Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-06-1987 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1987 7 : 30 P.M. OLD COURTHOUSE HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. A. BOARD COMMENTS B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. Matters on the Printed Agenda (We would appreciate you signing the pad ahead of time so that you are not overlooked. ) 2 . Matters not on the Printed Agenda C. MINUTES PUBLIC CHARGE The Board of Commissioners pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that indivi- dual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. PAGE # PUBLIC HEARINGS 002 1. Proposed CDBG Application/Rencher Street Area 003 - 2 . Real Estate Transfer Tax D. RESOLUTIONS OR PROCLAMATIONS 004 1. Community Development Week 006 2 . Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program E. REPORTS Filli.11111111111111111.11111111.1 PA� F. (Any item may be removed AGENDA ITEMS FOR DECISION--CONSENT moved for separate Consideration) Budget Amendments Orange Soil and Water 1. of Understanding-_ for 011 � , Memorandum Service Compensation :1:230 Ceso Resolution Just Resolution Establishing Conditioning Acquisition Mebane Heating and Air � , Change Order--Mebane 24 5, Tax Refunds Request 03 Sanitation Truck 03 4 Bid Award--Front-Loading 6. Display Request reement 047 8.7 • Fireworks Efland Cheeks Easement Age 04 0 AGENDA G. ITEMS FOR DECISION--REGULAR Proposed House Numbering Ordinance Number 040 1. Assignment of House and Building Nine 050 2 . Wolfe Property Subdivision—Preliminary ubd preliminary 056 3 . Woodbrooke Subdivision—Preliminary 099 5i Five Forks Subdivision__ preliminary 107 Section One Meadows of Eno-- 107 )7, Sunnyf 1eld_-Preliminary preliminary 115 8 . Jack Gates Subdivision—Preliminary 122 44.9 . Eno River Estates—Preliminary Triangle-Land Conservancy 132 Natural Areas Inventory--Triangle 163 10. Lake Orange Storage 163 Equalization and Review Board Resolution 170 X12 . School Capital Funding Awards 183 13 . Governor' s C. Utilities Commission 183 15. Response to the N 19 Xl6• Local Legislation 193 H. APPOINTMENTS I. ADJOURNMENT . 10 /. - ( 6-44 Ili,Pe`i 74' , , T 9/(/8 7 4- YAM / 1 a. APPROVED JUNE 16, 1987 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 6, 1987 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on April 6, 1987 at 7: 30 p.m. in the Courtroom of the Old Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Shirley E. Marshall and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr. , Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell and Don Willhoit. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers William T. Laws and Albert Kittrell, Finance Director Gordan Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Deputy Finance Director Ken Chavious, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Housing and Community Develop- ment Director Tara Pikes, Tax Collector Kermit Lloyd and Planner Greg Szymik. A. BOARD COMMENTS Chair Marshall made the following revisions to the agenda: 1. Moved item G-16 "Local Legislation" to item G-0.5. 2 . Moved item G-15 "Response to the N.C. Utilities Commission" to item G-0.75. 3 . Added a proclamation for RSVP Volunteer Day in Orange County. 4 . Added a resolution for Just Compensation to Item F3 . 5. Added item G-12B "budget information given to the school finance officers" 6. Moved Item Fl from the consent agenda to item G-12A. 7 . Moved Item F2 from the consent agenda to item G-9A. 8 . Moved Item F8 from the consent agenda to item G--9B. 9 . Add to F4 and Gll "and authorize the Chair to sign" . Chair Marshall asked that for the next agenda a summary be prepared listing the change orders on the Carr Building and the changes that are necessary as outlined in the report of the short range changes that are going to occur. B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS A. ITEMS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA None B. ITEMS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA Dick Helwig, Chair of the Telephone Technical Task Force, stated that on Friday evening there was a failure in the telephone system that lasted approximately three hours. He asked if he could present a report from the Technical Telephone Task Force with recommendations to file with the Utilities Commission on the handling of that failure. Chair Marshall added this report as item G-0. 7 . C. MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the minutes for February 24, 1987 as circulated. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Marshall read the public charge as approved by the Board and as 2 contained in the rules and regulations of the Board. PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED CDBG APPLICATION/RENCHER STREET AREA Tara Fikes presented for receipt of public comments the proposed FY87 Small Cities Community Development Block Grant application. This is the first of two public hearings required as part of the process of making application. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS. G. C. CORBIN asked about the location of the water and sewer lines. Tara Fikes indicated that the proposed boundary is Rencher Street with a few houses on North Fairview. Corbin expressed concern about the condition of the houses and the health problems that are caused by failing septic tanks. There are homes in the community that have homemade sewage systems. There is a need for water, a good sewer system, roads, and better housing. He represented 40 people in the audience from that area. WILLIAM WHITTED talked about the conditions of the area when it rains indicating the soil does not allow water to drain. MR. WALTON , a resident of Rencher Street for 41 years emphasized that because of the poor drainage, that whenever it rains the area and roads are flooded and the ditches are full of debris. Stagnant water stands in the area most of the time. RUFUS POTEAT , representing Mrs. Chavious who owns seven houses on Rencher Street spoke in support of the project. C. JACK PAYNE , owner of some property in the Rencher Street area spoke about the water problems in the area. He stated that there is raw waste on the ground. The road is very narrow and deadends. If the road could be open it would help the situation. ELAINE PARKER , business owner in the area, expressed concern that the water and sewer lines will be large enough to provide enough pressure to adequately serve the area. Flooding does occur when it rains and the road does need to be paved. Mr. Corbin stressed the fact that there are some homes in the area with water but that the pressure is so low that only one activity can take place at one time. He explained the home-built septic system and how it works. WILLIAM RICHARDS asked if School Bus Road would be included and Ms. Fikes stated that the specific area had not been determined. That determination will be made prior to the second public hearing which will be held on May 4 . WITH NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS. JAMES WALLACE , Mayor of Chapel Hill, spoke in favor of the Real Estate 3 Transfer Tax. He indicated that Chapel Hill is proposing that one percent of the sales price for land and buildings be paid by the seller at the time of the transfer. He stated the money would go to finance capital projects and in particular schools, street improvements, building of bridges and culverts, open space and parks and houses. He continued that based on 1986 sales, income from this tax would total $2 ,235, 000. If this money were to be allocated on the point of origin basis, Orange County would receive $1. 2 million or 54% and Chapel Hill would receive $973 , 000 or 44%. If allocated by population, Orange County would receive $1.4 million and Chapel Hill $587, 000. If it were allocated according to a combination of the two, Orange County would receive $1. 3 million and Chapel Hill $780, 000. He stated that it is their proposal that this be a county-wide tax. The County Commissioners and the County staff would administer the tax in the same way as the Ad Valorem tax. He proposed that the collection procedure be at the time of recordation of property transfer. On May 13 , the Chapel Hill Town Council will consider a resolution to support this local bill on a County basis and he urged the Commissioners to do likewise. There is no objection to the establishment of a figure below which there shall be no transfer tax. In conclusion Mayor Wallace stressed that this tax not be an added tax with the Ad valorem tax increasing also. JAMES PORTO , Mayor of Carrboro, stated that the Board of Aldermen has not made a decision on the Real Estate Transfer Tax because they did not have adequate information on which to base a decision. He stated that while the Carrboro Board would rather find an alternative way to raise revenues that they would like to be able to be included in further discussion. Chair Marshall noted that the legislative delegation would favor a bill that included a stipulation that a municipality would have to adopt the resolution in order to be included. This would give Carrboro the opportunity to hold a public hearing and approve a resolution before implementing the tax. Mayor Porto stated that if this tax is imposed on the citizens that live in Carrboro that Carrboro would like to receive a portion of the tax even if the Board did not support the tax. GRAINGER BARRETT , Vice-President of Governmental Affairs for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber of Commerce perceives this tax as a form of property tax. He stated that an alternative tax would be the hotel/motel tax or the entertainment tax. The Chamber feels the tax falls unevenly on those who pay and those who benefit. A major problem in Orange County is the price of property. A lower priced house will sell more times and when adding 1% to the price of that house each time, the price escalates. The lower income citizens will be driven out of the County into other counties. He noted that the way to pay for the capital needs in the County is not pay-as-you-go because it introduces an inequity between those who pay for a longlife facility today and those who enjoy it over a longer period of time. The way to finance for fiscal soundness and fiscal fairness is to issue bonds and let those who enjoy the facility pay for that enjoyment over the life of it. KAY LAYMAN , Executive Officer of the Durham-Chapel Hill Homebuilders Association, read a letter written by the President Nicholas J. Tennyson. The letter is an attachment to this minutes on pages . 4 HELENE IVEY , agreed that more revenue is needed but that additional taxes will drive people out of their homes and to other counties. She spoke in opposition of the Transfer Tax. JIM NEAL , President of the Chapel Hill Board of Realtors, stated that a home worth $98, 264 would have a tax liability of $663 . If the property were sold under the proposed 1%, the tax would total $982 . That is a 148% increase for one year. Statistics show that properties transfer every six or seven years which means that real estate taxes would be increased 10% on the low end. It is the consensus that the tax will not hurt real estate sales. The tax will be passed on from the seller to the buyer and will mean that those buying property will have to have additional monies for the down payment. BILL THORPE stated that the seller will always pass the tax on to the buyer. He feels the tax is unfair and expressed opposition to such a tax. HENRY WHITFIELD spoke in opposition of the Transfer Tax. The seller will add this tax to the cost of the house. He stated his willingness to pay additional Ad valorem taxes for the services provided by the County but asked that the County review their services if see if they are all necessary. NORMAN BLOCK , representing Thomas H. Heffner, President of the North Carolina Association of Realtors, Inc. , read a letter into the record. This letter is an attachment to these minutes on page . He stated that the tax will be paid unfairly by the people who sell their homes. The people who move within the community will be paying this tax and have no change in the level of services they receive. He encouraged the Board to restudy the Land Transfer Tax before making a decision to ask for enabling legislation. BARRY JACOBS , resident of Cheeks Township, spoke in favor of the Transfer Tax. As a matter of fairness he supported a minimum floor on the amount that would be taxed. The additional revenue would enable the County to address some of the problems caused by growth. H. B. HACKNEY spoke in opposition of the Transfer Tax. The largest investment of most people in a lifetime is a house and he doesn't feel home buyers should be penalized. The largest problem in the County at this time is controlling the traffic at the Dean Dome. He asked that the Board consider an entertainment tax instead. BEN LLOYD asked clarifying questions about leasing and assumption of loans from the seller. He stated that the tax is nothing more than an Ad valorem tax and seems discriminatory. He questioned if the tax had been tested in court. He labeled the tax unreliable and opposed the tax. WITH NO FURTHER CITIZEN COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. D. RESOLUTIONS OR PROCLAMATIONS 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the resolution as stated below: PROCLAMATION APRIL 11-18, 1987 5 NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK WHEREAS, the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM has operated since 1974 to provide local governments with the resources required to meet the needs of persons of low and moderate income; WHEREAS, community development block grant funds are used by thousands of neighborhood-based nonprofit organizations throughout the Nation to address pressing neighborhood and human service needs; WHEREAS, in the last several years the Federal Government has reduced Federal assistance to local governments and nonprofit organizations; WHEREAS, during this time of constricted Federal contributions to the task of meeting the needs of low and moderate income persons, the problems have grown as evidenced by the dwindling supply of affordable housing, the massive rise in homelessness, and the resurfacing of hunger and malnutrition; WHEREAS, during this time of Federal withdrawal from responsibility, the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM has assumed increasing importance for meeting pressing community problems; WHEREAS, the Congress and the Nation has often overlooked the critical value of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM and the significant number of organizations and projects that rely on its funds for support; WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States has declared April 11-18, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orange County Board of Commissioners proclaim April 11-18 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK and call upon all citizens of our County to support the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 2 . ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to adopt the resolution supporting the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program as stated below: WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58, entitled the Elderly and Handicapped Transpor- tation Assistance Program has been introduced in the North Carolina Senate; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requests an appropriation of $2 million for fiscal year 1987-88, one-half of which will be divided equally among all the counties, with the remainder of funds distributed on the basis of the percentage of elderly and handicapped population and population density; and WHEREAS, the funds would be used to provide transportation services to elderly and handicapped individuals; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requires no local matching funds; and WHEREAS, the funds would supplement existing sources of support for transportation services for the elderly and the handicapped but not replace - N 6 state funds already earmarked for Orange County for this purpose, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commis- sioners supports Senate Bill 58, the Elderly and Handicapped Transpor- tation Assistance Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate state officials. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 3 . RSVP VOLUNTEER DAY IN ORANGE COUNTY. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to proclaim April 16, 1987 as "RSVP Volunteer Day in Orange County as stated below: RSVP VOLUNTEER DAY IN ORANGE COUNTY 1987 PROCLAMATION All citizens can be proud that Orange County is a leader in the volunteer movement. This spirit of helping others involves hundreds of caring people and saves thousands in tax dollars. This tremendous contri- bution is helping many Orange County citizens live better lives. In addition, Retired Volunteers from all walks of life play a vital role in the success of schools, libraries, community centers, a radio station, day care centers, the county correctional facility, health and social organizations. Orange County's Retired Volunteer effort is a movement that is a living testimonial to the human spirit. This selfless giving to others is making it possible to continue vital programs, even with limited resources. NOW THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners DO HEREBY PROCLAIM April 16, 1987, as "RSVP Volunteer Day in Orange County" and urge all our citizens to recognize the volunteer contributions to our County and extend appreciation to those who have given of themselves. IN WITNESS THEREOF, as Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the County of Orange this sixth day of April in the year of our Lord, Nineteen hundred and eighty-seven. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. F. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the items as listed below: 3 . RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION FOR ACQUISITION To approve the recommended fair market values for the acquisition of three dilapidated dwellings in the Northern Fairview and Councilville Community Development areas and adopt the resolution establishing just compensation. RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ESTABLISHING JUST fl 7 CO]4PENSATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES PROPOSED FOR ACQUISITION IN THE ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, NRCD GRANT NO. 82-C-6285 IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED: THAT, The Orange County Board of Commissioners has obtained appraisals and a review appraisal for each parcel proposed to be acquired in the Orange County Community Development Program as required by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and HUD' s implementing at 24 DFR 42 . 101-127. THAT, Just Compensation is hereby established for each of the parcels as follows: STATEMENT OF RECOMMENDED VALUES 1. Rt. 4, Councilville - dwelling is 1,500 sq. ft. , lot is 16, 056 sq. ft. , first appraised value was $3, 000; second appraised recommended value was $3 , 000. 2 . Turner Street - Dwelling is 846 sq. ft. , the first appraised value was $4, 900; the second appraised recommended value was $4,900. 3 . Riddle Avenue - dwelling is 900 sq. ft. , lot is 15,550 sq.ft. , first appraised value was $10, 600; second appraised recommended value was $10, 600. 4 . CHANGE ORDER - MEBANE HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING To approve a change order for four return air grills which were omitted from specifications for the HVAC system for the Carr Building Renovation at a total of $125 and authorize the Chair to sign. 5. TAX REFUNDS REQUEST To approve nine (9) releases for refund of tax bills as listed below: James Helwig Fortney - Acct. # 94951 $ 5. 34 John Daniel Moriarty - Acct. # 104677 303 .43 Hoke and Annette Colley - Acct. # 6456 97.87 Royall H. Spence, Jr. - Acct. # 96588 150.72 Esther L. Gordon - Acct. # 21753 139.72 First Union National Bank - Acct. # 57829 58. 37 Cazwell, Inc. - Acct. # 104486 1, 087 .48 James and Mary Taylor - Acct. # 68234 48.20 Carolina Yogurt, Inc. - Acct. # 111413 125.47 6. BID AWARD - FRONT LOADING SANITATION TRUCK To award a contract to Carolina Waste Equipment for the purchase of one 38 cubic yard packer unit for a sum of $98,222 . 00. The following bids were received: 1. Cavalier $ 99,876 2 . Carolina Waste $ 98, 222 3 . Sanco $ 100, 699 7. FIREWORKS DISPLAY REQUEST To approve a request from the Town of Carrboro to authorize a fire- works display at the Carrboro Town Hall grounds on July 4. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. G. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA 0. 5 LOCAL LEGISLATION m 8 JOINT PLANNING AUTHORITY County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill explained that by agreement with Chapel Hill, Mike Brough was asked to draft the local legislation for Joint Planning. This will be presented by the local delegation as part of an omnimous bill. After a brief discussion it was decided that a Special Meeting would be scheduled for April 15 at 12 : 00 noon in the Board of Commissioners Room. AN ACT TO REQUIRE THE DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY AND BUSINESSES BY ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (A complete copy is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office) . Lois Herring spoke in support of this Act. Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to forward this Act to the delegation for enabling legislation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. IMPACT FEE AUTHORIZATION Already authorized for submission. REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Geoffrey Gledhill indicated that leases for more than ten years would be taxed under this tax. Commissioner Carey commended the public for speaking out for the low income citizens in Orange County. He stated he clearly recognizes the need for additional resources to accommodate the growth the County is experiencing. He also recognizes the problems created by this growth in providing the services that citizens demand with the current resources available and those expected in the future. He stated he is not convinced that this additional tax is needed at this time. There are issues associated with this proposal that need more understanding and the issue needs further discussion so that the full implications can be understood by everyone. For these reasons, Commissioner Carey stated he would not support this tax until more information is available about the floor, whether the floor will be a rising floor with a ceiling on the floor and whether it will be tied to some sort of index associated with the cost of living. He feels this should be considered further and should not be submitted for legislation this year. The impact fee should be submitted at this time and the Board should wait to submit the Real Estate Transfer Tax. Commissioner Hartwell stated his main objection is the effect on the affordability of housing. He talked with the City Manager of Raleigh who stated they have not voted or asked their delegation for any enabling legislation. The bill has been changed to not include an exemption. The attorney for the City of Raleigh indicated he had no concern with the legality or the ability to administrate. Commissioner Hartwell indicated he favors the Land Transfer Tax instead of the impact fee. The tax is related to the growth and is fairer than the impact fee. Commissioner Halkiotis reiterated the different types of taxes that are in effect and some that could be enacted such as entertainment or hotel/motel tax. There are some serious needs in this County that must be addressed. He stated he does not favor another tax, but that the money must come from someplace and he would support this tax. Commissioner Willhoit stated that an alternative would be to 9 raise the property tax which would have an adverse impact on the low income people. The Land Transfer Tax would be easier for people to pay at the time they realize a windfall tax or depreciation tax. Chair Marshall stated the tax brings some relief to those people who buy a house and remain in the house and who see their assessed evaluation rise tremendously because of the buying and selling that occurs. This tax does give a balance and puts pressure on those transfers that take place year after year raising the assessed evaluation. This tax would be reserved for capital improvements and would not be depended upon during periods of nongrowth. Part of this tax may be used for bonding. There are some issues that need to be addressed. It is important that the Board supports the State enabling legislation and, if it is not approved, that the Board request consideration of a local bill. The method of how it will be distributed and the threshold at which it starts needs to be determined. Chair Marshall entered into the record the letter from Town of Hillsborough Mayor Frank Sheffield. This letter is an attachment to these minutes on page Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Chair Marshall to approve the Real Estate Transfer Tax legislation with an amendment to exempt the first $50, 000 of all transactions. Commissioner Willhoit disagreed with setting a floor in the bill. Legislation would need to be changed if the figure is too high or too low. The allocation of the money needs to be determined. The floor is something that could be determined after the enabling legislation is received. Commissioner Hartwell amended his motion so it does not state a definite figure in the bill for the floor but requested that the bill allow the County to make that determination at a later time. Commissioner Carey stated there are questions that need to be answered before this bill is approved by the Board. There are implications that need to be thought through before enabling legislation is requested. After further discussion, Commissioner Hartwell withdrew his motion and Chair Marshall withdrew her second. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to table this item until April 15 for receipt of additional information. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 0.7 ADDED ITEM - REPORT ON THE TELEPHONE FAILURE (originally G-15) Richard Helwig, Chair of the Telephone Technical Task Force, reported that on April 3 , 1987 the Hillsborough telephone system was inoperative for a period of 3 .75 hours. The telephone company does not have a plan to deal with emergencies. He presented a resolution which makes a request to the Utilities Commission to investigate the failure. Bobby Baker, EMS Director, indicated he was unable to get any information on the estimated length of the outage in a reasonable period of time in order for him to make a decision to activate an emergency plan. He does support the task force and the resolution pertaining to the failure that occurred on April 3, 1987. Helwig indicated he would send with the resolution to the Utilities Commission a letter of support from Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass. 10 Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to forward the resolution as printed below along with supporting documentation to the Utilities Commission. R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the Hillsborough central office failed for all lines, including 911 service on Friday, April 3 , 1987, for a period of just over three hours, and WHEREAS, it took over two and one-half hours before the proper personnel who could repair the problem arrived on site, with restoration taking less than fifteen minutes and with operation resuming within thirty minutes, and WHEREAS, information about the nature and expected duration of the outage was withheld from our Emergency Communications Director which seriously compromised our County's emergency communications plans, and WHEREAS, our citizens who are served by the 732 exchange rightly expect a functioning and adequate plan to deal with failures in and of the system in a timely manner to support their trust in and security from the telephone system, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this Board expresses to Centel and to the North Carolina Utilities Commission its extreme dissatisfaction with the course of events to the restoration of service, and THAT this Board asks the North Carolina Utilities Commission to act on its behalf, by opening its own investigation of this matter to cover at least the following six areas: 1. Fully investigate the factors of the failure and make the response to the failure public knowledge. 2 . Examine the adequacy of Centel ' s preparedness plan to deal with failures in and of the system, with special attention given to the timeliness of response and the presence of alternative courses of action. 3 . Include an investigation of Northern Telecom's (the equipment manufacturer) recommended plan of action for such failures in its equipment and especially in this installation. 4. To review preparedness plans of the other telephone companies serving Orange County (Southern Bell, General Telephone, and Mebane Home Phone) . 5. To order the companies to develop plans in consultation with county and municipal agencies that will satisfy the deficiencies should any of these plans be partly or fully inadequate. 6. To look at preparedness plans for all of Centel 's exchanges in the state, to reduce probability of similar incidents elsewhere, and, THAT copies of documents supporting this resolution be included with this resolution to the North Carolina Utilities Commission. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 0.75 RESPONSE TO THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION (G-15) Richard Helwig reported that last April there was a long distance failure in Orange County and negotiations have been ongoing through the Utilities Commission. The Triangle J Telephone Task Force recommendation will encompass most of the issues raised by the County' s Telephone Task Force. The Telephone Task Force is suggesting a reply to the North Carolina 1 11 Utilities Commission which will request one more round of responses and asks the NC Utilities Commission: (1) To keep all of our previous requests open. (2) To ask General Telephone, which serves eastern Orange sub- scribers to respond to all previous questions as a Local Exchange Company, noting that General has responded only as a contractor between Centel and AT&T. (3) To order Centel and AT&T and General and AT&T to develop practi- cal plans and budgets, for complete review, for implementing fault-tolerant and self-healing networks through their class 5 office levels. (4) To request progress reports on studies AT&T has initiated as outlined in its response of August 28, 1986. (5) To keep the docket open to review the results of these requests and the monitoring of calling to and from Hillsborough, and (6) To modify the heading on the docket to reflect that Shirley Marshall is now Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve the letter to be sent to the Utilities Commission and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 3 . WOLFE PROPERTY SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY Planner Greg Szymik presented for approval the Preliminary Plan for the Wolfe Property Subdivision. The property is located on Dodson's Crossroads Road. The 36. 8 acres will be divided into seven lots with a community open space area of 7.9 acres, which includes a spray irrigation system for sewage disposal. The Planning Board recommended approval subject to 4 conditions. Since that time, the County Attorney in a letter to the Board has expressed some concerns about some legislation in the State House last year and some legislation in the State House this year that addresses County liability with regard to community septic systems. A fifth condition was added to the recommendation to insure that money would be available to meet the expected operation and maintenance cost of the spray irrigation system for a period of three (3) years from the date of final plat approval. After a brief discussion, it was decided by the Board that a policy needs to be made with regard to alternative septic systems and the administration of the maintenance fund. Tony Whitaker, engineer with Philip Post and Associates, stated that these types of septic systems are present throughout the County. The system is a small scale public system that would be approved by the Division of Environment Management and would be monitored by a licensed operator who would be certified by DEM. In answer to a question from Commissioner Halkiotis, Gledhill stated that the maintenance responsibility would fall on those using the system and the Homeowners Association. The maintenance fund would be maintained by the Association and continued for the duration of the system. Whitaker stated in response to a comment made by Commissioner Hartwell that the systems are designed to operate for 25 to 30 years. The system will use a small type pump station for each lot with the homeowner being responsible for the maintenance and upkeep. The public portion of the system would consist of a series of pipes and chlorination facilities and a larger pump station and a spray area which would be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association. The developer will install , both the private and the public portion of the system. The State will approve the system. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Chair Marshall to postpone action on this Preliminary Plan until May 4, at which time a policy will be brought forth by the Planning Board for Board consideration. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7 . SUNNYFIELD -- PRELIMINARY PLAN Greg Szymik presented for approval the Preliminary Plan for Sunnyfield. The property is located in Bingham Township on Dodson's Crossroads. The total tract is 8 acres with eight lots proposed. The Planning Board recommends approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the Preliminary Plan for Sunnyfield with the following conditions: 2 (1) Property lines being drawn to the centerline of the road on the final plat; and (2) All lots access restricted to Sunnyfield Court. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 10. NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY - TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY Pearson Stewart, President of the Triangle Land Conservancy, referred to the material in the agenda and noted that the proposal consists of a Natural Area Inventory for Orange County. The funding would involve a public donation of $5, 000 and private funding in the amount of $7, 000 with $2, 000 contributions from the towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Motion was made by Chair Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit to endorse the proposal for the inventory with a commitment to include Orange County's share in the 1987-88 budget. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. 11. LAKE ORANGE STORAGE CAPACITY RESOLUTION - SENATE BILL 2 FUNDS Ken Thompson gave a brief status report on questionable items relating to Lake Orange. He stated that to raise the Lake one foot would cost $32, 000. If later it is raised to 2 feet, it would cost $91, 000 plus litigation costs. It is recommended that the Lake be raised one foot and that authorization be given for the use of the Senate Bill 2 funds. In answer to a question from Chair Marshall, Thompson stated that if the monies from the Senate Bill 2 funds are not received that approving the resolution would not obligate the County to do the project. Geoffrey Gledhill concurred. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the resolution authorizing the use of Senate Bill 2 funds, and approve the Lake Orange Capital Project Ordinance and authorize the Chair to sign. Discussion ensued on the cost and reasons for requesting $45, 000 from the Senate Bill 2 funds which must be match by the County. Thompson explained that requesting $45, 000 would reserve this money which may be used next year for such things as raising the boat docks, raise piers, raise the roads, etc. Commissioner Halkiotis questioned the need to raise docks or piers when the Lake is being raised one foot and not two. Chair Marshall pointed out that according to Geoffrey Gledhill there was no reason to make the improvements and that it was understood that no improvements would be necessary if the Lake were raised one foot. The motion was amended by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the Manager's recommendation changing the $45, 000 in the resolution to $20, 000. Commissioner Halkiotis stated he cannot support this motion because for the last four months he has understood that no tax dollars would be spent for improvements to boat houses, piers, etc. if the Lake was raised one foot. In answer to a question from a property owner on Lake Orange, 3 _ Commissioner Hartwell stated and Chair Marshall agreed it would be the County's responsibility to maintain the easement below the 615 foot level. The easement across the land above the 615 foot level is not only for flooding but also to allow work to be done as needed by the County. VOTE: AYES, 4; NOES, 1 (Commissioner Halkiotis) . RESOLUTION LAKE ORANGE STORAGE CAPACITY SENATE BILL 2 FUNDS WHEREAS, Orange County is eligible to receive Senate Bill 2 funds over a two year period for water projects; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners have placed priority on efforts to increase water supply as the most appropriate means of allocating Senate Bill 2 funds; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution on , July 7, 1986 allocating Senate Bill 2 water funds for a reservoir study and the installation of a pump station to transfer water from the OWASA to Hillsborough; and WHEREAS, on July 23 , 1986 the Orange County Board of Commissioners placed a temporary hold on the use of Senate Bill 2 for Lake Orange flashboards pending survey of property owners and engineering; and WHEREAS, the Lake Orange Capital Project Ordinance once approved includes up to $20, 000 in Senate Bill 2 funds as part of the financing for the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that in the interest of increasing the water supply for all citizens, the Board does hereby formally allocate Senate Bill 2 water funds in the amount of $20, 000 to the Lake Orange project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners hereby requests that the State of North Carolina encumber $20, 000 of Senate Bill 2 water funds for the use of Orange County in addition to the amounts encumbered in accordance with the resolution adopted on July 7, 1986; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that the Board understands that Senate Bill 2 funds must be matched equally with local funds for the project indicated. Adopted this 6th day of April, 1987. 12 . BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to set the number of members at seven and to appoint Tom Hefner ' as Chair. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. The following persons were appointed to the Board of Equalization and Review: Tom Hefner, Chair John Hartwell Scott Dorsett Jerry Taylor Kathleen Buck Bonnie Gates Donna Hughes 8. EFLAND CHEEKS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (A copy of the agreement is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office) . Chair Marshall questioned #2 on page two of the contract which Airmen states specific things that must follow certain actions. 4 Geoffrey Gledhill clarified that the contract does not obligate the County because it does not state a specific time period. However, when the interceptor is extended, it will trigger certain other happenings. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to approve the agreement between the County and Marilyn Efland Liner and her husband W. David Liner for an easement on which a pump station for the Efland Cheeks Sewer Project will be built for a sum of $800 and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell to continue items G4, G5, G6, and G8 to 11: 00 a.m. April 15, 1987, Board of Commissioners' Room, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina and to continue items G1, G2, G9a, G9b, G12a, G13 and G14 to April 21, 1987, 7: 30 p.m. , in the Courtroom of the old Post Office, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adjourn the meeting at 12 : 05 a.m. The next regular meeting will be held on April 21, 1987 at 7:30 in the Courtroom of the old Post Office, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Shirley E. Marshall, Chair _ T 0o 1 ORANGE COUNTY Action Agenda BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Item No. (1 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE April 6, 1987 Subject: MINUTES fDepartment: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS I Public Hearing: Yes X no Attachments: , Information Contact: Beverly A. Blythe Under Separate Cover J Phone Numbers: 132-8181, 968-1+501, 221-0231 PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted for consideration: February 24, 1987 - Regular Meeting RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides. • 002 • ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO. P N 1 • MEETING DATE April 6. 1987 SUBJECT: Proposed CDBG Application/Rencher Street-Area DEPARTMENT: Housing/Community Dev. PUBLIC HEARING: X YES NO • •TTACHMENT(S)• INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara Fikes PHONE NUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-8181 HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361 CHAPEL Hill - 967-9251 1 MEBANE - 227-203.1 DURHAM - 688-7331 • PURPOSE: To receive comments from the public concerning the proposed FY87 Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Application. NEED: . The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development (NRCD) requires applicants to conduct a public hearing to obtain citizen's comments at the beginning of the CDBG application process. IMPACT: Citizen input should be reviewed to determine whether comments are consistent or inconsistent with available Community Development data pertaining to the area. RECOMMENDATION(S) : IAMEM ORANGE COUNTY 003 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No.144a ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: X Yes No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To conduct a hearing on the tax. BACKGROUND: A real estate transfer tax is one of several revenue options under consideration by counties and towns to fund capital projects whose need has been brought about by the impacts of rapid growth. Dare, Camden, Chowan and Carrituck implemented the tax in former years. Three others (Perquimans, Pasquotank and the City of Raleigh) have announced their intent to seek enabling legislation in the 1987 Session of the General Assembly. Separate from this thrust the Local Government Finance Committee has recommended a bill to make the tax available to all counties in the State effective for fiscal year 1987-88. The tax is an excise tax on instruments conveying certain interests in real property. Where levied it has been imposed as an amount not to exceed one dollar on each one hundred dollars or fraction thereof of the total consideration or value of the interest conveyed. What it would mean in revenue to Orange County would depend on the extent that property value is conveyed in a given year. Data is attached showing what the proceeds would have been in 1985-86 had the tax been in effect. It also shows what the distribution would have been using point of origin and per capita approaches. Ratified bills for Dare and Camden counties are attached for information. RECOMMENDATION(S) : 004 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No.1:)1 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Community Development Week DEPARTMENT: Housing/Community Development PUBLIC HEARING: Yes x No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara Fikes Proclamation TELEPHONE NUMBER: NACO Letter Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To proclaim April 11-18, 1987 as Community Development Week in Orange County to recognize the significant contribution the Community Development Block Grant program has provided to the low and moderate income residents of Orange County. BACKGROUND: The National Community Development Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities and the National Association of Counties are continuing efforts in support of National Community Development Week - April 11-18, 1987. They are urging all cities and counties to support this week by proclaiming Community Development Week in their respective localities. A report outlining the County's planned activities for this week will be pre- sented by the Housing Services Director. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Adopt resolution designating April 11-18, 1987 as Community Development Week and authorize the chair to sign the resolution on behalf of the board. -- I r 005 ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MARGARET LANE HILLSBOROUGH, N. C. 27278 MOSES GREY,JR. STEPHEN H.HALKIOTIS JOHN HARTWELL PROCLAMATION SHIRLEY E.MARSHALL DON WILLHOIT APRIL 11 - 18, 1987 NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK WHEREAS, the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM has operated since 1974 to provide local governments with the resources required to meet the needs of persons of low and moderate income; WHEREAS, community development block grant funds are used by thousands of neighborhood-based nonprofit organizations throughout the Nation to address pressing neighborhood and human service needs; WHEREAS, in the last several years the Federal Government has-reduced Federal assistance to local governments and nonprofit organizations; WHEREAS, during this time of constricted Federal contributions to the task of meeting the needs of low and moderate income persons, the problems have grown as evidenced by the dwindling supply of affordable housing, the massive rise in homelessness, and the resurfacing of hunger and malnutrition; WHEREAS, during this time of Federal withdrawal from responsibility, the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM has assumed increasing importance for meeting pressing community problems; WHEREAS, the Congress and the- Nation has often overlooked the critical value of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM and the significant number of organizations and projects that ;rely on its fiends for support; WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States has declared April 11-18, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK; 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. THAT the Orange County Board of Commissioners proclaim April 1.1-18 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK and call upon all citizens of our County to support the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, ON THIS THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL, IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD, NINE- TEEN HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SEVEN. Shirley Marshall, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners ORANGE COUNTY 006 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. D y ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SENATE BILL 58) DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 SENATE BILL 58 RESOLUTION TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To adopt resolution supporting the elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program. BACKGROUND: Legislation has been introduced in the Senate to provide transportation services to elderly and handicapped indivi- duals. Funds would be distributed to each county based on a formula. The provisions of the Bill are attached. RECOMMENDATION(5) : Adopt resolution. q . 007 WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58, entitled the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program has been introduced in the North Carolina Senate; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requests an appropriation of $2 million for fiscal year 1987-88, one-half of which will be divided equally among all the counties, with the remainder of funds distributed on the basis of the percentage of elderly and handicapped population and population density; and WHEREAS, the funds would be used to provide transporta- tion services to elderly and handicapped individuals; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requires no local matching funds; and WHEREAS, the funds would supplement existing sources of support for transportation services for the elderly and the handicapped but not replace state funds already earmarked for Orange County for this purpose, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners supports Senate Bill 58, the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate state officials. This the day of _ , 19 11 OO8 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 1 S SENATE BILL 58 Short Title: Transportation Assistance Program. (Public) Sponsors: Senators Hunt of Moore; Barnes, Goldston, Guy, Hardison, Harrington, Harris, Hipps, Johnson of Wake, Plyler, Rand, Rauch, Redman, Richardson, Seymour, Tally, Walker, Ward, Warren, Winner. Referred to: Veterans Affairs and Senior Citizens. February 23, 1987 1 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 2 AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED 3 TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO BE ADMINISTERED BY 4 THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 5 Whereas, the work of the Governor's Committee on Rural Public 6 Transportation in 1978 resulted in a State policy emphasizing coordination and use of 7 private sector resources in providing improved transportation services in rural areas; 8 and 9 Whereas, countywide transportation development planning is a statewide 10 effort that is intended to coordinate human service transportation services and 11 improve cost efficiency; and 12 Whereas, the Interagency Transportation Review Committee currently 13 reviews all requests for transportation funds administered by State government to 14 determine whether they are consistent with county transportation development plans; 15 and 16 Whereas, the Department of Transportation presently administers federal • 17 programs that provide funds for planning, capital improvement, administration, and - 18 operating expenses for human service transportation services, including transportation • 19 for the elderly and the handicapped; and 009 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 1 Whereas, local governing bodies and private nonprofit agencies have 2 made substantial progress in providing cost-effective transportation services to the 3 elderly and the handicapped; and 4 Whereas, the General Assembly finds that there is a need for State funds 5 with which to supplement existing sources of support for transportation services for 6 the elderly and the handicapped, but not to replace funds already earmarked for this 7 purpose by local governments; and 8 Whereas, this additional funding for transportation services for the elderly 9 and the handicapped has the potential to delay or preclude the placement of 10 individuals in rest homes or nursing homes, to improve the quality of life of elderly 11 and handicapped citizens, to provide opportunity for employment training programs 12 for the handicapped, and to reinforce the coordination of transportation resources 13 and strengthen the present planning process; Now, therefore, 14 The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 15 Section 1. Article 2B of Chapter 136 is amended by adding a new 16 section to read: 17 "§ 136-44.27. North Carolina Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance 18 Program.--(a) There is established the Elderly and Handicapped. Transportation 19 Assistance Program that shall provide State financed elderly and handicapped 20 transportation services for counties within the State. The Department of 21 Transportation is designated as the agency of the State responsible for administering 22 State funds appropriated to purchase elderly and handicapped transportation services 23 for counties within the State. The Department shall develop appropriate procedures 24 regarding the distribution and use of these funds and shall adopt rules to implement 25 these procedures. No funds appropriated pursuant to this act may be used to cover 26 State administration costs. 27 (b) For the purposes of this section, an elderly person is defined as one who has 28 reached the age of 60 or more years, and a handicapped person is defined as one who 29 has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life 30 activities, an individual who has a record of such impairment, or an individual who is 31 regarded as having such an impairment. Certification of eligibility shall be the 32 responsibility of the county. 33 (c) All funds distributed by the Department under this section are intended to 34 purchase additional transportation services, not to replace funds now being used by 35 local governments for that purpose. To this end, only those counties maintaining Page 2 Senate Bill 58 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 010 1 elderly and handicapped transportation services at a level consistent with those in 2 place on January 1, 1986, shall be eligible for additional transportation assistance 3 funds. 4 (d) The Public Transportation Division of the Department of Transportation shall 5 administer this plan by the implementation of a distribution method that divides a 6 portion of the funds available equally among all counties, while the remainder of the 7 funds available shall be distributed to the counties on a formula based upon the 8 percent of elderly and handicapped residents per county in conjunction with 9 population density. 10 (e) Funds distributed by the Department under this section shall be used by local 11 governments in a manner consistent with the local transportation development plan." 12 Sec. 2. There is appropriated from the General Fund to the Department 13 of Transportation the sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000) for fiscal year 1987-88, 14 to provide start-up funds for the North Carolina Elderly and Handicapped 15 Transportation Assistance Program established by this act. 16 Sec. 3. This act shall become effective July 1, 1987. Senate Bill 58 Page 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS • ACTION AGENDA ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO. Fl MEETING DATE ril 6 1987 011 SUBJECT: Budget Amendments 1 DEPARTMENT: Finance PUBLIC HEARING: YES x NO • '.--- ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Wagner Proposed Budget Amendment PHONE NUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH - 732-8181 HILLSBOROUGH - 732-9361 CHAPEL HILL - 967-9251 MEBANE - 227-2031 DURHAM - 688-7331 PURPOSE: Consideration of proposed budget amendments. GENERAL FUND 1) The Department of Social Services has received additional federal and state funds to administer the mandated AFDC - Emergency Assistance . Program. 2) The Department of Social Services has received additional State funds for the Permanency Planning program. 3) The Department of Social Services has received additional Federal Title XX funds. - 4) This amendment will increase the Orange-Person-Chatham Mental Health appropriation to the level requested during the 1986-87 budget process. GENERAL FUND 1), The additional funds to be budgeted are $20,000. The Department of Social Services will receive $10,000 in federal funds, $5,000 in state funds and the remaining $5,000 (currently budgeted County funds) will be transferred from General Assistance and Administration funds. 2) The additional funds to be budgeted are $3,514. The funds are 100% State funds; therefore, requiring no County match. • 3) The additional funds to be budgeted are $26,142. These funds require a 25% County match; these funds are currently budgeted. 4) The additional appropriation of $23,927 will be transferred from the Central Services budget. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve motion to amend the 1986-87 Budget Ordinance by proposed amendment. 012 ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1986-87 BUDGET AMENDMENT The 1986-87 Budget Ordinance as adopted on July 23, 1986, and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows: BEFORE AFTER AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMENDMENT GENERAL FUND 1. Appropriation: Social Services $3,410,294 $15,000 $3,425,294 Source: Income Maint-AFDC-EA 45,000 15,000 60,000 To accept federal and state AFDC - Emergency Assistance grants. 2. Appropriation: Social Services $3,425,294 $ 3,514 $3,428,808 Source: Permanency Planning 40,051 3,514 43,565 To accept State Permanency Planning additional allocation. 3. Appropriation: : Social Services $3,428,808 $26,142 $3,454,950 -_..:Source: Staff Reimbursement 330,235 26,142 356,377 To accept Federal Title XX additional allocation. 4. Appropriation: OPC Mental Health $ 355,750 $23,927 $ 379,677 Source: Central Services 493,934 23,927 470;00.7 To appropriate additional funds to OPC Mental Health. Approved this 6 day of April, 1987 013 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Age a Item No. F ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING--ORANGE SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: The Soil Conservation Service requires periodically a new Memorandum of Understanding as the Board of Commissioners charge. BACKGROUND: Under terms set forth in Soil Conservation Act of 1953 . There needs to be on file a memorandum of understanding as attached to this abstract. The last one was done in 1981. There is not a fixed term; either party has a right to modify at any time and a right to cancel upon 60 days written notice. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve and authorize Chair to sign. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 014 UETWEEN THE ORANGE SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT and the SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, USDA and the COUNTY OF ORANGE, NORTH CAROLINA This Memorandum of Understanding is between the Orange Soil and Water Conservation District, hereinafter called the District, and the Soil Conservation Service, hereinafter called the Service, and the County of Orange, North Carolina, hereinafter called the County. The District, the Service, and the County have the common objective of helping to bring about the conservation, development, and wise use of land, water, and related resources. They, therefore, enter into this Memorandum of Understanding as the foundation for an enduring cooperative working agreement. Under the terms of the Soil Conservation Act of 1935 and other Acts, the Soil Conservation Service is authorized to cooperate with and to furnish assistance to the District for conservation and resource development work. The General Statutes of North Carolina establishes the District as a governmental subdivision of the State of North Carolina for the purpose of exercising public powers in connection with the conservation and development of soil , water, and related natural resources. ImmEm The General Statutes of North Carolina authorize the County to possess property, and exercise all of those powers conveyed by law to the County in the interest of the health, safety, and general 01 Jr welfare of all the residents residing within the corporate limits and within the boundaries of the County. WHAT THE DISTRICT WILL DO: 1 . With the help of the County, Service, and others, will develop and keep current a long range program of natural resource conservation. 2. Make available to the County, and coordinate, such technical assistance as available, to assist the County in helping to bring about the conservation, development, and wise use of land, water, and related resources. 3. Provide assistance to the County in accordance with the annual work plan prepared by the District in consultation with the County and the Service. 4. Provide assistance to the County in accordance with priorities set by the County for the kind and amounts of work to be performed, including help with an effective sedimentation and erosion control program. 5.. Furnish-the County annually an estimate of the cost of providing the kinds and amounts of assistance requested by the County. 6. Provide the County progress reports annually, or as requested, showing type and amount of work done. 7. Provide the County soil survey interpretations and review and make written comments on problems of water disposal , drainage, erosion and sedimentation control , beautification, pollution control and related matters as requested by the County. 016 WHAT THE SERVICE WILL DO: 1. Make available through the District, such personnel as available to assist the County in helping to bring about the conservation, development, and wise use of land, water and related resources. 2. Provide assistance to the District and County in accordance with priorities set by the District for the kinds and amounts of work to be performed. 3. Assist the County in accordance with an annual plan of operation prepared by the Service in consultation with the District and the County. 4. Be responsible for technical supervision of all assistance provided the District and the County. 5. Assist the District and the County in establishing and maintaining standards and specifications for conservation use and treatment of land. 6. Assist the District and County in preparing and implementing resource conservation plans within the limits outlined above. WHAT THE COUNTY WILL DO: 1 . Develop procedures for the orderly and progressive handling of request for services to be provided by the District. It shall be the responsibility of the County to inform recipients of services provided by the District of these procedures. 2. Furnish the District annually, an estimate of the number of requests for services it will submit to the District in the coming year. The County will submit its estimate to the District 30 days before a budget estimate is needed by the County. +y 3. Be responsible for such enforcement as required to insure the conservation, development and wise use of land, water, and related Q 1 resources within the County. Development will be done in accordance with approved conservation plans and adopted standards and specifications. IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD: 1 . Either party, as mutually agreed upon, will provide or arrange for such additional services, facilities, equipment, materials, and arrangements as may be required to achieve common objectives. 2. Personnel and facilities of the County, the Service, and the District shall be under the jurisdiction of their respective employers; each retaining the right to establish headquarters for its personnel at such places as it deems most appropriate. 3. Funds supplied the District by the County will be transferred to the to the treasurer of the District to be expended under direction of the District. 4. Personnel and facilities supplied with County funds shall be under the administrative jurisdiction of the County and technically responsible to the District Conservationist of the Service. 5. Neither the County, the District, nor the Service be bound by any obligation in this Memorandum or any Supplement thereto, or other appropriate arrangements which will involve the expenditure of funds in excess of that authorized by law. • 6. Any Supplemental Memorandum of Understanding or other appropriate arrangements now in effect between the District and the Service shall remain in full force and effect. 7. This Memorandum of Understanding will be effective when signed by the three parties involved. It may be modified or terminated at any time by mutual consent of the parties hereto or may be terminiated . • -5- 01 8 by any one of the parties alone by giving sixty (60) days notice in writing to the other. • w -6- ORANGE SOIL AND WATER 019 CONSERVATION DISTRICT BY (,,„ Chairman DATE '�'}i, a.c_ /4/ / f g- 7 The signing of this Memorandum of Understanding was authorized b resol t on of the District Governing Body adopted at a meeting held on - r Secretary, Orange Soil and dater Conservation District /fd,7 Date ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BY . _ _ Chair - DATE The signing of this Memorandum of Understanding was authorized by a resolution of the Orange County Board of Commissioners at a meeting held on Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Date USDA, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE BY State Conservationist DATE ORANGE COUNTY 020 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. r 3 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing Just Compensation for Acquisition DEPARTMENT: Housing/Community Development PUBLIC HEARING: Yes x No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara Pikes Resolution Statement of Recommended Values TELEPHONE NUMBER: Appraisal Reports (under seperate cover) Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To establish just compensation for the acquisition of three dilapidated dwellings in the Northern Fairview and Councilville Community Develop- ment areas. BACKGROUND: The three dilapidated dwellings are infeasible for housing reha- bilitation and are presently vacant. Under federal regulations and in accordance with the Northern Fairview and Councilville CDBG applications the County must acquire these units and demolish them in order to eliminate their blighting influence on their respective comm pities. Federal regulations also require the County to make every reasonable effort to acquire the real property expenditiously by negotiation. Before the initiation of negotiation the property must be appraised to determine just compensation. A review appraisal is also necessary to assure that all applicable appraisals have been met. The amount established as just compensation should not be less than the approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property. Initial appraisals were conducted by Kathleen Buck and review appraisals were conducted by Fred Ruffin both of whom are professional. appraisers. RECOMMENDATION(S): 1) Approved recommended fair market values. 2) Adopt resolution establishing just compensation. . a 021 Statement of Recommended Values Second Property First Appraisal Appraisal Subject Property Size _ Value Recommended Value 1. Rt. 4, Councilville dwelling-1,500 sg ft. $3,000 $3,000 lot-16,056 sq.ft. 2. Turner Street dwellirig-846 sq.ft. $4,900 $4,900 3. Riddle Avenue dwelling-900 sq.ft. $10,600 $10,600 lot-15,550 sq.ft. 022 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action A en a ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. . Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER--MEBANE HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S CHANGE ORDER OFFICE,X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: Four return air grilles were omitted from specifications for the HVAC system in the building. BACKGROUND: Cost of these grilles is $125. 00 to be installed by contractor. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve change order. 023 CHANGE OWNER 0 ORDER CONTIRACTOR 0 FIELD AIA DOCUMENT G701 OTHER PROJECT: Carr Building Renovation 'CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 3 (name,address) Corbin Street TO (Contractor)Hillsborough, North Carolina INITIATION DATE: March 2, 1986 E —1 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 5568 Mebane Heating dc Air Conditioning CONTRACT FOR: Mechanical Construction P.O. Box 756 Mebane, North Carolina 27302 L J CONTRACT DATE: August 13, 1986 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract: Item One Supply & install 3 return air duct grilles Extra $125.00 Resultant Change Order Amount Extra $125.00 The original Contract Sum was Net change by previous Change Orders $ 19,000. 'The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was $ 300. The Contract Sum will be (increased) klibtItMCWOrowiteto by this Change Order. . • $ 22,000. The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be 125. The Contract Time will be CliMalt.VXMaltOMO (unchanged) by $ 22,125. The Date of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is ( -0- ) Days. CHR Associates Mebane Heating Sc Air Cond. County of Orange ARCHITECT • C A�rOR 730 Airport Road k3ox 756 MI. Margaret Lane Address Address Adclress Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Mebane, North Carolina 27302 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 BY BY /� BY DATE ,arC-I) 2r ID rV DATE DATE AIA DOCUMENT G701 • CHANGE ORDER • APRIL 1970 EDITION • AIA® • © 1970 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS,1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW,WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 ONE PAGE 029 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No.5 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Tax Refunds Request DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No Tax Supervisor ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Individual Request TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough -- 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 • PURPOSE: To consider 9 request for refund of tax bills. • BACKGROUND: General Statutes 105-381 C67 Action of Governing Body - Upon receiving a taxpayers written statement of defense and request for release or refund, the governing body of the Taxing Unit shall within 90 days after receipt of such a request determine whether the taxpayer has a valid defense to the tax imposed or any part thereof and shall either release or refund that portion of the amount that is determined to be in excess of the current liability or notify the taxpayer in writing that no release or refund will be made. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve releases as recommended by the Tax Supervisor. V TWP 7 ACCT # 94951 025 TRACT# • MAP • Fortney, Janet Helwig BILLS 8646191 4' P.O. Box 2378 Stanford, CA 94305 • • C ] COMMENT: Did not own 1964 Oldsmobile valued at $300ton 1-1-86 ACTION REQUESTED: Refund tax overpayment for 1986. 1986 • GO 1.86 - • LL .26 - _ - SC • .09 G1 2.30 LL .23 CH .60 $ 5.34 RECOMMENDATION: Approve a tax refund of $5.34 for the 1986 tax .vear.. • ORDER : DATE: • • TWP Chapel Hill ACCT # 104677 O q9-2 -6 ° 026 TRAM 714899 G,`f ,:,' 101 N MAP 7.108C.D.11 Moriarty, John Daniel BILL# 8625781 & Gail 102 Calumet Court Carrboro, NC 27510 COMMENT: 85 Volvo - Double Listed - Actually owned and listed by Volvo Leasing, Volvo Finance North America, Inc. Acct #96972. Also listed by John Daniel Moriarty & Gail. Volvo Leasing has. pd Bill #8645639 ACTION REQUESTED: Refund tax overpayment for 1986 tax year. , Valuation 18,800 GO 116.56 SC 5.64 G1 143.82 CH 37.41 $303.43 • RECOMMENDATION: Approve a refund of $303.43 for the 1986 tax year. ORDER : DATE: �WP 4 ACCT # 6456 027 TRACT# MAP•Hoke M. Colley BILL# 867303 & Annette P.O. Box 211 - Hillsborough; NC 27278 . • COMMENT: Due to clerical error personal property was rate code 23; should have been rate code 00. • ACTION REQUESTED: Refund tax overpayment for year 1986. Pd RC 23 Should have been RC 00 Difference GO 134.84 - GO 134.84 $247.93 SC 6.52 SC 6.52. - 7.50.06.. G3 106.57 FA 8-70 - $ 97.87. 247.93 150.06 RECOMMENDATION: Approve a refund of overpaid taxes in the amount of $97.87. for the 1986 tax year . ORDER : DATE: , • TWP 7 ACCT # 96588 TRACTD 730276 • MAP 7.27A..I.9 • Royall H. Spence, Jr. • BILLS 42098 Burlington Industrial • Realty Co. P.O. Box 2640 Greensboro, NC 27402 COMMENT: Above referenced property was inadvertently taxed as non-exempt property. The property is identified as McFarling.Cemetery and is exempt froth property taxes. • • • ACTION REQUESTED: Refund 1986 Property Taxes Valuation = $9;730_ GO 60.33 • • SC 2.92. • G2 68.11. • • • CH 19.36 $150.72 Total Refund RECOMMENDATION: Approve a refund of $150.72 for the 1986 tax year • ORDER : DATE: • • TWP 7 O 2 9 ACCT 21753 TRACT# 715289 MAP 7.39.D.16B • [ 8613911 Gordon, Esther L. BILL# 1600 Halifax Rd. Chapel Hill, NC 27514 COMMENT: Did not own 1974 Merz. on 1-1-86 per letter. • ACTION REQUESTED: Refund tax overpayment for - a .: 74 Merz. valued at $9,020. . for 1986. • 1986 G0 -55.92 - SC 2.71 • G2 63.14 CH .17.95 RECOMMENDATION: $ 139.72 Refund overpayment in the amount of $139.72 for the 1986 tax year. ORDER : . . DATE: • TWP 7 ACCT # 57829 030 TRACT# MAP First Union National Bank ] BILL# 8643088 First Union Plaza Leasing Dept. Corp 12 Charlotte, NC 28289 COMMENT: Leased vehicle was reported as being located in Orange County_when in fact the vehicle was located and listed in Chatham County. • ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Taxes. $8460 Valuation for 1985 Nisson GO 52.45 SC 2.54 FF 3.38 $58.37 • RECOMMENDATION: Approve a tax refund of $58.37 for the 1986 tax year. ORDER : - DATE: TWP 7 031 ACCT t 104486 TRACT# 727972 MAP 7.122A.B.28 Cazwell, Inc. BILL# 45912 • P.O. Drawer 3758 Chapel Hill, NC 27515 • COMMENT: House was taxed at 100% complete for 1986 but should have been taxed at only 5% complete on Jan 1, 1986. • ACTION REQUESTED: Refund overpayment Value Difference: $95,029 - 24,824 $70,205 GO 435.27 SC. 21.06 CH 139.71 G2 491.44 $1,087.48 RECOMMENDATION: Approve a refund of overpaid taxes in the amount of $1,087.48 for the 1986 tax year-. • ORDER : : DATE: TWP Cheeks 032 ACCT # 68234 TRACTS 323908 MAP 3.10. .10 James W. Taylor BILIJ, 8635868 & Mary P.O. Box 863 [ Hillsborough, NC 27278 ] COMMENT: Listed a 83 Chev-.Caprice on 1986 tax lisitng that they did no own 1/1/86. ACTION REQUESTED: Refund overpayment for 1986 tax year Valuation = 7140 GO 44.27 SC 2.14 FB 1.79 TOTAL: $48.20 • RECOMMENDATION: Refund overpayment of $48.20 for" the' 1986 tax year. • ORDER : . DATE: • TWP 7 ACCT 111413 033 TRACT# MAP • • Carolina Yogurt, Inc. BILL# 8645953 981 Keystone Way Carmel, IN 46032 • COMMENT: Due to a bookkeeping error, $9,000 was applied to a leasehold improvement account when in fact it was a prepaid rent expense. ACTION REQUESTED: Refund taxes. -• - . GO 50.22 Valuation $8;100 SC 2.43 G2 56.70 Ch 16.12 • $125.47 RECOMMENDATION: Refund taxes in the amount of $125.47 for the 1986 tax year. ORDER : • DATE: - • 034 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. Fla ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: BID AWARD: FRONT-LOADING SANITATION TRUCK DEPARTMENT: PURCHASING PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: PAM JONES X497 BID TABULATION TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To award a contract to Carolina Waste Equipment to purchase a sanitation truck. BACKGROUND: The 1987 budget includes funds for the sanitation vehicle. With current year collection tonnage increasing approximately 12% over last year putting the vehicle on line is imperative. The proposed unit is a 38 cubic yard LoDal packer on a White Cab and chassis. Similar units currently in use by this County provide excellent service. Additional benefits would be realized by standardization within the sanitation vehicles. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Award contract for one 38 cubic yard packer unit to the low bidder, Carolina Waste Equipment, for a sum of $98,222 . 00. 035 SERVICE REQUEST ?(//d DATE To: Purchasing Department From: 6)711.iJ NEW OR ADDITIONAL TELEPHONE SERVICE IS REQUESTED AS FOLLOWS: OFFICIAL FOR WHOM SERVICE IS REQUESTED /2441'YL C1"_J DATE SERVICE REQUIRED �C 41 1// /87 Lfil LOCATION /467 Ti /716-16--001- DESCRIBE REQUESTED SERVICE U ) fJ 1-4 /-. 14-) fQJJ -�- • I have been advised by the proper company that the installation cost for this additional service will be approximately $ e6""" and the increase in monthly charges is approximately $ D plus Long Distance charges. To what telephone number will additional monthly expense be billed? Telephone Number 500 JUSTIFICATION £ C(CLt U)I 0-- ********************************************************************************** *TO BE COMPLETED BY PURCHASING *I have reviewed the above described request and you are hereby advised that: * * Your request is approved as stated. * Your request is approved with the following exceptions. * Your request cannot be approved. * * * Other, or Exceptions lia/Atitt- 74tizr. * * Director of Purchasing Date ********************************************************************************** INSTRUCTIONS: Prepare in triplicate. Submit two copies to Purchasing. Retain one copy for your file. MUST BE PREPARED ON EACH CHANGE OR MODIFICATION OF TELEPHONE SLICE. BID TABULATION BID FOR:- �S(i/hi a;GT,nr• ' V.t-Q CLOSING DATE:�� CP CLOSING TIME: �. 04 7 ►� r FOR OFFICE USE: BID AWARDED TO: BID PRICE: BUDGETED AMOUNT: - b�c�� -B,r i;de� �ShaYp� Mmx� - -- • y-� Raw Raw aG � Nei F� � d fox. 6 4 GvkciL- x lWhc FF c3 3S vtS a -I�u q �?� as X99 — b�c�� -B,r i;de� �ShaYp� Mmx� - -- 037 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agend Item No. Fri ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: FIREWORKS DISPLAY REQUEST DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 TOWN OF CARRBORO CORRESPONDENCE TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To authorize permitting a public exhibition of fireworks to take place on July 4, 1987. BACKGROUND: The Town of Carrboro is requesting a permit for a fireworks display at their annual Fourth of July Celebration. The attached correspondence from the Town Manager addresses the permit requirements. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve request from Town of Carrboro to authorize fireworks display at the time, date and location stipulated in Town of Carrboro letter of request. 038 F y arrbor® P0•Box 337 301 West Main Street • Carrboro, North Carolina 27510 (919)968-7700 (919)942-8541 9V C March 25, 1987 Mr, Ken Thompson Orange County Manager Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 Dear Ken, For more than fourteen (14) years the Town of Carrboro has featured a fireworks display at our Annual Fourth of July Celebration held on the Carrboro Town Hall Grounds on July 4th. We understand that a permit for shooting the fireworks is now required by Orange County as authorized under N.C. State Statue 14-413. We would like to request a permit for this year's event. Based on information received from county staff, I am supplying the following information on our event which. I hope shall suffice to receive written authority from the Board of County Commissioners. SITE: The fireworks will be shot over the former Carrboro Town Hall Ballfield Grounds, located behind and adjacent to Carrboro Town Hall , 301 W. Main Street, Carrboro. FIREWORKS/DISPLAY SHOOTING: The fireworks display will take place between 9:15- 10:00 pm on Saturday, July 4 for a period of 20-30 minutes. The actual firing will be managed and supervised by the Carrboro Fire Department. NAPHA guider~nes will be followed. Only an aerial display will be featured. SAFETY: Safety supervision will be provided by the Carrboro Police Department and will include both traffic and crowd control . Barricades and roping manned by Town staff will be used to define the setback areas from the firing site. INSURANCE: The fireworks display is included under the Town's Comprehensive Liability Blanket Policy of $1 million with The Defender Company. The policy is administered by Chapel Hill Insurance Company • 1 • 039 Mr. Ken Thompson Orange County Manager Fireworks Permit March 25, 1987 Could you initiate whatever action is necessary for us to receive a permit? Please contact Richard Kinney or Carol Rosemond in our Recreation and Parks Department (968-7703) if additional information is needed. Your help and prompt attention to processing the matter will be greatly appreciated. Many thanks. Sincer , Robert W. Morgan Town Manager 040 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Alga Item No.F$ ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: EFLAND CHEEKS EASEMENT AGREEMENT DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE,X501 AGREEMENT TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To approve an agreement which sets forth conditions to an easement for a pump station site. BACKGROUND: The site, located on Efland/Cedar Grove Road, will accommodate a pump station to be used to collect and transfer sewage to Hillsborough. It is different from other easements in that the structure involved will be above ground which thus impedes the use of the land. The agreement terms provide: 1) compen- sation for the damage in the form of a cash payment and right of tap-on separate from an availability charge, 2) return of a portion of the easement when the pump station is relocated, and 3) continuation of a 20 foot easement thereafter to accom- modate the sewer line through the property. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve agreement and authorize Chair to sign. 1 041 NORTH CAROLINA CONTRACT ORANGE COUNTY This contract, made and entered into this day of e..) , 1987 by and between Marilyn Efland Liner and /4 her husband W. David Liner of Orange County, North Carolina, hereinafter "Liner" and Orange County, North Carolina, a body politic and corporate with its offices located in Orange County, North Carolina, hereinafter "County; " WITNESSETH: Liner has previously or will contemporaneously with the execution of this contract convey to County an easement, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter called "Easement") . The purpose of this contract is to set forth the terms and conditions upon which Liner has conveyed the easement to County. The conditions are as follows: 1. County shall pay to Liner for the Easement the sum of Eight Hundred Dollars ($800) and by this agreement authorizes Liner to "tap-on" to the gravity portion of the sewer line which will cross the property of Liner which is described in the Easement. This right to "tap-on" to the gravity portion of the sewer line crossing the property of Liner is limited to one such "tap-on." Liner shall not be required to pay any availability or other connection fee imposed by either Orange County or the Town of Hillsborough. In the latter regard, County agrees to pay any such fee 1 042 imposed by the Town of Hillsborough. The cost of constructing any connection to the sewer line and the actual cost of making the connection to the sewer line shall be born by Liner. 2. The portion of the easement described as Easement No. 2 (described as such in the Easement) is for the location and operation of a pump station, which pump station is identified in the project as the "McGowan Creek pump station." The future plan for the overall Efland Area Sewer System calls for the extension of the intercepter, which now terminates at Efland/Cedar Grove Road and at the McGowan Creek pump station, to Brook Hollow Road. When the extension of the intercepter (from Efland/Cedar Grove Road to Brook Hollow Road) is connected to the existing intercepter (at the existing McGowan Creek pump station) allowing wastewater to flow from the existing intercepter to the extension of the intercepter, the McGowan Creek pump station will be relocated from the property of Liner described in the Easement. At the time the pump station is relocated from this property of Liner, County agrees to convey to Liner that portion of the easement described as easement No. 2 (described as such in the Easement) at no cost to Liner. 3. At the time the pump station is relocated from the property of Liner, as described above, Liner agrees to convey to County a 20-foot wide easement, with a forty-feet wide construction easement, in the form of the Easement, to 2 043 the western property line of Liner in order to accommodate the extended sewer line. This conveyance by Liner to County shall be at no cost to County. 4. This contract is binding upon the parties to it and their heirs and assigns. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF , Liner and County have executed this contract in duplicate originals, one of which is retained by each of the parties, the day and year first above written. MARILYN LAND) TN W. DAVID LINER NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY I, , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that Marilyn Efland Liner and husband, W. David Liner personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and official seal, this day of , 19 Notary Public (Official Seal) My commission expires: ORANGE COUNTY By: Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners 3 T . [ r 044 ATTEST: Clerk to Board of Commissioners NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY I, , Notary Public for said County and State, certify that Beverly Blythe personally came before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by Shirley E. Marshall, Chair, sealed with its official seal, and attested by herself as its Clerk. Witness my hand and official seal, this day of , 19 Notary Public (Official Seal) My commission expires: 4 : • 045 • Witness: LU�l.�ia...•._ • NORTH CAROLINA • • I eve./1 , 164,7 P , , a Notary Public . for said ounty and State, do hereby certify. that 7 _ ,,$ , personally appeared before me this day, aug ..beiRevby me dul uworn, stated that in his/her presence f" ;VP' (signed) (acknowledged, the ex- ecution of) the foregoing instrument. ieit ess my hand and official seal, this . r3h day of r6A- r /17//i4;(0/ Notary Public (Official Seal) My commission expires: O R A N G E immoim C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 046 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date Aps i L 5, 1987 Act 1 on�genda Item %3:41. SUBJECT: PROPOSED HOUSE NUMBERING ORDINANCE DEPARTMENT: PLANNING — PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Proposed House Numbering Ordinance TELEPHONE NUMBERS: w Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve a proposed ordinance for assigning and regulating house and building numbers in Orange County . BACKGROUND: In 1981 , Orange County established a system for naming roads and streets in the County. However, identification of the location of homes and businesses continued to be according to rural box numbers assigned by the postal service for purposes of mail delivery . This has been an inadequate method where growth is occurring rapidly since the numbers assigned must be changed frequently at great inconvenience to the public. Furthermore, it is inadequate to give emergency service agencies indication of precise location . On March 24, 1987, a public hearing was held on a proposed ordinance which would establish procedures for assigning and regulating house and building numbers in Orange County. No comments were received at the hearing in regard to the proposed ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the proposed ordinance. 047 AN ORDINANCE TO ASSIGN AND REGULATE HOUSE AND BUILDING NUMBERS IN ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, a consistent and coherent house and building numbering system for ORANGE COUNTY is necessary for public safety purposes, to minimize confusion for citizens and visitors to the County, to facilitate orderly and comprehen- sive mail delivery, and to establish a constant and permanent address for ORANGE COUNTY citizens; NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do ordain: Section 1. As used in this ordinance, the term "administra- tor" refers to the person designated by ' the County Manager to perform the responsibilities pursuant to the accomplishment of the terms of this ordinance. Section 2. The owner of every house and ever princial building shall display or cause to be be on the front thereof, or on the appropriate rural box in a position easily observed from the street, the number assigned by the administrator to that specific house or building. House numbers used on rural boxes must be inscribed in contrasting color in neat numerals and letters not less than 1 inch high, on the side of the box, or on the door, if boxes are grouped. The owner shall comply with this section within thirty (30) days after receiving a written notice from the administrator requesting such action, and specifying the house or building number assigned. Section 3. No person may display or cause to be displayed on any house, building or box any number other than the number assigned by the administrator. Section 4. No person may remove, obliterate or destroy any number displayed in accordance with Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 5. The administrator shall assign house and building numbers in accordance with a system that adheres as closely as possible to the principles sat forth in this section. However, ' matters of interpretation regarding the following guidelines shall be formulated through the sound discretion of the administrator. 1 e 048 a. The County shall be divided by two axes, the north-south axis shall be Highway 86 (New Highway 86 from the Caswell County line to 1-85, Old Highway 86 from 1-85 to Calvander) . The east-west axis shall be St. • Mary's Road (from the Durham County line to Highway 70) and a continuance of Highway 70 from that intersection westward to the Alamance County line. b. Numbers shall run in an ascending order from east to west on streets to the west of the north-south axis. Numbers, likewise, shall run in an ascending order from west to east on streets to the east of the north-south base line. Numbers shall run in an ascend- ing order from south to north on streets to the north of the east-west axis. Numbers, likewise, shall run in an ascending order from north to south on streets to the south of the east-west axis. c. All dead-end streets shall begin numbers at the open end, no matter which compass direction they follow. d. Streets with both ends opening from the same • direction shall begin numbering on the end closest to the axis. e. Streets which do not run north-south or east-west shall begin numbering at the end closest to the axis. f. Streets which connect to both axes shall begin numbering on the end stemming from the north-south axis. g. Each block shall begin a nc►,r series, for example, 101, 201, 301. h. Numbers shall remain unassigned in order to accommodate future development, and block numbers shall be assigned to undeveloped areas. Section 6. Violation - of this ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable as provided in G.S. 14-4 . Whenever the governing body of the County has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate this ordi- nance, it may, either before or after the insti- tution of any other action or proceedingauthoriz- 049 zed by this ordinance, institute a civil action in the name of the County for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation or to require an act or acts necessary to comply with the ordinance. • Section 7. If any provision of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdictions, such provision shall be deemed a separate, independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of any other provision hereof, and to that end, the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. Section 8. This ordinance shall be effective on 1987. Adopted this day of 1987. • O R A N G E C O U N T Y 050 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6.,_ 1987 Action enda Item IId SUBJECT: ASSIGNMENT OF HOUSE AND BUILDING NUMBERS DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes __X_ No ATTACHMENT(S ) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Location Map Staff Response to Citizen Concerns TELEPHONE NUMBERS : rr Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve proposed house and building numbers to be assigned in two rural routes in the County. . BACKGROUND : Per an agreement reached in January 1987 between the County Manager and the Chapel Hill Postmaster, a Joint project was undertaken between the County and Postal Service to begin the conversion of rural box numbers to a system of permanently assigned house numbers. Once the actual assignments are made, no further changes in numbering should be necessary . Two rural routes have thus far been been assigned numbers according to a proposed system developed by the County . They include Route 8 (area north of Chapel Hill consisting of Stoneridge and Sedgefield subdivisions, and homes bordering Old N.C. 86, Mill House Road and Whitfield Road) and Route 5 (area west of Carrboro off Jones ferry Road ) . As required by G . S. 153A-240, a public hearing was held on March 24, 1987 on the proposed house and building numbers to be assigned . At the hearing, several citizens voiced concerns regarding the proposed house numbers. These concerns are being addressed by the Planning Department, and actions taken to date are summarized in the attached memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the proposed house and building numbers for rural routes 5 and 8, followed by notification of the Chapel Hill Postmaster, the N.C. Department of Transportation, and the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro as required by G. S. 153A-240 . q• • I.. l ::► • . -'-Ti •A.R. •••• �}".�` � ,..%• I I•N It 1. '" .. ∎.ea• y► vim' + r< "/K a '' l it ,..••, j• • "At� I ,j mi. ; . 0 ww 1 . , 4411!al•w .1.1. MIS,. u "�• 16/iiphillio.Irm•- . 400* aft r . / . $ / . dr N.. ... - ma ; 4- .....,- . w� � .14i .; , • u.... , ,l tiir - � �HWY o ,'�. 1 .. G 1• .rr , • =41-0 j r w ‘1 t 40 :IL:41 x • ~ tar c... • . ,.-7,•• W.'. OW 1._ " 1.. .- -- . ■ M r >>114111 11 _l(�1, 411 4 11 - ill II 14' ! `'.,....,Aa• _11 ... so.. AI IAA ...-' }• as 1 LIN s .,. Q .. w al y Old - a au •'� "'�, .w IP Ala. r ls• • • . ,A ,o.•r r 1KVV • � '' yy We •.u, - at r ..+.. _ �, Ir. . ^, �: 1. \ %;'■• AO 0 j•. ,r •Gwr t rr .'� •••• r ,``• .. r _ .�� . ,.., It • it• ' i , O: r . � .: w 411.3 - .- ♦. 11111/11/1 N -S and E- 4 . ��" . ` /'�' !` Affected Rural � . l^� j Routes 1. r I 1 ��_ I r C M i .a ,w.,a A r H ~ C O Y N i Y j Il 1 ._ 0 • O R A N G E C O U N T Y INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 052 TO: Ken Thompson, County Manager FROM: Marvin Collins, Planning Director SUBJECT: Assignment of House Numbers - Rural Routes 5 and 8 DATE: April 1 , 1987 COPIES : Don Powell , Planner I n t At the March 24, 1987 public hearing regarding assignment of house numbers, seven people expressed concern about the proposals. Residences. Since the hearing, Don Powell has spoken on the phone or in person with several citizens. Letters have been sent to all indicating what action can or will be taken in regard to their concerns. Listed below is a summary of these actions. Note particularly that requests for public road name changes require a separate public hearing in accordance with G.S. 153A-240 . 1 . N1r. roger Barr Complaint: Multiple changes have already been made in rural routes; Oak Hill Road ( place of residence) has a confusing loop configuration which makes traffic flow and mail delivery awkward ; has accepted past changes without due process; hopes this change will be final . Action : Letter sent to Mr. Barr apologizing for premature notification of address change; informed that Oak Hill Road was a public road and that name change would require public hearing (G. S. 153A-240) ; concerns regarding awkward placement of stop signs referred to NCDOT representative. 2. .frh Chjdk Mosher. Complaint: Agreed with house numbering system; disturbed by premature notice of address change; Oak Hill Road resident concerned with dangerous intersection at Oak Hill Road and Sunrise Road . Action : Provided same response as for Mr. Barr since their concerns were very similar . 3. EL., ,Lack Pendzjw ter Complaint: Concerned about premature notification ; Sunrise Road resident with concerns about 911 communication system; service overlap by telephone, electric and postal agencies creates confusion and hardship. Action : Provided similar response as for Mr. Barr; referred questions regarding 911 communications 053 problems to Mr . Bobby Baker, the Emergency Services Director . 4. Mr.,. Dal .41D an i el Complaint: Premature notice was frustrating; will suffer loss of business if change is effected ; wants to keep rural route system. Action : Apologized for premature notification ; stressed importance of house numbering; related Postmaster ' s comments regarding one year or more grace period within which address could be effected, allowing stationery and business forms to be converted ; indicated that permanent address would benefit customers more in the future because of permanency of address. 5. ML, Jame. Nob l iti Complaint: Expressed concern about more than one NC Highway 86; as a resident of Old NC 86, he feels the road name should be changed to Old Hillsborough Road . Action : Apologized for premature notification ; indicated that Old NC 86 was a public road and any name change would require a separate public hearing (G. S . 153A- 240 ) . 6. GIs. Shelby Hewett Complaint: Does not believe this will be final change; address assigned is Twin Elms, not Ferguson Road where mailbox is located; likes privacy and feels house numbering will give too much publicity; wants to keep rural box numbers - retain rural aspect of life style. Action : Apologized for premature notification ; stressed permanency of house numbering system; conducted field check of Ferguson Road--Twin Oaks Road issue; indicated that since entrance was from Twin Oaks Road, house number assigned on that basis; stressed that other residents had same problem and all were treated uniformly ; stressed that house numbers would not compromise rural life style. 7 . 1i L.0 c i D gl a Reiman Complaint: Ms. Newnam' s complaint was received in person at the Planning Department prior to the hearing; a letter of protest signed by Ms. Newnam and other residents served by Manor Drive was placed in the record at the public hearing; the complaint focused on the road name, Manor Drive; other concerns about the subdivision, Manor Hill , were also mentioned to the Planning Staff, including the proper road classification, participation/enforcement of the road maintenance agreement, and the alignment of rights-of-way. 054 Action : A field survey has been conducted at Manor Hill Subdivision ; problems have been found with right- of-way alignments; staff is to contact the developer to resolve the alignment problem and propose renaming of the private street in accord with adjoining property owners desires; a public hearing is not required on the road name change since the street is privately maintained; if a name change occurs, address changes can be handled administratively with the Postal Service. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the Board of Commissioners approve the proposed house numbers for rural routes 5 and 8. Further delays in the assignment of numbers will complicate the issue, since new rural route designations have been established as of March 28. Concerns regarding road name changes can be handled through a separate public hearing or staff action, depending upon the circumstances. Concerns regarding 911 communications and traffic hazards can be addressed by other agencies, and the Postal Service has indicated a willingness to work with the residents in providing time for stationery, checks and business forms to expire. Marvin Collins Planning Director O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 055 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6 , 1987_ Action,{► enda SUBJECT: WOLFE PROPERTY SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY Item 17F DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No Attachment(s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Application Preliminary Plan Certification Vicinity Map Agency Comments Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes County Attorney's Correspondence Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To approve the Preliminary Plan for the Wolfe Property Subdivision . BACKGROUND : The proposal is to divide a 36 .8 acre tract into seven lots with a community open space area of 7 .9 acres, which includes the wastewater treatment area. The average lot size is 3 . 9 acres. St. Michael 's Pond Drive is a proposed private "Class B" road off Dodson + s Crossroads South (SR 1102) . All lots but one are zoned R-1 Residential and designated as Rural Residential on the Land Use Plan . The remaining lot is located in University Lake Watershed in the Rural Buffer . All applicable agencies have reviewed and commented on the application except the N.C. Division of Environmental Management. A spray irrigation system is proposed for sewage disposal , and the agency has indicated that they will not provide any comment or approval until final detailed engineering drawings and a permit application are submitted. The Planning Board recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions : 1 . The N.C. Department of Environmental Management must give final approval of the sewage treatment system before the final plat is submitted. I � 056 2. A homeowners association must be set up to insure main- tenance of the proposed sewage system. 3 . Lot 7 must have impervious surface denoted and a payment- in- lieu of recreation space will be required . The payment would be $84 ( 1 /35 x $2945/acre) . 4. Setback lines must be shown on the final plat. The Planning Director furthers recommends that the developer be required to establish a maintenance fund in the amount of $3,000 as certified by the developer ' s engineer to meet the ' expected operation and maintenance cost of the spray irrigation system for a period of three (3 ) years from the date of final plat approval . ,1: 11}�11i n j /i5 s 1-E-J, 11)1 iz-$-Bb �LJ 057 _ - - C_ 01 i ,;. - 1 . rl _ , s -A, C. DATE: 12/1/86 SUBDIVISION NAME: Wolfe Property Subdivision LOCATION: Dodson's Crossroads Road- (SR 1102) OWNER/DEVELOPER: Walter & Jackie Wolfe ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO . : AGENT/CONTACT: JarkiP yol fe TELEPHONE NO . : 967-1367 A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Map _2$ Block _ Lotto) 21 Township Bingham Zoning District(a) : AR Total Number of Acres: 36.OT Phases : _ i Total Number of Lots: ,Z, Average Lot Size: 3.9 ACMlnimum Lot Size 40,0,0 SF Number/Type of Structures: (existing) 1 Triplex (5 BDR),(proposed)existinq houpe to Lineal Feet in Streets: 1700' Acres in Open Space ,7.9 IZe rgmov i Water Supply: Publlctspecify) Community x Individual Wastewater Dispose ! : Publlc(s ecif ) Community x Individual School District: General Land Uses- in Area: Farm/ ReciOentialFire District: Critical Areas : _ _etreem/dreinageways w_..._flood prone areas University Iaka watershedtspecify) historic sites othar(expLain) w B. ALL plate must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two— hundred feet 11 "=20013 and no Larger than one inch equals fifty feet (1 "=501 ) and must contain the following information : _4 ' - .subdivision nano PM building setback Linos • :. '..4 memo of ounerla) y::::• by items — o- nuns of surveyor, engineer or by Layout or typical lot `'' - land planner ✓ lxistt :ompleted) _4 fry:`• (title( Preliminary Plea Beat' (d and proposed utid eeaa- : goals, north error (Nsreb asi?fir •ante (drainage, uttllttaa, top of nap) r:e; ■. asp.) ''.. dote (insignia, revision domes( pry...• adjoinip, proposed and 1 `.4 taeaabt :.firy-, adjoining rlphi dimensions p. tea nep—bLoek—lot Including dl■eaalena end $Cf:;•'" 'references tt'} street Panes and Stilt' road _ 4 boundary described risk :.:-- pushers bearings and dietrmaea : _ 'motel soroove of the treat ti.:,�• utilitie and proposed `•`• and acreage of late, Inoladin typlltsit, Including 0 :,'':' type. suer . and :sclgelag area ■ithln YF # rightarof—ray ,: hydrrats, velure and ✓ asnirol earner .c. meobolas ./ .. `. • saluting and proposed culvert Proposer lot llama with +:; . k�a'�' dlnaaeloer ,,;� feoludla, Nsea and grease 6 '`•. lot numbers tyPiaol stress cross—eeat1ona :•�.0.1' phasing lines gill sad latsrsignlaa insane ?•�Y /nalgtlinp design aAd ■loth sapogrephy at tem foot (701 , 44 of tre w lway end a e tirt intervals cj n horizontal alignment - sad" •.racer bodies, susses, flood- general curve dais (R #;�'::' way an flaodplaino reeds) Pualta strews buffers and notation `' ''i•$ Indlostlog restricted �.. .:`p bui ldinga feature* such as i?'` developeras hislorica, osserealaa, ule e.y� paiMt/al •�� historic laaanarka, roil • toraaalp, corporate and erne— adjoining loo layout territorial plasmic, names of adjoining property jurisdiction lines mblob COMM and subdivisions Gregg Cho property _ - lessolan and diem of paresis dedleatod for publle use or reserved In Gooses ._. lsoation and sirs of lots of ',striated development Potential and :: noses/on on plat rsgsrdieg arms JF atarooster eanagarast plan indicating provision for control of the first 1/2 'soh of rumoff from impervious surfacer (GRAY AREAS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) . 058 C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: 1 . Twenty—six (25) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Orange County Tax map (one copy with tax parcels involved clearly marked . 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer 1s not available, a Letter from the arena County Health Department certifying the proposed wastewater system fo each Lot . I , the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate. I understand that a $210.00 fee (subdivisions of 15 lots or lase) or a 1370.00 fee (subdivisions- of 16 Lots or More] is due— at at the time of application . A $5.00 per Lot fee is due at the time the final plat is presented for recordation . LIM AP.;. IC. NT ' ° SISNAT RE OW R S SI NATUR r 9 � E 1 DATE 'L�[� DATE 1 5 S�(P FEES: Amount Date Paid Receipt WOLFE PROPERTY 05g 11/85 ORANGE COUNTY,; STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 10-20-86 Reviewed 10-22-86 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 12-11-86 Reviewed 12-17-86 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received Reviewed NCDOT: DATE 2-�7-87 _ CERTIFICATION Mike Mills SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel Hill -Carrboro) : DATE 2-9-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE Certification OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council 3-13-87 (Date) Carrboro Fire Department (Date) Chapel Hill (Date) Carrboro (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham _(Date) Other (Date) Erosion Control 2-2-87 _(Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial r. .J 1 -~ I •_li 0 6 0 /� \ ` :`o rdik„~o I // \ f S{P col", 27 ///// \ ••■ OVERLAND 11 . I. 1 /� = 2.M 4255 •_ _tic. 0 r ii____, _l_L34 .... ,, .. f / / 307 ' ' e 410 0 �, • ' ���' 340,40 f // 191T s // :_ .__. . 2740 3 /1/ fwCVOLAN 4CMDI .16 AC. ' // 20 r . i i ii/' 'i 872AG. r... r �92 • J. 92Afw 92AC. . I / .. , irM 1 1 / rr 0 -- r.. ` t { // 3973 22 // _ _ � 15.42 AC /i m t - .. _.. . . ._ _ .. 23' . 95.84 AC. 15.77 A . I Wolfe Properfy . • 1 AN; I c a n f' : PA li' f 51L 703 9.32 ABC-CAL. s n • R. 4 " ' 0 0 Zan� j 4o-r4 - 4100• 1AC. • ' CAL-4:1 AC. 02 104s 1.11 1 De(/5h4tleh : Pura/ Residential RURAL- • SeAde : 1 • 400 MAUER RD �''� r I I I -••• ' �� 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 061 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 6N� .I4 ITIE it Fr MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Officer SUBJECT: Stormwater Management Plan for Wolf Property Subdivision DATE: February 20, 1987 The plan for this subdivision proposes to meet the Ordinance requirements by using large lots, a buffer of vegetation around each lot to absorb and filter runoff, and grassed swales along the new road. The plan meets the Ordinanc .. requirements. )nAN,filFCIA/td61 062 %531WI. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, NG 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN February 27, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E.HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,P.E. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Mr. Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Wolfe Property Subdivision Off SR 1102 Dear Mr. Kirk: I have reviewed the preliminary plans of the above referencedsub- division as you requested- in your letter of February 20, 1987. The sight distance available is adequate for the posted speed limit. I foresee no problems due to sight distance. I hope this helps in the planning of this development. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Yours very truly, Ca**9-) . M. Mills DISTRICT ENGINEER JMM/SPI:jbh _ • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer AGRICULTURAL`� EXTENSION North Carolina State University SERVICE School of Agriculture and Life Sciences Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering Box 7625, Raleigh, NC 27695-7625 Telephone (919) 737-2675 MEMORANDUM TO : . FROM : A. R. Rubin, Extension Specialist Biological and Agricultural Engineering SUBJECT: Report of Investigation Attached is a copy of the report for the land application of waste at &ALTCE E JACKlc 140Lrg PCR __ _ ARR/wjc Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics Ad r and MC State Universities,100 Counties and U.S.Department of Agriculture 064. SITE INVESTIGATION Wolfe Property Orange County, North Carolina Dr. Walter Wolfe and Ms. Terrie Wolfe have purchased a 27-acre tract of land off Dobson's Crossroads in the southwestern portion of Orange County, North Carolina. The tract contains a mix of soils. The Wolfe family desires to divide the property into several single family home sites. The Orange County Health Department has evaluated the property and found only a small portion of the area to be suitable for design and development of either conventional or alternative subsurface wastewater treatment and disposal facilities. Optimum development potential for this property may require the development of both subsurface wastewater treatment and disposal systems on portions of the site where soil and site conditions permit and development of slow rate spray irrigation systems on those areas where the subsurface . wastewater treatment and disposal facilities will not function properly. There are two purposes for the brief report which follows. The first is to describe conditions encountered on the proposed wastewater receiver sites. The second is to make recommendations regarding appropriate uses and hydraulic and constituent loadings for those areas. Topography The site was characteristic of the slate belt region of the piedmont physiogeographic province of the state. Slopes ranged from nearly level to flat over much of the site to approximately 3 to 5 percent over other areas. Some topography or relief is necessary to provide a gradient along which applied constituents will move. The lack of a gradient on this site is considered to be a major limitation to design or development of subsurface wastewater treatment and disposal facilities on this property. The area where 2 065 the topography or relief is most noticeable is the area that is most suitable as a receiver soil for wastewater. The higher elevations on the site are those that are considered most suitable for subsurface treatment and disposal of wastewater. The major topographic limitation on the site is the lack of a suitable internal drainage outlet. Internal drainage is the most limiting of the factors encountered on the site. This will require careful design and installation of any system and will limit the overall suitability of the site. The topographic limitation can be overcome through careful placement of the selected wastewater treatment options. Soils The soils information required for design and development of soil based wastewater treatment systems can be determined through investigation of published literature sources and must be confirmed through actual on-site investigation. In determining the properties of the soils on any wastewater receiver site, hand auger borings must be advanced at several locations throughout the area to determine properties of the soils on the site. Soil properties investigated in the hand auger borings include: soil depth, soil color, and soil texture. Each of these are used •to characterize. a representative or typical soil profile. The hand auger borings advanced at several locations over the site indicate that there are a wide variety of soils encountered. The soils ranged in property from severely limiting to provisionally suitable for design and development of conventional or subsurface wastewater treatment systems to provisionally suitable for design and development of spray irrigation systems. Characteristic or representative soil profile descriptions for the Lignum, Herndon, and Georgeville-like soils encountered over the area proposed for wastewater treatment and disposal are included as an attachment to this report. 066 3 In general, the Georgeville and Herndon soils are considered to be provisionally suitable according to the rules and regulations promulgated by the Division of Health Service. The Lignum-like soils encountered on the site are considered to be unsuitable for design and development of subsurface systems and only provisionally suitable for design and development of spray irrigation or surface application systems. The limitations of the Georgeville and Herndon-like soils can be overcome through conservative hydraulic loadings. The application between .2 and .25 gallons/ft2/day with pressure distribution or .3 gallons/ft2/day with conventional distribution is an acceptable hydraulic loading. The application rate onto the Lignum-like soil is determined through a water balance calculation. The water balance calculation is attached and will be discussed in the following section on recommendations. The water balance calculation does indicate, however, that approximately 20 inches of water can be applied over the site. Soils are a limitation to optimum development of this property. Lot sizes must be quite large to accommodate the development potential of this property. The installation of both subsurface wastewater treatment systems and surface treatment systems are necessary to allow for optimum development of this property. The design limitations can be overcome through careful placement, careful design, and careful operation of the selected wastewater treatment options. Recommendations There are two distinct options which are available for handling the wastewater generated at the Wolfe site. One is to utilize a slow rate spray irrigation system to handle a portion of the waste flow and a community subsurface wastewater treatment and disposal system to handle the wastewater from the remaining homes. Based on the soil analysis and hand auger borings 4 067 attached, the deep, well drained Georgeville and Herndon-like soils can accommodate a daily wastewater flow of approximately 1000 to 1200 gallons/day. The .actual wastewater flow which can be accommodated in this area will depend on the size of the area. Careful determination of the areal extent of the well-drained soils is essential and must be accomplished on a plat map of the site. Any waste flow in excess of the 1000 to 1200 gallons which can be accommodated in a subsurface system can be handled with a slow rate spray irrigation system and surface application of treated effluent. A water balance calculation is attached for the most restrictive of the soils encountered on the site. This is the Lignum-like soil which was encountered over the largest area of the site. The Lignum-like soil is considered to be very restrictive for any subsurface wastewater treatment and disposal options; however, with sufficiently like hydraulic loadings the Lignum-like soil can tolerate approximately 20 inches of additional hydraulic input per year - the surface application. If a slow rate spray irrigation system is used to handle a portion of the waste flow, then the following calculations apply for each of the residential facilities to be placed on a slow rate spray irrigation system. For these design calculations, the slow rate spray irrigation system is assumed necessary to accommodate the wastewater flow from a three-bedroom home with a design flow of 120 gallons/bedroom/day or 360 gallons/home/day. Each of the constituents contained in the waste stream must be assimilated at rates consistent with the ability of the soil, the site, and the vegetation to accommodate or accept those constituents. The hydraulic loading is based on a water balance calculation. The nutrient loadings, however, are assimilated at the capacity of the vegetation and of the site. Annual mass loadings and land area requirements for typical constituents contained in a waste stream are calculated below: • 068 5 Hydraulic Loading: 360 gal/day x 365 days/year = 131,400 gal/year This can be assimilated at a rate of approximately 20 inches/acre/year. Based on this assimilation rate, the land area required to assimilate this hydraulic load is calculated as; 131,400 gal/year = .24 acres 27,154 gal/acre/inch x 20 in/year Nitrogen Loading: The typical domestic wastewater contains approximately 25 ppm of nitrogen. Based on this concentration of nitrogen in the treated waste stream, the land area required to assimilate the nitrogen contained in the waste stream is calculated as: .1314 MGY x 25 MG/L-N x 8.34 = .11 acres 250 lb-N/ac/year Phosphorus Loading: Typical domestic wastewater contains approximately 5 ppm or mg/1 of phosphorus. This can be assimilated at a rate of approximately 100 lb/ac/yr allowing for utilization and assimilation or adsorption in the soil. The phosphorus loading contained in the waste stream can be assimilated on a site containing: .1314 MGY x 5 MG/L-P x 8.34 = .05 acres 100 lb-P/ac/yr • 6 06'5 Clearly the hydraulic loading is the most limiting of the constituents contained in the waste stream. A land area of approximately .25 acres is necessary to handled the wastewater volume generated on an annual basis by a single three-bedroom home. The actual land area necessary to handle the wastewater generated at the homes proposed for the Wolfe site can be adjusted either upward or downward depending on the actual wastewater flow from the homes designed for this facility. A four-bedroom home will require slightly more land area than that discussed for a three bedroom home, while a two bedroom home will require slightly less land. The actual application of wastewater onto the soil surface can be accomplished""at'a rate not to'exceed .2 to .25 inches per hour. This will minimize potential for erosion and for soil loss and is consistent with the ability of the soil on the site to handle the water. Maintenance of these conservative hydraulic loadings is essential to insure the successful operation of this facility. Conclusion The single family homes sites investigated for the Wolfe family appeared to be acceptable for both subsurface and spray irrigation systems. The area available for subsurface treatment and disposal is small in area and can assimilate only a small portion of the wastewater generated potentially on this site. The recommendation of a slow rate spray irrigation system to handle a portion of the waste flow and a subsurface system to handled the remainder appears to be an acceptable or viable alternative. If I can be of further help or if you have questions concerning the content of this report, please contact me at the letterhead address on the transmittal letter. It was a pleasure working with you and I look forward to working with you toward completion of this project. 7 070 Wolfe Property Orange County Boring #1 Al 0-10" brown silty loam; weak, medium, granular structure; friable; many fine roots; many fine to medium size quartz pebbles. Blt 10-14" yellow brown silty clay loam; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine and medium roots; few thin discontinuous clay films on ped faces; few fine quartz and slate frag- ments encountered with increasing depth. B211 14-30" yellow red silty clay; common, fine, distinct red mottles; moderate, medium subangular blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic. Boring #2 Al 0-6" yellow brown silty loam; weak, medium, granular structure; friable; many fine roots. B1 6-12" strong brown silty clay loam; moderate, medium, subangular blocky structure; friable; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many fine and medium roots; few discontinuous clay films on ped faces. B21t 12-20" yellow red silty clay; moderate, medium, subangular blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots; few thin discontinuous clay films on ped faces; few small one- quarter inch pebbles or smaller. B22t 20-30" yellow red silty clay; common, fine, yellow mottles; moderate, fine sub- angular blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots. 30" boring terminated. 8 Boring #3 071 A P 0-6" dark red clay loam; weak, coarse, granular structure; friable; few fine and medium roots; many small black concretions. 821t 6-24" dark red clay; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few discontinuous clay films on ped faces; many small black concretions; many fine and medium roots. B22t 24-40" dark red clay; moderate, medium, sub- angular blocky structure to blocky structure; firm; slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots; many thin clay films on ped faces. 40" boring terminated. . . 7 072 Hydrologic Budget, Lignum-Like Silty Soil Orange County, North Carolina Wolfe Property Water Losses Water Input MO E.T. Drainage Runoff Total Rainfall Waste J .93 3.00 .32 5.25 4.16 1.09 F 1.40 3.00 .44 5.84 4.36 1.48 M 2.17 3.00 .21 6.38 4.06 2.32 A 3.30 3.00 .26 7.56 4.56 3.00 M 4.34 3.00 .57 9.91 6.58 2.33 J 4.80 3.00 .54 9.34 5.44 3.90 J 4.65 3.00 .35 9.00 6.51 2.49 A 4.03 3.00 .42 8.45 7.20 1.25 S 3.30 3.00 .48 7.78 5.81 1.97 O 1.86 3.00 .32 6.18 4.23 4.95 N 1.20 3.00 .51 5.71 5.07 .64 D .62 _ 3.00 ..80 5.42 5.03 .39 63.01 22.81 D13/R263/11-86/d1 RF NCE NINABER DATE PIN MAP REFERENCE C2297S SOIL ANALYSIS O9. 05, Ea 9749-94-7658 L.UUESTEE pNNeR 6, 2A_ _ 21 SHAMBLEY REX SHAMBLEY REX RT 10 BOX 52 07-3 CHAPEL HILL NC 27514 RT 10 BOX 52 TELEX' q?9X654 C1-114°F1 14TH NI"' A7! 14 SPECIFICATlprs TO RFL l :OC.4i10N/OwECTIONS: • 111]DSON CRIIRSROADS 7 414...24 • 'EE: RECEIPT: OWNER OR AU NT: 35 . 024767 :ONFEIMED 6Y PLANKR: FLANKER �' l OATS CLERIC SLOPE TEXTURE -.3 STRUCTURE .J;2.S- DEPTH R.HOR IN. DRAIN _ • EX.DRAIN S PERMEAB Y- OVERALL •'S' REMARKS i L r _ Ohl d � -tA L E - (D o -s .... rDe-P 4DCCc 01.11 MD o Iz ocidtphils • ti. DATE __111.243.5___ SANI T ' ��/ ARIAN �, 1 . 074 4 4 )yl 1 )(f �', • - °" • (4, $0X lift Fit /11 7)/a , Q,t, '4 ze *aid!. 7 e, zo 7ft. c e x N @range (�uuntti laureation anb barks 3Depurtment 4r_41,41,0 5 • 300 West Tryon Street lio' "fr. HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Life.Be In it. arCM Mary Anne Black, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner 11 FROM: Mary Anne Black, .Recreation & Parks Director DATE: March 13, 1987 • SUBJECT: Courtesy Review -- Wolfe Property Subdivision Upon review of the preliminary plan the Wolfe property subdivision, 1 find only one e&ement warranting ,comment from a recreation and parks perspective. in that lot #7 of the proposed subdivision lies within the JPA, 1 would recommend that Commissioners accept payment-of- lieu of dedication for this portion of the property. • Thank you for the opportunity to offer these staff comments, and 1 will present same to the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council at their April 7th monthly meeting. 1 will forward any changes or additional comments to you. Mary ne B� lack Rect ation & Parks Director CC: RPAC Planning Committee Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 Area Code 919 : . 076 7 . PHILIP POST Er ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS/PLANNERS/SURVEYORS #3260 31 March 1987 Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough. North Carolina 27278 Re: Proposed Wolfe Property Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in response to a request by the Urenoe •:.ounty Planning Staff that our office provide an estimate for the maintenance costs for the proposed public wastewater treatment system for the Wolfe Property Subdivision. We have contacted the North Carolina State Utilities Commission. which is responsible for approving public utility rates for systems throughout the state . The current rate established for spray-type treatment systems is about $18.00 per unit per month . of which about $16.00 per unit per month is for actual system maintenance costs. Using this criteria. we estimate that an amount of $2.880.00 will cover expected maintenance costs for the proposed system for a three-year period . Sincer ly, ' - 47:?....1-- Phi1i% $VI,ggst . P. E. PNPfadb ••%43,‘ t► •t , Attachment � SEAL _ cc: Jackie Wolfe 7635 Eddie Kirk .e':F'�CFki� '� =~ 401 PROVIDENCE ROAD • SUITE 200 • POST OFFICE BOX 2134 • CHAPEL HILL, NC 27514 (919)929-1173 • (919)493-2600 rtilLIPPOST& ASSOCIATES, INC. Joe (401..t 412 • En g Ineers Planner, .rveyors SHEET NO.____L_ 401 Providence Road Suite 200 OF I CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 CALCULATED BY 1)11&0 DATE 3IVO7 (919) 929-1173 493-2600 CHECKED BY ®N _ DATE_ 3 -117 ,fig ES770*7t OF f1Mdi. COsr rat- 6g#t 5 KS, , f 3 yee 4s o77 Ng• [i iTs +nig " u � 40,. a'►► ,"'4 .. arprogec .rate r Fort sPr21 ►rr;9a1%a.. i /�. $411,41 f 5 16:1C ...-.-. . ESDHMia .... . .. Fi1r.. 3 yea;., cor'�'. ..-. ..Ir 41. • • • 7635 . =• 4 .3 • i.eel rmas•l/Gcii:7••,arm rw own • h. Wolfe Property _� [1\ 078 (Preliminary Plat - Bingham Property) Presentation by Eddie Kirk . The proposal is to divide a 36.8 acre tract into seven lots with a community open space area of 7.9 acres, which includes the wastewater treatment area. The average lot size is 3.9 acres. St. Michael 's Pond Drive is a proposed private "Class B" road off Dodson 's Crossroads South (SR 1102) . All lots but. one are zoned . R-1 Residential and designated as Rural Residential on the Land Use Plan . The remaining lot is located in University Lake Watershed in the Rural Buffer. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application except the N.C. Division of Environmental Management. A spray irrigation system is proposed for sewage disposal , and the agency has indicated that they will not provide any form of approval until final detailed engineering drawings are submitted. The Planning Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1 . The N.C. Department of Environmental Management must give final approval of the sewage treatment system before the final plat is submitted. 2. A homeowners association must be set up to insure maintenance of the proposed sewage system. 3. Lot 7 must have impervious surface denoted and a payment- in-lieu of recreation space will be required. The payment would be $84 ( 1/35 x $2945/acre) . 4. Setback lines must be shown on the final plat. Best asked the cost of installing such a system. Tony • Whitaker of Philip Post and Associates responded the cost would approximately $5,000 .00 per lot. Best continued asking about maintenance of the system. Mr. Whitaker indicated that a General Contractor with a license from DEM or a public utility could be hired as the primary maintenance would be making sure chlorination tablets were in place which would involve a check of the system bi-weekly as well as checking the pumps. Yuhasz asked about the time frame involved In a breakdown. Mr. Whitaker responded by explaining the alarm and backup systems. 079 Best asked how many such systems are in use now. Collins responded that one has been approved for Bradshaw 's Mobile Home Park but has not yet been built. Best expressed concern that this system is a mechanism for increasing density. Collins responded that it is not such a mechanism. Mr. Whitaker addressed Best's concern by stating that this arrangement of the system cannot support increased density. Mr. Whitaker continued explaining the layout and function of the sewer system. Best asked where such a system was in place and functioning. Mr. Whitaker indicated there is such a system on Highway 98 on the shores of the Falls Lake which has been in operation for at least two years with no operational problems. MOTION: Best moved approval . Seconded by Yuhasz. VOTE: 9 in favor. I opposed (Hubbard - concern with the sewer system) Mr. Whitaker indicated he would be able to provide more information and documentation on this particular alternative community system and noted more such systems would be seen in future development. • 080 COLEMAN. I !.:UNHOLY_ I)I(..I(EIi'ON, BE UNHOLY., 6IJ J)H1I I. & IiARGI2AvE ;=\rroRNEys AT LAIN 110 1 HI:1fl()N STREET H ILLSROTt0I:(711. N.C. 27278 919-732-2196 919-942-8000 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20,FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E.FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL,N.C. 27514 April 2, 1987 919-929.7131 ALONZO B.COLEMAN, JR. STEVEN A.BERNIIOLZ DONALD R- DICKERSON ROGER B.BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL DOUGLAS HARGRAVE MARTIN J.BERNIIOLZ RICHARD J. SNIDER,JR. G.NICHOLAS HERMAN KAREN J- SHANGRAW Shirley E. Marshall, Chair Moses Carey Of Counsel l BONNER D.SAWYER Stephen Halkiotis (1902-1972) John Hartwell Don Willhoit Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re: Subdivisions to be considered for approval - April 6, 1987 Board Meeting Dear Board Members: I have concerns about two subdivisions which you will consider for approval on April 6. One of these subdivisions is the Wolfe Property Subdivision. The other is the Eno River Estates Subdivision. Wolfe Property Subdivision. North Carolina General Statutes Section 143-215. 1 (d) creates a permitting process for sewer systems which are, generally, other than single-family residential septic tank systems. The Environmental Management Commission is the permitting authority under this statute. Some or all of you may recall that during the last legislative session a bill was introduced which would require local governments to assume responsibility for failing or failed community sewer systems. That bill did not pass. However, the issue remains. Those effected demand correction, not untypically to local governments, of the failing community systems. This becomes particularly critical when the local health department threatens or considers condemning the residences involved because of the failing community system. In a sense the appeal of those effected is not unreasonable in that the local government has approved the use of the community system even though the actual system itself is approved by the Environmental Management Commission. Therefore, if the • 081 Board of Commissioners Page Two April 2, 1987 County is going to, as a matter of policy, permit community sewer systems some provision is necessary to, as far as practicable, insure their continued operation. Enclosed is House Bill 94 introduced on February 25, 1987 before the General Assembly of North Carolina by Representative Hackney and others. This bill attempts to address the issue raised here by requiring the applicant to furnish a performance bond. This bill, if enacted into law, will depend on rules promulgated by the Environmental Management Commission. If adopted the law would become effective October 1, 1987. A threshhold question for the Board ' s o consideration is whether this issue should be determined in the context of this subdivision request or as a policy matter with specific input from the staff and the Planning Board. If the Board elects to 0 approve the Wolfe Property subdivision with a community system, the manager's recommendation concerning the developer 's responsibility to fund an operating maintenance budget of a homeowner 's association seems critical. If the Board goes this route, it will be a Board decision to determine the amount of the fund by o establishing the number of years of maintenance which a should be provided for in the fund. Eno River Estates Subdivision. The developer proposes 27 lots to be located on approximately 81 acres of land with a private road. Although the roads ° are to be constructed to North Carolina DOT standards for a residential subdivision, there will be a private dedication only. Under the County's private road scheme, the property owners will become responsible for the maintenance of these roads until and if a public dedication is made and maintenance is assumed by North Carolina DOT. There is also the matter of the maintenance responsibility and the capital fund of the bridge crossing the Eno River. Under the County' s Subdivision Regulations, in the case of public dedications accompanied by construction to North Carolina DOT standards, the developer commits to maintaining the roads until such time as the maintenance responsibility is assumed by NC DOT. There is therefore a significant difference in the treatment of private and public roads in the County other than the difference in the road construction standards. Furthermore, I have serious questions about whether or not this subdivision plan satisfies the Subdivision Regulations' requirements for a private road. The Board 082 Board of Commissioners Page Three April 2, 1987 should perform the analysis called for in the Subdivision Regulations before approving this subdivision as a private road subdivision. Very truly yours, ,0' ` / G- •ffre Gledhill GEG/lsg Enclosure xc: Marvin Collins Barry Jacobs o Ken Thompson 9 e ui n.' x W 0 O T z O Ui w U U C1 0 x 0 o 083 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CA.ROLENA SESSION 1987 H 1 HOUSE BILL 94 Short Title: Treatment works permit/bond. (Public) Sponsors: Representatives Hackney; Holt, Colton, Fletcher, Barnes, Bruce Ethridge, Easterling, Buchanan. Referred to: Judiciary III. February 25, 1987 1 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 2 AN ACT TO REQUIRE A BOND OR OTHER COLLATERAL AS A 3 CONDITION TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF TREATMENT 4 WORKS. 5 The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 6 Section 1. G.S. 143-215.1 is amended by inserting a new subsection to 7 read: 8 "(d2) Bond or other Collateral Required. This subsection applies only to 9 applicants, other than a unit of State or local government, who apply for a permit or 10 renewal of a permit under subsection(c) or (d) to operate treatment works serving 11 three or more units used for residential purposes; two or more units used as offices or 12 for business, industrial, or commercial purposes; or two or more units used for a 13 combination of the above purposes. 14 The Commission may not issue or renew a permit under subsection (c) or (d) 15 unless the applicant has filed a bond, other collateral, or a written agreement 16 approved by the Commission, as required below. An applicant shall furnish a bond 17 in an amount of not less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) nor more than two ' 18 hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). • 084 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 1 The Commission shall determine the amount of the bond in each case in 2 accordance with rules promulgated by the Commission. The bond shall be 3 conditioned on compliance with this Article and the terms of the permit, shall be 4 payable to the State, shall be in a form acceptable to the Commission, and shall be 5 secured by: a corporate surety; a pledge of obligations of the federal government, the 6 State, or a political subdivision of the State; a cash deposit; or any other negotiable 7 security acceptable to the Commission. The applicant may file a separate bond for 8 each permit or a blanket bond for all permits to which this subsection applies. 9 The applicant shall maintain the bond at the amount determined by the 10 Commission. A blanket bond shall be maintained at the amount determined by the 11 commission until the expiration of all permits covered. If an applicant violates the 12 term of a permit to which this subsection applies, the Commission may reexamine the 13 bond amount to determine whether it should be increased. If, upon violation of a 14 permit term by an applicant the Commission takes any of the actions listed below, the 15 applicant shall immediately furnish the additional collateral needed to satisfy the 16 bond requirement as determined by the Commission: 17 (1) reexamines the bond and determines that the original amount of 18 the bond should be increased; or 19 (2) uses either a portion of the bond or the full amount of the bond to 20 take corrective action to remedy the violation; or 21 (3) increases the amount of the bond and uses all or part of the bond 22 to take corrective action as provided above. 23 In lieu of a bond as provided above, an applicant may enter into a written 24 operational agreement with the city or county in which the treatment works are 25 located. The agreement shall state that the applicant will not file a bond with the 26 Commission to secure the treatment works' compliance with this Article and the 27 terms of the permit. The agreement shall provide that if the Commission finds that 28 the applicant has violated the terms of the permit or the provisions of this Article and 29 notifies the city or county in writing to assume responsibility for the treatment works, 30 the city or county, as appropriate, shall assume maintenance, operational, and 31 financial responsibility for the treatment works. No permit may be issued until the 32 agreement is approved by the Commission. 33 Failure by an applicant to satisfy the terms of the permit or provisions of this 34 Article shall result in action on the bond or agreement by the Commission. The �I 35 proceeds from any action taken on a bond by the Commission shall be used to bring t:+ `� Page 2 House Bill 94 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 ti 1 treatment works back into compliance with the terms of the perry t and the 2 provisions of this Article. 3 An applicant is liable for expenses incurred by the Commission or by a city or 4 county which exceed the amount of the bond furnished by the applicant and which 5 are the result of an applicant's failure to comply with the permit terms or the 6 provisions of this Article." 7 Sec. 2. This act shall become effective October 1, 1987. House Bill 94 Page 3 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS U8 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April C. 1987 Action Agenda SUBJECT: WOODBROOKE SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY Item # 44. DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _ X _ No Attachment( s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Staff Memo Checklist Preliminary Plat Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve the Preliminary Plan for Woodbrooke Subdivision . BACKGROUND: The proposed cluster subdivision is located partly in Chapel Hill Township and partly in Bingham Township. The property is located at the end of Meadow Lane (SR 1195) , and the applicant proposes to extend this State road to serve the subdivision. The property is zoned RB (Rural Buffer) . It is located in the University Lake Watershed and is also designated as Rural Buffer in the Land Use Plan . The property contains 27 .32 acres. The proposed subdivision will contain 12 lots with an average size of 1 .5 acres. The overall density for the development is one dwelling per 2. 1 acres, excluding rights-of-way. All applicable agencies have reviewed and commented on the application . The Subdivision Regulations require at least 20% of the gross land area to be designated as common open space. The applicant has designated 44% of the land area for this purpose - 8. 55 acres to be dedicated to the County, and 3.43 acres designated as common open space. The Recreation and Parks Department recommends that the 8 .55 acres on the west side of the tract be accepted by the County for recreation and park purposes. The Planning Board recommends approval . R 087 RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions : 1 . A septic line easement for lot #8 must be provided through lot 7 into the dedicated open space area as required by the Health Department. The Recreation and Parks Director has indicated no difficulty with this arrangement. 2. A homeowners association should be established to maintain the common area. An optional approach would be to donate the land to the Triangle Land Conservancy. That organization has indicated an interest in the proposal and is willing to meet with the applicant. The Planning Director further recommends that lots 1 , 2, 9, 10 and 11 be revised to have an area of at least 43, 560 square feet in each lot. The cluster provisions permit lot size reductions of no more than one-half the required minimum lot size (two acres) . PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ( INK ONLY) . ' . 6 11/85- APnXCATION FOR SUBQIVTStGN• APPROVAL ORANGE COUNTY - DOTE; August 28, 1986 • • SUBDIVISION NAME: = WODDBROOKE LQCATI ON: Lot & 78 Page 21 Bingman Township OWNER/DEVELOPER:. Phoenix Construction Corp. of Fla. Inc. D.B.A. Construction Resources - ADDRESS:. 106B E. main Street TELEPHONE Na . : ) 67-51-5-9 Carrboro, North Carolina 27510 • AGENT/CONTACT: Thomas 'Dwyer ..0 TELEPHONE NO . : 967-5159 t Tom Starnes • A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Map p 9 21 Bluck NCR Latta] Township Aingham Zoning District(s] Chapel Hill Township/Bingham Township Total. Number of Acres : 27.32 acres Phases:Phases. Development Total. Number of Lots: _2. Average Lot Size: 15 ac.Minimum Lot Size 1ac- Number/Type of Structu.res.: (existing] • N/A _,(proposed] 9 houses Lineal Feet in Streets:. 1 .39n Acres in Open Space 13.38 Water Supply: Pub Lic(ap eel fy] Community X Zndivi due L Wastewater Disposal:, Pub Lic(epecify] Community. X�.„Individuat Sahao L District: Chapel Hill City Fi re. District : General. Land Uses: in Area: single family dwelling Critical Areas: XX stream/dreinagewaya flood prone areas `.... University Lake watershed(specify] historic altasl- ather(expLain], • • 3 . ALL plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two— hundred feet (1 "=2001 1 and. no Larger than one inch equaLs fifty feet (1 "=-30 ' 1 and must contain the following information: X ''�`' subdivision news X �` •� nuo of 4m+sr(sl bwi ldfng eepfeeli lines :eck items • ".1 name• of surveyor. engineer or Layout attam ■r typical tat X r Land. planner X h, )mpleted) ' (tlttul Prellslnsry Plan �'* seining end p,, uttd sise, amnia, north arrow (forth at `'�� rondo Idtataegs. u=tlltlrs. X sx tap of +epl X . existing, prvpased end data (including revleton dorsal! kw sdjaialnp rights-or-way toonshtp, tae sap-btoak+iot t : including imensions and X rsfersnawn iii y boundary described with '. street names end stet" road Y bearing= and distances �. N� misting and propound ..C. totwL earssgr of the treat utl Lttiee. including nft end aereeg• of Lots, including W hw type, sizes, and excluding area within '+ fur hydrants. valves and X rlyhss-ef-tar X �'k•:., manholes . control corner - existing end proposed culvert • proposed lot Linea stth including sits* and :' dlmrnslona X r`'. g grease 4a Lot numbers w+ �'' typical street cram-sea#ions ;.•:r•., ¢ > s::a�ti and intersection- details S z phasing Linea is ,. xt0 topography is tan foot (101 •:;.y, of design and width N/A # of trevelwsy sad shdutdars X . intervals ; :. horizontal ally and aster bodies. screens, flood ;'.- general curve date (public X •;c��, way and ftaodplaine { fi' rosdal ••`• • stream buffers and notation :• • : permanent features such se ,.. Indicating reatriated. _ buildings, =====arise. X dmvslopeapt potential X historic L1u+dmrrks. • �� tama+hlpe corporate and extra- adjoining Lot c.,. tsrritarlal punning f ed ainla layout Jurisdiction Lines which g ion*property `;' owners M4 subdivision* '• � property. croe+ the X " ! Locution and sits of NA in psraels dadtouted for pubtfe men of re+ervrd . .L s Loa=the and sits of Late of rtstriated development X ;NA notation on plat regarding aces p+tam=tsl and x..;.y utormeeter sanegeeent plan Indtsnting provision for control of the% 089 • . OTHER' SUBMITTAL REO.UTAEI4ENTS: 1 . Twenty—six (28) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Orange County Tax leap (one copy with' t: parcels involved clearly marked] . 3. Where municipal. or OWASA saner is not ' avaitable,. a latter trom the ran County Health Department certifying the proposed wastewater syste ti each lot. v , the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing .application is complete a aconite. I understand that a 1210.00 'fee (subdivisions of i5 tote or Lee ►r a $370.00 fee (subdivisions of IS lots or morel is due at the time 1ppLication . A $3.00 per Lot fee is due at the time the final pot a resented for recordation . • 'jab - :F'PLICANT 'S SIGHAT.t1RE • OW ER IS SIGNAT 'RE Syz.?(r 6 )ATE • • DATE • • FEES: Amount �L1w oa Date Paid -/3-2(1-$6 Receipt -(09 • • • WOODBROOKE SUBDIVISION 090 11/85 ORANGE COUNTY CERTIFICATION AND APPROVALS - PRELIMINARY PLAT Eddie Kirk STAFF ASSIGNMENT: 6-30-86 7-09-86 SKETCH PLAN: Received Reviewed PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 8- 29-86 Reviewed 9-03-86 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 10` 10-86 Reviewed NCDOT: DATE 1- 26-87 CERTIFICATION Recommendation SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel HiII -Carrboro) : DATE 3-4-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 1-5..87 Certification Health Department OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council 9-20- 86, 10-3-86,3-4-87Date) Carrboro Fire Department (Date) Chapel Hill .,(Date) Carrboro (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other -Erosion Control 9- 10-86 (Date) -Recreation 9-20-86 (Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date _ Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial 091 CONSTRUCTION RESOURCES 106B East Main Street Carrboro, North Carolina 27510 (919) 967-5159 WOODBROOKE SUBDIVISION ANALYSIS 1) Woodbrooke Subdivision is a cluster development designed to preserve the natural beauty of the surrounding land while allowing an average of approx- imately one acre for each of the twelve proposed lots for the single family dwellings to be built on. The remaining 12.75 acres would be designated open space of which approximately 8.55 acres is to be publicly dedicated. 2) The connected subdivision (Rollingwood) is in the process of being paved. Woodbrooke will maintain a consistancy with the neighborhood and add aesthetics through the preservation and beauty of the natural woods sur- rounding the proposed lots. 3) Slopes 7 - 15%: slopes range from 4% to 8% (a small area of 8% slope exists in the public use area). 4) Slopes 15% and greater: N/A. 5) Vegetation: 27.32 acres is heavily wooded with natural ground cover. 6) Trees: East and west side of property has small to large hardwoods and will be open space area; middle of property has small to medium pine and will be cluster area. 7) Significant trees: Large oak tree at the northwest corner of property and large beech tree on east side of property at creek. Both trees are located in the open space areas. 8) Drainage and waterways: Drainage area located on west side of property and creek located on east side of property. Both drainage and creek is located in open space area. 9) Floodplains: N/A. 10) Rock outcroppings: N/A. 11) Scenic vistas: N/A. 12) Soils with limitation: Lots 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 will need low pressure wastewater system. 13) Applicant requests that the 8.55 acre open space be recognized as an area of woods preservation, to be preserved and protected by the Orange County Parks and Recreation Department. �. �lr�� •N �J ( 1 1sr /$ w ' \ . 0 01 I r.) 8 mm m W v 'a O r. . ,. , 0 I •. 0. GI 0 r•y— N I o a 7 0 \\Is , - LITTLE CREE FARM I ..... :r.. 8I RNAM WO.ODh 4. 0. \ n ./ft..\\\ I -IO .A to et -� raw i ,WDM r 9 y • f..`"` /r/. . . = HAM ■ N• O , ,.-:i'L' i I> G . 4. n / r .� -A ....,co , - ': -1 -, )3 g ' N rq A i, . -. 1 io • • � I n N /,/ \ . \ . - , .'''. ' 113 0 • •W � �i I I I"1 fh .12 * •II • V• irn I o w / � 2 � Z `'o n / /o . ii•• - F I fo/ / -•- r a , o n • 04 / /4 / �S . r = m 2 ..... * CM '-� 0 m / / ' 00 GI n CD C cp 0 M i , , � . 1 \v"n cc, \� / / (D ‘ -1, 0 210: %. (0 \ Q .D w / No \ CD U) 19 3 % g 0 4. 4. .. -, P"1---...1 7 ___ 09a fif 11%, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G. MARTIN January 26, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E. HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,PE. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Mr. Marvin Collins Orange County Planning Department. 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Preliminary Plan - Woodbrooke Subdivision Off SR 1195, Meadow Lane Dear Mr. Collins: This is to advise that we are giving approval for the preliminary plan for the above development. Final approval will be pending approval of the construc- t-ion plan. If there are any questions, please advise. Yours very truly, /7 p . .."7-----2 �• (,... . Mills ISTRICT ENGINEER JMM/JBH:jbh - cc: Mr. Dale D. Faulkner An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 094 ' ���? Oraii P (I:County tcnrtutttn ant NarkS Department 300 West Tryon Street , Uit' �U +.- ;94*''"c r HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Life.Be in it. Mary Anne Black, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Mary Anne. Black i DATE: March 4, 1987 RE: Courtesy Review — Woodbrooke Subdivision (AKA Forest Park Subdivision) Upon review of the preliminary plan for the proposed Woodbrooke Subdivision (AKA Forest Park Subdivision) I would offer the following staff comments: 1. Please review the attached two (2) memorandums for previous comments offered by both this department and the Recreation & Parks Advisory Council concerning this proposed subdivision. 2. Specifically please note the fourth paragraph of the September 20 memorandum outlining my recommendations. I would still recommend that the portion of the property designated as "Dedicated Open Space (for public use)" be accepted by the County for recreation and park purposes. This parcel has the potential to be expanded by the County westward to the nearby proposed park/greenway sites. The Planning Committee of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council will meet to discuss this preliminary plan before the Council's April 7th meeting. I will forward any comments the Council members may have immediately to you. MAB/pbl Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 Area Code 919 4''= 0 9 (1rang Q aunty eecr ruttun anb ilark i Department Nat . C °1111�<�`iy. 300 West Tryon Street HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 life.Be in it. Mary Anne Black, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, P1 laer FROM: Mary Anne Bled. 71113 DATE: September 20, : :. 36 RE: Courtesy Revic: Forest Park Subdivision Upon review of the pre iminary plan for the proposed Fo::est Park Subdivision, the following comments from a recreation and park persp.ctive are rendered. I have "walked" the sLDject property and have viewed both parcels designated as "Dedicated Orange County Parks and Recreation". For 1,,.1rposes of this memo, I will refer to the t.. ; main areas designated as "Dedic _;:ed" as the "eastern" and "western" portions . I am most pleased with the developer's desire to "preserve (that portion of) the land" not designat :41 for his subdivision developmen._. Other than two small areas, neither t.'.e eastern nor western portions designated for dedi- cation lies in the JPA's Resource Protection Area, nor i , there a potential park or greenway deli. ated on the site in the adopted Land Use Plan. There is, however, a potent: .1 park site and greenway design... _d near-by (northwest of the subject proper. ). My recommendation is c at the western portion be accepted by the County for • . recreation and park pt:-poses in that this parcel has th potential to be expanded by the County westward to the proposed park/gr.._nway sites. Access to this parcel should be from the end of the proposed cLi-de-sac. The eastern portion is beautiful tract, bounded on it east side by a small stream. Howeve., in that this stream is not designated on the adopted Land Use Plan as paten -dal greenway, nor does it in my opinion have the potential for expansic.! that the western portion does, I would not recommend accepting this easter.- parcel for recreation and park p:- poses. This then would negate the need 'vr the two 30' "connector paths" .ndicated on the preliminary plan along he north and south boundaries -of the property. Thank you for the oppc-cunity to provide these staff corments. I anticipate bringing this prelimi.. ry plan before the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council's "Pl nning Sub-Committee" before October 10, 1986 and will forward their comments. if any, immediately to you. MA8/pbl CC: Lorraine Parker, C-.air, Recreation & Parks Advisory Council Hillsborough, 732.9301 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 Area Code 919 c c (orange IuuntU Recreation and Farms Dep rtnen>D 9 6 ��Its- 300 West Tryon Street ' HILLSBOROUGH. N.C. 27278 ]Ife.Be Ul lt. 4e. es Mary Anne Black, Director MEMORANDUM T0: Eddie Kirk, Phh. .ner - FROM: Mary Anne Black lins DATE: October 3, 198€ RE: Forest Park St. - ivision The Planning Committer- of the Orange County Recreatio: and Parks Advisory Council met yesterday to discuss the Forest Park Sul.'ivision. All four members (Hurow, Parker . Pelland, Ward) were in attendance. The Committee expres. ' its delight that a developer ar:aared so concerned about the land and it .. preservation. The Committee discussed the property at length and concluded that they needed to know mc:e about what the developer was going to do (as prompted by your September 29 letter to him) in terms of (a) req. asting approval as a "cluster development", (b) changing lot sizes, an (c) creating more or less lots. The Committee would 1 a to see the developer's revised plan so that they may make a more infor :d decision and recommendation. t am sure that the Committee will call . special meeting to discuss and review the revised plan so that the de .toper is not delayed in any ';ay because of the recreation and parks c.- irtesy review. Please forward the rt -ised plan to me as soon as it is received by your office so that I may schedule another Planning Committe meeting before the October 20th Planning --.yard meeting. MAB/pbl CC: Kani Hurow Alice Pelland Richard Ward Lorraine Parker • Hillsborough, 732-936. • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-45C. - Mebane, 227-2032 Area Code 919 L., , • g. Woodbrooke (Preliminary Plat - Chapel Hill Township) 097 Presentation by Eddie Kirk . Kirk indicated this plat was previously presented as Forest Park. The proposed cluster subdivision is located partly in Chapel Hill Township and partly in Bingham Township. The property is located at the end of Meadow Lane (SR 1195) , and the applicant proposes to extend this State road to serve the subdivision. The property is zoned RB (Rural Buffer) . It is located in the University Lake Watershed and is also designated as Rural Buffer in the Land Use Plan. The property contains 26.62 acres. The proposed subdivision will contain 12 lots with an average size of 1 .5 acres. The overall density for the development is one dwelling per .2.2 acres. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Recreation and Parks Department recommends that the 8.55 acres on the west side of the tract be accepted by the County for recreation and park purposes. The Planning Staff recommends' approval subject to the following condition : 1 . A septic line easement for lot #8 must be provided through lot 7 into the dedicated open space area as required by the Health Department. The Recreation and Parks Director has Indicated no difficulty with this arrangement. Jacobs asked if this subdivision is subject to courtesy review under the Joint Planning Agreement. Kirk responded that Carrboro had reviewed the plan when it was presented as Forest Park and indicated the desire for a public road. Jacobs also asked about the recommendation from the Recreation and Parks Director. Collins responded that the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board has recommended that payment- In-Iieu be accepted In lieu of dedication of the 8.55 acres. Collins continued that this will be reviewed by the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board again since this area would be the beginning of a park which would have future access to the greenways system. r " 098 Jacobs asked that a condition be added for a Homeowners ' Association to maintain the common open space. MOTION: Best moved approval with the staff condition and the condition added by Jacobs. Seconded by Kramer. VOTE: 8 in favor. 2 oposed (Margison, Hubbard - opposed to develop- ment within the watershed ) . ORANGE COUNTY 099 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6 , 1987 Action enda Item # SUBJECT: FIVE FORKS SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes .X( _ No Attachment( s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Checklist Preliminary Plat Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve the Preliminary Plan for Five Forks Subdivision . BACKGROUND: The property is located in Bingham Township on Dodsons Crossroads South ( SR 1102) . It is a 43. 1 acre tract with seven lots proposed. A common area jointly owned by all lot owners is proposed. The average lot size is 1 .54 acres . Private "Class B" roads ( Five Forks Road and Five Forks Place) are proposed to serve the development. The property is zoned R-1 and designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan . All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Planning Board recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions : 1 . Addition of vicinity map to plat; and 2. Addition of typical flare intersection detail with state road. r1.cnac. airs-: uK rf$WI LINK ONLY) • 11/ 5 100 A PI L Z o y A ORANGE COyNfl . DATE: 1-25-87 SUBDIVISION NAME:. : Five Forks LOCATION: _ State Road 1102, 2 miles north of NC 54 OWNER/OEVELQPER-:• _ Cross Road Creek Associates ADDRESS: , 204 Providence Rd. TELEPHONE NO. : 493-3857 thape-i. Hilr, NC 4)514' AGENT/CONTACT: , Scott Rines TELEPHONE NO . : _ Same game A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Map 21 Block 13 Lat(s) _ Township Bingham Zoning District(s) : Total Number of Acres: 43. 1 Phases: 1 Total Number of Lots; ___7_,_ Average. Lot Size:1.5aCr.Mieiwum Lot Si Ze I.L.12Sfes Number/Type of Structures: (ex _ None ,(proposed] Lineal Feet in Streets:. ,1 e9n , Acres in Open Space 7 2 Water Supply:, • Public(specify) I Community Individual• Wastewater Disposal: ,Pub tf c(apeci fy] , Community �Indi vi dua L school. District: , Orange county Firs District: rapA ( -P General Land Uses in Area: _D»,l Re. irig.ntiAl/Wnnrilnri , Critical Areas: stream/drainagerays flood prone areas vaterehed(specify] ��.historic sites. other(exp laf n]., MnnFa • B. ALL pLats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equaLs two- hundred feet (1 "1120013 and. no Larger than one inch equals fifty feet. (1 "=50 ' ) and must contain the following information : " subdivision no m, i:=. bni Ldl.g setback linos Haar of ouwer(sl • by netostrn or typical Lan iec( item ..4., ": isms- of sarveyar. englsaar or ' Wyse' p 1 lug planner existing astl )m feted) * (title1 Prrlts/Carr Pion '� proposed sleeve �4. '.-4 aoele, aortas arrow (Morse et nonce (drelnage, Yslllstre, sap of mop/ roads. aib.l .- saluting. proposed and .. dote Ilsoleding revision damsel"'� s'stikr• adjoining rlghsswf—esy ',forenoon- e;. :�p�e/a4l'•lot �. 1nsL d1ng dlrnweica■ and S r . boundary dssoribed with street canna and 'ipso road bearing' sad si aauwaea • : numbers . :-- • tote/ aorargr of the Crass �' .��°. utimitie sad proposed la sad 'erases of lass, lnoladia "••°F utilities. including sod aasLading area sitain g # type. t., s r/ghsa•efwrr ''� Aydraatw. valves and $.'. control earner ./ w�'"aLas' ' '• proposed Lot Uses w1 tie +::: Gaining sad propasad culvert dimensions lselatlisg *lase was grease Las ambers +� . • typical Meet arose—suosione :..-U phasing Limes . cad /nsereaestas assails sapagrwpay It saw foss I101 4} ::: installing design and eldt5 / ^.s{`' taterre/a N sf treveloey sea aho,Lders .4G,. ester bodies. asrsuwa. flood— a. herl=nowt allgasras and :;<.c>y general aurae dose (Swells say Sad floaaplaias t: rosdel p camass baffars sod aesasto 44: pinStsasing restricted PiLdisgt feature" seat s■ `- derslepsensfia 11 1. oosaterles, /� r.e potential • hi"sods Wedmorxa. %• sawsea/p. carparese and sxtre• adjoinin g .: • territorial plawnisg names ofadjoining propersya 4Jwriedisston lanes veto* •enema sad subdivisions y cross she property .JC •• Wootton sod a1de of morsel," dadlOssd for pebita use or reserved ':' • in *Gowan �. Logotlon and atsa of laps of reetrlotod devslapmsat Potential. Sod J ': notiasion an plat rsgsrdiag area 4. iwg ssermeatar sensgaseet plan isdlsastag provision for cbasrol of tae fires 1/2 nag of runoff from tapers/sus Surfsaea 10.E C. OTHER SUBMITTAL. REQUIREMENTS: 1 . Twenty—six (28) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Grange County Tax map (one copy with tae parcels involved clearly marked] . 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not eves Lab le, a Latter fro= the Cr nge County Health Deportment certifying the proposed wastewater system for each Lot. I, the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing appLication is accurate. I understand that e_ $210 pp complete and . or a $370.00 fee (subdivisions of 18 Lots f fee (subdivisions i ison due f at lots the. time of application. A $5.00 per Lot fee is due at the time the final plat is presented for recordation .. .t.��c C. APPLICANTS SIGNATURE GraEA s. s SUTURE 00/(7 / .30S'7 DATE DATE • FEES: amount 2/0.10 Date Paid 10_ P7 Receipt /2402 • , 102 FIVE FORKS SUBDIVISION 11/85 PIAMELMIX I STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 11-18-86 Reviewed 11-26-86 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 1-30-87 Reviewed 2-4-87 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 2-12-87 Reviewed 2-18-87 NCDOT: DATE 2-17-87 CERTIFICATION Mike Mills SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel Hill-Carrboro) : DATE 2-3-87 CERTIFICATION UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 3-4-87 Cert i f scat ion Health Department OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council (Date) Carrboro Fire Department _(Date) Chapel Hill _(Date) Carrboro (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other _(Date) Erosion Control 2-9-87 .(Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval _ Approval with Conditions Denial N � �� 103 i/ give Forks i! Apr hicA ht. : Scott Hii es 1/ W (WESTER 1/ � - ZonrH9 : R- t • // $ LUP Des'sn a flora : .Rural Residehf:41 i . / ' - Sc a/e : la - ina 1 • N - Iri: I I O.5AC. ��! I II ( _ I I _fa. I1 39.8 01' II i . . . . . . .. z... .. . . . ti . i •_ .. , . - . - -. • ;-:-.: :- - . ---. ,� \1 It II I 11 13 , 79 I I , , • 4 ti II _) II r 39.99AG. 41.51 AC. I 1 911 ii 0 22 i 1 , co I I - o) 900 000 —-- 80—— 74015 — i p2p 1 1 III I 25.778 AC. I d 1 I II h i - cm I ll II 104 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 a� Idl' n�i t` MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Officer SUBJECT: Stormwater Management Plan for Five Forks Subdivision DATE: February 9, 1987 This subdivision meets the Ordinance requirements by using large lots, developing only a portion of the property, retain- ing a buffer of vegetation around each lot to filter and absorb runoff, and using a gravel road and grassed swales along it. This subdivision meets the Ordinance requirements. o 105 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN February 17, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E.HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,P.E. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Mr. Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Preliminary Plan For Sunnyfield Subdivision and Five Forks Subdivision Off SR 1102 (Dodsons Crossroads) Dear Mr. Kirk: In response to your letter of February 3, 1987, I have reviewed the preliminary plans for the "Sunnyfield" and "Five Forks" Subdivisions. Since the proposed roads are private Class "B" roads and there are no plans to add these roads to the State road maintenance system, they will be considered driveways, therefore, requiring a driveway permit. Please submit the required permits for each subdivision accompanied by a fifty ($50.00) dollar check to cover inspection fee to this office for approval. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact this office. Yours very truly, J M. Mills ISTRICT ENGINEER J1491/SPI:jbh An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • 106 f . Five Forks n p 6 (Preliminary Plat - Bingham Township) U] � W I ' LJ Presentation by Eddie Kirk . The property is located in Bingham Township on Dodsons Crossroads South (SR 1102) . It is a 43. 1 acre tract with seven lots proposed. A common area jointly owned by all lot owners is proposed. The average lot size Is 1 .54 acres. Private "Class B" roads (Five Forks Road and Five Forks Place) are proposed to serve the development. The property is zoned R-1 and designated Rural Residential 'in the Land Use Plan. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application . The Planning Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1 . Addition of vicinity map to plat; and 2. Addition of typical flare intersection detail with state road. Best asked that traffic counts be included In order that ongoing totals could be achieved. Pilkey asked how many acres are in the tract owned by the Swanks. Kirk responded twenty-five (25) acres. Szymik indicated that a preliminary plan is in process for the Swank property. MOTION: Best moved approval with staff conditions. Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: Unanimous. ORANGE COUNTY 107 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6, 1987 Act ion enda Item #( _ SUBJECT: SECTION ONE MEADOWS OF ENO - PRELIMINARY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _S._._ No Attachment(s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Checklist Preliminary Plat Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill -- 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve the Preliminary Plan for Section One Meadows of Eno. BACKGROUND: The property is located in Eno Township on Willett Road (SR 1568) . It is a 22.6 acre tract with nine lots proposed . The average lot size is 2.40 acres. The developer proposes a public road (Rapids Lane) built to State standards. The property is zoned R-1 and designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application . The Planning Board recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following condition : ( 1 ) The developer meet with the Director of the Orange County Recreation and Parks Department to discuss voluntary contribution of property fronting on the Eno River for public recreation purposes. 11/ S • • 108 ORANGE COUNT DATE: 030t87 SUBDIVISION NAME: MboiDOW5 OP k)4 LOCATION: ,OFF MILL T'( Rpm) (4R.I.R.b) ,gMO 'TWP. OWNER/DEVELOPER; -Xo1lm M. t..94%<,•51.• --.—i--------- ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO. : AGENT/CONTACT: ,�>1'T Llaid us v, 1:44. TELEPHONE NO. : 732-'(•21.L • A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Nap 2„4�. Block — Lot(s) 17115 Township s Zoning District(s) : Total Number of Acres: 22,1# Phases: I Total Number of Lots: _Q Average Lot Size: la__ Minimum Lot Size I.•.t. Nuabar/Type of Structures: Isxisting) _ NI)J.11- a(proposed)7.51)461-0- F�4MlGw Lineal Feat in Streets: , Itsla1 , Acres in Open Spada --" Mater Supply: Pub lla(spealfy) Community Individual Maeteiat•r Disposal:_ .Public(wpecify) Community .,,., . Individual School. District: _ Fire District: General. Land Uses in Ares: 4t slO p1T L Critical. Areas: l streae/dralnage,eys X flood prone areas watershed Ispecify) historic sites other(explain), B. ALL plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than . one inch equals two— hundred feat (.1 "=20011 and. no Larger than one inch aqua La fifty feat (1 "'m60' ) and must contain the following information: -.ass subdt.IIpI.s nese _. bui(diag setback tines :,% nose of ssemer(oJ by notation se syplost lot check items Z .%?.. rise rf surveyor, ewg/oser sr '•. layout completed) ✓ :10- lied p1...., ,l/ . .•:: aaissis, snd prepossd ease-. P ) .4. (WW1 Pretielsary piss "' snots (draftees, utilities, aerate, mortis sires (Owe es roads, •se.J ✓ tap of earl existing, proposed and J dots (in.t.dls■ re.lei.. daces' '.~ .`,_'2 teusstip, tek :"`.• aasosdiag r/Odsssaslour ',Carouses ♦lee'-let Iselyd/er a/eeastamr and bundery dews/bed sisb J ae et sow ems stets road beerier' sod distea.se ..f. •amembers tie wet :assess of the trees r and greenest hiding sad :erase of lotto iw•lud1. y`'k�P..",`•, typlltisoo including sad sasled/og arse slthiw g '� tydr. tat valves righted-say hydrsees. vulvae sad i ran wholes Seal's' earner amistts add _4, * proposed loi tines eith `� .ti;:r. 0 Orepesrd culvert N:. dldow•1oo• 4 twalodieg nixes and Oradeo ( ..AL typlost street •teas-srstlonr fir let •ushers :sf and In lob Waite •t5 'bogies time• c Inel*dimg design mad oldtb topography at tea feat (101 rf trevelu.y awe shoulders : is to burit.at•l atla•uoas and .. F. woe bodice. wow, ttsed■ suers/ curve date (poetic 0.' say end flosdpt.iws reseal • stress 'offers sad wes*tisw 'f • Indirottar rs'srlased pereewewe features seep er d bultdlsgeo °solitaries, sys/sprewi t Nsnntlol historic leadsork', swwabi p, adrp.rsss sad were- x :% tars/tenet passe/og adjoining let layout .so if enjoining property jer/1dirt/ee lime• *bleb 0*asre sad seadiv/etoae orose the prepsrty 4 lossttsa sod sine et parests dadis*esd for public Was er reserved Is assess ✓� • te•etiea sod site of lets of ruasr/sted ds.el.p..a petrnslsl sod iw oesottsn so plus rowdies we • steresetor ss+.gssowt plan IsdIs*stsg pas./sleet for central of the first 1/2 lneb of r*asff from Ieeeeelove turfs'.. (GRAY AREAS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) J w I C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: 109 1 . Twenty-six (20) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Orange County Tax map Iona copy with tax parcels involved clearly marked) . 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer I. not available, a Letter from the Grange County Health Department certifying the proposed wastewater system for each lot. I , the epplicent, hereby certify that the foregoing application Is complete and saaursts. I understand that • $210.00 fee (subdivisions of 15 Lots or lees) or a $370.00 fee (subdivisions of 1H lots or more) is due at the time of application . A $5.00 per Lot fee is due at the time the final plat I . presented for recordation . 01J` 51 APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ' NER'S SI :NATURE DATE DATE FEES: Amount � 66 Date Paid /- 36-0 Receipt 124109 • 110 SECTION ONE MEADOWS OF ENO 11/85 ORANGE_ C WNTX CERTIFICATIQtI AND APPRQVALS_ - PRELIMINARY PLAT STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 12-29-86 Reviewed 1-7-87 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 1-30-87 _ Reviewed 2-4-87 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 2-24-87 _ Reviewed 2-?5-87 NCDOT: DATE, 2-16-87 CERTIFICATION Mike Mills SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel Hill-Carrboro) : DATE 2-3-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 3-4-87 Certification Health Department OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council (Date) Carrboro Fire Department _(Date) Chapel Hill (Date) Carrboro (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other _ (Date) Erosion Control 9-9-11Z (Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial I Sectr'or Qne Meadows of tio App licame. : To Art M. bang .5r. ii I , . Zorin 1 LU P Des' n41i6n: Rural Pes'dehtial f • Scale ff....._ a . /1 46.6 AC. // i 0 .44E3 I'Pli // w 9 AC. 0131 // . e R• 11.888AC.. // r f `~ = =•= // i 1 / _�w_� �� _ � �/ ��,.� � 11.9 AC. 8765- :`° 20 _ 0267 - o CV "- ///�. g . 11.546AG.• 2.504 AC. o 9529 � I� 1 1 r` --.9 24 4 \ 37.6 1111111111111170-A7. 0 j / 0 (51 kCATHY WALLACE 31- 96 //4,1/ . i / :C--- 2 5 j . . . } . - . S • fi - - I f o... `..ii.� W vopimryormu PLAT REFERENCES . 7 HILL 27'54 RIVERBEND(FRANCES HILL) 35 -82 ' II -� COUNTY LI "^""'—AKA. RIVERLAND 29124 n ww rAAlrf1 1 JA-►w w_ __ . ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 112 UILLSBOROUGR NORTH CAROLINA 27278 1PP SI CO* MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Officer SUBJECT: Stormwater Management Plan for the Meadows of Eno DATE: February 9, 1987 The plan for this subdivision proposes to meet the Ordinance requirements by using large lots, limited additional impervi- ous surfaces on each lot, a buffer of vegetation around each lot to filter and absorb runoff, and grassed swales along the new road. The proposed plan meets the Ordinance requirements, IL. iius1i Ektih�� 15 lit 11.g 113 • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN March 6, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS; GOVERNOR . JAMES E. HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,P.E. • SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Mr. Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret, Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 • Subject.: Meadows of Eno Subdivision Off SR.. 1568 (Willett. Road) • Dear Mr. Kirk: This is to advise you that the preliminary plan of the above subject development has been approved. Please submit construction plan for drainage and final approval If this office can be of further assistance,, please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours very truly, • VIS. M. Mills. TRICT ENGINEER. JMM/SPI:jbh . • • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. 114 d. Meadows of Eno - ® J�?1 If(Preliminary Plat Eno Township) uu Presentat ion by Eddie Kirk . The property is located in Eno Township on Willett Road (SR 1568) . It is a 22.6 acre tract with nine lots proposed. The average lot size is 2.40 acres. The developer proposes a public road (Rapids Lane) built to State standards. The property is zoned R-1 and designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan. There is also a proposed pedestrian easement along the Eno River. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Planning Staff recommends approval . Kramer expressed appreciation for the larger lot sizes. MOTION: Best moved approval . Seconded by Eddleman. MOTION AMENDMENT: Hubbard offered the following to be added as a condition of approval : That the applicant meet with the Orange County Recreation Director and representatives of the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Board to discuss voluntary donation or the granting of an easement of lands in the 100-year floodplain. This condition of approval was accepted. VOTE: 9 in favor. 1 abstained (Yuhasz - due to professional con- flict of interest) . O R A N G E C O U N T Y 115 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6 . 1987 Actionnda Item #kj SUBJECT: SUNNYFIELD - PRELIMINARY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No Attachment(s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Checklist Preliminary Plat Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve the Preliminary Plan for Sunnyfield . BACKGROUND: The property is located in Bingham Township on Dodson ' s Crossroads (SR 1102) . The total tract size is 8 .0 acres with eight lots proposed . Lot access is provided by a "Class B" private road ( Sunnyfield Court) . The property is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan and zoned R-1 . All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Planning Board recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions: ( 1 ) Property lines being drawn to the centerline of the road on the final plat; and (2) All lots access restricted to Sunnyfield Court. • •�� . .. r wn rnlnt \11th UTII.T) L.+J = 3�VI1KC r GL � . �' L 11/8S D V p 11 2AN ,cOuN,]Y DATE: 11 . 2 I 7 SUBDIVISION NAME:. : So Inn y TFi el d LOCATION: OFF 76DSatiIS Z•�iz1t7-?) C Ross IZ011) (S2li0011.tor gt:3TfrZSECTioN) OF DAi fly lc/vickTi] OWNER/DEVELOPER:. J E F F Z El P. ? c Lo oulk.1 ADDRESS: (1- `')n - TELEPHONE Na. : 97.9- 7f31) - WA PFI i-h ILL t\\L 7 -2<7.1 AGENT/CONTACT: M TELEPHONE NO . : a A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tex Map C BLock Imo Lob[a] Township 131►UGqAfY1 Zoning District(s) : Total Number of Acreu: Phases: Tota L. Number of" Lots: '1 Avers Average Loot Size:go 021 Number/Type n y � Minipos Let Si zey�,,, ; spar of Structurea: [axisting] 0 (proposed) Lineal. Feat in Streets: ,51 Acres in Open Space 0 Water Supply:\A1CL L 5 Pub L1a[specify] ,.�Cammunit Wastewater Di sposa L:cc?NV. SCPTi Y .. ,Inds v1 due I� School District: Cp2��G �Publictspecify] �Cammunity Individual. E roor. i'r Fire District: Piece,1(;.c (2-,R1).11-: General. Land Uses In Area: AC-Ric vaI T. vcAl 4 Rf 5; t'7E NS ids CriticaL Areas:NC)tJ streaa/dra1nagewsye n;or.)G flood prone areas nit'ti e- watershed[specifyi historic sites other[ezpLainl. nsJA B. ALL p lata must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch aqua La two... hundred feet (1 ' 2O13' ) and. no Larger than one inch equals fifty feet [1 "u50' ] and must contain the foLLowing information : : •abdi vi si ow nogg bat tdlag ••tbmo4 Liao. • : oars of ardr(al by material PP typical tat leek I tams ease- of surveyor, isolates, or �c��' toad trimmer Al la layws mpleted) �': :' (tida) psellalaary plea A(A.; •s1•stng sod proposed s••r ...0 }:•`. : •sofa. north •,row• Iligrtt •t ,•'.� reads (drainage, Yt1 Lilies, �,: : �,. ., , 's' top of sepl .�s-. • reed'. .seal : oaf joioin, proposed and .1L des. (tadlading nv/etowPatio;� .j.‘-::-.'"-4 toessaip, tam esp•Sieeit■Los <f`+ toe Lodi riOns•�tlon. •$r reterswoas 1naLudlas alaMaiota sod y x-;'Y street oases end state road �_ ' bossdery d••oribed vita };.'. ✓it .: bearings sod d1ssesess " •.- smsistin total .arouse of taw trs•t +r . hAd. proposed LudIo1 end senesce :z utilising.sit. 1nolYdias �s� of l•!s. lnolodlnq •• t sod •estedleg area ■tttiw type, •s, valves rigbsa-gf-gsy {:� bydreLes. valve. end � >'�. � mongrel earner � aaamo Les — '`" proposed rob Lines Nth �:.}/°' existing sod proposed culvert ^;;. diw•a.ioa. tnatodiag alter sad grades :: Lot naaeor. 4`r tYPia.L street argr•■•rvtlgae , <• c sod 'nemesia, data'Ls ,•I� pheaisg Li.•e ingladiag design sad width • topsgrspmy us tea foss (101 x� iiii Intervals i.•• if treeslsey sod sees Wars ...La" eater bodies, streams, (toad . :r•••• herisaesal •ltgn"ens sad say .std ftaadplains ••-• mineral ours, data Ipvolta + stnse wafer. sad a.iattca y rerdel • • T► Peresoest restores evab e• .::.y. tlndlogti.q r•rsriesed bYltdia0a, oeaeta r/ e•.�y dsvldpasat p•tesslei • bi•torty laadaeres.t.nwoml P. aerp.rete sad astre+ .J ad�aising lot • l•yogs t.rrieortel ?leaning Jur1•Hestaa ltaoe eblah Doses of e •dJolnlag property „ '/ creme the property •.pare .04 a4bg1r1e/aq. µ Losetida sad sits of parcels dsdl..tsd far pmeiis use or reserved r+:.; 10 cosmos .. -1>', Loestimn lid size of tots of restrias.d dewlap"ost potential end -14 :?t` waterloo on pies regorging 6111114 eeereeeter •wages .s plat ladlsatiag pr.•isten for control of the first 1/2 loom of reset'? from tsp•ry/cum surfaces C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: 11 1 . Twenty—six (26) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Orange County Tax map (one copy with tax parcels involved clearly marked) . 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer Is not available, a latter from the Ora ge County Health Deportment certifying the proposed wastewater system or each Lat. I, the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate. I understand that a. $210.00 fee (subdivisions of 15 Lots or Lees) or a $370.00 fee (subdivisions of 16 Lots or more) 1s due at the time of application. A U.00 per Lot fee is due at the time the final plat is presented for recordation. l T. A CA1;'S SISNA/19,-/W-44-eD E orNE � , S, S LTURE E T�` FEES: Amount j/Q,�d , Date Paid /-1S—,t 7 Receipt F41 IA9 • , 118 SUNNYFIELD 11/85 ORANGE COUNTY CERTIFICATION AND APPROVALS - PRELIMINARY PLAT STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 8-�9-86 Reviewed 9-3-86 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 1-30-87 Reviewed 2-4-87 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received Reviewed NCDOT: DATE 2-17-87 CERTIFICATION , Mike Mills SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel HiII-Carrboro) : DATE 2-3-87 CERTIFICATION I1/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 2-10-87 Certification Health Department OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council (Date) Carrboro Fire Department (Date) Chapel Hill (Date) Carrboro (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other (Date) Erosion Control 2-9-87 _(Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval - Approval with Conditions Denial :=1;,__ , E . i-t9 Sunny 0 0 0 . Ai/pi/144/1f : 'refire/ PeIoq1çtu'h In I Zanih : 1?-1 . • t .. w LuP D esi hAfioh : 'tiara' Res;dehfial Spa/e : I a. 40 _ f - . _ � — N . - `.o / 1/ 0564 / CROROADS e681 1001 AC. / 2.01 ) // , 41 . 0 • Ifi /AC. // .• : : 31. ' - ./// L : 52?4ACC 8 / 790 2 // - //// / 2338 b 732 • / 1—_ _ .:- -- _� / 3.17. AC. e opt 411) c 14 / 1 ~ 0 a 2S5AC. 0383 C-1253- lY i // 23 144 ' 20 327AC - '1001:_ 2.61 AC. f / / 0168/ / 164 E lj // 0 .00• Q , 2.551 AC- 4 •..... „\o .«. 16 01 ir MAP 20A ->/ , ^•-•-— • 8g i8 •r /3 -- •1941 a 5923. II 1 4870 6 2.04 AC: L IT 92AC. 0- (EQUESTRIAN FARMS) I l \ -. .1 K // c" 7A . a 0 /I �• \ Q IB 9.2 // 5.25 AC. • 6403 • // 2604 \ 554 Ace 0 556AC. / \ ..• / -v 934 i 5.65 AC. n - ,�.= /� • •13 8 0;97 -- - - ► r - Q9) 1 \ �� // Qr�3 __- — a.e9 ac. -e 1 �/ 7.17 AC. 219A�` 1 // ie 2.02 '. lop 2 'C. 22 0 6 .1��� 12 I IA 1970 1L,3 AC. 21 3056 120 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 1:71 4• oft tali.' MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Officer SUBJECT: Sunny Field Subdivision Stormwater Manage Plan DATE: February 9, 1987 The plan proposes to meet the Ordinance requirements using a detention pond. Also, the large lot size, the grassed swales along the new road, the limited additional impervious surface added to each lot, and the buffer of undisturbed vegetation around each lot will contribute to filtering and absorbing runoff. The proposed plan meets the Ordinance requirements. 100(1A•bsi Etkided i ~ ' . ON5rEc. � 121 ONY�P. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN February 17, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E.'HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,P.E. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Mr. Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Preliminary Plan For Sunnyfield Subdivision and Five Forks Subdivision Off SR 1102 (Dodsons Crossroads) Dear Mr. Kirk: In response to your letter of February 3, 1987, I have reviewed the preliminary plans for the "Sunnyfield" and "Five Forks" Subdivisions. Since the proposed roads are private Class "B" roads and there are no plans to add these roads to the State road maintenance system, they will be considered driveways, therefore, requiring a driveway permit. Please submit the required permits for each subdivision accompanied by a fifty ($50.00) dollar check to cover inspection fee to this office for approval. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact this office. Yours very truly, J M. Mills 'STRICT ENGINEER JMM/SPI:jbh An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 11 122 0 c. Sunnyfield (Preliminary Plat - Bingham Township) Presentation by Eddie Kirk. The property is located in Bingham Township on Dodson ' s Crossroads (SR 1102) . The total tract size is 8.0 acres with eight lots proposed. Lot access is provided by a "Class B" private road (Sunnyfield Court) . The property is designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Plan and zoned R-1 . All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application . The Planning Staff recommends approval subject to property Iines being drawn to the centerline of the road on the final plat. Best asked that a condition be added to read: All driveways access to Sunnyfield Court. Pilkey asked about access for surrounding lands. Kirk responded indicating a cul -de-sac in previously subdivided property provides access. MOTION: Best moved approval with the two conditions. Seconded by Yuhasz. VOTE: Unanimous. ORANGE COUNTY 123 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6, 1987 Action enda Item 1 SUBJECT: JACK GATES SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X _ No Attachment( s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Checklist Preliminary Plat Certification Vicinity Map Agency Letters Preliminary Plan Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To approve the Preliminary Plan for the Jack Gates Subdivision . BACKGROUND: The property is located in Chapel Hill Townshipp on Jack Gates Lane, a private Class B road, off NC l ssy The total acreage involved is 25 . 16 acres with 3 lots proposed . The average lot size is 2.46 acres. The property is zoned Rural Buffer (RB) and is designated Rural Buffer in the Land Use Plan . All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Planning Board recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve with the following condition : - payment- in- lieu of dedication of land for Recreation Area in the amount of $447 . This is based on 4/35th x the assessed value per acre ( $3,920) . 11/4 12�y ' _ 0, e ; • `! _ , t DATE: I1/6184 SUBDIVISION NAME: ,774C/c• ►'r-EZ 51461/0,5/ON LOCATION: eN/4.4F4.. 4//CL TLU96 i 4.eA0vG - CZ. / d.0 . OWNER/DEVELOPER: T4CK 6a.7 ADDRESS: _Zr- // ,� x ? /3- TELEPHONE NO. : o NG 1? r✓&# . /1 fC 4- ,c.c. AGENT/CONTACT: °CIA o Eac',o 544-041e ; TELEPHONE NO , 95z-z- 157-0/ .77+/,Es acs wa . 4 og Ate130Ar' ia-Q., CHAAes.. Nici—� N.C. A . SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Map Blo k _ Lots) .1_,Q.,_ Township Zoning District(s) : A-4 Total Number of Acres: 76. . 1 , Phases: Iota L Number of Lots: Z Average Lot Size: Z41.-1.1 Minimum Lot Si za * Number/Type of Structures : (existing) Sh•ALc 0&.8/"4 (proposed) .84Psioc..4-.)re) Linea L Feat in Streets : /$one- Acres in Open Space Water Supply:, 6•01116r Pub lic(spool fyl Community ) _Individual Wastewater Disposel:•• Pub lic(spool fy3 Communit Individual Schoo L District: - 4e` /c i Fire District: * 0 Genera L Land Uses in Area : ... Critical Areas : ter$ r a /drelnagaueys flood prone areas watershed(specify) ja.historic sites other( plain) NA B . ALL p Lets must be submitted on sheet no ems L Ler than one inch aqua Ls two• hundred feet (1 "=2OO 1 1 and• no larger than one inch aqua is fifty feet (1 "=501 ) and must contain the following information : I VA amed/rleias ease sass of owssr(e! -� building eoros linos '`' name of surveyor, en ieusr or La notation or typical lot =heck items ,. . ro v layout Land planner existing and proposed arms zompleted) ' ':-: (title) Preliminary Plan d,�,� ■ants (drainage, uttlttise, :••'.4 seals. north arras (North st top of sap! r roads, gsa.l `"4'•( date (ins lading rsvlstoa dateal� •,"i;• adjoining prapde-d sad `'` ' twsaaht g 'dJolsing rlghto�fwwy p, tae sap-Oloah•Los :, including dimensions aid ✓ ",• references street apes and state road boundary described rich mumsars d bearings sod di stenos' .[„ ::. existing and proposed total ■swage of the tract i utilities, including M{:. end acreage of lots, inaludta ' and no Mime arse within g type. sizes. .a P100ts-rf.■ay . subs les� salvo sod r''• central corner •^dv., sainting sod proposed solvers 44. • prapssed Lot pees sith � Inc Lydia' sizes sod grades : .:: di see slone 3.',.:•'�� •••• • Lot numbers sod street erase■eoatlans `: Mooing him ` sad lnsersaetloa daeatle V' topography at tea foot (10) including design sod sloth ` ; inures Le of lravalaay sad shoulders : :,k ester bodies. serasms, flood- . general Illtem(pu sod ':. : ray sod floodploins • W. raidrsl Darr• date (pubLlo roads) 44. stress buffers sod notation :p...+• permanent features such as indicating restricted but Wings, oemstarlas, + ` development p lei historic landmarks, ✓ G+•+ toseship, corporals and antra- " � :•. :•. edJalaing lot Layout :• tarritorial planning awes of adjoining property 1.k Jurisdiction lines Woe owners sod Subdivisions •:�: cross the Prapsrty _4 , loostion and size of percale dediostad for pub Ito use or reserved �::::,. in common .1 Loeaticn end alts of lass of restricted development petiatiel sod �,%�Y��•'' sotailon in plat regarding sane .TG'- • 'tormenter oanegemens plan indicating first 1/g 1550 of runoff from Isterrlusp urfssee for samisen of the (GRAY AREAS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) C. OTHER SUBMITTAL RECUIREMENTS : 125 1 . Twenty-six (25) copies of the preliminary plat 2. Two full size copies of an Orange County Tax asap' (one . copy with tae parcels involved clearly marked) . 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available , a letter from the ' 0 snge County Health Deportment certifying the proposed wastewater system far each lot. I , the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate . I understand that a $210.00 fee (subdivisions of 15 lots or: less) or a $370.00 fee (subdivisions of 16 -Jots or more) is due at the time of application . A $5.00 per tot- fee is due_ at the time the final . plat is presented for recordation . 111-cte,,d • / /, . AP- LICANT 'S SIGNATURE OWNER 'S SIGNATURE . V/6/7.6 oj yf - . DATE DATE • % 9'R.4-iNc . R . 601-0.4e17 90Z. 9 - ö'9 g — /to 4 4444 ti • . • ti 2 FEES: Mioant 4106, co Date Paid I L $ r /7 (o Receipt 1 • 126 JACK GATES SUBDIVISION 11/85 ORANGE COUNTY CERTIFICATION }AND APPROVALS - PRELIMINARY PLAT STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Eddie Kirk SKETCH PLAN: Received 11-17-86 Reviewed 11-26-86 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 1-30-87 _ Reviewed 2-4-87 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received Reviewed NCDOT: DATE 2'4-87 CERTIFICATION SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel HiII-Carrboro) : DATE 2-3-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsborough/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE 2- 87 Certification Health F23-Department OTHER: Recreation Advisory Council 2-23-87 (Date) Carrboro Fire Department (Date) Chapel Hill (Date) Carrboro 3-6-d7 (Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other (Date) Erosion Control 3-2-87 (Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Date Approval Approval with Conditions Denial Yn .4.?"_. . \ ii . , . ., . .......................,r.... ..1 !--.'"wafti. —. 1 127 i . . Tick Gates Suddivi$iay, T , Appi eanf : Tames- Ha//AAd r 4.65 A+ ' . zah/y,j : Rural Buffer i f- LUP Zesiina /ah : R urai au�fcr . University LaKe WS'c ched Sca►!e : is. µpp 1 P N - 0 . �'`.. N. -- olle ( 7r 4q' 4914 1.01.. . .69 88 . iT- � ^^ 2.59AC. • • 1643 ff —` 40 Al)Ir0.4, . i• _ • _.may-: _ .. .. �- 5.69 AC. 2F''.81 AC. • •9�iA1 / los 2a3 ac~— 7`- 42x6 . 5•• vrae, 7930 (1 6967 y cl . fl lac ' z 16A // r _ ;' ` 4.9. AC,, . - 0 . 1777 // 8938 .__ 0 / , etH •-., � AI 19.5 AC. ��SS7r� v.ID AC. , 6.42 AC , / r /'/! 1 AC 411) CAL. ; , o) • ' •z V, t rr 4376 ' / %/ I AC • V P Ir11B. N, , 1 � Qom. ..... C I I AC. aZ 23.IOAC' 9086 , ', 4011 2168 r 2 AC • • 6236 .I ; Vi s . !/ \22 • , I K 000.0111Reen, ..I � 2T� DISTRICT � . 1 r M SEE '/ 76AC 7.nnaPBIZE , � s►N MAP 1128 — ---- JEFF ATWATER 17.x3 (AIWATER 1r _ - .� `_ y ,.,r% 17C r� / '"~ 'I 128 N Orange alountU itecreatinn ani Parks Department - -� 300 West Tryon Street HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 life.Be in it. Mary Anne Black, Director MEMORANDUM TD: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Mary Anne Black'7inS DATE: February 23, 1987 RE: Courtesy Review — Jack Gates Subdivision Upon review of the preliminary plan for the above-mentioned proposed subdivision, I find that the only element warranting comment from a recreation and park perspective is the subject property's location within the JPA. In that no recreation and park open space sites have been designated on the Land Use Plan for the subject property, I would recommend that the Board accept payment-in-lieu of dedication of land for public recreation. This payment, it would appear, should be assessed to any and all lots previously created through the minor subdivision process, as well. Thank you for the opportunity to offer these staff comments. I will present my recommendations to the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council at their March meeting and will forward to you any changes/additional comments they may have. MAB/pbl Hillsborough, 732-9361 • Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 Area Code 919 I ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 125 HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 272'78 6:u .r a trrr:ii t/u MEMORANDUM TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner FROM: Warren Faircloth, Erosion Control Supervisor SUBJECT: Jack Cates Subdivision Stormwater Management Plan DATE: March 2, 1987 The Appendix to the stormwater management plan adequately covers the Ordinance requirements for detention. This subdivision meets the Ordinance requirements. 13 e. __- t P.O • -�'e" ,•-- 3a1 14•.:al AL.i z:;n •1 �� Y fialr j. NJi-Il i;arolnl.,:'raU t...._..�_.._ 9; C �- ( lil)tiuN i'iiU fiJl g42.3).1 I March 6, 1987 Eddie Kirk Orange County Planning Department 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 RE: Courtesy Review Jack Gates Subdivision Dear Mr. Kirk: Per your verbal request, I would have the following comments on this subdivision. If this parcel were located in the Carrboro Zoning District, it would more than likely be zoned R-41 for residential use. The lot layout as indicated would conform to provisions of this zoning district. Acreage within road right-of-ways could not be considered a part of the lots. If I can be of further assistance, please call . Sin erely ), Amy Parker - Development Coordinator AMP:sgm b. Jack Gates � n It (Preliminary Plat - Chapel Hill Township ) Presentation by Eddie Kirk . 131 The property is located in Chapel Hill Township on Jack Gates Lane, a private Class B road, off NC 86 . The total acreage involved is 25. 16 acres with 3 lots proposed. The average lot size is 2.46 acres. The property is zoned Rural Buffer (RB) and is designated Rural Buffer in the Land Use Plan. All applicable agencies have reviewed and approved the application. The Planning Staff recommends approval with the following condition: -payment- in-lieu of dedication of land for Recreation Area in the amount of 3447. This is based on 4/35th x the assessed value per acre ( 33,920) . In response to a question from Margison, Kirk explained the location of the other family member lots located on Jack Gates property. MOTION: Best moved approval with the staff condition. Seconded by Eddleman. Kramer asked under what circumstances payment- in- Iieu is required. Collins responded if there Is no recreation site shown on the plan, then payment- in-Iieu is required (Chapel Hill Township) . VOTE: Unanimous. -- — -_ ORANGE COUNTY 13,E BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date Apr i L 6, 1987 Action lenda Item fft SUBJECT: ENO RIVER ESTATES - PRELIMINARY PLAN DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _X_._ No Attachment( s) information Contact:Jane Garrett Application Vicinity Map Preliminary Plan Preliminary Plan Certification Agency Comments Draft 3-16-87 Planning Board Minutes Private Road Evaluation Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve the Preliminary Plan for Eno River Estates. BACKGROUND : The property in question is located in Cedar Grove Township extending from Lake Orange Road (SR 1323) . There are 27 lots proposed out of approximately 81 acres. The average lot size is 2.9 acres, and the subdivision will be developed in two ( 2) phases. The roads in the subdivision will be con- structed to NCDOT standards for a residential subdivision . However, the applicant proposes that the streets be retained in private status and maintained by a homeowners associa- tion . No zoning has been adopted in Cedar Grove Township . The Land Use Plan designation is Agricultural Residential . The minimum lot size required in unzoned townships is 40,000 sq. ft. All applicable agencies have reviewed and commented on the proposal . The North Carolina Department of Transportation provided recommendations in the enclosed letters dated January 80 1987 and February 11 , 1987 . The Orange County Planning Board supports their recommendations regarding the bridge. The Orange County Recreation Department provided a recom- 1 3 3 mendation in the enclosed memo of February 23, 1987 . Voluntary donation or an easement grant for the 100-year flood plain area adjacent to the Eno River is to be sought by the Recreation Director. Since no plan for parks and/or greenways exists for Cedar Grove Township, the Orange County Planning Board supports this recommendation and recommends approval . RECOMMENDATION: Approve contingent upon the following conditions: ( 1 ) Provide a notation on the final plat indicating restricted development potential if lots 17 and 18 prove unsuitable for septic systems; (2) The community association that will maintain the private streets in the subdivision should establish capital fund that will be sufficient to replace, in compliance with NCDOT guidelines (minimum construction standards for bridges) , the bridge crossing the Eno River. Capitalization of this fund should be deter- mined by a qualified engineer and should be based on the estimated replacement cost being available at the end of the present bridge' s remaining life span . (3) Meet with the Recreation and Parks Director regarding a voluntary donation of an easement in the 100-year floodplain area adjacent to the Eno River; (4) Provide a 50 foot undisturbed buffer for lots with frontage on the floodplain area adjacent to Eno River and frontage on Lake Orange; ( 5) The Road Maintenance Agreement for the private roads in Eno River Estates should indicate that the roads will be maintained to State standards; and (6) Include the name of the owner and location of parcel 2.45 . .3A, John W. Tolar, on the Final Plat. • 11/85 il tipaultautu42...Eundamatuatesiskl ! 134 . DATE: 12.12.4.01 S(.. • SUBDIVISION NAME:~� � -.2 .'')612- -5516;15'S S LOCATION: )J i t2.. /AKE- Olt, :16t✓ OWNER/DEVELOPER: G-F-11,6 (-441-1-1 MO 9-5— ADDRESS: TELEPNL. NO. : AGENT/CONTACT: f-N-r Lame( 7.5' ...,eve-4j s c . TELEPHO: . NO. : ?3Z—GZ.6,j. A. SUMMARY INFORMATION: Orange County Tax Map 61E1 BLcck Lot(a) .3 Township Z. Zoning District(•) : _ Total Number of Acrew . ��( i Pies: Total Number of Lots: Average Lot Size: 4•° -•Minimum Lot Size /. &. Number/Typ• of Structl as: (existing) 2c4or1lr. ,_(propoeed)•rsrl61-t+ MiLy1 Lineal Feet in Street: , 26°04. , Acres in Open 46011 Water Supply: _.,. .Pub ll c(specl fy) Camuunl ty , !C Individual ! Wastewater Disposal.:..., PubLic(epecify] __Clmmunity 74 Individual School District: Fire District: General Land User in A -e M6R1Cv1:Ti1 1./R.e.1)0f."1-1-V '_- Critical Areas: _Xst;•eam/dralnagaway ` [ flood ,=rone areas weterahed(epacify) historic sites othrr(ex,. Lain] S. ALL p Lats must be submit ad on sheet no sma L Ler tha.i . one inch aqua Ls two— hundred feet (111m20013 and. no Larger than one 1 ich equals fifty feat f1 "=50 ' ) and1au t contal the foILawing information : ,i asbdiriui. 'ass HAM• building petb.•.a liars .�L Derr of eh t(si by astatlos or syptdal lot ieck items 7'� `r seas of s, ipr. raglserr Sr layout amp 1 e tad) ,/ : k9' Load pleas. 10./44/, (title/ Pr. :minory Plan 'minting sad proposed aaes- roatr ldroiari.•s. utilities. ..� seals. Dora. error Iltersa a; / roads, ata.J w' ' ' top of sapl v ' . :fir, asissla suss linela.-lag reclaims dotes/+01 adjoining rlpnrs-of-way tdraeMip, t.4 osp'blaolt-Lot v. 1wrlYdtaq dl■swrlaw■ Dad :y't:% ratare cea street Danes a.:J Min reed bsradary d...- Abed Bite aYre.r. boasts s Si- :legumes saluting .- . .� ;.r�{;• iota/ oerrr • st she tract • proposed and edrorgr t Lois, faaledfaq ).'~• esllids.. lne/udlws aa■ sasladl•� rLot sisals type, tine. • • rndMsa- f-ti•y hydrants, ra lr.;.. sad miners& aim :r rdaarlra .ii.'•.. r< • ratotlaq tad or-posed salvers / prdpssed t. :load with y :::ti twsludla al=e. Dad ✓ dtmraetraa •r :: i errors lot moodier. � . sfplaal . :ass-rereidaa .. '.: .hw:• rod 1at paw/op 11a ch.: :an tlssrlla +: ::.• lneludimg cast!., and width topography . its foot (101 '$•'•`•': sf trar■L■s, .Yd saouldars ` ' toterrets herlsewtal aai.1 sad rater bodi,. derae■e. flood- W:.: orwarul maths 1.11 (pub 11a / c, way an tla: stains h J �f tiros. burr. •s sad notation :� lad/.atlas' I derlasad R!'!1 permanent tors.. .• auoa as �. 4 ? bulldfaps. Gees.arlrs. y� davILOpaaas I.ataastet +114 : alotstla trpcoe:cs tsaaaip, aii .mats sad lOIn - : f: territorial r Lsaa/sy _...1" adJalotao lac layout ..1:* Jur/adfrstaD liars wino* asses of adJola''►p preprrty /. tress Cho pr arty swore sad eYadirioteaw !1 Leonia, and .lea of parson dadtastad for mobile was or reserved , ' itl le oo.s townies s.• gist of lots of reetrittad dar$le •dal 7 g::,:...._:... assatlea . .at rdgsedfao saga P ;•aeraetal ■ad :.i.;0 sesrauasar e..sgassat plea ladittaleq priorities for :.:weroL of the tiros 1/2 loam of runoff from Impervious surfaces I 135 C. OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUI ENTS: 1 . Twenty--six (20) civil a of the preliminary plat• 2. Tom fuLL size coolies of an Orange County Tax map (one copy with tax parcels involved cLe+arly marked) . 3. Where municipal or OWASA serer is not oval Lab Le , a Letter from the Ore ge County Health Department certifying the propaa,ed wastewater system or each Lot. I , the applicant, hereby certify that the foregoing application is complete and accurate. I understand ''that a $210.00 tee (subdivisions of 15 lots or Lase) or a $370.00 fee (aubdivir:ione of 10 Lots or more) is due at the time of app Llcatlon . A $6.00 er lot fee is due at the , time the final. plat is presented for recordation .•. • .! . APPLICANT 'S SIGNATURE OWN/-a• ' = AT'1RE DATE y— I/� / 9 � DATE • • • • r r 'l • FEES: Amount , 4L9Q, Date Paid /.2-fir_ k6 Receipt r// • .1 J V GUN 1 WO Any vw CONTOUN BELONGS TO wl LAKE ORAhGE, INC. ACREAGE iNCLUOEP � E RO LYE : STArEs LAKE AC.^ C, aC. w La� A � AppI:ICANT:cam# AAArW um*WRY •'` lur�o�Ic►N,►tloy: R.61� 2 2158 Fu p�E 4 , _..il..____L.1 I L.44 22.1 AC. CAL. 0 164. 156.57 AC. At 2 AC 7c AC Q474 o AC. I ali:, 81 I 2274 N. -� \ cc....ts ‘ \ \ 7.--- .N., \ 1 l \ \ . II \ II I tlihk 42 \.��` .. . 6 ■ Z sap■�za 4— _ r ,b, , Sate: I N:4001.Ob - -7"-#.7:-....; Eno River Estates 11/85 137 o#zp,NC>a I COUNTY 1 CERTIFICATION AND APPRQVM,S - RLIMJNARY PLAT. STAFF ASSIGNMENT: Jane Ga. vts SKETCH PLAN: Received 17- *-86 Reviewed 12-17-86 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Received 12-29-86 Reviewed 1-5-87 REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT: received Reviewed NCDOT: DATES 2-13-87 :ERTIFICATION , J.M. Mills, District Engineer SCHOOL BOARD (Orange/Chapel Hill-Carrboro) : DATE 2-2-87 CERTIFICATION N/A UTILITIES (OWASA/Hillsboroigh/Mebane/Orange Alamance/Durham) : DATE N/A Certification OTHER: Recreation Advisor/ Council 2-23-87 MA Black (Date) Carrboro Fire DepL_rtment (Date) Chapel Hill .(Date) Carrboro .(Date) Hillsborough (Date) Durham (Date) Other S&E 10-2-86 W Fa i rcl oth (Date) Health Department 1-21-87 (Date) PLANNING BOARD: Date Approval Approva] with Conditions Denial BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: !`.:te Approval Il:proval with Conditions Denial ORANGE JOUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT niLLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 138 27278 `••.0 •1 4 J MEMORANDUM TO: Jane A. Garrett, Planner FROM: Warren Faire !oth, Erosion Control Officer SUBJECT: Eno River Estates Stormwater Management Plan DATE: October 2, :986 The plan for this subdivision utilizes large lots ( 2 acres) . limited impervious- surface on each lot, grass swales along the new paved ro:d, and retention of the existing vegetation as a buffer for filtering and infiltration of runoff to meet the Ordinance regilrements. The plan and subdivision meet the Ordinance regt, irements. 1 � Warren Faircloth • i U .� d 139 ,.tea STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, North Carolina 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN February 11, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E.HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,P.E. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County • Ms. Jane A. Ga-:rett Orange County Planning Department 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough,. NC 27278 Dear Ms. Garre 1: In response to your letter of February 2, 1987, I have reviewed the f.•.eliminary plans for Eno River Estates in Orange County. In c _der for the preliminary plans to be approved, all horizontal cuL .e data must be shown on the plans. Also, please refer to my le ter of January 8, 1987 for the guidelines regarding the existing bridge and dam. These guidelines mast be adhered to. I hoed these comments are helpful regarding this development. If ) - ,. have any further questions, do not hesitate to call this office. Yours very very truly, /. J. . Mills STRICT ENGINEER JMM:SPI:acr To-) An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • 1. 40 cog raw. .� J 4 g STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN • January 8, 1987 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GOVERNOR JAMES E.HARRINGTON GEORGE E.WELLS,R.E. SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR Orange County Ms. Jane A. Garrett Orange County PlanninL Department 106 East Margaret Lana Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Garrett: • In response Ica your letter of December 22, 1946, when I attempted to investigate this area indicated on Tax Map 45 in the Cedar Grove Township, I found the road. bloc: :d and, therefore, could not review the condition of the dam. �. Actually, it is the policy of the Division of Highways to discourage the location of roadway's on dams. However, in certain cases where a definite advantage is gained, a: dam may be utilized as a roadway provided the following criteria is met: I 1. The dam s:lst have certification from the N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development pursuant to the "Dam' Safety Law of 1967" (amended 1977). 2. All pertinent data regarding the design of the embankment . as an impoundment structure must be presented to the Division of Highways for review. 3. The top rress section dimension must be the roadway width requiredl;shoulder point to shoulder point) plus a mini- mum of four (4) feet.. 4. Guardrail dill be provided on the impoundment side of the roadway. If a safety hazard exists, then g..rdrail may be required ..n1 both sides of the roadway. 5. The spill; ay will be designed to provide two (2) feet of freeboard at the shoulder for an estimated S0-year design frequency outflow as a minimum. • An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Ms. Jane A. Garrett. January 8, 1987 Page 2 6. A means cf draining the lake completely will be provided. The Divisi: of Highways approval is limited to the use of the dam as a roadway and is no way intended as approval of embankment as an impoundment structure . Also, if t." section of roadway crossing a da.- is accepted as a part of the State Mainter...f•:e System, the maintenance of this roadway is limited to the shoulder point. _o shoulder point area only. Res .msibility for the impoundment, any dames: that may result therefrom, and ,,aintenance of the dam or appurtenances as Ili / be required to preserve its inte;;:ity as a water im- poundment structure s: +.11 remain with the owner of the impoundment. Any such maintenance work will ::e subject to the provisions of G. S. 136-93. If the dev . ..-per satisfied the requirements f,,;- a roadway section located on a dam, the section of road below this dam will be eligible to be added to the System c:_ maintained roads if it is constructed in accordance with the Department Transportation's minimum construction standards as out- lined in the Subdivi*.. a Manual, May 1, 1983, (right of :.ay, pavement design, minimum housing requi�-.ment, etc.). Of course, if the developer desired to add the road on the other side of the bridge to the : :stem of maintained roads, then t':o bridge will have to meet the following cr:":eria: 1. Structures which are to span streams shall be designed for hydrs,lic requirements in accordance wi_h Division of Highwyy. ' criteria, and plans shall be submitted to the Hydreraphic Unit for review and approval. 2. Structure.:; shall be designed for a minimum ;Ave load of HS-20 as :specified in the Standard Specifications for Highway B:_ides of the American Association of State Highway C` ficials, and plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Structure Design Unit. 3. Other requirements, as set forth in the Sub'iivision Manual, May 1, 1; 3, shall be followed. I hope this ....lips you regarding this development. If you have .:,y questions, do not hesitate to contact this office. Ycurs very truly, J M. Mills ]STRICT ENGINEER JMM':j bh I �G. rr-, 1 N Ord r (gaunt! 3& crta#tnn nab Parks i e.purtutrut �,-,ti �-� z ,. y Plze-" 300 West Tryon Street .li...� .o"r •�'" 4� HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 1 . .1. I • iaary Anne Black, Director ; I . R ...„:„1 .To: Jane Garre • -t, Planner p2-Z�`S'1 Q FROM: Mary Anne. Slack 7/2 DATE: February 13, 1987 RE: Courtesy _..view -- Elm Grove . Eno River Estates l ' Esoderrick Division ELM GROVE Upon review of the preliminary plan for the proposed Elm Grove Subdivision, I find that the, only element warranting comment from a recreation and pirk perspective is the subject property's location (a) in the JPA and (b) !on or near the New Hope Creek watekway. The owners have indicated to me that the.property is not in the New Hope Creek floodplain and if this i ' the case, I would recommend that the County accept payment-in-lieu 'of dedication of land for public recreation, in that the property does not contain lands for future park or greenway sites. ENO RIVER ESTAT '. The only el it of this proposed subdivision preliminary plan is its proximity to , Orange and its location on the Eno River. Both these water resources - ace valuable recreation resources as well. I would request that the County pursue the possibility of the owner (a) donating that portion of '::is property which lies within the 100-year flood plain to the County, o: (b) granting a(n) (conservation) easement on that same portion to the County. I would be willing to explore these options with the owner if the, Board so desires. The County Attorney would, of course, need to be involves in such negotiations. ESODERRICK DIVISI.:N I find no elca nt on the preliminary plan warranting comment from a recreation and park perspective in that the subject property's location is not within the JPA or planning jurisdiction of Hillsborough. Thank you for the opportunity to offer these staff comments. I will present my reccc-andations to the Orange County, Recreation and Parks Advisory Council at their March meeting and will forward to you any changes/addition`. comments they may have. MAE/pbl :4 I ' 1 , . Hillsborough, 732.9301 - Durham, 688-7333 • Chapel Hill, 968-4501 • Mebane, 227-2032 ., Area Code 919 II 143 1 SUBJECT: Eno River Estates - Preliminary Plan Private Road Evaluation BACKGROUND Private roads may be allowed in a subdivision when the following conditions have been found to exist. 1 . The nature and location of the subdivision, includ- ing such considerations as topography, the surrounding area, present and future road plans, and public safety access Justify private roads, and 2. One or more of the following conditions exist: a) the subdivision consists of less than ten ( 10) lots; b) the subdivision preserves a natural area through deed restriction and special design features; c) the subdivision does not include or abut any part of a thoroughfare or street shown on the Orange County thoroughfare plan or the thoroughfare plan of an Orange County munici- pality, or does not lie within a designated transition area determined by the County; d) the subdivision Joins or extends an existing subdivision where the streets are private or unpaved and when the new subdivision shall be platted to connect with the streets of such existing subdivision and be compatible with and in harmony with the surrounding community area; e) the subdivision roads, even if constructed to State Standards, would not be accepted by the State for maintenance due to density or some other State requirements that the subdivision cannot meet. EVALUATION In applying these conditions to Eno River Estates, the Planning Staff notes that the owner intends to build the roads in the subdivision to NCDOT standards, but intends to retain ownership and maintain them as private roads. The reason for this is to avoid rebuilding the Eno River bridge to NCDOT standards. The bridge must be considered as a significant factor in applying the conditions that allow private roads. II 2144 With regards to condition 1 , the location of Eno River Estates is a significant consideration . The only access to the property is via the private road that crosses the Eno River on the existing bridge Just below Lake Orange dam. State maintenance on SR 1323 ends approximately 875 feet east of the property that will be subdivided to create Eno River Estates. This means, that there can be no further use made of the roads without the consent of those persons who hold the private road easement. This and the location of the subdivision indicate little Iikelihood• that the roads in Eno River Estates will be extended significantly. With regards to condition 2, three of the five condi- tions that Justify private roads exist with Eno River Estates. The subdivision does not include or abut a street designated in a thoroughfare plan nor is it in a designated transition area. Access to the subdivision will be thorough extension of an existing private road. NCDOT would not accept the subdivision roads for maintenance until the bridge meets State standards. While the bridge appears to be adequate, extensive changes would be needed to bring the bridge up to State standards. The bridge is not located on the property to be subdivided, so the County cannot require bridge improvements as part of subdivision approval . Therefore, even if built to State standards, the State would not accept the subdivision roads for maintenance because of the bridge. RECOMMENDATIONS 1 . The subdivision roads in Eno River Estates should be built to State standards, but be privately maintained. 2. The Road Maintenance Agreement for the private roads in Eno River Estates should indicate that the roads will be maintained to State standards. 3. The community association that will maintain the private roads in the subdivision should establish a capital fund that will be sufficient to replace, in compliance with NCDOT guidelines (minimum construc- tion standards for bridges) , the bridge crossing the Eno River. Capitalization of the fund should be determined by a qualified engineer and should be based on the estimated replacement cost being available at the end of the bridge' s remaining life span . 1 Q DRAFT 114P MINUTES PAGE 2 projection for Little River Township was large in percentile terms, and had already been shared with the public, creating a credibility problem among area residents. These corrections have all been made. MOTION: Best moved approval with corrections as stated by Jacobs. Seconded by Pilkey. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #4: COMMISSIONERS BRIEFS - Informational only. AGENDA ITEM #5: CHAIR COMMENTS Pilkey reported from the Reservoir Site meeting with Don Cordell and respresentatives from the various water suppliers. She stated that review of the study is underway with a recommendation to be made within ninety days. Best reported from the Long Range Water Management Strategy Committee. He stated that the short term solution of transfer of water is being studied. For a long term solution, the question of how to finance a new reservoir site provided the need for a new site is established . He indicated a meeting would be held on April 1 to hear a report from Hazen R. Sawyer on procedures for transfer of water from surrounding areas such as Durham, Burlington, Chapel Hill and Chatham County. Also, methods of financing a long term project such as a new reservoir site such as bond issues will be discussed . Jacobs reminded staff of the public charge to be included on the agenda . Jacobs asked the Board to consider having a special Planning Board meeting on April 7 to review and make recommendations on the Rural Buffer and the Transition Area. AGENDA ITEM #6 : SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS [12 1, \ IF a. Eno River Estates i IT (Preliminary Plat - Cedar Grove Township Presentation by Greg Szymik . The property in question is located in Cedar Grove Township extending from Lake Orange Road (SR 1323) . There are 27 lots proposed out of DRAFT PBM MINUTES p, 3 approximately 81 acres. The average lot size is 2.9 acres, and the subdivision will be developed in two (2) phases. The roads in the subdivision will be constructed to NCDOT standards for a residential subdivision . However, the applicant proposes that the streets be retained in private status and maintained by a homeowners associa tion . No zoning has been adopted in Cedar Grove Township. The Land Use Plan designation is Agricultural Residential . The minimum lot size required in unzoned townships is 40,000 sq. ft. All applicable agencies have reviewed and commented on the proposal . The North Carolina Department of Transportation provided recommendations in the enclosed letters dated January 8, 1987 and February 11 , 1987. Orange County Planning Staff supports their recommendations regarding the bridge. Szymik presented photographs of the bridge as supporting documentation . The Orange County Recreation Department provided a recommendation in the enclosed memo of February 23, 1987 . Voluntary donation or an easement grant for the 100—year flood plain area adjacent to the Eno River is to be sought by the Recreation Director. Since no plan for parks and/or greenways exists for Cedar Grove Township, the Orange County Planning Staff supports this recommendation . The Planning Staff recommends approval contingent upon the following conditions: ( 1 ) Provide a notation on the final plat indicating restricted development potential if lots 17 and 18 prove unsuitable for septic systems; and (2) Compliance with NCDOT guidelines (minimum construction standards) regarding the bridge. Szymik indicated Planning Staff wished to expand condition 1 2 as follows: Planning Staff recommends that a Community Association of Landowners establish a capital fund to rebuild the bridge to NCDOT standards when the time comes to replace the bridge. 14' DRAFT PBM MINUTES PAGE 4 Best inquired when the bridge would be replaced. Szymik responded that staff would recommend that a certified engineer examine the bridge, determine its condition and estimate its future life span and recommend that the capital fund be created to have the amount of funds needed for replacement when that Iife span is reached. Jacobs asked why the question about the bridge would not be taken care of before preliminary approval . Collins responded that the Homeowners Association Agreement (with County Attorney ' s approval ) , will be included with the final plat. Scott Dorsett, representing the applicant, stated that the Lattimore' s home will be the first to be built in the subdivision and indicated he felt the applicant would be willing to take whatever steps necessary to assure the proper replacement and upkeep of the bridge. Jacobs asked about the applicant 's response to the recommendation from the Orange County Recreation Department. Mr. Dorsett responded that the Lattimore's expressed willingness to discuss the recommendation with Ms. Black, Recreation Director. Jacobs asked about adding a condition regarding recreation . Collins responded that it would have to be a voluntary contribution. Pilkey expressed a concern that in the future there would be a road going all around the lake. Mr. Dorsett responded that his clients would be opposed to such a road. Jacobs presented the following change and addition to the conditions as presented by Staff : Change Condition 12 to read : That a Community Association of Subdivision Landowners establish a fund of annual dues to be applied to replacing the bridge to NCDOT standards at the time the life span of the bridge is achieved. Add Condition /3: That the applicant meet with the Orange County Recreation Director and representatives of the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Board to discuss voluntary donation or the granting of an easement of lands in the 100-year floodplain 148 DRAFT PBM MINUTES PAGE 5 along the Eno River. MOTION: Best moved approval with the three conditions as recommended by Staff and Jacobs. Seconded by Swann. Hubbard inquired about the amount of drainage into Lake Orange. Szymik responded that the proposed extension of Lake Orange Road follows the ridge line. The property passes over the ridge Iine in the northeastern corner of the property which drains into Lake Orange. The remainder drains westward into a small stream which empties into the Eno River Just below the dam. Pilkey asked about access for adjoining property. Szymik responded the possibility of requiring a stubout to the property to the west ( a one- hundred acre tract) , which is separated from the State Road by another large tract of land (48 acres) , was discussed but the Planning Staff decided against a requirement which might encourage further development. Margison expressed a concern that this would be another area of pollution for a water supply watershed. Best responded that the lots are larger than two-acres and the requirement now is only 40,000 square feet; thus, he felt there is sufficient open space to address Margisonls concern. Collins clarified that after removing the flood- plain areas, there is sufficient buildable area to meet all setback requirements for the home and to install the septic system. Hubbard commented the large lot sizes were nice but he felt it was still too critical an area to allow development where any drainage would go into Lake Orange. Collins indicated he felt this was not an area for concern as the lots at that particular point would most likely remain wooded and that small area would act as a buffer. Eddleman noted that he felt the Board must stay with the findings of fact and the requirements or be challenged. Margison wished to add a fourth condition requiring that all lots fronting the lake and floodpiain have at least a fifty foot buffer of existing vegetation. 149 DRAFT PBM MINUTES PAGE 6 The fourth condition was accepted. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Hubbard - opposed to development In a watershed) . 1 abstained (Yuhasz - due to professional con- flict of interest) . • O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 150 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date April 6, ,1987_ Action enda Item �0 SUBJECT: NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY - TRIANGLE LAND CONSERVANCY DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No ATTACHMENT( S ) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Collins Olivia Ludington Letter of 3-17-87 Proposed Inventory Budget Charles Roe Letter of 2-10-87 Recreation & Parks Advisory Council Resolution of 3-3-87 TELEPHONE NUMBERS : Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE : To approve a proposal of the Triangle Land Conservancy for preparation of a Natural Areas Inventory of Orange County . BACKGROUND : On January 31 , 1987 , the Environmental Affairs Board held a workshop to identify environmental issues confronting Orange County . One concern which emerged from the meeting was the need for a detailed inventory of areas of outstanding natural significance. Since the workshop, the Triangle Land Conservancy has been working closely with the N.C. Nature Conservancy and the N.C. Natural Heritage Program to ascertain the best way to finance and organize such an inventory . Meetings have also been held with Orange County representatives, including the Planning Board Chair, the Recreation & Parks Director, and the Planning Director. The attached proposal of the Triangle Land Conservancy proposes a combination of public and private funding : a $5,000 private donation; a $7 ,000 contribution from Orange County; and $2,000 contributions from the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The funds would be used to cover expenses of N.C. Natural Heritage Program personnel , the professional services of contracted biologists, and duplicating, travel and other administrative costs associated with the project. The project would involve six phases: ( 1 ) consultation with individuals, organizations and other available resources; ( 2) selection of potential natural areas ; (3) survey of natural areas and compilation of preliminary reports; (4) compilation of detailed inventories; ( 5 ) preparation of 151 inventory maps and reports, and identification of priority areas; and (6 ) preparation of a summary report. Both the Planning Board and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council recommend that the County provide financial assistance to the Triangle Land Conservancy for completion of the inventory . The Planning Board recommended in January of 1987 , when the Inventory of Cultural , Historical , Recreational , Biological and Geologic Sites was adopted, that a more in-depth inventory be undertaken . The Triangle Land Conservancy has submitted a non-departmental budget request for funding in the 1987-88 fiscal year . Although funding in the current 1986-87 budget year is desired, the project could be initiated even if such resources were not available. This would be possible through the private donation . However, a commitment to the project in the 1987-88 budget is desired so that continuous financial support would be available for contracted professionals. RECOMMENDATION: Endorse the proposal for the Inventory with an indication that effort will be made to include Orange County ' s share in the 1987-88 budget. � 7 Triangle 152 Land Conservancy P.O. Box 13031 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 March 17, 1987 Orange County Board of Commissioners Orange County Courthouse Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Orange County Commissioners: We have been working on a project on which I now need your help. Many of us in Orange County feel that it is imperative to identify the outstanding natural areas of the County before they are lost. The County is being developed so rapidly that we must move immediately to identify these prime natural sites. Once they are identified, we can discuss the best ways to protect them. I have been working closely the the North Carolina Nature Conservancy and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program to ascertain the best way to finance and organize such a project. Under the guidance of the Heritage Program, a steering committee would be appointed. This committee, composed of local scientists and representatives from Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro, would outline the parameters of the project. A botanist and zoologist would be hired to carry out the inventory, which should be completed within one year. Chuck Roe, Director of the Heritage Program, estimates that we will need approximately $15,000 to do a comprehensive inventory. (A proposed budget is enclosed for you to see how this money would be spent) . We have obtained $5,000 towards this goal from a private individual . I now come before you to request $7,000 from Orange County. I am asking Chapel Hill and Carrboro for $2,000 each. We feel that we speak for many citizens of the County who are concerned about the quality of life in our area. When the natural beauty is destroyed, the heart of the community is harmed. A scientific identification of our Chatham —Johnston -- Durham — Orange — Lee --- Wake _ 153 Orange County Board March 17, 1987 Page Two natural areas is a, logical and critical first step toward preserving the County's environment. Thank you for your consideration of this requ st. 444- Olivia Ludington Chair, Orange County Chapter Triangle Land Conservancy Enclosures cc: Kenneth Thompson Marvin Collins 154 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY (1 ) N.C. Natural Heritage Program: $1 ,500 Supervisory costs for project organization and review (not including salary and time of NHP supervisory scientists) for travel , telephone, postage, supplies, editing, duplication and incorporation of inventory results into the State's central Natural Heritage data bank. (2) Professional services of contracted biologists $8,000 (a) "phase one" review of existing information and screening process (b) field surveys to identify all potentially important natural areas (c) repeat visits to all selected sites over several seasons (d) preparation of natural areas reports (e) preparation of general summary of ecological resources in the county or region of the study (3) Additional information required by county and towns, such as $3,500 land suitable for parks, wildlife corriodors, greenways, scenic areas, and other natural areas which may not be of outstanding significance but deserve recognition (4) Travel expenses for contracted biologist $1 ,000 (5) Telephone and postage $ 150 (6) Maps, materials and supplies $ 350 (7) Design and duplication of executive summary $ 500 $15,000 • II • �•sr�►tr 4 5•a ° -�� eb, yo State of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development �;: P ty P i . _ Division of Parks and Recreation V, 512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 James G. Martin, Governor Dr. William W. Davis l' S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary February 10, 1987 Director i . Ms. Livy Ludington Triangle Land Conservancy Orange County Chair 304 Ray Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Dear Livy: , We are encouraged to see that there is high probability to finance an Orange County natural areas inventory this year. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program offers its assistance to Triangle Land Conservancy and Orange County to help organize and supervise a countywide inventory of special natural areas, biological resources, and rare and endangered species. - • We are willing to contribute our program's time and expertise to assist the Orange County natural areas inventory project in the following ways: - selection of qualified biologists to be contracted to conduct the inventory; - training and supervision of the biologists; - provision of inventory report formats and content specifications; - monitor the progress of the.project; - help to assure completion of a high-quality inventory report; - review and edit the inventory report for accuracy; and - evaluate identified natural areas for overall state and regional ecological significance. The enclosed document elaborates on the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's experience and procedures for supervising and conducting natural areas inventories. We estimate the value of our contributed supervisory participation in the Orange County project to be at least $2,000 (for . professional services of Natural Heritage Program staff). That sum should be considered "in-kind services" and added with Triangle Land Conservancy's contributions to "match" other sources of project funding from the county and municipalities. P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-733-4181 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer _L 15€ Ms. Livy Ludington - Page 2 February 10, 1987 We recommend that $1,500 of the funds raised for the county inventory project be reserved for project supervisory costs (travel, telephone, duplication, etc. ) and for hiring an individual to compile and incorporate inventory results into the State's Central Natural Heritage data bank. We will be pleased to assist in organizing and initiating this inventory project. Sincerely, CLo Charles E. Roe, Coordinator N.C. Natural Heritage Program CER:jh Enclosure • LEI 157 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Financing and Sponsoring a County or Regional Natural Areas Inventory Directed and Supervised by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Division of Parks and Recreation North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development Post Office Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 (919) 733-7701 PURPOSE: Natural areas inventories are needed in all counties of North Carolina. A natural areas survey will provide advance identification of potential park lands, "greenspace", and areas of environmental sensitivity. A natural areas inventory will aid county planners and administrators in making wise land use decisions and in balancing needs for economic develop- ment with environmental protection. Such natural areas surveys help counties plan for growth and economic development, while identifying the natural resources most important for protecting the quality of life. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program has compiled information on specific natural areas and biological resources in nearly all one hundred counties of North Carolina. However, few counties have been thoroughly surveyed for their important natural areas and endangered species habitats. The costs for conducting an initial survey of special natural areas and ecological resources in a single county usually range from $5,000 to $11,000, depending on the size of the county, its amount of natural landscape, and existing scientific information. The Natural Heritage Program offers to organize and supervise reconnaissance surveys of natural areas in all counties and regions of the state. The surveys will produce reports identifying and describing the most important natural areas which are most crucial for their ecological, educational, scientific, cultural, recreational, and aesthetic values. With the ongoing population growth and land development in all parts of North Carolina, it is urgent that areas of outstanding natural heritage significance be identified and protected. EXPERIENCE: The Natural Heritage Program was established in 1976 to compile a statewide inventory of important ecological resources and natural areas, and to work for their protection through landowner education, voluntary conservation agreements, resource management and planning. More than 650 important natural areas have thus far been identified by the Natural Heritage inventory. Only a small number of counties have received thorough surveys of their priority natural areas. The quality of natural areas surveys is assured by direction and supervision by the Natural Heritage Program's staff of highly qualified scientists. The Natural Heritage Program has conducted general natural areas surveys in over 158 a dozen counties in projects financed by federal grants in the coastal region, State General Assembly special appropriations, and county govern- ments. The Natural Heritage Program supervised the successful completion of twenty contracted surveys in 1985 and 1986, including several county-wide surveys. PROCEDURE: Usually the Natural Heritage Program contracts and trains an experienced .biological scientist, or team of biologists, to conduct a county-wide or regional natural areas inventory. The contracted biologists have prior familiarity with the natural resources of the study area, and frequently are local residents or associated with local colleges or universi- ties. The Natural Heritage Program instructs the contracted biologists in conducting the survey and compiling reports according to detailed specifica- tions. Natural Heritage Program staff scientists supervise the work and edit the final inventory reports. Data from the surveys are incorporated in the Natural Heritage inventory, and protection priorities are established for natural areas of major significance. The process followed by contracted biologists is: (1) Consult with other knowledgeable individuals and organizations (eg., other scientists, foresters, soil conservationists, local naturalists) and other available sources of natural resource information (including maps, aerial photography, scientific literature, and the Natural Heri- tage Program inventory). (2) Select potentially interesting natural areas through the process of consultations, reviewing existing data, initial "field work", and sometimes aerial reconnaissance from light planes. . (3) Conduct surveys of all potentially significant natural areas and compile preliminary reports on their natural resources (according to specified report formats). (4) Compile more detailed inventories on the resources, size, ownerships, and condition of those natural areas possessing important ecological values (according to specified report formats). (5) Prepare site locational maps, inventory and evaluation reports and identify the natural areas of highest priority on a local and statewide basis (according to specifications). (6) Prepare a summary report about the general ecological resources of the county or region, including a list of its natural community (habitat) types, and endangered or rare species of plants and animals. 159 OUTLINE FOR COUNTY WIDE NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY SUPERVISED BY NC NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM I. Purpose and Procedures II. Characteristics of County A. General Information 1. Location 2. Land Use History 3. Land Use and Economy 4. Current Trends B. Climate C. Physiography, Topography and Geology D. Hydrology E. Soils F. Flora and Fauna , 1. Natural Communities 2. Endangered and Threatened Plant and Animal Species III. Natural Area Reports A. Natural Area 1 B. Natural Area 2 C. Natural Area 3 D. Natural Area 4 E. Natural Area 5 F. Natural Area 6 G. Natural Area 7 H. Natural Area 8 I. Natural Area 9 J. Natural Area 10 K. Area investigated but rejected for minor significance IV. County-Wide Natural Area Recommendations and Priorities • NOTES ON OUTLINE FOR COUNTY-SIDE NATURAL AREAS INVENTORIES • Purposes and Procedures This section explains the purposes behind a natural areas inventory of a county, briefly describes the products of the inventory and their usefulness to local and state agencies, organizations, and citizens. It also describes the general procedures followed in conducting the inventory. (This section can be written by the Natural Heritage staff for inclusion into each inventory, perhaps with some modifications to take into consid- eration pecularities of the individual county) II. Characteristics of the County The general purpose of this section is to provide general information on the county and its natural resources and conditions, providing the con- text for the specific natural area reports. Most of the information in this section will be collected by the investigators in the first phase of the project in order to frm;liarize themselves with the area and determine locations of potential natural areas and priorities for field investigation. County soil surveys (where available) are excellent sources of information for A-E. • III. Natural Area Reports • This section contains the results of the field investigations on individual natural areas. Information on each natural area includes: 1. Natural Area Name 17. Owner Attitude 2. County 18. Uses of Natural Area • • 3. Location 19. Uses of Surrounding Land 4. Topographic quad(s) 20. Preservation Status 5. Size 21. Regulatory Protections in Force 6. Elevation 22. Threats to Integrity of Area 7. Access 23. Management s Protection 8. Name(s) of Investigators Preservation Recommendations 9. Date(s) of Investigation 24. Plant Communities 10. Description of Site 25. Special Status Species 11. Description of Site Significance 26. Lists of Species 12. Summary of Significance 27. Map of Site Boundaries 13. Ownership.Type 28. Hap of Plant Communities 14. Number of Owners 29. Map of Locations of Rare Species 15. Names and Addresses of Owners 16. Names of Locals mold/or Scientists Knowledgeable About Site Also included is a list and description of areas investigated as potential natural areas, but found to be of poor quality. �• County-Wide Natural Area Recommendations and Priorities The goal of this section is to broaden out from individual natural area reports and discuss their importance on a county-wide and state-wide basis. It should assign relative priorities to areas, based on a com- b bination of natural significance and potential or actual threats to the integrity of the area. This section serves as a sugary, useful to local • • • {: and state agencies, citizen's organizations and concerned individuals, of the county's natural areas and how•they may best be protected. The emphasis must be on workable solutions, with a realistic likelihood of success (for instance, it is not acceptable to recommend that all ten areas should be purchased by The Nature Conservancy). A (sketchy) . example for a county with ten identified natural areas might be: Natural Area 1 has high state and regional significance. j It has some potential threat of destruction. It is on land of a large timber company. The Nature Conservancy should approach the company for a tax-deductible donation of the natural area. r . • Natural Areas 2 and 3 are of high significance but ulth no potential threat of destruction. Natural Heritage Program should try to reach Registry agreements with • landowners. If the land were to become available, pur- chase might,be an appropriate action. • Natural Areas 4 and 5 are of high significance and are on Federal or State-owned land. Natural Heritage Program should pursue Registry agreements and ensure that the agencies involved are aware of the areas and include theN in future planning. • • Natural Areas 6-9 are of lesser significance, with no apparent threat. Monitoring of their condition and features should be continued-by Natural Heritage Program, local citizens groups and concerned scientists. Land- . owner should be informed of the significance of the area. • If threats to the area develop, action should be taken ass deemed appropriate, at the time. Natural Area 10 is of some significance, with features that are not delicate. It is adjacent to a county park. Perhaps the area should.be added to the county park, • with provisions-for limiting recreational use to low- intensity use, such as a nature trail. • • • yr 711 RESOLUTION 162 Whereas, the continued population growth and land development in Orange County have made it necessary and desirable that areas of outstanding natural significance be identified and protected. Whereas, such natural areas are important for their ecological, educational, scientific, cultural, recreational, and aesthetic values. Whereas, the Triangle Land Conservancy's Orange County Chapter has developed an agreement with the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program to organize and supervise an inventory to identify these natural areas. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council Recreation recommends that the Orange County Commissioners provide financial assistance to the Triangle Land Conservancy for completion of a natural areas inventory of the County. This day of March, 1987. Dwaine Parker, Chair Orange County Recreation & Parks Advisory Council ORANGE COUNTY 163 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Ag n a Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: LAKE ORANGE STORAGE CAPACITY DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE, X501 RESOLUTION MEMORANDUM TO COMMISSIONERS TELEPHONE NUMBER: CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE Hillsborough - 732-8181 BACKGROUND CORRESPONDENCE chapel Hill - 968- 1 Mebane - 227-2032031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To approve an increase in lake level in order for funding to be retained and construction to proceed. BACKGROUND: This project was placed on hold July 23, 1986 pending further review. Since that time engineering plans for flashboards have been designed and approved and a survey of property owners has been reported to the Board. See attached memorandum summarizing background facts concern- ing the issue of how much to raise the lake level. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Adopt resolution authorizing the use of Senate Bill 2 funds and approve the Lake Orange Capital Project Ordinance. 164 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Orange County is eligible to receive Senate Bill 2 funds over a two year period for water projects; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners have placed priority on efforts to increase water supply as the most appropriate means of allocating Senate Bill 2 funds; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution on July 7, 1986 allocating Senate Bill 2 water funds for a reservoir study and the installa- tion of a pump station to transfer water from the OWASA to Hillsborough; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1986 the Orange County Board of Commissioners placed a temporary hold on the use of Senate Bill 2 for Lake Orange flashboards pending survey of property owners and engineering; and WHEREAS, the Lake Orange Capital Project Ordinance once approved includes up to $45,000 in Senate Bill 2 funds as part of the financing for the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that in the interest of increasing the water supply for all citizens, the Board does hereby formally allocate Senate Bill 2 water funds in the amount of $45, 000 to the Lake Orange project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners hereby requests that the State of North Carolina encumber $45, 000 of Senate Bill 2 water funds for the use of Orange County in addi- tion to the amounts encumbered in accordance with the resolution adopted on July 7, 1986; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that the Board understands that Senate Bill 2 Funds must be matched equally with local funds for the project indicated. Adopted this 24th day of March,1987 . Shirley E. Marshall, Chair Attest: Beverly Blythe, Clerk Orange County Board of Commissioners L.= 165 O R A N G E C O U N T Y INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: County Manager SUBJECT: Background on the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity DATE: April 1, 1987 This project has been under consideration as one of several measures to increase the amount of stored water available in the Upper Eno River during a drought. Authori- zation was given by the Board in November, 1986 to develop engineering plans and specifications to raise the lake by one foot yet with the capability of being raised to two feet at a later time were such decision to be made; and to survey property owner title claims and sentiment as related to a one or two foot rise. Background facts concerning the decision are as follows: 1. Safe Yield. The Division of Water Resources, relying on drainage area and average rainfall calculations, has estimated a 51 million gallon increase or a 200, 000 gallon per day safe yield increase from a one foot rise and a 104 million or 400, 000 gallons per day safe yield from a two foot lake level change. 2 . Engineering. Either level is engineeringly feasi- ble while still meeting the requirements of the Dam Safety Laws of 1967. All clearances have been received for construction to commence for the one foot. Were a two foot rise to be pursued additional approval would be necessary for the design of the flashboard release mechanism. The system consists of a one foot fixed vertical addition to the spillway crest with provision for a further one foot addition. The timber flashboards are to be permanently bolted in eight foot long sections to vertical structural steel supports which are to be anchored to the spillway slab. They are designed to withstand hydrodynamic forces occurring during severe storm events without compromising the safety of the dam embankment. • 16€ INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8704-501 Background on the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity April 1, 1987 Page 2 3 . Affect on Land Titles. There is some degree of overlap in the land to be affected. According to Orange County's deed the County owns land for the lake to elevation 615 feet even though the current spillway only captures water to 614 feet elevation. It further specifies Lake Orange Incorporated as owning the land between 615 and 620 elevation for the purpose of private recreation rights subject to an easement to the County for temporary flooding to elevation 620 feet. Other deeds reflect private ownership from 620 elevation and above with the exception of two deeds which claim ownership to elevation 615 edge. This overlap would have to be resolved before a two foot rise were approved. However, it is the testimony of one of the two property owners affected that the overlap would not be contested under a one foot change. Lake Orange Incorporated has offerred to deed ownership to the second foot to Orange County with conditions. The Board rejected the offer March 24, 1986 reserving its right to match any cash offer received by Lake Orange Incorporated. According to the Durham Morning Herald this week, Robert Nichols, Presi- dent of Lake Orange Incorporated, has stated that Lake Orange Incorporated has received no cash offer. 4. Survey Results. Of the twenty seven question- naires returned one third claimed to have an interest in the land below 620 feet elevation while two thirds supported raising the lake two feet. Comments had to do with asking assurances that: a) access to property would remain, b) lots would not be deemed unsuitable for building, and c) the flood plain would not be increased above 620 feet. Six owners expected damage to their properties in the form of shoreline erosion and damage to docks. 5. Costs. This varies depending upon the extent of improvements undertaken, any litigation which may be necessary, and whether the County would elect to pay for any damage to private structures resulting from a lake level change. The latter does not result from a legal responsibility; such structures as piers, private road and a boathouse were installed within the County's easement without the County's prior approval as required by its deed. Cost estimates are as follows: 16? INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8704-501 Background on the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity April 1, 1987 Page 3 One Ft. Elevation Two Ft. Elevation 1. Flashboards 24, 000 32, 000 2 . Additional Engineering 8, 000 2, 000 3 . Early Warning System None 7, 000 4. Litigation None Unknown 5. Private Structures No County expen- 50,000 County diture recommended Expenditure recom- mended though not legally required (to raise road, boathouse and bulkhead) 6. Funding. Hillsborough and the Orange Alamance Water System have each budgeted matching shares for the improvements according to the estimated cost of a two foot rise. Senate Bill 2 funds are available for 50% of the costs if acted upon immediately. This is assuming favorable action on a bill intro- duced to recognize projects by several counties which were not submitted by the deadline esta- blished for cities. Kenneth R. Thiampson KRT/srs CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE Be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners that pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chaper 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina the following capital project ordi- nance is hereby adopted: Section 1. The project authorized is improvements at Lake Orange. The project will be financed by an appropriation from the County Capital Reserve Fund, Senate Bill 2 Funds and funds received from Orange /Alamance Water and Sewer and the Town of Hillsborough. Section 2. The officers of the County are hereby directed to proceed with the pro- ject within the budget contained herein. Section 3. The following revenue is anticipated to complete this project. Senate Bill 2 Grant Funds $45,000 Town of Hillsborough 150,000 Orange /Alamance Water and Sewer 15,000 County Capital Reserve Fund 15,000 $90,000 Section 4. The following amounts are appropriated for the project: Improvements $90,000 Adopted this 23 day of July, 1986. NOTE: These expenditures are subject to Board of Commissioners' approval before the work can actually begin. 00 C� I iii, u. ,4e,9, -,.. z /�� & ze4ak - - Beverly A. BXythe, Clerk orange County Board of Commissioners a- (AL Don W llho t, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners r � A" SHI-He a shall,,�Vice Chair x. � Ben Lloyd Norman Walker Mosres Icarey I kP I 170 HAZEN AND SAWYER, p.c. CONSULTING ENGINEERS March 6, 1987 Mr. Ken R. Thompson County Manager County of Orange 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C . 27278 Re: Flashboard Design for Lake Orange Spillway, Orange County, N. C. H&S Job No. 3080 Dear Mr. Thompson: We are transmitting herewith for your review three sets of plans and technical provisions for the proposed one-foot flashboard addition to the Lake Orange spillway. Pursuant to the terms of our agreement with the County, the technical provisions are to be used in conjunction with the County' s standard purchasing contract to form complete documents for bidding. We would be happy to assist you in the bid solicitation process to the extent you deem appropriate. We are also transmitting a copy of our supporting hydrologic-hydraulic calculations and general reference material for your records along with a copy of our request for a construction permit from the North Carolina Division of Earth Resources . Under the Dam Safety Law ( 15 NCAC 2K) , the plans must be submitted for State review and a permit issued before the flashboards can be erected at the site. We have been assured that the State review process will move swiftly and the construction permit will be issued to your office in a week or two. The proposed flashboard system consists of a one-foot fixed vertical addition to the spillway crest with provision for a further one-foot addition at some future date. The timber flashboards are to be permanently bolted in eight-foot-long sections to vertical structural steel supports . The steel supports are themselves anchored to the existing spillway slab. The flashboards are designed to remain in place and to withstand the hydrodynamic forces occurring during severe storm events. Our hydrologic-hydraulic evaluation shows that, with the one-foot flashboards in place, the spillway has adequate capacity to safely pass the "Spillway Design Storm" required by the North Carolina Dam Safety Regulations . Therefore, the presence of the 4300 GLENWOOD AVENUE P.O.BOX 30428 • RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27622 • (919)782-8333 RALEIGH.NC • CHARLOTTE.NC HOLLYWOOD.FL • NEW YORK,NY 171 Mr. Ken R. Thompson March 6, 1987 . Page 2 flashboard system does not compromise the safety of the dam embankment. We recommend that the second one-foot addition, if pursued, be designed with either a manual or automatic collapse mechanism to avoid overstressing the spillway structure. We also recommend that provision of a telemetry system to monitor lake level be included as part of a further flashboard addition. Please let Mr. Cordell or me know if you have any questions or would like to meet with us to discuss the flashboard design. We will furnish you copies of the plans and technical provisions for bidding at your request. Very truly yours, HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C. (� James McCarthy, P.E. Principal Engineer JM/dve Enclosures 'I I 1 Mateth,c' c''''', itt'� C NEAR U OR, State of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development Division of Land Resources 512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 James G. Martin, Governor Stephen G. Conrad S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Director March 25, 1987 Mr. Ken R. Thompson County Manager County of Orange 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 RE: Approval to Modify Lake Orange Dam Orange County • Dear Mr. Thompson: This is in response to your submission on March 6, 1987 of plans and design data for the repair of the subject dam in Orange County on East Fork Eno River in compliance with the Dam Safety Law of 1967. These plans have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Donald L. Cordell, P.E. of Hazen and Sawyer, P. C. This letter 'constitutes approval of your proposal to repair the subject dam according to the plans submitted to this Division on March 6, 1987 with the following stipulations: 1. Project construction shall be supervised by Mr. Donald L. Cordell, P. E. 2. During construction the Division of Land Resources may require such progress reports as is deemed necessary. 3. Upon completion of the project, Mr. Donald L. Cordell, P. E. shall inspect the completed work and upon finding (1) that the work has been done as specified, (2) and the dam is safe, shall file with the Division of Land Resources "As-Built" drawings and a certificate stating that the work has been completed in accordance with approved plans, specifications and other requirements. • Pp. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-733-3833 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 17d Mr. Thompson March 25, 1987 Page 2 4. You must notify Mr. John Holley, P. E., Raleigh Regional Office, 3800 Barrett Drive, P. 0. Box 27687, Raleigh, N. C. 27611 ten days before the start of construction. The Dam Safety Law requires that project construction commence within one year from the date of this approval letter, or the approval is void. Very truly yours, x4/"14 Stephen G. Conrad SGC:ct cc: Mr. Donald L. Cordell, P. E. Mr. John Holley, P. E. 17 4C't =J 198 7 HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.c. CONSULTING ENGINEERS March 27, 1987 Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson County Manager County of Orange 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Re: Flashboard Design for Lake Orange Spillway, Orange County, NC H&S No. 3080 Dear Mr. Thompson: We were pleased to receive a copy of the March 25 letter to you from Mr. Stephen G. Conrad, Director, NRCD pertaining to the proposed flashboards at Lake Orange. Mr. Conrad's letter constitutes the approval by the Division of Land Resources of the one-foot flashboard addition at Lake Orange. Apart from the notification and supervision requirements noted in Mr. Conrad's letter, there are no further regulatory requirements which must be met prior to the erection of the one-foot flashboards. Accordingly, you may proceed with the construction process at your discretion. Please be aware that a separate request for approval must be made to the Division if and when the County elects to increase the flashboards above the one-foot height shown on the plans. The Division was notified in our March 6, 1987 request for approval and also on the plans that the flashboard supports have been designed to provide for a further one-foot addition at a later date. The present approval , however, does not cover the second one-foot addition. We would be happy to assist you in the bid solicitation process in any way you deem appropriate. Please notify us if we can be of assistance. Very truly yours, HAZEN AND SAW PC. Donald L. Cordell , P.E. Associate F DLC/j hl 4300 GLENWOOD AVENUE • P.O.BOX 30428 • RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27622 • (919)782-8333 RALEIGH.NC • CHARLOTTE NC HOLLYWOOD,FL • NEW YORK,NY ORANGE COUNTY 175 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action A nd Item No.At rd_ ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S RESOLUTION OFFICE,X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To adopt a formal resolution establishing the Board precedent to making appointments. BACKGROUND: The Orange County Board of Commissioners approved the establishment of a special Board of Equalization and Review for the year 1987-1988. The Board will convene on April 4, 1987 to set dates for hearing appeals. Taxpayers will be able to appeal from that date through June 30, 1987. It is expected that the Board will complete its work on July 1, 1987. Notices of Equalization and Review decisions will be mailed thereafter. The Board of Equalization and Review will consist of five or more members. it is essential that there be a quorum at each meeting and that members who decide the appeals be present to hear the taxpayer and discussions on each appeal. Adherence to an attendance policy will be necessary to ensure this on the part of all members appointed. It is not known at this point how many appeals there will be until the appeals procedure and dates are advertised. A total of 47 meetings were held in 1981, however, there probably will be a lesser number for the year 1987. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Adopt resolution. 176 • COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, 1)ICKERSON, 13ERNI•IOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 CHCTIITON STREET HILLSBOROUGH. N.C. 27278 919-732.2196 919-942-8000 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20,FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E.FRANKLIN STREET CHAPEL HILL,N.C.27514 April 2, 1987 Ili 919.929.7151 ALONZO B.COLEMAN, JR. STEVEN A.BERNHOLZ DONALD R. DICKERSON ROGER B•BERNHOLZ GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL DOUGLAS HARGRAVE MARTIN J.BERNHOLZ RICHARD J. SNIDER.JR. G.NICHOLAS HERMAN KAREN J. SHANGRAw Shirley E. Marshall, Chair Of Counsel Moses Carey BONNER D.SAWYER Stephen Halkiotis (1902-1972) John Hartwell Don Willhoit Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re: Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Dear Board Members: This letter is in response to inquiries made during the March 24, 1987 meeting of the Board concerning the composition of the special Board of Equalization and Review created by you on March 2, 1987. No formal resolution, however, was adopted by the Board at that meeting. North Carolina General Statutes Section 105-322 states as follows: Upon the adoption of a resolution so providing, the Board of Commissioners is authorized to appoint a special Board of Equalization and Review to carry out the duties imposed under this section. The resolution shall provide for the membership, qualifications, terms of office and the filling of vacancies on the Board. The Board of Commissioners shall also designate the Chairman of the special Board. The resolution shall be adopted not later than the first Monday in March of the year for which it is to be effective and shall continue in effect until revised or rescinded. it shall be entered in the minutes of the meeting of the Board of T a • • 177 Board of Commissioners Page Two April 2, 1987 Commissioners and a copy thereof shall be forwarded to the Department of Revenue within fifteen days after its adoption. The authority granted by this statute is, in my opinion, broad enough for the Board of Commissioners to create a special Board of Equalization and Review consisting of a "pool" of members with a lesser number constituting a quorum for the conduct of the special Board's work. This pool could include each member of the Board of County Commissioners and by agreement of S the Board of Commissioners each member could attend and serve during designated Board of Equalization and Review meetings. The "resolution" of the Board adopted on March 2, 1987 will have to be revised to accommodate the pooling concept. a _ Enclosed is a copy of the Resolution that was adopted in 1982 for your information. Very truly yours, W G=offrei E. Gledhill GEG/lsg o Enclosure xc: Kermit Lloyd a _ Ken Thompson p , d xz I ad I � • • 178 _too i . _513 • s 701 NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY RESOLUTION • WHEREAS pursuant to.N.C. Gen. Stat. 105-322 the Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County is presently composed of the members of the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County is authorized to appoint a special Board of Equalization and Review to carry out the duties imposed by N.C. Gen. Stat. 105— 322; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County deem it advisable to appoint a special Board of Equalization and Review and by this resolution provide for the membership qualifications, terms of office and the manner of filling of vacancies on the special Board of Equalization and Review; • IT IS THEREFORE RESOLVED: 1. The special Board of Equalization and Review of • —Orange County is hereby created. 2. The Orange County special. Board of Equalization and Review shall consist of 7 members, each to serve for a term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on .Funs 30, 1982 ------- 3. Vacancies occurring and existing on the Orange County special Board of Equalization and Review shall be filled by the Orange County Board of Commissioners at their next regular meeting after the occurrence of the vacancies. 4. Each member of the special Orange County Board of Equalization and Review shall be a resident of Orange County and have the statutory qualifications necessary to hold the public office of County Commissioner in Orange County. In addition the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, in selecting members of the special Board of Equalization and Review, may consider; a. The length of time a candidate has resided in Orange County, I../(1 ti• G,:�.•r�i'd. • . _ 44 b. Whether and to what extent & candidate owns real property located within Orange County, I7 • . C. Whether andtto what extent a candidate is familiar with the value of real 'property located within orange County, -- . - d. Whether and to.what extent a candidate < / • has had formal education in real estate appraising, e. The geographical composition of the special Board of-Equalization and Review within Orange County, , - f. Any other matters that the Board deems appropriate. • The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall appoint , members to the special Board.of Equalization and Review of Orange County in the same manner as it uses for other appointments. . + After the -members of the special Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County have been appointed, the 'Orange . County Board of Commissioners shall designate a chairman of the — • --special Board and shall fix such compensation and allowances ''' ' for the members as it deems appropriate. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the foregoing resolution was passed upon the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Whitted, Willhoit, Marshall, Gustaveson, 6 Walker • Noes: Commissioners • None • I, Paulette Pridgen-Pond, Clerk to the Board of • County Commissioners, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing . is a true copy of so much of the recorded proceedings of a meeting of the Orange County Board of Commissioners held on February 16, 1982 , as it relates to the resolution ~ hereinabove set forth. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the said Board this the 3rd day.of March 1982. • C:12atiferfiLa '' Ig.)-421... Paulette Pridge Pnu and • I •, Clerk to the Orange County ?s� Board of Commissioners . /1 .; f ) " J 180 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Ag d Item No. Lj1 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: APRIL 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Funding of. additional Classroom Units for Chapel Hill.-Carrboro City Schools DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: Yes x No Manager Manager's Office ext. 501 ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Resolution INFORMATION CONTACT: 2. Letter from Superintendent TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To consider adopting the attached Resolution assuring the school system that funds in an amount of $100,000 to construct two additional classroom units will be appropriated in the 1987-88 County budget. BACKGROUND: The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools have expressed a need for two additional classroom units for the beginning of school next fall. The total cost of the units is estimated by the school system to be $100,000. Assurance from the County of an appropriation in the 1987-88 budget for these classroom units is- needed at this time in order that construction can begin in time for occupancy by August, 1987. • • RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve the resolution and authorize the Chair to sign. - 0 •; 1987 �G � VI� 181 , CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS LINCOLN CENTER,MERRITT MILL ROAD CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 Telephone: (919) 967-8211 GERRY HOUSE,Superintendent MICHAEL RADZ,Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services ';j SHEILA BREITWEISER,Assistant Superintendent 'I March 25, 1987 for Support Services Mr. Ken Thompson Orange County Manager 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ken: Again, we in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School System will be faced with an increasing student population and insufficient space to accommodate the growth. Until some permanent construction can take place, we have no choice but to utilize alternate classroom space. The Board of Education is requesting again this year that the County Commissioners guarantee the Chapel Hill- Carrboro City School System at least $100,000 in the capital outlay budget for 1987-88 in order that we may proceed with the construction of two additional classroom units at Seawell School for use next year. The request is being made now in order to allow the necessary lead time for construction of the units to be completed for the beginning of school next fall . From our experience last year, we know this amount of time is needed in order to assure that the units will be ready for teachers when they report to work on August 18, 1987. It is the hope of the Board of Education that the County Commissioners will consider this request for $100,000 for building construction in excess of any allocation for current capital expenses. The school system' s ongoing main- tenance needs will continue to be seriously unaddressed as long as we are required to allot an amount as great as $100,000 from our capital outlay alloca- tion for construction costs to accommodate growth. The predictions indicate that this student population growth trend will continue. I appreciate your attention to this matter and eagerly await a response. Sinc ely, (Mrs. ) Gerry House Superintendent GH/alg . Yf y 182 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools are in need of two additional classroom units, and WHEREAS, construction of the classroom units needs to begin this Spring to allow the necessary lead time to complete the units for the beginning of school next fall, and WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools have requested that the Orange County Board of Commissioners appropriate $100,000 for the construction of the two classroom units in the 1987-88 County budget, and WHEREAS, The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools need the assurance from the Orange County Board of Commissioners that the funds will be appropriated before proceeding with the construction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Commissioners assures the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools that $100,000 will be appropriated for the construction of two additional classroom units in the 1987-88 County budget. Adopted this 6th day of April, 1987. Shirley E. Marshall, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners ATTEST: Beverly Blythe Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners p it 183 ORANGE COUNTY Action Agenda BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Item No. ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE April 6, 1987 Subject: Governor' s Volunteer Awards Department: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Public Hearing: Yes % no Attachments: Information Contact: Shirley Marshall and/or Beverly Blythe Guidelines t Phone Numbers: 732-8181, 968-4501, 227-0231 PURPOSE: Select those agencies from which nominations will be solicited, select the fri ::,_ categor i es of volunteers and direct the Clerk to proceed. BACKGROUND: Each year the Governor' s Office of Citizen Affairs requests each County to nominate outstanding volunteers who best represent individuals meeting community needs. Those volunteers selected (4) are then honored at a recognition ceremony in the fall . Heretofore, nominations were requested from the following community agencies: OPC Mental Health, both school systems, RSVP, Rape Crisis Center, Recreation and Parks Advisory Council , OCIM, Senior Citizens Board, Board of Social Services, Women' s Health Counseling and the Youth Services Needs Task Force. The categories for last year were: two community service volunteers, one school volunteer and one volunteer organization. RECODATION: The Board needs to select the categories from which nominations will be solicited, to approve the list of community agencies that will be contacted for nominations, and to direct the Clerk to proceed. II 1 ► a i 1 a ► _ i i yi ► 184 NOMINATIONS. In order for each local county contact to be able to choose the outstanding Volunteers who best represent individuals meeting community needs, the Governor 's Office of Citizen Affairs has set very broad guidelines on the nomination process. The following information is enclosed to try and answer any questions you might have in handling nominations for the Governor' s Volunteer Recognition Ceremonies for 1987. CATEGORIES. Because our office received so many favorable responses to last year 's ceremonies, we have decided to retain the "four-category system." We do want to clarify one matter, though. Although the categories G.O.C.A. has set will remain two Community Service Volunteers, one School Volunteer and one Volunteer Organization, you may choose any combination of these four in order to nominate from your county. A few suggestions that were related through evaluations indicated that a senior citizen category or a youth category might be a good idea instead of a school Volunteer category. It is entirely up to you and/or your committee as to what category of citizen you would like to honor this year. You could choose, for example, three organizations and a youth Volunteer an two senior citizens and two organizations an four school Volunteers. The choice is in your hands, because Governor Martin feels as though you know best who has been meeting the needs of your neighbors as Volunteers. DATES AND PLACES OF THREE REGIONAL CEREMONIES The regional ceremonies were very well-received last year, so we are planning once again to hold three ceremonies. We have not finalized where the receptions and ceremonies will be held, and although we will plan once again to have fall events, we do not have the tentative dates as of this writing. As soon as the Governor's schedule has been set, you will be the first to know. For now, plan for the fall ! You will find enclosed in this mailing your official nomination form. As noted, please fill this out as completely and accurately as possible, because the names you print, as well as the addresses, will be the ones distributed:to the news media and printed on the certificates. The MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENT section needs to contain a very, very brief description of the award winner's most impressive Volunteer accomplishment. (EXAMPLE Mary Jefferies- Red Cross Volunteer for 20 years Q C Meals on Wheels- feeding area 's homebound for 3 years. ) (more) 185 • Please make sure that a phone number is listed, so that our office has a means by which to contact the award winner. Please list the person who will be invited to receive the • award in the space (organization representative or contact) if you plan to nominate an organization. Double check the address of each award winner. The reception • and ceremony invitation will not reach them in time if the address is incorrect. List any interesting accomplishments under the space (Volunteer Accomplishments) so that our office will be able to share these facts with any media that calls for them. If you plan to distribute this form while taking nominations locally, please delete Lisa HcLemore's name and address from 1 the back of the copies. Last year, a few people sent their nominations to that address, because it remained on the copies of the forms. Although we were happy to mail them back to our contacts, it slowed up the local nomination process. As noted on the form, these nominations need to be back to our office by the middle of May. This is not a strict 1 deadline, but the sooner the nominations are in from your county, the quicker we can plan for the receptions and ceremonies. When you mail it in, your work is through, and ours is just beginning! Finally, if this very long set of guidelines has you confused, please feel free to pick up the phone and call Lisa. 1 McLemore at (800) 662-7952. She will be coordinating the events again this year, and she would appreciate any comments and/or concerns that you have. Your work in submitting nominations from your county is truly appreciated, and we want to make the process as simple as possible. Volunteers are North Carolina 's most precious resource, and the Governor's Volunteer Recognition Ceremonies are the State's way of saying "thank you" to these very special citizens. G.O.C.A. appreciates your help in making this happen. \Jr 1))°1)1 186 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action A era x Item No ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: Apr i 1 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Response to the NC Utilities Commission DEPARTMENT: BOARD OF'.COMMI SSI ONERS PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT:Dick H e l w i g or Yes - Memo dated April 2, 1987 Beverly Blythe Letter and Response TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough — 732-8181 Chapel Hill — 968-4501 Mebane — 227-2031 Durham 688-7331 PURPOSE: Proposed reply to the NC Utilities Commission Docket -P-89, SUB 23 Long Distance Failures during April , 1986. BACKGROUND: Additional time was requested by the Telephone Technical Task Force at the February 2, 1987 meeting to prepare a response to the NC Utilities Commission concerning comments made by AT&T Communications, General Telephone Company of the South and Central Telephone Company. RECOMMENDATION(S) : Approve letter to Chief Clerk of NC Utilities Commission and Reply of Orange County Board of Commissioners listed as Docket No. P-89, Sub 23. 18 ? TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners FROM: Technical Review Task Force - Telephone Richard A. Helwiq, Chair DATE: Thursday, April 2, 1987 TOPIC: Proposed reply to NC Utilities Commission docket P-89, SUB 23 Long Distance Failures During April, 1986, replies to company comments on our request for corrective orders from the North Carolina Utilities Commission. The Telephone Technical Review Task Force respectfully submits to you its proposal for a reply to the third round of comments made by AT&T, Centel, and General Telephone, on our requests for specific corrective action . These comments were requested (ordered) by the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) . This proposed reply comes to you with the unanimous recommendation of the Task Force from its meeting of Wednesday, April 1, 1987. After both joint and separate filings by the three telephone companies through the NC Utilities Commission, and after meeting with eleven AT&T representatives, and with continual contact with Centel, the Task Force developed and substantiated several proposals for changes in the operating relationships and interconnections between the companies involved in the failure of long distance service to Orange County (Centel, General and AT&T) . The Orange County Commissioners submitted these proposals to the NCUC on October 23, 1986. The NCUC sought comments from each of the telephone companies on these proposals. And now we recommend to you yet another reply. These rounds of responses and replies should be drawing to a conclusion within the next several rounds. While it is possible that we may be asked to participate in a "ore-Hearing" conference, or a full Hearing on this matter it is more likely that our efforts will blend into other similar activities. It appears that the Regional Telephone Task Force of TJCOG is developing (and is likely to adopt) major sets of recommendations that will address most of the issues that we have been raising. The reply that we recommend to you includes a brief review of the issue, a clarification of viewpoint and then asks the NC Utilities Commission: 1) To keep all of our previous requests open. 2) To ask General Telephone, which serves eastern Orange subscribers, to respond to all previous questions as a Local Exchange Company, noting that General has responded only as a contractor between Centel and AT&T. 3) To order Centel and AT&T and General and AT&T to develop practical plans and budgets, for complete review, for implementing fault-tolerant and self-healing networks through their class 5 office levels. 4) To request progress reports on studies AT&T has initiated as . outlined in its response of August 28, 1986. I 188 5) To keep the docket open to review the results of these requests and the monitoring of calling to and from Hillsborough. And, 6) To modify the heading on the docket to reflect that Shirley Marshall is now Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. The NCUC can accept our request and order what we've proposed, or deny our proposals in whole or in part, or ask for further responses from the phone companies, or call for a hearing on the request, or withhold action pending other actions. (For completeness, there are probably other procedural options also possible) . Our proposals fall quite nicely in line with the direction that the Regional Telephone Task Force of the Triangle J COG seems to be heading. These arguments and specifications for our requested changes to the network form a substantial foundation on which the COG can build. 1 18E BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION In the Matter of Orange County Board of Commissioners, ) Don Willhoit, Chairman, 106 East Margaret ) Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278, ) Complainants ) vs. ) Docket No. P-89, Sub 23 General Telephone of the South, ) ) Central Telephone Company, and AT&T ) Communications of the Southern States, Inc. , ) Respondents ) REPLY OF ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AS ORDERED BY THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 18, 1986 TO THE RESPONSES OF AT&T COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF THE SOUTH AND CENTRAL TELEPHONE COMPANY WHICH WERE ORDERED BY THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 26, 1986 This docket has been before the North Carolina Utilities Commission for almost a full year. It asked for relief from and resolution of a massive failure of long distance (interLATA) service to both Centel 's Hillsborough office and to General Telephone's office (s) serving subscribers in eastern Orange County; it also noted that the failure affected General Telephone subscribers in Durham County, including the Research Triangle Park. Moreover, it asked for the development of a Plan, under public scrutiny, to prevent such failures in the future. We have documented a massive failure that, in part, was due to the complexity of the network features being installed by AT&T and the lack of pathways between subscribers and alternative toll centers (network entrances) . With networks of such complexity, failures are inevitable. Thus, rather than addressing such failures on a case-by-case basis, the network should be designed so that it can monitor its own operations and detect and correct its own failures. These abilities, called fault- tolerant and self-healing, are standard components of modern network ___ 1 190 design. We feel that such attributes must be implemented throughout the network, even throughout the class 4 and class 5 office levels and to the larger remotes of class 5 offices. We have asked for a plan affecting both administrative and physical-structure-of-network components to address this issue. We have brought forth substantive issues of subscribers needs for high availability, dependability, and reliability of the telecommunications network, which, perhaps, are higher than the current criteria demand. Because we were aware of the separate postures of the Local Exchange Companies and the Interoffice Carriers, we asked for separate responses so that each could address the questions of such failures from its own perspective. We raised questions of reliability and responsibility, and again called for a plan to avoid such crises in the future. We also asked that the North Carolina Utilities Commission survey, and perhaps adjust, the relationships between the companies so that the subscribing public is served better than 11+ days of massive failure. After a substantial and complete meeting with AT&T representatives where a much better perspective of the impact of failure was gained, and after the individual filings by the respondents, we drew on recommendations of the companies and proposed that the Commission order 1) a direct connection between Centel and AT&T for interLATA services, and 2) that any new interLATA construction be to a separate AT&T Point of Presence. The separate replies by the respondents vividly substantiates the major difference in operating postures of each of the respondents on the matter of interconnection. In its filing of December 12, 1986, AT&T says, ". . .The design of the local exchange network and how that local network will be used to provide access to interexchange carriers is primarily the responsibility of the local exchange company. . .the method by which AT&T traffic is delivered to AT&T' s Point of Presence is a local company decision. " In its filing of the same date, Centel says, "Central. . .has no control over AT&T or any other interexchange carrier in establishing Points of Presence. . .Central will provide access connections to any interexchange carrier. . .Central does not have an obligation to construct facilities to meet any interexchange carrier directly. . . " On the same date, General says, " [it] . . .would defer to the response of Central and AT&T. . .The location of AT&T's Point of Presence is a decision to be made by AT&T. . . " Each respondent seems to imply that it is the other's responsibility to design, and make, the interconnection. There clearly must be more to this issue to protect the public's interest and necessity. Public choice (as between AT&T, MCI, Sprint, etc.) can instill a great deal of responsibility in the quest for market share. As for the Local Exchange Companies with the exclusive franchises, the Utilities 2 N 191 Commission' s policies and orders instill the responsibility. This docket has covered a lot of issues, but issues that are related, related to the public's need to benefit from introduction of modern network technology at the class 4 office and below. We, therefore, propose the following six positions to the Utilities Commission: I. We reiterate all of our previous requests of the Commission. II. We note that General Telephone has responded only as a contractor between Centel and AT&T. We request responses to our previous questions from General Telephone as a Local Exchange Company providing service to subscribers in Eastern Orange County and Durham County who also experienced this failure. III. Since the question of excessive costs of implementing modern network technology have been repeatedly raised, and in consideration of AT&T's offer to participate in discussions concerning the economic and practical feasibility of a direct connection, we ask the Commission to order AT&T and Centel, and AT&T and General to develop and to submit for review practical plans and budgets for implementing fault-tolerant and self-healing networks through their class 5 office levels. IV. Noting that AT&T, in its filing of August 29, 1986, said it would share results of a study on facility diversity between Durham and Greensboro, and that it was forming a Quality Assurance Task Force, we request the Commission to order AT&T to submit a progress report to us on each of those points. V. We ask that the docket be kept open to review the results of these requests and the monitoring as ordered by the Commission. VI . As Shirley Marshall is now the Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, we ask that the Commission replace Mr. Willhoit 's name on this docket with that of Ms. Marshall . This the 6th day of April, 1987. Respectfully submitted, Shirley Marshall Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners. 3 192 April 7, 1987 Ms. Sandra J. Webster Chief Clerk North Carolina Utilities Commission P. 0. Box 29510 Raleigh, NC 27626-0510 Dear Ms. Webster: Reference Docket No. P-89, SUB 23 At the Orange County Board of Commissioners/ meeting on April 6, 1987, I was authorized, by unanimous vote, to transmit this, our reply to the Respondents' separate comments on our proposals of October 23, 1986, which included all of our previous requests. Without relinquishing any rights to call for other forms of action under the procedures and rules of the North Carolina Utilities Commission, in our reply we are asking the Commission: 1) To keep all of our previous requests open; 2) To order General Telephone to respond to our previous questions as a local exchange company with subscribers in Orange County; 3) To order Centel and AT&T and General and AT&T to develop practical plans and budgets, for complete review, for implementing fault-tolerant and self-healing networks through their class 5 office levels. 41) To request progress reports on studies AT&T has initiated as outlined in its response of August 28, 1986; 5) To keep the docket open to review the results of these requests and of call monitoring to and from Hillsborough; and 6) To modify the heading on the docket to reflect that Shirley Marshall is now Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Sincerely, Shirley Marshall Chair RAH:ws 193 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action A enda Item No.0MC; ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Local Legislation DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No Manager's Office ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: BILL TELEPHONE NUMBER: FINANCIAL BACKGROUND Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To decide the bills to be submitted for the 1987 Session of the General Assembly. BACKGROUND: The proposed bills have been drafted or are in the process of being drafted for the Board's decision For Local Government Committee - deadline,April 15, 1987. 1. Joint Planning Authority Text of the bill is in the process of being drafted by the attorneys of the town and county. 2. An Act To Require the Disclosure of Interestlln Property_and Businesses by Orange County Commissioners. Bill attached. For the Finance Committee - deadline: as soon as possible. 3. Impact Fee Authorization Already authorized for submission 4. Real Estate Transfer Tax Text of the bill is attached together with narrative description on your alternative methods for distributing the tax proceeds with the municipalities. Estimates are included to illustrate what the tax would have yielded to the municipalities and the county under the four methods based on 1985-86 data. The preferred method will be incorporated as a second paragraph to section O ae-there is Board decision. 194 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 CHAPTER 525 AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO LEVY AN EXCISE TAX ON INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING REAL PROPERTY IN ORANGE COUNTY. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: Section 1. Tax. (a) Authorization. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may, by resolution, levy an excise tax on instruments conveying certain interests in real property in Orange County. The tax imposed may not exceed one dollar ($1. 00) on each one hundred dollars ($100. 00) or fraction thereof of the total consideration or value of the interest conveyed, including in the case of a sale, the value of any lien or encumbrance remaining on the property at the time of sale. This tax is in addition to the tax levied by Article 8E of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes. The value of a lease subject to this tax shall be computed on the basis of the present value of the fixed lease payments and, if the lease payments are based in whole or in part on the lessee's receipts, the estimated amount of the lessee's receipts. (b) Scope. A tax levied under this section applies to all instruments conveying an interest in real property in Orange County except an instrument: (1) Conveying an interest in real property from the United States, the State, or a political subdivi- sion of the State; (2) Recording a lease for a term of 10 years or less, unless: a. The lease gives the lessee an option to renew the lease for a period that, when added to the term of the lease, exceeds the 10-year limita- tion; or b. The lease is for substantially the same pro- perty and is between the same parties as a lease previously recorded, and the term of the new lease, when added to that of the previous lease, exceeds the 10-year limitation; or c. The lease requires or permits the property to be transferred to the lessee for less than the fair market value of the property; (3) Securing indebtedness; or (4) Recording a transfer in which no consideration was paid or is due the transferor by the transferee. In addition, this tax does not apply to conveyances of an interest in real ro ert b P P Y by operation of law, b intestacy. P by will, or by (c) Collection. A tax levied under this section is payable by the transferor of the interest at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office. This tax must be paid at the Register of Deeds Office before the instrument conveying the interest is recorded. The tax assessor shall stamp or otherwise mark each instrument to approve or exempt the amount of tax due to be paid prior to the instrument being 195 recorded. The Orange County Register of Deeds may not accept for recordation an instrument subject to a tax levied under this section unless the instrument bears the tax assessor's mark indicating that the tax is exempt or due to be paid. (d) Appeal. A person who is liable for a tax levied under this section who disputes the amount of tax due shall pay the tax stated by the tax collector to be due, but may appeal the payment of the tax to the Land Transfer Tax Appeals Board by filing a written notice of appeal with the tax collector within 30 days after paying the tax. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the tax assessor shall forward a copy of the notice of appeal to the chairman of the Land Transfer Tax Appeals Board. A notice of appeal shall state the reason for the appeal and the amount of tax the appellant contends is due. The Land Transfer Tax Appeals Board is established to determine appeals of taxes imposed under this section. The Board shall consist of five members, two fo whom shall be appointed by the Orange County Board of Cofmissiners, one of whom shall be appointed by the governing body of Chapel Hill, one of whom shall be appointed by the governing body of Carrboro and one of whom shall be appointed by the governing body of Hillsborough. The County Commissioners shall desig- nate a chairman of the Board from the membership of the Board. The expenses of the Board are an administrative expense and shall be paid from the proceeds of the tax. Members of the Board shall serve staggered four-year terms, with the term of two of the members appointed by the Board of Commissioners and the terms of one of the members appointed by the governing bodies of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough ending on June 30 of one four-year period, and the terms of the remaining members ending on June 30 of the four-year period ending the second year following the year in which the terms of the other three members ended. Members of the Board shall serve staggered four-year terms. Members shall serve until their successors are appointed. A vacancy shall be filled by the appointing authority of the member who created the vacancy. The Land Transfer Tax Appeals Board shall meet at the call of the chairman and shall meet as often as needed to hear appeals. All appeals to the Board shall be heard by the Board within 45 days of the date the tax collector receives a notice of appeal. The Board shall issue a written decision within 20 days after hearing an appeal and shall send a copy of the decision to the appellant and to the tax collector. If the decision states that an appellant paid more tax than was due, the register of deeds shall immediately refund to the appellant the amount of overpayment. The appellant and the tax assessor may appeal the decision of the Board in an action brought in the superior court of the county. An appeal to the superior court shall be heard de novo. (e) Use and distribution of Tax Revenue. Proceeds of the tax shall be divided on a quarterly basis among the county and the municipalities located in the 19E county in accordance with the per capita method after the taxing county has deducted its cost of administering and collecting the tax, less refunds. The revenue may be used only for capital expendi- tures. All proceeds upon distribution shall be placed in a special Capital Reserve Fund to be used for the following: 1. roads, including rights-of-way acquisition and construction of ancillary facilities; 2. open space and recreation; 3 . publicly assisted housing; 4. public elementary and secondary school capital outlay, including retirement of indebtedness incurred by the county for this purpose; and 5. other public buildings. (f) Penalties. A person who knowingly fails to pay a tax levied under this section, who knowingly aids another to fail to pay a tax levied under this section, or who, to avoid paying part or all of the tax due under this section, knowingly misstates the total consideration for an interest conveyed is guilty of a misdemeanor and is punishable by imprisonment for up to two years and a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100. 00) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1, 000) . (g) Taxes Recoverable by Action. If a transferor fails to pay a tax imposed by this section within 30 days of the tax assessor's demand that he pay the tax, the tax may be recovered by Orange County in an action brought in the superior court of the county. In an action to recover a tax imposed under this section, costs of court shall include a fee to the county of twenty-five dollars ($25. 00) for the expense of collection. (h) Effective Date: Application. A tax levied under this section shall become effective on the first day of a month, as designated in the resolution levying the tax, and may not become effective for at least 30 days after the adoption of the resolu- tion. A tax levied under this section applies to instruments that are executed on or after the effective date of the levy, except instruments executed on or after that date that convey an interest in real property pursuant to a recorded written contract made before the effective date. (i) Repeal. A tax levied by this section may be repealed by a resolution adopted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Repeal of a tax levied under this section shall become effective on the first day of a month and shall apply to repeal. Repeal of a tax levied under this section does not affect a liability for this tax that attached before the effective date of the repeal. 197 Section 3. Nonwithstanding subsection (d) of Section 2 of this act, the initial term of one of the members to the Land Transfer Tax Appeals Board appointed by Orange County Board of Commissioners and the initial terms of the members appointed by the governing bodies of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough shall end on June 30 of the second year after their term begins. Section 4. This act is effective upon ratification. V( 198 `C puns„ Of 69 FINANCE DEPARTMENT 17 1$, b -0rrh (Car''‘‘o ORANGE COUNTY GORDON R. BAKER DIRECTOR MEMORANDUM To: County Manager From: Finance Director Subject: Land Transfer Tax Date: April 3, 1987 Based upon the funds generated by the revenue stamps in the Register of Deeds office, the attached table illustrates how a land transfer tax of one percent (1%) would have been distributed for the 1985-86 fiscal year. The actual amounts of transfer tax would have been greater than the amounts shown because the revenue stamps are not an indication of the total market value of real property transfers. Unfortunately, the County does not have this data available in its files. However, the amounts shown are an indication of how a tax would have been distributed under the methods possible. 106 EAST MARGARET LANE • HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278 • 919/732-8181 0 199 0 4, rd x m CO ul r) -'Cr °• ■a Cl) 0 .0 �' •ai 0•d o C H 0 4.J 01 ro In 1-1 0 50.1 x >4 -H sa o -H w 0 v ro .0 ro v O en 4--) 4-3 H LH 'E Ib v � > Sa 4I 00 0 0 CO 0 00 O rd O r01 -H ro - 0 0 0 lO r') N 4J 4J +J rd 004 > �J 0 0 Cd0' N . r�-I m 0 ..� rd +?'� •cr rd •H 0 Q1 Q,' N N 1.J 0 -H r-I U) 40-) O rd 0 a Z ra N SI rd 0 +) ' ro 0 to- v>- .0 v al .0 ro $-1 3 Cl) '0 a, U 4J !-I rd !n 0 0 .0 0 k a 0 +J v H 0 0 4--)4--) a-1 0 U �it 0 W cO J1 0�I a ` Q,I O UJ -P -H U1 —i Z N 0 r0 C U 'n 0 -.1 �'' -P H 01 0 0 v 3 U 0 H 4-1 v C7 al o tr 0 0 Z 0I w m N 0 O ..R U7 a-J 0 0 .-0 U aJ C4' LP I rn ro N 0 0 0 .0 Sa v '0 -H u C M El I rd co 0 M N 4.) aJ -J Sa U v o ni • 0 U U i- 0 4-) GH'1 0 CO M cr) N dd co XC 0 0 +J XE 0 'd rd it 4-I Z a fO , `1' • ` C- N 1J 0 0 1J rd -'"I 0 0 01 'Z rl {N O •ri 'O .0 Cl) CD 0 }1 0 -H El 3 ' + r0-I 0 n C 0 co z 0 O cI -H + •r1 .0 H I co c o en w 0 0 -H a-1 .� co 0 4J -r1 -U7 E-1 c1 rl 0 aJ 0 ''O � -H 101 rd .=-1 rd Cl) o\o N Z n 0 rra rH-I Q 1011 -H CHa . '-I al U 0 a1 m '� H 0..i .0 -ra 1-a 40-1 •z a-1 rd -r♦ v 'O +J '0 0 rz � O .4 0 0 -'-I +J 0. CO X 0 O �Lr1 0)� 00 4J C 4) +J 0 0 Cd rd rd v 0 E 0 E 0 0 0 "H v CO 0 ri [n N Lo N 4-J 0 C v 5a -H 0 _ .0 0 0 4.) -J r) 4-3 Q Z ra IN OC' a' 1 +J H 1-I '� 4--1 O U] E 1 L- r1 4� ro m d O -H 0 - -H 0 0 '� 0 1.4 -P 0 aJ 0 -H O O •r1 4-) Q' N •r1 0 -H'd 0 0 'O 0 U 0 4.) d C A r-I ,0 4-) Cd 4 '0 ,.0 O 0 4-J • co H 0 d' rl ul d' d' 0 'II +J r 4 n N 0 0 a.0 .N -0 m -H 0 O oho N 0 4•-1 0 rd 0 -H Y CO a1 A >. S-I 0 A O Cd W 4-) -rl -H A 4J Z -P > a J O r� �, 0 > o it Ln co o 0 rN-I o � -H N 0 .0 004• 0 0 O at -P . co CO CS) r-I N Cd a•-1 0 4a v S: U C LO N In CO N in 3 E m O 0 m � 0 4 co P 0 l0 Hi in CO Lc) - N 0 0 0 C C C • 4J 0 a) C rd -1 _i. 3 C` i(N U) -H .) -H U W O a-1 a-•1 U) E 4•3 -H 4-1 0.,' W -P U) -,1 .g Cl) 0 00 U -k 0 Cd :� rd 0 3 b rd r° '-1 4i 4) CD E -H U r0 P -HH 0 0 it C '� H 0 H el 01 x 0 •n rd O 0 e O 0 rCl 4�I 40-I Hi 0 U 44-1 ro .0 0 N d C d `.. 0 rC1 0 0 QW 4a Q ro v ro ro fa C Cd rd � Z U) v 0 .--I .� v 5r rd a 0 0 0 04 01 Cq 4J III A rl rd .0 .H 0 O HI N co d' 0 U 0 X % U p Z I 1 200 AN ACT TO REQUIRE THE DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS IN PROPERTY AND BUSINESSES BY ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Section 1. Every member of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County shall disclose any legal , equitable , beneficial or contractual interest he/she or his/her spouse may have in any real property in Orange County. The real property which must be disclosed includes all real property which any Board member or his/her spouse holds title to, individually or jointly, any real property held in trust as well as any pecuniary interest he/she may have in any business , firm, or corporation of whatever nature, which holds title to or has any ownership interest in any real property within Orange County. Sec. 2. Every member of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County shall disclose any legal, equitable, beneficial or contractual interest he/she may have in or with any business, firm, or corporation, of whatever nature, which is doing business with Orange County pursuant to contracts which have been awarded by Orange County. Sec. 3. Every member of the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County shall disclose any legal, equitable, beneficial or contractual interest he/she may have in any business, firm, or corporation, of whatever nature, which is attempting to secure the award of a bid from Orange County or the approval of any Board or Agency of Orange County. 1 201 Sec. 4. The disclosures required in Secs. 1, 2 and 3 shall be in writing and filed with the Clerk of Superior Court of Orange County and with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County. Sec. 5. The written disclosures required in Secs. 1, 2 and 3 shall be made within the following time periods which are applicable: a. the latter of thirty (30) days after the effective date of this Act or thirty (30) days after the Board member has assumed office; b. the earlier of thirty (30) days of the acquisition of any legal, equitable, beneficial or contractual interest in the property or business, firm, or corporation required to be disclosed in Secs. 1, 2 and 3 or prior to the award by Orange County of a contract with or a permit or other approval to a business, firm, or corporation required to be disclosed in Secs. 2 and 3. Sec. 6. Subject to the limitations contained in .. w 1 this section, every Board member who has an interest required to be disclosed by this Act shall disqualify himself/herself from voting on any matter involving any such interest which comes for official action before the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County. The following interests do not require disqualification: a. interest in real property which must be disclosed in Sec. 1 provided the issue before the Board of 2 2 Commissioners is one of policy that affects the real property disclosed no differently than all other property similarly situated. b. an interest in business , firm, or corporation which is negligible from the point of view of the operation of the business,, firm, or corporation. Sec. 7. Any member who violates any provision of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and may be fined not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. Any member who is convicted of a violation of any provision of this Act shall forfeit his/her elected or appointed office, and such office shall be considered vacant as of the date of the final judgment of conviction. Sec. 8. This Act shall apply only to Orange County. Sec. 9. This Act shall become effective on •• 1 3 203 DISTRIBUTION ALTERNATIVES Alternate 1. Per Capita Basis The amount distributed by and to the taxing county and to municipalities therein shall be upon a per capita basis according to the total population of the taxing county, plus the total population of the municipalities therein; provided, how- ever, that "total population" of a municipality lying within more than one county shall be only that part of its population which lies within the taxing county. For this purpose, the County Finance Director shall determine a per capita figure by dividing the net proceeds of the tax collected under this Article for the preceding quarter within a taxing county by the total population of that taxing county plus the total population of all municipalities therein according to the most recent annual estimates of population as certified by the State Budget Officer. The per capita figure thus derived shall be multiplied by the population of the taxing county and each respective municipality therein according to the most recent annual estimates of population as certified by the State Budget Officer, and each respective product shall be the amount to be distributed to each taxing county and to each municipality therein. Alternate 2. Ad Valorem Basis The net proceeds of the tax collected in the taxing county shall be divided between the county and the municipalities therein in proportion_ to the total amount of ad valorem taxes levied by each on property having a tax situs in the taxing county during the fiscal year next preceding such distribution. For purposes of this section, the amount of the ad valorem taxes levied by the county or municipality shall include any ad valorem taxes levied by the county or municipality in behalf of a taxing district or districts and collected by the county or municipality. In computing the amount of tax proceeds to be distributed to any county or municipality, the amount of any ad valorem taxes levied but not substantially collected shall be ignored. Alternate 3. Point of Origin Basis and Taxing Effort The net proceeds of the tax collected in the taxing county shall be divided between the county and the municipalities therein according to the location of the property conveyed and in proportion to the total amount of ad valorem tax base within eac4r-•munieipalj_ty -and :the percentage of taxes levied by the taxing authorities. For this purpose the County Finance Director shall add the tax rates applied to determine the ratio of taxing effort existing between the respective municipality and the county. The percentage thus derived shall be applied to the transfer taxes collected to determine the amount to be distributed to each municipality and to the taxing county. C r 204 Alternate 4. Point-of-Origin The net proceeds of the tax collected in the taxing county shall be divided between the county and the municipalities therein according to the location of the property conveyed without regard to the overlapping taxing authority existing between the county and municipality. Proceeds of the tax would be distributed to a municipality if the property conveyed were within a municipal boundary and to the county if the property conveyed were outside of a municipal boundary. ORANGE COUNTY Action Agenda BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Item No. II ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT DING DATE April 6, 1987 Subject: APPOINL4ENTS • Department: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1 1 Public Hearing: Yes X no Attachments: Information Contact: Beverly A. Blythe Under Separate Cover Phone Numbers: 732-8181, 968-4501, 227-0231 PURPOSE: To maintain membership at effective levels on Commissioners appointed Boards The following vacancies are announced together with the indication of the status of securing candidates for possible appointment consideration. A-13 - RECREATION AND PARKS ADVISORY COUNCIL - 1 vacancy. No recommendation has been received. B-7 - HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION - 1 vacancies. No resumes have been received. B-21 - ANIMAL CONTROL TASK FORCE - 1 vacancy. No recommendation has been received from the Town of Hillsborough. B-26 - AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY BOARD - 2 additional resumes have been received. C-5 - HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - 2 vacancies. A recommendation has been received and resumes on file have been identified. C-6 - HILLSBOROUGH PLANNING BOARD - 1 vacancy. A recommendation has ,been received and resumes on file have been identified. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW - 6 resumes have been received. Two additional resumes are forthcoming. RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides. KATHLEEN BUCK. APPRAISER RT. 5 BOX 90 CHAPEL HILL. NC 27514 Orange '_' +_I!1ty Housing and Community Development 300 West Tryon St . Hillsborough . N. C. 27278 February 13 . 1957 Attention: Ms . Tara Fikes Sub lest Property: Parrish, Councilville Dear Ms . Fikes : As requested. I visited and inspected the suolect property for the purpose of reporting to you my opinion as to the fair and lust compensation due the owner as the result of the acquisition by County of the Property for a community development project . In order to arrive at this figure . I estimated the fair market value of the property using the market data approach for the land and the ocst approach for any improvements . The resulting value is my opinion of the fair and lust compensation. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This appraisal is made subject to these conditions and stipulations : 1 . The title is good and marketable . 2 . No responsibility for legal matters is assumed. All existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear. 3 . The Orange Co . Tax Map is accurate regarding lot size and dimensions . 4. Sketches in this report are included to assist the reaaer in visualizing the property and no land survey was made by the appraiser. 5. The information furnished to me by others is believed to be reliable but I assume no resoonsibilty for its accuracy. APPRAISAL CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that I have inspected this property: that ally'- statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge : that such statements are subject to the assumptions ands_ limiting condition contained herein: that I have not knowingly witheld anv pertinent information or data : that neither my employment nor compensation is contingent upon reporting predetermined or specified amounts of value ; that I have no present or future intended interest in this property and that the values expressed are my unbiased judgement as to the present Market Value of the estates appraised. Rest- tf v submitted. Ka hie K. Buck, Appraise- ' ■ PARCEL APPRAISAL REPORT PROJECT NAME: Councilville PARCEL ADDRESS: Man 113 PIk C lot 17 A PROPERTY OWNER: Melvin Parrish ADDRESS: Rt . 4 Box 332 Chapel Hill LOT: AREA: . 37 acre FRONTAGE: 126. 36 & 151 . 16 IMPROVEMENTS: none permanent HIGHEST AND BEST USE: open space UNLAWFUL USAGE OR VIOLATION OF CODES & ORDINANCES: The lot does not meet minimum size requirements . It is not buildable because there is insufficient area to support a septic field. *. VALUATION: Lot value $2 . 500 Building 500 Total $3 . 000 Photo of Property Sketch of Property SCR =vcs ;_ \-- 4 .c I I Ng \ - _ 1. jr: .4 It- sayi � ,. E:.',:,.; Air w 1 t=-sue .. It -1 S, g.4.° IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNER OF RECORD: Melvin Parrish PREVIOUS OWNER: ACQUIRED ON; Dec . 1972 PRICE: DEED BOOK: 239 PAGE: 451 REAL ESTATE TAX DATA County: Orange Township: Chapel Hill Mao: 113 C `17A Assessment : Land $ 11 , 894 Buildings : $ Total : $ 11 ,1694 ZONING DATA The subiect property is zoned R-1 which Permits residential development on a lot with a minimum size of 40, 000 so. ft . and a minimum width of 130 ft . PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL - The purpose of this appraisal is to determine the fair market value of the property as of the date mention to enable the purchase of the property... DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE Fair Market Value as estimated herein is defined as being "the hiahset price in terms of money which a property will bring if exposed to sake in the open market , allowing a reasonable period of time to find a purchaser who buys with a knowledge of all uses to which it is adaptable and for which it is capable of being used. " . i NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The Councilville neighborhood is characterized by small frame houses and mobile homes on large lots . The street have been paved and many of the houses have been rehabilitated under the Community Development block grant program the department fo Housing and Urban Development . SITE DATA Utilities Available Connected Street Improvements Water well no Walks no Electricity yes no Curbs yes Sewers no no Paved yes Septic no no Servi eta Blocks lilwa Schools 5 Stores 1 Churches 2 Location ( in relation to the nearest town) The property is located about 3 miles west of Carrboro Topography: level Shape : irregular Frontage : 126 & 151 HIGHEST AND BEST USE The highest and best use is defined as the most profitable and likely use to which a property can be out or that use of land which may reasonably be expected to produce the Greatest net return to land over a given period of time . It must be both a legal and a feasible use . The highest and best use of the sublect property for open space The lot is non--confromina in size and it does not have enought area to support a septic system. therefore it is not buildable . Description of the Property The property is a tract of approximately 16. 055 sa. ft . or . 37 acres . It is located on a corner so has roads on two sides . At the time of inspection there was a 1 . 5 story frame house that had been moved to the site and was resting on steel beams . It was in poor condition with termite damage to the floor foists and sills . There was also interior damage . VALUE INDICATED BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Sales Price $5, 500 $12 , 000 $8 . 000 Adiusted for: Time equal +500 equal Location equal -4. 000 equal Zoning equal equal equal Size equal -3 . 000 -3 . 000 Utility -3 , 000 -3, 000 -3 . 000 Other Adiusted Sales Price $ 2 . 500 $2 , 500 $2 . 000 (Refer to Comparable Sales Sheets for details) INDICATED VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH: $2 , 500 EXPLINATION OF ADJUSTMENTS: Sale 1 is in a location that is similar to the sublect , it approximately the same size but has greater utility because it has city water and sewer . Sale 2 is in a superior neighborhood. It is larger and has community water. Sale 3 is in a similar neighborhood. It is larger and has greater utility because it can support as septic system. Final Value Estimate : • Land: $2 . 50U Bui ldincrs : $50tJ salvacre value Total : $3 . 000 Date : February 13 . 1987 Aporaiser: Kathleen Buck Address : Rt . 5 Box 90 Chanel Hill , N. C. 27514 • a MARKET DATA APPROACH (Land Valuation) An appraisal technique in which an estimate of the appraised property's present value is predicated upon prices paid in actual market transactions. It is a process of correlation and analysis of the data about similar recently sold properties. GRANTOR: Steven- Adams GRANTEE: Sherman Tate LOCATION:lot 21 Rollingwood Subdivision Map 113B D 35 DEED BOOK 630 Page 30 Date December 15 , 1986 SALES PRICE: $5 ,500 SIZE: . 25 acres COMMENTS: lot has water and sewer available • Houses in neighborhood sell for $35 ,000 to $45 ,000 GRANTOR: Nathan Edelson GRANTEE: Phillip Cook LOCATION: Warren Court Robinswood Subdivision Map 113C A 4 DEED BOOK 513 page 231 Date May 1985 SALES PRICE: $12 ,000 SIZE: 1 acre COMMENTS: has community water system. Houses in neighborhood sell form $80 ,000 to$95 , 000 GRANTOR: Lewis Lipsitz GRANTEE: Joseph Bradshaw LOCATION: Off Rogers Rd . Sanburg Lane Map 24 4D DEED BOOK Page Date Nov .21 ;1986 . SALES PRICE: $8 ,000 SIZE: 1 acre COMMENTS: North of Chapel Hill . Mixture of houses in $35 ,000 to $45 ,000 range and mobile homes . T', RE SEUINGATE-, RUFFIN REALTY & I � NSURANCE INC._ RENTING gab Member of Local and State Realtors , PHonrg 682.1906 331 W.MAIN STREET DURHAM,NORTH CAROLINA 27701 REALTOR' "A Lot Means a Horne—A Home Means a Lot" Orange County Housing and Community Development MLS 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, N. C . 27278 March 11 ,1987 Attention: Ms. Tara Fikes Dear Ms. Fikes: As requested, I have reviewed the appraisals submitted on the following properties: Riddle Ave. Hillsborough, N.C . Owner Helen Alston. Torain Street, Hillsborough, N.C. Owner, Nannie Rainey Price. Lot 17A, TM 113, Blk C , Councilville, Chapel Hill N.C. Owner, Melvin Parrish I visited and inspected the subject properties for the purpose of reporting to you my opinion as the review appraiser. The appraiser has estimated a fair market value of the properties tot; be aquired, so that the owners may receive a fair and just compensation from the Orange County Community Development Project. Having analyzed the data and reviewed indications of the value by the appropriate approaches, I agree with the appraisers final estimate of value; and in my opinion the estimates are a fair market value of the properties appraised. respectfully S t d %lag Frede '� . Ru 'n Real tate Br. 'r BUCK, APPRAISER KAYH1-41 5 sox 90 NC 27514 CHAPEL HILL, a `�.Uf_A _ Housing and Community Development vranc?? v-' + February i3 , 1917 300 West Tryon St . 27278 Hillsborough.ough. N.C. Attention: Ms . Tara Fikes Sub sect Property: Price N. Fairview Dear. Ms . Fikes : red the surale-t Ur��c -rTy for t'� As requested. I visited and insnec and lust to the fair v oolnian as gt�ange Purpose of reoartina to you m the acquisition by compensation due the owner as the result of th- �� County of the property for a community development oroiect • t value Court to arrive at this figure . I estimated the fair market of order the market data approach for the land and the of the property using The resulting value is my opinion ocst approach for anyomnensations • of the fair and lust r- ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS conditions and stipulations : This appraisal is made subject to these 1 . The title is good and marketable . assumed. All existing 2 . No responsibility for legal matters is liens and encumbrances have beenndisreaarded and the Property is appraised as though free and clear. lot size and 3 . The Orange Co . Tax Map is accurate regarding dimensions . n 4. Sketches in this report are in ludey to assist bthe reader raise visualizing the Property and no land to me by others is believed to be 5, The information furnished accuracy• reliable but I assume no responsibilty for its MMIW APPRAISAL CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that I have insoec'ted this property: that all? statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge : that such statements are subiect to the assumptions an limiting condition contained herein: that I have not knowingly witheld any pertinent information or data : that neither my employment nor compensation is contingent upon reporting predetermined or specified amounts of value : that I have no present or future intended interest in this orooerty and that the values expressed are my unbiased luda_ement as to the present Market Value of the estates appraised. Respecr . ully - bmitted, ath ee -- B ck, Appraiser PARCEL APPRAISAL REPORT PROJECT NAME: North Fairview PARCEL ADDRESS: Turner St . Hillsborouah, N. C. PROPERTY OWNER: Nance Price ADDRESS: P. O. Box 32053 Newark N. J. LOT: AREA: . 24 acre FRONTAGE: 76 ft . IMPROVEMENTS: Single family residence HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Single family residential UNLAWFUL USAGE OR VIOLATION OF CODES & ORDINANCES: House is in dilapidated condition VALUATION: Improvements $4, 900 Lot Value 4. 400 Total Value $9. 300 Photo of Property Sketch of Property s"r tr: V Z-vi'r te ' ' ` - � _ , ..1 '1 • L - • 1 �.. l - i for i► r.- . IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNER OF RECORD; Nanie Rainey Price PREVIOUS OWNER; ACQUIRED ON; PRICE; DEED BOOK: PAGE; REAL ESTATE TAX DATA A County; Oranae Township: Hillsborough Map; 8 B 3 Assessment : Land $8 . 322 Bulidinas : $ 9. 635 Total : $ 17,057 ZONING DATA The subject property is zoned R-10 which Permits single family development on a lot with a minimum sq. ft . of 10. 000 sq. ft . and a minimun width of 75. ft . PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL The purpose of the appraisal is to determine the fair market value on the date mentioned to arrive at a purchase price for the property. DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE Fair Market Value as estimated herein is defined as being "the hiahset price in terms of money which a property will bring if exposed to sa .e in the open market . allowing a reasonable period of time to find a purchaser who buys with a knowledge of all uses to which it is adaptable and for which it is capable of being used. " . mmmw NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The North Fairview neighborhood is located north of U . S. highway 70 and west of N. C. 86. It is lust north of the Hillsborough Town limits . The area is characterized by a mixture of small single family homes and mobile homes . Most are in good condition. There are a few in dilapidated condition. SITE DATA Utilities Available Connected Street Improvements Water yes no Walks no Electricity yes yes Curbs no Sewers no no Paved yes Septic yes no ' Services Blocks Miles Schools 1 Stores . 5 Churches . 5 Location ( In relation to the nearest town) The property is located lust outside the Hillsborough Town limits Topography: level Shape : rectangular Frontage : 100 ft . HIGHEST AND BEST USE The highest and best use is defined as the most profitable and likely use to which a property can be put or that use of land which may reasonably be expected to produce the greatest net return to land over a given period of time . It must be both a legal and a feasible use . The highest and best use of the subject property is single family residential . Description of the Property The property is a tract of approximately 10. 460 sq. ft . or. 24 acre . It is located on the south side of Turner St . and has frontage on that road. At the time of inspection there was a frame single family house on the property. BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS Use : vacant Age : 30 yrs . So. ft . heated : 864 Sa. ft . unheated: Exterior Construction: Frame Condition: fair foundation basement crawl space : yes finished slab Type of construction: wood frame siding : wood attic : none roof: ashohalt shingle nutters & downspouts : none 4, insulation: none window type : double hung storm windows : yes L" Interior Construction: drywall & wood Condition: dilapidated No . of rooms 4 Livingroom yes dining room den or familyroom kitchen yes bedrooms 2 baths : full yes but plumbing not connected other rooms : Mechanicals: Heat : none Airconditioning: none wiring: inadquate Out buildings; Type: sq. ft . construction: Porches & decks : none other ( fireplaces etc . ) Fuctional Utiltiy: The property is in extremely poor condition. It has little value except for the exterior walls and founation. VALUE INDICATED BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ( lot value only ) Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Sales Price $4. 000 $4. 000 $ 8 .000 Adiusted for: Time +400 +400 equal Location equal equal equal Zoning equal equal - 1 . 000 Size equal equal - 2 . 500 *: Improvements none none none Utility equal equal equal Adjusted Sales Price $4.400 $4. 400 $ 4. 500 (Refer to Comparable Sales Sheets for details) INDICATED VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH: $4. 400 EXPLINATION OF ADJUSTMENTS: Sales 1 & 2 are residential lots in the same neighborhood as the subject property. Sale 3 is also in the same nelcrhborhood . It is larger and was zoned commercial at the time of purchase . ti COST APPROACH TO VALUE: In this approach the current costs of replacing the structure are estimated. The resulting value is then depreciated for physical , economic and functional factors . The resulting value is the current estimated value of the structure which is then added to the value of the lot which hsa been determined by the market data approach to obtain an estimated value of the whole property. . 864 sa. ft . x $38 . 00 per so. ft . = $ 32 , 832 less 85% depreciation —27, 907 depreciated value of structure 4. 925 rounded = $4, 900 lot value 4, 400 total value $ 9, 300 Final Value Estimate : Land: $4. 400 Buildings : 554.900 Total : $9. 300 Date ; February_ 13 . 1987 Appraiser: Kathleen Buck Address : Rt . 5 Box 90 Chapel Hill. N. C. 27514 • -- d MARKET DATA APPROACH (Land Valuation) An appraisal technique in which an estimate of the appraised property's present value is predicated upon prices paid in actual market transactions. It is a process of correlation and analysis of the data about similar recently sold properties. 1 GRANTOR: Belton Edwards GRANTEE: William Bowman LOCATION: Corner Haper St. & Homemont Rd. North Fairview DEED BOOK 524 Page 593 Date July 17,1985 SALES PRICE: $4,000 SIZE: .28 ac. COMMENTS: lot was vacant at the time of purchase 2 GRANTOR: Southern Leisure Homes GRANTEE: Talmadge Johnson r LOCATION: Corner of Old Cedar Grove Rd. & Riddle Rd. North Fairview DEED BOOK 529 Page 508 Date August 12,1985 SALES PRICE: $4,000 SIZE: .22 ac. COMMENTS: lot was vacant at time of purchase 3 GRANTOR: ICode11 Hicks Inc. GRANTEE: Naren Tambe LOCATION: Corner of High St. & U.S. 70 North Fairview DEED BOOK 563 Page 288 Date March 26,1986 . SALES PRICE: $8,000 SIZE: .43 ac. COMMENTS: property was zoned commercial, purchased by adjoining property owner !T REAL ESTATE I RUFFIN REALTY & INSURANCE INC. �� SELLING . RENTING �a Member of Local and State Realtors , PHONE 882-1306 331 W.MAIN STREET DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA 27701 REALTOR "A Lot Means a Home—A Home Means a Lot" Orange County Housing and Community Development 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 March 11 ,1987 Attention: Ms. Tara Fikes Dear Ms. Fikes: As requested, I have reviewed the appraisals submitted on the following properties: Riddle Ave. Hillsborough, N.C. Owner Helen Alston. Torain Street, Hillsborough, N.C. Owner, Nannie Rainey Price. Lot 17A, TM 113, Blk C , Councilville, Chapel Hill N.C. Owner, Melvin Parrish I visited and inspected the subject properties for the purpose of reporting to you my opinion as the review appraiser. The appraiser has estimated a fair market value of the properties tot be aquired, so that the owners may receive a fair and just compensat4on from the Orange County Community Development Project. AL Having analyzed the data and reviewed indications of the value by the appropriate approaches, I agree with the appraisers final estimate of value; and in my opinion the estimates are a fair market value of the properties appraised. ►espectfully S o t 1��d 10.01W _ MP% Frede k . Run��+ Real ' ,tate Br' r •. KATHLEEN BUCK. APPRAISER -y RT. 5 BOX 90 CHAPEL HILL. NC 27514 Orange !_' ,i±.v Housing and Community Development 300 West Tryon St . Hillsborough . N. C. 27278 February 13 . 1987 Attention: Ms . Tara Fikes Sub sect Property: Alston, N. Fairview Dear Ms . Fikes : As requested. I visited and inspected the sublect Property_ for the purpose of reporting to you my opinion as to the fair and lust compensation due the owner as the result of the acquisition by Or*anae County of the property for a community development prolect . . In order to arrive at this figure . I estimated the fair market value of the property using the market data approach for the land and the ocst approach for any improvements . The resulting value is my opinion of the fair and lust compensation. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This appraisal is made sublect to these conditions and stipulations : 1 . The title is good and marketable . 2 . No responsibility for legal matters is assumed. All existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear. 3 . The Orange Co . Tax Mao is accurate regarding lot size and dimensions . 4. Sketches in this report are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property and no land survey was made by the appraiser. 5. The information furnished to me by others is believed to be reliable but I assume no resoonsibilty for its accuracy. APPRAISAL CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that I have inspected this Property: that a1 " statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge : that such statements are subject to the assumptions anig limiting condition contained herein: that I have not knowingly witheld any pertinent information or data : that neither my employment nor compensation is contingent upon reporting predetermined or specified amounts of value : that I have no present or future intended interest in this property and that the values expressed are my unbiased judgement as to the present Market Value of the estates appraised. Resr-ctf — submitted. Kathie-n . Buck. Appraiser TM PARCEL APPRAISAL REPORT PROJECT NAME: North Fairview PARCEL ADDRESS: Riddle Ave . Hillsborough. N. C. PROPERTY OWNER: Helen Alston ADDRESS: Rt . 6 box 345. Hi11sborough. N. C. LOT: AREA: .36 acre FRONTAGE: 100 IMPROVEMENTS: Single family residence HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Single family residential UNLAWFUL USAGE OR VIOLATION OF CODES & ORDINANCES: House is in dilapidated condition VALUATION: Improvements $4. 700 Lot Value 5, 900 Total Value $10, 600 Photo of Property Sketch of Property 4 S4:4' •'a"' ' it pek-F jr) 014 AILIC / ato ' ti IDENTIFCATION OF PROPERTY OWNER OF RECORD; Helen Alston PREVIOUS OWNER: Pauline Holt ACQUIRED ON; Sept . 1981 PRICE; DEED BOOK; 372 PAGE; 452 REAL ESTATE TAX DATA County; Orange Township: Hillsborough Map; 7 B 62 Assessment : Land $6. 000 Buildings : $ 9. 865 Total : $ 11,865 ZONING DATA The sublect property is zoned R-10 which Permits single family development on a lot with a minimum sq. ft . of 10. 000 sq. ft . and a minlmun width of 75. ft . PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL The purpose of the appraisal is to determine the fair market value on the date mentioned to arrive at a purchase price for the property. DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE Fair Market Value as estimated herein is defined as being "the hlghset price in terms of money which a property will bring if exposed to sale in the open market , allowing a reasonable Period of time to find a purchaser who buys with a knowledge of all uses to which it is adaptable and for which it is capable of being used. " . _ d NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS The North Fairview neighorhood is located north of U . S. highway 70 and west of N. C. 86. It is lust north of the Hillsborough Town limits . The area is characterized by a mixture of small single family homes and mobile homes . Most are in good condition. There are a few in dilapidated condition. SITE DATA Utilities Available Connected Street Improvements Water yes no Walks no Electricity yes yes Curbs no Sewers no no Paved yes Septic yes no Services Blocks Miles Schools 1 Stores . 5 Churches . 5 Recreational Facilities Location ( In relation to the nearest town ) The property is located lust outside the Hillsborough Town limits Topography: level Shape : rectangular Frontage : 100 ft . HIGHEST AND BEST USE The highest and best use is defined as the most profitable and likely use to which a property can be put or that use of land which may reasonably be expected to produce the greatest net return to land over a given period of time . It must be both a legal and a feasible use . The highest and best use of the subject property is sinale family residential . Description of the Property The property is a tract of aooroximately 15, 550 so. ft . of . 37 acre . It is located on the North side of Riddle road and has frontage on that road. At the time of inspection there was a masonry single family house on the property. Immmm i BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS Use : vacant Age : 31 yrs . Sq. ft . heated 900 Sq. ft . unheated: Exterior Construction: Masonry Condition: Fair foundation basement crawl space finished slab yes Type of construction: Cement block siding : none attic : none roof: ashphalt shingle gutters & downspouts : none insulat-ion: none window type : sliding metal storm windows : none Interior Construction: drywall Condition: dilapidated No . of rooms 5 Livingroom yes dining room den or familyroom kitchen yes bedrooms 3 baths : full yes but plumbing not connected ceramic tile : other rooms; Mechanicals: Heat : none Airconditioning: none wiring: inadquate Out buildings; Type : sq. ft . construction : Porches & decks : none other ( fireplaces etc . ) Fuctional Utiltiy: The property is in extremely poor condition. It has little value except for the exterior walls and slab. r , _ 1 N _ COST APPROACH TO VALUE; In this approach the current costs of replacing the structure are estimated. The resulting value is then depreciated for physical , economic and functional factors . The resulting_ value is the current estimated value of the structure which is then added to the value of the lot which hsa been determined by the market data approach to obtain an estimated value of the whole property. . 900 sa. ft . x $35. 00 per sq. ft . = $ 31 ,500 less 85% depreciation -26, 775 depreciated value of structure 4. 725 rounded = $4, 700 lot value 5, 900 total value $104600 S VALUE INDICATED BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ( lot value only ) Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Sales Price $4, 000 $4, 000 $ 8, 000 Adiusted for: Time +400 +400 equal Location equal equal equal Zoning equal equal — 1 .000 Size +1500 +1500 — 1 500 Improvements none none none Utility equal equal equal Adjusted Sales Price $5, 900 $5 , 900 $ 5. 500 (Refer to Comparable Sales Sheets for details) INDICATED VALUE BY DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH: $5, 900 EXPLINATION OF ADJUSTMENTS: Sales 1 & 2 are residential lots in the same neighborhood as the subject property. The are smaller so were adiusted for size . Sale 3 is also in the same neighborhood . It is larger and was zoned commercial at the time of purchase. Final Value Estimate : Land; $5, 900 Buildinas : $4, 7u0 Total : $10. 6U0 Date : February 13 . 1987 Appraiser : Kathleen Buck Address : Rt . 5 Box 90 Chapel Hill . N. C. 27514 1 MARKET DATA APPROACH (Land Valuation) An appraisal technique in which an estimate of the appraised property's present value is predicated upon prices paid in actual market transactions. It is a process of correlation and analysis of the data about similar recently sold properties. 1 GRANTOR: Belton Edwards GRANTEE: William Bowman LOCATION: Corner Haper St. & Homemont Rd. North Fairview DEED BOOK 524 Page 593 Date July 17,1985 SALES PRICE: $4,000 SIZE: .28 ac. COMMENTS: lot was vacant at the time of purchase 2 GRANTOR: Southern Leisure Homes GRANTEE: Talmadge Johnson LOCATION: Corner of Old Cedar Grove Rd. & Riddle Rd. North Fairview DEED BOOK 529 Page 508 Da t F. August 12,1985 SALES PRICE: $4,000 SIZE: .22 ac. COMMENTS: lot was vacant at time of purchase 3 GRANTOR: Kodell Hicks Inc. GRANTEE: Naren Tambe LOCATION: Corner of High St. & U.S. 70 North Fairview DEED BOOK 563 Page 288 Date March 26,1986 SALES PRICE: $8,000 SIZE: .43 ac. COMMENTS: 'Property was zoned commercial, purchased by adjoining property owner REAL ESTATE-1 RUFFIN REALTY & INSURANCE INC. 0:11 `�. SELLING t RENTING • Member of Local and State Realtors PHONE 662-1906 331 W.MAIN STREET DURHAM,NORTH CAROLINA 27701 REALTOR ".4 Lot Means a Home—A Home Means a Lot" Orange County Housing and Community Development MLS 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, N. C . 27278 March 11 ,1987 Attention: Ms. Tara Fikes Dear Ms. Fikes: As requested, I have reviewed the appraisals submitted on the following properties: Riddle Ave. Hillsborough, N.C. Owner Helen Alston. Torain Street, Hillsborough, N.C. Owner, Nannie Rainey Price. Lot 17A, TM 113, Blk C-, Councilville, Chapel Hill N.C. Owner, Melvin Parrish I visited and inspected the subject properties for the purpose of reporting to you my opinion as the review appraiser. The appraiser has estimated a fair market value of the properties to . be aquired, so that the owners may receive a fair and just compensation from the Orange County Community Development Project. • t Having analyzed the data and reviewed indications of the value by the appropriate approaches, I agree with the appraisers final estimate of value; and in my opinion the estimates are a fair market value of the properties appraised. respectfully S t d 1 _-. �r�/. Frede . Ru Real ' -tate Br• I r o 7.3304 liAiwtscu3 Art-4 57, igg7 -De Drec4A-?ie. Co g) C.,e--vAva;SSLI:TYLZAS) `}e-e _ ._------- 0 _Up p.,Aw ; S+A-71 S L v..4 __cam pro -� �_._-�----- ---._- _ e yN04Asye-A.;64zi cd.14 0 \t,e,AA) ktc\a. 0-AA-A ailvz A-P - 1.11111111111111111111111 1 r A i 0 ' __ ., k_ ,,,,,,) N.,u......v, -,...., _ ;7 c., _ ertA-4--e4 ; - - . feAAA-1‘, NA.de;c-c-6RJL 76_ V_IA-' , _ '4-1-L---Q-1-\-4---er-Le_ 7--- J2-4"-"---49---'--1---1-43-5e--- -1--e^--e4---A- +Le- ') OFert-t'll‘`)61 .1//u-11__A--eA-.12■`— 7Q--)r"-Ati L'`‘ _e_d*rc_ 4■0(\-42,1-\--e-k- 3 _ u-Y■_ -_-1 OiL x:cAA-L 4-a-e- _ 0 S a 451- ‘ il _ . I Se,-)-1--u-C"'C't 1 ...1,-e_c--0-1\-e- -K-A-4--e- 11 1-1.P-.4,4-) ■ viA- --,-,Afrzte ci,„ 4-&-e----1-'0-_ ■(\i‘,1 _ . kIrTA.‘,.___ej,(___s, *--t._ CA:3--Yt-4-f- AS--)--Lxv-1 -- ' _ ,..ArYvk.yr-P---v`--1-3 0---0-A-_1. PieWATP-,41'01""S LAr:14-L le-1A. 1.-v■-___pi2}1 . L__. . ._ _ i -- - - - - --•--------- -- - 67C-c S Cc-c.S.. Tr - 0 -■- .. - , _____, - 6 6% C,t vn--,1 kV;■_1-7. c4c-, _-__e.s.4-€. -- - - - - - -- _ 1 — --- ---- --------.. I Mayor Tot tin of 11t11tinruugI Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners James Pendergraph Myron L. Martin Street Supt. Horace H. Johnson L.D.L.D. Wagoner Allen A. Lloyd , Chief of Police Remus J. Smith Rachel H. Stevens ` Arnold W. Hamlett 10114 Fire Chief . ' _ John Forrest Pf April 3, 1987 Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Commissioners: I have been told that special legislation is being considered to enable Orange County to levy a transfer .tax on the conveyance of real estate. I am not familiar with the details of how this legislation might be worded. How much revenue this tax would produce for the Town of Hillsborough is not yet clear. The pace of property development in and around Hillsborough, involving in most instances transfers of property ownerships, is a sign of prosperity but also a trend which will be placing a consider- able financial burden on Hillsborough for capital improvements such as thoroughfares, sewers and parks. The money to accomplish these improve- ments is not now in sight. The question of a transfer tax has not been discussed by our town board. What I can say now is that the town will need money to accomo- date the community growth. When all aspects of the transfer tax take shape, this may prove to be a helpful and equitable way to pay some of the cost of growth. I am sure that the Town Board would need more information about the transfer tax and its effect on the Town of Hillsborough before taking any position on this legislation. Sincerely, W_ 4/ caerAdi Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Mayor FHS/jc PHILIP POST ET ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS/PLANNERS/SURVEYORS #32605 '31 March 1987 Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough. North Carolina 27275 Re: Proposed Wolfe Property Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: Thin letter :.E in response to a request by the Orane_ie County Planning Staff that our office provide an estimate for the maintenance costs for the proposed public wastewater treatment system for the Wolfe Property Subdivision. We have contacted the North Carolina State Utilities Commission. which is responsible for approving public utility rates for systems throughout the state. The current rate established for spray-type treatment systems is about $16.00 per unit per month. of which about $16.00 per unit per month is for actual system maintenance costs. Using this criteria, we estimate that an amount of $2.880.00 will cover expected maintenance costs for the proposed system for a three-year period. Since>�ly, Phi`` ∎ s t.. P. E. PNP/sdb ��► . •••...•• .� Attachment 4@ ?<• SEAL cc: Jackie Wolfe 7635 Eddie Kirk A,� '�`t'EN���'�, ip II.II•l l\I\ 401 PROVIDENCE ROAD • SUITE 200 • POST OFFICE BOX 2134 ■ CHAPEL HILL, NC 27514 (919)929-1173 • (919)493-2600 , PHILIP POST & ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB aOtrG S/P Engineers/Planners/Surveyors SHEET NO. / 401 Providence Road Suite 200 OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 CALCULATED ay nib.) DATE 3/3//187 (919) 929-1173 493-2600 CHECKED BY ®N DATE_ 3 31-t7 _sc.tE• ,S7.704Ai11 0.r f '$"r, COsr ',Dec- S4$i Sys. 3 y N.C. lli;1;fi;Ad awl iii4;VS o,-, 6 ci ppvo.v ed .rater r s ' ,✓Y,7....i; � da. d Li ` i, hi" -Y Ass4►w!: . 5..............(cQr,►'1, .......7ri ./eX........ !f.... .....Z .artcsitocrie+±........... . .. Gs+. p .yP.Q.r . - Sx 1 16� Z � 60, 9 °" roy 3 years, . �sf...= R .. iEAw ..iis .... • 7635 = ',, ,, „ , PRIX10720411AZW Ix..Grata,11410 0H71. 6'000co ; FINANCE DEPARTMENT ;r . 52 ORANGE COUNTY April 10, 1987 GORDON R. BAKER DIRECTOR Ms. Aleta Mills North Carolina Office of Budget and Management 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Dear Aleta: Enclosed is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Commissioners on April 6, 1987 regarding the use of Senate Bill 2 water funds for the Lake Orange Project. The amount of Senate Bill 2 funds identified in this resolution is $20,000. Previously, a copy of the project ordinance for the Lake Orange project adopted on July 23, 1986 was submitted to you as evidence of the County's intent to use Senate Bill 2 water funds for this project. The project ordinance adopted called for $45,000 in Senate Bill 2 funds. However, due to recent developments, the Board has reduced the scope of this project. Therefore, the amount of Senate Bill 2 water funds needed for this project has been reduced from the original $45,000 indicated in the project ordinance to the $20,000 indicated in the enclosed resolution. Thank you for your assistance in helping the County reserve these funds for the various water and sewer projects that we have indentified. Sincerely, Gordon R. Baker Finance Director GRB:bjr Enclosure 106 EAST MARGARET LANE • HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 • 919/732-8181 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Orange County is eligible to receive Senate Bill 2 funds over a two year period for water projects; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners have placed priority on efforts to increase water supply as the most appropriate means of allocating Senate Bill 2 funds; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution on July 7, 1986 allocating Senate Bill 2 water funds for a reservoir study and the installa- tion of a _pump station to transfer water from the OWASA to Hillsborough; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1986 the Orange County Board of Commissioners placed a temporary hold on the use of Senate Bill 2 for Lake Orange flashboards pending survey of property owners and engineering; and WHEREAS, the Lake Orange Capital Project Ordinance once approved includes up to $20,000 in Senate Bill 2 funds as part of the financing for the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that in the interest of increasing the water supply for all citizens, the Board does hereby formally allocate Senate Bill 2 water funds in the amount of $20, 000 to the Lake Orange project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners hereby requests that the State of North Carolina encumber $20,000 of Senate Bill 2 water funds for the use of Orange County in addi- tion to the amounts encumbered in accordance with the resolution adopted on July 7, 1986; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that the Board understands that Senate Bill 2 Funds must be matched equally with local funds for the project indicated. Adopted this 6th day of April, 1987. r Aller SIC; E. Marshall, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: Beverly ly he, Clerk RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58, entitled the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program has been introduced in the North Carolina Senate; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requests an appropriation of $2 million for fiscal year 1987-88, one-half of which will bt divided equally among all the counties, with the remainder of funds distributed on the basis of the percentage of elderly and handicapped population and population density; and WHEREAS, the funds would be used to provide transporta- tion services to elderly and handicapped individuals; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 58 requires no local matching funds; and WHEREAS, the funds would supplement existing sources of support for transportation services for the elderly and the handicapped but not replace state funds already earmarked for Orange County for this purpose, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners supports Senate Bill 58, the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate state officials. This the 6th day of April , 19 87 , g-/Vate-Za-F-_, Shirl . Marshall , Chair Orange Co my Board of Commissioners ATTEST: ,g'4,& Beverly Blyt e Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners J t `. SYA3t4 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX 25201 RALEIGH 27611 JAMES G. MARTIN GOVERNOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DIVISION February 27, 1987 POST OFFICE BOX 25201 JAMES E. HARRINGTON 919/733-4713 SECRETARY MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Human Service Officials FROM: David D. King, Director( j Z SUBJECT: Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program For your information, please find attached a copy of Senate Bill 58, entitled the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program. The bill requests an appropriation of $2 million for fiscal year 1987-88, one-half of which will be divided equally among all the counties, with the remainder of funds distributed on the basis of the percentage of elderly and handicapped population and population density. The funds made available under this program would be used to provide transportation services to elderly and handicapped individuals. Funds would flow to each county, to be spent in a manner consistent with the approved Transportation Development Plan. Certification of eligibility, as well as local distribution of funds, would be the responsibility of the County Commissioners. No local match would be required. While the legislation has been introduced in the Senate and assigned to the Veterans Affairs and Senior Citizens Committee,_ it is anticipated that it also will be introduced in the House and referred to the House Aging Committee. Once endorsed by these Committees, the bill will go to the Joint Appropriations Committee for further consideration. If you have any questions about this bill , please give us a call . DDK/cwg Attachment An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 S 1 SENATE BILL 58 Short Title: Transportation Assistance Program. (Public) Sponsors: Senators Hunt of Moore; Barnes, Goldston, Guy, Hardison, Harrington, Harris, Hipps, Johnson of Wake, Plyler, Rand, Rauch, Redman, Richardson, Seymour; Tally, Walker, Ward, Warren, Winner. Referred to: Veterans Affairs and Senior Citizens. February 23, 1987 1 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 2 AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED 3 TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO BE ADMINISTERED BY 4 THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 5 Whereas, the work of the Governor's Committee on Rural Public 6 Transportation in 1978 resulted in a State policy emphasizing coordination and use of 7 private sector resources in providing improved transportation services in rural areas; 8 and 9 _ Whereas, countywide transportation development planning is a statewide 10 effort that is intended to coordinate human service transportation services and 11 improve cost efficiency; and 12 Whereas, the Interagency Transportation Review Committee currently 13 reviews all requests for transportation funds administered by State government to 14 determine whether they are consistent with county transportation development plans; 15 and 16 Whereas, the Department of Transportation presently administers federal 17 programs that provide funds for planning, capital improvement, administration, and 18 operating expenses for human service transportation services, including transportation 19 for the elderly and the handicapped; and GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 1 Whereas, local governing bodies and private nonprofit agencies have 2 made substantial progress in providing cost-effective transportation services to the 3 elderly and the handicapped; and 4 Whereas, the General Assembly finds that there is a need for State funds 5 with which to supplement existing sources of support for transportation services for 6 the elderly and the handicapped, but not to replace funds already earmarked for this 7 purpose by local governments; and 8 Whereas, this additional funding for transportation services for the elderly 9 and the handicapped has the potential to delay or preclude the placement of 10 individuals in rest homes or nursing homes, to improve the quality of life of elderly 11 and handicapped citizens, to provide opportunity for employment training programs- -- 12 for the handicapped, and to reinforce the coordination of transportation resources 13 and strengthen the present planning process; Now, therefore, 14 The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 15 Section 1. Article 2B of Chapter 136 is amended by adding a new 16 section to read: 17 "§ 136-44.27. North Carolina Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance 18 Program.--(a) There is established the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation 19 Assistance Program that shall provide State financed elderly and handicapped 20 transportation services for counties within, the State. The Department of 21 Transportation is designated as the agency of the State responsible for administering 22 State funds appropriated to purchase elderly and handicapped transportation services 23 for counties within the State. The Department shall develop appropriate procedures 24 regarding the distribution and use of these funds and shall adopt rules to implement 25 these_procedures. No funds appro p i ato p ursu an t to this act may be used to cover - _ _ _ _____-_ 26 State administration costs. 27 (b) For the purposes of this section, an elderly person is defined as one who has 28 reached the age of 60 or more years, and a handicapped person is defined as one who 29 has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life 30 activities, an individual who has a record of such impairment, or an individual who is 31 regarded as having such an impairment. Certification of eligibility shall be the 32 responsibility of the county. 33 (c) All funds distributed by the Department under this section are intended to 34 purchase additional transportation services, not to replace funds now being used by 35 local governments for that purpose. To this end, only those counties maintaining Senate Bill 58 Page 2 r GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1987 1 elderly and handicapped transportation services at a level consistent with those in 2 place on January 1, 1986, shall be eligible for additional transportation assistance 3 funds. 4 (d) The Public Transportation Division of the Department of Transportation shall 5 administer this plan by the implementation of a distribution method that divides a 6 portion of the funds available equally among all counties, while the remainder of the 7 funds available shall be distributed to the counties on a formula based upon the 8 percent of elderly and handicapped residents per county in conjunction with 9 population density. 10 (e) Funds distributed by the Department under this section shall be used by local 11 governments in a manner consistent with the local transportation development plan." 12 Sec. 2. There is appropriated from the General Fund to the Department 13 of Transportation the sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000) for fiscal year 1987-88, 14 to provide start-up funds for the North Carolina Elderly and Handicapped 15 Transportation Assistance Program established by this act. 16 Sec. 3. This act shall become effective July 1, 1987. Senate Bill 58 Page 3 OWNER CHANGE ARCHITECT ❑ ORDER CONTRACTOR ❑ FIELD AIA DOCUMENT G707 OTHE ❑ OTHER PROJECT: Carr Building Renovation CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 3 (name, address) Corbin Street Hillsborough, North Carolina INITIATION DATE: March 2, 1986 TO (Contractor) E 7 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 5568 Mebane Heating & Air Conditioning CONTRACT FOR: Mechanical Construction P.Q. Box 756 Mebane, North Carolina 27302 CONTRACT DATE: August 13, 1986 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract: • Item One Supply & install 3 return air duct grilles Extra $125.00 Resultant Change Order Amount Extra $125.00 The original Contract Sum was $ 19,000. Net change by previous Change Orders $ 300. The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was $ 22,000. The Contract Sum will be (increased) IMMONNXl i I( 111 by this Change Order. . $ 125. The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be $ 22,125. The Contract Time will be CSiiiKr g6t1M (unchanged) by ( -0- ) Days. The Date of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is CHR Associates Mebane Heating & Air Cond. County of Orange ARCHITECT • C N ORA TOR dd 0Airport Road P.O. ox 756 W T. Margaret Lane Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Address ane, North Caroli 27302 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 BY /nA-A-1/Aign--)q BY BY DATE 4arcI) �I 19 11 DATE /3-- Y7 DATE �• f /7/7 AIA DOCUMENT G701 • CHANGE ORDER • APRIL 1970 EDITION • AIA® • © 1970 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW,WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 ONE PAGE ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MARGARET LANE HILLSBOROUGH, N. C. 27278 MOSES CAREY.JR. STEPHEN H_HALKIOTIS JOHN HARTWELL SHIRLEY S.MARSHALL DON WILLHOIT April 8, 1987 Mr. and Mrs. W. David Liner State Road 1004 Efland, NC 27243 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Liner: The Orange County Board of Commissioners approved the attached contract between you and Orange County at their meeting held on Monday, April 6, 1987. The County certainly appreciates all the effort put forth in negotiating this agreement. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Mrs. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Orange County Board of Commissioners /bab File Attachment NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY CONTRACT This contract, made and entered into this day of _ , 1987 by and between Marilyn Efland Liner and her husband W. David Liner of Orange County, North Carolina, hereinafter "Liner" and Orange County, North Carolina, a body politic and corporate with its offices located in Orange County, North Carolina, hereinafter "County; " WITNESSETH: Liner has previously or will contemporaneously with the execution of this contract convey to County an easement, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter called "Easement") . The purpose of this contract is to set forth the terms and conditions upon which Liner has conveyed the easement to County. The conditions are as follows: 1. County shall pay to Liner for the Easement the sum of Eight Hundred Dollars ($800) and by this agreement authorizes Liner to "tap-on" to the gravity portion of the sewer line which will cross the property of Liner which is described in the Easement. This right to "tap-on" to the gravity portion of the sewer line crossing the property of Liner is limited to one such "tap-on. " Liner shall not be required to pay any availability or other connection fee imposed by either Orange County or the Town of Hillsborough. In the latter regard, County agrees to pay any such fee 1 • imposed by the Town of Hillsborough . The cost of constructing any connection to the sewer line and the actual cost of making the connection to the sewer line shall be born by Liner. 2. The portion of the easement described as Easement No. 2 (described as such in the Easement) is for the location and operation of a pump station, which pump station is identified in the project as the "McGowan Creek pump station. " The future plan for the overall Efland Area Sewer System calls for the extension of the intercepter, which now terminates at Efland/Cedar Grove Road and at the McGowan Creek pump station, to Brook Hollow Road. When the extension of the intercepter (from Efland/Cedar Grove Road to Brook Hollow Road) is connected to the existing intercepter (at the existing McGowan Creek pump station) allowing wastewater to flow from the existing intercepter to the extension of the intercepter, the McGowan Creek pump station will be relocated from the property of Liner described in the Easement. At the time the pump station is relocated from this property of Liner, County agrees to convey to Liner that portion of the easement described as easement No. 2 (described as such in the Easement) at no cost to Liner. 3. At the time the pump station is relocated from the property of Liner, as described above, Liner agrees to convey to County a 20-foot wide easement, with a forty-feet wide construction easement, in the form of the Easement, to 2 AID the western property line of Liner in order to accommodate the extended sewer line. This conveyance by Liner to County shall be at no cost to County. 4. This contract is binding upon the parties to it and their heirs and assigns. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF , Liner and County have executed this contract in duplicate originals, one of which is retained by each of the parties, the day and year first above written. PiciA-j • ' MARILYR E, LAND? / IN V' Y W. DAVID LINER NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY I, , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that Marilyn Efland Liner and husband, W. David Liner personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and official seal, this day of -, 19 Notary Public (Official Seal) My commission expires: ORANGE COUNTY By: �, Cha , Orange County Board of Commissioners 3 ATTEST: ,,,f ...0.'/ ,,[411 - - _-_,_ de .. .1. _.....4e7_ C erk to B. -:rd of Commi ioners NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY /� I, .J4"rna .�( o Not Public for said Count�i and State.. certify that Beverly Blythe personally came before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of Orange County, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by Shirley E. Marshall, Chair, sealed with its official seal, and attested by herself as its Clerk. 434., Witness my hand and official seal, this _ SA, day of d , 1987. B. D/ NOTARY 0 \ PUBLIC ; r. of �. :>.-.. �.se�a` My commission expires: INN Witness: NORTH CAROLINA ��TiF�L`COUNTY eaef i ,�� � y�yP , a Notary Public for s -id ount. and State, coo hereby certify. that �/ r 6 personally appeared before me this day, ai� ei by e dulL,worn stated that in his/her c � �g•�ol1 �.rei• � / presence ex- ecution of)[ the foregoing instrument.(signed) (acknowledged the ex- ,,,�itr�ess my hand and official seal, this c,1441 day of f/ltrCA- , 19 e7 r Notary PugYic -(official. Seal) My commission expires : //4 -Ft Alimmm RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Hillsborough central office failed for all lines, including 911 service on Friday, April 3, 1987, for a period of just over three hours, and • WHEREAS, it took over two and one-half hours before the proper personnel who could repair the problem arrived on site, with restoration taking less than fifteen minutes and with operation resuming within thirty minutes, and WHEREAS, information about the nature and expected duration of the outage was withheld from our Emergency Communications Director which seriously compromised our County's emergency communications plans, and WHEREAS, our citizens who are served by the 732 exchange rightly expect a functioning and adequate plan to deal with failures in and of the system in a timely manner to support their trust in and security from the telephone system, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board expresses to Centel and to the North Carolina Utilities Commission its extreme dissatis- faction with the course of events to the restoration of service, and THAT this board asks the North Carolina utilities Commission to act on its behalf, by opening its own investigation of this matter to cover at least the following six areas: 1. Fully investigate the factors of the failure and the response to the failure, and make public the results of the investigation. 2 . Examine the adequacy of Centel 's preparedness plan to deal with failures in and of the system, with special attention given to the timeliness of response and the presence of alternative courses of action. 3 . Include an investigation of Northern Telecom's (the equipment manufacturer) recommended plan of action for such failures in its equipment and especially in this installation. 4. To review preparedness plans of the other telephone companies serving Orange County (Southern Bell, General Telephone, and Mebane Home Phone) . 5. To order the companies to develop plans in consultation with county and municipal agencies that will satisfy the deficiencies should any of these plans be partly or fully inadequate. 6. To look at preparedness plans for all of Centel 's exchanges in the state, to reduce probability of similar incidents elsewhere. and, THAT copies of documents supporting this resolution be included with this resolution to the North Carolina Utilities Commission. • - • • • 33,4 (7,4 i 4 eb( . • • • 1 _ 147---01 C Z7S/Y itt r„:4 De-a-vne Co yi Cr-vri-v!-1 i7SS - LA----v•-n-lb-ek C-1-41-e---.-■_d__‘..Let-e___L) C4-yk, ) ez_i_ja 0 0,0-yrt yvti'SSAS11..e-t.S 71 -fz) rt_ 7 f v:Oecra,eci hr,u_s e_ IP‘ 1.711. e8t--beL cx-j4.4_,2 „ C1-1-4 ■Or-Y■ k 10_0 LI cH . • t, 4Q..L.A_fl-a-trLA— f Ltt,-W_ALIc.„ S c+-11-9_ CA-%/A-ak_ VYL. +et-Q-4-e tkLy 0 fftecaeal__. u y tAfts2- Co-y-rN. v_rt. s D r.el_otueci Sk.v0-1,.tka_ eco-vi, v-t) e-orf&v_i-S fo AAA roe.-e-"A-11 tAx=1:1-e--tLyv 1 y_A;1244_, 7 CAW ) The_ ev.70e.0-a_e_8- . .v-t.o.ykuyeitt4tal- &is _(eis ., -Davvtck.s .os at, 12a ; s Lie 1.,0.1 _ _ ° ( u�� \«� �� "2„..-- �-�^ ,�� �_ GH43....c..e. - '---'---�---� -----'-- -v��_ ---__'___—_ -_ --_-_-__- '-_--� � � �� � � �� --� -�»_�~� " �--_-1~ e~�~�~==�---- --__-_-_ __ _ i. ----�--__-_ - y -_---_--_'�_--_'-_---�_��-����,�."�'-__-,� .. _' �, � «~� -'- �---------' ^u ` � � _l � ~` -_- . ' __---_ I _^_~� ,q-1-__~~°~-�._-~�-~- _ ----__. -'------� "u ~ 1 ---- . --- . 6 , __-__---_-_~_'�---__---_--__--_----_- . ___--_-_-_. , 1 ( I eert.."431 'Awl-_ 1.\ 0......x.b-y- _ 1.--cr:LA-K._ '1"-EA-e._ 0 S a Y��� ��� � _ �-� -�-___'__ __---_--___ _ -- ' 4.1-1- . az ji...1, +.-e,_e___ . ,6.....,,,,yy,...„.„,„4_ om.„....ci 0....„..__ ___~ �__'1��fr��' l� v��C+�� z�c=�-_ x ~~ __'__ __--- -- __ �.�~~ ��C-Y?��' e e.-12-71 111 :1' | - -------' —| --_________� __ ________ -_s*'� �.'^~__~~^ ~�_-.-,~\ /�� � . � ' Gct. *� � &"�71�\�-_� = '�. ' -' - _ _- --__�-----_-__- _ ' ____-_-_ ' �~ \ , t - ' - - ���,� __�_��� �4�`ll _ --- - - ' - ' - -_ - -_ ' __ -_ -_- _ . . . . � . 1 AIN TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners FROM: Technical Review Task Force - Telephone Richard A. Helwig, Chair DATE: Monday, April 6, 1987 ABSTRACT: All telephone service, including 911, in the 732 exchange service area was out Friday, 4/3/87 from approximately 6:15pm to 9:30pm. We recommend filing a complaint with the North Carolina Utilities Commission that asks for a formal investigation of the -facts of, this event and raises strong questions of the adequacy of Centel's emergency plans, especially its time lines for response to such emergency situations. Our concern is not that this specific failure occurred, but with the apparent inadequacy of the company's emergency action plan. The Telephone Technical Review Task Force unanimously, by poll of membership, submits this report and recommendation to you on the failure- .of the 732 telephone exchange on 4/3/87, Centel 's apparent inability to readh- local repair personnel, the lack of status information from Centel 's trouble center in Hickory, and the compromise of the County's emergency communications plan. Briefly, the best information we have sets "the following events:. The exchange failed completely, including 911, at approximately 6:15 pm. County Emergency Communications Director, Bobby Baker reported the failure to Centel 's trouble center in Hickory at about 6:30 m. of the failure, although we believe Hickory has responsibilityyfors unaware monitoring and remotely controlling the Hillsborough office. ) Centel _ personnel from Roxboro are the first to arrive at the King Street office ; t about 7:45pm (1 1/2hrs) and with guidance from Hickory over the only working line (FX) in the office tried unsuccessfully to get the system going. Local Centel personnel arrived at 9:OOpm (2 3/4hrs) and by resetting the CPU power converters got the system up by 9:15pm and completely operational by 9:30pm (3 1/4hrs) , albeit on one of the two CPUs. Mr. Baker says that it takes 30 mins to get the county 's emergency communication plan operational, and that he usually can get information of expected down time to trigger our plan into action. No such information was made available by Centel 's Hickory personnel even though requested. We understand that local Centel personnel have no means other than telephone to call them in to respond to, emergencies and other problems. Once the proper personnel arrived the.. system was up within 15 minutes and operation within 30 minutes. It took 2 1/2 hrs to get the proper personnel on site. To have a plan that relies only on the telephone to call the telephone system repairman, raises serious questions about the adequacy, or even existence, of a responsible preparedness plan . Our Sheriff, Lindy Pendergrass, says that we are just lucky that we had no emergency situations during that time. This Task Force suggests to you that, once again, civil trust in Centel 's operation has been abridged by the apparent lack of a plan that effectively deals with telephone system failure in a timely manner. Failures occur, r J only plans based on alternative actions se(other waystto reacidservice ant personnel, and in another instance, paths in consultation with county and municipal agencies, can restore the security and trust we ex We recommend that the Orange County Commissioners express their extreme dissatisfaction with the COUnsanditovasksthe NorthyCarolinaoUtilitoesh Carolina Utilities Commissio to fully investigate the facts of Commission, on behalf of Orange County, Y the failure and the responsto deal the withlfailureseinmand adequacsysty Centel' s preparedness plan special attention given to the timeliness include an the presence orthern of alternative courses of action; Telecom' s (the equipment manufacturer) recommended plan of action for such failures in its equipment and especially in this installation; to review preparedness plans of the other telephone companies serving Orange County (Southern Bell, General. Telephone, and Mebane Home Phone) ; and, should any of these plans be partly or fully inadequate, ton order the develop plans in consultation with county municipal suggest that the will satisfy the deficiencies. We also recommend that you sugg Utilities Commission look at Centel' s plans for all of its exchanges in the state. Mayor Gown of itillstiorattgil Town Clerk Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Agatha Johnson HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 Supt. Water Works Commissioners James Pendergraph Myron L. Martin Horace H. Johnson Street Supt. Allen A. Lloyd L.D. Wagoner Remus J. Smith Chief of Police Rachel H. Stevens , Arnold W. Hamlett f. d. Fire Chief 1 3-'" John Forrest April 3, 1987 Orange County Board of Commissioners 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Commissioners: I have been told that special legislation is being considered to enable Orange County to levy a transfer tax on the conveyance of real estate. I am not familiar with the details of how this legislation might be worded. How much revenue this tax would produce for the Town of Hillsborough is not yet clear. The pace of property development in and around Hillsborough, involving in most instances transfers of property ownerships, is a sign of prosperity but also a trend which will be placing a consider- able financial burden on Hillsborough for capital improvements such as thoroughfares, sewers and parks. The money to accomplish these improve- ments is not now in sight. The question of a transfer tax has not been discussed by our town board. What I can say now is that the town will need money to accomo- date the community growth. When all aspects of the transfer tax take shape, this may prove to be a helpful and equitable way to pay some of the cost of growth. I am sure that the Town Board would need more information about the transfer tax and its effect on the Town of Hillsborough before taking any position on this legislation. Sincerely, s '=2Ciee&iel Frank H. Sheffield, Jr. Mayor FHS/jc • 1mb itoATIO�RS Home Builders Association of Durham and Chapel Hill CI niburlwm&ChapelHill 21 W Colony Place • Suite 280 • Durham, North Carolina 27705 • Phone 919/493-8899 April 6, 1987 Mr. Don Willhoit Chairperson Orange County Commissioners 203 Lexington Rd. Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Dear Mr. Willhoit: The Durham-Chapel Hill Home Builders Association represents over 500 member firms who are either builders of residential property, or are in related trades or businesses. Naturally, an issue that affects real estate as directly as the proposed Transfer Tax is of vital interest to our members. This issue is one that is being brought up throughout the state as local governments wrestle with the issue of funding the programs that are desired by the citizens of the various communities. While we sympathize with the problem that faces Orange County and all the other cities and counties across the State, we believe that SOME answers to that problem are simply wrong answers. The Transfer Tax is a specific solution to a specific problem faced by counties like Dare and Currituck who face absentee ownership with extremely limited opportunities to raise revenue. The Transfer Tax is NOT a general solution. To demonstrate the current dollar impact on a project, I have calculated the effect of the 1% tax on a single family home project built on 40 acres of ground with a raw land price of $30,000 per acre. At a density of 2 houses per acre a lot could be expected to sell for $30,000 and a final house sales price of $150,000 would be conservative. While these numbers are not precise, they are realistic and will provide a basis for calculation. The tax on the original sale of the land would be $12,000 which in this seller ' s market , would add $150 to the cost of developing every lot. Another $300 would be paid (and passed through) by the seller of the lot when sold to a builder. The Transfer Tax on the house and lot to the eventual owner would be $1 ,500, a non-deductible total tax of $1 ,950, increased cost for the citizen who has the misfortune to buy a new home in a county with a Transfer Tax. r;r;, d - x _ AMMON Mr. Don Willhoit Chairperson, Orange County Commissioners April 6, 1987 It HAS occurred to me that the ideal time to talk about green space requirements is April . There are no leaves on the trees. Everyone is tired of looking through the woods at the neighbor' s house and the trees that have been planted around -the new commercial developments look particularly spindly and forlorn. Later in the spring, green space will have begun to act as the beautiful buffer the newly enacted development ordinances contemplate. Let ' s use that same longer range view to think about the effect on the constituency for whom I am speaking, buyers and sellers of houses that will be built. The Transfer Tax translates into immediate inflation of prices for ALL residential and commercial property. Those who sell a home in one part of town and move to another part pay an incredible tax without changing the community' s service demand at all . Those who feel that their home is an investment that they may cash in when they need to pay medical or educational expenses could find that the tax that was added in when they bought must be paid when they sell - except the market has softened, rates have increased, and that equity is gone. There are more than enough risks for a homeowner to take already without having to bear a possible loss like that. The task before us is not to find the easiest source of revenue, it is to find the best, the fairest, the one most reflective of benefits derived. We are social animals. We live in communities for the positive effects on our lives of association with others. Let ' s not create another penalty for choosing to live in one place rather than another. If. there are costs to be borne, let ' s bear them equally, not try to concentrate the load on one portion of the community. Please consider the long term potentially disastrous effect of adding one more incremental lump sum cost to our already heavy housing cost burden. Thank you. Sincerely, Y",y141,1&,,_ Nicholas J. Tennyson v President ORANGE COUNTY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: County Manager SUBJECT: Background on the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity DATE: April 1, 1987 This project has been under consideration as one of several measures to increase the amount of stored water available in the Upper Eno River during a drought. Authori- zation was given by the Board in November, 1986 to develop engineering plans and specifications to raise the lake by one foot yet with the capability of being raised to two feet at a later time were such decision to be made; and to survey property owner title claims and sentiment as related to a one or two foot rise. Background facts concerning the decision are as follows: 1. Safe Yield. The Division of Water Resources, relying on drainage area and average rainfall calculations, has estimated a 51 million gallon increase or a 200, 000 gallon per day safe yield increase from a one foot rise and a 104 million or 400, 000 gallons per day safe yield from a two foot lake level change. 2. Engineering. Either level is engineeringly feasi- ble while still meeting the requirements of the Dam Safety Laws of 1967. All clearances have been received for construction to commence for the one foot. Were a two foot rise to be pursued additional approval would be necessary for the design of the flashboard release mechanism. The system consists of a one foot fixed vertical addition to the spillway crest with provision for a further one foot addition. The timber flashboards are to be permanently bolted in eight foot long sections to vertical structural steel supports which are to be anchored to the spillway slab. They are designed to withstand hydrodynamic forces occurring during severe storm events without compromising the safety of the dam embankment. r i INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8704-501 Background 19oon the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity April 1, Page 2 3. Affect on Land Titles. There is some degree of overlap in the land to be affected. According to Orange County's deed the County owns land for the lake to elevation 615 feet even though the current spillway only captures water to 614 feet elevation. It further specifies Lake Orange Incorporated as owning the land between 615 and 620 elevation for the purpose of private recreation rights subject to an easement to the County for temporary flooding to elevation 620 feet. Other deeds reflect private ownership from 620 elevation and above with the exception of two deeds which claim ownership to elevation 615 edge. This overlap would have to be resolved before a two foot rise were approved. However, it is the testimony of one of the two property owners affected that the overlap would not be contested under a one foot change. Lake Orange Incorporated has offerred to deed ownership to the second foot to Orange County with conditions. The Board rejected the offer March 24, 1986 reserving its right to match any cash offer received by Lake Orange Incorporated. According to the Durham Morning Herald this week, Robert Nichols, Presi- dent of Lake Orange Incorporated, has stated that Lake Orange Incorporated has received no cash offer. 4. Survey Results. Of the twenty seven question- naires returned one third claimed to have an interest in the land below 620 feet elevation while two thirds supported raising the lake two feet. Comments had to do with asking assurances that: a) access to property would remain, b) lots would not be deemed unsuitable for building, and c) the flood plain would not be increased above 620 feet. Six owners expected damage to their properties in the form of shoreline erosion and damage to docks. 5. Costs. This varies depending upon the extent of Improvements undertaken, any litigation which may be necessary, and whether the County would elect to pay for any damage to private structures resulting from a lake level change. The latter does not result from a legal responsibility; such structures as piers, private road and a boathouse were installed within the County's easement without the County's prior approval as required by its deed. Cost estimates are as follows: r INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8704-501 Background on the Question of Lake Orange Storage Capacity April 1, 1987 Page 3 One Ft. Elevation Two Ft. Elevation 1. Flashboards 24,000 32, 000 2. Additional ' Engineering 8,000 2,000 3. Early Warning System None 7, 000 4. Litigation None Unknown 5. Private Structures No County expen- 50,000 County diture recommended Expenditure recom- mended though not legally required (to raise road, boathouse and bulkhead) 6. Funding. Hillsborough and the Orange Alamance Water System have each budgeted matching shares for the improvements according to the estimated cost of a two foot rise. Senate Bill 2 funds are available for 50% of the costs if acted upon immediately. This is assuming favorable action on a bill intro- duced to recognize projects by several counties which were not submitted by the deadline esta- blished for cities. Kenneth R. T meson KRT/srs .... .. -ire NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®INC. 2901 SEAWELL ROAD, P.O. BOX 7918, GREENSBORO, N.C. 27417-0918 • 919/294-1415 REALTOR® EQUAL HOUSING OP OPPpFiUN�Ity April 6, 1987 Ms. Shirley E. Marshall Chair Orange County Commissioners Hillsborough, North Carolina Dear Ms. Marshall: The North Carolina Association of REALTORS is opposed to all forms of real estate transfer taxes. I regret that a prior commitment makes it impossible for me to appear at the public hearing on a possible Orange County real estate transfer tax this evening. I would request that you accept this letter as my statement on this important issue. A real estate transfer tax is discriminatory. The tax will affect only a small segment of the population of Orange County — real estate buyers and sellers. Additionally, a large proportion of this tax burden will fall on lower priced property, since they resell much more often than the more expensive properties. The revenue from a real estate transfer tax is unreliable. Since the transfer of real estate fluctuates with the swings of our economy caused generally by factors beyond the control of local or state government, such a tax would create an unreliable revenue base. Finally, a real estate transfer tax is simply unfair. The North Carolina Asso- ciation of REALTORS is concerned about the "housing gap" in North Carolina. This tax has a direct negative impact by widening the gap between families who can afford decent, sanitary housing and those who cannot. A transfer tax is definitely anti—housing. Infrastructure, such as roads, water, sewer, etc. , are every citizen's responsibility. I urge you and every other Commissioner to vote in opposition to any form of real estate transfer tax in Orange County. Respectfully/ submitted, /614,04 Thomas H. Heffner President President President-Elect Treasurer Executive Vice President Thomas H.Heffner James A.Basinger,Jr. Nick Angel 137 E.Rosemary Street 121 Colonial Avenue P.O.Box 748 James Box Bichsel Chapel Hill,N.C.27514 Charlotte,N.C.28207 P.O.Box N.C.2 919/968-4951 Kernersville, -43 27285 Gre®919/29, .C.27417 704/376-7579 919/996-4302 919/294-1415 RSVP VOLUNTEER DAY IN ORANGE COUNTY 1987 PROCLAMATION All citizens can be proud that Orange County is a leader in the volunteer movement. This spirit of helping others involves hundreds of caring people and saves thousands in tax dollars. This tremendous contribution is helping many Orange County citizens live better lives. In addition, Retired Volunteers from all walks of life play a vital role in the success of schools, libraries, community centers, a radio station, day care centers, the county correctional facility, health and social organizations. Orange County's Retired Volunteer effort is a movement that is a living testimonial to the human spirit. This selfless giving to others is making it possible to continue vital programs, even with limited resources. NOW THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners DO HEREBY PROCLAIM April 16, 1987, as "RSVP Volunteer Day in Orange County, " and urge all our citizens to recognize the volunteer contributions to our County and extend appreciation to those who have given of themselves. IN WITNESS THEREOF, as Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the County of Orange this sixth day of April in the year of our Lord Nineteen hundred and eighty-seven. /1/ Shirle,-- , . Marshall, Chair Board of ommissioners `-\/ ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MABGa1r LANE HILLSBOROUGH, N. C. 27278 MOSES CAREY,JR. STEPHEN H.HALKIOTIS JOHN HARTWELL SHIRLEY E.MARSHALL DON WILLHOIT MEMORANDUM TO: Tara Fikes FROM: Beverly A. Blythe DATE: April 9, 1987 RE: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND PROCLAMATION Attached are copies of the resolution establishing just compensation and the proclamation proclaiming April 11- 18 as National Community Development Week in Orange County. These were both approved by the Board of Commissioners at their meeting held on April 6, 1987. Thank you. • RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES PROPOSED FOR ACQUISITION IN THE ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, NRCD GRANT NO. 82-C-6285 IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED; THAT, The Orange County Board of Commissioners has obtained appraisals and a review appraisal for each parcel proposed to be acquired in the Orange County Community Development Program as required by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and HUD's implementing at 24 DFR 42.101-127. THAT, Just Compensation is hereby established for each of the parcels as follows: Second Property First Appraisal Appraisal Subject Property Size Value Recommended Value 1 . Rt. 4, Councilville dwelling-1 ,500 sq.ft. 53,000 $3,000 lot-16,056 sq.ft. 2. Turner Street dwelling-846 sq.ft. $4,900 $4,900 3. Riddle Avenue dwelling-900 sq.ft. $10,600 $10,600 lot-15,550 sq.ft. I hereby Certify that the above resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution adopted at a meeting of the Orange County Board of Commissioners on the 6th day of April , 1987 . Beverly Bly e, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners, Orange County, North Carolina ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MARGARET LANE HILLSBOROUGH. N. C. 27278 MOSES CAREY,JR. STEPHEN H.HALKIOTIS April 13, 1987 JOHN HARTWELL SHIRLEY E,MARSHALL DON WILLHOIT Department of Revenue Ad Valorum Division P.O. Box 25000 Raleigh, NC 27640 Dear Sir/Madam: At the March 2, 1987 regular meeting of the Board, the Board upon the motion of Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis adopted a resolution which created the special Board of Equalization and Review. The attached resolution is an amendment to the resolution which created the_..Equalization and Review Board.-.. - If additional information is needed, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Thank you Sincerely, _ 04.0 Mrs. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk /bab File Attachment AMMO AMENDMENT TO THE MARCH 2, 1987 RESOLUTION REGARDING SPECIAL BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS pursuant to N.C. General Statutes 105-322 the Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County is presently composed of the members of the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County is authorized to appoint a special Board of Equalization and Review to carry out the duties imposed by N.C. General Statutes 105-322; and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County deem it advisable to appoint a special Board of Equalization and Review and by this resolution provide for the membership qualifications, terms of office and the manner of filling of vacancies on the special board of Equalization and Review; IT IS THEREFORE RESOLVED: 1. The special Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County is hereby created. 2 . The Orange County special Board of Equalization and Review shall consist of 7 members, each to serve for a term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on June 30, 1987. 3 . Vacancies occurring and existing on the Orange County special Board of Equalization and Review shall be filled by the Orange County Board of commissioners at their next regular meeting after the occurrence of the vacancies. 4. Each member of the special Orange County Board of Equalization and Review shall be a resident of Orange County and have the statutory qualifications necessary to hold the public office of County Commissioner in Orange County. In addition the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, in selecting members of the special Board of Equalization and Review, may consider: a. The length of time a candidate has resided in Orange County, b. Whether and to what extent a candidate owns real property located within Orange County, c. Whether and to what extent a candidate is familiar with the value of real property located within Orange County, d. Whether and to what extent a candidate has had formal education in real estate appraising, e. The geographical composition of the special Board of Equalization and Review within Orange County, f. Any other matters that the Board deems appropriate. The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall appoint members to the special Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County in the same manner as it uses for other appointments. After the members of the special Board of Equalization and Review of Orange County have been appointed, the Orange County Board of Commissioners shall designate a chairman of the special Board and shall fix such compensation and allowances for the members as it deems appropriate. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the foregoing resolution was passed upon the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Shirley E. Marshall, Moses Carey, Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell and Don Willhoit. Noes: None. I, Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the recorded proceedings of a meeting of the Orange County Board of Commissioners held on April 6. 1987 , as it relates to the resolution hereinabove set forth. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the said Board this the 7th day of April , 1987. Beverly A.f lythe Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners J. I l- E A L