Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 06-27-1983
- c ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 27, 1983 ! MONDAY, 7:30 P.M. SUPERIOR COURTROOM ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE HILLSBOROUGH, NC A. BOARD COMMENTS B. .AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. Matters on the printed agenda 2. Matters not on the printed agenda C. PUBLIC HEARING - NC DOT PRESENTATION OF SECONDARY ROAD PLAN D. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING - JAMES RAY FREELAND E. PUBLIC HEARING - MODIFICATION OF A CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT - MIDWAY AIRPORT F. BOARD DECISIONS 1. CARRBORO DATA PROCESSING AGREEMENT 2. HOUSING REHABILITATION CONTRACT AWARDS 3. BUDGET AMENDMENTS 4. CETA - PROJECT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 5. PARTICIPATORY PAVING - NORTUSIDE DRIVE 6. IV-D CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT LEGAL AGREEMENT 7. SOCIAL SERVICES LEGAL AGREEMENT 8. 1983-84 BUDGET INDEX. TOPIC ABSTRACT PAGE PAGES C. NC DOT/SECONDARY ROAD PLAN 001 001-005 D. REZONING - JAMES RAY FREELAND 006 006-011 E. CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT/MIDWAY AIRPORT 012 012 F1.1 DATA PROCESSING CONTRACT/CARRBORO 013 013-016 F-2 HOUSING REHAB CONTRACTS 017 017-019 F-3 BUDGET AMENDMENTS 020 020-021 F-4 CETA - PROJECT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 022 022-023 F-5 PARTICIPATORY PAVING PROJECT 024 024 F-6 LEGAL SERVICES - CHILD SUPPORT 025 025:-032 F-7 LEGAL SERVICES - SOCIAL SERVICES 033 033-037 F-8 1983-84 BUDGET 038 038 I, ti 17 . 001 opA..\zE co zrtNi-r.ri.c ... BOARD OF C1ISSIONERS Action .P.g1-1c.1.a. • . . It No._Cc__ , ACTION AGTEM .L.Tr.:!.1 ABSTRACT ME...;.coaM DATE June 27, 1983 Subject: 1983-84 4ecoudary Road Improvements Program I __I 1 PubliC Hearing: X yes ____no f-137i):2_6_1Leat: Planning , ---__ ___-- „---1------. --- --- ----__„------------ ----- I AttaChErleat(S) : a) Jima 9, 1983 letter fro InIbliaati- al Ccatactl Susan Sadth J. W. Watkins, NCDOT; h) 1983-84 Secondary 1 Road Improvements Progam_ J 25011= arber: 732-8381 E. t 349 -— . ...., PURPOSE: To receive citizen input on the 1983-84 Secondary Road Improvements Program. DaDD: The Nc DOT Board of Transportation is required by law to post a County map showing proposed secondary road paving projects in the County Courthouse and hold a public hearing jointly with the Board of Commissioners on the proposed program. I The 1983-84 total allocation for secondary roads is $495,641, a 16% decrease in funding from 1982-83. This allocation includes $100,000 for paved secondary road improvemehe,s, a decrease .of 17% from 1982-83; $75,000 for spot stabilization of unpaved roads, a decrease of 12%; $275,000 for paving unpave roads, a decrease of 6%; and $45,641 for contingency, an increase of 12% from 1982-83. i The allocation for paving unpaved roads includes: 1 P.O.P: prOject, 3 P.P.P. projects requiring County participation (Oak Knob Court, proposed Northside Drive and Rangewood Subdivision), and 2 rural roads, including paving of the portion of Linden Road as requested in a letter form the Board of Commissiones to DOT. , . . IMPACT: Approval of the proposed program would allow DOT to schedule and complete the projects during the 198:3-84 construction year. • ' `,-',',1,,T r ■ ''ZIZ C-;':44/.2?,* 7,r,,-,c.: I,-: ' .; C-,, ' $,,g,-'II/A, • ,'"1.1. " a" •, „- , 1 • ,■''j - 'r„r'r'.."..:; ,-44:7::, ,^',!:■ , ..% ' , •%,4-4, , ':,'1 , i ;,' , - ti ' ct"4",r,-;5,t1:4' •'-.''7-- i , ,, 4,4' " -, -.''''' :' A.1'.4,2'-'-'1' ' '4: '4., `> 4 r ,, 'I.-, ',' ,,1 • ,.. .“,<"--k-, , '. , 1 ., ,.....- ,., ,. ;),„,,,,,,, ,,r,,,,,,,,'ft. 4 ,- t c.: - ' I.",r.,.`■ , ,,,,,,1, - r ir>,,'L.,'. ,t.,, .111'. , ..- ''''''<, N, 002 1, 4, , vi,.•. ) . ,44.11,641,tr. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JAMES B.HUNT,JR. Greensboro, NC 27429-0278 GOVERNOR June 9, 1983 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS WILLIAM R. ROBERSON,JR. SECRETARY Mr''. Richard Whitted, Chairman Orange Coiinty Commissioners 128 W. Uni on Street Hillsboropgh, NC 27278 I - Dear Mr. Whitted: 1 . 1 Senate Bill 593, which was enacted into law and became . i effective; on June 10, 1981, requires the Department of Transportation to post in the County Courthouse a county map showing tentative secondary': road paving projects rated according to priority. For . your information, I am attaching the proposed 1983-84 .Secondary Road Program for Orange County. 1 • ; I would appreciate your making this available to the other Cominissioners. , jYours very truly, d• W. Watkins 1 DIVISION ENGINEER I . JWW:mdj Atte. cc: -41'. Kenneth R. Thompson Mr. S. H. Jones ' t.-.:, N-:' . , - ,-.. . , 11 1,._ --- ....,,:, _.,. .......,...... ,..... ...„.-,....,.,-.. „.... -....„- --,:-...- ... .. -.0,,,,-,-,..„,,;V....-.:,,,,,,;:.7 i!..:„fs:....Z.1:::.,"".....‘P.-:,',:,•.!..*:***" .,',-.7-41-,;t7r,t41,,,:i.,?;.,„.1.4.0.44. / 1 i 1 NOTICE Representairtives of the Board of Transportation will meet with the Orange County Commissioners, on Monday, June 27, 1983 at 7:30 p.m. in the Orange County Courthouse in Hillsborough to discuss with the Board and other citizens present, plans and proposals for the 1983-84 Secondary Road Construction Program. A county map showing t&itative Secondary road paving projects is posted in the courthouse. ... ' 1 .1, ,.. 1 . , ,. MAIM CO. Y. -. Priority SR 1 No. No. ! Name and IlesQr3 ion No" .?raffia z . 15 Linden �. 2 e. ,• Roan. from US 70 to a Dead 1.2 I is Bad 27 t,00 ..ry 2 "f 1943 1 Sesame Road from SR 1005 to a Dead 0.5 22 196 End 311 3 1306 i Lebanon Road from SR 13.38 to a Dead 1.1 16 220 307.3E 4 1127 1 Borland Road from SR 1102 to SR 1113 2.7 . 33 210 305.53 5 1538 New Sharon Church Road from SR 1003 3.0 33 218 to NC 57 303.7E 6 , 1941 Old School Road from SR 1942 to a 0.9 23 1.38 283 Dead 81nd 7 * 1561 Lawrence Road from ER 1002 to End 0.70 6 230 276 of Pavement 8 1137 1uehy Cook Road from SR 1114 to SR 2.3 27 180 272.20 1144 9 15b8 ti1]. t Road from SR 1567 to a Dead 1.2 21 1 Rol L+6 262.7 10 1312 ' Richmond Road from US 70 to SR 1306 1.70 16 18 * 185 261.50 11 1727 Ehbanks Road from 3,1 1009 to SR 1729 0.92 7 200 12 1130 Ode Turner Road from SR 1006 to SR 1.6 256 X1129 22 160 251 13 1335 ;Eamon Road from NC 86 to sa 1332 1.8 23 153 249.7 14 * 1950 lOarl Durham Road from SR 1005 to 2. le 54 2 19 165 237.7 15 1135 IRncs•+etieldpe Road from SR 1134 to 1.9 17 174 236.1 SR 1134 16 1572 ibetezer Church Road from SR 1567 to 1.1 1.5 120 22 .50 t7 1952 in Durham County 5 1918 dicatruater take Road from End of ae st off SR 1008 to a Dead Eh 0.45 14 131 215 18 1113 Rooky Ei4ge Road from SR 1177 to 1.0 15 11 At 1115 110 z14.o 19 1730 Thita'Y Phrm Road from BST to SR 1718 1.5 12 150 206 20 1346 1 id',4ls Club Road from SR 1306 to SR 2.4 20 13 21 134) 5 203.7 1712 6ni:vereity Station Road from SR 1718 1.2 6 1 to °R 1720 150 187.5•- r. 22 1351 governor Scott Road from Sit .1004 to 2.6 20 131 13 196 23 1969 f'°1?6 MIA Road from SR 1567 to a Earth 1.2 15 120 195 Mkt Aoad tatm SR 1034 to SR 1.4 16 110 194.3 25 S 1735 01d Oxford Road from SR 1734 to Sind 0.4 0 of Pavement 560 575 S -- Denotes division or Residential Roads * - Denotes RA not Available } g anANGE COUNTY 1%-1.8 POINT :YSTEM Priority SR No. No. I No. S 1823 a -. CO Descri. ion Traffic • = Drive from SR 1718 to SR 28 tomes +. ..3 0 1 t s 13 350 443 27 S 1384 Pekoe Road from US 70 to a Dead &j 0.73 26 28 S 2013 Drive 280 436 e from NC 54 t o SR 2011 0149 29 S 1590 R ig doon Drive from 5R 1566 to a 4 6 a Dead, Ehd * 9 358 30 8 2016 9aithern Drive from NC 54 to SR 2013 0.16 1 350 356 31 S 1194 Roillingwoad Road from SR 1195 to SR 0.3 2 205 337 1112 32 S 1162 Latimer Street from SR 1161 to SR .20 1.11 228 288 33 S 1595 Duiont Drive from SR L0102 to a Dead 1.0 19 162 286 Bad 34 s 1839 Freeland Heights from NC 86 to a 0.4 15 174 274 35 S 2015 Trace View Drive from SR 2013 to 0.28 16 170 266 S R 12013 36 S 1964 Northside Drive from SR 1919 to SR 0.27 21 130 256 1990 37 3 1564 Gibbs rye from SR 1562 to a Dead Ehd 0.4 20 120 250 38 S .1184 Orallge Heights from SR 1161 to SR 0,10 1 1185 13 174 249 39 S 1794 Eisaa rl Drive from SR 1734 to a 0.60 15 114 214 40 3 1591 green Pine Road from SR 1545 to a 0.2 16 100 201 Dead End 41 S 1313 T nn;., Rned from US 70 to a Dead 0.40 15 115 199 End 42 S 1557 Chavis Funeral Home Road from NC 0.2 15 100 195 57 to a Dead Aid 43 1955 Dawson Road from SR 1005 to a Dead 0.9 16 96 193 44 1575 1611kPr Farm Road from S1, 1538 to SR 1.5 15 125 193 lei 45 S 1186 � Heights from SR 1185 to a 0.20 16 94 192 46 1555 Miller Rood from SR 1588 to SR 1554 1.5 ID 130 191.3 47 1563 Yates Road from SR 1562 to a Dead 0.6 15 90 1 Dad 190 48 S 1195 Meadow Lane from SR 1104 to a Dead 0.2 15 100 190 E 49 1541 agar PCigar Road from NC 57 to SR 1538 4.3 21 :143 188.60 f 50 S 1390 Holiday Park Road from US 70 to a 0.25 15 100 186 I F � I ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1983-1984 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983-1984 Secondary Allocation (Anticipated) $495,641.00 Map Priority SR I Estimated No. No. No. I Name and Description Length Cost { Paved Secondary Road Improvement 1 1919 Smith Level Road from SR 1962 to US 15-501 1.35 Widen Four (4) Feet and Strengthen $74.000.00 2 1734 Erwin Road from US 15-501 to SR 1733 0.44 26,000.00 Widen Four (4) Feet and Strengthen Siot Stabilization of Unsaved Roads SR 1550, SR 1712, SR 1575, SR 1131, SR 1531, $75,000.00 SR 2001, SR 1525, SR 1533, SR 1535, SR 1519, SR 1335, SR 1556, SR 1520, SR 1515, SR 1572, SR 1569, SR 1130, SR 1955, SR 1127, SR 1135, SR 1141, SR 1143, SR 1341, SR 13+0, SR 1336, SR 1113, SR 1115, SR 1175, SR 1950, SR 1114, SR 1137, SR 1140, SR 1182, SR 1730, SR 1538, ' SR 1540, SR 1541, SR 1516, SR 1548, SR 1508, ! SR 1536, SR 1512, SR 1544, SR 1351, SR 1366, SR 1346, SR 1361, SR 1353, SR 1383 -2- ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1982-1983 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Map Priority SR Estimated No. No. No. Name and Descri.tion Len:th Cost !Paving Unpaved Roads 3 1892 Seven Springs Road from US 70 to a Dead End 0.46 $27,000.00 (P. O. P. Paving) 4 1605 Oak Knob Court from SR 1595 to a Dead End 0.38 30,000.00 (P. O. P. Paving) 5 1964 Northside Road from SR 1919 to SR 1990 0.26 18,000.00 (P. O. P. Paving) 6 2013 System Streets in Rangewood Subdivision 1.04 55,000.00 2014 2015 2016 2017 1 7 1 1566 Linden Road from US 70 to SR 1590 0.42 60,000.00 8 1574 John Watkins Road from SR 1548 to SR 1002 1,4 85,000.00 (Complete Funding) Contingency to be Used for Overruns, Additions $45,641.00 to System, Paving Rural Fire Department Drives, and Property Owner Participation Note: If right of way is not available on the above unpaved roads, the funds will be programed on other roads in the order of priority or applied on property owner participation paving. BEI ... .„„. _ . . - . :. . , . • •;'•:7f'..:•• • • :::. : -; . . ,.. ..... BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action. r-s=irla, ' ' •-:', ,. . , Ite.-7. No- AcrioN Asazak ITEM ABSTRACT . " .. I:l'i.j.t.:17a13 DATEfu9e 27.,...19..9.1...,-- Subject: Rezoning Application (2-1-83 James Ray Freeland) ........... ...- ' . " ... _ --7-j, ipubi..ic II. , 7-ing.: ....,. ,x yes_ rto DETapp_4---,irantr. Planning . - _._ - ---------- . Attach:7.9n I.:(5 Application, .cheaklist,) : Information. Contact.: Marvin Collins ; Letter, Property Description, Tax Map - ' I . mane tx•ro .,r: 732-8181 EXT. 346 - 1 . . .- PURPOSE: To -obtain public input.on a request by JaMes_Raei-Freelandtrrezone 35.11 acres of property from R-1 to R-5 residential. 1 I . ... " DEED: The , . e is located on the west side of N.C. Highway 86 in Hillsborough Township andlis shown as lot 4 on Tax Map 45., An R-5 residential zoning clasSificatioh would allow the development of a subdiVisiOn with minimum lot areas Of17,500 square feet. The district would also require that public water and Salter exist at the site or be proposed as part of the development. The developer is extending water and sewer to Wildw000d Section 1 and will serve the piperty in question with the same facilities . Thesite is located in the Orange Rural Fire District and will be served by the Hillsborough Volunteer Fie Department and the Orange Rescue Squard. . . IMPACT: The property is located in a 10-Year Transition Area as designated by the Land Use Plan. The Plan was amended on March 7, 1983, changing the designation from 20-Year Transition and Rural Residential. With the provision of public water and seweZ, residential development at R-5 would be compatible with the Land Use Plan designation. . .i.` •:,..' ; f-,,, ••,,,, =y.'',911-1‘, .1.-'.'.-1 ft.'t51', -''',„,-.* 7,:"77,-`,V;' i"4.- ',%,' -, .."-4.:',h - 4 4. - ,."„ , 1.14V^',.',^•^;,":,. : .t„.,h,..1,... Con'k:41,■':,:04aA ; ;, r,. ' 194.,:-,;:,...., ,;? ,,,,t..n.t .., t ,. --, -,,,-, 4, ' I.,.:„ 7,"-.4-,i01,;..:;*:'1;4 l''..A,,,..,','-'. r' ,, -0,4%,;'!..-:..■- k..-A'r„;,,t7;..7:21.?,?!/0 -: ■; ,.:1,.. ■ -.... .1,,4, ,--r' - r' .T., .,i1, .;;;;;;' f ;7 , ''','? .4 i .c .-.1;,%-,,;:. •.;-;%,..%''-‘.. .,:,..#1,;;'4u.4-,11:„„.7 7 44.•e , - , .. • . • • - ... r....-. ... _--- APPLICATION FOR O17NGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLhSSIrICATION DATE May 20, 1983 The Honorable Board of County Commissioners Orange County, North Carolina COMISsIONEPS: The undersigned request that property located on Tax Map Number Block number .... , Lot number 4 ., Shown on the accompanying plat, - which is presently in a Rural District be rezoned to R5 14" for the following reasons; R-5: To enable residential development on 7,500 SF lots, thus making -- . less expensive single-family homes feasible. ..................- ---- , ---- - , ---_—_--_,-- — — --- - _ , • - . — — — Signed: Address: Post Office Box 113 JAMES RAE FREELAND1 ___ Hillsborough, NC 27278 ---- , .11 01.1'. ■3: . . „. « 4 '44 fi'''',,i. .'Ar'ff,.■,, ;141' ''''' '. ' '' ' . ., , ' . ,',,to,',A•• '' • .t 4:1;,i 'f;/'!4 7' '% ' .'^.^. , N., •t: .7. : ‘t. r.t'Z'..,'',.,,,,. '-- yttikt5-''..Att,vtt „ ., t:- ' ;,, •,, .t 7t1 .. ;''.Str,hkIttiF t''',04-Viu,nrilt).I' ''' '• :'',- "' ' :". :•"!-A : - t:: :."7 /k,t.t? ” ' -1'-';ra:',rod.„,, t7r'- '''•'"..'..1?-'4: 1 REZONING REQUEST CHECKLIST • - 008 • pg. ; 1 i OWNER'S NAME: 1 James Rae Freeland 01••••••.«....mear. ADDRESS: I Post Office Box 113, Hillsborough, NC 27278 ...•••••••••■•■••■•••.WINID.r.moRI.I.lo inwomm,........III,............. I CURRENT ZONING: I Rural District TOTAL NUMBER or ACRES: - 35.11 CURRENT LAND USE: Vacant TYPE OF REZONING REQUESTED: R-5 411.11.0.1..../000■1111•••••••110 PROPOSEtrLAND USE: Residential TAX MAP NO. 45 BLOCK NO. NUMBER OF LOTS 4 .. PROPOSED WATER SUPPLY: Public X Community — Individual ,.--- PROPOSED SEWAGE TREATMENT: Public X Community Individual Septic Tank ----- . I -,, , - ACCESS ONTO STATE ROAD NC 86 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT ON SR 5000 Atm DESCRIBE CRITICAL AREAS: Flood Prone Areas None Poorly Drained Areas None ___..__________-____—._._______„.___.___________—__:__-- Streams None ■ 1 N o ne • Other Sensitive Areas —_,--. ,____ ___ I DESCRIBE LAND USES: General Area Single Family Res. i Adjacent Parcels of Land 1-65, Central Carolina Farmers I NC 88, Parish Estate, & Wildwood Section I ■ Fire District: Hillsborouoh v•r_n ,- 11-..fie 4 . . _ ii!.1411'.11'7'1, -..; flf". - #,4Y3-'4'"■"11.0.54+: '‘' '1"..... ..i. V.F, " . , ^ 1 . 'If1111 *-*.„,;:g#:', . .-' ,.4' 4 1"t"'•' ' . Alh i .5 4 Z"''4;7 Oil /J - ';' 7'.; :', :i'l!' ,•, '":430"' - .■ p k:,•.,; ,,.„ . ' ' ' .. 4.p......'1, ' •.. ,t..,id.. ..4......1M4i.% : •'''4.1 : - '- - ' I •VIV'1"3„,V;'■-• .- '" ."2';' 11-??' '. ' ii::÷133r4 THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC. .... . . ,) • PV- 3 i. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 100 HAYES BUILDING,GLEN LENNOX CENTER,CHAPEL HILL P.O.BOX 2898,CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 (919)957•7079 Nay 20, 1983 I STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION ORANGE COUNTY, N6RTH CAROLINA WILDWOOD DEVELOPMENT, HIGHWAY NC 86 @ 1-85 Application is heeby made to rezone from Rural District to R-5,135-11:-acre tract of land adjacent of NC 86 at 1-85 in Hillsborough Township, Orange County. The following materials are presented in support of this applica- tion, as requirediby Section 20.3.2 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 1 I a. A map of the area prepared for rezoning is attached. b. . Legal description of the area proposed for rezoning is attached. 1 c. The error in the Zoning Ordinance is as follows: 1 ' The Wildwood tract has good vehicular access, with NC 86 adjoining the east edge, and the NC 86/1-85 interchange being at the northeast corner of the tract. 1 The property should be zoned for higher and better usage than Rural District because it is located at a traffic mode and because higher density (and thus lower cost) housing is needed, and this land is well suited from the standpoint of transportation, utilities, and proximity to Hillsborough. d. The changing conditions: Hillsborough water and sewer have been extended onto the site, as part of the developMent of the southernmost 10 acres of Wildwood. The capaci- ties of the water and sewer extensions far exceeds the needs for the ultimate development of Wildwood, even utilizing the rezoning requested herein. e. Compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan The site is locted in an area which, in the Comprehensive Plan, is designated "10-year transition" for urban use; thus high-density residential use is compatible with the Plan. I PREPARED BY: I 4, 'PT Thum — ...— —m s..—.. — _ --. .1 _ . =.11 ''* -; -4 • • , • 4 • ...",;11, , , • • 1; , •010 WILDWoOD DEVELOPMENT NC 86 at 1-85, Orange County, NC June 1, 1983 DESCRIPTION or PRO?ERTY BEING SUBMITTED FOR REZONING TO R-5 Beginning at a point on the western right-of-way of NC 86. The northeast corner of WildwoodiSection I, thence along and with the northern line of Section I N 62° 471 24" W 390.12', thence WEST 340,27 to a point thence along a new line N101° 34' 51" E 700.00 thence N 10° la, 25" W 1086.13, thence S 68° 11 49" E 848.60', thence S 000 31! 39" E 399.00' thence N 760 43' 21" E 2751.00, thence 290.01 along the arc of a simple curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 225.00', and a chord being of N 200 19' 14" W and chord distance of 270.35', thence N 820 50' 02" E 190.00'. Thence S 33 56" E 974.91' to a point on the western right- of-way of NC 86, thence along and with said right-of-way S 28° 07' 55" 919.83' to the Beginning, containing 35.11 acres more or less. 1 1 1 y e ..p...',p. •a• •j,;_..t:... T .R.. 1.Y ' .,j„�t ,r. �" �7'r, "�`�t - _ ,t S: i.. - �,i+ gwlc ,af,. .. l -6,`41.;r i -„ ;, ..1:01,Q.&,...t.� :_;�.,, f•-Fro -r` rsw. ,�„ '� •�°' • P v �'�,,,d,' f`4 7 . t�}�r !. ° ,1"..; �+�'t r';'„ ;*;.'• ,'off 3' 'j21+.b . "4 A r,L. �.a xr4p� t y`3�!'� ' rt 4:- :5.7:'.;r "f •'` t' ... f - M• i' , fit r Y'tr.�+ .�f t n. ~4 `rH 1 h il.-sn ' tl +nFrt �PI!= j' 't t 1 k�'f f 1- "^• ` xk f f y " "R, •;M:1 •` PF., 3 . ' .7'. 8159 -° gg.S $ • ` `1 -- s . CrAMES1 --itFiE - FREELi‘ND,_ ,..;\x ‘, i 4.t 1 his ' I T Raz ,, •SOT \ 04\ 422.9 Ac. 7�CS 4 i 4111444.11. A96 ... .,.., ' 'far AC., 0 °*' :**1..".� • E i 1♦�►♦ '44`1r� ,' . 1. - 1 # . . X01 y V. .4PAP.,4!4"' ' �: . ' - i I . C) .. � ` I wc ^-"� p' 4744-4 }�# � - r -•. ! 'j t4 0 n 1 04 ■ . 1 4 ,,,.• 41114 14,7 0; 40. , 4l+4 404AG VO' .41PM►'�►#it. NO 1.44iV fletel / / SEI /MAP 45A ■ ;�♦'�l��+'f�►+♦'��4, t, • [AC Cam°"° aaxs 1 } r*�i, ,� �+�'+#�, *i� / sa�� " t r✓ate; t4/44*"*+'++..♦+� � : /./ its 131 j 'r"' ., +#fir 4.4 / ,---HJ,0.40. ir.#4•40,# ,0") 290.,.# I Ai".. . r , r--- ire' yr . +40 -#4r, s6 �� I S MAp * �i� C✓ate pAKS �Ne .. 45J roftwi w' Sec.,31' 3.78 AC. SE'S 6 WiLDWOOD .. 1 25 / 7.75 Ac. 1 / TM rts t « _ a 03:.2..N. E COZ,iNTY . '.:. 46E 012 15t BOARD OF COMISSIONERS . An?... .1,2--± Item to SE ACTION "itGENDA l'C.,-1 t,m7LNc-; DATE June 27, 1983 .r.,.— I Subject.: MODIFICATION OF CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORT FOR • I BUCK MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 1 Depart.1rent: Plannin: . Public H .Pring: 4 yes • no • .,. . . Attac..brrant(s) : a) Maintenance Hangat InfOrrtiOnCOntaCt: Marvin Collins Schematic.,;b) See May 23, 1983 Public Heari -- ---__ Pborle. Ntrene ," 732-8181 Ext. 346 . agenda packet. .,._, . ,. RIEUXISE: Continuation of the May 23, 1983 Public Hearing to receive citizen input on • .- • additional material submitted as part of the request to delete or modify three (3) conditions placed on the approval of the Class A Special Use Permit granted Buck Mountain Development Corporation for a general aviation airport, NEED: At the May 23, 1983 Public Hearing, the Board of County Commissioners moved to continue the public hearing on June 27, 1983 in order to permit submittal of additional information on specific accessory uses to the airport facility and the possible alternative fire access route through Meadowcrest Subdivision. , .. 1 .-. .. . .".-: . . • ., .. ':.. ,.. .. L., IMPACT: Submittal of the additional information will facilitate continued discussion and public comment on the requested change to the Class A Special Use Permit, specifically Condition #3 and the addition of uses not documented on the site plan approved through the Special Use Permit. ,. ■• 1 . 1,±. .- .„ .•'; :, ... .r. ,. A, , .■ 1....' . , . ,..., „. 1' . It 1 ■ 1 , 1 I . I , . . 4 ,',0,'"5.'`'.''$;• tar.i :'''11 1 Mk' Lit 0;r^t:. ''''i •41 ;,n7v., ..,:..mytaei 1.:••,,..-.....-: ii."1,-74.17-.tr, .,_ :._ .:-.! .,.,.• ,,,,th' :',4.1e;.1;;:, ;' •,- 7,`,., -.§'• •/-1' i..:4144401:1.1.. ,..f..:, •• : .,, a'. '*•• '.. r. .:.Y.0.14,,,A:U A.1,1:"t0 '44 •. •• ir.,:,.., ,.`,:oii: .1'''''■ Piti .. X :{It',II• " 7 1" ■ ..'.'.';4'4 44'4 ' '. Ir'''. .''. '-`1"t'' '--: •:•• ' • .,00:04,": t?!.: ' 4 . ....,tt„,k q .0....4,/,th,. .4::4,0• ,:' . '' .1 4' ":..., ',A . )h44,,, ;• ;: : I ::. ' "*..::•e'C. 1 i 4 ,, ,;...0111104.4.4"........,.4.4.44.."....... ' I . . i 4... _...„......1,4*.:' .. ...." 4.r....*..' ."':: • 's .. . .":.'"r'''' „„,..,..„.-.., ...., ..,„44 ... 11111111111111111111111.1111Wr"...,,-4' .' .4, *"..,,,. .2''. .::A:".".i":%- -....-- • • -•7 ''-'^.•-•—. ---'1 ,'-^"....' .,,*'''''''1 ...'"1 .,„*. ...1. 1.. ..2.,..",",..„.7,-..1..-4....'•„,-,.. ''.-`,1',..-.7':.-::::,..,..-•-.:---:-. , - ..r "••••+c-r•*" ,...-+••:..:-** ,„....:••,,, ,..., .. , ,_.,-.4,-....;?•••••••-.•-.: ..,••••-:-....,,..".•:..` %."-..,:••.":"4,':.-1_,,.,..., •• ••••-, ,„1„-,:. .-• „.,.....::-.`•• ,..--,....<., 4",00-•••" ,....;;;:•••" ,....1."-- -,,., -':..- „.-•.;--• ...I:I..- 1''. ,•,,,r. *11' „.7,r-"...‹,..,,.. .<1*.'. • ......1.'' ,.... •-,.., ..,„•:::,' 1.„1„.............' ., ,^1,/ 1.1•• -,-- 1,,,,,,..-:-:-..1,..-::.;......1,.".r.,,,,-- :viliki-i," _...----::, --....--1--- -- - -..1.-4,-* - - • - - --- -mivi..,-..,,,..,..,-, --- .... ....:- ---:,,,,,...:.,:: :,„,,,,,,1100,----...„-.6....1.•,-,-... ,,.. .--.---- _.;,...,.- •4 ,„.1.:- .--;,•,..-4Q1,......-3„,00.:.-• ,„..„,,..‹..e,......:„!....;100,...,i• ,„, ::::.,,;.--- ...,„,,., .4,,,, r ......:::.„,.;:' ,i,' ;• r i '---"",,...,„-•5--,1 r 1 ..•_.•.iiirro•:,q:'.'•"•."',..:-.., I...,.. 1 '''•••■...4 ::::`;'"'...- ,,T,,1 '',-,.-"--.- .111110.- -...., ,...;;.."-." 1 'I:" .r.,,,..-1....., - - - , - 1 .. -4.1 4•••fl...... .: "4.4.4,..... .: at 1.14" 4,1'....' 4,4r **•"' 1.':;:t...:].i '''.›':<' '.1 '''''. :1;;;;..... .....„..... I '' 44,, '''' .4.4.''''' , ..,,,. 1:.1"-s.,..,........ I ...444.: 0 tot on'' 04•■•• „„, -..4..4,.. r ...,..,. ..... ..•',„ .:',::—. , 0, ,..,.. 'I.. 4 ; ..... ...WI.' ,,,O... . . .s.,.. ., , ^",,,,,,, .0' „e•1.'1;1"„no 0''.... . - ., i ... ,..., 1 . 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 . ; 1 ^ - 1 1 • I 1 1 - . 1 - i 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 --'---____----------_—_--_---__--_-_''_—_ PLANNING FOR AIRPORT NOISE IMPACTS Arizona Department o/Transportation Transportation Planning Division INTRODUCTION--- Aviation is the fastest growing mode of transportation within the Arizona transportation system. Air carrier service is a principal means of travel TABLE OF CONTENTS between metropolitan areas and general aviation provides essential access to a growing number of smaller communities throughout the State. Air freight contributes to the State's economy by providing convenient, low cost, rapid shipment of high value and perishable goods. Aviation is essential to Page commerce, industry, agriculture, tourism and the general traveling public. What is the Cause of Airport Noise and Land Use With the impending energy problems facing transportation,aviation will grow Problems? ..............._... .... .................... ... .1 even faster because higher fuel prices and spot shortages of the other fue! Why is Airport Noise a Concern .......................... 1 modes.Those conditions together with time savings make aviation travel more How do you Measure and Locate Airport Noise Problems? ... . 2 attractive. Measuring Airport Noise C-onflict Areas ............ 2 The positive far-reaching benefits of aviation are sometimes diminished Land Use Compatibility ....... ......................... 4 by less favorable airport noise side effects which may occur as a result of How to Deal with Airport Noise Problems ....... ............ 10 increased air-craft activity in or around existing airport facilities.The purpose of this brochure is to assist airport sponsors,local government officials,and Conclusions ................ ............................... 11 airport and urban planners in becoming aware of, preventing and correcting References .......... ......... ............ ...... 12 potential airport noise problems.This brocure is intended to partially satisfy one of the specific goals contained in the Arizona State Airport System Plan: namely,"to achieve compatibility between Arizona airports and adjacent land uses." WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF AIRPORT NOISE AND LAND USE PROBLEMS? impacts on people that may be described by such terms as annoyance, The land use and noise problems associated with today's airports have nuisance,disturbance or dissatisfaction. developed over the last half century. Today, rapid changes in urban Economic Impacts development patterns and increased aviation activity have made aircraft noise a major issue. Without proper airport/land use compatibility planning, airport noise levels may become an undesirable by-product of a service that offers In the past, most airports were located away from developed areas. substantial economic benefit for area communities. Excessive noise levels However,during the past two decades many urban areas have experienced have the potential of depressmg_P_LopeLtY_vafues_€n._noise_a#fected-areas.-- -- —considerat)le--populatioi=i..md-V6i enE-ot flf the central cities and into- -^ — -- -- Almost any activity engaged in at a property affected by high intensity noise is surrounding suburban areas. Consequently, an extensive amount of less productive than would be the case at a similar quiet location. This is previously undeveloped land near airports has been subdivided for residential particularly evident when considering residential property. In communities and related uses. which have developed noise problems. lower property values have caused When an urban area grows outward, the land between the airport and property tax revenues to decline for both local and state governments- existing urban: areas becomes attractive for suburban development. The Legal Impacts airport environs usually have good highway accessibility and existing People negatively impacted by airport noise may filedarnage suits against availability of utilities.Therefore,land near the airport becomes economically the airport. The outcome of many of these suits has resulted in court actions more attractive than other areas for subdivision development.Consequently, reducing airport service and/or the payment of large sums of money for the urban outward growth development pressures may cause previously relocation of noise sensitive land uses. larger metropolitan areas such as acceptable land use patterns around the airport to be rapidly converted to Phoenix and Tucson have been involved In noise litigation proceedings in noise sensitive land uses such as residences,schools.churches and hospitals. recent years. Smaller airports nave been less prone to suit: however, as air Increased airport aviation activity together with the introduction of larger traffic increases at their facilities.the impact of noise litigation will probably and faster aircraft can create an airport noise problem even though one may follow the pattern being set in larger metropolitan areas. not have existed in the past. The introduction of jet engine aircraft will Airport Development Impacts significantly increase noise levels well beyond that experienced when only The development of noise sensitive land uses around an airport may also propeller driven aircraft were used at the airport facility.Jet aircraftservice not create problems for the future expar lion of the airport.Rapid urbanization has only creates a greater intensity of noise within the existing airport boundaries, occurred in many Arizona communities in the past 25 years and as a but will extend the impact of aviation noise well beyond existing impacted consequence. a number of airports were unable to expand their facilities or areas. were forced to cease operations. Effective airport land use compatibility WHY IS AIRPORT NOISE A CONCERN? planning would have helped to avert many of these difficulties. Public Health Impacts Noise is one of the most serious environmental impacts associated will) HOW DO YOU MEASURE AND LOCATE AIRPORT NOISE PROBLEMS? airports.Excessive noise can lower the quality of living environments and may To prevent or correct an airport noise problem,you will need to determine cause health problems. and locate airport noise impact zones.While most general aviation airports Physiological Effects-Exposure to noise levels of sufficient intensity for currently do not have a noise problem. forecasted usage of many airports long periods of time can cause permanent damage to peoples bearing. indicates the possibility of noise problems.Determining the location of future cardiovascuiar systems and mental health. noise impact zones is an essential first step in the prevention of airport noise Behavioral Effects - Very high noise levels may interfere with speech problems. communication, formal education in schools, occupational efficiency, Measuring Airport Noise Conflict Areas television watching, sleeping and the quality of relaxation. Determining the noise impact of a particular airport's operations on Annoyance Effects - Noise may also have subjective or sociological nearby communities requires an understanding of noise measurement. a t 2 i' } Noise Exposure Indices The actual development of noise pontours for an airport is a complex The systems which treasure airport noise are usually based on the sum of process involving many calculations performed most easily on a computer, all"single aircraft noise events."These noise measurement systems arecalled Calculation of these contours is most often completed during the preparation cumulative measures and combine the Important elements contributing to of an airport master plan or in the preparation of Environmental Assessment noise exposure. Three such systems which are commonly used today are Reports on airport construction projects_If you have access to existing noise listed in order of historical development. contour maps,it will be possible to identify potential areas for noise problems or locate existing areas with noise problems.If existing noise contour maps 1.Composite Noise Rating {CNl?) are not available, then noise conflict areas may be prQduCed for_general - -- -- - -- — --- --- - aviation airports by"desk calculation"methods (see reference 61. 2. Noise Exposure Forecast (NEt=) Land Use Compatibility 3. Bay-Night Average Sound Level (L dn ) Land use compatibility with various levels of airport noise is a function of the types of activities associated with particular land uses. One can classify From each of these systems we can develop noise contours, Noise land uses according to their sensitivity to noise. The Federal Aviation contours describe equal noise values at varying distances from the runway. Administration (FAA) has developed a Land Use Guidance (LUG) Zone These contours should not be considered specific boundary Imes on a map System which relates noise to compatible land uses. that determine the precise location of severe noise impacts. Rather,they are This system delineates land use guidance Zones A, B. C and D which indicators of the type of response to noise that could be expected from a represent four levels of airport noise impacts ranging from minimal for LUG community as a whole. Zone A to severe for LUG Zone Generally, the land area within LUG Zone D should be contained within the airport boundaries or used only for those land uses which are not sensitive Cumulative Noise Measures and Levels to aircraft noise.' Description of Expected Response The land area within LUG Zone A is suitable for almost any land use GNR NEF L do because of the minimal noise impact.The land within LUG Zones B and C is suitable for iand uses which have intermediate sensitivitiesto aircraft noise.In Essentially no complaints would effect, it is within LUG Zones B and C that airport land use compatibility be expected. The noise tray, Fannin should take place. Less than: 100 30 65 p I however, interfere occasionally with certain activities of the residents, 1,5 Individuals may complain, 100-V 30-40 65-75 perhaps vigorously. Concerted group action is possible- i Individuals reactions would likely include repeated, vigorous i Greater than: 115 40 75 complaints, Concerted group I action might be expected. At general aviation airports,Zone D usually occurs only with substantial jet aircraft operations. 3 4 LAND USE GUIDANCE CHART 11: LAND USE NOISE SENSITIVITY INTERPOLATION LAND USE GUIDANCE CHART I: Land Use LUG Zone] All PORT NOISE INTERPOLATION Land Use Noise Imputs:Aircraft Noise Estimating HUD Noise Suggested Name Sug- Study Guidance Exposure Lan Day- NEF Noise CNR Assessment Noise Bested Zones(LUG) i Class Night Avg. Eicptfsore Composite Guidelines Controls t Sound level Forecast Boise Rating l Residential A_g 0 4 4 Normally s .____ __— -__ ._ ------------- --_._.._-_ ----Rey�ites-----__ �-----------__-}`IQt35Bh41d-UtiltS-.__....--------_....___--------------- "Clearly Single units-detached A Exposure To To To No Special g Acceptable 55 20 90 Con- Single units - sermtattached i siderations Single units -attached row i 55 20 90 t land Use Two units - Side-by-side l A Moderate 74 TO TG Ttorma€ty Controls I Two units -one above the other A Exposure Acceptable" Should Apartments - walk up 8 65 toR Considered Apartments-elevator B-C Norse Group quarters A-g 155 30 tit 'Normally Easements. Residential hotels 8 Significant To To TO Un- land Use. Exposure � Mobile home.parks or courts A i 75 as its Acceptable and other Transient lodgings C Controls Other residential A-C l severe 7 5 40 Its 'Cleatly Containment Manufacturing 2 C_D Within Exposure & 8 Un- Airport Professional and scientific g l Higher Higher Higher acceptable" Boundary Transportation, Communication and utilities p Trade 3 NOTES FOR LAND USE GUIDANCE CHANT I Wholesale trade C-D Retail trade C LUG - Land Use Guidance Zone Retail trade- eating and drinking C-D I€ LUG Zones are inputs to the compatibility planning process and are not intended for use in snaking direct comparisons of the various noise estimating methodologies. Ldn - Dav-Night Average Sound Level i NEF -Noise Exposure Forecast CNR -Composite Noise Ratirfg ±.Refer to Land Use Guidance Chart L Note:Caution is suggested in applying CNR methodology to general Z.Zone Suggested maximum except where exceeded by sell generated noise. aviation airports Since in such use it tends to exaggerate indications of J.if activity is not in substantial air-conditioned building.go to next higher zone. noise impacts. Source: Reference 2 6 LAND USE GUIDANCE CHART 11- LAND USE NOISE SENSITIVITY INTERPOLATION Land Use LU;GZ:one g Stu Name Sug- Ste Fge d Study Services 3 Finance.insurance and real estate services Personal qer vtos R-e-p -- Business services -a—, I C Repair service Professional services B-C The FAA, in its Land Use Guidance Chart It, has suggested a series of Contract construction services C relationships of aircraft noise to categories of land use. Significantly, these Governmental services B relationships are to be used only as a starling point. Specific relationships Educational services A-B should be established for each community and should be based upon citizen Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational input and specific community goals, values and needs. Cultural activities and nature exhibitions A The following examples illustrate theshapeof noisecontours and the land Public assembly A areas contained within LUG Zones B and C at several hypothetical airports. Amusements These examples show that significant increases in the volume of propeller Recreational activities C aircraft operations will increase the land area within which land use Resorts and group camps BA compatibility planning needs to be undertaken, Example I is typical of Parks A Arizona's rural general aviation airports. Example 2 is typical of Arizona's Resource Production and Extraction A-C larger volume urban general aviation airports without any jet operations. Agriculture I Finally,example 3 represents the projected volume of operations which are I C-D likely to occur at several general aviation airports in Arizona by the year 2000. Forestry activities and related services 0 None of these examples account for'any night-time or jet operations. The Mining activities and related services 0 inclusion of either of these two factors would increase the magnitude of the Other resource production and extraction noise impact. Undeveloped Land and Water Areas Noise impact areas and land use guidance zones must be prepared Undeveloped and unused land area D individually for each airport. Guidelines for selecting noise contours for Water areas A-0 general aviation airports are given in the FAA publication entitled:Developing Vacant floor area A-D Contours For General Aviation Airports (see reference 6). Under construction A_D FL Refer toiand Use Guidance Chart 1. 2.Zone-C"suggested maximum except where exceeded by self generated noise 3.It activity Is not in substantial air-conditioned building go 10 next higher zone. 7 8 4 ' Noise Exposure Forecast Contours s Propeller Aircraft Only ---✓ Runway Utiliztalon HOW TO DEAL WITH AIRPORT NOISE PROBLEMS 14 IF 5fl°� _50cu The principal ways of abating airport noise problems involve controlling aircraft noise at the source:regulating future land uses near the airport:and or ~'W EXAMPLE 1 taxing corrective action to resolve conflicts with existing unprotected noise 11.200-13.406 sensitive uses. Annual Operations Noise Control Measures • Modification of aircralt engines-The FAA has established standards __ ___ -- •- j----------___.__ _ __.___-__-_-----_—__.-----------tl�r rie se e€niss nns of�,ew aircraft built-niter 1969 and has G�reemptPd all rontrr�l in this area y 3 _ • �iOtiificatir�n cif flirfh[€u«ce�rftir<.>C The FAA has the Dower to regulate take-off and landinrl patlwns. however, loca! governments and NOISE LUG airport operalur<;c, ? ':ticlgesE ,v;:;s to alter flight procedures for the LEVEL ZONE abatement of ,irrrtart rioizjL. r- MODERATE -0 Planne.i airport L,1-;z'kjpntr>rit >Je i tuns: Aire.>Yrt sp^nsors may EXPOSURE I i :Enillt.ctili' offect ,::' lit=: ii,Yi ;i knorn ::npacts ay careful`:y r- ola(rliinq the!ocal,cn and r;.a=>r.'-, n :?; ;i, �:.a r5.it rimnal t."Ud ling. SIGNIFICANT sc.'t s roads, and navir.�tir,i:,li i.rt;tlitiul�, EXPOSURE ♦ 3-tas;r;r!I`3r15 tm aiYl)*-,t':lje: Tt':1_illfr:i5ilrr:I:'v(r?';f•S r£'=itr4Ct"?CJ nC}izS2r aircraf: to day-lioni :ar:e-tA!, ;jr lt.alrper*,, sufroilradeo t'.:. •i, se r —oft EXAMPLE 2,,`` Land Use Regulation Measures tic,0 ..and use 3nC d_VeJr'pt1,£zrtt :;nn'.'ci',- r`i3)' :}t. i:pPr.-3P''t:4rr •:?::JS t:,r ?R£ litJtlill. Opt'ra1i,1=;, D-c-!ectlon of ai=colt no;re rr,!)-c from., - nacho en!ov se:`:f:=e usa5 `�"•'j G:. ^t the ft'iti:?4Y 1"er tl: :i�atlt_ulil ^t� 1` �.�.t,:'r'.a CL?mC'rta1ji:.jst-:- olan wr icn _ ^5.ders:he r:ercls(11 tha t015!c:>si >r: . >:it :ts>�»°I as-tie 5:e�t'iC nPn,y=r}t fhe airport Zoning. in pariiraila.' il, rot ,il Wv In hW i omprehensive in scope nor G ss:ind in content unless it is based upoi=o previously prepared:a.nd use plan 1 /- • Zuninp: This is an .Yerc Ise of ;.cal Police powers whic'i delineates islinci zones wilt`tl? lVntcn `Ilia 1lsP5 an,i but.dinus ar? 5t,hleci to • '\ cettain restricvorls. .• i • Advanced property acqrlisilloi,. This i.,; the otttsiC'nt acilutsmon property by the atr0cri opera:or -mitts;'rbyConsentDfoY.nero;biy,irle •-w[ EXAMPLE 3 ilse of emiciiint dorti im powers. Lanio may ais<= be at_.-quited m t 355.000 - 449,000 advance of need and may be bold banked rtiu?,sal �t eratrons P Easements: Governments m.<iy purchase serect properly riat?ts which are needed for airport land use compatibility.For example.the government may purchase the right to make noise over the property Distance in Thousands of Feet or it may purchase the owner s right to maintain a noise sensitive use 11 10 9 8 i 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 I 5 6 t on the property. 9 10 .�- >. s i Building codes. Once aircraft noise impact areas are defined, • building codes could be amended to require soundproofing of new i structures built in these areas. Corrective Measures If airport area land use incompatibilities have already developed,the only solutions available are to purchase the affected property,to move the airport, REFERENCES or to Implement corrective actions. Examples of corrective actions include: 1. U.S.Department of Transportation,Federal Aviation Administration,Office EnvironmeptaL Ouality.-lmpact_of-Noise-or-People,-May-1977_-.----Soundproofing:--This" _ - reducing indoor - - -- 2 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. noise where an existing development cannot be relocated. Airport-Land Use Compatibility Planning, 1977. • Changes of land use:Public policy,particularly planning,zoning and 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Aircraft Noise capital expenditures can be oriented toward influencing the gradual Impact: Planning Guidelines for Local Agencies, November, 1972- change from incompatible to compatible land uses. 4. Schultz,Theodore J.and Nancy M,McMahon.U.S.Department of Housing • Purchase Guarantees:This program would allow people to remain in and Urban Development, Noise Assessment Guidelines, August 1971. lightly or snort-term noise impacted areas and would assure the 5. National Academy of Sciences, Noise Abatement: Policy Alternatives for sellability of their homes at market value without depreciation due to Transportation: A report to the U.S. Erivironmentat Protection Agency, noise effects. Washington. D.C.. 1977- • Acquisition of land: In areas where noise impact leaves no other 6. Bishop. D.E. and A.P Hays, for Bolt. Beranek,and Newman. Inc.,Report choice purchase for conversion to airport or airport related uses may No. FAA-AS-75-1, Developing Noise Exposure Contours for General be necessary. Aviation Airports; December 1975 (available through National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151, loo.ADA 023929,$7.751. Conclusions The abatement of aircraft noise is a complex and controversial issue.The Arizona State Airport System Plan recognizes that system airports must be able to satisfy current and future aviation demand while providing the maximum amount of freedom from noise impacts for the people who live.work For further assistance contact the Arizona Department of Transportation: or own property near these airports. Airport Modal Manager Assistant Director Noise impacts at any airport are not only a function of the type and amount Transportation Planning Division Aeronautics Division of airport operations,but are in part due to locai decisions on airport location, South r 17th Avenue Ph South 17th Avenue Ph layout and size and the purchase of duffer areas for noise abatement.Also, Phoenix. Arizona 85007 Phoenix,AZ 85007 local decision-making may permit residential development near an airport_ In order to abate and prevent airport land use incompatibilities, local action is necessary. The implementation of land use plans.zoning and other land use regulations will be needed to protect the integrity of Arizona's State System Airports. i 5 11 i ! 12 - -wry,wvsar■••..44101‘104i4.54V`!: od,A 4-.0, RIEVORaterNSW IEC Y. J. SEMINAR NOTES: NOISE CONTROL PLAN DEVELOPMENT 1 1 Presented for: 410 Department of Transportation/ Federal Aviation Administration 1 Presented by: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc . 1 40 DRAFI' INTRODUCTION I Airport noise control planning is a central elementl of the DOT/FAA Aviation Noise Policy. As we begin this Seminar , we shall discuss the policy in the context of "Legislative and Administrative Mandates for !1! Noise Control ." This Seminar is one element of the FAA' s technical assistance program and , by virtue of the range of experience and responsibilities of participants , helps provide a medium foir exchange of information , experiences , and points of view. The Seminar will also contribute to the FAA 's forthcoming "Guidance Document on Airport Noise Control . " The DOT/FAA Aviation Noise Policy describes the respon4ibilities of the many participants in aviation noise abatement . These ! responsibilities are outlined in the following table , and you should keep them in mind as we address the topics of the Seminar . 411 AVIATION NOISE POLICY Federal Responsibility: - Source noise control e .g. , FAR Part 36 Compliance ; SST Rule - Operational control e.g . , Departure Procedure - Financial/technical assistance e .g. , ANCLUC Studies - Research and development of noise abatement technology - Coordination with state/local/proprietors/users 1 Airport Proprietors : - Airport site location and operational planning - Appropriate restrictions on airport operations - Coordination with state/local /users/FAA 41110 1 -,,,ic•;*!!!,C4 4 .." VV - • ? 4111 State/Local Governments: - Land use planning - Appropriate zoning ra - Appropriate building code adoption Air Carriers/Residents/Travelers: I Various responsibilities distributed at these levels as well . I it 410 410r 2 ;T- 1111 THE LANGUAGE OF NOISE During this first segment of the Se•inar, we shall discuss some of the vocabulary of acoustics -- vocabulary and concepts that we shall use throughout the Seminar. During this Seminar , we are going to be talking about sound , noise (which is unwanted sound) , and vibration . In other words we are going to be talking about acoustics , the science that deals with the production , control , transmission, reception, and effects of sound. This section of the Seminar will introduce you to the basic vocabulary and theories of acoustics , particularly those you will need for a discussion of airport noise . Our discussion of vibration will be minijmal , because almost all airport-related vibrations are noise-induced. That is , noise from an aircraft makes windows vibrate and rattle . Because inoise causes vibration , control of airport noise will result in control of vibration as well . You cannot discuss airport ( or any other) noise without knowing 411111 some of the vocabulary o f' acoustics . The most important term s for you to understand concern three aspects of sound : its loudness , Its pitch , and how long it lasts . The terms you must understand are : ( • Sound pressure ) • Sound pressure level Loudness • Decibels • Addition of decibels • Frequency Pitch • Weighting network • Pure tones How long it 1 • Duration of sound. lasts Each of these terms is explained in this section . 3 • 1. . , , 1 Loudness Loudness is subjective , as anyone knows who has ever tseen involved w' in this kind of exchange: "Turn down the television! It s too loud ! " "Loud? Why, .I can hardly hear it ! " Acousticians define loudness as a function chiefly of the intensity of a sound , but also of the frequency and the composition of the sound . The first group of term's describing sound concern the general concept of loudness . 1 I 1 Sound Pressure 1 All sounds come from a sound source -- a musical instrument , a voice speaking, an airplane passing overhead . It takes energy to produce sound . The sound energy produced by any sound source is; transmitted through the air in sound waves . Sound waves are tiny oscillations of pressure just above and just below atmospheric p pressure . These oscillations or sound pressures impinge on the ear . The result? We hear sound . But sound pressures are not intrinsic to the source -- they are Eli greatly affected by the environment in which the sound source is located . A symphony orchestra playing outside would sound very different from the same orchestra playing the same music in a fine symphony hall . Figure 1 illustrates the sound source and sound pressure . / / / -.- �� \ \ \ / / ,---- SOUND SOURCE- ' ( (//,/ , \ ��VI.1 , f�4-- ''..isc-- 11 ..•------_.---. 1 / 411 SOUND PRESSURE 1 :� � ;- �f ,!, FIG. 1. ILLUSTRATION OF SOUND SOURCE AND SOUND PRESSURE. • 4 A , :_ . 411 Sound Pressure Level Our ears are sensitive to a wide range of sound pressures . The loudest sounds that we hear without pain have about one Million times more energy than the quietest sounds we hear. Also , ourj, ears are not equally sensitive to all sound pressures -- it takes more energy to 3 produce a noticeable change in a loud sound than it doesl, to produce a noticeable change in a quiet sound . We can reduce the range of sound pressures to which we are sensitive to a more manageable range , and we can account for the nonlinear sensitivity of our ears by introducing the concept of sound pressure level . In acoustics , the term "level" is used to refer to a logarithmic value of the ratio of a sound pressure quantity relative to a reference quantity . Sound pressure level is a measure of sound pressure relative to a reference pressure of 20 micropascals , 0 .0002 microbarp , or 2x105 newtons per square meter . All of these values are equivalent and are in common use . In your work with airport noise , you are goingl to hear a lot 41M about sound pressure level , because it is the sound pressure level to which people respond , pro or con , in their living and working environments . The language of acoustics is full of abbreviations , and there are two for sound pressure level : "SPL" and "L " "SPL" is more Widely used . ; P 1 Decibels Sound pressure levels are measured in decibels (ab reviation: "dB") , just as distance is measured in inches and temperature is measured in degrees . Decibels are used to express the ratio of two quantities in logarithmic terms . The table below shows a comparison of various sound pressures ( measured in microbars) and their; associated sound pressure levels ( expressed in decibels) . 411 5 'FLIPP t "..1 Calculate the sound pressure level this way: 410 2 P SPL = 10 log measured 1 Preference TABLE I. SOUND PRESSURES AND ASSOCIATED SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS, Sound Pressure Sound Pressure (Microbars) Level (Decibels) 200 120 0.02 40 0.0002 0 41/ . Because decibels are logarithmic quantities , it takes a tenfold change in the ratio of the square of the sound pressure to the square of the reference sound pressure to result in a 10-dB change in sound pressure level. A doubling of the ratio of the squares of the pressures results in a 3-dB change in sound pressure level . Sound pressure levels can be easily measured . To do so , acousticians use a sound level meter , an instrument which , like the human ear , is sensitive to sound pressure. A sound level melter relates the sound pressure of a incident sound wave to the standard reference pressure. A sound pressure level of 0 dB (i .e. , the measured sound 1 pressure equals the reference pressure) represents approximately the weakest sound that can be heard by the average young human ear in the frequency region of highest sensitivity. At the other end of the hearing range , humans feel physical pain in their ears when the sound (10 6 „ pressure is approximately one million times greater than the weakest sound. Such a pressure would produce a sound pressure level of about 120 dB relative to the reference pressure . This level would be approximately what you would experience standing next to the amplifiers oi f a hard rock band . A soft whisper would be rated at about 40 dB. In everyday use , sound pressure levels are often referred to as "noise levels." And the reference to 20 micropascals can bile , and often is , omitted when it is clearly understood that the dB quantity is sound pressure level . You might describe the sound of an engine repair shop this way : "The noise level in the shop is about 90 dB.1" Addition of decibels Question : The noise from an airplane engine , as you tear it on the ground outside the plane , is measured at 100 dB. The nolise from the engine in a nearby plane is measured at 95 dB. How much noise , in decibels , are the two planes generating? Answer : Did you say 195 dB? Wrong . Decibels cannot be added algebraically. They are logarithmic values and they mutt be added logarithmically. A simple table for adding decibels is shown below TABLE 2. METHOD 1: ADDING DECIBELS. When two decibel Add the following amount values differ by: to the higher value: 0 or 1 dB 3 dB 2 or 3 dB 2 dB 4 to 8 dB 1 dB 9 dB or more 0 dB 7 ; (. . t. Alternatively , use the following figure. 0 -a 3 4:741 1111111111111111 MI ; , cticg 1 0,114 U■1"1" 2 ill 1=116 00 z E II= Ill Ill mow— x 0 1 litg::Fis 111111121111111111 mmilimmiliminin 1111 0 imm......- 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 i DIFFERENCE IN DECIBELS BETWEEN TWO LEVELS TO BE ADDED FIG 2. METHOD 2: ADDING DECIBELS. The combined noise of the two engines , then , is 101 dB. When there are several decibel levels to be added , add them two at a time , starting with the lower valued levels and continuing , two at a time , until only one value remains . To illustrate , suppose that the sound levels of five fans , side by side in a mechanical room, are 68 dB , 75 dB, 79 dB, 82 dB , and 88 dB , respectively. They would be added this way : 68 dB222> = 76 75 dB = 81 79 dB ------. . . 85 82 dB—.---...----....— = 90 dB 88 dB----------- 0 8 .. 1 If there are several levels of the same value to be added together - several engines , all measured at 85 dB , for instance - add them this way: TABLE 3. METHOD FOR ADDING SEVERAL LEVELS OF THE SAME VALUE. NO. of Equal Add to that Levels Level 2 3dB 3 5dB 4 6dB 5 7 dB 6-7 8dB 8 9dB• 9-10 10 dB N 10 log N dB 411 Up to now, we have discussed the addition of 1 ev el s from events that occur at one time: for example , several airplanes warming up on the same ramp . We are adding energy from these simultaneous events. Later , we will be considering aircraft noise exposure from a series of events occurring at different times , such as the sequence of aircraft arriving for landings on a single runway. We will , however , add the energy of events that occur at different times in the same way we ad energy of simultaneous events . The second characteristic of sound is frequency , often referred to as "pitch ." 410 9 7,-,51!Anmv.m%:71#10.*1”771r""—' " : , _ Frequency 0 Frequency is the time rate of repetition of a periodic phenomenon . The traditional unit for frequency in the United States was at one time "cycles per second ." Now, we use "Hertz ," abbreviated "Hz ." Only the name has changed; the meaning hasn ' t . To represent the total noise of any source , acousticians break the 1 noise into frequency components . In other words , tiow much is low-frequency noise , how much is middle-frequency noise ) how much is high-frequency noise? This breakdown is essential to any comprehensive study of a noise problem for two reasons : ▪ People react differently to low-frequency and high-frequency noise , because high-frequency noise is much more disturbing. It is also more capable of producing hearing lossl. . Engineering solutions to a noise problem are different for different frequencies . (Low-frequency noise is generally harder to control . ) The frequency distribution of a noise is determined by passing the noise successively through several different filters that eparate the noise into 8 or 9 octaves on a given frequency scale . Just like an octave on the piano keyboard of Fig. 3 , an octave in sound analysis represents the frequency interval between a given frequencylr, such as 300 Hz , and twice that frequency , which for 300 Hz would be 600 Hz. 2 OCTAVES ABOVE MIDDLE C MIDDLE C luleil 111111 261.6 Hz 1046 4 Hz L 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz) FIG. 3. PIANO KEYBOARD OCTAVE. 10 01.tftyrr Sfrrr:$ st' " • • The normal frequency range of hearing for most people extends from a low frequency of about 20 Hz to a high frequency of 10 ,0100 to 15 ,000 Hz -- even higher for some particularly keen-eared persons . Most I octave-band filters now cover the audio range of about 22 Hz to about 11 , 200 Hz in 9 octave frequency bands . These filters are identified by their geometric mean frequencies . For instance , the 700- to 11100-Hz frequency range is called the 1000-Hz octave band . The bands are : 1 Octave Frequency Geometric Mean flange Frequency of Band (Hz) (Hz) 22-44 31 44-88 63 68-175 125 175-350 250 350-700 500 700-1400 1000 1400-2800 2000 410 2800-5600 4000 5600-11,200 8000 9 11 Awal • In some cases , a noise spectrum must be studied in finer detail than is possible with octave frequency bands . In such cases - and they are common in acoustics - one-third octave bands may be used . For instance , FAR Part 36 specifies one-third octave-band analysis . Remember , you must always specify the bandwidth and the identifying frequency of the band ( as in "Data were recorded and later reduced in octave bands with center frequencies of 31 , 63 , and 125 14 ." ) . If you don't , you are giving as little information as if youf said , "The distance is two." Two what? Miles? Feet? Inches? Give all the necessary information. 1 A set of filters used to separate a complex sound into octave bands is called an octave-band analyzer. When a sound pressure level includes all the audio range of frequency , the resulting value i called the "overall" level. When the level refers to the sound in one specific octave frequency band , it is called an octave-band le41 , and the frequency band is either stated or clearly implied . 1 411 Weighting Network Sound level meters are usually equipped with weighting networks that represent the way the human ear hears certain sounirls. Overall readings can be taken with these settings , which are calle A-scale or B-scale or C-scale settings on the meter . The A-scale setting filters out as much as 20 to 40 dB of the sound below 100 Hz as illustrated in Fig . 4 , while the B-scale setting filters out as much as 5 to 20 dB of the sound below 100 Hz . The C-scale setting retains almost all the sound signal over the full frequency range . However , the B-scale and C-scale settings are rarely used. Always make sure that you identify the scale setting used when measuring sound levels; refer to it as a dBA reading , and remember that !it does not S 12 • ... ! ! .. .. ,..,. ... represent a true sound pressure level because some of the sound has been 1 filtered out . i 1 .. I 10 I ,,..• 11111111111111111MAIII ,.. . ... . El1111111111 . cot) -10 imin ill . W , Cc 111 IIIIIIIII , 1.1-30 illimill II 111 III .., .., : Cc r21-450 1111WA011111111111111_1, 11111 10 2 5 100 Z 5 1000 2 5 10,000 FREQUENCY (Hz) 1 410 1 1 FIG. 4. SOUND FILTERING AT A-SCALE SETTING ON SOUND LEVEL METER. 1 1 ! I 1 . 1 i 1 ! 1 ! 1 I i i 1 i i 0 13 i .. . , ......— , k N Ii.' I ,., ii Pure tones I , I 410 In acoustics , a tone is a sound that gives a definitelsensation of pitch , loudness , and timbre . A pure tone is a sound wave characterized I by singleness of pitch. A tuning fork emits a pure tone . What we refer to as the "whine" of a turbofan jet engine is usually a combination of several pure tones . Pure tones can be the most annoying to listeners . Figure 5 is a graphic representation of the landing noise of a jet . 1 aircraft , in which pure tones are identified . , 1 1 0100 Ii ) 1 ' II 11 ii II 11 11111 4. 0 PURE TONES , • 90 _ 6. . i cil , -0 1 i ....i 1 ------ -- 111111 ›. ! L1J . ...I rac 67 _NJ__ D . cn 1 cc I 0 Z 1 M 1 050 I . J i II it , ii II II _ _11 Ili 0 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 1/3 OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz) FIG. 5. LANDING NOISE OF A JET PLANE, SHOWING PURE TONES. 0 14 1 . . 1 1 1 ., ... , ... ..._ I I Finally , the third characteristic of sound is duration , or how long it lasts . Duration of Sound One of the characteristics of a sound is duration how long it lasts . You hear an airplane approaching ,pproaehing , its sound reaches amaximum as FP it flies overhead , and its sound diminishes and dies has the plane disappears . The change in sound pressure level can be 'charted as a hill—shaped curve that clearly illustrates the duration of si)und . Often , when examining airport noise , we are concerned with durations defined as the amount of time the sound pressure level remains within 10 dB of the maximum sound pressure level during the flyby. Duration its illustrated in Fig. 6. 120 • 110 -. tMAX.LEVEL -13 Lo -s 100 MAX.LEVEL - minus 10dB 90 'r DURATION 1 - 80 TIME FIG. 6. ILLUSTRATION OF DURATION OF SOUND, 1 15 .,... m-ctsvncr.., . .... _. .. --- 011111 Your ear has an amazing dynamic range. At the low en'd of the range, you can hear very faint sounds of less than 10-dB sound pressure level , yet you can also hear and identify sounds of more thani100-dB sound pressure level. For example , sitting inside your house on a summer evening, you can hear a cricket chirping in your gardenland , minutes later, a commercial airliner flying overhead . The plane's sound power is many times greater than the cricket' s - but you hear and distinguish them both. The levels of a number of common sounds are shoWn in Fig. 7 . 1 * *I In your work with airports , you will often be disctissing noise abatement . Remember , as you do , that it takes a lot of noise reduction to make a perceptible difference in sound. When a sound is ecreased by 1 about 10 dB in level , people judge it to be about halt as loud as before. Yet to achieve that change , 90% of the sound energy must be 411 removed - a challenge! 1 Aircraft noise is one of the two major sources of noiseIin America; the other is freeway traffic . More than 16 million Americans are exposed , each day, to an average sound level of more than 60 dB because of aircraft operations , And , as you are aware , many doOt like it . 411 ; 16 1,1t ;1-.7 '-'4*•11M.; - {i' I ymY I 1 COMMON OUTDOOR NO/SE LEVEL COMMON INDOOR i S SOUND LEVELS da(A/ SOUND LEVELS -- 110 ROCK BAND CONCORDE LANDING AT 370ft 707 LANDING AT 370ft 707 TAKEOFF AT 1000 ft 100 GAS LAWN MOWER AT 3ff INSIDE SUBWAY TRAIN (New York) DIESEL TRUCK AT 50ft ____ 9© FOOD BLENDER AT 3ft NOISY URBAN DAYTIME — 80 GARBAGE DISPOSAL AT 3ff SHOUTING AT 3ft 747 TAKEOFF AT 1000ft -- 70 VACUUM CLEANER AT I0ft COMMERCIAL AREA NORMAL SPEECH AT 3ft — 60 LARGE BUSINESS OFFICE QUIET URBAN DAYTIME -- 50 DISHWASHER NEXT ROOM frb QUIET URBAN NIGHTTIME 40 SMALL THEATRE,LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM QUIET SUBURBAN NIGHTTIME (Bockground) LIBRARY - 30 i BEDROOM AT NIGHT QUIET RURAL NIGHTTIME CONCERT HALL (Background) - 20 BROADCAST &RECORDING STUDIO 10 THRESHOLD OF HEARING 0 FIG. 7. COMMON SOUND LEVELS. 17 n,wr._s. .r-. �....... 41 NOISE DESCRIPTORS IN THE FAA'S INTEGRATED NOISE MODEL Actual airport noise environments are defined using more complex descriptors than those we discussed earlier. During the next segment of the Seminar, we shall examine the methods used to describe the airport noise environments. Airport community noise is made up , primarily , of a series of separate events . Between events , the environment may b!e relatively quiet . Over the years , various noise descriptors have beeb developed to describe the noise environment . These descriptors can be,divided into two basic kinds : ( 1 ) those that reflect in a single numbO• the amount of sound energy during a 21 -hour day and (2) those that reflect in a single number how much of the time a noise level is exceeded . In the following pages, we describe five airport descriptors , fourlof which are in the first category, and one in the second : • Noise Exposure Forecast • Equivalent Sound Level Category • Day-Night Sound Level ( Cumulative Energy Measures) 410 • Community Noise Equivalent Level . Time Above Threshold Category 21 ( Cumulative Time Measure) Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF) Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF) is a cumulative energy measure of noise exposure . It represents a technical upgrading of a land use planning tool developed for airports in the early 1960 's - the Composite Noise Rating ( CNR) . NEF uses Effective Perceived Noise Levels (EPNL) . Calculations of EPNL not only weight frequencies according to the sensitivity of the human ear , they also account for higher-ithan-normal annoyance at the presence of pure tones in aircraft noise silgnals ( such as the chacrac ter ist Jo compressor whine of a jet engine during landing) , and they account for greater annoyance at a sound that h4s a longer duration . 410 18 1 Although these refinements make EPNLs difficult Ito calculate without computer analysis of the noise , the refinements emerged from laboratoryexperiments in which people were asked to judgeithe loudness of aircraft events . Many people feel that annoyance caused by flyovers increases during these hours because background noises are lower at night ; thus making aircraft noise more intrusive . Therefore , to account forithe supposed increased annoyance to events occurring at night , NEF adds a weighting of approximately 12 dB to each EPNL value obtained for operations between the hours of 10: 00 p .m. and 7:00 a .m. The exact value of the weighting s engineering g an en g eating judgement , not one for which there are conclusive community response data . The NEF value at any point , then , is the energy P , , gy average of the EPNLs ( including the weighting for night flights) for each aircraft operation during a 24-hour period . A constant is subtracited from the total so that the resulting NEF value will be significantly different from the EPNL value a help in avoiding confusion between the two measures . NEF o EPNL + 10 log10 (Nd + 16. 67 N n) -88 . lir : For each of the cumulative pressures , the exposure at a point is considered to be the result of the average level adjusted for any nighttime weighting. "Average" here is an energy average , which recognizes that noisy events produce a greater impact than quiet events . The result is similar to what we found in decibel addition . equivalent Sound Level (Leq) Leq is the steady A-weighted sound level over any specified period (not necessarily 24 hours) that has the same acoustic energy as the S 19 .. •p>,:'1't'0'.•.w.l lPd^."#Yl..,'.°•i�'P'��.�-,�TI'k-�'a�.._ _..�•._._.,_ L::a ..._''I{Imr:;o.....da••...a....,__._...... ...... fluctuating noise during that period (with no consideration of a nighttime weighting. ) It is a measure of cumulative energyL For single events , L eg used the sound exposure level (SEL) . The SEL!accounts for the ear's reduced sensitivity to low and very high frequen I cies , but it employs a simple "A-filter" rather than the complex function used in the EPHL calculation. Any increased annoyance caused by the pre6ence of pure tones is not accounted for by this simplified weighting ,lbut SEL does incorporate the effect of duration. Because the time interial may vary , tor it should always be specified by a subscript ( such as Leg(8 ) for an ( 8-hour exposure to workplace noise) or be clearly understood , L eq(24) SEL + 10 log (Nd + Nr ) - 49. 4 04614-17v Nry•-•e Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn) Ldn is Leg with a 10-dB nighttime weighting; it is a measure of cumulative energy. Ldn , which is similar in concept to NEF, uses the 411 SEL as the measure of noise from each single event . Like NEF, Ldn has a weighting for nighttime operations . The reason for this weighting is the same for both measures - intuitive rather than purely scientific . L dn has recently grown in popularity , partly because it is simpler to measure than NEF. Ldn SEL + 10 log10 (Nd + 10 Nn) -49 . 4 . Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNNL) California has a descriptor similar to Ldn. It is the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL ) , which adds an evening period - 700 to 10 :00 p .m . .. during which events are assumed to be 5 dB more noisy. To 410 20 -400 'or ' ...,-.„. 51. rA ' k. 41 put it another way, L dn is CNEL simplified . In cases where both descriptors have been used to describe the same set of operations , the results generally are the same or within 1 dB of eactli other. 0 0 CNEL : SENEL + 10 log10 (Nd + 3Ne + 10 Nn) - 49j4 . t.. .T= N • * t! i f Figure 8 shows the approximate relationships between the cumulative k energy measures described here. No precise relationships can be made because of the variations in the way pure tones , duration. , and evening 1 and nighttime weightings are handled , but for the majority of airport environments over the range of levels that are of Concern , the :•• relationships are reasonable within a tolerance of plus or minus 3 dB. Table 4 summarizes the factors considered in each of the cumulative energy measures . • NEF I 11111111 III Iii I III 25 30 35 40 45 III 1 , , Leq(24) . 57 60 62 65 67 70 72 75 77 Ldna I 1 1 i 1 I i _j _j I j j 1 1 1 1 1 t i 1 II .• CNEL 60 65 70 75 80 FIG. 8. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CUMULATIVE ENERGY MEASURES. I TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF FACTORS IN EACH CUMULATIVE ENERGY MEASURE, I --..,, Measure -..,..... ---.. —., Factor -...,....„ NET L eq L dn I CNEL Baste measure of Effective perc‘qvci Sound cx- :',713nt ,xpo:iur-r level Sinp,:. ,!,-cnt :;•rir,e exposure noise from single events noise level ensure le: l. ltv6: I I Annoyance due to 1 . Yes No :!0 1 Jc pure tones considered i Time periods considered Day (7 an -1.0 p,r1J Period must Elly 17 %,r; -1C r 7...) :g* :r EiLm,-7 p.r) i !(ight (10 p-n -7 n m ) bc npr!cif!■!-1 Ni,•h' ;1.1 : :; -- ■ rn.) Ew.r•01,-. i7 p n - 1-; p.m.) a.m. ) Weightings applied to Day 0 in 0 15 re : !- any C ti (-my k dE events in each period Night 17 J lens or :;1'ht 0 AP Ev,n - 15 dr, 410 perk! !ii,;ht n de. 21 .. 1 1 ,s1,,r,„. ...:,.4+44.;m VE7',/iI! .1'. ;.: ;.- . Note that these four cumulative descriptors , all in the first category, do not answer the question "How loud are the airplanes?" They simply describe the total amount of noise an area receives during a day. • Tine Above Threshold (TA) One airport descriptor does answer the question "H w loud?" It also answers the question "How long at that level?" To describe the total environment - an environment that , particularly at an airport , is made up of many levels of sound - a series of times above several sound levels is required . This description of the environment is i3 referred to as time above threshold (TA) . TA is amultiple-threshold system that adds together ingle-event durations of noise above a number of sound levels - typically 65, 75 , 85 , 95 , 105 , and 115 dBA - for 24-hour and for evening a d nighttime 410 periods . For full use of this method , a series of numbers is required to describe the environment . However , in some instances , a single level will be of primary concern ; for example , a level representing the onset of speech interference . We discuss the use of the TA descriptor in the segment on Annoyance and Community Reaction . S 22 _,e'l'gry'r,J-Tvin'Tolgarmwg h;- • S HOW HUMANS RESPOND TO NOISE We describe noise environments in terms of exposure and effects. Up to this point , we have limited the discussion to the topiclof exposure. Now we consider some effects . For many years , scientists have been studying , measuring , and reporting on the kinds of noise to which humans respond , the amounts of noise to which they respond , and how they respond . As a nesult , these scientists have identified a range of responses to airport noise , from acceptance of the noise all the way to litigation . What they have found out is valuable information for you , but its value depends on your background knowledge of human response to noise . Below, we summarize the basic principles of human response to noise . A variety of factors influence the response of people to a noise environment. They include the potential for damaging people's hearing and the potential for interfering with activities such as speech and sleep. Anyone or a combination of these factors can result in reaction 411 by people . When that reaction is by a group , it is called "community response ." Let' s review those key words again : hearing damage , speech interference, sleep and other activity interference, and annoyance and community response reaction. A brief explanation of each follows , together with a note on how or why this information is useful to you. Hearing Damage Noise-induced hearing damage is a loss in sensitivity of the ear because of exposure to noise. The loss can be temporary when the ear is exposed to a sudden loud sound , such as a firecracker explosion or gunshot) or it can be permanent (as when the ear is ex osed , over • long periods of time , to high sound levels such as are foUnd in noisy factories) . 23 - -404NI4ANIVAlirt Wien . -- i.*• Z-11 4, • 1 In the context of airport noise , hearing damage should not be a problem for neighbors . At an airport , noise levels vary widely from one minute to the next . Except for line crew members , no one at an airport or in the surrounding community is exposed to steady high levels of sound . Two recent studies [ 1 , 2] conclude that there is little risk of hearing loss from exposure to aircraft noise in nearby Communities . Speech Interference Of all the effects of noise , people recognize and understand speech interference best . When noise masks the sounds of conversation , telephone calls , or radio or TV listening , it has interfered with speech. The degree of speech interference depends on several factors - how loud the speaker' s noise is , how far he is from his listener , whether the conversation is indoors or outdoors , what is the level of the interfering noise , and whether that noise is Constant or intermittent . fAl At airports , noise from operations can interfere with speech for brief periods . Figure 9 indicates the sound levels of aircraft that will cause speech interference [ 3 ] . The severity of the interference is related directly to how long the interference lasts . 2'1 Y -fit ,e:K h . q.:C:';.�7n; _.: c _ .• .,.n. � .__., , al , , ,,- 1lin I 111 Ilit°1C6 h r,o, 1, 70 MI .• 4 .I., .... 4r:5 •,,'. 1 _50 e °Ne"s'-.Te„• 1 . t•g d ',TM §0 1•i'''.4.4'..4,,,, "4. 3 2 • .c eu 40 . .._ . 1_...... ihizl) I to "i;03 11 -0 .k k 1 ,.. ■, 1111 , .. - 1- 111 fillil 1 1161111111 411 __ 8 I 1 5 2 3 4 6 8 10 1 5 20 ComhunIcatkgr DIdonc* In Mohr% i I i i i FIG. 9, MAXIMUM DISTANCES OUTDOORS OVER WHICH CONVERSATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE SATISFACTORILY INTELLIGIBLE IN STEADY NOISE. I I i i 1 i i I 1 , 1 i i • i 1 25 i 1 1 . , F• ... „..! 1 • 1 ,,- w 1 411 Note that Fig. 9 applies to speech outdoors , not inside buildings. i Aircraft noise frequently interferes with conversation inside buildings. tz Howmuch? Determining that answer can be complex except in residential W.: spaces ; it involves knowledge of the building' s abili6F to protect I against aircraft noise , information about the level of aircraft noise , •!! ..1- and knowledge of the kind of activity taking place in the building. Each situation should be studied with care. We do not discuss t.- generalizations here because they could be misleading!. I However , in houses we can make a good estimate of the environment for communication with the help of Fig. 1C . Figure 0 shows the t percentage of sentences a listener should be able to understand in various noise environments . The relationship is valid when the room is i normally furnished and the listener is more than a meter away from the t! , r speaker . I .i, loo 1----- i 1 t 1 99% I 411 t )... 60— 95% 1.- — i 7.5 I I a 1 a - ... i 11 1 ; .... w ! , - z 1 i . w • ■. 50% 0 z i w 1-- 1 z 40- _ w ! m I 1.... \. . i z 1 w 0 I 3 20- - i a. 1 . 1 i 0-...1 ..1-_-____I______L. I 1 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 I SOUND LEVEL m, a 1 1 FIG. 10. NORMAL VOICE SENTENCE INTELLIGIBILITY AS A FUNCTION OF SOUND LEVEL IN AN INDOOR SITUATION. i :Lt•i', 26 1 1 i . : 7,...- .,..17,91,hifiiKT.,mia?.;i.' '. ..,: : t ,‘.: ! •:,--.7:::!..,..!i•I,N'i•:•01.,r.....t1,' Sleep and Other Activity Interference Common sense , as well as research , confirms that noise interferes with sleep and other activities . For airport operators , the results of one study [4 ] are particularly interesting . The study was done by British scientists who collected data from neighbors in the community around Heathrow Airport . These men and women were asked about the effects of airport noise on everyday activities , and , the scientists reported , . For an outdoor Ldn of 75 dB (or NEF 40) - when aircraft noise impact begins to become severe - at least 50% said they were disturbed during some activity, and as many as 80% said their TV listening was disturbed; . For an outdoor Ldn of 65 dB ( or NEF 30) - when aircraft noise impact begins to be moderate - more than 50% said they were occasionally awakened by the noise , and 140% had been kept from going to sleep ; • For an outdoor Ldn of 55 dB ( or NEF 20) - when aircraft noise impact is low - 50% still expressed annoyance at the interference with TV sound , and 145% said that the noise disturbed conversation ; . For all activities in which speech was significant , approximately 70% reported disturbance . 11 Although these data were obtained around an airport where night flights and some noisy aircraft are restricted , they agree , in general , with surveys at other airports . Annoyance and Community Reaction Interference with the kinds of activities we have just dliscussed is determined by the physical characteristics of the sound-frequency content , duration, abruptness , and ( especially in the case of aircraft) intermittency. Most interference results in annoyance , but the degree of annoyance - how much the interference annoys the listeneir - changes S 27 from one individual to another , and depends on such factors as age , 1 attitude towards the noisemaker , fear , and even socioecionomic status . In a recent study [ 5 ] comparing the data from 11 social surveys conducted over 13 years in 6 countries , the percentage or people highly annoyed was determined as a function of Ldn . These surveys showed that people who were questioned at different times in diffei.ent countries reacted to noise with surprising similarity. Figure 11 shows the average results of the surveys , as well as the results of the individual questionnaires . The range of response occurring at a givennoise level reflects human nature . In any group of people , you sill find some members are annoyed by sounds others won' t even notice . But when does annoyance result in action? And ho;■T much action? The answer is : Response cannot be pinpointed , but the rainge of response can be quite well predicted. One widely based relationship between noise and community response and noise exposure i he result of analyzing 55 case histories of impacts from various noist sources [6 ] . 411 The relationship is shown in Fig. 12. Because of the wide variety of situations represented by the 55 different cases , the data have been adapted to the standard set of conditions noted in the! figure . The major normalizing factor is that all environments were adjusted so that the residual noise level -- the noise that you hear , but! whose source you cannot determine -- was at the level found in urban residential areas . This is L dn 60. When the residual noise level differs from that found in urban residential areas , the impact of aircraft noise will also!differ. For example , in quiet residential areas ( an Ldn of 50 , 10 dB below urban residential) the impact is as if the aircraft noise were 10 dB higher . From Fig. 12 , we would expect aircraft noise at Ldn 65 in a quiet residential area to cause the reaction of aircraft noise at L dn 75 in an urban residential area -- vigorous community reaction 411 28 ,4 :r • i 1 100 ALL SURVEYS GIVEN ' EQUAL WEIGHT e Ca ► + s>- 60 aw ct a0 • ae • • •r k r •w+ + wMD' 20 ► + +• • • j ♦ ww ► 1 0 + • ► • 40 50 5fJ 70 BO g0 i Lan j k I FIG. 11. RESULTS OF 11 SURVEYS IN 6 COUNTRIES OVER 13 YEARS. i I i i 3 E i i 1 E ;.9 It k E j c Community Reaction c. Vigorous community • action /' i • i • �i. Mean �� •►- 1 Several threats of legal Envelope of 90%of Bata . • y a % action, or Strong appeals `/ s • s to local officials to stop / noise Widespread complaints •� or single threat of ((�� fj s • " ' legal action J / 1 jj f� Sporadic complaints f j Data Normalized to: �s j Residential Urban Residual Noise �f Some Prior Exposure Windows Portiolly Open j No Pure Tone or lmpluses No reaction, although • • • • noise is generally • —{ noticeable ! 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 40 Approximate pay-Might Average Sound Leval 1 Ldn 1 10 15 20 _ 25 30 35 40 45 50 _. 55 Approximate Noise Exposure_for ecast-in-d8------- 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 ..80 85 Approximate Leq(24) FIG. 12. COMMUNITY REACTION TO INTRUSIVE NOISES. . -� ' r. .r.: ,� / | | 1| How does Fig. 12 apply to airports? It helps predic reaction , yet q�N makes clear that , as we said prev1uuoly , you can eope t a range of responses from the people who live around airports . For | ample , yoran ' NEF 25, you can expect responses ranging from to "widespread complaints or single threat of legal action.I Many Dactoro influence people's reaction and account for the range of reactions found at a single levelnfezpooure ' The factors include a ttitiu d e about the airport ( such as economic dependence because of a job) , i'mportance of outdoor activities , and political sophistication . 1 | � i Time-above-threshold can also be used to predict community response . to noise control . TA is useful to describe to people the Change in the " duration of sounds at those levels that would result various alternative noise control actions . This information uu plemeotm the � information contained in the cumulative noise doonriptOrn . When TA information is presented , it may be related to specific o/ fectw by the qualitative descriptors in Table 5. Neither a cumulative e er�ymeaeur* m�� nor a cumulative time ' . ve mw meaaore such as TA alone can provide a complete ��� � � description of the noise environment around airport . b provides some useful ioformation ~ but not ell . You need cu descriptors •� for land use planning and predictions nfcommunity reaction . You need 1 . TA for data on sound levels useful for analyzing speech interference and ; other activity interference and to provide an answer t particular question "How loud?" Don` t substitute one measure other in an effort to simplify analysis . ' i TABLE 5, QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTORS APPLICABLE TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS. | _________ Threshold Speech Communication Outdoor JUdgments � Exceeded Disturbance Indoors | of 5ingl Event ! [d8/�\l ___ __- - -� M�xi Windows Windows | � ! , Open Closed | -1 ._l_. -~~-� .. , 65 just noticeable none | quiet , T5 moderate just ooticeatIe m,enrrolly ucceptable | 85 severe moderate noisy 1 �Q�. � �NNw / 95 extreme severe excessively noisy � - -- ------ '- i --- ' 31 . / ' � � | um ORANGE COUNTY � ' x��� BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGF3CA IIEM � ==STRA_T Item No.. �~ �� ' | MEG ET[N DATE June 27, 1983 � '� Sobject; Data Processing Contract with Town of Carrboro 2epartnent: o; . " ^/ . -„ ---'--1 | / ^`�'� " He*r ; yes « no] . . At'tacue/t\u/ : Information Contact: -- ---- Keith Brooks, DP Director �-----' Phone Number: 732-8181 ext 477 PURPOSE: To provide data processing services to the Town of Carrboro fnr fo period tor $72,000 per year and a one time payment at July 1 , lgu�3 V uryemr of $8,509. NMI): This will allnN Orange County to recover part of the costs of operating the data proc6ssing department and also provide a valuable service to the Town of Carrbo ' , / | IMPACT: Cost renoYe/_rV to Orange County and expansion of services. i ' : f '~\ • . �� � �e�� ! 4 ' | ` � , ; " . ' ' , . �� 1.� �� �� NORTH CAROLINA ' ^ ���� �� � ORANGE COUNTY , , AGREEMENT ` . ~° THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this A 7 day of � �� 1983 and by and between the Town of Carrboro, a municipal corporation ("The Town) and Orange � County,- a body politic and corporate ("The County"). . � |��� WHEREAS, the County operates and maintains a computer system ic serving various County departments' and agencies and wishes to make its computer ' +'| � operations and services available to the Town; and ' ^ ' • !i s.`' � WHEREAS, the Town desires to purchase certain necessary computer services / '' . from the County; `` NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and th e mutual promises ' � ` set forth below, the parties agree that, for an initial payment and a fixed � annual fee, the County sha�l prvvide O4—hnur, 7 day o week �omputer serv1�es ' � to the Town, including equipment,.hardware and software maintenance, required ' �~ operator training and software programs along with required communications linkage, v� with the following terms, conditions, and spanifications: ` , � 1. Subject to paragraphs two and eight, the County shall provide to the e� Town by July 1, 1983, the following required equipment; ` A. 2 Prism II Word Processing Terminals � �' . c B. 5 "Adds" Data Processings Terminals � | C. 1 150 LPM Line Printer / � D. 2 4-Channel Multiplexers ' E. 2 0600 Baud Modems � , F. 2 Two-way automatic "Intelligent" Switches ! ----'l G. l Manual � H. 1 Manual � I. 2 One Channel'Modem (to Public Works Shop) � J. 1 300-500 wmp "Leiter Quality" Printer / ` , 2. The County shall not be required to purchase more than $20,800 in � equipment to meet the requirements of paragraph one. Uwnersh�p of equipment ! � purchased pursuant to this agreement shall remain in Orange County. However, ' � in the event less than $20,000 is expended to meet these requirements, the � initial payment (see paragraph 121 shall be reduced by the difference between / � $20,000 and the amount actually spent. The Towp of Carrboro may provide mddi- � i. tinnal funds for equipment cost exceeding $20,000 or have the option of delpt1ng ! � certain equipment items except for Items n and E.. |'• ' 3. The County shall provide all equipment maintenanoe. The level of | maintenance shall be the same as that provided for other users of the Orange �` ^ County Data Processing System. The Town shall be responsible for repair of and ! `� c. the cost of repair and replacement to and the cost of replacement to equipment '��. damaged by the Town's negligent or abusive use of the equipment. | .7.•. 4. The County shall not be liable for any and all damages incurred by | the Town caused by interruption and/or delay of service from causes not under :. its direct'control. Causes of such interruption and/or delays may include but , ` is not limited to, telephone line failure, and equipment failure. However, the .` /. County shall do all things reasonably expected to bring the service up to the . . 'v. requ i re d level as soon as possib7e,after identification of the problem causing ~^'the interruption and/or delay. - . `� . • `� � ` . x �. ^�/ �c _ . _ . 5. The County shall provide the same "software" maintenance services as provided other users of the Orange County Data Processing System. 6. The County shall make available to the Town all existing "software" operational programs or new programs or re-programming that may become available to other users of the Orange County Data Processing System. The County agrees to make such "cosmetic" changes as may be required to meet the particular needs of the Town, such changes not to exceed 200 hours of programming. Additional programming is to be charged to the Town a%.a. rate not to exceed $20 per hour. The hourly charge may be adjusted at the end of each Year of the agreement to reflect increase in cost. This adjustment may not exceed 5% per year. 7. The County shall provide required Operator training for each program • to be used by the Town. ^' B. The County shal provide necessary communication linkage, including linkages between the Town's Public Works garage located on Highway 54 at Greensboro Street and the Town Hall for one terminal and the required linkage between Town Hall and the Central Processing unit facilities located in Hills- / borough for all equipment. 9. The County shall provide all installation and have all equipment and software programs operational with operator training complete by July 1 , 1883, unless the Town of Carrboro specifically waves some portion of this requirement. In the event the system is not functional July 1, 1983, the County shall refund a prorata share of the monthly cost based upon the number of working days in the month the system was not functional. . 10. Subsequent to initial installation, the County shall provide the Town • with the same level of service, including user priorities as other users of the Orange County Data Processing System. • 11. The County shall provide a security system as a part of the software programming that will permit the Town to assign user accessibility. 12. The County shall provide the same data security and retention of daia for the Town as provided for other users of the system, including daily "back-up" and other routine security storage. • 13, Subject to paragraph two, the Town shall make an initial payment to Orange County of $8,600, This payment shall be made not later than July 1, 1983, 14. The Town shall make an annual payment to the County in the amount of twelve thousand dollars. Such payment shall be made on July l , 1983 and on July 1 of 1984, 1985, and 1986. US^ 16. This agreement shall begin July 1, 1983 and end June 30, 1987. 4» • .,. This agreement is executed in duplicate originals the day and year first written above. TOWN OF CARRBORO ORANGE COUNTY , /7/-- By:By: B 7-- , X Richard F. Hunter, Town Manager `ichard . Whitted, Chair • Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: Attest: 0 1 m, 4Aa ___Loit___z. - ' e •Y, ' s , Sarah C. Williamson, Town Clerk Clerk to the County Commiss oprs, \ / Provision for payment has been made by an appropriation duly made or bonds or notes duly authorized, pursuant to the Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act. . _ Don Casper, Finance Director ORANGE COUNTY | �� � � ��� v BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda �� �� Item No .� -�a | ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE June 27. 1983 Eubject; Housing Rehabilitation Contract Award Department: Conmunit 0evelo«ment � Public Hearing: _ yes - Att»chm*nITT Fnformation Contact: Wilbert McAdoo - Bid Results !Phone Number: 732-8181 Ext. 429 Purpose: | Award of two Housing Rehabilitation Contracts. Need: Sealed bids were received and opened on June 17, 1983, Attached is a tabulation of the bids by dwelling unit numbers. | - ' ' Impact: Award of contract to the lowest bidder will be consistent with present housing rehabilitation bid procedure. 47• - 018 ,m- ' -- RESULTS OF BID OPENING ..:. ..:— OWNER: Samuel Jone _—_____ APPLIC&TION NUMBER 63 — , ADDRESS: Hill Street COST ESTIMATE: 6,438.00 PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER 10.52 UNDER CHECK ONE: JOB BID t2:1 JOB NEGOTIATED . ' :. caemy BID AMOUNT ---------- • Frank Griffin & Associates _ ......-___IMIID_________-_-_-------- . 2. Gates Construction 8,365.00 ....... Taylor Home Improvements 7,195.00 4 -------- 11 S. Bids opened by '' ' Robert Wilson Time of Bid Opening: 3:00- 0.m. I i Date of Bid Opening June 17, 1983 _ Witnessed by: Roxanne Warren Lowest Acceptable Bid: _— Negotiated Amount: N/A Contractor: Taylor Home Improvement NAM . ...,. 1156 Fiske Street, Durham N.G. 27 0 45' ADDRESS ! :.; 688-3214 i... CO .ZVENTS: , ) -,• 0.: Submitted by: DAIE:,_ . i .F.. Bid Approved by: Proceed Order: Issued E=1 Not Issued 1 I CM.MNIS: li- 1 , 474 IV 4.-.- RESULTS OF IITT,", cu'EtIING APPLICATION NUMBER 144 VoNER.:. Caleb Moor- i,. ...:: COST ESTIMATE: 6 32 is ADDRESS: Harper Street PERCENTAGE OF BID OVER 1.14 UNDER_______________ CHECK ONE: JOB BID la: JOB NEGOTIATED LJ COMPANY . BID AMOUNT ------------ . . . .,, 1. Frank Griffin & Associates 9 485.00 Ii:.: 2. SLke.1...Cous.triatian..----------- 7 6" t• .6,395.p0 3. aylor,Home It_jp_i roluent_.-----. • k'f,' 4. ......---... i ,,,, ' k* 5. ---------- l' .::' Bids opened by: t„. Time of Bid Opening: 3:0. • H Date of Bid Opening_llineILL1,21§2 Witnessed by: Roxanne Warren . ....-- ,, 1 - - Lovest Acceptable Bid: 6,395.00 , ..7; , ...: Negotiated Amount: N/A . Taylor Home Improvement : *;•:y . Contractor: __ , NAM 1156 Fiske Street, Durham, N.C. 27707 . ....... . 688-3214 . ' PHONE NUMER COMENTS: Community Development's contribution towards the rehabilitation of this dwelling unit will be $6,0000D. I ' .....,. if I . Submitted by: DATE: . ... Bid Approved by: --1. Proceed Order: Issued C:::] Not Issued 1-- CO TS: il ' .75..: ill , .7.ri — • 1 OBAV[Z [OUNT! ������ ��~� 13]AE0/ OF ____~^.^~E^S Action Agenda ACTION AGFMA ITEM ABSTRACT Item 0o. MEETING DATE June 27, 1983 *---�� Subject: Budget Amendments lLpartment: 'fiance / / Public ' Phone Number: 732-8181, ext. 495 PURP3GE; ---- ' Conside ion of proposed budget amendments. ^ 0E%]: General a) To bUdget fOyadditional state reimbursements for Jail Fees ..a.^ ^" the Sheriff's Department. b), /u bUdget for under-budgeted items in the Elections Depart- ment tne County CommisSfoners' c) To bi)dget for an additional year-end allocation for Janus IMPACT: General Fund: a), .~="° n funds available in the 5beeiff's Board b) /me nt will appropriate funds to cover items that /y un4er-budgeted, wens original- c) Amendment will increase the year-end allocation for Janus House. 4 7f1::--:.:'•'.. k'l ' 021 0' 1 ; i i . .. Orange County Proposed 1982 - 83 Budget Amendment , ',. The 1982 - 83 Budget Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on June 22, 1982, : , and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as fellows: , N GENERAL FUND: Hx -.,.. . „ I a) Appropriation: Sheriff $ 3,800. !i4 i,. Source: Jail Fees - State Reimbursements $ 3,800. To increase Sheriff's Board and Provisions account. t ' .:. b) Appropriation: Elections $ 6,500. County Commissioners 5,000. Source: . Contingency $ 11,500. '- ! . To cover under-budgeted items. .. i...,,, c) Appropriation: , 4 Janus House $ 600. .. .. • Source: ;.::' Community Based Alternatives $ 600. ,4 To accept additional year-end allocation. . 44- - , Adopted this day of , 1983, 4 .„..: .4, ,-.. ;'-. �� �`` � � . � ' � ! � ���� / � 023 6 . E� °~ I.. .� Orange County �^ -�' Proposed | I982 ~ 83 Project Ordinance I Amendment ' ' ' !x , /�'` i ` , -` � Ordinance of September � • 27, I982 , and subsequently amended, 1x hareby amended as fo|lowo� ? CETA: -; a) Source of Revenue: CETA IV SYEP Grant $306,264. - Appropriation: . ' ' CETA Admin Pool - Personnel 16,852. - Operations 2`012. � ' CETA - Personnel lSO,1�4,IV SYEP - Participants - Operations 3,893. . CETA IV SYEP - Service Staff ' Personnel 32,202- - Operations 1,131. � To accept CETA IV SYEP Grant. . ' . 3 b) Source of Revenue: I: . / OPC Mental Health $ 4"088. . ') Appropriation: CETA - Willie M 4,088. T. To accept contract entered between OPC �n�l ��th and ��nge C�n� .�\ � Employment and Training. !^', � . � '`^ � . � � . ' I Adopted this of ^ lQ83. ['‘. 'A ,- ` ! |� �ORANGE COUNTY ���� I�DD{D OF _____IO^~~°S Action Agenda ACTION AG3��� ITEM ABSTRACT It�m �o. r��g�I%3 I��� �--� | June 27.. lg�� � , Subject: Project Ordinance Amendment lepar - ------'—__- ' ' '''�//�� �� f i - -----'' / ^ ! _Phone Number: Donna Clayton . ______E, ConsideraHn of acceptance of project ordinance amendment for CETA program. D8�3�; CETA : _ 1.) To accept CETA IV SYEP grant for additional federal funds and t o adjust program bu �t in accordance with State budget back-up. dg 2.) To occept contract that was entered into to by OPC Mental Health and and Orange County Employment an d Training. / --- IMPACT: ^CE � : I.).^ /'//x jimendment will U vi� a�itfu�T ��ing in t� ��� ��� . -' '/n.Training program. ~ 2, ) This will provide additional funding in the Ora ' —` '«�v*m� and Training Program. Oran County Em I �� i 023 u��� i ' Orange County Proposed 1982 - 83 Project Ordinance Amendment The l982 -d8 Sep em Project Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on � t b 27, 1982 m � ^ and s osequently amended, is hereby amended as follows: er 27 CETA: a) Source of Re CETA IV SYER Grant $206,264. Approprfatio CETA Admin pool - Personnel - Operations 16,852. 2,012. CETA IV-SYEP! - Participants - Personnel 150,174 / - Dper�t�onu ^ 3,893. CETA IV SYEP1- Service Staff - Personnel 32,202. - Operations 1,131. To accept CETA IV SYEP Grant. b) Source of ReYen' OPC Mental Me' lth $ 4,088. Appropriation: . CETA - Willie M 4,088. To accept contract entered between OPC Mental Health and Orange County and Training. | . 4 7 I 0 2 4- !P:,,:. ;I 7 02A10E COUNTY " rAva = BOX-0 OF Cc1ISSIO9E3S •....• )---.• . - iteM No ._-_' - -1 .. -..te ACCION AGE.."NDA £11 iiESTP.,ACT p rit-FTral DATE June 27, 1983 _ 1 '$ ..",: " I ' Subject: Participatory Paving Project .:... - • 1 Public Hearing: . yes X no ' --ea..,ent: Planning . : - . . --------- , --------__---- - Attadrmaat(s): Infolmation COotaCt.: Susan Smith 1. ..,... ...`.';.:., phone moths= 732-8181 Ext. 359 '-. ...: = ' PonosE: Board approval of request that Northside Drive (SR 1964) be paved under the -. . . Orange County Participatory Paving Program. ' .., i.-..e.'., Northside Drive is an unpaved state-maintained road in Dogwood Acres which intersects with Smith Level Road (SR 1919) at its western end and Carlton T. ... • Drive (SR 1990) at its eastern end. Both of the referenced roads are paved. Northside Drive serves 23 residential lots. .110 a Si CE bive ... • --•-- c . uNIVERSIW LAIKE ..,..-..... . DoTovood t.. ... . •-_- , ••, • , ,, 1 . . HERITAGE •hus 9' r ,r 0.41111004. ill 4 'I'' . '-: ■P .''''.'4 .,,,.. 1 ' "'"-- 7.- —- IMPACT: Acceptance of the project into the Participatory 7-av ng 7 Program will provide for improvement of the road during the 1983-84 Secondary Roads Improvement :$ program. If accepted, Northside Drive will become project #3 on the Orange County Approved Projects list. The local share of the construction costs is $5,440, bringing the total Program project funding requirements to ; . $35,414 to date. 1 ., .;."' $ ;'. I RECOMMENDATION: Acceptance of Northside Drive (SR 1964) as a Participatory Paving Program [ ii project. $ .,. • • t.r ., r 1' i 1 "--- - , ' 1 t • 0 0 5i: -2- ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1982-1983 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM %I-719 map Priority SR Estimated: No, No. No. Name and Description - Length Cost- Paving Unpaved Roads 3 1892 Seven Springs Road from US 70 to a Dead End 0.46 27,000:0( (P. O. P. Paving) 4 1605 Oak Knob Court from SR 1595 to a Dead End 0.38 30,000f0( (P. O. P. Paving) :594 5 1964 Northside Road from SR 3919 to SR 1990 0.26 18,0007.0C (P. O. P. Paving) 6 2013 System Streets in Rangewood Subdivision 1.04 55,000,b 2014 2015 2016 2017 7 1 1566 Linden Road from US 70 to SR 1590 0.42 60,000.0 8 1574 John Watkins Road from SR 1548 to SR 1002 1.4 85,000.0 (Complete Funding) Contingency to be Used for Overruns, Additions 45,641.0 to System, Paving Rural Fire Department Drives, and Property Owner Participation Note: If right of way is not available on the above unpaved roads, the funds will, be programmed on other roads in the order of priority or applied on property owner participation paving. _ „ 004 ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1983-1984 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983-1984 Secondary Allocation (Anticipated) $495,64I.00 Map Priority SR Estimated No. No. No. Name and Description Length Cost Paved Secondary Road Improvement 1 1919 Smith Level Road from SR 1962 to US 15-501 1.35 $74.000.00 Widen Four (4) Feet and Strengthen 2 1734 Erwin Road from US 15-501 to SR 1733 0.44 26,000.00 Widen Four (4) Feet and Strengthen Spot_Stabilization of Unpaved Roads SR 1550, SR 1712, SR 1575, SR 1131, SR I531, $75,000.0C SR 2001, SR 1525, SR 1533, SR 1535, SR 1519, SR 1335, SR 1556, SR 1520, SR 1515, SR 1572, SR 1569, SR 1130, SR 1955, SR I127, SR 1135, SR 1141, SR 1143, SR 1341, SR 1340, SR 1336, SR 1113, SR 1115, SR 1175, SR 1950, SR 1114, SR 1137, SR 1140, SR 1182, SR 1730, SR 1538, SR 1540, SR 1541, SR 1516, SR 1548, SR 1508, SR 1536, SR 1512, SR 1544, SR 1351, SR 1366, SR 1346, SR 1361, SR 1353, SR 1383 =.9/ ,,/----- ., :/// i 1 , ow, MRIU OW i ii 7S ih, I ■ 1 7 11 0 t I / i 'al Nriz q ' • ck' RU. Rcl" -9 :-- ,p 1 /1) C'0 ALLEN X R \d's 1-• ST. -- ■ ^--„, '4, --. 0 ::.• LA-HOGEANI- 1, H_L L, .........\::, ,,, .03 1 / .•--ir- q9- i _, ,:l7 r ib, r 4.44e 01111"-Id ,. r , : 1 , ..;:..., 41/ "V=RYLAND i '94 , . cr p,„•-..... • i.r7/ et „----, ,.. ft-/-'. GO/ander HOUK'''. L - ,,, .44 1/03 ...„ Cs, / ,b, ,,, • 5 ,-- \ e ca 1 sa ckve,. (,, ig ( ----; I Lee RO. I.' \ „---- ......, •, -- / d--- ........_...., ..., 1.1 ie 1106 101111,• IT) 01111011/14of r...../.,\_. \ # . eV' , • 44 '-..---- • thlte C ss k , 1 ,,, „;(.. ?, 1.0.11O.D•• IL e".."7:: . ........11L0,......_...4,0.... ....4101111.P.- *VW' —:'"'IVI_.....,P'lpjr/- ill.. .40.".” ipP—Ap■-• ....,------- 1 s\ V kI7t,i 1'01/11.10._,,II 0 ill lit ,„11011r.„,/40„NIL' ••-•"-- 1 et, ., . 1 3 ' RI\f/ 4, 4, 8 opoo•-•••• -■■,vw-gre, ..,-,....---- . , .... 0110011. 017.4.■- (.., I ; .' lv,-.:3-••10- ./1,-, ", 03. ...iiiiisAl„.-fr....73.- j....' • % w q",./ I el W It 0.01°5 . .... . ...4.....„...- %.• ?"9, 1 OLD G . C.:. ''' ej 1 q Ci ci ''...-.'‘ .\ '',.. '.•1 - - I ! ° 0 z ----- . --- ... Cfl r CLap ..\ : ' ... .„.....,1 ' ,.a, • Wile 042. R, MI Z) t 1 E004 g 3 •:, Alt.-..1172taRI ) MS RI MIOULTT DR WILLIS c', I Ali , ,, /, ",.,0703•'_.„„ 4 1 d Ray Ro. RM Lrd . ' '%.11,..TOLL-. • vcio v. ..-• ----• d. . .--- "ie ce, i ce'lLY?li'. It,-1' 0_ ''■D ‘`' is4Z , -1.• (I ..■ .00',r ,.. S T'''''''r,4 ne, • g ,,..-r 1".. s ' . age qtzr e. , 0 „,, ---. , • • 1E :- : 4' Ltr,.. a cm=•;mama• - — 07/1 /4):'.,s, ', r.:"J., • q i ,o#,,,021.mas sf : /....... 27 •i County 1 ..,,,,___ . Heritage Hills ' 1 ti 431°•11• I , Is sail•=Oa a •. • /57-of eve;sc cl c.A,r7,79e. eq-,:,,, ,osed -,l)ear 9e 740. 270,,,r7 a c•ei.5 CA 44'd,--c..1, Rc,4Jo.' 7b /f-iecxcal-m-07, /3,:o c7c / SCALE: 111111111•102;earmi (iN wrom:I.orzfoftrimmil 0 4000 8000' „gig°Si.lip 'NI •••••1 I ORANGE 00UNTY 025 BOARD OF COMMLSSICNUS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTMCT Item No.:Pgil MEETING DAM ,June. 27 1983 Subject: LEGAL SERVI ES--CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT De■- .1 =1 t: COUNTY MANAGER ---Z?"11°- 1 A yr. sT: Oantact: MANAGER, Ken Thompson YES, CONTRACT Phone Number: 732-8181 ext. 505 1 PURPCSE: To consider renewing the contract for legal services for the County's Child Support Enforcement Program. 1 NEED: Last year the State IV-D office allotted $45.00 per hour for Attorney's fees and the Board approved a contract with the firm of Coleman, Bernholz, !Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill & Hargrave to provide legal services for this program at that rate. The presnt contract expires June 30, 1983; renewal of the contract would provide these services at the same rate as this year. IMPACT: Seventy-five percent of all Child Enforcement Program operation expenses are reimbursed by the State. RECOMMENDATION; Approval. COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ,1DICKERSON, 026 BERNI-IOLZ, GLEDHILL& HARGRAVE ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 CHURTON STREET HILLSBOROUGH.N C 27278 919-732.2196 919-942.8000 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SUITE 20.FRANKLIN BUILDING 137 E FRANKUN STREET CHAPEL HILL NC 27534 919-929-7151 ALONZO B COLEMAN.JR STEVEN A.BERNHOL2 DONALD R.DICKERSON May 23, 1983 ROGER B.BERNHOL2 GEOFFREY E.GLEDHILL DOUGLAS HARGRAVE MARTIN J.BERNHOL2 WILLIAM H BREEZE JR Mr. Kenneth Thompson OICo.nI Orange County Manager BONNER D SAWYER 11902 1972) Orange County Courthouse 106 Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re: Legal Services - Child Support Enforcement Dear Ken: I Enclosed is a revision of a proposed contract between our law firm and the County for child support enforcement work. I have followed the form directed by the State in every respect except that I have included the provision covering conflicts from our former contract's. This contract, not the one accompanying my April 27, 1983 letter, should be presented to the Board for its consideration during the budget process. Very truly yours, eof rey Gledhill GEO/jac 11/ Enclosure 4'78 027 ." STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT COUNTY OF ORANGE THIS CONTRACT made and entered into this the ,A7 day of J 4/ 0- 1983, by and between Orange County, hereinafter County, and Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill and Hargrave, "j• hereinafter Attorneys. \ WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, the County desires to employ Attorneys as its counselors at law for the County of Orange upon the following terms: L This Contract shall. begin July 1, 1983 and unless sooner terminated by 30 days' notice of either party shall exist and continue through June 30, 1984. 2. Attorneys, upon reasonable notice, -are to be available for .„ consultation, legal advice and for representation as requested by the Child Support Enforcement Agency on all legal matters arising from the duties of _ County under Sections 128 through 140 of Chapter 110 of the North Carolina General Statutes and Title 42 of the United States Code, Sections 651 through 660 and the federal regulations lawfully promulgated pursuant thereto. 1 3. Recognizing that from time to time representation of County by Attorneys may result in a conflict of interest for the Attorneys, it is agreed that when such a conflict arises, the Attorneys may refer cases requiring legal services to other lawyers in Orange County. Such referrals shall be with the consent and approval of the County Manager. In all cases of referrals, the attorney to which the case is referred shall be compensated in the same manner as specified in paragraph 5 below, and shall keep an itemized record of work performed County on a case-by-case basis, submitting 1 '14/ State Child Support Enforcement Agency. Failure to attend one approved worksho)I per year shall be construed as an indication that Attorneys do not wish to ;continue providing services under this agreement. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, said parties have executed this contract in triplicate originals, one of which is to be retained by County, one of which is to be ,retained by Attorneys, and one of which is to be filed with the Child Support Enforcement Section, Division of Social Services of the Department of Human Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON, BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL AND HARGRAVE BY 4„,L44,16. .7eof rf'. • ea- Q ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROL! 0 /..400197eir, ,/ BY: 4111601L.,- Ze ichard E. Whitted Chairman ATTEST :1 This instrument has been preaudited in the manner required by the Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act. Orange County Finance Meer 030 4 7"" 11 - % 1 17- Afrt zf art aarrartil RUFUS L. EDMISTEN pepartraerd uf Tusfice ATTORNEY GENERAL, P. 0. BO x 629 RALEIGH 27602 May 11, 1983 Ms . Janet Sparks Child Support Epforcement 103 E. King Street, Room 208 Hillsborough, Worth Carolina 27278 Dear Janet : Although we approved your IV-D legal services contract for the current fisCal year, the provisions of the enclosed model contract must be included when the contract for FY 83-84 is submitted. The current contract does contain an exemplary clause for handling conflict of interest cases which we need to include when the model Contract is revised. Thanks so much for your role in "squaring my account" with Bill Kiapheke. I've dug up a phone number for him, and will propose a plan by which he can even the score. Sincerely, RUFUS L. EDMISTEN Attorney General - C1117 n Dufrp Assistant Attorney General CHD: bb -33 ° Enclosure cc : Bob Coats ------" ImIll..1111.1.1111111111111.111MINIM : - • second part providing legal services undgr_th • ; .. P. ChAld_ Support• 0 3 2 . , D . -Enforcement Program. Such hourly rate shall encompass all • expenses, including but not limited to, those for salary, sup- . ) . plies, office space, beet-frig zaind MaintenaTiCe- for-office-space, . .. .,: _ .. , . telephone--servime.,-_-long-Iiiszance telephoner t alai,' 'and—traVel. ,_ .... . , • • .•. • . . , 1 - - -- ----- • 0 3 0 .tilt.W.I ...„„.....0, *ate Df sitTrifr (garalitta RUFUS L. EDMISTEN PEprxtriterd of alltStiE2 ATTORNEY GENERAL P. 0. Box 629 RALEIGH 27602 May 11, 1983 Ms. Janet Sparks Child Support Enforcement 103 E. King Street, Room 208 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 i Dear Janet : 1 . Although we approved your IV-D legal services contract for the current fiScal year, the provisions of the enclosed model contract must te included when the contract for FY 83-84 is submitted. Th ' current contract does contain an exemplary clause for handling c nflict of interest cases which we need to include when the model contract is revised. Thanks so much for your role in "squaring my account" with Bill Klapheke. I I've dug up a phone number for him, and will propose a plan by which he can even the score. Sincerely, RUFUS L. EDMISTEN Attorney General ' ar) ClIf '7,r1 H. Duke. 033 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No.r-1 PEEVING DATE Tneo 97 19R _ Subject: Legat Selvice4 Contaact I _Eepartmmt: Setv,c.cez 1 I Pubiic Hearing: ' yes x no.I Attachnnnt s : 1 Information contact: Thomas M. Waad Paopo4ed Contact Phone NUmber: 732-9361(229) PURPOSE: Renew annaat eonttact 6oL attotney to aeptuent PAatective SeAvice mate, s imotying negtect, abuse and/o4 exptaitation oe chiZAen and aduLto; tet- miwatirm oe paten-tat tight to IpLee. cettain chitdten eot adoptbm. Mum: sta66 petsonnee cannot peApam thi ekvice adequatety. IMPACT: In most cazez the Count on Leg at Aid Ptogtam ptovidez an attotney 604 the paAents. The Cocoa appoint an attotney az gUaAdian ad titem 6o& the chad. The Depattment' e66ectivene66 in cavEying out itz 4tatutoay tesponsibiltity AtquiAes the seAvicez oti an experienced attotney. The houtty tate ipt teat say-ices pumided undut this agreement wte $45.00 pet ham, unchanged &tom that eoa the current yeat. <., I...., x ..� :.,;.-_t-. ..• 4 .# . i'...'t. ..r...$. .,..?l • • 481 ' .5 r.i:XTLT • STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 3--_ Nom: COUNTY OF ORANGE 1 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the let day of July, 1983, • by and between NORTHEN & LITTLE, Orange County, North Carolina, a partnership organized under the laws of the State of North Carolina engaging sA in the practice of law, hereinafter referred to as ATTORNEYS, and ORANGE COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY: W I T N E S S E T H WHEREAS the Orange County Department of Social Services (hereinafter ;5:r`; referred to as the DEPARTMENT) has need of special legal services, not I,T I`s - I otherwise provided by County government agencies, in connection with its 1" :. • services to needy and dependent persons in Orange County, the administration of its functions under the provisions of Article 8, Chapter 110 of the General Statutes of North Carolina and other laws of the State and representation of the DEPARTMENT, its caseworkers and employees before the i'.`• various courts and agencies of the State of North Carolina; and 1 ' 1 WHEREAS, it is the desire of the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS to enter into a contract, one with the other, for the purposes and considerations as set 1N . forth herein for a period of July 1, 1983 through June 30, 1984; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual terms and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS do contract, each I `. with the other, as follows: 1'?; 1. That ATTORNEYS shall perform such services and render such advice to the DEPARTMENT on such occasions as shall be required by the Director of the DEPARTMENT and with the approval of said Director, employees and jcx. caseworkers shall require the services of ATTORNEYS. 2. That ATTORNEYS shall be compensated for all services rendered in connection with Paragraph No. 1 above based on an hourly rate for services 1 , performed of Forty-Five Dollars ($45.00) per hour, such hours and amounts to be furnished to the County Finance Officer or his designate for payment. • The ATTORNEYS shall also be compensated for and reimbursed for the services of clerks and legal assistants hired by them to assist them in the performance of their duties to the DEPARTMENT, based on an hourly rate of NORTHEN a LITTLE ATTORNEYS AT LAW services performed of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per hour. The COUNTY shall be All W FRANKLIN 6T CHAICL HILL N C 27914 responsible for all costs and expenses incurred in the performance of the 1 1 r .,„ 4 serviceEI rendered the COUNTY pursuant to this Contract. All costs and expense advanced by ATTORNEYS on behalf of COUNTY shall be reimbursed to ATTORNEYS. 31. That ATTORNEYS shall keep an itemized record of work performed for the IMPARTMENT on a case-by-case basis and shall submit its bill therefor showing a breakdown of those services performed and the cost. 4. That this Agreement shall exist and continue from July 1, 1983 to and including June 30, 1984, unless sooner terminated by thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS have hereunto signed this Agreement in duplicate originals, one of which is retained by each party hereto and either of which is sufficient as the original. ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA .aror- grni,a1204;eff By: RICHARD .Th".717-4-474111(REIEMIV Orange County Board of Commissioners Attest: I "I , ' ' h , • _ NOaCHEN Attorneys at Law .4011110111.1., 1 BY: 4111C. 'Trip 4011IVIE'SON LITTLE Thisl instrument has been preaudited in the manner required by the i ' ' \ O��QBOOOB�� 038 �xx� fOARD0F � __-_s~^~Nm^s Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item Nb^b1/4~ MEETING DATE Subject: 1983-8 mspmrtoent: M ana pr ----_-_ | Public Hearin ; " yes -_-'�- - _7I. - | Attachrrent ' ' Information Contact: ---- County Manager's Office Phone Nt.imber: 732-R78l ext 5D1 I�D�OsE: To consider 1983-84 budget ordinance adoption and establish tax rates for Orange County, special districts, and Chapel Hil7-Carrboro School 5us l r mental tax. pp e- NEED: To adopt the 7983-84 budget in accordance with North Carolina General Statutes 159-13A which states : era No earlier than 10 days dky the budget is presented to Ifthe board and not later than July 1 , the governing board shall adopt a budget ordinance making appropriations and l � taxes for the budget year in such sums as the board-may u�e«y�ng sufficient and proper, whether greater or less than th�� no�oer recommended in the budget, '. an the sums IMPACT: To provide for 1983-84 operations of Orange County. RE[0MMFNnurrom/r` . BUDGET ORDINANCE 1983.84 ORANGE C0 NT , NORTH CAROLINA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina. SECTION I. BUDGET ADOPTION 1983-84: There is hereby adopted the following Operating Budget for the County of Orange s for this fis4a7 .Year eginning July 1, 1983 and ending June 30, 1984; the same being adopted by fund and activity, within each fund, according to the following summary, ` ESTIMATED INTERFUND FUND BALANCE FUND REVENUE TRANSFER APPROPRIATED APPROPRIATION General 17,887,652 847,901 18,735,553 Revaluation 52,500 52,500 I Special Districts Cedar Grove Fire 35,000 35,000 Chapel Hill Fire 600 600 Efland Fire 36,608 36,608 Eno Fire 50,100 50,100 Little River .Fire, 33,520 33,520 New Hope Fire 40,474 40,474 Orange Fire 51,720 51 ,720 Orange Grove Fire 36,400 36,400 South Orange Fire 65,100 65,100 Southern Triangle Fire 12,000 12,000 Damascus Fire District 3,000 - ---- Dogwood--San-i-tary-----__-_— _ — 5,575 SECTION II. APPROPRIATION: That for said fiscal year there is hereby appropriated out of the funds the following: DEPT/AGENCY APPROPRIATION DEPT/AGENCY APPROPRIATION General Fund: County Commissioners IOB,165 Coalition for Battered Women 6,500 Courts 23,650 Women's Health 15,500 Elections 109,461 Sheriff 1 ,290,975 Register of Deeds 251,159 ABC 55,623 Sail & Dater 35,965 Emergency Services 617,824 County Manager 140,180 Forest Services 23,400 Personnel 78,623 Medical Examiner 10,000 Finance 143,299 Public Works 788,152 Purchasing 73,931 Street Surfacing 58,418 Tax Supervisor 371 ,695 Lake Orange 1,370 Tax Collector 125,054 Debt Service 822,755 Child Support Enforcement 74,020 Vehicle Lease Purchase Payment 25,000 Data Processing 238,173 Transfers to Revaluation 52,500 Planning 371,348 Classification Study and Merit System 97,800 Economic Development 28,000 Transfers to Capital Projects 689,400 Central Services 264,213 Contingencies 100,000 Social Services 2,417,060 Mental Health 272,563 Total General Fund Approp. 18,735,553 Health 1 ,044,905 Agricultural Extension 119,482 Revaluation 52,,00 Recreation 274,907 Recreation-Municipal Support 88,000 Dogwood Sanitary District 5,575 Aging 225,976 School-Curr. Exp. - CH 3,004,749 Fire Districts: School-Curr. Exp. - Orange 2,971,584 Cedar Grove 35,000 School-Cap. Outlay - CH 350,000 Chapel Hill 600 School-Cap. Outlay - Orange 450,000 Efland 36,608 Libraries - CH 87,120 Eno 50,100 Libraries - Orange 110,142 little River 33,520 Libraries - Mebane 556 New Hope 40,474 Dispute Settlement Center 11,000 Orange Commission for 1iomen__._._ -20-,-1 ___..-_Orange-Grave - 36,400 _._ Orange Industries 50,000 South Orange 65,100 Museum 4,000 Southern Triangle 12,000 Historical Commission 3,000 Damascus Fire District 3,000 dOCCA 37,124 Shelter Home 79,404 Phillips Project 5,618 Janus House 6,500 Tree House 6,000 Rape Crisis 11,550 SECTION II- REVENUES:. It is estimated that the following Fund Revenues will be available during the fiscal year beginning July 1 , 1983 and ending June 30, 1984 to meet the foregoing Appropriations. Taxes 13,016,897 Revaluation 52,500 Licenses & Permits 122,735 Franchise Tax 14,000 Dogwood Sanitary District 5,575 Intergovernmental Revenue 688,663 Fire Districts: Intangible Tax 680,000 Cedar Grove 35,000 Beer & Mine Tax 136,000 Chapel Hill Criminal Justice Grants 8,674 Efland 3fi,60 600 Social Services Grants 1,264,428 Eno 50,100 Support Enforcement Grant 79,300 Little River 33,520 Community Based Alternatives Grant 41 ,261 New Hope 40,474 Health Grants 182,010 Orange 51 720 Local Support 524,030 Orange Grove 36,400 Charges for Services 670,018 South Orange 65,100 Interest on Investments 315,000 Southern Triangle 12,000 'disc. Revenues 144,636 Damascus Fire District 3,000 Fund Balance Appropriated 847,901 General Fund 18,735,553 SECTION IV. TAX RATE LEVY: There is hereby levied for the fiscal year 1983-84 a genera' county-wide tax rate of $.55 per Mu of assessed valuation. This rate shall be levied entirely in the General Fund. Special district tax rates are levied as fo 7 l opus: Cedar Grove $.06 Orange Grove Fire District .04 Efl and Fire District .025 South Orange Fire District .07 Eno Fire District .04 Chapel Hill Fire District .065 Little River Fire District .06 - __,.__v_—. Damascus Fire District <04 Orange Fire District .03 Dogwood Sanitary District .0125 Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District .146 SECTION V. SCHOOL CURRENT EXPENSE: There is hereby allocated a lump sum of $3,004,749 for Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and $2,971,584 for Orange County Schools, for the purpose of supporting current expense. SECTION VI. SCHOOLS CAPITAL OUTLAY: There is hereby allocated $350,000 for Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and $450,000 for Orange County Schools, to be used to make Capital outlay expenditures. SECTION VII. DOG LICENSE: A license costing $4.00 is required for all dogs. SECTION VIII. SCHEDULE B LICENSE: In accordance with Schedule B of the Revenue Act {Article 2, Chapter 5 of the N. C. State Statutes and any other section of the General Statutes so permitting, there are hereby levied privilege license taxes in the maximum amount permitted on businesses, trades, occupations, or professional which the county is entitled to tax. I SECTION IX. BUDGET CONTROL: The Board of Commissioners, in approving..this budget, has utilized to the fullest extent possible its revenue sources. Over collections of revenue or unanticipated revenue sources cannot be expected to material- ize during the year. It is, therefore, of utmost importance, and the County Manager is hereby directed, to initiate steps to insure that the budget as fixed herein is rived within. Genera, Statutes of the State of North Carolina provide for budgetary control measures to exist between a County and Public School System. The Board of Commissioners hereby directs the following measures for budget administration and review: Per General Statute 115-429 (c) the Board of Education shall supply copy of its final budget (once adopted), annual audit, monthly financial reports, copies of all budget amendments. to the Board of Commissioners as to the disburse- ment and use of local monies granted to the Board of Education by the Board of Commissioners. SECTION XII. TRANSFER OF FUNDS BE114EEN OBJECT ACCOUNTS: The County Manager is authorized to transfer funds within an appropriation in accordance with provisions of the Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act,. --.-provided--that the--foilowi-ng--guide-l-i-nes-'ar�satis'fied�-"- --�__-- l. The transfer involves receipt and appropriation of grant funds or contracts which have been approved by Board action involving acceptance of the grant or award of the contract, or 2. The transfer is for the purpose of more appropriate accounting methods and does not involve a change in purpose for which the funds are to be spent. Any such transfers shall be reported to the Board of Commissioners at its. next regular meeting and shall be entered in the minutes. This Ordinance being duly passed and adopted this 27th day of LJune, 1983. Sharon Allison, Acting Clerk Rich4perL:'.--14Mtt,ed,-,,,Chairman k Orange County Board of Commissioners onaqii , Don WillFo—it,-- ce Chair ker A OA-1 _____�'___- ORANGE COUNTY BOARD oF camissioNms Action. Agenda Item No Acam7 AGENDA ITDIABSTRACT mErLNG DATE June 274, 1981 Subject: Federal Lcind and Water Conservation Fund Grant; Resolutions of Authorization and Match Funiing Availability. IDepartrent: Recredtion and Parks Public HPAring: yes x no Attachment(s) : Infonnation. Contact: Subject Resolutions Phone NI-11110er: 732-9361 (x-292) Purpose: [ - To gain authorization to submit final grant application for the Combined Playground and Neighborhood Park at Cedar Grove. - To signify assurance of 50% funding match if LWCF approval is rendered. Need: Action!to occur prior to grant submission deadline of June 30, 1983 . 1 Impact: - Possible receipt of $29,480 for local development. ---------,-- MEMORANDUM TO: Board Members FROM: County Manager DATE: June 27, 1983 RE: Alternatves for Solving the Efland Elementary School and Efland Estates Sewer Problems (Revised following the 6t23/83 meeting with the Orange County School BOard and Town of Hillsborough) Work 'had:progressed through May to airang 6 financing for Efland Estates sewer relief when it was learned that the package treatment plant of the Efland Elementary School was malfunctioning to the point'it would need to be replaced. Since both the subdivision and school are contiguous to one another jt seemed beneficial to try to solve the problems through a joint project. The f011oWing outlines how this might be accomplished in so far as cost of on-site treatment. Size and Location Combined flow from the subdivision and school would be 22,600 gallons per day (GPD) which is within the County (20,000 GPO) and School (10,000 GPD) discharge permits, were they combined, (16,400 GPD) of this is attributable to the 26 houses, 7,200 to the 18 Ilots and 5,000 GPD to the School. Alternative 1, Collection and On-Site Treatment Through a County Package Plant Cost Estimatedlexpenditure would vary as to the scope of the project. Shown below are five configurations. A plant on site to treat the combined flow would need to be located to the north of the subdivision and school on one to two acres of land. 'Gravity would enable waste water to flow to the plant without pumping. Repair Existing 26 Houses Plant Plus 16 26 Houses for School 26 Houses Undeveloped 18 Lots, 26 Houses, —Alone Alone 'Lots Plus School Plus School On Site Collection 88,126 93,120 93,120 88,120 System Outfall to the 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 Treatment Plant Treatment Plant 35,500 48,000 84,000 57,000 Engineering 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 Contingencies 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 IS 7 -2- Repair Existing 26 Houses Plant Plus 18 26 Houses, for School 26 Houses Undeveloped 18 Lots, 26 Houses, Alone Alone Lots Plus.School Plus School Repair Eiisting 12,000 Tank Slaw Release 20,600 ------- , Tank $32,000 $155,150 $172,620 $204,620 $185,620 Revenue -Sources this likewise must be projected bated on scope for the one-time cost of installation. Repati- Existing 26 Houses Plant Plus 18 26 Houses, for School 26 Houses Undevelped .18 Lots, 26Aouses, Alone ' Alone Lots - Plus School Plus School School System $32,000 Clean Water Bonds 38,787 42,712 42,712 42,712 (25% of Cost) Farmer's Home 42,500 . 42,500 42,500 42,500 Grant Farmer's Home 42,500 42,500 42,500 42,500 Loan Developer Share 32,000 36,000 ($2,000 per lot- equivalent cost of a septic tank) Local Share 31,363 12,900 - 40908 (School System - County) $312,000 $155,150 $172,620 $204,620 $183,620 Monthly Operating/MainterianCe and'DebaService:COSt'based On-the 26 Houses08 Lots ArESchowa. e• (Total and cost per house per month) Total Per:Month 26 Residents Households School 18 Lots Chemicals and 1$165 $110 $55 0 Electricity ($4.23 per house) Operator (Assuming 200 113 67 0 $200/month ($5.12 per house) 1311111111111.1111111111111.1111.111111.1011111M _ -3- 1 Total Per Month 26 Residents Households School 18 Lots Debt Service- 1 18? reit,00 Amortization for ($7.00 per house) 40 yrs. at 7.125% for the 42,500 Farmers Homd, Loan Repairs $165 111 $54 ($4.26 per house) • $803 $536 $266 0 ($20.58) Alternative 2, Collection with Off-Site Treatment -2 Throbgh-A Line to the Hillsborough AWT Plant Cost 26 Houses 16 Lots & School . . On Site Collection System $ 93,120 Pipe to Pump Station 15,000 Pump Station 12,000 8" Pressure Line ($60,000 for Line and 138,000 $68,000 for Labor) Pipe to Cross Bridge 15,000 Aerator for Tanklat Pump Site 5,000 Engineering for Collection System 8,700 Engineering for pump Station and Line 25,000 Contingencies 10,000 $321 ,820 Revenue Sources Clean Water Bonds 42,712 (25% of Cost up to $42,712) Farmer's Home Grant 42,560 Farmer's Home Loai 42,50D • Developer Share Local Share County ($36,001 fron ended for the 18 67,608 lots to be recovered by a $2,000 tap on fee and $31,1608) School 58,500 Town (In-kind labor) 68,000, 321,820 ; . -4-- - ; Monthly Operating/Maintenance and Debt Service Cost based on the 22 houses, 18 Lots and School 1 .., 26 Houses 18 Lots School Debt Service I . $7.00 per. . $91 (AmortizatiOn for 40 yrs. house - at 7.125% fOr $42,500 • Farmer's. Home Loan) I . SeWer Charge S $11.40 per . $169 for 110,000 I house assuming 4,000 gallon gallons per month assuming 22 days I , ” per month per month i .............,.. . I . $18.40 per month 0 $260 per house Evaluation On-Site OackagelPlant Off-Sit elreatmenILALE11qhMli Advantages Advantages. . ' I 1. Relief to immediate sewer problems. 1. Relief to immediate and other 2. Less frbt-end cash requirement to long range sewer problems. install the Plant. I 2. Less monthly charge for treat- 3. Would cause less development pres- ment. sure in the absence of zoning. 3. No County responsibility for 4. Wouldallowtime to develop a master operating and maintenance and ll plan for the entire township. bi ing. 4 5. Part of cost could be recovered 4. No need for a discharge permit. (salvage iralue on the plant) when 5. Capacity would be such to serve conversion -is made to a township-wide additional subdivision such as collection system is developed. Perry Hills where septic pro- Disadvantages blems are spotted. - 1. Higher operating cost per month to 6. Could be extended to serve the residents and school. However, industry. this would come down once the 18 lots are develOped. 7. County could recover its front-end I . cost through tap on fees. 1 2. County would have to perform the operating nd maintenance on the 8. The line could become part of plant. a master plan. , 3. Capacity is limited by the size of Disadvantages the Plant and the permit. It could not 1. Higher front-end cost to County. meet any needs in adjoining communities. I 4. If permit requirements by the State 2. If land use controls do not become mor parallel installation the line restrictive these could ' coUld have an adverse on a th pply more to the operation of a package impact orderly development. plant. 211111.11mminmm■,....._1 -5- Disadvantages 3. A pressure system encourages large tap ons and discourages small tap ons. 4. A master plan should prevail ; this line,gets ahead of planning for industry and township-wide sewer. and may end up not being the most strategically located. Kehneth R. Thompson KRT:nm 7 REZONING REQUEST PROPERTY OF JAMES RAE FREELAND 1 Mr. James Rae Freeland is requesting that the zoning be changed on 35.11 acres of property located south of 1-85 on the west side of N.C. Highway 86. The property is shown as a Portion of lot 4 on Tax Map 45 - Hillsborough Township. The present zoning is Rural Residential CR-1) which would allow one (1) residen- tial dwelling lit per acre. The requested zoning is High Intensity Residential (Rr5) which would allow up to five (5) dwelling units per acre with a minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet. Development of the tract at such densities could result in as many as 163 lots. Property to the north is zoned Rr1 Residential and contains scattered single- family homes. To the south is a 10-acre tract zoned R-4 Residential and under. develop- ment as a single-family subdivision. Property to the east is zoned R-2 Residential 1 and consists primarily of the Joppa Oaks Subdivision. Land to the west is vacant and zoned R-1 Residential. The Land Use Plan designation for the property was changed on March 7, 1983 from 20-Year Transition and Rural Residential to 10-Year Transition. The change was made in conjunction with a rezoning request for an R-4 designation on an adjacent lOracre tract to the smith presently called Wildwood Phase I. The intent of the R-5 district is to provide locations for high intensity resi- dential development and supporting recreational, community, service or educational uses in areas where the full range of urban services are available. 1 It is further intended that the R-5 district be used to promote economically- mixed housing and to contribute to the provision of a range of housing types for lower- income households. 1 The Zoning Ordinance states that this district will usually be applied where the following conditions exist: (1) The area is designated by the adopted Land Use Plan as a Transition Area which can reasonably be annexed by a municipality in the ensuing 10 •20 1 years. ......-""1"1"...11111.1.111MINIMINI , ! i 1 (2) Water and sewer lines should exist at the site or be assured of installation as part of the development process. (3) Vehiculr access must consist of direct access to a street classified as either arterial or collector as designated by the adopted Land Use Plan. 1 . (4) The full range of urban services exist or are proposed at the time of the development including fire, police, recreation, education, commercial and Cultural activities. As indicated previously, the property in question has been designated as 10- Year Transition on the Land Use Plan by action of the County Commissioners in March, 1983. The property has good access to N.C. Highway 86, a route which has been desig- nated as an "arterial" in the Land Use Plan. However, road improvements may be necessary due to proposed development in the area to accomodate additional turning 1 movements and allow for smooth traffic flow. The question of these improvements can be addressed during the subdivision approval process. Water and sewer lines are being extended to serve the property as part of the development of an adjacent 10-acre tract to the south. These lines would be connected to Town of Hillsborough water and sewer systems. 1 Police and fire protection would be provided by the Orange County Sheriff's Department and the Orange Rural Fire District respectively. 1 One question 1 to be resolved is the ability of the existing school system to provide adequate Lducational space for new children. A redistricting plan for the I elementary schools has been completed and Grady-Brown Elementary appears capable of handling approximately 30 additional students. Stanback Middle School has one (1) vacant class (25 pupils), but Stanford Jr. High and Orange Sr. High are already at capacity. 1 1 _ 1 ! .•,- .. . „ 1 r• Development of the property in question at R:-5 densities could result in as many as .163 new students (1 student per lot) . If apportioned to each school, 1 Grady-Brown Elementary, Stanford Jr. High, and Orange Sr. High would require sub- division of larger classrooms into smaller ones or, more likely, additional class- 1 , room trailers. 1 One additil 3 nal factor which comes into play on this request is the LUI or 1 Land Use Intensity System. This system applies to all Planned Development and 1. all other projects located in R-5, R-8 and R-13 zoning districts. It applies in the latter situations because of the high-density nature of such projects and sets . standards for open space, recreation, liveability, and building spacing. Prelimi- nary indications are that the requested rezoning and subsequent application of the LUI system will require the developer to provide 1.2 acres of recreation area with- in the project. Finally, the property in question is adjacent to an area known as the Harmon- Young Activity Node. The Node is currently under study by the Planning Staff.