Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1975120913~ MINVTEs ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS December 9, 1975 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, December 9, 1975, at 7:30 p.m., in the Commissioners Room of the Courthouse. Members present were Chairman Flora Garrett, Commissioners Norman Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker, and Richard E. T4hitted. - Members absent were none. Others present were S. M. Gattis, County Administrator, Neal Evans, Fiscal Officer, and Agatha Johnson, Acting Clerk. - Chairman Garrett brought to the Boaxd's attention a meeting to be held with the Orange Y7ater-Sewer Authority at the Municipal Building in Chapel Hill, December 19, 1975, from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the relationship of the Orange Water-Sewer Authority with the three local governing bodies, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the County of Orange. Mrs. Garrett informed the Board of a request from the Chapel Hi11 Carrboro Schocl Board for a meeting with the Board of Commissioners to discuss a committment of $404,430.15 in Capital Outlay to complete their Cultural Arts Building. The School Board needs a decision by Tuesday, December 16, 1975, in order to present the contract to the State Board of Education by December 19, 1975. Commissioner Pinney stated that he wished to consult with the Energy Task Farce regarding the heat and air conditioning of the Cultural Arts Building. The Board agreed to meet with the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board on Tuesday, Aecember 16, 1975, for further discussion. The Chairman referred to Item #1 on the Agenda: Public Hearing to consider actual site selection for a County Vehicle Maintenance Facility. She stated that this was the time and place for the Public Hearing. The County Administrator referred the Board to three maps of the proposed Maintenance Vehicle Garage. He stated that there were three passible sites proposed and that the Staff recommended Site #1 because that area had less slope and was closer to the Road. He informed the Board that the only problem with this site is to determine which direc- tion would be best far placement of the Building. The County Manager spoke of the other possible sites and quoted the disadvanges of placing the Building on these locations. Chairman Garrett asked for comments from the Citizens present and who might wish to speak to the issue of the Vehicle Maintenance Garage being placed on this property. Mr. A. C. Crowder, a resident of the "Crabtree property area" spoke for the group of residents present. He presented to the Board a letter from the residents of the area regarding the County Facilities in the "Crabtree Property area." "On October 21, 1975, the people of this section through oral _ and written communications with the County Commissioners voiced their disapproval of County facilities (Garage-Dog Pound, etc.). to be located in this area. You were given sound reasons for this action. They are: 1. Safety factor -- vehicles coming into Highway 86 during the early hours with the possibility of fog, excessive travel of people going to work (219 cars; 17 tog trucks; and 13 school buses) from 6 a.m. to 8:20 a.m. (counted 12-4-75) 1~~ 2. Noise -- garbage trucks and other vehicles coming and going early and late, daily. 3. Pests -- with this type of operation proposed, we feel that it will continue to serve as a breeding ground for rats and other rodents. It will open the area to all types of unacceptable odors which will constitute a health hazard. With rats will came flies and snakes. 4. This area will grow and be a credit to this section of Orange County with the construction of decent homes. With this type of facility, growth will be cut off. "~nTe refuse tc sacrifice our stand on this matter, and feel, since the Commissioners seemingly are not sympathetic to the feelings and wishes of a segment of the voting population in this area, we are wasting time and taxpayers' money to entertain any further discussion on the matter, but want the record to show that this group of Commissioners and County Officials ran roughshod over their electorate without proper consideration." Mr. Crowder stated that the feelings of the citizens from that area had not changed, the people would not compromise. Mr. Crowder and his group then left the meeting. Commissioner Norman Walker moved that the Board accept Site #1 for the construction of the Vehicle Maintenance Garage with the Building running in an east-west direction and facing a north-south direction. Commissioner Gustavesan seconded this motion. Discussion ensued concerning the best direction in which the building should be placed on the site. Commissioner Walker amended his motion to stated that Site #1 be used for the construction of the Vehicle Maintenance Garq'ge and that - the Building be placed on the site in the manner which is best suited for the garage. The Chairman called for the vote. Voting aye were Commissioners Gustaveson, Pinney, Walker and Whitted. Voting nay was Commissioner Garrett. The Chairman declared the motion passed. The Chairman referred to Item #2 on the Agenda: Interviews with four architectural firms prior to selection of an architect to conduct the County Facility Study. The County Administrator introduced to the Board representatives from the Firm of Haken and Corley of Chapel Hill. Mr. Joseph Haken present to the Board various features of his Facility Study proposal. He stated that his Chapel Hill firm was an in-house firm which handled all of its awn services. Mr. Haken stated that his firm usually proceeded with a Facility - Study by first studying the present uses of the existing buildings; _ secondly, define if the space is being used effectively and thirdly, how should each function be used and what changes would be provided thru the study. He stated the need of studying the expansion for _- the next 15 years. Mr. Haken stated that his firm would provide a solid, concrete proposal of what the Board should do. The architect stated that the architectual fee is based on a number of cents per square foot. Construction cost was estimated at $15.00 per square foot. Chairman Garrett inquired of Mr. Haken if his firm could propose answers in regard to the jail and the court system. Mr. Haken assured the Board that he would make very definite re- commendations for all functions of the Ccunty. 14.E Commissioner Whitted inquired of the time required for the Facility Study. Mr. Haken replied that the total Facility Study would take four months. Commissioner Gustaveson inquired of reports to the Board and Mr. Haken replied that the County Board would receive up to date reports from time to time. The County Administrator introduced to the Board Mr. Joseph L. Nassif, Architect from Chapel Hill. Mr. Nassif stated to the Board that his proposal for the Facility Study was basically the same as the first proposal he had presented to them. He reminded the Board "that the County is not starting new, but that buildings do exist." He stated that a Facility Study should give direction of the current and the projected space requirements for the next 15 years. It would determine what faciltiies could be used in the future and would develop a comprehensive building program which would include parking facilities. He pointed out that a Facility Study should be thorough enough that future administration could understand and utilize. Mr. Nassif spoke of a possible temporary use of the Grady Brown buildings. He stated 'that a Facility Study would decide whether or not to renovate the entire Grady Brown Building or use a phase-in pro- gram. Mr. Nassif stated that his fee was negotiable and would be based on what is done. Chairman Garrett inquired if after Mr. Nassif is finished, if his proposal will tell the Board exactly what is needed and will the County be in a position to start? Mr. Nassif replied that he could do all the work except that of a Mechanical Engineer. The Firm of John Latimer and Associates from Durham was represented by Mr. John Latimer and Mr. Chia. Mr. Latimer stated that his firm consisted of 40 people who were in-house personnel. His approach to a Facility Study was to analysis what the needs are for each department; what additional space is required; how depart- ments relate to one another and how these departments relate to the Grady Brown School Buildings. He spoke of the recycling of old structure throughout Durham and the new buildings in Durham and Chapel Hill which his firm has pro- vided architectual services. Commissioner Whitted inquired of the time required to do the Study. Mr. Latimer replied "a couple of months" and stated that his staff was large enough that he could handle the job in that length of time. He stated fuzther that for the quoted cost his firm could do a Facility Study and evaluate the soundness of the Grady Brown structures. He pointed out that his fee would be according to the amount of work done. He emphasised the importance of competence and stated that the fee was a minor part of the job. The County Administrator introduced the Firm of City Planning and Architectual Services from Chapel Hill. Messrs Robert Anderson and Donald Stewart represented this firm of City Planners, Architects and Engineers. Mr. Anderson informed the Board that City Planners had designed the Municipal Building, Fire Station, and Library for the Town of Chapel Hi11 as well as numerous other governmental buildings through- out North Carolina and other states. He stated that his firm would study the present facility plant; make records of existing space, and conditions of the buildings, as well as their probable life; study the interdepartmental relation to one another and that all information. would be compiled into a working paper defining what you have now and projec- tions of what is needed in the future. Mr. Anderson spoke of the Historical District in Hillsborough and stated that his firm had had extensive experience in this area. ~ :=~~~G He stated that after a study of the Grady Brown Buildings and if the Grady Brown Buildings "made sense" it would be appropriate to take the County's space requirement and project them into a schematic plan for the remodeling of the Grady Brown School which would enable the Board to develop cast estimates far the renovation. He stated that his firm would work with the County to determine the best situation for the County if the Grady Brown Buildings proved not to be feasible. In reply to Commissioner Gustaveson's question concerning jail facilities, Mr. Anderson stated that a jail facility must be in accordance to Department of Corrections specificatiens. Mr. Anderson stated that his firm would negotiate a fixed amount for designing the facilities not to exceed 7~ of the construction cost. Mr. Anderson concluded that the Facility Study was a step by step orderly thinking process. By starting with what you have, determine what you need and how+well functions meet these needs, the problems and cost involved to satisfy those needs, and then look at alternatives and make a determination to proceed to the next level of detail. Mr. Anderson stated that a basic Facility Study would take 90 days, and a final Study would take 120 days. Chairman Garrett reminded the Board that the time was 10:30 p.m. and inquired if the Board wished to continued to finish the Agenda? Commissioner Pinney moved that the Board extend the time in order 'to complete the Agenda. Commissioner Whitted seconded the motion. All members voted aye. The motion was passed. The Chairman stated that the Board needed to make a decision on hiring an architect so that the Study could get underway. The Board agreed to meet on Thursday, December 11, 1975, at 7:3D p.m. to decide on an architect and possibly discuss other items. ~ Chairman Garrett referred to Item #3 on the Agenda: Consideration - of a contract with James Webb to perform architectural services in connection with the renovation of Northside School as a Mental Health Facility. Mrs. Garrett introduced James Webb, a Chapel Hill Architect. Mr. Webb stated that he had been associated with Mrs. Pat Walton of the Orange-Person-Chatham Mental Health Center, and her staff for some time and was familiar with their programs. Consideration of the Northside classroom space came to his attention two years ago when the space problem became critical for Mental Health: He stated that this architectual service is not tied in with the County's Facility Study but that a space analysis in relationship to all the function to take place in the Northside buildings had already been conducted at no charge. The recommended fee of 9~$ had been arrived at, as an equitable fee, based on the knowledge of what is involved, and through discussion with the County Manager and Ms. Walton. He stated that final plans for Northside must be certified through the Health Facility Administration in Raleigh which provides another layer of _ review and consideration and which also means that an architect must meet the requirements of the State Facility in Raleigh as well as the County Commissioners. - Ms. Walter informed the Board that Mr. Webb was the original architect for the Northside School when it was built. Commissioner Whitted inquired of Mr. Webb of the time required to complete his plans. Mr. Webb stated that he could start immediately and will need six months to prepare drawings and take bids for cost estimations. Commissioner Walker asked if other architects have been considered for possible lowest bids? Ms. Walton replied, "no" that Mr. Webb had developed the schematics for the purpose of the Construction Grant and the Mental Health Board felt they would save time and money by employing Mr. Webb. X43 Commissioner Walker stated that he felt that the contract must be put out for the lowest bid, and that since the Board of Commissioners had heard from several architect tonight regarding the proposed Facility Study that an architect for renovation of the Northside School as a Mental Health facility should be pursued in the same fashion. Commissioner Gustaveson spoke of the professional relationship involved. He stated that the County had received professional services at no cost and that the decision had already been made by the Mental Health Board and that the Board of Commissioners should accept the Mental Health Board's recommendation. Mr. Webb stated that his proposal was not binding and that Mental - Health was free to look at other architect, however, there would be a penalty involved. He stated that information had been provided that could not be passed on to another architect. Commissioner Whitted pointed out the need to get ,started on the Mental Health Facility. Commissioner Pinney moved that the Board approve the Contract with James Webb to perform architectural services for renovation of the Northside School as a Mental Health Facility at a fee of 9'~$ of the construction cost. Commissioner Gustaveson seconded the motion. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Walker stated that he felt the Board was moving hastily and in a fashion not in keeping with how the County's business should be conducted. He stated that he was not in favor of hiring an architect without putting the contract out for a fair low bid. The Chairman called for the vote. Vating aye were Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, Pinney and Whitted. Voting nay was Commissioner Walker. The Chairman declared the motion passed. The meeting was then adjourned. ~\o~~.C~. ~a~,~ Agatha Johnson, Acting Clerk Flora R. Garrett, Chairman ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS December 11, 1975 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in special session on Thursady, December 11, 1975, at 7;30 p.m., in the Commissioners' Room of the Orange County Courthouse ~ Members present were Commissioners Flora Garrett, Norman Gustaveson, Jan Pinney and Richard E. Whitted. Members absent was Commissioner Norman Walker. Others present were S. M. Gattis, County Administrator; Neal Evans, Fiscal Officer; A. B. Coleman, Jr., COunty Attorney; and Betty June Hayes, Clerk to the Board. The Chairman referred to Item #3 on the Agenda: Mr. E. J. Edge, Jr., Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Cumberland County, has submitted to the County a Resolution for Study of Local Tax Revenue.