Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 199309215©4 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SEPTEMBER 21, 1993 REGULAR MEETING The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Regular session, on Tuesday, September 21, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the OWASA Community Room, Carrboro, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr.,and Commissioners Stephen H. Halkiotis, Alice M. Gordon, Verla Insko and Don Willhoit. COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Rod Visser, Economic Development Director Ted Abernathy, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Finance Director Ken Chavious, Housing and Community Development Director Tara Fikes, Program Supervisor I Frank Hartig, Environmental Health Supervisor Ron Holdway, Human Resources Director Elaine Holmes, Emergency Management Training Specialist Dinah Jeffries, Animal Control Director Elma Greene, Recreation and Parks Director Robert Jones, Budget Director Sally Kost, Land Records Manager Roscoe Reeves, Health Director Dan Reimer, Appraisal Technician Don Tapp,. County Engineer Paul Thames and Planner Mary Willis. I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Item VIII-B "Swimming Pool Financing" was moved to item VII-B. BOARD COMMENTS Commissioner Willhoit noted that Chapel Hill and Carrboro plan a public ,'hearing on changing their jurisdictional planning line which may change the line on Smith Level Road. His concern is that Chapel Hill may have different ideas in terms of thoroughfare planning for this road. He understands from Commissioner Gordon that the TAC has not taken any action on 5-laning Smith Level Road to the countyline. He feels that the towns and County need to have a discussion on this before it gets too far along in the planning. Commissioner Gordon stated that the County needs to discuss transportation issues with the towns and coordinate transportation planning. II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Chair Carey announced that citizens who wish to speak on an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the appropriate time. B. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA - NONE PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Carey dispensed with the reading of the Public Charge. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve those items on the Consent Agenda as stated below: A. PENALTY FEE FOR DISPOSAL OF YARD WASTE The Board approved establishing a penalty fee at twice the established tipping fee. for mixed solid waste to be imposed upon loads delivered to the Orange Regional Landfill that contain prohibited yard wastes. B. HOME CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT 505 The Board approved an amendment to the Orange County HOME Consortium Agreement as stipulated in the resolution stated below: RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT AMENDMENT WHEREAS, County and Towns entered into the Orange HOME Consortium HOME Investment Partnership Program Consortium Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") on or about August 27, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Orange HOME Consortium desires to be considered for eligibility under the federal HOME program operated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as authorized under the HOME Investment Partnership Act, Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, as amended (hereinafter "the Act") and the County and Towns agree that it is desirable and in the interest of their citizens to secure federal government approval for this eligibility; and WHEREAS, the proper administration of the Agreement requires that there be amendments to the Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of commissioners this the 21st day of September, 1993. 1. That the Orange County Board of Commissioners approves the request„ of the Orange HOME Consortium to the U.S. Department of Housing ar;` Urban Development for consideration for eligibility of the Orang,... HOME Consortium under the federal HOME program. 2. That the Orange County Board of Commissioners authorizes the County Manager to execute the HOME Investment Partnership Program Consortium Agreement Amendment, in the form attached herewith. 3. That the Town Managers and the Orange County Manager on the advice and consent of the Town/County Attorney may approve minor - amendments to the orange HOME Consortium . HOME Investment Partnership Program Consortium Agreement and execute documents recording the amendments. VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS IV. RESOLUTIONS PROCLAMATIONS - NONE V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. "LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN NORTH CAROLINA" TEXTBOOK .Chair Carey presented to Neil Pedersen, Superintendent of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools and to Barry Chlebnikow, Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services for the Orange County Schools a copy of the "LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN NORTH CAROLINA" textbook. He asked that both school- incorporate this textbook into the curriculum for all ninth graders. Thi textbook is free to all ninth grade students the first time around. 500 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE VII. REPORTS A. UPDATE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCHING (CADY The Board received a report on implementation of the County's new Computer Aided Dispatching system. This was implemented on August 19, 19,93.. Since that time, several items have been identified that will enhance the system. These include generating reports, retrieving information about an incident that has been closed, print-screen capability, and the assignment of an agency specific incident number. The 911 Communication Group also suggested several procedural changes. These included (1) providing only essential information to get officers rolling and then give additional information that will be useful to field officers as they approach the scene, and (2) providing a brief explanation to field officers of the reasons for giving "standby". They also discussed the need to move in the direction of discouraging non--emergency calls to 911. They will meet with the Sheriff next week to begin this process. In answer to a question about response time from Commissioner Gordon, Rod Visser indicated that with this new system, time begins at the time of connection and ends when the agency arrives on the scene. It is more accurate than the manual system of punching the time on a card. Commissioner Gordon stated that response time was a critical measure of the system, and she asked that the staff present a report comparing the response times of the old system with the new system. Rod Visser stated that the response time using the old system was eight minutes on the south side and 12 minutes on the north side. Dinah Jeff eries stated that a random sampling of response times show that they ...are shorter with the new system. Commissioner Halkiotis emphasized the need to educate citizens on how the 911 system works and when people should and should not use it. B. SWIMMING POOL FXNANCING John Link presented additional information about the proposed construction, operation, and financing of the swimming pool/ice rink facility. By using overheads he showed the financial commitment to the Triangle Community Activity Center as $400,000 a year paid quarterly for a total.of 4 million over 10-years. It is estimated that the pool will be used 33% of the time by-youth, 43% by adults and 24% by senior citizens., The TYHA.will have. a 13-member Board of Directors. The County will appoint 5 or 6 of those members. This is yet to be decided and is open for discussion. In answer to o-a question from Commissioner Willhoit, John Link indicated that if revenues don't meet projections, the Board of Directors will address the issue at that time. He emphasized that the revenue projections are very conservative. They estimate that they will have in an escrow fund at the end of year ten $1,068,000 which will be used to pay down the debt over the next five years. At the end of year 15, they should have $74,000 in this fund. Discussion ensued on the pool and the public in Chapel Hill. indicated that all these figures are be used every hour of every day. At the end of the fifteen of the facility. They will have selling the facility. number of participants that use the YMCA Recreation and Parks Director Bob Jones available as well as how this pool will years, the County will receive ownership the option of maintaining ownership or In answer to a question from Commissioner Gordon, John Link stated 5©7 that the $400,000 expenditure will be from sales tax and considered as a major County project. Commissioner Willhoit questioned if this project is going to 1 primarily for the kids and if the County is getting the most for its money. He emphasized that the Board has not discussed using these funds for other County needs such as court facilities. Chair Carey stated that the Board does need to address the long- term needs of the courts and perhaps should revisit the policy for the use of these funds. He asked John Link to meet with the YMCA to see if they are interested in working with the County in some kind of partnership arrangement for a facility in central Orange County that would be economically viable. Dan Kidd of TYHA noted that this facility will generate revenue to fund projects for years to come. He stated that the user fees at the YMCA are four times as much. Commissioner Halkiotis stated his support for this project. He feels this recreational facility will provide a healthy outlet for everyone in this County. John Link will talk with each County Commissioners to get their specific questions about this project and bring back the answers at the next meeting. The policy issues that need to be addressed are (1) whether or not the County Commissioners will continue using the sales tax revenues as they do now, and (2) County capital versus school capital. John Link will present at the next meeting a resolution relating to the project. VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA A. AUTHORIZATION TO REGULATE CABLE TELEVISION RATES Attorney Mark Sheridan gave an overview of the Cable TV Act Albert Kittrell explained that the cable Television Consumer Protection an.. Competition Act of 1992 expanded the authority of the FCC to regulate rates of cable systems for various services. The FCC guidelines permit local governments to apply to the FCC for certification to enforce rates for local broadcast television signals and "public access" channels. The certification form confirms that the County will (1) enforce the applicable rate regulations consistent with FCC guidelines, (2) consider the local cable system subject to FCC rate regulations, and (3) has the authority and ability to enforce the rate regulations. In order to regulate rates of the local cable systems, the County will incur costs for rate. reviews and analysis. Triangle J has submitted a proposal outlining the services they can provide at a modest cost. Bob Wynn, Chair of the Cable TV Citizen Advisory Committee stated that the Committee recommended that the Board of Commissioners apply to the FCC for authorization to enforce federal rules regulating certain cable television rates. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to authorize the submission of the Federal Communication Commission Form 328 certifying that the County will administer cable rate regulations consistent with FCC guidelines. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. SWIMMING POOL FINANCING - moved to item VII-B C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT OVERSIGHT IN ORANGE COUNTY This item was presented by Commis:;ioners Gordon and Insko Commissioner Gordon gave a brief summary of the information in the agenda abstract. The four principles in the memorandum dated April 10, 1993 are an 508 approach that underline all the recommendations. The first is fiscal responsibility. Both feel that fees collected should pay for County services rendered. The second principle is role of local government. They feel that this should be minimized. The public health principle emphasized that the County should take the steps necessary to protect the public health. The last principle is growth patterns which indicates that to the extent that the M&MA program affects county growth patterns, it should be implemented to promote County policies, or at least to be neutral. The remainder of the memo gives an overview of the program. The functions of the wastewater treatment oversight program outlines the entire wastewater treatment oversight program and gives a visual where the M&MA program fits in. The M&MA program is only a subset of all the wastewater treatment oversight functions that they believe would be appropriate. The only thing that doesn't come under monitoring in the M&MA program is just part of the management function which is listed under operation. Commissioner Insko emphasized. that Orange County would do the education component for all the systems at no cost. ' The M&MA assurance program falls under the monitoring function. They did not include the conventional systems in the program. However, they will continue to educate the citizens on how to care for the conventional systems. The things that are unresolved are the fees and the management entity for type IV systems * 'They support the Health Department proposal except that they set aside the conventional systems and the large systems that may be used in the rural buffer. One issue to be resolved includes the management entity for the type IV systems. At the present time there are no DEH type 5-C, D and 6 systems in Orange County. The Board may want to have a policy of not having these type systems in the County at any time. Dan Reimer noted that the word monitoring means in some cases onsite inspection where no water sampling is required but for the DEM system would require a laboratory testing. In answer to a question about fees, he noted that the fees were based on cost with the intention of recovering the cost of providing the services. He explained how the cost methodology was worked out by David M. Griffith and Associates. It was the consensus of the Board to have - staff bring back - a schedule of fees for the five types of systems for their consideration. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to (1) endorse the general approach to oversight of the County's wastewater treatment systems that is outlined in the April 10 memo entitled "Monitoring and Maintenance Assurance Program" and the September 14 memo entitle "Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program", and (2) approve the specific recommendations and request the specific information outlined in the September 14 memo entitle "Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program". (These memos are attached to these minutes on pages .) VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. GOVERNOR'S GROVE - PRELIMINARY PLAN Planner Mary Willis made this presentation. The property is located in Cedar Grove Township on the east and west side of Governor Scott Road (SR 1351). The tract is 177.28 acres with 116 lots proposed. Lot sizes range from .92 to 4.50 acres. The property is not zoned, however, it is designated as Agricultural Residential, Watersupply Watershed and Water Quality Critical Area on the Land Use Plan. It is also classified as WS-II 509 by the State. The Planning Board considered the Preliminary Plan for Governor's Grove on August 16, 1993 and recommended approval subject to thF,, conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. Commissioner Willhoit expressed a concern about approving . a,. subdivision when there is a possibility that a reservoir may be built in that area. Mary Willis noted that the State mandate on watershed protection can.be met through limitations on impervious surface. Though compliance is not mandatory until January 1, it would be in keeping with the intent of the proposed amendments, and provide for a higher level of protection than is required by existing regulations in an area which is highly sensitive due to its proximity to the proposed reservoir. The number of lots will be reduced to 112 instead of 116. However, if the area along the reservoir was deleted, the remainder of the area would not meet the 6% impervious surface requirement. David Thompson, land surveyor, stated that they would then take the acreage they could not build upon and include that in order to meet the impervious surface ratio. A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the Preliminary Plan for Governor's Grove in accordance with the Resolution of Approval attached to these minutes on pages VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. RECREATION AND PARRS -TEMPORARY TO PERMANENT POSITIONS ?. John Link asked the Board to consider approval, of permanent status for two temporary positions in the Recreation and Parks Department. Commissioner Gordon expressed a concern about increasing at a rapid.. rate the number of people on the County staff. John Link indicated that he has made it clear to department head.... that they are not to go out and create temporary positions without him knowing about it. These temporary positions can only stay temporary for a period of time. These specific positions have been around for a couple of years. Commissioner Halkiotis feels that these positions should only be approved at budget time. He doesn't doubt that they need additional help. A motion was made by commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chair Carey to approve the permanent positions as proposed. VOTE: AYES, 2; NOS, 3..(Commissioners Gordon, Halkiotis and Insko) The Board agreed that the County Manager may bring these request back to the Board with additional information for their consideration. They asked that there be an assessment of realignment of duties within that department. F. PROPOSAL TO FUND AN ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER POSITION Health Director Dan Reimer asked that the Board approve an additional Animal Control Officer position to be funded from an increase in animal control fees. This position was not approved at budget time. However, the Board indicated that if a funding source could be found, other than raising the tax rate, they would reconsider approving this position. Mr. Reimer stated that in the Animal Control Study that was just completed, they cited as an impediment, to effective enforcement the lack of personnel and equipment. He noted that the remainder of the fee money would be used for spay and neuter programs. Heather Ham stated she does volunteer work at the shelter. She noted that the differential licensing would give pet owners an incentive to 5I0 have their animals spayed and neutered. By approving this differential licensing, the Board will in turn decrease the cost to the taxpayers. Commissioner Willhoit stated that he favors the differential licensing but feels the emphasis is on the wrong place. This causes those people who comply to be the ones who support the program. He feels there should be a significant penalty for failing to license and a significant penalty for failing to vaccinate for rabies. He encouraged a more aggressive effort to go after those who have not licensed their animals and especially those who are not vaccinating their animals. He did not support the position in the study because there was no funding mechanism. He requested information on the amount that could be collected for animals which are adopted or retrieved from the Animal Shelter. He suggested going back two or three years for animals that have been retrieved and charging for the license. They would not be able to retrieve their animal without paying the licensing for the years that were not paid. He asked if Animal Control can reschedule their existing staff so more people can work in the evening. It was the consensus of the Board to delay this item. IX. BOARD COMMENTS - listed on page 1 X. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT - NONE XI. APPOINTMENTS A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Carey to appoint Kathy Baker to the Youth Services-Needs Task Force for a term ending 6/30/96 and to appoint Alner Green and Cecil Sheps to the Advisory Board on Aging for terms ending 6/30/96. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XII. MINUTES - NONE XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - NONE XIV. ADJOURNMENT With no further items for the Board to consider, Chair Carey adjourned the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on Monday, October 4, 1993 at the Old Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk RESOLUTION 511 OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date -Sp)ternber 21. 1,993 Name of Subdivision ov rnor0_ rove C?fi?a ? Owner/Applicant ell rs anufacturin My. eratr n The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves Governofs Grove subdivision preliminary plat, dated June 15, 1993 and containing 116 lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements specified herein. Governor Moore Street, Governor Sanford Street, Governor Martin Street, Governor Holt Boulevard, Governor Umstead Circle, Governor Cherry Circle, Governor Broughton Street Governor Hodges Street, Governor Holshauser Circle and Governor Huey Street shall be irrevocably dedicated to the general public and be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally, the offer of dedication of Governor Moore Street, Governor Sanford Street, Governor Martin Street, Governor Holt Boulevard, Governor Umstead Circle Governor Cherry Circle, Governor Broughton Street, Governor Hodges Street, Governor H the olshg'user Circle and Governor Huey Street. This acceptance by Orange County o of dedication to the general public of Governor Moore Street, Governor Sanford Stree, Governorrtn to Street, Governor Holt Boulevard, Governor Umstead Circle, Governor Cherry Circle, Governor Broughton Street, Governor Hodges Street, Governor Holshiauser Circle and Governor Huey Street shall be without maintenance responsibility. These roads shall be maintained by the owner/applicant until such time as they are accepted for maintenance b the North . Carolina Department of Transportation or some other governmental body. Before the Final Plat of Governox's Grove can be recorded: A. Sewage Disposal 1• Each residential lot shall contain an adequate area for septic disposal, and repair 'area, approved by the Orange County Division of Environmental Health. 2. The septic system location may restrict the size and location of improvements. This disclosure shall be included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The document shall also disclose that information regarding the tentative location of septic systems is available from the Orange County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health. 1 W B• Roads and Access 512 1. Governor Moore Street, Governor Sanford Street, Governor Martin Street, Governor Holt Boulevard, Governor Umstead Circle, Governor Cherry Circle, Governor Broughton Street, Governor Hodges Street, Governor Holshauser Circle and Governor Huey Street shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, within a 50 foot right-of-way, and the construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. OR A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be submitted to secure construction of Governor Moore Street, Governor Sanford Street, Governor Martin Street, Governor Holt Boulevard, Governor Umstead Circle, Governor Cherry Circle, Governor Broughton Street, Governor Hodges Street, Governor Holshauser Circle and Governor Huey Street and the required turn lanes on Governor Scott Road to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a certified/licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110 % of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. The document describing development restrictions to be recorded with the Final. Plat shall state that the financial guarantee will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 2. Provided Governor Scott Road is not already paved to NCDOT standards prior to approval of Phase Four, Governor Scott Road shall be paved along the frontage of this tract to NCDOT standards with final plat approval of Phase Four. Security shall be provided for this improvement with the final plat submittal of Phase Four. 3. Site distance it the intersection of Governor Scott Road and Governor Moore Street is limited. Grading shall be completed at this intersection to meet NCDOT site distance requirements. e 4. A right turn deceleration lane shall be provided in the north and southbound travelway of Governor Scott Road approaching Governor Holt Boulevard. Left turn lanes shall also be constructed in the north and southbound travelway of Governor Scott Road approaching Governor Holt Boulevard. These turning lanes shall be constructed to standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation with final plat approval of Phase 7. 5. All lots shall access onto the new subdivision roads. This restriction shall be stated in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 2 514 4 In rvi ,, 1 rf_a=. shhall die limited t ix r n ( % f the t of the devel m ent 4 39 s u __ f t with an additi nal ten rc nt 10°'0 4 ?4 uare f et rmitted u n a royal of he Planning Direct r. The im rvi surface- limit lf r indivi dual 1 t h ] shown on h Final Plat B it in nvelo d rivewa ] . tion shall also be indicated on he Final P- lat' _L All lots ad'acent to the West Fork f he Eno River shall c ntain a minimum to area of two (2) acres. F. Certifications 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in Section V-D-6-b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that all residential lots contain sufficient area for septic tank disposal and repair. 4- The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that all roads have been constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved. 5. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department. Signature of Applicant Clerk o the Board i?- I, and accept the above listed conditions of subdivision approval, .acknowledge -that each/must be met prior to recordation of the final plat. Applicant Date 4 .513 6. At the street rights-of-way intersections, sight-triangles shall be indicated in accordance with NCDOT design standards. 7. Approved street name signs shall be erected at intersections as required in Section IV-B-3-c-12 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. Evidence shall be submitted by the applicant that signs are in place or a copy of the receipt for purchase of the signs shall be submitted to the Planning Department. C. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be installed or preserved as indicated on the approved landscape plan, and must be inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections Department. OR Guaranteed financially through a letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond submitted to secure required landscape installation and preservation. An estimate of the cost for required preservation, plantings and their installation must be provided. The financial guarantee shall reflect 110 percent of the estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. 2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be included in a document describing development restrictions and requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. D. Parkland 1. Cash in the amount of $3,314.00 [($1,000/acre x 116/35 acre)] shall be paid to Orange County as payment in lieu of parkland dedication. E. Miscellaneous 1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity.map in accordance with Section V-D-2 and V-D-3 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 2. The following buffer shall be shown on the plat: a. A 50-foot stream buffer shall be provided along the West Fork of the Eno River as required in Section IV-B-9-b of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. 3. The 100 year floodplain along the West Fork of the Eno shall be indicated. 3 515 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Commissioners and Manager FROM: Alice Gordon DATE: April 10; 1993 SUBJECT: Monitoring and Maintenance Assurance Program (M&MA Program) Moses has asked me to write down the results of the meeting. on the M&MA program which Verla and-I had not long ago. This memorandum is written for that purpose. At our meeting Verla and I agreed that four principles should guide our decisions on the M&MA program. We also agreed that we needed to have certain questions answered before we could make our decisions. After the meeting I thought a littleomore about the program and concluded that the decisions could be grouped into five different areas, so I have used those five"'areas and the four principles as a framework for this memorandum. FOUR PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE OUR DECISIONS 1, Fiscal responsibility. The program should be implemented in a fiscally responsible.way. For example, fees collected should pay for county services rendered. The role of performance bonds should be considered where appropriate. Questions to be asked for each of the five decision areas given below: What does the inspection fee cover (employees, materials, other) ? Why are the same fees charged for all kinds of systems? Can we really recover all of our own costs? If we do not recover all costs,' when does that-occur and what is the reason? What are the broader fiscal impacts of the M&MA program? (e.g. Does it encourage residential growth? If so, what is the fiscal impact?) 2. Role of local government. The role of local government should be minimized. For example, when the county considers new programs, there should be minimal bureaucracy created. Also, there should be minimal conflict of interest in internal county functions. Finally, the county should not take on functions which could be effectively handled by private enterprise or the state. 3 Questions to be asked for each of the five decision areas given below: What is the justification for the inspection frequency? 516 - n 3. Public health. The county should take the steps necessary to protect the public health. Questions to be asked for each of the five decision areas given below: Is the proposed effort necessary for the protection of the public health? Could the collection of more systematic information about groundwater in Orange County, such as that being proposed by the Water Resources Committee, help address these questions concerning the steps necessary to protect groundwater? 4. Growth atterns. To the extent that the M&MA program affects county growth patterns, it should be implemented to promote county policies, or at least to be neutral. Questions to be asked for each of the five decision areas given below: What existing or proposed county policies are impacted by the M&MA program? Does the proposed M&MA program carry out those county policies? FIVE AREAS IN WHICH DECISIONS ARE TO BE MADE Each of these five areas of the M&MA program should be judged by the four general principles stated above. In addition, the following specific questions-need to be answered. 1. Ins ection of mobile-home narks. Specific questions to be answered for this area: Not much information is given. What is involved in these annual inspections? 2. Monitoring excluded.) The monitoring pi county programs. Fees" (June 29, program, but the of DEH-re ulated systems. " (Types I and II •oposed in this area is the most similar to ongoing . Note: The M&MA program "Report of Costs and 1992) excludes Type III as a component of the August 1992 documents include Type III. 3. Monitoring of DEM-requlated systems. (New. And existing systems handled together.) Currently the state does inspections for these systems. To undertake monitoring in this area a memorandum of agreement with the state must be executed. Specific questions to be asked for this area: Is it necessary to monitor these systems, or can the state do an adequate job? If we enter into a- memorandum of agreement with the State of North Carolina, will the state still collect fees? If they do, can the county still collect any fees for this service? Will these fees duplicate the state fees? 4. Mana ement entities for DEH systems for which a private certified operator is sufficient: T e IV and T e Va and Vb. (New systems handled separately from existing systems.) In the M&MA program it is proposed that the Health Department be the management entity for Type IV systems. Specific questions to be asked for this area: It appears that there is a conflict of interest if the Health Department both monitors and manages. How can this conflict be resolved? Cant private enterprise effectively handle this management function? Who certifies the local operators? Can the county license operators for orange County? Should a performance bond be required? In what circumstances? 5. Management entities for DEH systems for--.Which a ub c manes ement entity is required: Type Vc and Vd and T e VI. (New systems handled separately from existing systems.) The question of how this area should be handled remains unresolved. Specific questions to be asked for this area: What public management entities are available for this task? Should the county get involved if no pubic management entity is available? This memorandum gives my understanding of the principles Verla and I believe should be followed, and of the questions which she and I believe should be answered. However, there are two disclaimers: (1) Due to the pressure of time, I had to submit this memorandum before Verla could review it. Therefore, she will have an opportunity to offer her comments later. . (2) Due to the complicated nature of the subject matter and the fact that the contents of several documents were reviewed, it is possible that something has been overlooked or misunderstood. In that case, the memorandum will have served to facilitate communication and the staff is invited to make-any corrections.that are necessary. r A r I f; I.1 - 518 DEH (GRO UND ABSORP TION) SYS TEMS DEB SYSTEM JULY 1992 JULY 1992 CLASSIFICATION DEH REQUIRED DEB REQUIRED PROPOSED NUMBER FEES FOP (SECTION. 1961) REVIEW FREQ. REVIEW FREQ. OCHD M&MA OF EXISTING . M&MA FOR OCHD ME OPTIONS REVIEW FREQ. SYSTEMS PROGRAM TYPE I PRIVY, GREASE TRAP, N/A N/A N/A UNKNOWN N/A COMPOSTING, CHEMICAL, AND INCINERATING TOILETS TYPE II' CONVENTIONAL, SINGLE FAMILY N/A N/A N/A DWELLING OR LESS THAN 12,000 N/A 481 GPD TYPE III CONVENTIONAL, NON-SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, OR 115 YRS. N/A 115 YRS. 2 050 + GREATER THAN 480 GPD , TYPE 111 PUMP CONVENTIONAL WITH 115 YRS. N/A 1/5 YRS A SINGLE PUMP . 950 + TYPE IV 2/YR. LOW PRESSURE PIPE 1/3 YRS. OCHD, PME 2/YR.f 550 • $200 SYSTEMS WITH A SINGLE OR PCO PUMP TYPE IV CME WITH r SYSTEMS WITH MORE THAN 1/3 YRS. 2/YR. 2/YR f 1 ONE PUMP; LESS THAN OCHD . 0 5200 3,001 GPD PCO OR PME :/A - NOT APPLICABLE ;PD - GALLONS PER DAY OF WASTE FLOW (480 GPD = 4 BEDROOMS) )EH - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH - DEHNR WILL NOT BE INCLUDED AT IMPLEMENTATION - ONLY IF OCHD IS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED AND FUNDED AS THE PME •I&MA - MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE ASSURANCE. PROGRAM 'ME - COUNTY MANAGEMENT ENTITY THIS IS AN UNFUNDED STATE MANDATE 519 12 DEH (GROUND ABSORPTION) SYSTEMS (continued) DEH SYSTEM JULY '92 JULY '92 CLASSIFICATION DEH REQUIRED DEH REQUIRED PROPOSED NUMBER FEES FOR (SECTION. 1961) REVIEW FREQ. REVIEW FREQ. OCHD M&MA OF EXISTING M&MA FOR OCHD FOR ME OPTIONS REVIEW FREQ. SYSTEMS PROGRAM TYPE V (a&b) 2-521YR. GREATER THAN 3000 GPD OR SAND 1 YR. PME OR 2/YR. 6 $200 FILTER PRE-TREATMENT SYSTEMS PCO TYPE V (c&d) . LESS THAN 3001 GPD WITH 4-12/YR. MECHANICAL, BIOLOGICAL, OR I YR. PME 21YR. 0 $200 CHEMICAL PRE-TREATMENT REQUIRED TYPE VI GREATER THAN 3000 GPD WITH 52-260/YR. MECHANICAL, BIOLOGICAL, 6 MOS. PME 12/YR. 0 $1,200 OR CHEMICAL PRE-TREATMENT REQUIRED OCHD - COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT PCO - PRIVATE CERTIFIED OPERATOR PME - PUBLIC MANAGEMENT ENTITY GPD - GALLONS PER DAY OF WASTE FLOW DEH - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH - DEHNR ?> ' "kMA -MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE ASSURANCE PROGRAM E - COUNTY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM r 0 520 13 I DEM (NUN GROUND ABSORPTION AND NPDES) SYSTEMS DEM SYSTEM INSP ECTION OPERATOR PROPOSED NUMBER FEES FOR CLASSIFICATION BY DEM MAINTENANCE OCHD M&MA OF EXISTING M&MA (NOT IN SECTION .1961) (ROUTINE) FREQUENCY REVIEW FREQ. SYSTEMS PROGRAM SPRAY IRRIGATION SFD * NONE 2/YR. 10 $200 (OCHD CLASS III) SPRAY IRRIGATION NON SFD 11WK• 4/YR. 5 $400 (OCHD CLASS 111) SAND FILTER SFD ` NONE 2/YR. lb $200 (OCHD CLASS III) SAND FILTER NON SFD * 1/WK. 41YR. b $400 (OCHD CLASS III) PACKAGE PLANT (OCHD CLASS VI) 2/YR. DAILY 4/YR EXCLUDING OWASA AND HILLS. . 9 $400 SLUDGE APPLICATION SITE NONE DURING 1/YR (OCHD CLASS VII) APPLICATION . 23 $100 ?PDES - NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM BEM - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT - DEHNR FD - SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING - COMPLAINT RESPONSE ONLY CHD - ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT :&MA - MONITORING AND MAITENANCE ASSURANCE PROGR ti4E - COUNTY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AM 521 MEMORANDUM DATE: September 14, 1993 SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program (WTOP) FROM: Alice Gordon & Verla Insko TO: Board of County.Coxmissioners The purpose-of this memo is to 3.)-ex'pla'in and justify the concept of a Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program (WTOP), 2) present recommendations concerning all wastewater treatment systems in Orange County, except for DEH Type I and Type II gystems, and 3) identify some issues that need further clarification. r WASTEWATER TREATMENT OVERSIGHT PROGRAM Prior discussions on wastewater treatment systems in. Orange County centered around the Monitoring and Maintenance Assurance Program (M&MA). This program includes only those systems the Orange County Health Department (OCHD) monitors for a fee. To understand the county's role in protecting the environment and the public health, it is necessary to review all of the health department functions related to wastewater treatment systems.- We are calling the aggregate of these existing and proposed functions the Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program (WTOP). Goal The goal of the Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program is to protect the environment and the public health. Principles to uide Board of Count commissioners decisions: 1. Fiscal responsibility - No additional cost to taxpayer 2. Role of local government - Minimal increase in the role of government 3. Public health - Effective implementation of the goal 4. Growth patterns - Adherence to county policies These principles are explained more fully in the April 10 memo, 522 4 Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program, September 14, 1993 "Monitoring and Maintenance Assurance Program" Functions of the WTOP: Education Informing owners about inspection schedules and maintenance steps to extend the life of their system, what repairs will be needed if the system fails, and the consequences of not making repairs. No fees are charged for this service. Systems included: All Monitoring Performing basic steps necessary to determine if system is in good operating condition, ordering repairs as needed to restore faulty or failing system to full operating condition, reinspection to assure that repairs are made. Fees will .cover the full cost of this service. Operations Management: Directing the operation of a wastewater treatment system, including responsibility for regular monitoring, handling the necessary paperwork, and making repeeirs. A written contract between the owner and manager required. This function will be performed by the private sector. Orange County will monitor the private certified operators and report companies with below standard performance. No fees as Orange County does not perform this function Maintenance: Making repairs necessary to faulty or failing systems. s This function will be performed by the private sector. Orange County will inspect repairs as part of its monitoring function. No fees as Orange county does not perform this function, except that Orange County will continue to perform minor repairs for no fee. RECOMMENDATIONS We can recommend approval of the M&MA program if the first two recommendations below are acceptable-to the board and if the issues needing further clarification are resolved. 1. Fees. Develop a fee structure that includes charges for all 523 wastewater Treatment Oversight Program, September 14, 1993 monitoring activities (e.g. DEH Type III systems). Include a provision for regular evaluation of the schedule to assure costs are covered, including the cost of all new personnel hired to implement this program. (At the May 4, 1992 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to develop projected costs of the M&MA program and a fee schedule that would fully fund.the program). 2. Mana gment Entity---for Type IV Systems. Private sector companies should be the management entity for DEH Type IV systems. The OCHD should inspect these systems every 18 months (or some other justifiable period) and charge a fee to recover the cost of the inspection. The OCHD proposed that it serve as the management entity.for Type IV systems. We were not persuaded that the private sector would not perform this function adequately. - 3' Education. Establish an education program for'all systems. Begin by summarizing the educational activities currently in place for all systems including the type of technical information given for system operation and the consequence to the owners if their systems fail. The OCHD is currently providing educational material to owners of Type II systems; i.e., conventional single family systems >481 gpd. 4 Financial Guarantees to Insure Repairs. Develop and present to the Board of County Commissioners for their approval a plan that requires financial guarantees by owners to repair their failing systems. (Omit DEH Type I and II systems) ISSUES NEEDING FURTHER CLARIFICATION The Board of County Commissioners should discuss the following issues to determine what impact they have for Orange County and/or to give the staff direction. These items required modest staff effort. M&MA Progiam.s ssues 1.- -.DEM Systems. The state charges fees for some services; the county is.proposing to charge for inspections. Regarding these systems: For which services does DEM charge? Do proposed Orange County services duplicate any services provided by the state? Wake and Mecklenburg Counties have reportedly encountered problems trying to collect their inspection fees. What are the problems? Have they been resolved? How? 524 Wastewater Treatment Oversight Program, September 14, 1993 7 2. Private Management Entities. Private operators have been serving as private management entities for DEH Type IV and V systems for more than a year. The Board of County Commissioners should request information on the number of private management entities, whether their performance meets county standards, and any other relevant experiences with them for the period from July 1, 1992 to August 31, 1993. 3. Inspection. Staff base their recommendations concerning the frequency of inspections on the "best professional judgment of staff." The program has a significant impact on citizens. The Board of County Commissioners should request better justification and documentation. 4. Definition of Minor Repairs_ During routine inspections, OCHD staff sometimes make minor repairs for no fee. What is a minor repair?. 5. Conventional septic-Systems [481 d 'DEH Type II Systems) The OCHD initialy recommended an inspection schedule for these systems. The Board of County Commissioners directed staff to implement an education program as a first step.,, That has been implemented. Although we have no recommenda-Eons to make at this time about an inspection program for D£H Type II systems, this issue could be raised again by a commissioner or a staff person. Large Complex Systems DEM and DEH These issues will require considerable staff work and Board of County Commissioners discussions, but they should be addressed within the next several months. 1. Location of Large Complex DEM systems. The memorandum of agreement with the state outlines the County^'s inspection role with regard to these large systems. In addition, it may be advisable to develop guidelines to regulate-where these DEM systems are placed in the.county. Staff should prepare a report on the feasibility of implementing provisions in our zoning ordinance or elsewhere for governing the location and use of these systems. -DEH systems should also be considered for this kind of regulation. 2. Public Mana ement._Entities for large DEH_systems. (See item 5 on the second page of the April. 10 memo) We have not found a financially viable plan for creating a public management entity (PME) in orange County., This question needs further study. Note that no DEH Type Vc, Vd or VI systems currently exist in orange County. One alternative is to take some kind of action that would discourage their use here. 525 , a? P 0 +? x ) H 3 ? a? ro 3 0 w ?4 M00 H O N •O a to o Q1 ? ? O U N p >4 0 0 N N 0 R ? r-I •rl H 41 aJ ? ro ro ? > .i mo P0 ro 44 G tr, ss 0 r. 0.N G u• o $4 C4 N ro th +?N0 -P U w? It ro 41 3 ro tn •H 0 H O ro rl ? GI N m? 41 N N u V] zw U) z 0 I I I W z fs. I W ?O M E-4 zw U O a0 H ? za z rz N C? H O W •x a 00 w ?+ o cn w N w 1 zx z >4 >4 z z ?w w E-4 ro a zw 0 Oaz * a a. 0 v a E-4 C? >4 0 ? >4 > z z to u iT G N 4 N 41 W U •Q 41 E--1 1-I N G1 fGd z U 4 G z z N. U z 4 1 Q 1 O O H d) ri aJ -H 0 by 4-? H ?? W. a a0' H ro c L) f< E-f C r ? W 44 ? O w 2: O N a a? 1 a? G 0 G ro N Q1 N .rq 4-) O ? O Q! 41 ns ,-I 0 ' ro G ro 44 O l?4 4-) w O l4 9 N O td ro b ? 41 ? ro 0 .,q W O N ?4 a 4-J -J o 4-4 444 o a? ro •0 0 O U W ro N ? 'C f.r G? G a O G w O 0 0 0 T Ql (a N N ?4 >~ 4) 4J rI G 4-444 E w FE cv ?, -x is -K