Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-06-1980 I i ! A G E N D A ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 3 OCTOBER 6, 1980 j COMMISSIONERS ROOM, ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA ? 10:00 A.M. 1. Does any Board member desire to modify this agenda? 2. Does any member of the audience desire to comment about: A. Matte'rs on this agenda? B. Matters not on this agenda? 3. The Actin ig Clerk submits minutes of a meeting held September 22 for Board consi deralti on. I 4. The Department of Transportation recommends the Board approve the addition of Workmon Road and Luther Drive to the state road system. 5. A resolution supporting efforts to expand the toll free calling area offered by Central Telephone Company, 6. The Manager recommends two CETA program participants be transferred: A. A clerical position in the Durham Office (on PSE) , to the CETA office in Hillsborough. B. A YETP participant, currently functioning as a switchboard operator, to PSE. This person would continue serving as a switchboard operator. e 7. Review of a revised plan for the allocation of office space in the Old Courthouse, the Jail and the former Health Building. ! 8. Report of bid results for a coal boiler and stoker to be used at the Old Cedar Grave Sehool . Comfort Engineers - $26,654. 9. The Purchasing Agent recommends the Board accept the bid of Comfort Engineers to provide and install a coal fired boiler in the Old Cedar Grove School . E 10. A status report on the county Coordinated Human Service-Transportation Delivery, plan: ! 11. Status report, County Energy Conservation Program. 12. An application for transfer of land title from Orange County to Donald Donnell ,White. I 13. The Planning Board recommends that the Orange County Board of Comissioners extend zoning to the whole of Bingham Township. 14. Appeals to the Board of Commissioners for release or refund of property tax: A. Richard Copeland B. Cynthia McDonald C. Lul a Bel l Swann D. Robert H. and Barbara Frey I E. George High 3 F. Robert Shankle G. LaniiN. Crabtree 15. Appointments. A. One vacancy exists on the Commission for Women. B. OWAS� I C. ABC Board D. County Planning Board (Cheeks Township resident) I E 2 3- RESOLUTION 4• 5. I . WHEREAS: Orange County believes that it is important that its 7. citizens be able to have proper communication with County Offices. WNIEREAS; Orange County citizens in the Southern and Eastern sec- 8. 9. tions off the County have to either wait for a foreign exchange line or 10. call long distance to contact County Offices at the County Seat. WHEREAS; The need to conserve energy will make Orange County 13.1 12 citizes more dependent on the telephone system to conduct their business. WHEREAS; Orange County spends a great deal of money renting for- 3• E 14- eign exchange lines and on long distance charges. N�W, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED; that the Orange County Board of any effort to increase the toll Commissioners do wholeheartedly support y 16. free c�Jljng area so that residents in the Southern and Eastern regions 17. � . of theilCounty may call the County Seat without incurring long distance �9. chargels. Iommissioners Walker seconded the motion. Vote: ayes, 5; noes, 0. 20 a 21. 22. E AGENDA ITEM # bA The p p ro o ed CETA Administrative Budget for the coming fiscal year ries no funds for clerical services. The county staff recommends th7 s support provided through use of a PSE employee. until September 30, a PSE employee was serving in! the Durham office as clerk. We recommend this person nsferred to the centralCETA office and a PSE position be allocated for this purpose. i i i I I ! E ! ! J3 I t ! I 3 I I I I I ! i ' AGENDA ITEM n 6B i `f f 3I fj1 4 { MEMO I TO: Saris uatti�, county Manager FROM: Mark H. Rees, Director of purchasing & Central Services:* I DATn: October 11, .1980 I RE: CETA Employee on Switchboard The Coun4 is presently running two switchboards and will continue to do so until, the move of County departments is completed. To run both these switch- boards has required the use of my, two permanent staff people as well as one full time and one. part-tire CETA employee. On October 5, 1980, any full-time XETP CETA employee will be terminated when her program ends. T am requesting that this employee be transferred to PSP status, so that she can continue to operate the sw. tchboard untilithey are consolidated and to prevent my department from being severly restricted in its other activities. if I were to use mir permanent personnel to take the place of the terminated CETA I position, it would allow my department approximately one (1) hour per day spent i I on clerical. operations. I i I i I I I AGZNUA ITEM # 7 MEMO ' County Manager T0: Sou► Oattis ,-' FmAt Maxk 1j. Rees, Director of Purchasing and Central Services. . October 1, 1980 DATE: ri Cr�unty Revision of Recommendation for the Relocation of cep Departments and Agencies i e temblr 16, 1980, you presented to the Board of Commissioners. On S e p County Stafs recommendation for the re location of County Off i f' ces. This recommendation �ra,s given tentative approval by the Board: but. the Staff was d to return d address two concerns that ater to the Board 'h asked first of aska I on the first floor _- these concerns involved moving several operations now located used for court the ©1d CouxtI se to other areas so that this floor could be of The second concern related functias such as a Law Library and conference rooms- . i f the Board to retain their present meeting rather than was the desire lex and the District be shuffled ba ck and Earth between the Human Services Comp courtroom functions in the concern of giving more space to Court related The first Courthouse lace the ABC rcauld be solved in the following manner- faacst. P pfd Probation. office. wit. part of i police in the present 4 Cheriff s office along four probation of icer: The ABC pola:c i could oocupy' one room on the fa.rst floor and with certain remodeling) - These two agencies could the top floor G could occupy � The then place their receptionists in the remaining room of the first floor. r scheduled to be returned to its accup'ed since it is porch area should not be Storage far ABC Police could be located in the basement of Original condition. i • I h e or two probation officers could "'so be located in e the Old Courtouses. on basement if theyso desired. of the i d the Board of Elections could be moved to the East Wing ,s operation. Becon I the Sheriff with a socked. door separating them from Health Dap 'tmen�, m ft• as well as a sepaxate eittxance and 'hathxov This would give them 712 sq- P of i facilities. Thy Board of Elections would continue to meet i.n the �Y with € 5e. My discussion with the Supervisor of Elect�.ons le t me the old Couxthou terna�- t while she would prefer to xemain where she ia, the al I the impression �.ha r s mcyve with the Shexlff. tabi.e to hex. I have not discussed this would be accep ail, complex, i e placed in the new Finally, the Magistrate's office should function closer I d to put their both to areatelkmoxe space in the old Courthouse an to the facil.i�ies it may zequi.xe secold concern that the Berard had, centered around theme meeting roomr The quarters agreed should remain where �-t is ttri�-r�ss suitable q� which all parties are g e, Bn.fvrtunately, this reduces the spade allocated to pla.� can be lac�tted elsewhere, with the planning Director Wing and inspections- I have discussed their Bile the i ent use of the Co�►i.ssioners` raeet3 room �+ who responded even without perman area for a conference room when the Commissioners were not in would use th€e long as i area would be suitable for' their needs as session) , that the remaining outside use of they could place desks in the foyer area for the receptionists'- I the Board of Comnisic�ners should be the conference room by parties other than m� • � and Inspections with the Hance ©ffic �. The alternative of placing Planning Of the New Courthouse, while keeping the Manager-'s pffl.oer on the gruund floor inG tc. on the top floor, would Probably not be Personnel r: e feasible since Ply i I 1 s Inspections wou.ldilose more space in such a more than if they moved to the E 3 top floor minus tie Commissioners meeting room. (1990 sq. ft. to 1500 sq. ft.) E I I i i i I I I E 3 i I j i 1I I 1 I j!} E I AGENDA ITEM 8 & 9 } I BID RESULTS � VEND©RJ Comfort 3' Engineers, Inc. Equipment: Price: I Boiler and Stoker for Cedar Grove_School (Installed) -526,654.00 Request for bids were sent to ten (10) other vendors who failed tb respond BID RECOMMENDATION It is .recommended that ()range County purchase fx'am Comfort Engineers, Inc. , 40 PS Neal Rd, Durham, N.C_, a boiler and stoker at a cost of $26,654.00 on the basis of being the only bid received and being compatible with the existing structure at Cedar Grave School. I 3 S E E AGENDA ITEM L11 k STATUS REPORT ON COORDINATED HUMAN SERVICE TRANSPORTATION DELIVERY IN ORANGE COUNTY E This report is intended to inform the members of the Board on the status of coordinatingclient transportation among the primary human service transpor- tation providers as well as to more clearly define certain aspects of coordina- tion so that th's office and the Board can approach the system's design and future county-agency negotiations with a common perspective. As a result of our two meetings in June of this ,year, the Transportation Office has been lapproaching the coordination question under four guidelines the Board determined at that time. These guidelines included: 1 . Use of� current agency vehicles to make up any consolidated agencyfleet. These vehicles should be leased at a token fee (ii.e. , $1 a year) and a depreciation factor should be included. 2. OperatIing funds for any proposed system should be drawn from fundsicurrently in use by the agencies. There should be no increase in County funding beyong levels currently established. 3 3 3. That �n,y such system should be cost effective. 4. We should investigate an expanded role for priEvate-for-profit operaiors in any provision for public ridership, especially along the Hillsborough-Chapel Hill corridor. In terms of the first guideline on vehicle use, the three agencies in question--COA, !OPCMH and JOCCA, have agreed in principle to the consolidated use of vehicles and the establishment of leasing arrangements and a depreciation formula. I need to establish if it is the Board' s wish that I enter into nego- tiations with the agencies using a $1 a year leasing arrangement and a $.073 per vehicle mile depreciation formula (for miles covered beyond established agency use) . Alterations in these figures might be necessary as a result of negotiations , but it would be our intent to stay within the overall expenditure guidelines laid down by the Board. I The information that was outlined in June on funding sources for a proposed consolidated human services transportation system is accurate for the periods covered. JOCCA is currently deciding if they want to maintain their own driver/ aides or switch the funding and the driver function to the proposed systems, COAls new status as a county agency should tend to Facilitate bringing them into the system. As for thl system being cost effective, per passenger trip casts can be lowered from the $1 .13-$1 .18 range to 93t-98t, along with less quantifiable benefits such as regular vehicle maintenance, reduced fuel costs , and a reliable pool of drivers. Ridavehg and timesharing tshould allow us to reduce overall fleet mileage by 10% and c use from I E The idea of expanding the role of private operators deserves further explorations. �rJ Harry Sidden of Burlington is currently operating a one-round trip daily service from northern Orange to the UNC Memorial Hospital area. He has expressed interest in expanding service and talking to the Board about a proposed resolution to the State granting operating rights along the Hillsborough- Chapel hill corridor. Mr. McBroom of Orange County may also be interested in providing such service. Mould the Board be interested in talking to Mr. Sidden and/or Mr. MCBroom about increased service possibilities? Whatever the Board's inclination as to fixed route service along this one corridor, T believe we need to address the provision for general public rider- ship in the final design of consolidated human services transportation. No matter how efficiently we schedule client transportation, we are likely to have some empty seats, due to client illness, if for no other reason. By filling these seats with general public riders at a nominal fee (50t-75t per trip) , overall system's efficiency can be increased and a service can be provided for the public, especially the transportation disadvantaged in northern Orange County. By establishingla consolidated system and a track-record of public ridership, we can put ourselves in an excellent position for qualifying for state and federal funding (especially Sec. 18) of the system in the future. T would strongly urge the Board to include a provision for general public ridership in the consolidated system and a'llo� me to develop a fare structure. Authorization is needed to enter into negotiations with private garage operators in the county to discuss maintenance contracting. Considering the overall condition of the available fleet a system of regular and preventativ6 maintenance as apposed to current on-demand maintenance is necessary. i This office will continue to explore the possibility of expanding Orange County's fuel allocation so that fuel will be available to the consolidated fleet from County supplies. Since a number of vehicles are based in the Chapel Hill-- Carrboro area use should work in conjunction with County public Works in estab- lishing a fueling site in the southern part of the county. A personnel policy needs to be established for }tiring and training drivers (largely from the pool of current agency drivers). We will work closely with the County personnel office in these matters. We will continue to consult with our primary agencies and relevant county offices in all phases of system's development.. Along with subjects covered so far, such matters as routing, scheduling, vehicle dispatching, information and referral , billing and accountability, record keeping, and purchasing will also continue to be developed. i AGONDA ITEM # 13 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT MIU SBCRCUGH I NORTH CAROLINA i 27278 as°'m °r F7 �p�r �t0t`6 i MEMORANDUM To: Sam Cttis, County Manager From* Planning; Staff 9F p I Bet-. . . -P1ann ng Board recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners Date: October 1, 1980 At the Orange County Planning Board's meeting on September 30, 1980, the Bdard adopted a resolution dealing with the proposed Midway Airport in Bingham TO,wnstiip. The Board approved the resolution unanimously. Enclosed: M'i utes and resolution T�o memos concerning airport I I i I I E i 1 1 I E i , 1 i oR.ANGE CU-.TNTY PLA.NTUNG DEPARTMENT j HILLSIBOROTTGH NORTH CAROLINA j 27278 I i7 5z 3 Planning Board Minutes i September 30, 1980 Members Present: Logan Z'rvin, .Chairperson; Art Cleary, John Wilson, Steve Kizer, jClaudine Harris, Bazel Lunsford, Nancy Laszlo, Alice Gordon Staff Present; ! Jim Polatty, Pick Cannity, Fred Luce Agenda Item #1 A discussion on the proposed Midway Airport for Bingham Township which had been tabled at the September 29,, 1980 meeting was brought up for further discussion.. Steve Kizer made the following motion: i Whereas a develop� eut organization known as the Buck Mountain Development Group has proposed -that a general aviation airport and an industrial park be constructed on a tract of land located near the intersection of N. G. Highway 54 west and State Road 1958, and I Whereas, the 'Town iaf Carrboro has been requested by this development group to sponsor this airport and to apply for federal funds to pay for the majority of the cost of construction of this airport, and I Whereas, the Orange County Planning Board has previously recommended to the Orange County Board of Commissioners that a thorough study be made of the need 'and; site of an airport of this type, and Whereas; an unplanned and precipitous decision to construct a major band use such as a coiabi.ned major airport and industrial park prior to the completion of the Land iJse Plan and. revised Zoning Ordinance for Orange County may prove to be an irreversible mistake for the future development of Orange County, and I Whereas, the Orange County Planning Board in recommending planning and development policies in its sole„jurisdiction has advised that major development be directed to "jor urban areas, and I Whereas, the proposed location of the airport .and industrial park would encourage high density!xresiderrtial and commercial development in the surrounding area which would iuripact on the University and Cane Creek watersheds, increasing pollution and strip development, and Whereas, a project of the magnitude proposed by the said development group requires intensive study to determi e if the, said project is in keeping with the overall longterm goals for rural Orange County, and Therefore, be it recommended by the Orange County Planning Board that the Orange County Board of Commissioners extend Zoning to the whole of Bingham Township i ORANGE {:COUNW PLANNING DEPARTMENT I X=SBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 2'7278 i �agasp ��4 17 SL I MEMORANDUM T0: Sam Gattis, County Manager FROM: Fred Luce, Teresa Hawkins, Planning Staff - �-- DATE: September 26, 1980 i RE: Approval Process. for a Private Airport --------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- The proposed airport in Bingham Township will need to get approval from Orange County, the State Division of Aeronautics and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) before it could begin operation. 3 The Division of Aeronautics and the FAA requirements are minimal for privately financed airports. The Division of Aeronautics requires the completion of a one page farm with a sketch of the airport 'on the reverse side. The plan is checked for jetbacks from the nearest state maintained highways. The requirement is at least a 500 foot setback from the end of the runway and 150 foot setback from state reads paralled to the runway. The FAA also requires submission of a*e page form and reviews the proposal from an airspace stand- point. The nearest airport of any size is Horace Williams Airport and its airspace would not extend anywhere near the proposed site. These two approvals generally take less than 30 days. It is not known whether the developers of this proposed facility have applied for these two permits. The proposed Midway Airport will also require three local permits. A building permit cannot be issued until a grading permit and health department improvements permit are issued. A Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan for Midway Airport was submitted on Thursday, September 18, 1980. The S & E Department has 30 days to review the plan. At the e0d of this 30 day review period, the plan is either approved and a grading permit issued, or the S & E Departm6nt cdn require that additional information, moaifications or revisions be incorporated into the original plan. If the latter occurs, the S & E Department has another 30 days period to review the revised plan from the day it is resubmitted. To this date, a satisfactory plan has not been presented to the S & E Office, although several revised plans have been submitted. This S'& E Plan„ as with any other S & E;Plan, must follow our Guide for Developing Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. Since this is a large scale project, several complicated sediment controiis will be required. I I Sam Gattfs September 26, 1980 Page 2 I The developers have already received Health Department approval for this project. The b6ilding permit can be issued as soon as a grading permit is issued. FL/TH/mb I I e I 3 i I I i 1 1 E f I ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING MPARTMENT SBOROIUGB NORTH CAROLINA 27278 I �aOulu ft( w rya 'a' • w � 37 i i ba Cal IK6"Q` 3i I 3 MEMORANDUM I TO: Sam Gattis, County Manager FROM: Fred Luce, Planner DATE: September 26, 1980 RE: Development of an Airport in Bingham Township ---------------I-------------------------------------------------------------- The possible development of a private airport in Bingham Township raises a number of planning issues. These include: l) impacts on nearby development, { 2) relationship of the site to the proposed Bingham Township land use plan, 8) compatibility with the Regional Airport Systems Plan: Region J, 4) location of the site in relation to proposed Orange County transpdrtation improvements. Impacts on Nearby Development: There are a number of residences and commercial uses existing a ;ong N. C. 54 in the approach area to the southern end of the proposed runway (site. They include ten residences including four mobile homes, an auto salvage yard, two convenience stores and a wholesale mail--order distri- bution firm, j There will lbe some impacts on this area from aircraft noise and the poten- tial danger from crashes. Some restrictions on certain kinds of development will also be necessary immediately beyond the ends of the runway in the approach area. The most Icritical part of the approach area is the first 1 ,000 feet beyond the paved; runway called the "clear zone". This area should be free of vertical obstructions for maximum safety during takeoffs and landing. If zoning were in effect in Bingham Township, an airport hazard district could be created in the ordinance! to keep the clear zone free of obstructions. Lacking this, the airport owners would need to seek agreements with adjacent landowners to insure the safety of thl approach area. j Sam Gattis September 26, 1980 Page 2 I I Bi n ham Townshi p p land Use Plan: Planning Staff has developed a draft land use plan for Bingham Towns 7p. The proposed airport site is located within a large area that is classified Agricultural-Residential in the plan. The intent of this plan categolry is that, Agricultural-Residential areas are areas where the predominant activitiesiare related to the land and where farming can continue to be economically productive in the future. I Within the general agricultural-residential classification of the area, the intersection of N. C. 54 and Orange Chapel Clover Garden Road (SR 1958) has been designated as a rural commercial activity "node". The intent of the rural commercial category is to accomodate limited commercial uses that might serve local residents in rural areas. This would include the convenience stores with gasoline pumps that already exist at this intersection. The proposed air- port is in Coll ns Creek watershed and outside of both the Cane Creek and University Lake watersheds. The proposed airport and related 72 acres of light industrial development in this area isinot in concert with the present draft land use plan, I puRegional Airport System Plan, The concept of the Regional Airport System Plan shed by th Triangle J Council of Governments in 1979 was to have Raleigh- Durham Airport ringed by several general aviation airports. In Orange County, the best site for such reliever airport was recommended for the east-central area of the county between Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. This general locale was apparently chosen because of good access to ground transportation (1-85 and proposed T-40) which would, make it .convenient to serve pilots in the Chapel Hill , Durham and Research Triangle areas. The proposed airport in Bingham Township is not within the general locale recommended forla reliever airport in Orange County by the Airport Systems Plan and would be poorer access to users in Durham and Research Triangle Park, Transportation improvements: As noted above the proposed airport site in Bingham Township could riot take good advantage of I-85 or proposed 1-40. However it is located along N.1 C. 54, a first class two,-lane highway. Heavy use of the airport by persons east and south-east of Chapel Hill could increase traffic on the 15-501 bypass and renew pressure for a "southern bypass" of Chapel Hill . FL/mb i I i 3 l I 3 3 r r� ORANGE COUINTy PLANNING Dr--PART1vMNT 11ILLSBOROITGR XORTTE CAR03M7A 27278 6aLLa10 �Y 6 - 4 PLANNING BOARD T'4=TFS October 7, 1980 ` Members Present- Dr. Logan Irvin, Att Cleary, Dr'. John Wilson, Dr. Steve Ki,,r, Mrs. Hazel Lunsford, Ms. Nancy Laszlo, Robert D. Greer Staff Presents dim Polatty, Rack CannityY Sue Wagoner Item #1 "here were no additions to the agenda- Item #2 Minutes from September 29, 30, 1980 me etings were approved with corrections- Item #3 Carrie Copeland Subdivision Mr. Cannity used aerial photographs and a County tax map to show the exact location of the Copeland properties, Be then explained the reason for requesting exemption for the road at the Depart- construction with the understanding th ment would be given a maintenance agreement annd d provisions Depart sions foo r an escrow account wdoul3 be made if necessary_ Mr. Cannity stated that Dalton Loftin, Attorney ncy d Carrie Bateman were present to answer any questions the Board might have. Dr. Irvin asked if the Batemans could not afford to build this road until the lots were sold: ' Mr. Cleary stated this was a,single ownefship situation- 161x, Loftin: stated the s=veyor had put Carrie Bateman on the plat because she was the Berson listed on the tax records as the owner. He gave a brief history of..the Copeland property,. saying he would provide a more detailed explanation upon re- quest. Mr. Loftin indicated that the owners'of lots 2 and 3 were unwilling to sign a road maintenance agreement at this time_ Dr. Kizer asked if a right of way had been reserved extends in ndthe deeds. Mr. Loftin answered yes, saying the y0aa from a state maintained road through lots I and 2, Be further indicated that part of the proposed road had been recorded in 1902. -1 r 6L L ;l Planning Board Minutes pctober 7, 1980 Page 2 Dar. Irvin asked if there were any other, questions. Dr- Wilson. asked for a brief statement of the issue.. Hr, Cannity briefly explained the issue, Mr. Cleary mgved to approve subdivision_ Dr. Kizer -- Second. Dr. :Ervin asked for discussion. Mr. Cannity stated that the pr©p050d division required COUrtty planning Department appraval. Mr. Loftin disagreed, further skating 11is clients nave been seeking a building permit from the Planning Department since the end of August, 1980. Mr. Cleary calked the question. .Dr. Irvi.0 showed notion which carried unamiouslY. Dr. Kizer asked that it be noted the Plann'-ing Staff had recommended this exemption be approved by the Board_ E 1 ULk5 . u: ORANGE COvW PLANNING UFPAR'�'��LN'r XULLS3a0R0'UGX N07FY.PEE C,A ROUN A 4� MEMO TO: planning Board FROK: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Carrie Copeland Subdivision goad Construction Exemption DATE: September 304 19BO - The Orange County Planning Department recammends that the ' Change County Planning Board approve an exemption for the construction of a private Class 'C' road. The subdivision Ordinance allows the Board to grant an exemption in Section x'11-B--5-b. The exemption would require the construction of the Class 'C` road to any lot at the time the lot was sold or a building permit requested_ The property owner will record a right--of-way roar] maintenance agreement at the time of the recordation of the subdivision., i ,f ... /sw ., t ( 46.4 5 AC, k' 424 AC, 2713 BagB 2,� 47� 0 (1e 5AC /,� ._..._ 6g _ --•• "` ^' 46 , 33 AC. 76.29 AC ISO ' c 1512 _ 25 4352 — 12.5 AC. 103.15 AC to CD df �iEt3 S9 r a, W �r .,JS . '--w•a: sww_ .nom a a�c"w�r..:�X Kf 5 - is Where deemed necessary to the proper �e understanding of a proposed subdivision or development plan, centerline ,profiles of streets may be required 5 - Nanie of abutting recorded subdivisions_ Abutting acreage not subdivided shall be designated as "Lands of ,5 - k. The accurate ;location. and .dcscxiption an, of all monuments. 5 -.k Z_ .. A'space shall be provided on the face of the Final Plat not less than 3 inches by 3 inches, for the impxession of a Final Approval Stamp- ' Said space shall �� ti be free from any 3 ettcrimg or ctra�+ing and in the case of a blueprint shall. 'be blocked out to print ikwbitf 1. If the subdivision is to contain private= he roads, a verified certificate, ^signed by the �lkst owner of the Land subdivided, .attesting the fact that an instrument 'will be recorded ., with the Final Plat which guaXantees (a] a right of access to any, private: road in :the subdivision by all lots served by the road, and (b) maintenance of any px1vate xoacl in ,ar the subdivision at the standards set for t� approval. The guarantees of �ri.ght of access _-or and maintenance of private road in the sub - division shall run with the land and the guaranteeing instrument will be presented ?1l to the Planning Board for appxoval with the .Final Plat_ 5 ^- m. Where the construction of a private road ;sion is to be postponed, pursuant to Section 1V-- e B-5-b, lots served by that road shall be designated on the plat: PiThis lot may not 'be sold, nor a building permit issued until j the access road has been built as specified e for this subdivision:," IIT E - 6. it is recommended that the °k3anual of Practices for Land Surveying in, North Carolina" by the N_ C_ Board of Registration be followed :in preparing s the Final Plat. h j 4 Y l 4 M�`T ;ry:L•rt. ^a y;r, •vr x� L.:.ti..--....-�..-'^.^ .•"y,.�.:::-'i..�`l;ry ...... :�^�s:i.; z'r';;�4a.•.G,�:;1 n.�' �.G;=r3,. `f"`•trM.•;�;. z,- •"1'^�. t,.�iy.°x:.°�.: ._ 'Y4i*�.=' � � `.S �,, r.r 'i�::r'•.,t:n '�-.�_f �'.�����'''' +....,...., l"Z�€.-„='N c�F..3unaT,a.=�......i:L'imv.��i:±�fG i IV B S. LOT LAYOUT IV _ B _ 5 -- €. The shape and orientation of lots shah .•� be appropriate to the location of the sub- division and the development intended. ..F Commercial and industrial lots shall be of sufficient size to include off-street service facilities, and off--street parking of all vehicles used by all patrons and employees. IV 5 _ b. Each lot shall abut a publicly dedicated street except in subdivisions approved with private roads. In the latter situation■ each lot must abut a private road h a provecl maintained read which is shown on he s appp standard plat and constructed pursuant to the set by orange County. Upon recommendation of the Planning Board and with the approval of the County Commissioners, the construction ©t the access road may be postpoane c. until Uuk#ld-- ing or market development is undertaken. In £.. this case the lots shall be designated on ` the plat: This lot may not be sold, nor a building permit issued, until the access road uilt as specified for this .subdivision, has been b abut " has lot must t the street or road with a frontage of a least 24 feet. Except cohere reverse frontage is desirable double frontage lots should be avoided. IV - B - 5 - c. All lots shall. conform to each and all the requirements of the Orange County Zoning Ordi- '` nance for the zoning district in which they i are Located. .a w Xr'! AGENDA ITEM # 14 I MUFST FG1R TAX RWZ&9F, September 2* 1980 I Richard B. Cop4artdl Hillsbormigh Towns4p, Account #6511 Mr. Copelatad Listed as aatomobd2e, and $1010 worth of other personal property for 1980 and now clams he lives idth bis mother and the o17 i thing he should be taxed for is the automobile. I I Requested release o� 1980 tax: i Coumtp Tax $10.05 County Tate Listing Paaalty 1.91 HU-Us orough City Tax 7.07 H' borough Late 1,a sting Fena3- y ... _ Total: j MILL— Order E E i I i Date I i i i i i E { MUMT FM TAX RK&M i August 25, 1980 Cynthia A= McDonald Chapel. Hill TomshiIp, Account 60865 i Ma. McDmu-OA made a tamely listing for 1980 ($800 worth oY persmuml property) and now ripgaests that her account be "cancelled." bec=se she is a graduate stud i t living with her mother and owns no propeAyo Requested. Release aid 1980 Tax: i Couaty Tax $7.96 Chapel. Hill. — Carrboro School District Tax ; 2.32 Chapel. Hill City Tax 10.5 Total: i $20.80 i I Order I Date i i I I i i i i i I f i i I i i 1 i I E j e E 1 HST FDA TAX MUD August 1980 I I Dula Belk. Swa= P. 0. 5= 27 Carrbory N. C. 27$10 f I Chapel Hill T+whi�, (Accomt #36552 (1979) lbs. Swmm WSB assessed Carrboro City Tax far 1979 althmo she resided vuttsdde the city taii Wn the Soath Osage Fare District. Nefaamd of 1978 tax i eque ted: i i Ca=bao City Tau $19.80 less e Ste t� Or asge Fare District ct a " — 1.80 Toto.: i $ 0 i I EI i E E Order I Date" I 1 1 i E i i 1 E E - I I RETLST FGH TAX RUHD SePtembear 7t 1980 Robert H. & Barbara H. Frey Route 7, Box 655 Old bra Road Chapel. Hill, N. C. 27514 i Chapel. Hill Tomshipt Account A21239 i For .1980 the Freya Listed two automobiles, a 1979 B W and a 1976 Mercedes-Benz. The ENV, idattafied as a two-door coupe by the Frryst was asaigaed a valuatica of $22,950 (model. 633epi) althotgh it is actually a two-da sW= (Mods 3201) and d�OWd have a valuktion of $10,0025. The Mercedes, identified as a, four door sedaat was assigned a 'valuation of $8,675 (modal 280) although it should have a valuation Of $9t373 (model 300D). i Requested fef nd of 1980 Tax: Coizuty Tax $121.64 Chapel HJ I I - Carrboro School DiArict Tax Totals i $157.09 I Order i Date ) i 3 3 1 i E I I - E REQMT FM TAX RELFAW September 26, .1980 Georges High 5ecretazy—Treasure WHB Development, Inc. I I Chapel. Hill Tomship Tax Map 114D Parcel.j 3.1 Tract 14708 (2.5 Acres, Lot 18 flap 3 Stoneybrook) I Mr. High requ a Its that the current tact valuation of $83oo for this lost be reduced beacawe the Orange County Health Department has determined that it is not suitable for a septic system. € i i 3 ! s € i i I i i ! I ! i I iE i Ii I i &FQ= IE TAY RWMSE September ib, 19W i Robert J. Shamkle I Chapel Hill Tawshi Tax leap 72 Bock HI Parcel bA Tract #9642 2.23 Acres (Lots 3,111, 12 Goose Farm)0 oteV Road, Chapel Hill Dr. Shankl.e r I gists that the 0rtnt $9,000 valuation Of this property be cmside�rably reduced because the Ormge County Health Department has coe rmcd (September 31P 1980) that the property is =itabl.e for septlic tanks and the cost of providing city sewer is prohibitive ($3�,j000)« i i f E E l 1 { I i I i i € REQUEST FOR TAX REMD Septenber 8, 1980 { I I Mrs. Lmie N. Crabtree Route 79 Boz 165 Durham, North Carolina zno7 I 1 Chapel Hill. Township Tax Map 26, Parcel I1, Tract #1407 € This tract has been mapped and taxed as 54 acres although it contains aO,v 494 acres. Mrs. Crabtree is requesting a tax refund based upon the difference is valuation of $1,800. € Refund requested: E 1979 Tax County Max $1b.20 Chapel H 11 - Carrboro School District Tax 4.86 New hope Fare District Tax. 1.44 1978 Tax € Count T'ak Chapel Him.-Carrboro School 15 12 District Tax 4-39 New Hope Fire DtiArict Tax. 1• ,� TotAl _$.U.6 2.,..... 1 E {E I Order Date I i i E