Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-14-2010 - 6aORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: December 14, 2010 Action Agenda Item No. 6-a SUBJECT: Orange -Alamance Bounda Line Adjustment Action DEPARTMENT: Multiple Departments PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) Yes ATTACHMENT(S): Orange -Alamance Boundary Line Report 1. Executive Summary (page 5-6) 2. November 29, 2010 Joint Orange and Alamance County Boards of County Commissioners Work session Amendment Information and Map and Table (pages 7- 26) INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank W. Clifton, OC Manager Willie Best, OC Asst Manager John Roberts, OC County Attorney Craig Benedict, OC Planning Director Telephone Number 245-2575 3. A Resolution Agreeing To Deliver a Plat of the Orange -Alamance County Boundary for Incorporation into a 2011 Local Bill that Resolves the Disputed Boundary and Creates Conclusive Boundary (pages 27-28) (Please bring November 29 Work Session Report as base reference ) PURPOSE: To consider the Orange-Alamance boundary Line Report as amended (from November 29, 2010 Joint county work session) and make a recommendation for the 100% resolution of boundary location. BACKGROUND: UPDATE: December 6, 2010: Craig Benedict, Orange County Planning Director, attended the Alamance County Board of County Commissioners meeting in Graham last Monday night, December 6, regarding the Orange Alamance boundary line. The item title was "Orange -Alamance County Line Discussion-Clyde Albright, County Attorney, and Bruce Walker, GIS Manager". There were no materials or written staff recommendations available to the public. Clyde Albright, County Attorney led the presentation. There were PowerPoint slides available and shown as necessary as Bruce Walker, GIS Manager, explained the adjustments suggested from the November 29, 2010 Joint Board of County Commissioners work session. These work session adjustments are noted in this agenda on pages 7 - 26 Below is an abridged summary of the meeting as Craig Benedict understood and reports. He had the opportunity to clarify, upon request of their Board of County Commissioners, certain questions. He acknowledges that at times it was difficult to understand the ebb and flow of discussion but offers the following impressions. (the video of this meeting is available at http://www.aamance-nc.com/acweb-20/acvideo/commissioners/2010-meeting- videos/december-6-2010.html ) 1. What Orange County staff thought were consensus adjustments based on the November 29, 2010 meeting on the Village of the Oaks/Scarlett Oak Lane and the Morrow Mill Road area (both sections) were reported by Alamance County staff as Orange County's additional requests. 2. Alamance County staff commented that Orange County's `9%' request did not meet administrative criteria, although later noted that half of the area met administrative `petition' criteria and that the other half loosely met 2010 Local Bill 1362 criteria Section 7 and 8 related to `unduly burdensome'. 3. It was anecdotally reported that Alamance County staff and elected officials received additional requests after the November 29, 2010 meeting for adjustments and they were concerned of when do you stop. 4. Craig Honeycutt, Alamance County Manager, noted that the Orange County requests `do make sense' and `were reasonable' and there is interest to move forward with 100%. 5. A motion was made by Tom Manning, new Alamance County Board of County Commissioner, to approve the 91 % (i.e. 77% NCGS line and 14% property owner petitions) and the 9% Orange County request if Orange County `indemnifies' adjustments. (Note: This did not seem to include any mention of the work session adjustments) Seconded by William Lashley and approved 4-1 dissenting Tim Sutton. Agenda Background before update: The Executive Summary of the 2010 Orange-Alamance County Boundary Line Report (Attachment 1) of the abstract explain the amendments suggested at the November 29 Joint Work Session. Planning Staff will explain the amendments. A Resolution Agreeing To Deliver a Plat of the Orange -Alamance County Boundary for Incorporation into a 2011 Local Bill that Resolves the Disputed Boundary and Creates Conclusive Boundary explains the action of tonight's meeting. (Update 12/6/10 - to be amended accordingly) The Alamance County Board of Commissioners will hear this subject on December 6, 2010. Staff will report on the outcome of their meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Review of this report does not entail a financial impact beyond the staff time of the manager, attorney, and planning departments with additional review from emergency services, tax administration, and IT/GIS. After Orange Alamance County Board of County Commissioners December meeting, staff will begin to implement the recommendation of Board action and determine with more detail, the associated readjustment to the tax valuation and location of various properties. Survey costs are primarily born by the petitioners and property owners. Orange County is recommending paying for a few existing subdivision boundaries to make emergency services provision clearer. RECOMMENDATION(S): The manager recommends the Orange Board of County Commissioners: Based on their vote and the guidelines of the 2010 Local Bill 1362, the following options exist • Administrative reviews are necessary before December 15, 2010 (Section 7) • Develop consensus on a boundary adjustment 100% or in part for inclusion into 2011 Local Bill. • The 2010 Local Bill does not note that 100% boundary line resolution is necessary only that certain actions are necessary "that involve residents and property located in areas affected by the resurvey". Other areas could remain under current taxing jurisdiction. Option 1: Vote the same as Alamance County Board of County Commissioners 77% NCGS (green) 14% Petitions (blue) Except that: 9% Orange County Recommendation area (orange) is without any interlocal agreement (Note: does not include November 29, 2010 joint consensus adjustments) Option 2: Vote on a subset of the Alamance County Board of County Commissioners 69% NCGS (green) (77% less 8% noted below from work session adjustments) 14% Petitions (blue) 83% Subtotal Hold in Abeyance Two Years existing tax boundaries to remain until addressed by a time certain set in the 2011 Local Bill 9% Orange County recommendation area (orange) 8% Consensus Adjustments of November 29, 2010 joint work session. This would include the Village of the Oaks/Scarlett Oak Lane are and the Howard Miller Subdivisions and east Morrow Mill Subdivisions (red). 17% Subtotal Option 3: Vote the same as Alamance County Board of County Commissioners 77% NCGS (green) 14% Petitions (blue) Except that: 9% Orange County Recommendation area (orange) reverts to the green NCGS straight line (Note: does not include November 29, 2010 joint consensus adjustments) NOTE: Meet with Alamance County elected officials (Chair and Vice-chair) and managers after December 14, 2010 and before the May 15, 2011 Local Bill submittal to determine if there are any options to the proposals above. Recommendations Continued 1. Consider the report and November 29, 2010 amendment thereto 2. Approve the 100% solution: Option 1 or Option 3 or approve the 83% + 17% solution: Option 2 • as noted on Option Drawing 1, 2, and 3 (2012) (respectively matched to the options) and Table 1 (see corresponding color for specific area) • to confirm and adjust the boundary line 3. Proceed with implementation, subsequent to the Boards of County Commissioners December review, to include but not limited to a joint 2011 Local Bill. NOTE: References to drawings, table and appendix refer to the Orange-Alamance Boundary Line Report and the attachments included in this abstract Percentages shown in the abstract and various tables are approximations due to different total lengths of the boundary, rounding, and different recommendations being included in different categories. ATTACHMENT 1 2010 ORANGE-ALAMANCE COUNTY BOUNDARY LINE REPORT Executive Summary In 1849, Alamance County was established from part of Orange County. The original instructions were to go 9 miles west of Hillsborough and create a line north and south. This line was surveyed and 13 survey monuments were set in 1849. Over the years, the line on the ground has been less certain and it has become more of a negotiated settlement of the respective tax offices. There are differences between where county officials believe the line is situated on the ground. With an increase of residential and commercial development along the Orange/Alamance line, it has become increasingly important to be able to show property owners, with certainty, in which county all or portions of their property are situated. Emergency Services, school attendance, tax, voting, police, fire, ABC, and many more county services depend on these boundary lines. The two Boards of County Commissioners have pursued a process established in North Carolina law where the location of a boundary between counties is uncertain. That process and inter-county cooperation can provide a permanent resolution of the location of the Orange- Alamance line. The Orange and Alamance Board of County Commissioners requested that the North Carolina Geodetic Survey (NCGS), an agency of the State of North Carolina, prepare a preliminary survey of the Orange/Alamance County line. The purpose of this undertaking was to research and map the original 1849 Orange-Alamance County line using modern survey methods. The State's efforts did not change the county line, but established a physical location on the ground, which may vary from the lines developed by the tax departments over the years. The NCGS team, in 2008, placed monuments in the ground to mark critical points along their surveyed line. After joint review of this relatively straight NCGS line, the county commissioners from both counties gave staff direction to allow adjustment to lessen the impact of the shift in the line to affected homeowners and businesses. Therein, a 2010 Local Bill 1362 (Session Law 2010-61) as well as, jointly established petition criteria created an opportunity for adjustment to the line for the majority of homeowners and businesses in close proximity to the line. This report outlines the findings of the petition criteria and slightly differing recommendations of staff. This report suggests that a 2011 Local Bill could be submitted next year that would include three types of boundary line proposals that would resolve 100% of the uncertainty. Both Staffs are in agreement with 91 % of the line with Orange County recommending a change in 9% of the line based on planning, emergency services, safety issues, and local bill criteria that they will be presenting on November 29th. Alamance County staff is willing to support the modifications to the criteria for this 9% in order to move this process forward. Please note however, the line is not finalized and will not be finalized until both Boards receive and consider input and make a final decision by joint adoption and incorporation into a proposed 2011 Local Bill on this matter. This meeting is intended to garner direction and consensus on the approach to resolving the uncertainty of the boundary line so that the formal process can continue in December in earnest with each individual Board, because 2010 Local Bill 1362, approved this summer, gives us little time to resolve this matter. After both county boards approval property owners and county departments would begin the final survey and implement various aspects of the transition consistent with the previous 2010 and upcoming 2011 Local Bill that would become effective and create a new undisputed boundary line January 1, 2012. To date, four public information meetings have been held regarding the Orange-Alamance county line. Citizens were notified and given the opportunity to ask questions and learn about the issues and review material in person and on the web. This boundary line issue has surfaced over the years but without resolve and with increasing difficulty in resolution. This opportunity to resolve 100% of the line is due to the collaboration among county's elected officials, staff, City of Mebane, and valuable input from the public. Postscript -This executive summary was part of the November 29, 2010 report. During this meeting public comment was received, commissioners deliberated and some minor amendments were suggested. Attachment 2 November 29, 2010 Joint Orange and Alamance Boards of County Commissioners Work Session Adjustments A joint work session of the Orange and Alamance Boards of County Commissioners was held on November 29, 2010. Staff presentations were made, the public provided the comment and the Boards of County Commissioners deliberated on the report and information. The overall recommendation in the report was confirmed to: 1. accept the NCGS line (approximately 70%) 2. accept the petitions to adjust the boundary (approximately 14%) 3. accept the Orange County boundary line adjustments based on administrative and local bill criteria (approximately 9%) During the meeting and based on comments from the public and Boards of County Commissioners, a fourth set of adjustments were suggested from a legislative perspective. This fourth adjustment category will be titled "November 29, 2010 Boards of County Commissioners Work Session Adjustments". Three areas were the focus of discussion and adjustment: 4.a. Village of the Oaks subdivision Scarlet Oak Lane and b. Morrow Mill Road area 1. Specific public input on the Howard/Miller subdivision and 2. Orange County Board of County Commissioners comments on other small subdivisions in proximity with similar `historic' conditions of platting, schools, and emergency and fire services. The adjustment suggested would use Morrow Mitl Road as a clear county line boundary. (See map 4.b.2) This last subsection of Morrow Mill Road area was asked to be researched to determine if improved public health, safety, and welfare, and historic clarity and experiences that can be achieved. Research also shows that there were letters to Board of County Commissioners requesting this general adjustment similar to that of the Howard/Miller Subdivision. These Morrow Mill Road east side subdivisions would be split by the NCGS line otherwise which would create partial school district situations and loss of historic neighborhood character. (See letter from William and Alicia Bettman and Lindsey Fass Graham to Board of County Commissioners dated 9/10/10. They attended the public hearing but did not speak ) c. Collington Farms, Mr. Hafenmeier spoke of his lack of choice in the determination of his preference for his lot to be wholly Alamance County, this minor adjustment can be made These four sub-areas of this fourth category of boundary line adjustment area are mapped out separately and listed on the table 1 so a vote can be specific. Because these areas are rural, the line adjustment linear foot is approximately 10% 4.a Village of the Oaks, 1 %. Cost: Orange County/Alamance County 4.b.1 Morrow Mill Road Area south side- Howard/Miller, 5%. Cost: Orange County/Alamance County 4.b.2 Morrow Mill Road Area east side, 4%. Cost: Orange County/Alamance County? 4.c Collington Farms Hafenmeier Property Attachment 2 November 29, 2010 Joint Orange and Alamance Boards of County Commissioners Work Session Adjustments Category Four Justification Criteria Village of the Oaks and Morrow Mill Area Both Areas: • All properties can be served with better clarity by emergency services. • Entire streets serve both sides of road. • Multiple requests letters received. • Less split properties. Village of the Oaks (Scarlet Oak Lane)(from Orange County to Alamance County): Morrow Mill Road Area (from Alamance County to Orange County): • White Cross Orange County Fire Department is closer than Alamance County services for all properties. • All properties historically Orange County. • All platted pursuant to subdivision regulations and recorded in Orange County only. • All building and environmental health permits in Orange County. • No change to school district. • Out of county school enrollment forms eliminated. • All properties east of Morrow Mill Road for area 4.b.2. • Dividing line is primarily Morrow Mill Road Boundary !dine Summary (Option 1 ) s Approve 100% which includes 91 % NCGS and Petitioned areas an % Oc Recommendation without agreement. This cti®n does not include any of the November 29, 2010 work session adjustments a r x. % of the green NCGS line). q t i i OC Staff(9%) N 1 inch=2.7 miles NCGS (77%) 0 1 2PVes Petitioned (14%) Orange County Planning and Inspections Department GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson December 09,2010 Boundary Lino Summary (Option 11 Approves 83x® green and blue line and Holds in Abeyanc l7% orange and red line. Nov. 29 Meeting Adjustments(8%) N 1 inch=2.7 miles OC Staff(9%) 0 t z NCGS (69%) Miles Petitioned (14%) Orange County Planning and Inspections Department GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson December 09,2010 Boundary Line Summary (Option 3) 13 N 1 inch=2.7 miles NCGS(86%) 0 1 z ® fWles Petitioned (14%) a ® Orange County Planning and Inspections Department GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson December 09,2010 15 Orange-Alamance Boundary Line Summa of NCGS and AdWstment Areas A B C D H Linear %of Total Map ID Locations Feet Line** Paid By 1 NCGS 92,085 69 2 Eliza Lane 1,718 1 OC 3 Mill Creek 938 1 Owners 4a Northwest 9th St. 6,151 5 Owners 4b Northwest 9th St. 434 0 OC 5 Tan er/Mebane 8540 LLC 2,5321 2 Propertv Owners Original/Current 6 a Collin ton Farms 1,146 1 Property Owners Original/Current 6 b Collin ton Farms 546 0 Property Owners BDG Arlington Assoc. LLC Arlington Subdivision Area 7 (south of Collington Farms) 3,2031 2 Current Property Owner 8 Village of the Oaks 2,323 2 OC 9 Cane Creek Area 3,975 3 OC/AC 10.1 - 10.8 Miscellaneous 4,933 4 roperty Owner 4a.1 * Scarlet Oak Lane 1,252 1 OC/AC 4b.1 * South of Morrow Mill Rd 5,998 5 OC/AC 4b.2* East of Morrow Mill Rd 5,361 4 OC/AC Total 132,811 100 * Based on the Nov. 29, 2010 Joint Meeting **% of Total Line are approximations Map �7 -� - County Line o Historical Map Then and Now 20 0 2012 4a.I Current Taxing Status till 0 0 - , - - -- - � I i A132 A133 _ 'I A133 J 1 A132 I A135 A133 1 0-62-3 132 A135 0-62-3 A131 A1351 i0=62-3 A134 y'i A131 , A134 .µ{ 131 ',iA134i A11B A73 s A13D - - 0 50 1 - ' A119 '�i A730_ ` y .-' s- l' _ 0-504 .0 CO, A119 A130 d I A73 A122 A129 r a A122 A121 ' A122' _1 A129 I I7�y f 0-49 1 .�`G A128i 0-49-1 ®'' '` A121 ®. A128 A120 ®, N A121, 1 A128 0-49-L' � �'+.� A120 ' �. A127. 0-60-1 �� A120 m. �0 73 A127 A723 A127 - � '1P \ A123 0601 A126 'f �'. k 0-60-1 - 91 f(1', IA123 rA126 , A125 it 059-1 1zA126 r� E`-A125 !059-1 cy ;A72 A124 - N 1 f 0-61 1 .. �� A72 A124 . - -- ,0-227-4 A72 N - � �I -- 0 61 1 ® I A198 ,0.58-3 � _ � _ _ -227=4': - .- A118 A106 T{'I09VIR® -... � - 6-.- --- '� - i0-58-3 - f1 0-58 3 _ --YIiOM R® 0 5F-10M R®_ _ 106 M A107 0_57-1 °� 7t, N. a e 0-57-1 A110 A112 A117 A2 �ry'•, 110 �' GLj A107 `�' A117 A2. 95 ® 0-57-1 11 a110 Aid21 ® �L P. A112, °I `A117,'1. AI 0�, 1 D } ®`9 N ® ® ® A116 Q�' S, j' r... ;U A1161;, -a A111 SCgR 0-46-1 A109 N C 1 '" S A11 A114 ARCS ,9 56.1 t 0-56.1 .�. C R�114 ®q�< .. 0 n ' _ "105 A109 A114 rO k� N 109 A At _ _ A113 A115 A115 A108 A196 '0'-54=1 Ir - .� 113 1f' A108 A196 A104 - A115 A104 0-54-i J - A108, A1961 0.54.1 0-55-3 Irk' i (A681. A71Z . �+�kY x r Line Modification Based on Boundary Based on OC N Village ®f the Oaks/ °�-35 Nov 29, 2010 Joint Meeting Staff Recommendation o 200 400 ®Feet Proposed NCGS Line Taxed byAlamance Scarlet Oak Lane Boundary Based on Property Owner Petitions Taxed by Orange (Based on Nov.29,2010 Joint Meeting) GIISMapPre°paredbyB�Ca'o�mb Department 0-40-1 0-40-1 l 0 41-3 j 0-41-3 M � k,� - 0-16-4 f-; 0.39.3 0-10-4 �' 0-39-3 0-16-4 0-39-3 i IF ' 0-15-3 0-15-3 0-15-3i I 0.9 4 0-9-4 0-9-4 - - - 0-1-0 - - I! ' 0-44-3 0-44-3 0-44-3 0-8-4 0-8-4 ,�y t '•s 7 3 0 1 Dine Modification Based on Boundary Based on OC N 1 inch=550 feet Nov 29, 2010 Joint Meeting Staff recommendation South of MOrr®w Mill Rd. o zoo 4 ®Feet Proposed NCGS Line Taxed byAlamance Howard/Miller Area (Based on Nov.29,2010 Joint Meeting) Orange Cee.ty Piero xpd ln,pecheos Department Boundary Based on Property Owner Petitions Taxed by Orange GIS Map Prtpared by Ban C-pp November 30,2010 Q 2� 4b.2 Gurrent Taxing Slatus, 77-7- #,L- ioll"awo-eel" A66. 0-46-1 A66 0-4fi-1 0-38-4 0-13-4 0-36-1 0-38-4 ,J 0-33-4 0.33.4 0-35-4 0.35-4 0-37-1 0-34-4 0-14-4 i C 0-32-3 0-32-3 A641 ;A63i �A64y _ jA631 _ 0-294 0-29-4 rA65; i A651 0-28-4 0-30-4 0.311 0-28-4 '0-30-4 0-31-1 _.H�4RVEST _._. A61 /A61i HARVEST=L^N- LN 0-26-3) 9=7t �� 0-26-3 0-12-4 0-23-4. 0-24-4 0'12 4,0� 0-23 4 0-24-4 .- 0-2274 -- Sp 0-25-3 �p/NGFta�ll o-zz-a 0-25-3 A62 R®_ SPRING FARM RD A6 �l�SPRING'F' R® A59 0-10-4 I O ®�' 0-10-4 0-11-4' 0-21-4 �V (A59` 1011=41� 0-21-4 �I 0-27-3 NN o-27-3 0-20-4 o�O` ®YOr�wN ROB 020.4 L®VDPOwN Rp. v. it 0-43-3 0-43-3 0184 P i0-42-3 _ 018-4 t0-42-3 .. WNDERSO/y F\E�� Rp, f RSON F RD NFN��RSON F RD RD MW 0-1941 — N�yE /ELD` 0-19-4 IE �A60� 0-17-1 (A60) 0-17-1 0.41-3 0-41-3 =0411-1 i 0-40-1 016-4 Line Modification Based on Boundary Based on OC Nov 29, 2010 Joint Meeting Staff - N i md,=ssoreei ff Recommendation ®F Proposed NCGS Line Taxed by Alarnance East ®f Morrow Mill Rd. ,; ° ee (Based on Nov.29,2010 Joint Meeting) Boundary Based on Property Owner Petitions j Taxed by Orange O—g, -,ty dbyiM U ooROVemD,p 2010 aIC 4c Petition Response Proposal Staff Recommendation 4c.3 e 'x191; /A192 A191 A192 A I A' 0-2284 0-229.4, I' 10.228-4 0-228.4 ,0,229-4 0.229-4 A 0-230-4 �. A r0-230-4 0-230 4 _ - 0-131-1 (0=1314 II ®CCIPy(;TpN®� epCCIN%] ®R C �LIN ;TDN D �i R A q - 1 0-232-4 0-231-4 0-130-1 0-232-4 0-231-4. 0-130-1 0-232-4 ,0-231-4—0-130.1 f" A A i A A 0-129°7 ,A `A 0-129-1 0.129-1 0-234-4 I� - 0-233-4 0-233-4. I �0-233-4 0-234;4 -- I CA(0) G,c '0-127-3 0-127-3I _TPA �� 0-127-3.i 00" 1 P 1'1 A 0-132-1 :A 0-132-1 0-132-1 0-240-1 0-240-1 9-zoo-1 0-235-4 0,-235-4 - 0-235-4 A A A A i A'0-241-1 A,0-241'11 024111. I A A I 0-236-4 0-236-4 0-236-4 I �J I HA`VVARDS LN H`A`M1ARD$jLNI b yVVARDSLNI 0-242-3 - 0-242-3 - -- 0-242-3 Line Modification Based on Boundary Based on®C Nov 29, 2010 Joint Meeting ® Staff Recommendation """ Hafenmaier Property ° 5D ®reef - Proposed NCGS Line Taxed by Alamance Collington Farms Subdivision (Based on Nov.29,2010 Joint Meeting) Boundary Based on Property Owner Petitions Taxed by Orange Dupu County yBrinMrsonDenna0ep06,201 GIS Nap Prepa,ed by Brian Carson Decembar O6,2010 Attachment 3 ORANGE AND ALAMANCE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS A RESOLUTION AGREEING TO DELIVER A PLAT OF THE ORANGE-ALAMANCE COUNTY BOUNDARY FOR INCORPORATION INTO A 2011 LOCAL BILL THAT RESOLVES THE DISPUTED BOUNDARY AND CREATES CONCLUSIVE BOUNDARY WHEREAS, the boundaries of Orange County were established by act of the Colonial General Assembly in 1752, Orange County being "formed" from portions of Bladen, Granville, and Johnston counties; and WHEREAS, the boundary between Orange and Alamance counties was "farmed" by survey commissioned by an Act of the General Assembly of North Carolina, which Act was adopted during the Session of 1848 and 1849 (hereafter "the Act") at the time Alamance County was formed; and WHEREAS, the boundary established by the Act reties on numerous geographic or landmark references that, while perhaps useful and adequate then, are insufficient now to demarcate where the boundary between Alamance County and Orange County lies; and WHEREAS, over the past 161 years various agreements and arrangements were made by and between the Alamance County and Orange County tax offices which have resulted in inconsistent determinations between Alamance County and Orange County as to the situs of specific parcels of land in both Alamance County and Orange County; said inconsistencies being heightened by the ever increasing residential and commercial development in proximity to the Alamance County -Orange County boundary line; and WHEREAS, both Alamance County and Orange County agreed by resolutions adopted on December 17, 2007 and January 15, 2008, respectively, to observe North Carolina General Statute 153A-18 in requesting that the North Carolina Geodetic Survey (NCGS) perform a preliminary survey and present a proposed map of the county boundary to both Orange and Alamance Counties; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2008, NCGS staff presented to the staffs of Alamance County and Orange County ten points determined through extensive field and office research of the 1849 survey, as well as the county boundary as depicted on the USGS quadrant maps, which points and boundary NCGS deem to reflect the 1849 survey; and WHEREAS, the Alamance County Board of Commissioners agreed, by vote on Apri121, 2008, to approve authorizing NCGS to conduct the preliminary survey and the placing of monuments by the NCGS; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners agreed, by vote on May 20, 2008, to approve authorizing NCGS to conduct the preliminary survey and the placing of monuments by the NCGS; and WHEREAS, Orange County and Alamance recognize that based on previous experiences in resolving other ambiguous boundary lines, issues affecting residents and property owners in proximity to the Orange County-Alamance County boundary line will need to be acknowledged and considered in reaching a final determination as to the location of the boundary line; WHEREAS„ in order to accomplish the aforementioned consideration of existing conditions, a series of public outreach and joint Boards of County Commissioners work sessions meeting over three years were held to create a dialogue and seek input and develop alternatives. Attachment 3 WHEREAS, to create an orderly process a 2010 Local Bill 1362 (Session Law 2010-61) was approved to set parameters of boundary line adjustment and set forth future implementation steps. WHEREAS, after due consideration and deliberation by both Boards of County Commissioners has produced a common agreement to the location of a proposed new line as illustrated in Map 1, noting that the vast majority of the line is based on the NCGS work. WHEREAS, Map 1 will be further developed into a new boundary description that meets the criteria of the state's office of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)1 North Carolina Geodetic Survey (NCGS) section for incorporation into a bill to be submitted for the 2011 session to become effective, if approved, on January 1, 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orange County and Alamance County Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve portions of the NCGS line from 2008 and all changes depicted on Map 1. 2. Proceed to survey and describe new boundary consistent with state rules 3. Proceed towards the development of a 2011 Local Bill which would create a new boundary and 4. Upon adoption of the boundary line by the North Carolina General Assembly pursuant to the North Carolina Constitution, record the map showing boundaries and monuments of the USGS and NC State Plane Coordinate System with the Office of the Register of Deeds of both counties and in the Secretary of State office. The map shall contain a reference to the date of each resolution of ratification and to the page in the minutes of each Board of County Commissioners whet`e the resolution map be found. 5. Upon formal adoption by the North Carolina General Assembly, the map is conclusive as to the location of the boundary. This Resolution takes effect immediately. Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by Commissioner ,the foregoing resolution was adopted this the 20th day of May, 2008. I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the Minute Book of the Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this_day of 2008. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners I, ,Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Alamance, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the Minute Book of the Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this_day of 2008. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners