Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19830502 1. 374 .2,, MINUTES 3. 4. MAY 2, 1983 5• 6. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session 7. on Monday, May 2, 1983, at 10:00 A.M. in the Commissioners ' Room, 8, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. 90 Commissioners present: Richard E. Whitted, Chair, and Commis- 10. sioners Ben Lloyd, Shirley E. Marshall , Norman Walker and Don Willhoit. 11. A. BOARD COMMENTS 12. Commissioner Whitted added -an item on the purchase of the land 13. for the Community Development Park from the Town of Hillsborough; Commis- 14. sinner Marshall added consideration of a Resolution from Co.lumbus 15. County. In addition, Commissioner Marshall said there were six mem- 16. bers of the Orange County Planning Board at the Horizons UN limited 17. Retreat the previous Wednesday and she appreciated their dedication. 18. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to delete 19. item # 5 (Resolution--Proposed Watershed Protection Measures) from 20. the agenda and to place it on an evening meeting. Following a dis- 21. cussion of the motion, Commissioner Lloyd withdrew his motion on the 22.condition that no action be taken on this item. 23. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 24. Commissioner Whitted acknowledged the presence of those who 25.wished to address the Board on specific items of the agenda. There 26,were no members of the audience who wished to address the Board about 27.matters not on the agenda. 28. C. MINUTES P9* Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 30.approval of the Minutes of March 7, 1983, as corrected. Vote: Ayes, 31.5; noes, 0. 32. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, 33.approval of _the MintLte.s._ o.f. April_ 19,-.1983, . as corre.cted...,,, Vote:._- Ayes, 34.5; noes, 0. 35• D. PUBLIC HEARING--CLOSING OF OLD CEDAR GROVE ROAD 36. Mr. Michael Parker, Attorney for the petitioner, Mr. Garrard, 37-t0ld the Board that the Department of Transportation had no interest 38.in maintaining the right of way through Old Cedar Grove Road since it 39. 4n• 1. 2. 375 3• is not part of the State maintained road. system. • 5. There were no others who wished to speak to this issue. Com- 6. -missioner Whitted declared the public hearing on the abandonment of 7. Old Cedar Grove Road closed. 8. E. BOARD DECISIONS 9. 1. OLD CEDAR GROVE ROAD: Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded 10. by Commissioner Lloyd, to adopt the order for permanent closure of 11. this portion of Old Cedar Grove Road and to direct the Clerk to the 12. Board to deliver a certified copy of the order to the Register of 13. Deeds. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 14. 2. PROCLAMATIONS: 15. Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 16. to Proclaim May 1-7, 1983, Orange County Extension Homemakers Week. 17, Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 18. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit 19. to Proclaim May, Senior Citizens Month and May 8-14 Senior Center Week. 20., Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 21, Dr. Betty Landsberger, Chair of the Senior Citizens Board, 22, issued an invitation to all present to a conference on Saturday, May 23., 7, 1983, at the Lincoln Center in Chapel Hill ; the subject of the 24- Conference is "Improving the Quality of Life for Older People in Orange 25. County. " Dr. Landsberger announced the proposed establishment of 26. a Senior Citizens Hall of Fame in the Orange County Human Services 27. Center- in Hillsborough. 28. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, 290 to proclaim May 8-15 Soil Stewardship Week. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 30. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to 31. Proclaim May 22-28 Public Works Week. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 32. (Proclamations may be found on pages of this book, in order of adoption:) 33•..- 34• 3. HOUSING REHAB 35. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 36, to award the housing rehabilitation contract for unit # 42 to Samuel 37. English for $6,218.00 (Complete bid results are on page of 'this 38. book) . Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 39. 40. 1. 3 2. 376 3. 4• 4. WILKERSON ACRES 5. Mr. Rick Cannity of the Planning Staff reviewed this requested 6. subdivision for the Board (see Minutes of April 5, 1983,. for background) . 7. The Planning Board has denied .approval of the final plat citing the 8. road approved by the Board of Commissioners in the preliminary plat. 9. Planning Board feels that a high traffic generator may locate on one 10. of the lots at the end of the subdivision and the gravel road would be 11. insufficient (ex. dust,-noise) . Mr. Logan Irvin, Planning Board Chair, 12, confirmed the Planning Board's cited reason of the Class A Private 13- Road. which the Commissioners approved as being the reason the .Planning 14- Board denied the subdivision request. Dr. Irvin said the problem lay 15, more in the future than in the present; i.e., if the lots were sold, 16,, as they could be once divided, and if Mr. Wilkerson no longer had any 17- interest in the properties, the question of maintenance arose and the 18. question of paving. Board members said they felt it highly unlikely 19, that a high traffic generator would locate there, that the only off 20. site impact would occur to the south and the adjoining property owners 21. had offered no objections. Furthermore, it appears to the Board that 22. the adverse impact, if any, would be borne by the owners of those lots 23. and the businesses located there. The County Attorney said the main 24- tenance agreement would be conveyed with the pieces of property and 25- therefore potential buyers would be aware of their responsibility. . 26. Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Walker, to 27., approve the final plat of the Wilkerson Subdivision, Section IV-B, 28. with the Class A Private Road. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 29, 5. WATERSHED PROTECTION 30- Ms. Susan Smith, Planning Staff, told the Board that Recommend- 31. ation # 12 of the Water Resources Task Force Report had called for 32. a minimum lot size of 2 and 5 acres in the watersheds in the County; 33- however, when the Board adopted the Recommendations of the WRTF, it 34- deleted specific minimum lot sizes.The Planning Board had, in its 35-meeting on April 25, 1983, passed a Resolution requesting the Board of 36.Commissioners to reconsider this Recommendation (that Resolution is 37- on page of this book). 38- Drt Irvin said that Planning Board reasoning was that the County 39. 40- 1. 4 2, 37.7 3• 4• was in the process of beginning to plan for the industrial develop- 5. ment of Cheeks Township, particularly the corridor along U.S. 70- 6. I-85. Planning Board feels that the County can protect the McGowan 7. and Seven Mile Creek watersheds by being selective with regard to the 8. industries allowed to locate there. But industrial development brings 9. other types of development, private homes to house the people who 10. run the industries. Dr. Irvin said that contamination from sewage, 11. given the poor soil in the County, was more likely to occur than con- 12. tamidation from chemicals. Additionally, both industry and individ- 13- uals would need adequate supplies of potable water. 14. There was a consensus among the Board members to consider the 15, watersheds individually rather than as a complete package. The Board 16, is on record as opposing the extension of sewers into University Lake 17. watershed. 18. Commissioner Whitted said that -if indu•strial .development was 1g. allowed in the watersheds he felt that- the water quality would already 20, be compromised and that there would then be no need to impose minimum 21. 1ot sizes on private housing. On the other hand, Commissioner Whitted 22. added, if industrial development is not permitted in the watersheds �3- then place limits on the minimum lot sizes for housing to protect an 24. uncompromised water supply. Commissioner Whitted said different 25. criteria may need to be applied to each watershed. 26. Commissioner Lloyd said that he felt "progress" had been made 27. arrd that "harmony" had been established "whereupon zoning might be 28. extended County-wide" but that the imposition of the five acre minimum 299 lot size would create "one helluva fight." He added that this require - 30- ment would be "ridiculous" and that "storm water management requirements" 31. are "impractical for an individual homeowner" to meet. Commissioner 32, Lloyd said he couldn 't support the minimum five acre lot size unless 33. the Health Department determined the soil wouldn't perk. . .. -- -Commissioner Willhoit ..- -. .. . . -. .. .. .. � suggested that the Board proceed to re- schedule this question. Commissioner Whitted asked that it be rescheduled 35. 36, for May 23rd, the regular fourth Monday meeting. 37. Commissioner Marshall suggested that the Chair communicate with 38. the Mayors of the municipalities of the County and inform them that 39- this question was scheduled on the 23rd. 400 1' 378 2. 3• 4. 5. FARMLAND PRESERVATION s, Ms. Smith and Ms. Elizabeth Walters, Agri.cul.tural. •Task Force 6, Implemental Committee Chair, said these recommendations had been 7, reviewed and no changes were suggested. 8. Mr. Peter Kramer,.. Route 1, 121-A Eno Township (border of' Little 9. River Township) , spoke in favor of the Board of Commissioners adopting 10. the recommendations as presented by the Ag. Task Force Implementation 11, Committee. He cited the development pressures from Durham for his 12, area and said that Orange County.was the first in the State with these 13, measures. He feels it is necessary to preserve and protect the char- 14, acter of the County and the farms. 15. Dr. Irvin said the Planning Board had taken no formal action on 16, the recommendations because it didn 't know it was supposed to do so. 17, However, he added, there were no objections to the recommendations and 18. formal action could be taken at the Planning Board meeting on May 16th. 19, Commissioner Marshall said the Ag. Task Force Implementation 20, Committee also wished to know if the Commissioners wished any further 21,.effort from them. or if it wished to dissolve the Committee. 22. Commissioner Lloyd said he had two concerns regarding the recom- 23, mendations: 1) the ten/twenty year commitpent; and, 2) adherence to 24, soil conservation- practices. He said he'd like those two concerns 25. addressed. 26. Ms. Smith replied that the Committee had reconsidered those two 27, items at Commissioner Lloyd's request twice already and the Committee 28. had not changed the recommendations. Commissioner Whitted said the 29, information on the Ag. Task Force Recommendations had been well 30. disseminated and there was no need for the Committee to reconsider these 31- issues; however, the Planning Board recommendation is needed now. 32. This is to be returned to the May 23rd agenda with the Planning Board 's 33. recommendat ion. Further, the Ag. Task Force Implementation Committee 34. wi11 be dissolved at that time. 35. 7. BRIGADOON PETITION 36, Ms. Smith provided the background information on this petition. 37. (Petition is attached to and part of these Minutes on pages of 38- this book. See abstract on page of this book for specifics. ) 39. 140. 6 1� 379 2, 3• 4 Commissioner Marshall moved,. seconded by Commissioner Walker, 5 to request the DOT to reconsider and to pave the portion of Linden 6. Road which provides access to Brigadoon Drive and to consider paving 7. the State maintained road within that subdivision. Vote: Ayes, 5; 8 noes, 0. • 9. 8. DURHAM TAC MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 10. Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 11. to adopt the Resolution.of approval of the Memorandum of Understanding 12. for the Durham Urbanized Area Transportation Advisory Committee. 13. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 14. 9. WILD ANIMAL CONTROL 15. Dr. Vickers Burdette read a statement to the Board (see page 16. of this book) objecting to the caging requirements for servals. Com- 17. missioner Willhoit suggested that the perimeter fence be waived 18. and a variance be granted for this particular serval . Mr. Rod Farb, 19. tiger owner, opposed the requirement for the concrete or gravel floor- 20. ing for the tigers. He said it is not a humane manner of caging for 21. tigers, it damages the paws and is unsanitary; that is, fecal material 22. cannot be removed from gravel and the location of the enclosure some 23. E mile from a water source makes the washing of the material from 24- concrete impractical apart from the cruelty inherent in such a floor. �5,He said drainage would not be a problem in his case as the enclosure 26. is to be upon a hill in northern Orange. Mr. Jerry Robinson, Health 27. Director, said he would like to see the construction plans before he 28. recommended a variance; however, there was agreement to reexamine the 29. concrete/gravel floor requirement for humane reasons. 30. Mr. Mahler, attorney for Lynne Moredock and her jaguar, "Yoda," 31. requested that a variance be given for the den Yoda occupies. Mr. 32.Robinson said the den may well meet the standards, he did not inspect 3 3.the den at close range but would return and do so. Mr. Mahler also 34,requested that an automatic extension be given beyond the one hundred 35 twenty days for compliance with the caging standards. Upon the advice 36,of the County Attorney, the Board chose to deal with extensions on an 37.individual basis if needed. The Manager promised a status report at 38 ninety days on compliance with the caging standards. 39. 40. 2. 3. 4• Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 5. to approve the caging requirements as submitted and subject to the 6. amendment made today regarding the perimeter fence required for ser- 7. vals.and reexamination of the surface requirements for cages. Vote: 8• Ayes, 3 (Commissioners Marshall , Willhoit and Whitted); noes, 2 (Com- 9. missioners Lloyd and Walker). This will return for a second reading 10. on May 17th. 111 Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Whitted', 12. to approve the fee schedule as submitted today (see pages of 13* this book for both caging and fee requirements). Vote: Ayes, 3 (Com- 14- missioners Marshall, Whitted and Willhoit); noes, 2 (Commissioners 15• Lloyd and Walker) . This will return for a second reading on May 17th. 16. 10. EMS FRANCHISES--Second Adoption 17, The County Manager suggested the Board amend the Franchises to 18- impose a five year limit on the franchises. 190 Commissioner Whitted moved to issue franchises and certificates 20. to South Orange and Orange County Rescue Squads for the authorization 21. to administer emergency medical care and transport patients; to issue 22* franchises to Southeastern MedEvac, Piedmont Ambulance Service and 23. Southern Triangle Ambulance Service to allow for transport of non- 24- emergency patients; and, issue certificates to Caldwell and Chapel 25- Mill first responders to provide for administering emergency patient 26* care for terms of five years each. Commissioner Marshall seconded the 27- motion. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 28. This will be returned to the agenda of May 17th for a second 29. adoption because the franchises were amended. 30• 11. SURPLUS PROPERTY 31. Commissioner Walker moved, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, to 32. approve the Resolution authorizing the Purchasing Director to hold 33. an auction of surplus County property. 34- Commissioner Whitted asked that the portion of the Resolution 35* authorizing the Purchasing Director signature on vehicle titles be 36e struck as this responsibility resides in the Chair of the Board of J7. Commissioners and should. remain there. There was unanimous agreement 38- 39- 40- 1' 381 2. 3• �}• among the Board members. to delete that paragraph. (See page 5* of this book for the Resolution as adopted. ) Vote: Ayes 6. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 7• -12. DP CONTRACT WITH CARRBORO 8• Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 9. to approve negotiations with the Town of Carrboro for provision of 10. data processing services to the Town. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 11, 13. BUDGET AMENDMtNT 12., Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 13• to approve the budget amendment as submitted (see page of 14. this book) . Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 15. 14. APPOINTMENTS 16. Commission on Women: Commissioner Willhoit moved the appoint- 17* ment of Peggy Dearman to a three year term on this Commission; Com- 18. missioner Marshall seconded. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 190 Energy Commission: Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by 20. Commissioner Marshall , the appointment of Marybeth Scotchie Holleman . 21• and Frank Sedor to two year terms on this Commission (expiring June 22. 30, 1985) . Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 23. Hillsborough Planning Board: Commissioner Marshall moved, 24* seconded by Commissioner Whitted, the appointment of John Dorwood 259 as the County representative on this Board. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 26. 0. 27. Hillsborough Board of Adjustment: Commissioner Willhoit moved, 28. seconded by Commissioner Marshall , the appointment of Caleb Moore as 29. the County representative on this Board. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 30. Human Services Commission: Commissioner Willhoit moved, 31• seconded by Commissioner Marshall , to appoint Barbara Page to this 32• Commission. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 33• Health and Medical Care Advisory: Commissioner .Willhoit moved, 34. seconded by Commissioner Marshall , the reappointment of Wil Morse, 35. William McCormick, Kenneth Strayhorn and Mary Rita Gray to three 36* year terms. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 37. Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, 38. to appoint Verna Taylor to a three year term on this Council . Vote: 39, Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 40. 1.' g 2. 382 3• 40 Recreation Advisory Council : Commissioner Lloyd moved, 5. seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, to appoint Clyde Pickard to a 6. three year term as Bingham Township's representative on this Council . 7• Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 8. Nursing Home Advisory Council : Commissioner Marshall moved, 9. seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, to appoint Eleanor McConnell 10. to a three year term on this Council as recommended by Hillhaven 11. Convalescent Center. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 12. Appointment to the Industrial Authority was delayed until 13' next month. 14' 15. LANDFILL EASEMENT--Added Item 15' Commissioner Lloyd moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall , 16. to approve the easement agreement with the Town of Hillsborough 17. for access across the County garage property. Vote: Ayes, 5; 18. noes, 0. 19' 16. RESOLUTION--Added Item 20, The Board agreed that a Resolution detailing the required paper- 21, work by the Department of Social Services is to be brought to the agenda 22. on May 17. �3• The Board adjourned for lunch and resumed at 2:00 P.M. with 24- all members present. The Board interviewed candidates for the 25. Orange County Economic Development Commission. Those interviewed 26. are., George Johnson, Elaine Parker, John Gastineau, Peggy McCarthy 27. and Turner Forrest. 28' Following the interviews the Board adjourned by consensus. 29. 300 Richard E. Whitted, Chair 31. 32' Paulette Pridgen, Clerk 33• 34- 35. 36, 37. 38. 39. 40. ±; •s�'.: ; ,—n.: -:'^ OF44NGE COUNTY COMMMSIONERS 106 EAST MARGAR rr LME nrrr.r-�sapROUGH.N.a. 27278 ROMIAaD L ormzm6 aW, WN LLOYD e+awen.eixea DWVZLL11= PROCLAMATION WHEREAS.' Orange County is indebted to members of the Orange County Extension' Homemakers Council, whose outstanding contributions to the develop- ment of homes and vitality and whose skills and leadership continue to expand its greatness; and, WHEREAS, Extension homemakers continue their active involvement in communities throughout our County by seeking to identify the needs-of families to marshal the available resources, and encourage family and com- munity participation to achieve a richer quality of living; and, WHEREAS, Observance of National Extension Homemakers Week is a nationwide tribute to homemakers and the support they offer to individuals and families, and it is fitting that Orange County recognize these women for their contributions to the well-being and progress of our County and State and citizens; NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, acting on behalf of the citizens of Orange County, do HERESY PROCLAIM.the week of May 1-7, 1983,. EXTENSION;HOMEMAKERS.WEEK ORANGE COUNTY AND, FURTHER COMMEND this observance to all our citizens. Richard E. Whitte , Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners THIS,'-the 2nd day of May, 1983. i �,-r.-�; �S:fT...-,�•4..a;�� '-,^,+a.arc-�mk.2+�} ""r: _.s�.a.+�:' _ .;:w,Fi'.'iwv:.r�t:;�!.Fi��`�'�'r_.4' 0107 ORANGE COUNTY COMMMSiONERS io6 EAST MARGARu Lints _kE T SSORQi7GH.N.G 2MB �ICIIAItp!WTUTT M d r . air L MASS"" WOULAN vAUM 1=VM7101s PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, According to the latest population figures, there are over 8,000 persons over 60 years of age in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, Orange County is proud of the older adults who -live here and wishes to show appreciation for what they have given and for what they have contributed to their County;.State and Nation;: and, WHEREAS, Because of then, the rest of the citizens enjoy the fruits of their visions and their labors, and -their example is an inspiration to continue to make Orange County a good place In which to live; and, WHEREAS, Our President and Governor have proclaimed May as Senior Citizens Month, Orange County wishes to set aside a special month for recognition of the older-segment of-its citizenry; - NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Orange County Board of Comnissioners, join: the Governor of. North Carolina and the President of the United States in PROCLAIMING May SENIOR CITIZENS MONTH ANO,.. further, .do• encourage all citizens. to join us in honoring our older Americans. Richard E. Whitted, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners This, the 2nd day of May, 1983. 4 V F r7 ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, 106 FAST UAR"=LAM' =,LSBOROUGEL N.C. 27278 =CRAM&WHrrrIM6 CAil UK LUMD IL KARSUM N009M VAU= R 0 C L A M A T: 1 0 'N WHEREAS,. Senior centers affirm the dignity, self-worth and- independence of older persons by facilitating their decisions and actions, tapping their experiences, skills and knowledge, and enabling their continued contribution to the Community; and, WHEREAS, Senior centers function as service delivery focal;)points, helping older persons to help themselves-and each other, and offering services or access to communityservices,'as needed; and, WHEREAS. Orange County has established a Northern Orange Senior Cenier and has supported Senior-Nutrition Centers throught the County to serve older adults; and, WHEREAS•, ' Senior centers in our County serve as a viable commitment,to our older reside,nts'�,. NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, HEREBY PROCLAIM the week of May 8 through 14, 1983, SENIOR CENTER WEEK ORANGE COUNTY And, further, encourage all citizens to visit a senior center in their area•. Richard E. Whfitted, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners THIS, the d.day of May, 1983 "r'.+:;. -y-.�7:_isx*:=�.r°iT""- «,�,.+r-y:�.+a.- -"LJ:sw-,-_ _ -°-..rte>,v.c• _ ... _ - _;r i�.xrr_:•:,rti_:.�yi,. -:s_ - = Q0, • roc a 7f1/ ah a?fZ -- WHEREAS, the well-being of our people depends 'upon the production of ample supplies of food,fiber and other.products of the soil;and WHEREAS, the quality and quantity of these products depend upon the , conservation,wise and proper management of the soil and water resources;and WHEREAS, our people have a mutual interest in the land and share the responsibility of preserving its,productivity;and WHEREAS,conservation districts provide a practical and democratic organiza- tion through which landowners are taking the initiative to conserve and make proper use of these resources;and WHEREAS,the conservation districts are carrying forward a program of soil and water conservation in cooperation with numerous agencies and countless individuals; NOW,THEREFORE,1,in full appreciation of the value of the soil to the public welfare,and desiring to honor those who protect it,do hereby proclaim May 8-15,1983 od fewarl ki Ve'ek i n the COUNTY of ORANGE, NORTH CAROLINA IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the COUNTY of Orange%:North Carol ina to be affixed. Done at the Orange County Board of Commissioners in the County Official Seal) of Orange this 2nd day of May ,the Year of Our Lord onethousand nine hundred eighty-three. Attest: Richard E. Whitted, Chair Board of Commissioners, County of Orange, North Carolina ORANGE COiTNTY COMNBSSIONERS 106 EASr MAMA=LAM IMZ SBOROUGI-L N.C. 272'18 pio:nRa�aeQrrep,ur ' PROCLAMATION SN14i7 E u��•„��* Pout�uuwes WHEREAS, public works services provided in our community are an integral part of our citizens' everyday lives; and, WHEREAS,. the support of an understanding and informed citizenry is vital to the efficient operation of public works systems and programs such as water, sewers, streets and highways, public buildings, solid waste collection and snow removal; and, WHEREAS, the health, safety and comfort of this community greatly depends on these facilities whose planning, design and construction are vitally dependent upon the efforts and skills of public works officials; and, WHEREAS, the efficiency of the qualified and dedicated personnel who staff public works departments is materially influenced by the citizens' attitude and understanding of the importance of the work they perform; and,. . THEREFORE, We, the Board of Commissioners, do hereby PROCLAIM May 22-28, 1983, PUBLIC WORKS WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY and call upon all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the problems involved in providing public works and to recognize the contributions which public works officials make everyday to our health, safety and comfort. • RICHARD E. WHITTED, CHAIR ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS , '•. 1 7}1I he 2nd day of May, 1983. 01 388 RESULTS OF BID OPENING OWNER: Mae Freeney APPLICATION NUMBER 42 ADDRESS: D.U. 42 Hill Street _ _ COST ESTII.IATE: 6,271.00 PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER UNDER •85 COST ESTIMATE _HECK ONE: JOB BID I X J JOB NEGOTIATED �. COMPANY ' d B I D :i10UNT 1. Samuel English _ 6.218.00 2. William King8.823_n0__ 3. Gates Construction 7.627_nn w Bids opened by: Robert Wilson Time of Bid Opening: 3:00 .m. Date of Bid- Opening: April 11, 1983 Witnessed by: Albert Kittrell ♦w♦i+♦ttirrw++w+.++r.+r+r..arrr+++r++i++w+�.r+rwkr++.++•++rrr•rr*++r+rr+r rr.++++.+ .*west Acceptable Bid: 6,218.00 Negotiated Amount: NIA Contractor: Samuel English NAME Rt. 1 Box 16, Efl and N.C. 27243 ADDRE55 563-1292 PHONE NUMBER COMMENTS: Community Dev4l'opment's contribution towards the rehabilitation of this dwelling unit will be $6,000.00 Submitted by: ) DATE: ._..Bid.Approved by:. Proceed Order: Issued - I I Not !ssued r COMMENTS: & FCS=CN CF TM.pLANNMG BOARD APRM 25, 1983 WEg=; the pj=dne Board agms. in principle with the recammkIations.of the Water Resources Task Farce-concerning the need for restrictions on mUxImm lots sizes In poteritial and existing-watersheds (2.0 acre minlum with stornmIter u9magement and 5.0 acre mInInun without stormiater mmmgemmt); and WEMMAS., the M=4mt zwdM ardUmnee has no extra protective restrictiam as. tO Ud M M= lot size In watersheds or potential watershed-areas (I acre. minim=) and•, IjMEM; the pimAng-Board forsees a future need In the aOuntY for aU its water resources, and wamm; the Planning Board wishes arw error in Judsemmt concerfling future water resources to be mtumLzed, and feels that a conservative approach to restriction of building in watersheds is the safest approach; EF 1,T MMVM; that the planrdng Board recommends that the Board of County comissicnears' re-exandne the reed for imposition Of larger minim lot 3i= In watersheds, existing or patentW, in accordance with the firAIM of the Water Resources Task Faroe. :x. 39C 02 We, the undersigned, petition the State of North Carolina to pave all or at least a portion of Linden Road in orange County. This road is almost constantly in need of scraping and graveling and is in worse condition than any other road of comparable useage in Orange County.. The condition of the road is not only damaging to the paint, tires and suspension systems of the vehicles which must use it but more importantly, it is dangerous. Several passenger cars have slid into the ditch while trying to dodge hoies. as has at least one school bus. Fortunately, there have been no injuries to this date and we sincerely hope this road can be Paved before there is a serious injury. NAME AND-ADDRESS DATE r= t sa Q / _1.7 z s� A/L - 277-,-f • d ��e petftioa:the State:::af:flonth Carat i na.`to! ve al t ror. -;et:�le�=a-:parriorro�Lindena Roadk-.tra orange: County.:. :TEds road is almost - f .creed sera in F` ::and vets and is i n wo rse conditi P 4 9►a n4 on ti :any other=road`of comparable useage irt. Qrange.County. _ .: .:.1w caedition of the road is`not'anly damaging: to.'the. paint, tires and suspension systems of the.vehicles which most use it but,, more. importantly, ftis dangerous. SeveraT passenger cars have slid into the ditch while '-'.-trying-to dodge boles as has, at least one school bus. Fortunately, there have been w Injuries ta'this date and we sincerely hope this road can be paved before them is a serious-injury.. _ '&X AND ADM;M pAlti 'sax SaIS,B _ u.r NC,- -a 7?bZ 1 y 44 v 392 '� Iii, the undersigned, petition the State of North Carolina to pave all or at least a portion of Linden Road in Orange County. This' road is almost constantly in need of scraping 'and graveling and is in worse condition- than any other.road of comparable useage in Orange County: The condition of the road is not only damaging to the paint, tires and suspension systems of the vehicles which must, use it but, more-importantly, it,-is dangerous. - Several passenger cars have slid into the ditch while trying to dodge holes. as has at least-one school bus. Fortunately, there have been no injuries to this date and we sincerely hope this road can be paved before- there is a serioits injury- . . NAME ANO AOORESS DATE ti ?S- 2 4,11 42Qa�m e4A. — CJ X_'� ALL, /•S Sgt r _ '-(11 ) _t .. 3 X;;' a h'ax 5�;.>_/ ?' ,-7% .27'70 S' ���' - uy�GL- lac. A/z. 7-?;b"— ; z 77 3V We, the undersigned, petition the State of North Carolina to pave all or at. lent a portion of Linden Road in Orange County. This road is almost constantly in need of scraping land graveling and is in worse condition than any other.road of comparable useage in Orange County. The condition of the road is not only damaging to the paint, tires and suspension systems of the vehicles which must. use it but, more importantly, it is dangerous. .Several passenger.cars have slid into the ditch-while trying to dodge holes as has at least one school bus. .Fortunately, there have. been no injuries to this date and we sincerely hope this road can,be. paved before there is a serious injury. WAND ADORESS DATE _ .�- .�: Q:. 1 1 Z • '� ems- r�. 1 � �+'.w..�.�� �' z: f Z Aw zy 9/23 3/zs �.S s C�tc �3 2, gel-197 r / ` R%, 13C - Z 6 .L Z C 394 , 0' Vie. the undersigned, petition the state of North Carolina to pave all or at least a portion of Linden Road in Orange County. This road is almost constantly in need of scraping land graveling and is in worse condition than any other,-,road of comparable useage -in Orange County. The condition of the road is not only damaging to the paint, tires and suspension systems of.the vehicles which must use it but; more- importantly, At is dangerous. Several passenger cars have slid into the ditch while trying to dodge holes as has at least-one,school bus.. . Fortunately, there . have been no injurihs to this: date and we sincerely hope this road can be paved before there is a serious injury- NAME AND ADDRESS ' DATE • 7 >> 2 su-8 aZ 777 2 _c!;(z 1? 7 02 We, the undersigned, petition the State of North Carolina to pave all or at least a portion of Linden Road in Orange County. This road is almost constantly in need of scraping and graveling and is in worse condition _ than any other,-road of comparable useage in Orange County, The condition of the road is not only damaging to the paint, tires and suspension systems of the vehicles which must use it but, more importantly, it is dangerous.. Several passenger cars have slid into the ditch while trying to dodge holes as.has at least one school bus. . Fortunately, there have been no inJuries to this date and we sincerely hope this road can be paved before there is a serious injury. NAME AND ADDRESS RATE 11 IL 7*70r S / y i f k 1 ?) 10 ,� 39E : PUSONIM RATES/TIM EST1MAMS Page 1 PLANK= DEPARMENT: Personnel-Building InsE2ctor Salary $17,880 FICA 1;198 Rat-trement 1,148 Insurance 584 Total $20,810/Year divided by 2,080 m n,hau;rs/year $10.00/manho= Time-Play Review _ Reptile manhour Other 1 hour Time Inspection Reptile 1 hour Other . 1. hour Travel 30 miles round trip/inspection @ $.17/mile $5.10 Tims/round trip - 1 hour @ $10.00 = $10.00 REALTS DEPARTMNT: Personnel Animal Control Officer Salary $15,612 FICA 1,046 Retirement .1,002 Insurance 584 Total $18,244/Year divided by Z-,080 manhours/year $8.77/manhour Personnel-Clerical Salary $10,098 FICA 677 Retirement 648 r Insurance 384 Total $12,007/Year divided by 2,080 manhours/year ' $5.77/---hour Time-Clerical Clerical hour (Checks insurance coverage, application completeness, re- quired licenses, handles telephone inquires of the gen- eral public.) Travel 30 miles round trip/inspection @ $.20/mile = $6.00 Time round trip - 1 hour @ $8.77 Total $14.77 -:a :r =C .T311'rf a2a1w. .MIUX-16.3r`,13%Mile&. Spa cn:c:::.zoa�:. -=:,_� _ .��s,�':_oals��:,. ="'`:.;,,:.. =7. l�:oo • -- d �:4`' jY.4.�:G;' �y5 '±T.•rcY.� n.�4?N a -_ �4i;'.. - �? -' COSTS.a tiles Tasaiai =` .= w= CEeca1 Time ''11-hour $ 2.89 ctioa BmmaL do traL how 4.89 Cost Site , gavel C7Cms. Miles) 1 .hour 25.39 Total Z hours S 32.66 CoMli=Cft Animal. Control 11 hour = S 4.39 Inspeettoo Travel. Mime & 161es) 1 hour = 14.77 Cost Sate. Total 1 hour' _ $ 19.16 Others. Initial. Clerical Time '. hour ' _ $ 2.89 Serval Zns ction Play Review 1 hour = 10.00 Jaguar Cost Bn;.lding Inspector 1 hour 18.77 Hears Enclosure) Animal Control Tigers TraveL•(Time & Miles) 1 hour It 24.77 Leopards Total 3T hours $ 56.43 Compliance Animal Control hour = 8 4.39 Inspection Travel (Time & Miles.) 1 hour a 14.77 TEOGET Total. 17 hoar - S 19.16 Enclosure) Compliance Animal Control 1 hour $ 8.77 -luspection Travel (Time & Miles) 1 hour 14.77 ftLtiple Total 2 hours 23.54 Enclosures Same Site NOT .Minimal charges are noted above. No charges included for overhead, indirect 'costs, or administrative costs. Costs do not include expenses incurred by unusual required inspections. _ - - .398. w Page 3 O, VISITS/COMPOUND OR SITE COSTS TO OWn. R -.1st YEAR eptile'(Multipl`�w losures) Initial Enclosure Inspections $ 32.66 6-month..Comiplisnce Inspection, 19.16 Total S 51.82 Others (Sin le'Encldsure) Initial Enclosure Inspection (3 visits in charge - only one plan review - 1 @ 56.43 +- 2 @ 46.43 $ 149.29 6-15onth Compliance Inspection 19:16 Total $ 168.43 Others (Multiple Enclosures) Initial Enclosure Inspection (3 visits in charge - one with Plan review - 1 @ 56.43 + 2 @ 46.43 x 3 enclosures) $ 447.87 6-Month Compliance Inspection 23.54 Total $ 471.41 COU T COST/YEAR FOR ALL COMPOUNDS,- 1st YEAR Reptiles 1 site @ $51.82 $ 51.82/2.0 Mani Others (Sin le Enclosure) 3 sites @ $168.45 505.35130.0 Mar Others (Multi le Enclosure) 1 site @ $471.41 471.41/27.5 Man Subtotal. 5 sites. $ 1,028.58/59.5 Man Consultant 105.00 Total 5 sites $ 1,028.58/59.5 Man 2nd. YEAR COSTS/FEES County Cost Fee Per 0 Reptile Multiple Enclosure Site 2 Compliance Inspections/year $ 38.32 $ 38.32 (Younger). 3 Single Feline Enclosure Sites 2 Compliance Inspection/year 114.96 38.32 (Farb, Modrich-•Burdett, Moredock) Multiple Wild Animal Site 2 Compliance Inspections/year 47.08 47.08 (Greene) Total S 200.36 ICU: Estimates are based on- no replaeemeat animals being allowed and no new , animals entering county. 08 0WGZ COUNTY PRQPOSED 1982-83 BUDGET Ake The 1982-83 codger Ordinance of Orange CeunL}* as adopted on Jame 22, 1982, and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows: � General Fund: Appropriation: Social Services $10,000. Source: Social Services - Title 2g Grant $10,000. Adopted this day of , 1983.