HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.11.24 BOA Agenda PacketPLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (BOA)
WHITTED BUILDING
300 WEST TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278
Wednesday, December 11, 2024
7:00 p.m.
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
1.CALL TO ORDER
2.CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
3.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
November 13, 2024 Meeting Minutes
4.PUBLIC CHARGE
The Board of Adjustment 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. All electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers
should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial administrative body established in accordance
with the provisions of local regulations and State law to perform specified functions
essential to the County’s planning program. Action(s) taken by the board are based solely
on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented during a previously
scheduled and advertised public hearing on a specific item. As detailed within Section
2.12.2 of the UDO the Board chair reserves the right to exclude evidence and testimony
that is deemed: ‘incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious’ and therefore
fails to reasonably address the issues before the Board of Adjustment. While it should
be noted there is no time limit on the presentation of evidence, the Chair asks that the
presentation of evidence be consistent with established policies, rules of procedure, and
acceptable levels of decorum to ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties.
5.POTENTIAL BOA CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
It is the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances
of conflict. Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with
respect to matters before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict
and refrain from undue participation in the matter involved.
As a reminder, NC General Statute § 160D-109 establishes the following standard: A
member of any board exercising quasi-judicial functions pursuant to this Chapter shall not
participate in or vote on any quasi-judicial matter in a manner that would violate affected
person’s constitutional rights to an impartial decision maker. Impermissible violations of
due process include, but are not limited to, a member having a fixed opinion prior to
hearing the matter that is not susceptible to change, undisclosed ex parte
communications, a close familial, business, or other associational relationship with an
affected person, or a financial interest in the outcome of the matter.
6. CASES
A-7-24 - To review and hold a quasi-judicial hearing for a Variance request
(Case Number BA24-0005).
Request has been submitted by property owners Ronald L. Geib, Jr. and
Kristen Geib. The applicants have applied for a Variance to allow for
reductions in the required reservoir setbacks (150’ buildings and 300’ septic
systems). The site is located on Orange County PIN 9857-87-2089, located
4630 Old Lake Trail, Cedar NC, and lies within the Cedar Grove Township of
Orange County.
A-8-24 - To review and hold a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing for a Special
Use Permit request (Case Number SUP24-0010).
Request has been submitted by the property owners Triangle Land
Conservancy (TLC). The applicant has applied for a SUP to allow for a Camp
Use at the TLC Brumley Park facility. The site is located on Orange County
PIN 9883-30-4125, located off New Hope Church Road, Chapel Hill, NC, and
lies within the Eno Township of Orange County.
7. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 2
REGULAR MEETING 3
November 13, 2024 4
5
MEMBERS PRESENT: Leon Meyers, Chair 6
Nathan Robinson, Member 7
Jeff Scott, Member 8
Greg Niemiroski, Member 9
Kyle Myers, Alternate 10
11
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Beth Bronson, Vice Chair 12
Holly Fraccaro, Alternate 13
14
LIST OF APPLICANTS: James Tilson, Owner 15
Michael Tilson, Owner 16
Kevin Hornik, Brough Law Firm 17
John McPhaul, McPhaul Appraisal 18
19
PUBLIC: Susan Coppola 20
Katherine Downs 21
22
STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Director, Planning and Inspections 23
Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director, Development Services 24
Taylor Perschau, Manager, Current Planning and Zoning 25
Jack Moran, Planning Technician 26
27
AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 28
29
Leon Meyers called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM 30
31
AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 32
33
AGENDA ITEM 3: INTRODUCTION OF NEW BOA MEMBER KYLE MYERS 34
35
Leon Meyers: Is there anything that needs to be changed about the agenda, Patrick or Taylor or others? Then I 36
have the pleasure of introducing a new Board of Adjustment member, Kyle Myers, on the end 37
down there. Kyle, do you want to talk a little bit about your background and tell us how you got 38
here, besides being a generous person with your time? 39
40
Kyle Myers: Do I push the button to talk? 41
42
Leon Meyers: You push to not talk. 43
44
Kyle Myers: Okay. 45
46
Leon Meyers: This is Orange County. 47
48
Kyle Myers: Well, good evening. My real name is Andrew Kyle Myers, and I've lived in the area for about 7 49
years. I am committed to doing good things where I live, and so I'm happy to be here. I also serve 50
1
on the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. And, professionally, I'd like to say that I'm a herder of 1
cats, but technically, I'm a project manager, vice president for a general contractor that largely 2
builds multi-family affordable housing, hospitality senior living. 3
4
Leon Meyers: Okay. Welcome. 5
6
Kyle Myers: Thank you. 7
8
AGENDA ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 9
10
Leon Meyers: Then, board members, you have the minutes in your package. Any questions, or if not, motion to 11
approve would be in order. 12
13
Nathan Robinson: Motion to approve. 14
15
Leon Meyers: Second, anybody? 16
17
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 18
19
Leon Meyers: Did I miss a second? 20
21
Greg Niemiroski: Yeah, you missed my second. 22
23
Leon Meyers: Oh, yes. Sorry. Any discussion? All in favorite, please say aye. 24
25 MOTION was made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 26
27
VOTE: Unanimous 28
29
Leon Meyers: Minutes are approved. 30
31
AGENDA ITEMS 5 & 6: PUBLIC CHARGE & POTENTIAL BOA CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT 32
33
Leon Meyers: The Board of Adjustment pledges its respect to the citizens of Orange County. The Board asks 34
participants to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with 35
fellow citizens. Should any member of the Board or any participant fail to observe this public charge, 36
I'll ask the offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should 37
decorum fail to be restored, we'll recess the meeting until a genuine commitment to this public charge 38
can be observed. Please silence your devices now. The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial 39
administrative body established in accordance with local regulations and State law to perform 40
specified functions that are essential to the County’s planning program. Actions taken by the board 41
are based solely on competent material and substantial evidence presented during an advertised 42
public hearing on a specific case. Section 2.12.2 of the UDO allows the Board chair to exclude 43
evidence and testimony that is deemed: ‘incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious’ 44
and therefore fails to address in a reasonable way the issues before the Board. While there is no 45
time limit on the presentation of evidence, the Board asks that the presentation of evidence be 46
consistent with established policies and rules of procedure, and acceptable levels of decorum to 47
ensure a fair and effective hearing for all parties. Regarding conflict of interest, it's the duty of every 48
board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances of conflict. Board members having 49
any conflict of interest or appearances of conflict with respect to matters before the board should 50
2
identify the conflict or appearance of conflict and refrain from undue participation in the matter 1
involved. As a reminder, General Statute 160.D.109 establishes the following standard: A member 2
of any board exercising quasi-judicial functions pursuant to this chapter shall not participate in or 3
vote on any quasi-judicial matter in a manner that would violate an affected person's constitutional 4
rights to an impartial decision maker. Impermissible violations of due process include, but are not 5
limited to, these issues: a member having a fixed opinion prior to the hearing regarding the matter 6
that is not susceptible to change; undisclosed ex parte communications, meaning talking with parties 7
involved in the case outside the hearing; a close familial business or other associational relationship 8
with an affected person; or a financial interest in the outcome of the matter. Does any member of 9
the board need to identify a conflict or an appearance of conflict on Case A624? 10
11
Kyle Myers: No. 12
13
AGENDA ITEM 7: CASE: A-6-24 - To review and hold a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing for a Special Use Permit 14
request (Case Number SUP23-0011) 15
16
Request has been submitted by James Tilson and Canine Adventures. The applicant has 17 applied for a SUP to allow for the development of a Kennel Class II facility. The site is located 18
on Orange County PIN 9832-60-7469, located off Monotropa Trail, Efland, NC, and lies within 19
the Bingham Township of Orange County. 20
21
Patrick Mallett: If you don't mind, I'd like to give you an update on the Barlow case before we jump into the special 22
use permit. 23
24
Leon Meyers: Good. Okay. 25
26
Patrick Mallett: It's Item 2, so I'll just be very quick. Ms. Barlow has decided to withdraw the case. I gave you 27
courtesy hard copies of that request, a memo from David Cates, and an email from Mrs. Barlow, a 28
map sort of illustrating where we are with the lake in terms of structures, and a memo from Chris 29
Sandt, the county engineer. They were seeking withdrawal essentially because when they were last 30
before you, Nathan, I think you were sort of heading the discussion about I need more specifics 31
about the placement of the building, the setbacks, and specifically the septic system. Well, David 32
did that in conjunction with Alan Clapp, a soil scientist, and they realized, I think we might qualify for 33
a different provision that would negate the need for a variance. 34
35
Leon Meyers: Great. 36
37
Patrick Mallett: And that's under UDO Section 4.2.2.(I) under watershed protection. It essentially says, you know, if 38
you have a lot that was created prior to January 1st, 1994, it's within other criteria, and you can 39
commit to no more than four bedrooms, no more than 20,000 square feet of septic area, including 40
the drainage and the tank, and then it's reviewed by the county engineer and/or environmental 41
health, with regard to its impact and the extent of the encroachment. So, they took a serious look at 42
that and decided, yes, we can commit to those first two provisions and work with the county engineer, 43
and they've done that. So, the decision was to withdraw the case. 44
45
Leon Meyers: That's great. They had in mind to ask for a variance both from the septic setback and also the building 46
setback. So, apparently, they've figured out how to make that work? 47
48
Patrick Mallett: Within those limitations, yes. They didn't, unfortunately for her, she was not at a point where they 49
knew those for certain. Now they do, so they have a clear path. That solves one of the variance 50
3
cases. Unfortunately, the other variance case did not qualify for the date, the first qualifier, because 1
he did a recombination fairly after that date, and so he will have to come, and you will see that case 2
in December. I just wanted to give you an update on that. 3
4
Leon Meyers: That's great. Anything else on for December? 5
6
Patrick Mallett: Brumley Park, the Schoolhouse of Wonder. That'll be a special-use permit. 7
8
Leon Meyers: Thank you. All right, if you'd like to go ahead and do the summary, then we'll swear witnesses after 9
you finish. 10
11
Taylor Perschau: Good evening representatives of the board. Taylor Perschau, current planning and zoning manager. 12
I will be introducing the process, the case, and presenting staff testimony for Case A-6-24. So, where 13
the case has already been before it got to you, it started with staff review, receiving the application, 14
which does include a site plan that they're binding themselves to, exhibit materials from the applicant. 15
We moved it through the development advisory committee, which includes Environmental Health, 16
Inspections, NCDOT. In this case, the review did include Orange County Animal Services, and the 17
application was also sent to the state clearing house for a comprehensive environmental review. 18
While that was happening, the applicant was responsible to hold a neighborhood information 19
meeting, and now, with all of that review and the meeting held, we come before the board to conduct 20
an evidentiary hearing where you all are tasked to make a determination regarding the findings of 21
fact. So, your role is outlined by governing law. NCGS 160(d) directs us that the Board of Adjustment 22
is the one to hold evidentiary hearings in a quasi-judicial manner to review the special-use permit 23
application. Tonight, you will then be receiving evidence, hearing testimony from myself, the 24
applicant, and any parties that establish legal standing. After reviewing and deliberating the 25
materials, you will then be tasked to make a determination based on the findings of fact, and that will 26
result in either issuing an approval or denial for a special-use permit. I'm going to breeze through 27
this. You guys have had really great practice with special use permits so far this year, so if we need 28
to return, please point me back to it. Tonight's case is a special-use permit application request for a 29
Class 2 kennel on an unaddressed parcel off Monotropa Trail in Efland, North Carolina. Do you want 30
me to go through the full introduction before standing, or at what point do we need to stop? 31
32
Leon Meyers: Yeah, let's go ahead and do the introduction, if you will, and we'll deal with standing next. 33
34
Taylor Perschau: Great. So, all the case materials are available to you. I have this indexed to help us refer to if 35
questions come up. I will also have the agenda we can go through so we can get to specific pages 36
as we converse about it. It includes the abstract, the application package, staff report and analysis, 37
notification materials for both the neighborhood information meeting as well as tonight's Board of 38
Adjustment meeting. It includes project correspondence with other reviewing agencies, including 39
those involved with the development advisory committee, and finally, the findings of fact. My next 40
step will include my testimony, so I think now I'll defer back to you. 41
42
Leon Meyers: Good place to stop. Good. Let's see, I'm looking at folks who have signed up, and I see two people 43
who intend to speak, Mr. Hornik and Mr. Tilson. And the other folks who have signed up as 44
interested, just confirming, none of you folks has any intention of speaking tonight. Is that right? All 45
right. Folks who are going to testify tonight, please come forward to be sworn. 46
47
Kevin Hornik: For what's it's worth, my name is Kevin Hornik. I'm an attorney with Brough Law Firm. I'm here on 48
behalf of the applicant. I'm happy to take an oath, although I don't anticipate giving factual testimony 49
4
this evening. We have James Tilson, the applicant here, and John McPhaul, who is our appraiser. 1
They will both be doing the heavy lifting, of course besides county staff, this evening. 2
3
Leon Meyers: Good. 4
5
SWEARING OF THE TESTIMONY 6
7
Jack Moran: Do you swear and/or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and 8
nothing but the truth to the best of your knowledge. 9
10
Applicants: I do. 11
12
Staff: I do. 13
14
Leon Meyers: All right, Ms. Perschau, it's all you. 15
16
Taylor Perschau: So, a little bit more to orient us towards the parcel, we are talking about a parcel located in the 17
Bingham Township. Here it is symbolized by the red star, the green outline being Bingham 18
Township. So, we're in the western-southwestern side of the county. It is in the Cane Creek 19
protected watershed, and the applicant is James Tilson, co-owning the land with Michael Tilson, both 20
of whom are considered applicants. At present, the property is zoned agricultural residential, and 21
there is no request for changing that zoning, but instead the Kennel Class 2 use is designated as a 22
special use, so that means it is permitted in this district with the issuance of a special-use permit by 23
the Board of Adjustment. The SUP is requested for the entirety of the 32.4 acres, in accordance 24
with the submitted site plan. You will see that the site plan designated the specific use areas, so I 25
wouldn't say, and the applicant can speak to this, but I wouldn't say the entire use will really be going 26
to the full 32.4 acres. All of the surrounding zoning is agricultural residential as well. The future 27
land-use map designation is agricultural residential, and it also does have some resource protection 28
areas, which tends to stay along that stream that's on the southern portion of the property. These 29
resource protection areas were reviewed by the Orange County Department of Environment, 30
Agricultural, Parks and Rec. There were no comments of concern from them, nor did the return 31
comments from the State Environmental Clearing House present any concern for the proposed use. 32
The general overview that was submitted is that the project would allow for canine exercise, training, 33
and overnight boarding facilities. So, one of the qualifiers for a Class 2 kennel would be the keeping 34
of more than five animals at any given time, which is the one category that this particular use falls 35
into. They do have an overnight boarding facility that could hold up to eight animals, and the narrative 36
you'll find they will tend to keep around ten on site at any given time and no more than eight overnight. 37
The use standards for Kennel Class 2 do ask for 150-foot use setback along the property perimeter, 38
and I believe the closest element of the kennel use is 215 feet from the property line. They do 39
propose to retain existing vegetation on site. It is a largely wooded parcel as it is. There are several 40
vacant partials surrounding some residential uses, not many in close proximity. And I think it's worth 41
noting that many adjacent parcels are currently owned by the applicant, but that may not be true 42
forever. They do propose to use the existing ingress and egress on Monotropa Trail, which then 43
connects to Buckhorn Road, as their publicly maintained access point. This is the site plan, and we 44
can happily get into details of it. It's a very large parcel, so it's somewhat hard to see the details 45
here. We can zoom into it as questions come up, so based on the materials submitted, we 46
determined that the application was complete per the requirements of what's required from Section 47
2.5, which is our site plan review; Section 2.7, which is our special-use permit review; and then 48
Section 5.6.8, which details the specific standards and submittal requirements for a Class 2 kennel. 49
Staff finds that the special use proposed will maintain or promote the public health, safety, and 50
5
general welfare if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan. We 1
found that this was reflected in their submitted site plan, their submitted conditions, and then further 2
gone into in our staff report and analysis, and the review comments included the back and forth with 3
the Development Advisory Committee. Any concerns that were brought up were addressed by the 4
applicant, and no concerns have since been communicated to either us or the applicant. I think it's 5
worth noting that even from the neighborhood information meeting, staff has not received any local 6
correspondence from neighbors voicing question or concern. Based on the materials provided, staff 7
finds no potential injury to the value of contiguous property. I do think that you'll receive more detail 8
on this one from the applicant. From here, if you have any questions for me, happy to answer them 9
now. Otherwise, I will turn it over to the applicant. 10
11
Leon Meyers: Please. 12
13
Kevin Hornik: Good evening. We will try not to take up too much of your time this fine evening. I think, like I 14
mentioned earlier, county staff have already done quite a bit of heavy lifting here, so we'll just try to 15
cross some Ts and dot some Is here for you. Let me see. Do we have the presentation queued up? 16
17
Taylor Perschau: Yes. Does that look familiar? 18
19
Kevin Hornik: Thank you. Like I mentioned earlier, my name is Kevin Hornik. I'm an attorney with the Brough Law 20
Firm in Chapel Hill. I'm here this evening on behalf of the applicants, James and Michael Tilson, 21
who are both here this evening. We've already talked a little bit about the location of the subject 22
property. You're already familiar with this, so I won't belabor the point. Again, we've talked a little 23
bit about the proposed use. This is a Class 2 kennel use. You've got the UDO's definition of that 24
use here on the slide for you. Again, I think we've already kind of covered this material, but these 25
are the various sections of the Orange County UDO that establish the review criteria that the 26
applicant is responsible for meeting in order to be entitled to the approval of the special-use permit. 27
So, we already talked a little bit about this. County staff have already determined that the various 28
approval criteria found in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO have been met. That's established in the agenda 29
package on Page 24. That's one of, and we'll cross this bridge a little bit later, but that's one of the 30
required findings that this board will make. Let's see, so we'll get into the substantive standards, and 31
I think you've already heard some testimony from staff about the first one, and these are the three 32
classic special-use permit standards, and they're found in Section 5.3.2(a) of the UDO, the first being 33
that the use will maintain and promote public health, safety, and general welfare if it's located where 34
proposed and developed and operated in accordance with the plans as submitted. I think I'll turn the 35
floor over to James here to talk a little bit about what they've done in terms of designing the site plan 36
and kind of defining the use and their operation thereof in order to promote and maintain the public 37
health, safety, and welfare. 38
39
James Tilson: Well, first of all, I have conducted market analysis of services like this in the area, and from what I've 40
seen, it is a much-needed service, especially this is kind of a unique version of this service. I'd like 41
to be able to help people and the dogs in the area. And, also, in terms of safety, first of all, dogs will 42
remain on leash at all times outside of physically fenced areas, and as I have always done in this 43
business, I'll carefully screen the temperament of each dog that applies to work with us. And as my 44
attorney mentioned, we have designed the site plan and proposed conditions that we hope will allow 45
us to run this proposed business in such a way that it's in harmony with the county, neighbors, and 46
the land itself. 47
48
Kevin Hornik: I think we've already heard testimony from county staff, but I'd just like to ask you to confirm this. Is 49
it true that your proposed use will not be closer than 150 feet from any property line? 50
6
1
James Tilson: That is true. Further than 150 feet from any property line and further than 500 feet from any structure 2
that's not occupied by myself. 3
4
Kevin Hornik: And you've proposed certain measures that will be taken in order to mitigate or prevent certain 5
impacts on adjacent properties, first including retaining the existing vegetation and screening. Is that 6
correct? 7
8
James Tilson: Correct. 9
10
Kevin Hornik: And you've also proposed using motion-sensing lights that are directed towards the ground for after-11
dark use of the facilities. Is that correct? 12
13
James Tilson: That is correct. 14
15
Kevin Hornik: And it's your intention that that will prevent any possible impact from light intrusion onto neighboring 16
properties. Is that correct? 17
18
James Tilson: Absolutely. 19
20
Kevin Hornik: All right. And it's also your understanding that by retaining the existing vegetation, you will help to 21
mitigate the travel of noise and the impact of noise on nearby and adjacent properties. Is that 22
correct? 23
24
James Tilson: Correct. 25
26
Kevin Hornik: All right. You've also discussed with Orange County Environmental Health staff composting dog 27
waste on site. Is that correct? 28
29
James Tilson: Yes, sir. 30
31
Kevin Hornik: And so, it's your understanding that all of these things will help further the public health, safety, and 32
general welfare. Is that right? 33
34
James Tilson: Correct. 35
36
Kevin Hornik: Understood. And so, as a result, I think you've heard testimony both from county staff and from the 37
applicant that this first review criteria has been met. The second review criteria deals with maintaining 38
and enhancing the value of surrounding and contiguous properties. In order to address this criteria, 39
I'm going to ask Mr. John McPhaul, our licensed appraiser to approach. And you all may already 40
have, although you can tell me if I'm wrong, copies of his appraisal report. He's prepared a market 41
analysis. 42
43
Leon Meyers: We have some excerpts, I think. 44
45
Kevin Hornik: Okay. What I'll do then, well, first we'll go ahead, and we will establish Mr. McPhaul's credentials as 46
an expert witness. Assuming you all accept him as an expert witness, I will pass up copies of his 47
market analysis, and we can walk through that. So, Mr. McPhaul, can you state your name for the 48
record here? 49
50
7
John McPhaul: Yes, my name's John McPhaul. I'm a North Carolina state-certified residential real estate appraiser. 1
I am not an MAI. 2
3
Kevin Hornik: That is my mistake then. 4
5
John McPhaul: The institute would get angry if you claimed you were an MAI and you're not. 6
7
Leon Meyers: Can I ask you fellas to move a little closer to the microphone? 8
9
John McPhaul: Okay, yes, yes. I was asked to determine, basically, as y'all are aware, the ordinance is trying to 10
protect external depreciation to surrounding properties. There are three types of depreciation: 11
physical, functional, and external. And this would be similar to having a hog farm or something come 12
in and disturb the neighbors. 13
14
Kevin Hornik: To be clear, I don't believe Mr. McPhaul is testifying that this use in particular is similar to a hog farm. 15
Is that correct? 16
17
John McPhaul: No, no, no. Not at all. It's very benign. But what I'm tasked to do is determine if any nearby or 18
surrounding comparable properties have seen a diminution in value from the input of certain uses 19
like this. And so, what I did say I found two nearby kennels. There was a Bingham kennel and also 20
the Doggy Spa and Daycare. And they're all fairly close by. And what I did is I did about a 3-mile 21
radius out from them and did comparable sales for the last 5 years of single-family homes nearby. 22
23
Kevin Hornik: John, before we dive in too much further, I would just ask that the board accept Mr. McPhaul as an 24
expert in real estate appraisal. 25
26
Leon Meyers: Any objections, board members? Mr. McPhaul is accepted. 27
28
Kevin Hornik: All right. And what I'll do before we dive in, I'll ask that we pass out these market analysis reports 29
that Mr. McPhaul has prepared. 30
31
Leon Meyers: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Hornik. 32
33
Kevin Hornik: I'll ask Mr. McPhaul to go ahead and explain the methodology and the process that he went through 34
in conducting this analysis. 35
36
John McPhaul: In order to prove there would be an external depreciation caused by a nearby kennel, you would 37
have to have a sale of a home before the kennel was put in and one afterwards that showed a 38
diminution in value. And it would be so difficult to separate out, because of the way that the market 39
has been appreciating over the past 5 years since 2019, to determine that any, I guess at this point, 40
lack of appreciation would be attributable to the kennel. And I believe that the usage of the property 41
as a kennel would not impact any of the nearby property because the site is so large, and it actually 42
is down in a hole, too, so that's also going to, I believe, abate a lot of the noise or anything else. But 43
that's not my end of the world. My end of the world is does it hurt the value, and it doesn't appear 44
that it does. 45
46
Kevin Hornik: And so just to be clear, based on your analysis of similar uses and sales of surrounding properties, 47
it's your expert opinion that the proposed use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous 48
properties. Is that correct? 49
50
8
John McPhaul: It is. 1
2
Kevin Hornik: Thank you. So, unless the board has any questions for Mr. McPhaul, I will ask Mr. Tilson to come 3
on back up here, and we can move on to the next criteria. 4
5
Leon Meyers: Board members, questions for Mr. McPhaul? Thank you, sir. 6
7
Kevin Hornik: All right, James, come on up. Moving right along, you'll see on the screen, this is your next review 8
criteria, and this one states the location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan 9
submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located, and the use is in compliance 10
with the plan for the physical development of the county as embodied in these regulations, being the 11
UDO, or in the comprehensive plan, or a portion thereof adopted by the Board of County 12
Commissioners. So, first I'll point out, and I think that county staff alluded to this, or there might have 13
been direct testimony on this point, but the subject property is zoned AR. The UDO specifically 14
permits this use in the AR district provided that the applicant qualifies for a special-use permit. And 15
so that on its face is indicative of the fact that this use, again, provided that all of the other review 16
criteria are met, is in harmony with the UDO itself. I'll ask Mr. Tilson, can you tell us a little bit about 17
the character of the surrounding area, the surrounding properties? 18
19
James Tilson: Sure. We are surrounded by many trees. It's a fully wooded property, and the surrounding properties 20
tend to either be fully wooded or to be agricultural fields. 21
22
Kevin Hornik: And your proposed use of the subject property will not encompass the entire property. Is that 23
correct? In other words, your use will be located on a relatively small portion of the subject property 24
at large. 25
26
James Tilson: That's correct. We're applying for the special-use permit to apply to the entirety for the possibility 27
that we could walk on other areas of the property with dogs, but most of the business, in fact, will be 28
conducted off site. I've been running this business since 2012. We do group pack hikes in nature 29
areas, and I've never owned land. I've always lived in apartments. I've always been building towards 30
this, but I've always run the business this way that we are a mobile company. I go around and pick 31
the dogs up myself, so we won't be generating extra traffic to the land. And many of those adventure 32
walk hikes will be conducted off site in public parks, and the small portion of the business that is 33
conducted on the land will be in an area of less than an acre close to the dog den. 34
35
Kevin Hornik: And the remainder of the subject property will remain in its natural vegetated state. Is that correct? 36
37
James Tilson: Exactly. We will not disturb any other vegetation other than what we're clearing for this building. 38
39
Kevin Hornik: And so, in your opinion, and based on your personal knowledge of the surrounding area, as well as 40
your proposed use and site plan for this particular use, aside from the approximately 1-acre area 41
that you'll clear for this use, the remainder of the site will be effectively identical to and in harmony 42
with the general character of the surrounding area. Is that correct? 43
44
James Tilson: Correct. It will remain fully wooded. 45
46
Kevin Hornik: All right. And then with respect to compliance with the county's comprehensive plan, I think that the 47
agenda package on Pages 84 through 85 discuss this proposed use's compliance with the 2030 48
Comprehensive Plan. And staff can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it is their conclusion 49
that this proposed use is generally in compliance with or conformance with the county's 2030 50
9
Comprehensive Plan. I'll let you disagree with me momentarily if you do. All right. Moving along, 1
again, under the UDO, the applicant is also required to meet the requirements of Section 5.3.2(b). 2
These are, I think, criteria that allow county staff to conduct additional review regarding the practical 3
application of the use on the subject property. Is it true, Mr. Tilson, that you submitted information 4
to the county regarding sewage disposal, solid waste, and water as part of the application package? 5
6
James Tilson: Yes, sir. 7
8
Kevin Hornik: All right. And I believe, according to the information included in the agenda package, the county's 9
Environmental Health and Solid Waste Departments have no comments or concerns. Obviously, 10
the applicant will need to comply with the county's regulations with respect to septic and water on 11
site. The applicant stipulates to that fact. No. 2: The applicant has to address the methodology and 12
adequacy of police and fire and rescue squad protection. Excuse me. Again, this is a criteria that 13
has been submitted, and county staff and the Development Advisory Committee have found that 14
they have no comments, that the application material has satisfactorily addressed those 15
requirements. Again, the third criteria is that the method and adequacy of vehicular access to the 16
site and traffic conditions around the site are adequately addressed. Again, this site, this was 17
reviewed by NCDOT. You'll see their conclusions, and this comes directly out of the agenda package 18
here, is that there is already an existing driveway permit for the subject property, and there are no 19
additional requirements necessary unless the county requires upgrades or modifications to the road. 20
I would also ask, and I think Mr. Tilson testified to this a little bit earlier, but you don't anticipate that 21
there will be any significant increase in vehicular traffic as a result of your use. Is that correct? 22
23
James Tilson: That's correct. All transportation of dogs will be conducted by myself. 24
25
Kevin Hornik: So, it's not as though you are developing, for instance, a residential subdivision on the property which 26
might generate additional trips in connection with that residential use. Is that correct? 27
28
James Tilson: Correct. We created two parking spots at the dog den in case of emergencies, but primarily, I will 29
be doing the driving, and clients will not be coming to the land. 30
31
Kevin Hornik: All right. So, I think that the evidence included in the agenda package and in the record before you, 32
as well as Mr. Tilson's testimony, adequately addresses this review criteria. And then finally, and 33
we've already gone over this one, so I won't belabor the point, the other use specific standards as 34
set forth in the UDO must be met. The applicable additional specific standards in this case are those 35
found in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO. And, again, I think you've heard testimony, and there is evidence 36
in the agenda package that addresses this, county staff have found that all of those additional 37
standards have been met in this case. So, again, based on the evidence you've heard this evening 38
both from county staff, from the applicant, and from Mr. McPhaul, you've heard competent material 39
and substantial evidence that tends to show all of the required review criteria have been met here. 40
I think one last housekeeping item: I would ask that the agenda package, the presentation, Mr. 41
McPhaul's report – I think I already mentioned our presentation, but in any event, I'll do it again – all 42
be entered into and accepted into the record of this evening's hearing. 43
44
Leon Meyers: Without objection, board members? Accepted. 45
46
Kevin Hornik: I think that concludes our presentation unless the board has any additional questions for Mr. Tilson. 47
48
Leon Meyers: Questions, board members, for Mr. Hornik or the applicant? You guys must have done a really good 49
job. 50
10
1
Kevin Hornik: Well, I always like to hear that. Thank you. 2
3
Leon Meyers: All right. 4
5
Taylor Perschau: Now it comes to you all for a time for any questions, deliberations, and finally a determination of 6
findings of fact. As the applicant detailed, the planning director did determine that the application 7
satisfies established submittal requirements, and there is sufficient documentation demonstrating 8
general compliance with established development standards, as detailed in Section 5.6.8 of the 9
UDO. Staff doesn't make a formal recommendation on the approval of the application or on the 10
compliance of the project with the general standards in Section 5.3.2.(A).(2), so you all must 11
determine if the use will maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare if located 12
where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted; if these will 13
maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, unless the use is a public necessity, in which 14
case the use may not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and finally, you must 15
determine if the location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will 16
be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located, and the use is in compliance with the plan 17
for the physical development of the county as embodied in these regulations or in the comprehensive 18
plan, or a portion thereof adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. I'm going to defer to you, 19
Chair Meyers, if you want more detail from me or if you want to go ahead and kind of start making 20
your deliberations. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Board members, would some additional information from Taylor be helpful, or should we bring the 23
application before the board and discuss? Questions for Taylor? Sounds like we're well informed. 24
That's a dangerous statement. Good, well, the application then is before the board. There are some 25
conditions that are listed in the application on Page 34 and in Exhibit E on Page 44, and Mr. Hornik, 26
I assume there's no change in those conditions that have been a part of the application. 27
28
Kevin Hornik: That's correct to the best of my knowledge. I'll ask Mr. Tilson to confirm that. 29
30
James Tilson: Correct. 31
32
Leon Meyers: Okay. Then the findings I think, would be the first decision for the board. Is that right, legal 33
department? Right? The findings are on Page 111 of the package. And unless there is anything 34
that the board needs to discuss, a motion would be in order to approve the findings listed on, I'm 35
sorry, tagged Page 109 in the package. 36
37
Nathan Robinson: I make a motion to approve finding of facts on Page 111. 38
39
Leon Meyers: Motioned. Is there a second to approve the findings? 40
41
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 42
43
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on the findings for Case A-6-24? If not, all in favor, please say aye. 44
45
MOTION was made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 46
47
VOTE: Unanimous 48
Leon Meyers: And then please help me here, James, I believe the next motion would be, in this case, to grant the 49
special-use permit. Is that right? 50
11
1
James Bryan: The conclusions. 2
3
Leon Meyers: Sorry. Okay, conclusions then are on Page 112. 4
5
James: Yeah, 104 to 112, I think. 6
7
Leon Meyers: 104. 8
9
James: Oh, to 108. 10
11
Leon Meyers: 104 to 108. Okay. These are the conclusions that the board would approve based on the findings 12
of fact that we just voted on. Is there a motion to approve these conclusions? 13
14
Nathan Robinson: I make a motion to approve the conclusions on Page 113 and 114. 15
16
Leon Meyers: Is there a second to that motion? 17
18
Jeff Scott: Second. 19
20
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on the motion to approve the conclusions? All right, all in favor, please say aye. 21
22
MOTION was made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Jeff Scott 23
24
VOTE: Unanimous 25
26
Leon Meyers: And then the final motion, I believe, would be to grant the special-use permit. 27
28
Nathan Robinson: I make a motion to approve the special-use permit for the dog center. 29
30
Leon Meyers: Second to the motion to approve? 31
32
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 33
34
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on the motion to approve the special-use permit? No discussion. All in favor of 35
approving the special-use permit, please say aye. 36
37
MOTION was made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski 38
39
VOTE: Unanimous 40
41
Leon Meyers: None opposed. Special-use permit is granted. Mr. Tilson, good luck in your new business, and 42
welcome to Orange County. 43
44
James Tilson: Thank you, sir. Thank you, all. Appreciate it. Thanks for the time. 45
46
47
AGENDA ITEM 8: BOA Annual Report and Work Plan 48
49
Leon Meyers: Then we have the work plan. Is that right, Patrick? That needs discussed and approved? 50
12
1
Patrick Mallett: Yeah, I'm not going to pull it up unless you want me to go through it. It's the last two pages of your 2
packet. Every appointed board, there's over two dozen of them, I believe, has to do a year-end 3
review and a work plan for the upcoming year. Yours has been updated, but it's essentially been 4
the same for the last 3-years, plus or minus some minor changes. Other boards, like the Planning 5
Board, is a little bit more nuanced because they're a legislative recommendation body, and they 6
touch other things, and so they need to kind of outline what their work is going to be for the next 7
year. This is your work, handling the cases as they come in, the variances, the special-use permits, 8
and the appeals. So, if anybody's got any questions tonight or in the coming weeks, feel free to ask 9
me, send me an email. That will go as it has in the past. Sometimes probably January, February, 10
I'm guessing February time frame, we'll get a time slot, we have to go to the Board of Commissioners 11
and give a very, very, very short synopsis of, just a few minutes because they have to run through 12
all the boards. So, if you've got any questions on that. 13
14
Leon Meyers: Does this document need the formal approval of the board, or this is just for information? 15
16
Patrick Mallett: It's just for information. 17
18
Leon Meyers: Information. 19
20
Patrick Mallett: Yeah. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Okay. And board members have questions about it? 23
24
Patrick Mallett: They receive and approve it, I guess, is the best way to think of it. 25
26
Leon Meyers: Receive and approve it? 27
28
Patrick Mallett: Yeah. 29
30
Leon Meyers: Do I hear a motion to receive and approve? 31
32
Patrick Mallett: Yeah, well, the commissioners will, correct me if I'm wrong, James, I mean this is really for the benefit 33
of the commissioners. There's no approval. You're a board at their leisure. Is that a good way to 34
put it? 35
36
James Bryan: I've got no objection with however you want to handle it. 37
38
Leon Meyers: Good. 39
40
James: I'm good with that. 41
42
Leon Meyers: Then we'll move right along. 43
44
Patrick Mallett: All right. Sounds good. 45
46
Leon Meyers: Not to deprive Nathan of another motion there. 47
48
Nathan Robinson: I don't want to be left out here. 49
50
13
Leon Meyers: You want to talk to us about this work? 1
2
Patrick Mallett: Yeah, so we had enough money. We can't, unfortunately, pay you, even for gas or give you a 3
stipend, but we can do some things. We got the latest iteration from the School of Government on 4
quasi-judicial boards. Each of you gets copy. When I see Beth and Holly, I'll give them their copy. 5
It's a good guide. It's up to date. Use it. I will also say I haven't seen anything roll out just yet, but 6
at some point, we will see something from the School of Government with regard to local, nearby 7
opportunities for training. Some of those are in person, some of them are virtual, but I will certainly 8
share that with you. We're all about getting you equipped and informed to do your craft. 9
10
Leon Meyers: I did do a workshop, or a training I guess, with Professor Lovelady a couple years ago, and he is 11
very good. 12
13
Patrick Mallett: You went to the Kernersville one, right? 14
15
Leon Meyers: He knows his stuff, and he's a good presenter if anybody's interested. That would be a great 16
opportunity. 17
18
Patrick Mallett: Yeah, and, Kyle, for you specifically, if you want to jump into that a little bit deeper, I’m happy to help. 19
20
Kyle Myers: Right. I'm on it. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Anything else? Staff? Attorneys? Anybody else? Good? 23
24
Patrick Mallett: All right. 25
26
Leon Meyers: Thank you. Motion to adjourn then? 27
28
Patrick Mallett: Thanks. 29
30
Nathan Robinson: I'm not doing it. 31
32
Leon Meyers: We are adjourned, and Nathan is six for six, I think. 33
34
AGENDA ITEM 9: ADJOURNMENT 35
The meeting was adjourned at 7:49 p.m. 36
37
38
39
40
_________________________________________ 41 NAME OF CHAIR, CHAIR 42
14
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT CASE BA24-0005
Meeting Date: December 11, 2024
Agenda
Item No. BA24-0005
SUBJECT: BA24-0005 (Geib Variance)
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: Yes
ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Variance Application Materials
2. Zoning Report
3. Review Agencies Comments
4. Public Notification Materials
5. Findings of Fact
Lauren Honeycutt, Planner II (919) 245-2598
Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director,
Development Services (919) 245-2577
PURPOSE: To hold an evidentiary hearing, receive testimony and evidence, and take action on a
VARIANCE application from the provisions of Section 6.13.4(C) Minimum Buffer Widths for
Watershed Protection Overlay Districts; and Table 4.2.9 Water Supply/Sewage Disposal Facilities of
the Unified Development Ordinance (hereafter ‘UDO’). Specifically, the applicant is requesting relief
from the 150-foot building setback and 300-foot septic setback from the Lake Orange reservoir to
construct a residential structure on a currently undeveloped parcel.
BACKGROUND: The basic facts concerning the current application are as follows:
Owner: Ronald L. Geib, Jr. and Kristen Geib
1420 Ainsworth Blvd
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Applicant: David Cates, PE
210 S. Wake Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Parcel Information: a. PIN: 9857-87-2089
(See Attachment 2) b. Address: 4630 Old Lake Trail
c. Size of parcel: +/- 1.64 acres
d. Zoning of parcel: Agricultural Residential (AR); with Upper Eno
Critical Watershed Overlay District
e. Township: Cedar Grove
16
f. Future Land Use Map Designation: Agricultural Residential
(AR)
g. Growth Management System Designation: Rural
h. Roads: Frontage along Old Lake Trail (private, 60’ right-of-way)
i. Water and Sewer Service: The property is not located within a
primary utility service area meaning water and sewer service is
provided by an individual well and septic system.
Surrounding Land Uses: a. NORTH: Undeveloped parcel, zoned AR;
b. SOUTH: Single-Family Dwelling, zoned AR;
c. EAST: Old Lake Trail, a private 60’ right-of-way; and
d. WEST: Lake Orange.
Proposal: As detailed within Attachment 1, the applicant has applied for a VARIANCE from the
required 150-foot reservoir buffer setback and 300-foot septic setback applied to the Lake
Orange reservoir (the 615-foot elevation contour line on the parcel) to allow for the construction
of a new residential structure to be located +/- 145 ft. from Lake Orange. This variance will
provide relief from the standard 150-foot reservoir buffer for new structures and 300-foot
setback for new nitrification fields.
Should a Variance be granted, all construction activity would be required to obtain proper
permitting through Orange County.
The Orange County UDO allows for “Existing Lots” to encroach upon established “stream
buffers” and “setbacks for septic systems”, but defines “existing lots” as those that were
“…created prior to January 1, 1994”. This lot was created through a recombination of two
adjacent lots on January 27, 2003, and is thereby ineligible for this administrative allowance by
staff. UDO 4.2.2(I).
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Per Section 6.13.4(c) Minimum Buffer Widths for Watershed Protection Overlay Districts
development project(s) within the Upper Eno Critical Area Overlay District are required to
adhere to the following buffer requirement(s):
a. 65-foot stream buffer, when slopes are less than 7.5%, applied to the outside of the
outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year FloodZone)
b. 65-foot water body buffer, when slopes are less than 7.5%, applied to the outside of the
outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year FloodZone)
c. 65-foot floodplain buffer, when slopes are less than 7.5%, applied to the outside of the
outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year FloodZone)
d. 150-foot reservoir buffer applied to the outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100
Year FloodZone)
17
STAFF COMMENT(S):
1. The application has been deemed complete.
2. As required under Section 2.12.6 of the UDO, staff notified all property owners within
1,000 feet of the subject property of the variance request. This notice also informed
parties of the date, time, and location of the public hearing where the request will be
reviewed. Copies of the letter, as well as our certification of mailing, are contained in
Attachment 3.
3. As of November 5, 2024, the writing of this abstract, staff has not received any
complaints/concerns resulting from property owners notified of the request. The
application was reviewed at the October 17, 2024, Development Advisory Committee
(DAC) meeting. Additionally, the Variance request was sent to the State Clearinghouse
for review on October 8, 2024. All DAC and State Clearinghouse comments are available
to the Board for review in Attachment 3 and compete State Clearinghouse materials are
available through the Permit Portal.
4. As detailed within Section 2.10 Variances of the UDO, the Board is authorized to modify
or vary regulations when strict compliance with the regulation or standard would result in
unnecessary hardships upon the subject property.
5. In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the Board may approve
a variance in cases where unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict
letter of the UDO, when substantial evidence in the official record of the application
supports all the following findings:
a. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the Ordinance. It
shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the property.
Staff Comment: Staff cannot attest that in the absence of a variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the property or that failure to grant the
variance would result in exceptional hardship.
b. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as
location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as
well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood
or general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance.
Staff Comment: The applicant notes that the lot was created in 1992 as part
of Deer Run Subdivision, which predated the 1994 zoning ordinance in which
the 150-foot reservoir buffer was first implemented. However, the parcel was
subject to a recombination on January 27, 2003. Due to this recombination,
unlike many existing properties at Lake Orange, the parcel does not quality
as an “existing lot” as defined in UDO Section 4.2.2(I) Existing Lots. Such lots
may receive stream buffer and septic setback reductions administratively,
provided they meet all of the review criteria. The two smaller, parent parcels
of the subject parcel likely would have been eligible for the buffer reduction
allowances.
c. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property
owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist
18
that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created
hardship.
Staff Comment: Hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant
or property owner.
d. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the
Ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.
Staff Comment: Staff has determined the granting of the variance will not
create issues for adjacent property owners with respect to the
development/re-development of their properties. Staff determined the
granting of the variance will not have a negative impact on existing traffic
service levels in the area or be consistent with applicable access
management standards. However, per Section 2.10.7 Procedure for Certain
Stream Buffer Variance Requests if other properties are equally subject to
the hardship created in the restriction, then granting a variance would be a
special privilege denied to others and would not promote equal justice. As
other parcels bordering Lake Orange share the same buffer requirements
with similar lot sizes, but also may be eligible for administrative reductions
in buffers as qualifying “existing lots,” staff cannot determine that the
circumstances on the subject property are unique only to the subject
property and not to properties in general.
6. Per Section 2.10.10 of the UDO, the Board is not empowered to grant a variance without
an affirmative finding of fact supported by substantial evidence in the record of the
proceedings before the Board.
Further, the Board may impose appropriate conditions provided same are reasonable
related to the variance request.
7. Per Section 2.12.4 of the UDO the affirmative vote of four of the members of the Board is
necessary to effect any variation of the Ordinance.
19
9/27/2024
GEIB RONALD L JR and GEIB KRISTEN B
1420 AINSWORTH BLVD, HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278
(919) 824-6163 rongeib1@yahoo.com
David Cates, PE
210 S. Wake St, Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 427-9370 davidecates@gmail.com
9857872089
4630 Old Lake Trl, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Streams/floodplain buffer areas, sec. 6.13.4 (c) - "New structures shall be located at least 150' from
the reservoir or outside of the stream buffer, whichever is greater."
And U-ENO-CA overlay district requirement of the UDO (pg. 4-3). Continuing to Table 2.4.9, for the
same district, the UDO requires the septic be 300 feet from a reservoir
Attachment 1 20
Ronald L. Geib Jr
9/27/24 9/27/24
21
That a variance to the stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area requirement be granted to allow for the
construction of a house, at approx. 75 ft from the water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft)
setback area.
Also, that a variance to the 300' septic setback be reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for a
septic field.
This property was created in 1992 as part of the Deer Run Subdivision, which was prior to the 1994
zoning ordinance requiring a 150 foot reservoir buffer and 300' septic setback. As such these lots
were not created with these buffers in mind.
22
Due to the lot being created prior to the 1994 150' reservoir buffer as well as the 300' septic setback
they render the lot practically unbuildable for the typical home. As compared to many other lots on
Lake Orange which have been allowed to build closer to the lake than the 150' reservoir buffer this
creates an undue hardship on this property owner in regards to use of their property for the siting of
their proposed house.
Due to this lot being created prior to the 1994 reservoir buffer and 300' septic setback it was not
created with sufficient depth to allow for the home construction.
The property owner did not take any actions to create this hardship. The septic field geometry and
requirements were not known at the time of purchase.
23
As it would seem that most all of the original structures around Lake Orange lie in a non-compliant
zone, consideration must be given to residents attempting to create dwellings in a safe, viable state.
Further, the spirit of the numerous other variances and waivers granted by the board of adjustment
and Orange County Planning Department over the years has created the expectation that adjacent
properties would be accorded a similar courtesy as the need arises. The variance we are requesting
will not, in our view, have any negative implications to public safety.
Exhibit showing setbacks, buffers, property lines, septic fields
6.13.4 (c)
it isn't feasible to construct the proposed home within these constraints.
24
25
OLD LAKE TRAILDEER RUN TRAILLAKEORANGELOT 31.63 Acres26
OLD LAKE TRAILDEER RUN TRAILLAKEORANGELOT 31.63 Acres27
Flood
Panel:
9857J
596.0
9'
596.13'
Upper Eno
Critical AreaSoil: W
Soil: TaD
Soil: Ch
Soil: GeB
Soil: GeC
Soil: GeC 640638636634632630628626624622620618628626624622620616616616AR
DEE R
R
U
N TRL
OLD LAKETRLParcel Data
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 9857872089
Size: 1.64 acres
Relevant Documents for Register of Deeds
Plat Book/Page: 17 REC ROY A SCHMIDT P91/172
Other Relevant Documents: N/A
Zoning Information
Base Zoning District: Agricultural Residential (AR)
Min Lot Size: 40,000 sq. ft.
Min Lot Width: 150 ft.
Max Density: 1 dwelling per 2 acres
Overlay Zoning District(s): Upper Eno Critical Watershed
Max Impervious Surface: 8,921 sq. ft. based on sliding scale
Max Building Height: 25'
Building Setbacks: Front 40', Side 20', Rear 20'
Streams, Water Body, Floodplain Buffers
Stream/Water Bodies: 65 ft. stream, floodplain, and water body buffers;
150 ft. reservoir buffer
Floodplain: Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year Flood Zone); 500 Year Floodplain
Base Flood Elevation (BFE): 596 ft.
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation (FFE): 598 ft.
Land Disturbance Thresholds
Erosion Control: 10,000 sq. ft. Waiver needed if otherwise.
Stormwater Management: 21,780 for residential use, 12,000 for nonresidential use
High Quality Water Zone (Y/N): Yes
Disclaimer
This report contains documents prepared for the inventory of real property within Orange
County, and is compiled from recorded deed, plats, and other public records and data.
Some of these documents are private agreements. Users of this report are hereby notified
that the aforementioned public primary information sources should be consulted for
verification of the information contained in this report. The county and its mapping
companies assume no legal responsibility for the information on this report.
Please contact staff at 919-245-2575 if you have floodplain, High Quality Water Zone, or
wetlands indicated on this report.
¯
Zoning
Parcels
Road Easement
Soils
Soils Survey Stream
Water Body
Watersheds
2' Contours (NCDOT)
1% Annual Chance of Flooding
Regulatory Floodway
0.2% Annual Chance of Flooding
Cross Section
FIRM
Floodplain Buffer 65ft
Reservoir Buffer 150ft
Stream Buffer 65ft
Water Body Buffer 65ft
0 150
Feet
1 in =80 feet
O R A N G E C O U N T Y , N C
Zoning Report
Data shown on this map is obtained from Orange County
GIS and is for reference only.
Exact locations and boundaries should be verified.
Wetland information represented (of any) does not
constitute a jurisdictional determination of exact location of
wetland features.
Map prepared by Orange County Planning & Inspections.
Attachment 2
28
L a ke Ora ngeAddressed Structures (2021) Within 300' of 615' Elevation Line
¯0 900
Feet
1 in =900 feet
Planning and Inspections Department (BC)
10/18/2024
300' Reservoir Septic
Setback
150' Reservoir Building
Setback
Structures Within 150'
Reservoir Building Setback
Structures Within 300'
Reservoir Septic Setback
O:\GIS Workspace\Projects\Lake Orange\Buffer 150ft and 300ft\Buffer 150ft and 300ft.aprx\Addressed Structures (2021) Within 300' of 615' Elevation Line
O R A N G E C O U N T Y , N C 15
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
Development Advisory Committee (DAC) Comments
DAC review comments and recommendations do not constitute plan or permit approval for this application
and/or replace any other plans and permits that may be required by other County departments and State
agencies.
Project: BA24-0005 (Geib)
Location/PIN: 9857872089
Applicant: David Cates, on behalf of Ron and Kristen Geib
Staff Planner: Lauren Honeycutt, Planner II
DAC Meeting Date: 10/17/2024
Addressing and
Land Records Date: 10/14/24 Staff:
Britney Pendleton
brpendleton@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2576
1.No comments from addressing team – BP
Attorney’s Office Date: Staff:
James Bryan
jbryan@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2319
1.No comments received.
Building
Inspections Date: 10/8/2024 Staff:
Michael Rettie
mrettie@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2604
1.Any proposed construction regulated by the NC state building codes will require
permits.
DEAPR Date: Staff:
Chris Hirni
chirni@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2514
1.No comments received.
Environmental
Health Date: 10/16/24 Staff:
Victoria Hudson
vhudson@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2365
1.The Department has records for this parcel. No public health concerns.
Erosion
Control Date: 10/8/24 Staff:
Tyler Sliger
Tsliger@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2582
1.If the variance is successful the applicant will need to apply for a Buffer Authorization
Certificate (BAC) through Erosion Control.
Fire and Life
Safety Date: Staff:
Chris Pendergrass
cpendergrass@orangecountync.gov
919-245-6125
Attachment 3 29
1. No comments received.
NCDOT Date: 10/15/24 Staff:
David Genwright
Digenwright@ncdot.gov
336-570-6833
1. With no proposed roads, no proposed utilities in the right of way, low expected
change in daily trips count, low expected traffic impacts, and this proposal not
being connected to a state-maintained road, no NCDOT action or approval is
required.
Planning Date: 10/14/24 Staff:
Lauren Honeycutt
lahoneycutt@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2598
1. Staff comments will be provided by Planning for the Board of Adjustment agenda packet.
During this review, staff will evaluate the Variance request based on the standards within
UDO Section 2.10 Variances.
2. Property is located within Upper Eno Critical Watershed and will be restricted to 8,921
sq. ft. of impervious surface based on the sliding scale found in UDO Tables 4.2.5.2 &
4.2.5.3.
3. Should a Variance be granted, any structures shall still adhere to the Agricultural
Residential Zoning District building setbacks of 40’ from the front property line and 20’
from the side and rear lines.
Solid Waste Date: Staff:
Matt Taylor
mtaylor@orangecountync.gov
919-918-4905
1. No Comment.
Stormwater
Management Date: Staff:
Christopher Sandt
csandt@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2583
1. The project is located in the Upper Eno Critical Watershed Overlay District. Stormwater
Management is required if the proposed Land -Disturbing Activity exceeds 21,780 square
feet. NOTE: Land disturbance thresholds are cumulative to parent tract and will
carry over to any/all subdivided lots.
Transportation
Services Date: 10/15/24 Staff:
Darlene Weaver
dweaver@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2002
1. No comment
30
To: Kadisha Molyneaux
State Clearinghouse
NC Department of Administration
From: Lyn Biles
Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Service
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Re: 25-0070
Scoping - Appeal of Interpretation and Variance Application
requesting a variance to the Stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer
area requirement be granted to allow for the construction of a
house, at approx. 75 ft from the water body within the
reservoir buffer (150 ft) setback area; that a variance to the
300' septic setback be reduced to 150' to provide sufficient
room for a septic field.
Orange County
Date: November 8, 2024
The Department of Environmental Quality has reviewed the proposal for the
referenced project. The NC Wildlife Resources Commission has concerns that the
likelihood of the property flooding is high, especially since flooding is more intense
and frequent, which will threaten mussel species, wildlife, and the quality of the
water supply downstream.
The Department of Environmental Quality encourages the County to re-evaluate if
the existing buffer will provide adequate protection to the residence, septic field,
and any natural resources downstream. I have attached the comments for the
applicant's consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Attachments
31
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Ingram Cameron, Executive Director
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: (919) 707-0220 • Fax: (919) 707-0028
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lyn Biles, Environmental Assistance and SEPA Coordinator
NCDENR Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Services
FROM: Olivia Munzer, Western Piedmont Coordinator
Habitat Conservation
DATE: 01 November 2024
SUBJECT: Appeal of Interpretation and Variance Application for the Geib Property on Lake Orange
in Hillsborough, Orange County, North Carolina. DEQ No. 25-0070.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject
document. Comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131
et seq.).
Ronald and Kristen Geib have applied for a Variance for their property on Lake Orange located at 4630
Old Lake Trail, Hillsborough, Orange County, North Carolina. The Variance is for the 150-foot reservoir
buffer and the stream buffer and the 300-foot septic setback. The applicant is requesting a 75-ft setback
for the house and a 150-ft setback for the septic from the reservoir.
The East Fork Eno River (Lake Orange) in the Neuse River Basin is classified as a Water Supply II, High
Quality Water, and Nutrient Sensitive Water by the Division of Water Resources. We have records of the
state threatened creeper (Strophitus undulatus) and notched rainbow (Villosa constricta) in the East Fork
Eno River. We also have records of the state endangered and proposed federal endangered tricolored bat
(Perimyotis subflavus) in Orange County.
The NCWRC has concerns with an approval of the Variance. Firstly, the East Fork Eno River is a High
Quality Water with threatened mussel species living downstream and the buffers protect not only the
water quality for the water supply but also for wildlife. With a stream and lake bordering the property, the
likelihood of the property flooding is high, especially since flooding is more intense and frequent due to
climate change. Therefore, the larger buffer would provide the residence and septic field more protection
from flooding. Lastly, the zoning ordinance was created over 30 years ago and it seems any variances
could have been requested at that time. Perhaps the house can be designed to be built on the property
while still abiding by the zoning ordinances.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this project. Please contact me at (336) 269-0074 or
olivia.munzer@ncwildlife.org if there are any questions about these comments.
32
Reviewing Regional Office: Raleigh
Project Number: 25-0070 Due Date: 11/1/2024
County: Orange
After review of this project, it has been determined that the DEQ permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained for this project to
comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the
form. All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are availab le from the same Regional Office.
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Normal Process
Time
(Statutory time
limit)
Permit to construct & operate wastewater
treatment facilities, non-standard sewer system
extensions & sewer systems that do not
discharge into state surface waters.
Application 90 days before begins construction or award of
construction contracts. On-site inspection may be required. Post-
application technical conference usual.
30 days
(90 days)
Permit to construct & operate, sewer
extensions involving gravity sewers, pump
stations and force mains discharging into a
sewer collection
system
Fast-Track Permitting program consists of the submittal of an
application and an engineer's certification that the project meets all
applicable State rules and Division Minimum Design Criteria.
30 days
(N/A)
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water
and/or permit to operate and construct
wastewater facilities discharging into state
surface waters.
Application 180 days before begins activity. On-site inspection. Pre-
application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct
wastewater treatment facility granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days
after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
90-120 days
(N/A)
Water Use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary. 30 days
(N/A)
Well Construction Permit
Complete application must be received, and permit issued prior to the
installation of a groundwater monitoring well located on property not
owned by the applicant, and for a large capacity (>100,000 gallons per
day) water supply well.
7 days
(15 days)
Dredge and Fill Permit
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property
owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling may
require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and
Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
55 days
(90 days)
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution
Abatement facilities and/or Emission Sources as
per 15 A NCAC (2Q.O100 thru 2Q.0300)
Application must be submitted, and permit received prior to
construction and operation of the source. If a permit is required
in an area without local zoning, then there are additional
requirements and timelines (2Q.0113).
90 days
Any open burning associated with subject
proposal must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC
2D.1900
N/A 60 days
(90 days)
Demolition or renovations of structures
containing asbestos material must be in
compliance with 15 A NCAC 20.1110 (a) (1)
which requires notification and removal prior to
demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
919-707-5950
Please Note - The Health Hazards Control Unit (HHCU) of the N.C.
Department of Health and Human Services, must be notified of plans to
demolish a building, including residences for commercial or industrial
expansion, even if no asbestos is present in the b uilding.
60 days
(90 days)
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion &
sedimentation control plan will be required if one or more acres are to be disturbed. Plan must be filed with and approved
by applicable Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 days before beginning activity. A NPDES Construction
Stormwater permit (NCG010000) is also usually issued should design features meet minimum requirements. A fee of
$100 for the first acre or any part of an acre. An express review option is available with additional fees.
20 days
(30 days)
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOT’s approved program. Particular
attention should be given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable
Stormwater conveyances and outlets.
(30 days)
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with Orange Co. Local Government’s approved
program. Particular attention should be given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping
devices as well as stable Stormwater conveyances and outlets.
Based on Local
Program
Compliance with 15A NCAC 04B .0125 – Buffers Zones for Trout Waters shall have an undisturbed buffer zone 25 feet wide or of sufficient width
to confine visible siltation within the twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer zone nearest the land-disturbing activity, whichever is greater.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H .0126 - NPDES Stormwater Program which regulates three types of activities: Industrial,
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System & Construction activities that disturb ≥1 acre.
30-60 days
(90 days)
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 -State Stormwater Permitting Programs regulate site development and post-
construction stormwater runoff control. Areas subject to these permit programs include all 20 coastal counties, and
various other counties and watersheds throughout the state.
45 days
(90 days)
33
Reviewing Regional Office: Raleigh
Project Number: 25-0070 Due Date: 11/1/2024
County: Orange
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Normal Process
Time
(Statutory time
limit)
Mining Permit
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DEQ Bond amount
varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Affected
area greater than one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond
must be received before the permit can be issued.
30 days
(60 days)
Dam Safety Permit
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to prepare plans, inspect
construction, and certify construction is according to DEQ approved
plans. May also require a permit under mosquito control program. And
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is necessary
to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must
accompany the application. An additional processing fee based on a
percentage, or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
30 days
(60 days)
Oil Refining Facilities N/A 90-120 days
(N/A)
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
File surety bond of $5,000 with DEQ running to State of NC conditional
that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be
plugged according to DEQ rules and regulations.
10 days
N/A
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with DEQ at least 10 days prior to issue of permit.
Application by letter. No standard application forms.
10 days
N/A
State Lakes Construction Permit
Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include
descriptions & drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian
property
15-20 days
N/A
401 Water Quality Certification
Compliance with the T15A 02H .0500 Certifications are required
whenever construction or operation of facilities will result in a
discharge into navigable water as described in 33 CFR part 323.
60 days
(130 days)
Compliance with Catawba, Goose Creek, Jordan Lake, Randleman, Tar Pamlico or Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules is required. Buffer requirements:
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-permits/wastewater-branch/401-wetlands-buffer-permits/401-riparian-
buffer-protection-program
Nutrient Offset: Loading requirements for nitrogen and phosphorus in the Neuse and Tar -Pamlico River basins, and in the Jordan and Falls Lake
watersheds, as part of the nutrient-management strategies in these areas. DWR nutrient offset information:
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/nonpoint-source-management/nutrient-offset-information
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development $250.00 - $475.00 fee must accompany application 75 days
(150 days)
CAMA Permit for MINOR development $100.00 fee must accompany application 22 days
(25 days)
Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A. Subchapter 2C.0100.
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during an y excavation
operation.
Plans and specifications for the construction, expansion, or alteration of a public water system must be approved by the
Division of Water Resources/Public Water Supply Section prior to the award of a contract or the initiation of construction
as per 15A NCAC 18C .0300 et. seq., Plans and specifications should be submitted to 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27699-1634. All public water supply systems must comply with state and federal drinking water monitoring
requirements. For more information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919) 707-9100.
30 days
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line relocation must be submitted to
the Division of Water Resources/Public Water Supply Section at 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -
1634. For more information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919) 707 -9100.
30 days
Plans and specifications for the construction, expansion, or alteration of the water system must be approved through the delegated
plan approval authority. Please contact them at for further information.
34
Reviewing Regional Office: Raleigh
Project Number: 25-0070 Due Date: 11/1/2024
County: Orange
Other Comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to comment authority)
Division Initials No
comment
Comments Date
Review
DAQ DLP See checked box. 10/29/2024
DWR-WQROS
(Aquifer & Surface)
JM
&
See checked boxes. Any impacts to the riparian buffer will need a buffer
determination/authorization from the local program. If any impacts to
surface water are anticipated , 401/404 approval may be required. &
10/21/2024
DWR-PWS TP See checked boxes. 10/14/2024
DEMLR (LQ & SW) WHD See checked boxes. 10/25/2024
DWM – UST MRP 10/28/2024
Other Comments / /
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. 70 Highway
Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211
Phone: 828-296-4500
Fax: 828-299-7043
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street, Suite 714,
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Phone: 910-433-3300
Fax: 910-486-0707
Mooresville Regional Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301,
Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: 704-663-1699
Fax: 704-663-6040
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive,
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: 919-791-4200
Fax: 919-571-4718
Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall,
Washington, NC 27889
Phone: 252-946-6481
Fax: 252-975-3716
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.,
Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: 910-796-7215
Fax: 910-350-2004
Winston-Salem Regional Office
450 Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300,
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone: 336-776-9800
Fax: 336-776-9797
35
DATE: October 25, 2024
TO: Michael Scott, Division Director through Sharon Brinkley
FROM: Charles Gerstell, Solid Waste Section Field Operations Branch
RE: SEPA Project 25-0070, Orange County, NC
Orange County Planning & Inspections– Appeal of Interpretation and Variance
Application requesting a variance to the Stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area
requirement be granted to allow for the construction of a house, at approx. 75 ft from
the water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft) setback area; variance to the 300'
septic setback is reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for a septic field.
The Solid Waste Section has reviewed the scoping request for Orange County Planning in reference
to an Appeal of Interpretation and Variance Application requesting a variance to the
stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area requirement be granted to allow for the construction of a
house, at approx. 75 ft from the water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft) setback area;
variance to the 300' septic setback is reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for a septic field in
Orange County, North Carolina. The review has been completed and has found no adverse impact
on the surrounding community and likewise knows of no situations in the community, which would
affect this project from a non-hazardous solid waste perspective.
During the project, every feasible effort should be made to minimize the generation of waste, to
recycle materials for which viable markets exist, and to use recycled products and materials in the
development of this project where suitable. Any waste generated by this project that cannot be
beneficially reused or recycled must be disposed of at a solid waste management facility approved to
manage the respective waste type. The Section strongly recommends that any contractors are
required to provide proof of proper disposal for all waste generated as part of the project. A list of
permitted solid waste management facilities is available on the Solid Waste Section portal site at:
Solid Waste Facility List.
Please contact Chuck Kirchner, Environmental Senior Specialist, for any questions regarding solid
waste management for this project. Mr. Kirchner can be reached at (336) 776-9633 or by email at
chuck.kirchner@deq.nc.gov.
Ec: Chuck Kirchner, Environmental Senior Specialist
36
Date: October 14, 2024
To: Michael Scott, Director
Division of Waste Management
Through: Janet Macdonald
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
From: Katie C Tatum
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
Subject: SEPA Project # 25-0070 Orange County Planning/Canine Adventure, LLC, Orange County, North
Carolina
The Superfund Section has reviewed the proximity of sites under its jurisdiction to the Orange County
Planning/Canine Adventure, LLC project. The proposed project is for an appeal of Interpretation and Variance
Application requesting a variance to the Stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area requirement be granted to
allow for the construction of a house, at approx. 75 ft from the water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft)
setback area; variance to the 300' septic setback is reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for a septic field.
No (0) Superfund Section sites and no (0) Brownfields Program Sites were identified within one mile of
the project as shown on the attached report.
Please contact Janet Macdonald at 919.707.8349 if you have any questions concerning the
Superfund Section review portion of this SEPA/NEPA inquiry.
37
10/14/24, 4:12 PM about:blank
about:blank 1/2
Superfund & Brownfield Sites SEPA/NEPA Review Report
Area of Interest (AOI) Information Orange County SEPA project 25-0070
Area : 2,150.86 acres
Oct 14 2024 16:11:43 Eastern Daylight Time
38
10/14/24, 4:12 PM about:blank
about:blank 2/2
Superfund and Brownfield Sites
Orange County SEPA project 25-0070
Summary
Name Count Area(acres)Length(mi)
Certified DSCA Sites 0 N/A N/A
Federal Remediation Branch Sites 0 N/A N/A
Inactive Hazardous Sites 0 N/A N/A
Pre-Regulatory Landfill Sites 0 N/A N/A
Brownfields Program Sites 0 N/A N/A
39
Project Number: 25-0070 Date Received: 10-8-2024
Department of Environmental Quality
Project Review
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed.
Insufficient information to complete review
No Comment
Other (specify or attach comments)
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Air Quality
Waste Mgmt
Water Resources Mgmt (Public
Water, Planning & Water
Quality Program)
DWR-Transportation Unit
Air
DWR
DWR - Public Water
DEMLR (LQ & SW)
DWM
Coastal Management
Marine Fisheries
CC & PS Div. of Emergency Mgmt
DMF-Shellfish Sanitation
Wildlife Olivia
Wildlife/DOT
County: Orange
Due Date: 11-1-2024
Project Description: Scoping - Appeal of Interpretation and Variance Application requesting a
variance to the Stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area requirement be
granted to allow for the construction of a house, at approx. 75 ft from the
water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft) setback area; that a variance
to the 300' septic setback be reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for
a septic field. Parcel PIN 9857872089. BA24-0005
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmington
Winston Salem
11-5-24 Melodi Deaver, DWM hazardous Waste
x
40
Project Number: 25-0070 Date Received: 10-8-2024
Department of Environmental Quality
Project Review
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed. No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review Other (specify or attach comments)
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Air Quality
Waste Mgmt
Water Resources Mgmt (Public
Water, Planning & Water
Quality Program)
DWR-Transportation Unit
Air
DWR
DWR - Public Water
DEMLR (LQ & SW)
DWM
Coastal Management
Marine Fisheries
CC & PS Div. of Emergency Mgmt
DMF-Shellfish Sanitation
Wildlife Olivia
Wildlife/DOT
County: Orange
Due Date: 11-1-2024
Project Description: Scoping - Appeal of Interpretation and Variance Application requesting a
variance to the Stream/floodplain/reservoir buffer area requirement be
granted to allow for the construction of a house, at approx. 75 ft from the
water body within the reservoir buffer (150 ft) setback area; that a variance
to the 300' septic setback be reduced to 150' to provide sufficient room for
a septic field. Parcel PIN 9857872089. BA24-0005
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmington
Winston Salem
10/17/2024 DWR/WRM David Wainwright
X
41
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
November 27, 2024
NOTICE OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT QUASI-JUDICIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING
TO REVIEW A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR
4630 OLD LAKE TRAIL (ORANGE COUNTY PIN 9857-87-2089)
Dear Property Owner:
This notice is to inform you of a December 11, 2024 Board of Adjustment meeting, at which a
request for a Variance for a parcel located at 4630 Old Lake Trail, Cedar Grove, NC (PIN: 9857-87-
2089) will be reviewed in a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing. The +/-1.64-acre parcel is located
within the Cedar Grove Township. This notification is occurring in accordance with the provisions
of Section 2.10 Variances of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
The Variance request will be reviewed by the Orange County Board of Adjustment at 7:00 p.m.,
December 11, 2024 at the Whitted Meeting Facility (300 West Tryon Street, Hillsborough, NC).
NO CHANGES ARE PROPOSED FOR YOUR PROPERTY. You are receiving this notice
because you own property located within 1,000-feet of parcel requested for a Variance.
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Parcel ID Number (PIN) 9857-87-2089
Owner Ronald L. Geib, Jr. and Kristen Geib
Applicant David Cates
Location 4630 Old Lake Trail, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Acreage +/-1.64 acres
Current Zoning Agricultural Residential
Watershed Designation Upper Eno Critical Watershed
Under the provisions of the UDO, residential development(s) within the Upper Eno Critical
Watershed are required to adhere to a 150-foot building setback and 300-foot septic setback applied
to the outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100-Year Flood Zone).
The applicant has applied for a VARIANCE from the 150-foot building setback and 300-foot septic
setback from the reservoir to construct a residential structure on a currently undeveloped parcel.
Sections 2.10 and 2.12 of the UDO requires that the Board of Adjustment (BOA) hold an Evidentiary
Hearing to consider variance requests and that notices be sent to property owners within 1,000 feet of
Attachment 4 42
43
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
VARIANCE REQUEST – BA24-0005 (PIN 9857-87-2089)
I, Lauren Honeycutt, with Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.12.6 of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), I have caused notice of a HEARING for the project
referenced herein.
1.MAILED NOTICES: Notices informing property owners within 1,000 of the subject
property were sent November 26, 2024. The owners were identified according to the
Orange County Tax Records and as required by the UDO.
2.SIGNS: Staff posted a sign on the subject parcel indicating the date/time of the
public hearing on November 26, 2024.
The notifications specified the date, time, place and subject of the Public Hearing and
provided contact information for additional project inquiries.
WITNESS my hand, this 26 day of November 2024.
Lauren Honeycutt
Planner II
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
44
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
November 27, 2024
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact
Geib Variance Application
BA24-0005
PIN: 9857-87-2089
The Variance Application from Ronald L. and Kristen Geib, for the property with PIN 9857-87-
2089 located at 4630 Old Lake Trail, Hillsborough, Cedar Grove Township (hereafter, the
'Project'), has been received and reviewed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections
Department. The variance application and accompanying site exhibit map were sent to local,
state, and federal agencies for review.
On November 8, 2024, the NC State Clearinghouse provided the Orange County Planning
Department with its findings on behalf of the State agencies. The NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC) provided a finding that identified two (2) primary concerns: 1)The potential of the buffer reduction to negatively impact habitat conditions downstream
on the East Fork of the Eno River, where WRC has records of the state-threatened
creeper (Strophitus undulatus) and notched rainbow (Villosa constricta), both freshwater
mussels; and 2)The potential for flooding of the residence and septic drain field.
Orange County does not contest that these are concerns but we believe that the concerns are
minimal due to the subject property being adjacent to Lake Orange. Lake Orange is owned by
Orange County and maintained for flood control, downstream public water supply, and
downstream ecosystem health management. Orange County has an agreement with the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources, the Town of Hillsborough, Orange-Alamance Water
System, Inc., and Piedmont Minerals requiring minimum releases from Lake Orange to provide
for average daily public water supply needs in addition to supporting wildlife habitat conditions
on the East Fork of the Eno River. Point source discharge from Lake Orange is managed
volumetrically via Orange County’s control of the weir and the primary intake tower at the dam.
Orange County maintains a normal pool elevation of 615 feet above mean sea level (MSL) for
Lake Orange, and holds a flood easement for all lands up to the 620’ MSL elevation contour.
The likelihood of Lake Orange rising beyond the 620’ MSL contour is very low. The delineated
500-year floodplain has a minimal encroachment on the property and is well within the 75-foot
reservoir buffer requested by the applicant. As presented, no structures or impervious surfaces
are proposed or would otherwise be permitted within this proposed 75-foot buffer.
Sincerely,
Cy Stober
Planning & Inspections Director
Attach ment 5 45
VARIANCE REQUEST
CASE BA24-0005
4630 Old Lake Trail
(PIN: 9857-87-2089)
APPLICANT PROPOSED FINDINGSORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
As permitted under Section 2.10 Variances of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO), the Board of Adjustment is authorized to modify or vary regulations of the
UDO when strict compliance with the regulation or standard would result in unnecessary
hardships upon the subject property.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the BOA may approve a
variance in cases where unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of
the UDO, when substantial evidence in the official record of the application supports all of the
following findings:
(A)Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the Ordinance. It
shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the property.
(B)The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as
location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as
well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood
or general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance.
(C)The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property
owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist
that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created
hardship.
(D)The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the
Ordinance, such that public safety is secured and substantial justice is achieved.
Per Section 2.12 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment shall review the evidence at a quasi-
judicial evidentiary hearing, allowing for the presentation of evidence and testimony by staff, the
applicant, and any parties who establish legal standing, and providing for questioning by the
Board members.
Per Section 2.10.9 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment is not empowered to grant a variance
without an affirmative finding of fact supported by substantial evidence in the record of the
proceedings before the Board. The Board may impose appropriate conditions provided same
are reasonable related to the variance request.
Per Section 2.12.4 of the UDO the affirmative vote of four of the members of the Board shall be
necessary to effect any variation of the Ordinance.
In accordance with Section 2.10.9 of the UDO what follows in the Planning Director’s
assessment of the application and recommended disposition of the request consistent with the
information contained therein.
46
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BOA
FINDINGS
In accordance with Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment shall also consider the following before
the application for a VARIANCE can be approved.
Unnecessary hardship would result
from the strict application of the
Ordinance. It shall not be
necessary to demonstrate that, in
the absence of the variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the
property.
Sec 2.10.4 (A) Application package
The hardship results from
conditions that are peculiar to the
property, such as location, size, or
topography. Hardships resulting
from personal circumstances, as
well as hardships resulting from
conditions that are common to the
neighborhood or general public,
may not be the basis for granting a
variance.
Sec 2.10.4 (B) Application package
The hardship did not result from
actions taken by the applicant or
the property owner. The act of
purchasing property with
knowledge that circumstances exist
that may justify the granting of a
variance shall not be regarded as a
self-created hardship.
Sec 2.10.4 (C) Application package
The requested variance is
consistent with the spirit, purpose,
and intent of the Ordinance, such
that public safety is secured and
substantial justice is achieved.
Sec 2.10.4 (D) Application package
After holding a duly advertised public hearing, the Board voted ____ to __________ the
variance request as submitted by the Applicant.
_______________________________________ __________________
Chair Orange County Board of Adjustment Date
47
VARIANCE REQUEST
CASE BA24-0005
4630 Old Lake Trail
(PIN: 9857-87-2089)
APPLICANT PROPOSED FINDINGS
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
As permitted under Section 2.10 Variances of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO), the Board of Adjustment is authorized to modify or vary regulations of the
UDO when strict compliance with the regulation or standard would result in unnecessary
hardships upon the subject property.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the BOA may approve a
variance in cases where unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of
the UDO, when substantial evidence in the official record of the application supports all of the
following findings:
(A) Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the Ordinance. It
shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the property.
(B) The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as
location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as
well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood
or general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance.
(C) The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property
owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist
that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created
hardship.
(D) The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the
Ordinance, such that public safety is secured and substantial justice is achieved.
Per Section 2.12 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment shall review the evidence at a quasi-
judicial evidentiary hearing, allowing for the presentation of evidence and testimony by staff, the
applicant, and any parties who establish legal standing, and providing for questioning by the
Board members.
Per Section 2.10.9 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment is not empowered to grant a variance
without an affirmative finding of fact supported by substantial evidence in the record of the
proceedings before the Board. The Board may impose appropriate conditions provided same
are reasonable related to the variance request.
Per Section 2.12.4 of the UDO the affirmative vote of four of the members of the Board shall be
necessary to effect any variation of the Ordinance.
In accordance with Section 2.10.9 of the UDO what follows in the Planning Director’s
assessment of the application and recommended disposition of the request consistent with the
information contained therein.
48
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BOA
FINDINGS
In accordance with Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment shall also consider the following before
the application for a VARIANCE can be approved.
Unnecessary hardship would result
from the strict application of the
Ordinance. It shall not be
necessary to demonstrate that, in
the absence of the variance, no
reasonable use can be made of the
property.
Sec 2.10.4 (A) Application package
The hardship results from
conditions that are peculiar to the
property, such as location, size, or
topography. Hardships resulting
from personal circumstances, as
well as hardships resulting from
conditions that are common to the
neighborhood or general public,
may not be the basis for granting a
variance.
Sec 2.10.4 (B) Application package
The hardship did not result from
actions taken by the applicant or
the property owner. The act of
purchasing property with
knowledge that circumstances exist
that may justify the granting of a
variance shall not be regarded as a
self-created hardship.
Sec 2.10.4 (C) Application package
The requested variance is
consistent with the spirit, purpose,
and intent of the Ordinance, such
that public safety is secured and
substantial justice is achieved.
Sec 2.10.4 (D) Application package
After holding a duly advertised public hearing, the Board voted ____ to __________ the
variance request as submitted by the Applicant.
_______________________________________ __________________
Chair Orange County Board of Adjustment Date
49
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
EVIDENTIARY HEARING
AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 11, 2024
Action Agenda
Item No. A-7-24
SUBJECT: Special Use Permit request (case number SUP24-0010) proposing “Camp” use
at parcel (PIN 9883-30-4125) located at 3223-UT New Hope Church Road, Chapel Hill, NC,
Eno Township
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Application Package, including Site Plan
and Supplemental Materials
2. Staff Report
3. Neighborhood Information Meeting
Materials
4. Notification Materials and Certification
5. Project Correspondence and
Development Advisory Committee
Comments
6. Findings of Fact
Taylor Perschau Current Planning and Zoning
Manager, 919-245-2597
Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director
919-245-2592
PURPOSE: To hold a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing, receive sworn testimony and evidence,
and take action on a Special Use Permit (hereafter “SUP”) application proposing a “Camp” use
on a +/- 95-acre parcel (PIN 9883-30-4125) located at 3223-UT New Hope Church Road, Chapel
Hill, NC, within Eno Township, in accordance with the following Unified Development Ordinance
provisions:
• Section 2.7: Special Use Permits;
• Section 5.2: Table of Permitted Uses;
• Section 5.3.2: Application of Use Standards – Special Uses; and
• Section 5.7.5: Camp
BACKGROUND: On April 12, 2024, a SUP application (Attachment 1) was received to utilize the
property to operate a “Camp” use located on a +/-95-acre parcel at 3223-UT New Hope Church
Road, Chapel Hill, NC. “Camp” is identified as Land Use #32 in UDO Section 5.2 Table of
Permitted Uses and is permitted in the Rural Residential (R1) zoning district as a special use,
subject to approval by the Board of Adjustment. As detailed within the application, the proposed
operations would include nature-based day camps for children. The Staff Report in (Attachment
2) contains additional information, maps, and staff analysis.
Basic Review Process: A SUP application requires submission of a site plan and other
documents, in accordance with Section 2.7.3 of the UDO:
• FIRST ACTION – Staff Review/Analysis Begins.
50
STAFF COMMENT: An analysis of the application was made by qualified
representatives of the County and other agencies or officials. The application was
deemed complete.
• SECOND ACTION – Applicant holds a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM).
STAFF COMMENT: The NIM was held on May, 23, 2024, at 6:00 p.m., at 3223-
UT New Hope Church Road, Brumley Forest Nature Preserve. Summary meeting
materials are contained in Attachment 3.
• THIRD ACTION – Development Advisory Committee Review/Analysis Begins
STAFF COMMENT: The Orange County Development Advisory Committee
(DAC) met on May 2, 2024, to review this application. The DAC has no objections
to the approval of the Special Use Permit so long as the items in the attached
departmental memos (Attachment 5) are addressed.
• FOURTH ACTION – The Board of Adjustment holds a quasi-judicial hearing, hears
factual evidence and sworn testimony presented at an evidentiary hearing, and then
makes a determination with findings of fact supported by competent, substantial, and
material evidence.
STAFF COMMENT: The evidentiary hearing is scheduled to be held on December
11, 2024.
A formal application is required as part of a SUP request and has been submitted (Attachment
1). Approval of the application is part of the SUP process and shall include making appropriate
findings of fact stating that the Board concludes all applicable standards have been met.
Public Notification(s): In accordance with UDO Section 2.7.6 , notices of the Evidentiary Hearing
were mailed via first class mail to all adjacent property owners of the subject parcel. These notices
were mailed on November 26, 2024, 15 days before the meeting. Staff also posted the property
with signs on November 26, 2024, 15 days before the meeting. See Attachment 4 for the
notification materials details.
Planning Director’s Comments: The Planning Director has determined the application satisfies
established submittal requirements, and there is sufficient documentation demonstrating general
compliance with established development standards as detailed in Section 5.7.5 of the UDO.
Staff does not make a formal recommendation on the approval of the application or on the
compliance of the project with the general standards in Section 5.3.2(A)(2). The Board of
Adjustment must determine if:
(a) 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;
(b) 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); and
(c) The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will
be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance
with the plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in these
51
regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners.
In addition, the Board shall make findings certifying that the application is compliant with the
following specific standards:
(1) Specific standards for the submission of SUP applications as outlined within
Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7 of the UDO.
(2) UDO Section 5.3.2(B) relating to the method and adequacy of the provision of:
a. Sewage disposal facilities, solid waste, and water;
b. Police, fire, and rescue squad protection;
c. Vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site; and
d. Other use specific standards as set forth.
(3) Specific regulations governing the development of the “Camp” use, as set forth in
Section 5.7.5 of the UDO.
Per Section 2.7.11(A) of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment may impose reasonable conditions
upon approval of a Special Use as will afford protection of the public health, safety, and general
welfare, ensure that substantial justice is done, and equitable treatment provided.
52
53
Exhibit A – Statement of Standing*
I am the sole owner of the property subject to this application.
I have attached notarized letters authorizing this submittal from all entities or individuals with
ownership rights to the property.
Property Owner Information
Name:
Address:
Home Phone:
Cell Phone:
Email:
Applicant Information Same as owner
Name:
Address:
Home Phone:
Cell Phone:
Email:
Agent Information
Name:
Address:
Home Phone:
Cell Phone:
Email:
Law Firm Name: Bar Number:
Note: Only attorneys may serve as agents during quasi-judicial hearings. Realtors, surveyors and other professionals may
not apply or make arguments on behalf of owners.
Exhibit B – Narrative of Proposed Land Use*
Insert and label as “Exhibit B” a narrative description of the proposed land use. Includ e a detailed
description of the proposed use of property, including an outline of the proposed operational
characteristics of the proposed development. Also, include descriptions of structural components such
as the basic size, form, and character of the buildings shown on the site plan.
54
Exhibit C – Intended Evidence*
I intend to introduce the following document and have attached it follows:
Exhibit #1 entitled:
This is relevant to standards from Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Sections:
It demonstrates that:
Intend to call the following as a lay witness:
Lay Witness #1:
Their intended testimony has been included in an affidavit attached as Exhibit:
This witness has personal knowledge of and will testify about:
This testimony is relevant to standards from UDO Sections:
The testimony will demonstrate that:
Intend to call the following as an expert witness:
Expert Witness #1:
Is being offered as an expert in:
They possess specialized knowledge in this field through the follow ing training and/or experience:
They reviewed or examined the following data:
55
They used the following method of analysis when reviewing that data:
This expert opinion is relevant the standard at UDO Section:
It demonstrates that:
Their intended testimony has been included in an affidavit attached as Exhibit:
(attach additional sheets as necessary)
56
Exhibit D – Proposed Findings of Fact*
The Applicant shall be required to provide the proposed findings of fact for the project based on the
specific development standards for a proposed land use as detailed in Article 5 of the UDO as well as
the general findings as contained in Section 5.3.2 of the UDO:
# REQUIREMENT UDO
Section
SUPPORTING
EVIDENCE
(Finding of Fact)
Condition #
Application Components and Required Submittal Information:
1. Proper forms 2.2
2. Fees paid 2.2.4(D)
3.
Full description of use
▪Location
▪Appearance
▪Operational characteristics
2.7.3(B)(1)
4. Owner Information 2.7.3(B)(2)
5. Information needed for Use
Standards 2.7.3(B)(3)
6. Site Plans 2.7.3(B)(4)
7. List of parcels within 1,000 feet 2.7.3(B)(5)
8. Elevations of all structures 2.7.3(B)(6)
9. Environmental Assessment (or
EIS) 2.7.3(B)(7)
10. Method of Debris Disposal 2.7.3(B)(8)
11. Development Schedule 2.7.3(B)(9)
12. Extended Vesting Request 2.7.3(B)(10)
Notification Requirements:
13.
Public Notice
▪Date
▪Time
▪Place
2.7.6(A)
14. Sign Posting on Property (at least
10 days prior)
2.7.6(A)(2)
15.
Mailed Notice
▪Certified mail
▪All adjacent property owners
(within 1,000 feet)
▪Not less than fifteen days prior
2.7.6(A)(1)
Specific Standards:
16.
Waste Disposal
Method and adequacy of provision
for sewage disposal facilities, solid
waste and water service.
5.3.2(B)(1)
17.
Safety
Method and adequacy of police, fire
and rescue squad protection.
5.3.2(B)(2)
57
18.
Vehicle Access
Method and adequacy of vehicle
access to the site and traffic
conditions around the site.
5.3.2(B)(3)
Specific Development Standards for Proposed Land Use (Article 5)*:
*The applicant is responsible for completing this section, identifying all development
requirements/standards a proposed land use is required to abide by , and provide sufficient detail
documenting what evidence has been submitted documenting compliance. An application shal l be
considered incomplete without the proposed Findings of Fact completed by the applicant
General Standards UDO Section
SUPPORTING
EVIDENCE
(Finding of Fact)
Condition #
The use will maintain or
promote the public
health, safety and
general welfare
5.3.2(A)(2)(a)
The use will maintain or
enhance the value of
contiguous property
(unless the use is a
public necessity)
5.3.2(A)(2)(b)
The use will be in
harmony with the area
and is in compliance with
the Comprehensive Plan.
5.3.2(A)(2)(c)
58
Exhibit E – Proposed Conditions*
The Board of Adjustment must deny the permit if any standard cannot be met either by a
showing of evidence or by a condition placed upon the permit. Staff has included the general
conditions required for all Special Use Permits, as detailed within the UDO.
Please list any proposed conditions which may be necessary for the Board of Adjustment to find
that all standards will be met.
1.For public safety as required in 5.3.2(B)(2) of the UDO, final assignment of a street address shall be
completed by Orange County Land Records prior to the issuance of any permit authorizing land
disturbing activity on the property in accordance with the Orange County Addressing Ordinance.
2.Per Section 2.5 of the UDO, the applicant shall obtain all necessary development permits from the
County prior to the initiation of any land disturbing activity associated with the construction of the
proposed use including, but not limited to: Building Permit, Land Disturbance Permit (LDP), Solid
Waste Management Permit, and Zoning Compliance Permit.
3.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.11 (C) of the UDO, if any condition of this Special
Use Permit shall be held invalid or void, then this Special Use Permit shall be void in its entirety and
of no effect.
4.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.1 1 (D) of the UDO, the Special Use Permit will
automatically expire within 12 months from the date of approval if the use has not commenced or
construction has not commenced or proceeded unless a timely application for extension of this time
limit is approved by the Board of Adjustment.
59
Exhibit F – Proposed Order:
FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
______________________________________________ (APPLICANT)
PROPOSING ______________________________ (PROPOSED LAND USE)
ON ________________________________________________ (ROAD NAME AND PINS OF
PROPERTY INVOLVED WITH APPLICATION)
As required under Section 5.2 Table of Permitted Uses of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO), a Special Use Permit is required for the development/operation of a ______________
(Proposed Land Use), in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the UDO.
Such permits shall comply with general and specific standards as set forth in Section(s) 5.3.2 and
__________ (Section of Article 5 establishing development standards for proposed land use) of the
UDO.
Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) of the UDO requires written findings certifying compliance with the following:
(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;
(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 val ue of
contiguous property); and
(3) The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will be
in harmony with the area in which it is to be locat ed and the use is in compliance with the
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;
In addition, the Board of Adjustment shall make findings certifying that the application is complaint with
the following specific standards:
(1) Specific standards for the submission of Special Use Permit applications as outlined
within Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7 of the UDO.
(2) Specific regulations governing the development of a _______________ (Proposed land
use) as set forth in Section ____________ (Section of Article 5 establishing development
standards for proposed land use) of the UDO.
(3) Section 5.3.2 (B) relating to the method and adequacy of the provision of:
a.Sewage disposal facilities,
b.The adequacy of police, fire, and rescue squad protection, and
c.The adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site.
(4) The general findings outlined within Section 5.3.2 (A) (2).
60
Upon holding of an evidentiary hearing, and accepting into the record of competent, material evidence
and sworn testimony concerning the application, the Orange County Board Adjustment (BOA) hereby
makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of l aw:
# REQUIREMENT UDO
Section
SUPPORTING
EVIDENCE
(Finding of Fact)
Condition #
Application Components and Required Submittal Information:
Notification Requirements:
Specific Standards:
Specific Development Standards for Proposed Land Use (Article 5)*
Based on the competent material evidence and sworn testimony in the record the BOA hereby make(s)
an affirmative finding on the specific standards of evaluation and general standards as detailed herein,
further finding no evidence has been entered into the record demonstrating the applicant has:
a.Failed to meet their burden of proof that the project complies with the specific development
standards for a telecommunication facility, or
b.Failed to comply with the general standards detailed within Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) of the UDO.
The BOA hereby approves the Special Use Permit subject to compliance with the following conditions:
(CONDITIONS HERE)
61
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
Special Use Permit Application
Applicant: Triangle Land Conservancy (“TLC”)
Property: Brumley Forest Nature Preserve; PIN 9883304125
Exhibit B
Narrative of Proposed Use
Background
TLC is a non-profit land trust that has conserved over 25,000 acres in the Triangle region
and operates 7 nature preserves that are free and open to the public. TLC owns the
Brumley Forest Nature Preserve (“Brumley”), which has 17 miles of trails for hikers and
bikers. Since 2018, Schoolhouse of Wonder, a non-profit camp for kids (“Schoolhouse”),
has operated camps at the Brumley property. Schoolhouse of Wonder creates kind,
curious, and confident kids through nature-based outdoor adventures and embraces the
motto that kids will go home “dirty, tired, and happy.” Currently they offer summer camps,
as well as fall and spring track-out camps, and several weekend day camps. TLC sees
Schoolhouse as an ideal partner who introduces young people to the outdoors , increasing
TLC’s reach and helping us fulfill a core part of our mission: connecting people with
nature.
Prior to opening Brumley to the public in 2017, TLC consulted with the Orange County
Planning staff, who determined that Brumley was permitted of right as a park. At that time,
TCL provided the Planning staff a copy of TLC’s Comprehensive Management Plan for
Brumley Forest Nature Preserve, which specifically made reference to Schoolhouse of
Wonder. For this reason and upon advice of their attorney, TLC believed that it could
allow Schoolhouse to lawfully operate without any further zoning approvals. In early 2024,
however, the County Planning staff informed TLC that Schoolhouse of Wonder and any
similar camp program would require a special use permit to operate as a “Camp,” which
is regulated by Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (“UDO”) Sec. 5.7.5. For
this reason and to provide certainty for future programming at Brumley, TLC respectfully
submits this special use permit application. Although the application is being submitted to
address Schoolhouse in particular, TLC is seeking general authorizatio n to operate (or to
allow others to operate) day camps like those provided by Schoolhouse.
Operations
Schoolhouse of Wonder operates day camps, with pick up and drop off windows in the
morning and evening, respectively. Schoolhouse uses an old cul-de-sac on the Brumley
property (at PIN 9983304125; 3223 New Hope Church Road) for pick-up and drop off.
Currently, this is their only exclusive use of the property. This arrangement allows parents
to drop off and pick up kids off of New Hope Church Road using existing paved access.
A portable toilet is provided for campers, and water is brought in from off site.
During camp, Schoolhouse programs are allowed full use of the entire Brumley property
for camp programming. However, all camp-related equipment and infrastructure is
located at the cul-de-sac at 3223 New Hope Church Rd.
62
Structures and Other Infrastructure; compliance with UDO Sec. 5.7.5
Currently, Schoolhouse operates with only a small portable shed where equipment is
stored. The shed is located at the end of the cul-de-sac that serves as the entrance and
exit for Schoolhouse.
Schoolhouse would like to construct a small pavilion type structure near the cul-de-sac to
serve as a shelter during inclement weather. The structure would be erected in early 2025
to be prepared for campers during the summer of 2025. The structure is detailed on the
attached site plan. Future plans envision a potential pavilion or more permanent structure
in that location, along with reactivation of an existing well near the current entrance off
New Hope Church Road for improved water access. A larger more permanent pavilion
will depend on funding and may never occur if the smaller shelter fulfills the purpose
adequately. The attached site plan also shows compliance with the other requirements of
UDO Sec. 5.7.5(A)(1)(a).
To address the other requirements of UDO Sec. 5.7.5, TLC states the following (the UDO
requirement is reprinted in bold):
Sec. 5.7.5(A)(1)(b). A description of the type of facility planned, the size, capacity,
and use of proposed buildings; a signed statement from the owners or operators
that there shall be no activity allowed that will have adverse effects on adjacent
property. The statement shall also include a complete list of all recreational
activities that will take place on the site.
By submitting this application and project narrative, Triangle Land Conservancy hereby
states and affirms that no camp operations at the Brumley Forest Nature Preserve will
have adverse effects on adjacent property.
Schoolhouse (and any other camp that might operate at Brumley in the future)
emphasizes interactions with the natural world. As such, there are no additional
recreational facilities planned for Schoolhouse or future camps. Instead, campers engage
activities that utilize the forests and fields at Brumley such as, but not limited to, nature
hikes, plant and animal identification, age-appropriate conservation projects, and games
and activities that do not require additional permanent structures or fixtures.
Sec. 5.7.5(A)(1)(c). A phasing plan, when necessary, indicating the area to be
developed in each phase with time periods for construction of each phase. This
may be indicated on the site plan.
None.
63
Sec. 5.7.5(A)(2)(a). Unless public sewer is proposed to be extended, the adequacy
for the method of sewage disposal will be determined by the lot size and soil
suitability. Appropriate letters from the Orange County Environmental Health
Department, local jurisdictions and/or the State Division of Environmental
Management shall be submitted to indicate preliminary approval.
Schoolhouse uses portable toilets for the campers, which are rentals and serviced by
the rental company. See site plan for location.
Sec. 5.7.5(A)(2)(b). The landscape plan shall show how the facilities will be
screened from the adjacent properties. A minimum 30-foot Type B buffer, as
indicated in Section 6.8 shall be observed around the perimeter of the property.
See site plan. As TLC operates Brumley as a nature preserve, we request that the
Board of Adjustment find and determine that the spirit, intent, and requirements of the
buffer standard have been met.
Sec. 5.7.5. (A)(2)(c). If private recreational facilities are proposed, the
improvements must meet the site improvement requirements in Section 7.11 of
this Ordinance. The site plan for recreational facilities shall be reviewed by the
Orange County Recreation and Parks Director.
No new recreational facilities are being proposed.
Sec. 5.7.5.(A)(2)(d). Off street parking requirements shall be provided in
accordance with Section 6.9 of this Ordinance.
See site plan.
64
New Hope Church Rd540530520510500490480470RCPCREEK
U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.WELLHOUSESHEDEXISTINGBUILDINGGRAVELDRIVEO.H. UTILITYGRAVELDRIVEO.H.U.P.U.P.U.P.PAVED ROADOLDROADSTONY CREEKU.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.510530520500490500540550550540530520510510 500554552552480470 New Hope Church Rd540530520510500490480470RCPCREEKU.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.WELLHOUSESHEDEXISTINGBUILDINGGRAVELDRIVEO.H. UTILITY GRAVELDRIVEO.H.U.P.U.P.U.P.PAVED ROADOLDROADSTONY CREEKU.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.510530520500490500540550550540530520510510 500
554552552480470NorthScale : 1" = 600'-0"TopographyLIDAR Topo - 2 FT IntervalsScale: 1"=600'SURVEY2021 AERIALZONING MAP (from GIS data)SCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERSITETLC Property3223New Hope Church RdI-85I-40NC-10New HopeChurch RdNC - 86DURHAMScale : 1" = 600'-0"PIN: 9883-30-4125S.R. 1723SCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERSITETLC PropertyPIN: 9883-30-4125S.R. 1723SCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERSITETLC PropertyS.R. 1723Existing Conditions Plan(Overall property)Notes:1. Base Map information from boundary survey byFreehold Land Surveys, rev. May 17, 2010.Refer to surveyors plat for final information.Topography and other adjoining site informationfrom LIDAR and Orange County GIS and thisinformation is not survey quality.2. Property address is3223 New Hope Church Rd.,Hillsborough NCPIN: 9883-30-41253. Zoning: R-1 / Rural ResidentialSetbacks - street/front setback is 40 ft, interior/sideis 20 ft.4. Property area of plat - 4,156,364.5 s.f.(95.417 acres from GIS)3223New Hope Church Rd3223New Hope Church RdResidentialResidentialTriangle Land Conservancy TRAILS MAPSwanson + Associates, PAlandscape architectureChapel Hill, NC919.929.9000Revised:Issued:L-3.0.1. .for ReviewExisting ConditionsSite PlanSchoolhouse ofWonder SiteApril 11, 2024 Site Improvements PlanSCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERTriangle LandConservancy3223 New Hope Church Rd.Orange County, NCPIN: 9883-30-412509/26/242.10/25/2465
SURVEYRevised:Issued:L-1.011. .for ReviewPIN: 9883-30-4125SCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERSITETLC Property3223New Hope Church RdPIN: 9883-30-4125S.R. 1723Existing ConditionsSite PlanSchoolhouse ofWonder SiteApril 11, 2024 09/26/24Site Improvements PlanSCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERTriangle LandConservancy3223 New Hope Church Rd.Orange County, NC66
New Hope Church Rd540530520510500490480470RCPCREEK
U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.WELLHOUSESHEDEXISTINGBUILDINGGRAVELDRIVEO.H. UTILITYGRAVELDRIVEO.H.U.P.U.P.U.P.PAVED ROADOLDROADSTONY CREEKU.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.U.P.510530520500490500540550550540530520510510500554552552480470TopographyLIDAR Topo - 2 FT IntervalsScale: 1"=600'Swanson + Associates, PAlandscape architectureChapel Hill, NC919.929.9000Revised:Issued:L-1.11. .for ReviewExisting Conditions Plan(Overall property)Notes:1. Base Map information from boundary survey byFreehold Land Surveys, rev. May 17, 2010.Refer to surveyors plat for final information.Topography and other adjoining site informationfrom LIDAR and Orange County GIS and thisinformation is not survey quality.2. Property address is3223 New Hope Church Rd.,Hillsborough NCPIN: 9883-30-41253. Zoning: R-1 / Rural ResidentialSetbacks - street/front setback is 40 ft, interior/sideis 20 ft.4. Property area of plat - 4,156,364.5 s.f.(95.417 acres from GIS)PIN: 9883-30-4125NorthScale : 1" = 300'-0"Existing ConditionsSite PlanSchoolhouse ofWonder SiteApril 11, 2024 09/26/24Site Improvements PlanSCHOOLHOUSEOF WONDERTriangle LandConservancy3223 New Hope Church Rd.Orange County, NC67
1HZ+RSH&KXUFK5G83838383838383*5$9(/'5,9(2+87,/,7<*5$9(/'5,9(8383$9('52$'2/'52$'6721<&5((.83838383838383838383
6FDOH
1RUWK/([LVWLQJ&RQGLWLRQV3ODQ2YHUDOOSURSHUW\1RWHV%DVH0DSLQIRUPDWLRQIURPERXQGDU\VXUYH\E\)UHHKROG/DQG6XUYH\VUHY0D\5HIHUWRVXUYH\RUVSODWIRUILQDOLQIRUPDWLRQ7RSRJUDSK\DQGRWKHUDGMRLQLQJVLWHLQIRUPDWLRQIURP/,'$5DQG2UDQJH&RXQW\*,6DQGWKLVLQIRUPDWLRQLVQRWVXUYH\TXDOLW\3URSHUW\DGGUHVVLV1HZ+RSH&KXUFK5G+LOOVERURXJK1&3,1=RQLQJ55XUDO5HVLGHQWLDO6HWEDFNVVWUHHWIURQWVHWEDFNLVIWLQWHULRUVLGHLVIW3URSHUW\DUHDRISODWVIDFUHVIURP*,62OG1&1HZ+RSH&KXUFK5G65*UDYHO3DUNLQJIRU7/&%UXPOH\3URSHUW\6FKRROKRXVHRI:RQGHU8VH$UHDa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
3$9('52$'2/'52$'838383838383
'ULYH$LVOH
PLQZLGWK
'ULYH$LVOH
PLQZLGWK6FDOH
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aDF3DUNLQJDORQJH[LVWLQJ5RDG6LWH3ODQ6FDOH
$'$3DUNLQJUHJXODUSDUNLQJVSDFHVSDUDOOHODORQJH[LVWLQJDVSKDOWURDG([LVWLQJ6KHGSURJUDPPLQJ([LVWLQJ3RUWDEOH7RLOHW3URSRVHG6KHOWHU6WUXFWXUHVVIVIVI1DUUDWLYH1RWHV7KH3URSHUW\LVXVHGDVD1DWXUH3UHVHUYHDQGWKHFXUUHQWZRRGHGEXIIHULVVXIILFLHQWWRPHHWWKHLQWHQWRI8'26HFWLRQ$EIWPLQ7\SH%%XIIHU7KHH[LVWLQJWUHHVSURYLGHVXIILFLHQWVFUHHQLQJDQGEXIIHUWRPHHWWKLVFRQGLWLRQIW7\SH%%XIIHU7RWDO3DUNLQJIRUWKH6FKRROKRXVHRI:RQGHUVLWHLVSURYLGHGZLWKSDUNLQJVSDFHVUHJXODUVSDFHVDQG$'$VSDFH3DUNLQJUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUWKHDFUHDUHPHWIRUWKH´6FKRROV3HUIRUPLQJ$UWV6SRUWVDQG5HFUHDWLRQµFDWHJRU\ZLWKWKHSURYLVLRQRIRQHVSDFHSHUIRXUVWXGHQWV,QDGGLWLRQWKH´&DPS5HWUHDW&HQWHUµFDWHJRU\ZLOODOVREHPHWZLWKDPLQRIILYHVSDFHVIRUILUVWWZRDFUHVRIUHFUHDWLRQVSDFHDQGRQHVSDFHIRUHDFKDGGLWLRQDODFUHWKHUHDIWHU¬69
70
6FDOH
1RUWK6ZDQVRQ$VVRFLDWHV3$ODQGVFDSHDUFKLWHFWXUH&KDSHO+LOO1&5HYLVHG,VVXHG/-XO\IRU5HYLHZ6LWH,PSURYHPHQWV3ODQ6&+22/+286(2):21'(57ULDQJOH/DQG&RQVHUYDQF\871HZ+RSH&KXUFK5G2UDQJH&RXQW\1&3,13DUNLQJ3ODQ6FKRROKRXVHRI:RQGHU6LWH$SULO7HPSRUDU\3RUWDEOH7RLOHW6WRUDJH6KHG
[
6WUXFWXUH
[
6WUXFWXUH
[
6WUXFWXUH([LVWLQJ*UDYHO3DGaIW;IW+&3DUNLQJ6LJQDJH+&3DUNLQJ9DQ$FFHVVLEOH$'$VSDFH6FDOH
6FDOH
6WDII3DUNLQJVSDFHV2YHUIORZ3LFNXS3DUNLQJVSDFHV3DUHQW*XHVW3DUNLQJVSDFHV$'$9DQDFFHVVLEOHVSDFH3LFNXS3DUNLQJSDUDOOHOVSDFHV6WDII3DUNLQJVSDFH6LWH3KRWRVVKRZLQJH[LVWLQJ3DUNLQJDQGGURSRIISLFNXS7RWDO$FUHDJHRI3DUFHO3,1 VIDFUHVIURP*,6$SSUR[$FUHDJHRI7/&6FKRRO+RXVHRI:RQGHU8VHU$UHDVIDF6FKRROV3HUIRUPLQJ$UWV6SRUWVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ2QHVSDFHSHUIRXUVWXGHQWV7KLVZRXOGUHVXOWLQDWRWDORIUHTXLUHGSDUNLQJVSDFHV9DQ$FFHVVLEOH$'$VSDFHIRUVSDFHVWRWDOXVLQJDPD[LPXPFDSDFLW\RIFDPSHUV3DUNLQJ3LFNXS3URYLGHG 3DUHQW3DUNLQJVSDFHV3DUHQW3LFNXS3DUNLQJVSDFHV6WDII3DUNLQJVSDFHV$'$9DQ$FFHVVLEOH+&3DUNLQJ VSDFH7RWDO6SDFHV3URYLGHGVSDFHV3DUNLQJ&DOFXODWLRQV71
APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
3055 New Hope Church Rd
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
S/E INT OLD N C 10 & SR 1723
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
P.O. BOX 1848
DURHAM, NC 27702
03/29/2024
Samuel L Myers Jr.
Myers Real Estate Services
40 Cedar St
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-2712
SAM@MYERSREALESTATESERVICES.COM
Form GA6NV LT - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
LOCATED AT
FOR
AS OF
BY
72
Form SUP - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
24030022
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
3055 New Hope Church Rd
Chapel Hill ORANGE NC 27514
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
PLEASE NOTE: THE PROPERTY ADDRESS INDICATED IS FOR LOCATION PURPOSES ONLY. THE SUBJECT OF THIS ANALYSIS IS THE
MARKET AREA SURROUNDING BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE LOCATED AT 3055 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL, NC 27514.
THE BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE AND SURROUNDING MARKET AREA WERE OBSERVED 03/29/2024. THIS ANALYSIS IS BEING
PREFORMED FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES OF THE
PROPOSED USE, "SCHOOL HOUSE OF WONDER" CAMP, ACTIVITIES ON BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE. DATA SOURCES UTILIZED IN
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS ANALYSIS INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO; TMLS, PUBLIC RECORDS AND OFFICE FILES. THE
PROPERTIES USED IN THE MARKET ANALYSIS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE THE BEST AVAILABLE AS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE NOTED
ABOVE. THE FOLLOWING DETERMINATIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED UTILIZING AVAILABLE ON LINE DATA, TMLS AND COUNTY
PUBLIC RECORDS.
PER CONTACT, THE PROPOSED USE, "SCHOOL HOUSE OF WONDER" CAMP, HAS ACTUALLY BEEN UTILIZING THE PROPERTY SINCE
2018. PER CONTACT, THE USE BY THE CAMP WILL CONTINUE AS IT HAS HISTORICALLY WITH THE ADDITION OF THE SPECIAL USE
PERMIT. THE FOLLOWING DATA INDICATES THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES, LOW - HIGH - AVERAGE, FOR THE YEARS
INDICATED WITHIN THE 2 MILE RADIUS SURROUNDING 3055 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL, NC 27514.
LOW HIGH AVERAGE
2016-2017 - $30,000 $811,000 $287,075
2017-2018 - $44,000 $795,000 $311,872
2018-2019 - $35,000 $692,500 $297,314
2019-2020 - $157,500 $810,000 $280,752
2020-2021 - $100,000 $835,000 $283,808
2021-2022 - $134,000 $2,500,000 $464,837
2022-2023 - $140,000 $2,150,000 $515,708
2023-2024 - $195,000 $1,300,000 $473,111
2024-03/29/2024 - $482,000 $977,000 $719,666
IT IS THE OPINION OF THE APPRAISER THAT THE AVAILABLE HISTORICAL AND CURRENT MARKET DATA DOES NOT INDICATE AN
ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES DUE TO THE SPECIAL USE INDICATED ABOVE. THERE ARE SEVERAL
TMLS LISTINGS THAT INCLUDE BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE IN THE AGENT COMMENTS AS ONE OF THE LOCAL PUBLIC
AMENITIES.
SEE THE INCLUDED PHOTOGRAPHS, PLAT MAP, AERIAL MAP.
INTENDED USERS:
THIS MARKET ANALYSIS HAS BEEN DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO THE REQUEST OF TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY. TRIANGLE LAND
CONSERVANCY IS IDENTIFIED AS THE CLIENT AND THE INTENDED USER OF THIS ANALYSIS. NO ADDITIONAL INTENDED USERS ARE
KNOWN OR IDENTIFIED.
Market Analysis
Owner
Client
File No.
Property Address
City County State Zip Code
73
Form GPICPIX - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
Photograph Addendum
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
3055 New Hope Church Rd
Chapel Hill ORANGE NC 27514
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE
BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE
BRUMLEY NATURE PRESERVE
Owner
Client
Property Address
City County State Zip Code
74
Plat Map
Form SCNLGL - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
75
Aerial Map
Form SCNLGL - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
76
Form MAP.PLAT - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE
License
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
3055 New Hope Church Rd
Chapel Hill ORANGE NC 27514
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
Owner
Client
Property Address
City County State Zip Code
77
PIN OWNER1_LAST OWNER1_FIRST OWNER2_LAST OWNER2_FIRST ADDRESS1 ADDRESS2 CITY STATE ZIPCODE
9882099559 PACCHIANA CYNTHIA M TRUSTEE PACCHIANA GREGG J TRUSTEE 2812 NEW HOPE CH RD Chapel Hill NC 27514
9882178821 WC FIDDLE LLC 4112 POWDER MILL RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9882183228 PERREAULT WILLIAM D III PERREAULT EMILY H 2620 NEW HOPE CH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9882184872 HUDSON EDWARD V 2714 NEW HOPE CH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9882185170 GREENAWALT JUDITH ET AL INKENBERRY DAVID LYNN 2534 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD Chapel Hill NC 27514
9882197794 LOVO LUIS ANTONIO VENTURA NORMA ALICIA 2906 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 275149577
9882270974 WARNER D MICHAEL 4112 POWDER MILL RD CHAPEL HILL NC 275149658
9882273321 WARNER DAVID MICHAEL CRAVEN ELIZABETH BIBLE 4112 POWDER MILL RD CHAPEL HILL NC 275149658
9882282545 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 1101 HAYNES ST #205 RALEIGH NC 27604
9882284096 WARNER DAVID MICHAEL CRAVEN ELIZABETH B 4112 POWDER MILL RD CHAPEL HILL NC 275149658
9882291055 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 1101 HAYNES ST #205 RALEIGH NC 27604
9882387512 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 1101 HAYNES ST #205 RALEIGH NC 27604
9883018938 DUKE UNIVERSITY 324 BLACKWELL ST STE 850 DUKE UNIV CORP TAX DURHAM NC 27701
9883135990 NORTH CAROLINA RAILROAD C 2809 HIGHWOODS BLVD RALEIGH NC 27604
9883203740 JOHNSON GEORGE ALLAN JOHNSON JEAN 3008 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 275148221
9883205919 VASLEF STEVEN N VASLEF MARIA E 3102 NEW HOPE CH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883215472 LAMB JOHN T JR TRUSTEE 3118 NEW HOPE CHURCH RD CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883228080 MARQUINE MARIA AGUIRRE ANDRES 2723 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883304125 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 1101 HAYNES ST #205 RALEIGH NC 27604
9883310963 TERRELL ERNEST 2807 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883311780 TERRELL ERNEST 2807 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883312736 ROSEMOND CHERYL 2823 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883314282 STORY CRANDALL ONEAL TRIPP CONNOR COPELAN 5440 JESSICA BLVD UNIT 210 RALEIGH NC 27607
9883315582 CHRISTO GREGORY R 2909 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883318388 CAMPBELL CRAIG C HRS PO BOX 46 C/O TOM CAMPBELL MAPLE NC 27956
9883321264 CHANDLER HELEN E 2818 OLD NC 10 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
9883323682 PAULSON SARAH A 2709 BUCKBOARD DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
9883326294 THOMPSON EUGENE W JR TRUSTEE 3600 SURRY TRL HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
9883326436 FITZPATRICK MARTIN R FITZPATRICK KARIN D 3606 SURRY TRL HILLSBOROUGH NC 272789426
9883420350 TICE RAYMOND R 3601 SURRY TR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278
9883505374 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 514 SOUTH DUKE ST DURHAM NC 27701
9883525556 NORTH CAROLINA RAILROAD C 2809 HIGHWOODS BLVD RALEIGH NC 27604
9883644133 NC 10 PROPERTIES LLC 4514 S HOLDEN RD GREENSBORO NC 27406
9883722214 TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY 514 SOUTH DUKE ST DURHAM NC 27701
78
79
80
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
131 W. Margaret Lane, Suite 200, Hillsborough, NC 27278
919-245-2575 or planningapps@orangecountync.gov
Environmental Assessment
Please check all applicable boxes and complete the required documentation.
Additional information is contained in Section 2.25 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
If completing by hand, please use black or blue ink.
* Please fill out all required fields
An Environmental Assessment (EA) shall be required for each individual parcel proposed for development consistent with applic able criterial as detailed
within the UDO.
Date: ____________________
Contact Information*
Property Owner(s):
Mailing Address:
Phone: Email:
Applicant (if different than property owner):
Mailing Address:
Email: Phone:
I. Property Information*
Parcel ID Number (PIN):
Address:
Acreage: Township:
Zoning District:
Watershed Overlay:
Other Overlay:
II.General Site Information*
A. Adjacent Property
Zoning North: South:
East: West:
Land Use North: South:
East: West:
B. Topography
Highest Elevation:
Lowest Elevation:
General direction of slope:
81
Estimated % of property with:
0 – 5% slope:
5 – 15% slope:
15 – 25% slope:
More than 25% slope:
C. Water Features and Drainage
The following water features are located on the property:
Streams Wetlands Ponds Drainage Easements Special Flood Hazard Area
Describe
(attach additional sheets if needed)
D. Does the property contain any of the following Inventory of Natural or Cultural Resources?
As identified in the “Inventory of Sites of Cultural, Historical, Recreational, Biological, and Geological
Significance in the Unincorporated Portions of Orange County” or the “Inventory of Natural Areas and
Wildlife Habitats of Orange County, North Carolina”.
1.Cemeteries Yes No
2.Archaeological sites Yes No
3.Historic sites Yes No
4.Areas of geological significance Yes No
5.Designated natural areas Yes No
6.Designated habitat Yes No
For each yes answer above, please indicate the location on the site plan and complete Attachment A.
III.Project Description*
A. Describe proposed use of property:
B. Number of lots:
C. Number of structures:
82
D. Estimated square footage of area to be graded for development of attached residential units
(excluding roads, but including parking areas)
E. Estimated square footage of area to be graded for non-residential use (excluding roads)
F. Estimated area to be graded for roads
Road type: Public Private
Class A
Class B
Total road length:
IIII.State Permits Required*
A. Does the project involve the mining of earth products? Yes No
If yes, how many cubic feet of material are expected to be excavated?
Has an application for a Mining Permit been submitted to NCDRCD? Yes No
Please attach map indicating expected extent of proposed activity.
B. Does the project involve generation or storage of hazardous or toxic wastes, as identified by
the Environmental Protection Agency?
Yes No
Describe the wastes to be generated:
How much material is expected to be generated per month?
Will any material be treated onsite? Yes No If yes, indicate volume:
Will any material be stored onsite? Yes No If yes, indicate volume:
Where will disposal of the material take place?
How will materials be transported to the disposal site?
What measures are proposed to protect water quality and air quality in case of
spills?
83
C. Will the project involve a land application system for treatment of wastewater?
Yes No - If yes, describe
Has an application for a non-discharge permit been submitted to the NC
Department of Environmental Management or Orange County Department of
Environmental Health? Yes No
D. Is a septic tank system proposed which has a design capacity of more than
3,000 gallons per day?
Yes No - If yes, describe
E. Does the activity involve sludge disposal? Yes No
If yes, where is the source of the sludge?
Describe where and how the sludge is being disposed
Has a NPDES permit from the NC Division of Environmental Quality been issued?
Yes No
F. Water Usage
Estimated number of employees: x 25 gallons per day (gpd) = ______ gpd
Estimated water use for climate control = gpd
Process Water
% Consumed
% Discharged to septic system
% Discharged to surface (including storm sewers) - Describe:
% Evaporated
% Reclaimed/reused
% Other
= 100%
Water used for cooling, heating, etc., in association with production or manufacturing
% Reused
% Consumed
% Discharged - Describe:
= 100%
gpd Total Water Usage
Describe source of water:
84
Attachment A*
To be completed only if inventory sites are identified in I.D.
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
1.a. Impact on Resource from Proposed Development
1.b. Proposed Mitigation
2.a. Impact on Resource from Proposed Development
2.b. Proposed Mitigation
Certification and Signatures*
Statement by Applicant - I certify that the information presented by me in this application is accurate to
the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________
Applicant Date
85
Staff Report
Special Use Permit SUP24-0010
Basic Information
Parcel Address 3223-UT New Hope
Church Road
Parcel Identification
Number (PIN) 9883-30-4125
Applicant Name
and Address
Triangle Land
Conservancy, 520 South
Duke Street, Durham, NC
27701
Property Owner
Name and Address Same as applicant
Agent(s), if
applicable
Lydia Lavelle, TC Morphis
The Brough Law Firm,
1526 E. Franklin St.
Ste. 200
Chapel Hill NC 27514
Parcel Size +/-95 acres
Future Land Use
Map (FLUM)
Designation
Rural Residential
FLUM Overlay(s) Resource Protection Area
Growth Management
System Designation Rural
FLUM Category
Description
Land in the rural areas of the
County which is appropriate for
low intensity and low-density
residential development and which
would not be dependent on urban
services during the plan period.
Attachment 2
86
Current Zoning
District(s)
R1 (Rural Residential)
Stoney Creek Basin Overlay
Current Use Brumley Forest Nature
Preserve – “Park” use, by right
Township Eno
Requested Special
Use(s)
Camp (Use #32, Table of
Permitted Uses)
Watershed District Lower Eno Protected and
Unprotected Watershed
87
Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
North Rural Residential (R1), park use (Brumley
Forest North)
South R1, park use (Brumley Forest Nature Preserve)
East R1, park use (Brumley Forest Nature Preserve)
West R1, undeveloped land, residential uses,
research lands use (Duke Forest)
Existing Roads
North Old NC 10
South None
East None
West New Hope Church Road
Existing Conditions/Physical Features
The site is primarily forested, in keeping with its status as Brumley Forest Nature Preserve. The site
contains floodplain along its southern and eastern property lines. The property is located within Stoney
Creek Basin Zoning Overlay District and is traversed by Stony Creek. A portion of the property is held in
conservation easement held by the State of North Carolina, North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust
Fund.
Public Water and Sewer
Private well and septic systems are used in this area. The Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and
Boundary Agreement (“WASMPBA”) does not designate this area as a Primary Service Area for water and
sewer services.
Proposed Project
Project Narrative
Per the applicant’s description: Schoolhouse of Wonder has been operating on Triangle Land Conservancy
property since 2018 under a previous interpretation from Orange County Planning and Inspections that the
nature preserve was a park use permitted by right and the day camp was an accessory to that use. In early
2024, Schoolhouse of Wonder representatives reached out to Planning and Inspections staff regarding
installing permanent structures on-site related to the Camp use. The staff interpretation is that this permanent
Camp use of the property requires a Special Use Permit for the use and associated structures to be permitted
on-site.
For additional project information, including a narrative of the proposed use, see Application (Attachment 1)
Exhibit B.
88
Site Plan
89
Proposed Access and Transportation Network Improvements
The Project proposes access from New Hope Church Road with use of an existing paved road. A Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) was not required for this application, per the standards of UDO Section 6.17.
NCDOT reviewed the project and noted that no action is required.
Proposed Utilities
The property is not in an area served by public water/sewer. The application details that operators of the
Camp use currently bring in water from off-site and provide a portable toilet for campers. Environmental
Health staff will ensure that the use meets relevant State Health codes.
Erosion Control/Stormwater Regulations
Erosion Control staff indicated a Land Disturbance Permit (LDP) will be required if any proposed disturbance
associated with the use is cumulative greater than 20,000 sq. ft. Additionally, erosion control review indicated
the if the proposed scope of work exceeds 1 acre (43,560 sq. ft.), completion of “Notice of Intent” with the
state and compliance with NCG01 permitting will be necessary.
Land Use Buffers/Setbacks
North 30’ Type B Buffer along Old NC 10 and 40’ Setback
South 30’ Type B Buffer along perimeter of property, 20’ Setback
East 30’ Type B Buffer along perimeter of property, 20’ Setback
West 30’ Type B Buffer along New Hope Church Road and 40’ Setback
Environmental Assessment (EA)
The applicant provided an Environmental Assessment (EA) application and supporting materials as
required in Section 6.16 of the UDO with their submittal. These materials were shared with various State
agencies via the NC Department of Administration’s State Clearinghouse. Planning and Department of
Environment Agriculture Park and Recreation (DEAPR) staff have jointly reviewed the materials and
agree with a determination of “Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)” as required in Section
2.25.1(B)(5) of the UDO.
Solid Waste
The applicant has indicated development within the project will conform to the Orange County Solid
Waste Management Ordinance.
90
Ordinance Requirements
“Camp” is defined within Article 10 Definitions of the UDO as: “A recreation use which may include locations
for tents, cabins, or other recreational sleeping structures, but would not include mobile homes. A camp may
be owned by a profit or not-for profit corporation.”
Section 5.2.1: Table of Permitted Uses of the UDO lists Camp as Use #32, a permitted use of property within
the R1 general use zoning district subject to the issuance of a SUP.
Standards governing the development of a “Camp,” as detailed in Section 5.7.5 of the UDO, are as follows:
(1)Submittal Requirements. In addition to the information required by Section 2.7, the following
shall be submitted as part of the application:
(a)A site plan prepared in accordance with Section 2.5, also showing the following
(existing or proposed):
(i)Buildings;
(ii)Campsites;
(iii)Storage areas;
(iv)Fencing and gates;
(iv)Outdoor recreation areas; and
(v) Access road(s) to the site, as well as on site roads, with an indication of type of
proposed surface.
STAFF COMMENT: A Site Plan has been submitted with this request providing required
details.
Please note, this is the required site plan denoting compliance with the UDO as it relates to
the issuance of the SUP. A final site plan and Zoning Compliance Permit shall be required for
review and approval by the County prior to the commencement of earth disturbing activities as
required in Section 2.5: Site Plan Review of the UDO. Should the SUP be approved, the
Planning Director may only approve minor modifications from the site plan provided with this
application, as specified by Orange County UDO Section 2.7.14.
The applicant has also included a detailed narrative providing additional information on the
nature of the operations and activities conducted as part of the Camp use on the property.
(b)A description of the type of facility planned, the size, capacity, and use of proposed
buildings; a signed statement from the owners or operators that there shall be no activity allowed
that will have adverse effects on adjacent property. The statement shall also include a complete
list of all recreational activities that will take place on the site.
STAFF COMMENT: Provided within the Application Package (Attachment 2) as well as on
the submitted site plan.
(c)A P hasing Plan, when necessary, indicating the area to be developed in each phase with
time periods for construction of each phase. This may be indicated on the site plan.
STAFF COMMENT: The applicant is not proposing a phasing plan. The use currently
operates on-site and this application is being submitted in order to bring the use into
compliance with the Orange County UDO.
(d) The site plan shall show the distances to the nearest residential structure.
91
STAFF COMMENT: Provided on Sheet L-2.0 of the site plan submitted as part of the
Application Package (Attachment 2).
(2)Standards of Evaluation
(a)Unless public sewer is proposed to be extended, the adequacy for the method of sewage
disposal will be determined by the lot size and soil suitability. Appropriate letters from the
Orange County Environmental Health Department, local jurisdictions and/or the State Division of
Environmental Management s hall be submitted to indicate preliminary approval.
STAFF COMMENT: The application details that the Camp use utilizes a portable toilet and
brings in water for campers and staff. The applicant does not intend to modify, expand or
install new private systems to support the Camp use. Environmental Health review
comments provided as part of Development Advisory Committee Review do not indicate
any objections.
(b) The landscape plan shall show how the facilities will be screened from the adjacent properties.
A minimum 30-foot-wide Type B buffer, as indicated in Section 6.8 shall be observed around the
perimeter of the property.
STAFF COMMENT: The property exists today as Brumley Forest Nature Preserve,
managed by Triangle Land Conservancy. The subject site is mostly wooded throughout, and
a considerable portion of the acreage is subject to a conservation easement. The existing
vegetation is to be preserved and is considered sufficient for the purpose of meeting this
ordinance standard. See site plan and narrative notes in the Application Package
(Attachment 2).
(c)If private recreational facilities are proposed, the improvements must meet the site improvement
requirements in Section 7.11 of this Ordinance. The site plan for recreational facilities shall be
reviewed by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Director.
STAFF COMMENT: No recreational facilities are proposed as part of the Camp use, as
shown on the site plan.
(d) Off street parking requirements shall be provided in accordance with Section 6.9 of this
Ordinance.
STAFF COMMENT: As currently presented, the site plan does not meet the off-street parking
requirements detailed in UDO Section 6.9. Specifically, the drive aisle detailed on sheet L-3.0
of the site plan (Attachment 1, Exhibit C) provides for a one-way traffic moving towards the
cul-de-sac and does not provide for adequate egress from that cul-de-sac given the one-way
nature of the drive aisle. The site plan does contain required parking information in
accordance with Section 2.7.3(B). It is important to note that the existing paved road which
the Camp use currently uses for vehicular access and parking purposes is not platted as a
private right-of-way. As proposed, it is presented as off-street parking with the street being
New Hope Church Road.
92
Proposed Conditions
General Conditions
1.For public safety as required in Section 5.3.2(B)(2) of the UDO, final assignment of a street address
shall be completed by Orange County Land Records prior to the issuance of any permit authorizing
land disturbing activity on the property in accordance with the Orange County Addressing
Ordinance.
2.Per Section 2.5 of the UDO, the applicant shall obtain all necessary development permits from the
County prior to the initiation of any land disturbing activity associated with the construction of the
proposed use including, but not limited to: Building Permit, Land Disturbance Permit (LDP), Solid
Waste Management Permit, and Zoning Compliance Permit.
3.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.11(C) of the UDO, if any condition of this Special
Use Permit shall be held invalid or void, then this Special Use Permit shall be void in its entirety
and of no effect.
4.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.11(D) of the UDO, the Special Use Permit will
automatically expire within 12 months from the date of approval if the use has not commenced or
construction has not commenced or proceeded unless a timely application for extension of this time
limit is approved by the Board of Adjustment.
Review Milestones
Review provided by the State Clearinghouse (available here:
https://centralpermits.orangecountync.gov/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService#/plan/4a1a7afb-31a4-
4a0d-9c7a-ee84060e6e56?tab=attachments ) indicated no comments for concern.
Application Submittal Date April 12, 2024
Development Advisory Committee
(DAC) Review
May 2, 2024
Neighborhood Information Meeting
(NIM)
May 23, 2024
Note: the DAC is a staff/agency committee, established in Section 1.9 of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
Courtesy Review
Jurisdiction Date Sent Comments Received
State Clearinghouse September 27, 2024 October 29, 2024
93
Analysis
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 2 – Planning Principles
In October 2004, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted guiding
principles to guide and direct development of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. There are several
Comprehensive Plan Planning Principles of relevance to Camp (Use # 32) including:
2.Sustainable Growth and Development: Growth and development within the county should occur in a
pattern, location, and density that is sustainable over the long-term.
Staff Comment: The proposed project is a special use permitted within the R1 zoning
district, should it comply with the UDO standards and meet the standards of evaluation
reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Should it do so, the growth and development
realized by the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Rural Residential
Future Land Use (Comprehensive Plan Appendix F).
4.Natural Area Resource Preservation: Protection of the County’s natural areas, including forests,
wildlife habitat, and other important open spaces should be a priority. The County should work with
regional and local organizations, the towns, and private landowners to promote and achieve
preservation of the County’s important natural resources.
Staff Comment: This project proposes no new land disturbance and tree removal to allow
for continued use of the site for the Camp use operated by Schoolhouse of Wonder. This
principle is consistent with the property’s existence as Brumley Forest Nature Preserve,
which is ultimately the draw to the site for this specific Camp use. The conservation
easement already in place on the property exceeds Orange County’s standards, additional
details are included the site plan and narrative (Attachment 2 – Application Package –
Exhibits B and C).
5.Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern: The County’s rural areas are a cherished component of the
County’s character. Future development should preserve and enhance the county’s rural landscape.
Staff Comment: The proposed Camp is consistent with the County’s rural landscape, as
presented in the site plan. Minimal land disturbance, no lighting, and minimal noise are
associated with the Camp use. The landscaping buffer standards will be met and exceeded
in all parts of the property. (Attachment 2 – Application Package – Exhibits B and C)
7.Promotion of Economic Prosperity and Diversity: Development of a diversity of new businesses and
expansion of existing businesses should occur in Orange County.
Staff Comment: Schoolhouse of Wonder currently offers day camp programming and
activities to Orange County residents through its use of the property. The approval of a
Special Use Permit to bring this use into compliance with ordinance standards would
support the continued growth of those services at this site. (Attachment 2 – Application
Package – Exhibit B)
8.Preservation of Community Character: Future growth and development should occur in a manner
that preserves and enhances the existing character of the County, its townships, and rural crossroads
communities.
94
Staff Comment: This project proposes a use and development pattern that is consistent
with the surrounding areas rural landscape. (Attachment 2 – Application Package – Exhibit
B)
Chapter 5 – Land Use Element, Section 5.6 Goals
There are several land use goals in the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan of relevance to Camps
(Use # 32) including:
Land Use Goal 1: Fiscally and environmentally responsible, sustainable growth, consistent with the
provision of adequate services and facilities and a high quality of life.
Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and
that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character.
Land Use Goal 3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits
sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an
efficient and balanced transportation system.
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive.
Staff Comment: The location and character of the uses, developed according to the plan
submitted, will be consistent with the rural land uses of the area in which it is to be located,
and are a permanent realization of what has been, to date, a temporary, seasonal use that
has been in harmony with the surrounding area. By its character, the use supports access
to a natural asset and the greater natural environment and offers an educational
opportunity to the area youth without disrupting or requiring the development of
undeveloped property. The special use is consistent with the historic use and character of
the property, as well as the larger local land use patterns and character. The use is
anticipated to continue to create seasonal jobs, but the construction of permanent
structures may allow for the camp use and educational opportunities year-round. The
uses, as proposed and limited by the application and site plan, are consistent with the
2030 Comprehensive Plan’s stated goals for the physical development of the County, as
embodied in, or portion thereof, Land Use Goals 1, 2, 3, and 6.
95
Neighborhood Information Meeting Report Form
REPORT OF INFORMATION MEETING REQUIRED BY
THE ORANGE COUNTY UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
To: Taylor Perschau, Orange County Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Project Name: SUP0024-010 (TLC Brumley)
Approximate Location (or Address):3223 New Hope Church Road, Chapel Hill NC 27514
Proposed Number Lots: 0 Residential (Y/N):N
The undersigned hereby certifies that the required sign(s) was posted on the property proposed
for project, on each road frontage of said project on_5/10/24 (sign was posted by the county and
pictures were taken by the county at that time). A photo of the sign posted is recommended
to be attached to this form.
The meeting was held at the following time and place: 5/23/24 at 6:00 pm at 3223 New Hope
Church Road, Chapel Hill NC 27514, Brumley Forest Nature Preserve
The persons in attendance at the meeting:See attached Attendance sheet
The following issues were discussed at the meeting (Attach additional sheet(s) if needed):
TLC provided an overview of the SUP process, TLC’s relationship with Schoolhouse of
Wonder, their operations, and the impact of their plans. This included Schoolhouse’s plan to
build a shelter on site. TLC talked about the appraisal report we commissioned that showed no
negative impact on surrounding property values and had full-size and 11”x14” printouts of the
site plan that was submitted to the county. One question was asked about how this affected
zoning for our parcel and the neighboring parcels. TLC’s attorney who is advising explained that
this is an allowance for a specific use that lies outside the current zoning. It does not actually
affect the zoning of the parcel or surrounding parcels.
As a result of the meeting, the following changes were made to the project proposal (Attach
additional sheet(s) if needed): None. None of the neighbors opposed the project or
suggested large scale changes.
Date:5/24/24
Applicant:Triangle Land Conservancy
By:Matt Rutledge
Please submit this Report to the Orange County Planning Department located at 131 W.
Margaret Ln or mail it to Taylor Perschau, at 131 W. Margaret Ln. Hillsborough NC, 27278. If
you have any questions, please contact the assigned staff planner.
96
97
98
99
Attachment 4
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EVIDENTIARY HEARING
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I, Taylor Perschau, with Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) I have mailed, or caused to be mailed, a Board of Adjustment Evidentiary
Hearing Notice regarding a Special Use Permit application proposing a Camp use on
Orange County PIN 9883304125.
This notice informed those property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property of the
proposed Special Use Permit. The owners were identified according to the Tax Records
and as required by the UDO.
The mailed notice specified the date, time, place and subject of the Evidentiary Hearing
meeting and provided information on the Special Use Permit review process.
WITNESS my hand, this 26th day of November 2024.
____________________________________________
Taylor Perschau
Current Planning and Zoning Manager
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
100
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
November 26, 2024
NOTICE OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EVIDENTIARY HEARING
TO REVIEW A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION PROPOSING
A CAMP USE
Dear Property Owner:
This notice is to inform you of a December 11, 2024 Board of Adjustment meeting, at which an
application for a Special Use Permit for a parcel located at 3055-UT New Hope Church Road,
Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (PIN: 9883-30-4125) will be reviewed in an evidentiary hearing. The
+/-95-acre parcel is located within Eno Township. This notification is occurring in accordance
with the provisions of Section 2.7 Special Use Permits of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO).
The Special Use Permit request will be reviewed by the Orange County Board of Adjustment at
7:00 p.m., December 11, 2024 at the Whitted Meeting Facility (300 West Tryon Street,
Hillsborough, NC).
NO CHANGES ARE PROPOSED FOR YOUR PROPERTY. You are receiving this notice
because you own property located within 1,000-feet of parcel requested for a Special Use
Permit.
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Parcel ID Number (PIN) 9883304125
Owner Triangle Land Conservancy
Applicant Triangle Land Conservancy
Location 3055-UT New Hope Church Road, Chapel
Hill, NC 27514
Acreage +/- 95 acres, all of which would be subject to
the Special Use Permit request
Current Zoning R1
Proposed Special Use(s) Camp
Watershed Designation Lower Eno Protected and Unprotected
101
The Special Use Permit application proposes to utilize the property to operate a Camp. As
required by the Orange County UDO, should the application be approved, conditions will be
binding for the property, with any significant change requiring subsequent Special Use Permit
request and a new hearing before the Board of Adjustment.
The review of all SUP applications is carried out in a quasi-judicial format, meaning that
decisions relating to the approval or denial of an application are based solely on the sworn
testimony of all parties involved with the case, both those for and against an application. The
applicant has the burden of establishing, by the submission of competent, material, and
substantial evidence, the existence of facts and conditions that demonstrate the project’s
compliance with the various requirements and standards for the proposed uses detailed within the
UDO. Those opposing approval of the application shall have the burden of establishing, also
through the submission of competent, material, and substantial evidence, the specific manner in
which the proposal does not satisfy the requirements for approval of the application.
Public comments in the form of sworn testimony meeting evidentiary standards can be accepted.
Quasi-judicial hearings and decisions require a ‘fair trial standard’ including accepting only
competent, material, and substantial evidence. Personal, anecdotal, or hearsay comments,
however, shall not be accepted as they do not represent ‘competent, material, and substantial
evidence.’ Additional information related to Special Use Permits can be found at the following
link: https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/21348/Special-Use-Permit-Fact-
Sheet?bidId=
If you cannot attend the Board of Adjustment meeting and the website does not answer your
questions about the requested Special Use Permit, you may call 919-245-2575 during regular
business hours and you will be directed to a staff person who can assist you.
Sincerely,
Cy Stober
Planning & Inspections Director
Additional information is available on the Orange County Planning Department’s website:
https://www.orangecountync.gov/3038/Active-Development-Projects or scan below:
102
Board of Adjustment
Statutory Requirement of Standing for Parties
Case:
Only Parties may call witnesses, introduce documents, make legal arguments and objections. North
Carolina law requires that Parties have Standing which is defined in North Carolina General Statute
(NCGS) 160D-1402(c). Individuals seeking to be recognized as Parties are highly encouraged to
seek independent legal counsel. Note, North Carolina General Statute 84-2.1 and 84-4 prohibit the
unauthorized practice of law, including representing others in these matters.
North Carolina General Statute § 160D-1402(c)
The following persons have standing to file a petition under this section:
1) Any person possessing any of the following criteria:
a. An ownership interest in the property that is the subject of the decision being appealed, a
leasehold interest in the property that is the subject of the decision being appealed, or an
interest created by easement, restriction, or covenant in the property that is the subject of
the decision being appealed.
b. An option or contract to purchase the property that is the subject of the decision being
appealed.
c. An applicant before the decision-making board whose decision is being appealed.
2) Any other person who will suffer special damages as the result of the decision being appealed.
3) An incorporated or unincorporated association to which owners or lessees of property in a
designated area belong by virtue of their owning or leasing property in that area, or an association
otherwise organized to protect and foster the interest of the particular neighborhood or local area,
so long as at least one of the members of the association would have standing as an individual to
challenge the decision being appealed, and the association was not created in response to the
particular development or issue that is the subject of the appeal.
4) A local government whose decision-making board has made a decision that the governing board
believes improperly grants a variance from or is otherwise inconsistent with the proper
interpretation of a development regulation adopted by the governing board.
I own or have a legal interest in the following parcels related to or impacted by this Special
Use Permit application:
Name:
Address:
Property Identification Number (PIN):
Register of Deeds Book/Page:
That property will suffer the following Special Damage:
I have the following to demonstrate that Special Damage:
If that demonstration includes testimony which requires expert opinion per NCGS 160D-1402(j)(3)1,
then it will be supplied by:
Their expertise in will be
established by the following education, training and experience:
1. North Carolina General Statute 160D-1402(j)(3) can be found at the follow link:
https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_160D/GS_160D-1402.pdf
103
December 4, 2024
TLC Brumley Special Use Permit (SUP) Application
Case #: SUP24-0010
PIN: 9883-30-4125
Re: Development Advisory Committee Report for SUP23-0011 (UDO § 1.9.5)
The Orange County Development Advisory Committee (DAC) met on May 2, 2024, for a review
and discussion of the special use permit application for PIN 9883-30-4125 (Case #: SUP24-
0010).
The Orange County DAC has no objections to the approval of the special use permit application
so long as the items in the attached departmental memos are addressed. The application
package features an abstract and staff report that provide the foundations for my
recommendation regarding this application and request.
Sincerely,
Cy Stober
Planning & Inspections Director
Attachment 5 104
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
Development Advisory Committee (DAC) Comments
DAC review comments and recommendations do not constitute plan or permit approval for this application
and/or replace any other plans and permits that may be required by other County departments and State
agencies.
Project: SUP24-0010 (TLC Brumley)
Location/PIN: 9883-30-4125
Applicant: Triangle Land Conservancy
Staff Planner: Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Manager
DAC Meeting Date: 5-2-2024
Addressing and
Land Records Date: 5/1/24 Staff:
Britney Pendleton
brpendleton@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2576
1.The Address referenced in narrative - 3223 New Hope Church Rd - is not in E911
Address Database. An address for the pavilion, or the drop off area / portable toilet area
is highly recommended for 911 service in case of Emergency. May be advisable to name
the access road into the camp.
Attorney’s Office Date: Staff:
James Bryan
jbryan@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2319
1.None received.
Building
Inspections Date: 4/22/2024 Staff:
Michael Rettie
mrettie@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2604
1.Construction permit(s) will be required for any proposed work regulated by the NC state
building codes.
DEAPR Date: Staff:
Chris Hirni
chirni@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2514
1.None received.
Environmental
Health Date: 4/25/24 Staff:
Victoria Hudson
vhudson@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2365
1.No new comments
Erosion
Control Date: 4/29/24 Staff:
Nate Jacobsen
njacobsen@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2580
105
1.A Land Disturbing Permit will be required if the proposed disturbance is greater than
20,000 sq ft.
2.If the proposed scope of work exceeds 1 acre, completion of “Notice of Intent” with
the state and compliance with NCG01 permitting will be necessary.
Fire and Life
Safety Date: Staff:
Elizabeth Farnan
efarnan@orangecountync.gov
919-245-6153
1.None received.
NCDOT Date: Staff:
Chuck Edwards
cnedwards@ncdot.gov
336-570-6833
1.Based on the submittals, no NCDOT action is required.
Planning Date: 4/30/2024 Staff:
Taylor Perschau
tperschau@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2597
Application
1.Application form needs to be updated to include all subject parcels and signed with wet
signature or acceptable digital signature.
2.For any planned expert witnesses (e.g. licensed appraiser, engineers), please provide
information to establish expertise such as a CV. If application is being presented by legal
counsel, provide agent information.
3.Exhibit C, D, and F to be completed by applicant or notes made to refer to submitted
exhibits that serve as a response to those section of the application form.
4.Narrative notes that drop-off/pick-up and all camp-related equipment is located at 3223
New Hope Church Rd, PIN 9983304125. However, that address is located on PIN
9883505374. Please revise narrative, site plan, and application form to be inclusive of all
parcels subject to this Special Use Permit application.
5.Please submit a completed Environmental Assessment Application, per UDO Section
2.7.3(B)(7).
6.Please include statement indicating the anticipated development schedule (UDO Section
2.7.3(B)(9)). This can be addressed in the narrative and, to an extent, already has but
needs to be explicitly addressed.
Site Plan
1.Please include statement (preferably on-site plan) noting method of disposal of trees,
limbs, stumps, and construction debris associated with the permitted activity (UDO
Section 2.7.3(B)(8)).
2.Site plan to be updated to reflect all parcels subject to proposed Special Use Permit.
3.Please provide survey of property detailed on Sheet L-1.0 as a separate sheet for better
review. Survey will acceptably address UDO Section 2.5.3(A) and 2.5.3(E).
4.Please provide separate sheet to address UDO Section 2.5.3(D): zoning of property,
zoning of all adjacent properties, and existing land uses on adjacent properties.
5.Site plan acreage/summary data to be updated to reflect all parcels subject to Camp use
proposal.
6.Site plan to include note detailing total acreage, total building sf, required and proposed
parking. UDO Section 2.5.3(F).
7.Please confirm whether there are any plans for on-site lighting or signage specific to the
Camp use.
8.Update site data to include reference to R-1 dimensional standards relevant to non-
residential use of the property. Include maximum and proposed impervious surface and
required stream buffers on-site. UDO Section 2.5.3(G) and 2.5.3(H).
106
9. Not finding a note on estimated traffic generation. Please advise if provided. UDO
Section 2.5.3(I).
10. Proposed building information to include building height and function. UDO Section
2.5.3(K).
11. Vehicular use area/proposed parking needs to be delineated so as to demonstrate
compliance with Table 6.9.7 Off-Street Parking Requirements.
12. Please confirm how/whether any solid waste disposal facilities are being
accommodated.
13. Site plan to detail distances to nearest residential structures. UDO Section
5.7.5(A)(1)(d).
14. Narrative notes a request for the Board to consider the fact that the property is used as a
nature preserve as sufficient demonstration of meeting UDO Section 5.7.5(A)(2)(b) 30’
minimum Type B buffer. Existing site conditions could likely meet the standards of the
30’ Type B buffer but need to be noted on the site plan as such.
Solid Waste Date: 4/29/24 Staff:
Matt Taylor
mtaylor@orangecountync.gov
919-918-4905
Adherence to Orange County's Regulated Recyclable Materials Ordinance, specifically the
notes stated here, would need to be required when construction of these pavilions commences.
Construction Waste:
1. All existing structures 500 square feet and larger shall be assessed prior to the issuance
of a demolition permit to ensure compliance with the County’s Regulated Recyclable
Materials Ordinance (RRMO) and to assess the potential for deconstruction and/or the
reuse of salvageable materials.
2. Pursuant to the County’s RRMO, clean wood waste, scrap metal, and corrugated
cardboard present in construction or demolition waste must be recycled.
3. Pursuant to the County’s RRMO, all haulers of mixed construction and demolition waste
which includes any regulated recyclable materials shall be licensed by Orange County.
4. Prior to any demolition or construction activity on the site, the applicant shall hold a pre-
demolition/pre-construction conference with Solid Waste staff. This may be the same
pre-construction meeting held with other development/enforcement officials.
5. The presence if any asbestos containing materials (‘ACM’) and/or other hazardous
materials shall be handled in accordance with any and all local, state, and federal
regulations and guidelines.
Stormwater
Management Date: 4/29/24 Staff:
Christopher Sandt
csandt@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2583
1. The project is located in the Lower Eno Protected and Lower Eno Unprotected
Watershed Overlay Districts. The submittal of a Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) is
required if any future Land-Disturbing Activity exceeds 12,000 square feet for any non-
residential development. Land disturbance thresholds are cumulative to parent tract and
will carry over to any/all subdivided lots if subdivided in the future.
Transportation
Services Date: 4/30/24
Staff:
Darlene Weaver
dweaver@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2002
1. No comments.
107
MEMO
To: Taylor Perschau, Orange County Current Planning and Zoning Manager
From: T.C. Morphis and Lydia Lavelle, The Brough Law Firm
Date: October 3, 2024
Subject: SUP24-0010 (TLC Brumley)
SUP24-0010 (TLC Brumley) was submitted to Orange County dated 4/12/2024 by Triangle Land
Conservancy (TLC). The Orange County Development Advisory Committee met on May 2,
2024 and provided the following comments which needed to be addressed. Below please find
responses to these comments.
Application:
1.Application form needs to be updated to include all subject parcels and signed with wet
signature or acceptable digital signature.
The only subject parcel is PIN 9883-30-4125 as indicated on the original application form.
2. For any planned expert witnesses (e.g. licensed appraiser, engineers), please provide
information to establish expertise such as a CV. If application is being presented by legal
counsel, provide agent information.
T.C. Morphis and Lydia Lavelle from The Brough Law Firm (1526 E. Franklin Street, Chapel
Hill, NC 27514; 919-929-3905; morphis@broughlawfirm.com; lavelle@broughlawfirm.com)
will be presenting this application at the SUP hearing.
3. Exhibit C, D, and F to be completed by applicant or notes made to refer to submitted
exhibits that serve as a response to those sections of the application form.
We checked the box on the application form for 30 minutes or less, so our understanding is that
Exhibits C, D, and F are optional. We do plan to have Matt Rutledge and/or Bo Howes from TLC
testify as lay witnesses on behalf of the Applicant, and David Swanson testify as an expert
witness in landscape architecture and site design.
4. Narrative notes that drop-off/pick-up and all camp-related equipment is located at 3223
New Hope Church Rd, PIN 9983304125. However, that address is located on PIN
9883505374. Please revise narrative, site plan, and application form to be inclusive of all
parcels subject to this Special Use Permit application.
The only subject parcel is PIN 9883-30-4125. The site is located at 3055-UT New Hope Church
Rd, Hillsborough NC. TLC staff is trying to verify an address from Orange County.
5. Please submit a completed Environmental Assessment Application, per UDO Section
2.7.3(B)(7).
108
This is a separate attachment with this e-mail.
6. Please include statement indicating the anticipated development schedule (UDO Section
2.7.3(B)(9)). This can be addressed in the narrative and, to an extent, already has but
needs to be explicitly addressed.
This is addressed more fully in the revised narrative (separate attachment with this e-mail).
Site Plan
Note: a revised site plan addressing the following concerns is submitted as a separate
attachment with this e-mail.
1. Please include statement (preferably on-site plan) noting method of disposal of trees,
limbs, stumps, and construction debris associated with the permitted activity (UDO
Section 2.7.3(B)(8)).
Any trees that will be removed will be done in accordance with Orange County regulations and
disposal of subject trees and stumps will comply with Orange County solid waste management
regulations.
2. Site plan to be updated to reflect all parcels subject to proposed Special Use Permit.
The subject parcel is included (Parcel PIN: 9883-30-4125).
3. Please provide survey of property detailed on Sheet L-1.0 as a separate sheet for better
review. Survey will acceptably address UDO Section 2.5.3(A) and 2.5.3(E).
Refer to sheet L-1.01 of site plan for separate survey (with GIS topo and existing conditions)
with boundary of the subject parcel shown in red. Survey is from Freehold Land Surveyors.
Internal parcel line does not have metes and bounds since this is part of the larger TLC Brumley
property.
4. Please provide separate sheet to address UDO Section 2.5.3(D): zoning of property,
zoning of all adjacent properties, and existing land uses on adjacent properties.
Refer to L1.0 of site plan.
5. Site plan acreage/summary data to be updated to reflect all parcels subject to Camp use
proposal.
The site plan for the Schoolhouse of Wonder site is located on the subject parcel but since the
activities are limited to Schoolhouse children, this is shown in a polygon depicted by orange
dashed line and hatched. The primary activities are contained within this smaller site plan area.
This polygon represents ~12.01 acres.
109
6. Site plan to include note detailing total acreage, total building sf, required and proposed
parking. UDO Section 2.5.3(F).
Refer to L2.0 of site plan.
7. Please confirm whether there are any plans for on-site lighting or signage specific to the
Camp use.
Lighting will not be part of the site plan.
8. Update site data to include reference to R-1 dimensional standards relevant to nonresidential
use of the property. Include maximum and proposed impervious surface and required stream
buffers on-site. UDO Section 2.5.3(G) and 2.5.3(H).
Refer to L2.0 of site plan.
R-1 R.R. Setbacks – 40 ft. street and 20 ft. interior. Shown graphically for subject parcel.
Refer to the Conservation Easement Survey which is more restrictive than other County
regulated stream buffers.
Impervious area for subject parcel: Existing 47,138 sq. ft. (gravel parking, asphalt road);
Proposed 3,250 sq. ft. (gravel pad for structures).
9. Not finding a note on estimated traffic generation. Please advise if provided. UDO
Section 2.5.3(I).
The Schoolhouse of Wonder activities generate ~50 car trips per day (this assumes 20-25 in
morning for drop off and same for afternoon pickup). A copy of the NCDOT Daily Average
Traffic Count for New Hope Church Road is submitted as a separate attachment with this e-mail.
10. Proposed building information to include building height and function. UDO Section
2.5.3(K).
(2) 25 ft X 16 ft and (1) 20 ft X 16 ft – height to eve is 9 ft. Refer to website at
https://www.eaglecarports.com/shop/category/metal-carports. The function of the structures is to
provide shelter during inclement weather for the children during normal activities for the
Schoolhouse of Wonder. Program materials will continue to be stored in the existing shed.
11. Vehicular use area/proposed parking needs to be delineated so as to demonstrate
compliance with Table 6.9.7 Off-Street Parking Requirements.
Refer to L3.0 of site plan.
Vehicular parking depicted on L3.0 24 regular space + 1 ADA handicapped space (separate
attachment). This parking plan is submitted as a separate attachment with this e-mail
110
12. Please confirm how/whether any solid waste disposal facilities are being
accommodated.
All solid waste will be removed from site by owner.
13. Site plan to detail distances to nearest residential structures. UDO Section 5.7.5(A)(1)(d).
Refer to L2.0 of site plan.
Nearest residential units shown dimensioned to the subject parcel property.
14. Narrative notes a request for the Board to consider the fact that the property is used as a
nature preserve as sufficient demonstration of meeting UDO Section 5.7.5(A)(2)(b) 30’
minimum Type B buffer. Existing site conditions could likely meet the standards of the
30’ Type B buffer but need to be noted on the site plan as such.
Refer to L2.0 and L3.0 of site plan. Notes in the lower right corner reference that the property is
“used as a Nature Preserve and the current wooded buffer is sufficient to meet the intent of UDO
Section 5.7.5 (A) (2) (b) 30 ft. min. Type B Buffer. The existing trees provide sufficient screening
and buffer to meet this condition.”
111
STANDARDS EXAMINED AND EVIDENCE RECEIVED
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
PROPOSING A CAMP USE
ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3223-UT NEW HOPE CHURCH ROAD
(PIN 9883-30-4125)
As required under Section 5.2 Table of Permitted Uses of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), a Special Use Permit is required for a “Camp” use, in accordance
with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the UDO. Such permits shall comply with general and specific
standards as set forth in Section(s) 5.3.2 and 5.7.5 of the UDO.
Section 5.3.2(A)(2) of the UDO requires written findings certifying compliance with the following:
(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;
(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); and
(3)The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan
submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use
is in compliance with the 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.
In addition, the Board shall make findings certifying that the application is complaint with the
following specific standards:
(1)Specific standards for the submission of Special Use Permit applications as
outlined within Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7 of the UDO.
(2)Specific regulations governing the development of “Camp” as set forth in Section
5.7.5 of the UDO.
(3)Section 5.3.2(B) relating to the method and adequacy of the provision of:
a.Sewage disposal facilities, solid waste, and water;
b.Police, fire, and rescue squad protection;
c.Vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site;
d.Other use specific standards as set forth within the UDO.
(4)The general findings outlined within Section 5.3.2(A)(2).
Listed below are the findings of the Orange Planning staff regarding the application in question.
The findings have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Board of Adjustment
in its deliberations.
Attachment 6A 112
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Per Att 6 (b)
Submittal Requirements for all SUP Applications
Proper forms Section 2.2 Staff Testimony
Application (Attachment 1) 1
Fees paid Section 2.2.4(D) Application (Attachment 1)
[Fees paid at time of submittal.] 1
Full description of use
•Location
•Appearance
•Operational characteristics
Sections 2.5.3(F)
and 2.7.3(B)(1)
Application (Attachment 1) 2 - 6
Owner Information Section
2.7.3(B)(2) Application (Attachment 1) 1, 2
Site Plans
(10 copies)
Section
2.7.3(B)(4)
10 Copies of Site Plan
Submitted 2, 14
List of parcels within 1,000 feet Section
2.7.3(B)(5) Application (Attachment 1) 2
Elevations of all structures Section
2.7.3(B)(6) Application (Attachment 1) 2
10 copies of Environmental
Assessment (or EIS)
Section
2.7.3(B)(7)
Application, Environmental
Assessment Application
(Attachment 1)
[EIS Not Required]
2
Method of Debris Disposal Section
2.7.3(B)(8)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the
Application
(Attachment 1)
2
Development Schedule Section
2.7.3(B)(9)
Exhibit B – Narrative of
Proposed Use (Attachment 1) 2
Extended Vesting Request Section
2.7.3(B)(10) No extended vesting requested. 2
113
Submittal Requirements
Section 5.7.5 Application (Attachment 1) 2, 14
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Notification Requirements for all Evidentiary Hearings
Mailed Notice all adjacent
property owners (at least 10
days but no more than 25 days
prior)
Sections
2.7.5(B) and
2.7.6(A)(1)
NIM and BOA Materials (Attachments 3
& 4)
NIM notices mailed by applicant May 8,
2024 prior to May 23 NIM.
BOA Public Hearing Notices mailed by
staff on October 29, 2024. Certification
available in Attachment 4.
8, 9
Sign Posting on Property (at
least 10 days prior)
Sections
2.7.5(D) and
2.7.6(A)(2)
NIM and BOA Materials (Attachments 3
& 4)
NIM signs posted by applicant on May
10, 2024 prior to May 23 NIM.
BOA signs posted by staff on November
xx, 2024. Certification available in
Attachment 4.
10
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Waste, Safety and Access Requirements for all SUPs
Waste Disposal
Method and adequacy of
provision for sewage disposal
facilities, solid waste and water
service.
Section
5.3.2(B)(1)
Application (Attachment 1)
[Both Environmental Health and Solid
Waste reviewed the application as part of
Development Advisory Committee review
(Attachment 5).]
2, 11
Safety
Method and adequacy of
police, fire and rescue squad
protection.
Section
5.3.2(B)(2)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[Fire and Life Safety Division reviewed
application as part of the Development
Advisory Committee meeting
(Attachment 5).]
2, 12
Vehicle Access
Method and adequacy of
vehicle access to the site and
Section
5.3.2(B)(3)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[NCDOT offered review comments
(Attachment 5).]
2, 13
114
traffic conditions around the
site.
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Standards Specific to this Use: “Camp” Use
Site Plan
A site plan prepared in
accordance with Section 2.5
Site Plan Review
Section 2.5
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[Site plan is in compliance with Section
2.5 of the UDO.]
2, 14
Submittal Requirements
(a)A site plan prepared in
accordance with Section 2.5,
also showing the following
(existing or proposed): (i)
Buildings, (ii) Campsites, (iii)
Storage areas, (iv) Fencing and
gates, (v) Outdoor recreation
areas (vi) Access road(s) to the
site, as well as on site roads,
with an indication of type of
proposed surface
Section
5.7.5
Application (Attachment 1) 2, 14
(b)A description of the type of
facility planned, the size,
capacity, and use of proposed
buildings; a signed statement
from the owners or operators
that there shall be no activity
allowed that will have adverse
effects on adjacent property.
The statement shall also
include a complete list of all
recreational activities that will
take place on the site
Section
5.7.5
Application (Attachment 1) 2
(c)A phasing plan, when
necessary, indicating the area
to be developed in each phase
with time periods for
construction of each phase.
This may be indicated on the
site plan.
Section
5.7.5
Application (Attachment 1) 2
115
(d)The site plan shall show the
distances to the nearest
residential structure.
Section
5.7.5
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1) 2
Standards of Evaluation
(a)Unless public sewer is
proposed to be extended, the
adequacy for the method of
sewage disposal will be
determined by the lot size and
soil suitability. Appropriate
letters from the Orange County
Environmental Health
Department, local jurisdictions
and/or the State Division of
Environmental Management
shall be submitted to indicate
preliminary approval.
Section
5.7.5
Project correspondence (Attachment 5) 2
(b)The landscape plan shall
show how the facilities will be
screened from the adjacent
properties. A minimum 30 foot
Type B buffer, as indicated in
Section 6.8 shall be observed
around the perimeter of the
property.
Section
5.7.5
Site plan (Attachment 1) 2
116
(c)If private recreational
facilities are proposed, the
improvements must meet the
site improvement requirements
in Section 7.11 of this
Ordinance. The site plan for
recreational facilities shall be
reviewed by the Orange County
Recreation and Parks Director.
Section
5.7.5
Applicant is not proposing any private
recreational facilities. 2, 18
(d)Off street parking
requirements shall be provided
in accordance with Section 6.9
of this Ordinance.
Section
5.7.5
Site plan and parking plan
(Attachment 1) 2, 23
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
General Welfare, Value & Harmony Standards
The use (will / will not)
maintain or promote the public
health, safety and general
welfare, if located where
proposed and developed and
operated according to the plan
as submitted.
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(a)
Application package as contained in
Attachment 1 inclusive including, but not
limited to:
•Narrative;
•Site Plan;
•Environmental Assessment (EA)
Application; and
•Site Plan.
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5)
23
117
The use (will / will not)
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).
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(b)
Application package (Attachment 1);
Staff Report (Attachment 2);
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5); and
Evidence submitted by applicant
20
The location and character of
the use, if developed according
to the plan submitted, (will /
will not) be in harmony with
the area in which it is to be
located and the use is in
compliance with the 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.
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(c)
Application package as contained in
Attachment 1 inclusive including, but not
limited to:
• Narrative;
• Environmental Assessment (EA)
Application; and
• Site Plan;
Staff Report (Attachment 2)
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5).
21
118
FINDINGS OF FACT
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
PROPOSING A “CAMP” USE
ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3223-UT NEW HOPE CHURCH ROAD
(PIN 9883-30-4125)
Based upon the competent, material, and substantial evidence received at the evidentiary
hearing, the Board of Adjustments gave each piece of evidence its due weight and makes the
following Findings of Fact:
Application Components
1.Triangle Land Conservancy filed an application for a Special Use Permit (SUP) related to
Orange County PIN 9883-30-4125 on April 12, 2024 for Use 32, Camp with a fee paid.
2.The application included site plans and attachments as included in the agenda materials
received by the BOA, specifically: Attachment 1.
3.The existing conditions on the property include: The property exists as Brumley Forest
Nature Preserve, a privately owned and publicly accessible preserve.
4.The proposed structures include: two 16’ x 25’ and one 16’ x 20’ carport structures.
5.The access, parking, and “Camp” areas include: The project will be utilizing the existing
paved road for access and parking needs. The Camp use area is currently defined as +/-
12.01 acres; the Special Use Permit is to be applied to the entirety of the subject parcel.
6.The landscaping includes: existing vegetation is to be maintained in order to meet the
minimum 30 foot Type B buffer required around the parcel perimeter per UDO Section
5.7.5 for the Camp use .
7.Taylor Perschau, a member of the Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
staff, provided sworn testimony regarding receipt of the following: complete site plan, a list
of parcels within 1,000 feet, complete Environmental Assessment, method of debris
disposal, and development schedule.
Notice Requirements
8.Notices of a Neighborhood Information Meeting were mailed on May 8, 2024 by the
applicant and the meeting was held on May 23, 2024.
9.Notices of the BOA Evidentiary Hearing were mailed on November 26, 2024 and the
meeting held on December 11, 2024.
10.Signs were posted on May 10, 2024 for the Neighborhood Information Meeting and on
November 26, 2024 for the Evidentiary Hearing.
Waste, Safety & Access
11.The waste disposal methods were reviewed by Orange County Environmental Health
Department, and Orange County Solid Waste Department. Neither reviewing agency
indicated concerns for the method of waste disposal proposed.
12.The method of police, fire and rescue squad protection were reviewed by Orange County
Emergency Services Fire and Life Safety Division. There was no indication of concern.
13.The method of vehicle access was reviewed by NCDOT District 1. There was no indication
of concern.
Camp
14.Site plan submitted: Site plan was provided in compliance with Section 2.5 of the UDO.
15.No phasing plan is being requested.
16.Adequate sewage disposal to be determined by lot size and soil suitability: the Camp
use utilizes a portable toilet at present and offers no plan for on-site wastewater
Attachment 6B 119
treatment or water supply. Development Advisory Committee review indicated no
concern with the proposal.
17. Facilities will be screened from the adjacent properties: preservation of existing
vegetation will meet the minimum 30 foot Type B buffer around the perimeter of the
property.
18. No private recreational facilities are planned as part of the Camp use.
19. Off-street parking is provided in accordance with Section 6.9 of the Unified Development
Ordinance.
General Welfare, Value & Harmony
20. The expected value difference with the proposed use for contiguous property is: As
presented and entered as evidence on the evening of the evidentiary hearing.
21. The location and character of the use is: If developed according to the plan submitted and
in accordance with the conditions, the project will be in general harmony with the
surrounding area and the use would be in compliance with the plan for the physical
development of the County as embodied in the Unified Development Ordinance or in the
Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners.
22. The character of the area in which the use is located is: Rural with undeveloped parcels
and low-density residential.
23. 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.
120
CONCLUSIONS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY
PROPOSING A CAMP USE
ON AN PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3223-UT NEW HOPE CHURCH ROAD
(PIN 9883-30-4125)
When applying the adopted Findings of Fact to the relevant Standards found in the UDO, the
Orange County Board of Adjustments makes the following Conclusions:
1.All necessary submittal requirements were met, including:
a.Submittal of proper forms (UDO 2.2, Finding of Fact 1); and,
b.Fees paid (UDO 2.2.4, Finding of Fact 1); and,
c.The use was fully described (UDO 2.5.3(F) and 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2-6);
and,
d.Owner Information was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(2), Finding of Fact 1 and 2); and,
e.The facilities were described (UDO 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2-6); and,
f.Access, parking, and Camp use were identified (UDO 2.5.3(F), 2.5.3(L), 5.7.5,
Finding of Fact 5, 12, and 13); and,
g. Plans were identified (UDO 2.5.3(K) and 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2 and 14);
and,
h.Site plans were submitted, (UDO 2.5, Finding of Fact 2 and 14); and,
i.A list of parcels within 1,000’ was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(5), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
j.Environmental Assessment was submitted (UDO 2.7.3(B)(7), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
k.Method of Debris Removal was described (UDO 2.7.3(B)(8), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
l.Development Schedule was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(9), Finding of Fact 2), and
2.Proper notice was provided as required by statute and ordinance, including:
a.Notice was mailed for the Neighborhood Information Meeting (UDO 2.7.5(B),
Finding of Fact 8); and,
b.Signs were posted for the Neighborhood Information Meeting (UDO 2.7.5(D),
Finding of Fact 10); and,
c. Notice was mailed for the Evidentiary Hearing (UDO 2.7.6(A)(1), Finding of Fact
9); and,
d.Signs were posted for the Evidentiary Hearing (UDO 2.7.6(A)(2), Finding of Fact
10).
3.Waste, Safety and Access requirements were met, including:
a.The method and adequacy of providing for sewage disposal facilities, solid waste
and water service is sufficient for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(1), Finding of
Fact 2 and 11); and,
b.The method and adequacy of police fire and rescue squad protection is sufficient
for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(2), Finding of Fact 2 and 12); and,
c.The method and adequacy of vehicle access to the site and traffic conditions
around the site are sufficient for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(3), Finding of
Fact 2 and 13).
4.Standards specific to the Camp use were met, including:
a.A proper site plan submitted (UDO Section 2.5), Finding of Fact 2 and 14); and,
b.Unless public sewer is proposed to be extended, the adequacy for the method of
sewage disposal will be determined by the lot size and soil suitability. Appropriate
Attachment 6C 121
letters from the Orange County Environmental Health Department, local
jurisdictions and/or the State Division of Environmental Management shall be
submitted to indicate preliminary approval (UDO 5.7.5(A)(2)(a)), Finding of Fact
11, 16)
c. The landscape plan shall show how the facilities will be screened from the adjacent
properties. A minimum 30 foot Type B buffer, as indicated in Section 6.8 shall be
observed around the perimeter of the property (UDO 5.7.5(A)(2)(b), Finding of Fact
17),
d. If private recreational facilities are proposed, the improvements must meet the site
improvement requirements in Section 7.11 of this Ordinance. The site plan for
recreational facilities shall be reviewed by the Orange County Recreation and
Parks Director. (UDO 5.7.5(A)(2)(c), Finding of Fact 18).
e. Off street parking requirements shall be provided in accordance with Section 6.9
of this Ordinance. (UDO 5.7.5(A)(2)(d), Finding of Fact 19).
5. General welfare, value and harmony standards applicable to all SUPs have been met,
including:
a. 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 (UDO 5.3.2(A)(2)(a), Finding of Fact 23); and,
b. The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (UDO
5.3.2(A)(2)(b), Finding of Fact 20); and,
c. The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan
submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use
is in compliance with the 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 (UDO 5.3.2(A)(2)(c), Finding of
Fact 21).
122