HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-23-1982 ' |
� ^ �
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETI
MONDAY AUGUS 23, 1982
7:30 P.M.
SUPERIOR COUR ROOM, ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
A. BOARD COMMENTS
B. AUDIENCE 'COMMENTS
1 . Matters on the Agenda
2. Matters not on the Agenda
C. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
` -
1 . Rezoning Request for Roy Wilkerson/3 Proper --frVm Agricultural
~ Residential /A-R\ to Existing Commercial-5 (EC-5)
2. Amendment tV`the' Land Use Plan for Curtis F. Bane Planned
D8Vel' pmentv Housing R-4 (Stonegate)
3. Special Use Permit Request for Planned Development Housing
R-4 (PDH-R-4)
for Stonegate, Rezoning
4. Proposed Text Changes to the Zoning Ordinance
rdfnanc8
5. Proposed T ex t Changes to the Subdivision Regulations
latiOns
D. ITEMS FOR V
1. Housibg Rehabilitation Contract Awards
2. Safe Seat Lease
3. Elec Voting Machine Bid Award
4.^ Buck ' -''-Mountain Development Request for a Class A Special Use Permit
5. Water Resources Task Force Report
6. `Uea ioA of Zoning Ordinance Extension to Cheeks Township
7. Executive Session for Litigation and Personnel Matters
7 e
1f.Llluf3G
AUGUST 23, 1W2
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regul.a:. session on Monday
llur;u t 23, 1932, at 7:30 P.M. in the Superior Courtroom, Orange County Court-
. house, Hillsborough, North C,uuliine.
Coiiaass ioalers present: Ch,iron iiicherd 5,, lfn tted, and Commissioners
•
Cu;tavesof, Shirley E. Marshall, Norman 1,1ollcer and von ll:il.l,hoit,
Commissioner Uhi.tted announced that this was the regular Quarterly
Joint Public Hearing with the Orange County Planning Board. Ho corrected
the agenda to reflect that the Ouch Mountain Development request for a Special
Use Permit, is a portion of the Public Nearing for the Board of Coa;nissioners.
{ lc:
announce that the Chair of the Planning Board.., Pat Crawford, would conduct
i •
the Quarterly Joilt Public Iearit;; as is usual.
Planning Board members prese=nt: Prat Crawford, Logan Trviazr Sharlene
Car:_ 1;al..Le_s, Band Shankl in.
Planning Board members absent: Tom Bacon, Saragene Boericke, Alice Gordon, ,
John Kizer, Nancy Laszlo, Hazel Lunsford and John Oi 1 son.
1. Rezoning Request-Roy 'Hilleerson property (iron .Agriculturol/Resideatial.
( ,
(A-R) tc Is:c1;ti_r.�; Commercial-5 Li;_.5)P
he,. luck Comity, Planning Staff, made the presentation on behalf of the
i
Planning De ert:ient. he gave the location, and description of the propel-Li
and said when the zoning, was boi.na drawn uo for the County, this tract had been
overlooked. by the Staff. He said Staff had requested a portion of this tr,:.ct
be rezoned 50-5 but that the Planning Board had asked the Staff to re-ercn:ine
the tract and consider resoning the entire 6 acre tract to EC-5, as requested
by the property owner, Mr. Cannity said Mr. iiil.kerson had been in business on
property for appro.ivateay 20 years and that Staff recommendation is to
rezone a portion of the property (5001 „ 3001) EC-5; he added that the reason
is that it would apply the came criteria to this piece of property novella apply
Eo
to all other property in :toned townships.
Crawford asked for quostior s from Board members; there ware none. She
a;had for those in favor of the rezoning request to sped:.
Mr. Alois J.loinyn, a Land surveyor in Bills:orough, asked that the
r
6.6 acres be retired. He said hcevy eouiuineat can't be stored within a building
and this i.e on outdoor business. lie sold ti - cald.re tract would hove been coned
P.
'406
739�^,~
���
^ ~—
' .
uom^ervi"I originally the llozi`o oicli hod not v,or).ocl:=o the businnox,
oo x�6 that he had a lo fiom 11r. \ulkerson said 'that if
the um1c 6,6 acres `x's not ruco`ud ha 8iun't think he could continue to r.�:u
, a. living in his business,
Cr,h Paul. ffalznz:e`/ n`oo1- vT M},vrmn` Cons 000panr, said the
otzff proposal to rnse^ c only 50o1 x 3001 was too u17;z1], Ho needed the entire
track rcxenoJ in order to continue hi..s operation as he had for the last 23 yealo
|^ nod tc ollpvfoz continued v:.:puosion of- his business.
)is, Cro`/Iord asked that those members of the audience opposed to the rer,rlrg
- , rvqnvot spec ; there were none,
Curtis Pv Bane Plooucd D='elnpmrn4 Anen4zunt to the Land Use Plan-
, Cr, Fred Luvn` Planning Staff» mmua the presentation on behalf of the
i. Planning p,p^ztnont. B= said the request is to change the Land Use Plan for
36.5 acres 1Tnm Rural Residential to Tvcutv 'Sear T2.-,msitioo. (Specifics of the
request are on the agenda abstract for this item which is included on page
• Mr.of this book.) Mr Luce said Staff recommendation is for approval of the amend-
ment ment to the Land Use Plan.
[
Ms. Crawford asked for those in favor of the proposed amendment to the Land
Use Plan to speak; there were none.
Mb. Crawford asked for those opposed to the proposed amendment to the Land
Use Plan to speak; there were none.
J' Curtis F. Bane Planned Development, Class A Special Use Permit Request,
/Clerk's note: Staff had presented its information and Mr. Bane was pre-
senting his information when the Attorney reminded those concerned that the Special
Use Permit Request procedure required sworn evidence, with the Chair of the Board
of Commissioners presiding; accordingly, all information was reintroduced as evidence
as indicated in the Minutes which follow pertaining to this ftemJ
Chairman Whitted administered the oath to Messrs. Cannity and Bane, and Kx.
Crawford.
Mr. Cannity gave the presentation on behalf of the Planning Department on the
Class A Special Use Permit Request for the Planned Development, Stonegate, and fo,-
the rezoning associated with it. Mr. Cannity said:
The Applicant has requested a PD-H, R-4 for 114 mobile home spaces
• on 35,5 acres of land. The property is located in Eno Township on SR 17I3
(Mt. Hermon Church Road). Th:. property lies north of the Southern Railroad
east of an undeveloped wooded tract and south of Mobile Acres II mobile home
park. Building separation will be 35' minimum from the road, 20' minimum
407 4„
when mobile homes are end to end and 40' when mobile homes are parallel .
There are central sewage disposal sod water systems proposed for the
development, Two recreation area are shown on the plan, each connected
to the street system by pedestrian xalks. Private roads are proposed
to service the units in the development. The property is in the Eno
Rural Fire District,
Mr. Cannity continued, saying that there would be a divided entry-way into
the park with a central office where tennants could report problems, pick up mai .
pay rent, etc. He said the developer thought this would offer added security also.
Nr. Cannity said the Staff recommendation is that the rezoning and Special Use
Permit be approved with conditions. The Boards decided to make the findings of
fact prior to listing conditions. This concluded the Staff presentation on this
item.
Mr. Curtis Bane: Said that he had been working on this project for a number
of years and that it was the end-product of input from Planning, local resimts
and architects. He said that if anyone was familiar with his present mohi home
park, this one would be built to the some standards, emphasizing "appearance. ..
easy movement in and out of the park." He continued that this park would have
more density, three units par acre, "all roads will be 29' wide and we will have
a waste water tree. plant in preference to the usual septic tank.. .the roads
will be 'pd' The water system will be put in as prescribed by the Ground Water
Division of North Carolina' The waste water treatment plant will be unds the
continuous supervision of the North Carolina Environmental Protection ." .iu said
the lots would be landscaped and maintained in as original a condition as possible.
Planning Board Member Irvin: Asked what would he done with the effluent from
the waste water treatment plant.
Mr. Bane: Replied it would flow into a stream. He added that he had asked
about a lagoon but that the State "has their reasons for not wanting this. I was
• talking to one of the heads of the Envirumental Protection just last Tuesday night
^ "
and he was asking me did we have any properties that they could irrigate for the
uric acid factor. I told him that we did so we .re going back to that. My envir-
onmental architect is still working on it with the State and I can't say what the
• final outcome will be. „bvL it will be something that the State will approve."
Mr. Irvin: Asked what the relationship between the volume of effluent and the
flow of the stream would be,
Mk. Bane: Responded that he did not know and that he trusted the State
inspected h had 1 teU th and reviewed the data in Raleigh prior to his receiving
c a the area an ru;
opyroval .
z����
���'�
| '
Mr. Irvin: Asked what sort of arrangement had been worked out regarding
! maintenance of the recreation areas.
Mr. Dane: "We will provide it." H, Bane referred to the sketch plan and
noted the circles on it, saying each of those circles was a recreation area.
Mr. Irvin: "You will provide the facilities and the maintenance?"
Mr. Bane: "We will provide the area and the facilities, limited say, to the
tennis court and the net and the participants in the game will provide the other
| ^
equipment.' Mr. Bane elaborated saying that in the other park he had attemp\aJ
to provide equipment as well as facilities but that non-residents had come in and
damaged the equipment and facilities; consequently, he would only provide the
facilities at this park. "For smaller children there will he permanunt areas with
equipment."
Hr' Norman Hilliard, Route l` University Station Road: /Oerk's note: Mr.
Hilliard was not sworn or off /mad/ Said he is in favor of the project. He
presently lives in the other trailer park owned and operated by Mr. Bane. He
sai/ this park is beautifully maintained and well orgunized. He invited members
of the Boards to inspect the present park to note its condition. He added he
had friends who had or were buying mobile homes and found it difficult to find
a place to put the homes. Those whom he has told about Mr. Bane's planned new
park are excited about it and would like to live there. He cited some concerns
about extra expenses involved in developing the new park fearing that it may
increase the cost of living there. Mr. Hilliard said Mr. Bane provided snow
removal and the roads in the present park were clear during storms. He had no
complaints. He urged again that the Boards visit the present park.
Ms. Crawford asked if the applicant opposed any of the suggested conditions,
Mr. Bane: Replied no.
| There were no others present who wished to give evidence regarding the Class
▪ A Special Use Permit Request from Curtis Bane for a Planned Development Housing
▪ R-4, Stongate and rezoning for same.
C/ Proposed Changes to the Zoning Ordinance.
' ~ '
Mr. Cannity nresenteJ the seven main changes proposed for the Zoning Ordinance:
I. a "iti' ' of tel booster stations as a permitted use with additional
requ '^ ;
2. - ,dditionu7 application criterion to High Density Residential which
' 'ude the full ranee of urban services;
3. the application criteria of the Existing Commercial-5 dixtri' !.: to
all it /v be applied to previously zoned Townships;
4. fficiency apartments to the Permitted Use Table with Single Family
Residence;
^
�� �
~
5, require that residential accessory structures he placed behind the
principal residence;
. i O. set time limits on reapplication for Special Use Permit requests that
- ! have been denied and for the start of construction under a Special Use Permit;
7' add definitions for lot area and efficiency apartments to Article 22.
Ms, Crawford asked those in favor of any of the proposed amendments to
speak,
Mr. Banks Cline and Ms. Jill Maxwell , Southern Bell employees: Said they
vc,a present with regard to amendment # 1 relating to telephone booster stations.
The piece of equipment is a digital switching device located in a building 10'
wide and 20' long, with air conditioning, The additional capacity is needed for
growth in that portion of Chapel Hill (Weaver Dairy Road and Highway 86). The
alternative to building the booster station is to run another cable and` according
to Ms. Maxwell , conduit space in that area is "almost exhausted." Hr Clina
said there was no water, sewer required, that the building is self contained
self attended, and self diagnostic. Mr. Cline and Ms. Maxwell addressed the issue
of the County's requirements regarding minimum lot size of 40.000 sq, feet saying
that since this proposed switch station is so small and self cuvtained, they could
put it on a piece of property 180' x 190' . They noted that less land would h
used, the building used nothing (no water/sewer lines) and would save on tunstmotio"
costs by using less land,
Commissioner Nillhuit asked how many of these units would he built and the
material which would be used.
Ms. Maxwell responded that the one presently under discussion with another
smaller unit within a year near Hideaway Estates also on Hwy 86; Hr. Clive replied
that the material is fiberglass and concrete slab'
Commissioner Nillhoit asked if materials more harmonious with the surroundings
could be used- He suggested brick, for an example.
Mr. Cline responded that screening would be used for the building and it
would not be obtrusive; they prefer to use the previously mentioned materials,
i.e. concrete slab floor and fiberglass body.
Commissioner Willhoit asked about future maintenance of the landscaping
materials,
Mr. Cline said evergreens would be used which require a minimum of future
maintenance and that the office in Chapel Hill has someone who does the landscaping
maintenance, They will comply with the requirements of the Zoning Urdinance,
Commissioner Gustaveson asked what the telephone company's general response
was to the ,eyuirenu`ts as outlined in Section 6.13.
°� ��C
; '
,
Hr. Cline said the company was in agreement with all requirements except
the 40,000 so' ft required and mentioned previously,
There were no other comments from the audience on the proposed text changes .
to the Zoning Ordinance, either pro or con.
S Proposed Changes to the Subdivision Regulations.
.
Nr. Cannity made the presentation for the Planning Staff, saying there
were four me_ .r changes proposed:
�|
1. addition of definitions of road types that coincide with the
NC DOT definitions;
2, definition of a lot of record in reference to subdivision requirements;
J. revisions to road rights of way to coincide with revised HCDOT
standards (this also allows us to propose a reduction of private road
rights of way requirements);
4, deletion of Section VII Variances.
} There were no comments from the audience on the proposed text changes to
the Subdivision Regulations, either pro or con.
Mn' Crawford turned the meeting over to Chairman Vhitted for the recommendation
from the Planning Board on the Class A Special Use Permit Request from Buck Mountain
Development Company for the Midway Airport.
Chairman Vhitted declared the Quarterly Joint Public Hearing with the Orange
County Planning Board adjourned and declared the public hearing on the Bock Mountain
Development Company for a Class A Special Use Permit for a General Aviation Airport
(Midway) opened. The purpose is to receive the recommendation from the Planning
Board on the aforementioned request; Ms, Crawford was sworn (see pages of
these minutes).
/Clerk's note: The following, until otherwise noted, is a verbatim transcript
of ;s. Crmwford's testimonyj
Ms. Crawford: Chairman Hhitted, members of the Board, I want to bring the
following concerns to your attention, prior to making the Planning Board's
recommendation on the Special Use Permit Request by the Buck Mountain.
At our August 10, 1982, the following motion was made: "The Planning Board
has serious questions about the legality of the reconsideration of the Special
Use Permit request by Buck Mountain Development at this time' The Board feels
that a one year period should elapse before a reconsideration, The motion
was made by Dr. Irvin, seconded by Dr. Kizer; the vote was four in favor,
two opposed, and two abstentions
As indicated in the memo to you, dated August 29th, this is impossible,
dated August 23rd, The Planning Board previous to this meeting and pre-
vious to the second public hearing on this request, in addition, it was
raised by a citizen at the second public hearing. Futhermore, we have
just seen a ,eu- �st by the Staff to amend our Ordinance, in agreement with
the Planning Board's mation.
Th• memo to you indicates 1h�t special uses require changes in our Zoning
Ordinance and requires a public hearing. They are similar in that respect
to zoning amendments and therefore should be in accordance with the section
on amendments as it corrently reads, which requires a one year period before
411
reapplying after denial ,
However, during our process, the Staff and County Attorney indicated
disagreement with the Planning Board's interpretation , And, therefore
we went on with the public hearing.
The purpose of this motion is merely for the Planning Board to re-affilu
its position to you.
This is the secmnd'industrial special use permit we've had; the rest of them
have been Planned Development. Special Use Permits. And we've tried througk-
since the enactment of our Ordinance to refine the Planning Board's
process in making Findings of Fact that are useful to the Board in suc|a
that the Planning Board can also handle,
We, ah, therefore, did it a little bit differently this time, again. What
we did was rearrange the Ordinance essentially to take, first of all , the
specific requirements that are required of all special use applicants; we
then took the specific requirements that are required just for general
aviation airports; we then considered the three general standards at the
conclusion of our findings.
The first two types of findings are those for which the applicant had the
the burden of proving compliance w1th. You will find, I believe, that the
Planning Board's avocation of findings, particularly when they find that the
applicant did not meet its burden was because either there was lack of
evdenu or failure on the part of the applicant to rebut conflicting
testimony.
Our findings are different from other findings that we've done in the past
in that, before we've acted on Staff's findings of fact and in this instance
we made our own findings and did not take into account what the Staff had
found; however, the Staff was there to advise us if necessary.
With the Board's permission, I 'll begin our findinVs,
1. North point scale and date. We found this contained within the ay?li^7.'H-o.
2. The extent of area to be developed, The Planning Board found the: ic is
not clear in the record what areas are included in the development Pn'pus�l ^
particularly, the land of Mr. Leslie Walton, This is found on page 8` lines
12-14 of the draft minutes of the July 8th meeting, ' The vote woo O-2 on that
motion. The Board seemed some concerned that there was mentioned in the
proposal that Mr. Walton's land could be used if necessary, but yet was not
specifically included in the proposal.
3. Location wideths of all easements and rights-of way within or adjacent to
the sitp. The Board found the plans as submitted as deficient because they did
not show the approach/departure zone easement or rights-of-way. The vote
was four in favor, one against and three absentions.
4. Location of all existing or proposedand structures on the s1te. The Board
found that that's contained within the application.
5. Location of all areas on the site subject to flood hazard or inundation as
shown on the flood maps or soil maps. The Board found that that was contained
within the application'
6' Location of all water courses on the sites including direction of flow.
This was also contained within the application.
7. Existing topography at a contour interval of 5' based on mean level datvm.
This was also contained within the application.
8. Proposed or existing fencing, screening, gntes, parking, service and
storage areas. This is contained in the application.
9. Access to site including site distances on all roads used for access. Thi~
also is contained in the application,
10. Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development.
While the Planning Board eventually found that this item was contained in the
application, 1' e was some disagreement because within the applicant's pro-
! pnel th :y sut, ed pictures to us which did not indicate dimensions; further-
, more, there was later testimony by Hr. Hazzard that lacked some knowledge of
exact dimensions proposed for all structures,
lL Names and addresses of owners and applicants. This is contained in the
application,
^8� ~
���
12. A fee as set by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Staff
indicated that this was paid by the applicant.
• The following specific requirements are those that are only for general
• aviation airports:
u All F.A.A. and State regulations are met as a condition of approval .
~'e Planning Board found that the applicant did not supply evidence that
'^ own 'll the area within the clear zone and did not own or control
^^`/of tU- area known as the approach zone The vote was 6 in favor and
any the �
2 opposed. This finding assumes that one interprets the Ordinance to mean
that,---requ�rements are for airport regurdleo of the source of
��' t tion and still, I believe, disagreement
funding. There was some contention ` ,
on the interpretation rf this item.
b. The site and itt operation will not adversely affect existing adjacent
land uses. Evidence in pages 15-18 of the draft July 8th minutes indicates
• that there will he adverse affects on adjacent property, especially in the
testimony of Mr. galloce Kaufman concerning land values and real estate
• values and Bland Simpson concerning the affect on agricultural land.
The agenda package is incorrect here; the vote was 6 in favor, 1 against
and 1 absentiun
' h and over-run areas is controlled
c Land sufficient to provide ap� vac zones v over'm
n' owned and controlled by the applicant. The Planning Board found that the
applicant' has not provided evidence that they control sufficient land for the
ppa zones, The vote on this motion was 6 in favor and 2 against. Even
` ' - � - 'a' that all FAA requirements are met our Ordinaoca
if on item a you assume ,
goes over and beyond FAA requirements and does require ownership or cnotrb|l
-''
of the approach zone. This issue begins to raise a larger question should the
Board find that this 1s not necessary will the Board be willing to deny any
subdivision requests within the approach zones should they arise As per the
testimony of Mr. Bruce Matthews saying that residential uses were incompatible
with airports.
d' Adequate land area is provided for all of the proposed uses,
buildings x
and
nd
storage areas. The Planning Buard` on a motion,' voted in favor of this
item, 5 to 3, that it is contained in the application. However, there :as
some confusion and disagreement on the interpretation of this itcm. There was.
some that the Board felt proposed usage should have included the use
Of the airport and consistent with item 'c' should say no to this mutiuo.The majority felt that this should f lt th t thi h ld bp interpretated as physical usage such as
buildings or other structures.
e' Screening of buildings, storage and maintenance areas is provided from
adjacent res id hti l land.
This item was found to be met by the application.
on
.
f. Letters from ap r ' -te fire and rescue agencies that protective services
s
can be at an ---q-ae '--l . The Planning Board found that the applicant has
no t me t the requirement for adequate fire protection as evidenced by the testi-
mony of — ' Thomas Griggs on pages 13-14 of the draft July 8th minotca and by
a letter 24, 1982, by Dr. Edward Johnson. The vote was 7 to 1.
g. Access
shall be directly onto a State maintained road. The Planning
Board found that this item is contained in the application.
~~- - '--tiNe land uses are located in the final approach areas of the oir-
'c te Planning Board found that the applicant has not presented evidence
'— t' �compatible land uses are located in the approach zones. The testimony
that compor '
'
of Bruce'Matthews on July lD, 1982, public hearing, page 7, lines 32-35 of the
draft minutes indicates that homes should be excluded from the approach zone
of an airport. The vote on this motion was 5 in favor, 2 against and one
abstention, Again, this raises the larger question, of if, if we cannot
control through the way our Ordinance is currently drafted, uses withing the
approach zone, quite frankly, how will we?
There are other standards that the applicant can, must meet in addition to
those l just mentioned.
a Method and adequacy of provision of oevage disposal facilities, solid
—
'ste and water. The Planning Board has found that the applicant has addressed
the question of sewage and solid waste disposal and water supply. There is
concern that storm water runoff will impact adjacent property. See pages
19, lines for that la.-,et , ne s 30 and 33 of the July 8th draft t concern pages
m1notes, believe one citizen expressed a concern that a drainage easement
was shm" on the plat and he had not been contacted on that.
. -�� �
~u��
| .
b. Method and adequacy of police, fire and rescue squad protection` Planning
~ord found 1hc-'��''i :cant has not net the requirement for adequate fire
"° "�
protection as evidenced by testimony of D r' Thomas Griggs on pages 13 and 14
of the draft July 8th minutes, and letter dated June 24th by Or, Edward
Johnson The vote was 5 in favor, 2 against and one abstention.
c Methond and adequacy of vehicle access to the site and traffic conditions
around "ho site. This item was found to be contained in the application and
' ` 4 in fa 3 against and one abstention, This moth
testimony_ The vote was n "ur. aga n '
as you can tell by the close vote, had considerable discussion as there had
' �' been a ^~^previous motion that there was not adequate vehicular access as demon-
strated
u ~^-`tesdmuny concerning traffic counts and projected increases in
traffic counts.
That concluded the specific requirements for which the applicant carries
the burden. We next went to the general requirements where the burden
those shifts to ' critizing the the proposal . In those, these are a little
bit difficult to deal with cause you deal with negatives and you have to
find evidence that supports a negative conclosion. The best way I can state
it is that:
a. The use will not promote the public health, safety and general welfare
i'' located where proposed and developed according to the plan submitted.
The Board found that there is specific evidence to show that the use will
not promote the public health, safety and general welfare for two areas
1) fire protection and FAA State regulations. The vote on that motion e; :;
Din favor and 2 against. The references may be incorrect because xe ':d
a different pagination than on this one and if you'll give me some ti/;e' at
a later point I'll correct them for you. But primarily they are kase6 on our
specific findings.
b. Use will not maintain or enhance the value of of contiguous property
unless the use is a public necessity in which case the use need not wrn
tain or enhance the value of contiguous property. The Planning Board found that
the evidence shows the use will not maintain or enhance the value of con-
tiguous property; specifically see the findings of Wallace Kaufman and Bland
Simpson in the draft July 8th minutes, And the vote on that was G in favor,
1 opposed and one abstention.
c. Use is not in compliance with the general plans for the physical develop-
ment of the County as embodied in these regulations or in the cnmprch ..sivp
plan or portion thcreof, The Planning Board found that the evidence : haws
P/an y« '
` the use compliance �`�e i� not in nmpliance with the general plans for the davopment
of the`" Co''nty. Specifically the adopted goals of the Land Use Plan, ' oaTs
Two, Five and Seven; the adverse impact the development could have ( • the
cultural land uses �n the area Again on pages may be incorrect, and that
the agricultural land use' in the ap''roach zones for airports are not cenputible
airport.with �h� current zoning around the proposed a ryor . Th e vote on that motion
was five in favor and three against. This conclusion, item 'c'^ specifically
the Board felt permitted your Board to make a site specific evaluation of the
proposal and tie the proposal in with the general plans for the County.
Therefore, the Planning Board's final recommendation is that the Special
Use Pehnit be denied becauSe the applicant failed to meet the conditions
for the permit required by the Zoning Ordinance as evidenced by these
findings. The vote on that motion was sevenin favor and. one against.
In the past, several Commissioners have asked the Board for guidance on
proposals if they decide to do contrary to what the Planning Board has
recommended. Therefore, the Planning Board then looked at the project and
made a list of nine conditions that they would like to see uddr aed and
included should the Board decide to permit the request. This also raises
a concern that the Planning Board has in how we approach Special Use Permits_
I believe the Staff and the Board are pretty much in agreement on how the
project should proceed in terms of vat it would look like, or what one air-
port Aid look like But the met|x`.' of doing it is in disagreement, The
P»r ` ' ' handle d,
Staff seems to feel that we can o it with imposed conditions that will
solve all our problems, The Planning Board, however, chose to deny the per0t.
� Ie the event that you choose to approve the permit and impose conditions to
clear up any deficiencies these are some the Planning Board would like to
see included:
. g414
^
•
1. There he no based jet aircraft,
2. That the applicant own or control the area known as the clear zone.
Clear zone should he defined as starting 200' from the end of the runway
and rising at a 20:1 slope to a height of 100', This would make the
length of the clear zone 2000'.
3. There be no commercial uses associated with the airport facility such
as restaurants, motels or shops. Sale of fuel for aircraft, maintenance
service and flight training classes would be permitted.
4. That the number of based aircraft be limited to 200 hangared or tied-
. down planes.
5. That all the requirements and suggestions from the Orange Grove Rural
Fire Department be met, including the construction of a fire access road to
the property from 'leer Road.
6. That the construction schedule outlined on page 4 of the draft July 8th
minutes be .Jhered to by the applicants.
7' That a bond covering the cost of construction of all public improvements
and the runway, fire ponds and fire fighting equipment, plus 10% be
approved by and supplied to Orange County,
O. T| ,t ?light training operations not exceed 50% of the total operations
of the facility.
9. That any Planning Staff recommendations consistent with these conditions
be incorporated.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes the Planning Board's reconnendation-
• /Clerk's note: This concludes the verbatim portion of the meeting
5nless otherwise ooted.-/
Commissioner Marshall asked Ms. Crawfo' ] if she would explain the Planning
Board's rationale behind conditions # 4 and 8.
Ms. Crawford: "1 believe the 200 was as arbitrary a figure as Mr. Mehler
indicated 276 i»." She said concern was expressed that the original proposal
had indicated 50-100 planes whereas this proposal specifies 276 planes. The
Planning Board wished to limit ("cap") the number and "to clear the confusioa
that came up at the public hearing of whether we're talking about hangared and
an unlimited number of tied down oircraft...." She cited Mr. Matthews' testimony
regarding flight training operations, and said that he seemed to be of the opinion
that flight training "seriously increased" the noise level . She said that residents
had voiced concern about noise pollution and the Planning 8uard, while realizing
"that it would be virtually impossible to monite,.''thought limiting flight training
operations would decrease the potential noise level . Ms. Crawford added that
the votes on these conditions were unanimous.
Commissioner Hillhoit: Asked if thought had been given to limiting the
hours of operation for flight training operations,
Ms. Crawford: She said that the Board fored that anyone from Raleigh-Durham
might come to this site and just practice take-off and landing operations. She
iid that so. one might make more than three take-offs and landings per hour and
so hours of operation for such flights was seen to less desirable than what the
, Planning Board had agreed on. She said they still recognized the problem of pnrorco-
°
415
Hith no further questions, Chairman UhitteU declared the Public Hearing
on the Special Use Permit Request from the Buck Mountain Development Company
. ��
to be adjnvrosd' Chairman Whitted altered the agenda in order to accommodate
those persons present for items D. 4'6'
� ' D--4. Buck Mountain Development Special 1��l�nnit Request
Chairman Whitted said that the Board had heard the Planning Board's
,—
recommendation and he asked Mr. Hazard about the number of airplanes to be
placed on the site. Mr. Hazard replied that the site and the Development
Company could accommodate 276 planes and to limit the number would reduce the
income from the venture. He said he wanted to make a profit.
There was some discussion of when thd Board would make a decision on this
request; the Board members noted that they had not received the Minutes of the
proceedings yet. Upon advisement by the Clerk that the Minutes relating to this
requext would be on the Commissioners' agenda for September 7th, Commissioner
Nillhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson, to table this request until
the September 7th meeting when the Minutes would be available. Vote: Ayes, 5;
noes, O.
D--6. Water Resources Task Force Report
Chairman Whitted announced that there had been a public hearing on both
this item and the question of the extension of zoning into Cheeks Township.
He announced that procedure would be staff presentation, Board questions tv
Staff, Board discussion and then public input.
Hr' Fred Luce gave the presentation on behalf of Planning Staff. He said
( the Commissioners had referred the report to the Planning Board in 1981 which
had referred the report to the Township Advisory Councils for recomendation'
He said work sessions had been held on the Task Force Report. He added that the
Board had acted on three of the seventeen recommendations by: ]) adopting the
Land Use Plan which showed protected watersheds; 2) adopting zoning ordinance
amendments which required stream buffers; and, 3) requesting an allocation from
Jordan Lake water,
The Board chose to act on the recommendations one at a time at the conclusion
� of Mr. Lucas presentation.
Hr. Luce continued with recommendation ft 1 (for specifics of e ac h reCommendation
^ see pages of this book) regarding the outflow of water from one water basin
to another. H/. Luce noted that the Board has already requested that the water
outflow taking place in the 0ronge/0a,xunce water system to the Cape Fear and Reuse
' � �
416.
basin. Commissioner Nillhnit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to
|: adopt recommendation ig l. Upon being reminded that the Board had outlined
the procedure (see previous page of these minutes) to he followed to include
: public input, Commissioner Nil|hoit withdrew his motion
Recommendation f 2: Hk. Luce noted, with regard to the recommendation
on the allocation of water rights in Lake Orange, that it was "not currently .
a critical issue."
,
Reomoeo6ution ti 3: Mr. Luce read it aloud and did not supply any update,
Recommendation ig 4: With regard to reservoir sites, Hr. Luce said two
additional sites had been identified on the north and south forks of the Little
River,.
Recommendation .11S: To reserve a portion of the Jordan Lake Water, as
earlier noted, the Board has acted on this recommendation.
necomn. dation # 6: Mr. Luce read it aloud and did not supply any update.
Recommendation ig 7: To adopt a Land Use Plan which identifies protected
watersheds Nr. Luce noted the Board had done so on September 2, 1981-
Recommendation ig D: Mr' Luce read it aloud and did not supply any update,
Recommendation II 9: Mr. Luce read it aloud and did not supply any update.
Recommendation # 10: Mr. Luce summarized it and did not supply any upd/te.
Recommendation # 11: Regarding the extension of zoning into its areas of
protected watersheds, Nr. Luce said the Board had done so in the case of the uxten-
' sion of zoning into Hillsborough Township,
Recommendation # 12: Mr. Luce summarized the recommendation and added that
the impervious surface ratios had already been added to the zoning ordinance,
{
Recommendation # 13: Regarding the provision of stream buffers, Mr. Luce
said the Board had implemented this recommendation in the watershed amendments to
the zoning ordinance.
Recommendation # 14: Mr' Luce summarized the recommendation and did not
provide an update.
Rvnmoendation I/ 15: Nr. Luce cited the recommendation and did not provide
any update.
. Recommendation ' IO: Mr. Luce summarized the recommendation and did not pro-
1
ivide any update.
Recommendation # 17: Hr. Luce summarized the recommendation and did not
provide any update.
���
'^^° '
. � .
Cmmnissiuncr. Hil|hoit suggested changes in some recommendations: with
regard to 4, he said recent studies done by the State indicated the possibility
of a large dam on Corporation Lake and consequently, he would modify # 8 to delete
the sentence beginning "Medium- and high-density residential kovcin9.. .NcGoon Creek
sub-basin'" He added that references to "If development intensifies in McGmm
/ Creek" should also be deleted "because under what I am proposing we would not
be proposing any higher intensity development in the McGown Creek sub-basin than
in the rest of the ah Upper Eno," Beginning with "If development intensifieo. . .°
}
Commissioner Uillhnft said the remainder of the paragraph in #8 should be struck,
Concerning # 10, Commissioner Hillhoit said to strike references to "extending
water and sewer lines into McGown Creek sub-basin"; he clarified that such extension
was dependent on the ultimate site of the dam and was consistent with "al/ our
discussions that at some point sewer lines will be extended in the vicinity .[ I-
O5." He continued to leave in the reference that the "Upper Eno watershed in accord-
ance with the Land Use Plan." For recommendation 0 12, Commissioner Uillhuit
suggested striking reference to lot size; there was a consensus that this would
entail striking the entire recommendation # 12'
Responding to a question regarding the necessity of returning the amended
recommendations to another public hearing, Commissioner Willhoitsaid his under-
standing was that these deletions were less restrictive than what was taken to
public hearing and therefore, no second public hearing was required.
Mr. Shanklin, Planning Board member, said he thought an 18th renowmenctinn
regarding the New Hope Creek Watershed had been adopted. Planning Board o/�notes
were consulted and it was noted that the motion to include an 28th recommendation
on New Hope Creek Watershed had not passed.
Commissioner Gustaveson suggested that the Board hear audience comments
on the proposed changes to the recommendations; accordingly, Chairman Whitted
reviewed the recmnendations: # 5, # 7, he said had been "taken care of";
#8 had been amended /i.ee above7; # 9 reads as is; R 10 had been amended / ee
) -
above/; I! )2 had been deleted as above, however, Commissioner Willhoit said the
last sentence, regarding the impervious surface ratio should remain; R 13,
Chairman Whitted conintued, hed been "dealt with"; and R 14, 15, 16 and 17 were
as printed. Chairman Whitted asked for audience comments on the recommendations.
Mr. Ben Lloyd, Route l, Efland, asked Commissioner Nillhoit to "clarify" the
changes he had nnUe in the recommendations; Commissioner Nillhnit did so.
. —
��� �
���
. `
M/. Lloyd expressed his feeling that industry was being discouraged in
Seven Mile Creek Watershed, He added that he did "not agree with this" cnntcndin]
that developers said this was one of the most viable sites in the County' Cmx-
mi Auner W1llhoit said he had "no objections to it being reworded to say that, ah,
jndustry'.'thai does not have an adverse affect on water quality should be encouraged
to locate in the Upper Eno Watershed, I would accept that." Commissioner \/illhoit
| continued that since the mechanisms to demonstrate that water quality is not affected
had not been identified it was up to the "developer to indicate considerations that
they had taken to ensure that water quality would not be adversely affected; and.
that l will not compromise nn.^
Mr. Lloyd continued his comments by asking Commissioners to clarify the
recommendations. In reference to V 11, he said he is opposed to the extension
of zoning into Cheeks Township. Mr. Lloyd said he agreed with the changes in P12.
Ms' Josephine Vad‘our. Hillsborough, said she wished to object to recommendation
V 13; The Commissioners told Ms. Barbour that recommendation had already been
implemented, She objected, saying that the buffers would provide access across
private land. She objected to the Water Resources Task Force Report being
shared with the Triangle J Council of Governments, saying that Orange County
Citizens had not had prior input. The Commissioners reminded Ms. Barbour and
Mr, Lloyd that citizens had had primary input through the Township Advisory
Councils.
Hs. Crawford, Planning Board Chair, read the original motion on the 18th
(
recommendation which had not passed / ee Planning Board minutes/; she said that
with the exception of the recommendation to request on allocation from Jordan Lake,
none of the recommendations had addressed the Jordan Lake situation. Commissioner
• 18,Willhoit said that with regard to 0 l8 "we could address that with a Resolution to
the Triangle J Council of Governments , developing a regional plan for protection
of the Jordan Resevnir." Ns, Crawford said she would like to see stronger wording
for 0 18, regarding anyone who might be polluting or potentially pollJtinq the
"sources of Jordan Lake." Commissioner suggested that Staff bring hack to a
subsequent meeting a full motion "to work it into a policy statement" for V 18,
The Board consented to take each recommendation in order.
8LWEND8TIOM V 1: Commissioner' Gustaveson moved, seconded by Cuomis-ioner
Marshall , to approve the recommendation. Vote: Ayes, 6; noes, U.
' ~^
. �
RECOMMENDATION 4 2: Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded as amended by
;4PPe
Cmomfsti-mer Willhoit "to clarify that that is a longer range goal once adequate
water supplies are assured in all parts of Orange County"; Commissioner Gustaveson
accepted the amendment to his motion. Vote: Ayes, 4 (Commissioners Gustaveson,
oocey me � . ` ,
' Marshall, Whitted and Willhoit); noes, 1 (Commissioner Walker) .
RECOMMENDATION 0 3: Commissioner Marshall mmvcd, seconded by Commissioner
Gustaveson, app/oval . Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
RECOMMENDATION 4 4: Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Whitted, to approve the Planning Board's recommendation /;ee pages for
specifics/. Commissioner Walker moved to amend the motion to include the Lower
Eno as a site for a reservoir; Commissioner Willhoit seconded the motion to amend.
Vote on motion to amend the original motion to include the Lower Eno as a reservoir
site: Ayes, 4 (Commissioners Marshall, Walker, Whitted and Willhoit); noes, 1
(Commissioner Gustaveson).
}
Vote on original motion, as amended: Ayes, 4 (Commissioners Marshall, Walker,
Whitted and Willhoit); noes, l (Commissioner Gustaveson).
RECOMMENDATION 4 6: Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner
Willhoit, to approve. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O
, . . , ' .
RECOMMENDATION 4 8: Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Comioic �r
Marshall , to approve recommendation 4 8 through the sentence ending "' .,ixdx5triul
uses should be prohibited from University Lake and Cane Creek Watersheds" a"j to
ask that Staff return with an amendment to address Hr. Lloyd's concerns thai: this
( may be interpreted as "having a negative stance on industrial development:" Vote:
Ayes, 5; noes, 0'
RECOMMENDATION 4 9: Commissioner Willhoit moved adoption with the recommendation
changed to read ". ..should be encouraged to incorporate. ,.";. �. , Cum:.issfuner Gustaveson
seconded the motiun. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0.
RECOMMENDATION 4 10: Commissioner Willhoit moved to approve, seconded by
Commissioner Gustavesnn, Vote: Ayes, 4 (Coroissioneru Gustaveson, Marshall ,
Whitted and Willhoit); noes, l (Commissioner Walker).
�
RECOMMENDATION 4 ll: Comflissionar Gustaveson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Willhoit to approve. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, V.
RECOMMENDATION 4 12: Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner
- Gustaveson, to approve as previously changed Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
| - -
RECOMMENDATION V 14: Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by
C000isvionnr Gustavesno, to approve. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0.
RECOK [KoATJON V 16: Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Com-
missioner mfpsiuncr
Uillhni|^ to approve. Vote: Ayes 5; noes, D.
RECOMMENDATION V 16: Commissioner :.orshul\ moved, seconded by Com'
missioncr Gustaveson, to amend the motion to reflect the Planning Board's
revised version of this recomarndotion; Commissioner Marshall accepted the
i ^
amendment. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0.
RECOMMENDATION V 17: Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Com-
missioner Hhittod^ to approve. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
0-6' Extension of zoning into Cheeks Township.
Mr. Cannity presented the Staff background on this issue, noting that
the Planning Board had twice recommended that the extension of zoning into
Cheeks be delayed; he added that Staff's position was that "zoning provides
protection," He said that Cheeks Township was located in watersheds which
could provide drinking water to the County.
Commissioner asked that the Staff show two alternates to the Land Use
Plan for Cheeks Township as the result of the deletion of references to
NcGown Creek Watershed from Recommendation 8 of the Water Resources TAsk
Force Report; and the uncertainty of Seven Mile Creek and the possible expansion
i
of Corporation ��e.
Mr. Cannity said Staff proposed: "Area south of Efland to Old V lV and
then around the intersection with the interstate be increased or that the 10 year
transition area be increased to include this area it would be immediately south
of Efland and then down to the area of Old lD, around the interchange of 85
and back up to a line that's about parallel with the existing Ten Year Transition
at this point. We would also suggest that this area in here to the new proposed
Ten Year Transition be expanded and called Twenty-Year Transition,"
send this recommendation as p,es*ited
' |
Commissioner Gustaveson moved to sn o
by ! Cannity, to the Planning Board as an urgent item and to ask for its
expeditious consideration. Commissioner Walker said he would second the motion
if Conmissnner Gustaven would amend the motion to include Hr. ShanBiWs
so;:::`stiun that this recommendation return to the Township Advisory Council .
Commissioner Gustaveson said that would be a Planning Buard decision and he
would not amend his motion to include Kr. Shanklin's suggestion, commissioner
Marshall :,eonuded Commissioner Gustavcson's motion,
/
����
- _ . `
Chairman Whitted said that the ■ '�e major cnn:cons voiced a t the Public
Hearing on this issue, as he remembered them were: }) Industrial develop-
ment between the 1-O5 and US 70 cunride' ; 2) sewer and water extension; and,
3) lot size restrictions, e o He said the recommendations as amended and adopted
this evening of the Water Resources Task Force addressed those issues,
Vote: Ayes; 5; noes, D.
D—1 Housing Rehabilitation Contract Awards,
Commissioner Walker moved, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson, to
award the housing rehab contracts to the low bidders as recommended by
the Community Development Director. (That recommendation and all bid results
are on yages^N6 _^W`respectively, of this bunk') Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
D--2. Safety Seat Program.
Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to
approve the lease agreement with the Orange County Child Pas: )er Safety
Association, as recommended by the Manager. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
0-3' Voting Machine Bid Award.
Commissioner Gustaveson moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to
award the bid to Computer Elections Systems as recommended by the Purchasing
Officer Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, O.
O-7. Executive Session to consider personnel matters.
Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Villhoit, to
go into executive session for a personnel matter., Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0.
Following the executive session the Board adjourned the meeting by
consensus,
Richard E. NhitLed, Chair
°
Paulette Pridgen-Pond, Clerk
� -
11"4
1.7. ;; OF CO:;IESS;;IC;.‘!Fa0
7.). C-1
1
; DY17 August 2 3, 1982
subiL.: Request by Planning Staff for a Rezoning from A-R Agricultural
Residential to EC-5 (Existing Commercial-5) on a portion of
Roy Wilkerson' s property.
_
Lplann,n, -17-2.1.ic F1j y:2y,
1 X7J-,Ez1;han'c._(s) :Rezoning application (a InformatiOa
Rick Cannity
Ltrs 3, 4 Real=hecklt (2
is
Pon-21Agb.?. ; 732-3181 art. 347
Pn?OSE: To receive citizen input concerning the requested rezoning from
Residential-) (R-1) to Existing Commercial (EG-5)
INaED: This existing commercial use is located in Hillsborough Township
and is shown on Tar Map 5 Block H P/0 Lot 4. It is on Highway 57
north and is within the Orange Rural Fire District. This co -arci
use was overlooked when Zoning was originally applied to Hil3oborok:
Township on September 2 , 1981.
DEPACT: All existing commercial uses in unzoned Townships were given
the appropriate zoning classification when Zoning was applied
in September of 198].. Since all other commercial uses wore
designated, the Planning Staff feels the Existing Commercial-V
(EC-5) designation is appropriate for this use also.
!:::COMAE.NDAT).ON: Planning Staff recommends approval of the EC-5 designation
for a ;:oning lot of 500' r 300' on Wilkerson 's property .
42
3
I
\L ] 5
N SU1JlQ T-1
1220 S. CHUR TON STREET
HILLS3OROUGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27778
TELEI-HONE::732-3833
2 June 1982
Mr. Rick Cannity
Orange County Planning Department
Orange County Courthouse
Hillsboroug%, H. C. 27278
Dear Rick;
I mould like to respectfully submit a revisA map of Wilkerson Aci- ,
Section 1V, showing Um tracts of land, and also a letter from Roy
Wilkerson requesting that all of Tract A on the afuresaid map be zoned
existing commercial.
The 6,62 acres has always been a separate lot of record by deed,
and has always been used by the Vlilkersons commercially.
- —
- Would you please submit this request to the proper boards.
If I may be of any assistance in this matter, please contact me.
Respectfully,
/6A
Alois Callemyn
AC/el
F ,C-t,'„LOT,aOUNDAR Y, TOPQOR4PHIC LOAW,AND CO(1571f UCTION SURVEYS SURD'S/1510N DESIGN LAYOUT
424
Paul L. Wilkeraen Sr.
Route 1, Box 363
Hillsborough, NC 27278
May 25, 1982
•
Orange County Board of Commissioners
nnd Orangc County Planning Board
Hillsborough, 0 27278
, .
•
Deer Sirs:
As an Orange Covnty taxpayer since 1511. I appeal to tbAs Beard .,
of Commissioners to correct a zoning error made, concerning my
business operation on Hwy 57 about I mile Nerth of Hillsborough.
My father and I started the business in 199L with two pieces of
equipment, and have boon at this location for 20 years. Tho
business now has 20 pieces of equipment and nine families
earning their living through this business. The property has
four shop buildings. One shop was built in 1962. The second
1;as built in 197L and the other two were built in 1981 .
When zoning went into offset our property was incorrectly
zoned residential.
The Planning Department has recomgended a 300' x 500 lot be
zoned commercial. It would be difficult if not impossible
for these nine families to continue to earn a living from this
business if we are rrstricted to this small area. We need for
the full 933 x364' lot to be zoned commercial. Space is
needed for equipment, gravel, pipe, dirt, etc.
I would also point out that all residents within 500' of this
property moved in after this business was started. All adjoining
property owners were properly notified of the requested
correction in the zoning and the date of the public hearing.
No one appeared to protest the Commercial Zoning.
I have already had to pay $210.00 to meet with the Planning
Board and have spent many hours with Alois Cellemyn and the
• Planning Department to correct the Planning Departments zoning
error. Hours that I needed to be devoting to my Business.,
•
I appeal to this Hoard of Commissioners- to take Corrective
Action as soon as possible to zone my property Commercial,
the full 933' x 364' lot, where the nine family business is
located.
cannot afford to loose more time or incurr further expenses
in this matter.
Sincerely,
. .
Paul L. Wilkersn Sr.
•
1
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION
DATE Nay 10, 1982
The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, Ncrth Carolina
COMMISSIONERS
The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number 5
Block number B tot numberpart 4, Shown on'the accompanying plat,
which is presently in a A- District be rezoned to
EC-5 for the following reasons:
The existing commercial use was overlooked when zonin. was ado ted in Hillsboro gh
Township.
•
Signed: Address:
Orange County P1 ning Department Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, N.C.
' •-
1.41gAigirrk&101.9!. ; '4:-..''', Yli,!.•,,ili'44i, :.4,44Vii0,;,$"'',/,*,,„$)1 7..44e z.,,eiegl;;;;;',7..*'''T- "!14.4.:1%.": 15.,d'6:4 Vit
:'. t rff-4:0:4P-titlf it"4'.'.4' 1 -...4 s.',■.,t *.-t'''''-7 1.!..`:''' '‘`'.'1.'.)..flg''t i'.'':1 t!''it'AMH,., 14'-'' .P.f.f4WM:i'101.iVirP,'",41-1j H -
l''. ' .: t0';';-:,,1„, .411.,f„.,',;$..F.'.n'',1!,,k'.1,..•'1,.*.: .'. '.'. I' ;'". .-:'.'''.7-1.:':",i,:;..'i'', '.4.41;':4;;.;.,",:.i•f•.,:t,,f..?,'M‘`',?t,1 k I,. '"',';..?'' ': P.,.;;;4"
'''4''. ,.
.!1;
I.
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION
DATE B////
The Honorable Board of County Commissioners ,• •-:-.--:• •.-
Orange County, North Carolina - ,,.-„: ,!',,:,:..-•;-,
..r..... ::••,..:•-,--2.,..
, ".t$-=••,-...,,,-.4..").
p,OMMISSIONERS:
The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number
,I
Block number 6 . , Lot number J2/14 „ Shown on"the accompanying plat, -
1
which is presently in a 14),E,- District be rezoned to
g-e.... : . for the following reasons: •
, .
"0 1 X ../.61 ..-0 •e ,Q4-7/,,,,,t,ey/
ret-e-'0
,L4 det-1
eel'eel,. ' Al)on- C$0.eLe,A7'eel
•Je;'7 . .47./. i e 1/, a .,-.E. . 2724,6_,_ A 0 .a-a ..... 0-W..
/90 CO e r .ai i Q.II ' e' ". )4" ....' , .1,- - ,,,■/
/
I ........... ........-, . .
.. ... ..._
1
. . .
1
1 ..,.-4-.....---.-.* ..............
e ,
/ , 4 0 Address:
i A
* . O , ø/
,
, \ ,
. .
- 4
I .;,7
• .
. .
. . ,
. .
: .
- .
. .
) .
1 , _
. ..
2
p
I.
P. > r0
P. ‘13 9• Hr-31-100
1-
Pt 00 P '.4P
PC
I__,.. 0
al n 1-,- o P. Y. '0 .1
Tr o 1-.. to 11 Irl
0 •0 11
f-' r- In 4 P
0 In P- P 0 Pr)
r3
rn Fr r.r7
.)
k--
a a'
n 0
1--• 0 11. .°
- r1- 0 0 ri r4
11
1 I-- 0 CI rt 0 r-1 P
n 11 P CD 0 I-1- 53
rr P P- 0.1 03 t.r1 0 0 -
01 Fr X P. 11:1
1-.. 0 Cl) •• 0 G11
tn Cl Fr Fr En C
0 (1 rl P
1-t, 0 4-4 Pk '''d 0 P t•-7 , ,
I co 1--• P In 0 P 0 C Vi .
0 ...• 0, ta. 0* '0 0
0.•• ii "0 --* 03
0 .P. Cri
I 11 LI ri fa 1 to 0 A-
co
fa 0 a.
P -0.• 11
, P1 V a a or
1 . ton or P
u3 VI
P i-S Z
0
0
.. o., P ■-■-• 10
g 1-• ft
to in P
■.1 Ira 22: I
in • En .
ri
0 ..
rr ft f (0
a'
Y. fa C-3
, P 0 p- I-1 ce 0 co
0 0 ri P cn
Ft
P' Cl 03 Cl
'1 f0
P 5
0 o, 1--. 0.1 I-.
0 0 to Fr 0
p0 it P ••• rr ID • ■-,
4 a , ,vi 111
n DI P .1:1 p C ..
1 1,-. i-. P. a rrt
I o P. cr• rr ,,
1 - .4 I- PC
.
CO
1. 0 l
ft -,() 1-h r • b _
. ... .. . 0 Pi CC :1::7
. .
rh ' °,....•• ri I. , • N
..., . • . .. • -, m 1-,... .
: ....-
-....,„ . . . . . • 0 .
.. . . '■, "0
-_, •, 0
III C C) . •11 '' .
,- r•-■ '
ri• , -E.
FI' 0 0 il
4 o P p. O. n ,
o 0 P
P. •%., 0 vt V
I DI rt Fr Ps Cn ri tr
11 P' .4 17 0 0
C0 P i
(0
P '1 m rr o
In
.0 mr, . r./3 x ,
Y. 1-•1 .0
o 10 Z in P
O rr 0 Fr P
*I p
i-. .0 P. P. LI
1.4 P.
'-4 Pt •4 • as n
P.a H .•.P P co
P.21 13-• n
o
1 to ■-• )1. rd , H o
1-4- -• 4 P 0
O 1-`1 Y. 111 0
B
1 m . P. I-. "t
'1 p.,
ar co P. ri
'•
ro 1'4 ta Sil
. „ ■ P • 'D 0 R "
or n o 0 a,
. I Ii rT g
Fh 0
Cr. p a • a
i 0 -'. 0 0
1 P
rr pi
I rr K
P. 1,.^ CI .
Cl 0 r1-
I P
I a
173
1
L
. .
1
, .
1 . \
, .
[ . ,..
. '
..,,,,...4:,Ik...'11;7....' .t;',.',.:a,'....;.1.,64,..4'44,1,4‘1'1,t:,,,..S.W '.'J 4 4 4,,' ",',,ri.,S.'.n.'/A,‘AV,',..6:. 4:..;i Nt,qtr' 10,.r.,4, ':".7..::47t.'"::01.-:'...'s.■•',. , . :. .1...I/4 e:.
1;1,,...slig41.;,t-*pa.;i. •-•.":"...;.1.:.....,!.„.„yArleti,::•e, -,,,IL,:o.,,,.......,.•,‘ .:111.4,1, ti, 1..!,,4 rio.. f :„.ton..i.0. n 1..4..p..•4....k.,i.:.!... . ,j....L..
.NAIrj.‘: •:,4t,".....,,,'--4- .Zt",-44,,..;4.,,, ,,,E,fr4 tr...---:.',,g y,01.1.',.i.„ „,„,".-..-.' .. .‘4,,...,11-Z. „7.. €6,,VA,P,,,„-4,,.- ,.,...ttAA.).`-.,..,11,1. ,4„.4.frit
. ,•..,.,:,..,..‘„,.:,n„._ ,,,rj ,7,,,,,.t.15-.,...,L,,{ '11 ,47 7'`,";V''''S•VI.C.,..Z9 •' i• ' ' ''''a,^' T''', ' 'to t 47,-(f,": " . .1.1,2-4^,k.-::-..,••■••.- r•••• -,•-•.4
_.7. ';'' '• ::•:',.....,;" ' .1.4;" ;...'; ''V.":'...it...,,#17,e,..:r',.., ....,.•t.,,.4.1.el...:::1,,,,,,t',1„, „,,,,t,40-,.,...V..,:v,:.... ,..;E.y..,..4. ..4...,...*:,..y. ,;..7'*:'....7.1.1,1., ,,..'4,..''',.••
. 'irr.f 4:Irtt's,,,,,7,4.1r::!'+'":.','-4.1.7.4.'1,";■•=',.4'.'.. ”,' i"..P.,';
!: ',',".''''.01. r'',', ''''l •...'',,1.+=i64...41"...,r,'''''1%,4,t'.'.;rtrbin:t• • ' 1* ....•(r•:.'..V+'''. I
I . .
. .
0. re 1'4
t... f ,, c,
g il
{1.1 rk sr TD '1'4 at II t4
I.J. th 4 0 r2
}... 0 0
tft
ft P ett. ti t4
ti .0 1-4 t4 0
, 0 IA. 51
ote re 0 rt at
to tt *..... It
0 0 to , *4 0 0 . -
ro 'xi
ri 0 41
0\
........,
PI re re
o rl
V1 re o
., Otto N, 0
. ,
0,..
p oaq l ip% se,,
l ti
ar kt.
. 01 il
1 >
4 rt 0 !-• \
I 1 .
. re El 041
ri 0 0
• el et 0
ea .• IT
a .
c.
......,
p.= ..a a
. .._,
. .. N rrirl ea t s t ,,,4 rsr1eeP i r.0-t-0 i e r.t e
e e.
0 tII so[
\\
4:,.:,.,..'"• 0Qt.P r.:.e.
. 4
.1
m
a
4,
..
l,'..
....,
•.
...
t M g
4 o cu 8- 0
0 0 0., Z 0 re ra
0 rt rt 0 0) 1-1
ri 0. .k4 rt 113 E k.:.
ri rt
(.4 01 116
to• 0 0 0
o e-r •ri 0
h. 1...
1/44 ti '4 4
0 0 0
01 0. g3"
w. Ace
O ,0 "
0 Cn
O• .0
Ftts. fli' N,
,,,,,.. a .1.•.,
(D 4
1 1
w-
m ris 13
g. \1 tr4
. .,
........
_.. . ,
r,....,
. — . ....
. ,
. .. . ...... __ __ . .,
. " , .
I ,
..—,,.. ".--• 1
- .. .
. .
. . . .
. .
•
L... .
• .:,:. .
. .
1
' ' • ,.
1
.._....
-
,-:
•
1
i ----------. 1
------- --"1"„;..t......-7,------------- -----:":-------,.:
...........,
......______ ---..... -•)
---.. ----d-r.---- .'s--..-........
-. :X •."'eat,.. .-
. ,
Nta
1• •
' A, 41'•
' .'i! ..i.r.c... ,•.e....:.....' ''.. 1
' •
0...1/4.,...t.
‘I
n 01:,..;.,.:,•.,,..7.. .
Ca)..-4' ' A
1 I50 . ---"'s••••
. i 4., .
'' g i - ,:, .......
- '• or
. .......,..,ii.... -\\_)\
I '''■
\ . c)
/
\''...
, .. ....
R k is 1
\\\\\ K , ----
—........_ ......N
I I g,i,t• -I, (
\lb cto gi
40 ko 13 '"'......:'" . `.........
4.4 411‘
..... d
1'r
I \(411- Ct.! .-....-.,.,............... .**‘:\
. 1
.,
1
4.1
..-. 37
46 0.4 Q) ea
r, t; • .,...! \si //, zi: i.,
,995.s,
- NI.
;; —kL
PIN 101-Call.
-------„,
1:4 co
44--' -
I i
N I /
I: . ....
/r' 1
1 1
t\i g x
■
hi
■°.. .
/ -
/7 M CI q 1
4 4
•
t
,..
1
75
...
-.. I L„ ...---
/,■7 ■
-1...."
.------ '<, ------------
..-— - -...„.....
1.■ it ,
Ni IA
•It At •
. . .
t 0
IA 4 is
4 t.
_•._-- ....
Cr....4"...
T. aki
,...----
1 ,
\'''---..
,
4 4e, .
....____
II / - _
,
...„,,
.
:.1.1
'4. 7----- - '.------- -, )
. I
CI)
z 8
.trlwra,
/ ' t,i7-07,11rrar—i 34714-10N
1 1 *
o ■3
4 IA /A
NI 44 .
1 t)
F•
\ : '
. _
\ • .7.'
- - ---
' .
_ . ,..",• ._,
I .. .
- • . ,
. ..
•
- ..'. ..
' .
. . . - . _,-.. ... .
47 a
: ., •14:-•8513.••.. - - ..
SA 4
. ---
. , . - ..-r■-4,. ."- 4.":-:,::",,
' 7 55
•:'''''''.;:::Y.'q':::,' ',f-;._,
*
4
• ' — . - '
. .
. !`•:--*:e,-.:',.;',.-.7.:;":,,T, . ,.',. 7'..
50 • • • . - ..;,,7 7..".•';::,
, FY • - .•;:.- .'..'....,;..-.:ii.. ..:'':;:tri:2-•
- _ .
'.,,,.. • - '- ;
. .•",.i.::1'..t. ....,:r.:•::',
1197
' .4. ,
i • . : .. •:. • .:::.„,,...,... , ........:
, ...
.., •..
.. ., .. .
4 oE 4
•
\ :
.. .
\ 1 i .8061.! AC. •
.P
511° 502r '. GAPAGE i .
\ D CI 1 aug /
i 1 I , :
2cte.-
r" I 4•-- _1
- N 8 4 8p4
;•
. -- / / - -
•
: ..„. •
. . .
5813 •
ill
------- 0... . , . , •. •
------- 4,T . 46-76 i
•
•• .
.Lop • /
/
.. ,.
3.07 AC.
.-- • I., i....,..:, ,-;-..r, '
---.- -- - ---.... ' 0 RA,/ /
----
--......„, —0 i --,--.-.,_ : ''',5 '4-"''',:'' :,...:'!'"i.r -; •
...-- (":71.) I i z.20Z„• -:"---
c' ,cr. i
H------
.
• :.:"
442 c 1 . f.e/ 1 I
. MAP 1 y / / j ,.
.. t ,. :i "'
I ,e/, • , i • •
. .
• • r
1,0.' . ts...i•
...BURKE ,..1.,,
\,..
. .
0/
ul,
MAP 58 Zq
'i• ' (W/I...k'ER..iail I , ' .
- -ACRES) ,,,,4,,,..
‘.4 ....—.......•••- ,A11.14..,,,S.,.? *-1.--
V• 1 .
. /11
• ‘ ,,.13 ---797Z-75:11.cda nIcr i — _ ,, ,7, li.
: 1 \1/4...._ ,,....-7-'''' •-•••.7.7 7••:::.;;.,7/7 i 04
,„--, ':: I ', ,,-7) g a . ti....., •
AC. '....7 A • ,z--- 3849 ' I
. •
. , .
.. . . _ . .,
, •
.. -
. ..,
., •,, . . .. , .
. . , .
1 •T. .
, . . .
. • . . . ,
. . ,
- .
. '
• • .
•••• .. .. - ,...
i
1 i
t 1 1
., .
4 h,
"'aa' ", " " ,•
'
:1..,,
.,.. .
-
. ..
- --
.. . .
.- .
7197 " .
. . —
.- ",... .,.: .....;.. ...
:•- :: . ;
• (I") . . ....
•
80.61 .4d,
' . . .
H ,
. , ....,1=2", / • -
, ..
■ ./1.11tr:tW.ii9„7..-..:./h/ .. .:
... .
\ ,
- fit
..
N 3 5 i:i POO 1
• .•'.--'..7::...‘,..,!: ,::::- 0
_ .......:7
i
..., _ Q C)II.1 AC, 0 I
to 5813 "
/ /
k .,. •
,r.,- \...x. v. •
/ 11
/
.-
oa 3..07 AC, /
,...„L
1--,....... i / '
.".— ..--........—..... .„,„.,....
........_*,—.... ,
....—_,..—.,...
—...,...,...s
--- —.,,.. — - —...'"-•..7 .• •'
'''''I.,...—s....1 t--------:- --:-- I
035i '-.. ------.:".*..,__--4-%-"H,... -------..-0 ' i---..._
•
/
/ ----"" --•-• -„,... ,r, ,.
2 AC I
5C 'I, il/
I 1 ,
.. ___..1..._ ,.
H .
, ,---7-7.„,,,x., Ty32.1.---•(."-c":71.2.,7.. .,........ ::::.......00: . ., ..
..,
.,
- -----I /1556 . .
, .
'A ‘, •
MAP..sEE 58 '
v,. \
!il i
\ 'k
,,, •, OWL ASR,50/1 V / /
AC'.8E-5.):---NR I.,-
/1
-----'3 •‘. t 13) ___L9)80 ,''' gLiesor.to.,e / i —
–, ... , N....._,.... ------— .,p7 -..,..,,,:.•.,..6" 104
'.-.•'13 r- (--,-) ' /1-2,t 2AC. .1:-.".. _ _ . __._..... .
1
.1
• ... -- -
- \ '
i .
1 • - , _.
I .. .
, , , -,- 7,...- ...",-=.,...:
I ... ..- ,
. .,-
42t
COJTI.
17,7•7C O CO:'21.L5S Az:tiOr.
1.'1E21
iiG DATE Au g t 23 1932
" Amendment to the Land Use Plan or Curtis F. Bane Planned
•
Development, Housing n-4-Stonegate
- X
•
1—ar-6-1.1
Int riTatica Contzct: Rick Cannity
01120:Er: 732-8181 ext. 347
puizposi:1; To receive citizen input and comments on the proposed change to
The Land Use Plan for 36.5 acres referred to as Stonegate from
Rural Residential to 20 year Transition.
1■EED:
The applicant has requested a PD-H, P.-4 for 114 mobile home spaces
on 36.5 acres of land located 11 mile south of US '70 in Eno Township.
The tractis bounded on the north by Mobile Acres 112 , a 54 unit
mobile home park; on the east by Mt, Hermon Church Road (SR 1713) ;
on the south by Mt. Hermon Church Cemetery and the Southern Railwa
line; and on the west by Kirkland Estates. The 20 year Transi1:;
Area tends from the Durham County line west to SR 1713 and a,,b;:
the tract. Transition Areas are areas that are or will be u-ban
in character and where urban-type services are provided to 7
County citizens. The proposed amendment to The Land Use P711 would
allow for the density proposed for use of the tract.
-12,iP_CT.: The requested change to The Orange County Land Use Plan is reasonabl
and appropriate given the proNimity of the tract to the Twenty-year
Transition Area. The proposed development would not be inconsistent
with existing development in the area or development levels propose,:
for the contiguous areas east of SR 1113. The proposal would provit
moderate income housing for Orange County citizens residing in Eno
Township and provide adequate access via US 70 and I-85 to places of
employment and services. Fire, police and rescue services can be
provided to the area at an adequate level,. A package plant and,
community water system are proposed to serve the units until sue:
time as public water and sewer services can be e;,:tended to the a A.
C.CONNTF,WMTTON: The Planning staff recommends approval of the requested change
to Land Use Plan. The intcn_ity of development and the
applieation of the criteria for the Twenty-year Transition
Area e appropriate for this location.
'14 t
(1.3 :% :C : C.0.1.7.'ilf 759
0 07 CO:2ussr.c .:.; .:7..,7 ',. F..c...ticrt 7.--,;•I'r:o,
AC-I Tc:•:: ;::::::2::i17,. j'1.7..Z I
i=771.-NT.; DAT.T. _ An.gust 23,_ lp,82 _
Ei,,I..x. c..: Request of Curtis F. Bane Planned Development Mousing, R-4
Stonegate , Class A Special Use Permit; Rezoning
t Da:p7::1.,t_: _lanning _ _
,.
. . _
6r.7- ' -' ' . lication-P 1
, 9-, ,
'11-1. 1.N."2, Letter of Intent 354, Rick Cannity
Letters from State 5, 60, Tax Map-Po 8
rindin s-Pos. 9-21 Inforcotion Contact:
, ° - 1-0h0a ?..tinr: 732-0101 et. 341
puRnosE: To receive public input end comments concerning an application
for a Planned Development-Housing R-4 Special Use Permit
(PD-R, R-4) ; Rezoning.
NE,m, The applicant has requested a PD-H, R-4 for 114 mobile home spaces
on 30.5 acres of land. The property is located in Eno Township on
SR 1713 (Mount Hermon Church Road) . The property lies north of the
Southern Railroad, east of an undeveloped wooded tract and south of
Mobile Acres II mobile hone park. Building separation will be
35' minimum from the raod, 20' minimum when mobile homes are end
to end and 40' when mobile homes are parallel. There are central
sewage disposal and water systems proposed for the developmnt.
Two recreation areas are shown on the plan, each connected to the
_ street system by pedestrian walks. Private roads are proposed to -
service the units in the development. The property is in the Eno
Rural Fire District.
1MT: Cm: The request for 114 units on 36.5 acres of land
would most the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance if the
property is rezoned to PD7H, R-4.Floor area is below the maximum
allowed. Open space, livability and recreation space are all in
excess of required minimum for the PD-U,R-4District, Before this
property can be rezoned, an amendment to the Land Use Plan must
be made to extend the 20 year Transition designation from the east
side of State Road 1713 to include this tract of land.
1-1cOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning and
Special Use Permit with the attached conditions.
�8�~
"'- /
�
k��./
r.,-
,.
��
Pg. 1
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION
DATE 1982
-
The Hun6rable Board of County Commissioners ,
North Carolina ^=_
Orangc' �non�y, » � '� ���i
��� _
����ISSZ0X��S' . '
- ` � � ^- _ ^ '
- Tax �a Number 26
The undersigned request that property located on p __`_.,
Shown on�the �ccnmpanyfng plat,
Block number 035 Lot numbe� . �
which is presently in a
Rural istrict be rezoned to
,Residential
PD-R-4 • . - for the following reasons: .
It is our opinion that even though the area for the proposed Stonegate is EN `:xated
'R 1 that this planhed development will provide Orange County with a muth n' A
_
moderate intensity community. . __
------- ---
The j t ts located east of the 20 year transition area and with the advantage
-� �--�—� --------
0 cii :)' access to major Highways such as I nterSfa*e 85 and U
'3� 70,
~
-- . .
Effort has been given to site and road locations tn inimiza grading and its
impact on the existing wooded environment and to procure a coMmunity with natural
The owner will provide for installations of a private waste treatment plant :
accordance with State approved standards as well as a water ~ approve
by
N.C. Division of Health ServiceS.
Signed: ]� '/
EIZA-.1.,,: C ,d 0. ,f,Q.. zx 4.3 `"� � ` `}
^__� / . .__
U ��
� '
. —
_ _—__— _--__
___
�—_—__ ' --
-- -- --- - - -
,
-
42&
Pc
:1-- hl '-) I-) 0 0
I'• 0. P 1.5 0 a .:
....1
ti L.,• In
• LI 0 ig PP Cit': P ': r'3
n rn .,-. 7.11 0 7-1
0 0 I-, 0 En I'. Cl a Cl -
• Cr P R. '0 i-ti r: CO
ul r r p ).., o a .
0 0 p., .,,,, 0 E..)
I-1 •-d I-. C) r.- 1- P 0
,-. P Cl t 1 0 ta ;71
1,1 0 1,4„. 1--1
n ■-1 :-3 p ol .p. ;7_,
C t" 0 Pr p L9 C)
n 0 rr G
• c co •. p
En En rr Cr 0t
0 11 0 LG. C, • .
l 0 0 0 'I 1-. 11 X/ 1-4 •I
, ., . 0 rt., P 1-' .1 '"J 0 ta
• 0
• 1-. n on .—• 1 rt -
° C .
,.__. v 0 o P 0 e•
. •,ir • 31 C. P. 'ZI 0 M. ,
f 0-
= c7.., 0
En 0 7,3 ..-..... 06, I mc::
o
, CT I \
.., ,
0 --•• P 0 U)
.--, p
'13' 1-1_,.1 o r'
•a- E'-'
--" o
_, r, c....) co -... i
cl) • ,.• co 0 P a t
Li ,In I 1-I
E9:
\ \r'." •-•• r>
6 ,-L 13
11., 1
, HI
0:
>4 o ,-. p 0
-1 n, 0 C-i 0 I-' :..1
7■" 0- CP c-4
-11 \'I ..VI •
rt 0 •-4 1-' ta 4-+
r-■ .e.1 . .1
a. P
. -.■ r7 C.$ ,r,, L-,`_... .--I 7.)
n
ro r p P 1,- 01' CO '•,' 7•11-
tr, 1 tQ 1-1
. ,. . . ri• . '-'5 . .
...-_
I-, 0 • 0 I-` •-)
1'-
..J p cr •'::.1 En P
CI
Gil
En
S
p
1- CD
I
T. 'D
I 0 rr
I .0
.C1 V. 7J As,
-A. '
1-. T'N.
•••4 ri ••••4 rt lk,P
••., 0 '--1 •• m
0 T..1 p.. 4:3-• -...
ra p.., H" r0 fu
< P ._.,
0 r..) • 1-
I-'
.1
P Cf.
P P
En .0
o
i5 1---1 rr T-1
, ... .."
1-,
.17]
0 ,-..:
r r \
LP
'
_.1-.
r"...„
. .
``.�.
���
~
''
`
�c'^
. � �-_- -_-__ _^
J��� '
� ~°
` ` ` �
— '
;•� ^
,,•-.. This letter,is.to..give, some insight to our objective regar'Aing this 36.5 aCre-: :', - .
� --
�:
" "''
nun� east by SR 1713, on the south by llaunt Herman' '' -
' `znu�o��n='n ~" '""~ ~'— `' the � ��,�e^�~
The property-is "all ,,:locided with deciduous trees.BEST USE - The best bse of tha property in bur opinion would be a mobile home park.
-First; the property is already bound on the north by a fifty-four unit mobile park.
: Second,: the rise in the lay of the land makes it undesirable for structures of Taro,
, ' width or dePth: 'The'road (SR 1713) elevation is 455' mean sea level and 1,900' i:-.`
. .. this. property the elevation is 500'. A dwelling 65' long placed on this clay:.
would ._
.';',". The developing plan haS-been submitted to the Zoning Office as "Stonegate”. The
of the--Arregularities of�J units and the location of the roads, all make for zi
the - � � 36'5� s as designed by `°".~_. would_ _have
:',..'.:. excluding .all..roads;_storage and,recreation areas,. The minimum lot size is-,10,000
•- ••,: square,feet With,an a.verage density 'of :-374511r acre. The average lot size is 75`
wide and 150' deep.
This is an average of 11,250 square feet per lot. A 14' x 65'
mohileb»it.occ»n`es 910 square feet. A parking area 25 x 25' has 625 square feet.
.^ CombineU,,these.two would-occupy 153mquare feet, leaving 97I5 square feet of yard
area.. Each u»1 would have 3» deep front yard, a 50' deep back yard and Side 'yards
s
between each unit will be bl^- All units will
of 30' each. The average dist�»oeb eTaoduouped and 0rass or mnlch where gra6ed
have unJerp�nnin�' 8]l lo�y will be e»ch lot will be required to keep the lot tidy
leaving many trees. the tenant of e �
' mowed, leaves raked, etc.
and orderly, grass , ^ �Eno •
PROTECTION
re Department is within 6/I�0 of a mile �rnm the park and can give ample
1) service.
Sheriff's Department patrols approximately four times daily - nigh:
3) Orange County 2) Orange County kescu e Squad, Inc„ and Triangle Ambulance Service can give us
Service \
adequate service. Triangle Ambulance ery cp `as an ambulance on University
Station Road on a nightly basis.
'. � � � � .
,.
. �� '. � � ' , �
•
f , . �
. �
" �
� '
.
-
���C
^.-
',,
Pg.
Letter Of intent
CONS1RUCTION SCHEDULE A three year construction schedule is planned for completion
We are requesting that we be permitted to construct the park in four
phases. Each e
of
the P�r:'h phosvill be a cul-de-sac. Each phase will be completed with water,
sewer, electricity and road paved before occupancy.
The park k will have a community water system as approved by North Carolina
WATER -
bivii un pf Health Services Division. The average daily water consumption on shnol
d
be about 32,000 Qallans' ^ The wells, distribution system and storage will-all be
designed by North Carolina Registered Environmental Engineer, Glen Davis, and ap-
proved by North Carolina Division of Health Serv1cns. _
SEWER The sewer system will be a Package Plant (Private Waste Water Treatment
- permit for this plant has been granted and a suitable plant l ���)' The State p�rm r ' j This system will also be designed by
presently being checked out by our engineer.
Mr. Glen Davis. Hr' Davis will also design the Sewer Collection System and super-
vise to State
vi'e the installation of both systems. This system will be
approved standards'
ELECTRICITY All utilities are
planned to be sub-terranial as much as possible.
These include electrical , telephone and Cable television, All power supplies will
enter from th e back of the lots. All disconnect boxes, meter bases end other hard-
ware
will be kept as low as possible.
ROADS - The road will be in a large circular' configuration. This offers some natural
control .road edges,lhe road will be 25' wide. The adjoining parking area will be 25 ,
speed
c»n ' edgep parking lots and mobile unit parking areas will be clearo'l of
25' . The and graded to assure the easy movement of mobile units' ThL
all necessary
road will be well graveled to provide ample base_ The roads will
be paved and maintained by a reliable construction firm as each phase of the park
is completed.
STORAGE - Storage is an absolute necessity in mobile home living. Park rules will
permit appropriate private storage houses. However, the Coulter. plan has areas
designed for additional storage. The areas will be developed into secured areas
s for storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, etc.
GARBAGE - Private garbage pickup will be provided.
RECREATIOK ' Planned recreation areas in the park are ample These areas consist i
st
of I'19 acres. There will be court areas for tennis, basketball , volley ball ., Also
sn
there will be areas for children's parts with some furnished facilities. These
areas will be developed as eac h phase is developed.
OFFICE AND MANAGEMENT - The park will have a front office with a display register.
M� � ersonnnT-will be able to be reached at all times. There will be park
m9uwen »id l and, if necessary,,i Enforcement of these regulations will be done initially by
park management rules and 9« e n� ' by the'prn»er Orange County authorities.
Thank you
•` `—`''
p, ,��
� ��L�
Curtis F. Bane
Dorothy C. Bane
Owners
•
431
.• .
. . •
//1/7
Pg.
r 7
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ---
JAI,SCU J' DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
DinecTon
Division of Health Services
Phillip J. Kirk, Jr. . SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE.
Secretary WACNOVIA BANK BUILDING
SUITE 505
225 GREEN STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C, 28301
April 16, 1976
Mr. Curtis Bane
Route 2, Box 433
Chapel Hill, Worth Carolina 27514
Re: Well Site Investigation
Stonegate
Orange County
Dear Hr. Bane:
This letter will confirm my investigation of the proposed well sites to
be used for a source of public water supply for Stmegate water system. Theo.,
sitas as described below may also be located on plans submitted to this ofC..'..e
by you entitled, "Proposed Development Plan, Stonegate" dated January 5, 196.
Sites are shown on referenced plans as follow:
Site Pi is located on Lot 15 at a point approximately 140' east of the common
lot line between Lots 15 and 16, 190' west of the common lot, line between Lots
14 and 15, and 100' south of the northern border of the proposed development.
Site 02 is located on the common lot line 1 :een Lots 13 and 14, 100'
south of the northern border of the deve]opment.
The above described well sites are approved by the Division of Health Ser-
vices with the following provisos:
(1) That the ground surfaces on the uphill side of the well lots he
adequately ditched to protect the wells from surface run-off.
(2) That no sewer or other source of pollution shall exist or be
introduced within 100' of the wells. Buildings, dwellings,
barns, etc., are considered to be potential sources of pollution.
(3) That the ground surface around each well he sloped so that sur-
face water will drain away from the well.
(4) Bo purmanent type building, other than the well house, is to be
constructed on the well lot.
43'2
765
Pc .6
Dane
rage 2
April IG, 1976
. _
Violation of any of the above mentioned provisos could lead to disappro-
val of the well as a source of public water
Upon receipt of this letter and a well construction permit from the 1:11/i-
sion of Environmental. Management, you may proceed with drilling operations.
Upon completion of the-.we.:11construction, a twenty-four (24) hour capacity --
test must be conducted,irracCordance with requirements of the North Carolina
Well Construction Regulations and Standards. Copies of the well comAetion
record, water analysis, pumping test, and three copies of documents and
exhibits as outlined in the enclosed Guide for Obtaining Approval of Public
Water Supply S./stems must be submitted to the Engineering Planning Drench,
Division of h Jth Services in Raleigh. Also, copies of the well completion
record, pumping test, and chemical analysis should be submitted to the Divi-
sion of Environmental Management.'
Until the plans and specifications have been reviewed and approved by the
Division of Health Services, no construction on any portion of the water system,
other than the well head, is to be carried out The detailed plans and sp.:-
cifications must be prepared by an engineer licensed to practice in the State
of North Carolina.
Since January 1972, continuous disinfection of public water supplies is
also a requirement.
If-additional assistance or information is desired from this office,
please do not hesitate to call on us.
Very truly yours,
R66ert E, Hallisey /
Sanitary Engineering Technician
Water Supply Branch
Sanitary Engineering Section
REH:jbr
Enclosure
cc: Mr, W. J. Stevenson
Mr. W. E. Venrick
Mr. F. K. Yarborough
Orange County Health Department
Credle Engineering Company
43
Pg
•
\orth Carolina Departmet of Naturai
2,
Resources &Cornmulty Development
James 11. Hunt,Jr , Governor Joseph W. Grimsley,Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT January 29, 1982
lir. Curtis Bane
Stonegate Mobile game Park
Route 2, Bo;: 433 1;
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
SUBJECT: Permit No EG0049808
Stonegate Mobile Home Park
Orange County
Dear Mr. Bane:
In accordance with your application for discharge Permit received
October 2, 1981, we are forwarding herewith the subject'State-NPDES Permit.,
This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General
Statutes 143-215,1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 19, 1975.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this Permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing before a
hearing officer upon written demand to the Director within 30 days followinv,
receipt of this Permit, identifying the specific issues to be contended. 110.:
such demand is made, this Permit shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this Permit is not transferable. Part II, B.2.
addresses the requirements to be followed in case of change in ownership or
control of this discharge.
This Permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other Permits
which may be required by the Division of Environmental. Management. If you have
any questions concerning this Permit, please contact Mr. David T. Adkins,
telephone 919/733-5181.
Sincerely yours,
/J./Robert F. Helms
/ Director
cc: Mr. T. Michael Taimi, EPA
Raleigh Regional Office
Raleigh Regional Office Manager
P 0 0,75 7. WI fthteitih N C M11 70/
A,E,qual Opportunity Mfirmurive Action Employer
. •,' 1,1..'
.-...._..
$ /
.....---.----:--
, / ..---
—
..„.
....----
,...„.
/ ... -
,.......
1, ...•c";.
..... ------- ti
,,---
-.-,..„... „ ,-...„...........,
)
-
....,,...„ -,_,..., ----.:,-..._-_:._----,,;,--/_„•!.4,. -,---
1 — .
2 7 c.
.----- . -----....
-. ....,,
-----------------
,r _,.,..7;-----....,__-'''"":"':-•-,„ .C",--. -:',.., •..,' .'"'••• ''''-' '--. --"---..... :, —7 ,
...„... .,14 J.,..) ^.--__ •-•.,:. --.„... ... •-••;..,,::---„, '''...- ""`--.--- ----'
-s-- --- •----..,. ..... L....--
".-•-.• ------ ------.._ '-----, I.5. E...5
>"-.....---...;'' --.77.--.....-"1---.
'"---,-- .----- • —-- ' ,` ..., . .:-\.".....,_ .... : - .„,,,,_-_ ----.____,.---- —_____„,„„
-• ''"`- I --;-'-'---.;"--" ' ' .--7., ---'..■ .":.---,. ... .....„.„--
„.. 1 it -H -,
, . .
•
,. . —_________,___,_ i t;-1,!;-..,:::-;,..:•..g.-.04.;
1 . .
- If,:.r.i.;•....,'T:",- ...„-,!.-----..._. --- ___„......._
- - -:,/ ''!c•'-:•~!;','`‘)'•.
• - -VV
• -„, -
i '-'-----... ----,
, .
i -
. . . .
-...,
. .
-
. ..'
. . . .
1 ,
r'..7.-.7..
7,-...
...... A.
---- .....
.....„,
I --
,....,..„......,.......,..--..
li
(7"\ ,11,zfri:•./.47
, .35)
y ,
260•75a.C, 4-I'Vf
--•;ea
.---,•., tl - 4.53 AC. .6-',/,'
.......-„-.--......,4 _.," . , -
•
. „.-, • „..„
•
- tAot;T fl..r-- r-,Z---,—,-.7/7.,
,/.
,t,Api",.7.1" C:itOtOt.4 " I 0^
1 -,.... ---...., • "'''mt. ' t A
,.... E...Q...:1..D,...,,,,f„J_____"'17.;f;: ... -----"------'---"*.--''F7..-
-1 0.Y ... -....,.., ............„,
........,_,,,,,z.
i,,,,..,,,: ■,1`.1',,Q!" s'-'7.•:... '
,.....;... i i. .r.•,,$)
-----..,---
„ ii ......___,....
i 3 '.'.-:-•tv-'.:. .
\ \\
%Xi
...„,
. 1,.. sl,
•.
_
.\'
. • \\
..
\V A 7-
i •-•,,.. •
'"
' I ''`
,...„,, k
•"Y:, ___- --"'--"-•'''-,_ i'7'0 --'"------
-- -•- i --4-4------:•-•. ' ---,--4-.:-
..
‘‘I\
----"-",..:-_-:-. _..--• _ _ .
I - .----,----,,__..„-----...--_--, . --..„.> ,
,,...
\'0
i I ,/. --t------4..,_-_„., • 1;11
....,,,,..-,,..„,..„....,..---.....-,..,-„,.._...,..,... ,1 .1
i' ![
1'f; . I
1
:
C.1!
---.---...---—c.).
ll' /
i ,,;,',;7:11. ."- ,•:,, 11
I 0 4
—.....
J TOW I\i SHI P ,..m'T ■,..:,I
! ro .-,......._,......„.„...,1„...,...----...--...........,,p-;---7;=.7....;..—,14L..„,„„, ..„,, zrt..
1 I i,
LO
' 11
. i .. .
77—.4, 11
' f--1 o A For•r.-- /--tf.';'• I 1 IN r-A-•■,
•
. - ..
43,
The following information is the Orange County Planning Depart-
ment' s fihdings of fact concerning the request of Curtis F.
Dane for a PD-H, R-4 (Planned Development Housing, Residential
Four) Special. Use Permit and Rezoning for Stonegate Mobile Nome
Park, This request is made under Section 8,8,23 of the Orange
County Zoning Ordinance,
The following evidence has been supplied by the applicant or by
the Orange County Planning Department.
Article 8 Special Uses:
Ordinance requires: Findings :
6,2.1 a) The applicant shall The Planning staff feels
have the burden of establishing, that the applicant has
by competent material and presented competent material
substantial evidence, the exist- and substantial evidence few
ence of the facts and conditions the approval of the request .
which this ordinance requires for with the attached imposed
approval; and conditions.
8. 2.1 b) The Board shall make The applicant has proviC:A
written findings certifying corn- figures that indicate
pliance with the specific rules compliance with Article 5,
governing such individual Special Dimensional Requiremes
Use and that the use, which is and Aritcle 6, Applicat
listed as a Special Use in the of Dimenstional Require
district in which it is proposed
to be located, complies with all
required regulations and standards,
including the provisions of Article
5 and 6 of this ordinance, unless
greater or different regulations
are contained in the individual
standards for the dpecific Special
Use. It shall be the responsibility
of the applicant to present evidence
in the form of testimony, exhibits,
documents, models, plans' and the
like to support the application for
approval of a Special Use.
8,2.2 Where the Board finds a prepon- The Planning Staff feels
derence of evidence to indicate compli- that there is a preponder-
ance with the general standards, spedi- ence of evidence to indicat
fic rules governing the specific use compliance with the general
and that the use complies with all re- standards and specific rule
quired regulations and standards, the governing the Special Use
application must be approved unless and that the use complies.
the Board shall also find, in some generally with required
. pecific manner that: regulations. The folio
imposed conditions are t.
be considered a part of the
genral standards and
specific rules for this re-
quest.
, •
43€ •
7G9
Pg.10
Ordinance requires: Findings
a) The use will not promote the a) There have been no finc
public health, safety and general ings that the pro CL woul
welfare, if located where proposed not promote the puhlic -hew
and developed according to the plan safety, and welfare.
as submitted;
b) The use will ,nOtmaintain or b) No evidence was present
enhance the value of contiguous to the Plann-ing Department
property (unless the use is a to show that it will not
public necessity, in which case enhance or maintain propel
the use need not maintain or en- values of contiguous
hence the value of contiguous property.
property)
c) The use is not in compliance
with the general plans for the
physical development of the county
as embodied in these regulations
or in the Comprehensive Plan, or
portion thereof, adopted by the
Board of County Commissioners,
This project is located in the Rural Tze:sidential area as identified
in the Land Use Plan. The applicant has requested that the Land
Use Plan for this area be amended to Twenty Year Transition.
The intent of the Land Use Plan for these two plan categories is as
follows:
RURAL RESIDENTIAL. Land in the rural areas of the County which is
appropriate for low intensity and low-density residential develop-
ment and which would not be dependent on urban services during the
plan period,
TWENTY YEAR TRANSITION AREA. Land located in areas that are in
the process of changing from rural to urban, that are suitable
for urban type densities and should be provided with public utilities
and services within the second 10-year phase of the Plan.
The following policies in the Land Use Plan apply to the proposed
change in land use:
COAL FIVE: The management of growth so t- .t it is directed to areas
where growth is desireable and can be accodated.
5,1 Utiliv,e the following locational criteria to designate the most
appropriate location for the various Land Use Plan Categories :
natural environment constraints (land slope, hydrology, flore.
and fauna, soil conditions) ; availability of public services
and utilities; transportation system access and capacity; in-
pact on energy resources; existing land uses; presence of pro-
ductive agricultural. or forested land; appropriate population
densities; and the presence of historic or cultural features.
„ ..
437 '
I ,
• '
" •
5, 3 Direct intensive land uses to existing Urban areas and areas
designated Transition areas and away from areas which are
suitable for continued agricultural uses and/or which are
protected as water supply v;atersheds.
5.5 Designate land in areas changing from rural to urban in charac-
ter whicll could reasonably be developed to accomodate urban-type
densities, but are currently riot completely served by urban
systeMs such as water and sewer lines, as Transition- areas
These areas will be further classified into 10-Year and 20-Year
Transition areas to reflect the most appropriate sequence of
development as this area changes from rural to urban and services
are extneded.
GOAL EIGHT: Adequabed,reasonably priced safe housing in an appropriate
variety of types in proximity to jobs and daily activities for all
8.1 Encourage the construction and rehabilitation of a diverse
range of housing types in response to the needs of various
household sizes and incomes.
8. 3 Encourage the provision of a range of affordable and suitable
low-income housing by means of development incentives in order
to provide a balanced housing stock for the residents of Orang.
County.
8.7 Support the use of individual mobile homes as a useful housing
resource in the County by affording these homes the same
locational opportunities as single-family units meeting the
State Building Code.
8. 10 Discourage medium and higher density residential development
in the rural areas of the County,
GOAL HIDE: The provision of water and sewer lines in those areas
which can be practically and efficiently served by these facilities.
9.1 Develop and implement a cooperative join planning process
among the County,municipalities and those organizations re-
sponsible for water and sewer lines to guide the extension of
lines in accordance with the land use plans and policies of
the affected jurisdictions.
GOAL ELEVEN: Adequate and appropriate sewer disposal facilities for
all current and future residents.
43E
Pg.1
11, 1 Identify the type of sewage disposal facilities appropriate
for an area as a function of the magnitude of present and
future demand; the distribution of users; and the capacity
of the natural environment to absorb the impact,
11,2 Identify service by centralized water and sewer systems
(Towns of Hillsborough and Mebane , Orange-Alamancc Water
Systems Incorporated and Orange Water and Sewer Authority)
as most appropriate at the higher-density levels which occur
in the Urban and Transition Areas.
11.6 Allow ground absorption sewage disposal systems of 300 gallons
per day or more design capacity and package sewage treatment
plants with a design capacity of 3000 gallons per day or
less as appropriate only in the areas designated Ten and Twenty
Year Transition and Rural "Residential.
This proposal for a PD-H, R-4 in Eno Township contd.glmus -te -
the Twenty Year Transition Area is compatible with the policies
both stated and implied in the Land Use Plan. It is consis-
tent with a major theme of the Plan which is to promote
residential development in the County at apl,ropriate locations,
in appropriate densities and at affordable costs to meet the
needs and demands of Orange County Citizens and to mike best
use of existing and proposed public investments in roads and
services,
Ordinance requires: Findings :
0.2.4 In addition to the General
Standards stated in 8.2 the following
Specific Standards shall be addressed
by the applicant before the issuance
of a Special Use Permit:
a) Method and adequacy of pro- a) There is a central sewage
Vision for sewage disposal disposal system with a Package
facilities, solid waste, and Treatment Plant proposed for thi
water. site. North Carolina Department
of Environmental Management has
issued the final permit for this
system. There is a central vats
system proposed which will be
serviced by 2 wells drilled on
the site. Solid waste disposal
will be handled on a contract
basis with a private contractor.
If
43S• )'' ,
P9.13
Ordinance requires: FindinFs:
h) V.cthod and adequacy of police, b) Police protection
fire ond rescue squad protection. will be provided by
the Orange County Sherif
Department, fire protec-
tion by the Eno 'Volun-
teer Fire Department,
and rescue -protection
by Orange County E.M.S.
c) Method and adequacy of vehicle c) Access to this site
access to the site and traffic is from state secondary
conditions around the site. road 1713 (Mount Hermon
Church Road) . The Port;
Carolina Department of
Transportation does not -
have an average daily
traffic count available
for this road. This
property is located bet-
ween US 70 and Old N.C.
10. It is 2,300 feet
from US 70 and 1,200
feet from Old fl.C. lr
US 70 is dc7,ignated
an arterial Road in
land use plan and Old
N,C. 10 is designated
as a collector. Some
of the traffic along
this road is g,- erated
by the commercil opera-
tions across Mount
Hermon Church Road, The
staff feels that the
access to the site and
traffic conditions aroun
the site are adequate
to serve this developme
8,2.h d) Specific requirements The following are specifi
of all special use requests: requirements for this
special use:
8.8 a) The following additional 8.8 a) A site plan has
jnformation is required for all been supplied.
Special Use Applications:
4 4 C
4 4
Ordinance require:7,i : Fjndings:
Three copies of the Site Plan
prepared by a registered North
Carolina land surveyor or
engineer which shall contain
the following:
1. North point scal and date 1 . North point, scale and
date shown.
2. Extent of area to be developed 2. Extent of area to be
developed is indicated.
3. Locations/widths of all ease- 3. The location of ease-.
ments and rights of way with- meats and rights of
in or adjacent to the site. way are shown. No
widths are indicated
on the site plan.
I. Location of all existing or 4. All existing and pro-
proposed structures on the posed structures are
site. shown on the site plan.
5. Location of all areas on the 5. There are no flood prone
site subject to flood hazard areas on the site,
or inundation as shown on
flood maps or soil's maps.
6. Location of all water courses 6. The water courses arc
on the site, including direction shown on the site plan,
of flow.
7. Existing topography at a countour 7. Existing topography is
interval of five feet based on shown.
mean level datum.
B. Proposed or existing fencing, 8. A boat storage area is
screening gates, parking, proposed along with a
service and storage areas. car washing station.
The sewage treatment
plant is im'icated ;
however, no parking,
screening or fences are
shown. The site is
presently wooded and
the developer intends
to minimize grading
around each unit in
lieu of landscpin ,
Access to site including site 9. Access to site is shown
distances on all roads used on the site plan.
for access.
10. Elevations of all structures 10, The applicant proposeproposed to be used in the that mobile homes be
development,
set up in the developmen
,441.
Pg. '.
0“0 1.nance regulT0s: Findins:
Hamcs and addresses of owners li. The mane and address
and applicants . of the owner have ben
supplied.
12, A fee, as set by Orange 12. The application fee ..
County Board of Commissioners, has been paid by the
applicant.
8.8,23 Planned Developments
8. 8,23.1 Additional information
In addition to the information re- The applicant has supplied
quired in Subsections 8.2 and 8.8, the following information
information shall be supplied as as required in Article 7
part of the application as per Planned Developments, the
applicable requirements of Article 7. housing section.
Article 7 Planned Development Districts
7,4 .1 Relationship of Planned Development 7.4.1 Relationship of this
to Major Transportation Facilities. project to major trap.:
portation facilities .
(See 8,2.4 c above)
Requires that Planned Developments
make use of major road for access;
and public transportation facilities
available.
7.4 .2 Relationship of Planned De- 7 .4 .2 Relationship to Publi
velopment to Public Utilities, Utilities, Facilitie;
"eacilities , and Services. and Services . (See
8.2.4 above) ,
Roquires that Planned Develop-
ments make use of existing
utility systems and not require
the public .extension of such
systems. it also requires that
the Planned Development make use
of public transportation if avail-
able.
7 4 ,3 Physical Character of the 7.4 .3 Physical Character
Site; Relation to Surrounding of the Site; Relation
Property to Surrounding Propel
The Site shall be suitable for the This site is very gentle slc.
type development proposed and be free ing from the north to the
from adverse natural impacts, south. Tt is well timbe--.1
with pine and some hard'.:
It appears well suited
r7
442
C
Pg.16
Ordinonce requires: Findings:
the type development
proposed. To the north
is an existing mobile home
park (Nobile Acres II) , to
the south is a Southern Pail-.
road line, two existing commer-
cial establishments across the
road to the east, to the west
is underveloped land. The
applicant owns the surrounding
land to the south.
7.14.3 Site Planning
a) External Relationships:
The site plan should show how
the development will provide
protection for the development
from potentially adverse surround-
ing influences and provide protect-
ion for surrounding areas from
potentially adverse influences
within the development.
1. Principal access points 1. Generally, vehicular
shall be designed to encour- access to the site is
age smooth traffic flow. Street good and allows smooth
layout shall not connect minor traffic flow. The main
residential streets with collector r access does not connect
streets. minor streets or cause
through traffic jn residen-
tial areas. Circulation
indicated on the site plan
separates vehicles and
pedestrians which is good.
2. Access for pedestrians and 2. Pedestrian circulation
motor cyclists shall be safe as shown on the site plan
and convenient, Where there allows access to recreation
are street crossings, they areas without much conflict
shall be marked and controlled. with vehicles. (See impose
conditions)
3. Protection of visibility 3. Protection of visibility
at intersections. Shall be as at intersections. Visibili
set forth in Article 6. at the external intorsectic
is good and unobstructed.
4. Uses adjacent to sim.je family 4. The Planning Staff feels
districts. This section requires that the proposed setbacks
a 1-)ermanct 100' buffer or lot of units 35' from roads; 4(
sixes wit:.in the district equal side to side to be adeouate
to t;e adjacent. residential The proposed 40' along the
district.
443
,
Pg.17
Ordinance requires: Findings:
south property line will 0,0vick,
some buffer beLween the mobile.
homes and the railroad.
5. Yards, fences, walls or 5. It is the applicants sti d
vegetative screening, at intent to minimiz grading
the edges of the PD-H district and clearing on this site,
shall be such as to provide Since it is heavily wooded
protection for the developaent no additional landscapping
FroM adjacent properties, or screening should be
necessary.
6. Height limits at the edge 6. Maximum height limits will
of PD-H districts shall be be met by all structures
as set forth in Articles 5 and in this development.
Articles 6.
7. Signs visible from outside 7. All signs for this project
the district shall be according shall be in accordance
to Article 9. with Article 9,
h) Internal Relationships.
The site plan shall provide for safe,
efficient, convenient and harmonious
groupings of structures, uses and
facilities, and for preservation of
desirable natural features and minimum
•
disturbance of natural topography.
1. Streets, drives and parking, 1. The proposed street patter Itreets and drives shall provide provides adequate internal
77.1fe and convenient access to circulation. The parking
units and other facilities, proposed will be off the
Streets shall discourage through street; 2 spaces/unit are
traffic and blocks shall be laid designated. The circular
out to maximiz efficient. use of layout minimizes the number
the property. of vehicles using any one
road.
2. VehiCular access to streets 2. The site plan with the pro
shall be limited and controlled posed parking layout minim .
If the street serves less than friction between the parke
50 units parking can be directly vehicles, and the circula,
off the street. of vehicles.
If the street. serves more than
50 units parking shall be from
controlled points.
3. Ways for pedestrians and 3. The pedestrian circulatio
cyclETETFTFEMT-sTin fr(537-7t proposed does not all(
Et—t-tiTd-logical and convenient a walkway through the
system for pedestrian access mobile home park witho.,,
to all units, project facilities usinc; the streets, It cic
and any principal off site des- allow access to the recre
tinations. areas.
, .
4.44
_ .
Pg.18
Ordinance requires: Findings:
4. Protection of visibilitV 4. The site plan adequately
for TITITT5c-Talo traffic, addresses visability
cyclists and .edest rians. protection for motor
vehicles. Dowever, it
does not provide adequat
visibility protection
for pedestrians.
/0
4 4 c
Pg. lr
The Planning Staff feels the applicant has presented a preponderance
of evidence to indicate compliance with the general standards and specific
Iles governing a Planned Development (P-D.11-R-4 ) request. The Stonegate
pplication substantially complies with ail required regulations and
standards,
Th.: Planning Staff further feels that the following conditions should.
be imposed on the Planned Development Stonegate.
1. The grantee of this Special Use Permit shall post with Orange
County , in a form acceptable to the County Attorney, a bond or letter of
credit in an amour equal to the cost of all improvements plus The
emeunt shall be determined on the basis of fully executed construction
contracts or certification by a registered engineer employed by the grantee
of this Special Use Permit. Security for construction of the improvements
in this project may follow the phasing in the project. Specifically, as
improvements are cOmpleted in each phase that phase and a correspond mg
amount of money may be released from the security instruments or the
security instruments may be renegotiated based on the "yet to do" potion
of the improvements,
2. Security shall be provided for the grading, paving end stabilisation
of all cleared areas, streets and other vehicular travel ways; sidewalks
and other pedestrian walkways; erection of street signs; utility installation
and hookups and "tot lot"; landscaping and mulching around all mobile home
units.
3, All necessary easements to permit_ utility (electricity, telephone
nd cable television by any cable television provider franchised by Orange
aunty to serve this development) installation, servicing and hookups to
the development and to each unit within the development shall be provided
no cost to the utility provider.
4. Roads, parking areas, walkways, sidewalks, street signs, utilities ,
recreation facilities and sites (including boat storage area, car wash area,
office area and "tot lot") , landscaping and mulching around units sh';ll be
maintained as constructed. All such improvements and facilities shall further
be maintained and operated in a safe manner.
S. The grantee shall promulgate rules and regulations governing tenancy
in the development which shall restrict accumulation of trash and rubbage
outside of the mobile home units , shall require maintenance of yard areas
by the mobile home unit owner, shall restrict storage of goods outside of
mobile homes and which shall further prohibit the storage of junked or unreg-
istered motor vehicles.
The grantee shall file with the Orange County Planning Department a
copy of the rules and regulations promulgated under this condition and main-
tain an up-to-date copy of the rules and regulations in the Orange County
Planning Department.
6. The recreation areas shall be cleared and grassed, a hard surfaced
basketball court installed in Block D, tot lot built. in Block C. The
recreation facilities and sites shall. be open to the tenants of this devel-
-)mont at all reasonable times, periods for maintenance excepted,
//
44t
Pg.20
7. Grading on the site shall be kept to a minimum. In liew of planted
indscaping, existing vegetation shall be maintained between units.
8, All plans for drainage , soil erosion and sedimentation control shall
be reviewed and approved by Orange County. In addition, Orange Colinty shall.
inspect the installation of control devices and the on going work for the
total project, The project shall at all times meet the requirements of the
Orange County Soil Erosion'and Sedimentation Control Ordinance,
9. Mailbol:es should be provided close to the entrance , hut far enough
into the Mobile Home Park to prevent traffic problems on Mt. Hermon Church
Road. A pulloff should be provided and the mailboxes set back off the main
entrance road. The entrance road and pulloff should be of sufficient width
to allow three or four cars to stop and get mail while others continue to
pass. The mailboxes should not be located in a place that would require
cars to cross traffic , make unnatural turns or go against the flow of traffic,
10_ Ail mobile homes must be at least 100 feet from each well. site.
11. The office area should be designated concerning it' s use to insure
compliance with the zoning district-
12. All units shall not be closer than 35' to the roads, 40' center to
center, 20' end to end. .
13. There shall be at least 2 parking spaces per mobile home unit in the
Fvelopment,
14. The roads in the mobile home park should be hard surfaced.
15. All roads will be named and the names not duplicate any other names
within Orange County. Road name signs to Orange County standards shall be
erected at all intersections. Individual units shall be numbered in such a
manner that the identification is visible from the road.
1G. Removal of snow and ice from the roads in the development and the
sidewalks within the development shall be the responsibility of the grantee.
Such removal shall be completed promptly,
17. There should be : ore access points to the recreation areas in
Phases 2 and 3. Phase 2 has two access pedestrian walkways. This may be
enough, however, one more could be provided. Phase 3 has only one pedestrian
walkway; there Ishould be at least one more provided and possibly two.
18. For pedestrian safety there should be a central walkway four feet
wide from the back of the office through the center of each block connecting
the recreation areas and connecting the front and back of the mobile home
park.
• 15. The private waste water treatment plant should be included as part
the Planned Development with access from Mr. Hermon Church Road.
'•
20. Prior to the start of any construction that the State Health
Department approve the final plans for the water distribution system and
that the Division of Enfironmental Management approve the final plans for
/2—
• •
tv 4-
780
Pg.21
ha sewage collection and disposal system,
21. That the project remain in unitary ownership and that no lots be
sold t individuals.
22. A final boundary survey of the Planned Development and improvements
shall be recorded by the developer.
23. The final site Oar' and narrative of the project incorporating
all changes , deletions and additions through the final, approval of the project
are incorporated herein and made a part of this Planned Development Special
Use Permit. A copy of the final site plan and narrative are on file with
the Orange County Planning Department. Building permits, upon application ,
will be ssued for Phase 1 after approval and recordation of the spec al Use
Permit. After Phase 1, all improvements in each phase must be compluted beforc
building permits will be issued for the next phase.
24 . The development shall be built and run according to the sit. plan
and written narrative supplied by the developer, and in compliance with the
above conditions.
4 4 8
cawry
o i%:17ticJr.
IL Co_ C-4
list
Ii D:7‘.'1E Angus t 23, lc.:U2
Proposed text changes to the Zoning Ozdinance
Planning Pub:Lic nar.trig x
Attaent(s) :page5 of th OrdinaflC 1nt0 CCirltaCt: Pie% Cannity
with changes underlined. Pqs,
PhOna 1A17bar: 732-5181 ext. 347
1-NTPOSE: To receive citizen input on several proposed changes to the
Zoning Ordinance text.
There are seven main changes proposed; 1) addition of telephone
booster stations as a permitted use with additional requirements;
2) add an additional application criteria to High Density Dosidentia
which would include the full range of urban services; 3) change the
application criteria of the Existing Commercial-5 district to allow
it to be applied to previously zoned Townships; 4) add efficiency
apartments to the permitted Use Table with Single Family Residence;
5) require that residential accessory structures be place behind the
principal residence; 6) set time limits on reapplication fox Special
Use Permit requests that have, been denied and for the start of
construction under a Special Use Permit; and 7) add definitions for
lot area and efficiency apartments to Article 22 .
DADACT: Telephone booster stations (subscriber loop huts) will allow the
telephone company to increase its capacity without considerable
physical improvements_ High density residential rezoning requests
will be required to be in areas where the full range of urban
services are available, The EC-5 district criteria will be changed
to allow the district to be applied to previously zoned townships
and previously zoned parcels that are not located at activity nodes,
It is the intent of the Ordinance to require all accessory residenti
buildings to he placed behind the principal structure. This
mal:es clear that intent. There should be a time limit on reanplicat
for denied or withdrawn Special Use Permits and for the start of
construction on those projects. There are two proposed definitions
for lot area and efficiency apartments which will clarify sections
of the Ordinance.
4 4
•
, c--
ARTICLE 4 , ESTABLISHMENT OF PERnITTED USE TABL
7ND SCHEDULE
4.1 Establishment of Use Regulations
Except as otherwise provided herein, regulations governing
the use of land and structures are hereby established as
shown in the Schedule of Permitted Uses. Uses not expressly
permitted are prohibited.
*Uithin all districts there are certain uses that are permitted
as a matter of right. The uses are :
,A7110.ed* 1, Above ground and buried utility lines for local
1-23-81 distribution of electricity, telephone, and cable
television service, accessory and apartment apparatus
such as poles , guy wires , transformers and switchiug
boxes.
2, Bone fide farms.
3. Buildings and other temporary structures used in
connection with the construction of a permanent
building.
4. Neighborhood utility facilities located within a
public right of way with the permission of the
owner of the right of way (State, City or Town) .
5_ Off street parking as a regfrired accessory use to
a permitted use.
G. Public and private streets and roads. Railroad
rights of way,
7. Water and sanitary sewer lines, gas and liquid
fuel distribution lines.
8. Telephone exchanges (without buSiness offices) ,
subscriber loop huts , pressure regulator stations,
water and sanitary sewer pumbping stations_ (See I.
Section G. 16. 12,_
Uses requiring specie) permits must meet certain conditions
specified in this ordinance , Only after the existance of
these specified conditions has been debermined by the Board
of Adjustment, or the Board of Commissioners , as appropriate,
will a special permit be issued; otherwise such uses are
prohibited uses.
4-1
..
450
,
Pg'.2
4.2..4 High intensity Residential (R-5, R-E:, R-13) Dintriete
a) The purpose of the High Intensity P.csid,ential (R-5, R-f.1,
n-13) Districts is to provide locations for high intensity
residential development and :supporting recreational community,
service, or educational uses in aras where the full range
urban services are available.
It is further intended that these districts be used to
promote economically mixed housing de■,elopments and to
contribute to the provision of a range of housing types
for lower income households.
b) Application Criteria
This district will usually be applied where the follow-
ing conditions ei5t:
1. Designated by the adopted Land Use Plan as a Transition
Area which can reasonably be annexed by a municipality
in the ensuing 10-2D years, within the, Chapel Hill Joint
Planning area located at en Activity Node designated by
the adopted Land Use Plan,
2. Water and sewer lines should exist at site or be assured
of installation as part of the development process„
3. Vehicular access must consist of direct access to a
street certified either arterial or collector as desig-
nated by the adopted Land Use Plan.
4., The full range of urban services exIst or are
proposed including recreation, oducion , commercial
and cultural activities.,
4 .2 .5 RESERVED
4,2.6 RESERVED
4 .2.1 RESERVED
4-3
'*01
Pg.
5_ Let sixe for individual uses would be appropriate to the
method of water supply and sewage disposal.
(5 . Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned CC-3 at any node
shall not exceed 29 acres , but 15 acres shall apply in rural
areas where population density is lower and distributed more
widely than in the Transition Areas.
7. All property to be designated for new development under this
classification shall have direct access to major collector
streets as designated by the adopted Land Use Plan.
4 .2. 11_ General Commercial-IV (Gc-4) District
a) Intent
The purpose of the General Commercial IV (GC-4) District is to
provide suitably situated and sized sites in Eno and Hillsborough,
Townships that allow a broad range of commercial, officc, and
service uses. Performance standards will be used to insure the
absence of adverse impacts beyond the zoning district boundaxy.
b) Application Criteria
This district will usually be applied where the followin
conditions exist:
1. The site is within an area designated as either Commercial
or Industrial Transition Activity Nodes , by the adopted
Land Use Plan, in Eno or Hillsborough Townships.
2. Water and sewer mains exist at the site or are to be
made available as part of the development process or the
lot size for individual uses are appropriate to the method
of waster _su:oly and sewage disposal.
3. All property to be designated for new development under
this classification shall have direct access to major
collector streets, as designated by the adopted Land
Use Plan.
4.2. 32 Existing Commercial-V (EC-5) District
a) Intent ,
The purpose of the Existing Commercial V (EC-5) District is
to provide a district to be used only,during the application
of zoning to previously uuzoned townships to accommodate
eisting commercial uses or in zoned townships to previously
oned con mercial property which is located in areas desiqnated
as Activity ode:: by the adopted Land Use Plan.
4-6
•
Pg
h) Aulication Criteria
• This district will be applied to existing commercial
uses in unzoned township's and praviou Ly zoned commrcl.,
-property- . oca•ec in • ',as not designaTed as Activity NT56es
•
in the adopted Land Use Plan'. Thin designatfon nhall cnIy__
be applied at the time of application of this ordinance .
1. 2. 13. RESERVED • .
4.2 .14, RESERVED
4 .2.15. RESERVED
•
4.2.16. Officu/Institutional (0/I) District
a) Intent
The purpose of the Office/Institutional (WI) District is
to provide locations for medium intensity office and insti-
tutional land uses and to function as a buffer between Con-
flicting land use situations.
b) Application Criteria
• This district will usually be applied where the following
conditions exist:
1. Site is located in areas designated by the adopted
Land Use Plan as Commercial Transition or Industrial
Activity Nodes.
2. Site would provide a buffer or step down in intensity
of land use from a commercial use in a Neighborhood
or Community Activity Node.
3. Generally, these areas should have water and sewer
mains existing at site or are to be made available
during the development process_
4. Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned to this
0/I classification shall not exceed five acres.
5, Vehicular access must consist of direct access to a
street classified either arterial or collector as
designated by the adopted Land Use Plan.
4.2. 17. RESERVED
- 2 . 10 RESERVED
4-6A
45 --i
`
/ � .
� �.
Pg'8
y'x Pn11:Mzrrsn USE TABLE
* ~ PERMITTED USE
A = CLASS A spnczxc USE (ARTICLE u)
13 ~ CLASS 13 nT2mczuL oso (ARTICLE o) `
AR 131 a�`n R4 1 s u �|� z[ cz`cuo[Gc^| oc-* 0I Er '12 I3 AS LE»|PIv
\
-
HL Day Nursery,
uarcare' nci-
vate oinuuc-
yecu�n oo 13 a ) B B * * * * ^ ^ '
_ �_ z --
_
---- -
z Dwelling; Single ° * * , * * * * * * * * A '
�z zr ant ' .
Family ���'�-���� '�_--. '__'-_-__' ______ -__ -_'--.__----_.__-____
■ o"elling/ mm
1.--amilr - --~, *_-*_*--* +'� . * ° --°�--�- �-- ^----- ----'
-'-__'
::^ c°eouno; ° * + * * * ^ * / * I.
svz��pzc-ram��L__� ___ __^___� _______- -___ ____
_
o5 Dwelling; Mobile.
Rome + ° ^ ^ ^ ° ° a|^ ° ° ° *
1LIIIi
|
,.., Group Care 1:acni;ty,13 o\ u o o o a c| a B o a o n
--
s mo,onuau"e °,^" * * *ciz�
-��' �/�t�'� -- F- -- -- | \ - - - -
/ | \ °| °� | �
.r m�ris' a w,��s } _ . . -� / ' ~
.__'____ __-_--
CIO Residential, Hotel
(Fraternities,
Sororities &m'ni*,,irs) u « x » » m - _
.i.i. Rooming :louse * ^ | * +' *|
'/ 2 Tcmporary �i
ze \ `
!tome \ \ noo o B T.
.. ____./ ,noc^`` Home ------- ---
-'�a'"= ""^��--or s--'-^ ^ * + ^ +' * ° ° ^
) --] �
|i— \- — — --'--
.xx |' 1.xzn3mx 1::!,i .y xo\LcI xcz./'Cz.�c'' .PC-s[o/ :z Till zzzIos •o Pco
[
4-11
_ _ .. ...
454
c) No equipment or process shall be employed that will cause
noisc, vibration or glare detectable to the normal sense
at the lot lines in the case of detached duelling units
or outside the dwelling unit, in the case of attached
dwelling units.
d) The on-premises sale and delivery of goods, which are not
the product of the home occupation is prohibited.
0 All activities shall be conducted within the dwelling unit .
f) No me:aat' 'Ai 1 individual, not residing in the dwelling unit,
may work in the home occupation.
g) The accessory building shall be set back at least 20 feet
farther from the road than the residence.
6.16,6r2 Home Occupations in the AR and R-1 Districts
a) :hema:lorlfgl:iscqtuiaornesfselle:liaopoprlia:::::: :csceud-
pationsin the AR and R-1. destricts on lots less than
200,000 Square feet.
for the home occupation. This floor area can be a detached
accessory structure,
b) Signs shall be as provided in Article 9.
c) The on-premise sale and delivery of goods, which are not
the product of the home occupation is prohibited.
d) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate
noise, vibration, or glare detectable at the lot lines of the
lot on which the home occupation is located.
e) No more than 2 individuals riot residing in the dwelling unit
may work in the home occupation.
f) No outside storage of goods, or materials,
g) The accessory building shall be set back at least 20 feet
farther from the' road -then the residence.,
6..16.6_3 Home Occupations in the AR-RI Districts (Nin. 200,00 uare
foot lots)
The following restrictions shall be applied to home occu-
pations in the AR and R-1 districts on lots in excess of
200,000 square feet.
a) A maximum of 2,000 square feet of floor area may be used for
the home occupation. This floor area can be in a detached
accessory structure.
b) Signs saiL be as provided in Article 9.
e) The on-premise sale and delivery of goods, which are not the
produt of the home occupation, is prohibited,
d) No equipment or process shall be employed that will generate
no'cc, vibration or glare detectable at the lot lines of the
lot on which the home occupation is located.
4 5 r
1-/
rk%
Pg.10
c) No more than 2 identification signs, not to exceed
16 square feet each and not located closer than 1
foot to the right of way.
d) No adverse impacts such as noise or glare shall extenc
beyond the lot boundaries.
6.16 .11 Recreational Faciliti ; (Profit)
The following restrictions shall be applied to for
profit recreational facilities such as tennis clus,
swim clubs, raquetball, squash clubs, pitch and putt
courses, amusement areas, bowling allies, skating -
rinks, shooting ranges, billiard and pool hells, in-
door athletic facilities and such similar uses:
a) The minimum lot area shall be two acres.
b) No building shall be closer than the minimum require-.
merits of the district or 20 feet to the public right
of way or private property line which ever is greater_
6.16.12 Residential Accessory Building Setbacks
The accessory building shall be set back at least 20
feet farther from the road thal the residence.
6.17 RESERVED
6.18 RESERVED
- - 6.19 RESERVED
6,20 Large Ground Absorption Systems (3,000 gals. per day)
and Package Sewage Treatment Plants Prohibited in AR
Districts and Rural Duffer Districts
6.20.1 Ground absorption systems with a design capactiy of
3,000 gallons per day or mo, rid package treatment
plants for sanitary sewage -)sal are expressly
prohibited in the AR distr Ind the Rural B;'ffer
Districts as shown in the J 7se Plan except as
may be approved through a l Use Permit or a
planned Development District
21 Rxist;inr or New Mobile Home Pa,ks
6.21,1 Existing mobile home parks tat do not meet the standards
set forth in Sections 6.12 and 5. sahll be considered non-
conforming_ Such parks shall not expand in any way,
outside the existing developed portions, but shall be
allowed to remove and replace units existing at the
time of adoption of this ordinance within the cxistinL
park. Removal and replacement of units shall not bc
eonjdered expansion of the nonconformin us,a.
6.21_2 New mobile home parks or portions of existing moblje
home parks that have been previously approved have not
had sabstantial improvements or do not have sewage
disposal systems installed on the date of adoption of
this ordinance shall meet the standards set forth in
Sections 6.12 and 5.2
456
Pg
c) No more than 2 identification signs, not to exceed 1G
square feet each and not located closer than 1 foot to
the right of way,
d) No adverse impacts such as noise or glare shall e:4Lend
beyond the lqt boundaries.
6.16,11_ Recreational Facilities (Irofit)
The following restrictions shall be applied to for profit
recreational facilities such as tennis clubs, Gain
raguetball, squash clubs, pitch and putt courses , amuseMent
areas , bowling allies, skating rinks, shooting ranges , bi1liarC2
and pool halls , indoor athletic facilities and such similar
uses :
a) The minimum lot area shall be two acres,
b) No building shall be closer than th,. minimum requirowts
of the district or 20 feet to the public right of way or
private property line which ever is ,greater
6.16.12. Telephone F.xchanges (without buSj.ness offices) , subs riber -oo
huta_f_p2Lessure regulator stations, water and sanitar; sswe
•um•ing stations in all zoning districts
The following restrictions shall be applied to the above 1.1es
in all zoning districts;
a) The design of structures shall conform as closely as
possible to the character of the area in which it is
located.,
b) Buildings or structures shal.1 -.2.22 ,111Ljairlimum
huildin -vetba-ek distances fox the a ) llcable zoning_
c) All buildings and structures shall be landscaped and
screened according to the standards that fol ow;
,..l. 1 -1dingsactures which resemble residential
accessory structures must be landscaped, and maintained
in the character of a residential. arer:
2. Any outside storage areas J,ust be fenced with a
minimum 5 foot fence and the arca screclied from'
_i cflt property according to the standards in
thi,- section
3. Lichtino in and around these facilities shall be
constructed and shielded ;:.o as noL to shine direcl,1\,
on oc.joining propertyused fur or zoned for residential
G-23
. _
45"/
Pg.1
purposes. Types of lighting to be considered shll
include, but not be limited to, indour lights when
visible through windows, outdoor lighting, automobile
*headlights eTd signs. Devices to shield lighting may
include. sha,les, fences, shrubs, trees an(4n -E0
conditions.
4. , Parking areas and driveways used in connection with
facilities constructed pursuant to this Section
6.16.12 shall either be surfaced or shall be located
and maintained in a conditions so that dust and dirt
will not settle on adjoining properties as a ie:sult of
their usc:---Driveway entrances shall be locatea in a
manner that will create as few additional traffic
hazards as possible.
5. Buildings, structures , equipment or material shall
be screened by either a durable masonry wall, or a
fence, or by natural planting, designed—Io b6- corTnTatible
with the character of adjoining properties , in oia,,- ---
to materially screen the uses within tire siiT7Thet p.roprl
from the view of adj:4cent properties. Walls and
shall be at least 5 ,:eet in height, buf—F-6-Ca not be -
gretOZ than 7 feet in height, measured from the ground
along the common lot line of adjoining ETTEDpertri-Ea7
"Walls and fences shall be constructed and maria-ained
in a safe and sound condition. Where natural planting_
is to be Used as screening, a strip of land at_least
10 feet in width shall be rese :ved for this purpose . .
This planting strip shall be composed of an arrang,ament
of shrubs and trees. The shrubs shall be evergreen and
shall be arranged in 2 rows as a minimum and planted at
en Lal heignT- o7t at lease-3 icet, wfcn disCance
between shrubs being not morn than 5 feet. Thc shrubs ,
Shall be of such variety that an average height. of at
least 6 feet could be expected as normal growth within k
no more than 2 years from the time of planting. frees,
which may be either evergreen or deciduous, shall aug:.,snt
the arrangement of shrubs so that there will be a scrctan-
ing effect or opacity to Materially screen the use within
the subject property from the view of adjacent propertie.,T.
6. 17. RESERVED
6. 10. RESERVED
6. 19. RESERVED
G. Large Ground Absorption Systems (3,000 gals. per day) and Package -
S7. -age Treatment plants Prohibited in AR Districts and Rural
im-f:-fer Districts
6-23r,
4•U•
pg.D
•
•
Support Services
Ret ESIDIC Group
4111 Hoar.Sou.Nail.NZ7
Ponl Of Ik7e.[Rot 30 in
Chorlolle.North Carolina 28230
July 12, 1982
Mr. Rick Cannity
Orange County Planning Department
106 F.. Margaret Lee Lane
Hillsborough, NC 27276
Dear Mr. Cannity:
Southern Bell Telephone Cornj. uy is beginning to use a new piece of telephone
technology called a Subscriber Loop Carrier (SLC-06) This equipment allows
us to take the existing cable (underground) and run it through this equipment
(SLC hut) back into the ground, thus expanding the telephone facilities. This
expansion is necessary to keep up With the demand for telephone service in i2-;a
growth areas of Orange County and in North Carolina
These SLC huts requi.,e no water, no sewer facilities and no personnel, except
when maintenance is necessary. As you can see, this equipment is primarily
an expansion of the cable located underground.
We have already located these huts in other counties of the state; and in
Guilford, Wake, Mecklenburg, New Hanover, Richmond, Robeson, Cleveland, those
units are permitted in all zoning areas. For example, there are 24 of these
huts in Guilford County now, with more planned fox late 1982 and 1963, The
life of this technology will probably be 50 years or longer, so when negotia-
ting with land owners for land to locate SLC's on, we use three methods:
Pee Simple Title - long term, gives owner first right of refusal
Easements - long term, owner retains ownership
Lease - long term, owner retains ownership
Since we use no water or sewer, our presence on a lot would not affect your
sewage ' 11.ups or the land's r dlity to absorb waste through the use of a
sptic
Also, because of the long-term usage of the land, approximately 50 years, par-
haps in the cases where the original landowner would not choose to exercise
• the first right of refusal, would it be possible that in 50 years or longer a
Jot 100 feet by 150 feet would not be substandard?
45S
Pg.1 it
Mr. Rick Cannily
July 12, 1982 -•
Pae 2
111 CannitY', our intentions, as a provider of an essential service in Orange
County, is to work with you in making cartain that we do not locate a but that
would be obtrusive. We stand to lose in the community as well by doing some-
thing of this nature. Therefore, we have taken the posture of working with
local officials so that we're all in harmony in meeting the demands for service
in an area Our plans show we'll need to place si to eight of these units in
your area in 1903,
Enclosed are a couple of photographs that will give you a visual concept of
(JUL SIC huts. We can add more trees and greer-ry when needed or stain the
exterior.
Thank you for your consideration and the consideration of the officials in
Orange County.
Respectfully,
•
p77-)41/2.7,
Daukn P. Cline
iis -Jciate Manager-Real Estate
mat
, .
Enclosures
46G
.•
•
I.
Pg.15
Imposed Conditions.
The Board of County Commissioners or the Board of Adjustment,
as appropriate, may impose such reasonable conditions upon
approval of a Special Use as will afford protection of the
public health, safety and general welfare, ensure that sub-
stantial justice is done and equitable treatment provided.
Such conditions shall run with the land and use, and shall
be binding on the original applicant (s) as well as all.
successors, assigns and heirs.
8.4.8 Withdrawal of Application
An applicant may withdraw his or her application at any tine
by written notice to the County Manager. However, any withclrawa1 of ail- application after the giving of -the first notice
as required in--8.4.4 shall considered, for the purposes
'of Article 8; a denial of the itition.
8.4.9. Effect of Denial on Subsequent Petitions
When the Board of County Commissioners or Board of Adiustmenty
as appropriate , shall have denied an application, the : oard_
of County Commissioners or Board of Adjustment shall ‘,0t1
received another application for the Tame or similar usend-
ment, affecting the sane property or a portion on it until
the expiration of a one year period, extending from the 'date
of denial.
8.5 Action Subsequent To The Board Action
The Zoning Officer shall within seven days cause notice of the
disposition of the application to be sent by certified mail to
the applicant and a copy of the decision to he filed in the
office of the ZOning Officer.
The Zoning Officer, in the case of approval or approval with
conditions, shall issue the necessary permit in accord with
the Board' s action.
The Orange County Manager shall certify that the Special Use
Permit with ant imosed conditions is as approved by Board
of County Commissioners or Doard of Adjustment, as a uriate,
8.G Contents of Application For Approval of A Special Use
T!'e application for approval of a Special Use shall be
submitted on forms provided by the Zoning Officer, Such
forms shall be prepared so that when completed a full and
accurate description of the propo!;ed use, including its
8-5
• •
461
•
Basement A grant of rights by a property owner to
another individual, group or governmental
unit to make limited use of a portion of
real property for a specified purpose.
Efficiency Apartment An add5tional dwelling unit within
a single family residence that meets the
following criteria:
1. Either the si le family unit or the
efficiency urt is occupied by thO
property owner,
2. The efficiency unit contains no more
than 25% of the gross floor ica--67-1:he
total dwelling.
3. The lot meets the minimum lot size.
requirements of the zoning distriEC in
——
which it is located.
_
. ,
- , •
Environmentally Sensitive Areas Land which is subject. to
special natural environmental condition
such as flooding that present signific7
constraints to built development.
•
22:-7
_ .
416,2
Pg
The gross area of lot 1 in the illustration would
thus be the area within its boundaries plus the
hatched areas at the top and side, including the
small rectangle marked a. The gross area of lot
2 would include its net area plus the hatched area
• across its front,
Lot Area The total horizontal area within the lot lines of a
lot exclusive of street o hic;hway rights-of-way and
easements of access to other property_
Lot line, Front In the case of an interior lot, the lot line separa-
ting said lot from the street; in the case of a
corner lot or through lot, the lot line separating
said lot from that street which is desingated as
the front street in the request for a Building Permit_
Lot Line, Rear The lot line opposite and most distant from the
front line; in the case of irregularly Itaped lots,
such lot line shall be an imaginary lin parallel. to
the front lot line but not less than ten feet along
and measured within said lot.
Lot Line, Side Any lot line which is not a front lot line or a
• rear lot line; a lot line separating a lot from
_ a side street. is an exterior side lot line, while
a lot line separating a lot from another lot, or
lots is an interior side lot line_
Lot, Non-Conforming. A legally subdivided lot shce;n on legally
recorded plat, existing at the time regulations were
passed requiring greater minimum width or area than
provided on such lot, or establishing other limitations
which such lot does not meet- Such lots may be
considered substandard lots of record. (See 11.1) _
Lot, Non-legal For Zoning Purposes A lot which is neither a zoning
lot nor a non-conforming lot.. No such lot shall
be used or occupied until it is made to conform to
the requirements of this ordinance and other applicable
regulations.
Lot Of Record A lot created by deed or plat prior to the existence
of subdivision regulations. The area and dimensions
of the lot shall meet any regulations in effect at
the lime the lot was created.,
Lot, Regular A lot with direct vehicular access to a street. as
•• required by sub,livision regulations and so locaLed,
shaped and orieled to adjacent lots as to be
reasonably adapted to application of general measure-
ments as indicated below, and with location of setbacks
by type (fro, t, side, rear and spacial) logically
determined by and related to adjacent setback patterns_
22-1G
48'd
, .
,,..)
(-: ,c...: : 0--;:,,-..---,---f. .
cl: C.:a
1 ,
[L : i.0., C-5
;:',.^... .:,:::: ;,.;;,?..:T';`■ I.!;:I 1,:;:.;';:,.:,N.:-.7.i: _________
ilT 1):1 _1\ur_u )3,_.1-932,--
S,°... Proposed text changes to the Subdivision Regulations
planing 1 , PUblic U.I.Kiring: T!..s 1:
1\tant(5) : pages of regulations InforiOci COntact: Rick Cannitv
with changes underlined. -
________:_________ P cr• 1- 7
1 Pbona NuITisar: 7 3 2-8 18 1 e. xt. 347
_
PailP057.]:: To receive citizen input on several proposed changes to the
Subdivision Regulations,
NEED: There are four major changes proposedz
1„ addition of definitions of road types that coincide with
N-C, DOT definitions
2, definition of a lot of record in reference to subdivision
requirements
3, revisions to road rights of way to coincide with revised
- NC DOT standards (this a3so allows us to propose a reductio
of private road right of way requirements)
4. deletion of Section VII Variances
The addition of the road types will make the Subdivision Regulatic;
definitions the same as the Department of Transportation, which
will facilitate understanding. The lot of record concept is used
to determine the administrative procedure a subdivision must go
through for approval. The Department of Transportation has
recently reduced the right of way requirements for secondary ro,'s,
The proposed changes reflect the new requirements- The recinixo It
for private road rights of way have also been reduced. The se( )1.
that sets out variance procedures should not have been included In
the subdivision Regulations, The State enabling legislation
does not allog variation from the specific standards of the Sub-
d.Li.lion Regulations ; therefore, ' t should be deleted.
464-
Pg.1
SECTION II. DEFINITIONS
Unless otherwise stated the following words shall :
For purposs of this ordinance, have the following defini-
tions_ Nords used in the present tense shall be understood
to include the future tense. Words used in the singular
shall be understood to include the plural_ .
ALLEY - A roadway which affords only a secondary
means of access to abutting property and not intended
for general traffic circulation.
DEDICPTION - A gift, by the owner, of land for a
specified purpose, ox purposes.. Because a transfer of
property is entailed, dedication must be made by written
instrument and is completed with an acceptance.
DWELLING UNIT - A room or grouP of rooms for mina a
single independent habitable unit with facilitie, used
or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cook.ing
'and eating by one family; for owner occupany or 115F-rente?„
lease or other occupancy on a weeny or longer basis, ----
and containing independent cooking, sanitary and sieeD-
ing facilities. Units otherwise meeting this definTEI
but occupied by qsients on a rental or lease basis
for periods of iee than one week'ghall be construe:a
__
to be lodging units.
Mobile Homes and modular units are to be considered
dwelling units under this definition.
*EASEMENT - A grant of rights by the property onwer
to a protion of land for a specified purpose.
GROUP DEVELOPMENT - One or more principal structures
built on a single,lot, tract or parcel of land and designed
for occupancy by more than one separate family, firm, busi-
ness or other enterprise.
LOT, DOUBLE FRONTAGE - A continuous (through) lot
which is accessible from both the streets upon which it
fronts on opposite sides.
LOT,OF RECORD .- A lot created by deed or plat prior
to the existence of the subdivision regulations. The
area and dimensions of the lot shall meet any regulations
in effect at the time the lot was recorded. The lot of
record dates are as follows:
Chapel Hill Town:;hip 12/4/157
Eno Township 3/2/70
-Hillsborough, Bingham, Cnceks
Cedar Grove and Little River 3/13/7S
*Amended Effective (januray 11, 1979)
4 e
Pg.2
STREET - A way for vehiCular traffic whether designated.
as a street, highway, thoroughfare, parl:way, throughway, free-
way, road, avenue boulevard, land, place or however otherwis,-,
designated.
STREET, ARTERIAL - A street connecting widely separated
areas and designed to carry a large volume of traffic which may
be fast, heavy or both. Arterial streets are sometimes referred--
to as "major-thoroughfares" "freeways" , "e;cpressways" , etc, . and
are usually numbered State or Federal Highways.
STREET,COLLECTOR - A street which carries traffic from
minor streets to the major systems of arteri I streets, including
the principle entrance streets of a residential development and
streets for circulation within such a development. Collector
streets may also be referred to as "connector" or "feeder" streets.
STREET, LOCAL - Local street is used or designed primarily
to provide access to abutting proecrites. It serves as the conriec:
ing road system between other roads wiWn a subdivie:ion and .Ehe
thoroughfareelystem. It also serves or Asdesignedit° serve at
least ten but not mo than twenty five dwelling unifS and is ax
to or does handle between seventy five and two nundred trips pe
day.
STREET ,LOOP - Loop streep is used as a means fe,r local
traffic to leave and enter other stroe:es without turrd r aroulTd7,
but provides access only to abutting properties_ Thee-. streets
arn less than one mile in length and have.no collectcyr ca-Eiract7i.
tics.
STREET, MARGINAL ACCESS - A minor street which is parallel
to and adjacent to arterial streets, and which provides access to
abutting properties and protection from through traffic. Marginal
access streets may also be referred to as "service roads."
SUBDIVIDER. - Any person or persons, firm or corporation sub-
dividing land within the jurisdiction of this ordinance.
SUBDIVISION - A"subdivision" shall include all divi-
sions of a tract or parcel of land into tow or more lots, building
sites, or other divisions, for the purpose, whether immediate or
fW.IJre, of sale °rebuilding development.■, and shall include all
divisions of land involving the dedication of a new street or a
change in existing streets; provided, however, that the following
shall not be included within this definition nor be subject to the
regulations authorized by this article: (1) the combination or
recombination of portions of previously platted lots where the
Lot al number of lots is not increased and the resultant lots arc
equal to or exceed the standards of Orange County as shown in its
s6bdivision ordinance; (2) the division of land into parcels
greater than ten acres where no street right-Of-way dedication is
involved; (3) the public acquisition by purchase of strips of
land for the widening or operning of streets; (4) the division
of a tract in single ownership whose entire area is no greater
than two acres into not more than three lots, where no streets
•
466
•11
right-of-way dedication is involved and where the resul-
tant Joots are equal to or exceed the standards of the County
as shown in its subdivision ordinance,
*SUBDIVISION, MINOR - A division of a tract of land in-
to more than four (4) lots with access to be provided either from
en existing public street or from a private road as defined in the
Orange County Subdivison Regulatiors.
•
PRIVATE ROAD - A road not intended for public use or
public dedication and serves a limited number of lots, and there-
fore is typically not built to Department of Transportatioy, Stan-
dards. It is maintained by private property owners, and intended
for those private property owners,
STRUCTURE - Anything constructed or erected which requires
permanent location above ground including mobile homes. For pur-
poses of this ordinance, "structure" does not include landscape
features such as ornamental pools, driveways, walls or fences,
playhouses, open stairs,
STREET, MINOP. - Minor street is used or desiqned primarily
to provide access to abuttinc properties. It serves or
to serve not more than nine dwelling units and is expectcd ..c) or
does handle up to seventy five trips per day. These stree6:: zji"E2—
normally one block lon or extend or a block-by-block basis
have no collector characteristics.
STREET, CUL-DE-SAC - Cul-de-sac is a street that gel lly,
terminates in a circular richt-of-way. It is used or design -
to be used to provide access to abutting properties.
4P
. ,
Pg.4
IV - B - 3. STPEETS
IV - B - 3 - a. The provision of street rights-of-way
shall conform to and meet the requirements
of such major thoroughfare plan for Orange
County as may be recommended by the Planning
Board and adopted by the Orange County Board
of County Commissioners, from its date of
adoption, provided that a subdivider shall
not be required to provide or dedicate right-
of-way for a proposed street to which acces
would be prohibited by any governmental agency.
IV - B - 3 - b. The proposed street layout shall be co di-
nated with with the existing street system of th..
surrounding area. Where possible proposed
streets shall be the extension of existing
streets.
IV - B - 3 - c. Public dedicated streets meet the minimum
construction standards as adopted by the N. C.
Department of Transportation for acceptance
of streets as additions to the State Highway
System but shall be no less than the following:
IV - B - 3 - c - 1. Widths - Right-of-waY widths, measured
from lot line to lot line, shall be as wide
as existing streets extended but in no case
said widths be less than the following:
Street Type Minimum Required Right-of-Way WidtH
(in feet)
Arterial Streets 100
Collector Streets 70
Minor Streets 50
Marginal Access Streets 45
45
Cul-de-sacs
IV - B -- 3 - c 2. Partial Widths - A partial width right-
of-way, not less than 2. . feet in width, may
be dedicated when it adjoins undeveloped
property; provided that the width of a
partial dedication permits the installation
of such public facilities necessary to serve
the lots abutting thereon. When said ad-
joining undeveloped property is subdivided, •
the remainder of the full required right-of-
way width shall be dedicated.
IV - B - 3 - c - 3. Grades - Pronosed streets shall confol•.
to grade standards adopted by the Depart7v.
of Transportation for public roads, or by
Orange County for private roads.
2t
qt4c,.
Pv,
•
SUBDIVISION 1-ZEGULATION II-11
. •
..:.; •
•.:. ' • • : ; .
• cliapterl5SA.,
Artide18, ••
Planning and Regulatbn of Development„
Fart 2.Subdivision Regulation. •
•
§ 153A-330. Subdiviniorr.regulation. — A county may by ordinance
rtgtilate the subdivision of land within its ter ritoilal jurisdiction It a county,
pursuant to GS 153A-342.has adopted a zoning ordinance that applies only to
one or more designated portions of its territorial jurisilir don, it may adopt
ision regulations that apply only within the areas Si zoned and nerd not
egulatc the subdivision of land in the rest of its jurisdiction 11959, c 11)07;
thiV)
c. 195: 1973.c.S22.s ' •
i53A-331,. Contents and requirements of ordinance., — A subdis ision
control ordinance may prroicle for the orderly growth arid development of the
county: for the coordination of streets and highways within other subdb,isions with existing or planned streets and highways and with otner public
facilities;for the dedication or reservation of recreation areas serving residents
of the immediate neighborhood within the subdivision and of rights-of-way or
eascriuMCg-ffr street and utility purposes;and for the distribution of population
and traffic in a manner that will avoid congestion and o%ercrowding and will
create conditions essential to public health,safety,and the general welfare Tire
ordinance may include requirements that the final plat show sufficient data to
determine readily and reproduce accurately on the ground the location,bearing,
rind length of every street and alley line, lot line,easement boundary line, and
other property- boundaries, including the radius and other data for curved
propert■ lines, to an appropriate accuracy and in conformity with good
sun eying practice.A subdivision control ordinance may provide that a developer
may provide funds to the county whereby the county may acquire recreational
land or areas to serve the development or subdivision, including the purchase
of land which may be used to serve more than one subdivision or development
within the immediate area.
The ordinance may provide for the more orderly development of subdivisions
lv requiring the construction of community service facilities in accordance with
county policies and standards, and, to assure compliance with these
requirements, the ordinance may provide for the posting of bond crt any other
method that will offer guarantee of compliance
The ordinance may pro'.1cle for the_reservation of school sites in accordance
with comprehensive land use plans 7-T0ot-et-try the board of-commissioners or
the planning agency.For the authorization to reserve school sites to be effective,
the hoard of commissioners or planning agency, before approving a
comprehensive land use plan,shall determine jointly with the board of education
with jurisdiction over the area the specific location and size of each school site
to in reserved, and this information shall appear in the plan Whenever a
sohd:vision that includes part or all of a school site to be reserved under the plan
Sidimitted for approval, the board of commissioners or the plain rig agency
iinmediately notify tiy board of education 1 hat board shall pmnpth
sit4:_to S r e LI and sh li rU boar'd
0; inn 1;!iF,Moue r- or ulautriri g_a It the hr 1i d Of i2-thiCit Lion
do':s riM.ViEdri.1-Te,site 1p b.?,reseFfATiftiSiti>ThTivriie. reserved:If the-hozird of
edimatiori does wish the site to be reserved.the sul.idvisirin nine not be Ttili)E oved
1977
4G
7 i
It-17 v.ithout the reservation.The board of education must acquire the site within 16
months after the date the site_is errsen•e<1, either-bt,'p:riciirse of bti-eserct e oT
th power owe ntn,nt'do tam It'theboard of education has not purchased th •
site or begun proceedings to condemn the site within the 18 months, the
subdivider may treat the land as freed of the reservation.
The ordinance may require that a plat be prepared, approved, and recorded
. pursuant to its provisions whenever a subdivision of land takes places,(1959, c..;
1007; 1973, c. 822, s.. 1; 1975. c.,231.)
§ 153A-332. Ordinance to contain procedure for plat approval;approval •
,.
prercquiaita to plat rscordation; statement by owner.. —. A r.ruh:livisiun
ordinance adopted pursuant to this Part shall contain pro,idioms setting forth -•
the procedures to he follow cc! in granting or denyinys approval of a suhrii,'i;iitrn
plat before its registration.. -
The ordinance shall provide that the following agencies he giren era
opportunity to make recommendations concerning an individual suhrlivisiun
plat before the plat is approtccl:
ill The district highway engineer as to proposed streets, highways, ant!
drainage eystems;
t2r The county health director as to proposed water or sewerage sr::tenrs;
tat Any other agency or official designated by the hoard of coinmissictner ..
The ordinance may provide that final approval of each indic-itiaal sulnlivision
plat is to he given by: •
(It The hoard of commissioners,
12r The hoard of commissioners on ttcroutatendation nt a p'.annire,agency,
or '
13i A designated planning agency.. •
From l i r e time I h a t l a silkiicisiun rrrtlirrtnri is•fib r i with t h e rr> is. i rnf r rrrl�
of aloe' Inuits; tin snhtlit isiuu plat of lama a i;hitr the n+trrtl y-s jar i,ilir;irrrr may
by filth rn rt curried until it has lit tit sulnrritlrrl In :wit :ttttnnrrd 1; I}1r
;i gi;,nirtiatt^ hn;:r ti or age nc, as spat ifierl in the subdivision oerl'at:Oni- .. :u:tl
until this approv al is entered in writing on the fare of the plat lty Hie'chair emt 1
or- head of t hr board or :tgrnt•c The r egi<Irr nI tor•:sic may nrrt file or recur it ; t
plal ui: :e .nlrtlit i=inn nit I:ut l Lurie it wit hit rate 1,rt it<n ial jut isilir!inn iii I Lr
Cuunl� (lint is:tc nu( (turn :tirluntrti in act or dance with thew- pmtir:urns ;r; rl ;b •
Clerk of superior tuurt may not milt t or rlitr'rl the 1i'uis,ding lit' a 1,1:r1 it !hi.
rrt'tstrl iitg a unlit he in lunlliei a lair this i—i tinn.,ThC^utc net of tarot p:!;uct r: tin a
sulnlic isinn plat snhotiltcd fur t i t ooling.. or his author hull agent, shall sign a
slatrnnvrt on the plat stating whither any laud sliot •n the;con is within the
.ulnlivjshirt-iigula tint,jut isrlitloin of the t,runtr II!1aU,.c. itthr: I r..622. -:
§ 153P,-333. Effect of post approval on oedicetions., — The iillit:-ne'itl or 0
plat does not constitute or eft ect the acceptance by the count„ of the pol,lie of
the dedication of any street or other ground. public utility lint,or other tit:biiee
facility shown on the plat and shall not lie construt el to du set. r i!e ti, r.. 11017;
l9;:3,c 822,s hi
§ 153A--334, Penalties for transferring lots in unapproved subdivisions-—
If a person who is the owner or the agent of the owner of any land located within
the territorial jurisdiction of a county that has adopted a subdivision regulation
ordinance subdivides his land in violation of the ordinance or transfers or sells
land by reference to, e::hibition of, or any other use of a plat showing a
subdivision of the land before the plat has been properly approved under the
ordinance and recorded in the office of the appropriate register of deeds, hi; is
guilty of a misdemeanor The description b} metes and hounds in the instrument
of transfer or other document used in the process of selling or transferring land
does not exempt the transaction from this penalty.. The county may bring an
action for injunction of any illegal subdivision, transfer, conveyance,or sale of
lar,;l, and the court shall, upon appropriate findings, issue art injnnctit;n and
order requiring the offending party to comply with the _tibi',i;isior.orJinance..
15:1,1-:ta5 "tiuht:ic odour" rlrfirrr°d.. l sir I,nt I+n '< ni tiri-. 1':11 t,
nluli' daW! iii:rot: all tart iii, s ,tt :t I;itt i Bat 1.1•1 ,ri land
111s. knit ling viii; ,it ritltri r1ivli- n= far thy Jim pt-at rtl' ::I: n: huilrl ri
tti t rto n ,n:
r I ti tit lu'Ihr r' inuni Hiatt r"t I'r:;urr+ arot uu aurae: ali~rllt c'inu r,f i:utrl
1977
:-.)•..'LI -
/
/
/ .
P y, cc
. . II-1.3
involving the a,dicalion of a new Street,or a change in eting streets;hovrever,
the following is not included ,,vithin this definition and is not subject to any
-tilations enacted pursuant to this Part
, '
' (1) The combination or recombination of portions of previously sillodivided . •
and recorded lots if the total number of lots is not increased and the • .
resulta.nt lots are equal to or e:iceed the standards of the county as
shown in its subdivision regulations;
(1979,c. 011, s. 2) 1.
he division-of and into.,darcels greater than 10 acres if no street
right-of-wa).:dedication is involv ed; -
Go The- public acquisition hy purchase ot-strips of land for
opening streets;and .
(II Thu division of a tract in single ownership the entire art:a of which is
no greater than 1.,'D 7.1cres intu not more than three lots,:(nu street
right-uf-waN dedication is involved and if the t esultant lots rue equal -
to or eNceed the standards of the crd:nty a$ Sbo .r1 b■; its subdivision
eulations.(1959,c. 1007.. 1.17:3,c.1.!.::.:.,
.
t1.07E: See also proons from G.S. Chapters 59, 47, and 13(5 vhich
follow the municipal subdivision regulation enabling, aat in the seation '
on Laws of Primary 'raciest to Municipalities. .
. .
. .
.....___
.. ..
: ..., .-
...
1970
onm,7GE cozNTY
BomoD co7,111s5IoNET/s xctioz ��en�`
Item 'Co. D-1
P.CzzOx nscNos ran sssraxnc
mC'm DArF, August 23, 1982
Subjcot.` Housing Rehabilitation Contract Awards
zo \
___ Yes __�= �
\--- � C���nit� Deva!o /
_
[ittar.:11mmt(5):
Bid Results
Idformation Cont,eo : Wilbert McAdoo
Phone Ntr0-Lt,r: 429
Purpose: Award of three Housing Rehabilitation Contracts,
Need: Sealed bids were received and opened on August 11, 1982.
Attached is a tabulation of the bids by dwelling unit numbers,
� Award of contract to the lowest bidder will be consistent
—=-' with present housing rehabilitation bid procedure,
ndtipo(s> :
�� � z
zn
DU # Street Contractor Bid Amount
116 [?rper Street Gates Construction $11°243 00
|ioimmnt Avenue McDuffie Construction 6,300'00
113 Fu� rtte Mill Rd Morrow Construction 16,571.50
496
C74.? GE COC;NTY
?CD ClOY31/417:557:17-:ERS
:1.ction 1-.7;enc2z
Itr; ';:o. D-3
':CTIC: .1",.-:=EINI7La. :1717,1
iiicnist 23 1 P.
Elecrronic Voting Machine hid Award
ves no
Furchasine, Central Serviced PtIblic
_
ChMarlt;(S) ; Information C...mtz,z.t:Marl.: H. Rees
Phone n..1m177,77x: X/196
To award the purchase of four electronic voting machines
to Computer Elections Systems of Greensboro, P. C, at a total
cost of $11, 000 .00
North Carolina General Statutes require appro-oal by the hoard
of County Commissioners for any purchase of equipment over
$10,000- 00. Only one bid was received. This was because
the only other company that makes comparable machines had moved ,
leaving no forwarding address . In any event , the price bid was
• less then the County paid for the same machines last year_
-117-T- The purchase of these machines would absorb all the funds
allocated in the budget for their acquiUition . However , becauue
of their reduced price , the County can purchase four machines
rather then the orginally intended three .
Rac.-7..m7er=z!z1c71,.) . Award the bid to Computer Elections Systems ,
^���� �>� �' :!�` ' ^ -, � ~ \'
"~^ �
"L.).
RESULTS OF 815 SyLxn/E
ri ':;R;------------�
AvvI.|CAT|0u 011n3Ep146
[0�T ���V{��[� _-5"�����O-_____-
:]��ES5� Harper ���t--''-------'-
' --- {C�� BTV�J�
s�� �� ---�
;:.��ExTpx� OF' BID 0»Ep___l3.ZO_-__—_ -�---' _--
_- - /
O; [: J03 BID ��- � HF60: ; u L_ �
11'AMY Ai
Griffi �����
�l5'7����_________ -------�-
_Io�---------- --'---�
----'----� lI~936OU
HcDuffie Construction '
Cowp�Dy — '------- -'------
11
3 '"x'"' Home ^ ________
Gates Co.'t. -cti h Conna
5 Mono/ Constructi nn --------�
�___-__-------
opened by: _ Robert liason.
Time of Did Open " "
Date o Did Opening: «"
w1 |u -------------------'
V�tnssscd by ~`.',°,.°^,,,^~~~,^~,,^,~,.'~-
~°'^~~°°"^^°~^^^°°~°°.°~~°^.-^~^'.'^^. -~~~-
�.n`as t occop tab)u Did: $ll,243:OO . ________
:'9ntietod Amount:
Cnnt,ucmr:
Rt. l, Box 8, Snow Camp North Car
___--------------'--7�%0]��'---
376-6597
RIME MOrIBER
C0U:E|QS: Community Development's contribution towards the rehabilitation of this
dwelling unit will be $6,000.00
��
(' - - '- --�-'------
�vun�ttcd b;: 7f �
Bid Approved by: -----'-------------'---------- r- l
oot Issued
Proceed Order: Issued L---
CVMEnTS:
•
488`
�..2
.._
PE.SuUS C« 5! OPE:i:',',
xrr�|C�J|O: o����� 138A _
�� ��� Richard Johnso�___ __________' -----------� �05| Br�ooJE�__� U,GSpJ��_____-_-
�5JpESS: Unmpmux� ______-________
-------' OST ESTIMATE P[x[EHTACi OF BID OYEn__ ---_____ y/�0�;_6`2I_________ _C
lTEO: 0:[: JOB BID F-y JOB UEUOTIA-i8) i -_]
NT
COMPANY BID AMOU
$6,300.00 ______ __
_ ______ ---
I "`""' ' '" Construction_ ---'
Taylor l _ -______ �,D9l.0g ----------------
Griffin & Associates ___ --l���n�OO ___-____ --
� ___�
Gate, Construction __ -_�����uv __________________
� ___________
__
5 �_ ----------'-- ------
Bids opened by: Robert Wilson _______________
Tina of Bid Opening: .__.3:80'U,m,'_-_----' ___ --------- -
Date of Bid Opening: __August._11, ____ ___ _ ___
Witnessed by: _________ t'Md\dno _____ _______ -------'°,.°^,,^^~~ ,
^^~~.^^°^~^^^^^~^-.�^.^ .^~^-.~.,~^.~.^~^~~^,.,.^~^`~~,,,~, ^°.^,,..`.
Ln.,est Acceptable kid:_ _ $6`y]D`{0_--___—____------
Negotiated xn'ev«t: ____ __N//L---_-__'_________---------
[!cti�u________________ ___________
Contractor: � --_---��� /mmE
2azzougb`_N. ______
ADDRESS
732-6901 __
. PHONE NUMBER
COMMENTS:
~ DATE: S:• _____
Submitted by: __ _� __ __
- ___--'—_---__
Bid Approved by: __-__ _____._________
Not Issued L_-_J
' Proceed Order: Issued !______J
����
~~^�
RESULTS Of BID OPENING
APPLICATION NUMBER 113
D�//iER: �senh li:zz ----�-------
COST ESTIMATE: 15,44g.00
kUDe[5S:
;EnC[NTX6E G[ BID OVER 6.78 UNDER COST ESTIMATE wAJ[___ ''
CHECK ONE: JOB BID ;—1 JOB NEGOTIATED |___J
COMPANY BID AMOUNT
1 HcDvFfiz Construction $18,385.00
2
Taylor Home Improvement 16,590.00
] E, P Gates Construction 17,850.00 Construction
4 Morrow Construction 16,571.50
jrank &riffin ________ 23,850.00
Bids opened by: Robert Nilson
Time of Bid Opening: 3:00 p.m.
Date of Bid Opening: August 11, 1982
Wilbert - —
Uitneo ed by� -�_���e�- — -----
^^^w� *^^°°e°~°°*°~^' ^~'°^°°°°~^~ ~°~~°~^° °^° ~°~^^°^°°^^^°°+*+w*°^^~+^*~°°*
Loost Acceptable Rid:_ Sla,571'5D
_— —
xegotioLod Amount: M/& _________________
Cootructor: Morrow� Construction
NAME
27302
� North N�.
563-3023 -- '
PHONE NUMBER
C6vmunity Development's contribution towards the rehabilitation of this
COMMENTS: dwelling unit will be $0`000'00'
DATE: :5 ` /� ^ �2_
Submitted by:
Bid Approved by:
---' nu� Issued L
Proceed Order: Issued r--- ^_
COMMENTS:
•
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
ACCION AGDTDA ITD1 ABSTRACT Item, No. D-2
MEETENG DATE August 23, 1982
Subject: Infant/Toddler Automobile Safety Seat Program
- .
DeparU—rent: Orange , o. Child Passenger Safety Public Reaming: yes
Associa ion
Attachre...nt(s) : Information CortEact: Jerry Robinson
1. Agreement to lease seats to Safety
Asthaciation Phone Natibe.r: 311
•
..,•
Purpote: To lease 411 infant/toddleF automobile safety seats to the Orange County
Child PasSenger Safety Association at a total cost of $1.00 per year for
two years:
Need: If Orange County handles the program directly, the financial transactions
cost would be prohibitive and the fiscal rules established by the State
would force such revisions in the program as to make it much less viable
of a coum4nity/public service.
1
Impact: The finances will be cheaply handled, the program will be able to operate
in a normal mode, and the Association will be better able to solicit
donations , since few wish to donate to the County.
•
, I
LEASE AGREEMENT
A. For the sumlof One Dollar ($1.00) per year, the Orange County Board of
Commissioners hereby agrees to lease to the Orange County Child Passenger
Safety Association the following automobile child safety seats and other
items of eq7ipment: (Identify fully, i.e. , brand name, model #, etc.)
1. Century Infant Love Seat - u. to 260
2. Astrosat Toddler Seats - 60
3.
4.
TERM OF AGREEMENT
1
B. Unless sooner terminated by either party upon giving thirty (30) days writ-
ten notice, this Agreement shall cover a period of two-years from the date
of this Agreement.
C. Orange County Child Passenger Safety Association (lessee) agrees to provide
manpower for' the two-year period of this Agreement to distribute above list-
ed equipment within the County of Orange and to operate the distribution pro-
gram during the two.-year period in accordance with the provisions of the
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHILD RESTRAINT LOANER PROGRAM AGREEMENT between the N. C.
Governor's Highway Safety Program and the County of Orange, dated
August 17, 11982.
D. If Orange County Child Passenger Safety Association (lessee) fails to con-
'
tinue a distFibution program for the full two-year period from the date of
this Agreement, Orange County Child Passenger Safety Association (lessee)
shall return the seats to the lessor who will return them to GHSP for sub-
;
sequent use.1
E. If Orange County Child Passenger Safety Association (lessee) continues and
expands the distribution program for the full two-year period following the
date df-thislagreement, all safety seats and any other equipment included in
this agreemeht shall become the property of the lessee and all agreements
1
between the County of Orange and Orange County Child Passenger Safety Asso-
ciation (lessee) are discontinued.
In witness whereof, said parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the
date herein shown below.
Executed by the County of ORANGE , State of North Carolina this the
23rd day of 6.1HcT . 19 147 .
. .
MANGE COUNTY'
SCAR.° OF COMMISSICNERS
Action hgende
Item No. D-3
ACTICN AGENDA =ism ABSTRACT .
Mt.b.;TING DATE August 23. 1982
Subject: Electronic Voting Machine Bid Award
Depart:rent:Purchasing & Central Services Public Hearing: yes x. no
. _
. .
Attaallament(s) : Tn.formation Contact: Mark H. Rees
Phone Number: X498
. _ . .
Par2:3se: To award the purchase of four electronic voting machines
to Computer Elections Systems of Greensboro , N. C . at a total
cost of $ 112, 000 . 00
I
!
1
I
1 .
- - I
t
Need: 1
North Carolina General Statutes require approval' by-the Board
1
of County Commissioners for any purchase of equipment over
$ 10, 000 , 001. Only one bid was received . This was because
the only o her company that makes comparable machines had moved ,
leaving no forwarding address . In any event , the price bid was
less then the County paid for the same machines last year .
/1/11_0.act: The purchase of these machines would absorb all the funds
allocated in the budget for their sc,quii-.tion . However , because
of their reduced price , the County can purchase four machines
rather then the orginally intended three .
I
1
471
oacE couNTY
:., EQAED OF COC211.S510:,!STZS ;Actiea 1-1-,:encLA
Item :,:o. D-4
ACTION .-i:::;i7:7DA JTEM 1,BSTPACT
VOLTENC; DATE f/ /: -----
Subjct: 14e2: ',7euntain revels Arent refloe:;t for Class I.. ! pecial Use Pen it
--- j Public Hearing: yes -• '
Attach:Ala:it(s) : 7cro to Izard of Corr..iT . foam Cmtact: 'Fi-ck Carir lit"
stoners r.) 7 Flannilv 13eard.
lamrdril find.i_nr5 7V,P
PhOne D,IVE] 22-B181 1-..„. 347
—4't71i7a117--;7,'ira'5 lir:;)oo cundit1c115
Piani.nr, PePartmenf'S" :. nooserd conditions
PURPOSE: To receive the Pl.annirvz; EoFrds findin,75 on the Special Use Perr7it re7,uest
tf 3och- cduntain revolornent for a , eneral aviation airport.
NU..;u: The Planninr Doard has reviewed the evidence supplied by the applicant in
the subrittal request and held public hearin , July 8 and July 19, 1962.
The findini-s, developed Anos.t 16, 1932, will be orally presented by the
Flcnnin bard Chair at the hosed cf ConrissionerS P,u.7,ust 23, 1932 iiecular
eetinf.',..
The findims vary in several raspcts frm the Planninc repartrIents'
previous [Tath(irinE.,: of inforran. In particular the PlanninE, Board found: ..
1, it is not clear in the racorl what areas are included in the develop-
rant orellosal, particularly the land of Leslie 'Ialton,
2, The plans do not she:: approach-departure zone easerents, or oilier-
ship.
3. M PAP standards are not ret because the applicant does not oun
all the clear zone or any of the apnroach zone.
I. There will be adverse affects on adjacent existing land uses,
particularly land value and aFricultural land use.
5. There was no evidence that the applicant controls sufficent land
for' aperoach zones.
6. 'fie ap,Aicant has not oroviied evidence of adequate fire protection.
7. The".re are inconnatible land uses located within the approach zones.
a. The request will not pro:rete the publc health, safety and c,eneral
welfare. (see P 3 and 16 above).
9. The reouest will not raintain or enhance adiaccnt property values.
(see NI above)
10. The request is not in co:.N.iance with the general clans for the
physical developrent or," the County. (see Land I.'se Flan Coals
2,5, and ( and Li, and VI above)
Baand on these, the P]ann1.n:' Board recors,:ends denial because it finds
the appli :.7t did not nett the conditions for api:roval on set forth in the
,.
'Lonin;': Oriijnance, (7 voting to deny, 1 oi,nose ) .
The Plann']nr- DepartFent recer,:rendation, on the other hand is for
an-;roval subject to conditions ;-s it feels the nnnlieant has substntially
rot the or%jinF-nce reaujonts- Ps to Planni.nE Bands !rinin.Ts, the
Pir,nrin Lena_rtront feels
472.
1, The area under consideration for a Special Use PerLit was
shown on the plans and described in the deeds submitted by
the applicant,
2, plans stir';' the existing and propozed road rights-of-way and
there are no existing, or proposed utility or drainage easements.
Any necessary casements or r,fthts-of-way for' approach zones or-
clear zones con be handled as an imposed condition,
3. 'The applicant can meet all applicable FAA and state requirements;
it any be necessary to slightly modify the site plan to do so.
This can be an imposed condition.
4, The opinion of Wallace Kaufman about property values had valid
points; however, there were not specific numbers given to support
the idea of decreased values. In spite of the existence of Norace
Ai-port land development has continued around that facility.
5. The applicant can provide land sufficient for a clear zone and
thereby assure aircraft operator safety. There is no evidence
that the applicant can own or control the land uses or height
of objects in the approach zones and thereby protect residents
from adverse in-pacts associated with the airport or protect the
airport operations from adverse impacts from adjacent uses.
6. 'lbs Orange Grove Rural Fire Department provided a letter that
stated their ability to provide adequate fire protection
if certain requirements were met. They also made suggestions
for improved services which would enhance their ability to
provide protection,
7. Mere are several residences located in the approach zones for
the airport. 'This number As relatively small and further
residential development should be discouraged. Other compatiWe
land uses generally would not be allowed in the approach zones
because they are not allowed under the present zoning, therefore,
agricultural use of the land may continue,
8. Conditions imposed on the applicant can prevent or allivate
many of the concerns for public health, safety and general
welfare,
9. The Land Use Plan does not specifically address the appropriate
location for an airport, The Zoning Ordinance allows general
aviation airports in the Agricultural-Residential district,
with a Special Use Permit, The General Aviation Airport Need
and Sites Stud indicated that this location was on an above
average site within the County. The Planning Department aciciow-
ledges that there axe other better sites for such a facility if the
County were to construct an airport.
riPACT: Approval of this request would allow the construction of an air-
port.
RECOYE-a1DATION: The Planning Board recor.,Imends denial of the request,
The Planning Department reconmends approval with imposed con-
ditions,
4Th
:. .
,. . . . .,.... . .. . ... . . ..
0.1.-?../.11iG-F, GOUNTY PL,NNIN-LNC.4 DEPARTMENT
ITILLSBOIZ ou Grc
NOV.Tli CA:110IINA.
27276
)
I.TMO
TO: Richard Uhi,tted, Chairman Board of Commissioners
FR( : Orange County Planning Board
SUBJECT: Time limitcuraapplication fora Special Use Permit for Buck
Duntsdn Development.
DATE: 8/29/B2
The Planning Board at their August 16, 1982 meeting passed a recom-
mendation asking the Board of Coymissioners to consider the appropriate-
ness of another apolication for a Special Use Permit by Buck Mountain
Davelopment. This question had been raised at the Planning Board meet-
ing on June 21, 1982 and was again asked by a citizen at the public hear-
ing on July a, 1982.
Special Use Permits may allow commercial uses in residential areas
and they co through substantially the same review process as rezoning
requests, Therefore, the Planning Board feels that Special Uses are
arr2ndrmts to the Zoning Ordinance and came under the requirements of
that article of the Ordinance. If they are considered amendments then
there should be a one year waiting period after denial of an applica-
tion.
The motion was: Toe Planning Board has serious questions about the
legality of a reconsideration of the Special Use Permit request for Buck
Mountain Development at this tine. The Board feels theta one year period
should elapse before reconsideration, Motion by Irvin, second by Kizer.
Vote [linfavor, 2 opposed, 2 abstained '
RC/dg
. .
. .. .
.. ..... . .. . . . . . . _. _ . .
lne 170.1-1.33 a z.oning o‘o
of a Class A Special U1-,e Permit for a cj,,,n.‘ral aviation airport:. i th leftsiC7,
is the standard of cvaluaUion; on the .right is a $p:Ice to ans"-er yes or no:, .If
the answar is yes, list the evidence heard to support that point of view. I-F.2-
the answar is no, list lack of evidence to support the point.
6
474
No Yes EVIDEZZE
i. North point scale and date_ X contained in application
2. Extent. of area to be developed x It. is riot clear in 1:17,e
record what areas are
included in the develof.-
• went proposal, particularl,
the land of Leslie Val ton
(pg. S line 12-14)
(VOTE 6-2)
3. Location widths of all ease- X The plans as suLmitted are
Rents and rights-of-way with- deficient because thay
in or adjacent to the site. Co not showilla approach-
departure zone casen:1t
or rights-of-way.
(WIT 4-1-3)
4. Location of all existing or X contained in application
proposed structures on the
site
5. Location of all areas an X contained in application
the site subject to flood
hazard or inundation as shown
on flood maps or soil's maps,
G. Location of all water courses X contained in application
on the site, including direction
of flow.
7. Existing topography at a contour X contained in application
interval of 5' based on mean level
-- datum
S. Proposed or existing fencing, X contained in application
screening, gates,parking,
service and storage areas.
9. Access to site including X contained in application
site distances on all roads
used for access.
10. Elevations of all structures X contained in application
proposed to be used in the VOEE (4-2-2)
develdpment.
11. Names and addresses of X contained in application
owners and applicants.
12. A fee, as set by the ' X paid by applicant
Orange County Board of
Comdssioners.
The following specific standards shall be used in making findings of fact for
the approval or denial of this class of use,
. .
a) All F.A.A. and State X The Board found theao-
regulations are mat as plicant did not supply
a condition of approval evidence that they all
the area within the clear
zone and did not own or
control any of the area l=
as the approach zone.
• (iuTL 6-2)
b) The site aro. its op ..7ation X Evidence in pages 15:18
will not ad%:::rsely affect of the July S minutes
existing adjacent land uses indicates that there will
be adverse affects on
adjacent propertvtos
I.
4 7 5 44
NO YES EVIDFiv=
10 X Kaufra1 concerning real
estate values, and Slant:
Simpson concerning the aff,,---1
Oil agricultural land
(VOTE 6-1-6)
x
c) ,Land sufficient to provide Applicant has not provided
approach zones and overrun evidence that they cant areas is (.-,,ned. or controlled sufficient land for tha
the er,' approach zones.010TE 6-2)
0) P.dequate land area is X contained in application
provided for all of the (VOTE 5-3)
proposed uses, buildings
and. storage areas.
e) screening of Buildings, X contained Id application
storage and maintenance
areas is provided from
adjacent residential
land.
f) Letters from appropriate X Applicant has not jmet
fire and rescue agencies the reqviterui-nt_ for adequ:
that protective services fire protection as evident:
can be provided at an by testimony of ar.', Tho?..:a.E
adequate level. Gricis on pg. 13-44 July
8,- 1982 minutes, and letter
dated June 24, 1982 by Dr..
Edward Johnson (VOTE 1-1)
g) Access shall be directly X contained in application
onto, a State maintained
road.
h) Compatible land uses are X .Applicant has not r..i:esented
located in the final evidence that cc•v, - ible
approach areas of the land uses are loc;r-J.; :a in
airport, approach zones. Ufhe
testimony of Bruce Matthews
on July 19, 1982 (-1?g-7.
line 32-35) :b ' icates that
homes should excluded
from the a-p .• 11 zone of
an airport. (. 7. 5-2-1)
8.2.4 In addition to the ceneral
Standards stated in 5.2
the following Specific
Standards shall be
addressed by the applicant
before the issuance of
a Special Use Permit:
a) Methcd and adequacy of X The applicant has address -.
provision of sewage dis- the question of sewage an
posal facilities, solid solid waste disposal [747:.
waste, and water. water smplv. There i
concern that storm wax;
runoff will imact adj:
property (see • . 19-1i:
30-33 July 8, ' 32 minute.
(V(TE 8-0)
b) Vethod and ad adequacy of X Applicant has n. t net the
pals , fire and rescue requirement for adequate
squa:', protection, fire protectioll as eyiden;...
by testimony of Dr.. Therrai-
Griggs -zn pg. 13-14 July
1982 mlnutes, and letter
dated June 24 by DL. '7d:c I
_ Johnson. (VGTE (5-2-1)
476 .
NO YES EVIDENCE ...., . t..
c) 1,:ethod and adeciuncy of X contained in aprjliCation
vechicle access to the and testiwcry ' (VOTE 4-3-1)
site and traffic
conditions around
the site
8,2.1b) The Board. shall make
written findings certifying
compliance with the specific
rules governing such individual
Special. Use and that the use,
which is listed as a Special
Use in the district in which
it is proposed to be located,
complies with all required
regulations and standards, in-
cluding the provision of
Article 5 and 6 of this
ordiance, Unless greater or
different regulations are
contained in the individual
standards for the specific
Special Use. It shall be
the xesponsibility of the
applicant to present evidence
in the form of testimony,
exhibits, documents, models,
plans and the like to
support the application
for approval of a Special
Use.
8.2.2 Where the Board finds a pre-
ponderance of evidence to
indicate compliance with
the general standards,
.. . specific rules governing
the specific use and that
the use complies with all
required regulations and
standards, the application
must be approved unless
the Board shall also find,
in some specific manner
that:
a) The use will not promote a) :4 Evidence shows that the
the public health, safety use will not prollote the
and general. welfare, if public health, safety and
located where proposed general welfare, g.pecifical
and developed according in two areas :1) fire pro-
to the plan as suhdtted; tection, and:2) zm and
State regulatici'is (see
specific findings on pages
2(a) and (d) ; 3 (C) ,
. 4 (b) . (VOTE 6-2)
b) The use will not wain- X Evidence shows the use will
tam n or enhance the not maintain or enhance the
value of contiguous value of Contiguous-prepert;
property (unless the specifically see the findinc
.. .
use is a public necessity, on page 2(b) the testimony
in which case the use of Wallace Eaufran andslruld
need not maintain or onhnnce siopsonin the July 8, i932
illevalue or contiguous pro- minutes,
c) The use is not in cowplinnce
with the general. plans for
th physical. development
of the County as enbodied
in these regulations Of in
the Comprehensive Plan, .
or portion thereof,
ri
A No YES EVIDENCE
t>;.:■ c) adoptnd by the Board of X Evidence shows the use is
County Commissioners. not in compliance with the
general plans for the dev,,,lop
ment of the County, specifi-
cally the adopted goals o7
Land Use Plan (Coals 2,5
the adverse impace the
vent could have on the
tuna land uses in the ar,.
(see page 2 (b)).,and that
compatible land uses in the,
approach zones for airports
not compatihle with the
zoning around the proposed,
airport. (see page 3 (h)) .
il,,C01,',L1ENDATICN - The Planning Board. recomaends denial of this Flpecial. Use Fermit
because the applican.- failed to meet the conditions for the permit required by the
Zoning Ordinance as evidenced by these findings. (VOTB 1-1)
The Planning Board understands that the board of Curnissioners may approve
the request :Hr the Special Use permit. If the permit is grante ,the folac:,•ring
conditioni: should be iimpasedon. the developer:
1- That there be no based jet aircraft permitted.
2. That the applicant own or control the area known as the clear zone. The
clear zone starts 200 from. the end of the runway and rises at a 20:1
slope to a height of 1001. The length of the clear zone.sball be 200b .. --
3, That there be no commercial uses associated with the airport faiclitv
such as restaurants,motels, or shops. The sale of fuel for aircraft,
maintenance service and flight training classes shall be permitted.
4. That the number of based aircraft be limited to 200 bangared or tied-
, down planes.
5. That all of the requirements and suggestions from the Orange Grove Rural
Fire Deparbrent he met, including the construction of a fire access
road to the property from Tear Road.
6. That the construction schedule outlined. on page 4 of the July 2, 1932
minutes be adhered to by the applicants,
7. That a bond convering the cost of construction of all public improvements
and the runway, fire ponds and fire fighting equipment, plus ln be
approved by and supplied to Orange County.
8. That flight training operations not exceed. 501 of the total operatians
for the facility.
9. That any Planning Staff recommendations consistent with these conditions
be incorporated.
4.7E
The Planning Staff finds that are is a perp-Dndere.nce of eVidence.to
indicate sUbstantial compliance with the General Standards and specific'
rules governing the request by Buck Yountain Development Co. for a Class
A Special Use Permit under Srotion 8.8.0 of the Orange County Zoning Ord-
inance. The Planning Staff recomv-unds approval of the Special Use Permit
with the folldwing imposed conditions:
1, That the final site plan and narrative of the project
incorporating all changes, deletions and additions
through the final approval of the project are in
corporated herein and made a part of the Special Use
Permit. That'a copy of the final site plan and narrative
be on file with the Orange County Planning Departnent. All
improvements as indicated on the site plan or stated in the
narrative shall be constructed according to the construction
schedule, set up on the final site plan.
2. That the grantee of this Special Use Permit shall, post with
Orange County, in a form acceprPhie to the County Attorney,
a band or letter of credit in an amount equal to the cost
of all public iscip=rve;. ots plus 10%. The amount shall be
determined on the basis of fully executed construction contracts
or certification by a registered engineer employed by the
grantee of this Special Use Permit. Security for construction
of the improvements in this project may follow the phasing in
the project. Specifically, as improvements are cu,tleted in
each phase, that phase and a corresponding am-aunt of money may
be released from the security instronents or the security ins-
truments may be renegotiated based on the unconstructed portion
of the improvements,
3... That security shall be provided for the grading, clearing,
paving and stabilization of all areas in public streets and
the erection of street signs.
4. That all necessary easements to permit utility (electricity,
telephone, sewer and water) installation, servicing and hookups
to the development shall be provided at no cost to the utility
provider,
5. All plans for drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation control
shall he reviewed and approved bv Orange County. In addition,
Orange County shall inspect the installation of control devices and
the on going work for the total project. The project shall at
all tires meet the requirements of the Orange C runty Soil Erosion
and Sedimentation Control Ordinance.
6. That dense evergreen screening be provider] for any buildings that
are not at least 500 from the property line. This screen material
shall b-. of suilficient size to provide a 6' hedge within 3 years of
plantiv, . Also acceptable as a screening material is a 6' birm
or solid wood fence.
13
. . _
47c
7, 'Coat the developers provide a 24 hour/day vehicle will be provided for
security, fire fighting and mainUplance purposes. This vehicle will
he outfitted with master keys, rallo system, turnout gear, portable
fire extingushur, fire fighting foam, and airpack..
0, 'i.hat any lighting of the runway or other parts of the airport nec-
essary for safety or coenience shall be of a design and so
located. and screened so as not to create a nuisance on adjoining
proy.erties.
9. That if an owners association is to be formed and be responsible for
any of the approted pub]ic improvements, all such documents and
orgainzational material be approved by the Orange County Attorney. -
10. That the developer build a 20' wide hard surface access road along
the southern property line westward to service the "T" hangars on
the west side of the runway.
11. That there be no based jet aircraft at the facility and that the
Airport /Facility Director pUblished by the U.S. Dent. of Comrrerce
(11.0.S.) shall specify that the project is not intended for jet aircraft.
12. That the developers own or have control over the height of objects in
an area at each end of the ruaaay whi61 is know as the approach - de-
parture zone. The dimensions of this 'zone are shown in the diagram
below. If the developers do not u.;:i this area, the easements rights
th":,, negotiate with each property owner must specify that the developer
can control the height of objects within the approach - departure zone.
The County Attorney shall approve the form and content of any easement
4/11/78 AL 150/5300-4B'CliG
Appendix 6
APPENDIX 6. RUNWAY CLEAR ZONE. DIMENSIONS
1
C)
I I
rA.17!.4:
RPM,An nul G7,7,2?. Y-Til
ArDrc,,-h lb
B7way
Cla,r
Th,nw;lv 1
•
1.1
•
. - : ` �
oRANGEmUNUY
nouennzccuaooyzonEnn Action agenda
ACTION AGENDA zTr» ABSTRACT Iusnmz' D-5
PETTING DrrEAnYust 23, lqyy
nruj*uL: Hater Resources Task Force Report
��jn�� yes Planning Public or
/ /-------- ~~—`— ^--- '
��taczn�ot(s) ' (a) list of Kcpnyt In�oc�a�i on Contact: Rick Connity
rucm.a2odations and Plamniv\i Board
action ux them,
Phone Number: 732-8181_ t.
PooPOsE To review and consider acting on the recommendations contained in the Hater
Resources Task Force Report.
The Board received the Report of the Orange County Hata Resources Task Force
NEED: in June 1981 . before referring it to the Planning DoarJ for its review and
recommendation, he PlnnninS Board in turn sought comments on the Report
from the Township Advisory Council. In February 1982 the Board received
the recommendation of the Planning Board and held a work session (Hay,1982)'
Following public hearing, the Planning Board reaffirmed its generally favorable
reconmendatiun.
Three of the seventeen recommendations contained in the Report have been
adopted through approving the Land Use Plan (September, 198l) and by approving
- 'zoning�^` amendments which require stream buffers and maximum ispsrvio"s Surface
/~`'~'' The recommendation to request Jordan water has also bee &1ed upon,
What remains is adoption of the Report and and acting on any or . of the
remaining fourteen recommendations.
IMPACT: AdoptiOn Will result in additional inspection wm/ both for the Planning
Department and the Health Department to implement certain of the recommen-
dations. Effort is now being made to quantify the amount.
P[COMMERDATl0M(3):
The Planning Board, at its June 21 , 1982 meeting reaffirmed its earlier
recommendation for approval with changes (see attachment) by a vote of
four in favor, one opposed and five abstentions.
-14gaa
3
PLANNING ACTION ON WAIER TASK FORCE
RECOMMENDATION
1. Orange County should adopt a policy which,calls to minimizing_Sptnt
outflows of water from one mair basin to another-
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer motioned that the Board of Commissioners adopt recoam:endaion
number one of the Water Task Force. Wilson seconded . Notion carried
with one abstention by Ms, Gordon.
2. Orange County should allocate the water it has rights over in Lake
()Tanga to the Town of Hillsborough, the Orange-Alamance Water Systems
incorporated, and the in-stream flow needs of the Eno River.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer motioned approval of the second recommendation of the Water
Task Force. Cleary seconded, Notion carried with four in favor,
three against, Bacon and Laszlo abstained.
3. Orange County should develop policies requiring water conservation in
both the receiving and withdrawal basins where interbasin transfers pf
water are required to meet emergency situations.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer motioned approval of the recommendation. Laszlo seconded, Approved
unanimously,
4. The Task Force Report has identified five prime reservoir sites in thr,
County. Local water suppliers should identify which of these sites
they would like preserved for future use. The County and water suppliers
should work together to implement means of protecting and preservinh.
these sites for future use,
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer motion that recommendation number four be accepted but that in
addition sites seventeen and eighteen shown on the watershed ma and
discussed in the report on pages 26-30 be included as protected sites.
These sites are on the north and south forks of the Little River, Irvin
seconded. Ayes: Kizer, Gordon, Cleary, Harris, Wilson, Laszlo, Irvin.
Noes: None, Abstentions: Lunsford.
5, Orange County should investigate the feasibility of a regional solution
EFTET-17uture water needs. As part of that effort, Orange County should
reserve a portion of the water allocation from Jordan Lake as a long
term option for water supply.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Irvin moved approval of this recommendation, Kizer seconded, Carried
unanimously.
6. Orange County should promote efforts Co conserve water.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer moved approval of the recommendation. Laszlo seconded. Carried
unanimously .
7. Orange County should adopt a Land Use Plan which identifies protected
water supply watersheds. These protected areas should be University
Lake watershed, the Upper Eno watershed whi7Eil drains to Lake Ben
"J-61-1F-ToliT-T!TIU-1.171e watershed •-:1Dosed Cane Creek Reservoir,
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
The Land Use Plan, adopted the Board of Commissioners identifies
th -ee protected watersheds. No further action is needed by the Plan-
ning Board.
4182
8. Oranv. County should adopt a Land Use Plan nnd associated regulations
which preserve and enhance water quality in_protected watersheds.
Certain point sources of pollution ine!eding sewage treatment plants,
• land fills, hazardous waste generators storr„;.2e_ 2 tics or disposal
sites, and major newhighways should beprohibited from these watersheds.
Urban development including medium-and high-density residential commercial
and industrial uses should be prohibited from University Lake and Cam:
Creek watersheds. Medium- and high-density residcncial housinu_ and
commercial and industrial development in the lipur Eno wateThscd skould
be directed to the McGowan Creek sub-basin. Strict water-quality related
standards should be imposed on development in the McGowan Creek water-
shed. Development should not be promoted in the Seven Mile Creek sub-
basin and any industry which does propose to locate in that watershed
should be able to show that it will not have any impact on water qualits:
If development intensifies in the McGowan Creek sub-basin the water
quality in Lake Den Johnson and Corporation Lake should he monitored
Any decrease in water quality which does occur may necesitrite either
moving the intake pipes of the Orange-Alamance water syst.. Is and the
Town of Hillsborough upstream of the confluence of McGowan Creek and
the Eno River or an earlier development of Seven Mile Creek reservoir
than might be necessary based on water demand alone.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer motioned that the recommendation be approved with the addition of
the watershed areas fro reservoir sites 17 and 18 which were added in
an earlier motion. Irvin scuended. Ayes: Kizer, Cordon, Cleary, Bacon,
Wilson, Irvin, Noes: None.
9, The Towns of Carrboro and Hillsborough and Chatham and Alamence Counces,
should incorporate the findings and recommendations of this report
their Land Use Plans and Development Regulations.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
•
Gordon motioned to accept the recommendation with a change in the
wording from "should incorporate" to "should be encouraged to
incorporate". Irvin seconded. Ayes: Kizer, Gordon, Harris, Wilson,
Las?lo. Noes: Cleary, Lunsford• Abstention: Bacon.
483
10- The Orange Water and Sewer Authority should adopt a policy which
states that it will not extend sewer and water lines into the
University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds except in emergency
situatione. The Town of Hillsborough, the Tewn of Mebane and
Orange-Alamo:Ice water systems should adopt policies that state
that they will only exteriii sewer and water lines into the Mc-
Gowan Creek sub-basin of the Upper Eno watershed in accordance with
the Land Use Plan of Orange County except in emergency situations
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Cleary motioned approval of the recommendation with a change in the
language from "should adopt" to "should be encouraged to adopt",
Irvin seconded, Ayes: Kizer, Cordon, Cleary, Harris, Wilson,
Laszlo, Irvin, Noes: None.. Abstentions: Lunsford .
11. Orange County should extend coverage of its Zoning Ordinance to •
include the proposed protected water supply watershed areas in
Bingham, Hillsborough, Cheeks and Cedar Grove Townships.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Wilson moved adoption of the recommendation as written in the
Report, Laszlo seconded, Ayes: Kizer, Gordon, Bacon, Harris,
Wilson, Laszlo, Irvin, Noes: Cleary. Abstention: Lunsford,
12. Orange County should implement the following zoning districts and
associated performance standards in protected watersheds: a minimum
2 acre residential lot size coupled with seormwater management re-
quirements which will insure that the quality and quantity of run-
off from a site approximates the predevelopment conditions. A minimtt
5 acre resdiential lot size without requiring stormweter managament
measures. For non-residentiel developments the ratio of impervious
surface to gross land area should not exceed 0.25.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Gordon moved approval of the recommendation, Harris seconded,
Motion passed with Lunsford and Shnaklin opposed..
13. Orange County should require stream buffers along perennial streams
in water supply watersheds and stipulate land uses for these buffer
areas appropriate to their intended function. The Task Force recommends
that the width of stream buffer along any length of stream be 50 feet
plus 4 times the percent slope. The stream buffer should be measured
from the edge of the flood plain. The technical review committee es-
tablished in the County Zoning Ordinance should review the buffer re-
quirements for all proposed non-residential developments and require
additional buffer areas where necessary. The,Task Force recommends that
stream buffer areas remain in natural vegetation.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer moved approval of the recommendation. Gordon seconded. The motion •,
passed, opposed Lunsford and Shanklin.
NOTE: In considering language for the Zoning Ordinance amendments, the •
•
Planning Board modified the wording of the above recommendation.
484
14. Orange County should adopt the following recommendations regarding
on-site waste water disposal. sysl'ems: All newly platted lots bordering
on perennial streams and requiring an on-site waste water diMposal
system should show a second disposal area to be rocorded as no ease-
ment on the final plat and no building or other activity should occur
on this portion uf the parcel of land which would prevent its future
use for on-site waste dispusal. Orange. County should investigate ---
developing an on-site waste water disposal system monitoring, snd
maintenance program for the three water supply watersheds in the
county.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Gordon motioned approval of the recommendation. Irvin seconded,
Motion passed with Lunsford, Irvin, Gordon, Cleary, Harris,
Crawford, in favor; Kizer and Shanklin opposed,
15. Orange County should adopt stormwater management Measures that would
apply to protected watersheds
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Cleary moved approval of the recommendation. Irvin seconded. Notion
passed unanimously.
16, Orange County should adopt the two following recommendations regard-
ing sedimentation and erosion: the County should continue to administer
a strong local sedimentation and erosion control program. The County:
should sponsor in conjunction with OWASA a resource conservetion_ and
development project in Cane Creek and University Lake watersheds,
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Kizer moved approval of the recommendation as revised:
Orange County should adopt the two following
recommendations regarding sedimentation and
erosion: the County should continue to administer
a strong local sedimentation and erosion control
program, The County should sponsor in conjunction
and development projector Cane Creek, University
Lake, Upper Eno, North Fork Little River and
South Fork Little River watersheds., Motion
passed with Shanklin opposed.
17 , Orange County should develop a plan of action for dealing with
spills of hazardous materials in water supply watersheds.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
Gordon moved approval of the recommendation. Irvin seconded.,
Motion passed unanimously
•
/sw
•
;0%, � OnnNcE conox
��^ oaoao or oz*uSszmM Action Agena
ACTION AGENDA zoF ABSTRACT Item No. D-6
a
KurroN3 DATE puyEst^ 23.—]9az_''
»ub/c/t.: Question of Zoning Ordinance Extension to Cheeks Township
- PlonoingL' --- | Public Hoaziu8: ~~'~^-yes2�—!no]J
Information 000t7-7.rt; Nck Cannity
None
Phone 1loursez: 732-810 ext. 347
PURPOSE: To consider adding Cheeks Township under the jurisdiction of the
Zoning Ordinance.
NEED: Commissioners The Board nf Commissioners Commissioners approved zoning of Chapel Hill Township in
1967, Eno in 1970 and Hillsborough and Bingham in 1981' Extension of
zoning to Cheeks Township was delayed to this point to allow more time
for considering watershed protection measures.
A Public Hearing concerning extension to Cheeks Township was held
October 6, 1981. Some of the recommendations of the Hater Task Force
Report have` already been adopted and others will be discussed at this
meeting.
'Previous Planning Board recommendations were to delay application of
zoning to Cheeks Township. These recommendations were made on
December 30, 1980 and October 19, lgDl.
Zoning is a means of property protection either within or outside of
a woteohed It enables growth to take place in those areas that are
best suited to handle it. Moreover, it permits a blending of new land
uses with those already in existence,
Cheeks Township contains watersheds whiCh are the sources of drinkable
water supply. Zoning would provide an adetional means. nf protection
for these watersheds.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
As the Board decides.