HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-01-94 - VIII-G 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 1, 1994
Action Agenda
Item #
SUBJECT: HANNAH CREEK - PRELIMINARY PLAN
ACTION BY: November 14, 1994
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _x_No
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Willis
Resolution of Approval Extension 2583
Application
Vicinity Map TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Comments from County Attorney Hillsborough - 732-8181
Private Road Justification Durham - 688-7331
Staff Evaluation of Mebane - 227-2031
Private Road Justification Chapel Hill - 967-9251
Fiscal Impact Analysis
nrtnhar 17, 19444 Planning Rnard Minntaa
PURPOSE: To consider the Preliminary Plan for Hannah Creek
Subdivision.
BACKGROUND: The property is located on the west side of High Rock Road
(SR 1340) near the Orange-Alamance County line. It is
zoned Agricultural Residential with an overlay district of
Back-PW, and designated Agricultural Residential and Back
Creek Watershed in the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Land uses in the area include farming and a residential
subdivision. The 1993 traffic count for High Rock Road
was 400 trips per day. This count was taken south of this
property close to Mill Creek Road (SR 1343) .
The tract contains 84 .62 acres. A tributary of Back Creek
flows through the western portion of the property. There
is some open area on the south side of the creek, and the
reminder of the tract is wooded.
Concept Plan Review
Forty-two (42) new residential lots were proposed. Twenty-
seven of the lots contained from 1 to 1 1/2 acres. The
2
remaining 15 lots ranged in size from two to five acres,
with the larger of the residential lots located adjacent
to and west of the stream. The applicant also proposed a
5-acre park in the northwest corner of the property and a
stream buffer of 100' on the east side of the stream and
150' on the west side of the stream. Restrictive
covenants would prohibit any clearing or development in
the buffer.
The main entrance road into the subdivision was proposed
to be public, with most of the individual lots served by
one of four Class B private roads which access to the
public entrance road.
The private, road standards of the Subdivision Regulations
require that a private road serve no more than 25 lots.
The main entrance road into the subdivision must be public
because the portion between High Rock Road and roads A and
B will serve more that 25 lots. In most cases, either
public or private roads are recommended within a
subdivision, but not both. In this case, the Planning
Board found in the Concept Plan review that private road
justification criteria were met through a combination of
the average lot size and setbacks, both of which are
significantly greater than the minimum required, the
preservation of a wooded area in the vicinity of the creek
on the western portion of the property, and restrictive
covenants which require approval of all development and
clearing by a review board made up of the builder and
developer.
A pedestrian/equestrian easement was proposed within the
stream buffer which would intersect with an existing
pedestrian easement in the Spoon Lake Subdivision to the
south. Access to the 5-acre private park site (which
includes a waterfall) would thus be provided to residents
of both subdivisions.
The applicant has indicated that a review board made up of
the developer and builder would examine all site plans and
house plan elevations to optimize the effect of climatic
conditions (prevailing winds, solar access, shade, etc. )
minimize disturbance and clearing in areas containing
hardwoods and other significant vegetation types, and
assure consistency in architectural style.
On April 18, 1994, the Planning Board approved the Concept
Plan for Hannah Creek subject to the following conditions:
1. Submit restrictive covenants, homeowners
association documents and private road maintenance
agreement documents for review with the
Preliminary Plan.
Provision for a review board which examines all
site plans and house plan elevations to optimize
the effect of climatic conditions (prevailing
winds, solar access, shade, etc. ) and minimize
3
disturbance and clearing in areas containing
hardwood and other significant vegetation types,
shall be made in the restrictive covenants and/or
Homeowner's Association documents.
Restrictive covenants shall also include the
prohibition of all clearing and development within
the stream buffer except as needed to provide a
pedestrian easement on the west side of the
stream.
2 . Provide appropriate turn-arounds on the private
roads as provided in the Orange County Private
Road Standards.
3. An access easement shall be provided form private
road C to the park site. The easement shall not
be located within the stream buffer, except as
necessary to cross perpendicular to the stream
buffer.
4 . A pedestrian easement which connects with the
Spoon Lake subdivision shall be provided on the
west side of the stream (if approved by the
Homeowners Association of Spoon Lake) .
Preliminary Plan
The Preliminary Plan includes 45 lots, three more than
were included in the Concept Plan. According to the
applicant, the additional lots as proposed because the
soils analyses indicate a more extensive presence of
suitable soils than was originally anticipated. A revised
private road justification is attached. The Planning
Staff finds that justification for a private road remains,
even with the addition of three lots.
The average size of lots adjacent to the stream is 2 .44
acres (right-of-way excluded) . The required stream buffer
ranges from about 60 feet to about 100 feet from the
stream. The applicant has proposed that the area within
125 feet of the stream be included in a conservation
easement. The area within the easement would be located
in individual lots, however, there could be no
construction of any kind and no disturbance of vegetation
within the easement, except as necessary to provide for
the proposed pedestrian/equestrian access.
The applicant proposes to construct a trail within the
pedestrian/equestrian easement along the creek. The
location of the trail would be outside of the floodplain
but within the stream buffer, to minimize impacts on the
stream and maintain the privacy of the adjoining property
owners.
The applicant has also requested a waiver of landscape
requirements to allow all required trees to be planted
within the private road easements just outside of the
4
ditches, to create a canopy. A gravel sidewalk os
proposed within the edsement, on the outside of the row of
street trees. Planning Staff is recommending approval of
the waiver to allow more flexibility in the location of
landscape materials.
Payment in-lieu-of parkland dedication is calculated to be
$1,890 ($1,470/acre X 1/35 acre X 45 lots) .
The Preliminary Plan was distributed to the following
agencies for review and comment:
Orange County Fire Marshall
Soil and Water Conservation
County Attorney
Duke Power
Orange County Schools
Southern Bell
Orange County Erosion Control
NC Department of Transportation
The following comments were received:
Emergency Management
Hannah Lane should be renamed to avoid confusion with
Hannah Street, located in Carrboro.
Department of Transportation
Sight triangles ( 10' by 70' ) are required to be dedicated
at the intersections of High Rock Road and the proposed
private roads with Elizabeth Walters Road. Initial
correspondence from NCDOT indicated that the aprons of the
private roads within the dedicated right-of-way must be
paved. However this requirement is now being reconsidered
by NCDOT, and may not be included in the final plans which
will be reviewed and approved by NCDOT.
A driveway permit from NCDOT will be required prior to
construction of Elizabeth Walters Road.
Soil and Water Conservation
Georgeville silt loam soils are located on the property.
These soils have moderate limitations with regard to
suitability for buildings and septic disposal.
County Attorney
Comments received from the County Attorney are attached,
and have been incorporated as applicable in the attached
Resolution of Approval.
The Planning Board considered the Hannah Creek Preliminary
Plan on October 17, 1994 and recommended approval per the
attached Resolution of Approval. The vote was unanimous.
5
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Preliminary
Plan for Hannah Creek Subdivision in accordance with the
attached Resolution of Approval, per the Planning Board
recommendation.
•
6
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date November 1. 1994
Name of Subdivision Hannah Creek
Owner/Applicant Ann Moss Joyner
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Hannah Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plat,
dated August 22, 1994 and containing forty-six lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified
herein.
Elizabeth Walters Road shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to
standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution
authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the
public generally, the offer of dedication of Elizabeth Walters Road. This acceptance by Orange County
of the dedication to the general public of Elizabeth Walters Road shall be without maintenance
responsibility. The road shall be maintained by the owner/applicant until such time as it is accepted for
maintenance by the North Carolina Department of Transportation or some other governmental body.
Before the Final Plat of any phase of Hannah Creek can be recorded:
A. Sewage Disposal
1. Each residential lot shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair area,
approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health.
2. The septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements. This
disclosure shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be
recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that
information regarding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the
Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health.
B. Roads and Access
1. Elizabeth Walters Road shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, within a 50-foot right-of-way, and the construction shall
be inspected and approved by NCDOT.
OR
A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction
of Elizabeth Walters Road to the standards of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a
certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and
Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate
and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North
Carolina.
The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat
shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction
has been inspected and approved by NCDOT.
7
2. Hannah Lane shall be renamed to avoid duplication with a similar street name in the
Town of Carrboro.
3. Pippin Trail and McMillan Park Road shall be constructed to Class A private road
standards within a 50-foot right-of-way, and Hannah Lane (to be renamed) shall be
constructed to Class B private road standards within a 50-foot right-of-way.
Each of the above-mentioned private roads shall be inspected, and the construction
certified in writing to the Orange County Planning Department by a North Carolina
Professional Engineer, or a North Carolina Registered Land Surveyor. The location of
the travelway within the platted private road right-of-way shall also be certified.
OR
A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction
and inspection of the above-mentioned roads to the indicated private road class. An
estimate of the construction and certification costs must be prepared by a
certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and
Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate
and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North
Carolina.
The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat
shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction
has been certified by a North Carolina Professional Engineer or a North Carolina
Registered Land Surveyor.
4. A Private Road Maintenance Agreement for Pippin Trail, McMillan Park Road and
Hannah Lane (to be renamed) shall be received by the Planning Department and
approved by the County Attorney. The Road Maintenance
Agreement shall reference the dedication of right-of-way for Elizabeth Walters Road
and include provisions for the maintenance of Elizabeth Walters Road such time as the
maintenance responsibility is accepted by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation.
5. An erosion control plan for construction of the roads shall be submitted by the
applicant for review and approval by the Orange County Erosion Control Division.
6. 10' by 70' sight triangles shall be shown at the intersection of Elizabeth Walters Road
and High Rock Road, and at the intersections of the proposed private roads with
Elizabeth Walters Road.
7. All lots shall access onto the new subdivision roads. This restriction shall be stated in a
document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by
Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
8. Approved street name signs shall be erected at the intersection of streets as required
in Section IV-B-3-c-12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Evidence shall
be submitted by the applicant that the sign is in place or a copy of the receipt for
purchase of the sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department.
C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall be preserved and installed in an amount needed to meet landscaping
requirements of Section IV-B-8-d of the Subdivision Regulations, as indicated on the
approved landscape plan dated September 22, 1994. Locational provisions of Section
1V-B-8-d are hereby waived to allow additional trees required for lots which are
accessed by one of the proposed private roads to be planted within the easement of
8
that road for the purpose of creating a canopy over the road, provided that at least 14
feet of vertical and horizontal clearance is maintained in all cases. Installation of
landscaping must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections
Department.
If the Final Plat is to be recorded prior to installation of landscaping, then the
applicant shall secure landscape requirement installation and preservation through a
letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond. An estimate of the cost for required
preservation, plantings and their installation must be provided. The fmancial
guarantee shall reflect 110% of the estimate and be issued by an accredited financial
institution licensed to do business in North Carolina.
2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan
shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements
to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
D. Drainage
1. Impervious surface data, as pursuant to Article 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be
included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
2. Locate additional drainage easements as required following review and approval of the
Erosion Control Plan.
E. Parkland
1. Cash in the amount of$ 1,890 ($1,470/acre X 45/35 acre) shall be paid to Orange
County as payment in lieu of parkland dedication.
F. Miscellaneous
1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section
V-D-2 and V-D-3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations.
2. The following natural and man-made site features shall be shown on the plat: (Include
streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, swamps, marshes, sites in"Inventory", houses, barns,
sheds, railroads, overhead utility lines, cemeteries)
a. perennial stream
b. pedestrian/equestrian trail in vicinity of perennial stream
3. The following easements shall be shown on the Final Plat:
a. A conservation easement extending 75 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of
High Rock Road.
b. A conservation easement extending 125 feet from each edge of the perennial
stream.
c. A pedestrian/equestrian easement extending 50 feet from each edge of the
perennial stream.
4. A front setback of 125 feet shall be maintained as measured from the edge of the
public or private road right-of-way for lots D2, D3, D4, and D5. A front setback of 75
feet shall be maintained as measured from the edge of the public or private road
9
right-of-way for lots Al, A2, A5, A6, A7, B5, C5, C6, Cll, C12, D1, E2 and E6. A rear
setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the rear property line for lots
B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, E2 and E3. Other setbacks are as required by Article 5.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance, except where conservation easements result in a larger setback.
These setback requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document describing
development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and
recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
5. Lot F shall be designated on the Final Plat as being of restricted development
potential. Lot F shall be owned by an entity established for the purpose of conserving
and maintaining natural resources. Such an entity may include, but is not limited to, a
homeowners association, provided that conservation of natural resources is one of its
established purposes. Documents associated with compliance of this condition shall be
reviewed and approved by the County Attorney. The restricted use of Lot F shall be
included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be
prepared by the Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
6. The area included in the conservation easements must remain natural and undisturbed.
Removal of any vegetation and all construction or disturbance in the easement is
prohibit, except as necessary to allow the construction of the pedestrian/equestrian
trail along the stream. The recipient of the easements shall be an entity established
for the purpose of conserving and maintaining natural resources. Such an entity may
include, but is not limited to a homeowners association, provided that conservation of
natural resources is one of its established purposes. Documents associated with
compliance of this condition shall be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney.
The restricted use within the easements shall be included in a document describing
development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by the Planning Staff and
recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
7. A pedestrian/equestrian trail for use by the residents shall be constructed along the
stream outside of any identifiable flood-prone area. The trail may cross the stream as
necessary to maintain minimize disturbance of slopes and vegetation. The Erosion
Control Supervisor shall approve the specific location of the trail prior to its
construction. Upon construction of the trail, the Erosion Control Officer shall certify
that the final construction is in accordance with acceptable erosion control practice and
the trail is in the approved location.
If a Final Plat is to be recorded prior to the construction of the trail, then future
construction of the trail shall be guaranteed through a letter of credit, escrow
agreement, or bond. An estimate of the cost for required preservation, plantings and
their installation must be provided. The financial guarantee shall reflect 110% of the
estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in
North Carolina.
8. If the subdivision is to be completed in more than one phase, then Lot F and the
conservation easements and equestrian/pedestrian trail shall be constructed or secured
in the first phase, and an easement be provided to assure access from Elizabeth
Walters Road to Lot F.
G. Certifications
1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall be
notarized on the face of the Final Plat.
10
2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V-D-6-b
of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer
shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development
restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. The Division of Environmental Health shall certify that each lot contains a suitable
area for septic disposal.
4. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Elizabeth Walters
Road has been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been
approved.
5. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections
Department.
Signature of Applicant Clerk to the Board
, accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, and
acknowledge that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat.
Applicant Date
APPLICATION 1-OR PRELIMINARY PLAN 1PPROVAL
MAJOR SUBDIVISION 11
8183
ORANGE COUNTY
DATE: n1 7.-2,\c14-
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) I
SUBDIVISION NAME: uANT`,Plk CaZO. 1..
LOCATION: q H RCj 1� (-'_.c_.0\Jv 1 v\•-X),
OWNER/DEVELOPER; Al A-9 ( %k'1C1 LAC .
ADDRESS: Cv�il`�L�,_ ,zxi TELEPHONE NO.: •4.--4-I1 .
/CONTACT; __Ni 't 1V
IL TELEPHONE NO.: 7p.-(eL(aL
A. SUMMARY INFORMATION:
Orange County Tax MOP A-2— Block Lotts) icl A Township TA .12-0 0'
Zoning District(sl: A/c&. v --
Total Number of Acres: 7So Phases: ,t S
Total Number of Lots: AP Average Lot Size: I. /lam-- Minimum Lot Size: o,' l_,A'
Number/Type of Structures: (existing) (proposed)
Linea( Feet in Strestr O' - Acres in Open Space: S' _A_ ,
Water Supply: Public (specify) Community Individual
Wastewater Disposal: • Public (specify) Community 7- Individual
School District: Or``.'—y c,..•-•-- C..i Fire'District; C,`c)-4r C,-Ps„a
General Land Uses in Ares! LvailsCbLta.f -pL ( if)d IN)-ci t.`
Critical Areas: '( stream/drainegeways flood prone areas
watershed (specify) PA.4-‹.-- - k1, historic sites
other (explain)
Is the property to be subdivided currently under 'farm use value taxation'? Yee No_. If "yes",
pleas* contact the Orange County Tax Office. Subdivision of the property may require payment of
deferred taxes under 'farm use value taxation'.
B. All plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two-hundred feet (1".'200') end
no larger than one inch equals twenty feet (1'=20') and must contain the following'inforrnation:
' r subdivision name TS6 zoning of tract and adjacent,
'/ • r r name & address of owner(') properties
"' name & address of subdivider
_JC._ "'''�: 1 t/ building setback lines by notation
(if other than owner) / or typical lot layout
L.,/2n name of surveyor, engineer, ',PM location and width of existing and
o
co
landscape architect or architect, proposed easements (drainage,
address, registration 0 and seal utilities, roads, etc.)
cow - , ' (title) Preliminary Plan /WA existing, proposed and adjoining
o /'•'•°. scale, north arrow rights-of-way including dimensions
0 1..),,,-,:„',..f date (including revision data') and street names and state road
8 w • ,•sn: township, tax map-block-lot numbers. Lineal feet of road
C references centerlines and approximate
v •: Parent Parcel identification N acreage of new strait rights.of
deed book and pegs d of rope
m o =' ,..v,, property way
� WA. .'+-s to be subdivided ' � existing and proposed utilities,
so MI boundary described yvith bearings including type, sizes, hydrants,
g and distances l r I, valves, manholes
V co w total acreage of the treat and ' ",u existing and proposed curbs,
acreage of lots, including and ��� gutters and culverts, ineludlnq
-Id 0.1 excluding area within rights-of- ■, / sizes and grades
0 to
54 Zzei way ,"l , location and width of alleys,
control corner sidewalks, bike lens*, transit
systems, and bus stops
(please complete reverse side)
1
proposed lot fines "+lift dimensions ty + street cross-sections end)
lot & block numt intersection details including
design and width of traveiway and 12
_ !,a/ phasing lines
. :':.:±1
.w topography at ten 1 oat (10) / shoulders
-i intervals
horizontal alignment end general
:i?:iii;;, water bodies, streams, floodwey curve data (public roads)
r, �r and floodplains • centerline radius on all proposed
N
n : stream buffers streets
tu
_,� location and size of parcels 1=1-L a'` permanent features such as
V) U dedicated for public use, buildings, cemeteries, historic
E •,-+
• w recreational use or reserved in landmarks ,
•-•f p common, with purpose noted ',:i.i.;1'i;` adjoining lot layout names of
b Fi #;: ;n•; Impervious surface date (if located adjoining property owners. If
a w in water supply watershed) subdivided, subdivieion plat name,
vicinity map showing general plat book & pegs number, end
a CP location of subdivieion with streets perimeter lot numbers.
'�,'''''' location end size of lots of
E r and •roads identified by State road < ,
U number end name restricted development potential
r'':':s? landscaping and buffer • and notation on plat regarding
U 17
to
to requirements same
c .,- .04 township, corporate and extra- ) -$ irk;..;5: stormwater detention and/or
territorial planning jurisdiction lines retention sites end undisturbed
which cross the property areas for infiltration purposes (if
located in water supply
'watershed)
C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1, Twenty-five (25) copies of the preliminary plat,
2. One full aite copy of en Orange County Tax map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked in
pencil).
3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat indicating
Health Department soils analysis approval/denial for each lot shown thereon.
4. Where a private road is proposed a written statement by the applicant or his/her authorized
representative which sets forth the justification for a privets road (see Section 1V-B-3-d-1 of the
Orange County Subdivision Regulations).
5. Auxiliary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section•VL of.this Ordinance
which assure completion and/or maintenance of improvements required by this Ordinance.
Such documents may include, but not be limited to, a private road maintenance acracinent, and
articles of incorporation and restrictive covenants pertaining to • homeowner's eseociation.
These documents may be required as necessary as evidence that the ordinance requirements
are being met.
0. Fee - $350.00 plus 05.00 per lot (1 fee for preliminary and final plat).
7. If the subdivision contains 10 lots or more the following information shall be submitted with the
application:
a, Number of years to buildout. .
b. Number of houses to be built during each year to buildout,
a. Average price of houses including lots for each year to buildout. ii LS I ,'t?b
I,the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application in complete and accurate.
or /
APPLICANT'S SIGNAT ! OWN '8 SIGN --, /J
8 - '� ,
DATE DAT
FEES: Amount . Date Paid, Receipt 0
, 0 , "....A ,.6
i J . , _
CD 13
22,089. 5 4 3
•
7 AC \ 7.4•0 •
he
222a
th 1 ' \'
N 874 OCO 4,
ko .‘• •
' 158.75 Ac.
.
0 ----...-, ,r 44_4c
\\
® \
\\
\\
d 2 0 86 AC 35 AC.
\\ / ..•
e3 \\
\\‘\ c
9426
..-
\
\
5376 \\
,..
\\ •
. .
•
>- >- ...
i-- 1— \\ • klia. " _
Z Z l
M M \
0 0
0 0 . \\\\ .
.--/-----
7 9 9 4
FL'
•••
. \\
\\
-5 8.8 AC
\\
\\\\0 . HANNAH CREEK
zAopnpelicant:84AnnBAMc:oss_pJoyner
• • .
\\
Olt \\,,,, •
\\ $.,....
•
\\ _...
4i?
\\ t ••
i
0
i •
:5.6 A \\ '
\
\\
.,.
6';',..,■'-.,,i3sto 3
Lu
1 6.5AC.(-)teni
5949 IC'/ ."----'..„.--"'---.
<Z
0/Sr..'''"--------7.:
<i, 17785
ist r
—J 0
S -
II.a
' - 7
IC)
2 529
/..
/311 (11111(f111111111
101.24 AC.
7 5 AC. I 13.
ri• /5
\3.5 AC /0
1%., __, \I.••••.• 0
18,
C\1
3299
,
a)
cr) I
1106 ..4, •
HAC€4 715 1
N $700: '
SAC
CD .
..\..Hk_Q
.8 994 SAC.SI I 0 . commorv°8.45;?(.4 0 , 30
• CD '-.--
‘t.
0 .364
3 ii .
H.49 . AC' 3 554 \ kil 9515
784 Ac.
TOTA-t.O.• %.
t13
1_ — "'" .-• 7
— 1• ,360
114 .0„
1 >
I
OCT-13-1994 13:43 FROM COLEMAN GLEDHILL HARGRAVE TO 6443002 P.02
LAW OFFICES
• 14
COLEMAN, GLEDHILL &. HARGRAVE ALONZO BROWN COLDAAN,
A PROFF.351ONAL CORPORATIOD1
GF.OFFRET 6 m Fr+wrt i
129 E.TRYON STR8TT DOLX3IA5 HARGRAVE
P.O.DRAWER 1329 KIM K.S718l•AN
H1LLS C ROWH•NORTH CAROLINA I7278 IANb7 D.DUTTON
(419)732.2196 DOUXLAS P.THOREN
FAX 0193 732.7997
October 13, 1994
Ms. Mary Willis
Orange County Harming wept.
306F Revere Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Re: Hannah Creek
Dear Mary:
Geof and I reviewed the preliminary plan, architectural standards, restrictive covenants,
and road maintenance agreement accompanying your 8/31/94 request. We did not receive a copy
of the private road justification, if one was submitted. In our review of the documents we did
receive, we note the following:
1. Standards for Vernacular Southern Architecture. We did not review and have no
comments on the architectural guidelines as they are not required by the Zoning or Subdivision
Regulations of Orange County.; •
2. Hannah Creek Covenants. We did not review and have no comment on architectural
requirements or other similar restrictions contained in the covenants. We are unable to determine
whether the language contained in Paragraph 4 of this document restricting the clearing of trees
satisfies the landscaping requirements of Orange County for this particular subdivision.
Paragraph 5 makes reference to a permitted use of certain lots for local commercial
purposes. This reference seems inappropriate since the property is not zoned for local
commercial use. In-home office facilities may or may not be permitted under the Home
Occupations section of the Zoning Ordinance and may be affected by the impervious surface
regulations as well.
Paragraph 6 makes reference to possible further subdivision of lots within Hannah Creek.
We note that further subdivision of these lots may individually or cumulatively affect the
appropriateness of private mad servicing lots within this subdivision.
Paragraph 13 establishes easements for wildlife, walking trails, equestrian riding trails,
and an arboretum and states that they are to remain as private property. It also states that
Hannah Creek,inc. may grant a conservation easement to a non-profit conservation organization,
1
OCT-13-1994 13:43 FROM COLEMAN GLEDHILL HARGRAVE TO 6443002 P.03
15
Letter to Mary Willis
October 13, 1994
Page 2
to Orange County, or to the Hannah Creek Homeowner's Association in order to protect the
creek and the land. Since these areas are designated as private, we note that Orange County
would not he an appropriate donee of any such easement. In order to grant such an easement,
Hannah Creek, Inc. would need to comply with the requirements of Article 4 of North Carolina
General Statute Section 121; which contains the Conservation and Historic Preservation
Agreements Act. A conservation agreement must be executed and recorded with the Orange
County Register of Deeds. This agreement should be perpetual and Orange County should he
a third party beneficiary in order to ensure that the County will review any and all changes in
the agreement. The County has an interest in seeing that this property is maintained for its
intended purpose and not abaftdoned in the future. G.S. Section 121-35 states that the holder
may be a non-profit corporation or trust or a private corporation or business entity whose
purposes include any of those listed in paragraph 1 of Section 121-35, which indicates that
Hannah Creek Homeowners Association could be an appropriate donee if its charter and bylaws
are appropriately crafted. A cppy of that statute is enclosed for your reference.
Please require the applicant to submit to you for our review the proposed conservation
agreement and homeowners association documents.
3. Preliminary Plan. Phasing on the preliminary plan needs to he revised so that the first
phase includes the private dedication of the arboretum, conservation easement, equestrian and
pedestrian trails, etc. The existence of these areas is presumably critical to the development
being considered as suitable for private roads and the County should ensure that these areas will
he preserved even if subsequent phases are never developed. This should be the case in all such
projects.
Also we note that since the bulk of the arboretum, conservation easement, equestrian and
pedestrian trails,etc. are inaccessible except by private roads, there needs to be some interim or
permanent pedestrian easement connecting these areas to Elizabeth Walters Road so it is
accessible to Phase A and all other Phases prior to completion of the entire subdivision.
4. Road Maintenance Agreement. Section IV-B-3-d-2 of the Orange County Subdivision
Regulations requires, among other things, that the subdivider of a subdivision containing private
roads record a document substantially in the form of the County's Standard Road Maintenance
Agreement guaranteeing the right of access for the proposed private road to a State or
municipally maintained road by way of direct access or other private roads. The road
maintenance agreement proposed provides private mad access to Elizabeth Walters Road. While
this road is to he dedicated and accepted as a public road, it will not be State or municipally
maintained immediately after its creation. Therefore, the agreement must provide for access
to High Rock Road, which is; State maintained. Article 2 should also he revised to include
Elizabeth Walters Road.
Further, when the Cotlnry accepts a public dedication of a road, it does so expressly
without maintenance responsibilities. Section V-D-6-b of the Subdivision Regulations requires
•
2
OCT-13-1994 13:44 FROM COLEMAN GLEDHILL HARGRAUE TO b443002 P.04
16
Letter to Mary Willis
October 13, 1994
Page 3
that the owner of the property being subdivided assume full responsibility for the maintenance
of the public road until it is accepted for maintenance by an appropriate body. With that in
mind, the applicant should be advised that it might be wise to consider including the maintenance
of Elizabeth Walters Road in this agreement until such time as the road is accepted by the State
for maintenance.
We have read but not " eviewed" the second paragraph of Article 3. This language is not
a part of the County's standard road maintenance document and its rneaning.is not known to us.
We make no further comment on this paragraph except to say that it does not seem to diminish
the private rights of way maintenance established in this proposed subdivision.
Finally, the reference tt+ Spoon Lake, Inc. in the last paragraph should be corrected.
Please advise the applicant of the re,sults of our review and request the necessary revisions
and further documentation. We appreciate your patience as this was a detailed project and
required a more extensive review than most.
•
•
Sinc- y ours,
ire..
Dutton
•
•
3
TOTAL P.04
Private Road Justification (Revised) 17
for
Hannah Creek Subdivision
We submit that private roads are justified in the Hannah Creek
Subdivision because of the specific nature and location of the
subdivision.
1) The subdivision is designed to preserve the natural character of
the area as much as possible through:
a) The subdivision has minimal public road frontage, and a
wooded buffer, building setbacks and tree conservation will assure
that all houses are screened from the public road. Setbacks and
covenants against cutting trees in the buffer will see that this
continues to be true into the future.
b) The average lot size is at least twice the minimum required
by the zoning. This is a fifty percent reduction in density.
c) The Rural Character Study and the current Open Space /
Flexible Development plan recommend private roads as an incentive
for developments for open-space developments, which matches this
subdivision exactly. This legislation is not finalized yet, but this
meets current and proposed regulations.
d) The density proposed for this subdivision is in line with the.
proposed regulations developed for this area by the Rural Buffer,
which is considered appropriate to protect the much more densely-
populated town of Chapel Hill.
e) Lots along the paved public highway are larger than the
average, while small lots are grouped to provide as much open space
as possible. The lots bordering the creek are long enough to allow a
150' conservation area along the creek in the rear of each lot. The
creek is bordered by mature oak, hickory and beech woods, and
numerous wildlife (including bobcats) have been seen using this
area. There is a 300'-wide conservation easement along the creek,
and the area containing a waterfall has been set aside as a 5-plus-
acre park.
f) Setback lines are significantly greater than required. Where
the county requires only 40' for front setbacks, we are requiring 75'
minimum for most lots. And, again, we are creating larger (150')
rear setbacks for all creek-side lots to protect the creek. Most lots
are wooded, and trees will of course be planted in those that are not.
18
g) The interior roads are located along the highest portion of
the land, in the open whenever possible, to avoid tree-cutting. We
will be planting street trees to create an avenue of shade trees along
both sides of all roads in the open.
h) Except for one stream crossing by a private road, the roads
are well away from streams to allow sufficient infiltration of storm
water run-off prior to any run-off reaching streams. An effort has
been made to cross the creek where it would make the least impact.
i) There are no more than 12 lots accessing any private road,
and the central access road will be a paved public road. This is for
fire protection and school bus access as well as to meet county
requirements.
j) Subdivision of all lots will be prohited through restrictive
covenants.
Thank you for your consideration and time in this matter.
Ann Moss Jol,
for Hannah eek
6919. Lee St. 19
Mebane, NC 27302
9-30-94
Ms. Emily Cameron
Orange County Planning Dept.
Hillsborough, NC 27278 9-30- 94
Dear Emily:
As we discussed on the phone yesterday, I would like to apply for a
variance to the landscape ordinance in order to accomplish a plan that is
more in keeping with a "planned community" of lots (as opposed to a
subdivision of individual lots that just happen to be adjacent).
For Hannah Creek, we would like to use the trees we are supposed to plant
as street trees (instead of along the borders of the open lots) . This
means taking the total number of trees and placing all of them (or nearly
all, as agreed upon) along the front of the lots, and it means placing them
in the street right-of-way, rather than set back from the street.
We need to plant in the right-of-way so that the trees will be close
enough together to eventually make a canopy across the road, and so that
we can install Chapel Hill grit sidewalks in the right-of-way (when
possible), as well.
I took pictures of several residential streets in Chapel Hill (such as North
and Rosemary streets)* and measured the widths of the streets, shoulders
and sidewalks, and their relationships to each other. I have also measured
the distance between trees, which is between 50' and 100'. We want to
plant our trees (willow oaks) between 50' and 75' apart (as deemed
necessary) along both sides of the street, wherever the land is open.
I have sketched a section of what I am proposing, and hope it is clear.
Thanks for your help, and I wish you the best in "your new endeavor!" (Call
me if you need something.)
Sincerely,
Ann Moss Joy?
P.S. Of course, we will not be installing curb and gutter, and we will have
grass between the road and sidewalk.
20
STAFF EVALUATION OF PRIVATE ROAD JUSTIFICATION
SUBDIVISION: Hannah Creek- Preliminary Plan
DATE: October 13, 1994
The standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to public and private roads are
listed below. The Planning Staff comment regarding each is provided in italics.
IV-B-3-d-1. Roads - Public roads are generally required in all subdivisions and will be required
where it is found that:
1. The subdivision roads would be accepted by the State for maintenance if:
a) They are built in a manner which satisfies the minimum State design
and construction criteria for subdivision roads; and
(If the roads were built according to State construction standards, they
could be accepted by the State when the required density is met.)
b) They would satisfy other requirements for addition to the State
maintenance system, including, but not limited to, the general density
standard of at least two occupied residences for each one-tenth of a
mile of subdivision road.
(According to the Department of Transportation, a road less than one
mile in length must provide ingress and egress for at least 5 occupied
permanent residences and have a minimum density of two houses per
tenth of a mile. These private roads serve a total of 34 residences
when the subdivision is fully developed. NCDOT would consider this
positively when reviewing any request for State maintenance.)
2. The subdivision roads extend existing roads which are public; or
(The subdivision roads do not extend existing public roads.)
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
(The subdivision is not located in a designated Urban or Transition Area.)
4. A proposed road is designated as an arterial or collector street on an approved
Thoroughfare Plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive
Plan; or
1
21
(The proposed roads are neither arterial or collectors.)
5. The subdivision roads are part of a non-residential development consisting of
office, retail, industrial, and similar businesses, each located on a separate lot.
This provision shall only apply to that portion of a subdivision being developed
for non-residential purposes.
(The subdivision roads are proposed for residential development.)
However, private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where, in the judgment of the
Planning Board and with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, it is
found that the nature and location of the subdivision with respect to other
development and the Comprehensive Plan are such that a private road is justified.
In determining whether-to permit private roads in subdivisions, the following design
features will be considered:
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 significantly
greater than required by ordinance provisions. Compliance with this
standard is assured in University Lake Watershed where a subdivision
is required to provide a minimum required lot size of five acres.
Where the minimum required lot size is less than five acres, compliance
is assured when each lot in the subdivision contains at least twice the
minimum required lot size. For example, if the minimum required lot
size is two acres, and each lot contains at least four acres, compliance is
assured; and/or
(Lots in the subdivision average 1.73 acres, .11 acre less than twice the
minimum lot area of.92 acres. Proposed building setback lines will
be larger than required by the ordinance on at least 35 of the 45
proposed lots. Front setbacks of 125 feet are required on four lots.
Front setbacks of 75 feet are required on 13 lots. Rear setbacks are
increased to 40 feet on seven lots adjacent to Spoon Lake. Rear
setbacks on lots adjacent to the stream range from about 25 feet to
about 60 feet greater than required due to the conservation easement.)
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,
maintain a wooded or forested character, maintain scenic views, or
preserve wildlife, botanical, historic, archaeological and/or recreation
sites;
(The site is mostly wooded. Proposed dwelling units will be screened
from High Rock Road by and existing trees within the 75 foot
conservation easement proposed along High Rock Road. Retention of
existing vegetation within a 250 foot conservation easement centered on
the stream will and a 5-acre arboretum set aside for passive use by the
residents of the subdivision will maintain and preserve the wooded
character of the site.)
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
2
22
accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State
requirements.
(Upon buildout, the subdivision will meet NCDOT density requirements.)
3. Recreation and/or open space areas, including lands containing significant
botanical, wildlife, historic and/or archaeological sites, are to be dedicated
and/or preserved through restrictive-covenants in amounts significantly greater
than required by standards for recreation/open space dedication.
(Approximately five[5]acres of park land is proposed along the stream in the
northwest corner of the property. This is a natural wooded area containing a
waterfall. There is no requirement for the dedication of recreation or open
space area.)
4. Significantly 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.
(The conservation easement extends 125 feet from each side of the stream. The
required stream buffer ranges from about 60 feet to about 10100 feet. Thus the
conservation easement results in a buffer which is 25 feet to 65 feet greater
than required. There is a large stream buffer proposed along the perennial
stream running through the property. Lot sizes, along the stream, are larger
than required which will reduce the amount of impervious surface. The
average size of the residential lots adjacent to the stream is 2.27 acres. The
average size of all lots along the stream (including the 5-acre arboretum)is
2.44 acres. These figures compare with an average lot size of 1.73 acres for the
entire subdivision.
5. Topographic and environmental features, such as streams, steep slopes, or
watersheds, that would be adversely affected by the use of roads constructed
to State standards because of factors such as significant amounts of earthwork
(cut and fill) that would contribute to increased run-off of stormwater and
siltation.
(Building all the roads to State standards would require grading significantly
more area than with the proposed private roads. The stream would be
adversely affected by construction of a public road crossing instead of a private
road.)
6. The site is already developed to 100% of the capacity which could be achieved
after approval of the subdivision and some or all of the non-conforming aspects
of existing development on the site will be made more conforming as a result of
the proposed subdivision, and all conforming aspects of the development will
remain conforming.
(Not applicable.)
7. There is only one subdivision road proposed. Its length does not exceed 350
feet. It serves no more than five lots. Its grade does not exceed nine percent.
The'land being subdivided is not connected to or is part of another subdivision
required to be served by public roads. In addition, the average lot size within
the subdivision is at least 40,000 square feet.
(Not applicable.)
3
23
EVALUATION SUMMARY: The subdivision is located in the Back Creek Watershed and the
stream running through the property flows directly into Back Creek. Although the subdivision roads
would be taken over by the State if they were built to their standards, the subdivision is located in a
rural area of the County designated as Agricultural Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. The
subdivision proposes conservation easements along the stream and along High Rock Road, larger than
required setbacks, and a park area to protect vegetation and a waterfall area. The private roads would
also reduce the impervious surface area in the subdivision. Based on these factors the Staff
recommends that the subdivision roads be private, except for the main entrance road, and constructed
to Class A or Class B standards, as required for the number of lots to be served by the individual
private roads.
4
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR HANNAH CREEK SUBDIVISION 24
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE STANDARD APPROACH
Prepared by
The Orange County Planning Department
October, 1994
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Hannah Creek is a proposed 45-lot major subdivision located in Cedar Grove Township on the
south side of High Rock Road just east of the Alamance County line. The total area of the subdivision is
84 acres,and the current zoning is AR-Agricultural Residential.The average lot size is approximately 1.84
acres, including the area within street rights-of-way. All lots will be served by individual wells and septic
tanks, and a combination of public and private roads. In addition to the 45 building lots, one additional lot
(5.0 acres) is proposed for open space purposes.
For Hannah Creek,project build-out is estimated at eight years.Housing units will be constructed,
beginning in 1995, with completion of the project scheduled for 2002. Units will consist of detached
single-family homes, and the applicant estimates the average sales price to be$150,000, including the lot.
METHODOLOGY
Fiscal impact analysis is a projection of the direct, current, public costs and revenues associated
with residential and non residential growth in the jurisdiction in which the growth is taking place. Fiscal
impact analysis considers only direct impact in that it projects only the primary costs that will be incurred
and the immediate revenues that will be generated. It calculates the financial effect of a planned
development or new subdivision by considering the current costs and revenues such a development would
generate if it were completed and occupied today.Fiscal impact analysis does not consider the private costs
of public action, It is concerned only with public (governmental) costs and revenues.
The method used in preparing the fiscal impact analysis is the Service Standard Approach. While
only gross expenditures by service category are derived from the Per Capita Method,the Service Standard
method determines the total number of additional employees by service function that will be required as
a result of growth. This method employs average county government costs per person, average school
costs per pupil, an employee to population ratio, and average operating expenses per employee for each
service category and school district. The number of new employees are projected and multiplied times the
average operating expenses(includes personnel,operating and capital costs)per employee. These average
costs are then weighed against per capita and per pupil revenues to project the total net fiscal impact of
the development.
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2F
SERVICE STANDARD APPROACH
PROJECT FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Section 1 - Project Data
Project Name, Township, School District
Beginning Year, Ending Year, Inflation
Characteristics of Households
Construction Schedule/Cost Data
Section 2 - Local Government and School District Data
Budget Year
Per Capita Revenues
Per Capita Expenditures
Per Student Expenditures
School District Per Employee Expenditures
Employees Per 1000 Population
County Per Employee Expenditure
Other Data
Other Model Constants
School District Data
Section 3 - Demographic Projections Based On Project Data
Total Housing
Total Population
School Children
Additional County Employees
Total
School District Additional Employees
Section 4 - Projected Net Fiscal Impact on County
Tax Base
Revenues
Expenditures
Net Fiscal Impact
Section 5 - Projected Net Fiscal Impact on School District
Revenues •
Expenditures
Net Fiscal Impact
Section 6 - Summary of Projected Impacts
Additional Housing
Additional Population
Additional School Children
Tax Base
County Government Balance
School District Balance
Total Net Fiscal Impact
EXPLANATION OF TERMS AND DATA SOURCES
26
EXPLANATION OF TERMS AND DATA SOURCES
SECTION 1 - PROJECT DATA
Project data includes information about the specific development project. Much, if not all, of the
information is supplied by the applicant. Data inputs include:
Project Name: Name of the project.
Township: Township in which the project is located.
School District: School district in which the project is located.
Beginning Year: The first year of the project in which dwelling units are completed and
occupied.
Ending Year: The last year in which dwelling units are completed and occupied. The template is set to
calculate fiscal impacts for a ten-year period.
Inflation Rate: Unless an inflation rate is entered, the template will calculate fiscal impacts based on
constant dollars. Since the inflation rate changes frequently, the Finance Department must be contacted
for the most recent figure.
Persons/Household:The estimated average number of persons/household(dwelling unit) based on 1990
Census data for the township in which the project is located. This information is supplied by the Planning
Department and will be updated as necessary using population projections and building permit data.
Children/Household: The estimated average number of school age children/household (dwelling unit)
based on 1990 Census data for the township in which the project is located. This information is supplied
by the Planning Department and will be updated as necessary using school membership data.
%Non-Elderly:N.C.General Statutes permit an$11,000 exemption to the elderly and disabled who meet
certain income criteria. In the event that elderly units are part of the project, the percentage of eligible
non-elderly units is entered. The tax base will automatically be adjusted to reflect the exemption.
Number of Homes: The number of dwelling units to be constructed in the project in each year.
Average Sales Price:The average sales price of all dwelling units based on the number and sales price
of dwelling unit types to be constructed in each year.
27
SECTION 2 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA
Local government data includes information regarding expenditures required to provide County
services and revenues received based on the approved Orange County budget for the fiscal year in which
the project is considered for approval.All information derived from the approved budget remains constant
throughout a fiscal year (July-June) and is changed only with the approval of a new budget.
Local government revenue and expenditure information is compiled on a per capita (per person)
basis. Per capita figures are derived by dividing the total expenditures for a particular service function or
revenue source by the estimated population of Orange County for the year in which the project is
considered for approval. Populations estimates are prepared by the Planning Department.
Data inputs include the following:
Budget Year: The current fiscal year; i.e., 1993-94.
Per Capita Revenues: The sources of revenue by major category are as follows:
Taxes-Other Than Property:Revenues from taxes other than property taxes include those from sales
and use taxes, franchise taxes, and animal taxes.
Intergovernmental Aid: Revenues from this source, in the form of categorical aid or shared-tax
revenues, are provided through State and federal assistance programs.
Service Charges: Service (or user) charges support numerous functions and are charged to those who
voluntarily receive governmental services or use governmental facilities.
Miscellaneous: Miscellaneous revenues include interest earnings on investments, proceeds from license
and permit fees, and all other revenues.
Per Capita Expenditures: Expenditures by major category are as follows:
General Government: Services related to the legislative, administrative, financial, and legal functions
of government.• .
Public Safety: Law enforcement services and emergency medical services.
Public Works: Efforts related to the maintenance of County-owned property and the provision of
sanitation (solid waste disposal) services.
Human Services: Departments responsible for the provision of health, social, and recreation-related
services.
Education: Orange County supports two school units, the Orange County school system and the Chapel
Hill\Carrboro school system. This category includes appropriations made to the designated school system
for Recurring Capital items. Recurring Capital funds are used for general maintenance, purchase of new
equipment/furnishings and vehicle maintenance.
Non-Departmental: Contributions to agencies providing cultural and social services outside the formal
structure of county government. Other expenditures include equipment replacement and contingency
funds. Although there are no employees generated by this category, it has been included as an operating
expenditure. It will be included in Section 4, "Total Annual County Expenditure." These expenditures will
be calculated on a per capita basis as opposed to a per employee basis.
28
Per Student Expenditures:Information regarding expenditures required to provide educational services
and revenues received are based on the approved school system budgets for the fiscal year in which the
project is considered for approval. All information derived from the approved budgets remains constant
throughout a fiscal year (July-June) and is changed only with the approval of new budgets.
Expenditure information is compiled on a per student basis for County Government Current Expense,
School District and State appropriations. County Government Current Expense funds are used for general
operation purposes including Instruction and Support Services. Federal revenues and expenditures and
other local revenues such as Fund Balance have not been included since they are not directly growth
related. Per student figures are derived by dividing the total appropriation for educational purposes from
a particular source by the estimated number of students to be enrolled in the applicable school system for
the year in which the project is considered for approval. Student enrollments are obtained from the
approved school system budgets.
County Government: Expenditures in this category are based on appropriations to the school systems
by Orange County for Current Expense. The minimum level of per student appropriation is determined
by the State Board of Education.
School District:Expenditures in this category are unique to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system and
are based on the level of expenditures possible through assessment of a supplementary school tax.
State: Expenditures in this category are based on appropriations from the State Board of Education.
School District Per Employee Expenditure: Expenditures per employee based on County, School
District and State appropriations, and the total number of school district employees.
Employees Per 1000 Population: The number of employees in a particular service category per 1000
population.
County Per Employee Expenditure: The average operating and capital expenses per employee in a
particular service category. Total expenses in each category includes personnel,operating and capital costs.
Other Data:
County Government Tax Rate: The County tax rate per $100 of assessed valuation. Since the per
capita method focuses only on operating expenditures, the tax rate is reduced by an amount equal to the
debt service payments from property taxes for capital projects.
School District Tax Rate:The supplementary tax assessed on behalf of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school
system.
Assessment Ratio: The ratio of market(sales) value to assessed value based on information supplied by
the Tax Office. The assessment ratio is used to convert market value to assessed value for the purpose
of computing the tax base.
Other Model Constants
Elderly Exemption:For projects developed partially or exclusively for elderly(65 and older) or disabled
individuRla whose annual income does not exceed$12,000, an$11,000 tax exemption is used in projecting
the tax base.
School District Employees Per Student: The number of employees per student in a specific school
district.
29
SECTION 3 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS BASED ON PROJECT DATA
Demographic projections provide information about the number of new residents and school children
anticipated in Orange County resulting from project development.Projections also provide the number of
additional employees required per service function and school district as a result of the new development.
Total Housing Units: The cumulative total of new housing units added each year by project
development.
Total Population: The total population added each year by a project derived by multiplying the number
of homes to be constructed by the number of persons per household (see Section 1).
School Population: The total number of school children added each year by a project derived by
multiplying the number of homes constructed by the number of children per household (see Section 1).
Additional County Employees: The number of additional employees required per service category
based on project development.
Total: Total of all additional county employees required based on project development.
School District Additional Employees: The number of additional employees required per school
district based on the project development.
SECTION 4 - PROJECTED NET FISCAL IMPACT ON COUNTY
Tax Base: The tax base represents the increase in assessed property value expected each year resulting
from project development.The values shown are in$1,000's and are derived from a formula which includes
the number and sales price of homes, and the assessment ratio. Where applicable, the percentage of
non-elderly units and elderly exemption are also used.
Revenues: All revenues are derived from a formula which multiplies the per capita revenues (Section 2)
times the projected population (Section 3). The exception to this is the property tax which multiplies the
tax base times the county government tax rate.
Expenditures: All expenditures are derived from a formula which multiplies the per employee
expenditure (Section 2) times the number of additional employees (Section 3).
Net Fiscal Impact: The net balance is the difference between projected expenditures and
projected revenues. A negative net balance indicates that it costs Orange County more to provide services
to a project than it receives in revenues.A positive net balance indicates that more revenues are received
than it costs to serve a project. Positive net balances in one project may thus be used to offset negative
balances in another.
30
SECTION b - PROJECTED NET FISCAL IMPACT ON SCHOOL DISTRICT
Revenues: The County contribution is derived by transferring education expenditures by County
government(Section 4).Revenues derived from the school district tax are derived by multiplying the school
district tax times the tax base. State revenues are derived by multiplying the per student expenditure
figure times the total projected number of school children (Section 3).
Expenditures: Expenditures are derived from a formula which multiplies each per student
expenditure (Section 2) times the total projected number of school children (Section 3) and adding the
results.
Net Fiscal Impact: The net balance is the difference between projected expenditures and
projected revenues. A negative net balance indicates that it costs the school system more to provide
educational services for children in a project than it receives in revenues. A positive net balance indicates
that more revenues are received than it costs to serve a project. Positive net balances in one project may
thus be used to offset negative balances in another.
SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PROJECTED IMPACTS
31
RESIDENTIAI.FISCAI,IMPACT TEMPLATE: SERVICE STANDARD METHOD
Bureau of Economic & Business Research — University of Florida
Modified 11/5/93 — Orange County,NC Planning Department
SECTION 1 - PROJECT DATA: ENTER THE FOLLOWING DATA FOR EACH PROJECT:
PROJECT: Hannah Creek Subdivision
TOWNSHIP: Cedar Grove
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD:
Beginning Year: 1995
Ending Year: 2002
inflation Rate: 2.9U .
CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS:
Persons/House: 2.73
Children/House: 0.46
HOME SALES DATA:
Average Distribution
Number of Sales Price of Units
Year Homes ($) by Year
1995 3 150000 6.67
1996 7 150000 15.56%
1997 9 150000 20.00
1998 9 150000 20.00%
1999 7 150000 15.56c
2000 4 1500(X) 8.89%
2001 4 150000
2002 2 150000 4.44%
2003 0 0 0.00
2004 0 0 0.00%
SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA: ENTER"1"IN( )BESIDE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN WHICH PROJECT IS TO BE
LOCATED TO GENERATE STUDENT DISTRIBUTION BY SCHOOL TYPE.
School District: School Attendance:
Orange county ( 1 ) Elementary School 50
Middle School 23%
Chapel Hil—carrboro ( 0 ) High School 27
SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN/HOUSEHOLD: ENTER NUMBER OF UNITS BY HOUSING TYPE TO
GENERATE NUMBER OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN.
Children School Age
Housing Type Units Per House Children
Single—Family 45 0.46 21
Duplex/Triplex/Quadplex 0 0 0
Town House 0 0 0
Totals 45 0.46 21
SECTION 2 — LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA 32
COUNTY POPULATION: 100758
SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT POPULATLON 5444
COUNTY EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER CAPITA
GeneraLGovernment I0&60 00011
Public Safety 134.00 .0.0013•Public Works 5G00 0 0005
Human Services 24629 0.0024
SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER STUDENT
COUNTY PER CAPITA REVENUES ($): REVENUES PER CAPITA
Taxes- Other Than Property 4127000 4096
Intergovernmental , 8778421 87.12
Service Charges 2969123 2947
Miscellaneous 787197 7.81
COUNTY PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURES PER CAPITA
Public Safety 5854402 58.10
PublieWrks 2760727 2740
Human Services 15528989 154.12
Education(Recurring Capital) 750000 744
Non—Departmental 2343967 23.26
COUNTY PER EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURE ($): EXPENDITURES PER EMPLOYEE
Public Safety . 5854402 43689.57
Public Wurks 2760727 55214.54
•Human Services 15528989 63051.64
SCHOOL DISTRICT PER STUDENT EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURES PER STUDENT
County Government 7420172 136300
School District 0 0.00
State 17584881 3230 14
SCHOOL DISTRICT PER EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURES PER EMPLOYEE
County Government 7420172 1022062
School District 0 0.00
TAX DATA: ENTER APPLICABLE ASSESSMENT RATIO AND RI.DERLY EXEMPTION:
CountyTaxRate ($) 07460 Per$10(}Assessed Valuation
School District Tax Rate ($) 0.0000 Per$100 Assessed Valuation
Asessmet Rate 10000
Elderly Exemption 0 $11,000 Where Applicable
33
SECTION 3 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS BASED ON PROJECT DATA
YEAR 1995::' 1996 1997 1998 :1999::
HOUSING UNITS 3,` 10 19!j 28 35:
POPULATION ----
OPULATION $ 27 52 76 96:
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary . 1; 2 ! 4: 6 8
Middle 1
High School 0 1
2 3
4.'.
TOTAL 1:: 5 9 13 16:•
COUNTY GOVERNMENT .,>
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES .i ::
General Government 0 0: 0.0 01 0.1 0.1
Public Safety 0 0 0 0 0.1.. 0.1 01.
Public Works 0 0;i 0 0 d 0: 0.0 0 0
Human Services 0 0: 01 01.; 0.2 0 2
TOTAL 04 0.1 03. 0.4
SCHOOL DISTRICT :. 0 l: 0.2 0 4 0.6 ' 0 7.:
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES
YEAR 2000': 2001 2002 2003 2004T
HOUSING UNITS 39 43 45 45 45'
POPULATION 106 117 123 123 : 123::
SCHOOL CHILDREN
Elementary 9:' 10 : 10, 10 ..10
Middle 4; 5 .. .
5; ... ., S:
High School 5` S . ;. 6> 6 :! ; 6
TOTAL ... . : .. . 18 20 21 21
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES :.
General Government 01 0.1 0.1 0.1 01
Public Safety 01: 02 0 2.. 02 :0.2.
Public Works 01: 0.1
01 0.1 p.1:.;
Human Services : 0 3 03 ::: . 0 3; 0.3 ...... :: 0.3:
TOTAL : 06` 0.6 07,; 0.7 0.7.;
SCHOOL DISTRICT 0 8 0.8 0 9: 0.9 0.9:
ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES
SECTION 4 — PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF PROJECT ON COUNTY GOVERNMENT 34
YEAR 1995': 1996 1997; 1998 1999::
TAX BASE($1000) 450:: 1513 2907 4341 5517
REVENUES ($)
Property Tax : 335`7.: 11287 ; 21686: 32386 41158:
Other Taxes 335 1151 2250 3411 4388
Intergovernmental 714 2447 4785 7256 9333;
Service Charges 241.' 828 1`618 2454 3757'
Miscellaneous 64 219
429: 651 i;837;
TOTAL ($) 4711 15933 30768 46158 58872'
EXPENDITURES($)
General Government 508: 1743 308 5167 6647'
Public Safety 476.: 1632 3191: 4839 6224+
Public Works 224 770 X505 2282 2935;
Human Services 1262: 4330 8465:; 12836 16510;,
Education 1942;: 6661 13022 19747 25400
Non—Departmental 191 : 654 1278 1937 2492:
TOTAL ($) 46034 15789 3ti868< 46809 6020'9:
108;
NET FISCAL IMPACT($) 144 101;: 1336
YEAR 2000 2001 2002': 2003
2004:
TAX BASE ($1000) 6277 7059 X564 7783 8009:
REVENUES ($) .
Property Tax .46827 52661 56426 58063 59747.:
Other Taxes 5031:, 5708 61.47;: 6325 6508;
Intergovernmental x0701,_; 12141 13074 13453 . ..- ........13844:
Service Charges :: 3620: 4107
4x22; 4550 4682:
Miscellaneous : 960 1089 1.172; 1206 ... .1241;:_
TOTAL ($) 67139: 75706 .
X1242; 83598 .. : 80022:
EXPENDITURES ($)
General Government 7621: 8646 9311.: 9581 9853;
Public Safety 7137.: 8097 ; 8719 8972
9232':
Public Works 3365: 3818 4112 4231 4354;
Human Services 18931: 21478 23128 s 23799 :, 24489:
Education :29124:: 33042 35582:: 36614 ..:: 37675;
Non—Departmental 2857, 3242 3491 3592 36969
TOTAL ($) ; 69035 78323 84343 886789 _ .. 89306':
NET FISCAL IMPACT ($) 1896?` —2618 3101:: —3191 3284
35
SECTION 5 - PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF PROJECT ON SCHOOL DISTRICT
YEAR 1995 1996 1997 1998 ;1999
REVENUES ($)
:-: 1942; 6661 13022: 19747 25400:.
County
School District fi;.. 0 0 0 -:•••,..: 0`
State 4458; 15290 29893!: 45330 58305.'
42915' 65077 83
TOTAL ($) 6399 21950 706
EXPENDITURES ($) ..
County 1942; 6661 13022 19747 2540(}:
0
School District 0 0 0 0
State 4458: 15290 29893._ 45330 58305.
TOTAL ($) 6399 21950 .42915: 65077 83706'
NET FISCAL IMPACT($) :;, 0_; 0
0?i 0 4
YEAR 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
REVENUES($) :
County ;29124::: 33042 35582: 36614 • 37675'
School District 0 0 D. 0 0:
State 66853; 75847 81677: 84046 86483
TOTAL ($) ..=95977: 108889 17259 120659 124158;:
EXPENDITURES($)
County 29124;. 33042 35582 36614 37675:
School District ;:.: ......: . 0:; 0 0• 0 . .:' .. 0•
State : .66853: 75847 :: 81677; 84046 is .86483;
TOTAL ($) 95977 108889 11'7259 120659 '124158:
NET FISCAL IMPACT($) P:: 0 .
0- 0 A
•
36 ,
SECTION 6 — SUMMARY OF PROJECTED DEMOGRAPHIC/FISCALIMPACTS
..........,,...,....,..,.... .,.....: ., . .:.
YEAR :::f:-:::4U.:..::,:!::::::::::1!i::::',::::::;:::19p.5::::::,: 1996 .............::::'..;;;?„-,;:t.:::::::::::,,,..:,::::::::.1991:-.,.;;; 1998 '..,...J.:;;„..;:a!,:.,:•,'„;.:::; :;,;::;.;;.;;;;...;;,..: :.;i1999:.:.
--::::::::::,..,:,:::::-...,.--.::::::,::.....,....:::::::::::.:ii:::-.o.::::::::::•.::::::. ...,..........;:.;.:,....„:„....:::::.:: :::::.:.....,,,:.:.....::::...".........:,... ........-,
.„.:.::,,.. ........
HOUSING UNITS 10 ''.1::::i..."::::: ::-:: ::M"::.--":"':...'...:':::::,1.9,:::::: 28 '-:;-:::::::;:',..::.;;.';'-;:::::':.'...';.;:-.;.....;';.-..'.'.;..;; '.;,.....;:-.35-.
; ---•:::.'i..•i'.:-,...i''. ..:1:?....;.:•;,..;•,.::::::;.;'.:;";;.,, .„......„,:„..; .,,,i,..... ..,,,,,..„,....,,-.;„ ; ; ; ; ; ;.--...;::;•• ....,-..
POPULATION ;..,.:::::-.,:ii..-. i...-:-..• .-i-'..:':',.'-i:',.---..::.n,:-::::-:::::::::#--:,..: 27 -::::'...;,-;:.,.;•:::.:4):.„'„:....::•:;i:'...:;;; ::::::::......:..5Z;; 76 :•;.;ii•.:.;:•-•:-1::..';.,;i:::::;.i-.,:,";.;-:.:;:;---.-.';•:::-:.:;,96.
,,„.........,,,.,.....-„:„...„...„..,::::::,,,.. ..,...:,:,•,,,..........;:::„...;.„.„....,„
......... ........ ......;:.....„......:
SCHOOL CHILDREN
::::::-.,:....:-.;*:„.......,.. ,..--:?.......i..;:-..::...:::,?. ..,..:....:...::::::::: .........„:,...:„:„„:„...„...:,....,,,..,..„ ,... .
Elementary ::::::::::::::::-.•:::::: :::::::::-•MM:',:--:-•:::::::i...v. 2 ..-:::::;••.i].: ::::--;it.'.;:: :::::::Ri..:::::::::..i::::::..-••.:4-- 6 '....:'::::--':',.:-..:::'•:-:-.M:::.:::::::*:::::::::::-:•-•-•-•:.•'-•- .1.••'-'8
.............„-......„„„,„:„:„,„:„„„...„:„........,
..„...„,..,..,„:„:„..,.„,..........„.„,„........„,.....„: . „... ...........„...„....,„„.„.„,, :„..;.•,,-::::::.:,,,•„• .,.,,,•-•••-..-:,::-:,
Middle
"..--."..- ---'0. 1 :'•.-;•::.:-.:T.:::.•-•.••:',•• •-.'-•::•::::•:-..*:•:-:-. .•-•::::':'•.2.•i'.-, 3 .;::::•-.. ..:::::,.,:::::..•••,...-u....„-:......;•.:'-..•-.- .,.,.4-
,„:„„....„...„.„,....„‘ . .„„.....,_„„........„ .:-..:;,:.,•-.,•-. ;„,•.-.:,,-„ ,..!..-.,:-,:.:-„,.,-,-..---. -.•:•.....,••-.....-.
High School 1 i.--.•...,-'_-.:•, •:.-•-:-..•••:-.,.. .-..--.::::•- •-.:-.-.:•.:-.-:•.•2:-: 3 :::...-?--.•-:::::::::::::••:::',-:::„.-..•:.•-•_::::,,•-•;-:.-::::::::::::•„:•4---.
.......... ...„., ,..,,.,.,... ..i.:•.„,•.-..::.:•:::-.-••::,-.•-•-....:•„:•-•••:::::•-..:
.„„:;,...,,
TOTAL :1''E'-'.:.., ::":.:::'"'. ..:::::::.:: :::::,.::::::.:::::::::t.:.-..::: 5 :.;,...::::::". .:.::•;;--.,':::::::::.:::::•::::.;;:: :::::: ;--.:;:;:•:*. 13 -.,;.:.;-:::::::-;;.-.!,.;,;::::::.;..::: ::-.,.;,.-,g;.:,.::...-::-:;,,:,,::46;:-
;.;,;-...„:„.. ..,........ ....;i:„.......:::::,:.. . , :?...i-,„...„..,,...,..,...;„.„...,........,... .... ..
COUNTY EMPLOYEES 0.1 •-•;.::::::::::...;;:::::::-.;...:;:ii..-..i.....-:.;:.;;.-,;-;:. .,03.: 0.4 •::::::::',:::;::::;;,;-.;',...:;,•••.'.;;;;'...:;;;;.:.;',-.;,-;.;• '135.?:.
,...„.„.„..;......
..;' ,...,...,....;,:„...,,,,.....:,..,‘,...;,.i....:,....-„,,,.....,....,;....--,. .,......
. ... ..................„„. ...,..;
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES '•:::::•.::.:,':'."'-i' l'''':•iii:iii:i''''..-. :::".:--0.4. 0.2 ::...,':';;:::;;::::•;,;;,;:;;;,;.::ii,...,::::::::: :; ..'.4.4:::: 0.6 ;-;;;;,.-::::::,;,.;=„;',....-- :::::;ii,.::;.•;;;..;.'„ :::•-,.9.7...
:„...„....,..„. ..„:„........,,:::,,,,. ...„
TAX BASE($1000) ii'-.'-'.'-'::::-..-,•aa".;•.-.•••:::.i:-.•:,-,-,i:,-,i,.,-450:•::: 1513 ::•.:-......:.::::.',.• ,.-:•';:•'.'''',•..::::-.:-.T-•:-:2907::: 4341 :-..:.-.:-,...':'.,:-...•.:J...•::::,-,-.•-•::•-•i•:••••:•:.•,.--.....5517-
COUNTY BUDGET(S) .,:iig.:::".i).:1.;:i:;::::,.;:ii::::.10...":k....i;:],V,Ri.$!: :,::,"::::,....„'.....:.:--,>:,... :•..?::::::: ::::::"g:f...:,,,,::::::::-..:,,;..:
Revenues -..::::::-..,::::::?:?,:'::::::::-----1:: ::•-.471I::-. 15933 ''....•:•:.•:•-:::.'-'-.t--:::::::::::•::-. --1::::.•-_---'.:30768-..--.:: 46158 ...a•-'-:::::-•:'.:::•':::',.:::-.;.•'"::':..•-....--.•••=•...:58872.-
„:-...-...„...„„.,:-.,,„..........„:-.. ..--„:.,„..„. ...........* :
•-.E:-:-.:,..0::::::?::•:•:-...:::::•.:.:::::::::::.-:,..-•::-.....:-.:-•:.-::
Expenditures ':•'.'*"':--i'•-•,-,•::i.,•••-iiii:--,,i,:•.:.-i.•,i,-•:::.--.4003:'.•-:: 15789 ::-.-.•:•-•-•,•-•:::::::::::::•:::.:•::::?. .:10868:: 46809 ..:::::::::•-:::::-.-,;:g-,-E--::.:„4.E:-,..:.:•:.....60209...:
...„ ... ....„:„................„.:„..„,.... :.:,.,,:-.....,.„„„:.:....,„,„„,....:.„:„..,...:,..:,......
BALANCE 104:::: 144 --'....::::::'-':[0'..-.•::•-••.,.-::•-::::::,,,:::::-.:4,410.1.:::::: -_:•:::::-,--:-..-„,..,.....--..---.:::::,.:-.-
—652 1::;:;.;.:::::.'.;;::::;J•..j•,;;;;:;.:::::::-..743.36.
SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET(S),::',......::::,,1:.::::::,,:•:...,.0:....q..,..,:::::::::..'4,.-:,:::-.....0. •:-:::.'":':::::: :::: ::::::....: ::::.:':.:::::::.'::-:'..,:::::::::::::::...1
...,,.....,.......,..:.,.....„:...... ::,....:::::_,.....:.„.„..,.......,„::: .:.,..;]......,....:::,...:........-.-,.,„::::..•::: :::
Revenues ::::::::::::::::,:::::::::::::::,:::::::::::::* •1-'6399., 21950 --- ...-,----:.:.,,,.::•-••••••:,-:::::::::•42P15:',:• 65077 '..--.•:',:::::..-.'---•:: :::---••:•••••••;:::•••::,.-:-1,-.•-.$3706.'-
. ....... „:„„ -.•,"--.- •-•:-.::-.-•:-.•.::::: :::::::::-.:..-:::.::-.-::,--:-..-.,:-i--•--------'•-•
Expenditures ,...i.::,::•:•.*---•.i .::?...,:-•:::;-•::-.•:-.-•::•::-:0399.',::: 21950 ...•.--.... i-.•:-'.:::::::'.•::::-.,::::::::-4291Si.::::. 65077 -•-•.:::-:::::::,..•-.i..::•,:.....•... ...:.: ::::.,:--,:.:::..83706.
-,-•- -..?„:- - - „,-..-„:„
-- ,, .::-.....m.,„, . .-....--:••.: -,,,,•„:•-•,•:-..-.:.•::::::,:-.r.::::::......::-,:::i....,-•:•-,-•:-..,-,,„•-•.-,:•:•.:.-..,-.....--.
BALANCE ::g..:Ri!:::-ii:E!".!ii;i"..,.4:1:4"...::::::::0:::::';': 0 ::::::.:j;:'...--.".:"...:;:j."...Igoi-::::::Ai 0 ,:::::::..,-.ii. .•.::,..--••:::..',:':.,..,-...:::':.:-..:;:::-.--.,.:--:,..',-.:1).::.-
,,.....:::,:.,:..................;.....:......,.........,.....i.,.....:i......,:::.,,,.............. ...................... ....i....:::::::::...,.. . . ......:....:....::::
..................... ........
COMBINED BUDGETS($) ..,...,...,.:........., ,.....,,2..;..,..,:::;:„....,:,..„:::„.,...,,,....,,,,..::,......;:.,....,...". .:.„.,...„„.. . ,,...,., , ., ,
......,..::„.:=,..,..:......i., ..:,..,... ,:i.,.....,„„........:.„..„,...:.,:„..,::.. ,..,......„..,,,..::.•...,.....,..,..,.....,.. ..
Revenues .•-"--,,,,,,"::::',:•::•-,i:::•,-:::::,::•:41, iF. 37883 ::--.-:-.'-:::::::::::::::•-•:•,11::::::•-'••••:‘,.:,-.:-73683-':•:::. 111235 '-',Ji.::g.•.••-•-•••..-:;1•••-: :':::•---.::::-,..:...i42578:-
. -..i..i•i:e.- ........:•,..........,........,„:.,,:::::.:„,-„,„:::::::.
Expenditures ":.:::"::'"'"''''''''''''::::41003::::: 37739 i.:':::'::::',.,'....:,. ...::-.0::::•-,7:37:81.::::. 111887 •••••.'-'-::::::-.•-..:::'- '.::::.?,:••:•.:•-:;::,-,-•••:•-•-'143914.-, .
:-.-,.- -,:h.,„,.„„,„.,.,........,..„, - . - . --- -.
-.--!-•••••,•: ::,.-,V-•••••-"::',.::'•••••••••••'-''''''''',.•i:::
BALANCE R :::::::3::$%:-g10$::::::: 144 ':-.::.•,•-.--:••••„:--.-:-•-•,••••.:::::'.:::::::::-,:•:-.•,-..i.-., .191: —652 ...i'.....,::::.,;.>:',..•;:. .-.•;:'.'-..:;.*.i;.:-.;,;:iH1536
YEAR 4000:::: 2001 2992. 2003 :::::::::::;;: ;::::i;;:;:::;.::::::::.--;;,-;,..,;; -.:-20{)4.,
. ..... ... .......... .
,;.,......,,....... ....
„„...................„..„...... ,...,...,,,:-;,,,,,:.......-,..,..:,::::,:.::::::......,,.....,.,,,,,,„,.„........ ...,..„.:....,„„,„....,,..„.,,,...„,...„..,..„; .....
HOUSING UNITS :::;',.::::::::::::_i:P.:::::::::: ::::'':::: ::::::::..7,:'.::3W. 43 1..,'.';,:;-.:; .:;:-.M.:.:.;;:i.;:;,..;:;,.;;;;.;;;•:-...::: :45..ii;:.; 45 ',::::,.:,.5,:::::;:,;.;:.-.-::.;,.;•.:;....:...:.,:::::;•:....;,,.•..45.
'.....:::::::::-..........,.....:.;,...........:„.„.: ....
POPULATION "..::::::'.'::::&:U:'.::::::::::::::::,::::::::::::::-.]:106....:::: ..:,i'.-:i .....-i:'..:,:-.--; :.
117 '.;,.'-'..;;;;;;'.,:•:;:;-,-;;'g- ;,:i::.-;,:;;;;-,:-.11:: 123 '..-:.:;;;--.:::::::::;-::::::-.::::::-.:;:-:;;;::::;:..'...;::.;::.:-.-;v:123.,
'-;'";:"••••:'-;":::;;;';;"'..:";-;-',;,,,,::::': .::::::„.„:„,..„...„....„..,:;.....;:.,....,..„,‘:,...,,,....,...„..,, „.,.. .
SCHOOL CHILDREN
...................„,„.„...,„......„..„,........„..,.....„ .,........,...::,.....,,i,..„......:.,.„...,„,,..:. .... . ...'.... ..-
Elementary 10 :.--::::?••: :::•-•::::::::::::::::: :-.:-•:,•:::::.-k.i.,.-.V.::: 10 -.•:,--::::.--,li.:-. ..:'-•:•-•-:•-•:::-.'•:-<•:•:'-:-::•,-•.::::::-.-.--:---:.10:.
:•.:.•:::•:•„•.:•..a...:,.:-.::::::::::::-.:'-z.. ...:,:::::,--„,•-.:::•.....::::::: . .„.„,„.„..„„„.„..„?.„.,:.,„:.„:
•Middle 4 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::5: 5 '..'•:::::::::::,::::,.-,:::'::::::::::,:.:::::::::,::::::::::::.::-: .:::.5
. ..,. ..::,,,,,,,,,,,, ,„,,,,,,...:.:.
High School :,,. .-:•• • - - 5 :-.-:•';"-•:•:::::::::::::.ii::::::::::::: ,:•-•.--•.•:--:-•-;:,6.•-:.:: 6 •-.::-.::::.::::::,..4•-:•::::::::-.,:,•..-:-..:::-.-i....••f.•'.. 6
TOTAL 18 20 :".:"....:::-.ff.]:::',..?:,..'.:,,::,:,-...:::::,...::::::::•':21:.:i: 21 ::::.;:::::::::::••„H.:',. :;:s.:.:;:',...;...'.;...•...- :.21
..„.....,.....„. .........., .
COUNTY EMPLOYEES :-.-;„?:::•:.:•:::::::CM:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•:.--:41:6:',-, 0.6 :.::::::::-.--,-,:::-....::::::-::--..„:::::::::::•..-,:::::-...t9....74 0.7 ;.-.;;,.;;::::-. ...;:::;;:: ::::..i:,;;:::::::;,;.. :-..;:;.;9.7:
.,.: .....„..,,...•
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES :::::::-:::.i::::..:'.:;:f:::-.i::::'.::'...-'1,:';',:-::::::::::::::its::::: 08 :,::::::-.-:,:::-. t:::-.I,:::::::::::::::::::::-,.,.:9.9.,,, 0.9 -.;:..."....i.....:;;.:.i':;-.:;;;;,;::;,:,..;•.. ;;;;. 0-9
...h..,....,...,,..
........-.......-....... . .,
TAX BASE($1000) 0277..,:::: 7059 •;:::;,::;;;:::.;::::.'....;.:.....:::::::....7564. 7783 :::::::10::::Z;;:-.. --::',.;:;;:;,.;.:,:•:•809.9::.
COUNTY BUDGET(S) ::,:.....:....-.:::n....::,:::,,.:::::„....,.......:,..:-.:,,,•:::: ':"..-...K.:::::,..,:....-...,,!::::-. ...,.:!..I.::.......,..:.;T::,!„:,..;!.::::::::...:::
.........-.-............ ..............
•,:i..;:::::,::::::::.,::::::::::::„::::::::f...,:-,::::•:::::--...:..... ....::......................:*:::::-...„.„......::::...::„„„.:
..-.. ............... : .....
Revenues ",'"?•i":::::::,'•••••-•;',E,-....:,:-:...'- ',:-'-':67139;;:•-: 75706 ii:,1',..-...',.:::.* :::::,.... ...::::::::-.,81;242.: 83598 '...---;;':".':::::::',...,;:!-::e....,::::::1,::',,',.:''''.-8602Z.
. ...:::,:,.•,,,...-„,'..:i.: ,:,,,,,, :::, ..
Expenditures ::,":",:""...:''""":"""W:::::69035:'-:-. 78323 ,::::•-•••.•,:',.•-i.::',..----:•:::::::::::::•-]:•::::::,,::::84343: 86789 •-ee.,•-i:::::::::::,--:-..:.-:::::,.•:.]:...:-.'---•:-::--:.--:$9306.,
,..- -... -„,......:. .....,..-.,.,..„,,,...„-- - -...„,„-.„„-:-.
BALANCE .-..•;:ni.,:;:g::.....::::',::::'.:"'.:::::::,::: 189 —2618 ::::::::,::-..-:: ::,..--,:::::::::,,-.,„:„.t1191,.: —3191 ..1.....':-.J.:;....;:;...: .,;...;:1:::1-.:;-:...'liH7.32$4;
.............,.........„......„.„...... ......„ .„:„..,;.;„...........,,.........:,„...;,,..,„,............„,...„,„;.,....,,,..;..;...,
..........,..,...,,.....„.„,„......„......;
.......,...„..............„„:„..„,„,,,...„..„..„,.:„..,;.,,,,„
SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET($)•:,,:.,..?..J0::::::,:::::........-..i,-,,,,,,ii......,:::,:,-,:,,,.:„:::,:y...,::::-..::*;:,: ......,. ....,..:,,,,:a....,:i.,.,......:;,........,::::.,,„::::.,:.,::„...:-.......,::::..,„
Revenues ,."-..,:.•:.1'.',.'••••• •;'-:-:::•..,'-'-',..•.:95977'•::.:: 108889 II7259:::,:: 120659 ••••••••••••.:',:„:::,:-.:-.:::::-.:::.-•-•:',.....• 124158
:.:.---.::::::::V:-:::::::::••.•-•:•,, --:,••••,,...:,,-•.-...•:::,
Expenditures -:-..-•- •!..,..--;-'*:;::::::;'•-•:::::::::::-:•.ii:::95977:::: 108889 '-',..,•:•-•;-.--,..-'•••-.:.:-::.•:•:••-•::::-.•-•417259::: 120659 •,,..-::•:•:-..--.:::::::::::: : -.-..-.:.:,..••••.•,.:124.158:.
:,...,.....:„.„:„,..,:„......, „,.,::.
BALANCE 0 ...-.-:,::::.:::-...:•:....:...,':: :'i:,:i... .,...::::::::.::::.,:::::-0.. o '...i.:.,..:::i:-.:-.'..•::•:::..,..,:',..-..'::.-.-.::•.-...-.:.:.:.-....(1.
...„..„:::„„..,....„„.,..„...........„::::::,...:.,....,.........„....
COMBINEDBUDGETS(S) .:::-.....::::::..,....:.:...........,.....:-.....-.:....:.:.:......:::....... .. . . .. .„,,, . ,
Revenues :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::16:3116:::: 184595 •--...-:-:::::::::,:.:'...-:•.Z.--i!ig:;:':-.-...194,591: 204257 --::::,:::::::::::,::::::::::::.,...-2101.81
',.',:..::::::'...':'1.:1::::'..:i:'1'.1:: :...0912,..: „....,„
Expenditures 187213 •'..--.•;•::::.•i:,--...-..-:,•.:1.-:::•:,:::::--,...--:.20160.2::: 207448 ----::-.:-.:-.••-•-::-.--- -•:..-.-•-•-•-.213464
,-.-.:„.-„:-....,:„-..,...-„-........::::.,.„..........„.....,..„.. .,„,
,--:.•.:-..,...-...•:_:::::-.....,:.,...:-...:•:).<:. ...---
BALANCE ::•':'::::::::::: ::'''':;:•?::::::..::."..:4•1896:j. —2618 ',........:.:::,'-.;-:;-•••••;..::::::::; 3101:::::. —3191 :','..-1-1.'..•;..: ::....',;;;;.':.'•..-' —3284
37
HOUSEHOLD OCCUPANCY CHARACTERISTICS FOR ORANGE COUNTY,NC
BY TOWNSHIP
Children Childrem School Age School Age
Number Persons Persons Under 18 Under 18`, Children: ChOdren
of In Per In Per In Per
Township Households;:;Households ;>Household ! Households! ..Household:. Households Household':
1990 CENSUS
Butgha ..:::::
Cedar Grove 1345 3676 2.73 865 0.64 624 0.46
Cheeks 2036 5422 2.66 1340 0.66 999 0.49
Hillsborough: 3811........................9816......._...............2.58......................2567 .... . 0.67 17 77.........................0.47
Orange County 36104 84627 2.34 17698 0.49 j 12399 0.34
1980 CENSUS
Cedar Grave 1176 3166 2.69 919 0.78 N/A 0.66
..............
Cheeks 1693 4821 2.85 1466 0.87 N/A 0.70
Hillsborough 3233 8599 2.66 2421 0.75 N/A 0.65
Orange County 28707 77055 2.68 15879 0.55 N/A N/A
NOTES: (1)Number of households included under 1980 Census data is number of housing units.
(2)Persons in households included 1980 Census data includes population in households as well as group quarters.
(3)Number of children under 18 years of age includes children living in group quarters due to lack of breakdown
by household in available Census data.
(4)Data not available from 1980 Census.
(5)1980 data calculated using demographic multipliers from "The New Practitioner's Guide to Fiscal Impact
Analysis"by Burchell,Listokin,and Dolphin.
v�1vfRA FUND EXPENDITURES- FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET 35
L
1993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 100758
% OF % OF PER CAPITA
TYPE AMOUNT SUBTOTAL TOTAL EXPENSE
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
ommissianers $304,069 486% `0.59% $3.02
Courts $11000 0.18% 0.02% $0.11
Elections' $261,283.;1 ._.... 4.1.6° 0 5.186.. $2.59'
Manager 9 $521,356 8.34% 1.01% $5.17
Personnel :$357133;; 5 71% 069% $354:
Budget $148,268 2.37% 0.29% $1.47
Purchasing $159,082 2.54% 0.31% $1.58
Data Progess3r11 ... $425,353;: ........: 680% 4 83% $4.22:
Central Services $653,144 10.45% 1.27% $6.48
F egieter of Deeds ::;:
Tax Assessor $723,433 11.57% 1.40% $7.18
Tax Collector $310,467 4,97% 0.60% $3.08
Plannms&Inspection $ ,232.008,' .... :,..19,7196 2 399 $12 23
SUBTOTAL $6,251,551 100.00% 12.14% $62.05
PUBLIC SAFETY
Domestic Violence $38,188 0.65% 0.07% $0.38
SUBTOTAL $5,854,402 100.00% 1137% $58.10
PUBLIC WORKS
Other $177,134 6.42% 0.34% $1.76
Sanitation $1,004,204 36.37% 1.95% .$9.97
SUBTOTAL $2,760,727 100.00% 5.36% $27.40
HUMAN SERVICES
Economic Development $187,691 1,21% 0.36% $1.86
•
Servioes $s�195,043.:'. 5521%< 378fi% $91.26;:
Health $3,367,943 21.69% 6.54% $33.43
Agricultural Extension $269,945':'.: ....:::.: 174%:. 0 522% $2.68'
Recreation& Parks $542,847 3.50% 1.05% $5.39
CAT $407,979 2.63% 0.79% $4.05
Commissio i tar Wcmen :.;::.:::;::
;......... $73+408: :...... 0 4796.; ..:.........fs 14% ,
Library $393,934 2.54% 0.76% $3.91
$41,559..:` 2.65% 0,809 $4.08
SUBTOTAL $15,528,989 100.00% 30.15% $154.12
39
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES- FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET-
(CONTINUED)
1993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 100758
% OF % OF PER CAPITA
TYPE AMOUNT SUBTOTAL TOTAL EXPENSE
EDUCATION
Current Expense
$73:64.'
Chapel Hill $9,838,134 52.45% 19.10% $97,64
Recurring Capital
Orange Caunty $754;000 . 4.00% 1 6% $7 44.
Chapel Hill $750,000 4.00% 1.46% $7.44
SUBTOTAL $18,758,306 100.00% 36.43% $186.17
NON—DEPARTMENTAL
/s, enc Contributions $1 893,978 80 80% 3 6896 $1880
Fund Tranfers $15,000 0,64% 0.03% $0,15
Miscellaneou§ $434,989 18:56% 0:84°% $4.32::
SUBTOTAL $2,343,967 100.00% 4.55% $23.26
FUND TOTAL $51,497,942 100.00% 100.00% $511.11
Source:FY 1993-94 Approved Budget,Orange County, N.C.
•
40
GENERAL FUND REVENUES - FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET
1993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 100758
% OF % OF PER CAPITA
TYPE AMOUNT SUBTOTAL TOTAL REVENUE
PROPERTY TAXES
Current Taxes $36,119,679 98.33%
Delinquent Taxes $475,000 1.29% 0.89% $4.71
nterest on Delinqi.ent Taxes si 40.000 0.38% •
Late Listings $0 0.00% 0.00% $0.00
Vehicle Ust Penalties SO 0.00% a
$
SUBTOTAL $36,734,679 100.00% 68.80% $364.58
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
Sales and Use Tax $a$50
Privilege license Tax N/A 0.00% 0.00% $0.00
Franchise Tax $107,000 2.59% 0.20% $1.06
Animal Tax $70,000 1.70% 0.13% $0.69
SUBTOTAL $4,127,000 100.00% 7.73% $40.96
INTERGOVERNMENTAL.
Infangibles Tax $2,073,000 23.61% 3.88% $20.57
Beer&Wine Tax $157,437 1.79% 0.29% $1.56
Social Services $4,523,440 51.53% 8.47% $44.89
Aging/CAT $320,535 3.65% 0.60%. .
Other State $789,946 9.00% 1.48% $7.84
SUBTOTAL $8,778,421 100.00% 16.44% $87.12
SERVICE CHARGES
Register of Deeds $911,902 30.71% 1.71% $9.05
Land Records $30,975 1.04% 0.06% $0.31
Planning Fees 592.000 3.10% 0.17% $0.91
Sheriff $767,213 25.84% 1.44% $7.61
APS Fees $4,200 0.14% 0.01% $0.04
Social Services $38,000 1.28% 0.07% $0.38
Recreation& Parks $63,412 2.14% 0.12% $0.63
Tax Collection Charges $72,000 2.42% 0.13% $0.71
Miscellaneous Charges $99,068 3.34% 0.19% $0.98
SUBTOTAL $2,969,123 100.00% 5.56% $29.47
41
GENERAL FUND REVENUES - FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET
(CONTINUED)
1993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 100758
% OF % OF PER CAPITA
TYPE AMOUNT SUBTOTAL TOTAL REVENUE
MISCELLANEOUS
Interest.Earnmgs $310,000 39,38% 0 58° $3.08
Licenses&Permits $230,700 29.31% 0.43% $2.29
All Other Revenue . .:.:. $248,.497; 31 31:96 . Q:46% . $2,45;1
SUBTOTAL $787,197 100.00% 1.47% $7.81
FUND TOTAL $53,396,420 100.00% 100.00% $529.95
Source:FY 1993-94 Approved Budget, Orange County,N.C.
•
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES- FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET 42
1993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 100758
PERMANENT FTE % OF % OF POSITIONS
FUNCTION POSITIONS SUBTOTAL TOTAL PER CAPITA
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Commissioners 3.225 2 ""0.15% C.000O3"
Courts N/A 0.00% 0.00% 0.00000
Elections 3.500 3.22% 0.16% 0.00003
Manager 8.000 7.37% 0.37% 0.00008
Personnel 6.000 5.53% 0.28% •:••0.CCCO6•
Budget 3.000 2.76% 0.14% 0,00003
Finance 5.000 4.60% 0.23% 0.00005
Purchasing 3.000 2.76% 0.14% 0.00003
Data Processing 5.370 4.94% 0.25% 0.00005
Central Services 3.000 2.76% 0.14% C.00003
Registerof Deeds 14.750 13.58% 0.68% 0.00015
Tax Assessor 18.000 16.58% 0.84% 0.00018
Land Records 6.000 5.53% 0.28% 0.00006
......
Tax Collector 6.000 5.53% 0.28% 0.00006
Planning&InspectIons 23.750 21.87%. 1.10% 0.00024
SUBTOTAL 108.595 100.00% 5.04% 0.00108
PUBLIC SAFETY
Sheriff 85.500 63.81% 3.97% 0.00085
Domestic Violence 1.000 0.75% 0.05% 0.00001
Emergency Services 47.500 35.45% 2.21% 0004 .**
SUBTOTAL 134.000 100.00% 6.22% 0.00133
PUBLIC WORKS
Buildings&Grounds
Other N/A 0.00% 0.00% 0.00000
Motor Pool 5.000 10.00% 0.23% 0.00005
Sanitation 17.000 34.00% 0.79% 0.00017
SUBTOTAL 50.000 100.00% 2.32% 0.00050
HUMAN SERVICES
Economic Development 3.000 1.22% 0.14% 0.00003
Social Services 107.100 43.49% 4.97% 0.00106
Health 69.650 28.28% 3.23% 0.00069
AgrIcultural Extension 9.750 3.96% 0.45% 0.00010
Recreation& Parka 11.375 4.62% 0.53% 0.00011
Aging 10.450 4.24% 0.49% 0.00010
CAT 10.515 4.27% 0.49% 0.00010
Commission for Women 1.750 0.71% 0.08% 0.00002
• •••
Library 8.700 3.53% 0.40% 0.00009
Child Support 10.000 4.06% 0.46% 0.00010
SUBTOTAL 246.290 100.00% 11.44% 0.00244
,
" 43
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES- FY 1993-94 ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET
(CONTINUED)
11993 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION 1007581
PERMANENT FTE % OF % OF POSITIONS
FUNCTION POSITIONS SUBTOTAL TOTAL PER CAPITA
EDUCATION
0 range-County • :. .:..: ...•...:,i ::'' • * '-':-- .. . 726.000 . . - ,44.97%- . 33.72% . 0.00721
Chapel Hill 888.410 55.03% 41.26% 0.00882
SUBTOTAL 1614.410 100.00% 74.97% 0.01602
FUND TOTAL 2153295 100.00% 100.00% 0.02137 1
Source:FY 1993-94 Approved Budget,Orange County,N.C.
44
Rosemond expressed appreciation for the work of
the developer noting that she felt it was a
substantial improvement over the previous concept
plan. She noted concern with the link up of
roads for future development in the area. She
referred to the request of the Fox Hill
developers to present a phasing plan asking if
the same could apply to this project. Willis
responded that Fox Hill Farm is all in one
ownership and that is not the case for this
project. The adjacent properties are not the
same ownership, so, a phasing plan cannot be
required. Willis continued that the Planning
Staff would be coordinating as best they can, but
there are limitations as to what can be required
with individual ownership. There is an access
easement that will be recorded with the plat.
Rosemond asked if the circular road on the plan
could serve as an access point for the most
southerly development.
Burklin asked about access from Cedar Pass Road.
The developer,. Arthur Cogswell, responded that
access is not obtainable from the property owner
who claims ownership of Cedar Pass Road.
Brown noted that after the previous meeting where
this concept plan was presented, news articles
had indicated that the development along with a
golf course had been approved. She asked if
Staff was aware of plans for a golf course.
Willis responded that she was not aware of any
plans for golf courses. She noted that golf
courses are allowed by right in this zoning
district, but that no plans have been indicated
or presented to the Planning Department for a
golf course.
MOTION: Jobsis moved approval as recommended by the
Planning Staff. Seconded by Burklin.
VOTE: Unanimous.
b. Preliminary Plans
( 1) Hannah Creek
(45 Lots - Cedar Grove Township)
Presentation by Mary Willis
(A copy of the abstract information is an
attachment to these minutes on pages . )
45
(A copy of the Private Road Justification and the
Staff Evaluation are attachments to these minutes
on pages . )
Barrows asked about the utility lines in relation
to the trees being planted in the right-of-way.
Willis responded that on a private road there is
some flexibility for working with utility
providers.
Willis referred to the proposed conservation
easement noting that Triangle Land Conservancy
was approached and indicated they were not
interested. She noted that there are several
possibilities for the handling of such an
easement such as a non-profit conservation
organization or the Homeowner's Association.
According to a letter from the County Attorney,
Orange County should be a third party beneficiary
in order to ensure that the County will review
any and all changes in the agreement.
Willis noted that agency comments have been
incorporated into the Resolution of Approval.
Willis noted that initial correspondence from
NCDOT indicated that the aprons of the private
roads within the dedicated right-of-way must be
paved. However, this requirement is now being
reconsidered by NCDOT, and may not be included in
the final plans which will be reviewed and
approved by NCDOT.
Willis continued that it is most likely that this
subdivision will be developed in a single phase.
However, if there is more than one phase, Lot F
and the conservation easements and equestrian/
pedestrian trail shall be constructed or secured
in the first phase, and an easement be provided
to assure access from Elizabeth Walters Road to
Lot F (the arboretum) .
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the
Preliminary Plan for Hannah Creek Subdivision in
accordance with the Resolution of Approval (copy
an attachment to these minutes on pages ) .
Barrows asked about references in the County
Attorney's letter to the use of certain lots for
local commercial purposes and further
subdivision. Willis responded that the applicant
had indicated the possibility of a church or
day care facility on the corner lots sometime in
the future. She continued that any use of the
46
corner lots would have to be a u'se that is
consistent with what is allowed by the zoning. A
commercial use would not be allowed. She stated
that further subdivision would require
re-justification of the private roads for the
entire subdivision and the applicants have been
so notified.
Rosemond asked about the arboretum. Dolly Hunter,
developer, responded that there are hardwoods and
large boulders. Ms. Hunter continued that the
intent is to provide a nature trail along the
stream of packed dirt and gravel. The Erosion
Control Supervisor shall approve the specific
location of the trail prior to its construction.
Upon construction of the trail, the Erosion
Control Officer shall certify that the final
construction is in accordance with acceptable
erosion control practice and in the approved
location.
Reid asked about utilities and the trees along
the private roads. Ms. Hunter responded that all
utilities are to be underground.
MOTION: Burklin moved approval as recommended by the
Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis.
Barrows asked about the reference to commercial
purposes in the County Attorney's letter and if
the Planning Board could request a copy of the
covenants. Willis responded yes. She noted that
the final covenants must be approved by the
County Attorney.
Ms. Hunter stated that the reference to local
commercial simply means that it would be
something beneficial to the community such as a
day care or church.
VOTE: Unanimous.
(2 ) Phase C Brower Creek
(9 Lots - Cedar Grove Township)
Presentation by Eddie Kirk.
The property is located on the west side of
Harmony Church Road (SR 1341) . It is zoned
Agricultural Residential with an overlay district
of Back-PW, and designated Agricultural
Residential and Back Creek Watershed in the Land
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
1.
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 1, 1994
Action Agenda
Item # Vnir-14
SUBJECT: PETITION FOR ADDITION - EXTENSION OF SPRINGVIEW TRAIL IN ENO
TOWNSHIP
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _x_No
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Slade McCalip
Extension 2595
T.J. Dyer Letter of 10/12/94
Secondary Road Addition TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Investigation Report Hillsborough-732-8181
Durham -688-7331
Mebane -227-2031
Chapel Hill -967-9251
PURPOSE: To consider a petition from NCDOT for approval of the
addition of the Extension of Springview Trail in Eno
Township to the State-maintained Secondary Road System.
BACKGROUND: The N.C. Department of Transportation has submitted a
petition for the addition of Extension of Springview Trail
in the Meadow Estates (Sect. 1) Subdivision to the Board
of Commissioners for review.
The Board's decision will be forwarded to the N.C. Board
of Transportation for their deliberation on acceptance of
the road to the State-maintained Secondary Road System.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the addition of
the Extension of Springview Trail in Eno Township to the
State-maintained Secondary Road System.
cEzi
—
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Managers Office
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT,JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT I I I
GOVERNOR P. O.Box 766 SECRETARY
Graham,North Carolina 27253-0766
October 12, 1994
ORANGE COUNTY
Mr. John M.Link,Jr.,Manager
Orange County
106 E.Margaret Lane
Hillsborough,NC 27278
Subject: Petition for Addition
Extension of Springview Trail
Eno Township
Dear Mr.Link:
Attached is Form SR-4,Secondary Road Addition Investigation Report for the above subject road.
This is being forwarded to you for review by your Board of Commissioners.
Yours very truly,
T. J.Dyer
DISTRICT ENGINEER
ikww
Attachment(s)
•
cc:Mr. J. W. Watkins
0
3.
NORTH CAROLINA STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ,
SECONDARY ROAD ADDITION INVESTIGATION REPORT
•
County Orange Co. File No. Date
Township Eno Div. File No.
Local Name Springview Trail (Extension of) Subdivision Name Meadow Estates - Section 1
Length 0.11 mi Width 18' Type ABC Condition Good
Is this a subdivision street subject to the construction requirements for such
streets? Yes Recording Date 11-08-72 Book 20 Page 163
Number of homes having entrances into road 2
Other uses having entrances into road None
Right-of-Way Width 60' If right-of-way is below the desired width,
give reasons under "Remarks and Recommendations."
Is petition (SR-l ) attached? Yes
Is the County Commissioners Approval (SR-2) attached?
If not, why?
Is a map attached indicating information for reference in locating road by the
Planning Department? Yes
Cost to place in acceptable maintenance condition: Total Cost $ 0
Grade, drain, stabilize $ , Drainage $ , Other $
Remarks and Recommendations Meets Minimum Requirements. Recommend Addition. •
Reviewed and Approved
BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION MEMBER
Reviewed and Approved J. W. Watkins _- ,�_ T. J. Dyer
DIVISION ENGINEER DIST CT ENGINEER
(Do not write in this space -
/ `� "� For use of Secondary Roads Dept. )
New Sharon � � •�i �,
Q,. 1042. ®� 'Lili
Petition No.ti
leg 1407 1z1L Ebiti:er
1144... r!+:71:,.../'
" UPI Tai (Do not write in this space -
.
36.05 For use of Planning Dept. )
11
Fnrm. cR-4 (4/Rq1 61-03395