HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-03-2006-9dORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 3,2006
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ -~
SUBJECT: Homestead Road Campus Master Plan Approval
DEPARTMENT: Purchasing, ERCD, Planning PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pam Jones, Purchasing & Central
1) 2004 ERCD Site Map Air Photo Services, 245-2652
2) 2004 Pros & Cons Potential Building David Stancil, ERCD, 245-2590
Sites Craig Benedict, Planning, 245-2592
3) Unadopted 1998 SHSC Master Plan
4) Cultural & Archaeological Executive
Summary
PURPOSE: To consider approving a conceptual master plan for the Southern Human Services
Center (SHSC) property.
BACKGROUND: In 1992, the County purchased 34.1 acres of property at 2501 Homestead
Road, Chapel Hill to serve as the County campus in southern Orange County. The most
compelling need at the time was the consolidation of County human services departments
located in various buildings throughout Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Under an approved Special
Use Permit issued by the Town of Chapel Hill in 1994, the County built an approximately 28,500
square foot building and co-located the departments of Health, Social Services, Housing and
Child Support Enforcement. The concept master plan presented to the Board previously
indicates that there is an expansion area to the east of this building, sufficient to essentially
double the size of the building in a two-level addition. Further, there is a smaller footprint to the
south of the building for the addition of a Dental Clinic (Site E on the attached ERCD Site Map
Air Photo -Attachment 1)
In 1995, the Interfaith Council (IFC) approached the County requesting land upon which to
construct Project Homestart, which provides alternatives for homeless families in transition and
battered women seeking refuge. The County granted a 25-year lease for three acres of
property in the northwest corner of the site, upon which IFC constructed these facilities. A
modification of the County's SUP was approved by the Town of Chapel Hill at the time of this
construction.
In 2004, the Board considered alternatives in the siting of the Seymour Senior Center on this
campus (See Attachment 2). At that time, the conceptual master plan reflected four potential
available building sites (See Attachment 3). However, during the deliberations regarding the.
senior center, the Board agreed to establish nature conservation areas in the southwest corner
of the site in order to preserve valuable hardwoods (Site D). This eliminated two potential sites
for smaller buildings, thereby bringing the available number of additional building sites to two,
plus the area around the residence. The Board ultimately selected one of the remaining two
sites as the location for the senior center (Site B).
An assessment conducted by ERCD in 2004 indicates that additional construction in the area
around the residence of the previous property owner (Site C) would require that the mature
hardwoods around the residence be removed. Previous studies regarding additional facilities
on this campus have recommended that the house be retrofitted and reused in lieu of
replacement with a new and larger structure.
The sole remaining site is located east of the access drive and between the existing Southern
Human Services Center and the new Seymour Center (Site A). The estimated footprint will
accommodate approximately 22,000 square feet of ground level building construction. Although
no formal allocation of function. has been attached to this site, the County's mandated
responsibilities to provide court and court related functions has been a focus of previous
conversations. At this time, the Town of Chapel Hill allows the use of the Old Post Office on
Franklin Street as the location of courtrooms, with the balance of the current court needs
addressed by space leased by the County in Carrboro (Public Defender at Carr Mill Mall, other
court offices at the Moody Building on Laurel Ave). Presumably, the County would continue to
consolidate new buildings for County and court obligations to the Homestead Road site.
In summary, the recommended master plan of the Southern Orange Homestead Road Campus
would include:
• Building Site A shall be reserved to maintain flexibility in the location of future
county/court operations;
• Building Site B is designated for the Seymour Senior Center;
• Building Site C shall remain undisturbed, except for the renovation/upfit of the existing
structure for County use as may be recommended in the upcoming space study update;
• Building Site D shall remain undisturbed as a nature conservation area on-the site;
® Building Site E shall be reserved for future expansion of the Health Department,
specifically for the Dental Clinic; and
• Expansion of the current human services building will occur to the east of existing
structure.
As a final note, upon Board recommendation, acultural and archaeological study was
conducted on the campus in areas where future construction could occur to ensure that future
development would not destroy hidden artifacts that may have been of value. A recently
received report, summarizing the findings of the assessment conducted over the summer,
indicates no remarkable findings and recommends no further study of the site (See Attachment
4).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The County Manager recommends that the Board receive the
information, discuss as necessary, and approve the master plan as cited.
2004 ERCD Site Map Air Photo
® Walking Trail Entrance
2' Contours
~_a~
t `~'~ Orange County Land
Walking Trail (0.65 miles)
1998 Orthophotas
Southern Human Services Center
~~.:
80 d 80 160 Feet A -•" `...~•''
N
~u~ m ~~
ErmironmetG b Resource
Cot>ssenration DepecCneM
MJ 2/19lD4
A-~~+ a
Southern Human Services Center Property
Homestead Road, Chapel Hill
Pros and Cons of Potential Building Sites
Site A
Pros
Cons
Site I3
Pros
Cons
Site C
Pros
• Least environmentally sensifiive site {abandoned farm field and young pine trees)
• Large size {>b acres)
• Adjacent to existing facilities and infrastructure
• Would not be overly disruptive of current on-site traffic pattern
• Moderately sloped topography
• Slight disruption of vista
• Primarily pine trees {would..not need to remove mature hardwoods)
Good access and visibility from Homestead Road
• Small size {about 1.2 acres) and. moderate slope
• Would disrupt current on-site traffic pattern
• Level topography
• Central location on property
• Could expand existing parking area to accommodate this site
Cons
- Would lose opportunity to reuse former fannliouse as small conference center
• Would have to cut down existing mature hardwood trees around the house
• Small size {just under 1 acre)
Site D
Pros
• Fairly level topography
• Adjacent to existing parking area
• Would not disrupt current on-site traffic pattern
Cons
• Small size {about 1 acre)
• Would encroach on mature hardwood forest located west of site
• Would disrupt newly established walking trails
Site E
Pros .
• Level topography
• Adjacent to existing facilities and infrastructure
• Primarily pine trees {would not need to remove mature hardwoods)
Cons
• Unusual location; access and visibility would be challenge
Unadopted 1998 SHSC Master Plan
-~
~~ ~
i ~ ~ ~ ~'
~ ~
~~ ~ ~
.. ~ .~s
0
~"'
_ ~
~.
~.. ~
~ ~
_~
MANAGENIENT SLTMMA.RY
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) conducted an intensive archaeological investigation of the
Southern Human Services Campus {SFISC), located an approximately 34 acres in Orange
County, North Carolina, in August 200G. This investigation was conducted for the Orange
County to comply with local. policies on County development projects. All fieldwork was
designed to comply with guidelines established by the Office of the Secretary of the Interior of
the United States.
Orange County has proposed to construct additional improvements to the SHSC off Homestead
Road, just north of the town limits of Chapel Hill in Orange County, North Carolina. Orange
County leas requested that an intensive archaeological survey be conducted in -the areas of
proposed ground distuxbance (Areas 1 and 2). In addition, it was requested that ESI conduct a
limited field reconnaissance of the remainder of the parcel where no construction is currently
planned (Areas 3 and 4}.
Background research was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA). Field
investigations consisted of.pedestrian investigation and shovel testing. .Areas of clear visibility,
including eroded ar exposed ground surfaces and unpaved roads within the survey area were
inspected far historic structures, artifacts, and other signs of prehistoric or historic cultural
activity: .All shovel tests (n=25) were approximately 30 centimeters in diameter and dug to
sterile subsoil; no shovel testing was conducted outside the project area.
Intensive archaeological investigation of Areas 1 and 2 recorded one archaeological site
(31 OR584* *; Table A). This late nineteenth to early twentieth century domestic site yielded
few artifacts and expressed little archaeological integrity. It is xecomrnended not eligible for the
National Register. No further work is necessary in Areas 1 and 2, and it is recommended that
work be allowed to proceed in these areas without concern for impacts to significant cultural
resources.
Table A: Summary of Site Data
Site Number Cultural Affiliation Site Type Recommendations
310R584** Late 19~'-Early2d~`Cen. Domestic Not Eligible-NFW*
*Na Further Work
A reconnaissance of Areas 3 and 4 found that these areas Have a low potential to contain
significant cultural resources. A pedestrian inspection of these areas did not observe any cultural
resources on the ground surface. Limrted shovel testing did not yield any cultural materials and
zevealed a thin, partially eroded soil profile. Areas 3 and 4 also encompass previously developed
areas, moderately steep slopes, and the headwaters of ephemeral drainages, landforms that do not
typically contain significant archaeological sites. It is recommended that no additional
archaeological investigations occl~x in Areas 3 and 4, based on the results of the reconnaissance
investigation.