HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-16-1981 AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
FEBRUARY 16, 1981
COMMISSIONERS ROOM, ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
7:30 P.M.
1. Does any Board Member desire to modify this agenda?
2. Does any member of the audience desire to comment about:
A. Matters on this agenda?
B. Matters not on this agenda?
3. A Work Session to review the County' s Land Use Plan.
DISCUSSION OUTLINE
Commissioner's Work Session on Land Use Plan
February 1981
1. Land Use Districts - function, locational criteria, extent
a) Urban
b) Transition
10 year and 20 year transition areas
transition activity nodes
c) Rural
rural residential
agridulturaltkresidential
rural activity nodes
rural buffer
d) Conservation
public interest areas
environmentally sensitive areas
reservoir protection
2. Activity nodes - function, locational criteria, distribution
a) transition commercial nodes
b) transition industrial nodes
c) rural activity nodes
3• Relationship between land use districts and zoning districts - Proposed
zoning districts for:
a) transition areas
b) transition nodes
c) rural buffer
d) rural residential
e) agricultural residential
f) rural activity nodes
g) public interest areas
h) environmentally sensitive areas
i) reservoir protection area
Alimmins
4. Land use reports for each township
a) Cheeks
b) Hillsborough
c) Eno
d) Cedar Grove
e) Little River
f) Chapel Hill
g) Bingham
5. Proposed policies for adopted land use goals.
„#.
DISCUSSION OUTLINE.
Commissioner's Work session on Land Use Plan
February 1981
1. Land Use Districts - function, locational criteria, extent
a) Urban
b) Transition
10 year and 20 year transition areas
transition activity nodes
c) Rural
rural residential
agrieulturalqresidential
rural activity nodes
rural buffer
d) Conservation
public interest areas
environmentally sensitive areas
reservoir protection
2. Activity nodes - function, locational criteria, distribution
a) transition commercial nodes
b) transition industrial nodes
c) rural activity nodes
3. Relationship between land use districts and zoning districts - Proposed
zoning districts for:
a) transition areas
b) transition nodes
c) rural buffer
d) rural residential
e) agricultural residential
f) rural activity nodes
g) public interest areas
h) environmentally sensitive areas
i) reservoir protection area
4. Land use reports for each township
FP a) Cheeks
b) Hillsborough
c) Eno
d) Cedar Grove
e) Little River
f) Chapel Hill
4
g) Bingham
5. Proposed policies for adopted land use goals.
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
DRAFT
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 1981
1:
If: P
Page
R 3.0 FULL LAND USE PLAN
3.1 General Purpose and Structure
1
P.;'.
3.2 Land Use Goals and Draft Policies
3........._
- natural environment, resources conservation and energy 3
- growth
4
- housing
8
- community facilities and services
9
°I 3.3 Conceptual Framework
- basic concepts
14
- land use categories
17
, .
- location criteria
20
3.4 County-Wide Summary
37
- description general pattern of proposed land use
- LUP map (1": 8000')
- relationship between land use plan patterns and
township plans
3.5 Township Components
3.5.1 Cedar Grove Township Land Use Plan Component 38
- township profile summary and analysis
- social-economic
- transportation
- existing land use and infrastructure
- natural environmental constraints
- agriculture
- framework and application
- organizing concepts
- population and /and needs projections
- allocation of growth
- locational criteria
- distribution of land use plan categories in the township
3.5.2 Little River
47
3.5.3 Cheeks
56
3.5.4 Hillsborough
70
3.5.5 Eno
85(
3.5.6 gingham
96
3.5.7 Chapel Hill
107
4.0 Implementation and Evaluation
4.1 Overview of Implementation Strategies
. 1
4.1.1 Zoning Ordinance
- matrix showing zoning districts appropriate for each
land use category
133
1
4
;-:
;
GENERAL PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE
•,,tf
,v■
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
CDUNTY-WIDE SUMMARY
—
GENERAL PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE
In its broadest sense, county planning is a process of
guiding and managing the growth and development of the county
through the application of sound planning principles. This
planning process should reflect the social , economic and natural
environmental conditions and values of the county citizens. The
purpose of the Orange County Land Use Plan is to set guidelines
for the rational distribution of growth and to recommend
management strategies to achieve this objective. Such strategies
could include implenentation tools such as subdivision regula-
tions, zoning regulations, water and sewer line oonstruction,
public investments, a stormwater management ordinance, community
development projects, a thxoughfare plan, soil erosion and sedi-
mentation ordinance, coordinated planning among local governments
in the county, and improved public awareness of planning issues.
The Land Use Plan for the county has its foundation in the
county-wide goals and policies. The goals are general statements
which express ideals toward which the management of growth and
development will be directed. Each goal is supplemented by policies
that state specific public actions which should be taken to achieve
that goal's objectives. The following chart shows the hierarchical
relationship between goals and policies , and the other elements
in the planning process :
Survey and description of COMMUNITY *VALUES Basic beliefs of individt
existing social, economic, and PROFILE which form the basis of
natural environmntal conditions
their attitudes
General statements which express GOALS
-- ideals toward which the management of
growth and community development is
directed
Statement-which emergefrom the goals POLICIES
and which describ definite courses of
public action that lead ultimately
toward the expressed goal
Specific actions to accomplish IMPLEMENTATION
plan and policies. Include- PROGRAMS
regulations, design standards, etc.
FoLlow-up stage to analyze effective... EVALUATION
ness of implementation programs in
achieving expressed goals, could
lead to revision and updating
The structure of the Orange County Land Use Plan is built
on a township framework. Thus, each of Orange County's seven
township plans is a component of the County Land Use Plan. Most
of the detailed land use planning information and recommendations
are contained in these township components. The purpose of the
county-wide summary is to present the goals and policies and to
tie the township components together into an analysis and de-
scription of the plan at the county-scale. Additionally, this
section will review industrial development, water resources pro-
tection, and the agricultural land protection element of the
plan since these issues effect the county as a whole.
:; , . • ,
„ • y; 1 .—t .
•I
„
; ; ;1. • it '
kv
et A,
11,
11;e
LAND USE GOALS AND DRAFT POLICIES
Revised 10/80
LAND USE GOALS AND DRAFT POLICIES
These county-wide goals for Orange County are general in con-
cept and scope . They encompass areas over which county government
has varying degrees of influence and are meant to serve as a gen-
eral guide in developing policies and programs related to land
use planning.
CATEGORY : NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND ENERGY
GOAL ONE : The conservation and protection of Orange County's natura
and cultural environments by means which are equitable
to all citizens of the county.
DRAFT POLICIES :
1. 1 All of the following significant public interest areas :
state-owned parkland, water reservoir buffer land, state
or federally designated historic/archaeological sites
and lands placed by individual property ownegs into
conservation easements should be protected from develop-
ment that would have any detrimental impact . These
lands will be classified as Public Interest Areas in
the Land Use Plan and in addition to being protected
will be managed in ways that will prevent any inter-
nally generated negative impacts from affecting surround-
_
ing land.
1.2 Duke Forest lands are a unique and valuable feature in
the Orange County landscape because of their use in re-
search, education and recreation and should be afforded
a maximum amount of protection from incompatible land
uses through designation as a Public Interest Area.
1, 3 Development should be managed in 100-year floodplains
and floodways to eliminate the potential for damage to
structures, property, and human life as well as to pro-
tect the function of the floodway as a water course
during high flow.
GOAL TWO: The conservation of natural resources
Draft Policies :
2. 1 Land which contains valuable renewable resources such as
productive agricultural areas, managed forested areas
and water supply sites should be identified. These re-
newable resource lands should be maintained and protected
by directing incompatible development away from these
areas.
2.2 Non-renewable resource; lands should be protected
from incompatible development and allowed to be used
in a safe and reasonable manner according to perfor-
mance standards designed to ensure a sufficient level
of environmental protection.
GOAL THREE: The conservation of energy
Draft Policies:
3.1 Encourage site planning and design alternatives for
building development which reduces demand for atrificial
heating, cooling ventialtion, lighting and minimizes
travel distances. This will be accomplished, in part,
by modifying land development regulations to eliminate
impediments to the introduction of more energy-efficient
design and construction.
3.2 Encourage energy-efficient industry to locate or ex-
pand in the County in the appropriately designated
land use plan districts.
3.3 Public buildings and public housing should be designed,
sited and constructed to conserve energy and use non-
polluting renewable energy sources when economically
feasible.
GOAL FOUR: Development of renewable sources of energy
Draft Policies:
4.1 Facilitate use of non-polluting renewable sources of
energy by removing local administrative and legal
barriers to their installation and use.
4.2 Develop educational and public information programs
to increase awareness of the potential for the de-
sign, construction and rehabilitation of commercial
and residential structures.
CATEGORY: GROWTH
GOAL FIVE: Direct growth to those areas where growth is desirable
and suitable to accomadate it
Draft Policies:
5.1 The following suitability criteria will be used to
determine the best location for various land uses:
natural environmental constraints (land slope, hydrology,
flora and fauna, soil conditions) , availability of
public services and 'utilities ; transportation system
access and capacity; impact on energy resources ; existi
land uses ; presence of productive agricultural-on
forested land; sufficient population densities; and
the presence of historic or cultural features .
5.2 Guide growth to achieve a miximum amount of infill
development in the urbanizing areas of the County while
maintaining the integrity of the existing and future
open space and recreational system. The purpose of in-
fill development will be to reduce transportation
energy costs in addition to reducing public-service
costs . The Chapel Hill Township component of the Land
Use Plan will be based on the assumption that 75% of
the suitable vacant land in the Town' s existing urban
area will be developed, however the objective will be
to achieve 100% infill.
5. 3 Medium and higher-density residential development will
be discouraged in the rural portion Of the County.
5 . 11 Crossroad communities in Orange County have unique
identities which will be Maintained. The following
crossroad communities have locational attributes which
make them suitable to accomodate new commercial and
residential growth at a limited, community scale :
Caldwell, Schley, Cedar Grove (Village) , Carr, and
White Cross . New development at these locations will
be appropriate for each community and will not exceed
the capacity of the natural or physical systems to
support it.
5.5 Lands in areas changing from rural to urban in charact-
er and reasonably could be developed to accomodate
urban-type densities but are currently not completely
served by urban systems such as water and sewer lines,
will be classified as Transition Areas. These areas
will be further classified into 10-year and 20-year
Transition Areas to reflect the most appropriate
sequence of development as this area changes from rural
to urban and urban services are extended.
5. 6 The rural, low-density land surrounding the urban areas
but beyond the Transition Areas, which contains environ-
metally sensitive areas such as water-supply watersheds
and Public Interest Areas will be classified as Rural
Buffer. This area will remain rural in character,
will not require urban services and will maintain farm-
ing or rural non-farm residential development as the
most appropriate land use.
5.7 Generally, commercial and industrial land uses in the
rural areas of the County occur along highways, especially
near intersections. The County Land Use Plan will
build on this historically evolved pattern in an effort
to modify it for the purpose of attaining the stated
goals and policies. The framework for this approach
will be to establish Activity Nodes, of various types
and functions, in order to accomodate different in-
tensity levels of commercial and industrial development.
The Nodes will be focused an major intersections and
will meet other locational criteria developed from
Policy 5.1. In the urban areas Activity Nodes will
be called Developed (D) , AND WILL CORRESPOND TO THE
"activity centers" identified in the Town's Land Use
Plans. There will be two types of existing and pro-
posed Nodes in the Transition Areas: COmmercial
Transition (CT) , and Industrial Transition (IT) . Three
types of existing Activity Nodes will be designated in
Transition Areas since these areas are subject to
comparatively rapid change, creating the need and
ability to specify a more detailed future land use
pattern. In rural agricultural and residential areas
only existing Activity Nodes will be designated. New
rural activity Nodes will be located using the specified
locational criteria in response to proposed development
activity.
GOAL SIX: Economic development which emphasizes local employment
while preserving the character of communities and pro-
tecting the natural environment.
Draft Policies
6.1 A sufficient amount of suitable land in the Urban,
Transition, and rural areas should be designated to
accomodate the projected expansion and growth of the
industrial uses in the County. Industrial sites in
urban areas will be determined by each town's land use
plan. 'Industrial sites in the Transistion Areas will
be selected on the basis of the capacity of the support
systems such as water lines, good highway or rail access
and the absence of detrimental environmental or social
impact. In general, industrial sites in the rural
areas of the County will be located within the U.S. 70-
1-85 highway and rail corridor. A limited number of
rural industrial nodes could be located north of this
corridor for small-scale rural industrial uses, not
needing urban-type service support, and meeting the
specified locational criteria.
GOAL SEVEN: Agricultural land and the farming way of life to con-
tinue in rural areas as a viable part of the County ' s
economy
Draft Policies :
7.1 The problem of increasing tax burdens on agriculture
should be alleviated. The public economic ,social and
environmental benefits provided by a vital farming
community should be protedted through property tax re-
lief to farmers .
7 .2 New non-farm development should be located so that com-
plaints and nuisance suits against farm operations are
minimized. Only very low density residential develop-
ment should be allowed in farming areas . More intensiv
residential development will be encouraged to occur
outside of farming areas.
7. 3 The negative impacts of proposed public projects on
farming operations and on productive farmland, includin
the use of eminent domain, should be minimized. Public
review of eminent domain proposals should include ex-
plicit consideration of the impact on agriculture.
7. 4 Relocation of farming operations because of non-farm
development should be minimized. Residential, commerci
and industrial growth pressures should be directed away
from farming areas , so as to minimize both nuisance
complaint problems and the inflation in rural land
values and tax assessments that can price farmers out
of the land market .
7.5 Intensive land uses should be directed away from viable
farming operations and concentrations of prime farm-
land. Adequate amounts of vacant land in and near
existing urban areas should be available to these uses,
without the need for consuming farmland.
7. 6 Commercial land uses which serve favining communities
should be allowed to locate at activity nodes accessible
to farming areas. Adequate amounts of vacant land in
rural activity nodes should be available to serve the
future local commercial needs of the farming community.
7. 7 Encourage more effective forest Management practices
with consideration to discouraging clear-cutting,
providing renewable energy resources and protecting
wildlife habitats .
CATEGORY : HOUSING
GOAL EIGHT: Development of adequate , reasonably priced, safe housi]
an appropriate variety of types for all citizens in
proximity to jobs and daily activities
Draft Policies
8.1 Efforts should be to encourage the construction and
rehabilitation of a range housing types in response
to the need of various household sizes and incomes .
8.2 Housing types should be located according to the
accessibility of public services and commercial uses .
Multi-family housing should be built in Urban, and
Transition Areas where urban services are available.
Lower density (amiximum of one dwelling per acre)
non-farm housing is most appropriate in rural and
community areas outside of productive farmland areas.
8 . E Orange County should provide housing assistance for
households in need through technical assistance and
coordination with public organizations responsible for
housing in the County including the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Farmers Home Administra-
tion, the Orange County Housing Authority through the
Chapel Hill Housing Authority, the Joint Orange-
ChathaM Community Action Agency, Triangle J Council
of Governments , the Community Development Programs in
Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, State Housing
Finance Authority, and the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development . The
primary coordination objective will be to direct the
housing assistance provided by these organizations to
those areas and households in the County which are in
need.
8. 4 The Orange County Community Development Block Grant
Program will concentrate its efforts and resources in
those areas of the County occupied by low and moderate-
income households and having the most severe housing
and community development needs.
8.5 The Areawide Housing Opportunity Plan will serve as
the basic guide for the allocation of assisted housing
to the County. The Housin:. Assistance Plans for the
County and for the towns will serve as the kuide for
the allocation and distribution of housing within the
County.
8. 6 Individual mobile homes are a useful housing resources
in the County and will be afforded the same locational
opportunities as site-built single-family units .
8. 7 All new housing built or located in Orange County will
meet the minimum standards specified in the State of
North Carolina Building Code, as well as Department
of HUD and FMHA Standards when required.
CATEGORY: COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
GOAL NINE: Provision of water and sewer lines in those areas which
can be practically and efficiently served by these
facilities
Draft Policies
9. 1 Urban Service Areas will be established for Chapel Hill
Carrboro , Hillsborough, Mebane and Durham, which will
Correspond with the 10-year and 20-year Transition Area:
Water and sewer lines should be directed to these areas
which contain and are appropriate for higher density
levels of residential, commercial and industrial,
development.
9. 2 The County should develop and implement a cooperative
joint planning process among the municipalities and
those organizations responsible for water and sewer
lines to ensure that these lines are extended in accor-
dance with the land use plans and policies of the variot
jurisdictions affected.
GOAL TEN: Clean and safe water supplies adequate to meet future
need
Draft Policies
10 .1 Adopt a land use plan and other policies which specify
Land use patterns and intensities of development in
water supply watersheds that will minimize potential
adverse impacts on water quality.
10 . 2 Continue to support programs such as sedimentation and
erosion control and SOS which help to protect water
quality.
10. 3 Cooperate with other public and private bodies in pro-
moting water quality legislation and programs.
10. 4 Support educational efforts which serve to increase
citizen understanding of water quality problems and
the need for water conservation.
10. 5 Encourage efforts to monitor the quality of water in
Orange County streams .
10 . 6 Manage Orange Counts water supplies so that avail-
able resources are balanced with existing and projecte(
needs.
10. 7 Orange County should designate prime reservoir sites
so that these areas can be protected from adverse impac
There should be an evaluation of all water sources
available to the County so as not to place inappro-
priate restrictions on a large proportion of the Count3
, land area and land resources.
GOAL ELEVEN: Appropriate sewer disposal facilities for present and
future residents
Draft Policies
11. 1 The type of sewage disposal facilities used by develor
ment should be a function of the magnitude of present
and future demand; the distribution of users ; and the
capacity of the natural environment to absorb the im-
pact .
11. 2 On-site disposal is most appropriate in low-density
and, rural areas where soil conditions are acceptable .
In rural areas with unacceptable soils, state-approved
on-site sewage disposals systems will re required.
11. 3 There should be a process developed that would ensure
that buyers of property in the County be fully in-
formed about the on-site sewage disposal characteristi
of the soils on their property.
11. 4 The use of alternatives to traditional septic systems
is desirable on land which is not suitable for septic
tanks and not served by public sewers. Modification
of state legislation is encouraged to remove any bar-
riers to the use of safe, sanitary alternative on-
site disposal systems.
11.5 Service by centralized water and sewer systems (Towns
of Hillsborough and Mebane, Orange Water and Sewer
Authority) will be most appropriate at the higher-
density levels which occur in the Urban and Transition
Areas.
GOAL TWELVE : Improvement of existing transportation facilities
Draft Policies
12 .1 The use and improvement of existing highway and trans-
portation facilities is desirable , as opposed to de-
veloping extensive new conventional transportation
systems.
,
7.
.-
C i
:--;- .
,.i
12 .2 Alternative, safe, energy efficient transportation
.-.
systems should be developed to discourage dependence
k:f on automobiles . Bikeways , walkways and supportive
facilities such as bicycle parking zones should be
..„
developed. Acquisition of pedestrian and bikeway
easements with public utility easements should be
made wherever feasible, as long as primary use of
easement will remain intact.
;'-
12 . 3 Encourage arrangements of land uses that ease the
expanded use of non-auto modes of travel, increased
occupancy of autos and use of energy-efficient trans-
port system.
12 . 4 Improve transportation services for human service
r-
agency clients in the County through coordination
and utilization of available resources, while main-
taining or reducing present system costs. Use
private transportation providers as part of the system'
service base as well as to serve the needs of the
general public.
i
12 . 5 Before another general aviation facility is built in
the County, there should be a feasibility study under-
taken to first, determine if there is a need for
such a facility and then, to study the locational
alternatives if a sufficient need exist .
12 . 6 There should be a reassessment of the need for I-40
and of the corridor selected with respect to its
human and natural environmental impact on the County .
12 . 7 Because of the importance of the highway system in
the County and for the purposes of effective long-
range planning, including the evaluation of highway
(traffic) capaCity, there needs to be a Road Classi-
fication System developed which classifies major roads
into the following types according to their function :
interstate, arterial; and collector. All other roads
should be classified as subcollector, local, minor,
or private . The following major roads have been
classified:
Interstate : 1-85
Arterial: US70, NC86, NC57, NO54 , US15-501, NO49 ,
NC157
Collector: Mt . Carmel Church Road, Old Greensboro
Road, Old 86, Weaver Dairy Road, Mt. Sinai Road, Home-
stead Road, New Hope Road, White Cross Road, Crawford
Dairy Road, Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road, Orange
Grove Road, Jones Ferry Road, Damascus Church Road,
Smith Level Road, Ervin Road, Dairyland Road, Dodson'
Crossroads , Arthur Minis Road, Old NC1O, Pleasant
Green Road, St . Mary 's Road, New Sharon Church Road,
Schley Road, Holly Ridge Road, Little River Church
Road, Walnut Grove Church Road, Wilkerson Road, Saw-
mill Road, Carr Store Road, Corbett Ridge Road, Lynch
Store Road, Efland-Cedar Grove Road, lebanon Road
West , Weat Ten Road, Bowman Road, Mt. Willing Road,
Dimmocks Road, Coleman Loop, Mebane Oaks Road.
GOAL THIRTEEN: Recreational Land, structures and open space land
to serve citizens at both the county-wide and
community level
Draft Policies
13. 1 Encourage multiple use of existing public and institu-
tional buildings and grounds for recreation as well
as their primary uses .
13.2 Location of parks and recreational facilities close
to residential areas so that long trips can be reduced
13. 3 Developers will, provide adequate open space suitable
for active passive recreation in very large subdivisic
GOAL FOURTEEN: Full and equal educational opportunities for the
people of Orange County consistent with the wishes
of the school district
Draft Policies
14. 1 Planning by the School Board, Planning Boards and
Planning Departments should be coordinated to provide
for future needs of the school districts .
GOAL FIFTEEN: An efficient and effective solid waste collection
and disposal system for Orange County citizens
Draft Policies
15 .1 Encourage the recycling of solid waste when feasible.
15 .2 The value of solid waste as an energy resource should
be acknowledge and recovered when feasible.
15 , 3 The, County ' s present solid waste collection system
should be evaluated for its effectiveness and efficieni
If appropriate, recommendations for alternative system
or ways to improve the existing system should be made
as a result of this evaluation.
GOAL SIXTEEN: An efficient and effective system of public safety
for Orange County Citizens
Draft Policies :
16. 1 Site design standards for residential, commercial
and industrial development will include road design
standards to ensure adequate emergency vehicle access.
16. 2 All state roads in the County should receive non-
duplicated names to be posted on signs at intersection
and all houses will be numbered in order to improve
the response time by emergency vehicles .
GOAL SEVENTEEN: A land use planning process which is responsive to
the citizens and communities of Orange County
Draft Policies :
17.1 There will be a comprehensive effort to inform and
involve County citizens in the Land Use planning
process . The basic components of this process in-
clude : regular and special public hearings ; direct
citizen input to the Board of County Commissioners
and Planning Board; special citizen task forces and
committees to work on certain problems ; and the Town-
ship Advisory Councils to advise the Planning Board
on land use planning matters . It will also include
a systematic effort to inform and notify the general
public through special news features as well as
public meeting notices in newspapers of local circu-
lation.
{ƒ . • . . ;
•
± j%
ƒ
2 • . %
§y • \
& . _
. . a . .
\ . •
;�.
r }\ > . .
�
6 }
£ '
[ ( ,
•
(
\ :
( `
1, . , \•
} '
{ •
{ CONCEPTUAL fRAM-WORK.
•
•
( .
( .
(
! `
: , B : . !
BASIC CONCEPTS
The basic concepts used to design the Orange County Land Use Plan
emerged from the information base contained in the Community Profile
and from the Goals and Policies. Basically, the approach was to
balance the concerns of citizens as expressed through the Goals and
Policies with the constraints and potentials of the natural environ-
ment.
Orange County's landscape contains many diverse features that
have evolved into certain patterns over a period of several decades.
Sometimes, these development patterns result in an inefficient use
of energy and other resources. It is preferable to have develop-
went that is responsive to public concerns about community-wide or
county-wide impacts. The purpose of the County Land Use Plan is
to modify the historically evolved use patterns in ways that will
achieve the stated Goals and Policies.
Land Uses in Orange County range from urban-type residential-
commercial development in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro area to the low-
intensive rural and agricultural uses in the north. Between these
ends of this geographic spectrum Orange County contains a diverSity
of land uses at varying levels of intensities.
The County's transportation system consisting primarily of
highways and roads and limited rail service, is a very important element
in the land pattern. The road system perhaps more than any single
factor has had an enormous influence on the form of development in
the County. Commercial enterprizes, especially those specializing
in retail sales tend to locate at wide intervals along rural high-
ways in a strip-type fashion. The resulting pattern is often energy
inefficient, and encourages rural sprawl to the detriment of produc-
tive agricultural land. TD counter this trend, the Land. Use Plan
identified a series existing of Activity Nodes containing com-
mercial and industrial activities. The purpose of this strategy
is to cluster rural development of this type at sites that would
eventually create a more efficient distribution of land uses.
Generally, Activity Nodes are located at intersection sites in
addition to meeting other social and environmental criteria. In
the future, as identified existing Activity Nodes become 'built
out' , new additional Activity Nodes may need to be located at
rural intersections. lAgien this happens, the proposed use and site
will be evaluated using the locational criteria from the appro-
priate land use category. The primary objective will be to contin-
ue the clustering of small-scale oamercial and industrial uses
in the rural areas of the County.
The urbanizing seci-ons of the County, unlike the rural areas,
contain support services that allow a high-density development.
Of course, the primary support system is municipal water and sewer
lines. Even with the presence of support systems same portions
of the County's urban areas have remained undeveloped. This
situation sets the stage for the second fundamental concept of
the plan: to direct higher-density uses to develop on vacant,
suitable land in the urban areas.
Encouraging development of vacant, suitable land already served
by support systems will eventually create a more compact and
cost efficient urban form. It would also mean that the conversion
of agricultural land to urban uses would be diminished. The Plan
contains a group of policies and districts designed, at least in
part, to achieve greater infill develoment. She major management
tool that will be used to accomplish this is a structured coopera-
tive planning process between the municipalities and the county. -
The basic concepts form the primary approach used to achieve
the stated goals and policies. The application of these basic
concepts will effect the entire range of areas covered by the goals
and policies.
•
•
---
LAND USE DISTRICTS
One of the fundamental methods used to accomplish the stated goals
and policies is the design and application of land use districts.
EaCh district is designed and located to accorrodate certain uses.
The land use plan districts contained in the Orange County Plan
are based on five categories which has been translated into a more
detail classification system. to meet the specific needs of the County.
Orange County Land
Basic Category Use Plan Categories
Developed Urban
Transition 10-Year Transition Area
20-Year Transition Area
Commercial Transition Activity Nodes
Industrial. Transition Activity Nodes
Community Rural Community Activity Node
Rural Rural Residential
Agricultural Residential
Rural Neighborhood Activity Node
Rural Industrial Activity Node
Rural Buffer
Conservation Public Interest Areas
Environmentally Sensitive
Reservoir Protection
_ .
tI
Each district serves a particular function :
Urban - Land that is within the corporate and extraterritorial
planning limits of a town (and is therefore under the
jurisdiction of the Land Use Plan for the town)
10-Year Transition - Land located in areas that are in the
process of changing from rural to urban, and are
suitable for urban-type densities including the pro-
- vision of public utilities and services within the
first 10-Year phase of the Plan.
20-Year Transition - Land located in areas that are in the
process of changing from rural to urban, and are
suitable for urban-type densities including the pro-
vision of public utilities and services within the
second 10• Year phase of the Plan.
Commercial Transition
Activity Nodes - Land focused on designated road intersections
within either a 10 or 20-Year Transition Area that
is appropriate for retail and other commercial uses .
Industrial Transition
Activity Node - Land focused on designated road intersections
within either a 10- or 20-Year Transition Area that
is appropriate for manufacturing and other commercial
uses.
Rural Community
ctivity Node - Land focused on designated road intersections
which serves as a nodal crossroads for the surrounding
rural community and are appropriate locations for any
of the following: church, fire station, small post
office , school, or other similar institutional uses
and one or more commercial uses .
Rural Residential - Land ih the rural areas of the county
that is an appropriate location for low intensity and
low density residential developed which are not de-
pendent on urban services .
Agricultural Residential - Land in areas where the prevailing
land use activities consist of agriculture or forestry
and is appropriate location for these uses to continue.
Rural Neighborhood
Activity Node - Land focused on designated road intersections
within a Rural or Agricultural Residential area that
is appropriate for small-scale industrial uses .
Rural Buffer - Land adjacent to an Urban 10- or 20-Year
Transition Area that is rural in character and should
remain rural and not require urban services .
Public Interest
Area - Land which contains public or quasi-public uses such
as state parks , research forests or known archeological
or historical sites .
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas - Land which is subject to special natural
environmental conditions such as flooding that pre-
sent significant constraints to built development .
Reservoir Protection - Land that drains to existing reservoirs
which are public water supplies for the county or to
potential reservoir sites which have been designated
for protection.
rs7
LOCATION CRITERIA
Applying each of the Land Use Plan Categories involves making de-
cesions about the most appropriate distribution of land uses
throughtout the County. Land in the County was filtered through
a series of criteria designed to evaluate locations for their
suitability to contain the various land uses which would occur in
each plan category. The following locational criteria were de-
,
rived from the County Profile because of their importance in
determining the best locations for new land uses :
Ten and Twenty Year Transition Area
-
Criteria Evaluation
: -
Land Slope No significant slope or topography problem
that would unreasonably increase cost of ex-
tending water and sewer lines.
Hydrology Located outside of 100-Year flood prone areas
as identified by Corps of Engineers.
Flora and Fauna Located away from sites that would, if de-
veloped, create a threat to unique or en-
dangered species as identified by state or
federal government.
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions
are suitable for urban uses because of good
drainage characteristics and load bearing
capacity for site development .
Public Service/
Utilities Located in areas which are or could be reason-
ably and efficiently served by centralized
public services and utilities
Transportation
System Located in areas that have very good access
and are well served by arterals, collecters
and other roads, as well as service by rail
lines . These areas should have the most con;
-------
Criteria Evaluation , , .
plete transportation network in the County ' s
planning jurisdiction.
Energy Use Located within less than 5 minute commuting
time from small-scale commercial uses and 5
to 10 minute commuting time from major com-
mercial uses or an urban area.
•
Existing Land Use Located in area that are in transition from
rural or low-density uses to urban or higher
density uses.
Agriculture and
Forestry Located away from areas that would have a
detrimental effect on productive agriculture
uses and managed forest land.
Population Density Located in areas with moderate to high popu-
lation densities.
Historic and
Cultural Located away from areas that would have a
detrimental, impact on state, or federally
acknowledged historic-cultural sites or
Public Interest Areas as identified in County
Land Use Plan
Commercial Transition Activity Nodes
Criteria _Evaluation '
-------
Land Slope Located on land with slopes of less than 15%
grade.
Hydrology Located outside of 100-Year flood prone area
as identified by Corps of Engineers
Flora and Fauna Located away from sites that would, if develop-
ed, create a threat to unique or endangered
species as identified by state or federal
government.
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions
are suitable for urban uses because of good
drainage characteristics and load bearing
capacity for site development
Public Service/
Utilities Located in areas which are or could be reason-
ably and effectively served by a centralized
public services and utilities
Transportation
System Located on arterial or collector highway at
or within .5 mile of the intersection with
another arterial or collector or within 1 mile
of an intersection with an interstate highway
Energy Use Located within less than 10 minute commuting
time from an Urban area
Existing Land Use Located within identified 10-or 20-Year Tran-
sition Areas
Agriculture and
Forestry Located away from areas that would have a de-
trimental impact on productive agricultural
uses and managed forest land
Population Density Located in areas with moderate to high popula-
tion. densities
Historic and
Cultural Located away from areas that would have a de-
trimental impact on state or federally acknow-
ledged historic - cultural sites or on Public
Interest Areas as identified by County Land
Use Plan.
_
•
Transportation System Located on arterial or collector highway at or with-
in .5 miles of an intersection with another arterial
or collector or within 1 mile of an intersection
with an interstate and located within 1000 feet of
rail lines
Energy Use Located within less than 10 minute commuting time
from an urban area
Existing Land Use Located in areas that are in transition from rural
low-density uses to urban and higher density uses
Population Density Located in areas with moderate to high population
density
Historic and Cultural Located away from areas that would have a detri-
mental impact on state or federally acknowledged
historic-cultural sites or on 'Public Interest Areas
identified in County Land Use Plan
Pural Community Activity Node
. ,
Criteria ' :Evaluation . : ' : ' ' ' '
_-
Land Slope Located on land with slopes of less than 15% grade
Hydrology Located outside of 100-year flood prone areas as
identified by Corps of Engineers
Flora and Fauna 'faceted away fran sites that would, if developed,
create a threat to unique or endangered species
as iaentified by state or federal government
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions are
suitable for on-site sewage disposal systems
Public Service and Located in areas that will not require or need
Utilities urban type services
Transportation System Located on an arterial or collector within .5
Niles of an intersection with another collector
or arterial
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing Land Use Location characterized by a crossroads that serves
as a rodal area for the surrounding rural and farm
population and contains 3 or more commercial or
institutional land uses
Agriculture and Forestry Located at sites within rural areas that would not
unreasonably intrude with this existing landscape
character
Criteria EValuation
Population Density Located in areas that would provide service to sur-
rounding low-density rural and agricultural popula-
tion, general 1000 to 5000 persons for each node
Historic and Culturl Located away from areas that would have a detrimen-
tal impact or state or federally acknowledged
historic and cultural sites or on Public Interest
Areas as identified by Cbunty Land Use Plan
Rural Residential
Criteria Evaluation
Land Slope Located on land with an overall slope of 25% grade
or less
Hydrology No evaluation
Flora and Fauna Located away from sites that would, if developed,
create a threat to unique or endangered species
as identified by state or federal government
•
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions are
suitable for on-site sewage disposal systems
•
--
Criteria EValbatiop: : " " " " " " ' "
a...---■■•■■■ ■••••■■■■■■■■■•■•
.-■■■■■■■■■■■■-
Public Service and Located in areas that will not require or need
Utilities urban-type services
._
Transportation System No evaluation
Energy Use Located in areas that are withinmininum travel
and time of 5 minutes from an Activity Node
Existing rand Uses Located in association with other low-density rural
residential uses and in general proximity to deve-
loped or developing Activity Nodes
Agricultural and Located away aom areas that would, if developed,
Forestry have a detrimental impact on productive agricul-
tural and managed forest land
•
Criteria " ' " " — .EValUation
-------- _.
Population Density Located in areas of rural level population density,
generally one dwelling unit per acre
Historic and Cultural Located away _Crum areas that would have a detri-
mental impact on state or federally acknowledged
historic--cultural. sites or on Public Interest Areas
as identified by County Land Use Plan
--------
A. icultuxal Residential
Criteria Evaluation
Land Slope No Evaluation
Hydrology No evaluation
_-
Flora and Fauna No evaluation
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions aer
good for agricultural production
Public Services and Located in areas where urban-type services, espec-
Utilities ially water and sewer lines, are not needed and
should be discouraged
Transportation System No evaluation
Criteria . . . . . . . ..Evaluation '
---------------
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing Land Uses Located in areas where the prevailing activity is
agriculture or forestry and is outside of new-
farm clusters of population
Agriculture and Forestry See Existing Land Use
Population Density located in areas of very low population density
which is dispersed-typical of agriculturally pro-
ductive areas
Historic and located so as to not have a detrimental impact on
n iltur al state or federally acknowledged historic-cultural
sites or on Public Interest Areaq identified in
County Land Use
...16.0..,
',.
[ Rural Neighborhood Activity Node
-- -
Criteria Evaluation
_ __ __ _ ---------- .
Land Slope Located on land with slopes of less than 15% grade
(
F'- Hydrology Located outside of 100-year flood prone area as
identified by Corps of Engineers
Flora and Fauna Located away from sites that would, if developed,
'
create a threat to unique or endangered species
as identified by state or federal government
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions are
suitable for on-site sewage disposal systems
, .
Public Service and Located in areas that will not require or need
Utilities urban type services
'
aiteria Evaluation
-
Transportation System Located on an arterial or collector highway within
.25 miles of the intersection with another arterial
or collector
Energy Use Located at least 2smiles from another Rural Neigh-
borhood Activity Node
Existing Land Use Located in an area surrounded by rural or agricul-
tural residential, uses and containing one or two
commercial uses
----....
Agriculture and Located at sites within rural areas that would not
Forestry unreasonably intrude into this existing landscape
character
Criteria Evaluation ' '
Population Density Located in areas that would provide service to sur-
rounding low-density rural and agricultural population,
generally 1000 persons or less for each node
Historic and OILtrual Located away from areas that would have a detri-
mental impact on state or federally acknowledged
historic-cultural sites or on Public Interest Areas
as identified by County Land Use Plan
2(1
Rural Industrial Activity Node
— _
Criteria Evaluation .
--------
Land Slope Located on land with slopes of less than 15% grade
Hydrology Located outside of 100-year flood prone areas as
identified by COrps of Engineers
——
Flora and Fauna Located away froM sites that would, if developed,
create a threat to unique or endangered species
as identified by state or federal government
Oil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions are
suitable for on-site sewage disposal systems
Public Services and Located in areas that will not need or require urban-
Utilities type services
Transportation System Located on an arterial highway within 0.5 mile of
the intersection with another arterial or collector
Energy Use Located at least 5.0 miles from another Rural
Industrial Activity Node
Existing Land Use Located in an area with rural, very low-density
population
Agriculture and Located at sites within rural areas that would not
Forestry unreasonably intrude into this existing landscape
character
Population Density Located in areas with very low-density population
Historic and Located away from areas that would have a detrimental
Cultural impact on state or federally acknowledged historic
or on Public Interest Areas as identified in County
_
Land Use Plan
. -_
Rural Buffer
Criteria Evaluation
Land Slope No evaluation
Hydrology No evaluation
Flora and Fauna Located away fruasites that would, if developed,
create a threat to unique or endangered species
as identified by state or federal government
Soil Conditions Located in areas where general soil conditions are
suitable for on-site sewage disposal and agricul-
tural uses
Public Service and Located in areas that will not require or need
Utilities urban-type services
•
Transportation System No evaluation
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing land Uses Location in area directly outside of Transition and
Urban areas where prevailing uses are rural, resi-
dential and agricultural
-----
Agriculture and See Existing Land Use
Forestry
Population Density Location ix areas with very low density rural
population
Historic and Cultrual Located away from areas that would have a detri-
mental impact on state or federally acknowledged
historic-cultural sites or on Public Interest Areas
irls=111-ific0
Public Interest Area
Criteria Evaluation -
Land Slope No limitation
Hydrology Located in areas that may be within 100-year
flood prone areas
Flora and Fauna Located in areas that may contain unique and
endangered species as identified by state or
federal government
•
Soil Conditions No limitation
Public Service and Located in areas where urban-type services will
Utilities not be needed or required, and should be discouraged
_ •
Transportation Located in areas where arterial or collector high-
System ways would not exist or be needed
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing Land Use Located in areas containing specialized uses,
generally owned by public or quasi-public
institutions
Agriculture and Forestry No limitation
Population Density Located in areas that would necessarily be extremely
low density or contain no permanent residential
population
Historic and Cultural Located in areas that may have historic or cultural
value as identified by state or federal government
Environmentally Sensitive Area
Criteria Evaluation
Land Slope Located on land where the slope is steep enough
(25%i) to create a potential for severe erosion
if developed
Hydrology Located in areas containing 100-year flood prone
and flood way areas
Flora and Fauna Located in areas that may contain unique or
endangered species identified by state or
federal government
Soil COnditions Located in areas that has soil conditions
associated with flooding
Public Service and. Located in areas not having a need for urban-
Utilities type services
Transportation Located in areas that would not contain or
System need major roads, either arterial or collector
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing Land Use Located in non-developed areas where surround-
ing land uses are limited to agriculture,
forest and open space
Agriculture and No limitation
Forestry
Population Density Located in areas containing no permanent
residential population
•
Historic and Located in areas that may have historic or
Cultural cultural value as identified by state or
federal government
1
Reservoir Protection (Overlay district)
Criteria --------- Evaluation
Land Slope No limitation
•
Hydrology Located in designated present or future water-
supply watersheds and in areas that may be
subject to flooding
Flora and Fauna No evaluation
Soil Conditions No evaluation
Public Services Located in areas that uould contain (and be app-
and Utilities ropriate for) water and sewer lines only if a
Transistion Area is present, otherwise exten-
sion would be discouraged
Transportation No evaluation
System
Energy Use No evaluation
Existing Land Use No evaluation
Agriculture and No evaluation
-Forestry
Population Density No evaluation
Historic and No evaluation
Cultural
•
4 1,*
11
COUNTY WIDE Su/ MY
COUNTY-WIDE SUMMARY -
RESERVED
, •
• • 7
' 6
• Alvf '
•
•
C.ts.
,
1■7'
•
CEDAR GROVE TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN COMPONENT
5 .
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
CEDAR GROVE TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
COMMUNITY PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
Cedar Grove Township consists of a predominantly rural landscape with
limited low density commercial and residential development. It is the most
removed of any of the County's seven townships from urban growth pressures.
The major employment centers of Durham, Research Triangle Park, and Burlington
are well outside of convenient commuting distance from the township. The
construction of proposed 1-40 is unlikely to cause an important change in the
commuting access of Cedar Grove to these areas. As a consequence, the township
is likely to retain its rural agricultural character over the planning period,
even as other townships experience significant non-farm development.
Agriculture
The major agricultural activities in Cedar Grove township are tobacco
farming, dairying and hog production.
Tobacco production in Orange County is centered in Cedar Grove township.
Nearly 2,600 acres of the crop were harvested in 1978, each acre averaging almost
2,500 dollars in revenue. Total farm revenue from tobacco in the County in 1978
was 6.3 million dollars making it second only to dairying as a source of farm
income.
Five significant dairy operations are located in Cedar Grove with an esti-
mated total of over 400 cows. Swine operations are increasing in the township
with more than 300 animals contained in two significant existing operations and
several more planned.
Between the years 1955 and 1977, Cedar Grove cropland (harvested and idle)
diminished by about 2000 acres or 13%. In contrast, the township pastureland
base increased during this period by nearly 50% or 1 ,800 acres. On balance,
the total Cedar Grove township cropland and pastureland base was stable during
10
this 22-year period, diminishing by less than 1%.
In summary, Cedar Grove township is one of the most important agricultural
areas in the County. As of 1971 , it contained over 36% of all the cropland and
25% of all the pastureland in the county even though less than 20% of the county's
land area is within the township.
Transportation
A modified version of the North Carolina Highway Functional Classification
System has been used by the Orange County Planning Department to describe the
road network in Cedar Grove township. The major township roads are the arterial
highways, NC86 and NC49, both important north/south transportation routes. One
level below the arterial highways are the collector roads which provide access
to the major road system. In Cedar Grove township these include Efland-Cedar
Grove Road (SR 1004), Carr Store Road (SR 1004/SR 1352) , Corbett Ridge Road
(SR 1004) , Walnut Grove Church Road (SR 1001 ) , Little River Church Road (SR 1543) ,
Wilkerson Road (SR 1507) , Lynch Store Road (SR 1364), and Saw Mill Road (SR 1545) .
Natural Environmental Constraints
The natural environmental constraints in Cedar Grove township include flood-
prone areas, water supply watersheds, steep slopes and soil conditions.
Flood Hazard Areas: The major flooding hazard in Cedar Grove township
exists along the Eno River, the South Fork of the Little River and Forrest Creek.
The areas that would be subject to flooding in a storm which would occur on
average once every 100 years is not extensive. It is generally confined to
band along these streams rarely exceeding 1000 feet.
Water Supply: The Eno River which has its head waters in Cedar Grove
township is the water supply for the Town of Hillsborough and for the Orange-
Alamance Water Systems Incorporated, a nonprofit association which supplies
water along the U. S. 70 corridor west of Hillsborough including the Efland
community and areas in Alamance County around the Town of Mebane. These two
water suppliers draw water directly from the Eno. Lake Orange, constructed by
the County in 19 is sited on the east branch of the Eno River in Cedar Grove
township. The County owns the water rights from this impoundment. Lake Orange
is a secondary reservoir and water can be released from it during dry spells to
increase flow in the Eno for the two downstream users. The watershed area in
Cedar Grove township needs to be protected from types and intensities of
development which could reduce the water quality in the Eno River.
Steep Slopes: Cedar Grove township is in the headwaters of three major
drainage basins, the Neuse Basin, the Roanoke Basin and the Cape Fear Basin.
As a result streams are quite small in Cedar Grove township and they do not have
the power to cut steep valleys. As a result, there are very few areas with
slopes greater than 15% in the township.
Soils: Soils of the Appling-Helena association predominate in northern
and western Cedar Grove township, They are well drained and moderately well
drained soils that have a surface layer of sandy loam and a subsoil of clay or
sandy clay. This soil type is nearly ideal for growing tobacco and accounts
for the concentration of tobacco farming activity in the township. The clay
subsoils of the Appling-Helena association, however, makes this same area poor
for many other land uses, especially on-site waste disposal systems.
In the southern and eastern portions of Cedar Grove township, the George-
ville-Herndon soil association predominates, These are deep well drained soils.
They are some of the better soils to be found in Orange County and are well
suited for most urban uses.
FRAMEWORK AND APPLICATION
The following township policy statements represent the organizing concepts
around which the land use plan for Cedar Grove township has been constructed :
1 ) Cedar Grove Township will retain its agricultural and low-density
residential character
2) The integrity of the small crossroads communities of Carr and The
Village will be maintained
3) Low-density commercial uses should be encouraged to exist in order
to serve township needs
4) The Eno watershed in Cedar Grove Township will be protected from
adverse development
The land use plan for Cedar Grove township reflects these organizing
concepts. The majority of the township is designated as Aoricultural-Resi-
deptial . In the future, the predominant land use activities will remain related
to the land. The Eno River drains the central portion of the township and
supplies water to people in central Orange County. It is designated as
Reservoir Protection.
Several major intersections in the township were analyzed to determine thr
suitability as activity nodes. Selection of the designated nodes was a function
of the locational criteria and the needs of the township and County for various
types of land uses. The needs considerations are a result of an effort to
project the level of growth in various sectors of the local economy to determine
the amount of land needed to contain and support this growth, while maintaining
the goals and policies of the plan.
One of the initial and fundamental steps in the land use planning process
is to calculate the amount of land necessary to accomodate projected growth.
Generally, the amount of land space required for residential and commercial
uses is directly related to population size, The need for land for industrial
uses is not as clearly related to existing and future population size and is
therefore less predictable. The following tables summarize the populations
projections and space requirements for Cedar Grove Township from 1980 to the
year 2000.
Population Projections: 1980-2000
1980 1990 2000
Cedar Grove 3562 3922 4661
Township
10-Year Growth 360 739
(additional people)
20-Year Growth 1099
(additional people)
Space Requirement Projections: 1980-2000
Total Need
1990 2000 by 2000
Dwelling Units
Needed +115 +236 +351
Residential . +245 +503 +748
Acreage Required acres acres acres
Total Acreage +257 +528 +785
Required acres acres acres
Allocation of Growth
Cedar Grove Township will easily be able to accommodate the additional
1100 people projected to be living there by the year 2000. The main task then
was to provide space for addition commercial enterprises in the Township through
the year 2000. The following allocation guidelines were derived from the
township policiEs and used in determining the location of new growth in Cedar
Grove Township.
1 ) Rural non-farm commercial development will be allocated so as to
avoid negative environmental or economic impacts on agriculture.
2) Commercial development will be allocated to designated activity
nodes chosen because they meet specified locational criteria.
3) Industrial and high intensity commercial and non-farm residential
development will be directed away from areas that, if developed at
those intensities, would create negative impacts on the Upper Eno water
supply watershed.
Locational Criteria
Land in the Township was subjected to or "filtered through" a series of
criteria designed to evaluate locations for their suitability to contain
various land uses. Locational criteria were developed and used in each of
the following areas:
- topography
- hydrology
- population density
- energy use
• existing land use
- historic and cultural characteristics
- public services and utilities
- transportation system
- agriculture and forestry
These criteria were derived from the Community Profile because of their
importance in determining the best locations for new land uses. Certain measures
for each locational criteria were used)
Distribution of Land Use Plan Categories in Cedar Grove Township
Land in Bingham Township has been classified into the Land Use Plan categorie
according to the set of locational criteria which define the environmental context
and according to public policy as expressed in the Orange County Land Use Goals
1County-wide Summary
and Policies section of the Plan. The purpose of this approach is to account
for both physical environmental factors (natural and social ) and for public
values regarding the future of Orange County.
The basic strategy of the County's land use planning process was identify
and evaluate all potential activity nodes in the Township. These activity nodes
are generally focused on major intersections and represent a point rather than
an area concept. They must also meet the additional locational criteria listed
previously.
A total of six activity nodes have been designated in Cedar Grove Township.
Two are Rural Community nodes, three-are Rural Commercial nodes aft -orre-ts--a-
--Gommef.e4a4-nede-. The following is a description of these
activity nodes.
Location: N. C. Highway.49 and Carr Store Road (SR 1004) (Carr) (CG-1)
Plan Category: Rural Community
Analysis and Evaluation: Existing land uses at this node include a small store,
a car wash and single family residential units. There are no significant
environment constraints. The commercial facilities at this intersection make
it a place where. local people go frequently and meet each other as well as shop.
Location: Efland-Cedar Grove Road (SR 1004) and Carr Store Road (SR 1352, SR 1004)
(Village) (CG-2)
Plan -Category: Rural Community
Analysis and Evaluation: A well established community character is present in
the area of the node with three commercial uses, a church, a post office and
several residences. No environmental constraints hinder further commercial
development in the Upper Eno watershed and commercial development that does
occur will require certain site design features to protect water quality.
Location: N. C. Highway 49 and N. C. Highway 86 (CG-3)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial/Rural Industrial
Analysis and Evaluation: This intersection is located at the intersection of
the two major highways that run through Cedar Grove Township. It thus has
good access for rural commercial as well as rural industrial uses. Minimal
disruptions of residential uses would result from such development. No
environmental constraints would hinder this scale of development at this
intersection.
Location: N. C. Highway 86 and Walnut Grove Church Road (SR 1001 ) (CGk
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: An existing commercial use is present at this node.
There are no environmental constraints in the area of this node and no dis-
ruption of existing residential character would result from development at the
node.
Location: N. C, Highway 86, Saw Mill Road (SR 1545) and Carr Store Road (SR 1352)
(CG-5)14
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: A commercial use is present at the intersection. No
environmental constraints hinder small-scale commercial development in the
area. There is some residential development in the area of this node and addi-
tional commercial development could be disruptive, The area west of Highway 86
is in the Upper Eno watershed.
Location: Walnut Grove Church Road (SR 1001 ) , Saw Mill Road (SR 1545) and
Little River Church Road (SR 1543) (CG-6)5-
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of three
-------....%=-a
p;
collector roads. No environmental constraints hinder small-scale commercial
e^.
development for this node. Three commercial uses exist in the area of this node,
46
• . t•-
I I •
'4'• • • •.,1$.5.1=nep
• •.7.'
•'
,
•.::.;,.,
•
• .
a ; • •
.•
•
LITTLE RIVER. TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN OOMPONISINT
.•
•
•
,••••
•
I •
: e •
.1 •,..
re,
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
LITTLE RIVER TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
TOWNSHIP PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
Little River Township in north-eastern Orange County is rural in character
and agriculturally based. However, sections of the Township within reasonable
commuting time to the City of Durham are beginning to see suburban residential
development. If this trend continues, the character of much of Little River
Township could change dramatically in the future,
Social - Economic
The 1980 U. S. Census preliminary count for Little River Township is 1770
persons. That is a 46.3% increase over the 1970 population of 1210. Of equal
interest is the distribution pattern of this increased population, The sub-
areas in eastern Little River Township closest to Durham contain a dispropor-
tionate amount of the population, The population distribution reflects the
fact that people who live in these area probably work and shop in Durham. Much
of Little River Township is within a half-hour commute of major employment
centers in Durham.
The major agricultural activities in Little River Township are tobacco
farming, egg production, dairying and swine operations. Tobacco is an important
cash crop in the Township and four of Orange County's five commercial egg farms
are located there.
The population of Little River Township is projected to reach nearly
6000 persons by the year 2000. As the population of Little River Township
increases, it will inevitably put pressure on agricultural activities.
Transportation
The two major highways in Little River Township are N. C. 57 which runs in
a north-easterly direction up through the Township and N. C. 157 (Guess Road)
which runs across the Township in a south-easterly direction towards the City
of Durham. These two routes form an "X" pattern in the Township. The Caldwell
community has developed at that intersection in the center of the Township.
The other important routes are New Sharon Church Road (SR 1538) , Schley Road
(SR 1548) and Little River Church Road (SR 1543) . The remaining roads in the
Township are less heavily travelled routes which serve primarily local traffic.
The busiest segment of Township road is N. C. 157 (Guess Road) east of
its intersection with New Sharon Church Road. The most recent traffic count
was 940 vehicles per day along this highway. The section of N. C. 57 just
southwest of Caldwell had the next highest traffic count at 900 vehicles per
day.
Existing Land Use and Infrastructure
The southeastern portion of the township has seen increased suburbanization
in recent years with residential subdivisions being developed as housing for
people who work and shop in Durhath. The northern part of the Township retains
its agricultural character and consists primarily of farms with some scattered
low-density residential development and a very few commercial uses,
Little River Township is not currently served by either public water or
sewer. There are no existing plans to provide these services to the Township.
Natural. Environmental Constraints
Some constraints are placed on land uses in Little River Township by flood
hazards, poor soils and steep slopes.
Flooding: The north and south forks of the Little River are the two main
streams subject to flooding in the Township. These streams flow in narrow
valleys so that the areal extent of flooding is not great during the projected
100 year flood. The flood prone areas along these two stream segments rarely
?7,
exceeds 1000 feet and is usually much less.
Soils: Little River Township has generally good soils, suitable for most
kinds of development and land uses. A small area of predominantly heavy clay
soils does occur in the northwestern corner of the township, an extension of
a wide area of such soils in Cedar Grove Township.
Steep Slopes: There are only a few areas with steep slopes (greater than
15%) in the township. They generally border segments of the north and south
forks of the Little River.
Agriculture
The major agricultural activities in Little River Township are tobacco
Jr
farming, dairying, egg production and swine operations. Eight of Orange County's
estimated fifty commercial dairy farms are in the Township with a total herd of
over 360 milk cows. Four of Orange County's five commercial egg farms are in
Little River Township, having between them over 130,000 layers, One commercial
swine operation exists in the Township with some 300 sows.
Little River contained, as of 1977, 13.4% of the cropland and 10.4% of the
pastureland in Orange County. Combined, this represents 12.3% of the County's
farmland. For comparison the Township represents 11% of the area of Orange
County.
Reported cropland and pastureland (harvested and idle) declined by over
32% or some 3,400 acres between 1955 and 1977.
1955 1977 Change 1955-1977 % Change
Cropland .6,997 5,016 -1 ,981 - 28.3%
Pasture 3,695 2,258 -1 ,437 - 38.9%
Total 10,692 7,274 -3,418 - 32.0%
3
As shown pasture underwent the largest percentage decline, almost 39% over
the 22 year period. Cropland loss was slightly less at 28.3% for the same time
period.
The factors that have caused this decline in farming activity in Little
River Township over the past two decades will likely continue to influence the
viability of farming in the future. These factors are essentially economic
in nature. One of these factors is the price of land. Population growth
pressure in the Township will cause land values to be bid up. Farmers may
find it to expensive to acquire more land to enlarge their farming operations
and may in fact find that it makes more economic sense to sell out to residen-
tial housing developers.
Population and Land Needs Projection 1980-2000:
The population projections for Little River Township are:
Total
1980 1990 2000
1943 3401 5882
Additional persons:
1990 2000
1458 3939
Using an average household size of 3.13 persons, the number of additional
residential dwellings needed was calculated for each ten-year increment:
Total
1980 1990 2000
466 750 1216
. 1
The residential acreage re.uired was calculated using an average subdivided
lot size of 2.13 acres:
Total
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
993 acres • 1598 acres 2591 acres
Residential development brings with it the need for land for related uses such
as shopping, schools, recreation facilities, churches, etc. A multiplier of
1 .05 was applied to residential acreage to derive the additional acreage
needed for these uses. The Total Additional Acres needed in the Township are:
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
1043 1678 2721
Since industrial development usually has little or no market relationship to
local residential development, it has not been calculated as a part of the
township needs. Instead, industrial land needs were computed for the entire
County and are included in the Countywide Summary.
Organizing Concepts for the Little River Township Plan
The land use plan for Little River Township is organized around the
following concepts:
1) Agricultural operations in the Township should be protected
against disruption due to non-farm development,
2) The rural , low-density residential character of the Township
should be maintained.
3) The Caldwell and Schley areas have the characteristics of a
community within the Township and this character should be
enhanced.
4) There is a need to provide for some commercial and industrial
locations especially far agricultural support services.
Land in Little River Township has been classified into Land Use Plan
categories according to public policy as expressed in the Orange County Land
Use Goals and draft Policies, its proximity to urban areas and sewer and water
services and a set of locational criteria which define the environmental con-
text. Accordingly, Little River Township has been classified into the following
Land Use Plan categories: Agricultural-Residential , Environmentally Sensitive,
Rural Community Nodes, Rural Industrial Activity Nodes and Rural Commercial
Activity Nodes.
The majority of the Township is classified as Agricultural-Residential .
This designation recognizes the fact that Little River Township is rural and
agriculturally oriented. The Environmentally, Sensitive, areas in the Township
are the flood hazard areas along major streams.
In addition to classifying these areas of land, the County's land use
planning strategy has been to identify and evaluate a number of potential
Activity Nodes in the Township. These activity nodes are generally focused on
major intersections and represent a point rather than an area concept. A total
of six Activity Nodes have been designated on the Plan for Little River Township.
Location; NC 57 and NC 157 (Guess Road)
Plan Category: Rural Community (LR-1)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
arterial highways. A multi-use community with a recognized social identity
exists in the area of this node. Several commercial uses, a church, a fire
station and several residences comprise this rural community. No material
environmental constraints hinder development of a rural community node in
this area. The lack of public water and sewer over the 20-year plan horizon
will determine in part the degree of commercial and institutional activity in
this area.
Lotation: N. C. 57 and neasiaAt elm- Road (SR 1548)
Plan Category: Rural Community (LR-2)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an arterial
highway and a collector road. The node is considered to have a social identity
and it has some of the characteristics of a rural community. A church, grange
hall and several residences are within or near this node. No environmental
constraints hinder small •scale commercial activity in the area of the node.
The likely lack of public water and sewer service over the 20-year plan horizon
constraints all but low intensity activity in this area.
Location: Schley Road (SR 1548) and New Sharon Church Road (SR 1538)
Plan Category: Rural - ;--- ' ' 1 (LR-3)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two collecto)
roads. No disruption of an area of residential character would result with
small-scale commercial activity in the area of the node. An existing commercial
use is presently within this node.
Location: N. C. 157(Guess Road) and New Sharon Church Road
Plan Category: Rural CoMmercial (l_R-4)
Ana is and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an arterial
and a co actor road. No disruption n area of residential character would
result with sm 1-scale commercial developme t at this node. No environmental
constraints hinder elopment at this node.
Location: N. C. 57 and Ne . Sharon Church Road (SR 1538)
Plan Ca -'ory: Rural Commerci. Rural Industrial(LP-5)
Analysis any valuation: This nod- is located at the intersection of an arterial
and a collector tad. No environmenta constraints hinder small-scale development
in the a a of the node. No disruption of residential uses would result
from commere\,\al or light industrial uses t this node.
c
Location: N. C. 157 Holley Ridge Road (SR 1524) and Brown Road (SR 1516)
Llk-A-Z4 ,1r41-tr
Plan Category: Rural GemRe-VGia-1-/Rural Lin-46440- (LR
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial and a collector road. No environmental constraints hinder small-
scale development in the area of the node. No disruption of residential uses
would result from commercial or light industrial uses at this node,
9/4/80
:;i
"
A
CHEEKS TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN COMPONENT
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
CHEEKS TOWNSHIP COMPONENT -----
TOWNSHIP PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
Cheeks Township lies to the west Of the Town of Hillsborough and is
divided by the transportation corridor made up of US 70, Interstate 85 and the
Southern Railway lines. This corridor serves, in effect, as a focus for
development in the Township with the greater population densities occurring
in areas near these highways and rail lines. The small , unincorporated
village of Efland is the place where much of the population concentration exist,
outside of the portion of Mebane that extends into Cheeks Township. Most of
the Township north and south of the transportation corridor is rural in charac-
ter with agriculture constituting the major land use.
Social-Economic,
The 1980 U. S. Census preliminary count for Cheeks Township is 4762,
representing a 33.4% increase from 1970. The number of dwelling units increased
at a faster rate during this same period, moving from 1076 units in 1970 to
1691 units in 1980, a 57.2 percentage increase. A related trend is the average
household size which decreased from 3.35 persons per household in 1970 to 3.02
persons in 1980. The small household size parallels a nationwide trend toward
smaller families. The rapid growth of Cheeks Township during the 1970's is
in contrast to the virtually unchanged population count between 1960 and 1970.
Much of this new growth is in the form of non-farm, residential development,
housing people that work for local industries or work in Mebane or Hillsborough.
The unincorporated village of Efland is the focal point for most of the
growth occurring in the central portion of the Township. Efland has several
commercial uses, including a small shopping area on US 70 which contains a post
office and retail stores. There are an estimated 500 to 600 persons in Efland.
Transportation
Cheeks Township contains the principal east-west transportation corridor
through Orange County. Nine and one-half miles of Interstate highway (I-85) ,
over seven miles of a major state highway (US 70) , 8 miles of rail line
(Southern RR) along with several miles of locally important roads make up this
corridor. The principal north/south routes are comprised of local roads , in-
cluding Buckhorn Road/SR 1114 and the combination of Mt. Willing Road/SR 1120 and
Cedar Grove Road.
A modified version of the North Carolina Highway Functional Classification
System has been used to describe the road network in Cheeks Township. This
system describes parts of a road network based on the factors of access and
mobility. The most heavily traveled roads are interstate and arterial
highways. These roads provide the best service, meaning the shortest travel-
times, to and from important employment, shopping, educational and population
centers. Roads of lesser importance Ccollector roads) do not provide as good
a service function, but do provide an area with access to the major road system.
At the next lower level are local roads that give the most limited service,
but do provide large land areas with access to major roads and highways.
The major highway in Cheeks Township is Interstate 85, with the arterial
highway US 70 one level below the interstate level . The next level ,collector,
includes the following Township roads : Lebanon Church Road/SR 1306, Cedar
Grove Road/SR 1004, Mt. Willing Road/SR 1120, Bucklprn Road/SR 1114, Dimmock
Mill Road/SR 1134, Bowman Road/SR 1142 and Ben Wilson Road/SR 1140. All other
roads are considered to be at the local level of service function.
Cheeks Township's transportation network adequately connects the Township
with such population centers as Burlington, Durham and Chapel Hill . The con-
struction of the Interstate 40 extension along the proposed route will put
Raleigh and the Research Triangle Park within closer traveling time of the
Township. Cheeks : Township's transportation system places it in direct line
of the Northern Piedmont growth area of North Carolina. Winston-Salem,
Greensboro, High Point, Burlington, Chapel Hill , Durham and Raleigh are the
major centers of this growing region. The strategic position of the Township
in this region as well as the large land areas within it that have convenient
access to Interstate 85, US 70 and the Southern Railway lines, make Cheeks
Township attractive to industrial development interests.
Existing Land Use and Infrastructure
Most of Cheeks Township north and south of the 1-85-US 70 corridor consist
of agricultural land uses and scattered non-farm rural housing, All of the
medium and higher intensity residential , commercial and industrial uses occur
along the I-85-US 70 transportation corridor. The village of Efland and the
portion of the Town of Mebane which is in Cheeks Township, serve as the focal poini
for most of this medium and higher intensity development. There are several
industrial uses along the portion of 1-85 which forms the southern boundary of
Mebane's extraterritorial planning jurisdiction. Efland is the site of a few
small-scale textile manufacturing firms. There are several commercial uses,
some associated with farming and a post office located in Efland.
Presently, the only municipal sewered area in Cheeks-Township is the
portion of Mebane's corporate limits that extends into the Township and an area
southeast of Town between 1-85 and US 70, where the industrial uses are located.
The Town of Mebane also supplies water within its corporate limits and within
the immediate vicinity of the Town, The Orange-Alamance Water System supplies
water away from the Town and along US 70 between Mebane and the Eno River.
Their dam and filter plant are located on the Eno River just north of where the
River crosses US 70. Distribution lines for this system extend throughout the
road network in the Efland area.
Natural Environmental Constraints
Cheeks Township contains natural environmental constraints because of
floodplains, a watersupply watershed, a few steep slopes, and poor soil
conditions in some areas. 100-year floodplains that represent identified
constraints occur along Sevenmile Creek, Crabtree Creek and Rocky Run in the
southeastern part of the Township; along the Eno River and tributaries and
McGowan Creek in the north-central part of the Township and along Back Creek
(tributary A) northeast of Mebane. Most of the Upper Eno watershed which is
drained primarily by the Eno River and Sevenmile Creek is located in Cheeks
Township. In general , this watershed encompasses the eastern two-thirds of
the Township. Water from this area goes lo supply both the Town of Hillsborough's
system and the Orange-Alamance water system. Steep slopes represent only
very limited constraints in the Township, occuring along sections of the Eno
River and Sevenmile Creek in the eastern part of Cheeks Township. As would be
expected poor soil conditions because of flooding are found to generally
coincide with the floodplains identified. The only other significant pattern
of poor soil conditions exist in the north central and on scattered sites
in the south central part of the Township where there is some limitation due to
heavy clay content and shallow depth to bedrock.
Agriculture
Reported Cheeks Township cropland both harvested and idle, diminished by
over 30% between the years 1955 and 1977:
1955 1977 Change 1955-1977 % Change
Cropland 7,294 acres 4,992 acres -2,302 acre -31 .6%
Pasture 2,579 acres 3,085 acres + 506 acres +19.6%
Total 9,873 acres 8,077 acres -1 ,796 acres -18.2%
As shown, the cropland base of the Township decreased in this period by 2,302
acres. In contrast, the pasture land base increased over the same period by
almost 20%, or just over 500 acres. Overall , the combined total of cropland
and pasture land in Cheeks Township declined by about 1 ,800 acres between 1955
and 1977, representing an 18% loss.
Part of this loss probably occurred as a consequence of the construction
of Interstate 85 through Cheeks Township. The three townships through which
the Interstate was built lost an average of more than 26% of their total crop
and pasture land, as compared to an average loss of 19% for the four remaining
townships. Such major highway construction can cause farmland loss through
both direct acquisition of right-of-way and through the commercial industrial
and residential development that is stimUlated, by approved transportation access.
The proposed widening of 1-85 to six lanes through this part of North Carolina,
as well as the construction of the 1-40 extension along the proposed corridor
will further upgrade the transportation access to regional population and
employment centers from Cheeks Township. Growth resulting from these changes
will create additional pressures for the conversion of crop and pasture land
to non-farm uses,
Population growth pressures, even without the addition of such major
public projects such as new highways, are likely to promote the conversion of
farmland to residential and commercial use. Dairying, which is an important
use of Township farmland south of 1-85, is especially vulnerable to the pressures
of non-farm development. Relocation of such operations is very clostl,y and often
impossible.
FRAMEWORK AND APPLICATION
The following Township policy Statements represent the organizing concepts
around which the land use plan for Cheeks Township has been constructed:
1) The moderately sized Town of Mebane is capable of providing urban-type service
appropriate to its surrounding 10-year and 20-year Transition Areas.
2) The small , unincorporated community of Efland has characteristics which
make it suitable for urban-type services, including water and sewer lines.
3) Areas to the north and south of the I-85-US 70 corridor should remain in
agricultural , rural/low-density residential and rural commercial use.
4) Medium intensity commercial and residential development is appropriate
for the Efland area.
5) Medium and higher intensity commercial and industrial development is appropria
areas within and immediately outside Mebane's planning jurisdiction that
are served by water or sewer lines.
6) Development in the portion of the Township which is within the Eno River
watershed should adhere to standards and distributions of land use types
directed toward maintaining the quality of the water draining into the
existing water supply reservoirs of Lake Orange, Lake Ben Johnson, Corporation
Lake and into the proposed Sevenmile Creek reservoir.
The Land Use Plan for Cheeks Township reflects these organizing concepts or
policies through the recommended pattern of the various land use plan classifi-
cations across the Township. The amount of land in each classification is a
function of the projected population change in the Township and the capacity
of the natural environment to contain the uses associated with that plan
classification,
Polulation and Land Needs Projections 1980-2000
One of the initial and fundamental steps in the land use planning process
is to calculate the amount of land necessary to accomodate projected growth.
Generally, the amount of land required for residential and commercial uses is
directly related to population size. The following tables summarize the
population projections and land space requirements for Cheeks Township.
The population projections for Cheeks Township are:
Year 1980 1990 2000
Population
Projection 4504 5500 6716
This means that the following number of persons will be added to the population.
Year 1990 2000
Additional
Persons 996 2212
Using an average household size of 3,13 persons, the number of additional
dwellings needed was calculated for each ten-year increment:
Total
Year 1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
D. U. 's Needed 318 388 706
The residential acreage required was calculated using the average subdivided lot
size of 2.13 acres for the County outside the municipalities:
Total
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
Residential Acres 677 826 1503
Residential development brings in its wake the need for land for non-residential
purposes such as shopping, schools, churches, fire stations and other similar
associated uses. Orange County, outside the Urban areas, needs a smaller
amount of land for these associated uses because of the lower density residential
development. A multiplier of 1 .05 was applied to the residential acreage to
derive the land needs for these associated uses. Thus, the total acreage required
is:
Total
Year 1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
Total Acres 711 867 1578
Since industrial development usually has little or no market relationship to
local residential development, it has not been calculated as a part of the
Township needs. Instead, industrial land needs have been computed for the
County as a whole and are included in the County-wide Summary.
Allocation of Growth
The Task is to geographically allocate the anticipated growth to various
parts of the Township. The amount of land actually allocated will be two to
three times the calculated need, to allow for variations in land availability
and to allow for market choice. The following allocation juidelines were derived
from the Township and County policies and were used in determining the location
of new growth in Cheeks Township:
1) Medium and higher intensity commercial and industrial development that
would most appropriately be served by a centralized water and sewer system
should be located within Mebane's 10 and 20 year Transition Area in proximity
to the activity nodes designated.
2) Lower and medium intensity commercial , industrial and residential
development types that will not create negative impacts on the watersupply
watershed should be located 'in Efland's 10 and 20 year Transition Areas in
proximity to the designated activity nodes.
3) Most of the areas to the north and south of the 1-85-US 70 transportation
corridor are best suited for agricultural purposes as well as needing
protection of the watersupply watershed and should be designated as
Agricultural Residential .
4) A small area in the southeastern part of the Township adjacent to Hills-
borough Township and the area focused on 1-85-US 70 corridor between Mebane
and Efland are best suited for low density, rural non-farm residential
growth.
5) Low intensity rural commercial land uses should when they occur away from
the Urban and Transition Areas, be located in proximity to the Rural Com-
mercial Activity nodes to prevent strip-type development.
Locational Criteria
Information about land in Cheeks Township was "filtered through" a series
of criteria designed to evaluate locations for their suitability to contain
various land uses, Locational Criteria were developed and used in each of the
following areas:
- Topography
- Hydrology
- Population density
- Energy use
- Existing land use
- Historic and cultural characteristics
- Public services and utilities
- Transportation system
- Agriculture and forestry
These criteria were derived from the Community Profile because of their import-
ance in determining the best locations for new land uses. Measures for each
locational criteria were used. These are explained more fully in the County-
wide Summary.
Distribution of Land Use Plan Categories in Cheeks Township
Land in Cheeks Township has been classified into the Land Use Plan
categories according to the set of locational criteria which define the environ-
mental context and according to public policy as expressed in the Orange County
Land Use Goals and Potties section of the Plan. The purpose of this approach is
to account for both environmental factors (natural and social) and for public
values regarding the future of Orange Cnunty.
Cheeks Township is classfied into the following Land Use Plan categories:
Urban, 10-Year Transition, 20-Year Transition, Rural Residential , Agricultural
Residential , Public Interest Area, Environmentally Sensitive, Reservoir Protec-
tion, Urban Activity Node, Commercial Transition Activity Nodes , Industrial
Transition Activity Nodes and Rural Commercial Activity Nodes,
Urban. All of the area within the portion of Mebane's corporate and planning
jurisdiction which is located in Orange County has been classified as Urban.
10-Year Transition. For the Mebane area the 10-Year Transition category is
entirely contained with the planning jurisdiction. In the Efland area, the 10
Year Transition Area is generally focused on the Commercial area along US 70
and the rail lines.
20-Year Transition. The 20-Year Transition Area for the Mebane vicinity extends
a short distance beyond the Mebane planning area along US 70 and 1-85. Around
the Efland area the 20-Year Transition area extends south to 1-85 and west along
US 70 to Richmond Road (SR 1312) .
Rural Residential . A comparatively small part of the Township, located in the
southeastern section, adjacent to Hillsborough Township has been designed as
Rural Residential . The other Rural Residential Area in the Township is focused
on the section of the I-85-US 70 transportation corridor between Efland and
Mebane. It extends further north of this corridor than it extends south,
encompassing the existing Perry Hills Sibdivision.
Agricultural Residential . In Cheeks Township this category applies to the
vast majority of land-area, both north and south of the I-85-US 70 corridor.
Public Interest Area, This category applies to the Duke Forest tract located
on the eastern boundary of the Township, north and south of US 70.
Environmentally Sensitive. All of the land within the 100-Year floodplains
along the rivers and creeks described in the Township Profile Summary, have
been placed in this category.
Reservoir Protection. This category is designed to apply to existing and
proposed water-supply watersheds for the purposes of providing protection of
the quality of water draining from that watershed into a supply source. For
Cheeks Township, this classification applies to the Eno River watershed, which
includes the subbasins of the Upper Eno, north of I-85-US 70 and Sevenmile
Creek, north of this corridor.
Transition Nodes
Location: Efland Commercial Area (CK-1)
P an 4 0 6-1W-0. : 7;etAwYs/A,70,./
Analysis and Evaluation: An existing commercial/industrial node is located at
Efland, with the intersection of Southern Drive and Mt. Willing Road serving
as the central point. This node currently serves as a focal point for lower
and medium intensity residential , commercial and industrial uses. As Efland
develops, new growth should "infill" on suitable vacant land within the immediate
area to take advantage of the existing infrastructure which includes water
supply from a central system. Because this node is entirely within a Reservoir
Protection area, industrial and commercial should be limited to those types
which have a demonstrated record of not generating pollutants, because of the
character of the industrial process or the size of the operation, which are known
to degrade or harm water quality. Those uses which do meet this initial
criteria should be designed and built in ways to minimize any other potential
negative impacts on the quality of water draining from the Eno River watershed.
Commercial Transition Activity Nodes.
Location: Interstate 85 and Mt Willing Road (SR 1120) (CK-2)
Ce./W•
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
Interstate and a collector highway. There are no environmental constraints
caused by the presence of environmentally sensitive areas. However, this node
is located in the Eno River watershed, which has been classified as Reservoir
Protection, Therefore, commercial development should be limited to those
types which have a demonstrated record of not generating pollutants which are
known to harm water quality. Those uses which do meet this initial criteria
should be designed and built in ways to minimize an,yothernegative impacts on
the quality of water draining from this watershed, This node is presently
served by a central water supply system. Existing land uses include several
small commercial operations, some of which are vacant and unused. The layout
of this intersection will also be effected by the widening of 1-85 from 4 to '6
lanes. As the Efland area develops this node will become more attractive for
commercial uses.
Since there are presently several commercial uses, the need for additional
commercial uses will be minimal . The emphasis should be on the continual
utilization and, if necessary, rehabilitation of these existing buildings , rather
than constructing new ones.
Commercial Transition/Industrial Transition Activity Nodes
Location: U. S. Highway 70 and Buckhorn Road (SR 1114) (CK-3)
049. (_ Cearn.
Analysis add 'valuation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial and a collector. Existing commercial uses at or near this site
include a small mill outlet and two gas stations , one of which is also a
small store. There are no environmental constraints imposed by sensitive
lands or Orange County water-supply watersheds. A rail line is nearby. This
site is presently served by a central water system with sewer line extension
a possibility for the future. These facts combined with its proximity to
Mebane create the potential for fairly intensive commercial and industrial
uses during 1990-2000 phase of the Plan. In fact, this node falls within the
20-Year Transition Area that extends slightly beyond the Towns Urban classifi-
cation area. As this site becomes more intensively developed, care should be
taken to ensure that the highway intersection is upgraded sufficiently to
handle the increased load.
Location: Interstate 85 and Buckhorn Road (SR 1114) (CK-4)
- <91
Analysis andoEtfaluatlon: This node is located at the intersection of Interstate
85 and a collector. Existing land uses include a small residential community
(Miles) , a gas station, and a small vacant store. The General Electric plant
is located on I-85 a short distance west of this node. This site is currently
served by a central watersupply system. The GE plant is served by sewer lines
from Mebane. This node falls within the designated 20-Year Transition Area
outside of the Mebane Urban Area. Therefore its development potential is
long-term. When additional commercial or industrial uses are located here,
attention should be given to minimizing any negative efforts on the residential
area nearby.
Rural Commercial Activity Nodes,
Location: Lebanon Church Road (SR 1306) and Cedar Grove Road (SR 1004) (CK-5)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collector roads. Existing land use at this node are currently limited to
farmland, rural residential development and open fields. Because this node
is located in an Agricultural Residential and a Reservoir Protection Area
new commercial development should be limited to one or two small-scale stores
designed to serve the needs of the surrounding rural area.
Location: Old #10 (SR 1144) and Bowman Road (SR 1142) (CK-6)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collectors. There are no natural environmental constraints caused by sensitive
lands or County water supply watersheds that would hinder development. However
the node is located within a agriculture area giving rise to concerns that
new development not disrupt this farming activity. Existing land use at the
node include a church and a low-density residential area. This site is not
presently served by either water or sewer lines and will not be served in the
foreseeable future. As a result of these factors, new commercial development
at this node should be lower intensity, designed to only serve the residents
in the immediate area. A new store at this node will probably not be needed
before the 1990,2000 phase of the Land Use Plan.
Location: Bowman Road (SR 1142) and Ben Wilson Road (SR 1140) (CK-7)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collectors. There are no natural environmental constraints caused by sensitive
lands or county water-supply watersheds. Existing land uses are presently
limited to low-density residential uses and agriculture. This site is not
served by a central water supply or sewage treatment system. Extension of
these services during the time horizon of the Land Use Plan is unlikely and
inappropriate. As a result, this node should remain low-density in character
with perhaps one small , additional store during the 1980-1990 phase of the
Plan.
Location: Buckhorn Road (SR 1114) and Mt. Willing Road (SR 1120) (CK-8)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collectors. There are no environmental constraints caused by the presence
of sensitive lands. The node is located within the triangle of the Sevenmile
Creek watershed. Existing land uses consist of single-family houses. This
node is not now served by water and sewer lines and should not he served during
the time horizen of the Plan. Because this area is now residential in character
the introduction of a new commercial us., (which should be limited to one small
store) should be accomplished in way so as to not disrupt the surrounding
residential area. It is unlikely that such a store will be needed here before
the 1990-2000 phase of the Land Use Plan.
9/9/80
!^ i
1 ^
•
•
•
•
•
•
HIT.TABOROtJGH TOWNSHIP LAND USE P N;COMPONENT,
•
•
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
HILLSBOROUGH TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
TOWNSHIP PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
The major growth and development center in Hillsborough Township is the
Town of Hillsborough, located at the Township's geographic center. The
Town, including its planning jurisdiction divide the Township into northern
and southern sections. Located generally south of Interstate 85, the
southern section is influenced to some degree by the urbanizing area of
Chapel Hill and Carrboro because of the presence of both N. C. Highway 86
routes connecting this part of the Township with those Towns. This level
of influence will significantly increase if Interstate 40 is built along
the correctly proposed corridor. Access to Chapel Hill and Carrboro as
well as to the Research Triangle Park would be upgraded, perhaps making
Hillsborough Township a more attractive pla:efor commuters to reside.
However, this attractiveness may be mitigated in the future by either the
scanty or high costs of gasoline. Regardless of this situation, the Town
of Hillsborough as it grows in population and area, remains the dominate
urban influence in this area of the County.
Social-Economic
The 1980 U. S. Census preliminary count for Hillsborough Township of 8523
represents 11 .2% of the total population of Orange County. The current
population is a 45.6% increase over the 1970 population of 5855. This
represents an average annual growth over the past ten years of 4.56%. The
preliminary count for the Town of Hillsborough is 2620, which means that
the 69% of the people in Hillsborough Township live outside the corporate
limits of the Town. Development patterns indicate that a large portion of
this non-corporate area population does live in proximity to the corporate
limits, generally within the one-mile planning jurisdiction.
The economic characteristics of this Township is strongly influenced by the
presence of the transportation corridor formed by Interstate 85, U. S. High-
way 70 and the Southern Railroad line. Historically, the Town of Hillsborough
has been a good site for industrial uses because of its location on this
important east-west transportation corridor that connects major towns and
cities in the expanding "Piedmont Crescent" region in North Carolina.
Hillsborough Township's economic and employment profile is primarily based
on manufacturing, agriculture, and public sector employment including
education, medical-hospital , and county government.
Transportation
Orange County's principal east/west and north/south transportation corridors
pass through Hillsborough Township. Four miles of Interstate 85, three and
one-half miles of a major U. S. Highway (US 70) and four and one-half miles
of rail line (Southern Railroad) make up the east/west corridor. The
north/south routes consist of two important state highways (NC 86 and NC 57) ,
as well as two other important roads (Old NC 86 and Orange Grove Road) . The
major highway in Hillsborough Township is Interstate 85, One step below the
interstate highways are the arterial highways which include NC 86, US 70 By-
pass, and NC 57, The next lower classification is collector and includes
US 70 Business, St. Mary's Road, Orange Grove Road, and Old NC 86, All
other roads are considered to be at the local level of service function,
Hillsborough Township's transportation network adequately connects it to
the nearby population centers of Durham, Chapel Hill and Burlington. The
construction of Interstate 40 will put Raleigh and the Research Triangle
Park within closer travelling time.
Existing Land Use and Infrastructure
In the southern portion of the Township, outside the Towns planning jurisdic-
tion, the existing land use pattern consist of low to medium density
residential development, several commercial uses and a few industrial -type
uses. The northern tier of the Township is larger in area and primarily
consist of farms, scattered low-density residential development and a small
number of commercial uses.
Most of the area within the corporate limits of Hillsborough is served by
municipal water and sewer lines. Extension of the sewer lines beyond the
corporate limits but within the planning jurisdiction, have expanded the
service area to residential , commercial , and industrial development north
and south of the Town. Water lines have also been extended to the east of
the Town across the planning area and into Eno Township along US 70 and
Old NC 10,
Natural Environmental Constraints
Hillsborough Township contains only natural environmental constraints because
of floodplains, a water supply watershed, steep slopes and some poor soil
conditions. Floodplains occur along the Eno River, Cates Creek and Strouds
Creek. S small portion of the Upper Eno water supply watershed falls within
the western edge of the Township. A few steep slopes (greater that 15%
slope) exist in the east central portion of Hillsborough Township, mostly
along the banks of Eno River. Most of the area, outside the Town's planning
jurisdiction contains soil types which are suitable for both agriculture and
urban development. There are, however, scattered areas especially in
the northern tier of the Township that contain soil types which have a high
clay content, presenting limitations because of poor suitability for building
foundations and roads.
Agriculture
Reported Hillsborough Township cropland both harvested and idle, diminished
by nearby one-half between the years 1955 and 1977:
1955 1977 Chanse 1955-77 % Chanile
Cropland 1 ,842 acres 991 acres -851 acres -42.6%
Pasture 1 ,780 acres 1 ,623 acres -157 acres - 8.8%
Total 3,622 acres 2,614 acres -1 ,008 acres -27.8%
As shown, the cropland base of the Township declined in this period by al -
most 1000 acres. In contrast, the pastureland base decreased at a much
slower rate of about 9% between 1955 and 1977. This represented a loss of
fewer than 160 acres.
Part of this loss probably occurred as a consequence of the construction of
Interstate 85 through Hillsborough Township. The three townships through
which the Interstate was built lost an average of more then 26% of their
total crop •and pasture land as compared to an average of 19% loss for the
remaining four townships. Such major highway construction can cause farm-
land loss through both direct acquisition and through the commercial , in-
dustrial and residential development that is stimulated by approved trans-
portation access. Much of Hillsborough Township's farmland is concentrated
in the portion of the Township north of the intersection of NC 86 and
NC 57, As such construction of the Interstate 40 along the proposed
corridor will have very limited direct impact on the Township's agricultural
land. The indirect affect is likely, however, to increase development pres-
sure on farmland, even in this area which is north of the Town of Hillsborough.
The greatly reduced travel time from Hillsborough to Research Triangle Park,
RDU Airport and to Raleigh that 1-40 will provide, will likely make
Hillsborough Township more convenient as a place of residence and as a
location for new businesses, Conversion of more Township farmland to
non-farm uses will probably result from this increased access.
FRAMEWORK AND APPLICATION
The 'following Township policy statements represent the organizing concepts
around Which the land use plan for Hillsborough Township has been construc-
ted:
1) The Town of Hillsborough is the Township's major growth and development
center.
2) The more intensive, higher-density commercial , industrial and residential
land uses are most appropriate io the Town 's corporate limits and
inside of the Urban Transition Areas that surround the Town.
3) Agriculture should continue as the most viable land use in the
northern tier of the Township.
4) Low-density, rural non-farm residential land use is best suited to the
southern tier of the Township.
5) All of the Ten-Year Urban Transition Area will be in the current
extraterritorial planning jurisdiction of the Town. Some of the Twenty-
Year Urban Transition Area will be in the planning jurisdiction and
the east of the Town, generally encompassing an area that is or could
be, efficiently served by municipal water and sewer lines.
The Land Use Plan for Hillsborough Township reflects these organizing concepts
through the distribution of the various land use classifications across the
Township, The amount of land in each classification is a function of the
projected population change in the Township and the resulting land needs.
Population and Land Needs Projection 1980-2000
The population projections for Hillsborough Township outside the Towns
corporate limits are:
Total
1980 1990 , 2000
5,960 7,517 9,410
Additional persons:
1990 2000
1 ;557 3,450
Population projections for the Town of Hillsborough were subtracted to
derive the projections as shown. This was done by allocating one-half of
the Town's projected increase to the balance of the Township under the
assumption that Hillsborough would only be able to absorb that much of
its projected growth within its corporate limits. This situation exist
because much of Hillsborough has already been developed, leaving little
vacant land suitable for development.
Using an average household size of 3.13 persons, the number of additional
dwellings needed was calculated for each ten-year increment:
Total
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
497 605 1 ,102
The residential acreage required was calculated using an average subdivided
lot size of 1 ,5 acres:
Total
1980-1990 I 1990-2000 1980-2000
746 Acres 908 Acres
1 ,654 Acres
Residential development brings in its wake the need for land for non-resi-
dential purposes such as shopping, schools, churches, fire stations and
the like. Orange County outside the Town's planning jurisdictions needs a
smaller amount of land for these associated uses because of the lower
density of residential development then occurs in urban areas. For Hills-
borough Township this situation is compounded by the small size of the
Township, making most areas reasonably accessible to the Town and its
commercial and institutional facilities. Therefore, the need for extension
commercial development outside Hillsborough and its planning jurisdiction
is unneccessary. It is also important from an energy efficiency standpoint
to direct commercial (and low-medium density residential ) uses toward areas
that are already served by water and sewer lines, as well as other urban
type services. The projection for additional commercial land is only one
acre to account for some low intensity uses at the designated activity nodes.
Thus the Total Acres Needed is:
TOTAL
•
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
746.5 908,5 1655
Since industrial development usually has little or no market relationship
to local residential development, it has not been calculated as a part of
the Township needs. Instead, industrial land needs were computed for the
entire County and are included in the County-wide Summary.
Allocation of Growth
The task is to geographically allocate the 1655 acres of anticipated growth
to various parts of the Township. The amount of land actually allocated
will be two to three times the calculated need to allow for variations in
land availability and to allow for market choice. The following allocation
guidelines were derived from the Township and County policies and were used -
in determining the location of new growth in Hillsborough Township:
1) Higher intensity residential and commercial development that would
most appropriately be served by a centralized water and sewer system
should infill vacant, suitable land in the Town of Hillsborough then,
in its planning jurisdiction and finally in the 20-Year Transition
Area to the east of the Town's planning jurisdiction.
2) Rural , non-farm residential development will be allocated to the
southern tier of the Township so as to avoid negative impacts to
agricultural land which is mostly located in the northern tier of the
Township.
3) Agricultural uses will be allocated to the northern tier of the Township,
acknowledging the viability of this land use in this area.
4) Commercial or industrial development that does occur within the Township,
outside the Town's planning jurisdiction will be allocated to designated
activity nodes, chosen because they meet certain locational criteria.
This strategy will provide a more reasonable and efficient alternative
to counter the historical trend toward strip-type development.
51 Commercial , industrial and non-farm residential development will be
directed away from areas that, if developed at those intensities, would
create negative impacts on either water supply watersheds or environmentally
sensitive areas.
Locational Criteria
Land in the Township was "filtered through" a series of criteria designed
to evaluate locations for their suitability to contain various land uses.
Locational criteria were developed and used in each of the areas:
- Topography
- Hydrology
- Population density
- Energy Use
- Existing land use
- Historic and cultural characteristics
- Public services and utilities
- Transportation system
- Agriculture and forestry
These criteria were derived from the Community Profile because of their
importance in determining the best locations for new land uses. Measures
for each locational criteria were used. These are explained more fully in
the County-wide Summary,
Distribution of Land Use Plan Categories in Hillsborough Township
Land in Hillsborough Township has been classified into the Land Use Plan
categories according to the set of locational criteria which define the
environmental centext and according to public policy as expressed in the
Orange County Land Use Goals and Policies section of the Plan, The purpose
of this approach is to account for both environmental factors (natural and
social ) and for public values regarding the future of Orange County.
Hillsborough Township is classified into the following Land Use Plan
categories: Urban, 20-Year Transition, Rural Residential , Agricultural
Residential , Environmentally Sensitive, Public Interest Areas, Reservoir
Protection, Commercial Transition Activity Nodes, Rural Industrial Activity
Nodes, and Rural Commercial Activity Nodes. All of the area within the
Town of Hillsborough's corporate limits and planning jurisdiction has been
classified as Urban. This means, in effect, that the Town's Land Use Plan
will shape the development pattern in that area. With the policy of
encouraging infill development, most of the projected higher-intensity
growth over the next 20 years should occur within the designated Urban area.
However, some additional 20-Year Transition Area has been deliviated to
the east of Hillsborough's planning jurisdiction which includes land area
that is currently served by the municipal water and sewer system or could
be efficiently served at some time in the future, when the demand is suf-
ficient. The 20-Year Transition Area outside the Town's planning jurisdic-
tion is bordered to the north by Strouds Creek, to the east by the Township
boundary and Lawrence Road and to the south by the railroad tracks, which
are south of an generally parallel Interstate 85, All of the Rural Residen-
tial classification occurs in the southern tier of the Township where rural ,
non-farm housing will be the most suitable land use. Most of the Agricultural
Residential classification is in the northern tier of the Township where
farming and associated agricultural activities are the most appropriate land
use. The Environmentally Sensitive Freas in Hillsborough Township include
the 100-Year floodplains which are described in the Township Profile section,
The Duke Forest tracts in the southeast and west central portion of the
Township area Public Interest Areas. A small portion of the Upper Eno
watershed which lies along the western boundary of the Township will be
classified as Reservoir Protection. In addition to classifying these areas
of land, the County's land use planning strategy has been to identify and
evaluate all potential activity nodes in the Township. These Activity Nodes
are generally focused on major intersections and represent a point rather
than an area concept. They must also meet the additional locational criteria
listed previously. A total of five Activity nodes have been designated in
Hillsborough Township:
Location: North Carolina Highway 86 and State Road 1334 (HB-1 )
Plan Category: Rural
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial highway (NC 86) and a collector (SR 1334). Commercial uses
presently exist near this node an NC 86. There are no environmental
constraints that would hinder small-scale commercial development in the
land area focused on this node, This scale of commercial development
would not disrupt any of the residential areas nearby. The lack of water
or sewer lines in the foreseeable future also limits the scale of new
development. Because there are already commercial uses in the area, only
limited new development would be necessary during the 20 year time horizon
of the Plan. Instead, encouragement should be given for the rehabilitation
and reuse of existing stores if and when they fall into disrepair or become
vacant,
Location: North Carolina Highway 86 and State Road 1332 (HB-2)
,O/4.ewre ekle—perdi - Atf _rAede,th.
Analysis and EValuation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial highway (NC 86) and a collector (SR 1332) . A small scale indus-
trial use presently exist at this node. There are no environmental constraints
that would hinder small scale, rural industrial development in this area,
This type of development also would not disrupt an area of residential
character. The scale of future rural industrial development at this node
would be limited by the lack of municipal water and sewer lines as well as
--•■••••=1=6311=MbeNZI
the capacity of NC 86 to handle additional traffic. These factors, among
others would be taken into consideration during the revieW of a new or
expanded rural industrial use.
Location: U. S. Highway 70 By-pass and St. Mary's Road (HB-3)
Plan Category: Commercial Transition
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial (US 70 By-pass) and a collector (St. Mary's Road). Commercial
uses presently exist near this node including small gas station, a conven-
ience store with gas pumps and a flea market store: There are no natural
environmental constraints that would hinder medium to higher intensive
commercial development in this area. However, there are presently con-
.
straints imposed by the arrangement of the highway and its access points
which would need to be redesigned to safely accomodate additional commercial
development. This redesign could include turn lanes on US 70 By-pass and/or
St. Mary's Road at the intersection and/or perhaps a stoplight. With the
increased residential density in the immediate vicinity, sewer lines will
likely be extended, adding important infrastructure, thus allowing more
intensive commercial development in the future.
Location: The intersections of Interstate 85 and Old #10 (SR 1710) with
North Carolina Highway 86 (jB-4)
Plan Category: Commercial Transition
Analysts and Evaluation: This node is focused on two intersections which
are enough together that a functional relationship exist with respect to
Activity Node designation. Various commercial uses presently exist in the
area including a convenience store, 2 gas stations, a health club and a
truck stop-restaurant. There are no natural environmental constraints that
would hinder more intensive commercial activity in the area. Also, there
would be no disruption of an area of residential character, with the possible
exception of the area immediately to the south of the intersection of
Old #10 with NC 86. Another limiting factor is the existence of an historic
site west of NC 86, just south of 185. These constraints have the effect
of directing any new development to the area north of Old #10 and east of the
section of NC 86 which is south of 185. Most of the development capacity of
the node has, in fact, already been utilized thereby decreasing the need for
additional development in the near future. However, this Activity node
will retain and gain in capacity as sewer lines are extended, makign it a
good site for commercial uses servicing the surrounding population.
ocation: Old NC 86(afld-proRosed Interstate 40 extension (HB. 5)
Pl . , Category: Rural Commercial
Analyse and Evaluation: This node\-1 ocational at the site where an
intersectio ould be created if In -rstaf.6,40 is built. There are no
natural environme- al constraint that would hl'nder small-scale commercial
development, nor woule there &e disruption to an aria of residential
character. Limitations o/2 he scale of development ar- primarily a function
of the lack of water . 'd sewer ' es and the absence of sionificant demand
for commercial act' ities in the nea future. When and if I-,0 is built,
creating this i •tersection, the demand fl such activities will ikely be
sufficient • support their location at this .ode.
Altho , the Land Use Plan for the Town of Hillsbo •ugh does not specifically
designate activity nodes or centers, the following sit- , have the character-
istics of existing urban "Activity Centers" :
•
I
Location: Intersection of US 70 By-Pass and Highway 86
Location: Central Business District of Hillsborough focused on the
intersection of Churton and wing Street
Location: General area of Daniel Boone Complex near 1-85.
These Hillsborough Activity Centers are shown in order to provide clari-
fication about the relationship of the Township plan with the Town 's Plan.
8/28/80
•
•. ,
Ef•:• : •'?
• .,
• •
•
4 .:71. •
• •
ENO TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN COMPONENT
•
•
•
•
• •
•
•
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
ENO TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
COMMUNITY PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
There are a number of physical features and existing land uses which in
the aggregate make up the character of Eno Township. The area of the township
north of St. Mary's Road is agricultural in character and marks the southern
limit of the tobacco farming area that extends up into Little River Township
and north into Caswell County,
The southern portion of the township is traversed by Interstate 85,
U. S. 70 and a main line of the Southern Railroad which parallel one another
east-west across the township.
The Eno River flows west from Hillsborough across the township and then
turns sharply and flows directly south for a time before turning to the west
again just north of 1-85.
The south-western portion of the township is near the City of Durham and
residential developments which are focused on Durham are taking place in this
area.
Social and Economic Factors
Eno Township takes its name from the Eno indian tribe which inhabited this
area when the first white men arrived. The indians were displaced by the
white man and joined with other tribes such as the Occoneechi who moved west
and north out of the area.
Within the township there exists further divisions of communities and
neighborhoods. These social units were of more importance in the past when
individual areas were more isolated and people were more self sufficient.
Rural sociologists define a neighborhood as a small group of farm families
who live fairly close together, who recognize a common name for their immediate
•
locality, who personally know one another and, to some extent, visit among
themselves, and who usually are accustomed to working together as a local
unit. Their homes are usually centered around a church, store, filling station,
or school .
A community may be defined as a group of neighborhoods which have a
natural tendency to associate together because of common interests. The
•
comunity usually possesses one center to which most of its people go fairly
often. Communities are more arbitrarily delineated then neighborhoods since
factors such as physical barriers, nearby towns, and the locations of common
meeting places, schools, churches, etc. , may attract people from the same
neighborhood to different places.
The neighborhoods and communities that were important in an earlier
time are less important now when people's social spheres are expanded by the
automobile. However, people in Eno Township still identify to some extent
with Pleasant Green, Palmer Grove, and St. Mary's communities that were impor-
tant communities in the past, Eno Township has experienced rapid growth in
more recent times. Preliminary population figures from the 1980 Census show
that between 1970 and 1980 the population of Eno Township increases by 2440
persons from 1641 persons in 1970 to 4081 persons in 1980. This is a 60%
increase in population Over the 10 year period.
Most of this growth has taken place in southern and western Eno Township.
This area has good access to employment centers in the City of Durham and
Research Triangle Park via U. S. 70 and 1-85. The Research Triangle Park
continues to grow. General Electric has recently announced the construction
of an electronics plant which will employ 1500 people. As long as this kind
of growth continues the population of Eno Township will probably grow at a rate
similar to that experienced over the past 10 years.
..mana=m
Transportation
The principal east/west corridor through Orange County traverses southern
Eno Township. This corridor is made up of 1-85, U. S. 70 and a main line of the
Southern Railroad. North/south transportation is much less pronounced in the
Township with one important road serving this function (Pleasant Green Road/
SR 1567) .
Using the North Carolina Functional Classification System, the major roads
in Eno Township have been placed in the categories of interstate, collectors,
and local roads based on their ability to provide service.
The interstate highway in Eno Township is 1-85. This road travels for
5 miles across the township. 1-85 has one interchange in Eno Township with
U. S. 70. Current plans of the North Carolina Department of Transportation
call for the six-laning of this highway beginning in 1973. There are no plans
to upgrade the I-85/U. S. 70 interchange at this time. U. S. 70 served as a
major east/west route across the United Stated before the construction of the
interstate system. It is a major two-lane highway and is classified as an
arterial highway, The next service level , collector, includes the following
township roads; U. S, 70 business, St, Mary's Road (SR 1002) , Pleasant Green
Road (SR 1715-1710) , Cole Mill Road (SR 1569) , and New Sharon Church Road (SR 1538:
Sewer and Water Systems
Eno Township is not currently served by a public sewer system. However,
sewer mains from the Town of Hillsborough and the City of Durham currently border
Eno Township and the "201 " sewer plans prepared for these two municipalities
call for future expansion into Eno Township. Sewer lines from the Town of
Hillsborough are projected to include a small area of Eno Township along
U. S. 70 by the year 2000. The Greater Durham 201 Facilities Plan proposed
n,
•
future extensions of the City of Durham's sewer system to provide sewer service
to the area of Highway 70 near the Orange County/Durham County line.
Water lines from the Town of Hillsborough do extend into Eno Township
along U. S. 70 business to its junction with U. S. 70 Bypass, down Old N. C.
10 to its junction with New Hope Road and along Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711 )
and Lannie Road (SR 1831 ) .
The City of Durham is currently extending its water lines into Orange County
along U. S. 70 a distance of about 1/2 mile, This extension is to serve
residences and mobile home parks in this area whose private water supplies have
been contaminated by malfunctioning on-site sewage disposal systems.
It is expected that the Hillsborough system will expand into Eno Township
to meet needs for public water there. The further expansion of the City of
Durham system from the west is less certain because the City has demands from
many areas within Durham City and County for provision of public water and be-
cause the City currently has a policy of not extending services into Orange
County.
Natural Environmental Constraints
Several areas in Eno Township have natural features which affect their
suitability for certain kinds of land uses.
Floodplains: The Eno River is the major stream which drains Eno Township. The
Eno and its tributaries are subject to flooding and the extent of that flooding
for the "100 year storm" has been determined by the Army Corps of Engineers.
Because the streams have cut steep valleys in this area, the maximum width of
the floodplains is not great, generally not exceeding 500 feet. One exception is
the north-south section of the Eno where flatter topography produces areas where
the floodplain reaches a 1000 feet in width during the 100 year storm.
Steep slopes: Areas with slopes greater than 15% are generally concentrated in
the central portion of the township along the Eno River and in the lower
drainage basin of its tributary, Buckwater Creek.
Soil Characteristics: Eno Township has large areas of good soils suitable for
sanitary facilities, development, and water management north of St. Mary's Road.
South of St. Mary's Road less suitable soils begin to predominate. The areas
of steep slopes in the center of the township have a covering to thin soils
underlain by hard rock which make them generally unsuitable for development.
In many other areas where the topography is gentler, heavy clay soils present
problems especially regarding on-site sewage disposal systems.
Agriculture
Reported Eno Township cropland both harvested and idle diminshed by over
53% between the years 1955 and 1977. This is a decline in cropland of 2,300
acres. The amount of pastureland in the township also declined, but at a slower
rate of 5% for the 22 year period. This represents a loss of about 100 acres.
Several factors may account for this loss of farmland. Some of the losses
may have taken place as a direct consequence of the construction of 1-85 through
the township, Perhaps more importantly the construction of the interstate has
greatly improved transportation access in the area and stimulated competition
for land by residential , commercial and industrial uses. Southern and western
Eno Township is also in close proximity to a regional employment center which
includes Duke University, Duke Medical Complex, downtown Durham and Research
Triangle Park, This has made those areas of the township an attractive place
of residence for "exurban" commuters,
Eno Township is likely to continue to experience growth pressures due to
its good access to employment centers in the City of Durham and Research Tri-
angle Park. As many as 7,500 new residents are projected for Eno Township by
the year 2000. Increases in land values due to such population growth usually
increase the cost of farming.
Active farming operations are concentrated in Eno Township along St. Mary's
Road and in the area north of it. Commercial dairying, beef, swine and poultry
operations are located in this general area.
Special Township Issues
Eno State Park
A State Park has been established along the Eno River valley in Eno
Township. It is the first State Park in North Carolina that is linear in
character.
In Orange County, the State currently owns or has easements for three
large parcels. These are the Cate's Ford access, Cabe's Mill access and the
Red Hill Farm.
The Eno River State Park Master Plan calls for the development of the
Park in two phases. For the section of the park in Orange County, the first
phase calls for the development of the Cate's Ford and Cabe's Mill areas to
provide for primitive camping, picnicking and hiking. The Red Hill Farm tract
will be used only as the site of a ranger residence.
The second phase of the development plan calls for accomplishing the linear
character of the park by purchasing land or easements for connecting pieces
along the Eno River. It also calls for two additional access areas. The point
where the Eno crosses Lawrence Road is the proposed site of a small parking area
and canoe launch. Another area just softh of where the Eno crosses Pleasant
Green Road is proposed as a second canoe launch area. Additional land will also
be added to the Park around the Cate's Ford Access in the second phase of
the plan.
Population and Land Needs Projections : 1980-2000
The population projections for Eno Township are:
TOTAL
1980 1990 2000
4385 6475 9425
This represents the following number of additional persons in the years
1990 and 2000:
_
1990 2000
2090 5040
Using an average household size of 3:13 persons, the number of additional
dwellings needed was calculated for each ten-year increment:
TOTAL
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
668 942 1610
The residential acreage required was calculated using the current average
subdivided lot size of 2. 13 (outside the Towns of Chapel Hill , Carrboro and
Hillsborough): -0
TOTAL
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
1423 2006 3430
In order to allow for additional acreage for uses typically associated with
residential development a multiplier of was applied to the additional residential
acreage needs projected for 1990 and 2000. Adding the resulting non-residential
acreage needs to the residential acreage needs the following total land use
needs for the Township are projected:
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
1494 2106 3600
Since industrial development usually has little or no market relationship to
local residential development, it has not been calculated as part of the
township needs. Instead, industrial land needs were computed for the entire
County and included in the County-wide Summary,
Framework and Application
The following township policy statements represent the organizing concepts
around which the land use plan for Eno Township has been constructed,
1 ) Central and northern Eno Township contains the best agricultural
soils in the township and virtually all of the existing farms,
Planning should protect this existing use.
2) The area in and aound the intersection of U,5. 70 and 1-85 and
southeast to the Durham County line is an area suitable for
commercial and industrial development.
3) The State of North Carolina has designated certain areas along
the Eno River for development in its Master Plan for the Eno
State Park. The Eno State Park Plan and the County Land Use
Plan should be in agreement.
4) Duke Forest lands in southern Eno Township are a valuable research
and teaching facility as, well as being available for public use.
These lands should be protected from the negative impacts of develop-
ment.
5) Low density residential development should be the predominant use
in the southern portion of the township.
Land Classification Categories
The land use plan for Eno Township reflects the organizing concepts
outlined in the previous section. Land in Eno township has been classified
into the following five categories,
Agricultural-Residential : The central and northern areas of the Township
are areas where agriculture is an important use of the land and economic
activity. They have been classified agricultural-residential .
Public Interest Areas: The plan recognized the existing State Park lands
along the Eno River and the sections of Duke Forest in Eno Township which are
available for public use. They are classified as public interest areas worthy
of protection from incompatible land uses.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The environmentally sensitive areas in
the township include flood-prone areas along the Eno River as well as several
of its tributaries. Some of the flood-prone lands along the Eno are proposed
for inclusion in the Eno State Park to link the existing sections and complete
the linear character of the park.
Urban Transition: The area along U. S. 70 and 1-85 from the Durham-Orange
County line to the intersection of these roads in Eno Township has been classi-
fied as urban transition. The area is an extension of the expanding Durham
City urban area and part of it is currently provided with water by the City of
Durham. It also contains several large tracts of land which are zoned commer-
cial or industrial . Transportation access is obviously good.
Rural Residential : The remaining land in the southern portion of the
township has been classified rural residential . It is an area of the Township
with good access to the City of Durham which will in the future attract sub-
urban-type development,
Activity Nodes
Several major intersections were analyzed to determine their suitability
as activity nodes. Selection of the designated nodes was a function of the
locational criteria and the needs of the County and the Township for the various
types of land uses. The ends considerations are a result of an effort to
project the level of growth in various sectors of the local economy to determine
the amount of land needed to contain and support this growth, while maintaining
the goals and policies of the Plan.
Location of Activity Nodes
Commercial and Industrial use areas are specified in the Plan as Activity
Nodes. These Nodes attempt to specify the most appropriate locations for
commercial and industrial development in the township based on certain locational
criteria. These criteria include:
- topography
- hydrology
- population density
- energy use
-
existing land use
- historic and cultural characteristics
public services and utilities
- transportation system
- agriculture and forestry
The purpose of the Node concept is to direct commercial and industrial
uses to the most appropriate areas in each township and prevent strip-type
development and general sprawl of these land uses.
Three Activity Nodes have been designated in Eno Township. All are along
U. S. 70. One is classified as a Rural Commercial Node, one is a Commercial
Transition Node and one is an Industrial Transition Node. The following is a
description of these nodes.
Location: U. S. 70 Business/U.S. 70 By-Pass -;:/ke0 -(
lliff1074-0?a
Plan Category: Rural a441
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial (U. S. 70 By-Pass) and a collector road (U. S. 70 Business) . Palmer's
Grove Church Road intersects By-Pass 70 at this intersection. Two commercial
uses are currently located in the vicinity of this node. No environmental
constraints hinder commercial development in the area of this node.
: ss — •1 s 6re' 73wia-r64,:`41.
Plan Category: Commercial Transition/ ' . . . 1 2
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two major
highways. It is also serviced by a spur of the Southern Railroad. The area of
the node has existing commercial uses. The node is located within Durham's 201
sewer planning area. Durham City water is within 4000 feet of this node.
There are a minimum of residential uses located in the area. A section of the
Eno River State Park as well as floodplain along the Eno River are located north
of 1-85 interchange at this node. Therefore industrial and commercial development
should be confined to the south and east of this interchange.
Location: U. S. 70, Old Number 10 and N. C. 751 8A47 5
Plan Category: Commercial Transition
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of three
collector roads. It is bordered on the south by a main line of the Southern
Railroad. Existing land uses include commercial uses and mobile home parks.
The node is within Durham's 201 sewer planning area and has Durham City water.
A section of Duke Forest land abutts the interchange on the southern side of
U. S. 70. Therefore, commercial development at this node should be confined to
north of U. S. 70 at the intersection.
; •
•
;
;
;
B/NCHAM TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN COMPONENT
ij
•
•
•
, : ••
•.
• ,
: :
1
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
BINGHAM TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
TOWNSHIP PROFIT SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
Bingham TbWnship consist of a predominantly rural landscape with limited 10W-
' density commercial and residential development. Farming remains an important
activity in the township. About 40% of the County's dairy operations are
located in Bingham TOwnship. Because of its location, however urban forces
have begun to exert a influence. North Carolina Highway 54 running east-west
across the central portion of the township acts as a connecting link between
Bingham and the adjacent, expanding towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill. This
highway and its several intersections provide a visible demonstration of the
increasing impacts resulting from urbanization. Additional commercial uses
have located along this route, particularly on the sections nearest the towns,
creating concern about the potential for strip-type development along NC 54.
Bingham Township is attracting new rural non-farm development because of its
accessibility to Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Durham and Research Triangle Park as
work places. In 1978 Bingham Township accounted for 13% of all building permits
issues. Yet its estimated population for that some year amounted to only 5%
1 of the County total. Thus indicating that development activity this township
was disproportionately high in comparison with the population. These trends
are a course of concern among Bingham Township residents. As with many rural
residents of the County, they see this new growth as a disquieting element in
their lives. The designation of Cane Creek has created a very specific focus
for this concern since it represents a conflict between two valuable and
necessary land uses: agriculture and a water reservoir. The resolution of this
issue, as well as the other land use issues facing Bingham Tbwnship, should
seek to balance completing uses in a way that enhances the public interests'
benefits.
Transportation
In its capacity as the major transportation route in Bingham Township, NC 54
clrries an average daily traffic load-of 6,000 vehicles at its busiest point
within the Township. A second, important east/west route is the Old Greensboro
Road/SR 1005, which averages 1300 vehicles per day at its busiest point within
the Township.
The north/south routes are not as important, the busiest ones are Orange
Grove Road with a traffic count of 790 and White Cross Road/SR 1951 with an
average daily traffic county of 630 vehicles. Additional north/south routes
include bodson's Crossroads/SR 1102, Netane-Oaks Road/SR 1007 and Orange Chapel
Glover Garden Road. In general, all other roads only provide a local level
services function.
Natural Environmental Constraints
Bingham Township contains natural environmental constraints because of flood-
, plains, water resources, a few steep slopes, and soil conditions. Floodplains
that represent identified constraints occur along the Haw River in the southwest
corner of Bingham; along Cane Creek and its tributaries in the central. and
northwest sections and Collins Creek in the south central portion of the town-
ship. Approximately 28% of the University Lake watershed extends into the
eastern section of the Township consisting of 5385 acres or 8.4 square miles.
The watershed which would drain into the proposed Cane Creek reservoir covers
20,160 acres or 31.5 square miles of Bingham Township. Steep slopes respresent
a limited constraint, occuring primarily along the Haw River and same sections
of Cane Creek. Soil conditions in the east central and southeastern area of
the Township present some limitations to building or development activity
because of a heavy clay content and shallow depth to bedrock. Additional
I
areas containing limiting soil condition characteristic occur primarily in
association with the identified floodplains.
te
Peporbed. Bingham Township cropland both harvested and idle diminighed by 16%
below between the years 1955 and 1977. The cropland base ot the Township
declined in this period by almost 1,400 acres. The Township pastureland base
also diminished, but at a much, slower rate of less than 2%, representing
a decline of less than 100 acres. The twenty operating dairy farms in Bingham
Township maintain over 1800 milk cows. Consequently, Bingham TownShip is an
Important center of dairying in a county, ranking sixth among North Carolina's
100 counties in number of milk caws. Other types of farming operations in the
Township include poultry and swine operations. Pressures fra• the urbanization
trends will likely affect Bingham Township agriculture. The proposed 1-40
extension, if built, will significantly decrease the commuting time to typical
places of work such as the Research Triangle Park, Durham and Raleigh.
The dairy, swine and poultry operations in Bingham Township are vulnerable to
development pressures. Nuisance complaints fram non-farm residential areas are
often directed at the and poultry farms. Dairy farming is sUbject to increased
environmental regulation as population density increases. The large capital
investment necessary in dairying makes any relocation of a operation due to
surrounding development pressures very difficult and expensive.
FRAMEWORK AND APPLTCATION
The following Township policy statements _cepresent the organizing concepts
around which the land use plan for Bingham Township has been constructed:
1) The agricultural and rural residential character of the
Township should be maintained.
2) Existing and potential watersupply watersheds in the Township
should be developed in a way that will minimize impacts on
water quality and not conflict with agriculture.
3) The White Cross area has the characteristics of a community
within the Township and this character should be enhanced.
4) Residential development that does occur in the Township
should be planned for areas that will, not create negative
impacts for agriculture or potential or existing watersupply
watersheds.
5) The area along North Carolina Highway 54 is not appropriate
for strip-type commercial development, rather it should take
place in compact clusters focused on designated activity
nodes and separated from residential areas. This approach
will help to preserve the utility of the highway as an
important throUghfare.
Several major intersections were analyzed to determine their suitability as
activity nodes. Selection of the designated nodes was a function of the loca-
tional criteria and the needs of the County and the Township for the various
types of land uses. The needs considerations are a result of an effort to
project the level of growth in various sedtors of the local economy to determine
the amount of land needed to contain and support this growth, while fulfilling
the goals and policies of the Plan.
k
Population and Land Needs Projections 1980-2000
The population projections for Bingham Township are:
TOTAL
1980 1 1990 2000
__________
4,487 6,290 8,805
Additional persons:
1990
2000
1,803 4.318
Using an average household size of 3.13 persons, the number of additional
dwellings needed was calculated for each ten-year increment:
TOTAL
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
576 1,380 1,956
The residential acreage required was calculated using the current average
subdivided lot size of 2.1:3 acres (outside of the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro
and Hillsborough) :
TOTAL
1980-1990 1990-2000 1980-2000
------- --------
1;227 acieS 810 acres 2,037 acres
In order to allow for additional acreage for uses typically associated with
residential development a multiplier of 1.05 was applied to the residential
acreage. Residentia3 development brings in it's wake the development of land
for non-residential purposes such as shopping, schools, churches, fire stations
and the like. Orange County outside the Towns' planning jurisdictions needs
a smaller amount of land for these associated uses becFuse of the lower density
of residential development than occurs in the urban areas.
Total Acres Needed:
1980-1990
1990-2000
1980-2000
2,787 acres 5,786 acres 8,573 acres
Since industrial development usually has little or no market relationship to
local residential development, it has not been calculated as a part of the
township needs. Instead, industrial land needs were computed for the entire
County and included in the County-wide Summary.
Allocation of Growth
The task is to geographically allocate the 8,57.3 acres of anticipated growth
to various parts of Bingham Township.
The following allocation. guidelines were derived from the township policies
and were used in determining the location of new growth in Bingham Township:
1) Rural non-farm residential development will be allocated so as to
avoid negative environmental or economic impacts on agriculture.
T 2) Commercial development will be allocated to designated activity
nodes, chosen because they meet specified locational criteria.
This-strategy will provide a more reasonable and efficient alternative
to counter the trend toward strip-type development, especially
along NC 54.
3) Commercial and non-farm residential development will be directed
away frcn areas that, if developed at those intensities, would create
negative impacts on watersupply watersheds
Locational Criteria
tf,
Land in the Township was subjected to or "filtered through" a series of
criteria designed to evaluate locations for their suitability to contain
various land uses. Locational criteria were developed and used in each of
the following areas :
- topography
- hydrology
- population density
- energy use
- existing land use
- historic and cultural characteristics
- public services and utilities
- transportation system
- agriculture and forestry
These criteria were derived from the Community Profile because of their importance
in determining the best locations for new land uses, Certain measures for each
locational criteria were used)
Distribution of Land Use Plan Categories in Bingham Township
Land in Bingham Township has been classified into the Land Use Plan categories
according to the set of locational criteria which define the environmental
context and according to public policy as expressed in the Orange County Land
Use Goals and Policies section of the Plan, The purpose of this approach is
to account for both physical environmental factors (natural and social ) and
for public values regarding the future of Orange County.
Bingham Township is classified into the following Land Use Plan Categories:
Rural Residential , Agricultural Residential , Environmentally Sensitive, Reservoir
Protection, Rural Buffer, Rural Community Activity Node, and Rural Commercial
Activity Nodes,
1 County-wide Summary
Rural Residential . This area of the Township is generally bounded by the
University Lake watershed to the east, Dairyland Road to the north, Orange
Grove Road to the west and NC54 to the South. This area has characteristics
which make it suitable for rural , non-farm residential development. It is
adjacent to the major east-west road, NC54 and near the Rural Community of
White Cross. A proposed Rural Commercial Activity node at the intersection
of NC54 and Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road is also close by. Commercial
uses , either existing or future at these nodes will provide the necessary
support services for the Rural Residential area. This area is also outside
both the University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds.
Agricultural Residential . The vast majority of the land area in the Township
is classified as Agricultural Residential . This classification is to designate
those areas where the land use activities are predominately related to the
cultivation of the land or the use of land as pasture. The intent is to provide
for the preservation of land suitable for agriculture, silviculture and horti-
culture uses.
Environmentally Sensitive. This classification applies to the 100-year flood-
prone lands which were described in the Township Profile Summary. The purpose
is to show those areas where development needs to be controlled so that the
loss of property or human life because of flooding is eliminated.
Reservoir Protection. In Bingham Township this classification applies to the
University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds (In the case of Cane Creek the
Reservoir Protection covers the part of the watershed that will drain into the
proposed reservoir. ) . This classification includes lands that drain to existing
reservoirs which are public water supplies for Orange County or to potential
reservoir sites which have been designated for protection. These watersheds
need to be protected from the impacts of development which could cause water
F quality problems for existing public water supplies or preempt the future
utilization of potential reservoir sites.
Rural Buffer. This area extends into Bingham Township from Chapel Hill
Township generally coinciding with the boundaries of the University Lake
watershed. The purpose for this classification is to designate land near or
within the urbanizing area of Chapel Hill and Carrboro that should remain
rural in character and not require urban-type services. It should contain
very low density residential uses and agriculture uses.
In addition to classifying these area; of land, the County's land use planning
strategy has been to identify and evaluate all potential activity nodes in the
Township, These activity nodes are generally focused on major intersections
and represent a point rather than an area concept, They must also meet the
additional locational criteria listed previously. Using the designated activity
' nodes as starting point, the next step in the process was to inventory and
evaluate the balance of the land area in Bingham Township. The land classi-
fication decisions which evolved from this process, are shown in map form (see
Orange County Proposed Land Use Plan Map) ,
A total of five activity nodes have been designated in Bingham Township, Four
of these have been classified as Rural Commercial and one is Rural Community.
The following is a description of the activity nodes designated in Bingham
Township:
Location: N. C, Highway 54 and Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road (BH-1 )
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial road and a collector road. Existing commercial in the vicinity of
this node include: 2 auto gas-service stations, an auto parts firm, a wholesale
mail -order distribution firm and a vacant store. There are no environmental
Location: N. C. Highway 54 and Dodson's Crossroads South (BH-2)
Plan Category: Rural Corrraunity
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is the site of the old White Cross School
and currently has a combination gasoline station and small grocery store.
There are no environmental constraints. This node currently has only limited
community or comaercial type uses, hover it possesses locational attributes
which make it a suitable Rural Community node. It is located at the intersec-
tion of an important and well traveled east-west road and important north-south
route. This location is near a area to the northeast of the node (between
Orange Grove Road and Dodson's Crossroads South) that has been classified as Rural
Residential. As this residential area develops it will have a need for support
1
services that could most appropriately be located at this node.
Location: Old Greensboro Highway and Crawford Dairy Road (BH-3)
Plan Category: Rural Camrrercial.
Analysis and Evalnation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collector roads. Existing land uses at this location include a church and
a few residential uses. There are no environmental constraints. It was
determined that this node would be a gond location for small scale limited
commercial use, such as a single-small grocery store to serve residents of
south-western Bingham, when and if a sufficient population density develops.
Location: Orange Grove Road and Dodson's Crossroads North (BH-4)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collector roads. .Existing land uses include a comercial use, previously
used as a leather shop and an auto parts store. It is located on the boundary
of Cane Creek watershed. Its location in the northeast section of the
Township means it can serve the residents in that area efficiently.
Location: Oak Church Road and Mt. Willing Poad (13H-5)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collector roads. Existing land uses include a combination small store and
auction facility, a mobile home park and a retail meat outlet. It is located
in the fringe boundary area of the Cane Creek watershed. This site is a good
location to serve residents in the northwest section of Bingham Ilownship.
[.r,.; ,,,,;'• -.::: : . II! , „. •
i • ' ,, ,,,
nforiZt, f; ..,. 1.5111 • 4 1.- MA tt
.....4.,. .:-."
Y.;.14.'
''!i:'';'',
k . , •- ■;:-Ii'..k: ,
': ' ''''' ''''' ,,`,,,,I:J.,.• ',
,
0 ,
4,
;?: 1
p..
,..,.
cr .
;
, .
MAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP LAND USE PLAN COMPONENT
!..
!
1,
r •
I. 1 •
. ,
: .
1 t
,
",,,' ',; . •.i , 'T ; ; . i 4 •, j,,,7 -.
ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP COMPONENT
TOWNSHIP PROFILE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
The primary factor shaping the urban form in this portion of the county
is the presence of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro urbanizing area. Additional , but
secondary growth pressures are having an effect on the east side from the City
of Durham and to a lesser extent on the south from Chatham County. However,
residential development activity in northern Chatham, adjacent to Orange
County is likely to increase with the completion of B. Everett Jordon Reservoir.
These factors are having a direct impact on the overall physical form of
development in Orange County because of their adjacency to the County. Other
significant influences include the addition of residents employed by new
research and industrial firms locating in Research Triangle Park. Supportive
uses will cause further developmental and environmental impacts to occur in
various parts of the County including the transition areas.
Future sewer extensions from the City of Durham to the area on the east
side of New Hope Creek could encourage development in the eastern sector of
the County. The northern part of Chapel Hill , generally focused on Weaver
Dairy Road is currently being subjected to strong development pressures and
as a result is in the process of urbanization. Most of this area is or will
be served by water and sewer lines thereby increasing the potential for higher
density development.
Transportation
Chapel Hill Township is traversed by four major north/south and east/west
highways. The north/south routes are 'NC 86 and SR 1009 (Old 86) which connect
Hillsborough and points north with Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The proposed
1-40 Interstate extension if built, would serve as a significant part of this
north/south corridor. The east-west routes are the business and by-pass 15-501
highways and NC 54.
A municipally operated bus system currently serves the Towns of Chapel Hill
and Carrboro. In the future this system could potentially serve areas outside
town limits if they contained sufficient population density,
A modified version of the North Carolina Functional Classification
System has been used to describe the road network in Chapel Hill Township.
This system describes roads based on access and mobility. Interstate and
arterial highways are most important because they provide the best (least
travel-time) to and from employment, shopping, educational and population
centers. Roads of lesser importance are called collectors because their chief
function is to "collect" traffic from large neighborhood and community areas
for eventual access onto an arterial or Interstate. Local roads are the third
category providing access to the major road system from smaller areas in the
County.
The arterial highways in Chapel Hill Township are: NC 86, NC 54 and
NC 15-501 . Collector roads in this towilship include the following: Damascus
Church Road (SR 1940 and part of SR 1939) , Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) , Old
Greensboro Road (SR 1005) , Mt. Carmel Church Road (SR 1008) , Homestead Road
(SR 1777) , Old NC 86 (SR 1009) , Weaver Dairy Road (SR 1733) , Ervin Road (SR 1734) ,
Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) , New Hope Church Road (SR 1723) .
1
Chapel Hill Township's transportation network connects it to the
regional population centers of Durham, Burlington, and Raleigh, as well as
to the Research Triangle Park employment center. The construction of Inter-
state 40 along the proposed corridor will mean that Durham, Raleigh and the
Research Triangle Park will be within much closer commuting distance to Chapel
Hill Township. This increased convenience of access to such centers is likely
to cause new growth pressures in the area of the Township north of Chapel Hill .
Sewer System
Except for some minor areas within the Chapel Hill-Carrboro corporate limits,
much of the southeastern portion of Chapel Hill Township is sewered or has the
potential for sewer.
A trunk line which runs south of Chapel Hill-Carrboro along Smith Level
Road has encouraged and will continue to encourage medium to high-density
development in this area. The commercial complex at the Chatham County line
and the large residential development called Heritage Hills represent evidence
of this trend.
A major sewer trunk line runs northward south of the Horace Williams Airport
toward the Calvander area. This line built on University of North Carolina
property, is expected to fulfill UNC expansion needs in the area. Sewer lines
extending northward of Chapel Hill in toe general vicinity of Weaver Dairy
Road and U. S. 15-501 has generated and in the future can be expected to
generate additional medium to high density development. Timberlyne, Carol Woods
and the Village Companies offices are examples of this type development.
Natural Environmental Constraints
Several areas in Chapel Hill Township contain environmental constraints
which affect the degree to which land can be developed. Floodplains: The
floodplains in Chapel Hill Township are found along Morgan, Phils and Pritchard
Creeks in the University Lake watershed and New Hope, Bolin and Collins Creeks
in the northern and central part of the township. The land adjacent to these
water courses defined as the floodplain is a natural hazard which places a con-
4 -
straint on the development of this land. Most types of urban development should
be discouraged from locating in these areas. Whatever limited building that
is permitted should adhere to design standards which would ensure that the
function of the flood plain would be maintained.
Water Resources: The University Lake watershed is an important natural resource
for Chapel Hill Township since it drains into a water supply reServoir. This
watershed needs to be protected from development and land uses which would
negatively impact the reservoir through excessive sedimentation and other
forms of poilution from various types of urban development. The streams within
this watershed form a critical element in this system and need spetial consi-
deration with respect to development and land use impacts.
Steep Slopes: Although not a township wide constraint, some steep slopes
(greater than 15%) exist in portions of Duke Forest and around University Lake.
By itself, steep slope conditions are not necessarily a prohibitive constraint
on small scale development. However, the level of constraint does increase
when this condition is superimposed upon additional environmental constraints
•
• such as floodplains or water supply watersheds.
Soil 'Conditions: Certain soils in the Township have poor building development
potential . The extreme eastern portion of the Township along the Durham County
line, and the area known as the "southern triangle" contain soils which have
limitations far development because of erodability, "shallow depth to bedrock
and high runoff potential . The University Lake watershed area is comprised of
generally poor soils in terms of development potential . North of Chapel Hill
(
and Carrboro soils are more suitable for various types of development. Similar
to steep slopes, poor soil conditions do not necessarily represent prohibitive
constraints on development, rather they indicate the need for appropriate
design standards.
Agriculture,
Reported Chapel Hill Township Cropland (harvested and idle) diminished by
over one-half between the years 1955 and 1977. This reduction accounted for
a decline in the Township cropland base of over 4,200 acres. Moreover, the
Township pastureland base also decreased, but at a slower rate of about 27%,
representing a loss of 1 ,300 acres.
Much of this loss must be assumed to have taken place because of intensive
development pressures taking place in Chapel Hill Township during the past two
decades. Between 1960 and 1978, the population of Chapel Hill Township increas-
ed by 64%, from 25,000 to nearly 54,000 personsl . Increases in land values
due to such population growth usually increases the cost of farming by making
expansion more costly; directly and indirectly increasing the tax burden on
farming; and increasing the "externalities" costs (crop theft, soil and crop
pollution, nuisance complaints, etc. ) . Increased land values also offer an
inducement to farmers to sell some or all of their farms and realize a capital
gain, rather than absorb increased operations costs.
Growth pressures are likely to continue to impact on Township farmland.
In 1978 alone, over 500 new lots on over 1000 acres, were created in Chapel Hill
Township outside of the planning jurisdictions of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The
construction of Interstate 40 extension along the currently proposed corridor
1 Orange County Planning Department, Population Projections, March 1978.
Aegnsavan=c4
I,
V
will place additional development pressure on the remaining Township farmland.
Most of this remaining farmland is in the western third of the Township. The
decreased commuting time to these areas from Durham, Research Triangle Park,
and Raleigh will likely make the area more attractive for residential and,
in turn commercial development as well. Dairy farming, still carried on in
the western part of the Township, is particularly vulnerable to development
pressures in that the relocation of such an operation is very costly.
•
PLAN FRAMEWORK AND APPLICATION
k
The following policy statements represent the organizing concepts, around
k which the land use plan for the township is being constructed:
1 ) The Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrhoro are the major growth
centers in the township. ' Infill ' development of suitable vacant
land in the towns should be encouraged. This development should
take place at:existing or projected densities as set forth in
the Towns' 1977 Land Use Plans.
2) The more intensive land uses are most appropriately located, first
in the Towns, then inside the Transition area surrounding the Town.
3) The rural residential and agricultural character of the Township
outside the Towns and Transition area should be maintained.
4) The existing open space system in Chapel Hill Township, which
includes Duke Forest Lands , the UNC buffer around University Lake ,
and existing agricultural and forest land, should be protected
from intrusion by incompatible land uses.
5) University Lake watersupply watershed is an appropriate area for
very low density residential uses, very low intensity commercial
use and for agriculture land uses.
The infill of existing urbanizing areas is the guiding principle upon
which the Chapel Hill Township Land Use Plan is based. Using this guideline
as the foundation, the framework was expanded to include activity nodes.
In general , these activity nodes are 'focused on major intersections which
are good locations for a specified level of commercial or industrial activity.
Activity levels specified for each node are partially a function of the
several site locational criteria discussed previously. In addition to these
e e
•
criteria, the needs of the County and Township for the various types of
commercial or industrial uses are taken into consideration. These needs
considerations are a result of an effort to project the amount of growth in
various sectors of the local economy in order to determine the amount of
p„.
land needed to contain and support this growth.
Land Needs Projection 1980-1982:
A forecast of the land required to accomodate future population growth
must rely upon both a projection of future population and an assumption
about the compactness of settlement. For Chapel Hill Township the stated
policy is to encourage 'infill development of suitable vacant land within
the existing urban areas. If totally successful , the effect of this policy
would be to achieve 100% infill of vacant urban land. Unfortunately, this
level of total infill is very optimistic and not likely to be achieved.
Therefore, the Township Land Use Plan will be based on the assumption that
75% infill will , in fact, occur for the period 1980-2000. The infill goal ,
however, will remain at 100%. In other words, all relevant policies will be
directed toward achieving maximum infill .
Settlement within the Towns? planning jurisdiction is projected to take
place at densities set forth as existing or projected in the Towns ' 1977 Land
Use Plans. Settlement occuring outside of these areas has been projected to
occur at an average density of one dwelling per acre.
Using the 75% infill assumption as a base, the amount of land acreage
needed outside the Town's planning jurisdictions can be calculated:
"Spillover" Development '
In-fill Scattered Development (from Town's jurisdictions) Total
75% 1 ,797 acres 2,172 3,969
r
The scattered development refers to a constant, minimum amount of growth that
will occur in the rural areas of the Township, regardless of the amount of 'in-
fill ' of vacant land within the Town's jurisdiction. This constant has been
projected to be the land required to settle 9% of future Township population
growth, which represents the estimated percent of the 1980 Township population
residing outside of the Town's planning area. It has been assumed that this
constant rural density growth will be equally distributed throughout the rural
fr
areas of the Township. "Spillover" development refers to that growth which
after absorbing 75% of the suitable vacant land within the Town's jurisdiction,
will begin to overflow into the rural areas of the Township.
domommim■■■■■,=,....72
Allocation of Growth
The following were used as allocation guideline standards in determining
the location of new growth (these follow directly from the organizing concepts) :
1 ) Duke Forest tracts Will not be developed over the period 1980-
2000.
2) No "spillover" growth from the two Towns will occur in Chatham
or Durham Counties or in Bingham Township. In other words, all
"spillover" development will be absorbed within the boundaries of
Chapel Hill Township.
3) University Lake watersupply watershed will develop only after the
remaining suitable vacant land in the Township is developed.
4), The "southern triangle" area will develop only after all the suitable
land south of and between the Duke Forest tracts has been developed.
•
5) "Spillover" growth from the Towns will locate in contiguous
•
planning units along a growth corridor focused on NC 86. The
area north of the Towns' is assumed to be most suitable for
absorbing "spillover" because of transportation access; the large
efficiently sewerable area below the Morgan Creek-New Hope Creek
divide; and existing growth patterns.
To facilitate the allocation of growth the Township was divided into 27 planning
units. Boundaries for the planning units were determined primarily by major
roads -and the University Lake watershed divide. The exception to this was the
designation of the Duke Forest tracts as separate, distinct planning units.
(It should be noted that the planning units to which the anticipated growth were
delineated before the recent annexations by Chapel Hill and CarrborO. The
calculation of vacant, suitable land within the Town's planning areas was also
done before the annexations. The net effect on the display of the amount of
land developed in the rural part of the Township, however, is minor. )
LAND NEED ANALYSIS (1980-2000)
Acreage Available 75% Average Dwelling Units
Jurisdiction for development of vacant Density Accomodated
Chapel Hill 3.7 10,793 D. U.
Planning Area 2,917 acres d.u./ac
Carrboro 6.2 6,392 D. U.
Planning Area 1 ,031 acres d.u./ac
Total 17,185 D. U.
The estimate, then, of the Town's capacity for additional population growth
is 47,431 persons. (17,185 multiplied 4 the average household size of 2.76
persons per household. ) Therefore the projected 1980-2000 population growth
which will not be accommodate within the Town's planning area (spillOver) is
5,450 persons. (Projected township population growth of 52,881 minus 47,431 ) .
This spillover growth translates into 2, 172 acres of land needed outside the
town 's jurisdiction. (5450 divided by averaoe household size of 2.76, then
multiplied by 1 .1 to account for non-residential growth associated with
residential growth including institutional , commercial , utilities and non-resi-
dential streets. ) The results of these calculations are as follows:
Projected low-density development acreage in rural sections
of Township: 1 ,797 acres
Projected "Spillover" development from Towns planning
areas: 2,172 acres
Total 3,969 acres
The task, therefore is to geographicallj allocate the 2,172 acres of spillover
growth to the Township outside the urban planning areas. This was accomplished
by applying the allocation guidance standards as outlined. The balance of the
11,
land area in the Township was classified into series of land use types accord-
,:
p!'
P ing to a set of locational criteria for each land use.
Land Use Plan Categories and Locational Criteria
The following land use types or categories constitute the basic framework
of the land use plan:
Transition or Urbanizing
Commercial Transition (CT) - Land within or adjacent to the extra-
. territorial jurisdiction of a town that
should be provided with sewer and water
services, develop into an urban area,
' and probably become part of that town
within the next 10 or 20 years.
Residential Transition (RT) Land within or adjacent to the extra-
territorial jurisdiction of a town that
should be provided with water and sewer
services within the next 20 years, develop
to an expected density of at least 1200
persons per square mile (+2 persons/acre) ,
WT.dthrr'112:cetc7lifeorg of that town
Industrial Transition (IT) Land within or adjacent to the extra-
territorial jurisdiction of a town that
should be provided With water and sewer
services, develop into an urban area, and
become part of that town within the next
10 or 20 years.
Rural Buffer (RB) Land near or within the urbanizing area
of a town (probably only Chapel Hill and
Carrboro) that will remain rural in
character, never require urban services,
contain very low density, and maintain
farming as an economically viable use.
Urban or Developed
Urban or Developed (D) Land that is within the corporate limits
of a town, or land that has been developed
to approximately 1200 people per square
mile (I- 2 persons/acre) .
a.'
Community
7
Rural Community (RC) Rural communities that will never require
urban services or become part of an urban
area and are generally characterized by a
crossroads location, and 3 or more of the
following; a church; a fire station; a post
office; a school ; or other similar social
institutions and one or more commercial
establishments.
Rural
Rural Commercial (RCM) A commercial use will be suitable in areas
where the predominant activities are related
to the productive potential of the land.
These areas will never become urban. An
example are the so-called Mom and Pop grocery
stores and gas stations.
Rural Industrial (RI) An industrial use will be suitable in areas
where the predominat activities are related
to the productive potential of the land, in
areas with good access, but in areas never
to become urban.
Rural Residential (RR) Those rural areas to be developed as low
intensity and low density residential .
Agricultural Residential (AR) Areas where the predominant activities are
related to the land and where farming can
continue to be economically productive in
the future.
Conservation
Public Interest Areas (PIA) Those lands that are owned by public or
quasi-public institutions or agencies such
as the University of North Carolina or
Duke University.
Environmentally Sensitive
or Critical Areas (ES) The primary areas in this category are
floodplains. Floodplains present a natural
hazard to built development and other high-
intensity land uses.
Reservoir Protection (RP) This district includes lands that drain to
existing reservoirs which are public water
supplies for Orange County or to the
watersheds of potential reservoir sites
which have been designated for protection.
These watersheds need to be protected from
the impacts of development which could cause
water quality problems for existing public
water supplies or preempt the future
utilization of potential reservoir sites.
Obviously, all these land use plan classifications will not apply to any one
township. Orange County's diversity does, however, dictate that a broad range
of classifications be made available for application where appropriate.
Location Criteria
Land in the Township was subjected to or "filtered through" a series of
criteria designed to evaluate locations for their suitability to contain various
land uses which would occur in each plan category. The following locational
criteria were derived from the Community Profile because of their importance
in determining the best locations for new land uses:
topography
hydrology
population density
energy use
existing land use
historic and cultural characteristics
public services and utilities
transportation system
agriculture and forestry
Measures of each locational criteria were developed for the various land use
plan categories.
Distribution of Land Use Plan Categories
Land in Chapel Hill Township has been classified into land use plan
categories according to the set of locational criteria which define the
environmental context and according to public policy as expressed in the Orange
tl
;-;
'.-
= County Land Use Goal and Policy Statement. The purpose of this approach is
to account for Loth physical environmental factors (natural and manmade) and
...
for public values regarding the future of Orange County.
F The basic strategy of the County's land use planning process was to
initially identify and evaluate activity nodes in the Township. These
..___
activity nodes are generally focused on major intersections and represent
a point rather than area concept, They must also meet the additional loca-
K tional criteria specified previously. The next step in this process was
to inventory and evaluate the balance of the land area in the Township.
°
The land classification decisions which evolved from this process are
shown in map form (See Chapel Hill Proposed Land Use Map) .
The following is a description of the various activity nodes designated
in Chapel Hill Township:
Location: NC 86 and Weaver Dairy Road (CHT-1 )
Plan Category: Commercial Transition (10-year)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial (NC 86) and a collector (Weaver Dairy Road) . Commercial uses and
medium density residential uses presently exist within the area focused on
this node. The Chapel Hill Land Use Plan designates this area as an "activity
center". There are no environmental constraints which would severely limit
commercial or medium density residential development. Sewer lines have been
extended to this area making the development of medium to higher density
more feasible. For these reasons, in addition to the fact that it is
located in the 10-year Transition Area this node is classified Commercial
Transition.
Locational : Homestead Road and NC 86 (CHT-2)
Plan Category: Commercial Transition (l0-year)
, _.
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of an
arterial (NC 86) and a collector (Homestead Road) . Commercial uses exist
in the area- No environmental constraints exist which would prevent
commercial development. Sewer line extensions to this area will increase
the scale and density levels of commercial development. Since this node is
located in the 10-year Transition Area it is classified Commercial Transition.
iLocation: Homestead Road, near Chapel Hill High School (CHT-3)
Plan Category: .Commercial Transition (20-year)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node is located at the intersection of two
collectors. There are no environmental constraints. Because there are no
' major residential areas nearby, continued commercial or business development
would be minimal . Future sewer line extensions will increase the potential
for higher-density commercial development. This node is classified Commer-1
cial Transition, because of its location in the 20-year Transition Area.
Location: Weaver Dairy Road, east end adjacent to Chapel Hill planning
jurisdiciton (CHT-4) .
Plan Category: Commercial Transition (10-year)
Analysis and Evaluation: This node has been designated as an "activity center"
in the Chapel Hill Laid Use Plan. No disruption of residential areas would
result from continued commercial growth focused on this node. There are no
.environmental constraints. Development at this node will be promoted by the
future extension of sewer lines. It is located in the 10-year Transition
Area.
Location: Old NC 86 and Homestead (Calvander) (CHT-5)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: There are limited environmental constraints because
P
I .
this node is located on the boundary of the University Lake watershed.
There would be no disruption to residential areas resulting from environ-
mental development. Some problems however, would probably exist with traffic
safety at this intersection if intensive commercial development did occur.
The surrounding residential area that would be served by commercial uses
at this node is growing in population and density. For this reasons, a
Rural Commercial node at this site will be appropriate especially in the
longer-term when population density is sufficient to support limited, rural
commercial uses.
Location: Mt. Sinai Road and NC 86 (Blackwood Station) (CHT-6)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node exists at the intersection of two
collectors. Several commercial uses presently exist in the area. There
are no environmental constraints which should restrict limited commercial
development at this node. There should be no disruption to nearby residen
tial areas. Because of its distance from Chapel Hill-Carrboro and because
of the generally rural character of the area sewer lines should not he
extended to this node. Because this node presently contains several com-
mercial uses, its capacity for additional development is somewhat limited.
Location: Proposed 1-40 extension and New Hope Church Road (CI-IT-7)
Plan Category; Rural Commercial
This node would be located at the intersection of an Interstate highway and
a collector. No environmental constraints would limit small-scale commercial
activity in the area. Redidential areas would not be disrupted as a result
of small-scale commercial development. The scale of future development will
be limited to rural densities, since sewer lines will not be extended to this are
Location: Old NC86 and New Hope Road (CHT-8)
Plan Category: Rural Commercial
Analysis and Evaluation: This node exist at the intersection of two collectors.
There would be no disruption of an area of residential character if limited,
small-scale commercial activity developed at this node. There are no environ-
mental constraints that would hinder limited commercial development in this
area. Commercial development would also be limited because of the lack of
water and sewer lines. In general , the present population density in the vi-
cinity of this node is such that it could not support much commercial activity
beyond a small store to serve the nearby residents_
The balance of the land area in Chapel Hill Township outside the town's
planning jurisdiction's is divided into three classifications : Agricultural
Residential , Rural Residential , Public Interest Areas, 10-year Transition,
20 •year Transition, Environmentally Sensitive, Reservoir Protection and
Rural Buffer. The Agricultural Residential areas are located on the western
• boundary of the Township adjacent to Bingham Township. In general , these
areas are presently being farmed or used for pasture land. Designation as
•
Agriculture Residential means this land should remain in agricultural use
With non-farm development limited to those uses which would serve and support
the farming population.
The Duke Forest tracts and the buffer around University Lake have been
designated as Public Interest Areas. These areas are unique because they are
being held, in effect, as open space and are used in the case of the Duke
Forest tracts as laboratories for environmental research. The Environmentally
Sensitive Areas include the 100-year floodplains and the steep slopes are
described in the Township Profile Summary. The watershed for University Lake
in the southwestern portion of the Township is classified as Reservoir Protec-
tion. The 10-year Residential Transition Area begins at the north side of the
Chapel Hill-Carrboro planning jurisdiction line and extends northward generally
to Homestead Road west of NC86 and to the electrical power line right-of-way
just north of Weaver Dairy Road on the East side of NC86. The 20-year Residen-
tial Transition Area extends north of this area to Whitfield Road and Eubanks
Road. Other than the activity nodes which were described, these areas will
develop as higher and medium density residential , serviced by water and sewer
lines. Taken together, the 10 and 20 year Residential Transition Areas encompass
a total of 6031 areas. In order to acknowledge potential variations in land
availability and to allow for market choice, the amount of Transition acreage
allocated is approximately three times the
calculated land need acreage of 2172. The Rural Buffer, extends from the
western boundary of the Town's planning jurisdiction to western boundary of
the University Lake watershed. To the north, Rural Buffer extends to New
Hope Road and includes most of the major Duke Forest tracts in Chapel Hill
- Township. It is this area that is proposed to serve as the outer boundary
of the Joint Planning Area, with the Town's corporate limits serving as
the inner boundary. The remaining areas in the Township are classified as
Rural Residential . Areas classified in this way are appropriate for rural
density non-farm housing development. The overall land pattern which will
evolve from this distribution of plan categories has certain characteristics
which are important. Those Activity nodes south of the Duke Forest
tracts and directly north of the Town's planning jurisdictions, are capable
of sustaining more intensive commercial and residential development than
other nodes in the Township. These nodes represent the core elements of
a transition area between the urbanizing area focused on Chapel Hill-Carrboro
and the rural area to the north. This area is in a process of transition
from rural level densities and characteristics to urban level densities,
including the need for urban services such as centralized sewage treatment.
The Duke Forest Lands, as a group, form a band across the north central
part of the Township generally separating the rural area from the transition
area. Thus, the integrity of the Duke Forest tracts are an important aspect
of the developing land pattern in the Township.
In the Town of Chapel Hill the following are existing and proposed
Activity Centers (See Appendix A for more detail description) :
Existing
1) Chapel Hill Downtown (CBD)
.2) Town and Country
3) University Mall-Kroger
L7
1 '
4) Legion Road
5) Eastowne (on U.S. 15-501 )
6) Glen Lennox (on N. C. 54)
Proposed
1 ) N. C. 86 (corresponds with County's proposed Activity. Node at
N. C. 86 and Homestead Road)
2) Watts/Star Point
3) Pittsboro Road
L.; 4) Ephesus Church Road
5) Weaver Dairy (cooresponds with County's proposed Activity
Node on east end of Weaver Dairy Road)
6) Parker Road (corresponds with County Activity Node)
7) Timberlyne (cooresponds with County Activity Node at N. C. 86
and Weaver Dairy Road)
In the Town of Carrboro the following are existing and proposed Activity
Centers (See Appendix B for more detail description)
Existing
1) Carrboro Downtown (CBD)
Proposed
•
1) Bolin Creek Collector Road (Neighborhood Shopping)
2) Intersection of N. C. 54 (Business) and N. C. 54 (By-pass)
(neighborhood shopping)
3) Smith Level Road and Culbreth Road (neighborhood shopping)
4) Homestead Road (neighborhood shopping) (this Activity Center
is located on Homestead Road near Chapel Hill High School and
corresponds with a County Activity Node)
•
•
127
• •
I • ,. :Itl..
,,..),104:,,,,t,i.„:„.,...„„ ,•1.•!:„
.,.-••..;,•7.4,,,,,,,ri; :;:,,•••: . .. ,,
• •
. • ••:„ ,,., ...., ,, . 1 -
. 4. 4, •4 ',.1-.,,,,r ';'• 'it '''.' . •
' .
.e.. .,
, • ,
_, opi • ,:, 11 ' , .
„.,. .., .
,., ..
t,E.
, 1
'','''', : .' .=. ;, ; •
. .. .
',...;-:' 11.,-':.i,•...
:'.., .
!?:
i,;,,,
Li
,..-
,.•:.
i• ‘
f .
• ,.-
.:!
. .
P.. ,
r .
r....-- IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
. ,
,
i
• .
•
, •
; .
, .
•
•
• . .
• :
. •
. . -. • ' ' '
• ,! 4 ..:,; . :
. .,..-,.
. •
. .
: • . ' . .. F.!. 4. .1 :• - :, , .
t : '”` ',41.1.'11:.44.:. , • : : $::"..! ::5;
APPENDIX A
Activity Centers
Because access by motor vehicles to activity centers is essential , the
most important consideration in placing these centers is the transportation
system. Activity centers should be.located along major thoroughfares which
can accommodate the high level of traffic flow. If possible they should be
located so that bus service may be provided to them.
Because it is a Town policy to avoid strip commercial development and
concentrate commercial uses and activities in centers, activity centers
should be spaced a minimum of one mile apart (see figure 3) . This provides
each activity center with a minimum service radius of one-half mile, which
should provide a reasonable economic base for the center. While this spacing
represents the ideal , in fact, the density of development of the land
immediately surrounding the center and the economic viability of the urban
area will be important in determining the final spacing and service radii
for activity centers.
The Land Use Map shows thirteen activity centers:
(1 ) Central Business District (CBD) ( 8) Watts
(2) University Mall-Kroger Plaza , ( 9) Pittsboro Road
(3) Legion Road (10) Ephesus Church
(4) Eastowne ' (11 ) Weaver Dairy
(5) Glen Lennox (12) Parker Road
(6) Town & Country (13) Timberline
(7) NC 86
The first six centers are well developed and the location of each is already
determined although they may expand in the future. The CBD, University Mall-
Kroger, Legion Road, and Eastowne activity centers serve both regional
and subcommunity needs.
For the next two activity centers, NC 86 and Watts, there are some existing
commercial uses in the area. The final location of the activity center may
be anywhere in the vicinity of these existing uses. Finally, the last four
activity centers are the most tentative in location. While approximate
locations for the last seven centers are indicated on the Land Use Map, the
final locations will be determined by economic forces that cannot be accurately
predicted. The Land Use Plan, however, does recommend activity centers
somewhere in the vicinity of the indicated locations, along the major thorough-
, fares and in keeping with the location and spacing criteria discussed above.
With the thirteen activity centers, it is anticipated that all residential
development will be within approximately 1/2 mile of an activity center.
It was decided not to adopt a minimum or maximum site size for activity
centers. The squares on the Land Use Map represent 25 acre sites. Existing
shopping areas at Town and Country (4.5 acres) and Glen Lennox (6 acres) are
considered inadequate in size to function properly as activity centers. Ten
acres was one minimum site size standard that was not adopted. However, a
10 to 25 acre standard may serve as a flexible guideline for judging the
adequacy of a proposed center. The size of the proposed service area, the
density of surrounding development and the uses proposed for the activity
center should be considered in setting the final size of a center. Careful
consideration should also be given to expansion capability of the site. A
small site, adequate at first, may not be adequate once the surrounding area
is fully developed; The thirteen activity centers, current acreages, land
available for expansion, and the subcommunities serviced by each center
are listed in Table 3.
Residential and Recreational Uses
With the location of activity centers and boundaries of the subcommunities
delineated, only allocation of land within subcommunities to future resi-
dential and neighborhood recreational uses remained. Critical environmen-
tal areas are the starting point for mapping an open space system for the
Planning Area. In addition to critical areas, it was decided not to esta-
blish a specific standard for a percentage of land within the urban area
which would be left in its natural state. The Town, however, has adopted
the objective of achieving an open space network designed to protect the
natural environment, provide active and passive recreation sites through-
out the community, buffer incompatible land uses, define urban form, and
provide scenic viewsTM. To meet this objective a minimal amount of additional
open space was designated in the form of open space density credits, stream
buffers, and recreation sites. A density credit is a way to preserve open
space without outright purchase of the land and without taking the value of
the land from the owner. With a credit the owner is allowed to develop part
of his property with a greater number of dwelling units per acre if he
agrees to leave a specified portion in open space. Stream buffers along
• watercourses far which there are no designated floodways, while not criti-
cal areas, are logical locations for addition open space. In areas where
•
there are no existing parks the Plan includes possible recreation areas.
The location of these proposed facilities is only tentative. The Community
Facilities Analysis will study recreation needs in much more detail and
will recommend suitable sites.
Residential uses in the subcommunities have been divided into lbw density
residential , with a density of from 1 to 7 dwelling units per acre, and
high density residential , with a density of from 7 to 15 dwelling units
per acre (see discussion under Intensity of Land Uses) .
High density residential development, like activity centers, has special
locational requirements. Again, intense use of land can be expected to
create an increased traffic flow. Careful placement of high density resi-
dential areas can minimize this increase, as well as its detrimental effects
on other residential areas. Locating high density housing no more than
one-half mile from an activity center places a substantial number of
households within walking distance of shopping, employment, and other
activities. Also, this location near an activity center places apartments
close, thoUgh not necessarily directly on a major thoroughfare which can
absorb the higher levels of traffic and also minimizes travel through
other residential areas. Finally, high density housing surrounding and
activity center can serve as a transition use between the intense land use
of the center and lower density residential use.
EXISTING AND PnOPOSED ACTIVITY CENTERS
Existing Acres Availab) c Subcommunitics
Center Acreage for Expansion Served
Existing :
CBD* 103 1 Batt] c Park
Bolin
South Campus
Umstead
Westwood
University Mall-
Xroger* 106 35 Battle Park
Bolin
=c1Moic..i'°(=
Little Creek
Legion Road* Colony Woods
Eastwood Lake
Little Creek
Mt. Moriah
Eastown,- * 19 10 Colony Woods
Eastuood Lake
Mt. Moriah
Glen Lennox 29 6 Battle Park
Little Creek
Morgan Creek
South Campus
Town & Country 4. 5 2 Bolin
Umstead
Proposed ;
NC 86 3 up to 25 Airport
North Forest hills
Watts 1 up to 25 Dogwood
Southern Triangle
Pittsboro Road 0 up to 25 Culbreth
Dogwood
Farrington
Southern Triangle
Ephesus Church 0 up to 25 Colony Woods
Little Creek
Weaver Dairy 0 up to 25 Eastwood Lake
Parker Road 0 . up to 25 Morgan Creek
Timberline 0 up to 25 Mt. Moriah
N. Forest Hills
* Activity centers that servo both regional and subcommuntiy needs .
It Was decided not to adopt a minimum or maximum site size for actiy.
centers . The squares on the Land Use Map represent 25 acre sites .
ing shopping areas at Town and Country (4 . 5 acres) and Glen Lennox (
are considered inadequate in size to function properly as activity c(
Ten acres was one minimum site size standard that was not adopted.
a 10 to 25 acre standard may serve as a flexible guideline for judgil
adequacy of a proposed center. The size of the proposed service are
the density of surrounding devcalopment and the uses proposed for the
activity center should be considered in setting the final size of a
center . Careful consideration should also be given to expansion
capability of the site. A small site, adequate at first , may not be
adequate once the surrounding area is fully developed. The thirteen
activity centers, current acreages , land available fox expansion , an(
the subcommunities serviced by each center are listed in Table 3 .
Residential and Recreational Uses
" With the location of activity centers and boundaries of the subcommul
delineated, only allocation of land within subcommunities to future
dential and neighborhood recreational uses remained. Critical envir(
mental areas are the starting point for mapping an open space systen
the Planning Area. In addition to critical areas , it was decided nol
establish a specific standard for a percentage of land within the ual
area which would be left in its natural- state . The Town, however,
• adopted the objective of achieving "an open space network designed t(
protect the natural environment, provide active and passive recrcati(
sites throughout the community, buffer incompatible land uses, defin
urban form, and ttrovide scenic views" . To meet this objective a min
amount of additional open space was designated in the form of open sr
density credits, stream buffers , and recreation sites . A density crc
is a way to preserve open space without outright purchase of the lan
without taking the value of the land from the owner. With a credit
•
owner is allowed to develop part of his property with a greater numb(
of dwelling units per acre if he agrees to leave a specified portion
open space. Stream buffers along watercourses for which there are nc
designated floodways , while not critical areas , are logical location
additional open space. In areas where there are no existing parks 'al
Plan includes possible reacreation areas . The location of these .prol
- facilities is only tentative . The Community Facilities Analysis will
• study recreation needs in much more detail and will recommend suitab]
sites.
Residential uses in the subcommunities have been divided into low der
residential, with a density of from 1 to 7 dwelling units per acre , c
high density residential , with a density of from 7 to 15 dwelling uni
per acre (see discussion under Intensity of Land Uses) .
High density residential development, like activity centers , has spec
locational requirements. Again, intense use of land can be exPected
create an increased traffic flow. Careful placement of high density
residential areas can minimize this increase, as well as its detrimer
effects on other residential areas . Locating high density housing nc
• 1 -
APPENDIX B
TOWN OF CARRBORO
NORTH CAROLINA
. 1,41-F414 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
,
$
s>"
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Brian Benson
Orange County Planning Department
Hillsborough, NC 27278
FROM: Larry Belkin, Interim Planning Director
DATE: August 22, 1980
RE: Activity Center Definition
Here are the detailed descriptions of the Carrboro activity centers.
Existing
1 . Carrboro Downtown (CBD) L This is a linear zone extending from the
Chapel Hill line westward to Carrboro Town Hall . The most intense
commercial district in Carrboro, it is designed to accomodate a
great variety of ,retail and office uses. Under the proposed Land
Use Ordinance the Carrboro downtown will also include high density
• residential use.
Proposed
1 . Bolin Creek Collector Road (Neighborhood shopping) - A draft
Collector Roads Plan, and the draft Residential Rezoning Plan
for the Carrboro Planning District indicate a medium density
residential neighborhood along Bolin Creek. A limited commercial
center will be appropriate within this area. The commercial uses
would be confined to neighborhood needs.
2. Intersection of NC 54 (Business) and NC 54 (By-Pass) (Neighborhood
shopping) - Limited business uses which do not actively compete
with the Carrboro downtown will be located at this major inter-
section. A convenience store is currently at this location.
3. Smith Level Road and Culbreath Road (Neighborhood shopping) - A
draft Residential Rezoning Proposal indicates a medium and high
density zone to the west of Culbreath Road. This intersection
is a reasonable location for neighborhood business and services.
131
Brian Benson
August 22, 1980
Page 2
4. Homestead (Neighborhood shopping) (This activity center is located
on Homestead Road near Chapel Hill High School and corresponds With
a County activity node. ) - This neighborhood shopping area would
provide goods and services for an area which is suitable for urban
development. The development of this activity center is considered
to be some time away.
/1m
. .
„etc
ZONING ORDINANCE
H Z 1
c- w
O 1-i
14 In 0 0 C4 00 0 0
.,.,;.. 14''.•?-
ri
0 E.
^Tr —4--- .
— —-----
L. z
0
g 0 I-1
a.; E.
0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
P, 2
,e
E., .
.
12
12j 1-1▪ 4
O
:e..' H •4
ii.".• 0
a _
„•,,, ._-,-
- — —
t.1
.,!:t..:.
0 H
00 a Q •
1.: Z
•i„ U
1.,
Er '1
E. 0 0
0 a
ki 4:
.. , ....
tti
o
o
0
:4
i2
t H 0
H
:, Z
I 0 0 Z
.,.
H H
a Z al
.....
—
,..1 .
P.
n u4
I
tx o
H .
—.—..— .
CT,C4
0 0
0
0 01
g 0
In
--- , ,---.
ft Z
H Q
Z 0 H
a a in
O ri Z
u vz g
c-,
,......,,,_,,
0 Z
4 0
>4 H H
a- E. H 0 0 C30
n VI LI)
0
O 3Z
0 0 4
Z 0
H E.
0 Z
4 0
>4 H H
Q FL4 cn 0 0 0 0 0 6
d ...r.
(,) E-■
co
7 T
r
HI on m r-o - -
rst rs,
1 gr 7 Hi :
sZt
I 0 •-) -.
k 4: k , ...4 H I I 0 U Q (..) V) H 0 H
H H - Z 1 (..)
. ,
sTonilsra OtlINOZ C3sodoud 133
if;;NA Orange Iountg ,Stipois
200 EAST KING STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT (919) 732-9126
TO: Orange County Board of Education
FROM: Dan G. Lunsford7X____-
Assistant Superintendent
DATE: February 12, 1981
RE: Zoning Ordinance Proposal
You recently received from Dr. Simmons (and Linda Stevens - student intern)
some information regarding the impact of the proposed zoning ordinances
and their impact on the school system. In addition, Dr. Simmons contacted
Dr. Lacy Presnell, Director of the Division of School Planning - Department
of Public Instruction, to secure input on the ordinance from SDPI staff.
I have enclosed for your information a copy of the responses from the SDPI
School Planning staff. I plan to hand deliver copies of these comments to
the Orange County Commissioners tonight at their meeting. If you have any
questions about this, please feel free to contact me.
DGL:ha
Enclosures
..=.3
•
FEB12
1981
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
611iii4.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA RALEIGH
February 11, 1.981
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lacy Presnell
FROM: Charles Reed
Subject: Orange County Zoning
RE: Parking Lot Screening
Assume an area of 540 square feet for 2 cars and an aisle. Ten
cars would need 5400 square feet. A planting area of 180 square feet
is 0.0.33% of the total area. This does not seem to me to be unreason-
able where there is lots of ground area available for parking. It
could even be considered somewhat less than minimum for a small park-
ing lot. The 180 square feet is the equivalent of one 9 feet by 20
feet parking space.
If this requirement is considered along with requiring 5 feet high
screen walls for every 5 cars, then it could be restrictive. The 5 foot
screen will not always be effective for a large area. Parking lots are
not always of uniform elevation or seen from a seated position. Some-
times adjacent roads and buildings are higher than the parking lots.
No amount of screen wall or planting will conceal autos which are next
to high elevation surroundings.
Also, the ordinance should allow for other kinds of screening if
screening is required. For instance, earth berms and sunken areas
should be permitted and parking behind buildings.
Re: Number of Cars Per Person
Elementary school children do not drive cars. Very few, if any,
junior high pupils drive cars. High school is another matter. I have
no suggestion for the high school ratio without any factual information
to relate too. Maybe DPI has some facts and figures. How about driver
education? They should know something about this.
CR:bm
It
rts
4 2 7.c
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
CT] STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA RALEIGH
February 12, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO Lacy Presnell
FROM Gerald Knott
Subject: Orange County Zoning
Community zoning is important for the protection of existing
and future schools. Local school administrators should look to
zoning to prevent encroachment by factories, conjested business
centers, and noisy transportation systems. School officials
should assume the responsibility of reviewing codes and zoning
ordinances as they apply to schools. Zoning should maintain health,
safety and certain broad appearance standards to insure public wel-
fare. It should not restrict use of different styles, materials
and design techniques, especially when such approaches affect effi-
ciency and cost savings (except in the unlikely event of a new school
in a historic district).
Requirements should not be counter-productive. Building a 5'
wall to screen a parking lot would result in an unsupervised activity
which would cause great concern for school officials and parents.
Limited, broad scope appearance standards such as limiting the
size and type of signage and breaking up large parking areas with
planting are basically good design principles.
Hopefully community zoning would deal with protecting neighbor-
hoods from undesirable encroachment rather than establish restrictive
appearance standards.
GK:bm
F 1 2
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
trtA STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA RALEIGH
sivk
February 11, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: lacy Fresnell
FROM: Rolf Seifert
Subject: Orange County Zoning
I am. . . No great friend of zoning, but it seems to be the
best solution of our society. It does more good than harm.
•
a. 1-5 cars hidden behind a screen will be a liability.
It does not only hide cars.
b. One parking lot per ten (approximately) is a ratio which
anyone can follow. Most parking lots in Raleigh have
probably more.
c. To break large parking lots into smaller units is a good
idea as long as we do not have small parking lots all over
the site. This would require drives between and behind
buildings which are impossible to supervise and to control.
I would prefer parking areas broken into small lots for
the reasons mentioned above.
RS:bm
January 5, 1981
Orange County Board of Commissioners
and
Orange County Planning Staff
Lady and Gentlemen:
As you know, during the past several months the Orange County
Planning Board has been reviewing the draft of the new zoning ordinance
for Orange County with the objective of approving this draft or raking
suggestions for further changes. At a recent meeting of the Planning
Board,section 2.21 entitled Planning Board., was reviewed, and a motion
was made by Dr. S. Kizer to change section 2.2.3, Qualifications , to the
following: "Every member of the Board shall be a member of Orange County's
planning jurisdiction. Each township within the County shall be represented
in the membership of the Board by two residents of that Township". After
discussion this motion was passed by a vote of 7 to 3. The discussion of
the motion had brought out the fact- that currently there are more than 2
members og the present Board who are residents of Chapel Hill Township
and the motion, if adopted, would necessitate the resignation of some of
the present members of the Board. Consequentl,y, a second motion was passed
to the effect that all current members of the Board be permitted to complete
their terms of appointment.
At the meeting of the Planning Board on December 15, 1980 the
question of section 2.2.3 of the revised ordinance was again opened for
discussion by one of the members of the Board who had voted against Dr.
Kizer"s motion to change section 2.2.3. During this discussion the follow-
ing objections were raised to the change in the membership of the Planning
Board:
1. With two members from each township the total membership of the Board
would be 14. It would be difficult to conduct meetings of the Board with
such a large membership, and it would be more difficult than at present
to obtain a quorum for the meetings.
2. The townships differ greatly in population (see attached table of data)
and consequently equal representation from each township would seem to
be inappropriate and inequitable.
3. The principal business of the Planning Board is to review proposals
submitted by developers. A majority of the proposed developments are
located in Chapel Hill Township (wore than half of the total proposals
submitted during the past two years), and the remaining proposals are lo-
cated principally in Eno, Hillsborough, and Bingham Townships. Consequently,
it seems desirable to have greater representation on the Board from those
townships in which the greatest developmental activity is occurring since
the representatives from those townships would be better acquainted with
potential problems with those developments. The original statement of
section 2.2.3 would seem to be preferable since it provided for at least
one repersentative from each township with the possibility of 5 other
members who could be appointed from those townships in which the greatest
development4 activity was occurring.
4. Several townships will not be included in the jurisdiction of the Zoning
Ordinance at present (Cedar Grove and Little River Townships are not
included in the proposed zoning jurisdiction, and the Planning Board
voted on December 15, 1980 to recommend exclusion of Cheeks Township
also). Consequently, it does not seem to be equitable for those town-
— -41
1, ! 2.
..
.;,
ships which will be excluded to have equal representation on the Board
.04 with those townships which are included in the jurisdiction of the
the ordinance.
YI
P.
In view of the above listed objections to the change in the
membership of the Board, J.L. Irvin proposed the following motion for
a statement of the composition of the Board as a possible compromise
between the original statement and the revised wording proposed by Dr.
Kizer:
"That the Board consist of 10 members with one member to be appointed
from each township and 3 at-large members to be appointed from any town-
ship but with no more than 2 at-large members from any one township': This
motion failed by a vote of 5 to 6. If the motion had passed, then another mot:
would have been presented to enable all present members of the Board to
complete their appointed terms.
The undersigned members of the Planning Board hereby submit the
above statement as a "minority report" on the question of the membership
of the Planning Board, and we respectfully request that the Board of
County Commissioners consider our arguments in reaching a decision about
changing sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 of the revised zoning ordinance. We
prefer the original statement of section 2.2.3 or the revised form pro-
posed by Irvin.
Sincerely yours,
AO'
/ i '
J. o:iin I vil/11711,
rthu ". C eary
aez„an. ic, ,
Alice Gor on
,
a , ei/1/24/24,0
Claudine Harris
/94
1 John E. Wilson
, -
H o
Z
..
. A' z - . - . •
= 0
. •
U: ,
.
.
1:
. 4
•
i4
H
•
. -, 7 ;
Q =
* g o F ..
_
.-. • -
F
a H
_ .
0
4 : w M
,, 0 po 0
I
1.-
1'.
ir.r.
I .
.7:
4 4,
, a
..-1
tn 14
w 0
r > La >
i .,-1 • P a)
; 0 al >7 ill
•-• P a) H .--;
r. eq 0 04 H
I r0 al •,-.) 04 r-1
-.-I
cp 4-1 10 44 Cei
0 00) 0 /4
H
0 )4 r-4 0 a) 4 H
N 0 '03 0 ts r0 4-)
I Cr) La 0 0 fd 0 ab
, 0 o o - it) --1 0 Ln at
CO N )4 III ta 4) ..4 0 N
0 PO .g 0 14 r0 0 N >1
H a)
4-) . 0 11) a) -r-1
a) 0 )4 q A I g
,o3 4-) o o 14
0
,..-.- .4 1414 0 4 al al
•
r.14 )4 .--t g C. r0 0
Z
0 0 ID 0 -..) I-I a) .0
H 4-I 0 #1/ 4 -ri 11)
U) 0 10 .•-) .X 4.3 2 rg 0 A
0
5
00 0 0 0) 0 g' 0 a) .4-1 •r-i --- H
4 N ul RI TO 0 g 10 (1) fcl
• =
In e 4 4-1
N ..-4 C.3 0 14
I CO 0 0 0 0 1,.:i rci
0 0 0 tn 4 0 • 0 0 ..-1 0
al A C 0 U 1.1 in 11 -
. .-. t4
-A Z • ty
',. m 14 14 w $4 S.) m n3 .0 0) 0
H 0 Ill
2 ,8 a 0 a 4-) 04 H H 0
4 -.-1 a) •• A4 ..-1 ai -
A A 0 6 4 H Pe ta 4' r0 W 0 .-I 0
IT tr) SA DI HO LI -,-4 0 A In 4-1
•ri H t/) ID -■-i r3 = cl) Cl) re.3
0 10 -P
W a) P, w k rut dp 34 4-) 0 Z 03
,-, it eD Z Z 0 0 Z 3 g CD 0 a) a) ea 4-)
- 0 1 as /4 4 4:1) 4 3 1 TS 0 1.-1 rizi g Z erl C.) ITS
. H I CD •--1 - H # U CD H : 4-1 Z H H H 0 al 0
r A co 0 0, it 0 as 0 . a) 0 a) 0 r1 r0 0 0
Z 01 co CO )4 W H • g $.4 . H'0" O . • O. H g 14 H
H 0) H 0
H C4 M M . 0
P . W g .g il •• 4 -.41 0 I4-4 W
• 0 0 0 ' co • Cr] 0 Ca
0 •
" g
4) a) tt 04 , :...
a)
d g - --) .
E4 In 11 .0u3
i94 Q .. E-I W
cri .c:1 •C 0 Z La >1 a)
8 c• g 0 PI g 4-1
cn
P. CD a) ul Z -,-I -,4 z
f M H
0 .. ij 0 H U) I
z
NI') ,..•
> - 0
RI H
)4 H r4 4
0
3 (,) -.-liti N
IN
0 ul •--4 fa raiii A Ho cs• t.}0 H.,1 (44
0 cO CO •••I .0 r0 •,-4 0 H W 0 ot
al
i-t o tTs >1 0 0 id 0 S.) CA In
4 ••-I )4 0 )4 04 G P H 0 H N
8 0 z -,-1 Cl) H 0 a)
oi
0 nil -u3' 'CD irt•
4 ITS co a)
=u3 rta
1
Al 0 1.4 0
gr, r4 0 6 0 0, H
H 0 C.) 0 ' >, 12 e.) 0 F4 .0 ,--,
; = 0 XI )4 ai 0 i-; .
r n t o ,-, 0 0 3 0 4 H FA 0 4-1 >7
0 PI 0
01 i.0 ill s 0 to 0 -1-0 44 .0 '11 I - 0
1 •• I CO S.) 0 3 CP ta S-I 14 r1.1 '11 'el 0) u 0
0 rd CI N
M al 0 -,1 0 0 1 )4 a) g 0 0 4J > 0
E:4 W al LI) 141-4 = )4 A f'.4 H P4 0 0 • C U 4 as 'Ci
iv a) r4 (90 co U 1 0 -ri OP 0 a) > g
CV "4
0 ITS
-ri •. . 0
cc( ra 0 0 ..x •• 1-4 W 4-1
CO 4-1 cr f0 -r-s a)
(U W. g 01 IP -
Z 0 • l-i •
frl 3 0 H 0 itS 0
P
>1 H Z III
14 00) Z 0 0
st C14 (Z) ).4
0 o ›-1 --t
Di.0 rli *a 4
14 4-1 W
P rn ,
0 0 0
at 0
tr Z rx4 0 3 0 0 Z 144
PI
1-I C)
U a) •• •• •• 0 E./ • 0)'V 0 '1:1 10 w 44
0 Cs) .1-1 0 0 0 4-I a)
0 0 H 0 O
0 ca a)
4
El 0 0 0 0 •
'N
I •,-1 ••-1 •,4 0 Cl] 4 ItI >t Z ''' 0
H N H 43 4-1 4-1 g A E-1 a) N OH H
RI 0 c.0 0 I MI 0 a) 0 a) 4 a) RI HO] 0
4-) c0 c.- 1-4 rd 0 0 0 )4 ua.) • • 0 > V
3 . • =
H Sa4 3 "
• --1 -
U)
0
P.,
o
z ,-1
o 01 L.) g-i N u) en
H H V H V N Ln In Lo L-NI W (N 0 cs) 0 N u-I H en In ' ' N CC)
E4 0 a) 0 0 C) 0 0 CD •-I H 04 H H H F-1 a) .-I
I H r4
A HO) Ha) H H
.. r-I 0 H 0 HO r-I a) 0 1--) a) H 5 H H i-i H
0 g 0 0 0 0
0 . 0) . .5 . .5 . ,...
• ..-4 • 5 • -4 • 4.I -,-4 • .•-I • 4-, • • 1 •
1-1 a; E4 04 14 Cli P R4 04 04 0-1 04-1-1 04 1-1 04 En 1-1 P44 S.10-1 CtI P4 E-4 A
–.4. - 4-- ...-----4.-4—
ak 0 ri N en cr
r-i (N rn sr In %ID N a) al H .-4 •-4 .--; .--:
, .
-- .........- .........44....A...,
' .
;:,•
;=.
, ..-1
tti • a)
A 0 U3 >
..,
1$
ic-- 0
0 --I
rd A
ii • rd o P
t* g 4-5 „.., 2 En -A
.X r-1
w It A (1) $-1 0 >1 cri
•... 0 11) 14 r-1 ul rd 0 4-) 4-) ..-...
0 $4 0 .1 id -- Or A •ri 0 rd •zi,
,,. 0 GI id tri a) U •=r > 0 0
a) to -,4 0 rt1 E4
.-4 0 E V c.) H 4) 0
rd -.1 0 0 0 14 -.-1 .0 = C) 4-1 C.)
-H 0 in 0 c$ 44 Cs C.) rzt A 0
C) a) CU , 11-1 -.-1 4.111) rd
0 = -1 -0 1 il
- 43 if) .
, a) id A 0) •H ...,;.;
0 ..--- H
s I -a H 41 $4 E-4
A I-1
4W 0 "-^
.4.1
.-1 14 0 N U)
---) -.-1 o Fr, o >,
0 o w 1.4 co rd 0 = GI U
..... ....1 , A U P44.) . el
2 F-1 pi H 0 14 I:4 a) )4 4.1 GI 0 - al
O .-. el el r-I r-I 13) W P4' a) -ri I a)
r H Z U ..-I 04 0 ›, CO rd in > $-1 0 $4
`. U.1 /A 1.11 CD 5 0 1,4 o g 14V a)
H `** .C1 Iti $.1 -H U 6 E4 a)id 14 00
> 4-1 A x 04 g 2 x Ts ci 2 ra
m 'II ri H 0 CD 5.1 .C.,) "-" rid rd 'ti
0 id 1-1 •.-1 0.4 V ,ca ..... 0 0 0 0 V >. ...
- og -.-) .4go w c 0 4 o o 0 04 of 4) 4-'
0 4 ---- 0 .4 u) a) a -.-i. 1
)4 > • .,-1 /--I 1.1 P W 41 -H 0
0 0 • • .m 4.) 0 0 0 14 111 O .,4
ja spe a)
in N 0 A A .0 H a) 14 4.1 •-• rd
-H .0 .0 .0 0 00"
V g
an 0 V a) 0-1 131 . C.) 0 /4 4 0
V '0 Vial 0 -4 a) -H ..... = Cd E4
0 0 (1) -H ru •ri a) .0 '0 N 4)
2 rd •-• a) .--. 0 4.1 14 2 2 2 •• rd VI 0 4.J VI
V,
V ri 41 N 41 1.0 0 a) a) a) c U) 0
r 0 p-I H t--I W Ii) IQ el •r1 .-f ri rl 4.) 4.1 4,3 rtl 10 0 i CD
0 CO rd 0 CC E4 WE-' WE id 0 , 0 a o a)
a) EX g 0 • k $4 14 r4 H H a 4-1 0 • •
Hal 0000 CJ = • o a) a) - rt) 14 r001 `
i..-1 0
IR IF) z ...... = ....... = .... . C4 a : M a A 0 • 3-- 04 Pq •
0 ••••
z in
r N .....____. -
--
- >9 i-I
u) $4 .-;
_ , _..,..
2 0 -H
E-1
Cl) A 2 • ri . 4-)
H a) 2 QJ E-1
2 g
04 X 0 G'•
M 0
CI+ 0
›, 0 0 U 10
al to CO 0
0 a) 0
U 0
14 6 a) r-1 H -,-1 al
o -a U • 4-1 al C.) Id in 0 .4
0 ra 2 4
---
rn -a 2 -,-) 4 . -1 >,
A in • 0 0 C.) 0 -41 -.-.1 H
PL4 '0 a) • E k r0 H 4-) 54
1-4 1 4 Z Z E-1 • 0 0 4 a) X a) a) fa
= CD 0 - 6 2 = 6 ra g a) E-1 2 a) A
-
Cl) > V r-c-I
2 43 rd • rc 0 • U 0 V V g 0 14
E.) 2 r...) ..4. g g 24 M a)
,.., - a) •%. P4 f--t )4 aS 1 id rd >
E--1 Z E-4 0 .H r-4 H H - Cl) 0
rIl V rd 0 Id W 111 •H rd to 0 V P 0
1-4 r=4 g rd rd A CI CO 1-i rd 14 rCr . CO /-I 0 0 2
rd --- 0 .- a) 0 0 g 0 (DV 1-1 a) -d
H o H .0N 4-1 CO /-1 U Z ”-1 C4 in cc, C.) i:) 4-1 0
m
HO to 0 w a/ 2 . .-4 U) 0 2 C.) o ral 0
el .g co El WE-' -'0 > 0 Rf A w
5 X 5 1;) (Cl V - --I • •• 00 V - a 14 r0
E z 1 00 0 0 0 0 0 -.4 al r-1 >4 0 4) >I 14 5-I H • 0 0 fa 0
$4 .0 Z -- M --• M = 0 $4 $4 Z1.4 124 0 0 VV M -P ; 0
a) .4 0 a) 21 6 m 0 In
...,. 44,
6 1 -ri • .. - - - Q9' " 4) k 1:10 U1 - w
a) 4 g c 4 4 4i 0 g 4-) g o 0 X a.) >1 ni 4-) (U
U 2 0 o 0 0 Oral C) 0 Id 0 134 0 G) g 4-1 4-1 a)
-4 -I --1 -H -d 0 Y4 U -,i 0 -ri E•I S-I ••-i • rd •
-P 41 4) -P 4.' ' H 4-) 4) x 4) ra > •
el al el rt1 as 0 rd g el nl g rd al T3 04 -,I • '
5-1 /-I t./ 0 0 0 Oral S-I 0 rrl 0 C.) 0 4.1
00 3 3 3 3 3 V. 3 V, 3 A' r$' -5 ,-i : -: -•
tn
•
rd Rd
0 '4, W in to 1-4 a)
H 01 H r-1 1.4 N N r-- N 1-4 N N in N in H in •q' N N u) n Cl) r-
E4 1-.1 N (N N N N N N N N N NO NO N
14 H r-4 0) H CD HO) Ha) H 0 HG) HI)) H 1-4 H r-1 124 1-4 04 1-1
C) c g g c o o
o • . .9 • -H • .9 . ^..4 • -,-1 as • -.-1 • • • • M • k •
P4 1-I 04 a P4 -1 P4 I-1 D4 1--4 04 1--1 04)4 04 04 04 04 I3-4 al al Pi
. •••■■•... "---.--
O lO N CO al 0 r-i N rn 'Cr If) ;-(34 -F:: Co. as
H H H N N N N ev f-.) --
La L., co ...-
ru r o
'ts ot, n
• Ft al • 11 • 0
0 li 0 n
-..... N 0 tr to 0 ) $-.3
1N.) Oi CR 0 .4 M -.1 H
(xi M ii CD 0
P. Z
CO
H
> .. -4
hi ...... ......
•
tl .
Z P
o 0
H 0,
X 0
0
O Ill 2
(r (1,
,.<
F, Li
ri
O• 0
ft F.- =
r. 1:9 H
C ti 0
P. l'‹ 0
ft
a, 0
z •
O —'
at CI)
M Z
H
hi
(")
0
•0
0 hi
Z M
t:i Cr
Z 11
Pa
_ ril
11
l'
ts)
U'I
•
• CI) .
• •
• • H
0 • • 0
O Co
H 0 P.' H
Pa 0
0 R.
F.- 0
O rt- "4
C) 1-‹ CD
H Pi
C 4
al a o
co ft 1-1
p-
H 4 c)
cu 1-- $1)
tr
it r- N
CD LC t C
H I< H
•• Z CO
0 0
52,
a • Z
co
I 1
VI
2 (I
L-, =
,-3 ,-3
=
H La H
t'l ..... ,....
t''
ti
0
.., crl
ti
NI
ti
N
LAND USE MAP (FEBRUARY 1981)
REVISIONS
February 25, 1981
CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP ACTIVITY NODES
1) EPHESUS CHURCH
LOCATION: EPHESUS CHURCH ROAD
PLAN CATEGORY PROPOSED URBAN
2) WATTS-STAR POINT (CHT-9)
LOCATION: U.S. 15-501 AND SMITH LEVEL ROAD
PLAN CATEGORY: PROPOSED URBAN
„,.
r..7-.
)NJ
.2
'P tri
k it I k'4 Z H
r)
)...
P1 0 z 171 01 z
,L
H z 0 H ts 0
p,i z H 1-3
: 0 0
”. DJ
,- - P'
i t-Iti OH IC
' 1-3 t-) H Do P' ti)
't tr 0 En H
i: CD ID .......----
, t■.)
1-3 tri it) t-i
, - m H
.- 11 iti
'1
ID kr) 1-1 0 LL) 0
-.4 o CD 0 P:1
kg) 1) -4
o P ru -4
- 0 C) 0
O 11 11 U2
. (D ID (D H
II U) (t) 0
, 0 DJ
14- Z
!
r, ■-a
C•I
' 0
I'• H W t)
... H t1
ft W CO LC)
, --.1 tC1 OD g
't) IA 0 0 1:1 Pi
H 0
O 13) Sli 'V 0
O 0 0 Z
O 11 11 DI
CD ID
, 0 CO (f) LA
cn
>
CD Z
m
m t.
.<
' U)
H
(/)
Pi
o
I-4 co Pi
.. ... 0
F-3 to t...., i--,
0
H •-1
Nj tu A'
0 0
.. m CD
U) a)
t-1
--., U]
I-, 1)1 'I'
I-. 11
LO EI EU GU tu
CO P/ El'0 0 0 P.■ ta
o (D XI (D 0
I Z" CH .--. al 4 tn
P..) a) In ci m M
0 (D CD 11 0 H ch
OP.. 1-.- P 0 0
0 w ha t-0 t-h it) 0
....• 1--. I-. rt
P ...... rt ID
Pi 0 rt tri
H n
ea
14 0 0 0
0) m u)
1-,
Ul 0 1-. H 1-ti
(D DI 0 H
O ID P.+ H
ft