HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Agenda Packet 3-4-26 1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
131 W. MARGARET LANE, SUITE 201
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
f
17 52
Am
Q
Cato
AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
WHITTED MEETING FACILITY
300 WEST TRYON STREET, SECOND FLOOR
I-IILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
Wednesday, March 4, 2026
Regular Meeting — 7:00 pm
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
4 - 5 a. Planning Calendar for March and April
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3 6 December 3, 2025 ORC Notes
7 - 14 February 4, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes
15 February 4, 2026 ORC Notes
4. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
5. PUBLIC CHARGE
Introduction to the Public Charge
The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute,
appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB)to uphold the written land development
laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and
harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and
future needs of its residents and businesses through efficient and responsive process that
contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB
will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services
during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations.
Public Charge
The Planning Board pledges its respect to all present. The Board asks those attending this
meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner toward each other, County
staff, and Board members. At any time should a member of the Board or the public fail to
observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and decorum. Should it
become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will recess the
meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
The Planning Board asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and
computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
Please be kind to everyone.
2
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
6. CHAIR COMMENTS
7. 16 - 59 LAND USE PLAN 2050 -To respond to a request for information made by
the Planning Board at its December 2025 meeting.
(The memo associated with this item was emailed to Planning Board
members on February 18 with a request to review the information and
come prepared to the March 4 meeting with any questions and/or items
for discussion.)
Presenter: Tom Altieri, Senior Planner — Long-Range Planning &
Administration
H. ADJOURNMENT
Sign up to receive a notification when Planning Board agendas are posted
Interested persons can sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx to receive a
notification when agendas are posted. (Scroll down to the "Agenda Center" category and choose
Planning Board).
Monthly Planning & Inspections Newsletter
Sign up at https://www.orangecountync.gov/list.aspx?ListlD=408 to receive the monthly
communication on happenings in the Planning & Inspections Department.
Written Comments
Interested persons who cannot attend the meeting in-person are invited to submit written
comments on agenda items to the Planning Board via email at
planningboard orangecountync.gov no later than 3:00 p.m. on the afternoon of the meeting.
Please include in the Subject line of the email the title of the agenda item your comment pertains
to. Emails sent to this address are viewable on Google Groups:
https://groups.googIe.com/g/ocplanningboard
Written comments can also be dropped off at the Planning Department's offices at 131 W.
Margaret Lane, 2nd floor, Hillsborough, NC during normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday). Written comments will be scanned and sent by staff to the email address
indicated above.
Review Process
The Planning Board is an appointed volunteer advisory board which makes recommendations to
the Board of County Commissioners (the elected officials). The Board of County Commissioners
holds a formal public hearing and makes decisions. Section 2.8 of the County's Unified
Development Ordinance contains a flowchart depicting the review process for rezoning and text
amendment applications.
3
Planning Board Member Potential Conflict of Interest
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: Members of
appointed boards shall not vote on any advisory or legislative decision regarding a development
regulation where the outcome of the matter being considered is reasonably likely to have a direct,
substantial, and readily identifiable financial impact on the member. An appointed board member
shall not vote on any zoning amendment if the landowner of the property subject to a rezoning
petition or the applicant for a text amendment is a person with whom the member has a close
familial, business, or other associational relationship.
If any Planning Board member has any concern about a possible conflict related to an agenda
item, please notify Planning staff and get in touch directly with a member of the County Attorney's
staff before the meeting time to determine whether a conflict exists— and if so, how best to handle
the potential conflict.
4
March •
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Planning Board BOCC
Meeting Business
7:00 pm* Meeting 7:00
pm
Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
BOCC Work
Session
7:00 pm
Southern
Human Sery
Ctr.
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
BOCC
Business Joint Meeting
Meeting w Mebane
7:00 PM 7:00 pm
Southern
Human Sery Whitted Bldg.
Ctr.
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Legislative
Breakfast
8:30 am
Whitted Bldg.
29 30 31
Notes:
* Planning Board member attendance required
Planning Board meetings are held at Whitted Human Services Building - Donna S. Baker Meeting
Room 2nd floor 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278
5
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4
Planning Board
Meeting
7:00 pm* HOLIDAY
Whitted Bldg.
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
BOCC Board of
Business Adjustment
Meeting 7:00 pm
7:00 pm
Whitted Bldg. Whitted Bldg.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
BOCC Work Budget Work
Session
7:00 pm Session—CIP
7:00 pm
Southern
Human Sery Whitted Bldg.
Ctr.
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
BOCC
Business
Meeting
7:00 pm
Southern
Human Sery
Ctr.
26 27 28 29 30
Joint Meeting
w School
Boards
7:00 pm
Whitted Bldg.
Notes:
* Planning Board member attendance required
Planning Board meetings are held at Whitted Human Services Building - Donna S. Baker Meeting
Room (2nd floor) 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278
6
1 SUMMARY NOTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 DECEMBER 3,2025
4 ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE
5
6
7 NOTE: A QUORUM IS NOT REQUIRED FOR ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
8
9 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor(Chair) Cheeks Township, Chris Johnston (Vice-Chair) Hillsborough Township,
10 Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Meg Millard, Little River Township Representative; Venkat Yendapalli,
11 Cedar Grove Township Representative; Jonah Garson,At-Large Representative;Whitney Watson,At-Large
12 Representative; Delores Bailey,At-Large Representative.
13
14 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director—Long Range Planning
15 &Administration; Jack Moran, Planner 1
16
17 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
18 Meeting began at 7:59 PM.
19
20 AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT—OMNIBUS AMENDMENT PACKAGE-To
21 review Planning Director-initiated amendments to the LIDO that include a variety of topics such as error
22 corrections, incorporation of recent changes in State laws, internal inconsistencies, addressing existing
23 school needs, and better serving the public interest.
24 PRESENTER: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director
25
26 Cy Stober gave a presentation on the proposed LIDO text amendments.
27
28 The board discussed newly imposed rules that would apply to the UNC school systems properties and how it affects
29 other entities in the county.
30
31 The board discussed the changing ordinance for Erosion Control Waivers and how it affects the permitting process.
32
33 The board discussed zoning changes related to Orange County Schools and how it would affect future Planning
34 Board agenda items.
35
36 The board discussed the proposed landscaping amendment changes and how they would affect development in the
37 county.The board entertained the idea that the current landscaping standards were not meeting their intended
38 purpose and Meg Millard and Delores Bailey emphasized the importance of preserving and planting trees in new
39 developments in the county.
40
41 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT
42 The meeting adjourned at 8:49 PM.
43
7
DRAFT
1 MEETING MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 FEBRUARY 4,2026
4 REGULAR MEETING
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Johnston (Vice-Chair) Hillsborough Township, Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township
7 Representative; Meg Millard, Little River Township Representative; Venkat Yendapalli,
8 Cedar Grove Township Representative; Jonah Garson, At-Large Representative; Whitney
9 Watson, At-Large Representative; Delores Bailey, At-Large Representative; Charity Kirk,
10 At-Large Representative
11
12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Lamar Proctor(Chair) Cheeks Township, Beth Bronson, At-Large Representative.
13
14 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director—Long Range
15 Planning &Administration; Taylor Perschau, Current Planning Manager; Jack Moran,
16 Planner 1
17
18 OTHERS PRESENT: None
19
20 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
21
22 The meeting began at 7:02 PM
23
24 Chris Johnston: Number one call to order. Hey, everyone. We're now calling this meeting to order.
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 2: ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
27
28 Chris Johnston: Item number two election of chair and vice chair for 2026 along with term expiration dates
29 and reappointment eligibility, there's a mouthful, by a member.
30
31 Charity Kirk: Didn't we just do this?
32
33 Chris Johnston: It does certainly feel like we did this very recently, but it was last year wasn't it? Time how
34 does it work?
35
36 Statler Gilfillen: So, who wants to be chair?
37
38 Chris Johnston: So, if you look at item number 4 in your agenda packet, we have a list of Orange County
39 Planning Board Membership and term information with a list of everyone who is currently
40 up for renewal. Delores is actually eligible for reappointment, but not seeking
41 reappointment. So that is a loss for our board there, and then myself and Jonah are up
42 for reappointment and are seeking. We have two vacant appointment slots so friends
43 anyone who wants to come and be a part of this wonderful group.
44
45 Cy Stober: Mr. Chair, I just want to state that reappointments are entirely a discretionary matter of the
46 commissioners. We're just electing a chair and a vice chair this evening.
47
48 Chris Johnston: Right, yes. Oh yeah. That's a good clarification, yes, no, so we're not reappointing
49 anyone I'm just saying that we have two open positions so get the word out. So, we need
8
DRAFT
50 a chair and a vice chair, and the person who I would think would want to continue being
51 chair is not here yet.
52
53 Charity Kirk: Do you know if he wants to continue?
54
55 Chris Johnston: I don't know anything. Again, figurehead, so—
56
57 Charity Kirk: Cy, do you know if he wants to continue?
58
59 Cy Stober: I haven't heard him object. I do know that his—
60
61 Chris Johnston: Schedule.
62
63 Cy Stober: His regular job keeps him quite busy, but he has a great attendance record and seems to
64 be, from all the conversations he and I have had, kind of feeling like he's getting into his
65 comfort zone as chair. You didn't ask for my opinion but that is it.
66
67 Chris Johnston: Does anyone else want to be chair and will fight him in the parking lot for it? Okay, does
68 anyone want to nominate anyone?
69
70 Jonah Garson: I would like to nominate our current chair.
71
72 Chris Johnston: Okay. Any seconds?
73
74 Statler Gilfillen: I'll second that.
75
76 Chris Johnston: Okay, Statler. Anyone else want to be nominated or have ideas for nomination.
77
78 Statler GiIfillen: I have a question.
79
80 Chris Johnston: Yes.
81
82 Statler GiIfillen: Okay, I've seconded it. If for some reason, he decides he doesn't want the position after
83 we would say approve him, he can step down, and we can do this again, then, right?
84
85 Chris Johnston: Yeah, I believe so, yeah, great. Hearing no other nominations, I will go ahead and take
86 the vote for nomination for Lamar to continue as board chair. All those in favor?All those
87 opposed?
88
89 MOTION BY Jonah Garson to nominate Lamar Proctor as Chair. Seconded by Statler GiIfillen.
90
91 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
92
93 Chris Johnston: That it is unanimous. So, all right, excellent. Vice chair? I believe that is currently me, uh,
94 I'm happy to continue, but if anyone else would like to take a shot at the opportunity, that
95 is perfectly fine as well.
96
97 Charity Kirk: I nominate you.
98
99 Chris Johnston: Okay.
9
DRAFT
100
101 Statler Gilfillen: I second that.
102
103 Chris Johnston: Great, so we have a nomination and a second. Are there any other nominations? Okay,
104 hearing none, we'll take the vote for Vice Chair for Chris Johnston. All those in favor?
105 Okay. All those opposed?
106
107 MOTION BY Charity Kirk to nominate Chris Johnston as Vice-Chair. Seconded by Statler Gilfillen.
108
109 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
110
111 Chris Johnston: All right that is unanimous. Thank you so much. All right, so we are all set with item
112 number two, which is election of vice chair and chair.
113
114 AGENDA ITEM 3: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
115
116 Chris Johnston: Now we are moving on to item three, informational items, planning calendar for February
117 or March, so if you take a look at item number 5 on the packet, we have tonight's meeting.
118 We have a BOCC work session at the Southern Human Services Center on February 10,
119 February 11, there is a board of adjustments 7:00 p.m. here at the Whitted and on the
120 17th, we have a BOCC business meeting at 7:00 here at the Whitted as well.
121
122 Cy Stober: There will be no BOA meeting. It was just canceled for a lack of business.
123
124 Chris Johnston: All right. Thank you for the clarification. And then point of order, do I need to read March
125 or are we good just saying and there's also March?
126
127 Cy Stober: We don't need to read March.
128
129 Chris Johnston: We don't need to read March, okay, all right, wonderful. Thank you. Lamar reads the
130 whole thing. That is the calendar as it is written. We will move on to item number 4,
131 approval of minutes.
132
133 AGENDA ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
134
135 Chris Johnston: So, if you look at page 7, there begins the minutes from the previous meetings. Does
136 anyone have any questions, comments, or concerns in regard to the minutes as written?
137
138 Statler Gilfillen: I move that we approve the minutes.
139
140 Chris Johnston: Do I have a second?
141
142 Charity Kirk: I second.
143
144 Chris Johnston: Excellent, we have a second, all those in favor say aye.
145
146 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to approve the December 3, 2025, regular meeting minutes. Seconded by Charity
147 Kirk
148
149 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
10
DRAFT
150
151 Chris Johnston: Perfect, so it is unanimous. The minutes have been approved.
152
153 AGENDA ITEM 5: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS To AGENDA
154
155 AGENDA ITEM 6: PUBLIC CHARGE
156
157 AGENDA ITEM 7: CHAIR COMMENTS
158
159 Chris Johnston: All right next consideration of additions to the agenda. Does anyone have anything that
160 they'd like to add to tonight's agenda? Great, hearing nothing, we will go ahead and take
161 the agenda as it is. There is no public tonight, so I am going to, in my role of board chair,
162 skip over that component. I don't have any comments other than Lamar is missed in this
163 particular meeting.
164
165 AGENDA ITEM 8: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT-TO REVIEW AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO
166 THE BOCC ON A COUNTY-INITIATED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE JORDAN LAKE
167 UNPROTECTED WATERSHED OVERLAY DISTRICT AND UNIVERSITY LAKE PROTECTED WATERSHED
168 OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARY LINE ON ONE UNADDRESSED—19.4 ACRE PARCEL(PIN:9851-43-
169 3215)OFF DODSON'S CROSSROADS IN BINGHAM TOWNSHIP. THIS ITEM IS SCHEDULED FOR
170 BOCC PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 5,2026.
171
172 Taylor Perschau: Taylor Perschau, current planning and zoning manager. I will be presenting a watershed
173 protection overlay amendment application, so it is a zoning atlas amendment, you have
174 seen a couple of these before, but I will do a little bit of process, and then dive into the
175 details. The address of the project being affected is actually an unaddressed parcel at the
176 moment off of Dodson's Crossroads at the intersection of Dodson's and Arden Estate
177 Court, which is a newly established private road. So, watershed protection overlay
178 districts are a component of a zoning atlas. They are adopted as an overlay. They are a
179 component of the Orange County's delegated stormwater management program. We
180 have tiers of watershed protection. We have critical and protected water supply
181 watersheds that are regulated by this overlay district because they are adopted as a
182 zoning layer. Any change to the watershed boundaries requires a change to the zoning
183 map. When we're talking about watersheds, it's explicitly where does water fall in relation
184 to water supplies. The closer you get to a water supply, the more protective the measures
185 are going to be around those, specifically in regard to how much built-upon area and how
186 much residential density can be established in those areas. So, as a part of Orange
187 County's stormwater management program, this is a two-step process. We're in step 2
188 where we're initiating a zoning atlas amendment that will go to the Board of County
189 Commissioners so I won't go to the details of zoning atlas, you're used to that, but
190 because it is part of our delegated program, the step one, which has already happened is
191 also a component different from other zoning amendments. First what happens is a
192 boundary line discrepancy is identified, that is what Orange County has mapped in our
193 overall topography, the contours. A surveyor goes out on site and finds that field work
194 doesn't match our current map, so how do we correct the map. We're going to rely on the
195 survey work for what the ridge line actually is telling us where the water falls between
196 those watersheds. So, the property owner and their surveyor identified a discrepancy.
197 They informed planning staff. Planning staff before this meeting has notified the Board of
198 County Commissioners of the discrepancy and the work that is required to amend it, and
199 county staff has also worked with the NC Environmental Management Commission. Both
11
DRAFT
200 of those bodies have acknowledged and have no issues with this proposed amendment,
201 so now we are in step two with no objection from the BOCC or EMC. Planning staff
202 initiated the zoning atlas amendment to update our maps to accurately reflect the ridge
203 line surveyed on site. So again, this is an unaddressed parcel off Dodson's Crossroads in
204 the Bingham Township where amending the watershed boundary between the University
205 Lake protected and the Jordan Lake unprotected, but in my previous slide you will have
206 noted that only the protected and critical are the ones that have regulations explicit to
207 impervious surface and residential density maximums, so we are going to be talking
208 specifically about amending the protected boundary. Current zoning is Rural Buffer.
209 Surrounding zoning is Rural Buffer and Agricultural Residential and on the north side of
210 the property, the property is outlined in black on this slide. On the north is the Jordan
211 Lake unprotected watershed. On the south is the University Lake protected. To the west,
212 southwest you have Cane Creek protected. You'll see this map a couple times, but the
213 black is the property line, the red is the proposed new watershed boundary. The survey
214 work was done on the subject parcel here that's outlined in black. It was also done on this
215 easternmost parcel. There was some property exchange between these two parcels,
216 which is why there was survey work across the two. And then the blue dash line is how it
217 is currently mapped, so we are strictly modifying the University Lake protected watershed
218 boundary line. It's going to end in removing about 4 acres from the University Lake
219 protected and those 4 acres are now going to be in Jordan Lake unprotected, so no
220 change to the underlying zoning. This is the survey that identified that again this dash line
221 up here is what Orange County mapping currently reflects and the survey work identifies
222 the ridge line to the south. So as required under the zoning atlas amendment 2.8.5, the
223 planning director is asked to make an analysis of the application. We offer the following,
224 that the application is complete in accordance with the requirements of 2.8.3. Staff review
225 did include consideration of how the request relates to the comprehensive plan. You'll
226 see that in the staff report available in the packet. We did notify properties within 1,000
227 feet. Staff received multiple phone calls, which we were able to answer all the questions
228 and have no public in attendance tonight. Similarly, the property has been posted.
229 Mailings and postings happened January 21, so as with all zoning atlas amendments, the
230 Planning Board is asked to make a recommendation to the Board of County
231 Commissioners; either an approval, denial, approval with conditions or ask for more time
232 and so after tonight, this item would be scheduled for an April Board of County
233 Commissioners meeting. That's about all I have for you. What questions do you have on
234 the topic.
235
236 Chris Johnston: Okay, let's start at the end. Do we have any questions, Statler.
237
238 Statler Gilfillen: No, I could make a motion we approve this.
239
240 Chris Johnston: Well hold on we want to make sure if we have any questions so we're going to go down
241 the line real quick.
242
243 Statler Gilfillen: I have no questions.
244
245 Charity Kirk: So, this is prior to an actual land survey and now a land survey has been done, so what
246 would happen if we say no?
247
12
DRAFT
248 Taylor Perschau: We would have a zoning atlas that is inaccurate. Currently there is an error in the zoning
249 atlas. So, if it wasn't adopted the error would remain and the zoning atlas would be
250 inconsistent with on the ground ridge line.
251
252 Charity Kirk: Yeah.
253
254 Taylor Perschau: So, it affects how planning staff reviews the impervious surface for this particular property.
255
256 Charity Kirk: Right.
257
258 Taylor Perschau: And part of why this is coming about now is the property is, there are three separate
259 applications for subdivisions that have been applied from an original parent tract. So,
260 they're in the process and they're trying to figure out where houses can be sited and what
261 their impervious surface constraints are.
262
263 Charity Kirk: Why would we want to say no?
264
265 Taylor Perschau: I don't have a good reason.
266
267 Charity Kirk: Okay, thank you. That's it.
268
269 Taylor Perschau: Yes.
270
271 Statler Gilfillen: If I am understanding what you are saying, this is a procedural issue where the original
272 way it was laid out is no longer in consistency or corrected to the current standards and
273 that you are asking us basically to bring this up to the current standards.
274
275 Taylor Perschau: Yes, the request is to get mapping to be accurate with the topography found on site, yes.
276
277 Chris Johnston: You good Charity?
278
279 Charity Kirk: Yes.
280
281 Cy Stober: And for what's it worth to play this out in the regulatory framework. This is different from
282 most other zoning cases in that because the EMC has recognized the watershed
283 boundary and because we are a delegated program by the state and these watershed
284 boundaries are assigned to us by the state, the appeal would go directly to the
285 Environmental Management Commission. It would not go to our Board of Adjustment,
286 and they've already recognized this boundary, so it's a bit of cart and horse, but I do think
287 this is the appropriate way, and this is what the state DEQ has directed us to do. This
288 process and this procedure of recognizing the new surveyed ridge line boundary and
289 following up with our locally applied zoning even though this is zoning that reflects state
290 watershed protections. It is cart and horse depending on how you look at it, but this is the
291 path forward that the state has laid out to us.
292
293 Charity Kirk: So, it would be kind of ridiculous if we said no?
294
295 Cy Stober: You could say that.
296
297 Chris Johnston: Whitney?
13
DRAFT
298
299 Whitney Watson: No.
300
301 Chris Johnston: Meg?
302
303 Meg Millard: I just, I know that this is following the topography and everything, but this does then
304 maybe give them 4 more acres that they can develop. Is that right? Because it's in a less
305 protected watershed.
306
307 Taylor Perschau: So, they could develop it regardless. They could develop it according to the zoning. They
308 could develop it according to the University Lake protected.
309
310 Meg Millard: Right but they, in the denser way they could develop it, slightly.
311
312 Taylor Perschau: There's a lot there. I don't think it's fair to say a lot more densely.
313
314 Meg Millard: Okay. I mean there's only so dense you can get in that area, I know.
315
316 Taylor Perschau: Right, so there is an existing application on file where this property is proposed for four
317 lots. The smallest of which is 3.5 acres. The zoning would allow them to go down to 2
318 acres. University Lake does have a 1 per 5-acre residential maximum. With or without
319 this, I think they could still get four lots.
320
321 Meg Millard: Okay.
322
323 Chris Johnston: Are you good now?
324
325 Delores Bailey: Just really quick, did you say the owner saw it first?
326
327 Taylor Perschau: No, the surveyor found it. So, the owners commissioned survey work in March of 2024
328 and that's when it was identified for the first time, March of'24, and then in September of
329 '24, they recorded it in at the Register of Deeds to make it an official registered document.
330 Since then, the Board of County Commissioners and the EMC at the state level have both
331 had that survey as reference for their consideration as to whether this amendment is a
332 county initiated that came out of March 2025 authorization from the Board of County
333 Commissioners.
334
335 Chris Johnston: Okay, Jonah? Okay, any final follow up questions. I will look to entertain a motion.
336
337 Statler Gilfillen: I suggest a motion that we approve this.
338
339 Meg Millard: Second.
340
341 Chris Johnston: Okay, so I have a motion to approve the amendment as written. And a second from Meg.
342 Is there anything else I need to add? Cy? No, wonderful. Great. So we will go ahead and
343 have a vote. All those in favor say aye.
344
345 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to approved. Seconded by Meg Millard.
346
347 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
14
DRAFT
348
349 Chris Johnston: Aye. Seems to be unanimous.
350
351 Taylor Perschau: Thank you.
352
353 Chris Johnston: Great, so I believe that is it for the evening for our Planning Board agenda, so let's see
354 here. I do think we adjourn at this point, right. We have an ORC after this, but we still
355 have to adjourn the meeting to close it out. So, I have a motion for adjournment?
356
357 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT
358
359 Statler Gilfillen: I'll so move.
360
361 Chris Johnston: Statler, second. Meg, thank you. Okay. We are adjourned.
362
363 MOTION BY Statler Gilfillen to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Meg Millard.
364
365 MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
15
1 SUMMARY NOTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
3 FEBRUARY 4,2026
4 ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE
5
6
7 NOTE: A QUORUM IS NOT REQUIRED FOR ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
8
9 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamar Proctor(Chair) Cheeks Township, Chris Johnston (Vice-Chair) Hillsborough Township,
10 Statler Gilfillen, Eno Township Representative; Meg Millard, Little River Township Representative; Venkat Yendapalli,
11 Cedar Grove Township Representative; Jonah Garson,At-Large Representative;Whitney Watson,At-Large
12 Representative; Delores Bailey,At-Large Representative; Charity Kirk,At-Large Representative.
13
14 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director; Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director—Long Range Planning
15 &Administration;Taylor Perschau, Current Planning Manager; Jack Moran, Planner 1
16
17 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
18 Meeting began at 7:21 PM.
19
20 AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE(UDO)TEXT AMENDMENT—SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS-To
21 review Planning Director-initiated amendments to the LIDO pertaining to subdivision review processes and
22 classifications.
23 PRESENTER: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director
24
25 Cy Stober gave a presentation on the proposed UDO text amendments.
26
27 The board reviewed previously proposed text amendments and how they relate to the new proposed package.
28
29 The board discussed their role in the subdivision approval process,weighing the importance of public involvement.
30
31 The board discussed the current subdivision ordinance and how it applied to development within the county,
32 specifically section 7.2.3 in relation to multiple subdivisions from a single parent tract.
33
34 The board discussed potentially changing the lot threshold which would trigger Planning Board involvement and
35 review, specifically whether the Board should review more or fewer subdivision applications.
36
37 The board requested clarity from planning staff regarding public notification and neighborhood information meetings
38 within the subdivision approval process.
39
40 The board requested a review of the approved major subdivisions from the previous five years.
41
42 The board reviewed the associated proposed changes to articles 2 and 3 of the Orange County LIDO
43
44 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT
45 The meeting adjourned at 9:21 PM.
46
16
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober,AICP,Director I cstober@orangecountync.gov 1131 W.Margaret Lane,Hillsborough,NC 27278 919.245•2575
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 18, 2026
TO: Orange County Planning Board
FROM: Tom Altieri, Senior Planner, Planning and Inspections
RE: Land Use Plan 2050 — Update on Planning Process
ATTACHMENTS: A: Meeting notes from Nov 14, Retreat 1
B: Meeting notes from Nov 21, Retreat 2
Request for Background Information Presented to Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC):
At the December Planning Board meeting, Planning Board members requested
information that was received by the BOCC at its retreats held in November of last year.
Planning Board members were invited to attend the retreats to hear the presentations
and a few members were able to attend the daytime meetings. The specific subject
matter mentioned by Planning Board members included:
• Community Septic and Wastewater Treatment;
• Groundwater Resources; and
• Conservation Subdivisions.
On December 29, 2025 Cy Stober, Planning Director, emailed links to all of the fall 2025
work sessions and retreats to the Planning Board. Following are links to the agenda
materials for the two retreats (which included the materials the Planning Board
specifically requested), as well as an audio recording of Retreat 1 and video recording
of Retreat 2. Please review the subject matter of your interest and come prepared to
the March 4 meeting with any questions and/or items for discussion. Planning staff will
answer questions at the meeting but will not present the information that was provided
by subject matter experts. If needed, Planning staff will follow-up after the meeting as
well.
November 14, 2025, Retreat 1
Community Septic System & Community Well Packet
BOCC Retreat 1 Audio
November 21, 2025, Retreat 2
Conservation Subdivision Packet
BOCC Retreat 2 Video
A representative from Clarion Associates attended the retreats to hear the
presentations, BOCC discussions, and take notes of main points. Attachments A and B
17
are provided as supplemental but may be helpful as a summary of presentation,
including some graphics, and discussion highlights from the Consultant's perspective.
Next Steps: A third BOCC retreat has been scheduled for Saturday, March 21 for the
Board to continue receiving background information. Remaining agenda item topics
include: 1) the economics of housing supply and demand and, 2) roundtable discussion
of housing among the Home Builders Association of Durham, Orange, and Chatham
Counties; local Chambers of Commerce; Habitat for Humanity; several other
organizations; and the BOCC.
Following the conclusion of presentations, the BOCC has been asked by Clarion
Associates and Planning staff to identify any changes to the preliminary draft Land Use
Plan 2050 that may be needed prior to its release for public review during Community
Engagement Window (CEW) #3. CEW #3 was scheduled to occur between May - July
of 2025. The last public engagement meeting held for the LUP 2050 project occurred,
during CEW #2, on October 15, 2024.
Contract Amendment #4 will need to be prepared and approved by the BOCC prior to
Clarion's initiation of any work editing the preliminary draft LUP 2050, scheduling
engagement meetings, preparing engagement materials, and coordinating with County
staff for public notice prior to the launch of engagement.
Planning staff will continue to keep the Planning Board apprised as more is known
about the project schedule and next steps.
Additional information about the project, including e-mail sign-up for project updates, are
available on the project website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com.
Completed project deliverables, including Fact Book; outreach summaries; and more,
are also available on the project website:
https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com/resources
Why does Orange County Need to Update its Land Use Plan? - In North Carolina, local
governments that apply "...zoning regulations... shall adopt and reasonably maintain a
comprehensive plan or land-use plan (G.S. 160D-501(a)). This statute requires that
zoning regulations are "in accordance with a comprehensive plan" and requires that
local governments make statements of consistency when making rezoning decisions on
a development application. The existing Orange County Comprehensive Plan was
adopted in November 2008.
Please feel free to contact Tom Altieri, Senior Planner, with any questions at
land useplan(a_orangecountync.gov; taltieri(a_orangecountync.gov or 919-245-2579.
18
Attachment A
Summary Notes
Community Wastewater Systems
Tony Whitaker, PE, presented slides describing onsite wastewater systems. He is a
professional engineer in NC and a principal in a private consulting firm. He is also a current
member of the Orange County Board of Health.
General
Definitions
• Onsite Wastewater System: A treatment system located on or near the property
that generates the wastewater being treated, and which disperses the effluent to the
soil for final treatment.
• Community Wastewater System: A single onsite system that serves more than one
residential or commercial property.
Ownership Options
• Private: Individual property owner, property owner association, mobile home park
owner, business or non-profit entity, regulated water company
• Public: Local government, state government, public utility(e.g., OWASA), sanitary
district
Regulatory Authority
• Subsurface dispersal
o Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
■ Has authority over these systems, reviews system designs
o Local Health Department(LHD)
■ Issues permits, provides inspections and enforcement
o Engineered Option Permit (EOP)
■ Private engineer designs the system and issues permits (effectively
regulatory functions are shifted to the private sector)
■ This is a relatively new option, but very popular
• Surface dispersal or discharge to the surface
o Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ)
■ Has authority over these systems
■ No formal relationship with local health departments, but does
provide notice to local health department when permit is issued
19
Location of Wastewater Systems
• Septic systems do not need to be downhill of wells, but it is important that they do
not flow into groundwater.
• Horizontal separation of wells and drainfields is important to ensure that
wastewater does not affect well water.
• Can use testing wells to examine current water quality(and potential impacts from
septic system).
• Safety regulations, such as requiring a monitoring system, could be added to the
UDO at a later date.
• Dispersal fields generally do not last as long if they contain trees
Community vs. Individual Systems
W11
& R,-
Z.
• Community systems are larger and more complex
• Common elements of community systems are owned by the HOA and located on
HOA land
• Subject to higher design standards (due to size and complexity, not due to common
ownership)
• Operated professionally with more robust monitoring, inspections, and reporting
• Package plants can be anysize—from an individual home to hundreds.
Sequencing of Building Homes and Wastewater Systems
1. System permitted for construction
2. Building permits can be issued as soon as the system is permitted
20
Treatment
Soils
• Soil used for dispersal must be able to absorb and treat effluent, appropriately
Located, and sufficient in area.
o Such soil is in limited supply in Orange County
• Enhanced treatment or dispersal types can be used for lower-quality soils, but some
soils are not usable at all
• Soils suitable for septic are also often suitable for farming, so there is a tradeoff to
consider
Effluent Standards
Standards Acronyms: Standards for Effluent Quality
• DSE: Domestic
Strength Effluent Septic Tank
g Effluent I<------------ Advanced Pre-Treatment ---------->I
standard
• NSF/ANSI 40: IM3WIMIMIM
National Sanitation BOD_5:350 mg/1 CBOD: 15 CBOD:10
Foundation/ TSS: 100 mg/1 TSS:15 T55:10
American National TKN: 100 mg/1 NH3:10 NH3: 10
Standards Institute 7to 15 x better than D5E
• TS-I: Treatment
Standard I
• TS-II: Treatment Standards II
• RCW: Reclaimed Water
Wastewater Constituents of Concern Acronyms:
• BOD-5, CBOD: Biological Oxygen Demand
• NH3, TKN, TN: Nitrogen Compounds, Ammonia
• TSS: Total Suspended Solids
21
More intensive treatment(TS-1 or TS-11)is required for package treatment systems than for
basic onsite systems (DSE).
• Package systems discharge to ditch/stream, so the water does not go through the
soil for extra cleaning, but the higher effluent standards more than make up for that
• Advanced pre-treatment can filter out heavy metals (usually with a fabric or heavy
textile material that can be removed for cleaning and disposal)
• Advanced pre-treatment generally does not address PFAS
• Package treatment systems don't necessarily produce drinking-quality water, but it
gets close to those standards
• Package plants are highly regulated and monitoring is required
Why use advanced pre-treatment?
• Overcome a limiting site condition
• Increase system capacity
System Costs
• Community systems tend to be more expensive on a per-lot basis, but there are cost
savings compared to advanced pre-treatment for individual systems
• The table below shows a per-lot basis; compact locations drive per-lot costs down
(due to the amount of infrastructure required to transfer the water to the common
Location)
• The table below
shows a range of Comparison of Treatment Methods
estimates for
Basic Septic Tank Soil
wastewater systems onsite Prima Dispersal Dis rsalinto Final
Treatment Soil Treatment
in Orange County, System DSE DSE
based on the Advanced Septic Tank Soil
industry contacts of on5lte Primary ji, P Advanced Pre- Dispersal into Final
Treatment Treatment Soil 0 Treatment
Mr.Tony Whittaker System DSE TS-1orTS-II TS-1orTS-II
(presenter) Package Septic Tank
Treatment Primary Advanced Pre- * Discharge to
System Treatmerrt Treatment Ditch/Stream
DSE TS-1 or TS-11
22
Estimated Installation and Maintenance Costs
Installation, Not Monitoring and Maintenance and
System Description Including Design Testing, Annually Repairs,Annually
lu Conventional system $9,000-$12,000 - $100-$200
E
a�
a, = With pump $16,000-$20,000 - $300-$400
E
m 0
Innovative system $25,000-$50,000 $0-$1,000 $300-$400
a�
c a With Advanced Pre-
Treatment $45,000-$75,000 $750-$1,500 $300-$400
0 Without Advanced
c Pre-Treatment $20,000-$40,000 $200-$300 $300-$400
E �
�o .5 With Advanced Pre-
N Treatment $40,000-$60,000 $300-$500 $400-$600
Operational Monitoring
Community Wastewater Systems have more monitoring and more stringent requirements
than individual systems. The management and inspection characteristics of each system
type are shown in the table below.
23
NC DHHS Onsite Wastewater System Types
OrangeInspection Inspection
System Example Frequency-By Frequency-By
Classification Characteristics Mgmt. Entity M.
.
Type I Composting Toilet Owner None None
e Single family with a'
a Type II Owner None None
Q, conventional dispersal `
oSome types of non- is
U Type III conventional dispersal Owner 5 years if a pump 5 years if a pump
bfi'NtLe
r ! LPP dispersal,shared Certified Operator or Annually or Semi- _
Type IV 5 or 3 years w
elements,etc. Public Mgmt. Entity annually I +a
V I i
= 65E a 3000 gpd,AP¢ Certified Operator or =
I TypeV Annually-Weekly Annually I -
3000 gpd,etc. Public Mgmt. Entity
Type VI AP>3000 gpd
Certified Operator or I
Monthly Daily Semi-annually
Public Mgmt. Entity
Any Community System will be classified as Type IV,V or VI.
System Failures and Repairs
Components and Solutions
• The most expensive components to replace are also the most durable; these would
mostly not be expected to be replaced.
• None of the system components are proprietary or hard to obtain
• What happens when something fails?That depends:
o Is the failure known by the property owner?
o Is the problem discovered early or late?
o Is it a matter of normal maintenance/repair, or something more serious?
o Is correction optional, or mandatory?
o Is the owner motivated to fix it?
o Are funds available to fix it?
• What happens when a dispersal field fails?
o Sometimes a dispersal field benefits from resting/taking time off, for
biological and chemical reasons. It is a good practice to have multiple zones
to alternate between active use and rest. So if a dispersal field fails and the
repair field is used, and then the repair field is used, it is possible to use the
original dispersal field again.
o If solids get into the lines, that failure cannot be recovered.
• If something in a community system goes wrong, who bears liability and
responsibility?
24
o The HOA. They hire companies that provide wastewater system maintenance
services.
• How does flooding impact wastewater systems?
o Dispersal fields do not work as well when they're soaking wet from rainfall.
■ Can address this by requiring additional storage capacity in the tanks
(they can hold water back for a day or two when it's really wet, then
disperse it later)
o Systems are at risk when in floodplains. Note that floodplains are dynamic—
think beyond regulatory maps when considering flood risk to systems.
■ Keep systems outside of floodplains and near-term future floodplains
o Orange County regulates wastewater beyond state rules, and has historically
been a leader in the state in wastewater regulation. Keeping stormwater
regulations that prevent water intrusion into wastewater systems would help
to protect against the effects of intense rainfall events.
o These risks exist both for individual and community wastewater systems
• Wastewater systems can have progressive failure and remain unnoticed for years.
This is less likely in community systems due to increased monitoring requirements.
Replacement
❑urability for Materials
System Long-Term Readily Relative Cost
Component Service Available? to Replace
Tanks HIGH YES $$$
Filters MEDIUM YES $
Pumps MEDIUM YES $
Controls& MEDIUM YES $$
Alarms
Advanced Pre- HIGH YES $$$
Treatment Units
Dispersal Field MED-HIGH YES
Repair Field) $$$
Piney Mountain Neighborhood Example
• Neighborhood with community wastewater system was permitted by the NC
DEHNR—DEM (pre-DEQ); OC Health Dept had no role in approving wastewater
treatment design
• Major defects were identified sixyears later by OC Health Dept during permit
renewal; the dispersal field and repair field were not suitable due to inadequate
soils and poor dispersal design.
25
• Property owners were angry at the County because they couldn't get permits to
build their homes anymore. Eventually resolved via OWASA& Durham Cooperation.
• The major subdivision procedures currently in the UDO would prevent this
problem from happening again, as County staff evaluate and assess the soils in
the areas intended to be used for dispersal.These requirements could be
strengthened even more (Whitaker has some ideas for such changes)
• With state-level changes in the authority of local governments, some health
departments are not sure if they are allowed to comment on proposed
development.Whitaker believes that they still have the ability to comment and
assess, but not to approve/reject, which is up to the BOCC. The County Attorney
should weigh in on that.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Community Systems
Advantages and disadvantages of community wastewater systems over individual systems,
for both developers and for the County, are shown in the tables below.
Community System Advantages
0 3 Advantages
O u°
X X 1. More effective use of limited soil resources
X X 2. Better neighborhood design with clustered lots
X X 3. Supports a higher lot yield,within limits
X 4. HOA control and responsibility
X 5. Requires professional operational management
X 5. Can provide much better effluent quality(if AP is used)
X 7. Common maintenance not subject to family budget choices
X 8. Opportunity for BOCC to influence system characteristics
26
Community System Disadvantages
qJ
r_ Disadvantages
v o
o u
x 1. Higher costs may work against attainable housing goals
x 2. System problems and costs affect all property owners
x x 3. Some maintenance costs are still incurred by household
x x 4. HOA control and responsibility
x 5. Can be a higher installation cost,on a per-lot basis
x 6. Developer bears costs of design and most of installation
Disadvantage#3 elaboration: smaller, less robust HOAs may not be able to do the
management required (find a professional to do the repairs, collect money, stay on top of
repair needs)
Reflections
1. The regulatory environment for onsite wastewater systems doesn't differentiate
between Individual and Community ownership status.
2. Community wastewater systems are inherently unique and customized.
3. Any Community system requires professional operational management.
4. The Engineered Option Permit (EOP) process shifts significant regulatory functions
to the private sector.
S. Current Orange County UDO procedures for Major Subdivision should prevent a
repeat of the"fatal flaw" in the Piney Mountain community system.
6. Community systems present opportunities for the BOCC to shape wastewater
system characteristics in ways not typically available for Individual systems.
Policy Considerations
• Assess the level of confidence in:
o Available technology
o Current and future NC regulatory framework
o Practitioners in the industry
• Assess Orange County's ability to assure good practices related to design and
operation:
o UDO text
o SUP conditions
27
o Conditional Zoning conditions
o Development Agreement per NCGS 160D
o HOA documents—maintenance fund, surety
o Administrative procedures
• Legal and administrative reviews needed
• If community systems are desirable for Orange County, consider if they should be:
o Incentivized
o Permitted in limited areas, or more broadly
o Permitted only with specific conditions or standards
Community Wells
CJ Cornett, PG presented slides describing community wells. He has experience in
geotechnical geology and environmental and hydrogeologic consulting at Applied
Resource Management(ARM). ARM does well drilling, design, modeling, and remediation
work.
Water-table AOesion
well well
What is a Well? Land surface
n Potentiometric
• Definition: a pit or � ; z _ _.— _'• surface.l .
o'a o Copillar
" N UNCONFINED SAND Y
-Z
hole sunk into the > > - - fringe o
AQUIFER
earth to reach water Water table t-
screen - a
• Uses:
O Extraction of z CONFINING _-_-_ _-_- --- - -
No BED - - - - - - CLAY
resources (like
W S
water, oil, or
minerals), F cotvFINED LIMESTONES Ohoole -1 =
-1
a AQUIFER
contaminants,
and information Heath, 1983. Basic Ground-Water Hydrology
o Injection for
water, heat, or treatments for contaminants
o Monitoring
o Drinkingwater
What is a Public Supply Well?
• Well supplying water to greater than 15 residences
• Installed to higher standards (water quality and yield testing for sustainability)than
private water wells
28
• Managed by individuals or companies that maintain Drinking Water Operator
Certifications through DEQ
Public Supply Well Siting
• Where to get adequate yield:
o Siting is based on topographic and lithographic trends, site geology, regional
well trends, and pollutant setbacks.
o Different rock types offer different yields
o No matter the data you collect,you don't know until you drill. Often need to
drill multiple wells to find one with suitable yield (about a gallon per minute
per residence)
• Regulatory requirements
o Setbacks from potential sources of pollution
■ 100 feet away from sanitary sewage disposal systems, buildings,
surface water, and other similar pollution sources
■ 200+feet away from more intense potential sources of pollution
o A PG or PE must submit a sealed letter to NC DEQ certifying setbacks due
diligence
o Note: private wells only require 50'separation from septic systems, while
public wells require 100'separation
• Land use implications:
o One public well can supply 49 private residences, which minimizes the land
use impacts of wells and allows for more space for other uses (such as
septic disposal, open space, or denser neighborhood construction)
o In theory, a larger cluster of homes with one community well and lots of open
space with potential for second or third wells is more resilient than homes
spread farther apart each with their own well/
• Impacts on surrounding wells:
o A single community well that serves 40 homes will have less of an impact on
surrounding wells than 40 individual wells. Community wells have timers,
maximum use, and state monitoring
Public Supply Well Drilling
• Drilling requires space for drill cuttings (sediment); lots of air pushes everything out
at a high velocity
Public Supply Well Yield and Water Quality Testing
• Downhole video surveys are used to supplement well testing
29
• Yield
o Drawdown testing
■ A 24-hour drawdown test is used to determine a sustainable yield for
the well(gallons per minute)
• Wells are meant to be run 12 hours per day; 24 hours is used to
strain test.
■ Weather can affect the drawdown, but at a general, regional level
(supply is for a much greater distance than you might expect)
■ Seasonal changes in drawdown results are mostly due to the demand
for watering lawns—in the short term, this is more immediately
apparent than the impact of rain or drought
■ A long-term regional dewatering study would be helpful to ensure
sustainability of water supply
• Orange County has 13 wells that they monitor where data is
collected 24 hours per day(Orange County WellNet). The
County also monitors on the Eno River and in the Falls Lake
and Jordan Lake watersheds.
■ If a drawdown test is found to interfere with another well, it's not a
valid drawdown test
o How much yield is needed?
■ Up to the discretion of the manager of the site; lots of design and
management to understand what type of well is right for your system.
■ A good rule of thumb is one gallon per minute per residence
■ Generally much more use in the mornings and the evenings
• Quality
o Water quality samples are collected during drawdown testing and tested for
contaminants
o Quality testing results advising on filtration requirements
o A significantly larger sample spread is used for public supply wells than for
private wells, and standards are more strict
o In Orange County, pretty much every well will have iron and manganese and
will need to filter for those. Usually filtering for these is not complicated
o PFAS are generally from local contaminants
o Radiological problems are common constituents that preclude development
of a community well because it can be cost-prohibitive
■ Constituent= naturally appears in water supply
■ Contaminant= comes from somewhere else
30
o NC 02L standards are for groundwater, W-4 standards are for surface waters
(did not specify this in personal notes, expert clarification would be helpful)
Contaminant NC 02L Standard' W-4
Turbi¢Ity None e%teblShed. 0 3 tm.
Calcium None established. 18.2 mglL
Chloride 250 mg/L x5 mtyL
Fluoride 2 mg& 4.100 mglL
Iron 0.3 IT9L <0.06 mglL
Magnesium None established_ $.90 mglL
Manganese 0.05 mg& <0.010 mQ&
Sodium None established. 9.04 not
Sulfate(NW) 250 mot E5 m9t
AC4ty None established. 10 m9/L
Zinc 1 MA 0.0?0 ITVIL
Color PtCo 15 units <5 un"
Total Hardness None established. t38 m9IL
pH 6.5-t3.5 units 7.5 units
Alkatinity None established. 103 m I
TDS S00 mglL 142 mglL
Total Cokform 1 per 100 mL Present per 100 mL
E. Cali None established. Absenl Na
Toluene 0.6 1 nxyL 0.0406 mVL
Uranium 15 pCVL 068 pCtIL
Radiologieals EPA Standard' W-4
Gross Alpha 15 pCVL ND POOL
Combined Radium 5 pCWL c 1 0 pCVL
Radium 226 Summed tar combined lCWL ND pCVL
Radium n8 Radium value. pCVL FID pCVL
Gross Seta 50 PC& 4.5 pCVL
•tSA NCAC o2L.0202 GROUNDWATEM puALiTY STANOAROS,https:Ndt q.m.govldon mwOslne•stdc-roundwater-021�=
'NepholomauicTur6idiryLinot-
=RadronudrdrsFkk,EPA.hops:Irrwww.apa.govldwrr�inFohadianuc4dts ruA
•This taWe pro%idrs a botF ow+alrw of significant consIOLw ts.RoFN to tFk Full laboratorq rrpW For planning and f"Off r*mVions.
Final Construction and Permitting
• Final well drilling and testing report
o Summarizes geology and well construction
o Certifies construction meets 15A NCAC 02C standards
o Certifies yield testing results
o Provides water quality samples for State review and filtration design
• Next steps
31
o Distribution system engineer designs water distribution
o Review by utility operator
o NC DEQ final permitting after distribution design
o Construction
Well Drilling Costs
• Expenses vary significantly per well
• Drill costs influenced by depth, surface casing, diameter requirements, and site
access
• Maintenance costs include pump replacement, well cleaning, and water quality
monitoring
Long-Term Well Health
• Well lifespans generally range 30-50 years, but may be extended with proper
maintenance—cleaning reduces the strain on filtration systems, and not running
the well too much (it's not meant to run 24 hours per day) prolongs its lifespan
• It is difficult to build a new well after the old one expires, especially if there are
homes all around
• Redundancy is recommended—have another site available!
• Regional groundwater trends may impact well lifespans beyond the control of
operators (water mining, contamination, anthropogenic forcings)
Commissioner Questions
Questions Commissioners previously asked that relate to these topics, alongside
additional questions asked during this part of the meeting.
• How do the types of rocks matter for water supply to wells?
o Types of rock matters to a great degree, but that is part of the whole for each
site. Rock types vary from site to site and some rock types may be better in
one region due to local deformations as opposed to other regions where they
remain minimally altered.
o Bedford: some community oppose diabase rock, claiming it is more likely to
deplete other wells in the area. Is that accurate?
■ Diabase rock does allow for more breakdown and weathering—can be
a channel, or a means to take out water
■ However: Any well runs the risk of drawing down another well. Utilities
and project professionals can advise if drawdown is a substantial
32
concern. The farther apart the wells are, the less likely they are to
influence each other
• What is the impact of a well if it is near the headwaters of a stream?
o Since the creeks are usually a few feet deep, and community wells are
around 55 feet deep, it is unlikely that it would be taking water from the
stream.
o Surface water is transported away from the site; wells use deeper water that
is recharged farther from the site
o If groundwater is feeding a spring, and you tap into the groundwater ahead of
that spring,you may affect the spring. Community wells are less likely to do
that kind of thing than a private residence well.
• Do wells have an effect on the water table's pressure?
o Community wells in crystalline rock(like in Orange County)would generally
not have an effect on the water table or the aquifer
• Can any portion of our county be predictable or not for water supply/aquifer?
o Yes and no. Every well is different. We can use the information at our disposal
to reduce the risk or randomness in drilling, but there will always be risk.
• Can wells be tested ahead of approval for zoning change or building?
o Yes, and they should be.This work can be completed prior to any
development on a property. No development work should be undertaken
without ensuring that well water(or another water source) can sustain the
development.
• What are the most common human impacts on well yield?
o Usually irrigation-related (especially for landscaping)
o Otherwise,just the regular consumption and use of water
• Impacting other wells?
o All wells run the risk of impacting other wells, community or private.
Community wells are typically focused on due to the higher demand they
require with more residences connected. However, the increased efficiency
of operators and distribution systems with the higher scruple of regulatory
agencies means they are also generally maintained and monitored to a
higher degree than private wells.
0 24-hour drawdown tests performed on community wells area great
opportunity to monitor nearby wells for fracture interconnectivity.
• Costs to drill?
o This can vary widely, but the major expenses in drilling are the surface
casing, well diameter, and depth requirements.
33
o Wells with 100'or more surface casing become very expensive due to
specialty equipment holding the borehole stable during casing installation
and the expense of larger piping materials for the casing.
o Deeper wells are more expensive as greater depths frequently correlate with
Longer drill times. Footage prices increase with depth which coincides with
those longer drill times.
o Access to sites across difficult terrain and strict regulations on
sedimentation during drilling can also increase prices.
• Costs to maintain?
o General maintenance is outside the scope of our work, but most operators
will replace some of the mechanical equipment like pumps and motors in
time. Should not have to replace very frequently if properly maintained.
o Mineral build-up may also require well maintenance, but this can be reduced
if the well is monitored and regulated appropriately.
• Reliability? Failure Rates?
o The strict requirements of NC DEQ help provide confidence that at the end of
drawdown testing with water quality results, you have a final idea of long-
term sustainability. However, any aquifer is subject to change with continued
human or natural forces acting on it.
o Aquifer change versus well change will vary per well.
• In face of climate change?
o This is going to be a site-specific discussion, but most wells in the Piedmont
are going to be influenced by immediate anthropogenic forcings to a greater
degree than global scale climate change.
34
Attachment B
Summary Notes
Conservation Subdivisions
Presentation by Randall Arendt.
Conservation Subdivision
Density
• Conservation i • ' . 9 4 ' r '
subdivisions are density - MMIMM
neutral: same lot count,
but with significant
open space. Smaller
Lots does not mean -
higher density.
•
Below: Bucks County,
PA outside PA that �'r ; , 1&6
struggles with
affordable housing �, 4� � Fjold,.Stream Corridor.andan Mature Woodlds Protected_
• some worry that these !"yfm�eNelopmert
` I
small lots will devalue
their homes—in fact, it
�-a a�a a•iay�0� a■ ��a
will improve property
values.
• Expensive homes example on small lots—Westwood Commons CSD north of
Detroit
• Neighbor was opposed to the small lot houses next door to devalue his home—after
he saw them built, he joined the neighborhood with a new driveway from his back
yard to the new cul-de-sac with the pricey homes, improving his own property
values
• Attractive upload open space in a CSD compensates for the smaller lot sizes, as
they do in golf course development—described as"golf course developments
without the golf course"with neighborhood greens instead of putting greens,
greenway instead of fairways
• CSDs can provide a variety of housing types and price points
• Example: Battle Road Farm in Lincoln, MA, 12 homes (40% affordable) located on
24 acres at 5 du/ac, with 59% open space
35
• Upland = non-riparian, non flood prone, etc.
Comparison to flexible developments
• CSD typically protects 50-65% of the land, much more than either clustering or
flexible development
• Shortcomings of flexible developments were his primary motivation in creating the
superior CSD approach 30 years ago
• CSDs protect _ 4 _ _ 1 a 4 0
at least 50% of
the
unconstrained i •
Land, PLUS all '
of the
wetlands,
floodplains, a �'
and steep
slopes
• Flexible
developments
are allowed to
include all of
r
these {
unbuildable
Land types plus t _ *4,A ''=' ` '
"wet pond"
stormwater basins in meeting their minimum open space requirements
• Yield plans: critically important step showing how many lots could realistically be
Located on the parcel, given its constraints. Not based on total acreage
o Honest reckoning of how many lots you can get
o The need to require yield plans is illustrated below—not only were there
many acres of undevelopable wetlands, but also parts of the property that
probably could not be accessed on the other side of the two streams
• A big drawback to Flexible Development is that—in allowing developers to count
unbuildable land as part of their required minimum open space—they can satisfy
much of that requirement with wetlands, steep slopes and floodplains—thereby
allowing them to locate house lots on farmland and other resources needing
protection
36
To better protect more of the developable land (such as farmland) in the rural areas,
and in the Rural Buffer, the County might consider upgrading Flexible Developments
with the better CSD standards, OR Replacing the Flexible Development provisions
with those for Conservation Subdivision Design.
In Arendt's professional opinion: the Rural Buffer zoning is still too rigid-even with
"Flexible Development"-- and does not allow the greater flexibility of CSD, which
would enable new developments at the desired overall two-acre density to conserve
much more land,with smaller lots.
Importance of CSDs
• CSDs can help achieve a number of important goals, including
o Environmental Resource Protection
o Climate Resilience
o Farmland Conservation
o Housing Attainability
o More and Better Wastewater Option
• Wastewater treatment can be provided in a variety of different ways with
Conservation Subdivision Design:
o On-lot individual septic drain fields
o Off-lot individual septic drain fields
o Off-lot shared drain field
• CSD enables lots to avoid borderline-soils and for on-lot drain fields to be located
entirely on soils that are better-drained and more suitable
Better soils x4 ��
p 4
- - - KC't F
1
margin all
1 y b
1 A
. �1 "�.. �_ +'����� �"'4 •f k, Irk
Thirteen twa-and-one.hall acre lots Thirteen one-acre lots
Six orr marginal soil AH on betler sail
37
• CSD approach is well suited to individual off lot septic-serving smaller lots that
enable substantial open space to be preserved
o Madison,WI
•
• if off lot septic drain fields need to be located on the better farmland soil,the
house lots could be located on other nearby soils,thereby minimizing farmland
Lots
• Better to spend $150 every three years by HOA to avoid clogging of drain field,
Leading to expensive repair
• HOA plays key role in maintenance-usually a discount to handle all of the homes at
once
Question from Hamilton:
• Can the farms still use the land where the drain fields are?
o Answer: generally
o Septic drain fields only cover about 2000 sq ft. even for a 20 lot subdivision-
you may lose an acre.
o Would add a fence so the cows or tractors don't go into the drain field.
o Can't put heavy equipment on a drain field
o Use that farmland sparingly
38
Springifield in SE PA-Chester County example:
r
septic fieide wel houses
w
e rrreiq�pw -- pond
Woe s
farnly yy =
0
S tar
po Gels
town rxxi e
Io#s
o ZOO 400 goo
FEET
• These are shared wells, shared septics, not many units
Acres Saved with CSD
Figures below about 15 years old
39
35
Acres Saved with CSD
Towns and Townships
Westborough, MA 448 acres
Westford, MA i acres
Hamburg i
, MI 750 acres
Hopkinton, ` a
Counties
Cherokee County, • 1,374 acres
Waukesha County, Wl 1,670 acres
Hanover ! ' 5,550 acres
County,Calvert • cres
San Luis Obispo County, ` 9,000 acres
NationwideEstimate:
• CSDs have been created in many states in different regions of the country, including
the Northeast, the MidAtlantic, the South, the Midwest, the Rockies, the West
Coast, and across Canada. Such as Maine, Massachusetts, CT, PA, MD, VA, KY, NC,
GA, FL, TX, OH, IL, WI, MN, CO, CA, and Washington State.
Ownership of CSD Open Space
• Homeowner Associations
o Need to be automatically opted into the HOA
o Pay your back dues with interest when you go to sell your house if you are not
part of the HOA
• Land trusts—conservation easement in perpetuity
• Counties or municipalities
o Management plan submitted to the county for review—who is responsible for
what and what frequency
40
Permanent Protection of the Open Space
• Through conservation easements held by:
o Land trusts
o Counties or municipalities
o State or federal agencies
• National examples
o Bucks County—horse pasture
o Walkers County, Wisconsin— playground
o Chester County, PA —orchard
o MN —Community supported agriculture and deer bred for antlers
o Llama farm
o Allen, TX —Tree farm
o Others: Bluebird houses, llama farms,vineyards,viewshed protection
0 1982 South Brodrick—community gardens came in 10 years later, soccer
fields, public wellfield for public water
■ 1982—didn't know all the uses would be fulfilled to keep open space.
o Developer—Ron Sietmant,Wisconsin—trails
o Blairbyfarm in Brunswick, ME—saved blueberry plants in the middle
o Other locations - Hanover county, VA; Brunswick County, maine
Site Visits
• Essential first step with applicants and abutters to discover and evaluate special
site features
• Site visits are essential because reviewing a paper plan without walking the property
is like hiring a person on the basis of a resume only and with no in person interview
• Site visits are informal outdoor work sessions
• Conducted by PB members and sometimes by BOCC members too, advertised in
the usual manner, at which no decisions are made
• It's extremely difficult for officials to really understand a property simply by looking
at a two-dimensional abstraction, like a paper map. Everyone benefits when they
see the land three-dimensionally, in person.
• Prefer abutters to be involved from the beginning and it doesn't build resentment
41
Recommendations
• Recommend that codes require that sketch plans be created by landscape
architects or by physical planners, not by engineers, whose training is mostly in
streets and stormwater
o Only two schools left in the country that require design with planning
o Davidson, NC—planners that they hire are architects or landscape architects
for many years
o Believe that's the best profession for the sketch plans
o Let designers do the designing and engineers do the engineering
• Opposers
o Abutters—upfront experiences during informal site visits where they can ask
questions and sometimes provide useful information/context for the area
o Example of historic preservation—civil war road—greenway has added value
with history
Four Step Design Process
• Contained in the regulations
• Identify potential conservation areas
• Locate house sites
• Connect homes with streets (engineer)
• Darw in the lot lines (eingeers)
Orange County example in book
Before:
42
43
d
U
■
w ■■
1 ■fioadplain
lop Ar •hydrio soils
■ •shalbw soils
■moderato to steep
■ slopes
• Flow r,r� R
SPI�M1B
s un
■ ■2
r
�pil[ei5YiI1B Road
6 90G�S�Ov
Yield plan:
steep slopes(>25%)
m
floodplaln
hydric sous
shallow soils•— 1L..
,ti {
Rohsef sulltE
Road
t fl 9011 eo0
Lr—L=Feet
44
I
Z -potential development areas—
1
9 �
G
conservatior
ti
Rur[
N 1 o w+nR S p r l n S s
c
0
Y
n
9r�
hcusA Sites•
• conservation are
Hun
Flawirl8 5pr�"gs
cabin
45
roads House spas
m
w
o ` I trails
6 ■
` Conservation area
• Air ■ice r � ■
a, •
f
a
• • Run
wi s
spring Fri ng .Sy rf nB
cabin
R�"rsvl;le pOdti
-ED y�30D��6a0
z l�.i IJ �Faet
rneadow tulure toad extension
w
p
v'
r atone trails
9 wall *v
■ meadow r
tedbuds ~
f
stone wall i a/ 16 r
goo
orchard- a
* Run
loweRB ;rtgs
spring and
5 pringhcu s9
Gahlfl
meadows
historic site
Rohrersvilte Road
L o atan soo
z° LJ LJ 7 Feet
46
meadow
� 1GU
w
� pores
m .raw
o alone wall field
wa \ moderate siopes
redbuds
wild"a corridor
stone wall mea
orchard
Rrrn
spring and plow+ng Sr,iri85
springhouse cabin
historic site
meadow
Rorirersvllle Road
v svo evv
Rural CSD Examples
• Illustrate more and better options for water supply and sewage disposal
• When farms become smaller—become more productive in types of products (high
value crops, fruit, vegetables)
o Peach orchard instead of row crops
• Example: Fields at Cold Harbor, Hanover County, VA
o Individual on lot wells and individual on lot septic systems at a five acre
overall density(25 one acre lots on 120 acres)
Conservation Subdivisions with Shared Wells and Shared Septic
• Example: Indian Walk, Buckingham Twp, PA
o Individual on lot wells and shared central septic drain field
0 50 acres with ten lots (20,000 to 30,000 SF), about 90% open space
• Canterbury, Buckingham Twp, PA
0 16 small starter homes with'/a acre lots of 17 acres
o About 75% open space, shared well, and community septic drain field
• Ringfield, Chadds Ford Township, Delaware County, PA
o Shared wells and shared septic drainfields
0 38 dwellings on 76 acres including 6 attached townhouse units
0 74% open space, 56 acres
47
bwn
drntl'f '�Du.��.`y. .wW,..,�•�V�~�_,.}
:::......;... ,.. .. :: o
_..-....�:...ter�. ....-.-,'�.,x,.._....«,........,1_.s..-.,,+.mow...-r.�....c...a....._r-.�
. .w..�._........
. .
D tpp 200 Q00
FEET
Conservation Subdivisions with Off-Lot Individual Septic
• Strathmore Farm, Madison, CT
o 24 homes on 29 acres
o .2 acre density
o Condos on lots of 10,000 to 12000 SF
"[Conservation subdivisions]are what you can do when you free yourself
from the shackles of zoning"-Randall Arendt
Conservation Subdivisions with Community Septic in the Protected Open
Space
• Partridgeberry Place, Ipswich, MA
0 20 lots at 8500 SF on 37 acres
o Nearly 2 acres per dwelling unit density
o Shared septic drain field and public water
• **Recommends single loaded streets-ratio of street length to houses is not
excessive
o Double the density and put all the houses on one side of the road
48
o Don't usually design it that way—loading houses on one side of the road
maximizes the open space
Multiple Shared Septic Systems and Shared Wells on Utility Easements in
Open Space
Public Water Supply
• Not necessarily advocating for this in the rural area
• But this would be a great fit between rural buffer and Carrboro/Chapel Hill—in
between
• Long Hill Farm, Guilford, CT
0 55 condo lots of 5000 each plus 35 attached units in a large barn-like
building
0 90 dwellings on 50 acres
o Density: 1.8 acres per dwelling
o About 65% open space
o Developer was beloved
Conservation Subdivisions with Community Well and Community Septic
• The Ponds at Woodward, Kennet Township, Chester County, PA
0 57 homes on 120 acres, 2 acre density
0 24 townhouse units plus 33 half acre lots
o About 70% open space
o One well and one septic—don't really advise this. Like to spread out the
utilities.
Community Septic and Public Water
• Weathersone CSD,West Vincent Twp, Chester County PA
0 273 dwellings on 300 acres
o Preserved 65% of developable land
o 195 acres of farmland and woods
o Mixed uses, including county library branch
o Others include daycare—fit well into comp plan and zoning
• PA: drip and sprawy irrigation works well into ponds but wouldn't necessarily
recommend that here
• Mixed use—rental apartments above properties
• The Fields of St. Croix, Lake Elmo, MN
o Community well plus constructed wetland sewage treatment system
0 113 homes on 247 acres
49
0 2.5 acre density
0 60% open space
o Prairie preservation
Areas with Public Water and Public Sewer
CSD becomes OSD: Open Space Development(24-40%preserved land)
• Farmview, Lower Makefield Twp, Bucks County, PA
0 310 homes on 310 buildable acres
o With 108 acres of unbuildable land conserved
o Density of 1 dwelling per buildable acre
o Designed by landscape architect
o Total 208 acres land preserved—140 farmland acres, 68 acres woodland
o Farmers formed a corporation to preserve the land—been farmed for a long
time
o Designed by Michael Staduhs, RLA, for Realen Homes
• Summerfield, borough of Everson, PA
o 318 homes on 137 acres
o Houses from the highway, and back up to a horse pasture
o Density of 2.3 dwellings per acre
o Variety of housing types—single family to5du/building
o Use mix with shops, offices, and a commercial equestrian facility
o Roughly 33% open space
o Mennonite church (religious developer)
50
neighborhood
corner store Route 23
post office
village
p townhuses
day care .:'
con wTI rn'#jr bk�
a
office and
\� �
employment �y
centers
main street
twins I� I-
I pond
estate houses viliage
/ 0 single houses
• People that live there have first dibs on having a horse there; a lot of the horses are
boarded from people in the surrounding area; backyards overlook horse pastures
51
t= _
- . --- - _ :,gas t;7 -. > • :..:;,.; -ry�z-..�,�:�°''...
• Battle Road Farm, Lincoln MA
o Example IF orange county builds into rural buffer
0 120 dwellings on 24 acres, 5 du/ac gross
0 40% affordable-48units
o 60% are senior and market rate
0 59% permanent open space
o Layout id designed like a golf course development but without the golf course
o Connected farmhouse design to be able to walk to farm
o Outside—can't tell if it's affordable, senior, or market rate—blended together
o Varying density
• Cottages on Greene, East Greenwich, RI
o Example of ensuring that affordable units blend with market rate units,
require that they often share the esame two, three, or four family building
Question from Portie-Ascott
• Clarified if Summerfield was on public water
• Can you get affordable units on only public water?—
o Answer is only on community well
52
o Lot cheaper than extending sewer line and a lot of people don't want sewer
Line extended (plus impact to growth if that's extended)
o Yes can have affordable housing on community well and community septic f
o Pretty high density example
• Single family detached townhouses can also be located along streets or can
surround a "green"(cottage clusters)
• Poplar Gardens, North Boulder, CO
0 100% affordable cottages
0 14 dwellings on 1.4 acres (10 du/ac)
o **add minimum width of 30 feet for central greens and plant trees!
• An excellent way of ensuring that affordable units blend with market-rate units
is to require that they often share the same two-,three-, or four-family building
53
�r •'J.
Ip
-} y
t 1 } r
a� y+r { ,� Y e k •yy}
hot
Y +7j
�= t
hL + R }
4.4,
I'd
.7 • _ y
0- Ail I
IL
��-.fie,.} � � �;�,•'. _` }�}+ k� � j3 ;�+f�Js��`' ,I;f_',
f� N�`[� ��"'yy"'���+'��rY= -; F� � L� +i'aa.. +i �a* �•.
• Bungalow Courts: aka pocket neighborhoods or cottage clusters
o With detached townhouses
o Higher density infillwith central open space
o Either on shared septics and wells, with public water/sewer
Question from McKee: asked how they define affordable?
0 Percent of AMI
54
Final Recommendations
• Because CSD is not explicitly discussed in the 2030 Comp Plan, the 2050 Plan
needs to include it, for the Rural Area and the Rural Buffer.
• In the meantime, a guidance document to support this approach would be very
helpful, besides updating the UDO.
Summary
• CSD protects more land than Flexible Subdivisions, Can be designed to
minimize farmland loss, Can utilize various wastewater options, Is compatible
with"Attainable Housing", and Is very applicable to the Rural Buffer.
• Recommendation: *** ensure that affordable units blend with market rate units
is to require that they often share the same two, three or four family building
Question from Carter
• Question: laid out the four steps in the design process.Where are those four
steps embedded in the planning process? Plan, UDO?
o Can allude to them in the comp plan. But specifics are always in the UDO.
o NC model ordinance for conservation design - randall sent to staff.
• Open space requirement-plan? UDO?
o Doesn't hurt to include in guidance document. But what really counts is the
ordinance language
• Agricultural management- how does that work and how does that work in terms of
management and ownership?
o County planning in PA and NY its advisory, Ohio west its regulatory
o MD its regulatory?
o Lower Mayfield township farming corporation- bucks county, PA, advisory
■ Township had rules
■ Township put ordinance-owner of open space maybe abcde
options, probably didn't even think of a farmland corporation
■ Not one individual owner- kind of like a co0op
o Most examples are owned and managed by HOAs
■ should be a permanent easement on that plan
55
• Stober: clarification that our ordinance that the flexible subdivisions layout was
updated 1 year ago. In the process of putting together 94 pages of amendments—
better enable flexible developments and encourage them. Conventional layout is
only used administratively by staff as a futile step in the pre-application. Additional
cost burden to applicant and is another cost obstacle.
• Present time—exists in the ordinance. Doesn't usually go past Cy's desk. Arendt is
proposing a much more public exercise. Some of the last zoning hearings had
questions about what is the actual buildable land versus not buildable
Recommendations, Continued
• Recommendation: ***update the plan and UDO to randall arendt definition to
preserve 50%of BUILDABLE land, not just all land
CSDs protect at least 50% of ed
PLUS
all of w 7
contrast,plains, and steep slopes.
In
Flexibleare allowcd to include
ALL
of these unbuildable land types
plus "wet pond" stormwater basins
in meeting their minimum open space requirements.
Question from Fowler: where should we put CSDs?
• Up to us.
• Leon county, FL surrounding Tallahassee—wanted conservation subdivisions within
X number of miles of the water line and sewer lines, not the far end of the rural areas
56
• Other counties have said anywhere
• Arendt can't advise on the location
• Might want to take a gradual approach—conservation subdivision in one part of the
county before adding elsewhere.
• **advises to get rid of flexible development!
o Can't build there anyway—why give them density credit for that?
o Stober: riparian buffer—50 feet from the edge of bank at the state level.
Depending on the soil, we have 65 or 80 feet buffers. Additional reservoir
setbacks separate from riparian. Also flood plain buffer.
o Arendt: riparian buffer will push the development back. Good conservation
plan will not push the development close to sensitive resources.
Question Portie Ascott: Repeat about development soil sample
• In an area with septic systems, developer will come in with yield plan and it might
Look good on paper but the critical question is—all those imaginary lots perk?
• Tricky
• Rather than having the developer on do a lot pick on each lot, planning department
would direct ed to do a countywide septic map, look for wet soils and vegetation,
• Stober:Yield plan is the only thing that is different—no preliminary eval of the soils
o We require a comprehensive soil suitability analysis and septic locations
o Administrative approval by staff or by hearing—required by all
• Arendt—discussing that this would be much earlier
Question from McKee:
• Small lot developments on subdivisions—how would anyone be willing to buy land
without doing a perk on at least 50% of the projected lots. Not just if its going to perk
—what type of system
Question from Carter: Orange Country has a reputation for being difficult to work with. 10%
requirement for perking—how would this impact working relationship?
• Arendt: these lots don't get into critical areas for flood, riparian, slopes, etc.just
Lines on paper and don't know more about perks
o Count it as a compliment—don't want to have development like the
unnamed neighboring counties
• McKee: provides for a better outcome in the long run but is quite difficult and quite
onerous to work with
57
o Arendt: soil tests in Maine-don't do a perk test.What works better is to dig a
hole and look at the soil texture and color-can see water table modeling.
Haven't dug a hole and poured water into it. maybe costs $1000 to evaluate
in ME, under$1000 for backhoe, so for under$2k can figure out if yield plan is
realistic or just blowing smoke and isn't just lines on paper
• Policy perspective- put this up front in the process
**Legal:what rights do we have to demand what of HOAs in regard to septic and
general land ownership.Will need that info in the future.
Question from Fowler: affordable homes option. How did they make that happen?
• Short answer: state requirements
• Arendt: battle road farm in Lincoln. Under the gun from the state to require
affordable housing. Had a town meeting to buy some land -bought 24 acres. Put out
RFP for Boston area to submit proposals for affordable development (40%) in a
realistic but preliminary way. Look like England style
o Bill Ron-architect, came up with the plan
o Drivers seat of the development
o Not waiting for a developer to come in
"If you want to accomplish affordable housing goals,go buy the land."
Randall Arendt
• Develop bought the land from the town
• Cy can send case study example
Note from Greene: local regulation-cannot impose regulations to require affordable
housing
• OC provides AH through subsidies to AH nonprofits
• Could buy the land
• Could also incentivize developers to work with AH developers
Note from Hamilton: Didn't like that flexible subdivision and conservation subdivision were
being interchangeable.
• Clarified for her what this means
58
• Question: goals of a conservation subdivisions.When we are thinking about our
Land use plan, and where we want things to be—preserve farmland. May look
different than if we are looking for housing attainability.
• Arendt: sunset provision. Could adopt an ordinance provision that is in effect for a
certain time frame unless renewed. Allows flexibility.
• Public access to land. How does that work with HOA?
o Arendt—model ordinance for NC.There is a provision for an optional
density bonus to make the trails publicly accessible. Can make it legal
and post a sign with rules.To get that sign,you get a SMALL density
bonus
o In most cases, the public uses it anyway. Usually by someone that lives
nearby. As long as someone doesn't abuse it, no one really notices or
recognizes who that person is. Could be the person that lives behind the
subdivision. Informally uses the trails.
Question from Portie Ascott: could have conservation subdivision all over the county if we
want.Thinking about the housing gap that we have—number of housing units of all different
types over the next five years that we need. Housing for all is a goal for the county from the
strategic plan. Heard that conservation subdivision could go in the rural areas?
• Yes, that is where its typically done. Not saying its necessarily right for you but can
be done. That's how it usually works in VA.
• **wouldn't allow flexible development—old idea that should be replaced.
Carter: if we envision that we want to have some areas of additional density with proximity
to current water and sewer but not necessarily used right away.
Delores Bailey, Planning Board
• Subdivisions with community wells and sewer systems
• How are orange county soils be prepared for that kind of massive development
• For the ones shared with us—designs were simple to do from the designs he
showed us
• Septic system multiple 4-5 times
• Not a community system serving 20 or more homes
• One hole in the ground can serve up to 49 homes as a maximum in NC ?
• Three wells—could do more and spread them out
• Depending on the geology,you can get a different yield from a well based on
Location
59
Jane, Planning board
• Enforcement—question
o HOAs—seen some plans that have natural areas, trails, etc. and not a plan
for how those will be maintained. How is that put in place for maintenance
Longterm?
o Answer: one cardinal rule is to not make it too complicated. Might be an acre
or two that they mow every 10 days in the growing season. Trails every spring,
a work crew of neighbors needs to trim back the branch and clear the path.
Bridge, every ten years replace.
o Don't like private roads- requires quite a lot of private money put into the
account every year so that by the time you need to repave that road, you have
a huge account with enough to draw from. People just don't do it. lien
authority unless you pay our dues in arrears. Don't make it too complicated!
o Avoid private road situation
o Someone in the family will really enjoy the benefits and will be willing to
volunteer to help
o Community comes together and has a picnic and a work day every year on
the same day to build community and maintain the space
o Activity that binds them but isn't too onerous