HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-17-2011- 8aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 17, 2011
Action Agenda
Item No. 8 - a
SUBJECT: Solid Waste — Rogers Road Community
DEPARTMENT: Solid Waste Management PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. County Map - Historic Rogers Road
Planning Area
B. 10 -19 -95 Recommendations to The
Landfill Owners Group
C. 1997 Report of the Landfill Owners
Group /Landfill Neighborhood
Working Group "Recommendations"
D. 5 -1 -08 Rogers Road Community Task
Force — Recommendations
E. 8 -18 -09 Rogers Road Area: Cross -
Reference of Town and County Task
Force Reports
F. 2 -8 -11 OWASA Sewer Extension
Estimates — Rogers Road Area
G. 4 -25 -11 Estimated Tonnage Solid
Waste Delivered to Landfill by Source
FY 2009 -10
PURPOSE: To review and consider:
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Frank Clifton, County Manager, 245-
2300
Gayle Wilson, Solid waste Management
Director, 968 -2885
Michael Talbert, Interim Assistant
County Manager, 245 -2153
A plan for the remediation of the impact of the landfill operations on the Rogers Road
community:
1. Creation of an oversight Committee to make recommendations to the Board.
2. Plan of action approved by the Board.
3. Funding Sources for Remediation.
Three options for scheduling the closure the Orange County Landfill.
BACKGROUND: Beginning in 1972 with the initial opening of the County landfill and extending
to the present, the expected life of the landfill has evolved. In 1989 the expected life of the
landfill was projected to be through 1997.
Rogers Road Neighborhood
On August 18, 2009 the Board received Attachment E, "Rogers Road Area: Cross Reference of
Town and County Task Force Reports. This agenda item abstract summarizes the results from
the Rogers Road Small Area Plan Task Force and the County Historic Rogers Road Community
Enhancement Plan Task Force reports from 2009, but did not recommend that the County take
any action. These two plans are the most recent in a series of committees, task force and
plans completed since the landfill opened in 1972. A number of local government initiatives
have been implemented to improve the quality of life in the Rogers Road Community and they
are as follows:
1. The Solid Waste fund paid $650,000 to extend public water service by the Orange Water
and Sewer Authority (OWASA) to the Rogers Road area. As of July 2010, water was
available to 166 parcels and 71 have connected.
2. Solid Waste has installed gas flares to reduce odors. A landfill gas to energy project
(Orange County and UNC) will be completed within the year. The project will further
reduce air odor problems, provide a long -term renewable energy source to UNC reducing
dependence on increasingly expensive fossil fuels, and reduce carbon emissions.
3. Town of Chapel Hill initiated bus service on Rogers Road.
4. Solid Waste has initiated a no -fault well policy to deal with failing drinking water wells
remaining in the adjoining neighborhoods.
Resolution proposed by Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA)
On April, 5, 2011 the Board received numerous public comments regarding the three options
presented to extend the life of the landfill. RENA presented a resolution requesting that the
Board take actions on behalf of the Rogers Road Community.
1. Immediately designate $2.50 per ton or 5% of the landfill tipping fee to fund remediation
for the Rogers Road Community, proceeds to be paid in full to RENA, who is the
designated agent for this historic community.
2. Set a County priority to seek alternative methods of waste disposal in order to close the
landfill as soon as possible but not beyond 2016.
Landfill Gas to Energy Project
This Landfill Gas to Energy Project is not yet operational and therefore difficult to project the
impact on Solid Waste Fund. This issue will be revisited at a later date.
Landfill Operations
There are numerous variables involved with the continually changing capacity expectations and
projections. Disposal volumes have varied over the past 40 years. Changes in regulations,
changes in operational best management practices, equipment and techniques, effectiveness
of recycling and waste reduction programs, public environmental knowledge and awareness,
state and local bans, increasing tipping fees, evolving regional disposal options, etc. have all
contributed to extending the life of the facility. There is difficulty with predicting the landfill
biodegradation process at work that varies due to the types of waste, moisture content, age of
waste, compaction, etc. Moving forward there are fewer opportunities to significantly extend the
life of the facility as the above variables will have a diminishing impact.
Upon the hiring a new engineering consultant (HDR Engineering, Inc.) last summer, County
staff asked that the landfill facility be given a thorough evaluation to prepare for facility closure
and any final possibilities for obtaining further capacity, without expansion of the facility
footprint. Staff recommended extending landfill life to approximately January 2017. The Board
requested additional information concerning a plan for the remediation of the impact of landfill
operations on the Rogers Road community.
On April, 5, 2011 the concept of instituting a tipping fee surcharge with the intent of generating
funds over the remaining life of the landfill for neighborhood improvements was discussed.
Within life remaining in the Orange County Landfill, there is limited time to fund meaningful
reserves for remediation. Currently the FY 2011/12 projection of municipal solid waste tonnage
is 48,000 tons per year. This means that each dollar on the tipping fee would generate about
$48,000 annually. The County Manager recommends a tipping fee surcharge of $5.00 per ton.
This recommended increase would generate $240,000 in the first year to be reserved for
neighborhood improvements. To immediately fund reserves for neighborhood improvements,
an initial contribution of $750,000 is recommended to be appropriated from the Solid Waste
Fund Balance. This would bring the reserve for neighborhood improvements balance to
$990,000 as of June 30, 2012. Incremental annual increases in the tipping fee surcharge of $2
per ton per year would generate total revenues shown below.
Projected Revenues from an increasing Tipping Fee Surcharge
Fiscal Year
Tipping
Fee
Surcharge
Annual Revenue
Total Revenues
Fund Balance Appropriation
$750,000
$750,000
2011/2012
$5.00
$240,000
$990,000
201212013
$7.00
$336,000
$1,326,000
201312014
$9.00
$432,000
$1,758,000
2014/2015
$11.00
$528,000
$2,286,000
Option 1 close 111/2016
$11.00
$264,000
$2,550,000
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The financial impact of extending landfill capacity could be considerable
for Orange County and the Interlocal Agreement partners (as well as other users). The landfill
is currently projected to reach capacity about June 30, 2013. Option 1 would generate about
$0.9 million of additional funds that could be reserved for closure /post closure costs and delay
closure over current projections and permit authority by about 2.5 years. Option 2 would
generate about $1.25 million of additional funds that could be reserved for closure/ post closure
costs and closure for about 3.5 years. Option 3 would generate about $1.6 million of additional
funds that could be used for closure/ post closure costs and delay closure for about 4.5 years.
The Landfill tipping fee surcharge could generate $1,800,000 over five years. Combined with
the $750,000 initial contribution from the Solid Waste Fund Balance, total revenues of
$2,550,000 could be established for the Rogers Road Remediation Reserve Fund.
The extension of time provides an opportunity to build reserves from a tipping fee surcharge as
outlined in the Background. Additionally, extension of landfill life would delay incurring the
additional expenses by all Interlocal Agreement partners related to the hauling of waste to the
City of Durham Transfer Station (undetermined but substantial).
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board provide guidance to staff
with regard to the staff proposal related landfill capacity issues.
Provide guidance to staff on a plan for the Remediation of the Historic Rogers Road
Community including but not limited to the following elements:
4
1. Establish a Rogers Road Over -Sight Committee to advise and make recommendations
to the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
2. Appoint an eight (8) member Over -Sight Committee as follows; (3) members from the
Towns, (3) members from the Rogers Road Community, (1) member from the County,
and (1) member from OWASA.
3. Empower the Over -Sight Committee to accomplish the following:
a) Define the boundaries of the Rogers Road Community.
b) Identify remediation needs in the Rogers Road Community that are related to the
operation of the Orange County Landfill since 1972.
c) Prioritize needs in the Rogers Road Community that are related to the operation
of the Orange County Landfill since 1972 achievable within available funding
limits.
d) Make recommendations to the Board
4. Beginning July 1, 2011, establish a $5.00 tipping fee surcharge that incrementally
increases each fiscal year by a minimum $2 per ton as long and the landfill is operational
to fund a Solid Waste Rogers Road Remediation Reserve Fund. Funds will be
maintained in the Solid Waste Fund and used for remediation of the Rogers Road
Community as directed by the Board.
5. Effective July 1, 2011, appropriate $750,000 from the Solid Waste Fund Balance to
Establish a Rogers Road Remediation Reserve Fund.
Other Issues /Concerns:
1. Those representing the Rogers Road Community (RENA) and others have made
numerous requests and put forth a variety of service demands that may not have any
direct or indirect relationship to the landfill or its location. Not all of those requests can
be linked to the landfill or the proposed Remediation Reserve Fund (regardless of the
merit of those requests otherwise).
It is intended as noted above that some thought and acceptance be developed toward a
`priority list' of actions for which the Remediation Reserve Fund be specifically dedicated
to finance. The legality of some uses proposed by RENA and others could lead to
successful challenges that cause delays to implementing important improvements.
A clear, concise list of priorities should be a first step to action.
Since this area clearly lies within or next to the municipal boundaries of the Towns of
Chapel Hill and Carrboro, it would seem reasonable both towns might extend additional
resources to address needs not directly /indirectly attributed to the landfill's location.
Previous studies suggest that the direct involvement of the municipalities will be essential
to success. (Municipal matching funds could be used to meet specific demands,)
2. The Board of Commissioners has full authority to close the landfill at `its' option.
Extending the landfill's closure date allows the accumulation of financial resources to
address some but not all needs within the Rogers Road area.
It is suggested the Board of Commissioners clearly declare a closure date to finally
resolve the issue of how long the landfill remains open. At least a six -month notice
needs to be provided all users. If desired the landfill could be closed as early as the end
of 2011.
E
3. There may be alternative disposal methods available for solid waste management at
some future date. Regardless of technology, those alternative methods will come at a
higher cost AND still involve the transport of large volumes of waste to a specific location.
This will remain a county -wide issue BUT not solely a county government problem.
Legitimate, forthright discussions need to occur involving the disposal of municipal solid
waste. Method to be selected, how to fund the associated costs and where to place
facilities remain to be properly addressed. The process should be transparent but
focused. NO neighborhood, urban or rural, wants to host such a facility. Addressing
those localized concerns will be a difficult and troubling task.
4. Recycling remains a high priority in Orange County. The County has taken the lead role
in providing these services county -wide. The County must continue to focus on
efficiencies in both the fixed drop -off locations and curbside service elements of this
program. Automation and compaction of recyclables will help contain costs BUT those
costs will increase.
Recycling also includes debris and yard waste services along with demolition waste
disposal. Those residing in the Rogers /Eubanks Road area should recognize and
understand that Eubanks Road will remain home to the County's demolition debris
disposal efforts and solid waste equipment storage and maintenance functions long after
the municipal solid waste landfill closure.
There are no current plans to relocate that facility or site a new similar facility elsewhere
in Orange County for the foreseeable future.
5. Summarizing: Extending the lifespan current municipal solid waste landfill can provide a
revenue stream to address some but not all Rogers Road area needs. Determining what
needs are addressed is a role for community /government collaboration but the final
decision and responsibility for action rests with the Board of Commissioners in
conjunction with municipal cooperation. Moving forward will bring some closure to many
long standing issues (besides just the landfill). It will not resolve or address all
community concerns or desired outcomes. Those goals will require on -going efforts and
commitments among all of those with a vested interest in Orange County's future.
MAN
At
miff <��1��� �1
is ♦� �, , � �i I�,l-yyc a ..R��/�"' � �, .
Rai ►s'' :, `�� '' :� I lank
�j�fj'�im F .
* At W.-
IIik�.�►._ i� �•
Attachment B
October 19, 1995
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE LANDFILL OWNERS GROUP
recommend that the Landfill Owner's Group recommend that the
_ree governing bodies (Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro)
;rchase the Neville tract under the following three conditions:
Establish a Monitoring Group to participate in the
environmental assessment and Special Use Permit (SUP)
application processes. The Monitoring Group should be
composed of the citizens who participated in the development
of these recommendations (representatives of the Nunn family,
representatives of the Northwest Chapel Hill Neighborhood
Association) at a minimum, plus other affected citizens as
needed, and technical resource people identified by the
citizens to assist them in understanding the technical
discussions and to supplement the expertise of the SUP
applicant's consultant.
2. Generate through the environmental assessment and special use
permit application process, with the continuing good faith
participation of the citizens and governments who participated
in the development of these recommendations, the information
and decisions needed to resolve the following 22 issues. The
group developing these recommendations believes that it
cannot resolve these 22 issues without further technical
information and informed discussions based on that
information.
3. The above- mentioned environmental assessment will be performed
in conjunction with development of the above- mentioned special
use permit and will include a description of the proposed
actions, identification of their potential environmental
impacts, strategies to minimize and mitigate potential impacts
on the environment and resources, and consideration of short -
term and long -te=m benefits and effects of the project.
We recommend that these three conditions be addressed prior to the
beginning of any operations on either the Greene or Neville tracts
for acquiring landfill daily cover.
We recommend that all of the conditions below be addressed and an
attempt made to resolve them by the three governing bodies within
the guidelines of this document.
We recognize that it will be easier to reach agreement on some
issues than on others, and so have separated these unresolved
issues into two groups to facilitate resolution:
"Easy Issues for onsensus"
1. Plans for protecting and monitoring water quality in the areas
8
of the Neville and Greene tracts.
2. Should any contamination or problems surface in regard to
environmental damage to soil and water, the governments shall
provide solutions to those problems (i.e., providing these
areas with water a government expense).
3. Plans for creating appropriate buffers that will minimize the
effects of the soil removal operations on , adjoining
landowners.
4. Future use of the properties by landowners over the next
twenty years if the properties are under the management. of
local governments. This should include the necessary
guarantees that stipulate that these sites will not be used
for landfills or supplements to any landfills either directly
or indirectly.
S. A written guarantee of no blasting.
6. A clear description of the process to be used for dirt
removal, including:
- when and how long (number of years, hours of operation,
etc.),
-where (including buffer, design of site),
- how
7. Any and all guarantees and agreements be legally enforceable.
8. 'A plan for - future use of the Neville and Greene tracts be
developed that is environmentally sound and prohibits use for
any type of dumping or storage.
9. No utility roads to the Greene tract be developed unless part
of the future use master plan.
10. The optimal solution to the soil deficit problem will be found
by utilizing either the Neville Tract or-the Greene Tract.
The following principles.for selecting an area for obtaining
soil within the Neville /Greene tracts will be used by the
Landfill Owner's Group in developing the special use permit
to be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill:
- Select area that minimizes removal of "significant"
hardwood trees.
- Select area which will allow utilization of modern
erosion control techniques to .. vent. s:tormwater
problems.
11. Non - monetary alternative for mitigating potential impacts on
property contiguous to the current landfill and Neville
Properties will be considered by the LOG, including:
- Enhanced dust control measures.
- Ensuring that the Neville /Greene tracts will not be
utilized in the future to process or dispose of solid
waste.
"Issues Needing SicMif ;ca= Disc ion"
12. Begin immediately stockpiling any possible sources of dirt
now. Can any available dirt from commercial and /or
residential construction be stockpiled? Could the Johnson
tract (recently logged) be used to stockpile dirt?
13. Is there a 55- acre "land locked" tract behind UPS and the
park- and -ride lot that could be used for obtaining dirt?
14. Can a survey and description of the oak trees be conducted and
published so that everyone will know what's being lost (e.g.,
age of oaks, plans to replant and length of time to grow)? In
a broader sense, could a complete assessment of what is
actually going-to be destroyed be prepared (history of land,
streams, trees, topography, and any other nontangible
variables) and published?
15. A written report from an environmental impact study on the
removal of soil from Neville and Greene tracts.
16. Conduct complete environmental pre - measures of possible
effects of dirt removal. Specifically, an independent
analysis of current environmental conditions before any dirt
is removed. Facts to assess include but are not limited to:
- noise and vibration
- dust
- water run -off patterns and volume
- well water quality
- wildlife
17. A periodic independent assessment of environmental factors
(e.g., yearly ?) once the dirt removal process begins.
18. A process to remedy any environmental damages) to neighboring
properties. A compensation and restoration process be
developed in the event that damage occurs.
19. The following principles for selecting an area for obtaining
soil within the Neville /Greene tracts will be used by the
Landfill Owner's Group in developing. the. Special Use Permit
,SUP) to be submitted to the Town of Chapel•Hill:
Select area that minimizes the number of-residences
0
10
affected.(noise, dust, aesthetics, etc.).
- Select area, that minimizes energy expenditure (haul
distance).
20. Non - monetary alternatives for mitigating potential impacts on
property contiguous to the current landfill and Neville
Properties will be considered by.the LOG, including:
- Alternative daily cover usage to reduce the need for
soil and to minimize odors.
Extending water lines to residences if the landfill
causes chemical or biological contamination to drinking
water.
21. A state certified appraiser be hired by the authorities
involved to assess the "non- landfill" per -acre value of the
Nunn tract and any other affected areas adjoining the proposed
sites. A per -acre compensation amount to be paid by the
governments to the adjoining landowners shall be determined by
subtracting the per -acre value of Neville tract (determined by
the purchase price) from the appraised Per -acre value of
these lands (without the landfill), the difference being fair
compensation for value loss due to past, present and future
impacts that the landfill has caused to the Nunns and others.
22. Options for mitigating potential impacts on property
contiguous to the current landfill and Neville properties are:
Purchase tracts, voluntarily offered, on a fee simple
basis. Payment to be based on fair market value,
determined by standard governmental procedures, plus a
"relocation consideration" for tracts with residences.
- Purchase easements from neighboring residents to ensure
maintenance of a buffer (e.g., for noise abatement) and
a ,relocation consideration" for affected residents.
Signatures of group members participating. in the discussions which
generated these consensus recommendations:
WA
Names of group members participating in the discussions which
generated these consensus recommendations: Mrs. Gertrude Nunn,
Judy Nunn Snipes, Roger Snipes, Ashley Nunn, Irving Nunn, Larry
Reid, George Griffin, Joyce Brown, Jacquie Gist, Don Willhoit.
11
12
Attachment C
Report of the Landfill Owners Group/Landfill Neighbors 'Working Group
The following recommendations of this Working Group should be incorporated into the
inter -local agreement transferring ownership and operation of the Orange Regional
Landfill to Orange County. The recommendations should be incorporated in such a way
as to be legally binding on the signatories to the inter -local agreement.
In no way should these recommendations be interpreted as compensation for siting of a
future landfill in the Eubanks Road area -- rather they are solely meant to address the
compensation of neighbors for having lived near the current landfill.
Recommendations for Improvements around the Orange Regional Landfill
t.
1. The Working Group recommends that water and sewer mains be extended to provide
service to the area along the entire length of Rogers Road; Millhouse Road from Eubanks
Road to New Jericho Road; and serving households on other side streets off these main
roads (including, but not limited to, Purefoy Drive, Rusch Road, Priscilla Lane, Sandberg
Lane, Meadow Rug. Court,.Manor Drive, Manor Court, and Blackwood Mountain Road).
Theso improvements should be provided by the completion of-the 2002 -2003 fiscal year.
The costs of providing these improvements should be paid for by landfill funds to the
extent allowed by North Carolina law. The remaining costs of these improvements
should be divided among the owners of the Orange Regional Landfill on the same basis
as their ownership (i.e. Orange County 43 %, Town of Chapel Hill 43 %, Town of
Carrboro 14 %).
The Working Group recommends that the Town of Chapel Hill act as the coordinating
agency in carrying out these improvements.
2. The Working Group recommends that Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro
provide assistance to low - income residents in the areas where water and sewer service are
to be extended in paying the costs of connecting to water and sewer. This assistance' can
take the form of Community Development Block Grants, other grants, or local funds
where allowed by state law.
"Assistance to low- income residents" is defined as paying for at least 75% of the cost of
water and sewer hookups to households whose income is less than 80% of the median
income in Orange County for a family of four; and providing at least 50% of the cost of
hookups for households whose income is between 80% and 100% of the median income
in Orange County for a family of four. Very low- income residents in these areas should
receive 100% of the costs of hoo l
In recognition of the special burden placed on persons living closest to the landfill,
households within the area bounded by the Landfill, the Greene tract, Eubanks Road, and
13
Report of Landfill Ovmers Group/Landfill Neighbors Working Group
the University Railway will be eligible for long -term (up to 50 years), low- interest loans
from the landfill fiord to pay the costs of hooking up to water service.
3. The Landfill Owners Group will prepare and recommend a policy for adoption by the
Chapel Hill Town Council which will require loads of waste (MSW and Construction
.and Demolition waste) being brought to the Orange Regional Landfill to be covered.
Under the policy, loads which are not covered would be subject to fine. The fines would
become effective after a three mouth grace period. Non - commercial first -time offenders
should be offered the option of purchasing a tarp at the landfill in lieu of paying the fine.
4. The Landfill Owners Group will adopt a policy which requires loads of mulch leaving
the Orange Regional Landfill to be covered. The Landfill will make available for sale
tarps of various sizes for purchasers of mulch to cover their loads. This policy will
become effective after a three month grace period, during which time education will be
provided to mulch purchasers at the landfill.
5. The Landfill Owners Group will adopt a policy which doubles the minimum frequency
of litter pickup on roads suzzounding the Orange Regional Landfill. This will result in
litter pickup on Eubanks Road east of the landfill entrance at least twice weekly, on
Eubanks Road west of the landfill entrance at least six tunes annually, and on Rogers
Road at least eight times annually. Future modifications of these pickup frequencies
shall be made only by the Landfill Owners Group or its successor.
6. The Landfill Owners Group will adopt a policy governing construction at the Orange
Regional Landfill This policy will govern issues affecting neighboring residents,
including nighttime construction, blasting, and noise. The policy will identify ways to
mitigate or eliminate adverse effects on landfill neighbors, and will require all neighbors
(those living in the areas to be provided-with water and sewer service) to be.notified one
week in advance of the start of construction. Such notification shall include the
estimated duration of construction, and a description of any special construction activities
which may impact neighbors. Notification will, at a minim i include posting of signs
on the four roadway entrances into these neighborhoods (the north end of Millhouse
Road, both ends of Eubanks Road, and the south end of Rogers Road).
Under ordinary circumstances, the LOG and its contractors will avoid construction
between the hours of 11:00 pm and 6:00 am, and will provide for immediate notification
of neighbors when emergency circumstances dictate that construction. activities are
unavoidable during these hours. The LOG will ensure that any contractors carrying out
construction at the landffffi follow the Orange County noise ordinance.
7. The Working Group recommends that residents living-near the orange Regional
Landfill take initiative in identifiying perpetrators of illegal dumping near the landfill to
assist in successful prosecutions. Identification of vehicles, license tags, drivers, and/or
types of articles discarded should be made when possible.
14
Report of Landfill Owners Group/Landfill Neighbors Worldng Group
The Landfill Owners Group will investigate with the Orange County Attorney the
possibility of enacting legislation which would provide for civil penalties for illegal
dumping, to make it easier to penalize people who litter. In addition, the LOG will
publicize the names of those convicted of illegal dumping.
The Working Group recommends that additional "No Littering" signs be erected in the
neighborhoods near the landfill.
8. The Landfill Owners Group will budget for the installation of perimeter fencing
around the Orange Regional Landfill no later than the 1998 -1999 budget year. Prior to
completion of the fence, the Director of the Orange County APS shall be notified to
ensure that no large animals are trapped inside the fence.
9. The Working Group recommends that Orange County erect "Children Playing" and
"School Buts Stop" signs on Rogers Road. Residents of the Rogers Road neighborhood
will identify appropriate locations for these signs.
10. The Working Group recommends that Chapel Hill Transit re -route the North-South
connector bus line to serve Rogers Road on. either its northbound or southbound trip,
starting with the 1998 -99 service year. For the duration of the 1997 -1998 service year,
the Rogers Road area should be designated as a Shared Ride Feeder Zone if this can be
accomplished within adopted budgets and available resources.
11. The Landfill Owners Group will work with the Orange County, Chapel Hill and
Carrboro planning departments to sponsor a public information meeting regarding the
planning •boundary (future annexation boundary) between Chapel Hill and Carrboro. A
"ballot" should be prepared identifying at least three options:
1. Leave the planning boundary as it is, along Rogers Road,
2. Move the planning boundary east, placing the entire Rogers Road
neighborhood in Carrboro's future annexation area.
3. Move the planning boundary west, placing the entire Rogers Road
neighborhod in Chapel Hill's future annexation area
(See the attached map showing the possible changes to the planning boundary.)
Additional options may be identified and added to the ballot. -All households in the area
which may potentially be shii%d shall be given the opportunity to submit one ballot
selecting their preferred option.
The Working Group recommends that after the ballots have been tallied, the local
governments take the necessary action to adopt the option favored by a majority of local
residents within one year. If no single option is favored by a clear majority, the Working
Group recommends that no action be taken.
15
Report of Landfill Owners Group/Landfill Neighbors Working Group
12. The Working Group recommends that following the closure of the Eubanks Road
landfill, portions of the landfill (as allowed by regulations), the Neville tract, and at least
50 acres of the Greene tract will be used for recreation facilities.
The Landfill Owners Group or its successor will appoint an advisory group to make
specific recommendations about the post - closure use of the landfill. This group will
convene and make recommendations at least two years prior to the expected closure of
the Eubanks Road landfill. The advisory group will be composed of LOG members,
residents near the Eubanks Road landfill, and other Orange County citizens.
13. The Working Group recommends that no expansion (beyond the existing permitted
disposal capacity) of the disposal areas (MSW or Construction and Demolition) of the
Eubanks Road landfill occur.
The Working Group recommends that the Landfill Owners Group or its successor make
no incremental land acquisition at the Eubanks Road Landfill.
14. The Working Group recommends that three residents of the area near the Eubanks
Road landfill (two in the Rogers Road area, and one in the Millhouse Road area) be
identified to receive all mailings and information sent to members of the Landfill Owners
Group or its successor agency. This information should be made available to all
residents of the area.
Any resident who requests to receive mailings of the Landfill Owners Group shall
receive such mailings.
Epilogue
Nothing in this report should be interpreted as indicating that this Working Group favors
or acquiesces to any particular site for a future landfill in Orange County. Neighborhood
members and LOG members of the Working Group did not agree as to whether a future
landfill site was an appropriate topic for discussion for the Working Group. Neighbors
insisted that the only adequate compensation for living next to the landfill for 25 years is
to have no new landfill sited in the area.
The Working Group acknowledges that individual elected officials in 1972 made
promises regarding water and sewer service in the area of the Eubanks Road Landfill,
and regarding the siting of future landfills, some of which were in writing. None of these
promises were officially adopted by any elected body, even though these officials
represented these elected bodies. Neighborhood members and some LOG members of
the Working Group did not agree as to the legal validity of these promises.
The Working Group acknowledges that having a landfill in a neighborhood is an
undesirable land use that has a negative impact on the surrounding residents. • Further, the
Working Group acknowleges that the current Eubanks Road Landfill has been an
Report of Landfill Owners Group/LandfM Neighbors Working Group
undesirable neighbor for the residents in the area for over two decades, having been sited
-there in the early 1970'. against the will of the local residents.
Adopted, this the 18th day of September, 1997
David Caldwell
J — - - I UNI �.
Richard Franck
Cecil Griffn
PIL
Ra. McMillian
Sheila McMillian
Gertrude Norm
Not Present:
Joyce Brown
Bill Crowther
Diana McDaffie
Horace Johnson.
Mark Chilton
Ja
Leo Hopkins
Robert McMffiian
W .1 F At"
...
16
17
Attachment D
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 1, 2008
Action Agenda
Item No. 3-e.—
SUBJECT: Rogers Road Community Enhancement- Task Force - Recommendations
DEPARTMENT: Solid Waste Management PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Recommended Enhancements
Recommended Historic Rogers Road Gayle Wilson, 968 -2885
Enhancement Area Map
PURPOSE: To present for Board of County Commissioners' consideration the Historic Rogers
Road Community Enhancement Plan Development and Monitoring Task Force's recommended
Historic -Rogers Road Enhancement Area Map delineation and list of proposed community
enhancements.
BACKGROUND: At the May 3, 2007 BOCC meeting the BOCC created the Historic Rogers
Road Community Enhancement Plan Development and. Monitoring Task Force. The purpose of
the Task Force was to develop and forward to the Orange County Board of Commissioners a
proposed plan, including financing options, for enhancements in the historic Rogers Road
Community. The Task Force was also charged with recommending the geographical
size /parameters of the Historic Rogers Road community, for which the recommended
enhancements would be provided
The Task Force has met seven times, with the first meeting held on June 6 and the most recent
meeting on November 12. A June 26, 2007 interim report was provided. At the September 12
Task Force meeting the attached map was adopted by consensus and is being recommended
to the BOCC for consideration. At the November 12 meeting the Task Force adopted a final list
of community enhancement recommendations.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There will be a substantial financial impact related to implementation of
many of the Task Force's. community enhancement recommendations.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the Historic
Rogers Road Task Force's Recommended Historic Rogers Road Enhancements and Area
Map.
Memorandum
To: Board of County Commissioners
Through: Laura Blackmon, County Manager
From: Gayle Wilson, Solid Waste Management Director
Subject: Historic Rogers Road Community Enhancement Plan Development and Monitoring Task Force
Final Recommendations - Neighborhood Enhancement List and Area Designation
Date: April 24, 2008
At the November 12, 2007 meeting of the Rogers Road Community Enhancement Task Force the list of
community enhancement recommendations was finalized and recommended to be presented to the Board of
County Commissioners for consideration and implementation. The list is presented below-
Ia. Do not use Eubanks Road as a site for the transfer station. Leave the Solid Waste
Convenience Center at its current location on the north side of Eubanks Road. Upgrade the
convenience center waste containers to enclosed waste containers as soon as possible.. This will
help reduce odor and the number of rodents escaping into the Rogers and Eubanks Roads
communities.
Orange County
lb. Extend water and sewer mains be extended to provide public service to the recently endorsed
Rogers Road Community Enhancement Area, (which is the landfill impacted area), including
Ms. Nunn's property, at no cost to any of the residents. The Task Force further recommends that
water and sewer connections and OWASA impact fees for these connections be provided to the
Rogers Road Community Enhancement area at no cost to any of the residents. Orange County,
Chapel Hill, and Carrboro should utilize Community Development Block Grants, other grants, or
local funds where allowed by state law to pay for adding water and/or sewer mains, house
connections, and OWASA impact fees.
Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Orange County and OWASA
2. Reduce the odor from the landfill and convenience center now!! Pursue a masking agent
atomization for landfill working face. Complete landfill leachate sewer project to eliminate
leachate storage basin as soon as possible. Confer with OWASA and utilize best management
practices for the landfill industry to control odor and vermin.. For finance: lease the landfill areas
to a private company that can harvest the methane gas for profit and to help in odor reduction.
Orange County and Chapel Hill
3. Build a barrier wall (beginning with below the surface of the ground) to impede stop rodents and
other animals from leaving or entering the Iandfill and to decrease noise, improve air quality.
Plant more trees and other vegetation to obscure the view of the landfill mount.
Orange County and Chapel Hill
19
4. The Task Force recommends that water and sewer mains be extended to provide public service .
to all of the Task Force recommended Community Enhancement Area (map attached), including
Ms. Nunn's property. The Task for also recommends that Orange County, Chapel Hill, and
Carrboro provide public water and sewer in the Community Enhancement Area where water and
sewer service are to be extended in paying the costs of connecting to water and sewer. This
assistance can take the form of Community Development Block Grants, other grants, or local
funds where allowed by state law. Costs for all residents should be eliminated or minimized to
the extent possible.
Chapel Hill, Orange County, Carrboro, and OWASA
5 Institute a moratorium on property taxes. Pay for /subsidize future taxes for the residents in the
community enhancement area for as long as any solid waste facilities remain in their community.
Pay impact stipend to property owners whose land is adjacent to the landfills. Be vigilant about
not allowing residents to lose their homes and/or property because of their inability to pay taxes;
advocate for residents who become at risk of losing their homes and/or land due to inability to
pay property taxes.
Return property taxes paid from the time of the opening of the landfills. (This would include
Hillhouse Road residents.)
Orange County
6. Build park and other recreation facilities within the Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Area such as basketball and park type equipment: jungle gym, swings, picnic tables, benches.
The Parks and Recreation Department should maintain these facilities. Children within the
Enhancement Area should be provided summer youth employment opportunities.
Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County
7. Add NCDOT traffic calming bumps on Rogers Road and decrease speed limit to 25 mph. The
Task Force recommends that Orange County erect "Children Playing" and "School Bus Stop "'
signs on Rogers Road. Residents of the Community Enhancement Area will identify appropriate
locations for these signs.
Chapel Hill, Orange County, Carrboro, and DOT
8. Add sidewalks to both sides Rogers Road from Homestead Road to Eubanks Road.
Chapel Hill and Carrboro
9. Widen Eubanks Road and add shoulders and turn lanes at landfill facilities. These areas are
extremely unsafe and congested — especially in the mornings. Given the garbage and UPS
trucks and city buses, Eubanks Road is too narrow to be safe.
Chapel Hill, Orange County, Carrboro and DOT
10. Bring the bus service down Rogers Road at least three times (morning, noon and evening).
The Task Force also recommends that Chapel Hill Transit re-route the North-South connector bus
20
line to serve Rogers Road on either its northbound or southbound trip, beginning as soon as
possible. For the duration of the 2007/2008 service year, the Community Enhancement Area
should be designated as a Shared Ride Feeder Zone. Build an enclosed and lighted waiting area at
the bus stops.
Chapel Hill and Carrboro .
11. Add publicly financed street lights for public roads and streets.
ChaQel Hill and Carrboro
12. Add fire hydrant north of Edgar Street, between the properties of Tim and Edward Peppers and
Nola Mae West This hydrant will service properties that presently are more than 400 feet
and as far as 1500 feet from a fire hydrant.
Chapel Hill
13. Modify building, zoning, and other ordinances that make it difficult/unpossible for landowners in
the Community Enhancement Area to develop their property.
.Chapel Hill. Carrboro and Orange County
14. Do not allow industrial zoning. Do not allow any zoning that makes this community vulnerable
to big developers.
Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County
15. Do not allow any large development (including affordable house) on Purefoy Drive that has no
other means of egress into the Purefoy, Sandberg, and.Edgar Road area other than Purefoy Road_
Chapel Hill
16. Ensure adequate representation of this community in local government decisions that affect this
community, including land use ordinances.
Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro
17. Re -unify this community by de- annexing the west side of this community from Carrboro.
Carrboro
Do not divide this community between different jurisdictions. Do not annex this community
Carrboro and Chapel Hill
18. Document in writing all meetings concerning this neighborhood and have these documents
officially recorded and filed.
Orange County, Chapel Hill. Carrboro
19. The Task Force recommends that residents living near the Orange Regional Landfill take
initiative in identifying perpetrators of illegal dumping near the landfill to assist in successful
prosecutions. Identification of vehicles, license tags, drivers, and/or types of articles discarded
should be made when possible.
The BOCC should coordinate with the Orange County Attorney to pass legislation, which
provides for civil penalties for illegal dumping to make it easier to penalize people who litter or
dump. In addition, the BOCC will publicize the names of those convicted of illegal dumping. The
BOCC should increase enforcement of anti - dumping laws in the Community Enhancement Area.
21
The Task Force recommends that additional 'No Littering" signs be erected in the neighborhoods
near the landfill.
Orange County
20. Allow power to be turned on in power outages in a different order so we are not next
to last eyery time.
Duke Power
21. Pay more attention to our roads during ice and snow events.
Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and DOT
22. Expand fire, EMS, and sheriff services as soon as possible.
Chapel Hill, Orange County. Carrboro
23. St. Paul .Church purchased a 20 -acre property that holds 3 -story house and neighboring cemetery
filled with history of local families. Community would like to see efforts that that section of the
property be protected from demolition and preserved as a Historic Site.
Chapel Hill, Orange County, and Carrboro
Note: St. Paul AME has purchased five g-d oining properties along the northeast corner of
Rovers Road and Purefoy Road The parcel that contains the 3 -story house and cemetery was
included in that.purchase. The house was recorded as Mt of countywide survey for historic
properties or historic architectural resources in the early 1990's. These countywide surveys
were conducted throughout the state in coniunction with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office. This particular house was first recorded in 1992. and re eyed during a
2006 update. According to notes of the survey there is a white cemetery (Hogan) in the front
yard and a black (slave) cemetery somewhere in the back
23
Attachment E
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: August 18, 2009
Action Agenda
Item No, _-7—ia_
SUBJECT, Rogers Road Area: Cross - Reference of Town and County Task Force Reports
DEPARTMENT: County Manager's Office PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No
Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Matrix of Recommendations
2. Composite Map
3. Historical Review of County Investment
in the Expansion of Water Service for
the Rogers Road Neighborhood'
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gwen Harvey, Assistant County
Manager, 245 -2300
Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director,
245 -2592
Perdita Holtz, Senior Planner,-245 -2611
Tara Fikes, H & CD Director, 245 -2492
PURPOSE: To receive a report from staff representing a cross - reference of recommendations
contained within the reports from the Town of Chapel Hill Small Area Plan Task Force and the
County Historic Rogers Road Community Enhancement Plan Task Force and related historical
background
BACKGROUND:
Convergence of Two Task Force Reports
The Rogers Road Small Area Plan Task. Force was a planning effort initiated by the Town of
Chapel Hill in December 2006 and completed in early 2009. The Town Report concluded
additional transportation access and the provision of sanitary sewer were needed to improve the
infrastructure of existing residents and for the orderly development of the Greene Tract. The
Final Report was discussed at the March 26, 2009 Assembly of Governments meeting, including
consensus for creating an intergovernmental work group of elected officials and staff to work
aggressively to achieve needed financing for community improvements.
In 2007 the BOCC engaged in a parallel planning effort known as the "Historic Roger's Road
Community Enhancement Plan Development and Monitoring Task Force" which overlapped on
the Town planning area. In the final Meeting Summary Report of the County Task Force, it was
stressed that "final decisions regarding enhancements would not happen until the final decision
of the solid waste transfer station was made ". It was also recognized that many of the items on
the list would require collaboration with the Towns and that actual financing of enhancements
was not the purpose of the Task Force. A Final Report and recommendations from the County
Task Force was received by the BOCC as information in December 2008.
24
In late April 2009 the County received a letter from the Town inviting comments on its Task
Force Report by June 30. The County Report and Town Report shared similar findings and
conclusions which should be integrated to form a common strategy for implementation. At its
meeting on June 16, 2009 the BOCC authorized a cover letter from the Chair and accompanying
summary comments from County staff on the Town Report to be transmitted to the Town: The
BOCC also tasked County management to create a framework for a review and reference of
both the Town and County Task Force reports in anticipation of the formal appointment of an
intergovernmental work group.
Attachment I is a Comparison of Rogers Road Small Area Plan (Town of Chapel Hill) and
Rogers Road Community Enhancement Task Force (Orange County) Recommendations.
Attachment 2 is a composite map.
Public Utilities
Historically — dating back to the 1997 "Report. of the Landfill Owners Group /Landfill Neighbors
Working Group" — the provision of public utility services has been central among requests from
representatives of the Rogers Road community. The 1997 Report was foundation material for
the 1999 Inter -local Agreement for Solid Waste Management and the precursor to the County
making public water available to much of what was termed the Historic Rogers Eubank
community in 2000. For background purposes, staff has compiled an historical review of County
investments made in public utilities for the area and an update on most recent efforts by the
County to address.
Attachment 3 is a Historical Review of County investment in the Expansion of Water Service in
the Rogers Road Neighborhood.
More recently the Housing and Community Development and County Engineer worked with
OWASA on preliminary due diligence for a Letter of Interest to secure Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding for sewer services in the Rogers Road community. Construction
and connection costs to serve an estimated 50 households were approximated at $3.3 million.
CDBG application guidelines required the presence of severe sewer needs• in order for the
potential project to qualify for funding. Severe needs are defined as: no on -site wastewater
disposal system, the presence of privies, evidence of straight piping, failed septic systems, or
the failure of a public sewer system. None of these conditions could be documented. The project
was therefore determined not to meet CDBG guidelines and a Letter of Interest was not
submitted under the June 30, 2009 deadline. Housing and Community Development will be
completing its income survey of the community and continuing to investigate alternative funding
sources.
A BOCC request for "Potential Partnership and Federal Planning Grant to Provide Water and
Sewer Services to the Rogers Road /Eubanks Road Community" presented in May 2009 to
Congressman David Price was favorably received and remains outstanding. A federal planning
grant would be the first step in forging a partnership including the County, the Towns of Chapel
Hill and Carrboro, and OWASA to help engineer and design a comprehensive service plan for
the community.
25
Next Steps
The most immediate next step that involves the elected leadership and staff of the Towns and
County.regards action on the proposed small area plan itself. The Rogers Road planning area is
located in the Chapel Hill Transition Area as defined by the Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) and
implementation will require amendments to the Joint Land Use Plan (LUP). All three parties to
the JPA — Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County — must adopt the required amendments.
The Town of Chapel Hilf has lead responsibility for initiating proposed changes to the. LUP
projected for the October 2009 JPA Public Hearing.
The BOCC is also scheduled to resume its consideration of alternate locations for the solid
waste transfer • station when it reconvenes in the fall. The official organization of an
intergovernmental work group to address public water and sewer infrastructure requests remains
pending but could also occur in late fall.'The attachments to this abstract constitute a "body of
work" that should be helpful to the BOCC as it looks to participate in a coordinated, organized
review of policy decisions and financing options along side Town counterparts and the OWASA
Board of Directors.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Implementation of many of the recommendations made in the Town
Small Area Plan and /or BOCC Task Force Final Report is expected to have significant fiscal
impacts, most especially water and sewer development An intergovernmental work group is
expected to pursue an aggressive strategy . of financing options to help support desired
community improvements.
RECOMMENDATIONS: The Manager recommends the Board:
1. Receive the Rogers Road Area: Cross - Reference of Town and County Task
Reports and related historical background; and
2. Authorize County staff to continue in coordination with Town counterparts relative to next
steps.
Comparison of Rogers Road Small Area Plan (Town of Chapel Hill) and
Rogers Road Community Enhancement Task Force (Orange County) Recommendations
Note: The geographic boundaries of the two planning efforts are different (see attached map). The Town's planning boundary is smaller than the County's planning boundary
but the County's planning area contains all of the Town's planning area.
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to Date
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
Transportation
Bus service should be provided
Bring the bus service down Rogers Road at
An expanded bus
Lore•
L: TOCH
and
to the existing community and
least three times (morning, noon and
route is stated to
P: TOC, OC
Infrastructure
bus service should be extended
evening). The Task Force also
begin service In.
as the community develops.
regommends that Chapel Hill Transit re-
August 200g,
route thr3 North-South connector bus line to
providing weekday
serve Rogers Road on either Its northbound
service between RR
orsouthbound trip, beginning as soon as
and Morris Grove
possible. For the.durationof the 2007 /2008
Elementary to
service year, the Community Enhancement
downtown CH.
Area should be designated as a Shared
Ride.FeederZone. Build an enclosed and
lighted waiting area at the bus stops.
Improve transportation access'
Add sidewalks to both sides Rogers Road
L• TOCH, TOC
through all modes (vehicles, • •
from Homestead Road to Eubanks Road.
bicycle and pedestrian, transit).
New points of ingress and
No functional route to
L; TOCH
egress to the community should
Eubanks Road
be established.
through County
Landfill property
Identified.
A road should be built that
L ;. TOCH
connects the neighborhood to
Weaver Dairy Rd.
L - Lead; P — Participatory. OC — Orange County, TOCH —Town of Chapel Frill, TOC - Town of Carrbaro, TOH a Town of Hillsborough, NCDOT — North Carolina Department of ThWortation, CHCCS — Chapel Hill —
Carrboro City Schools.
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Recommendation
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Task Force Recommendation
Work Accomplished
to Date
Work to be
Accomplished
Responsible
Local
Government
Lore*
Approximate
Cost
Water and sanitary sewer
Extend water and sewer mains to provide
OC RR
L: TOCH and
OC RR
mains should be extended to.
public service to the recently endorsed
Neighborhood Water
OWASA
Waterline
the community.
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
line connection
Connection
Area, (which is the landfill Impacted area),
project Implemented
P: 00, TOC
Project total
including Ms. Nunn's property, at no cost to
in 2001. Thirty -nine
cost.
any of the residents. The Task Force
(39) applicants were
$690,094
further recommends that water and sewer
eligible for general
($681,260 —
connections and OWASA Impact fees for
fund grant assistance
Solid Waste
these connections be provided to the
to cover lateral
Enterprise
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
installation and
Fund;
area at no cost to any of the residents.
availability/meter
$108,834
Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro
fees.
General Fund
should utilize Community Development
Block Grants, other grants, or local funds
where allowed by state law to pay for
adding water andlor sewer mains, house
OC Housing &
Community Income
Project cost
connections, and OWASA impabt fees.
CD /County
survey to be
estimate -
Engineer / OWASA
completed; Continue
$3.3 million
conducted
to pursue other
to serve 60
preliminary due
funding sources
households
diligence on Letter of
Interest for CDBG
funding for RR sewer
Improvements.
Project failed to meet
CDBG need
guidelines for
submittal.
L -Lead; P = Participatory. OC- Orange County, TOCH — Town of Chapel Hill, TOC -Town of Carrboro, TOH - Town of Mborough, NCDOT -North Carolina Departinent of Transportation, CHCCS — Chapel HM —
Carrboro City Schools.
N
•d
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to pate
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
Lore'
The Towns of Chapel. Hill,
The Task Force recommends that water
L• TOCH and
Carrboro, Hillsborough, and
and sewer mains be extended to provide
OWASA
Orange County should
public service to all of the Task Force
collaborate to identify and
recommended Community Enhancement
P: OC, TOC,
secure funds to be used for
Area (map attached), including Ms. Nunn's.
TOH
financing the entire cost of
property. The Task for slab recommends
OWASA water and sewer
that Orange County, Chapel Hill, and
connections for individual •
Carrboro provide public water and sewer in
homes within the Historic
the Community Enhancement Area where
Rogers -Eubanks community as
water and sewer service are to be extended
part of the compensation for the
In paying the costs of connecting -to water
years of hosting the
and sewer. This assistance can take the
C
County Landfill and other r solid
solid
form of Community Development Block
waste facilities.
Grants, other grants, or local funds where
allowed by state lavii. Costs for all residents
should be eliminated or minimized to the
extent possible.
Add NCDOT traffic calming bumps on
L• TOCH
Rogers Road and decrease speed limit to
25 mph. The Task Force recommends.that
P: NCDOT,
Orange County erect "Children Playing" and
TOC, OC
"School Bus Stop" signs on Rogers Road.
Residents of the Community Enhancement
Area will identify appropriate locations for
these signs.
Widen Eubanks Road and add shoulders
L TOCH
and turn lanes at landfill facilities. These
areas are extremely unsafe and
P: NCDOT,.
congested -- especially In the mornings.
TOC, OC
Given -the garbage and UPS trucks and city
buses, Eubanks Road Is too narrow to be
safe.
L = Lead; P = Pardctpatory. OC =Orange County, TOM —Town of Chapel Hill, TOC -Town of Carrboro, TOM - Town ofMllsborougb, NCDOT -North Carolina Department of Transportatioo, CHCCS -Chapel HM
Carrboro City Schools.
N
00
Tbpic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to Dale
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
•
•
lorP `
Add publicly financed street lights for public
L TOCH, TOC
roads and'streets.
Add fire hydrant north of Edgar Street
L TOCH
between the properties of Tim and Edward -
Peppers and Nola Mae West. This hydrant
will service properties that presently are
more than 400 feet and as for as 1500 feet
from a fire hydrant -
Open Space and
Active recreation opportunities
Build park and other recreation facilities
L• TOCH,
Recreation
need to be provided for the
within the Rogers Road Community
TOC, OC
Rogers Road community.
Enhancement Area such as basketball and
park type equipment Jungle gym, swings,
picnic tables, benches. The Parks and
Recreation Department should maintain
these facilities. Children within the
Enhancement Area should be provided
summer youth employment opportunities.
Low - impact recreation
L TOCH,
opportunities such as trails
TOC, OC
should be constructed on thq
Greene Tract In order to do so,
the Greene Tract Concept Plan
should be revised by the local
governments to reflect
changing conditions along with
this plan.
If a school Is built In the
L• TOCH,
community, explicit facility
TOC, OC
sharing relationships should be
established prior to
P: CHCCS
•construction.
L —Lead; P - Participatory. OC -Orange County, TOCH— Town of Chapel Hill, TOO — Town of Carrboro, TOR — Town ofHilisborough, NCDOT — North Carolina Deparhnent of Transportation, CHCCS —Chapel EU —
Carrboro City Schools.
T
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to Date
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
Design and Land
The Recommended Master
LorP*
L' TOCH
Use
Plan on page 17 should
become the basis for a future
P: OC, TOC
land use plan amendment for
the Rociers Road area.
The Town should take the lead
Modify building, zoning, and other
L: TOCH
in initiating intergovernmental
ordinances that make it difficultrmpossible
land use discussions (as
for landowners In the Community
P: OC, TOC
required by the Joint Planning
Enhancement Area to develop their
Agreement) by articulating a
property.
new vision for growth in the
area:
Do dot allow industrial zoning. Do not allow
any zoning that makes this community
vulnerable to big developers.
Do not allow any large development
(including affordable house) on Purefoy
Drive that has no other means of egress
into the Purefoy, Sandberg, and Edger
Road area other than Purefoy Road.
Ensure adequate representation of this
community in local government decisions
that affect this community, including land
use ordinances.
L -Lead; P - Participatory. OC — Orange County, TOCH— Town of Chapel ML TOC -Town of Carrboro, TOH m Town of Hlllsboroogh, NCDOT -North Carolina Department of Transportation, CHCCS -Chapel Hill —
Caftoro City Schools.
W
CD
Topic Area
Rogers Road.Small Area Plan
Recommendation
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Task
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Force Recommendation
to Date
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
.
New development should be
Lore• L• TOCH
compact and offer a range of
housing types. This will
P: OC, TOC '
facilitate the development for a
neighborhood core in the
eastern part of the study area,
as will the presence of a school
and a neighborhood
commercial-district
Minimum setback requirements
L TOCIt
for new development should
reflect the Task Force's desire
P: OC, TOC
to have a front porch
community where life meets the
street. Houses should be built
RINI
close to sidewalks.
The Task Force desires that the
L TOCH
currently developed areas near
Rogers Road and the
P: OC, TOC
peripheries of the study area
maintain their current densities.
This would allow this part of the
community to maintain its Nral
feel.
New roads near the
neighborhood core should have
L TOCH
curb and utter:
P. OC, TOC
A maximum building height of
L: TOCH
45' is recommended to maintain
the t ommuni s character.
P: OC, TOC
L -Lead, P m Participatory. OC —Orange County, TOCH— Town of Chapel Hill, TOC - Town of Carrboro, TOH —Town ofHillsborough, NCDOT —North Carolina Department o£Transportation, CHCCS - Chapel HM
Carrbom City Schools.
W
j
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to Date
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Government
LorP•
Do not use Eubanks Road as a site for the
BOCC initiated new
Upgrade of
L OC
transfer station. Leave the Solid Waste
site search process In
convenience center
Convenience Center at Its current location
November 2007; •
was to take place in
on the north-side of Eubanks Road.
Removed Olver, Inc.
conjunction with TS
Upgrade the convenience center waste
Site 669 (Eubanks
project Upgrade
containers to enclosed waste containers as
Rd) from
currently
soon -as possible: This will help reduce
consideration among
unscheduled.
odor and the number of rodents escaping
alternate sites in
into the Rogers and Eubanks Roads
October 2006.
communities.
Community
The two remaining historic
Preservation
buildings in the study area
should be.preserved and
integrated into future
communitv facilities.
The Town should explore
Institute a moratorium on property taxes.
L• OC
options similar to the
Pay forlsubsidize future taxes for the
Homestead Exemption that
residents in the community enhancement
would enable current property
area for as long as any solid waste facilities
owners, particularly long -time
remain in their community.
residents, Habitat residents,
and descendants of the Historic
Community, to retain ownership
Pay impact stipend to property owners
of their property.
whose land is adjacent to the landfills. Be
Vigilant about not allowing residents to lose
.
their homes and/or properly because of
their inability to pay taxes; advocate for
residents who become at risk of losing their
homes and/or land due to Inability to pay
property taxes.
Return property taxes paid from the time of
the opening of the landfills. (Tliis would
include Milihouse Road residents.)
– �im., s – r u w—Y. vv – orange vounry, 10CH – Town oI Laapei h" TUC –Town of Carrboro, TOH -Town of HMsbarougb, NCDOT -North Carolina Department of Transportation, CHCCS -Chapel Hill –
Caaboro City Schools.
CA
N
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Recommendation
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Task Force Recommendation
Work Accomplished
to Date
Work to be
Accomplished
Responsible
Local
Approximate
Cost
Government
Lore`
Local governments should
L TOCH
collaborate with the community
,to develop strategies that help
P: OC, TOC
ensure that the majority of the
housing stock be affordable to
those making at or below 80%
of the Area Median income.
Residents need to be Informed `
L: TOCH
of development pressures and
opportunities In the Rogers
Road area. This could happen.
.through information sessions
periodically hosted by the
Town.
The Town and the Community
L: TOCH
should collaborate to find
Innovative ways to rehabilitate
declining residential properties
in the area.
Local governments with
L TOCH
jurisdidtion should revisit
ordinances pertaining to the
replacement of manufactured
housing and strive to develop
rules to allow existing housing
to remain In place .
The Town and the Rogers
L TOCH
Road community should
maintain the type of meaningful
dialogue that was made
possible by the efforts of the
Task Force and by the work
done during the design
workshop.
L = Lead; P = Participatory. OC - Orange County, TOCH— Towm of Chapel IM TOC = Town of Carrboro, TOH = Town of Hillsborough, NCDOT =North Carolina Department of Trawportation, CEICCS — Chapel EM
City Schools
W
W
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Recommendation
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
-Task Force Recommendation
Work Accomplished
to Date
Work to be
Accomplished
Responsible
Local
Approximate
Cost
Government
Lore•
Re- unify this community by de- annexing the
west side of this community from Carrboro.
L. TOC
Do not divide this community between
P: TOCH, OC
different jurisdictions. Do not annex this .
communi "
SL Paul Church purchased a 20 -acre
property that holds 3-story house and
neighboring cemetery filled with history of
local families. Community would like to see
efforts. that that secpon of the property be.
protected from demolition and preserved as
a Historid Site. •
Note: St Paul AME has purchased five
adioinlna properties along the northeast
comer of Rogers Road and Purefov Road
The panel thW- contains the 3 -story house
and cemetery was included in that
1urchase The house was recorded as part
of eounlvwide survev for historic
Propertles or historic architectural resources
in the eadv 1990's. These countywide
surveys were conducted throughout the
state in coniunction with the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office. This '
parficularhouse was first recorded In 1992
and re- surveyed durfno a 2006 update
According to notes of the w—v there is a
white cemetery lHoaen) in the faint yard
and a black (slave) cemetery" somewhere in
Me'bagk
Lead; P @ participatory. OC =Orange County, TOCH —Town o£Chapol Hill, TOC -Town of C
Cau boro City Schools. arrboro, TbH —Town ofHMsborougb, NCDOT =North Carolina Department of Transportation, CHCCS m Chapel MR
aa
W
40h
Topic Area
Rogers. Road Small Area Plan
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Work Accomplished
Work to be
Responsible
Approximate
Recommendation
Task Force Recommendation
to Date
Accomplished
Local
Cost
Govemment
Lore*
Other Topic
Areas
Reduce the odor from the landfill and
convenience center nowil Pursue a
Odor control masking
and neutralizing
No further
experimentation
L• OC
Odor Control
Expenditures
masking. agent atomization for landfill
agents tested, with
projected.
P. TOCH
-$17,365
working face. Complete landfill leachate
inconclusive results.
sewer project to eliminate leachata storage
basin as soon as possible. Confer with
Leachate Sewer
Project complete.
Total Cost of
OWASA and utilize best management
Construction
Sewer
practices for the landfill industry to control
Complete (March
Protect -
odor and vermin_ For finance: lease the
2009) and Leachate
$458,937
landfill areas to a private company that can
Basin Removed.(May
harvest the methane gas for profit and to
2009)
help in odor reduction.
Landfill Gas Project
Completion of design,
Agreement with UNC
permitting, and
(February 2009).
construction.
Design and
Projected completion
Permitlina Underway.
spring 2010.
Build a barrier wail (beginning with below
L OC
the surface of the ground) to Impede stop
rodents and other animals from leaving or
P: TOCH
entering the landfill and to decrease noise,
Improve air quality. Plant more trees and
other vegetation to obscure the view of the
landfill mount
Document In writing all meetings concerning
L OC, TOCH,
this neighborhood and have these
TOC
documents officially recorded and filed.
L -Lead, P - Participatory. OC —Orange County, TOCH— Town of Chapel Bill, TOC -Town. of Carrboro, TOTS —Town of Hillsborough, NCDOT =North Carolina Department of Transportation, CTCCS - Chapel Hill —
Carrboro City Schools.
W
Ln
Topic Area
Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Recommendation
Rogers Road Community Enhancement
Task Force Recommendation
Work Accomplished
to Date
Work to be
Accomplished
Responsible
• Local
Government
Lore*
Approximate
Cost
The Task Force recommends that residents
Solid Waste Staff
L• OC
living near the Orange Regional Landfill
have not.recelved
take initiative in identifying perpetrators of •,
any reports of illegal
illegal dumping near the landfill to al;sist in
dumping from Rogers
successful prosecutions. Identification of
Road residents.
vehicles, license tags, drivers, and /or types
of articles discarded should be made when
possible.
The BOCC should coordinate with'the
Orange County Attorney to pass legislation,
which provides for civil penalties for illegal
dumping to make it easier to penalize
people who litter or dump. In addition, the
BOCC will publicize the names of those
convicted of Illegal dumping. The BOCC
should increase enforcement of anti-
dumping laws in the Community
Enhancement Area.
The Task Force recommends that additional
"No Littering" signs be erected in the
neighborhoods near the landfill
Allow power to be turned on in power
L. TOCH,
outages In a different order so we are not
-Duke Power
next to last every time.
Pay more attention to our roads during ice
L: TOCH,
and snow events.
TOC, NCDOT
Expand fire, EMS, and sheriff services as
L• TOCH,
soon as possible.
TOC, OC
L —Lead, P —Participatory. OC — Orange County, TOCH —Town of Chapel Hill, TOC —Town of Carrbom, TOH —Town ofFIillsborough, NCDOT —North Carolina Department of Transportation, CHCCS s Chapel MU —
Caaboro City Schools.
W
r7)
38
A Historical Review of County Investment in the Expansion of Water Service
to the Rogers Road Neighborhood
April 17, 2000
The Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) approved a contract with the
Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) to construct an extension of existing
OWASA water lines to serve designated properties of the historic Rogers Road
neighborhood.
Background language from the Agenda Abstract
Governing boards from all. member governments of the Landfill Owners Group
(LOG) approved a series of benefits to be provided to neighborhoods in the vicinity of
the existing landfill on Eubanks Road In early 1999, a sub- committee of the LOG
met and issued recommendations regarding the extension of water lines to serve
various properties in and around the historic Rogers Road neighborhood
In accordance with the interlocal agreement governing the organization and
structure of solid waste management in Orange County it has become. the
responsibility of the County to implement the remaining landfill community benefit
commitments At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the BOCC adopted a resolution
directing staff to begin working with OWASA to begin the process to design and
construct the water lines that will serve the Rogers Road neighborhood County and
OWASA staff have conferred a number of times since then. OWASA has developed a
proposal under which OWASA would contract for and manage this construction
project. It has been the Board's stated intention to use reserves from the landfill
enterprise fund to pay the costs of extending the water lines into the Rogers Road
neighborhood
The projected cost of constructing the water line extension project with
administrative and engineering costs that time was .$550, 000. The total . project cost*
increased and $675, 000 was appropriated in FY 2000 -2001 to cover the costs.
January 18, 2001
The Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) authorized OWASA to negotiate
the purchase of temporary construction and permanent utility easements for the Rogers
Road waterline project.
November 13, 2001
At a scheduled work session, the BOCC received a report from staff on the possible
parameters of a County - funded program that would provide grants to property owners in
the Rogers Road Waterline project target area to connect to the installed water mains. At
39
tinge, the BOCC confirmed their desire to implement a grant program using the County's
general fund to directly subsidize eligible applicants the costs associated with the
installation of laterals, availability fees, and meter fees.
February 5, 2002
The BOCC approved the Assistance Policy for the Rogers Road Waterline Connection
Program. This policy offered grants for waterline connections for households with
incomes below 80% of the area median income. The income limits at that time are listed
below.
y`,i;. '�•.9"r. Y:iJ... _: .1X.C`
:ti_,T_ul�lt?eT']il;, a
���'�j��'.f-
.�.a. ^ 1:.r • '.ci;;
.:. !t0�0-0;)`.r
'�'�.'L't��� �
.�^!t n :d t t
; - :.SO..�o,�Ofilvl'ean•;.�va80:%:O
�.r.x �"at<.� a,. � '+ i�.�
:.3� :
,......... Et�larlrz!,
ca_�•-_` -a-'' �= rr�,s+,ti -ti
1
$14,950
$24,950
$38,100
2
$17,100
.$28,500
$43,500
3
$19,250
$32,100
$49,950
4
$21,400
$35,650
$54,400
5
$23,100
$38,500
$58,750
6
$24,800
$41,350
$63100
7
$26,500
$44,200
$67,450
8
$28,250
$47,050
$71,800
The Housing and Community Development Department administered this .program and
began taking applications immediately thereafter. Also, a community meeting was held
on April 8, 2002 at the Faith Tabernacle Church to explain the program and on Saturday,
May 18a' OCHCD staff was on site that afternoon in an effort to make it easier for
residents to apply for the program.
*Note: The County Engineer reported that there were 114 parcels with 96 habitable
structures located in the community /project area.
June 18.2002
Housing and Community Development staff provided the BOCC with a Status Report on
the Waterline Connection Program. At that time,-the total number of applicants was 36
representing about 38% of the habitable structures on the associated project map. Of
these, 26 or 72% were eligible for assistance with connection fees. At that time, five (5)
property owners had chosen to pay the connections fees themselves.
May 20, 2003
A second Status Report was presented to the BOCC on this date. At that time, a total of
45 applications had been received representing about 47% of the total number of
40
habitable structures. Of these, 33 or 73% were eligible for assistance. The remaining 12
applicants were not eligible due to household incomes exceeding 80% of the median
income.
March 2006
A final Status Report was prepared for a Manager's Memo. The total final Program
Summary is as follows.
Application Intake
Total Applications Received: 51*
* Represents approximately 60% of the total number of habitable structures.
Eligibility Analysis
Eligible applicants (76 1/.) 39
Ineligible applicants (24 %) 12
Total applicants .51
Area Summary
Received Water Connections via Assistance Program 39
Ineligible for Water Connection Program 12
Existing Structure —No Application 34
Vacant Lots 29
Total Properties 114*
* The earlier estimate of 113 properties with 96 habitable structures was corrected
at the end of the project based on actual data to a total of 114 properties in the
project area with 85 habitable structures.
Total Proi ect Costs
Water Distribution System Construction Costs $581,260
OWASA overhead and administrative costs $ 39,138.
OWASA Meter and Connection/Availability Fees (for 36 units) $ 34,776
Plumbing Connection Costs 34,920
Total $690,094
41
Attachment F
OWASA ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
Quality Service Since 1977
MEMORANDUM
TO: J.B. Culpepper
FROM: Ed Holland
DATE: February S, 2011
SUBJECT: Updated Concept Plan and Cost Estimates for Providing Public Sewer
Service to the Town of Chapel Hill's Rogers Road Small Area Plan
Study Area
Background and Overview
This memorandum and attachments are intended to update and supersede the information
we provided in a June 22, 2007 memo to Mr. Gordon Sutherland regarding preliminary
concept plans and cost estimates for extending OWASA sewer service to properties
within the Town's Rogers Road Small Area Planning Area. We hope this information
will help inform ongoing discussions about implementing the proposed Rogers Road
Small Area Plan. Please note several items:
• Virtually all existing parcels in the Town's Rogers Road study area already have
access to OWASA water lines; therefore, this exercise is focused on sewer service
only.
The concept plan represents a gravity flo-yv sewer configuration.. It incorporates no
sewage pumping stations, which OWASA approves only in unusual circumstances
where it is not viable to serve properties by gravity. It continues to be OWASA's
experience that wastewater pumping stations are expensive to maintain and less
reliable over the long term than gravity collection, due to the greater risk of
mechanical failure and resulting sewage spills.
Our previous (June 2007) work included three separate concept scenarios for serving
separate portions of the Rogers Road study area. Thanks to the completion of one or
more development projects since that time (e.g., Habitat for Humanity's Phoenix
Place Development) and the submission of one or more development proposals with
substantial engineering detail (e.g., St. Paul's AME Church), this current update
comprises only a single concept scenario.
• This concept and cost estimates focus solely on providing sewer service to the
specific area delineated by Chapel Hill's Rogers Road Small Area planning
42-
Updated Rogers Road Sewer Service Concept Plan and Cost Estimates
February 8; 2011
Page 2
process It does not address any nearby or surrounding properties that have been
discussed in other venues or meetings convened during the past three and a half
years by Orange County or other parties, such as the Rogers - Eubanks Neighborhood
Association. It is important to consider this concept plan and cost estimates within
the larger community in which sewer service for all or a portion of the area might
realistically be implemented, rather than in isolation from those nearby properties.
• If the Town or others decide to pursue this or alternative sewer concepts, additional
engineering and professional services will be needed to provide site -level detail and
an overall determination of project feasibility.
Guide to the Concept May
Rogers Road Small Area Planning Area The study area is delineated by a black and
white dashed border on the accompanying map. All currently platted parcels within this
area could be served either by existing (green) or potential (red) sewer lines, except for
three parcels in the extreme southeastern corner of the study area, which are expected to
have access to a separate sewer line that will serve the Church of the Advocate to be
constructed on a parcel located between Merin Road and the railroad right-of-way.
Existing and Potential Sewer Lines: Existing OWASA sewer lines and manholes for
the entire mapped area are shown in solid green. Sewer lines needed to serve the
unsewered portions of the Rogers Road Small Area Planning Area are shown in red._
Arrows indicate the direction of sewage flow.
Within the Rogers Road Planning Area Only: Platted parcels for which OWASA
sewer service is currently available are colored in light or dark green. Parcels which are
already connected to the OWASA sewer system are indicated with cross - hatching.
(Note: This is shown only for properties within the Rogers Road Planning Area.)
Preliminary Cost Estimates
Project Costs — The attached table summarizes preliminary estimated construction costs
of the concept plan. Total estimated project costs are summarized in the table below.
These were derived through the same methods that OWASA uses to estimate its own
capital project costs. Further details are available on request. The following important
caveats are noted:
• If the Town or others decide to pursue this or another sewer system concept,
additional engineering and professional services will be needed to provide site -level
detail and overall determinations of engineering feasibility.
43
Updated Rogers Road Sewer Service Concept Plan and Cost Estimates
February 8, 2011
Page 3
Construction cost estimates are preliminary only and are not based on a site -level
assessment of field conditions. Cost estimates will become more precise as detailed
engineering design proceeds. Please note that additional costs for acquiring sewer
line easements that may be needed across privately property have not been included
in these totals, due to the highly variable and case-specific nature of these costs.
Estimates are based on the best information available as of February 2011. In
general, construction costs have remained stable during the recessionary economic
conditions of the past three years, but OWASA assumes that project costs will
escalate at a 5 percent annual rate in the coming years as economic conditions
improve. We recommend that this inflation factor be used in any future
interpretation of these estimates.
The overall extent of this concept plan, including the number of unserved parcels,
will change in the future if (or as) individual development projects extend new
sewer lines to currently unnerved properties.
The costs shown below are for the extension of sewer to unserved portions of the
Rogers Road study area only. Additional eU r lot costs for connecting individual
properties to the sewer system are discussed in the next section.
Estimated Costs of Extending OWASA Sewer Service to All
Currently Platted Parcels within the Town of Chapel Hill's
Rogers Study Area
Engineering Design & Permitting
$198,000
Construction
$2,562,000
Construction Administration
$128,000
Construction Inspection
$128,000
Contingency
$414,000
Total
$3,430,000
Individual Connection Costs — As noted, the table above only includes estimates of
constructing the sewer collection system itself. Additional pgLlot costs for connecting to
the new system would include the following:
OWASA Service Availability Fee — This one -time connection fee represents the
proportional cost of "buying in" to OWASA's existing facility infrastructure (main sewer
lines, treatment plant, etc.) and is assessed according to the square footage of residential
Updated Rogers Road Sewer Service Concept Plan and Cost Estimates
February 8, 2011
Page 4
properties. The sliding scale of availability fees currently in effect ranges from $2,753
for homes of less than 1,300 square feet to $5,090 for homes of more than 3,800 square
feet. Fees for multi - family residences are $2,983 per unit. A different scale of
availability fees applies to non - residential sewer connections. Availability fees are
typically adjusted annually through OWASA's budget and rate- setting process.
Private PIumbing Costs — The pipe that extends from a building and connects to the
OWASA sewer line is called a "lateral" and is part of the private property served by the
public sewer. Installation and maintenance of a lateral line is the responsibility of the
property owner, who typically contracts with a private plumber for installation. Costs
depend on several factors, especially the distance from the building to the OWASA sewer
line, but are typically in the range of $25 per foot. That is, installation of a 50 -foot
lateral would cost approximately $1,250; a 100 -foot lateral would cost approximately
$2,500; and so forth.
OWASA Sewer Tap Charge — This fee is charged for physically connecting the private
sewer lateral to the OWASA sewer line and is in addition to the more costly sewer
availability fee discussed above. The base tap charge is currently $320.
Monthly User Fees — In addition to the one -time service availability fee, tap charge, and
private plumbing costs, all OWASA customers pay monthly water and sewer bills that
include a fixed service charge plus a water and sewer commodity charge based on the
number of gallons used each month. The typical water plus sewer bill of a residential
customer using an average of 5,000 gallons per month is about $80 per month.
OWASA staff has appreciated the opportunity of providing this information to support
Chapel Hill's Rogers Road Small Area Planning process and will be glad to answer
questions or provide further details as needed.
�r �4"
Edward A. Holland, AICP
Planning Director
attachments
cc: Mason Crum, P.E
44,
46�
Rogers Road Area Sewer Concept January 2011
Construction Cost Estimate Snreadsheet
Description
Units
Qty
Unit Price
Total
DESIGN COST
Engineer
LS
1
$110,000.00
$110,000.00
PERMITTING COST 3%
LS
1
$67,312.08
$67,312.08
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Consultant Engineer
LS
1
$0.00
Design Traffic(Pedestian Control Plan
LS
1
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
Traffic Control Setup
LS
1
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
Work Zone Fence
LS
$0.00
MOBILIZATION COST
Mobilization 10% of Job
LS
1
$224,373.60
$224,373.60
SITE PREP
Site Preparation 5% of Job
LS
1
$112,186.80
$112,186.80
Set Up Work Zone 5% of Job
LS
1
$112,186.80
$112,186.80
EARTHWORK
Excavation
0-4 FT Cut
LF
$37.00
.$0.00
4-6 FT Cut
LF
8618
$43.56
$375,400.08
6-8 FT Cut
LF
5747
$58.09
$333,843.23
8-10 FT Cut
LF
$72.61
$0.00
10-12 FT Cut
LF
$87.12
$0.00
Clear and Grub
AC
7.7
$10,000.00
$77,000.00
Sewer Pipe
8 inch DIP Sewerline (401 Liner)
LF
11251
$33.17
$373,195.67
12 inch DIP Sewerline (401 Line)
LF
3114
$53.00
$165,042.00
16 inch DIP Sewedlne (401 Liner)
LF
$72.97
$0.00
24 inch Seweriine (401 .Liner)
LF
$119.06
$0.00
Man Holes
Man Hole 4' Diameter
4' Depth
EA
35
$2,131.42
$74,599.70
6' Depth
EA
19
$2,537.35
$48,209.65
8' Depth
EA
4
$3,004.11
$12,016.44
10' Depth
EA
$3,762.33
$0.00.
Man Hole 5' Diameter
4' Depth
EA
$2,244.42
$0.00
6' Depth
EA
$2,836.75
$0.00
8' Depth
EA
$3,412.85
$0.00
10' Depth
EA
$4,119.80
$0.00
SUB TOTAL $2,106,366.05
Description
Units
Qty
Unit Price
Total
BORING AND J CKING
6 inch seweriine w/ 16 inch casing
LF
$325.00-
$0.00
8 Inch sewerline w/ 16 Inch casing
LF
$400.00
$0.00
12 inch sewedine w/ 24 inch casing
LF
100
$600.00
$60,000.00
SITE RESTORATION
Replacement of Pavement
LF
3361
$120.D0
$403,320.00
Removal & Replacement of Unusable
Material
EA
300
$150.00.
$45,000.00
Removal & Replacement of B6ick
Sidewalk
SY
$70.00
$0.00
Curb Replacement
LF
$70.00
$0.00
Rockwall Removal & Replacement
SY
$100.00
$0.00
Compaction of Road Sub Grade'
CY
$200.00
$0.00
Resurface Asphalt Pavement
SY
$90.00
$0.00
Seeding
SY
36679
$0.75
$27,509.25
Sift Fence
LF
20600
$3.00
$61,800.00
Tree Protection
LF
16600
$3.00
$49,800.00
AS -BUILT DRAWINGS & CLOSE OUT
LS
1
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
15% Contingency I
LS
1
$413,969.29
$413,969.29
SUB TOTAL $1,067,398.54
TOTAL COST $3,173,764.59
NOTES
$220 Per foot
47
Attachment G 4-8
Waste Tonnage from County and Towns Delivered to OC Landfill
April 25, 2011
This information is provided per Manager request to determine impact of potential surcharge on MSW.
The following tonnages were derived from our landfill scale management reporting system, with the
exception of the Hillsborough franchise tonnage, which was provided by the Town of Hillsborough. While
the franchise tonnage is not directly paid from the Town general fund, the Town is responsible for
coordinating and managing the franchise agreement, approving fees, etc.
Chapel Hill
Hillsborough
Carrboro
Orange County
FY- 2009/10
15,554 —MSW
1,177 —MSW
6,526 —MSW
11,175 —MSW
440 — C &D
5 — C &D
96 — C &D
28 — C &D
Franchise MSW =
2,091
FY- 2010 /11 YTD
11,595 — MSW
1,196—MSW
5,113 — MSW
8,195—MSW
(Through March)
37 — C &D
5 — C &D
79 — C &D
28 — C &D
Franchise MSW =
1,251