HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-23-1999 - D4r
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 23, 1999
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement
DEPARTMENT: Planning ~ PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
"Final" version (4130/99) of Water and Gene Bell, ext 2589
Sewer I•Jlanagement Planning and
Boundary Agreement
Excerpt from 2/11/99 OWASA Minutes
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To receive a report on the work of the Water and Sewer Service Boundary Task
Force and review the "final" version of the Water and Sewer Management Planning and
Boundary Agreement.
BACKGROUND: The elected boards of Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and
Hillsborough and the appointed Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA} Board of
Directors adopted resolutions in April 1994 to create a Water and Sewer Service Boundary
Task Force to develop water and sewer service boundaries for the County's service providers.
Commissioner Moses Carey served as chair of the Task Force that began meeting in June
1994. In December 1994, the Task Force issued a preliminary report with a "straw" set of
service boundaries, accompanied by a list of inter-re{ated objectives to be addressed. In 1995,
the elected and appointed boards passed resolutions agreeing at different levels of detail with
the initial report, and charged. the Task Force to continue meeting to work through the issues
and service boundaries. After almost five years of diligent work, the Task Force is pleased to
present the "final" version of the Water and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary
Agreement.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time.
RECOMMENDATION(S): .The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report for
information only at this time.
y
ti
FINAL.
' 4/30/99
WATER AND SEWER 112ANAGEMENT. PLANNIlVG
AND BOUNDARY AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered•into this day of '
,1999, by and between the COUN'T'Y OF ORANGE, a
political subdivision of the State of North Cazolina; the TOWN OF
CARRBORO, the TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, and the TOWN OF
HILLSBOROUGH, municipal corporations duly created and existing under
the laws of North Carolina; and the ORANGE WATER AND SEWER
AUTHORITY, a public water and sewer authority duly created and existing
under Chapter 162A, Article 1 of the North Carolina General Statutes.
WITNESSETH:
Inconsideration of mutual benefits regarding the definition of water and
sewer service boundaries and the management and planning thereof, the
parties to this agreement hereby mutually agree as follows:
A. Charge to the Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force
Since the mid-1980's, several attempts to define water and sewer
service boundaries for Orange County and the municipalities of
Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough have been undertaken.
In 1994, a Task Force was formed consisting of elected officials
from Carrboro, Chapel Hell, Hillsborough and Orange County,
as well as two members of the Orange Water and Sewer
Authority Boazd of Directors. The charge to the Water and
Sewer Service Boundary Task Force is attached as Appendix B.,
B. Purpose of Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement
1. To provide a comprehensive, County-wide system of
service areas for future utility development and
interest azeas for dealing with private water and
3
FINAL
4/30/99
wastewater system problems in areas without public
water and sewer service.
2. To complement growth management objectives, land use
plans and annexation plans in existing agreements, such
as the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint
Planning Agreement and Joint Planning Area Land Use
Plan
3. To resolve in advance and preclude future conflicts about
future service areas and annexation areas.
4. To provide for predictable long-range water and sewer
capital improvement planning and financing.
5. To provide for limitations on water and sewer service in
certain areas, as defined.
A. Effective Date of the Agreement
This agreement shall become effective .upon execution
by all of the parties and signature by the chief elected or
appointed official.
B. Term of Agreement
This agreement shall remain in effect for five {5) years from its
execution, and shall be renewable as provided in the following
subsection.
C. Procedure for renewal
At the end of each five-year term, the agreement shall renew
automatically, unless written notice is provided of intent to
withdraw as noted in subsection E below.
2
ti
FINAL
4/30/99
D. Procedure for proposing and acting on changes in
agreement including boundaries
1. Any change to the agreement (including
boundaries) requires approval of all parties to the
agreement.
2. The addition of other parties to this agreement shall be
by consent of the current parties.
E. Procedure for withdrawal from/decision not to renew the
agreement
1. A party may riot withdraw. from the agreement, until it
holds a public hearing on the proposed withdrawal
followed by written notice to the other parties within 30
days of the public hearing. The withdrawal shall be
effective one (1) year following receipt by the other
parties of the written notice.
2. If a party to the agreement withdraws as provided above,
the agreement remains in effect as to the other parties until
all but one party withdraws in the manner provided for the
in this agreement.
F. Accountability of Future Parties
1. Future utility providers that wish to become parties of
this agreement must be financially and technically
capable of providing water/sewer service to address
public health emergencies or other identified public
facility needs, as defined by the parties of the boundary
agreement. The provider must have adequate system
capacity, technical capability and financial assets to
address system problems within its interest area without
compromising service to current customers.
4
3
5
FINAL
4/30/99
G. Courtesy Review of Development Proposals Within
Service and Interest Areas
The water and sewer providers that are parties to this
agreement will be provided courtesy review and the right to
provide written input into utility design and the provision of
easements for all new major subdivisions and other residential
and non-residential site plan approvals within their service area
and interest area. The `party to this agreement with development
plan review authority shall retain approval authority for all
development proposals within its planning jurisdiction.
H. Linkage with the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro
Joint Planning Agreement and other future agreements
This agreement shall be made part of the Orange County-Chapel
Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Agreement, by reference, and to
any future cooperative planning agreements that may be entered
into among some or all of the parties. Termination of the Joint
Planning Agreement or any other cooperative planning
agreement does not terminate this agreement. Termination of
this agreement can only be accomplished as provided in this
agreement. Similarly, the withdrawal of a party from the Joint
Planning Agreement or from any other cooperative planning
agreement does not constitute withdrawal from this agreement.
Withdrawal from this agreement can only be accomplished as
provided in this agreement.
Primary Service Area: An area where water and/or sewer service is
now provided, or might reasonably be provided in the future, according
to adopted plans {hereinafter referred to.as "service area")~.
2. Asper the map in Appendix A, the Town of Hillsborough Long-Term Interest Area and Primary Service
Area are combined and for purposes of this agreement is its Primary Service Area.
4
6
FINAL
4/30/99
OWASA Long-Term Interest Area: An area (as shown on the Water
and Sewer Service Boundary Map, which is Appendix A) within
which public water and/or sewer service is not anticipated to be
made, but if such services are to be provided, OWASA will be the
responsible utility service provider. Long-Term Interest Areas are not
service areas, and do not include areas outside of Orange County.
OWASA's Long-Term Interest Area is hereinafter referred to as
OWASA's "interest area."
Orange County Long-Term Interest Area: The areas of Orange
County planning jurisdiction (as shown on the Water and Sewer
Service Boundary Map, which is Appendix A) not part of a Primary
Service Area or another Long-Term Interest Area within which public
water and/or sewer service is not anticipated to be made, but if such
services are to be provided, Orange County will be responsible for
coordinating the provision of utility service. Long-Term Interest
Areas -are not service areas, and do not include areas outside of
Orange County. Orange County's Long-Term Interest Area is
hereinafter referred to as Orange County's "interest area."
Essential Public Facility: Apublicly-owned facility, or a facility
wholly financed by Federal, State or local government (or a
combination thereof) that provides a service for the health, safety and
general welfare of County residents (for. example, a school, fire
station, public safety substation or solid waste convenience center).
Adverse Public Health Condition: An Adverse Public Health
Condition exists in the case of a wastewater system(s) when it is (1)
failing, (2) documented to be failing by the Orange County Health
Department, and (3) no on-site repair is approvable or recommended
by the Orange County Health Department; or, in the case of a well
water. supply system, it meets all of the following criteria:
• the well water supply system is contaminated with
a microbial, chemical or other agent which is
known to cause disease or other serious health
effects;
5
FINAL
4/30/99
• the well water supply system is not reparable to
.the point where the contamination can be
eliminated;
• the water from the well water supply system is not
treatable prior to withdrawal to the point where the
threat of disease or serious health effects is
eliminated;
• there is no alternate location on-site for a new well
water supply system which can be permitted under
Orange County Health Department regulatory.
criteria in effect at the time of the contamination
or an alternative site is unacceptable because
widespread existence of contamination or because
of the potential of contaminant migration to the
alternate site.
A description of these terms and their application is provided in
Section VI of this Agreement.
Public Water or Public Sewer Service: The provision of water
.and/or sewer service by a party to this agreement. This defuution
does not include consulting services andlor technical assistance
services.
Emergeacy Water Transfer: Any short-term transfer'of raw water
supply or fuushed drinking water supply from one service provider to
assist another service provider in meeting water needs during:
a) unanticipated disruptions or emergencies relating to raw or
finished water supply. Such disruptions or emergencies may
result from events including, but not limited to: (i) human
error; ii) equipment or power failure; iii) supply contamination;
iv) major fires, floods, droughts or other disasters; and v)
operations or facility maintenance activities, or
b) periods when temporary, short-term disruption of water
supply or finished water service may occur as a result of
6
y
FINAL
4/30/99
planned or unplanned maintenance of major water supply,
pumping, transmission, treatment, or storage facilities.
Non-Emergency Water Transfer: Any transfer from one water
service provider. to another water service provider of raw water
supply or finished drinking water supply which is not an emergency
water transfer.
Wastewater Transfer: Any transfer from one wastewater service
provider to another wastewater service provider.
Water and/or Sewer Provider: A municipal corporation, county,
private non-profit water system, or public water and sewer
authority under the N.C. General Statutes that provides water
and/or sewer service to the public.
A. Service Areas and Interest Area Boundaries
The service area and interest area boundaries are as shown in
Appendix A.
B. Adherence to Boundaries
The boundaries on the map (Appendix A) define the .areas in
which the parties may provide water and sewer service, and no
party to this .agreement shall extend service beyond the
designated boundaries, except as provided in this agreement
(Sections VI.B, VI.C, VI.D, VI.F, VII.A, VII.B, VII.C)3. In no
case-shall service be extended beyond the boundaries of Orange
County without the approval of the elected boards which
exercise planning jurisdiction on either side of the County
boundary. Any extension of lines or service into Chatham
County requires the approval of Orange County, .Chapel Hill,
Carrboro and OWASA.
3. Parenthetical phrase to be le,~! in until agreement is adopted
8
7
FINAL
4/30/99
4 ,~~
r
r
+~p ^^^7'--ytt'' ( a 1 3 {j ~nyj'-~ a, y.~Y ~`~:a x °~~,
A. Policy Issues
Planning and growth management issues are influenced by the
location of water and, sewer. This agreement is not intended to
supersede other land use agreements made by the local
governments.
B. Procedures for the provision of service within the Service
Areas and Interest Areas
1. When water and sewer service provision is required
to address an adverse public health condition, or to
provide service to an essential public facility, the
designated provider for the service area or interest
.area shall have the right of first refusal to provide such
service.
2. Within the service areas and interest areas, the water and
sewer provider will agree to provide service, as defined
in this agreement, as system capacity, financial
resources, and other reasonable utility considerations
allow, and as provided in this agreement.
C. Policy of "first-refusal"
1. The designated water and sewer provider within
a service area or interest area has first right to
provide service if an adverse public health condition
or essential public facility service need is established, and
public water or public sewer service is determined to be
required to address the adverse public health condition.
2. If the designated water and sewer provider declines to
provide service, it must notify the other parties to the
agreement with a statement of rationale.
9
8
10
FINAL
4/30/99
3. The designated water and sewer provider may contract
with another service provider to address the situation, in
the manner prescribed in Section VI of this agreement,
upon consultation with other jurisdictions.
4. If no other water and sewer provider is available, Orange
. County retains the right to address the adverse public
health condition or essential public facility need in the .
manner prescribed in Section VI of this agreement.
D. Other Extension and Management Responsibilities
1. Reserved
~ @,'{ ~> 9;r 'a'..R ,,y: ~"S:' ~1•~ "-s .• :'v.1 F: •..~ :'e:. 'Sd ~tii~a~:~%i~:;~i ~a ,~'y~~
!4 j BBi t € ~ ~ i t~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ' °~i~: ~ ~.'s.~ i ?t`;,'^' ~",.er i" `.s}a ::'':i~.:,:,S=y r'~. sY.v. ~33~ .~ xb'z_~'-.~at,.e..,. ;.. ,...eSi.
..1e~~,~ ~. ~.'~.. ~=A`5..:'1-3 .~_~.~., ~`' ~ ,~'-~. ~~~~-`t<''"t.~.`~ei=:.i:?w~. $ .,4, .d S $, ~ ° ~ ~ _.J.4 '~e~^•tr V''°h.:. (;k, ~„•
A. Prohibitions and Limitations on Extension Into Interest Areas
The development of land within interest areas is not projected to
occur at urban densities, and therefore, public water and sewer service
shall. be prohibited in these areas, except as provided in this
agreement {Section VI.B, VI.C, VI.D, VI.F, VII.A, VII.B, VII.C}3.
Individual on-site and small/community-scale alternative water
supply and wastewater treatment systems not physically connected to
central •systems will be the primary methods of meeting the water and
sewer service needs of existing and future development.
3. ibtd
B. -Adverse Public Health Conditions
An exception to the prohibition of public water and sewer service in
interest areas may be made to allow the extension of lines in the event
the Orange County Health Department documents an "adverse public
health condition."
9
11
FINAL
4/30/99
An adverse public health condition exists where:
1. In the case of existing wastewater system(s), it meets all of the
following criteria:
• the wastewater system is failing;
• the wastewater system is documented to be failing
by the Orange County Health Department;
• there is no on-site repair approvable or
recommended by the Orange County Health
.Department.
The following terms used in the criteria above mean:
Failing Wastewater System• A wastewater system is failing
when sewage or effluent is seeping or discharging to the
ground surface or to surface waters. A permitted, properly-
functioning non-dischazge wastewater system (e.g., a spray-
irrigation system) and a permitted, properly-functioning
discharge system aze not failing wastewater systems.
Approvable On-Site Re air An approvable on-site wastewater
system repair that can be completed in a designated repair area
which is approvable under Orange County Health Department
regulatory soiUsite criteria in effect at the time of the needed
' ~ repair.
Recommended On-Site Repair A recommended on-site repair
is one that is not an approvable on-site repair, but is one that in
the best professional judgement of the Orange County Health
Department will reasonably enable the system to function
properly. A recommended on-site repair may incorporate
engineered design (a design certified by an engineer to
overcome all soiUsite limitations in the particular situation),
site or system modification, flow reduction or other measures
calculated to improve functionality of the system.
2. In the case of an existing well water supply system(s), it meets
all of the following criteria:
10
12
FINAL
4/30/99
• _ the well water supply system is contaminated with
a microbial, chemical or other agent which is
known to cause disease or other serious health
effects;
• the well water. supply system is not reparable to
the point where the contamination can be
eliminated;
• the water from the well water supply system is not
treatable prior to withdrawal to the point where the
threat of disease or serious health effects is
eliminated;
• there is no alternate location on-site for a new well
water supply system which can be permitted under
Orange County Health Department regulatory
criteria in effect at the time of~the contamination
or an alternative site is unacceptable because
widespread existence of contamination or because
of the potential of contaminant migration to the
alternate site.
The following terms used in the criteria above mean:
Well: A well is any excavation that is cored, bored,
drilled, jetted, dug or otherwise constructed for the
purpose of locating, testing, developing, draining or
recharging any ground water reserves or aquifer, or that
may control, divert, or otherwise control the movement
of water from or into any aquifer.
Well Water Supp1Y S stem: A well water supply system
is any well that is intended for use or is usable as a
source of water supply for domestic. use (including
household purposes, farm livestock, or gardens) and the
pump and pipe used in connection with or pertaining
thereto, including well pumps, distribution pipes,
plumbing pipes, tanks, fittings, and water treatment
devices. '
11
FINAL
4/30199
3. The Orange. County Health Department makes the
determination when an adverse public health condition exists,
and will make a recommendation on the appropriate remedy to
the ,governmental entity(ies) in the appropriate interest area.
The final decision to use any particular means or tool for
rectifying any particular adverse. public health condition
remains, through zoning regulations or other land use
ordinances, with the governmental entity or entities having
zoning or planning jurisdiction over the area where the adverse
public health condition exists. In the Orange County-Chapel
Hi11=Carrboro Joint Planning Area, the Joint Development
Review Areas shall be used to determine which of the JPA
- parties shall jointly decide on the appropriate means or tool for
rectifying an adverse public health condition. Public water or
public sewer lines extended to provide service to an adverse
public health condition or essential public facility cannot be
used for other purposes or other parties, except to remedy
another adverse public health condition.
C. Siziag of Lines Eztended Into Interest Areas
The extension of public water or public sewer lines into an
interest area shall be sized so as only to serve the intended use,
as defined in this agreement. However, in the case of a public
water line extension, provisions shall be made to address
adequate line sizing for pressure and volume considerations.
D. Controlling Access to Lines In Interest Areas
Public water. or public sewer lines extended to provide service
to an adverse public health condition or essential public facility
cannot. be used for other purposes or other parties, except to
remedy another adverse public health condition.
13
12
ti
14
FINAL
4/30/99
E. Siting of Essential Public Facilities Within Interest Areas
The location of some essential public facilities, particularly .
schools, requires special consideration for access to public
water and sewer lines.
Where possible, schools shall be sited in a manner that
promotes the efficient use of existing water and sewer service.
Preferably, a set of criteria governing such situations would be
. developed based on consultations between the appropriate
school boards and the elected officials of affected jurisdictions,
and applied as necessary.
Publicly-owned facilities other than a public school shall be
located in a manner that promotes the orderly provision of
water and sewer service. The preferred method of connection is
to lines that already exist, or in a manner that would minimize
the need to extend existing lines.
F. Water and Sewer Service Into/Out of Orange County
Recognizing the land use implications of public water and
public sewer service in adjacent counties on jurisdictions
within Orange County, water and sewer service of any of the
service providers that are parties to this agreement shall not be
extended outside of the boundaries of Orange County without
the approval of the elected boards which exercise planning
jurisdiction on either side of the County boundary. -Any
extension of lines or service into Chatham County requires the
approval of Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and OWASA.
This approval is not required when water and sewer service is
required as a condition of annexation by .the towns of Chapel
Hill or Carrboro.
13
15
FINAL
4/30/99
A. Emergency Water Transfers
Emergency water transfers are transfers that:
1. Are made for s~iort-term duration. For the purpose of this
Agreement, short-term duration shall be reviewed at 30
days, 60 days and 90 days, with subsequent 90-day
intervals up to one year, as per the following process:
a. After 30 days duration, a memo from the chief
administrative officials of the service providers
will be sent to the managers of the jurisdictions
that are parties to this Agreement. The memo shall
document the emergency, steps being taken to
address the situation, and notify the managers of
the potential for a longer period of the emergency
water transfer.
b. At 60 days, the service provider sending the water
• shall notify its elected board (or, in the case of
OWASA, the member government elected boards)
on the status of the emergency and provide
opportunity for the boards to review and comment
on the situation. The receiving provider shall
provide similar information.
c. Between 60 days and 90 days from inception of
transfer, the elected boards which exercise •
planning jurisdiction on either side of the
boundary in which the service is provided shall
review and approve or not approve the
continuation of the transfer beyond 90 days. If
continuation of the transfer is approved, it may
continue for an additional 90-day period.
Approval shall be required for each subsequent
90-day period, with a maximum emergency water
14
16
FINAL
4/30/99
transfer duration of 365 days from inception. Lack
of action by the elected boards as provided in this
subsection constitutes .approval for the subsequent
90-day period.
d. At the 30-day point, the service provider shall
determine that adequate water and other resources
and facility capacities are available to support the.
extended emergency transfer without adversely
affecting the quality and quantity of water supply
and services to customers within its service area,
and without adversely affecting environmental
quality within its service area;
AND
2. Are not intended to provide raw or finished water supply
necessary to support new growth and development
within the service area of the service provider receiving
the transfer. Neither party shall, in planning for future
growth and associated increases in water supply needs,
rely upon water from the other party supplied under this
agreement to serve such growth.
a. A service .provider experiencing a water
emergency and receiving emergency water
transfers must agree to act expeditiously and
adequately to mitigate and remove the causes of
the emergency conditions.
B. Non-Emergency Water Transfers
Non-emergency water transfers are only permitted with the
approval of the Orange County Board of Commissioners and
the elected or appointed boards of the service providers
providing the transfer. If OWASA is the service provider,
approval must come from the OWASA Board of Directors and
15
17
FINAL
4/30/99
the .elected boards of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange
County.
C. Wastewater Transfers
Wastewater transfers are only permitted with the approval of
the Orange County Board of Commissioners and the elected or
appointed boards of the service providers providing the
transfer. If OWASA is the service provider, approval must
come from the OWASA Board of Directors and the elected
.boards of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County.
A. Linkages to Other Agreements
There are a number of existing agreements~among the parties to
this agreement that are relevant. to the management and
planning of public water and sewer service. In addition, this
agreement and those listed below should all be read together.
Where inconsistencies exist, this agreement shall~control.
Included among these relevant agreements with linkages are:
• Hillsborough-Durham Service Area Agreement
• OWASA-Durham Service Agreement
• Eno River Capacity Use Agreement
• Hillsborough/Orange-Alamance Water Systems
Agreement
• OWASA-Hillsborough Service Agreement
• OWASA-Hillsborough Bulk Water Transfer Agreement
• Chapel Hill-Durham Annexation Agreement
• Mutual Aid Agreement
• Jordan Lake Allocations from NC DEHNR
• OWASA Agreements of Purchase and Sale between 1)
OWASA and Carrboro, 2) OWASA and Chapel Hill, and
3) OWASA and UNC
16
18
' FINAL
4/30/99
A. ~ Water and Sewer Service Boundaries Map
B. Charge to the Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force
C. Toolbox of Remedies for Adverse Public Health Conditions
D. Joint Planning Area Boundary Map
E. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Maps for all Orange County local
governments,. and of Chatham County
17
y
FINAL
4/30/99
TffiS AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO TffiS DAY OF
,1999.
~na~r, yrangc ~.vunry avara or I;OmII11SS~OnerS
Attest: .
Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners
Mayor, Town of Chapel Hill
Attest:
Town Clerk, Town of Chapel Hill
Mayor, Town of Carrboro
Attest:
Town Clerk, Town of Carrboro
Mayor, Town of Hillsborough
Attest:
Town Clerk, Town of Hillsborough
Chair, OWASA Board of Directors
Attest:
19
4306nal.doc
2,0
ti ~ Oraagc Water and Sc~vcr Aufltori(y
.' _' Fd~ruary 11,1999
'` Pagc IZ
;'
ITEM TWENTY: WATER AND SEWER MANAGEMENT. PLANNING. AND BOUNDARY
AGREEMENT
Daa VanderMeer Bald he requested Patrick Davis to bring the. Board up-to~ate on the
Water aad Sewcc Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement, aad that he requested Ed
ICertvia and Robert Epting to advise the Board what the unresolved issues are.
Mr. VanderMeer said that Robert Eptiag provided to the Board of Directors is his January
25,1999 letter his opinion and coacera that certain provisions of the present draft dated October 28,
1998 of the Service Area Boundary Agreement conflict with OWASA's duties under the Agreements
oC Sa[e aad Purchase that were enterod into separately with The University of North Caro[iaa at
Chapel Hill, the Town of Chapel H'it[, aad ttte Town of Carrboro.
Patrick Davis said he coatmenced attending the Water aad Sewer Boundary Task Force
Meetings in 1994. Initially there were concerns about how water and sewer utilities would be
managed is order to be compatible with local [aad use planning growth management objectives, hoer
assignments. would be made regarding respoasibil<'ties for providing services in areas throughout
Orange County where it would be appropriate and desirable to provide public water and sewer
secvioes or, is the event of as unfortunate environmental oc public health probtem, those services
might be needed to be extended under careful ooatrols.
Mr. Davis said the Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force discussed the issae oC where
retailwater and sewer ttt~ity services shoald be extended aad where they. shouldn't be ezteaded.
That resulted in ootuensus oa prunary uti[itq service areas and long-term tutecest areas. Patrick
Davis referred the Board to the map oa Appendix A entitled "Proposed Public Water/Sewec Service
Boundaries Subject to Addition of Other Utditiesll.ocalities." The map includes the Town of
Hillsborough's extraterritorial planning jurisdiction, cerporate limits, and what was identified is the
Town of Hillsborough's long-range sewer plan as as alternate bui[d~ut of itr sewer service area.
The southern part of the Town of Hdtsborough's projected service area would coincide with the
northern boundary oC the coca! buC[er that is idenfified in rite Joint Land Use Plaa behveen Orange
County, the Towa of Chapel Hill, and fhc Town o[ Cacrboro. Mc. Davis said a concern from the
outret was obtaining tlic Town of Hillsborough's commitment not to provide sewer service Into the
rural buffer and into critical water supply watersheds. That commitment from the Towa of
Hillsborough was received early in the discussions sad one significant obstacle was overcome.
Mr. Davis said tltcrc ~vecc subsequent discussions about constcaintr and language that would
ntakc it clear that OWASA vas comniittcd to not providing retail scrvica in arras beyond tltc urban
transition arras for tltc Cltapct I{ill-Carrboro community. Tlic t3oard and staff ~vcrc in agreement
~~~ • ~ `-
r Orange Water and SCwcr Authority
` February 11,1999
Page 13
that there are community benefitr in havipg reasonable controls on the extension of OWASA's retail
water and sewer tines and services within the southeastern part o[ Orange County and the urban
growth area for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro community.
Mr. Davis said there was consensus from the local government representatives on the Water
and. Sewer Boundary Task Force (Town of Carrboro, Towa o[ Chapel Kill, Town of Hillsborough,
and Orange County) that by putting any type;of constraint on the provision of public water and
sewer utfiities In areas outside of the urban service areas that the only alternative for providing water
and sewer services to new growth -aad development is by using alternative type systems. Patrick
Davis said alternative type systems are individual .wells, private community water systems, individual
septic systems, or sma[i-scale community-type" wastewater systems. The local government
representatives recognized and acknowledged that would be the preferred alternative approach in
the outlying, areas.
Mr. Davis said corresponding with the decision that the decentralized-type systems in the
rural buffer and is the water supply watersheds would be the appropriate approach then brought up
the issue o[ what happens in the event the alternative type systems fail and public utilities need to be
eztended to correct a failing wastewater system or water supply wells that contain contaminants that.
needs an alternative which might, in fact, need to be public water. Patrick Davis said in situations
that are dearly determined to be emergency in nature, carefully designed, carefully located and
controlled public utilities in the sensitive areas -rural butler and water supply watersheds -could
under certain limited situations be acceptable. Mr. Davis said the agreement spells -out some
situations in whidt public utility ezteasions might be appropriate in areas that would normally not be
considered appropriate for public utilities.
Mr. Davis said some of the areas where there has not been consensus have to do primarily
with dealing with the intergovernmental agreements concerning wholesale transfer of water or
cooperative agreements regard'utg wastewater. service and wastewater treatmeat~and particularly in
those instances where it is beyond the Orange County boundaries. Patrick Davis said those areas
have significant long-#erm implications not just from a land use planning aad growth management
standpoint in OWASA's service area in Orange County as a whole but there is also significant
implication from a water and sewer utility provision standpoint -reliability, quality of service,
economy of service, and the provision of the backbone infrastructure nceded to meet the planned
increases is water and sewer demands that come with the community's growth and development in
accordance with the adopted land use plans.
Mr. Davis said that he and Barry Jacobs represented the Board on the Water and Sewer
Boundary Task Force and they made it clear their opinions were their own and that the full OWASA
Board of Directors will state itr opinion at the appropriate lima - ~ ,
Mr. Davis said the draft agrcement is getting doser to a final agreement. Two meetings have
been scheduled for March 1999 with the hope that the Water aad Sewer Boundary Task Force wilt
concede its discussions and present a final agreement similar in version and content to the draft
February 2,1999 Water and Sewer Management, P[snning aad Boundary Agreement. Patrick Davis
Bald there would bt some provisions in the agreement that vrill not have consensus support of all the
particpantr on the Task Force.
Mr. Davis said the initial issue of a common boundary agreement with the Town of
Hillsborough has not been formalized. There are some provisions in the draft agreement that the
representatives o[ tl~e Town of Hillsborough said they could not and would not agree to. Patrick
Davis said that the elected representatives and staff of the Town o[ Hillsborough stopped attending
the Water and SeFVer Boundary Task Force meetings and, therefore, there is concern about-the Town
of Hillsborough's commitment to the agreement.
21
lD.~-5
Orange Water and Scwcr Authority ~.
" February 11,1999
Page 14
Dan VandcrMcer requested that the ,points made in Robert Eptiag's January 25, 19991ctter
be discussed at the February 25, 1999 Board' of Directors 1l4eeting.
William Strom said at some point the Board should talk about significant issues such as
whether or not permission is needed from the constituent governments to provide retail services
outside Orange County. Mr. Strom said it is his opinion that the Board should put itself in a position
to sign the Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement.
Dan VanderMeer said if the Town of Hillsborough is not participating then the whole
process does not seem to make a lot of sense. Why would there be a boundary agreement if it only
applies to OWASA? Why is OWASA involved i[ tl-e Town of Hillsborough is not participating?
Peter Gordon acid in his recent conversations with an elected o[ficial and a member of the
Task Force Committee, he got the impression that if the Town of Hillsborough will not sign the
Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement that there was not an
expectation that OWASA would sign either. Dr. Gordon said his issues are:
1. Is the Town of Hillsborough in or out and what does that mean?
2. Ed Holland's February S, 1999 memorandum states "Current wording could be
construed to prohibit construction of s raw water main from Jordan Lake without
approval by all three bodies." This should be addressed and clarified.
3. With regard to the rural buffer in the watershed, the agreement is outstanding. Orange
County's willingness to -have the Orange County Health. Department determine the
existence of an Kadverse public health condition" lets OWASA off the hook. The Board
of Directors should make it clear that it is appreciated.
4. There are potential issues of efFcieacy regarding emergency water transfers vs.
nonemergency water transfers particularly at the wholesale level
5. Permission for extending retail service into Chatham County.
Patrick Davis asked if the Board agrees with .the concept of a formalized service area
boundary agreement that would define retail service area esfabtishment for OWASA. Mr. Davis said
in past discussions there has been agreement that is a reasonable expectation of OWASA and would
be a good demonstration of OWASA's commitment to work in partnership with the local
governments. Patrick Davis said the concept of a retail service area boundary is one that OWASA
has supported in the past and Mr. Davis suggested that OWASA continue to support it.
Mr. Davis said if OWASA is looking for the Town of Hillsborough's commitment at 'the
same time the Town of Hillsborough is looking for OWASA's commitment in a service area
boundary, then that is a key cornerstone.. What does it mean to OWASA if the Town of Hillsborough
is not part of the Water and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agrcement? Patrick Davis
. said there are iacons~steat provisions that ace applicable to the Town o[ Hiillsborough and their
ability to enter into intergovernmental agreements on retail and wholesale service vs. OWASA's
totally di[ferent provisions. Mr. Davis said part of what the agreement is doing is trying to get local
elected board control formalized over OWASA's ability to extend services and to eater into
wholesale agreements. It does have significant utility ramifications.
Patrick Davis said he heard some representatives on the Water and Sewer Task Force
specifically state that they wanted veto authority over any project in which OWASA might build a
raw water transmission main solely to pump water from Jordan Lake up to OWASA's service area
and the repcescntativcs felt that was a signiticant growth.related issue.
Wit[iam Strom said there has been discussion about coordinating regional policies. The
issue of OWASA's relationship with the Towtt of Hillsborough is often overlooked but has the most
potential in the short- and medium-term to impact OWASA. OWASA should be at ttic table
negotiating an agreement that OWASA is comfortable tivitti in its service arcs and Icad by example.
- 1p.Zf~
~ <~
Orange Water and Scwcr Authority
February 11, 1999
Page IS
William Strom said i~c does not understand why the Town of Hillsborough is no[ required to get
approvals tivhen OWASA is required to get approvals. Mr. Strom said the agreement is important
eciough to move toward signing it and hope that the Town oC Hillsborough can be convinced to join.
Peter Gordon said it does not make sense for OWASA to sign the agreement iC the Town of
Hillsborough does not sign it. Dr. Gordon said exactly the same provisions should not apply to both
OWASA and the Town oC Hillsborough. OWASA's long-term interest area should be recognized by
the Towa of Hillsborough and, if not, Peter Gordon said he wonders about the value of the
agreement.
Bernadette Pelissier asked if the Town of Hillsborough definitively said they would not sign
the agreement and Ms. Pelissier also asked what their objections are. Yt is probably related to the
Cact that the-Town of Hillsborough does not have a joint planning agreement and that the Town o[
Carrboro, Town of Chapel Hitl, and Orange County do have joint planning agreements. l:f OWASA
does not sign the agreement, it will not help the larger issue of the Town o[ Hillsborough's lack of
participation.
Patrick Davis said if the Town of Hillsborough is not a party to the agreement, there is a
significant hole that relates to the integrity o[ the rural buffer concept that could present a problem
in terms o[ the joint planning agreement. Mr. Davis said it is his opinion that iC the Town of
Hillsborough decides not to participate in the agreement then that is sufficient reason for OWASA
not to participate in an agreement of this nature that is designed to formalize OWASA's retail
service extension policies relative to the land use planning efforts of joint planning parties. Patrick
Davis said the Town oC Hillsborough's interest is to have a common boundary line established which
they reviewed some time ago. The agreement has expanded at this point and the Town of
Hillsborough has not expressed much interest. Mr. Davis said stafT oC the Town oC Hillsborough said
they would be inclined to recommend that the Town of Hillsborough not sign the agreement the way
it has been structured. The Town oC Hillsborough's specific concerns have not been formalized in
writing. Patrick Davis said there is strong benefit for OWASA to formalize ifs commitment to be
cooperative with the local governments in its service area.
Alan Rimer said his concern is that a neighboring community may choose to extend services
into an area that the group believes should not be served. There is precedent for that in the past.
Mr. Rimer said he is concerned that the Town oC Hillsborough is not at the table and they may have
designs on the rata[ bullet where OWASA cannot extend service. Mr. Rimer said he would like
assurances that will not happen and the agreement should be tailored accordingly. OWASA should
strive to find a way .to work toFVards a consensus and make it an agreement that the Town of
Hillsborough will sign. Alan Rimer said it is critical that the Town of Hillsborough comes back to the
table in order for it to be a working agreement.
William Strom said OWASA can only be responsible Cor its own actions and there are
significant benefits for OWASA to sign the agreement. Mr. Strom said it behooves OWASA to
support the rural buffer, to support the agreement, and to support OWASA's constituent
governments by indicating willingness to sign the agreement.
Susannah Holloway asked if the agreements could be bifurcated. For instance, art
agreement with tlic Town of Hillsborough regarding the boundary and an agreement [or alt the other
items. Patrick Davis said in previous years that he and Barry Jacobs proposed a phase Y service area
boundary agreement ~vitli the Town of fiil[sborough because tine Task Force had a commitment for
agreement on tl~e boundary line. The Task Force overruled it because the. majority oC the members
wanted to tackle ail the issues together.
~'1'illiam Strou- said the Ucccrnbcr 14, 1994 document Crom Moses Carey makes approval of
file boundaries cot~tingcnt upon tine subsequent agreements. Patrick Davis said that vas the Task
14- Z?
i
1 ~
24
,. O'i'ange Water and Sewer Authority
February il, 1999
Page 16
Force's decision at that time and that is why ttie Task Force is still considering proposals in February
1999 that have been on tlic table for the last four years.
Peter Gordon said It has been his assumption. that the Board's charge is to follow the land
use plans of the appointing governments. Dr. Gordon said there is immense value in the Town o[
Hillsborough recognizing the southern boundary.
William Strom said the Town oC Hillsborough should be engaged in the discussions. An
important issue is the southern service boundary for the Town oC Hillsborough but it is not nearly as
important as equity issues, such as the Town of Hillsborough can do something that OWASA can't.
Mr. Strom said that lays the groundwork for negotiation.
Dan-VanderMeer said if the agreement becomes an agreement between OWASA and the
three elected governmentr that it has the effect of limiting OWASA's ability to serve as an
independent authority. Mr. VanderMeer said he would be reluctant to tie the hands of future Board
of Directors by signing an agreement that would extend is perpetuity an arrangement that may not
anticipate things that will happen in the future. It becomes a viable limitation on OWASA's ability
to do business. Dan VanderMeer said the Board of Directors is appointed to OWASA to help
provide guidance on major and minor policy matters to OWASA. IC every time a major issue arises
and the Board needs the concurrence of the three elected bodies to do what OWASA believes is in the
best interest of OWASA, then why have a Board of Directors. Why not turn over that responsibility
to the elected officials and do away with the OWASA Board of Directors.
Mr. VanderMeer said he is not opposed to entering into some kind of declaration of
principles that reflect the hard work that went into the development of the agreement and recognizes
OWASA's commitment to joint planning and protection of the environment on which OWASA has
an impact. Dan VanderMeer said without the Town oC Hillsborough becoming a signatory to a
boundary agreement that he is not convinced OWASA ought to enter into the agreement. OWASA
would be willing to separate the t~vo issues and go forward with a general statement of principles that
says "This Board and OWASA are committed to working within the joint planning principles."
Patrick Davis said is response to Dan VanderMeer's concept of a declaration of principles,
that vas done in 1989 in the form of a formally adopted Memorandum of Undecstandiag among the
Town of Carrboro, Town of Chapel Hill, Orange County, and OWASA. OWASA's commitment to
be compatible and consistent with the land use plans and growth management policies was clearly
stated and established a good, solid foundation.
Mr. Davis said he has concerns with the draft Water and Sewer Management, Planning and
Boundary Agreement the way it is structured and how it relates to OWASA's responsibilities as a
Board.
Robert Epting said there is also the impact that would result from the withdrawal of any of
the elected bodies from the Joint Planning Agreement. Mr. Epting said withdrawal of any of the
elected bodies from the Joint Planning Agreement would dissolve that agreement. If the Joint
Planning Agreement were dissolved, then the Water and SeFVer Management, Planning and
Boundary Agreement would also be dissolved. Robert Epting said this impact is being discussed.
Dan VanderMecr said the next item for discussion is whether OWASA would need the
approval oC the ttircc governments to withdraw water from Jordan Lake. Peter Gordon said
providing retail services should have oversight. Acquiring resources to scree citizens that OWASA is
charged to serve is an issue for the Board oC Directors. Dr. Gordon said in his conversation with an
elected official, ti~cre was basic agreement regarding Jordan Lakc.
Patrick Davis said that iC, in tl~e future, OWASA determines it necessary to ~vitl~draw water
from Jordan Lakc and one oC tlic member governments is under ttic opinion that such an
~`~. 28
C
. _ ,~,
2~
y Orange Water and Scwcr Authority
Fcbruaryll,l999 -
Page I7
undertaking is inappropriate, the way the agreement is structured any one jurisdiction would have
veto authority over that decision. The remainder of OWASA's service area would be adversely
affected, OWASA's obligations under the Sale and Purchase Agreements would be adversely
affected, as well as OWASA's ability to provide service. Patrick Davis said he has stated on
numerous occasions that he could not support any agreement that restricted OWASA's ability to do
that because that is a responsibility of the Board of Directors.
Dan VanderMeer asked if the Board is In agreement with the proposal that if an adverse
public health condition is declared by someone else, It would trigger whether or not OWASA could
extend Iines during emergencies. Peter Gordon\said he is in favor of that because there. will be clear
tines oC authority and Orange County citizens will know with whom to speak.
William Strom said the agreement defines and proposes a series o[ remedies for septic
system problems and creates an opportunity for remediation, openness, and eliminates citizens' fear.
It makes tradeoffs and compromises in other areas worth doing.
Dan VanderMeer said the nett item for discussion is interutility water transfers that ties to
the question of emergency transfers. How long is an emergency transfer an emergency transfer?
What are the limitations, if any, on OWASA's ability to enter into interutility transfer agreements?
Alan Rimer said he does not believe it is the local governments' responsibility to deliberate what is
and what is not an emergency and he could not advocate the emergency water transfers as it is
currently written in the agreement. Mr. Rimer said that decision should rest with the Executive
Director.
Patrick Davis said about two years ago the emergency water transfers were structured so
there would be a six-month notification. The emergency could be one-year duration which is when
local government check-in would occur. Mr. Davis said there was a majority agreement on that by
the Task Force with the exception of one member. One member reopened this topic and three of the
seven Task Force members voted against what has been presented in the corrected February 2,1999
draft agreement
.Peter Gordon asked what is an emergency. To some degree it is a technical, hard call aad
one that is better left out o[ a po[itical context. On the other head, some emergencies reflect bad
planning. Dr. Gordon said this issue is related to whether the capital investment of the community
should be present as a safeguard for communities that have allowed or promoted growth without
capital investments to assure that its citizens receive basic services.
Patrick Davis said since the late 1960's, the community depended upon the emergency
transfer of water from the City of Durham and the Town of Hillsborough for two decades. The
community was trying to pursue development, the Cane Crcek Reservoir had regulatory delays and
lawsuits, a moratorium was never imposed on growth, orderly development was allowed to occur,
and agreements were executed that alto~ved OWASA to meet those needs until the Cane Creek
Reservoir vas on Line. Mr. Davis said he understood the local governments' perspective and asix-
month check in and the ability to review and approve the transfer oC water was reasonable but not as
stated in the agreement.
William Strom said he agrees with Patrick Davis and Peter Gordon_ Mr. Strom said the
relevant part is stated on page 16 oC tlie corrected draft agreement which states that these transfers
"Are not intended to provide caw or finished water supply necessary to support new growth and
development within the service area oC the service provider receiving the transfer." Given that these
decisions arc both health and political, tlicre is a point where there should be a check in and the
constituent governments I~ave every right to want that check in.
Robert Epting said the draft corrected agreement states that "Between GO days and 90 days
from inception of transfer, tl~e elected boards which exercise planning jurisdiction on either side of
~0.2~1
}'
Qrange Water and~Sewec Authority 2, f,~,
February 11,1999
Page 18
the boundary in which the service is provided shall review and approve or not approve the
continuation oC the transfer beyond 90 days. if continuation o[ the transfer is approved, if may
continue for an additional 90-day period. Approval shall be required for each subsequent 90-0ay
period, with a maximum emergency water trstns[er daratioa of 365 days from inception. Lack oC
action by the elected boards as provided is this subsection constitutes approval for the subsequent
90~iay period." Mr. Epting said that veto element ought to be troublesome to each oC the elected
boards as welt as to the OWASA Board.
Dan VaaderMeer said the next Item for discussion is aonemergency interuti[ity water
transfers sad Mr. VaaderMeer suggested that it be linked to the provision of water into Chatham
County by OWASA.
Peter Gordon said he suggests not linking nonemergency interutility water trans[ers to
eztension of service into Chatham County. Dc. Gordon said he would distinguish wholesale vs. retail
service. Mr. VanderMeer said the retail issue would be discussed.
William Strom said he is comfortable with the language in the draft-corrected agreement as
it stands. OWASA exists to provide service to southern Orange County, the Town of Carrboro, and
the Town of Chapel H~11. If OWASA is going to expand its retail aces the constituent governments
would have a say and Mr. Strom said he is comfortable with that arrangement.
Patrick Davis said O WASA has Sale and Purchase Agreements with The University oC North
Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Town of Carrboro, and the Town of Chapel Hill and each has specific
obligations in each of the Agreements. Mr. Davis said the Agreements states that OWASA must
provide its best effort to eztend service into those areas that the Town of Carrboro and the Town of
Chapel H'i[I annex, and to also support its orderly growth and development plans.
Mr. Davis said if a member government wasted to annex into a certain area, any one of the
parties to the Sate and Purchase Agreements could veto the proposed annexation wader the draft
agreement OWASA's ability to eztend service would then be constrained by one of the other two
member governments and OWASA's ability to meet its obligations under the Sale sad Purchase
Agreements would be hindered. Patrick Davis said if the three member governments decide that this
was appropriate and desirable, could this agreement be a supplemental understanding , or
clarification of the Sale:and •Purchase Agreements that would supersede the previous Sale and
Purchase Agreements' ~provisioas or obligatioas..that OWASA has. Mr. Davis .said he xis
uacemfortab[e with language that would give any jurisdiction or member government veto power
over another member government's decision.
William Strom • said in-the interest of getting OWASA into a position to s'cgn the agreement,
an approach is to include a provision that should these be annexation that OWASA !s obligated to
serve that annexation. ~ ~•
Robert Epting said he has spoken to the Chapel Hill Town Attorney about William Strom's
comment sad it could be resolved in that way or by way of an annexation boundary agreement
between the Town of Carrboro and the Tows of Chapel Hi[[. Mr. Epting said that if the Towns'
intent by language in the boundary agreement is to amend the Sale and Purchase Agreements and
OWASA's responsibility under those. agreements, then there should be a provision stating that.
OWASA is constrained in every direction in terms oC annexation.
William Strom said in the absence o[ annexation, the Board should discuss new turf in
northern Chatham County regarding a new service area, and it would be appropriate for the tt~rce
constituent governments to agree to that.
Peter Gordon said he would be pleased to take to. the Task Force the suggestions Cor
amending the language in the Agreement to the c[fect that approval would not be needed iC tltc
10- 30
.-a\~~
- Orange Water and Sewer Authority ~ ~ ~
' February 11, 1999
Page 19 -
Towns annex land and OWASA serving that annexation. Regarding whether OWASA should liavc
the authority to acquire retail customers in Chatham County, that is power that OWASA does not '
need. Dr. Gordon said it is politically wrong for customers not to have a say on appointments to the -
OWASA Board of Directors when the Board is not in a position to reconstitute how members are
appointed.
Patrick Davis said it is important to point out that the comments the Board made relative to
the retail service provision particularly in Chatham County clearly stated there is no intention on
OWASA's part to unilaterally make a decision: Mr. Davis said the Board's concerns have been
related to annexation and orderly growth and development of the two municipalities with whom
OWASA has Sale and Purchase Agreements.
Susannah Holloway said that as Robert Epting pointed out in his January 25,19991etter, the
annezation issue would not help the problem with The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
(The University). The University is a party to the Sate and Purchase Agreements and yet they are
not part of the boundary agreement. Ms. Holloway said The University's rights might be affected by
the boundary agreement. Susannah Holloway asked if there was a way to have The University
represented in the boundary agreement.
Peter Gordon said he would be concerned If the Sale and Purchase Agreements with The
University could be construed to say that if The University decided to build a campus in Chatham
County that OWASA would have to serve them.
Robert Epting said there isn't any question that the Sale and Purchase Agreements with The
University says ezactiy that. Mr. Epting said the obligation of OWASA is to serve the orderly growth
and development of the Town oC Carrboro, Town of Chapel Hili, and The University. Robert Epting
said that if The University expanded to Chathacci County they would first took to Chatham County
for their water. There isn't any reasonable likelihood that The University would locate in Chatham
County where OWASA water would be cheaper than Chatham County's water or more desirable to
The University than Chatham County's water. Mr. Epting said OWASA would have to request
Chatham County for the right to acquire easements and Chatham County now has the right to
disapprove and could prevent OWASA from serving The University should they ezpand to Chatham
County. Robert Epting said, for practical purposes, it is remote given that OWASA does not have a
way to lay its pipe in the ground in Chatham County without the permission of the Chatham County
Board of Commissioners and why would they give permission when they could be selling water to
The University themselves. Mr. Epting said he did not intend to imply that The University's ability
to require that OWASA provide itr service in Chatham County was a serious constraint in the Water
and Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement. Robert Epting said he mentioned this
matter because he believed it is important to understand that OWASA was formed for the purpose of
providing service to The University on the same terms and conditions as it vas.providing service to
the Town o[ Carrboro and the Town of Chapel Hill and their growth and development was clearly
anticipated in 1977. •
Patrick Davis said when the Sale and Purchase Agreements were entered into with the Town
of Carrboro and the Town of Chapel Hi[!, Franchise Agreements were also entered into and it was
agreed that the Town of Carrboro and the Town of Chapel Hill would not get into the water and
sewer business. There arc provisions that say that. as long as OWASA is able to provide service to
The University to accommodate growth and development then The University would rely on
OWASA, but in the event that OWASA was constrained then The University had the right to do any
and all things necessary to meet its growth requirements.
Dan VandcrMccr said tl~c next discussion item is tlic sizing of lines and ~vhcthcr or not tl~c
agreement ought to address line sizing.
gyp. 3~
„y , l
>:
Orange Water and Scwcr Authority
February 11, 1999
rage 20
William Strom said the notion oL OWASA extending lints into an interest area to remedy an
adverse public health emergency t-as'signiticant impact on potential for sprawl and potential Cor
making land developable that does not pert. Mr. Strom said his understanding is that the sizing of
lints is a tool that attemptr to restrict tap-ons and avoids unattended consequences oC remedying a
health emergency. William Strom said he is comfortable with the language in the agreement that the
lines should be sized to address that emergency if that is possible.
Patrick Davis said a concern was raised with the Piney Mountaia Subdivision project. There
were engineering sizing requirements and constraints at fhe State of North Carolina level that
required the infrastructure to be sized for peaking factors that were mandated by the State and
would impact this issue. Mr. Davis said the ~vay to address it would be to point out that it is sized to
serve only the intended use but in accordance ~~ith the sizing requirements determined by the State.
Patrick Davis said implications should be recognized if the decision is made to limit capacity.
Mr. Davis said there is also a related issue that has to do with improvemcntr and lines that
have excess capacity. For example, the Rangewood Subdivision's force main had to be 4", the pump
station had to be a certain capacity, and when that is done there is automatically excess capacity
because the pump station is only pumping a certain number of hours during the day. The agreement
is structured so that if Orange County wanted to locate a school facility or a human resource center
and hook onto the force main to take advantage o[ the excess capacity, the agreement would prohibit
that from occurring. An investment already made could not be used more cost~ffectively to support
public facility development. Patrick Davis said there ought to be the ability to use lines and facilities
that serve public emergencies in appropriate ways to support essential public facilities.
Alan Rimer said OWASA could probably meet the volume and pressure considerations with
a 4" water line to serve a community of houses with problems. Fire protection could be provided if
the size is increased to 6". Mr. Rimer suggested that the bene[itr of fire protection be considered.
Alan Rimer asked Robert Epting if it is possible to restrict ~vho taps on to water lines. That getr to
the point of increased facility needs for the public for fire protection but prohibits houses from
connecting.
Robert Epting. said the Chapet Hill Town Attorney and the Orange County Attorney have a
friendly disagreement on that point. Orange County by its ability to require building permitr
controls tap~ns. Mr. Epting said OWASA could get special authority is that regard if it needed it.
However, many developers could see that as a method for limiting development. Robert Epting said
if tap-ons are restricted, how can the lines be afforded to serve a few people who are experiencing the
problem if the only way to run the lines is by assessment.
William Strom said in response to sizing the lines to accommodate fire, there is an "avoid
sprawl" mentality. It is in the preambles in Orange County's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Strom said
that if someone buys a house in the watershed where there is no fire service and the community has a
water emergency, he does not feet an obligation to provide fire service along with rescuing them from
a water problem. Orange County can restrict building permits and control zoning, there is turnover
on the various boards and different political will existr. Lt seems that utility growth takes on a life of
its o~vn and if capacity is there, it usually getr used over a period of time.
.Patrick Davis said once tines are extended to alleviate a public health hazard, there should
not be a prohibition on connection of essential public facilities.
Tlic Board was in agreement that the Collo~ving arc t[ic unresolved issues:
1. Is the TO\vR of [iillsborough in or out and what dots tl-at mean?;
2. Does tlic Qoard agree that O~~'ASA should enter into an agreement to deGnc the retail
service area?;
L~
`~'
~p• 32
Orange Water and Sewer Authority ;,,', c~
February 11,1999
Page 21
1
3. Should the Board eater into as agreement unilaterally that would Limit OWASA and not _
put the same limits on potential competitors?;
4. Sizing of the lines into interest areas;
5. Two aad one-half (2-1/2j years notice to withdraw from the agreement. (This
requirement has been dropped from the current draft and only requires none-year
notice before withdrawing from the agreement.);
6. The impact that would result from the withdrawal of any of the elected bodies from the
Joint Planning Agreement would dissolve that agreement as well as the Water and
Sewer Management, Planning and Boundary Agreement;
7. Emergency water transfers vs. nonemergency water transfers particularly at the
wholesale level;
8. Does the approval of the three governments required for eztension of Unes into another
jurisdiction apply to the two lines that are solely for the purpose of bringing water into
the established OWASA primary service area?;
9. OWASA's Long-term interest area should be recognized by the Towa of 13iUsborough;
10. Lines into another jurisdiction outside Orange County that does not necessarily have
anything to do with water transfers;
11. Whether or not permission is needed to provide retail services outside Orange County;
12. Prohibiting construction of a raw water chain from Jordan Lake without approval by alt
three bodies.
WiWam Strom said that the nezt Water and Sewer Boundary Committee meeting is
scheduled for March 4, 1999. Mr. Strom requested that the OWASA representatives on the Task
Force bring back a list of unresolved issues from the Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement with the
ezception of whether or not to Include essential public facilities on the rescue Lines. William Strom
also requested that the discussion be continued by the OWASA Board of Directors.
Dan YanderMeer requested that Ed Kerwin arrange to have the Board polled to make sure
there will be a quorum at the February 25,1999 Board of Directors Meeting.
ITEM TWENTY-0NE: CLOSED SESSION
Peter Gordon made a motion that the Board go into Qosed Session for the purpose. of
discussing property acquisition. It was seconded by A[aa Rimer, and carried by unanimous vote.
See Motion No.10.
There being no further business to properly come before the Board, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:15 P.M.
Respectfully,
PJrli ~>~
Joni Giigor
Clerk to the Board
Enos.
NOTE: Audiotapes and videotapes are available at OWASA for listening and/or viewing.
jo~ 33