HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-21-1985 t
ORANGE COUNTY
BUM OF CONKISSIa4M
AGENDA
REGUIAR MEETING
TURSW, MAY 21, 1985
OFD POST OFFICE
aZPEL KUL, N.C.
7:30 P.M.
A. POM
B. AM ER= Comm=
1. Matters on the Printed Agenda
2. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
C. AMINnum
D. PUBLIC HS&EM
1. Preliminary Assessment Full--Wilkins Drive
N.
1. W.% Sludge Application Practices
PAGE # F. IT_M ,FM DHCISIM
041 1. Wilkins Drive--PPP Project
052. 2. Heart's Ease Subdivision--Preliminary
-054 3. Renfrew Drive,. Hrigadoon Drive and McDermott Drive
-PPP Project - Petition
072 4. Request for Continuation of Public Hearing--S'cbolar
add Weng Rezonings
074 5. Amend Orange County Private Road Standards to
Eliminate Requirement for Road Sign on Roads Iess
Than 500 Feet
082 6. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Section 8
Housing Annual Contributions Contract
089 7, Budget Amendment
. •.``:94 t og-acts for Pipe Insulation. Removal (backup material
will be delivered prior to meeting of May 21 , 1985)
G. ADJOURNMENT
R''
Page I
ORMGE: COUNTY
BOARD OF 00NIlUSSIONEFS Action Agenda
ACTION AGENDA 1 E ABSTRACT -item No. C
MWIME DATE May 21� 1985
Subject: Appoiwn=Ts
beputirent: Public Hearing: yes X no
Attacbmint(s) Contact:
UNDER SEPARATE COVER BEVERLY A. Blythe, Clerk
Phone Number: 732-8181, 968-4501 or 227-0321
PUFWOSE: To maintain membership at effective levels on Commissioners' appointed Boards.
The following vacancies are announced for the first time for information only:
B-4 - oRaGg coLwff SMIOR CITIZENS WARD - I vacancy (termination of term
for Dr. James Allen.)
p=px a nxq .CM MCI L_ - 1 vacancy (resignation of Mary C. Davison.
The following vacancies are announced together with the indication of the
status of securing candidates for possible appointment consideration. All
vacancies have been, duly advertised.
A-4 CORMSION FOR WOMEN 7 T vacancies; 4 resumes have been received.
A-6 inwsmm DEVEWINENT REVENUE BOND AUTHORITY _ 3 vacancies; no new
resumes have been received.
A-13 - RWRENTION AIM PARKS ADVISORY COUNCIL - 2 vacancies; no new resumes
have been received.
A-14 - SECONDARY ROAD _aWROVREW ADVISORY-COmmr1qMR vacancy;.no new
resumes have been received.
B-1 BOARD OF HEALTH - I vacancy; no resumes have been received.
B-5 - DOMICILIARY HM ADVISORY C01%ff vacancy; no new resumes have
been received.
RMING HOME CON1UNITY ADVISORY'COI.MTTEE - 2 vacancies; no resumes
have been received.
11-3-1 - SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE No new resumes have been received.
IWACT: 13-15 -- SCH0_0L_ MERGER STUDY CoplMISSION- - lh resumes have been received.
C-T - ORANGE COUIPTY BOARD OF ADJUSTME17T - No resumes have been received.
WHM CROSS FIRE DEPAR040T - 5 vacancies; 5 resumes are attached.
IMPACT: to maintain 100% membership on Commissioners' appointed Boards and Commissions.
RECOMMENDATION
As the Board decides.
002
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date May 21, 1983
Action Agenda
Item #i9l
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON THE OWASA LAND APPLICATION PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
PUBLIC HEARING —Yes No
Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH'
(1) 4/29/85 PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION
(2) 4/29/85 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
(3) 3/21/85 BINGHAM TAC MINUTES
(4) 4/11/85 BINGHAM TAC MINUTES INCLUDING
RESOLUTIONS;
(5) 4/19/85 LETTER TO OWASA FROM PLANNING DEPARTMENT;
(6) GRUNDY COUNTY, ILLINOIS CASE;
V) SITE MAP - DURHAM HEIRS/HEADWATERS TRACTS;
(8) DEM PERMIT;
(9) MAP SUBMITTED TO PLANNING BOARD SHOWING SLUDGE SITES-PROPOSED/EXISTING
IN BINGHAM TOWNSHIP;
(10) PETITION FROM CLOVER GARDEN CHURCH COMMUNITY
(11) 1/23/85 LETTER 1±0 HARTLEY FROM NRCD
(12) Excerpt from 12/31 TJ COG SLO.QE AM SEETAGE IN HBGION_ jj_
Telephone Numbers
Hillsborough - 732-8181
Durham - 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 968-4501
PURPOSE: To receive the report of the Planning Board on the OWASA land
application of municipal sludge program including the
resolution of the Planning Board adopted April 29, 1985.
Owasa has conducted a program in Orange County providing for
land application of treated municipal sludge at agronomic rates
since the 19701s. This program was established in cooperation
with the farm community, specifically the Soil Conservation
Service. OWASA currently conducts these operations under
agreement with the owners on 8 privately owned farms in Orange
and Chatham Counties, most of which are located in the Collins
Creek sub-basin. Recently, OWASA proposed to purchase two
properties (Headwaters and Durham Heirs tracts) upon which to
conduct similar operations under OWASA ownership. In the case
of one of the parcels, OWASA was required to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement in order to obtain federal
funding for purchase of the tract. For all properties
utilitized in the program OWASA is required to obtain and
operate under Department of Environmental Management permits.
003
REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON THE O-WASA LAND APPLICATION PROGRAM
PAGE TWO
MAY 21, 1985
NEED: On April 29, 1985 the Bingham Township Advisory Council, along
with several other township residents, expressed concern to the
Planning Board about OWASA's proposed land application of
municipal sludge to OWASA-owned property. Concerns were also
raised about the conduct of OWASA operations on privately-owned
farmlands under active Department of- Environmental management
permits.
IMPACT: By receiving this report the Board will be made aware of the
concerns, raised by the Planning Board, Bingham Township
Advisory Council and residents of the Community.-
Following receipt of the report the Board may wish to take
action on this matter by directing the Planning .Board, Planning
Staff and/or any other County Department or agency to prepare
recommended procedures under which sludge application
operations would be approved and conducted.
RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides.
I
I
I
i
I
004
RESOLUTION BY THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
ADOPTED APRIL 29, 1985 AS REVISED
Whereas, the Bingham Township Advisory Council has voiced
legitimate concerns regarding OWASA's application of treated
municipal sludge to land in Bingham Township and concerns
regarding possible health hazards to the community.
Whereas, the Planning Director has ruled that this use 'falls
outside the zoning regulations of Orange County.
whereasj, the Planning Board apparently has no direct
authority in this matter.
Therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Board forward to
the Board of County Commissioners all of the material which
it has received on this matter, including citizen comments at
our meeting, with the recommendation that the Commissioners
review the concerns voiced by the Bingham Township Advisory
Council and other citizens. The Planning Board would
particularly like to draw the Commissioners' attention to the
question of whether the County should assume responsibility
for overseeing the application of sludge via the special use
permit or other process;
Goy
1
DRAFT
MINUTES
PLANNING BOARD MEETING
APRIL 29. 1985-
Members Present: Alice Gordon, Chair, Chris Best, Ruth Burnette
(Arrived 7:47) , Peter Kramer, Frank Pearson, Sharlene
Pilkey, David Shanklin.
Members Absent: Steve Kizer (unexcused) , Valerie Greenberg, Betty
Margison, Steve Yuhasz.
Staff Present: Marvin Collins, Susan Smith, Gene Bell, Joanna
Bradshaw.
Gordon requested, with the consent of the Planning
Board, to . move item #5 RECEIPT OF BINGHAM TAC
RECOMMENDATIONS-OWASA LAND APPLICATION OF MUNICIPAL
SLUDGE to item #4.
Two comments by Chair; (1) a letter has been sent out
to the Township Advisory Councils telling about the
new operating guidelines and asking for resumes to be
turned in by May 10th. There will be 9 to 11 members
appointed to each TAC.
(2) Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments pertaining to
road capacity and modification of Special Use Permit/
Planned Development Articles is being worked on by
staff. Chair requested that these be ready for the
regular June meeting or July 9 special meeting in
j order that they may be presented at the August public
hearing.
Agenda item #4 Receipt of Bingham TAC Recommendations-Owasa Land
Application of Municipal Sludge.
00C
2
The purpose of this agenda item is to receive the
resolutions of the Bingham TAC regarding the OWASA
land application of municipal sludge program, forward
by the TAC to the Planning Board on April 11r 1985
and attached to minutes of that meeting.
OWASA has conducted a program in Orange County
providing for land application of treated municipal
sludge at agronomic rates since the 19701x. This
program was established in cooperation with the farm
community, specifically, the Soil Conservation
Service. OWASA currently conducts these operations
under agreement with the owners on 8 privately owned
farms in Orange and Chatham Counties, most of which
are located in the Collins Creek sub-basin. Recently, -
OWASA proposed to purchase two properties (Headwaters
and Durham Heirs tracts) upon which, to conduct
similar operations under OWASA ownership. In the case
of one of the parcels, OWASA was required to prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement in order to obtain
federal funding for purchase of the tract. For all
properties utilitiaed in the program OWASA is
required to obtain and operate under Department of
Environment Management permits.
The Bingham TACT along with several other township
residents, have expressed concern about OWASA's
proposed land application of municipal sludge to
OWASA-owned property. Concerns were also raised
about the conduct of OWASA operations on privately-
owned farmlands under active Department of
Environmental Management permits.
The Planning Department's interpretation of the
provisions of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance as
they apply to the OWASA program and operations on
both privately owned and OWASA owned property is
outlined in the attached April 190, 1985 letter from
OWASA.. The letter specifically states that the
current proposed operations are exempt from
regulations under the Orange County Zoning Ordinance.
The Board may wish to forward these concerns to the
Board of Commissioners for their consideration.
The staff interpretation in this matter may be
appealed, however, only to the Board of Adjustment.
Gordon stated that the Bingham TAC is advisory to the
Planning Board and in that capacity it is aware of
real concerns regarding the OWASA operation.
However, the Planning Director has ruled that the use
falls outside of the Zoning Ordinance regulations for
00
3
Orange County. Therefore, the Planning Board has no
direct authority in the matter; the official appeal
for a change of ruling of the interpretation of the
Zoning Ordinance has to go to the Board of
Adjustment. The outcome here tonight could not be
any official action because the Planning Board has no
decision making authority; however, in its capacity
as advisors to the Board of Commissioners it could
express our concerns.
Representatives of Bingham TAC comments follow:
Dan Eddleman, Member of Bingham TAC,' stated that the
concerns of the TAC were expressed in the minutes of
the TAC Minutes of March 21 and April 11, 1.985 page _
He noted there was new information
regarding additional sites.
Michael Hartley stated that he is not a member of the
TAC, but is a resident in Bingham Township. He
presented a map showing the locations of sludge
application sites existing and proposed in Bingham
Township (the map is attached on page of these
minutes.) . OWASA is pursuing the utilization of
lands in Bingham Township for the disposal of sewage
sludge under a grant from Environmental Protection
Agency and they have in the past used private
farmlands, indicating that these materials were soil
conditioners, nutrients of agricultural nature.
These materials are also sewage materials sewage
sludges as clearly identified in the permit from EPA
which is a permit which applies to industrial waste
and other waste. It makes no comment about these
materials being agricultural in terms of the permit
to discharge. In the summer of 1984, the conditions
and. management of these programs became so offensive
to the residents of area 4 of the map that a petition
was circulated among the Clover Garden Church
Community. 82 names were submitted to OWASA.
The petition indicated that these materials were a
nuisance and that they created runoff problems,
terrible odors, attracted large swarms_ of flies,
contaiminated wells. The petition was circulated in
either late July or August. 1984. No public response
was received from OWASA in the matter of this
petition. Hartley noted that he had a copy of the
petition if the Board wished to see a copy. Gordon
stated that she would like a copy. (A copy of the
petition is attached to page of these minutes.)
Gordon questioned whether the areas on the map were
all the areas with which to be concerned.
I
OO
4
Bartley stated that one point raised at the TAC
meeting was that the drainage area of Collins Creek
was the receiving area for the sludge with the
exception of one site on New Hope Creek and two sites
in Chatham County. Otherwise, in Orange County all
of those sites that you see there are in a 3 mile
area. They are all located in the Collins Creek
drainage basin. This has been pointed out to OWASA
and they responded that they have no policy about not
dumping this material in the drainage basins of Cane
Creek and into Morgan Creek in the University Lake
Watershed. These two drainage areas are the present
and potential future water supply for 'the urban place
of Chapel gill.
EPA has just circulated a request for comment on an
environmental finding of no significant impact.
One of the points that was made was -that Collins
Creek was the nearest drainage stream and no adverse
impact was anticipated. The findings of significant
impacts which were submitted to EPA by OWASA clearly
indicated to EPA that OWASA is not discharging this
material into the water supply. However, there is
much concern regarding concentration in Collins Creek
versus other areas.
Sites 2 & 3 are approximately 60 acre tracts. Number
2 the Weaverhauser tract, is actually 4 lots called
the Headwaters subdivision. Tract 3 is Durham Heirs
property. Owasa has purchased the Durham Heirs
tract, but did not openly state that they were
purchasing the property and that they would be using
it for sludge disposal to the surrounding community.
There was no public notification, discussion nor-
public hearing.
They also indicated that they had options on tract 2,
the Headwaters Subdivision, which they have done a
soil environmental impact study drafted by OWASA, not
by an outside agency. They are now approaching EPA
to acquire funds to purchse that 60 acres.
Gordon asked if they have an option.
Hartly replied yes. In communication with Mr.
Standler of EPA in their Atlanta office who handles
these particular cases, he indicated that he did not
want to purchase the C.R. Durham tract but was
receiving pressure from OWASA to allow for purchase
of the Headwaters Tract.
j Gordon questioned if the Raeford Thompson tract was
150 acres.
UUE
Hartly responded that the DEN permit stated they had
access to 150 acres on the Raeford Thompson tract.
Gordon questioned whose well was contaminated.
Hartley noted that the previous name of Johnson was
incorrect and should be J. T. Thompson and that he is
present.
Gordon stated that in her understanding the reason
there would not have been an environmental impact
statement as far as Orange County was concerned was
because the County does not regulate bona fide farms.
So, if a farmer is using fertilizer he doesn't have
to have a permit. The reason the ruling was made was
because it was considered as being an extension and
part of the type of activities conducted on a bona
fide farm.
Hartly felt that the County. has the responsibility to
recognize this as a sewage disposal system.
Be expressed concern regarding the concentration in
Collins Creek versus other areas. Residents have
been to Department Environmental Management with a
complaint by the Clover Garden community about the
procedures and conditions of operation at these
sites.
A copy of the petition was given to DEN also.
He noted an inspection was made in dry weather and
that in dry weather the runoff problem would not be
present.
Be further noted the feeling of Bingham Township
Advisory Council was that local attention to and
regulation of this type project was needed.
Gordon inquired if Mr. Hartley was asking for Orange
County regulation and his response was yes. The
residents felt that this is clearly the operation of
a sewage system even though agricultural crops might
be grown.
Gordon distributed copies of the resolution of draft
Planning Board .resolution (A copy of this resolution
is attached to -page of t hese minutes.)
Hartley noted that OWASA maintained there has been no
public concern or opposition. He felt there had been
substantial opposition in the documents that have
been presented to EPA. If this will not be
011
6
recognized by the State it needs more local
attention.
Gordon . stated that the problem seemed to revolve
around the way bona fide farm is defined. The
Planning Board could bring this to the official
attention of the Hoard of County Commissioners only.
The Board of County Commissioners could direct the
County Attorney and staff to look into this further.
Collins clarified that the letter he sent to OWASA
contained certain conditions. As long as OWASA
adhere to these conditions the use of that property
would be considered a bona fide farm operation.
These two condtions are as follows:
(1) There must be a lease agreement or •some kind of
contractural agreement between OWASA- and the bona
fide farm operation.'
(2) The farm operation on the OWASA owned land must
be on extension of a bona fide farm.
If either of these two conditions is not met, it
changes the whole complexion of our position on this
matter. It also changes the County Attorney's
position. Also, if these conditions are not met,
what we will proceed to do is regulate OWASA's use of
the property through a Special Use Permit procedure.
That is the only way at this time that we can see
this as a bona fide farm operation.
Gordon then asked if there were any new information.
Hartley indicated that EPA has asked Orange County
for comment. Gordon stated she had not seen such a
document. Hartley added it was an April 9, 1985 EPA
request for comment on findings regarding the Durham
Heirs Tract.
Collins noted this had not been received by the
Planning Department.
Hartley stated he would get a copy for Planning Board
Chair.
Gordon stated that she would like to hear from Mr. J.
T. Thompson whose well had been contaminated.
Mr. Thompson stated that his well had been
contaminated three different times and it had to be
pumped dry several times. At one time he had to haul
j water for his use for a six week period.
Ili
i
i
I
01.1
Gordon asked where Thompson's well was and Hartley
responded immediately downstream on tract 4.
Gordon inquired what time period. Thompson responded
the summer of 1984 was the last time. OWASA pumped
the well and chlorine was put in the well.
Gordon inquired about the first date of a problem.
Thompson responded 1981 and that the last time was
1984.
Chris Walker inquired asked management and
participation by another farm operation. Would the
farmer that the contract was with actually manage the
operation and tell OWASA when sludge can be put out.
Collins responded that the controlling factor would
be the provision of the DEN permit. The, application
rate on the permit could not be exceeded: The farmer
would tell OWASA when to apply sludge only if it were
part of the contractual agreement.
Shanklin inquired if Mr. Thompson's well was a deep
or shallow well. Thompson responded it was a shallow
well, 39 feet deep.
Walters inquired about soil acceptability for septic
tanks. He expressed concern regarding health
problems due to soil absorption problems.
Peter Kramer inquired what was the procedure was if
EPA/DEM should find the process unsafe. any
Gordon responded the Board of County Commissioners
could take official action.
Mr. Walker expressed concern regarding violations of
the DEN permit. He had received no satisfication
regarding his concerns in the petition.
Gordon asked to whom the petition was sent.
Hartley responded it was sent to OWASA and td Cecil
Madden at DEN who in turn forwarded it to Mr. Atkins
of their Inspection Staff. Mr. Atkins made no
mention -of the p etition in his response.
Mr. Walker- indicated there was no response by OWASA
at the meeting regarding management of the sites.
Hartley also noted that in the letter from Mr. Atkins
that the comments regarding the Thompson well were
incorrect. There were concerns that were hardly
addressed at all and the inspection was made in dry
weather.
I
012
8
Robert Mann expressed concern that the runoff of the
field goes into the Haw River. His concerns were for
health problems for people, as well as as farmlands.
Pilkey stated she felt the Board should vote on the
resolution and forward all this information to Board
of County Commissioners. She requested Mr. Hartley
add a specific list of concerns to the summary.
MOTION: Pilkey moved to adopt the Planning ,Board resolution
and to forward it to the Board ' of County
Commissioners; seconded by Walters as follows:
RESOLUTION BY THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOAR •,*
ADOPTED APRIL 29r -1985
Whereas, the Bingham Township Advisory Council has voiced
legitimate concerns regarding-OWASA's application of treated
municipal sludge to land in Bingham Township.
Whereas, the Planning Director has ruled that this use falls
outside the zoning regulations of Orange County.
Whereas, the Planning Board apparently has no direct
authority in this matter.
Thereforey be it resolved that the Planning Board forward to
the Board of County Commissioners all of the material which
it has received on this matter, including citizen comments at
our meeting, with the recommendation that the Commissioners
review the concerns voiced by the Bingham Township Advisory
Council and other citizens. The Planning Board would
particularly like to draw the Commissioners' attention to the
question of whether the County should assume responsibility
for overseeing the application of sludge via the special use
permit or other process.
Kramer asked for an amendment expressing concerns
for possible hazards.
MOTIOAmendment was then read as follows to be added to the
end of the first paragraph:
land concerns regarding possible health hazards to
water supply and to the community.*
"The amendment was revised to read "hazards to the
community."
013
9
Amendment was accepted by the second to the motion.
VOTE: Unanimous.
Ir
AObk
MINUTES
BINGHAK TOVnISHIP ADVISORY.COUNCIL
MARCH 21j, 1985
ATTENDING: Margaret Hartley, Raeford Thompson, Ralph Marren,
Rebecca- Bullock, Richard Bullock, 147alter
Gottschelkr Barry Brener, A. R. Rubin, Burnice
Sparrow, Janne Groner, Joseph E. Suggs, Joe Ray,
Howard Smith, Wanda Smith, Beverly. Sizemore,
Chris Walker, James poustf J T, Thompson, Bessie
M. Thompson, •Joe Durhamr Lillian D. Duncan, D. C,
Eddleman, Michael O. Hartley, . Sr. , Leon Duncan,
Edward Johnson.
GUESTS Wralter
ATT:;1tINiG: (OWASA) Pat Davis, Ron Williams on,
Godschalk, Dr. Bob Rubin (NC Agricultural
Extension Service Specialist) .
Susan Smith, • Orange County Planning St-afff, opened the
rneeti-ing. She indicated that the Planning Board had' adopted
new Operating Guidelines for the TACs and would soon. be
prope.ring new membership lists. She asked that thAose
interested in being a member or retaining membership contact
t
th6 Planning Department.
Smith introduced the item for discussion as 01-ILNSA land
application of municipal sludge operations. She indicated
L-ha pur-pose olel L-his -neeting was to provield. a *forum for
r.0 that the
n, ripation and questions /answers. She clarified
Orange' County Staff r.osit-ion on the proposed GWASA opera'U.-Jons
had not yet been finalized.
Smith introduced Pat DaVisr 0rWISA.
4r
Davis rev.,-eved t1Ie map locating the ;,-.%-;-o tract u 0r,P*zVC'.,, iE.:
interested in.
Ed Johnson inquired if ONMISA was in the process of 4W
buying the Fleaftaters tract. Davis responded OWASA had an
option on 60 acres contiguous including .lots 6-10.
N-4chael Hartley inquired about. the Neadowcrest tract.
Ron Tliiliamson, OVIAGAj, responded OWMSA had 45 acres of that
tract.
Ron Williamson, OPTASAr presented an informational progra
on the land application program. He indicated the program
was implemented in 1977 and was cooperatively with the
farming community and agencies.
- Dan Edelman inquired what crop would be raised on the
proposed tracts. Williamson and Dr. Rubin, Agricultural-
S..-d-e-nic.n. Service responded a hybrid B.qrmuda grass called
Tifto 44.
Flilliamson indica-Eed sludge is applied at a rate of 25--
27,000 gallons/acre.
**art'L ey asked if any land application bites were located
Outside of the Colli.ns Creesk drainaae area. , Williamson
r-_sponded there was a site on. northern Orange and some
CLatham County. Edal.man inquired if OWASA would consider
S . S in the University Lake and Cane Creek watershGds.
I I i.-a-alson responded no requests had been received for• sites
of a suitable nature. Davis indicated that OWASA had no
pol-lay or regulations restrict-1-ng these opertions -in those
,IrterS ►eldS. Hartley inquired about County policies. Sir-I i t!I
the County P-011cias addressed p.ackage plants rand
treatAment plants by prohibiting their location in
th- C Watershedr but did not address 'this operation. Hartley
ei_-pressed concern about the emphasis of the program on sites
in the Collins Creek area.
.7mith requested that OTM-SIN be pernit-t-ed to continue with
at ion to assure that all attendees had the same
level of information on the operation.
Williamson Ccritip-leted the oral presentation and cont.inned
with a slide presentation on the progta-m, itz development~ and
the agricultural benefits derived from it.
An audience member asked who monitors the operations.
Mammon responded it is monitored through the inspection of
Y"Icorr'
6-3 and unannounced sit o visits. Ho continued that the
opera=-ions are inspectc-d 3 to 4 times a yeLar . -
E'd 3ohnsoft inqujired how ranch sludge is produced.
responded 8 million gallons in 1.084. He noted
"and is utilized in the prograra and that
.4; res of
�at. 100 ac-_
he rate of application, though de-endent on the
consentration of Sol-ids, is 25-27,000 gallons/acre generally.
Jin•vy Faust -incldired' about heavy metals in the sludge
Tuilliamson- responded there are trace elements which remain in
t1he soil with the excep�ion of those taken up by the crop
cove. He continued, that -the l-ife of the site is determined
by the ability of the soil to assimilate the metal of
concern,
Dr.Rubin continued indicating - that the annual
(e..,.phosphorus) and cumulative (ex.copper) loadings for
various metals and elements govern the rate of ,application.
P
Rubin added that plants will uptake these metals at differing
ates lie noted t!lat EPA sets very conservative maximum
uizmulativa loadings (CEC)
const asked if the metals can be removed at the plant.
vuiamson responded that s6 me are precipated out in the
treatment -process. Foust noted that the presence of heavy
metals was at issue in the Jordan Lake versus Cane Creek
debate. Rubin noted there metals could be removed with
significa,it costs involved.
Rubin' asked what the concern was regarding these
matters. , Edelman responded the level of concentration on the
Sites. Hartley questioned . cumulative loadings with twro or
mo;ie metal load limits being reached at the end of the sit-O' s
life-. Rubin responded that many are removed by crop uptake;
0-1-",e---*S from stable organic kelites, and other.s are
petwanently stored ciz. 4%-.h-.. e.zchange siZ-e.
Hartley questioned groundwater depth on the .site. Rubin
he
responded that the storage capacity of the soil is in It
first 6-12" of -soil. Hart-ley raised the issue of the
contahination of the Johnson well. Rubin questioned t-,,nether
the well tuas a Protected vvell. There w-as much dIS-cussion cf
his particular circumstance.
Hartley questioned the private property owner 's respon-
sibility in protecting their wells from municipal set-tage
v-aste disposal. Rubin responded the process reC17 clod
j
agriculturally viable nutrients. gartley raised the issue of
the : .legal definition of the operation as a function of a
se age system.
Edelman inquired about the volume applied. Rub in
responded it is less than 1" on an acre.
T
youst expressed concorns about runoff ftaim Surfc.ce
application versus injection motbod.
rtiember of the audience in4uired about the cropa
M
raised. Rubin respon(led the crops sold. on tho. open
market for animal not human consumption.
Hartley e.-Prassed' concern 'about the quality of life in
ty of damages, n
the community and the &ssibili' Pubis
respond-ed that he would address these concerns to the e.x.'Cent
that there is information about them. He noted that in
t 962 there had been no
moiiitoring these oyeMtlions since 1
deleterious effects on groundwater in analysis - on selected
L
viruses, bacteria and heavy metals.
Sdelman inquired about monitoring ;-.-ells along Clover
Gave,, -i Church Road. T.7ill-4amson responded there . were
X R-bin
Y .req- ' _ U
3.-sI-v!.Ied -recently and were not prev..,_-us ,.,i red .
cia!Jfied that groundwater testing rar,-Li-i-roneents * went into
on Japuar' Ir
y
An audience member questioned if OwASA had met its EIS
permit require-mments -for other sites regarding posting of
distance from wells and distance from - ar"Ijacent
lines. Davis responded operations could tak& place
t 11- it was
no .2cser than 100' -from a private well and iat
aond.f ;7ian 418 on the PerrDMIC.
S for theT
r.artley questioned the app-.4cabilif-y of thL E-
Davis responded
C I-
tra t to the Durham Heirs- Tract.
no "IYS required w-here funding uias not requeSted. Davis
_! sites jqere comparable for analysis purposes.
d:'cvted the
- h nson well was a 3 in d ' scusse. ...
issue of t'he U o
responded 'Chat there was no statcment, or
I the. problem.
iillol,cation froll, OWASOil-A that they had caused
11cart-ley questioned the u"t-ilizat-ion Of the Collins Creek
area Pror oran(;e County s-11,jage disposal. Rubin Oresponded 'r-he
genc-ratcS aind
not- %,ralid given that uillsborough , .
:�as slu-6ge. also. OBartlely vflhat Tpercentage
C' Lam'V. 0 *s-es outside of
. ..a 3 F.1; I I ii:�nqa lions of sludge is to sil-
,%:I. . *ollins Creek area.
Johnaon asked 1111y OV.-FASA pumped out his well. williamson
'T -Isa provided wa e to the ccMMunitY
rc—:;oncled t,,rj.t owir.si ter servic
Johnson' s request.
26e3;n3a asked if OWASA w-culd cons-i6er sites in Cane
cfeck or University u%r ' watershads. •illiamizon cOSPOI-ded
criteria.
tTL,'.J: 01-1ASA would evaluat-e the sites urzIng the same
moan=IN
00ant of Sludgc produced
t,'d jO!.ir.SOr. a-SIONP;CA .11011 rl-IPICI 6he aB
C-Ias gro-wing- eaah year. Pliliiamson responded 3"S a year, but
iderably
n•.-ted requi-remnents fror phosphorus removal would cons-
I
iac-ease 16h4z amount and that was looking for
L
t
ernati-.re disposal methods. .
Ed j oh. son asked what. land in er.cess of the amount
needed to dispose of 3 m i illion gallons of sludge was under
T I-
U1.71MI control. relilli-amson responded to allow fle*-%oibility in
mana5=men4- o-'� the prgram re application. Jol-aison asked what
I A. I
ailliamson responded 50 ,
additional land would OWASA desire. t
more.
Foust inquired if .injection versus surface application
would solve odor and runoff problems.
The issue of bad weather and sludge application was
di-mdussed. Villiamson indicated that if sites ifere und.er
MNIASIN can trol Ort.kSA could reapir any on-site darmayew' .
Hartley indicated that the co-mmunity needed more then
OWASA assurances.
Rubin ind4 cated that sludge is head in holding tanks
t�uring inclement w eather. I Tilliamson responded that these
L:inks are designed for 2.0 days for heating 8 million gallons.
Eartley qA 0.0 -corrie
.,aesti.oned if adjacent owners ::ere ctly
he uses of the Darham Heirs tract.
-ror- - tine-n,- med or potent
Ed Johnson asked if hospital waste%rater was treated
differently. (fill ia-If-son responded it received special
,:soinitarng.Hartley e=pressed concern 'Chat CT.*�'.ASA apei7ationa on
o*w-nGd, land was. not a• legeti"malCe fa_rming activity.
Rubin indicat-ed the permits were issued for a finite
period of t4miej i.e. : 2-5 years and that -siteu received
extensive soil, vegelation and groundwater mon-It-oring. if
1*11 Hermit u-ould not 1-4e
Celatel-ous impacts w=ere ider.-Lified tle p
reissued. go noted that adverse irgpacts -viould be obviou 's on
a Fie eLiiphasized
. .e before they :could b seen do,:-n.strea.m.
the soil will given
th,'Cat t1he cationic exchange capacity of
LISe C)f A--e Site
L�LA
Edle-man stressed the concern vith conficence leve.is
:-ecarding adverse affects. He asked if would
the liability for well repair and repincement -if
3 -.sv I-''e d from the o r.e ra-ion.ion. Williamson reoponde, -hat 0
would *
wld pon
be ressible. Rubin not-Get EPA qu. I
the suc�.sr.
via wa!;tavratar treal C-11t OPtiOPS F-I
f IMovative alternat.L
ptt:o 9 rta n s al-ld _hat standards for operating are in effect.
Sadc'_Iman as!-.-ed if litia.aticn C.L t-h es e 1*-,atters are at tile
t"W'I'ler's e::-,jense. Rubin responded that to his knowledge EPA
had had to repair ons innovative system at EPA's expense and
that t.he repair had been successful.
T- I-e group discussed permit renewals and loadina at other
Ccunit_y sites. Iffilliamson noted OWASA only sought potential
Sites initially in tie' program- and that since then CT•A•A has
o,,rat ed under a request response mode. 86 stressed OWASCIX
Z"
did not wish to over-commit itself to providing sludge.
Fbust asked why OTRAS.A was buying property for this
purpo-se. Ulliamson responded to provide ad-itional management
. capability. Foust asked i� OT-TASA would abandon land purchase
if enough private requests were made. 14illiamson responded
he would consider it.
m r rates and volume. Rubin
auosr- application ra
-ar-onded. sludge -was '.-,-.?irg ap,,,plied at �,aina rate as manure.
Rubin clarified that CNIASA asccor►vatodated the farmer's
schedula but OTI-ASA owned lands would allow self management.
An audience imember felt farmers monitor OW activities
inf-restrienniCs cruect- 0 ..ld monitoj- ONTASA
%.icning w1ho woul
ov,ned lands
Ceveral men-bers of the audience expreszed a ,refr J_
., erence
for app.1-41 cation to established agricu-Itual uses for OT-UTISA
-65. 7r.-,rilliamson responded that OMASA' s goal was to work
re-ith the aT.ricuitural contounity but needed the
Cq.';-*'.:. I "ty to man-a-ge. Sl-ute-e Ou-'Cside Of s,-.-.hsdule.s. f nol-eel a i: 1)- Cz wo v Id et:['a n.! 01"'Ac-':"' rol
Raeford Johnson, farmer owning site in, program, felt it
t-.'as a good program working for hiri 95S of the ti e- Se noted
up the sod with current
for ..is land injection tears
U.
Ve in, _-ca'tr-.,d . 1/3" 4s apr.lied thrt-• times a X-ear
Ui-er. ' Re :Fe't tbis was a•
Ld e5 him 4$5000 a vear 2_n. fort-J. - L
tjood '-,-.rogram and t I&,--a t the problem was b ta s !d Oil
s u n,2 e r s t a n d;i r g He indicated he- has been in tfle progran;
for 5 years and tiould not pauticipate if there uas a prcblem.
4.
Edel!:':7n expressed concern about lo ring �Ii• choCks a�nd
balances if OUAS&zi ouned and operated the vite.
'tY Wan-ts to use produc2- safe'y
't J_I- %.
roust, n.-.)ted the covirun-
1-!"N In
a; d p-ro-L-ect tie J.1 ind.4ca-ted the. runo.1.7'f
pzable!.-, could be •clvcd with good e,�Yricultural practices.
Vaeford aohns()n a-;,ea why a sample of the llell in
sponded it.-bat t"e lat-/
quastion could not be taken . 421.ubin re protected 4..we 11
:2
Qcos not aljo-�.j sar,.ples to be taken from an un,
in-dicated th-E-Itt in {'his ca::e 011a could not
distinguish the source of contaiminant.
Gill iaWilson stressed t-bat ONA-SA is oppossed to putting
0. `�erred the recu-cling
Suantiti-Us of sludge int "sinks" and pref
Hartley stated he felt this was a concentrated
depositi.on of sewage sludge. Rubin responded that EPA i,=Ild
not . agree. Hartley noted deposit ion over tin.e.. Rubin
responded that .ever time' there would be uptake at agronomia
rates. Hartley countered there would be constant
accumulation and indicated that hartley was disregarding the
breaking down of organic pollu.'Cants by sail -organ 4sits and
If 1� e occured natutrally
,plant uptake Pupil not-i-i-di Uhat matrils : tc-
in tbo soil and that the i-,ac! cround concert-tration-a very frOM
'lembers ignore plant tiptak-e- Or
s(,.il to soil. He noted th-ese
leaching.
an audience rneuiber aslk.ed tirlhat tjould happen if the
natural level el-ceeds ', c ' loading --requIrem.nts. Rubin
resonded if these were present at the upper '_• units, notbing
v-culd grow. .
teo-II-ed 11-
--'In audience Pay-hey ashed -v7hir bad not L.
1-.1411iaTtIS respopded OVICA21%, Isiad not yet �.urcjlased the
site. L
cedures.
site and had not co-Ijipieted pefvdittiag P4-0
An audience member asked if Owmqrl had cinn4vas-Scr-I the
- -;-.r
Cri-MM, -y br-.fore purchase. r.,rill-ii n.son
on 'the -tract tr_:-s cc%,-
with federal la-t-7 for funding. noted advance notice I by
a public agency�L often results in another purchasing J!-hc
property and preclud]ng it fro.-tj t,,-je proposed use.
Pdelm.an z;.E!!_-ed if st-ate . law -vz-onld P-110W the use
Univel:zity Lake watershed. Rubin A-es-,ponfed yes.
adleitan asked if Ork-LD—EA P01-icy �70uld preclude tLe area
J_rolll use, Davis re3ponded OWASA had- .lo official adop t?e d
roj-ey addressing sites ror this use . Tzilliamson a ec
4ve per-ni-itted bocznIse theY
.._eqijezts ha& been roc.--i d but not
were garden-t..Ipe, sites.
na audience t.e-tuber jnquired abcul- Lhe criteria -r-or the
Eurpose of site' s rc_ .-
0
jncluded an auareness thal L*j(,�.
t. t Vii:e i.,ias on
th
1-tarj.o: for a. fiai.j- -,-,rice and t at It 1'Ct t'-`0 futI7,':':2
Of the An audie.-nce mem' er qj,:,(�E-611:ion I It-11a.-C ULIC
J
C'l.'r;r%"-':3 jq.,�,cc tolu, -it * ,-..oujd be d e ve I o pe,d for housing. Davis
L': a• r-Aal ecta-Ite an
cut w in.volved and thlat if this
i -n it- *-ion o' G-FACIA, arnd
,-f .d=ated- it ua* no. at the direct- A.
d2e. --..ot dircot 'Che age'rit. to USO deceptive means
in, acnUir-ng the Sit e .
The MC Chair requacted Staff to schedule a second
m-ee's-. 5-vig -to allow tilne TAC to make a recommendat ion, to the
in -d on this matter.
ing Boa&.
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
406 Jones Ferry Road p
0.WA5 A P.O. Box 366 n,�•►/
Carrboro, NC 27510 U
(919) 968-4421
April 23, 1985
Mr. Marvin Collins
Director
Orange County Planning Department
106 East Margaret Lane
Rillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Marvin:
Thank you very mach for prodding orange Water and Sewer.Authority
(OWASA) staff an opportunity to review the draft minutes of the March
21, 1985 meeting of the Bingham Township Advisory Council. It is
requested that these minutes be revised to incorporate -the following
comments. "
Page 1
Under the "ATTENDING" section, the names Walter Gottschalk and A. R.,
Rubin should be deleted as they also appear under the "GUESTS ATTENDING"
section. Change "Godsehalk" to "Gottschalk."
Page 2
Paragraph 3: Ron Williamson stated that OWASA had 45 acres of that
tract permitted for land application of sludge. He indicated that this
site was privately—owned and leased by an agricultural operator. Land
application of sludge was being carried out under an agreement with both
of these parties•.
Paraoraph 7: Williamson stated that there was a site in northern
Orange County in the New Hope Creek drainage basin.
Paragraph IQ: Williamson stated that it is monitored by the State
Division of Environmental Management through the inspection of records-
and unannounced site visits, and that sludge analyses are undertaken by
independent certified laboratories.
Page 3
Paragraph 4: On line 5, the word "there" should be changed to
"these."
Paragraph 6: On line 4, "Johnson" should be changed to "Thompson."
An Equal Opportunity Employer
i
mom
Mr. Marvin Collins
April 23, 1985
Page Two
Page 4
-Paragraph 44: On line 2, the word "there" should be "these."
Paragraph 6: An EIS is not required where state and/or. federal
funding assistance is not requested.
Paragraph 7: On line 1,. "Johnson" should be "Thompson."
ParairaPh.8_: On line 2, "area for orange" should be changed to
area for"all"of Orange..." On Line 5, insert the word "applied" after
the word is.
Paragraph 9: Change to read as. follows: "Thompson asked why, OWAsA
pumped out is well. 'Williamson responded that OWASA provided this
Particular service at Thompsont's request."
Page 5
Paragraph 4*. The word "repair" is misspelled.
•
Paragraph 6s The last sentence should read: "Williamson responded
ME these tanks are designed for 40 days for heating and 20 additional
days for holding at a plant design flow of 8 million gallons per day."
Paragraph 10: On Line 4, the word "deleterious" is misspelled. Oa
Line 7, the word "given" should be change to "govern."
Page 6
Paragraph 3: The word "additional" is misspelled on line 2.
Paragraph 5: The word "accommodated" is misspelled on Line 1.
Page
Paragraph 1: On -line 1, "Johnson" should be changed to "Thompson."
Paragraph 3: Line 6 should read as follows: "accumulation and Dr.
Rubin indicated that Hartley was disregarding the"
Paragraph 4: On line 3, the word "responded" is misspelled.
Paragraph 6: Line 2 should read "community before purchase of
the Durham Heirs tract."
Paragraph 8: Add the words "with only a little amount "
at the end of the last sentence is this of acreage.
paragraph.
I
Mr. Marvin Collins
April 23, 1985
Page Three
Your letter concerning the applicability of the Orange County Zoning
Ordinance to the proposed development of the Headwaters tract or other
OWASA--owned lands for sludge nutrient recycling purposes was received
today. Comments concerning your letter will be forwarded to the County
by April- 26, 1985.
Once again, thank you very much for your consideration-of these comments
and your continuing assistance in this matter.
Sin r ,
Patrick Davis
Assistant to the Director
wP
I
ORANGE COUNrY FLA-NWM_rG DEPARTMMNT
fall. OTMUG11
27278
to
MINUTES
BINGRAX TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COM,iCIL
APRIL Ur 1985
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Foust, Dan Eddleman, Lindsay Tapp, Ed
Johnson
OTHERS PRESENT: Michael 0. Hartley, Sr., Margaret Hartley,
Beverly Sizemore, Chris Walkerr Jean
Eddleman, Joe Smith, Tommy Tapp, Tommy Cole,
Frances Cole, J. T. Thompson, Bessie Mae
Thompson, Edith Faulkner, Oliver Prichard,
B.G. Morrisont Mr. a Mrs. Robert Mann
STAFF PRESENT: Eddie- Kirk
Jim Foust opened the meeting.
Ed Johnson noted that OTtTASA is attempting to concentrate the
sludge application operation in the Collins Creek watershed
and suggested that there is some risk involved since there
were no plans to apply sludge in the other Vatersheds.
Dan Eddleman asked about the County's position given OVTASA's
lack of response to concerns about the operation. He felt
Collins creek is unprotected.
Kirk responded that an appeal to the Zoning Officer's
position in this matter is to the Board of Adjustment.
Dan Eddleman felt there was inconsistency in the zoning
regulations.
Jimmy Foust felt that the program is well managed since
sludge/effluent does not go directly to the lake. He
suggested that units be set in the amount to be applied per
acre in that crops can only absorb so much from the soil in a
year's period .of time.
Ed Johnson cited condition -27 retention of permit if
nuisance is created. (See attachment #1) .
Dan Eddleman noted DEM responded to concern that OWASA did
not meet posting requirements and was not operating according
to the permit conditions. He felt DEM should hear the
landowner's concerns and expressed concern about OWASA safely
operating on OWASA owned lands.
Michael Hartley indicated that cattle were not permitted to
graze on pasture immediately before or after application, ' but
that they are allowing them to do so'. He added that the,
odors are bad in wet weather.
Jim Foust suggested an on-site inspection is needed at the
time of application.
Michael Hartley noted Dr. Rubin had indicated that the comiaon
feeling is "not in my backyard". He added that it is the
county's responsibility to insure that the citizens have a
voice.
Lindsay Tapp asked why the operations were concentrated in
one area. He felt OWASA could secure permission from enough
farmers and could have a temporary storage during bad
weather. He "felt a representative of the Department of
Environmental Management should have been available at the
last meeting.
Jim Foust suggested the TAC forward a recommendation to the
Planning Board.
Dan Eddleman felt there is an inconsistency in that OWASA is
not in the farming business and should be governed by the
Zoning Ordinance, but was exempt specifical?y under the farm
exclusion.
Ed Johnson submitted the following resolution for the PAC's
consideration:
RESOLUTION #1
The Bingham TAC has held two public meetings
concerning the plans by OWASA to apply sludge to
two tracts of land in the Collins Creek
watershed. There was widespread apposition to the
plans and concerns expressed regarding OWASArs
past practices in applying sludge.
Bingham TAC has the following concerns:
I. There will be a possibly dangerous
concentration of sludge in the Collins Creek
watershed. This material should be more
widely difused:
2. Citizens in the Clover Garden area have
complained via petition to DEN of problems
concerning improper application of sludge in
violation of OWASA's permit. These included:
odor problems, surface run-off, failure to
post signs, files, , application in wet
weather, application on top of snow and ice,
' possible contamination of wells. The
citizens feel this complaints have been .
ignored.
3.. OWASA has made no attempt to locate other
tracts where landowners would voluntarily
accept sludge. Enough volunteers might
eliminate the necessity of buying a °sludge
tract.0
4. OWASA seems unwilling to allow sludge to be
applied in the University Lake and Cane Creek
Resivor watershed. This implies that OWASA
regards the sludge as being a hazard to its
watergsupply. It follows that the concen-
tration of sludge in the Collins Creek
watershed might. present a hazard to the wells
of citizens in this area.
5- , DMO local ' governmental authority should
assume some oversight for the application of
sludge* he urge. the County to assume this
responsibility by requiring a special use
permit for the application of sludge.
The Resolution was adopted by consensus.
Don Eddleman submitted the following resolution for the TAC's
consideration.
RESOLUTION 0 2'
Whereas, Orange County Zoning Ordinance is
operating under charter of North Carolina
Statutes,
Whereas, Forth Carolina Statute specifically
defines the proposed .OV7ASA operation as a sewer
system as a use requiring a special use Class
"A" permit.
Therefore the Bingham TAC takes the- position the
Orange County is legally bound to execute its
responsibilities in requiring the Class "A"
--v.....r.aaw� IT A.i.la .a.4.. vu•rct C
operation in the Collins Creek Drainage Area.
• This responsibility can not be a due to the -fact
that private farmers in the area are exercising
their freedom to perform similar operations as
legitimate farming operations.
The Resolution was adopted by consensus.
Both resolutions are to be forwarded to the Planning Hoard
for consideration.
The meeting was adjourned.
i
I
i
ORANGE COUNTY F -.ANNRYG DEFARIIA=4 NT
NOR= ; :ROLIVA
27278
s_
April 19, 1985 -
Pat Davis
Orange Dater and Sewer Authority
P. 0. Fox• 366
Carrboro,. W. C. 27510
Dear Pat:
This letter refers 'to the status,' under - the Orange
County Zoning Ordinance, of OWASA's proposed application of
treated municipal sewage Sludge to properties- under OWASA's
control which are located in Bingham Township and zoned for
agricultural and residential uses, specifically known as the
Durham. Heirs and Headwat °s tracts. Previously this
operation has been conducted by OW SA under agree-merit with
owners of private farm lands and was considered to be exempt
from zoning regulation as an activity adjunct to bona fide
farming operations.
At issue presently is whether the conduct of these operations
on OWASA-owned property is subject to zoning regulation as a
sewage disposal activity. In reviewing litigation addressing
this issue, the case of Gruaft Coll'"'Ity c i i 1 inoo g zr go;
'Enrichment Hakerla a QQ pora +ign. S'' 7cb) 292 N E 2d 755
provides guidance on this matter. In this case, the higher
court reasoned that. if SENCO was dumping or snoring versus
spreading sludge as fertilizer that there is no question as
to the agricultural purpose of the latterr although the
organization may have several objectives which may or may not
be related to an agricultural purpose.
Further, TJCOG's 1981 publication •"Sludge and Septage
in Region J: Generation, Disposal and Options for Reuse: ",
mentions that EPA is drafting regulations to address land
apply cation, particularly sale or "gave away" programs for
treated sludge. In the 1980 Pre-Proposal Draft Regulations,
EP?! proposed to classify sludge. into two categories of use -
fertilizer and soil conditioner - with three sub-classes -
unrestricted,. restricted and governmental use - based on the
toxic" composition of the sludge. According to the draft
Pat Davis
Apri"L 19r 19'85
Page 2 oil
regulations, OwASA's sludge would be given the highest
classifica�ion of "fertilizer z8r' unrestricted use".
In the case of OWASA, the proposed use of OTMSA-owned
property for the application of municipal sewage sludge is to
be conducted at agronomic application rates in like manner as
the use of private farmlands for this purpose. It must also
be noted that the exercise of police power through zoning
regulations involves the regulation of the use of .properties,
not ownership of the same. The proposed use of OXASA-owned
property is essentially the same as the current use of
private lands for the "Land application of municipal sewage
sludge.
Based on the above comments and the exemption of
"bonafide farms" contained . in. . TA
the zoning enabling
legislation, it is my opinion that OSA's proposed
application of municipal sewage sludge at agronomic rates to
properties used for the production of a cover crop known as
. . Tifton 44 would be exempt from Zoning .Regulations as a
bonafide farm if the following conditions exist:
1. A lease agreement or contracturai agreement must
. exist between O EASA and the farm. operation.
2• The farm's operation on G ASA--owned Land must be a
extension of a bonafide far: "Located and in
operation on another tract.
If OXASA chooses to grow a crop--of its own accord and
then sell that crop as an agricultural product, or if OWASA
increases sludge applications above agronomic rates to the
point that the site becomes a disposal site for sludger a
separate determination will have to be made regarding OWASA's
subjection to Orange County Zoning regulations.
I ate requesting" that, in order to maintain current and
complete ,files on ONWA's land application operation, copies
d
of the ates, amounts and method of sludge application and
the results of the chemical analysis of each sludge batch as
wail as monitoring well tests be forwarded to Orange County
on a routine and timely basis. in addition, I would like to
receive notification of the source, nature and resolution of
any complaints received by 011%SA and/or filed with the ` .
Division of Environmental Management or Orange County Health
Department'. Finally. I would like copies of all lease/-
Pat Davis
A6k April 19t. 1985
Page 3
contractural agreements betweeii OT-TASA and a bonafide farm
operation.:
Please contact the Planning Department if you have any
questions on this matter.
Sincerely,
Marvin E. Collins
Planning Director
CC: Don Willhoitr Chair, Board of County Commissioners
Renneth R. Thompson, County Manager
Geoffrey Gledhill, County Attorney
Jerry Robinson, Health Department
Susan Smithr Planning Department -
755
UNTY Or GwrixDY r.SOM 311MICHNEWT MATERIALS Coup. 11L
aJ 111-kvp.."d 7•0 tributoes main business interest arts nrot
N
&N,
COUNTY OF GRUNDY. 11111101% application.and use of the digmtrd Mudge
Z
loil fartulnuo• but rilli•r ww; tilt- oli-ilamal
of phut•r fr#llll ull-1*011#14ilall •-,1114.11% 4.1%
trio.
CHIACNT MATERIALS COn-
k-q-
OTION. a corpurallon.Do-
w R-
f0rodant-Appollant.
No.71-147. Richard T. Duck, Joliet, fur defrudwit-
appellant.
Appellitte Vourt
Irldrit P1str_R:C'_ • John J. Hanson. Asst.' States Att•..
r•tL is, IBM? Grundy County. Morris.' for Illaintiff-ap-
r
Pellet-
brought action for inj(inction
cou9tv MAZY'. Presiding justice:'
=Vent defendant rrum distributing and
„tiding t6lutel strX.-sitte frrt;liz4-r our land -tilt. ~toil Foriclulorur Mall-ri-dr.
-it" and defrudallt MCA CuEliviratinn Its. [bm raturt ft-tini ate-rurullur.
;,ntercomplaint. *Me Circuit Court,- injunction order culs-red in the ►-irndu
4k.dy County. Thomas R. Clydesdale, J.- court of Grundy County enjoinin-the ust:
:t, cred -u4nneut ill favor of the-county of di�qcsted sludge a.• a liquid ur ..critic fc'r-
,A-,h.e defendant appealed. The Appel- tilixer: ,,I• farm land situated in Oruntly •
4 At' to, County. Grundy Cututty had %toutcudrd
.Court.alloy. R J.,held that spreadiru;
J-.1," •• slucdge a-; a liquid nrganic icr• that a zoning ernificate astol !n1!q tams W
.2 r anal I-il ellnolitioncr Ittr farullauct ernifiral were rmls6ml lvefiery thr shoolgo-
g..4 for an agr;rultural purloutse "id. untler., eoulil lg. 114L.11 tat farno land.. its the 4.4►1ally. ll.
A
-4•
was Illot subject to entarcol by coma- Nail E.urichnicut Mairrials. Cittli-Pra6vtoo
Unit 1-ttilding officcr and county hereinafter callml SEXIM that
ice even though the sludge. the use fit the t1hrstril Andre tilt tgricul-
:1u t*han -.cold tit farmenq anit tural laIlds .13 a frrfilirrr wa- an --agricut Wit
if IL-r dir.r%lerl slullge Wan r3licrillivil- 111ral r" and wa.s. thelrbsor.
dr- frifell tht- CnI1111% hill
hipud vorganic frrtilirer and I
. .
,.,j4-uCs maul husitirs., intcrest was not anec.
,r,adial: of sled•e as fertilizer but was
I'lle issue- in the cwsr, therefore. is
dispwal of shidge front a metropolitan
- :
whether the spreading; sligeste.1 1111gr
J,"-;Q
)eM71
district.
wt fertilizer on. farm lands in Grundy
Reversed and remandcd. County was subject to cuutral Ity the(;nut-
dy County zoning and building officer and' 2.
the Grundy County Zoning Ordinance-or
Ia9 0=234 whether the ruse thereof is exempt as all
## QMV
agTicultural purpose under the 1971 llli- `..Vq_5!a
'p
"i Sprcadt " . 'n.
reading; of digested sludge as a liq- .7r--..;?_-_P
I M--
nois Revised Statutes,ch.34 3151.
,Aorganic fertilizer and soil conditioner
farml;.d its county alto for an acricul- S
.5rction 3151 of the zoning
purl00%r atul. under statute. such ac- laflul-lo coutulies in rhapirr .11 gof the Illi
,ty rvas nt-t mdjt-ct it) coutrul toy couitty- nuis i4cyiscd S' tatutrs reform-d to. litnivick-,
wiag and 1--ilding officer and county specifically in section 1:
,yj�p;: ordinance even though the sludge
-P-
vm rather than suld to farmers and The powers toy this Act given shall not
?,CIA if the dig t;tcd sludge was experimell- he exercised so as to deprive the tounwr
Is a liquid organic fertilizer and dis- of any existing property of its use or
7.
wy••{l.ip;Y off'•.-. 1 •T'`•�, y ..r�. ., ...�.y. ,y C <,..,..: ,,.`.� .i �4 y. :Y.,t'i1•'T c!` •. .r. �i
-''.•Y•:•- : -�r..{J.'��-`-•• ;ti• Site.iw%J:... ri.•"�;-,'(• ��G�aa ;'.•' R.. V• , '�•.'3:ry+t .... Xa=..i•'�
',-%!.T�♦-: 'sL•t d•,• •� ,w.^.iA,T ±� •,�•ii.f� 4 ...F�Trr��•,.,T �3� i...+iiy�rj.• i�'���� .. i":,,I� '•`^`+r'i:.r ♦ ♦,. .�,'
1 µ'wk tom„ °' `f4,J d• ! r:J'.a.• n�' r..r.''F'=»[�.2• ". mod .L' • �yLtiri •�••i' ,}.�;• .+.. yr •i��.• •` •vf? Y'.i,..
s.r4• 11 lttC�(J'•�., ? t �e.0 7 n ' {, wt:�rJ�?i if 4.::. f• M'Ff: N k:•i +ti J r
5 .•��w.,.La}r.f.. t:T.n•7" •' t}�.. •'t Y ..=i' ° ►•�...,•i.z: ;•w'�..
y S wi+.•'. ^i ••.a' 1 !•' a�' �• M• .'N' 12 ,,,.t� •1..•.�1. .•'.T. w�.. .a• .1 '..
a r.a-rh:._!S+'••� .4 1i; v.••,.+"-i,,4• .ti►',._�r^��'ry ••/S yeJ'S1:r'SA`.t.' ,.Y.f,. '.i?t+..l�'•�i.�•.t ?.X.; :•;. '.'t•a..+..�w-•' ti..+. ty' % •,,,,;,r_
:[ •.t•4• a.. lry. I'!,.'/�l -"; err• _ %••* "[+��:.., .? �..tq....•r:-ti•-�wr.r [ �. l,3•'�...
_�•'•�7 � Pr� 'C'ni'.�•i�` itt-�L:�7�.'V•Y`r � t t s[•.. c+Y-t..':a"'ra:{• .i,. w r.. a �''v�'.'+'::►�., .,.:'7..:,j w•i•� -.+�':�r�i:':+.?'?_�:.
•� •iy, ♦S-t. F � tlj.v :.b,/Ta.v i-•• -w •i.M.t ..�'+'' t••t •:!»�� -. :
:-:t'-;'� .•�,i- 1.�. r; 1, •alt" fir• v:.•� i.v^..,ft•;�:'*% .t+'"�:-:.:'Si. r
:» �: .r..�r•..:{• • •,t- ti ys K;,,1 S!'1••�N'1.'-•.fi)) 'St ice. spa '•'1 r t.,..`r a.�T:•:i{."•'. :'1:f'..''"w.•:"'y.N. "^•y tit;.- �.
+S''trt �ti`�''4 K.t. r T ..,.. Y.,. r Y...,_•�+,2•:'�'. �y►.1.3•.`�'=•� ..'I .rr_.0 ;l� •'',.:„t• .:'lS1
.o av ':i'•'.: i.},f:-+';1' , i"` �, •3. r+.' s�..
Iw .r
-4 4. :..'.�.•.'"iS:S: t '' dl.!-:°+.+Yr
,..e-:-�,!.-}� �;�s- .,�".» .iF...•.6itiefc:..n
':'.'� ,. ♦t7 i-?::.•tU.!;it"�'rwva,.#,a{-tg."i.a•.n.i$Vi l:r•:w:.'Y'� � `i�� '+w:ia. -'•.:
.ti.:r�_Li,Tf�ryt��`,��.jt[s��eY•I,'T.,II•y4f{1••••y'1 ' r •. a.
-,f.:+ ,.`r.� ?�u � r-,�••-{''h ,rj, j 111. 292 NORTH SASTEMN I+.l+POr,.TE1ti`, 'Zd SEl~1ES r'
•leas. r..�;,.tr,::.;�;1• ,t
' '"� #fi "`!• r mai itcnanrr fur the ur*#,.v to which it U[[ u,.,: IG 1'71, +
„ ."...t +.,,. 7- +a,.?l+.rt},"'t.• ,.f. R 1 . (rrlltNly Cmintp 1• �:
� ^ �" •*•" is then lawfully devoted; nor shell th[• alt action praying fur att in nliction to re,
s..yt = ,.rat, ,•tom j F 1 1 e. j P
" '"'` ,k t�, '- i-a :_ . be txereisest so as t[► impose riwalatiatts vent SERI O from distrilimnig; 04
Pk:r t,
I ,t: - or requite /•[moils with 'rt sperl ht lent! spreading [tic liquid organic ferti:tzes �
�r ;,i-" ;►r =j used or to be used Iur uprietdtcihd pur- land admittedly zoned "Agricultural."' It ''•
purrs, [tr with resperr to thr vrectiollJ was cnntriided by Grundy County, that the
111ainlennure, repair. attrraliuu. rtuuetrl storradiur. uC lifgttitl nrg•anir ►rrt:!i:er tC`
in• air t•xtrn-611 of lruildict•. air strut- quired the issuance of a. zoniu atnl W.M. '
tares u
�'=.;�'��..c�•",�''�''M ; t • srd or to,ltc used fur agricultural pattt:y pl:rntit or a conditional ttsr pctmiL
pur,lt,:ts upon such land except that such At a preliminary hearing on]tc•te 31.191
r:�:•G•q,:.t.. �r�; Mr t s •it P K
ioti?h-19, a: structurts for agricultural the trial tour rent:--cd to grant the injum-
f �- purp�t s may be re uirt-d to coniurm to tiott and continued die matter u„it after
. '°•- s� z building or set bark liucs, the Zoning Board of Appeals o: Grarhr
s .; �. • ' kEnipttasis added.) t:otutty rendered its decision oil the appneal y
= �: ;�.¢». •�• Vie*P which SfiMCO had talk-em to such f'.oatd of. N
�•`: It appa-irs. front the rectird that deirtid-
•s ;•...t -` ,, App[-als. 'ilia Guard of Aigma6 :net.a►d ,
ham a ctmtra[•t fur y_,j milliu•1
"•i ,f."--:p' • ,. affinnrd tilt sian of the xtrtia:;offictr r
� ^•s �:'' Y". :,cis to'rrtnu.r 11 --chic) shale f rntti tic l alu-
r{.iX-.rr '•u.� a •.u::• 1 �m that a Xt)ttilt• erinit or r r•:'
�a r- 1~ P crrti f is tt. trc
:�:•- ..� c,•pt; M•+/+r. i• met ticuae:i •1'r••xtau•rt 1'I:utt tft tl►i •11ct-
" 't^' --°•� quired. ti1i�It;U i:n Jane 2% In,'t. fihds
,
al,•`r '"' i?•'"^t• rK rnilo!is:t:: �anit.try.District ut Greater t hi-
.,1'" rr•',�s,"► t •t?.;.• — countercomplaint for an iti gun as
°+ !��' -Ma+� ta•d. `I:NIC0 hair ctttttri�tvil [tithe a p )In.[1•
' 'r 't'`' '%%•=:�~`+"�`r°f, a'"'y.-•�.r►e..= nont!s r ''r:tin•t f irtcl[I} tInuur a:+tl ruotrltI11 tits.,NN; Ili l.ndt �nrrs a uh gral rely in
tilt• cpr[•.uttnw ut .li)•mir-t ahtflt•r an the
�^ • '••`sC!s' f i+' tirint[ty t•uanty tit ,IIrv.tJ s11u1Fr ua glue '
•mot �.. r"."A. : f inn lands teals alt agricattur tl pui•>•t
,j. ;,_-4i �` j•:,. Larar latul. It is Conceded In the parti[•s
•=:,c�„,,� ,.,•°' and,that urstiant to Illinois
�2•. 4�, '- . that the property u t• which the sludge is P Revi,ri!
�-r^' '•"` "" lm• arc:;. clt. 3!. 31;i1 and tt•c Crtuttl Cot :
+i to In::�pr[y.•ad is proluldy :ic*rutrd to arrirnt- a '
�R"'� r'SC '°"'tom' tyg`t " jOntll�OTtllt{aTlt l' relating
! c 2..,.—, y�r'*:r i!''�+: •�' "' t• to a•ri_:ilturall.
4 •,.. i'ttrr e?�li%a•.�
tun. my,. The sint!1,•,e is placed in railroad " n
:: ""'-. '"x'••'' .p`. zolled districts the spreading
_; ","w`ti's "�••� ;�� ":_'.p" ; cars and hatileil by rail to a site ill (;randy of [ilplid ot•
•t%= .�;.�+,:F•: • ti^tnic fertilizer on said a};riculttc:al Taa1t ,
• .,;as a...,•: tree•. Cuuilty. It is plaaled there ill a lagoon o-
• �;?2 �:i;�" :;t n rf.`e ,--. , could not ht: iv-dated b dr
''. r =izY` '�•ifi;*��'�: pit vul pumped from that lagroun onto act- 1. y tilt t�rttl -
f joining; farnt lands, [vltrrr it is sprayed
County t►uildittg,-told zoning,officer.
A-1. upon tilt: suit. A hearing [ras the cr � h h
VA
craft had riore t •a
circuit f Grundy County Jul 1.
'4b �. .� court o
:♦ :j ;. '�:'r'; In January 1971 SEE-IC0 applied for a } r o i
• 1 1971. The trial act :
111-M-1 —�a ' •r� 3s:•i .)•`^• j Rq who pr side i at tl:e
,. :a�:r -r ;- building ptrtait so its to allow �1f\ICC? to
ia-m f •s.. �, IlMrin•properly stated the iscae i•efure the
Rs
rVt t•Trit :1. tttllt f 11; hntlit• 111 t tyllaln tile
ttintrt as bring
;,�^-�i}}i ';"•,-a'a c- �•�/, i' :.[T ,t'f��:= n tirnply, •'I:K tilt .41
40
1 un l sib- ct ui tnent and nertcsay controls. operation of applying ci R rstcd Mudge e<sueUlk i
:•i
Grundy County building;and zoning officer Grundy farm lands an :c"t i[tticnral ur
ZP Ft f� v� ,i��. - rt:fttsrd lc> t-nut the gmrncit fur rctnstrtt>:-
�•,rt••:r`:!.-,'�1iI '•f.t.r 8 -,,.� IK,::[•. if it t:s, tile:$ tits Xtntinir i,Crniit IS
,•; fig`:[F;: tion of tilr"pultlphnttsv &noi controls arid, as ntress.try• for tilt itse of the taut. Tnt
'=i `-'s „�� "•; :a;; `' a. result S�GtIICO did not build a ,nn
r`•u• ,�'-' ,,•-' '.':Y• P• p" only requirencnt 'for the erection, of its
t ` " :`"'r `• '' hou.,c For its entployces and pumping equip. tr y -
=�; •_' ='='�` -tp;;a#::ii=: ' bttildilt is to obey all building, and ::t.tbzcl•
i�� �` :ta•�/ f.-apt:rs:' in
.•;.�•, s,;,n..l.;.-';r.,tt,, h ut filed a-mandamus suit to compel
'•.r°a.J'••"^,.t{....:..{r:ei» lines. if it is not all ag riclllttlr.^.t fonrglaie, e,
the issuatlee(of a building;permit. On may
..r •. ,� :a, c t then it tuns: seek a zoointi permit s:d fire
= ''•'�'•�V•;MlLi4 •^` %s'''' 17, 1971, during;•the pendency of the man-
+ ". = y�r''a�•;,*i-I '. - rottnt 's prayer for i julldi:tu saonlj k
action, SKIAICO conlulcnced thv e R y n'
;; ' �c•�" '- spreading, of liquid organic fertilizer an g-ranted."
ias-gy r t;�y b the farm lands zomd "Agricultural" whh- At the hearing in �-"
6 this cans.no ceidt:..-- ••
tint rt/ll•i1rt1/•till• mly buildit/• y / ly Colility to r
-�.;�• ;�. �:.-.,,�-�:_. k t,• ?<u coo w:e:: I:rrsrnttcl h (`runt
:
'r�;,,,„t•�;,�;;:•;.;�{• ..+• .• �Unrliva ul .t bttihhlry; Lc +1:_11l'I t ha•! all
Ic•.limun ►rr:+cntrfi b ti '>%:'•
�'rr.r{',••+'• - - S 1 Y 1:11t't/ tl:ar
•:two•6=`'`•'r '�fi'•e;:•tali-y i' .�
-; sX;}.;;:t-i'��f•/r;f�f!? + ! in1't ta6ctt grl:lrr in tirun[ty l'unnty. -,.tell stodge [:ras and Is a benrfirrat fertil- i
i:�a-vy1} Ji'.ui•-�i�i�3}her :X ,• - - .
r.••�' rY i•.yY',S i
"OUNTY aim tf%t .•-OF GRUNDY 7.SOIL ENRICMIMIT MAMIALS 00,&p.
t
V it..a it MC 1.F—W Za
A
-Alit etowlititnirr and Thal it jort• lilily of 11-C %#oft .111,1 ineream-of etwp 1 1.-1&1
16r%.,Il 111al !-.1VIVII Ille infilirru ..n lilt'. Will. It.- al!." Irsfifiell Ill.-A :10
0 were Nillooliell %vith it %vitiluill chargo.. gli'll"I (11only %;I;.
W.11.% Mot rvqtTll1-.1
v
itel.v $30 an acre oil the cf-%t of to oulain a 1wrtitit rur tile 7;•' .er -Whilv the cotmay did tit
*1,off tit:,-
ldf 1611till %lonRe too tile isvil for the te*..4
elted And- .1"v lie UNCELIN a it is-tit a.-ricultural me and a liermh -4 nW
-+? dig
itillfruds that tile totiniary atir- required. Ali :1.*•Ni.%I.tllt jorJ)rv%%tl.1 tot Sold
x5c elf mit•inti►" is its dispels.at $organic 4-livini.-Iry at i1tv I'niver%ir%
_gEv. Which it Contellds_iaJwL;aL.;1l;zL linis likewise• agrr"I wrWills- aerl•llitirrA
.11MI nw. .11 wwwrtrol that %;twe 1ll;j:zal still of j;:c.
r net sqe himills-,is i..; tfie
10105- Ifflialt-d olit That Alkh-r haol In-J-11 .11.11lictl it,
:.hut•r, dir %farradilln got 1-:11rope cillitillitownly (rcons lilt- rear t:qtr
frrtitiacr
c3linot come within the stal- "in[ tIlat rnps
the c ' %vere doing very wt 11. V-
Z'jilmlidlitian regulation of -'twiculftern A research -toil scict;tL-;t'also tust:r1rd that
loy film- rnini • flor•nutrients in slig"ed %
It :k
1C t. rtrar fr••it tile W•linnitir of live r.11111
te.1-11"M And zoning officer that be- docs, ilk soil- Conditiulling ►•pecm in stipplyiggg 2..
Mille nL'tfvr and.in jortithichilc
44*rcilivirr a IKrtnit from L farmer or nirc;;-,vtry OM
,rzu a cnitunervial establishment for he ualer holding vnpicity and, perun.allijily of
I"mthin of fertilizer to farm land.-- I lel file sivil'..111d, liku%visr. that its alljoliration, C
1619r,"fue-1- tint require a Imim it when either U it fertilizer is =it ag-ricultural pilrinse.
r-farmer or commercial establish It was pointed nn h- -o".—
establishment ISQ. thaL
4ta • ills m
-Clichics or herbicides. The of- 4 1gested sludge is a well-recuLmixcil rurtil-
.,=-
Lper and has Been sold for years ismier the No.-J..- 4 -.1
4r. however, took the POSWC6 that di. VQ
name of
A'rd sfudge as a fertilizer is in an-exper;_. ilorganil'ie"�which Fcomcs�rom v.
4Mt A29C. And. therefore, that ther Pertilizer. This fertil.,
V
izer 6 used widdy I.- v-
LftE%V*Y has the right to regulate it and es-
'Intl c"'I'litilins- Wfort- it itr Is,similar In the tart slinige iKVlplvrlr in
Ibis Irasr exterlil Illat it is ill .1 dry ,.late
;41%11 C-.1011611oll ill-it
netlike other commercial
and ill llagS' It %V-19 list$ 100iniell Intl
that a cullipany known as, I-arn; Stipply" J.
is 116-1Z applied under a permit-
mtz-- 4AA
"r-ethe 1--tivirnnnit•rito Sells commercial fertilizer which it sprays
1rotection A 41�4
'4-h tic ted *�'l -ency front stor.ge tanks
fit
opera.operation as.the onto the farnier's land A
and that neither live I"arin Supply Cniniva.
af
I Ma.
',ztland areas. ny nor the sellers of Milorganite. nor nth-
I I was also therell-I de.
4
ors who spread fertilizer an the 1.111ij, .1
1F. r .1. *%an experimental procvtlurc.— re
dtditions uere in►loosed I required to have t zoningr certificate #Ir Z f-.
Woo,
JY the Environ-
pennit.
=1 Protection Agency ulmn the use
rn.
Pei
V'_Application. which were designed to
N 2.o colltrnls are v%tablishad i1i the (;run-
i IP
ejctkt possible pollution of streatus and
dY County Zonitig 0rdinance for the '`" `-
Spreading of fertilizer and there are no
%Pcrts t'%lificd for SHMEX) that tl
t. jvrrflvnnanrt• standards in lilt' Zeiniti- ordi-
for &L-rnled .41:11KC on'tior rants land witirt- Air ferlif4crm or fur
cleartr an agricultural ptirpoSL* in that •licre is lit) testimony in the record that T
slat gc Pniv:I,'d a necessar• fertilizer digested sludge was not t fertilizer or that
and. The ex- applying digested Sind;
;e 94? on farm lands was%oil crinditiniter for the
in
;y
5 : cilidt'd 111v executive dirvetor of the ►I'll a properly recognized agricnitural pur-
Iffirld Sajut:
try nistrict in Spring- jKl4e. Micro was tMaillitilly that the Sludge
Hiinuis, wilt. testified that the apply- operation had ane4Tc_LranoI was' tllcrcfcorr.
40%0 t1i9cSt".'- sludge increased the fer-
objectintinble. The draftsinan of tile
g
'•`.:1,,:.^K'�:�?r' .'�♦','-'�.�""t'„1.'i':°• � ti;1.•T.- :d ,....r.,.: - �: -{+ •.•-"-P ^4 '- -
a','.n,• y - +"�.��'•• •?� !: ,, •k«r •t,:."r- •:� j ' �F '' ,i:,:..,• 7�;=y�. '':-�,,;,;rv�:•?:.�°•:; ';.._...a.e:i.:Y•yL,_,:t.r�:'• ..�-'.
-. 1•- �{ ..7^ :,.,,► v:S:!.e. • 'L+�•"s,-•'r�- ,,,;t'Y•••.. ,..T.+•.:«:'� ! ^.+.,:r-+'•}:a••L..' .-w.$;� , i.• M
•'1.•••s;7wr;i (•1+ a.-�i''•:�j�._.-':.•.v tr+�.:•«.:.:ti-.�.:t+."+i. •t'� '1� e'liy,.�.. S'get., -�-i:...�r•:.•:_r«•:.• .i..1.?t''':
'-•t:: ••% .t l7lt:r:y;r� I•t.:.:_«:i:_ ..:dM• . . '. -'•••_.. v<!•.`j, •Rr,`:.^y'�•r,;;•;.-'.J'-*µr•:,•'•c:
✓ .C�.••.#.�4 ,• �•
_ r Yt�
:0 f... t :1..a-Y
758 tit. mm, Nounr EASTER T ktroRTEI[, 2d
'tee•;:-:::s: «-� •:'f`t=`•j:; •..
° �°' i,','; ''� t irnntiy t;nunt� %r• ir►g )rdivantll- ;dw has �t/!n!:•r a prrnlit frn.•I the l:avirtnntc
spl ifi ally givc•ct :t written upiu: 11 to the Prntertinn Agency the court tilt. r
fit.-.:• ,. _� a.r • aii. t.
' 1.c •'.-.+'.- t:rnutly t'„nnty
z/ntin;Ind l+nihiint, ntticrr a, ei.d t{: courts can:cJnrnn that it wsa `
��
:that tile-
liquid :g+pta•.ttlun u( tte�esttt! :iutl{;r or nut bring r„ •tt fttr act ahrhulturei !'tr.;,ose:
i.>,e.._.-•.....-1.•i.....• tia'l
ct. • 1h is
M •-{„anti�.fcrtilirrr nn the laud:; xtint•tl t)n r.tis tl:tsic. the trial cunt;, s:.ltrd that t,
? �•u ,,,,. '"N-*�...^ ' Agr4whoetal r.,ldd tint lw rrgtdatrtl tut• ISE.1111) Ltil:ct to l,rtivi. that its ul'rrtti:,n '5
•'�"� -_-•• .•;:. :.�.« °".i"` g-�
111.1 111, u►in)•-its liif.$mt. .. . f..1. an a);rutltar;l pn11u ,. T hy trim
= °
,net th,•reulnttl c•+:eroded that •.incv Ilse '{•
.rte °t:; r• �' In tlty r-thillits it Was inth ated titat Ihl-
' .•*,1.,,,., M: !; altplitatiuu of the digmted sludge tt;t,, in ts.t►t: tray a ctc!:atahlr_one. :ltc court trotthi -�
' "~:' t'� the ex+,crimcl:tal stage anti that drainxl~-is n't i"terfcn r.ith the judgment of the 1 a-
•teC t 1$aItt•C holy of the rattt:tr Ill aunlanz►tt; V
,.StJ ,, t fmm I.
dislmcal area shtmhd he invcsti- a,•
•S.y',X ,
+•'; Lite zarti►}g ofticer to rsgttice n zti::in+•crr-
f ..: „ t`'t }sated, St► that nitimle pollution bf ground ;st
P. ;"Z ,r t hater stopplirs tvanlel he avoided anti, e- tificate Before SRUCQ could sl+rG•ul -the.
J, i� 1i slud�Yi:u»'the farm lands.,
}�w �. r,,• µisr. as a•zafrt;measure die sludge is not ;
^� a=�°. �i',-•''IF'�r,� = trsed uu ernp:: that would l,c raten rate lw 1'ltt: i cue bcfurr this eunrt, thy-t•forr. is
*"� ��' �`,%,:• humans. It :1.as lutinted tint.'hutvew, tllat�hrthrr the record offer:: a lta,ic ulrm
; the prapvr use u[ the sludge rrttouunt•tairtt Which thus trial court's order cold,h he sits-
V
Of that it i1c lagoons-rd and ►tut lie a lied a••t taint-d: it is pit t at if nt-trerc in-•
Pp a arras that cry_ -
;,,,.;. frtshIF dixtstell Mudge so as to coiner thr vulec-d in what was simply a chl�c;tin;;or `
uitru);rtt in the slntl t, r•
'-!t" 1.'.°�~.• •-6'�. �•`•.i%��.. 1`' litUr:►t•t t,l 1119' 'It•ll 11t1i11,��'. t .2
�,k'��!�ja.h•=.` J..w •...i1.. !�/1.1••1/ Ill• Ut flit- -b!
.., -: X. t !, osier is :t rr;,,ttu,tl+
r 'Yam•`.'.''•' 'l•ltrrl- raK liken vi* . v '•
...•..� t tvi.--rvi+tt•net front ouc of It. -
�;ca>f' ' x:• '4 ;� furtilixc !hetc_.tsttt:itf`i •a 4�
. K�� ..:1;• �to a: a ..5� ,
,:.
the- fain owners whim teas haul-•• the di-
ial-`�;faj, �,;;� ;,; qt:r lion as to the we for at;rictdtura)�m -
.>: y .,f; t. • gt••trtl Sludge applied to his farm land. tlr
`�::.; ,ahc .,+:%_•••. l,ctsc t. facts in this -'
tt•Slifi4•t! hr the hiM1ltly dcsirahlt: results of ,
ever, let: have an entirely diffcrunt p
.1.s♦_?;: •mt!`Sr1:2;*. c•t the application of Such fertilizer.As rte have trin since there is :e prnlitttivary t 4ga,► ing � y'
�`:pry statell. the arrangement whirls SIr,.�ICO `
�« ,. •*. • • : of the digested sludl and it is therex[:cr
nladr frith lttr farnlrrs t�aS Thal the di- ,
41`�'rx,h• 7 L v m lal.uoned prior to :apitlicatiun and is applied
r`n4�-t;:•t_ j `" ' JU-Sted AntlLa• wtudt! 1►c givt.-n in the farm- J
sellyt-vt to certain contrat:c of the�Ha irae-
.`;.:"•
em-and tint sold to then!.
a 1.f+, �. ,s;:tjit?r"`F,+ko�c•v+.. t:s•,:.: T1.r:.
mental Protection Aa•*t•n cy�� Ctcartl, ndrx
.ntill-evidence is prestntrd in tilt•r,-t-urd,the
a1.•�,mr': si,Z ,%',".'.;,-,•a'i 0" the 11.'1515 of cite record, the trial spreading .. U
s;X.r• cnnrt rttn.utirl of the di„rstcci sludge as a fer-
r,__ �4n, I 1 that tli},c%tell %lodge ill its t
rat Jr^.V. t.��e etc t qtr. litizvr Iherr+ry vlovittttsiy ltecotn % � or .4
,y .yM* 1 sr1 t reperintrntal xtalre ra11nill ife t. a live f
.,:.. �►� Si. ., �,..• t1.
s; ► ate:-r.:!�ty (j✓ aRrirultt al lint-limes.
,1. t -•.r�,� � 1.1.1111+) as a 11144111/-1 wlim-t• application )u
'3rd«t•55, •.
k' ( the aril tart lirrlx•r{y I1..• dctrrn►inrd agri- :\s ter hart natrlt under
t• the iaw of this ',;:
!i;,Y•t,+� :- `; ,%W cultuc a " The court also stated that State. a county. thranxi, its zoning nrdi- -`
-;1:11(•1?';;tit 1 unty teas nance. !nay not itni>r,sc rt�u1:{tigns with te- li
K•r,tian in (intrn•r t•t1. •:
i"''�:`"''��`'-","h `'�?,• tint, tir,f eta: It rter Itltt'11tilYt rev ( t„1. .tit 1.,r' _ '•,�.
4:. { t f 111 1:11111 used for :!"rivuhuml purl►osrs '
C,.�.•-1, +y:.:�„tn.-'lie% ..�•..
1.i':�.'.%;['-:.k.,N.•?+r�z4-.. .�.r
. •_,, „� ,, r a{.►rictdamil I►ttrptcsc. since it teat baricalty utl►er than requiring the structures or
lkisal o1wratiatt to rid the selvage tlit- hui:.tingx on the I:tnd to conform 1.a Gnil:t-
'•"`•' posat p,aut of the storage prohlcm trhiclt it in t r r r
, set+,acl: lines./ f:vc» t.tc C:rw~tdg ._a
•''y'•'"R -�4t! ^� ?♦
has /:1 111 i r!:c:'!ctt/M1 t,f T:ltr 'iltt'at;r. -1'itr t•Ui112t %g1at1 [7 :•
.:.r,�•v_;ry' �'::!'::::• • r , • ' ,} L rd tllallCl- itaclf tit:ItlaC!y •{
•'' _ ugn..t lied -111-11 enlikr eviller cam• rt•cr,>uuixrd the etiliress statutory prohihi•
y-„1.,cc:' : ;:. touch t .'•
t"�t:�'"�°�+•' !° w ♦f: tit relit Irrl/1{�:/', till;1••1. i, ivrtt oust then against the cout.ty ,it III in,,,.. :c1 rCl•'t.
r•::;i•...,i i.;1.:t-_� t K, t. �' �.; • , +-
`� wthl. it, tilt- farmer I--,l ii tht•t. is r
delav its Utv or rec hire permits... �::..,M•. Y`;,,.�.'.•: ! 1 1 t. leittt respt•rt b,tan:
_�j:� ;, �;, .• il.• : its appti.:uit,n, SE •lll'l) pays the fanote'- n:t t or to be ttsett for agcirdtural 11111.-
vt"r== y :j�_.�'•+l fur file ere•+s n1l;C11 emild not hr !. �.
1 cultic• t..1.. •ha c Ihaa thou ul;h rc�nl�ti n ;-
«. o;l� .w. • ass. n• t ., t( '
K;';��; ,:; •�•'�'1 . Ille tart dial (ar;-v ontevtinl• ul xh,1l{;r :urr Inulahn v ,
a. •• t: ► ter. inat. ..,'
.•s`'t'' = cE4s``'•�• 1;•-�- r r �trt rte ; tar :►+ �+•r, - i
• ^p•.,t:. �1t r t_; t t littl to the• 1:11,11 alld lttat t►tdike other throe, in cott[orntity tttith appiicable Ql�
�1p
4:0 *+!'•s7-T.i,,4• C1,iptlh:rt'rtl (t'Tt11i,:C1'S, It tS held r the 11l1tCt l,; concerned, ttruntly Cotiaty
, ;- 1• P l teks teas
�Y,K.r�.:.•r'=y..:F:iii : - '..a
COUNTY or GRUNDY r.SOIL El%'=G =NT MATEMALS C01tF. Tlt. 759
rrt'•!ing; Orditl.•1acr. Agricultural Ilist-riets. ttsl• of ulan. 1'b►- a-%pert:c in tht- fit-Ill'of
'' :f4 art •.IuIY, th{. .101*1111111t• It-.11114,11 .►'- 111 [lie .1rth•IUt`6u1 .1•.
:y pro-1-4 rf : : p 11,1110.1 r"ti atNt f-I hl:'
i s:+-•;3
rt 1•c •tt►llarrut li!:Misr tlral flrlilinnl�,,f '` `"t
cr and thb;temlitntony +►:1a snl►tutrted by toil--"�•'` ��"
arricultnral latuN. is a nect•ssar /art c ' 1
of the faun mvures »{wet+ +rhtosr land Ill-.-
uSC for agricultural purposes and as such shale had brt•u applied a: a frrGlizcr. ; iY A
'"- Would 1►c exempt front the county zonint; x"-
: b. Thu nFC of digestcd sltalge under the trade i .
onlinancc regulation. .The words. "agri-
cultural u " have been name of Milurginite was also referred to
p rposr. generical! dc- , .
y and there was evidence that it was being . , ,: .... 1
fined tl-r the Snpten{t: Court of the State
purchased ill a dry front in bogs and up- .
-of Illinois. In reople cs rel:. Pletcher r, plied upon lands in Grundy Gaunt}.
thi:Illinois tiupreme ill.
Ccmrt determined the It
' sL� t)n the leesis of the rt.core we rla not be- r• ,
=`; yua.Ntinn.of the•validity of annexation pro- licvc that.the circla»stxlmV that the digest- ... i"
cerdingn as they applied to ar two and a- ed sludge might llr'crntsidi"d to Iw in an
half acre-tract coutilpionsS to,Joliet's launder rxprrhurnlal starry• as a fertilizer want d
!L plwtu whiels ilia, trwurr i;rr%r. Itralw.% atal• prvvrni it% ntir In-toil: rLrsifir-t .1% -tor k;-rt
: r co it hay. Tttc enalilittg, act for anurmt cult tral use. I:vrtt if the dil;rsird sltnlat ; y.
tion then exentpred lands"used e.•cclwivcly was experimental as a liquid organic fertil-
�.
for agricultural purposes'° where the owner inert there is nothing in tale Illinitin Statrtte .�
cd refuses consent unless-such "agricultural which_% ntdtl insrifv dt_-ttvim„ the exrml>:iun
:` lac:ds
are bounded on at least three sides from euuuty yoninr• control- n: uvhirltr':? ,
r
by sulrtlividrtl lands also c'tttl►rtrrcl in such weutd urohit+it �n r•chrrimrntal use of f y -
°,x territory to Ire anncxcV After the %-%ia,- tilizrr for an atsrictdtut al purpose•._ N- * ;: :~♦
` U pr�nte Court first rejected tilt cuutc ttitm rut i tu/ anthorit5 which tvunld authorize a �''r•
that.t'lrtchcr's land was hounded on three county tatting and building nificer to del:-
r;y
F. si+irt, it nr:ct -.onsiderrd what thr Icgisla- t.•tlr whether a^ farmer can r-iserinu-n t Wilk
parr meant by the pinse "for agricultural different fertilizers. 11hc u::c• of sludge ns
w - pttrltose:'" The court then quoted a defini- a fertilizer necessarily requires controls in ->_!
{i-►n hrg:inning with the essentiai ernt•rpt' usage ;ts wtould alt% tither fertilizer air her.
ti:at agriculUtnl pnrpOsc involved "the• art hicidr or insrcticide. :11t+• fart that the � tY'`_ r
or. sclence of eutltivatitiz the g•mund I:nvironmcutal Prowdiou Agcucy is I, I- wit-`
• '." The court further stated that lating;this use does not Stake it any-)iris an �=• w
r,tz: .;1 ualt•ss restricted by the context. the words agricultural Siam. Mang of the necessary I;c;:M•,..
-'agricultural purpose" have generally kern compounds used trt• a iurnt-r in raising
,, given this comprehensive meaning by the cropart, "Perimental and to:ruttiatiy in-
courts of the country. The definition was j�{ a�ts to the soil :znd its surranndines. ':"i4
,I;aiu affirnnKl in trntsytlrr v. Village of Such ►tcttn•. we cunrlade, nitirssarity call-
• cooksrille.356 Ill.399,1110 N.1;421. tinues to lac fair an agricultural purpose ti
+" arid, under the applicable Illinois Act re- :. k
'—I*rom the record in this case, therefore, - ;:- `•�eizt
: +va•must.conclude that digested sludge�r fcrred to. it is not under the control of the R
lied to farm lands is aclmittedl county zoning ordinance. : • -
<-`� � y a air itid � . . -.•-;,
o ha:iic fertilizer and ant e•Or ncr at:d is also arnica by ail-101-tut Ilum the a
: t.,i•1nt:r+ptrnttr. brine; m:rd inr an ag;lirpl• rlrrnurtirutr.• than SE X1411%. i-u•:inr•;: iv
r•• a�.tr
f rural rite tr>.tr :toll :1cc►lrtlin (v n•►nlbt IK• + r i lallr 1ti• n•.nr• nt- •.loll t !111118 1b: _N.
from the Grundy County 'l,Oning 1'ITetr►>pulaau Sstnitaey iti::ltirt u;akt»• itc
'�$• V;11itSutlee and rcl,-ttl.Uitttis. `I'1a, latul upon •prraltnr;; ni the +ludt r :1s a ice;ilirrr tat: ra4_
+111.t:h lhr'-sill:he ,,vus rciu;„ applied in � t:;:�inr alt "rtrrl•n rnr.1. put 1t+•s�•:• 'I'I:c- .� .. ;1•• y
'A*. t:ratiely 0►11nty was zont•cl Agriculltlral", fact that an t-r•ataL.11i-{► ►t-.'ta' !1.:117 tuanr
=� ate!, was all used for farming purposes, i. major tobjectires wl!;:•I1 !lave run n riznitur•
a• t, raising: Of crops for the consamptinn or ai ct►nnectaul would not ula rail- tc► charac-
;i'
-.
71
.ly i;.
- "p. .�t••�..44ji•M••L1+�•!1`M aL•�w^,.:•_�.:.r. r,.i•ti'1,...•:. .....-..ra ., . .. ;Y .•
I, .•+. ,1.�" ,r.a�:yy„a.+r.n'. tie .G•irw^3:,.%r-rv�.�:s..:./•Tp•.y.�.�w,•••4�,•1.;++:+w„�ar±;!.►• y,,•a,•w�✓!.-y.•t•_N «.i;i•`'1L�..iC2''y,• r::s++�:+f-!1w�.... ►rY.� ..
'. t•«.•.w A.:`: 1•f•: i'I{t� yi •.i.�-•1.� i-r,�• :lf. ,1•w••.'l: •.:r...ir «f•� ..:��±:si•;'� -
u •-•�• ,f: .!•-.-r-Z,',-..,i�..a. .°'• ::��.�•:{•.':t::li!.•-:•:t;:•r:ice-• ,_-.
•;1:..� ` r.^.r:.:.• ' t:• :.a•. `.:.� »a,-.. .;•`'r '�•�an... _ f-, - -�S.S-.'� �<\•.
�;,� �.?[:r: .y.,��'�.�':: ,.,i'L Sri:'�_':•,: _ .a,1.+ 1a,.. _G s'^•::•''`=.it W.t.rr.•��.'I:r: - :«..i.•1� '�='. 3
,ti• i...�:j•\N".`,'�:^.1..•f�.-•. �:,•-•�..,.•.t�� �:w +'��he••iV„•'ih•1/ '•-;,'d•JS.a.t. .i'•~•,.,l,-�:_-�� w;R,v• .tai• •'-• i
• ... Li_ , .., .• .. .•.cl.'.' Si:%•:�?' .•,V.^f •..•._•i:9•.:...ry ti!. �.`.�'; ... •`:�- .:tTp'ti:t::. :7f.t-;•A.`�...n�!ti a�-,:...'G:7a,::?.rl'..::7••[?-!+'[-:r{. :�:..•11'=:���•'!"
N•i ...:t�:.t :t'S;4's�:;�;y�'df..>. �i�"!"'t:.:•ls��.i.; ••- .- 7..i + r•-",fvaa.ar.-t•err'..:..+
1 G"•'.1�=�Yir.•;a'�,s...�'•�L''aI b','I'+PT w?'4i,r,.,-�..(�t 1-�:'-•.M•w-.,:.1''.`.6..'l.'.�.+rc•+..•,*�..a •t�:�."�+:�•Rt rV�+_i4`N a.,.N•::.�r•.f„i.."'•p«Y�,I,'+.�f..�r��•'M,...::•-i:C.17a1.•j:�.�•c M tt.r.-C . •... t'•i M•�:•' }:t%r:.•'rr•'iy-.•:,�..rOr:..r..,. y, '+.w.;4�'7-^.'t?"•S`:�^''`'j 4�.+•••.t w v.r+.,'rr.t;'f.',a,�..tt's.•�'SiJa v•...�..r:,•.••n"t hi r:��".
..
;".:•: -.s�.t�l'
� E"• tit.'q'�`•••`7, ''Ft�a'. �?'��«.:��_ ���, �.r'
"Ha•r.er,•... •..tF..3a- }..,{�: ..tY:`�.:i.:.. •,••t yf...h �. .r+ ...-'• 7':r5�...sLUen..�.:7..,.:5�.'.+.>»�•'9;•
V• «r"".{Y,S;,e f:• .,:�t•..�.t.%�•A;;::.4:':'r,T•'+Y.::'�r'a'«..+..,.. .`.r':..t.:'.•+Lv.�ir....."1::=..i�aC•:,' 'S�•`a'i •..s_
c ' _
r� aA t;. Y:..=»''•fit
5"A VAL.-A to i 7 Ill. 29'3 Nonni FIf:S' IMNL REPOTtTzIt. Zd SEP.IBS ''
: s?� �.•
r�• ��i�;:iGM��`y}.r.�'.•3 ' t4rizr the +:uc nr gift of a fct'4ilizt•r if, in is n{)plTCnt, as the trial cactri itw:if :?
fart the Frrri(iret` ns aN•1ict1 lets r.n a��ci_ po,cd the issue, that if the oper:tcin
st•?�;at;`rsy�:.��Ja '16.,'r•� ! ctdtnr:ll tmrt►nsr.. Tits issue is :tot wile[ al>tdying digtsted s1utIgc it an al;rittdtu�t
�%". x�•�"'r•sb-• ' r v; •; '?k'— purpose kio=zonin permit is Wert-•:zry for
=??�G f"•tL11 Cx�.,,,�� ai►iMtlatll K tnalri t)nstltesx i1tICrCSt 1:: l►tlt. ( (►�•' is Pe ,w
`• � L,a '•;,J colt:ty whether ther or not cha a6ulication ant! the use of the land in such[Wanner.
""''�e•�`K"q' 3 '' e ttlC uE'dil;t :ttal sluat.0 un Earn[ laude is 11tt nrdrr of the ctra'ttie rnurt •/f Grundy
4 ` 'f :F
st•rt•ing :In agricultural till New: r1K tiff. Supi! (:nrah•
;t�'�^-• ��,-�;,,,k., h tom,�,f; : t innity rnjoinin(. ttcErntl:tnt
{ i had iactit nttxl. if ttte s!tuil;t: was sitnp(y ant Materials Corporation from*. Is 111
�t r
dun and stored on land in Grundy digested sludge to agricuitural lands as a ••'� t
•�• r.,�a< *• Coun withou�b g used as a fertilizer
cy fertilizer. is, therefore, rreerced. and this =?
in a reasonable manner, rhea the issue be-
cause is remanded to the circuit coon of • q
•"�. +t �'7� 1''r•
fore its teauld ltr' entirely different. On j�
„...,v •.� tM•�, � Grlatdy County with directions :u eacate
the basis of tike rccu nt. ltowcrcr, it is tea injunction.
,rya'.► rtF •.
srnt.• t lrl?ct •tr that ttt County diet nut cities-
r_ 7s
3...:� t'zf •ter` 'f
` `"�•#+.:'!"' lion the ix nt Ficial aspects of digested Rtwcrccd and remanded. <
sltulgt a l a liquid organic fertilizer and
>w'• , `z`yr• t" t=_ t STntml tt tntl SCOTT, 1.conrn.
^ -vt 'r• kr.:r�s'K'-'.,. • lint was clearly drinnn:tratttt by the testi- j.• j
'•i!lr'';. .^"�r.CAW... i' j
[none presented on Lt:half ui St:&Nif O- i• t
,'�'=y f-'�=• r �'4�r An intrrt skin(; r:t tr is ched by appellant M •7
Ir•M`+z'7,.n•"7*• '+." .!"T' 114 d tal..fwM�s.fgn :-Y
-�,- y�,•Wit,,-,-`'- . : ahnh rrl.►It• pa lhr i•:snr I►rft►ra- tt•t. t
••+1•' {••:�•"riyi%• 7 St,. • t ! • of Ali It+tllta'lll n♦ `lilw{i•
�'- -% ••'s
hip at itahlrtthrrt;. .;t1.'. 1'a. .. l.+'► :��I '
ice; ai•'s••' '- V xw (14-58). h t lwfurl• it a scttta-
,�.. vr• r•i 1. the court had ca*•ri:{'Js�••$:•'"^ r'• - � Ill..l(t(1.dtl Irwrl -
.,. -
• tion w1wre it was char9crl that ihl• actual
a
� ,z,.x • r t PEOPtM of the State of Illinois
+ • ',�y; ,.r7 (�a+• ►'' ••'�:.; pruthu•liuts .1. -yuthtate frniliv.er un the r rs
•- ;r4�,. k4"°'�';+•-•'1. Plaintiff-Appellant, ,
xts -
„�J•'•-••�'•••^••+r �;' YtMa land tt ii t •it t�t111t11 ie 1C , 1►t tilt: M
.. '.�
•+"�`•'T"%:i. - ;Ciilltl' liltlll. I•IP wow itltw 1111t7:It/.Mlnti, t�itti p•
,;,:.•:-' 7:s• ���,yn•�,;,ty- e:. fN►1 :rte nGrn•u!tnr:►) i.nt ..+Ihe•r inane• doe Eduard 13AfCE11. Defendant-Appllt?G. �.
.:a•' �= �i. r: � fattnrinh, and. thcrrit-r+:. not 4 u%c irnrntit• No. IiS18. •F 4`
r �;:r'':zx�r .•« :*;` led tit the xaltlitlg 46161.1 to( kite p!:tinttiF.
a;M;ff, ;y;• �'�y3ar .•'*,x', `I'hr rune[ tiara• specifically
I'xil: natr ati Aliptdiatt• CtmPt of ltttun(::, ? r
t•-„�'--+- z^�. t• E:uurllt lll:,cr(ct.
the testimony of an =Mwrt tritattKs that t:
:�•a i;ti t4a `�t:u:s pt -paring material in which -"oil exituet to
r-
u.,
. "*r'E„ ~'ti' ► Itntr a tn+p i
N •. jnsl :+!: tnurh :.n :r(;rittdtae -J.
a! pnt!•,wr;t: tbt•a•lu.tt lilhnt;uC for larnr 1'ruxc+ [lion for ntuntcr. The l'trt tit
.";�''^-;."•�•u.,•-,fir; ••4•,�•ii•r.�; tr s field, in snt'h t.•a.•a:. therefore. even ,t •
} * r. ' : .;•.r.a.
Court. Sangamon. County, I)onald 1:• t .v
the prt-ductinct of a <<ut uUC rrtilizcr .cas ;t
�11►r11t1 tent, �.. titq►prrrsed all t uttfcss:ons. ;
Iritutheral ttrr uP intr►x_ra
+ •ti'rS�; zs`�aY�t =;tiw,T This ta:.t• illtt•Ctr:ttrs the extrilt t•► which
admi.-Mons and statrnttatts masse I. eleFet:d-
=a�%'�;r•:, r '
ant and the People t i
eattd. Tn: Appel-
W
hat t:
at!-
CUCr has-L. IatC COltrt, n;ne in dettrininin; Simkins. J., hell that find.
�::*_,:.Y:.y';_p:.,y,;t5: $titlnt!c hn:tL'r)l'Idtttral list-
r.•.y� x, t• lie
PAW ; t who at
tirn
ti
�,�„�,�,1;w-r."��. that I.5-year-old ticfendan , a
.:.'' Rri:�;- •'r.�; 1�rt.n7 nor ansinatiod of the record, wa. 11 ytats and tour months of a;r had
,• Liu„=.. .+ F_ w :uaccd a rcri+at t() of i(t a +ertnrRta:ICa
_{qR',: t,�M st"�'r ,•.•,•-, thcrrfarc, tiro ate not lxlirrc that llto can- 1
� It !► iu• it of 7n and a Fait-scale 1Q of 72 and. r
;•+�.••' r.•. Chta11111 of th." trial t'O rt is ,lilmiiicd Y • ,•,;rte
�'•:=:w!' +2 ^”"?t%r'={`�"� ctirlenrc prsrntrct. It was clearly %holm Matt dctijecl a grade rquitatrnt of Lt arc
••r`_• •a=`:'• •d.:'+`t-••.
that :wait•t 1`. 115[• N1 the• latNl. ili�trf:►[ aK ward recnl;tttt:l)n pGrtlntl Af a Ct;tliMt
f'-��`••'"SiJ'f�4e' '�+'..r+•F:f r»h tut• .'•r.
it
iuvt►lertl :Ip(dy inti Illy tli};r•aatt •Irn1I r U► ar!liceentrnt Vests. and tchn aa5 aimrrst tt
.•+ -;!;r"tTJ..., i'.•�,t�-%'�•%;I :It•rta9tttllral Milli as •a (1•1111iw. :rd'• :t iltni tlnlltll as :1 Sttltlt•Tn, Intl INtt !.1 M
^ ';'�;�fry�!` ltr� (►Pt1(►tr c5t
for an agr:ct►ilural purptw•• It anti intcllirvIltly ttairc big run ,_ !,�
w1 1�
t ,
SR r ) 4
!DO 1►op .
-PEER
Oaks �_---•_. -..
jo
cam,�' .,M.•
w
r
F "' to
E _ to
rr� �• Tir '1 � , N t 1 1 �
1
to I
CY
i 1
Whffe Cr
MILL Va.
t
1005
y GREENSSM RD. ;
Ck -oojo a
i�3 h� h / r �'I�y � t �•
""on a. e 9
HUNME 4TA
IAAWAGSf,�E�l
r North Carolina Departmerit of Natural
UM
-v A
Robert F 1�Blm
Resources &Community Development Dir icto
James R Hunt.Jr,Governor James A.Summers.Secretary
June 7, 1984
Mr. W. Everett Billingsley, Executive Director
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
Post Office Box 366
Carrboro, North Carolina- 27510
SUBJECT: Permit No. 7586E
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
Land Application of Sludge on
Multiple Sites - Mason Farm Wastewater
Plant and Jones Perry Road Water Plant
Digested Sludge•and Alum and Sediment
Sludges
Orange and Chatham, C6unties
Dear Mr. Billingsley:
In accordance with your letter of request received April 12, 1984, we are
forwarding herewith Permit No. 7586R, dated June 7, 1984, to the orange Water
and Sewer Authority for the continued operation of the subject land application
program with the change of the addition point of the alum and sediment from
the water filter plant to the digested sewage plant sludge.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until June 30,
1987, shall void Permit No. 7586 dated August 25, 1982, and Permit No. 7586
Amendment No. 1. dated March 21, 1983, and Amendment No. 2 dated May 16, 198t,,,
and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an ad.udicatory hearing before a
Q
hearing officer upon written demand to the Directot within thirty (30) days
following receipt of this permit, identifying the specific issues to be' con-
tended. Unless such demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
One (1) set of approved plans and specifications is being forwarded to
you. If you have any questions or need additional information concerning this
matter, please contact Mr. A. R. Hagstrom, telephone No. 919/733-5083, ext. 103.
Since-rely.-yours,
bert F. Helms
cc: Orange County Health Department Mr. Forrest R. Wastall
Chatham County Health Department Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Engineers
Mr. Ronald Williamson Raleigh Regional Supervisor
ARH/djb
P 0.Box 27687 Raleigh.N.C.27611.7687
'
'
�
NORTH CAP-OL121A
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AMD COMW=TY DEVELOP='r
For the Discharge of Sewage- Industrial Wastes, or Other Wastes
Iu accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143., General
Statutes Of North Caiolina as am-ended'. and other apgicable Laws, Itules, and
Regulations
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
Orange County
FOR THE
continued Operation of the land*application facilities and program to dispose O.0
digested stabilized solid and liquid sludges from the Mason Farm Wastewater Treat-
(Wment ?14ht and the alum arid, sediment sludges from the Ferry Road Water plant
by land application to sites having a to�al approximate area as identif ed in
ondition No. 28 of this permit, Li
Pursuant to the letter of request received on April 12, 1984., and :Exx conformity
with the project plans, specifications and other supporting data, subsequently
filed and approved by the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
and considered a part of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until June 30.* 1987,
shall void Permit No. 7586 dated August 25, 1982, and Permit No- 7586 Amendment No.
I dated March 21, 1983, and Amendment No. 2 dated May 16, 1984, and 'shall be subject
to the following limitations- and conditions:
I- This Permit shall become voidable unless the land application
facilities are used in accordance with the approved documents.sludge disposal
2. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes
described in the application and other supporting data.
.3. Tfiis permit shall become voidable in the event of failure of the s6ii to
adequately absorb the wastes, and may be rescinded unless the facilities',are
Installed, maintained and operated in a manner which will protect the assigned
water quality standards of the surface waters, and pr�_vvent any contamination
eam unsatisfactory for normal use.
of the groundwaters T?hich will render thi
!
Permit No. 75861
Paga T%4o
4. In event the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, the Permittee shall
take such immediate corrective action. as may be required by this Department.
L
5. Diversion or bypassing of the untreated sludge from the sludge land aPPllcitlo
facilities is prohibited.
6. The facilities shall be effectively maintained and operated as a non-discharje
system to prevent the discharge of any sludge into the surface waters of the
State.
7. This permit is not transferable.
8. The issuance of this Permit shall not relieve the orange Water and Sewer
Authority of the responsibility of damages due to groundwater Pollution.
9. Adequate provisions shall be taken to prevent wind erosion and surface runOf1
from conveying pollutants from the sludge application area onto the adjacent
property and/or surface waters.
10. Sludge shall not be applied in inclement weather or until 24 hours fo.Uoc_yin&
a rainfall event of h--inch or greater in 24 hours. Emergency sludge disposa
measures shall be approved by the Division of Environmental Management.
11- NO type of sludge other than that from the Orange Water and Sewer Authority s
W
Mason Farm Wastewater Treatment Plant combined in accordance with the present
or proposed methods with sludge from the Janes Ferry Road Water Plant shall
be placed on the disposal sites.
12. A 100-foot suffer shall be maintained between each landowner's Property lines
and any applied sludge, and a 200-foot buffer, shall be maintained between
any residence• and any applied sludge.
13. Sludge shall be evenly applied and then plowed in Within 24 hours after appl,
cation where no cover crop is established.
.14. The sites shall be adequately limed to 'a soil pH of 6.5 prior to sludge
applications.
IS. No root or leaf crops for public consumption shall be
raised On this -site.
16. Any moditaring deemed necessary by the Division of Environmental Management
will be done and an acceptable sampling and reporting schedule shall be
followed. This may include monitoring of surface water, groundwater, soil
crop residue and salable crops.
a. Monitoring wells shall be constructed and sampling schedules arranged 'R",
required by the Division of Environmental Management and constructed
accordance with 10 NCAC 2C 0.0100.
..........
Permit No. 758GR
gage Three
b. Contact, the Raleigh Regional Groundwater Office to establish the
monitoring well siting., parameters, frequency of sampling and reporting.
17. Maximum slope for sludge application shall be 12% for surface applications and
18% for subsurface applications.
18. No liquid sludge will be applied by surface or subsurface application within
. 100 feet of any surface water or well, or within 200 feet of any tributary of
a public water supply.
19. Application rates shall not exceed:
a. 20,000 to 26.000 gallons/acre/day. of liquid sludge, uniformly applied so
as to avoid runoff, ponding, or erosion.
b. 2.0 dry tons of sludge/acre�/year.
c. 225 lbs. of plant' available N/acre/year for lands covered In fescue or
bermuda grass.
d. 180 lbs. of plant available N/acre/year for land to be used for corn crops
e. 200 lbs. of plant available it/acre/year of solid sludge for agriculatural
land.
f -The needs of the crops.being grown based upon current soil and sludge
analysis.
20. Surface application of liquid sludge shall not be applied to sites that are
prone to flooding conditions.
21. The owner of the disposal site shall be furnished an analysis of sludge delivel
to the site.
22. Animals should not be grazed on sludge applied land within a 30 day period
following the sludge application.
23. A recorded log of applications including amounts applied, dates, whether
injected or incorporated, coordinates of application, etc., shall be maintained
at the wastewater treatment plant as a permanent record.
24. In any future transfer of this land, a notice shall be given to the new owner
that gives full details as to the materials applied or incorporated at these '
sites.
25. The Permittee, at least six (6) months prior to the expiration- of this permit,
shall request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Comimission will
review the adequacy of the facilities described therein, and if indicated,
will extend the permit for such period of time and under such conditions and
limitations as it may deem appropriate.
Permit No. 758GR
Page Four
26. Each land application site shall be posted: with signs indicating that it is
being used for the "land disposal of digested sewage sludge".
• 27. If any nuisance conditions arises concerning this land application facility,
including creation of an odor problem, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority
shall terminate sludge disposal immediately after notification by the Division
of Environmental Management.
28. This permit shall become voidable unless the agreements between the Orange
Water and Sewer Authority and the land owners listed below are in full force
'and effect:
Site No. Owner Area
1. Ch-1 W. H. Knight 50 acres
2. 0-2 R. S. Lloyd 25 acres
0-3 Eugene Montgomery 25 acres
4. 0-4 Jesse Parker 75 acres
5. 0-5 Willimm E- Smith 23 acres
6. 0-6 William E. Teer 45 acres
r
. '7. 0-7 William, E. Teer, 25 acres
leased from Ida
Andrews
8. 0-8 Raeford Thompson 150 acres
9. 0 •9 Andrew Womble 25 acres
443 acres
Permit issued this the 7th day of June, 1984.
NORTH CAROLINA EIMIRO=-NTAL MUNAGMIENT. CO%&21XSST-ON
00 Robert r. Nelms, Director
vDivision of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Con fission
Permit No. 75868
,.�' •'•�v' �'/`-'�``.' ' �Jr� -'.,+, t� /�� ''ate �!' � �:.� �' . ..���_���?:'
f` (� �'t�q1`^' \• �;`—"—� \ �� Pte•
fy
A.
'' ,, ` `•-••�� •,,..,/� �i�.\ ---•.._„I�-!�'`"� ,"`• J .Y 1 �` .._ � '„� �.}-• �'-'' may, -�1• L
011
. 1'�,/'?J,+!-" rs�% ya'' t / � •` \.` / L.��•�''r^."'.�,•• •¢fit
_� r� �..'�"��✓.%r �!:s •....•.mow . jt ll- ••' '•.� / s♦a r.
'• ..-•1• �'• -. ./"r•.`'i 1 ��•'__�"`�."�.. i 'j � ',` �'1 �''• .` '•' ..•.,rte '�1:
''tom.-"'' :_i ��`"�.� r r (J�'•� •u+y .!-��• �".. ' �1` ,,1. .`,,// :r t � i'.
. l `••`'`'.�� `] , r:s�ty v.c .sssa ! l A i'^1 �'` � i�1\\ •L
Ve
PF
Lf
r.
- •.�� ` ,, . �/ f• ,yam'
w � 1
,1
y/} m
Ln p CO
lu
1�.�-•-•,'il,r^r I.'.�'•�l�'•�'ll�r•'r�:+ /�.wrcly� i^-�:�: ..��'a' .;�i.1 n ./".�!I(( 1/(.. -.\ :�.. _ n•._ i C''_ 1
034
NORTH CAROLINA PETITION OF R.ESI DENPIS
g: OF CLOVER GARDEN
ORANGE COUNTY. CHURCH COMMUNITY
We, the undersigned, are residents of the. Mover Garden
Church Community and'hereby petition NASA that it no longer make
available to any person or persons waste matter from its sewage
treatment facility who would deposit the matter on the fields of our .
community,
Such waste matter has been spread on the property of Warren
Ray and .Toe Thompson and constitutes a general and public nuisance
G
in that it generates very bad and penetrating odors throughout the
general community, attracts large numbers of flies, creates rum-off
onto adjoining properties and contaminates wells and streams.
U PETITIONERS ADDRESSES
e'
Ir
II
03
PETITIONERS ADDRESSES
L4. )v. AI- Bow L o �' �,C ►•��/?'2 "
7 .
jy•.� �LC A/- �� t
�WC
4L -Vag
A4 112U&
s
5
° 4 '
x
m
9 '
_ �L1
i
. �ZJ
W--T- v Awl
A A M-A jl_�rLP Of A to - —
w
034
PETITIONERS ADDRESSES
Le
Aff A Ap 1��
V
6,OL
-A.Af
op
ir ---------------
ti -----
---------- ---
Z--L-
0/0
A
AV
NA-
H
�rf=
r
c
r.
IWAFA
6 /
F
r
•_ ,�► + „ /
.•. .� U 3 C.
PETITIONERS ADDRESSES
&L(A«
0,2- j V.
A4o ,
�04
U _
_ a
w
f
---U =
J�Glma. 4.co" .
w__ _ .._ ..��` sir'_'_-_`/_'� ��.�1• �" �4/" �
•y
Alt fl.
/f 7OLs
fiol Ajafa q- _. ..
Ij
s � .
i
i
•i �
:. •STAr, .
-�/lsf
s.c
. ; a3E
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street a Raleigh,North Carolina 27611
James G.Martin,Governor S.Thomas Rhodes,Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
January 23, 1985
Mr. Michael 0. Hartley, Sr.
Route #1, Box 15tH
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 ...
Subject: Investigation of Permit Violations
OWASA- Land Application Sites
Orange County
Dear Mr. Hartley:
As a. result of your concerns expressed during your meeting with Mr. Cecil
Madden, Environmental Engineer for this Division; the staff of the Raleigh
Regional Office met with representatives of the Orange County Water and Sewer
Authority on January 7, 1985, Ms. Carolyn McCaskill, Environmental Engineer,
Environmental Management, Mr. Wayne Munden and Mr. Ron Williamson, OWASA and
myself visited all the sites in question to investigate reported violations
of permit conditions.
The reported concerns included:
1.. Improperly maintained sites to ,prevent surface runoff of the land
applied sludge.
2. Contamination of nearby wells.
I
3. Buffers were not being maintained.
4. Monitoring wells were not constructed or not sampled according to
the provisions of the permit.
5. Records of the application rates and points of application are not
being maintained.
6. Improper/Inadequate posting of the fields.
i
P.Q.Box 27687,Raleigh,North Carolina 27611-7687 Tekphone 919-733-4984
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
i
i
0 3 18f
Mr. Michael 0. Hartley, Sr.
January .23, 1985
page two
At the time of the investigation, there was no physical evidence to
indicate any well contamination directly resulting from the land application
of the sludge. The Orange County Health Department indicated i Mr.. Thomp;on's
well problems apparently result after high rainfall events (the septic tank
is less than SO feet from the well) and that Mr. Cole's well would be
considered Indaequate using today's criteria.
The investigation revealed no evidence of surface runoff from the
application sites that would result from Improperly.applied sludge. I agree
the signing at the sites could be considered marginal at best... OWASA indicated
that additional more visible signs would be erected at the sites. When the
monitoring wells have been located and constructed, proper safeguards (signs,
locking well caps and monitoring) will be implemented by OWASA.
In addition, we have requested OWASA implement a program to continue to
make employees aware of the proper application practices including: proper
buffer distances from property lines and surface waters, proper application
rates, and maintenance of the sites. Mr. MUnden indicated this request was
reasonable and OWASA would comply with it.
If we can be of any further assistance or you have any additional concerns,
please do not hesitate to contact either Ms. McCaskill or me at 9191733-2314.
Sincerely,
David T. Adkins
Water Quality Section
Raleigh Regional Office
cc: Mr. Wayne Munden, OWASA
Mr. W. Lee Fleming, Jr.
Mr. Cecil G. Madden, Jr.
trger-rAROAA /YY 777COG 6WW,=- IWD 66-M-16
04C
According for the Pre-P"roposa 1 Draft Regulations- released-Art-May
1980; EPA p 1 ans: to p i ace: sl udge'and's 1 edge: products i nto s.i'x bas i c.
groups.. These will fail under two categories- of 'sludge use. fert i 1 i zers
and: soi l conditionersr and three classes. within- each type: unrestricted,
restri"cted, and r vernmental use Standards will be set far sampling
and: ana 1 ys i s of sludges: for pathogerr reduction as. we 11 as cadmium,
lead,. and PM concentrations. Concentration limits may also be set
for-other trace. metals• or hazardous constituents.
Under- these proposed_ regulations, fertilizers have- been- tentatively
defined as sludges containing at least 5 percent nitrogen and 10
percent or less moisture,. by weight.. Soil conditioners ar..e%those
sludges not classified- as fertilizers. :The three usage classes
within- each category will restrict distribution and use of sludges.
Criteria- are based art contaminant concentrations. Less contaminated
sludges will be vailable. for unrestricted use which will be the
only class authorized for application to food and feed crops, use
around the home, or for reta-il distribution. Sludges characterized
as restricted or governmental have higher contaminant concentrations
and fewer permitted uses. (Additional details are presented in
Appendix B of this report.)
Based on the range of contaminant concentration limits in EPA's
P"re-Proposal • Draft Reaulatio_ns, for the sale, give away, or land
applicat.i06 of, sludges, OWASA's sludge would fall in the unrestricted
use, fertilizer class. OWASA's sludge contains about .6.6 percent
nitrogen (TKN). Concentrations. of• cadmium and lead are 6.0 mg/kg
and- 27.0 mg/kg respectively, well below the upper limits set for
these elements in the unrestricted use class. Unless EPA's maximum
contaminant concentrations for this class are made twice as stringent,
OWASA should. have little trouble meeting the new regulations
governing the land disposa-1 of sludge..
I
La
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
'44 vsqrleli REGION IV
345 COURTI-AND STREET
ATLANTA.•GEORGIA 30308
APR 9 3985 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Approval of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) Portion of the
Durham 201 Facilities Plan. Durham, North Carolina
The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to determine
whether a proposed major agency-.'action will significantly affect the environmert.
One such major action, defined by Section 511(c)(1) of the Clean Water Act, is
EPA approval of a facilities plan prepared pursuant to Section 201 of that Act.
In making this determination, EPA assumes that .all facilities and actions
recommended by the plan will be implemented, whether or not EPA grants are
issued to fund construction of any of the facilities. If our analysis concludes
that implementing the plan will not significantly affect the environment, EPA
issues a Finding of No Significant -Impact (FNSI•).
• A Negative Declaration (presently referred to as FNSI) was issued in
March 20, 1978 approving various elements of the Durham 201 Facilities PI
The proposed construction projedts were:• (I) a 10 mgd Farrington Road
treatment plant with interceptors, (2) expand and upgrade the Mason Farm
plant from 5.5 mgd to 8 mgd. The Farfington plant is currently under
construction with completion scheduled for 1985 and the Mason Farm plant
has been completed except finding a solution to the sludge disposal problem.
Another FNSI was approved November 18, 1981 supporting the construction
of a gravity system, force main, and pump station to serve the Rangewood
community. This project is almost completed. A third FNSI was issued
July 9, 1984 approving the upgrade of• tbe 9.5 Northside plant with an
interceptor and a new'outfall line. Construction for this project has not
been initiated. This FNSI precedes partial approval of this element of
the Durham 201 Facilities Plan (partially funded by EPA grant C370380-01),
which will require the purchase of a Aland application site for sludge
disposal for the Mason Farm plant operated by OWASA.
Attached is an Environmental Assessment, containing detailed information supporting
this action in the following sections•: A) Proposed facilities and actions; grant
status; B) Existing environment; C) Existing wastewater facilities; D) Need for
proposed facilities and actions; E) Alternatives analysis; F) Environmental
consequences; mitigative measures; G) Public participation; sources consulted.
Comments supporting or disagreeing with this proposed EPA action received within
30 days of 'the date of this FNSI will be evaluated. before we• proceed. If you wish
to comment, phone (404) 881-4015 or write:
Ernesto Perez, Planning Manager
North Area Grants Managepent Section
• U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Water Management-Division
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
4 Sincerely your
Sincerely your
JeteT
0
Regi al dmini rator
-2-
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Durham, North Carolina
A. Proposed Facilities and Actions; Grant Status
Sludge Land Application Site: Attached Figure 1 shows the planning area
in proximity to the proposed sludge site, Figure 2 provides general
information about the sludge land application area, and Figure 3 provides
•detailed information about the .proposed site.
The project consists of purchasing 59.95 acres of land (Weyerhauser Site)
to apply the sludge from the 8.0 mgd Mason Farm wastewater treatment•operated
and owned by OWASA. This plant has already been upgraded and expanded and
the sludge is currently being applied to privately owned sites. These
sites are not always available for sludge disposal because of inclement
weather, crop growing and harvesting, and grazing schedules. The proposed
site will give OWASA the capability to disposb of sludge generated
(8,400 pounds daily) at the plant when application to privately owned
land is not desirable or when conflicts exist with the landowner's use
of the site. The total land area (59.95 acres) will require 31.66 acres
for sludge application with 28.1-97acres of the total to be used for
vegetated buffer areas. The sludge will be trucked 12 miles from the
plant to the application site. Coastal Bermuda grass is the proposed cover
crop. Since this site will be• used approximately 40 days during the year,
minimal site preparation and harvesting will take placp and this can be
handled with the help of local farmers.
The application site (Figure 1) is approximately 2 miles from the delineated
boundaries of the planning area. The purchase of an application site in' the
planning area could not be accomplished for the following reasons: the cost
of latd within the planning boundary is excessive; OWASA does not have the
power to condemn property whicl• would be the case if' the selected site is
within the planning -area; and, of several sites examined in the planning
area, OWASA has not been able to negotiate the purchase of a tract near the
• treatment plant.
Grant Status: The upgrade and expansion of the 8.0 mgd Mason Farm
wastewater treatment plant has been completed under EPA grant •C370380 •03.
The cost of land for *tbe sludge site is $143,900 and $36,410
is the cost for site clearing and preparation. The total EPA
eligible portion is $135,232 and $45,078 is the local share.
Preparation and operation of the site will be a responsibility
of OWASA and specific requirements will be made as a part of the
grant conditions.
B. Ex;Usting Environment
Topography and Soils. The planning area, as well.as the. project site,
Is located within the eastern part of the Piedmont physiographic province,
which consists generally of rolling to hilly land sloping to the
southeast. However, the planning area can be characterized as being
relatively flat. The planning area covers the Town of Carrboro, the City
of Durham and Town of Chapel Hill, as well as portions of Durham County
and Orange County. There are twelve major soil associations and about
one-half of the soil types are considered moderately well drained to poorly
drained soils. The number of soil associations is well distributed through-
out the planning area and the similiar characteristics permit the variods associafigns
to be grouped. The White Store/Creedmoor/Mayodan/Granville/F.rinceton group
is moderately well drained with a surface layer of. fine sandy loam and a
subsurface of silty clay loam. The Chewacla/Webadkee/Congaree group is
somewhat poorly drained to well drained with a surface of fine sandy loam
and sub*surface of sandy clay loam. The Irdell/Mecklenburg group consists of
well drained soils that have a surface layer of gravelly loam and a subsoil of
clay loam. The Georgeville/Herndon/Mason/Tatum/Davidson soils are well
drained soils that have a surface layer of silt loam and a subsoil of silty
• clay loam. The Appling/Cecil/Louisburg/Helena/Vance soils are well drained
to moderately well drained that have a surface of sandy loam and a subsoil
of sandy clay loam. The soils associated with the project site are Herndon
and Lignum, and they are moderately wi_-11 drained with a surface layer of silt
loam and a subsoil of silty clay loam.
Surface Waters. The planning area covers parts of the Reuse Riveir and
Cape Fear River Basins. The Cape Fear River Basin is located in the
southwestern part of the planning area and sub-basins 05 and 06 cover
portions of the planning area. The proposed project site is located. in
sub-basin 04 of the Cape Fear RiVer Basin. The main stream of this area
is that portion of the Haw River.from Mutes Creek down to its confluence
into New Hope River. The largest tributaries are Cane Creek, Terrill Creek
and Dry Creek. The tributary in proximity to the proposed sludge site is
Collins Creek and this tributary runs into Haw River. Collins Creek is
a Class C stream which is classified for fish and wildlife propagation.
There is no sampling station on Collins Creek but the available information
on the Haw River indicates water quality is being maintained for the current
classification level. From its headwaters to its confluence with Haw River,
New Hope River is the dominant drainage stream in this portion of the plan-
ning area. New Hope River is a class C stream and the waters are meeting
the required water quality standards.
-2-
Groundwater. The Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill obtain water supplies
from an impoundment, University Lake. An alternative source, an impoundment
on Cane Creek, is being planned for Orange County. The City of Durham's
primary water source is Lake Michie. The recently completed Jordan Reservoir
has a significant water supply to be potentially shared with counties and
cities in and around the planning area. outside the municipalities, water
supplies come from groundwater through wells and springs. The depth,of the
water table varies depending upon topography, climate, and properties of the
water bearing materials. Since the climate is -fairly uniform and water bearing
properties do not differ significantly, topography has the greatest influence
on water -table depth. The lowest water yield is found on hills and the
highest on slopes, flats or valleys. The reason for the difference in yield
is the soil and rock at lower elevations receive recharge from surrounding
hills and the rocks tend to be more fractured and porous than rock underlying
the hills. The geology of the area is not conducive to high yields of
groundwater. Groundwater yields are adequate for domestic use, isolated
industries and small communities. operating the proposed sludge land
application site is anticipated to have no significant adverse impact to
groundwater in the area and monitoring wells will be established to
assure early detection of any groundwater contamination problems.
C. Existing Waste-eater Facilities
1. The City of *Durham currently operates four.wastewater treatment plants
(Eno River.plant, Northside plant, Rock Creek plant and Little Lick plant)
in the Neuse River Basin. Each plant discharges into a tributary that flows
into the Falls of Neuse Reservoir. Durham has four additional plants
(New Hope, Sandy Creek, Third Fork, Hope Valley) that are located in
the New Hope Creek drainage basin. A new 10 mgd plant (Farrington Road)
has been funded as described in an EPA grant (C370380-01) in the 1978
Negative Declaration (FNSI). This plant is scheduled for completion
in 1985. This 1978 negative declaration also describes the expansion of
the Little Lick Plant, as well as interceptors .to transport wastewater
from the New Hope and Third Fork Creek plants to the Farrington Road
facility. Durham's Northside plant was approved for funding in
1984 in an EPA FNSI. This project will result in the upgrade and
expansion of the Northside plant.
2. The Rangewood portion of the Durham 201 Facilities Plan was approved by EPA
in 1981. This project will require a gravity system to be constructed,
as well as, a force main and pump station, to alleviate the need for
malfunctioning septic tanks. OWASA operates the existing 8 mgd
Mason Farm treatment plant. The plant has been upgraded and expanded
through an EPA grant. This is an advanced secondary treatment that
serves Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The disposal of sludge remains a
problem at the Mason Farm plant. pjjAgA_bAA-already- received 5
percent EPA funding for the acquisition of equipment utilized
s-al.
-3-
D. Need for Proposed Facilities and Actions
(The purpose of this project Is to provide the most cost effective site/
method of sludge disposal for the Mason Farm wastewater treatment plant.
Sludge from the plant is presently being disposed by spreading on nine
privately owned agricultural sites totalling 443 acres in southwestern
Orange and northern Chatham County. 11rivately owned application sites
are not always available because of inclement weather, crop harvesting,
crop growing, and grazing schedules. Because of these limitations, OWASA
needs to develop the capability to manage and dispose -of sludge during
periods when it is not desirable or 'there are conflicts with the land-
owner's use of the site. The purchase of the proposed 59.95 acre site
would give OWASA the capability to dispose of sludge in an orderly manner.
At present plant .loading conditions, there have been periods extending
for 30 to 45 days when the privately-owned sites have been unavailable
for sludge disposal-) Plant sludge has been managed on-site for the most
part by temporary storage in the Mason Farm wastewater treatment
plant digesters. During the more extended periods when the
digesters have been filled to capacity, sludge has been held in the
aeration process-by increasing the mixed liquor solids concentration.
This temporary sludge holding arrangement has the potential to cause
plant process upsets and needs to be avoided whenever postible. If no
action is taken to correct this situation, it is anticipated that plant
process upsets will result from the shortage of adequate facilities to
provide for ultimate sludge dispos*al.• These process upsets could result
in the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater to Morgan Creek.
The existing severed population for the OUIASA service area is 44,500
and the projected sewered population for the 20 year planning period is
63,750. Current sludge production is 1 160,000 pounds of dry solids per
for the planning period
year, and the projected level of sludge production
is 1,690,000 pounds per year.
ge capacity for the• proposed site at a flow of 5.5 mgd
The current storage
is approximately 57 days and the* storage capacit y at the design of
8.0 mgd is 40 days.
E. Alternatives Analysis
-
The 201 facilities plan and amendment considered several alternativese
The evaluation of these alternatives* can be grouped into two categories:
(1) alternatives considered but not selected for detailed evaluation, and
(2) alternatives selected- for a more detailed evaluation.
Alternatives considered but not selected for detailed evaluation.
ae Sludge incineration - This approach was considerid a volume
reduction technique and ultimate disposal would still be
required. As a result of potentially increasing cost to
operate an incineration process and the high energy cost
requirements, this is not a viable alternative
• since a successful operation would be dependent upon the
capability to recover or.reclaim energy from the process.
-4-
b. Landfilling The utilization of this disposal approach would
require a dewatering process at the wastewater plant such
that the solids content is an acceptable level for landfilling.
This would require an expensive upgrade .at the plant to handle the
sludge for planning period.
C. Static site composting - This alternative was not evaluated in
detail because of the high labor and space requirements. OWASA
is attempting to avoid high operating cost and the Mason Farm
plant has space limitations for handling static site composting.
2. Alternatives selected for detailed evaluation.
a* On-site storage tank This method would require construction of
an adequately sized covered tank to temporarily store liquid
sludge until it can be transported to privately-owned application
sites for ultimate disposal. There is not adequate space
available at the Mason Farm plant site to locate such a storage
facility without expensive construction. The cost of such a
tank, with a cover to control potential odor problems, is
not cost-effective and will provide only a temporary means
of handling sludge until such time as it can be retrieved and
transpoited to a final disposal site.
b. On-site lagoon - An on-site lagoon with a capacity of at least
904,000 gallons could be constructed to provide for the temporary
• storage of liquid sludge during those periods when privately-
owned land application sites are unavailable for use. This
alternative would require the construction of an earthen lagoon
and installation of associated pumping and piping facilities.
Construction of an on-site lagoon for temporary storage of liquid
sludge would not be a tostTeffective sludge management alternative.
This alternative would'have substantial capital costs associated
with installation of odor control facilities.
• C. Dewatered sludge stockEile -1 This sludge management alternative
• would provide for a reduction of the volume of sludge and temporary-
on-site storage would be required prior to ultimate disposal.
The 804,000 gallons of liquid sludge would be concentrated by a
centrifuge to a volume of 268,000 gallons of dewatered sludge.
This would reduce the costs associated with the transportation of
this sludge to the land application site for disposal; however,
energy, personnel, and chehical cost increases would offset expected
transportation cost savings.
-5-
d. "No Action" alternative - The result of taking no action to
provide additional sludge management capability has been
considered. OWASA presently utilizes only privately-owned
• property for ultimate disposal of the sludge produced at
the Mason Farm wastewater treatment plant. This has created
problems for ultimate disposal of this sludge because of
conflicts with the schedules of the private property
owners' agricultural operations. If no action is taken to
provide additional sludge management capability, then these
problems� will worsen as the loading on the Mason Farm plant
increases.
e. Land application of liquid sludge - This is the most cost-
effective alternative for the following reasons: (1) OWASA
would have the capability of managing sludge when weather
conditions and scheduling problems result in the inability
to utilize privately owned sites, (2) expensive deviatering,
facilities would not have to be purchased, (3) the energy
costs are less with the land application approach, (4) sludge
is used as a soil conditioner, and (5) inexpensive liquid
sludge transport and application system can be used.
The amendment resulted in an examination of three different
sites for sludge disposal. Two of the three sites examined
are 'Located in the planning area. Both sites were located
closer to the treatment plant. However, both sites were
rejected for the following reasons: (1; land cost was five
times greater than the selected site, (2) tb -S
wer Q tg M ro:l-`motto,residentia „ur► ts, and
(3) the owners were unwilling- to, convey title and OWASA_doi�,s, np.t
have the authority dons,
not
li,.r -y n
P. Environmental Consequences; Mitigative Measures
The proposed land application site has been examined and there are no rare,
threatened or endangered plant and animal species involved. The Department
of Cultural Resources has determined that the project must be,.Purveyed to
determine if there will be any impact on cultural resources. There would
be some limited environmental impacts associated with preparing and operating .
the site�, (1) land disturbing activities from site preparation will be
required but any erosion and siltation would be minimized by maintaining a
2001 buffer strip between applicatioii area and watercourses; ((2) a cover crop
would be established to further reduce adverse runoff;) (3) noise and dust problems
will occur but the relative remote location of the sife should limit these
problems to the area; (4) the site is owned by Weyerhasuer Company and no
residence will have to be relocated;• (5) a 100 foot vegetated buffer zone
will be maintained between the application area and other property boundaries; •
-6-
(6) the transport distance from the treatment plant to the site is
approximately 12 miles and the number of trips generated by the transport
vehicles should not have any adverse impact on traffic; (7) the transport
• vehicles- will have enclosed tanks and significant odor problems should
not occur; (8) the sludge is anaerobically digested and nuisance odor
problems are not anticipated; (9) the removal of 32 acres of mixed pine
and hardwood forest is unavoidable because portions of the site must. be
cleared and graded in order to establish a qover crop; (10) the proposed
site is not within the 10,p-year floodplain; (11) no wetland area will be
impacted by the project; K(12) there •are no wells located within 1,000
feet of the proposed site and monitoring ells wi be required to assure
groundwater resources are not affected adversely1#13) no agricultural
land will be displaced by the proposed project and the partial site clearing
will result in the addition of 32 acres of harvested cropland (14) no parks,
schools or recreation sites will be Impacted; (15) approximately four trips
per day will be required to transport the sludge fbr disposal and the route
currently being used has presented no significant adverse transportation
problems; (16) the utilization of *the selected alternative will result in a
substantial savings in energy cost; (17) Collins Creek is the nearest drainage
stream and no adverse impact is anticipated and the area's existing water supply-4
(University-Lake) is located--1n--a-n-o-tb-e-1r-drain—ag—eTa—sin as well as the proposed
Cane Creek water supply; (18) the sludge has been tested—and meets'EPA-*toxicity
test; (197—thepridposia- project- will have no direct or indirect impact on the
population growth for the areand (20) any a
will be minimized by adhering to an erosion and sedimentation plan.
G. Public Participation; Sources Consulted
A -public hearing was held November 15, 1984 on the selection of the proposed
project site. Although other public hearings were held on the original 201
facilities plan selection of a sludge land_Appl�c�application site—occurred
afteE, fhe initial 'public h—ea�r-rn were addressed
�*I�p public _�vl The various alternatives
and the selection of t!1"roposed site has not caused y,y4�bi 4�,_�jpy�o s I t i o n,.)-,;a-
Giii_4p_ _ _ .
The resolution to adopt the�amiend--me-nt—tO—tfii26-1 iities plan has been signed by OWASA and the lead applicant (City of Durham).
The typical customer will pay $8.68 per month to have wastewater treated at.
the Mason Farm plant and the operation and development of a land application
site for sludge will not cause any additional cost to the average user.
The user charge for treating wastewater at this plant has been evaluated
for compliance with EPA's affordability criteria, and it has been determined
that this is not a high cost project.
The proposed project is consistent with the Triangle J Council of Governments
Areawide Water Quality Management Plan.
-7-
Sources consulted about this project for information or concurrence included:
af City of Durham, Town of Chapel Hill, Town of Carrboro,
b. Durham County, Orange County
C. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Water Resources Planning
Wildlife Resources Commission
Parks and Recreation
Geological Survey Section
Division of Forest Resources
Groundwater Section
d. North Carolina Department of Human Resources
e. North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
f Triangle J Council of Governments
North Carolina State Clearinghouse
T ''��i�v'�r•�y°•^.riei.JF«iY:.�ems_--- - +v.S�•••ww�e,�,,*.,,�,t• •�+-���«✓+•:\w';r,r+'s:�ssoe�y •..•�.Y�h6yys.,.,p� ��..• ,c:�y,,yyy� --
• ;aosto�ia.K#4 a"•tAmm.>o�onEl• - -*��.�•-�-'•' -- u�--° - '""�------ "�- - �''t
j 4 �• a
s I. I. }• s rt.
• w.� :w /_� :•.S 1..�♦.� "'••d` -1 X11'y-`�I�f'•a'r
AV
•a,�, ,� .•Os t::
- _'��. �• t ';.�' • r;, rte:;``:..•_.•• ': ;. , � �"�• -. " ,� . �.
.°`' U =�'•''"" �` .` '•• �.•�• v �'` �•;.,,,• ice': � ��,.:-
of a
� �. raev t r. s t1•.t ��� 4• w-•• - •� �+. },�.�y�rj,r. �� •:
, � tl• �! �` /mss is t C�,S.�t r,��'r•,rers"r -�p�q k� «: CC r'�..
i '1 a�•. .1 •k'" d t/�, t�•`�•_ •' lit _r' r .�•.1:,-,,L D _ -
' �t t fit' -i � ►C 0j• •�•Crtr �
t
is G C $W.
CD 0 CO
9-1 cc
' • •• � .mot 1`•:' .••�. � �� p.9y {�`� a.,1. .�+'1• •,...
• r
.-1 Y `ci.
am �i
y m
r >s y J/ �.t.•.
CD
W 10
1 1 C RD
Vot
t;
• ...•ern 1 :�' -"'/.. �.;5 .... ,,,•.//Y y�.•+ \r.. n +M' r +
'1; ;."'!�.: `� /.. -•1 .. �, •1�� 1�ti%j�.,..y�rtiry �1.`15+� ,al.r.�.+,/r';' .'• .
_ + Cr •� i;•:�:w �r id C7 = rr i' ((" i� '•1 •.frr•/, >n� 1 ��, v `.•+.
lt(L'UNA t• &W
VL
la
lip
' s�`x'`�ti ;z;� 1 C i�C���j.''���`�:J S C��►`t l�•'/,'� �l `•�••"',�`. �•,d�t r
.• _ �.�'�•,1yr ,�+..-' V•j`.�iA,,,h_�•�Y 1�'�r1''p'ii �. �..,1 \`-�f 't '-�Lf+• ' -wrrrr...
�) o
to w
4 El'jbk rc"ool-
' _ (v�.'r''�;.••�..'".7 � ��%fir�:�����..,,--".. ��!'i`/�.-�^.� •../1 ���•��'�' ,• '��
• '00 •`v' W' `'�111\�'J tr�� r• . '.� /; ^�� ��a lv l� � '��*.. ,L
lit
AJ
• ,�.°�• ram •,r /:' �+' �'� ti N` „�� \ � �'!/ ��� r �'fi'``r W.
rte.- _ _i'•..��� ti+�.l. 1 � � �:•h'w.�� � � '•r..
_� � .:•��r.,,•,!••,,r�. •1� J\4•r •!lm•:r�::�•ri�\'`'�i"/,'�i .. ' L � "'"%�•,�n �, ?C� \,.-:-^/y. �' r �+--:•'
• ���"1�.����•� 4•.�l�f�rl+a,"�c �ti i�• `\;!;�`.-•'"jr•+Y!"(� .,1,�.� �� �i�'��� G.!r'�::- "'= i
I,�a3`1j i°'J \\ �"' 1••,••/ QCs+ •�•�� 11�.�1��L y �
. / � •� 1 r+�i�f �`��r..:��\s-�,_.��r i, r•ti •�`� •^�C'"Q• , ,. �.o+...,y`r ll� �~�•.!�'1•� .` r .
' .�•�/hlr r'g �: \\ ���"�' ^��r A��.ii, ~•`••�7 ./—w�1!�1'n;�`e!y� �/'�/ + i
• — ,t� •��' 'I , �� :,ran f i '••�+ � r+'�! �.'11 (/�+1�r�/`I
.r v \ �'�\\�, t� �. pTY�u/';`�3 5:• n I��C/��1:(�r� `•`'M� V , +,`
r+••�``.r•.r��\ (r,.\\/frr�+.a .`�' .ii��� ••'►`nr!�•o •r:✓ Gt •. r-��:1�•�-'�...r+. p�`�`�"-^^^+fit
k'.��Z-f•�.lG /�. 1 G:.ti.,:wf►�� t►1;r`7/ �i•I"J/�
uj
uj
G.
u $ 3: to
W LLJ
0 co go
LII a. ¢ iip w to Cy b }` C1
W a z w o �
C4 '° O < .
!L ` � r 0-
Z
1
= 4 c w
o COQ ® � o s
i lu rys _ •j
0
� om o � c L= am
Od d o d 93
ID d fa q o UJ LU til .•i iJJ �•
LU
IL W
IL
O co
Ul
O
-• 'tom: .±ram G.•f...:��:.`•►•..I.'..•�,4.
r. fy: w4•��•:.•.�t^..Y•• ..• •'tiff
�iC.•Ir. • ••..i•.'r.![' V.: �S jl.�Mw:�:�7�'l r•�M�:.1
.i�t•`,'S ti: !.:�f,••'•;1!1 pv��,.,T��✓: T P_Yti,t1�i r' 'r:�.,.-ai:��•^•,�.I�r t+—n::
di:Lra.;Y!ti, k.•c"�,k7:: ••:: ..�!'_r_ -�: 1;yr.�,.r.;;1�• .` t w,� 1•. i"•.'.:ne'
Yf-• lrr±p.J� 7t.:�'..c-+•v.:C!•''u•�:K:..r:5'.«M1L.� y
�..�+1\•ri..,:��.:N:wl�.;!r•q1, i�:O.i�.,:�:c.Y.«>;:�•••.:..wi.•:•.r•�:.•�t•.ti.•M(w'.=:`� •C�*�
�•. 'L':!•�'.�rt�T.. +r•r:• I :•�"'►%..:rirV.,.� 'r7C!-K•=�- a/ •( 4
$iN`Yd:i� .S.ti •�" r.-fir^_s s:.�_ ��;•�. ,sr{yyfie=�• b�•[4 Y
•:7'v.:y,XSlt;:1„"^ti”' :'�'RYK'•%�'J.r'S::.i:?r;.:,•F:j.. f.:.:••`.Lw.f�::� Sol-
4
jw
•_.yv.•..••-.r�ry:r•.�•,F'f,�'-r-.•5.�...::.',i:;;�:.. ti•.;,�::Tf T•r`Yij .^ {+'�
li. '•r-�. M,•:��:3.L ii.4.�,rt"'�':r:'•.�,•r: yu;Lr..0'- -�+y'
_• 'Krim:::k Y��t_,•:F;�. �c��rr�t.�,•,•w�:r.•.�b.••.r'•h.: y
•'siw� LSLi•t{%ir '11.5�cw:r M� �:' �• [(€
4; h. co
`°+:✓,••:�_;y�:.to:.�=�'^•«•+...`«,'%�:►-•i:�ti+Cy Y•�•e!......,�i v:� +�r.•r.. y,...:.
•••"".ric•w-•,• •r'!•\:••�r;i�y,�^.��c`�tr rv. ..+mod.;,••v�..,;••%f.L�:..L�- r'a'/faJr•y'S'^` v
rw.:s:`►':.�•w.1_ •y�,•,V; i`�T• •1 •i��,,,;'•' .t�s y a...•'�..�.
y
1
i'
I
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTIONOSMA.
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM Nor
MEETING DAT& MAY. 21 , 1985
SUBJECT-- WILKINS DRIVE - PPP PROJECT
�EPARTWT: PLANNING L PUBLIC HEARING: X YES. NO
ATTACHMNT(S) : PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT INFORMATION CONTACT: SUSAN SMITH
ROLL
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
PHONE HUMBERS : HILLSBOROUGH - 732-8181
HILLSBOROUGH- '- 732-9361.
CHAPEL HILL - 967-9251
NEBANE - 227-2031
DURHAM - 688-73311
PURPOSE: To receive public comment on the Preliminary Assessment Roll for Wilkins
Drive (SR 1$03) .
To confirm the Final Assessment Roll for the project.
NEED: Public input on the Preliminary Assessment Roll , filed with the Clerk to
the Board and containing a tax description of each parcel of land to be
assessed, the basis for the assessment, the amount assessed against each
parcel of lard;, the terms of payment and the name of the owner of each
parcel as can be ascertained from County tax records, is necessary to
complete the program procedures for the project.
The Clerk to the Board has filed a Certificate of Mailing which certifies
that the notices of this public hearing and notices of i.ndividual assess-
ments were mailed on or before May 10, 1985.
The amount to be assessed includes the local share of the construction
;costs and project administrative costs. The combined total specified on
IMPACT:
the adopted Assessment Resolution is $7,639.25.
IMPACT: Upon close of the public hearing and confirmation of the Assessment Roll for
the Wilkins Drive project, the Board can direct that the Assessment Roll
be delivered to the Orange County Tax Collector for collection.
RECOMMNDATION(S) : Confirm the Assessment Roll.
Accept the Certificate of Mailing offered by the Clerk,.
Direct the Tax Collector to collect the assessment.
nil,
04',r__
ASSESSMENT ROLL IN CONJUKCTION
WITH THE FINANCING AND ASSESSING BY
ORANGE COUNTY OF THE LOCAL
SHARE OF TBE COST OF PAVING
NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803,
AISO KNOWN AS WILKIN3 DRIVE,
IN CHAPEL HILL TOMMY, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
The property described below, the names of the owners of said
property, the assessment levied against each parcel- of property, the
basis for the assessment levied against said parcel and: t'he terms of
payment of the assessment all set forth below, together with tax maps of
the project, constitute the assessment- roll for the paving of North
Carol-ina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Bill
Township, Orange County, North Carolina.
BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT
The basis for assessment against the property described below
is frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot of frontage which
represents the total local share of the cost of this project.
TERMS OF PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT
A. Within thirty (30) days after notice of the confirmation of
assessment roll is published each owner of assessed property may pay his
i
or her assessment in full without interest.
B. Any assessment not paid- in full as provided above shall be
paid in five ( 5) equal - annual installments with the first such
I
installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the date that the
assessment roll is confirmed, and the remaining installments, with
04�
interest, due on the same date in each successive year until the
assessment is paid in full.
Map, Property Owners Amount of
Block & Mailing Address Assessment
& Lot
15.A.1 Clyde A. William, Jr. $ 814.60
Gerda Williams
100 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15.A.3 Joseph B. Slaughter $ 326,10
Estelle Slaughter
101 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.A.5 Labarre Weston $
217-.40
Maurine Weston
172 Carol Woods
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
15A.A.5A Labarre Weston $ 804- 38
Maurine Weston
172 Carol Woods
Chapel HUI, NC 27514
15A.A.5C An Labarre $ 108-70
234 Daniel Drive
Auburn, CA 95603
15A.A.5 D Thomas Price, Jr. $ 326. 10
Sandra Price
116 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.A.6 Mary Garner McKeel 108. 70
120 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
-2-
044
15A.A.6A Mary Catherine C. McKeel $ 2.17. 40
120 Wilkins Drive
Durham,. NC 27705
15A.A.7 Mary Catherine C. McKeel $ 217.40
120 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.A.9 Wade C. Parrish $ 3Z6-. 10'
Nancy Parrish
Route 5, Box 525
S haw Roa d
Durham, NC 27704
15 A.A.11 Wade C. Parrish 50'2.41
Nancy Parrish
j Route 5, Box 5 25 _
Shaw Road
Durham, NC 27704
ISA.B.I Joseph B. Slaughter, $ 953 . 73
Estelle C. Slaughter
101 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.2 John C. Kl uttz $ 10$. 7 0
Lucille KI uttz
2808 Woodrow Street
Durham, NC 27705
I
I
041
:
15A.B.3 Frances Ann Nichols $ 326. 10
107 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.4 Frances Ann Nichols $ 217.40
107 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.5 Clarence Edward Wiggins $ 217. 40--
Tarlouh H. Wiggins
Ill Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.6 Thomas Johnson Price $ •434. ao
Margie Price
115 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.7 A. B. Ray, Jr. $ 181 . 16
U7 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.8 Albert Byron Ray $
Helen Ray 180 - 79
117 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
15A.B.9 Albert Byron Ray $ 1 1 . 16
Helen Ray
117 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
I5A.B.10 William R. Baucom, Jr. $
Route 1, Wilkins Drive 217- 40
Durham, NC 27705
III
15A.B.11 Clyde A. Williams, Jr. $ 652. 2
Gerda Williams
100 Wilkins Drive
Durham, NC 27705
MINNINUM
046
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of
Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about May
11, 3985, I mailed, by first~class mail, postage prepaid, a Notice to each
property owner of the Public Hearing to be held on the Preliminary
Assessment Roll for the. financing by Orange County of the 3ocal share of
the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #3803, also known as Wilkins
Drive, lccated in Chapel. Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina.
The Notice mailed set the date and time of the Public Hearing and also
�I
the amount of assessment on the property owned by the person to whom
the Notice was sent according to the County tax records.
WITNESS my hand and official seal of the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, this the 11th day of
May, 1985.
A/C'
Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County, North
i
Carolina
I
I
i
i
i
j
i
l
04t
The Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North
Carolina, met in regular session in the Courthouse in Chapel Hill, North
Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at at 7:30 o'clock p.m. on May
234 1985.
Present:
Absent:
The Chair announced that this was the hour -and..:day fixed by
the Board of Commissioners for the Public Hearing on the Preliminary
Assessment Roll filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of
Orange County pursuant to the direction of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners and pursuant to the Board's decision to finance the local
share of the cost of paving North Carol-ina State Road #1803, also known
as 'Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North
Carolina. The Chair also announced that the Board of Commissioners
would immediately hear anyone who might wish to be heard on the
Preliminary Assessment Roll. Vafious persons appeared and were
recognized and heard on the said Preliminary Assessment Roll. Those
recognized and the essence of their comments were recorded by the Clerk
to the Board of Commissioners in the minutes of the Board.
Thereupon, upon Motion of Commissioner seconded
by Commissioner and carried, the Preliminary Assessment Roll
for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of
paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in
048
Chapel Hill, Township, Orange County, North Carolina, was confirmed
The vote upon confirmation of the assessment made against each
property owner was:
Ayes:
Noes:
Upon motion of Commissioner seconded by
Commissioner and unanimously approved, the.Clerk to the
Board was directed to enter into the minutes of the Board the confirmation
date, hour, and minutes.
Thereupon, the Clerk to the Board entered the confirmation
effiective o'clock m., the _ day of 3985.
Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded. by
Commissioner and unanimously approved the Clerk to the Board
was directed to deliver a copy of the confirmed Assessment Roll to the
Orange County Tax Collector.
Upon motion of Commissioner seconded by
Commissioner and unanimously approved, the Orange County
Tax Collector was directed to publish once, a Notice, no earlier than 20*
days from the date of confirmation as herein set forth, that the
Assessment Roll for the financing by Orange County of the local share of
the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins
Drive, located in Chapel HM Township, Orange County, North Carolina,
has been confirmed and that assessments may be paid without interest at
045
any time before the expiration of 30 days from the day that the Notice is
published and that if not paid within that time, all installments thereof
shall bear interest in an amount equal to the interest on past due ad
valorem taxes in Orange County. The Chair directed that said Notice
shall be published in the Durham Morning Herald. Said Notice. shall be
in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL..
FOR THE FINANCING BY ORANGE COUNTY OF THE
LOCAL SHARE OF THE COSTS OF PAVING
NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803j
ALSO KNOWN AS WILKINS DRIVE,
LOCATED IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Article 9 of Chapter
153A of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the Board of Commissioners
of Orange County has confirmed the Assessment Roll for the financing by
Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina
State Road #2801, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township;'
Orange County, North Carolina, The specifics of any
adjustment made are in the minutes of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners for its meeting on May 23, 1985. The confirmed Assessment
RcLU reflects, any adjustment. Pursuant thereto:
L The Board of Commissioners of the County of Orange, North
Carolina, met in regular session in the Courthouse in Chapel Hill, North
Carolina, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. on May 21, 1985.
2. The Chair announced that this was the hour and day fixed
by the Board of Commissioners for the Public Hearing on the Preliminary
05C
Assessment Roll pursuant to the Board's decision to finance the local
share Of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #I803r also known
as Wilkins Drive, located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North
Cato3ina.
3. All persons attending and wishing to be heard were
recognized by the Chair and were heard.
4. The Board confirmed the Assessment Roll and 'directed its
delivery to the Orange County Tax Collector.
5. The assessments confirmed by the Board may be paid without
interest at any time before the expiration of 30 days from the date of the
publication of this Notice. If not paid within this time, all installments
thereof shall bear interest at the rate set for past due Orange County ad
valorem taxes.
John T. Horner, Tax Collector for
Orange County, North Carolina
I# Beverly Blythe, Clerk tor the Board Of Commissioners for the
II
County of Orange, North Carolina, do hereby certify that the foregoing is
a true copy Of So much of the proceedings of the Board of Commissioners
for said County at a meeting held on May 24 1985, as relates in any way
to the confirmation of the Assessment Roll fbr the financing by Orange
County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road
#1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, located in Chapel Hill Township,
Orange County, Worth Carolina.
Beverly Blythe, Clerk W the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County,
North Carolina
(SEAL)
0541-
ORANGE COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date May 20, 1985
Action.Agenda
SUBJECT: HEART'S EASE SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY Item IE%
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING _Yes _j_ No
Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH
REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT
(PLEASE SEE MAY 6, 1985 AGENDA ABSTRACT #F4)
Telephone Numbers
Hillsborough .- 732-8181
Durham - 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 968-4501
PURPOSE: To consider approval of the revised Preliminary Plan for
Heart's Ease Subdivision.
NEED: Chuck Sneed has requested a subdivision for 34.7 acres of land
from a 40.0 acre tract located west of SR 1450 Craig Road in
Eno Township. The . purpose of this request is to permit
construction of a 33-unit subdivision.
At the May 6, 1984 Board Of County Commissioners meeting a
motion to approve the preliminary plan failed. The Board
subsequently moved to continue this item for consideration at
the next BOCC meeting.
The applicant has revised the Preliminary Plan to provide
recreational space and facilities as follows:
44,000 square foot recreation area
I basketball court (55 x 95)
1 tot lot (50 x 70)
6 picnic tables
4 gravel parking spaces
Recreational space is not required for subdivision of a tract
zoned Residential-1. However, the LUI system fora planned
ed
development-housing (Residential-1) specifies a required
minimum recreational space ratio of .019. For a tract of this
size the resulting minimum recreational space requirement would
be 27r064 square feet. The applicant proposes to exceed this
requirement by 16r936 square feet in his'
subdivision request.
0-5 3._
HEART'S EASE SUBDIVISION -PRELIMINARY
PAGE TWO
MAY 20, 1985
IMPACT: Consideration of the revised subdivision for approval would
allow a 33-lot subdivision to be constructed on the site and
served by on-site recreational facilities.
A letter from the Durham County Planning -Department is
forthcoming and indicates that the project, -as designed,
complies with the standards of development provided in Durham
County's zoning and subdivision regulations. A formal courtesy
review arrangement will be established with _• Durham County,
according to discussions held with the County Manager and
Planning Department Director for that County, for all projects
submitted to Orange County in the vicinity of the Durham County
line. These submittals will be- forwarded to the Durham County
Planning Staff for comment by the staff and Durham County
Planning Board. Their comments and recommendations will be
incorporated into the consideration of the project for
approval.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Board recommended approval of the original
submittal.
The Planning Board recommends approval of the revised plan
subject to the following conditions:
1. submittal and approval of a maintenance agreement for the
recreation site and facilities
2. specification of tot lot details, including size,
equipment, and construction materials, on the plat
3. specification of the basketball court details, including
size and hard surface, on the plat
4. specification on the plat that the remaining recreation
area will be grassed.
i
I -
ORANGE COUNTY
---..-BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTON A'GENDA.
ACTION AGENDA 11224 ABSTRACT' ITEM Ncy-BA
MEETING DATE MAY 21 , 1985
SUBJECT. RENFREW DRIVE OR 1590) , BRIGADOON DRIVE (portion) AND McDERMOTT -DRIVE (portion)
PARTICIPATORY PAVING PROGRAM PROJECT - PETITION
P_EFAR!UW_T: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING: YES- X NO
ATTACHMENT(S) : PETITION INFORMATION CONTACT: SUSAN 6 SMITH
LOCATION MAP
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
RESOLUTION PHONE. HUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH
HILLSBOROUGH' - 732.-936-1
CHAPEL HILL - 967-9251
MEBANE - 2Z7-2031
I L DURHAM - 688-73311
PURPOSE: Approval of the petition for the Renfrew DriVe/Brigadoon Drive/McDermott Drive
Participatory paving program project accepted as a paving projic"t by the Board
of Commissioners on Ap •i•I 17, 1984.
NEED.: Approvai .of the netition is required for completion of Orange County Participatory
Paving Program procedures. The project is listed as priority #4 on the NC DOT
1984-85 Secondary Road. Improvements Program. The road is also listed as priority
#2 in the Orange County PPP Program.
17 of 22 property owners, or 77% of the property owners, owning 23 of 28 lots
have si-gned the petition accounti.rIg for approximately 5,278 feet of frontage
or 82% of the total road frontage The petition meets the criteria for eligibility
to participate in the program.
IMACT: Upon approval of the petition the assessment resolution and assessment roll can
be- prepared and public hearings on both items scheduled.
RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approval of the petition.
Adopt the Preliminary Assessment Resolution.
Schedule a public hearing on the Preliminary Assessment Resolution
for June 3, 1985.
C\J
RIVER
o
oo 0
CD
F-
-an.
OJ to
C•
f M X.
rn
CO 3
1j
tr) 00
- 303 M
L%1 • 44
CA
LIP 33 d' 3P h it
'16
'y '16 At
CY 0)
w w co
to tfj
0
A Y to
ID9 :3. mo- �, , 0 to
Cki
tu
35
N i E5
(Mp- C4
0 1w
to r4f
204
CD cq
to CM
7
cv ty• w
tD lkj� @
eE 9v
dN N C4 7 - a— (
4
89 ,pJa CAI z Jrr CD
Z6
tj
18r 1664ta L /o
15 In
so
as
D 3 w i;�'P �=i•r Z7.
i w A
1. < 41y
J .4-ACCA%�
TO U- 416
In LLJ A
is CID LLI
-n 0
ti
0•
CA
j
'IWO.
ui Oj
<Wwl
®ro-D
uwj 1. ZI
-Ole, 410 Cb
D2
OM D
00
Mf
of Obe of
too
Q.
Q2 CO N 0 n, u CU
(0
M 0 %)*,q
k�t a)
92 M ow in
Ao
!
e I" et h
in m cu
MM , co
U % 0•09
( 00
to es cj
in
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
PETITION FOR PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1590,
ALSO M40WN AS RMqFREW DRIVE, BRIGADOON DRIVE
(A PORTION THEREOF), MCDERMOTT DRIVE (,& PORTION THEREOF)
We. the undersigned, being property owners of land that will be
assessed if a Final Aisessment Resolution is adopted by the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County providing for the financing of the local
share of the costs of paving North Carolina State Road-#1590,, also known
as Renfrew Drive, Brigadoon Drive (a portion thereof), McDermott Drive (a
portion thereof) , in Eno Township, Orange County, North Carolina, and
assessment by Orange- County of the total local share of the project,
which local share is estimated to be forty-nine percept (4986)v do hereby
petition the Department of Transportation to pave the above described
roads and do hereby petition the Orange County Board of Commissioners to
finance the local share of the cost of the paving of the above-described
roads.
Tax Map
Lot Number Name and Address Signature
22..170 Mamie P. Walsh
Route 2, Box 510 vVA X Moo tr/ .0
Durham, N.C. 27705 &J
22..24D Thomas B. Branham
Evelyn Branham
3704 Cambridge Road
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..24E Thomas B. Branham
Evelyn Branham
c/o D. D. Branch
3704 Cambridge Road
Durham, N.C. 27705
Ca
22..51 Thomas D. Branham /
Wo Dallas D. Branch
3704 Cambridge Road +y
Durham,. N.C. 27705
22..51A- Jean Grote Yates
Route 2, Box.516
Durham, N.C. 27705
22...51C Jean G. Yates
Route. 2,.Box 516
Durham,. N.C. 27705
22..52 Janet H. Cates
Route 2, Box' 515A
Dur,ham, N.C. 27705 kl C
22..54 Frances M. Blackwood
Route 2, Box 5
- .Durham, N.C. 27705 27105
22..55 Linwood W. Johnson, Jr. n
Marie Johnson
Route 2, Box 514 ,
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..56 Linwood W. Johnson, Jr.
Marie Johnson
Route 2, Bog 514
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..51 Lester S. Payne
Frances Payne
Route 2, Box 515
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..58 Lester S. Payne
Frances Payne
Route 2, Box 515
Durham, N.C. 27705
li 22..61 Sammy L. James
Route 2, Box 512B
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..62 Gertrude S. Hyde
1311 Watts St.
Durham, N.C. 27701
l
' A
22..67 Mary Anne Stocker
Box 931 Trust Dept.
Durham,. N.C. 27702
22..69 Lewis G. Burke
'Lena Burke
906 Hale Street
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..70 Charles W. Clark
Carolyn P. Clark B�
Route 2,. Box 512 �N
Durham, N.G. 27705r
22..71 James H. Matthews
Eva M. Matthews
Route 2, Box 511
Durham, N.C. 27705
22'..73 Mamie P. Walsh
Route 2, Box 510
Durham, N.C. 2 7705
22...93 Irma M. Dillon
101St' Place
Wes
Westminster, CO 80030 lj
22..95 Robert W. Leyen
Jennifer L. Albright
Route 2, Box 506-A
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..96 Barcosnic Inc.
c/o R. N. Barringer, Jr.
P. o. Box 2628 Durham, N.C. 27705
22..97 Thomas L. Stephenson
Josephine Stephenson
3216 Luther Rd.
j Durham, N.C. 27712
22..98 Joseph F. Ferettino
j Margie Ferettino
j Route 2, Box 518
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..99 Cecil C. Martin
Route 2, Box 517
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..110 Glenn F. Winstead
Gayla Vi Winstead
.Route 2, Box 513
Durham, N.C. 27705ryfU'
22..112 Johnnie Mack Arrington
Route 2, Box 512A may,
Durham, N.C. 27705 Oy-
22..115 Glenn- F. Winstead
Gayla Winstead
Route 2, Box 513
Durham, N.C. 27705
I
I
I
i
I
4r
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
PETITION FOR PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1590,
ALSO KNOWN AS RENFREW DRIVE, BRIGADOON DRIVE
(A PORTION THEREOF), MCDERMOTT DRIVE (A PORTION THEREOF)
We the undersigned, being property owners of land thait will be
assessed if a Final Assessment Resolution is adopted by the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County providing for the financing of the locil
share of the costs of paving North Carolina State Road #1590, *.also known
as Renfrew Drive, Brigadoon Drive (a portion thereof), McDermott Drive (a
portion thereof), in Eno Township, Orange County, North Carolina, and
assessment by Orange County of the total local share of the project,
which local share id estimated to be forty-nine percent '(4996), do hereby
petition the Department of Transportation to pave the above described
roads and do hereby petition the Orange County Board of Commissioners to
finance the local share of the cost of the paving of the above-described
roads.
Tax Map be
Lot Number Name and Address Signature
22..17C Mamie P. Walsh ?>2a,,�
Route 2, Box 510 0-t"L M-4 X57 0
Durham, N.C. 27705 )7f—' -477 DO
22..24D Thomas B. Branham
Evelyn Branham
3704 Cambridge Road
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..24E Thomas B. Branham
Evelyn Branham
c/o D. D. Branch
3704 Cambridge Road
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..51 Thomas D. Branham ��� ; '••�
c/o Dallas D. Branch
3704 Cambridge Road
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..51A Jean Grote Yates
Route 2, Box 516
Durham, N.C. 27705 � „� k�
22..51C Jean G. Yates
Route 2, Box 516
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..52 Janet H. Cates
Route 2, Box 515A r -
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..54 Frances M. Blackwood
Route 21 Box 5
.Durham, N.C. 2770770 5
22..55 Linwood W. Johnson, Jr.
Marie Johnson
Route 2, Box 514
Durham, N.C. 27705 i
22..56 Linwood W. Johnson, Jr.
Marie Johnson ..
Route 2, Box 514 f
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..57 Lester S. Payne
Frances Payne
Route 2, Box 515
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..58 Lester S. Payne
Frances Payne ,, .- � :• �__
Route 2, Box 515
Durham, N.C. 27705 .
22..61 Sammy L. James
Route 2, Box 512B
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..62 Gertrude S. Hyde
1311 Watts St.
Durham, N.C. 27701
I
064
22..67 Mary Anne Stocker -
Box 931 Trust Dept.
Durham, N.C. 27702
22..69 Lewis G. Burke
Lena Burke
906 Hale Street -
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..70 Charles W. Clark ��
Carolyn P. Clark
Route 2, Box 512 `
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..71 James H. Matthews
Eva M. Matthews -7
Route 29 Box 511 r
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..73 Mamie P. Walsh
Route 2, Box 510
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..93 Irma M. Dillon-
4640 MIST Place
Westminster, CO 80030
22..95 Robert W. Leyen
Jennifer L. Albright
Route 2, Box 506-A
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..98 Barcosnic Inc.
c/o R. N. Barringer, Jr.
P. O. Box 2628 Durham, N.C. 27705
22..97 Thomas L. Stephenson _._.
Josephine Stephenson
3216 Luther Rd. ...... -------►----._._._
Durham, N.C. 27712
22•'98 Joseph F. Ferettino
Margie Ferettino
Route 2, Box 518 _ -- ---
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..99- -- _
Cecil C. -Martin
Route 2, Box 517
Durham, N.C. 27705 -
I
i
22..110 Glenn F. Winstead '
Gapla W Winstead
Route 2, Box 513
Durham, N.C. 27705
22..I12 Johnnie Mack Arrington
Route 2, Box 512A
Durham, N.C. 27705 1
22..115 Glenn F. Winstead
Gapla Winstead , --
Route 2, Box 513
Durham, N.C. 27705 ,
i
-064.
Jerry A.Morris
Trust Officer
September 18, 1984
Ms. Laura E. Yates
Route 2, Box 516
Durham*, North Carolina 27705
Re: Stocker, Mary Anne Atty In Fact-53-1634-00 jA14
Dear Ms. Yates:
Thank you for your letter and a copy of the-petition for the
paving of Ronfrew Drive (S. R. 1590). After reviewing this matter,
please be advised that we are unable to sign on.behalf of Mrs.
Stocker. However, while we Cannot sign the petition, we certainly
will not be opposed to any such paving if approved and would gladly
pay Mrs. Stocker's share of the assessment. Please feel free to
show this letter if you desire to the Board of Commissioners of
Orange County. Best luck to you with this project.
Sincerely,
J,
JAM/jh
Post Office Box 931, Durham,North Carolina 27702,919/683-7548
os�
A meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina, was held in the Courtroom of the old Post Office, Chapel Hill,
North Carolina, the regular place of meeting at 7:30 o'clock p.m., on the
21st day of May, 1985.
Present:
Absent:
The following resolution was read to the Board:
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION
FOR THE FINANCING BY ORANGE COUNTY OF
THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE COSTS OF
PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD i#1590,
ALSO KNOWN AS RENFREW DRIVE, BRIGADOON DRIVE
(PORTION ONLY) , AND MCDERMOTT DRIVE (PORTION ONLY) ,
IN ENO TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County
has received a petition requesting the paving of North Carolina State
Road #1590, also known as Renfrew Drive, Brigadoon Drive (portion only) ,
and McDermott Drive (portion only) , in Eno Township, Orange County,
North Carolina, which petition has been signed by at least seventy-five
percent (758) of the owners of'property adjoining the said roads, which
property represents at least seventy-five percent (758) of the lineal feet
of frontage of the lands abutting the said roads, pursuant to North
Carolina General Statute Section 153A-205(c); and
WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County has
i
elected to finance the local share of the casts of paving the said roads,
_l_
Uhf
as permitted by North Carolina General Statutes Section 153A-185(4) and as
provided for in North Carolina General Statute Section 153A-205;
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT:
1. Orange County shall undertake financing of the kcal share
of paving North Carolina State Road #1590, also known as Renfrew Drive,
Brigadoon Drive (portion only) , and McDermott Drive (portion only) , in
Eno Township, Orange County, North Carolina.
2. That the basis for assessment for the local share of the
costs of this project shall be frontage abutting the road at an equal rate
per foot of frontage.
3. Orange County will assess the total local share according to
the basis set out in number 2 above which local share represents
approximately thirty-four and two tenths percent (34.2%) of the total
project cost.
4. No assessments of this project will be held in abeyance.
5. The assessments shall be paid in the following manner:
a. Within thirty (30) days after the notice of confirmation of
the assessment role is published, each owner of the property
may pay his or her assessment in full.
b. Any assessment not paid in full as provided above shall be
paid in five equal annual installments with the first such
installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the
date that the assessment role is confirmed, and the
remaining installments, with interest, due on the same date
in each successive year until the assessment is paid in
2
full.
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that a public hearing on
all matters covered by this preliminary assessment resolution will be held
on the 3rd day of June, 1985, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., during the regular
meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, Hillsborough,
North Carolina.
The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized
and directed to cause a notice of the public hearing to be given by
publication one time, not less than Ten (10) days prior to June 3, 1985,
the date set for the hearing, in a newspaper having a general circulation
in Orange County. Such notice shall be in substantially the following
form:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ON
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY
THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO
FINANCE THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE COSTS OF PAVING
NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD 01590, ALSO KNOWN AS
RENFREW DRIVE, BRIGADOON DRIVE (PORTION ONLY) ,
AND MCDERMOTT DRIVE (PORTION ONLY) ,
IN ENO TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to Article 9 of Chapter
153A of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the Board of Commissioners
of Orange County has adopted a Preliminary Assessment Resolution as
follows:
1. Orange County shall undertake financing of the local share
of paving North Carolina State Road #1590, also known as Renfrew Drive,
Brigadoon Drive (portion only) , and McDermott Drive (portion only) in
-3-
OGE
Eno Township, Orange County, North Carolina.
2. The basis for assessment for the kcal share of the costs of
this project shall be frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot
of frontage.
3. Orange County will assess the total local share according to
the basis set out in number 2 above which local share represents
approximately thirty-four and two tenths percent (34.2%) of the total
project cost.
4. No assessments of this project will be held in abeyance.
5. The assessments shall be paid in the following manner:
.a. Within thirty (30) days after the notice of confirmation of
the assessment roll is published, each owner of the property
may pay his or her assessment in full.
b. Any assessment not paid in fun as provided above shall be
paid in five equal annual installments with the first such
installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the
date that the assessment role is confirmed, and the
remaining installments, with interest, due on the same 'date
in each successive year until the assessment is paid in
fu-U.
A public hearing will be held at 7:30 o'clock p.m., on the 3rd
day of June, 1985, in Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of
meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina,
in order to discuss all matters covered by the preliminary assessment
resolution.
-4-
At the time and place above stated any resident of Orange
County or any other interested person may appear and be heard.
This the 21st day of May, 1985.
BEVERLY BLYTHE,
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for
Orange County, North Carolina
The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized
and directed to cause a copy of this Preliminary Assessment Resolution to
be mailed by first—class mail to each owner, as shown on the county tax
records of property subject to assessment if the project is undertaken, not
less than Ten (10) days prior to June 3, 1985.
The Clerk to the Board Of Commissioners is hereby directed to
file with the Board Of Commissioners a certificate that the Preliminary '
Assessment Resolution was mailed as directed using a form substantially
as follows:
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
It Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board Of Commissioners of
Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or before the
24th day of May, 1985, 1 mailed, I by first:-class mail., Postage prepaid, a
copy of the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for the financing by Orange
County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road
#1590, also known as Renfrew Drive, Brigadoon Drive (portion only), and
McDermott Drive (portion only), in Eno Township, Orange County, North
Carolina, to each owner, as shown on the County tax reoords of property
subject to assessment if the project is undertaken.
07C
WITNESS my hand and official seal of the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, this the 24th day of
May, 1985.
BEVERLY BLYTHE, Clerk to the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina
(SEAL)
This resolution is effective upon its passage.
Thereupon Commissioner moved the passage of the
fDregoing resolution and Commissioner seconded the motion, and
the resultion was passed by the following vote:
Ayes;
Noes:
I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for
Orange County, North Carolina, DO HERE.BY CERTIFY that the foregoing is
a true copy of the proceedings of said Board Of Commissioners at a
meeting held on the 21st day of May, 1985, so far as the same relate bc)
the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for the financing by Orange County
of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1590,
also known as Renfrew Drive, Brigadoon Drive (portion only) , and
McDermott Drive (portion only) , in Eno Township, Orange County, North
Carolina, as such proceedings are recorded in Minute Book
WITNESS my hand and the offical seal of said Board, this the
21st day of May, 1985.
-6-
071
BEVERLY BLYTIJE, Clerk w the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina
(SEAT,)
E
B
kF
E
' f
S
}
-7-
071-
0 R A N G E C 0 U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date May 21. 1985
Action Agenda
Item # FA
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING SCHOLAR AND WENG
REZONINGS
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING _Yes _K- No
Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH
5/14/85 LETTER FROM SCHOLAR
Telephone Numbers
Hillsborough - 712-8181
Durham - 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 968-4501
PURPOSE: To continue the public hearing on the Robert A. Scholar and
Dr. Weng rezonings heard at public hearing on February 25, 1985
and March 12, 1985 and continued upon the applicants reque st_
to the May 28, 1985 public hearing.
NEED: The public hearing- on this item was continued to May 28, 1985
at the request of the applicants to allow water pressu re
problems to be addressed and resolved with the Town of
Hillsborough. This issue has not yet been resolved and
discussions on the matter are continuing with the applicants,
Town of Hillsborough and their respective engineers.
Both applicants have requested that the public hearing be
continued to August 26, 1985 to allow additional time to
resolve this matter. Scholar's request is attached; Dr. Wen ,s
9
request for extension was made orally by his agent Frank
Pearson and Associates.
IMPACT: Continuation of the public hearing will allow time for both
applicants to resolve the water pressure problem with the Town
of Hillsborough.
RECOMMENDATION: Continue the public hearings to August 26, 1985.
073
May 14, 1985
Mro- Marvin Collins, Director
Orange County Planning Staff
Hillsborough, N.C.
REs North Dixie Subdivision
Hillsborough Township, Orange County
Dear Mr. Collins,
We respectfully request that the Public- Hearing for
the subject rezoning application be adjourned until
August 26, 1985-
It still appears that the North Hillsborough water
pressure problem, which we planned to concurrently re-
solve at the time of our rezoning application, must be
resolved prior to a rezoning decision.
An adjournment will be greatly appreciated since our
final engineering submittal has, for reasons beyond
our control, taken longer than expected.
Sincerely,
Robert A. S.cholar
P.O. Box 22, Hillsborough, N.C.
919 929 3828
074
ORANGE C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date May 21, 1985
Action -Aqenda
Item LE-5--
SUBJECT: AMEND ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS TO ELIMINATE REQUIREMENT
FOR ROAD SIGN ON ROADS LESS THAN 500 FEET
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING —Yes No
Attachment(s) . Information Contact: Jane.t Van Handel
Orange County Private Road Keith Rosemond
Standards -Page 1 & Page 5 susan Smith
Revised Draft April 15, 1985 Planning
Board Minutes
Telephone Numbers
Hillsborough - 732-8181
Durham -. 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 968-4501
PURPOSE.- To amend Orange County Private Road Ctroadsdless ie requirement for a road sign on Class than 500 feet
in length.
To receive the Planning Board's recommendation to delete this
requirement.
NEED; The Board Of Commissioners deferred consideration-of. this item
at the May 6, 1985 meeting and directed staff to provide more
informative minutes on the Planning Board's discussion of this
matter.
Since the revision of the Private Road Standards on July 5,
1981, Class C private roads under 5001 do not have to be
constructed or inspected by the Planning Department. However,
a road sign is Still requireFd. The citizen is often required
to purchase a sign at a cost of $50 to $75 for a road that is
never constructed. In most cases, the road sign is never
erected. If we would require erection of the sign, it often
would not indicate where a road is located, but would be placed
by a woods or field. This expense has been major or complaint of
citizens over the past nineteen months and it is difficult for
staff to justify this requirement.
When the Private Road Standards were reviewed by the Planning
Board in July, 1983, there ws a discussion of road signs needed
for Class C roads under 500 feet. At that time, the Board
decided to require road signs on all private roads. Since then
staff experience has indicated a need to bring this requirement
before the Board for reconsideration.
Approximately 20% of the private roads would be affected by
this revision. There are an average of 30 private roads
approved each year.
The Planning Board considered this matter for recommendation at
their April 15, 1985 meeting. The Board also directed staff to
prepare information on road maintenance agreements and
construction and/or bonding of private roads for the Board's
consideration at a subsequent meeting.
IMPACT: Citizens would not have to purchase a road .sign for Class C
roads under 500 feet in length.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Board recommends that the Private Road
Standards section Road Name- and Siall be amended. to provide as
follows: "Class C roads under 5001 -in length ' are required to
be named, but are not required to have a road sign provided."
|
Approved July 5, 1983
ORANGE COMM PRIVATE ROAD.STANDARDS
Orange County allows the construction of Private. Roads td se' rve lots within
subdivisioils that do not have. access" to state-maintained roads. The purpose of a
Private Road- is to insure that all lots have docuM'ented legal right-of-way and to
provide adequate access for residents -and emergency vehicles.
Private Roads may ' be permitted- in situations wh&e one- or more oithe following
conditions exist:
I.- traffic volume would be- smali-
Z. the 'subdivision consists of less than 10 (ten) lots*
3. the division would preserve a natural area through- deed restrictions
a�d special design features
4. the division is adjacent to property using an existing Private Road for
access
5., the property does not abut any important street
6. the ifoad would not be'accepted by the State even if budt io their
standards because of the .low housing density or length
After initial constructiom of the Privati Road, maintenance =1 t be provided by
the property owners that use the road. A Road Maintenance Agreement or Declaration
between.the lot owners- is required to insure that the needed repairs are made. Since
Private Roads are not constructed to North Carolina Department of Transpo ti
rta on
standards, they wUl not be added to the .Secondary Road System and -vill not be maium-
tained- by* the State or Orange County.
The standards and specifications for Privavaa Roads apply to subdivisions in orange
County and the class of road. required depends on the number of lots served by the road.
A Class C road serves 1 to 3 lots, a Class B roacl serves 4- to 9 lots and a Class A road
serves 10- or more lots. ' ,(Class A road requires approval- of the Board. of County
Commissioners). Generally, subdivisiom with ten (10) or more lots are requixed to
construct a road to the standards of the North. Carolina Departmenrof Transportation.
(Exceptions to this may be allowed under the conditions listed above.) BP*-fore the final
plat of the subdivision a'an be recorded, the Private Road mast,be built and approve' d,
or the applicant mu t post a security ins ea . h the County, in an amount that would
cover the cost of constructing- thip- roa 40frass Private Roads that are.5001 or_�Jess in
length are not required to be'*constructed to Orange County Standards orto be inspected
before recordation of the final plat. However,_Orange Counpr rec s t these
bat
Class C roads be'built*to'these*st&ndards-in-order t6 tirovide adequate access, especially
for emergenc;Z1Vdfticl;s which reduire the clearances and*turn areas shown on the
Construction of the Private Road must be inspected and approved by the Orange
County Planning Department. The road should be inspected during construction in order
that. any changes necessary to insure approval c'an-' be made before the final inspection.
In order for these inspections to be made during construction, the property owner must
inform the Planning Department prior to the start of trading so that & inspections
can be scheduled. The inspections by the Planning Department are made onli to injure
the road is built to the required dimensions, that an acceptable stone surface is pro-
vided, any disturbed- areas are seeded in permanent vegetation and the road sign is in
Place. The County does not assume responsibility 'Or such quality- control inspections
as compaction of fill Or construction materials. The person having the road built should
have a qualified grading' coutractor to insure that adequate methods and materials -are
|
Ditches ��.a?? be ccrostxurtad to pzavi.de d.=wage . om the road and adjacent
amas.- The d aches shalL be built with' sufacieat depi!h to catty the expeC..ed
vo:tie'of water. The' site- slopes: shaI I ba.,c oed so `hat they cam be- stzbi 3 i,zed
aced. to prevent vshi.clas f=M be I^g stuck i_E they slide into the. ditch.
Whe= tae raced crosses streams or minor wetexo=es� culverts siaaLt be
3st,►-`�s 13 ad to prevent: ?ondzag and.w- ttouts. og .e road. Ca s t^-eams whew it is
not economical to .�.as a c�tlaest of the rec_uix-ed.size, the Erosi.=
Cart:trl: Cffi*= may allow the. is=stallatic m of a. smal tar c tl vet it prov4si.tais
am maade to p=ut=t thm Z-Oad. 5=zface- and f ilL slopas from• e - ion when
txsps the, road.
T�sr�c--stouads . -
Vehicle: turn-around areas shall. be provided at the end of all dead end
roads. This can be accomplished by ending the road in a cul-de-sac or a.. "T".
Cul-de--sacs. shall have a m;-�diameter of 70' . A "T" turn-around mast conform
to: the: dimensions in. the diagram: below. The "T" type turn-aroui=d• is prefered.
The Location of the. turn-around will depend on. the.arrangement of•the lots in the
'I subdivision;. If the- Private Road serves only one lot the turnaround should be
located near the building site. Ice a subdivision with severaL lots the- tu=r-.
around should. be at the- end of the road and. the necessary right-of-way provided.
401 -A
IV Trave1way
$0'
Rig*--of-Way
. 1
20'
II --
I
'I
Rzad Name and S i= .
Me toad name siazll. be ve:jgied.with the C,^an a COt�ty p ,r.
to =S=8 that: the cropOsed nar'm does not d=,b 9 la a�g Cepa,._meati
sigm� m=t have one blade showing the name 04 ..�.cate as existing n.am-e The toad"
tae name Of the existing Stare main - . - the P--:"'at+�. ROad. and another showing
'-a-met' -pad. Class C roads of ally length are re-
qui.red to be named and to have a road sign posted. '
6 0 7E
trouble-free and takes up less space than a
traditional system.
Pilkey also noted that Lot #14 was shown as
questionable. Kirk responded that the Health
Department had not yet found suitable sites. It is
possible that the areas marked questionable may not
be used at all.
Mr. Sneed stated that only one site had been tested
but that he was willing to pay permit, fees for the
remainder of the acreage to be tested for
suitability.
Kizer noted that the property could be subdivided
even if some of the lots were not usable.
Yuhasz inquired about lot 11.
Smith responded that all those lots in square
were under Durham County's jurisdiction and the
applicant has not yet applied to Durham County for
subdivision of these lots.
Notion: Pearson moved approval. Seconded by Shanklin.
Vote: 6 in favor.
2 opposed.
Pilkey opposed due to the feeling that more cars
and more development are not needed on Craig Road.
Gordon opposed due to incomplete information
regarding water and sewer.
Smith explained the preliminary and final process
lii for the benefit of new Board members.
(Walters left at 8:05 p.m.)
Item #7: Matters for Decision
Presentation by Smith.
ftgnd Oranag County` Pri gte Rogd. -X Standards to
EJiminate- Requirement- for-Egad Signs on Rgadg. Less
Than- 500 Peet,
The purpose of this agenda item is to amend orange .
II
County Private Road Standards to eliminate the
requirement for a road sign on Class C roads less
than 500 feet in length.
0 7 S,
7
Since the revision of the Private Road Standards on
July 5, 1981, Class C private roads under 500 1 do
not have to be constructed or inspected by the
Planning Department. However, a road sign is still
required. The citizen is often required to
purchase a sign at cost of $50 to $75 for a road
that is never constructed. In most cases, the road
sign is never erected. If we would require
erection of the sign, it often would not indicate
where a road is located, but would be placed by a
woods or field. This expense has . been a major
complaint of citizens over the past .nint6en months
and it is difficult for staff to justify this
requirement.
When the Private Road Standards were reviewed by
the Planning Board in July, 1983, there was a *
dicussion of road signs needed for Class C roads
under 500 feet. At that time, the Board decided to
require road signs on all private roads. Since
then staff experience has indicated a need to bring
this requirement before the Board for
reconsideration.
Approximately 20% of the private roads would be
affected by this revision. There are an average of
30 private roads approved each year.
Citizens would not have to purchase a road sign for
Class C roads under 500 feet in length..
The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning
Board consider the following alternatives:
1) No change in the provisions of the Private Road
Standards.
2) Amend Private Road Standards section Road Name and
Bj.= to provide as follows: *Class C roads under
5001 in length are required to be named, but are
not required to have a road sign provided."
3) Amend Private Road Standards (page 1) to delete the
provision regarding .Class C roads less than 5001 or
less in length, thereby requiring that they be
constructed.
Gordon asked if staff had spoken with the County
Attorney. Smith responded that they had, and that
the attorney has raised questions regarding the
matter of actual construction versus bonding of
roads to be constructed.
08C
8
The Board discussed volunteer fire department needs
for signs on private roads. Best indicate that
each volunteer fire district maps the roads in the
district.
Yuhasz expressed concern of old roads having
problems meeting current subdivision standards.
Kizer emphasized that the key standard was the
legal guarantee of access over time. He noted that
. even if the road is never built access is recorded
for the future.
Board discussed the difference between Private
Roads and Driveways.
Gordon noted there was a problem deciding the
difference between a private road versus driveway.
Smith responded this was staff's reason for asking
for this change because in essence these roads do
it
serve as driveways.
Shanklin stated that he felt the difference between
a private road and a driveway is that the private
road is your driveway that crosses someone else's
property. He felt this was a somewhat clearer
definition. There are people who live a good
distance off the "main" road and do not erect a
sign on what they consider their driveway.
Best inquired the reasons why someone would not
want a sign. Pearson responded that when a sign is
posted people assume it is a public road and they
would be driving down the road just out of
curiosity and creating more traffic.
Margison noted that the fire departments wished to
have road signs. Shanklin responded that that was
one concern that any road be wide enough to
accommodate an emergency vehicle.
Yuhasz noted that at times the driveway runs so
close between buildings that a 501 easement is not
possible. Shanklin. noted that the main reason for
having the Private Road Standards is to be sure
that there is legal guaranteed right-of-way and
proper ' dimensions which allows access to all
property.
Shanklin stated that he felt the County should not
put a sign on a private road if the owner does not
want a sign.
081
9
Kizer noted that he felt it made a difference if
only one house was served by the private road. He
felt we could not force the signs on people.
Shanklin responded that at the present time we
could. Smith noted that all the owner had to do
was show a receipt for the purchase of the sign.
Shanklin preferred that property owners have an
option in providing road signs.
Motion: Shanklin moved alternative #2. amend Private Road
Standards Section Road Name & S' _JJ to provide as
follows: "Class C roads under 5001- in length are
reqired to be named but are not required to have a
road sign provided.
Yuhasz seconded.
Best inquired how toads were named. Smith
responded, staff reviews proposed names to prevent
road name duplication with road names in the County
and surrounding area and indicated that staff
maintained an available road name file.
Yuhasz asked if the Board should consider deleting
the road maintenance agreement for Class C roads
under 5001 . Kizer responded that it was premature
to discuss whether other statutes are applicable,
indicating a desire to discuss the matter with the
County Attorney. Gordon advised the Board to keep
to the narrow focus of the road sign question. She
added that the Board could discuss the broader
issues raised regarding the legal question about
road maintenance agreements and constructions , of
Class C roads under 5001 in length on April 29.
The Board discussed the value of private road signs
in providing emergency services. Shanklin
indicated there is no problem in providing
emergency service access if the agencies map these
roads, even when there is no sign. Best noted that
there may be confusion regarding road names during
an emergency, if the road name is not posted.
Gordon noted that option #2 addresses more than
just roads which are not constructed.
Vote: 5 in favor-.
3 opposed. (Best, Gordon, Margison)
Agenda item #8a:
Planning: Short Term Concerns
Public Hearing Policies
Gordon reviewed the public hearing policies.
ORANGE COUNTY 082
BOARD Or COMISSIONERS ACTION•AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE Mav .21, 1985
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing-Execution of Section 8 Housing Annual Contributions
Contract
DEPARTMENT:Housing/Community Development ES _X NO _______!
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilbert McAdoo
HUD Resolution -- il I LL§-GTROUGII-- 732 .6 81
Master section 8 Annual contributions K15-NEHIIMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361
Contract C11APEL HILL - 967-9251
MEBANE - 227-2031
DURHAM 688-7331
PURPOSE: To consider adopting a resolution authorizing execution of Section 8
Existing Housing Assistance Payments Annual ContributionsContract.
NEED: on April 9, 1985 the county received from the U.S.' Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) an allocation of 20 additional
Section 8 Existing Housing Units to be assisted by Housing Assistance
Payments for the Rental Rehabilitation Program in the Towns of Carrboro
and Chapel Hill.
The Annual Contributions Contract is an agreement between the County and
HUD which establishes/provides annual.housing assistance payments for
the 20 units. Currently, the County administers 368 Section 8 Existing
Units. The total number will increase to 388 units..
IMPACT: Provide rental assistance to eligible applicants in the Rental
Rehabilitation Program in Carrboro and Chapel Hill.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Adopt resolution ailthokizing execution of section a Existing
Housing Assistance Payments Annual Contribution Contract.
it
/
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AN ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRACT
Whereas, the Orange Coun
(h: rein called the **PHA") Proposes .to enter into an Annua.1 Contributions
Contract (herein called the "Contract") with the United States of
America, Department of Housing and Urban Development (herein called
the "Government")-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the PHA as follows:
Section 1. The Contract, numbered Contract No. A-2
is hereby a I pproved and accepted both as to form and substance and
the Chair of Bd of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed
(Title o officer)
to execute. said Contract in triplicate on behalf of the PHA, and the
C is hereby authorized and directed to
(Title of officer)
impress and 'attest the official seal of the PHA on each such
counterpart and to forward said executed -counterparts to the
Governmen-t together with such other documents evidencing the
approval and authorizing the execution thereof as may be required by the
Section 2. The Count Mana is hereby authorized
to file with the Government from time to time as monies are
required, requisitions together with the necessary supporting
document, for payment under the Contract.
'Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
Waster Section 8 ACC Humber: A-2903
ACC Part I Humber: A-2903-E
D.B. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
SECTION 8.EKWTING
ANNUAL CONTRMUT[ONS C2NT8ACT--PAB,;,T I
for
HOUSING CERTMCATE PROGRAM
1.1. DBFINITIONS. - .
A. ACC. Annual Contributions Contract,.
D. Fiscal Year. The PHA Fiscal Year as speed in section 1.3.E of
this ACC.
C. MD. D.S. Department of Hogg and Urban Development.
D. Maximum Annual Contribution Commitment. 2be amount
apecfied in section 1.2.0 of this ACC.
13. PHA. Public Housing Agency.
F. Program Reec ipts. Amounts paid by HUD to the PlU under this
ACC for the PHA's Housing Certificate Program, and any other
amounts received by the PHA in connection with the program.
G. Program Mures. Au»ounts Which May be dwTed against
Program Reempts in aceordaDee with the ACC and HUD
requirements.
1.2. EX1SMN HOUSING CERTIFICATE PROGRAM.
i
A. Pro ts: The PHA% Section 8 Houft Certirmate Program undex
CC Consists of the projects listed in Exhbit 1, each of uehieh
represents a ftmding kwremest for the program.
i
R. Number of Units (by number of bedrooms). 7b the maximum
REM Mule, the PHA.shalt enter into contracts for housing
assistan a payments for units under the PHA`s Housbe Certificate
i Program in aectk*daace with the unit distribution stated in this
paragraph H. No substantial deviation, as determined by HUD,
ftom this unit distribution is allowed w!Ux d prior HUD approval.
i
Page 1 of 5 pages HUD 52520 B (December 1984)
s
Dumber of bedrooms )Number of Units
0 1
1 ` b
a 219`-��
3 91
d _.�
Total 388
C. Maximum Annual Contribution Commitment. The Maid um
EEO Con taan sCommittnent or aIl m turea;
wheal)be$1,131 ,708.00 for each PHA Fiscal Year.
Onsert amount equal to suai of the per project contract authority
amounts listed in Rdn'bit l.) 11'the fast fol cal year fora program
ftKft increment Is more than is months(see section 2.2.1)of this
ACCT, the Maximum Annual Conh%w tion Commitment for the
program for the PRA Fiscal Year may be adjusted as determined-
by HUD by the addition of the pro rata amount applicable to the
period in ezeess of 12 months. BUD my reduce the Maximum
Annual Contribution Commitment by giving written notice of
re&wtion to the PHA in aceoirdance with section 2.3 of this ACC.
D. 7�erm of ACC. The term.o_ f this ACC shan begin on
execute o�'n"mate (insert b%mmng date),
and shall end on
two years from execution date (insert last date).
F. PHA Fiscal Year. 7he Focal Year for the P13A''s Ho=ng
Cart icate gram shall be the 12-month period
wffinr December 31 of each calendar year. Msert
same Fiscal Year, ending &—teeii for other section 8 assistance
administered by the PHA umxkr an ACC with HUD.)
1.3. ANAL OCi1MlT U1710K.
A. TIM shall pay the PHA an annual contribution for
the MA's Housing Certificate Program in
accordance with HUD regulations and
requirements. 7he annual contribution shall be
In the amount approved by HUD for the PHA Fiscal
Year to cover the sumo of
1. The amount of housing assistance payments
payable by the PHA.
2. The amount of PHA. costs for program
administration.
The amount of 'the annual contribution by HUD may
be reduced, as determined by HUD, by the amount
Paige 2 of 5 pages HUD 52520 B (December 1984)
. 0 8-,
of Program Receipts (such as interest income)
other than annual contributions.
B. Except as provided in section I.$.0 of this ACC,
the annual contribution payment by BUD for any
Fiscal year shall not be more than the Maximum
" Annual Contribution Commitment.
C. An PC reserve account May be established and
naintained by HUD, -in an amount as determined by
IUD consistent with its responsibilities under
erection 8(c)(6) of the Act. The ADC reserve
account may be used by BUD for payment of any
portion of the annual contribution payment
approved by BUD for the FHA's Housing Certificate
Program for a Fiscal Year which exceeds the
Maximum, ,annual Contribution Commitment for the
program.
A�te�..
j A. This NZ consists of this .AM Part I (including
Exhibit I) and the form AM Part II prescribed by
HUD for the Dousing Certificate Program and
Blousing Voucher Program, designated as form HUD
52520 8, and dated December 1984. 7bese
documents constitute the whole ADC for the PHA.'s
Housing Certificate Program.
i
i
it -
I .
it
I -
i
I `
Page 3 of 5 pages HUD 52520 B (December 1984)
Ii
]8. This ADC supersedes any previous ACCs for the
PHA's Mousing Certificate Program. Matters
relating to operation of the PHA's Housing
Certificate Program under a previous AOC shall be
governed by this ACC.
(SEAL)
Signatures,: ATTEST;
PUBLIC OWSING AGENCY'
t0a Ti t e
Orange County Housing Authority
Name of
BY
ignature Date s gne
Print or type name and official t t e of signatory
I� UNITED STATES OF AMMIC&
SBCRETARY'6F- WNING AND URBAN DEVEWFU ENT
Signature Date s gne
Print or type name and 16flIcial title o signatory
I _
I •
it
II
i
I
i
i
i
i
I
.. I
i t
Page 4 of S pages HUD 52520 B (December 1984)
• - I
08E-
XMIBIT I
FRDJBCT ,ADO LIST XFFECTIYE CONTRACT
NUMER ER DATE ITY ($)
NC19-E104-001 A-77-247 May 26, 1977 22,920
NC19-E104-001 A-81-685 June 30, 1981 281 ,364
NC19-E104-003 A-77-248 May 26, 1977 92,376
NC194104-004 A47-517 September 7, 1977 452,436
NC19-E104-006 A-8T-679 June 30, 1981 121,140
NC19-E104-007 A-84-0676 September 17, 1984 66,960
NC19-E104-008 A-85-0289 April 2, 1985 94,512
�I
-
Page 5 of 5 pages HUD 52520 B (December 1884)
i
• 'ORANGE COUHTY O 35
• BOARD. OF COIr��IISSIOIrER5 ACT AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO.�
MEETING DATE. May 21, 1985
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment . _
DEPARTMENT: Finance* PUBLIC HEARING: YES R NO
ATTACHMENT(S); Budget.•Amendment INFOPf4ATION CONTACT:
Vetter from Mr. Chris Stale , . PHONE NUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9181
President, Orange Rural " r , W
Fire Department HILLSBOROUGH - 731_ 9361
. CHAPEL HILL - 967-9251
. 14EBANE - 227•-2031
. DURHAM - 68877331
PURPOSE: Consideration of-proposed budget amendment.
NEED: ORANGE RURAL FIRE•DEPARTMENT _
To budget for request from Orange Rural Fire Department for funds to
be transferred from Unappropriated. Fund Balance to Appropriated Fund
Balance for down payment on fire apparatus replacement.
I
IMPACT: ORANGE RURAL FIRE DEPARTMENT
This amendment will reduce Orange Rural••Fi.re Department Fund Balance
by $7,947.00. '
i
RECD` 1ENDATIOM(S)• Approve motion to amend 1984-85 budget ordinance by proposed
budget amendment.
09c ,
April 25, 1985
Rt. 4, Box 294
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Mr. Kenneth Chavious
Orange County Finance Office
E. Margaret Lane
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Dear Mr. Chavious,
In a meeting the evening of April 23, 1985, the Board of D:Lrector s
of Orange Rural Fire Department, whiizh provides fire protection, for
Central Orange Fire District #1, approved a motion to request from your
office the available fund balance in our account. We understand that
the balance of this account is approximately $7947.00.
II The Board of Directors plans to use this money for a down payment
to replace a piece of fire apparatus. The remainder of the money that
will be necessary for this purchase is being included in our 1985/86
budget. we would appreciate the, release of these funds at your earliest
convenience. if there are any problems, or if you have any questions,
please call me any evening, or drop me a note. Thanks so much for your
assistance in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Chris Staley, esi4ent
Orange Rural Fire Department
CS/mlg
it
ORANGE COUNTY
PROPOSED
1984-85 BUDGET AMENDMENT
The 1984-85 Budget Ordinance of Orange County as adopted an June 28, 1984,
and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows:
Before After
Amendment Amendment Amendment .
ORANGE RURAL FIRE DEPARTMENT
Appropriation:
Orange Rural Fire Department—
. Remittance to District $7,947
Source:
Fund Balance Appropriated 7,947
To budget for request for funds to be transferred from Unappropriated Fund
Balance to Appropriated Fund Balance for down payment on fire apparatus replacement.
II -
I
BOARD OF C0%iz1ISSIONERS • ACTION AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA ITE14 ABSTRACT ITEM NO_�
14EET I NG DATE *MY 21, 1985
SUBJECT CONTRACTS FOR IL15UI,ATI0:3 RlOVAL AND HYGIENISTS SERVICES
COUNTY mANAG&R PUBLIC HEAP.IPIG: ,�.YES
X NO 1
-DEPARTMENT.
• INFORMATION CONTACT: -mANAGER'S OFFICE
ATTACHMENT(S): x 501
YES PHONE NUt�18ERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-8181
HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361
CHAPEL HILL ...96 7-925r1
14EBANE - 227-2031
. DURHAM - 688-7331
PURPOSE: . - 1- Contract 'to rempve approximately. .550' of insulation from. the
heating pipes in' the Old Courthouse.
2: Orange County must secure the service of:a private hygienist for.-
certification of a clean removal.
ED, The insulation must be removed before the.prime contractors can proceed
- _ - with the building renovation.
Orange County must employ a hygienist to monitor the wank while in process.
IMPACT:
orange County has secured two proposals for the removal of the pipe and
'
insulation. They are as follows:
Harris, Humphrey and Moore .
$ 5,230.00 .
Southeastern Shelter Corporation $12,690.00
Orange County has received tow quotations for the 'hygienist as follows:
Northroup Corporation $325.00 per day (flat charge)
ELB and Associates $350.00 per day plus
25$25.00 per
se I ' per mile
I -
RECOW4ENDATI Oil(S)
Approve contract of Harris, Humphrey and Moore at $5,230.00
n at $325.00 per dad
Approve contract of hygienist Northroup Corporatio
CAROLINP
JR
Cau.
P\ID ENTERED or-7 COM-
S N-- R q C ADOPTED BY -rH:= BOARD
pi�RSUSNT 7D HERETOFoR__
.: x AsND BETWEEN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ORANGE l_-OUNTYv NORTH CAROLINqi R-Y . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . TN. . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . jPAL OFFICE AND prLACE OF -BUSINESS
THE COMPANY") AND THE
1 .•
A Co-:�OQRATION W!Tr: ITS PR!Nr� INAFTER CALLED
(HERE L I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I REINAFTER CA-'-,-ED THE
C .-y --- ORA ITIC (HE
OUN A 13ODY POL-
WITNESSETH
*1 : CONS7DEpRT7Ox OF THE BID SUBMITTED SY THE
A CqRE,= A
FORE
OF GRANGE COUNTY HAS HERETO
THE 20ARD OF COMMISSIOMERSE-- AMD TMS
CO.4..PR',\iY,l R=Sll' UT'ON A -1 1 - ACCEPTANCE Oc SUCH Bin,
UT� ORIZIING TH OF A CONTRACT WITH SA
ADOPT�'* A . - __ . I
THE COUNTY OF ORANGE THE OLD
EXECUTION, IN THE NAME OF VAL OF ASSEStOS PIPE INSULATION FROM
CCMPA,,,,( COVER11\10 Tpr:
N.C. g
ON-
INCONSIDERATION OF THE PREMISES AND IN FURTHER C
Nl_*%w 7HEREFORE AGREEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN, AS WELL AS THE
STDSRpTION OF 7HE MUTUAL RETO HAVE
EINAFTER REFERRED TO, THE PARTXES HE
FIN!pj,,'7TAL CONSIDERATION HERE-1
4 , S FOLLOWS',
CONTRAICTSD AND PGqEED AD -
"ylS SPECIFICATIONS AND GENERAL
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUN , L. COPIES n7
AND C':PECIAt COND'.1",-iTONS, AND COMPPNYIS ►PRUPOSA
AND
!-tERE",C H!L-SBOliOW' 0H N-
COURTHOUSE,
BY REMOViNo AS A UNIT ASBESTOS
-,-PE INSU'
-A jjQjjj D TI HE INSULATION'
p NSU.; PTI ON PNrj THE PI PE .q
n.
CON j
. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .
RAC=" PRICE IS . . . . . . .
PAYMENT SHALL B=.MR ON A' L i,MP_su m BRSIG. . AFTER CojyiPL=T-oq OF 7HE WORK ARID
JURIS-
ACCEPTANCE BY RLL STATE AND FEDERAL AeENCIES HAV-
DlCTION OVER AS=4ESTOS- REMOVAL. QPERATIOIN, AND THE COUNTY.
S AND ITS ATTACHMENTS, C-ENIERAL AND SPECIAL.
-'ON MPANY, COPIES
THE �_j jZ r,q •
I OpOSAi 1HEREON BY THE CON SH.P.LL
CONDITIONS, AND T AND MADE p, PART HEJ�'�EOF,
Ll CHj:-:n HERETO
0;= WHICH PRE ATTA �_P_ THE PA-.RTlES AS
BETW..-N
PART O!= THE CONTRACT
BE BINDING ON THE
I-jF-REIN AND SHALL
7ULL.Y Wr ANSUAGE CONTAINED IN
_,qTj-, I! MODIFIED F-ty. THE L
:_. I �=Nj- W141CH LAN3URG_z= Slr.lRLL CONITROL.
-HIS CONTRACT DDCU!e-
,m SEECTION-1
ITF�E!_.F AS PROY'!)ED
ml E TPI-2-= L1 M I TS 0 F 5 Ql 2A, 'Z"Z"rl-"
E-:XCEP, THAT
A0, 0010
o fzq F c 71 1.4 2CDI-'-Y lNjl.JRY F1. 1D $5L
COL:NTY S�-;ALL* BE NqF-D AS r-'!\;
ppt y P.ND --HE
p :-_ I .
r",O: I r A r_'E*.R T 1 F I C A7 E 0= EXECU-
N q2 _y. Ur
6 u RE D I v -QM%PPl
_4g7 PROVIDED BY THE
`V:= COVE1RA03E W'L--
CrOINTRA
--SS THE cui_"NTY, ITS
AND SPV=
F
BY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (SEAL-)
NDIVID!'P'_
Ary
. . . . .. . . . . . . k c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �S= ;L}
PARTNERSHIP
ATTr^T%
II , . a _ . . . . . . > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BY, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PARTNER
AT :=S. w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . . . . . . . . . BY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (SEA!)
Tit?DTi�a AS
w . . . . . • . • . . . . • w M w w • w • w . . . . . . .
ORW,.;GE M._NTY
. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C}-jAIRi-y`AN OF BOARD
T.-.-J_5'zN � +,:+�E�`T HAS B=-EN PREgUDITE'D
IN THE iYRNMER REQUIRED BY THE' LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AND FISCAL CONTROL. ACT:
I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
I—S E•YPL-DYEI.-:.S FROM AND AGPIr"IST ANY AND ALL SUITS,
LOSSES, COSTS, P_ENqLTIES AND DA4,MxAGES WHAT-
S2EV!_:7,.R V,_!,Ml OR i\,P*--,IJRE ARISING OUT OF OR IN' CONNECTION WITH
_-TS REMOYPL D'F qGl-:!;_7E"70S P-l'PE INSULATION FROMf T!"S 0'-D COURT-
Hcus-:=.
IN WITNESS 1.1"HERREOF, Tl-(E COMPANY AND THE COUNTY HAVE CAUSED THIS
C%0,NTRPCTj TO DE LEGALLY EXECUTED, IN. DUPLICATE EACH OF WHICH SHALL Cw.4-
STITUTS AN ORISTNAL, ALL AS OF THIS DAY AND YEAR FIRST ABOUT WRITTEN,
THE CD__R.PQ RATE 'SEAL OF EACH HAVING BEEN AFFIXED HERETO BY ITS PROPER
.OFFICERS, ALL AS PROVIDED BY LAW.
BOARD OF COWISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA*ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO.
14EETING DATE MY 21, 1985
SUBJECT: 'REgUESTED MODIFICATIONS TO THE"WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND PURCHASE CONTRACT
PUBLIC HEARING:. YES X NO
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY
INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGERTs OFFICE
ATTACHVIENT(s):
: HILLSBOROUGH - 732 8181
YES HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361
CHAPEL HILL - 967-9261
14EBANE - 227-2031
FPUBLIC
EPARTHENT: COUNTY-MANAGER
FNF HT�ACT _AGER"S 0�
U i
60 IL MML
i: H RO Gi 7
0
PH?NE NUMSERSt HI SBO Ua
HILLSBOROUGH
C E�
DURHAM 68B-7331
PURPOSE: To consid er revisions to the pioposea-contract approved in concep�:.b.y the
. .
Hillsborough Town Board.
sirther by the Town•Board May. 20, 1985. One
NEED: Two options were considered further
for construction of the approximately.
was that the Town assume resP6
.1,goo feet of gravity sever in orang 6 Heights to serve as a- link.between
the Town's existing system and the force main to be 'constructed by the
County. The second was that the county construct the gravity sewer and
make adjustments if and when the Town annexes orange Heights.
The Town Board selected the latter option. , Specific terms,are outlined
in attachment and will be expidined at the meeting...
Manager outlines IMPACT: A May 20, 1985 letter of Don Cordell to the County M - .ger the�t�orange •
cost impact of option 2... A point'of correction, however, is th .
Height'-8 Hillsborough-
residents would pay the County rate as apposed to the Hillsboro
outside rate until annexation.
During this period the greater number of rate payers would lessen•the
cost that any one•customer would Pay. After annexation the .reduced
monthly service charge ($4.50 per month). would help defray debt service
while the reduced treatment cost for Orange'
Heights residents would
lessen another factor that makes up ope rating cost.
RE COKMENDATI ON(S) Approve the terms in concept and authorize the manager and
Attorney to revise the contract with .Hillsborough to incorporate
the terms.
|
�
\
140DIFICATIONS TO WASTEWATER COTLBCTION
AND PURCHASE CONTRACT
posed by Town Of H"lsborough
May 20, 1985
sewer line from the Cheeks
County would be responsible to construct the r-tion
1. i 'e Shore Drive Point of conne
_o sewer far- lities to the LELV a Town Of Hillsboroughr
Townshil Ilection system of th orange Heights-
with the existing co r portion through
including the gravity sewe east of the Eno
ran parallel lines
would have the right to of the County sewer line
2. The Town t into the gravity portion .
River and conn9c stub-outs as'part Of project cost for all dwellings
3. County would install
and buildings to be servedin orange Heights nts to the sewer
County would allow connection of orange Height's reside
4. with the understanding that-
system Iply for the up to 34 property
a. No tap fee by County or Town would al;s signed the Countys sewer
owners involved providing these Owner months from the
rationi timeframe of 12
agreement within a regist and purchase COntrac"
signing of the wastewater Collection charge until
County monthly service
b. The residents would PELY the
annexed by the Town-
5. County would pay the Town a blanke t tap fee of $15',000 for up to. 19174 S CL61
an identification 14st of the names Of fee.
6. county provide the Town with s would be waived by the .blanket tap
s whose individual tap fe
owner ts residents would
Upon annexation of orange Heights' the orange Heigh-
7. Revenue produced by the rates- would be
pay the TOWA sewer rates- relatable to the orange Heights
sewer charges
remitted to the County for
portion of the County project- Also upon
.. . . . . arge the County a reduced treatment rate
annexation the Town would ch ed from orange Heights- The
f sewage volume generat charged to
for that amount 0 1 coincide with the bulk rate
reduced treatment rate would
other -custOmers of applicable size within tile Town.
for the sewer s I ervice to Orange Heights until
8. The County Would bill
xation whereupon the Town would do the billing.
anne re the force main
9. County would place the meter at a point near to whe
connects with the gravity system at orange Heights-
|
S WYER, Pc. M
ENGINEERS
- 4
RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA x7622 1949)782.8333
MAILING ADDRESS:P.O.BOX 30428 45O5CREEDMOOR ROAD CRAMEE VALLEY
OFFICE LOCATION:302 COTTON BUILDING
May 20; 1985
Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson
County Manager
County of Orange
106 East Margaret Lane
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
I .
Dear Mr. Thompson:
Based on the discussions at the joint meeting of the Orange
County Commissioners and the Town Board of Hillsborough on
May 16, 1985, Hazen and Sawyer has made additional investigations
of several matters concerning the proposed point of intercon-
nection between the Cheeks Township Sewer facilities and the
existing collection system of the Town of Hillsborough. The
following information and comments are offered for consideration
by the County and the Town of Hillsborough relative to these
issues:
1. The Town of Hillsborough is considering the feasibility
of assuming responsibility for construction of
approximately -1,900 feet of gravity sewer in Orange
Heights to serve as the link between the Town' s existing
collection system and the force main to be constructed
by the County. Assuming the Town constructed this
portion of the required sewer facilities, the County
would realize a reduction in construction cost of
approximately $70,000. While this influence is indeed
possitive, it is moderated by the loss of potential
County sewer customers in Orange Heights, in order to
assess the net effect of this proposal, additional
analyses have been made of projected user. charges for
the remaining County sewer customer.s assuming no County
i
I
I
i -
-
i -
OFFICES IN NEW YORK,RALEIGH,AND HOLLYWOOD.FLORIDA
Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson
May 20, 1985
Page 2
service to the orange Heights area. The results of this
analysia.are presented below:
Sewer Chargea
User class Typical Total MOnthl ange Heights
Monthly Water Orange Heights Or
Sewer Built by sewer Built by
User class Usage al
ic
Monthly
Usage
the Hillsborough
22.16
< 000 $22.85
4,000 gals/mo 3,000 gals/mo
0 10 000 49.92 43.51
> 4,000-10,000 6.000
'000_ 0 ,000 83,20 72.21
>101000-20j000 13r000 36707
000 428.98
H>29,00074#000 I
a. Rates cited• are based on construction of the Base Bid and
Alternates A and C.
2. Under the. second option, the County would construct the
gravity sewers located in orange Heights and agree to
limit sewer charges to these customers- to the prevailing
Hillsborough "outside" rate (currently $9.00 per month) .
Upon annexation by the Town, sewer charges to the
customers in Orange Heights would be reduced to the
prevailing in-town rate.
The economic implications of this proposal are somewhat
difficult to evaluate since several different factors
e involved. Assuming no growth in the number of
are
County sewer customers outside of the orange Heights
area, the $9 .00 per month limit on charges to customers
in orange Heights Would not produce sufficient revenue
to offset the County fixed expenses (debt service plus
O&M) . We estimate that the potential short fall in .
revenues would be approximately $1,750 per year which is
equivalent to roughly $1.25 per month for the remaining
sewer customers. while this would indeed increase the
cost of sewer service to the remaining customers, a very
modest growth in the number of sewer customers on the
County system could totally eliminate the need for any
increased charges.
Annexation of the orange Heights area by the-Town of Hillsborough prior to any growth in
the number of County sewer customers would further
increase the revenue deficit that would have to be
offset.
Either of the two options discussed above appear to be
economically- viabile. Assuming the Town of Hillsborough can
afford to fund the gravity Portion of the collection facilities
in orange Heights, the savings in construction cost realized by
the County would lead to lower monthly sewer charges for the
Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson
May 20, 1985
Page 3
County customers. If the Town of Hillsborough is unable to fund
the sewer construction, then the economic implications to the
County sewer customers are negative in that monthly rates might
have to be increased by as much'as $1.25 per month. The. need for
any increase in sewer charges could be mitigated by a natural
growth in the number of sewer customers in the Efland area.
Since there appears to be less risk to the County with the. first
option, we recommend you pursue this course of action as most
appropriate.
We trust this information will be of value to the County in
reaching a decision. Please advise if further information is
required.
Very truly yours,
HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C.
Donald L. C dell, P.E.
Associate
DLC/dve
li
AZ. YER, Pc.� M
ENGINEERS
MAILING ADDRESS:P.O.BOX 30428 RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27622 (919)782-8333
OFFICE LOCATION:302 COTTON BUILDING 4505 CR EEDMOOR ROAD CRABTREE VALLEY
May 20, 19-85
Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson
County manager
County of orange. ..
106 East Margaret Lane
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Mr. Thompson:
The following is *a breakdown of the expected material. costs
for the section of gravity sewer located in Orange Heights which
the Town of Hillsborough is considering constructing with Town
forces:
Estimated Unita
item • Quantity Price Total
b b
Clearing 0.6 ac .
Surface Restoration 1.1 ac Soo 550
- LF
1,900 4.70 80,930
Gravity Sewer
4n Dia. Manholes 9 ea 450 4,050
Crushed Stone 270 to 6.75 1,825
House Services 15 ea 60 900
175
Pavement 5 to 35 $16,430
Contingency (10%) 1,640
Total Material Cost $18,070c
Say $18000
a Prices given are for material costs only.
b No material required for this item.
c Allowance for cost of rock excavation not included.
We trust this information will be of assistance to the
County and the Town of Hillsborough. Please advise if there are
further questions.
Very truly yours,
HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C.
onald L. Cordell, P.L.
Associate
DLC/jhl
OFFICES IN NEW YORK,RALEIGH,AND HOLLYWOOD.FLORIDA
OFFICIAL COPY
MINUM APPROVED--q/40/85
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 21, 1985
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on May 21,
1985 at 7:30 in the Courtroom of the old Post Office buildingg Chapel Hill,
North Carolina.
CMISSIONERS ERESML Vice-Chair Shirley Marshall and Commissioners Moses
Carey, Ben Lloyd and Norman Walker.
CCWJ§$,TQNER ABSENT-- Chair Don Willhoit.
,ATTORNEY PRE§BW:. Geoffrey Gledhill.
=AfF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County
Managers Albert Kittrell and William T. Laws, Planner Susan Smith and Clerk to
the Board Beverly A. Blythe.
A, DOUR GMENTS
Commissioner Marshall added two items to the agenda: (1) a report
received from the Hillsborough Town Council dated May 20 relating to the Efland
sewer and (2) scheduling a special meeting for May 24 for the purpose of
reaching a decision on revisions to the wastewater collection and purchase
contract with the Town of Hillsborough; receiving information from FHA and the
engineer' questions raised by the County, and receiving any further
engineering
information from the county attorney on the status of the sewer agreement with
the residents in Cheeks Township.
Commissioner Marshall announced that at the June 11 Joint Planning Meeting
with the Town of Chapel Hill, the Town Councilo County Commissioners and the
Planning Board, a discussion on the status of joint planning will be held, and
if necessary, a work session will be held to finalize calendars and address
other questions involved with joint planning. The meeting will be held in the
Cultural Arts Building at Chapel Hill High School.
B. AMIENCE r.&OMTS
1. MA,, TERS ON THE PRINTED ,AGENDA
Commissioner Marshall announced that those present to address the
OWASA Sludge application will be recongnized at the appropriate time.
2. MATTERS NOT Obi THE PRINT M AGENDA
None.
C. Al
!MINTMEM
QgMISSION FOR WOMEN
Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner
Marshall to appoint Eva Metzger, Miriam Saxon, Tina Vaughn and Karol Stang and
to reappoint Ann McPherson to the Commission for Women.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
NUggNa HME gqffl1JX1JX ADVISORY g2WITTEE
Motion was made by Commissioner Careyp seconded by Commissioner
Marshall to reappoint Mary Ann Matteson and Carol S. Weissert to this advisory
committee.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
ORANGE ggyj= BOARD Pe ADJUS=T
Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd
to appoint alternate member William Bunch as a full member of this Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
WU1 E CROSS FIRE DISTRICT
Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner
Lloyd to appoint William Braxton Bowden, John 0. Cecil, Jr., Carson Lloyd,
Tommie Rogan and Albert Williams to the Board of Trustees for the White Cross
Fire District.
VOTE-. UNANIMOUS.
2
D. PUBLIC HEARING-PREL, INARY ASSESEUM ROLL-FOR WTI MR nR1VE (A copy of the
assessment role and the proceedings of the Board are on file in the permanent
agenda filed in the office of the Clerk to the Board.)
Planner Susan Smith presented for public comment I the Preliminary
Assessment Roll for Wilkins Drive (SR 1803).
Helen Rayp resident of Wilkins Drive for 29 years, endorsed the
Participatory Paving Project because of the growth in the area which has caused
the traffic to increase.
Thomas Price, Jr., resident of Wilkins Drivel spoke in favor of the
project because of the potholes in the road and noted his willingness to pay.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
VOTE ON THE W119119 12RUEMP PRQJ=T
Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to
confirm the Assessment Roll, accept the certificate of mailing offered by the
Clerk, and to direct the tax collector to collect the assessment. The time Of
confirmation was exactly 7:58 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
E. REPORT- 0WASA_ S=QR_AFTLJCATJON PRACTICES,
Commissioner Marshall announced that the Planning Board has presented a
report on the OWASA land application of municipal sludge and that concerned
citizens will be given an opportunity to speak.
Dr. Alice Gordon, Chair of the Orange County Planning Board, stated that
at the Planning Board meeting held on April 29, 1985, concerns were heard from
the residents of Bingham Township about the application for municipal sludge to
lands in that township. Dr. Gordon presented the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION BY THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
ADOPTED APRIL 29, 1985 AS REVISED
Whereas, the Bingham Township Advisory Council has voiced
legitimate concerns regarding OWASA's application of treated
municipal sludge to land in Bingham Township and concerns
regarding possible health hazards to the community.
Whereas, the Planning Director has ruled that this use falls
outside the zoning regulations of Orange County.
Whereas, the Planning Board apparently has no direct authority
in this matter.
Therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Board forward to the
Board of County Commissioners all of the material which it has
received on this matter, including citizen comments at our
meeting, with the recommendation that the Commissioners review
the concerns voiced by the Bingham Township Advisory Council and
other citizens. The Planning Board would particularly -like to
draw the Commissioners' attention to the question of whether the
County should assume responsibility for overseeing the
application of sludge via the special use permit or other
process.
Dr. Gordon stated that citizens from Bingham Township expressed concerns
about the future use of tracts that have been purchased by OWASA for the
disposition and use of sludge and also expressed concerns about possible health
hazards created by the existing sludge application. A petition presented by
the residents is in the permanent agenda file..
Dr. Gordon noted that Michael Hartley, Sr. presented to the Planning Board
a document from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency entitled "Findi ng of
No Significant Impact" which referred to the Weyerhauser tract and determines
3
whether a proposed agency action will significantly affect the environment.
Dr. Gordon read from this document:
§gction Do Paragraph 1 anti line 1 of paragraplZ
"The purpose of this project is to provide the most Cost
effective site/method of sludge disposal for the Mason Farm
wastewater treatment plant. Sludge from the plant is presently
being disposed of by spreading on nine privately owned
agricultural sites totalling 443 acres in southwestern Orange
and northern Chatham County. Privately owned application sites
are not always available because of inclement weather, crop
harvesting, crop growing, and grazing schedules. Because of
these limitations, OWASA needs to develop the capability to
manage and dispose of sludge during periods when it is not
desirable or there are conflicts with the landowner's use of the
site. The purchase of the proposed 59.95 acre site would give
OWASA the capability to dispose of sludge in an orderly manner.
At present plant loading conditions, there have been periods
extending for 30 to 45 days when the privately--owned sites have
been unavailable for sludge disposal."
Dr. Gordon pointed out that Section F states "There would be some limited
environmental impacts associated with preparing and operating the site." Also,
Section a states "Although other public hearings were held on the original 201
facilities plan, selection of a sludge land application site occurred after the
initial public hearings. The various alternatives were addressed and the
selection of the proposed site has not caused any public opposition."
The Planning Board suggested that the Board of Commissioners consider the
undertaking of a study to determine if the County wants to assume an oversight
or develop other procedures under which sludge application operations would be
approved and conducted. Dr. Gordon suggested that a definition of a bonafide
farm be determined and that the staff investigate the question of special use
permit or other local oversight process.
Commissioner Marshall expressed appreciation for the information being
brought to the Board as the sludge application is something significant in
relation to growth impacts. Solutions need to be worked out that will help
people feel comfortable with what is happening.
FULIG CCMZNTS e processing of
Michael Hartley, Jr. defined sludge as the residue in th
sewage materials and noted that the materials have toxic dangers associated
with them. He referred to the permit which is granted for the discharge of
sewage, industrial waste and other waste. The Orange County sites are located
in the Collins Creek drainage area. OWASA's response to why the materials were
concentrated in the Collins Creek drainage area was that they have no
particular policy for the application of sludge in protected watershed
districts. The statement contained in the "Finding of No Signi ficant Impact"
indicates "Collins Creek is the nearest drainage stream and no adverse impact
is anticipated and the area's existing water supply (University Lake) is
located in another drainage basin as well as the proposed Cane Creek water
supply". The statement is a contradiction to OWASA's previous statements.
Because of the problems, hardship and rudeness to the people of Clover Garden
community, a petition was circulated which received 82 names. This petition
was presented to OWASA in the summer of 1984 and no official response has been
received.
The Department of Enviromental Management (DEM) did inspect the sites in
dry weather and no runoff was observed. A number of the items listed in the
permit have been observed to be violated. Hartley observed surveyors on the
Durham Heirs tract who indicated lines were being run for an easement for
• _ 4
OWASA. Durham said OWASA had not indicated the purpose of the property when it
was purchased. Pat Davis, Assistant to the Director at OWASA, told Hartley in
December that the property would be used for the disposal of sludge materials.
The Orange County Planning Department Was contacted and requested to evaluate
the problem -of sludge disposal in Bingham Township. The County dial not know
the location of these fields but did study the situation. Also, the Planning
Department received a resolution from the Bingham Township Advisory Council in
which they expressed concern about the problems with sludge.
When the Durham Heirs' property was sold, Hartley contacted the EPA
officer who was not aware that OWASA had purchased the- Durham Heirs tract for
sludge application and expressed concern that no environmental impact
assessment had been completed. No public hearing had taken place and none of
the procedures necessary under the terms of the EPA requirements were
undertaken. Hartley submitted to the EPA a packet of maps and other documents
with a letter requesting an extension for the period for comment. The request
was denied on the grounds that OWASA told the EPA that the Durham Heirs'
property was purchased for transferal property to be exchanged in the Cane
Creek project. An appeal has been sent to the Board of Adjustement. He
requested the Board- of Commissioners evaluate the situation and set some means
for regulation at on the local level so the citizens can be assured of a level
of government with which they have contact and which is responsible to the
citizens will have some regulation over the procedures involved.
J. T. Thompson, property owner, expressed concern about the drainage and
the fact that this drainage infiltrated his well on three (3) occasions.
He noted that the sludge was spread on the land three (3) times last year. No
signs were present, and it was put on deep enough to cover the tall grass and
spread all the way to the road. Windows and doors had to be kept shut because
of the odor. The sludge was put on with a tanker truck and not sprayed. The
people in the area were not contacted about the use of the property. OWASA
indicated their intention to increase the amount of sludge that will be
disposed on this property in question.
Commissioner Marshall indicated that sludge application is intended to be
advantageous for the farmers and expressed concern that it had not been worked
out.
Edward Johnson, resident in the area, noted a problem in the concentrated
application on parcels of land that are located close together and in the
watershed. An attempt needs to be made to distribute the materials as widely
as possible in Orange County and adjoining counties instead of all in the same
watershed. If OWASA thinks the materials are too hazardous to endanger their
j water suppply, it is too hazardous for the downhill wells of the residents in
the area.
Lillian Duncan, a Dunham Heir, stated she was informed that houses would
be built on the land. She would not have sold the property for sludge
disposition.
Carl Walters, Vice Chair of the Orange County Planning Board, expressed
concern for the health factor and talked about the value of land application
and the need for cooperation of everyone involved. The runoff problem must be
a prime consideration in this application. He feels the Soil Conservation
j Office and the County Health Department should be involved in the monitoring of
the areas where sludge is disposed. The farmer can benefit from this land
application but should not have to pay for soil conservation.
Everett Billingsley, Director of OWASA, indicated on a map the seven sites
used for disposal of sludge. Three (3) are located in Bingham Township, three
(3) in Chapel Hill Township and one (1) in Chatham County. The sludge is more
I
widely dispersed than some may realize. The program is one that is
environmentally sound and is closely monitored by the State and inspected
periodically by the DEM. He emphasized the cost effectiveness of the program
which represents a savings to OWASA of five cents per one thousand gallons of
wastewater treated and a savings to the farmer of $40 per acre because of the
5
high yields (two or three times more) and larger crops. It offers an economic
benefit to the farming community because of the contents of nitrogen and
phosphorus in the sludge plus the addition of one inch of water to the land.
The sludge is not applied before or after a thunderstorn. The farmers that
have been participating have a very strong endorsement of the program and its
benefits. Also the -Agricultural Extension Service works very closely with
OWASA on the program. The practice is consistent with the EPA policy on
recycling and the EPA has offered to . underwrite 85% of the capital
improvements for recycling. Billingsley stated he feels the practice is
consistent with farming activities. He referred to the comments made about the
program and stated that although the statements were made in good faith and in
all honesty that none are documented by the facts as to the dangers that might
be related to the program. He indicated that the petition was answered and
that there is no requirement that public notice be given for OWASA to purchase
the property. He believes that after the Planning Board Chair reviews the
situation she will agree that what OWASA proposes to do with the property is
appropriate under the ordinances of the County. The Institute of Government
feels that what OWASA is doing is appropriate. It has been a cooperative
effort between OWASA and the local farm community. Signs have now been posted
on the property which indicate the proposed use of the property. It would be
highly unlikely that the sludge application would contaminate a well. He
pointed out that the Durham Heirs tract was purchased for a legitimate reason.
He feels that statements have been made which are not quite correct. It may
smell musty but there is no odor. He invited everyone to visit the sites to see
for themselves.
Commissioner Marshall referred to the statement that OWASA works very
actively with the Agricultural Extension Agency. She asked if OWASA had worked
with the local agency and Mr. Bill Mainous, who is the Director, who works very
closely with the farmers and may be able to help with solving some of the
problems and bring them to the attention of OWASA.
Mr. Billingsley stated that OWASA had worked very closely with the former
Director but had not contacted Bill Mainous.
Commissioner Marshall indicated that Mr. Mainous would be a very good
contact with the farmers and their immediate problems as they come up.
Commissioner Marshall also asked if any attempt had been made to contact
the 82 people who had signed the petition to notify them of the Public Hearing
and Billingsley noted that it would have been a good idea but that no attempt
was made.
Commissioner Carey asked about a policy for the application of sludge in
i the County and Billingsley indicated that no policy had been needed.
Chris Walker noted that he attended several meetings with regard to this
concern and no response from OWASA had been received.
Raymond Kirby expressed concern about bacteria in his neighbor's pond and
noted the pond had to be drained for the contamination to be cleared up.
Billingsley noted that on January 23, 1985, Mr. Hartley received a letter
from Mr. Atkins about the lack of signs, runoff of the sludge, monitoring wells
not used, etc. and was informed that investigation revealed there was no
improper application of the sludge and no contamination caused by runoff.
Hartley responded that the sites were investigated during a dry period
instead of during the period when the problem would be expected to happen. One
of the basic problems has been the lack of communication and lack of response
to the concerns of the citizens.
J. T. Thompson emphasized that sludge was applied right after a rain. He
j attempted to call Ron Williams, but Williams did not respond. The problem seems
to be before or after a rain.
Joe Smith asked Mr. Billingsley about the benefit to the farmer and ask
for the number of farmers who benefit. Billingsley indicated that seven have
participated in the program. Smith questioned the benefits with only seven in
the program.
6
Ron Williams summarized the different ways for disposal of sludge.
Because of the risk of groundwater contamination the sludge is concentrated in
one area. The best way for disposing of sludge is to -apply the sludge to the
land at a rate that will keep the nutrients in a cycle so the farmer will
benefit. He explained the process of extracting the sludge from the wastewater
and the treatment of the sludge. The application rate is controled by an
annual soil test taken on each site. It is applied to the pasture land or to
the soil if the land is used for growing crops.
Carolyn MeGaskil, Division of Environmental Management, advised OWASA that
they will need to remove the phosphorus from the sludge and that there are no
regulations for the sludge sites. Periodically samples are taken from the
monitoring wells. Some of the concerns are true. However, signs have been
erected, the monitoring wells will be used, and the buffer area must be
maintained. She explained the purpose of the monitoring wells. Public concerns
and complaints are welcomed and will be answered. She outlined the procedures
if the permit is violated. The site can be revoked but the permit cannot be
taken away.
Commissioner Marshall expressed hope that the problems can be worked out
to everyones satisfaction. She asked that the manager and attorney look into
the situation and provide direction to the Board.
F. ITEMS FOR 37ECISIJOJ9
1. WILKINS DRIVE PPP PROJECT,
Approved under item D above.
2. HEART'S EASE I-VISION-PRELIMINARY
Planner Susan Smith presented for Board consideration of approval the
revised Preliminary Plan for Heart's Ease Subdivision. The 34.7 acres of land
is located west of SR 1450 in Eno Township. A 33-unit subdivision is.proposed.
The Planning staff recommended approval of the original submittal. The
Planning Board recommended approval of the revised plan subject to four (4)
conditions A letter was ,received from Durham County on May 17, 1985 in response
to the staff's request for a second review in which they reaffirmed their
position of having no difficulty with this subdivision— The Durham County
Planning Board will do a courtesy review of this development on June 4.
Commissioner Marshall asked if the Board is willing to wait on the
courtesy review.
Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd
to approve the recommendation from the Planning Board to approve the revised
plan subject to the following conditions:
1. submittal and approval of a maintenance agreement for the
recreation site and facilities
2. specification of lot details, including size, equipment$ and
construction materials, on the plat
3. specification of the basketball court details, including size
and hard surface, on the plat and
4. specification on the plat that the remaining recreation area
will be grassed.
Commissioner Walker questioned the requirement of the Board of a
recreational area for 34 acres when another development was previously approved
without this stipulation.
Commissioner Carey noted that a development of this size should have
a recreational area and it was an oversight when the previous development was
approved.
Commissioner Lloyd noted the recreational area is not a requirement
in the Ordinance.
Commissioner Walker expressed a concern that the requirement of a
recreational area will increase the cost of the lot.
Commissioner Marshall reviewed that the vote against the project was
3-2 because of the lack of recreational space and because a response on the
1§6
7
application had not been received from Durham County. The applicant has
included the recreational area in the plan for approval. For future
developments a clarification is needed on the requirements of recreational
areas. Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner
Lloyd to amend the motion to permit the developer the right to decide whether
or not to provide recreational space in Heart's Ease Subdivision.
VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT- AYES, 2; NOES, 2 (Commissioners Marshall and Carey).
VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION: AYES, 3; NOES, 1 (Commissioner Marshall).
F4. RENFREW, BRIGAP-P-Q& AND MCDERMOTT-D-RIVES - PPP PRQJ-Fu-PETITION
Susan Smith presented for approval the petition for the Renfrew
Drive/Brigadoon Drive/McDermott Drive participatory paving program project.
The petition meets the criteria for eligibility to participate in the program.
Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner
Lloyd to approve the petition, adopt the Preliminary Assessment Resolution and
schedule a public hearing on the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for June 3,
1985.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
F4. REQUEST FOR 9ONTIMIAMN OF PUBLIC HEARING. FOB SCHOLAR AND )—IEKG_
REZONING$ Motion was made by Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner
Lloyd to continue the public hearing on the Robert A. Scholar and Dr. Weng
rezonings to August 26, 1985•
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
F5. AMEMNT TO THE Qp
4pGE COUNTY- PRIVATE EW___STANDARDS
Susan Smith stated that Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill advised this item
will need to go to public hearing in August and asked that no action be taken
by the Board at this time.
F6, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZINQG M_(ECUTTQXOF
ANNUAL CONI)31BUTION,5 CONTRACT (Resolution recorded in full in the
minute book, page —-)
Motion was made by Commissioner Carey$ seconded by Commissioner
Marshall to adopt the resolution authorizing execution of Section 8 Existing
Housing Assistance Payments Annual contribution Contract.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
F7, BUD-GET AMNDMENT I Carey
Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Com missioner
to amend the 1984-85 budget ordinance as follows:
Appropriation-Orange Rural Fire Dept. Remittance $ 7,947.00
to District
Source - Fund Balance Appropriated $ 7,947.00
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
ADDED ITEMS
F8. CONTRACT F-0-g- IN FEMOAJ, AND UGIENISTZ SERVICES (a copy of
the contract is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office).
Bill Laws explained the contract for removal of 5501 of insulation
from the heating pipes in the Old Courthouse which must be removed before the
contractors can continue the renovation work.
Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd
to approve the contract of Harris, Humphrey and Moore for $5,230 to remove the
insulation and the contract of Northrop Corporation at $325.00 per day for the
services of a private hygienist for certification of a clean removal.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
F9. K&"T WATER QOLLEC.=OX ,AND PURCHASE CONTRACT NIENT (a copy of the contract
is in the permanent agenda file.)
Kenneth Thompson corrected the wording in #5 to read:
County would pay the Town a blanket tap fee of $15*000 for up to
191 plus 34 properties in Orange Heights and the school.
8
He presented a letter from Hazen and Sawyer dated May 20 in which two (2)
options for Orange Heights were outlined.
Commissioner Marshall suggested t1fat other options besides "A" and "C" be
worked out by Hazen and Sawyer to get back to the base bid and a phased-in
program to include the 191 who signed contracts.
Commissioner Carey agreed that additional options need to be developed to
include as many of the 191 as possible in the initial project for the amount of
money available.
Geoffrey Gledhill pointed out the County will bear all the capital costs
in the Orange Heights area and will continue to serve this area at the city
rates which means the other users will be picking up the cost for these people.
Kenneth Thompson indicated that the capital cost will be there regardless
and the system would be sized correctly. The only cost would be the $300 tap
on fee. He read through the modifications to the Wastewater Collection and
Purchase contract as proposed by the Town or Hillsborough. He stated that
Kordell recommended against allowing any entry into the force main because the
last major pump would need to be upgraded and likely some change in the size of
the force main.
By consensus a special meeting was set for Friday, May 24, 1985 at 3:00
p.m. in the Commissioners Room, Hillsborough, NC for further discussion on the
Wastewater Collection and Purchase Contract with the Town of Hillsborough.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Marshall adjourned the meeting.
Don Willhoit, Chair
Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk