Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 02-01-1988
R. f _ _ e •-• "i ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 1988 MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, OLD COURTHOUSE HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 7 :30 P.M. A. BOARD AND MANAGERS COMMENTS B NCE COMMENTS 1. Matters on the Printed Agenda (We would appreciate you signing the pad ahead of time so that you are not overlooked. ) 2 . Matters not on the Printed Agenda C. MINUTES PUBLIC CHARGE of The Board of Commissioners The Board asks itslcitizens Orange County its respec courteous manner, to conduct themselves in a respectful, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. any time should any member of the Board or any to observe this public charge, the Chair that l askitie offending person to leave the meeting dual regains personal lrcoW�i�l'recessShould thedecorum meetingfail until be restored, the Chair public such time that a genuine commitment to this p charge is observed. PAGE # D• RESOLUTIONS OR PROCJ,AMATYONS 002 1. Resolution of Support for the Capacity Use Designa- tion for the Eno River E. REPORTS 004 * 1. Citizen Complaint F. ITEMS FOR DECISION--CONSENT AGENDA (Any item may be removed for separate consideration) 007 * 1. Budget Amendments ior PAGE # G. ITEMS FOR DECISION--REGULAR AGENDA 010 * 1. Topographic Mapping of Potential Reservoir Sites 014 * 2 . Noise Ordinance Amendment 026 * 3 . Capital Improvement Program Update 027 4. Assignment of House and Building Numbers for Rural Routes 2 and 3--Rougemont 034 5. Subdivision of Lot 9 Lake Woods--Preliminary 066 6. Subdivision Regulations Amendments--Traffic Impact Analysis 083 7. Zoning Ordinance Amendments--Traffic Impact Analysis 103 8. Zoning Ordinance Amendment--Home Occupation Provi- sions 124 9. Private Road Standards--Interpretation Policy 157 *10. Master Recreation and Parks Plan 183 *11• Advertisement--February 22, 1988 Public Hearing 212 *12 . Joint Planning Area Public Hearing 218 *13 . Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Sanitary Sewer Bonds 245 14. The Human Workplace: Employee Supportive Programs 249 H. APPOINTMENTS I. ADJOURNMENT (*) Indicates items that need immediate attention. 001 ORANGE COUNTY Action Agenda BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Item No. Cj A„"7I0N AGENDA Iii ABSTRACT MEETING DA= February 1 , 1988 Subject: 2 IU1 Department: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Public Bearing: Yes X DO • AttacbmentS: Information Contact: Beverly A. Blythe Under Separate Cover Phone Bombers:_ 732-8181, 968-14501, 227-0231 PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted for consideration: June 15, 1987 - July 20, 1987 - Budget Work Sessions August 4, 1987 - Continued Regular Meeting December 5, 1987 - Goals and Objectives Work Session January 4, 1988 - Regular Meeting January 19, 1988 - Regular Meeting BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the governing Board has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the board's proceedings. PECO Dr. LDE: As the Board decides. / AO 0 2 Alen: Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE CAPACITY USE DESIGNATION FOR THE ENO RIVER DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 RESOLUTION TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To consider the adoption of a resolution to express support for the Capacity Use Designation of the Eno River as requested by the Environmental Affairs Board. BACKGROUND: The Board of Commissioners requested that a capacity use study be conducted by the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. An Executive summary report has been submitted. The Environmental Affairs Board has recommended that the Board support the Capacity Use Designation of the Eno River and that Orange County prepare a management plan for withdrawal and use from the Eno River. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Adopt the attached resolution and authorize Chair to sign. ,r 003.. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners requested a study be made for the Eno River by N. C. Depart- ment of Natural Resources and Community Development, and WHEREAS, an Executive Summary Report of the Eno River Area Capacity Use investigation has been received, and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby support the Capacity Use Designation of the Eno River, and NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that from this Capacity Use Designation a management plan for the Eno will be prepared for Orange County in cooperation with the Division of Environmental Management for consideration by the Environmental Management Commission. Adopted this 1st day of February, 1988. Chair, Board of Commissioners ATTEST: Clerk 004 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Awnda Item No. . ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: CITIZEN COMPLAINT DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES CORRESPONDENCE COMPLAINT REPORT TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To present a citizen's complaint report. BACKGROUND: See attached report. 005 Report of Complaint by Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Wagner Address: Rt. 6, Box 647, Hillsborough, NC (Rex Road off Dimmocks Mill Road, in close proximity to the Hillsborough water plant. ) Complaint: Mr. Wagner sites several areas in the neighbor- hood where debris and miscellaneous junk has accumulated. It is his contention that these areas constitute a health hazard by providing a favorable habitat for the wharf rats found in their neighborhood. Since the complaint was lodged with the Manager's office on November 25, 1987 the following steps have been taken by County staff: 1. Numerous site visits have been done by sanitarians and the Health Director, Management Analyst from the Manager's office and representatives from the Planning Department. The unanimous findings show a "general housekeeping" problem in the neighborhood. 2 . Dr. Barry Engber, N.C. Department of Human Resources, Health Services Division, also made a site visit to the area and concurred with staff findings. His corre- spondence is attached (Attachment I) . 3 . In an effort to allow residents to clean up the area, a Public Works truck was made available on Saturday morning, January 16. Although some residents did take advantage of the opportunity, a significant trash problem continues to exist. Door-to-door notification was provided to residents along Rex Road and a segment of Dimmocks Mill Road. Although the County has an ordinance which governs abandoned vehicles and by State law the Health Director can declare some trash a public health hazard and require its removal, we have no legislation governing "general trash. " This type of problems will generally fall within the parameters of a nuisance ordinance, which addresses, but is not limited to, such items as lots overgrown with vegetation, rubbish and trash, abandoned appliances such as refrigerators, washers, etc. It is suggested that staff be requested to review and draft a nuisance ordinance, providing there is no existing State law which provides remedy to the situation. The County Attorney will assist in this endeavor. " " otzch-rent , •tea:';�•' North Carolina Department of Human Resources Division of Health Services P.O.Box 2091 •Raleigh,North Carolina 27602-2091 James G. Martin,Governor Ronald H.Levine,M.D.,M.P.H. David T. Flaherty,Secretary December 16, 1987. State Health Director (919) 733-6407 Mr. Carlton A. Laws Environmental Health Supervisor Orange County Health Department 306-C Revere Road Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Mr. Laws, I am writing in regard to my visit on December 14, 1987 to the residence of Mr. Daniel Wagner on Rex Street in Hillsborough to investigate his complaints of rats in the area. During the visit Mr. Waiver showed me a rat which he had trapped on his property. I saw rib evidence of rodent burrows or runways that would indicate an established rodent problem on his property. I noted that several neighbors had accumulations of rubbish and/or woodpiles which could potentially harbor rats, but I made no direct observation of rats, burrows, or runways. One neighbor, however, did have a dog pen in which several active rodent burrows were noticed. An effort should be made to remove any unconsumed dog food from this pen as that is a ready source of food for rats and encourages them to nest nearby. Additionally, a stream runs through the neighborhood and, while no burrows were noted, stream banks are a common nesting ground for rats. The neighborhood around Rex Street is semi-urban and rats are to be found living under feral conditions. When rats are provided with food and harborage they will become a pest around homes, so it is always advisable to remove rubbish, to properly dispose of garbage, and to undertake any other measures that will deny food and harborage to these pests. Elimination of rats can be accomplished with traps or with the use of a suitable rodenticide. Such rodenticides must be used according to the package directions. If I can be of further assistance please do not hestitate to contact me. S-1 c. rely yours, arry RI Engber, Sc.D. Medical Entomologist Vector Control Branch 0.07 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. F ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 1 , 1988 SUBJECT: Budget Amendments DEPARTMENT: Finance PUBLIC HEARING: Yes x No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Wagner TELEPHONE NUMBER: Proposed Budget Amendments Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To approve the following budget amendments . BACKGROUND: 1 . Orange County has received State Discretionery Funds to be used by the Orange County Committee on the Bicentennial of the Constitution . These funds were appropriated for the purpose of enhancing its programs . No County match is required. 2 . Orange County has received. renewal of a grant from the Governor ' s Waste Management Board. This grant will enable the Environmental Affairs Board to continue the work that began last fiscal year . The grant renewal will enable the continuation of staff support , supplies and travel . 3 . During fiscal year 1986-87 , a CAT bus was destroyed by fire . The insurance did not make payment until June 1987 ; this was too late for a new bus to be purchased in FY 86-87 . Therefore , the money was deposited into the County Capital Reserve Fund. This amendment will transfer the payment from the Capital Reserve Undesignated Fund Balance (account balance-$78 , 406) to the Aging budget . This will allow purchase of the CAT bus in 1987-88 . 4 . In September , 1987 , the North Carolina Division of Social Services issued revised AFDC - Emergency Assistance regulations These regulations tightened eligibility requirements and reduced program payments . As a result , the demand for General Emergency Assistance has increased . For several years , the department has received additional General Emergency Assistance funds from the Contingency fund. This amendment will utilize "under spent" funds already in the department ' s budget to assist Orange County citizens with emergency needs (medicines , utilities , evictions , etc) . RECOMMENDATION - _(_S) : Approve motion to amend the 1987-88 Budget Ordinance by the proposed amendments . ,., , ✓ 008 ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1987-88 BUDGET_ AMENDMENTS The 1987-88 Budget Ordinance as adopted on August 4 , 1987 , and subsequently amended , is hereby amended as follows : BEFORE AFTER AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMENDMENT 1. General Fund Appropriation : Bicentennial Committee $ 0 $ 7 , 000 $ 7 , 000 Source : State Discretionery Funds 0 7 , 000 7 , 000 To accept State Discretionery Funds . 2 . General Fund Appropriation: County Manager $ 0 $ 5 , 000 $ 5 , 000 Source : Governor ' s Waste Management Board 0 5 , 000 5 , 000 To accept :renewal of Governor ' s Waste Management Board grant . 3 . County Capital Reserve Fund Appropriation : Transfer to General Fund $ 0 $28 , 900 $28 ,900 Source : Appropriated Fund Balance 0 28 , 900 28 , 900 009 BEFORE AFTER AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMENDMENT General Fund Appropriation : Aging $380 , 044 $28 , 900 $408 , 944 Source : Transfer from County Capital Reserve $ 0 $28 , 900 $ 28 , 900 To budget insurance payment received for CAT Transportation bus . 4 . General Fund Appropriation : Social Services-Subsidy- General Assistance $ 29 , 400 $10 , 000 $39 , 400 Source : Social Services- Income Maint - AFDC-EA $120 , 000 $10 , 000 $110 , 000 To transfer county funds from AFDC-EA to the General Assistance program. Approved this 1 day of February , 1988 . 010 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Ada Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING OF POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 ENGINEER'S CORRESPONDENCE TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To discuss the possibility of requesting proposals for topo- graphic mapping. BACKGROUND: At the December 5, 1987 goal setting session, the Board generally agreed that phase II of the County Water Supply Study should be implemented. Additionally, it was emphasized that accurate topographic information is necessary before phase II of the study can begin. Based on this discussion, staff requested cost estimates from Hazen and Sawyer. Subsequently, Hazen and Sawyer solicited informal cost estimates from two firms. Staff discussion with State officials indicate Senate Bill 2 funds may be used for this activity. However, confirmation of whether topographic mapping for reservoir study is an eligible expenditure will be determined after the State has reviewed formal request for Senate Bill 2 funds. Orange County has a balance of 57,433 remaining. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Authorize staff to request formal proposals for topographic mapping. a RI( HAZEN AND INEERS SAWYER. P.C. ENG P.O.BOX 30428 U1 1 RALEIGH.N.C.27622 DATE: January 12, 1988 MEMORANDUM FOR: 3070 File, B/L4 4.4w / DL FROM: Jim McCarthy —5-4//c . SUBJECT: Price Quotations for Topographic Mapping of Site B Preliminary price quotations for topographic mapping of Site B (Eno River Above McGowan Creek) were received by telephone communication from the following firms: • Mr. Jim Morgan Robert Kimball & Associates Telephone (814) 472-7700 • Mr. Irving Isaacson Piedmont Aerial Surveys Telephone (919) 294-6025 The following prices relate to the maximum potential reservoir and dam site construction areas bounded by contour 620 feet MSL as indicated on the attached map. Costs may be reduced somewhat by lowering the upper bound contour below 620 feet. Cost reductions will not, however, be portional to the reduced acreage unless individual flight lines can be eliminated. PRELIMINARY PRICE QUOTATION 0.12 Option Dmrintion Kimball Piedmont 1 1" . 200' scale, 2-foot contour maps of entire area Total Cost: $36,500 $38,000 2 a) 1" . 200' scale, 5-foot contour maps of entire area $17,940 $20,000 b) Aerial and field work for preparation of 1' .100' scale, 2-foot contour maps of dam construction area $ 5,410 $ 6,600 c) Preparation of topo maps described under (b) above $ 2,100 $ 2,920 Total Cost: $25,450 $29,520 3 Additional cost for conversion of data for use with County and/or Hazen and Sawyer CAD system, if required $ 2,000 $ 7,000 *($1 ,000) 4 Develop stage-storage relation for reservoir, if required -- $ 1 ,000± A formal request for bids will be submitted to Kimball and Piedmont following the receipt of authorization from the Orange County Board of Commissioners. *Dam construction area only 1 Sys°ntp °r� � 4 /) 01.3 014 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agwida Item No. lua ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: NOISE ORDINANCE; AMENDMENT DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes x No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE NOISE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To consider amendments to the existing Noise Ordinance in Orange County. BACKGROUND: The Sheriff Department's experiences with measuring noise and the numerous citizen complaints support the need to review and revise the existing noise ordinance in Orange County. The Town of Chapel Hill similarly modified their ordinance in February, 1987. It is recommended that the Noise Ordinance be amended as follows: Sound levels by Receiving Land 60 dB(A) Sunday thru Thursday 8 am - 11 pm Friday and Saturday 8 am - 12 midnight 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday 11 pm - 8 am Friday and Saturday 8 am - 12 midnight Since recent complaints have also dealt with vibration and its relationship to noise, it is further recommended that the County Manager be authorized to seek expert advice and an investigation of the subject be conducted. In addition, it is recommended that permits to exceed the maximum noise level be eliminated until such time a basis for allowing or denying permits is determined. RECOMMENDATION(S) : To approve recommendations as stated. o5 A RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY Pursuant to the authority provided in N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 153A-121, 153A123 and 153A-133, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby resolves and ordains as follows: Article I: Definitions In addition to the common meaning of words, the following definitions shall be used in interpreting this ordinance. (1) "A" weighting scale: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured with a sound level meter using the "A" weighted network. The standard unit notation is dB(A). 2) dB(A): Sound level in decibels determined by the "A" weighting scale of a standard sound level meter having characteristics defined by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Publication ANSI, S14-1971. (3) Decibel: A unit of measure on a logarithmic scale, of the ratio • of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to a standard reference pressure, which for purposes of this ordinance shall be 20 micronewtons/meter2. (4) Impact Noise: Sound that occurs intermittently rather than continuously. (5) Sound Amplifying Eauioment: Any device for the amplification of the human voice, music or any other sound, including juke boxes, stereos and radios. -1- (6) Sound Level: In decibels, a weighted sound pressure level determined by the use of a sound level meter whose characteristics and frequency weightings are specified in the ANSI Standards. (7) Sound Level Meter: Any instrument certified to meet or exceed ANSI standards which includes an omni-directional microphone, an amplifier, an output meter and frequency weighting network(s) for the measurement of sound level. 8) Sound Pressure Level: In decibels 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to the standard reference pressure. The standard reference pressure is 20 micronewtons/meter2. Article TI;._t Maximum Permissible Standards by Receiving Land (1) The use of sound amplifying equipment is limited to the conditions specified in this article. (2) A live musical group or individual using sound amplifying equipment may operate out of doors only if the property owner, tenant in possession or in the case of a business the business manager or an authorized agent of that business manager has been granted a permit This permit may be secured after it is signed by an authorized agent of the musical group and by a representative of the individual organization or group retaining the services of the musical group and on whose premises the amplifying equipment is to be used. (3) No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds -2- 0 17 the limits set forth in Table I below when measured as specified in Article III. Table I: Sound levels (dB(A)) by Receiving Land 8 A.M. - 11:00 P.M. ll P.M. - 8 A.M. 60 50 (4) Sound levels in excess of those listed in Table I above will be permitted as follows: Without a With a Permit Permit Thursday Evening 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (5:00 p.m.-11:00 p.m. Thursday) Friday Evening 70dB(A) 85 dB(A) (5:00 p.m.1:00 a.m. Saturday) Saturday 70dB(A) 85 dB(A) (10:00 a.m.1:00 a.m. Sunday) Article III: Sound Measurement Standards Standards, instrumentation, and measurement procedures to be used in the measurement of sound as provided for in this ordinance are as follows: (1) Sound level measurement shall be made with a sound level meter using the "A" weighting scale set on "slow response." ,(2) Sound level meters shall be of at least Type Three meeting American National Standards Institute, Incorporated (ANSI) S1.4 - 1971 requirements (or the latest approved version thereof). The entire sound measurement system shall be serviced and operated as recommended by the manufacturer. Persons using the sound level meters shall be trained in sound level measurement and the operation of sound level meters. -3- 0.18 (3) Except in the case where noises are emanating from within multi-family structures and the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be taken at the corner of the primary structure of the complainant nearest the noise source but when this location is not practical noise measurements shall be made at the boundary of the public or private right-of-way which adjoins the complainants' property. (4) In the case of noises emanating from within a multi-family structure and where the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be made in the unit of the complainant at a height of at least four (4) feet above the floor and at a point approximately equidistant from all walls. Article IV: Exceptions The following are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance: (1) Construction operations from 7 A.M. to 9 P.M. on weekdays and 8 A.M. to 9 P.M. on weekends for which building permits have been issued, or construction operations not requiring permits; provided all equipment is operated in accordance with the manufacturers' specifications and with all standard equipment, manufacturers' mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (2) Noises of safety signals, warning devices, emergency pressure relief valves and church bells. (3) Noises resulting from any authorized emergency vehicle when responding to any emergency call or acting in time of -4- 019 emergency. (4) Unamplified noises at street activity (such as fairs or parades) where the participants have a permit for use of the streets. (5) All noises coming from the normal operation of properly equipped aircraft (not including scale model aircraft). (6) All noises coming from motor vehicles properly equipped with the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (7) Noise from lawful fire works and noise makers on holidays. (8) Lawn mowers and agricultural equipment used between daylight and 9 P.M. when operated with all the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (9) Agricultural equipment operated for farming purposes. Article V: Permit to Exceed Maximum Permissible Standards (1) A person or group of persons intending to operate or cause to be operated a source of sound in excess of sound levels not requiring a permit as specified in Article II,__must apply for a permit (2) Any person or persons desiring a permit shall apply as provided herein and provide all information required. (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty- eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the permit is requested. (b) The Orange County Manager, or his designee, will act upon all requests for a permit to exceed maximum -5- • 020 permissible standards. (c) In considering and acting on all requests for permits pursuant to this article, the Manager shall consider, but shall not be limited to, the following in issuing or denying such permit: the timeliness of the application; the nature of the requested activity; previous experience with the applicant; the nature of the event; the time of the event; other activities in the vicinity of the location proposed; the effect of the activity on surrounding areas; previous violations, if any, of the applicant. (d) Upon receipt of a permit to exceed maximum permissible unpermitted sound levels, the applicant will pay to Orange County an administrative fee of $5.00. (e) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriff's Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued and being capable of assisting the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. Article VI: Burden of Proof Regarding Exceptions In any proceeding based upon this ordinance, if an exception stated in this ordinance would limit obligation, limit liability, or eliminate either an obligation or liability, the person who would benefit from the application of the exception shall have the burden of proving that the exception applies and that -6- - 021 the terms of the exception have been met. Article VIE: Violations and Penalties (1) Violations The Orange County Sheriff shall be responsible for determining noise level violations of this ordinance. Upon his determination that the noise levels prescribed herein have been exceeded he shall determine the source of the noise and the person responsible for it and promptly notify the person responsible of the noise limits prescribed herein and the fact that they are being exceeded. He shall also then notify the person responsible to immediately reduce the noise level to that permitted herein. Failure on the part of the person responsible to immediately comply with the Sheriff's directive to reduce the noise level to a permissible level after notification shall constitute a violation of this ordinance. Failure on the part of the person responsible to maintain the noise to a permissible level after notification shall also constitute a violation of this ordinance. Failure to maintain noise to a permissible level shall include any incident of noise exceeding the levels prescribed herein occurring .within twenty-four hours of notification by the • Sheriff that the noise exceeds permissible levels. For purposes of this ordinance "The Orange County Sheriff" shall include the Sheriff and any Deputy Sheriff of Orange County. (2) Civil Penalties (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance -7- 022 shall be subject to a civil penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00). Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. (b). The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall assess civil penalties under this ordinance and shall make written demand for payment upon the person responsible for the violation and shall set forth in detail the violation for which the penalty has been invoked. If payment is not received or equitable settlement reached within sixty (60) days after demand for payment is made, the matter shall be referred to the County Attorney for institution of a civil action in the name of the County in the appropriate division of the General Court of Justice of Orange County for recovery of the penalty. Any sums recovered shall be used to carry out the purposes and requirements of this ordinance. (3) Criminal Penalties Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not to exceed thirty (30) days or by fine not to exceed fifty ($50.00) dollars. Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. Article VIII: Severability If any provision of this ordinance is adjudged invalid or if the application thereof to any person or in any circumstance is adjudged invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or of any __g_ 02 part, subpart, sentence or clause thereof not adjudged invalid. Article XIX: Abrogation This ordinance is not intended to repeal, abrogate or impair any greater restrictions imposed on existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. Wherever the provisions of any other law, ordinance or regulation impose higher standards than are required by the provisions of this ordinance, the provisions of such law, ordinance or regulation shall govern. Article XIII: Effective Date Following the adoption of this ordinance as provided by law, this ordinance shall be effective on August 15, 1983. -9- AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange Cuonty in the following respects: Article V(2)(a) is amended to read as follows: (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the permit is requested. This forty-eight hour requirement shall not prohibit the issuance of a permit in situations where the application is received less than forty-eight hours prior to the activity, provided the application is made within enough time of the activity for the County Manager to consider the factors necessary and contained in Section V(2)(c) of this ordinance. Article V(2)(e) is amended to read is follows: (e) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriffs Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant or the applicant's designee as indicated on the permit application available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued and agree to assist the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant or designee of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. This Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange County in the following respects: ARTICLE II (3) is amended to read as follows: TABLE I: Sound Levels dB(a) by Receiving Land 60 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday 8 am-11 pm Sunday-Thursday 11 pm-8 am Friday & Saturday 8 am-12 midnight Friday & Saturday 12 midnight-8 am ARTICLE II (2) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE II(4) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE V is deleted in its entirety, including all amendments. The Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. Amendment dated February 1, 1988. ORANGE COUNTY Ammipummmimmmim 026 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Atli! Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To provide update on CIP process. BACKGROUND: Commissioners Carey and Willhoit will lead discussion outlin- ing process and schedule for adopting CIP as planning document and deciding on components of bond referendum. O R A N G E C O U N T Y 027 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date February 1,_1988_ Action //��9gends Item ,l .i4 SUBJECT: ASSIGNMENT OF HOUSE AND BUILDING NUMBERS FOR RURAL ROUTES 2 AND 3 - ROUGEMONT DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _XC_ No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Powell G. S. 153A-240 Location Map Notification Letter Legal Notice Letter to Orange County Postmasters TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To consider setting a public hearing date concerning assign- ment of house numbers on Rural Routes 2 and 3 - Rougemont and approval of the advertisement for the hearing. BACKGROUND : Per an agreement reached between Orange County and the Rougemont Postmaster, all rural box numbers are being con- verted to house numbers in the area of Orange County served by the Rougemont Post Office. The conversion is a continuation of the project begun in January, 1987 to change all County addresses to permanently assigned house numbers. To date, three Chapel Hill postal routes have been converted - Rural Route 5, 8 and 2. The conversion represents the initial changeover of routes other than those served by Chapel Hill post offices. Rougemont Rural Routes 2 and 3 are located in Little River Township and include Caldwell , portions of Highways 57 and 157 , and Guess Road. The area is bounded generally by the following roads: Kiger, New Sharon Church, Bill Poole, McBroom, Bunny, Sawyer, Hall Dairy, Holly Ridge, Brown, Breeze, Mary Hall , and Blalock . General Statute 153A-240 requires that a Public Hearing be held on the proposed house and building numbers to be assigned. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of Notice of Public Hearing for February 22, 1988. • 028 § 153A-236 CH. 153A.COUNTIES § 153A-240 153. • cil, set the duties of any person appointed or designated as a fire prevention 1 ;�.a,ed• . inspector. A fire prevention inspector shall not make electrical inspection q hearing unless he is qualified to do so under G.S. 153A-351. (1965,c.626; 1969,c.1064. a i.,,n pul • s. 3; 1973, c. 822, s. 1.) twee pi „udsen §§ 153A-236 to 153A-238: Reserved for future codification purposes. • I a 15: . ARTICLE 12. :1 A cc • counts Roads and Bridges. Ai .; board § 153A-239. Public road defined. I close t The b In this Article "public road" or "road" means any road, street, highway, i succes thoroughfare, or other way of passage that has been irrevocably dedicated to regist, the public or in which the public has acquired rights by prescription, without of pro I regard to whether it is open for travel. (1973, c. 822, s. 1.) revue: I publti; ' Local Modification. — Brunswick: 1979, or ea . 2nd Sess., c. 1319; Cabarrus: 1981, c. 568, appe amending 1979,2nd Sess.,c. 1319. inter. cumn § 153A-240. Naming roads and assigning street numbers in o�n; unincorporated areas. local. A county may by ordinance name or rename any public road within the I certif county and not within a city,and may assign or reassign street numbers for use of th. on such a road. In naming or renaming a public road, a county may not An (1) Change the name,if any,given to the road by the Board of Transports• apps,. tion, unless the Board of Transportation agrees; Gene - (2) Change the number assigned to the road by the Board of Transports- court tion, but may give the road a name in addition to its number; or I (3) Give the road a name that is deceptively similar to the name of any -4 trier other public road in the vicinity. i. No A county shall not name or rename a road or assign or reassign street a .lu,i • — rnumbers on a road until it has held a public hearing on the matter. At least ;� 10 days before the day of the hearing, the board of commissioners shall cause pruc notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the hearing to be prominently 3 lip ` ' posted at the county courthouse, in at least two public places in the township right or townships where the road is located, and shall publish a notice of such a lots c hearing in at least one newspaper of general circulation published in the :ins -. county. After naming or renaming a public road, or assigning or reassigning line g street numbers on a public road, a county shall cause notice of its action to tk i in a' utili given to the local postmaster with jurisdiction over the road, to the Board of 3 atels Transportation, and to any city within five miles of the road. ' utili >�� This section does not repeal or modify Chapter 945 of the Session Laws of - *19,1 1953,which pertains to naming streets in Kannapolis. (1957, c. 1068; 1973,C. 4 c 50 • 507, s. 5; c. 822, s. 1; 1981, cc. 112, 518.) . Local Modification. — Brunswick: 1979, been substituted for"State Highway Comma : �'t 2nd Seas., c. 1919; Cabarrus: 1981, c. 568, lion" and for "Commission" in this section:.• Zas:Le sin amending 1979, 2nd Sess.. c. 1319; Forsyth: enacted by Session Laws 1973.c.822. 1981,c.558;Guilford: 1979,c.283. i .- Effect of Amendments. —The first 19s: ; to is Editor's Note.—Pursuant to Session Laws amendment substituted"at the County Cour.• e ii 1973,c.507.s.5,"$card of Transportation"has house. in at least two public places in ti.. U 6 78 et r to - , ,-- .4 • „; .. , - 6; • . - i...\u. , , •.---154—. r • .- - ..'•-• ,-i imm. 1 •• - , , . - . • .1;4' .,, .1 . , i ... ... -, . ..„.. , . •, ., , , . , ,_ , • t , ,....... .... ,, , ............_... . , ,A. 1„// • A _d• -{;''' ' , 1,,.-A ' .'a.- - ,,,,-4"„.-,,p- %,, - — ,. -,,, die. ...: :r,.. ,,,g• '-+ . rfr•-■ 0_ 4 I 4/ . ... ....,--- sign . i....,, ,li_ - — . . _ .. v toe 4101v"/"4: . , „fr./ ..... mt,„,, - . z ---....., 'D..'" ' , • '' ' •AL 4. ,.40 """ ...,.. - 1--bi:-:,,.. i).---;11'1 " --!:- N`---..." I 029 , ..-4-- . ; • -lit mi. osi,1 .,... .,...11 ..,er to., •- .. A..., . -,_ .1-' - 1 Ilio :tog ...N 7- - ;,,: , ".._,....7 . -..,_---------;c.- 1 .,a14. ty . (JAL i. ,,..„,L \ AL --.4.- 47 3 7;`) . . , , ,,.101-., „ 0 -- &ft 5 lik 1 ,,, . .. ■ 1 ..., -. , - - ,}1:-dr- - I" --11,,,•••• 1 ••••••• •-., a . \• .„„, . 7.°V • t. is°,.: _,_, , '° "'GR:fr44.7' Aer........,:t•, . I \ II: .ft. r - „ i.. a i,',.' ' -•i_e_.,•;_ -..t.!CO f --"2'4' ...-..i. . 1 , / e al. ,...... •ii... i . UM OMme \4 ■ *fililL '-"A.:;444,-"H... ..; .".:011.. ..7 . - ' .. -... - -ri.t MR ' Hwy 601E• " '..r,_ .' • . ' '12 A. ■ • a .'' "', . • , 1 • " ' ' .8., RP' . Bk. . ., •• in ,.. tSbio. ' I ' • '..• u SW '41. I, , . . . .• Ma ly I . AIL lr W Aft i •.2 ' °1it 'Ib • La al• .... 15 • 4r.- ' , '.., ] MEL le Allak4. taw i 1 • ' CS MIMS ••• ' 5"iii,„,CIL 1 .Z 110.11,0 - -IL .,S (..... • i Mamd•10.:4,_ : 4.1 , : • . . 'IM .1 i,. le& l . • •.. UM .._,.. ., a •Id . - k-- ' .- ') S\ ( .... •■ ... ... ' I WI Ll.--111112 tat ■••/gar,. 9•• : '.. 1 la 9a.' . Jilli. at , -,... XIS ._Zifti.-111&' nicrivalz.11. :: I - ..... i n ------i: A rdifirwrH. " keer I___ --1641_ ■- . I • — r ;5 „„--. ASIL . ' f' ''' .- -,• -••--••■•.r _._..... .....111111a '.MI' Ma Zit ir: • IMIM•m = r ,.7 __... ..... .,..,. _.:..„,.:,_ .., 41,ti......., ,...,_,..." . , flu' ... - - ---- y•:•-• ' % .z,,,,,,, .......•;;;--- .;...., ;lb.; 13 -...: . -- --- • • 1410,1fr .. M. • .I.1 V" , MINI•lali .11.11.= e2•• • i 9 1). i4 'I U . N --dr.. ', ., -u. ..., ........— ._. LI& $0Z. / A 71 ----. S&L i ink Eit via, rii - . Ain • '': als• c 86 co . . ,... .... 1 . ea, . • .. •1.=, a„ " SAM I '• • ''.` •.), '''. -X 311. •••.t. ' - Ina t- .. 0 A2*-■,,. 4.. '\ • ... -.' " ',.• =at ...... _.,.. \ • ; 1 vf- -.4. . .. , . . ., let J23• simfoli"64..ip. = ■ - ,..v.r \('- 't - .7 UK '- • r . I• • ' 0 I A ' \ • ., , 7 i„.•3112. ' =I - ;. nks ,.. - tar 17 ....) • .,... .:. , _, ea ‹ rilia. 1 I . 41..■ i , 11 11111a. , .. .. - • \ •: .) . au p , "--.eAf.........- - ,au* - i 11 .: . ---.. . .., .. ._.!.__ __ •e2• I12 ibC7Umim 46' • i.,tr 0 0 \ r‘er 1 - ,•• i '''' -• u711.-.0 , • 1 ■ . 41 — w..°. JAI .:i. ' • um i 'N.„.,Z I • i , .....„,a i=. ., am 1 r ,... ..--. r—". ', - 1 14.-441 %--\ . - : ' , —. - ,..." I I ...I -...‘• . 9/ ,,,.., •%.\ '- 1 '.• . rd I ' -4MIL VIM I\,.... ...... A ! 1 .=.°•L mer- - • 1 \ • .11.- • 1, %. .., • ... . Lb. L'ti • Z .,• , '.: ji.' • .. G10. 7. la . 1•&• • • Of '? !- -- ta,ra . _..--... -- ... - ...::., .-....4 / N • • Stit) .,.■••• ' ' ' , ....r.,.. • m ) • ' .ma, •' .... ... ' • PO _.„._..„.... • 1 .., ? .,„.......): 46.- b_ .__,:4"._ ,,- • ' . , ....... _, . i _,-. • '' ... • • .... - .. „,...../ • 41. r'- ,t,.. . ..;s• 1 i;rr"- • N.- ....4.a 21.:".1.4 a,'"' AA& ..in. •-, .X,20 1 ...--• / . I R.R• 3 -15.-- L., . . _ . / / L 1 - .,:. r 1 • ow • -,..- , • \ i ,----.- ei , i I 1"7 \,) . _.,.. . , = .... _. .— \ i 1 J - C al A 7 iw 4 ail i 1 COuNt7 ft, • i • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD 030 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 iRd `r.rr ei o, kiff NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ASSIGNMENT OF HOUSE NUMBERS TO ROUGEMONT RURAL ROUTES 2 AND 3 IN ORANGE COUNTY , N. C. Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of N. C. , Chapter 153A, Section 240, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Orange County County Courthouse ( New) , 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, N. C. , on Monday, February 22, 1988 at 7 : 30 p. m. for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or against the assignment of house numbers on Rural Routes 2 and 3 served by the Rougemont Post Office in northeast Orange County ( Little River Township) . ASSJPMENT Qa HOUSE NUMBER$ Rural Routes 2 and 3 , Rougemont are proposed for a change from existing rural box numbers to a system of permanently assigned house numbers. These two routes encompass an area within Little River Township, including Caldwell and portions of Highways 57 and 157 and Guess Road . The following roads, either in their entirety or portions thereof , form the general boundaries for the area : Kiger Road, New Sharon Church Road , Bill Poole Road, McBroom Road , Bunny Road, Sawyer Road , Hall Dairy Road, Holly Ridge Road, Brown Road, Breeze Road, Mary Hall Road, and Blalock Road. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard. Public comment must be received during the public hearing. Changes may be made in the advertised proposal which reflect debate, objections and discussion at the hearing. Questions regarding the proposal should be directed to Don Powell in the Orange County Planning Department. The Planning Department is located in the HAgricultural - Environmental Center, 306F Revere Road , in Hillsborough. Office hours are from 8 :00 a. m. to 5 : 00 p. m. , Monday through Friday. The Planning Department telephone number in Hillsborough is 732-8181 - Extension 345. Marvin E. Collins Planning Director PUBLISH: February 10, 1988 February 17 , 1988 • ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD 1 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 031 Dear Citizen : On April 21 , 1987 the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted the House Numbering Ordinance as required by NC General Statute 153A-240. This statute authorizes the conversion to house numbers from rural route and box numbers of all Orange County addresses. Postal routes in their entirety are being used to effect address changes. Rural Routes 2 and 3, Rougemont are now being proposed for conversion to house numbers. On Monday, February 22, 1988 a public hearing will be held before the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider the proposed assignment of house numbers to residences and buildings on Rural Routes 2 and 3 served by the Rougemont Post Office. The hearing will be held at 7 :30 p. m. at the Orange County Courthouse ( New ) , 106 East Margaret Lane, in Hillsborough, N. C. If approved, the house numbers will replace the old system of rural route and box numbers. This change will improve mail delivery and allow 911 emergency calls faster access to addresses. Residents will be required to display their new number on their mailbox with numerals at least 1 inch high. The proposed change affecting your address is as follows: OLD AURESS NEW ADDRESS If you wish to speak in regard to this proposal , please attend the public hearing. the welcome your comments. If there are questions, please contact: Don Powell or Miriam Coleman Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Phone: 732-8181 , Ext. 345 or 575 Sincerely, Marvin Collins Orange County Planning Director ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 03 27278 `...1 ..` t, _'5, September 14, 1967 1 Postmaster U.S. Postal Service Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Postmaster: As you probably know by now, 0ranoe County has adopted an ordinance providing for the change-over from rural route addresses to house numbers. In its initial effort the Planning Department hes been working most closely with the Chapel HiII Post Office on Estes Drive. Entire postal routes, those most affected by "growing pains" , have been chosen by the Chapel Hill Postmaster for house number asslon- ment. To date, three Chapel Hill routes - 2, 5, and B - have been changed, with public hearings, posting of notices and the other requirements of N. C. General Statute 153A-240. Initially, it was decided to involve only those Post Offices in whose jurisdiction address changes were being effected. Inasmuch as the high growth areas exist primarily in the southern part of the County, it was felt that the Chapel Hill Post Office would be a sole working partner with County Planning for the first months of the project. It was later determined that this would hold true only If postal routes in their entirety, were assigned house numbers. Well into the project it was decided that newly constructed buildings, erected after the Ordinance went into effect, should also be essigned numbers conforming with the overall , County-wide system. This would preclude an additional address change for that resident further down the line. But it would also bring into the picture postal jurisdictions other than Chapel . Hill . We now are at the point where those other postal jurisdic- tions and Orange County Planning must meet to coordinate the address assignments relative to specific postal controls. September 14, 1987 Page 2 May I suggest that you contact either me or Miriam Coleman In this department to set up a meeting most convenient for you end your staff , at your location. we will fill you in with our plan and the progress to Date, and receive your comments and suggestions to make the transition work best for -your jurisdiction. Thank you for your cooperation, and we look forward to working with you. Sincerely, n e11 , Planner 732-8181 , Ext. 345 -777,14egort., Miriam Coleman, Planning Technician 732-8181 , Ext. 575 DP/MC/ dmg cc: Marvin Collins, Planning Director Albert KIttrell , Interim County Manager 5441477 7 • ,q2,5 PECi /7 /LL • • /10/2 L- 17/AZ s? �vAo came 00.t / - - 7' Ct-V/ 1 01/z#fyJ e %/t/F • • 77418(7e /72/ e4 1- cilury *()1114\_..; O R A N G E C O U N T Y 034 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date Fe¢ruatYl,_1288_ Action agenda Item # (, SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9 LAKE WOODS - PRELIMINARY ACTION BY : March 7 , 1988 DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _ x No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk Checklist Preliminary Plan Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Restrictive Covenants-Lake Woods/Phase I Warranty Deed-Lot 9/Phase I /Lake Woods 4/16/84 Planning Board Minutes 7/16/84 Planning Board Minutes Planning Director Memo of 12/31 /87 County Attorney Letter of 1 /4/88 Draft 12/21 /87 Planning Board Minutes Draft 1 /18/88 Planning Board Minutes TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: Consideration of the Preliminary Plan for the subdivision of Lot 9 Lake Woods. BACKGROUND : The property is located in Chapel Hill Township on Jones Ferry Road ( SR 1942) . There are 4.6 acres in the total tract with two (2) lots proposed . One lot will be 2 . 1 acres and the other lot 2. 5 acres. Both lots will have frontage on Jones Ferry Road . The property is located in the University Lake Watershed and zoned Rural Buffer. All applicable agencies have reviewed the preliminary plan . The Recreation Department indicated a need to specify that the recreation area is dedicated to Orange County for public recreation and park/open space purposes. Carrboro has indicated the following concerns: 1 . A 100 foot buffer area would be required along the stream. (That portion of University Lake watershed in Carrboro' s Jurisdiction has standards similar to those 2 036 for Orange County' s Water Quality Critical Area - WQCA. If the subdivision were located in the WQCA, the buffer requirements would be greater. Since the subdivision is located in Protected Watershed Area - PW- 11 , the buffer requirements are less restrictive. ) 2. The house and existing driveway are shown for lot 9B, however, the house site for lot 9A has not been determined . (The tract is totally wooded with proposed clearing areas to include the driveways and house sites. ) 3 . Septic field areas need to be designated on the plat. ( OWASA expressed this concern as well . Septic field areas have been designated on the revised preliminary plan for lot 96. ) At the December 21 , 1987 meeting of the Planning Board, consideration of the preliminary plat was continued to the January 18 , 1988 meeting to permit the Planning Staff to review the restrictive covenants governing Phase I of Lake Woods Subdivision. The preliminary plat for Lake Woods Subdivision was approved by the Planning Board on April 16, 1984 and by the Board of Commissioners on May 7 , 1984. The final plat for Phase I of Lake Woods Subdivision was approved by the Planning Board on July 16 , 1984 . There is no reference to any approval being based on a condition that the restrictive covenants limit the lot size to a certain area or to preventing further subdivision of the property. The deed restrictions do limit subdivision of the lots to not less than two acres in size. The County Attorney has provided information regarding the relationship between restrictive covenants and subdivision review and approval . ( See County Attorney 1/4/88 Letter. ) At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following condition : 1 . Label the recreation area as dedicated to Orange County for public recreation and park/open space purposes. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1 . Label the property to be dedicated to Orange County for public recreation/open space purposes as "Property of Orange County". 2. Approval of a deed dedicating the property for public recreation/open space purposes to Orange County. r C,Ef c: E a; D,7 , n7 i MK DN�v ) ',DPI -t- 1 ')r; r n: C,1Oh I v 1 C 1 /1fv' FPCvryvt, SUEDIVI ME: AA E 1. 0:A IDN: Jones Ferry Road 1-1/2 miles south of 54 by-pass pwNER/DEVELOPER: 0 ADDRESS: 73,(1_11:r ort Rd r� ' 104-C TELEPHONE NC. : Ch e1 Hill NC 27514 AGENT/CONTACT. Don Nicholson TELEPHONE NC. : 933-2116 A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orenpe Cour,t�• ;ax MalC Orenpe CourT c7ex rural bulffe Lat(s) .... '701.151 Number s ---a� '°«^S h 1 F Chanel Hill C f`CreS.: iota' Number of LC7g : 2 phases: One Number/Type -�AverbOe Lo- Si:e: •5A Ype of STrucTures ; ( existlno) none MinimuS d) S10 Lineal Fee- in STree-s; (DrODOSed) two liter SFee7 none __al__ Acres in Open het r STer � e ublie ( speelf ) none SPalce •School DiVTDjCDCSpI Y ►°mmuniT) two maugRubi ic(specI? )noneCommunlr)�t o IndIv' I duel General' Land Uses in Area: �res•dentiallre Di t 1d rboroloual .Grll. ital Areas:aume_sTream/oralnapeways fl eetersned (s 'Hoot prone areas oTner (explain) Decify) nlsTprl t sites E. Ail plats muST be Su 'vo-Hundred tee- ( submi Tee on shale'` no smeller Than one Inch e feet u Or 01 ) ' and H alnd mus; CoITaln larper owlnp^info inch equals o1e�Y y:_r•:�:: t o l l ormaT 1 on: 4. .+yC.:.::• ..bob's;.. Haar ` •- �" : lei:, near OT ern r �-+�► near r Is) ? ::- bulleinc setback •. �. 7.n OT surveyor, ::: pt. npTeTipn I Inez Qlnrer Or 'enC IarpuT Or TYDICrI IoT ',::�?'••; r lst in 9 eh c P rODOt r C Planner • 4 s lorelneps. ; (71Tle) frelialn erY : : YTIIITies, roses. r T )-.. Pist ;41;i:. :• sCelt, „„h error �:: � 7.x 1 sT l ny, DrODOsr[ en[eC101nin 5 r IOnTy�pr«rev" IA D Tn CT TO D OT moo) InClutllnS AlwanslOn_ en G oeTr ( Incise's; - f:•_) $TrreT heart *SIC sTeTe reviSIOn cotes) '� p+oD[.«1L. Tee asp« v roes nuUDers ���//!!-�• IOT re1rrr Holt �•A •_ :- es l tT in DrD : }}• bosseerr DrscrIDeC YTII1T le one Aotrc A {: r17n Arerinpt and -i:::.:.}: sisal., ererinGlYAing 'ye's. q .: _:: cltt encrs - aannDlrs enTS. velvet �jr :w4; TOTeI scresce el { � D Tree= one /sir "I ::r►* eels/Inc 'est proposer c eereepr of CYlrrr! in - IpTS, IneluOins one .-:: one Qra000ClYClad il)rry la's, in . .� � :: T .:. rlpnts∎Or∎rare rlTnln r}.}-,• sYPiCaI 'Tree/ crass- re � 00,177.0) COrnar 0e/b1 sett I,1Tr7.ieeT lDn v U y - Pro ID- line rnea�ls Ise lyalns orslyn PDS.0 _ ?' •: �: 1Dt nnolwrns Ions t one sno r OTS7rarrlr/Y Yaorr AlOrr ..r O '`y�'.•. Pnat InF fines — .: norizonTrl al ienaenT erne �:C ;::: 1DADp rebnv eT Tar. ��: rases) ! Carr. ae7e 1PYD1 i[ L : ) lee TOOT 7 7 0 -7�T •-' ::'•: rrrali ::.rGlr: Pr roman :+....,: reTrr bOLles. !t7. Dull rnT faeTyrry *wen as r OlalOnseY • C /loos..as. AIiTOrhey• Cewc'ns1ls. c lenaw �� ST 7.e "x: ': ale joining IDT Z. u -� HOTlT IO�OT bullet's ant •::::-}:): CT ec Jo )nc >Drppr7.•r nrnrt •, rlSTr leTeC n[IClT inF :::�:.}_,; Ornery anC sYDOirlslons : potrnTioi OrrrlapweeT Y r� 70rnsniL, . ^L IOCETiOnran�nl[eTCrOSSnT,1r prp9e«trlTprlal plennln£ ,IurlsClc« : 512! Y 4% �}� rrserrar .ln conwpr. O, Dartels beoleete[ tor puDI1G usr or :AVE.:: 10ClT i or. '� STe neT c enc :12, Dle� 7.r PerolnrriefF[trC orrel ODwr,1T PDTe7.tlel �.1G+rr•: e .....: of /no TIrsT 1/2 rwnCr DDl rrseq irem n Fn0r0r1ilpr TOr CbnT 7.41 4 OT1 pearl Out tYrT ores 037 . CTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1 . Twenty-seven ( 27 ) copies of the preliminary plat. 2 . Two full sire copies of an Orange County Tax map ( one copy with tax parcels involved clearly marked ) . 3 . Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a letter from the Orange County Health Department certifying the proposed wastewater system for each lot. . the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is mplete and accurate. I understand that a $105 . 00 fee ( subdivisions 1 -5 lots) , 5210 . 00 fee ( subdivision of 6-9 lots ) , 5315 . 00 fee ( sub- visions of 10-25 lots ) or a $420 . 00 fee ( subdivisions of 26 lots or re) is due et the time of application. A 15 . 00 per lot fee is due et e time the final plat is presented for recordation. /U Cfd74stw AteF.z'ii-ice ,�VC., Nichol Pro er C es, Inc. BY: Lam' Ai .A/: Af ,41.1-4-4- _..... PLICANT' S SIGNATURE WNER' S SIGNAT Don N' hot n, Jr. R /0 36 T7 /6 3P/77 .T` DAT: FEES : Amoun t _/0� S� °_w_ Date Pa i d 10-31-P7 i Rene 1 pt /�G7D • • SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9 LAKE WOODS OZi sS 11 /85 RAN M STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 8-2 -87 Reviewed 8-26-87 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 10- 0-87 Reviewed 11 -4-27 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 12-q-87 Reviewed NCDOT: DATE 11-22-87 CERTIFICATION Mike Mil l s SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel Hill -Carrboro) : DATE 11 -4-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 11 -17-87 Certification Pat Davis OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council _-i'-. l Carrboro Fire Department � _ (Date) Chapel Hill (Date) Carrboro _ (Date) Hillsborough 1` �_E7 (Date) Durham (Date) Other - Health Department _�_ 7 (Date) (Gate) - Erosion Control 11-Z1-87 (Date) CANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial 30ARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial • �J - 1� ..' -"D SAC- �,`. ,r .._ 20 •. : b° +S Qe�y 2.16 • �j��� �� C GY M W 6457 S�1 y w1 3�BD �. p �B 12 1/-,. ra �, . 2.045 a ,yr z{ a E 4410 - P- o 7-4/73 xc'.----- 4S4 'el- 0 1 . 5. .A-3 ..021107 "Cr:' : 1.86 5, 2.1 l'` 2.004A AC. .7 .• LOT 9 LAKE WOODS F (eil . . -4.56 1410 APPLICANT : DON NICHOLSON "�� - ZONiNC • R-B " LUP : WATER SUPPLY WATERSHED i -� . SCALE : I �=400 ! �' SEE 116J'S Ef LAKEWOODS 1WAP 117-12 4. -. P1 i 22.592 AC. IL/.SAC 5.04 ( 1 ► 9423 4433 0 il .... . :7,-; - �\�� * 4 © . _ \ 1$AC. 411111 - SEE 116 t1 �* x LAKE WOODS \ -1 .ti SEE MA , , - � : ' . . • ,'i /;...----------- - N 78O,000 t-54 ', i . SEE MAP 116M z./ LAKE WOODS . = 1 � 0 . I80.6 AC. , - • \\` 74.43 , ;r o' " - . , 7. .. - 't ' 040 II r STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, N. C . 27253 JAMES G. MARTIN November 22 , 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E. HARRINGTON SECRETARY GEORGE E.WELLS, P.E. STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR ORANGE COUNTY M".. . Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106F Revere Road Hillsborough, N. C . 27278 SUBJECT: Lake Woods Subdivision cff SR 1942 Dear Mr. Kirk: This is to advise that the subject preliminary 'plan is approved as two individual lots for residential use. Approval is giver for two residential driveways only and should not be construed as approval for any other type of entrance. If you have any questions, Please advise. Yours Very Truly, M. Mills, P. . ISTRICT ENGINEER JMM:sn; - . 041 11 11 P 0. Box 337 ar r b o ro 301 West Main Street Carrboro. North Carolina 27510 11- �I (919)968-7700 (919) 942-8541 December 3 , 1987 Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 RE: Lake Woods Subdivision Courtesy Review Dear Eddie: Per your request , I have reviewed the above referenced plans and have the following comments/recommendations: -a 100 ft . buffer area would be required for the stream under the Carrboro Land Use Ordinance for a subdivision in the watershed -proposed houses and driveways should be located on the plans. This is of special concern for lot 9B , where a drainage easement precludes development from a large portion of the lot . -grading and tree clearing limits should be indicated on the plans -septic field areas and well sites should also be shown on the plans. If you need further information, please call. Sincerely v Amy rker Development Coordinator ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 042 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 v ,- r45i1 MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Supervisor SUBJECT: Lakewoods Subdivision Lot 9 DATE: November 23 , 1987 This subdivision meets the Ordinance requirements by using large lots, limited additional impervious surfaces on each lot, and retaining a buffer of vegetation around the perim- eter of each lot to filter and absorb runoff. aided 1 04o tr""N Orange Water and Sewer Authority 400 Jones Ferry Road [OWASA 1 P.O. Box 366 Carrboro, NC 27510 (919) 968-4421 November 17, 1987 Mr. Eddie Kirk Planning Department Orange County 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Eddie: Thank you very much for providing Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) staff with the opportunity to review the major subdivisions of: (1) Lot 9 of Lake Woods; and (2) the property of Theodore Parrish. The following comments are offered-. in response to these proposals: Lot 9 Lake Woods The preliminary plan does not show the areas suitable for the primary and backup septic tank systems. The presence of the drainage easement and narrow configuration of Lot 9B would appear to. limit the development potential of that proposed lot. Theodore Parrish Tract If, in the future, public sewer services are determined necessary and appropriate in the general area of this property, it would be necessary to extend a gravity sewer main or other public sewer improvement through the property, along New Hope Creek. A sewer utility easement or right—of—way should be reserved for this purpose in advance of further development or subdivision of the tract. OWASA requests that, as a condition to subdivision approval, the property owner be required to dedicate a public utility easement along New Hope Creek, as marked on the enclosed sketch. At a minimum, the easement should be 30 feet wide. Your consideration of the above comments is appreciated. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sin a y, . Patrick K. Davis Assistant to the Executive Director wp Enclosure An Equal Opportunity Employer to ■ r .."..4yi 0 'AGE 5 5 Prepared by and Return co: Charles H. Thibaut, P.O. Box 207, Chapel Hill, NC 27514 I _ DECLARATIONS OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS This Declaration, made this the / day of r/ , 1984, by C 6 C Partnership, Route 5, Box 322 Chapel Hill, NC 27514, hereinafter _ referred to as "Declarant -` W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain property in Chapel Hill 4-- Township, County of Orange, State of North Carolina, described as all of Lots r:• 1 through 14 inclusive, Phase One, Lake Woods Subdivision, according to plats rJ Ii thereof prepared by Freehold Land Surveys, Inc., Registered Land Surveyors, '_ v •-7 r'- recorded in Plat Book , Page terl , and Plat Book 35 Page 113 , Orange County Registry. 1._ _. Ira J WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of Declarant, as well as to the J � ' benefit, interest and advantage of each and every person or entity hereafter kr ,. acquiring all or any portion of the within—described property that certain '7 covenants, conditions, easements, liens, and restrictions governing and regulating the use and occupancy of the same be established, fixed and set forth and ie,� - 1∎1: declared to be covenants running with the land; and WHE REAS, Declarant desires to provide for the preservation of the amenities _ and the desirability and attractiveness of [he real property of the subdivision; y NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that all of the properties described above shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject to the following easements, restrictions, covenants, and conditions, which are for the purpose FR MJ:r P - SEr 5�'1K p G� � pJ. - a -',-7;f .i"-„i�-.�._fLI .7- 1.i.yw1e.3 v;._;a ~w`Y?m . ' aoc� �5 PArE 5�5 A, • O45 -2- of protecting the value of and desirability of, and which shall .run with the real property and be binding on all parties having any right, title, or interest in the described properties or any parts thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. .:<„, 1. The property which is and shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to this declaration is located in Chapel Hill Township, `a Orange County, ). ',. g y, North Carolina, and is more particularly described as all of Lots -: ',i- <- 1 through 14 inclusive, Phase One, Lake Woods Subdivision, according to plats w thereof prepared by Freehold Land Surveys, Inc., Registered Land Surveyors, recorded in Plat Book ,, Page j1'7, and Plat Book 3C1 , Page 12z, Orange County Registry. t 2. No home, outbuilding, fence or wall of any nature whatsoever shall be commenced, erected or maintained upon the property, nor shall any exterior addition to or change or alteration therein be made to the above-referenced items until a the plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials, .: and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing as to the harmony of the external design and location in relation to the surrounding structures and topography by Declarant, or by some person or person designated by Declarant to review such plans. In the event Declarant, or its respective ; - designated party, fails to approve or disapprove such design and location within thirty (30) days after said plans and specifications have been submitted in writing _t;.` to its last known address, approval will not be required and this article will be deemed to have been fully complied with. Upon giving approval to such plans and specifications, construction shall be started and prosecuted to completion promptly and in strict conformity with such plans as have been previously .;:. approved, or the Declarant, or any one or more lot owners, shall be entitled to stop the construction which is in violation of these restrictions. - F - .i- y' T. ' . _ ti ; ' -3- ' 3. No lot shall be used except for residential ' " •' ..` purposes. No building „1., .4-. shall be erected, altered, placed, or permitted to remain on any lot other than ;�' one single family dwelling. ":o dwelling unit, or portion thereof, shall be :41 1;,-_. ,•``;r located nearer than corn: (40) feet from the front lot `-,,. ..:,% ,:4-. ,,.. line, or nearer F. '= ," 'r' ? r than twenty (20) feet from any side or rear lot line. :1•.' '`:.' " 4. No noxious or offensive activity shall be conducted upon any lot, nor ,fi shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an annoyance or :,- +. nuisance to the neighborhood. 1..r,- rc pigs or swine shall be kept or maintained on any lot or in any '` : - - dwelling. '' w, ...,F 6. No signs of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any lot, ,, ??' except one sign of not more than three (3) square feet advertising the property for sale or rent may be used by the lot owners. .n• 7. The minimum lot size for all lots shall be two (2) acres. No lot shall be subdivided into lots containing less than two (2) acres. x , . M` -,`' 8. No mobile homes, duplexes, modular homes, or apartment building shall *?y be placed permanently or temporarily on any lot. . '. 9. Declarant, or any lot owner, shall have the right to enforce, by any y' +, ' proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, or `*r'= ,:' reservations now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration. ;:.*0:,! Failure by the Declarant or by any lot owner to enforce any covenant or restriction =- herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. _ . . 9. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. 10. Covenants and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind 4?:.>' _., the land for a term of twenty (20) years from the date this Declaration is ',..',.14A7 -, r , _. k � c- s '� . ;T: o BODY i.F S °A6E 598 • -4- recorded, after which time they shall be automatically extended for successive i, periods of ten (10) years. This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by the owners of not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots, - provided that the amendment is properly recorded in the Orange County Registry. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant has caused this Declaration to be duly executed the day and year herein first above written. •• ,� ..7,,,,,„, C & C PARTNERSHIP cps PDg�,I �+? _ ,, F 't .:,. fi f--D: BY: • /�CC4. `_ �, • �`~'L •,` - Sylvia Chi, Partner ~ ± t.ATTEST: ��,�''r , "; ,.. BY: Coffey Grounds of Chapel Hill, Inc.,Partner a1� , i../-f.-..--,..._ /Secretary John Coffey, President /w STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, 04M4-e- County 5' I, R/2f ThLI...ris cc , ` o ;s_,P,ub}f of the Cou Rrer er Orange - - State of North Carolina, do her 's rt.ifv g tfraYYLVIA CHI/personally appeared before me this day and acknowledg t3t4•'d;6 gtion of the fornstrument. Witness my hand and officio.; seal tai& ? foregoing i day of �71Ly -, 1984. My Commission Expires: /Fri, c A F(/Bi_ g_ i.T- Notary Public 11-25-84 ' .`r ■ STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ..s...7... ti. COUNTY OF ORANGE tip- I, a Notary Public for said county and state, do hereby certify that C -�t� 1#Sfirr7- personally appeared before me this datte rated that he is the 4,...a.Secretary of Coffey Grounds of Chapel Hill, Inc.,!aa tat ity duly given and as an act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its President, se le}d with its corporate seal, and attested by AIM as its ecretary. Witness my hand and NO aaia;Sea this the ,�{p day of ,77//t/ , z. 1984. -,�l�•, J: ° r :.: �J My Commission piras:_% � V ' ; �%� ' ,4 ,./.„..4,1,..) Notary Public 11-25-84 * * /1 z t s ` r,v.,PtiG L I v .^'• 1.•Srf v �� fn _ NORTH CAROLINA-ORANGE COUNTY The foregoing certificate(s)of_ Elizabeth H. Justice, A Notary ( 1s Public of the designated Governmental units.4 (are) certified to be correct.Filed for registra- _. Lion this the 31st _day of July 19_84_ at_8s3q o'clock. A-.1 - in Record Book_ 4Zy:_Page y :_{y June H�• Re • ter of eeds ,•.- Return: _ B I` _ _ / / d-r_rsrant/Deoury _ ._ Register of Deeds -- ya •lid i H •l, a .�:. -0,-��NA .,iiJ' _'--- -� 04 F },_ J� - .{I - F1lEb ►-• sr—,XMxwfi44 - - ,146 `• t:fr. ac.. 644 FA(E 146 1r, Z I lb ii `�, BETTYJdr- -i, n[CnJ7U- c- ' ORANGE COGNTY.h.0 „= 1656 Excise Tax Recording Tune,Book and Page .7 ' Tax Lot No, 7 .114 5 t" !!y,• Parcel Identifier No. 1 7`8- 7 a —(p 18 ?' , Verified by.. .. 1 . County on the day of , 19 by .. .. .... t :p . f • Mail after recording to 0. Kenneth Bagwell, Jr., 105 N. Columbia St., Suite 500, Chapel Hill, , NC 27514 " This instrument was prepared by C. Bagwell, Jr. Brief description for the Index (Pt. Iot 9, LAKE WOODS 1 r is:- NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED •k, . THIS DEED made this 27 day of march . 19 87 , by and between GRANTOR I GRANTEE I& C & C PARMERSHIP, a NICHCILSCIN PROPERTIES, INC. Q ' - North Carolina General 730 Airport ?`* Partnership rHill Read :� '•` 71 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 �; fri --- r.) M fy CJ •: 6. C7 - ,_ Enter in appropriate block for each party: name,address,and.it appropriate,character of entity,e.°.corporation°r partnenhfp - . The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties• their heirs,successors, and assigns, and '� ,`. shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine nr neuter as required by context. .,.sue.' WITN$SSETH, that the Grantor. for a valuable consideration P y ;`' acknowledged, has and by these paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is hereby presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple, all that k'.. certain lot or parcel of land situated in the City o.( Cha 1 Hill Pe Township. Orange County.North Carolina and more particularly described as follows: ?!' BEGINNING at a point on the northern boundary of the right-of—way for SR 1942 (Jones Ferry Road), a common corner of Lot 9 and Lot 10, and running thence N54° 14' 28" E 290 feet, thence N53° 52' 47" W. 393.27 feet, thence N79°33' 45" W. 193.20 feet, thence N69° 51' 49" W. 159.77 feet, thence N33° 39' 47" W 427.29 feet, thence S10° 14' 38' E : i. F' 386.42 feet, thence S45°51' 32" E 347.10 feet, thence S580 31'51" E 414.65 feet to , ; the point and place of beginning; AND BEING all of that tract shorn( as LOT 9, PHASE CHF, - '" LAKE WCODS, at Plat Hook 39 Page 127, Orange County Registry, LESS AND EXCEPT that triangular portion of said Lot 9 previously conveyed - - .7_;:,3b- P Y �Yed by Grantor herein to third parties . -= by Deed recorded at Book 559 Page 218, Orange County Registry. . iY_� . - is?.-- -r wi = �_e•: Y • -C :! 046 • x,,.644 PAGE 147 The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument recorded in .. .F•.. r.: A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat Book 39 page 127 • TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging W • •'!•• the Grantee in fee simple. k, And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee, that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple,has the right to convey the same in fee simple, that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances,and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated. Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions: Restrictive Covenants of record at Book 476 Page 586, Orange County Registry. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereulete set his hand and seal.or if corporate,has caused that Instrument to be Signed Its corporate name by to duly authorized Officers and Hs seal to be hereunto sinned •y f It hoard - (Si , the day and year tarot d►` a" p (Corporate Manse) • (SEAL) i i Sylvia Chi, General • x' br s ls Partner (SEAL) '':'s • $ President ■ ATTEST: eg (SEAL/ ^gsbia4an/plg heefeta Yy)Carpera.a Seal( f f 9: EY .A_ r�S;A A]IP •-Cy NORTH CAROLINA, Orange fg;TT Coun1Y. hOl^R% J+ 1•a NOtary Pe btac of the county and state aforesaid. certify that Sylvia Chi, general r �,� = partner of C & C Partnership �", a Granter, w - . PO?! If^� ,{ :" personally app d before me this �L 9 day and ae Ygerl the:l 1� .v eaeeb[idn of the foregoing Ins[rueeunt,w'Ithna my _ r7 q -�,�'I ± hand and official sump Of tool,tai[p 21 day Or__f ys{A9sj'/•_' 19 7__ 4,-..Cc.area 11tast t,`s+` My romsission*Mitres:-r/7-C J E.7 y(/ _.2d-_I3(,4/ 4,____ Notary Public • i - SEAL.STAMP NORTH CAROLINA, COUoty. 1.a Notary Pt5Nle el the County pod State afe.esald. eertIfY that - .. penally same belere me this day sad aehuewle41ed that he H Secretary of - - t a North Carettna eoeperatnn•and that by authority duty - C ghee 1y as the net of the eprpantamn,the Iotegolflg Instrument was!tined IC Ira name by Its _ - _ y President,sealed with Ise corporate Mel and attested by as 14 Secretary. __ Wltpess my band and°mein'stamp et seal thgf day of l9 -= My emoelssioe empires: Notary Wblar • :.7:.Y7.,,,,.. _ The leeezem CerlllaeaM(gt oI . Tine e. Burden, Notary -Public of Crenge -County, --C. _ _' Is 7(k rerrlfled to be correct.This instrrmpat and mu certificate are duty ream/teed at the date and time and in the book and Page Morn on the rift page hereof_ This 2nd a of April, 1997 Betty June Hayes Orange REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR COUNTY - By •. = `,S: fn _-__ elense Anlawar-Reg or NUr beetle j .:4i; ?�. ....t b. e..-r....... i....0.. -�•+e ..-a_. .-, x.. )r.a..�..•..n.1 c]io5s . .. FY's (1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 050 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA. 27278 .,•rn n � jEC= oil PLANNING BOARD MINUTES APRIL 16, 1984 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carl Walters, David Shanklin, Frank Pearson, Steve Kizer, Valerie Greenberg, Alice Gordon STAFF PRESENT: Eddie Kirk, Susan Smith, Jeff Coutu, Marvin Collins • ITEM #1: ADDITIONS Kizer moved the Joint Planning Agreement to 5g. ITEM #2: MINUTES The Board deferred the minutes to the next meeting. IITEM #3: COMMISSIONERS' BRIEFS 'here were no Board comments. ITEM #4: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION Gordon read the Resolution which is located on page 24 of these minutes. MOTION: Greenberg moved approval. Walters seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #5: SUBDIVISION APPROVALS .. ITEM #5a: - James Bennett Subdivision (Preliminary Plat) Presentation by Coutu. The property in question is located in Hillsborough Township on Rosewood Road which is indicated as a pre-existing public road on the plat. This property is with n the Town of Hillsborough's extraterritorial jurisdiction. It is referenced as Lot 2E of Tax Map 32 Block C and is bordered by residential development. The tract is designated as Rural Residential in the County's Land Use Dian. There are three (3) lots proposed out of a 15.67 acre tract, however; only 2.76 acres of this tract will be developed with each lot consisting of .92 acre. The Town of Hillsborough has zoned this property as A-R (Agricultural-Residential) . Page 2 051 The tract is located in the Orange Rural Fire District. district is served by the fire department located in the Town of Hillsborough on Churton Street. Law enforcement in this area is provided by the Orange County Sherif_ ; Department. It is patrolled on a 24 hour basis. Development of this subdivision would have minimal impact on the area. The Planning Department recommends approval contingent upon developer showing 15' drainage easement on each side of the branch at the rear of the lots. Coutu indicated that DOT was not presently maintaining the road, but that no written response from the Town on that matter had been received. He noted the road was shown in the plat as a preexisting public road and that Mr. Bennett was concerned about upgrading the entire length of road. MOTION: . Shanklin moved approval with the condition Pearson seconded the motion. proposed by st,,aff. VOTE: Unanimous AGENDA ITEM #5b: Hackney Heirs Subdivision (Preliminary 0 Plat) Presentation by Coutu. The property in question is located in Chapel Hill township on SR 1942,Jones Ferry Road. It is referenced as Lot 21 of Tax Map 116. The tract is designated as Rural Buffer in the Land Use Plan and zoned Agricultural-Residential. There are 22 lots proposed out of a 75.6 acre tract. The maximum lot size proposed is 5.7 acres, while the minimum. lot size is 2.0 acres. The property is in University Lake Watersed. The tract is in the Orange Grove Rural Fire District. This district is served by the Orange Grove Fire Department. Law enforcement will be provided by the..Orange County Sheriff's s Depa_rtmn nt and will be patrolled on a 24 hour basis. Applying the maxamin I'rper'vious surface ratio of 6% to each lot gives the attached figures for each lot. The engineer proposes construct' of the proposed Lake Court ,�d� a detention storage area upstream to pass AQ10=48.32 cfs. while sto.�'°�with arisen/r'estricted outlet approximately 6933 of and the capacity to pass the full Q25 through the top of the riser/culvert system. Final design will be in conjunction with the roadway/culvert design. The engineer concludes that complete sto_r water routing will be performed for the lo year and 25 year storms, and checked for Q100, at the time of final engineering design. 3 • , r rage S , Planning staff recommends approval of this preliminary 0.5 plat subject to an approved stormwater management plan. For copy of memo from Erosion Control Officer, see pages 16 and 17 of these minutes. For copy of report from Phillip Post and Associates entitled Storm water Management Report for Site of John Hackney Heirs Subdivision. See pages 18-23 of these minutes. . Greenberg inquired if the Towns had reviewed the proposal. Coutu responded that no written response had been received from either the Towns or OWASA. Greenberg felt it was imperative to get a close review of the project by the Towns given the presence of the critical feeder creeks, Phils and Neville Creeks, Collins clarified that the staff had net with Carrboro staff, OWASA staff and TJCOG staff for the purpose of jointly reviewing the proposal. Kizer inquired if the Town had any problem with the proposal. Faircloth responded that the staffs had reviewed the project interns of the Carrboro proposed Soil & Erosion Control standards. Carrboro staff had indicated that there were no problems with the subdivision meeting the requirements. Gordon asked if this was the usual procedure pursued by the staff with project review. Coutu responded staff always notifies the Towns in writing and that the Towns generally respond by phone. He added that in this case the County staff went further and set up a meeting with all the relevant staffs to review the project. Greenberg expressed a desire to have written reports on the project from both Towns given the proximity of the project to the University Lake. Pearson questioned the request stating the Towns had been notified and had not given a written response. Shanklin agreed that further delay was unwarranted. Gordon added that legitimate concerns were needed to delay consideration of the proposal, that is deviations from • established procedures or unanswered questions. Kizer noted that staff had gone further in review than normal procedures called for. Gordon asked if Greenberg had specific questions. Greenberg asked why 10 instead of a. 25 year peak flow was used- Phili1 Post, engineer, responded that he had followed the ordinance specifically, indicating that this requirement was specified in.the ordinance and tracked standard procedure used in North Carolina. Greenberg asked if lots are to be sold later to individual builders. Post answered affirmatively. Greenberg expressed concern about siting of homes without Planning Board review. Q 5 Page 4 She inquired about separate entrances for each lot on to- Jones Ferry Road. John Coffey, developer, responded that common driveways were to be used to cut down on clearing and to provide for good sight/access points. Greenberg indicated this was not shown on the plat. Coffey responded he wanted to see if the lot lines were to be changed through the review process. Post indicated the driveways presented no impact on the stormwater management plan. • Greenberg questioned the plans for managing drainage. Post indicated the drawing was schematic and not to scale. He noted the basin fits between the dashed lines and the driveway between the dashed line and solid property line. Greenberg inquired if there is a drainage easement for the inter- mittent stream. Post answered affirmatively. Greenberg asked if the stream had been looked at during heavy rains. Post responded that the drainage basin bad been reviewed in terms of a 25 year storm designee. storm much larger than normally seen. Greenberg asked if soil types were considered. Post reponded they were part of the study indirectly as runoff projections take into account slope and permeability. He noted the slopes here were • generally moderate. Greenberg experssed concern that sub-basin A-1/A-4 is critical for University Lake asking if construction in that area would have no effect on the Lake. Post responded the report did not say there would be no effect, clarifying that it said there was no effective way (1) to retain stormwater from the lot, notirg_:: that in perspective of cubic feet per second the increase is 10% only as opposed to the doubling and tripling of stormwater he is used to ; (2) that the quality of water supply may not necessarily relate to the water flowing into it; and (3) the ordinance does not require the management of every drop of stormwater. He noted that the site needs to be considered as a whole and that attempting to manage each drop is impractical and may do more harm than good. Greenberg asked if it was presumed that trees be left. Post responded impervious surface areas were specified. They discussed the relative benefits of forest versus other types of vegetation in managing stormwater. Post noted portions of the site were pastures. Greenberg expressed concern about later home-building activities. Post indicated good engineering judgements regarding expected types of development were made ie..single family/large lots. Faircloth expressed concern about the lack of good clear guidelines for applying the Carrboro revisions to the S&E Ordinance noting a choice between approaching the development as individual lots or as an entire site. He continued that there was no place with concentrated runoff along the creek for detention structures. To try to do that would require diversions and concentrated flow across the buffer. The proposal submitted calls for sheet flow Page 5 054 and infiltration/filtration across the buffer which relects the direction he had given the engineers. Greenberg asked if private restrictive covenants addressed clearing of the property. Faircloth responded the buffer could not be distributed in any way and had to remain in natural vegetation to alow infiltration. Pearson asked what penalties would be enforced if the erosion control plan was violated. Kizer responded that they could be prosecuted under the law. Shanklin revised the question of clearing versus lumbering. Faircloth responded that forestry/timber operations are exempt from the ordinance. Gordon questioned lot #2 as a flag lot. Collins responded the lot was proposed prior to the most recent interpretation of the ordinance. He explained that the County attorney had advised that flag lots were not .permitted under the ordinance. Greenberg questioned the size of lots #2,5 and 9 with regard to building sites. Post responded the scale of the map was deceptive and that these were large lots which could confortably accomodate home sites. Greenberg inquired about septic tanks. Coffee responded that each site had been reviewed to determine both home site and septic tank area. He reviewed the septic tank locations for lots #9 and 2. He added that each site was reviewed twice. Greenberg asked if the private convenants addressed the retention of trees. Coffee responded most people are not interested in cutting trees dawn. Gordon inquired about the r'eauired minimum lot size. Staff responded 40,000 square feet in R-1 and A-R without public sewer. Kizer expressed concern about OWASA plans to pump water down Phiis, ..Creek given strearrbed-- erosion and siltation in University Lake. • Faircloth responded that CWASA does intend to pump water from Cane Creek to University Lake down Pails.:: Creek. Greenberg remained dissatisifed with her perceived lack of close scrutiny by the Towns and OWASA. Gordon responded the staff had been notified and a special review meeting scheduled. Faricloth emphasized that staff met with David Blaha and Jerry Davenport to try to come to a concensus regarding the project. Gordon asked if Carrboro was satisfied in the staff's opinion. Faircloth responded he was confidant that Carrboro was satisfied that the ordinance recuirements had been met. Coffee indicated that OWASA staff had contacted him and both OWASA and Carrboro had indicated they were happy with the two acre lot proposal. Shanklin questioned 115.67 cubic feet per second. Post responded it is the amount of stcrmwater which runs off at peak moments Q5 Pam p• from the site as it is now. Shanklin asked if it was concentrated at one point and asked about the 125.44 reference. Post responded the latter figures is what it will be at the worse possible mount if all lots are developed at maximum impervious surface levels. Shanklin asked if this reflected the greatest runoff at peak develo; ment. Post responded affirmatively. Kizer noted this was the potential runoff if nothing was impounded. Post indicated the detention proposals addressed the site as a whole though runoff controls affected certain lots and certain sections of the development. Greenberg inquired about the schedule for stormwater improvements. Smith responded they are to be in place before permits are issued. Greenberg inquired about stream buffer calculations. Faircloth responded that they varied with width and were calculated on the basis of the formula in the ordinance. He continued that the Carrboro ordinance called for 100' for streams feeding directly into the lake and 50' for lesser streams. He added slope was a real factor only with regards to Phils and Neville Creeks. Gordon inquired if there was any necessity to improve the ordinance due to lack of specificity. Faircloth answered affirmatively. MOTION; Pearson moved approval with staff recommendations. Shanklin seconded the motion. VOTE: 5 in favor; Greenberg opposed • Motion carried. TM 5c: Mel Oak Estates Preliminary Plat. Presentation by Coutu. The property in question is located in Chapel Hill Township on SR 1942, Jones Ferry Road. It is referenced as Lot 2 of Tax Nan 118 and is bordered by ? icultu -Residential land. The tract is designated as Ag_^icultura1-Residential in the Land Use Plan and zoned Agricultural-Residential. There are seventeen (17) lots proposed out of a 19.53 acre tract. The Traximr mn lot size proposed is 96,000 sq. ft. or 2.2 acres while the minimum lot size is 40, 000 sq. ft. or .92 acres. The property is in University Lake Natershed so the impervious surface ratio. applies. See Table 1 for impervious surface ratio per lot. To meet the stor^rwater runoff requirements, the engineer proposes a detention pond on Lot 4 with the following calculations: Computed Discharge Undeveloped = 55 ft.3/second Computed Discharge Developed = 67 ft.3/second Additional Discharge = 12 ft.3/second ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH O G' NORTE CAROLINA 27278 IL1 lr - ♦wry+ " PLANNING BOARD MEETING JULY 16, 1984 MEMBERS PRESENT: Alice Gordon"(Chair) , Tom Bacon, Valerie Greenberg, Nancy Laszlo, Frank Pearson, David Shanklin, Carl Walters, John Wilson MEMBERS ABSENT: Ruth Burnette, Steve Kizer, Sharlene Pilkey, Steve Yuhasz STAFF PRESENT: Marvin Collins, Susan Smith, Jeff Coutu, Eddie Kirk, Joanna Bradshaw AGENDA ITEM #1 : There were no additions to the agenda. AGENDA ITEM #2: Approval of Minutes a. June 12, 1984 Minutes List absentees on minutes; list chair. MOTION: Wilson moved for approval with these changes. Seconded by Greenberg. VOTE: Unanimous b. June 18, 1984 Minutes Pearson noted a change on page 4, paragraph 10: depth should be 15' instead of 150' . MOTION: Greenberg moved for approval with these corrections. Seconded by Laszlo. VOTE: Unanimous AGENDA ITEM #3: Commissioners Brief Smith received the briefs noting the BOCC action on the Joint Planning Agreement and the removal of the extension of zoning to 0 Cheeks item from the agenda. AGENDA ITEM #4a: Lake Woods Subdivision - Phase I (Formerly Hackney Heirs Subdivision) The purpose of this agenda item is to consider approval of the Final Plat for Lake Woods Subdivision - Phase I . I Page 2 05`t Presented by Eddie Kirk. The property in question is located in Chapel Hill Township on Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) . It is known as lot 21 of Tax Map 116. The t: t is designated as Rural Buffer and Water Supply Watershed in the Lanc Use Plan and is currently zoned AR-Agricultural Residential. There are 14 lots proposed in Phase I comprising a total of 49.42 acres. The maximum lot size is 5.97 acres, while the minimum lot size is 2. 13 acres. The average for all lots is 3. 53 acres. All lots are sub- stantially the same as shown on the Preliminary Plat. The property in question is located in University Lake Watershed and a maximum impervious surface ratio of 6% applies to each lot. The application of this ratio is shown on the plats and on the acompanying sheet. Water supply would be provided by individual wells. Sewage disposal would be accomplished by septic tanks and nitrification fields. No street improvements are proposed in Phase I . The Preliminary Plat for this subdivision was approved by the Planning Board on April 16, 1984, and by the Board of Commissioners on June 2, 1984. A Stormwater Management Report for Site of John Hackney Heirs Subdivision was submitted at the time of consideration of the Preliminary Plat (See 4/16/84 agenda packet) . That report called for the construction of a stormwater detention for lots in Phase II .. 1 Stormwater detention for lots in Phase I would be handled on a case- by-case basis by the Erosion Control Officer. Specific methods utilized would incorporate limitations on impervious surfaces, stream buffers, sheet flow, and infiltration. This method is to be used to reduce the amount of land disturbance on individual lots. The Planning Staff recommends approval of Phase I Lake Woods Subdivision subject to denoting required 40 foot building setback line on plats. Pearson inquired why the setback was required on the plat. Collins responded it was a new policy. Pearson noted that it needed to be stated "front" setback. Wilson inquired if The Health Department had approved the lot near the watershed and Kirk responded no. Wilson also inquired what school district the lot was in and Kirk responded Chapel Hill . MOTION: Pearson moved approval . Seconded by Shanklin. Pearson noted all setbacks were specified in the Ordinance and, if they were shown on the plats, the plats were going to be covered up with information. Collins responded he felt the setbacks could be indicated on the plats without any problem. Pearson further noted that it should be all setbacks rather than just the front setback. Collins agreed. P Q5b _ a,Qe 3 Motion was amended to read with the staff recommendation that all setbacks be indicated on the plat. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM 46: Deerfield Subdivision Phase Two The purpose of this agenda item is to consider approval for the Final Plat for Deerfield Subdivision Phase Two. Presentation by Kirk. Property is located In Chapel Hill Township off Ridgewood Road. There are two lots proposed with the road presently constructed to Department of Transportation standards. The proposed lot sizes of 2.00 and 2.01 acres meet the minimum standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. This tract is designated Rural Buffer and Water Supply Watershed in the Land Use Plan. It is also in the University Lake Watershed. The fire district for this area is South Orange with the Fire Department located in Carrboro on Roberson Street. An impervious ratio of 6% applies and has been shown for both lots on the plat. Lot 23 has an impervious surface limitation of 5,253 sq. ft while that of Lot 25 is 5,227 sq. ft. Development of these two lots with the existing road constructed to state standards and the lot sizes proposed would have minimal impact on this residential area. A two-lot subdivision is exempt from the Soil Erosion and Sedi - mentation Ordinance requirements for University Lake Watershed. Section 9 (a) (3) states that only single family detached resi- dential developments where more than 3 lots are to be created are subject to stormwater management practices. The Planning Staff recommends approval subject to denoting the required 40 foot front building setback line on the plat. Staff clarified that all setbacks are to be on plat. MOTION: Walters moved for approval with staff recommendation. Seconded by Pearson. Shanklin inquired if the road name Deerfield Trail had been approved and Kirk responded yes. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #4c: Final Plat of Alexander Woods Section II The purpose of this agenda item is to consider approval of the final plat of Alexander Woods Section I1 . 056 MEMORANDUM TO: GEOFFREY GLEDHILL, COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM: MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR DATE: DECEMBER Z1, 1987 SUBJECT: RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS COPIES: ALBERT KITTRELL, INTERIM COUNTY MANAGER BARRY JACOBS, PLANNING BOARD CHAIR MARY ANNE BLACK, RECREATION & PARKS DIRECTOR At the December 21, 1987 meeting of the Planning Board, questions arose regarding the above mentioned subject (s) . Specifically, the questions resulted from the Planning board' s consideration of two separate items - the Master • Recreation and Parks Plan, and the Subdivision of Lot 9 of Phase I, Lake Woods. While we are meeting today to discuss the issue of conservation easements, I thought it best to put the basic questions in writinc for your consideration. Subdivision of Lot 9 - Phase I of Lake Woods 1. Can the County require a developer/owner to put certain stipulations in restrictive covenants at the time of preliminary plat approval? As an example, can the County require the a restriction establishing a certain minimum lot size (greater than required by ordinance) or preventing further subdivision of the lots? 2. What is the role of the County in the enforcement of - restrictive covenants? I told the Board that such covenants constituted an agreement between private parties, and it was neither desirable nor necessary that the County become involved in the enforcement of such covenants. __.: .= Is there any County liability by actinc . in contradiction, -:- to recorded covenants, particularly if the covenants served as the basis for the initial approval 'of a - project? _. - - - These questions arose because some Planning Bard members . thought that the preliminary plat for Lake Woods had been -pprovied with a stipulation, that restrictive covenants be recorded limitinn the lot size and further subdivision of the - - -lots. A check of the minutes revealed that no such conditions had been attached to the approval. Furthermore, the proposed subdivision, of Lot 9 into two lots, each two or more acres in size, was. consistent with the recorded covenants. 06U Master Recreation & Parks Plan Proposed text revisions to the Plan (copy attached) contain references to rnananernent agreements, conservation easements, mutual covenants, etc. Such mechanisms would be employed where land would be left in private ownership but protection would be sought for natural conservation areas. Questions which arose regarding the mechanisms for protection, of conservation areas include the fallowing : • 1. What are conservation easements and what are permitted uses within designated conservation areas? If an existing structure is located within, an area proposed for dedication or protection by means of a co.nservatior, easement, how should it be treated? I have enclosed a copy of The Landowner' s pptions for Natural Her i t ape Protection which identifies various mechanisms for . protecting conservation lands in North Carolina. Panes 15-54 define those mechanisms referred to in the Plan text. Panes .54-Z5 contain, a copy of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act. The provisions of that act define the limitations can uses of land under Section (2) . The Planning Board is to consider the above items anair, at a January 12 special meeting. If you could provide answers to the above, either verbally or in narrative form prior to that date, I would be most appreciative. Marvin Collins Plannir,a Director • 061 COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.O. DRAWER 1529 * ; ,l 528 �1 1E,129 E. TRYON ST. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 919-732-2196 919-942-8000 January 4 , 1988 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20,FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E. FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL,N.C.27514 919-929-7151 ALONZO B.COLEMAN,JR_ STEVEN k BERNHOLZ DONALD R.DICKERSON ROGER B. BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL Mr. Marvin Collins DOUGLAS HARGRAVE Director C.NICHOLAS HERMAN KIM K.STEFFAN Orange County Planning Department NATHANIEL E.CLEMENTS 306F Revere Road MARILYN ELIJSON Hillsborough , North Carolina 27278 Of Counsel BONNER D.SAWYER (1902.19721 Re: Subdivision Requirements - Restrictive Covenants Dear Marvin: This letter is a follow up to our December 31 , 1987 meeting concerning the relationship between restrictive covenants and subdivision review and approval . Generally speaking the County has no role in the exaction or enforcement of restrictive covenants . There are , by definition , agreements among private parties . The County ' s subdivision regulations (Section IV-B-3-d ) permit private roads in a subdivision when in the judgment of the County it is determined that private roads are justified. In making that determination the County should be looking for subdivisions which, among other things , "preserve a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features . " To satisfy that requirement , a developer could propose a private road subdivision with . restrictive covenants which both limit lot size and prohibit future subdivision of the lots . The County then can approve the private road subdivision as proposed by the developer, imposing those conditions proposed by the developer. Unless the subdivision regulations create some other standard (such as a public road standard ) which can be varied upon the development ' s meeting certain conditions ( such as special design features as part of a private road subdivision ) there is no ordinance basis for imposing deed restrictions or • 082 . Mr. Marvin Collins Page Two January 4 , 1988 restrictive covenants in any other context . Certainly any requirement for restrictions imposing lot size requirements in excess of that required in the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance are without authority in either the subdivision regulations or the zoning ordinance . Finally, you asked about County liability by acting in contradiction to recorded covenants and particularly if the covenants served as the basis for initial approval of the project . Generally speaking the County should not act in contradiction to previously imposed requirements . This should only be done where ordinance changes make it necessary. Also generally speaking the County ' s development review process is. not limited by restrictive covenant conditions or requirements . For example , County building permits must issue if the proposed building meets all County subdivision regulation requirements and zoning requirements, including set backs even if the structure if built as proposed would violate restrictive covenants . Restrictive covenant enforcement is a matter for the private landowners a affected by the restrictions. 0 Very truly yours , A -go e E. G -dhill 0 GEG/lsg xc : Barry Jacobs , for t•e Plann nq Bo- d Shirley E. Marshal , for thy- Boa 'd of County Commissi• •.ers DRAFT 066 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 18, 1988 MEMBERS PRESENT: Barry Jacobs ( Chair) , Chris Best, Abbie Dickinson, Dan Eddleman, Peter Kramer, Betty Margison, Sharlene Pilkey, Steve Yuhasz . MEMBERS ABSENT: Virginia Boland ( excused) , Mike Lewis, Brenda Swann, Prince Taylor ( unexcused) . STAFF PRESENT: Marvin Collins, Eddie Kirk, Brad Torgan, Joanna Bradshaw. AGENDA ITEM #2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA There were no additions to the agenda. AGENDA ITEM #3 : COMMISSIONERS BRIEFS - January 4, 1988 Informational only. AGENDA ITEM #5: CHAIR COMMENTS Jacobs informed the Board that the continuation of the public hearing on the capacity use designation is scheduled for February 3, 1988 at 7 :00 p. m. He also announced there is to be a public hearing on the Durham/Chapel Hill /Carrboro Thoroughfare Plan at Jordan High School on January 28, 1988 at 7 :30 p. m. He asked if information would be avail - able before the public hearing. Collins responded any information that is available will be passed on to the Planning Board . Jacobs announced the meeting between the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners will be held at Moorefield ' s on February 29, 1988 at 7 :30 p. m. AGENDA ITEM #6 : SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS a. Preliminary Plats (Total - 2 lots) 1 . Lake Woods - Division of Lot 9 (2 lots - Chapel Hill Township) Presentation by Eddie Kirk . This item was continued from the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting. The property is located in Chapel Hill Township 0t4 2 on Jones Ferry Road ( SR 1942) . There are 4. 6 acres in the total tract with two (2) lots proposed. One lot will be 2. 1 acres and the other lot 2. 5 acres. Both lots will have frontage on Jones Ferry Road. The property is located in the University Lake Watershed and zoned Rural Buffer. All applicable agencies have reviewed the preliminary plan. The Recreation Department indicated a need to specify that the recreation area is dedicated to Orange County for public recreation and park/open space purposes. Carrboro has indicated several concerns. A 100 foot buffer area would be required along the stream in their Jurisdiction, however, the buffer proposed meets Orange County requirements. The house and existing driveway are shown for lot 9B, however, the house site for lot 9A has not been determined. The tract is totally wooded with proposed clearing areas to include the driveways and house sites. OWASA and Carrboro both indicated a need to show septic field areas. This has been designated on the revised preliminary plan for lot 9B. At the December 21 , 1987 meeting of the Planning Board, consideration of the preliminary plat was continued to this meeting to permit the Planning Staff to review the restrictive covenants governing Phase I of Lake Woods Subdivision. The preliminary plat for Lake Woods Subdivision was approved by the Planning Board on April 16, 1984 and by the Board of Commissioners on May 7, 1984. The final plat for Phase I of Lake Woods Subdivision was approved by the Planning Board on July 16, 1984. There is no reference to any approval being based on a condition that the restrictive covenants limit the lot size to a certain area or to preventing further subdivision of the property. The deed restrictions do limit subdivision of the lots to not less than two acres in size. The County Attorney has provided information regarding the relationship between restrictive covenants and subdivision review and approval . ( See County Attorney 1 /4/88 Letter included on pages of these minutes) . The Planning Staff recommends approval with the following condition: 1 . Label the recreation area as dedicated to Orange County for public recreation and • o€ o 3 park/open space purposes. This item will be considered by the Board of Commissioners at its February 1 , 1988 meeting. Jacobs asked if the County could use restrictive covenants to prevent further subdivision of previously subdivided lots. Collins responded in general , no and referenced the County Attorney' s letter as follows : In making that determination the County should be looking for subdivisions which, among other things, "preserve a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. " To satisfy that requirement, a developer could propose a private road subdivision with restrictive covenants which both limit lot size and prohibit future subdivision of the lots. Collins continued that the condition for private roads is the best way at this time to prevent further subdivision. Jacobs continued asking about the reference to Lot #2 as a flag lot in the Planning Board minutes of April 16, 1984. Collins responded that flag lots are currently restricted under the ordinance. He indicated the only areas likely to have flag lots are the two northern townships where the minimum frontage requirement is twenty feet. He indicated that the proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee are to allow flag lots where property constraints are such that a flag lot would be the only way for access to a buildable area of the lot. MOTION: Margison moved approval with the Staff condition. Seconded by Eddleman. Best asked about the location of the driveway. Kirk demonstrated the location of the driveway on the plat. Pilkey commented that the proximity to other jurisdictions and consistency of regulations needed to be addressed. VOTE: Unanimous. O R A N G E C O U N T Y 066 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date February 1 ,_1,88 Action enda Item #� _- SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Proposed Amendments Sections IV-B-3-d and e ( Existing) Section IV-B-3-e ( Proposed ) Section II Draft 11 /23/87 Public Hearing Minutes Draft 1 /18/88 Planning Board Minutes TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : Consideration of proposed amendments which would require a traffic impact analysis to be submitted as part of a subdivision application. The amendments were presented at public hearing on November 23, 1987 . BACKGROUND : The proposed amendments would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all subdivision applications where 80 or more lots or building sites were proposed or the estimated traffic generated by the subdivision exceeded 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirements into the Subdivision Regulations include the following: 1 . Renumber Sections IV-B-3 d and e to d-1 and d-2, respectively, to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Subdivision Regulations. 2. Add Section IV-B-3-e which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 3. Add definitions to Section 11 which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. No comments were received at the public hearing regarding the proposed amendments. At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed Subdivision Regulations text amendments as recommended by the Planning Board . PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 066 _ ORDINANCE: Subdivision Regulations = REFERENCE : IV-B-3-d STREETS ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x_ Staff x Board BOCC Public _ Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle_x.., Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE : November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Section IV-B-3-d will be renumbered to Section IV-B-3-d-1 . There will be no change in text. IMPACTS/ ISSUES : The renumbering of Section IV-B-3-d to Section IV-B-3-d-1 is part of a reorganiza- tion of this part of the Subdivision Regula- tions made necessary by the inclusion of a traffic impact study requirement as a new Section IV-B-3-e. There is no change in the text of Section IV-B-3-d proposed in con- junction with the reorganization . PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Section IV-B-3-d will be renumbered as Section IV-B-3-d-1 . obi 'rV - B - 3 -- c - 11 . Street Names - Names of streets which -; duplicate or be confused with the names of existing streets within Orange County, in-- cluding all municipalities , shall .not be approved.. _ Extensions of existing and- named= streets shall bear the name of such existing - streets. numbering - _ ets Rouse nu.. g shall comply- ;_- *- _ . . with standards recommended by the Planning oard adopted by the Board of County _: --_ Commissio ne _.. - -B - _3 c - 12. Street Name Signs - Approved street name signs w erected all be by the subdi- vider at the intersection of streets. d. Private roads may be allowed in a subdivision c where : (1) in the 'udem 7 ent of the Planning -=='= Board and with the approval of the County Commissioners - it is found that the nature and _.. location of the s ubdivision, including such - considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans , and access by public safety vehicles , are such that a private road is justified (2) and if one or more of the following conditions are met: _ A) the subdivision consists of less than ten (10) lots B) the subdivision preserves a natural area throught deed restrictions and special design features C) the subdivision does not embrace or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County thoroughfare plan, or a municipality' s thoroughfare plan within the County, or does not lie within a designated transition area as determined by the County. D) the subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the - streets of the existing subdivision are private or unpaved and when the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community area. E) the subdivision roads , even if constructed to State Standards , would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State recuirement that the subdivision cannot meet. For -a subdivision to be approved with privy roads , it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible. The meeting of one (1) or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval of private roads. -30- PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 070 - ORDINANCE : Subdivision Regulations - REFERENCE: Section IV-B-3--e STREET _ ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x� Staff .._x : Planning Board BOCC Public Other: - STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION : High Middle_x_Low Comment: _-- EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE : November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Section IV-B-3-e will be renumbered to Section IV-B-3-d-2. There will be no change in text. IMPACTS/ ISSUES : The renumbering of Section IV-B-3-e to Section IV-B-3-d-2 is part of a reorganiza- tion of this part of the Subdivision Regula- tions made necessary by the inclusion of a traffic impact study requirement as a new Section IV-B-3-e. There is no change in the text of the existing Section IV-B-3-e proposed in conjunction with the reorganization . PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Section IV-B-3-e will be renumbered as Section IV-B-3-d-2 . 071 . _v - rs — 1 --- e. A private road shall be required to meet - - standards set by Orance County. . Satisfactoav • proof that the standards are met will be required by -the County Manager or his appointed . agents . If -a subdivision is to contain private roads , the subdivider shall guarantee (a) a right of access to any private road in the sub - * division by all -lots served by the road, and . (b) perpetual maintenance of any private road _ _:_ _- - in the subdivision at the standards set for :.:._ - _ — approval. See Section III - - 5 - k for - - additional requirements_ ---- -31- 074 _-. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ORDINANCE: . .Subdivision Regulations _ - - : - REFERENCE: Section IV-B-3-e (New) TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: x, Staff - - x_ Planning Board BOCC • Public - Others - STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle_x_Low = Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23 , 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: new Section IV-B-3-e will require preparation and submission of a traffic impact study as part of the application for approval of sub- divisions with 80 or more dwelling units or where the estimated traffic generated by the subdivision exceeds 800 trips/day. IMPACTS/ISSUES: Large-scale development has a significant effect on a community' s and in some cases a region' s environment, economy, and public facilities. A traffic impact study is used to determine whether the roadway network in the area of a proposed major development will be able to handle the existing traffic plus additional traffic that will be generated by the development. If in preparing the study, it is determined that the roadway network cannot adequately handle the additional traffic, the study should provide useful information for determining the types and extent of improvements necessary to handle the additional traffic. In this way, it can provide a basis for linking roadway improvements with develop- ment project approval. This amendment would require preparation and submission of a traffic impact study as part of the application for preliminary plan approval for subdivision containing 80 or more dwelling units. Procedures are included that would allow Orange County to require preparation of a study for smaller subdivisions as well as an exemption proce- 070 _ dure for larger subdivisions when it can be ` -- demonstrated that the subdivision would not _ . - produce a need for transportation improve- _. rnents. Recommendations for transportation - ' improvements resulting from the study will be incorporated into the -subdivision approval process. Certain improvements may - - be attached as conditions for approval of = - the subdivision. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: None. This is a new require- men . PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Section IV-B-3-e pL traffic, j-mpact_study shall be required of - subdivisions as defined iri Section IV-B-3- e-3 . The study will enable Orange County to assess the impact of a proposed subdivi- .,ioon on the highway w is at or nee.r capacity or a safety problem T u proposed developments do n9t adversely affect the highway network and tp identify w from the site to the existing transporta- tion network . The purpose of the study i,5 also to identify solutions to potential croblems and to present :improvements tp be incorporated into the proposed development. IV-B-3-e-1 Conduct 8 traffic impact study shall be ctualified traffic engineer and/or transportation planner with previous traffic study experience. The procedures and standards for the traffic impact study are set forth in Section IV-B-3-e-3 of this Ordinances. IV-B-3-e-2 App;icability Except as described be}.ow, a traffic impact study shall-be requjsed for ell subdivisions containino 80 or more dwelling units or where the estimated traffic generated by the subdj_visi9n exceeds 800 trips/day. A subdivision conta,icing 80 or more dwelling e requirement to prepare and submit a traffic impact study if, as Pert pf sketch plan review t t , subdivision when added to u_istinp traffic will not result in a need for transportationt improvements. Planning AePertment staff will 074 review r;atgri_al _yubm+tted ir. :B&o.r of an = - = - whether or nat _to grant the exei ption. If an - exen:ptipn _ is °ranted. dag - exempts qr� will be subjnj.tted as part of the staff _ _ Orange County may require any subdi isioa approval application to_ accompanied Y ' traffic impact study why a road capacity or safety. issue exists. If one is required. the _-_ _ - _ _ county will notify the -app,liclult - of the reason _ _- . _ for the requirement. IV-B-3-e-3 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS - __-_- - i c t t following information:. (a) GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION s i location. proposed land_ uses. construction development, If the _development is residential, w t a shall also be included. A brief description of other major existing _and proposed land develop- ts The oeneral site descrip _ion shall also include, probable socio-economic characteristics of i t e t t t affect the transportation needs of the site 5.L e. , number of senior_ citizens (b) TRAPSPORTAT;ON FACILITIES DESCRIPTION The description shall contain a full documenta- tion of the proposed internal and existino external transportation system. This des ription shall include proposed ,i,„ntQrnal vehicular, bj.cycle and pedestrian circulation. all .propo ed ingress and egress locations. all internal w -w conditions. traffic chiane1 i�. ; one and any. traffic signals or other. intersection control devices at all intersections withip the site.. he report _shams_ _ r, he_eztire ex ernal roadway system withip the gtudy sZre_a. Major t stud ea 1 nti- f ed and_sketched. All existing _ and proposed p lic t anspor,tation_ ervices and_ , .facilities wltn one rni�, t ite shall-, a�.sQ be 0'70 dos u�^en ed� - El�tl��e _ ighwav 3 :F ents .. _ _ __ - -- 1=1 uC1ng _.'Y.9 Se - .sDa1izatioat_ a 1 be notes-,_ This ir_formaticn -- - shall be obtained from North Carolina' s -7- Transportation Ijnprpvement Program. An}r :;- _. .; proposed roadway yjnpro emepts due to proposed surxMndiing developments shall also, a nosed. ..- - (c) EXISTING TRAFFFg CONDITIONS Exis c a ' i u = and documented_ for I'll roadways and ntersecti . in the -study _area. _ Existing - - V. a- - . -V- _ . . - - •- • hj.,ghwav hour(s)__ traffic, and peak development generate _hour (s) traffic shall be recorded. Manual trAffic counts at inaior intersect u in the study area shall be conducted, encompassing - hour (s) , and documentation shall be included in . the report. A, volume/capacity analysis based upon existing volumes shall be perforinsQ during the peak highway hour (s) and the _peak development-generated hour (s) for all _roadways and major intersections in the study area. Levels of service shall be determingd for each location. This analysis will determine the adequacy of the ousting roadway system to serve the current traffic demand. Roadways and/or intersections ci v f c c (d) TRANSPORTATION IMPACT OF TEE DEVELOPMENT Estimation of y r tr p. to red t f r4L.._. e v w v V a er cc d c - V a w turning _ movements shall j2_e calculated. These v t . • - • - . • - - . - . t e Documentation of, 1l Assu rk, mptions u ed i the a v si Q7b 9S shd1.1_ ELL be - - - s chool_csossin,Qs are to .r used, e_d an vol uLnz to ech cro ina. Any characteristics_ of the site - that will cause -- particular tryp generation problems ,hall be note. - ` (e) :: k. '• ; . • 4 .4 — - . The total traffic demand that will result from cnstructior- Qf_the Propose} devgl,Qpment shall be_,c_alculatgd. T s_depand shall consist of the - combipption of the existing traffic and traffic generated_ by the propose.d development, I t . • _ 4 " • .A_• - . • -V- • 01 -.4 antirjpated, calculations for each stage . completion shall be made. This analysis shall be peck developm t-generated hour(p) for all _ roadways and major intersections in the study - Area. Volume/capac -ty cg/culatipns shall be. • • - - • • - _ • • • . t' s-. ' • t t • usually at these locations that capacity is most restricted. All access points and pedestrian crossings shall bg examined as to the feasibdlity of installing traffic signals. This evaluation_shali compare . - • -c _ - d •e - t v•1 - • - w- - t • - 1,t ' • • (f) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS Levels of service for all roadways and intersec-, tions shall be listed. All roadwavj and/Qr interse Lions showing a level of service below £ - . - . �- . - - 0 d- i ' - ,- , o •ec ' fi recommendations for the elimination of these. problgms shall be listed. This listing of recommended improvements shall include, but net be limited to the following elements: internal circulation design., site accgzs locAtion are , - 7 . . . - .w- -i • ' + - - • . . - ' • , ari improvements, traffic signal installation and operation including_ siapAl timing, and tignsit design improvements. .all p ysical • - • - a• •V- - .. - . - - •W. . 1 - - Ths listing of xecommengled improveingnts for road. ' 11.• •v^ Ii- t. .- - ' e . 0 - • -- t • •v- - t, the party responsible for tne_ improvement, the Lest and Banding of the impspvement, and the. cQ)npletion date _for the improvement._ IV-B-3-e-4 - ST,1BMIS$1ON AND I TLEMEr:TATION The traffic impact study will be submittethto •n 9�Pa�tment_ wll view the stu y as part of _ the development r v ' w • wij1 co _be_inrporated to the�_sipal vat rocs - as indicated below. -_ (a) TIME OF_$UBMISSI ._ The sketch plan should be sufficiently detailed to allow the Dep Planning ar„tnient to ,_assess the need for a_ traffic impact study, The traffic. d . - .. ft - 4 w 4 . 4 - • - 'U '_ 4 - • _ I • - • • 1 (b) IMPLEMENTATION The Planning Department and such other aaencies or _officials _, as may aprear _a,p r ?p .ate in t,�i...e circumstances of the case shall review the impact shady to analyze its adequacy in gplving .ny_ traffic . prQ twill occur_,due to the ,subdivision _ The Planning Depar ingnt and Planning Board may recommend and the grange county Board of Commissioners may _ecide that certain_ improvement , on_ o,r jacent to the__,__site d v c Of Commissioners cQncludgs that additional improvements axe_.,B4ss� Y� k? p icant shx have the opp ity t4___resubmit alternative improvement designs for approval, 076 - ORD BRACE : .Subdivision RFgulat.tons. - . _- - - _ REFERENCE : Section H p FINITIONS - ORIGIN OF. A!EElID'1EIIT: x;_ Scoff _xw P ! ;In ning Eoard - +- - BOCC Pub I. i c Other: STAFF PRIORITY- r'ECOi0 IErIDAT (OM: High Ni i dd I eYLow Ccr:!men t : EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November :23, - 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Section II will be amended by adding definitions of terms used in the traffic impact study requirements proposed as a new Section IV-B-3-e of the Subdivision Regulations . IMPACTS/ ISSUES : The traffic impact study requirements that are proposed as a new Section IV-3-3-e of the Subdivision Regulations contain certain terms that should be defined in the Sub- division Regulations . Section II will be amended by adding definitions for the following terms : Level of Service, Major Intersection, Study Area, Trip Generation Rates, and Volume/Capacity Analysis . These items will be added alphabetically . No other change in Section II is proposed . PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The following terms will be added alphabetically to Section. II . L`VEL OF SEH ICE - Level of strii ■ - . - . . - • i . . , • . • . •1 • . of servicing ranging from A_through F„ Lex' I_ of service A i nd i czt_es generally free movQment . Level pf saryjLe _ represents- ma ti c r i • t • - c i s i r i - - _ -- '`r 1,f j i ; gerier ,,4 , 1 by Th_t_...i'f r..1.a C?1 w• ,i a- S i gnij i ca.nt o n e cper af io cj_.tne- intersection . - STUDY AREA This area will e?sf end approx i- -- .. - gateIv one-half mile along -'-re adjacent_ - .- roadwa Y in 129f1] d i reef i ong from all I �cces s __- - RQ i nts or - to a major intersection aLong these rQadways . r :. !RIP GENEEATICE FATES Ali trial couili r'f... fr i ps to ansi__from a _.fudv site per unit of = land use as measured by parameters like dwelling unite , acras , etc: VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYSIS - This procedure compares the yQlume of a rpadway or inter- section approach tojts capaclfy (maximum - Dumber of vehicles that can pass a giveb point during a given time period ) . The procedures descrjbed in the 1465 Highway Capacity Manual , Highway Reslyrch Board b. Traffic Jmmac+ Ana ! YS'! Provisions 0 New Article 13 - Traffic Impacts - ---:-- ..-.-.-=- (2) New Article_ 6. 17 - Traffic imp acts (3) Renumbering - Article 8. 8 a) - (4) New Article 8 .8 e) - Traffic I mP ac s ( 5) Renumbering Article 20.3.2 f ) 08u : _ (6) New Article 20.3 .2 f) - Traffic Impacts (7 ) Addition to Article 22 - Definitions - 6 . SUBDlV1SlON REGULATjONS TEXT AMENDMENTS - MARVIN COLLINS -. _ a. ZraffIc Impact Analysis Provisions ( 1 ) Renumber Section IV-B-3-d _ ( 2) Renumber Section IV-6-3-e (3 ) New Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic impacts (4) Addition to Section II - Definitions = _ --_ Motion was made by Commissioner Wilihoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to dispense with the presentations for. items 5 ( b) and 6 ( a) and refer to the Planning Board for recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on January 4 , 1988 . VOTE: Unanimous. With no other items for presentation, the public hearing adjourned at 12: 10 a.m. U3LIHflT 6 081 (3 ) Article 6 . 17 - Traffic Impacts ( 4 ) Article 8 . 8 a) - Renumber ( 5 ) Article 8 . 8 e) - Traffic Impacts (6 ) Article 20. 3 . 2 f ) - Renumber (7 ) Article 20. 3. 2 f ) - Traffic Impacts (8) Addition to Article 22 - Definitions b . Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments "`yyy ( 1 ) Section IV-8-3-d - Traffic Impacts (2) Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic Impacts (3 ) Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic Impacts (4 ) Section II - Definitions Zoning Ordinance text amendments ( agenda item #7 a 2-8) and Subdivision Regulations amendments ( agenda item #7 b 1 -4) were presented and considered together. Presentation by Marvin Collins. These items were continued from the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting. The proposed amendments would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all applications for zoning changes, special use permits or site plans where the estimated traffic generated by the project exceeds 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirement into the Zoning Ordinance include the following : 1 . Renumber Articles 8. 8 e) and 20. 3 . 2 f) to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Add Articles 6 . 17 , 8. 8 e) and a new 20. 3 . 2 f ) which state that a traffic impact study is required for site plans, special use permits and zoning changes, respectively. 3. Add Article 13 which sets forth the con- tents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. MMMIrUI 4 . Add definitions to Article 22 which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. The proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all sub- division applications where 80 or more lots or building sites were proposed or the estimated traffic generated by the subdivision exceeded 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirements into the Subdivision Regulations include the following : 1 . Renumber Sections Iv--B-3 d and e to d-1 and d-2, respectively, to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Subdivision Regulations. 2. Add Section IV-B-3-e which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 3 . Add definitions to Section II which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. No comments were received at the public hearing regarding the amendments. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations text amendments. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposals for decision on February 1 , 1988 . MOTION: Best moved approval of Planning Staff recom- mendation. Seconded by Eddleman. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #8 : PLANNING BOARD ITEMS a. Public-Private Roads Standards - interpretation Policy Presentation by Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to consider a draft policy resolution regarding the interpretation and application of the private road standards contained in Section lv-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations. ( A copy of this resolution is an O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 086 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date Febrivary.J,_ 1 988 Action/4nda Item #V'1 SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes—}_(_—No ------ ATTACHMENT( S) :----------- INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Proposed Amendments Article Article 6 . 17 Article 8. 8 a) TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Article 8. 8 e) Hillsborough - 732- 8181 Article 20.3.2 f ( Existing) Durham - 688- 7331 Article 20. 3. 2 f ( Proposed ) Mebane - 227- 2031 Article 22 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Draft 11 /23/87 Public Hearing Minutes Draft 1 /18/88 Planning Board Minutes PURPOSE: Consideration of proposed amendments which would require a traffic impact analysis to be submitted as part of a development application. The amendments were presented at public hearing on November 23, 1987 . BACKGROUND : The proposed amendments would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all applications for zoning changes, special use permits or site plans where the estimated traffic generated by the project exceeds 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirement into the Zoning Ordinance include the following: 1 . Renumber Articles 8 . 8 a) and 20. 3 . 2 f ) to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Add Articles 6. 17 , 8. 8 e) and a new 20. 3 .2 f ) which state that a traffic impact study is required for site plans, special use permits and zoning changes, respectively. 3 . Add Article 13 which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 4. Add definitions to Article 22 which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. No comments were received at the public hearing regarding the proposed amendments. At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board • • 084 recommended approval of the proposed amendments. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments as recommended by the Planning Board. b. Traffic Impact APalys15 Provisions. ( 1 ) New Article 13 - Traffic impacts JJ (2) New Article 6. 17 - Traffic Impacts (3 ) Renumbering - Article 8. 8 a) (4) New Article 8 .8 e) - Traffic Impacts ( 5) Renumbering - Article 20.3 . 2 f)_ % (6) New Article 20.3 .2 f ) - Traffic Impacts (7 ) Addition to Article 22 - Definitions 6 . C : • • ;c - • r T - N a. Traffic Impact Analysis Provisions . �_. ( 1 ) Renumber Section IV-B-3-d ( 2) Renumber Section IV-B-3-e (3 ) New Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic impacts (4) Addition to Section II - Definitions Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to dispense with the presentations for items 5 ( b) and 6 ( a) and refer to the Planning Board for recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on January 4, 1988 . VOTE: Unanimous. With no other items for presentation, the public hearing adjourned at 12: 10 a. m. 086 . PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: . Article 6. 17 Traffic Impact Study Required ORIGIN OF. AMENDMENT: _ _,._x Staff �x., Planning .Board • BOCC Public Other. STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle_xLow Comment: - EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Article 6 . 17 . will require submission of a traffic impact study as described in Article 13 before issuance - of a zoning compliance permit. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Article 6. 17 will require preparation and submission of a traffic impact study as described in Article 13 prior to issuance of a zoning permit. A traffic impact - study • would then be required as part of site plan approval when traffic generated by the development on the site plan exceeds 800 trips per day. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISION: There is no existing provision. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: 6 . 17 Preparation and 5ubmjgsiQn pf a traffic required prior to issuance of any zoning cQm,i Lance permit ize igq isssted in con j unc- Pion with a buJl .jng permit being issued for aanstruct ion of improvements sjjowp on an aaprQved_ site plan. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 087 ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Articles 8 .8 a) 10) , 11 ) ,- and . 12) - Regulations •4 ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x Staff max_ Planning Board BOCC P ub l is Other: STAFF PRIORITY . RECOMMENDATION: High Middle_xLow Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1.987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: These Articles will be renumbered as follows: Article 8.8 a) 10) will be renumbered Article 8. 8 b ) , Article 8.8 a) 11 ) will be renumbered Article 8.8 c) , Article 8.8 a) 12) will be renumbered Article 8 .8 d) . There will be no change in text. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: The renumbering of Articles 8.8 a) 10) , 11 ) , and 12) is part of a reorganization of this part of the Zoning Ordinance necessary to accommodate changes resulting from the inclusion of a traffic impact study require- ment as a new Article 13 . There is no change in the text of Articles 8.8 a) 10) , 11 ) , or 12) proposed in conjunction with the reorganization. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Article 8. 8 a) 10) will be renumbered Article 8 .8 b ) . Article 8 .8 a) 11 ) will be renumbered Article 8 . 8 c) . Article 8 . 8 a) 12) will be renumbered Article 8 . 8 d ) . O fj b PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 8 .8 e) (traffic impact study required -_ for Special Use application) • ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x_ Staff „x_ Planning Board BOCC Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High -- Middle_xLow Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Article 8 . 8 e) requires Special Use applications to Include a traffic • impact study described in Article 13. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Article 8.8 lists additional information that is required for all Special Use appli- cations. Article 8 .8 e) will require such applications to include a traffic impact study as described in Article 13. Such studies would be required with applications that would produce 800 trips per day or more. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: There are no existing provisions. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Article 8 . 8 e) A traffic 11npgcf study as required by Articl $ 13. Ob PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance . REFERENCE: . Article 13 .TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY -- ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: x Staff x Planning Board BOCC Public Other: - -RECOMMENDATION: . STAFF PRIORITY High Middle -. _ - g �xLow - Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Article 13 will create a new require- ment for developments that produce 800 or more trips per day. These develop- ments will be required to prepare and submit a traffic impact study. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Large-scale development has a significant effect on a community ' s and in some cases a region ' s environment, economy, and public facilities. A traffic impact study is used to determine whether the roadway network in the area of - a proposed major development will be able to handle the existing traffic plus additional traffic that will be generated by the development. If , in preparing the study, it is determined that the roadway network cannot adequately handle the additional traffic, the study should provide useful information for determining the types and extent of improvements necessary to handle the additional traffic. In this way, it can provide a basis for linking roadway improvements with develop- ment project approval . This amendment would require preparation and submission of a traffic impact study as part of an application for a zoning atlas amend- ment, a special use permit, or site plan approval that would result in production of more than 800 trips per day. Procedures are included that would allow Orange County to require preparation of a study for smaller proposals as well as an exemption procedure for larger proposals when it can be demon- strated that the proposal would not produce a need for transportation improvements. 091L) 2 Recommendations for transportation improve- ments resulting • from the study will be Incorporated into the approval process. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: None. This is a new require- ment. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: ARTICLE 13. TRAFFIC _IMPACT STUDY 13. 1 PURPOSJ A traffic impact study sha l l he required - of zoning changes . special use permits, and site t proposed zon i ng_ change, special tae perm i tl or development on the highway system when that - syatem is at or neAr capacity or a safety proposed development2 do not adversely affect the highway rte'twork and to identify any traffic problems associated with access from the site to the exis purpose of the study is also to identify solutions to potentJa.f._ptQb I eml_and to present improve p.r_oRQaad development. 13. 2 CONDUCT A traffic impact shady shall he prepared by a sivaf Cfied tra transportation planner with previous traffic study experience. The procedures and standards for the traffic impact study are set forth in brticle 13. 4 of this Ordinance. 13 .3 APFLIBILITY Exce.pt as described below a traffic impact study shaLI he required for all zoning changes_., apec ial use following criteria: Z o n i n g Cha n a.:_ e s t i ma.t a L_A era _ ILA f f i s generated by ysesQermittgd in the zone tieing applied for exceeds 800 trips/day Permit: estimated traffic generated by the permit_ exceeds 800 tc Lp si.d - &91 Site Plan: est i ma_tad tra_f f is generated by the development exceeds 800 trips/day ti Zoning changes . special use permits, or site plans that produce more than_ 800 tr ips per day may be exempted from the requirements t9 p epere end_ submit a traffic impact study _if materl is _ • submitted to demonstrate that traffic created by will not result _in a need for transportation improvements. Planning Department staff will - review mater i a L submitted in support of an exemption and will determine from that materiel whether or not to grant the exemption,- [f an exemption _is granted, documentation of the exemption will be submj tted_ as part of the staff recommendation . Orange County may require any zoning change., special use permit. or site plan_ application to be accompanied by a traffic impact study when a road capacity or safety issue exists_. If omg is requlrel . the County will nQtify_ the sppllcant of _the reason for the requirement. 13 . 4 GENERAL REN IREMENTS AND STANDARDS The traf_t i c impact steady shall contain the following information a) GENERAL SITE DUCRIPIION. The sit e____ADScr i pt i on sha_I location . proposed land uses . construction stagil]..a_.nd_completion date of the proposed _land development. Li the deveJ opmeat is residential 21811 also be Included. 9 brief Description of other major existing .and proposed land developments within. the study area shall be provided. The generalagll characteristics of potential site users^ to the extent that they may affect the transportation of senior citizens), b ) TRANSPORTATION FAQIjITIES QESCRIPTION Ile description ;?haJJ J sise..nmen to t i on pf th I and existing external transportation s41t.01. . This Aescrj,ption shall_ _ioclu4e pLQpQsed in�grnal vehicular . bicycle and_ _pedestrian circulation . 094' all proposel ingress and Qgres_s, J�.cations aLl internal roadway widths and rights-of-way . parking conditions„ trgfficchannelizations, and ti any traffic signals or other intersection control devices at all intersections within the site. • The report shall describe the entire external roadway system within the study area. Major intersections - Jn the study area shall be ,I_SI ent i f i ed ._pan sketched , .. ._.All ei..s. x t iiig . and proposed public transportation services and faciJ itiea within one-mile of the site shall glso be documented. Future highway t t Carolina ' s Transportation Improvement Program. Any proposed roadway_ improverpgIlts due to proposed surrounding deyelopmehts shall also be noted. c) Ex1UIlNG TRAFFIC CQNDITIONS Existing_ And _docgmented fir a_11 roadways and intersections in the traffic yolgmes for_Aygrage daily traffic . peak t i geh hg recorded. courts at,ma jor _i.nt.QLsac± i ons i n the study area shall be condj .t. d . encompassing the peak highway and development-generated, hour( s) . aj i be _Iuci uded _i R the report, A vo Ila.ni /capac.j ty anal ys ig based formed during peak development-gengra 1 . . . . , . and major _infgrsectlon s IL the study area. L.Q/gla of service shall be term i ned for each location . IhiL analysis wiiJ determine the adegppcy of the $ erye the current traffic demand. Roadways end/or intersections experlencing levels of service E or F shall be notegi as congestion loQatioCs- d ) TRANSPORTATJON EMPACT OF THE DEVELOPM.NT Lslima_t ion _ _veh.iQJljAr trips to result from the groposa I sha l I_ be comp) eted for the average dally�sak hi4hl��y hour(s) and peak development ggnerated hour(1) . _ Yeh i cu lar trip generation 05 - rates toe used_for, this _cBJsu.L.satJon hall_ be obta i neLL from an accepted source such as the Trans portat ten_ and Traffic Engineering 1andJ2ook,. Institute of Tran development-generated traffic movements as estimated, and the n methodology followed shall be documented. All • - = turning movements shall be Qalcijated„ - These generated vojumeg shall be jistrihuted tQ th-e study area and assigned to the existing roadways and intersections throe-ghout the study area. Docymentation of all assumptions used in the djstritution and assignment phase shall be pro- Traffic volumes shall be assigned to individual access points, Pedestrian voiumes shaj l .a_1l2 be c. J cu l eted, if anp l icat l e. I f sofQOL cros ings are to be used, pedestrian Y_Qlumea shall be assigned to each crossing. Any characteristics of th_ site that will_ cause particular trip generation problems shall be noted. e) ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION _IMPACT The total traffic demand that will result from construction of the_grapcued development ghaII, be _cajculated. This demand shall consist of the soml2.inat1on of the existing, traffic and traffic generated by the gropoggd development, ___ staging of the proposed dgygloument is a!1 QQm-pletion_shalI ke made. This epelysis shall be AaLformast_ diming the peak highwayhour(s) and peak dey.al opment-gererated hour(s) for _Ail LQsadAa a__ar.d_ma_j o r intersections in the study V 0 I competed far a1 I major Intersect ions. I t is tthese jocatioga that capaity✓ is most LQSt r i c f ed All access points and pedestrian crQssings_ sha1I b.e examined as to the feasibility of Installing fCs3f Imo_ Ih i ;z evaluation sha I]_ _ compare the projected traffic and pedestrian volumes to the warrants for traffic signal 1IISta] lation,. f ) LanIJSIONS AND RECOMMENDED IMPRQVEMENTg Leveis.Q ryice for ail roadways and_intersec- tions shall be _listed . _AlI roadways and/or intersections showipg a level of serxice C ▪ a1L_12a cons i dered defic i @nt. and _speQjf ic. L gQQmmsnsb d o ris _for the e l i m i naj- i o n of these grob l ems .shaj_J be _ i stsd,__ This ],jstjng of 094 6 L be ! lofted to the following elementsy internal circulation design. site access location and desig external roadway and intersection design and improvements. traffic signal - installation and operation including signal timing . and transit design improvements. All physical • roadway improvements shall be shown In sketches. The listing of recommended improvements for road nclyde for each improvement. the party responsible for the _improvement, the cost and funding of the improvement, and the e t - 13.5 ,UBMISSION AND IMPLEMENTATION The traffic Impact study will b_e_ submitted to the Orenge County Planning_ Department within the applicable tjmg frame indicated blow. The Plan- ning Department will review the study as part of the deyslopmen± review process_. Recommendations will_ be incorporated into the approval process Da indicated below. a) ZQNJ NO CHANQ 1 . LIME OF SIJBMISSJON The traffic -impact study sball be submitted to the Planning DepartmVZj_w ith the application for thg_ zQIIing thane., 2. IMPLZMENTALLQA The Planning Department and such other agencies or Officials as may appear appropriate Jo the Circumstances of the case sha I L review the impact study to analyze its adegpacy_ in solving Any traffic problems that w i l t occur due to the uses a Llowed_ by the proposed zoning. The Bpard of Commissioners shall consider the impact study and the analysis of the_ impact study .before any change of zoning is approved or denied. b ) SPECIAL USE PEEMITS 1 . TIME OF -SUBM I a l ON The traffic_ _impact study wiLl be _aj.t nittld to the Plannjag_De aL±ment�w_itb_±.h appl�icoo for the special use permit. 2. IMELEREBILI I 0 N 09,6 - The P l ann i rtq Departmen.,t and sucfl other agenQ i e or officials as may appear appropriate _i in the Circumstances Di t112 case_ shall review the im •a • . I _ _ _ . - . _ I . anv traffic problems that will occur due to the proposed use. • The Board of Commissioners or Board of _ Adjustment. as appropriate. shadL consider the impact stay and the _analysis of the impact study before the application Ls approved or - _ . - denied. The Board of Commissioners or Board of Adjustment as appropriate may decide that _ certain _jmoroyements on or adjacent tQ the ,s1te are mandatory for special use permit approval and may puke these improvements conditions of approval. mad require modifications in the use. or may deny the permit., c) SITE PLAN APPROVAL 1 . TIME OE 3UBMLSSION • The traffic impact study will be submitted to the Planning Qepartment with the site plan. 2. 1 MPLEMEJJTAT I Oiy The Planni or officials as may appear appropr (ate in the circumstances of the case shall review the iMPagt study _ a_ana l yze i t s adequacy I n so l y ing any traffic protjems that will occur due to development proo9sed on the . site plan. The Planning Department may recommend that certain improvements on or adjacent to the Bite are mandatory for site_gl.aa_spproval and may require these improvements to be on the approved sit. Alan. 04t) PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 20.3. 2 -f ) Contents of Application ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: �x_ Staff �x Planning Board • BOCC Public Other: - -- - STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middlex`Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Article 20.3.2 f ) will be renumbered as Article 20.3.2 g) . There will be no change in text. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: The renumbering of Article 20.3.2 f ) to Article 20.3. 2 g) is part of a reorganiza- tion of this part of the Zoning Ordinance made necessary by the inclusion of a traffic impact study requirement as a new Article 13 . There is no change in the text of the existing article 20.3 .2 f ) proposed in conjunction with the reorganization. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Article 20 .3 .2 f ) will be renumbered as 20.3 .2 g) . 4 si PROPOSED ORDINANCE .AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 20.3 .2 f ) Contents of Application ( New) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: fix Staff x_ Planning Board • BOCC Public Other: - STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle x_Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, --1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: The new Article 20.3. 2 f) will require submission of a traffic impact study as described in Article 13 as part of the application for an amendment to the Zoning Atlas or Zoning Ordinance text. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Article 20. 3 .2 lists the required contents of applications for amendments to the Zoning Atlas and the Zoning Ordinance text. The new Article 20.3. 2 f ) will require such applications to include a traffic impact study as described in Article 13. Such studies would be required with applications that would produce 800 trips per day or more. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: There are no existing provisions. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Article 20.3. 2 f ) A traf f ir_ j rnj Aj study as required by Articje 13, • Q4ti PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 22 DEFINITIONS ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: ix_ Staff x_ Planning Board BOCC Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION; High Middle_x_Low Comment: -- EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: Article 22 will be amended by adding definitions of terms used in the traffic impact study requirements proposed as Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: The traffic impact study requirements that are proposed as a new Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance contain certain terms that should be defined within the Zoning Ordinance. Article 22 will be amended by adding definitions for the following terms: Level of Service, Major intersection, Study Area, Trip Generation Rates, and Volume/- Capacity Analysis. These terms will be added alphabetically. No other change in Article 22 is proposed. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The following terms will be added alphabetically to Article 22: LEVE I described in the 1965 Htghwey Capacity a part ieu_I �r h ightay fee i1_ify or t_llroug_h a specific intersection. There are. -six levels of _servicing ranging from A through_ F. Level of sery ice A [nd icafes generally free movement. Level of service E _represents maximum capacity of the facility, Level F indicates corlge5tion. Leyei of- service C, is e el of setviQe, r es,r j end a r-e I at i ve I v sa.tnisi tort'_travel speed MAJOR R - interseijab_wherp traffic Qeaeratgd lay the proposel will hove • 2 a significant impact ______the oiler intersection. STUDY AREA - T h i s area w i l l extend approxi- mgtel one-half m i l s _aJ ong Elie adjacent. roadway in both directions from alL access points or to a major intersection along- * _ these roadways. TR l.P . .Sid Eli RAT-I.ON.,FLIES - .The,_ �.ta l c.Qunt o .. trips to and from a_ study site per ynit of land the as measured by Daremeters Iike. dwelling units . acres . etc. VOLUME!C8PAcITY ANALYSIS - This procedure compares the volume of a roadway or inter- section aDproacjl to It.s ga,pa,c.it (maximum Il t at s pQlnt during a given time pgriod) . The procedures described to the 1265 Highway Capacity Manual , H1ghway Research Board Special Report 87, 100 MEdhFrif 5 comments were received that auto repair shops should not be home occupations, and home occupations should not be permitted on private roads. Subsequent to the meeting, an attorney repre- senting citizens protesting an existing home occupation submitted proposals for the consider- ation of the Board of Commissioners and Planning Board. Those proposals as well as the County Attorney' s response to the proposals are attach- ments to these minutes. Several options are available to address the proposals and pending ordinance amendments. They are as follows : 1 . Refer the proposed amendments and the pro- posals received after the conclusion of the public hearing to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. 2. Prepare a recommendation on the proposed amendments and forward same to the Commis- sioners. Refer the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review committee to study and present at public hearing in February. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments and referral of the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposals for decision on February 1 , 1988. Collins indicated that the only effect those recommendations or comments made by Mr. Acker would have on the proposals already presented at public hearing would be to perhaps "tighten-up" those proposals even more. He continued suggesting that the Board approve those proposals presented at public hearing and refer the remainder of the proposed amendments and proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. Jacobs responded that the Ordinance Review Committee had already reviewed Mr. Acker' s letter and it was the general sense of the committee that most of his proposals were onerous or unnecessary. He indicated the committee would review Mr. Acker' s letter along with the County Attorney' s response if the Board felt it was necessary. MOTION: Best moved approval of the Planning Staff recom- mendati'on. Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: Unanimous. 0 ( 2) Article 13 - Traffic Impacts ■ • 6 (3 ) Article 6 . 17 - Traffic Impacts (4) Article 8. 8 a) - Renumber ( 5) Article 8 . 8 e) - Traffic Impacts (6 ) Article 20. 3. 2 f ) - Renumber (7 ) Article 20. 3 . 2 f ) - Traffic Impacts (8 ) Addition to Article 22 - Definitions b . Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments ( 1 ) Section IV-B-3-d - Traffic Impacts (2) Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic Impacts (3) Section IV-B-3-e - Traffic Impacts ( 4 ) Section II - Definitions Zoning Ordinance text amendments ( agenda item #7 a 2-8) and Subdivision Regulations amendments ( agenda item #7 b 1 -4 ) were presented and considered together. Presentation by Marvin Collins. These items were continued from the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting . The proposed amendments would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all applications for zoning changes, special use permits or site plans where the estimated traffic generated by the project exceeds 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirement into the Zoning Ordinance include the following; 1 . Renumber Articles 8. 8 e) and 20.3 . 2 f) to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Add Articles 6 . 17 , 8. 8 e) and a new 20. 3 . 2 f ) which state that a traffic impact study- is required for site plans, special use permits and zoning changes, respectively. • 3. Add Article 13 which sets forth the con tents required In a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 1N3LAHPCEr 102 7 4. Add definitions to Article 22 which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. The proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all sub- division applications where 80 or more lots or building sites were proposed or the estimated traffic generated by the subdivision exceeded 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirements into the Subdivision Regulations include the following: 1 . Renumber Sections iv-B-3 d and e to d-1 and d-2, respectively, to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Subdivision Regulations. 2. Add Section IV-B-3-e which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 3 . Add definitions to Section II which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. No comments were received at the public hearing regarding the amendments. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations text amendments. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposals for decision on February 1 , 1988 . MOTION: Best moved approval of Planning Staff recom- mendation. Seconded by Eddleman. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #8 : PLANNING BOARD ITEMS a. Public-Private Roads Standards - Interpretation Policy Presentation by Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to consider a draft policy • resolution regarding the interpretation and application of the private road standards contained in Section Iv-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations. (A copy of this resolution is an O R A N G E C O U N T Y 103 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date EQ4ruary_ 1 . 1.188_ Action nda Item ` - - SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - HOME OCCUPATION PROVISIONS DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Draft 1 /18/88 Planning Board Minutes Proposed Amendments - Article 6 . 16 .6 Draft 11 /23/87 Public Hearing Minutes G. Norman Acker Letter of 12/14/87 County Attorney Letter of 12/29/87 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : Consideration of proposed amendments to Article 6 . 16 .6 of the Zoning Ordinance. The amendments were presented at public hearing on November 23, 1987 . BACKGROUND : Recent complaints concerning the operation of home occupations resulted in Ordinance Review Committee recommendations for strengthening the ordinance provisions. The recommendations included the following: 1 . In all residential zoning districts except RB, AR and R-1 , add a provision limiting traffic generation by a home occupation and requiring off-street parking other than in a required yard area. 2. In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts for lots 200,000 sq . ft. or less in area, add the following : a. Limitations on the size of a detached accessory structure in which a home occupation is conducted to 1 ,000 sq. ft. b . A requirement that the accessory structure as well as off-street parking be screened by means of an evergreen hedge or a combination of a stockade fence and deciduous plant materials. c. Limitations on the effects of odor and electrical interference on adjoining properties. d . A requirement that outside storage of materials must be screened and the storage area limited to 500 sq. ft. e. Limitations on traffic and off-street parking as 104 described in #1 above. 3 . In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts for lots in excess of 200, 000 sq. ft. in area, add the following: a. A requirement concerning screening as described in #2-b above. b . Limitations on the effects of odor or electrical interference on adjoining properties. In addition to the above, provisions are recommended which describe the permit approval procedures. Comments were received at the public hearing which indicated that the proposed amendments were not stringent enough. Specifically, comments were received that auto repair shops should not be home occupations, and home occupations should not be permitted on private roads. Subsequent to the meeting, an attorney representing citizens protesting an existing home occupation submitted proposals for the consideration of the Board of Commissioners and Planning Board. The County Attorney ' s response to the proposals is attached. At its January 18 , 1988 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments as presented at public hearing. The Planning Board also recommended referral of the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments and referral of the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee as recommended by the Planning Board. 5. Z,QN Lta DRD I NAS^,F TEXT AMENDMENTS mmtuF a. dome Occypzfion ProvLtons - RevLELon cif Presentation by Marvin Collins. 106 Collins noted that the requirements for home occupations vary according to the zoning district in which they are located and also the lot size. Recent complaints concerning the operation of home occupations resulted in Ordinance Review Committee recommendations for strengthening the ordinance provisions. The recommendations included the following: 1 . In all residential zoning districts except RB, AR and R-1 , add a provision limiting traffic generation by a home occupation and requiring off-street parking other than in a required yard area. 2. In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts where the minimum lot size is 200, 000 sq. ft. or less, add the following : a. Limitations on the size of a detached accessory structure in which a home occupation is conducted to 1 , 000 sq. ft. b . A requirement that the accessory structure as well as off-street parking be screened by means of an evergreen hedge or a combination of a stockade fence and deciduous plant materials. c. Limitations on the effects of odor and electrical • interference on adjoining properties. d . A requirement that outside storage of materials must be screened and the storage area limited to 500 sq. ft. e. Limitations on traffic and off-street parking as described in 11 above. 3. In RB, AR and P-1 zoning districts where the minimum lot size is over 200, 000 sq. ft. , add the following : a. A requirement concerning screening as described in t2-b above. b . Limitations on the effects of odor or electrical interference on adjoining properties. One of the major additions was an effort to be more specific in the requirements for application materials. in addition to the present application, there must be a full description of the nature and extent of the home occupation . • A provision is also being added that allows the Planning Staff to add conditions to the approval after the review 106 of the application materials much like conditions which can be recommended by the Planning Board and approved by the Commissioners. Those conditions must address specific deficiencies in the application or address some specific impact which may result from the operation of the home occupation such as hours of operation, number of vehicles which can be parked on the premises, etc. Another provision is that once the permit is in a form for approval , the applicant must also sign the permit. This serves as real evidence that the applicant has reviewed and agrees with the conditions of approval . A sketch has also been provided which indicates guidelines in the preparation of a site plan. Henry Morris stated that he felt an auto repair shop should not be considered a home occupation and also that a home occupation should not be permitted In a development which is served by a private road . Motion was made by Commissioner Wilihoi.t, seconded by Commissioner Carey, that the public hearing be closed and the amendment for Home Occupation Provisions be referred to the Planning Board for recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on January 4 , 1988. VOTE: Unanimous. COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, �( fi (�rr^?�1 BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ,�i �l3v l���U ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.C. DRAWER 1529 10 129 E. TRYON ST. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 ' December 29 , 19 8 7 919-732-2196 919-942-8000 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20, FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E. FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL. N.C.27514 919.929.715151 Mr. Marvin Collins ALONZO B.COLEMAN,JR. Director STEVEN A. BERNHOLZ Orange County Planning Department DONALD R.DICKERSON 306F Revere Road ROGER B. BERNHOLZ GEOFFREYE.GLEDHILL Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 DOUGLAS HARGRAVE C. NICHOLAS HERMAN KIM K.STEFFAN Re: Home Occupations NATHANIEL E.CLEMENTS MARILYN ELLISON Dear Marvin: Of Counsel BONNER D.SAWYER (1902-1972) I have reviewed the amendments to the County' s Zoning Ordinance proposed by G. Norman Acker , III . I have comments only about his proposed 6 . 16 .6 .2 amendment and his proposed 6 . 16 .6 . 4 amendment. I don ' t think it wise to condition issuing a permit for the potential perpetual use of land on the consent of present owners of property. I 'm also not sure about the workability/enforceability of requiring the permit holder to do all of the maintenance . I ' d rather see a prohibition of home occupation permits for high traffic or potentially high traffic uses to be located on private roads . The "public meeting" concept suggested in 6 . 16 .6 .4 would be an anomaly in the County' s Zoning Ordinance . I ' d rather see any application for a home occupation permit which generates significant public comment be treated as a Class B special use permit or considered like one . Very/truly yours , eon .re . Gledhill GEG/lsg xc: Shirley E. Marsh 1 for the Board of Count Comrnissiof ers Barry Jacobs for the Plann ng soard Albert Kittrell G. Norman Acker , III G. NORMAN AcKER, III Q f D) i ATTORNEY AT LAW 800=D FRANKLIN SQUARE CHAPEL HILL, N.C. 27514 919-96S-1900 December 14 , 1987 Ms. Shirley Marshall Chairman, Orange County Commissioners 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, Nc 27278 Dear Ms. Marshall, I am writing this letter on behalf of myself (as a citizen) and my clients, Henry Morris, Harold Herndon and Eddie Crain. We are greatly concerned about the county ordinance as it relates to Home Occupation Permits. We appreciate the hard work the planning board and the commissioners have put into the proposed amendments to the ordinance in this respect, but we feel the changes do not go far enough. Home Occupation Permits can be appropriate for part-time or "low impact" businesses in residential zones. On the other hand , the operation of full-time "high impact" commercial activities makes residential zoning meaningless'. We believe the ordinance should be amended to make regulations tighter on home occupations and to clarify that home occupations are not intended to be full- time , high impact commercial activities. Our specific complaint deals with the operation of auto repair businesses as home occupations. It seems reasonable that an individual should be able to work on automobiles in his spare time or as a second job at his home. I suspect there are hundreds of people in the county doing so. However, running a . full-time business is a different matter. Not only is this use not "customarily incidental" to the residential use, but it also has a tremendous impact on the neighborhood. For example, each car which is being repaired at an auto repair shop generates at least 6 vehicle trips in the residential neighborhood. Typically, the owner drives his car in, with a friend or family member following behind. The friend then drives the owner home or to work. .Later , the friend brings the owner back to pick up the car and they both leave. Simply counting these trips shows that at least 6 trips are generated. In addition, if the mechanic must drive the car to check its proper functioning, more trips are necessary. Furthermore, a full-time auto repair shop will typically have daily deliveries of parts, uniforms, tools, etc. , as well as perhaps towing services, all of which generate substantial traffic. In addition, auto repair shops, by their nature, require a substantial amount of space for the storage of cars being worked on, which can cause a negative impact on the neighborhood. They also tend to generate more noise than is normally present in a residential neighborhood. These problems, especially concerning traffic, are particularly significant for - home occupations located on privately maintained roads. The additional burdens placed on these roads translates into a direct financial cost to the other owners along the road. Not only do the neighbors have to suffer the inconvenience of having a full-time commercial establishment in their neighborhood , they also have to subsidize the business through the additional costs of maintaining the road . The ordinance changes help in this regard , but do not go far enough. We believe they should prohibit home occupations ( or at a minimum, auto repair shops) on private roads unless the person obtains the consent of at least 50% of the other property owners located on the private road. Our suggestions for additional changes to the ordinance are outlined on the attached sheet. Please give this letter and those suggestions your utmost. consideration. Let me close by saying'that we strongly support the proposed changes to the ordinance which were presented at the recent public hearing. We especially support the limitation of accessory buildings to 1000 square feet, because it is almost impossible to monitor the compliance of the permit holder if the accessory building is larger . We also support the ability of the planning department to add additional conditions to the permit. We strongly suggest, however , that the property owners within 500 feet of the property line and all property owners on a private road be given a chance to respond to the permit application and the proposed conditions . Otherwise, the planning department may not be aware of specific conditions which should be added. Thank you in advance for your serious consideration to this matter. If I can help in any way, or answer any questions you might have, please do not hesitate to call me. Very Truly Yours /4/6144°--64-- 44-1"Z?r"-- G. Norman Acker, III - Attorney for Henry Morris, Harold Herndon and Eddie Crain cc: Members of the County Commission Members of the Planning Board Albert Kittrell Marvin Collins Geoffrey Gledhill 110 Further Proposed Changes to the Zoning Ordinance Article 6. 16 . 6 - Home Occupancy Submitted by: G. Norman Acker , III , Attorney for Henry Morris , Harold Herndon and Eddie Crain. 6. 16. 6 . 2 (d) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of good incidental to the provision of service. Goods , materials, uniforms and other items for use in the home occupation shall not be delivered to the home occupation by anyone other than the permit holder ,_ his immediate family or an employee . 6. 16 . 6. 2 (g) Any outside storage of goods or materials for use in the home occupation shall be totally screened from the road and from adjacent property in the same manner as the accessory structures . The storage area shall not exceed 500 square . feet. The setback from the side and rear property lines shall be the same as for an accessory building used as a home occupation. The storage of cars to be serviced or already serviced by an auto repair shop shall be considered goods or materials as used in this subsection ( g) . 6. 16. 6.2 (i) A Home Occupation Permit shall not be granted for any use [ alternatively , for auto repair business] located on a privately maintained road unless written consent is obtained from at least one-half of the property owners other than the applicant who are responsible for the road ' s maintenance, or , unless the applicant agrees as a condition of his permit to assume all maintenance responsibilities for said road from the point of connection with a public road to his property . 6.16. 6.4 (add the following new paragraphs after the existing fourth paragraph) Prior to consideration of the application for approval of a Home Occupation Permit , the public shall be given an opportunity to comment in person or in writing to the Zoning Officer . The Zoning Officer shall post on the applicant ' s affected property a notice of the right to give 1.L such comments at least ten days prior to the issuance of the permit . Written notice of this right shall also be sent by certified mail to all adjacent property owners and all owners of property located on the same privately maintained road as the apalicant not less than fifteen days before the issuance of the permit. Adjacent property owners are those whose property lies within five hundred feet of the affected property and whose names and addresses are currently listed in the Orange County tax records . The Zoning Officer shall take such comments into account in determining the conditions , if any , to be placed on the Home Occupancy Permit . If the Zoning Officer believes public comment will be substantial , he may by these same notice provisions, call a meeting to give the public an opportunity to .voice their objections . • 112 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: 6. 16 .6 �S As An Accessory Us@ ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _..xStaff _Planning Board_x�BOCC Public Other : STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: �xHigh Middle Low Comment : EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 23, 1987 PURPOSE: To amend Article 6 . 16 . 6 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide additional conditions to when home occupations may be permitted and to clarify the approval process for Home Occupation Permits. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: The County has received complaints about several home occupations. The complaints involve impacts on adjoining residential areas that result from operation of the home occupations. The question raised in response to these complaints was whether the definition of home occupation was too broad, thereby allowing inappropriate uses in residential areas. An evaluation of the home occupation provi- sions in other jurisdictions indicated a range of approaches being used, varying from more restrictive to less restrictive than Orange County provisions. Requirements addressing external impacts were noted in particular and are recommended for addition to the Zoning Ordinance. This approach is recommended to address concerns regarding the impacts of home occupations. While providing requirements limiting home occupations to truly incidental uses of residential property, the proposed amendments would allow County residents latitude in the type of home occupation activity in which they may engage. The latter point is important, considering the rural character of Orange County. The proposed amendments concentrate new 2 restrictions on those home occupations permitted on smaller residential lots. Few changes are proposed on large ( more than 200, 000 square foot) residential lots. This approach is consistent with the emphasis on impact rather than use. A new paragraph is also proposed to outline and clarify the procedure under which home occupations are permitted. It describes the approval procedure and the nature of the activity that is being allowed by a home occupation permit. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: 6 . 16.6 Regulations Concerning Home Occupations . As An Accessory Use 6 . 1 6 . 6 . 1 Home Occ u psa ti on_s, _ _ I n_ _AJ_l_ _ Res_i d ent]e1_ _ D_i str_i ct s Except RB. AR and R-1 The following restrictions shall be applied to all home occupations in all residential districts, except RB, AR and R-1 : a) No external evidence of its existence shall be visible, except a sign as permitted by Article 9. b ) No more than thirty-five percent of the floor area of the dwelling unit or five hundred square feet, whichever is less, can be used for the home occupation. c) No equipment or process shall be employed that will cause noise, vibration or glare detectable to the normal senses at the lot lines in the case of detached dwelling units or outside the dwelling unit, in the case of attached dwelling units. d ) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. e) All activities shall be conducted within the dwelling unit. f ) No more than 1 individual , not residing in the dwelling unit, may work in the home 1.1.4 3 occupation. 6 . 16 . 6 .2 Home OcclIpations in The RB. AR and R-1 Districts The following restrictions shall be applied on home occupations in the RB, AR and R-1 districts on lots less than 200,000 square feet. a) A maximum of 1 , 000 square feet of floor area may be used for the home occupation. This floor area can be a detached accessory structure. b ) Signs shall be as provided in Article 9. c) The on premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. d) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate noise, vibration, or glare detectable at the lot lines of the lot on which the home occupation is located. e) No more than 2 individuals not residing in the dwelling unit may work in the home occupation . f ) No outside storage of goods, or materials. 6. 16. 6 .3 ( Min . 200,000 square foot 12±51, The following restrictions shall be applied to home occupations in the RB, AR and R-1 districts on lots in excess of 200,000 square feet. a) A maximum of 2,000 square feet of floor area may be used for the home occupation. This floor area can be in a detached accessory structure. b ) Signs shall be as provided in Article 9. c) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited , except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. d ) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate noise, vibration or glare 116 4 detectable at the lot lines of the lot on which the home occupation is located. e) No more than 2 individuals not residing in the dwelling unit may work in the home occupation. f ) If an accessory structure is to be used for the home occupation the following criteria must be met: 1 . The accessory building shall be set back at least 30 feet farther from the road than the residence. 2. The accessory building shall not be closer than 40 feet to the side and rear lot lines. 3. The accessory building shall be adequately screened from view of the road and adjacent property by a densely planted evergreen hedge of shrubs or trees. 4. Any outside storage of materials for use in the home occupation shall be totally screened from the road and from adjacent property in the same manner as the accessory structures. The storage area shall not exceed 1 ,000 square feet. The setback from the side and rear Property lines shall be the same as for an accessory building for use as a home occupation. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: 6. 16 .6 Regulations ConcerniDg Rome Occupations, As An Accessory Use 6. 16 .6 . 1 Home Occupations In All Residential Districts. Except RB. AR and R-1_ The following restrictions shall be applied to all home occupations in all residential districts, except RB, AR and R-1 . a) No external evidence of its existence shall be visible, except a sign as permitted by Article 9. b ) No more than thirty-five percent (35% ) of llti 5 the floor area of the dwelling unit or five hundred ( 500) square feet, whichever is less, can be used for the home occupation. c) No equipment or process shall be employed that will cause noise, vibration, glare, odor S2r electrical interference detectable to the normal senses at the lot lines in the case of detached dwelling units or outside the dwelling unit, in the case of attached dwelling units. d ) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. e) All activities shall be conducted within the dwelling unit. f ) No more than one ( 1 ) individual , not residing in the dwelling unit, may work in the home occupation. g) NQ traffic shell be generated by such home ,occu pation in significantly__greater volumes than would normally be expected in a residential neighborhood, ansi any peed for parking generated by the conduct of the home pccupat i on sha I I be net off the street aDs-.1 other than in a required yard _area. 6. 16. 6. 2 Home_ Occu�at_i or�s__in_ Tie __,.Ai,.R and $_1 D i str.icta The following restrictions shall be applied on home occupations in the RB, AR and R-1 districts on lots less than 200,000 square feet. a) A maximum of 1 ,000 square feet of floor area may be used for the home occupation. This floor area can be a detached accessory structure. When a detached accessory structure is jeed fqr the home_ occur_atjon, I - .t. • • - . • 11 -- - • structure cannot exceed sgjiare feet. b ) If an accessory structure is to be used for the home occupation, the following standard must be met: 1 . The accessory building off-street parking shal I be adequately screened from view of the road and 11 7 6 adjacent property by a densely planted evergreen hedge of shrubs or trees. In _lieu of an evergreen hedge. a six Lk) foot stockade fence and deciduous plant materials may be used for screening purposes . c) Signs shall be as provided in Article 9. d ) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. e) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate noise, vibration, glare, 9lior or electricj interference detectable at the lot lines of the lot on which the home occupation is located . f ) No more than two (2) individuals not residing in the dwelling unit may work in the home occupation. g) Any outside storage of materials for use in t e e e t o t t T t e t exceed 500 square feet. The setbg.ck from the c se home occupation . h) No traffic _shall_ be generated by such home occupattop in significantly grgater voIlimes than would normally IZe expected in a e the occupation shall be met off the street and other than in a required yard area. 6 . 1 6 .6 .3 Nome Occupations I n The RB. AR and R-1 Districts (Min. 200 . 000 square foot lots) The following restrictions shall be applied to home occupations in the RB, AR and R-1 districts on lots in excess of 200, 000 square feet. a) A maximum of 2,000 square feet of floor area may be used for the home occupation . This floor area can be In a detached accessory II 7 structure. b ) If an accessory structure is to be used for the home occupation the following criteria must be met: 1 . The accessory building shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet farther from the road than the residence. 2. The accessory building shall not be closer than forty ( 40 ) feet to the side and rear lot lines. 3. The accessory building and any rggjiired oft-street parking shall be adequately screened from view of the road and adjacent property by a densely planted evergreen hedge of shrubs or trees. I n _I i eu of an evergreen hedge. a _six (c) foot stockade fence yard deciduous plant materials mpy be used for screening purposes. 4. Any outside storage of materials for use in the home occupation shall be totally screened from the road and from adjacent property in the same manner as the accessory structures. The storage area shall not exceed 1 ,000 square feet. The setback from the side and rear property lines shall be the same as for an accessory building for use as a home occupation. c) Signs shall be as provided in Article 9. d ) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods which are not produced on the premises is prohibited, except in the case of the delivery and sale of goods incidental to the provision of a service. e) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate noise, vibration, glare, 9dor LLE electrical interference detectable at the lot lines of the lot on which the home occupation is located. f ) No more than two (2) individuals not residing in the dwelling unit may work in the home occupation. 6 . 16 . 6 . 4 Home Occupa_t_ion Permit - Application Procedure 8 N home occupation may be operated in a residence except as permitted under this Ordinance and 11_ after H the Zoning 0 An application for a Home Occupation Permit shall 1 __1115.d. with the Zoning Officer and aba I I be submitted on forms provided by the Zoning Officer. c t a f u l l _and accurate description ot the proposed use. including its location ` appearance and operational characteristics are cl tZc lauds In addition tp the application, the applicant is required to submit a site plan of the property on. which_ the .home Qccjapat_ion_ is_ to_,be_ _located. The site plan shall show the location of the residence Dr accessory bu i ld ing in whLicJi the home occupation is to be located in relation to existing property ,Dines and adjacent homesz_ the location . number. and means of access to required off-street parking areas_: and the location and type of required landscaping and/or screening. The applicant is also required to submit a floor plan of the residence or accessory building in which the home occupation is to be IQcated. The plan shall show tb.e location. size. and 41- of each room or area within the residence or accessory building _ JJpon a determination that the p I icat_i on is complete, the Zoning Officer shall cause a reYiew of the application to _b g made. The review shall the review, the application will be approved . approved with conditions . or denied . tt permit . they may address deficiencies in meeting specific Ordinance requirements or they may address ,specific impacts which result from the operation of the home occppation. In the Jitter case. the conditions may include. but nQt be _limited to, Limitation= on the hours of operation . the number of vehicles to be parked on the premises . gad the .location of an accessory building , storage area or ggrking on the property. In addition . the Zoning Officer may requir greater sethacks and/or n c e o ad ate screen the home occupation from adjoining tI S 12U S I f the appl icatlop is approved, PIther with, or. w itbopt con it ions , the Zoning Officer sha I L send the applican apDroyal and of the requirements of th.e Ordinance that i t t his/her willingness to oggrPtg tbo borne occupation in conformance with the reouirements and conditions set forth in the permit letter_. Each permit letter sha_I_I _ be ept_ on_ __file_ _ by the Zon ina Officer and shall constitute the Home Occupation Permit for the particular use in _question . The home occupation may, DP opPLated by the appl icapt ps long as it Is operated ip conformance with the requirements and t t t I f the application _i is dep jed ` the _Zoning Officer shall notify the applicant of thQ_AUliel and shall state the reasons for denial in writing. The sappl icant may appeal the decision of the Zoning t B t t Article 21 of this Ordinance. D � e • • a C� 221 park/open space purposes. This item will be considered by the Board of Commissioners at its February 1 , 1988 meeting. Jacobs asked if the County could use restrictive covenants to prevent further subdivision of previously subdivided lots. Collins responded in general , no and referenced the County Attorney ' s letter as follows: In making that determination the County should be looking for subdivisions which, among other things, "preserve a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. " To satisfy that requirement, a developer could propose a private road subdivision with restrictive covenants which both limit lot size and prohibit future subdivision of the lots. Collins continued that the condition for private roads is the best way at this time to prevent further subdivision . Jacobs continued asking about the reference to Lot #2 as a flag lot in the Planning Board minutes of April 16, 1984. Collins responded that flag lots are currently restricted under the ordinance. He indicated the only areas likely to have flag lots are the two northern townships where the minimum frontage requirement is twenty feet. He indicated that the proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee are to allow flag lots where property constraints are such that a flag lot would be the only way for access to a buildable area of the lot. MOTION: Margison moved approval with the Staff condition. Seconded by Eddleman. Best asked about the location of the driveway. Kirk demonstrated the location of the driveway on the plat. Pilkey commented that the proximity to other Jurisdictions and consistency of regulations needed to be addressed. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #7 : MATTERS HEARD AT 11/23/87 PUBLIC HEARING a. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments ( 1 ) Article 6 . 16 .6 - Home Occupations Presentation by Marvin Collins. n aIfIf 12 4 This item was continued from the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting. Recent complaints concerning the operation of home occupations resulted in Ordinance Review Committee recommendations for strengthening the ordinance provisions. The recommendations include the following : 1 . In all residential zoning districts except RB, AR and R-1 , add a provision limiting traffic generation by a home occupation and requiring off-street parking other than in a required yard area. 2. In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts where the minimum lot size Is 200,000 sq. ft. or less, add the following : a. Limitations on the size of a detached accessory structure in which a home occupation is conducted to 1 , 000 sq. ft. b . A requirement that the accessory structure as well as off-street parking be screened by means of an evergreen hedge or a combination of a stockade fence and deciduous plant materials. c. Limitations on the effects of odor and electrical interference on adjoining properties. d. A requirement that outside storage of materials must be screened and the storage area limited to 500 sq. ft. e. Limitations on traffic and off-street parking as described in #1 above. 3 . In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts where the minimum lot size is over 200, 000 sq. ft. , add the following: a. A requirement concerning screening as described in #2-b above. b . Limitations on the effects of odor or electrical interferenece on adjoining properties. In addition to the above, provisions are recom- mended which describe the permit approval procedures. Comments were received at the public hearing which indicated that the proposed amendments were not stringent enough. Specifically, n If I 123 5 comments were received that auto repair shops should not be home occupations, and home occupations should not be permitted on private roads. Subsequent to the meeting, an attorney repre- senting citizens protesting an existing home occupation submitted proposals for the consider- ation of the Board of Commissioners and Planning Board. Those proposals as well as the County Attorney ' s response to the proposals are attach- ments to these minutes. Several options are available to address the proposals and pending ordinance amendments. They are as follows : 1 . Refer the proposed amendments and the pro- posals received after the conclusion of the public hearing to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. 2. Prepare a recommendation on the proposed amendments and forward same to the Commis- sioners. Refer the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review committee to study and present at public hearing in February. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments and referral of the additional proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposals for decision on February 1 , 1988. Collins indicated that the only effect those recommendations or comments made by Mr. Acker would have on the proposals already presented at public hearing would be to perhaps "tighten-up".,. those proposals even more. He suggesting that the Board approve those proposals presented at public hearing and refer the remainder of the proposed amendments and proposals to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. Jacobs responded that the Ordinance Review Committee had already reviewed Mr. Acker' s letter and it was the general sense of the committee that most of his proposals were onerous or unnecessary. He Indicated the committee would review Mr. Acker ' s letter along with the County Attorney ' s response if the Board felt it was necessary. MOTION: Best moved approval of the Planning Staff recom- mendation. Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: Unanimous. (2) Article 13 - Traffic Impacts ORA NG E COUNTY 124 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date fg 1 88 Action nda Item I SUBJECT: PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS - INTERPRETATION POLICY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING _Yes _X_ No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Draft Private Road Standards Resolution Proposed Amendments - Section IV-B-3-d Chronology - Adoption of Private Road Standards Section IV-B-3-d of Subdivision Regulations County Attorney Comments - Private Road Standards Draft 1 /18/88 Planning Board Minutes Planning Board Resolution County Attorney 1 /4/88 Letter TELEPHONE NUMBERS: _~��� Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane -- 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : Consideration of a draft policy resolution regarding the interpretation and application of the private road standards contained in Section IV-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations. BACKGROUND : Recent events involving the interpretation of the private road standards contained in Section IV-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations have indicated a need to insure consistency of application. On December 9, 1987 , the Transportation Advisory Committee met with the Ordinance Review Committee to discuss the private road standards. Both groups agreed that an interim policy regarding the interpretation and application of the standards was needed until a detailed study could be completed and revisions prepared. A draft policy resolution was prepared which contains the major points identified by the two Committees at the December 9 meeting. Emphasis is placed on the preservation of the rural character of Orange County; the use of restrictive covenants to prevent further subdivision, thereby maintaining the approved density and decreasing the likelihood of NCDOT acceptance of roads for maintenance purposes; and the use of design features for watershed protection , natural /historic areas preservation, and the retention of scenic views and natural vegetation. At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board approved r 5 the policy resolution and recommended that the Board of Commissioners approve a similar resolution. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the following : 1 . Approval of the attached policy resolution as revised by the County Attorney; and 2. Conducting a public hearing on February 22, 1988 for the purpose of incorporating the provisions of the policy resolution into the Subdivision Regulations as an amendment to Section IV-B-3-d. The proposed amendments to Section IV-B-3-d are attached . If approved following the public hearing, the new provisions would be administered until a more detailed study of private road standards could be completed and additional amendments proposed . RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGARDING THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS CONTAINED IN SECTION IV-B-3-d OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WHEREAS, Orange County adopted Subdivision Regulations which apply county-wide on February 27 , 1978, and the effective date for application of the Regulations was established as March 13, 1978; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-5-b of the Subdivision Regulations requires that each lot in a subdivision abut a publicly dedicated street except in subdivisions approved with private roads; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations states that private roads iy _ba.11owed in a subdivision where: 1 . In the Judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision, including such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans, and access by public safety vehicles are such that a private road is justified ; and 2. One or more of the following conditions are met: a. The subdivision consists of less than ten ( 10) lots. b . The subdivision preserves a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. c. The subdivision does not embrace or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County Thoroughfare Plan, or a municipality ' s thoroughfare plan within the county, or does not lie within a designated Transition Area as determined by the County. d. The subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets of the subdivision are private or unpaved, and the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible • j' with and in harmony with the surrounding community. e. The subdivision roads, even if constructed to State standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State requirement that the subdivision cannot meet; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-3-d also states that for a subdivision to be approved with private roads, it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible; provided, however, the meeting of one or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval of private roads; and WHEREAS, clarification of the interpretation of the private road standards is necessary to insure consistency of application and expeditious handling of subdivision applications ; and WHEREAS, an interim policy for the interpretation and application of the private road standards is needed until specific ordinance amendments are prepared and considered for approval : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that : 1 . The following design features will be considered in determining whether to permit private roads in subdivisions : a. The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through : ( 1 ) The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines greater than required by ordinance provisions; ( 2) The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads and/or maintain a wooded or forested character; (3 ) The maintenance of scenic views, including vistas of open farmland and/or forested hills and mountains ; and/or ( 4) The clustering of dwelling units to preserve wildlife, botanical , historic, archeological and/or recreation sites; 126 b . The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; c. Restrictive covenants are proposed which prevent further subdivision of the property and the same shall be made a condition of approval , thus maintaining project density ; d. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical , wildlife, historic and/or archeological sites, are to be dedicated and/or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts greater than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication ; and/or e. Larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and/or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. 2. Public roads will usually be required where it is found that: a. The subdivision roads, if constructed to State standards, would be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; or b. The subdivision streets join or extend existing streets which are public; or c. The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan ; or d . A proposed street is designated as an arterial or collector street on an approved thoroughfare plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan . 3. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for subdivision approval to supply a written statement justifying the reasons for private roads in the proposed subdivision; and 1 j d 4. Compliance with one or more of the above standards does not insure approval of either a public or private road within a proposed subdivision . Adopted this 1st day of February, 1988. marvin : p/p-bocc PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Subdivision Regulations REFERENCE: Section 1V-B-3-d ( Private Roads) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: X Staff _ _ Planning Boardd BOCC Other : STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: X High Middle _ Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: . February 22, 1988 ****************************************** PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To incorporate standards for determining situations in which private roads will be permitted in subdivisions. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Recent events involving the interpretation of the private road standards contained in Section IV-B 3-d of the Subdivision Regulations have indicated a need to insure consistency of application. On December 9, 1987 , the Transportation dvisory Committee met with the Ordinance eview Committee to discuss the private road standards. Both groups agreed that an interim policy regarding the interpretation and application of the standards was needed until a detailed study could be completed and revisions prepared. A draft policy resolution was prepared which contained the major points identified by the two Committees at the December 9 meeting. Emphasis was placed on the preservation of the rural character of Orange County; the use of restrictive covenants to prevent further subdivision, thereby maintaining the approved density and decreasing the likelihood of NCDOT acceptance of roads for maintenance purposes; and the use of design features for watershed protection, natural /historic areas preservation, and the retention of scenic views and natural vegetation. At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board approved the policy resolution and recommended that the Board of Commissioners approve a similar 151 resolution. At its February 1 , 1988 meeting, the Board of Commissioners approved such a resolution and set February 22 as the public hearing date to consider incorporating the policy into the Subdivision Regulatiions. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: Section IV-B-3-d Private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where: 1 . In the judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision, including such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans, and access by public safety vehicles are such that a private road is justified ; and 2. If one or more of the following conditions are met: a. The subdivision consists of less than ten ( 10) lots. b . The subdivision preserves a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. c. The subdivision does not embrace or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County Thoroughfare Plan, or a municipality ' s thoroughfare plan within the county, or does not lie within a designated Transition Area as determined by the County. d. The subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets of the subdivision are private or unpaved, and the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community. e. The subdivision roads, even if constructed to State standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State requirement that the subdivision cannot meet For a subdivision to be approved with private roads, it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible; provided, however, the meeting of one or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval private roads. - PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: iV-B-3-d Private Roads The following design features will be considered in determining whether to permit private roads in subdivisions : 1 . The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through : a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines greater than required by ordinance provisions; b. The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads and/or maintain a wooded or forested character; c. The maintenance of scenic views, including vistas of open farmland and/or forested hills and mountains; and/or d. The clustering of dwelling units to preserve wildlife, botanical , historic, archeological and/or recreation sites; 2. The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; 3. Restrictive covenants are proposed which prevent further subdivision of the property and the same shall be made a condition of approval , thus maintaining project density; 4. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical , wildlife, historic and/or archeological sites, are to be dedicated and/or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts greater than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication ; and/or. 5. Larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and/or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. Public roads will usually be required where it is found that: 1 . The subdivision roads, if constructed to State standards, would be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; or 2. The subdivision streets join or extend . existing streets which are public; or 3. . The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan; or Imo 4. A proposed street is designated as an arterial or collector street on an approved Thoroughfare Plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for subdivision approval to supply a written statement justifying the reasons for private roads in the proposed subdivision. Compliance with one or more of the above standards does not insure approval of either a public or private road within a proposed subdivision. ********************************** -********* ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: amend : new- iv-b-3-d i ii34 CHRONOLOGY OF ADOPTION OF PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS IN ORANGE COUNTY December 4, 1967 Subdivision Ordinance for Chapel Hill Township adopted by Board of Commissioners. Ordinance requires streets to meet the minimum construction standards of the Highway Commission. ( See Attachment A. ) At that time, the State standards permitted unpaved streets. No reference is made to private streets. September 30, 1975 Effective date of NCDOT provisions, after which any subdivision road with a right- of-way dedicated, recorded or that has preliminary approval from a county planning board will not be added to the State system unless the road is paved to the minimum . construction standards for subdivision roads. February 23, 1976 Public hearing conducted on proposed amendments to Subdivision Regulations, including criteria for private roads. March 15, 1976 Planning Board recommends approval of proposed amendments, Including criteria for private roads. ( See Attachment B. ) April 5, 1976 Board of Commissioners approve amendments to Subdivision Regulations, including criteria for private roads. February 28, 1977 Public hearing held to discuss proposed amendments to Subdivision Regulations and extension of the Subdivision Regulations county-wide. February 20, 1978 Planning Board recommends approval of proposed amendments to Subdivision Regulations, including revisions based on meetings with various citizen groups. Additional amendments not previously considered are recommended for public hearing. ( See Attachment C. ) February 21 , 1978 Board of Commissioners schedules all proposed amendments for public hearing on May 30, 1978. February 27, 1978 Board of Commissioners approves extension of Subdivision Regulations county-wide and sets effective date as March 13 , 1978. 136 EX 1STING REGULATIONS IV - B - 3 - c - 11. Street Names - Names of streets which duplicate or be confused with the names of existing streets within Oranae County, in- cluding all municipalities , shall not be approved. Extensions of existing and named streets shall bear the name of such existing streets. House numbering shall comply with standards recommended by the Planning Board and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. IV - B - 3 - c - 12 . Street Name Signs - Approved street name signs shall be erected by the subdi- vider at the intersection of streets. 0 IV - B - 3 - d. Private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where: (1) in the judgement of the Planning Board and with the approval of the County Commissioners , it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision, including such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans , and access by public safety vehicles, are such that a private road is justified (2) and if one or more of the following conditions are met: A) the subdivision consists of less than ten (10) lots B) the subdivision preserves a natural area through4 deed restrictions and special design features C) the subdivision does not embrace or abut any part cf a thoroughfare or street shown on the Oranae County thoroughfare plan, or a municipality' s thoroughfare plan within the County, or does not lie within a designated transition area as determined by the County. D) the subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets of the existing subdivision are private or unpaved and when the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community area. E) the subdivision roads, even if constructed to State Standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State recuirement that the subdivision cannot meet. For a subdivision to be approved with private roads, it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible. The meeting of one (1) or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval of private roads. -30- IV ` B - 3 - e. A private road shall be required to meet standards set by Orance County. Satisfactory proof that the standards are met will be required by the County Manacer or his appointed agents . If a subdivision is to contain private roads , the subdivider shall guarantee (a) a right of access to any private road in the sub- division by all lots served by the road, and (b) perpetual maintenance of any private road in the subdivision at the standards set for approval. See Section III - E - 5 - k for additional requirements. -31- 44 1 q- r r IV - B - 5 . LOT LAYOUT l IV - B - 5 - a. The shape and orientation of lots shall be appropriate to the location of the sub- division and the development intended. Commercial and industrial lots shall be of sufficient size to include off-street service facilities, and off-street parking of all 0 vehicles used by all patrons and employees. IV - B - 5 - b. Each lot shall abut a publicly dedicated street except in subdivisions approved with private roads. In the latter situation , each lot must abut a private road or a state maintained road which is shown on the approved plat and constructed pursuant to the standards set by Orange County. Upon recommendation of the Planning Board and with the approval of the County Commissioners , the construction of the access road may be postponed until build- ing or market development is undertaken. In this case the lots shall be designated on • the plat: "This lot may not be sold, nor a building permit issued, until the access road has been built as specified for this subdivision, " Each lot must abut the street or road with a frontage of a least 20 feet. Except where reverse frontage is desirable double frontage lots should be avoided. IV - B - 5 - c. All lots shall conform to each and all the requirements of the Orange County Zoning Ordi- nance for the zoning district in which they are located. -37- J J 21 Adjournment time was reached . MOTION: Yuhasz moved to extend the meeting for completion of the agenda. Seconded by Lewis. VOTE : Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM /8: Reports Mr . Geoffrey Gledhill , County Attorney ( Public/Private Road issues ) Mr. Gledhill began his report stating he felt that in time, the type of roads allowed in the County would become a much more significant . issue. He continued that those things being done in Joint planning and comprehensive' planning would cover everything except the issue of roads. He indicated there is no scheme in the plan to cover roads. Mr. Gledhill stated : "Road planning needs to be higher on the agenda - of things that need to be done in the County on a comprehensive planning basis. I suppose that my ranking It so high has some selfish aspects in that I see the road issue as being a nightmare administratively as opposed to a nightmare aesthetically which could happen if some of the other comprehensive planning issues are not taken care of . It's the administrative nightmare and the problems associated with what to do with all the private roads or public roads that are not under state maintenance, things that twenty years from now the County Commissioners will have to be dealing with. I will give you a little historical picture of the origination of the Private Road Standards and the County Ordinance. Until recently there were no private road standards in the County Subdivision Regulations. In 1979 a need was perceived to permit, under certain circumstances, private roads. The efforts were undertaken to create a system by which the County would permit private road subdivisions. When the present scheme associated with private roads was adopted by the County, it is very clear to me that the legislative history of all that was that the standard in Orange County was: when you subdivided property the lots fronted on public roads. However, under certain circumstances, the County would permit a private road and in that process, the burden is on the developer to establish the entitlement to a variation of the public road standard . There are some significant merits, I guess, or some good reasons for not having all i e. �i d 22 roads In Orange County public roads. I think we could all cite one or more reasons why a public road is not the best answer to all the questions about roads in the County. However, that is a policy question and that policy question probably needs to be evaluated from time to time and this Board needs to make recommendations about it and the County Commissioners need to consider the recommendations and take action along that line . I am relating to you the policy decisions that have already been made and that are the basis for the present ordinance . If there is disagreement on this Planning Board about the focus, then it needs to be addressed from that point of view as opposed to defacto changing the focus. When I review sub- divisions for whatever reason, I am concerned that I don 't think the Planning Board and even the Commissioners at times remember the focus. That concerns me because a system which is designed with a bias toward public roads is being administered with a bias towards private roads doesn 't work. The policy issue needs to be addressed if the concern is that you want, generally speaking, small subdivisions to be permitted to have private roads. There Is a difference in the construction level of private roads versus public roads. There is also a different review process and also a different approving agency. The County approves all private roads, both the design and the construction. The State approves the design and construction of public roads. The reason for that Is that private roads are maintained by the people who live where the road is located. Public roads, once density criteria or that criteria established by NCDOT for them to become part of the State system become thereafter maintained by the State of North Carolina. The way the ordinance treats that difference is that all public roads that are created by subdivision have to be maintained by the developer or property owner until the Department of Transportation accepts the road for maintenance whereas, all private subdivision roads have to be approved by the property owners through the Private Road Maintenance Agreement that is one of the requirements. The Road Maintenance Agreement addresses two issues ; one is the proper dedication of the road and the second is the maintenance of the road. A third issue is to insure that the private road accesses a state road. The reason for mentioning this is that I have seen some confusion as to how roads are maintained or what happens to them after you 140 23 finish with them . What happens after you finish with them is the County is out of it altogether, or that is supposed to be what happens . The only time the County gets back into it is where you have approved a road that is part of a road network and you see it again in the context of an extension of the same road. Ordinarily you see it only one time and then you are finished with it. It' s our goal at a staff level that the County is finished with it once the approval process is complete . I have written a letter to Barry Jacobs, which he may or may not have shared with you, which is evidence of what happens when that whole system breaks down and it is this that concerns me, in part. I received a letter from a group of homeowners who are concerned about particular members of a Homeowner ' s Association who will not pay their dues and are so against paying those dues that they are willing to assume responsibility for maintaining an entire road system at an Orange County required level as opposed to agreeing to pay whatever the Homeowners ' Association says is due In exchange for the agreement of all of the members of the Homeowners ' Association to ,Jointly maintain the road. So that is the degree to which such things can become problems. Orange County is not in this and my goal is to keep Orange County out of this; it is a Private Road matter. That is one of the things that will develop. I predict that 1 will see five of these letters in 1988 and I will see twenty of these letters in 1989, etc. The reason for this prediction is that ten years ago I saw fifteen subdivisions a year I see fifteen subdivisions a month now. That's just the kind of development that is occurring. With respect to the issue of what kind of road there ought to be, under the current scheme of things we have one problem in that there is at least one standard which exists In the Subdivision Regulations which we don 't know how to use because we don 't have what it requires and that is a Thoroughfare Plan, or Transportation Plan of some kind. Orange County has none. So, when a road is proposed to be private, if there is no transportation plan, then it is deemed not to be in conflict with one . It seems to me that is probably correct as a matter of logic, but it seems to me that what ought to happen with that is that standard should be removed from the Subdivision Regulations , probably should have been removed however many years ago it was put in until a Transportation Plan got in there so as not to 141 24 confuse what it is you are supposed to be doing with that. The next thing I would say is, that of all of the standards that are contained in the Private Road section the two that seem to me to be the most important are the lot size because that is going to determine DOT' s eventual willingness to maintain the road, or maybe not lot size but lot configuration might be a more accurate way. DOT has a rule by which they decide whether or not they are going to maintain a road . It seems to me that when the Planning Board and Staff looks at a subdivision that should be the first thing to look at, whether or not this road were public if DOT would ever take it over for maintenance . I think if it were part of a subdivision that somewhere down the road would meet DOT' s density standards, there ought to be a very strong bias in favor of that road being public. The way . that a developer who wants to build a private road subdivision counters that is by creating some thing about the subdivision that would prevent DOT taking it over. That is an approach such as lot configuration or lot size or something of that nature . It seems to me until recently that the only thing that mattered when Staff or when the Board was looking at these was the lot count and I think that is an inappropriate way to review the subdivisions. I think that you have changed that practice and now are going through a process of the reviewing the subdivisions with the eye toward making sure that they meet the standards for private roads. One thing about that that I 'm still concerned is going on is that my sense is that when a subdivision is submitted as a private road subdivision, the Planning Staff and Board is assuming the burden of changing that idea. The burden of establishing the right or a need for a public road are being taken on by the Staff and Planning Board. That, as a matter of the concept of private roads in the Subdivision Regulations, is the exact opposite of what Is intended. The intention has been all along that the standard was public roads and the burden was on the developer to establish a basis for a private road . The Staff nor the Planning Board has no burden in that regard. The developer ought to be here telling why his private road subdivision should be approved. That is probably the most important thing I want to say. Insure that that burden is the way it is unless it is changed ; but intentionally so, not by practice . Another thing which happens on a regular basis 1'425 which concerns me from a fairness and a future administrative problem point of view is the idea of allowing phased developments to come in as private roads with the notion that when they are expanded at some later point in time that there will be the imposition of public road requirements . The fairness viewpoint troubles me because you are burdening only a group of the lot owners with the cost of bringing the road up to public standards and whereas the whole subdivision will benefit. I am also concerned about it from an administrative point of view. The County, in its Private Road Maintenance Agreement reserves the right to require public dedication of these roads ; however, actually acquiring that public dedication may be another matter altogether. It is going to involve Staff , the developer and possibly others going out and saying to the property owners that they agreed when the document was signed that they would dedicate the road public. One owner wants to perhaps subdivide a six acre lot into two (2 ) three acre lots but the County will not approve it unless the road is built to state standards . If the other property owner does not want the property subdivided, then that property cannot be subdivided. At the very minimum there would be a public relations problem with the County as the ' bad guy ' . So I think that the focus of the Staff and the Board on these subdivisions should be on the ultimate development of the property that surrounds or that is involved in the project. I guess I would perceive it differently depending on who owns the adjoining property. I have not really developed all of the ways to look at each one because there are going to be case by case problems. The developer tries to recover some costs for future development. The problem with that is that later development may not be possible because of the fact that you cannot get the public dedication needed . When that happens, the County is going to be the one where the focus is going to be and creates the fairness question of who is to pay for the cost. It seems to me that if it will ultimately be a public road subdivision, it ought to be planned initially as a public road subdivision so that all lot owners bear the cost on a fair basis. " Yuhasz voiced his objections noting that there is some advantage to ' coming In first' on any endeavor. That advantage may be that at some future point you may have a paved road of which you did not pay your fair share . Gledhill responded that he would strike the fairness question . From the County ' s point of view it is unmanageable and is a legitimate concern of the Planning Staff and Planning Board . Yuhasz 20 - 1 Q 3 continued asking if the Road Maintenance Agreements could be constructed in such a way that it is clear that a public dedication is required . Gledhill responded yes with the proper ordinance authority. The problem Is that that violates the very principle of private road concept which is it is a private road, you handle It and the County gets out of it. The ultimate authority the County has to make It all work is condemnation and that ' s just not the answer. Orange County is not going to get involved in the condemnation of roads for the purpose of satisfying development requirements. So the ultimate problem is that Orange County is liable to have to buy up all this property because the developer cannot develop it under the County ' s standards and the developer can 't get the consent of the adjoining property owner. The only way Is through the County insisting and enforcing its power and the only way to do that is by buying all the property. That is not the answer. Yuhasz agreed that is not the solution but he also did not think making development prohibitive over much of the County was a solution to the County ' s open road problem either. Gledhill responded that a way to approach it is to create public roads in all instances where present and future development would dictate public roads and create a different construction standard . He noted he was not sure that could be done without some legislative changes but it is a better solution than the present one . It will be vexing to those dealing with it ten years from now and I also think reasonable minds can differ on the fairness question. He continued that the administration problems being created are overwhelming. The County ' s power and jurisdiction in the road area is not as complete as the towns and cities in road matters and that creates a dilemma. Jacobs noted that especially in the lower density areas there are roads that do not meet the density requirements of DOT. Gledhill responded that when you have a subdivision that is planned and will ultimately be planned so that it won 't meet DOT standards, that would be a good reason for not requiring a public road. A particularly important reason for requiring a public road is ultimate state maintenance of the road . Orange County has a waiting ! 1st of people wanting roads paved. Private roads are thought of as unpaved roads. More often than not, once a subdivision is completely built, homeowners get tired of the dust, maintenance and problems with Homeowners ' Association and wish to have the government to 'take it over ' for them . Those roads will have to be built to state standards , there will be 144 27 right-of-way concerns and lots of problems created by private roads in the situation where the DOT density standards would ultimately be met. Jacobs responded that the Board seemed to see more where the density standard is not met. Gledhill noted that then there was no reason under the present scheme of things to require public roads in that instance . He continued that he felt it was unlikely that the General Assembly will ever put counties in control of roads to the degree that cities are in control of roads. The recent legislative session was an indication that there is more of an entrenchment of the way we have things than before . The cities who want their roads paved or upgraded are willing to offer money for matching funds. The State is more willing to go with those projects with matching funds because that enables them to build more roads which is the ultimate goal of the State . This results in the wealthier municipalities getting all the State Road money. Thus the General Assembly is limiting the ability of those larger areas in acquiring State Road monies . It is possible for the State to change its maintenance requirements to allow for state maintenance of roads where the density requirements are different. That Is a matter of policy established by the Board of Transportation. Practice with respect to roads ought to parallel or follow or predict what DOT is doing with respect to maintenance . Lewis expressed concern with the cost of public roads. He asked if there is a ` country lane , type road for such subdivisions that would be accepted by the State for maintenance . Gledhill responded that the State would not require curb and gutter but would require right-of-way, shoulder requirements, erosion control and design standards. Lewis continued that there should be some middle ground that could be reached to allow for less expensive yet good roads for a good subdivision. Pilkey expressed concern that many times a nine lot subdivision was developed and adjoining property was either developed In lots of 10+ acres or developed at a much later date which did not allow the Planning Board or Staff to be able TO require public roads. Gledhill responded that the County critically needs a Transportation Plan and within that plan all the roads need to be public roads . Without such a plan, it is a matter of choices. The choices are ultimately those of the County Commissioners. He expressed the concern that the choices that have been made in the past are not being followed . The process has eroded the concept. The whole private road 145 28 scheme had in mind some kind of specially designed project where public roads would destroy the idea of the project . He reminded the Board that it has an opportunity and responsibility to make recommendations with respect to policy and it is the Board of Commissioners job to adopt policy. He noted that economics is not a factor . Yuhasz asked if there are any specific legal difficulties with the private road system which is in place now such as legal liability for the County. Gledhill responded he had not thought about that issue at all and that he had already expressed his concerns . He indicated he felt that until approximately six months ago, a subdivision submitted with private roads was assumed to be okay unless the Staff developed some reasons for public roads. He stated that the Commissioners did not know this and he felt it distorts the process. Best asked how strongly Mr . Gledhill had conveyed his opinion about the importance of a transpor- tation plan and Gledhill responded "every chance I get" . Gledhill noted that the Board sets the policy and he could not make the choices. Developer Ann Joyner asked If the statement that public dedication does not preclude private maintenance was correct. Gledhill agreed noting that public dedication requires private maintenance until DOT accepts the road for maintenance . Ms. Joyner continued asking if one answer to administration problems could be public dedication at the beginning of any project. He noted there may be statutory problems with such dedications. It is the interplay between local governments in this area and DOT that creates the statutory issues. Jacobs asked for clarification if the County could require public dedication and require private maintenance. Gledhill responded that without a change in the statutes, the County has a problem with avoiding DOT' s design approval for public roads . Jacobs referred again to the density requirement for DOT standards. Gledhill indicated trat the roads had to be designed to DOT standards to be accepted as a public road. AGENDA ITEM !9 : MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING - 5/26/87 a. Z-2-87 Wildwood Section IV - Rezoning Collins noted there is some information lacking in regard to the pump station ' s capacties without which this item is not Complete . NCDOT ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS ( -1! 14b C. Loop Roads - A road that has its beginning and ending points 7. on the same route. It is more than one mile in length and has collector characteristics. D. Other Roads - These are other roads having a "collector" type function in the thoroughfare system. Requirements for Addition of Subdivision Roads to the System: 1. The minimum construction standards and other requirements in this manual must be a part of the proposal to be reviewed for approval in order for a plat to be recorded by the County Register of Deeds prior to development. 2. A Petition for Addition (DOT Form SR 1) is required from the developer and/or property owners. 0 3. Developers or property owners must dedicate right of way, as indicated in the minimum design and construction criteria section of this manual , free of charge and clear of all encumbrances. 4. Utilities requiring adjustment or relocation to conform to Division of Highways' requirements (See Utility Requirement) shall be made at no expense to the Division of Highways; Existing and/or relocated utilities may remain within the right of way of any subdivision road added to the Secondary Road System provided the location of same meets Division of Highways' approval and further provided the utility . owner executes an encroachment agreement on forms furnished by the Division of Highways. As per General Statute 136-102. 6, "Utilities - are defined as electric power, telephone, television, telegraph, water, sewage, gas, oil , petroleum products, steam, chemicals, drainage, irrigation and similar lines". G. S. 136-102.6 dictates further V that "The right of any utility placed or located on a proposed or existing subdivision public road right of way shall be subordinate to the road right of way, and the utility shall be subject to regulation by the Board of Transportation". r) S. . At least 20 percent of the lots bordering the road must be individually owned. 0 6: There must be at least two occupied residences for each one-tenth of a mile. Subdivision Access Roads must provide ingress and egress for at least 5 occupied residences for roads less than 1 mile in length and an average of 5 occupied residences per mile for roads . over 1 mile in length. Subdivision Access Road - This is a road built through vacant property . to provide access to the property being ceveloped. This road would not have lots platted along it. 0 7. A minimum of four occupied homes is required for the addition of roads less than two-tenths of a mile in length. Short cul-de-sacs less than two-tenths mile in length must serve at least four occupied homes. If four occupied homes are not served, it will be treated as a private drive. - • - -ii -12-- ( . 14.i a El) 8. Connecting roads with less than the required occupied homes for the length involved may be reviewed as to traffic usage for addition purposes. Traffic usage equivalent to the traffic that would be generated by the correct number of occupied homes will be acceptable. 0 9. Any subdivison road with a right of way dedicated, recorded, or that has preliminary approval from a county planning board dated after -- • September 30, 1975, will not be added to the State System unless the road is paved to the minimum construction standards of the Division of Highways for subdivision roads. 10.• The Division of Highways will consider the addition of roads that 0 serve developments with large lots or parcels that are of the size _ _ that the occupied housing requirement of two homes per .tenth of a mile cannot be met. The number of occupied homes needed will be a judgment factor based upon the length and the number of lots or parcels involved. The minimum requirement will be four occupied homes. 11. Erosion and Sedimentation - All subdivision roads shall have an acceptable permanent vegetative cover established and other acceptable permanent erosion control measures installed in accordance with Division of Highways' specifications, prior to addition to the State Maintained System. 12. Subdivision roads shall meet the minimum design and construction criteria contained herein prior to addition to the State System and .0 ' shall be in an acceptable state of maintenance when petitioned for State Maintenance. 13. All pipe culverts, storm sewers and appurtenances shall be free of all debris and silt build-up and shall be structurally and hydraulically sound, and functioning in a normal manner. All drainage ditches " _ shall be of such a width and depth and with such a slope as to carry the anticipated discharges. Paved ditches or Rip Rap shall be required where necessary. 14. Where extenuating circumstances exist, the Division Engineer has the authority to allow deviations from the design and construction = criteria presented in this manual. The deviations allowed will be , reasonable and limited only by safety and maintenance factors. No deviation will be allowed from the typical section requirements except by written approval from the Secondary Roads Officer. 15. Within a Municipal Extra Territorial Jurisdiction or within Counties having local ordinances affecting subdivisions, the- more restrictive ordinance shall apply. - 16. For the Policy on Roadway Bridges and Dams, see Page 16. -13- I • El M i4b7 4. Add definitions to Article 22 which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. The proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations would require that a traffic impact analysis or study be submitted with all sub- division applications where 80 or more lots or building sites were proposed or the estimated traffic generated by the subdivision exceeded 800 trips/day. Proposed amendments for incorporating the requirements into the Subdivision Regulations include the following: 1 . Renumber Sections Iv--B-3 d and e to d-1 and d-2, respectively, to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Subdivision Regulations. 2. Add Section IV-B-3-e which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 3. Add definitions to Section II which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. No comments were received at the public hearing regarding the amendments. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations text amendments. The Board of Commissioners will consider the proposals for decision on February 1 , 1988. MOTION: Best moved approval of Planning Staff recom- mendation. Seconded by Eddleman. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #8 : PLANNING BOARD ITEMS E> a. Public-Private Roads Standards - Interpretation Policy Presentation by Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to consider a draft policy resolution regarding the interpretation and application of the private road standards contained in Section Iv-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations. (A copy of this resolution is an 111 at,\ If 8 attachment to these minutes) Recent events have indicated that the private road standards contained in Section IV-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations have been incor- rectly interpreted and applied to new sub- divisions in the county. On December 9, 1987 , the Transportation Advisory Committee met with the Ordinance Review Committee to discuss the private road standards. Both groups agreed that an interim policy regarding the Interpretation and application of the standards was needed until a detailed study could be completed and revisions prepared. A draft policy resolution has been prepared which contains the major points identified by the two committees at the December 9 meeting. Emphasis is placed on the preservation of the rural character of Orange County; the use of restrictive covenants to prevent further sub- division, thereby maintaining the approved density and decreasing the likelihood of NCDOT acceptance of roads for maintenance purposes; and the use of design features for watershed protection, natural /historic areas preservation, and the retention of scenic views and natural vegetation. Collins continued, reviewing the standards as listed in the draft policy resolution. Jacobs made the following suggestions: That 1 c of the resolution be changed to read : Restrictive covenants are proposed which prevent further subdivision of the property, adherence to and same shall be made a condition of approval , thus maintaining project density. That 1 e should begin Larger than required . . . , deleting the words private roads. Jacobs asked Collins for an explanation of the different classes of private roads. Collins responded that ten or more lots required a public road or approval of the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners for a Class A private road. A Class B private road has a twelve-foot travelway with four to nine lots, and less than four lots is a Class C private road which has an eight-foot travelway. Yuhasz noted that NCDOT standards for a local residential road is an ' eighteen-foot travelway and a twenty-foot travelway for a subdivision collector road. • [ 1 5 u 9 Collins noted that there seemed to be three groupings of roads; one group that clearly need NCDOT maintenance standards, another group which with larger lot sizes, restrictive convenants and other factors is clearly a private road subdivision and another group in which the density meets NCDOT requirements but may be in a protected watershed where unpaved roads would be preferred. Jacobs asked if there was any provision in the current ordinance to address the concern of the Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force In which a subdivision was obviously for lower income families. Collins responded no. Jacobs continued that it seemed there would be a future need to work toward an intermediate road class- ification in order to address this concern. Yuhasz stated that he felt that the category of significant design features could adress the concern of the Task Force. Jacobs reminded the Board that the County Attorney had stated that economic considerations should not be a category considered. Yuhasz expressed the concern that his interpre- tation of 1 b of the resolution indicated the only circumstance under which one could have a private road was not meeting NCDOT density standards. He was also concerned with Jacobs revision to 1 c with the use of the word "adherance". He noted that restrictive covenants could be required of a developer but that the purchasers of the lots could not be required to adhere to those covenants. Jacobs replaced the word "adherance" with " inclusion". MOTION: Best moved approval of the draft reso- lution with those changes recommended by Jacobs and replacing the word "adherance" with " inclusion". Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: 7 in favor. 1 opposed (Yuhasz - felt that the entire Public/Private Road section of the ordinance should be revised to address some of the specific economic consequences. ) 151 RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REGARDING THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS CONTAINED IN SECTION IV-B-3-d OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WHEREAS, Orange County adopted Subdivision Regulations which apply county-wide on February 27 , 1978, and the effective date for application of the Regulations was established as March 13, 1978 ; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-5-b of the Subdivision Regulations requires that each lot in a subdivision abut a publicly dedicated street except in subdivisions approved with private roads; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-3-d of the Subdivision Regulations states that private roads may._ be _ allowed in a subdivision where: 1 . In the judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision, including such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans, and access by public safety vehicles are such that a private road is justified ; and 2. One or more of the following conditions are met: a. The subdivision consists of less than ten ( 10) lots. b. The subdivision preserves a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. c. The subdivision does not embrace or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County Thoroughfare Plan, or a municipality ' s thoroughfare plan within the county, or does not lie within a designated Transition Area as determined by the County. d. The subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets of the subdivision are private or unpaved, and the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community. e. The subdivision roads, even if constructed to State standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State requirement that the subdivision cannot meet; and WHEREAS, Section IV-B-3-d also states that for a subdivision to be approved with private roads, it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible; provided, however, the meeting of one or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval of private roads; and WHEREAS, the interpretation and application of the private road standards has not been in accord with the intent of the ordinance provisions; and WHEREAS, confusion has arisen among applicants for subdivision approval , the Planning Board, the Board of Commissioners and the County staff as to the proper interpretation and application of the private road standards; and WHEREAS, clarification of the interpretation of the private road standards is necessary to insure consistency of application and expeditious handling of subdivision applications ; and WHEREAS, an interim policy for the interpretation and application of the private road standards is needed until specific ordinance amendments are prepared and considered for approval : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Planning Board that : 1 . The following design features will be considered in determining whether to permit private roads in subdivisions : a. The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through : ( 1 ) The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines greater than required by ordinance provisions; (2) The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads and/or maintain a wooded or forested character; (3 ) The maintenance of scenic views, 1.53 including vistas of open farmland and/or forested hills and mountains; and/or (4 ) The clustering of dwelling units to preserve wildlife, botanical , historic, archeological and/or recreation sites; b . The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; c. Restrictive covenants are proposed which prevent further subdivision of the property and the same shall be made a condition of approval , thus maintaining project density; d. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical , wildlife, historic and/or archeological sites, are to be dedicated and/or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts greater than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication ; and/or e. Larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and/or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Land Use Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. 2. Public roads may be required where it is found that: a. The subdivision roads, if constructed to State standards, would be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; or b. The subdivision streets join or extend existing streets which are public and paved ; or c. The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Land Use Plan; or d. A proposed street is designated as an 154 arterial or collector street on an approved transportation or thoroughfare plan for a municipality or Orange County. 3 . It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for subdivision approval to supply a written statement justifying the reasons for private roads in the proposed subdivision; and 4. Compliance with one or more of the above standards does not insure approval of either a public or private road within a proposed subdivision . Adopted this 18th day of January, 1988 . 155 COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, L BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL Ez HARGRAVE ATTORNEYS AT LAW ` 7 +,-; Drill P.O. DRAWER 1529 ►`5`$3 129 E. TRYON ST. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 919-732-2196 919-942-8000 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE January 4 , 1988 SUITE 20,FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E. FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL, N.C.27514 919-929-7151 ALONZO B.COLEMAN,JR STEVEN A.BERNHOLZ DONALD R DICKERSON ROGER B. BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL Mr. Marvin Collins DOUGLAS HARGRAVE Director C. NICHOLAS HERMAN KIM K.STEFFAN Orange County Planning Department NATHANIEL E.CLEMENTS 306F Revere Road MARILYN ELLISON Hillsborough , North Carolina 27278 Of Counsel BONNER D.SAWYER (19024972) Re : Subdivision Requirements - Restrictive Covenants Dear Marvin : This letter is a follow up to our December 31 , 1987 meeting concerning the relationship between restrictive covenants and subdivision review and approval . Generally speaking the County has no role in the exaction or enforcement of restrictive covenants . There are , by definition, agreements among private parties . The County ' s subdivision regulations ( Section IV-B-3-d ) permit private roads in a subdivision when in the judgment of the County it is determined that private roads are justified. In making that determination the County should be looking for subdivisions which, among other things , "preserve a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features . " To satisfy that requirement , a developer could propose a private road subdivision with restrictive covenants which both limit lot size and prohibit future subdivision of the lots . The County then can approve the private road subdivision as proposed by the developer , imposing those conditions proposed by the developer. Unless the subdivision regulations create some other standard ( such as a public road standard ) which can be varied upon the development ' s meeting certain conditions ( such as special design features as part of a private road subdivision ) there is no ordinance basis for imposing deed restrictions or Mr. Marvin Collins Page Two January 4 , 1988 restrictive covenants in any other context . Certainly any requirement for restrictions imposing lot size requirements in excess of that required in the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance are without authority in either the subdivision regulations or the zoning ordinance . Finally, you asked about County liability by acting in contradiction to recorded covenants and particularly if the covenants served as the basis for initial approval of the project . Generally speaking the County should not act in contradiction to previously imposed requirements . This should only be done where ordinance changes make it necessary. Also generally speaking the County ' s development review 6 process is. not limited by restrictive covenant conditions or requirements . For example , County building permits must issue if the proposed building ameets all County subdivision regulation requirements and zoning requirements , including set backs even if the structure if built as proposed would violate restrictive covenants . Restrictive covenant a enforcement is a matter for the private landowners a affected by the restrictions . Very truly yours , A a a E. G -dhill 2 GEG/lsg xc : Barry Jacobs , for t•e Plann ng Bo- d a Shirley E. Marshal , for th- Boa 'd of ° County Commissi. ,ers U I ~ O R A N G E C O U N T Y / 1 � i5i BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date Febru .ry 1, 1988 Action da Item I SUBJECT: MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLAN DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _C_ No �� ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Proposed Text Revisions Revised Greenway Map Public Meeting Announcement Draft 12/21 /87 Planning Board Minutes Planning Director 12/31 /87 Memorandum County Attorney 1 /4/88 Letter Draft 1 /25/88 Planning Board Minutes TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 8181 Durham - 688 7331 Mebane - 227 2031 Chapel Hill - 968 4501 PURPOSE : To consider a proposed Master Recreation and Parks Plan for Orange County presented at public hearing on November 23, 1987 . BACKGROUND : In April of 1987 , work was begun on the preparation of a Master Recreation & Parks Plan for Orange County. The preparation of the Plan was carried out by the consulting firm of Woolpert Associates, working with the Master Recreation & Parks Plan Advisory Group. Following nine months of work and a series of public meetings, the completed draft Plan was presented at public hearing for citizen comment. In preparing the Plan, community input through public meetings, coupled with a review of typical recreation and park standards, aided in identifying immediate and long- range recreational needs of the County. Once these needs were put into quantitative terms, they provided a guide in determining land requirements for various types of recreation and park facilities. These standards were then used to formulate the direction of future recreation and park development. The Master Recreation & Parks Plan is designed to become one element of Orange County ' s Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with other County land use plans and ordinances. The Plan recommends that Orange County concentrate its efforts in the provision of four types of recreation and park facilities/areas : ( 1 ) community parks ( serving the more densely populated unincorporated areas of the county) ; (2) it; district parks; (3) greenways; and (4) swimming pools. c, A crucial element in the success of the Master Plan is the effectiveness of cooperative efforts between Orange County and the two school systems, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, the University of North Carolina, Duke University ( forest properties) , and the municipalities. The Master Plan envisions providing park facilities and recreation opportunities for aii citizens of Orange County and will require a long-term commitment and coordinated action on the part of these and other agencies. At the November 23 public hearing, many people spoke in regard to the Plan. Principal among the concerns voiced at the hearing were the cost of plan implementation and the provision of greenways. In response to citizen concerns, text amendments were proposed at the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting which recommended a new system for greenway classification. Two types were proposed, recreational trails and natural conservation lands. The Planning Board delayed consideration of the Master Plan to obtain the County Attorney ' s opinion concerning what uses could be allowed on natural conservation lands. Although the County Attorney has indicated that conservation easements and the uses of land thereon could be structured to fit almost any need, further revisions to the Master Plan were recommended at the January 25 Planning Board meeting which may alter the necessity for such easements. The proposed revisions would delineate "recreational trails" only and delete "natural conservation lands". Since the focus of the Master Plan is recreation and parks, only those greenways to be used for recreational purposes (or trails) would be shown on the Plan. The identification of "natural conservation areas" would be considered later during the development of the Open Space Plan and after more detailed information is available from the Natural Areas Inventory. Following consideration of the proposed revisions, the Planning Board recommended that the Master Recreation and Parks Plan be presented again at public hearing. The Planning Board felt that the Plan had been revised significantly from the proposal presented on November 23, 1987 . RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the following: 1 . That the Master Recreation and Parks Plan be scheduled for public hearing again as recommended by the Planning Board ; and 2. That the public hearing be scheduled for February 22, the next quarterly public hearing date. The Recreation & Parks Director had previously scheduled a series of public information meetings on February 8-11 to present the revised plan. The information meetings as well as the public hearing will provide ample opportunity for 1 - 159 additional citizen review and comment on the Master Recreation and Parks Plan. 160 ORANGE COUNTY MASTER RECREATION & PARKS PLAN The following text is recommended to be substituted for all text appearing in the draft Master Recreation and Parks Plan, Chapter 6, County-Wide Proposals and Recommendations, Greenways section (pages 6-7 through 6-9) . -Greenways A final county-wide recommendation is for the county to develop a greenway system, composed of recreational trails. The system is to be. based upon guidelines provided to the county by the Triangle Land Conservancy and greenways plans included in the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan adopted October 1986. It is also proposed that the county coordinate its greenway plans with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro on a local level, and the Triangle J Planning Area on a regional level, to assure proper connections with other systems in the area. Orange County is also within the path of the "Mountain to the Sea" trail being developed through the State of North Carolina. It would be beneficial to connect with this trail system where possible to become a member of a unique and historic recreational activity. The final recommendation on the development of a greenway system is that it be planned compatibly with other systems as recommended by the President's Commission on American Outdoors (PCAO) which emphasizes the creation of a "National Greenway Network." Areas designated on the individual township maps show the areasirecommended for recreational trails (graphically depicted by a dot pattern and labeled RT) which are accessible to the public and managed by the County, and are developed with walkways or trails. Recreational Trails Recreational trails in more urbanized areas or accessible to relatively large numbers of people, or which connect two or more identified significant areas should take the form of corridors of land with a paved or prepared walkway (these trails can provide walking connections and opportunities for bicyclists and joggers) or with well-marked and maintained unpaved trails. These corridors should be a minimum of sixty feet (60' ) wide or the width of the 100 year floodplain whichever is more, providing the user with the impression of being away from urban development. The recreation trails will require operational management such as litter and security patrol with appropriate vehicular restrictions endorsed. For recreational trails for which county ownership may not be necessary or appropriate, conservation easements and mutual convenants between the landowner and the county or another land management group like the Triangle Land Conservancy, may be useful. The above-described system would be developed using the methods for acquisition and development described in the Plan's section entitled the same, beginning on page 7-6, and should provide a special public-private partnership to ensure that the uniqueness of Orange County is preserved for future generations. . . • GREEN' AY Have A New Look ! gmali., 7, if,e.(.., •.); slifip, e.,te,ri..V,I:J„.‘....( (....:\:. __./. ...........r. •..;L.,. ..,, . \k j ..'•• 4 0. ‘ \., • ._ I. .-1....t.. t:I .'rj. _ ilik: el, t ii..f i 7-....ic-7, , -_...e.• , .. ../I)k,_. . / ' 1 •( rd... \'••••••••, .1 1'. ••• • V •,,,,. 1-, 4,T , ;.1...,,,./ if ..c.,1. , \ � �� l C4NT � -1 flik 4t IN, ,, ,Itiiiiikk,.., 44 ,, o:...Javarap..... ..,,- .; Ni gr ‘0 - -'11.14ir I ?pt It .4 7GA:VE !r YMr• .Y• - 4111F7 I tP..'. I Wr -� t ,?•'.A„ti �•.•• r±. • ..�_ •�' Kopf , 4t t -...• 1i sof' 0 �'�' ( , ,,. L rACNEE .g till* 't i •ENO , _ ," ,•\ 'I /�'�i'`�� `rte irk. .; �f ,, ,;. ; -- • .* �a 1 1 P. lik ■\ �` • ... a•-C, 7.0� go. �'..' 1',. ...4.-.• ,a--r 0 f'T �� f '' f fIr - J y r ��I .t LnNAi • •, -- M.,.`-' - f ��.{y ` - k.S' - i �, ` .. t �TIYO , - r • ,r. r r q.• , f I. ! v,l. . ..,. q±, I ?^.r , r t IT°,: - ; .t .f}7 , •i.•..e '.r / ,!. ' � _ .REFER TO TABLE 5-2 .... . �.�, 4, g maim....4 FACILITIES KEY k , . - L • ' r... C _ .r �1 - . �,. .� • .r' cow MOVE TMiw.., w.w. i• +NOFt1Y0 .� e _ r•- A OTSTKICT FAN (.....r./ ,, :=,=..r �^ 2' 'llTT�'WlN TYM, I1� `( T aegis TM. ti'd TWP t 2s J ,111:111 '7 � •r,NOFO+n? .. , \_• , . . ' • ▪N?J�. : 1MEpp! ' j �• z Mti •29} = y ' X• . . / I '1`( ua�. 'NGIMY TM,.ww' W?rAk• Until t_I 4rf.. .. -2,--:-.1.. f-c-..Q.', "14 ;,./ : )... ,- . i. ,' .! '- ''•-iiiWitt- , . ,,,i. V, —7W41.4 :4 •1 �` t - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES ORANGE COUNTY, N. C. MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLANS TRAIT. EXM?B?7 8-1 Orange County Recreation and Parks Department �,•'3�!'. • ‘"#`C 300 west Tryon Street• Hillsborough, North Caroline 27278 r for ``. 'SI' Mary Anne Black,ter YOU SPOKE. WE LISTENED. now GREEN AYS Have A New Look ! Recently Orange County asked the citizens to voice their opinions about the proposed Master Recreation and Parks Plan. The citizens spoke favorably about two parts of the plan (the need for parks and the need for public swimming pools) but had concerns about the other part of the plan called "greenways. " As a result of those concerns, the County has re-defined this part of the Plan and wants you to see the changes that have been made. PLAN TO ATTEND A SPECIAL PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Monday, February 8, 1988 -- Hillsborough/Eno Townships 7:00 - 8:00 pm Library Conference Room, Hillsborough Tuesday, February 9, 1988 -- Bingham / Chapel Hill Townships 7:00 - 8:00 pm Orange Grove Volunteer Fire Dept. Wednesday, February 10, 1988 -- Cheeks Township 7:00 - 8:00 pm Efland-Cheek Elementary School Thursday, February 11, 1988 -- Cedar Grove / Little River Townships 7:00 - 8:00 pm Northern Recreation Center, Hwy 86 N • 11t t •+ +■ilFr ••ti Come See the Changes GREENWAYS Have A New Look ! EENWAYS Have A New Lank P atently Orange County asked the biti;ens to uo,Ce their opinions about the dropos.o Master Recreation and Parks Plan. The citizens spoke favorably about two parts of the plan (the need for barks and the need fOr puglte swimming pools) but had concerns about the •.ther part of the plan called "greenways." As a result of those concerns. t he County has re-defined this part of the Plan and wants you co glee the changes that nave been roads. PLAN TO ATTEND A SPECIAL P119LIC INFONMTION MEcETING Monday, February 0, 1908 wi lleborougn/Eno Townenipe 7i00 - aide pm Library Confeeenee Room, Hillsborough Tuesday, February 9, 1388 -- Bingham / Chapel Hill TownsnlOS 7:00 - 0:00 pm Orange Grove volunteer Ftre Dept. Wednesday. February 16, 1988 -- Cheeks Township 7:00 - died pm Efland-Cheek Elementary 3enool Thursday. February 11, 1386 -- Cedar Grove / Little River TownSntbs 7:00 - 8:88 pm Northern Recreation Center, Nor on N dreenwav . Areas. usually along streams and creeks, which warrant Pe ion/conservation because of their unlbu■ character rfl•ora. fauna, historical. cultural, archeological) and which Can pro lqe corridors for movement by people Or animals between two points. these arras *mould be p 221 so that future ganeract;r.c may Continua to enjoy and appreciate the natural Charebte- Of .;,.e1,- changing communities. Oi What is the purpose of greenways? What are they used for? As Greenway■ are lands usually along streams and creeks which eithlr are developed for public use with trails or are undevel:.wuc aria left in their natural state. The greenways proposed in tn3 Master Recreation and Parke Plan are to be developed wltn trails for you and your family for hiking, biking, or walking. 0i Where will there trails be in Orange County? Why? As The trails are located to Connect public Parks. to prt•v1oe places where you can relay and enjoy natural areas away from crowned towns and ditiaa, and to provide ace... to areas of local interest. Os When will the trails be bulls and how mill the land be acquired? As The Plan proposes that the county begin now to build the trail. so that you and your family have places to walk and bike. It will take many, many year* (2a or more, to develop the proposed system. The county will look to acquire the land just like other Counties and towns have developed their parks and trail-: oystem-- tnrough donations or purchase of land. 0. Who will maintain these trails? As The county. with the halo of civic Clubs. Scout grou0s, will be responsible for maintaining the trails in a Clean ...,a safe manner so that you and your family can enjoy trrelr Os WINO Can use the trails? As v.}u, your family, and your friend* will all have access to thy beautiful trails System. (OVER) DRAFT 12/21/87 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES V ,1 64 17 An Irrevocable Letter of Credit has been submitted for the required improvements and Is being reviewed by the County Attorney. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the final plat subject to the approval of the Letter of Credit by the County Attorney. MOTION: Pilkey moved approval as recommended by Staff . Seconded by Eddleman . VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #8 : MATTERS HEARD AT 11 /23/87 PUBLIC HEARING 0 a. Master Recreation and Parks Plan Presentation by Marvin Collins. In April of 1987 , work was begun on the prepa- ration of a Master Recreation and Parks Plan for Orange County. The preparation of the Plan was carried out by the consulting firm of Woolpert Associates, working with the Master Recreation & Parks Plan Advisory Group. Following nine months of work and a series of public meetings, the completed draft Plan is being presented at public hearing for citizen comment. In preparing the Plan, community input through public meetings, coupled with a review of typical recreation and park standards, aided in identify- ing immediate and long-range recreational needs of the County. Once these needs were put into quantitative terms, they provided a guide in determining land requirements for various types of recreation and park facilities. These standards were then used to formulate the direction of future recreation and park develop- ment. The Master Recreation b Parks Plan is designed to become one element of Orange County' s Compre- hensive Plan and is consistent with other County land use plans and ordinances. The Plan recom- mends that Orange County concentrate Its efforts in the provision of four types of recreation and park facilities/areas: ( 1 ) community parks ( serving the more densely populated unincorpo- rated areas of the county) ; (2) district parks; (3) greenways; and (4 ) swimming pools. A crucial element in the success of the Master Plan is the effectiveness of cooperative efforts between Orange County and the two school systems, the Orange Water and Sewer Authr,r tv _ +►,o LL .1. 18 University of North Carolina, Duke University ( forest properties) , and the municipalities. The Master Plan envisions providing park facilities and recreational opportunities for all citizens of Orange County and will require a long-term commitment and coordinated action on the part of these and other agencies. At the November 23 public hearing, many people spoke in regard to the Plan. Principal among the concerns voiced at the hearing were the cost of plan implementation and the provision of green- ways. Citizen comments are summarized in the attached 11 /23/87 minutes. In response to citizen concerns, text amendments are proposed which recommend a new system for greenway classification. Two types are proposed , recreational trails and natural conservation lands, and they are discussed in the proposed text amendments. ( Amendments attached to these minutes on pages ) . The Recreation and Parks Director and the Planning Director recommend approval of the Master Recreation 8 Parks Plan, including the proposed text amendments which address greenway classification. The Planning Board ' s recommendation, as well as that of the Recreation and Parks Advisory . Council , will be forwarded to the County Manager. Collins presented a map with overlays showing recreational trails, greenways and natural conservation areas. Also included on the overlays were existing and proposed parks, including all current recreation ' facilities. Collins proposed that natural conservation areas be left in the ownership of the private land- owner, using restrictive covenants and easements to preserve such areas. Should subdivisions occur in an area that the County was interested in securing because of some endangered species, it could be possible to place the area In + the ownership of the Triangle Land Conservancy through the dedication/payment- in- lieu provisions. The options available for the acquisition of recreational trails range from the dedication/payment- in- lieu provisions to acquisition through bond funds, capital improvments programming and land donation. Mary Anne Black, Recreation and Parks Director, stated that the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council met the week after the public hearing. The Council asked for a redefinition of greenways F, 1 M V 19 and also asked for text revisions expressing that the private landowner is a good steward of his/her property, including the farmlands handed down through the years. She indicated that the concerns had been addressed in the text revisions. The Advisory Council also indicated a desire for limited public access, and she noted that the request had also be addressed in the text revisions. Eddleman indicated he felt the revisions were much better than the greenways as presented at public hearing, and that the public reponse would be more favorable with the revisions. He indicated he felt another public hearing was in _ order. Black responded that there would be two public meetings held on the revisions and that recommendations from the Planning Board and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council would be forwarded to the County Manager for presentation to the Board of Commissioners. She indicated the Manager felt the Plan could go to the Board of Commissioners on February 1 . Collins informed the Board that he had been asked if the Plan was adopted , would it become automatically a part of the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County. He noted that according to provisions for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and the fact that becoming a part of the Comprehensive Plan had not been advertised, a public hearing would have to be conducted to address the issue of whether or not the Master Recreation and Parks Plan should become a part of the Comprehensive Plan. Jacobs asked that Occoneechee Mountain and Seven— Mile Creek be included as unique natural areas of Orange County. MOTION: Yuhasz moved to delay consideration of the Master Recreation and Parks Plan until the January 12 or January 25 Planning Board Meeting In order to obtain the County Attorney ' s opinion on what uses can or will be allowed in the natural conservation areas. Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: Unanimous. b. Land Use Plan Amendments ( 1 ) Cedar Grove Township Land Use Plan Presentation by Brad Torgan. r! .Lb ( MEMORANDUM TO: GEOFFREY GLEDHILL, COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM: MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR DATE: DECEMBER 31, 1987 SUBJECT: RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS COPIES: ALBERT KITTRELL, INTERIM COUNTY MANAGER BARRY JACOBS, PLANNING BOARD CHAIR MARY ANNE BLACK, RECREATION & PARKS DIRECTOR At the December 21, 1987 meeting of the Planning Beard, questions arose regarding the above mentioned subject (s) . Specifically, the questions resulted from the Planning Board' s consideration of two separate items - the Master Recreation and Parks Plan, and the Subdivision of Lot 9 of Phase I, Lake Woods. While we are meeting today to discuss the issue of conservation, easements, I thought it best to put the basic questions in writing for your consideration. Subdivision of Lot 9 - Phase I of Lake Woods 1. Can the County require a developer/owner to put certain stipulations in restrictive covenants at the time of preliminary plat approval? As an example, can the County require the a restriction establishing a certain minimum lot size (greater than, required by ordinance) or preventing further subdivision of the lots? What is the role of the County in the enforcement of - restrictive covenants? I told the Board that such covenants constituted an agreement between private parties, and it was neither desirable nor necessary that the County become involved in the enforcement of such covenants. .:•. Is there any County liability by actino . in contradiction - - - to recorded covenants, particularly if the covenants served as the basis for the initial approval -of a project? _ -These questions arose because some Planning Board members thought that the preliminary plat for Lake Woods had been approved with a stipulation that restrictive covenants be recorded limiting the lot size and further subdivision, of the -lots. A check of the minutes revealed that no such conditions had been attached to the approval. Furthermore, the proposed subdivision of Lot 9 into two lots, each two or more acres in size, was consistent with the recorded covenants. 166 Master Recreation & Parks Plan Proposed text revisions to the Plan (copy attached) contain references to management agreements, conservation easements, mutual covenants, etc. Such mechanisms would be employed where land would be left in private ownership but protection would be sought for natural conservation areas. Questions which arose regarding the mechanisms for protection of conservation areas include the fallowing : 1. What are conservation easements and what are permitted uses within designated conservation areas? If an existing structure is located within an area proposed for dedication or protection by means of a conservation easement, how should it be treated? I have enclosed a copy of The Landowner' s potions for Natural Heritage_ Protection which identifies various mechanisms for . protecting conservation lands in North Carolina. Pages 19-24 define those mechanisms referred to in the Plan text. Pages 34-35 contain, a copy of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Aareernents Act. The provisions of that act define the limitations on uses of land under Section (2) . The Planning Board is to consider the above items again at a January 12 special meeting. If you could provide answers to the above, either verbally or in narrative form prior to that date, I would be most appreciative. n Marvin Collins Planning Director ORANGE COUNTY MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLAN 16 The following text is recommended to be substituted for all text appearing in . the draft Master Recreation and Parks Plan, Chapter 6, County-Wide Proposals and Recommendations, Greenways section (pages 6-7 through 6-9) . -Greenways A final county-wide recommendation is for the county to develop a greenway system, composed of two types of areas: recreational trails and natural conservation lands. The system is to be based upon guidelines provided to the county, by the Triangle Land Conservancy and greenways plans included in the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan adopted October 1986. The descriptions of greenway types listed below should be used in delineating each segment's use as the plan is implemented. It is also proposed that the county coordinate its greenway plans with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro on a local level, and the Triangle J Planning Area on a regional level, to assure proper connections with other systems in the area. Orange County is also within the path of the "Mountain to the Sea" trail being developed through the State of North Carolina. It would be beneficial to connect with this trail system where possible to become a member of a unique and historic recreational activity. The final recommendation on the development of a greenway system is that it be planned compatibly with other systems as recommended by the President's Commission on American Outdoors (PCAO) which emphasizes the creation of a "National Greenway Network." Areas designated on the individual township maps show the two types of areas ) recommended: (1) recreational trails (graphically depicted by a dot pattern and labeled RT) which are accessible to the public and managed by the County, and are developed with walkways or trails and (2) natural conservation areas (graphically depicted by an asterisk pattern and labeled NCA) which are lands managed by the landowner and designated for protection from destructive development and are not accessible to the community. Recreational Trails Recreational trails in more urbanized areas or accessible to relatively large numbers of people, or which connect two or more identified significant areas should take the form of corridors of land with a paved or prepared walkway (these trails can provide walking connections and opportunities for bicyclists and joggers) or with well-marked and maintained unpaved trails. These corridors should be a minimum of sixty feet (60' ) wide, providing the user with the impression of being away from urban development. The recreation trails will require operational management such as litter and security patrol with appropriate vehicular restrictions endorsed. - For recreational trails for which county ownership may not be necessary or appropriate, conservation easements and mutual covenants between the landowner and the county or another land management group like the Triangle Land Conservancy, may be useful. Natural Conservation Lands Natural conservation areas in more rural areas, or which connect identified significant areas should take the form of undeveloped wide strips of land, not i (7U • accessible to the public and off limits to all vehicles. These areas should be at minimum the ,width of the 100-year flood plain or sixty feet (60' ), whichever is more. These areas can serve as wildlife corridors and are characterized by flood plains, restricted from development, and may include sites of endangered plant or animal species which warrant protection. Protection from development would be sought from the landowner via management agreements, conservation easements, mutual covenants, etc., and from the developer via deed restrictions and/or dedication to the county if the property is of designated significance. As the recreational trail system develops and as the county grows and becomes more urbanized, the natural conservation areas may need to be incorporated into the recreational trails system. At that time, the county would approach private landowners to negotiate utilization of their natural conservation lands for recreational trails. The above-described system would be developed using the methods for acquisition and development described in the Plan's section entitled the same, beginning on page 7-6, and should provide a special public-private partnership to ensure that the uniqueness of Orange County is preserved for future generations. • • heirs.Lastly,the landowner could choose to name another charitable land- Ili, Options Involving holding organization which would nutontically assume title if the condi- tions for use were longer being fulfilled.m Detention Of Ownership Conditional transfers may enable the landowner to claim the value of the gift as a charitable deduction if the gift is given to a qualified recipient. By Internal Revenue Service regulations, a donor must transfer land to a government agency or a publicly-supported charity in order to claim the value of the gift as a deduction. Because the existence of restrictions may reduce the spptaised value of the gift,a landowner wishing to maximize the Most of North Carolina's natural areas and environmentally-sensitive income tax deduction may want to transfer the unrestricted land to a lands will remain in private ownership. It is not possible (or government qualified agency which would then impose the conditions and convey the agencies or conservation organizations to acquire and protect all the impor. land to the agency that is to own the land permanently. tant natural areas and environment at resources of our state. Not all land is There are certain Icg,il limitations ott the use of conditiotal transfers for for sale,much of it is too expensive to purchase,withdrawal of private lands permanent land protection.Courts,which term to disfavor Conditions,may is sometimes unpopular, and public agencies are increasingly unable or be reluctant to enforce the conditions through forfeiture of title if litigation reluctant to incur costs of purchase and management in acquiring more becomes necessary. Despite their possible limitations, conditional transfets land.Many private landowners wish to retain their properties. If the natural arc an appealing«ay of regulating future use because they are created with heritage and natural beauties of North Carolina are to be preserved, it will case,particularly if an intermediate agency is riot involved.At the same time be due primarily to active participation and initiatives by private property they provide strong guidance for the use of the property—loss of title is a owners—private landowners concerned enough to protect their natural severe penalty for breaking the regulations set on use. lands by voluntary actions. A variety of options are available for private Practical considerations become an Important aspect when analyzing owners to protect their natural lands while retaining ownership. the utility of this technique. Would the heirs take the initiative to reassert ownership if necessaryl' If the land reverted automatically to them, would they treat it wisely?If an intermediary or second agency should be involved, The Conservation Easement is there one which is willing to participate and which would net responsibly in the future? T lrese are considerations which must be judged against the A Conservation easement is a legal means by which a landowner can voluntarily set permanent limitations on the future use of the land,thus pro- ; facts of the particular situation. tecting the land's natural qualities.*Through an easement, the owner con- veys to a qualified public or private organization the right to prevent certain uses oft he land in the future or to use it for specific purposes.The attraction of the conservation easement lies in the fact that the land remains in private ownership.The owner may use,sell,lease,or convey the land subject to the explicit terms of the easement,because neither the title not right to posses- , sion of the land is given up by the agreement. The responsibilities and rewards of ownership continue, and unless specified otherwise, the land- owner retains full control over public access just as before granting the easement. The limitations on land development set forth in conservation j easements are tailored to suit the unique characteristics of individual proper- ties, as well as the different needs and interests of individual landowners. Generally, the limitations prescribed in an easement limit the type and loca- tion of development activity, and they specify what can be done to the sur- face of the land and its natural resources. The versatility of conservation easements allows them to range from the easements that assure that the land ✓�-+ will remain in undisturbed natural condition, to the easement that allows limited residential use, farming, and properly managed timber harvesting. *See Appendix B for the Historic and Conservation Agreement Act,N.C. General Statute 121-34 to 42. 19 18 Not only do the type of restrictions vary,but so can the size of the pro- might even bring the value of the estate below the exemption limit and free perry under easement. An owner may place under easement the entire pro- the heirs from paying estate taxes. At a time when land values are high and perty or only the portion that has greatest significance for conservation are still climbing,this incentive for granting a conservation easement may be interests.The size can be several acres or several thousand.Each easement is important both For the heirs and for the future of the land. All too often created in light of the particular situation, according to the values of the land roust be sold to cover the estate taxes. F J land and the activities acid wishes of its owner. 1 The easement is a legal document which is written in deed farm and is If a conservation easement is granted for a payment by the recipient, it constitutes a taxable event. if the easement is donated, it can constitute e n filed with the county register of deeds.The protection afforded by conserva- charitable contribution. •tion easements is usually permanent because easements legally bind all pre- sent and future owners of the land. The easement burdens the title to the The loss in market value resulting from the grant of a conservation ease- land thereafter, whether the land is transferred by sale, by gift,or by will. ment in perpetuity may also be entered as a charitable deduction when the donor calculates his or her income tax.*The reduction in income tax that A conservation easement need not open the land to public use. But if the owner wishes to do more than preserve the integrity of the natural results from taking a charitable deduction can help a landowner cover the costs of owning a resources, the easement tnay provide for limited public recreational an and maintaining the property. d If the land is n be given t an individual prior to death,federal gift tax educational activities, such as hiking, fishing, and nature study. may be due. The lower value may reduce the amount of the tax,or in some The limitations contained in conservation easements have lasting effect cases, may eliminate the need to pay any tax for that gift. in practice because each easement is granted to an organization or agency in- There may also be a property tax benefit.Easements do not remove land terested in preserving the natural characteristics of the land. T'he sole from the tax rolls, but assessors must consider the effects of enforceable responsibility of the recipient of an easement is to assure that neither the restrictions, such as conservation easements,on the value of the land.Thus, present nor any subsequent owners disregard the regulations on use set forth the land should be assessed at its actual value reflecting the limited potential in the easement. An casement would be enforced by litigation by the reci• use of the land. Actual value is defined as fair market value —in other pient,so the recipient agency must have the resources and determination to words, what a willing buyer will pay. County assessors should be notified make sure that the easement is enforced. Because the agency is assuming a after a conservation easement is granted, so that property taxes may be long-lived and important responsibility when it agrees to accept an ease- reassessed, meat,it makes the decision thoughtfully and in accordance with its own ob- in summary,the most distinctive aspect of protecting land through the jectives. Those public agencies specifically identified in North Carolina grant of an easement is that the land rernains in private ownership, yet its General Statute 121-34 to 42 are "t lie Stnte, any of its agencies, any city, use is regulated and the protection can be stronger than that afforded by county,district or other political subdivision or municipal or public corpora- zoning or stale land use laws. The financial aspects can be important from tion, or any instrumentality of any of the foregoing." In addition, any both the point of view of the owner's family and the future of the land. private charitable corporation or entity founded for conservation purposes A landowner can take this voluntary measure quite easily,but must weigh may also receive conservation easements. Public and private agencies the decision carefully, for once done, it is difficult to reverse. The financial interested in accepting conservation easements are discussed in Chapter IV. benefits must be weighed against the realities of a loss in market value; the People grant conservation easements primarily because they wish to pro- protection must be weighed against the need for flexibility.In many instances, tect land which they value and which will be important for its natural however,the range of covenants that can be contained in a conservation ease- attributes in the future.Their greatest reward is their sense of satisfaction at ment and the way they may be applied,afford tremendous room for finding a having protected something of value. however, the financial benefits of proper balance of personal and conservation considerations. granting a conservation easement in perpetuity can also be important. A conservation casement will affect the market value of the land to the Mutual Covenants extent that it limits the development and use potential. It is the effect on Occasionally there are situations where a conservation easement ma market value that is important when considering the financial aspects of y not be feasible, either because there is no recipient agency interested in easements. accepting the easement or because the landowner does not want to enter Any reduction in the market value may lower estate and inheritance into an agreement with an agency or organization. In such a case,it would taxes. Taxes must be paid on the amount an estate exceeds the exemption be possible to limit the future uses of the land through the imposition of limits set by state and federal governments, and these taxes would reduce mutual covenants if there are several landowners in the immediate area the assets in the estate going to the owner's heirs.Assuming that a parcel of interested in entering into mutually restrictive agreements. land is part of a taxable estate, federal and state taxes may have to be paid Neighboring landowners having a common conservation interest may based upon the appraised value of property at the time of death.Thus,any reduction in the value of the prwerty caused by the granting of an easement will similarly lower estate taxes. In certain instances,the reduction in value *See Appendix A regarding charitable deductions. 20 21 sign an agreement containing mutually benelidal protective covenants con- Leases trolling the future of their land. The agreement would be recorded in the Another option available to the landowner is that of granting a long- county records and would he binding upon subsequent owners just as an term lease to a land management agency. Leases are rental agreements. An easement would, and the types of restrictions imposed would be much the agency pays rent to the landowner and takes temporary possession of the same.These covenants would then he enforceable by any of the landowners property in order to control its use. The lease would allow for unrestricted who entered into the mutual agreement or by any future owners of the land. and exclusive use of the land by that agency for the given number of years, These covenants differ from conservation easements in three respects. and it would be Filed with the county register of deeds. Even if rental First, the nature of the enforcer is quite different. It would he a person or a payments are not received for the use of the land,there may he or her finan- group of people rather than a conservation agency or organization.Though cial incentives which accompany the leasing of land. Although it is not the presence of any restrictions of which others are aware is likely to restrain possible to take a charitable deduction for the value of a lease which is forbidden acts by the owners,enforcement would ultimately depend on the donated, any impact of the lease on the value of the land would he taken determination and resources of an individual. Normally enforcement of the into account when estate taxes are calculated. terms of the covenants by the neighboring landowner is not legally man- Certain use restrictions can also be incorporated within the lease. Fur- datory; rather, it is optional. (her,provisions could be contained that if the lessee(conservation agency or The second difference is that mutual covenants may not be as lasting as organization)does not use the property as directed,that the lease would he the restrictions contained in an casement. By their legal nature they would automatically terminated, and all of the lessee's interest in the property be subject to the doctrine of changed conditions; a court would be able to would thereafter he forfeited. refuse to enforce the covenants if it felt that it is no longer possible to The lease provides an alternative for those who may not wish to transfer achieve the benefits sought when the covenants were imposed. their land to a conservation agency or organization but who want to see it Lastly, there are the financial considerations. These covenants muld used or protected by such a group for a period of years, receive a similar treatment as do easements when the property taxes and estate taxes are calculated. The local assessor may consider them, and the Management Agreements appraiser may take them into account when determining the value of an Management agreements are legal contracts between landowners and estate at time of death. 'File imposition of these covenants, however,does conservation organizations,obligating the landowner to manage the property not enable landowners to claim the loss in market value as a charitable in a specific way for a specified period of time to achieve purposes mutually ac• deduction on their income tax returns. cepted. These agreements are well suited for private landowners who have While not as strong as conservation easements, mutually restrictive traditionally and consciously managed their property for natural values. covenants provide an alternative for those instances when easements may Most frequently, management agreements are voluntarily granted by land• not he feasible or desirable. They do, however, require the presence of the owners. The agreement is tailored to suit both parties, The agreement can right combination of people and circumstances. last as long as both parties desire.The agreement may he recorded with the county register of deeds and may produce tax incentives similar to those gained by leases. Management agreements have been a commonly accepted means to pro- tect natural areas in Great Britain,and in recent years have been used inure qq frequently by conservation organizations in this country. Registration The N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Develop- `t( ment has established the North Carolina Registry of Natural I leri(age Areas to recognize and honor landowners who promise to protect important natural areas. The Natural heritage Program arranges these voluntary agreements with private owners of natural areas and with public land management agencies. The registry has proven to he an effective and popular means to encourage protection of natural areas. Sites have been Nr registered by many individuals,timber companies, utility companies,other corporations,colleges and universities,hunting and sports clubs,churches, Scouts and civic groups, various conservation organizations, and federal, G state, and local government agencies. 23 22 For an area to be eligible for registration, it must possess significant CONSIDERING THE C14010ES natural values such as an exemplary natural community habitat type, en- dangered or rare species of plant or animal, outstanding geologic feature, --A significant wildlife habitat, or other unique ecological resource or excep- tional natural conditions.Additionally,a site is evaluated on its educational Many of the hardest questions that will affect the landowner's final deciyl�� and research oppr>rumities, diversity of flora and Fauna, the duality and Sion must be answered by the owner alone—questions such as whether to viability of the natural features,absence of damaging land uses and extent of give up the development potential of the land and how important continued alteration from past disturbances, its capacity for being maintained in ownership of the land is to the owner and one's family. A landowner can help ensure a proper decision by obtaining professional advice. natural condition, and capability to protect the area. A landowner who is seriously considering protecting a property through An area is entered on the registry only after the owner or managing agen- cy voluntary agrees to have it recognized as a protected rmtural area and signs with of any of the legal techniques described should discuss the alternatives a conservation pledge. Owners are given written descriptions and manage- with an attorney who is familiar with land conservation law and the tax meet recommendations for their natural areas. Owners are awarded framed implications of complex,conservation measures. Although the final legal transaction certificates in recognition of their conEferntion.The Natural Heritage Program may not he complex, a landowner needs to be sure that the alternative chosen is legally sound, that the legal instrument used will he able to fully maintains frequent communication with owners of registered areas and con- ducts an annual nros,itoring review. Owners of registered areas do not as yet accomplish the goal, and that the action will be wise from a tax planning receive any tax incentives for voluntarily assuring Vicar protection. perspective. Also a landowner may wish to consult a real estate appraiser to deter- mine the approximate effect of the proposed measure on the value of the property or the value of the gift that will be donated. Only if a landowner has a realistic idea of the financial impact of the conservation measure can one determine whether he or she can afford to take the step and to what extent any tax benefits will counter the loss in value. The services of an accountant may be required to help with these determinations if the land- owner's financial situation is complex. Should a landowner consider the conservation alternatives and decide not to take action now,the subject need not be closed. Circumstances and thoughts may change with the passage of time, and actions may later become appropriate. Landowners should choose the conservation method most appropriate for them after considering their individual financial and personal needs and their desires for the land.The range of options is wide enough to allow most landowners to find a suitable solution.The presence of committed conserva• tion organizations with similar objectives will enable North Carolina land- owners to achieve their goals. l' r 24 25 APPENDIX B. C�. 4. 12( - 3¢� inheritance,eminent domain or otherwise and to use property of any kind for public purposes. Historic Preservation And Conservation Agreements Act Section 4. Acquisition and Approval of Conservation and Preservation The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: Agreements.Subject to the conditions stated in this act,any holder may,in any manner,acquire,receive or become a party of a conservation agreement Section 1.The title of this act shall be known as the I listoric Preserve- or a preservation agreement. tion and Conservation Agreements Act. Section 5. Validity of Agreements.(a)No conservation or preservation Section Definitions. Subject to any additional definitions contained agreement shall he unenforceable because of(1) lack of privity of estate or in this act,or r unless the context otherwise requires contract, or (2) lack of benefit to particular land or person, or (3) the (1)A "preservation agreement"means a right,whether or not stated in assignability of the benefit to another holder as defined in this act.(b)Such the form of a restriction, reservation, easement, covenant, condition or agreements are interests in land and may be acquired by any holder in the otherwise,io any decd,will or other instrument executed by or on behalf of � same manner as it may acquire other interests in land. (c)Such agreements the owner of the land or any improvement thereon, or in any other of may he effective perpetually or for shorter stipulated periods of time. (d) taking, appropriate to preservation of a structure or site historically signifi- Such agreements may impose present,future,or continuing obligations on cant for its architecture,archaeology,or historical associations,to forbid or F either party to the agreements,or their successors,in furtherance of the pur- limit any or all(a)alteration,(h)alterations in exterior or interior features of poses of the agreement. the structure,(c)changes in appearance or condition of the site,(d)uses not Section 6. Enforceability of Agreements. (a)Conservation or preserva- toappropriate ate pre erv.,i or(e)other acts or uses supportive of or detrimental tion agreements may be enforced b the holder h injunction and other a to appropriate preservation of the structure or site. g y y y i p (2)A"conservation agreement"means a right,whether or not stated in propriate equitable relief administered or afforded by the courts of this State. the form of a restriction, reservation,easement,covenant or condition, in Where appropriate under the agreement,damages,or other monetary relief any deed,will or other instrument executed by or on behalf of the owner of may also he awarded either to the holder or creator of the agreement or land or improvement thereon or in any order of taking, appropriate to either of their successors for breach of any obligations undertaken by either, retaining land or water areas predominately in their natural,scenic or open (b) Such agreements shall entitle representatives of the holder to enter the condition or in agricultural,horticuhural,farming or forest use,to forbid or involved land or improvement in a reasonable manner and at reasonable limit any or all (a) COnstnleti(11 or placing of buildings, roads, signs, times to assure compliance. billboards or other advertising, utilities or other structures on or above the Section 7. Assessment of land or Improvements Subject to Agreement. ground, (h) dumping or placing of soil or other substance or material as For purposes of taxation,land and improvements subject to a conservation or landfill, or dumping or placing of trash, waste or unsightly or offensive preservation agreement shall be assessed on the basis of the true value of the materials,(c)removal or destruction of trees,shrubs,or usher vegetation,(d) land and improvement less any reduction in value caused by the agreement. excavation, dredging or removal of loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock or other Section 8. Public Recording of Agreements. (a) Conservation mineral substance in such manner as to affect the surface, (e) surface use agreements shall be recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds of the except for agricultural, farming, forest or outdoor recreational purposes or county or counties in which the subject land or improvement is located,in purposes permitting the land or water area to remain predominately in its (lie same manner as deeds are now recorded.(b)Releases or terminations of natural condition,(f)activities detrimental to drainage,flood control,water such agreements shall be recorded in the same waiver. Releases or termina- conservation, erosion control or soil conservation,or(g)other acts or uses � tions, or the recording entry, shall appropriately identify by date, parties, detrimental to such retention of land or water areas. and book and pages of recording,the agreement which is the subject of the (3) "lle,lder" means any public body of this State, includirig the State, release or termination. any of its agencies,any city,county,district or other political subdivision or municipal or public corporation,or any instrumentality of any of the fore- Section 9. Short Title. This act shall he known and may he cited as going, any nonprofit corporation or trust, or any private corporation or Uniform Conservation and Historic Preservation Agreement Act. business entity whose purposes include any of those stated in (1) and (2) Section 10. This act is effective upon ratification and applies only to above, covering the purposes of preservation and conservation agreements. agreements executed,created or entered into after that date. Section 3. Applicability.(a)This act shall apply to all conservation and preservation a r s In the General Assembly read three times and ratified, this the 1st day greeents falling within its term and conditions. fh)This act y of June, 1979. shall not be construes! to make unenforceable any restriction, easement, covenant or condition which doles not comply with the requirements of this act. (c)This act shall not be construed to diminish the powers of any public entity, agency, or instrumentality to acquire by purchase, gift, devise, ''!', j Cil 34 35 176 COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, - BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE Era:C 177! ED ATTORNEYS ArRNEYS AT Lkw gS P.O. DRAWER 1529 MSG 129 E. TRYON ST. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 919-732-2196 919-942-8000 January 4 , 1988 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20,FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E.FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL,N.C.27514 911929.7151 ALONZO B.COLEMAN,JR. STEVEN A. BERNH012 DONALD R. DICKERSON ROGER B. BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL Mr . Marvin Collins DOUCIAS HARGRAVE Director C. NICHOLAS HERMAN KIM K.STEFFAN Orange County Planning Department NATHANIEL E.CLEMENTS 3 0 6 F Revere Road MARILYN ELLISON Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Of Counsel BONNER D.SAWYER (1902-1972) Ms . Mary Anne Black Director Orange County Recreation and Parks Department 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re : The revised Orange County Master Recreation and Parks Plan with respect to greenways Dear Marvin and Mary Anne : I have reviewed the document accompanying Mary Anne ' s December 22 , 1987 letter and Marvin' s memorandum dated December 31 , 1987 . I have done so at a meeting with Marvin on December 31, 1987 . The Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act , North Carolina General Statutes Section 121-34 et seq. , defines a conservation agreement in very broad terms. It strikes me that almost any limitation on the use of land could be imposed through a conservation agreement. Likewise , the act provides flexibility to deal with almost any conceivable case including the case of an existing structure located in an area proposed for dedication . By agreement with the landowner in question, the structure could continue to be used for the landowner' s lifetime or some series of lifetimes and thereafter revert to the County or the agency to be the ultimate owner of the conservation easement . Thereafter the structure could be used or not as the County or agency desires . .17' Mr. Marvin Collins Ms . Mary Anne Black Page Two January 4 , 1988 Requiring public recreation trails and private natural conservation easements generally should cause Orange County no difficulties . The requirements can be problematic in a particular case , however. Certainly in the case of the public recreation trails , access to the trails must be assured to landowners within the subdivision. The recreation trail requirement should satisfy a recreation need or requirement of the subdivision in question . There must be , in all of this, a nexus , and as close a one as possible , between the development under consideration and the exaction being considered . I will be developing this notion in more detail as soon as possible . This task , however, must wait further clarification by lower federal courts of the more recent Supreme Court decisions in this area . I am analyzing those decisions presently. Very truly yours , c=• fr: y E. Gledhill GEG/lsg Enclosure xc : Barry Jacobs , for the Pla ing :oard Shirley E. Mars ;11 , for th- oard of County Commissioners . 112 /1 176 2. Revision of the final plat, if required by the County Attorney ' s review, to denote the following : a. The area designated as "To Be Dedicated To Homeowners Association" is to be changed to "Property of Piney Mountain Homeowners Association" and a lot number assigned. b . The area designated as "100,339 SF To Be Dedicated To Orange Co. For Recreation and/or Open Space Purposes" is to be changed to "Property of Orange County" and a lot number assigned. c. The area designated as "Phase I - Nitrification Field" is to be assigned a lot number and proposed ownership indicated, if known. AGENDA ITEM #10 : MATTERS HEARD AT 11 /23/87 PUBLIC HEARING 0 a. Master Recreation and Parks Plan Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item was continued from the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting. In April of 1987 , work was begun on the preparation of a Master Recreation & Parks Plan for Orange County . The preparation of the Plan was carried out by the consulting firm of Wooipert Associates, working with the Master Recreation & Parks Plan Advisory Group. Following nine months of work and a series of public meetings, the completed draft Plan was presented at public hearing for citizen comment. In preparing the Plan, community input through public meetings, coupled with a review of typical recreation and park standards, aided in identifying immediate and long- range recreational needs of the County. Once these needs were put into quantitative terms, they provided a guide in determining land requirements for various types of recreation and park facilities. These standards were then used to formulate the direction of future recreation and park development. The Master Recreation & Parks Plan is designed to become one element of Orange County ' s Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with other County land use plans and ordinances. The Plan recommends that Orange County concentrate its efforts in the provision of four types of recreation and park facilities/areas : ( 1 ) 17J community parks ( serving the more densely populated unincorporated areas of the county) ; (2) district parks; (3) greenways; and (4) swimming pools. A crucial element in the success of the Master Plan is the effectiveness of cooperative efforts between Orange County and the two school systems, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, the University of North Carolina, Duke University ( forest properties) , and the municipalities. The Master Plan envisions providing park facilities and recreation opportunities for all citizens of Orange County and will require a long-term commitment and coordinated action on the part of these and other agencies. At the November 23 public hearing, many people spoke in regard to the Plan. Principal among the concerns voiced at the hearing were the cost of plan implementation and the provision of greenways. In response to citizen concerns, text amendments were proposed at the December 21 , 1987 Planning Board meeting which recommended a new system for greenway classification. Two types were proposed, recreational trails and natural conservation lands. The Planning Board delayed consideration of the Master Plan to obtain the County Attorney ' s opinion concerning what uses could be allowed on natural conservation lands. Although the County Attorney has indicated that conservation easements and the uses of land thereon could be structured to fit almost any need, further revisions to the Master Plan were recommended at the January 25 Planning Board meeting which may alter the necessity for such easements. The proposed revisions would delineate "recreational trails" only and delete "natural conservation lands". Since the focus of the Master Plan is recreation and parks, only those greenways to be used for recreational purposes (or trails) would be shown on the Plan. The identification of "natural conservation areas" would be considered later during the development of the Open Space Plan and after more detailed information is available from the Natural Areas Inventory. Collins presented maps with overlays identi- fying the types and locations of greenways, utility easements, designated floodplains, proposed park sites, natural areas inventory and recreational trails. At a subsequent meeting with the Eno, Hillsborough and Chapel {imav 180 Hill Township Advisory Councils, concerns were expressed with the extension of natural conser- vation areas. From the concerns at that meeting, as well as those expressed at public hearing and the Planning Board meeting of December 21 , the Recreation Director, Mary Anne Black, and the Planning Director were able to determine that the Plan should be left on a strictly recreational basis. The more active greenways are the ones which should be left in the Plan. Natural conservation areas for the preservation of wildlife and botanical resources should be addressed through other vehicles, the Open Space Plan and the Natural Areas Inventory to be completed by Dawson Sather later this year. The Recreation and Parks Director and the Planning Director recommend approval of the Master Recreation and Parks Plan, including the text amendments which limit greenway classifi- cation to "recreational trails". The Planning Board ' s recommendation, as well as that of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council , will be forwarded to the County Manager. Best indicated he felt there would be much less opposition to the conservation trails due to the lack of accessibility. Ms. Black responded that the exception was that every greenway would publicly accessible. She noted that was not the intent, nor did she feel it had been presented at the hearing that every greenway would be publicly accessible. Therefore, every effort is being made to present the Master Recreation and Parks Plan as a plan for an active recreation and parks system with the emphasis on active recreation. Kramer stated that those citizens who had contacted him were concerned what the process would be if they did not wish to donate a portion of their property for greenways. Ms. Black responded that the answer has always been to "go around them". The Plan as viewed by Ms. Black is the ideal plan with the concentration in the areas of the greatest need for a twenty year period. Collins indicated that if the Plan is adopted and incorporated into the Land Use Plan, the dedication/payment-- in- lieu provision could be applied and this process would allow for the acquiring of greenways as development occurs. In other areas, those funds acquired through the payment- in- lieu provision and other revenues could be combined and used to attempt to purchase greenways. Kramer continued , asking if there would even- tually be condemnation of land and Ms. Black p responded no. D fri � Jacobs asked how the Natural Inventory would implement anything. Collins responded that the Inventory by itself would not implement any- thing. The approval of the Plan by itself would also not implement anything. It would serve as a guide or plan by which to try and acquire park sites. Payment- in- lieu is one mechanism by which to implement the Plan . Once the Inventory is complete, there are mechanisms by which to implement it such as an Environmental Impact Ordinance. Jacobs asked the relationship of the lands identifed in the Natural Areas Inventory with this Plan. Collins responded that he sees them both as preserving open space in the county partic- ularly along streams and creeks. They have different uses. One is to be preserved and left in its natural state and the other is to be primarily used by man in varying degrees of intensity. Ms. Black noted that she perceived them both as a piece or part of the entire "puzzle". Collins stated that there are areas where active greenways and conservation trails run side-by-side. Pilkey stated that she felt that the revised Plan should be presented to public hearing. Best noted that he viewed the conservation trails as a park such as a state or federal owned wildlife park property. Ms. Black responded that she sees the Plan as one addressing people oriented places and programs. Jacobs indicated that his concept of the Plan during the entire process was one of a combina- tion of active and passive recreation. Otherwise, he would not have been supportive of the Plan. He stated his preference that the revised plan go back to public hearing in order for the public to know which trails are being proposed. Collins responded that the purpose of a public hearing is to feedback from the public about proposals. He felt that the revisions of the Plan clearly represented those public concerns. Jacobs continued, that it seemed to be the sense of the Board that it is the active trails being objected to rather than the natural conservation corridors. Best indicated he felt the Plan has been significantly changed and should be presented again at public hearing. Ms. Black responded that Staff feels that the Plan has just been better defined. Yuhasz agreed that he felt no one wants green- ways on their property that is accessible to 184- the public. He felt that Og 1--,\ If limiting the amount of publicly accessible creek (or greenways) does belong in a recreation and parks plan . He felt that the conservation of natural areas has no place in a recreation and parks plan. He ✓ iewed the revisions as a workable plan. He continued that he felt condemnation may be a ✓ iable option for to keep open for the acquiring of greenways but that the Commis- sioners did state at the public hearing that there would be no condemnation of lands for the purpose of the recreation and parks plan. Adjournment time was reached . Pilkey moved extension of the meeting until 11 : 15 in order to complete the discussion and make a recom- mendation on the Master Recreation and Parks Plan. Seconded by Best. Vote was unanimous. February 9 was set as the continuation date for completion of the Planning Board agenda. Pilkey expressed concern regarding the bond issue. She expressed concern that the public was not aware of the revisions in the Plan and that they should be properly notified before any recommendations could be made. Ms. Black responded that public information meetings have been set for February 8 - 11 for this purpose. MOTION: Jacobs moved that the revised Plan go back to public hearing to consider the question of the various greenways. Seconded by Best. VOTE: 6 in favor. 2 opposed (Yuhasz - felt the revisions were not sufficiently substantial to require return to public hearing and Lewis -- willing to accept the Staff recommendation) . hearing. AGENDA ITEM #11 : MATTERS SCHEDULED FOR 2/22/88 PUBLIC HEARING a. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS 1 . Sec. IV-B-3-c ( Street Access) Consideration of a proposed amendment to Section IV-B 3-c-8 of the Subdivision Regula- t ions. This item is scheduled to be presented at public hearing on February 22, 1988 . Section IV-B-3-c-8 of the Subdivision Regula- t ions is proposed to be amended by specifying forms of common or restricted access to lots in new subdivision along major roads. The amend- ment is intended to provide more control over O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT i Meeting Date February 1s 19.88 Action nda Item SUBJECT: ADVERTISEMENT - FEBRUARY 22, 1988 PUBLIC HEARING DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _X_ No ATTACHMENT( S) : �J- INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Draft Legal Notice Background Information TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 8181 Durham - 688 7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: Consideration of the legal notice for the February 22, 1988 quarterly public hearing. BACKGROUND : The regularly scheduled quarterly public hearing will be held on February 22, 1988. The Board of Commissioners reviews notices for public hearing for form and content prior to advertisement. The Board also reviews plan and/or ordinance proposals for content and consistency with County goals and objectives. Items scheduled for discussion and comment at the February 22 public hearing include the following : - Master Recreation & Parks Plan - Amendments to Subdivision Regulations - Section IV-B-3-d ( Private Roads) - Section IV-B-3-c ( Street Access) - Various Sections ( Land Use Plan References) - Amendments to Zoning Ordinance - Articles 2. 2. 12 - 2. 2. 14 ( Comprehensive Plan ) - Article 22 (Definition - Comprehensive Plan ) - Various Articles ( Land Use Plan References) - Assignment of House Numbers - Rural Routes 2 and 3 ( Rougemont) - Amendments to Land Use Plan - Designate Land Use Plan as Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan - Incorporate Master Recreation & Parks Plan as Recreation Element of the Comprehensive Plan Approval of the notice will permit advertisement on February 10 and February 17 , 1988 as required by the N. C. General Statutes . 184 RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Notice of Public Hearing for February 22, 1988 . abstracts : 2/22-phad ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 uu - �O a� don a o. 4` S� lef NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED MASTER PARKS AND RECREATION PLAN, ASSIGNMENT OF HOUSE NUMBERS TO ROUGEMONT RURAL ROUTES 2 AND 3 , AND PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN, ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter 153A, Sections 240, 323 and 343, Article 20 - Sections 20. 5 and 20. 6 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, and Section VIII of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse ( New) , 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina, on Monday, February 22, 1988, at 7 :30 p. m. for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or against the following items: ORANQE LQUNTY MASTER RECREATION AND PARK. PLAID The purpose of the Master Recreation and Park Plan is to assess the current and future recreation and park needs of Orange County citizens. The plan is organized into five major components, including the following : ( 1 ) Goals and Objectives (2) Current and Projected Factors Pertinent to Orange County (3 ) Analysis of Current_ Recreation Programs and Park Facilities, Development of Recreation Standards, and Community Needs Assessment (4) Plan Proposals and Recommendations (5) Action Plan Implementation' Of particular importance are components 4 and 5. Component 4 proposes a system of district and community parks and greenways for the County, along with a proposed time 186. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PAGE 2 schedule for implementation. Component 5 itemizes the facilities and costs associated with developing each proposed park or greenway . The Master Recreation and Parks Plan was initially presented at public hearing on November 23, 1987 . Proposed revisions to the Plan made since the initial public hearing will be identified. LSSIGNM.EfII QF_ HOUSE NUMBERS Rural Routes 2 and 3 , Rougemont, are proposed for a change from existing rural box numbers to a system of permanently assigned house numbers. The two routes encompass an area within Little River Township, including Caldwell and portions of Highways 57 and 157 and Guess Road. The follow- ing roads, either in their entirety or portions thereof , form the general boundaries for the area : Kiger Road, New Sharon Church Road , Bill Poole Road , McBroom Road , Bunny Road, Sawyer Road, Hall Dairy Road, Holly Ridge Road, Brown Road, Breeze Road, Mary Hall Road, and Blalock Road . ORANGE COUNTY LAND USA PLAN The proposed amendments to the Land Use Plan are as follows: 1 . Designate the Land Use Plan as the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is based on a new definition of the Comprehensive Plan . 2. Incorporate the Master Recreation and Parks Plan as the Recreation Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is based on a new definition of the Comprehensive Plan . ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE The proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance under consideration are as follows: 1 . Amend Articles 2. 2. 12 through 2. 2. 14 to provide a new statement of intent and procedures for amending the Comprehensive Plan_ for Orange County. 2. Amend Article 22 (Definit ions) to provide a new definition of Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PAGE 3 18 3. Amend Articles 4 . 2 . 1 through 4. 2 . 30, 6 . 20. 1 , 7 . 15 . 1 through 7 . 19 . 1 , and 22. 0 to change all references to "Land Use Plan", "Thoroughfare Plan", "Road Classification Plan", and "Plan" to "Comprehensive Plan". The proposed amendment is based on a new definition of Comprehensive Plan and is necessary to insure consistent terminology throughout the Zoning Ordinance. ORANGE COUNTY _auanivisloN REGULATIONS The proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations under consideration are as follows: 1 . Amend Section IV-B-3-c-8 by adding access restrictions, including common driveways, marginal access streets or reverse frontage lots, where a proposed subdivision adjoins a heavily traveled arterial or collector street. 2. Amend Section IV-B-3-d by providing new standards for determining when private roads will be permitted in subdivisions. The new standards stress the preservation of the rural character of the County through larger lot sizes, the retention and/or provision of landscaping, the use of clustering to preserve open space, the maintenance of scenic views, and the use of restrictive covenants to maintain approved project densities. 3. Amend Sections IV-B-1 , IV-B-3-a, IV-B-7-a-1 , IV-B-7-b-2, IV-B-7-b-3 , IV-B-7-b-6, and IV-B-9-a to change all references to "Land Use Plan" and "Thoroughfare Plan" to "Comprehensive Plan". The proposed amendment is based on a new definition of Comprehensive Plan and is necessary to insure consistent terminology throughout the Subdivision Regulations. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard . Public comment must be received during the public hearing. Those wishing to oppose the proposals must provide competent material and substantial evidence as to the specific manner in which they are opposed to the amendments. Following the close of the public hearing, only evidence presented at public hearing will be examined by the Planning Board and Board of County Commissioners for decision. Changes may be made in the advertised proposals which reflect debate, objections and discussion at the hearing. Questions regarding the proposal should be directed to 18o PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PAGE 4 the Orange County Planning Department. The Planning Department is located in the Orange County Agricultural /Environmental Center, 306F Revere Road, Hillsborough, N. C. Office hours are from 8 : 00 a. m. to 5 : 00 p. m. , Monday through Friday. Marvin Collins, Planning Director PUBLISH: February 10, 1988 February 17 , 1988 current-plan : 2/22-phnotice • • GRANGE COUNTY MASTER RECREATION & PARKS PLAN p i O.7 The following text is recommended to be substituted for all text appearing in the draft Master Recreation and Parks Plan, Chapter 6, County-Wide Proposals and Recommendations, Greenways section (pages 6-7 through 6-9). -Greenways A final county-wide recommendation is for the county to develop a greenway system, composed of recreational trails. The system is to be. based upon guidelines provided to the county by the Triangle Land Conservancy and greenways plans included in the joint Planning Area Land Use Plan adopted October 1986. It is also proposed that the county coordinate its greenway plans with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro on a local level, and the Triangle J Planning Area on a regional level, to assure proper connections with other systems in the area. Orange County is also within the path of the "Mountain to the Sea" trail being developed through the State of North Carolina. It would be beneficial to connect with this trail system where possible to become a member of a unique and historic recreational activity. The final recommendation on the development of a greenway system is that it be planned compatibly with other systems as recommended by the President's Commission on American Outdoors (PCAO) which emphasizes the creation of a "National Greenway Network." Areas designated on the individual township maps show the areas4recommended for recreational trails (graphically depicted by a dot pattern and labeled RT) which are accessible to the public and managed by the County, and are developed with walkways or trails. Recreational Trails Recreational trails in more urbanized areas or accessible to relatively large numbers of people, or which connect two or more identified significant areas should take the form of corridors of land with a paved or prepared walkway (these trails can provide walking connections and opportunities for bicyclists and joggers) or with well-marked and maintained unpaved trails. These corridors should be a minimum of sixty feet (60' ) wide or the width of the 100 . year floodplain whichever is more, providing the user with the impression of being away from urban development. The recreation trails will require operational management such as litter and security patrol with appropriate vehicular restrictions endorsed. For recreational trails for which county ownership may not be necessary or appropriate, conservation easements and mutual convenants between the landowner and the county or another land management group like the Triangle Land Conservancy, may be useful. The above-described system would be developed using the methods for acquisition and development described in the Plan's section entitled the same, beginning on . page 7-6, and should provide a special public-private partnership to ensure l that the uniqueness of Orange County is preserved for future generations. r 190 GREENWAYS Have A New Look ! 1 lev ,i 4 ! .., 74 _ A .1.,_ , ,. , :4_11, ..7. .K.c. , . . . 4 ,. .. ., ( 4<;,--.. -.,- (:,., A it y''''\i).14,- ,,,-, •.,_•:,• ..::-. 1/4. " '-• %%, r.uwen' d, '-'7 • I 4%, , -...it,..., ....44 ip,_..airr • 0.1"-i- '.1 fera d • 1� ♦ •' r cl `I 'r ■ `I 1� 1 .ci,pio TowoYR f A,v1r. f� • r �. , ,•, t iy• i .. I "..2"411P �i son-,a . "I ■i , • 't r \ , ' �' 1. ti � a , ' r .eq.4, .,, .r,,•-• r aK ` e to f ■ r� .' .,. ;• •I ` 1 ' f.ri,i,,,,.., 1 . staim ..._____ , wii, IP;„,.-..... .... 711111PP"... s' , ---;---rova...4.._,--." 7.40; / IF :j.-- if, . '.1.,: rb.t, - -..,,rie 4 .....11,,Qk . , ..--•i• . ›..- 4,„„.,. 3 .11;1 4041 .:...,,,,_ 4,1stirioi‘F. ,4;a0'`r.....-••• 011 • ,\ - 'I ." .� L� ;_ •'i1I'}' • 1 •~1 • ,.'\. I/ASI . P�.. A,I.�y1•� �J ' Y1 r • •y •l�:'\ !! .Mrs M Ail'�'; ; --t .. REFER TO TABLE i'2. 'k 1 . ,. .t.'� ■ lra.orw Try, rtw ur r � r \ ....� .rte �:::::111411tri‘\ ��. _ �2 `•{ urr.u may rr. •,� J y �� � 1 � • �r.wrr��..1 entoima L.,' Tvr► `r' "1 4' 1 20 = r W... -0•» '!••..,..„.;,,. J_•Ws .t `. e4 Via: •w ( •i4 w++.... IL J r l ''' ''. u., . M, Tom"! i. _ . No:All* ideirsili,' 1 :.....=-._-- PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND =_1:w EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES ORANGE COUNTY, N. C. e z-----N . MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLAN EXHIBIT a-i 151 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Subdivision Regulations REFERENCE: Section IV-B-3-d ( Private Roads) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _ X Staff _ Planning Boardd _ BOCC Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: X High _ Middle _ Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: . February 22, 1988 ****************************************** PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To incorporate standards for determining situations in which private roads will be permitted in subdivisions. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Recent events involving the interpretation of the private road standards contained in Section IV-B 3-d of the Subdivision Regulations have indicated a need to insure consistency of application. On December 9, 1987 , the Transportation dvisory Committee met with the Ordinance eview Committee to discuss the private road standards. Both groups agreed that an interim policy regarding the interpretation and application of the standards was needed until a detailed study could be completed and revisions prepared. A draft policy resolution was prepared which contained the major points identified by the two Committees at the December 9 meeting. Emphasis was placed on the preservation of the rural character of Orange County; the use of restrictive covenants to prevent further subdivision, thereby maintaining the approved density and decreasing the likelihood of NCDOT acceptance of roads for maintenance purposes; and the use of design features for watershed protection, natural /historic areas preservation, and the retention of scenic views and natural vegetation . At its January 18, 1988 meeting, the Planning Board approved the policy resolution and recommended that the 1 i 9 2 Board of Commissioners approve a similar IG resolution . At its February 1 , 1988 meeting, the Board of Commissioners approved such a resolution and set February 22 as the public hearing date to consider incorporating the policy into the Subdivision Regulatiions. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: Section IV-B-3-d Private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where: 1 . In the judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision , including such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, the present and future road plans, and access by public safety vehicles are such that a private road is justified ; and 2. If one or more of the following conditions are met: a. The subdivision consists of less than ten ( 10) lots. b . The subdivision preserves a natural area through deed restrictions and special design features. c. The subdivision does not embrace or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County Thoroughfare Plan , or a municipality ' s thoroughfare plan within the county, or does not lie within a designated Transition Area as determined by the County. d . The subdivision joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets of the subdivision are private or unpaved, and the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community. e. The subdivision roads, even if constructed to State standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State requirement that the subdivision cannot meet For a subdivision to be approved with private roads, it should meet as many of the above criteria as possible; provided, however, the meeting of one or more of the specified conditions will not insure automatic approval of private roads. PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: I V-B-3-d Pr i v,dg RoAd.a The following design features will be considered in determining whether to permit private roads in subdivisions : . 19i 1 . The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through : a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines greater than required by ordinance provisions; b. The retention and/or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads and/or maintain a wooded or forested character; c. The maintenance of scenic views, including vistas of open farmland and/or forested hills and mountains; and/or d. The clustering of dwelling units to preserve wildlife, botanical , historic, archeological and/or recreation sites; 2. The number, location and/or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; 3 . Restrictive covenants are proposed which prevent further subdivision of the property and the same shall be made a condition of approval , thus maintaining project density; 4. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical , wildlife, historic and/or archeological sites, are to be dedicated and/or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts greater than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication ; and/or 5 . Larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and/or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. Public roads will usually be required where it is found that: 1 . The subdivision roads, if constructed to State standards, would be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirement; or 2. The subdivision streets join or extend existing streets which are public; or 3 . The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan ; or 194 v 4. A proposed street is designated as an arterial or collector street on an approved Thoroughfare Plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant for subdivision approval to supply a written statement Justifying the reasons for private roads in the proposed subdivision . Compliance with one or more of the above standards does not insure approval of either a public or private road within a proposed subdivision . ******************************************** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW : BOCC REVIEW: amend : new- i v-b-3-d PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 1 E v ORDINANCE: Subdivision Regulations REFERENCE: Section IV-B-3-c-8 Access Restrictions ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff _ X__ Planning Board BOCC Public Other STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High _X Middle W__ Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE : FEBRUARY 22, 1988 ************************************************************* PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To amend Section IV-B-3-c-8 of the Subdivision Regulations to strengthen access controls on arterial and collector streets. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: There has been increasing concern among Planning Board members about the effect of driveways on major highways in Orange County. The Planning Board is concerned that as land along major County highways develops, both the amount of traffic on the highway and the number of driveways will increase. There will also be increasing conflicts between vehicles turning into and out of driveways and through traffic. These conflicts will create a safety problem and , potentially, a need for road widening that might be avoided if some control is placed on the location of driveways. These concerns can be addressed by creating or strengthening access restrictions to major County highways from parcels of land created under the Subdivision Regulations. It is during subdivision review and approval that the number and location of driveways can be controlled . It is also through subdivision review and approval that lot configurations can be developed that will allow for access provisions other than individual driveways and lot dimensions that will permit desirable driveway locations with regard to intersecting streets. Being part of the subdivision regulations, these requirements would apply to only the 196 creation of new lots. Existing lots would not be made non-conforming as would be the case if these provisions were incorporated in the Zoning Ordinance. This is consistent with the concern that additional development will create the conflicts cited above. This item was considered at public hearing on August 24, 1987 . Subsequent to the hearing, the Planning Board recommended that the proposed amendment be referred to the Ordinance Review Committee for further study. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: IV-B-3-c-8 Marginal Access_ Streets Where a subdivision adjoins a heavily traveled street, in the interest of highway safety, the subdivider may be required to provide either a marginal access street parallel to said heavily traveled street or reverse frontage on a smaller street. Where access is available to any internal subdivi- sion street, whether by reverse frontage or other lot arrangement, private driveways shall not have direct access to said heavily traveled street. It is the intent of this section to minimize the number of points of egress and ingress to main roads within Orange County. PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: IV-B-3-c-8 Access Restrictions Where a subdivision adjoins a heavily traveled street classified as arteriaa pr QQLLe_ctor_in_the Orenge_�QU ac .c.omprehe<uai ve Plan , in the interest of highway safety, the subdivider shall be required to provide a common driveway , a marginal access street parallel to the arter_iaj_ or collector, or reverse frontage on a smaller street when the only access_ tQ ffe subdivila will be tcom an arterial or coLLector 5±reet. Where access is available to any internal subdivision street, whether by reverse 18'7 frontage or other lot arrangement, private driveways shall not have access to the attaLi. ..L_Qr oilectorL It is the intent of this section to minimize the number of points of egress and regress to main roads within Orange County. ****************-**************************** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE : January 21 , 1988 PLANNING BOARD REVIEW : January 25, 1988 BOCC REVIEW: amend : access-street 1.yb PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 2. 2. 12 ( Comprehensive Plan, Intent) Article 2. 2. 13 ( Comprehensive Plan Adoption) Article 2. 2. 14 ( Amendment of Adopted Comprehensive Plan) Article 22 (Definitions) ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _ X _ Staff Planning Boardd - BOCC Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: _X High Middle Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: February 22, 1988 ****************************************** PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To revise the statement of intent concerning the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County and incorporate adopted procedures for its amendment into the Zoning Ordinance. IMPACTS/ ISSUES: Existing references in the Zoning Ordinance generally refer to the Comprehensive Plan for the County as the Land Use Plan. Furthermore, procedures for the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan ( or Land Use Plan) have been approved by the Board of Commissioners but not incorporated into Article 2. 2. 14 of the Zoning Ordinance. While the Land Use Plan has served well as the County ' s Comprehensive Plan, new issues are emerging which warrant special study. Among the subjects which have received or are contemplated to receive special study are recreation and parks, open space, housing, utility services, and transportation. To recognize the special nature of such issues or subjects yet incorporate them as part of the Comprehensive Plan , a re-definition of the Plan is proposed. The Comprehensive Plan would consist of several documents or plans, each dealing with a specific element of physical development and each adopted by resolution as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Proposed elements would include land use (the current Land Use Plan ) , recreation, transportation, housing, 155 open space, economic development, services and facilities, and additional elements as needed. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: 2. 2. 12 Comprehensive Plan, intent_ The Comprehensive Plan, which includes, the land use plan, maps, plats, charts, and descriptive matter, task force reports, official statements which are officially approved by resolution of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, and are part of the underlying policy of the County, shall constitute the Boards recommendation of the physical development of that portion of the County under County jurisdiction. The recommendations shall address in whole or part such things as the general location, character, extent of streets, bridges, boulevards, parkways, playgrounds, squares, parks, aviation fields, and other public ways, grounds, and open spaces; the general location and extent of public utilities and terminals, whether publicly or privately owned or operated , for water, light, sanitation, transportation , communication, power, and other purposes; the removal , relocation, widening, narrowing, vacating, abandonment, change of use, or extension of any of the foregoing ways, buildings, grounds, open spaces, property, utilities, or terminals; the most desirable pattern of land use within the area, including areas for residential uses, for farming and forestry, for manufacturing and industrial uses, for commercial uses, for recreational uses, for open spaces, and for mixed uses. In preparation of these recommendations the Board shall ever be mindful of the need to balance the public interest with the needs of private interests, particularly in the conservation of surface and underground water resources, soil resources, and natural growth resources of the county and the efficient use of the renewable and non-renewable sources of energy. 2. 2. 13 Gomprgtierts i ve P Ian AA.optioa The Board of Commissioners upon receipt of a recommended Comprehensive Plan and portions thereof from the Planning Board shall consider such recommendations and adopt them by resolutions, either unchanged or with modifications. Prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Board of Commissioners shall hold a public hearing thereon. Notice of the public hearing shall be given by publishing said notice at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation in Orange County, stating the time and place of such hearing, and the substance of the proposed plan . This notice shall appear in said newspaper for two successive weeks with the first notice appearing not less than fifteen days nor more than twenty-five days before the date set for the public hearing. 200 2. 2. 14 Amendment of Adopted Comp_rehensiNL2 Plan Proposed amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan, if not initiated by the Planning Board, shall be referred to it by the Board of Commissioners for recommendation . The Planning Board shall have sixty days from the date of referral in which to make such recommendation . Failure to make a recommendation within the sixty day period shall be considered approval of the proposed amendment by the Planning Board . Adoption of all amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan shall be made only after a public hearing with notice as specified in 2. 2. 13 . Article 22 - Definitions Comprehenslie Plan Land Use Plan , maps, plats, charts, and descriptive matter, task force reports, and official statements which are officially approved by resolution of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. The plan shall address in whole or part such things as the general location, character, extent of streets, bridges, boulevards, parkways, playgrounds, squares, parks, aviation fields, and other public ways, grounds, and open spaces; the general location and extent of public utilities and terminals, whether publicly or privately owned or operated , for water, light, sanitation, transportation, communication, power, and other purposes; the removal , relocation, widening, narrowing, vacating, abandonment, change of use, or extension of any of the most desirable pattern of land use within the area, including areas for residential uses, for farming and forestry, for manufacturing and industrial uses, for commercial uses, for recreational uses, for open spaces, and for mixed uses. ( See also attached Procedures for Amending the Land Use Plan) PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: 2. 2. 12 .Q.OMprghgasLYe PL4n. Intent The Comprehensive Plan shall constitute an internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the long-term, physical development of that portion of Orange County under County jurisdiction. The Comprehensive Plan shall consist of a statement of development policies and shall include maps and text setting forth objectives, principles, standards and plan proposals for physical development. The Comprehensive Plan shall be comprised of the following individual elements: a) A Land use eLement which designates the general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for housing, business, industry, open space, 201 education, public buildings and grounds, and other categories of public and private uses. b ) A tra_rn.saQrtatioa element which identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major highways, scenic roads, railroads, transit routes and facilities, bikeways and pedestrian facilities, airports, and other public and private transportation facilities. c) A housing element which contains an evaluation of housing problems and sets forth a program to alleviate unmet needs, including standards and plans for the improvement of housing and the provision of adequate sites for housing. d) An open ,__apace element which identifies the location and extent of existing and proposed open space for the preservation of natural resources, the managed production of resources, outdoor recreation, and public health and safety. e) A recreation Qlement which designates a system of areas and public sites for recreation , including parks and playgrounds, recreational trails, and other similar areas. f ) An economic development element which contains an analysis of the local economy and projections of future economic activity. The economic development element may also identify existing and proposed sites for new and expanding businesses and industries, and the facilities needed to serve them. g ) A services and faciLities element which identifies existing and proposed service areas and improvements for water, sewer, refuse disposal , education, emergency services, and other utilities and service facilities. h) Such additional elements dealing with other subjects which in the judgment of the Board of Commissioners relate to the physical development of the County. Such elements may include, but not be limited to, the subjects of historic preservation, community or rural design , growth management, etc. As part of the Comprehensive Plan, area plans may be prepared which focus on a portion of the County such as a township, a watershed or an interstate highway interchange. Likewise, technical information and/or task force reports prepared as part of a plan element or an area plan may be incorporated as part of the appendix of or as a supplement to the Comprehensive Plan. In preparation and adoption of a plan element, area plan or other similar document, the Board of Commissioners shall ever be mindful of the need to balance the public interest with the needs of private interests, 202 particularly in the conservation of surface and underground water resources, soil resources, and natural growth resources of the county and the efficient use of the renewable and non renewable sources of energy. 2. 2. 13 Comprehens_i v,e Plan Adopt]on The Comprehensive Plan shall be so prepared that all or individual elements and parts thereof may be adopted by the Board of Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners, upon receipt of a recommended Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof from the Planning Board, shall consider such recommendations and adopt them by resolution , either unchanged or with modifications. Prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof , the Board of Commissioners shall hold a public hearing thereon. Notice of the public hearing shall be given by publishing said notice at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation in Orange County, stating the time and place of such hearing, and the substance of the proposed plan . The notice shall appear in said newspaper for two successive weeks with the first notice appearing not less than ten ( 10) days nor more than twenty-five ( 25 ) days before the date set for the public hearing. 2. 2. 14 A.sr andment 9f Adapted Comprehensive Plug For the purpose of establishing and maintaining sound, stable, and desirable development within Orange County, the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof shall not be amended except as follows: a) Because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or areas of the County; b ) To correct an error or omission ; or c ) In response to a change in the policies, objectives, principles or standards governing the physical development of the County. 2. 2. 14. 1 Initiatiea.of Amendments An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof may be initiated by: a) The Board of Commissioners on its own motion ; b ) The Planning Board ; or c ) Application, by any person or agency, which accurately and completely sets forth the reason ( s) for the proposed amendment as prescribed in Article 2. 2. 14 above. 2. 2. 14 . 2 .QLass Lf icat i on of Amendments Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof 206 are classified as "principal " or "secondary" amendments. Principal amendments include: a) Additions to or modifications of policies, objectives, principles or standards; b ) The creation of new activity nodes or additions to existing activity nodes which exceed ten ( 10) acres in land area ; or c) Proposals for new freestanding plan areas or additions to existing areas that exceed one hundred ( 100) acres in land area. Secondary amendments include: a) The expansion of an activity node where the additional area is contiguous to an existing node and does not increase its land area by more than ten ( 10) acres; b ) The expansion of a designated plan area where the additional area is contiguous to the existing plan designation and does not increase its land area by more than one hundred ( 100) acres; c) A correction of an error or omission ; or d ) Revisions to any factual or descriptive material . 2. 2. 14 . 3 Ca2jid.QtatLQn of_Ameg.dments Except as noted herein, the submission and consideration of applications for proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof shall be governed by the procedures contained in Article 20 of this Ordinance. Principal amendments shall only be considered once each year at the quarterly joint public hearing in February. Secondary amendments may be considered four ( 4 ) times each year at the quarterly joint public hearings in February, May, August, and November. No proposed amendment is to be considered in conjunction with a rezoning, planned development or special use permit request for the same property. Requests for a rezoning, planned development and/or special use permit may only be considered at subsequent hearings or meetings following approval of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Article 22 - Definitions .GgamkcQhanalve Plan An internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the long term, physical development of that portion of Orange County under County jurisdiction, consisting of a statement of development policies and maps and text setting forth vi objectives, principles, standards and plan proposals for physical development. The Comprehensive Plan is - -. comprised of the following individual elements: a) A lead usa alejeat which designates the general distribution, location , and extent of the uses of land for housing, business, industry, open space, education, public buildings and grounds, and other categories of public and private uses. b ) A ±rs,ortation eLemerit which identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major highways, scenic roads, railroads, transit routes and facilities, bikeways and pedestrian facilities, airports, and other public and private transportation facilities. c) A borLu ing _elamerlt which contains an evaluation of housing problems and sets forth a program to alleviate unmet needs, including standards and plans for the improvement of housing and the provision of adequate sites for housing. d) An S?.�en space element which identifies the location and extent of existing and proposed open space for the preservation of natural resources, the managed production of resources, outdoor recreation, and public health and safety. e) A t a Q t a a t i Q r m._ 1am e rlt w h i c h designates a system o f areas and public sites for recreation , including parks and playgrounds, recreational trails, and other similar areas. f ) An Qg2QQrm.iQ. detie I op.mant_ le e n t w h i c h contains an analysis of the local economy and projections of future economic activity. The economic development element may also identify existing and proposed sites for new and expanding businesses and industries, and the facilities needed to serve them. g) A rii a_a_a_ad, facii Lt Les elantenit which identifies existing and proposed service areas and improvements for water, sewer, refuse disposal , education, emergency services, and other utilities and service facilities. h) Such additional elements dealing with other subjects which in the judgment of the Board of Commissioners relate to the physical development of the County. Such elements may include, but not be limited to, the subjects of historic preservation, community or rural design, growth management, etc . The Comprehensive Plan also consists of adopted area plans which focus on a portion of the County such as a township, a watershed or an interstate highway interchange. Technical information and/or task force reports prepared as part of a plan element or an area 205 plan and incorporated as part of the appendix of or as a supplement are also considered part of the Comprehensive Plan. ******************************************** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: amend :complan-2. 2. 12 ,AINIE■M■ - .,-0- ---- • . _ ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 4, .,-. 331:LLSBOROIIGEE NOR= C.A.ROLMA- PLANNING BOARD SUBOOMMEE 206 27278 • PROPOSAL. 9/30/82. t FL.viera. and Recommendation by • — t.t. : by Planning Board 10/18/82. tp c _ pizn - Adopted by the ECCC 114/81 . ) , - PROPOSED PROCEDURES FOR Arfamrc THE LAND LSE PLAN - PURPOSE The Orange County Land Use Plan (Plan) was adopted by the Board of Commissioners al_ Septether 2, 1981.. The act of adoption formalized the Plan text and map as County policy in. land use matters. The Plan.T.fill need to be amended_from tram no daze to reflect changing, coodie- is in the County.. This document proposes pro ced=es by ....- which the P1 an!will be amended. REASONS' FOR&EMMEN:LS The Plan may be amended for the following reasons: r - , --01:ecause of changed or changing oraditions in a partici/11m- area ‘...._ or areas of die County; b) to correct an error or omission in the Plan; c) in response- to a change in land use policy. SOURCES OF AIENCHENTS Proposed ancencinents to the Plan. may originate from: a) the Board of Commissioners; b) the. Planning Board; c) an amendment applicaticn made by any person or agency. CalECORIES. OF AMENIvans Amendpants ndren are classtaed as principal or secoristiary amendments. POncipal amets include: a) additiont.-to ormixlificatitris of goals aid policies• • b) 'creatica of new aativity nodes or additlions-to exisiLl.ng node areas - iri.ondlike lei acrim • , c), protnasals fi3r new freestanding plan'areas .cc,addid.oris to existing areas that exceed 100 acres. - • . . 1 gr. • - age2-P - _ •- • 20 ri secondary- amaxtogats a) 3nViSi011 of a noda area where the additional area is contivoue. - with the e:d_ ng area and does no increase the existing area by-tore thaa. 10 acres-; b) excelsior?. of any plan: area where the additilmal area is ccind.gxous with the existing area and does not increase the ezisting area by rocan than 100 acres; . c) correction of any error or cirdssirn.in the Plan; zevi.sions na any factuaL or- descriptive material in the Plan. • WHEN AL'''E\IDLIENZ MAY BE CaNEICERED Principal. amendments to the PIza shaLT. be :considered once a year at the quarterly joint pubLic hearing in February. Secondary amendments to the Plan. may be considered four times a year at the quarterly joint pubLic hearings in February, May, August aid November.. Timmer-, no principal amendment is to be considered in coajtnctior t.with a rezoning request for the saxes property. Such =ring requests may caly be considered at subsequent hearings or -crtings.. • (Note: after September 2, 1983,. no Land Use Plan amendments axe to be corsidered in caajtucti.cn with a rezoning riquest). • _ . 1:52F3P4L of AN ; Amendments proposed by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning Boardpr _ an amendumnt appl-N-Ptitin made by a perscan or agency shall be referred to the - Orange County Planning Department: Amendment applications should contain a descripticaz of the changed or chArefrig condit:Lcals which justify the requested • change-, or the error or omission in the Plan_which the amendment- seeks to correct, or the changed: land use policy which necessitates aa amendment. STAFF REMZi. _ • • - - For each-proposed:amendment to the7Plan, the Orgile Count Y Planning 3Xpartment sh11 carry out, an analysis-rcif the proposed amendtheit and its effect on land use in the partiCuUr area_ of the proposed. change and the Ccinty- as.. a whole. Based on its analysis, Planing_Staff shall prepare a reOznnenda*n-, 4): the proposed amefid- _ . . • •_ FLAMING BOApa PRELIMINARY REVIEW - The roposed -amandthent along with than-anal4iis and recomtnen.datian of the -' Planning.Staff-shaa•be considered by the Pirating Bo=d at a regularly schsera ed ,meet=ing.. The Plannin.g Board may refer-the proposed Pai amendmmt to its 15ownship • , Page 3 2 CA.dvisory- Cotric iL (s) is the area of the Canty- to be affected by the change:: a) or its. ccaa. non b) on a. rawest from. the c iairpersaz (s) of the Tounsbi p Advisory Council. (s) in the areas to- be affected;. c) in respaase to a rawest from PT it Staff.. . PUBLIC et Commissioners ame amendments to the Plan., th e an.,. the Board of Commissioners shall hold a fix. F joint hearing with the PImning Board~ Wig a-p hl is heariig.is held, notice shall, be giver by pubs; ti hing the me, place and substance of the.proposed a d- .-treat at least twice in a newspaper of general. circulation in the Cotr.ty. This 'notice sbaJ.L appear in the newspaper z"or two successiva weeks with the first notice arming not less tit f7:f.een days nor mare t haa. twenty-five date set for the public bearing.. befiare. the RECONSICERAthi by, the PLANNING BOARD Following a joint public hearing an a Flan amen.dment, the proposed arandment sh 11, be referred back to the Plug Board for its review and recomman . C /DAM• CON.LESS2E: A tb The Board:of Commissioners shall decide by formal vote, on the request for a Plan amendment following the final Planning Board rec elation. • LAND USE PLAN AMU& REPOFCC 71x. Planning Boari at its regular meeting each November shall hear a report prepared by the. Planning S`CafE on. the: status of the Land-Use Play including:„ • . - . . . :. .:. siding a) a strmry of-propose -to the Play over the past_year • b) dispvs ._, f•.r aid how P� land use issues iii -the Cotaty well.--the.P.lam .Wises these: �-c) staff reca datti.:cr .-for-possible changes td the Plan.. Based on Planning St the report, e Planning Board may direct Staff to -•_ • prepare specific a®.dmazts° to the Plan or, if in the Board's opinion the ages needed in. the Plan-are extensive in :scope and ntnrber, the Board may red..tv the Board of Cmnissioaers a'wholesale revision of the Land 'Use Ply • r.. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD 20 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Dear Citizen : On April 21 , 1987 the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted the House Numbering Ordinance as required by NC General Statute 153A-240. This statute authorizes the conversion to house numbers from rural route and box numbers of all Orange County addresses. Postal routes in their entirety are being used to effect address changes. Rural Routes 2 and 3 , Rougemont are now being proposed for conversion to house numbers. On Monday, February 22, 1988 a public hearing will be held before the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider the proposed assignment of house numbers to residences and buildings on Rural Routes 2 and 3 served by the Rougemont Post Office. The hearing will be held at 7 :30 p. m. at the Orange County Courthouse ( New) , 106 East Margaret Lane, in Hillsborough, N. C. If approved, the house numbers will replace the old system of rural route and box numbers. This change will improve mail delivery and allow 911 emergency calls faster access to addresses. Residents will be required to display their new number on their mailbox with numerals at least 1 inch high. The proposed change affecting your address is as follows: OLD PQDRESS NEW ADDRESS If you wish to speak in regard to this proposal , please attend the public hearing. We welcome your comments. If there are questions, please contact: Don Powell or Miriam Coleman Orange County Planning Department Hillsborough, NC 27278 Phone: 732-8181 , Ext. 345 or 575 Sincerely, Marvin Collins Orange County Planning Director _ _ , Ili_ A' - ,".".'77' it„.4: "*"..... ;21" . — -,,,-,°-'7'4, '•'•-■.--i ■■••• •.....-7f- .: - - � .- 4-,------;- :141.,..107 "I.. i I ( , .I Off,1 -♦� „ ii. IMO ' /�//''�s�� � .NIts1 Ow 1 Ant fg Z • /�/rte• • . - 7 .....-cc . -.., .1• O OA •■ 1n•o• ! Jim! / ii& I y y� • r i .1C7 16. 11Ao• TWIM'' A "NM= AMIL 'LA Of ' �^-' rr +R � . ter +. `� L� •Y Axis � ,t A di" p • • � � -� • li ii y - � �.i� 1 � .r OW t. mc �f t ,....fa. `r'. .l '�`._ Jul //%/�J�� ` S.Jt.. /G • Y . ( • . �I� Y :1)...1"...;:%m. ma/ ..isr A ....„ r_ ay <TM.' 41.__ c pi. ,ii,... -,- ,. I , . . ., . A „pi 44/ .0,6 .1. La-i-4Th ... r.- aal y " • ass...( - .,. - - / y p fir'. ` r rr�, r, lj L` a� _ +ice ..._ice . s , ' ,: _ >a - �� I' - J /� ire in !\ ^ • ,.• / . -• I • . , ,r"• .r. a.. ..r. • �- •- z .. ., �, �: - =' Rougemont?O _ �r.= , , �. ;��� 'r �r "i. � - R.R. 2 N. t. 7� ,�. • - ` !�� - R.R. 3 • C M A T M 1 '! {x•22 .t•.n w r1 i + C o u w 7 7 . f \ i X 4 - (' ,. 7 2.11 § 153A-236 CH_ 153A. COUNTIES § 153A-24 I ; 153.: tuq,•41. cil, set the duties of any person appointed or designated as a fire prevention ► . inspector. A fire prevention inspector shall not make electrical inspections ir i.r,rani: unless he is qualified to do so under G.S. 153A-351. (2965,c.626; 1969,c. 1064. i.on Nu, s. 3; 1973, c. 822, s. 1.) tmre pi. ..lid ren §§ 153A-236 to 153A-238: Reserved for future codification purposes. a i5: ARTICLE 12. A co count' Roads and Bridges. i under -. iwa rd $ 153A-239. Public road defined. clt►M t The la • In this Article "public road" or "road" means any road, street, highway, i aucees thoroughfare, or other way of passage that has been irrevocably dedicated to regist. 1 the public or in which the public has acquired rights by prescription, without .,f pro regard to whether it is open for travel. (1973, c. 822, s. 1.) rryue: ic Local Modification. — Brunswick: 1979. i or publsc - Ind Secs.. c. 1319; Cabarrus: 1981. c 566, appea amending 1979,Ind Sess..c. 1319. intere cumn; § 153A-240. Naming roads and assigning street numbers i12 rants: OMIT unincorporated areas. ]„Celt A county may by ordinance name or rename any public road within tin 1 t .,his county and not within a city,and may assign or reassign street numbers for u crrcif on such a road. in naming or renaming a public road. a county may not • °f the (1) Change the name.if any,given to the road by the Board of Transports. An. tion, unless the Board of Transportation agrees; spy` (2) Change the number assigned to the road by the Board of Transporce• i (tilts lion, out may give the road a name in addition to its number. or 1 cuun (3) Give the road a name that is deceptively similar to the name of any 1 and t 'r other public road in the vicinity. trier A county shall not name or rename a road or assign or reassign street �° 1 — numbers on a road until it has held a public hearing on the matter. At least `"'''r 10 days before the day of the hearing, the board of commissioners shall hawk ; piths • i i notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the hearing to be prominently i Liu . posted at the county courthouse, in at least two public places in the township right or townships where the road is located, and shall publish a notice of such 4 lot.' c hearing in at least one newspaper of genera] circulation published in thy ad�o� . county. After naming or renaming a public road. or assigning or reassigning i'nr street numbers on a public road. a county shall cause notice of its action u k i • in at given to the local postmaster with jurisdiction over the road. to-the Boars of utiltt Transportation. and to any city within five miles of the road. - i ctrl. - - This section does not repeal or modify Chapter 945 of the Session Laws of unlit 1953,which pertains to naming streets in Eannapolis. (1957, c. 1068; 1973.c. ` 19-f 507, s. 5; c. 822, s. 1; 1981, cc. 112, 516.) - -,e r• 3U Local Modification. — Brunswick: 1979. been substituted far"State Highway Coma„ Luc 2nd Set.. c. 1319; Cab.rruc- 1981. c. 566. mon" and for "Commission" in this sectror. ' I in amending 1979. Ind Secs.. c 1319; Forsyth: enacted by Session laws 1973.c.8M. Lea a ..• • 1981.c 558;Guilford:1979.c.283. i ' v Efiect of Amendments. —The first 1'i: • - Editor's Nett.—Pursuant to Session Laws amendment suuaututed'si use County Coin.-_ , t: i 1973.c.51n.s.5."board oi'Tranapor tauot"has house, in at ieast two public Pisces in t1. v 78 e E ti 212 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting D a t e Fr.t..UC.-L-_--- Action a Item _#�-- SUBJECT: JOINT PLANNING AREA PUBLIC HEARING DATE DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _1_ No ATTACHMENT( S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Planning Director 1 /14/88 Memo Carrboro Schedule TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To consider setting a public hearing date of April 13 , 1988 for Joint Planning Area items. BACKGROUND : Section 1 . 3 of the Joint Planning Agreement, enacted November effectiveatdate of an Orange shall become effective County ordinance: 1 . Adopting the Agreement ( after approved by Chapel Hill and Carrboro) ; 2. Amending Orange County ' s Zoning Ordinance ( including Zoning Atlas) and Subdivision Regulations to include the following: a. A Zoning Map prepared by Chapel Hill for that portion of of the Transition Area that lies in the Chapel Hill Joint Development Area (CHJDA) , and the Chapel Hill Land Development Ordinance, making its provisions applicable to that portion of the Transition Area located within the CHJDA; and b . A Zoning Map prepared by Carrboro for that portion of the Transition Area that lies in the Carrboro Joint Development Area ( CJDA) , and the Carrboro Land Use Ordinance, making its provisions applicable to that portion of the Transition Area located within the CJDA; 3 . Amending the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan text to reflect the existence of Transition Area I and Transition Area II designations ; and 4. Amending the Joint Planning Area Land Use Map to show 216 the location of Transition Area I and Transition Area II . Item #1 has been completed . Conversations with the County Attorney, however, have indicated that item #3, the text amendment, and item #4, the map amendment, should be considered at public hearing as a formality. Although the proposals were approved by the Commissioners, amendments were not presented for consideration. Item #2 will also need to be considered as well as the following: 1 . A petition from the Stoneycreek Neighborhood Association to be included in the Rural Buffer. 2. A ( possible) petition from Fox Meadow Subdivision residents to be left in the County ' s jurisdiction or moved to the Chapel Hill Joint Development Area. 3. A petition from E. K. Powe, representing property of owners ition Area II movedrnorthwardVetoheinc include ludehis Trans clients property. 4. A request from Randy Danziger, a Calvander resident, to adjust the Transition Area I boundary to follow the western right-of-way line of Old N. C. 86 south of Homestead Road . 5 . A proposed amendment to the Orange County Land Use Plan involving the Bingham Township component. The eastern portion of the Township is in the Joint Planning Area, and any amendment to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan must be presented at joint public hearing . The Planning Director met his counterparts in Chapel Hill and Carrboro on January 13 for the purpose of developing a schedule at which the above items could be presented at public hearing. Initial attempts at scheduling such a hearing (February 22 and March 8) had been unsuccessful due to insufficient staff time for zoning plan preparation and/or governing board conference/meeting conflicts. Provided as an attachment is a tentative calendar of events related to a public hearing date of April 13. The date provides more time for municipal staffs to prepare the required zoning plans but does not push the hearing so far back as to conflict with the County ' s regular public hearing date of May 23 . RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the Joint Planning Area public hearing date be set for April 13, 1988 . The prop p meeting site is the Chapel Hill High School Auditorium. The meeting time would be 7 : 30 p. m. O R A N G E C O U N T Y INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 2 1 4 8801 -1808 TO: Albert Kittrell , Interim County Manager FROM: Marvin E. Collins, Planning Director SUBJECT: Joint Planning Area Public Hearing Date DATE: January 14 , 1988 COPIES: Barry Jacobs, Planning Board Chair Geoffrey Gledhill , County Attorney Roger Walden, Chapel Hill Planning Director Roy Williford , Carrboro Planning Director Gene Bell , Planner III ( Comprehensive) Section 1 . 3 of the Joint Planning Agreement, enacted November 2, 1987 , states that the Agreement shall become effective on the effective date of an Orange County ordinance: 1 . Adopting the Agreement ( after approved by Chapel Hill and Carrboro) ; 2. Amending Orange County ' s Zoning Ordinance ( including Zoning Atlas) and Subdivision Regulations to include the following: a. A . Zoning Map prepared by Chapel Hill for that portion of of the Transition Area that lies in the Chapel Hill Joint Development Area ( CHJDA) , and the Chapel Hill Land Development Ordinance, making its provisions applicable to that portion of the Transition Area located within the CHJDA; and b. A Zoning Map prepared by Carrboro for that portion of the Transition Area that lies in the Carrboro Joint Development Area ( CJDA) , and the Carrboro Land Use Ordinance, making its provisions applicable to that portion of the Transition Area located within the CJDA; 3. Amending the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan text to reflect the existence of Transition Area I and Transition Area II designations; and 4. Amending the Joint Planning Area Land Use Map to show the location of Transition Area I and Transition Area II . Item ,#1 has been completed. Conversations with 216 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8801 -1808 Joint Planning Public Hearing Date January 13 , 1988 Page 2 the County Attorney, however, have indicated that item #3, the text amendment, and item #4, the map amendment, should be considered at public hearing as a formality. Although the proposals were approved by the Commissioners, the actual amendments were not presented for consideration. Item #2 will also need to be considered as well as the following: 1 . A petition from the Stoneycreek Neighborhood Association to be included in the Rural Buffer. . 2. A ( possible) petition from Fox Meadow Subdivision residents to be left in the County ' s jurisdiction or moved to the Chapel Hill Joint Development Area. 3. A petition from E. K. Powe, representing property owners in the Rural Buffer, to have the boundary of Transition Area II moved northward to include his clients property. 4. A request from Randy Danziger, a Calvander resident, to adjust the Transition Area I boundary to follow the western right-of-way line of Old N. C. 86 south of Homestead Road. On Wednesday, January 13, I met with the Planning Directors of Chapel Hill and Carrboro for the purpose of developing a schedule at which these items could be presented at public hearing. Initial attempts at scheduling such a hearing (February 22 and March 8) had been unsuccessful due to insufficient staff time for zoning plan preparation and/or governing board conference/meeting conflicts. Listed below is a tentative calendar of events related to a proposed public hearing date of April 13. The date provides more time for municipal staffs to prepare the required zoning plans but does not push the hearing so far back as to conflict with the County' s regular hearing date of May 23. Event rate Chapel Hill Planning Board 16 February 1988 prepares recommendation on Land Use Plan Amendments and Zoning Plan Chapel Hill Town Council prepares 22 February 1988 recommendation on proposals Carrboro Board of Aldermen conducts 23 February 1988 public hearing on Zoning Plan and amendments to Land Use Ordinance providing for Transition Area 4 - INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8801 -1808 2.16 Joint Planning Public Hearing Date January 13 , 1988 Page 3 representation; prepares recommendation for Commissioners Chapel Hill and Carrboro proposals 29 February 1988 are sent to Orange County Commissioners consider items for 15 March 1988 13 April 1988 public hearing and approve advertisement JPA Public Hearing conducted 13 April 1988 Carrboro Board of Aldermen 19 April 1988 decision on proposals Chapel Hill Town Council decision 25 April 1988 on proposals Orange County Planning Board 16 May 1988 recommendation on proposals Board of Commissioners decision 6 June 1988 on proposals Please poll the Board of Commissioners for approval or place this item on the 19 January agenda so that the hearing date may be set as part of its 1988 Meeting Schedule. I will notify the Planning Directors of the Board ' s decision. ti . .. SCHEDULE ROTE: THIS SCHEDULE MAY CHANGE WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE, THEREFORE IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND ANY OF THE MEETINGS LISTED, PLEASE CALL THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT 968-7714 FOR CONFIRMATION. A NOTICE OF ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE PUBLISHED IN THE CHAPEL HILL NEWSPAPER. JOINT PLANNING AREA/LAND USE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENT December 9, 1987 Send notices to property owners for public information meeting to be held on December 17 , 1987 December 17 , 1987 Meeting to explain the Joint Planning Area Land Use Amendment process--Carrboro Planning Staff February 04, 1988 Carrboro Planning Board---( 1 ) Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan ( 2) Zoning of Joint Planning Area February 09, 1988 - Aldermen Worksession and set public hearing for the 23rd on proposed joint planning area zoning and land use ordinance text amendment for representation on Planning Board and Board of Adjustment February 16, 1988 Aldermen Worksession (Reserved) February 23, 1988 Carrboro Board of Aldermen to Hold a Public Hearing---- ' Proposed zoning of Joint Planning Area and Land Use Ordinance Text Amendment for representation on the Planning Board and Board of Adjustment February 29 , 1988 Orange County Planning Department---To receive recommended zoning and Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan Amendments March 15, 1988 Orange County to Set Public Hearing Regarding Recommended zoning and Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan Amendments April 13, 1988 ( 1 ) Joint Public Hearing---Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan Amendment ( 2 ) Public Hearing Orange County Commissioners---Joint Planning Area Zoning - Amendment- (3) Zoning Ordinance April 19, 1988 Carrboro to adopt Land Use Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance Changes May 16, 1988 County Planning Board to review and make recommendations regarding Land Use Plan Amendments and Zoning Amendments June 06, 1988 County Action---Adoption NOTE: Anticipated Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan Amendments includes 1 ) revised Transition Area, Rural Buffer area boundary along Old 86 between Calvander and Old Fayetteville Road, 2) elimination of the buffer between Duke Forest and Transition Area II . 216 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action A Item No.tj ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF SANITARY SEWER BONDS DEPARTMENT: FINANCE PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: KEN CHAVIOUS, X496 RESOLUTION TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To consider adopting a resolution authorizing the issuance of sanitary sewer bonds for the Efland Sewer project. BACKGROUND: On March 24, 1987 the Board adopted an order authorizing not exceeding $200, 000. 00 Sanitary Sewer Bonds. On June 15, 1987 the Board adopted a resolution providing for the issuance of $200,000 Sanitary Sewer Bond Anticipation Notes. Another resolution providing for the exchange of the original notes for new bond notes was adopted on December 1, 1987. This action extended the maturity date of the notes for three months to allow for completion of the Efland Sewer project. The new maturity date is March 16, 1988; however the bond sale must take place one month earlier in order to meet all legal and fiscal requirements by the March 16 deadline. The resolution authorizes the issuance of the $200, 000. 00 Sanitary Sewer Bonds to repay the bond anticipation notes of the maturity of the notes. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Adopt resolution. 2.1 A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners for the • County of Orange, North Carolina, was held at the Old Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at 7:30 P.M. on February 1, 1988. Present: Chairman Shirley E. Marshall, presiding, and Commissioners Absent: • Commissioner introduced the following resolution which was read: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $200,000 SANITARY SEWER BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina: Section 1. The Board of Commissioners has determined and does hereby find, declare and represent: (a) That an order authorizing not exceeding $200,000 Sanitary Sewer Bonds of the County of Orange was adopted by the Board of Commissioners for said County on March 24, 1987, which order has taken effect. " (b) That none of said bonds have been issued and that there are outstanding $200,000 Sanitary Sewer Bond Anticipation Notes of said County, which notes are dated December 16, 1987, mature on March 16, 1988, bear interest at the rate of 6% per -- -- annum and were issued in anticipation of the receipt of the proceeds of the sale of a like amount of said bonds. (c) That it is necessary at this time to issue all of said bonds, all of the proceeds thereof to be applied to the payment of said outstanding notes at their maturity. (d) That the maximum period of usefulness of the facilities for said County to be provided with the proceeds of said bonds is estimated as a period of forty (40) years from BROWN a WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.10048 December 1, 1987, the date of the bonds authorized hereby, and 220 that such period expires on December 1, 2027. (e) That (i) said County is a governmental unit with general taxing powers, (ii) no bond which is part of the issue of bonds described in Section 2 hereof is a private-activity bond, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") , (iii) 95 percent or more of the net proceeds of said bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of said County, (iv) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private-activity bonds) issued by said County and all subordinate entities thereof during calendar year 1988 is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000 and (v) to the best of said County's knowledge, there are no subordinate entities of said County. Section 2. Pursuant to said order there shall be issued bonds of the County of Orange, North Carolina (the "Issuer") , in the aggregate principal amount of $200,000, designated "Sanitary Sewer Bonds" and dated December 1, 1987 (unless said bonds shall be awarded to the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration (the "FmHA") , in which event said bonds shall be dated as of the date of delivery thereof) . Said bonds (the "bonds") shall be stated to mature (subject to the right of prior redemption as hereinafter set forth) annually, ,7une 1, $2,000 1990 to 1995, inclusive, $2,500 1996 and 1997, $3,000 1998 to 2000, inclusive, $3,500 2001 and 2002, $4,000 2003 to 2005, inclusive, $4,500 2006, $5,000 2007 and 2008, $5,500 2009, $6,000 2010 and 2011, $6,500 2012, $7,000 2013, $7,500 2014, $8,000 2015 to 2026, inclusive, and $6,000 2027, unless the bonds shall be awarded to the FmHA, in which event the bonds shall be stated to mature as hereinafter set forth. The bonds shall be issuable in fully registered form in -2- BROWN 9 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK,N V.1 0045 7 221 the denomination of $500 or any multiple thereof and shall be numbered. The bonds shall bear interest at a rate or rates to be determined by the Local Government Commission of North Carolina at the time the bonds are sold, which interest to the respective maturities thereof shall be payable semiannually on June 1 and December 1 of each year; provided, however, that the interest on any bond awarded to the FYnHA to the respective maturities of the installments of the principal thereof shall be payable on June 1, 1988 and annually thereafter on the 1st day of June each year. Each bond shall bear interest from the interest payment date next preceding the date on which it is authenticated unless it is (a) authenticated upon an interest payment date in which event it shall bear interest from such interest payment date or (b) authenticated prior to the first interest payment date in which event it shall bear interest from its date; provided, however, that if at the time of authentication interest is in default, such bond shall bear interest from the date to which interest has been paid. The principal of and the interest and any redemption premium on the bonds shall be payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts on the respective dates of payment thereof. The principal of and any redemption premium on each bond, other than a bond registered in the name of the F7nHA, shall be payable to the registered owner thereof or his registered assigns or legal representative at the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar mentioned hereinafter upon the presentation and surrender thereof as the same shall become due and payable. Payment of the interest on each bond shall be made by the Bond Registrar on each interest payment date to the person -3- BROWN 9 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y 10048 22 appearing on the registration books of the Issuer hereinafter provided for as the registered owner of such bond (or the previous bond or bonds evidencing the same debt as that evidenced by such bond) at the close of business on the record date for such interest, which shall be the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date, by check mailed to such person at his address as it appears on such registration books or, in the case of a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, as hereinafter provided. If the FmHA is the registered owner of the bonds, payment of the installments of principal and interest with respect thereto shall be made at the office of such fiscal agent as the FmHA shall designate without presentation or surrender thereof. Section 3. The bonds maturing prior to June 1, 1999 will not be subject to redemption prior to maturity. The bonds maturing on June 1, 1999 and thereafter will be redeemable, at the option of the Issuer, from any moneys that may be made available for such purpose, either in whole on any date not earlier than June 1, 1998, or in part on any interest payment date not earlier than June 1, 1998, at the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed, together with interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, plus a redemption premium of 1/2 of 1% of the principal amount of each bond to be redeemed for each calendar year or part thereof between the redemption date and the maturity date of such bond, such premium not to exceed 2% of such principal amount. If less than all of the bonds of any one maturity shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions of bonds of such maturity to be redeemed shall be selected by lot by the Issuer in such manner as the Issuer in its discretion may determine; provided, however, that the portion of any bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $500 or some -4- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.V.10040 22"5 multiple thereof and that, in selecting bonds for redemption, the Bond Registrar shall treat each bond as representing that number of bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such bond by $500. If less than all of the bonds stated to mature on different dates shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed shall be called in the inverse order of their maturities. Not more than sixty (60) nor less than thirty (30) days before the redemption date of any bonds to be redeemed, whether such redemption be in whole or in part, the Issuer shall cause a notice of such redemption to be filed with the Bond Registrar and to be mailed, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of each bond to be redeemed in whole or in part at his address appearing upon the registration books of the Issuer. Each such notice shall set forth the date designated for redemption, the redemption price to be paid, the maturities of the bonds to be redeemed and, if less than all of the bonds of any one maturity then outstanding shall be called for redemption, the distinctive numbers and letters, if any, of such bonds to be redeemed and, in the case of any bond to be redeemed in part only, the portion of the principal amount thereof to be redeemed. If any bond is to be - redeemed in part only, the notice of redemption shall state also that on or after the redemption date, upon surrender of such bond, a new bond or bonds in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion of such bond will be issued. The preceding provisions of this Section shall not apply to bonds awarded to the FmHA. If the FmHA is the purchaser of the bonds there will be issued a single registered bond as hereinafter provided, which bond may be redeemed, at the option of the Issuer, at any time prior to the maturity of any installment of the principal thereof, either in whole or in part in the inverse order of the maturity dates of the installments of --5- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.V.1 OD4B 224 w principal, from any moneys that may be made available for such purpose, at the aggregate principal amount of the installments of principal to be redeemed, together with the interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, but without any premium. In case of a redemption of all or any part of a bond awarded to the FmHA, a notice of redemption shall be sent by registered mail, mailed at least forty (40) days prior to the date fixed for redemption, addressed to the Finance Office, Farmers Home Administration, United States Department of Agriculture, 1530 Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri, 63103, or to such other address as the FmHA may designate by registered or certified mail forwarded to the Issuer at least fifty (50) days prior to any interest payment date. On the date fixed for redemption, notice having been given in the manner and under the conditions hereinabove provided, the bonds or portions thereof called for redemption shall be due and payable at the redemption price provided therefor, plus accrued interest to such date. If moneys sufficient to pay the redemption price of the bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, plus accrued interest thereon to the date fixed for redemption, are held by the Bond Registrar, or at such place as the FmHA may designate in the case of a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, in trust for the registered owners of bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, interest on the bonds or portions thereof called for redemption shall cease to accrue, such bonds or portions thereof shall cease to be entitled to any benefits or security under this resolution or to be deemed outstanding, and the registered owners of such bonds or portions thereof shall have no rights in respect thereof except to receive payment of the redemption price thereof, plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. -6- BROWN R W00D.ONE WORD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.I 00.0 If a portion of a bond, other than a bond awarded to the FmHA, shall be selected for redemption, the registered owner thereof or his attorney or legal representative shall present and surrender such bond to the Bond Registrar for payment of the principal amount thereof so called for redemption and the redemption premium, if any, on such principal amount, and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver to or upon the order of such registered owner or his legal representative, without charge therefor, for the unredeemed portion of the principal amount of the bond so surrendered, a bond or bonds of the same maturity, of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution and bearing interest at the same rate. In the event that an installment of principal of a bond awarded to the FmHA shall be redeemed, the Bond Registrar shall direct the registered owner thereof to evidence such redemption by appropriate notation on the schedule attached to such bond for such purpose. Section 4. Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, may, at the option of the registered owner thereof, be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds of the same maturity (or, in the case of a bond awarded to 'r the FmHA, of bonds having maturities corresponding to the maturities of the installments of principal of such bond then unpaid) , of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution and bearing interest at the same rate. Except as hereinafter otherwise provided, the transfer of any bond may be registered only upon the registration books of the Issuer upon the surrender thereof to the Bond Registrar -7- BROWN 0 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.1 0040 221 together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar. Upon any such registration of transfer, the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver in exchange for such bond a new bond or bonds, registered in the name of the transferee, of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution, in an aggregate principal amount equal to the unredeemed principal amount of such bond so surrendered, of the same maturity and bearing interest at the same rate. The transfer of a bond awarded to the FmHA may be registered by the registered 'owner thereof only upon an execution of an assignment thereof duly executed by such registered owner or his attorney or legal representative. Notice of such assignment shall be given promptly by the assignor to the Bond Registrar by registered mail, such notice to be in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, and upon receipt of such notice such bond shall be registered as to both principal and interest on such registration books in the name of the assignee named in such notice. In all cases in which bonds shall be exchanged or the transfer of bonds shall be registered hereunder and a new bond or bonds are to be delivered in exchange therefor, the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver at the earliest practicable time bonds in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. All bonds surrendered in any such exchange or F —: registration of transfer shall forthwith be cancelled by the Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall not be required to make any such exchange or registration of transfer of (i) any bond during a period beginning at the opening of business fifteen (15) days before the day of the mailing of a notice of redemption of bonds or any portion thereof and ending at the close of business on the -8- BROWN C WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.10040 227 day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to Section 3 of this resolution. As to any bond, the person in whose name the same shall be registered shall be deemed and regarded as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and payment of or on account of the principal or redemption price of any such bond and the interest on any such bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof or his legal representative. All such payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such bond, including the redemption premium, if any, and interest thereon, to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. The Issuer shall appoint such registrars, transfer agents, depositaries or other agents as may be necessary for the registration, registration of transfer and exchange of bonds within a reasonable time according to than current commercial standards and for the timely payment of principal, interest and any redemption premium with respect to the bonds. NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, is hereby appointed the registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the "Bond Registrar") for the bonds, subject to the right of the governing body of the Issuer to appoint another Bond Registrar and except as hereinafter provided, and as such shall keep at its corporate trust office the books of the Issuer for the registration, registration of transfer, exchange and payment _ ' of the bonds as provided in this resolution. If the FmHA is the purchaser of the bonds, then the Finance Director of the Issuer shall be the Bond Registrar; provided, however, that, in the event that a bond registered in the name of the FmHA is assigned, the paying agent with respect to such bond shall be NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina. -9- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER,NEW YORK.N.V.10040 Section 5. The bonds shall bear the facsimile 226 signatures of or be executed by the Chairman of and the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of the Issuer and the corporate seal of the Issuer shall be impressed or a facsimile thereof shall be imprinted on the bonds. The certificate of the Local Government Commission of North Carolina to be endorsed on all bonds shall bear the facsimile signature of or be executed by the Secretary of said Commission and the certificate of authentication of the Bond Registrar to be endorsed on all bonds shall be executed as provided hereinafter. In case any officer of the Issuer or the Local Government Commission of North Carolina whose facsimile signature shall appear on any bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such bonds, such facsimile signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes the same as if he had remained in office until such delivery, and any bond may bear the facsimile signatures of such persons who at the actual time of the execution of such bond shall be the proper officers to sign such bond although at the date of such bond such persons may not have been such officers. No bond shall be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any benefit or security under this resolution until it shall have been authenticated by the execution by the Bond Registrar of the certificate of authentication endorsed thereon. The bonds, other than a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, and the endorsements thereon shall be in substan- tially the following forms: -10- 9ROWN a WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER,NEW YORK,N.V.10048 229 [Front Side of Bond] No $. . . . United States of America State of North Carolina COUNTY OF ORANGE Sanitary Sewer Bond Maturity Date Interest Rate Cusip The County of Orange, in the State of North Carolina, is justly indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to or registered assigns or legal representative on the date specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, at the corporate trust office of NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, (the "Bond Registrar") , the principal sum of DOLLARS and to pay interest on such principal sum from the date hereof or from the June 1 or December 1 next preceding the date of authentication to which interest shall have been paid, unless such date of authentication is a June 1 or December 1 to which interest shall have been paid, in which case from such date, such interest to the maturity hereof being payable on June 1 and December 1 in each year, at the rate per annum specified above, until payment of such principal sum. The interest so payable on any such interest payment date will be paid to the person in whose name this bond (or the previous bond or bonds evidencing the same debt as that evidenced by this bond) is registered at the close of business on the record date for such interest, which shall be the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date, by -11- BROWN 9 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW VORR.N.Y.10048 2oU check mailed to such person at his address as it appears on the bond registration books of said County. Both the principal of and the interest on this bond shall be paid in any coin or currency of the United States of America that is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts on the respective dates of payment thereof. For the prompt payment hereof, both principal and interest as the same shall become due, the faith and credit of said County of Orange are hereby irrevocably pledged. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS OF THIS BOND ARE SET FORTH ON THE REVERSE HEREOF AND SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS IF SET FORTH HERE. This bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any benefit or security under the resolution mentioned hereinafter until this bond shall have been authenticated by the execution by the Bond Registrar of the certificate of authentication endorsed hereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said County of Orange, by resolution of its Board of Commissioners, has caused this bond to bear the facsimile signatures of the Chairman of and the Clerk to said Board and a facsimile of its corporate seal to be imprinted hereon, all as of the 1st day of December, 1987. [Facsimile signature] - - Chairman [Facsimile signature] Clerk CERTIFICATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION The issuance of the within bond has been approved under the provisions of The Local Government Bond Act of North Carolina. -12- BROWN 5 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.1 0045 281 JOHN D. FOUST Secretary, Local Government Commission By [Facsimile signature] CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This bond is one of the bonds of the series designated herein and issued under the provisions of the within-mentioned Resolution. NCNB NATIONAL BANK OF NORTH CAROLINA as Bond Registrar By [Manual signature] Authorized Signatory Date of authentication: [Reverse Side of Bond] United States of America State of North Carolina COUNTY OF ORANGE Sanitary Sewer Bond This bond is one of an issue of bonds designated "Sanitary Sewer Bonds" (the "bonds") and issued by said County for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for constructing a portion of a sanitary sewer system for said County, and this bond is issued under and pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, Article 7, as amended, of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, an order which has taken effect, and a resolution duly passed by the Board of Commissioners for said County (the "Resolution") . The bonds at the time outstanding maturing prior to June 1, 1999 are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. The bonds maturing on June 1, 1999 and thereafter may be redeemed, at the option of said County, from any moneys that may -13- BROWN k WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK,N.•.1004B 232 be made available for such purpose, either in whole on any date not earlier than June 1, 1998, or in part on any interest payment date not earlier than June 1, 1998, at the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed, together with interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, plus a redemption premium of 1/2 of 1% of the principal amount of each bond to be redeemed for each calendar year or part thereof between the redemption date and the maturity date of such bond, such premium not to exceed 2% of such principal amount. If less than all of the bonds of any one maturity shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions of bonds of such maturity to be redeemed shall be selected by lot by said County in such manner as said County in its discretion may determine; provided, however, that the portion of any bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $500 or some multiple thereof and that, in selecting bonds for redemption, the Bond Registrar shall treat each Bond as representing that number of bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such bond by $500. If less than all of the bonds stated to mature on different dates shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed shall be called in the inverse order of their maturities. Not more than sixty (60) nor less than thirty (30) days before the redemption date of any bonds to be redeemed, whether such redemption be in whole or in part, said County shall cause a T_ __ ' notice of such redemption to be filed with the Bond Registrar and mailed, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of each bond to be redeemed in whole or in part at his address appearing upon the registration books of said County. On the date fixed for redemption, notice having been given as aforesaid, the bonds or portions thereof so called for redemption shall be due and payable at the redemption price provided for the redemption of -14- BROWN Q WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y 100413 233 such bonds or portions thereof on such date and, if moneys for payment of such redemption price and the accrued interest are held by the bond Registrar as provided in the Resolution, interest on the bonds or the portions thereof so called for redemption shall cease to accrue. If a portion of this bond shall be called for redemption, a new bond or bonds in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion hereof will be issued to the registered owner hereof or his legal representative upon the surrender hereof. The bonds are issuable in fully registered form in the denomination of $500 or any integral multiple thereof. At the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar, in the manner and subject to the conditions provided in the Resolution, bonds may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds of the same maturity, of authorized denominations and bearing interest at the same rate. The Bond Registrar shall keep at its corporate trust office the books of said County for the registration of transfer of bonds. The transfer of this bond may be registered only upon such books and as otherwise provided in the Resolution upon the surrender hereof to the Bond Registrar together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner hereof or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar. Upon any such registration of transfer, the Bond Registrar shall deliver in exchange for -Y this bond a new bond or bonds, registered in the name of the transferee, of authorized denominations, in an aggregate principal amount equal to the unredeemed principal amount of this bond, of the same maturity and bearing interest at the same rate. The Bond Registrar shall not be required to exchange or register any transfer of (i) any bond during a period beginning at the opening of business fifteen (15) days before the day of -15- BROWN @ WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N V 10048 the mailing of a notice of redemption of bonds or any portion 234 thereof and ending at the close of business on the day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to the Resolution. It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of North Carolina to happen, exist and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, exist and have been performed in regular and due form and time as so required; that provision has been made for the levy and collection of a direct annual tax upon all taxable property within said County sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on this bond as the same shall become due; and that the total indebtedness of said County, including this bond, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned registered owner thereof hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within bond and all rights thereunder and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to register the transfer of said bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. -16- BROWN B WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.V.i 0046 235 Section 6. If the FmHA is the initial purchaser of the bonds, there will be issued a single registered bond of the issuer of the denomination of $200,000, numbered R-1, maturing in annual installments on the 1st day of June in the following years and in the following amounts, respectively: Year of Principal Year of Principal Maturity Amount Maturity Amount 1990 $ 2,000 2009 $ 5,500 1991 2,000 2010 6,000 1992 2,000 2011 6,000 1993 2,000 2012 6,500 1994 2,000 2013 7,000 1995 2,000 2014 7,500 1996 2,500 2015 8,000 1997 2,500 2016 8,000 1998 3, 000 2017 8,000 1999 3,000 2018 8,000 2000 3,000 2019 8,000 2001 3,500 2020 8,000 2002 3,500 2021 8,000 2003 4, 000 2022 8,000 2004 4,000 2023 8,000 2005 4,000 2024 8,000 2006 4,500 2025 8,000 2007 5,000 2026 8,000 2008 5,000 2027 6,000 and bearing interest on the unpaid part of such principal at the rate of 6.375% per annum until payment thereof. Such bond will not be defeased without the written consent of the FmHA during such time as the FmHA shall remain the registered owner of such bond. Such bond and the endorsements thereon shall be in substantially the following forms: -17- BROWN B WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.1 004$ No. R-1 $200,000 23Q REGISTERED BOND WITHOUT COUPONS (Registered as to both principal and interest) United States of America State of North Carolina COUNTY OF ORANGE Sanitary Sewer Bond The County of Orange, in the State of North Carolina, is justly indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION or registered assigns or legal representative the principal sum of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS in annual installments on the 1st day of June in the following years and amounts: Year of Principal Year of Principal Maturity Amount Maturity Amount 1990 $ 2,000 2009 $ 5,500 1991 2,000 2010 6, 000 1992 2,000 2011 6,000 1993 2,000 2012 6, 500 1994 2,000 2013 7, 000 1995 2,000 2014 7,500 1996 2,500 2015 8, 000 1997 2,500 2016 8,000 1998 3,000 2017 8,000 1999 3,000 2018 8,000 2000 3,000 2019 8,000 2001 3,500 2020 8,000 2002 3,500 2021 8,000 2003 4,000 2022 8,000 :____ . 2004 4,000 2023 8,000 w 2005 4,000 2024 8,000 2006 4,500 2025 8,000 2007 5,000 2026 8,000 2008 5, 000 2027 6,000 and to pay interest from the date hereof on the unpaid part of such principal sum at the rate of six and three hundred seventy- five one thousandths per centum (6.375%) per annum until payment thereof, such interest to the maturity hereof being payable on June 1, 1988 and annually thereafter on June 1 in each year. The -18- BROWN 9 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.10045 2�c7 interest so payable on any such interest payment date will be paid to the person in whose name this bond is registered at the close of business on the record date for such interest, which shall be the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date. Both the principal of and the interest on this bond are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, at the respective dates of payment thereof, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts. During the time that the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration, is the registered owner of this bond, payment of the installments of principal and interest when due and payable on this bond shall be made at the office of such fiscal agent as the United States of America, Farmers Home Admin- istration, shall designate without presentation or surrender hereof and, during any such time as an assignee hereof is the registered owner of this bond, payment of the installments of principal when due and payable on this bond shall be made at the corporate trust office of NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, upon the presentation and surrender hereof and payment of the interest when due and payable on this bond shall be made by check mailed to such assignee at his address as it appears on the bond registration books of said County hereinafter mentioned without the presen- tation or surrender hereof. Upon receipt of said payments of principal and interest, written acknowledgment of the receipt thereof shall be given promptly to the Bond Registrar hereinafter mentioned and said County shall be fully discharged of its obligation on this bond to the extent of the payment so made. Upon final payment this bond shall be surrendered to the Bond Registrar for cancellation. -19- BROWN b WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.T.I 00 3 For the prompt payment hereof, both principal and in- 238 terest as the same shall become due, the faith and credit of said County of Orange are hereby irrevocably pledged. This bond is duly authorized and issued under and pur- suant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, Article 7, as amended, of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, an order which has taken effect, and a resolution duly passed by the Board of Commissioners for said County, for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for constructing a portion of a sanitary sewer system for said County. At the office of the Bond Registrar, in the manner and subject to the conditions provided in said resolution, this bond may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds having maturities corresponding to the maturities of the installments of principal of this bond then unpaid, issuable in fully registered form in the denomination of $500 or any integral multiple thereof and bearing interest at the same rate. This bond is registered as to both principal and inter- est in the name of the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration, on books of said County kept by the Finance Director for the County as Bond Registrar, and the transfer hereof may hereafter be registered by the registered owner hereof only upon an execution of an assignment hereon duly executed by such registered owner or his attorney or legal representative. Notice of such assignment shall be given promptly by the assignor to the Bond Registrar by registered mail, such notice to be in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, and upon receipt of such notice this bond shall be registered as to both principal and interest on such registration books in the name of the assignee named in such notice. -20- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y 1 00413 2�� This bond or any part hereof at the time outstanding may be redeemed, at the option of said County at any time prior to the maturity of any installment of the principal hereof, either in whole or in part in the inverse order of the maturity dates of the installments of principal, from any moneys that may be made available for such purpose, at the aggregate principal amount of the installments of principal to be redeemed, together with the interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, but without any premium. On the date designated for redemption, notice having been given and moneys for payment of the redemption price being held in trust for such purpose, all as provided in said resolu- tion, this bond or part hereof shall become and be due and pay- able, and the interest on this bond or part hereof so redeemed shall cease to accrue. The Bond Registrar shall not be required to exchange or register any transfer of (i) any bond during a period beginning at the opening of business fifteen (15) days before the day of the mailing of a notice of redemption of bonds or any portion thereof and ending at the close of business on the day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to said resolution. It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, con- ditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of North Carolina to happen, exist, and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, exist, and have been performed in regular and due form and time as so required; that provision has been made for the levy and collection of a direct annual tax upon all taxable property within said County sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on this bond as the same shall become due; and that the total indebtedness of -21- BROWN a WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.1004E said County including this bond, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said County of Orange, by resolution of its Board of Commissioners, has caused this bond to be executed by the Chairman of and the Clerk to said Board and the corporate seal of said County to be impressed hereon, all as of the day of March, 1988. [Manual signature] Chairman [Manual signature] Clerk CERTIFICATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION The issuance of the within bond has been approved under the provisions of The Local Government Bond Act of North Caro- lina. JOHN D. FOUST Secretary, Local Government Commission By [Manual signature] CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This bond is issued under the provisions of the with- in-mentioned resolution. Finance Director for the County as Bond Registrar By [Manual signature] Date of authentication: -22- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N,v.10048 241 ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned registered owner thereof hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within bond and all rights thereunder and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to register the transfer of said bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must corres- pond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. SCHEDULE "A" [This to be a separate sheet. ] Principal Installments Paid in Advance of Maturity Date Name of Bond Registrar, Principal Due Principal Date Authorized Official Date Amount Payment Balance Paid and Title $ $ $ Section 7. The Issuer covenants that, to the extent permitted by the Constitution and laws of the State of North Carolina, it will comply with the requirements of the Code except -23- BROWN B WOOD.ONE WORD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y.10048 to the extent that the Issuer obtains an opinion of bond counsel 4'� to the effect that noncompliance would not result in interest on the bonds being includable in gross income for purposes of federal income tax. Section 8. The Issuer hereby represents that it reasonably expects that it and all subordinate entities thereof will not issue in the aggregate more than $10,000,000 of tax- exempt obligations (not counting private-activity bonds except for qualified 5O1(c) (3) bonds as defined in the Code) during calendar year 1988. In addition, the Issuer hereby designates each of the bonds as a "qualified tax-exempt obligation" for the purposes of the Code. Section 9. The action of the Finance Director of the Issuer in applying to the Local Government Commission of North Carolina to approve, advertise and sell the bonds and the action of the Local Government Commission of the North Carolina in asking for sealed bids for the bonds by printing and distributing circulars and publishing a notice relating to the sale of the bonds are hereby approved, ratified and confirmed. Section 10. If the bonds are awarded to a purchaser other than the FmHA, the bonds will be delivered in such author- ized denominations and registered in such names as the purchaser may request no later than five days prior to the date of their delivery. If the purchaser fails to submit such information by the required time, then a single bond will be issued for each maturity date registered in the name of the purchaser or the senior manager of the bidding group constituting the purchaser. Section 11. If the bonds are awarded to a purchaser other than the FmhA, there shall be printed on the reverse of each of the bonds the legal opinion of Brown & Wood, bond counsel to the Issuer, with respect to the validity of the bonds, and there shall be printed immediately following such legal opinion a -24- BROWN 9 WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N Y.10048 24d certificate bearing the facsimile signature of the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the Issuer, said certificate to be in substantially the following form: I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the legal opinion on the bonds therein described which was manually signed by Brown & Wood, New York, N.Y. , and was dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for said bonds. [Facsimile signature] Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina Section 12. This resolution shall take effect upon its passage. Thereupon Commissioner moved the passage of the foregoing resolution entitled: "RESOLUTION PRO- VIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $200,000 SANITARY SEWER BONDS", and Commissioner seconded the motion and the resolution was passed by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Noes : * I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of the Board of Commissioners for said County at regular meeting held on February 1, 1988 as relates in any way to the issuance of bonds -- — of said County, and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Board, beginning at page and ending at page I HEREBY CERTIFY that a schedule of regular meetings of said Board, stating that regular meetings of said Board are held at the times and places set forth in the schedule attached hereto, has been on file in my office pursuant to G.S. 143- -25- BROWN B.WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK,N Y 10046 • 318.12, as of a date not less than seven days before said 2 4 4 meeting. WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this day of February '1988. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners • -26- BROWN&WOOD.ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER.NEW YORK.N.Y 100418 1 a 4. ' ORANGE COUNTY 2 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Age/. Item No. G ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 1988 SUBJECT: THE HUMANE WORKPLACE: EMPLOYEE SUPPORTIVE PROGRAMS DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 O.C.M.H. REQUEST TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: Consideration of granting funds to underwrite Employee Supportive Program Workshop. BACKGROUND: The attached correspondence requests $500 to help fund "The Humane Workplace: Employee Supportive Programs" workshop. Vera Insko, Committee Co-Chair, explains in her letter the purpose of the workshop. The only available funding source is the Commissioners ' Con- tingency. The current balance in the account is $27, 670. RECOMMENDATION(S) : As the Board decides. 24b December 16, 1987 The Honorable Shirley Marshall Chair , Orange County Board of Commissioners County Courthouse Hillsborough, North Carolina 27510 Dear Ms . Marshall and Commissioners: Leaders in government and business share a relatively new, but very important concern -- how to improve American competitiveness in the world market. Everyone is seeking ways to make the American workplace and the American worker more productive. One proven way to help is to make the workplace less stressful and more supportive; but employers have to be convinced the initial investment will result in higher profits and happier workers . On March 8, 1987, the Orange County Mental Health Association, the University of North Carolina, and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce will hold a major workshop, The Humane Workplace: Employee Supportive Programs . The purpose of the workshop is to promote positive, productive workplace settings . Our target audience is Orange County and Triangle area employers and employee representatives. Copies of the agenda and budget are attached. We are furtunate to have Mr . Lou Harris to give the keynote address, "What Worries the Worker . " In addition, the main panel features top executives from agencies, _.. businesses leading the way in employee corporations/ and bu benefits. _. In May, during Mental Health Week, ten local employers with successful, model programs will be honored at an awards ceremoney and banquet. Government units are often called on to be model employers -- to initiate and promote workplace benefits needed by all employees. Orange County government can promote these employee su• •ort - •ro• rams b •rovidin• a one till-F-7-rant o II o help underwrite the of the workshop. If you need additional information, please contact me at 929-6115 or 856-4611 . Thank y for your consideration of this request. L-0,141/Laait,t) erla C. Insko Workshop Committee Co-Chair O.C.Mental Health Association 247 The Humane Workplace: Employee Supportive Programs 3)4144.t A Single Set of Sessions in March, 1988 11:30 Registration Noon Welcome and Introduction Luncheon 12:30 The Issue: Keynote Speech "Stress at the Workplace" or "What Worries Workers" 0 n 4164;40. 12:45 The Response: (.."*"."14.4. A Panel Discussion A team of top managers from the public and the private sectors will briefly describe the efforts they are currently making that are supportive of their employees. Each employer will explain the organization's rationale for getting involved in the program as well as the impact that the program has had on job performance and company productivity. 1:20 Break 1:35- Concurrent Sessions - Focus on Special Topics 2:50 Panel A- Helping Working Parents: Child Care Options for- Employers Panel B - Helping Troubled Employees: Employee Assistance Program Models Panel C - The AIDS Epidemic: Developing a Humane Policy douleoe."4- .) 248 HUMANE WORKPLACE CONFERENCE Tuedsay, March 8, 1988 Budget as of 1/21/88 EXPENSES Carolina Inn Rental, 4 breakout rooms $ 265. 00 Lunch, 130 @ $10 each 1300.00 Total $1565. 00 Honorarium, Lou Harris 5000.00 Awards, 3 @ $50 each 150. 00 Printing, brochures 300.00 programs 200 . 00 Bread refreshements 100. 00 Contingency 500. 00 Total $6250.00 Total Expenses $7815. 00 INCOME Conference registration 100 @ $30 each $3000. 00 (30 panelists as guests ) Fundraising, committed sources NCNB 200.00 Glaxo 500. 00 Duke Power 500. 00 Z . Smith Reynolds Foundation 500. 00 The Village Companies 500.00 NCMH (for printing expenses) 500. 00 UNC (for panelists ' lunches) 300.00 Town of Carrboro 500. 00 Total Income committed $6500.00 Balance ($1315. 00 ) Possible additional sources Town of Chapel Hill 500. 00 Orange County Gov' t. 500.00 OC Mental Health Assn. 500. 00 IBM 285.00 DONATED GOODS & SERVICES: Graphics and printing -- Blue Cross/Blue Shield Flowers -- to be identified 24 ORANGE COUNTY Action Agenda BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Item No. H ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE February 1 , 1988 Subject: APPOINTMENTS Department: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Public Hearing: Yes I no 11 1 Attachments: Information Contact: Beverly A. Blythe . Under Separate Cover Phone Numbers: 732-8181, 968-1501, 227-0231 PURPOSE: To maintain membership at effective levels on Commissioners' appointed Boards. The following vacancies are announced for the first time for information only. B-14 - ARTS COMMISSION - 3 expiration of terms (Roland Buchanan, Gerald Eidenier, and Edgar Marston) and 3 resignations (Judith Bell , Nan Gressman and Rita Berman) . The following vacancies are announced together with the indication of the status of securing candidates for consideration of appointment. A-5 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - 4 vacancies (expansion of membership) . Two resumes have been received. B-4 - COUNTY ADVISORY BOARD ON AGING - 1 vacancy. No new resumes have been received. B-7 - HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION - 5 expiration of terms. C-2 - CARRBORO PLANNING BOARD - 1 expiration of term. A recommendation has been requested from Carrboro Town Government. C-6 - HILLSBOROUGH PLANNING BOARD - 1 expiration of term. A recommendation has been requested from Hillsborough Town Government. C-8 - ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD - 3 expiration of terms. Chris Best would like to be considered for reappointment. RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners requested a study be made for the Eno River by N. C. Depart- ment of Natural Resources and Community Development, and WHEREAS, an Executive Summary Report of the Eno River Area Capacity Use investigation has been received, and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby support the Capacity Use Designation of the Eno River, and NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that from this Capacity Use Designation a management plan for the Eno will be prepared for Orange County in cooperation with the Division of Environmental Management for consideration by the Environmental Management ,Commission. Adopted this 1st day of February, 1988 . Chair, o rd of Commissioners ATTEST: "lerk A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, was held at the Old Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at 7: 30 P.M. on February 1, 1988. Present: Chairman Shirley E. Marshall, presiding, and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr. , Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell and Don Willhoit Absent: None * * * Commissioner Hartwell introduced the following resolution which was read: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $200, 000 SANITARY SEWER BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina: Section 1. The Board of Commissioners has determined and does hereby find, declare and represent: (a) That an order authorizing not exceeding $200, 000 Sanitary Sewer Bonds of the County of Orange was adopted by the Board of Commissioners for said County on March 24, 1987, which order has taken effect. (b) That none of said bonds have been issued and that there are outstanding $200, 000 Sanitary Sewer Bond Anticipation Notes of said County, which notes are dated December 16, 1987, mature on March 16, 1988, bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum and were issued in anticipation of the receipt of the proceeds of the sale of a like amount of said bonds. (c) That it is necessary at this time to issue all of said bonds, all of the proceeds thereof to be applied to the December 1, 1987, the date of the bonds authorized hereby, and that such period expires on December 1, 2027. (e) That (i) said County is a governmental unit with general taxing powers, (ii) no bond which is part of the issue of bonds described in Section 2 hereof is a private-activity bond, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") , (iii) 95 percent or more of the net proceeds of said bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of said County, (iv) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private-activity bonds) issued by said County and all subordinate entities thereof during calendar year 1988 is not reasonably expected to exceed $5 , 000, 000 and (v) to the best of said County's knowledge, there are no subordinate entities of said County. Section 2 . Pursuant to said order there shall be issued bonds of the County of Orange, North Carolina (the "Issuer") , in the aggregate principal amount of $200, 000, designated "Sanitary Sewer Bonds" and dated December 1, 1987 (unless said bonds shall be awarded to the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration (the "FmHA") , in which event said bonds shall be dated as of the date of delivery thereof) . Said bonds (the "bonds") shall be stated to mature (subject to the right of prior redemption as hereinafter set forth) annually, June 1, $2, 000 1990 to 1995, inclusive, $2, 500 1996 and 1997, $3 , 000 1998 to 2000, inclusive, $3 , 500 2001 and 2002 , $4 , 000 2003 to 2005, inclusive, $4, 500 2006, $5, 000 2007 and 2008, $5,500 2009, $6, 000 2010 and 2011, $6,500 2012, $7, 000 2013 , $7, 500 2014, $8, 000 2015 to 2026, inclusive, and $6, 000 2027 . unless the hnnr1 ch. 1 ti-,s �..r�,.a..a i_ �.__ ,._,.. •- the denomination of $500 or any multiple thereof and shall be numbered. The bonds shall bear interest at a rate or rates to be determined by the Local Government Commission of North Carolina at the time the bonds are sold, which interest to the respective maturities thereof shall be payable semiannually on June 1 and December 1 of each year; provided, however, that the interest on any bond awarded to the FmHA to the respective maturities of the installments of the principal thereof shall be payable on June 1, 1988 and annually thereafter on the 1st day of June each year. Each bond shall bear interest from the interest payment date next preceding the date on which it is authenticated unless it is (a) authenticated upon an interest payment date in which event it shall bear interest from such interest payment date or (b) authenticated prior to the first interest payment date in which event it shall bear interest from its date; provided, however, that if at the time of authentication interest is in default, such bond shall bear interest from the date to which interest has been paid. The principal of and the interest and any redemption premium on the bonds shall be payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts on the respective dates of payment thereof. The principal of and any redemption premium on each bond, other than a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, shall be payable to the registered owner thereof or his registered assigns or legal representative at the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar mentioned hereinafter upon the Presentation Ana appearing on the registration books of the Issuer hereinafter provided for as the registered owner of such bond (or the previous bond or bonds evidencing the same debt as that evidenced by such bond) at the close of business on the record date for such interest, which shall be the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date, by check mailed to such person at his address as it appears on such registration books or, in the case of a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, as hereinafter provided. If the FmHA is the registered owner of the bonds, payment of the installments of principal and interest with respect thereto shall be made at the office of such fiscal agent as the FmHA shall designate without presentation or surrender thereof. Section 3 . The bonds maturing prior to June 1, 1999 will not be subject to redemption prior to maturity. The bonds maturing on June 1, 1999 and thereafter will be redeemable, at the option of the Issuer, from any moneys that may be made . available for such purpose, either in whole on any date not earlier than June 1, 1998 , or in part on any interest payment date not earlier than June 1, 1998 , at the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed, together with interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, plus a redemption premium of 1/2 of 1% of the principal amount of each bond to be redeemed for each calendar year or part thereof between the redemption date and the maturity date of such bond, such premium not to exceed 2% of such principal amount. If less than all of the bonds of any one maturity shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions of hnndc of c»rh maturity to ha radaamad cha11 ha calanted by lot by multiple thereof and that, in selecting bonds for redemption, the Bond Registrar shall treat each bond as representing that number of bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such bond by $500. If less than all of the bonds stated to mature on different dates shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed shall be called in the inverse order of their maturities. Not more than sixty (60) nor less than thirty (30) days before the redemption date of any bonds to be redeemed, whether such redemption be in whole or in part, the Issuer shall cause a notice of such redemption to be filed with the Bond Registrar and to be mailed, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of each bond to be redeemed in whole or in part at his address appearing upon the registration books of the Issuer. Each such notice shall set forth the date designated for redemption, the redemption price to be paid, the maturities of the bonds to be redeemed and, if less than all of the bonds of any one maturity then outstanding shall be called for redemption, the distinctive numbers and letters, if any, of such bonds to be redeemed and, in the case of any bond to be redeemed in part only, the portion of the principal amount thereof to be redeemed. If any bond is to be redeemed in part only, the notice of redemption shall state also that on or after the redemption date, upon surrender of such bond, a new bond or bonds in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion of such bond will be issued. The preceding provisions of this Section shall not apply to bonds awarded to the FmHA. If the FmHA is the purchaser of the bonds there will be issued a single registered bond as T_ L L,- - �- --- principal, from any moneys that may be made available for such purpose, at the aggregate principal amount of the installments of principal to be redeemed, together with the interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, but without any premium. In case of a redemption of all or any part of a bond awarded to the FmHA, a notice of redemption shall be sent by registered mail, mailed at least forty (40) days prior to the date fixed for redemption, addressed to the Finance Office, Farmers Home Administration, United States Department of Agriculture, 1530 Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri, 63103 , or to such other address as the FmHA may designate by registered or certified mail forwarded to the Issuer at least fifty (50) days prior to any interest payment date. On the date fixed for redemption, notice having been given in the manner and under the conditions hereinabove provided, the bonds or portions thereof called for redemption shall be due and payable at the redemption price provided therefor, plus accrued interest to such date. If moneys sufficient to pay the redemption price of the bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, plus accrued interest thereon to the date fixed for redemption, are held by the Bond Registrar, or at such place as the FmHA may designate in the case of a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, in trust for the registered owners of bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, interest on the bonds or portions thereof called for redemption shall cease to accrue, such bonds or portions thereof shall chase to be entitled to any benefits or security under this resolution or to be deemed If a portion of a bond, other than a bond awarded to the FmHA, shall be selected for redemption, the registered owner thereof or his attorney or legal representative shall present and surrender such bond to the Bond Registrar for payment of the principal amount thereof so called for redemption and the redemption premium, if any, on such principal amount, and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver to or upon the order of such registered owner or his legal representative, without charge therefor, for the unredeemed portion of the principal amount of the bond so surrendered, a bond or bonds of the same maturity, of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution and bearing interest at the same rate. In the event that an installment of principal of a bond awarded to the FmHA shall be redeemed, the Bond Registrar shall direct the registered owner thereof to evidence such redemption by appropriate notation on the schedule attached to such bond for such purpose. Section 4 . Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, may, at the option of the registered owner thereof, be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds of the same maturity (or, in the case of a bond awarded to the FmHA, of bonds having maturities corresponding to the maturities of the installments of principal of such bond then unpaid) , of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution and bearincr together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar. Upon any such registration of transfer, the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver in exchange for such bond a new bond or bonds, registered in the name of the transferee, of any denomination or denominations authorized by this resolution, in an aggregate principal amount equal to the unredeemed principal amount of such bond so surrendered, of the same maturity and bearing interest at the same rate. The transfer of a bond awarded to the FmHA may be registered by the registered 'owner thereof only upon an execution of an assignment thereof duly executed by such registered owner or his attorney or legal representative. Notice of such assignment shall be given promptly by the assignor to the Bond Registrar by registered mail, such notice to be in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, and upon receipt of such notice such bond shall be registered as to both principal and interest on such registration books in the name of the assignee named in such notice. In all cases in which bonds shall be exchanged or the transfer of bonds shall be registered hereunder and a new bond or bonds are to be delivered in exchange therefor, the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and deliver at the earliest practicable time bonds in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. All bonds surrendered in any such exchange or registration of transfer shall forthwith be cancelled by the Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall not be required to make any such exchange or registration of transfer of (i) any bond during a period beainninc at tha nnc+n i nrr /lc. a..,.,,. day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to Section 3 of this resolution. As to any bond, the person in whose name the same shall be registered shall be deemed and regarded as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and payment of or on account of the principal or redemption price of any such bond and the interest on any such bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof or his legal representative. All such payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such bond, including the redemption premium, if any, and interest thereon, to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. The Issuer shall appoint such registrars, transfer agents, depositaries or other agents as may be necessary for the registration, registration of transfer and exchange of bonds within a reasonable time according to then current commercial standards and for the timely payment of principal, interest and any redemption premium with respect to the bonds. NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, is hereby appointed the registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the "Bond Registrar") for the bonds, subject to the right of the governing body of the Issuer to appoint another Bond Registrar and except as hereinafter provided, and as such shall keep at its corporate trust office the books of the Issuer for the registration, registration of transfer, exchange and payment of the bonds as provided in this resolution. If the FmHA is the purchaser of the bonds, then the Finance Director of the Issuer shall be the Bond Registrar; provided, however, that, in the event that a hrnd ron; c+eroa ;� r Section 5. The bonds shall bear the facsimile signatures of or be executed by the Chairman of and the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of the Issuer and the corporate seal of the Issuer shall be impressed or a facsimile thereof shall be imprinted on the bonds. The certificate of the Local Government Commission of North Carolina to be endorsed on all bonds shall bear the facsimile signature of or be executed by the Secretary of said Commission and the certificate of authentication of the Bond Registrar to be endorsed on all bonds shall be executed as provided hereinafter. In case any officer of the Issuer or the Local Government Commission of North Carolina whose facsimile signature shall appear on any bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such bonds, such facsimile signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes the same as if he had remained in office until such delivery, and any bond may bear the facsimile signatures of such persons who at the actual time of the execution of such bond shall be the proper officers to sign such bond although at the date of such bond such persons may not have been such officers. No bond shall be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any benefit or security under this resolution until it shall have been authenticated by the execution by the Bond Registrar of the certificate of authentication endorsed thereon. The bonds, other than a bond registered in the name of the FmHA, and the endorsements thereon shall be in substan- tially the following fn,-m . [Front Side of Bond] No $. . . . United States of America State of North Carolina COUNTY OF ORANGE Sanitary Sewer Bond Maturity Date Interest Rate Cusip The County of Orange, in the State of North Carolina, is justly indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to or registered assigns or legal representative on the date specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, at the corporate trust office of NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, (the "Bond Registrar") , the principal sum of DOLLARS and to pay interest on such principal sum from the date hereof or from the June 1 or December 1 next preceding the date of authentication to which interest shall have been paid, unless such date of authentication is a June 1 or December 1 to which interest shall have been paid, in which case from such date, such interest to the maturity hereof being payable on June 1 and December 1 in each year, at the rate per annum specified above, until payment of such principal sum. The interest so payable on any such interest payment date will be paid to the person in whose name this bond (or the previous bond or bonds evidencing be made available for such purpose, either in whole on any date not earlier than June 1, 1998, or in part on any interest payment date not earlier than June 1, 1998, at the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed, together with interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, plus a redemption premium of 1/2 of 1% of the principal amount of each bond to be redeemed for each calendar year or part thereof between the redemption date and the maturity date of such bond, such premium not to exceed 2% of such principal amount. If less than all of the bonds of any one maturity shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions of bonds of such maturity to be redeemed shall be selected by lot by said County in such manner as said County in its discretion may determine; provided, however, that the portion of any bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $500 or some multiple thereof and that, in selecting bonds for redemption, the Bond Registrar shall treat each Bond as representing that number of bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such bond by $500. If less than all of the bonds stated to mature on different dates shall be called for redemption, the particular bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed shall be called in the inverse order of their maturities. Not more than sixty (60) nor less than thirty (30) days before the redemption date of any bonds to be redeemed, whether such redemption be in whole or in part, said County shall cause a notice of such redemption to be filed with the Bond Registrar and mailed, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of each bond to be redeemed in whole or in part at his address appearing upon the s-- such bonds or portions thereof on such date and, if moneys for payment of such redemption price and the accrued interest are held by the bond Registrar as provided in the Resolution, interest on the bonds or the portions thereof so called for redemption shall cease to accrue. If a portion of this bond shall be called for redemption, a new bond or- bonds in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion hereof will be issued to the registered owner hereof or his legal representative upon the surrender hereof. The bonds are issuable in fully registered form in the denomination of $500 or any integral multiple thereof. At the corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar, in the manner and subject to the conditions provided in the Resolution, bonds may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds of the same maturity, of authorized denominations and bearing interest at the same rate. The Bond Registrar shall keep at its corporate trust office the books of said County for the registration of transfer of bonds. The transfer of this bond may be registered only upon such books and as otherwise provided in the Resolution upon the surrender hereof to the Bond Registrar together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner hereof or his attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar. Upon any such registration of transfer, the Bond Registrar shall deliver in exchange for this bond a new bond or bonds, registered in the name of the transferee, of authorized denominations, in an aggregate principal amount equal to the unredeemed principal amount of this r�i� the mailing of a notice of redemption of bonds or any portion thereof and ending at the close of business on the day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to the Resolution. It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of North Carolina to happen, exist and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, exist and have been performed in regular and due form and time as so required; that provision has been made for the levy and collection of a direct annual tax upon all taxable property within said County sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on this bond as the same shall become due; and that the total indebtedness of said County, including this bond, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned registered owner thereof hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within bond and all rights thereunder and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to register the transfer of said bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: Section 6 . If the FmHA is the initial purchaser of the bonds, there will be issued a single registered bond of the issuer of the denomination of $200, 000, numbered R-1, maturing in annual installments on the 1st day of June in the following years and in the following amounts, respectively: Year of Principal Year of Principal Maturity _ Amount Maturity Amount 1990 $ 2, 000 2009 $ 5, 500 1991 2 , 000 2010 6, 000 1992 2 , 000 2011 6, 000 1993 2 , 000 2012 6,500 1994 2 , 000 2013 7, 000 1995 2 , 000 2014 7,500 1996 2 , 500 2015 8 , 000 1997 2 , 500 2016 8, 000 1998 3 , 000 2017 8, 000 1999 3 , 000 2018 8, 000 2000 3 , 000 2019 8 , 000 2001 3 , 500 2020 8, 000 2002 3 ,500 2021 8 , 000 2003 4, 000 2022 8,000 2004 4, 000 2023 8, 000 2005 4, 000 2024 8 , 000 2006 4, 500 2025 8, 000 2007 5, 000 2026 8, 000 2008 5, 000 2027 6,000 and bearing interest on the unpaid part of such principal at the rate of 6. 375% per annum until payment thereof. Such bond will not be defeased without the written consent of the FmHA during such time as the FmHA shall remain the registered owner of such bond. Such bond and the endorsements thereon shall be in substantially the following forms: No. R-1 $200, 000 REGISTERED BOND WITHOUT COUPONS (Registered as to both principal and interest) United States of America State of North Carolina COUNTY OF ORANGE Sanitary Sewer Bond The County of Orange, in the State of North Carolina, is justly indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION or registered assigns or legal representative the principal sum of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS in annual installments on the 1st day of June in the following years and amounts: Year of Principal Year of Principal Maturity Amount Maturity Amount 1990 $ 2, 000 2009 $ 5, 500 1991 2 , 000 2010 6, 000 1992 2 , 000 2011 6, 000 1993 2 , 000 2012 6,500 1994 2, 000 2013 7, 000 1995 2 , 000 2014 7, 500 1996 2 , 500 2015 8 , 000 1997 2 , 500 2016 8, 000 1998 3 , 000 2017 8, 000 1999 3 , 000 2018 8 , 000 2000 3 , 000 2019 8 , 000 2001 3 , 500 2020 8 , 000 2002 3 , 500 2021 8, 000 2003 4 , 000 2022 8 , 000 2004 4 , 000 2023 8, 000 2005 4, 000 2024 8, 000 2006 4 , 500 2025 8, 000 2007 5, 000 2026 8, 000 2008 5, 000 2027 6, 000 and to pay interest from the date hereof on the unpaid part of such Drincioal sum at the rats of ci lr and t hroc hiinArgA cevonty- interest so payable on any such interest payment date will be paid to the person in whose name this bond is registered at the close of business on the record date for such interest, which shall be the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date. Both the principal of and the interest on this bond are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, at the respective dates of payment thereof, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts. During the time that the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration, is the registered owner of this bond, payment of the installments of principal and interest when due and payable on this bond shall be made at the office of such fiscal agent as the United States of America, Farmers Home Admin- istration, shall designate without presentation or surrender hereof and, during any such time as an assignee hereof is the registered owner of this bond, payment of the installments of principal when due and payable on this bond shall be made at the corporate trust office of NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, in the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, upon the presentation and surrender hereof and payment of the interest when due and payable on this bond shall be made by check mailed to such assignee at his address as it appears on the bond registration books of said County hereinafter mentioned without the presen- tation or surrender hereof. Upon receipt of said payments of principal and interest, written acknowledgment of the receipt thereof shall be given promptly to the Bond Registrar hereinafter mentioned and said County shall be fully discharged of its obligation on this bond to the PY1- t- of 1-1,a For the prompt payment hereof, both principal and in- terest as the same shall become due, the faith and credit of said County of Orange are hereby irrevocably pledged. This bond is duly authorized and issued under and pur- suant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, Article 7, as amended, of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, an order which has taken effect, and a resolution duly passed by the Board of Commissioners for said County, for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for constructing a portion of a sanitary sewer system for said County. At the office of the Bond Registrar, in the manner and subject to the conditions provided in said resolution, this bond may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds having maturities corresponding to the maturities of the installments of principal of this bond then unpaid, issuable in fully registered form in the denomination of $500 or any integral multiple thereof and bearing interest at the same rate. This bond is registered as to both principal and inter- est in the name of the United States of America, Farmers Home Administration, on books of said County kept by the Finance Director for the County as Bond Registrar, and the transfer hereof may hereafter be registered by the registered owner hereof only upon an execution of an assignment hereon duly executed by such registered owner or his attorney or legal representative. Notice of such assignment shall be given promptly by the assignor to the Bond Registrar by registered mail, such notice to be in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, and upon receipt of such nnt; ep This bond or any part hereof at the time outstanding may be redeemed, at the option of said County at any time prior to the maturity of any installment of the principal hereof, either in whole or in part in the inverse order of the maturity dates of the installments of principal, from any moneys that may be made available for such purpose, at the aggregate principal amount of the installments of principal to be redeemed, together with the interest accrued thereon to the date fixed for redemption, but without any premium. On the date designated for redemption, notice having been given and moneys for payment of the redemption price being held in trust for such purpose, all as provided in said resolu- tion, this bond or part hereof shall become and be due and pay- able, and the interest on this bond or part hereof so redeemed shall cease to accrue. The Bond Registrar shall not be required to exchange or register any transfer of (i) any bond during a period beginning at the opening of business fifteen (15) days before the day of the mailing of a notice of redemption of bonds or any portion thereof and ending at the close of business on the day of such mailing or (ii) any bond called for redemption in whole or in part pursuant to said resolution. It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, con- ditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of North Carolina to happen, exist, and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, exist, and have been performed in regular and due form and time as so required; that provision has been made for the levy and collection of a direct annual tax um nn A l l . said County including this bond, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said County of Orange, by resolution of its Board of Commissioners, has caused this bond to be executed by the Chairman of and the Clerk to said Board and the corporate seal of said County to be impressed hereon, all as of the day of March, 1988 . [Manual signature] Chairman [Manual signature] Clerk CERTIFICATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION The issuance of the within bond has been approved under the provisions of The Local Government Bond Act of North Caro- lina. JOHN D. FOUST Secretary, Local Government Commission By [Manual signature] CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This bond is issued under the provisions of the with- in-mentioned resolution. Finance Director for the County as Bond Registrar By [Manual signatures ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned registered owner thereof hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within bond and all rights thereunder and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to register the transfer of said bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must corres- pond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. SCHEDULE "A" [This to be a separate sheet. ] Principal Installments Paid in Advance of Maturity Date al Name of Bond Registrar, Principal Due Principal Date Authorized Official Date Amount Payment Balance Paid and Title to the extent that the Issuer obtains an opinion of bond counsel to the effect that noncompliance would not result in interest on the bonds being includable in gross income for purposes of federal income tax. Section 8 . The Issuer hereby represents that it reasonably expects that it and all subordinate entities thereof will not issue in the aggregate more than $10, 000, 000 of tax- exempt obligations (not counting private-activity bonds except for qualified 501 (c) (3) bonds as defined in the Code) during calendar year 1988 . In addition, the Issuer hereby designates each of the bonds as a "qualified tax-exempt obligation" for the purposes of the Code. Section 9. The action of the Finance Director of the Issuer in applying to the Local Government Commission of North Carolina to approve, advertise and sell the bonds and the action of the Local Government Commission of the North Carolina in asking for sealed bids for the bonds by printing and distributing circulars and publishing a notice relating to the sale of the bonds are hereby approved, ratified and confirmed. Section 10. If the bonds are awarded to a purchaser other than the FmHA, the bonds will be delivered in such author- ized denominations and registered in such names as the purchaser may request no later than five days prior to the date of their delivery. If the purchaser fails to submit such information by the required time, then a single bond will be issued for each maturity date registered in the name of the purchaser or the senior manager of the bidding group constituting the purchaser. Section 11. If the bonds are awarded to a purchaser other than the FmHA_ ttharc chm, , certificate bearing the facsimile signature of the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the Issuer, said certificate to be in substantially the following form: I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the legal opinion on the bonds therein described which was manually signed by Brown & Wood, New York, N.Y. , and was dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for said bonds. Facsimile si nature Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina Section 12 . This resolution shall take effect upon its passage. Thereupon Commissioner Ha l k i of i s moved the passage of the foregoing resolution entitled: "RESOLUTION PRO- VIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $200, 000 SANITARY SEWER BONDS", and Commissioner Carey seconded the motion and the resolution was passed by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Marshall , Carey, Halkiotis, Hartwell and Willhoit Noes : None * * * * * * I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of the Board of Commissioners for said County at regular meeting held on February 1, 1988 as relates in any way to the issuance of bonds of said County, and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. 22 of the minutes of said Board, beginning at page and ending at page I HEREBY CERTIFY that a schedule of reau1 a,- 318 . 12 , as of a date not less than seven days before said meeting. WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this _ 1st _ day of February •1988 . • Ale/ , 404111!' // Cl-r to the .ard of Commi -loners 1 CERTIFICATE AS TO ARBITRAGE We, Shirley Marshall and Kenneth T. Chavious, the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina (the "County") and the Interim Finance Director for the County, being duly charged with others with responsibility for issuing the $200, 000 Sanitary Sewer Bond of the County, dated March of_,the 1988 years and maturing in,annual installments on June 1, in each 1990 to 2027 inclusive (the "bond") , to be delivered this day, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, pursuant to sections 1.103-13 , 1.103-14 and 1. 103-15 of the Treasury Regulations and under Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") , as follows: 1. All of the proceeds to be derived from the sale of the bond, excluding accrued interest, will be applied to the payment at their maturity of $200,000 Sanitary Sewer Bond Anticipation Notes of the County, dated December 16, 1987 and maturing March 16, 1988 (the "maturing notes") , which maturing notes were exchanged, par for par, for $200, 000 Sanitary Sewer Bond Anticipation Notes of the County, dated June 29, 1987 and maturing December 16, 1987 (the "initial notes") , which initial notes were issued for the purposes of paying (a) a portion of the cost of constructing a portion of a sanitary sewer system for the County, including the construction of sewage collector, interceptor and force mains and lines, sewage pumping facilities and appurtenant facilities, the construction of a sewage main to transport sewage to the sanitary sewer system of the Town of Hillsborough for treatment and the acquisition of any necessary land, rights of way and equipment therefor (the "Project") and (1- certain legal, accounting and financing expenses incurred in k . connection with the issuance of the initial notes (the "Issuance Expenses") . 2 . The estimated total cost of the Project and the Issu- ance Expenses will be at least $1, 589, 045. Said total cost has been financed by the County from the proceeds derived from the sale of the initial notes, the maturing notes, investment earnings thereon and certain other moneys of the County. 3 . The County does not expect to sell or otherwise dispose of any property comprising a part of the Project prior to June 1, 2027 , the maturity date of the final installment of principal of the bond, except such minor parts or portions thereof as may be disposed of due to normal wear, obsolescence or depreciation in the ordinary course of business. 4 . Work on the Project began after July 20, 1987 and the County has entered into binding contracts or commitments obligating the expenditure of not less than $100,000 toward the cost of the Project. Work on the Project will proceed with due diligence to the completion thereof presently expected on or about March 31, 1988. 5. On the basis of the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date hereof, which is the date on which the bond is to be delivered (the "date of issue") , we reasonably expect the following in respect of the proceeds of the bond, the proceeds of the initial notes, the maturing notes, investment earnings thereon and said other moneys of the County: (a) The proceeds of the bond in the amount of $200,000 (representing the face amount of the bond) will be applied to the payment of the maturing notes on March 16, 1988. ,L. -. 11 ...p 4-1,e nrnr!P_eds of the initial notes and • • ings thereon, have been expended to pay Project costs and Issuance Expenses. (c) The proceeds of the bond, the proceeds of the initial notes and the maturing notes, the investment earnings thereon and said other moneys of the County do not exceed the total of the amount necessary for the purposes described above. (d) Any accrued interest received upon the delivery of the bond will be credited to the General Fund of the County (the "General Fund") . 6. Moneys in the General Fund will be used to pay the general expenses of the County. There are no funds or accounts established by the County, which are reasonably expected to be used directly or indirectly to pay interest on the maturing notes or debt service on the bond or which are pledged as security for the maturing notes or the bond and for which there is a reason- able assurance that amounts therein will be available to pay interest on the maturing notes or debt service on the bond if the County encounters financial difficulties. 8. The following represents the reasonable expectations of the County with respect to the investment of the proceeds of the bond and certain other money related to the Project: (a) $200, 000 representing the amount of the proceeds of the bond, will be invested at an unrestricted yield until expended on March 16, 1988. Investment earnings on bond proceeds will be invested at an unrestricted yield for a period not to exceed one year from the date of receipt. (b) Amounts described in subparagraph (a) , ii1-h investment earnings thereon, not invested 1 l - shall be invested at a yield not in excess of the yield on the bond or invested in tax-exempt obligations or United States Treasury-State and Local Government Series, Demand Deposit Securities. 9 . No portion of the proceeds of the bond and any amounts received from the investment of such proceeds will be used in the place of funds that are (a) now available or that will become p act or the available to the County to pay the costs of the Proj ance Expenses and (b) will be used directly or indirectly to Issu field on acquire obligations producing a yield in excess of the y the bond. 10. For purposes of this certificate, "yield" means that yield which when used in computing the present worth, based on annual computations of interest, of all payments of principal and interest to be paid on an obligation produces an amount equal to the purchase price of the obligation. The yield on obligations acquired with amounts described in paragraph 8 above and the yield on the bond shall be calculated by the use of the same frequency interval of compounding interest. For purposes of calculating the yield on the bond, the purchase price of the bond is the initial offering price of the bond to the public (excluding bond houses, brokers and other intermediaries) at which a substantial amount of the bond are sold to the public plus any accrued interest. Any investments acquired with amounts that may not be invested at an unrestricted yield pursuant to paragraph 8 above shall be purchased at prevailing market prices and shall be limited to securities for which there is an estab- lished market, tax-exempt obligations under Section 103 (a) of the Code or United States Treasury Securities-State and Local Govern- 11. The resolution providing for the issuance of the bond passed on February 1, 1988 , by the Board of Commissioners for the County, represents that (i) the County is a governmental unit with general taxing powers, (ii) the bond is not a private activity bond (as defined in the Code) , (iii) 95 percent or more of the net proceeds of the bond are to be used for local govern- mental activities of the County, (iv) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private-activity bonds) issued by the County (and all subordinate entities thereof) during calendar year 1988 is reasonably expected not to exceed $5, 000, 000 and (v) to the best of the County's knowledge, there are no subordinate entities of the County. 12. There is no other governmental obligation of the County that (i) has been or will be issued at substantially the same time as the bond, (ii) has been or will be sold pursuant to a common plan of financing together with the bond and (iii) will be paid out of substantially the same source of funds (or will have substantially the same claim to be paid out of substantially the same source of funds) as the bond. 13 . To the best of our knowledge, information and belief, the above expectations are reasonable. 14. The County has not been notified of any listing or pro- posed listing of it by the Internal Revenue Service as an issuer whose nonarbitrage certificates may not be relied upon. WITNESS our hands as of the day of March 1988. / -/ g/t/teAfte____ - Chairman r _ - Interim Finance Director • 4. 'e Fo' ^ 8038-G Information Return for Tax-Exempt (December 1986) Governmental Bond Issues GME No 1545 0720 Department of the Treasury •Under Section 149(e) E.F..es :2-31-83 Internal Revenue Service (Use Form 8038-GC if issue price is under S100,000.) GMReporting Authority ORANGE Check box if Amended Return • 1 1 issuer's name COUNTY OF ORANt;E 2 Issue's empic,er,dentif catior number 3 Number and street 4 Report number 106 E . Margaret Lane G198 8- 1 -..- s cltyor town.sta i� mde orough, North Carolina 27278 6>iarc i` , 1988 Type of Issue(check box(es)that applies) 7 Check box if bonds are tax or other revenue-anticipation bonds► ❑ Issue Price 8 Check box if bonds are in the form of a lease or installment sale• ❑ 9 ❑ Education �'=' 10 ❑ Health and hospital - 11 ❑ Transportation 12 0 Public safety 13 ❑ Environment(including sewage bonds) • • 14 ❑ Housing 15 ❑ Utilities . . . . . . . . . . _____j6�L_L_.Q.th ucLonsll -_ ---� . -- - - .- ------ ----- .- _ .---- - - - —__ ---_--.. ,„..,....,...„,„ F,; ?-(i .,,..zu.::,:v,404-204 1, ,,,,,,:... MID Description of Bonds (a) (b) (c) • Stated redemption Weighted (r) Net interest Maturity date Interest rate Issue price price at maturity overate maturity Yield cost 17 Final maturity % 7 0 0 0 6, 000 % "''' -'`, 6 1 2 0 2 7 3 f5 %iii//%//"..'�/,i"L'., ,. ,f; s- .;-Ri::� z-A 18 Entire issue . . ,, ,,Ilf%M/'`' -','.y�'4'':-j; % / 200, 000 200, 000 EZMO years • Uses of Original Proceeds of Issue(including underwriters'discount) 19 Proceeds used for accrued interest 19 20 Proceeds used for bond issuance costs(including underwriters'discount) 20 21 Proceeds used for credit enhancement 21 —0— 22 Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund 22 —0- 23 Proceeds used to refund prior issues 23 �• $7 0 0 . 0 0 0 24 Nonrefunding proceeds of the issue(subtract lines 20.21,22,and 23 from line 18,column(c)) . . . 24 I —0- =♦ Description of Refunded Bonds(complete this part only for refunding bonds) 25 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded • 97 years 26 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called , March Jb, 19 id 5 27 Enter the date(s)the refunded bonds were issued • Dec em e u . -- Miscellaneous 28 Enter the amount(d any)of the state volume cap allocated to this issue ■ —0— 29 Arbitrage rebate: a- Check box if the small governmental unit exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement applies b Check box if the 6-month temporary investment exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement is expected to apply ❑ c Check box if you expect to earn and rebate arbitrage profits to the U.S. ❑ 30 Enter the amount of the bonds designated by the issuer under section 265(bx3XBxii) $200, 000 31 Pooled financings: a Check box if any of the proceeds of this issue are to be used to make loans to other governmental units ■ ❑ and - enter the amount ■ b Check box if this issue is a loan made from the proceeds of another tax-exeippt issue • ❑ and enter the name of the issuer • and the date of the issue • Under penalties of perjury.I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements.and to the best of my knowledge and belief. Please trey are true.correct.and complete. Sign .�L ���_ Finance Director Here 'Signature of officer . Date 'Title - For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice,see page 1 of the Instructions. Form 8038-G (12-e5) • Otis wwr.mp.t.Primal"Oflawr 1ea7tata4srNes • Fo,,r 8Q38-G Information Return for Tax-Exempt (December 1986) Governmental Bond Issues OMB No 1545 0720 Department of the Treasury to Under Section 149(e) E.o.res :2-31-89 Internal Revenue Service (Use Form 8038-GC if issue price is under$100.000.) on Reporting Authority Check box if Amended Return • 1 Issuer's name COUNTY OF ORANGE 2 Issuer s employer.oent.hcat,on r•.umper 3 Number and street 4 Report number 106 E. Margaret Lane G1 9 8 8 - 1 5 Crtyw town.state,11 PsC roLlgh, North Carolina 27278 6t arcr lie , 1988 reM Type of Issue(check box(es)that applies) 7 Check box if bonds are tax or other revenue-anticipation bonds,. ❑ I Issue Price 8 Check box if bonds are in the form of a lease or installment sale O. ❑ 9 ❑ Education 1 10 ❑ Health and hospital - 11 ❑ Transportation 12 ❑ Public safety _ 13 ❑ Environment(including sewage bonds) • so r I ii 14 ❑ Housing 15 ❑ Utilities - - -- ...- _ . _ .- _-_-• ---- •. _.----- . -- - i-- --�_- 1sLLLQther Desscitlew(see rnstructicda5.)l.- -- r,fig,;(1..,0:10,4011, A.,:;,,,i4,.../.„,,, ,,;,1„:„9„,w, 0)::::./..",........:,„7,. ..,,,,,::,,,,, Part III Description of Bonds (a) (b) (c) Stated redemption Weighted (f) Net m crest Maturity date Interest rate Issue once price at maturity avers a matuntr Yield cost 17 Final maturity 6/1/2027 3750,6 6, 000 6, 000 rif%%1 i�%%hi/%%% !%„%;r'!ii: ;;r ',I-. -;"`- 18 Entire issue . /�//.%F'%-'!"'!/%' /� 200, 0 0 0 200, 0 0 0 years OMUses of Original Proceeds of Issue(including underwriters'discount) 19 Proceeds used for accrued interest 19 -0 20 Proceeds used for bond issuance costs(including underwriters'discount) 20 ~0- 21 Proceeds used for credit enhancement 21 -0~ 22 Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund '22 -0- 23 Proceeds used to refund prior issues 23 S 0 0 . 0 0 0 24 Nonrefunding proceeds of the issue(subtract lines 20.21.22.and 23 from line 18,column(c)) . . • 24 _0 Part V Description of Refunded Bonds(complete this part only for refunding bonds) 25 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded ■ - 0 9 2 years 26 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called • March 16, 1985 27 Enter the date(s)the refunded bonds were issued • Dec erloer 16, 191 . Part VI Miscellaneous 28 Enter the amount(if any)of the state volume cap allocated to this issue • F 0- 29 Arbitrage rebate: a Check box if the small governmental unit exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement applies b Check box if the 6-month temporary investment exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement is expected to apply ❑ • . c Check box if you expect to earn and rebate arbitrage profits to the U.S. ❑ • 30 Enter the amount of the bonds designated by the issuer under section 265(bX3X8Xii) ii. $200, 000 31 Pooled financings: a Check box if any of the proceeds of this issue are to be used to make loans to other governmental units • ❑ and - enter the amount • b Check box if this issue is a loan made from the proceeds of another tax-exerppt issue • ❑ and enter the name of the issuer • and the date of the issue • Under penalties of perjury.I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements.and to the best of my knowledge and belief. Please they are true.correct,and complete. Sign e- 7 _ Finance Director Here ,Signature of officer Date 'Title For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice,see page 1 of the Instructions. Form 8038-G (12 786) - Au,ea....r.wt alemn onnar.sass—tat4t7„aMaa Form 8038-G Information Return folrkTaz-Exempt (December 1986) Governmental Bond Issues okee No 1545 C720 Department of the Treasury I►Under Section 149(e) E•cres ;2-3:-83 Internal Revenue Service (Use Form 8038-GC if issue price is under$100.000.) Part I Reporting Authority Check box tf Amended Return ■ 1 issuer's name COUNTY OF ORANGE 2 Issuers employe Cent f,canon r.amoer 3 Number and street 4 Report number 106 E. Margaret Lane 61988- 1 S Cayortown.stat111S1JOrough, North Carolina 27278 6itarche , 1988 om Type of Issue(check box(es)that applies) 7 Check box if bonds are tax or other revenue anticipation bonds• ❑ 1 Issue Price 8 Check box if bonds are in the form of a lease or installment sale• Q 9 ❑ Education �� 10 ❑ Health and hospital - 11 ❑ Transportation 12 ❑ Public safety • 13 Environment(including sewage nds) I s t i t 14 ❑ Housing 15 ❑ Utilities it: f__ —.__ _ l6 Dc u f _ L rd Description of Bonds(a) (b) (o) Stated redemption We ghted (t) Net merest turity date Interest Issue price pace at maturity averaee maturity yield cost 17 Finalmeturity 6/1/2027 .3 • ••/I//'%i�i�i� y :•• %, ; 75gy 6, OOD 6, 000 ��/�i �%�, li�i�i�,;„?iii;%'!,%';�a,:;i� ;:%;:: %G. 18 Entire issue . %//%� • ' ' :I": 020s f Issue(including underwriters'discount) 19 .Proceeds used for accrued interest 19 _`t 20 Proceeds used for bond issuance costs(including underwriters'discount) 20 -0- 21 Proceeds used for credit enhancement 21 -D 22 Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund 22 23 Proceeds used to refund prior issues Z3 S 7 0 0, 0 0 0 24 Nonrefunding proceeds of the issue(subtract lines 20.21.22,and 23 from line 18.column(c)) . . 24 =ably rzra required of Refunded Bonds(complete this part only for refunding bonds) 25 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded -- -1 Q 2 years 26 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called March 6, 19 f3 27 Enter the date(s)the refunded bonds were issued • • DeCenu er 16, 191 1Th!A Miscellaneous 28 Enter the amount(if any)of the state volume cap allocated to this issue ► -0 • • 29 Arbitrage rebate: • • a Check box if the small governmental unit exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement applies Iri b Check box if the 6-month temporary investment exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement is expected to apply ❑ c Check box if you expect to earn and rebate arbitrage profits to the U.S. ❑ 30 Enter the amount of the bonds designated by the issuer under section 265(bx3XBxii) ob. $200, 000 31 Pooled financings: a Check box if any of the proceeds of this issue are to be used to make loans to other governmental units ► ❑ and enter the amount • b Check box if this issue is a loan made from the proceeds of another tax-exerftpt issue ► ❑ and enter the name of the issuer ■ and the date of the issue li- Please Under penalties of perjury.I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements.and to the best of my knowledge and belief, P tease they are true.correct,and complete. Sign k .:-.,• : ---7�-r�_ Finance Director Here r Signature of officer Date 'Title . For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice,see page 1 of the Instructions. - Form 8038•G (12-86) Cu.&ta•wrwrsoxe•trrumea Wilma 1fet-1014647/aeeea - For,,, 8038-G Information Return for Tax-Exempt (December 1986) Governmental Bond Issues We No 1545 0720 Department of the Treasury •Under Section 149(e) E•p•rrs :2-31-83 Internal Revenue Service (Use Form 8038-GC if issue price is under 5100.000.) IZZI Reporting Authority Check box if Amended Return ■ 1 1 Issuer's name COUNTY OF ORANGE • 2 Issuersrnpore•..aentit.cator number 3 Number and street 1 Report rry,mper 106 E. Margaret Lane 0198 8- 1 v s cicygrtown.sta Mr sgprough, North Carolina 27278 6t ac` i` , 1988 raa Type of Issue(check bax(es)that applies) 7 Check box if bonds are tax or other revenue'anticipation bonds a 0 I Issue Price 8 Check box if bonds are in the form of a lease or installment sale• ❑ 9 ❑ Education ---v 10 ❑ Health and hospital - 11 ❑ Transportation 12 ❑ Public safety _ 13 ❑ Environment(including sewage bonds) ' • r s e e - 14 ❑ Housing 15 ❑ Utilities . . . • ' • .._.. .... -- • - ' • - -•— - ._. .__. .. _ ..--- . .. _ F__ - 16_LLather.Describe isee inSiructlt ) _ 790,,,,,,,,,AW,04;7 4 IZMO Description of Bonds (') (b) (c) Stated redemption Weighted (t) Net interest Maturity date interest rate Issue once price at maturity average matuntr Yield cos' 17 Final maturity 6/1/2027 . 375% 6, 000 6, 000 �� • %''' "''A/4)s,"`",;°r;; ' 18 Entire issue . J1,,:it,. ;c?, /.4..;�i;/;471/ 200, 000 200, 000 years Uses of Original Proceeds of Issue(including underwriters'discount) 19 Proceeds used for accrued interest 19 —U- 20 Proceeds used for bond issuance costs(including underwriters'discount) 20 —0 • 21 Proceeds used for credit enhancement ' • 21 —0- 22 Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund 22 1 —0 23 Proceeds used to refund prior issues 23 1- S 2J)0 . 0 0 0 . 24 Nonrefunding proceeds of the issue(subtract lines 20.21.22,and 23 from line 18,column(c)) . . . _ 24 _ _0_ PartV • Description of Refunded Bonds(complete this part only for refunding bonds) 25 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded _0 0 7 years 26 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called a March 16, 19 S 3 27 Enter the date(s)the refunded bonds were issued ■ Decenber 16, 15E Miscellaneous 28 Enter the amount(if any)of the state volume cap allocated to this issue ■ • —0— 29 Arbitrage rebate: a Check box if the small governmental unit exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement applies " . b Check box if the 6-month temporary investment exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement is expected to apply ❑ - c Check box if you expect to earn and rebate arbitrage profits to the U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . _ ❑ 30 Enter the amount of the bonds designated by the issuer under section 265(bX3XBXii) ■ $200, 000 31 Pooled financings: - a Check box if any of the proceeds of this issue are to be used to make loans to other governmental units • ❑ and - enter the amount ■ b Check box if this issue is a loan made from the proceeds of another tax-exeippt issue P. ❑ and enter the name of the issuer • and the date of the issue • Under penalties of perjury.I peelers that I nave examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements.and to the best at my knowledge and belief. Please they are true,correct,and compete Sign Hero Finance Director 5ighatureCI OffiCer Date Title For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice,see page 1 of the Instructions. Form 8038-G (12-86) - *u.s.o..+rament.Pron na oft Ills—isuranstrass - . 1 t SIGNATURE CERTIFICATE We, the undersigned, being officers of the County of Orange, North Carolina, as indicated by the official titles opposite our respective signatures, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that we did on the day of March, 1988 , officially sign a $200, 000 Sanitary Bond, No. R-1, being a single registered bond of the County of Orange, North Carolina, dated March , 1988 , registered as to both principal and interename United maturing inannualStates America, Farmers Home Administration, on the 1st day of June in the years and in the amounts as follows: Year of Principal Year of Principal Maturity Amount Matures Amount $ 5, 500 1990 $ 2 , 000 2009 6, 000 1991 2 , 000 2010 2011 6, 000 1992 2 , 000 6 , 500 6 ,5 1993 2 , 000 2012 00 1994 2 , 000 2013 7 ,000 1995 2 , 000 2014 1996 2 , 500 2015 8,000 1997 2 , 500 2016 8 ,000 1998 3 , 000 2017 8, 000 1999 3 , 000 2018 2000 3 , 000 2019 8, 000 2001 3 ,500 2020 . 8 , 000 2002 3 , 500 2021 2003 4 , 000 2022 8 , 000 2023 8, 000 2004 4 , 000 8, 000 2005 4 , 000 2024 8, 000 2006 4 ,500 - 2025 5, 000 2026 8,000 2007 2 2008 5, 000 2027 6,000 and bearing interest (payable June 1, 1988 and thereafter on June 1 in each year) on the unpaid portion of such principal sum at the rate of 6.375% per annum, said bond being exchangeable for fully registered bonds in the denomination of $500 each or any multiple thereof. The corporate seal of said County is impressed on said bond. WITNESS our hands this day of March 1988. SIGNATURE OFFICIAL TITLE EXPIRATION OF TERM /./` 1/ t' Ch airman of the Board of Commissioners December 1990 die / ••- Clerk to the Board of Commissioners At pleasure of Board NO-LITIGATION CERTIFICATE We, the undersigned, being officers of the County of Orange, North Carolina, as indicated by the official titles opposite our respective signatures, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that no litigation of any kind is now pending (either in state or federal courts) or, to our knowledge, threatened to restrain or enjoin the issuance or deli- very of a $200, 000 Sanitary Sewer Bond, No. R-1, being a single registered bond of the County of Orange, North Carolina, dated March , 1988 , registered as to both principal and interest in the name of the United States of America, Farmers Home Administra- tion, maturing annually, June 1, 1990 to 2027 , inclusive, or the levy or collection of taxes to pay the principal of or the interest on said bond, or in any manner questioning the proceed- ings or authority under which said bond is issued, or affecting the validity of said bond; that neither the corporate existence or boundaries of said County nor the title to the office of any officer whose signature appears on said bond is being contested; and that no authority or proceedings for the issuance of said bond or for' the security thereof have been repealed, revoked or rescinded. WITNESS our hands as of the day of March 1988. SIGNATURE OFFICIAL TITLE EXPIRATION OF TERM AlUdocel- Chairman of the Board of Commissioners December 1990 4441'_2! AeFeAlr !/ Clerk to the Board of Commissioners At pleasure of Board County Attorney At pleasure of Board • OFFICERS AND SEAL CERTIFICATE I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY: 1. The following is a correct list of the names of certain officers of said County who have held office from a date or dates prior to February 1, 1988 and of the dates of expiration of their respective terms of office: OFFICE OFFICER EXPIRATION OF ER TM Chairman Shirley E. Marshall December 1990 Vice-Chairman and December 1988 Commissioner Moses Cary, Jr. Commissioner Stephen Halkiotis December 1990 Commissioner John Hartwell December 1990 Commissioner Donald L. Willhait December 1988 At pleasure of Board Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Beverly A. Blythe of Commissioners Interim Indefinite Finance Director Kenneth T. Chavious John M. Link, Jr. At pleasure of Board County Manager of Commissioners Geoffrey E. Gledhill At pleasure of Board County Attorney of Commissioners 2. The corporate seal of said County, being the only seal used by said County in the execution of bonds, notes and contracts, is the seal an impression of which is affixed opposite my signature upon this certificate. WITNESS my hand and said corporate seal, as of the day of March 1988. /4/ 441-- Clerk to the,/:oa d of Co issioners SCHEDULE "A" Principal installments on which payments have been made prior to maturity Principal Due Principal Date nmuun►miiimPayment Balance Date Paid Name of Paying Agent mom Authorized Official and -Title MM. MEM AGREEMENT FOR PROVIDING LIMITED TECHNICAL SERVICES AND ASSISTANCE TO ORANGE COUNTY THE COUNTY'S WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY WASTEWATER SX THE MAINTENANCE SYSTEM NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into and executed dinn duplicate Water between originals, this the _lstday of February 1988, by and Sewer Authority, a public body politic and corporate, organized and existing under the provisions of Chapter 162A of the North Carolina General Statutes, with its principal office in Carrboro, North Carolina, hereinafter referred to as "AUTHORITY," and Orange County, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY." WITHESSETH: WHEREAS, the AUTHORITY provides wastewater collection, pumping, treatment and disposal services for the Chapel Hill - Carrboro community and surrounding area; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has awarded contracts for the construction of, and will be the owner of, wastewater collection and pumping facilities serving the Efland/Cheeks area of Orange County; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and AUTHORITY are authorized under North Carolina General Statutes to enter into agreements for the provision of water and wastewater facilities and services; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has requested the AUTHORITY to provide technical services and assistance relative to preventive and corrective maintenance of the Efland/Cheeks wastewater system; and WHEREAS, the AUTHORITY is willing to provide this requested service to the COUNTY under the terms set out herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the governing bodies of the parties hereto have determined that the public health and welfare will be served and benefited by their cooperation, mutual undertakings and agreement as hereinafter set out; and, in consideration of the benefits, assistance and mutual obligations to be received and performed by the parties hereunder, the COUNTY and AUTHORITY, for themselves, their successors and assigns, do mutually agree as follows: 1. AUTHORITY shall provide, at the request of COUNTY, technical services and assistance as regards maintenance of the Efland/Cheeks wastewater system facilities and pump station, in accordance with Schedule A attached hereto. This agreement does not provide for routine corrective and preventitive maintenance of the wastewater system, facilities, lift stations, or individual pumps, except as set out under Schedule A, Item A. 2. This Agreement shall be effective as of the date first above written and shall continue in full force and effect, unless terminated as herein provided, until June 30, 1988; provided, however, that this Agreement may be extended on a month-to-month basis thereafter upon approval by the AUTHORITY'S Executive Director and the COUNTY'S Manager. -1- 3. Either party may terminate this Agreement by mailing written notice thereof by registered mail, return receipt requested, to the other thirty (30) days prior to the date of termination. The COUNTY agrees to pay for any service rendered by the AUTHORITY prior to any such termination. 4. The charge for services which the AUTHORITY provides to the COUNTY under this Agreement shall be the AUTHORITY's actual direct and indirect costs of providing such service including, but not limited to, personnel expenses and operation, maintenance, and amortization costs of the vehicles and equipment used in providing the requested services. This cost will be as determined by the AUTHORITY and will be at the rates generally described in Schedule A attached hereto, if the service is performed on or before June 30, 1988. Charges for service after that date will be determined by the AUTHORITY with consideration for actual direct and indirect costs which are experienced at the time the service is rendered. Additional expenses, including but not limited to materials and supplies, which are required in the performance of this service shall be paid by the COUNTY. 5. The AUTHORITY shall render a bill by monthly invoice to the COUNTY as service is provided. The COUNTY shall make payment to the AUTHORITY within 20 days after the invoice is rendered. 6. The parties to this Agreement shall not be responsible or liable in any way for acts of God or any other acts or omissions beyond the control of the parties which may cause the interruption or discontinuance of the delivery of the AUTHORITY'S services to or for the COUNTY. The AUTHORITY shall not be responsible in any way for damages caused by the failure of the County's wastewater collection and pumping facilities or by interruption of services to any customer served by said facilities and COUNTY shall, by liability insurance or otherwise, insure the AUTHORITY and idemnify it from any claim, loss, damage, or expense including reasonable attorney's fees, arising out of the AUTHORITY'S provision of services hereunder, or out of the condition, maintenance, and operation of any COUNTY owned pumps or other facilities provided by the COUNTY in the provision of utility services hereby affected. 7. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties relating to the provision of services to and for the COUNTY by the AUTHORITY. 8. Any litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be determined in Orange County District or Superior Court. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the undersigned Chairman of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, North Carolina, and the Executive Director of Orange Water and Sewer Authority, each having been duly authorized by Resolution of the respective governing boards to execute this Agreement, have duly executed this Agreement for and on behalf of the COUNTY and the AUTHORITY to evidence the undertakings entered into as hereinabove shown in particular. The respective official seals of the COUNTY and the AUTHORITY have been affixed hereto by authority of the respective governing bodies, all as of the day and year first above written. -2- ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY Executive Director ATTEST: ` r ' Secretary-Treasurer - ORANGE COUNTY Ae g Chairm.. Orange County Board of Commissioners ATTEST: "i‘-/ 4010770' This instrument has been preaudited in the manner required by the Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act. 0714/ 7‘oftle. 7. Date Finance Officer Orange County 2- 24- 98 Date inane O icer Orange Water and Sewer Authority This document is hereby approved as to form and legality. - 2 - $19 .►, / ►- Date Co i s= to the A7 orit -3- lir SCHEDULE A ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY PROPOSED LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES APPLICABLE TO THE PROVISION OF MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR EFtAN D/CHEEKS SEWER SYSTEM (February 12, 1988) The labor, equipment, and overhead rates quoted below are those in effect as of January 1, 1988. The rates billed to Orange County are subject to revision to reflect the rates in effect at the time services are provided. Actual charges due shall be based on the wage rates and rental charges applicable to the personnel and equipment used by OWASA. A. Operation and Maintenance of McGowen Creek Pump Station: Labor (1 employee, 3 hours, @$10.25/hour) Equipment (3 hours @ $4/hour) $ 30.75 Materials and supplies 12.00 Total Direct Costs 3.00 Indirect Costs (1.29 x Labor costs) 45 75 39.70 TOTAL COST PER VISIT: 85.45 * * NOTE: It is recommended that this service be provided at a frequency of at least 3 visits per week. OWASA inspects its pumping stations on a daily basis. B. Corrective Maintenance Services at McGowen Creek Pum• Station: La••r (2 employees, 4 hours each, @ 16.70 crew hour) 66.80 Equipment (4 hours @ $4/hour) Materials and Supplies *** 16.00 As Required *** Total Direct Costs Indirect Costs (1.29 x Labor costs) 86.20 86.20 TOTAL COST: 169.00 * NOTE: This service will be on an "as-needed" basis. Additional costs will result if more than 4 hours are required to correct the problem which caused the alarm condition or if this work would be done at the overtime rate for labor, which is 1.5 times the normal labor rate. Note that materials and supplies costs are not included. -1A- Schedule A February 12, 1988 Page Two C. Provision of Tanker For Te rar Pump and Haul of Wastewater: Labor (2 employees, @ 17.50/crew-hour) $ 17.50/hour Equipment 28.00/hour Over-the-road tractor/tanker ($21/hour) Portable Pump ($3/hour) Pick-up service truck ($4/hour) Total Direct Costs 45.50/hour Indirect Costs (1.29 x Labor costs) 22.60/hour TOTAL COST: 60.10/hour * * NOTE: This service will be on an "as-needed" basis. The hourly charge would begin at the time OWASA personnel and equipment depart from OWASA to the Efland pumping station and continue until the return to OWASA headquarters. The overtime multiplier for labor is 1.5. D. Corrective Maintenance to Remove Blocka.es In Gravit Sewer: La..r 2 emp oyees, 16.70/crew hour) 16.70/hour Equipment 29.00/hour Pick-up service truck ($4/hour) Vector- High Pressure Sewer Hodder ($25/hour) Total Direct Costs 45.70/hour Indirect Costs (1.29 x Labor costs) - 21.55/hour TOTAL COSTT $ 67.25/hour * * NOTE: This service will be provided on an "as-needed" basis. The hourly charge will begin at the time OWASA personnel and equipment depart from OWASA to the Efland sewer problem and continue until the return to OWASA headquarters. The overtime multiplier for labor is 1.5. E. General Maintenance Services supplemental to those listed above shall be billed at the applicable hourly rate for personnel, vehicles, and equipment. An indirect cost multiplier of 1.29 will be applied to all labor. Materials will be billed at inventory cost plus 10%. -2A- Orange Water and Sewer Authority 400 Jones Ferry Road I OWASA P.O. Box 366 Carrboro, NC 27510 (919) 968-4421 March 10, 1988 Ms. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Blythe: Enclosed are the two copies of the Efland/Cheeks Wastewater System Agreement signed and sealed by Orange Water and Sewer Authority. Please have the Orange County seal affixed to the agreements and return one original to my attention. Thank you. Very,,truly yours,_ Everett Billingsley Executive Director daw Encs. An Equal Opportunity Employer ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 Erie MARGARET LANE HILLSBOROUGH, N. C. 27278 MOSES GREY.JR. STEPHEN H.HALKIOTIS March 21 , 1988 JOHN HARTWELL SHIRLEY E.MARSHALL DON WILLHOIT Everett Billingsley, Executive Director Orange Water and Sewer Authority 400 Jones Ferry Road P.D. Box 366 Carrboro, NC 27510 Dear Mr. Billingsley: I have enclosed for your files a copy of the Efland/Cheeks Wastewater System Agreement with all the required signatures. If I can provide you with any additional information, please let me know. Thank ... you -:_ __ =- :: .. ........ Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk _m. Board -..�-. ,_..-. . _...__ ... ..,- o Commissioners /bab File Enclosure AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange County in the following respects: ARTICLE II (3) is amended to read as follows: TABLE I: Sound Levels dB(a) by Receiving Land 60 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday 8 am-11 pm Sunday-Thursday 11 pm-8 am Friday & Saturday 8 am-12 midnight Friday & Saturday 12 midnight-8 am ARTICLE II (2) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE II(4) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE V is deleted in its entirety, including all amendments. The Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. Amendment dated February 1, 1988. A RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE 1 CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY Pursuant to the authority provided in N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 153A-121, 153A-123 and 153A-133, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby resolves and ordains as follows: Article I: Definitions In addition to the common meaning of words, the following definitions shall be used in interpreting this ordinance. (1) "A" weighting scale: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured with a sound level meter using the "A" weighted network. The standard unit notation is dB(A) . (2) dB(A) : Sound level in decibels determined by the "A" weighting scale of a standard sound level meter having characteristics defined by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Publication ANSI, S14-1971. (3) Decibel: A unit of measure on a logarithmic scale, of the ratio of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to a standard reference pressure, which for purposes of this ordinance shall be 20 microewtons/meter2 . (4) Impact Noise: Sound that occurs intermittently rather than continuously. (5) Sound Amplifying Equipment: Any device for the amplification of the human voice, music or any other sound, including juke boxes, stereos and radios. (6) Sound Level: In decibels, a weighted sound pressure level determined by the use of a sound level meter whose characteristics and frequency weightings are specified in the ANSI Standards. (7) Sound Level Meter: Any instrument certified to meet or exceed ANSI standards which includes an omni-directional microphone, an amplifier, an output meter and frequency weighting network(s) for the measurement of sound level. (8) Sound Pressure Level: In decibels 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to the standard reference pressure. The standard reference pressure is 20 microewtons/meter2. Article II: Maximum Permissible Standards by Receiving Land 2 (1) The use of sound amplifying equipment is limited to the conditions specified in this article. (2) A live musical group or individual using sound amplifying equipment may operate out of doors only if the property owner, tenant in possession or in the case of a business the business manager or an authorized agent of that business manager has been granted a permit. This permit may be secured after it is signed by an authorized agent of the musical group and by a representative of the individual organization or group retaining the services of the musical group and on whose premises the amplifying equipment is to be used. (3) No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds the limits set forth in Table I below when measured as specified in Article III. Table I: Sound levels (dB(A) ) by Receiving Land 8 A.M. - 11:00 P.M. 11 P.M. - 8 A.M. 60 50 (4) Sound levels in excess of those listed in Table I above will be permitted as follows: Without a With a Permit Permit Thursday Evening 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (5: 00 p.m. - 11: 00 p.m. Thursday) Friday Evening 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (5: 00 p.m. - 1: 00 a.m. Saturday) Saturday 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (10:00 a.m. - 1: 00 a.m. Sunday) Article III: Sound Measurement Standards Standards, instrumentation, and measurement procedures to be used in the measurement of sound as provided for in this ordinance are as follows: (1) Sound level measurement shall be made with a sound level meter using the "A" weighting scale set on "slow response. " (2) Sound level meters shall be of at least Type Three meeting American National Standards Institute, Incorporated (ANSI) S1.4 - 1971 requirements (or the latest approval version thereof) . The entire sound measurement system shall be serviced and 3 operated as recommended by the manufacturer. Persons using the sound level meters shall be trained in sound level measurement and the operation of sound level meters. (3) Except in the case where noises are emanating from within multi-family structures and the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be taken at the corner of the primary structure of the complainant nearest the noise source but when this location is not practical noise measurements shall be made at the boundary of the public or private right-of-way which adjoins the complainants ' property. (4) In the case of noises emanating from within a multi-family structure and where the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be made in the unit of the complainant at a height of at least four (4) feet above the floor and at a point approximately equidistant from all walls. Article IV: Exceptions The following are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance: (1) Construction operations from 7 A.M. to 9 P.M. on weekdays and 8 A.M. to 9 P.M. of weekends for which building permits have been issued, or construction operations not requiring permits; provided all equipment is operated in accordance with the manufacturers' mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (2) Noises of safety signals, warning devices, emergency pressure relief valves and church bells. (3) Noises resulting from any authorized emergency vehicle when responding to any emergency call or acting in time of emergency. (4) Unamplified noises at street activity (such as fairs or parades) where the participants have a permit for use of the streets. (5) All noises coming from the normal operation of properly equipped aircraft (not including scale model aircraft) . (6) All noises coming from motor vehicles properly equipped with the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (7) Noise from lawful fire works and noise makers on holidays. 4 (8) Lawn mowers and agricultural equipment used between daylight and 9 P.M. when operated with all the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (9) Agricultural equipment operated for farming purposes. Article V: Permit to Exceed Maximum Permissible Standards (1) A person or group of persons intending to operate or cause to be operated a source of sound in excess of sound levels not requiring a permit as specified in Article II, must apply for a permit. (2) Any Person or persons desiring a permit shall apply as provided herein and provide all information required. (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the permit is requested. (b) The Orange County Manager, or his designee, will act upon all requests for a permit to exceed maximum permissible standards. (c) In considering and acting on all requests for permits pursuant to this article, the Manager shall consider, but shall not be limited to, the following in issuing or denying such permit: the timeliness of the application; the nature of the requested activity; previous experience with the applicant; the nature of the event; the time of the event; other activities in the vicinity of the location proposed; the effect of the activity on surrounding areas; previous violations, if any, of the applicant. (d) Upon receipt of a permit to exceed maximum permissible unpermitted sound levels, the applicant will pay to Orange County an administrative fee of $5. 00. (e) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriff's Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued or being capable of assisting the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. 5 Article VI: Burden of Proof Regardins Exceptions In any proceeding based upon this ordinance, if an exception stated in this ordinance would limit obligation, limit liability, or eliminate either an obligation or liability, the person who would benefit from the application of the exception shall have the burden of proving that the exception applies and that the terms of the exception have been met. Article VII: Violations and Penalties (1) Violations The Orange County Sheriff shall be responsible for determining noise level violations of this ordinance. Upon his determination that the noise levels prescribed herein have been exceeded he shall determine the source of the noise and the person responsible for it and promptly notify the person responsible of the noise limits prescribed herein and the fact that they are being exceeded. He shall also then notify the person responsible to immediately comply with the Sheriff's directive to reduce the noise level to a permissible level after notification shall constitute a violation of this ordinance. Failure on the art of the person responsible to maintain the noise to a permissible level shall include any incident of noise exceeding the levels prescribed herein occurring witin twenty-four hours of notification by the Sheriff that the noise exceeds permissible levels. For purposes of this ordinance "The Orange County Sheriff" shall include the Sheriff and any Deputy Sheriff of Orange County. (2) Civil Penalties (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be subject to a civil penalty of one hundred dollars ($100. 00) . Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. (b) The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall assess civil penalties under this ordinance and shall make written demand for payment upon the person responsible for the violation and shall set forth in detail the violation for which the penalty has been invoked. If payment is not received or equitable settlement reached within sixty (60) days after demand for payment is made, the matter shall be referred to the County Attorney for institution of a civil action in the name of the County in the appropriate 6 division of the General Court of Justice of Orange County for recovery of the penalty. Any sums recovered shall be used to carry out the purposes and requirements of this ordinance. (3) Criminal Penalties Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not to exceed thirty (30) days or by fine not to exceed fifty ($50. 00) dollars. Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. Article VIII: Severability If any provision of this ordinance is adjudged invalid or if the application thereof to any person or in any circumstance is adjudged invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or of any part, subpart, sentence or clause thereof not adjudged invalid. Article XIX: Abrogation This ordinance is not intended to repeal, abrogate or impair any greater restrictions imposed on existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. Wherever the provisions of any other law, ordinance or regulation impose higher standards than are required by the provisions of this ordinance, the provisions of such law, ordinance or regulation shall govern. Article XIII: Effective Date Following the adoption of this ordinance as provided by law, this ordinance shall be effective on August 15, 1983 . A 7 AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange County in the following respects: Article V(2) (a) is amended to read as follows: (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty- eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the permit is requested. This forty-eight hour requirement shall not prohibit the issuance of a permit in situations where the application is received less than forty-eight hours prior to the activity, provided the application is made within enough time of the activity for the County Manager to consider the factors necessary and contained in Section V(2) (c) of this ordinance. Article V(2) (e) is amended to read as follows: (e) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriff's Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant or the applicant's designee as indicated on the permit application available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued and agree to assist the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant or designee of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. This Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange County in the following respects: ARTICLE II (3) is amended to read as follows: TABLE I: Sound Levels dB(a) by Receiving Land 60 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday 8 am-11 pm Sunday-Thursday 11 pm-8 am Friday & Saturday 8 am-12 midnight Friday & Saturday 12 midnight-8 am ARTICL4,. II (2) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE 11 (4) is deleted in its entirety. ARTICLE V is deleted in its entirety, including all amendments. The Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. Amendment dated February 1, 1988. A RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY Pursuant to the authority provided in N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 153A-121, 153A-123 and 153A-133, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby resolves and ordains as follows: Article I: Definitions In addition to the common meaning of words, the following definitions shall be used in interpreting this ordinance. (1) "A" weighting scale: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured with a sound level meter using the "A" weighted network. The standard unit notation is dB(A) . (2) dB(A) : Sound level in decibels determined by the "A" weighting scale of a standard sound level meter having characteristics defined by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Publication ANSI, 514-1971. (3) Decibel: A unit of measure on a logarithmic scale, of the ratio of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to a standard reference pressure, which for purposes of this ordinance shall be 20 microewtons/meter2 . (4) Impact Noise: Sound that occurs intermittently rather than continuously. (5) Sound Amplifying Equipment: Any device for the amplification of the human voice, music or any other sound, including juke boxes, stereos and radios. (6) Sound Level: In decibels, a weighted sound pressure level determined by the use of a sound level meter whose characteristics and frequency weightings are specified in the ANSI Standards. (7) Sound Level Meter: Any instrument certified to meet or exceed ANSI standards which includes an omni-directional microphone, an amplifier, an output meter and frequency weighting network(s) for the measurement of sound level. (8) Sound Pressure Level: In decibels 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the magnitude of a particular sound pressure to the standard reference pressure. The standard reference pressure is 20 microewtons/meter2. Article II: Maximum Permissible Standards by Receiving Land 2 (1) The use of sound amplifying equipment is limited to the conditions specified in this article. Article H (2)(2) deleted (2) A live musical group or individual using sound in its entirety by amplifying equipment may operate out of doors only Board action effective if the property owner, tenant in possession or in 2/1/88 the case of a business the business manager or an authorized agent of that business manager has been granted a permit. This permit may be secured after it is signed by an authorized agent of the musical group and by a representative of the individual organization or group retaining the services of the musical group and on whose premises the amplifying equipment is to be used. (3) No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds the limits set forth in Table I below when measured as specified in Article III. Table I: Sound levels (dB(A) ) by Receiving Land 8 A.M. - 11:00 P.M. 11 P.M. 8 A.M. 60 50 (4) Sound levels in excess of those listed in Table I above will be permitted as follows: Article 11 (3) is amended as follows: Without a With a Permit Permit Thursday Evening 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (5: 00 p.m. - 11:00 p.m. Article 11 (4) is deleted Thursday) in its entirety by Board Friday Evening 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) action effective 2/1/88. (5: 00 p.m. - 1: 00 a.m. Saturday) Saturday 70 dB(A) 85 dB(A) (10: 00 a.m. - 1: 00 a.m. Sunday) THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT WAS APPROVED AND EFFECTIVE ON FEBRUARY 1, 1988 ARTICLE II(3) is amended to read as follows: TABLE I: Sound levels dB(a) by Receiving Land 60 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday 8 am-11 pm Sunday-Thursday 11 pm-8 am Friday & Saturday 8 am-12 midnight Friday & Saturday 12 midnight-8 am Article III: Sound Measurement Standards Standards, instrumentation, and measurement procedures 3 to be used in the measurement of sound as provided for in this ordinance are as follows: (1) Sound level measurement shall be made with a sound level meter using the "A" weighting scale set on "slow response. " (2) Sound level meters shall be of at least Type Three meeting American National Standards Institute, Incorporated (ANSI) S1.4 - 1971 requirements (or the latest approval version thereof) . The entire sound measurement system shall be serviced and operated as recommended by the manufacturer. Persons using the sound level meters shall be trained in sound level measurement and the operation of sound level meters. (3) Except in the case where noises are emanating from within multi-family structures and the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be taken at the corner of the primary structure of the complainant nearest the noise source but when this location is not practical noise measurements shall be made at the boundary of the public or private right-of-way which adjoins the complainants ' property. (4) In the case of noises emanating from within a multi-family structure and where the complainant is a resident of the same multi-family structure, noise measurements shall be made in the unit of the complainant at a height of at least four (4) feet above the floor and at a point approximately equidistant from all walls. Article IV: Exceptions The following are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance: (1) Construction operations from 7 A.M. to 9 P.M. on weekdays and 8 A.M. to 9 P.M. of weekends for which building permits have been issued, or construction operations not requiring permits; provided all equipment is operated in accordance with the manufacturers' mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (2) Noises of safety signals, warning devices, emergency pressure relief valves and church bells. (3) Noises resulting from any authorized emergency vehicle when responding to any emergency call or acting in time of emergency. (4) Unamplified noises at street activity (such as fairs or parades) where the participants have a permit for use of the streets. 4 (5) All noises coming from the normal operation of properly equipped aircraft (not including scale model aircraft) . (6) All noises coming from motor vehicles properly equipped with the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (7) Noise from lawful fire works and noise makers on holidays. (8) Lawn mowers and agricultural equipment used between daylight and 9 P.M. when operated with all the manufacturers' standard mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper operating condition. (9) Agricultural equipment operated for farming purposes. Article V: Permit to Exceed Maximum Permissible Standards (1) A person or group of persons intending to operate or cause to be operated a source of sound in Article V is deleted in its excess of sound levels not requiring a permit as entirety including the specified in Article II, must apply for a permit. amendments (2) Any Person or persons desiring a permit shall effective 2/1/88. apply as provided herein and provide all information required. (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the permit is requested. (b) The Orange County Manager, or his designee, will act upon all requests for a permit to exceed maximum permissible standards. (c) In considering and acting on all requests for permits pursuant to this article, the Manager shall consider, but shall not be limited to, the following in issuing or denying such permit: the timeliness of the application; the nature of the requested activity; previous experience with the applicant; the nature of the event; the time of the event; other activities in the vicinity of the location proposed; the effect of the activity on surrounding areas; previous violations, if any, of the applicant. (d) Upon receipt of a permit to exceed maximum permissible unpermitted sound levels, the applicant will pay to Orange County an administrative fee of $5.00. 5 (a) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriff's Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued or being capable of assisting the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. Article VI: Burden of Proof Regarding Exceptions In any proceeding based upon this ordinance, if an exception stated in this ordinance would limit obligation, limit liability, or eliminate either an obligation or liability, the person who would benefit from the application of the exception shall have the burden of proving that the exception applies and that the terms of the exception have been met. Article VII: Violations and Penalties (1) Violations The Orange County Sheriff shall be responsible for determining noise level violations of this ordinance. Upon his determination that the noise levels prescribed herein have been exceeded he shall determine the source of the noise and the person responsible for it and promptly notify the person responsible of the noise limits prescribed herein and the fact that they are being exceeded. He shall also then notify the person responsible to immediately comply with the Sheriff's directive to reduce the noise level to a permissible level after notification shall constitute a violation of this ordinance. Failure on the art of the person responsible to maintain the noise to a permissible level shall include any incident of noise exceeding the levels prescribed herein occurring witin twenty-four hours of notification by the Sheriff that the noise exceeds permissible levels. For purposes of this ordinance "The Orange County Sheriff" shall include the Sheriff and any Deputy Sheriff of Orange County. (2) Civil Penalties (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be subject to a civil penalty of one hundred dollars ($100. 00) . Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. • 6 (b) The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall assess civil penalties under this ordinance and shall make written demand for payment upon the person responsible for the violation and shall set forth in detail the violation for which the penalty has been invoked. If payment is not received or equitable settlement reached within sixty (60) days after demand for payment is made, the matter shall be referred to the County Attorney for institution of a civil action in the name of the County in the appropriate division of the General Court of Justice of Orange County for recovery of the penalty. Any sums recovered shall be used to carry out the purposes and requirements of this ordinance. (3) Criminal Penalties Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not to exceed thirty (30) days or by fine not to exceed fifty ($50. 00) dollars. Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation under this subsection. Article VIII: Severability If any provision of this ordinance is adjudged invalid or if the application thereof to any person or in any circumstance is adjudged invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or of any part, subpart, sentence or clause thereof not adjudged invalid. Article XIX: Abrogation This ordinance is not intended to repeal, abrogate or impair any greater restrictions imposed on existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. Wherever the provisions of any other law, ordinance or regulation impose higher standards than are required by the provisions of this ordinance, the provisions of such law, ordinance or regulation shall govern. Article XIII: Effective Date Following the adoption of this ordinance as provided by law, this ordinance shall be effective on August 15, 1983. 7 AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE IN ORANGE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County hereby amend the Resolution and Ordinance to Provide for the Control of Noise in Orange County in the following respects: Article V(2) (a) is amended to read as follows: (a) The applicant must apply for a permit at least forty- eight (48) hours prior to the activity for which the Article V Amendments permit is requested. This forty-eight hour requirement were deleted effective shall not prohibit the issuance of a permit in 2/1/88 situations where the application is received less than forty-eight hours prior to the activity, provided the application is made within enough time of the activity for the County Manager to consider the factors necessary and contained in Section V(2) (c) of this ordinance. Article V(2) (e) is amended to read as follows: (e) Permit holders agree to cooperate with the Orange County Sheriff's Department in enforcing this ordinance by having the applicant or the applicant's designee as indicated on the permit application available at the site of the event during the entire time for which a permit has been issued and agree to assist the Sheriff in enforcing this Ordinance. Failure of the applicant or designee of the applicant to be present or to assist the Sheriff as herein prescribed shall be cause for revocation of the permit. This Ordinance Amendment is effective upon its adoption. APPROVED 3 1 8s MINUT OF COMMISSIONERS COUNTY BOARD OF ORANGE FEBRUARY 1, 190 regular session Commissioners mroom of the Old Courthouse, $°ard of •m° in the court it iuse , d Comm , The Orange► County s a Carolina P ley E. Ma 1 a a Don W illhplt February North Chair Sh1r Kartwel Hillsborough, John MEMBERS PRESENT:T HalKiotis► ASSistant o�D Jr. , Stephen Ge Gledhill' er A Kge tell► n Blythe, Moses Carey, Geoffrey Albert Beverly A. Collins, EY PRESENT- County Manager Board ctor Mary ATTORN Interim Clerk to Director Director under NT: Laws, Planning Dan STAFF pRESEwilliam T. Chavi°us►Health 1 be considered Manager nano am Jones, and Heal County rOfficer cor Update will at 400 in the Deputy u sing Di MANAGERS COMMENTS program D AND MANAtal ImPr°vements February �rP°rt sues• t tx A. BOARD G3 w Capital Will be held on o discuss �al licensing. plain at < item E2 meeting ce RpOx° of an the special me id Conference discussion the d iri assessing v that tee A A got the prod es used of the .comnk will Department item Was raZdlelKioti d re e5 cedar . ration Li A issione the Board a organization that Commissioner °f ttle• asked about th and was t t dairy cattle. as line beef and issioner Cart am boundary Comm Orange-Chatham item. will Study the on this is item follow up specific the S UDIENCE CO ON THE PRINTED At ND speak on a ender $ A MATTERS Would like appears on the erg who 1• Those the time that ed at ON THE PRINTED AGENDA recognized Commis' 2 ' None. NOT lobs► seconded by 24 , Ju N inner HalK e 17 ► Jun Commis 16► Jun C Motion was ove the June tes► as u c°rrected• ed by Comma Carey to and July 20 m1 second June 30 UNANIMOUS. Hartwell,crculated Commiss�°net voTE: b minutes Motion was prove the August � Comm seconded HalkiotNANIM0U5. Hartwell, as corrected. VOTE- Commissioner oe ember et 1987 minutes made by 5► Motionto was the December seconded by Comr HalkiOtUNANIMOUS• Carey,VOTE: by Commissioner Motion was made ---mmilmmillimmill 2 • Ha11 iotis to approve the January 4 , 1988 Minutes as circulated. VOTE: UNANIMOUS• seconded by Commissioner otion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, Carey to approve the January 19, 1988 minutes as corrected. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. PUBLIC CHARGE ublic charge. Chair Marshall read the p D. RESOLUTIONS OR PROCLAMATIONS of asking for 1. CAPACITY USE DESIGNATION Commissioner Willhoit emphasized that the purpose Ca Capacity Use Study was to provide data on whichha bmana eemento plan the P ed. He suggested be develop ted that a request Environmental Management Commission useCa to delay for 90 to 120 days the nd give the County that time to decision on declaration of capacity come up with a management plan. Commissioner Carey tioneon whether would ori not it can behenforced�s an the plan but there is a goes be Discussion ensued on onehowmanagement much latitude the and EMC wouldcgive to enforced. There was a question the County to wok mmadeabylaChair Marshall, enforcement. Motion w Commissioner Carey Motion was s Y to adopt the resolution as printed below to be presented at the February 3rd public hearing: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners requestedoa studyabe Department made for the Eno River by N.C. Community Development, and WHEREAS, an Executive Summary Report of the Eno River Area Capacity Use investigation has been received, and pP WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby support the Capacity Use Designation of the Eno River, and NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that from this Capacity Use Designation management plan for the Eno will be prepared for Orange County cooperation with the Division of Environmental Management for consideration by the Environmental Management Commission. Adopted this the first day of February, 1988 . VOTE: AYES, 4 ; NOES, 1 (Commissioner Willhoit) E. REPORTS 1. CITIZEN COMPLAINT OF RATS IN THE AREA OF REX STREET IN HILLSBOROUGH Pam Jones explained to that had Board beene takenabyttheaCounty staff1 Wagner had lodged and the steps in The complaint was that debrisprovidedua s junk had favorable habitatlfordthe the Rex Street neighborho od which wharf rats found in that neighborhood. Pam Jones stated that the County cannot help any further it complaint er than has been has with the ordinances that are now in effect. presented to the Board of Health eahazaDdrwithout Dan recorded cases of reported that it is difficult to claim a health illness. He, along with the Environmental Health staff, will explore ordinances that will help in cases like this and he will work with the County Attorney in this effort. pass Mr. Wagner described the neighborhood ofdthese an ordinance or do whatever it could rats. 3 County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill noted that there is the same 't granted to the Health Director health nuisance.eis granted If it is not a authority g with respect to a public public health granted the Health Director, it is no hgaing to be under health authority g a limitation in that it is not going to be a public health nuisance under the authority granted is g Commissioners. There is difficult Board to County court of law to declare a public health nuisance. to enact ordinances for governing removal, Tierecist to utt a authority is limited 1, method is manner located outside of corporate limits and the area to method or manner of disposal of trash but the authors questioned whether rural areas of the mCounty Commissioner Marshall qu idvestether in question is semi-urban. suggested the Attorney statute might be from earlier years and Bugg whether "outside of corporate limits" rather than "in rural areas" might d be controlling. Chair Marshall stated that all avenues woo After du and report will G3 on the agenda) be explored and a report will be given as soon as possible. 2. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE (originally the CI) e stated that the process for refining Commissioner Carey and those components that will be considered sfor pea bond issue ue will a presented to the Board the middle ointed at the next meeting to work with a citizens task force can be appointed agreed to the timetable and to advertise forncitizeensrtoeServe one the atask aforce. ' advertise F. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA BUDGET AMENDMENTS Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Motion was made by the amendments as Halkiotis to amend the 1987-88 Budget Ordinance by stated below: _ $ 7 ,000 F GENERAL FUND Appropriations - Bicentennial Coittee 7,000 Source - State Discretionary $ 5, 000 Appropriation - County Manager Source - Governor's Waste Management Board $ 5, 000 $ 28,900 Appropriation - Aging Capital Reserve 28,900 Source - Transfer from County Appropriation - Social Services Subsidy $ 10, 000 General Assistance 10,000 Source - Social RServices - Income Maint - AFDC-EA COUNTY CAPITAL $ 28,900 Appropriation - Transfer to General Fund 28,900 Source - Appropriated Fund Balance VOTE: UNANIMOUS. G. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA 1. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING OF POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES The presentation was made baAssistant heyreviewed Manager Bill estimates and Jim McCarthy of Hazen and Sawyer.that had been received for the preparation of topographic information. Water Supply This icanrbegin.n is McCarthy necessary explained Phase II of theevcontours and can edgit. oad y xP and assured the Board that the has beendreceived this necessary information desired. be used for state officials indicating that Senate Bill 2 funds may project. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner request formal proposals for Willhoit to authorize the staff to requ awarding ng of proposals contract topographic mapping with the understanding that I 4 will be contingent upon receiving Senate Bill 2 funds. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 2. NOISE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Pam Jones reviewed the amendments to the existing Noise Ordinance in Orange County. They are as follows: Sound levels by Receiving Land - 60 dB(A) Sunday thru Thursday 8 am - 11 pm Friday and Saturday 8am - 12 midnight 50 dB(A) Sunday-Thursday llpm - 8 am Friday and Saturday 8am -- 12 midnight It is also recommended that the County Manager be authorized to seek expert advice and an investigation of the subject be conducted and that permits to exceed the maximum noise level be eliminated on an interim basis until such time a basis for allowing or denying permits is determined. Chair Marshall stated that the amendments do not address the specific vibration problem but that by lowering the decibels and not allowing any special permits will help the present situation. Several citizens and the owners of the roller rink spoke against the proposed amendments and in support of the roller rink and several neighbors explained the problems that exist because of the loud music. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to amend the Noise Ordinance as recommended. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 3 . CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE This item was moved to item E2 . 4. ASSIGNMENT OF HOUSE AND BUILDING NUMBERS FOR RURAL ROUTES 2 AND 3 IN ROUGEMONT Marvin Collins made the presentation. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve setting a public hearing date of February 22, 1988 for receipt of public comment on the proposed assignment of house numbers for rural Routes 2 and 3 in Rougemont. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 5. SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9 LAKE WOODS - PRELIMINARY Planning Director Marvin Collins made the presentation. The property is located in Chapel Hill Township on Jones Ferry Road. Two lots are proposed out of 4. 6 acres. The property is located in the University Lake Watershed and zoned Rural Buffer. The Administration recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to two conditions. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the preliminary plat subject to two conditions: (1) Label the property to be dedicated to Orange County for public recreation/open space purposes as "Property of Orange County" . (2) Approval of a deed dedicating the property for public recreation/open space purposes to Orange County. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 6. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the proposed subdivision regulations text amendments as recommended by the Planning Board and the Administration and as stated below: 1. Renumber Sections IV-B-3 d and e to d-1 and d-2, respectively, 5 to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Subdivision Regulations. 2. Add Section IV-B-3-e which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 3. Add definitions to Section II which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 7. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments as recommended by the Planning Board and the Administration and as stated below: 1. Renumber Articles 8.8 a) and 20.3.2 f) to permit incorporation of the provisions into the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Add Articles 6. 17, 8.8 e) and a new 20.3 .2 f) which state that a traffic impact study is required for site plans, special use permits and zoning changes, respectively. 3 . Add Article 13 which sets forth the contents required in a traffic impact study, and submission and implementation procedures. 4. Add definitions to Article 22, which define the terms used in a traffic impact analysis. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 8. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - HOME OCCUPATION PROVISIONS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as stated below and to refer back to the Ordinance Review Committee those comments made at the November 23, 1987 public hearing and comments contained in a letter from an attorney representing several citizens. 1. In all residential zoning districts except RB, AR and R--1, add a provision limiting traffic generation by a home occupation and requiring off-street parking other than in a required yard area. 2. In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts for lots 200,000 sq. ft. or less in area, add the following: a. Limitations on the size of a detached accessory structure in which a home occupation is conducted to 1,000 sq. ft. b. A requirement that the accessory structure as well as off- street parking be screened by means of an evergreen hedge or a combination of a stockade fence and deciduous plant materials. c. Limitations on the effects of odor and electrical inter- ference on adjoining properties. d. A requirement that outside storage of materials must be screened and the storage area limited to 500 sq.ft. e. Limitations on traffic and off-street parking as described #1 above. 3. In RB, AR and R-1 zoning districts for lots in excess of 200,000 sq. ft. in area, add the following: a. A requirement concerning screening as described in 2-b above. b. Limitations on the effects of odor or electrical interference on adjoining properties. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 9. PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS - INTERPRETATION POLICY I . 6 (The resolution is attached to these minutes in the minute book on pages ? (-22 15 12021L22 Marvin Collins made the presentation. A draft policy resolution was presented to the Board for their consideration. The purpose of the resolution is to provide guidance to the Planning Board and Staff in terms of interpreting and administering those standards. The resolution received approval from the Planning Board on January 18 and they asked that the Board of Commissioners adopt a similar resolution. The County Attorney has reviewed the resolution and suggested some changes which have been incorporated in the resolution. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the policy resolution as revised by the County Attorney and to conduct a public hearing on February 22, 1988 for the purpose of incorporating the provisions of the policy resolution into the Subdivision Regulations as an amendment to Section IV-B-3-d. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 10. MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLAN Marvin Collins stated that significant changes have been made in the plan to warrant another public hearing. The Planning Board and the Administration recommends that the Master Recreation and Parks Plan be placed on the public hearing agenda for February 22, 1988. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Carey to place the Master Recreation and Parks Plan on the public hearing agenda for February 22, 1988. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 11. ADVERTISEMENT - FEBRUARY 22, 1988 PUBLIC HEARING Marvin Collins presented the list of items that will be included in the legal notice for the February 22, 1988 quarterly public hearing. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the legal notice as presented in the agenda and as amended. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 12 . JOINT PLANNING AREA PUBLIC HEARING Motion was made by Chair Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve April 13, 1988 for a Joint Planning Area public hearing to be held at 7:30 in the Chapel Hill High School Auditorium. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 13 . RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF SANITARY SEWER BONDS (A copy of this resolution is in the minute book on pages 22c-�- Commissioner Hartwell introduced the resolution authorizing the issuance of sanitary sewer bonds for the Efland Sewer project. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adopt the resolution. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 14. THE HUMANE WORKPLACE - EMPLOYEE SUPPORTIVE PROGRAMS After a brief discussion, it was decided to refer this request to the Commission for Women for funding. ADDED ITEM DOG LICENSING The Commissioners expressed concern about the process that has been followed by citizens obtaining licenses for their animals. Health Director Dan Reimer explained why some citizens received forms to complete for licensing their animals and some did not. He further explained the 7 process that is being followed at this time with reference to proving if an animal is spayed or neutered. The Board restated the fact that a declaration of the animal owner will be accepted as evidence that an animal over three years old has been sterilized. H. APPOINTMENTS The following appointments were made: Orange County Planning Board Chris Best Carol Bilbro Amanda Cantrell Human Services Advisory Commission Chris Nutter Ruth Royster I. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to consider, Chair Marshall adjourned the meeting. The next meeting will be held on February 16, 1988 at 7: 30 p.m. in the Courtroom of the old Post Office, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Shirley E. Marshall, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk