Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-29-2000-9ei r ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: June 29, 2000 Action Agenda Item No. ~~ SUBJECT: Bricewood Acres Subdivision -Preliminary Plan DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) ~IJ ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Stream Buffer Protection Methods 2) Resolution of Approval 3) Application 4) Vicinity Map 5) Agency Comments 6) Fiscal Impact Analysis 7) 3-1-00 Planning Board Minutes 8) Draft 4~-00 County Commissioner Minutes INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk Extension 25$2 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 96$-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane (336)227-2031 PURPOSE: Consideration of the Preliminary Plan for Bricewood Acres Subdivision. BACKGROUND: This item was tabled on April 4, 2000 to examine multiple approaches for protecting the stream buffer. The four approaches are elaborated in the staff report but are described as follows: 1. Stream buffer on lot 2. Stream buffer on lot with conservation easement 3. Stream buffer as a common area 4. Stream buffer as part of a public park dedication (See attachment 1 for explanation of methods and preferred approach and recommendation.) Request -Preliminary Plan Applicant: Joe Phelps, agent; Steve Yuhasz, surveyor • Subdivision follows the conventional plan. A Conservation Easement is proposed on the area designated as Stream Buffer. • 15single-family lots on 27.04 acres (including rights-of way) Average lot size -- 1.63 ac. • Fourteen (14.49) acres in the critical area (U-ENO-CA): max. density = 1du/2 ac.; • Twelve (12.55) acres in the balance of the watershed: max. density = 1 du/ .92 ac. Location The property is located off the south side of Governor Scott Road east of Mill Creek Road in Cedar Grove Township. Existing and Proposed Conditions Existing: • Current zoning is Agricultural Residential (AR). • The property is located in the Upper Eno protected and critical area watershed. Physical Features: • There is one intermittent stream in the southwestern portion of the property. • The site is entirely wooded with mixed hardwoods and pines. Adjacent Land Use: • Properties to the south and east are wooded. • Properkies to the north and west are developed in single family residential lots. Proposed: . Roads: • Access is from Gov. Scott Road (SR 1351). • Proposed public streets to be constructed to NCDOT standards. • Propased public right-of--way connection to the. southern properly line. Water-Sewer: • Water will be from individual wells. • Health Department verified that each lot contains suitable sails to locate a septic system. Agency Comments: • Comments attached from NCDOT, Environmental Health, and Emergency Management. Develo ment Process Schedule and Action Planning Board: • First Action: Concept Plan approved by the Planning Board October 6, 1999 with the three following conditions: 1. The Intersection and road alignment on the Preliminary Plan shall meet NCDOT standards. 2. A publicly dedicated right-of-way should be provided to the southern property line to allow for future interconnectivity of public roads (in accordance with County policy). 3. With the Preliminary Plat, submit a plat indicating areas for on-site infiltration of storm water that demonstrates compliance with Article 6.23.3a of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. • Preliminary Plan addresses all conditions of approval of the Concept Plan. • Second Action: Planning Board unanimously recommended Preliminary Plan approval March 1, 2000. • Third Action: Board of County Commissioners to consider the Preliminary Plan continued from April 4, 2000 meeting. Options: 1. The Board shall consider the application within a reasonable amount of time. 2. During deliberations and consideration of the application the Board may defer consideration at any point to pursue additional analysis and review. 3. If Preliminary Plan is approved by the, County Commissioners the applicant shall have one (1) year to prepare and file a Final' Plat or to request aone-year extension from the Planning Director. In the April 4, 2000 meeting the Board of County Commissioners requested information on 'the nature of the stream buffer and how it connected to open space and adjoining properties' and 'whether there might be another approach to protecting the stream buffer.' 3 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Fiscal Impact Analysis included as an attachment. RECOMMENDATION(S): Planning Staff Approval, in accordance with the attached Resolution of Approval. Plannin Board Unanimous Approval, in accordance with the attached Resolution of Approval. Administration Approval, in accordance with the attached Resolution of Approval which includes Method 2 stream buffer protection method for the reasons stated in the Method 2 analysis. This method: • provides for a conservation easement within the stream buffer located on the property unencroached by uses prohibited by law or ordinance in the stream buffer; • removes and incorporates Lot 8 into an adjacent lot or lots to increase the unencumbered size of the adjacent lot or lots and to eliminate a lot which has the potential for stream buffer encroachment problems in the future. 4 ATTACHMENT 1 STREAM BUFFER PROTECTION METHODS METHOD 1 1) Stream buffer on lot This method was originally proposed by applicant. The following issues apply to the stream buffer; a) i's.~art of a minimum sized lot b) does not offer secondary means of monitoring protection of area c) permits disturbance of azea by well construction d) severely limits the use of a minimum sized lot (40,000 SF) because the stream buffer encumbers a large percentage of the lot and the remainder mazginally permits the septic field, house, accessory structures, driveway and other front/side yazd buffers. (See Lot 8 septic field sketch. In the case of lot 8, 75% of the lot would be consumed by the conservation easement.) e) the limited usable area increases the likelihood the encroachment of the stream buffer may occur and restricts the use of the lot as compazed to others in the subdivision and zoning district. METHOD 2 2) Stream buffer or lot with conservation easement This method is a proposal by the applicant in response to concerns of the Apri14, 2000 Board of Commissioners meeting to enhance preservation and protection of stream buffer. The following conditions apply; a) is part of minimum sized lot b) does offer secondary controls for monitoring by easement language c) as written the easement permits disturbance of the stream buffer by allowing well construction, however item d) should supplant this item c) d) administration recommends: Lot 8 does not have enough unencumbered azea to provide for a septic field, house, driveway and typical single family home accessory structures. It is likely that the owner of lot 8 would want one or more accessory structures further raising the likelihood that stream buffer encroachments, especially as to structures typically constructed without building permits, will occur. Therefore Lot 8 would need to be incorporated into Lot 7 and/or 9, or both. Lot 8 is only marginally sized anyway and can only be used as a lot if its well is located in the stream buffer. (See preliminary sketch by Environmental Health of septic system layout of Lot $) 5 METHOD 3 3) Stream buffer as a common area This method is commonly used within flexible development subdivisions to sepazate protection/open space areas as the common protection value and enjoyment by the Homeowners Association (HOA). The applicant's proposal is presently a conventional subdivision with 0% open space and in most cases with lots of minimum size. For example: within critical area (min. 2 acre lot size) Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are 2.00 acres within protected are Lot 7 - .95 acres Lot 9 - 1.00 acres Lot 11 - 2.62 acres Lot 13 -1.66 acres Lot 15 - 2.11 acres 'a (min .92 acre lot size) Lot 8 - .93 acres Lot 10 - .93 acres Lot 12 -1.55 acres Lot 14 - .92 acres Conventional subdivisions may include common area open space (up to 33% after which the subdivision is considered 'flexible') and in this case if the stream buffer was protected by this method, then Lots 7, 8, 9 would not meet minimum lot size since the buffer would not be part of lot and approximately 21ots would most likely be deleted. This method is not recommended because open space is not required by the Subdivision Regulations for a conventional subdivision. The following conditions apply; a) Buffer is not part of individual lot. b) Method does provide secondary means of protection/monitoring/maintenance. c) does not permit disturbance by individual activities (well, accessory structures, etc.) d) owners of adjacent lots would need a minimum sized unencumbered lot which would provide for a proper usable area for house, well, septic, etc. METHOD 4 4) Stream buffer as a public dedication Stream buffer would be a land dedication instead of payment in lieu for pazks and recreation impact. In some cases, where the stream buffer is part of a wildlife/conservation corridor this method is preferred. The dedication in this case would only be 15/57 of an acre (11325 SF or .26 acre). This immediate azea has not been designated as a corridor therefore we do not recommend a public dedication. For comparison purposes, a) the dedication would not~art of the lot b) secondary means of protection is provided by county ownership, monitoring and maintenance c) azea would not be disturbed by material intrusion such as a well. ~~~ 6 C,~<<c ~~ ~~~~ RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date June 29.2000 Name of Subdivision Bricewood Acres Owner/Applicant Joe Phelps , The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Bricewood Acres subdivision preliminary plat, dated November 2$, 1999, containing 141ots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified herein. Dustin Drive and McCray Lane shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally, the offer of dedication of Dustin Drive, and McCray Lane. This acceptance by Orange County of the dedication to the general public of Dustin Drive, and McCray Lane shall be without maintenance responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the owner/applicant until such time as they are accepted for maintenance by the North Cazolina Department of Transportation or some other governmental body. Before the Final Plat of Bricewood Acres Subdivision can be recorded: A. Sewage Disposal and Water Supply 1. Each residential lot shall contain an adequate azea for septic disposal, and repair area, located outside of the Stream Buffer Conservation Easement and shall be approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health. 2. Disclosure that the septic system location may restrict the size and location of unprovements shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regazding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health. B. Roads and Access 1. Dustin Drive and McCray Lane shall be constructed to standards of the North Cazolina Department of Transportation, within a 50' right-of--way, and the construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. OR A letter of credit or escrow agreement or other security shall be submitted to secure construction of Dustin Drive, and McCray Lane to the standards of the North Cazolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepazed by a certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guazantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Cazolina. The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final Plat shall state that the f nancial guazantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 2. An erosion control plan for construction of the roads shall be submitted by the applicant to the Orange County Erosion Control Division far review and approval. 3. Approved street name signs shall be erected at the intersection of streets as required in Section IV-B-3-c-12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Evidence shall be submitted by the applicant that the sign is in place, or a copy of the receipt for purchase of the sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department. 4. All lots shall access onto the new subdivision roads. No driveways shall be permitted within 50' of a street intersection. 5. A 50 foot public right-of-way designated as tract C shall be provided to the southern property line with 20' temporary construction easements as indicated on the Preliminary Plan. 6. All streets shall have 5 foot utility easements on each side of the right-of--way. 7. The applicant shall request the posted speed limit on Gov. Scott Road to be lowered to X15-mph as recommended by NCDOT prior to Planning Department signatures on the final plat. C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be installed or preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan, and must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections Department. 9 2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepazed by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. A conservation easement to a homeowners association created by the owner/ applicant shall be provided on the azea designated as Stream Buffer on the Preliminary Plan. The conservation easement shall prohibit the use of the easement for any purposes prohibited in the stream buffer by any State Law or Orange County Ordinance. The documents creating the homeowners association shall provide far successor owners of the conservation easement whose purposes and responsibility shall include ownership and maintenance of the conservation easement as provided for in the easement. The documents creating the homeowners association shall require Orange County approval before the responsibility for ownership and maintenance of the conservation easement aze for any reason extinguished. D. Drainage 1. Locate drainage easements as required following review and approval of the Erosion Control Plan. 2. Drainage culverts shall be sized and located as required by NCDOT and the Orange County Erosion Control Officer. 3. A stream buffer shall be provided as indicated on the preliminary plan. E. Parkland 1. Cash in the amount of $5,915.00 shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of pazkland dedication. F. Miscellaneous 1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with Section V-D-2 and V-D-3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 2. The following easements shall be shown on the plat: a. Drainage easements as required by D.1. above. b. A conservation easement shall be provided on the azea designated as Stream Buffer on the Preliminary Plan. zo Minimum building setbacks shall be as indicated on the Preliminary Plan. The setback requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. ~. Sign easement location to be shown on final plat. Sign shall be landscaped, and if lighted, at a wattage to avoid casting light on adjacent properties. 5. Lot 8 shall be deleted and the land within lot 8 shall be combined with lots '1, 9 or both. 6. Lot 6 shall meet minimum lot size requirements of 2 acres. 7. If any condition of this Resolution shall be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or void, then this Resolution is void in its entirety and of no effect and the Preliminary Plat approval granted herein is rescinded. G. Certifications 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a Professional Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 4. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V-D-6-b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document .describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 5. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that Dustin Drive and McCray Lane have been constructed to State standazds or that construction plans have been approved. 4. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department. Signature of Applicant Clerk to the Board I, ,accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, and acknowledge that each must be met prior to recordation of the final plat. Applicant/ Owner Date APPLICATION FOR P;~FLIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL MAJOR SUBDIVISION ORANGE COUNTY e/s3 PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) / ' SUBDIVISION NAME; /4G 44L ~C~r~S LOCATION: Pc~yL' /~~ ~w OWNER/QEVELOPER: ~Lt/ ~ ~J~ ADDRE55: ~Z~ S. C ~w•Q/m1 1.'~r£LEPHONE N0.:7~~ [~Z~ •'~ ~ V ~p--T„~ AGENT/CONTACT: TELEPHONE NO.: ,~ A. SUMMARY' INFDRMATION: Dranpe County Tex Mep `~-~ Slack ~ i Z D ' // / Lat(sl `~~ Township G~Gyr~ ~ an np istrictlsl: ~ It/o , U Total Number of Acres: . Q Phesas: Total Number pf Lots: 1 ~ Average l.ot Size: Minimum Lot Size: Z Number/Type of Structures: (existing) r(tc ~ (proposed) ,N Lineal Feet in Streets: /LIO ~ Acres in Open Space: Water Supply: Public (specify) Communi Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (specif ) C School District: y ommuni tY Individual Fire•District; E'y'f General Land Uses in Aree: far Critical Areas: stream/dreinnpeweys flood prone a-eas watershed (specify) historic sites other (explain) Is the property to be subdivided currently under 'farm use value taxation'? Yes No It 'yes' _ _. , please contact the Orange County Tax Office. Subdivision of the property may require a m f deferred taxes under 'farm use value taxation'. p y ent o 8. All plats must be submitted on sheet na smeller th en one inch equals two-hundred feet (1'-200') and no larger than one inch equals twenty feet (1'20') and must contain the followinp'informetio n; V'~` suhdiv.ision name ;.' ~•.~•.• ,.','~ ~ ••<.a>~ ~ ~~~ . .i'a:•. zoning of tract and adjacent ~~ Hems & address of ownerls) nema ~ dd f . properties „ a ress o subdivider / ""? building setback lines by notation 7. '~ (if other than owner) +>.ry~;:>~: or typical lot layout ,..~ ~ ~» nema of surveyor, engineer, ''~~ location and width of existing and 0 landscape architect or architect, proposed easements (drainage at / address, registration ~ and seal ~ •~~ , utilities, roads, etc.) w ~ (title) Preliminary Plen ~'~ '~b••• .: ~ ;;}~ existing, proposed end adjoining scale, north arrow a~ .<~ ~ v •.~ :: . date Cncludinp revision dates) ri hte~f-we p 0 y includin dimensions -~- ~ ~ `F`+~"<•~a township, tex.map-block-lot and street nema^ end elate toed refarsnces numbers. Lineal het of road ~ O '~ ~ Perant Parcel Idantificetion N centerlines and approximate ti ~, ~ y p ,rr~ deed book end peps M of property acreage of new street rights-of- ~'' ~' °~ '~ ny to be subdivided ' ~ b , way ~ ' existing end proposed utilities, E ti + eundery described with 6eerinpe • includin p type, sizes, hydrants o ~ / v end distances ~~~ total eeraapa of the tract and , ~ valves, manholes C° ~ % x m acreage of lots, including and >;;i:: existing end proposed curbs. excluding eras within rights-of- putters and culverts, including ~ sites and prade~ U ~ / V ~ ~m way S t i ~ t '` ~' ' ~% ~ ~ y-~ I,~• ~ location end width bf alleys, ' r' ~ n control corner T sidewalks, bike lance, transit systems, end~bus stops (please complete r everse sidal 1~ ~/ / proposed lot lines with dimensions lot & bl k ~,~ ~`A/'`~~~ ac numbers phasing lines ~, / / topography at ten foot (101 "~ c intervals ~ ~ ;~: ft., water bodies, streams, flocdway ~ v1 end flogdplains a `~ stream buffers ' a~ ~ ~ location and size of parcels N U ~ •~ dedicated far- public use, ~ 4"' ~~ recreetianal use or reserved in "'~ O cammgn, wish purpgse noted 'd ~+ V `:ye~ impervious surface date (if located +~.+ ~ in water supply watershed) ,~ ~ ~~~ ~;~~ vicinity map showing general ~ ~ location of subdivision with streets v co end roods identified by Stnte road ~ number and Hems ~ ~ /'~ ~'~'• landscaping end buffer U ~ requirements township, corpareta end extre- territoriel planning jurisdiction lines which crass the property ~• OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ~ l tY ~c , e p street Crag5,4eCtjanS and intersection details including design and width of travelway and "`'i/~`i shoulders h i or zontal alignment and general curve data (public roads) cent li er ne radius on ell proposed / streets J ~ permanent Features such es buildings, cemeteries, historic / landmarks v ~ adjoining lot layout names of adjoining Property owners, If subdivided, subdivision plat name, plat book & page number, end A': '''JV perimeter lot numbers, , location end size of Iqts of restricted development potential - end ngtation on plat regarding r same ~ :;:~ .:<, stormwater detention an~/or retention sites end undisturbed arses far infiltration purposes (if located in water supply' watershed) t • Twenty-five (Z5) copied of the preliminary plat. Z- One full size copy of en Orange County Tex map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked in pencil). 3• Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat indicating Health Oepertment soils analysis approval/denial for each lot shown thereon. ¢• Where a private road is proposed a written statement by the applicant or his/her authorized representative which sets forth the justification far a private road (see Section IV-B-3-d-1 of the Orange County Subdivision Raguletions). 5- Auxiliary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section Vl ot. this Ordinance ' tivhich assure completion and/or maintenance of improvements required by this Ordinance, Such documents may include, but not bs limited to, a private road maintenance ~~reciTent, and articles of incorpgration end restrictive covenants pertaining to a homeowner's association. These documents may ba required as nacersary es evidence that the ordinance requirements are being~g.//m~~at, 6• Fee - S357g.00 plus 55.00 per lot f1 fee for proliminary and final plat). 7- If the subdivision contains 10 lots or more the following information shall 6s submitted with the application: a. Number of years to buildout, Z b- Number of houses to ba built during each year to buildout. 7r$ c. Average pries of hau:as including lots for each year to buildout. 1~- zO IOOQ I, t applicant, here y certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate. .~ , AP IICANT'S SIGNATU E DATE _~,~ 12 ~t-a4oeee~ i ,,, w zv ~Q ~Q ~~ W 4 V ,~ ~ ~~ ~ ~$ .. ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ $ 4 13 'S ~ N ~ \N\11UIItlllry~i~ 3 .4 $C ~ H~ ~ ` e~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3sr~y~~~ ~ ~a ~ ~ Y Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~_ '~, >~ ~ ~ ~~.' d ~ ~ E a ~iii~Vlutaltu+\`a' ~ as to e ~ g $e~ ~i ~~~~, n r FL~ w^ $ ~ ~~m nom rt~na~~~8 '~ ~ 2 ~ _ ~ 3 -- ~sy ~ ~ ;~_ ~e~ ~a ~e~ ~~~ 7N ~ LIL1r ~ 0~ 1 s •_ ~ I `` ~ I; ~; ~~ I 9aoyr~b'[ ]7rxt' a time ~ ~~ I ~ ~ • ~r 1 1 , 4 I 1 Saeto•1s1" stssy I I ~ 4~M1~,~ \ O 1 ~ M AGOltl''l '~ ~ II ~ r ~/ 1 -r F ~ - ~ ~ I 3 ~ a w ~~~_ ~iw~ ~~~~ .l~ ~ g1 "~ 1 1 M. 1 ~ 1 .. a :~ ~s ~ ~ 1 ~, R srl 4 ' ~~ ~ R O~ 1 R/A~ .Q- ~` d . ~"'~ tr _ ~ ~ 3sR ai .~~ _ ~s ~- 6,Saj ~ ~x a C 4 o~ }O~ ~__ ~I ~~p ~ ~ "~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ fie: 1 w ,», ~~: o$ N _,+~ ~ ^~ a O$ ._ ~~ / ~' ~ e~~~ ~. / ~ ~ ~~~~' pn ~$~ S~~ 1 ~ ~^~'~ h~ a ~~g8~. ~- ~" ~~ i'd' ~, ~ B ~~ ~_ ~ }t-~e ~'~ ~ ~~~= L~ ~. i Jo ~P~~N ,- _ -~- ~- ~kPor~ .. D .. ~, .. ~ -.. -. lA TUM LNG - ~i ~.. . ~ r '~ r! ~ _ .. .. .. , ~/. ~-{11/~ .~ .- •\ r~ 1 ~~O ~~ GO OL T ` 15 ,. n"Tr- z a~° ; ~~ 3 r t~ ~ ~ ~~ .~ ~: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JAMES B. HUNT JR.. GOVERNOR 16 September 1999 ORANGE COUNTY Robert Davis Orange County Planning Department 306E Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 919 732 8181 Ext. 2595 Subject: Proposed Sricewood Subdivision on SR 1351 (Governor Scott Road) Dear Mr. Davis: ~~D David McCoy SECRETARY Per your request, a review of the above mentioned subject has been completed by the NCDOT Graham District. Attached for your files are a copy of the revised plans and a list of our comments and recommendations for the subject. We respectfully request that you provide a copy of this letter and any necessary referenced documents to the owner/developer so they may be fully informed. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Mr. Michael Venable, Assistant District Engineer, at (336) 570-6833. Yours very truly, '^~.~' -~ Tommy 7. Dyer, P. DISTRICT ENGINEER Attachment TJD/MSV/msv P. O: Box 766 Graham NC 27253-0766 16 NCDOT REVIEW NOTES FOR DHR Bricewood Subdivision on SR I35I (Governor Scott Road)) 16 September 1999 COMMENTS & REQUIREMENTS: 1. Prior to construction of any new access or alteration of any existing access within the right of way, the developer/owner is required to secure a permit with this office. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to obtain a permit. 2. The owner/developer should dedicate 10' x 70' Sight Triangles at each proposed intersection. Please refer to the attached figure regarding the minimum design. Please note that the subject site has a limited 400' to 420' of sight distance. Normally, the minimal sight distance for S5-mph speed zone is S50'; therefore, we recommend the developer provide additional safety improvements and/or the pasted speed limit is lowered to 45-mph. 3. We are concerned with the existing lake and how the owner is proposing to develop the roadway and the lot. No part of the lake or dam is permitted within the right of way. 4. The proposed 50' right of way is an acceptable design; however, it has been our experience that the owner/developer will have trouble, maintaining the typical ditch section in the small right of ways. In addition, we have received complaints from the local utility companies about the limited workspace. Therefore, we recommend the owner/developer provide a b0' right of way or some type of an additional easement along the roadway. S. Prier to any construction, the owner~developer will need to submit their final plans for review. The final plans should include the horizontal and vertical alignment information, a typical section, drainage facilities, vicinity map, and the number of lots with the proposed driveway location. 6. The owner/developer should be aware of General Statute 136-102.2, in which new roads are not eligible for the State Maintenance system unless certain requirements are mac. An explanation of these requirements can be found on pages 13, 14 and 15 of the current (January 1999) NCDOT Subdivision Roads Manual. Particular attention should be placed on items 2 (petition for addition), 5 and 7 (occupied housing requirement), 11, 12, and 13. 17 IINARY PLAT Racordation~ ~ce~ or Sales'; 1 r Mpr~n aq 22~ va sss ~.e Far uSOM ~Sp1" 27 r OB 227 ~° jqy I C! 25p pp ip72 / ' ~~ GOV. SCOTT F~1D (SR l.75T) ~_ _~ 'DSO ~ e~ yia ~y Q ~ ~ ~ Reed ~ ~ ~..,~ .. ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ' I la 1 i ~ w p" R -- CONCEPT PLAN - - CLUSTER SUED/VISION ~ 3 BRICEWDOD A CRS ~,. _ ,T~ a..~ ,~ 1j~ ~~ scv,~ T •_ rAV' ~ lao soa ~ -~ ~~ ~~ -~~ ~ ~-~-- comae Van. Srt ~~-- VaNrnaC(cpl Pt. .` • Mpp SN rarC wrv g ~,.,y,,,r. 27.04 Ac. taU 11 Ac. P11T (p 16AcG 2. 2.2Z 11C, rop 15.61 Ae. b!~ Il~li® KMG PAi'Ip•~• PS 31 py 117 1$ • ' • -.----- 5q'IRW ~~ • . CL 20.00' FlRST 1q0' STA71gN - •• '~ PAST ROAM TAPER ~ • R/1H WIDENING I - ~ . ~ • ~- 10' x 70' : ' o `~ 10' x 70' SIGHT TRIANGLE .'• R=30' 3 ~ 0' R•~ 0' ~ 1 51GHT TRIANGLE ~ ~ EDGE GF pAVE1AENT p EDG>± OF PAVf]AENT EDG>~ OF PAVE~AENT - ~ - ~ EXISTING ROAD ~ ~^' ` EDGE OF PAVt31ENT - RIw - • TYPICAL ' ROAD CONNECTION ' STOP CONDITION FIG D7D1 7-94 -~ 19 `~~r .r e•r (~rttlt~E (~IILLI:[~~ ~Ett~~ ~E.~1FiZ~ITtPI~~ a o~~~Y ~e G r' ~ ;' i " ~I ~= ~ ~ Timothy). Ivey, chair Roselxlary L. Summers, I~tPH, DrPH Brenda Crowder•Gaines, vice Cha, o ° ~- ~" Orange County Board o(Heal[h Health Director Orange County Board of Heal[h ^~ ~ : ~ ~ •"•, LtJ.~,W,1.1,IJ,1 w.». a..w. nw. r. lrnvironmental Health Division lion Holdway, Division Director 30(rC revere Road, P.Q. $oz 8181 Phone: (919) 732.8181, x7,360 F.a.X[ (919) 644.3 Hillsborough, NC ?7273 $etty Dorland Barbara Patterson Chapel Hill Durham h(ebane www.m.oran~e.ns.us x ;~envhlth/ Administrative Assistant Office Aaeistant (919) 968-{501 (919) 688.73}1 (919) 227• B~ucEwoon AcREs TMBL: 2.40..15 ~; MAP DATED NOVEMBER 28, 1999 PROPOSED LOT AVAYLABLE SYSTEM TYPES PUMP REQ? COMMEN" CONVENTIONAL INNOVATIVE ALTERNATIVE 1 X X X NO 2 X X X NO 3 X X X NO 4 X X X NO 5 X X X NO 6 X X X NO 7 X X X YES 8 X X X NO 9 X X X YES 1 D X X X YES 11 X X X NO 12 X X X NO 13 X X X YES 14 X X X NO 15 X X X NO zo Orange County Emergency Management P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough Narth Carolina 27278 9-1-1 Communications 24 Hour Warning Point 919-732-8161 •933-2600 24-Hour Fax Machine 919-967-9026 ,~ Lrrr~~ y e ~~ 4 * ~ '~ ~^ ~ ''~+ ert•`'' Januazy 20, 2000 TO: Eddie Kirk, Planning Depaz~nent FROM: Mike Tapp, Deputy Director/Fire Mazshal ~~ RE: Bricewood Acres Subdivision Emergency Medical Services Fire Marshal Disaster Response Hazardous Materials 919-b44-3030. 968-2050 Administrative Fax Machine 919-968-4066 We have reviewed the Bricewood Acres Subdivision and find the plan acceptable. As with all new requested subdivisions, additional staffing for 9-1-1, EMS and Fire will have to be taken into consideration. Please send us a final plat, if approved, for distribution Please feel free to contact us if you need additional information. 21 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR WINDFALL RESIDENTIAL SERVICE STANDARD APPROACH Prepared by The Orange County Planning Department February, 2000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Bricewood Acres subdivision contains 15 buildable lots and is located in Cedar Grave Township. The lots are accessed by new public roads which will intersect with Gov. Scott Road. The current zoning is AR -Agricultural Residential. The average lot size is approximately 1.63 acres. Lots will be served by wells and individual septic systems. Project build-out is estimated at two years. Housing units will be constructed, beginning in 2000, with completion of the project scheduled for 2001. Units will consist of detached single-family homes, and the applicant estimates the average sales price to be $120,000, including the lot. METHODOLOGY Fiscal impact analysis is a projection of the direct, current, public costs and revenues associated with residential and non residential growth in the jurisdiction in which the growth is taking place. Fiscal impact analysis considers only direct impact in that it projects only the primary costs that will be incurred and the immediate revenues that will be generated. It calculates the financial effect of a planned development or new subdivision by considering the current costs and revenues such a development would generate if it were completed and occupied today. Fiscal impact analysis does not consider the private costs of public action. It is concerned only with public (governmental) costs and revenues. The method used in preparing the fiscal impact analysis is the Service Standard Approach. While only gross expenditures by service category are derived from the Per Capita Method, the Service Standard method determines the total number of additional employees by service function that will be required as a result of growth. This method employs average county government costs per person, average school costs per pupil, an employee to population ratio, and average operating expenses per employee for each service category and school district. The number of new employees are projected and multiplied times the average operating expenses (includes personnel, operating and capital costs) per employee. These average costs are then weighed against per capita and per pupil revenues to praject the total net fiscal impact of the development. ~z TABLE OF CONTENTS SERVICE STANDARD APPROACH PROJECT FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Section 1 -Project Data Project Name, Township, School District Beginning Year, Ending Year, Inflation Characteristics of Households Construction Schedule/Cost Data Section 2 -Local Government and School District Data Budget Year Per Capita Revenues Per Capita Expenditures Per Student Expenditures School District Per Employee Expenditures Employees Per 1000 Population County Per Employee Expenditure ether Data Other Model Constants School District Data Section 3 -Demographic Projections Based On Project Data Total Housing Total Population School Children Additional County Employees Total School District Additional Employees Section 4 -Projected Net Fiscal Impact on County Tax Base Revenues Expenditures Net Fiscal Impact Section 5 -Projected Net Fiscal ,Impact on School District Revenues Expenditures Net Fiscal Impact Section 6 -Summary of Projected Impacts Additional Housing Additional Population Additional School Children Tax Base County Government Balance School District Balance Total Net Fiscal Impact Section 7 -Summary of Projected Public School Capacity Impacts •, 23 EXPLANATION OF TERMS AND DATA SOURCES SECTION 1 -PROJECT DATA Project data includes information about the specific development project. Much, if not all, of the information is supplied by the applicant. Data inputs include: Project Name: Name of the project. To~ivnship: Township in which the project is located. School District: School district in which the project is located. Beginning Year: The first year of the project in which dwelling units are completed and occupied. Ending Year: The last year in which dwelling units are completed and occupied. The template is set to calculate fiscal impacts for aten-year period. Inflation Rate: Unless an inflation rate is entered, the template will calculate fiscal impacts based on constant dollars. Since the inflation rate changes frequently, the Finance Department must be contacted for the most recent figure. Persons/Household: The estimated average number of persons/household (dwelling unit) based on 1990 Census data and studies of the number of students per household for the school district in which the project is located. The most recent studies include A Study of Housing Characteristics and Student Generation Rates for Orange County, N. C. (1995) and Technical Report: Calculation of Proportionate Share Impact Fees for Financing Public School Capital Needs, Orange County, N. C. (1996). Children/Household: The estimated average number of school age children/household (dwelling unit) based on studies of the number of students per household for the school district in which the project is located. The most recent study is A Study of Housing Characteristics and Student Generation Rates for Orange County, N. C. (1995). Non-Elderly: N.C. General Statutes permit an $11,000 exemption to the elderly and disabled. who meet certain income criteria. In the event that elderly units are part of the project, the percentage of eligible non-elderly units is entered. The tax base will automatically be adjusted to reflect the exemption. Number of Homes: The number of dwelling units to be constructed in the project in each year. 24 Average Sales Price: The average sales price of all dwelling units based an the number and sales price of dwelling unit types to be constructed in each year. SECTION 2 -LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA Local government data includes information regarding expenditures required to provide County services and revenues received based on the approved Orange County budget for the fiscal year in which the project is considered far approval. All information derived from the approved budget remains constant throughout a fiscal year (July-June) and is changed only with the approval of a new budget. Local government revenue and expenditure information is compiled on a per capita (per person) basis. Per capita figures are derived by dividing the total expenditures far a particular service function or revenue source by the estimated population of Orange County for the year in which the project is considered for approval. Populations estimates are prepared by the Planning Department. Data inputs include the following: Budget Year: The current fiscal year; i.e., 199$-97. Per Capita Revenues: The sources of revenue by major category are as follows: Taxes -Other Than Property: Revenues from taxes other than property taxes include those from sales and use taxes, franchise taxes, and animal taxes. Intergovernmental Aid: Revenues from this source, in the form of categorical aid or shared-tax revenues, are provided through State and federal assistance programs. Service Charges: Service' (or user) charges .support numerous functions and are charged to those who voluntarily receive governmental services or use governmental facilities. Miscellaneous: Miscellaneous revenues include interest earnings on investments, proceeds from license and permit fees, and all other revenues. Per Capita Expenditures: Expenditures by major category are as follows: General Government: Services related to the legislative, administrative, financial, and legal functions of government. Public Safety: Law enforcement services and emergency medical services. Public Works: Efforts related to the maintenance of County-owned property and the provision of sanitation (solid waste disposal) services. 25 Human Services: Departments responsible for the provision of health, social, and recreation-related services. Education: Orange County supports two school units, the Orange County school system and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system. This category includes appropriations made to the designated school system for Recurring Capital items. Recurring Capital funds are used for general maintenance, purchase of new equipment/furnishings and vehicle maintenance. Non-Departmental: Contributions to agencies providing cultural and social services outside the formal structure of county government. Other expenditures include equipment replacement and contingency funds. Although there are no employees generated by this category, it has been included as an operating expenditure. It will be included in Section 4, "Total Annual County Expenditure." These expenditures will be calculated on a per capita basis as opposed to a per employee basis. Per Student Expenditures: Information regarding expenditures required to provide educational services and revenues received are based on the approved school system budgets for the fiscal year in which the project is considered for approval. All information derived from the approved budgets remains constant throughout a fiscal year (July-June) and is changed only with the approval of new budgets. Expenditure information is compiled on a per student basis for County Government Current Expense, School District and State appropriations. County Government Current Expense funds are used for general operation purposes including Instruction and Support Services. Federal revenues and expenditures and other local revenues such as f=und Balance have not been included since they are not directly growth related. Per student figures are derived by dividing the total appropriation for educational purposes from a particular source by the estimated number of students to be enrolled in the applicable school system for the year in which the project is considered for approval. Student enrollments are obtained from the approved school system budgets. County Government: Expenditures in this category are based on appropriations to the school systems by Orange County for Cun-ent Expense. The minimum level of per student appropriation is determined by the State Board of Education. School District: Expenditures in this category are unique to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system and are based on the level of expenditures possible through assessment of a supplementary school tax. State: Expenditures in this category are based on appropriations from the State Board of Education. 26 School District Per Employee Expenditure: Expenditures per employee based on County, School District and State appropriations, and the total number of school district employees. Employees Per 1000 Population: The number of employees in a particular service category per 1000 population. County Per Employee Expenditure: The average operating and capital expenses per employee in a particular service category. Total expenses in each category includes personnel, operating and capital costs. z~ Other Data: County Government Tax Rate: The County tax rate per $100 of assessed valuation. Since the per capita method focuses only on operating expenditures, the tax rate is reduced by an amount equal to the debt service payments from property taxes for capital projects. School District Tax Rate: The supplementary tax assessed on behalf of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system. Assessment Ratio: The ratio of market (sales) value to assessed value based on information supplied by the Tax Office. The assessment ratio is used to convert market value to assessed value for the purpose of computing the tax base. Other Model Constants Elderly Exemption: Far projects developed partially or exclusively for elderly (65 and older) or disabled individuals whose annual income does not exceed $12,000, an $11,000 tax exemption is used in projecting the tax base. School District Employees Per Student: The number of employees per student in a specific school district. SECTION 3 -DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS BASED ON PROJECT DATA Demographic projections provide information about the number of new residents and school children anticipated in Orange County resulting from project development. Projections also provide the number of additional employees required per service function and school district as a result of the new development. Total Housing lJnits: The cumulative total of new housing units added each year by project development. Total Population: The total population added each year by a project derived by multiplying the number of homes to be constructed by the number of persons per household (see Section 1). School Population: The total number of school children added each year by a project derived by multiplying the number of homes constructed by the number of children. per household (see Section 1). Additional County Employees: The number of additional employees required per service category based on project development. Total: Total of all additional county employees required based on project development. zs School District Additional Employees: The number of additional employees required per school district based on the project development. SECTION 4 -PROJECTED NET FISCAL IMPACT ON COUNTY Tax' Base: The tax base represents the increase in assessed property value expected each year resulting from project development. The values shown are in $1,000's and are derived from a formula which includes the number and sales price of homes, and the assessment ratio. Where applicable, the percentage of non-elderly units and elderly exemption are also used. Revenues: All revenues are derived from a formula which multiplies the per capita revenues (Section 2) times the projected population (Section 3). The exception to this is the properly tax which multiplies the tax base times the county government tax rate. Expenditures: All expenditures are derived from a formula which multiplies the per employee expenditure (Section 2) times the number of additional employees (Section 3). Net Fiscal Impact: The net balance is the difference between projected expenditures and projected revenues. A negative net balance indicates that it costs Orange County more to provide services to a project than it receives in revenues. A positive net balance indicates that more revenues are received than it costs to serve a project. Positive net balances in one project may thus be used to offset negative balances in another. SECTION 5 -PROJECTED NET FISCAL IMPACT ON SCHOOL DISTRICT Revenues: The County contribution is derived by transferring education expenditures by County government (Section 4). Revenues derived from the school district tax are derived by multiplying the school district tax times the tax base. State revenues are derived by multiplying the per student expenditure figure times the total projected number of school children (Section 3). Expenditures: Expenditures are derived from a formula which multiplies each ,per student expenditure (Section 2) times the total projected number of school children (Section 3) and adding the results. Net Fiscal Impact: The net balance is the difference between projected expenditures and projected revenues. A negative net balance indicates that it casts the school system more to provide educational services far children in a project than it receives in revenues. A positive net balancd ,indicates that mare revenues are received than it costs to serve a project. Positive net balances in one project may thus be used to offset negative balances in another. SECTION 6 -SUMMARY OF PROJECTED IMPACTS 2~ SECTION 7 -SUMMARY OF PROJECTED PUBLIC SCHOOL CAPACITY IMPACTS RESIDENTIAL FISCAL IMPACT TEMPLATE: SERVICE STANDARD METHOD Bureau of Economic 8 Business Research -University of Florida Modified 4!15/97 -Orange County, NC Planning Department SECTION 1 -PROJECT DATA: ENTER THE FOLLOWING DATA FOR EACH PROJECT: 3a _... .... '. - ,~_ Bricewood Acres ....~ .. ... --__~__. ...,u.. _ __.. .....:._ ~.._...,_....__ ... w ... . „ ....._ ..._.._. _....______..._...._ Ce,__..._,.......e TOWNSHIP: - CONSTRUCTION PERIOD: .BeginningyYear. ______....~,~ :~.~-,.r,~,d....wW,.,__,..~.~...._._w.__ . _ ...~.~..,..~,.~~.~~.~,~~.~._.~~::.._.~-._.....~ ._ ~..:y.~.~.~.. ~:~..w_ __..__w ,_.M~ _.200( Ending Year .9,.~.,...---,... - - z 200" Inflation Rate. ;1 ~ .~ 2,50°i CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS: x r ~~ ,~ 2.4 ~ Persons/House _ ` ~ ENTER 1 LL BESIDE APPLICABLE~SCHOOL DISTRICT BELOW ' .., .. ...._..__.,. _L~.~... ....__.._ _. ,,. ..~.,~. . Children/House' ENTER "1" BESIDE APPLICABLE SCHOOL DISTRICT BELOW.'..- ~' WW~.~..... µ _ - ~~~• ~~%~ •M ~~, ,_ ,.,,m _ 0.3; _ - :_100.00°lc HOMS SALES DATA: Average Distribution Number of Sales Price of Units Year Homes (S) by Year .. ~._...., ..._._...~,. 2000„-..~,_.._..~_ ~....._~... ~.. , _ ..~.. .... .~ _ a .........,7 _..._... ~ _... . ~.~..<,~, ~ _ 1217;OOOJ.. ~ s,.. ~ ° 2001 8 120,000 83,33°~ ?002:., ~a y O, ~- a. a` .~.,~_.. _- ~ 2003 0 0 0,00° ~ Zoos o o 0.0 o°r .,, .~ , ~. ,~..... 2006 ~ , mF. T-.T : d ? ~~ :~ ,~ ~ ..... ~~° d __ . _ .. ........_ ..Y ,._ .~.....~ ~~...._._ _ _ . . _ ~__..~ _. ...,:.: . ...._~.. ,.. . _.._~._ ..~,_...~~_. _~.W~. - - _~~ .... / .._... _ zoo? 0 0 0.00°~ zoos - ~o >, - - ~~ ~ o ooh w . ~ .. .. ... .. ,._._._ .. _......~..,.-......~_.... .. .. .......,..~. _~...._..,. -.... .e...~...._ ..14.....1 ~~.....-w ~._M..~.....1.. ~. . ....1_ ... _l.w .i-4u._r....a. ~...~_ .a.. .. _ ..W..w... _ 204.7 o O O~QQ°~ SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA: ENTER "1" IN (')BESIDE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN WHICH PROJECT IS TO BE LOCATED TO GENERATE STUDENT DISTRIBUTION BY SCHOOL TYPE. School District: School Attendance: .Orange Gounty~. `, r ~ ' ~ 1 )~..~ ~ Elementar;`i School.. &4~ Middle School 17° ~ Chapel Hill-Carrboro ~'--~iwu'~• ('• •'`~x~ - T p ~) ';~,t.'"„~ ~ ~' Hi hvSchool,- z "y~ ~ 19 ~ 9 ° n~r.T~.~u n ~ .-. r... .-...•..~..~....~..r. ..... ..... ~.~.~~ n~1.T191/~T l1ATw 31 BUDGET YEAR: 1996-97 COUNTY POPULATION: 0589E SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT POPULATION: 5680 COUNTY EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER CAPITA General Government - ; ,' : -.:.. . - - ... ,:.:..:. 10B 6 ,. .. .: ,:,.... 0.0010 . - Public Safety ... .. _. 142.95 - - .... `_ ..----_. Public .. _......_.. -. Works:. - - :. _ - .. ,, 5 .0.00 - - - - ._ p.0005 Human Services 264.07 ., . . ., .. Education (School Distract ~` - - .. _ . - ..... _ -. - ,. 81 BAOF _= - ' "~ " - O.OQ77 ,. ,"_ SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT: POSITIONS PER STUDENT ,_ _ .. .. " ..Total ~ . ,." , . ..,. ,- - ,, r , . r~ 18.00'.. " ., ~.:. 0:1440 COUNTY PER CAPITA REVENUES ($): REVENUES PER CAPITA .- Taxes ~ Other Than Property . _.,_.___, .,~,,,.~... ..M _. _~...-. ...~.y,_..._w~ .._ ... ~ 4653250 -_ ~ ~~ Intergovernmental _.. . .. . 9 007481 , 85 06 ,, , . ,. . _ .., ... , .. ._ . Service Cha es t .. r9 ~ ~. ~ _ `"~ `"'.`.. ,. -.,_. 3$$8t]55 ~: .: ~ _~ 3199: _. _..._. ._._..._..._.__...~..~.,_.._... ..._ _.~,.~ ....u -__~ .~ . ;~.~~.~..,-.~........ ._ . r ~....~ .,.~._ _.. ._......_ ,-_ Miscellaneous 1738939 16.42 COUNTY PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES (S): EXPENDITURE PER CAPITA General' Gavernment. :~~.._ ,...~. ..,- - _~ ' " ~ 6804231 `" 64 Public Safety - 7274334 68.69 Public Works ~ _ . ,- .~.,.__...__ .~ _~ ____. . ~s _y_ ___, -_--,.._„~,_~W._._....,.,..w _ -^ 2$71,690 _ _. ..~... ~ r.~ ~r 27;12 ~ Human Services , 17112641 161.60 .:Education (Recurring Caprtal). _ ~..~ -_, .. _ _ ,.,-.. . _ . .._ __~ -_ ~ ='~~? ,._. ~.. ,750000 7.08 Non-Departmental 3163481 29.87 SCHOOL D15TRICT PER STUDENT EXPENDITURES ($): EXPENDITURE PER STUDENT :w ~ ~. Coun Govemment - ,~ - ~ = School District ~0 0.00 State ,~ -~ - . T . „_. „~ _. „ . ^ .,w . ~. --... , .. , .. ~'~* 21523177.w ~ 3789.29` SCHOOL D15TRICT PER EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURE5 ($): EXPENDITURE PER EMPLOYEE . ~ f~"~~x ~- ' a> ~ .~ County Govemment ~ _ . ._.~~ t. " '~ ..,.•, ......10121760 ~ . , . ~.-_ . School District _ . 0 0.00 • State. ~ F- `r' - 'r' ro. - 't c ^~•- .•.-...r'-- •rp.•-•---r - _ . . r. _ ._ . . -•t ~ 21523177 _ .. ti :26311.95 ` 32 YEAR 2000 , 2001 2002 ; 2003 200 HOUSING UNITS T ` 15 15 ! 15 15 POPULATION 17 ~~ 37 37 37 37 .'r3 'r SCHOOL CHILDREN - Elementary ~~ ~ ~ ~ ' ` 3'~ ~ - _ ' ..~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , .~ 3 Middle "r ,:r R ' ,'' '1~~ 1 1 .,~; t , High School ~ Y ' ~ b~ 1 ' k' ~~ 1:~~ 1 ,°~.1 TOTAL ~ ~ {t ~ $.,, 5 w2 5 ~ ~> ~ 5 , Mfr ~.a r it r } i + i COUNTY GOVERNMENT r 2="'~~r i ~` ( , s`~~` ; ~ ~ l -'- ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES ~' ~ 4~ s ` ' ~ ~ 1 ~' -~~ ` General Government ~ , ~ . ~ 0 Q2_ 0.04 '- ~ x ~ .:- 0 04,~ 0:04 0,0~ Public Safety - ', ~ r "4`F~'0~ Q2~ 0.05 .~;, ~ ~ {F~x~W 0 05,E 0.05 • , ~ ' 0.0! Public Works =~ ~ ~kxM~O, Q1. 0.02 N'~z;~n<~ ~~i ~0 Q2J~ 0.02 ~ ~ , .~, ~ , ' o.o Human Services ;~~~'~ ~ 0"'04. 0.09 ~ '~~' ~ ~x~0 p9 0.09 , ~ ° ~ r,,, ' f <(l 0! ,~~,.,~, ~. ~ r~'f~ ~ "~ :„~" r~ :;;021 TOTAL i;,~,~'da:v~ 09; 0.20 yw;,y~ irk ,~„0:20' 0:20 ,d~~Y~Y,`~i~~ ~„~ aria f5~t~~s"f i~°° }~,~iS ..":~ SCHOOL DISTRICT `~~'~~ f ~'~ ' + ' '` ~- ~ "''~` :.,~ 1.13;, 0.29 ,~', ~ 0.29 ~ 0.29 ,. ~, 0.2! ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES `~} '~ '~~; '~°°~ J~~ ~`{ ~ ~~ -~; `_ _ $ . •, YEAR a 2005« 2006 , ,~, `^" :.2007 2008 ,~ ;'~.~ ` .'200! HOUSING UNITS '; ta;w. 15 15 ,., ~," '~~ ~~ ,~,. ~ ~, ~ 15 _.~ 15 15 POPULATION = a x.°~7}~ 37 ~,, ~ rk .~ ~~~ 37 + 37 ; •, - 37 t k~ - - i ~ 1 ~.^ ~ ~x!t~ ,~ r~ SCHOOL CHILDREN .~, ~ r ~''~;,,. ~~ ~ n~a..1 ~~ ~. ;'~ Elementary , ~ ~ F ,, W * t~7 r „3;°°i' 3 ~„ -~ x,f 3 3 Middle ~ ~ 1~~~~~ 1 1 ~~"~ , ~ ~ , . A.. High School ~ s,.~yE .~ 1.'0 1 Fsuy~t -, , 1 TOTAL ~:,, - 5;;: 5 ~ ~~ r, ~, ~. 5 5 ~ ~ ,~ a. e COUNTY GOVERNMENT ~ "~ ~~~`'"'~ `y~`~~ ~ ~ ~~ ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES y ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ `~=»~ ~' ~ ~- ~ ~.~ ~~ General Governm - ~ N ~ ~ ,a ' ent ~ ~ TO-Q4 0 04 ~~ .,. , 0` ~. 0.04 ~, ~ Q.a Public Safety ~ 0`05 0 05 ~ b5' 0.05 _~'' ' ; } ~ 0.0! Public Works y_~ ~~~' ~; ~Q 02~: 0 02 ~' ~,~~ x ~ ~d2,y 0.02 ~~ ~• : 0.0' ~ tl~~" -w ' i '-~ , Ada • ~<~s ~'? . , ' Human Services ~>'!~ ~<'~ ~ 0 Q9 0 09 ~~ ~ ~~'.~ 0'09 0.09 ._ ~ ; ~ Q 0! TOTAL ~ li, ~ ~ ~; ~t ~~:~; ~ ,„ ~, ~~,a~ ~„~_~, ,~~~ . t ~~ 020 0 20 rJ~~: ~ ~~ ~ `~ 0 20'" Q.20 ' ~_ 0.2i SCHOOL DISTRICT , ,_ ~, 0.29.; 0 29 k ~ ~~"'~~- ,0.~9 ~ 0.29 ~ 0.2! ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES :,. ~,, • ~ ,~~ { ~`' ~;'`" F'''~ - 33 YEAR TAX BASE ($1000) REVENUES ($) Property Tax Other Taxes Intergovernmental Service Charges Miscellaneous TOTAL ($) EXPENDITURES ($) General Government Public Safety Public Works Human Services Education Non-Departmental TOTAL ($) NET FISCAL IMPACT I . 2000 840 .::, 6813' ~: 760 - ..'9471:; -„ ~ 553 .- 284 ~- ,~ 9881• ti; ~ ~ 'a i .~ ~ Iii ~ j s ,~w~1111 -1188 s~. °~ ~ 469 ~~ a 32794''•° ` ~aJ'~' x r.=: .~yw f ' '~ , ~~.~ .r .'r 1 Di .'+~ ~ w _ } ~ .a° 2001 2002` 1821 -. 1867 = 14770 ~•i ~ ~ 15139~y ~ 1669 - 1710 3230 3311 1215 r -- ~ ` ~ 1245 , 624 ~,. `639 a {. ~_~a. , 21508 ~,'' ;'~' 22045 2440 2609 ~l 1030 6137 9310 1134 ,".- 22660 -1153 ` 2003 2004 1913 - .. 1961 . 15518 15906 1753 - ~ 1797 3394 3479. 1277 _ - ,~,,1308~ 1 655 672 22596 ~123161~~ ~ ,~' ' `'~ :, 2564 ' ' °. 2628: 2741 ~ ~ ~ .:2809.: , 1082 , _ ~, ''' -x 1109" 6447 ~ ~ i`~ s', 6609 9782 ,a ' - ~ ' 10026` 1192 ~ ~~~„~ ~1222a ~ ~ j~ -~ 23807 ' ~_,,' ~ ,~~` ' ;24403 F ' -1211 ~, ,..1241 YEAR ,, 2005 ~ 2006 ': ~ 20p7. 2008 ~ 2009 ,1.; ,. TAX BASE ($100D) "~" 2010 ~ 2060 ~'.~ r "2112. _~ 2165 - 2219 ~~ REVENUES ($) ~ "`', 9 ~~ ,~{'t~~~ ~~~ `~~r~, ~ ,t Property Tax .16303 16711 , ~- ~ pr1.7129•x~ 17557 _ a~ 17996.: Other Taxes r, - 1842 ~ 1888 `~~~ ~ 1935~~ 1984 ~' " 2033; ~, z~ Intergovernmental , A. ~ ~3566,~~ 3655 j~~~~ ,3746 3840 tk ~ ;~~~ 3936: ., t~.r ~+ ~ +, ~ r Service Charges ~' '1341 1375 1 ~~h~~ ~ ~• 1409 ~ 1444 ' ~ , ' s~" ~:= " 1~1$D Miscellaneous ~s ~,~ 688 `t 706 ~ ~., ' x:723'• 741 - ~ ' 760: TOTAL ($) ~ , , 23740 ~ 24334 , ., ~~ ;,~ 24942;:, 25566 • '~ ~,{ 4 ."..26205'-. r ff r EXPENDITURES ($) Y ~ ~ } ,~ ~ ~ ~~~L General Government w ~ '.'2693-:, 2761 •; r:~~:; 2830 ~ 2900 ~ ; t' 2973 Public Safe ~ ~~ 2 79+' 2951 g ~.• ~ 7~ ; ' ~~'' 8 ~ ~ '~~~''~3025, 3101 ~ ' 31.78.E Public Works ~. ~ .~: , 1137.;; 1165 -• ~ :~ ~1.194,~ 1224 ~~ ~$ ,. ~' .1255: Human Services 'n ~ ~ ~ 6T,~14?tip 6943 ~~ ~~ « ~7~1 ~ 7295 ~ f, ~;~ ~ ~ 7477; Education ~ •~• ~`~ 1027 10534 3 , ~~ ~ 1Q79j"~ 11067 ; ~~'~ ~ X11344: Non-Departmental _' ~.~~252_,~ 12$4 ~`T~~~~~ 131 r' 1349 ~ ~~ -~' ` 1382' ,ry. ~r F 7 ~~Ik ~ q. ~ 7 ~.~ 0 ~ :4 TOTAL ($) 25013~~ 25638 ~ , ~- ' r'~~26279 -:~ 26936 . ~ 27609 ~ r NET FISCAL IMPACT ($) r .`=1272 ~~ -1304 ` _F -1337'` -1370 ~-1404 34 SECTION 5 -PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF PROJECT ON SCHOOL DISTRICT YEAR 20Q0 ',: 2001 ~- 2002 2003. 200 REVENUES ($) K '' -_ County 4239 9310 9543- , 9782 1002E School District `` p = 0 0 ~ 0 _ ~~~ State 8753 , ~ 1922fi ~ 19707 ~ 201.99 z070e , ~: ~ ~. TOTAL ($) ;` 12992 r' 28536 , ` 29250~~ 29981 ~ , . r , 3073C .. rT •~ U,.~ _.f-i! ~ ~ 'P 4 -F ,~~ a y~ .y ?i EXPENDITURES ($) ~~ ~~`~ ~# ~ ~, ` ~ k~ ~ ~y~," County ,, ~~ ~r ~'k~ - 4239 ~ ; ~ ~~"~,€ ~ 9310 i.' + n ' o < , ;~ '> ; ~ 9543 r t ~ ~ '~ ~` , Y r ,~ , , ~ ~ , ? ~ ~;~ ; ~;~ 9782 ~ 1002E School District ; t"r~ ~ ~ ~ Q= } 0 ', 0 , ~:~~, ~~ 0 State $753 a~~ 19226 t ; .~ ~. r , ~ . , '19707 , , ~~ Y' , ~~ , , , ~rv~ 20199 _ 20704 ./ "$ _~ •1~ ~ A ' '. YAF - ~a~ ~ ~ .1 f.v 'n '/ ~IVCK r t~',: 1 r .v n ';P ~ ~ ., ~ ~~ . ' y f. ',; ~~ TOTAL $ () ' " x,12992 'i 28536 ~' ~`29250' 29981 ~- 30730 ~ ` - ~ F, I ~ ' ~' ~ ' » ~ ~ NET FISCAL IMPACT ($) P ' ~ 3 ~ ~ N~'~~[ ~ l i n ~?;A '~'0~ { '~f F ~~ ~ ~ . '"'~ a,;~ ~ ~ ' TS.F,~ `~ ~ ~ ~. , s 0 k ~ " ~ r 0 0 ,: ,_. .:~ YEAR 2005 7 2006 ~~~•'.' °, ,'~. 2007:,8 2008 . < . ZDO y T J I REVENU () .ca ;r x ~~~~: ~~ ~~ ~" ~.r y'yy`~~. f ES $ ,, ~ ;,. M ~ .~., -~.; C , County r }f f '; ,„,~ .; ~`. .4, -10277;,":J 10534 `' 10797,~~~ 11067 r '.,11344 School District s 0',~~ 0 ~ ~ 1 ; '~~"'~ ~„~~ 1 ~ ,.._ , 0. 0 ~: ._., ~.~ State ~ ' " A21222,~°~ 21752 =~~ ~' `~` 222g$ `~ 22854 ~ " ` 2342 ~~ ~~, " ~ s. 5 ~u , ~ f9~ v`. TOTAL ($) , _ •31499 ~~~, 32286 ~ ~ 33093 ~ 33921 34769 it - ~- tia ~} G~[ 1 ~~ 5~"~~ m, ~ d 3'~~ ~ t EXPENDITURES ($) ~`~ ~' ~~~ -~ ~~ ~ x'`~ ~~'' ' +~ 'Jib rv 4~ 9PP i` i~~,r.~ County , °~' }a~~}{,.V10277°.' 10534 4i~~ - 10797.:-~ 11067 .113,44 School District W `"~ ~ ^~~ "" '; >n~ i State ~ ~ ~ ~ ~3<, ,21222~~ 21752 -;;w ~~2229~ ° 22854 f ~ .'2342 ~vla<' .ly f ~M ~~f ~~~ i~ ~1 L ($) ;y '" 31499 ~ 32288 f•~ ~ s~t"~ ~~ ~~~ ~d ~ 33093 -: 33921 ~ 34769 j Q.4 1 y l .•~$»~ ~ r ~~ ~ NET FISCAL IMPACT ($) ::~ ~~ ~~. ,~d.~ 0 ' 0 ~'t ~.~ ~Y 0;.'. 0 ' ~.. ~~ : j SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PROJECTED DEMOGRAPHIC/FISCAL IMPACTS YEAR ;' 2DQ0 2001 ~ : ~ :2002-~ 2003 200 HOUSING UNITS 7..; 15 15 :; 'r 15 1: 35 SCHOOL CHILDREN Elementary ... 1: 3 ::: 3. 3 3 Middle ~.. 0''> 1 - . ~ 1 1 High School 0~ 1 1 1 1 ~ ` ... 5 5 ,.. :, ,. 5. COUNTY EMPLOYEES _ ~.0.09,Q 0.20 , ~ 020' 0.20 ,0.2L - ,.. -. SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ~ ` - " 0.13 ~ 0.29 `.` . ': 0 29 0.29 '' 0.2~ TAX BASE ($1000) = 840 •~ 1821 .1$67 ~~ 1913 ~°~ 1961 COUNTY BUDGET ($) ~ ,~j - __ Revenues -9881 '° 2150$ - 22045 ~ 22596 23161•. Expenditures ~ ^ ~, 10317 .~ 22660 ~ 23227 ~ 23807 - 244p3, BALANCE ~- d ;;,~36 ,~ -1153 -11$1., ~ -1211 ~, . -1241:; SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET "~~ ' •':'~ 1 Revenues < .•12992 ~~ 28536 ' ~ 29250 ;~ 29981 ;. 30730; ,~: Expenditures ~, 12992 N 2$536 .29250 29981 _ -~ 30730.;: BALANCE Y ~ ~ ^ {~0°~ 0 F, , ~; ,Q 0 Q '' ` COMBINED BUDGETS ($) ~ `t ~ ~~~ tip,' ~ ~ ' Revenues r ~ ~ 22873 ~~ 50044 ~ ~ ~. 51295.. a± 52577 ~ '-53892y Ex enditures '~' "~~23309' 51196 ~ •52478: 53788 ~~,~ ~~ ~''; 55133` BALANCE ~~y`i~: r~~'-;~`~"436: -1153 "` -1181. -1211 "`.~ ~ ~~ ~` , ~ "- ' .1241? YEAR ,~ t `2oos;~ 2o0s ~ ~ zo07 200$ h ~~n X2009: HOUSING UNITS ~ ~ 15 :~ 15 ~ ~ 15 ~' 15 ~'~- "'y ' =15 POPULATION ~;; : ~. - 37:,,, 37 ~ ~ ;~ '3X;°a 37 ' ' , ,. 37 F ~ ~ y SCHOOL CHILDREN g°'s ~ `: 1 , t,. ~ ~~, ~ Elementary '_~ ~ . ,; :g ~ 3 : r ,:_ ; 3 ; 3 ~ 3 ~, Middle ., , F -- "1;. 1 1 t 1 _s _ 1 r tik.. 4 f.. ~ i y~y .~ L High School y , ~" 1 ~~ 1 ter ;~~, 1 ~ 1 ' 1 TOTAL 4'' ~ ~ ;~ 5. { 5 ~ - .~ '- ~~ COUNTY EMPLOYEES ,~~ i0.20'I 0.20 ~ } ~,:~~0,20.~ 0.20 - 0.2~ SCHOOL EMPLOYEES t , r: ,029 0.29 ~ ,,;0~9~ 0.29 ~ ;. ;K' '~ Q.2S TAX BASE ($1000) ~ :2010 ' 20s0 ~ 2112 ~ 2165 ~ 2219 COUNTY BUDGET ($) r :~ ~ # ~» ~ >~ +~~~ _ Revenues '~~` ~~r -23740 ~' 24334 ~ 24942 •.~q 25566 26205 Expenditures ~'~~~ ~~~~5013`,~ 25638 ~~, t , 26278;' 26936 ~` .~ 27609: BALANCE ~'.~ 1272 -1304 _,~,; ~~ -1337•: -1370 ~r ~ ` `,-1404 SCHOOL DISTRICT BU ~ •r' "`~ ~ ~` ~ ~ s n Revenues DGET ($) '~: ~~ '~' ~"~~~ ~ ~;~ X., ,~~~~~ ~; ;" ,fig ~ 31499 ~ 32286 ~ 4 33093 ~,._,-~,,,~„~ ; ~ ~ .~ 33921 ~ 34769; Expenditures "" ~~~3~499:~r: 32286 . ,;• 33093 .~ 33921 ~ 34769 BALANCE ~'~ :~~~r~`'' 0~ 0 ~~= ~`0 ~ '~ COMBINED BUDGETS ~ ~~ l a~ _} N ~r ij,~J~~ - ` Revenues ~ ,~y@~Q55235:`- 56620 ~ , ,58036~~ 59487 ~° 60974 Expenditures ~ _ ~ 56511 ~ 57924 r ..: k 59372 60857 '. 62378; BALANCE ~'~, 1272;' -1304 . "~ ~:=133T.:.. -1370 F -1404 SECTION 7 - SUMMARY OF PROJECTED PUBLIC SCHOOL CAPACITY IMPACTS SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA: School District: School Attendance: ~~ 36 Oran a Coun __ Elementary School _ .. _ 64~ 9 tY .:...........:... ;~ _......,::.... .....YES ... j.... __..:.....:.:....... _ ..... _... _ . _ _ ~.~ .. - - .. _ ._ Middle School . - 17~ Chapel Hill-Carrboro NO j High School 19~ YEAR ~ 2000 2001 __ 2002 2003 200 YEAR 2005 2006 2007 2008 200' SCHOOL CHILDREN )1' ~ r, ~ ~ ` Elementary't ~ ' ~, ` 9.~ 3 x ~ ; 3 j 3 °' Middle ~ ~'~` ~ w~~~.. 1 , , - ~ a _~ ~ ~' High School ~' ~ 1 ' ' 1 4 1 ~; 1 - TOTAL ' , ~ ~'~ r., v 5 , ~ k ,, ,.. SCHOOL CAPACITIES -ALL SCHOOLS CURRENT ENROLLMENT -ALL SCHOOLS ,.Elementary~_~~,~ r.~:::a =;: .~ yah~.~:~y~ ~'~3328 w . . ' `_~ Elementar~l ;aw `a~ ~ ~~ a~ ~ ..: _ 2822 _... ... . . . , ~ , . , . . ~ ~~ Middle 1522 Middle 1240 High School ~~ 1520 • ~ Hi h S ho l°3 ~ ~ "' '~ " a w c o ~ ~ ~~~~, .1487 TOTAL 6370 TOTAL 551' YEAR ~ 2000 2001 2002 2003 200 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT ~;~ ; ,`.::;„~' r. , .1, , 4 Elementary -~~~~~~~ ,2$23µe 2825 ~ ;'~' 2825 ~'~ 2825 r 2$25 Middle ~ ~~; `.-~"~~, -Ti~,1240:"';~ 1241 ' ',~ X1241 ;~ 1241 1241 High School , ' ~ ~ ~ ";1457y~~ 1458 Y a ' 1458 1458 1458 OTAL t, ~ , ,;. ,~,~- ~., r, ~~., , ~. - .~ 5521 524 , ~"^ - ~~ 6524.. ~ , •.~~,~ 5524 .. .5524 YEAR 2005 2006 2007 2008 200 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT .' = 6 ~~~ Elementary e i ~' ~ .2825 ~~' 2825 ~ ' p ~„,~'~ 1 ~ :2825 ~ 2825 - 2625 Middle : , } '~~" ~k;~ 1241 1241 I ": ` ~~,~ y~1241 j~ 1241 -~- . _ 1241 ~ ` High School ~~- ~- ~'1458~' 1458 - :,:' ~ ~ 'r1458 .~ 1458 - ~° 1458 TOTAL ~ ~ ~ ~~ 5524`~ 5524 ' ~' `:5524 552 p , - _- . :. . 4 ~.. 5524 3-1-00 PLANNING BOARp MINUTES 37 Strayhorn said that the people in the subdivision would prefer it to be a private subdivision with as few access points as possible. He said that the one house in the open space would have a significant bearing on whether the field would stay farmed. MOTION: Katz moved acceptance of the Concept Plan for Creek Wood subdivision as presented without the condition of the stub out. Seconded by McAdams. VOTE: Unanimous. 9 Barrows made reference to something that she did not see before. She said that under "Landscape Notes" l o there are exceptions. She is concerned about items b and d that speak to looking at trees that are aged. 11 She thinks an expert should be consulted about these kinds of decisions about trees and forestry. 12 13 Benedict said that there is someone on the staff that has a degree in Landscape Architecture. 14 15 ~ b. Preliminary Plans 16 (1) Bricewood Acres 17 (Cedar Grove Township - 15 Lots) 18 19 Eddie Kirk made the presentation. BACKGROUND: Re oast --Preliminary Plan Applicant: Joe Phelps • Subdivision follows the conventional plan. • 15 single-family lots on 27.04 acres (including rights-of way) Average lot size - 1.63 ac. • Fourteen (14.49) acres in the critical area (U-ENO-CA): max. density = ldu/2 ac.; • Twelve (12.55) acres in the balance of the watershed: max. density = 1 du/ .92 ac. Location The property is located off the south side of Governor Scott Road east of Mill Creek Road in Cedar Grove Townshi Existing and,Proposed Conditions Existing: • Current zoning is Agricultural Residential (AR). • The property is located in the Upper Eno protected watershed. Physical Features: • There is one intermittent stream in the southwestern portion ofthe property. • The site is entirely wooded with mixed hardwoods and pines. Adjacent Land Use: • Properties to the south and east are wooded. • Properties to the north and west are developed in single family residential lots. Proposed: Roads: • Access is from Gov. Scott Road (SR 1351). • Proposed public streets to be constructed to NCDOT standards. • Proposed public right-of--way connection to the southern property line. Water-Sewer: • Water will be from individual wells. • Health Department verified that each lot contains suitable soils to locate a septic system. Agency Comments: • Comments attached from NCDOT, Environmental Health, and Emergency Management. Develo ment Process Schedule a d Action Planning Board: • First Action: Concept Plan approved by the Planning Board October 6, 1999 with the three following conditions: 38 I. Action within forty-five (45) days of this meeting; 2. Or within such further time consented to in writing by the applicant. 3. If the Planning Board fails to prepare its recommendation to the Board of Commissioners w the specified time period, approval recommended without conditions. • Preliminary Plan addresses all conditions of approval of the Concept Plan. l .The Intersection and road alignment on the Preliminary Plan shall meet NCDOT standards. 2. A publicly dedicated right-of way should be provided to the southern property line to allow for future interconnectivity of public roads (in accordance with County policy). 3.With the Preliminary Plat, submit a plat indicating areas far on-site infiltration of storm Ovate demonstrates compliance with Article 6.23.3a of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. • Second Action: FINANCIAL IMPACT: Fiscal Impact Analysis included as an attachment. RECOMMENDATION(S): Planning Staff Approval, in accordance with the attached Resolution of Approval. Kirk made reference to item B6 in the resolution and said that all streets shall have five-foot utility easements on each side of the right-of--way. Also, item 7 says that the posted speed limit on Governor Scott Road should be reduced to 45 miles per hour. He said that if the County Camrnissioners approve this resolution as written, then they would be recommending to NCDOT that the speed limit be reduced. Barrows asked about lots seven and eight and said that there was a significant stream buffer. She was told that Environmental Health has assured that two lots can goon this area. 10 lz 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2p 21 22 23 24 2S ?6 27 78 7th 30 Steve Yuhasz said that he vas concerned that lot eight was a little tight. He said that there was some additional room on lots nine and ten that could give lot eight a little more room. MOTION: Holtkamp moved approval of the Preliminary Plan for Bricewood Acres. Seconded by Katz. Chair Allison made reference to page 50 and that NCDOT recommended a 60-foot right-of--way, and in some places there is going to be a 50-fast right-af--way. He asked Yuhasz how he proposed to deal with this. Yuhasz said that an additional 5-foot utility easement would be added on each side of the 50-foot right-of- way. Benedict said that even though the Fiscal Impact Analysis does need some updating from 1997, it does show that there is negative impact. There is a net loss between the expenditures for County public services and the revenue that comes forth from the subdivision. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM 11: ITEM FROM JPA PUBLIC HEARING 2/Z1/00 31 Benedict gave an update on the Greene Tract. The Commissioners met last night to discuss the Greene 32 Tract, and the original proposal that came forward was a zoning for 169 acres. In the interlocal 33 agreement, it said that only 60 acres had to be assigned. The decision last night was to determine the 34 most appropriate 60 acres. The County Commissioners did not have enough information last nighk to 35 make a decision on what was the most appropriate 60 acres. The County Commissioners made a motion 36 to not have the rezoning a part of the interlocal agreement before the County takes over solid waste pRAFT 4-4--00 COUNTY COMMISSIONER MINUTES 8 The Board approved the submission of an application for $10,778 in federal grant funds to the Corporation for National Service to provide school-based literacy assistance. f. RFP Award -Printing of the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Guide This item was removed and considered at the end of the Consent Agenda. 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 S1 52 53 5a 55 56 57 V07E ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA c. Bricewood Acres Subdivision -Preliminary Plan The Board considered a preliminary plan far the proposed Bricewood Acres subdivision, located on a 27.04-acre tract near the intersection of Governor Scott and Mill Creek roads in Cedar Grove Township. Commissioner Jacobs questioned the nature of the stream buffer and haw it connected to open space and adjoining properties. He asked about one of the circles in the drawing and if it was a pond. He also had some questions about having a pond on several properties and how it would be maintained. He asked about the note indicating that dwellings are prohibited an a portion of lot #15. Planning Director Craig Benedict said that each subdivision plan that is submitted to the County is submitted bath as a conventional plan (no open space requirement) and a flexible plan (at least 33% open space is required). In this case both a conventional plan and a flexible plan were submitted and the staff and Planning Board approved both of the plans. The developer chose the conventional plan with no open space. He said that any environmental areas, such as the stream buffer, could be incorporated in the lot. He showed on a map the lots and said that the lot sizes were down to .9 acres. Since this project is subdivided by a water quality critical area to the east only development could occur an the western side of the line on lot 15. The developer has used the amount of density that could be created within the critical area, so lot 15 lies within the protected watershed. He said that the pond would be filled in and would not be part of this development plan. A future road will go through the pond area. In regards to the stream branch, the staff still has the opportunity, as development continues deeper into the Upper Eno critical area, to suggest open space planning for flexible development to preserve the stream buffer. Also, incorporated in this conventional plan, there is a stub out of a public road to future undeveloped properties to the south. Chair Carey asked about the difference in the number of lots and Craig Benedict said that there would be 15 lots in the flexible plan and 15 lots in the conventional plan. Commissioner Brown made reference to the fiscal impact analysis and asked about the net loss between expenditures for County public services and the revenues that would come from this subdivision. Craig Benedict said that the fiscal impact analysis needed to be updated. It has not been updated to include the current rates. Commissioner Jacobs said that he has a problem with accepting the payment in lieu instead of the stream buffer. Craig Benedict said that at this location it did not seem that the staff was ready to suggest dedication of one acre versus payment in lieu in this case. He said that the staff is continuing to look at the best way to handle preservation of these areas. Commissioner Gordon agrees with Commissioner Jacobs' concerns. A motion was made by Chair Carey to approve a preliminary plan for the proposed Bricewood Acres subdivision, located on a 27.04-acre tract near the intersection of Governor Scott and Mill Creek roads in Cedar Grove Township. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Commissioner Jacobs would like some more detailed information about how this fits in to adjoining waterways and properties. He would like the staff to talk to Mr. Phelps and Mr. Yuhasz about whether there might be another approach to protecting the stream buffer. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Brown to send the preliminary plan for Bricewood Acres back for additional information. VOTE: AYES, 3; N0, 1 (Chair Carey) f. RFP Awarder Printing of the Chapel Hill/Orange,County Visitors Guide The Board considered awarding a bid to Hickory Printing of Raleigh in the amount of $28,386 for the printing of 40,000 Orange County visitor guides. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the brochures went to the welcome centers on the interstates. He suggested that these brochures go to the welcome centers outside of the County. A copy of this brochure will be distributed to the members of the Board. 39 ~_ ~. ...~~... ~~ ~ .• ~.