECEIVED'. ' s;� NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY--NOMINATION FORM ,DATE ENTERED ' CONTI NUATKIN SHEET' ITEM NUMBER g PAGE 3 - In 1893 the property containing, 316 2/3 acres and meeting the description in the original deed of Morrow to Bingham, was sold by Sarah C. Stroud, wife of Weldon M. Stroud, to W. G. Careathers for "twelve hundred and sixtysix dollars ($1266) cash and twelve hundred and thirty three dollars to be left by will of last testament of said second part." It is not known how Sarah C. Stroud obtained the Bingham property to sell to Careathers. She was the daughter of Alvii2 Durham and W. G. Careathers was her brother-in-law by marriage to her sister Nancy. Careathers sold this same piece of land to Harmon McIver in 1910. The McIver family which is closely related to the families in that area of Orange County have maintained part of this land including the site and surrounding 9.98 acres which contains the old Bingham home and several outbuildings. The property--extant build- ings which date from the 1840s--is an historic architectural monum2gt to the efforts of one of the nineteenth century's most notable educator families. FOOTNOTES 'Samuel A. Ashe, ed., Biographical History of North Carolina (Greensboro, N. C.: Charles L. Van. Noppen, 1907), p. 67. 2lbid., p. 68. 3"Bingham Occupies Honored Place• Among the Educational Ranks of Western Carolina's Institutions," Asheville Citizen Times, November 30, 1921. 4Ashe, pp. 67-68. 5Orange County Records, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, N. C., (Subgroup: Deeds, Book 31, p. 139). 6Laurence McMillin, The Schoolmaker, (Chapel Hill, N. C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1971), p. 12. ' 7Ashe, p. 69. 8cMMillin, p. 23. 9Charles Lee Raper, The Church and Private Schools in North Carolina (Greensboro, --. C. : Jos. J. Stone, Book and Job Printer, 1898), p. 67. 10McMillin, p. 22. • . • 039 • Fang No.10-300i IRev t0.74) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR NPS USE ONLY . NATIONAL PARK SERVICE . RECEIVED • . ' *: . • . •TIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES - - INVENTORY—NOMINATION FORM OATEENTERE0 CONTINUATION SHEET ITEM NUMBER 8 PAGE 4 11As he, p. 75. 12__ -waiter P. Williamson, "The Bingham School," Our Living and Our Dead, 2 (/ay, 1875), p. 372. 13 McMillin, p. 14. 14 Ashe, p. 84. 15 Ashe, pp. 76, 77, 79. • p. 40. • 17 Orange County Records, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, N. C.: (Subgroup: Wills, Book G, p. 482). 410 18 Ashe, pp. 84, 85. 19 Orange County Records, Orange'County Courthouse, Hillsborough, N. C.: Grantors Index, Deed Book 49, pp. 313, 315. 20 Ibid., Will Book H, p. 374; Deed Book 52, p. 48. 21 PMMA Harvard Monk, personal letter (Los Angeles, California: 1954). 22Orange.County Records, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, N. C. : Deed Book 53, p. 376; Will Book H, p. 283. 23 Ibid., Deed Book 63, p. 108. • 4IM ! . IMMEMMI■mmir Ifi- x, MAJOR BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES . ,;, .Aili11 i Samuel A. ra hical History of North Carolina. Greensboro, N. -C•: Charles 040 L. Vaa Noppen, 1907. - "Bingham Occupies Honored Place Among the Educational Ranks of Western Carolina's Institutions."' Asheville'Citizen Times. November 30, 1921. :Milan, Laurence. The'Schoolmaker. Chapel F411, N. C.: The University of North Carolina Press 1971. DGE-OGRAPHICAL DATA ', ACREAGE OF NOMINATED PROPERTY• 9.98. acres--see-attached survey sheet; present house site UTM REFERENCES : A{-_,__J11r' II _,J t1tt -1 B1 r111 rlrt11 , 1 , Lj , 1 ZONE EASTING N Lt-1-.1. ZONE EASTING NORTHING CWI1LlIII1_ , I ► ( r + l DLitt thillti ! 111 VERBAL BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION . ririll:" r.: r,.. ..4. ._ . .. . • c.q. . .f., .. . :/: r LIST ALL STATES AND COUNTIES FOR PROPERTIES OVERLAPPING STATE OR COUNTY BOUNDARIES gay" STATE CODE COUNTY CODE - v 3, , STATE CODE COUNTY CODE •_ • FORM PREPARED BY .. - : _..• NAME/TITLE Description prepared by Catherine W. Bi_shir, Head, Survey & Planning Branch Significance prepared by Diane Lea. Consultant DATE ORGANIZATION STREET&NUMBER• . TELEPHONE • 1 nQ Pas_t 3onPS i•S_rrp.t.• :- ..�.. .• CITY OR TOWN STATE - Sa1 ceLerE+ or. 4, atolina 2761_ 3STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER CERTIFICATION . ' = "'''' - HE'EYALUATED SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE STATE IS:."' NATIONAL__ STATE,,,,,,X,,, LOCAL ' As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966(Public Law 89-665).I hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Regis-fit and• ertify'ihat it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Service. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER SIGNATURE TITLE ' ation Officer State Historic Presery DATE Jul 14, 1977 R N PS USE NLY: ',::: •I FEEB$CEFiEF1:1F!Ai7HIS•PRO PERTY IS'INCLUDEDvN TH EiNATIONA L s 4_t:x - . :�Y ,:.. 2i DATE• DIRECTOR,OFFICE OFArCHEOLO GY AND HIS TORIC i?RESERVATION •.DATE` - TEST: - KEEPER OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER •` • ' ' ;; . . v •• GPO 892.453 - _ • • .• .1 • , - Form No.1P•300a 041 (Rev.10.74) . UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTER IOR FOIP—T.Nps SEONLY NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECEIVED •TIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY NOMINATION FORM LOATE ENTERED CONTINUATION SHEET ITEM NUMBER 9 PAGE 1 Monk, Emma Harward. Personal letter. Los Angeles, California, 1954. Orange County Court Records. Orange County Courthouse. Hillsborough, N. C. Subgroups: Indexes, Wills, Deeds. Raper, Charles Lee. The Church and Private Schools in North Carolina. Greensboro, N. C.: Jos. J. Stone, Book and Job Printer, 1898. Williamson, Walter P. "The Bingham School." Our Living and Our Dead. May, 1875. • • • • 410 • 300 W.Tryon Street - ran e coun Er::2127° Chapel Hi ine 967.9251 x = HEALTH DEPARTMENT bane tine 22 .72032 Durham line 688.7333 042 688-7331 Carr MM Mal, Sufte 225 100 N. Greensboro Street Carrboro, N.C. 27510 942-4168 Jerry Robinson, M.P.A. Director July 10, 1985 Orange County Planning Department Attn: Susan Smith Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 RE: Bingham Township, Tax Map 17, Lot 19 Dear Susan: The above referenced property, owned by Robert Kelly, has a. sewage disposal system that is adequate to supply a 2 bedroom residence plus a 4 bedroom boarding house. If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, please don't hesitate to call. • Sincerely, (---4)%c-hii6C)/ Ron Holdway Environmental Health Section RH:sm cc: Robert Kelly Rt. 2, Box 330 Mebane, NC 27312 • - Orange Grove Volunteer Fire Company 043 ROUTE 3, BOX 816 0 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 TG WIALA. It ni,o_q CavLci_ki ., ... Vuturv..-t_LLK j{.)._,/, wo,pci..itnisikt u3.0i b2. i\JUDpvitn[ba bOA itt Liu .p.,,\.,a.Cic,,tLcAu ,o4i\A.._ pAkp.(2.. ..I.LA c , I(XA . ./ 6..1 ttik eKt- L.F1..t.ikatc.ItlaK) cl.._) rA9,130,(1,Lty CI:JD Qoad evAkci kl :C . 1-Ai_ghwOm_ 1---i ) u),L Oi\cks ) ks1(). 0 Ce-k...tr\Jk,6 1 133iii(nInon(k) G.u._)1(\oru ..p . (46--y-veli 14-6-14A.,z_ /-• . CJA(.1 b ; oik.culcfsk C-:(A_eve Yo.Q.Lta.tui LA..t DipaktiiwItt 1 ORANGE COUNTY 044 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 EMERGENCY SERVICES 106 EAST MARGARET LANE July 15, 1985 Established 1752 Mr. Robert M. Kelly Route 2, Box 330 Mebane, N. C. 27302 Dear Mr. Kelly: In response to your letter, Orange County Emergency Medical Services will provide medical and rescue services to the area to be developed at Mebane Oaks Road and 54 West. We understand that this development is located in Orange County. _ Sincerely, ' ORANGEtCOUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES 7.51. Mr, Bobby L. Baker, Director BLB:js - . LINDY PENDERGRASS 045 • Sheriff of Orange County • !tit t.stuutotual. NtIri1 I:Awn s 410 TO: Orange County Planning Depart nt Susan Smith FROM: Sheriff of Orange Count RE: Restoration of Old Bingham School DATE: July 2, 1985 The Orange County Sheriffs Department can provide Law Enforcement services for this tourist home at the intersection of Mebane Oaks Road and 54 without any forseable problems. This would not require our department to request any additional personnel or equipment. Based on average calls to motels, hotels, etc in this county we expect about 10 calls per year a total of 5 man hours one person. LP/jc •. Robert Murdock Kelly Route 2 Box 330 • Mebane MC 27302 • • • ' III • Q46 - • r-rni) tr7) CEVJ il STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Greensboro , NC 27429-0278 JAMES G.MARTIN August 21, 1985 GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON • SECRETARY Ms. Susan Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department - Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Smith: This is in reference to the driveway on SR1007 to the Bingham School historical site which is to be renovated to a small bed & breakfast type facility. The developer will have to obtain a driveway permit from our district engineers office in Hillsborough. This is required because the usage of the structure is changing to commercial . The proposed development will not generate enough traffic Op to require roadway improvements such as left turn lanes. Sight distance from the existing drive is adequate and should not present a safety problem. If we can be of any further help in this matter please advise. Sincere y / er , 7 • J. Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/cb cc: Mr. D. B. Kelly An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 1.1■11....ismusea ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TITT.T.8130ROUGH 047 NORTH CAROLINA 27278 volt ir 1111111 N..% e• -1;71. tff..k2.2 411I3 'It Cos CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I , Susan J . Smith , Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about August 12, 1985, I malted, by certified mail, postage prepaid, a Notice of the PubLic Hearing to be held on the b_gtereupstforaelssASeciLPUsermitor the Bingham School Inn . located at the intersection of NC 54 and Mebane Oaks Road (SR 1007) in Bingham Township , to each property owner as required by Article 20 Section 20.6.3 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The notice mailed specified the date, time, place and subject of the Public Hearing on the zoning classification change . WITNESS my hand, this the 15th day of/ August, 1985. c.711 `-.U201/1 SUSAN J . gmi H ZONING OFFICER 411 048 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Frrz SBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 KILI;1-Trq■ oir 00.0* NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ATLAS 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 .5 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, 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' Monday , August 26 , 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 amendment to the Orange County Zoning Atlas . • The amendment under consideration is as follows : SUP-1-85 BINGHAM SCHOOL INN The property in question is located in the northeast quadrant of 4Ite intersection of . NC 54 and SR 1007 (Mebane Oaks Road) in Bingham Township . It is known as Lot 19 on Orange County Tax Map 17 . The area to be rezoned contains approximately 434,729 square feet or 9 .88 acres . The present zoning of the property is Agricultural—Residential (A—R) The applicant is requesting that a Class A Special Use Permit for a Non— Residential Reuse/Mixed Use of an Historic Structure be granted to allow the use of the property as a bed and breakfast establishment . 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 attend the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning Department , 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough , North Carolina 27279 . For your concerns to be fully considered , they must be received by the Planning Department prior to. the 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 • ORANGE COUNTY 049 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date August 26, 1585 Action ends Item # SUBJECT: SECONDARY AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE PLAN REQUESTED BY CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY, INC. • DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No Attachment(s) Information Contact : GENE BELL SUMMARY SHEET APPLICATION MATERIALS CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS (SUPPLIED BY CHANDLER) ANALYSIS (MEMO TO MARVIN COLLINS) Telephone Numbers Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hill — 968-4501 IPRPOSE: To receive public comment on a proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for 1 .41 acres of a 7.25 acre tract (inclusive of street and railroad rights—of—way) owned by Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. The property in question is located on the south side of OLd N.C. 10 (SR 1710) approximately one—half mile from the intersection with N . C. 86. The property is referenced as Tax Map 45 , Lot 32 in Hillsborough Township . NEED: The request for redesignation of the 1 ,41 acre site from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition/Commercial—Industrial Transition Activity Node has been submitted to legally address wastewater runoff problems from an existing concrete plant site. Under a directive from the N.C. Department' of Natural Resources and Community Development — Division -of Environmental Management (DEM) , the applicant attempted to contain runoff with retention basins . The basisns were constructed on property owned by the applicant and which were Located in an R-1 zoning district . The applicant erroneously thought the site was zoned for industrial purposes and the use of property for retention basins as well as for truck parking resulted in a zoning violation . Upon official notification from the Planning Department, the nonconforming use of the property ceased . 050 August 26 , 1985 411 Page 2 SECONDARY AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE PLAN REQUESTED BY CHANDLER CONCRETE CO./NC. The request is a new application . The applicant previously submitted a proposed amendment for 4.34 acres of the property to public hearing on May 28 , 1985. In the Board of Commissioners review (August 5, 1985) of the request for decision , it determined that new information had been submitted after the public hearing and directed that the request be sent back to public hearing as a new request on August 26 , 1985 . The Board also directed that the rezoning request for the same property be considered at the same public hearing . IMPACT: The proposed amendment would change the Land Use Plan designation of the 1 .41 acre portion of the property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition/Commercial—Industrial Transition Activity Node making it compatible for rezoning to PD I-3. Rezoning would make it possible for the applicant to legally pursue on—site wastewater retention and recycling . 411 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request . 411 -... J ) .7.', . ...„''' . '-'''''.'"'"'.. .N .21 r ' N-i .....■"--.- ...„. ''''-. I c^:,,, -: . , 051 .: . -, . , • _ _ . . i... -..-..:....,. • . . . . .. _ .,..._ , ,--.....„- ., %.N.---.... .. 1 ; • --.. I 1 ..1:--, :.7.--,....„...,..,........* . . 1 • ....."<....,....„:.......... ' I . . . : . .._ ...,...., . . , -..... I ..1 ---„s. ••... . _ 1 . • •..... , "" E• i..-_ '.. •,:".0 !.-. 7 AC ... \ . _ ..r,..- - --• • s ... ,.. s. ,„....., ; --.., \ / .- •,... . . . . ---..„. . . • --„. ' ..,-... 1 . \ ',....., i •. . a 3' -. ::::: .. .- • Sr, - ‘ • 2,, - J .--..•7.,..;„.. 1 . .85 te . . 'i. ' : - '''•:.- E,-,, .... _.• ,_ . . ; • ...E..„, 4:4193; ...%,,,,--. • : • , .--■ 82- - iC . . .„„•-•:82 8A -AC,,, \--_.; /„„.„ ' . -2c35 ," tr.,..C.W.• . . ..e; C.f..•r . . • . ---""*.--tt*:_. s.....2..........,..,.:1.(r7Alc. ...a.,\ •'.\,:1A ,".,:.,.0.9.7ixi,:,....::.v .0.,..c ..,„. . . O.•■._1 r. 905?..---. I .-- , -- •::,',.. ...._ ..... i •-■-..„........4.1,,35- -^ - • . ' -.. ..''.. ...-:.:094 f_...:-.' ...-'7..__ •e.,$)43'•-7,-- , . . . ; ---'''''.... ...,...•••••,, ..., '6'95_ v-,,...... ' i 0 . ., t,... - ..... -••...1.,...............,••*--" . • A. 0 I I • 43.1. 1r2634\ .,. AC ...-, -•• - • • '1:37j' ' ._ . -. . -.". \ ., 11 . .4' • •'*-..`•!.. <- , • • -- 7"""''.-..".." ."``'•••.......4 . ...••••..„`• ... I -..., ...*. • I .\\!. h. I , . \ " jt , : : •.. ""•••••!.._..,4,,-..-""""--. ' 4•04.41,..; ! .... 5Ei •.-----. *. : :.,E.z. \ , I • ....7P);.;J...:ve :Ii!...., " ..-.' se,.,-. _ '. '''''P.::34/•-,..,/ ..:444, ......:. --, 14 < ..T.F.7, ..;" ...:: 1 C0438' :. 7.t .r. .,. •44 1, r I /'. .c. 4._ .4' .s. I / r.• \ 1 - z. . 4.54. •!`' ' / - ' -: .'‘`■ i'.4". i • -75U• •?'< ---..„‘:, ' • .......„ I ."-;•'.. ''I". •'-' • 4: 52 • ii • \i . -',.../. '8 ----- •-I :A, • 1,'..= ..- • - '-. -.----"7-7;-------4,, • • •::, :-.?--. :.‘„ • d -Lt ------------ . !-E 2A 744Z- • . . • 3 -I ...-. ....-._„...._________,._....„ -----'"•\...,s ' --. ! ........ I ::8.:7. MAP •- .t5.6 si: -: a 6 4:, `"12" frt 4:, i • •• -7:::- - ' . 1 / I I - ..----___„azo_______. - ............ • 1 ; I ...;Pm.::..., 1 •.182.1,' :E. - c-..E: . ' • ve::.-DWO:71% • ' r ' '-':.•-:,.; s-- I f se /- 1 ..., AC. -- : ----6,-'47.:-..v, • • - - •-i '' I 3ez•-- 5E1. . -**'1.1..... ..__ :::. - _ 23 544E -?-t-i . / . • . - 7.:5E I • _- • 1 I I , 1,-r. • / 2 3 ..._ I - .. - . - ._...... . 11 ORANGE COUNTY PLANING DEPARTMENT- EELLSBOROtTGEE • 052 . ziostrii CAIZOLDTA. EIECEINEra 27'2.7S ■11 tool mr 41" 441 1/4400 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- - DATE RECEIVED: • STAFFPERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE:. • GENERAL DATA:- Property ainer(s) Name: Chandler Cohcrete Co. , Inc. • Mailing Address: . $ 1 - IA Phone: (&0;,) (919)226-1181 ANOBoro-(919)732-8121 Agent(s) Name: Thomas E. Chandler, President Mailing Address: P. O. Drawer 1239, Burlington, N. C. 27216 Phone: (cto) 225-1181• SPECIFIC DATA: • Tax Reference: Ta nship Nillsborounh 45 Lot 32 Tax Map Block Public/Private Road Name: State Rd. 1710 Lot Size: Acreage 1.41 Square Footage • Lot Frontage Lot Depth IIP ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH C NORTH CARLI ONA O 5 3 27278 :..q .r ago iiiir37• 'no co.". TO: Marvin Collins, Director of Planning FROM: Gene Bell, Planner 6,43 DATE: August 19,1985 RE: Analysis of Chandler Concrete Land Use Plan Amendment Application (LUP-3-85) I have reviewed- the Chandler Concrete Land Use Plan amendment in accordance with "PROCEDURES FOR AMENDING THE LAND USE PLAN" adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on November 1, 1982, and with applicable portions of the Orange County Land Use Plan. My findings are: —"-`- APPLICATION (Complete, but two minor points to make) ID (1) On page 2 of the application form under REQUEST, the requested zoning classification has been entered instead of the requested land use desig- nation. However, the requested land use designation is stated correctly in the letter of request. (2) In the letter of request, how the amendment would carry out the intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan is not addressed. REASON FOR AMENDMENT The applicant cites "...changed or changing conditions in a particular-area....'" as the reason for the amendment. Several examples of commercial uses coming into being after the establishment of the concrete plant are cited. The applicant is correct In that non-residential development has taken place in the area since the establishment of the concrete plant. A recognition of this prompted the Board of County Commissioners to direct Planning Staff to undertake the Central Orange Area Study which resulted in redesignation of the Commercial Transition Node to Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node.in November, 1983. A point not brought out in the Central Orange Area Study and which has more applicability as a "changed or changing condition" is the recent recognition by the N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development - Division of Environmental Management (DEM) of the undesirable runoff from the concrete plant site. It seems logical to assume that runoff has been. a "condition" associated Ash with the area since the concrete plant was located there in the early 1970's. MP Likewise, the recent recognition of the runoff as a problem by DEM would seem to qualify the runoff as a "changed-or c!iang i ng 'condition.". The applicant cannot adequately deal with this problem on the existing 1-3 site. A "reclaiming" facility on the western end of the 1-3 site has been mentioned as a possibility, but this would only retain slurry from truck washing. There would still be substantial run- off (natural and manmade) which could only be dealt with in a retention/recycling fashion. 054 Marvin Collins August 19, 1985 Page 2 . COMPARISON OF LOCATION_ STANDARDS Analysis of a Land Use Plan amendment requires that the requested designation be compatible with the applicable Locational Criteria. in Section 3.4 of the Land Use Plan (a copy of these standards is attached) . In the table below, YES means that the area being evaluated is •compatible with the locational criterion and NO, of course, means that it is not. Additional explanation is provided where the response is not a clearcut YES or NO. LOCATIONAL CRITERIA 10 & 20 YEAR TRANSITION COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL Land Slope Water lines already exist YES in area. Slope is away from Hillsborough sewage treatment plant. If sewer extended would probably require pump stations. Hydrology YES YES. Flora & Fauna YES YES Soil Conditions YES YES Public Services/ Utilities Already served with water. Already served with water. If sewer extended would If sewer extended would probably require pump probably require pump stations. stations. Transportation System YES YES Energy Use YES YES Existing Land Use YES NO (would be compatible if.land use designation changed) Agriculture C Forestry YES . YES Population Density YES YES Historic & Cultural YES YES RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, it is mrecommendation mm RESIDENTIAL that EtheErequeAtSIor redesig - nation of the 1.41 acre tract from COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION ACTIVITY NODE be approved. cc; Susan Smith, Current Planner PLAN CATEOGRE: TEN AND TWENTY YEAR TRANSIT:ON • Land Slone. No sionificant Transportation System. LOcate4)55 sicpe or topography treble: in areas :net nave very good that would unreaeonably in- read access, as wall as service crease the coat of extending by rail. lines.. These areas water and sewer lines. should have the moss complete networ 4 • k -n the transportation 411 v4q .otlowl... Located outSide 4.....=-2.--.... County's planning :urisdiction. of 100.0year flood prone areas as identified by the Carps at Engineers. Enemy Use. Located within less than a 5 tttnur.e. commutinf • ?Zara and ? lm aa. Located tine from, small-scale commerc-aI away from sizes that would, uses and a 5-10 minute commuting If developed, create a time from major commeroial uses threat to unique or en- or an Urban area. dangered species as identi- fied by the state or !misting Land Use. Located La federel roverncent. areas watch are in transition from rural or low-density uses Soil Conditions. Located to urban or higher density uses. in areas where general soil conditions are suitable for Agr4culture and pores try. urban uses because of rood Located away from areas where drainage characteristics development would have a detri- and load bearing canacity for mental impact an productive site development. agricultural uses and managed forest Land. Public Se-v4casfirtdlitges. Located tn areas wtich are Ponulation Density. Located or could be reasonably and in areas wish moderate to effeciensly served by ten- high population densities. tralized public services and utilities. Historic and Cultural. Located away fro= areas where development - would have a netri-,ental impact on state or federally acknowledged historic-c"Itural sites or County identified Public interest Areas. III . . . PLAN CATEGORY: COMHERCIAL-iNDUSTRIAL TRANE:TION ACTITETY NOD= Land SloPe. Located on Transportation Svstem. Pocused land with slopes of leas on the intersection of arterial than 15; grade. and/or collector highways and extending .5 miles beyond such. Evdrolon7. Located out- intersections or within one side of 100-year flood mile of an interstate Inter- prone areas as identified change and within 1000 feet of by the Corps of Engineers, rail lines. ?lora and ?auna. Located Energ Use. Located within away from sites that would, less than a 10 minute can- t: developed, create a muting time from an Urban threat to unique or endan- area. gered species as identified by the state or federal Existinc and Use. Located government. within identified Te... or Twenty-Year :cans:L.:ion areas. Soil Conditions. Located in areas where general sail Azritulture and Forestry. Lo- conditions are suitable for oaten away from areas where urban uses because of good development would have a dd-tri- drainage characteristics mental impact on productive and load bearing capacity agricultural uses and managed for site development, forest land. Public Services/Ut41it4es. Population Dems'ty. Located are 1 - 7 7----- trate to nigh Located in areas which are ift NIP or could be reasonably and effectively served by can- population densi'.ie- . s tralleed public services and utilities. Histaric and Cultural. Located away from areas where,. development would have a detrimental impact on state or federally acknowledged historic-cultural sites or County identified Publ't interest Areas. MaaMOMMemmeme. 056 CHANDLER CONCRETE CO., INC. READY MIXED CONCRETE Poo'Orrice DRAYMN 1230 BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27215 (919) 226-1181 411 August 14, 1985 • Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, North Carolina Re: Land Use Plan Amendment Lot 32 Map 45 Hillsborough Township Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: My company is requesting a Land Use Plan Amendment for 1.41 acres located on State Road # 1710 in Hillsborough Township, Orange County, North Carolina. This request is based on the procedure for amending the Land Use Plan adopted by the Board of Orange County Commissioners, 11/1/82 as follows: I Reason for Amendments: (a) Because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area of the county.411 As you approach this property from N. C. highway 86, you pass a garage, mini warehouses and our concrete plant on the right. A convenience store and a trailer park are on the left. The concrete plant and the roads for part of the trailer park was the first construction in the area. The concrete plant was built in 1972. Trailers began moving in after, this date. The balance of the trailer park, the garage, mini warehouses and convenience store were all built later. These types of business 'conditions indicate a change in the conditions of this area. II Sources for Amendment: (b) An Amendment application made by any person or agency. Chandler Concrete Company is the owner of this property and is requesting the change. III Categories of Amendment - Primary or Secondary: This is a Secondary Amendment. (c) 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. This property is located on State Road 1710 and bounded by our concrete plant on the west, State Road 1710 on the north, Southern Railroad on the south, and land owned by our company on the east. The current land use is rural residential and we are requesting it be changed to commercial/industrial transition node. We own the property both to the west and east of this acreage. We operate a concrete plant on 2.91 acres of land west of this property that is commercial/ industrial land use and zoned 1-3. We have been in operation at this location since 1972. The land being requested to be changed is contiguous with this property. We also own 2.93 acres of land to the east, which is rural residential . • : 057 Our company plans to use the land for waste water and wash water collection lagoons and install a pump to recycle the water for use in our concrete plant Aft operation. We will also park trucks on the property and install a drive en- trance.trance. This drive entrance will improve- the visibility for our loaded concrete trucks entering State Road 1710. The change in the Land Use Plan and rezoning would allow us to be in compliance with the Department of Environmental. Management requirements to control the waste water from our concrete plant. My company requests approval of a change in the Land Use Plan for this property. Very truly yours, CHANDLER CONCRETE CO. , INC. tte:=147/14-421 / 44"144/164.1 Thomas E. Chandler President TEC:nd 110 "3ytror. Cr.,,.antee GJ' �J�J b 058 Y DEEDw_WARRANTY DEED—Faint WO.sOt _ - ?.._ Printed and for sale by James Williams 8 Co.Inc..Yadkin.d la.s • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,, {- ORANGE County. • THIS DEED,atad.ibm '•day atryY'f s7's'ptI4^ar ,19 84 .by and below* JACK 2_ EREELANO (a n an JAMES LANDON FREELAND (single) of Orange „, and ease of Nash Carolina.hetemsfta eakd Grants.and CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY, INC. .— of County and Seam of North Carolina.heremai called eranrre..hos.permanent mading address a P. O. Drawer 1239. Hurlinvton. North Carolina 272.15 WITNESSETH: T is the Gamut.Car and in eoaadre sum ation of the su of —'L Dall. and ocher toot and valuable considerations to has in hand pad by the Grantee.the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,has given,panted.barsamed.x and conveyed,and r by them presents does pre.grant.barpun.sell,convey and canton,onto the Grantee,he Min and/or successors and amens,premises MID .,.,..._._Township, mulct! �._...County.North Cu,.,..described as foaomo Consisting of 4.34 acres as shown on the plat entitled 'Property Surveyed for Chandler Concrete Company", dated September 19, 1984, by Steve P. Yuhass, Registered Land Surveyor, (a portion of which survey is attached as Exhibit A) Lying on the Southwest side of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 (known as ' old N. C. 10) and described particularly ad follows: BEGINNING at a control iron see in the Northwestern property line of Lot B of BEECEW00D BEND at the Southwestern right-of-way line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 and running thence South 54 degrees 41 minutes 03 seconds West 222.13.feee•to a point in the center line of the right-of-way of Southern Railroad; thence North 28 degrees 09 minutes 55 aeconda West 276.02 feet to a point; thence in a Norehwescvardly 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 Weet 481.89 feet) to a point in the•Eastern line of property now belonging to Chandler Concrete Company, Inc., and running thence North 09 degrees 50 minutes-26 seconds Ease 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 Ease 1,221.41 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 land was conveyed to Grantor by TO HAVE AND TO HOLD The abort descrnbed premises.with all the sppuotenances thereunto beanong,or to any arise app.ttsunng,unto the Grantee.hi, news atdlet successors and maws forever. And she Grantor eae4tants that he is stud of cad premises on fee.and his the right to convey the same in ice simple;that said premises are free from en eumbraxa(with the escapaonn above stated.tf any/:and that ha will warrant and defend the tad ode to the same against the lawful claims of 41 persons whomsoever. When reference in made to the Grantor or Grime.,the angular shat include the aheral and the masculine that(include the feminine or the Renter. ,(tip b W/HER Of,Th rancor heesunro nit ni,hand and mat,the day and yeas. n abase,,wS(tt �4 '' 'Y I ∎L: • t '•^.,U..c :SEAL( "er'trn 4tiC.'',oy' Q(�y�fII (SEAL. ►/ (SEAL) ,- (SEAL' STATE QF NORTH CAROLINARsy COUNTY. iS�tii: JiJi��, I,, -j t..atzurv'.I. .-)n of r. ,a Notary Public of mid County.do hereby c eP SACK I. FREELAND (single) NOTARY Gramm.personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the eaeeucion of the foregoing deed. . Witness my hand and mooed sril,t ra the-_ ........2, _r- day of _ • / �,_ - _ ,ay Cummanon Eapbea t./.=p IR/� t - . - • STATE OP NORTH CAROLINA t"R t,A* ,COUNTY. g I. O�y C''''Y s t. ti .�, t - a Notary Public of said County,do hereby sandy a f,na fQfyj^ JAMES LANDON FREELAND (single) - :, 'd' =:rants,personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the miming deed. 2 NOTARY Wince my hand and norms�al.ai�. is the. --/ day of •.•• My Cummuatotn Expires: .lr brr� 14 .v 70!1!�!._1MI - C,0p.•Sae cTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, rOUHTY• NCE`CO"`' The foregoing cerafcaee(sl of Q.� a tares certified to be eotrese.This Instrument was presented for regnsraclon this day of- (^ �'y _ ,'9�i..•• as �' ` ! A.M.P.M..and duly recorded in the office of the Regina of Deeds of eD ' 1........_. County. Ntweh Catalina.In Book �, ay.St) • • This the. 3 day 013: 1 4 . .A.D.19c30.". 3y «.-_ Reinter of Deeds Assistant,Deputy Restate of Deeds nits Dams drawnby C. n,,H3II. NOCUE & 8i8./M 'Q,_b),0 W. Margaret Lane. Hillsborough. NC 17/7: i i :.. ..w•••••• 7.4:709 P.A=715L:.:JP^„'1. .41777310r01 is:...4.0. 7.�i8080003. 301:.5 "7.a.901,1-Na 0 5 9 . • 607.2 (��/ a 04.•04 c•er...,•••.,••s04..• • at 'tile mg=.,......,,....4..„,,,,,.......4 :S•'-f •••a.r F.O CUat7 • :7 a...a•efva. •' :AXES :. FWZL.p0 a04'vtle. r C:L A. R7.1.440, :1 • moat 7001-ees:area . mac. ....OF...I 0•7010•0•••• •MITVtlltT•• h a1�1n.•V.•...•......F a ••r w .Ne.. :.Nr•.lwl<a Mt,a.-•°' aa.tr..s...J7%app. tt i.-.a." r .1 CO•r.NYV•r.R• O..wit.ua.N-:I•y{..car0..•• a•Wa...t. .c.a•R�O.•c.-rwlp0•a •: .M.0.44..a•••r•N NNeYN OOt• •..NY N.ai•t•v.q ry f INO• >/•t I•to..• O.r1.U.1.+C •.a.05 • . N V••n a.. p.0.4M■• 8LL2i00e.o o •l.•••••e••Mp OOY•••.. "M%••••1.MtYf WW2/MN .w•a S..ab.•..rp w.gyp..•. 96C,"YOLMC ac a 100-9uuuo asLl to l,4[canter Lisa of NC Saeaedaeq ,teat.r0• L7:O at s5a ;aces Noes. :h1 sand 4 LdtarallCOa4 by r3a ju1t LOS Ot :he prapar 1 at 2r....:. 1, 1217.044 is fadW :p „;[ 744; ..n=eat:at e.tarrad :a. a.aas Saint a 4onerol :.raps: :r..rua aloe; tna 3.at Liza or 1aL4 dat=a-.a �. aeaperty Sou*S' 74' Use 309.37 Cale co a sail m :na :r0..-:L.of Southern Sailra.d :orlausy; *.ors 4041 fall railroad Nor* s4• :' Oast e 93.79 :..e ;a an4Glet sail la .ocher:rasa-:la Lt said tallmad; ta.au.00tSoWat aloof said ra/L•0a4 tract.vae'_s 51' 4l,' x.ae :50 roue :3 430.-.e: mail to aog=or turf[-.. :.drain: inane[ eassLau** or 18. 39' oast 200 144e 54 snot:Ise sail la aaoch.r.roan-ela; *iota aent3auig vita said railroad aaprasiaanir S8• 39' 3.. :s a rev ;slot iodated .94ctly 23 :oat :too CSa:last Lou L at :ha rot loom on t5a plat henloac:ar ea/erred to osiers..sound at a ri=ot an is :34540.; :Salta a sof Lou manias pacai,aL :a tha :4lt line ad *aid :or and saadel7 24 tame th.ratraa•man asa.und ad 4 tta0 oath *erica Norco :7' 48'Laid. ahem mealy 250 rate :a a sue paL1C to --4u :.near it Secondary load 30. 1727: _coca along:na t.aetr Of ..4.4:s44 a distal..or appraslaataiy u :sac to 49s1 steal, fpiha sawn at :ma Nortsusum Comer at :ha lot SUa..%an said plat: tone. tancLau3f 11,00{ *a :eater :t s.td !sae Soars ':• LO' !sa: X3.20 su: :a mu P. :. at 4 corm: :Santa :adrr«I•+yt +Lo08 :5■ :anise ai fa:C road curvot ra cr.. sl. 5 savior a radius at:33.94 as a :aimed of:51.38 :tic :a 441. P.2. 443 said turn: :544405 aoaasauLat float e5a tartar of said road South 39' :3' Luc i3.i8 ...a :a �a 3EC1"tirtYO 70Lhr. Swiss ail of that 7.71 aa.aa semen cd pLae Sy hours a. :aOu. .aetlac.r.d 'a/Myer, 411C Id yab•aar/:1. 1957, plat 441 vn449 is •ntl«ad"?s0PSSSS Oa 0&0402 ,1S,apC:•C% '=CJEw, t3C:, cocoons!'•rich a 7.5-toot 10:54 :944044 '. dLacaly 4440 ae fan adjaceor to .4414 :-AL atria. Mya o:o...mic. L.f .sada sublet: to eta rtae 32.15 *0 NC$.exsda.T 1334 Na. 17+0, £34 t.'ts :itht of vat of Southern SaLlroad as short an said slat- ..4.1.4•••■• •••••••w •a•••N•r•.r1••••••••.a.••.•a....-. H•.... l 5,■ 1.a•.t+.w"a••"4:7•r.•IO•.M•a N.CT a.n..rIt p.u.a....•a.•«•.yaaaa..a Jw1a•t;•.r..w.•NY.q•..p.p.M a f .c0.O N.• (4 ..*3 .t•y y ..y.a It..a.....5 uC .. A.c.V.. .a Wiw N w°e.�a.-.y«�o.w Data e : `uqa a.w.a.•a...0,w••a ww�a«p,.r a.• a.� ` 17.0'VRV ati.M • t.•l Nei.Nr w+c./[aa W .sT.o••a.ta•t, O•.••.t..y..�i a.�.43 NO.a•Y1•1.VMM..A•"•�'...•.�a'7 M•w.N YYr'.f•'tv'a---•"'•'N•i5,....•rt....4W....1.r uM J.•..•tMaa. r•ti N i.•y.Gayt O.y.a{..oua y wy CRMVtiT.•.• .O•Gat =NAU,fIa.IT 1M[a[DO-as s..a.ra•N w••t nap•••••..•.Yt4.q Re7•.•••ap•.a uIa ♦.n•V•..w.w..•..s.a I• r i C.:\. .444.0,....r.....•. -:%.Cara...•*a✓ /7".... .,,,,,,„,.......2_.mod/ tt c 1 i _/ C am.. :CI,V44 6404) ;asisa Craalsnd) MI.... iF•` sea .T r:a.vOM ..our a •••••••••a. 3rasta i i. • • p la sit WSW :afro 1. rrealas4 age'rr4a, raga.1. Fr.eland. Naar-a Mt 0J Q�iR t L I ..re. N.•p....a.•.a..rp.tm•.t-..•Y...sr��,,.......r/aa/w���eyyysa ue•.t wt uatuT.a.<.hat•w•po-.a '.ass. • I .. We N.M....VV.a...fa...-.•O 444 3 - ‘W .• 73 • ' ..040.NA a.•y -•ay.N.Or YM•{► 279+l,3 !///���- .�I••• .. L r•GrF� �w�� `tea'':� = r el'ArI O/:7 _ •A�1i41•.i :- •.may w .•I... vow= ,• r tj1+ •.•.N va V/ 1•y!.y � . ••t••."1•p a.We aau.F 440 U.S.." °6 ' Y•.•O•,..••Or.yy...•..l,0••.•.a•t•..•Y.....<•.•.yaM•••.•••.I.alb^s.>.*ma •�•-e.:rp•+y • ...•aN.•.w w....sly•4404•...n.a a.•a. I .•.•..N•..... .•:o•.•10,u.•N. 1.f .. . - _ ._ - .N.w raw -.-.. _ _ ` .Tart oe roar,.CaaoUna..¢a...w J•f•aass fi •as••.•t4...p■tan..n.•)I, a• 41X.4 a.-.t:riw, �. • •w ra.."y-•-T.wiV wM.0 S...a aWO..114.3o.•..a..f.a...h,l.,a:a•n« r ■ .dR as• at«Yl1 •F.1 A..•M•r..hpr>. .. i•f 1. M.::' ..:2: trams . i .o a..•.V 0.34,-r a.h<a 0.'-t•.slut.O.1NY......4.yw .NO•..a.*Y 40 act /�..1...., e• •.•,,.. 0 ::aaxt 'aaty-.Sao tire:.. -... Jf` --. -;:"1":,-`1".."-•.. ._�._r. :� 00 ti. . _ - :414,_ -"T - �,,.•• _ y r •t 1 _ 1 N...Nn•r• ;410:.•!1 Md�?L:.:.4r.7..., 0001:!.'-• .. ... 7 •r/a otta •••i W a..f.ae.rta•r•...a :3 c1 '3012 r. :ahES Z. FSLEL.WD and vela. Il.4 iE f.. 7.r-trli4, wad..w.0•rr./N L. • ^..sae •• QIRI SPASM-40;3: X;E• :NC. •• • .m444 •4.444.1.1. N.4440441.4 W 1 r• aga•YW•�• MN w•7.1.5 •N N ,� Nis ,.wc-•.i MI O 1:Y aNy�VMa I-i•l0.0•d4 ee w 4 1 rh.:.•11141a mese.•.•r'M..e4 *40.4.ar 41 40.111.40 4.40*1. S3114aoraula w..re M N Ct . •e.Y t•.•.Jr• u0-.Y* 01.4. 14N.N.N e.I.. 3E0:8bLS4 at a '40-p•.47 3at1 L4 Ma :mots :las of MC Sleaadat7 Idol,to. 1714 to :b. • UM Sgr It tactrsaces4 81 1184 Wyse Was al chi praeorc7 of +r.:. I. 3itiaa, as Bnaatr as t slag • httaLaafear :1404114 10, lam 4484$ i :OO4ra1 44:8.0: c8.oCi ales; Mee Walla 1140 O4 said 3.8i,* praparrr Soveh 11 34' Vote 349.37 last :o •aatl 1a :ha cro/0-eta of Sooebore iaalroa4 Company: t aasea &.10o;sold rit.UOW!forth Ad* ::' Wart 91.7e !awe :a usoca•t 3412, ..a =oust :rol..c:a 1a 4414 rteerstdl ;beset ceoelaulld atop; alto tall9ad :rage Month SI• ir• 'eat :20 fart :0 aoc.8er r Safi 1a amour eroaa-tea :Maria: :hmei eeae:aulos MaKh Sa• S9' :tape :0Q :aid :o wocarc tab: t Li aaoehar emu.-offs; chases 3f3d31.1ulag v1.1$ 441.4 rat:road aoomraiSaoaL7 !8. 39. a. • to a new lit.F 503t Lauead Bt4ael7 :3 feat Ira.eta WNC Liao of :M :o; flowq am as 5444 hrC.iadf:ar • nisi-nod to Mimi 3el/utrd as a et;he aµ4 :$.race: :hopes a.aav 14,4* maso3.a; p.etl:al.:4 :h.,fat , 144. Of 4.14 :at 164 *4.404 Z3 Care :serelraa undo amasurad as a 154$6 °Male :$sway 14444 13-48'La.t, a4prot17ata17 :SO 's.c ea 4 ow poise u :ea:tutor a4 Stcoedier 50sa 9o. L;10; :aa4ca aLm; :h4 cadets aE •414 ;aid a diaeaaer le appreczdetly IS !sae •o ao ae.a1 soil.. /sows a4 :411 MorCaesae comae 44 :he :ae sawn ea Bald plan: :aoOea :aa4.ataa Sough r1' 1Q' :art 1.9.24 lade eo ;Om ?. 0 14411':`g ':;t :h a0* acid sat II! read esi-+sal 18 a. C: 1 '• Of 4 94 l.* :• 4th cOaeeaYiat {lays :he :mazer aE /Ln • 84 aa+'tsa ►rratua al +53.85 lure a 402 0021411 a raid eu4r/1 :aaseo :aagete ;a f :31.53 :gee :a the ? at 44:4 594?2LN1. Setae all a! fade 2.51 4444.1 34 5/41a tied read ;1ach S9• ::' :ut is..d ate: :a :et 61i 1.-a.rer. :at■d r•brnar7 :L. :9 r1 L4..g nY Sgaeee s.. :zees. ..rtiac.e•a sloe it vnlaa :a sa::;lyd ?xPCttt 37 48.L8.;d .11..1'...19-.C...".: C34:'E. :]C"., e3pe.... vt:a ♦3S-face it rlp aesud :aaa43ae.L7'jug 41. uta •e:ushe -: pats 1.41 481.. ^:L1 :aaryrtppa :4 Mal 144:•.1 :a :ht r::ne at vet' 11 :{ ad :Os :iime aS war a! Saucarlrs Sa11r0ad 41 14040 30 1414 51ac. C Saetrlar7 '�•d 00. 17:0, A•■..eml.w••w.•a•••4.....a.•w w Nw mamma•r�, 00•,0 _ Aa wart.M4 r4..eta,...rout.-.•.4.40'4•..»A J.•. 4 urn ••••..Nma..r.-............•................M ..•-a a...-..r.Y era epee 0000 Mesa..•.a.N • YM .+.Y.�. ............A Y w�':...r.Y.all. 4400.•..r.{ U/10...'•''Via.;.•.N . ./.+a.r.am Yr.y. N I.r4.t.•a4 •B «Jr....,a•uet, { R iw•uNV toe ,i w -:.v i�.iM�ri• a.... a'••�'x��.l•.a, • .a,G4'�1:• N.N-.rrWaNYY.. 4j•10VY. a•. .........i!I� a.a w'Vt awnY.... .a•. fir∎C1.- 1..• ... N•N• O•. w.. I .. •...'a'.r.•0*r....mry... •.1v NN. �, +-.CetO.Mr BYO J•4rY N f. N de' J '' - NN...y l 'j,' �..�1040 a.N...N.Nr.e•er+..+W W 0400 tip ON N••YJ.1M..s.. t `•ti.1r J',NM7 ti.t,��-i1.a_...p•y+�.r /•• __r._• 'N. 'r J ..Y.., f";/ .:odor .2 7rlalaa4) •Y4i r 4.8411 G� '. '4 00...08° rrMlaaal I F. .4M. • Hare 41.Orris G.4t5w. ease..>. O.Jatl I ','�' e'n +r•aYw w.5.p r Nw reeNr ‘.**400*.tI. w.r.' • t . t7a:aQ11S :4444 :. Fra.Lao . P d and vtts. :.ryas Y. Fra•Laad. `541.L. oi�o�e•N'N 1.04.1.wogs ..........1.•.40.e..o....4.aa•r.W.5.e.4aw ar r. 1 t.oNat»« ' +.w•N N are w M..N.4.a... • � ip\to roiled ' ...w...-..a .0:p...a•w.5000*. :-4-13 L.r.ls1 t ttW..• .. •3 .. 1.3 _ CilA y" a N.Na:5.00 • • a • Krtrw y, , /�i{IJi: 1 "� M t.N.p. .*'Misr.../• 4.•N.MO..N t.Y tea w•a. ' at.m <a.w-4agM.•rr pV.IYaeY'•p-i.•Yg•r.acp...{ ' ' 0111.00.r.r1.ism y.•/.y.MV N•O•.r a.r M I a r 414,1 04.cart.C 1.0 N w •. N• 14.... .�..� - ..,, 4: n-Mead....as p.•.. 1 •.a.e+114...4.........y4 J. 1.401 Ar.erowo i ..p...laTJt ••t,,.YN.O 94 .*•fl./...ra•ae0Nn.n•.,a...a It.SAO a/. ..Ye 4 a4 ap � ••4th aw N•.a•••nar •' •r/=r ' •r01v. .U:. , ....1 a.apl a.•..Na•rP 1.a./.•.•••a ...• . • • '• •••• .•..-. �: .pa.•.n0*..p �. p ......11 •aa n•• •1141• �..•1. T-'"" �� '4 1 _c a�.�. •:•-..`mac.- -•.±•-.w.•^ .. . 51p0.' .•r...o 4¢.10* •a.. .0.0.04:r. _ .- __ T. • 0000 .':.•.� • f at4 .- �dR*t tea.. •.. -_. • • ati re; Grantee �� �•t^'d�b�•%J 061 cv WARRANTY DECD.-Rem en abut •_c.r_�_.� = Fronted and for std 7^„e,Wham y�4 Y.dkta.dl. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. I,knNC:THIS DEED.Made thn-QC,e_t' „a,p1 `r' t.. r 'r• _County. JAMES LANDON F3EELAhro (single).___:_______4+�_ Iq d4 .tryatd6erreen,lACK X. FR`cELANp (sln¢Le) or Oran e and orate of North Carolina.herrnaiuer:awed Granter.and CHANDLER CONCRETE COMp,3Ny INC. ..Iced Grantee,,chow Permanent madams address is._ P. U..r_____—_. .�2—~ —.-.___ __'_""'Coun<y and Stage.,(North Groh.a,here WrTxESee,wh Thar 3`Qa"gt; CCRIla—Xnrct r.Erl eta 'r- r and other at the Cnnm,'.Mr and m cannderataon of:he sum ut --__ hood and eahuabie eomtdera men:a horn m hand cud by the Grantee,:he receipt whereof ea hereby aeknuwled d.h and:on.eved,and by these peermts does cue.gam.Dothan,tell,convey and.oni.rr. • E:r'fQ - 'nun the Cramer.ha hors andrge successors panted.os.poem. • . •n-nd,tp, DRAtr.E.., ,_ and ethos.Prcm .County.Nntth Cuni,na.described as fooleries: Consisting of 4.34 acres as shown on the plat entitled "property Surveyed for Chandler Concrete Company-, dated September 19, 1984, by Steve F. Tuhasz, Registered Land Surveyor, (a portion of which survey la attached as Exhibit A) lying on the Southwest side of North Carolina SecoadaSy Road No. 1710 (known as old N. C. 10) and described particularly as _follows: BEGINNING at a control iron sec in the Northwestern property line of Lot 3 of BEECHWOOD BEND at the Southwestern right-of-way Line of North Carolina Secondary Road No. 1710 and running thence South 54 degrees 41 minutes 03 seconds West 222.13 feet to a point in the center line of the right-of•May of Southern Railroad; thence North 28 degrees 09 minutes 55 seconds Vest 276.02 feet to a point; thence in a Northwestvardly 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 la the Eastern line of property now belonging to Chandler Concrete Company, toe., and running thence North 09 degrees 50 ainucea 26 seconds East 311.34 feet to an iron in the cancer 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 1,221.41 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 co Chandler Concrete Company, Inc. There is no subdivision intended by the conveyance of this loc. The above land wan Conveyed to Grantor by ,a HAVE ANO TO MOLD The above*untied prcmnee..neb all the appurtenances thereunto bden •See boot No. mows anHA successors ASO and MOLD T forb ear. •Pagers, And the Comer eq.eeanu that he n teard of said rem �•or�n any"r•�xPperrabtms,ono the Grants., cwnb,d the Coat the euunu above hated,of an premises,n re.and has the r_;ht to convey the same in fee um whaasax.er yl:and that he snit war r a n t and deknd the said yule m the,m.ava hat i lawful al are free from When reference u nude rn the Grantor it Grantee.:, aAkst din or th etauns ideal peen. a-S WHE OF.Th'cantor a hereunto gnu rand and seal.he ruv n and.ear.iirse above ,,.n. • Nine plural shall include the remnant or the —.—_-- ..._.— SEAL _ c5'et STATE F NORTH CAROLINA, __ (SE: ----a N,a.,,Facile of u,d c.,smrv,do+rerebv ce q y;ta F? i. Gurrun.pttsohafla a `---.__ -d no kL_t:$£ !p_.t$24WJJ) ,,,i_ _ '� .a opeared before air:•,.,J„ and ask nowlcdyed:he eaten-Ion,d the ` W,eneu m}hand and eosarut wen,ti. .r a junrFVn'!deco. r ` fir :_• , ��� .__ 'a••Cummwaon EaPtter. �-�'s rs7T ..Jan if. l..y�4 1-_ STATE OF NOR•y,i CAAO :N _ f ��ri- a ! Q trey �_•_._ --_._-..o Coll„NTT, �- ,.jute .• a NOWT P t of utd County ao hereby*way lOa ■:nna«, • — J.3McS LANA77N 1REELANO (stn le) peronaho•pPearrd before me lb.,day end aeb V• '�Q�{6 Wu aonaudsed the elect:on of the,fwepo,tat deed. �� nna my baud and notional sod,:j:u the - me C.aeirnu tna Expires: ...fa Jnid f .%. day of r NOTARY -cTATE OP NORTH v _. -_-•+ - _ - -! t. Sf CAROLINA,-_�•,�� -- _ The fererotng ccrttficatnn of` �� """O"MY. "—", - u:attl2ccrtuied to be correct.*ti e CQU�� {.� o muNnent eras presented for r .a a A.,,.P. n matron hu r �—r..dx..f '4#' - . N. m • d duly reeer.ed m me office of the Register rnf Deeds of �_ �� '7 n Nneth Caenhna,in Boob 5"4�payer' / ^.Dunn This me 3 .day mien^.+CA`k-•, ReOUer ref Dodo > Annum.Deputy=e user Thu Deed drawn eV C. D. 'iop - ■ of Deeds as .._.__Dctl _S...7Ia?....�1?_,...10 :: a . � Qarrr. I- one ts�1- -`4L']u 7+e • • 062 - * Chronology of Evenjs • 8/22/84 Contacted by James Ray Freeland of Apple Creek Realty that land to 411 the east of our concrete plant was available for sale. 9/26/84 Purchased 4.34 acres from Jack S. and James Landon Freeland. 10/3/84 Deed recorded with Orange County Register of Deeds- merged with existing '2.91 acres of property. 12/28/84 Tom Arrington- Hydrology Technician, Raleigh Regional Office, North Carolina 'Department of Natural Resources and Community Development responded to a citizen complaint of acid ador in the • area. Inspected property at plant and tested soil. Said to have a high acidity level. 1/7/85 Mr. J. C. Tuttle, Chandler Concrete Co. , Production Mgr. met with David Adkins, Regional Engineer, Division of Environmental Management (DEM) to discuss wastewater run off at Hillsborough plant. 1/10/85 Mr. Tuttle received a letter from Mr. Adkins (DEM) confirming visit to plant and asking for written intention of controlling wastewater and permit for same. 1/17/85 Mr. Chandler requested more information and forms from Ms. Carolyn McCaskill (DEM). 411 1/18/85 Forms received from (DEM) . 1/30/85 Letter from Mr. Chandler to Mr. Adkins advising him of plans to control wastewater. 2/4/85 Applied for Grading permit and plan review by Soil Erosion Officer. 2/19/85 Received permit to grade property and construct 2 lagoons to control wastewater run off. February & March English Construction grading site as per plan. 3/14/85 Mr. Chandler received a letter from Fritz H. Brunssen, P. E. of Phil Post & Associates regarding phone conversation with Ms. Carolyn • McCaskill of the DEM. The letter stated that at this time we do not need to file drawing and application. 4/4/85 Received a letter from Jane Atwater, Orange County Planner requesting a meeting with Mr. Marvin Collins, Planning Director and a represent- ative of our company 4/9/85 Mr. Chandler met with Jane Atwater and Marvin Collins of the Planning Dept. at 2:00 P. M. to clarify questions concerning property. Advised to file for a Land Use Amendment, on the 4.34 acres. • 410 4/16/84 Filed the necessary paper work for amending the Land Use Plan with the Orange County Planning Sept. 4/22/85 Mr. Chandler received a letter from Mr. Rosemond, Erosion Control Cont. • Inspector, asking questions concerning the grading plan and expecAil completion date. •5/6/85 Call from Mr. Rosamund. regarding update on seeding and head walls on grading plan for property. 5/8/85 Letter from Mr. Rosemont stating the points of our phone conversation. - 5/9/85 Letter from Harry H. Harkins, Jr. stating he represented Miss Betsy .Rhine and Dr. Sally Feather and they were concerned about the use of our property not meeting the zoning ordinances of Orange County. 5/10/85 Filed a non discharge permit application with the DEM. 5/20/85 Received a copy of a letter from Mr. Harry Harkins Attorney for J. B. Rhine heirs to Mr. Mervin Collins, Planning Director of Orange County. 5/21/85 A letter received from Susan J. Smith, Orange County Planning Dept. notifying our company. to cease all use of the 4.34 until the property was in compliance with current zoning for industrial use. 5/21/85 A letter from Cecil G. Machcline, Review Engineer of OEM requesting additional information for our application for a non discharge permit. Deadline of 8/11/85. 5/28/85 Public Hearing- on Land. Use Plan Amendment. 411 5/31/85 A letter from R. W. Van Tilburg, Regional Supervisor DEM stating that our application for a non discharge permit had been received and was in complete. ' He outlined the additional information needed and re- quested we complete the application by June 14, 1985 6/4/85 Met with David Adkins & Carolyn McCaskill (DEM) at the Hillsborough plant to seek advice on how to meet their requirements for controlling the wastewater run off. This was after the unfavorable comments were received at the public hearing. Verbal suggestion and options were received. • 6/13/85 Met with Mr. Collins, Ms. Smith and Mr. Bell to seek their advice on how to use a portion of the 4.34. Basically we need to use the 2 lagoons that have-been constructed. They suggested a possible amendment to- the Land Use Plan we had submitted and request a smaller portion. 6/14/85 Wrote a letter to Mr. Van Tilburg updating him on our application. 6/19/85 Met with Fritz Brunssen of Phil Post & Associates at the Hillsborough plant to discuss updating our plans and to reduce the amount of land being considered in the Land Use Plan Amendment. 6/27/85 Completed seeding of 4.34 acres and all work on the original grading and Soil Erosion Plan finished. •/28/85 Informed Mr. Rosenmond by phone that all work was completed. 064 7/10/85 Submitted a revised request for 1.41 acres of the Hillsborough property to be changed in the Land Use Plan instead of the original 4.34 acres. 7/15/85 Atteded:the Planning Board Meeting and answered questions. 411 7/24/85 I wrote a letter to Carolyn McCaskill DEM updating her on the progress being made on the change in the Land Use Plan and when we could give her department additional information on our non discharge permit application. 8/5/85 Received letter from Mr. R. W. Van Tilburgh DEM that once they had a complete set of plans that met their specifications, that the lagoons could be considered as adquate system for controlling wastewater run off.. 8/5/85 Appeared before the Orange County Commissioners on behalf of our application for changing the Land Use Plan. Board referred plan to • another public hearing on 8/26/85. 8/6/85 Met with Ms. Smith and Mr. BM to get additional forms needed for next hearing. 8/7/85 Met with Phil Post & Fritz Brunssen to go over additional material for next • hearing. 8/8/85 Wrote Mr. Van Tilburg on latest developments on our application for change in Land Use Plan and non discharge permit application. ** These are high lights on my efforts to obtain changes in the Land Use Plan and a non discharge permit from DEM. They do not include all phone", calls and or correspondence with Orange County, DEM, and Chandler Concrete • Company. T. E. Chandler President TEC:nd 411 ORANGE COUNTY 065 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date AUGUST 26. 1985 Action , ode Item SUBJECT: PD—4—85 CHANDLER CONCRETE, CO . DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No w wawa.■•■■■■■■■■•■■........ Attachment (s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH • APPLICATION AND NARRATIVE VICINITY MAP SITE PLANS FINDINGS OF FACT AGENCIES' LETTERS • CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Telephone Numbers Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hill — 968-4501 • To receive a public comment on a request for a Planned Development —Industrial III Special Use Permit for 1 .41 acres • of property owned by the Chandler Concrete Co . NEED: The applicants are requesting the issuance of a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development — Industrial III designation for 1 .41 acres adjacent to the existing Chandler Concrete facility zoned Industrial—III . The 1 .41 acres of property is located east of the existing facility on the south side of Old NC 10 and is referenced as Tax Map 45, part of Lot 32 in Hillsborough Township . The applicants previously submitted a proposed secondary Land Use Plan amendment for the entire 4.34 acres of property . This request for an amendment from Rural. Residential to Transition Area and Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node was submitted to public hearing on May 28, 1985. In the Board of Commissioner 's review of the request for decision , the Board determined that too much new information had been submitted after the public hearing and directed that the request be sent back to public hearing as a new request on August 26 , 1985 . The Board also directed that the rezoning requst for the same property be considered at the same public hearing . IMPACT: Approval of the rezoning request , pending approval of the Land Use Plan amendment , would allow Chandler Concrete to utilize Air property which it owns adjacent to the existing plant on Old NC 10 for runoff control facilities , parking and access . RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request with conditions (SEE Attachment) . 066 Article 8 .2.2 states that where a preponderance of evidence indic •s compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use, 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 contigous 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 . 410 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 screening , Landscaping and Lot size requirements . Given the nature of the request and the intent to Limit the area of expansion to the minimum necessary to provide for the runoff control facilities and parking associated with the vehicles to be cleaned on the site , and the potential pollution problem to be addressed by the proposal , staff recommends that the Boards recognize the limits of the applicant ' s ability to satisfy the minimum Lot size requirements specified in the planned development provisions and make the following finding under Section 7 .3 : "where actions , designs, or solutions proposed by the applicant are not literally in accordance with applicable PO or general regulations, but the Board of County Commissioners make a finding , in the particular case, that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree, the Board of County Commissioners may make specific modification of the regulations in the particular case 111 The Planning Staff does , however , recommend approval with the attachment of conditions as follows: 1 . The grantee of this Special Use Permit shall . post with Orange County, in a form acceptable to the County Attorney , a bond or 067 Letter of credit in an amount equal to the cost of all public improvements plus 10%. The amount shall be determined on the IIIbasis of fully executed construction contracts or certification by a registered engineer employed by the grantee of this Special Use Permit . As improvements are completed a corresponding amount of money may be released from the security instruments or the security 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 only, and Landscaping . 3 . Roads , parking areas and Landscaping shall be maintained as constructed . ALL such improvements and facilities shall further be maintained and operated in a safe manner . 4. Grading on the site shall be kept to a minimum . In Lieu of planted landscaping , existing vegetation shall be maintained between units . 5 . That screening and landscaping requirements as provided in Articles 7 and 12 be provided along the full Length of the eastern property line and along the rear property line . 6 . A final boundary survey of the Planned Development and improvements shall be recorded by the developer . 7 . The final site plan and narrative of the project , incorporating all changes , deletions and additions through the final approval of the project , are to be incorporated herein and made a part of this Planned Development Special Use Permit . Copies of the final site plan and narrative are to remain 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 . B . The development shell be built and operated according to the site plan and written narrative supplied by the developer and in compliance with the above conditions . 410 , ,/ ..,,,.„„ ... ' :;.1 • --.: • ...A .•. . tr.• . ..../... . ' ''...-^"''''''''N. •:1 - . •-i . . .. ,, ..• ...• . - • 06 8 '••,.I . •••I - t . • . - . :..:•4 • . .. - - . ‘..\•. . - . . . , -• . . • I - • is.. , . ••••••:•......„......„ I6C. . . . 0 - N....*****-.."-•••••-,..... .. -. .- - •"---1 _ 2.:.- ... ••••..„ " -.....„. .••• ... _ .. .... ....t... . . • . . . - '. V+ • _041 f.7- . • . . z v.' . - . • \ 8159 • ..... .... • , - ..., \ • • . . . ...1.*".•••■,........ . • .,,, ...... • • .. \r" / N. • .• ........„....... I ,.... .1 .."" . ....,.., \ kl.,C......g; i . .....„.. ,*"."'N 3.3 . ' :L.., -.'-'•:: . ...... .......,.. • . , \ . • 12 Z - "'•:- ';'.: Sc'• . ‘.'4 \",30\-2.2",,,C; kt c. •-,. / 7t., ;.•,, :...; ---, .... ■Fitt, .3 82••%•:: . •: ...S•4 2- -.•• ..•••••• . • . . • . • / 8 43281\. '''..1"-N, . ; . / ..--:`,,-- S2.: • i 10 • .. ' = :i er...,csat • ., ../1.9:-:, 18A„--i4C-v , ......./,/,,„_, . , -..2D3: , .i, •otert.f. CC,0" f <*-4.-1"" . 1•7^'^ % \ ' "AV,109191% • aC if. 805?!...-., I ------.... ..,_, .. . ...• ,-::: „,. r:r:). • -z- -- : 13': , ••••,...„ 1 - ... .1,:f..-- , I:'5.; --- . --^*--:.,44.,'`."..; a........ . . . 1 ----rea ---------\-__L_ ---'7"---i-.°;: ••• 1.^?.4- - - R t 1 z.,■, ...' .. ,„,,,,,eft. "*"4'-'71".7;,7"."'" : .. i ! r*,•-,-1--. ........ : ....s.,40 ' ,/,'",,,s, ...,...4Q .. '4,s.. . Ask. --.L.,d----4--. r: A' G''' • --''',-_ • '. NI, 1 k ." ..1/2- 'r. -•---• . _ •.... . '07'11 .....,.... ..*.i.L. ' • I c,t..• i. .1 t-, .4 . , -, . '.-:•.?:, '• ...• •20; . Ns..." ...„.•Ok*; "- .„, ...''....'.... '''.... ......\**1 -'1:.:-.1.1.•'' \‘,4-....".•-• .. .I. ..1",• 1 wao : • ... - . \ . ,... i 1_,,,,,,-1. i 4.040.1 •, SEE ;MAP 48z. )-.- SEE ••••••:•'-'•;';'5.:,•1 ..3.„ • VOPPA ' ..r. ' '-, ■ ..'OPR4 Ciao,' -+-c.z4;..-x.-c- .."-.." •-••.. rk\ 1 AC / , sr.,71i .-.. - - - —-:.-. $.F....:- ',.. z :- .. \ • ,,Z: 41,. \-;---...\\ -: ,..-z- t 44sEve . ...-.' .2 . ••..... _, .z..•3.1.4 \ ; •14; \ 1• N • , / A; 2 v . - )) ..,:,„ •- e,,,,e'.4.‘..." SEE vt.;.• / .i..., . . -• 31 45;... ‘,.;V. I^ • Ts\ ...,:; • A . "7558. -• • •....., .... ‘., . , w•'...3w00:, • s,:,•4., 11714C. ..-. I Ei ' i 4...'-'4i. "••••1:•,* IS___..------- :7;* F. ....-- i.„ • , i -,.84 i - • . 1J 1 . • . I , I ■ 'l 1 ';'s°' \I*' 7$::. , , 3 24 A:. ,:f4 , "/ ‘.....1 ... : / •326"\ -' ..alr Al.... .""7....". , 14 '4.,..f.,• •,.,I ........., .. .... ."••• '''... '"". . 1 ••• '......" , r•."'""'""-'•^•'...,,,...._ I / .,„, ,. ' far, ,...,%•:e, 4 ---.. ..... ,_,,- ..II 1'., I SF: .7.) • 1 Sr: P yr r• 86 -- - - - - - - -'- - '.' - ...." I SEE M.aC --.. .m.fj , 2 6 --------1 ,::. --- - •-:p.- ill 45., I 1 .--.... : .-• ..,-.. - t • ■ISA' • ■6' .62 . - . I / I ,...-:-i.. .. Pat :4--:- • • --,,-! ! *1'; ,.- Ac. w:Lcwoo:, • i • • f ii • 383;--.583. . •/' I - • 9686 . -... -- -- ' "•;•-;- 41: --f-4- .... 5 .1.-.4" , . -- - -- " ' "-/ / • 7..if.,f. -!r•- 2,1•.,: ! ""..."r 1,4',„4::::: / / . ,,,.........a 2■2„.. I , / L __....-----r-r , •- i _........._____„„ . - .. . Amok FINDINGS OF THE ORANCIROUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATION PD-4-85 CHANDLER CONCRETE CO. Planned developments must comply with general and specific standards as set forth in Article 8 for Special Uses as well as those set forth In Article 7 for Planned Developments. Article 0.2.1 h) requires written findings certifying -compliance with the following: .(I) Specific regulations governing Individual Special Uses as set forth in Article 8.8 These regulations are divides! 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 tire 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 non coil,p fiance) Planning Staff Ordinance Requirements Findings Based on Planning Berard Submitted on Evidence Submitted to Support Findings 9 Recommended Findings 8.6 - Application submitted oil -X-Yes No forms providing full and accurate Application, narrative and site plans Yes No description of proposed use, submitted by applicant. Including location, appearance and operational characteristics 8.8 a) twenty-six (26) copies of the X Yes No site -.—_ ,._ 26 copies of the site plan submitted plan prepared by a registered by the applicant. Site plan was prepared Yes No N.C. land surveyor or engineer containing: by Philip Post & Associates, Inc. 1. North point, scale and date X Yes No ._.. Shown on site plan. 2. Extent of area to be developed X Yes Shown Yes No _ own an site plan. 3. Location and width of all ease- Yes No ments and rights-of-way within i �' or adjacent to the site X Yes No ._.._ Shown on site plan. Yes No � CIO C3 ARTICLES 8.6 AND B.B - APPLICATION COMPONENTS (Continued) Planning Staff pplannin Bqa d Findings Based on Recomme9de� i.ndings Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings 4. .Location of all existing or pro- X Yes No No structures are proposed. Detention Yes No posed structures on the site basins are shown on site plan. 5. Location of all areas on the site X Yes No There are no flood prone areas on _Yes No subject to flood hazard or inunda- the site according to the FEMA-FIA tion as shown on flood maps or maps and soils maps. soil maps b. Location of all water courses X- Yes No No water courses present on site. Yes No on the site, including the direction of flow , 7. Existing topography at a contour Yes No Shown on site plan. Yes No Interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level datum a. Proposed or existing fencing, XYes No Shown on site plan. Yes No screening, gates, parking, .� service and storage areas Yes No g: Access to.site Including sight Yes No Shown on site plan. — distances on all roads used for access 10. Elevations of all structures X Yes No No structures are proposed. Yes No proposed to be used in the development . Yes No Submitted with application. Yes No 11 . Names and addresses of owners Y '! and applicants 12. A fee, as set by the Ooard of X Yes No $150.00 application fee paid. Yes No Count Commissioners AMIN, Ask ANN, ART WE 8.8.2 3 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Article 8.8.23 indicates that the application shall comply with the applicable sections of Article 7 - Planned Development ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ("Yes" Indicates compliance; "No" indicates noncom liance) Planning Staff Findings Based on pplannin B Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings 1tecommeNde3a f¢indings Article 7.11 Indicates the applica- tion must first comply with all requirements specified In Article 20 - Amendments. Those requirements Include: 20.3.2 a) Map snowing affected X Yes No Provided with application. 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 Provided with application. 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 DEM is mandating the control of _Yes No any, which make amendment reasona- wash water and wastewater from ably necessary to promote public the existing concrete plant. The proposal health, safety and general welfare substantial) addresses y potential pollution 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed Yes No impacts on nearby streams and residential areas. amendment will cart out purpose '—' Yes -No Y p p Applicant is requesting a Land Use and intent of adopted Comprehensive Plan amendment to Commercial-Industrial Activity Plan Node. If approved, this designation provides for the district proposed. I I ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) Pj.a t}ing Staff Finings Based on Planning Board � Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings Recommended Findings 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 Proposed- use has direct access Yes No major streets and mass transit to Old NC 1.0 OR 17 10) a road — facilities and designed so as not classified as a collector in the to create traffic on minor streets Land Use Plan. Use will not create In residential districts adverse traffic impacts on minor residential streets. 7,4.2 so located with respect to X Yes No Proposed use will not require _Yes No water, sewer, and storm drainage system use or expansion. facilities that enlargement or extension will not result In higher net public cost or earlier incursion of public cost and So located with respect to X Yes No Proposed use will not require Yes No police,fire and rescue services, services. and schools anti parks so as to have access in the same manner as permitted under the existing zoning 7.4,3 Site suitable for develop- X Yes No No critical development areas Yes No ment without hazard from flooding, are present on site. erosion, and soil subsidence or slipping 1 ARTICLE 8.2.4 SPECIFIC STANDARDS/ALL SPECIAL USES ("Yes:' indicates compliance; "No" indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Ordinance Re ufrements Findings Based on Planning Boar¢ q Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findingi Article 8.2.11 requires the applicant to address the following; a) Nethod and adequacy of provision Yes No Not applicable. Yes No for sewage disposal facilities, -- solid waste and water service b) Method and adequacy of police, Yes No Not applicable. Yes No fire and rescue squad protec- tion I c) Method and adequacy of vehicle X Yes No Access to site is proposed via. Yes No access to the site and traffic Old NC 10 (Sit 1710). Three driveways — conditions around the site presently serve the site. The applicant is proposing to construct a fourth driveway referenced as Drive D and close an existing driveway referenced as Drive C to provide a safer entranceway to the site. NCDOT has commented that the driveway, as proposed, is adequate and meets sight distance requirements. til ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFI-C STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPl1ENTS (Contl.nued) lagiini StafA in in Base on Planning Board Q Ordinance Requirements Submit ed Application Evidence SubmiLted to Support Findings Recommended Findings Article 4.2 Identifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the appli- cation of a zoning district , designation. The applicant has applied for a PD-I-3 designation, The criter a For that district are set forth In Article 4.2, and are as follows: I a) Site is located •outside the _Yes No Applicant is requesting a Land Yes No Chapel Hill Joint Planning Use Plan amendment to Commercial- — Area and within an area. designated Industrial Transition Activity Industrial Transition Activity Node. Node. b) Water and sewer mains exist or Yes No Yes No will be wade available as Not applicable to proposed use. --- part of the development process. C) Access consists of direct X Yes No Site has direct access to Old NC 10 Yes No vehicular access to arterial 'r (SR 1710), a road classified as a or collector. collector in the Land Use Plan. d) Yes No Yes No e) Yes No ^Yes No lot •4 -'ESTARLISIltiENT'Ol:'PERMITTED USE TABLE AN SCHEDULE {"Yes" Indicates compliance; "No" ind ica s noncom iianc Pia chin Staff Fin�zng� Based on Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Planning Board Evidence Submitted to Suppott 'Firldirlgt' Recommended Findings O Article 4.3 Permitted Use Table Use is a permitted use or requires the issuance of a special use permit to *locate in the PD-I-3 ` Yes No Applicant is requesting amendment district. to the Land Use Plan for designation of the property as Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node. This designation, if approved, allows the full range of commercial-industrial districts, upon rezoning. O Of ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) P1a pin Staff Planning Board Fina�.ngl Based on Recommended Findin ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Submitted Application EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Article 7. 17 sets forth develop- ment standards with which an - applicant must comply as follows: a) PD-I districts must be K Yes No Proposal satisfies provisions _Yes No established in accordance with _._.__ and intent of district. the provisions of Article 7 7.4 - 7.9 and with the Intent of the district as expressed in 7.17.1. b) Minimum net land area for the Yes X Na Proposal includes 1.41 acres of —Yes No use is 2 acres; the minimum land fronting on a road classified frontage requirement Is 200' as a collector. (See staff on an arterial street. recommendation for further comment). c) PD-1 districts must be _Yes X No Applicant meets the requirements of _dies No established in accordance. these districts with the exception of with Articles 4,5,6,9,10 the lot size, landscaping and screening and- 12.* requirements. (See staff recommendation for further comment). d) electrical/telephone service Yes No Not applicable. Yes No lines are underground; e) Applicant must comply with X Yes Na Applicant's submittal complies Yes No site planning standards i with specified standards. specified for PD-I districts 7. 15-10 ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) AML AM Pla oin gtaf ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Suamairfed 2pp ication EVIDENCE SU(3MITTED TO SUPPORT F1NDiNGS Planning Recommended Board ndi.ngs Section 7.15.10 provides that the application must comply with the following site planning standards: q) External Relationships 1. Uses and structures are XYes No Proposed use is oriented away from oriented away from minor minor residential streets and separated Yes No residential streets and from residential neighborhoods by residential neighborhoods. street and railroad rights-of-way. 2. Vehicular access points are X Yes No Applicant proposes to open a driveway designated to encourage smooth in exchange for closing an existing Yes No traffic flow and controlled driveway to reduce traffic conflicts turning movements. Merging, at the site. turn-out lanes, traffic dividers NCDOT has indicated approval of this etc. shall be required where needed and may be included in proposal. the required yard setbacks, except landscaped portions. Pedestrian access is, where practical, sep$rated from vehicular access points. 3. External yard of 35' must be X Yes No Applicant provides for 35' yard setback provided along perimeter, excepfi —'" Yes No where they adjoin other comm./ along front, rear and eastern property Ind. dlstricts;and landscaper! lines. as follows: a. Along collector or arterial X Yes No Applicant provides for a 18' landscaped streets or frontage streets the strip along the frontage of the property _Yes No nearest 15' to the ROW shall be as shown on the site plan. landscaped; where a turn-out or merging lane Is provided, the land- scaped area shall be 10'. The remainder may be used for off-street parking. „� ICLE ] - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued) Planning Staff Planning Board. Findings Based on ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Submitted Application EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Recommended Findings b. Along side property lines X Yes No Applicant proposes 18 ' landscaped strip Yes No adjoining a residential along eastern property line for distance O district and not separated of 46 feet to the rear of the '3 by an intervening street, proposed drainage basins. Standard requires 00 the nearest 15' to the property a landscaped strip 40' in length. line shall be landscaped for a distance equal to the minimum front yard depth of the adjoin- ing residential district. c. Where a residential dis- Yes No Not applicable. Yes No trict faces this district across a minor street, the 10' nearest to the ROW within the district shall be landscaped and no off-street parking permitted. d. The nearest 10' of all other X Yes No Applicant indicates existing Vegetated Yes No yards, not adjacent to a strip along the rear of the property. The '- commercial or industrial rear property line serves as the centerline district, shall be landscaped for a 200' railroad right-of-way. to reasonably conceal parking, service areas and undesireable views. Fences, walls, hedges, etc. may be required to protect against adverse impacts of noise, lights or undesireable views. f b) internal Relationships 1. Plan provides for a unified, X Yes No Plan, as proposed, satisfies this Yes No well organized arrangement of standard. buildings and use areas. ARTICLE 5 - DIMENSIONAL RE UIREMENTS ("Yes"Q ( Yes Indicates compliance; "Ho" indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Su Planning Board _ _ pport Findin3s Recommended Findings 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-I-3 designation. Tie standards for that district are set forth in Article 5. 1. 2 and are as follows: a) Mln hnum lot area X Yes No Applicant proposes minimum lot area per use 20,000 sq.€t. Yes No "" of 1.41 acres or 61,409.60 square feet. r b) Mini Q m lot width - X Yes No No setback requirement specified for this sq. ft. �""- PD-district. Yes ho C) Required front setback - Yes No No setback requirement specified for this Yes No 0 ft. PD-district. d) Required side and rear XYes No No setback requirement specified for this Yes No setbacks - 0 ft. —" PD-district. -- e) Maximum building height - Yes No 45 f t. _. Not applicable. No structures are Y No es proposed. Compliance with lot coverage and development Intensity. standards Is addressed In Article 6. Q ftj CO ................ . .. ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (' Yes" indicates compliance-, "No" indicates noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planing Board Od Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted To Support Findings Recommended Findings O 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 _Yes X No Yes No area - 623, 144 sq. ft. b) Maximum gross land Yes No No maximum specified for district. Yes No area - sq. ft. c) Maximum floor area ratio - Y No Not applicable. No structures are proposed. Yes No .459 ...__. es -' Maximum floor area permitted - sq. ft. d) Required minimum open X Yes No Applicant proposes 61,409.60 square feet of Yes No space ratio - .72 open space.. Required minimum open space - 44,214.91 sq. e) Required minimum pedestrian/ X Yes No Appbicant proposes pedestrian/landscape area in landscape ratio - •25 excess of the minimum required. Required minimum pedestrian Iandscape area - 15,352.4 1 square feel Amok ANIL ARTICLE& APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Contln ) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted ApplicationEyi.dence Submitted.To Support Findings Recommended Finding; Article 6.24 contains those standards applicable in the MiC-Major Transportation Corridor district. These standards include the following: a) Minimum of 25% of total Yes No Yes No lot area shall remain uncovered. b) 100-foot buffer you No Not applicable. Yes No required adjacent to T edge of Interstate highway r1ghL-of-way. Kept in natural state or landscaped in accordance with approved landscape plan. c) Front, rear, and Yes No Not applicable. Yes No side yard setbacks required as followst 1. 1OO 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 Findings Article 6.24 Standards (continued) O OO d) off-street parking and X Yes No Applicant satisfies requirements. Yes No loading shall conform with the requirements of Article 10. e) Signage shall conform Yes No No applicable. No signage proposed. Yes No with the requirements of Article 9. f) Landscaping shall conform Yes X No Applicant meets all landscaping Yes No with the requirements of with exception of Class A Screen Article 10. along rear and side property lines. AM ARTI M 9 - SIGNS ("Yes" indicates compliance; "No" indi es noncompliance) Planning Staff Findings Based on Planning Board ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Submitted ApplicatioEVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Recommended lindin g a. Signage is erected out- _Yes No Not applicable. No signage proposed. Yes No side of sight preserva- �"' ____ tion triangles, ROWS, and district setbacks. b. sign area does not Yes No Not applicable. No signage proposed. Yes No exceed 72 square feet c. signage is limited to Yes No Not applicalbe. No signage proposed. Yes No two single or double- _ faced signs d. signage does not exceed Yes No Not applicable. No signage proposed. Yes No twelve (12) feet in _ _ height e. signage meets setback Yes No Not applicable. No signage proposed. Yes No requirements of feet _ from ROW; feet from side/rear property lines; feet from adjacent residential district. O Qo C�3 ARTICLE 10 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING ("Yes" indicates compliance; !'No" indicates noncom-plinace) 7 O Co Planning Staff Planning Bdard Findings Based on ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Sdbmitted Application EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FIPIDINGS Recommended Findings Off street parking shall conform with the requirements of Article 10. 1. The off-street parking _ . Yes No Applidant is proposing 10 Yes No standard for the 12 x 30 parking spaces; proposed. use is as follows: Parking- standard is not applicable as no structure is proposed on this parcel. I Apace per employee on shift of meximum employment. (Alternative standard: 1 space per each 2 employees + l space per App II aAtr1 n %'1PM vehicle) standard results in a requirement of (See comment spaces. 2. The off-street loading Yes No Not applicable. Yes No standard for the pro- posed use is as follows: Application of the standard results in a requirement of spaces. Ask 71CLE 12 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING "yes" ln<li s compliance; "No" Indical'es noncom Ilance•) Planning::Staff Findings Based on Planning Board Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findings The development shall conform with the reclui remeuts of Article 12 - Landscaping and Screening. These standards are as follows; 1. Street frontage land- X Yes No Applicant provides an 18 foot landscaped Yes No scaping must Include strip along the frontage of OLD NC 10 which a 10-foot landscaped satisfies the standard. area planted with one tree per 40 feet, a hedge or other durable landscape material at least 3 feet in height and grass or gromid cover. 2. Peripheral landscaping X Yes ,No Applicant provides an 18 foot landscaped Yes No must include a 10-fool strip along the eastern property line which landscaping area planted with one tree per 60 feet, satisfies this standard. a hedge or other durable landscape material at least 3 feet in height, and grass or ground cover. 3. Interior landscaping must X Yes No Applicant provides• for additional 8 feet Yes No coverage 6f at of landscaping adjoining the proposed -- least 5% of any parking area. vehicular use area. QO CA ......._.__. ARTICLE 12 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING (continued) O 40 Planning Staff Planning Boar= Findings Based on Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Recommended Findings Ordinance Requirements Submitted Application PP 9 No more than 10 lYes No Not applicable. Yes No Parking spaces r allowed In a curt tis}uous raw without division by land- scaped riwdian strip. Every fourth row of Yes No Not applicable. Yes Na Larking• separated by 8-foot median with at least ocie tree for each 60-feet of median length. 4. Type A screen is Yes Y. No Applicant satisfies screening requirement Yos No required. Standards along front and two--thirds of the eastern for that type include property line extending to rear of proposed the following: drainage basins. Screening is not proposed within lower third of eastern side and rear A screen opaque from the ground to property lines located within the 200' railroad a height of (6) feet, with inter- right-of-way. mittent visual obstructions to a height of (20) feet. May be composed of wall, fence, berm, existing or planted vegetation. Intended to exclude visual contact and create impression of spatial separation. AdML 087• 1 ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA i APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION Date: TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA J-IJ AT= The undersigned do hereby make application to change the Zoning Atlas of Orange County as hereinafter requested. I . The property is located on the South side of $ .11.# 1710 ( . .. Street/Road) _ between - -' .--,--- 11.C.. 86 and S.R.# r/OT It is known as Lot(s) 32 , Block , of Orange County Tax Map 45 - Hillsborough Township. It has a frontage of feet and a depth of ■ feet , containing .w..■••■■••• ••••■•••• square feet or acres . 2: It is desired and requested that the foregnina prone/ b „ Planned ueve i o ment rezoned from Rural Residential — 1-R44s-trial 7 1 T • 3 . The following information has been attached in support of the application for changing the Zoning Atlas (* - Required on all applications) . *a. A fully dimensioned map at a scale of not less than one ( 1 ) inch equals one hundred ( 100) feet nor more than one ( 1 ) inch 411 equals twenty (20) feet 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 Zoning 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 Land Use Plan or part thereof. *f. All other circumstances , factors and reasons which the appli- cant offers in support of the proposed amendment . 4 . A list of all, individuals , firms or corporations owning property adjoining or within five hundred (500) feet of the property sought for rezoning is attached. The list is current as of (Date) I certify that all information furnished in this application is accurate to the best of my k owledge . ac licant(s) : e-hetnlaad.,/ ....+ 4° . rle7f1, ' e5. e., if, _ _ Address : Phone :_ CHANDLER CONCRETE CO., INC. • 0 8 8 READY MIXED CONCRETE POST•()MICE DRAWER 1239 BURLINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 27213 (919) 226-1191 411 August 14, 1985 To The Board of County Commissioners Orange County, North Carolina Re: Lot 32 Map 45 Hillsborough Township • Dear Members of the Board: My company requests a change in the zoning for an additional 1.41 acres of our property, located on State Road # 1710. Currently 2.91 acres is zoned 1-3 and we request 1.41 more acres be rezoned from rural residential to Planned Develop- ment Industrial III . The following information is submitted for section 3 of the zoning change application. Item 3-0. 410 . . As you approach this property from N. C. highway 86, you pass a garage, mini warehouses and our concrete plant on the right. A convenience store and a trailer park are on the left. The concrete plant and the roads for part of the trailer park was the first construction in the area. The concrete plant was built in 1972. Trailers began moving in after this date. The balance of the trailer park, the garage, mini warehouses and convenience store were all built later. These types of.business conditions indicate a change in the conditions of this area. The Department of Environmental Management is requiring us to control the wash water and waste water from our concrete plant on our property. We propose to construct three lagoons to catch this water and to install a pump that will re- cycle the water to our concrete plant for reuse. This will conserve water and also stop the run-off. This will eliminate any potential pollution to nearby streams. Item 3-E The Land Use Plan is being amended from rural residential to commercial/industrial transition node. This would make the original 2.91 acres and the 1.41 acres in the same Land Use Plan. This would also carry out the intent of Secondary Amend- ment and 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. II! 3 .1 089 III Item 3-F The 1.41 acres rezoned P.D. I. - III would be used for 3 lagoons for wash water and waste water control . A pump would be installed and the water recycled to our concrete plant for reuse. The property would provide parking for some of our trucks. We would also install a material reclaiming system. We would construct a drive through the property allowing our concrete trucks to enter State Road 1710 at a better grade. It would also increase the visibility for our drivers and provide a much safer access. We would also plant the vegetation required to shield this part of our operation. Very truly yours, CHANDLER CONCRETE CO., INC. **Arnaeler: //1/44844---J Thomas E. Chandler President TEC:nd 410 411 090 PHILIP POST ,r ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS/PLANNERS!SURVEYORS Chandler Concrete Co, Inc. Hillsborough Plant • Purpose: Rezone 1.41 acres of a 4.43 acre tract from residential to industrial classification. • Current Situation: The Chandler Concrete Plant is located on 2.89 acres now zoned 1-3, located on Old NC 10 (SR 1710) . The plant has been in operation since the early 1970's. The land is a narrow strip between Old N.C. 10 and the .southern railroad track. The N.C. • Department of Natural Resources and Community Development has requested that the storm water run-off from the plant be retained on site and not flow off Chandler Property. • Proposed Situation: • Thar Land adjacent to the eastern boundary of the concrete side belongs to Chandler Concrete. Of this 4.43 acre tract, 1.41 acres is required to provide the manuevering room and basin space to provide ample storage for the run-off water. • A. Landscaping: I-3 zoning required that the lot have 26%c of the useable land landscaped. We have provided landscaping along the front of the property and the eastern side past basin #3. Screening was not provided between the railroad and the basins because the railroad track is 3 to 10 feet higher than the basins. Therefore the railroad acts as a natural buffer of the eastern Chandler Property and the residential zoning across the railroad track. The six foot fence will provide immediate screening of • the basins from the adjacent property and on N.C. 10. The trees • and shrubs will soften the appearance of the fence and the trees will grow 40 to 50 feet tall . This will provide the screening required for a Type A screen. 8. Water Reclaimation System: - - The N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development has requested that three sources of water be controlled from running off the site. The sources are as follows: (1) Truck wash water, (2) Plant run-off water, and (3) Storm water. The volume of water can vary from' 3000 gals. per day to a maximum of 55,240 gals. after a 100 year storm . �t. . _ • 091 PHILIP POST &ASSOCIATES INGINEERS/PiaWAIFISt SURVEYORS 41, Cnandler Concrete. Inc. . Hillsborough. N .C. Page Two The basi.ns work as a unit, basin #1 remains at a constant 4' depth, acting as a settling pond. before the water overflows into basin #2. In basin #2 a sump pump is Lnatalled that pumps the water to a 2,000 gallon holding tank. .The water in the holding tank is used as wash water for the trucks and is also used to temper the truck's concrete load, prior to leaving the site. More water can be used from the reclaiming system than flows into the basin daily. The third basin is used exclusively for catching rain water run-off. A 100 year storm can be contained with basin #2 half full and basin #3 empty. Basin #3 is emptied by the sump pump in basin #2. A cross-section of the basins is shown on drawing #1. Sedimentation that accumulates in the bottom of any of these basins can be removed with a backhoe. Depth of sediment is only critical in basin #2 and #3 since they are needed to store the . maximum storm water run-off volume. _ • Per the attached calculations this system will prevent overflow of the basins into ad3acent stri=ems. 411 C. Truck circulation: Currently the truck comes into the plant on driveway "B". Drives behind the gravel and sand bins and parks until the next load is ready. The truck pulls up next to the office and backs under the plant. The truck is loaded with cement, sand. rock and water. The truck leaves the site through driveway "C" . In the proposed system, the truck would come into the plant at driveway "B" and park in a parking space. When the dispatcher is ready to send a load the truck backs under the , ' plant. Is loaded with cement, rock, sand and water. The truck drives to the water tank and has his load tempered. When his tank is full . the truck leaves through driveway "0" . By having • driveway "D", driveway "C" will be eliminated because it is in the middle of curb and driveway "0" has better sight distances. • Drawing two provides a diagram of the flow. • D. Truck cleaning: Every two to three weeks the outside of the trucks are washed with a concrete removal solution. The solution reacts ' with the cement residues and removes the rp,sidue from the truck. - 40 The reaction of the two items neutralizes the concrete removal solution. This solution is further diluted when it flows into Basin #1 . 092 • PHIUP POST &ASSOCIATES • ENGMMRS/PLANNES/SURVEMPS 111 - Chandler Concrete Co. , Inc. Hillsborough. N.C. Page Three E. Water Circulation: • Water is generate from three oistinct sources: (1) truck wash water. (2) plant run-off water . and (3) storm run-off. In order to contral the storm water run-oli, from the plant, three basins are required to hold the water from a 100 year *storm. Investigating the elevations of the existino property, the 'run-off flows into the basin as shown. The site - spot elevations also indicate that the water will not flow to . any other part of the site. The rain water will flow to the area shown, which is the lowest area adjacent to the plant. Water from the railroad ditch will not flow into the basins. The normal water circulation will occur in the following • manner. Truck wash: water and plant run-off water will flow into basin #1 at the-normal rate of 3000 gals. per day. It will take approximately 11 day i to fill the basin with water to a 4' level. In this basin all particles will settle to the bottom and clear water will flow into basin #2. A sump pump is installed in basin #2 and the Sump pumps the clear water into a • 111 2000 gallon holding tank on the plant side of basin #1 . The water in the *tank is pumped into the trucks as temper water and as wash water. Excess water can be used in the plant if necessary. The water level in basin #2 be no higher than 2' during normal operation. During rainy periods the storm water run-off flows from the plant site into basin #1. settles out the particles and flows into basin #2. When basin #2 fills up the water automatically flows into basin #3. The pump is capable of pumping water from both basins into the holding tank. • • • 093 * Chronology of Evenjs 8/22/84 Contacted by James Ray Freeland of Apple Creek Realty that land to the east of our concrete plant was available for sale. 9/26/84 Purchased 4.34 acres from Jack S. and James Landon Freeland. 10/3/84 Deed recorded with Orange County Register of Deeds- merged with existing -2.91 acres of property. 12/28/84 Tom Arrington- Hydrology Technician, Raleigh Regional Office, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development responded to a citizen complaint of acid ador in the area. Inspected property at plant and tested soil . Said to have a high acidity level . 1/7/85 Mr. J. C. Tuttle, Chandler Concrete Co. , Production Mgr. met with David Adkins, Regional Engineer, Division of Environmental Management (DEM) to discuss wastewater run off at Hillsborough plant. 1/10/85 Mr. Tuttle received a letter from Mr. Adkins (DEM) confirming visit to plant and asking for written intention of controlling wastewater and permit for same. 1/17/85 Mr. Chandler requested more information and forms from Ms. Carolyn McCaskill (DEM). III 1/18/85 Forms received from (DEM) . 1/30/85 Letter from Mr. Chandler to Mr. Adkins advising him of plans to control wastewater. 2/4/85 Applied for Grading permit and plan review by Soil Erosion Officer. 2/19/85 Received permit to grade property and construct 2 lagoons to control wastewater run off. February & March English Construction grading site as per plan. 3/14/85 Mr. Chandler received a letter from Fritz H. Brunssen, P. E. of Phil Post & Associates regarding phone conversation with Ms. Carolyn McCaskill of the DEM. The letter stated that at this time we do not need to file drawing and application. 4/4/85 Received a letter from Jane Atwater, Orange County Planner requesting a meeting with Mr. Marvin Collins, Planning Director and a represent- ative of our company 4/9/85 Mr. Chandler met with Jane Atwater and Marvin Collins of the Planning Dept. at 2:00 P. M. to clarify questions concerning property. Advised to file for a Land Use Amendment, on the 4.34 acres. 411 4/16/84 Filed the necessary paper work for amending the Land Use Plan with the Orange County Planning Sept. 4/22/85 Mr. Chandler received a letter from Mr. Rosemond, Erosion Control Cont. 094 Inspector, asking questions concerning the grading plan and expected completion date. 5/6/85 Call from Mr. Rosemond. regarding update on seeding and head walls on grading plan for property. 5/8/85 Letter from Mr. Rosemont stating the points of our phone conversation. 5/9/85 Letter from Harry H. Harkins, Jr. stating he represented Miss Betsy Rhine and Dr. Sally Feather and they were concerned about the use of our property not meeting the zoning ordinances of Orange County. 5/10/85 Filed a. non discharge permit application with the DEM. 51.20/85 Received a copy of a letter from Mr. Harry Harkins Attorney for J. B. Rhine heirs to Mr. Mervin Collins, Planning Director of Orange County. 5/21/85 A letter received from Susan J. Smith, Orange County Planning Dept. notifying our company. to cease all use of the 4.34 until the property was in compliance with current zoning for industrial use. 5/21/85 A letter from Cecil G. Machcline, Review Engineer of DEM requesting additional information for our application for a non discharge permit. Deadline of 8/11/85. • 5/28/85 Public Hearing on Land Use Plan Amendment. 5/31/85 A letter from R. W. Van Tilburg, Regional Supervisor DEM stating that our application for a non discharge permit had been received and was in complete. - He outlined the additional information needed and re- quested we complete the application by June 14, 1985 6/4/85 Met with David Adkins & Carolyn McCaskill (DEM) at the Hillsborough plant to seek advice on how to meet their requirements for controlling the wastewater run off. This was after the unfavorable comments were received at the public hearing. Verbal suggestion and options were received. 6/13/85 Met with Mr. Collins, Ms. Smith and Mr. Bell to seek their advice on how to use a portion of the 4.34. Basically we need to use the 2 lagoons that have.been constructed. They suggested a possible amendment t& the Land Use Plan we had submitted and request a smaller portion. • 6/14/85 Wrote a letter to Mr. Van Tilburg updating him on our application. 6/19/85 Met with Fritz Brunssen of Phil Post & Associates at the Hillsborough plant to discuss updating our plans and to reduce the amount of land being considered in the Land Use Plan Amendment. 6/27/85 Completed seeding of 4.34 acres and all work on the original grading and Soil Erosion Plan finished. 6128/85 Informed Mr. Rosenmond by phone that all work was completed. 095 7/10/85 Submitted a revised request for 1.41 acres of the Hillsborough property to be changed in the Land Use Plan instead of the original 4.34 acres. • 7/15/85 Atteded:the Planning Board Meeting and answered questions. 7/24/85 I wrote a letter to Carolyn McCaskill DEM updating her on the progress being made on the change in the Land Use Plan and when we could aive . her department additional information on our non discharge permit application. 8/5/85 Received letter from Mr. R. W. Van Tilburgh DEM that once they had a complete set of plans that met their specifications, that the lagoons could be considered as adquate system for controlling wastewater run off. 8/5/85 Appeared before the Orange County Commissioners on behalf of our application for changing the Land Use Plan. Board referred plan to another public hearing on 8/26/85. 8/6/85 Met with Ms. Smith and Mr. Bell to get additional forms needed for next hearing. 8/7185 Met with Phil Post & Fritz Brunssen to go over additional material for next • hearing. 8/8/85 Wrote Mr. Van Tilburg on latest developments on our application for change in Land Use Plan and non discharge permit application. ** These are high lights on my efforts to obtain changes in the Land Use 410 Plan and a non discharge permit from DEM. They do not include all phone calls and or correspondence with Orange County, DEM, and Chandler Concrete Company. T. E. Chandler President TEC:nd 410 ='.'.. 096 JOB CA A M.P1 (f 4::,..z.S. #, t:v.;4.: rt A./ri PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. • SHEET NO. I . OF . Engineers/Planners/Surveyors - rm a DATE 8-i3 100 Eastowne Drive Suite 208 CALCULATED BY CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROUNA 27514 CHECKED BY DATE (919)929-1173 493-2600 f'`. SCALE •.-:r c :-e..J.:- 4..1"311 "7'..-7t. tr. 1 i • I : i- iiiii • ;; ; : : : ; : • , ; , • ,, . : - 1 ; • ---1---ir- ! . 11 , r Vt- ut}} i);-- ! ..ulgip j_le ' ' • ' ... I i i 1 t 1 1 ; ''. • i---------L• -;.----I---- .;1- LLIi 1 - ''. - ! Jr. i. 1 _,, • 1 . ! ! ii - , 1 i I -1--. i i ,---i -r- 1 i , 1 I 4t 560 I 0 114-1 lc- ju E 1.. 1 I I I i I i _ ! 1 1; _i_ IL . : 1 I I -1 ■ • "---- IC)Wri* I l': 10,8 j(./*L 4 1 • 1 i i i i 1 f._ 1: I 1 i ; t ; • ii; ....,,i, !,.... il .. le, i , ; . i ; • y( CI ei II' r '-' • '.,,_j—Ld LoL.i.- t.2 in- ‘.." ' :, ; .; : _______-• i I I i i 1 1 1 1 1 i il 1 i i 1 I ! i ■ ; 1, i 1. ; • I i i 1 i -4,.. f-......L... .....i... , ; . _.......1, .:. • H ......4.. ......i ......,.... : I ! .— i 1 i - 1 • 1 , 31(1 , • , , 144112 I 1 ai ... ?t• .:6:0kg.4-, - i 1 r i 1 ._ , , . . . . i . • , , , , ,,__L_...4_ ..._. 1 1 i 1 ! . , ._1 [ i• : -,- , t.... . ,,, • : , . .. : ., 4.,... ___, i .1 „I„ J.,. bi• ! ..., i , . , • , _, „,,, ,, „ ...,,.. , 1 1 . ,, , ; 211 , i ; ATI s- 4 .r. ,11, 1 it.„'_1 , ,op . ; : iii ,, , . .; ; I : 1 , lifri . ' , II pi 1 i ... 1 i7 I-) _ ..i.: 14:•-i ' ::3,1 , cpi 1 1 — , 1, . .21. . .e. ,i-1/4],--4 .J._............!......... * I • iit .' ' l -- i--, I l' III •i11 ; 11 ; 1 ; : iiiii i 1 -111 ; ; i1 '. * 1111 '111 ' .....- I 1 .45-ixtAD ct, al' I- I 43 1:•.?F'IA " I's 11 1 I:1 . I: 3 6 lid' 1 ,f i4L:_li_Zret" .fztir.. ! 1EO Ale Ci 1 ,--, i . • 1 1 —; !• i ; Jill ! ; ; ; ; ; 1 111 ; 1111111, ! ii- iiiiii : 111 iiii .,_. 1 , 1 ; ; ; , , , 1 , 1 IIii "T i i i I I ';,,,/•-! ■•• i-, I I.4. 4 .... 1; I • i ■ I I I 1 1 1 i/ ii j I • I . ."'L...2.34+...) i 1 . l■ I 1 II ...-- 1 T t ,i f 1 , I4J11 ' 11i 1 1 ; , 1 .?(.1 Pc `t 1 c 41- Xt.e ■ ,, -/1?.. dio_j_ lii4i_ i , ,, 1111 i I . I 1 1 !t- 1 k■/i j. 1 --I 1 hcr I ■ I : • 1 i I I. 1 : ! 1 ■ ; I • i ! i 4./ 115 ,-`1':}((4 I '-'i !("1-,_.0. I 1 , 1 I i ' .1.............1-. I. ..t..... ,...I- -4- --1--r- I , dy 4/ELajacii ,PL I- I I 313,t-LO• IG411- ,$: , i MI . , , i .',_ I IIIIIIIIIIIII ! . 1 -1 lt1 , 1 , 1 . 1_ , .. ! 4_,,...., i 1 : , 1 i ' I ! . 1 J 1 1 ITit 1 I ■• I. , 1 ; ,.L., ,,,1 17- lit li 1 • . r 1 1 M.O..t-CItit I c__!.. 1 t-t..-. 19.r il..r.. .1.4...........1._;.........1._......L.-------;---i„--i---. ; ---- ----.1 4 1 ! i ' • I I 11 1 I _i_ I i i ! I t. I 1 i .. . I. i i „! I'm . ; ,,,...H,, .L : ; I : ■ I ; i i I I Tr,U d.,K.z i Yd. u _s..... 1 =z--. i 1 P ! ,I_ ic-u Z-:. :. , !. .-L.• ---1- : .• ' ; ii ' Ili ; : . 1 . • : . . 1 : 1 : • - 1 Ii - • '. 1 I ! I I • i . . ii • ; i .. L5-0 ..1.74.,....i, , , : . , , . : .. . . • • • - r —... • --,- . • _____,......._____T . i i . . : 2 , • ' • . ! ' . . Iii::0' ti 1-0 1:7 : 7•"!c7 r.____TAlt. i r ! ' ...11r.L1 j; )i ,..1 i-.■..2,-...J 1. . • • ---i-----. -;--: '---1- ; . . • • . ' : '.. 2tjAii...,bri F. p ,r).v. ;,-)4■17 7. ' i ' . .• :. ' • • • . , ! : nr& ". ,ic ',,.-....,,--i •1.nu. :.: ; • — . .I . f Ur :: '...*:....i ..2: . ' • • • • if311-1_ (je 17:' .. 7 ''--"..) •,..SP4-.1 e' . . . . . .. . . . . ._ . , . . . _ . . . . . , . • - • - . • - . : . . . . . . . • . . 097 ,-;,.. _ . if . Joe i._ aez.:_,„r ,,6___..sj.AtJ::- • PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO.- /7- OF Engineers/Planners/Surveyors • itga DATE 8-11- 95 100 Eastowne Drive Suite 208 CALCULATED BY CHAPEL HILL NORTH CAROLINA 27514 - (919)929.1173 493-2600 . CHECKED Br SCALE• DATE 0 Pr C LA ir A'n OH s y crr ni • IIIMII• 1 I : I 1 i i i ;. 1 1 I 1 i ; ! : . : i . •i . . . 1 1 I i 4)1 ' ■ : ..o.• i....■—' .T.Pricri't.■■•.ak,5—*• .-L do...Are 1 000 i :31!Ac_S: 1 Day: I 4 1 ! 1 - ' 1 • ! ; 1.--• 1- ; 4-----L 1, --1-- . '.. -- ----i-. . :: ',. — -.:- i -1-- .,.." '. - . I. 1 -90 FJ.LIL__1_,....AL.IL:e.Fi;i1:11...q_.._ - ..3 .1 14(06 .4. 134 5 k 8i ili ; , , ! 1 , 1 [5 AY C 1 . . ii I A .ELti,. i 7 i 174 irklatle: ' I 3 2 5qc ' DAY( • 1 I ..- 1 , . ..... ...., ...,..... . . . . LE ,, 4 ; cr Clyc LL ■ ; Lzt12, Lin ): _i- : _.., ; ,t_g, 1 1 ; ; 1 ; 1 ; - I ; ; • ; : 1 I : — - — I 1 ; "--.1 ; i ; _...1_ a., .i.... i . Rt.4)3-d_r•ft # f-L._ PLAit1irgz...6 rE fel_ I 01 trif:k eir ii'.7- 5,:AZ C 1i T) _ __ 24/ - i .. -I . 1 .1 : Ir v r; e. . J,/ , .iikele. 1 i-p4 ci:: 1 4 tit- i 21/G;47- or- Ui 41/s i ! I i i ; ! : I • ! : i cp_i_s4LA. 7. pio frL.ap_.,0.1Cp___4:A:447/i_ 4_. ei4 ,./.'1 ) ! i I .. . .t) I E.,q1 WI red rri! Optirt+- _ ., 1 . • i , ! i , . • 1 : ! ! I 1 Le..:%1. 8' if:7 r I .47 ,rru; t • , : : ; i -...1..._ 1 • : : . II ' I • . . , 1 : 1 .! , 1 i i —I— : —t—t-----, . 9 gi i(1 r i I P t a i i a r c i - 1 2. t a • . , l. I I • i I 1 I 1 i s ' I ■ ! 1 1 1 I i i 1 1 1 ' I I , 1 I f , . ! 1 l • 1 . 1 , i f ■ ; : : i ...0. rrAnni,E, 1 p P I co ivir_F•iv-rtR.4‘7.70&.) —.._ i I 11 , - 1- ii 4 , • i 1 1 1.----l' - -r- t 1 I 1 1 [ I 1 , 1 i ■ 1 1 ' I , I ' 1 1 itO I . A ;i:gL.L , ikiiiEAl..,51/77E1A:__, i . ; ; :- , . ge... .: 1 , -- : 31 i - 1 I 1. ,i_i_ ;2 i !„., f i 1 ; ! i 1 i 1 I i 1 1 ! , - ' I i 1 j i I I I ; ' I I ' ! ! 1 • I ! '; 1 i ! 1 t. i I i , i ; 7 t■I i/I-IRJ__. , , ! : ; : : 1 , i. : ! , : _ 1 , ! : : • :- 1 i -4 ■ 1 • ; --"--- I 1 1 1,--"'; i : 1 :4_ . ,:_-: 7 (i ALI] f r,,,tic_ : i „. ! , , • :• 1 , 7.-. , „ , ./. „ ,i , : , . . . ; -1-4„"•••i =I_. f cytp : i : : • • . : . . • . . • : . . . . • . . : : . . . .. . .. . -. — : . : . • • : :/..,5 : ,I.P.tj f•!._1.:s',..-7 •---. ._.:. /-7:•--'7-1.j.'''(-2,1 ----.....-r.,;. :.___ .... , • '.. • y • 7...• . sr L ,‘ 6,g s-r!..- v 7 Lft:' .0 .. . ' C -7(.-.1 : = .10 • • _4__ _4-- - - , ,._./.3 4. , -,.. . - V :-.: !•1/. ))( 5-co) ' -7 • 'iri) 718\ 7:: .F47.,...2.... .- 0,....,/, zi - • -0 - ' • . V 5 • .- - • . 7•,.5•.',d . • ..._._ .... 5... . . . . v_. . . .• _.._.-. . _._ - • - . . _ . V -.: f,(.) .. ----7 c- i 2 .'f• -) -.- - -' .'.,:'0 _ sl, el -. . . .. _ . . :.. ... . , . -: ; , '•fr; ' V. :+e :,,. : ...'-I., ' • : . . • ..................-.................................... ,. ','.-, joa L-14•14%ND,r t:' - i-t I C...I.1:Cin k...3 fi:',::. 11-P1 PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO. -1 OF 098 Engineers/Planners/Surveyors 100 Eastowne Drive Suite 208 CALCULATED BY re41R DATE 8- 13-P-4* CHAPEL HILL NORTH CAROUNA 27514 CHECKED BY DATE (919)929.1173 493-2600 ..N 'SCALE LC ' Air A7701) v i 1 if : ; , . .. : . . . . - , . _ . ,,,---,_ ; . ,, .,, , . ,, ,t ! ,. f i i /I' I ; ,. • * - i ' 1 . f•-• : .-4.- --4.- i- i • ..."•• -;--- (7,1e4 ) i ;,..7. i 52.i 2 64L.1.5 1 i i 1 1 -7 -1=-• 1 - 1 . 1. -Th. I I* ; 7 -- -1- ; ',- • 1,, 'T----1---1-.• •:.----r—T-7.--T—I -"..— i I I { Iii- i; I tiliki 11 ; ; III ; i 1 : - ..i. • t-" ; -I— -1- ; I "-r•—• -1 11 '1 ' 111 11 - 14. 111 1 I ; 1: I ; 1 ,_,, - i ---. -1...--h. , : : : ; • :- • 1 __-. ; .,,...... 1 I I 1 .. 1 "; ; i I i 0 Fliedl Cedi 5 1; ; I 1 I ..i .1. . 1 ; ■ : I ,-.._....- ,..I..„ - ' ■ I ' t : ii .. : I 4 . : , , i ; -r– ! i 1 i I • • 1 • } • i_ ; -4----1--1 1-----i...- , ! -.1--...-' - , L , ii , , , , i, :51 c g A.EttriT:- , r(), ..,r," • ,-/-. i -.1. - - ' _I i i IL-1,14,.1,,F,...1 7. • -=. • I .... 2,1',5"?.,? 1. 74;I:t. i 7. ; 1 ....1.. _I , 1 ll ' f • Ilitlitit ■ I -7- 1 1 - I I 1 : . ! 11 ; - ; 1 ; 1 ; 1 ' 111 : - t 1 ot- ---1- :1- - ...1 —t /- *"1"" " ; • - "I'' : f ■ ' • I 1 1 'ell ri..hoc ..1.-- 11.1.1 1..H1,,,it „I 1 1 --L, --- i 1 1 . Lr..1-44...„....._ ... .."___ _ ._-- . --r - .-1- = =, I I 1 1 1 - ----= i ; I ; I ' I ; , • I . 1 I , I I, „1„„m I- c ,,11 _1_- ___ _"'"' KII-PIAPPALL.1.. ,f,I (.(1) 1.0 L q-2),2.,(1/0 I - -4--------1---7.---1-4— ' I 1; L.... ,. i : ! • ; I 1 II I ; i : , • 1 4 _ ____I ! 1 i 1 I• . , — , • 1 1, I ; - I ,I• I e • ; I i• I • i , I i I = .1 11 I -T.I.L171;4_,L„ ,J ; J.744 –.. 1 !0 • I i : i_ . i. i 1-1 • . I I ; 1 . 1 , 7i- 1 ---•• I I I I 1 I I I i 1 I i ' I I i -I .1 I . - i i 1 I I 1 I I I i I I 1 I ! i i ' il" ,1-• ifT)+16. i 55 I 2-Ltka I 6 IALL j I i ; 1 i I I I I I i i il 1 i I . i ' • • ' I i I I . I • I. I i I 'I I i • i i. I ''• I ! 1 I • -f-- ! i • i i 1 I I_ • I . .I i i I i I i I I • i I I I ! I 1 I I . ; T : 11 i .._ • 1 t ; ; '-"I li ; lt I - ' ;.. 1 ■ ' t . t I I, 1--i-- 1 ----r-- t- 1 • t ; ---T" i ; t- 2,- - • • . : t - ; • . • 1 1 ; I - 1 i 1 ; I I : .-i---1 1.---7. •r•• i -I- i ; ---4. ,;.. I -I. ' 1.- ; , : i I , 4. 1 1 •-•-•r I 1 : •, .' I I I , i 1 1 I i 1 i ' 1 1 I r. 1 I • I I 1 1 I • ' . • I ,r I .,_--:,--..-.....,.. • ....L. .. . '. 1 l'•‘.. 1 • ; 1 1 FT I i !• • ! 1 . .,.••••1.,• 1--*i 1 ..4 ' i I I ' • ' I ••1 ' : ' '''''i''' ''';'' ';'''' .1".. ; ....r.o : ,---j.—.■.■., I . ; I • • .-.L.--.-1. ' • 1 t--...-t. • : : • ; .— ,---4- , -r• 1-------to 1. 1- ' •--1. I* 1 -4 i ', ‘...1.---i—J.--1--.4___ • , , : , : : , : : : . . . , I 4- ; i. : -: t - . • - . , : ; ; ; . • • : • ; -; • ; - ; :. : 1 • ,., , : • , ; . : • . ._ . . . .. , .. _ .. . • . • . . . . . :.. . . .._ . .... . . .... .. . . . -_ .. . . . . . - • • _. . . • . . . • : • • • • - - _._... . a'2W2 •'1Z / t SAHO p1N j• - _ ORtVE Ui �^ t f '$ rn b°B to-wr' .64© A xlxa � _ ° 1.47 ACREES + >� roACra oANO } t ..• � �_#AIIRVlC • ; ppAVEi AIN � ��, ITlCLA161Rn � � f • t � II {1 TOWER�xg1'IU'A'It7�` �..----" -, �{NO IARx' _....�..� n TEw1 N iEHFq — <Y f �j„__ 1 OWEn AR ,j000 EA*I •t _.__.t... x I-i� n 6tp J J 0:506'A6RES 1.42 ACRES t e1s % - - -•••era _ ABC LENGTH 176.22' cgnntut TnucR L°Ao TAANSTEn AREA 20 xQIT •�2�O.p0 TRUCK CIRCULATION PLAN PRELIMINARY CHANDLER CONCRETE . CCs CCs ' I { r C) DRIVEWAY 'C' TO DE CLOSED ' WHEN DRIVEWAY 'D' I8 OPENED h ' b6.48' X95 OtIQ NC I� {SR I ec' S _._ 9'40 DRIVEWAY C 6.262 ACRES o iv—a'w o eDe 0. 100 AC APE VIIIP LAHOSIC `13 {1t(`O T m eOP 16-f7'af 0' A Ai R INifG R *A P A!C Af4yVN €€f �« 8AH0 61N p ACRE T DNAT! LTlRN4T E , *BIN#7 it « VEL ylti TOX�q,- pA00 ' n pnpt u mrwn•mPnw M° naYI r r .L 4 .....U......CRES wen Af.TEAATE i RAT'll VLp � - c e 1-O WER � �Qo GAL 6e *- '4- ~� �O` Q8 ACRES 14 BERM 10 BE BUILT Aff RfEOOIRIO qtr �j"t4 �.`J�'`C � 'y - --• ._ ._ t Ja'� 1.42 ACRES To DIVERT WATER TO DA61H8—�` ��LEµatN ,.�-''."��� ! r r• � FKi$TiHO PIHf TOFlB ALTERNATE BASIN LOCATION & TRAFFIC FLOW N I IJllrvri 1r ls'R'lit;� I:� r�l•gl r3 r� 11 I r . ' IJrrr:.l_ x•111.1 tr• r IJr., it r: •f III, it i PRELIMINARY I r:.ili tdsl..r 1.r• i• i�r� .11:r•1 w_ r. -1111• is. ,1 s�:••i 1 r I � L���D L G� CONCRETE ,', 1 Y•!•••1'�I I r e.r. if) l%.� t-'+ •, ••., ' All ,..•f,�f�."1 1 i 0 -.. t:,rr R�: it s=: s P ush•:11IIAilI il All i N, dill, t.r At Trf 0AII h=n-it 1:• At I- I 1{ r n D ORANGE COUNTY PLAIV:s.TUNIC. DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROrGH , 101 O NORTH CAROLINA. 27278 ...I, Of .4,411MbA. .4P It 3 -- Fib co*. MEMORANDUM TO Fritz Brunssen , Philip Post & Associates FROI4: Warren Faircloth , Erosion Control Office SUBJECT: Chandler Concrete Plant DATE: August 20, 1985 In response to your Letter of August 8, 1985, the construction of the additional basin will not require approval or permits from the Erosion Control Divi - sion since the amount of disturbance is Less than 20,000 square feet . However , the owner is responsible for taking the necessary measures to keep sediment on his property and to prevent damage to adjacent property . The installation of this basin must comply with current zoning regulations . I understand that you have discussed this matter with Susan Smith . c: Susan Smith 411 102 • PHILIP POST • ASSOCIATES • ENGINEERS/PLANNERS/SURVEYORS #58501 8 August 1985 Mr. Warren Faircloth .• Orange County Erosion Control 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re: Chandler Concrete Plant - Hillsborough Dear Warren: Last spring Philip Post & Associates submitted an Erosion Control and Grading Plan to you for the Chandler Concrete. Plant on Old N.C. 10 south of Hillsborough. All work that was requested to be done has been completed. We are requesting that an addition be made to the area where the two detention basins are currently located. An additional basin with the basic dimensions of 40' by 40' by 5' depth needs to be added on the east side of the existing basins. Since a drawing does not need to be submitted, we request that you provide us with a letter stating that since the area is less than 20,000 square feet we are allowed to excavate the basin provided we protect the area from excessive erosion. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Frit H. Brunssen, P.E. FHB/dht (919)929-1173 3 100 EASTOWNE DRIVE a POST OFFICE BOX 2134 a CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 • • d'`....st.A7•4' ztiy 1:1‘. • 5 dr I • • • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JAMES G.MARTIN Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 GOVERNOR August 23, 1985 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan Smith, Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 . • Dear Ms. Smith: • • • • This has further reference to my letter to you dated August .21, 1985'concerning the proposed. driveway ott SR 1710 for Chandler Concrete . - . Company. -• The proposed driveway "D" has a greater sight distance • • • and is a safer. entrance than the driveway that is currently being used. . • • • • • Sincerely, • • AO( °- • W. Watkins • DIVISION ENGINEER 3WW:mclj cc: g•-.‘.. Tom Chandler • • Mr. D. B. Kelly •• • •• • • • • • • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 103 • ..3.„ STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 August 21, 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Smith: This is in reference to driveway use at Chandler Concrete on SR1710. (Old NC10) in Orange County. This driveway is designated as driveway on the site plan. Sight distance is adequate and this driveway should not present a safety problem. •1f we can be of any further help please advise. Sincer, 1 . , . Watkins DI SION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/cb • cc; Mr. Chandler Chandler Concrete Co. Mr. D. B. Kelly III . An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 104 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Ei 47,-76 I. Atrilo - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA ' ,Susan J . Smith, Zoning Officer, Orange County , North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about August 12, 1985, I mailed , by certified mail, postage prepaid, a Notice of the Public Hearing to be held on the request or a planned development—specia1 use permit for, Chandler Concrete Co . . Located on Old NC 10 in Hillsborough Township . to each property owner as required by Article 20 • Section 20.6 .3 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The notice mailed specified the date, time, place and subject of the Public Hearing on the zoning classification change . WITNESS my hand, this the 15th day of August , lsas. S SAN J . S ITH ZONING OFFICER 105 ORANGE COSY PLA I•JING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH • NORTH CAROLINA 27278 IT r ,,. �•_rk 001 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE ATLAS 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 20.5 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse, 108 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough , North Carolina on Monday, August 25, 1285 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 and Zoning Atlas . LUP-2-85 AND Z-12-85 CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY, INC . The property in question 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 in Hillsborough Township . It contains 81 ,419 .6 square feet or 1 .41 acres . The present zoning of the property is Residential-1 (R-1 ) . The applicant . is requesting that the property be redesignated in the Land Use Plan from Rural Residential to Commercial—Industrial Transition Activity Node . The apLicant is also requesting a Class A Special Use Permit for a Planned Development—Industrial (PD I-3) to allow for use of the property for runoff facilities associated with the operations of the plant . 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 attend the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning Department, 108 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough , North Carolina 27278 . For your concerns to be fully considered , they must be received by the Planning Department prior to the 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 6 :00 a .m . to 5:00 p .m . , Monday through Friday. MARV I N rni i 1 PIC Pr nuu I ur_ n I orr-1-no 106 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 Swill. Use Parmjt, 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. he public hearing process on 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 oermilt ., 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 rimiest 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.' Oil • • J. S. HARDER&ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED 'P I RI - 1 IN1 GENERAL CONTRACTORS (RE rinfl n CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 'nflPt;5' TELEPHONE POST OFF1cE BOX 761 4919)942-6376 1777 DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL BLVD. August 26, 1985 Mr. Don Wilhoit, Chairman The Orange County Commissioners Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Application of Chandler Concrete Company Dear Chairman Wilhoit and Members of the Commission: The undersigned is a resident of Orange County, as well as the owner of property near the subject site. I am a land dealer and broker, developer and builder in Orange County; additionally, I perform economic impact and feasibility analysis for financial lending institutions. I am familiar with area land values, as well as ordinances and statutes relating to this application. - After examination of the Chandler Concrete Company plant, and the adjacent and nearby properties, it is my opinion that the applicant has satisfied all criteria to support the application. Specifically, it is my conclu- sion, after review of plans for intended environmental management prac- tice, that surrounding property values would not be adversely affected. If I can provide further data, please do not hesitate to call upon me. Sincerely, Jon S. Harder JSH/rtm MillliO01111111111101■1111 i HoToQ.RA►PHS idHAN,bt.� .1 XWE AW }YPtSSAI, 1.wH11bLw!•t ...«.. _.____- v �...._ - _ :. ......_,�.. .._.... Ail _ +'i. ni�Irn a s. 'so �.. for TOM 0111111 11f M'A t.•/ AC11Ea � .•••n"''r ��,•IU. V � �„ „1• :. •iia7. `�Lr. •+1 •e�.+u*Iw t•.r 1 �••.•` `� .7` �j 1 4Hws/Mr Nr•,•H•ItU•rf �E��'pf11.e.......•-��� 1 4!' �j[''f'1'!•�• �f1✓IIY� �1iM� ,�• V i-�� s•r�r•r ., ,17/ 'j r"• � f�'• RANAO�b Rtn�� ..'..,-'�.,.. 1, :...�..r.�.:..:;n�fa�;_.•��"na!{��3+1C�1� F:�3t��ix;lr t�tdc' ' " ' ��i t.tf ALYtt!1 •,ror,r••a•••un•' ,...�."w:..:Er.. s"' i.•.!' . .� � ,wt iili•w �. ,• ti �"i liiw�w J '/�� •_. '. •r r ii 4 ,It1.!i ". •t. r 1 J �••� �' 1 'i+s.ii Iu.nN so � 1pat-W so Sol taa til PI A1/ • cpne4•eectta�l a Of at/:cetMAUOtI trtrtM • t ■.tsn• tilt/t111HAAY CHANDLEn C©NCItETE J. S. HARDER& ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS' rmi • - n CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 1 - n TELEPHONE POST OFFICE BOX 761 (919)942-63 • 1777 DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL BLVD. August 26, 1985 Mr. Don Wilhoit, Chairman The Orange County Commissioners Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Application of Chandler Concrete Company Dear Chairman Wilhoit and Members of the Commission: The undersigned is a resident of Orange County, as well as the owner of property near the subject site. I am a land dealer and broker, developer and builder in Orange County; additionally, I perform economic impact and feasibility analysis for finAncial lending institutions.. I am familiar with area land values, as well as ordinances and statutes relating to this application. After examination of the Chandler Concrete Company plant, and the adjacent and nearby properties, it is my opinion that the applicant has satisfied all criteria to support the application. Specifically, it is my conclu- sion, after review of plans for intended environmental management prac- tice, that surrounding property values would not be adversely affected. If I can provide further data, please do not hesitate to call upon me. Sincerely, Jon Jon S. Harder JSH/rtm • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT mr-Isnonouon NORTH CAROLINA 27278 ,; rix • • • cr 4. if REFERENCE: LUP-3-85 0 APPLICANT; CHANDLER CONCRETE CO. TYPE OF REQUEST: SECONDARY AGENT: T.E. CHANDLER SPECIFIC REQUEST: TEN YEAR TRANSITION/ STAFF ASSIGNMENT: GENE BELL COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION ACTIVITY NODE PUBLIC HEARING DATE: AUGUST 26, 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 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 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 portion to be redesignated contains 1 .41 acres (inclusive of highway and railroad rights-of-way). It is the northwestern tip of a 4.34 acre parcel which was merged with the existing Chandler parcel ((2.91 acres inclusive of rights-of-way) on October 3, 1984. ISSUES This application raises the following land use issues for consideration: 1. Appropriateness of area for industrial uses. 2. Implications of rezoning. 3. The relationship between the application and the overall Land Use Plan and policies for the County: 4. Impacts on Old N.C. 10 (SR 1710). 5. Public health, saftey, and welfare concerns related to wastewater runoff. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request. KLgULS1 ift.W- . fSPEC1FIC. DATA (continued) : Rural Residential i 'Curi-erePlen Category Designation(s): General Activity Node iatershed Joint Planning Area Describe Land Uses In the General Area: Mini warehouses, Convenience Store, Trailer Park, Pond, Railroad and Ready Mixa Concrete Plant. On Adjacent Parcels of Land: Ready Mixed Concrete Plant Hwy. 1710, Railroad and a buffer area and Manufactured Hone. • • • • REQUEST:: Commercial Planned Development Land Use Plan Category Designation(s) Requested: Industrial I-III Type of Amendment: Primary. Secondary X- • * * * * * * * * * * _ This application should be submitted with the folIowing*materials: X Fully dimensioned tax map on which is highlighted the parcel , ar,portion thereof, in question. X Legal description of the parcel , or portion therof. * X Letter of request to include: • o the tax reference, general location and owner of the parcel • o the-current 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. ( ) , the underSigned, certify that all statements furnished in this application. are true to the best of -my (W) knowledge and that the application as submitted is complete. - NAME- OF APPLICANT(S) SIGNATURE OP APPLIANT(S) • RS- DATE • • 14417N A'f'f*r 17j) • • olffg5- State of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development • Raleigh Regional Office James C. Martin, Governor S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT August 22, 1985 Mr. Thomas E. Chandler, President Chandler Concrete Co. , Inc. P.O. Box Drawer 1239 Burlington, North Carolina- 27215 Subject: Chandler Concrete Company Industrial Washwater Recycle Facility Orange County Dear Mr. Chandler: This will acknowledge receipt of four (4) sets of the plans and, specifications and the appropriate application fee ' ($50.00) for the recycle system to serve the Chandler Concrete Plant in Orange County. The plans and specifica- tions appear to be satisfactory. Upon satisfactory review o.c the plans and specifications, it is reasonable to assume the facility could be permitted. - If you have any questions or need additional assis- tance, please contact Ms. Carolyn McCaskill at 919/733-2314. Sincerely, . P C Ida;''Lt1 R.W. Van Tilburg Regional Supervisor Raleigh Regional Office RWV:DTA:bas CL601. cc: Ma-. Susan' Smith Ms. Carolyn McCaskill Mr. Gil Vinzani • 3800 Barrett Drive,PO.Box 27687,Raleigh,N.C.27611-7687•Telephone 919-733-2314 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer Illowwwww. P. H. CRAIG • REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES P.O.BOX 553 CHAPEL HILL NORTH CAROLINA 27514 REALTOR° (919)942-7234 RESIDENTIAL SALES,NEW CONSTRUCTION,INVESTMENTS&APPRAISALS 2C LF-y. less .1ror: 1. L. Craj. , wpraiser Dr. j, P.:-ine heirs Stf.j: irppraisal damo7er, as c result of pror.pective rezonimi of cer- tain trztet across .i. a. 1710 nor zoned Residential, to Commercial lndusttial. Cone: Als a result of Industrial use and or reroring or, the identified tract' on Souti. side of Z. R. 1710 the decrease in value of the Residential zoned property of J. :a. Rhine beim will amount te $30,000.00 lotes: Tract under consideration is identified a amehdment LUP-2-85 Chandler Concrete Co, Inc. wit). appro:rimrtely fa° front feet directing facin? the 120C ft of road fronta ae elonfs im to J. . iNhine heirs. 1. the particular topor.lraphF :;!_(.1 late fror:tage exposes almost the 7.. 'tire trect to the view of t handler addition, 2. tl-:e home place itself directly faces the area stripped entirely of all top soils. 3. because of lake little if any effective screenimy can be rade to prospective home sites even across the lake from the Chandler additio:t. 4. almost the entire area is zoned residential. • S. all frontae or. S. E, 171C will be adversely effected by the - commercial-industrial use an lr d or rezoni , 6. T!'e -economic impact will decrease the value of the -above 46 acre tract bv at least $$30,000.00 P. Craig, 641,A Appraiser ‘7, • • VERNON,VERNON,WOOTEN,BROWN 8c ANDREWS,P.A. ATTORNEYS ANT/ comsrszzsons AT LAW JOZer VPZE0S(04 012613.1.1t orrzcz: 522 SONTE X.ERIE0TON AVRNOB JOUR.0.3,11401034 00 CO 9011.11.08,9.W. 1.02.11MP.WOCMM EitHaLnsTOTON,NORTH GAROLTNA enzersex,NORM Eattao:NA 7,41.1030N X11203,02.177Z. TZLEEPRONE 2Z9-9 .O8 JEMMY A...ANDIMWS TELEPHONE 1319-222,88151 U. JOE aumETT ILLIZIN0.1■00P.9EM nearmax.SAM10,010i1 P..0.EMS 234e 13102LINOTON,27.C.1E0318 0340 August 27, 1985 M . Susan Smith, Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Ms. Smith: In accordance with the consent granted by Mr. Don Wilhoit, we are submitting the comments made by Mr. Tom Chandler during the public hearing on the Land Use Plan Amendment to be made part of the public record of the rezoning hearing. i should appreciate you forwarding these written comments to the appropriate person so that they may be appropriately incorporated into the documents relating to the rezoning hearing. If you have any questions, please contact me. Yours very truly, ORIGINAL. SIGNED DIN R. JOYCE GARRETT R. Joyce Garrett RJG:lbw cc: Mr. Don Wilhoit, Chairman Orange Co. Board of Commissioners Mr. Tom Chandler WORK16:8/27/85 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 107 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date AUGUST 26. 1985 Action enda Item 0 SUBJECT: Z-2-85 (Rezoning Request) Or Khye Wang Ng and wife Guat a g Ng DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No Attachment (s) Information Contact : EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION AND NARRATIVE VICINITY MAP PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS AGENCIES LETTERS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Telephone Numbers Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hi l L — 968-4501 411RPOSE: To receive public comment on a proposed rezoning request scheduled for public hearing on February 25, 1985 and continued to this date by action of the Board of County Commissioners . NEED: The applicants have requested a rezoning for 41 .86 acres of land Located at the southwest corner of N .C . 86 North and Coleman Loop Road (S .R . 1332) . The purpose of the request is to permit higher density residential development than is presently allowed . The property in question is lot 28 of Orange County Tax Map 3 Hillsborough Township . The present zoning classification is R-1 Residential, while the requested designation is R-3 . The property is located within an area designated as 10 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 . RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request . . 957 i. 0 \\ . . 5 ,,c. _ ilia ,?..\\ R --\ -\, —.11–a° 1 : ,20 a... _42 , NG 0 Applicant: Frank Pearson & Associates 5598 Zoning : R- 1 Requested : R- 3 LUP Designation: 10 Year Transition MAJOR BLISINESSFORWS. \\ 1,, Vill; ,,,.. CD eFs4. \\%. 0 .6701 \\c.) /r,---/ - -5'52-,----"".›'''''' -----(3 \\ - "' ..„ '"--,..................._..... ........--......-••••----;:.......„„.„,-,• 0 A e... • ) " \\ / 88 - 1 20 - \\ , 1 1 I roir „iv. sis5..; . so. 0.50..G. \\\, • 1 1 ...500c, B.G. . 1 1 \‘ 1 ?si 16ecs 0 ,,,,,, i Ai Bil-63 9092 i r \\\V . . . . . . _ 10.52p,c1 \it 5;5. 0/00;/7/1/\'\\\ . • . . • III : ..-1 .../\\\ \ - , I .., -- \‘'-.5.5. 95 ,. (. , .:. . . : • i 1 - • . C) ." ' ' \ t ,....••,. VI\ - . . . . 0 t. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 4" _ = 1,l t +Eery; root MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM : EDDIE KIRK, PLANNER II DATE: AUGUST 22, 1985 SUBJECT: Z-2-85 DR. KHYE WENG NG AND WIFE GUAT CHANG NG GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Frank Pearson & Associates P . 0. Box 752 Hillsborough , N. C. 27278 LOCATION: Southwest corner of N .C . 86 North and Coleman Loop Road (SR 1332) REQUESTED ACTION: Approval as a Rezoning from R-1 to R-3 PURPOSE: To allow higher density residential development than one unit per 40,000 sq . ft . LOT SIZE: 41 .86 acres or 1 ,823421 .6 sq. ft . EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant, wooded tract SURROUNDING LAND AND ZONING: NORTH — Residential property zoned A—R with an undeveloped Industrial tract at the intersection . SOUTH — Wooded undeveloped land zoned A—R EAST — NC 86 and wooded undeveloped Land zoned A—R WEST -- Single family Residential and undeveloped Land zoned A—R III LAND USE PLAN: Designated 10—Year Transition All 1111iiii I:; I i FINDINGS OF. THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERTAINING TO APPLICATI0N: Z-2-85 Dr. Khye Weng Ng and wife Guat Chang Ng 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 CD ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ("Yes" Indicates com liance• "No" indicates Noncom fiance 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 than 1 '= 100" 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) 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 Applicant has Indicated that Hillsborougks—Yes ____No any, which make amendment reasona- is growing and there is a shortage of bly necessary to promote public moderately priced residential lots in health, safety and general welfare. the immediate area. 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed _Yes No Applicant indicates the property is • Yes No amendment will carry out purpose located in a ten-year transition area. and i t of adopted Comprehensive Plan-. Adlhhk 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-3 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 Applicant has indicated the property Yes No Use Plan as a Transition Area, is in a Ten Year Transition area. which can reasonably be expedted t o be annexed by a mun i 6 pal i t_y in the ensuing 10-20 years. 6 b) Water and sewer lines should . X Yes No Applicant has submitted a letter from the Yes No exist at site or be assured of Town of Hillsborough stating that stater and Installation as part of the sewer is available. On Aug. 12, 1985, the development process. Town Bard re-endorsed its ierter.as astate- ment o commitment to serve the site with public water--and-sewer services upon extension of lines by applicant. c) Vehicular access must consist X Yes No Applicant does have direct access to Yes ao of direct access to a street N.C. 86 which is classified as an arterial. cl ass fied as either arterial' or collector as designated by the adopted Land Use Plan. • M N REZONING REQUEST CHECKLIST Dr. 1_hye %'on '; 1.1:; tilld life .OWNERS NA r �; ,t� ADDRESS R t. 5 lio.: : • ,.�•, ,- h�rn 1911- ilzllsborou�h, l.t; 272 - Current zoning AR Total number of acres 41.13 Current land use vacant Type of rezoning fequested [t3 Proposed land use Single family residential ax map 1L 3_ Block # Number of lots 1 Proposed Water Supply: Public if Community (��Access Individual Proposed Sewage Treatment•: Public It. Community Individual septic tank 1.1C C ,, 56-,00 . . onto state road # 1*!-2 Average daily traffic count on the state' road 1100 Describe existing critical areas: Flood prone areas H/A Poorly drained areas IVA Streams intermittent Other sensitive areas N/A Describe land uses in: General Area Ap'ricultural Residenti-1, Single Family, Industrial Adjacent parcels of land r =rrir',i1tur-il Pesirlontig1 to rit' "t„LLsnlith ; ,Gin-1r-, fnmi1d nnrj WE, (I) the undersigned as hereby make application to change the Zoning Map of Orange Cnunty as hereinafter requested. 113 1. The property is located' on the iest, side of State Road t NO 86 which is named . The address is and it is located in iiill.g..1::Orm_p:"" Township Tax"Map block , lot-number(s) . It has a frontage of P55 feet end a depth of IMMCF/W7 feet, containing 6 acres. All applications for a change to the Zoning Atlas shall contain the following (when applicable): • - Required on all applications *a. A fully dimensioned map at a scale of: not les!..- th,L.% nulierec fCt co tne inch nor more than twenty feet to the inch showing :he 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. 4IM *e. The manner in which the proposed amendment will carry out the intent and purpose of the adopted Comprehensive Flan or part thereof. *f. All, other circumstances, factors and reasons Which applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment. It is the desired and requested that the foregoing property be rezoned from A2 tO 4. The following are all individuals, firms or corporations owning property adjoining or within'500 feet of the property sought to be rezoned as of 1-" E-Z?5 (DATE) TAX NAME ADDRESS MAP BLOCK LOT 1,,:e•-‘4} 13-7z- - • • .••$' , 14 Name Address Tax Map.Block.Lot Charles B. Parker Rt. 2 Box 31E 3. .26 Charles B. & Clara Parker Rt. 2 Box 31E 3. .27 Charles B. & Clara Parker Rt. 2 Box 31E 3. .28A Dr. Khye weng Ng & Suat Ng Rt 5 Box 194 3. .289 Major Business Forms P.O. Box 1299 3. .25 Joseph F. & Demesie Coleman Rt. 2 Box 160 3. .2 Joseph F. & Demesie Coleman Rt. 2 Box 160 3. .2C Vance C. & Margaret Brooks Rt. 2 Box 138 3. . 1 Nelson L & Linda Kaye Edwards Rt. 2 Box 140 3. .2D Mrs. Myrtle Blackman Rt. 2 Box 776 3. . 16 J. E. Faucette Heirs 700 E. 156th St.Apt. 5A 5.A.4 c/a Mary Johnson Crocker Bronx, N.Y. 10455 Clyde Brown Heirs Rt. 2 Box 124 5.A.5 c/a James B. Satterfield Mary Jones 517 Morris St. 5.A.59 Orange, NJ 07050 Eva P. Brown Rt. 2 Box 122 5.B. 1 William J. & Ruth Furbish Rt. 2 Box 125 5.9.2 Duke Power Company Hillsborough 5.A.6 115 The 2roperty is designated Ten Year Transition in the Grange County Land Use Plan and meets all the criterta as set forth in the Land Use Plan. The aronerty meets the application criteria as set forth in the zanin.7. ordinance in that it is desiznnted "len Year "lrnn- s'tion, water and sewer are nraposed as part of the development, and vehicular access is by C a and s.a, "413?2 a.k.a. Colenan loon Road. The accompanying letters from the Pawn of Hillsborough, Orange County Rescue Scuad, Hillsborough Volunteer Fire Dezert- ment, and Orange County Sheriff' s 3epartment, all indicate that these agencies can and will nravide the necessary services for this development. HillsborouFth is growing and there is a shortage of moder- ately priced residential lots in the immediate area. if this -rezoning is granted , we hope to be able to provide those needed home sites. 410 116 uract *2: Beginning at a paint on the South side of Cedar Grove Public Road which point is South 75. 35' West 630 feet from the •West side of the Hillsborough-Danville Highway, which Highway is also known as N.C. Highway Na. 14, and which point is the Northwest corner of the lot conveyed by Mary E. 411 Muse to Donald H. Muse and wife, Lucille B. Muse; thence from said point of beginning along and with the South side of the Cedar Grove Public Road South 75. 35' West 330 feet,. to a point; thence South 7. 25' East 745 feet to a point; thence North 77. 10' East 430 feet to a point the Southwest corner of the lot of Donald H. Muse and wife, Lucille B. Muse, above referred to; thence along and with their West line North 14. 50' West . 753 feet to the place or point of beginning, containing 6.3 acres, more or less. Tract *3: Beginning at a point on the West side of Hillsborough-Danivlle Highway, which Highway is also known as N.C. Highway No. 14, said paint of beginning being 774 feet in a southerly direction from the South side of Cedar Grove Public Road and being the Southeast corner of the property conveyed to Marvin H. Musa by deed recorded in Book 105, page 207, Orange County Registry; thence from said point of beginning South 77. 10' West 1460 feet to a point in J.F. • Coleman's line, the Southwest corner of the lot conveyed by Mary E. Muse to H.S. Muse and wife, Ruby D. Muse; thence with Coleman's line South 510 feet to a point; thence North 77. • 40' East 1585 feet to a point on the West side of N.C. Highway No. 14; thence along and with the West side of said highway in a Northwesterly direction 465 feet to the place or 411 point of beginning, containing 17 acres, more or less. Further reference as to Tracts 2 and 3 is made to deed dated June 7, 1947, from Mary E. Muse (widow) , et. al. to S.G. Miller and Parker Roland, Trading and doing business as Miller-Fa Roland, a partnership, recorded in Deed Book 127, page 24 1/2, Orange County Registry. • • 41/ 117 411 . Tract *4: Beginning at a point . in the West side of Hillsborough-Danville Highway, which Highway is also known as N.C. Highway No. 14, said point of Beginning being 1239 feet in a southerly direction from the South side of the Cedar . Grove Public Road and being at the Southeast corner of the property conveyed by Mary E. Muse to J.W. Muse and wife, Bertha- C. Muse; thence from said point of beginning along and with the South line of said J.W. Muse and wife, Bertha C. Muse, property South 77. 40 West 1585 feet to a point in J.F. Coleman's line, the Southwest corner -of said J.W. Muse and wife, Bertha C. Muse property, thence South with Coleman's line 268 feet to a point in the line of Ed Faucette' ; thence along and with said Ed Faucette line East 1732 feet to a point in J.L. Browns line; thence along and with said Brown's line North 270 feet to a point in the West side of. N.C. Highway No. 14; thence along and with the said side of said Highway in a Northwesterly direction 375 feet to the point or place. of beginning, containing 17 acres, more QC lees: Tract *5: Beginning at a point on the South side of Cedar Grove Public Road which point is South 75. 35' West 960 feet from the West side of the Hillsborough-Danville Highway, which Highway is also known as North Carolina Highway No. 14; said point of beginning being at the Northwest corner of the 411 lot conveyed by Mary E. Muse to JW. Muse and wife, Bertha C. Muse; thence from said point of beginning along and with the South side of the Cedar Grove Public Road South 75. 35' West 330 feet -to a point in J.F. Coleman's line; thence with Coleman's line South 740 feet to a point; thence North 77. • 10' East 430 . feet to a point at the Southwest corner of the lot of J.W. Muse and wife, Bertha C. Muse, above referred to; thence along and with their west line North 7. 25' West 745 feet to the place or point of beginning, containing 6.3 acres, more or less. 411 1 • 118 • Gown Mayor of Eillsborougli Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water 103 Commissioners James Pendergraph Lynwood J. Brown Horace H. Johnson Supt. • s •-•4. Allen A. Lloyd v.- 4r L. D. Wagoner "- Remus J. Smith itio • Chief of Police • Ra.:hel H. Siesens Arnold W. Hamlett t . Fire Chief ar ° John Forrest • f -O telt ; 41` Lik• • August 22; 1985 i Mr. Don Willhoit, Chairman Orange County Commissioners • 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 Dear Chairman Willhoit: With reference to the County public hearing on August 26th, on behalf of the Hillsborough Town Board, I would like to reaffirm the willingness of the Town to provide water and sewer service to the proposed Wens, Scholar, Scottswood, 411 and Cornwallis Hills developments, as expressed by the Board at its August 12th meeting. Letters of tentative approval were issued earlier for each of the projects, and we feel that the commitments contained in these letters should be honored by the Town and County. Our willingness to serve these developments is, of course, subject to review and approval of detailed engineering plans by both the Town Engineer and State Division of Health Services. We expect these engineering reviews to determine whether the proposed developments can be con- structed in a manner consistent with the Town's current plans to maintain and improve water pressure to existing customers in the vicinity of the proposed new developments. At its meeting on August 12th, the Town Board adopted a change to the Town's water and sewer extension policy which requires that all future applications for water—sewer service be reviewed by the Town Board. This review will be based on preliminary drawings and other information submitted by a developer with the application for approval. Under this new procedure, the Town Board will determine whether to extend water—sewer service to the proposed development, based on con- sideration of the availability of treatment plant capacity and other potential impacts of the proposed project. Tentative Board approval, subject to engineering• review and approval, will then be communicated to the County by letter. This new approval procedure will substitute for the letter approval procedure used to date. Ai& • Mi. Don Willhoit Page 2 August 22, 1985 119 . I trust this clarifies the Town's intentions with respect to the four developments currently under review by the County and makes clear the fact that all, future developments will be subject to our new, and hopefully im- proved, approval, procedures. Sincerely, W. 2444)41 Frank H. Sheffield, Jr., . Mayor FHS/jc cc; Town Board Members Ken Thompson, County Manager Marvin Collins, County Planning Director James Pendergraph, Town Water-Sewer Superintendent 410 • • 120 .ifa or ZOb31i of 14i1115borougb ToxnC7erk frank H.Sheffield.Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water Works ContnrttsWneri C.E.Roxmond Lynwood J.brown• �,�S tcv.�,L Street Supt. Horace Ij.Johnson ♦ ry L.D.Wagoner Allen A.Lloyd «--+•' ��' Remus J.Smith JYM>�'�r''A" Cltiejof i b6ee Rachel H.Stevens y /, Arnold W.Hamlett AY F�*! w �4! February 25, 1985 Orange County Planning Department Orange County Courthouse Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 Re: Dr. Weng Ng Property - Tax Map 3, Lot 28 Dear Sir: This is to advise you that the Town of Hillsborough is willing to per- mit the owners of the above described 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 o�xtension upgrading lines between improvement che Townns system system component, nor for the and the proposed development. It should be noted that it is the Town's position that the Town's system does not presently have the storage capacity necessary to ensure ade- quate water pressure to existing users in the vicinity of the proposed develop- ment. It will be necessary to resolve this and possibly other technical pro- blems to the Engineer, before connectionntoothe,Town's system recommendation of the Town Engineer, befor Sincerely, ....74/0-14,u„. 0/1"1,—.4„ • Horace J nson, Water Cliimissioner • IIM - 121 Au rff "(Eaton of jOiliAorougb Town Clerk 'rank H.Sheffield.Jt. Agatha Johnson Con K„t� HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt, Water Works Lynwood J.Brown C.E.Rosemead - . Horace H.Johnson itio Tor Irt6 Street Sup t. Alien A.Lloyd , Wage= Remus J.Smith '' I`t` QuefofPbGCe Rachel IL Stevens ~ � Arnold W.Hamlett October 16, 1984 Orange County Planning Department Orange County Courthouse 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 . Dear Sir: The purpose of this letter is to state that Frank Pearson, developer, will be able to tap to the Town's water-sewer system for a proposed develop- ment found on Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 4 and Tax Map 3, Lot 28, if all re- quirements shown on the Town's Water-Sewer Extension Checklist are met; and if all State agencies requirements are met; and all requirements of the Town's engineers are complied with. However, the Town of Hillsborough assumes no financial responsibility for the upgrading or improvements to any existing water or sewer line or to any existing pumping station located in this area. • Sincerely, /Ma& . L444c4&. Horace H. hnson, Water Commissioner • . 122 O WC Of itilboCOU b Mayor YL Town Clerk l rank i Sheffield.Jr. Agatha Johnson FULLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Conant!':loners Supt.Water Wor Lynwood J.Brown C.E.Rosemond -;: Horace H.Johnson r • Street Supt. Allen A.Lloyd • _ L..D.Wagoner Remus J.Smith VP' Chief of Police Rachel H.Stevens d,, Arnold W.Hamlett c ',''�,/�1f,L-'� February 13, 1985 To: Orange County Planning Board From: Hillsborough Planning Board Regarding the rezoning requests by Bob Scholar for Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 17 and Dr. Weng Ng for Tax Map 3, Lot 28: On February 7, 1985 the Hillsborough Planning Board made the following recommendations: The Hillsborough Planning Board made a unanimous vote to recommend that the Scholar property not be rezoned for higher density than R-3. There was a lot ilo of concern about the density already in the area, and R-4 was higher density than the Board thought should be allowed. There was a unanimous vote that the Weng Ng request for R-3 was appropriate. Both of the developments would have to have Town Approval for water and sewer. After the Town Board met on February 11, 1985 concerning the problems of water pressure and sewer capacity in the area north of town which would include both the Scholar and Weng Ng property, the Planning Board met on February 13, 1985 to make further recommendations. The Town Board had determined that at this point in time, the problems with water pressure would not allow either development to be served in the near future. The Town Engineer is to make a feasibility study and report to the Town Board by July or August, 1985 on what would need to be done to serve the area with water and sewer. The Water •Commissioner estimates that it would be at least 1 to 1 1/2 years before the Scholar and Weng Ng properties would be able to have town water if the Town Board decided to proceed. Oa February 13, 1985, the Hillsborough Planning Board passed a motion that a recommendation be sent recommending that the Scholar and Weng Ng rezoning requests be turned down due to the lack of sufficient water pressure to allow usage of town water and due to the time period of 1 to 1 /2 years before it is even possible that the pressure might be corrected. If the County decides to hold this request until the decision is made by the Town Board or if the County decides to rezone, please consider the comments made on February 7, 1985 listed above. 123 lf 4 • Orange County Fescue ..Eluac‘ I V : • - 261 S. CHURTON ST.,EXT. n- • ILLLSBOROUGH.MMUliCAEpLUCk27278 • To Whom it may concern: The Orange County Emergency Medical Services and the Orange County Rescue Squad provide EMS coverage to the Coleman Loop Road area on NC 86 north. S". - -1, 4111 r ,Av Jim , I on, Deputy Chief Or. g- founty Rescue Squad 411 • • 1 • • .0 ° 124 • HILLSR43ROUGH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT SO6 Snuth Mamas Suva HILLMOIROUCK NORM CLUOLUVA 37Z78 • Mn Forreia,Eke Child • • • • October 16,1984 • Frank Pearson and Associates - - Daniel Boone Village Hillsborough , N. C, 27278 . Dear Mr . Pearson; I have reviewed the proposed developement to be constructed on N. C. 86 al Coleman Lp . Rd. , North of Hillsborough . If the water lines are installed in accordance with good engineering practices, with hydrants properly located, the Orange Rural Fire Deptartment can provide adequate fire protection with no additional burden or problems. . Sincerely, ohn W. F1frIA*.reset#.4 hief of Dept . • • LINDY PENDERGRASS • Sheriff of Orange County 125 111. IiILLSHORM7G11;NORTH CAROLINA RES.PHONE 929-5535 • TO IIIMV j'ktiV; 4° Orange County Planning Dep. FROM: Lindy Pendergrass, Sheri • RE: Housing Development intersection of Hwy 86 North and S.R. 1332 . • (a.k.a. Coleman Loop Road) DATE: Oct 22, 1984 . - • The Orange County Sheriff Department can provide Law Enforcement services for the new Development listed above without any forseeable problems. we would not have to request any additional personnel or equipment to provide routine service requests. ' • LP/jc 111 cc: Frank- Pearson • • 411 • . . 126 - 4011t§,p • 44;-- f 44, V • *i`,-.121; IVIPIED Al■ . in} STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Greensboro, North Carolina 274292-0278 February 13, 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS • JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Ms. Susan J. Smith Planner Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Smith: . This is in reference to your request for an access review of property located in southwest quadrant of intersection of NC86 and SR1332 (Coleman Loop Road) in Hillsborough Township. It is recommended the a left turn lane be constructed on NC86 for any access onto NC86. The speed limit on NC86 is 55MPH at this location. The vertical alignment is hilly. Trucks using NC86 will build up speed going downhill and probably have a difficult time stopping for traffic stopped on NC86 waiting to turn left into the development. The development also borders onto Coleman Loop Road. It is possible that access to the development can be off Coleman Mill Road with the left turn lane being constructed at the intersection of NC86 and Coleman Mill Road. We will be glad to discuss options with the developer or his engineer as plans are being finalized. Access to development off SR1395 (Harper Street) was also investigated. Access to Harper Street from this proposed development is acceptable. If we can be of any further help, please advise. Sincerely W. Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DSK/cg cc: Mr . D. B. Kelly 410 Mr . S. H. Jones • (Attn: Joe Haynes) • • • 127 • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING.DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH 41/ • NORTR cUROIJNAL ' 27278 ..6.3■111%,• Irar. • MEMORANDUM TO ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: EDDIE KIRK, PLANNER II e.x. DATE: FEBRUARY 21, 1985 RE: TRAFFIC GENERATION - INTERSECTION OF COLEMAN LOOP ROAD AND NC 86 • The NC DOT traffic count on NC 86 north of the NC 57 - NC 86 intersection was 5,600 Alps per day in 1982. Within one mile of the intersection of NC 86- and Coleman Loop Road, minimal develop- ment has occurred in the County's jurisdiction since 1982. One "major" subdivision consisting of 6 lots was approved on NC 57 in 1983. Within the same area, there have also been two minor subdivisions since 1982. Two lots were created by these sub- divisions, one on Coleman Loop Road and the other at the southwest corner of the intersection. The intersection lot is the site of the only Planned Development approved within the one mile radius. That development would add a maximum of 48 • trips per day to NC 86 upon construction. The above mentioned projects would add 55 trips per day to NC 86 north of the NC 57 intersection. If the 41 .86 acre tract under consideration for R-3 zoning designation is approved, an additional 706 trips would be generated, all directed to NC 86. EK/jb •. -.5 3__ \•.' lk %4 ' ft. ‘„11/1• ' "--.1, . •,,- -----... ._ ,-;.N \-•... --,---rr,....1 77 -1 s•1 - 9 . i..",, c...h.__l_e 7i 1. \ ) ,... "-- ... ..;:......1 -‘ s R ta •• Elf -\ - 7 / • ....", /.,..,... \\, TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH ) PLANNING JURISDICTION RD IA -674'1" f I . 1 I MILE FROM INTERSECTION \ ... 4., 0...• "'"'iales OF COLEMAN LOOP RD. and N.C.HWY 86 4LKER 1 I - S 4,14. RD I ). .i0 r -,?../"........... , • ,,.... , _......,,..........._. _._..„._.,._.. ....,,. ,_. , . / , / . r ' ..._ i .. - ,133 , , . . -t ,,, ill \ ...,,,, • (-4 • 1337 fr ta ./ 1 re P' . 0 1 DRAW. : / ' 111113k S ' 4141• 1,x. 17-3(34 kii?ctuapl I *\ /1 ii i k I SANE .' i Z / CATIAI•JA0 II .... • „" .... Of.RD. _ 1 a . 0•••••••• C' I N , CV , /I I • ,,,, It\ , It f \ t '.'p <44:1" s =i- • ' - \ ig..- e41. 032* . Iti : ..-.4 2 _raWillt ■1.1. .4 1 I ' A IN, . 1 <ie./ 1 "7'"ORO • • .ii 1i- ify -.., If g 11/0 -•- . : s • . 1r Iv <4*, ... . I I i A% 1 4 . Air, ,, ,.... .... ; . „ Na A,,..... ciy. , c, , .0„ , , s r . 6 te N ,i \ .141IPICV \ cri ;p0, EURK miRI:ir- i 16 ce •-9, z.- if .11 A......„ . s r. . ''-'-• s i ik■-..., • 'Ka . '11E9IP -r. . ........ , . • 0,, , :9 . .. ,. „.. ....._,Th , , , , .... „ 7, . , , . ., , 1'4- 411* 't- Vsetr .t..14.? 4 .. 1- 1 I I 1, :. II, ...\,:xf■ ,9 .:. 4,,,, 4 ... 4• ; -\ ........ I .. I , t. 11‘',• :■:::::, Of Dusan sr. • • *ER si. It. ToRmq PO, I / I 11 ■ :: i. 'Or0;0/7 :-.:•:::::-;•f: e0 ...\......) LA•fmet 15AA s 49t g - PAR.- *- - -te , 1 , s g y :. .,,..- •..E ST -7/::1:. ' 011101 .a.aillirl . •,.... t ° : : **" i .., * --.•=4,41API ' 7..1:: rij ata ://41111PP.— 151001." , -4 • ; P r**- .0. ,.. li\c(0-' igattvilke -.1 0 _,ali- 1 turc ").:-.„'..:...!!:,..• • lin .4 N ,* - .._._ '-"4 P', 0As7:77• •...„,,„.:.:...,-?„••• , , i IP 0 ...0000.*.r 2,, plik.....--47Ars" a 1 "„ - ,:-:,-...::.::-,-;,-,,,-;,...,-•-••i . t Q'''- 00401- -lig 1 - &a ! c----- vi , a glOOPILppl•- liliO3.1' AR- ,oki5 ilLTOO\ ,.., LA R ST% 11111A •..'et x , 8' ( • :1.4 PIE 162 0..-,,,g _dr senciiii.Mila s' I lk •'.-I. j; Jr..) • -Li Egg • -411,-„,„,,,.W.lant • APP-..iliikorir ,--,- ‘ , ,,-•%aili . , ....4 , --4, .... , J0mnish.,,'2•14.111111111110•111V 'II' ■ ,• - • -.N. -11-PO. "- ''''''' n 0 I 1 4 4 rc x. '44' ffP10"- k- 1 5-- --41141111.74110 -et.0. •`MT.WE" -1 1.sr, 1553 i ...;"'"•-•,„,,,, ,,c....) (.446 -,. \•''',„. V ;ttalli1P"-- _.:04,7--•'-'!!!:-Lid..11,0"...44.7411.. ' :- .", .. I is. - . 1 *14111111t. Z? i • . • ',"'"' -444:11 1- ..a.„, • 'SI / Eno re.RR , I ri N7 114a ,. 4, ,40, .,) u.s.70, 1 4111r . i' p , . ., ' iit'of ' or 1..(0. - eus . - 0-4•• To 1 to _4 -..../6EER • .„0,t) - nu. 0' •1 1 111k,_ I O' --....e , .../ • ,....!* 1 ,:- • 105 e .., / ---,.. ...1411100 • , „. ....... .. —_ . _ , .z -.,. 1822 ;tir -, . :CATES ,. C*. -.- -t, 4 ' * g 1133 OA At.E\. \d" - 1 4:1:111° vvArgRs IN : 13' '?fo W ., 4. 0 • DA? . p.... ht • IR 1724 ,p, :A7 0.? - :.:-•-••• /4" ■ . +■••• '''''' . - AcH.A tA e ......, ) - w i Oh ,, • ? '•''''-' '.1. - . 4, •'-•,itL ..•.'r CR- 14, -,-- ,.. 0 .-...**4 1 r 1'5?■fiF4*,‘ 4 1"2" ...^414 :: ....J....4 ..„ ,1 - 2, if Cr, • CD 4-)t• r \.*"1 ....k.....z ...\•,...,./.., . .:6,k . -.., i - --P.11.111111. 1 ,,,N: " ( C\N fr". .) L517. •....,.:.:ra'; I . , 'I.'"• 1/' . .. 1, .2.-- —,, -4 .7%.**;;:4*:;1,, 1 •-• ■ 7- ; 1 .t/ ! I P■ii Co ivi 8 L.,,......). • ,......, -.-:-...'13'4:.:.•?-7.71. • ' ' -•_. .-...... , - ...„ .---.-,. ..,--:*-;!::,,• r. .-....-„,...11 ,..1 I .7............... I j•-•-•..-•e. .4 ..**-"* / •\..-'i,e.:.,,./.71:" \\:....:1 -e.„.• '4,..CZA ( :: .A.:!...17„I: :•::1..,.:".. -', ' • CO t‘ r• 5 .... ......• ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT - 129 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 __sow If. ,IiIIIIII11106N ( 6.....i 5: .4. : '4%. . • vi CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I , Susan Smith , Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Caroline, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about August 21 , 1985, I mailed , by first class mail, postage prepaid, a Reminder Notice of the continuation of the May 27, 1985 Public Hearing to be held on the rezonina gIiiFeuestortItia —jtLatsitolKiavgirenikig, BILL123.—CALI—P290 €411:4Y.-12921 . Coleman Loop Road (SR 1332) in Hillsborough Township to each property owner as required by Article 20 Section 20.6 .3 of 111 the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The notice mailed specified the date, time, place and subject of the continuation of the Public Hearing on the zoning classification change . WITNESS my hand , this the 22nd day of August , 1985 . k I ik li SUSAN SM H ' ZONING q FILER 0 13 0 NOTICE OF THE CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC BEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TH& ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS AND ATLAS OF ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter Alp, Section 323 and Section 343, Article 20.5 and Article 20.6 of the Orange County Zoning., Ordinance. notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Court- room of the Orange County Courthouse, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina on Monday August 26, 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 and Zoning Atlas. The amendments under consideration are as follows: 1. Z-2-85 DR. KHYE WENG NG AND GUAT WENG NG. The property. in question is located at the southwest corner of NC 86 North and Coleman Loop Road (SR 1332) in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 28 on Orange County Tax.Map #3 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 1,823,421.6 square feet or 41.86 acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-3. 2. Z-3-85 ROBERT A. AND RACEAEL SCHOLAR The property in question is located along Harper Street (SR 1395) and Dixie Drive north of the Town of Hillsborough in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 17 on Orange County Tax Map #5 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 540, 144 square feet or 12.4-acres. 111 The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-4. 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 attend the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning Department, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278. For your concerns to be fully considered they must be received by the Planning Department prior to the public hearing. Questions regarding the proposals should be directed to the Orange County Planning Department. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Ykawtio&LC' MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR PUBLISH: August 23, 1985 411 13.E IIINOTICE' OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TEE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND ZONING ORDINANCE OP ORANGE COUNTY, N 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 VIZI 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, N.C. on Monday, Pebruarf 25, 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: 1. Z-2-85 DR. =YE WENG NG AND GUAT WEND NG The property in question is located at the southwest corner of N.C. 86 North and Coleman Loop Road (SR 1332) in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 28 on Orange County Tax Map #3 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 1.823,421.6 square feet or 41,86 acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-3 . 2. Z-3-85 ROBERT A. AND RACEAEL SCHOLAR The property in question is located along Harper Street (SR 1395) and Dixie Drive north of the Town of Hillsborough in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 17 on Orange County Tax Map #-5 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 540,144 square feet or 12.4 acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-4• 3. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS FOR CHEEKS TOWNSHIP a. Z-5-85 WIL COM. TRUCK LINES, BURCH COMPTON The property in question is located north of US 70 in Cheeks Township. It is known as Lots 36C and 37 an Orange County Tax Map 28 for Cheeks Township . Lot 36C contains 166, 834.8 square feet or 3 .83 acres. Lot 37 contains 760,122 square feet or 17.45 acres . The applicant is requesting that an error in the Zoning Atlas be corrected and that Lot 36C and a portion of Lot 37 be rezoned from Residential-I to Existing Commercial-V. • 1 3 2 b. Z-6-85 CLARENCE WAYNE DOEY • The property in question is located north of West Ten Road (SR 1144) in Cheeks Township. Lt is known as part of Lot 1 an Orange Cou ins x• Ta Map 2s for Cheeks Towuship- 869,022 square feet. or 19.95 acres. The portion.-to be rezoned is 4inteasioned as 250' by 300' or- 75,000 square feet. The applicant is requesting that an error in the Zoning Atlas be corrected and that the . portion. of Lot 1 be rezoned from Residential -Z to Existing Commercial- V. 4• PD+=-85. 0AR9POOD g5+_rAcTES The property' in question islocateCovest of raignRoad ' (SR. 1450) is Eno Township, Orange known as Lot 24A on Orange County Tax Map TeaW=tshipr Durham -County.l6 for Esc Township. Lot 24A contains 1,511,532 square feet or 34.7 acres. The total tract is 40•.0 acres- The applicant is requesting a Class A Special Use Permit fpr a Planned Development (PD-R-1) to allow the construction of a 32 unit mobile home park. 5. SLtBDZVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS • Amend the Defini.tiosts of the Orange County Subdivision Reg tic' by revising the definition of "sub ivisi n! to track the definition provided in G.S. 15 All interested citizens are invited this hearing • be- heard- Changes may be ma the advertised - which reflect debate, objections and discussions at the hearing. Citizens unable to attend the hearing may express their views Planning Department; 106 East by- writing to• the orange County- s ux concerns -to- be .�o• Margaret Lane, Eillsborough, NC 27278. For _yarn the plaern - befully considered, they must be received by • Department prior to the public hearing. Questions regarding the proposals• should c�ehdirected t the Or Orange County Planning Department. Offs. Orange n Monday through Friday. ritanviNCOSPAlle0-). 6200 �.ui► to 5:00 P•.m- r MARVIN COLLINS , PLANNING.REr I • PUBLISH; February 13, 1985 t{.e- • r ' September 3, 1985 Mr. Don Willhoit, Chairman Ms. Shirley Marshall, Vice-Chair Mr. Ben Lloyd Mr. Norman Walker - Mr. Moses Carey, Jr. Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 W. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. Dear Commissioners: Re: Rezoning requests of Robert and Rachel Scholar and Khye Weng Ng and Gust Chang Ng I am writing this letter regarding the above rezoning requests that were presented to you on August 26th as I do not feel that satisfactory notification was given to the public that the re- quests would be on the agenda for Monday, August 26th. 1. The notice in the Durham Morning Herald August 15, 22, 1985 did not mention the above requests. 2, A one-time notice in the Durham Morning Herald on Friday, August 23 (with the meeting to be held on Monday, August 26) does not seem to be ample notifi- cation to the citizens of Orange County. The zoning requests wore originally scheduled for the quarterly public hearing for Monday, February 25, 1985, but were not heard at that time and have been continuously postponed since then. It has been clearly stated in a lett1er dated August 22, 1985 from Mayor Sheffield that to serve those developments would be subject to review and approval of detailed engineering plans (a copy of his letter is attached). As we all know, the Town of Hillsborough has been advised by the Town Engineer that an above ground water tank north of town is needed to serve the areas in question; this will take time to accomplish. Any decision made now by you on the rezoning requ will apply whenever the Town of Hillsborough is able to service the area, even though it may be 1-1/2 years from now. Request of Robert and Rachel Scholar 1. With reference to their original request in February, a 1982 traffic count waa used; surely that cannot be an accurate count with the construction we have already had during the past three years. 2. The only streets referred to in the original request are North Dixie and Harper. Please refer to the street map attached. It is not pointed out that the traffic would - - probably all exit via Faucette Mill Road or Cedar Grove Road onto Hwy 70 By-Pass, which is already a very con- gested area and would also feed traffic into the Town of Hillsborough via U. S. 70-Business, which has been listed by the State Department of Transportation as one cr the most dangerous in the State. 3. The Hillsborough Planning Board recommended R-3 (see copy of letter dated February 13, 1985). The request is still for R-4 regardless of the impact it would have on the surrounding community. s , Orange County Board of Commissioners September 3, 19• 85 #2 Request of Khye Weng Ng_and Gust Chang Ng • L. Consideration'must be given by all concerned to the traffic flow already on Hwy 86-North, the road that area would use. • 2. I personally feel that a member of the Orange County Planning Department should not represent an applicant, nor should he or she be personally involved with an • applicant in developing property. This appears to be a conflict of interest. • • • In view of all the circumstances, I do not feel that decision should be made until the Town of Hillsborough is in a position to furnish water and sewer and until an up-to-date traffic count can be made for both areas concerned, Please do not allow more density than the surrounding areas can handle. Yours very truly, Mrs. Edna S. Ellis "1.09 Revere Road P. 0. Box 67 Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 • • • 133 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date _ AUGUST 26. 1985 Action ends Item # SUBJECT: Z-3-85 (REZONING REQUEST) ROBERT A . $ RACHEL S . SCHOLAR DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No Attachment(s) Information Contact : EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION AND NARRATIVE VICINITY MAP PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS AGENCIES , LETTERS FEBRUARY 21 , 1985 STAFF MEMO—TRAFFIC GENERATION CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 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 scheduled for public hearing on February 25, 19B5 and continued to this date by action of the Board of- Commissioners . NEED: Robert. A . and Rachel S. Scholar have requested , a rezoning for 12.40 acres of land Located along Harper Street (SR 1395) and Dixie Drive north of Hillsborough . The purpose of the request is to permit higher density residential development than is presently allowed . The property in question is part of Lot 17 of Orange County Tax Map 5, Hillsborough Township . The 'present zoning classification is R-1 Residential , while the requested designation is R-4. The property is Located in an area designated as Ten Year Transition in the Orange County Land Use Plan . 134 AUGUST 26 , 1985 Z-3-85 REZONING REQUEST 411 PAGE 2 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 1982 traffic Count on Harper Street at the entrance into Northern Fairview indicated 300 trips per day . If this 12.40 acre tract is developed at an R-4 density an additional 274 trips per day would be added to the streets in Northern Fairview. If Highland Woods is completely developed , approximately 415 trips per day would be using Harper Street from this subdivision . If the remainder of Mr . Scholars ' property does not get developed this would put approximately 698 trips per day on the streets in Northern Fairview. If the remainder is developed at an R-4 density, this would provide approximately 1005 trips per day concentrated on North Dixie and Harper Street unless another entrance is considered . RECOMMENDATION : The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request . 111 411 .,..... . . . • • 1\ , . \I . . ! • - - _ .....„.... \\ ! • ' 48 AC. 5232 135 101 \\ ------.., --- . . . • ;. ----- —..._____ 2 AC. . ,........ • r--• r •• •. . I A • • -,....... . - ..,.... . ,,, --....../.., \ . . „ -----•-..... _____I 1 • I ......... _ . 1 - ../ _ ll'‘ . PROPERTY OF ROBERT SCHOLAR . - _/' ,/ kill • AND WIFE RACHEL SCHOLAR — , //.. 7 / . . Applicant: Robert & Rachel Scholar - / ' '/ 1 • . Zoning: AR Requested R4 • // z MAP 5A i I z cc, j LUP Designation: 10 yr Transition - (HIGHLAND' • I ' Scale: 1" - 400' , e ' t . -„, 7. i ...., , . WOODS) I. i .:. 1 I: • 1 /1.N N ..„...„,,, \co.._...... 1. — —— — --.... LINOEN• DRIVE — _„„„....... 1* -.... — — -- ---- ----,- "-- 'AC ' • • 47 28 AC. • • - la I \ 2 - : • . I I I I 1 • \ CD OM111111.11.11111 3 297 . 8242 / i 1 . A - I 1 1 , . i I . . . . ty 41.75 AC. • ■ z 9 21 , - . ...•■• D.. . ....... ......... , • 16620 - -.- 7625 /AoeAoes s 5584 C) i ■ . , 1 6 47cM -dr, 44...\1\ EXEmPT • I - - 41) • - a 4 4 C) . *-.• . - \\ 9035 , I 1 t. ":,\\•• I'''. 4 AC (D) \\ I I 7 - • .. .S.5-:-.1 1.6 i I • C. \ \ \-::.........., - ".., \ i I- I 17 ,., A c.• i (25 1 4'62 ) • --1.1•677 .7;ZeC 17, 2.14) les . , • il Ac. i 5 V s...-. • I.5 AC p . G' 9 \\ III .. -,-.... - AC1 4.7AC. 947,;`` 4C6i-NMI i I I - ----. .. . \ ______ I.3•-.r: 0 "---- -le" ... 1-' 454• . 1 • -----, - , rii "I' cr, 01 -... I I H I ii i 1 . I N ii 1 I • 1 : ‘ I I ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTNLENT 136 IXELLSBOROUGII NORTH CAROLINA 27278 17..414,4 p. °Pr. tlx# MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 1985 SUBJECT: Z-3-85 Robert A. & Rachael S. Scholar GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Robert A. 6 Rachel S. Scholar P. 0. Box 22 Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 LOCATION Harper Street (S.R. 1395) and Dixie Drive REQUESTED ACTION: Approval as a Rezoning from R-1 to R-4. PURPOSE: To allow higher density residential development than one per 40,000 sq. ft. LOT SIZE: 12.40 acres or 540,144 sq. ft. EXISTING' LAND USE: Vacant, wooded tract SURROUNDING LAND AND ZONING: The property in question is zoned R-1 . Zoning designations are identified below for surrounding property. NORTH - North Dixie and Highland Woods zoned R-10 in Town of Hillsborough jurisdiction SOUTH - Northern Fairview zoned R-10 in Town of Hillsborough jurisdiction EAST - Orange County's property zoned Institutional in Town of Hillsborough jurisdiction WEST - Vacant wooded land zoned A-R LAND USE PLAN: Designated 10-Year Transition. FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PER ING TO APPLICATION: Z-3-85 RO RT A. & RACHAEL S. SCHOLAR 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 20.3.2 indicates that the application shall comply with the applicable sections of Article 20 ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/REZONING ("Yes" indicates compliance "No" indicates noncompliance) PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS BASED ON PLANNING BOARD Ordinance Requirements SUBMITTED APPLICATION Evidence Submitted To Support Findin s RECOMMENDED FINDINGS The application must comply with all requirements speci- fied in Article 20 - Amend ments. Those requirements in-clude: 20.3.2 a) Map showing affected X Yes No Site Plan provided at scale of I" = 100' Yes No property at scale of not less than 1" . 100' nor more than 1" - 20' 20.3.2 b) Legal description X Yes No Description provided with application Yes No of property --- 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 Applicant has indicated the development Yes No any, which make amendment reasona- is adjacent to property currently zoned bly necessary to promote public R-10• health, safety and general welfare 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed X Yes ' No Applicant Indicated the property is located Yes No amendment will carry out purpose in a Ten-Year Transition area. .__ and intent of adopted Comprehensive F_A Plan W -�I TICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Y Planning Staff Planning Board N dinance Requirements Finding_ Evidence Submitted to Support Findings Findings -C4 00 ticle 4.2 identifies the iterla which will normally used to determine the plication of a zoning district signation. The applicant has plied for a R-4 designation. e criteria for that district e set forth in Article 4.2.3 d are as follows: Designated by the adopted Land = X Yes No Applicant has indicated the.property Yes_ No e- Plan as a Transition Area, is in a Ten-Year Transition area. .--� ich can reasonably be expected be annexed by a municipality the ensui.ng!.:• 10-20 years. Water and sewer lines should X Yes' No Applicant has .submitted a signed water Yes too .Ist at site or be assured of ...... and sewer extension easement/agreement stallation as part of the with the Town of Hillsborough. :velopment prAcess. Vehicular access must consist Yes 'X No Applicant does not have direct access Yes ._._.No direct access to a street to a street classified as either arterial assified as 'either arterial or collector if considered as an Isolated collector as designated tract; however, if considered as part of. the the adopted Land Use Plan. Northern Fairview subdivision, direct access Is provided. Harper Street serves a resi- dential subdivision and by definition of the Zoning Ordinance would be considered a subcollector based on the number of trips per day and the number of units served. AM Affilk 139 )ECE111 )1102/35/1_) ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT ZULLSBOROUGIEE NORTH CAROLINA 27278 4•1161... is...5J,, k• I.FTMALI I 4, 4P •ftiftwo REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO. TEE ZONING ATLAS We (X), 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 AIR to R-4 • The property is located on ift0 both side$of State Road # 1395 which is named Harper St. . The property is located in Hi 3)mbgronerh Township,. Tax- Map 3 Block A Zot WO 17 . It has a frontage of irregular feet and a depth of irregular feet, and contains 1?..40 acres• III Applications for a change- to the Zoning Atlas shall contain the following: a. A fully dimensioned 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. SUBMITTED HEREWITH b.- A legal description of the land. SUBMITTED HEREWITH 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. REFER TO APPLICATION 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. REFER TO APPLICATION e. - The manner in w2ich the proposed amendment will carry out the intent and purpose of the adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. REFER TO APPLICATION f. All other circumstances, factors and reasons wlich applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment. REFER TO APPLICATION We (I), the undersigned, certify that all statements furnished in this application are true to the best of our (my) knowledge and that the application as submitted 40 is complete. .4.1//444.4 .4.. euti Robert A. & Rachel S. Scholar NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SIGNATURE OF APPLI ANT(S) P.O. Box 22, Hillsborough, N.C. igr-aa • 919 929 3828 DATE 11.1 rr C IL - 1.40 . . . . . - . , . . . . t . APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION . . . . The Honorable Board of County Commissioners Orange County, North Carolina . • - • . . . , - ROMMISSIONERS: . - . - . . The undersigned request that property locaied on Tax Map Number 5 5? . . Block number A , Lot number MO 17 , Shown on the accompanying plat, . . which is presently in a :A-R District be rezoned to R-4 . - for the following reasons: . When the zoning ordinance was adonted in 1 .8f t - .ust L . - Tho 'the •roces of administering the Northern Fairview C.D. Grant. This grant money allo - the coup to brin- urban services to an area which sorel needed them. I addition, - the county will' be building a park- in the Northern Fairview- area This .ro 'ect will add another im.ortant urban amenity_to this area. This _ ype deve opment over the, past several years has changed the characiir of the area and will continue to exert a .ostive influence on development in e u ure. e • -- o assi ication o this property in 19:1 may avp •ekn appropriate, however, given the changes over the past years a reeval on of zoning seems logical. Northern Fairview subdivision is zoned R- by Orange Oounty. Highland Woods subdivision to the north is zoned R-10 • (equivalent, to R-4) 'by the Town of Hillsborough. Most urban services exis to the nronertvor would b- -xt-n. -d ; . - 144 - t - z. - . 0 4 - d-velo.ment , process. This property is located at the edge of a built up area. The co of the urban serv* - - . - v- . - . • .- . • .- .. . - 00 4- . -ve oper The R-4 designation will allow the high cost of development to be spread out over more lots thus kee .in.:. the final c. -t .f .t3 • -,teu-h or ' - Northern Orange residents to afford . - . - . - Signed: • Address: . 6g,7.44.44/ 4. .G1,4-1..4.44"../ . _ __ ees,„ 6 "GR /P. *, . 7z6", • io-ont, • ._ _ ....... 411 • AM Alk REZONING REQUEST CBECKLIST OWNERS NAME Robert S„cho_larrfRaahe], s_ hal ADDRESSP,Q, Box 22, Hillsborouuh, K.C. 27278 Current zonizig A-R Total number of acres 12 = Current land use ,undevPl tined Type of rezoning requested R-4 Proposed land use single family residential Tax map It L _Block it &__)Doha A' 1oty p/0 It Proposed Water Supply: Public x Community ' Individual Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public x ' Community Individual septic tank .� . Access onto state road # 1395 Average daily traffic count on the state road 340 Describe existing . critical areas: Flood prone areas none Poorly drained areas none Streams none, onlv surface Other sensitive areas Arai awe Describe land uses in: General Area single -family residential t proposed regional Orange County Park Adjacent parcels of land Northern Fairview subdivision:Highland Woods subdivisions Millgun eubdivisl6nj residential lots in single ownership 14 • ,:�t.i•�. Sri Y+�'t;=;' :•.y• .:..�' - :+., �'�.>�,u;yo-:: H,c"�:ti'• .:•�.•;:J - = _ :•:,,:� Wit.. :'v_•zy.... ...J: -:r.:r:JC• �- .. •H • - - -•�•�r II. r*, �.-�;.+..•ray.:-:':^•. .:k'C - rl: - •Az:.cer•ta•i n-=panceT of-1-a,n d: -."r,n:' t+L:1,-rsi or.•au gh:.Townsh i p,• Orange County, - -Nortj Carol i na, descr i bea`;:a"s.•' : -• . - '}BEG•tNNING. at a.-poi n t Err:.tile:. cen ter • of• .0`1#-,,Cedar...Groove' Road•, the . , southern. corner: of Lot. ;;L 'o . Q'T;ocFC •B==of• °,14 .gh•1acrd:.t400d.s" tP1at- -r e.car�ded- i n •Qr-•ar ge Courrtj P1 a:1 800te•`1.5.':p.arge• 1.78):..`' Thence with th-el'Zoning. •;j_uri•sill.cti oc�;.?-Q ':*61.' Town of.::t-ki,•l l:,sboro'ugh the foi low i ng•, • •. • courses c• Se- 34459-2ZZ.• E,'•,;1299::8 :feet, S.=:4P,:i4-22• E • 217.33 feet, • S. 3.8..-40-22- E'• 40'4•.39' feet' to a;:•'pra1 n t: •i;n::the Tine of property of .:--, Orange Countr.,::..irr,•:the center-:..6+::::!..„q1 d Cedar- Grove Road. Thence w•i-th• the• center:=.:o$-:.•Q1.' . Cedar Cir:'ave' Roads the following g. courses: ••' ' - : S 2:731-00 E• •94;.46:.,feet' •*•S: 0.8E-32-L6.- E:• 5:09.73 feet ,• S 22-17-16 E • - 122.70 feet, S. 28.53-21:. E• ,. i56.G5:•..feet .to a paint . in Dixie Trail . .- -Thence• I th•i n the Ri;gh_t-of-way- of t}i x i.e. Trail N. 8301•-'O1 W • • 761 .90 feet to: the cerr•t•er of Harper Street <S.R. 139S) . Thence • N 82-35-14 4 : 401;.22 feet. ,to the:•edge of Harper Street. Thence the. pr-ap•erty of ,•F,.::Dnnegari:.conti nu i ng N 82--35-14 W 143.56 feet to a:: corner -w:i th *Bobby• Roberts. i n said Dunnegan's 1 i ne . • Thence w•i th• Bobby Roberts-•N 05-08•-40 E . 480 .64 feet t-o a poi nt ,• • Roberts' Northeast corner ..• Thence. N 29-28-09 E.' 500 .08 feet to - • the begi nn i:rr-g, con tai n i•ng -t .-40' acre.e•.• - • • • • • • • ' • • fit•K -•II,II..•-l:. - -• _ •-�1..,•t•.. � ,..i.•! ?..-•_•`_••- - . ORIGINAL --Poor Quality .1.4ra%, Prepared br/Recurn ton Maltese,H. Loftin. Attorney at taw. Hillsborough. S.C. X 500 'WE 271 1 NORTH CARO:ANA WATER/1431St ECTP,IS10!1 EASER!if'C/ACREFJIENT I 4 T ORANGE CO'i.'\^.T I . t 1 ' 1 i RU RASMIOTT/AnWEEMENT. dated the QT1 a r of *-•'. t.. \ . 1915' f • : VV 1 :by and between ...-, &ei ,tr. Sexed•L tc Awb akere, as Al-4,F1 EG S . c, t o/3. 2.a X//us8dy ' .0 +heretnafter called Owners (whether one or aura); and the Tam of Hillsborough. .,_. 14.T1!*mLCP*1 corporation. 101 Ease 0ranla Street. Hillsborough. North Carolina 127275. hereinafter called Ten: iV 1 TN is S S ST tit 1 AR1TCLE I. General. Any pronoun used herein shall he Riven a non-literal I Construction if a literal incer•precaeton would frustrate an othervine clear I Y III : leteec when considered in the context in•whieh used. After this „o.:eft:nt/Agreement has been duly executed by each party In Y. x_ -duplicate. the saes* shall be binding upon this parties aerecu and their• 1 • Rsueceseere. in perpetuity; ochervtse. this dor:meet. and each and every clause• : and phrase thereof. shalt be and rennin null and void. j That In securing this Sesame= and Agrveeune. the Town of Hillsborough i t 1 • has caused no rc nreeontat l on to he 'side to the owners, nor either of them. • eentrary to the terse herein set forth and has delegated no such authority to • f any- of its officers. anentq, servants. nor vne.!uw.en to stake such a represent- ! a atient eta the Owners. nor either of them. . ' ` A- E.I$ T.T. ?s.Feen::. In consideration of the promise of the Tout. to permit t'te "Jnrrs to Connect to the Town system an extended eater and/or If 1 • v) Vl - -sewer erstee to serve the• property of one or more of the tester►!, and in further ; y• � bL( 'consideration of ?4e- +■cosier or the Town to maintain rata tines and apparatus r '� •.t !from and after con"!eclou of Construction and !nstailattun as hereinafter 1 �• ; :apec.9ied. the thorns above (to the extent they may min an interest in the u. ;subject property! herou.y give. grant. and convey unto the Town. and its • o ; .4 . successors sex asni•t•es. a perpetual right an.' easement ewer, span and through J 'the p i•e. roperty or peert!ee as "reel f1ea con c,•h.nlul.••A attached and incorporated.} r i - Veretn to ninta!n ••'•o ee mere underground water and/or ,.ewer lines and a f"` t•'f .. • - it.t apparatus over. uner and through said prnis.rry or properties: . • 17 .r Together with .-se ••ernetuel right and .•as..ment Co rims upon said lands . G Olienever the &See :K reasonably necessary f..r the purpose or Inspecting. atin- . w. - 'ruining and repair'ne said lines and apparatus; pr.w-.4•d, however, that in .4 rapatrinr sold '_!m••:. ...!.! T.vn ti!.a!' rrnww.• are •;urn!.•. ..:►rrh. .hall maks• q I 1 t! ^ . ' level the surface or !4.• ground shove said Hs.•s and aenarates, and shalt 1 7fi s ` - '� - a:. W.1184 (t) :.1 7 ti • 1 it - --144 - 1 - - . i• ? B6c1500 Pm 278 -. ;interfere-air little as: lx renannehlw hnnsihle with any plants, fences, nr Y' ocher lleptrowsentx-tutor the prnperty or properties. f-i7:. ! To ltave,nttd to hold paid rights•aol easenrnta to the Town, and its ' ,successors, ir.'perpetuity. _ • ACTT= !tt. 'lacer/Sewer Connections. And further, for said considerations. w - said Ownera• do uneondi tlonally covenant and agree, for cheeaelvee and choir _ c banoeeasers in- title•as. fol lots: _ tA. That- they shall s:.at leant pro•contes• of complete plans and �•• specifications For each pcotoned p hnsr of development for said properties I ms die ?cwn•and also• ce the appropriate adatnincraclvr agencies-of the ay II State of lfort`i Carolina. for their inspection. F S. Thee- no.Rrttding nor other conncrucctotrtype work will be commenced on any phase of development unless and until: (1) said plans _ and specifications hnve kern officially approved by approprtate•State. r administrative agencies and she Town Council of the Tuwn of !ttllabarough; .1 I :?) all other annra!triace cbtna•apntea and/or encroachment agreetrentshave berm•duly recorded it the office of the Itugiseer of ieeds of Grange County.! 4 %. 14. and (1) this document has been duly executed and notarized by all i- parties in dualicate. c. That nn aspect of a protect phase may ht• connected to any line • in the Tewn'e &vacate unless and until sold protect phase has been . r completed in strict accordance with said approved plans and apecificatlaps.i . M. Xo connection shnt.l be actually made to any line in or connected j e. • to the Town's svatrres except' under she supervisinn and .lireacion of the 7• H Superintendent of Nob/is Works. the Town Manager, or other duly auchurtze.l ! 'i:_: e official of the Teen of till ishnrough, and no-wacer meter shall be , connected exetrot by Town enpleyees•, !` t:. Any connection made In violatitnn of any of the caret, of this ,r Agreement shall cause the- fallowing aanettnnn and reek•.Ilee to became available eo- the ?'tun; Y :. The 'own may disconnect sold line ur apparatus with or a t • without advance notice- to Owners. The owners shall save thv Town !,armless 'rum any and n!i claims for damages aliened CO have been ( 3' ,. suffered 'tv Wry and all persons aft'rieved by any morb dlaeonneetfun. ( a . 2. •"n, owners shall he liable In the Town for any and all . declares• es•• arses. fines, nenalelus. Wind/or otter losses incurred or sustain.' by sni.i Town aris(nn from ....-it v'.••l.tti.o or violations. (:) 145 ! -- •aazi 500 Fox 279 i • S. The i'wners shall provide at their f.Ne expeose a11• plats, plans s and specifications. ensements. encroachment agreements. lahor, materials, i Supplies and equipment for said lines and apparatus at net cost or • I` 1 obligation for same on the nary of the Town; htmever, the Town shall at $ all times curing the progress of construction thereof have the right to i make en•site inspeetions through Its engineer. Superintendent of Public . Works, Town Manager. or any other duly autnortxvd official. i'i C. !luring the said construction the Petters shall as soon as Q reasonably posy hle repair and fully restore Co its peke..construction C condition each and every public and/or private street. driveway. richer of-my. parking area, etc. which shall have here damaged in any way what..., k ever by virtue of said construction work. F ` H. That a subdivision plat of each phase shall !.•• files! in advance of construction in the office of the Kvgiseer of needs of orange County, . I. North Cart'tioa. and upon complecinn of Installation of the lines and i ' apparatus of each recorded phase In accordance with clue rorrespnndini r 'r 7 plans and specifications for such phase. the title to said lines and i . a apparatus shall thereafter be and remain vented exclusively in the Tan of i lW:thorough and Its successors and assigns. That a ropy of each said s 1 1 - pia: shall he- filed with the :own of iII!!shormsrh•to he attached to this ;. Agreement and to become a parr hereof. e - • 1. The Teen shalt have solo and exclusive right. authe*rfcy and i e control in. over. and to all regular monthly service fees to he charged • to any and All users of said lines•and apparatus and shall have the . j _ 4 sate and exclusive dfseret!on and authority in cha determination of cha d rates of said charges from time to time. J. That from and after the completion of the Installation of the said water•and seater lines in any phase of development in accordance with ' . o the corresponding plans and specIficntinnn as referenced ;shove, the Town ti l IShall have sole and exclusive right. authority and cer►rr..l ,.verr each 5 I further connection t'erreco sex! extension thereof. Mat tit.. Town shalt receive to advance of earl water meter 14Nin.ec!on the sum of "ll!R t1UNfRlit I T nouns ($6OE.f!!” as a Cap-it fee for each such connection. Ti►at 411 such Cason fees s!a i he ewilercad by the toners and remitted to the Town. K. That it is undersre d and agreed that the T.sen Is currently seeklnw, co structure a nr.q!ran to provide r.•ishur•.esmt•nt for flip e.ret ul f '• eonstrt,.r!on and !nstatlarlan of water ''ne% And sewer tteers to individu.al..� f f .5 . • •. eoi 500 ran 280 1 F and: n ecitles 'art 1o1 tinting.innsuch con er wtreserio and Innta1145104 prnlecta and than the Owners.shall he fully prroieted and entitled to participate '- i fi ieany reia�!,ursemene prograsrwhich is given'tlnal apnruvs! by the Town. 1 ARTICLE' TV. Title Transfer. For said considerations, owners do hereby 4eonvey Co Town sole. absolute.. and' exclusive title to alt weer and/or sewer F. clines and related apparatus• now. or hereafter installed within the boundaries ` !i pof said property or properties and within-the euurview of thin agree+enc. ARTICLE V. General Exceptions. Any ocher provisions In this.Agreement �- 1 • 'te the.contrary notwithstanding.. it is understood and agreed• chat, the Town • t )0411 be under no obl1tlat:en ar any tine Co permit a connection to the•Town "= 3. water weever wysten•whlch would•hm alert~ ro violate any moratorium. - ;•ultianeiem. order. er mandate issued by an administrative agency of the'States . • r . i ' 'of North Carolina charted with respnnsibilityfor the safety of gush system. II I ;!e is further enderaenod and agreed that Owners and their respective successors r.Lip title shall be solely responsible for the maintenance of each water line _ ! ~located. between a sperifie water weer and• rho gait or facility being served - i ;by said never. It is further understood and agreed that the Miners and their a !respective succeessnrn In title shall he solely responsible for the esitneenance • ! + !of each sever service tine. which is defined as that purtien'of a sewer line ?froe••its•point. of connection to the unit or facility being served thereby cu - 1 1 . its point of connection to the main sewer line or' lines serving owners' t =property. i J re ES':'IO?V HEREOF. the said Owners have hereencn xrc their hands and m r -seals; and if corporate. has caused this d. .,ment to be executed to acs 'corporate name 'v Its 'resident. witnessed by its Secretary. and its corporate ; -i .sea1 hereunto•affixed ail by authority of its Heard of direrrnrs duly given: ": f ,'and the Town has caused this- Easement/Agreement to he executed fn its corporate - ...UMW by its Mayor. attested co by its Teen Clerk. and Its off trial seal to he 'i 0 s'-• rhereunte affixed. nit ',y authority duly given by the members of its Town :• 'Council. i. • .4f i.erch. _f'a"r�+uSe= (51•Ai.) (SEM.) _rA+iee4 p 1,4•:.'.°1141'ei illy- v.Letl OF CUKI"RATi oS :7.4 ,. tax 44TCRO1A4Y .� Hy: rs.• '4 ;.r 4. 1'kFtiliskNT �.. s . �,._*.y; My•Y?. . Ne i •. .N: arm; - . .• - . 147 ., ?! CAROLNA { aso 500 acE 281 - " --I. t •— Notary tary Public. certify that on the 9th day of- S . Jacinto . 19 85■ before me't. rs nw l Iy came ROPJECI A. SCHOLAR d kits RACAL S► SGQLAx land. acknowledged the due execution of the fore/coin% Kascment/AilremmenC. sI Witness my hand and notarial seal this 9th day of January • °IL. i • /Motuil, t'n• ' -..- ! Ninon eh941 C (iii'll commission expires: February 22. 1986 (_ 1 'Nekra CAROLINA • al ue ct care:r { r. � Spy _ a Notary uh l t.• for clops above Count, and State..do•hereby certify that on tho22ed day of JatnlarY • 19.0,E 'befeee ee. personally cane Agatha Johnson to ni Personally known. who-being by } 1 .!me duly sworn. did Gennce am say Clint she- Mini 1Mini Clerk tic the Tcwa of _ llil:aborregh. c5c moalciont corporation dcarrthed In the foregoing P.aaumeat/ _Agreement: that by authority duly given and an the net of said corporation. ;the foregoing Easemenc/Agreement was signed In its name; by thw Mayor. frank U. 45heffieId. sealed with its yea/ and attested No said Town t;terk;%t.:woER w.. ,p -t � 'Uitness my had and ofrfrtai 'will. �� 4r ''''-' 1/1: :ttqa azni + ___i strrAKY C" , 1L:Oily cohlmaion exntres: JULY 10, 1989 s•....../..,,e47•0., • NORTH CAROLINA—ORANGE COUNTY • The foregoing certificstels)of Michelle McGahan and Sherry G. Carter, • lottblicahliattNotariesi Public of the designated Governmental unitslisclare)certified to be correct.Filed for registra- denims the 24th day of January ,19 85 .at 3:38 o•elodc.P.M- in Record Book, S00 page 277 � . Hayes,Register•f Deed 1 • &n um. Sy:IP - . ,y► .0_- Annuo/Caterha+ Regissrr of Oases : _ . 1 . , , .. . . „...,. . .: . . .,.„..;.,:,,... .. ... . 148 North 4‘: North Carolina.Department of Natural - • s Resources &Community Development ,6) • 4e. *.m.7.4"07,0e James a Hunt,Jr.,Governor James A.Summers,Secretary DIVISION. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT December 10, 1984 • MEMORANDUM TO: FMHA FROM: R. W. Van Tilburg SUBJECT: North Dixie Subdivision Air, surface water, and ground water data available to this office indicate that environmental quality is high in the project area. Since the project will be served by public systems, the environmental inpact should be minimal . RWVT:Cs • 114.11- Raleigh Regional Office 3800 Barren Drive.P.O.Box 27687.Raleigh.N.O 27611-7687 Telephone 919/733-2314 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - _ - - 149 FilLLSBOROUGH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT 2011 So..*flan..•Strert 11111-460110tICK NI 1011TH"CARIIUNA 2727a .N.Inv 1..ergwa,Fire 4114 October 31 , 1984 Robert A. Scholar P, O. Box 22 Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 Dear Mr. Scholar ; 1 have reviewed your proposed development in Northern Fairview and the Orange Rural - Hillsborough Fire Department will have no problems providing adequate fire protection for the development . You should place fire hydrants so that no structure in your development is more than 500 feet from a hydrant and the hydrants are on no less than 6 inch lines. 411 Your development will place no burden on the Fire Dept . Sincerely, /ohn W. Forrest /Fire Chief • III • ; kA;1/1. 1.EisawitGetAss 150 • :,• ( • • ,•:•1.1N u . Ir2,9 • TO: Orange County Planning Depart nt • • 2 FROM: Lindy Pendergrass RE: North Dixie Sub-Division(47 acreas north of Dixie Avenue in North Fairview ) DATE: October 30, 1984 • The Orange County' Sheriff's Department can provide Law Enforcement Services for the new sub-division listed above without any forseeable • problems. We would not have to request any additional persona) or equipment to provide routine service requests. • . . • . . LP/jc cc: Robert Scholar • . . . • • • • • , 411 • ��t 31it!5tu1rnug1 i4a Frank H. Sheffield, Jr.• 'T° Clerk •HILLSBOROUGH; NORTH CAROLINA 27278 A Johnson rnmisstoRert Supt. Water Works ood J. Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson �4+ i;a j� Street Supt. Allan A. Lloyd L. D. Wagoner Remus 1. Smith - t N ICachel H. Slesen, Arnold ojPoGce pt, . nold W. Hamlett -, , 4 v ire Chief j, John Forrest Alter._ rai' August .22, 1985 V Mr. Don Willhoit, Chairman, Orange County Commissioners 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 - • Dear Chairman Willhoit: With reference to the County public hearing on August 26th, on behalf of the Hillsborough Town Board, Z would like to reaffirm the willingness of the Town to provide water and sewer service to the proposed Weng, Scholar, Scottswood, IIIand Cornwallis Hills developments, as expressed by the Board at its August 12th meeting. Letters of tentative approval were issued earlier for each of the projects, and we feel that the commitments contained in these letters should be honored. by the Town and County. Our willingness to- serve these developments is, of course, subject to review and approval of detailed engineering plans by both the Town Engineer and State Division of Health Services. We expect these - engineering reviews to determine whether the proposed developments can be con- structed in a manner consistent with the Town's current plans to maintain and improve- water pressure to existing customers in the vicinity of the proposed new developments. At its meeting on August 12th, the Town Board adopted a change to the Town's water and sewer extension policy which requires that all future applications for water--sewer service be reviewed by the Town Board. This review will be based on preliminary drawings and other information submitted by a developer with the application for approval. Under this new procedure, the Town Board will determine whether to extend water—sewer service to the proposed development, based on con- sideration of the availability of treatment plant capacity and other potential impacts of the proposed project. Tentative Board approval, subject to engineering review and approval, will then be communicated to the County by letter. This new approval procedure will substitute for the letter approval procedure used to date. • • Mr. Don Willhoit • Page 2 - August 22, 1985 . 152 trust this clarifies the Town's intentions with respect to the four developments currently under review by the County and makes clear the fact that all future developments will be subject to our new, and hopefully im- proved, approval procedures. Sincerely, • Frank H. Sheffield,. Jr., • Mayor FHS/jc . cc: Town Board Members Ken Thompson, County Manager Marvin Collins, County Planning Director James Pendergraph, Town Water-Sewer Superintendent [ 153 . . ...- . . . - . . - . Mayor . &tint:- ot *itbstiorougb Town Clerk Frank N.ShetTieldar. . 0 Agatha Johnson • Contrainion HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 ar - Amt. Water Works Alk Lynwood.1.tlrown ' . C.E.Rosemont! 111/Horace H.Johnson ' .4.01.3P17.* ' itreet Sum Allen A.Lloyd ,<4 . ' i I. • r LEL Wagoner Remus J.Smith .:::iii"9 pats :.." .t.-3-2 Ode!of Pace Rachel H.Stevens -1' Kir Arnold W.Hamlett _ t Vol,- 4 • . . . • . . . . . . . . • February 13, 1985 . -. • • . . To: Orange County Planning Board - • From: Hillsborough Planning Board . . Regarding the rezoning requests by Bob Scholar for Tax Map 5, Block A, Lot 17 - and Dr. Wens Ng for Tax Map 3, Lot 28: On February 7, 1985 the Hillsborough Planning. Board made the following recommendation - The Hillsborough Planning Board made a unanimous vote to recommend that the Scholar property not be rezoned for higher density than•R-3.. There.was a lot of-concern about the density- already in the area; and R-4 was higher- density than the Board thought should be allowed'. - . . . • . - . There was a unanimous vote that the Wang Ng request for R.-3 was appropriate. • Both of the developments would- have to have Town Approval for water and sewer. . • After the Town Board met on February 11, 1985 concerning the problems of water pressure and sewer capacity in the area north of town which would include both • the Scholar and Weng Ng property, the Planning Board met on February 13, 1985 to make. further recommendations. • The Town Board had determined that at this point in time, the problems with water.presaure would not allow either development to be served in the.near future. The Town Engineer is to make a feasibility study and report to the Town Board by July or August, 1985 on what would need to be done to serve the area with water and sewer. The Water Commissioner estimates that it would be at least 1 to 1 1/2. years before the Scholar and Weng Ng properties would be able to have town. water if the Town Board decided to proceed. Ont.-February 1.3, 1985, the Hillsborough Planning Board passed a motion that a recommendation be sent recommending that the Scholar and Weng Ng rezoning requests be turned down due to the lack of sufficient water pressure to allow usage of town water and due to the time period of 1 to 1 ; /2 years before it is even possible that the pressure might be corrected. ' . If the County decides to hold this request until the decision is made by the Zown Board or if the County decides to rezone, please consider the comments • made on February 7, 1985 listed above. • • 154 19tez., 4 3 , 41$4 iJ • March 8, 1985 Mr. Marvin Collins, Director Orange County Planning Staff Hillsborough, N.C. RE:. North Dixie Subdivision • ' Hillsborough Township, Orange County Dear Mr. Collins. We respectfully request that the Public Hearing for the subject rezoning application be adjourned until May 27, 1985. It currently appears that the North Hillsborough water pressure problem, which we planned to concur- rently resolve at the time of our rezoning application. , must be resolved prior to a rezoning decision. We have completed our preliminary engineering and this adjournment will hopefully give us time to get the necessary approval of same. Very truly yours, s///4. Robert A. Scholar - • : -,•' . GE ORAN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 155 • . • • • •• .• • • • -. -• ,'• • • - - =--: ..esti If 0,0 r[71-1 ftst• • . - • • Ta: MARVIN COLLINS' - • EDDIE KIRK SUBJECT:: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS — SCHOLAR REZONING rr High-Iand Woods. is .comptetely developed, approximately 415 trips per day would be- using Harper Street from this subdivis.ion. If only, the proposed. portion of Mr. Scholar's property- is developed: and the remainder of Mr. Scholar's property is Left - undeveloped', this would put approximately 898 trip-sr per day on the streets in. Northern- Fairview. If the remainder is deve-loped at an: R-4 density, this would provide approximately 1005 trips per day Concentrated on North Dixie and Harper Street,. unless another- entrance is considered.. • • • • • • • • „.:,----•• . . .., . .. ._,.,,,•,•:...:• C ,::i;:::,•.,-..••.•••••-••••:•-•-••••,:•:••••'-:-.:•_••..• . .-•••••••;".... •••-:- .... %I;;:•• .„ •• ': :'•••••••• ' 1•••••• • - :.*•••• - -• •... . • ••••••••••.::.•••:-.,.-..,;,..'„ti::,...,-:;:tg,:......-::....•••••.:• ...,;;;•%:..',....-:;••;:i.v-i:oti.s.'..-;:•;,.:••'::.•••*.••:•••'',:-•-••-",.'.,,t.,.•J.....,,..; •;.-.. ,„.:-; • • . . •• . •••••,... •••• ....:•,•.:.....•.•:*•:.• , .. . • -. •••••-. • ••• •••• . ••..•,'•'':•:•-•,-.%,...,:::::.....y.•,.:.......2.,..-,._:::•;!,3;•:::.'..?_:::,i•••••;;;,:tlyS,...;;;,:,',ftiy...4.P.k',.•=:•••:'A."'if,e;'',:5:[11:•::;:d3.".•?•-•••••.:.....':.;:,•'!.... -:•• -• '• • ' ..*, • • • •• . : ” •.• • • - --...r.••:.,-:• ..-.•• • •7••••:-.r.. ..••-•••.:•1-':"."-..,::',--:;':f•c:.:.=::„•..!,•,...:: •• .;; *.., '.••:',..,•:.-,.f. er••• 1' • ,--. • = • • ,,....-•".•.., .4 ...'-...----........... ''''....f.:''. RAN GecuzTy r L A,1411e DEPAI• TR• E N' i • • • - ' --•- • •". • ''. '"-'''''''': •••••••.''' - 1-.''--:••.• .* -• ':. • • *'''1••;•''!..`:•':•---*,,..*-raxassoRercrqtt -.. :. ::.:. .,•:• . :-......... • •-.1 : •-. ... : . :.;::,. ,::. ... % - • -.-:-:••••:••':. •••::••••;:-•:;..• 'i,i.-,:••-••:•.....;:•,;:;••••_•/..<1'21i..4.•:.•-•,,I;•_•44:1•.:(•,::-..., ,•,,- . . .•• _:::,.,,'-'..•,•:-.=•••••••••;.‘....:*.'.'...;•• ....t.t i,:-.•.•-•••••••:"?...:i.;••,."1,:".-:::•, ....L.,:1-14,,•f 1:•L;i,•-:,:(•••Ntarrjr. CAROLINA. • ....... .....-.r-1.:.••••••.-.• •:.„-::":•,.••.;17,.:.•;...':...::..r,Z•.....1•(;•....,-..i.:::„.z..,..1*_.-f...-•:',....1•:,. , , , .. . ,..., .......2, .•,.. ;•-••.:.:. :•, •:,!:„.: ...,-.1::; ... .1;:,....;',r.z-..•:•.....-.-..:•••'•.,:.• -.::--..:',27279,•.•• • . . . • .. . . - . .• • •. • . - . . • • .. .- ... . . . .. . . . . . . , . . -• - _ .; : fitAinembuilt.e. • -- • ' . • ". - .. .., - :. l• 8: i'S“-•7.7.1 -.11... • • •iple': . * ..4 • ' , •..% • *slik Goo • . - • .. . " • ..... .- • . . ,. . . • . . • .- . . . •••• ' •.'. * . • ,.. -. .. . .... , • -:•••• ' ••-- :....,";•.•:....!'••',.;:':•':-':', -,:••'-'•.::',:-...•.••••1•:•:-.. '...-..' ' .."--.....•••"- : - - • • . - ' •.1 . : ...'••••• :••:•••••••-•,...•••:•*:-.....-.::....-'''•-•'''.•••••''';'....• CEFITIFICATE OF MA/LING- • . • • . •-• •-. ...; •i .. •' •-,-..r....,•:::,......:..:-:: . •-- . . • •• ....•.... ." . —. .*".-1.% .• ."':.'-'...--''•'..:''''•••:•''''''..*•:"'*-"*"• ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS . .. . , . •. -"• . • ••• .t ••• ••••:••• ''''' ''. •..- ::-: ORANGE COUNTY', NORTH CAROLINA - . •,•' • County,. North . I.',. . Susan Smith , Zoning Officer, Orange • • Carolina, Da HERESY CERTIFY that on or about .• • . August: 21 , 1985, I mailed, by fi rst. class mai l, • postage p.repeid, a Reminder Notice of the continuation of Hearing the May 27', 1985 Public, Gering tobe held on the rezonina m• • - 9.u :s .• - o Res •de 1 ; —1 t. Re- idnt " . 1.-4 or Robert and Rachaet Sc-ho ,.- • :d .n. Ha . e Street SR 131,_Ang, ..,. ., ; . no rth of Dixie Drive in Hi L Lsbo rough Townshio to each • property' owner. as. al fred by Article 20 Section 20.8 .3 of • the Orang:e• County Zoning. Ordinance. • • • The. notice mailed: specified: the date, time, place- and- sub-j.ect •• '- • of, the • continuation, of the Public. Hearing. on the. zoning . ola.s.sificatinn, change-. .. •• • •. • • . WITNESS my hand,. this- the 82nd day o - August , 1985 . . . • • 1. / Alp . . . . • • . ., . .• • 4/ , . .Ai,_ _,._.... • . . .-• . . • . • . - SASAN SM .H • - . . . • ZONING OFFICER . . .. - • - , . . . .. . • • • . .. . - . ' • • • • . . . . • . . . . • . ,. ... — -, -I. .. . . • . • . _ . . . .. - •. • . . •,. ..... , . .• • •• •• . . . .. . . . - • • . . • . • • . • , • . , • , . . • • . • . . • - • - . . . • • ' . • . - . • • . . • • -- • . NOTICE OF THE CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 1 57 TO THE' ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS AND ATLAS OF ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA • Aft Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes. of North Carolina, Chapter 153A, ligction 323 and Section 343, Article 20.5 and Article 20.6 of the Orange. County Zoning Ordinance, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Court- room of the Orange County Courthouse, I06 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina on. Monday August 26, 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 and Zoning Atlas. • The_ amendments under consideration are as follows: 1. Z-2-85 DR. IONE, WENG NG AND GHAT WENG NG The property, in question is located at the southwest corner of NC 86 North and Coleman Loop, Road (SR 1332) in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 28 on Orange County Tax Map #3 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 1,823,421.6 square feet. or 41.86 acres. The apifl,icant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-3. 2.2. Z-3-85 ROBERT A. AND RACRAEL SCHOLAR The property in question is located along Harper Street (SR 1395) and Dixie Drive north of the Town. of Hillsborough in Hillsborough Township. It is known as.Lot- 17 on Orange County Tax Map i15 for Hillsborough Township. It -• contains 540, 144 square feet or I2.4-acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-I to Residential-4. • 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 attend the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning•Department, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278. For your concerns to be fully considered they must be received by the Planning Department prior to the public hearing. Questions regarding the proposals should be directed to the Orange County Planning Department.. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 1111244gAiiaglitap MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR PUBLISH: August 23,. 1985 158 - NOTICE 0? PUBLIC, BEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TO'• THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND ZONING ORDINANCE OF ORANGE COUNTY, 01 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 VII: 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, S.C. on Monday, February 25, 1985 a; 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: 1. Z-2-85 DR. =YE WENG NG AND GUAT WENG Na The property in question is located at the southwest corner , of N.C. 86 North and Coleman Loop Road 6sR. 13327 in Hillsborough �,.• Township. It is known as Lot 28 on Orange County Tax Map 03 for Hillsborough Township. It contains 1.823,421.6 square feet or 41,86 acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned f=rom Residential-1 to Residential--3 . - 2. Z-3-85 ROBERT A. AND RACHAEL SCHOLAR The property in question is located along Harper Street " (SR 1395) and Dixie Drive north of the Town of Hillsborough in Hillsborough Township. It is known as Lot 17 on Orange ' County Tax Map t5 for Hillsborough Township. It contains m 540,144 square feet or. 12.4 acres. The applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned from Residential-1 to Residential-4- • 3. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS FOR MIMES TOWNSHIP a. Z-5-85- WIL COM. TRUCE LINES, BURCS COMPTON The property in question is located north of US 70 in Cheeks Township. It is known as Lots 36C and 37 on Orange County Tax Map 28 for Cheeks Township. Lot 36C contains 166,834.8 square feet or 3 .83. acres. Lot sa` 37 contains 760,122 square feet or 17.45 acres. The applicant is requesting that an error in the Zoning . . Atlas be corrected and that Lot 36C and a portion of ,...` Lot 37 be rezoned from Residential-I to Existing Commercial-V. • -159 b. Z-6-85. CLARENCE- MAYBE. DOBT • The property in question is located: north of nest Ten. Road (SR. 1144) in Cheeks Township. It is known. as part of Lot 1 on Orange County Tar Map- 28' for Cheeks Township. Lot 1 contains 869,022 square feet or 19.95 acres. The portion.-to be rezoned is dimensioned as 250' by 300' or 75,000 square feet. The applicant is requesting that an error in. the Zoning Atlas .be corrected and that the • . • portion. of Lot 1 be rezoned. from Residential .-i •, to Existing Commercial- V. 4, - PD-I-85 OARWOOD•• ES';ATES. • . The property in question is located west of Craig Road • (S'8. 1450) in Eno Township, Orange County and Lebanon Township, Durham County. It is known as Lot 24A on Orange County Tax Map- 16 for Ewa Township. Lot 24A. contains: 1,.511,632 square feet or 34.7 acres. The total tract is 44.0 acres. The applicant is requesting a Class A Special Use Permit for a Planned Development (PD-R-1) to allow the construction of a 32 unit mobile home park. - 5. SUBDIVISION- REGULATIONS: TEXT AMENDMENTS Amend. the Definitions of the Orange County Subdivision Regulati. by- revising the• definition of "subdivisionT to track the -- definitioa provided. in G.S. 153A-335 as follows: 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 attend the hearing may express their views by writing to• the Orange County Planning Department, 106 East Margaret Lane, Eilliborough, NC 27278. For your concerns . to•. be- fully considered', they must be received by the Planning • Department prior to the public hearing. Questions regarding- the proposals- should be directed to the - . • Orange County Planning Department. -Office hours ate from, 8:.00 a.m.. to 5:00 p-.m. , Monday through Friday. 411 140/104(.0.(024411.). MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRE February 13 . 1985 160 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT . Meeting Date Amaggi2aj_1985 Aotion ,4rnda SUBJECT: Z-10-85 (Rezoning Request) Cornwallis Hills Item #V, • I.I.NMPOI■■••••IIII■1■1•••■■■••■• DEPARTMENT: PLANNING ----------- PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No 4111•111111.■M■•■•■• IMMO I.0111.■..141111••••••■■• ONO. Attachment(s) Information Contact: EDDIE KIRK APPLICATION AND NARRATIVE VICINITY MAP PLANNING STAFF FINDINGS TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH LETTERS AGENCIES' LETTERS JULY 25, 1985 STAFF MEMO—TRAFFIC CONDITIONS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING TeLephone bet "---- Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hill — 968-4501 PURPOSE: To inform the Board of a proposed rezoning request scheduled for pub tic. hearing on August 26, 1985. NEED: Attenton ReaLty & Insurance Company is requesting a rezoning for 64.71 acres of land Located off Old NC 86 (SR 1009) and along the south side of Oakdale Drive (SR133) south of Hillsborough . The property is referenced as Tax Map 44A, lots 3 through 26 and Tax Map 42, Block C part of Lot 1 , Hillsborough Township . The present zoning classification is (Residential-1 ) . The applicant is requesting the entire 64.71 acres to be rezoned (Residential-3) R-3. The property is located in an area designated as Ten Year Transition in the Orange County Lend Use Plan . IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow a density of 15,000 square feet per dwelling unit on the 64.71 acres. Soils in the area are Georgeville, Tatum and Enon . White georgeville and Tatum, which cover most of the tract , are slight to moderate for building site development , Enon which 410 /61 Z-10-85 (Rezoning Request] Cornwallis Hills August 26, 1985 Page 2 • covers approximately 20% of the tract, is severe due to shrink— swell potential and Low strength . Cates Creek runs around the southeast corner of the tract and has a considerable amount of 100 year flood plain which extends into the property in question . According to the Department of Transportation , both Old NC 86 and Oakdale Drive are classified at service Level C. At the current 45 mph speed Limit and given a 22' travelway, the capacity of Old. N.C. 86 at service Level C is estimated to be 7,500 trips per day. At the current 45 mph and given a 20' travelway, the capacity of Oakdale Drive at service Level C is estimated to be 5,770 trips per day. Department of Transportation is recommending a left turn Lane on Old NC 86 for safety reasons . (sea traffic conditions memorandum) . RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request. 4IM 410 _ _ r SEE: ; CORNWALLIS HILLS M - i t AP 4' , DEVELOPER: ALLENTON REALTY N PRESENT ZONEr R-1 PROPOSED ZONE R-3 DESIGNATION: 1®- r Tramition \` LUP A 1« a 400` 1 SEE MAP 42E '1 CORNWALLIS HJ,Ljt Ste. PHI V 8.3 A JEFFERSON RD } 1 DOT 0720 J / .7147 } } 21.6 3 AC. 8657 t . ... ., ..::.: . . . . . . . - '... `,.. •..:...1'...!....'f,,;:,'.:.' -•:7".•';INkFV-....,%• 4• :: : ::.,.:;-.4.,..,V0.0;.1:.,;•:.*Fit,%.+5Z11,4.1ii,:',;■0y.• . • - • •''''.' ..•4..Z::.- :.....':. . . ' . .. ',.. ..... . ,S.:.....:...:/:',"::..••.".....1:....i:.,.,'.,..'''.•■•.Y.-:.,:r 7--...'.,. • •,....„....••:...'J:::-2.-::-...--•..,-••:,:::.• , . • •-•-•• . • ... •• • --• •••• - ••- ... -. - •.---,-J..,!•;::•:.-.:'-:-,.'.:.‘--.2,'..,";f-:! 6i64:.bal. litP' LANNING DEPARTaIN• T Ina . ..............,.:....... •... .. .••-•-....,•.:-,:.... ..r. ::,..•:'.•••••,-; ::**,-;-, ;;'....4C,..: ;--.:•1111;LSBOROTTGR • ..• 1.. . . .. ... ....y,*.........• • .1.•.-,: ...',..:.- ••• -,..::*-'- . . .•;.,,-.• :.•-. . ..- •..•...*.-:.i,..-..*:•.,.: -,•,?:":.:...;',.::.;.,.....!:.:,.4:e.•, .:.-.. .-• . . .-.:f V%••••.--* i,-;.-• . • *.";;?:.."*!-') ,,"?( .•• '•-!••fireirrig.CAR.OLIN.ii.• • .• .. . . . ....... . . . . • - , • • ••.• , :::-.. ---......•:. •: .......!:•:.". ;• ••••••••.:.;-, :f-:...-‘:*;:-",..:t....',. ••••.'": 2727S- • • • •• ' • . ' • • • . . , . . . . ,. • ..:.•-.. ..., ...oft* ty,6 • • . - •• • • , • • ,..4weei..-44, • , . - ill-niF.:7. • . • . •• • ',11-j,...F . , . . . . •er we% . . . . 0EHORANDUM.„ .• • ..• - . ' .''.*.... . . ::.: ...:.-;-1.:. ,:.....-..:•%.-, ...-... . . .. - -. .".• -.••••• ....•-•.",' '-•-:•';'.':."--:-•*-7-.•Y'.••••••: '- !,.....:.-;..,...c.....:,...';'. ....::-.••••••••,• " • ..• • • • . - - , .. • ';--....*::•-• . . ., . ' • - .. • • TCL:,. - . ,.. ..*: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD • .. • . • . . . ..•- . • ••,. PROW: • : . ' Etitat Krmt,. PLANNER • -- •:' . . . : . '. . .. .• ... . . • . • ..., :. • - . . .• . . .. •.. - ••t - . . .• , . . • •. . •.. .... ....... • • DATE:: August...8:4'. TS8U. • • . . • .. . • .. • • .. . .,. ...• . • .• .. .. , • . _ . .. • SUBJECT:. z-ict-as (Rezoning, Request) Cornwe l/i a Hi Lie . . • GENERAL INFORMATION. . .. • - • . . APPLICANT: . . ALLentort, Realty & Insurance Company- P.D. Box 731 • - .• . • , . • • . • ' • Durham, N. Q. 27702. ' • • • - • • • • . • . : . . • . . LOCAT/OW:, 0 Ld NG BS (SR. 1009) and Oakdale 0 ri vet • • . • • . .', .:. . . . csaitaai . • • : • • . • • ., • . . . 0 . . . . . . . REQUESTED AMOR: ., Approval as a. Rezoning from R-1* to R-3 . •*•••••••,.• • .• • . : , %.• •-%.......-. '-':-.',"-...• far 64.71 acres. . .. , . PURPOSE:: To allow h.igh:er density. residential development • than one per 417,01:1D sq. ft.. .• LOT ,S/ZE: 64.71 total acres requested: • , EXISTING LAND- USER Vacant? wooded tract , . . SURROUNDING LAND • . AND ZONING: The property: in question is zoned R-1.- . • . . • ..• . Zoning designations are identified below for • . • •• - . ...- surrounding: property. . .. .• • • . . . . • • NORTH • developed property with small lots. • • ..• ,••••• • . ...... : . mixed with undeveloped property zoned 11,-4. . . • • • . SOUTH. - undeveloped wooded Land. zoned R-1 • • . . EAST - Cornwe.11is Hills is zoned R-3 and a few . . houses along Old NC-86 are zoned R-1 : • . WEST - wooded undeveloped property zoned R-1 ) . . . . : LAND USE PLAN: Designated. 10-Year Transition i .. , . . . • . • - • . FINOINGS OF THE ORAWLIA&OUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANIL PER AINING TO APPLICATION: Z-10-85 CORNWALLIS BILLS 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 l I ance• 11No" Indl cates Noncom l lance PLANNING STAFF 'PLANNING FINDINGS BASED ON BOARD SUBMITTED APPLICATION EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS RECOMMENDED Ordinance Requl rements FINDINGS The application must comp l y with ail requirements speci- fied *in.Article 20 - Amend- ments. Those requirements I nci ude: 20.32 a) Map showing affected Yes No Site play provided at scale of property at scale of not less Yes No l"=100' than I '= 100" nor more than l'= � • 201 20.3.2 b) Legal description of Yes No Description property p provided with application Yes No 20.3,2 c) Explanation of alleged X Yes No No error alleged error, if any, to be corrected by Yes No Proposed amendment 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, If X Yes No The property 'Is located.beh.ind the present any, which make amendment reasona- — Lornwallis Hills 'Subdivision which is ----Yes No bly necessary to promote public zoned R-3. • There are also smaller lots health, safety and general welfare; to the' north of the proposed development along Oakdale Drive. 20.3.2 e) -Manner in which proposed used X_Yes No Therproperty is located In a Ten-Year Yes 411b-No amendment will carry out purpose � ^.,,,, and intent of adopted Comprehensive Transition Area as designated ,in the P adopted Land Use Plan.' R-3 is a permitted zoning Pl nn. district .in this area, ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTEREST AND APPLICATION CRITERIA Ordinance Requirements Article 4.2 identifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the CA application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has applied for an :R-3 designation. The criteria for that district are set forth in Article 4.2.3 and ane as follows: z) Designated by the adopted Land X Yes Na Applicant has indicated the property Yes N4 is in a--.Ten Year Trgiisitioa firma. Use Plan as a Transition Area, which can reasonably be expected to be annexed by a municipality in the ensuing 10-20 years. Public water Apo. sewepdci)sties Yes NO b) Water and sewer lines should K Yes N0 presently serve Cornwallis hills exist at site oa be assured of Section I. These facilities wo,41d be-. installation as part of the upgraded and extender) to serve the development process. additional lines as required for sub- division approval. Applicant has submitted a letter from the Town of Hillsborough stating that water and sewer is- available. On Aug. 12, 1985 the Town Board re-endorsed' it$ letter as a statement of commitment to serve �. the site with public water and sewer services upon extension of lines by the applicant. X Yes _ No Applicant does have direct access to a Yes No c) Vehicular access must consist access to a street street classified as arterial, via of direct ac classifies c either arterial Lafayette Drive. DOT is recommending a left turn lane on SR 1009 for safety or collector as designated reasons by the adopted Land Use Plan. : ' Adh REZONING RG URST 'CHECKLIST APP ANT: Allenton Realty & Insut$nce Co. } • 'p, U. Box 739# Durham,* N. C. 27702 1p OWNER'S NAME Old 86 Limited Partnership ADDRESS :p;_t�, nox 211, Cba eRl..�ii I If N_ r- 97591 ` Current zoning R-9 Total number of acres 51,63, Current land use Mdegelnlaed (wnn_dt-d),, i Type of rezoning requested H-3 Proposed l4nd use Detached, b,ingle Family r2sidPnt1A1 Tax snap 0 A2 Block # C Number of lots 90 -Proposed Water Supply: Public X Community _ Individual Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public—L ' Community Individual septic tank NMOT Estimate Access onto state road # 9009 Average daily traffic count on the state road 9,500 Ileseribe exist#& (Un-named tributary critical areas: Flood prone areas Southeast corner to Cates Creek) Poorly drained areas Streams Un-named creek Qther, sensitive areas None . .Describe land ,uses in: General Area Residential (sinol.e4 multi-family): undeveloped (wnnded) Adjacent parcels of land North - single family, undeveloped; South-undeveloped, proposed I f•0: East - single family, undeveloped west - undeveloped". E! 'CK T,ZST RBZONTNG 1iEQt1EST Ri3C APPLICANT: Allentoq Realty & Insuran�re Co. .z}, P.0. 73`x, Durham, N.C. 27702 ADDRESS OWNER'S NAME 2g; u a e s. . 1 � j �_h �] •i uRloo d (+rinncledl Current zoning R-1 Total number of acres ' 13.bR ': Current land use itnd i �,1 a TamJ-1,Y Lse�dcnti sal hype of rezoning requested ' R-3 Proposed land use t�etached sin `� ' Community Tax ma !� 44A Block -- Number of lots 21 `. ;:proposed Water Supply: Public X p 4 individual septic tank individual Proposed Sewage Treatments Put�lic X. Community Not AYaiial ascribe exiatipg e Access onto state road # 1133 Average daily traffic.couut on the state voad critical areas: Flood prone area Hone Poorly 41:# .ned areas None Streams None other,.sensitive arms None use u deve o ,Describe land uses in: General Area Residential (sin le & Multi-fainil e Adjacent parcels of land North Single family; South-.•i ndevelo ed• East-Sin le Tamil u days a West - Single family; undeveloped ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA '000113 APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION Date: July 1, 1985 TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH. CAROLINA The undersigned do hereby make application to change the Zoning Atlas of Orange County as hereinafter requested. 1 . The property is located on the West side of S'.R.i 1009 (aid NC Street/Roade . between S.R.# 1133 and XiCXRX# 1-40 .5 It is knimp as Lot(s) -* 6 , Block , of Orange County Tax Map 42 - Hillsborough Township. It has a frontage of • 260' Oakdale ------feetand a depth of . feet, containing 2.818.768 • 29WB-1-d-NG-86 64.71 square teet or acres . 2. It is desired and requested that the foregoing property be rezoned from R-1 to R-3 3 . The following information has been attached in support of the application for changing the Zoning Atlas (* - Required on all applications) . *a. A. fully Oimensioned map at a scele of not less than one ( 1) inch equals one hundred ( 100) feet nor more than one ( 1) inch equals twenty (20) feet showing the land which is proposed to be rezoned. 0 *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 Zoning 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 Land Use Plan or part thereof. *f. All other circumstances, factors and reasons which the appli- cant offers in support of the proposed amendment . 4 . A list of all individuals , firms or corporations .owning property adjoining or within five hundred (500) feet of the property sought for rezoning is attached. The list is current as of, July 18, 1985 . (Date) I -certify that all, information furnished in this application is accurate Co the best of my knowledge. Applicant(s) : Ailenton Realty & Insurance Co. AritlAZille11110 PI. Address : P. 0. Box 731 B : Ran. S ith Durham, N. C. 27702 Deyelo• ant Administrator Phone: 683-1410- 683-1414 • • --- 169- 410 • • CORNWALLIS HILLS SUBDIVISION • "A Single Family Residential Development" Orange County, N. C. . Prepared By:. • Allenton Realty & Insurance Company, Inc. 119 Orange Street Mall P. O. Box 731 Durham, N. C. 27702 (919) 683-1414 • 410 • • • 170• • • • PROJECT OVERVIEW • trnwallis- Hills is a single-family subdivision located off Old NC 86, south of Oakdale Drive between Interstate 85 and proposed Interstate 40. The existing subdivision encompasses approximately 17.20 acres of land containing 36 lots. Initial development of Phase One was started in 1982. Construction of homes on all the lots is nearing completion. The inception of Cornwallis Hills was begun by Mel Rashkis & Associates of Chapel Hill in 1981. Out of a 116.50 acre tract of land, 17.2 acres were developed under the Orange County Subdivision Ordinance. The ordinance,at that time,permitted minimum lot sizes of 15,000 square feet if municipal water and sewer was utilized. The Town of Hillsborough permitted extension-of these services to Cornwallis Hills Subdivision. When Orange County adopted a land use plan and zoning ordinance in late 1981, the development underway was designated R-3,. (Low and Medium Intensity Residential District Zoning). The remaining 99.3 acres of land was zoned R-1, Rural. Residential District. During this initial stage of development, ' it was anticipated that subsequent rezoning requests would be forthcoming on the remaining 99.30 acres of land as market conditions dictated. The applicant is requesting rezoning of a 51.63 acre portion of the remaining 99.30 acre tract of land owned by Old 86 Limited Partnership as well as an addi- tional 15.08 acres of abutting property owned by Oakdale Associates. Existing zoning for both parcels is R-1, Rural Residential District. The requested zone is R-3, Low and Medium Intensity Residential District. This additional acreage will be used for medium density single-family housing similar in size and cost iloto the homes constructed in Phase One of Cornwallis Hills. As a part of this rezoning request, the applicant is submitting a preliminary subdivision plan. It is felt that a graphic depiction of the proposed Cornwallis Hills Subdivision expansion helps the governmental and elected.officials visualize the rezoning request proposal, as well as, presents a definitive development scheme by the applicant. • • • • 01111MOM1110.■ 171 The proposed admendment will carry out the intent and purpose of the adopted 410 Land Use Plan. LOCATION • The area in which the- property is located is currently designated as Ten Year Transition in the adopted Orange County Land Use Plan. Designated Transition Areas are parcels oflaruithat can reasonably be expected to be annexed by a municipality in futUre years. The Ten Year Transition plan category is associa- ted with the full range of residential densities permitted in the Ordnge County Zoning Ordinance. The continuation of R-3 zoning to permit expansion of Cornwallis Hill Subdivision conforms to the Land Use Plan. ACCESS Vehicular access to the subdivision will be from a collector street (Old NC 85), as well as a minor street (Oakdale Drive), as designated by the Land Use Plan. All proposed subdivision streets will be built to public-standards. Street stubs to.adjoining properties are provided for future development. ' Proposed public street right-of-way dedications are wide enough to accommodate future pavement widening. The applicant believes that the new street patterns will provide safe and convenient access to and from the development. UTILITIES Water and sewer lines are in place at Phase One of Cornwallis Hills and within Oakdale Drive. As a part of the land development approval process, detailed 411 drawings will be submitted to the Town of Hillsborough for approval of public water and sewer line. extensions.. PROPOSED USE The proposed rezoning for medium density, single-family homes served by municipal water and sewer facilities, will provide future- community housing needs conveniently located to major transportation corridors and employment centers. This residential use will be compatible with adjoining residential and rural land uses. A cohesive continuation of Cornwallis Hills Subdivision is permitted within the Land Use Plan. -2- . 411 • • • • -_ 172 Changing conditions in the area make the proposed amendment reasonably necessary to promote public health, safety, and general welfare. LOCATION The 64.25 acres of property requested for rezoning is located west of Old NC 86 and south of Oakdale Drive between 1-85 and proposed 1-40. Currently, the Town of Hillsborough municipal boundary is approximately 3,600 linear feet north of the project, terminating at 1-85. Adjacent property to the north' is either undeveloped or single: family lots with frontage on Oakdale Drive. The tract is bounded on the south by undeveloped property with frontage on Old NC 86 or residual pieces of property resulting'from the acquisition of right-of-way for 1-40. Property to the 'east and west is undeveloped or contains scattered single-family homes. The close proximity of both 1-85 and the new 1-40 interchange on Old NC 86 offers convenient and fast transportation to employment centers and service areas. The commercial area north le 1-85 on Old NC 86 presently offers most retail ser- vices that residents of this expanded subdivision can use. Future plans indicate that the subdivision is within a two mile radius of a commercial-industrial node on NC 86 as designated by the Land Use Plan. TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS • The site' has 290 feet of- frontage on Old NC 86 (Phase One Cornwallis Hills) via dll Lafayette Drive. Lafayette Drive is strip paved to a width of 20 feet.. Old NC 86 10' is currently strip paved to a width of 22 feet. As a. part of Phase One of Corn- wallis Hills, an additional 15 feet of public right-of-way was dedicated along the sire frontage on Old, NC 86. If the N.C. Department of Transportation determines that a left turn lane is necessary to- handle additional traffic generated by the subdivision, the applicant will make these improvements. In addition to Old NC 86 access, the proposed development has 260 feet of frontage on Oakdale Drive. This roadway is strip paved to a width of 20 feet. Kelley Road, a previously dedicated 60-foot right-of-way, will be improved to provide a second means of access into the site. This road will be 20 feet in width and strip paved, also. Traffic circulation within the project will consist of public streets. The pro- posed Lafayette Street Extension and Kelley Road realignment will serve as addi- tional collector streets for the area. As such, these will be public right-of- way dedications of 70 feet in width. Al]. other streets will contain 50 feet of publicly dedicated right-of-ways. The entire project will have 20-fqot wide, strip paved streets built to NCDOT standards. Street stubs are provided for future development of adjacent areas. - PUBLIC SERVICES All public services are available or will be made available to the site. lip The utility plan provides 8" water and sewer lines to the new lots within the • -3- 47' ;.z.,• -,. - . . " ." • • 173. development. These will be' extended in accordance with.the ToWn- of Hills-. borough policies and specifications.' • The 8" water line at the intersection of Cheshire Drive and Oakdale Drive will be extended down to Kelley Road to connect with the existing 8" line- in Lafayette Drive. This will serve as a "loop feed" into' the subdivision which will improve water service considerably. As. a part of these improve- ments, the Town of Hillsborough is in the process of installing water lift stations to boost. water pressure. Sewer to the project will be provided by the ektension of the 8" sewer line near the.intersection of Cheshire Drive and Oakdale Drive down Kelley Road. The 13.08' acres on Kelley Road can be served by gravity flow to- ward Cheshire Drive. • It is necessary, as a part of the sewer scheme, to relocate the present pump station from Phase One of Cornwallis Hills to the southeastern corner • of the parcel requested for rezoning. This is necessary because the remainder of the undeveloped land cannot be served by gravity flow. The existing 3 inch force main will be extended down to the pump station. From this pump station, all waste water will be pumped to the existing manhole in Cheshire. Drive. The extension of these water and sewer lines.will not only serve this develop- ment, but will also provide service to portions, of abutting property on the north, west, and south sides of this development. ZONING 111 The site.is. now zoned R-1 (Rural Residential District). The purpose of this zone is to provide locations for rural, very low density residential development in areas where long-term solutions to water supply and sewage disposal is provided by individual wells and septic systems.. Under current zoning, a minimal amount of planning is necessary to subdivide the property • into one-acre tracts., place individual wells and septic systems on the lot, and provide above-ground telephone and electric service to the lots. The proposed R-3 (Low and Medium Intensity Residential District) will pro- vide a logical, cohesive expansion of the existing subdivision. . Public water and sewer lines will be extended, public streets will be constructed, open space centrally located to the subdivision will be provided, existing streams and floodplains will be buffered, landscape easements are provided along existing roadways, and all other public utilities will be underground. Surrounding residential zoning within a quarter-mile radius' ranges from a density of R-5 (High Intensity Residential District) to R-1 (Rural Residential District). RECREATION SPACE • Passive recreation space is provided for the neighborhood on approximately 3 acres of land centrally located within the site. A 10-foot pedestrian easement will be provided from this area to the creek traversing 410 -4- • r= • 174 • 410 the site in a southeasterly direction. It is the intent of the applicant to dedicate this. land to a homeowner's association for the use and enjoyment of.the neighborhood as the existing and future residents choose. • SITE DESIGN The site is wooded in mature pines and hardwoods. The overall site design anticipates a minimum of clearing necessary for development. Street patterns are designed.to minimize earthwork operations, thus retaining as much existing vegetation and stream protection as possible. Homes to be constructed within this. development will be sited among the trees. Natural drainage patterns will not be rerouted or altered. The storm sewer system necessary as a part of the road construction process will be provided with outlet velocity control measures to prevent erosion of downstream areas. A sedimentation and erosion control plan will be submitted and approved prior to any earthwork occurring. A neighborhood open space/recreation area is provided for the use and enjoyment of the residents. A Homeowner's association will be established to- maintain and improve the area. If active recreational facilities are desirable, the existing and future residents should determine what those improvements will be. The design scheme, rkluested residential density, location, traffic circula- tion, and extension of public water and sewer services all combine to comply di with the adopted Land Use Plan for Orange County. Future growth, triggered by the completion of 1-40, a burgeoning Research Triangle Park, a healthy economic climate, and anticipated commercial and industrial expansion within the immediate area, when combined, make this a desirable location for single family housing. These changing conditions place a market demand for future housing needs within the area. The applicant feels that the rezoning and expansion of Cornwaliis Hills will help the County meet the needs of its present and future residents. • • Ag■ • • -5- • • 175 • . • 411 CORNWALLIS HILLS • Development Summary . Gross Land Area: 64.71.Acres Existing Zone: R-1, Rural Residential District Proposed Zone: R-3, Low• and Medium Intensity Residential District Minimum Lot Area 15,000 S.F. Minimum Lot Width 100 -Ft.: Front Yard Setback 30. Ft. Side and Rear Yard Setback 15 Ft. Maximum Building Height 25 Ft. Number of Lots 111 Total Street Length 7,200 L.F. • • • 410 • • • • 176 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT 2 • Beginning at a stake at the northwest corner of Lot 14 of Cornwallis Hills - Phase 1 and running thence along and with Cornwallis Hills- Phase I the following courses, south 01''22'28" east, 202.40 feet, south 34°28'17" east, 214.30 feet, north 83°21'37" east, 203.22 feet, south 39°28'57" east, 137.93 feet, south 50°31'04" west, 80.00 feet, south 39°28'57" east, 180.00 feet, south 43°39'54" west, 119.50 feet, south 35°20'04" east,. 262.46 feet, south '88°56'33" east, 204.08 feet, north 34°21'13" east, 124.28 feet, north 73°11'34" east, 117.91' feet to .a stake on the western R/W of Lafayette Drive, thence along and with the western R/W of Lafayette Drive in a curve to the right, having an arc length of 109.38 and a radius of 450.00 feet to a stake, thence north 88°06'49" east, 60.00 feet to a stake in the eastern R/W of Lafayette Drive thence along and with the eastern R/W of Lafayette' Drive in a curve to the left having an arc length of 40.00 feet and a radius of 510.00 feet to a stake thence north 83°20'20" east, 179.47 feet to.a stake, the southeast corner of Lot 33, Cornwallis Hills, Phase One, running thence with the line of J. C. Rippy south 25°48' east, 984.00 feet to a stake thence south 19°02'05" east, 172.00 feet to a stake, thence south 88x59'10" west, 1136.16 feet to a stake, thence north 44°22'28" west, 476.70 feet to a stakes thence.north 33°37'32" east, 75.00 feet to a.stake, thence north 44 22'28" west, 730.00 feet to a stake, thence north 33°37'32" east 60.00 feet to a stake, thence north 43. 52'28" west, 450.00 feet to a stake, thence north 61°22'28" west, 330.00 Feet to a stake thence south 88°37'32" west 570.00 feet to a stake, thence north 066 33'44" east 859.44 feet to a stake, thence north 88°37'32" east, 1250.12 feet to a stake, the point and place of beginning nad containing 51.63 acres,.more or less, according to a sur- vey by Philip Post and Associates, dated 1981, and being Job Number 52001. • 17;7. • • • LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT 1 Beginning at an iron stake at the intersection of the southern R/W of Oakdale Drive and the eastern R/W of Kelley Road, and running thence along and with the eastern R/W of Kelley Road south 06°41'57" west,. 595.89 • feet to a stake, thence south 82°26'22" east, 198.32 feet to a atake, said stake being theanorthwest corner of tract 2 of Old 86 Limited Partnership, thence south 06 33'44" west,859.44feet to a stake, the northeast corner of the Calhoun D. Geiger property as recorded in DB 253 at Page 1345, running thence along and with said Geiger property south 88°02'24" west, 464.99 feet • to a stake, running thence north 06°41'57" east 1558.59 feet to a stake - in the southern R/W of Oakdale Drive, thence along and with the southern R/W of Oakdale Drive south 76°43'12" east, 201.07 feet to a stake, thence continuing along. the R/W of Oakdale Drive south 76°43'12" east, 59.99 feet to a stake, the point and place of beginning and containing 13.08 acres, more or less, according to a survey by Philip Post and Associates, dated 1981 and being Job Number 52001. 410 • • • • • 178 411 • July 10, 1985 Oakdale Associates N.C. Limited Partnership 212 E. Rosemary Street Chapel Hill, N. C. 27514 Orange County Board of Commissioners Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Board Members: The purpose of this letter is to serve notice that Allenton Realty and Insurance Company has been granted permission to- apply for a rezoning request. This request encompasses the- property owned by Oakdale Associates, further described on Orange County Tax Map 44A-0-3 thru 26, Hillsborough Township, consisting of 12.70+-: acres. Sincerely, 410 uucvad • Melvin F. Rashkis A General Partner of Oakdale Associates MFR:cau • 110 • • • • • C- • • 179. • 4i, duly 10, 1985 Old 86 Limited Partnership 212 E. Rosemary Street Chapel Hill, N. C. 27514 Orange County Board of Commissioners Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 . . . • Dear Board Members: The purpose of this letter is to serve notice that Allenton Realty and Insuiance Company has been granted permission to apply for a rezoning request. This request encompasses. the property owned by Old 86 Limited Partnership further described on a portion of Orange County Tax Map 42.-C-1, Hillsborough Township, consisting of 47+- acres. • Sincerely, 411 ttliwt:4 Melvin F. Rashkis A General. Partner.of Old 86 Limited Partnership MFR:cau • . • • . • 180. . auntie eminty /&cue ....Sguati, igh ts_ "I Or I 261 S.CHURTON ST..EXT. gimsBorcouGn.NORTH CAROLINA 27278 July 15, 1985 • Mr. Randy Smith Allenton Realtors P.O. Box 73]. • 119 Orange Street Durham, North Carolina. 27702 Dear Mr. Smith: The Orange County Rescue Squad will certainly provide the same efficient and courteous service to the extension of Cornwallis Hills Subdivision as we afford other residents im our call district. Thank you for the map of the area. We would appreciate' any additional 410 numbering system information as the project becomes complete so that we may locate the proper residence quickly in the event of a medical emergency. Thank you, OrT(04 a(q Richard Bradford Deputy Chief, OCRS 410 - LINDY PENDERGRASS • . , Sheriff of Orange County 7:12.2431- ,t' 9.12 6:100 • IIILL,SBOROUGH.NORTH CAROLINA RRS.PHONE 929-54Wisk • IP • TO: " Orange County Planning Department Susan. Smith FROM: Sheriff of Orange. County • RE: single housing additions in Cornwallis Sills DATE: July 17/ 1 985 These 112 single family dwellings will house an average of 3-.5 persons/ and increase the population for this area. by approx- . imately 392 persons. These new single family dwellings will increase our average citizen requests for service from 3.62 to 3.65 and increase of .03 percent. These single family dwellings will not increase our process service per household in this new sub-division.- We can provide Law 410 Enforcement services to these new homes but it will increase our work load and decrease our response time by 1 minute approximately from our average of 7 minutes. Other increases would be patrol mileages and other support services. LP/jc cc: Randy Smith ; - • • 4 .. . ;;7.;7':' ORANGE',COUNTY'.PLANNING DEPARTMENT . •. '- • 4 'NT* ageo .. . ••!: : 7 : MENU • • •- -=.714,-,:•••• '- • Orange County Planning Board :. • ' • FROM:: . Eddie* Kirk. : ••• • • - . Date:': . Jtrl:.y 31, 1.985 - -. RE: • Traffic conditions around Cornwallis Hills: • Present traffic• conditions around Cornwallis Hi L is are • - . difficult.. to. determine- since the only traffic- counts avaf table are from- 1981 . Oakdale Drive had a. traffic count of 330 trips p•e•r-day in 1981 whi le' Old. NC. 86 had a count of _ • : 4,20.0: between Oakdale 'Drive and Interstate 85. Tire present Cornwallis H••i Bills—Phase I" development of 37 Lots • :.., generates approximately sea trips per day, alt of which are . added to Old NC 86'. If'. the 84.71 acres that is proposed to . - be rezoned to- R-3 is approved an a.ddit•i one C 111 Lots would be • created which' would. generate approximate-L'y 1,079- trips per day. Eighty—five percent of the trips generated would flow- directly to Old. NC: 86• through' 'Cornwallis Hilts. The other" fifteen percent would flow to Oakdale Drive with the majority • turning right toward' Old- NC 86. If' the remainder of the property identified for future development were to ire. developed at an 9-3 density, an • • additional 1 ,145 trips- per day wouLd be created. The • ■ajo.rity of this traffic would be directed- toward Old NC- 86. Nuch-"of this traffic turns in a northerly direction toward 1.-85; however, with the construction of 1-40 much of this - traffic will. be- diverted in a southernly di recti tin . The • Board of Commissioners have requested the- widening of. 01.d NC 86 to 4 lanes north of Interstate-40 as part of' the N.C. Department of Transportation 's Seven Year Transportation Improvement Program. • - _ 183 ac"srAlt,i, 404 4ie &'41 • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 JAMES G.MARTIN August 12, 1985 GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMESE.HARMNGTON • SECRETARY Mr. Eddie Kirk Planner • Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Mr. Kirk: This is in reference to your request for a preliminary review of the Cornwallis Hills development off SR1009 north of the 1-40 interchange now under construction. SR1009 presently has a volume of over 4000 vehicles per day. This is expected to increase to 7600 by the year 2000. It is recommended 110 that a left turn, Lantsbecturstr=tad on SR1009 at Lafayette Drive for safety reasons. Sight distance is adequate looking both south and north along SR1009 from Lafayette and should not present a safety problem. If we can be of any further help in this matter please advise. Sincerely, • ,00,001. W. Watkins DIVISION ENGINEER JWW/DBK/cb cc: Mr. D. B. Kelly 411 _ _ 184 .Mayor : "'aunt of tU 1 nuug Town Clerk Frank H.Sheffield'.Jr. Agatha Johnson *mmissianers HILLSBOROUGH. NORTH.CAROLINA 27278 Shpt. Water Works wood J. Brown James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson �x r Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd ��" L. D. Wagoner Item, J. Smith 0.1 Chief of Ponce Rachel H. Steens Arnold W. Hamktt • ++ :''�i F . Fire Chief tr 5#4 John Forrest August 22, 1985 • • Mr. Don Willhoit, Chairman Orange County Commissioners 106 E. Margaret Lane • Hillsborough, N.C. 27278 . Dear Chairman Willhoit.: With reference to the County public hearing on August 26th, on behalf of the Hillsborough Town Board, I would like to reaffirm the willingness of the Town to provide water and sewer service to the proposed Weng, Scholar, Scnttswood, and Cornwallis Hills developments, as expressed by the Board at its August 12th meeting. Letters of tentative approval were issued earlier for each of the projects, and. we feel that the commitments contained in these letters should be honored by the Town and County. Our willingness to serve these developments is, of course, subject to review. and approval of detailed engineering. plans by both the. Town Engineer and State Division of Health Services. We expect these engineering reviews to determine whether the proposed developments can be con- structed in a manner consistent with the Town's current plans to maintain and improve water pressure to existing customers in the vicinity of the proposed • new developments. At its meeting on August 12th, the Town Board adopted a change to the Town's water and sewer extension policy which requires that all future applications for water-sewer service be reviewed by the Town Board. This review will be based on preliminary drawings and other information submitted by a developer with the application for approval. Under this new procedure, the Town Board will determine whether to extend water-sewer service to the proposed development, based on con- sideration of the availability of treatment plant capacity and other potential impacts of the proposed project. Tentative Board approval, subject to engineering review and approval, will then be communicated to the County by letter. This new approval procedure will substitute for the letter approval procedure used to dace. IIM • • Willhoit • - Page 2 August 22, 1985 I trust this clarifies the Town's intentions with respect to the four developments currently under review by the County and makes clear the fact 410 that all future developments will be subject to our new, and hopefully im- proved, approval procedures. Sincerely, ‘§Laatk dL/ Frank H. Sheffield, Jr., Mayor FHS/jc col Town Board Members - Ken Thompson, County Manager Marvin Collins, County Planning Director James Pendergraph, Town Water-Sewer Superintendent 4110 • • 411 -0.. 186 oyor . O'irum tiurtrug1 - nr Town Clerk F k H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278• ommissioners Supt. Writer Works Lynwood J. Brawn James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson , . Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd L. D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith • ")+-++`•: Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens 3' Arnold W. Hamlett Fire Chief it . *�► John Forrest August 7, 1985 Orange. County Planning Department Orange County Courthouse 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 Re: Cornwallis Hills Dear Sir: This is to advise you that the Town of Hillsborough is willing to permit the owners of the above described development to connect to the Town's• Water-Sewer system; provided, 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 individna1'ly or in cooperation with other developers. The Town of Ni'tlsborough. assumes no financial responsibility for the upgrading or improvement to any line or system 'components, nor for the extension of lines between the Town's system and the proposed development. Please be informed that the Town of Hillsborough is currently in- stalling a booster pumping station on Mayo Drive which will increase • water pressure for the area south of Hillsborough, in the Cornwallis Hills/Plintridge area. . • Sincerely, _ • Horace Jo ' son Water-Sewer Commissioner cc: Randy Smith :A'flenton Realtors .. - . • . 1 8... • . . . - i Touin of Billohnrougli • . Mayor Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield. Jr. - • Agatha Jo—kort HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. WatetWrIcs Commissioners Lynwood J. Brown . James Pendergraph Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd l ,..... -.,1. L. D. Wagoner i. Remus J. Smith I.4* r _ Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens • IRO -A, ... .. . Arnold W. Hamlett .•••4? :,••? - Fire Chief . .0.4 N , 0-- "Pir . . - 4,• • John Forrest ..- . . , . August 6, 1985 . • . . - - TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner' . • . - - ' . FR : Laura 17.1•11.0 Interim Zoning Off ice* I-4.1 ... • - RE: Courtesy Battey.of Cornuallia Hills RezOning and Burnside Subdivision . • • • - On August 1st • the B ill sborough Ple'ning Board reviewed-the rezoning- request for Cornwallis Hills and the Burnside Subdivision. The following comments were Wade about the applications: • .. 3.. Cornwallis Hills: . a. 'Is there adeqnate i:IresSure.to provide Water' and sewer service to the . • site?' • - - - • - • b. 'What will be the overall impact'due to the traffic generated at the • site?''' c. Will'adequate space be provided for recreation for the residents? 2. Burnside Subdivision - a. The subdivision meets the requirements of the Town's Zoning Ordinance and Flood Damage Ordinance.' Members expressed concern over a possible indian dig adjacent to the minor subidivsion (on Lot T # 6 on map), a.nd•reqUested: that if there is a crew working on the site,•that they* off er•coMments- should it be'applicable' to the dev- • elopment on the Minor subdd.Vision. :SeVeral members from the'Planning Board are checking into the matter. • .. • • . • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 188 IfILLSBOROUGE NORTE CAROLINA 41/ 27278 ' \,, i1 5471:1 t - rti, 000 August 6, 1985 Miriam Black Recreation Department RE: Cornwallis Hills Dear Miriam: Please review the attached Preliminary Site Plan . The developer is requesting that the area shown with numbered Lots be rezoned to R-3, it is presently R-1 . The straight rezoning proposal will go before the Planning Board on August 19, 1985 for their initial review. It will then go to a 41 • public hearing on August 26, 1985. On September 16, 1985 it will go back to the Planning Board for their recommendation to the. County Commissioners. If approval is recommended on the rezoning, the preliminary plan for the subdivision wilt. be considered at a later. time during that same meeting. . Please provide comments on the rezoning and subdivision by August 12, 1985. rf there are any further questions, please contact me at the Orange County Planning Department . Sincerely, • foal /f4A. Eddie Kirk Planner Enclosure 0 - • 189 • • ORA.NGE. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGTZ • • NORM CA.ROLINA 27278 • 4e. .111 Arc% Pik ed,..0 August 6, 1985 • Or. Ira Trollinger Grange County Board of Education , 200 East King Street Hi llaborough , NC 27278 RE: Cornwallis Hills • Dear Dr. TroiLinger: Please review the attached Preliminary Site Plan. The developer is requesting that the area shown with numbered. Lots be rezoned' to R-3, it is presently R-1 . The straight rezoning proposal wilt go- before the Planning Board on August • 19 , 1985 for their initial review. It will then go- to a public hearing on August 28, 1985. On Septembet• 16, 1985 it will go back to the Planning Board for, their recommendation to the County Commissioners.. If approval is recommended on the rezoning, the preliminary plan far the subdivision will be considered at a Later time during that same meeting . P lease provide any comments on the rezoning and subdivision by August 12, 1985. If there are any further questions, please contact me at the Orange County Planning Department . Sincerely, /04Z Eddie Kirk P tanner Enclosure • • ' " • ••:**•••.:•: 1-11);:•-•:-,•• ' • • r . • , r- • • • „.•• ORANG E.COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT - • • - •• •• -....•.; .;-.• • :•.MILSBOIIOUGEE 160 • .• . • ••• ••••.. • -. CAROLINA. .• • • 27278 •• • • . • • • .• • • ,.61411111■.7...1% •+. •• • '4 coo- . . . . • ': : • • • • . . • :••-• CERTIFICATE OF MAILING • • ". • •-• • ZONING. ATLAS AMENDMENTS • .•.. • -• ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA • • I, Eddie Kirk • Zoning. Officer, Orange County,. North . Carolina, DO. . HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about August 12, 1985, r mai Led.,. .by certified mail,. • postage prepaid, a Notice of the Public Hearing, to be- held on . the _rezoning: request from Residential-1 to ResidentjeL-3 for r C. a Is Hi a . ca — est of 0 d NC 86 SR 1009) and south- of Oakdale rive (SR 1133) in Hi Llsborough Township. to each property owner as required by Article 20 Section 20.6.3 of the Orange County, Zoning. Ordinance.. ,• • • _The notice matled. speci f led the date, time, place- and subject of the Public.. Hearing; an the zoning cLessification change. . . WITNESS my hand, this, the 15th, day of August • • • • • • • . • EDDIE KIRK. ZONING OFFICER .• • • . - • • . .• • • • • • • • I •• • • - r• • • • . • • • • •••••• • ••• • • • _ •• • • • • • • • • , • • • • • . . • _ • • • • • . • • • • • • . . • • • • • • . • • • • .. • • • „.• • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 JAMESG.MARTIN August 21, 1985 GOVERNOR • DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMESEHARRINGTON SECRETARY Mr. Eddie Kirk Planner Orange County Planning Department • Hillsborough, NC 27278 • Dear Mr. Kirk: This is in reference to your request for an opinion as to direction traffic will take after leaving the Cornwallis Hills Development located on SR1009 (Old NC86) after new 1-40 is complete. • The new 1-40 interchange on SR1009 provides easy access to 1-85 westbound, Chapel Hill - Carrboro area via NC86 , South Durham, Research Triangle and Raleigh area. Traffic headed for these destinations would make a right turn out of Cornwallis Hills. The left turning traffic would go to Hillsborough and north Durham. • It is our feeling that ultimately majority of traffic would right turn out of development because more urban areas are available via 1-40. It is speculated that as high as 75% of traffic using development could go in this direction. If we can of of any further help in this matter please advise. Sincer iy, J . Watkins • DIVISION ENGINEER • JWW/DBK/cb cc: Mr. D. B. Kelly • • • • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • • Y ' O R A N G E C O U N T Y 191 BOARD. OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date AUGUST 28. 1985 Action SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS Itea: / DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No • Attechment[sl --- PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH DRAFT 8/19/85 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES. Telephone Numbers Hillsborough — 732-8181 Durham — 688-7331 Mebane — 227-2031 Chapel Hilt — 968-4501 PURPOSE: To receive public comment on proposed text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. NEED: Concerns have been identified by the Board of Commissioners and staff about features of the Special Use. Permit and watershed standards. Recent changes in the General Statutes dictated amendments to Article 20 AMENDMENTS., Issue statements proceed each amendment. IMPACT: The proposed text amendments, if approved, wouLd clarify and improve the administration of the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of amendments. 14a ARTICLE S APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 4IM • ISSUE.: In the period of time following the approval of the Water Quality Critical Area and Protected Watershed II Zoning Ordinance text amendments, the staff has monitored the administration of these standards and has identified specific concerns to be addressed. These concerns have tracked similar concerns raised by members of the Board of Commissioners and by other local government staffs attempting to implement the State—Local. Action Guide- Lines for the Fells of the Neuss and Jordan watersheds. Specifically, these concerns include the complexity of the Impervious Surface Ratios Table as opposed to the three—tiered approach endorsed by the TJCOG and the State of North Carolina; the lack of recognition in the Table of areas already serviced by public water and sewer services and developed at higher densities given the provision of these services; the technical difficulties posed by a standard of stormwater management which relies solely on infiltration ; and the need to establish an acceptable guideline for immplementation of the infiltration standard by type of Land use, particularly large lot development . EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION(S) : 110 Article S APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Article 6 .29.4 /pinervious Surface Reoulated in Protected Watersheds An impervious surface is any surface through which water cannot penetrate or can only penetrate slowly . This would include paved streets and parking Lots, concrete sidewalks and structures which cover Land . As a watershed becomes developed, the amount of impervious surface increases causeing a decrease in soil absorption of stormweter and an increase in direct runoff to streams with a - resulting increase in potential water pollution . In order to promote infiltration of stormweter into the maximum soil and minimize direct and immediate runoff into streams, impervious surface ratios shall be required in the Protected Watershed II IPW—I/1 410 District. mimmiummmi 193 WROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT(S) : 6.23.4 REVISE Imoervi_ous Surface Ragut _f t�rotected Watersheds An impervious surface is a surface composed of any material which impedes or prevents the natural infiltration of water into the soil. Such surfaces shall include any concrete or asphalt surface. These would include, but not be Limited to,- streets. and parking areas, sidewalks, patios and structures which- cover the Land. As a ,watershed becomes developed the amount of impervious surface increases causing a decrease in soil absorption of stormwater runoff and an increase in direct runoff to streams and other water bodies resulting in an increase in potential water pollution . In order to promote infiltration of stormwater runoff into the soil and to minimize direct and immediate runoff into streams and water supply impoundments, impervious surface ratios shall be required as provided in the Table of Impervious Surface Ratios Section 6.23.4. Impervious surface calculations for an individual development shall be cumulative for original construction and any subsequent additions and calculations of impervious surface coverage for individual Lots shall include that portion of a right-- of' way between the center Line of the street and the abutting property line of the lot . EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION(S) . 6 .23.4 Maximum Impervious Surface Ratios—Gross Land Area (SEE ATTACHED TABLE A) PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT(S) : 6.23.4 Maximum Impervious Surface Ratios (SEE ATTACHED TABLE B) EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION(S) : 5.23.7 infiltration of the First 1/2 Inch ofa Runoff free Impervious Surfaces Stormwater runoff carries large amounts of oil, nutrients, metals , bacteria and other pollutants. The ability of stormwater runoff is closely associated with the land use from which it originates. The most significant factor is the increase of impervious surfaces which prevent the natural infiltration of water in to the soil . Most of the pollutant concentration is carried in the "first flush" of runoff. To control this pollutant Load within the Water Duality Critical Areas the first half—inch of runoff from all impervious surfaces in new developments shall be infiltrated on—site. Developers shall be required to submit documentation which indicates compliance with the specified standard. - _ ....,. ... . ....._ . _ TArat.E A . _ ,. 194 1 M IDI?ERV OUS. SiRnCE RATIOS-GROSS LOLL AREA• . DVEZONSO • a 5.o"' b.as 6.0% 6.OS• 6.0% 6.01 24- 6.91, 7.0% 3.90 15.91 0lF 3 14 .0 14.2.1 14.2% 3I 17.0% 17.a% 22.0 22.0% 4 24.E 31.0% En 3 ' 30 r 0% ~ _ 3.1. r 0; en WO 21.0' aDE 50 34. % 52 S(a.3% Ask 36.0% B5 36.0%4 35.4 _CC 442 2.3.. .2% at 23 6.3% 5..r• 25 6.3% 23 5.3:: 5.3% � 5.3»' � 6.34 24. 24.3% .5% or x„7.0'% 31. 31."'. 31.0% • 31.0%. 6.3 6.35 5.0x ' ® S+ux 5.0% 5.0% -° 6.0x . • S.G. 6... FM -e v..1,x . eadm+3 7/6/92 5-23 195 (TABLE B) • 6.23.4 MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIOS ill ZONING DISTRICT WaCA PWII PWII (PUBLIC WATER/SEWER (PUBLIC WATER/SEWER UNAVAILABLE) AVAILABLE) AR. 6.0%. 12.0% 30.0% R-1 6.0%. 12.0% 30.0% R-2 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% R-3 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% R-4 6 .0% 12.0% 30.0% R-5 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% R-8 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% R-13 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% LC1 NA 12.0% 30.0% III NC2 ' NA 12.0% 30.0% CC3 NA 12.0% 30.0% - GC4 NA 12.0% 30.0% EC5 6.01 12.0% 30.0%• 01 NA 12.0% 30.0%•El 6 .0% 12.0% 30.0% I-1 NA 12.0% 30.0% 1-2 NA NA NA 1-3 NA NA NA• AS 6.0% 12.0% 30.0% ED NA 12.0% 30.0% PIO 6 .0% 12.0% 30.0% 411 NA re. Uses permitted in these districts are • not permitted in the Protected Watershed-II or Water Quality Critical. Area overlay zoning districts. 196 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENOMENT(S) : 6.25.7 Control of the first 1/2" of Runoff from Impervious Surfaces Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces generally carry Large amounts of oil,. nutrients , metals, bacteria and other pollutants. The. amount of such pollutants in stormwater runoff is closely associated with the Land use from which it originates. An important determinant of water quality is the increase in impervious surfaces which prevent the natural infiltration of water into the soil . Most of the pollutant concentration i-s carried in the "first flush" of runoff. To control this pollutant load within the Protected Watershed—IL district the first one half—inch (1/2") of runoff from all impervious surfaces in new developments shall be controlled. The purpose of' the stormwater control measure is to reduce off site effects by minimizing clearing , compaction and overall site disturbance, while maximizing vegetated areas for stormwater infiltration . Methods to accomplish this standard shall include, in order of preference: a. on—site infiltration through the retention of undisturbed, vegetated areas b. structural or engineered infiltration measures, such as trenches or retention ponds, which reduce the amount of runoff c. detention structures that reduce the rate of runoff. Areas to which the standard applies shall include individual. lots or a new development as a whole. If applied to a development as a whole, the applicant must provide for installation and maintenance of proposed stormwater management ' facilities . Applicants shall be required to submit documentation which indicates compliance with the specified standard . An individual Lot of 80,000 square feet or more in size created. by -deed or plat in accordance with Orange County Subdivision Regulations prior to the adoption of this provision shall be exempt fro m this requirement upon submittal of a site plan which demonstrates that the development of the property is in accordance with the intent of this provision to minimize overall site disturbance; maximize maintenance of vegetated areas for stormwater infiltration; and protect. critical drainageways and waterways from direct runoff impacts . I II 1.97 EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION(S) : 6.24.6 Impervious Since Reauetted in Protect d Wt�rsheda An impervious surface is any surface thorugh which water cannot penetrate or can only penetrate slowly. This would include paved streets and parking Lots,, concrete sidewalks, and structures which cover Land. As a watershed becomes developed, the amount of impervious surface increases causing a decrease in soil absorption oir stormwater and an increase in direct runoff to streams and water supply impoundments. In order to promote infiltration of stormwater runoff into the soil and minimize direct and immediate runoff into streams and water supply impoundments impervious surface ratios shall be required as provided in Section 6.23.4. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTISI : 6.21.6 Isnaarvious Surface Rag ulated ;n ,, tact d Waters REVISE heds An impervious surface is a. surface composed of any material which impedes or prevents the natural infiltration of water into the soil. Such surfaces shalt include, but not be Limited to, streets and parking areas, sidewalks, patios and structures which cover the land'. As a watershed becomes developed the amount of impervious surface increases causing a decrease in soil absorption of stormwater runoff and an increase in direct runoff to streams• end other water bodies resulting in an increase in potential water pollution. In order to promote infiltration of stormwater runoff into the soil and to minimize direct and immediate runoff into streams and 'water supply impoundments, impervious eurfece ratios shall be required as provided in the Table of Impervious Surface Ratios Section 6.23.4. Impervious surface calculations for an individual. development shalt be cumulative for original construction and any subsequent additions and calculations of impervious surface coverage for individual Lots shall include that portion of a right- of—way between the centerline of the street and the edge the abutting property line of the lot. I 198 EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION(S1 : (SEE 6..28.71 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENOMENT[S] : 6.24.8 Cent • of the F' st 1 2" o Ru • r.m Im. erv'ous Sur ace. Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces generally carry Large amounts of oil, nutrients, metals, bacteria and other pollutants. The amount of such pollutants in stormwater runoff is closely• associated with the Land use from which it originates.' An important determinant of water quality is the increase in impervious surfaces which prevent the natural infiltration of water into the soil. Most of the pollutant concentration is carried in the "first flush" of runoff. To control this pollutant load within the Water duality Critical Area the first one half—inch [1/2"] of runoff from all impervious surfaces in new developments shall be controlled. The purpose of the stormwater control measure is to reduce off site effects by minimizing clearing, compaction and overall site disturbance, while maximizing vegetated areas for stormwater infiltration . Methods to accomplish this standards shall include, in order of preference:• a•. on--site infiltration through the retention of undisturbed, vegetated areas b. structural or engineered infiltration measures, such as trenches or retention ponds, which reduce the amount of runoff c. detention structures that reduce the rate of runoff. Areas to which the standard applies shall include individual Lots or a new development as a whole. If applied to a development as a whole, the applicant must provide for installation and maintenance of proposed stormwater management facilities . Applicants shall be required to submit documentation• which indicates compliance with the specified standard. An individual Lot of 80,000 square feet or more in size created by deed or plat in accordance with Orange County Subdivision Regulations prior to the adoption of this provision shall be exempt from this requirement upon submittal of a site plan which demonstrates that the development of the property is in accordance wih the intent of this provision to minimize overall site disturbance; maximize maintenance of vegetated areas for stormwater infiltration; and protect critical drainageways and waterways from direct runoff impacts . ARTICLE 8 SPECIAL USE PERMITS 410 ISSUE: In reviewing recent requests for the issuance of Special. Use Permits, members of the Board of Commissioners and Planning Board have expressed concern regarding the burden of proof in determining compliance with the General. Standards specified in Section 8.2 of Article B. The Ordinance provides that where the Board finds a preponderance of evidence to indicate compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use and that the use complies with all • required regulations and standards, the application must be approved unless the Board finds , in some specific manner, that the general standards have not been satisfied. Under the present Ordinance, the burden of proof rests primarily with those opposing the issuance of the Special Use Permit to prove that the general and/or specific standards have not been satisfied . The proposed amendment would require the Board to make specific findings that the genera ! standards have been met ; Those opposing the issuance of the Special Use Permit would continue to have the burden of proving that the general standards have not been satisfied. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONCSI : ARTICLE 8 SPECIAL USE PERMITS 8.2 General Standards 8.2.1 Before any application for a Special. Use shall be approved: a] The applicant shell have the burden of establishing , by competent material and substantial evidence, the existence of the facts and conditions which this ordinance requires for approval; and b] The Board shall make writtenfindings certifying compliance with the specific rules governing such individual Special Use and that the use, which is listed as a Special. Use in the district in which it is proposed to be located, complies with all, required regulations and standards including the provisions of 411 Articles 5 and 6 of this ordinance, unless greater or different regulations are contained in the individual standards for the specific Special. Use . It shall, be the responsibility of the applicant to present evidence in the form of testimony. exhibit! ••-"-'-"- 2gD • models, pLans and the Like to support the application for approval of a Special Use. 411 8.2.2 Where the Board finds a preponderamce of evidence to indicate compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use and that the use complies with all required regulations and standards the application must be approved unless the Board shall also find, in some specific manner that: a) 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 submittted; 0 The use will not maintain or enhance the value of continguous property (unless the use is a public necessity , in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property) cl The use is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical devel- opment of the County as embodied in these- regulations or in the Comprehen- sive Plan , or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners . Those opposing approval of the application on the grounds that the use will not promote the public health, safety and general welfare, will not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property or is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical development of the County shall have the burden of establishing , by competent material and substantial evidence the specific manner in which the proposed use does not satisfy the requirements for approval of the application for a Special . Use. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT(S) : 8.2.2 REVISE: Before any application for a Special Use • Permit shall be approved: ( l) The applicant shall have the burden of establishing , by competent material and substantial evidence, the existence of • the facts and conditions which this ordinance requires for approval, ,....ntionno with the PrAnProml s.....sAinsb.a.L.A._iscantalacajberaLLe - It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to present evidence in the- form of testimony, exhibits, documents, models, plans and the Like to support the application for approval, of a Special Use Permit . (2) The Board shall make written findings certifying compliance with the following general standards: (a) That the use. or development is located, designed and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety and welfare, if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; (b) That the use or develnoment Is jagfflieg , sijuLiaagsLmLcipLmoszLtsL be onerated so as to ipaintain or a_hence the velue of contiguous pro_perty. or that the use or Cc) That the Location and character of 410 the use or development . if developed according to the !flans as submitted and approved will p_e is harmony with the area in which ft with the general otans for the as embodied in these reputations and in the Comprehqnsive .Pl an . or portion thereof. adoptd by the Board of County Commissioners . Where the Board finds a preponderance of evidence to indicate compliance with the • specific standards governing the specific use and that the use complies with all required regulations and standards, including all applicable provisions of Articles 4,5,6 ,9,10 and 12, the applica- tion must be approved unless the Board shalt also find, in some specific manner, that the use does not comply with._ the general standards . Those opposing approval of the application shall have the burden of establishing, by competent material and substantial evidence the specific manner in which the proposed use does not satisfy either the general or specific standards for approval of the application for a Special Use Permit . aPa—' ARTICLE 20: AMENDMENTS ISSUE: In the 1985 Session the General Assembly enacted an amendment to G.S. 160A-384 to require that zoning procedures include a notice requirement. Specifically, the act provided for notification of the owner of a parcel affected by a zoning classification and owners of adjoining parcels of land by first class mail. It further provided far certification to the- Board of Commissioners that such notice was. mai led. The Orange County Zoning Ordinance already provides for notification of zoning classification actions . Article 20.6 provides for notice of public hearing on a proposed zoning change by certified mail to all owners of adjacent properties within 500 feet of the affected property. The Ordinance does not currently require certification to the Board of these mailings nor does it specifically require notification of the owner of affected property. By common practice said owner is notified of the proposed zoning classification action . EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION (8) : Article 20 AMENDMENTS Ilk 20.8 Pub c H :ar"n . .nd N. tic : If = .0 20.6.3 In the case of amendments to the Zoning AtLas, written notice shall be sent by certified mail to all adjacent property owners not Less than fifteen days before the hearing date. Adjacent property owners are those whose names and addresses are currently listed in the Orange County tax records and whose property Lies within five hundred feet of the affected property. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT(S) : 20.6 .3 REVISE . . . .written notice shall be sent by certified mail to ti . a f.ct.d . o. = rt • ,n . .n . adjacent property owners ADO 1 . .00. J .0 e Z. "n . At .9 proposed by the County. notice shall be sent • drat c =,ss m. i to . 1 = ff-ct = . . ro . er . ,ne . an to eL ad a .n • o. ert ow : rs within 500 feet es_Rzovided above . It . Zot n . 0 i : r t - - tie m: i in. of all such notices to the Board of County. Commissioners. 411 NORMAN Block REALT• ORS :11_ER g •• 410 Airport Rd.,Chapel Hill, NC 27514 •(919)967-9234,(919)688.2302 �l • August 26, 1985 Ms. Beverly Blythe • Clerk of Board of Commissioners - Orange County Offices Hillsborough, NC • Dear Ms. Blythe, I am writing to you because 1 understand there is a public hearing' tonight on several proposed changes to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance Texts. I had hoped to be there in person and now find that I cannot be present. Please read . this letter for me at the public hearing or in some other acceptable way make • my feelings known to the Board of Commissioners. ' It is my understanding that there are text amendments proposed for comment tonight that would change the burden of g g proof as to three specific findings in • the Special Use Process in Orange County. As I understand our ordinance, we now have a system of review that carefully studies all development applications. Our County staff is very good about working with developers to help them under-- stand•the complexities of our body of regulations. Once an application is in proper form and comes before the Planning Board and then the Board of Commissioners for review, parties seeking to oppose a Special Use Permit have the opportunity • to show that the development should be denied on the grounds of adversely affecting: 1. health, welfare or safelY, 2. contiguous property value • 3. compliance with the general plan for development of the County. 1 understand that the proposals you are studying tonight would significantly change the burden on a developer by forcing him,' as applicant, to "prove" that there is no adverse affect in any of these three categories. I fear that a chal- lenger would. merely have to raise questions or concerns, perhaps real or perhaps spurious, in order to greatly complicate the task of meeting such a burden. I feel that this is unfair and ill advised. if one is to make a challenge or seek denial of a plan that has been worked out under our rules and regulations, then the challenger should have to make a substantive showing and carry some measur- able burden of proof that his or her argument is more than a pesonal or emotional question mark. Our Special Use Process has many safeguard provisions in it. Developers are asked to go to great lengths to meet our requirements and.work within our guidelines. All of that is good and proper, but_ a shift in this affirmative - burden of proof on these three areas of specific findings would be going too far. I appreciate your considering my thoughts and opinion as you study this matter. . Sincerely, . • & (( ' 0. Norman E. Block • NEB/kjb • • OFFICIAL COPY mums APPROVED 9/30/85 MINUTES MAME COUNTY BOARD CF COMMISSIONERS JOINT PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 26, 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners net in joint session with the Planning Board for the purpose of holding a joint public hearing on August 26, 1985, 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. aMmISSIONERs PRESENT: Chair Don Willhoit, and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey and Ben Lloyd. CCMMISSIONER ABSENT: Commissioner Norman Walker. WAIT PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Planner Susan Smith, Planner Gene Bell, Administrative Secretary Joanna Bradshaw and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Eaythe. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Alice Gordon (Chair), Chris Best, Barry Jacobs, Steve Kizer, Peter Kramer, Betty Margison, Frank Pearson, Sharlene Pilkey, Carl Walters, and Steve Yuhasz. pLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: David Shanklin A. BOARD COMMENTS NONE. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS NONE. C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. S1P-1-85 Bingham School Inn The presentation was made by Planner Susan Smith. The purpose of this agenda item is to receive public comment on a request for a Class A Special Use Permit for the non-residential use of the historic Bingham School. The applicants Robert M. and Jane B. Kelly have requested a Class A Special Use Permit for a Non-Residential Mixed Use/Reuse of an historic Structure for the property commonly known as the BinghanSchool. The property is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of NC 54 and Mebane Oaks Road (SR 1007) in Bingham Tbuoship. The property contains 9.98 acres or 434,728.9 square feet. The purpose of the request is to allow for the development of a bed and breakfast country inn. The property is known as Tax Map 17, lot 19 in Bingham Ibwnship. The property is located within an area designated Agricultural-Residential. That designation allows the consideration of development application for uses permitted in the Agricultural Residential and Agricultural Services zoning districts. The present zoning classification of the property is Agricultural Residential (A-R). The use of the property, as proposed, requires the issuance of a Class A Special Use Permit. Certain development standards mast be met and a Special Use Permit itust be obtained for the development to proceed. Approval of the request would allow for the use of Bingham-School for commercial purposes as a bed and breakfast facility for a maximum of twelve occupants. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request with conditions (Attachement on pages of these minutes). Commissioner Marshall expressed a concern that there was no illumi- nation planned for a sign that would not be easily seen by night travelers. She noted this was a safety concern for the Planning Board to address. Mr. Kelly spoke noting that his primary interest is renovation and preservation of the historic value of the Bingham School for the general public. "Pilkey inquired out fire precautions. Smith responded that Mr. Kelly had been working with the Inspections Division over the past year as to the requirements for residential/co mercial use in all applicable building code 2 areas. No one spoke in opposition to the request. 2. SECONDARY AMEl►J MENr To THE LAND USE PLAN .RJouEg'TED BY CHANDLER CRETE COMPANY, INC. The presentation was made by Gene Bell. This agenda item is to receive public ant on a proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for 1.41 acres of a 7.25 acre tract (inclusive of street and railroad rights-of-way) owned by Chandler Concrete Cyf Inc. The property in question is located on the south side of Old NC 10 (SR 1710), approximately one-half mile from the intersection with NC 86. The property is referenced as Tax Map 45, Lot 32 in Hillsborough Township. The request for redesignation of the 1.41 acre site from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node has been submitted to legally address wastewater runoff problems from an existing concrete plant site. Under a directive from the NC Department of Natural Resources and Community Development - Division of .Environmental Management (DE 4), the applicant attempted to contain runoff with retention basins. The basins were constructed on property owned by the applicant and which were located in an R-1 zoning district. The applicant erroneously thought the site was zoned for industrial purposes and, the use of the property for retention basins as well as for truck parking resulted in a zoning violation. Upon official notification from the Planning Department, the nonconforming use of the property ceased. The request is a new application. The applicant previously submitted a proposed amendment for 4.34 acres of the property to public hearing on May 28, 1985. In the Board of Commissioners review (August 5, 1985) of the request decision, it determined that new information had -been' submitted after the public hearing and directed that the request be sent back to public hearing as a new request on August 26, 1985. The Board also directed that the rezoning request for the same property be considered at the same public hearing. The proposed amendment would change the Land Use Plan (LLIP)designation of the 1.41 acre portion of the property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node making it compatible for rezoning to PD I-3. Rezoning would make it. possible for the legally pursue on-site wastewater retention and recycling. applicant to The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request. Bell continued listing �' amending equest. three reasons for which the Plaan n ayy be amended as fllows U Plan and the (1) Because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or areas of the County (2) 'lb correct an error or omission in the Plan (3) In response to a change in Land Use Policy The applicant cites 41 as his reason for request for amendment and lists several changes of a nonresidential nature which have taken place in the area since the concrete plant was established. A condition not mentioned by the applicant nor brought out in the Central.-Orange Area Study is run-off from the concrete logical to assume that runoff has been a condition associated with tthe concrete plant site since it was established in 1982. Likewise, the recent recognition of the runoff as a problem by DEM would"seem'to qualify as a 'changed or changing condition". Pilkey inquired if a letter had been received from Southern Railroad and Bell responded no. Commissioner Marshall inquired if there had been any statement how the amendment would carry out the intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan as this was not addressed in the application. Bell agreed that this had not been 3 addressed. Bell continued that the procedures for amendments said "should" not "shall" or "must" in that regard. Gordon asked how the change in the request (regarding amount of land) affects the staff recommendation. Bell responded that staff looked upon runoff as an existing condition recognited by DEM as a public health, safety and welfare hazard that does represent a changing condition that was not addressed in the Central Orange Area Study. Commissioner Marshall noted that these were undesirable existing conditions, not conditions brought about by other things happening in the neighborhood. Bell continued that the procedures in the plan were not very specific regarding "changing conditions" and it was the staff interpretation that conditions had changed sufficiently to warrant amendment. Commissioner Marshall requested that the May 28, 1985 public hearing minutes be entered into the record.' _ 'nom Chandler, applicant and president of Chandler Concrete,, spoke. Be noted he had operated the business in substantially the same manner for 13 years. He was notified by DEM in January concerning the problem of water runoff. He noted the reason for the new request for 1.41 acres was to ask for help in solving the water runoff problem. He continued noting that the Railroad representatives were aware of the existence of the ponds, but that it usually took six to eight months to get a letter of approval from Railroad officials regarding right-of-way encroachments. If it becomes necessary to rove the ponds from the railroad right-of-way, they could be shifted forward without having to relocate the recycling equipment. Mr. Chandler stated that there would be no expansion of his business operation, no increase in the number of trucks or use. There will be an improvement in the traffic conditions due to the relocation of the driveway. He cited a letter from J. W. Watkins stating that the proposed driveway ha& 'a greater sight distance aid is a safer entrance than the one now being used. He also cited a letter from Jon S. Harder concerning land values. He submitted these two letters along with a letter from DEM dated 8/22/85 to the Board as _ evidence. (Copies of these letters are on pages of these minutes): Chandler continued addressing the concern regarding the contents, appearance and overflow of the ponds. Be noted the purpose of the third pond was to take care of any overflow. The design and construction of the ponds has been approved and accepted by as a solution to the environmental problem. Chandler referenced the comment that he had graded the property to make it more usable and noted this was inaccurate. Be called on Philip Post to explain exactly what had been done on the property and the design details as well as the traffic circulation pattern. Philip Post explained that there were three sources of runoff: truck washing, runoff from the making of concrete, and rainwater; the latter being the primary source of runoff. Be noted that other than the technical problem regarding water runoff, there were three other benefits from this site plan: (1) additional landscaping, (2) access improvements and (3) eventual recycling of materials used in the opetation so there would be no *Solid or liquid waste removed from the site. At this point Willhoit asked that the applicants only address those things relating to the Land Use Plan amendment at this time. Post noted that most of -his remarks were specific to the site plan. Regarding the Land Use Plan amendment he continued that DEM required total detention of water runoff at this site. The liquid waste contains materials used in making concrete. This proposal requires 1.41 acres as an absolute minimum area to accomplish the requirements of DEM. 4 Kizer inquired what the anticipated results were if the request for LOP amendment is denied. Post responded that if the request were denied, the applicant could not comply with DEM requirements and closure of the plant could eventually occur. Gordon read the reasons for making a Land Use Plan Amendment. Post noted that his client was responding to a state requirement and he felt this was a changed condition. Harry Harkins, an attorney from Chapel Hill, representing the Rhine family who own the land surrounding the Chandler Concrete plant, spoke. He noted there would be three additional speakers in opposition to the amendment to the LUP. He continued expressing more firmly the opposition to the amendment for three reasons: he felt it was bad policy, set a bad precedent, and it was not necessary to the operation of the Chandler Concrete plant. He stated that from meeting to meeting the applicant had changed his needs or reasons for the requested amendment. Be felt only two lagoons were needed and the proposed driveway was unnecessary. He also felt that a way could be found for location of the lagoons on land that Chandler already is using and that the barriers that are being stored by contractors working on 1-40 could be stored anywhere. He and his clients greatly oppose the expansion of industrial use into this residential area. Harkins continued stating that Chandler had purchased land without checking into the zoning and had begun using the land in violation of the zoning regulations. Harkins° clients, the Rhine family, had to report the nonconforming use to the County before the action was corrected. Be further stated that he and his clients felt that this was simply a means to-expand the operation of the existing concrete plant. He read from the Zoning Ordinance the reasons for change and noted that he'did-not view the situation as-"changed conditions", but simply an expansion of the use after purchase. He also reminded the Boards that Commissioner Marshall had asked for the May Wpublic hearing evidence to be placed in the record. Commissioner Marshall noted that she only asked for the minutes to be entered into the record and if Mr. Harkins had some particular item of record to be entered he would need to make that request. Harkins then requested that all evidence presented by the opposition at the May public hearing be entered as part of the record of this hearing. Dr. SAlly Feather spoke expressing the concern that her property was the most affected by the requested LUP amendment. She noted that the use and enjoyment of her land has been seriously jeopardized by the concrete plant already. She continued noting she had registered her property as a National Wildlife area and the wooded area was placed in a forest management program. She is also participating in the nutrient sensitive watershed program operated by the State Division of Water Resources. She felt that the hard work done on one side of the road to preserve and protect the land had been destroyed by the fact that just on the other side of the road trees had been destroyed and land cleared. Betsy Rhine spoke stating that she had been living across the road from Chandler Concrete property long before it was a concrete plant. She continued that everyone in the area who are concerned are here to stay; She expressed concern that the request for less land in this amendment request:was supposed to be a compromise, but yet it seemed that everything Mr. Chandler wanted originally was included in this site plan. She expressed concern with traffic safety, health and welfare of the area. She also stated that residents of Joppa oaks complained of stinging, burning eyes from the acid solution used to clean the trucks. She continued that the hazardous acid solution should be dumped elsewhere and the Land Use Plan left as is to protect the County. Alan Fields, a resident of Strayhorn Hills, inquired if after the ten year period the property in question could be used for any purpose or if it must stay with this same use. Gordon responded that the Ten Year Transition 5 Area is a land categorization meaning the land is expected to go from rural to urban in a ten year period. Joyce Garrett, attorney for Chandler Concrete Conpany, spoke stating that the purpose for the amendment to the LUP was the requirement imposed by DEM regarding runoff control. This is based on changes in the environmental agency position in the last ten years and not based on changes in the use of the facility. She noted this was a secondary amendment and she reviewed the criteria for a secondary amendment. She stated that when the LUP was developed it was simply an arbitrary decision that the boundary was the boundary line of the Chandler Concrete Company. She noted that other commercial type activities had developed along SR 1710 and residential and industrial areas can co-exist side-by-side. She noted that the operation of the concrete plant could only go forward with respect to compliance with the requirements of DEM. Representatives from DEM were on the site when it was raining; according to the direction of the flow of runoff, they told Chandler where to place the ponds. She continued that Chandler originally petitioned for 4 + acres with the intention of expansion, as well as environmental, control. Since it is clear that the community does not wish this expansion, Mr. Chandler is only requesting an amendment for sufficient land to control the runoff problem. The effort to control the problem does not constitute an expansion of the business. The community should not be able to dictate if an environmental problem must continue to exist. She continued that the driveway proposed in the Planned Development has been endorsed by NICDOT as a safer entrance. Chandler stated in his opinion it is a bad precedent if the County is not flexible in helping residents and responsible people comply with the ordinance. He noted that the County cannot anticipate an increase in the sales tax as there will be no expansion of the business. He expressed concern about the irresponsible action of the opposition in referencing that the Rhines' were "tricked" and that somehow he was involved. He noted that he did not buy the property from the Rhines, but was solicited by a subsequent owner of the property who approached'him regarding its availability for purchase. He continued that he was not aware of the sequence of events leading up to the sale. He emphasized that the stated requirement that the property be used only for residential use was not part of the public record. He continued that the deed does not show that the property came from the Rhine Estate. Be continued that he felt it was important not to have the comment regarding being "tricked" linger in the Boards' ndnd. 3. PD-4-85 CHANDLER CCECRETE =PAW The presentation was made by Susan Smith. She informed the Boards that the screening and lot size requirements had not been satisfied, but continued that staff would recommend that the lot size requirements be modified under Section 7.3 given the nature of the request. She continued that staff had been in contact with DEM as of this morning and that DEM verified that a three pond system was required to satisfy their requirements; that a runoff control system in this location was necessary as an immediate measure to address runoff in this area; and that the proposed recycling system is a long term proposal to address the applicant's needs beyond the control of runoff. She noted that DEM had approved the submitted plans with the exception of a freeboard requirement which the applicant has subsequently indicated he will comply with. Thomas Chandler requested that all materials submitted for the Land Use Plan application be made part of the record on the rezoning request. He also requested that his written comments be made part of the record. The Board concurred. Chandler subsequently read the letter from Jon Harder. Phil Post, engineer for the applicant, spoke on the project and clarified that he would address what will happen to the runoff on the site and --•. 6 the nature of the materials in the ponds. He noted that the materials are not hazardous and that they will not be leaving the site which would substantially improve the current situation. He described the recycling facility noting that the solids and liquids derived from the system will be reused in the plant as recycled materials. Until this system is in place accumulated solids will be removed by trucks. Post cited a map prepared to illustrate the nature of the request noting the actual acreage to be utilized for the operation is very limited once you identify right-of-way, open space and screening proposed. He clarified that the area designated in pink is the use area and includes .74 acres. Post clarified that the applicant must meet the specifics of the site plan upon development of the site. Be continued that maintenance of facilities installed is also required as a condition of approval and that this would address landscaping and the integrity of system. Fritz Brunssen, engineer for the applicant, addressed traffic flow. Be noted that driveway C is in the middle of the turn and has limited sight distance and that the applicant proposes to use Driveway B to enter and load the vehicles and then use Driveway D to exit the tract. He continued noting that NCDOT accepted the proposed driveway as having safer sight distance and that the driveway is higher than the road. Be noted that truck parking will not be seen from the road and that those on the other side of the railroad cannot see the basins due to a combination of plant material and fencing. Be summarized that the proposal would result in improved traffic arrangements, improved landscaping and total compliance with environmental regulations. Planning Board member Kizer inquired about the total concentration of the liquid in the ponds. Chandler responded that there are 10 parts water to 1 part muriatic acid. He informed the Boards that this acid-is purchased and stored in 55 gallon drums and diluted on a 10-1 basis for utilization. Kizer inquired how much acid is used a month. Chandler responded that they use 55 gallons a month generally, but that use-is not determined on a scheduled basis. This is determined by the plant manager and related to the number of trucks out of use. He clarified that they use 550 gallons of diluted nuriatic acid monthly. Kramer inquired about the structures to be located above ground associated with the ponds. Post responded that the pumps will be placed underground. He described the process indicating that the water would flow from the wash area in the plant area to the first pond and that the liquids will be pumped out of the second basin. The third basin would accommodate a storm event. . Liquids would be pumped to an existing overhead tank. Yuhasz asked the applicant to describe the recycling system. Post indicated that it utilizes a conveyor belt which scoops heavier material out of a bin filled with water laden material. Chandler indicated that there are many models on the market and that they are generally 16-20 feet long and 8 feet wide. Yuhasz inquired how close landscaping may be placed to the railroad tracks before the railroad company objects. Brunssen responded 15 feet. Be continued that existing vegetation in the area is not to be disturbed and that additional vegetation will be added. Best inquired if the said and gravel reclaimer mentioned is also the recycling facility. Post responded yes. Best asked how high is such a facility. Chandler responded six feet. Pilkey inquired about projected water usage and the depth and rate per minute of the well. Chandler responded that the well was installed when the . plant was built and-though he did not know how deep it is, it was installed by the Dodson Well Co. Be indicated that he had replaced the pump once since acquiring the plant. He noted that the facility was also connected to city water, but that well water was preferred as the temperature of the water is constant. He noted there was a storage tank on site. • Chandler reviewed his decision to 7 apply for a planned development versus a general rezoning as a means to "clear the air" and put into writing and on plans what he intended to do with the property. P.H. Craig, appraiser, reviewed his appraisal credentials and noted he had a long term familiarity with the property. He noted that he had observed the "acid pits" and the long section of stripped'property. He indicated that there was an adverse impact on the property values of the Rhine property,e property which by its use and the owners actions is an asset to Hillsborough. Craig cited a map prepared to show on which parcel he was cormenting He noted that the area designated in blue was the ro r p 1� tY in question. Be cited the topography of the Rhine property which has 1200' of road frontage with 400' immediately adjoining the Chandler property. The yellow area on the map indicated possible building sites. Be maintained that the Rhine property had been damaged a minimum of $30,000.00. He continued that the homlace had some intervening vegetation, but that Ms. Laura Feather's 40 acres was entirely impacted and that the value could not be added back to the property once so severely damaged. Kizer asked Craig if in his professional opinion the proposed screening and runoff control facilities would further devalue the property. Craig responded that the property was already devalued when the Chandler property was stripped of vegetation adding that the industrial use of the property had damaged the Rhine property. Kizer repeated his question noting that Craig had not responded to the question posed. Craig responded that the screening will help, citing the blue green area on the map. Kizer again asked if in Craig's professional opinion the proposed runoff control facilities would further devalue the property. Craig responded that in his appraisal comment he had not concerned himself with the runoff question. He noted his concern was with the aesthetics of the possible pond sites. res Kizer asked if the proposed screening is an improvement.' Craig po yes. - Commissioner Lloyd asked if Craig addressed the value of the property before and after development in his appraisal comment letter. Craig responded yes. Commissioner Lloyd asked whose property was devalued $30,000.00. Craig responded that the heaviest damage was to Sally Feather's propeity.as.potential building sites look down a ravine into the Chandler site. Commissioner Lloyd asked if she was entirely affected by the $30,000.00. Craig responded that the topography allowed for no space and screening between the lake and the road. Comdssioner Lloyd asked how nuch land Ms. Feather had. Craig responded that she has 40.93 acres of land which includes the right-of-way and pond. Commissioner Marshall inquired what happens to the "acid ponds" built and constructed without permission. Smith responded that the ponds cannot be used until approval is obtained. Commissioner Willhoit inquired if ponds can be put in otherwise. Smith responded that the ponds cannot be used except as permitted, but that property can generally be cleared and ponds constructed without regulation. Commissioner Willhoit inquired if most of the devaluation was due to the denuding of the property as opposed to the construction of the ponds. Be further inquired if there would be devaluation if screening was installed. Craig responded that the industrial zoning devalues the property. Commissioner Lloyd asked if Craig was referring to the 1.41 acres proposed or the entire plant. Craig responded that the 1.41 was the only part he took into consideration. Commissioner Lloyd cited Harder's letter and Craig responded he took exception to Harder as an appraiser. Gordon asked Gledhill how much weight could be given to Harder's letter. Gledhill responded that the letter was introduced for the "truth of it" and 8 was, therefore, hearsay evidence. It is admissible so long as there is no objection and that the weight attributed to the letter is the choice of the Board members. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if Mr. Harder exists. Craig respcmded that he is a licensed contractor. Robert E. Rhine questioned if approval should be given by the Board after the fact. He asked what Mr. Chandler would have done if the land had not been available for purchase. He reviewed the history of the ownership and sale of the property. He noted that the family had listed a 19 acre tract with James Rae Freeland of Apple Creek Realty and that he had inquired of him the zoning of the property to which Freeland had responded Residential. Be had not put a proviso in his listing to the effect that it could only be used as such. He noted that due to irregularities in their relationship he had sought the assistance of the Real Estate Board. Mr. Rhine further addressed the engineering aspects of the project, citing his qualifications to address such a matter. With regards to "space" he noted that the area to the west was utilized for the storage of concrete barriers which he numbered to be 1000. These barriers are 12 feet long, 2.5 feet high and 2 feet wide at the tese. He noted that if this property were unavailable, Chandler would have to store the terriers elsewhere and reorient the use of the property within the confines of the industrially zoned portion. He addressed "slope of the land/flow of water" by noting that the land can be made lower or raised. He addressed "washing/cleaning" commenting that on July 15 Chandler had indicated he needed 200 gallons to wash and clean 15 trucks aid that they were cleaned every two weeks. In regards to "flow of-traffic" he cited the potential removal of the stored barriers for use of driveway A-as a regular entrance and exit for the plant. He cited the truck circulation map noting that no comment had been made regarding the use of driveway A versus D. He addressed "parking" noting that 15 trucks had been perked at the facility over the weekend. He addressed "noise" asking how much noise the conveyor system will generate. When Rhine addressed "facility layout", he maintained that the directive to be given to the engineers is to show haw and why more land is needed versus bow to operate within the confines of the industrial land already owned. Be addressed "business/return on capital" commenting that Chandler had said he had been led to believe that industrial uses were permitted, but that he had not commented on when he was notified that the land could only be used for residential uses. He expressed concern that the County would change the zoning to accommodate Chandler's expenditures. He continued that Chandler has found or will find a way to operate if the land was not available for purchase or is still zoned residential. Commissioner Lloyd commented inquired about the barricades. Chandler responded that W. C. English Construction Co. is constructing the interchange of 1-40 and 1-85. This company had requested storage space from local businesses for the concrete barriers and that Chandler Concrete Co. had complied with their request. Be noted that the barriers are used to divert traffic at the interchange. Chandler commented that he had not initiated the purchase of the property and that he had dealt with the same individual as the Rhines and was guilty of the same lack of foresight. Be indicated he had cooperated with the State investigation of the real estate firm. Be continued that he did not do anything with the property from the time of purchase of the land in September and recordation in October until he was contacted by DEM and told that he had to control the runoff and suggested where to locate the control facilities. He was contacted by the Planning Department in March regarding the improper use of the property and the requirement that all activity cease until he had applied for approval. He noted he had received a permit to one the site and construct the pond prior to being informed of the violation of the Zoning Ordinance during the last week in March. 9 Smith noted that all property owners within the study area were notified of the development of the Central Orange Area Study, notices were posted on local properties and notices were published in the local newspaper. Commissioner Carey inquired if the boundary for the zoning lots was an arbitrary boundary. Stith reviewed the history of the development of the plan, noting that zoning boundaries did not necessarily follow, property lines, that the drainage basins for public water and sewer service were an important criteria in determining the boundary for certain planning designations, that there was considerable community opposition from those residing at the intersection of NC 86 and Old #10 to nonresidential development in the area; and the designation of the Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node area was linked to those areas designated as Transition; and that the indentification of a potential service area for public water and sewer given drainage basin boundaries had limited the designation of Transition and. subsequently, Industrial areas. Gordon inquired why a Soil and Erosion Control permit was issued. SWith responded that clearing of property and control of runoff from adjacent properties may or may not relate to the uses permitted. She noted that upon further review by staff, the staff determined that, in this case, the runoff control facilities could not be disassociated from the industrial use. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if the whole tract is zoned. Smith responded that the designation of a zoning lot does not necessarily correspond with the ownership of the property, but generally relates to the use area. Kizer indicated that the Board had been persuaded to "grandfather" in this use when Hillsborough was zoned given that the lot area was small; there was no room for expansion and given the plant's fifteen year history at that location. Chandler commented that the topography does not allow for the use of the land for trucks to turn away from the plant and utilize driveways A or B given the presence of the railroad tracks. On the other side of the plant are fuel tanks. The only possible exit for loaded trucks is Driveway C which has been used since the plant was constructed. Driveway'A was constructed by English Co. to get to their barricades, not by Chandler Concrete. Commissioner Willhoit inquired about screening requirements. Smith responded that the screening requirements are specifically stated in the ordinance. She described the applicant's proposal commenting that the applicant had indicated during the public hearing his desire to comply with all the requirements. 4. Z-2-85 (REZONING ) DR. KWH WEND AND WIFE MAT CHANG NG Smith cited the letters from the Tbwn of Hillsborough regarding water and sewer services availability, noting that the following comments are applicable to all of the subsequent projects to be considered at this public hearing. She informed the Board that the Tbwn of Hillsborough Board had endorsed their previous commitment to service these projects and had also adopted amendments to the water and sewer extension policy which were suggested by the Orange County Planning Staff to address concerns with the procedures for Town approval of service extensions. She noted that the Town Board had determined that only new submittals would be subject to the revised policy. Gordon inquired why the projects were continued and why this item had been continued from the February public hearing. SWith reviewed the history of subsequent action on this matter noting it was the staff's and applicant's desire to resolve the water and sewer issue with the Tbwn of Hillsborough to assure compliance with the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. Gordon asked for the Attorney's opinion on the satisfaction of the zoning criteria by the most recent letter from the Town of Hillsborough. Gledhill responded that his opinion did not matter as the Board had accepted a similar letter on a previous development request. 10 A.W. Kenyon, resident of Hillsborough, spoke to both the Weng and Scholar projects. He referred to the question of the availability of water and sewer services to the projects. Be reviewed the history of Town action on these requests and their discussion of the availability of services. Be noted that the Tbwn Board had been told by Horace Johnson of serious defects due to water pressure north of Tbwn. Be noted that the Tbwn Engineer had been directed to study the problem and then submit a solution to the Town Board for consideration by July, 1985. Be indicated that Horace Johnson had stated that both a storage tank and pumping station would be necessary. Be continued that the Board had been informed that it would be 12-18 months after the receipt of the engineer's report before the solutions posed would be put into effect. Be noted there was a postponement in the arrangement with the Town Board. Be questioned why there would be a shorter period for implementation of a solution now. He stated that the Town Engineer had brought a report before the Town Board in July that indicated that the only feasible solution would be a 300,000 gallon storage tank at Frank Perry's farm with 8" service lines and construction of at least one pump station. He noted that the Town Board had accepted the report unanimously and called for a 12-18 month delay. Be continued that at the August 12, 1985 meeting of the Town Board discussions were conducted on the possibility that new developments would not worsen the situation and that the Mayor had seemed skeptical of that outcome. He noted that, as in February, the Town Engineer had not been consulted nor were plans approved for either development. Be expressed concern about a tentative promise of service from the Town and asked why the most recent letter from the Town was acceptable given that the attorney had advised that previous letters were unacceptable. Be asked that the approvals wait until service was available and that the projects be considered on the merits of conditions then prevailing. Vance Brooks, resident of the Coleman Loop Road area, expressed concerns that he had mixed feelings about the project arid felt he had received bad information. Smith reviewed the development request, citing the density of residential use requested. Brooks asked what type of residential units would be constructed. Smith responded that the applicant had not specified the type of units, but had only indicated that the lots would be moderately priced. Z-3-B5 (REzwpu ) ROBERT A. AND RACHEL S. 'SCHOLAR No additional staff presentation was'made: .-- "- Rick Cannity, agent for the epplicant, indicated that his client wishes to proceed at this time with the project, but would be willing to delay for more information from the Town of Hillsborough. Be cited the "Practice of Local Government Planning", a manual for planners, which indicated on page 201 that with the reference to utility services provision, the economics of such improvements requires the development of property into quarter acre lots, otherwise the profit margin is marginal. Cannity cited the recently approved rezoning immediately to the south in the Town's jurisdiction which is currently under development by the applicant. Kenyon reiterated his previous comments. In addition to his concerns on the water difficulties he cited problems with the wastewater treatment plant. Be also noted a concern with traffic along US 70 and the intersection rated by NCDOT as the 37th most dangerous section. Commissioner Lloyd asked that he clarify which intersection he was referring to. Kenyon responded the intersection of Corbin and Geer Streets at the Snake Den. Commissioner Lloyd indicated he was impressed with the development by the applicant currently under construction. 6. Z-10-85 REZONING REOGESTFOR CORNWALLIS HILLS The staff presentation was made by amen Smith. 11 Randy Smith, agent, reviewed the project noting that the existing portion was presently zoned R-3 and that the awn of Hillsborough had agreed with extension of utilities to service the new section. He continued that the remaining undeveloped portion of the property would remain R-1 as the applicants would wait until they were ready to develop the property to determine the zoning from the dictates of the market current at that time. Pilkey inquired about the exit patterns for the project. Randy Smith responded that the main exit would be Lafayette Drive exiting onto both Old NC 86 and Oakdale Drive. Pilkey inquired about the number of houses proposed. Randy Smith responded 111 houses. Susan Smith cited page 182 of the agenda and the letter from NCDOT regarding access. Tbm Tesler:, resident of the area, noted a storm sewer problem on Lafayette Drive. He inquired about the intentions with the remaining acreage and the need for two exits. Jim Barick, resident of Cornwallis Hills, asked if there was a water pressure problem in this area. Susan Smith responded that Horace Johnson, Water Commissioner for the Tbwn of Hillsborough, had indicated there was good water pressure in this area. She added that the applicants would have to make specific improvements to the services as part of the development process. Smith continued that mmar had estimated that 85% of the traffic would flow to Old NC 86 and that 75% of that traffic would flow to 1-40. She noted that road improvements would be required through the development process, specifically wider rights-of-way, turning and deceleration lanes. Ralph Cochrane, agent, noted that in their analysis Oakdale Drive is a viable secondary access. Be commented that they had tried to acquire a second access onto Old NC 86 but had not been successful. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE MKT AMENDMENTS The presentation was made by BUsan Smith. Concerns have been Identified by the Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Staff about features of the Special Use Permit and watershed standards. Recent changes in the General Statutes dictated amendments to Article 20 AMENDMENTS. The proposed text amendments, if approved, would' clarify and improve the administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Smith noted there were a number of text amendments OF put forth for consideration. The first is Article 6 APPIICATIoN OF DaMENSIONAL REMIREMENTS. In the period of tine following the approval of the Water Quality Critical Area and Protected Watershed II Zoning Ordinance text amendments, the staff has monitored the administration of these standards and has identified specific concerns to be addressed. These concerns have tracked similar concerns raised by members of the Board of Commissioners and by other local government staffs attempting to implement the State-Local Action Guidelines for the Falls of the Neuse and Jordan watersheds. Specifically, these concerns include the complexity of the Impervious SUrface Ratios Table as opposed to the three-tiered approach endorsed by the TUCOG and the State of North Carolina; the lack of recognition in the Table of areas already serviced by public water and sewer services and developed at higher densities given the provision of these services; the technical, difficulties posed by a standard of stormwater management which relies solely on infiltration; and the need to establish an acceptable guideline for implementation of the infiltration standard by type of land use, particularly large lot development. The particular it are: 6.23.4, 6.23.7, 6.24.6, and 6.24.8. These track each other within the two watershed districts' and, specifically, provide for the control of the first 1/2 inch of runoff from impervious surfaces in protected watersheds in one of three ways. The preferred method is on-site infiltration through the retention of undisturbed, 12 vegetated areas; the other two methods are structural or engineered infiltration measures, such as trenches or retention ponds, which reduce the amount of runoff and detention structures that reduce the rate of runoff. These methods will, be used on a site specific basis. SWith noted that Orange County is the only agency at this time which is evaluating every project that is in a protected watershed. it is felt that a minimum cutoff is reasonable from a technical and administrative standpoint in terns of evaluating a site plan. Staff would like to provide some flexibility in the administrative procedures so that those sites 80,000 sq. ft. or larger would not have to be reviewed through detailed calculations, yet would have some site specific requirements. Also proposed is a revision of the Impervious SUrface Ratios Table by district to reflect State requirments. Gordon inquired if the Planning Board reviewed these proposed amendments. Smith responded yes. Smith continued with Article 8 SPECIAL USE PERMITS In reviewing recent requests for the issuance of Special Use Permits, members of the Board of Commissioners and Planning Board have expressed concern regarding the burden of proof in determining compliance with the General Standards specified in Section 8.2 of Article 8. The Ordinance provides that where the Board finds a preponderance of evidence to indicate compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use and that the use complies with all required regulations and standards, the aplication must be approved unless the Board finds, in some specific manner, that the general standards have not been satisfied. Under the present Ordinance, the burden of proof rests primarily with those opposing the issuance of the Special Use Permit to prove that the general and/or specific standards have not been satisfied. The proposed amendment would require the Board to make specific findings that the general standards have been met. Those opposing the issuance of the Special Use Permit would continue to have the burden of proving that the general standards have not been satisfied. Kizer expressed concern about the proposed amendments, noting that what was currently in the ordinance was precisely what the County Attorney had advised and that the County Attorney had stated during the 'preparation of the Ordinance that wording such as that proposed was incorrect. Be felt what was proposed was significant and needed to be addressed. Be continued that to require the applicant to meet all aspects of the general standards is unreasonable, particularly in the consideration that the general standards serve as the catchbasin for what the staff and Boards missed. Be noted that the Courts have demonstrated that they will not uphold such ordinances if the applicant does not know the specific requirements that must be met. Be reviewed the court literature on the issue. He maintained that the process is failing if the County does not anticipate specific requirements in advance for the applicant to be aware of and to answer in the application. Commissioner Lloyd commented that it makes the applicants "guilty before proven innocent". Gledhill commented that the provision as spelled out satisfies the decision of the Court. Be asked that he be allowed to provide the Board with further information on this matter. Gledhill continued that offhand he objects to using generalized findings, though he recognizes they are used by other jurisdictions, as they are not informative of the process. He cited a 1984 Court of Appeals decision on such a matter noting that one cannot deterMin6 from the decision what went on. Commissioner Willhoit commented that he was concerned about competent evidence and the need for more specific criteria. Gledhill responded that there is a difference between showing that you are meeting the general conditions versus shifting the burden of proof. As the current Ordinance provides, the applicant must show or establish that he has provided everything required by the Ordinance as opposed to proving some specific health, safety and welfare issue. Be continued that if the process is • . 13 being followed appropriately, then the current Ordinance provisions are satisfactory. Kizer noted that educative information is needed for the citizens on these matters. SWith cited the letters regarding the special use permit Procedures forwarded to all affected property owners as part of the notification process, an example of which may be found on page 106 of the agenda package. Gordon questioned the last paragraph of page 201. Gledhill responded that this provision applies to those opposing approval- and occurs only after the applicant has established his evidence. • Kizer indicated that those in opposition should have real, legitimate evidence of a concern which the applicant should then be asked to address. Otherwise, the ordinance requires that the permit be issued. Bobby Nichols expressed concern with the proposed amendment and agreed with Dr. Kizer's position. Gordon commented that she favored the proposed wording. ADJOURNMENT Chair Willhoit adjourned the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on September 3, 1985, 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners' ROOM of the Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Joanna Bradshaw, Administrative Secretary Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk • dyJ9' --�----- - c - .12w 4 L __ • { • SS n� ., - • • . . ' • ■ • - - • --- - • - . ..__. ___ . . _ . . • . . . . ci . .. . . . . . .... . _ . .... . . . . . . ....... __ . . ... . . . .. . • _ .. ._ __ - ' ' - • - - . __. . . _ . . _ ..... . . . . .. .... . ._ . . . ..._ . . ••- •- . . • • ••• ..._. ... - • •- _. • • ----c::::, • . . . . .. ... . . _ . .. . ._ . _._ . ..___ . . . . .. ... . .._ . . . . . .. . . _. . ----r-W-A"...- -' .-• . . . . .. . . - . , . .. ......_ . . . .. . / •• - .....,_-:__ _ . .......„...... _ .... 401111 . .1...-' - • • - - -• . _ . . . .__ . . . .. . .. .. . . - - . . . ..... _ . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . _ . ... --•• if, . • - c . • - • • - . .. ... .. ....,_,Lit.14.0...)) . .. . . . . .. . . .iy„...9t. ier.r.„„) .4(44)..)44_,. . .. ._..... . • • . . . __. . . . . .. . ._ ... .. .... ._ . .. . . .. .. . ._.. . . . .. . ... ... .. . . . .. .. . . .. . ._ . •. ._ . _ • • -• • - -- . __.. . . - __. _. . • _ •_• • . . . . . . .. . . . . _ .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . .... . .. .. ._. •. • ova,4,.... 7./ . .. . . . . . . _. . _ . __.. . __. . . . .... . .. - • Andg--4_......., 17/.477-/-*"D _ • _• . . . . . . .. . . .. . _. --• ....... . . _. . • Y. - - . . . . . . b.. _. . -•'I' -- __. . .. .... ..._ _ _ .__ _ . ---- ----- • _4.... __ _ __. . . ..__ _ __._. _ . ._ .. .r:* . al. "-?ec... . e.".14r2.77.7..,...e2,...2, _. I" -__ -- -- - . --- -- -- -- --- ... __ _ _. ._. ___ .__ _.. _ ._ __ _... __ _ _ _ . • --- - -- -- -- .- --- ...- . - - -- -- ,=,,or..1, . , qtar.-A.,_-• . -.4---- ..4.-°.'°.7 -- . .0 -.?E ) ...0.---z-r ..:-.- ___•_- - . ._ 2 -- --C .----4'..."- .-- - . . .._ __ .._ ..._ ._.. . .._ • - ) _ - • A-ce.--r-.Ledd) - OP: ce.C.-•cp-t...) • 4(;7gAtte . .efraioStatj 444 CLey k• C C .,••■ 0 r d -'7 /0 � , __.e _ _ _ _ . . • , . .- . . . 112 A . _ . . • __. . _ . . ._ _ . . ••___ - ...7 _ . . _ . . _ _ TiL _ • . - . . . - - - - - -. • 1 . - - . - - ...---.--- .- - - G,/ _ .,J _... . . ,;'�,r'f �� P' -�'!• ---ter ..._ _ _ . .. : . _.. • . - , . • . .... .___.. _ ___. . - •---- - - - .___.. ._..... __. __ . _ ._ .. _ . ___. ___ er... ... ,.... ... _ ... __. .____ _ .... __. _. __. . . _ - .. ._. _____ ____. • • -- -- •--- ---- - ,,./... , ..--.. . ,,g.:2.... • - . . . ,..--- • __ . _. "2—......_ )_..„...-ee„..,.. 6..) ....... . . .___ . ._ . .. _. _ . .. _..... . .... _ .. .___ ...... . _. . . ‘e-.-'77._. --.1a----•,..; ___. .. ._.... ........ . _..... _ . _ * '- - - - " • • _. _ . ... . . . ..... ... . .__. .... ..5/77 .._.. . __ _______ . _ .....„...„-. . , Er- _ .....---7--.- .---, _ .._ _ . _ _. . ______ _ ...e___. . _,L s...____.Q__ ..,0?-±..-7..._,..„..---. . -4111, •." . gli — - /.11 C-.,- —.. ---i°2-....:::? ..e_._ _‘_."'Te_,.... ..__ . . _ . . ._. . .__ .._ . _._.. ___ _... . ..__ _._ _—. . .. .. .. __._ __ "-- •— "---' -- *--- •- ----C. -- ._- _ -. ._...._ . . . . . .... . - .- . - --. — ----- . -- . -- .. --.....——-- .. . .. .. _. .. . ___ __ __ . _._ ._.. _. .___. .__ . .._ .__ .... . .... _. .__. . . --• .._ _ . . ..._.../.....,............>;.„. .._. ._ .. .... ..__ _ ._._ ... _ __ _ _ .. ._. _... _.. .... ._. . . .._ . _______ _ _..._ ._ ._.._ _. ._ _ . • _ _ .____ __ . ._ ...._ . __... ..... . .. . `'"�- '" - . �`�"' 2 _ - �'�' ./~. 0 .). . .„...7. . . . _. _ . _...._. . ._ . . .. . . ./gie ......„--... . . .. _ . .. ... . . . ___ .. .. ...... . . . _ __... ... .. . . • .• • . . . • .. . .. . ._._.. . .. . .. . 0 . _,,..... r .") . . . ..._. ._. . .. . 7-- ..e/c._ L.. _: _ . . . . _. _. . . fr7 __ ._.. . . . _. ..._.. . ....... . . . _ . . . . . . . . . _. .. . . - _. • . . .. . . ..... . _ . . .. .. •• ._ _ . . .. . _. . . . . . .. . . ... _.._ . . . .. _ .. . ... . _ ._._ . .. . . . _ . • . .. ._.. ... _ . . . .. . _ . .. . --. .�..�,�.. _ . _ f - . _ . . . _ . . ± '"'. . , • . ".,--r ." . e"-- ... ...off. y- --' . .isi.0.....\.A1,../..„..s.... . 0 \- • ,---- ___ _ __„- ..."...........0 _ _ _ ___ . _"7". -c-- __ _ c......_._ ___ ___ _____ __ . ___ _ ___ _ __ . ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . __ __ _.__� _ _. - -_. .. -_ ± ... _ __ . _ --- — ------ . ___ __ _e, 7 ---- - _. _ _ . _ ___ _.__ _ ____ ___. __ __ _c <z)C -- - _ - -- -- G ' !-- CC i _/�3 ..� . _ .. _.__ �,,. r __ c___42.....,„ _gja__3,_ .e_7_ .(0 _ . _ _ _ _. . .._ - c . _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _c....,,z_ . . __ __. _ ___. __ _