The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 03-15-1983 ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR M STING 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY MARCH 15, 1983 COURTROOM--OLD POST OFFICE CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA A. BOARD1COMMENTS B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. Matters on the printed agenda 2 . Matters not on the printed agenda C. MINUT* FEBRUARY 15, 1983 D. REPORT--NACo LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE E. BOARD ECISIONS 1 . Cost to Relocate Power Poles 2 . Housing Rehabilitation Contracts 3 . Registration of Non-Domestic, Wild Animals 4- Ho'use Numbering in South Orange 5. Ca rboro Water Quality Task Force Report 6. Ec nomic Development Commission 7. Board of Equalization and Review 2. 30 MtNtTIES MARCH 15, 1983 6. 7. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, 8. March 15, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. in the Courtroom in the Old Post Office Building 9. Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 10. Comri ssfrners present: Cannissionnter Richard E. Whitted, Chair, and Can- 11. m;Gsioners Ben Lloyd, Shi.rlky E. Marshall, Norman Walker and Don Willhoit. 12. A. BCARD ClaMMENTS 13. Corm ssioner Willhoit added an executive session for property ratters, B. ADDIEN E CO VENTS 15. Mr. .T .rr.y Cooper, 112 Warren Way, Chapel Hill, presented a petition (on 16. permanent file in the office of the Clerk to the Board with the materials for 17. the agenda of this date)to the Board requesting the Board amend the existing 18. cable television franchise to permit Alert Cable T.V. provide cable T.V. service 19. to Robinswood, Councilville, Stoneybrook and Rangewood neighborhoods. Mr. Cooper 20. said that Village Cable would not provide cable service to those neighborhoods with- 21. out haneowners' financ'i.i participation because they (Viii age) says the density of 22. hones per mile is 66 and Alert would be willing to provide cable t'.v,- service at 23, no additional installation cost to those neighborhoods but were not pwrm;tted to 24.. do so under the franchise granted them. (See Petition #3 in Clerk's permenant 25. file) . 26. The Board referred the matter to the Manager with two instructions: 1) to 27. check on the discrepancy between Alert and Village's density of hones per mile; 28. and.. 2) to check the possibility of Village figuring service for those neighbor- 29. hoods via booster from the nearest lines rather than from Weaver Dairy Road. Ms. 30 In Stevens, General Manager of Village Cable, told the Board they had not figured .31. costs from the nearest lines but would do so, The Board further asked the Manager to check 32. on the extension policy as provided for under the franchise. The Manager said 33.. he would have a report on April 19th. 34. C. MINIMS 35. Crmmigsioner Marshall moved, seconded by Commissioner Willhoit, to approve 36. the minutes of February 15, 1983, as coLLected. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 37. D. NACo LEGISLATIVE RIFT 38. 39. !j.0. L. / 2. 3• Four of the Board members provided brief reports on the recent NACo s. Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C. Carr',ssioner Willhoit said the 6, entire agenda of the Taxation and Finance Subcommittee dealt with revenue 7. sharing. One aspect being eiAcussed was the speeding up of the first quarter pay- s. meat of revenue s'�arang funds, paying them at the beginning of the quarters rather 9. than at the end of the quarters_ Carmissioner Willhoit added that Congress seed 10. to feel that there was a need to get the money out into the counties and cities in an 11. Commissioner Lloyd cited Senator Dale's speech, saying that Senator Ible 12. had "laid it out on the ling" and that everyone has to contribute and give same. 13. Cam issioner Lloyd told of Senator D urenberger's speech which said that the 14. budget could be balanced by providing only "basic needs;" he continued, saying 15. that Senator Durenberger said that programs would be reduced and the "well- 16. bodied" would have to go to work. 17. Commissioner Marshall said there was a difference in this Conference can- 18. pared to all the other LLgislative Conference. She said the administration 19. representatives present were the lower levelled ones and they "tended to stone- 20. wall." She added that the administration did not "work with" local officialc 21. to solve problems; rather, they are "adamant" about pushing their programs. 22. Commissioner Marshall said with regard to "workfare" as a member of the Board 23. of Social Services she was concerned about "how and where the jobs are" as 214.. well-as "transportation" and day nine. She said there was no planning and no 25. money "up front" for workfare and no information forthcoming about it. 26. Canni_ssi nor Whitted agreed with Caumissioner Marshall about the admin- 27. istration's officials at this meeting. He added that^Senator Durenberger wanted 28. to use revenue sharing to "do awe' with deductions, of local- taxes on State and Federal 29. Income Taxes;local government is opposed to that-Commissioner Whitted sand regarding 30. the Human Resources Programraste, fraud and abuse were singled out for attention. 31. Drastic changes, he added, were coming in the CETA program as of October 1, 1983. 32. He said he thought Congressman Ike Andrews, wham the Board visited in Washington, 33. :would be a strong voice for local government. n 34. E. BOARD DECISIONS, 35. 1. Relocation of Power Poles: Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by 36. Cammissioner Marshall, of the authorization of $8,593.21 to move six additional 37. power poles in the Comity Development area, superceding the PArlier authorized 38. amount. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 39. !}0. 2. 3. 4. 2. Housing Rehab Awards: Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Ccar- 5. missioner Marshall, to approve the awarding of rehabilitation contracts to 6. Frank Griffin & Associates for unit # 22 on Torah" Street for $7,545.00 and 7. to l C0 for unit # 143 on Harper Street for $10,800.00. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 6. (Complete bid results on these two units are on pages of this book.) 9. 3. Penalties for Failure to Reu:stet Non-Domestic Wild Animals (Second 10. Reading for Penalty Clause): Commissioner Marshall moved, seconded by Cry+s- 11• Willhoit, approval of the penalty clause in the Resolution Pertaining to 12. Registration of Non-Domestic Wild Animals in Orange County, N.C. Vote: Ayes, 13. 3(C3mmissioners Marshall, ..'.''.hilted and Willhoit);. noes, 2 (Commissioners Lloyd 14. and Walker). 15. Commissioner Walker asked if dealers needed to register the animals. Can- 16. missioner Waitted said the only animals exempted were those used by the Univer- 17. city of North Carolina in Chapel Hill for research/teaching purposes and foxes; 18. therefore, dealers trnast register their animals which are covered. Commissioner 19. Walker said the USDA. regulated those (dealers); however, others disagreed, 20• saying the USDA was not able to do its job of regulating. 21. County Attorney GeorrL.ey Gledhill updated the Board on BB 364, Wild Cats 22. Regulated by the State. 23. 4. House Nwibering: Commissioner Walker moved to approve the recommendation; 24. Commissioner Whitted ruled the motion out of order. Planning Director Malvin, 25. Collins suggested that the Mount Camp"! Church Road community coordinate the 26. renuMbering effort with the Post Office. Be said it is immensely frustrating 27. to number houses in rural areas. 28. 5, Carrboro Water Quality Task Force Report: Commissioner Willhoit moved, 29. seconded by Carmissioner Marshall, to receive the report and to refer it to 30. the County Planning Department for recommendations on three items: 1) soil 31• and sedimentation controls: (to determine the Affect on University Lake); 2) 32. review the stars water management recaumendati.ons; and, 3) buffers along inter- 33. mittent streams and to-identify the impact. _ 34. Alderman Jim White of the Carrboro Board was present to answer questions 35. fran the Board of Cam ssioners. 36. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 37. Caum.ssi.oner Wil.lYtoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, to have 38. the Chair contact the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of Carrboro and tell. them 39. 40. 1. - ) c.. if k 2. 3. the report does a good job of translating water quality Variables into zoning 4• ordinance concepts but that there are two contradictions with the County's Water 5• Resources Task Force's adopted recommendations: 1) the clustering concept presumes b• extension of sewer lines into the watershed. The County has adopted a policy of 7. extension into the watersheds only under emergency conditions. 2) The Carrboro 8. proposal would provide for industrial development in the watershed, The County's 90 policy is to prohibit industrial development in University Lake and Cane Creek 10. watersheds. Commissioner Willhoit continued his motion saying, that the joint 11. planning process could be u?ed to identify areas outside Carrboro's watershed for 12. industrial development and to encourage Carrboro's participation in joint planning. 1i• Alderman White said Carrboro feels that industrial development carefully 12. planned could occur within the watershed without harming water quality, Alder- 13. man White told the Board that even if the County helped identify areas far 14, Carrboro's industrial development outside the watershed he would still favor 15. such development within the watershed. 16. Commissioner Lloyd said he agreed with Alderman White: that economic 1,7. development can occur within watersheds with protection; and extension of water 18. and sewer lines into the watersheds where ever necessary. 19. Commissioner Willhoit said that extension of water and sewer lines encouraged 20. higher density development than might otherwise occur; the non-point source 21. runoff is related to the intensity of development and impermeable surfaces, 22. 'which go hand in hand." Commissioner Lloyd disagreed 'with that concept." 23. Vote: Ayes, 3 (Cciunissioners Marshall, Whitted and W.illholt); noes, 2 24. (Commissioners Lloyd and Walker). 25. 6. Economic Development Commission n Candidates Questions: The Board 26. approved, by consensus, the questions submitted by the Manager. The Board 27. further agreed by consensus to interview four candidates each an April 5th 28. and April 19th. 29. 7. Board of Equalization and Review: Ccmissioner Willhoit nominated 30. lk der; Commissioner Lloyd nominated Tyson Clayton and Commissioner 31.. Marshall nominated Elizabeth.Walters. t:o the Board of Equalization and Review. 32. Commissioner Walker moved, seconed by C ssioner Whitted, to close the nordnations 33. and to appoint those three members. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 3j1.• Commissioner Willhoit moved, seconded by Commissioner Marshall, to appoint 35. Mr. Heffner Clair of that Board. Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 36„ Crrrmi-ssi:oner Wiliholt moved, secondedby Commissioner Whitted, to set the 37, per diem at $50.00 38. 5 .1. 3r 2. 3• Commissioner Lloyd offered a substitute motion, to set the per diem at 5. $40.00; motion died for lack of a second. 6. Vote on original motion: Ayes, 4 (Commissioners Marshall, Walker, Whitted 7, and W.il hoit); noes, 1 (Commissioner Lloyd). $« 7. Executive Session--Property matters; Commissioner Wil:lhoit moved, 9, seconded by Ccard.ssioner Marshall, to convene in executive session to discuss 10. a property matter. 'Vote: Ayes, 5; noes, 0. 11. Following the executive session the Board adjourned by consensus. 12. 13. Richard E. Whitted, Chair 114.. Paulette Pridgen, Clerk 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 2tt.. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. L- 3.3.- 3 .• 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. i0. . INDEX MARCH 15, 1983 AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT PAGE PAGES E-1 POWER POLES 1 1-4 E-2 Housing Rehab Contracts 5 5-7 E-3 Registration of Animals 8 8-12 E-4 House Numbering--S. Orange 13 13-18 E-5 Carrboro Water Quality Report 19 19-24 E-6 Economic Development Corn.. 25 25-26 E-7 E & R Board 27 27-28 ORANGE COUNTY 001 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action AGENDA. Item No.ru ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE March 15, 1983 Subject: Relocation bf Power Poles Department: Community Development Public Hearing: . yes x no Attachment(s) : setter ' from The John Information Contact: Albert Kittrell McAdam Company i phone Number: 732-8181 Ext. 425 Purpose: To consider authorizing a higher amount- for the relocation of Duke Power Company power poles on conjunction with street improve- ment activities in Northern Fairview Community. 'seed: The John McAdams Company, consulting engineers, inadvertently omitted the relocation of approximately nine power poles from street improvements plans and specifications. This omission was presented to the Board on January 7, 1983 (see attached letter from The McAdams Company dated 12-21-82) . The Board authorized the relocation of nine power poles at a cost of 56,271 .85. ($5,271 .$5 for Old Cedar Grove Road and 51 .000.,00 for Hill Street) Subse- quently, Duke Power, N.G. Department of Transportation and The McAdams Company discussed the relocation of power poles further. The discussions resulted in the proposed relocation of six additional power poles (see attached letter from The McAdams Company dated 3-8-83). The total cost of relocating power poles is $8,593.21 an increase of $2,321 .36. • Impact: DOT will not accept improved streets unless power poles are relocated. The cost of relocation will not impact the community development Street improvements budget. 1 [i!ii!! 002 1-� THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 100 HAYES BUILDING,GLEN LENNOX CENTER,CHAPEL HILL P . BOX 2896.CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 L�} . (919)9677079 December 21, 1982 Mr. Albert Kittrel1, Director Orange County Community Development 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 RE: Northern Fairview C.D. Street Improvements OCO 8001 1 Dear Mr. Kittrell : This letter is written at your request to explain the unforeseen expense of 55,271,85 for the relocation of several Duke Power Company power poles in the Northern Fairview area. Several of the streets where improvements are being made are being widened, and the widening necessitates in some cases that certain power poles be relocated farther from thelcenterline of the road. In all of our past experience, when power poles needed to be relocated in association with improvements to a road on the NC DOT sy9tem (as these roads are) , the relocation was carried out at the expense of the power company. The reason the power company would bear the expense is that -Ihe power company "encroached" on the DOT right-of-way in making the initial powerline installation; and the standard conditions of a DOT encroach- ment agreement arse that the utility owner must relocate the utilities if they interfere with aIfuture road improvement. The situation at1Northern Fairview is different. In the area where the power poles are to be relocated, which is along the southern part of Old Cedar Grove Road, DOT acquir d the 60-foot right-of-way there in March of 1972, and the power poles were alrea y existing at that time. Although additional right-of-way was acquired in 1972 by DOT, and this additional right-of-way included the land on which the power L�Oles stand, there was no way to impose on Duke Power a condition they had not agr rd to at the time of initial installation. Thus, if the power poles are to be relocated, Duke Power must be paid to do so. We regret that we did not foresee DOT's inability to require Duke Power to relocate the power poles at Duke Power's cost. On discovering the problem, we have worked with DOT and Duke Power to reduce the number of poles to be relocated by more than half (and reduce the cost from an original quote of $19,000) . We now believe that certain poles must be relocated in order to construct the streets properly, and we believe that the $5,271.85 is a necessary cost of the project. Sincerely, THE JOHN . ADAMS COMPANY, INC. BY: Rfi://C &64"YV JO R. McADAMS, P.E. Pr sident JRMc:cw .i. t , • 1: I_l1T}1E JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC. 003 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 100 HAYES BUILDING,GLEN LENNOX CENTER,CHAPEL HILL P.O.SOX 2896, CHAPEL HILL_NORTH CAROLINA 27514 (919)96777079 March 9, 1983 Mr. Albert Kittre.11 Orange Cot4nty Community Development Director 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsboro Ugh, North Carolina 27278 Re: Nord ern Fairview C.D. Street Improvements OCO 8001 Dear Mr. ittrell: This lett]r is written to clarify the need for an increase (of about $2400) inithe budget amount for the relocation of the power pbies in conjunction with the street improvements in Northern Fairview. When we f rst descovered that we would be unable to arrange with DOT to direct Duke Power to relocate the power poles at Duke's cost, we got a quote from Duke of about $20,000 to relocate all the poles in the area, and then we got DOT's agreement that many of the poles could remain if we just routed the ditch lines around some of the r existing poles. Through negotiations with a Mr. Copley of Duke, we generatedia quote of $5200 to relocate several poles on Old Cedar Grove Road and $1000 to relocate a pole on Hill Street; those being the only poles that we thought we could not possibly avoid by rerouting the ditch lines. The County made the necessary budget amendments to provide the $6200 for the pole relocation. Then when we approached Duke Power to arrange their moving the poles, Mr. Copley had retired and a division manager, Mr. George Johnson, objected strongly to several of the other poles not being relocated. He reasoned that some of the poles which we were not calling for the relocatio of would be too close to the new road, and he feared that DOT would require Duke to relocate those poles at a future date. DOT then provided Duke assurance that if all poles within 8 feet of the new edge of pavement were relocated, DOT would then not require relo- cation oflother poles at any point in the future. This new 8 foot criterion form DOT was the first specific criterion we had tojdetermine which poles must be moved. In applying the criterior6 six additional poles were found to need to be moved. .. -._ --- Mr. Albert Kzttrel.l ._ ___ _ March 8, 1983 004 Page 2 The increased cost for the six additional pole relocations, by quote from Duke Power, is $2400. We have now achieved a full understanding between DOT and Duke Power as to which poles must be relocated and which ones can be allowed to remain, and we be"ljeve that there will be no further need for budget adjustnien:s. - Sincerely. THE JOHN R ADAMS COMPANY, INC. BY "Aid 0 _g.4.. ohn R. McAdams, P.P. 1 resident 1 ORANGE COUNTY " 005 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action AGENDA Item No 1011.1070 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT 1 MEETING DATE_ March_15,_.19.83., abject: Housing Reha ilitation Contract Award apartment: Community !Development _ t Public Hearing : yes x no 1 tdchaen*.is — - --- , !Information Contact: Wilbert McAdoo Bid Results Phone Number: 732-8181 Ext. 429 ==o-pose: award of two Housing Rehabilitation Contracts. I Sealed bids were received and opened on March 3, 1983. Attached is a tabulation of the bids by dwelling unit numbers. ;mpact: Award of contract to the lowest bidder will be consistent with present housing rehabilitation bid procedure. I Li 6 162 Z' -0046' ;',, APPLICATION N ItuM BER 143 ;tER: Samuel Tore .. LOORESS: Har•er Str--t COST ESTIMATE: ERCENTAGE OF B I D OVEa_ 10. UNDER COST ESTIMATE : 4=CK ONE: JOB BID I, a J JOB NEGOTIATED I COMP COMP _..� AI B I D AMOUNT PM Eugene Morrow _ 10,835.00 �� Frank Griffin - _ 13,500.00 .__ TEMCo _ _ 10 ag8.00 __ , Samuel English __- 11 ,170.00 Bids opened by: Robert Wilson - Time of Bid Opening: 3 p'Tr.lnr.k ��.---- Date of Bid Open ang: March 3, 1933.__ Wi tnessed by: __, 4Ji 1 bent McAdoo - ______- Lowest Acceptable Bid: 10,806.00 — ---- gotiated Amount: N/A ontractor: TEMCO 500 Dupont Circle, Durham. ILL_ 77705 --- 383-5384 PHONE NUmBER COMMENTS: }} /.��,•- /� DATE: 3"..... (J '- F.3 Submitted by: f .0 ��:4a11 . ♦ t� �._.�..� 007 RESULTS OF BID OPENING APPLICATION NUMBER 22- OWNER: Dian Can - -_-__— .: COST ESTIMATE:_y,897.Of1 �DDRESS: Torah -- �ERCEHTAGE OF BID OVER 8.59 UNDER _. _ __-- COST ESTIMATE =HECK ONE: JOB BID I x ] JOB NEGOTIATED 1 _ MOUNT COMPANY Eu ne e 3,984.00 Frank Griffin & Associ . 7 ,545.00 _-- TEMCO _ 8,300.00 Sar uel English 7,790.00 Bids opened by: Robert Wilson Time of Bid Openng: 3 0' �--m - Date a P f Bid 0 eni n 9: March 3. 1983 - _-- Witnessed by: Wilbert McAdoo r ****4*******#*+**4*4*t****r,4***t**,.***w**w++********r**4******************fir****** Lowest Acceptable Bid: 7,545.00 Negotiated Amount: NIA Contractor: Frank Griffin & AssOcjat-PS NAME Route 5 Box 674, Greensboro, N,C. 27405 _. ADDRESS 375-5353 PHONE NUMBER _--_ COMMENTS: Community Development's contribution towards the Rehabilitation of this dwelling unit will be $6,000.00. Submitted by: J141____71,. DATE': 3-e--p? s • 008 O '\ZE CO'UN.TY BOARD OF CCLt.ISSIChN&-RS Action P..genda Item No.F.-3 �rla V AG E\10P ITE4 ABSfl CT MEE"2ING DA,TE____macli 15 , 114;13 .. Subject: Penalties for failure to Register Non-Domestic, Wild Animals Depattren `;anager . Public Hearing:. yes X no A ckment(s) : Iafmmlati(m Contact: Ken ompson 1 . Resolution 732-8181 ext. 501 -2 . Registration form Phone Number: pr1RpOSE: To consider giving second reading approval to a penalty clause. NEED: Under authority granted under NC General Statutes 153A-131, 153A-153, the Board at its March- 7, 1983 , regular meeting approved a resolution requiring registration and gave first reading approval to a penalty clause. Attached is the amended resolution which includes the penalty clause. Also includ41:1.e d for information are : 1 . public notice which will appear once each week in tije News of Orange , Chapel Hill Newspaper and Durham Morning Herald; and Ehe 2. Revised registration form being used by the Health Deparitment, RECOMMENDATION: Approve the amend Resolution. .,. 009 7 AMENDED RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO REGISTRATION OF rON-DOMESTIC, WILD ANIMALS IN ORANGE COUNTY, N. C. WHEREAS, Sections 153A-151 and 153A-153 of the N. C. General Statutes authorize counties to restrict or regulate the possession or harboring of animals which are dange ous to persons or property; and, WHEREAS, any p olicy prepared for Orange County concerning the regulation and/or restrict'on of wild, non-domesticated animals should reflect the incidence of such animals in the County; and, WHEREAS, accurate information is needed concerning the location, number and species of 1/gild, non-domesticated animals in Orange County, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that: 1 . All persons, firms or corporations residing and/or operating within Oran County shall register, within 21 days of the adoption of this 9 Y g Resolution, all wild animals in their possession with the Orange County Health Department, 300 West Tryon Street, Hillsborough, N. C. The number, species name (common and biological ) , and location of the anima's, as well as the owner or possessor's name and address must be provided. The only exception to this requirement shall be animals used for teaching and/or research purposes at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill . 2. "Wild Animals", for the purposes of this Resolution applies to species of animals not traditionally considered domesticated, specifically, all felines (other than the domestic house cat) , nonhuman primates, bears wolves, coyotes, reptiles (poisonous, crushing, and giant) , and ay crossbreed of such animals which have similar characteristics of the animals specified herein. 010 perta'ning to wild animals and such a role has been traditionally beyon the realm of county government responsibilities. 4. Penalties. Violation of this Ordinance shall be a misdemeanor and an y persolli convicted of such violation shall be punishable as provided by G.S. l4-4, and, in addition, subject to Civil penalty at a rate of $50.00 per day, per animal , for failing to register, beginning March 29, 1983. ADOPTED THIS THE DAY OF MARCH, 1983. 1 OFFICE USE 011 A Animal Species Animal Type Date Received _— Initials of Persons who checked in form ORANGE COUNTY WILD* ANIMAL REGISTRATION FORM Use Separate Form For Each Type Wild Animal Kept 1. Owner(s) Nime: A. Owner(i) Address ; (If on Rural Route, -- _ include Road Name) B. Owner(I) Home Telephone: C. Owner( ) Work Telephone: D. If Owner is a Corporation: I Name of Corporation: State incorporated in : Names and Addresses of principal officers: Name: Address: E. If owner is any other type of organization: — Name o organization — .._. Addres of organization: Names ind address of principal officers, director's, trustees, or man- aging officials or partners: Name: Addre ssl: F. What is the owner' s purpose in keeping the animal(s) : G. Describe owner' s qualifications to care for the animal(s) (Such as any training) : 2. Name, home addresses and telphone numbers of person(s) responsible for care of animals (If other than owner) : Name . Home Address ; • 3 . Location where animals(s) kept (If rural route include road name) : 012 Street/Road City: I . A. Describe the method, materials, and square footage of facilities for confinement of the animal(s) : B. Is the animal(s) ever transported away from location where kept and returned? Yes . No C. Descri a transport vehicle or means and the special transport equip- ment u ed: 4. Species of animal (such as Feline) : A. Sub-type of species (such as Bobcat) : B. Number of this type animal kept: . C. General description of this type animal(s) kept: D. Where kid animal(s) come from prior to your ownership of? Name of prior person(s) who owned animal(s) Street/Road City . . County .. .� State — _____ E. How long have you kept the animal(s) in Orange County? Return this form to either office of the Orange County Health Department Not later than March 28, 1983, Owners not registering wild animals they keep by March 28 may be subject to a penalty of $50 per day per animal. 0l'ANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 300 W. Tryon Sprees Suite 225 Hillsborough, 'C 27278 Carr Mill Mall 100 N. Greensboro Street - Carrboro, NC 27510 Telephone: Hillsborough 732-8181 , Ext, 305 Telephone : 942-4168 Durtam 688-7333 Chapel Hill 967-9251 Mebane 227-2032 5. Signature of person submitting this registration: 6. Date this (registration filled out: . f . ORANGE coU� 01.3 BOARD OF C Lei*..C' SSIO'VE 'i Aotion Agenda 4. 4$10. ACTION AGENDA :'.,`a4 ABSTP-'r T Item Not* •` M Z INN DPrE March 15, l983 _ Subject. House Numbering Department: PLANNIN 1 Public Hearing: yes_J__ no Attach flt(S) : 2/2483 Memorandum Information Contact: Marvin Collins To County Manager; 1/26/83 Memorandum to Planning Director Phone Nt er: (919) 732-8181, ext. 349 ,_ PURPOSE: To consider a method for providing house numbering within certain portions of the County. NEED: Several citizens have expressed concern over a number of changes to rural rote and box numbers. These changes have occurred frequently and require affected residents to notify relatives, friends, banks, businesses, etc. of address changes. The citizens with the County to inte ene by.providing a more permanent method of house numbering than that presently utilized by postal branches. Responsibility for house numbering should rest with postal.. — offi.ci-Is . . - IMPACT: The attached memorandum to the County Manager dated 2/2/83 provides information and recommendations regarding the establishment of a m house numbering system for Orange County. Initiating such an effort at this ti..i.me will divert staff efforts from objectives in the 1982-'83 work program. Inclusion of house numbering efforts in the 1983-'84 work program is more desirable. RECOMMENDATION: As part of the upcoming budget process consider what the cost . , ORANGE GO-U 7TY PLANNING DEPARTMENT laLmsnoROtrc i N'ORTh: CAROLINA • 27278 i191 ,..f.4.4+dw r Qir MEMORAt3DUM TO: KEN THOMPON, COUNTY MANAGER- iA 'ci PROM: MARVIN FOI.LINS , PLANNING DIRECTOR DATE: F'EBRUARr 2, 1983 RE: HOUSE NUMBERING Your memorandum of January 26, 183 requested that I provide you . with information and recommendations ;:regarding the establishment - of a house numbering system for Orange County. The request was prompted by changes being made in rural route and box numbers in the southern � ortion of the county . This action required that area residents make changes to stationary or notify companies and individuals of such changes . A need for a constant house numbering system was expressed. F I have provided below information regarding the present house numbering system utilized in rural portions of the county, the efforts made by the Road Naming Advisory Committee in this area, and a recommendation as to possible actions for resolving this problem. Existing House Numbering System Information regarding the rural route numbering system was provided by Mr . J.C. Sharp and Mr. Horace Grant (Postmaster) of the Hillsborough.. Post Office. Prsently, the county is served by eight (8) different poste branches . These include Chapel Hill, Hillsborough , Efland, Mebane, Durham, Cedar Grove, Hurdles Mill and Rougemont. Each branch provides or serves from one (1) to eight (8) rural routes . When boundaries for routes are established, permanent landmarks are generally used so that they can be readily identified on the ground . No set procedure has been established for identifying rural routes , so individual post offices are left to their own creativeness or to rely on the experience of others in creating routes . Once a route has been established, individual box numbers are set up for the residents on that route . Numbers are assigned so that room is left in the numbering sequence for homes which are added later . As an example one house may be Box 45 with a 200 yard gap to the next house . That hnus has been assigned Box 55 . If a house were built between the two existing units , the new number would be Box 50. - Douse Numbering --2- C February 2, 1983 01 The system existing within the county is very similar to that used in a more urban area . It works well except when certain sections begin to develop densely . To insure a more or less equal distribution of mail by rural rdute carriers , it often becomes necessary to create new routes . Thisi is the situation which has occurred in the southern portion of the ounty, and, according to Mr . Sharp, is about to occur near Hillsborou, h. This occurrence is not unusual even in urban settings - where vacant land is developed at high densities and the original numbering sequence did not take this into account. Changes to the system are inevidable and can occur on a block, route or even county level . Road Naming AdvJsory. Committee Efforts Keith Rosemond jf the Planning Department staff served as resource person for this information. In February of 1580, while the Committee " was functioning, Jim Polatty. and Keith discussed the idea of house numbering, count -wide. Jim discussed the idea with the former County Manager Sam Gattis and received approval to see if something could be developed.. The county was civided into a grid with N.C. Highway 86 and Wilkerson Road forming the north-south line, and U.S . Highway 70 and St. Mary 's _ Road forming th a east-west dividing line. These roads were designated the "base" road from which the numbering system radiated outward. Roads were designated as East Lebanon Road or West Lebanon Road, etc . Block numbers were then assigned such as the 100 block of West Lebanon Road. The assignment of the block numbers always began with "100" being closest to the "base': road. Finally, each block was delineated on a county tax map and that section of road marked off in 25-foot increments for ,purposes of 'assigning individual house numbers . ` This was as far as the house numbering effort was taken. The staff did have block numbers placed on most of the road signs, but because the effort was discdnti,nued, more re"cent1y installed signs do not have such numbers . The primary reason for discontinuing efforts on the house numbering system was time constraints which the staff faced . General Considerations - County-wide System Discussions with postal officials indicated that they are in favor of a uniform house numbering system for the county. They did indicate their willingness to rovide assistance, but such help would not be either financial or manpower oriented. They also indicated that such an effort would be very tilme consuming and should be approached as a long-range project lasting several years . Once established on paper, actual implemen- tation would result in numerous complaints similar to those occurring now in the southern portion of the county . - If an effort is to be made in this area, several items must be taken into consideration. These include: . 1 . The need for accurate aerial photographs to assist in identifying dwelling unit locations . The Tax Department has indicated a need for such maps as, part of the Land Records System. Tax maps in an aerial photograph/property line format would greatly assist. iio.tee Numbering February 2, 1983 0.1 3 . High degree of coordination and cooperation between the County and eight (8) postal branches to design and implement the system, 4. Consideration of house numbering systems already established in Chapel Hill, Carrboro , Durham, etc, to avoid conflicting number'i lg 5. Changes in existing road signs where numbers have not been establi, hed., Recommendations My basic recomm ndation would be to postpone any effort towards establishing a ouse numbering system until accurate, up-to-date aerial maps are available. Such maps are indispensable in the identification nd numbering of dwelling units . The staff also has a number of projects scheduled for the remainder of this fiscal year and cannot devo e time to this effort. If any efforts are to be made, I would suggest the following : 1. Establish a House Numbering Advisory Committee composed of County representatives, postal officials, private citizens. :. and municipal officials to work on preparing guidelines for a working system. 2. Employ a summer intern in the Planning Department who would work.. with the Committee in developing a report on the system. 3 . Present the report to all participating organizations for approval . (Note; Durham County has established a county-wide system si some assistance may be available from that source) . 4. Include the implementation phase in the work program for fiscal y�ar 1983-84 and seek to initiate the system on a limited basis; i.e_ , in more densely populated areas of the county . Expansion to more rural areas could come later. If a report is prepared , it should present the basic framework within which the system is to operate . The numbering of specific "blocks" can be accomplished, and recommended procedures for assigning specific house numbers can be included. Recommendations on the implementation phasing can alsolbe addressed. The importance of this approach and agreement by all parties involved is that each agency will operate within the same guidelines . One system will apply to all rather than having eight to ten different and distinct systems . Finally, I would strongly urge that final administration of the system be given to the postal authorities . People generally think of the post office when needing house numbers, and I think it is practical to leave this function with them. The Planning Department can offer support in the development of the system, but administration on a day-to-day basis is time consuming and not a proper function for a "planning" organization. The intserfl r n ins;,,;ass, ,. • 0:1 7 t ! Li I I Lt• tlititil i 1 ; 1 I cED,. R GROVE TWP IA)i _ . ! Pk., I . . 1 ., . "i•ti „ , I. . I. * , Iiir • 0 -,1 % 1 •w : • , I: , . ... ,,:y., ... Allpappfr41111111 , z. , 4-1 , ' elf - i t""1". --q"ilir41 NO TWE abill' 1111"'- • ' HI i,7,':i SBOROU Gli . • Twit , . _...., 1 CHEEKS 6-111111111,• . tr. ‘. . • * 1".:• ..-<:--- . I : .... , -i.., „.‹,...e. .. • . 113. .L10 , t • ii Mtibone 1:7 • I . . _7,7_ ,ii`. - •'16‘.----11..----- b...it momm _r__ p......;.--- ..___.„1441L-n4w-........tfr-, . :..;:i. diI 4 11 . 1111116MEM411111111 .......:......:...,.., 7 1111,11146 '. . 1 • . 1 ” ii,,,..;.; Ilitrivit . ...di. . . i ORANGE E...„o.5 R.-O V riVR ." •_tI•4,11 h I°,_•.,.1 A. P:-dolIl i r'l3'i li f'it'.t•ll .1 l •, •.::„::....:.:.........:.. . _ • i I IM I .• ... ...• if' Cgrri:\t_ .:;ii::.,::::: •--N-.-0:::::17::::::::.%::'':::::*::::. :::.%- Hi/I h ' - 'g&.101Li*:2kg,:::::;:i.;:;::::;*.:1'-::: • .. ii ---)i ' ‘. C1( . - I • --\\ 1;1 A 3 33 018 # k MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Director FROM: County ,Manager - DATE: Januar,Y 26, 1983 RE: Addresses At last night's Board Meeting questions were raised by Commissioner Willhoit about the Road Numbering Policy of the postal service. Changes in rural route and box numbers are being made by postal officials without regard to the numberlof address changes (e.g. on credit cards, mail, etc.). This necessitates do the part of residents. An example of an area recently affected by this is Moint Carmel Church Road, which is densely populated. The Road Naming Advisory Committee was interested in developing a house numbering sch 'me which could remain constant. What is the status of that interest, and in particular, was-anything done? I understand from Commissioner Willhoit that counties may assign street numbers in cooperation with postal officials. This information comes to him from a Mr. Riley, a foreman of rural delivery in southern Orange County. i would like for you to investigate this question to s e what action the County might be able to take. Your inquiry should be made, not just to Mr. Riley, but to the postmasters both here in Nillsbboraugh and in Chapel Hill . Please give me your findings and recommendatio1s which I can in turn report back to the Board on March 7. Kenneth R. Thompson KRT:nm OF y...,. ;Yc- ;-;!FP. V.. Item no. l,, Ii%G DATE Parch 15, 1983 • , Subject: Carrboro dater :Quality Task force Report & Racommendations . nap e,e‘� PLA:1UI1•G . - i Pub.- �.arirag: . Y.eS X ' zi: Attac Lt(s) : 2/24/83 Letter from . In ku.m.wkat a. ContCt: Marvin Collins Richard Hunter, Carrboro Town Manager: • . • Watershed Maps . IIZA1Z =tat: (919) 732-8181, ext. 349 • poRposz: To provide recommendations and comments to the Carrboro Board of Aldermen . concerning the Carrboro Water Quality Task Force Report. ' NEED: University{ Lake is presently the primary water source for the Carrboro- Chapel Hill area, and the lake and the eastern portion of its watershed. lie within! Carrboro's Planning jurisdiction. In 1980, Carrboro became concerned with the possible degradation of water quality" in University Lake due to hon-point sources of pollution. A watershed task for was appointed to recommend measures to reduce non.-.point source pollution, and in November, 1982, the Water Quality Task Force Report was completed. . In conjunction with an on-going local review process, the Carrboro Board of Jldermen have asked the Orange County Board of Commissioners to provide its comments and recommendations on the report. This request is primarily due to Orange'Count'y's present and proposed expanded role in admini tering erosion control standards in Carrboro as well as`the County. I CT: The propos d watershed Protection plan for University Lake includes the following elements 1. Provision of natural buffers 2. Sedimentation and erosion control 3. Zoning regulation 4. Stormwater management 5. Clustefing development The waters ed protection plan employs the same natural buffer y f er concept thit the County has adopted; i.e., to reduce runoff velocity and to filter out pollutants. However, the recommended standards differ somewhat from those of Orange . County, e County requires a natural buffer along perennial streams eqial in width to 50 feet + % slope x 4, with the buffer beginning at the n„ ar P401. of +-ho f1n.,7 ,-.1:“., „n,_ E 020 IMPACT cont'd: I ci areas between 20,000 and 40,000 sq: ft. In light of the proposal contained in the Carrboro plan, some question exists _ - - as to whether the benefits of inspecting (on paper and/or in ,. the field) every site would exceed the cost of such inspections aid who will pay the additional expense if brought on by e panded inspection demands. Some question exists also as to ' h w effective these measures would be, since little attention has been given to erosion"sediment controls on agricultural ]and (exempt by statute) , much of which is located beyond Carrboro's jurisdiction. oning is one of the most effective means of maintaining water 'quality and is part of Carrboro's watershed protection Plan. Rather than continue the present watershed district cith its five (5) acre minimum lot size, the plan proposes graduated zoning scheme; i.e. , the greater the distance rom the lake, the more intensive the development allowed. upled with this approach axe impervious surface restrictions and runoff controls. !Minimum lot size requirements are educed, and commercial and industrial development are recommended on a limited basis. while this approach may seem logical, given the other controls Proposed, pollutants in a stream will reach the lake once they are in the stream. Furthermore, with the limited mount of commercial/industrial development existing and proposed j,i5 acres)., a more logical tactic would be to restrict Duch development to existing uses only. This would better rirotect the watershed and not place the County in the position of having to "follow suit" in that portion of the watershed within its jurisdiction. Another element of the watershed protection plan involves tormwater management and includes a requirement.for stormwater discharge produced by a development to approximate pre-development discharge rates. This may nqt be enough to insure water quality and some agreement needs to be reached as to what "pre-development" . unoff rates would be acceptable. Another recommended practice is the use of stormwater detention ponds, a practice that is falling into disuse by Other jurisdi ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MARGARET LANE HILLS'3OROT7Gj3, N. C. 27278 R[CHARD E.WHflTEO.CUP faEN LLOYD .... SHIRLEY E.MARSHALL NORMAN'VC ALKER DON WULLHOIT Mesh 22, 1983 " . r: r F. t T - rY`..r; The Honorable Rob Drakeford and the Carib Board of Alden • ;P.O. Box 337 : 1 , • ',Y..: ^ ttw Vir -,.. IE lr'i�"(''ild"g '7Wit}4 .# lw"7i` :� y't3fr. ill/,.t' '`''p' �.+<''I.tiS?t.�.try';:'-'.:r•itis-:;':;;.?xii:;ra,.• �`.r o 4 `�.,;.i . r':.+ v, � a...,F �.�','',,:a• y. it -5; 3•'%'Y•�c�r ..:5�'?Yx.`• �.',r •� �f� �.? `MfF F[ a' lr'il ., k' :•:::..-..;; •1 t S s i -4,!..!-;.'',..1.,..; 1,1•r tid T ,. I;., ^ I.� 3 r.4_ ..:;ri.,l K.•, �! •�3»M, t '•v �# '�i� �f py �1?'�•r:� Y• 'SVn., r+ "�4'�"!'�i,, ^ .. ... c a ,1 •,YT.n�, .4 R.'•t 3 i 1 •Yfv.'.�n J .447 It; `t '1 _ .• . {' ,.ly L A •: '.✓:,`�.s'n.'...r '.r^i:,.,•�-,. `•� ��1ti., k: �.IM �� wJ,i� y 1'.�� •,fi r+"�'.a �j ..�,`.�"I _ �:4 '.ni w, '�Z�'r� .r, ,. `�. ' .Artl�'k•'J,' t y rY - v,..•. 'ST !:.! ?r•o-• �7 rt' "'333111 ' �'":1 .t^y f . t -','' •r. . ck: -i.. :: � yi. � �'7 i�w�i'0 �"- { i -i:•. �'�d. .y L ��A•�40. :7,25-,,,,;::.�}''��'�'a ,. 7.7 �+�. 1'r;'",: � �1 •i{-3•'' l _ ^•�k�` ,x� •'IY-'�\�• .]m�f' e'. r 1 fA 1� .i� � _ �'iG : .S. _- " L , }' ..• r sJ '` is ,�5'rW: N.�.-.f��t ��.�.r`� �^i '�:... _ ''`5 •.;+ 'yi�� I�'�"µ (r•,'r�:�'ri3:.j,�,r-:°:.•,....-..;,•••77.,,•;.:-..,..i. - _ . .. .t. '.c,� �, ,•': ,t i..,.: :.: %: •.' =.,,t. V;,•,51174,71'!. ,'S "si} , ^i' r 'y- t s i '-•∎•• '.�rt� - :=1:.•: i.r.,' .'",!-C'.'41=' rt 4;T.Jr�.."..*-O�•;c.:'}i. ».. . '''t.7-.f -. "'' "� TQWN OF ; CARRBORO • • TOWN MANAGER I r : . ' • February 24, 1983 Mr. Ken Thompson ' ' Orange County Manager • • . 106 E. Margaret Lane - . ' . Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear, Ken: ' . The Carrb'ppro Board of Aldermen has requested that the Orange County • Commissiohers provide us with their'recommendations and comments on the Carrbaro Water Quality Task Force Report. If possible, the Board would like to have the County's comments by the middle of March or at . your earliest convenience. Particular attention should be given to the proposed revisions of the Orange County Sedimentation and Erosion Control Ordinance. . . If you have any• questions or need further explanation of the material contained in the Task Force's Report, please contact our Planning Director, Roy Williford. .. - Thank you. _ 5' ,erely, :(1/“' . Richard . Hunter Town Manager .. RHH:tp , •••••,::-7:7.:.. 7 an S I .,,,,.,"..:":„.,....f.."....;..:',,:.....,:,i":„‘,....-:,,,:..\I.:A.1/4 ',1'.:e76.7,..25:"...;-:,'..;:.,.:1-...l.... ,. . . i 1 1 '''' . ;'-'7.." ; , • ; 0 , mai" ilhs,T.rei-riiii . .p. \'"'..... .......-13in g 001 IT 4 p.'t .1 .440111 .,.:. f , ..., , ' . ,,..,,,;.,..... ........• .4.-,:.p.::.....„4-4.....,„ ,...,,,,.. .,,,,,r. .;:,.. ;:.:,..-:4 *.m I • fil • ,. .. .. ... ........-„, ..::%.„ . . . . .... . ......_ 1 . . . , •10 "4- . IIAP1 ii- , .001, .i„ . 14 • ...„,„::•,:,,,,,,„0.4„.....,„,,...,, A.:::„..., -,,,,g.........:„,„:::,::::.1.::::-„A::.,,,▪ ,-:::•,:::-..,,:- . :,.,..:::::,..... ,....., .. . li, 1 Illiialloo iiiiiiiiiiiI) iii, ir• 4 ,.- ..-.::''':::::441-14,:':•::::::.::: '. ..;.„, . .'t. ,,•§::::•••••••,00.4 N::%"-,47,,,...:.:::::.p.v,K,..„.....,..4 "SC 1. t... I. •,.......v., / -,,n.•,; ,• •.., 4....:'''''''''''''L'' ''''''?:, I II 7 r xlir.::::.:....419wH.4,..:,...rei .:111-.).:Aii.1,;, -...:.!.. .ii..0-1.(1. 11. .;•?..::,•,:;;I:::.....tz'74.4(.i.ii....::;:itostili-ill .• .▪..v..:..F.,:,-;":".... gge,tl'?::.i;fil:,!,!-:l';',•."'.-'r);.....,.F':;."1.'''::::e. ' I.4.1.1 ii r...:',:ti. ....t.d...,;,.....,,,,:;2m.,:::*:,• ,,,,t.:;:w. ii.:.:1::::4:..:5:,:p:::-0::::-:"iilia.:-,.. ._„„.„. '-':',71,-,..:,..■ t,„......._,•A •tv...,:.17.!.17-,..........„4,,,i!....,...,:c.,.....,,,,,,I.:).1124.,4;!..."-,...:,;.,,,,..,'Q...,•`:.•1:::_.: :-,::.u„,' ::.,i.. :*zt:;;;,... i 1:,.. 7.,;i..........,,,::::3..),,....7:::: 4e. ., .........::::.:::.:.: ::.....::::...... ri.k. ..6.. 6.4 , ,.... ,..- - . ,-,.. . .:..... ...„,......„...4::.. „:„.....„..........„....:„.,::-.„ ii.„,,, , ...tv-..:. I --„.",. r....„ . ..-...>*,-.:?;;. i1.4::::,. _-__ •••••.r. • ,•_. •.: ,,,:„.......,•,...434. 44". .." ..4 "".--.:s-.....te t.t., ,41..,''';1"‘Ii.n:i..4.: 4*..." : '..',.1 ' %4 .:':.'''' ''-:. • ' '' ,' '''' '''".*• ''' '' '-. -..- . '')0". :, ,t.. , :'...<si: •"., -:.....-Nil; 4-.4,,,.....v.' /^-\\...j......./ C'?..".F..-1'''''',..,:.:,f,'.if-a.t`' ..;.,V,...4-..:,:;?, ..?:.:'.. ..,1?."'::::?........:;',..,,....:::..:"-.1:',..":-..., ......:.'...Y.,.':•'3!...-Z..?.'•••••i'-.:'' ''''''' . -.J:' -...-. .'.f.". I . . '44.1'..f.g.'1U-Cr:qP'.'.IV .- %a,:,',1,= ••• 4, ..:::::'....*L::: t••%[,:•,:f„,,::Lj;0. :?.:",•••.: m:.:: ...y..::,,,,t, ..,..,..•PrO4 ' '..:-:.r',,,,,::..,....7....: Iii.-:Z5310.,,,!-,Vt.',1".?'4, .it,'•.t.i'•'',.. ''''if,...":";3 :.•"::::....::::.■••N.." -- •• ,••x: ' .••1:::.x.,-::' ,A. •S-- c,....;.74;- .„2*-.,=.:•4-.T...-... -.4.,'-`;.. 4-•••="•go.N.: ": .4:',. '-::•'•'.--':','•;1 '.,1.:::':...i: :"..;:•;;•::, •-::: ;'•:.:,.::::.=r;:.•::• .›.•tyritif.-•-.1•47.-- 1U,.,1;i7 ". -7-- g,:g;.;;;f%7.,:if, :,.,1,:f4•,..',,,,:,,-,s:f..r.':-.. !,:if::::":1 ft::-•:::: „:..:- '.1-• i.-'''';'"*.-''..t;..,..,,,' •-,1.- 1.1%3 -- ' •*--1. i -- B H• ,..#4i;•.:•:••,, ,,,,:•:•...!....?,','..,:,,,..4... ,s,,,vrs...,.:-,:-t •::::z .•:,•::::... L.,...,.,. x „,, . . ,.....,;.:•-.,.;:::; it- ••,,,,,,- - ..• ..4,,,,-,,. __,z I AN., .i,..1,..,:',0 2,-4:.:..',.:'.'-'''' ''4',,,s i +-h..%,.'', ' '-i::.':g"'.'..',..`.';.•Et,** ... .'''.7 ..$91" •'. '-': ''..t- : - - ' --:-.1.E.... ' .:: •-'- .,,,,,,,,,..t.T.?-•,A...,:?'-,-:.• .......1i. i. >.,,.-...-: ;4 '..il -.4‘$,.... ,' "".' .4:', . W:". .- ....- '''' .-.... .i Att..'.• -r-,7 , ..._,. " ,!;744'11V:i.:Ii:: ".....,,L,I.,-.F.,;,F.';'47..W.:,>.,1; ,;•,.:+.•;...:.V.'4:•;',.:4.., :.;t:.f.''::Si,s%:::, ::.::•:; :::;.$1!t' 1:11. ..7-'-..: I 1 I. 44'4%v,,3,-,...,...•..,1"1.,,Lit'fi C2...7.ei:;171.1''.....,t,r,.A.......„4.. ..,........N•-.0.:•,,„„ . . ....., : ro pi 11-. e•, -,...r- ---T,.......,,-,,-..... .• - -- t. ...., ,,,.1,,,,'.„-.,,,,Ar.:,.;.L..-1.; r..",.:. • ,.I.,. ,.,,.,..tv,,r.1 •................_ ..1% .;=.•.. Ait•--- -- _ - - -'14-ises,--••!..,....e.V....-...., : T.•;1•=1,0'3,1•,..•1 Ak ' -A. +.,=';-• •u • • ,.1. •=-...• ' ' =•'...• "turtdr -_ .- ........ -r.,4 7'.- .'‘.--‘ 41.1 •: .•,....1-1,..... • ••Asihm. • -........-:. 'i.'''''"4-• '''l'i. +t. V.AS,',='`.1'‘ .0„rfx,41 '7•A'".'.1"ti71,-*--..riPL- - :.•;6L,L,k,,..,ki,'A 1,,1,: .,. , kr-0; 1.'?-1.-qa\,'=' ...-•=. •t=, c■• ^---- 1 ? „3,•• -..1,,k,',-,•:,V;0.1\1'.. ,f'A ti,,q.11:ctA.1 4y.1..f.,,e;4.-..4 117S1 11A tit.eiliTi..,:•._..." r..7....,..7:_-: a BH•2 ./..op.7 ,k.::,....:•\:, ..,....,,, ,.., .,,.:,:11.,,,....:.0 4.1akki,,,,,,,..:4A,,-.44:1 ii.,11. ..t.w.,i,,t:,, .1.„,_-_-_-_ __ • _- i e : atcf,:...,,;.,,,,,,i.,,...\‘,........,,,A1:.;,,4,..,,, ....,,k-, :".....v,e,,,,,,,t2:•,F4J.,,,,,•44.0t1..,,,ki.1.,,.; . .......c.77.#51:: ...xt,li,... --...: :,.k 1,-1,-.. .yo.: „.0,1r,A,:,,,I.:,...-. .",------- I • •- , :!••'::1.A.;1‘'A:.., ::\-,,,..t,- \,.,k V,•1"4 0:4.''.:1 R.c..:V:if.:', 11,':41i-,r‘''..;r ' ...r'.17.k 1.: '.''..1..Ai„' h'.,i:k.' !".f...'h ..:'.P...;;',0-7,',". .• 4 rr . . ,..,... I 1 '1..1--..:.- 14:\:',,,■=.1. .1-..,-y n.t w ...w‘1,\v,'4..1"`g',ilk.:`i 4..--,:lie$.:-ft !,,;,-,-•p.....p:,:": e.,A4,;:c..11.; BH ../j-i . -./ ...\- , Rd. :'.11P:'.V:'''''''''''''''''''''':‘::k:•\::,::;11'''..;-:;.:'31:1.1",.;\;::::',':;:i.r.ti''''',:ty'Cl.r.rili'' ''...'"-1*..::::.''.:'-.7.7,... 7:::...t.r• ...in:: : e.''.1,';,I.V.T'll'A'h■'..:,V ..'1. W..i...ir W.,:.1g;,-... 1,10:‘I ,''''. , "..--"1„......„, ........i4.4.--7,...;)..r,-, AillA ,,, .11 , • .k'.,,r,,,....„,,,,..,,,,,, .:,. ..,..,.L.,..„ „,,,,,„...„..„....,„..,...„_• _, •• ,....,......„.„ ••:,.., L„,,, .„.,,,,. .....,..,,,,,,,....,„, ,„..,.‘„,„„ ,, ,..,......,..L..., ..,....,,,, ..,„„:„.t,,,;.:A.' 11 -''4.-- .„.44 kv•VAT4.-t- 4 ='=','•* " ; ,;-ii:6.•,=1-7:1,1! -.., VI.•:*:''''"-?.... 4-A.-013'''''=•.'3g&•tr•I;' ,-;.-.," ..-;,;:Lit- 4 ..;wi, .■ei . t ,.....i .,..s. % A;.,:t...... •,....,64, „...,•:t.,0 •;,,,k'vt.6.1 1.•.11 0 W 1.1'•11• ..;':. LI ,,.klt• t,tV it.•t1 1.1,,", :1,,, VI 4.1 ••■ ..,,.,:.- ..,.., .... , 7,011 , i zi a it,.„ii NI,,„:-. i . 1„ j. •Ilt--A"-....•11.1,,,,r1W•-•1;=.14‘.1., " ',.. A.V.-1),‘1.1Y.11\fiT *.•^".1' .... ..;5.1..1.,iE'efl. .4.•9411.1 .4. 4, V6'1,'.1"- -ttl s, ti. 1.:. •al..',..,-‘,..,,-.111.11, .,,,,4.-,=.1.,1%-. -....1 1: L'..., .-)■::" ...../ ..."1 .......‘Il.'4.)' ., . , / t •k,1.4:r•.,..4,..',Ak ay: ., -,‘,v .LA .1' ....,,,,\,,.....:-1.:n.a=,, I,4.4:',1,.:- , v' ert,',. 'f=j,II':?,t,.4..-11`.i.•,:,, • . .:\.. ,v,v ,,,-„,, ,,,,,..„,,,,„ ,.., lc qv:Aviii;Ani,,,v.y.''t 4 i'.1k iyix...,:,k... ''''• ,':1,•■'• ,,,,?,, -,. 1-1•3'.."; ., `' .1t4"-a,": ... 1 P ....•••••••••■....., • „,...,...„... ,,.. , , ..;.',::1.:14,3‘.t•11:■.1:1.,11.1.4•411 111'.‘s-PI F4.t--11:-.A1\‘1...1,141'0..R.•F',.'.:-.;1•.1.4,til 1.4%.,.".••. .,;!.. -"4 ?:'?":"4 .'' '''.,'•!,...„i V‘,1,1:it Art.4=--., , J=•=1,:-: ,' .........:.L.- 17-14., •1=1\1'41'; I i r , . USE p LAN LAND i PLAN CAT GORES: ., .:71 PUB . URBAN PUBLIC INTEREST AREA A RURAL O RURAL 10 YEAR TRANSITION IF I 1 IWATER SUPPLY WATERSHED PR EN 20YEAR i TRANSITION ACTIVITY NODES: O OP° i 52 COMMERCIAL TRANSITION ID Extant', Vilffili,:. RURAL SUFFER i .............., . tl S 1 i . 46 J. , 1 1 02 . 07„......._, . ......... -- . , ,.....-‹ .„. :....-- !• .. do i : 1 .. - --....... ‘ Hi 0 / \ . _ %,. j '1'4- '• / i: / ■- 1 .-r•e ——..A'....".-".' ""--..''''''..,•••e"e''r v-.. f"–::::"':-":.::\: % ' ; • p,,,,.....: • ., i. I .7.-7.A:A L_ '::.- _. i e• • I I - -...;- . .""'-....- 1'...:... -• ..-.....,. -Asocd" . -1*-',0 lva.;_.„,,* .... '•.'--',_,. .,--,-7•-•••------i'-'111 il I; ,,y\', ,. —:...;:-1,-$7,-,7-•.>... '-... . . ., . ''11• . , \ • \,..1 i/ fr S... 1..-1 t. i ‘0,„,,,44• ,,ai %....,;....il v..„:,. ..t; 4 .:-.---r.---• ., ,.--itri.,:.7-..--..,:,---", :',...,;1-1- --/- ,.... ,---7,..-t I•— 1:, .,.• N. ,';:1,41,-, k.ir ,,..'••••-- .... *\:•', tV...v.IY, rr -7.y i 1::i■ • , ......, ,./ .0 '''' ' I '"I s •v?..74,1'.... .7, (.:...--4.....,,,,,... . ,I; z•A , I .' --"--"cr;r .- . .) l' 4' -4•77''''',4 - i _. 3 iiihowil• 4,C, s '''1) ''' .1...::. ..".f w' •;94 ` ..\''; • ; •kk....,..„ l'i''.! ti,„..z. 1 .S., 0.,, ..,4 •,1", ; i 1 "iiiA ''''''\q i N. Nyk-,....-i/....,„,.„,... , 'S-1, .,,,,...•.,,...i." .0:.....e.-.. ; ohoik . 1 . .t.•;,..,77t4.... • ....-t.• •••••.:Py-ns,l'. •?•,-.0 •<„4,,,• I . i 4:**.4.4.%00000 :;-: -Ii)%)l'iWri'i' .1":::t.."•'''' 4"' 1 .. i \..,„.....‘-t""."-1,.,., ....,..',"1"-•' .... ...„., ••.,..t.. . i ...4. 00.41110•40 . \„.......:=r.', , .c.: .--••••-■-.•;c"-...,.._.% : ; -. tile--"N ' ." 1 .11.j.;...: .•''`74.;&"-"I'. l'.■ . •;...solkdo, :".;_...1:1V:=K"-;":/"."4,-0;"- N..'"'14164"...Ci' 1 . . . ,),., A • --t. :1101: :*.,."•k, '..1'._. ..---.:11;Z: It" : ! : ,....1,..„,,, ,,,,,,, a'.er"". \:.i.`,„...-. to t---."7"-- ...11.••le, .. ;. ,,c?,.- ....:•.*_..1 t.-,1,11: ii:c•-•r, , , \I ,:i•,::• ,;%....et i --.1. •1 %..=1.• • . . : MAP II -....„4 ...„ ,,....... .0 . /..\- .. . - - -, ..,, ,t w..-..,......•,...., ...,.......-i ...!..-;.--,-,. . • Ir._ ,--- . - . ... .. • 13‘, - ,a--, 1,ki, ,vslik004.6_ IlL '•". leek.1:' -• Ajf '4,41.-f"• .1%. .."--4P iI.;7:14'\ .3 ,..----- 1-7:1\\ • ''. - '‘• i'' : 11*.<;;:t5.;. 7":;7' ''*'.-';' • tillt VUNIVERSITY f,-,..---,ji. ,.,....,:,=,,.=7:1.??. . it I Fi I P-" ,-,•••-,,::‘, `'-—,— NOR11-1 ' ' , . L.AKE ;•,:ilff, i., _. . 1°L' ...., -.: 1 . t'• - : . :,,,,,,42., L________■-- ) ..,:..............,,,r,...-7\--...........)::,-;J:).... . EXSTIN ZONING iy......., , L .1,*-41 . 10110 I . 1.; j 7••.4''''''''....... , I legend .. , .. ,--, g Watershed District • - \ •.1.--i- •• 1:1-- ..---- (5 Acre Minimum Lot Size) . - I •••■ 44114.- • "• •0 0.0 4 I I:1h; --.--.- r"'; ' .•.. I , Di 8-3 Neighborhood Business ''.. / ,.\ti>„re.,-,-1•2-rre4 . -.\'. KM ,•. w.;'•: M-1 Manufacturing District \ ; . $. . .., ,;• . ., \t;':"4-*-1.::?.....i.'"' .4.-ed.pe#1.1: •l •---.....— .- -..---.........„.; . . 1, • • ,7.e-r- v-,`."■'; • :7'-`• i- ..—..--- - 4,..1 7• . R g-,,e,:,.,:_,::,:-.'-..1`....,1.-•■••-A....----ii.f- ,.-".-.4..".--.■-.•.•„-.:••,.--'/e-*.A-.l—.,P C•..-•: .......,,..........5.......a....4..,...o...t_t,t_O._.1.1...t.*..,_„,t*,,_o*o_.'.t'''.'•_',','}t 1 2,:.4-.1 0's•,-‹,...-,,,t,'„_;N•.x.i..■.V.,.•„•:1wk 0**o..C.*,;1Ao 0*1i.*it i'l i,,.....-....'.7!,,t rF.',,,—.,''lr',::.7 f.—•"-•”.■.". ,.",-..-',,.-"„;_N''.1*-•. -_•=,0'..--"4:t-.'.,,-'4...,-.');.-.-,--;.i\",.;.*.,.•).•,•.%,.•. \." "■" ,"""r-.-;---.-44•\e-•-.:"-1""-•:'•;"-..••'•.•.'-•'4••i—•-"7-.... . I 0 2 Li,'....11,.'.::: i \ - - - _i .:: i■ I ':•'.: - •••:•-•••• • . ••,t4 _------ •-,..4• .' i. weliVitla,:;."4*.--***** • 1 li 11, f.1 1. - •:•.1..., • ••:•-si e • ., -r•-'--"-.1•"- -•'' ".'4"-•:*,..."Stst00%. :VI 7.:•00041/1 r). --tt .",--'.''' ..1 V.-:1r-i, / c".. • - .3 tt.,..;.,,,4 `0.•;..'..1 4 ?. ••:••• '-'••-'-• ":--":',....*--.. .•.vki.••••-..,11,....,.....P•ts.o.::tto .:t"7:c.v...004,00 t ..-1;,:.7,---;77-L-,),,, ., r , v.,,,,,... - -..-,...-.., . . I g \'''1444t'.4-s*ve ...,...,.........,,_ --.... • "•, ,,..,,.....„,,.......:-.•••••A wosora, • i.V•z•:-.-71.-.• '------ %"111:'S v , •.•• • -,./....e.:- ••••••-4,-•.•-•,, • •,•-;:,;-'4ZZ.,-.1.,(S'..t.:::.1"='-'•otzi----;:'•'''' 4t,...-*•• '..yrol-----ra-Iii.v1 -• r---'4'-'•••,..r..:%Y /-'':',, : v' -•.:1' • :••="4"- •••••••.....•-•-r:Nor04-***gtoss --,tit6„ i•nc pi....,.:.>, -..t: .4,, '.....-:-.„ : It ......v -----....."40,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -.. -.... 3.t .'./fi t...c.h. !of:'4:'•1"..,.;'-`). 1 ■1 ''4,N1‘I 1 ri'.•:.:.::.;:•:::::•:r.:.<:,:,•=2,„&11,110,141tlitAit N'' ,...,1 r...,:„.•,•e; ,. ,v,•.i....• .!.--; i 1 -; • 1.1-7: tr..*:•.•.•••••:•51 : X, "'i, •••1 ,,,,,Y%1 -*•:.••:•;,..:.-•'^--- <• i"fzjr.":-:•• .e040::'VV::' IN..k Z) k"'-'*4›I-.._---•L;1"•"‘'•,,-.*. X•;:-......:I•y",:-:•:%,440;;::??,40-".:,\,,,- • \"1-„„,' ''.1---.'`:•-'3•-f•• ':-.'-'`;`-...._._k.,‘'- • 1 I• '4.1. - --..:•i•:-::-4),*'F„.v.--:...:::.;.„ i;..il' -4,•• I 11;•...„1,',&,.:: ::!;'''''1.' ::, 0''... Vt:::4*::::'.2.7::%%... ft.'."4.4/1/..........:4\ ::............ r.4.1•44.0. .....„___*,;;141:77.4..Li. .2• *::ir.:::::.:::. .CS.1,. '%!..:.f:....*:•.....:•:4,4:::‘••±Z '..3-,0..A,:. ‘,.., T7-.7....„1: .t.,.-..... :-.. , 0,....-..............\;:.....::::::.:::::::::::::if.„.„..„3::„...,XS,..r..111. f•••-,-.1'.'"•'''' 4'1!N.:,,,Y• •, , ,,......„,A • \ .!', 1-::::P7:::::::•;?:-4i.:::.:•:::::•••••••:*::::•4;:tit.".A., %\,*ri-nit....- , •.•f--"'..`7-'1'. 't • \ !, --. S(.,t7z5:0:-;::-:-.1 :::::::::::::::;:;•:-:::•:::.:::.."11 1 .:.!..i...;;;kr,‘.. .4 1:::;,--r. ';Iir til\F I I I ....:n...:.:..x::::.::.-:.:;ff5t..3:4 .. . ..:4, _ vvv.tii:-.... e...7 ..':::-:.:.../.. ..%.........3-:.. . .,'-----..---------,-,,LIN.:.;:::,:.-.F.. , -.........7z -....../...x., --:rk:- 1,5:ii.kA - -4,- -..ik::::::::::::::,,,:---:..,-,:-.,: ii.-.- F.41'7.- • ',....--. ."t..., .--V.4.%;:.::::::::::::.....r, -tiZ. ■,:,..-- M ,:.■:' C%1"'''. ifj 1 l'sii'l‘ '::11111,1 " : .. a.co‹) i . \"........,1!.'4%41"i' . ,• • W::::;`,iy.:::::.'' '•-• ',,,;)-4 1.IA t ..,"1."-•-it...,'••-•,,,,,..;..z,_,7 I . Ili \i.:•:•::...pg.. .-,, ',,i;;;,":- ,1-I; ". -1.; - -.•-,--:.----,-_,, * ... ,,',444.±:. '.:,--' - .....,sL':, • : „..,1-,,,,,,,,,/..7) ,--'-. ---:-... i....., ;, ,... ,„ er• t ,„ • ,............. ,.„.:....... .. . , .....,....„, ‘. ...„, ‘,.... ..-. .,..,..„,,...„„ . r I - i . "- •..A .z., Nr ' ER51TV LAKE. • ,.., OTH i '/ ) . .,.,..,;. . i ..... i ' . ••- ‘,.... F c.=•••L.:.: ,."1" Y T -‘ ... .....Y.:-'—'.:------•- 7 •,•• • ...,,•:,:v. \.:..„,..„;....„.... -,--: .1/4,_.N•-- 1 ... , ...„ i 11 . 1 , . PROPOSED ZONING -\.....::"6:z.,;:ly,:ts..\ i-------i i ,. ..Jr.. ..: .1 el, Irte '...r.`. .A.,:l."...%‘ 1 ........ :...1:7: „ '.f......y.?...:illi.....ri. r .."1 4....:1:1::"..'."... ."' legend k .. :•.!,•, ,i-, tik:t.!,14;.*:-•::r77.:t .` 1:7.4,:-':;..".•71:::"•*.".::::.1:-.'.1- :*.r -.. I]i*/ Conservation District . / ... .... . ;;:i....:„."1.-71.."1/;:iiiiii.." N-,•••---el..,—..1-- \(-2:;:::-••.i.7... ...?,,•-. 1.,71_,..;-----N . --:-:::,•:.,-..":•4-... 4$•K r k•-. .....%-pac--: • Watershed Residential I (R-80) ‘,4::..„• - -. . 4 4s..:■14..z-..."-- 7....4.1 ,. .'74:::"•..•-..,t,....:!:,4::4,,, t:1.:-_..._ d ED (2 Acre Minimum Lot Size) i L. 11.4,...\-:., .'4,.4•:‘ -i‘,..-,., ....._ 1 ' -'''\ IV . ". d:e.Nft• \ :f......."7 Waterhsed Residential II (R-40) 17-0 9..,..14 (1 Acre VI i n i mum Lot Size) riat:&• tb,4* \ ---- . ••4-4:-..-A* '-• .4-..N.;11 iN...<-- ‘s. •.,o,.., , tts•ok...,,..71.:,........,...:17,:k%s6...,..1,......74.3 i R-20 Residential (Existing) 1 lb (1/2 Acre Minimum Lot Size) ? , x...3..k Watershed Commercial (WB-3) 11 El (2 Acre Minimum Lot Size) Area of Suitability For A.f 111" Watershed Industrial Di stri ct E...... , \ . 4 iiV.emzc Nnf 7nned For Watershed Industrial . t rr} ORANGE rouarY 025 BOARD OF Cf CSSIONERS Pctian Agenda ACTION AGENDA 'Tail ABSTRACT Item i+k?.+fig ~ i ETING DATE March IS, 1383 Subject: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS -- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CANDIDATES Departr nt: ,- • IRAN r .� I Public Hearing: -- yes _X no 1 Information Contact: `Attachm nt(s Draft letter to Marvin Collins Economic Development Commission candidates Phone Number: (939) 7328 8] EXT. 343 PURPOeE: To consider a draft letter establishing interview times for Commission candidates and providing a list of questions for each to answer during the interview. I NEED: The Orange County Board of Commissioners must decide from among a number of candidates who to appoint to the Economic Dvelopmenit. Commission. The decision will be made easier through interviews of the candidates. By providing a list of questions to the candidates, the interview process will be expedited as well. IMPACT: The questions contained in the attached letter were developed with the assistance k the Commission for Women, the Institute of Government anti the N. C. ommerce Department. They are broad enough to allow the candidates to cover a range of issues related to economic development. They will also allow the mmissioners to select candidates which they feel will work effectively together to achieve a common purpose - increased economic devel.apmen , . Remit i ,/ r-i La.,1-0---i.A 026 Y. • 1 You have been suggested for appointment to the Orange County Economic Development Commission. Prior to making a decision regarding the appointments, the Board of County Commissioners intends to conduct interviews of the candidates, and the date of �_�� has been established for this purpose. The interviews will. be conducted in the Commissioners' Room in the Orange County Courthouse, "06 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, N. C. The time for your inter- view has been set for _. To assist you in preparing for the interview, a list of questions is provided below which will be asked of each candidate. These include the following: 1. What does the term "Economic Development" mean to you? 2. What do you think are the main benefits to be derived from an Economic Development Program in Orange County? 3. What role do you think the Commission should play in promoting economic developmen in the County? 4. The Economic Development Commission will ha ve a staff working for and with it, irjeluding an Economic Development Director. What qualities, education and experience do you feel the Director should have? 5. How do you 'feel, about growth in° general in Orange County? 6. What types of economic development activities (industries, commercial ventures, etc.) are most•'isvi.table for Orange County? 7. ghat population segments and geographic areas do you feel are in greatest need of economic development efforts? 8. What aspec of a prospective economic development activity; i.e. , wage rates, persinnel policies, affirmative action programs, day care oppor- tunities, etc. , do you feel should be considered in recruitment efforts? W 9. How do you feel about the use of County tax dollars to create job opportunities through financing utility extensions, payment of staff :salaries and expenses, etc? .. JO. What qualities, skills and experience would you provide to the commission I, in its efforts to achieve increased economic development? i 027 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CCX*ISSIONER,S Action Agenda 7 ACTION AGEEID.A ITE4 ABSTRACT AC'T Item �Tel,Ce MEETMG DATE MARCH 15, 1983 Subject: APPOI NTS--EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW BOARD Depa.rtrrent: COMMISSIONERS 1Public Hearing: yes X no Attachment(s) : Information Contact: Bill Laws yes phone Number: 732-8181 ext. 502 . -_,..� PURPOSE: For the Board to consider appointments and take other action to implement a special Board of Equalization and Review. NEED: With ap ,ointment having to be made prior to April 1983 there was not opportunity to advertise the positions . Board member nominations should be made and voted on March 15th or 28th . A list of names is atta hed from the Tax Office of past E & R Board members who have ex ressed a willingness to serve again and other persons who would be qualified. per: The Board will need to meet four times during the year and hear approximately 50 appeals cases . RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 --Appoint three members 2--Appoint one of the three to serve as Chair 3--Establ .sh compensation level at $50 .00 per meeting a 7 028 BOARD OF E & R APPLICANTS 1. Tom Heffner 2. Tyson Clayton 3. Mary Lynn Truelove 4. Miriam Slifkin 5. Elizabeth Walters 6. Thomas E. Brooks 7. Kenneth Collins . I HILLSBOROUGH SAVINGS �,.�'?,ar�eA, f =11=1'7� ,�i r �M _, AND LOAN ASSOCIATION ;•;,:.0 p•:._�.rE'E!] 1913 HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 March 9, 1983 Mr. William T.jLaws 106 E. Margaret Lane Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 Dear Mr. Laws:I This letter is to advise you that I would be interested in serving on the Board of Equal zation & Review. I was employed by the County Tax Department as Assistant Tax Supervisor from January 1962 until May of 1972. Therefore, I am familiar with the function of the Board. I presently serve on the loan committee for the Hillsborough Savings and Loan Association, and am involved in the property appraisals by the committee. I have also attended courses sponsored by the Society of Real Estate Appraisors. Sincerely, 97" çb)J3- (.6.) D. Tyson Clayton Vice President DTC:gr I a M(r001 N 'MA r.1 11 MI. ' . yw . ES!! .L r 4'y 10 RESUME Name: Date: March 13, 1983 Thomas Edward Brooks Route 2, B x 227 Hillsborou h, NC 27278 732-3396 Place of Em•lo ment: North Carolina Memorial Hospital Position: Department Manager Length of Tim Employed: 23 years Property Owne : One lot with two apartments on Nash Street. One house on three lots on Faucette Mill Road. One house on two acres of land on Faucette Mill Road.