Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 08-03-1992
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REGULAR NESTING NOTE: BACKGROUND MATERIAL MONDAY, AUGUST 3, 1992 ON ALL ABSTRACTS 7 :30 P.M. - - AVAILABLE IN THE OLD COUNTY COURTHOUSE CLERK'S OFFICE. HILLSBOROUGH, NC NOTICE TO PEOPLE WITH IMPAIRED HEARING: Audio amplification equipment is available on request. If you need this assistance, please call the County Clerk's Office at 732 -8181 or 968 -4501. I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. Matters on the Printed Agenda (We would appreciate you signing the pad ahead of time so that you are not overlooked.) B. Matters not on the Printed Agenda PUBLIC CHARGE The Board of Commissioners pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION- CONSENT AGENDA (Any item may be removed for separate consideration) A. 1991 -92 Annual Tax Settlement B. Personnel Ordinance Revision -- Temporary Appointments C. Sewer Easement Agreement with Hillsborough D. Proposed Subdivision Regulations Text Amendment Section V- D -6 -b -- Certificates of Dedication and Maintenance E. Bellechene East -- Preliminary Plan F. Voluntary Agricultural District Designation- - Walters Farm G. Voluntary Agricultural District Designation- - Crutchfield Property H. Identification Sign -- Voluntary Agricultural District IV. SOLIITIONS PROCLAMATIONS A. - Access to Potential Landfill Sites V. S ECIAL PRESENTATIONS VI. PII LIC HEARINGS A. PD -1 -92 Carolina Friends School (Decision Required) VII. RL RTS A. Orange County Solid Waste Committee Recommendations B. County Inter - office Waste Reduction C. Jail Inspection Report VIII• ITELIS FOR DECISION-- REGOLAR AGENDA A. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment- - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedures B. Introduction of Bond Order and Sworn Statement of Debt C. Advertisement -- August 24, 1992 Quarterly Public Hearing D. Z- 2 -92 - -P and S Sporting Goods, Inc. - Zoning Atlas Amendment E. Featherwood Phase. II--- Preliminary Plan I8. ROM COMMENTS S. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT XI. APPO NTMENTS %II. SIII. AXECRTIVE SESSION BIV. AW99RNMENT ( *) Indicates items that need immediate attention. I ,,w- 1 APPROVED 10/5/92 - MINUTES r. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 3, 1992 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on :August 3, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the Courtroom of the Old County Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Moses .Carey, Jr., and Commissioners Stephen H. Halkiotis, Alice M. Gordon, Verla C. Insko and Don Willhoit. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Albert.Kittxell and Rod Visser, Clerk -to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Personnel Director Elaine Holmes, Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass, County Engineer Paul Thames, and Solid waste Coordinator Beth Wickham. NOTE: ALL ITEMS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE PRINTED AGENDA - NONE II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair Moses Carey announced that those citizens who want to speak to an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. B. MATTERS NOT-ON THE PRINTED AGENDA -- NONE PUBLIC CHARGE Moses Carey, Jr. read the Public Charge. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve those items on the Consent Agenda except item "B" as listed below: A. 1991 -92 ANNUAL TAX SETTLEMENT (pages of these minutes) The Board accepted the tax settlement as listed below: Total taxes collected for Orange County $ 36,634,411.03 Total taxes collected for Chapel Hill 10,840,902.19 Total taxes collected for Carrboro 2,528,105.83 Total taxes collected for Hillsborough 730,012.16 Other Revenue 324,387.07 B. PERSONNEL ORDINANCE REVISION - TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS This item was removed and considered at the end of the Consent Agenda. 2 C. SEWER EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH HILLSBOROU GH To alleviate the problem of surface discharge of stormwater and sewerage spraying out of the manhole located on the west side of'St-illhouse Creek directly behind the Tax and Records Building, the Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the easement agreement which will allow for the construction of .a new sewer line from the overflowing manhole to its Eno River interceptor -line which lies approximately 150 yards to the south on the north side of the Eno River. The route for the new sewer line is proposed to move southwest from the existing manhole, cross Stillhouse Creek, turn south along and parallel to the west (rear) property line. of the Orange Family Medical Center and extend straight on to the existing interceptor line. D. PROPOSED SUODIXISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT SECTION V- D -6--b CERTIFICATES OF DEDICATION AND MAINTENANCE The Board approved the text amendment to the Subdivision Regulations as stated below: V- -D -6 -b Certificates of Dedication and Maintenance (1) The following certification shall be printed on the Final Plat and shall be followed by the signature of the owner(s) of the property being subdivided acknowledged by a notary public: "The undersigned hereby certifies that the land shown hereon is owned by the undersigned and is located within the subdivision regulation jurisdiction of Orange County and hereby freely dedicates all rights -of -way, easements, streets, recreation area, open space, common area,. utilities and other improvements to public or private common use as noted on this plat, and further assumes full responsibility for the maintenance and control of said improvements until they are accepted for maintenance and control by an appropriate public body or by an incorporated neighborhood or homeowners association or similar legal entity." Owner: Date: E. BELLECHENE EAST - PRELIMINARY PLAN The Board approved the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East Subdivision. The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east side of Eno Cemetary Road. The property is not zoned, however, the tract is designated Agricultural Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Comprehensive Plan. It drains into Lake Orange. Thirty new lots are proposed with an average lot size of 1.04 acres. Three phases are proposed with Phase I containing four (4) lots, Phase II containing eight (8) lots and Phase III containing eighteen (18) lots. F. VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATIO - WALTERS FARM The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the conservation agreement, after review by the County Attorney and the Land Records Manager to assure that the description of the property in Exhibit A. -is proper, which designates the property of Victor Carl - Walters, Sr., Lucille Walters, Victor Carl, Walters, Jr., and Elizabeth T. Walters as a voluntary agricultural district. G. .VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION- CRUTCHFIELD PROPERTY The Board apgtoved-and- authorized the Chair to sign the conservation agreement, after review and approval -by the .County Attorney and the Land - Records Manager to assure that the property owners and /or representatives, and the -d- ascription of the property in Exhibit A are - proper, which designates the property of Crutchfield Heirs as a voluntary agricultural district. H. IDENTIFICATION SIGN - VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT The Board approved the design for an identification sign announcing the location of a voluntary agricultural district. VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEM REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA B. PERSONNEL ORDINANCE REVISION amendment has been placed in the Personnel Ordinance cceRloatedlNn theS(This Clerk's Office) . Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to approve the draft revisions to Article 11, Section 5.2 and Article I, Section 4.37 as they relate to temporary positions. The temporary employment category will continue to exist and there will continue to be temporary employees. Temporary appointments will not continue beyond one year except as specified in the policy. The use of temporary employees on a continuing basis beyond one year to work 20 hours or more each workweek Will end. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IV. RESOLUTIONS PROCLAMATIONS A. ACCESS TO POTENTIAL LANDFILL SITES County Manager John Link presented for the Board's consideration of approval a resolution and interlocal agreement between Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill that authorize the Town of Chapel Hill to act on behalf of the jurisdictions comprising the Landfill Owners' Group in exercising the statutory authority granted to each jurisdiction to conduct testing of potential sites for a sanitary landfill. The Landfill Site Search Committee (LSSC) has identified four potential landfill sites that will require subsurface testing for further evaluation of the suitability of each site. The results of this testing would permit development of preliminary engineering plans and cost estimates. These would allow the LSSC to compare alternative sites along the lines of social implications, capital and operating costs, and environmental effects. The County has authority under GS 40A -11 to enter upon lands specified for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient in 4 selecting a site for -a future landfill. Property owners can receive compensation for damages that occur as a result of required testing,. At the May 19, 1992- Board' -of County Commissioners meeting, the Board deferred'a decision on exercising that statutory authority pending a detailed report on the landfill site search process. The staff of the Landfill Owners' Group and Joyce Engineering presented that report to the Board of Commissioners at its most recent meeting on June 29, 1992. The resolution authorizes the County Manager to sign the interlocal agreement as presented in the agenda allowing the Town of Chapel Hill to carry out this activity-on behalf of all three jurisdictions. John Link stated that he has requested that the Health Department staff be on location at the time the boring holes are filled to affirm that they are filled appropriately so that there will. not be any damage to the property at a Future date. 'The test pits would require a 25 foot setback from the leach -lines for future development. CITIZEN COMMENTS Vic Knight expressed concern about what the testing may do to the Fox Hill Farm. He distributed additional information to the Board members. He explained that he is trying to determine the impact on what they may want to do with the development of Fox Hill Farm. He referred to a letter from Bob Cheek, head of the groundwater section for NCDEM, which outlined the necessary process for anyone going on site to do any exploration for a future landfill. The test borings fit the definition of a well. He referred to a letter dated July 7 to Gayle Wilson from Mark Taylor of Joyce Engineering which indicated that they had contacted the Orange County Environmental Health Department about the setback requirement and the potential effect and site disturbance on the future septic systems. This letter indicated that setback requirements apply only to water wells and not to monitoring wells and definitely not to soil test borings. This was confirmed with Bob Cheek. Vic Knight noted that he has had conversations with Tony Laws and Bob Cheek who both stated that the setback requirements do apply if the engineers don't abandon it and abandon it properly. Knight's concern is that these people will go on the site, do some intrusive activity that will permanently affect the site which will remain even if the site is not chosen. No where does it say that these borings will be abandoned properly. John Link noted that the governing jurisdictions can instruct the Environmental Health staff to confirm when each soil. boring has been abandoned appropriately. They will be at every single boring and also when they fill the hole to be sure it is done correctly. Mark Taylor stated in the letter that "with the test site density proposed, roughly one test site per 100 acres, Tony Laws saw no reason not to proceed with the planned activities. In fact, he was quite comfortable with Joyce's plans for backfilling and site restoration." Vic Knight stated that neither Tony Laws or Bob Cheek have ever talked with Joyce Engineering. He feels this is deceptive. Knight continued stating that the current state regulations strictly applied do require that bore holes be grated or abandoned by some other means through variance. According to the state regulations, there is no such thing as a variance as to whether they abandon it or not. The proposed rules referred to on the second page of this memo to Gayle Wilson are only proposed and have not been submitted to DEM for their review. He feels it disturbing to make statements that are not substantiated. They talk 5 in terms of three intrusive activities that take place on the site. First is clearing trees, second is drilling holes and the third is digging test borings. Most of site 11 is heavily wooded. He feels there will be a lot of permanent damage.. He asked that the Board take into consideration the problems he will have to deal with later on.when the testing is finished. Vic Knight - clarified fore Commissioner Halkiotis that if anyone called Tony Laws, the- person never identified himself as- being from Joyce Engineering and having any interest in trying to get answers -.to landfill issues. Also, Bob Cheek stated he has not spoken to anyone in Orange County concerning landfill issues in over two months. John Link stated that Tony Laws met with Joyce Engineering on July 30. The letter indicated they had met on July 7. Rod Visser .noted that they met with Joyce- Engineering specifically because of the letter and -other questions they had._. Commissioner Halkiotis stated for the record that it hurts the credibility of Joyce Engineering if in fact a letter -was written with false information. Reggie Gillespie referred to information they have previously provided to the Board about the landfill. He is against the geotechnical work that is proposed. He suggests that the appropriate approach is to identify the best site that has the likelihood of being selected as the landfill and only be intrusive on that site. He understands it is necessary to get technical and scientific information but feels there are other ways to get this information that will not subject the landowners of the four sites to the intrusive and invasive geotechnical investigation that Joyce Engineering has proposed. He referred to a letter dated August 3, 1992 to him from Aquaterra. The letter explained the prospecting geophysical method from which useful information can be used to select appropriate sites for further investigation. One procedure is the magnetic prospecting method. He summarized the four key advantages of using this method with the most important being that it is not invasive -- the site will not be disturbed as far as cutting trees, clearing land, cutting roads or drilling the land. The cost is significantly cheaper than other methods. Another approach is the electrical resistivity soundings which can identify the vertical extent of a site being evaluated for a possible landfill. Another way to identify the vertical extent of a site is seismic refraction technique. This technique uses information gathered of the arrival times of seismic compressional waves to determine depths and competency of definite geologic units. The last technique is the electromagnetic method where a remote transmitter is used as an energy source with frequencies varying between 15 to 30 kilohertz. In conclusion, he feels that the geophysical methods can be a successful screening tool as part of a landfill siting study. The non -- invasive approach with low cost and ease of implementation can be very useful to screen a number of prospective sites to a more manageable number for more detailed evaluation. He urged the Commissioners to not approve a technique that will be invasive. Scott Franklin spoke in support of drilling four sites - not necessarily these four sites but four legitimate sites. He asked that they review the sites again. It is not enough to make a decision by using topographic maps. He is also concerned about the landowners who serve on the Site Selection Committee and their conflict of interest. 6 Dan Zipple referred to the November meeting. of the Site Search Committee and noted that there was a long di.0cussion of seismic refraction as an alternative to drilling on maybe eight or nine sites instead of 4 sites. There is a geologist on the committee and a decision was made that seismic refraction would not provide enough information to justify the extraordinary cost -of pursing this on even four sites. With this method, the type of soil on top of the bedrock will not be determined. At best, this method would reduce the..number from:four sites to three. The most they could . gain with seismic refraction is that all these sites are equally good. They would still rreed to drill to find out what kind of soil is there. He encouraged the Board to give an endorsement to the citizens' committee to go ahead and do the drilling and whatever testing is necessary to select the site. He noted that it takes a lot of courage for elected officials to proceed with the testing that'is.necessary. Mark Marcoplos questioned why the County is- trying to site -a large landfill. In answer to a question from Commissioner Insko, Marcoplos indicated that he has heard conflicting descriptions of the size of the site. One was 300 to 500 acres needed for a period of 20 to 40 years. He feels that the question of how large a landfill site is needed based on waste reduction projections and the current rate of consumption and the 40% reduction as required by state law by the year 2001 have not been brought together. His point is that the County can do with a 250 acre landfill and it would save a lot of pain and expense. His impression is that the entire size of the lots under consideration will be made into a landfill. Commissioner Insko noted that it seems that what they want is a site that is about 300 acres and if they explore in a 1200 acre site, they have a better chance of finding a 300 acre site somewhere within that acreage rather than just picking 300 acres. She feels there is an assumption that just because the County is testing a 1200 acre site that the County will site a landfill that large. She understands they are looking for 300 acres which would be buffered and last approximately 30 to 40 years depending on the amount of recycling that takes place. Commissioner Willhoit noted that 200 acres was purchased in the early 701s. If they were using it at two acres a year, this 200 acres ought to last for 100 years. In the near future, they will be moving south of Eubanks Road where there is 70 acres. This is currently projected to last until the year 2000. In siting a landfill, consideration must be given to buffers and land within the fill area that may not be usable because of streams, rocks, outcropping, etc. The site selection criteria called for looking for a site from 300 to 500 acres which would provide a life expectancy of 20 to 25 years. but that was with no assumptions for volume reduction. The site should last much longer because the County expects to achieve significant volume reduction. He feels it is necessary to find the largest landfill that is consistent with the sites that are available. The acreage listed for each of the four sites is the total acreage of the parcels that are touched by the ameba and not the size of the potentially usable Area. He would like to see the engineers reduce that figure to the area that is most likely to come out of the search rather than use the total r acr h ge. One reason for stating the total acreage is because one app to acquisition of land would be to purchase the entire tracts that are affected instead of negotiating for just the portion that is needed. 7 Commissioner Halkiotis stated that he has some serious concerns with respect to_ the- letter from Mark Taylor to Gayle Wilson dated July 7, 1992 and the implications that-are not true. He feels that if the County can save money and go the less intrusive -route that it should be considered. He stated that the County needs mandatory recycling. The County Commissioners have a responsibility to the rural citizens on the issue of the landfill and recycling. He strongly supports a composting operation. He will fight to protect peoples property so that it is not damaged but will not be responsible and pay for any damage -done to private property. He is against drilling on people's land. Commissioner Willhoit agrees with a composting operation. He is also - concerned about the inconsistencies in the letter and would like to have this cleared up. His understanding of the difference between the test pits and the test borings is that if the borings are grouted correctly, it would not present a-permanent impediment to the development of the land, whereas the test pits and the required setbacks by the -state health regulations are less certain. He suggested that they nut authorize the test pits until that can--be,- verified. He suggested that the Board meet with the Landfill Site Search Committee because in this entire process there must be a transfer of ownership from the Landfill Site Search Committee to the consultants to the Board. -He feels that a lot of the questions have been discussed and the Board members can get a lot of their questions answered at such a meeting. One question is why was site 10 taken off and site 11 left on when they have similar characteristics. Another question is whether the committee process Possibly overlooked a site. Chair Carey expressed his concern about the information in the letter that appears to be untrue. His biggest concern is with the impact of the testing and the excavation on the property. He doesn't feel that they have enough information to select just one site for testing as suggested by someone in the audience. He supports a less- intrusive way of testing before using the more intrusive testing that must be done. He would like to be able to exclude some sites before doing more intrusive type testing but he needs more information. Commissioner Insko stated she favors doing less invasive type testing if possible. This may not lead to the elimination of any of the sites but it may. She feels that the Board should take every step possible to get additional information in an effort to eliminate one or more sites. Commissioner Gordon still questions if these are the proper sites to test. She has questions about the process and understanding the criteria used. She questioned the location and the size. Also, she questions if these are the proper testing procedures and, if not, which procedures should they use. She asked if there is adequate protection for the landowners and should there be compensation for damage. She favors a work session of the Commissioners. She feels it is complicated enough to ask the staff to develop a recommended process for the Commissioners, input in deciding whether it would be helpful to have the Landfill Site Search Committee involved. Commissioner Insko favors a work session with the Landfill Site Search Committee. She would like additional information on how they selected the four sites as well as other information. She would like to have the difference between site 10 and site 11 explained to her. She does not want to take the process away from the Landfill Site Search Committee. There does a need to be a process where the ownership is transferred but this committee has done a lot of work and invested a lot of time in the process. She feels strongly that site 9 is not feasible. She questions how trucks would reach site 9 without going down Churton Street. It would be difficult to put trucks on little country roads to go around Hillsborough and would increase the amount of drive time.which is not reasonabre. Site 11 has some of these same problems. Chair Carey feels it very important to have these questions answered. There seems to be a consensus that the less invasive type testing is preferable at this point. It was decided -that a meeting with the Landfill Site Search Committee would be held before the testing-would proceed. The LOG will be invited to participate as well t as t meetingtederefwilllbe Of a Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. At review of the technology of testing, information about - -the sites that were chosen and those that were not, and the criteria for-the size of the lots. John Link suggested that the work session be arranged so that the other elected bodies are invited to attend as well as the LOG, and the LSSC. He feels that they should articulate the questions they have that relate to 'ownership and concerns they have so that the other governing bodies will know that the Board of Commissioners has thoughtfully pursued the questions and still has other outstanding questions that need to be resolved. He understands the questions to be (1) the process itself, (2) the techniques being recommended as they pursue the final site, (3) the Taylor - Wilson letter and what was intended, (4) compensation for landowners, and (5) realistic size of landfill site. V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS -- NONE VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PD -I -92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL Planner Emily Cameron stated that this item is to consider a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which is an existing private school. A public hearing was held on May 26. No citizen comments were received. The hearing was held open to receive the Planning Board recommendation which is included in the findings in the agenda abstract. If positive findings are made, the administration recommends approval with the added conditions to the Special.Use Permit. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to make positive findings on pages eight through eighteen as included in the agenda abstract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to make positive findings on the three items as listed on page nineteen of the agenda abstract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Insko and seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School subject to the additional conditions listed below which will be placed on the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. 9 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Resource Center, submit final- grading /erosion control plans and storm drainage calculations for review and approval by Orange County Erosion Control; 2. Revise the site plan to: a. Remove parallel parking along the east side of the driveway between the basketball court and the creek. All proposed parking must be at least 75 feet from the lot boundaries; b. Indicate clearing limits and tree protection fencing for the expansion of the Upper School access, parking and the Resource Center. Provide a detail of the - method --of tree protection and _add a note which states that no storage of construction materials or vehicles is to occur beyond the clearing limits; and c. Show the boundaries of lot 7.6..2. VOTE: UNANIMOUS VII. REPORTS A. ORANGE COIINTY SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS John Link noted that in January, 1992, the Board of Commissioners established the Orange County Solid Waste Committee with a specific charge as outlined in the agenda abstract. Rod Visser recognized the committee members present. He stated that this committee formed four sub - committees. The Collection Options sub- committee has been discussing alternatives for solid waste collection. their report they presented three recommendations: In I. To develop the Ferguson Road Solid Waste Collection Center as a staffed site, using the compactor collection center model. 2. To work cooperatively with the community to identify two additional solid waste collection center sites in no Orange County. 3. To associate the closure of existing greenbox sites with development of new solid waste sites. Rod Visser noted that in order. to develop a compactar collection center. at the Ferguson Road site, the County would need to pursue one of two options. They could purchase additional land at Ferguson Road or ask for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. He asked that the staff be directed to Pursue these two options. Commissioner Halkiotis spoke in support of this recommendation. He asked about the cost of manning the sites and Wilbert McAdoo stated that for eight months the total operational cost will be approximately $65,000. Woodhall Stopford, Chair of the Orange County Solid Waste Committee stated that the committee has accepted as their charge to meet the state requirements to reduce the amount of waste being landfilled by 25% and 40% by 1996. This is just the first set of recommendations for meeting that 10 goal. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate the need for ,a large amount of land for a landfill. They are also charged with making this a cost effective system. They will make recommendations on how to finance this in an equitable way. They agree there is a need for recycling. However, in conserving land they will need to consider everything that goes into the landfill. 'He emphasized that - the committee is worki7hg -hard _and will be reporting to the Board of County Commissioners on a- regular basis. The Board endorsed the recommendations in the report. B. COUNTY INTER- - .OFFICE WASTE REDUCTION VWilbert McAdoo gave=• -a brief report -on the current inter office "Paper Back" waste reduction program- and plans for enhancement of the program. He stated that the County -and'Orange Regional Recycling staff will be developing- a plan of-action for waste reduction in the Orange County School system. C. JAIL INSPECTION REPORT,. - The jail inspection report for July 1, 7992 was received by the Board. Corrective action is being taken as required. VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- REGULAR AGENDA A. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as stated below: ARTICLE 2.2.14.3 "Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in- February; provided, however, if a principal amendment is scheduled by the Board of Commissioners for other than the February public hearing, it shall be scheduled during one of the quarterly public hearings held in May, August, and November." VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. INTRODUCTION OF BOND ORDER AND SWORN STATEMENT OF DEBT The Bond Order was introduced by Chair Moses Carey, Jr. Motion v made presented a commissioner Willhoit to approve Order as in the d as read by the Chair. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to authorize the Deputy Finance Director to file the "Sworn Statement of Debt ", set the public hearing date for August 18, 1992 and th Clerk to publish the Band Order and public hearing notice by instruct e August 6, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was Willhoit to approve 3, 199'2' ballot and to Brown and Wood. VOTE: UNANIMOUS - 11 made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner the form of the bond question to be posed on the November authorize any County Commissioner to.revise it and send C. ADVERTISEMENT - AUGUST 24 1992 DARTER Y PUBLI HEARING Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the advertisement for the August 24, 1992 public hearing as submitted with the addition-of a definition for ten -year transition. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. 2-2 -92 P & S SPORTING-GOODS, INC. - ZONING.-ATLAS AM E DMENT The property in question is located on the south -side of NC Highway 54 between Morrow Mill Road.and Orange Grove Road. The total area proposed for rezoning contains 3.98-'acres and is described as part of Lot 28 of Tax Map 26 in Bingham Township. .The current zoning is Agricultural Residential. The zoning districts proposed are 2.06 acres of Local Commercial -1 and 1.92 acres of Neighborhood Commercial -2. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the Zoning Atlas amendment from AR to LC -1 and NC -2 based on the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. FEATHERWOOD PHASE Ix - PRELIMINARY PLAN This property is located at the southeast corner of Piney Grove Church Road and US 70 Business in Eno Township. The property is zoned Rural Residential (R -1). Eight lots are proposed out.of 10.24 acres. The average lot size is 1.29 acres. The Planning Staff has evaluated the request for a private road and, due to the location, size of lots, and private road, criteria, recommends a public road. The Planning Board recommends approval with a Class B private road and the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to approve the preliminary Plan for Featherwood Phase II with a public road built to state standards based on the Planning Staff findings contained in Section IV-B-3-d-1 of the Subdivision Regulations and subject to the conditions contained in the attached Resolution of Approval. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IX. BOARD COMMENTS - NONE X. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT - NONE XI. APPOINTMENTS PROGRAM COMMITTEE FOR THE NEW HIGH SCHOOL Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Commissioner Verla Insko to serve on this committee. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 12 CHAPEL HILL PLANNING BOARD Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Chair Carey to reappoint Marianna Chambliss for a term ending June 30, 1995 and to appoint Tim Ream to a term ending June 30, 1994. VOTE: UNANIMOUS HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Motion was made by Chair Carey,- seconded by.Commissioner Insko to appoint Susan Kim Furtney for a term.ending December..30, 1994. VOTE: UNANIMOUS NURSING HOME COMMUNITY'ADVISORY COMMITTEE Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Lane Beauchamp to a term ending "June 30, 1993. VOTE: UNANIMOUS " XII. MINUTES Motion was made.by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the minutes for the June 29, 1992 Regular Meeting as corrected. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XIII. EXECUTIVE.. SESSION - NONE XIV. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to consider, Chair Carey adjourned the meeting at 10:45. The next regular meeting will be held on August 18, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the OWASA Meeting Room in Carrboro, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk I ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No.ZM-A ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 SUBJECT: 1991 -92 Annual Settlement DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING YES X NO Re enue ATTACHMENT (S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Report of Annual Tax Settlement PURPOSE: John Horner, Extension 2727 TELEPHONE NUMBER; Hillsborough - 732 -8181 ext 2727 Chapel Hill - 968 -4501 Mebane - 227 -2031 Durham - 688 -7331 To receive the Tax Settlement on current and delinquent taxes whi.ch.gives the amount charged, the amount unpaid and the amount collected for -1991 and prior. BACKGROUND: Mandated by General Statutes 105 -373.3 (3) Settlement for current taxes': After July 1 and before he is charged with taxes-for the current fiscal year, the Tax Collector shall make full settlement with the - governing body of the taxing unit for all taxes in hi.s hands- for collection for the preceding fiscal year. In the Settlement the Tax Collector shall be charged with: (_a) The. Total amount of all taxes in his hands for collection for the full year, including amounts originally charged to him and all amounts subsequently charged on account of discoveries; (b) All penalties, interest and cost collected by him in connection with -taxes for the current year. RECOMMENDATION (S): The Manager recommends the Settlement be accepted as reported and entered into the minutes, REPORT OF TAXES COLLECTED FOR YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1992 98.08 Percent ORANGE COUNTY Levy for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest charged Total . Levy collected for 1991 1990 and pior $ 35,550,158.76 $ 914,185.97 $ 170,066.30 $ 36,634,411.03 Accounts receivable for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest collected Total * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL Levy for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest charged Total $ 10,577,805.24 $ 221,534.06 $ 41,562.89 $ 10,840,902.19 Levy collected for 1991 1990 and prior Accounts receivable for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest collected Total $ 34,850,796.97 $ 670,279.73 $ 699,361.79 $ 243,906.24 $ 170,066.30 $ 36,634,411.03 $ 10,402,256.47 $ 150,985.86 $ 175,548.77 $ 70,548.20 $ 41,562.89 $ 10,840,902.19 7 J, 3 REPORT OF TAXES COLLECTED FOR YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,1992 TOWN OF CARRBORO Levy for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest charged Total $ 2,417,655.02 $ 92,190.07 $ 18,260.74 $ 2,528,105.83 Levy collected for 1991 1990 and prior Accounts receivable for 1991 1990 and prior Total interest collected Total * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** TOWN OF HILLSBORO Levy for 1991 $ 698,182.65 1990 and prior $ 27,689.41 Total interest charged $ 4,140.16 Total $ 730,012.16 $ 2,376,763.73 $ 66,393.64 $ 40,891.29 $ 25,796.43 $ 18260.746 $ 2,528,105.83 Levy collected for 1991 $ 677,881.88 1990 and prior $ 22,332.79 Accounts receivable for 1991 $ 20,300.77 1990 and prior $ 5,356.62 Total interest collected $ 4,140.19 Total $ 730,012.16 4 OTHER REVENUE CHAPEL HILL VEHICLES Levy for 1991 $ 199,435.00 1990 and prior $ 5,942.73 Total $ 205,377.73 Levy collected for 1991 $191,075.04 1990 and prior $ 2,395.17 Accounts receivable for 1991 $ 8,359.96 1990 and prior $ 3,547.56 Total $205,377.73 CARRBORO VEHICLES Levy for 1991 $ 65,910.00 1990 and prior $ 2,866,05 Total $ 68,776.05 Levy collected for 1991 $ 61,842.17 1990 and prior $ 1,045.43 Accounts receivable for.1-991 $ 4,067.83 1990 and prior $ 1,820.62 Total $ 68,776.05 MOTOR VEHICLES PENALTY Levy for 1989 $ 33,308.14 Levy collected for 1989 $ 4,477.02 Accounts receivable for 1989 $ 28,831.12 Total $ 33,308.14 Y HILLSBOROUGH VEHICLES Levy for 1991 1990 and prior Total Levy collected for 1991 1990 and prior S Accounts receivable for 1991 1990 and prior 15,590.00 1,335.15 16,925.15 Total $ 14,154.56 $ 7$9.71 $ 1,435.44 $ 545.44 $ 16,925.15 5 I OR A N G E C O UK T Y BOARD OF COMliISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 31 1992 Action Agenda Item # -72T B SUBJECT: Personnel Ordinance Revision - Temporary Appointments DEPARTMENT: Personnel PUBLIC HEARING: Yes _X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 - Draft Revisions to Elaine Holmes, Personnel Director Article II, Section 5.2 and Article I, Section 4.37 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough -732 -8181 2 - Current Article II, Durham - 688 -7331 Section 5.2 and Article I, Mebane -227 -2031 Section 4.37 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To revise the temporary appointment provisions of the Orange County Personnel Ordinance. BACKGROUND: During 1991 -92 County staff completed a review of the County's use of temporary employees for extended periods. This review arose from the concern that the County has employees being appointed as temporary for extended periods of time who do not receive benefits. Under the Personnel Ordinance, there are two major categories of employees. These are temporary and permanent. A temporary employee may be full time or part time (any number of hours) and may be appointed as temporary for up to 12 months. A temporary employee receives no benefits except Social Security, Workers' Compensation, Civil Leave and Administrative Leave. A permanent employee may be full time or part time (appointed for at least 20 hours each workweek) and receives benefits. The temporary employment review included identifying temporary appointments which have extended beyond one year and surveying the types of schedules these employees work and the needs they serve. This review showed that the County has two major groups of employees serving as temporary for extended periods. Group 1 consisted of employees who averaged 20 hours or more each workweek on a continuing basis. Group 2 consisted of employees who have been appointed for extended periods but work more limited hours 3 (usually 10 hours or less) or work on a sporadic (seasonal or other) basis. The approved 1992 -93 budget included funds to provide permanent status for those temporary positions (the "Group 1" type positions) identified during the budget process as serving permanent work needs. During the temporary employment review process, County staff considered whether appointments to the "Group 2" type of positions (those which work limited schedules or serve sporadic or seasonal needs) should end at one year. Departments advised they have a strong need to be able to continue appointments of such qualified staff to meet the work needs. The Attachment 1 draft revision to the Personnel Ordinance modifies the Ordinance to provide that the "Group 2" type employees may continue to be appointed as temporary beyond one year with the Manager's approval as specified in Section 5.2.2 of Attachment 1. Under the proposed policy, the following would occur: -The temporary employment category will continue to exist and there will continue to be temporary employees. - Temporary appointments will not continue beyond one year except as specified in the Attachment 1 policy. -The use of temporary employees on a continuing basis beyond one year to work 20 hours or more each workweek will end. RFCOMMBNDATION: The Manager recommends the Board adopt the attached revision to the Personnel Ordinance effective August 1, 1992. 3 Attachment 1 DRAFT REVISION TO ARTICLE II SECTION 5.2 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL�ORDINANCE 5.2 Temporagy ARRointaent 5.2.1 A temporary appointment may be made for six calendar months or less. The Department Head may extend the temporary appointment for six additional months. A temporary appointment may not extend beyond one year except as provided in Items 5.2.2 and 5.2.3 below. 5.2.2 With the County Manager's advance approval, the department head may extend a temporary appointment beyond one year when the employee regularly works 15 or less hours each workweek (as averaged on a monthly basis. In urgent circumstances where additional hours are necessary to continue critical services, the County Manager may approve additional hours in writing. For this purpose, critical services includes such services as public safety and top priority goals of the County. 5.2.3 A temporary appointment may extend beyond one year when the employee is working under an established academic internship program or work study program. 5.2.4 A temporary appointment may be made to a temporary position or to a permanent position such as on a fill -in basis for an employee on leave. DRAFT REVISION TO ARTICLE I SECTION 4137 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL ORDINANCE 4.37 Temporary Employee - an employee appointed to serve in a position for a period of six calendar months or less. The Department Head may extend the temporary appointment for six additional months. A temporary appointment may not extend beyond one year except as provided in Article II, Section 5.2 of this Ordinance. Attachment 2 CURRENT ARTICLE II SECTION 5.2 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL ORDINANCE 5.2 Temporary Appointment By definition, a temporary appointment may not exceed a six (6) month period. Exceptions may be granted by the County Manager based on written recommendations from the Department outlining that circumstances warrant an extension of temporary services. Such time must be specified in writing to the Personnel Department not to exceed twelve (12) months. A temporary appointment may be made to a permanent or temporary position. Individuals may be candidates for a Probationary appointment to classes for which they qualify. These individuals must compete with all other applicants for probationary appointments. Temporary Appointment includes social security (FICA) match and Worker's Compensation Insurance. It does not include other fringe benefits such as vacation, sick leave, holidays, retirement, health insurance, etc. CURRENT ARTICLE T SECTION 4.37 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL ORDINANCE 4.37 Temporary Employee - a non - permanent employee appointed to serve in a position for a period of six (6),calendar months or less. O R A N G E C 0 U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 Action Agend Item # ff--ice SUBJECT: Sewer Easement Agreement �. with Hillsborough DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): Easement Agreement and Plat INFORMATION CONTACT: County Engineer TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To present a proposed sewer easement agreement to the Board of County Commissioners for its approval and execution BACKGROUND: For some years, the Town of Hillsborough has had problems with sanitary sewer manholes overflowing, during and after heavy rainstorms, in the'.section of its gravity sewer system near the County's Tax and Records Building. The overflows have resulted from two distinct problems with Hillsborough's gravity sewer collection system. One problem is that the advanced age of many portions of the collection system has resulted in large quantities of infiltration and inflow (I & I) of stormwater being taken into the system. During storms. cross - connections between storm sewers, roof drains, etc., and sanitary sewers have allowed a great deal of water to enter the sewer system (inflow). During wet periods, the subsurface water rises and leaks into the sanitary sewers through cracks and loose joints in the pipes and manholes (infiltration). The . second problem is that at least this section of the Town's sewer collection system is currently flowing at full capacity under normal conditions. The extra flow which occurs as a result of I & I overloads the sewer pipes to the extent that much of the excess flow escapes at manholes in the lower elevation portion of the problematic section of the sewer system. Currently after heavy rainfall, a combination of stormwater and sewerage often sprays out of the manhole located on the west side of Stillhouse Creek directly behind the Tax and Records Building. 1 z a Hillsborough proposes to remedy the problem of surface discharge of sewerage and stormwater by constructing a new sewer line from the overflowing manhole to its Eno River interceptor line which lies approximately 150 yards to the south on the north side of the Eno River. While this solution does not relieve the I & I problem, which would be a very expensive undertaking, it will provide sufficient additional flow carrying capacity and relieve the overflow problem. The proposed sewer line cannot be routed straight to the existing interceptor, because an old pond lies directly between the existing manhole and the interceptor. The route for the new sewer line is proposed to move southwest from the existing manhole, cross Stillhouse Creek, turn south along and parallel to the west (rear) property line of the Orange Family Medical Center and extend straight on to the existing interceptor line. The requested easement for the new sewer line is a twenty foot wide permanent easement with an additional temporary construction easement on the east side of the permanent easement. The majority of the permanent easement is on County property, although there is some permanent easement on the medical center property. The construction easement is nearly evenly divided between the County and medical center property. The size and scope of the easements requested are typical of sewer construction projects of this nature and the proposed sewer line route is consistent with standard engineering practice. Hillsborough's proposed remedy for alleviating sewer overflows in the vicinity of the Tax and Records building represents a net benefit to the County and particularily to County employees. The sewer overflow has long represented a morale problem, and perhaps a potential health problem, to employees in the Tax and Records Building. Although the sewer overflows in the Tax and Records Building parking lot have abated over the past two years, overflows on nearby County campus.grounds periodically continue unabated. The current location of the sewer overflow is less an immediate threat to anyone's health but it is a nuisance and a potential hazzard. Hillsborough's proposed actions should eliminate the nuisance conditions permanently. RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board review the Easement Agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign and execute the agreement. V STANDARD FORM (Recorded With Plat Attached) For Water and Sewer Lines ORANGE COuNTy NORTH CAROLINA DEED OF EASEMENT (WATER /SEWER LINE EASEMENT) THIS DEED OF EASEMENT, made this ,,,` day of 19—, by and between , North Carolina ( "Grantor "), and the Town of Hillsborough, North Carolina, a municipal corporation, 101 East Orange Street, P. 0. Box 429, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 (the "Town "): THAT WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in Hillsborough Township, being more specifically de- scribed in Book ., at page , Orange Count Re g y Registry ry (the "Property "); THAT WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough proposes to construct or otherwise improve its water and /or sewer system along or near Cameron Street; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of One and No /100 ($1.00) Dollar, and other good and valuable consideration paid to Grantor, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby fully acknowledged, Grantor does hereby give, grant, quitclaim, and convey unto the Town of Hillsborough, its successors and assigns, the right privilege and perpetual easement over upon pon and through the Property to construct, install, maintain, repair, modify or remove one or more underground water and /or sewer lines, all as more specifically described and located on a copy 3 R 4 I twenty foot wide permanent easement; together with a perpetual right and easement to go upon the Property whenever the same is reasonably necessary for the purposes of constructing, inspect- ing, and maintaining said lines and making all necessary altera- tions and repairs thereto. The Town of Hillsborough shall remove. all surplus earth, shall make level the surface of the ground above said lines and apparatus, and shall interfere as little as is reasonably possible with any plants, fences, or other improve- ments upon the Property, provided that such plants, fences and other improvements shall not interfere with the right of the Town of Hillsborough of ingress and egress to the Property for the purpose of maintenance and repair of said main or mains or the construction and repair of laterals and connections, and such plants, fences and other improvements shall not interfere with the Town of Hillsborough's maintenance operation or installation of the lines. Grantor further conveys to the Town of Hillsborough a thirty toot wide temporary easement, more particularly described on the attached plat as a construction easement to be used by the Town of Hillsborough for the initial installation of the water and /or sewer lines, said thirty foot wide construction easement to terminate upon completion of installation of such improvements and at that time to be survived by the twenty foot wide permanent easement described above. The Town of Hillsborough shall also have the right of in- gress and regress through, over, and across the Property to and from said easements at such times as the Town of Hillsborough deems it necessary for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, and inspecting said lines and of making all necessary alterations and repairs thereto; the lines of pipe shall be located at such point or points, elevation or elevations below the surface of the earth as shall be necessary, for proper operation of the system, and shall be established at the proper grade for running said lines and for conveying sewage and /or water as aforesaid, and said manholes, if any, shall be at such point below of above the surface of the earth as may be necessary for the proper operation of said pipe line or lines; and the Town of Hillsborough shall have the right, privilege and easement to tap the line or lines and construct laterals from the main to the outside boundary of right -of -way over which this easement and privilege extends. It is understood and agreed by the parties that the execu- tion and delivery of this deed of easement by the Grantor and its acceptance by the Town of Hillsborough shall not obligate it to construct sewer and /or water lines or permit connections to its sewer and /or water systems. It is further understood and agreed that failure of the Town of Hillsborough to construct improve- ments within the said easement and /or to clear or keep cleared of land shall not impair in any way the rights, privileges and easements conveyed hereunder. (SEAL) (SEAL) TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid easements and access rights and all privileges thereunto belonging to Grantee and its assigns, free and discharged form the right, title, claim or interest of Grantor or anyone claiming by- through or under it. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, County has caused this Deed of Base - meet for Sewer Line to be executed in its name, by its Chair, and the official County seal to be affixed and attested by the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA By: Moses Carey, Jr., Chair orange County Board of Commissioners ATTEST: [OFFICIAL SEAL]_ Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the orange County Board of Commissioners NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY ,.a Notary Public for the I, Y da of above County and State, do hereby certify that on the 1 19 , before me personally came Beverly A. Blythe to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, a body politic and corporate described in the duly foregoing Deed of Easement for Sewer theeforegoing Deed of Ease - given and as the act of said county, the Chair of its ment for Sewer Line was signed in its name by Board of Commissioners, Noses Carey, Jr., sealed with its seal and attested by said Clerk. Witness my hand and official seal. Not Public My commission expires: [i ts I -* PL EI Y� C Y s i I I I a � it i • + �■ P� f� �e • 4if 7 nU 0 r 2 =Z, u a o 33 w OM z U Q zoo p w Cl) � J ¢ J_ O = 7 y t b 4 V y � t a o Itu a x a s o m H W Jti .I . I � •iS�i 1 }r r t 'till � 3 1 IE I!i I {rill Ilnl' , fill;, I i I 1 a �i 1 1 1 � I 5 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 - I I I I 1 � _ I 8 1 1 1 3� 1 I 1 1 I I 13 s mAr. •� a 1 'I 7 nU 0 r 2 =Z, u a o 33 w OM z U Q zoo p w Cl) � J ¢ J_ O = 7 y t b 4 V y � t a o Itu a x a s o m H W Jti .I . I � •iS�i 1 }r r t 'till � 3 1 IE I!i I {rill Ilnl' , fill;, I i OR AN G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date August 3, 1992 I Action Agenda item # =- SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT SECTION V -D -6 -b - CERTIFICATES OF DEDICATION AND MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC SEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed Amendment 5/26/92 Public Hearing Minutes 6/15/92 Planning Board Minutes INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Cameron Extension 2580 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed amendment to the subdivision Regulations which would change the certificate required on a final subdivision plat signed by the owner of the property being subdivided. BACKGROUND: The Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance is a statement required to be placed on the Final Plat and on the Declaration of Restrictions and Requirements which is signed by the owner(s) of the property being subdivided. By signing the certificate, the owner certifies that he or she is the owner, that all easements, rights -of -way, and common areas are duly granted for the purposes stated on the plat, and that all improvements /common areas will be maintained until taken over by a public agency or homeowners association, etc. The current, language in Section V- D -6--b of the Subdivision Regulations for the certificate only implies that the person signing is the owner of the property. The proposed amendment will expressly state the certification of ownership. The proposed amendment was presented at public hearing on May 26. No citizen comments were received at the hearing. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be forwarded to the County Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. z 11 On June 15, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Section V -D -G -b of the Subdivision Regulations. 3 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Subdivision Regulations REFERENCE: Section V-D -6--b Certificates of Dedication and Maintenance ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff Planning Board BOCC Public X Other: County Attorney Expected Public Hearing Date: May 26, 1992 Purpose of Amendment: To make a technical correction to the certificate required on a final subdivision plat to be signed by the owner of the property being subdivided. Impacts /Issues: The Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance is a statement required to be placed on the Final Plat and on the Declaration of Development Restrictions and Requirements which is signed by the owner (s) of the property being subdivided. By signing the certificate, the owner certifies that he or she is the owner, that all easements, rights -of -way, and common areas are duly granted for the purposes stated on the plat, and that all improvements /common areas will be maintained until taken over by a public agency or homeowners association, etc. The current language in Section V -D -6 -b of the Subdivision Regulations for the certificate only implies that the person signing is in fact the owner of the property. The proposed amendment will expressly state the certification of ownership. Existing and Proposed Ordinance Text: V- D -6 -b. Certificates of Dedication and Maintenance (1) The following certification shall be printed on the Final Plat and shall be followed by the signature of the owner(s) of the property being subdivided as wei! as th acknowled ed by a notary Rublic: "The undersigned eimerr hereby certifies that the land shown hereon is owned b the undersigned and is located within the subdivision regulation jurisdiction of Orange County and hereby freely dedicates all rights -of -way, easements, streets, recreation area, open space, common area, utilities and other improvements to public or private common use as noted on this plat, and further assumes full responsibility for the maintenance and A control of said improvements until they are accepted for maintenance and control by an appropriate public body or by an incorporated neighborhood or homeowners association or similar legal entity." Owner: Date: Ordinance Review Committee: Planning Hoard: BOCC: s -��• 9a FL) 50c M IAIUTES After discussing various options, including hearing these amendments monthly, Commissioner Halkiotis indicated that hearing Comprehensive Plan Amendments quarterly rather than annually appears to be a reasonable compromise. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer the proposed amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 4. SUBDIVISION REGULATION$ TEXT AMENDMENT a. CERTIFICATES OF DEDICATION & MAINTENANCE Section V -D -6 -b This presentation was made by Emily Cameron for the purpose of receiving citizen comment on the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations which would change the certificate required on a final subdivision plat by the owner of the property being subdivided. The Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance is a statement required to be placed on the Final Plat and on the Declaration of Restrictions and Requirements which is signed by the owner(s) of the property being subdivided. By signing the certificate, the owner certifies that he or she is the owner, that all easements, right -of -way, and common areas are duly granted for the purposes stated on the plat, and that all improvements/ common areas will be maintained until taken over by a public agency or homeowners association, etc. The current language in Section V -D -6 -b of the Subdivision Regulations for the certificate only implies that the person signing is the owner of the property. The proposed amendment will expressly state the certification of ownership. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, to refer the proposed amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko, to adjourn -,the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on June 1, 1992 at 7 :30 p.m. in the Old Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Bow MItiIUT�g 6 principal amendments. However, the Committee felt that they should be restricted to other quarterly public hearings; e.g., May, August, and November. The proposed wording would be as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February, provided, however, if special hearings are called -by the Board of Cammissioners, applications for_pr_incipal amendments shall be considered in conjunction with another quarterly public hearing. At the May 26, 1992 public hearing, the County Attorney suggested changes to the proposed wording. The changes are shown on the ordinance amendment form which is an attachment to these minutes on page The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment as worded by the County Attorney. MOTION: Reid moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Gray - indicated he felt the County Attorney had "muddied the waters" even more. e. Subdivision Regulations (1) Owners Certificate Presentation by Emily Cameron. The Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance is a statement required to be placed on the Final Plat and on the Declaration of Restrictions and Requirements which is signed by the owner (s) of the property being subdivided. By signing the certificate, the owner certifies that he or she is the owner, that all easements, rights -of -way, and common areas are duly granted for the purposes stated on the plat, and that all improvements /common areas will be maintained until taken over by a public agency or homeowners association, etc. The current language in Section V -D -6 -b of the Subdivision Regulations for the certificate only implies that the person signing is the owner of the property. The proposed amendment will expressly state the certification of ownership. VA The proposed amendment was presented at public hearing on May 26. No Citizen comments were received at the hearing. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be forwarded to the County Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Section V -D -6 -b of the Subdivision Regulations. A copy of the wording of the proposed amendment is an attachment to these minutes on pages MOTION: Reid moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Waddell - indicated that he felt such an amendment is unnecessary). AGENDA ITEM #10: INFORMATION ITEMS a. Resolution of Appreciation Miriam and Harold Murdock Miriam Murdock has served as a Hingham Township Advisory Coun inception of the TAC system in Harold Murdock is president of Aging Council, and has been an with the TAC as well. member of the :il since the 1977. Her husband the Orange County active participant Over these 15 years of service, Miriam and Harold Murdock have been regular members, rarely missing a meeting. In addition, they have played an important role in drafting TAC comments to the Planning Board and facilitating discussion of issues of township.interest. The „Murdocks have recently moved from Bingham Township to Carolina Meadows in Chatham County, leading Miriam to submit her resignation from the TAC. At their May 14 meeting, the Bingham TAC unanimously approved a resolution of appreciation for the Murdocks years of service to community planning. The Planning Staff recommends adoption of the resolution. A copy of the resolution is an attachment to these minutes on page Pq i O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3. 1992 Action A en Item # SUBJECT: BELLECHENE EAST - PRELIMINARY PLAN ACTION BY: September 17, 1992 1- DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _x —No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk Extension 2582 Resolution of Approval Application TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Vicinity Map Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Agency Comments Durham - 688 -7331 Preliminary Plan Mebane - 227 -2031 7/20/92 Draft Planning Board Chapel Hill - 967 -9251 Minutes PURPOSE: To consider the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East Subdivision. BACKGROUND: The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east side of Eno Cemetery Road. The property is not zoned, however, the tract is designated Agricultural Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Comprehensive Plan. It also drains into Lake Orange. The total acreage of the tract is 33.22 acres. Thirty (30) new lots are proposed with an average lot size of 1.04 acres. There are three phases proposed with Phase I containing four (4) lots, Phase II containing eight (8) lots and Phase -III containing eighteen (18) lots. The applicant is proposing public roads to serve each phase. All four lots in phase one would have to receive access from the subdivision road for the state to accept maintenance. The Orange County Health Department has checked the property and found a suitable site for a septic system on each lot. The Lake Orange Authority has indicated their policy is to only allow direct lake access by membership to those land owners who adjoin the 620 foot elevation. Membership is available on a limited application basis and at that time, rules, regulations and common access areas are agreed upon. The Orange County Engineer has indicated he has no comments concerning the proposal. IPH 2, The County Attorney has,indicated his concern that the east property line follow the 620 foot contour, which is indicated on the preliminary plan. He also indicated concern about lots 27 and 28 fronting on Eno Cemetery Road, however, out of 30 lots, these would be the only two lots receiving access directly from Eno Cemetery Road. Other agency review comments were solicited and are on file in the Planning Department. The Preliminary Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on July 20, 1992. At that time, the Planning Board recommended approval subject to the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East subject to the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. 3 RESOLUTION 1 91 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date . August 3. 1992 Name of Subdivision Bellechene - East Owner /Applicant _ Richard Swank for Wade Patterson The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Bellechene - East subdivision preliminary plat, dated May 13, 1992 and containing 30 lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified herein. All roads shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally, the offer of dedication of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place. This acceptance by Orange County of the dedication to the general public of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place shall be without maintenance responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the owner /applicant until such time as they are accepted for maintenance by the North Carolina Department of Transportation or some other governmental body. Before the Final Plat of any phase of Bellechene - Fast can be recorded: A. Sewage Disposal 1. Each residential lot shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair area, approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health. 2. The septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements. This disclosure shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regarding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health. B. Roads and Access 1. Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, within a 50 foot right -of -way, and the construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. n. [a) 0 A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a certified /licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 2. Submit an erosion control plan for construction of the road in Phase C. 3. All lots, except 27 and 2$, shall access onto the new subdivision roads. This restriction shall be stated in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan, and must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections Department. 2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. D. Drainage 1. 30 -foot drainage easements as required and indicated on the Preliminary Plan. E. Parkland 1. Cash in the amount of $162$.00 [($1900 /acre x 30/35 acre)] shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of parkland dedication. F. Miscellaneous 1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section V -D -2 and V -D -3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 2. The following natural and man-made site features shall be shown on the plat: (Include streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, swamps, marshes, sites in "Inventory" houses, barns, sheds, railroads, overhead utility lines, cemeteries) 5 a. Drainageways as indicated on the Preliminary Plan. 3. The following easements shall be shown on the plat: a. 30 -foot drainage easements referenced in D.1; G. Certifieations 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered band Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V -D -G -b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that all residential lots contain sufficient area for septic tank disposal and repair. 4. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place has been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved. S. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department. Signature of Applicant Clerk to the Board I, , accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, and acknowledge that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat. r~ O 5CPPLIDATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL h MAJOR SUBDIVISION 2/9 ` ORRNGE COUNTY DATE PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) ��_7 Z_ � SUBDIVISION NAME: �-��G' ��(i "F ST LOCATION: e) OWNER ADDRESS: �s2 ,���/ ��J TELEPHONE NO.: = • CONTACT: ����_ � TELEPHONE NO.. 10'efC S.Bo,P�v :�C . z 7Z76 A. SJHMAkf INFORMATION; Orange County Tax Map Block �� Lot(s) / Township Zoning District(s): Total Number of Acres: . Z4 Pnases: Total Number of Lots; ,? p - Average Lot Size: e4,4c .Minimum Lot Size: Number /Type of Structures:,(VM-at-Trp (proposed) r n Lineal Feet in Streets: / S f7 Acres in Open Space: ef!clos! Water Supply: Public (specify) Community Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (specify) Community Individual School District: Fire District: General Land Uses in Area: �r/T - — Critical Areas: stream /drainageways flood prone areas watershed (specify) historic saes other (explain) Is the property to be subdivided currently under "farm use value taxation "? Yes— No —. If "yes ", please contact the Orange County Tax Office. Subdivision of the property may require payment of deferred taxes under "farm use value taxation ". B ALL plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two- hundred feet (1" =209') and no Larger than one inch equals twenty feet (1 " =20') and must contain the following information: subdivision name 2L zoning of tract and adjacent properties 6.V v, 7 � V 1-+ 0 rZ $-4 C,r O m- 0 / G ro (.: ui name & address of owner(s) name•& address of subdivider , (if other than owner) name of surveyor, engineer, Landscape architect or architect, address, registration # and seal (title) Preliminary Plan scale, north arrrow date (including revision dates) township, tan map- block -Lot references Parent Parcel Identification # deed book and page # of property to be subdivided 4 _1, building setback Lines by notation or typical Lot Layout Location and width of existing and proposed easements (drainage, utilities, roads, etc.) existing, proposed and adjoining rights -of -way including dimensions and street names and state road numoers. Lineal feet of road centerlines and approximate acreage of new street rights -of -way existing and proposed utilities, including type, sizes, hydrants, valves, manholes existing and proposed curbs, gutters and culverts, including sizes and grades Location and width of alleys, sidewaLks, bike lanes, transit systems, and bus steps' (please complete reverse side) n _r iboundary described with bearings / nd distances total acreage of the tract and acreage of lots, including and excluding area within rights- of-way control corner 1Z proposed lot lines with dimensions lot & block- numbers. u phasing lines topography at ten foot (10) intervals water bodies, streams, floodway and = floodplains w stream buffers –_ ro location and size of parcels dedicated c ........... i; for public use, recreational use of- reserved in common, with purpose noted Qj impervious surface data (if located in r water supply watershed) V vicinity map showing general location " of subdivision with streets and roads identified by State road number and name C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Twenty -five (25) copies of the preliminary plat. typical street cross- sections and intersection details including oesign and width of travelway and shoulders horizontal alignment and general curve data ( public roads) centerline radius on all proposed streets permanent features such as buildings, cemeteries, ? historic lanomarks adjoining lot layout names of adjoining property owners. If subdivided, subdivision plat name, plat bock & page number, and perimeter (at numbers. landscaping and buffer requirements township, corporate and extra - territorial planning =i jurisdiction lines which cross the property Location and size of lots of restricted development potential and notation on plat regarding some stormwater detention and /or retention sites and undisturbed areas for infiltration purposes (if Located in water supply watershed) 2. One full size copy of an Orange County Tax map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked in pencil). Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat indicating Health Department soils analysis approval /denial for each lot shown thereon. G. Where a private road is proposed a written statement by the applicant or his /her authorized representative which sets forth the justification for a private road (see Section IV-E-3-d-1 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations). S. Auxiliary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section VI of this Ordinance which assure comoletion and /or maintenance of improvements required by this Ordinance. Such aocuments may induce, but not be limited to, a private road maintenance agreement, and articles of incorporation and restrictive covenants pertaining to a homeowner—s association. These documents may be required as necessary as evidence that the ordinance requirements are being met: 6. Fee - $350.00 plus 55.00 per lot 0 fee for preliminary and final plat). 1, the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate. APPLICANTS' SIGNATURE OWNER'S SIGNATURE DATE DATE FEES: Amount 5io, Qo Date Paid _r- /s- %� Receipt 9 �Y 04 //l I 1300r4t = 3C Z5.4 AC.- r 32 7,7AC 5 8 ?qC. 33 ' 009 /\ • ossr �- T �8e 1.2 � I f ,Qss1 1$s ... _ o 2-21AC. 1 18 7,;' 4C. 31C ! 84 36 14io _. .. . J' 1.84QC. BELLECJENE - EAST LgCC.. IB f 36 34 r ,185 • APPLICANIT: Richard Swank IACZ 31A I I 9 ! l 067r 35 5 LUP: Agricultural Residential 131 ! 5.B-AC. Protected Watershed ! I 4c ' 78 1 / / �c -Olg C. -0/4 f I !'404C ' 038, 48 OI ! !! !r v 'LAND BE7'wEEN 615•COMMURAND 6W'CON7WR BELOWS 7D LAKE ORANGE MK. ACREAGI IN040DED /N 35.02 IC r r • _ • o 6 S9 azr.ar 1 184 L142�ER 387.64 P 1 077h z9 11 D a 9 41 Ac - -- — 1 !N1 067 =:- _. _.. HE ! !N 1530 SEES N I MARCH 20, 1992 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: RE: LAND OWNERSHIP BETWEEN THE 615' & 620' ELEVATIONS SURROUNDING LAKE ORANGE IN ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA. AS OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY IT REMAINS OUR POLICY TO ALLOW DIRECT LAKE ACCESS BY MEMBERSHIP TO THOSE LAND OWNERS WHO ADJOIN THE 620' ELEVATION. MEMBERSHIP TO LAKE ORANGE IS AVAILABLE ON A LIMITED APPLICATION BASES TO THE LAKE AUTHORITY AND AT THAT TIME RULES, REGULATIONS AND COMMON ACCESS AREAS ARE AGREED UPON. FOR THE LAKE AUTHORITY ROBERT B. NICHOLS JR. PRESIDENT q LAW OFFICES 7.0 COLEMAN, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ALONZO BROWN COLEMAN, JR. 129 E. TRYON STREET GEOFFREY E. GLEDHILL P. 0. DRAWER 1829 DOUGLAS HARGRAVE HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278 KIM E. STEFFAN JANET B. DUTTON TELEPHONE 919 732 -2196 - JOSEPH IR.e. COLEMAN FACSIMILE 919 732 -7997 May 27, 1992 Mr. Eddie Kirk Planner Orange County Planning Department Post' Office Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 RE: Bellechene - East - Preliminary Plan Dear Eddie: I've reviewed the preliminary plan accompanying your May 20, 1992 letter for Bellechene - East. The big issue with this subdivision is the location of the east property line. The plat indicates that the surveyed segments of the east property line of the project are along the 620' contour. elevation. This is critical to insure Orange County's interest in Lake Orange. The only other comment I have is more in the form of a question. Can this project be designed so that Lots 27 and 28 do not front on Eno Cemetery Road? GEG /lsg xc: Mary Scearbo very truly vours, ill M P'Ll I � V MOTION: Gray moved that the Preliminary Plan for Featherwood be approved with a Class B private road and subject to the conditions in the Resolution of Approval. VOTE: Unanimous. (2) Bellechene East Presentation by Eddie Kirk. The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east side of Eno Cemetery Road. The property is not zoned, however, the tract is designated Agricultural Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Comprehensive Plan. It also drains into Lake Orange. 11 The total acreage of the tract is 33.22 acres. Thirty (30) new lots are proposed with an average lot size of 1.04 acres. There are three phases proposed with Phase I containing four (4) lots, Phase II containing eight (6) lots and Phase III containing eighteen (18) lots. The applicant is proposing public roads to serve each phase. All four lots in phase one would have to receive access from the subdivision road for the State to accept maintenance. The Orange County Health Department has checked the property and found a suitable site for a septic system on each lot. The Lake Orange Authority has indicated their Policy is to only allow direct lake access by membership to those land owners who adjoin the 620 foot elevation. Membership is available on a limited application basis and at that time, rules, regulations and common access areas are agreed upon. The Orange County Engineer has indicated he has no comments concerning the proposal. The County Attorney has indicated his concern that the east property line follow the 620 foot contour, which is indicated on the preliminary plan. He also indicated concern about lots 27 and 28 fronting on the Eno Cemetery Road, however, out of 30 lots, these would be the only two lots receiving access directly from Eno Cemetery Road. Other agency review comments were solicited and -n 12 are on file in the Planning Department. The Concept Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on May 20, 1991. At that time, the Concept Plan was approved with two (2) conditions: 1. Investigate the possibility of a pedestrian easement for access to the lake by the property owners. 2. Lots 1, 4, 5, 12, 13 and 26 shall receive access from the subdivision roads. Kirk noted that staff has invesitigated the possibility of a pedestrian easement for access to the lake. A letter was received from the Lake Authority, signed by Robert B. Nichols, Jr., which stated that it is the policy to only allow direct lake access by membership to the land owners who adjoin the 620' elevation. A copy of this letter is included in the agenda materials and is an attachment to these minutes on page The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East subject to the condit ions contained in the Resolution of Approval (a copy an attachment to these minutes on pages ). Gray asked if drainage easements could be used as access to the lake. Kirk responded no. Access is by membership to those lots that front the lake. MOTION: Gray moved approval of the Preliminary Plan for Bellechene East as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. VOTE: Unanimous.. b. Appeal of Subdivision Classification Eno Coon Hunters Association Presentation by Jim Hinkley. This item is to consider an appeal of the decision of the Planning and Inspections Department to classify'a proposed subdivision as a major subdivision or to require that subdividing the parcel be postponed until March 27, 1994, in accordance with Section III -B -1 of the Subdivision Regulations. The Eno Coon Hunters Association has applied for approval of a one -lot subdivision of 5.5 acres on OR AN G 8 C 0 U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3 1992 1 Agenda Abstract Item # =_ r- SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION - WALTERS FARM DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes 8 No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Applications Planning Director X2592 VicinityMap ---------------------------------- Certifications PHONE NUMBERS: - Soil Conservation Service Hillsborough 732 -8181 - Tax Supervisor Mebane 227 -2031 Staff Checklist Durham 688 -7331 Agricultural Districts Chapel Hill 967 -9251 Advisory Board Draft 7/8/92 Minutes Proposed Conservation Agreement PURPOSE: To consider the application of Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for designation of their property on High Rock Road in Cedar Grove Township as a voluntary agricultural district. BACKGROUND: Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve applications for qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of agricultural districts. The official designation of agricultural districts is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners. Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To be certified as qualifying farmland, a farm must: 1. Be participating in the farm present use -value taxation program established by the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through 105 - 277.7, or is otherwise determined-by the County to meet all the qualifications of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105- 277.3. 2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of the land is composed of soils that: a. Are best suited for providing food, seed, fiber, forage, timber, and oil seed crops; b. Have good soil qualities; c. Are favorable for all major crops common to Orange County; d. Have a favorable growing season; and e. Receive the available moisture needed to produce high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten (10) years; OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the land has been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5) previous years, measured from the date on which the determination must be made as to whether the land in question qualifies. 3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on the farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined erosion - control practices as specified in the 1985 Food Security Act. The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office and the Tax Supervisor have provided memoranda which indicate that the Walters' property complies with the above requirements. In addition, the property is comprised of three separate tracts, totaling 228.70 acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.1.b. is satisfied, since the farm consists of two or more contiguous tracts containing at least 155 acres. The property in question is located adjacent to property also in the ownership of Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters. That property was designated as Orange County's first voluntary agricultural district (284.50 acres) by the Board of Commissioners on June 29, 1992. When combined with the current application, the total district will have an area of 513.20 acres. At its July 8, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to 3 approve the certification of the Walters farm as qualifying farmland and recommend its designation as a voluntary agricultural district. At the same meeting, the Advisory Board unanimously approved the form and content of a draft Conservation Agreement for -use by all designated districts. Section IV-D.1. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance authorizes the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve the form of the conservation agreement. The Agreement had previously been reviewed by the County Attorney and the former Chair of the Advisory Board. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the property of Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters be designated as a voluntary agricultural district and that the Chair be authorized to sign the conservation agreement. Prior to the signing of the conservation agreement, it should be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney and the Land Records Manager to assure that the description of the property in Exhibit A is proper. 2 Orange County - Agricultural Districts Advisory Board APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION AS QUALIFYING FARMLAND AND DESIGNATION AS AN ORANGE COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONS: Before completing the application, please review the provisions of the orange County Voluntary Farmland preservation Program Ordinance, then fill out the form u accurately and completely as possible. Be sure to sign and date the form, and return it to the Orange County Planning & Inspections DepaRment, 306F Revere Road, Hillsborough. N.C. APPLICANT: Name: Victor Carl, Jr. & Elizabeth -T. Walt:'ers Address: 7119 HIGH ROCK RD, City: Efland State: NC ZIP Code: 27243 Phone Number: (Home) 563-3842 (Work) Same PROPERTY INFORMATION: Property Location/Address: N/ 0 High Rock Rd Township: 2 Tax Map: 42 Block: Lot: 5 Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 9837 -03-2356 Number of Acres: 45. 33 Deed Book: 2 0 6 Page: 18 9 Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service? Yes: x No: If "no ", please complete back of form. Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office? Yes: x No: If "no", please complete back of form. OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION: I [We], the applicant[s], hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing application is complete and accurate. Signature:dL" L j.,, , v a, _. _ Date: .3 D /g 9,g Signature: [. LcJa z. Date: -1/ - 3o - / g T a Please direct inquiries to: Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Cooperative Extension Service Orange County Planning & Inspections Department Hinsbwo* 7e24181►Cmpd HM W7- Mt9aurhzm US -7W1• =7-2W1 zA1 Orange County, agricultural Districts Advisory Board APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION AS QUA LEnaNG FARMLAND AND DESIGNATION AS AN ORANGE COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT INS'T'RUCTIONS: Before completing the application, ply review the provisions of the orange County Voluntary Farmland PrOwmation Program ordinance, then fill out the form as scc mudy and completely as possible. Be sure to sign and date the form, and rewrn it to the orange Courlry pkmling & InepeeWns Department, 306F Revere Raid, Hillsborough, N.C. n Q - IN 0"; 1' Name: / -� A �l 1 Address: S ^ _"" '2 C -Gf✓ ( �� �f C City: Stater ZIP Code: G Phone Number: (Home) (Work) PROPERTY INFORMATION: Property Location/Address: Township: �Tax Map: y a Block: Lot: A/15 Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: Number of Acres: Deed gook: _ % / page_ Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service? Yes: No: If "no", please complete back of form. Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office? Yes: No: If "no% please complete back of form. OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION: I [We], the applicant[s], hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing application is mplete and accurate. Signature: Date: Signature: Please direct inquiries to: Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Cooperative Em scion Service Orange Ccurrty Planning & Inspo=ons Departnma HHL*woo& 73241819Cbs* HM 967401 eDudma 6S&70310,1 . ms 727.21131 w 43 OD rc •� ± ^ � .wr •f� (• 1 Iwf ` p(re a ®>^ s � •i• .i- i,i t ' t I Fw • t ALE ..�•w. •� �. J fIM v r° . In r r +•nK r.r� .•® a ..arc• _ f ' I w , wr••r . I W •� �'•:. I I I I - _ ww '•. �r Fes• 5 �P6�1� -'� - , �� Syr .._ �. " '�` H_,,,_,1. —�vY" ,' : -G �,(::.z,,w •� 2 , Ir -JLr K y 1 1 ' � / •F Fn 444 11 /II w.w � • \, / r(..w -u(. Laww((fA.,.. •,•, "'• "fm'9 e±� 1 1� 1 \ � '.��� ..•. \ 11 S�I�. .. �1. �.. ly. -��I,r a•s � / . -F7,.; .�,tt /1.:'.' �.�, ._ �� . `•- �: .., �� � \.!�•� / •e�et e.(f•R.rOrF S•S:Si rRS•..rt- .,.... X41 , -�1f -'::- �' \•.� ��:� i,`(�•'•y I • »..,.., 9•:a - •uT IIErSIP \LC7 - II N; LM ..?( _ I: +' .ice .. � •....;•i..'a , +•F ••_ y..��: �....c •air -, r.�• � .... �:m r . I • _ _ k" ' ORAY'iGE-- •.CLRrt1TY °^; N.C" ��- s;:. :•r01 (F••T� w�'�rsr' v"ii��e }.;•yr `��%- .. ''�" e�— *xt�^L"�'w r-»• - -- �ti���i = -- •� � _ _ :yn: `�:a(y. •s:F ..e,e e:;�L`,,,,r,.(..(-•..: t i >.. .:L,VC1+JIr�iCUf YY-T . -....- • I • � �• • - _. - � •�-:• tt'�.+kY:: o" :.ray.' -lr`.� ° = 2_'.'rv'l. _ �+I �I..eF ei� .mited States Department of Agriculture !yl9yIIIIII soil P. 0. Box 8181 Conservation H it j i sborough, NC 27278 Service 73288181, Ext. 2751 June 30, 1992 TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director FROM: Greg A. Walker., District Conservati,oni•st SUBJECT: Applications for Certifications as Qualifying Farmland for V. Carl Walters and Patsy Upton (Crutchfield Heirs) Enclosed are certif'rcat'ron requirements for the above tracts under the Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program. Enclosures O The soil Conservation Service Vis an agency of the Department of Agriculture o _ \ � ' V. Car] Walters 8 m This report serves to document how the Iroposed farm quaKfies for acceptance into the Vv|antary Agricu(tura| Districts in Orange County. l. Two-thirds of the a. Be suited for timber and oi es __—^IL no ______ Comments: ' soils on the farm must: providing food, seed, fiber, foreSe, seed crops. Z C, a__ ________ b. Have good soil qualities. yes no Breakdown of soil classes in percent: Class I Class II Class III C|ass IV Class V Claps VI ______ Class VIII .� Comments: C|asses`I, II, III are primarily used for cropland,, Classes III-VI are generally best suited for pasture or woodland. Class VIII generally unsuited for agricu|tura| use. c. Be favorable for all major crops common to Orange County. Major crops are corn, tobacco, small grain, pasture, loblolly pines. �w*___% favorab|e ______% unfavorab|e / E d. Have �avorab|e Sro�'nS season. P/E�) Tha 3row 200 d��s of Apri| October. farms in n3 season for It be8ins in and runs unti| This response ]ran3e County' � g Pa8e 2 ���_C�Li !"I t�_is �pproximate|\ ap�roximate|y the second wee� �bout the |ast week in w�|| be cunsistent for a/| e. Receive the avai|ab}e moisture needed to produce hi8h yie|ds for an averaSe of 8 to 10 year Oran8e CoL ty receives approxim�te|y 42 - 45 incries ra|nfal| a ua||y. This response wi/| be consistent for ai| f8, rms` in Oran8e County. OR At |east two- thirds of the |and has been ac ve/y used in a8ricu|ture, hor ti; icu u forestry operations as defined i n the NC Genera| Statutes, 3 ect1: on 105-2T7.2 (1,2, an6 3) durin3 each of the five previous yaars,`measured from the date on which the de±erm nation must be made as to whet,her the |and in questio: qua {ifies. Acres in crop|and Acres in formstiand Acres in homeste�d, farmstead ur other re|ated use T | TRACT Acres _2 8reater than two- thirds in designated uses. Yes mo Comments: ` 10 ' m Pa8e 3 �. Farm must be mana3ed, if hiShiy erud|b\e \and exists on the farm, in accordance with the USDA, Soi/ Conservation Service (8CS) defined erosion- contro| practices as spec|fied in the 1985 Food Security Act. P\an on f\{e in SCS Office If No p|an wi|| be required before accaptanc� |nto the Vo|untary Agricu|tura| D i s m. ~��-' _� �-�� Ald C r c/o) � �J) A~ it twv ��,^���»�»«�� ���f��� �»~ o�m�$���� ��n�w�^�^� ,I~L. � . _ � 0*4 '�� �l� .�" � ORANGE COUNTY TAX SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE 208 SOUTH CAMERON STREET HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 KERMIT LLOYD Tar Supfrnivor TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director FROM: Kermit Llovd, Assessor;?� SUBJECT: Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters Application for Certification as Qualifying Farmland T1lF RFF: 2.42..5, 2.42..1413 DATE: June 22, 1992 This is to verify that the above referenced property is qualified and currently active in the Land Use Value taxation program. -._ ...r.. _ -. Orange Count - y _ Agricultural. Districts Advisory Board STAFF CHECKLIST FOR VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT SELECTION 12 Date Application Received: 5 9 Z APPLICANT NAME: v L G ?a ig ce ml, VA b L S s 2 .�K� �•1�Ze►3�- -r� Wa��©z,5 PROPERTY INFORMATION: •Property Loeation/Addnw: 41t�t1 I!5�^k. Cx•odt� •Township: CEO&rz. GrkN t- Tax Map: 2 Block: •Parcel kle ttifiestion Number [PIN]: • Number of Acres: Zza .172) Deed Book: -- ZO i 13 reflect the,goals of the voluntary agricultural districts program. The Planning Staff recommends approval and use of the draft conservation agreement. (A copy of the agreement is an attachment to these minutes on pages ,) Collins reviewed the agreement noting that it reflects extensive study by Elizabeth and Carl Walters using their historical perspective. It includes revisions by the County Attorney. He noted that he felt it is a workable agreement in terms of dealing with the basics as required by the Agricultural Districts Farmland Preservation Ordinance. Collins continued that he is recommending approval of the draft agreement and its use in dealing with applicants whose properties are designated agricultural districts by the Board of Commissioners in the future. Hunter asked about the amendment process in Section 10 of the agreement and whether those amendments should be presented to the Board of Commissioners. Collins responded no. Hunter continued asking if the Board should be more specific about requiring a three - quarters vote to make amendments. Collins responded that this agreement should remain general. it should address only those things specified in enabling legislation and remain a fairly simple procedure. Any major amendments would, of course, be presented to the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and Board of Commissioners. MOTION: Nutter moved approval of the Agricultural Conservation Agreement as presented. seconded by Hunter. VOTE: Unanimous. b. Qualifying Farmland- Certifications (1) Walters Property - Cedar Grove Township Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider the application of Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for certification of their property on High Rock Road in Cedar Grove Township as qualifying farmland. Collins indicated the location of the property on the vicinity map included in the agenda packet. Section IV.D.2 of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve applications for qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning 14 the establishment and modification of agricultural districts. The official designation of agricultural districts is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners. Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To be certified as qualifying farmland, a farm must: 1. Be participating n the farm present use -value taxation program established by the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through 105 - 277.7, or is otherwise determined by the County to meet all the qualifications of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105- 277.3. 2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of the land is composed of soils that: a. Are best suited for providing food, seed, .fiber, forage, timber, and oil see crops; b. Have good soil qualities; c. Are favorable for all major crops common to Orange County; d. Have a favorable growing season; and e. Receive the available moisture needed to produce high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten (10) years; OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the land has been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5).previous years, measured from the date on which the determination must be made as to whether the land in question qualifies. 3. Be managed, if'highly erodible land exists on the farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined erosion - control practices as specified in the 1985 Food Security Act. The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Offices and the Tax Supervisor have provided memoranda which indicate that the Walters' property complies with the requirements. In addition, the property is comprised of three separate tracts, totaling 228.70 acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.l.b is satisfied, since the farm consists of two or more contiguous tracts containing at least 155 acres. MOTION: VOTE: The property is located adjacent to property also in the ownership of Victor Carol Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters. That property was designated as Orange County's first voluntary agricultural district (284.50 acres) by the Board of Commissioners on June 29, 1992. When combined with the current application, the total district will have an area of 513.20 acres. The Planning Staff recommends that the property of Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters be certified as qualifying farmland and be recommended for designation as a voluntary agricultural district. (Due to personal conflict of interest, Walters did not participate in the discussion nor vote on this item.) Strayhorn moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Hogan. 5 in favor. 1 abstained (Walters - due to personal conflict of interest). (2) Crutchfield Heirs Property - Cheeks Township Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider the application of the Crutchfield Heirs (by Patsy Moore Upton) for certification of their property on Moorefields Road in Cheeks Township as qualifying farmland. Collins indicated the location of the property on the vicinity map included in the agenda packet. He noted that Ms. Upton was the only heir living in the area but, that, she does have authorization from all the heirs to participate in the voluntary district program. Section IV-D-2 of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve applications for qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of agricultural districts. The official designation of agricultural districts is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners. Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To be certified'as qualifying farmland, a farm must: 1. Be participating n the farm present use -value taxation program established by the N.C. General 15 16 I AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT THIS AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement ") is made this day of , 199_r by Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, husband and wife, and by Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters, husband and wife, ( "Grantors "), and between Orange County, a North Carolina unit of local government ( "Grantee "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors are the sole owners in fee simple of certain real property in Orange County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference (the "Property "); and WHEREAS, the Property possesses conservation values of great importance to the Grantors, the people of Orange County, and the people of the State of North Carolina; and WHEREAS, Grantors intend that the conservation values of the Property be preserved and maintained by the continuation of land use patterns, including, without limitation, those related to agriculture use existing at the time of this Agreement, that do not significantly impair or interfere with those values; and WHEREAS, Grantee is a North Carolina unit of local government seeking to preserve and protect land in its agricultural condition pursuant to the laws of,the State of North Carolina, and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Agricultural Districts Advisory Board ( "Board ") certified the Property as qualifying farmland pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland,Preservation Program Ordinance on July 8, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners designated the Property as a Voluntary Agricultural District ( "District ") pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on August 3, 1992; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, Grantors hereby voluntarily agree to preserve and protect the conservation.values of the Property for a period not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of this Agreement. 1. Purpose. It is the purpose of this Agreement to assure that the Property will be retained in agricultural use and to prevent any use of the Property that will significantly impair or interfere with the 17 conservation values of the Property. For the purposes of this Agreement, "agricultural use" is defined as cultivation of soil for production of crops, including but not limited to fruits, vegetables, flowers,.and ornamental plants, the planting and production of trees and timber, and the raising of livestock,.for individual and public use, consumption, and marketing. Grantors intend that this Agreement will confine the use of the Property to such activities as are consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. 2. Rights of Grantee. To accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantee by this Agreement: (a) As provided in and subject to the limitations contained in this Agreement, Grantee shall preserve and protect the conservation values of the Property by limiting its use to agricultural use as defined in this Agreement; and (b) To enter upon the Property at reasonable times in order to monitor Grantors, compliance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that such entry shall be upon prior reasonable notice to Grantors, and Grantee shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantors' use and quite enjoyment of the Property. 3. Rights of Grantor. Grantors reserve to themselves, and to their personal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, all rights accruing from their ownership of the Property, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Property that are not expressly prohibited herein and are not inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement. In addition to the foregoing and to accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantors: (a) To have a sign identifying the existence of the District erected on each major public road providing access to the Property; (b) To have water and /or sewer assessments held in abeyance, without interest, until.improvements on the Property are connected to the water and /or sewer systems of the Grantee; including the right to decide when it is necessary to connect such improvements to the water and /or sewer systems of the Grantee; (c) To have the Grantee, through its Land Records System, provide a notice reasonably calculated to alert a person researching the title of a particular tract that such tract is located within one -half mile of the Property; (d) Upon notice to the Board that a State or local public agency or governmental unit, including the Grantee, will formally initiate action to condemn any interest in the Property, the Board or its authorized - representative shall hold a public hearing on the proposed condemnation; and M9 :3 (e) To have the Grantee take into account the existence and terms of this Agreement, and the provisions of N.C. General Statute 153A- 340 in land use planning decisions and ordinances affecting the Property as well as parcels of land adjacent thereto. 4. Prohibited Uses. Any activity on or use of the Property inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement is prohibited; provided, however, from and after the date of this Agreement, the creation of no more than three (3) lots that meet applicable zoning and /or subdivision regulations is permitted. 5. Access. No right of access by the general public to any portion of the Property is conveyed by this Agreement. 6. Grantee's Remedies. If Grantee determines that Grantors no longer meet the criteria necessary for certification as qualifying farmland and designation as a District, Grantee shall give written notice to Grantors of such non - compliance. Grantors may take corrective action sufficient to bring the Property into compliance or may seek to extinguish the terms of this Agreement pursuant to paragraph 7. 7. Revocation. By written notice to the Grantee, the Grantor may revoke this Agreement as provided for by Section VI of the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance and by N.C. General Statute 106 -737.1 (Farmland Preservation Enabling Act). A record of the revocation shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds and shall result in loss of eligibility to participate in a voluntary agricultural district and the benefits thereof. 8. Condemnation. If the Property is taken, in whole or in part, by exercise of the power of eminent domain, Grantor shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with applicable law. 9. Costs and Liabilities. Grantors retain all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to the ownership, operation, upkeep, and maintenance of the Property._Grantors shall hold harmless Grantee and its Board of Commissioner members, directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors and the heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns of each of them (collectively "Indemnified Parties ") from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from or in any way connected with: (1) Injury to or the death of any person, or physical damage to any property, resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the Property, regardless of cause, unless due solely to the, negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties; (2) The obligations specified in paragraph 9; and (3) The existence or administration of this Agreement. 19 10. Amendment. If circumstances arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Agreement would be appropriate, Grantors and Grantee are free to jointly amend this Agreement. Any such amendment shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds. 11. Transfers. Grantors agree to give written notice to Grantee of the transfer of any interest at least ten (10) days prior to the date of such transfer. The failure of Grantors to perform any act required by this paragraph shall not impair the validity of this Agreement. 12. Notices. Any notice, request or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Grantors: Victor Carl Walters, Sr. Lucille Walters 7501 High Rock Road Efland, North Carolina 27243 Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters 7119 High Rock Road Efland, North Carolina 27243 To Grantee: Orange County c/o Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 or to such other address as either party from time to time shall designate by written notice to the other. 13. Recordation. Grantee shall record this instrument in timely fashion in the Orange County Register of Deeds and may re- record it at any time as may be required to preserve its rights in this Agreement. 14. General Provisions. (a) Controlling Law. The interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of North Carolina and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and by the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance. (b) Liberal Construction. Any general rule of construction to the contrary notwithstanding, this Agreement shall be liberally construed in favor of the grant to effect the purpose of this Agreement. If any provision in this instrument is found to be ambiguous, an interpretation consistent with the purpose of this Agreement that would render the provision valid shall be favored over any interpretation that would render it invalid. We H (c) Separability. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, as the case may be, shall not be affected thereby. (d) No forfeiture. Nothing contained herein will result in a forfeiture or reversion of Grantor's title in any respect. (e) Joint Obligation. The obligations imposed by this Agreement upon Grantors shall be joint and several. The burdens of this Agricultural Conservation Agreement shall run with the Property.and shall be enforceable against the Grantor and all future parties who have an interest in the Property for the term of the Agreement. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee, its successors, and assigns, this Agricultural Conservation Agreement together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges belonging or in any way pertaining thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantors have set their hands and seals and Grantee has caused this instrument to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers and its seal affixed by authority of its Board of Commissioners, all on the day and year first above written. GRANTORS: (SEAL) Victor Carl Walters, Sr. (SEAL) Lucille Walters (SEAL) Victor Carl Walters, Jr. (SEAL) Elizabeth T. Walters GRANTEE: BY: Moses Carey, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners i State of North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY If the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of 19 Notary Public My Commission Expires: State of North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY 21 If the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Beverly A. Blythe personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument signed in its name by Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners, sealed with its official seal, and attested by herself as its Clerk. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of f 19 My Commission Expires: Notary Public 1 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3,,1992 Agenda Abstract Item # ZI -G SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION - CRUTCHFIELD PROPERTY DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes S No - ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: - -- - Applications Planning Director X2592 Vicinity Map --------------------- - --------- --- Certifications PHONE NUMBERS: - Soil Conservation Service Hillsborough 732 -8181 - Tax Supervisor Mebane 227 -2031 Staff Checklist Durham 688 -7331 Agricultural Districts Chapel Hill 967 -9251 Advisory Board Draft 7/$/92 Minutes Proposed Conservation Agreement PURPOSE: To consider the application of the Crutchfield Heirs (by Patsy Moore Upton) for designation of their property on Moorefields Road in Cheeks Township as a voluntary agricultural district. BACKGROUND: Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve applications for qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of agricultural districts. The official designation of agricultural districts is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners. Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To be certified as qualifying farmland, a farm must: 1. Be participating in the farm present use -value taxation program established by the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through 105- 277.7, or is otherwise determined by the County to meet all the qualifications of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105- 277.3. K 2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of the land is composed of soils that: a. Are best suited for providing food, seed, fiber, forage, timber, and oil seed crops; b. Have good soil qualities; C* Are favorable for all major crops common to Orange County; d. Have a favorable growing season; and e. Receive the available moisture needed to produce high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten (10) years; OR be one on which at least two- thirds of the land has been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5) previous years, measured from the date on which the determination must be made as to whether the land in question qualifies. 3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on the farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined erosion- control practices as specified in the 1985 Food Security Act. The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office and the Tax Supervisor have provided memoranda which indicate that the Crutchfield property complies with the above requirements. in addition, the property is comprised of one tract, totaling 684 acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.1.a. is satisfied, since the farm consists of one tract containing at least 155 acres. At its July 8, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to approve the certification of the Crutchfield property as qualifying farmland and recommend its designation as a voluntary agricultural district. At the same meeting, the Advisory Board unanimously approved the form and content of a draft Conservation Agreement for use by all designated districts. Section IV.D.1. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance authorizes the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve the form of the conservation agreement. 3 The Agreement had previously been reviewed by the County Attorney and the former Chair of the Advisory Board. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the property of Crutchfield Heirs be designated as a voluntary agricultural district and that the Chair be authorized to sign the conservation agreement. Prior to the signing of the conservation agreement, it should be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney and the Land Records Manager to assure that the property owners and /or representatives, and the description of the property in Exhibit A are proper. min 1� ll� 1 OOV4 S911 71 t ok ----------------- I ---------------- I. Ln Rl -7 O Ln sl rl- L() 5. Orange County Agricultural Districts Advisory Board APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION AS QUALIFYING FARMLAND AND DESIGNATION AS AN ORANGE COUNTY VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT INmucnONS: Before completing the application, Pleam review the pmvissons of the Orange County voluntary Farmland Preservation Prngraln OniinAnce, then fill Out the form as aoea M* sad completely as Possible. Be sure to sign and date the form, and return it to the Change Carroty Planning & Inspections Department, 306F Revere Road; Hillsborough, N.C. M-1 -9*140zilf. Name: Address: City: State: ZIP Code: a zZ Phone Number: (Home) (Work) PROPERTY INFORMATION: . Prop24� =fion�=ss: jJ Township: C If S:: 5 Tax Map: S / Block. Lot: / Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 8 Number of Acres: Deed Book: .5 ;Z Y- Page: 154 9 Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service? Yes: X No: If "no ", please complete back of form. Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange Countv Tax Office? Yes: No: If "no ", please complete back of form. . OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION: I [We], the applicant[s], hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing application is complete and accurate. Signatur�e:.,� Date- Signature: 6 4 Date: Please direct inquiries to: Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Cooperative Extension Service Orange County Planning & Inspections Departtnert HAsbo,uugh 732 181@Cba* tm967401•Dur6m 6er-7031al -It .227 -2091 6 i 1 W, United States e j Department of Agriculture MEMO soil Conservation Service P. 0. Box 8181 Hi ' i i sborough,, NC 27278 732 -8181, Ext. 2751 June 30, 1992 TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director FROM: Greg A. Walker, District Conservationist `SUBJECT: Applications for Certifications as Qualifying Farmland for V. Carl Walters and Patsy Upton (Crutchfield Heirs) Enclosed are certification requirements for the above tracts under the Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program. Enclosures OThe Soil Conservation Service is an agency of the Department of Agriculture e ■ 7 eatmy Upton (Crutchfield Tract) This report serves to document how the Vroposed farm qualifies for acceptance into the Voluntary Agricultural Districts in OranSe County. 1. Two-thirds of the soils on the farm must: a. Be suited for providing food, seed, fiber, forage, timber and oil seed crops. yes no _______ %________ Comments: b. Have good soil qualities. � yes � ��___ no Breakdown of soil classes in percent: Class I C|assas`I, II, III are Class II _���~_ primarily used for cropland,, class III Class IV _A __ Classes III-VI are generally Class V ______ best su:ted for pasture or Class VI _���� woodiand. Class VIII______ Class ViZI generally unsuited'' for agricultural use. Comments: c. Be favorable for all major crops common to Orange County. Major crops are corn, tobacco, small grain, pasture, loblolly pines. 102__% favorable ______% unfavorable Pa8a 2 d. Havo favorab(a growing season. (-YES) The Srow|n8 season for ���_C�L! "I t _is appr ateiy 200 d�ys. It be3ins in approximate\y the saco�d week of Apri1 and runs unt| bout the |ast week �n October. This be consistent for ai| farms in OranSe County. e. Receive t�e avai|ab|e moisture needed to ca hi3n E.' ;w for an averagm 0 8 to 10 years. Oran3e County receives approximate| 45 inches rainfa|| annua\|y n e W e c nsistent for z, || farms in Oran8e County' OR At !east two- thirds of tha iand has bmen- active|y used in agricu\ture, hort|cu|tura! or forestry opera�ions as dmfined in t C 8enera/ Statutes, sect ion 105-277.2 durin8 each of the five previous years, measured from the da�e on which the de- termination must be`made as to w h e er the |and in question qua||fies A cres Acres n forest\and Acres in homestead, farmstead ur other re|ated use Total TRACT Acres Greater than twu- thirds in desiBnated uses. Yes No Comments: ~rA I Jw, 06 ltt ________ % _____ _� 1 -�.*m�m� �9&m� s ��� fv^,�r'y~�� "�w~' � m 11 a Page 2. sit rr, rn u s t 'Zi e in a ri -,,L -j e d , j p g L c I a j L S i, S C, Fi t I CL, 11 ri ac co rd an c 0 w I ti I t r. C- Us DA S;--; i 1 C.,: el-va, i clrt e I S - v i c e S CE-33 ) g: i e f i ri e d e r .:, s :I U1- 1 ---1:1 ri it r ---*, i a c t i CC'S ci S S �- e L I f P 1 d I t 1 n S C: S i-1 f f i c c 1`x...5 If N,J, plar, will be I-- e C1 u i r- ed b c- f ore a c c & p t a n c F-a i r, to t h V o I u n t a r y A S r i CJ 1 -11-1 u; a I D i s t i-- i c: t s PI- -,.[ 3 r a rn . 4- 6— a c J v 1, oh. 4z,+kwp- w. Pdj y e//AA/ A1OAVtAA o" 400'e, .s o 117 A430 If Nc- 6,J � Le 10 ORANGE COUNTY TAX SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE ` - 208 SOUTH CANIERON STREET HILLSBOROUGH. NORTH CAROLINA 27278 KE:RNIFF LLOYD T(a sut)Pnivor TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director FROM: Kermit Lloyd, Assessor SUBJECT: Crutchfield Heirs: By Patsy Moore Upton Application for Certification as Qualifying Farmland MAP REF: 3.51..1 DATE: June 22, 1992 This is to verify that the above referenced property is qualified and currently active in the Land Use Value taxation program. Orango ounty� Agricultural Districts Advisory Board STAFF CIIFCE LIS'r FOR VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT SELECTION Date Application Received: eo l 4 Z. APPLICANT NAME: Ct2�onz -- neL.t:) WL =jtaa , r3-,f PaT5Y t.A=zr tavTCr4 PROPERTY INFORMATION: *Property L.ocatiOWAddress: W*Sr sm")c oC "CCrMt=tr=w5, Rc)Lt7 *Township: C-U�EV-5 _ Tax 51 Block: "" Lot: � •Parcel Idertification Number RINI: *Number of Aera: & Deed Book: 42,4 Page: CERTIFICATION CRITERIA REVIEW: *Meets acreage requin� of: [ll One farm con Wning at least 155 contiguous acres; OR j Yes: Y, No: Initials; [2I Two or more contiguous faire containing at least 155 acres. Yes: No: Initial s• Dace: *Pliftw4 sting in farm prom t user value taxation program. Yes: No: Initials: MEL— Date: 6 ?Z` q Z *Certified by Soil Conservation Service as to land suitability. Yes: X No: Initial s• miX� Date: -;o 2 *Managed in accordance with SCS defined erosion control practices. Yes: No • Initials: l r L-_ Data: In 3 0 e? 2— CERTIFICATIONMESIGNATION ACTION: Date *Application raviawod for completeness. (o /7 q- -7, Application forwarded to - Tax Supervisor's Office. ! 7 Z - Soil Conservation Service. 4117LZ *Evaluatkm received from - Tax Supervisor's Office. 19/2S/5-2-- - Soil Conservation Service. ax] *Application presented to Agriculturd Advisory Board. 7f 61,04 Z Lll Ong farmland =tificatkn approved. Yes: t/ No: Reaso : 5 Z [2l Reeommaidatiar for district designation approved. Yea No• i� -•— 7 B i Z Reason: * APPIicatkn Presented to Board of Commissiarers. [ 1I Agricultural district dcaipation approved. Yes: No: Reason: [2I Conservation agreement formlcontaut approved. Yea: No: Reason: *Conservation agreement signedfrecorded. OAgricultural district identified in Land Records System. *Agricultural district identified on Tax Map. *Agricultural district sign[sl posted. MOTION: VOTE: 12 The property is located adjacent to property also in the ownership of Victor Carol Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters. That property was designated as Orange County's first voluntary agricultural district (284.50 acres) by the Board of Commissioners on June 29, 1992. When combined with the current application, the total district will have an area of 513.20 acres. The Planning Staff recommends that the property of Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters be certified as qualifying farmland and be recommended for designation as a voluntary agricultural district. (Due to personal conflict of interest, Walters did not participate in the discussion nor vote on this item.) Strayhorn moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Hogan. 5 in favor. 1 abstained (Walters - due to personal conflict of interest). (2) Crutchfield Heirs Property - Cheeks Township Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider the application of the Crutchfield Heirs (by Patsy Moore Upton) for certification of their property on Moorefields Road in Cheeks Township as qualifying farmland. Collins indicated the location of the property on the vicinity map included in the agenda packet. He noted that Ms. Upton was the only heir living in the area but, that, she does have authorization from all the heirs to participate in the voluntary district program. Section IV.D.2 of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and approve applications for qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning the establishment and modification of agricultural districts. The official designation of agricultural districts is the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners. Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Pre; ordinance contains the requirements for voluntary agricultural district. To be qualifying farmland, a farm must: 1. Be participating n the farm present taxation program established by the ;ervation Program inclusion -in a certified as use -value N.C. General 13 Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through 105- 277.7, or is otherwise determined by the County to meet all the qualifications of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105- 277.3. 2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm on which at least two- thirds of the land is composed of soils that: a. Are best suited for providing food, seed, fiber, forage, timber, and oil see crops; b. Have good soil qualities; c. Are favorable for all major crops common to Orange County; d. Have a favorable growing season; and e. Receive the available moisture needed to produce high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten (10) years; OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the land has been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5) previous years, measured from the date on which the determination must be made as to whether the land in question qualifies. 3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on the farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined erosion - control practices as specified in the 1985 Food Security Act. The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office and the Tax Supervisor have provided memoranda which indicate that the Crutchfield property complies with the requirements. In addition, the property is comprised of one tract, totaling 684 acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.l.a. is satisfied, since the farm consists of one tract containing at least 155 acres. The Planning Staff recommends Crutchfield Heirs be certified be recommended for designation district. that the property of as qualifying farmland and as a voluntary agricultural Strayhorn asked about open land. Collins responded that the property is primarily a tree farm. He noted that the enabling legislation applies to forest land as well as farmland referring to the definition of agriculture in the General Statutes. Walker noted that there are 10 1/2 acres in beans and corn that has an FSA plan. Strayhorn asked what the advantages would be for a tree MOTION: VOTE: 14 farm to have an agricultural district designation. Collins responded that he felt the Crutchfield Heirs are more interested in the waiver of sewer assessments and insuring long term use of the property for tree farm purposes. This is part of the site of the proposed Seven Mile Creek Reservoir and borders lands owned by orange County which was purchased in the 1970's with the intent of providing a reservoir. Discussion followed regarding the kinds of trees and Walker responded mostly hardwoods. It was also noted by Collins that the property would not be protected from condemnation for a reservoir. But, if the property was condemned for a reservoir, there would have to be a public hearing and the owners would have to be paid a fair market price for the property. Strayhorn moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Nutter. Unanimous. Collins stated that these recommendations will be presented to the Board of Commissioners on August 3, 1992. c. Minimum Farm Size - Voluntary Agricultural Districts Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider changing the minimum farm size required for participation in the voluntary agricultural districts program. The abstract and relevant materials are included as an attachment to these minutes on pages The Planning Staff recommends that Section V.C.I.a and b. be amended to reduce the minimum required acreage from 155 to 80 acres. The change would recognize the role that smaller farms play in the agricultural economy, and, by permitting two or more contiguous farms to join together, allow farms as small as 40 acres to participate. If the Advisory Board recommends the change for public hearing, it can be included on the August 25, 1992 agenda. An important point to remember is that under the current standard or any revision thereof, all applications must be processed and, if eligible, certified as qualifying farmland by the Advisory Board. The applicant(s) would not be eligible for designation as an agricultural district, however, unless the threshold standards were met. 15 AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREWMNT THIS AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT (_ "Agreement ") is made this day of , 199, by Patsy Moore Upton, part owner and representative of the James Edmond Crutchfield heirs, ( "Grantors "), and between Orange County, a North Carolina unit of local government ( "Grantee "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors are the sole owners in fee simple of certain real property in Orange County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference (the "Property "); and WHEREAS, the Property possesses conservation values of great importance to the Grantors, the people of Orange County, and the people of the State of North Carolina; and WHEREAS, Grantors intend that the conservation values of the Property be preserved and maintained by the continuation of land use patterns, including, without limitation, those related to agriculture use existing at the time of this Agreement, that do not significantly impair or interfere with those values; and WHEREAS, Grantee is a North Carolina unit of local government seeking to preserve and protect land in its agricultural condition pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina, and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Agricultural Districts Advisory Board ( "Board ") certified the Property as qualifying farmland pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on July 8, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners designated the Property as a Voluntary Agricultural District ( "District") pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on August 3, 1992; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, Grantors hereby voluntarily agree to preserve and protect the conservation_ values of the Property for a period not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of this Agreement. 1. Pur ose. It is the purpose of this Agreement to assure that the Property will be retained in agricultural use and to prevent any use of the Property that will significantly impair or interfere with the 01.1 Y conservation values of the Property. For the purposes of this Agreement, "agricultural use" is defined as cultivation of soil for production of crops, including but not limited to fruits, vegetables, flowers, and ornamental plants, the planting and production of trees and timber, and the raising of livestock, for individual and public use, consumption, and marketing. Grantors "intend that this Agreement will confine the use of the Property to such activities as are consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. 2. Rights of Grantee. To accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantee by this Agreement: (a) As provided in and subject to the limitations contained in this Agreement, Grantee shall preserve and protect the conservation values of the Property by limiting its use to agricultural use as defined in this Agreement; and (b) To enter upon the Property at reasonable times in order to monitor Grantors' compliance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that such entry shall be upon prior reasonable notice to Grantors, and Grantee shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantors' use and quite enjoyment of the Property. 3. Rights-of Grantor. Grantors reserve to themselves, and to their personal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, all rights accruing from their ownership of the Property, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Property that are not expressly prohibited herein and are not inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement. In addition to the foregoing and to accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantors: (a) To have a sign identifying the existence of the District erected on each major public road providing access to the Property; (b) To have water and /or sewer assessments held without.interest, until improvements on the connected to the water and /or sewer systems including the right to decide when it is nee such improvements to the water and /or sewer Grantee; in abeyance, Property are of the Grantee; -.essary to connect systems.of the (c) To have the Grantee, through its Land Records System, provide a notice reasonably calculated to alert a person researching the title of a particular tract that such tract is located within one -half mile of the Property; (d) Upon notice to the Board that a State or local public agency or governmental unit, including the Grantee, will formally initiate action to condemn any interest in the Property, the Board or its authorized representative shall hold a public hearing on the proposed condemnation; and 17 (e) To have the Grantee take into account the existence and terms of this Agreement, and the provisions of N.C. General Statute 153A- 340 in land use planning decisions and ordinances affecting the Property as well as parcels of land adjacent thereto. 4. Prohibited Uses. Any activity on or use of the Property inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement is prohibited; provided, however, from and after the date of this Agreement, the creation of no more than three (3) lots that meet applicable zoning and /or subdivision regulations is permitted. 5. Access. No right of access by the general public to any portion of the Property is conveyed by this Agreement. 6. Grantee's Remedies. If Grantee determines that Grantors no longer meet the criteria necessary for certification as qualifying farmland and designation as a District, Grantee shall give written notice to Grantors of such non - compliance. Grantors may take corrective action sufficient to bring the Property into compliance or may seek to extinguish the terms of this Agreement pursuant to paragraph 7. 7. Revocation. By written notice to the Grantee, the Grantor may revoke this Agreement as provided for by Section VI of the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance and by N.C. General Statute 106 -737.1 (Farmland Preservation Enabling Act). A record of the revocation shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds and shall result in loss of eligibility to participate in a voluntary agricultural district and the benefits thereof. 8. Condemnation. If the Property is taken, in whole or in part, by exercise of the power of eminent domain, Grantor shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with applicable law. 9. Costs and Liabilities. Grantors retain all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to the ownership, operation, upkeep, and maintenance of the Property._Grantors shall hold harmless Grantee and its Board of Commissioner members, directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors and the heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns of each of them (collectively "Indemnified Parties ") from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from or in any way connected with: (1) Injury to or the death of any person, or physical damage to any property, resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the Property, regardless of cause, unless due solely to the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties; (2) The obligations specified in paragraph 9; and (3) The existence or administration of this Agreement. 18 r 10. Amendment. if circumstances arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Agreement would be appropriate, Grantors and Grantee are free to jointly amend this Agreement. Any such amendment shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds. 11. Transfers. Grantors agree to give written - notice to Grantee of the transfer of any interest at least ten (10) days prior to the date of such transfer. The failure of Grantors to perform any act required by this paragraph shall not impair the validity of this Agreement. 12. Notices. Any notice, request or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Grantors: The James Edmond Crutchfield Heirs c/o Patsy Moore Upton 215 North Cameron Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 To Grantee: Orange County c/o Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Hoard of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 or to such other address as either party from time to time shall designate by written notice to the other. 13. Recordation. Grantee shall record this instrument in timely fashion in the Orange County Register of Deeds and may re- record it at any time as may be required to preserve its rights in this Agreement. 14. General Provisions. (a) Controlling Law. The interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of North Carolina and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and by the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance. (b) Liberal Construction. Any general rule of construction to the contrary notwithstanding, this Agreement shall be liberally construed in favor of the grant to effect the purpose of this Agreement. If any provision in this instrument is found to be ambiguous, an interpretation consistent with the purpose of this Agreement that would render the provision valid shall be favored over any interpretation that would render it invalid. (c) SeRarability. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances i 19 other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, as the case may be, shall not be affected thereby. (d) No forfeiture. Nothing contained herein will result in a forfeiture or reversion of Grantor's title in any respect. (e) Joint Obligation. The obligations imposed by this Agreement upon Grantors shall be joint and several. The burdens of this Agricultural Conservation Agreement shall run with the Property and shall be enforceable against the Grantor and all future parties who have an interest in the Property for the term of the Agreement. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee, its successors, and assigns, this Agricultural Conservation Agreement together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges belonging or in any way pertaining thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantors have set their hands and seals and Grantee has caused this instrument to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers and its seal affixed by authority of its Board of Commissioners, all on the day and year first above written. GRANTORS: BY: (SEAL) Patsy Moore Upton Part Owner and Representative The James Edmund Crutchfield Heirs GRANTEE: BY: Moses Carey, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners State of North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Patsy Moore Upton personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of , 19 Notary Public My Commission Expires: State of North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY 20 t I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Beverly A. Blythe personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument signed in its name by Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners, sealed with its official seal, and attested by herself as its Clerk. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the day of 19 . Notary Public My Commission Expires: O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3 1992 Agenda Abst act Item �- SUBJECT: IDENTIFICATION SIGN - VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ----------------- - - - --: ----------_---- - -_- DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING. Yes X No ,.------------------------------ ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: ----------w- Sketch of Proposed Sign Planning Director X2592 Agricultural Districts ------------------------- m Advisory Board Draft PHONE NUMBERS: 7/8/92 Minutes Hillsborough 732 -8181 Mebane 227-2031 Durham 688 -7331 Chapel Hill 967 -9251 PURPOSE: To consider the design of a proposed identification sign announcing the location of a voluntary agricultural district. BACKGROUND: The goal of the voluntary agricultural districts program is to increase identity and pride in the agricultural community and its way of life and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other negative impacts on properly managed farms. One means of accomplishing this, other than through specific ordinance provisions, is through the erection of signs which identify the location of voluntary districts to the passing motorist and neighboring property owners. Rowan County has used such signs in its program, and Orange County would like to do the same. In fact, a specific provision has been included in the draft agricultural conservation agreement [Section 3(a)] which requires the County a erect such a sign. Attached to this abstract is a sketch of the proposed sign to be used as part of Orange County's program. It contains the logo of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and the wording, @$You are entering an Orange County Voluntary Agricultural District." The sign would have a white (or Carolina blue) background with green lettering and logo. The size of the sign would be approximately 2 feet high and 2.5 feet wide. If the sign design is satisfactory to the Board of Commissioners, the Planning Staff will obtain cost 1 2 estimates for preparation and contact NCDOT to determine procedures for erecting the signs within its rights -of -way. Once this information is obtained, Staff will initiate efforts to have the signs produced and installed for districts designated by the Board of Commissioners. At its July 8, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the sign design. RECOI,MNDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the sign design. You are entering an Orange County Voluntary Agricultural District MOTION: VOTE: 4 Collins noted that those farms which did not qualify due to the threshold of 155 acres were a mix, one of which was a sheep farm. Discussion seemed to indicate that 80 acres was considered to be more realistic for a County such as Orange. There are many farms in the County which are listed as farm use or forestry-but, yet, cannot qualify for agricultural district designation. Hunter asked how the program would be monitored. Walker responded that spot - checking had been considered. He continued that if application is made by a farm that is under the FSA (Food Securities Act) in Soil Conservation Service, it is already on a spot -check list with SCS. A separate listing can be kept of farms that are not already in the SCS program,and spot - checks can be set up for those farms. Strayhorn moved approval of the Planning Staff recommendation to reduce the minimum required acreage from 155 to 80 acres. Seconded by Hunter. Collins noted that any application that is received, regardless of acreage, must be reviewed to determine certification as qualifying farmland. This would then enable the applicant to pursue combinations with adjacent properties to meet the threshold. Unanimous. d. Identification Sign - Voluntary Agricultural District Presentation by Collins. This item is to consider the design of a proposed identification sign announcing the location of a voluntary agricultural district. The goal of the voluntary agricultural districts program is to increase identity and pride in the agricultural community and its way of life and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other negative impacts on properly managed farms. One means of accomplishing this, other than through specific ordinance provisions, is through the erection of signs which identify the location of voluntary districts to the passing motorist and neighboring property owners. A sketch of the proposed sign to be used as part of Orange County's program is included as an attachment to these minutes on page It contains the logo of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and the wording, "You are entering an Orange County voluntary District." The sign would have a white (or Carolina blue) background with green lettering and logo. The size of the sign would r S be approximately two feet high and two and one -half feet wide. If the sign design is satisfactory to the Advisory Board, the Planning Staff will obtain cost estimates for preparation and contact NCDOT to determine procedures for erecting the signs within its rights -of -way. Once this information is obtained, Staff will initiate efforts to have the signs produced and installed for districts designated by the Board of Commissioners. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the sign design. Hunter asked the reason for having the signs in the right - of -way. Collins responded it would be more visible. He continued that he was concerned that if it is placed back onto the property, it will be so far from the travel lane that it will not be seen. The desire is for the signs to be obvious. Concern was also expressed that signs might be destroyed when the Highway Department mows the right - of -way. It was concluded that information regarding the placement of the signs from NCDOT must be very specific. The sign design was approved by consensus. Hunter recommended that the colors be green and blue. The Board agreed. ITEM #4: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION a. LESA - Cropland Site Assessment Forest Land Site Assessment Environmental Site Assessment A copy of the outline presented by Collins for discussion is an attachment to these minutes on page Collins explained that the outline is an attempt to provide a land evaluation and site assessment system which addresses some of the Board of Commissioners' concerns. He continued reviewing the site assessment section of the outline. Collins continued that sites proposed for purchase of development rights could be evaluated using the LESA system and then be compared with other sites to determine which would be the most appropriate for the purchase of development rights program. He expressed concern that if "too much is tied to numbers ", any flexibility in terms of recommendations might be lost. Hogan noted that he felt the program would be most cost effective in the more rural rather than urban areas. Collins responded that when the report was originally 9 F ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 SUBJECT: Access to Potential Landfill Sites DEPARTMENT County Manager ATTACHMENT(S) Proposed Resolution Proposed Interlocal Agreement NCGS 40A -11 1 Action Agenda Item No PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X INFORMATION CONTACT County Manager, ext 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To consider a resolution and interlocal agreement between Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill that authorizes the Town of Chapel Hill to act on behalf of the jurisdictions comprising the Landfill Owners' Group in exercising the statutory authority granted to each jurisdiction to conduct testing of potential sites for a sanitary landfill. BACKGROUND: The Landfill Search Committee has identified four potential landfill sites - OC -2, OC -9, OC -11, and OC -17 - that will require subsurface testing for further evaluation of the suitability of each site. The results of this testing would permit development of preliminary engineering plans and cost estimates. These would allow the LSC to compare alternative sites along the lines of social implications, capital and operating costs, and environmental effects. The County has authority under GS 40A -11 to enter upon lands specified for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient in selecting a site for a future landfill. Property owners can receive compensation for damages that occur as a result of required testing. At the May 19, 1992 meeting, the Board deferred a decision on exercising that statutory authority pending a detailed report on the landfill site search process. Landfill Owners'Group staff and Joyce Engineering presented that report to the Board of Commissioners at its most recent meeting on June 29, 1992. The Town of Chapel Hill adopted a resolution similar to the one proposed here on May 11. The Town of Carrboro Board of Aldermen is scheduled to receive a landfill search process report from LOG staff and Joyce Engineering at their August 11 meeting, and to act on a similar resolution after that report or at a subsequent meeting. N 2 The attached resolution would authorize Orange County to exercise its statutory authority under GS 40A -11 and authorize the County Manager to sign the attached interlocal agreement allowing the Town of Chapel Hill to carry out this activity on behalf of all three jurisdictions. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board ,adopt the resolution. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXERCISE OF ORANGE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY TO ENTER UPON PRIVATE LANDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING SURVEYS, BORINGS, EXAMINATIONS AND APPRAISALS TO ASSIST IN THE SELECTION OF A SITE FOR A NEW LANDFILL TO SERVE ORANGE COUNTY AND APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE EXERCISES OF THAT AUTHORITY WHEREAS, Orange County is a member of -the Landfill Owners' Group and is a part owner of the present Orange County Landfill; and, WHEREAS, Orange County and the two other owners of the present landfill, the Town of Chapel Hill and the Town of Carrboro, have appointed a citizens' Landfill Site Search Committee to consider sites for a new landfill for orange County; and, WHEREAS, the owners of the Orange County Landfill have appointed representatives to the Landfill Owners' Group which is considering issues related to the operation of the present landfill and possible location of a site for a future landfill; and, WHEREAS, as part of the process of evaluating potential sites for a future landfill for Orange County, it is necessary to enter upon properties which have been identified as possible sites for a future landfill; and, WHEREAS, under North Carolina law (N.C.G.S. 40A -11), Orange County, as an agency with the authority to exercise the power of eminent domain, may enter upon lands for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient in carrying out and performing its powers of eminent domain, specifically in this case to select a site for a sanitary landfill to serve Orange County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners that the Board hereby approves the exercise of the County's authority under -G.S. 40A -11, to enter upon the lands described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient in selecting a site for a future landfill to serve Orange County; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners authorizes the County Manager to execute the attached interlocal agreement on behalf of Orange County with the other owners of the Orange County Landfill, whereby the Town of Chapel Hill is designated to exercise said authority on behalf of Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill, and ratifies said agreement. 3 IMMI'M "A" 3IT C•2 1 4 9 1 M ( Acres Land Omer Addre ;.23.3 (1.0ac) Thcmas York Tear 8222 Stanford Rd. Chapel Hill, NC 27516 i.23.3A (1.0ac) SAXE AS ABOVE ).23.13 (1.37ac) Leta Check Tear 822 Stanford Rd. Chapel Hill, NC 27516 5.23.14 (1.02ac) SAME AS ABCNR ;.23.15 ( 223.3ac) Teer Farms Inc'. 8222 Stanford Rd. Chapel Hill, NC 27516 1.26.1 (49.18ac) Alease P. Wilson 2521 Azalea Dr. Durham, NC 27703 .3 (9.23ac) John J. & Helene A. Dixon 4915 Airport Rd. Chapel Hill, NC 27514 �Atti brand to transmittal nW 32 -. 'J yr VV -7 %OT f u1sres) Land Cwne Address 1.2.10 (65.35ac) Helen N. & Leroy J. Miller 2506 NC 57 Hillsborough, NC 27278 6 ! 2- .OT ACr al Land owner Address 1.8.31 (13.61ac) Nancy J.S Ronald R. Beauvais Route 4, Sox 508 Hillsborough,NC 27278 i.8.31A (47.00ac) Alex Watkins Heirs Route 4, Box 678 Hillsborough, NC 27278 1.8.32 (93.02ac) Dathene Hawkins, et al. 7107 Wilkerson Road Cedar Grove, NC 27231 i.8.329 (1.79ac) Agnes & Warren S. Su maey, Sr. 122 Occoueechee St. Hillsborough, NC 27278 1.8.32$ (2.83ac) Wanda & Warren S. su mey, Jr. 2701 Miller Road 8111aborough, NC 27278 i_S_36 (4.51ac) Harold V. & Barbara Summy 1.13.1 (35.12ac) Laura Louise Watkins & Alex Watkins Heirs 1.131E (16.Oac) Laura Louise Watkins & Alex Watkins Heirs 5.13.1A (55.23ac) Billy W. & Carolyn P. Sprinkle 1.13.10 (38.14ae) Frederick V. Miller, Sr. 1.13.10A (12.25ac) Frederick V. Miller, Sr. 5.13.108 (11.71ac) Jesse L. Miller 5.13.14 (1288.67ac) Randolph Dudley Fox 5.14.1 (0.61ac) Sue Thompson Johnson 5.14.3 (0.53ac) Calvin Roosevelt Mayfield & Mable Long s. .4A (0.74ac) Dwan V. Johnson 1 Route 4, Box 468 Hillsborough, Ne 27278 1312 New Sharon Church Rd. Hillsborough NC 27278 1312 New Sharon Church Rd., Hillsborough, NC 27278 607 Watts Street Durham, NC 27701 1200 Now Sharon Church Rvac Hillsborough, NC 27276 1200 New Sharon Church Rd. Hillsborough, NC 27278 1122 New Sharon Church Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 2726 Croasdaile Dr., Suite V Durham, NC 27705 2608 St. Mary's Road Hilj8bOrough, NC 27278 P.O.Box 1057 Hillsborough, NC 27278 13158 Old Durham Road Roxboro, NC 27573 I lte OC -17 of k res .18.27E (4.2ac) .19.24 (10.0ac) .19.240; (10.01ac ) Land Owne Ida Strowd, Pendergrass, at al. Dr. David paydarfar wendy D. s walker A. Long ess 451 Valencia Drive Pontiac MI 48058 226A Harvard $t., Apt. 1 Cambridge, MA 02139 28 wedgewood Chapel Sill, NC 27514 7 8 NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT made and entered into t ,ixj the day of , 1992, by and between the County 0 Orange, a North Carolina po itical subdivision, the Town of Carrtjord, a North Carolina municipal corporation, and the Town of Ch*ea Hill, a North Carolina municipal corporation, pursuant to Claptex 16ok, Article 20, Part 1, North Carolina General Statutes. WHEREAS, Orange County, the Town of Carrboro and this Town of Chapel Hill own and operate jointly a landfill located in Orange County to serve their respective jurisdictions and the fesidents thereof; and, WHEREAS, Orange County, the Town of Carrboro and this Tws of Chapel Hill desire to exercise jointly each agency's individual authority under N.C. General Statute 40A-11 to enter upon private lands for the purpose of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or expedient toward tte selection and possible acquisition of a site for a future land! llj NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by Orange County and the Town of Chapel Hill and Carrboro as follows: I. The Town of Chapel hill is hereby authorized and directed to exercise the authority given under G.S. 40A -11 oh Behalf of orange County, and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Dill for the purpose of considering possible, future sites for a landfill to serve the three respective governmental agencies and their residents. 2. All costs associated with the authorized pxr case of authority under G.S. 40A -1.1, including, but not limited to, costs of surveys, boxing&, and, examinations, shall be borne by the Present Landfill Fund adriinnistered by the Town of Chapel Hill. 3. This agreement shall be for the period begirsniog on the date of execution first above written and extending to June 30, 1993. 4. This Agreement may be extended or modified by agresa wnt of the parties. I r 5 • Any party may withdraw from this agreement, Wt om 30 dare written notice to the remaining parties. ORANGE COUNTY by County Manager TOWN OF CARR80RO by Town Manager TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL by Town Manager N Attest clerk Attest clerk Attest C 1 er li i 40A -11. Right of entry prior to condemnadon i Any eotedemnor without having filed a petition of seem at, depositing any sum or taking any other action prsviisd lbr is Chapter, to authorized to enter upon any lands. but not to make surveys, borings, examination., and a praiesle se be * tteceesary or expedient in carrying out and r er duties under this Chapter. The condemnor 11 give in writi to the owner at his Ism known 'sddress and tl in A f te land of the intended entry authorised tiae►. Entry under this section shall not be deemed a treMass or within the meaning of this Chapter, however. th6amwsbW w snake reimbursement for any damage resulting fruvi and the owner is entitled to bring on salon to oe m- aj . Utlee owner recovers damages ortwentyfive ) t6s amonmt ol%n d by the condemnor for reim its activities the court, in its discretion, may award r tees -to the owner. (1981, c. 919, e. 1. 10 Y, 0-R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date August 3 1992 SUBJECT: PD --1 -92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL (MODIFICATION OF PD -3 -90) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING ATTACHMENT(S): Site Plan vicinity Map Planning Board Recommended Findings 5/26/92 Public Hearing Minutes 6/15/92 Planning Board Minutes (Refer to 5/26/92 agenda packet for other attachments) 1 Action Agenda Item # �=-A PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No INFORMATION CONTACT:Em11y Cameron Extension 2580 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967- 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which would allow expansion of the existing private school approved as a Planned development in 1990. BACKGROUND: Carolina Friends School is an existing private school located on the north side of Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) and west of Friends School Road (SR 1719). The property contains 32.94 acres and is zoned PD -RB, Planned Development - Rural Buffer. In August of 1990 a Class A Special Use Permit was issued for Carolina Friends School to allow the use of the school's wastewater disposal system in the Rural Buffer. Article 6.20.1 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a large ground absoption system with a design capacity over 3000 gallons per day may be allowed in the RB district only through approval of a planned development. The Board of Directors of Carolina Friends School adopted a five -year master plan in 1991 for development of the school. The plan calls for expansion of the facility with a 9500 square foot Resource Center adjacent to the Upper School, a 200 square foot office additon, four 120 square foot storage sheds, handicapped accessible bathrooms, and road widening with additional parking. Student enrollment is projected to increase by twenty 2 students--.- The proposed construction constitutes a major modification to the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that such a change be considered by the Board of Commissioners following a public hearing. The proposed expansion of the school complies with almost all the findings (see attachment) required by the Zoning Ordinance that are attached to the current Special Use Permit. Conditions have been included in the Planning Staff's recommendation to address deviations from the approved findings and to insure compliance with all State and local regulations. The existing sewage disposal system has a capacity of 4000 gallons per day and is regulated by the NC Division of Environmental Management. Based on the State's standards, the potential system flow is 10 gallons per day per student. Current daily flow is about 2400 gallons for 368 students, or 6.5 gallons per student per day. Projected enrollment at Carolina Friends School will not exceed 394 students. The resulting potential for a 3940 gpd flow through the system is within the 4000 gallon capacity permitted by DEM. The proposed modification was presented at public hearing on May 26. No citizen comments were received at that time. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. The Planning Board recommended approval of the proposal on June 15, 1992. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School based on the attached findings and subject to the following conditions added to those placed on the Special Use Permit issued in 1990: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Resource Center, submit final grading /erosion control plans and storm drainage calculations for review and approval by Orange County Erosion Control; 2. Revise the site plan to: C 3 . Remove parallel parking along the east, side of the driveway between the basket -' ball court and the creek. All proposed parking must be at least 75 feet from the lot boundaries; b. Indicate clearing limits and tree protection fencing for the expansion of the Upper School access, parking and the Resource Center. Provide a detail of the method of tree protection and add a note which states that no storage of construction materials or vehicles is to occur beyond the clearing limits; and c. Show the boundaries of lot 7.6..2. (PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT - INK ONLY) APPLICATION FOR CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DATE: 4/ 7 / 92 APPLICATION NUMBER: PD- 1 - 9 2 8188 I (We) request a Class A Special Use Permit as provided for in Article of the I Orange County Zoning Ordinance for the addition of a 9,500 s.f. Frien The following information is provided in support of this request: A. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Street Address or Location: 4809 Friends School Road, Durham, NC Orange County Tax Map_ 7 Block Lot(s) ZQA, 20B Township ChAppl Hill Zoning District(s): F_0eA,. BUFFrzP_ and 2 Lot /Parcel Size: 32,9 acres or square feet Number of Existing Buildings: 12 Gross Floor Area: 45.120 _ square feet Number of Proposed Buildings: 4 Gross Floor Area:___ 9,860 square fee Water Supply: Public (Specify) Community Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (Specify) Community Individual School District: - Fire District: Eno River General Land Uses in Area: Residential Critical Areas: ✓ Stream /Drainageway Flood Prone Area Watershed (Specify) Historic Site Other (Explain) B. SITE PLAN INFORMATION: Twenty -six (26) copies of a Site Plan, prepared by a registered North Carolina "�?cT surveyor or engineer, are provided as required by Article 8.8 and which contain the following information: ' ALtr PEQUtF_E:P $Y &ZTICL_. - 14 [SEE CNECKt -lSr and Sl'm North point, scale, and date. aPFt -IC 4�rt o� FORM ) Extent of area to be developed. Locations and widths of all easements and rights -of -way within or adjacent to the site. Location of all existing and proposed structures on the site. Location of all areas on the site subject to flood hazard or inundation as shown on flood maps or soils maps. Location of all water courses on the site, including direction of flow. Existing topography at a contour interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level datum. - ' Existing and proposed fencing, screening, gates, parking, service, and storage areas. Access to site, including sight distances on all roads used for access. (PLEASE COMPLETE REVERSE SIDE) . s 5 C. OTHER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION: �✓ _. Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development. �_ Two (2) full -size copies of the applicable Orange County Tax Map, one (1) copy with the property in question clearly marked. - The names and addresses of the property owner(s) and /or applicant(s), and the names and addresses are all persons owning property within five hundred (500) feet of the property in question. Application fee as set by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Traffic impact study as required by Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Additional information regarding the proposed Special Use as required by Article 8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Narrative (or letters from appropriate agencies) indicating: 1. Method and adequacy of provision of sewage disposal facilities, solid waste disposal, and water service. Where public sewer is not available, a letter from the Orange County Health Department certifying the suitability of the existing and /or proposed wastewater treatment system for the property. 2. Method and adequacy of police, fire, and rescue squad protection. 3. Method and adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site. I (We), the applicant(s), hereby certify that the foregoing application and supporting documentation is complete and accurate. I understand that it shall be my (our) responsibility to present evidence to the Board of Commissioners the form of testimony, exhibits, documents, models, plans, and the like to support the request for approval of the Class A Special Use Permit. APPLICANT DATE NOTE: If title to the above mentioned property is not in the name of the applicant(s), Please include a letter from the -owner(s) signifying approval of the request. rr•+ rr+ rrr+ rtrrrtrtrrrrtr+*+ rtrrr■ rr• r+ r+ rrrtrt+ rtrrrrtrr+ + +rtrtrr•rtr�`s * +rtrrtrrrrr *trtrrrrtrr FEES: Amount $ 405.60 Date Paid: 4 / IS / 92- Receipt # 035719 Nbz It . �' - gip• , :.E:.,1�7.:: -;;:. s5 c ,9, � .;na• �j+__y. ;' •.4`�. k� 4 rib' its of �vdQ/!�� ,e��.�, � 5 o n: ?>y �ii:S;• �. ���� . r f.3"i+;. �!:. is i :: � \ j ! ` i• a � � r'. ,..R:i. 7 E - � l . 3� i ns ��ya:-`try '• r *r , J+ Y 9 S �i :_ ` o f ^: ��a r:{�l.. '', ;;�91 it f. ( { _ � � ::•..'* �� w,1J :Fi'•:'yi�. •. .v. -. `�,f:i F. ,.. - .. 1>SfjT�J�� �4ei �iK � yp� i J , -1Vli: 5 C '.r� :. `r1:r'� •..r:.: _ ��::: a:r :_ •, Yo- � _ 55§ ! Y w + ;�. E: "���J�t""��r`M {;ji:" ' °r :!o;_Srlaii: };;a. •'. :7 N} -l;r•Vf.r...., WIN Val I " W'l IFS.: `;, Ji big J!iJ •:. c i itszC?� — 5�9 5N � 2g p Is a :5s° sl' ss� �'� �t• e? ' $!t °O 1 JIM �lag �'� � I ..• •, it ".... � �t = , .� .�" _ ,�� � ©_ - _��_ ale 1 1 C7 ' a Pat N •M ` rain .a \ •� - ..c •��. \ . O » 1404 *00 1 to . S 00 �, O i i w y w- ' i moo too& VRL r pp to r , � • • �{: .,ac p� -5 -moo Got 40 ." o OIL .00 � t? r �1 DS SCE -4oOL Al o ROO E) t�el r..oPL M �-- d 1 t✓�>~e r'O O� S i w �• r� •� �'© , epi lose •tAK - IO ac Gob t a�' .' ON 1 dp- "WC Y r� K fb" * • ! • .r 1 r 'a M le Q /A{ � err. � « � .J • rare M « .G 1 V-0 D r, _ - -- — — H Sr 1.01 CAL r K O NO I I e 9 Te p. we IN 1 .e a IN ; ®'1 , �. a sal 1 ( pfa w1 aK �i rAt bw 1'�ID00' FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD PERTAINING TO APPLICATION: PD -1 -92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL (MODIFICATION OF PD -3 -90) The Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School was approved in 1990. Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance states that modifications to Class A Special Use Permits (other than minor changes defined by 8.7.1) shall be considered by the Board of County Commissioners following a public hearing. The findings listed below are those required by the Zoning Ordinance and used in approval of the current Special Use Permit. Where a finding has been affected by the request for a modification, it has been noted by an asterisk ('). ARTICLES B.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance; _ "No" indicates Non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD OF BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Renuirements 8.6 - Application submitted on forms providing full and accurate description of proposed use, including location, appearance and operational characteristics. • 8.8 a) - Seven (7) copies of the site plan prepared by a registered N.C. land surveyor or engineer containing: _x—Yes No �x —Yes No 1. North point, scale and date _x —Yes No 2. Extent of area to be developed x Yes _.._._.._No 3. Location and width of all easements _x—Yes No and rights -of -way within or �T adjacent to the site 4. Location of all existing or _X—Yes No proposed structures on the site 5. Location of all areas on the site x Yes No subject to flood hazard or inundation as shown on flood maps or soil maps 6. Location of all water courses on _x—Yes No the site, including the direction of flow • Finding. affected by modification, PD -1 -92 Submittal includes application Yes No forms, site plan and supporting documentation on the sewage disposal system. 26 copies of the overall site Yes No plan and schematic site plan of the proposed Resource Center were provided by Philip Post & Associates and Dail Dixon & Associates. Shown on the site plan. Yes No Site plan indicates extent of Yes No area to be developed. The rights -of -way off Mt. Sinai Yes No Road and Friends School Road and required drainage easements are shown on the site plan. All structures are shown. Yes No The area south of the pond is not Yes No detailed on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Orange County Soil Survey does not indicate soils subject to flooding in this area. All intermittent streams and Yes No direction of flows are provided. A pond is also shown on neighboring property. ARTICLES 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPUCATION COMPONENTS Continued PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance Requirements • 7. Existing topography at a contour _x—Yes No interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level datum S. Proposed or existing fencing, _x—Yes No screening, gates, parking, servicn and storage areas 9. Access to site including sight Yes _x—No distances on all roads used for access • 10. Elevations of all structures Yes _x—No proposed to be used in the development 11. Names and addresses of owners _x—Yes No and applicants • 12. A fee, as set by the Board of _x—Yes No County Commissioners • Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 Topography is shown on the second sheet with the schematic site plan of the proposed Resource Center. Existing and proposed parking and service, and storage areas are indicated on the plan. Sight distances are not shown on the plan, but an on -site inspection proved the sight distance at the entrance on Friends School Road is adequate. Sections through the existing Upper School and the proposed Resource Center were submitted showing building heights and spacing. Elevations showing building materials and window spacing have not been prepared. Provided with application. $489.50 application fee paid on 4/15/92. A BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes , No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 1190 ARTICLE 8.2.4 SPECIFIC STANDARDS /ALL SPECIAL USES (*Yes* indicates compliance: *No" indicates Non - compliance) PLANNING I BOARD OF BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Re uire ants Article 8.2.4 requires the applicant to address the following: • a) Method and adequacy of �x_Yes No Applicant has provided copies of Yes No provision for sewage disposal permits and a letter approving facilities, solid waste and additional enrollment from the water service N.C. Division of Environmental Management as well as actual daily flow data for the existing sewage disposal system. The system includes a package treatment plant, storage lagoon and spray irrigation system with a design capacity of 4,000 gallons per day. The system's current flow is about 2400 gpd /for 36$ students. Based on DEM's standards, proposed out flow is based on 10 gallons per day per student. Projected enrollment will not exceed 394 students resulting in 3940 gallons per day potential system flow, still within the design capacity permitted by the State. Dumpsters are shown for solid waste disposal, and a water tower for water supply. b) Method and adequacy of police, _x —Yes No Letters from the Orange County Yes No fire and rescue squad protection Sheriff, Emergency Services, and Eno Fire Department were provided.. All agencies will be able to provide services to Carolina Friends School. • c) Method and adequacy of vehicle _x _Yes No The school has access to Yes No access to the site and traffic Friends School Road (SR 1719). conditions around the site A statement has been provided with the application which indicates that the proposed widening of internal roads will improve emergency access and internal circulation. • Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 y ABDM 8.8.23 SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Article 8.8.23 indicates that the application shall comply with the applicable sections of Article 7 - Planned Developments ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATIONIPLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates Non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD OF BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS ordinance Requirements Article 7.4 indicates the application must first comply with all requirements specified in Article 20 - Amendments. Those requirements include: 20.3.2 a) Map showing affected _x—Yes No Site plan provided at a scale Yes No property at scale of not less of 1"=100'. than 1 " =100' nor more than 1 " = 20' ' 20.3.2 b) Legal description of _x—Yes No The legal description is on Yes No property the current Special Use Permit. The boundaries have not changed since the permit was issued in 1990. 20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged Yes No N/A - No error alleged. Yes No error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment ' 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if _x—Yes No A 5 -year plan for development Yes No any, which make amendment was adopted by the school. reasonably necessary to promote Proposed expansion of the public health, safety and school facility required a general welfare modification to the Planned Development Special Use Permit. ' 20.3.2 e) Manner in which _x—Yes No Goal Fourteen of the Yes No proposed amendment will carry Comprehensive Plan calls for out purpose and intent of "Full and equal educational adopted Comprehensive Plan opportunities for the residents of Orange County consistent with ... the needs of the County residents ". The applicant has requested a modification to the Special Use Permit in response to a need created by adoption of a 5 -year Master Plan for the school. ' Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ,Continued► PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordi nce Re uirements Article 4.2 identifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development - Rural Buffer designation. The criteria for the Rural Buffer district are set forth in Article 4.2.1 and are as follows: a) Designated by the adopted —x—Yes countywide Land Use Plan as Rural Buffer or by the adopted Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan as Rural Residential or both. b) Urban services, including water —x —Yes distribution and sewage collection _. mains are not likely within 10 -20 years. c) 01 2 ' Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 No The property is designated as Rural Buffer on the County Land Use Plan and Rural Residential on the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan. No The Orange County Water and Sewer Policy prohibits the extension of water and sewer lines into the Rural Buffer except to address public health emergencies or for public facilities. Under those exceptions, water and /or sewer lines are sized to serve only the purposes for which they are extended. Yes No Yes No Yes. No 12- BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No I ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR._EVALUATI.ON./PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (Continued Ordinance Requirements Article 7.4 then indicates the application must comply with certain specific requirements common to all Planned Developments. These include: 7.4.1 So located with respect to major streets and mass transit facilities and designed so as not to create traffic on minor streets in residential districts. 7.4.2 So located with respect to water, sewer and storm drainage facilities that enlargement or extension will not result in higher net public cost or earlier incursion of public cost. and So located with respect to police, fire and rescue services, and schools and parks so as to have access in the same manner as permitted under the existing zoning. 7.4.3 Site suitable for development within hazard from flooding, erosion, and soil subsidence of slipping. 13 PLANNING BOARD OF BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS I . „x —Yes No • Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 —x—Yes No rx_Yes No —x—Yes No Access is provided via a private drive off of Friends School Road (SR 17181. No minor residential streets will be affected by this project as proposed. The proposed development will not have access to public water, sewer or storm drainage facilities; therefore, no higher net public cost will result. Letters regarding adequate service provision have been received from the Sheriff's Department, and fire, and rescue services. The area south of the pond is not detailed on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Orange County Soil Survey does not indicate soils subject to flooding in this area. Slopes adjacent to the drainageways average 10% gradient. Drainage easements are provided to accommodate drainageways. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /PLANNEM OEVELOPMENTS Icon 'nued) Ordinance Requirements Article 7.14.3 sets forth "site planning" standards with which an applicant must comply. Standards regarding "external relationships" are as follows: a) 1. Access points provided to encourage smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movements and minimum hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Use of minor streets by substantial traffic is discouraged. a) 2. Safe and convenient routes provided for pedestrians and motorcyclists. Crossings safely marked, located and controlled. PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS _x—Yes No Access will be provided via a private drive to State Road 1719, Friends School Road. No minor streets will be affected by this development. _x—Yes No Since there is no through traffic, vehicles speeds are slow, allowing for safe pedestrian circulation. Most of the existing structures/ facilities are located on the west side of the entrance drive which minimizes pedestrian crossings. a) 3. Visibility provided at N /A_Yes No intersections (pedestrian and vehicular) in accordance with Article B.S. •a)4. 100 -foot open space provided _N /A Yes No along perimeter of PD -II district. Recreational use and off - street parking set back at least 75 feet of district boundary. There are no internal intersections. Sight distance is adequate at Friends School Road. N/A - 100 foot open space not required. Schools are permitted in all residential districts. Proposed parking at the upper school is at least 75 feet off lot boundaries. The parallel parking proposed along the east side of driveway between the basketball court and the upper school will not be allowed (Condition #26). a) 5. Yards, fences, walks, or x_Yes No Most of the parking is screened vegetation provided to screen by existing vegetation. off' undesirable views, lighting, noise, etc. Parking /loading areas and refuse collection/ storage areas screened. Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 14 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes Yes Yes im No No Yes No Yes No r ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS OR EVALUATION LANNED DEVELOPMENTS Continued PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance Reauirements •a)8. Maximum building height _x—Yes No complies with standards set forth in Article 8.12.3 and Article 5.1.1. a) 7. Signs to be erected in _X —Yes No accordance with Article 9. Standards regarding "internal relationships" are as follows: 0b)1. Streets, drives and parking ,x —Yes areas provide safe and convenient access for dwellings and emergency vehicles, and do not create small block sizes. b) 2. Vehicular access controlled as follows: a) Streets serving 50 or less _x—Yes dwellings provide direct access to parking /service areas. b) Streets serving greater than N /A-Yes 50 dwellings provide access to parking areas so located. designed and controlled as to channel traffic without interruption. b) 3. Walkways form safe, convenient _x . Yes system of access to dwellings, facilities and off -site designations. Maximum walking distance between dwellings and parking; delivery and refuse collection areas does not exceed 100 feet. • Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 No No No Maximum building height in RB district is 25 feet. The height of the proposed resource center is 27 feet. According to Article 8.2.1, a height of 27 feet is allowed if one foot of additional front and side setbacks is provided. The proposed location of the Resource Center would meet the additional required setbacks. The existing sign meets the requirements contained in Article 9. The existing drive will be widened to provide improved access for emergency vehicles. The existing entrance drive provides access to parking/ service areas. Not applicable. No No system of walkways is shown. The maximum distance between a school building and parking is approximately 75 feet. 1.5 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS - Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Continued) PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance Re uirements Walkways used as play areas _x_Yes or school routes by children located and designed to minimize contact with vehicular traffic. Crossings appropriately marked and safeguarded. b) 4. Protection of visibility - See a)3. and b)3, above. b) 5. Open space and spacing between _x—Yes buildings - See Article 8 standards. 16 x BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS No Since there is no through traffic, Yes No vehicle speeds are slow, allowing for safe pedestrian circulation. Most of the existing structures/ facilities are located on the west side of the entrance drive which minimizes pedestrian crossings. No Open space requirements are met. Yes No. No standards are provided in Article 8 for spacing between non - residential buildings. ARTICLE 5 - DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non- compliance) PLANNING BOARD OF BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Reauirements Article 5 lists standards for minimum lot size, lot width, front, side and rear setbacks, maximum building height and lot coverage, and development intensity. The applicant has applied for a PD -H -RB designation. The standards for that district are set forth in Article 5.1.1 and are as follows: a) Minimum lot area per non- residential use - 87,120 sq. ft. b) Minimum lot width - 130 ft. c) Required front setback - 40 ft. d) Required side and rear setbacks - 20 ft. ' Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 _x—Yes No The lot size shown on plan Yes No is 1,110,780 sq. ft- _,,.x —Yes No The lot width shown on plan Yes No is 240 feet. _x —Yes No Typical 40 -foot front yard Yes No setback is noted on plan. _x —Yes No Typical 20 -foot side and rear Yes No yard setbacks are noted on plan. ARTICLE 5 - DIMENSIONAL „REQUIREMENTS (continued) Ordinance Reg uirements •e) Maximum building height - 25 ft. Compliance with lot coverage and development intensity standards is addressed in Article ®. ' Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 PLANNING BOARD FINDINGS —X —Yes EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS No Maximum building height is 25 feet. The height of the Resource Center is 27 feet. Additional front and side setbacks will be required in accordance with Article 6.2.1. 1.7 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes No ARTIg E-8 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ( "Yea' indicates compliance; 'No' indicates non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance Requirements Article 8 lists specific standards which apply to various types of development applications. Article 8.12 contains those development intensity standards which apply to group developments controlled by the Land Use Intensity (LUI) system. a) Minimum gross land area - 174.240 sq. ft. b) Maximum gross land area - None specified sq. ft. •c) Maximum floor ratio - 0.100. Maximum floor area permitted - 111,606 sq. ft. •d) Required minimum open space ratio - .$4. Required minimum open space - 937,490 sq. ft. 'e) Required minimum pedestrian/ landscape ratio - 0.21. Required minimum pedestrian/ landscape space - 234,372 sq. ft. Note: See Appendix A for "Definitions ". 1.8 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS x_Yes No Applicant's site contains 25.5 Yes No acres or 1,110,780 sq. ft. The gross land area is 1,118,060 sq. ft. N/A Yes No Article 5.1.2 of the Zoning Yes No Ordinance. _x—Yes No Maximum permitted by ordinance Yes No is 111,808 sq. ft. The total proposed floor area for the 5 -year plan is 52,840 sq. ft. _x —Yes No Applicant's plan indicates Yes No 1,057,940 sq. ft. of open space. _x —Yes �. No Applicant's submission indicates Yes No 983,940 sq. ft. • Finding affected by modification, PD -1 -92 k t� 19 In accordance with Article 8.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Commissioners shall also consider the following general conditions before the application for Special Use shall be approved: (1) The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted; Yes No (2) The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (unless the use is a public necessity, in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property); Yes No (3) The use is in compliance with the general plan 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. Yes No 5-;E4-92 Puet-tc t4E&2JA', MIA10rES 20 r1 Residential. To the east is PHE, Inc., a mail order facility zoned General Commercial --4. Across NC Highway 54 to the north is undeveloped land zoned AR and LC -1. The Planning Staff has made positive findings on the application for rezoning to LC -1 and NC -2 as required by Article 20 and Article 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. The list of permitted uses in the proposed districts is included in the attachments. The applicant has no plans for developing the property in question. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS MADELINE CURL, a White Cross resident with property adjoining P and S Sporting Goods, spoke in opposition to this request. A copy of her comments are in the Permanent Agenda File in the Clerks office. GREG SHEPHARD, 'a representative of P. and S Sporting, spoke in support of this request. He indicated that all of the Planning regulations and requirements have been met. A motion was made by Commissioner Commissioner Gordon, to refer this item to the recommendation to be returned to the Board of County than August 3, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Willhoit, seconded by Planning Board for a Commissioners no sooner b. PD -1 -92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board, swore in Planner Emily Cameron who presented this item. It was presented for the purpose of receiving citizen comments on a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which, would allow expansion of the existing private school approved as a planned development in 1990. Carolina Friends School is an existing private school located on the north side of Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) and west of Friends School Road (SR 1719). The property contains 32.94 acres and is zoned PD -RB, Planned Development -Rural Buffer. In August of 1990 a Class A Special Use Permit was issued for Carolina Friends School to allow construction of a wastewater disposal system in the Rural Buffer. Article 6.20.1-of the Zoning Ordinance states that a large ground absoption system with a design capacity over 3000 gallons per day may be allowed in the RB district only through approval of a planned development. The Board'of Directors of Carolina Friends School adopted a five -year master plan in 1991 for development of the school. The plan calls for expansion of the facility with a 9500 square foot resource center adjacent to the upper School, a 200 square foot office addition, four 120 square foot storage sheds, handicapped accessible bathrooms, and road widening with additional parking. Student enrollment is projected to increase by twenty students. The proposed construction constitutes a major modification to the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that such a change be considered by the Board of Commissioners following a public hearing. The proposed expansion of the school complies with most of the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance that are attached to the current Special Use Permit. Conditions have been included in the Planning Staff's recommendation to address deviations from the approved findings and to insure 21 compliance with all State and local regulations. The existing sewage disposal system has a capacity of 4000 gallons per day and is regulated by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. Based on the State's standards, the potential system flow is 10 gallons per day per student. Current daily flow is about 2400 gallons for 368 students, or 6.5 gallons per student per day. Projected enrollment at Carolina Friends School will not exceed 394 students. The resulting potential for a 3940 gpd flow through the system is still within the 4000 gallon capacity permitted by DEM. THERE WERE NO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS. A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, second by Commissioner Gordon, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners on August 3rd, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 3. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS $. HOME OCCUPATIONS ARTICLES 6.16.6 AND 22 This item was presented by Mary Scearbo for the purpose of receiving citizen comments. This proposed zoning ordinance text amendment will create more performance - oriented standards for home occupations. The substantive changes proposed in the amendment pertain to setbacks and square footage limits for accessory structures on lots larger than 200,000 square feet (Article 6.16.6.3). The proposed standards would allow greater flexibility in the location of home occupation accessory buildings if the site contained wooded areas or topographic features which provided effective screening. In contrast, the location of structures in open areas would be more restricted in some instances. Other proposed changes involve the use of large existing structures for home occupations activities. The amendment was originated by the Planning Staff to address problem situations which have been encountered in administering home occupation regulations. A recent example involved a deep lot about 11 acres in size, with the residence located almost 1000 feet from the road. Current regulations required the home occupation structure to be located in an unsuitable location to the rear of the residence. The desired location was in a wooded area, several hundred feet from the road. The home_ occupation could not be approved, even though the use would have been very heavily screened, and would not be visible from the roadway. These proposed amendments begin a more comprehensive overhaul of home occupation standards. The issues addressed at this time will resolve situations which are more commonly encountered. Staff will be proposing in a subsequent amendment changes to requirements for smaller lots, specific standards related to traffic impacts, and additional standards for home occupations which could potentially create nuisance impacts. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD Commissioner Willhoit asked for clarification regarding the number of persons who would be allowed to be employed in the home. Ms. Scearbo indicated that the definition is interpreted to mean that two full -time persons (FTP) may be employed at any one time. That could include part -time positions equaling two full -time positions. 12 P�.,I�►U�11 A�j �QQ.D MIAIVTP-S 22 MOTION: Eidenier moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff with the findings as presented. Seconded by Gray. VOTE: Unanimous. c. Planned Developments (1) PD -1 -92 Carolina Friends School Presentation by Emily Cameron. This item is to consider a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which would allow expansion of the existing private school approved as a planned development in 1990. Carolina Friends School is an existing private school located on the north side of Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) and west of Friends School Road (SR 1719). The property contains 32.94 acres and is zoned PD -RB, Planned Development - Rural Buffer. In August of 1990 a Class A Special Use Permit was issued for Carolina Friends School to allow the use of the school's wastewater disposal system in the Rural Buffer. Article 6.20.1 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a large ground absorption system with a design capacity over 3000 gallons per day may be allowed in the RB district only through approval of a planned development. The Board of Directors of Carolina Friends School adopted a five -year master plan in 1991 for development of the school. The plan calls for expansion of the facility with a 9500 square foot Resource Center adjacent to the Upper School, a 200'square foot office addition, four 120 square foot storage sheds, handicapped accessible bathrooms, and road widening with additional parking. Student enrollment is projected to increase by twenty students. The proposed construction constitutes a major modification to the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that such a change be considered by the Board of Commissioners following a public hearing. 4 Y 23 The proposed expansion of the school complies with almost all the findings (a copy of these findings is an attachment to these minutes on pages ) required by the Zoning Ordinance that are attached to the current Special Use Permit. Conditions have been included in the Planning Staff's recommendation to address deviations from the approved findings and to insure compliance with all State and local regulations. The existing sewage disposal system has a capacity of 4000 gallons per day and is regulated by the NC Division of Environmental Management. Based on the State's standards, the potential system flow is 10 gallons per day per student. Current daily flow is about 2400 gallons for 368 students, or 6.5 gallons per student per day. Projected enrollment at Carolina Friends School will not exceed 394 students. The resulting potential for a 3940 gpd flow through the system is still within the 4000 gallon capacity permitted by DEM. The proposed modification was presented at public hearing on May 26. No citizen comments were received at that time. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School based on the findings and subject to two conditions added to those placed on the Special Use Permit issued in 1990: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Resource Center, submit final grading /erasion control plans and storm drainage calculations for review and approval by Orange County Erosion Control; 2. Revise the site plan to: a. Remove parallel parking along the east side of the driveway between the basketball court and the creek. All proposed parking must be at least 75 feet from the lot boundaries; b. Indicate clearing limits and tree protection fencing for the expansion of Upper School access, parking and the 14 MOTION: VOTE: 24 Resource Center. Provide a detail of the method of tree protection and add a note which states that no storage of construction materials or vehicles is to occur beyond the clearing limits; and c. Show the boundaries of lot 7.6..2. Waddell asked about the condition regarding removal of the parallel parking area. Cameron responded this condition was to meet the setback requirements in the Planned Development District standards. She noted that sufficient parking is available so the loss of the twelve spaces did not create a problem for the applicant. Gray moved approval with the conditions as recommended by the Planning Staff with the findings. Seconded by Hoecke. Unanimous. d. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments (1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedures Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider a proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment which would change Article 2.2.14.3 to provide greater flexibility to the Board of Commissioners in conducting public hearings involving principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. In April of 1988, Article 2, Administration, of the Zoning Ordinance was amended to define the Comprehensive Plan and add procedures for its amendment. Prior to that time, procedures for amending the Land Use Plan (as referred to then) were contained in a policy statement approved by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners. When'-the Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1988, the procedures were incorporated into Article 2 with little or no change. Section 2.2.14.3 of Article 2 requires that principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February.. Since the adoption of the amendment, few applications for principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan have been processed under the procedures. While applications for principal amendments have generally been held in February, there have been 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No A ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 SUBJECT: Orange County Solid Waste Committee Recommendations DEPARTMENT Public Works PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X ----------- ....-,.----------------- ATTACHMENT (S) Compactor Collection Center Description Procedural Guide for Siting Solid Waste Centers Cost Estimates for One Site Implementation ---------- - ..,.,. - - - - -- -- - -- - -- ------------------------------- INFORMATION CONTACT Wilbert McAdoo, ext 2627 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -5501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To present some initial recommendations from the Orange County Solid Waste Committee with regard to enhancement of solid waste collection in unincorporated Orange County. BACKGROUND: In January 1992, the Board of Commissioners established the Orange County Solid Waste Committee ( OCSWC) and assigned it the following charge: * To identify means for compliance with state mandates regarding solid waste management in unincorporated Orange County. * To identify solid waste collection service to be provided as determined by citizen needs. * To identify equitable financing for the chosen level of service. * To identify means for garnering citizen support for and commitment to a solid waste management plan. The Committee has met four times since its initial meeting on March 31. Four sub - committees (Collection Options; Education; Legislation; and Waste Reduction) were established by the Committee at its April 13 meeting. The Collection options sub - committee has met on four occasions to discuss alternatives for solid waste collection. They presented a report and recommendations to the entire OCSWC at its July 22 meeting. After discussion, the OCSWC voted to present to the Board of Commissioners the following recommendations: 1) To develop the Ferguson Road Solid Waste Collection Center as a staffed site, using the Compactor Collection Center model. 2 2) To work cooperatively with the community to identify two additional solid waste collection center sites in northern Orange County. 3) To associate the closure of existing greenbox sites with development of new solid waste sites. The existing Ferguson Road consolidated greenbox site is a 2 acre parcel located at the edge, but just inside, of the University Lake watershed. It was purchased by the County in 1989, before watershed restrictions were in place, but is now subject to the 12% impervious surface limitation. In order to develop a compactor collection center at the Ferguson Road site, the County would need to pursue one of several options. Among options that could be explored would be acquisition of additional land at Ferguson Road or amendment to the zoning ordinance. The first option could result in the County having sufficient acreage to meet impervious surface restrictions. The second option could involve the substitution of structural best management practices (BMPs), such as a wet detention pond, to achieve the surface water protection impacts that impervious surface limitations promote. If use of permissible BMPs were limited to governmental entities, long term financial responsibility and performance of required periodic maintenance could be assured. If amendment to the zoning ordinance were considered, the process of review by Ordinance Review Committee, Planning Board, and public hearing would probably take about three months before the Board of Commissioners would be prepared to take action on any recommendation. Staff and a representative of the OCSWC will be available to respond to Board questions and to pursue alternatives in accordance with the Board's direction. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report as information. 3 COMPACTOR COLLECTION CENTERS 40 YARD HIGH COMPACTION SYSTEM AND 40 YARD OPEN TOP CONTAINERS The 40 yard high compaction system utilizes a 40 cubic yard container loaded with a stationary 2.0 cubic yard compactor unit to accept household waste. The 40 yard compactor systen, will hold the equivalent of six (6) yard containers. This system uses one stationary compactor with two containers; one for use and another as a backup that is rotated as the container is taken to the landfill to be emptied. The 40 yard high compaction container has the same dimensions as the 40 yard open top container, but is enclosed and has compaction capabilities. It does, however, require that an employee be stationed on site to operate the compactor. This system provides better waste control in that the employeee Monitors the type of waste deposited. Since_ the hopper itself is smaller, it too controls the type of waste received. The 40 -yard high compaction container and the 40- yard open top container both use tandem tilt -frame roll -)ff trucks for collection. Thereby, allowing f .nterchangeability and easier servicing. Three 40 yard open top containers are needed for c_-ollec-.�4i on of bulky items. one container each for wood products, white goods, and furniture. This system allows for maximum source separation at the point of disposal for the citizen. 4 November, 1991 ,4 Revised July, 1992 ORANGE COUNTY SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CENTERS A PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR SITING, LAND ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT I. Target Areas in Rural Orange County For Solid Waste Collection Center Siting. A. Sites should be located to serve .residents within a specified radius in unincorporated Orange County. B. Areas should be located using the Transportation section of the Oraniae County Land Use Element as a guide. This will assist in determining ideal areas for placement of renters by: I. Outlining road classifications and their primary use such as minor arterial, collector, major local and minor local. 2. Delineating the goals and policies of the Orange County Land Use Element with regard to safety, convenience and the elimination of land consuming and unsightly sprawl along the transportation system. II. Preliminary Screening of Areas A. Acquire tax maps to identify various parcels of undeveloped land in targeted areas. B. Obtain further information on targeted areas through the Orange County Land Records and Tax offices. C. Eliminate unsuitable areas. D. Conduct meetings with Township Advisory Councils (TACs) to communicate need/process and solicit feedback. III. Preliminary Negotiations with Property Owners of Targeted Areas A. Orange County staff to contact property owners and explain process which led to the final targeting of their property for solid waste collection center. Explanation should include the following: * Components of Senate Bill 111 * Components of House Bills 1109 and 86 * Proposed Orange County Solid Waste Ordinance * Preliminary and Secondary Screening Processes * Rising number of out of County residents using greenboxes B. If property owner refuses, ask for alternatives. 5 C. Orange County staff to contact property owners within a .500 foot radius of targeted area and explain process which led to targeting of site. If opposition to the site is strong, or the owner has a legitimate concern, address the concern or abandon the site. IV. Site Suitability Assessment A. Orange County Staff will visit proposed site to assess its,suitability for a solid waste collection center. Representatives from the following departments or divisions will assist: * Planning * Environmental Health * Soil and Water * Engineer * Public Works B. County Engineer to develop generic site plan layout. C. Based on generic site plan layout, Orange County Staff will assess site suitability based on the following standards: 1. Proximity to Homes ando.Commercial, Industrial Businesses and Institutions Due to heightened public awareness about the environment, citizens are becoming more knowledgeable and critical of government actions which may have an environmental impact. As a result of Senate Bill 111 and the EPA's Subtitle D Criteria, N.C. local governments are scrambling to meet requirements regarding solid waste collection and disposal. At the same time, citizens are becoming increasingly concerned about environmental impacts "in their back yard." It is extremely important, therefore, to. ,consider and address public perception in defining a process for . acquiring land for solid waste collection centers. Targeted areas should be canvassed by County staff to determine distance from communities, neighborhoods and homes. Sites should not be located within a 500 foot radius of a residence, or a 100 foot radius of a commercial or industrial business or an institution. The Planning Department, however, will make adjustments on a case by case basis. 2. Watershed Restrictions. Land acquisition is a significant expense in the 2 6 County's capital expenditures for the solid waste collection centers. Much of Orange County lies in classified watersheds which have regulations limiting the percentage of impervious surface and undisturbed land. The County, therefore, must purchase a greater sized parcel of land to accommodate a site and comply with the existing watershed standards. Such restrictions may make it difficult for the County to finance sites in those areas. '(See Appendix). 3 -. Major Transportation Corridor The Major Transportation Corridor is an overlay district restricting public and private development along major transportation corridors. The major transportation corridors include the interstate system as designated in the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Application Criteria is outlined in Section 4.2.31 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 4. Floodplains Floodplains are areas which would be inundated by water in a specific storm event generally referred to as a "100 year flood." Solid waste collection centers cannot be located in a floodplain. (See Appendix). 5. Slopes Slopes indicate the relative suitability of vacant land-for development. Land slope of less than 5 % is capable of accommodating most types of development. Slopes greater than 5 -15o would be less than ideal for solid waste collection centers. 6. Soil Conditions Soil conditions such as depth to bedrock, permeability, shrink -swell potential, erodibility, and drainage are crucial factors that will influence the suitability of an area for a solid waste collection center. In most instances, as problems with soil conditions increase, so do the costs of site preparation and construction. Well drained, permeable soils such as Georgeville or Appling are ideal. Less than ideal are poorly drained, impermeable soils such as Lignum or Helena. 7. Unique Natural Areas A natural area, as defined by Triangle J Council of 3 Governments is "any space containing unusual or exemplary biological habitat, geologic feature, or hydrologic location." This would include endangered plant /animal sites, threatened plant /animal sites, special plant /animal sites, Plant communities and exemplary geologic formations. Section 12.6 of Orange County Zoning Ordinance states that buffers may be required on developments adjacent to natural areas (as inventoried). Buffer distance would be decided on a case by case basis by the Planning Department. An Environmental Assessment* and possibly Environmental Statement would be required before development could occur. (See Appendix). S. Historic Sites Appendix D in the Orange County Land Use Element is an "Inventory of Sites of Cultural, Historical, Recreational, Biological and Geological Significance in the Unincorporated Portions of Orange County." This includes churches, cemeteries, historically significant buildings /sites, recreation centers and other natural areas also mentioned in the Natural Areas Inventory. Although there are currently no Historic Districts in unincorporated Orange County, there are sites which are on the National Register Of Historic Sites. Section 12.6 of the Orange Count - Zoning Ordinance states that buffers shall be required on developments proposed adjacent to historic sites (as inventoried). Buffer distance would be decided on a case by case basis by the Planning Department. 9. Wetlands Wetlands are areas characterized by hydric soils (usually gray in color) and vegetation specific to wetlands areas. Wetlands are considered a very important natural resource because they provide recharge areas for groundwater and they serve as filter traps for sediment, pesticides, and other types of pollutants. The Information Services Division of the Orange County Planning Department is currently working on a map of recognized wetlands in Orange County. * An Environmental Assessment is part of the Orange County Environmental Impact Ordinance and is a form which must be filled out when more than 40,000 square feet of land is disturbed. An Environmental Statement is an additional form which must have H t 8 " clearance by,the State and is required when an Environmental Assessment identifies one or more areas where clearance and development may have a significant impact on the environment. 10. Zoning Ordinance Requirements. Section 6.16.15 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance has restrictions applying to solid waste collection facilities owned or operated by a public agency for the disposal of household waste by Orange County residents. (See Appendix). 11. County Engineer to- adjust site plan layout as necessary. V. Public Information Public information efforts will run concurrently with the targeting of areas for solid waste collection centers. Solicitation of suggestions for land acquisition and selection criteria will be included at these meetings. A. After negotiation with property owner, send notices to all residents within 1/2 mile radius of site, informing them of proposed site location. Included in,the notice will be the following information: * Current legislation mandating changes in solid waste management (copies of pertinent legislation will be available). * Consolidation of current greeribox system into staffed solid waste collection centers. -Description of pilot solid waste collection center - --Location map of proposed site A notification sign will also be posted at the site at this time. B. Submit press releases about proposed site and announce site location. Include a description of pilot solid waste collection center and a location map of proposed site. C. Develop fact sheet of technical information policies, state mandates and other public interest data on solid waste collection centers. Make report available to county staff who may be questioned about solid waste issues. D. If necessary, conduct special public hearings on solid waste collection centers. Public hearings will take F1 Z place after -other public information efforts have revealed that a public hearing would be wise. Public hearings should take place before purchase of property for a site. E.' At least one month prior to the closing of a site, prepare press releases, post signs and send out flyers to notify all residents within a four mile radius of the greenbox site that is to be closed. (If closing of site is done in conjunction with opening of another, new site location will be included with notice of closing). E. At least two weeks prior to the opening of a solid waste collection center, prepare press releases announcing the opening of the center. VI. Update Rural Private Haulers Keep rural private haulers abreast of all solid waste collection center issues as they occur. Schedule quarterly meetings to discuss concerns and keep haulers informed. VII. Planning and Approval Process A. Have surveyor conduct survey, including topographic elevation, and provide final plat. B. Review final plat with property owner,. address concerns and make changes. C. Submit eight (8) copies of final plat and a tax map to the Orange County Planning Department for subdivision approval-if property needs to be subdivided for purchase (Public works will send final plat and tax map to County Attorney). D. Hire appraiser to conduct appraisal of property and make initial contact with attorney to conduct a title search. E. Review offer with the owner, make any revisions if necessary. F. Prepare agenda abstract for the Board of County Commissioners' meeting and obtain approval for purchase of property. G. All parties sign final plat (Health Department for septic system if applicable, Public Works Director, property owner, and zoning officer) which is then sent to Land Records and recorded. H. County Attorney to prepare deed and closing documents and handle closing. 6 10 I. Secure an engineer to design site plans and specifications, including plans for septic system, if applicable, and all required setbacks and buffers and approval from DOT for driveway permit. J. Erosion Control division to develop erosion control plan and gain approval from the State. (-State is allowed 30 days to respond after submittal date. If there is a problem with the Plan, it must be corrected and resubmitted so process could take as much as 60 days.) An Erosion Control Plan is not required for less than 1 acre of disturbance. K. Efforts will be made to avoid sites that require Environmental Assessment. If Environmental Assessment is necessary, the Planning Department will conduct the assessment before Site Plan can be approved. (Site Plan can be.approved within 21 days if complete and there are no further approvals necessary.) L. If Environmental Statement is necessary, a consultant will be hired to prepare Statement. Statement must be reviewed by the State and Board of County Commissioners, and presented at a public hearing before a Zoning Compliance Permit is issued (This process may take up to three months). VIII. Site Construction and Development A. Draw up specifications, prepare bid package, receive bids, make recommendation, get BOCC approval and award contract for the following: -- Utility Building -- Landscaping -- Fencing and Gates -- Signs Site Construction. B. Develop specifications, prepare bid package, receive bids, make recommendation, get BOCC approval and award contract for collection service for compactor containers and 40 yard open top containers. C. Contact Duke Power to initiate installation of lighting equipment. D. Contact telephone company to initiate installation of telephone hook -up. E. Prepare Orange Regional Recycling for construction of salvage shed, placement of recycling bins and used oil container, if applicable. 6 11 F. Building, Electrical and Plumbing permits should be requested for utility building, lighting of site and any plumbing features that might be included. G.' Get final approval for outdoor toilet facilities (if applicable) from Environmental-Health and County Attorney. IX. Equipment Purchase Draw up specifications, prepare bid package, review bids, make .recommendation, get approval from BOCC and award contract for purchase of: Stationary Compactor -- Compactor Containers -- 40 Yard Open Top Containers (if applicable) X. Staffing A. Devise a schedule for attendants to staff solid waste collection center(s). B. Submit Solid Waste Collection Center attendant job description to Personnel Office and set-up schedule for press releases. C. Set up interviews for selection of site attendants. D. Keep current staff apprised of issues relating to opening of solid waste collection centers. XI. Plan and Publicize opening ceremony at least two weeks in advance of opening of each site. 8 Appendix WATERSHED 3 STRICTIONS Orange County currently has two classifications within watershed areas. Those classifications include: WQCA - Water quality critical (WQCA) area is the area in the portions of-water supply watersheds which are immediately adjacent to the water supply impoundments. These portions of the water supply watershed drain directly into the water supply impoundments. The WQCA is established as a district that overlays other zoning districts established in the Orange County zoning Ordinance. In WQCA's in Orange County, a maximum of 6% impervious surface is acceptable for each individual parcel. Maximum percentage of impervious surface 6% Average amount of impervious surface required for solid waste collection centers 40,000 sq.ft. Acreage required to meet impervious surface requirements 15.3 PW -II - Protected Watershed II (PW -II) is the area of the water supply watershed which is outside of the WQCA. These portions are presently mostly undeveloped and should be maintained in a rural undeveloped character for the watershed in the future. A maximum of 12 % impervious surface is allowed in PW- II,areas where there is no public water or sewer. A maximum'of 30,-% impervious surface is allowed in PW -II areas where public water and sewer are available. Maximum percentage of impervious surface Average amount of impervious surface required for solid waste collection centers Acreage required to meet impervious surface requirements Maximum percentage of impervious surface Average amount of impervious surface required for solid waste collection centers Acreage required to meet impervious surface requirements 12% 40,000 sq.ft. 7.6 300 40,000 sq.ft. 3 12 13 Assistance from the following departments and divisions will be needed: De artment Division Ex ertise Manager Engineer Site Plan development Watershed standards Topography Planning Current Zoning ordinance Watershed standards Land Use Element Flood Plains Wetlands Planning Comprehensive Transportation Watershed standards Land Use Element TACs (Outreach) Planning Erosion Cont. Erosion Control and Grading Permit Planning Inspections Building, Electrical and Plumbing permits Health Environ. Soil Conditions Soil & Water Soil Conditions and outreach Purchasing Manager Public Info. Specifications and bidding Flyers,. .brochures and public information assistance Personnel Staffing for centers Ag. Ext. Outreach 14 COMPACTOR COLLECTION CENTER FY - 1992 -93 ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSES Site Attendent Staffin Operating hours: lam - .lpm - Total staffing hours - 77 /week Phase One - November - June (8 77 hours /week x 34 weeks /year 2,618 hours x $7.73 hourly rat 7pm Monday - Saturday 6pm Sunday months, 34 weeks) = 2,618 hours. e = $20,237 -Total site attendant cost = $20,237 Service for 40 Yard Compactor and Open Top Containers The County will contract out for service wl"th the pilot program. Phase One - November - June (8 months, 34 weeks) Compactor containers estimated 3 pulls /week at $84 /pull = $252 /week x 34 weeks = $8,568 40 yard open top containers estimated.4 pulls each week at $84 /pull = $336 /week x 34 weeks = $11,424 Total for compactor and 40 yard open-top container service = $19,992 Site Maintenance Staffing Site maintenance will be absorbed by current county staff. Rental of E ui ment Equipment needs include: One (1) Compactor with container One (1) additional container Three (3) Forty Yd. Open Top Containers Compactor and 1 container at $320 /month x 8 months = S2,560 One additional container at 5175 /month x 8 months = 51,400 Three forty yard open top containers at $90 /month x 8 months $2,160 Total equipment rental cost = $6,120 Other O eratin Ex enses Phase One - November - June (8 months, 34 weeks) Chemical Toilet Phone Lights Electricity Equipment Upkeep Site Maintenance Landfill Fees $60 /month 40. /month 40 /month 40 /month 50 /month 100 /month 2000 /month Total other operating expenses = $18,640 $480/8 months 320/8 months 320/8 months 320/8 months 400/8 months 800/8 months 16,000/8 months TOTAL ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSES FOR FY 1992 -93 "= $64,989 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT NEEDS-FOR FY 1992 -93 SITE DEVELOPMENT COST SUMMARY FOR FY 1992 -93 Land Acquisition Site Development Costs 560,000 Fencing & Gates 11000* - Utility Building 4,000 Service Connections 1,500 Landscaping 500 Signage 1,000 Heat & AC 600 Total $68,600 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FOR FY 1992 -93 = 68,600 TOTAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL-COSTS FOR FY 1992 -93 = $133,589 2 0 V1161 A i . O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 Action Agenda Item # Vf 13 SUBJECT: County Inter Office Waste Reduction DEPARTMENT: Public Works PUBLIC HEARING: Yes _x—No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilbert McAdoo Proposal for Enhancement ext. 2627 of Waste Reduction Recycled Items Purchased TELEPHONE NUMBERS: by Orange County Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227 -2031 Chapel Hill- 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: Report on current inter office "Paper Back" waste reduction program and plans for enhancement of program. BACKGROUND: In February of 1989, Orange County started an inter office waste reduction program with recycling for newsprint.-, aluminum and white ledger paper. The "Paper Bark" progran has 26 sites located in county offices and county related facilities. Sanitation workers collect recyclables every Tuesday and take them to American Reclaim for processing. Since February of 1989, the County has recycled 12 runs ^` white ledger paper, 5.1 tons of aluminum and 24.2 tons of newsprint. Other Orange County waste reduction efforts include purchase of products rude from recyc.lables, and dissemination of information on waste reduction measures to be taken by County emplo n&, Attached is a partial list of c:_r_ycled products current!, purchased by Orange Count-. The Grange County Purchasnn_ Department has been active in Triangle J Council of Governments' Purchasing Agents Recycling Committee which promotes purchasing of recycled products. Staff has also issued information on how employees can reduce the amount of waste produced in County offices. Waste reduction measures include re -using paper (printin-,{ draft copies on backs, making notecards, printing,front and bark), sharing magazine and newspaper subscriptions, buying re- usable plastic mugs for meetings, purchasing materials in larger sizes, purchasing refillable 1 2s containers and buying concentrated materials and mixing on site. As the County approaches the State mandated 25% waste reduction target. date (June, 1993), we are looking at possible ways of further reducing.the amount of waste that comes from our County offices. Attached is a plan for promoting waste reduction and further enhancing our "Paper Back" program. Implementat.inn of the inter office waste reduction program enhancements will take place during the winter of 1992. Additionally, the County Commissioners, during the 1992 -93 budget deliberations, discussed waste reduction for the Orange County Schools. County and Orange Regional Recycling Staff have scheduled a meeting with the school staff to develop a plan of action for waste reduction in the Orange County school system. Staff will report back to the Board of County Commissioners as a plan is developed. RECOMMENDATION: Manager recommends Board receive as information only. No decision needed at this time. U PROPOSAL FOR WASTE REDUCTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF COUNTY INTER OFFICE "PAPER BACK" PROGRAM Senate Bill 111 requires that counties reduce the amount of waste that goes to the landfill by 25% by .Tune of 1993. In order to accomplish this goal, all contributors to the solid waste stream must adopt practices to reduce the amount that goes to the landfill, including Orange County. Waste reduction is best accomplished through waste reduction at the source, reuse, recycling and composting. The following is a plan to encourage Orange County employees and users of County buildings to maximize our potential for reducing our waste stream. Components of the plan include: * Waste Audit * Total Recovery of Recyclables from the Waste Stream * Evaluation of Existing System and Ways of Enhancing * Education Waste Audit The Public Works Department is currently conducting a waste audit to determine: 1) The types and amount of recyclable items that are going into our waste that we do not have inter office bins for (plastic, glass, cardboard,, blueprint paper, magazines, mixed paper), and 2) The amount of recyclable items that are going into our waste that we do have inter office bins for. Upon this determination, staff will be able to devise a plan specific to our needs and make the most of our resources as we try to rapture as much of our recyclable waste stream as possible. Total Recovery of Recyclables From the Waste Stream In order to effectively enhance our "Paper Bark" program and reduce the amount of waste going to the landfill, the following information is needed: 1) Items that are recyclable - Currently, the following. recyclable items are accepted in Orange County: . aluminum, tin cans, newsprint, white paper, green bar computer paper, blueprint paper, colored paper, green glass, brown glass, clear glass, plastics 1,2,3 and 5, magazines and glossy catalogs, used motor oil, cardboard and brown paper bags and plastic grocery 3 4` bags. Although there is no permanant mixed paper recycling, orange Regional Recycling has been successful in providing a number of mixed paper recycling opportunities for County residents. Mixed paper has been collected on specific weeks -ends at University Mall and Walmart. The frequency is determined by our ability to find a market for the materials. 2) The amount of these items that are currently in our waste stream (waste audit). With this information we can determine the feasibility of total recovery of recyclables from our solid waste stream. Obviously, a strong education component will be necessary. Evaluation of Existing System and Ways of Enhancing The "Paper Back" program consists of 26 sites with recycling bins for newsprint, aluminum and white paper. Problems with the existing system include: * Limits recycling opportunity for employees while at work because of lack of recycling bins for many items. * Lack of recycling bin locations for the public in buildings with more traffic_. (New Courthouse, Tax and Records, Richard E. Whitted Building, Recreation and Parks,etc.) * Lack of training and updating of employees on items that can and cannot be recycled. * Unreliable markets for .recyclable items. Because the recycling industry is so volatile, with supply far exceeding demand, it is difficult to estimate oasts for recycling. Currently, grange Regional pays processors to accept mixed paper and plastic_. It is difficult to estimate, theref cre, the expense of additional collection options for County employees. * There are certain problems associated with buying recycled products. In a recent survey conducted by the North Carolina Recycling Association and the Triangle J Committee, performance was ranked first in order of importance in purchasers reaching their decision to use recycled products. Because recycled products are still relatively new, there continue to be problems with performance. Additionally, respondants site higher prices as a deterrent. �i Measures to Increase Recycling and Enhance Waste Reduction 1) Adding recycling bins for glass, plastic and other recyclables that are found during the audit in significant enough quantities to warrant collection. We are currently investigating the possibility of co- mingling certain items that are not as prevalent in the waste containers, such as glass and plastic. ?) Most County buildings have only one site for recycling. County employees are familiar with site locations but citizens are not. There are quite a few buildings that get a significant amount of citizen traffic. Citizens are generally not familiar with the location of the recycling bins and throw recyclables into the waste containers cans. We would like to invest in additional recycling bins to be placed in County buildings with citizen traffic. Bins would be in a very obvious location and would be placed beside containers for non- recyclable items. 3) One of the major problems with our inter office program is contamination of recyclables. There is often garbage and other items in the bins and public works employees have sifted through bins on many. occasions. It is impossible to catch all contaminants and this makes it difficult for our processors. Processors cannot sell contaminated recyclable materials and ultimately must pass the cost of contaminants back to-the County. We are currently taking all recyclables to American Reclaim in Mebane. Although Orange County employees have brochures and stickers on boxes informing them of items that can and cannot be recycled, we continue to experience quite a bit of contamination. An education and training program is planned to address this problem (described below). 4) Continue to increase the amount of recycled products that the County buys. This can be accomplished by thorough investigation of alternatives, and involvement in associations researching how purchasers can accomplish this goal in the County's (city, organization's) best interest. A representative from the Orange, County Purchasing Department recently attended the "Buy Recycled" Conference in Research Triangle Park which provided information about recycled products currently available. It might be helpful to develop policy guidelines or goals for buying recycled products. L• Education Education is a key component of any successful waste reduction program. Our "Paper Back" education efforts have included mailing handouts to "Paper Back " - monitors for posting. Many employees, therefore, do not see the handouts and remain uneducated. We propose the following for addressing this need: * Estabish a waste reduction training program for all County employees. Public Works Staff will train selected county employees about all aspects of our "Paper Back" program. Selected employees will then train employees in their department. A major component of the training session will be waste reduction at the source, or ways to generate less waste or rec_yclables in County offices. Training sessions will be provided for all County employees. Trainers will schedule sessions for their departments. A program monitor will be appointed by each department head to monitor the "Paper Back" system. !this could be the trainer, as selected above). It will be the responsibility of the program monitor to actively pursue maximum waste reduction and recycling for his/her department. Program monitors will periodically check individual garbage containers for recyclable materials. All information on recycling and waste reduction will be filtered through program monitors who will be responsible for the education of their department. Orange County is in the process of moving many of its offices because of the completion of the new Government Services building. It would be wise, therefore, to implement our plan for enhanced inter office waste reduction after the moves are completed. With approval of the orange County Commissioners, implementation will take place during the winter of 1992. Orange County has purchased and is currently using the following products made of recycled paper: 1. Toilet Paper x 11" Continuous Run Paper 3. All Greenbar Computer Paper 4. Window Envelopes - Purchasing and Central 5. Window Envelopes - Finance 6. Animal Control Brochures 7. Stationary - Board of County Commissioners 8. Window Envelopes - Tax Assessor 9. Window Envelopes - DSS 10. Letterhead - DSS 11. Stationary Envelopes - DSS 12. Stationary - Second Page -Board of County 13. # 10 Envelopes - DSS 14. # 10 Window Envelopes - DSS 15. 9.5 x 12.5 Craft Envelopes 16. Covers and Tabs for Budget Document 17. Family Brochures - Commission for Women 18. Directory of Services - DSS Services Commissioners VA O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: AUGUST 3, 1992 SUBJECT: JAIL INSPECTION REPORT DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER Action Agenda Item # c. PUBLIC HEARING: Yes _X —No ATTACHMENT(8): INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE, EXTENSION 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To receive the jail inspection report for July 1, 1992, from the North Carolina Department of Human Resources. The General Statutes require the Board of County Commissioners to receive and take necessary corrective action to the semi- annual jail inspection reports submitted by the North Carolina Department of Human Resources. The statute further states that the governing body shall promptly initiate any action necessary to bring jail facilities into conformity to standards. The report for July 1, 1992, is enclosed for review, and indicates our compliance with standards. - RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board of Commissioners receive the report. Corrective action is being taken as required. I North Carolina Department of Human Resources Division of Facility Services 701 Barbour Drive • P. O. Box 29530 • Raleigh, N. C. 27626 -0530 Courier Number 56 -20 -05 James G. Martin, Governor David T. Flaherty, Secretary July 16, 1992 Mr. Lindy Pendergrass County Sheriffs Department 125 Court Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 2727$ -2510 Dear Sheriff Pendergrass: JUL 2 a 2 John M. Sy.ria, Director Telephone (919) 733 -4560 FAX (919) 733 -3307 On July 1, 1992, Area Jail Consultant from the North Carolina Department of Human Resources inspected the Orange County Jail. A copy of the inspection is attached for your attention. Please submit your plan of corrective action on each deficiency cited in this report to this office by August 17, 1992. If you have any questions, please call me at (919) 733 -4560. Sincerely, Ernest T. Dixon Area Jail Consultant ETD :vmh Attachment J cc: Mr. Robert G. Lewis, Head, Jail and Detention Branch Mr. Moses Carey, Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners Mr. John Link, Orange County Manager C �B Y En �i 6„r ns r ax 0 d 0 0 b 1-1 • • N y y�y J '1 r hR ft 42-A, h'R 0 � pp Fi I 1 Q X; I ra 9 r � N WWW 3 I �O N � W 4 v rr v �^ `4v { J tv IV P�v to I w c+ o �r ro co O ~' O ON 42-A, h'R 0 � pp Fi I 1 Q X; I ra 9 r � N WWW 3 I �O N � W 4 v rr v �^ `4v { J tv IV P�v to I w c+ o 40 r� cn P- iv {jir M• n �m0� rt N I-�• Nn hm' ( l to 0 OR :" p ► c c �UwJ1 (,"pr 01 m N �o N y H N co Ln wN ti to O y O W (� '•G fA N W f'h O I r� cn P- iv {jir M• n �m0� rt N I-�• Nn hm' ( l to 0 OR :" p ► c c �UwJ1 (,"pr 01 m N �o N y H N co Ln wN ti to O y O W (� '•G fA N W f'h Zn H W 1`h C r �n N r N 0% 4 O r En N Q1 J r 1 C U1 - CA v H W m � Iy tqv Nil gim A wl o R t pp R t. r. • 2 Sc A G p i� sz s: PE H n r�i N • V i U'1 V n Nx iw . � l 1 ll a � r. • V i U'1 JOIN • - 9 u 3 y i 01 ■ y r n�� Ox H � vir�-i9 • C CkH0 9n N~ ] �000O�AAJ'S CJ 9O a�y �] LrJ O C Q ro y ZH 0d x 1.8 M C" V, t CA H Ri O A t] 9 a �cn I�9bt.,I op"" w nw ~ 1 LZ7d OOHCq H H 7d N,7�ir �► -+�mm ��7 ON� N 07dt=1H0 � ►si l=1 t� yy d CrJ O N x w O Cs7 x z C ►re � y 9 H ny C;1 ~ C "~�. 1r O'W x M H C+7 H n t -1 C/! c�nd Ly+7 C"� "r10 40 9 �0 C [�sf tzs �+ m 7C+7d •t7 0 � x cn tG m w r n cn t� �L' ,� . .,rw•y�r 9 . +w mow.... ....rw.. ...�. N + N lJ1 \ CA ID ^� W N O r� CrJ � H - n V oN g ° ~ c 1\. R V 1 n.. h c I N,- � I I �s Is �.m S!B io CAN y M N � V O e�gy.w•�y� � N O , O 1 U7 Q � 8 Z\ l'y � r L n co rh 't7 p] � m � �- rr U1 Ai n N � N r r � a Ul Mf N• M1 III I o I-h N � fD F�• • N rt�4 O O w a � N • d� (rh ~ L�+ 11 4S] lJ H LW] W D • �j En 't7 iD w o Ph rt, a oaf 5W • wr K N r r � a Ul Mf N• M1 III I o I-h N � fD F�• • N rt�4 O O w a � N • d� (rh ~ L�+ 11 4S] lJ H LW] n r n 0 r z n ra z a c a 7 12 r- Q c prm�i, N M s d .c w ca QQ aI9 �c1 ,o i h cart m R 0� 10+Crt ca 0O9 �\ A H 1�0 m n ro A O A b C A m 14 m 04 cn �-c z m R m O m rOy 'd to m m m IC F+ A 9 10 F+ m vj R C F+ p rp R A Fh A m M 0 ""m nh� �m � A o we to 0 m w �d w r+ m xm 1° ma" (Da�. mmm m m v�a ..m m w H R C v D E W rp � [W IN 9 co m H. 0 OQ m n r n 0 r z n ra z a c a 7 12 r- Q c �\ cn �-c z v�a IN r�- 1+ w. n r n 0 r z n ra z a c a 7 12 r- Q c 13 7 y v n b ^4 P. z 73 :7 x7 7 a a n 0 z .. rn h a :ob Qa Of Ic W ty r-, 0 d Fr 0 D cn a a rf w w n p► n rr n d rn m po n w a & n m K n o m K h rt s w• �+• ro C n M. w to M 7r "I m W n o m m rt r µ 0 w 1..." w `d o. p C Oo C o' n n co 4 cn o m art ' p a m r IV C a+ d m m n on � a w M o r A. w C m w w rn 1eo � o try m "+, t" ►+ n � p w ro M p a a m r► w o w 7r w 00 'd tl •c ra K to 0 w m m w cn M 10 m~ ►�i ~ 0 m 1 m 13 7 y v n b ^4 P. z 73 :7 x7 7 a a n 0 z o _. --AMPS, •c ra cn 13 7 y v n b ^4 P. z 73 :7 x7 7 a a n 0 z tsi N �• N Y 7, 14 z 1 • t w N Fr N Y 7, 14 z 1 • t w N O `1 ,Z t r r. e� Y 7, 14 z 1 • t w N 1 s m a .a oo p .ea rr .c po A :3 �+ ra A M A ro 15 we ro a R G C .a C , a � 10 d ro `�G ro ro ro O ro � x M m � m� d m C] � e n F+. �C ti{ ro Q1 M O ro w D C O H 00 ib' ib 0 CL 04 w 'd n ro m t" m cn oo m rt 0o9µ w 0 r _ f° ro m n m C, H r za zan o�rLI x •emn m cn z zan o�ee� n 0 n C C=7 - >. a n H Q z w b dG w h a w ao m ID OD K m ao m w � ►t w n m 1" r rt m CL rr w m -- w M �o 0 rn V w m h m m b 0 a w r* w ro m a m ti ft we �.;..: m �+7 fD a �o K n w w 9 n a 9y �0 W n a � A a � O ro w ro H m a o i ^ m n 0 v � n m d t �^4 µ 0 00 A rr w 0 A C A 11: : ir " O IT a 0o A O PC 0 IV 7-„ c a� �y rp" m m W . 0 y e tv ~ M m rl ro a Y a 0 H v j 1 7 16 T r h 7-„ c a� �y Y a 0 H v j 1 7 16 T r t . • ' .ry11�y'r`t�r:�...4:x;;rex::- tie!: *. ,:- .:�e'A.+�r- +* viiww►..:,:. �:�r.•�i�- :#"fir, -.- ..��.= v. - -� d w rt ►s c R w O O LIE a w+ w N C7 C y C H R G7 1� ; J 17 Ui I OR AN G E C 0 U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 Agenda t Item # s SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes S No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Draft 5/26/92 Public Planning Director X2592 Hearing Minutes Revised Proposal PHONE NUMBERS:., -- Draft 6/15/92 Planning Hillsborough 732 -8181 Board Minutes Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 Chapel Hill 967 -9251 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment which would change Article 2.2.14.3 to provide greater flexibility to the Board of Commissioners in conducting public hearings involving principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND: In April of 1988, Article 2, Administration, of the Zoning Ordinance was amended to define the Comprehensive Plan and add procedures for its amendment. Prior to that time, procedures for amending the Land Use Plan (as referred to then) were contained in a policy statement approved by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners. When the Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1988, the procedures were incorporated into Article 2 with little or no change. Section 2.2.14.3 of Article 2 requires that principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February. Since the adoption of the amendment, few applications for principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan have been processed under the procedures. While applications for principal amendments have generally been held in February, there have been some exceptions. For example, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan involving four township components were considered at a May, 1988 public hearing. More recently, 1992 amendments to 7 the Eno and Chapel Hill township components incorporated the New Hope Open Space Corridor into the Comprehensive Plan. Insofar as other types of amendments are concerned, flexibility is available to the Board of Commissioners in calling special public hearings. While secondary amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, rezoning requests, special use permits, and planned development applications are generally heard at the quarterly public hearings, the language contained in the Zoning Ordinance allows lattitude in setting public hearing dates. Recently, an application was received for the University Station project, a proposed rural village to be located southeast of Hillsborough. The application involves a principal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and strict interpretation of Section 2.2.14.3 suggests that the application be considered at the February, 1993 public hearing. Because of difficulties associated with holding multiple property owners together and retaining a major investor, the applicants have requested that a special public hearing be set. Rather than considering the University Station application at a public hearing other than that scheduled for February, 1993 hearing, an amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 is proposed to build in the flexibility needed by both private.citizens and the County to consider principal amendments out of sequence. The proposed amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 affects only the first sentence of the second paragraph. That sentence would be reworded to read as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February. The addition of the word "generally" would be sufficient'to allow the Board of Commissioners discretion in calling special public hearings on principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Ordinance Review Committee met on May 14, 1992 and proposed that additional wording be added to allow more than one public hearing on principal amendments. However, the Committee felt that they should be restricted to other quarterly public hearings; e.g., May, August, and November. The proposed wording would be as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February; 2rovided, however, if s ecial hearings are called b-X the Board of Commissioners applications for principal amendments shall be considered in conjunction with another uarterly public hearing. At the May 26, 1992 public hearing, the County Attorney suggested changes to the proposed wording. The revised wording is as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February; provided, however, if a rinci al amendment is scheduled by the Board of Commissioners for other than the February ublic hearing, it shall be scheduled during one of the quarterly public hearings held in May, August, and November. At its June 15, 1992 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendment as worded by the County Attorney. RECOMONDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment per the Planning Board recommendation. A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Zoning Ordinance REFERENCE: Article 2 - Administration Section 2.2.14.3 - Consideration of Amendments ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: ,,,_S -Staff Planning Board BOCC Citizen STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: _S High Middle Low PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 26, 1992 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To provide greater flexibility to the Board of Commissioners in conducting public hearings which involve principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or portions thereof. IMPACTS /ISSUES: In April of 1988, Article 2, Administration, of the Zoning Ordinance was amended to define the Comprehensive Plan and add procedures for its amendment. Prior to that time, procedures for amending the Land Use Plan (as referred to then) were contained in a policy statement approved by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners. When the Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1988, the procedures were incorporated into Article 2 with little or no change. Section 2.2.14.3 of Article 2 requires that principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February. Since the adoption of the amendment, few applications for principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan have been processed under the procedures. While applications for principal amendments have generally been held in February, there have been some exceptions. For example, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan involving four township components were considered at a May, 1988 public hearing. More recently, 1992 amendments to the Eno and Chapel Hill township components incorporated the New Hope Open Space Corridor into the Comprehensive Plan. Insofar as other types of amendments are concerned, flexibility is available to the Board of..Commissioners in calling special public hearings. While secondary amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, rezoning requests, special use permits, and planned development applications are generally heard at the quarterly public hearings, the language contained in the Zoning Ordinance allows lattitude in setting public hearing dates. Recently, an-application was received for the University Station project, a proposed rural village to be located southeast of Hillsborough. The application involves a principal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and strict interpretation of Section 2.2.14.3 suggests that the application be considered at the February, 1993 public hearing. Because of difficulties associated with holding 61 multiple property owners together and retaining a major investor, the applicants have requested that a special public hearing be set. Rather than considering the University Station application at a public hearing other than that scheduled for February, 1993, an amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 is proposed -to build in the flexibility needed by both private citizens and the County to consider principal amendments out of sequence. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: See attached provisions. PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: The proposed amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 affects only the first sentence of the second paragraph. That sentence would be reworded to read as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February. The addition of the word "generally" would be sufficient to allow the Board of Commissioners discretion in calling special public hearings on principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE: May 14, 1992 The Ordinance Review Committee proposed that additional wording be added to allow more than one public hearing on principal amendments. However, the Committee felt that they should be restricted to other quarterly public hearings; e.g., May, August, and November. The proposed wording would be as follows: Principal amendments shall generally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February; provided, however if special hearings are called bv the Board of Commissioners 4212lications for rinci al amendments shall be considered in conjunction with another quarter l ublic hearing. PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: May-17, 1992 The Planning Board reviewed the proposed amendment and the Ordinance Review Committee recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING: May 26, 1992 The County Attorney provided a handwritten suggestion regarding wording changes. The alternative wording suggested by him is as follows: Principal amendments shall generaliz only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February; Provided however if a rinci al amendment is scheduled-bZ scheduled-b the Board of Commissioners for other than the February ublic earing, it shall be scheduled during one of the quarterly aublic hearin s held in MaK, Augrust, and November. F r Minutes of the May 26, 1992 public hearing are attached PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION: June 15, 1992 The Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendment as worded by the County Attorney. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DECISION: August 3, 1992 7 Resource Center. Provide a detail of the method of tree protection and add a note which states that no storage of construction materials or vehicles is to occur beyond the clearing limits; and c. Show the boundaries of lot 7.6..2. Waddell asked about the condition regarding removal of the parallel parking area. Cameron responded this condition was to meet the setback requirements in the Planned Development District standards. She noted that sufficient parking is available so the loss of the twelve spaces did not create a problem for the applicant. MOTION: Gray moved approval with the conditions as recommended by the Planning Staff with the findings. Seconded by Hoecke. VOTE: Unanimous. d. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments (1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedures Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider a proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment which would change Article 2.2.14.3 to provide greater flexibility to the Board of Commissioners in conducting public hearings involving principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. In April of 1988, Article 2, Administration, of the Zoning-ordinance was amended to define the Comprehensive Plan and add procedures for its amendment. Prior to that time, procedures for amending the Land Use Plan (as referred to then) were contained in a policy statement approved by the Planning Board and Board of Commissioners. When the Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1988, the procedures were incorporated into Article 2 with little or no change. Section 2.2.14.3 of Article 2 requires that principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February.. Since the adoption of the amendment, few applications for principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan have been processed under the procedures. While applications for principal amendments have generally been held in February, there have been E some exceptions. For example, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan involving four township components were considered at a May, 1988 public hearing. More recently, 1992 amendments to the Eno and Chapel Hill township components incorporated the New Hope Open Space Corridor into the Comprehensive Plan. Insofar as other types of amendments are concerned, flexibility is available to the Board of Commissioners in calling special public hearings. While secondary amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, rezoning requests, special use permits, and planned development applications are generally heard at the quarterly public hearings, the language contained in the Zoning Ordinance allows latitude in setting public hearing dates. Recently, an application was received for the University Station project,'a proposed rural village to be located southeast of Hillsborough. The application involves a principal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and strict interpretation of Section 2.2.14.3 suggests that the application be considered at the February, 1993 public hearing. Because of difficulties associated with holding multiple property owners together and retaining a major investor, the applicants have requested that a special public hearing be set. Rather than considering the University Station application at a public hearing other than that scheduled for February, 1993 hearing, an amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 is proposed to build in the flexibility needed by both private citizens and the County to consider principal amendments out of sequence. The proposed amendment to Section 2.2.14.3 affects only the first sentence of the second paragraph. That sentence would be reworded to read: Principal amendments shall generally_ only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February. The addition of the word "generally" would be sufficient to allow the Board of Commissioners discretion in calling special public hearings on principal amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Ordinance Review Committee met on May 14, 1992 and proposed that additional wording be added to allow more than one public hearing on principal amendments. However, the Committee felt that they should be restricted to other quarterly public hearings; e.g., May; August, and November. The proposed wording would be as follows: Principal amendments shall ener- ally only be considered once each year at the quarterly public hearing in February; rovided however if s ecial hearings are called by the Board of Commissioners a2elications for rincz a1 amendments shall be considered in conjunction with another quarterlX 2ublic hearing. At the May 26, 1992 public hearing, the County Attorney suggested changes to the proposed wording. The changes are shown on the ordinance amendment form which is an attachment to these minutes on page . The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment as worded by the County Attorney. MOTION: Reid moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Gray - indicated he felt the County Attorney had "muddied the waters" even more. e. Subdivision Regulations (1) Owners Certificate Presentation by Emily Cameron. The Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance is a statement required to be placed on the Final Plat and on the Declaration of Restrictions and Requirements which is signed by the owner (s) of the property being subdivided. By signing the certificate, the owner certifies that he or she is the owner, that all easements, rights -of -way, and common areas are duly granted for the purposes stated on the plat, and that all improvements /common areas will be maintained until taken over by a public agency or homeowners association, etc. The current language in Section V -D -6 -b of the Subdivision Regulations for the certificate only implies that the person signing is the owner of the property. The proposed amendment will expressly state the certification of ownership. A ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. VM-- $ ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 SUBJECT: Introduction of Bond Order and Sworn Statement of Debt DEPARTMENTt Finance PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X 1 ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Chavious Correspondence from Bond Counsel Suggested form of Board Proceedings TELEPHONE NUMBER - Sworn Statement of Debt Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Bond Order Chapel Hill - 968 -4501 Suggested form of Bond Question for Mebane - 227 -2031 Ballot Durham - 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To introduce the Bond Order and take other actions for the November 3, 1992 Bond Referendum as required by the Local Government Bond Act. BACKGROUND: At the June 29, 1992 meeting the Board of Commissioners - authorized publication of a "Notice of Intent" to file an application with the Local Government commission seeking approval to hold a Bond Referendum On November 3, 1992. In addition, the Board approved a calendar of the various steps to be taken in connection with the referendum. The "Notice of Intent" was published in mid July and the application has been filed with the LGC. The next step in the referendum process is the Introduction of the Bond Order. This is usually accomplished by the Board Chair reading the Order aloud. Subsequent to the Bond Order's introduction, a public hearing date on the Order should be established, and the Finance Director, or Deputy Finance Director, is required to file a "Sworn Statement of Debt" with the Clerk to the Board. In accordance with the approved timetable, the public hearing should be held on August 18, 1992 and the "Sworn Statment of Debt" filed within the proceedings of the August 3, 1992 meeting. Finally, the Bond Order and the public hearing notice must be published by August 6, 1992 in order to meet the requirements set forth in the approved timetable. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board; a. Introduce the Bond Order as mentioned above. b. Authorize the Deputy Finance Director to file the "Sworn Statement of Debt." c. Set the public hearing date for August 18, 1992. d. Instruct the Clerk to publish the Bond Order and public hearing notice by August 6, 1992. e. Approve the form of the bond question to be posed on the November 3, 1992 ballot. s 2 535 CALIFORNIA STREET SAN FRANCISCO. CA. 04104-171S TELEPHONC: 415 -308 -3909 FACSIMILE: 415- 397 -a82 1 SIS CONNECTICUT AVENUE. N.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20008.400& TELEPHONE: 202- 2F3.OZ20 FACSIMILE! 202.2 23-0485 10900 WILSHIRE 8OULEVARD LOS ANGELES. CA. 90024 -3059 TELEPHONE: 310.443 -0200 FACSIMILE: 310 - 208.57 a0 B ROW N & WOO D ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER NEw YORK, N.Y. 10048 -0557 TELEPHONE: 212-839-5300 FACSIMILE: 2 1 2- 839 -S S O9 July 17, 1992 Mr. Kenneth T. Chavious County of Orange Finance Director 109 Court Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re: County of Orange, North Carolina �52,000,000_School Bonds Dear Mr. Chavious: BLACKWELL MOUSE GUILDHALL YARD LONDON EC2V SA@ TELCPHON E: 071-606.1989 FACSIMILE; 071-796-1807 172 WEST STATE STREET TRENTON, N.J. 00608-1104 TELEPHONE: 600- 393 -0303 FACSI M 1 LE: 609 -393 -0732 1 am enclosing the following items relating to the authorization of the bonds: 1. Five copies of a suggested form of proceedings to be taken by the Board of Commissioners at a regular meeting to be held on August 3, evidencing the introduction and passage on first reading of the order authorizing the bonds and the call of a public hearing upon such order. 2. Five copies of •a suggested form of sworn statement of debt to be made by you, verified on August 3, the day of the Board of Commissioners, meeting, and filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners, in the presence of the Board of Commissioners, after the introduction but prior to the passage of the bond order on first reading. 3. Copies of the bond order with appended statement giving notice of the public hearing for handing to The News of Qrange County and The Cha a Hi 1 Herald for publication on August 6, after all blanks have been filled to correspond with the figures set forth in the debt statement, and extra copies of such order for proofreading the text thereof after type has been set put prior to actual publication. 4. A copy of a suggested form of the bond question for handing to the printer who will prepare the ballot strips and /or other forms of ballot to be used at the referendum and an extra copy of such form for proofreading the text thereof prior to printing. I wish to suggest that you check this item with the County Board of Elections before using it. After the enclosed proceedings and sworn statement mentioned above have been taken or executed, please provide me with two certified or executed copies thereof. After the bond order has been published, please provide me two publisher's affidavits, with printed clippings attached, to evidence each such publication. Also, please provide me with six specimens of each_ form of the ballot to be used at the referendum after they have been prepared. One copy of each item should also be sent to Ms. Janice Burke of the Local Government commission. If you have any questions, please call me or Gundars Aperans. Enclosures cc: Ms. Janice Burke F, Sincerely yours, 1 Athena A. Frangoulis VC] 4 A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners for the County of orange, North Carolina, was held at the old County Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at 7 :30 P.M., on August 3, 1992. Present: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., presiding, and Commissioners Absent: Also present: Roderick Visser, Deputy Finance Director, and Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners. Commissioner authorizing bonds which was read: introduced the following order ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Board of Education and the orange County Board of Education have certified to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, resolutions passed by said boards of education to the effect that adequate school facilities are not now available in the Chapel Hill- Carrboro Administrative Unit and the orange County Administrative Unit to comply with the requirements of Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution of North Carolina for the maintenance of schools nine months in every year and that it is necessary, in order to maintain such nine months' school term as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, to provide additional school facilities in said units by erecting additional school buildings and other school A plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, the estimated aggregate cost of which is at least $52,000,000; WHEREAS, said resolutions request said Board of Commissioners. to provide the funds required for such school facilities; and WHEREAS, said Board of Commissioners has carefully examined the facts and has determined and does hereby find as a fact that the statements made in said resolutions are true and that it has become the duty of said Board of Commissioners, acting as an administrative agent of the State in providing a State system of public schools, to order the issuance of bonds of the County of Orange so that the school facilities mentioned in said resolutions and in paragraph 1 of this order may be provided in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution; now, therefore, BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange: 1. That, pursuant, to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, and in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, the County of Orange, North Carolina, is hereby authorized to contract a debt, in addition to any and all other debt which said County may now or hereafter have power or authority OA 5 6 to contract, and in evidence thereof to issue School Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $52,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, in order to provide additional school facilities in said County. 2. That taxes shall be levied in an amount sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on said bonds. 3. That a sworn statement of the debt of said County has been filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for said County and is open to public inspection. 4. That this order shall take effect when approved by the voters of said County at a referendum as provided in said Act. The Board of Commissioners thereupon designated the Deputy Finance Director as the officer whose duty it shall be to make and file with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners the sworn statement of debt of the County which is required by The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, to be filed after the bond order has been introduced and before the public hearing thereon. Thereupon the Deputy Finance Director filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners, in the presence of the Board of Commissioners, the sworn statement of debt as so required. 7 Thereupon the order entitled: "ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS" was passed on first reading. On motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, the Board of Commissioners fixed August 18, 1992 at 7:30 P.M., at the OWASA Community Meeting Room on Jones Ferry Road in Carrboro, North Carolina, as the hour, day and place for the public hearing upon the foregoing order and directed the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners to publish said order, together with the appended statement as required by The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, once in The News of Orange goiMty and The Chapel--Hill Herald Chapel-- not later than the sixth day before said date. I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a regular meeting held on August a3, 1992 as relates in any way to the introduction and passage on first reading of an order authorizing bonds of said County and the calling of a public hearing upon such order and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Board, beginning on page and ending on page I DO HEREBY FURTHER CERTIFY that a schedule of regular meetings of said Board in the form attached hereto, has been on file in my office as of a date not less than seven days before the date of said meeting in accordance with G.S. 5143- 318.124 4 WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this day of August 1992. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners P7 8 ` JUN-E2 -1992 14 :36 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO DOJIXN::-� K;LL$BOnovas January 6 February 3 February 24 (Regular Quarto March 9 (NACo Legislative Confere April 6 (5:30) May 4 May 25 (Tuesday, Regular Qu June 1 (Legislative update June .(NACo Annual Conference i August 3 (NCACC Annual Conference August 24 (Regular Quarterl September S. October 5 November 2 November 23 (Regular Quarto December 7 (NCACC Conference in Gres APPROVED LINTY BOARD OF 092 MEETING St Public Hearing) in Washington 92128395599 P.02 SSIONERS January 21 February 18 Marcia 24 .b.. 28 - March 3) April 21 May 19 ly Public Hearing) Minneapolis July 11 -14) Charlotte August ?ublic Hearing) Public Hearing) ro Dec. 10,-11) 13 -16) June M At August 18 September 22 October 20 November 17 December 22 The date for the COMtassiONIRS' RETREAT will set later. The meetings in Hillsborougi will be hold at a Old County Courthouse at 7:30 p.m. except for April 4 which will begin t 5:30) The second meeting or.the th will be held in the OWASA Meeting Room on Jone Ferry Road in Carrboro at 7:30 p.m. All Quarterly Public Hearing will be hold in a Superior Courtroom in the no, County Courthouse in Hills rough. 10 COUNTY OF ORANGE, NORTH CAROLINA SWORN STATEMENT OF DEBT MADE PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOND ACT, AS AMENDED I, Roderick Visser, Deputy Finance Director of the County of Orange, North Carolina, having been designated by the Board of Commissioners for said County to make and file with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners a statement of the debt of said County pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the following is a true statement as shown by the books in my office, not taking into consideration any debt incurred or to be incurred in anticipation of the collection of taxes or other revenues or in anticipation of the sale of bonds other than funding and refunding bonds: (a) GROSS DEBT a(1) Outstanding debt evidenced by bonds: 4 Sanitary Sewer Bonds....... $.......... School Bonds ............... .......... School Building Bonds...... .......... School Bonds, Series 1989.. .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1989.. ........ .......... School Bonds, Series 1990.. .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1990... ......... .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1991.. ........ .......0.0 School Bonds, Series 1991.. .......... $29,725,000 a(2) Bonds authorized by an order introduced on August 3, 1992*, but not yet adopted: School Bonds ........................... $52,000,000 a(3) Unissued bonds authorized by adopted orders: Water Bonds....... .................... $ 1,000,000 a(4) Outstanding debt, not evidenced bybonds: .............................. $ 557,483 (a) GROSS DEBT, being the sum of a(1), a(2), a(3) and a(4) ...................... $83,282,483 4 11 b(6) Uncollected special assessments heretofore levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred to the extent that such assessments will be applied, when collected, to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. $ -0- b(7) The amount, as estimated by the Finance Director, of special assessments to be levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred, to the extent that the special assessments, when collected, will be applied to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. $ -0- (b) DEDUCTIONS, being the sum of b(1), b(2) , b(3) , b(4) , b(5) , b(6) and b(7) .... ............................... $ 1,000,000 0a (b) DEDUCTIONS b(1) Funding and refunding bonds authorized by orders introduced but not yet adopted .................... $ --0- b(2) Funding and refunding bonds authorized but not yet issued .......... $ -0- b(3) The amount of money held in sinking funds or otherwise for the payment of any part of the principal of gross debt other than debt incurred for water purposes or sanitary sewer purposes (to the extent that the bonds are deductible under G.S. 5159- 55(b))....... $ -0- b(4) Bonded debt included in gross debt and incurred, or to be incurred, for water purposes ...................... $ 1,000,000 b(5) Bonded debt included in gross debt and incurred, or to be incurred, for sanitary sewer system purposes to the extent that said debt is made deductible by G.S. $159 -55(b) .......... $ -0- b(6) Uncollected special assessments heretofore levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred to the extent that such assessments will be applied, when collected, to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. $ -0- b(7) The amount, as estimated by the Finance Director, of special assessments to be levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred, to the extent that the special assessments, when collected, will be applied to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. $ -0- (b) DEDUCTIONS, being the sum of b(1), b(2) , b(3) , b(4) , b(5) , b(6) and b(7) .... ............................... $ 1,000,000 0a 12 (c) NET DEBT (c) NET DEBT, being the difference between the GROSS DEBT (a) and the DEDUCTIONS (b) ..................... $ 82,282,483 (d) APPRAISED VALUE (d) APPRAISED VALUE of property subject to municipal taxation before the application of any assessment ratio, being the value fixed in 1992 .......... $3,752,502,561. (e) Percentage which the NET DEBT (c) bears to the APPRAISED VALUE (d) ........ 2.2% The foregoing statement is true. Deputy Finance Director of the County of Orange, North Carolina STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ss.: COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3rd day of August 1992. Notary Public My commission expires * I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a statement which was filed with me at a meeting of the Board of Commissioners for said County held on August 3, 1992, after the introduction and before the public hearing on an order authorizing bonds of said County, and that said statement is open to public inspection in my office. 3 WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this day of August 1992. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners 13 14 TO THE PUBLISHER OF =&UMEL Please publish the following on August 6, after all blanks have been filled. ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill- Carrboro City Board of Education and the Orange County Board of Education have certified to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, resolutions passed by said boards of education to the effect that adequate school facilities are not now available in the Chapel Hill- Carrboro Administrative Unit and the Orange County Administrative Unit to comply With the requirements of Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution of North Carolina for the maintenance of schools nine months in every year and that it is necessary, in order to maintain such nine months' school term as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, to provide additional school facilities in said units by erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, the estimated-,aggregate cost of which is at least $52,000,000; WHEREAS, said resolutions request said Board of Commissioners to provide the funds required for such school facilities; and WHEREAS, said Board of Commissioners has carefully examined the facts and has determined and does hereby find as a fact that a 15 the statements made in said resolutions are true and that it has become the duty of said Board of Commissioners, acting as an administrative agent of the State in providing a State system of public schools, to order the issuance of bonds of the County of Orange so that the school facilities mentioned in said resolutions and in paragraph 1 of this order may be provided in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution; now, therefore, BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of orange: 1. That,'pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, and in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, the County of Orange, North Carolina, is hereby authorized to contract a debt, in addition to any and all other debt which said County may now or hereafter have power or authority to contract, and in evidence thereof to issue School Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $52,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, in order to provide additional school facilities in said County. 16 2. That taxes shall be levied in an amount sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on said bonds. 3. That a sworn statement of the debt of said County has been filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for said County and is open to public inspection. 4. That this order shall take effect when approved by the voters of said County at a referendum as provided in said Act. The foregoing order has been introduced and a sworn statement of debt has been filed under The Local Government Bond Act showing the appraised value of the County of Orange to be $ 3;752,502,561 and the net debt thereof, including the proposed bonds, to be $ 82.282.483 . A tax will be levied to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds if they are issued. Anyone who wishes to be heard on the questions of the validity of the bond order and the advisability of issuing the bonds may appear at a public hearing or an adjournment thereof to be held at 7:30 P.M. on August 18, 1992 in the OWASA Community Meeting Room, Jones Ferry Road in Carrboro, North Carolina. Beverly Blythe Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina s 17 TO THE PUBLISHER OF THE NEWS OF ORANGE COO:C : Please publish the following on August 5, after all blanks. have been filled. ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Board of Education and the Orange County Board of Education have certified to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, resolutions passed by said boards of education to the effect that adequate school facilities are not now available in the Chapel Hill- Carrboro Administrative Unit and the Orange County Administrative Unit to comply with the requirements of Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution of North Carolina for the maintenance of schools nine months in every year and that it is necessary, in order to maintain such nine months' school term as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, to provide additional school facilities in said units by erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, the estimated..aggregate cost of which is at least $52,000,000; WHEREAS, said resolutions request said Board of Commissioners to provide the funds required for such school facilities; and WHEREAS, said Board of Commissioners has carefully examined the facts and has determined and does hereby find as a fact that is the statements made in said resolutions are true and that it has become the duty of said Board of Commissioners, acting as an administrative agent of the State in providing a State system of public schools, to order the issuance of bonds of the County of Orange so that the school facilities mentioned in said resolutions and in paragraph 1 of this order may be provided in order to maintain the nine.months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution; now, therefore, BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange: 1. That, pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, and in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, the County of Orange, North Carolina, is hereby authorized to contract a debt, in addition to any and all other debt which said County may now or hereafter have power or authority to contract, and in evidence thereof to issue School Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $52,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, in order to-provide additional school facilities in said County. T E, 2. That taxes shall be levied in an amount sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on said bonds. 3. That a sworn statement of the debt of said County has been filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for said County and is open to public inspection. 4. That this order shall take effect when approved by the voters of said County at a referendum as provided in said Act. The foregoing order has been introduced and a sworn statement of debt has been filed under The Local Government Bond Act showing the appraised value of the County of Orange to be $ and the net debt thereof, including the proposed bonds, to be $��z�4�� A tax will be levied to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds if they are issued. Anyone who wishes to be heard on the questions of the validity of the bond order and the advisability of issuing the bonds may appear at a public hearing or an adjournment thereof to be held at 7 :30 P.M. on August 18, 1992 in the OWASA Community Meeting Room, Jones-Ferry Road in Carrboro, North Carolina. Beverly Blythe Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina 19 20 Shall the order adopted on August 18, 1992, authorizing not exceeding $52,000,000 School Bonds of the County of Orange, North Carolina, for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, in order to provide additional school facilities in said County to maintain the nine months' school term as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, and authorizing the levy of taxes in an amount sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on said bonds, be approved? r OR AN G E C 0 U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3 1992 Agenda Abstract Item # M 0, SUBJECT: ADVERTISEMENT - AUGUST 24, 1992 PUBLIC HEARING DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACffi 3NT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Proposed Legal Notice Planning Director X2592 Proposed Public Hearing Items Draft 7 -20 -92 Planning Board PHONE NUMBERS: Minutes Hillsborough 732 -8181 Draft 7 -8 -92 Agricultural Mebane 227 -2031 Districts Advisory Board Durham 688 -7331 Minutes Chapel Hill 967 -9251 PURPOSE: To consider the legal notice and items for discussion at the quarterly public hearing scheduled for August 24, 1992. BACKGROUND: The next regular quarterly public hearing is scheduled for August 24, 1992. The Board of Commissioners reviews proposals to be considered at public hearing for consistency with general County policy and presentation format. Items to be considered at the August 24, 1992 public hearing include the following: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendments a. CP -1 -92 University Station 2. Zoning Atlas Amendments a. Z -3 -92 Donald Wayne Combs b. PD -2 -92 Heartwood at Blackwood Mountain - Phase 3 3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments a. Mobile /Manufactured Structures (1) Article 4.3 - Permitted Use Table (2) Article 6.7.2 - Accessory Structures in Residential Districts (3) Article 8.8.28- Mobile /Manufactured Structures (4) Article 22 - Definitions 4. Voluntary Farmland Preservation Ordinance a. Voluntary Agricultural Districts (1) Section V.B.1 - Minimum Acreage Requirements 1 Approval of the notice will permit advertisement on August 12 and 19, 1992 as required the N.C. General Statutes. The proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Atlas amendments will require notification of individual property owners. The notice must be mailed on or before August 7, 1992. The Planning Board considered the proposed ordinance text amendments at its July 20, 1992 meeting and recommended that they be presented at the August 24, 1992 public hearing for citizen comment. The Agricultural Districts Advisory Board considered the proposed ordinance text amendments at its July 8, 1992 meeting and recommended that they be presented at the August 24, 1992 public hearing for citizen comment. RECOMMMATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Notice of Public Hearing for August 24, 1992. ORANGE COUNT' PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, tiORTH CAROLINA 27278 r' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ZONING ATLAS, ZONING ORDINANCE, AND VOLUNTARY FARMLAND PRESERVATION ORDINANCE FOR ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter 153A, Article 18, Sections 323, 340, and 343; and Articles 2.2, 8.4, 20.5, and 20.6 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, notice is hereby given that a public hearing 'Will be held in the Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse (New), 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina, on Monday, August 24, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or against the following items: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan is as follows: 1. CP -1 -92 University Station The property in question is located south of the Southern Railroad on both sides of Old N.C. 10 (SR 1710). The property contains approximately 629 acres and is specifically described as lots 20 and 20A of Tax Map 27 in Eno Township, lots 47 and 48 of Tax Map 26 in Eno Township, lots 7,12, 13, 13A, 13B, and 13C of Tax Map 3 in Chapel Hill Township, and lots 51, 52, 52A, and 52E of Tax Map 4 in Chapel Hill Township. The property fronts on New Hope Church Road (SR 1723) for a distance of 2,900 feet, on Old N.C. 10 for a distance of 4,920 feet, and on University Station Road (SR 1712) for a distance of 865 feet. The current zoning designation of the property is R -1 Residential. The property is being considered for re- designation in the Eno and Chapel Hill Township components of the Comprehensive Plan from Rural Residential, Agricultural Use, and Resource Conservation to Ten -Year Transition. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS The proposed amendments to the Orange County Zoning Atlas are as follows: 1. Z -3 -92 Donald Wayne Combs The property in question is located 597.22 feet west of Ferguson Road (SR 1948). The property contains 1.84 acres and is specifically described as part of Lot 6A of Tax Map 37A in Bingham Township. The property has a width of 200.45 feet and a depth of 400 feet. The current zoning designation of the property is RB -Rural Buffer. The proposed zoning designation is EC -5 Existing Commercial --5. The request has been made to correct an apparent error in the Zoning Atlas. 2. PD -2 -92 Heartwood at Blackwood Mountain - Phase 3 The expansion of an existing planned development is proposed on property located west of Mill House Road (SR 1725). The property contains 19.534 acres and is specifically described as lot number 26E of Tax Map 19 in Chapel Hill Township. The property is currently zoned RB -Rural Buffer. The proposed zoning of the property is PD -H -RB. The planned development is not a new facility but represents the expansion of an existing residential development. Approval of a planned development application and a Class A Special Use Permit is required, because the expansion is considered a major modification to an existing planned development. Nine (9) new lots are proposed and would be served by the extension of Heartwood Drive and the construction of a new street, Pathway Court. ZONING ORDINANCE TEST AMENDMENT The proposed amendment to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance is as follows: I. Mobile /Manufactured Structures Under the proposal, mobile /manufactured structures would be defined in the Zoning Ordinance. Such structures would be permitted for use as accessory buildings in AR- Agricultural Residential, R -1 Rural Residential, and RB -Rural Buffer zoning districts upon the approval of a Class B Special Use Permit by the Board of Adjustment. VOLUNTARY FARMLAND PRESERVATION ORDINANCE The proposed amendment to the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Ordinance is as follows: I. Minimum Acreage Requirement Under the proposal, the minimum required acreage for designation as a voluntary agricultural district would be reduced from 155 to 80 acres. The change would recognize the role that smaller farms play in the agricultural economy, and, 5 by permitting two or more contiguous farms to join together, allow farms as small as 40 acres to participate. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard. Public comment will be received during the public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, only evidence received in writing by the date of the Planning Board meeting following the public hearing will be considered by the Board of Commissioners for decision. Changes may be made in the advertised proposals which reflect debate, objections and discussion at the hearing. Questions regarding the proposals may be directed to the Orange County Planning Department located in the Planning & Agricultural Center, 306F Revere Road, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. You may also call 732 -8181 (Hillsborough), 688 -7331 (Durham) or 967 -9251 (Chapel Hill-- Carrboro). Please ask for Extension 2585 or 2575. You will be directed to a staff member whc will answer your questions. Marvin Collins, Planning Director PUBLISH: August 12, 1992 August 19, 1992 J ; ORANCE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD i HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 A'�:'' , f , LKND USE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION 6 S A11 persons requesting an amendment to the Land Use Plan of Orange County are required to complete the Following application as completely as possible: OFFTCE USE ON-Y Cp REn�ST "LUP- 1 DATE RECETVED cmp ^r pERSON I S 1 RESPOt.STBI,, . GEh'ER�L 'DATA .Property Owner(s) Name: Mailing_ Address: Phone: Age^. t (s) Name: ?•iawlina� Address `Phone: IMNAN AA'{.ERIVEST COGSWELL GROUP , acent for: (see attachment A - list of owners) 4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 502 Raleiah NC 276( (Home) (919)782 -6583 Same (Work) (919)787 -7400 SPEC =�"I^ Dr.TL.' (SEE ATTACHMENT A) .Tax Reference: Townshin ENO Tax Map Bloc: Lot Puhlic /Private Road 11ame: New Hope Church Rd.,' NC 10, ❑r_iveysity Static: Lot Si- e:' Acreace Annrox. 600 Scuare Foatace 26,000,000 sf Lot Frontage (see ratan) Lot Depth Cur7e.nt = ?: Cate=ory Des' gnation { s) General Rural ..0 -1vi=y Node Joi::t P1a7%:ning Area W,azew shed SPECIFIC ;, A (continued). Describe Land Uses in the General Area: RS •L^ EST: Rte' C'J =S` r C'.T? - 9z Farming, residential On Adjacent Parcels cf Land: Same Land Use Plan Category Desicnation(s) Requested: Tvoe of Amendment: Primary X Secondary Transitional This application should be submitted with the following materials: Fully dimensioned tax man on which is highlighted the parcel, OZ portion there of, in question. •� Legal description_ of the parcel, or portion thereof.- Letter of request to include: q� the tax reference, general location and owner of the Parcel q/ the current and requested land use plan category designations) o` a narrative stating the :garner in which the Proposed amendment wi11 carry -out the in tert and purpose a= the adopted comprehensive plan cr part thereof 19/a statement ow any other circumstances factors and reasons which the appli can_ a «e_s in support of the proposed amendment statement of the changed or chancing conditions in the area, o_ in the County generally,. which make the proposed amendme^- reasonably necessary. (We), the undersigned, certify that all statements furnished in this application are true and to the best o-- my (our) knowledge and t..at the application as submitted is complete If .rj_L'!: -7 q)L, LDP„' -Cr"N' , V SwGh = iL!_~i-Z' k-' F.P?:,T~'T..��T �I �r ( S ) /1 . i NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION The amendment proposed will permit the development of a "Rural Village" on the University Station site. This will be consistent with the intent and purpose of the. Comprehensive Plan and is in line with work cu'rr'ently underway by the Rural Character Study Committee. Development will be focused on the village center, reserving permanent open space for use as a public golf course and a 25 -acre public park. Development of this community will be similar to neo- traditional villages at Seaside in Florida, Kentlands in Maryland, .Black Oak in Virginia and Lake Park Village here in North Carolina. They are examples of recent developments in rural land planning and of a line of thinking gaining increased acceptance from planning boards and in the marketplace, as well. This plan will produce a community with a complete mix of housing types and costs, together with associated commercial and civic facilities. The character of the village will draw heavily from 19th century architectural precedents from Orange County, with a grid of streets, a village square at the center surrounded by shops. A site will be reserved for a church and another for a community center. Housing of various types, ranging from small apartments over the shops and in buildings to attached houses, houses on small in -town lots, and larger houses on lots facing the golf course. It is proposed to develop University Station with approximately 1200 dwelling units, an associated mix of small scale commercial uses and a championship signature golf course of 18 -27 holes. The 600 plus acres will be developed with clustered density near the village center and decreasing density away from the center toward the golf course which wraps around the village. The project is b being planned with an overall density of 2 units per acre: necessary because of land costs and because that density is required if the small commercial core of the village is to prosper. The project will be phased, with a first phase of approximately 500 acres south of NC 10, with 18 holes of golf. The second phase of 160 acres would add another 9 holes north of NC 10, and additional housina units. L n The planning will be characterized by: • Siting of the village center on high ground, as in 19th century precedents. • A regular street grid in the village center to facilitate internal transportation. • Provision, in the village center, of necessary commercial and common facilities to minimize off -site trips. • A village square, with traditional uses. Short blocks and narrow streets with two traffic lanes and diagonal parking. • Mixed uses and building types, not separated by zoning. • Mixed cost range for housing types. • Housing over shops and other commercial spaces. • Narrow lots. • Lots dedicated to churches, daycare and community center and other common uses. • Minimum setbacks. • Street lighting for pedestrians. Golf clubhouse within walking distance of village square and shops. • All facilities clustered for maximum walking distance of 1,350 feet. • Site reserved for light rail station on Southern RR line within walking distance of village square. • Retention, where possible, of existing historical buildings and other features, roads, etc., to preserve historic context. • Occ2sional irregularity within regular grid pattern. On, 10 • Maximum variety, minimum repetition within design guidelines, provision of unexpected features. • Low speed limits in village. • Low hazard sprinkler systems in wood frame construction to minimize fire hazard, lower insurance costs. The appearance of the village will be characterized by: • A small, human scale, consistent throughout. • A mix of white clapboard, stucco and brick construction. • Steep roof slopes,8 /12 or higher, of selected colors. • White trim, very "carpentry" • Many benches, flower beds, flowering trees. Many shade trees along streets. • Frequent street lights for pedestrians. • Variety in material, detailing and dimension within a selected palette. • Many gables, porches, bay windows, dormers, turrets, picket fences, gates and trellises. OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES This development will contribute to the prosperity of Orange County by: 1) Creating jobs, both during construction and after completion. 2) Providing housing which will complement and stimulate other compatible industrial and business projects. 3) Stimulating local business by providing many new customers for goods and services. CHANGING CONDITIONS As we near the end of the 20th Century, an increasing number of families everywhere are dissatisfied with the current living conditions they find in urban areas. Street crime, traffic congestion and the decay in the urban infrastructure cause them to look elsewhere for an environment more suited to the needs of families of all sizes and ages. More and more, people are turning back with a sense of of nostalgia to the values suggested by images of the 19th Century village, and to the advantages of living in a small town environment. University Station is planned to satisfy this desire for a simpler life in a smaller place: a place where traffic is quiet, where families can walk the streets or sit in the park, where children can play, where most o the necessities can be found within a short walk. In short, University Station is planned for people, not for automobiles, and for the enhancement of the quality of family life and the convenience and gratification of a broad and diverse mix of families and individual residents. Legend ' e rr..rw pwnw rf ffn.r`� f...l � e..f.l•.ww 4 1+r f.•....1 . r .era+ trf w r r I. K ...>•� fwr I I awl- RM f M tl••.1 w !\ I O O.f..f. A Iww.M w.. i it F i Unit Dlstrlhutton \ r_- ..f... , .f�• i • 7fr trw..• bn ff..y.f f -tyl In G.w 4f• 1� �.wl .. Arw>,r1r.w..wfww. •4 L M 4,w ww. ac ltw a.4 Gww^f.rW we 119 ml Acreage AnalysIS Iw... , .2 %W 13 CM C— 2" u •rr ..wr M 'N fw,rA. Iw1Y ww. ,.f u Pnw n •.. f•. r. 111; 316 Mt ,S% \.n iz ' UNIVERSITY STATION us)1 1 �p PRELIMINARY SR"E PLAN C7 ,w L Gnu F w M,wH �qIf PTUAL ONLY .r•o. � t „ .WO�_ � ..I I I I .dfllrw \i. V •f��r' ���' ,v .wlr I— fw..w 3— ff... Typical VMage Bloc:; \ 13 �/ _ ��• ,, rr�^.rwjar al �j'1 I .w �—��! O =-1•~- ��' G nr_p 1�rI In rl�Tc�� V 1 •tit _mil— -`— I •- , i Af it tz lam• III r' : -- �f ---r� . r ARTHUR R. COGSWELL Architect Architecture April 22, 1992 Land Planning Urban Design Mr. Marvin E. Collins Planning Director Orange County Planning Department 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 RE: CP -1 -92 University Station Rural Village Dear Mr. Collins: 14 This is to request that the Land Use Plan Amendment Application, which has been submitted relative to University Station be heard at the May 26th Public Hearing rather than in February. We understand that we are proposing a Primary amendment to the Plan, usually only heard in February, but we believe that there are extenuating circumstances here that justify such a request at this time. Specifically, we have an opportunity with this site to demonstrate the benefits of the new Rural Village approach to rural land planning, but we have a problem of timing: the land options are going to expire shortly, and we will lose our investor if we cannot move ahead soon with the approval process. This request is made in the following context: We believe that there is a general consensus that the Rural Village approach to rural land use, as currently studied by the Rural Character Study Committee and as proposed for this project, has significant advantages over the traditional way of doing planning in rural areas, with one or two acre lots using septic tanks, and that this new concept would bring benefits to Orange County. These will include: A. The retention of large amounts of visual open space, with development concentrated in smaller areas of higher density, connected to water and sewer extensions. B. The consequent avoidance of suburban sprawl and the conservation of the rural flavor of current land use. C. Provision of areas for public recreation, such as the 25 -acre public park site being donated to the county by University Station, and the 27 -hole public -use golf course being provided. P.O. Box 61 D. The provision of jobs in the county, Ch West Franklin St. both dune construction and after completion. Chapel Hill, NC 27a i4 g P 919 - 942 -5196 E. The stimulation of economic activity in the county. F. A reduction in the number of off -site auto trips by residents. 15 Mr. Marvin E. Collins April 2¢x,21992 Page Two Conditions exist, just now, which will permit the development of the site as a rural village. and secure the above benefits. These conditions include (a) options on the land (the last large site in this part of the county which. can be assembled for such a project), (b) an investor willing to commit $15 million to the project, (c) a professional team committed to the rural village approach, and (d) a climate of opinion recognizing the validity of the approach. If there is a delay in considering the land use amendment until February, the options will expire and some critical ones will not be able to be regained; for the same reason the investor will no longer be interested, and the opportunity will be lost. Six years ago a group of investors assembled the site, consisting of approximately 600 acres of land. We thought it was the finest site available for a planned development designed with housing and recreation in mind. It was outside the sensitive rural buffer and watershed areas. Two parcels consisting of 300 acres are owned by one family. A second family owns an additional 159 acres and Mr. Don Lacefield owns the former Craig parcel. When the land was originally purchased, Mr. Lacefield had three partners planning to combine theirs with the 159 -acre parcel and develop it with wells and septic systems, but soil studies indicated this was not the best approach for that particular site. This became a serious problem for Mr. Lacefield. He has held onto his land although his partners had to dissolve their relationship and left him with the full financial obligation. He has talked with others about developing the land, but so long as there was the slightest chance of University Station becoming a reality, he has delayed doing anything else. Recently he has been under great pressure from the bank to resolve his situation with them. Mr. Lacefield prefers to include his parcel for development with ours, and indeed, his land is critical to the development of the rural'village proposed here. He is a long time Hillsborough businessman and is concerned about the future of his part of the county. He understands the benefits which will accrue from University Station, but very soon will be forced to commit to another use for his property to avoid losing it altogether, despite the fact that this will also destroy the conceptual plan for University Station by taking away the only land topographically suitable for a portion of the village center. But the fact is, that by February, he will will have done something else with his land. Similar problems face all of the landowners who are under pressure from one circumstance or another to do something else with their land, and the tenure of their options will also become questionable after May. lh Mr. Marvin E. Collins April 2;2-1992 Page Three Apart from the land, as has been suggested above, the most serious consequence of a delay would be the loss of the principal investor. We feel most fortunate that at this juncture moment, we have an investor enthusiastic about the rural village concept. Due to his optimism that the economy is rising from its slump, he is currently willing to commit the development funds necessary. We will lose him if we delay the project until next year. He has assured us that he will not even be interested in further discussions unless we are successful in keeping the application on a fast track. Everyone recognizes the current problems with our economy. The S&L's, insurance companies and banks have made so many bad loans in recent years that it is now impossible to obtain financing for development in North Carolina. Private investors are not interested in "risk" projects when they can simply invest in Cary and have a "slam dunk." There are builders standing in line to build and buyers waiting to purchase homes in areas like Greensboro, Cary and Charlotte. To secure development financing for a new concept in a rural area is difficult in the best of times. Recently a nationally prominent planner was quoted: "The real problem with implementing many of these ideas (neo- traditional plans) is the lenders, most of whom do not fully understand the development business and insist that the same mistakes be made time and time again." We will be submitting facts and figures on development impact analysis. These estimates will hold firm for 1993 and 1994 as well. There is no reason to see much change over that period, nor will the development ratio change, nor will the cost of developing this tract of land. In addition, the revenue numbers will be relatively constant. In sum, both the plan and associated analyses will be the same, whether submitted now or if delayed until February. If the County wishes to see land developed in a new and very desirable way, the development of University Station is an opportunity to do that, but because of circumstances over which we have no control, the window of opportunity is small. The application must be heard at the May 26th hearing, or the options will expire, the investor will go elsewhere and the opportunity will pass. We very much hope that the Commissioners will favorably consider this request to hear this application on May 26th. Very sinc Arthur . Co Archite t and AR /jb r/ v Ll z4ot ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT 19 Date: 4 -3 -92 To THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA The undersigned do hereby make application to change the Zoning Atlas of Orange County as hereinafter requested. 1. The property is Located an the west side of S.R.# 1948 rerguson - Strwe-t /Road) between S.R.# 1005 and S,1; 1 It is known as Lat(s) 6A block - of Orange County Tax Map 37B -. Bingham Township. It has a frontage of feet and a depth of _feet, and contains square feet or c acres. 2. It is desired and requested that the foregoing property be rezoned from ARPRB to EC -5 3. The JoLLowing information has been _attached in_, support of the application for changing the Zoning Atles (* — required on aLL +a. A fully diwrnaianed weD •t r ■tale of no" less %hen ena (1) inch •curls one- nuhdred 1ia01 fast nor wore then one (1) eoeh *to be. twenty - 1201 rest -- shorl",; the lend which t• prtrpeeed to b• rezoned. -y. A legrl description of the land proposed tc be roZonse. .C. A statement of justifi CIO. :Lon •ddroseinp one or wore of the fcllowinr: 111 . culdabe ocorractetrbyn e • any. which Zoning -.he proposed emsnewsntwith a detailed explanation of such error in the Zoning Atlas and detailed reasons has the proposed amendment will correct the error. (2) The changed or changing conditions, If any. in adthemores or e in the County generally, reasonably necessary to th promotion of the public health, safety end general welfare. -(3) The manner in which the proposed amendment WiLL earl-7 out %he intent and purpose of the adopted Lend Use Plan or part thereof. -[A) All ether circumstances, factors and reeaono which the sooticant Cffere it luopart of the proposed amendment including, but no: Lislted to, aecuwnntetian from service agrnciat (a.g. fire, po n es, rescue end utilities sQsnefos) assuring services provision copsoility to the ceerlopment. d. A list of all individuals. firma or corporations owning Property soup adjoining orezonin within islvattached. (The)Lis% isfcurrent Property of souplt ltq.tl g (Dotal Y -- I Certify that ell informetion furnished in this application is accurate to the b -est of my knowledge. 0 :, p p L i c an t (s) ; Donald Wayne Combs & Brenda Carol Combs TSB Address: 1300 Ferguson Road Chapel Hill h o n e : �92�1- 3385 N Uj W a U W U H r� G:a c� z H O N w Ln n N U z H O L1. ca A U C� 0 O rn CC O O M r-1 r� Cn A r d N r^ O U 0 rJ C� ro u s~ w 4� r ro ca C 0 x 74 w z 3 O 0 O E a z Cd tN N d 4) r-1 � •ri •N e W O p i-J � w O ri to 0 O A F+ O O +-+ vi eta aJ y,4 w O v , Q] � G es ca $d 0 d LJ -P C tn a1 N 1 N O U -d 0 R1 rl .ti Q] N O O. a In I4 a u ro 4.1 O l+ al A E a C r-I L Ln O 1 HI c .Y.i C O N rJ c a� N eo 4 a u7 4, v N ro b Q u rl 0 f a 0 E +-1 M Q! > 4 r-q ea r0 G al �C ri o M u U] cd U U U) y N (D p y.,l L q " co O. (A a, 0 0 .4 w U) ro 0) ca o 0 i4 u —4 cq u 0 4 W u CL x ro u •a W t+ E•+ E-4 W d u 7 9 ri Rr .1 0 ro ro H d r•1 .--I a it p u P4 N UJ QJ aJ (1 (ti L 1J ro N d � ul 4-1 O O �. .,q a. U O y O U N PO fn U •rl L1 w m CJ i 1.1 O u � n .a �I O •rl pr .b N ij •• N O W pQ -4 G ro a t1 ro d a) .0 N E M 14 v d � vi v, y - C N 4 u7 O v a ro b Q u a+ 0 f a 0 E u a > 4 r-q ea r0 G M X U] cd O y N p y.,l ^I " co 0 0 .4 w n. ro ca o 0 u Eg u 4 W u CL x ro u •a u t+ E•+ E-4 W d u Qq •d' 1 n M A C4 W OD m 00 00 U W ca OD I A n M A ca d' 1 n M N 1 n M c� LO I n R1 M a d ui 3.1 M al A a) cd C7 c C ca c� +J w N O Qi' M m ca o � a� ro' U G 1.1 � u A G •r4 a w u u ca N •n A d ?. 0 21 Statement of Justification Combs Rezoning . One of the permissible grounds for a change in the zoning atlas of Orange County is to correct an error in the zoning ordinance. The property requested for rezoning has been used for the storage of automobiles since before the adoption of zoning for Bingham Township, and thus should have been zoned EC -5 to allow the continuation of preexisting land use. This rezoning is being requested in part at the suggestion of the Orange County Board of Adjustment. According to the Orange County Planning Staff, zoning became effective for Bingham Township on September 2, 1981. The property was at that time an uninhabited tract of land. It had been purchased as part of a six acre parcel known as Orange County Tax Map 37B, Lot bA, by J. B. Martin and wife Doris Helen Martin on May 31, 1979. Mr. Martin was in the automobile business and bought this land as a salvage yard to keep old cars. He is now deceased, but his son Kenneth Martin has stated that the family checked with Orange County before the land was purchased and was told that no zoning or other regulations would prevent the property from being used for this purpose. As soon as the property was purchased, the Martins started to place cars upon it for storage. According to testimony of numerous persons, cars have been stored on the property continuously from the Spring of 1979 until the present time. At the time the property was zoned in 1981, it appears that Orange County was not aware of the use of the property. The property has access off of Ferguson Road, and the cars were stored towards the rear of the property, so that a person driving past the property on Ferguson Road would not see the stared cars. It would have been difficult to know the use of all the parcels of land in an area as large as Bingham Township. On August 29, 1983, the property was purchased from the Martins by the present owners, Donald Wayne Combs and wife Brenda Carol Combs. It was bought for the purpose of storing cars, and the Combs agreed to let the Martins continue to store cars on it. Mr. Combs, at that time, owned and operated West Franklin Street Gulf in Chapel Hill. Cars could not be stored at the downtown location, and Mr. Combs stored cars on the property. In 1985, Mr. & Mrs. Combs built an framed ranch style house 22 on the front of the property to be their residence. They continue to live there. Under their proposed rezoning, this portion of the'six acre parcel which fronts on the public road, will remain residential. The impetus for this rezoning came in October of 1991, when Mr. Combs received a letter from the Orange County Planning Department stating that he was operating an automobile storage and repair business on the property in violation of Orange County's zoning ordinance. He has been informed that one anonymous telephone compliant had been made. Mr. Combs has not been informed of and is not aware of any other complaints concerning the use of the property. To meet Orange County's concerns, Mr. Combs did a number of things. He had over two - hundred cars removed from the property. This was done in December of 1991 at a time when demand for these cars was low, and he received approximately $7,500.00 less than if he had waited. He also applied for a home occupation permit on November 11, 1991 to allow car repair at the building on the property behind his residence. Mr. Combs had previously received a building permit from Orange County to construct this building. The home occupation permit has not been acted on at this time. The issue of storage of cars was heard by the Hoard of Adjustment on February 10, 1992. It was Mr. Combs' contention that the storage of cars could be allowed under Article 11 of the zoning ordinance as a valid non - conforming use since the property had been used for this purpose since prior to the adoption of zoning for all of Bingham Township, including the property in 1981. At the hearing, a number of witnesses testified in favor of Mr. Combs. They included persons who had first -hand knowledge that cars had been stored on the property at the time that zoning became effective in 1981, and neighbors who stated their support for Mr. Combs and his use of the property. No one spoke in opposition to Mr. Combs. The Hoard appeared very sympathetic to Mr. Combs, and it was stated by the Chairman that it appeared that the property had been used to store cars at the time when zoning became effective, and that Mr. Combs should be able to continue this use. Since the County has the authority to rezone property to EC -5 to correct situations it was unaware of at the time zoning is adopted, it was suggested that Mr. P 23 Combs apply for rezoning of the property. Mr. Combs provides a valuable service to Orange County. He is on the wrecker rotation for Chapel Hill, and for the N. C. Highway Patrol. There is a shortage of places to take cars after wrecks, especially near Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill used to allow abandoned vehicles to be stored at it's police lot, but since December of 1991 has required such vehicles to be stored at the facility of the person who tows the vehicle. The cars are stored in such a way that they are not visible from the public road. Thus, it is evident that the county was not aware of this use at the time zoning became effective in 1981. There has been one anonymous complaint against Mr. Combs. In contrast, all who appeared at the Board of Adjustment spoke in favor of this use. By its very nature, an -EC -5 district will have only a small effect on the county, since the law already allows continuation of non - conforming uses. Applicant thus respectfully requests that the Board grant his request for rezoning to EC -5, and make the necessary change in the table of permitted uses to allow cars to be stored outside. r" U U Z4 91 m LI 9l- -8 'd fi Q kel 2tios a 9 � IM te y .••N 11 X11 i09�� � �� 3\ f"a8 a •' llf (3c b � .rt eti 7K Wu Iv a a I IN Q \Y 65l -cv %%Via� �. m (PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT - INK ONLY) 8/88 25 APPLICATION FOR CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DATE:_/ CO APPLICATION NUMBER: PD --1-- �r 8 I (We) request a Class A Special Use Permit as provided for in Article of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance for ELIZEi�{.�,�Rt ?TL�do A7-Lf+u� - A L CD 04 N1 The following information is provided in support of this request: A. PROPERTY INFORMATION: B. SITE PLAN INFORMATION: Twenty -six (26) copies of a Site Plan, prepared by a registered North Carolina surveyor or engineer, are provided as required by Article 8.8 and which contain the following information: North point, scale, and date. Extent of area to be developed. Locations and widths of all easements and rights -of -way within or adjacent to the site. Location of all existing and proposed structures on the site. �R Location of all areas on the site subject to flood hazard or inundation as shown on flood maps or soils maps. /704 r Location of all water courses on the site, including direction of flow. t/ Existing topography at a contour interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level datum. Z• Existing and proposed fencing, screening, gates, parking, service, and storage areas. Access to site, including sight distances on all roads used for access. (PLEASE COMPLETE REVERSE SIDE) � r Street Address or Location: 'fK-6LI d/40r aO 12_cXO 2400")i1f(sn Orange County Tax Map 19 Block! ZCPE _Lot(s) —9 Township - tAr iLL Zoning District(s): !'3 - ' fee[ Lot /Parcel Size: S' acres or tD square Number of Existing Buildings: / Gross Floor Area: /� (4d,64-e �.5- square feet _24POD Number of Proposed Buildings:_ cl Gross Floor Area: square feet Water Supply: Public (Specify) X /�7 y Community Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (Specify) Community Pm 5i _Individual School District: >7w O r r'aGr Fire District: M .G� r'r General Land Uses in Area: � Critical Areas: o"i;7 Stream /Drainageway P7Obt� Flood Prone Area __•/ north (Specify) 4 0/10: Historic Site _Watershed Other (Explain) 4 i Pte: C. OTHER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION: 171,4 Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development.. —� Two (2) full -size copies of the applicable Orange County Tax Map, one (1) copy with the property in question clearly marked. _ The names and addresses of the property owner(s) and /or applicant(s), and the names and addresses are all persons owning property within five hundred (500) feet of the property in question. Application fee as set by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Traffic impact study as required by Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Additional information regarding the proposed Special Use as required by Article 8 of the Zoning Ordinance. ✓ Narrative (or letters from appropriate agencies) indicating: 1. Method and adequacy of provision of sewage disposal facilities, solid waste disposal, and water service. Where public sewer is not available, a letter from the Orange County Health Department certifying the suitability of the existing and /or proposed wastewater treatment system for the property. 2. Method and adequacy of police, fire, and rescue squad protection. 3. Method and adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site. I (We), the applicant(s), hereby certify that the foregoing application and supporting documentation is complete and accurate. I understand that it shall be my (our) responsibility to present evidence to the Board of Commissioners the form of testimony, exhibits, documents, models, plans, and the like to support the request for approval of the Class A Special Use Permit. A PPLICA T SIGNATURE(S) 7 / 6, / 4? -2-- DATE NOTE: If title to the above mentioned property is not in the name of the applicant(s), please include a letter from the . owner(s) signifying approval of the request. (VLCIL 16 FEES: Amounc- Date Paid: '7 / l `"%� Receipt # 29.--> f -Z -?C> = 4 f Z° 27 July 6, 1992 To: Orange Co. Planning Staff Attn: Eddie Kirk Re: Phase III Heartwood Subdivision . Please receive for your review and information the following preliminary plan for Heartwood Phase III. We propose using 19.534 acres of Dickinson land for 9 fee simple lots. Lots would average 1.3 acres in size and the balance of the 2 acre minimum, approximately 5.96 acres, will be in common land. There will be an area around the lot arrangement set aside for a trail easement, where residents can have full access to all common areas. This easement will also allow the farm and the HEARTH Creative Learning Center access to Duke Forest. The addition of the 5.96 acres to the Heartwood Common Land brings the total common land up to 13.55 acres, which already include a swimming pond with trails, water garden, and water falls and fountains, also a picnic shelter with play structure, and a dock and an amphitheater. There is over 87000 SF of improved recreational space and the required space is 74920 SF. There is also an additional acre of recreational space set aside as community garden space and a 1/2 acre park below the swimming pond. This has turned out to be one of the nicest developments in Orange County. The single family homes to be built here will be in the current Heartwood style and be priced for compatibility with current Heartwood home values. We propose the extension of Heartwood Drive for ease of traffic flow, sighting, and to minimize the impact on the home at 6402 Heartwood Dr. We have on file a priliminary letter of approval from Joey Hopkins NCDT. For ascetic purposes, we wish to preserve the quartz rock outcropping in the middle of Phase III and have designed the road and set aside common land accordingly. At the June 7th general meeting of the Heartwood Landowners Association the Homeowners and members unaminously approved Phase III to be added to the Heartwood Community. The addition of further phases of development involving Dickinson land is allowed for, by right, in the covenants of Heartwood Phases I & II. For that reason and for the protection of all residents, current and future, �8 Heartwood Phase` III will share the same covenants as Heartwood Phase I & II. The water distribution system is already owned by the Homeowners Association and the wells have been on Dickinson lands. With the transfer of Phase III common land to the Homeowner's they will own that well. We have NC State approval to cover all proposed development in Phase III. The original water proposal was for 3 duplex lots, 2 residents and a conference center. We have modified the design for 9 single family lots and have adequate water available. Respe aHe submitted, o n Spe a Dickinson Lyn Dickinson / I -J 0 I Q 0 N I w U I cv I a iQ co i h p O [V � ar _I Ir ,rU1a Y Q ICI QC4 I U I Ilr Q N co �I �I W U 1 N 0 I U. I I I Q N � p _ N '2( Lid a'� - / N U N (p Q 67.95 � `yG L d m � z fL O �_ 1 F Q n uj m (1 v�r� m (D .7C LL - N _ J Al � :.J Q L> "1 (Q 7 n e� Loo a - N l ty(t) (D 7 O Q N I I U Q q CY U ai. N m C a m m DLMIJ = O rn a Q z w / c� O U W Q IC h C N C V O LO q , 1 N m I I I e� e I w \ MILL NOM 5E FD R ' a_ .;r �G mom z W F lyd�e� J �Y aT 0 0 O O rv^j q U O � PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: ZONING ORDINANCE REFERENCE: ARTICLE ARTICLE RESIDEN' ARTICLE ARTICLE ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: 4.3 - PERMITTED USE TABLE 6.7.2 - ACCESSORY STRUCTURES rIAL DISTRICTS 8.8.28 - MOBILE /MANUFACTURED 22 - DEFINITIONS Staf f BOCC Other: 31 IN Planning Board Public STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle x Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 24, 1992 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To add a new section addressing Mobile /Manufactured Structures to the Zoning Ordinance. Mobile /Manufactured Structures would be classified as a Class B Special Use in the Agricultural Residential (AR), Rural Residential (R -1) and Rural Buffer (RB) zones. IMPACTS /ISSUES: Mobile homes are not allowed as accessory structures in residential districts, however, recently the Planning and Inspections Staff has been presented with the issue of whether to allow mobile /manufactured structures, as opposed to mobile homes, to be used as accessory structures to residential uses. Whereas manufactured structures and mobile office structures are constructed differently than mobile homes and are not intended to be used as residential units, these types of structures would be. appropriate to use as accessory structures. This amendment would specifically set up mobile /manufactured structures to be used for accessory purposes as a Class B Special Use Permit and provide specific standards that would apply in Agricultural Residential (AR), Rural Residential (R --1), and Rural Buffer (RB) zones. Utility buildings are currently allowed as accessory uses in residential districts and would not be affected by this amendment. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Article 4.3 - Permitted Use Table (see attached table) 32 Article 6.7 - Accessory Structures in Residential Districts Article 6.7.2 - Mobile homes, as accessory structures to residential uses, are prohibited. Mobile Manufactured Structures may be permitted as accessory structures-in the AR, R -1, and RB district with the application and approval of a Class B Special Use Permit from the Orange gounty Board of Adjustment. Article 22 - Definitions Mobile Manufactured Structure Accessory - A subordinate structure the use of which is customarilv incidental to-the permitted, use of the principal building. These structures may include mobile office and manufactured buildings that are ins ected and labelled by a third party who is approved by the State. Utility builgings, mobile homes or manufactured homes ,�Tol' -ld not be-included as a mobile/manufactured_ structure -:essor uses include but are not i ited to: 1 storage unit and 2 home occupation. The mobile manufactured structure shall not be used as a residential unit and may be permitted as accessory structures in the AR R -1 and RB district with the ApRlication and aRRrovaj of a Class B Special Use Permit from the Orange County Board of Adjustment. Article 8.8.28 - Mob' a Manufactured Structure Class B Special Use 8.8.28.1 - Additional Information n_ addition to the information rearuired in Subsections 8.2 and 8, 8,1_ the , following shall-be--submitted as part of the application: a. A description of the exact type and size of structure planned, including the proposed, use. b. Site Plan___showina the location of the ,existing single- family unit and the Proposed mobile manufactured structure. C. If a home occupation is proposed, requirements.,asindicated in Section 6.16.6 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met. d. If RroRosed, approval of the OrMge-County Health De artment .for water and sewerage dis osal facilities or the a roval of the aRRronriatg agency from which _-sanitary sewer and water will be supplied. 8.8.28.2 - Standards of Evaluation The followin s ecific standards shall be used in deciding on an application for this use: a. The site plan shall show the boundaries of the site. .the location_ of existing and proposed structures, driveways and parking areas- _i.f._proposed. 33 b. if a home occu a ion is Rroposeg, the s ec' is standards in Section __6 .�� 6 must be comp ied wi The home occlapation apulicatign shall be submitted to and reviewed by the Orange County Plan Lq and Inspections Department. c. The 2K020sed mobilelmanufactured_ structure shall meet all applicable North Carolina State u ldin Codes. *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: CD to � w U U IC d a w o0 H � i5 G 4 al aww I Q to U2 y Nem w x rn to waa � U U a 4 m �Iv N &n N w CO 4)r 0 I I 1 m 0 ol 0 0 0 1 I I 1 •y I 1n n in O I D 1 1 1 ..I N •-1 .a w.l m 1 \O m C a E a a Iw N IM I It' Iw Im Iwlp I I_ I.. IY I "I 34 I I ► o a m C D I. I �, W v � J I m I ► v1 � a a I..ro � e e y a to ++ I m a n m G w I y U I U ~ N 0 1D I I I' V I • n I�! 1 Y l i I ro �1 i t ro ++ i•III� .r to ++ �+ -� ++ W a W >,+ r m m W R w I to 0 to a E w a. w E �. E, E E •+ L 0 W w I D T a w I • a r r r � I +•+ E a •� . C! I R I• O 0 A a I W W a ,J U I I Lai .+ I I W I a I l O I •• U �, a a 0 4j e 1: i z �+~ o1G i i U► r r m o[ • a m •- U m CD I C C b I W I .. m 7 a ,.. W m I A F a m N v I 11e a a W O 0 a N ++ LGu' 4 D x a W a! ► b .-� - m 1 7 b S b e m S D a E w c m I a W V U I • L a ro S R m R � I l a U to tr C w C n F r U C— 01 W ro C -+ C L D 0 b 0 b ro ro � I U • I s a a . a m L ,q m I m . U U � .a ..I .w .. Cw l I •, 9 r 0 0 a1 'C 0 C. I .. m r a m m U ,r p .w i •+ " 7 m W a p 0 0 LL r 11 cD w 4 3 C C N C U w S C O G I O 4 A I C I C W V K I F F tai D F ^U7 1 R a I` m I• I I I I I .. ` I I ' m l a r I r r . m l rt • m I . ► II I a I I m R I• s I R R I• I m I I I !� • + Qi • � • � ► I C C a I a m I m I l • R ++ E-1 l I ,. I C ipipip I IIr m I` ` lm I I imI• ►• le aI I` l m I s R I• R m m i ♦ j a I m • R m ►- a K l I. � la l ► I I� I Imp I I= W �• a I m � I I I� Ir I I�, la l m� m R R R j R I• m m iC I I I � ( � i. I• i� 4 Iw N IM I It' Iw Im Iwlp I I_ I.. IY I "I 34 I I ► a m C D I. I �, v � J I m I ► v1 � a a I..ro e y a to ++ I m a n m G w I y U I U y. 00 N 0 1D V +a+ 00 -p+ ► Y ro ro ++ I .r to ++ �+ -� ++ W a W >,+ r m m W R w I to 0 to a E w a. w E �. E, E E •+ L 0 W w I D T a w 0 O C �'O W W Gr 1 W +•+ E a •� w ti W 0 A a W W a ,J U I I Lai .+ a a W a a a •• U a a a 0 4j e 1: i z �+~ o1G i i o u m o[ �- �w e a •- U m CD C) C C b -+ I d .. m 7 a ,.. W m I A F a m N v I 11e a a W O 0 a N ++ a F a S I D x a W a! ► b .-� - m 1 7 b S b e m S D a E w c m I a W V L a ro S W a p q �+ b to tr C w C C F r U C— 01 W ro C -+ C L D 0 b 0 b ro ro -+ a I w 5 m o— L w a 3 ro m a m m U U U rl .a ..I .w .. Cw I •, 9 r 0 0 a1 'C 0 C. I .. m r a m m ,r p .w i •+ " 7 m W a p 0 0 LL r 11 cD w 4 3 C C N C U w S C O G I O 4 A I C I C W V K I F F tai D F I R Iw N IM I It' Iw Im Iwlp I I_ I.. IY I "I 34 M61 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: Voluntary Farmland Preservation Ordinance REFERENCE: Section V.B.1.a. and b. ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _8 Staff Planning Board BOCC Citizen STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: _8 High Middle Law PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 24, 1992 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To reduce the minimum required acreage for designation as a voluntary agricultural district from 155 to 80 acres. The change would recognize the role that smaller farms play in the agricultural economy, and, by permitting two or more contiguous farms to join together, allow farms as small as 40 acres to participate. IMPACTS /ISSUES: When the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance was enacted in March, the minimum size of an agricultural district was set at: 1. At least 155 contiguous acres of certified qualifying farmland; or 2. At least two or more certified qualifying farms, contiguous to each other, which will create a district of not less than 155 acres. Since the adoption of the ordinance, 13 applications have been received by the Planning Department. Of these, all may be certified as gualifying farmland, but only three applications contain sufficient acreage (at least 155 acres) to be designated as a voluntary agricultural district. A fourth application may be eligible for designation, but questions exist regarding ownership and size of the farm. A fifth application involves 150.5 acres and is only 4.5 acres short of qualifying for designation. The rationale for using the 155 -acre threshold was the figure represented the average farm size in Orange County according to the 1987 Census of Agriculture. Historically, Orange County and the counties surrounding it have demonstrated a general trend toward increasing farm size. The same holds true for counties which have adopted PDR programs (Wake, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg) and those with voluntary agricultural district programs (Buncombe and Rowan). Buncombe County, with an average farm size of 87 acres, requires a total of 100 acres of contiguous qualifying farmland for designation as an agricultural district. Rowan County requires 200 acres and has an average farm size of 131 acres. In both counties, two or more farms totaling 100 and 200 acres, respectively, may form a district if the farms are within one mile of each other. Orange County's ordinance requires that the farms be contiguous. 0..i The enabling legislation [G.S. 106 - 738(1)] requires that an ordinance must provide for the creation of districts consisting initially of at least a number of contiguous acres of qualifying farmland or a number of qualifying farms deemed appropriate by the Board of Commissioners. While the 155 -acre threshold was adopted, suggestions were made during the public hearing process to set the threshold at.a minimum to recognize farm operations such as those which raise specialized produce (squash, green beans, sweet corn, cucumbers, canteloupe, tomatoes, strawberries, and pumpkins), livestock (sheep, goats, and horses), and flowers. The 1987 Census of Agriculture bears out this suggestion, including the comment that there are more smaller farms but greater amounts of acreage in large farms. Farm Average Farm Size Acres Size County 1987 1982 1974 1969 Alamance. 122 118 108 103 Durham 103 135 140 113 Person 212 171 129 131 ORANGE 155 151 139, 124 Chatham 117 115 129 119 Caswell 184 163 141 132 Wake 128 125 116 111 Forsyth 75 67 69 62 Mecklenburg 103 107 118 121 Rowan 131 134 125 110 Buncombe. 87 73 77 62 The enabling legislation [G.S. 106 - 738(1)] requires that an ordinance must provide for the creation of districts consisting initially of at least a number of contiguous acres of qualifying farmland or a number of qualifying farms deemed appropriate by the Board of Commissioners. While the 155 -acre threshold was adopted, suggestions were made during the public hearing process to set the threshold at.a minimum to recognize farm operations such as those which raise specialized produce (squash, green beans, sweet corn, cucumbers, canteloupe, tomatoes, strawberries, and pumpkins), livestock (sheep, goats, and horses), and flowers. The 1987 Census of Agriculture bears out this suggestion, including the comment that there are more smaller farms but greater amounts of acreage in large farms. Farm Average Size Number Acres Farm in of in Size Acres Farms Farms Acres 1 -9 31 109 3.5 10 -49 126 3422 27.2 50 -69 75 4316 57.5 70 -99 63 5288 83.9 100 -139 58 6677 115.1 140 -179 37 5951 160.8 180 -219 32 6225 194.5 220 -259 10 2415 241.5 260 -499 58 21165 364.9 500 -999 26 16551 636.6 1000+ 6 8989 1498.2 Another suggestion was made to allow designation if the family earned at least 50 percent of its income from the farm operation, regardless of the size of the farm. Such a provision, however, would not be consistent with the standards set forth in G.S. 106- 738(1). 9Nl More recently, the use of the "median" (half above /half below) as opposed to the "average" has been recommended by a citizen. Based on 1987 Census of Agriculture data, this would place the median farm size, in terms of number of farms, at approximately 80 acres. If this standard were adopted, this would mean that half of all farms (eight of 13 applications - 62 %) would qualify for district designation. Based on the current threshold of 155 acres, only 30 percent of all farms (four of 13 applications - 31 %) would qualify for designation. One concern related to the threshold issue is the number of potential applications which might be received and the staff time required to process them. The charts accompanying this abstract indicate that the applications received to date have generally followed the same distribution of farms in the county. The 13 applications received, however, only represent two percent of all farms. Even if participation was 30 percent, this would mean that the potential number of applications (with an 80 -acre threshold) would range from 80 to 100. If spread out over several months, that number of applications would seem manageable. 12+4 (4 4 4 � lexf 113 4 ,1 try � 144 DO 4�1•I +Fc -fire F-r, Section V - APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QUALIFYING FARMLAND AND VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS B. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION IN A VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT 1. An agricultural district shall initially consist of: a. At least 155 contiguous acres of certified qualifying farmland; or b. At least two or more certified qualifying farms, contiguous to each other, which will create a district of not less than 155 acres. PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: Section V - APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QUALIFYING FARMLAND AND VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS B. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION IN A VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT I. An agricultural district shall initially consist of: a. At least 80 contiguous acres of certified qualifying farmland; or b. At least two or more certified qualifying farms, contiguous to each other, which will create a district of not less than 80 acres. 38 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW: 7/8/92 - Recommended for public hearing. BOARD OF CORMISSIONERS REVIEW: a* LL C LL to 0o 22 P 3 m ~` a H � V� w D� � C] a€ W w a W m cc LL et " a O O p 0 0 0 ;ueeJed No 0 0 O O 0 ao 0 m 0 0 LO ca 0 m N N N +w+ N c � v r •q N a cc � 0 r ` 0a y � c p � m . Q m n D D w A � A O � v cc m r � 1 D T n b W', LU 0 14 LU cc +1 U 2 LL 0 0 Z 03 z L6 LU zot CIO LU cc LL O O O 2 m m m m co 03 60 N I 0 N 4-9 m N V- CL CL (4 4-0 Cc CR 0 cp O cri I $ %.40 %.%a 246. g .%.- r- 0 0 0 0 L6 L6 6 0 m N CY V, ZUGOJGd 410 1 ........ . ...... . ... ............ .............. ............... ............ 2 m m m m co 03 60 N I 0 N 4-9 m N V- CL CL (4 4-0 Cc CR 0 cp O cri I $ %.40 %.%a 246. g .%.- r- 0 0 0 0 L6 L6 6 0 m N CY V, ZUGOJGd 410 1 DISTRIBUTION OF FARM ACREAGE BY NUMBER OF FARMS ORANGE COUNTY, NC - 1987 Farm ---------------------------------------- Percentage of Farms Below - - - - -- SizeNumber Acres Percent ------- �------------- --------------------- - in of of 50 70 100 140 180 - - - - -- 220 Acres Farms Total Acres Acres ------------------------------------------ Acres Acres Acres Acres 1 -9 31 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% -- - - -- 5.9% 10 -49 126 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 50 -69 75 14.4% 5.3% 14.4% 14.4% 14.4% 14.4% 14.4% 70 -99 63 12.1% 6.5% 12.1% 12.1% 12.1% 12.1% 100 -139 58 11.1% 8.2% 11.1% 11.1% 11.1% 140 -179 37 7.1% 7.3% 7.1% 7.1% 180 -219 32 6.1% 7.7% 6.1% 220 -259 10 1.9% 3.0% 260 -499 58 11.1% 26.1% 500 -999 26 5.0% 20.4% 1000+ 6 1.1% 11.1% Total 522 100.0% -------------------------------------------- 30.1% ---------------------------------------------- 44.4% 56.5% 67.6% 74.7% 80.8% Source: 1987 Census of Agriculture 1987 Census of Agriculture DISTRIBUTION OF FARM ACREAGE BY NUMBER OF ACRES ORANGE COUNTY, NC - 1987 Farm ------------------------------------------ Percentage of Farms Below Size- Acres Percent ------------------------------------------------ in in of 50 70 100 140 180 220 Acres Farms Total --------------------------------------- Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres 1 -9 109 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% ----- 0.1% - - - - -- 0.1% 10 -49 3422 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 50 -69 4316 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 70 -99 5288 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 100 -139 6677 8.2% 8.2% 8.2% 8.2% 140 -179 5951 7.3% 7.3% 7.3% 180 -219 6225 7.7% 7.7% 220 -259 2415 3.0% 260 -499 21165 26.1% 500 -999 16551 20.4% 1000+ 8989 11.1% Total 81108 --------------------------------------------- 100.0% ------------------------------------------------------ 4.4% 9.7% 16.2% 24.4% 31.8% - - - - -- 39.4% Source: 1987 Census of Agriculture n.1 A2 DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICANT ACREAGE BY NUMBER OF FARMS ORANGE COUNTY, NC - 1987 ---------------- Farm •------ - - - - -- Percentage of Farms Below Size Number Percent ------------------------------------------------ in of of 50 70 100 140 180 220 Acres Farms Total Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres ---------------------------------- 1-9 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10 -49 4 30.8% 30.8% 30.8% 30.8% 30.8% 30.8% 30.8% 50 -69 1 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 70-99 2 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 100 -139 1 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 140 -179 1 7.7% 7.7% 7.7% 180 -219 1 7.7% 7.7% 220--259 1 7.7% 260 -499 1 7.7% 500 -999 1 7.7% 1000+ 0 0.0% ---------------------_------ Total 13 100 0% 30.8% 38.5% 53.8% 61.5% 69.2% 76.9% Source: Agricultural Districts Program Applications DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICANT ACREAGE BY NUMBER OF ACRES ORANGE COUNTY, NC - 1987 -------------- Farm •------ - - ---- Percentage of Farms Below Size Acres Percent ------------------------------------------------ in in of 50 70 100 140 180 220 Acres Farms Total Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres --------------------------------------- 1-9 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10 -49 159 7.9% 7.9%- 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 50 -69 59 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 70 -99 160 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 100 -139 100 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 140 -179 150 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 180 -219 182 9.1% 9.1% 220 -259 228 11.4% 260 -499 284 14.2% 500 -999 684 34.1% 1000+ 0 0.0% ----------- Total -------------------- 2006 100.0% - 7.9% - - - -- 10.9% 18.8% 23.8% 31.3% 40.4% Source: Agricultural Districts Program Applications rrj 43 farm to have an agricultural district designation. Collins responded that he felt the Crutchfield Heirs are more interested in the waiver of sewer assessments and insuring long term use of the property for tree farm purposes. This is part of the site of the proposed Seven Mile Creek Reservoir and borders lands owned by Orange County which was purchased in the 1970's with the intent of providing a reservoir. Discussion followed regarding the kinds of trees and Walker responded mostly hardwoods. It was also noted by Collins that the property would not be protected from condemnation for a reservoir. But, if the property was condemned for a reservoir, there would have to be a public hearing and the owners would have to be paid a fair market price for the property. MOTION: Strayhorn moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Nutter. VOTE: Unanimous. Collins stated that these recommendations will be presented to the Board of Commissioners on August 3, 1992. c. Minimum Farm Size - Voluntary Agricultural Districts Presentation by Marvin Collins. This item is to consider changing the minimum farm size required for participation in the voluntary agricultural districts program. The abstract and relevant materials are included as an attachment to these minutes on pages The Planning Staff recommends that Section V.C.I.a and b. be amended to reduce the minimum required acreage from 155 to 80 acres. The change would recognize the role that smaller farms play in the agricultural economy, and, by permitting two or more contiguous farms to join together, allow farms as'small as 40 acres to participate. If the Advisory Board recommends the change for public hearing, it can be included on the August 25, 1992 agenda. An important point to remember is that under the current standard or any revision thereof, all applications must be processed and, if eligible, certified as qualifying farmland by the Advisory Board. The applicant(s) would not be eligible for designation as an agricultural district, however, unless the threshold standards were met. MOTION: VOTE: 44 Collins noted that those farms which did not qualify due to the threshold of 155 acres were a mix, one of which was a sheep farm. Discussion seemed to indicate that 80 acres was considered to be more realistic for a County such as Orange. There are many farms in the County which are listed as farm use or forestry_but, yet, cannot qualify for agricultural district designation. Hunter asked how the program would be monitored. Walker responded that spot- checking had been considered. He continued that if application is made by a farm that is under the FSA (Food Securities Act) in Soil Conservation Service, it is already on a spot -check list with SCS. A separate listing can be kept of farms that are not already in the SCS program and spot - checks can be set up for those farms. Strayhorn moved approval of the Planning Staff recommendation to reduce the minimum required acreage from 155 to 80 acres. Seconded by Hunter. Collins noted, that any application that is received, regardless of acreage, must be reviewed to determine certification as qualifying farmland. This would then enable the applicant to pursue combinations with adjacent properties to meet the threshold. Unanimous. d. Identification Sign - Voluntary Agricultural District Presentation by Collins. This item is to consider the design of a proposed identification sign announcing the location of a voluntary agricultural district. The goal of the voluntary agricultural districts program is to increase identity and pride in the agricultural community and its way of life and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other negative impacts on properly managed farms. One means of accomplishing this, other than through specific ordinance provisions, is through the erection of signs which identify the location of voluntary districts to the passing motorist and neighboring property owners. A sketch of the proposed sign to be used as part of Orange County's program is included as an attachment to these minutes on page It contains the logo of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and the wording, "You are entering an Orange County Voluntary District." The sign would have a white (or Carolina blue) background with green lettering and logo. The size of the sign would 45 Attorney and he had responded that it is a procedural issue rather than substantive and he did not express concern. She continued that the intent of the two year provision in the ordinance could be reviewed in terms of the intent of this subdivision, and the decision based on this particular set of circumstances. Should such a situation occur again, it would be reviewed and judged on its own merit. MOTION: Jobsis moved to grant the applicant's appeal and classify this subdivision as a minor subdivision since it is a special case and the intent is not to create a large subdivision. Seconded by Scott. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #10: MATTERS TO BE HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING (8/24/92) 0 a. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (1) Article 4.3 - Article 6.7.2 - Article 8.8.28 - Article 22 - Permitted Use Table Accessory Structures in Residential Districts Mobile /Manufactured Structure Definitions Presentation by Eddie Kirk. The Planning & inspections Staff has recently been presented with the issue of whether to allow mobile /manufactured structures to be used as accessory structures to residential uses. The Zoning Ordinance does not allow mobile homes to be used as accessory structures. whereas manufactured structures and mobile office structures are constructed differently than mobile homes and are not intended to be used as residential units, these types of structures differ from mobile homes and would be appropriate to use as accessory structures. This amendment would specifically set up mobile/ manufactured structures to be used for accessory purposes as a Class B Special Use Permit and provide specific standards that would apply in Agricultural Residential (AR), Rural Residential (R -1), and Rural Buffer (RB) zones. Utility buildings are currently allowed as accessory uses in residential districts and would not be affected by this amendment. 45 The Planning Staff recommends that the proposed amendment be presented for public hearing on August 24, 1992. A copy of the proposed amendment is an attachment to these minutes on pages MOTION: Reid moved approval for public hearing as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #11: PLANNING BOARD ITEMS a. Hillsborough Thoroughfare Plan Presentation by Gene Bell. A copy of the abstract information and revised thoroughfare plan map are attachments to these minutes on pages Bell reviewed the map and noted that the Hillsborough Town Board voted unanimously to adopt the revised thoroughfare plan boundaries on July 13, 1992. The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Board endorse the action of the Hillsborough Town Board and recommend to the County Commissioners the adoption of a resolution supporting the proposed boundary revisions. Such an item could possibly be considered by the commissioners at their August 18, 1992 meeting. MOTION: Gray moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Reid. VOTE: Unanimous. b. Regional Bicycle Plan Update Presentation by Gene Bell. This.item is to report on efforts to prepare a Regional Bicycle Plan. On October 22, 1991, the County Commissioners agreed to participate financially in the preparation of a Regional Bicycle Plan at the request of the Durham--Chapel Hill- Carrboro (DCHC) Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC). Other c 0 R A N.G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3_1992 Action Agenda Item # SUBJECT: Z -2 -92 P AND S SPORTING GOODS, INC. - ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): Site Plan vicinity Map Staff Memorandum Findings of Fact 5/26/92 Public Hearing Minutes 6/15/92 Planning Board Minutes 1 INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Cameron Extension 2580 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed Zoning Atlas amendment in Bingham Township. BACKGROUND: The property in question is located on the south side of NC Highway 54 between Morrow Mill Road (SR 1958) and Orange Grove Road (SR 1006). The total area proposed for rezoning contains 3.98 acres and is described as part of Lot 28 of Tax Map 26 in Bingham Township. The current zoning is Agricultural Residential. The zoning districts proposed are 2.06 acres of Local Commercial -1 and 1.92 acres of Neighborhood Commercial -2. In the adopted Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the property is designated Agricultural Residential and Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. The proposed rezonings will maximize the five -acre allotments of NC -2 and LC--1 zoning at this activity node. Each of the proposed zoning lots will have direct access to NC Highway 54, an arterial. Each lot also has suitable area for ground absorption sewage treatment as evaluated by Orange County Environmental Health. Adjacent property to the south and west is undeveloped and zoned Agricultural Residential. To the east is PHE, Inc., a mail order facility zoned General Commercial -4. Across NC Highway 54 to the north is undeveloped land zoned AR and LC -1. • 2 f The Planning Board has made positive findings on the application for rezoning to LC -1 and NC -2 as required by Article 20 and Article 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. The list of permitted uses in the proposed districts is included in the attachments. The applicant has no timetable for developing the property in question. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas was presented at public hearing on May 26. Greg Shepard spoke on behalf of the applicant. Madeline Curl, an owner of adjacent property, spoke against the rezoning because if approved, there would be no more LC -1 or NC -2 zoning available in the node. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the County Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. in early June, a representative of Madeline Curl met with Comprehensive Planning Staff and Economic Development Commission Staff to discuss the future of the Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. They discussed the limits on commercial zoning and procedures for requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. On June 15, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment based on the attached findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment from AR to LC -1 and NC -2 based on the attached findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. Q .RANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROL) - APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT 3 171f1: s �L- 14 -L2 ;Q Date: March 27, 1992 TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA The undersigned do hereby make application to change the Zoning Atlas of Orange County as hereinafter requested. 1. The property is located on the So_ uthaida of EX]IX N C (_ Highway 54 Street /Road) between S.R.# 1958 and S.R.# 1006 It is known as Lot(s) 26 0 Block ^frontage - of Orange County Tax Map 26 - Bingham Township. It has a of ±665 feet and a depth of +480 and contains ^feet, 295,7_72 square feet or 6.79 —acres. 2. It is desired and requested that the foregoing property be rezoned from AR to NC -2 and LC -1 . 3.- The foLLowing information has been -attached .in-._ support of the application for changing the Zoning Atlas (• - required on a L L applications). v"s. A fully dimensioned map at a scale of not Lass then one (1) inch^ Squats one — hundred (100) fast nor more then one (1) inch egUals. twenty 1201 feet- showing•• the land which is proposed to be rezoned. ✓•b. A legal description of the land proposed to be rezoned. •e. A statement of Justification addressing one or more of the following: N/A (1,1 The alleged error in the Zoning Ordinance, if any, which would be corrected by the proposed amendment with a detaiLed explanation of Such error in the Zoning AtLss and dateiLed reasons how the proposed amendment wiLL correct the error. `121 The changed or changing conditions, if any, in the area or in the County gonereLLy, which make the proposed amendment reasonably necessary to the promotion of the public health, safety and general welfare. "(31 The manner in which the proposed amendment wiLL terry out the intent and purpose of she adopted Land Use Plan or part thereof. ✓•(41 ALL other circumstances, factors and reasons which the applicant offers in support of the proposed amendment including, but not Liaited to, documentation from service agencies (e.g :. firs, Po Lies, rescue and utilities agencies) assuring Services provision capability to the development. "d. A list of ell individuala, firma or corporations owning property adjoining or within five hundred (500) feet of the property sought for rezoning is attached. The List is current as of (Oats) I certify that ell information furnished in this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Applicent(s): Philip D. Harve Address: P &S Sportin Goods Inc. Post Office Box 1500 Phone: Chai2el Hill NC 27514 9.29-2.14 3 - G. Greqory Shepard Shepard Design Associates 424 Waterside Drive Carrboro NC 27510 9 -6069 • Q , z —�— ✓� A APvLIC,AArr : P4 5 Sf or-TIA1CI- QCOPS, INC. CVZZEA-r ZOAlIA q- AgZfCULTURAL zest mAT'uL 'PROPOSED. W.A4 /AICj : LOCAL- .d0ime - CIAL- -1 .3534 ' I 4.16 AC. el •3203 � WI 4.16 AG, (' 6E 3 2 1961 Q 17 02 AC. 4.07AC. 639 P7 . _. 42 89 AC 6 10 19 AC 3 4687 I IA AS. / 601 AC 1 B42T 1 2504 \ 3.3RA C. �P.d{Id,l•{ 2 RURAL �) 2.94AGI 5 �.b1 13 t2 + _ AC r 1 �► �. 4382 A 69 Cpl e -2) I S E F M n :: N J j 4 � Y eaerz�,r t 5 o -� 5.24 U R 5 ig4 a a• 7951 6914' 3 3 o J _: . :s�:� t 8 3871 4.22 15 •3743 /W/ 308 AC sr � 44-4 I( 31 r w M rn S��'� �•a6ACRE5 1'972 ACEES /DOl 'r►c� a� p� /� O ,B 30 0 e' a ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278. u �_ t • '•r e.r MEMORANDUM TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD FROM: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 5, 1992 SUBJECT: Z -2 -92 P & S SPORTING GOODS, INC. APPLICATION FOR REZONING GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. c/o Philip D. Harvey P.O. Box 1500 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 5 Location: South side of NC 54, 590 feet east of Morrow Mill Road (SR 1958). Lot size: 6.79 acres in total lot (exclusive of right -of -way), 2.06 acres requested to be rezoned from AR to LC -1, and 1.92 acres to be rezoned from AR to NC -2. Acreages proposed for rezoning include half of the right -of -way of NC Highway 54. Existing Land Use: The property proposed for rezoning is undeveloped. Surrounding Land Use: North - NC Highway 54 and undeveloped land zoned AR and LC -1. East - PHE, Inc., mail order facility, zoned GC -4. South - Undeveloped woodland zoned AR. West - Undeveloped residential land, I -acre lots, zoned AR. MEMORANDUM 6 Z -2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. May 5, 1992 s- Page 2 Land Use Plan Designation: Agricultural Residential and Rural Neighborhood Activity Node Zoning: The property is presently zoned Agricultural Residential (AR). The intent of the Local Commercial -I (LC-1) District is provided in Article 4.2.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. a) Intent The purpose of the Local Commercial -I (LC -1) District is to provide appropriately located and sized sites for limited commercial uses designed to serve a population at the neighborhood and rural level with convenience goods and personal services. Performance standards will be used to insure the absence of adverse impacts beyond the immediate space occupied by the building. b) Application Criteria This district will usually be applied where the following conditions exist: 1. Site is located within areas designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan as either a Commercial Transition Activity Node, a Rural Commercial Activity Node or a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. 2. Uses would serve a market area population confined to the immediate area and would generally not serve commuters or persons outside the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Lot size -for individual uses shall be appropriate to the method of water supply and sewage disposal. 4. Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned LC -1 at any node shall not exceed nine acres, but 5 acres shall apply in rural areas where population density is lower and distributed more widely than in the Transition area. Acreage limitations shall not apply to property zoned Existing Commercial -V (EC -5) or planned developments. 5. All sites designated LC -1 shall have direct access to a street classified either as an arterial or collector as designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. MEMORANDUM 7 Z -2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. May 5, 1992 s _ Page 3 ". The following is a list of permitted uses in LC -1: H1 Day Nursery, Daycare, Private Kindergarten H2 Single- Family dwelling w /wo efficiency apartment H3 Two - Family dwelling H5 Dwelling; Mobile Home H6 Family Care Home H8 Rehabilitative Care Facility Accessory Uses P2 Botanical Gardens P4 Bus Passenger Shelter P7 Church P8 Community Center P14 Public & Non - Profit Parks P21 Schools: Dance, Art and Music P24 Governmental Facilities & Office Buildings P25 Water and Sanitary Sewer Pumping Stations S4 Assembly Facility Less than 300 S6 Banks and Financial Institutions S7 Beauty and Barber Shops S8 Clubs or Lodges S15 Health Services: Under 10,000 sq. ft. S21 Laundry and Dry Cleaning Services S22 Libraries S26 Motor Vehicle Services Stations S28 Offices and Personal Services That Attract Few Customers or Clients on Premises Other Than Employees, Generate Low Traffic Volumes, Have No Adverse Impacts Beyond the Space Occupied by the Building S35 Recreational Facilities: Golf Club S37 Repair Service Electronic & Appliance S42 Retail Trade, Sales, & Rental of Durable and Convenience Goods, Merchandise & Equipment Where No Adverse Impacts Occur Beyond Immediate Space Occupied By The Building Where: A) Operations Are Designed to Attract & Serve Few Customers Or Clients On Premises Other Than Employees Of The Principal Use. B) Low Volume Traffic Generation (0 -200 Trips /Day) C) All Operations Entirely Within A Fully Enclosed Building With No Outside Storage The following uses are allowed with a Class A Special Use Permit: P16 Public Utility Stations and Sub - stations, Switching Stations, Telephone Exchanges, Water and Sewage Treatment Plants �i MEMORANDUM Z -2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. May 5, 1992_ Page 4 \ The following uses are allowed with a Class B Special Use Permit: H7 Group Care Facility P17 Radio & Television Transmitting & Receiving Towers & Elevated Water Storage Tanks P22 Transmission Lines S34 Recreational Facilities (Non- Profit) The intent of the Neighborhood Commercial -II (NC -2) District is provided in Article 4.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance. a) Intent The purpose of the neighborhood Commercial -II (NC -2) District is to provide appropriately located and sized sites for limited commercial uses designed to serve a population at the neighborhood and rural level with convenience goods and personal services. Performance standards will be used to insure the absence of adverse impacts beyond the lot boundaries of the use. b) Application Criteria This district will usually be applied where the following conditions exist: 1. Located within areas designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan as either a Commercial Activity Node or Rural Neighborhood or Rural Community Activity Node. 2. Uses would serve a market area population confined to the immediate area and would generally not serve commuters or persons outside the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Lot size for individual uses shall be appropriate to the method of water supply and sewage disposal. 4. Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned NC -2 at any node shall not exceed nine acres, but a maximum of 5 acres shall apply where population density is lower and distributed more widely than in the Transition areas. Acreage limitations shall not apply to property zoned Existing Commercial -V (EC -5) or planned developments. 5. All sites designated NC -2 shall have direct access to a street classified either as an arterial or collector as designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. MEMORANDUM g Z -2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. May 5, 1992 1 s- Page 5 The following is a list of permitted uses in NC -2: H1 Day Nursery, Daycare, Private Kindergarten H2 Single - Family dwelling w /wo efficiency apartment H3 Two - Family dwelling H4 Multiple family H6 Family Care Home Accessory Uses P2 Botanical Gardens P4 Bus Passenger Shelter '1'7 Church P8 Community Center P10 Governmental Protective Services (Police and Fire Stations) Rescue Squads, Volunteer Fire Departments P13 Military Installations P14 Public & Non - Profit Parks P15 Parking as a principal use P21 Schools: Dance, Art and Music P24 Governmental Facilities & Office Buildings P25 Water and Sanitary Sewer Pumping Stations S6 Banks and Financial Institutions 87 Beauty and Barber Shops S8 Clubs or Lodges S13 Greenhouses (no on premises sales) S14 Greenhouses (on premises sales) S21 Laundry and Dry Cleaning Services S22 Libraries S26 Motor Vehicle Services Stations S28 Offices and Personal Services That Attract Few Customers or Clients on Premises Other Than Employees, Generate Low Traffic Volumes, Have No Adverse Impacts Beyond the Space Occupied by the Building S29 Offices & Personal Services That Generate Medium Traffic Volumes and Have No Adverse Impacts Beyond the Lot Boundaries S35 Recreational Facilities: Golf Club S37 Repair Service Electronic & Appliance S38 Research Facility S39 Restaurants: Carry Out S41 Restaurants: General S42 Retail Trade, Sales, & Rental of Durable and Convenience Goods, Merchandise & Equipment Where No Adverse Impacts Occur Beyond Immediate Space Occupied By The Building Where: A) Operations Are Designed to Attract & Serve Few Customers Or Clients On Premises Other Than Employees Of The Principal Use. MEMORANDUM 1. o Z -2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods, Inc. May 5, 1992 s - Page 6 B) Low Volume Traffic Generation (0 -200 Trips /Day) C) All Operations Entirely Within A Fully Enclosed Building With No Outside Storage S43 Retail Trade, Sales, & Rental of Durable and Convenience Goods, Merchandise & Equipment Where No Adverse Impacts Occur Beyond the Boundaries of Lot Where The Use Is Located. A) Medium Traffic Generation (200 -300 Trips /Day) The following uses are allowed with a Class A Special Use Permit: P16 Public Utility Stations and Sub - stations, Switching Stations, Telephone Exchanges, Water and Sewage Treatment Plants The following uses are allowed with a Class B Special Use Permit: H7 Group Care Facility P3 Buildings; Portable P22 Transmission Lines S34 Recreational Facilities (Non - Profit) FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD PERTAINING TO APPLICATION: P & S SPORTING GOODS, INC. BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS SUBMITTED, THE PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /REZONING ARTICLE 20 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /REZONING L"Yes" indicates Compliance: "No" indicates Non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance. Requirements The application must comply with all requirements specified in Article 20 - Amendments. Those requirements include: 20.3.2 a) Map showing affected property at scale of not less than 1 " =100' nor more than 1 " = 20'. 20.3.2 b) Legal description of property. 20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment. 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if any, which make amendment reasonably necessary to promote public health, safety and general welfare, 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed amendment will carry out purpose and intent of adopted Comprehensive Plan. _x—Yes No Site plan provided at scale of 1 " =40'. _x—Yes No Descriptions provided with application. Yes No Not applicable. Yes No Not applicable. _x—Yes No The property is located in SH -1 Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. The purpose of the node is to provide small scale commercial uses serving the population in the surrounding area. The proposed zones are consistent with the Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. 11 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ARTIC 4 -DISTRICT STATEMENTS OF INTENT AND APPLICATION CRITERIA ("Yes" indicates Compliance; "No" indicates Non- compliance) PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED INS, DINGS Ordinance Re uirements Article 4.2 identifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has applied for a Local Commercial -1 and Neighborhood Commercial -2 designation. The criteria for these districts are set forth in Article 4.2.8 and 4.2.9 as follows: (a) Located within areas designated —x—Yes No by the adopted Comprehensive Plan as either a Commercial Transition Activity Node or Rural Neighborhood or Rural Community Activity Node. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FILINGS The property is located in a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. (b) Uses would serve a market area Tx —Yes No Permitted uses would be those population confined to the allowed in the LCA and NC -2 immediate area and would zoning districts, which are generally not serve commuters small scale commercial and or persons outside the service areas. surrounding neighborhood. (c) Lot size for individual uses shall be appropriate to the method of water supply and sewage disposal. (d) Normally, the maximum amount of land zoned LC -1 and NC -2 at any node shall not exceed nine acres, but a maximum of 5 acres shall apply where population density is lower and distributed more widely than in the transition areas. (a) All sites designated LC -1 and NC -2 shall have direct access to a street classified either as an arterial or collector as designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. —x—Yes _x Yes _X—Yes No The Orange County Health Department has determined that each proposed district has an area of suitable soils for ground absorption sewage treatment and disposal. Improvements permit issuance would be pending final survey, waste flow of proposed develop- ment and protection of the approved area of suitable soils. No The request to rezone the property would not exceed the maximum of 5 acres of land zoned LC -1 and NC -2 at the SH -1 Activity Node. It would, however, complete the allotment for both zones within the Rural Neighborhood Node. No The property has direct access to NC Highway 54 which is designated as an arterial in the adopted Comprehensive Plan. 12 1 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No MW No PUPSLIC N�IA(� M gill V T9iS 13 Commissioner Willhoit stated that it is clear that growth ha; outstripped resources. There is a need to address that issue. Hi indicated that he was gratified to hear support for increased taxes as ai alternative to the impact fee. Mr. Collins and Commissioner Halkiotis indicated that Mr. Radwal would be contacted for further discussion on the statistics he presented. J In response to a suggestion from commissioner Halkiotis, Commissioner Willhoit indicated that the County has previously tried to tae the University facilities and the Court system declared it unlawful. Commissioners Insko and Gordon both indicated that there is a neec to research innovative ways to increase revenue. It was also suggested that the number of new homes which are being sold to buyers who are already Orange County residents be reflected in the statistics. Planning Board Chair Carol Cantrell indicated that she has livec here since 1976 and is actively involved in the schools as a teacher. For as long as she can remember the Chapel Hill- Carrboro School System haE exceeded their student projections. She feels the County needs to plan for this growth. Commissioner Gordon stated that the school needs have beer documented and already exist. Mr. Radway's information needs to be reviewed. She noted that documentation at the end of the technical report on impact fees shows that what residents pay on taxes is less than the value of the county services they receive. Several comments were made which suggested the Planning Boarc consider capping the fee, as well as, give very serious consideration tc whether or not this is an appropriate fee. A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commission( Gordon, to refer this item to the Planning Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS a. Z -2 -92 P AND S SPORTING GOODS INC. - ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT This item was presented by Planner Emily Cameron. The propert in question is located on the south side of NC highway 54 between Morrow Mil Road (SR 1958) and Orange Grove Road (SR 1006). The total area proposed fc rezoning contains 3.98 acres and is described as part of Lot 28 Tax Map 2 in Bingham Township. The current zoning is Agricultural Residential. Tr proposed zoning districts are Local Commercial -1 for 2.06 acres ar Neighborhood Commercial -2 for 1.92 acres. In the adopted Land Use Elemer of the Comprehensive Plan, the property is designated Agriculture Residential and Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. The proposed rezoning wil maximize the five --acre allotments of NC -2 and LC -1 zoning-at this activit node. Each of the proposed zoning lots will have direct access to NC Highwa 54, an arterial. Each lot also has suitable area for ground absorptic sewage treatment as proposed by Orange County Environmental Health. Adjacer, property to the south and west is undeveloped and zoned Agriculture 14 C1 Residential. To the east is PHE, Inc., a mail order facility zoned General Commercial -4. Across NC Highway 54 to the north is undeveloped land zoned AR and LC -1. The Planning Staff has made positive findings on the application for rezoning to LC -1 and NC -2 as required by Article 20 and Article 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. The list of permitted uses in the proposed districts is included in the attachments. The applicant has no plans for developing the property in question. THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR I PLANNING BOARD. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS MADELINE CURL, a White Cross resident with property adjoining P and S Sporting Goods, spoke in opposition to this request. A copy of her comments are in the Permanent Agenda File in the Clerks Office. GREG SHEPHARD, a representative of P. and S Sporting, spoke in support of this request. He indicated that all of the Planning regulations and requirements have been met. A motion was made by Commissioner Commissioner Gordon, to refer this item to the recommendation to be returned to the Board of County than August 3, 1992. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Willhoit, seconded by Planning Board for a Commissioners no sooner b. PD -1 -92 CAROLINA FRIENDS SCHOOL Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board, swore in Planner Emily Cameron who presented this item. It was presented for the purpose of receiving citizen comments on a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School whichl would allow expansion of the existing private school approved as a planned development in 1990. Carolina Friends School is an existing private school located on the north side of Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) and west of Friends School Road (SR 1719). The property contains 32.94 acres and is zoned PD -RB, Planned Development -Rural Buffer. In August of 1990 a Class A Special Use Permit was issued for Carolina Friends School to allow construction of a wastewater disposal system in the Rural Buffer. Article 6.20..1 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a large ground absoption system with a design capacity over 3000 gallons per day may be allowed in the RB district only through approval of a planned development. The Board of Directors of Carolina Friends School adopted a five -year master plan in 1991 for development of the school. The plan calls for expansion of the facility with a 9500 square foot resource center adjacent to the upper School, a 200 square foot office addition, four 120 square foot storage sheds, handicapped accessible bathrooms, and road widening with additional parking. Student enrollment is projected to increase by twenty students. The proposed construction constitutes a major modification to the Special Use Permit issued in 1990. Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that such a change be considered by the Board of Commissioners following a public hearing. The proposed expansion of the school complies with most of the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance that are attached to the current Special Use Permit. Conditions have been included in the Planning Staff's recommendation to address deviations from the approved. findings and to insure a -?-� - Z-ol i I i .I ......... ... ..... .`� ... '�`�'-- "'a'�L.L.� G"""tr ..�,. ..� ... � .... • .. .. � .. �. LiA .air -� J .. _...... ; .. ... r- �^► -4-- ..._ _ . _. . _...___..... -- TDTAL P.04 1U. 6/ 157/92 PLJWAJ1A(C1 BAP MIAJUM:5 19 increases in the budget were not being used for schools and education, but, rather, for administration costs. Scott restated his motion: That the Planning Board, at this time, vote to disapprove, in any form or fashion the principle of impact fees for schools. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Reid - indicated that he was not totally in opposition to the motion but was in favor of block education money. His concern was with the State cutback and what method would be used to acquire funds for schools.) Discussion followed regarding sending the data to the School Boards for verification of projections. It was the consensus of the Board to forward the data as recommended by Collins since it was indicated that information would be valuable if the issue of impact fees is raised again in the future. It was also agreed that it would be appropriate for discrepancies to be addressed by the School Boards. b. Zoning Atlas Amendment b(1) Z-2 -92 P & S Sporting Goods Presentation by Emily Cameron. The property is located on the south side of NC highway 54 between Morrow Mill Road (SR 1958) and Orange Grove Road (SR 1006). The total area proposed for rezoning contains 3.98 acres and is described as part of Lot 28 of Tax Map 26 in Bingham Township. The current zoning is Agricultural Residential. The zoning districts proposed are 2.06 acres of Local Commercial -1 and 1.92 acres of Local Commercial -2. In the adopted Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the property is designated Agricultural Residential and Rural Neighborhood Activity Node. The proposed rezonings will maximize the five -acre allotments of.NC -2 and LC -1 zoning at this activity node. Each of the proposed zoning lots will have direct access to NC Highway 54, an arterial. Each lot also has suitable area for ground absorption sewage treatment as evaluated by Orange County Environmental Health. �O d r ?0 t Adjacent property to the south and west is undeveloped and zoned Agricultural Residential. To the east is PEE, Inc., a mail order facility zoned General Commercial -4. Across NC Highway to the north is undeveloped land zoned AR and LC -1. The applicant has no timetable for developing the property in question. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas was presented at public hearing on May 26. Greg Shepard spoke on behalf of the applicant. Madeline Curl, an owner of adjacent property, spoke against the rezoning because if approved, there would be no more LC -1 or NC -2 zoning available in the node. The item was referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the County Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1992. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment from AR to LC -1 and NC -2 based on the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the findings is an attachment to these minutes on pages A statement was distributed from Ms. Madeline Curl stating her opposition to the Zoning Atlas Amendment as presented at the public hearing. A copy of the statement is an attachment to these minutes on pages Scott asked how the proposed amendment affected Ms. Curl. Cameron responded that the proposed rezonings will maximize the five -acres allotments of NC -2 and LC -1 zoning at this activity node. She continued that there are methods by which to request changes /amendments to the activity node. Gray expressed concern that the NC 54 corridor will' become more commercial. He indicated he felt the Planning Staff and Economic Development Commission should.review the area and either change the zoning or develop a plan for the area. Oli Devaud of the Economic Development Commission stated that the Planning Board /EDC Work Group had been primarily studying three areas along the interstate. He continued that the NC 54 Corridor is another area that the Group would like to study, but, with the other work in process, it will probably be quite some time before such a study could take place. 21 MOTION: Eidenier moved approval as recommended by the Planning Staff with the findings as presented. Seconded by Gray. VOTE: Unanimous. c. Planned Developments (1) PD -1--92 Carolina Friends School Presentation by Emily Cameron. This item is to consider a proposed modification to the Special Use Permit for Carolina Friends School which would allow expansion of the existing private school approved as a planned development in 1990. Carolina Friends School is an existing private school located on the north side of Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) and west of Friends School Road (SR 1719). The property contains 32.94 acres and is zoned PD -RB, Planned Development - Rural. Buffer. In August of 1990 a Class A Special Use Permit was issued for Carolina Friends School to allow the use of the school's wastewater disposal System in the Rural Buffer. Article 6.20.1 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a large ground absorption system with a design capacity over 3000 gallons per day may be allowed in the RB district only through approval of a planned development. The Board of Directors of Carolina Friends School adopted a five --year master plan in 1991 for development of the school. The plan calls for expansion of the facility with a 9500 square foot Resource Center adjacent to the Upper School, a 200 square foot office addition, four 120 square foot storage sheds, handicapped accessible bathrooms, and road widening with additional parking. Student enrollment is projected to increase by twenty students. The proposed construction constitutes a major modification to the Special Use Permit issued in 1990- Article 8.7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that such a change be considered by the Board of Commissioners following a public hearing. r 1 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 3, 1992 Action Agenda Item #- VM--E. SUBJECT: FEATHERWOOD PHASE II - PRELIMINARY PLAN ACTION BY: September 17, 1992 DEPARTMENT: PLANNING - PUBLIC HEARING —Yes---x—No ATTACHMENT(S): Resolution of Approval Application Vicinity Map Applicant's Letter & Private Road Justification Staff Evaluation Agency Comments Preliminary Plan 7/20/92 Draft Planning Board Minutes INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk Extension 2582 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 -9251 PURPOSE: To consider the Preliminary Plan for Featherwood Phase II Subdivision. BACKGROUND: The property is located at the southeast corner of Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711) and US 70 Business in Eno Township. The property is zoned Rural Residential (R -1). The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Rural Residential. There are eight (8) lots proposed out of 10.24 acres. The average lot size is 1.29 acres. All lots except lot 8 are Proposed to be served by individual wells and septic tanks. Lot 8 would be used as sewer easement for lots 1 and 2. Part of lot 7 would be used as a sewer easement for lot 6. A Class B private road, Featherwood Court, is proposed to serve four (4) of the eight (8) lots. The remaining lots would access off Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711). The applicant's private road justification is included in the attachments. The Planning Staff has evaluated the private road and, due to the location, size of lots, and private road criteria, recommends a public road. The subdivision does not provide larger than normal required lot sizes, larger than required setbacks or proposed open space, and is not located in a watershed. Based on proposed density, the 2 r North Carolina Department of Transportation would accept the road for maintenance if constructed to their standards. The Preliminary Plan does not vary from the Concept Plan with the exception of the proposed sewer easements. The Preliminary Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on July 20, 1992. At that time, due to the large number of trees that would need to be cleared for a public right -of- way, the Planning Board recommended approval with a class B private road and the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Featherwood Phase II with a public road built to State standards based on the Planning Staff findings contained in section IV- B- 3--d -1 of the Subdivision Regulations and subject to the conditions contained in the attached Resolution of Approval. 3 RESOLUTION 16 ' ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY CONEMSSIONER.S Date Auggst 3, 1992 Name of Subdivision Phase U Featherwggd Owner /Applicant _Laura Lee Feather The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Phase 11 Featherwood Subdivision preliminary plat, dated October 31, 1991 and containing eight (8) lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified herein. A. Sewage Disposal 1. Each residential lot, except lots 1, 2 and 6 shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair area, approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health. 2. The septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements. This disclosure shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regarding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health. 3. Septic easements shall be provided for lots 1, 2 and 6 (by lots 8 and 7) as indicated on the Preliminary Plat. The easements and their conditions shall be contained in the development restrictive covenants or other documents. A reference to the restrictive covenants shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 4. Lot 8 is of restricted development potential because it has been identified to accommodate septic fields for lots 1 and 2. The restricted lot shall be identified in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. B. Roads and Access 1. Featherwood Court shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, within a 50 foot right -of -way, and the a construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. DR ' - A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction of Featherwood Court to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a certified /licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 2. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall access onto Featherwood Court. All other lots shall access onto Piney Grove Church Road. This restriction shall be stated in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. Approved street name signs shall be erected at the intersection of streets as required in Section IV- B- 3 -c -12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Evidence shall be submitted by the applicant that the sign is in place or a copy of the receipt for purchase of the sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department. C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan. 2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. ' A Type E Land Use Buffer shall be provided along U.S. 70 Business. The buffer shall be 75 feet in width and provide sufficient vegetation to meet the standards of Section IV -B -8-e of the Subdivision Regulations. Said buffer shall be so noted on the plat, and described in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. D. Parkland 1. Cash in the amount of $500.00 (1135 x 2,190.70 /acre = $62.59 /lot x 8 lots $500.00) shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of parkland dedication. F� E. MisceUaneous 5 L The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section V -D-2 and V -D -3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 2. The following natural and man -made site features shall be shown on the plat: (Include streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, swamps, marshes, sites in "Inventory", houses, barns, sheds, railroads, overhead utility lines, cemeteries) a. Utility easement through lots 1, 6 and 7. 3. A setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the edge of the right -of -way. Side yards shall be a minimum of 20 feet, and rear yards a minimum of 20 feet. These setback requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. F. Certifications 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V -D -6-b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that each lot, except lots 1, 2 and 6, contains a suitable area for septic disposal. 4. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department. 5. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Featherwood Court has been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved. Signature of Applicant Clerk to the Board I, , accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, and acknowledge that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat. 3 a d J C J C' V •� C CI 1 U 0 � r V U) APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL 6 PL �� EASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) ` l A J O R S U B D I V I SI O N _ X ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION NAME: . LOCATION: OWNER /DEVELOPER: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: DATE: -� AGENT /CDNTACT :���CL.�b l�,T TELEPHONE NO.: E ?'j"IAPY INFORMATION: ')ranee County Tax Map Z Block Lot($) �_o 0 7ovnship o Zoning District(s): To,aL Number of Acres: J Phases: Tc:al Number of Lots: Average Lot Size: Minimum Lot Size i Number /Type of Structures: (existing) (proposed) C Lineal Feet in Streets: r r Acres in Open Space Water Supply: Public (specify) Cowunity—7-- InciviouaL Wastewater Disposal: Public (specify) Community '`� Incivicual Scnool District: Fire District: General Land Uses in Area: c Critical Areas: stream /drainageways 'loot prone areas watershed (specify) historic sites other (explain) AGL olats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two- hundred feet (1" =200') and no large- t an one inch equals twenty feet (1 " =20') and must contain the following information: / subdivision name zoning of trazz and adjacent propeties r name & address of owner(s) 'A. building setback Lines by notation or typical Le: name & address of subdivider (if ether than owner) name cf surveyor, engineer, Lanescape architect or architect, acoress, registration # and seal (:i,le) Preliminary PLan scale, north arrrow oate (including revision dates) township, tax map -block -Lot re`erences Paren: Parcel Ieentification oeed cook and page X of property To be subdivided boundary described with bearings and distances total. acreaoe of the tract and acreage of lots, includinc and excluding area within rich:s -of -way Layout Location and width of existing and proposed easements (drainage, utilities, roacs, etc.) existing, proposed one adjoining ricnts- c` -.ay including dimensions and street names arc state road numbers. Lineal feet of road centerlines and approximate acreage of new street rights -of -way existing and proposed utilities, including type, sizes, hydrants, valves, manholes existing and proposed curbs, gutters and cw Lver -s, including sizes and grades location and width of alleys, sidewalks, bike Lanes, transit systems, and bus stops typical scree: cross - sections and in- ersectign aetails including besion and width of :rave way an: shoulders hori :ontaL alignment and oeneraL curve ca:a roads) reverse S_ :.de/ control corner Proposed lot lines with dimensions Lct B OLOCk numbers c Phasing lines y! ' <+? :_ topograDny at ten foot C10) intervals :.1±71. water bodies, streams, floodway and C floodoiains ` strear buffers q loca:icn and size Of DarceLs dedicated { for publiC use, recreational use or reserved �n common with purpose noted L I !'A�` `; impervious surface data (if located in Z water supply uatersned) Lo vicinity mao snowing general Location Of subdivision with streets and roads identified by State road numoer and name C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 7 ✓ ,li - : <: centerline radius on all proposed streets -.Y— permanent features such as buildings, cemeteries, ":. historic LanomarKs ad)Oininra Lot Layout names Of acieirimd DroDer7y owners. If subdivided, subdivision plat name, OLa: boOK 8 page numoer, and Perimeter lot numoers. LanoscaDing and buffer requiremer township, corporate and extra- territoriaL PLannlns jurisdiction Lines which c -oss the prooer'y / * <: location and size of Lots of restricted development potential and notation on plat regarding same G N stormuater oetenticn and /or retention sites and undisturbed areas for infiltration p,rooses (.f Located in water supply watershed) 1. Twenty -five C25) copies of the preliminary prat. 2. One full size copy of an orange County Tax map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked in Pencil.). .5. Where municipal or GUASA sever is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat incica :inc Healtn Department soils analysis approval /genial for each lot shown thereon. 4. where a private road is proposed a written statement by the applicant or his /her authorized recresen :a :ive which sets forth the justification for a private road (see Section Iv- 5 -3 -c -1 of the Orane_e County Subdivision RecuLations). S. AuxiLiary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section Vi of this Ordinance wnicn assure completion and /or maintenance of imorovemerts required oy this Ordinance. Such eocuments may incLUCe, cu: not be Limited to, a private road maintenance agreement, and articles of incorooration and restrictive covenants pertaining to a homeowner's association. These oocuments may be required as necessary as evidence that the ordinance requirements are Deinc met. the a.OLicant, hereby ce. ^.ifv That the foregoing anoLlca`ion is comoLete and ac: :rate. 1 unoerStand :na: a S ^,w5.00 fee (subdivisions of . -5 lots), S210.00 fee (suadivisions of 6 -9 Lots), 5315.00 fee (subd'v's'ons c` ',:-25 Lots) or a S42C.0C fee (subdivisions of 26 lots more) is due at the time of application. A 55.CC Der is due a: :ne time the finaL plat is presented for recorcation. APP'i' NT'S S_GNATUR_ DATE - OuN =_R'S SIGNATURE Cam`= Date Paid �� �� -�L Pecei.. ✓���� P/0 5° 3a 74:2 I FEATHERWOOD PHASE U A / —5 �`.1 ' . ....3a� Applicant: Laura Lee Feathe 5� 1.053A.. .y, ,�-•- PP 4 7 `-8' �y ''�'s -- LUP: Rural Residential '26� � ^ \ \� of �� ,M.11 �. E .. 1 �J0069 :+7 r �� _ . _ • ��" 6097 10060 1.G,', � 6� �� `•, • ^47c2 �� i r:� + P ,� r ,, . -C /1" 943 ��., U /�.I 5 \`741 0 11 44 31 Il . kvl-- . 5z J7 �6 }�� 1'j5 % �� . ' 6 9920/ I \ ' titer n `T %Sire "� I �� 0845 '� �p� ~' `� 4310 I 25 SEE I ,.� `� \ r m 1 slag ,--� 6 44C, LC 12 Q�J i v. i i ti G 70 l01�! 275 I I �n 10.7 7, S-n- 6. (r.� I � I � � 1 11 •I III :z /�2e D. 12 �3 , t � EO t 7844 9.15 4C /O/ 5125 2.75A 10.0 I AC 111 � 50A �= = 609-; 1.25 fpp� `,aE30 51-1 5 T ^ L.:, I• ., 1.14 � ` 3 AC. 254 '211 �rsc rz 3161 7� '2697 7.46 AC. c,c o.1,R ��l 8~1 j, r 0126 E Mr. Eddie Kirk Orange County Hillsborough, Dear Mr. Kirk: November 6, 1991 Planning Department NC 27278 Re: Featherwood Subdivision I am writing this letter to provide some background regarding the parcel of land now under review for major Sub- division, known as Featherwood Phase II. This land has been in my family for many years as a single tract of 38.88 acres with two houses on it; a 2300 square foot log house, and a 900 square foot frame house. In 1989 My mother, Sara Feather Hendrickson, conveyed the property to me and my brother, Keith Feather to divide between ourselves. My brother and I explored a number of options regarding possiile divisions but were never able to agree to pursue one to finality. In March of 1990, I petitioned the courts to divide the land in equal halves in a partition proceeding. Three knowledgeable real estate professionals, pau, Kempa, Alois Caliemyn, and Lisa Vettranc, were appointed by the Court to divide the land. They tested soil, appraised the houses and walked the land before dividing the property into a 22 acre tract of mostly interior land, along with the 2300 square foot log house, and a 15 acre tract with substantially more road frontage and the _ram_ house. They explained their valua.=on and division of the property by pointing to the development pc7en7_al of the 15 acre tract, with its ample road frontage and good soil. After a great deal of negotiation, my brother and agreed that 1 would take the 15 acre tract and he would gee she 22 acre tract, with the understanding that I would sub - divide --- order to obtain the equal value intended by the commissioners. Mr. Eddie Kirk io November 6, 1991 Page 2 • This history is intended to illustrate that the development plan I am pursuing represents the culmination of a lengthy process of division of my family land and is my attempt to put into effect the plan the commissioners envisioned when they divided the property. Thank you for your time and consideration of this bit �f background in your consideration of my request for subdivi- sion approval. III you have any question please do not hesitate to call me at 919 - 383 -8853. Sincerely yours, Laura L. Feather y PRIVATE ROAD JUSTIFICATION FOR "FEATHERWOOD - PHASE II" Tax Map #5.21..60 The following justification, for a private road in the Featherwood Subdivision follows the five points on paves 30, 30a, and 31 of the April 4, 1988 revisions to the Subdivision r. _"alations for Orange County, North Carolina. These five points discuss design features that are to be considered in deciding to allow a private road. General statement The existing private road, Feat.herwood Court, will serve -five(5) lots in the subdivision containing a ;.atal of 6.73 acres. Featherwood Court is approximately 300 feet lonc. A _perpetual road maintenance agreement is on record at the Orange County Register of Deeds office and wi11 guarantee ma- -ntenance of said road. 1. Road Preserves Rural Character: The proposed major subdivision has_ existing large hardwoods and evercreens in a general area of residential and agricultural use. a. The average lot size is 1.28 acres with setbacks that meet' the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. b. Minimal amount of clearing will be done to the lot to maintain as much of the existing hardwoods and evergreens as possible. C. Any existing scenic areas will be pr eserved by restrictive covenants also to be recorded. d. Maximum wildlife and botanical species wi11 be maintained by rrir_inal des action of any exi s tinc t=ees or shrubbery. 11 12 t Private Road Justification for Featherwood Subdivision Page 2 2. State Maintenance: With this existing private road serving an existing dwelling - (Phase � "Tj ,- we are only proposing four new lots to be added. Lo-.#3 also would have restrictions to access only on Featherwood Court, thus providing onij, one access to U.S. 70 Business 3. Restrictive Covenants: Subdivision covenants will be enforced to maintain the screening along the additional restricted areas within each lot, provided in the covenants. 4. Recreation /Open Areas: Not applicable - payment in lieu of. 5. Other Design Features: The design of the subdivision was so that minimal lots would be accessing on U.S. `70 Business. Most lots were designed to front on Piney Grove Church Road because the volume of traffic -s sufficiently less. 6. ImAervious Sur =ace: By only upgrading the exist =ng private roac to a c -ass B, the amount of impervious area will be consideraba.v less than a' paved road. With an existing drainage area and large pond within a few hundred feet from this development, all measures will need to be taken to help protect any increase in runoff. ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 13 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 r e• STAFF EVALUATION OF PRIVATE ROAD JUSTIFICATION SUBDIVISION: Featherwood - Phase H - Concept Plan DATE: November 15, 1991 The standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to public and private roads are listed below. The Planning Staff comment regarding each is provided in italics. IV- B- 3 -d -1.. Roads - Public roads are generally required in all subdivisions and will be required where it is found that: 1. The subdivision roads would be accepted by the State for maintenance if: a) They are built in a manner which satisfies the minimum State design and construction criteria for subdivision roads; and ( Featherwood Court is approximately 300 feet in length and would satisfy the minimum Stare design criteria if constructed to State standards.) b) They would satisfy other requirements for addition to the State maintenance system, including, but not limited to, the general density standard of at least two occupied residences for each one - tenth' of a mile of subdivision road. (According to the Department of Transportation, a road less than one mile in length must provide ingress and egress for at least 5 occupied permanent residences and have a minimum density of two houses per tenth of a mile. A short cul -de -sac must provide ingress and egress to at least 4 occupied permanent residences. This private road would serve five (S) residences when the subdivision is fully developed. NCDOT would consider this positively when, reviewing any request for State maintenance.) I 1.4 2. The ,subdivision roads extend existing roads which are public; or ('The subdivision road does not extend existing public roads.) 3. The subdivision roads are part of a development which is located in an area designated as Urban or Transition on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan; or (The subdivision is not located in a designated Urban or Transition Area.) 4. A proposed road is designated as an arterial or collector street on an approved Thoroughfare Plan for a municipality or in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. (The proposed road is neither an arterial nor a collector.) 5. The subdivision roads are part of a non - residential development consisting of office, retail, industrial, and similar businesses, each located on a separate lot. This provision shall only apply to that portion of a subdivision being developed for non - residential purposes. (The subdivision road is proposed for residential development.) Provided, however, private roads may be allowed in a subdivision where, in the judgment of the Planning Board and with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, it is found that the nature and location of the subdivision are such that a private road is justified. (The road is located in the R -1 zoning district in Eno Township. The minimum residential lot size is 0.92 acre. The subdivision is located at the southeast corner of Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711) and US 70 Business. A 1989 trafi7c count indicated 500 trips per day on Piney Grove Church Road and 1700 on US 70 Business.) In determining whether to p ermit private roads in subdivisions, the following design features will be considered: 1. The location and design of the subdivision is such that it clearly preserves the rural character of the County through: a. The provision of lot sizes and building setback lines .greater than required by ordinance provisions; 2 i (To meet this requirement, lots would need to be approximately twice the minimum lot size of 40, 000 square feet. The average lot size is 1.28 acres. Although all of the lots are larger than one acre, none of the lots are twice the minimum lot size.) b. The retention and /or provision of landscaping and use of clustering of dwelling units to screen the view of the subdivision from public roads and /or maintain a wooded or forested character, maintain scenic views, or preserve wildlife, botanical, historic, archaeological and /or recreation sites; (According to the applicant, the site is wooded. There will be minimal clearing to maintain the wooded character. No clustering of units is proposed.) 2. The number, location and /or size of lots to be located in the subdivision are such that, even if constructed to State standards, the streets would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or other State requirements; (Upon buildout, the subdivision will meet NCDOT density requirements.) 3. Recreation and /or open space areas, including lands containing significant botanical, wildlife, historic and /or archaeological sites, are to be dedicated and /or preserved through restrictive covenants in amounts greater than required by standards for recreation /open space dedication; and /or ('There are no areas proposed for recreation and /or open space.) 4. Significantly larger than required stream buffers and lot sizes, and /or other design features are proposed as part of a subdivision to be located in a Protected Watershed as designated on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface and cause infiltration of storm water runoff to prevent the pollution of water supply reservoirs. (The subdivision is not located in a water supply watershed. Also, lot sizes are not significantly larger than required.) S. Topographic and environmental features, such as streams, steep slopes, or watersheds, that would be adversely affected by the use of roads constructed to State standards because of factors such as significant 3 15 16 amounts of earthwork (cut and fill) that would contribute to increased run -off of stormwater and siltation. (Based on indicated topography there would not be significant amounts of earthwork to construct a road to Stare standards. Also, the property is not located in a watershed.) EVALUATION SLN04ARY: The subdivision is not located in a protected watershed. The subdivision road would be taken over by the State if it were built to their standards. It is also located in a rural residential area at the intersection of Piney Grove Church Road and US 70 Business, which is an arterial in the Comprehensive Plan. Due to the location, proposed density and length of the road, Staff recommends the road be public and constructed to State standards. S1 V JAMES G. MARTIN GOVERNOR THOMAS J. HARRELSON SECRETARY ORANGE COUNTY STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Nurlh Carulinn 27253 -0766 Jude 19. 1992 Mr. Eddie Kirk Or'aciee CuuaLV Planning Department 306 -F Revere Road Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 17 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Subject: Phase II Featherwood / Bellechene East / Thompson's Cross Preliminary Plan Reviews Dear Mr. Kirk: Featherwood is a private subdivision and must obtain a driveway permit for access to US 70 Business Bellechene East is shown as public and as such two sets of plans along with driveway permits should be submitted to this office for review. I recommend that the number of accesses off of SR 1383 be minimized. Thompson's Cross is shown as public and as such two sets of plans along with a driveway permit should be submitted to this office for review. Permission for encroachment, from W. Fairbailt, Jr. and F. Pen, Jr., must be obtained before the entrance radii can encroach on their frontage. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact Mr. Juey Hopkins, at (919) 570 -6833. JMM /JRH /jrh Y,ou $ very tru y, J M. Mills, P. E. Assistant Division Engineer An Equal ODDOrtunity /Affirmative Action Emolover ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT s 306F REVERE ROAD HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 y i - 1 f. MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner II FROM: Warren Faircl.oth, Erosion Control Supervisor SUBJECT: Featherwood Subdivision Phase II DATE: June 17, 1992 It does not appear than any erosion control approvals or permits are required for this project since all the roads exist. A9 6-17-92.0 Post Office Box 8181 Carrboro/Chapel Hill 968 -3501 Durham 688 -7331 Hillsborough 732 -8181 Mebane 227 -2031 FAX 919 -644-3002 Extension 2586 I d& N .� C Mary Anne Black, Director Orange County Recreation and Parks Department Post Office Box 8181 • Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 iOr Eddie Far -•k FROM.- 01a)-yArty -,E S. hlc,t•,'r- DATE : J u I y E, 193 RE: Courtesy Faeview -- Featherwood I have reviewed the preliminary plait for Featherwood Subdivision. The E lot subdivisicn•, proposal would requsr.e a dedicaticen of recreation open space if such sites were found to be designated ear, the adopted Comprehensive Land Use. Plar, for the property in question. No Stich sites are des i gnat ed for this property, and so payment-in-lieu of dedication is required. I will present my findings to the Orange County Recreation and Advisory council at the next scheduled meeting or, July 7, 1992 and will immediately forward to you arty additional ccuaments they may have. mAMlpbl Offices located at 300 W. Tryon Street, Hillsborough, NC Telephones: 919 732 -8181 • 919 967.9251 - 919 688 -7331 - 919 227 -2031 s DaQQ4 Burklin requested that the towns of Hillsborough and Pittsboro be included in the plans for a transit system noting that there are many who work in RTP who reside in those two towns. The response was that Chatham County is not currently a member of the Triangle Transit Authority. If Chatham County should become a member, then, Pittsboro would be a likely town for a transit system. Mr. Ritchey continued noting that the area being discussed is in the Jordan Lake Watershed and perhaps would not be an area where intense development should be considered. Reid asked about the timeframe for construction, if the study proved that such a project should become a reality. Mr. Ritchey responded that he was hopeful that construction would begin seven to ten years from now and be in operation ten to fifteen years from now. Cantrell commented that commuter systems in residential areas with which she was familiar were very quiet operations. Mr. Ritchey's response was that the transit system was a much better neighbor than a sixteen lane highway. He encouraged the Board to make the Commissioners aware of their interest and opinions regarding a transit system. AGENDA ITEM #9: SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS a. Preliminary Plans (1) Featherwood Phase II Presentation by Eddie Kirk. The property is located at the southeast corner of Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711) and US 70 Business in Eno Township. The property is zoned Rural Residential (R -1). The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Rural Residential. There are eight (8) acres. The average lots except lot 8 a individual wells an be used as a sewer Part of lot 7 would for lot 6. lots-proposed out of 10.24 lot si _ze is 1.29 acres. All re proposed to be served by d septic tanks. Lot,8 would easement for lots 1 and 2. be used as a sewer easement A Class B private road, Featherwood Court, is P M � T V 21 proposed to serve four (4) of the eight (8) lots. The remaining lots would access off Piney Grove Church Road (SR 1711). The applicant's private road justification is an attachment to these minutes on pages The Planning Staff has evaluated the private road and, due to the location, size and number of lots, recommends a public road. The subdivision does not provide larger than normal required lot sizes, larger than required setbacks or proposed open space, and is not located in a watershed. Based on proposed density, the North Carolina Department of Transportation would accept the road for maintenance if constructed to their standards. The Preliminary Plan does not vary from the Concept Plan with the exception of the proposed sewer easements. The Concept Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on December 16, 1991. At that time, the Planning Board approved the Concept Plan with a Class B private road. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Featherwood Phase II with a public road built to State standards, and subject to the conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval (a copy is an attachment to these minutes on pages ). Gray asked what had changed since the Concept Plan when the Planning Board had recommended a private road. Kirk responded that the only changes are the proposed sewer easements. Gray continued noting that the applicant had indicated that several hardwoods would have to be removed if a private road is not approved. Gray continued that he still felt a Class B private road is most appropriate. Gray and Scott agreed that a Class B private road is sufficient for a 300' cul-de -sac. Reid asked why the Staff wished to require a Public road. Kirk responded that the Staff applied the criteria in the Ordinance and felt a public road should be required. The Planning Board and Board of Commissioners have the authority to approve the applicant's request for a private road. nn�T 7 22 MOTION: Gray moved that the Preliminary Plan for Featherwood be approved with a Class B private road and subject to the conditions in the Resolution of Approval. VOTE: Unanimous. (2) Bellechene East Presentation by Eddie Kirk. The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east side of Eno Cemetery Road. The property is not zoned, however, the tract is designated Agricultural Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Comprehensive Plan. It also drains into Lake Orange. The total acreage of the tract is 33.22 acres. Thirty (30) new lots are proposed with an average lot size of 1.04 acres. There are three phases proposed with Phase I containing four (4) lots, Phase II containing eight (6) lots and Phase III containing eighteen (18) lots. The applicant is proposing public roads to serve each phase. All four lots in phase one would have to receive access from the subdivision road for the State to accept maintenance. The Orange County Health Department has checked the property and found a suitable site for a septic system on each lot. The Lake Orange Authority has indicated their policy is to only allow direct lake access by membership to those land owners who adjoin the 620 foot elevation. Membership is available on a limited application basis and at that time, rules, regulations and common access areas are agreed upon. The Orange County Engineer has indicated he has no comments concerning the proposal. The County Attorney has indicated his concern that the east property line follow the 620 foot contour, which is indicated on the preliminary plan. He also indicated concern about lots 27 and 28 fronting on the Eno Cemetery Road, however, out of 30 lots, these would be the only two lots receiving access directly from Eno Cemetery Road. Other agency review comments were solicited and ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: AUGUST 3, 1992 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS DEPARTMENT: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING- YES: -NO: -X -- ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER SEPARATE COVER INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY - BLYTHE EXT. 2130 TELEPHONE NUMBER - Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel Hill - 968 -4501 Mebane - 227 -2031 Durham - 688 -7331 PURPOSE: THE ATTACHED RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BEING PRESENTED FOR THE -BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERATION. THE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS ARE LISTED ON PAGE TWO. BACKGROUND: CHAPEL HILL PLANNING BOARD: HUMAN RELATION'S COMMISSION: Recommendation by Town Council to fill Town vacancy NURSING HOME ADVISORY COMMISSION: Recommendation by Nursing Home Administrator to fill Nursing Home Vacancy PROGRAM COMMITTEE FOR PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL RECOMMENDATION($): AS THE BOARD DECIDES. County Commissioner needs to be appointed ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. _xim_ Meeting Date: AUGUST 3, 1992 SUBJECT: MINUTES DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER SEPARATE COVER PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY BLYTHE TELEPHONE NUMBER - Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel Hill - 968 -5401 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes as submitted for - consideration: June 29, 1992 - Regular Meeting BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A -42 of the General Statutes, the governing Board has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's proceedings. RECOMMENDATION(S): As the Board decides. ORANGE COUNTY IN -HOME AIDE SERVICES PROVIDER AGREEMENT This is to certify that Health Force, Professional Health Care- People (Name of Agency) _ herein after known as the Provider agency, located at 4009 Barrett Drive, Suite 103 Raleigh, NC 27609 �T- (Address) - on this first day of July, 1992 agrees to participate as a provider in the Orange County Elderly Respite Care Program for the period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 1. The Provider agency agrees to provide necessary In -Home Aide services to approved recipients at a rate not to exceed $9.50 per hour upon the request of the Orange County Department on Aging's Care Management Program, hereinafter known as the Lead Administrative Agency. 2. The Provider Agency agrees to meet all service provision standards for In -Home Aide services, such as training as required by the State of North Carolina and provide documentation upon request. (Attachment A) 3. The Provider Agency agrees to provide the In -Home Aide services within ten working days from the beginning service date specified in the Purchase of Service Authorization on each approved recipient. (Attachment B) 4. The Provider Agency agrees to ensure that such records as necessary are kept to fully disclose the extent of the service provided to recipients for four years and available for inspection. 5. The Provider Agency agrees to submit a.monthly bill for services rendered payable within 30 days from date of receipt. 6. The Provider Agency agrees to adhere to the Inter - Agency Long Term Care Management Procedures in the provision of the service. (Attachment C) 7. The Provider Agency agrees to indemnify and save harmless Orange County, its agents and employees from and against any and all loss, cost, damages, expense and liability caused by the failure of the Provider to fully perform its obligations under this agreement and in accordance with its terms; or by an accident or other occurrence causing bodily injury, including death, sickness, products or services rendered under this Agreement. The Provider Agency shall maintain general liability insurance with limits no less than $100,000 /occurrence. Certificates of Insurance reflecting such coverage must be furnished to Orange County and shall contain the provision that Orange County will be given thirty days written notice of any intent to amend or terminate such policies by either the Provider or the insuring company. Im' �"_ ._. 8. This Agreement may be terminated by Orange County upon giving 30 days prior written notice or by the Provider Agency upon giving 30 days prior written notice. However, Orange County may immediately suspend a provider agency for violations of the :rules or regulations that govern the program or this agreement. Lead nistra % A en Provider gency By: By; Si nature of Autho i e Agent Signature of Authorized Agent Title of Aut rpYZed Agent Title of Authorized Agent Date: 3 / Date: L FN:PROVIDER.DOC ATTACHMENT A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISON OF AGING INSTITUTIONAL AND IN -HOME RESPITE CARE SERVICE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Policy and Procedure Manuals are available upon request from the Orange County Department on Aging. Attachment B ORANGE COUNTY IN -HOME CARE PROGRAM administered by Orange County Department on Aging PURCHASE OF SERVICE AUTHORIZATION I. Client Information Name: Tel. Address: Caregiver Name: Relationship Client MIS information attached. II. In -Home Service Information Authorization Date: Total approved Hours: Authorized service from: To: Rate: The provider: is authorized to claim reimbursement as follows: Code frequency -.cost (monthly) Total Cost: Adee Turner, Care Manager authorized signature This authorization supplements /replaces previous authorization dated: A monthly bill should'be sent to: Dept. on Aging Care Management Program 410 Caldwell St. Chapel Hill, N.C. 27516 FN:RespFrm2 919 - 968 -4478 05/91 i4. ATTACHMENT C INTER- AGENCY LONG TERM CARE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES The Orange County Department on Aging provides Long-Term Care Management to all county residents who are sixty years of age and older. It is the process in which the individual is linked to an array of services appropriate to the assessed needs and based on a plan of care specific to the individual. Long Term Care Management provides ongoing support and follow -up to assure an awareness of changes in status for a prolong period, provide smooth coordination of services and avoid unnecessary duplication. Care Management differs from comprehensive and long term. service or agency specific. case management in that is Whereas, case management is In order to more effectively coordinate client services and ensure continued appropriateness of services, the following inter - agency care management procedures are instituted: 1• Update the referral source -- DOA Care Management Team periodically on the situation of the requested service from DOA. 2. Do not refer to another service area within the Provider agency without conferring with the referral source - DOA Care Management Team. 3. Notify the DOA Care Management Team promptly when a specific Provider service is terminated, giving the date, if possible. 4. The DOA Care Management Team should always be notified when there is a problem or change in providing the agency service to the client: whether on the part of the agency or the client. 5. Purchased services should never be terminated or altered without appropriate discussion with the DOA Care Manage- ment Team. FN:LTCPROCE.DOC ..�i AQLL4TEPPA Environmental Consultants August 3, 1992 Mr. Reginald Gillespie Faison, Fletcher, Barber & Gillespie University Tower Suite 1400 3101 Petty Road Durham, North Carolina 27717 -1729 LA 0 S 1992 Referefice: Use of Geophysical Methods Reconnaissance for Sanitary Landfill Evaluations Orange County Sites, North Carolina Aquaterra Job No. 598 Dear Mr. Gillespie: As you requested during a July 28, 1992, conversation with Mr. David Duncklee, Aquaterra has prepared the following information concerning the merit of geophysical evaluations in siting suitable tracts of land for sanitary landfills. The possibility of using geophysical techniques such as a seismic or magnetic method was originally recommended in our March 2, 1992, correspondence (L2434 -92). Prospective Geophysical Methods Magnetic Prospecting Method The presence of a diabase dike is a major limitation for a potential site. Magnetic prospecting techniques such as a magnetometer can be used to determine whether a diabase dike underlies a site- These instruments detect variations in the earth's magnetic field, which indicates the potential presence of near surface objects. The presence of ferrous minerals in the geologic features account for the features' magnetic properties. The order of magnetic properties are from the basic igneous rocks (ie, gabbros, diabase), acid igneous rocks (granites), metamorphic rocks, shale sandstone and sediment, and dolomite. , Corporate Office Charlotte office P. o. Box 50328 Greensboro Office Raleigh, NC 27650 P. O. Box 668107 (919) 859 -9987 Charlotte. NC 28266 -8107 P. O• Box 16241 FAX (919)859.9930 ('04)525.8680 Greensboro, NC 27416 -0241 FAX (704)527 -2792 (919) 273 -5003 FAX (919) 271 -8138 Mr. Reginald Gillespie L2757 -92 August 3, 1992 Page 2 Near surface geologic and manmade structures significantly influence the total magnetic field. The closer the magnetic sensor is to a near surface structure, the greater effect that structure has on changing the total magnetic field where the object is located. Magnetic susceptibility is the degree to which a substance may be magnetized. For example, formations that contain a high percentage of ferrous material (i.e., diabase dikes) would have a relatively high susceptibility whereas a formation that contains little or no ferrous materials would have a low susceptibility. Based on these two factors, magnetics could be used to determine whether these formations are present at prospective sites. Typically, these investigations involve the use of a gradiometer to determine the amount of ferrous material in the underlying formations. The earth's vertical magnetic gradient is particularly sensitive to near surface variations as they are typically very localized especially in the cases of diabase dikes. The effects of the near surface structures on the magnetic field rapidly decrease as the distance between the object and sensor increases. This method offers four key advantages: • it is non - invasive with no disturbance of the tract (i.e., trees, road cutting, drilling) • the relative quickness for conducting a survey (the site can be covered in 1 to 3 days, depending on the size of the area and level of detail of the survey) • anomalous structures can be located in the field • the minimal cost for the procedure Aquaterra has used the magnetic survey techniques for mapping diabase dikes for both water supply and ground water remediation. Although the diabase dikes are relatively impermeable, when they are injected through the older rocks, they form very permeable zones on either side of the dike which can readily transmit ground water and contaminants. Their presence is considered a major limitation for a prospective landfill site. Aquaterra has mapped for two clients in the Research Triangle Park over 1,500 acres of land, locating nearly 4 miles of dikes. The magnetic survey results were used to place 5 extraction wells and numerous monitoring wells for ground water remediation and one well for water supply. Electrical Resistivity Soundings Further definition of the depth to bedrock can be assessed using electrical survey methods such as DC Resistivity. Vertical electric soundings (VES) can be used to determine whether a traceable geologic bedrock unit can be found. Generally, bedrock is more resistant than soils or sediments because of the soils or sediments fluid content. If this is achieved, several lines consisting of VES will be conducted through the prospective site to determine whether this unit has continuity. The depth of the traceable unit will be determined by using a geophysical model; the AQUATERRA Mr. Reginald Gillespie L2757 -92 August 3, 1992 Page 3 vertical extent of a site being evaluated for a possible landfill will be approximated based on this information coupled with any geophysically mappable characteristics of the site. Aquaterra proposes using DC Resistivity to determine any traceable bedrock units for several reasons: it is non- invasive the relative ease of conducting the survey it is not susceptible to aboveground interferences Seismic Refraction Techniques Another method of determining the vertical extent of a site being evaluated for a possible landfill is seismic refraction techniques. The seismic refraction technique uses information gathered of the arrival times of seismic compressional waves to determine depths to and competency of definite geologic units. Refraction lines can be conducted at selected sections to trace out a mappable bedrock unit and detect depth to ground water. If the geologic conditions between the soil and the bedrock are significantly different, the outline along the refraction lines may be approximated. This method involves using a recorder that depicts arrival times at set stations. These devices are sensitive to the movement of seismic waves. An energy source (such as a hammer -like device) is used to generate the seismic wave. The ability to trace out geologic bedrock units and the water table is the key advantage of this method. The advantages of this method are its non - invasive nature, ease to conduct, and its ability to avoid aboveground interferences. Aquaterra has used seismic refraction techniques on several sanitary landfill siting studies. One particular study for Rowan County, reduced the need to employ invasive drilling techniques to only two sites with one being the ultimate location for their present landfill. Electromagnetic Method In this method, a remote transmitter is used as an energy source with frequencies varying between 15 to 30 kilohertz. The receiver is set at a position normal to the transmitter wave direction and profile lines are conducted along this trend. The receiver measures the radio signal distortion along the profile caused by electrically conductive structures in the subsurface. Aquaterra normally uses an ABEM Wadi VLF instrument to conduct these surveys. Fractures are located based on current density distributions of an electromagnetic field. Current density is calculated by the conductivity meter and then plotted along the profile. In general, positive current densities are associated with porous fractures. Fracturing is considered a major limitation for a prospective landfill site. AQUATFRRA t ' A site in Greensboro was surveyed in pumped for ground water remediation. of fractures strildng N351' to 50 0E. An 150 gpm. Mr. Reginald Gillespie L2757 -92 August 3, 1992 Page 4 an attempt to find fractures that could be The electromagnetic survey detected a series extraction well was installed that produces Geophysics as a Tool in Landfill Siting Studies Overall, it is felt that the geophysical methods described above can be a successful screening tool as part of a landfill siting study. The non- invasive approach, low cost ($4,000 to $8,000 per site), and ease of implementation can be very useful to screen a number of prospective sites to a more manageable number for more detailed evaluations. This approach has been used by Aquaterra in the past to produce more cost- effective results instead of using soil boring programs at every site. Even though these geophysical methods do not eliminate the need for more detailed study (i.e., invasive investigation) on a prospective site to support a sanitary landfill application, they can be used to minimize the number of sites or even to target a specific site for detailed and invasive studies. If you require additional information, please contact us at (919) 859 -9987. Sincerely, AQUATERRA, INC. Phillip L. Rahn, P.G. President PLR /suz AQLIATERRA State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Division or Parks and Recrearion 512 North Salisbury Sneer • Raleigh, Norrh Carolina 2 7611 James G. Martin, Governor \William �V Cobey, Jr- Secrerary Dr. Philip K. McKnelly Direcror February 26, 1992 Mr. Edward N. Mann, Jr., Chair Orange County Landfill Search Committee Route 1, Box 126 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 Dear Mr. Mann: In our letter to you of October 23, objection to potential landfill sites oC - 1991, we indicated our 10 and OC -11. Either of these sites would adversely impact the Eno River State Park. We are pleased that site OC -10 has been removed from further consideration, but we are disappointed that Site OC -11 is still listed as one of the potential landfill sites. Site OC -11 borders the Eno River and proposed for addition to the Eno River nStates Parka- which even greater concern is the fact that the site is drained by Little Creek, which empties into the Eno River at the upstream end of the master planned state park. All of the runoff and pollutants from a landfill in this location would flow into the park, where People will be swimming, wading, and fishing. This could degrade the recreational and ecological values of the park, and may pose a public health hazard. In addition, the segment of the Eno River just m the mouth of Little Creek contains: , an unusually highndensityfand diversity of freshwater mollusks, indicating very good water quality. Species present include the yell lLampsilis casa) and the- triangle fl aterow lampmussel undue), both oz which are state listed as Threatened. Thisnis the only site in the Eno River where the triangle floater is known to occur. These sensitive species could be adversely affected by sediment and other contaminants from the landfall. P.O Box 27687, Rakiph. North [arduy 27611 -7687 'Telephone 919.7331181 r k , Mr. Edward N. Mann, Jr. Page 2 February 26, 1992 The N.C. Solid Waste Management Rules (10 NCAC 10G) list of siting and design include a requirements for disposal sites. section .0503 (1)(b)(iv) states that a site shall not cause an adverse impact on a state park, recreation or scenic area, or any other lands included in the State Nature and Historic Preserve. We believe Site OC -11 would not be in compliance with this rule. We recommend that Site OC -11 be excluded from consideration as a landfill location. If this site continues further to be considered, we request the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate potential impacts on the park. Sincerely, Philip K. McKne PKM /app cc: Chris Derby Nina Baird Leigh Peek Daniel Textoris Valerie Boxer Kubacki William A. Ralston Bryant Walker Thomas S. Warren Walter Feribault, Jr. Susan Andrews Dovenbarger Dan C. VanderMeer Lacv W. Tinnin Gayle Wilson t* State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Division of Parks anci Recreation 512 Forth Salisbury Street * I 'neigh. North Carolina 27611 James C. (Martin, C,overnor Dr, Philip K. \1cKne11%- William- W. Cobey Jr., Secrerar\ Director October 23, 1991 Mr. Edward N. Mann, Jr., Chair Orange Regional Landfill Search Committee Route 1, Box 126 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 Dear Mr. Mann: We have been following in the newspapers your committee's efforts to select a site for a new landfill in Orange County. We have serious concerns about two sites which have been mentioned as possible landfill locations. Site No. OC -10 is directly adjacent to Eno River State Park and actually overlaps onto land proposed to be added to the park in the 1979 master plan. This site drains into the river across park land. We are very concerned about the direct and indirec- impacts of a landfill at this location. Water quality impacts would be especially significant because the stretch of the riv into which much of the proposed landfill site drains is impounded by a small dam near Pleasant Green Road. The impoundment retains water even when the rest of the river is low, so this portion of the river is very popular for canoeing. In many parts of the river there is a great deal of swimming, wading, and other water - contact recreation. Site No. OC -10 also contains a significant natural area identified in the Orange County Natural Areas Survey. The natural area is called the Eno River Uplands and Vernal Pools, and is the largest undeveloped forested tract in the county outside of Duke Forest. The area contains mature second- growth hardwood forests, as well as two large vernal pools. The habitats provided by these pools are quite rare and provide prime breeding sites for salamanders and other amphibians. This natural area is mostly outside the state park, but we are very concerned about the effects of a landfill on this ecologically important site. Pf I lice --7r,.,7 !':drlt'!i N..,;i, � . :, -A a 2 7w,- h!lnnr'1I4. 7 'i r. w. Mr. Edward N. Mann, Jr. Page 2 October 23, 1991 Site No. OC -11 is located north of the Eno River State Park. This site drains into Little Creek, which flows into the Eno River upstream of the existing park boundaries, and within the area proposed to be included in the park's master plan. Use of this site for a landfill could have significant adverse effects. on water quality in the park. Your siting criteria for the landfill state that sites having an adverse impact on a state park will be excluded from consideration. This criterion is based on the siting and design requirements for disposal sites listed in the North Carolina Solid Waste Management Rules. Because of potentially significant effects on Eno River state Park, we believe that Sites OC -10 and OC -11 should be excluded from further consideration. Sincerely, Phili p K. McKnel ` � PKM /ct /mb CC: Chris Derby Nina Baird Leigh Peek Daniel Textoris Valerie Boxer Kubacki William A. Ralston Bryant Walker Thomas S. Warren Walter Feribault, Jr. Susan Andrews Dovenbarger Dan C. VanderMeer Lacy W. Tinnin Gayle Wilson ,.. .� ,w,. e O. WILL-LAM FAISON GEORGE L. FLETCHER TIMOTHY C. BARBER REGINALD B. GILLESPtE. JR. GARY R. POOLE SAMUEL A_ MANN MICHAEL R. ORTIZ SHERRY L. CORNETT CYNTHIA T. SHRINER SELINA S. NOMEIR Mr. Bob Cheek North Carolina Environment, Resources FALSON, FLETCHER, BARBER & Gui Eslm ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW Suite 1400, University Tower 3101 Petty Road Post Office Box 51729 Durham, North Carolina 27717 -1729 Telephone (919) 489 -9001 Wats (800) 437 -9001 Telecopier (919) 489 -5774 July 17, 1992 Department of Health & Natural Division of Environmental Management Groundwater Section Post Office Box 29535 Raleigh; North Carolina 27626 Dear Bob: UCB BUILDING I IS NORTH THIRD STREET. SUITE 306 WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28401 TELEPHONE (919) 251 -9900 TELECOPIER (919) 2514667 PLEASE REPLY TO DURHAM Thank you for taking the time to meet with Randy Fox, Vic Knight, and me yesterday to discuss certain regulations relating to groundwater and wells. From our conversation and your comments made during the meeting, it is our understanding that it is the Division of Environmental Management's position that any borings made for the purpose of locating or which penetrate groundwater, �t saw the requirements of the Division's well construction standards and regulations set forth in Title 154, Subchapter 2C §§ .0100 through .0119. In particular, it is our understanding that any borings penetrating groundwater and /or bedrock must comply with the Division's standards and regulations.. It is also our understanding that a site plan must be submitted and a permit issued by the Division for each boring, before the boring is drilled, and that only persons and firms who have specifically registered with tke Division are authorized to make any such boring. It is our further understanding that any such boring which is done must satisfy both construction and abandonment standards, requirements, and. procedures. Please foregoing ma information requirements construction excavations regulations confirm that our understanding with respect to the tters is correct. In addition, please provide specific and details concerning applicable standards, and procedures, particularly those relating to and abandonment. We also understand that test pit may also be subject to the same standards and as those applicable to 1 t appreciate your this regard, and would be subject appreciate your soi est borings, and we would confirming that our understanding is correct in under what circumstances such test pit excavations to the regulations. Finally, we would very much - omments concerning whether construction activity Mr. Bob Cheek July 17, 1992 Page 2 related to clearing, boring, and related operations might or could, in the Division's estimation, result in any soil compaction which would restribt development and use of compacted areas under applicable regulations. Your response to the foregoing matters will be very much appreciated. In addition, it will be very much appreciated if you will authorize the disclosure of the information contained in your response to all interested parties, such as the Orange County Commissioners, the Chapel Hill Town Council, the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, the Orange County Landfill Owners Group, and the Orange County Landfill Search Committee. Thank you very much for your attention to and ccnsideration of this matter. With very best regards, Sincerely, N, FL ETCHER, BARBER & GILLESPIE Regin B. Gil pie,~ J�. Counsel to Randolph D. Fox RBGjr /slg 2050.1 \L \147CHEEK cc: Mr. Randolph D. Fox Mr. E. Vic Knight State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Management 512 Noah Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 James G. `dartin, Governor William W. Cobey, Jr., $ecretar,v P.2 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E. Acting Director l,eF,i;nalQ(fiC!eI- Groundwater Section A�hcvilie July 27, 1992 70-1,1251-6208 51 -6208 Mr. Reginald S. Gillespie, Jr. 919/486 -1e Faison, Fletcher, Barber & Gillespie ? 19,�4$b -1 X41 Post Office Box 5179 Moorezville Durham, North Carolina 27717 -1729 704/663 -1699 Raleigh Dear Mr. Gillespie: 919/571 - 4700 This is in response to your letter of July 17, 1992 vasrangton requesting clarification of well construction and 17;`9�c, r'81 abandonment requirements as set forth in the state's WELL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (15A NCAC 2C.0100 - hereinafter ,� iimington "Rules" ) . Responses to the issues you raised are as 919595 -3940 follows, and copies of the referenced statutes and rules are attached- Winston-Salem 1 The statutory definition of a "well." as specified in 919/396 -7007 y P NCGS 87- 85(14), would include borings or test pits constructed for the purposes of evaluating or testing the geophysical or hydrogeplogic characteristics of an area, such as potential sanitary landfill site, 2. Anyone who constructs a well, using power equipment, must register annually with the Department [NCGS 143- 355(e)). 3. Rule 2C.0105(b) requires that a permit be issued prior to the construction of the types of wells specified in 1. above. Rule 2C.0105(e) requires that site and facility maps accompany the well construction permit application. 4. Once they'are no longer of use, all wells must be permanently abandoned in accordance with Rule 2C.0113(a)(2). For test pits, which most closely approximate "bored" wells, abandonment should be in accordance with Rule 2C.0113(a)(2)(E). Pollution Prevention Pays - P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626 -0535 Telephone 919.7.33 -7015 -- A n Cnnal , r -. . ` JUL ?0 '92 12' 59PM P. _ 5• During the construction, use and abandonment of wells, every effort should be made to surficial contaminants from potentially enterin elude groundwaters via the borehole or well casin 9 the such contamination--could result in a contraventionnof groundwater quality classifications and standards as specified in 15A NCAC 2L- 6. As to the issue of adverse impacts o. development as a result of soil compaction, this is an issue that can possibly be addressed by the Land Quality Section the Department's Division of Land Resources. he. can be contacted at 919/733- 4574. hope this information will clarification you reauested. If provide the please contact me at 919/733- 3221•Y °u have any questions, Sincerely, �.. Z� � y Robert B. Cheek, Supervisor Permits and Compliance Attachments CC: Perry Nelson Ted Bush Gail Wilson be /gillespie } JOVCP 32M Norhtlne Avenues e G(8Wzb& , MM Cam4rm 274[ N (atv) IIN4W9 M E M 0 R A N D U M F= C919) TO: Gayle Wilson. FROM: Mark Taylor DA T E: July 7, 1992 RE: Well- Issues Raised by Gillespie Letter of 6!23i92 Orange County Landfill Site Search JEI Project No. 229.00, Task 41 As requested by the Orange County Commissioners at their June 29 meeting, 1 have contacted the Orange County Health Department, Environmental Health Section (Mr. Tony Laws) to inquire about the purported setback requirement and the potential affect of site disturbance on future septic systems. The following summarize the responses: Setback requirements apply on to w• ter suppl wells. They do not apy to mandod g_wells and defies wrmed with b . nfi Mr_ Bob Cheek of DEM's Groundwater Section, the state agency that enforces well construction regulations. r • Soil test borings, property abandoned, pose no real threat to, 1utur sP:e, development potential Test pit Pxcavatons could ba considered .'ex cava G" under the regulations requiring a 25-foot. setback for septic system leauh lines: Ath the test site densthl proposed (roughly one test site per 100 acxey To_ry� Lars saw no reason not to proceed with the planned activit;es. He. in fact, -Y,as qute comfortable with cur plans' for bac*filling and site restoration. RNs oauld.; consider renting a "wacker" (portable r,,r),-rpactor used in trenches) to eornpact Vh-e upper 3 to 4 feet of the test pits. Post -It' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 #I or pegm Foam uli e � Tr- Fhu- -# Fax x CJ Primed on recycrad paper 07/29/92 15:12 0919 932 2900 CHAPEL HILL PVCJ002 Gayle Wilson July 7, 1992 Page two. Regarding backfilling of borings, • The current state re ulations, strictly applied, do require that boreholes be grouted or abandoned by some other means through a variance. Proposednew regulations allow for backfilling with grout, clay, or native soil compacted throughout the depth of the borehole. We are attempting to obtain a copy of the proposed rules. You may be interested to note that NCDOT, who is responsible for a lot rif.5eotec.hnic.;p.i drilling thr+ ugh!.,. state. -doh ,� +�:1:�'rfaiy brriiit abandoned boreholes, and they have expressed concerns over the applicability of the rules to conventional geotechnical drilling and other routine excavations that could be classified as "wells". This conflict is still pending. The new rules become effective on September 1. 1992. P.S. We are developing some written criteria for site activities proposed for this project which will become part of our agreement with Bain, Palmer, & Associates and the drilling contractor(s). I will forward a draft of these to you soon for comment. MAT:Jp cc: Butch Joyce Wes Scarlett r North Carolina 42 ■ a as P Manageme 15A NCAC 13B Prepared by the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Solid Waste Management Division Solid Waste Section As Amended Through January 9, 1992 The form of this rule may be revised by the Attorney General pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 150B -61 Reduce ♦ Reuse ♦ Recycle e 1:/1,N'R - .SOLID IVASTli 3I.TNAG£.11F.:VT T1511: 13B.0500 SI•X"TION .4)51)1- UISPOs,\I. SI'17iS Rulcs .11,5111 - .0510 of Title 15A Subchapter 13B of the North Carolina Administrative Code ('115.x.1313 .11501 - .0510); have been transferred and recodified from Rules .0501 - .0510 of -1 -tle 10 Subchapter I OG of the North Carolina Administrative Code (T I O. I OG .0501 - .0510), effective April 4, 1990. .115111 APPROVED DISPOSAL METHODS The disposal of solid waste shall be by the following approved methods or any combination thereof: (1) Sanitary landfill; (2) Demolition landfill; (3) Incineration; or (4) Disposal by other sanitary- methods which may be developed and demonstrated to be capable of fultillin,- the basic requirements of these Rules and which have been approved by the Division. 1lislwy . WCu Staluto .•lutltoritt• G.S. 130:1 -294; W..4pril 1. 19,53; Imended Of Sepiepnber 1, 1990. .0502 OPE\ DUMPS A person operating or having operated an open dump for disposal of solid waste or a person who owns land on which such an open dump is or has been operating shall immediately close the site in accordance with the following requirements: (1) implement effective vector control, including halting for at least two weeks after closing, to pre - N col vector migration l4) adjacent properties; (2) If the site is deemed suitable by the Division, compact and cover existing solid waste in place with two f-cet or more of suitable compacted earth; a condition of closing the site by compacting and covering the waste in place sliall be recordation of the waste disposal location by the property (,%%tier ��-ith the Re,-ister of Dccds in the county where the I.•tnd lies. Copies of the recordation procedure may he obtained from and inspected at the Division of Solid Waste )lanagement; (3) 1f the site is deemed unsuitable by the Division, remove and place solid waste in an approved disposal site or facility: (4) implement erosion control measures by grading and seeding: and (5) i'rcvcnt unauthorized cntn' to the site by means of gates4 chains, berms, fences, and other security mcaSUres approved by the iivision and post signs indicating closure for a period designated by the Dig i.ion not to exceed one year. Ili.vtnrT Note. .Statutory .4uthoritt• G.S. 130..1 -294; .1 mended Lff. December /, 1990; August /, 193$; February /, 1938. .115113 SITING AND DESIGN REQ IR1•:Mt•:N7:S roR DISPOSAL SITES Disposal sites shall comply with the following requirements in order for a permit to be issued: (1) A site shall meet the following siting requirements: (a) A site located in a floodplain shall not restrict the flow of the 100 -year flood, reduce the tem- porary water storage capacM, of the floodplain or result in washout of solid waste so as to pose :a hazard to human life. wildlife or land or water resources. (ICI ;\ site .hall he located in of the followirl�: (al a sate Sha11 1101 CausC or contribute to the taking of any endangered or threatened species of plants. fish or wildlife; (il) a site shall not result in the destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat of en- d:ut,ercd or threatened .pcciCS as identified in 50 C.I .R. fart 17 which is adopted by reference in accordance with (;.5. 15013- 14(c); (iii) ;a site shall not d;ura;ac or destroy an archacological or historical site: and (iv) a site !'h III nut cause ;an adverse impact on a state park, recreation or scenic area, or any other Iculds included in the state nature and historic preserve. VOR 171 C. I ROLI.V. I .11).111.\'LSTR :1171 F CODE 01109193 Page 12 1'IINR - SOLID 11'�fSTI:.3l„1 :1'�fGl:'.1IE,`'T 775.4: /38 .1I5110 (c) A new site dispclsing of putrescible .wastes shall not be located within 10,0011 feet (if :ul airport runway used by turbojet aircraft or within 5,000 feet of an airport runway used by piston -type aircraft; and (d) A site shall have available adequate suitable soils for corer either on -site or from off -site. (2) A site shall meet the following design requirements: (a) The concentration of explosive gases generated by the site shall not exceed: (i) twenty -five percent of the limit for the gases in site structures (excluding gas control or recovery system components); and (ii) the lower explosive limit for the gases at the property boundary; (b) A site shall not allow uncontrolled public access so as to expose the public to potential health and safety hazards at the disposal site; (c) A site shall meet the following surface water requirements: (i) A site shall not cause a discharge of pollutants into waters of the state that is in violation of the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NI'DI:S), under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, as amended; (ii) A site shall not cause a discharge of dredged material or fill material into waters cif the state that is in violation of the requirements under Section 404 elf the Clean Water Act, as :urlended; and (iii) A site shall not cause non -point source pollution of waters of the state that violates assigned water quality standards; ` (d) A site shall meet the following ground water requirements: (i) New sanitary landfalls and lateral expansions of existing landfills must be designed with liners, leachate collection systems, and final cover systems as necessary to comply with aground water standards as established under 15A \CAC 2L. 15A \CAC 2L is adopted by reference in ac- cordance with G.S. 15013- 14(c). (u) A site shall be designed so that the bottom elevation of solid waste will be a millimuin of four feet above the seasonal high water table; (e) A site shall not engage in open burning of solid waste; (f) A site, except a demolition landfall, shall meet the following buffer requirements: (i) A 50 -foot minimum buffer between all property lines and disposal areas; (ii) A 500 -foot minimum buffer between private dwellings and wells and disposal areas: and (iii) A 50 -foot minimum buffer between streams and rivers and disposal areas; and (g) Requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Law (15A \CAC 4) shall he met. History ,Mute: Statutory .4whority G.S. 130.,1-294,- Eff.: April /, 1981; Amended Eff. February /, 1991; September /, 1990; August /, 1988; Febntaty 1, 1983. .11904 APPLICATION REQUIREMEN -CS FOR SANITARY LANDFILLS A permit for a sanitary- landfill shall be based upon a particular stream of identified waste, as set forth in Rule .0504 (g)(i) and (ii) of this Section. Any substantial change in the population or area to be served, or in the type, quantity or source of waste shall require a new permit and operation plan, in- cluding waste determination procedures where appropriate. l=ive sets of plans shall be required with each application. (I) The following information shall be required for reviewing a site application for a proposed % anitary landfill: (a) Art aerial photograph on a scale of at least 1 inch equals 400 feet and a blueprint of the photo- graph accurately showing the area within one - fourth mile of the proposed site's boundaries with the following specifically identified: (i) Entire property owned or leased by the person proposing the disposal site; (ii) Land use and zoning; (iii) Location of all homes, industrial buildings, public or private utilities, and roads; (iv) Location of wells, watercourses, dry runs, and other applicable details regarding the general topography; and (v) Flood plains. (b) A map on a scale of at least 1 inch equals 1000 feet showing the area within two miles of the proposed site's Niundaries with the following specifically identllled: (i) Significant ground -water users; A'ORTII C.4ROLI,VA .4D:1lLNISTR,4TIi'E CODE 01109192 Page 13 STANDARD FORM (Recorded With Plat Attached) For Water and Sewer Lines ORANGE COUNTY ,,ql� f_14%2, I DEED OF EASEMENT NORTH CAROLINA (WATER /SEWER LINE EASEMENT) THIS DEED OF EASEMENT, made this day of /T� A1s1 , 19 -9, by and between , North Carolina ( "Grantor "), and the Town of Hillsborough, North Carolina, a municipal corporation, 101 East Orange Street, P. O. Box 429, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 (the "Town "): WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in Hillsborough Township, being more specifically de- scribed in Book , at Page , and Book , Page , Orange County Registry (the "Property "); THAT WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough proposes to construct or otherwise improve its water and /or sewer system along or near Cameron Street; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of One and No /100 (.$1.00) Dollar, and other good and valuable consideration paid to Grantor, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby fully acknowledged, Grantor does hereby give, grant, quitclaim, and convey unto the Town of Hillsborough, its successors and assigns, the right privilege and perpetual easement over, upon and through the Property to construct, install, maintain, repair, modify or remove one or more underground water and /or sewer lines, all as more specifically described and located on a copy of a plat attached hereto as Exhibit. "A ", said easement being a and inspecting said lines and of making all necessary alterations and repairs thereto; the lines of pipe shall be located at such point or points, elevation or elevations below the surface of the earth as shall be necessary, for proper operation of the system, and shall be established at the proper grade for running said lines and for conveying sewage and /or water as aforesaid, and said manholes, if any, shall be at such point below of above the surface of the earth as may be necessary for the proper operation of said pipe line or lines; and the Town of Hillsborough shall have the right, privilege and easement to tap the line or lines and construct laterals from the main to the outside boundary of right -of -way over which this easement and privilege extends. It is understood and agreed by the parties that the execu- tion and delivery of this deed of easement by the Grantor and its acceptance by the Town of Hillsborough shall not obligate it to construct sewer and /or water lines or permit connections to its sewer and /or water systems. It is further understood and agreed that failure of the Town of Hillsborough to construct improve- ments within the said easement and /or to clear or keep cleared of land shall not impair in any way the rights, privileges and easements conveyed hereunder. twenty foot wide permanent easement; together with a perpetual right and easement to go upon the Property whenever the same is reasonably necessary for the purposes of constructing, inspect- ing, and maintaining said lines and making all necessary altera- tions and repairs thereto. The Town of Hillsborough shall remove all surplus earth, shall make level the surface of the ground above said lines and apparatus, and shall interfere as little as is reasonably possible with any plants, fences, or other improve- ments upon the Property, provided that such plants, fences and other improvements shall not interfere with the right of the Town of Hillsborough of ingress and egress to the Property for the purpose of maintenance and repair of said main or mains or the construction and repair of laterals and connections, and such plants, fences and other improvements shall not interfere with the Town of Hillsborough's maintenance operation or installation of the lines. Grantor further conveys to the Town of Hillsborough a thirty foot wide temporary easement, more particularly described on the attached plat as a construction easement to be used by the Town of Hillsborough for the initial installation of the water and /or sewer lines, said thirty foot wide construction easement to terminate upon completion of installation of such improvements and at that time to be survived by the twenty foot wide permanent easement described above. The Town of Hillsborough shall also have the right of in- gress and regress through, over, and across the Property to and from said easements at such times as the Town of Hillsborough deems it necessary for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid easements and access rights and all privileges thereunto belonging to Grantee and its assigns, free and discharged form the right, title, claim or interest of Grantor or anyone claiming by through or under it. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, County has caused this Deed of Ease- ment for Sewer Line to be executed in its name, by its Chair, and the official County seal to be affixed and attested by the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA BY: - / Y I -- l/ Moses Carey, Jr., Ch 'r Orange County Board Commissioners A�.. _.. [OFFICIAL SE. _ Beverly A. Blythe, erk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY I, a Notary Public for the a ove C unty and State, do hereby certify that on the Jz22- day of 1992- , before me personally came Beverly A. Blythe to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, a body politic and corporate described in the foregoing Deed of Easement for Sewer Line; that by authority duly given and as the act of said county, the foregoing Deed of Ease- ment for Sewer Line was signed.in its name by the Chair of its Board of Commissioners, Moses Carey, Jr., sealed with its seal and attested by said Clerk. W t;[kss my hand and official seal. Notary Public My commission expires:--// 3a qa i ti 9 a L 6 I I � x kg fg I EAST.MAR6AR[T 4ANe��,� I 1 1 � 1 p{ 1 .h I 1 I • 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 e8 I I I 1 = I 83 �1 i I I F I 1. A 3Ell,. !�!I J li s I t T- g@ A 9 a L 6 I I � x kg fg I EAST.MAR6AR[T 4ANe��,� I 1 1 � 1 p{ 1 .h I 1 I • 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 e8 I I I 1 = I 83 �1 i I I F I 1. A 3Ell,. !�!I J li s I 9-3 -qa yy AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT THIS AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made this 20th day of January , 199, by Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, husband and wife, and by Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters, husband and wife, ( "Grantors "), and between Orange County, a North Carolina unit of local government ( "Grantee "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors are the sole owners in fee simple of certain real property in Orange County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference (the "Property "); and WHEREAS, the Property possesses conservation values of great, importance to the Grantors, the people of Orange County, and the people of the State of North Carolina; and WHEREAS, Grantors intend that the conservation values of the Property be preserved and maintained by the continuation of land use patterns, including, without limitation, those related to agriculture use existing at the time of this Agreement, that do not significantly impair or interfere with those values; and WHEREAS, Grantee is a North Carolina unit of local government seeking to preserve and protect land in its agricultural condition pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina, and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Agricultural Districts Advisory Board ( "Board ") certified the Property as qualifying farmland pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on July 8, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners designated the Property as a Voluntary Agricultural District ( "District ") pursuant to the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance on August 3, 1992; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, Grantors hereby voluntarily agree to preserve and protect the conservation values of the Property for a period not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of this Agreement. I. Purpose. It is the purpose of this Agreement to assure that the Property will be retained in agricultural use and to prevent any use of the Property that will significantly impair or interfere with the conservation values of the Property. For the purposes of this Agreement, "agricultural use" is defined as cultivation of soil for production of crops, including but not limited to fruits, vegetables, flowers, and ornamental plants, the planting and production of trees and timber, and the raising of livestock, for individual and public use, consumption,'and marketing. Grantors intend that this Agreement will confine the use of the Property to such activities as are consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. 2. Rights of Grantee. To accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantee by this Agreement: (a) As provided in and subject to the limitations contained in this Agreement, Grantors shall preserve and protect the conservation values of the Property by limiting its use to agricultural use as defined in this Agreement; and (b) To enter upon the Property at reasonable times in order -to monitor Grantors' compliance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that such entry shall be upon prior reasonable notice to Grantors, and Grantee shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantors' use and quite enjoyment of the Property. 3. Rights of Grantor. Grantors reserve to themselves, and to their personal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, all rights accruing from their ownership of the Property, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Property that are not expressly prohibited herein and are not inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement. In addition to the foregoing and to accomplish the purpose of this Agreement, the following rights are conveyed to Grantors: (a) To have a sign identifying the existence of the District erected on each major public road providing access to the Property; (b) To have water and /or sewer assessments held in abeyance, without interest, until improvements on the Property are connected to the water and /or sewer systems of the Grantee; including the right to decide when it is necessary to connect such improvements to the water and /or sewer systems of the Grantee; (c) To have the Grantee, through its Land Records System, provide a notice reasonably calculated to alert a person researching the title of a particular tract that such tract is located within one -half mile of the Property; (d) Upon notice to the Board that a State or local public agency or governmental unit, including the Grantee, will formally initiate action to condemn any interest in the Property, the Board or its authorized representative shall hold a public hearing on the proposed condemnation; and (e) To have the Grantee take into account the existence and terms of this Agreement, and the provisions of N.C. General Statute 153A- 340 in land use planning decisions and ordinances affecting the Property as well as parcels of land adjacent thereto. 4. Prohibited Uses. Any activity on or use of the Property inconsistent with the purpose of this Agreement is prohibited; provided, however, from and after the date of this Agreement, the creation of no more than three (3) lots that meet applicable zoning and /or subdivision regulations is permitted. 5. Access. No right of access by the general public to any portion of the Property is conveyed by this Agreement. 6. Grantee's Remedies. If Grantee determines that Grantors no longer meet the criteria necessary for certification as qualifying farmland and designation as a District, Grantee shall give written notice to Grantors of such non - compliance. Grantors may take corrective action sufficient to bring the Property into compliance or may seek to extinguish the terms of this Agreement pursuant to paragraph 7. 7. Revocation. By written notice to the Grantee, the Grantor may revoke this Agreement as provided for by Section VI of the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance and by N.C. General Statute 106 -737.1 (Farmland Preservation Enabling Act). A record of the revocation shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds and shall result in loss of eligibility to participate in a voluntary agricultural district and the benefits thereof. 8. Condemnation. If the Property is taken, in whole or in part, by exercise of the power of eminent domain, Grantor shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with applicable law. 9. Costs and Liabilities. Grantors retain all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to the ownership, operation, upkeep, and maintenance of the Property._Grantors shall hold harmless Grantee and its Board of Commissioner members, directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors and the heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns of each of them (collectively "Indemnified Parties ") from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from or in any way connected with: (1) Injury to or the death of any person, or physical damage to any property, resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about the Property, regardless of cause, unless due solely to the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties; (2) The obligations specified in paragraph 9; and (3) The existence or administration of this Agreement. 10. Amendment. If circumstances arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Agreement would be appropriate, Grantors and Grantee are free to jointly amend this Agreement. Any such amendment shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds. 11. Transfers. Grantors agree to give written notice to Grantee of the transfer of any interest at least ten (10) days prior to the date of such transfer. The failure of Grantors to perform any act required by this paragraph shall not impair the validity of this Agreement. 12. Notices. Any notice, request or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Grantors: Victor Carl Walters, Sr. Lucille Walters 7501 High Rock Road Efland, North Carolina 27243 Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters 7119 High Rock Road Efland, North Carolina 27243 To Grantee: Orange County c/o Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 or to such other address as either party from time to time shall designate by written notice to the other. 13. Recordation. Grantee shall record this instrument in timely fashion in the Orange County Register of Deeds and may re- record it at any time as may be required to preserve its rights in this Agreement. 14. General Provisions. (a) Controlling Law. The interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of North Carolina and, in particular, by the Farmland Preservation Enabling Act (Chapter 106, Article 61) and by the Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act (Chapter 121, Article 4) of the North Carolina General Statutes, and by the Orange County Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance. (b) Liberal Construction. Any general rule of construction to the contrary notwithstanding, this Agreement shall be liberally construed in favor of the grant to effect the purpose of this Agreement. If any provision in this instrument is found to be ambiguous, an interpretation consistent with the purpose of this Agreement that would render the provision valid shall be favored over any interpretation that would render it invalid. (c) Separability_. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, as the case may be, shall not be affected thereby. (d) No forfeiture. Nothing contained herein will result in a forfeiture or reversion of Grantor's title in any respect. (e) Joint Obligation. The obligations imposed by this Agreement upon Grantors shall be joint and several. The burdens of this Agricultural Conservation Agreement shall run with the Property and shall be enforceable against the Grantor and all future parties who have an interest in the Property for the term of the Agreement. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee, its successors, and assigns, this Agricultural Conservation Agreement together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges belonging or in any way pertaining thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantors have set their hands and seals and Grantee has caused this instrument to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers and its seal affixed by authority of its Board of Commissioners, all on the day and year first above written. :0:i: \�I��il;� .(NLI/r� ( SEAL) Victor Carl Walters, Sr. • ( SEAL) /Lucill "e �Walters UiG�ec� C�tiV L Imo!_ a 4; • (SEAL) Victor Carl Walters, Jr. _ 7� 2)41&, (SEAL) (glizabeth T. Walters GRANTEE: BY: Moses Carey, COW Orange County Board of/VoA6issioners Attest: everly B , lerk to the Orange Count Board of Commissioners r State of North Carolina X'i'1 Lej WX91 +1ZY4`4 I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters, and Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the e day of 19� . r My Commission Expires: g//'o L't�? State of North Carolina Notary Public o� sy Cle I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the said State and County, do hereby certify that Beverly A. Blythe personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument signed in its name by Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners, sealed with its official seal, and attested by herself as its Clerk. WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the �5 day of r Notary Public My Commission Expires: "EXHIBIT All The property certified as qualifying farmland and designated as a Voluntary Agricultural District is located in Cedar Grove Township, Orange County, North Carolina and is more particularly described as follows: (1) The property conveyed to Victor Carl Walters, Sr. and Lucille Walters in Deed Book 117, Page 179; and further described in that certain Deed of Trust at Deed Book 230, Page 622, as follows: Beginning at an iron stake in the Eastern edge of an old road that runs in a general Northeasterly direction from the Hi -Rock to Cedar Grove and runs thence from said place or point of beginning North 1 degree East 37 chains to a large gum; thence North 88 degrees 30 minutes West 6.24 chains to a rock and pointers; thence South 2 degrees 30 minutes West 46.50 chains to a rock and pointers; thence South 88 degrees East 28.75 chains to an iron stake and pointers; thence North 2 degrees 15 minutes East 16.30 chains to a stake in the South side of the Hi -Rock Road; thence along the course of the Hi --Rock Road 59.30 East 7 chains to a stake; thence North 33 degrees East 1.60 chains to a stake; thence South 86 degrees 30 minutes East 0.5.0 chain to an iron stake in the Eastern edge of an old road, the point and place of beginning, containing 192 acres more or less, according to a survey made by Ralph Weaver, Surveyor, May 9, 1938. The said tract of land is located in Orange County, N.C., and lies on both sides of Hi -Rock Road and is subject to the right -of -way thereof. There are excepted from the above conveyance the following: (a) Two acres more or less as described in a Deed to Loy R. Hill and wife, Betty June W. Hill, dated December 15, 1961, recorded in Deed Book 185, Page 252, Orange County Registry; and (b) 2.25 acres more or less as described in a Deed to Johnny M. Walters and wife, dated October 31, 1966, recorded in Deed Book 209, Page 418, Orange County Registry; and only represented at Cedar Grove Orange County property map 42, lots 14 and 14B; and (2) The property conveyed to Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters in Deed Book 206, Page 189, and represented at Cedar Grove Orange County property map 42, lot 5. � A6 North Carolina Department of Human Resources Division of Facility Services 701 Barbour Drive • P. O. Box 29530 • Raleigh, N. C. 27626 -0530 Couricr Number 56 -20 -05 James G. Martin, Governor David T. Flaherty, Secretary July 16, 1992 Mr. Lindy Pendergrass County Sheriffs Department 125 Court Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 -2510 Dear Sheriff Pendergrass: JUL 2 0 1992 2 John M. Syria, Director Telephone (919) 733 -4560 FAX (919) 733 -3207 On July 1, 1992, Area Jail Consultant from the North Carolina Department of Human Resources inspected the Orange County Jail. A copy of the inspection is attached for your attention. Please submit your plan of corrective action on each deficiency cited in this report to this office by August 17, 1992. If you have any questions, please call me at (919) 733 -4560. Sincerely, Ernest T. Dixon Area Jail Consultant ETD :vmh Attachment cc: Mr. Robert G. Lewis, Head, Jail and Detention Branch Mr. Moses Carey, Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners Mr. John Link, Orange County Manager � �o ! ¥ M x ■ ■ / e � @ . R R 2 x * e A vi � � � g 7 � pr � � e � § 2 � ¥ ch � � S % v NO A � � � . � ■ E� Ci A � A � E E � / § � � K � � $ � � V � � 0 . ro � �o ! ¥ M x ■ ■ / e � @ . R R 2 x * e A vi � � � g 7 � pr � � e � § 2 � ¥ ch � � S % v NO A � � � . � ■ E� Ci A � A � E co @ § � K o h % � A � g E E 7 .7 / % % 4 e / R A � O � ^■ § � � � � � � \ � 7 � 0 2 m K / e (n � I . 7 F-J . rj) H- 'n � $ ( . ] 0 0 .� . k ch .: .c q ��q � � 2 w -4 WEI.. La ON .. L CD a �. . .��\ . ■ @ ? \ . � ® k E E 7 .7 / % % 4 e / R A � O � ^■ § � � � � � � \ � 7 � 0 2 m K / e (n � I . 7 F-J . rj) H- 'n � $ ( . ] 0 0 .� . k ch .: .c q ��q � � 2 w -4 WEI.. La ON .. L CD a �. . .��\ . to j I (5D tH-h O yco oC yy fcD�� � W rh m (n D H O c� Chi N rt,W• wo W N• rh In n rn En N• �N� H �"h fD (p �• T On H E 5m fi • I-h It U1 ' C (D A U~'i �'MfAA W fD N ID r S Fes• N O W O O �+ NO CD O, Ln P, In .. c a N F-s • Q W N Ln0 O W N In n 4 M roro N � ~ H S K m K �rn to K �� r En g cn m o cn ON tzj w X; H ""I cn CrJ C�J co F'0 CD H CA U] Rl� O ��H��8 G L• S bP C7 � Cl7 H ,'•,, ` O 10 H �1 W En WIN y till p.M 0 o • H LGA- u �1 n i 1 I i •l 't . • H LGA- .� �" " w � N O�y N tNDH �� C/] �l~TI • �s]7 qC • 1��prJ1 N F� �C • O CrJ OO bib. Ch E3 r-i o v ri �d cn � ►� c� 0 C', � c ~ cn C � ��� n � ►�i ►d r-i � bb 9 8 A� oz yyM�� z.ard oH� cn -a f) � � C n � Cri C7 �zti r Cd +i C7�1 H 02t1i z0 H0cn H4n H 7d W Ww b rv��r m W w a tx7H d n• H Ha acn t;9 t - GH re ml C ooHt�i ,� pd r.a >e �Htyy'!CCAA� tsi C" M 013 O i yw d N Z cn H; cn H cs H co ~0 W �N Qwtms7r]G I�Z�H Ok MH0 rte-] rA H 9 t-4 H nyCyj1 �CC7 t"0�Ga 1000 9 HCC t�f `n "si C v Ml � .tJ tyY7 ix I m w r a a 7 n 0 t� n H H C t=i a n H 1-1 O V �7 w N ft N n 0 c Ln w itD-� cn �' r�r A� F�• rt •C" O tQ N tQ i�+ ryi A A tip c5 O w w w N ft N n 0 c Ln w 8 10 0 0 r•�y A A tip r ti_ 1� mot` V 8 10 0 n �i ch ril 11 ., H 0 N• 1�Jy1 rt n �_ n m f6 G Wa O ro N $1 f~D n m a ''O O i, r• rr n rorr w rNt• N rNt• m • N rtw p, �C�c w �.'. `�. y °o �4 rt rt '� fio� • � N+ �' o (D n o O � ct ri • r � Q o cb to o ` U) m N P iD 4 � roue tv Fj. • " °, to �cn tD N cron � � rn P. fnD m ~ � N rt o n �i ch ril 11 ., H cn 4 n ni rn 110 n cs w C w w C w�% p b g w �M cn m n w, m H- m p w w o d a C .c G C F+ n 0 o r ,n C d i-4 0 c C6 n o 0 w cn w w rt w 6 rt w C rt w w go h o w w rt rt m rr r• H rt o rt o H. E3 F4 w rt rt 1--� N. p w m m m rt m m m pi ro C 0-00 m m m rt w (M w C w o w w m" S m FA w i W n o w o w m m m E rt w r• o E cr r• o r• m a w ro :r n .c p n o r• n o rt rt w rt rt n w m C m rt rt N CA C K m cn awo 10 owo .4 w rt r as m H 3 m p n m 6 w .-.w m m w m pro p � C7 w wo wa r w r•PI w rt p C cn p o M a �. W O w w m m w m= a m N w ao w d m 12 n t4 to H r� r -. r H n c� 0 n H H C [rJ a n H H O Z c cn i �c z CA cn H � C7 o� cn 4" .F 12 n t4 to H r� r -. r H n c� 0 n H H C [rJ a n H H O Z c cn 0 .-% cn cn cn t) t l t� N o p MI. �. m cn m m m H n r� m r r w rt m o n n rt n" w m n r p m m H m n o cn O rt H rt m F+ F+- Im O n n l-W m ri 'Jr H m M H W G W& m m m rt rt O H O W fA �C o. 0 d m C= er G o n n m K cn m C- H d m pi r m C m 0 m t=1 n 3 rt m a C m r m r w a. rt rµe o w cn wm�n r n n :j w m ry y m O N- pr m m H %..+ H O m E� 0 7r m rt m rT H rt t�D rt 13 t•- C� m b '•� HH 9 i I 7 � Q � I Cn ►4 t+7 C�7 � ' Cn ' vj H I za o� 0i y v 7 Tj a n 0 rn n H H G' Cr7 C; n H M O z En cn En 1� . R ?1 11-11 2� f (D M R-t. � i � 9. n o m m �, M, cu ran mrr � R �- H H m N a o' ID N m m v' 14 R • r i� • L H N N N l� 1 O Ui ._ .. ... i. .. .... f + ,' .i.' .. .. . .. .� If f� O 7 i{ 1 14 R • r i� • L H N N N a r a a w a H a cn as a a a s a a W w a rt a m a w a a M :., oo m m w ro m m ro m W m m rt .0 •d .a rt C d F+• p m G rt C C Gs W w W O w H w w w W p1 rt :3 rt rt 0 r? m rt h rt rt rt m as m m m m a. m �C m m m c m m lb n m 03 d w o o �m n -'r O rt rt m rt o N. C g r. :3 o H rt O H� x rt n W F-6 N F4 H n 5 ro n r°t m ado m oa r 0 nrt N H H 0 rh cn cn H Z Q cn i i i I i I I Q Pwo r n :, C� H. Z :7 [=i 7 >0 =7 7 7 . i 7 15 rr w O 4 H n rti n D n c L� a a z 16 H w m m;j N 9D, C' 4 C. d C ca ro o o b b my b f�C � y tiwwn� ron�rt' � a. rt rt r1 fA w ,A R 0) H H � 9 lb r w`G to rr n w n a.�� w fC ra, a q r o�v ro w h,�' n R ro R m m m U 01-J n ►C ro 0Rj n rt cn � a R z w %- n m o.. Pi a ao R MC F-1 � H p 9 R m Cn p ri ro ra CL t`r rorp � r �s � r= Pd (M rt { ,( n R O 4 H n rti n D n c L� a a z 16 H 00 tr rp c. 17 1- t-n T A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, was held at the Old County courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at 7:30 P.M., on August 3, 1992. Present: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., presiding, and Commissioners Absent: o G Also present: Roderick Visser, Deputy Finance Director, and Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners. Commissioner introduced the following order authorizing bonds which was read: ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Board of Education and the Orange County Board of Education have certified to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, resolutions passed by said boards of education to the effect that adequate school facilities are not now available in the Chapel Hill- Carrboro Administrative Unit and the orange County Administrative Unit to comply with the requirements of Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution of North Carolina for the maintenance of schools nine months in every year and that it is necessary, in order to maintain such nine months, school term as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, to provide additional school facilities in said units by erecting additional school buildings and other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, the estimated aggregate cost of which is at least $52,000,000; WHEREAS, said resolutions request said Board of Commissioners. to provide the funds required for such school facilities; and WHEREAS, said Board of Commissioners has carefully examined the facts and has determined and does hereby find as a fact that the statements made in said resolutions are true and that it has become the duty of said Board of Commissioners, acting as an administrative agent of the State in providing a State system of public schools, to order the issuance of bonds of the County of orange so that the school facilities mentioned in said resolutions and in paragraph 1 of this order may be provided in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution; now, therefore, BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange: 1. That, pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, 'as amended, and in order to maintain the nine months' school term in the County of Orange as required by Section 2 of Article IX of the Constitution, the County of Orange, North Carolina, is hereby authorized to contract a debt, in addition to any and all other debt which said County may now or hereafter have power or authority �q to contract, and in evidence thereof to issue school Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $52,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds, with any other available funds, for erecting additional school buildings and. other school plant facilities, remodeling, enlarging and reconstructing existing school buildings and other school plant facilities, acquiring any necessary land, furnishings and equipment therefor and developing such land, in order to provide additional school facilities in said County. 2. That taxes shall be levied in an amount sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest on said bonds. 3. That a sworn statement of the debt of said County has been filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for said County and is open to public inspection. 4. That this order shall take effect when approved by the voters of said County at a referendum as provided in said Act. The Board of Commissioners thereupon designated the Deputy Finance Director as the officer whose duty it shall be to make and file with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners the sworn statement of debt of the County which is required by The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, to be filed after the bond order has been introduced and before the public hearing thereon. Thereupon the Deputy Finance Director filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners, in the presence of the Board of commissioners, the sworn statement of debt as so required. 3 1- Thereupon the order entitled: "ORDER AUTHORIZING $52,000,000 SCHOOL BONDS" was passed on first reading. On motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, the Board of Commissioners fixed August 18, 1992 at 7:30 P.M., at the OWASA Community Meeting Room on Jones Ferry Road in Carrboro, North Carolina, as the hour, day and place for the public hearing upon the foregoing order and directed the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners to publish said order, together with the appended statement as required by The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, once in The News of orange County and The Chapel Hill Herald not later than the sixth day before said date. I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a regular meeting held on August 3, 1992 as relates in any way to the introduction and passage on first reading of an order authorizing bonds of said County and the calling of a public hearing upon such order and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. '11 of the minutes of said Board, beginning on page and ending on page I DO HEREBY FURTHER CERTIFY that a schedule of regular meetings of said Board in the form attached hereto, has been on file in my office as of a date not less than seven days before the date of said meeting in accordance with G.S. §143 - 318.12. 4 � � 5 WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said Co-! gty, _ this day of August 1992. - -r Clerk t We Board of Coaftissioners 5 _ - r COUNTY OF ORANGE, NORTH CAROLINA SWORN STATEMENT OF DEBT MADE PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOND ACT, AS AMENDED I, Roderick Visser, Deputy Finance Director of the County of Orange, North Carolina, having been designated by the Board of Commissioners for said County to make and file with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners a statement of the debt of said County pursuant to The Local Government Bond Act, as amended, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the following is a true statement as shown by the books in my office, not taking into consideration any debt incurred or to be incurred in anticipation of the collection of taxes or other revenues or in anticipation of the sale of bonds other than funding and refunding bonds: (a) GROSS DEBT a(1) Outstanding debt evidenced by bonds: Sanitary Sewer Bonds....... $.......... School Bonds ............... .......... School Building Bonds...... .......... School Bonds, Series 1989.. .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1989.. ......... .......... School Bonds, Series 1990.. .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1990............ .......... Public Building Bonds, Series 1991.. ......... .......... School Bonds, Series 1991.. .......... $29,725,000 a(2) Bonds authorized by an order introduced on August 3, 1992, but not yet adopted: School Bonds ........................... $52,000,000 a(3) Unissued bonds authorized by adopted orders: Water Bonds ............................. $ 1,000,000 a(4) Outstanding debt, not evidenced bybonds: .............................. $ 557,483 (a) GROSS DEBT, being the sum of a(1), a(2), a(3) and a(4) ...................... $83,282,483 (b) DEDUCTIONS b(1) Funding and refunding bonds authorized by orders introduced but not yet adopted .................... $ -0- b(2) Funding and refunding bonds authorized but not yet issued .......... $ -0- b(3) The amount of money held in sinking funds or otherwise for the payment of any part of the principal of gross debt other than debt incurred for water purposes or sanitary sewer purposes (to the extent that the bonds are deductible under G.S. §159- 55(b))....... $ -0- b(4) Bonded debt included in gross debt and incurred, or to be incurred, for water purposes ...................... $ 1,000,000 b(5) Bonded debt included in gross debt and incurred, or to be incurred, for sanitary sewer system purposes to the extent that said debt is made deductible by G.S. §159 -55(b) .......... $ -0- b(6) Uncollected special assessments heretofore levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred to the extent that• such assessments will be applied, when collected, to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. b(7) The amount, as estimated by the Finance Director, of special assessments to be levied for local improvements for which any part of the gross debt (that is not otherwise deducted) was or is to be incurred, to the extent that the special assessments, when collected, will be applied to the payment of any part of the gross debt ............. (b) DEDUCTIONS, being the sum of b(1), b(2) , b(3) , b(4) , b(5) , b(6) and b(7) .... ............................... K $ -0- $ 1,000,000 (c) NET DEBT (c) NET DEBT, being the difference between the GROSS DEBT (a) and the DEDUCTIONS (b) ..................... $ 82,282,483 (d) APPRAISED VALUE (d) APPRAISED VALUE of property subject to municipal taxation before the application of any assessment ratio, being the value fixed in 1992 .......... $3,752,502,561. (e) Percentage which the NET DEBT (c) bears to the APPRAISED VALUE (d) ........ 2.2% The foregoing statement is true. Depu y Finance Director of-the County of orange, North Carolina STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ss.: COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3rd day of August 1992. } tary Public My commission expires -3(� I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a statement which was filed with me at a meeting of the Board of Commissioners for said County held on August 3, 1992, after the introduction and before the public hearing on an order authorizing bonds of said County, and that said statement is open to public inspection in my office. 3 ti .- WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, - ,,this day of August 1992. 4 1 RESOLUTION 4-0 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COAINIISSIONERS Date August 3 1992 Name of Subdivision Bellechene - East Owner /Applicant Paul Kem a and Wade Patterson The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Bellechene - East subdivision preliminary plat, dated May 13, 1992 and containing 30 lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified herein. All roads shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally, the offer of dedication of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place. This acceptance by Orange County of the dedication to the general public of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place shall be without maintenance responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the owner /applicant until such time as they are accepted for maintenance by the North Carolina Department of Transportation or some other governmental body. Before the Final Plat of any phase of Bellechene - East can be recorded: A. Sewage Disposal 1. Each residential lot shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair area, approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health. 2. The septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements. This disclosure shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regarding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health. B. Roads and Access 1. Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, within a 50 foot right -of -way, and the construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. j, , J 0 C� J PA •2 A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction of Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a certified /licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 2. Submit an erosion control plan for construction of the road in Phase C. 3. All lots, except 27 and 28, shall access onto the new subdivision roads. This restriction shall be stated in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan, and must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections Department. 2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. D. Drainage 1. 30 -foot drainage easements as required and indicated on the Preliminary Plan. E. Parkland 1. Cash in the amount of $1628.00 [($1900 /acre x 30/35 acre)] shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of parkland dedication. F. Miscellaneous 1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section V -D -2 and V -D -3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 2. The following natural and man -made site features shall be shown on the plat: (include streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, swamps, marshes, sites in "Inventory", houses, barns, sheds, railroads, overhead utility lines, cemeteries) k. 11 • F r� �J a. Drainageways as indicated on the Preliminary Plan. 3. The following easements shall be shown on the plat: a. 30 -foot drainage easements referenced in D.1; G. Certifications 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V -D -6 -b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that all residential lots contain sufficient area for septic tank disposal and repair. 4. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Canotage Court, Porteur Point, and Hamecon Place has been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved. 5. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department. W - Signature of Applicant Z40etoihe Board I, 7-Nd rn a AP k- �D � P fl Tr E f� E Q N and acknowledge that each must bec met t above conditions priorto recordationof the vision approval, final plat Signature of Applicant 3