HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-15-1990ORANGE COUNTY
D OF COMMISSIONERS
a. a &.r
REGULAR MEETING NOTE: BACKGROUND MATERIAL
TUESDAY, MAY 15, 1990 ON ALL ABSTRACTS
7:30 P.M. AVAILABLE IN THE
OLD POST OFFICE CLERK'S OFFICE.
CHAPEL HILL, NC
NOTICE TO PEOPLE WITH IMPAIRED HEARING: Audio
amplification equipment is available on request.
If you need this assistance, please call the County
Clerk's Office at 732 -8181 or 968 -4501.
I. BOARD COMMENTS
II. COUNTY MANAGERIS REPORT
III. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
IV. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
A. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(We would appreciate you signing the pad ahead
of time so that you are not overlooked.)
B. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Board of Commissioners pledges to the citizens of
Orange County its respect. The Board asks its
citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful,
courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow
citizens. At any time should any member of the Board
or any citizen fail to observe this public charge,
the Chair will ask the offending person to leave the
meeting until that individual regains personal
control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the
Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a
genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
V. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- CONSENT AGENDA
(Any item may be removed for separate consideration)
A. 1989 -89 Audit Contract
B. Airport Capital Project Ordinance
C. Rencher Street CDBG Public Facilities Contract- -
Change Order #1
D. Rencher Street CDBG Financial Status Update
E. Approval to Submit Application for State
Planning Funds to Develop Model County Aging
Plan
F. RSVP Application for Augmentation Funds and New
Literacy Initiative
G. Simplified Access to Human Services Grant
H. Tax Refunds Request
I. Grant Project Ordinance-- Culbreth Park
Affordable Housing Project
VI. RESOLUTIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
VII. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
IX. REPORTS
A. Response to Human Relations Commission Report
X. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- REGULAR AGENDA
A. $100 Penalty for False Certification
B. Durham Estates -- Preliminary Plan Amendment
C. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment Article
7.14.4 Density Bonus for Affordable Housing
D. Lease Purchase Proposal - -First Wachovia Leasing
XI.
APPOINTMENTS
XII.
MINUTES
XIII.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
XIV.
ADJOURNMENT
M Indicates items that need immediate attention.
1
APPROVED: 8 -21 -90
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 15, 1990
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular
session on Tuesday, May 15, 1990 at 7:30 in the courtroom of the old
Post Office, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., and
Commissioners John Hartwell and Shirley E. Marshall.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Stephen Halkiotis and
Don Willhoit.
ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill
STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., and
Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Ellen Liston, Economic
Development Director Ted Abernathy, Deputy Clerk to the Board Kathy
Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Finance Director Ken
Chavious, Housing and Community Development Director Tara Fikes, Tax
Assessor Kermit Lloyd, Department on Aging Director Jerry Passmore,
Health Director Dan Reimer, Planner Mary Scearbo, and County
Engineer Paul Thames.
I. BOARD COMMENTS
Chairman Carey announced the upcoming meetings of the Board.
II. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
John Link introduced the new Economic Development Director
Mr. Ted Abernathy.
III. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
None
IV. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
None
PUBLIC CHARGE
Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. read the public charge.
V. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA
Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by
Commissioner Hartwell to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as
stated below:
A. 1989 -90 AUDIT CONTRACT
To approve a contract with the firm of Deloitte & Touche
to develop the audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1990 for a
cost of $41,500 and to authorize the Chair to sign.
B. AIRPORT CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE
To approve the proposed capital project ordinance to
appropriate North Carolina Department of Transportation grant funds
for the Airport Capital Project as stated below:
AIRPORT
CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE
Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners that pursuant to
Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North
Carolina the following capital project is hereby adopted.
section I. The project authorized will provide a feasibility
study for the siting of a new general aviation
airport in Orange County and will be financed by an
appropriation from the County Capital Reserve Fund
and by state grant funds.
Section 2. The officers of the County are hereby directed to
proceed with the project within the budget contained
herein.
section 3.
Section 4.
section S.
Section f,.
The following revenue is anticipated to complete this
project:
Transfer from County Capital
Reserve Fund $ 53,788
Intergovernmental 45,787
Total Revenues - ----- - - - ---
$ 99,575
The following amount is appropriated for this
project:
Airport Project
Total Appropriations
1 99,575
$ 99,575
This ordinance supersedes all previous Airport
Capital Project Ordinances.
This ordinance shall be in effect from date of
adoption through June 30, 1990.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 1990.
C. RENCHER STREET CDBG PUBLIC FACILITIES CONTRACT
CHANGE ORDER 1
To approve and authorize the Chair to sign Change Order
11 to the Rencher Street Public Facilities Improvements Contract
with Billings and Garrett, Inc. for $14,125.67. This amount will
cover the design changes necessary because of unforeseen
regulatory requirements and site conditions revealed after the award
of the contract.
D. RENCHER STREET CDBG FINANCIAL STATUS UPDATE
To receive as information a status report on the Rencher
Street Project. The public facilities improvement work is in
progress. Rehabilitation work on two houses has been completed and
other rehabilitation work on additional houses is continuing.
E, APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION FOR STATE PLANNING
FUNDS TO DEVELOP MODEL COUNTY AGING PLAN
To approve the submission of a demonstration planning
grant in aging at the local level. The competitive applications are
for $20,000 and will be awarded for fiscal year 1990 -91.
F. RSVP APPLICATION FOR AUGMENTATION FUNDS AND NEW LITERACY
INITIATIVE
To approve and authorize the Chair to sign the RSVP
application to ACTION in the amount of $10,081 in Federal Funds to
augment the present ACTION grant and initiate a new literacy
program.
G. SIMPLIFIED ACCESS TO HUMAN SERVICES GRANT
To authorize the Chair to sign a letter of support for
the Simplified Access to Human Services Pilot Project Planning
Grant. The County is requesting $20,000 to help in this effort.
H. TAX REFUNDS REQUEST
To approve the following
NAME
James I. Malhoney, Jr.
Gene H. Ramsey
Ellen C. Taylor
Juanita Grace Rigsbee
Albert L. Pendergrass
Robert Herron Harvey
Mark A. Stone
Delores Stewart
Virginia C. Bartow
George W. Vaughn Estate
Michael D. Vaughn
Michael D. Vaughn
Michael D. Vaughn
Michael D. Vaughn
I. GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE
HOUSING PROJECT
refunds of tax bills:
ACCOUNT
AMOUNT
8041
$ 104.99
29015
263.32
129129
101.66
102894
34.99
28332
21.28
89563
587.54
105350
143.32
106818
565.13
5884
$ 149.68
9551
119.97
115111
39.32
115111
11.53
115110
128.85
114110
120.02
CULBRETH PARK AFFORDABLE
To adopt a grant project ordinance for the Culbreth Park
Affordable Housing Project as stated below which will authorize the
undertaking of the Culbreth Park Affordable Housing Project, will
budget grant revenues to finance the project, and will make
appropriations of $2,250,000 to complete the project.
GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE
CULBRETH PARK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina, the following grant project
ordinance is hereby adopted:
section 1. The project authorized is the Culbreth Park
Affordable Housing Project and is funded by a
Community Development Block Grant award through the
North Carolina Department of Economic and Community
Development.
Section 2.
The officers of this unit are hereby directed to
proceed with the grant within the terms of the grant
document(s), the rules and regulations of the North
Carolina Department of Economic and Community
Development, and the budget contained herein.
Section 3.
The following revenues are anticipated to be
available to complete this project:
Intergovernmental $2,250,000
Section 4.
The following amounts are appropriated for the
project:
Culbreth Park Affordable Housing $2,250,000
Section S.
The finance officer is hereby directed to maintain
within the Community Development Fund sufficient
specific detailed accounting records to provide the
accounting to the grantor agency required by the
grant agency and federal and state regulations.
section 6.
Copies of this grant project ordinance shall be made
available to the finance officer for direction in
carrying out this project.
Section 7.
This ordinance is effective from date of adoption
until November 30, 1991.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 1990.
VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS
IX. REPORTS
A. RESPONSE TO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION REPORT
County Manager John Link listed his recommendations in
response to the requests listed in the Human Relations Commission
annual report. His recommendations are listed below. The report
was accepted by the Board of Commissioners.
1. Sexual preference as a category of anti - discriminatory
protection will be considered as a part of a general
review and recommended revision of the Orange County
personnel Ordinance during 1990 -91.
2. An Aids Policy Committee has already been developed and
staffed by Albert Kittrell, Assistant County Manager.
A draft of the Aids Policy is expected within two months.
3. The creation of a Human Rights Office is a concept worthy
of additional study. Discussion at the Public - Private
Partnership meeting in Boulder, Colorado suggested that a
comprehension approach to human rights inclusive of all
jurisdictions and the University community would be
productive. The Manager recommends that the Human
Relations Commission travel to other counties during the
year and discuss the potential function of such an office
with the University and Municipal officials and that
establishment of this office be reconsidered in the 91 -92
budget.
4. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will include
funding for legal assistance in drafting a Human Rights
Ordinance.
5. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will include
funding for County -wide "Human Rights Day" event.
6. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will include
funds sufficient for two Human Relations Commission
members to travel to other counties to learn from other
Human Rights Commissions' experiences.
7. The Fall timetable for developing the Human Rights
Ordinance including strategy for submission of enabling
legislation to the General Assembly is appropriate and
should be adhered to if legislation is to be presented in
a timely way in Spring of 1991.
A citizen, Mr. David Baird asked several questions about the
Human Relations Commission and in particular questioned allocating
any county money for this project and the possible creation of a
Human Rights office. He was directed to contact the Clerk's office
for a copy of the report.
X. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA
A. 100 PENALTY FOR FALSE CERTIFICATION
Tax Assessor Kermit Lloyd explained the General Statutes
as they relate to the $100 penalty for falsely certifying that a
motor vehicle was listed for property taxes. The statute does allow
the county to release or refund all of this penalty for calendar
year 1988 and 1989 if the Board determines that the taxpayer's false
certification was not made intentionally to avoid payment of the
tax. Mr. Lloyd indicated there are twelve people in this category
and he recommends these twelve be released or refunded the $100.00
imposed on them as a result of this action. The twelve people are
Walter Bololenbacher, Valerie Moore, Don MacLeod, Cameron Nims,
Medora Ebersole, Luis Manuel Cubeddu, David Lamson, Keith Layden,
Angie Owens, Edward Eagle, Jr., Shannon L. Talton and Louise James.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by
Commissioner Marshall to approve releasing the twelve named
individuals from this $100 penalty as appropriate for each of them.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
B. DURHAM ESTATES ; PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT
Planner Mary Scearbo made this presentation. The
Preliminary Plan for the Durham Estates was approved by the County
Commissioners on February 5, 1990. The approval provided for lots
7, 8, and 9 to receive access from Lumley Drive in Laurel Springs
Subdivision. Lot 6 was to receive access from Dairyland Road, since
it did not have frontage on Lumley Drive. The applicant has
requested that the Preliminary Plat be revised to provide a 30 foot
access easement between lots 7 and 8 for access to Lot 6. The
Planning Board on April 16 recommended an amendment to the
Resolution of Approval to include this 30 --foot easement. They also
added a condition that Lot 6 use the proposed easement for access
and not be allowed to access Dairyland Road.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by
Commissioner Marshall to approve these changes in the preliminary
plan for Durham Estates as stated in the amended Resolution of
Approval on pages of these minutes.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
C. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ARTICLE 7.14.4
DENSITY BONUS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by
commissioner Marshall to approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Article 7.14.4 Density Bonus for Affordable Housing as stated below.
NOTE: Section 7.14.4.2 Applicability was the only change made by
the County Commissioners from the proposed amendment.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
7.14.4 Affordable Housing
7.14.4.1 Density Increase Permitted
An increase in density may be permitted for Planned
Developments which provide on -site or off -site housing
opportunities for low- or moderate- income households. A
contract shall be approved by the County Attorney and the
Orange County Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) as a condition of permit approval
guaranteeing that the reserved units will be purchased by
or rented to qualifying households, and shall be binding
for a period of not less than 15 years from the date on
which the unit is first occupied. The reserved lots or
rental units shall be indicated on the site plan or
Preliminary Plan.
7.14.4.2 A liaabilit
a) A density bonus may not be approved for a Planned
Development project located within any watersupply
watershed designated in the Land Use Element of the
Comprehension Plan.
b) A 25% density bonus for duplex or multi - family units
may be approved if:
i. A minimum of 40% of the units are to be rented
to families earning less than 60% of Orange
County median income, adjusted for family size,
as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD). (Hereinafter,
"median income ").
OR
ii. A minimum of 20% of the units are to be rented
to families earning less than 50% of median
income; or
c) A 25% density bonus for single - family residential
development may be approved if the greater of two
(2) units or all the bonus units are to be sold to
families earning less than 80% of median income; or
d) A 25% density bonus for single- family residential
development may be approved if land with suitable
soils or access to public water and sewer is donated
to Orange County for the purpose of the development
of affordable housing. The donated land shall
contain at a minimum the land area needed to develop
the greater of two (2) units or the total number of
the bonus units, in accordance with the zoning
requirements of the district in which the donated
land is located, or with minimum lot size of 40,000
square feet in unzoned areas; or
e) A 50% density bonus may be approved if at least 20%
of the units are to be occupied by families earning
less than 50% of median income and the remaining 80%
of units are occupied by families earning less than
80% of median income. This bonus shall not apply to
lands which have been donated to Orange County in
exchange for a density bonus pursuant to d) above.
7.14.4.3 contract for Sale of Single-family Residences
Approval of the Special Use Permit shall not occur until
there is a contract between the property owner and Orange
County, which shall also be binding on future owners of
the reserved lots. The contract shall be administered by
(HCD), and shall include the following provisions:
a) All sales and resales shall be approved by HCD to
assure ownership by qualifying buyers in accordance
with the following eligibility criteria.
i) Family income, as
Ordinance, at the
exceed the limits
Qualifying buyers
net assets, as de
Ordinance, at the
defined in Article 22 of this
time of purchase shall not
set forth in Article 7.14.4.2.
may also own up to $10,000 in
Eined in Article 22 of this
time of purchase.
ii) At least one member of a qualifying household
must have lived or worked in Orange County for
the past 12 months.
b. The contract shall apply to each of the reserved
lots, and shall continue to affect a particular lot
for a minimum period of 15 years after the initial
sale of that lot.
c. There shall be no occupancy of the unit prior to its
sale to a qualifying buyer.
d. The contract shall include a timeline by which
construction and sale of the reserved units will be
accomplished.
e. The resale price of any reserved housing unit shall
not, at any time during the life of the contract,
exceed the maximum amount affordable to the
purchasing household.
f. The maximum sale or resale price shall be determined
by HCD, calculated by using HUD modeling for housing
affordability. HUD modeling take into consideration
assumptions such as interest rates, percentage of
annual income allowed for housing, and amount of down
payment.
g. In the event that the financial status of the buyer
significantly improves prior to the expiration of the
contract period, the buyer may lease the unit,
provided that the lessee and the lease are approved
by HCD. HCD shall use the standards set forth in
Article 7.14.4.4 to determine whether or not to
7.14.4.4
approve the lease. In addition, the term of the
lease shall be for a minimum period of two years.
h. Violation of any of the terms of the contract
required by this ordinance may constitute grounds for
revocation of the Special Use Permit and rezoning of
the land, as provided in Article 7.9 of this
Ordinance.
Contract for Rental of Duplex or Multi -family Units
Approval of the Special Use Permit shall not occur until
there is a contract between the property owner or
developer and Orange County, which shall also be binding
on future owners of the development. The contract shall
be administered by HCD, and shall include the following
provisions:
a) All rentals shall be approved by (HCD) to assure
occupancy by qualifying households in accordance with
the following eligibility criteria.
i) Family income, as defined in Article 22 of this
Ordinance, at the time of purchase shall not
exceed the limits set forth in Article 7.14.4.2.
Qualifying renters may also own up to $5,000 in
net assets, as defined in Article 22 of this
Ordinance, at the time of initial rental.
ii) At least one member of a qualifying household
must have lived or worked in Orange County for
the past 12 months.
iii) Families whose income increases above the
eligibility requirements may continue to occupy
the rental unit, unless otherwise required
through terms of the rental agreement between
the lessor and lessee.
b. Every change in occupancy during the 15 -year term of
the contract shall be approved by HCD to assure
continued compliance with eligibility criteria.
c. The maximum rent allowed shall be computed by
multiplying the applicable percentage of median
income by the value of median income at the time of
the transaction, then multiplying the resulting value
by the maximum percentage of income spent for
housing, as recommended by the mortgage banking
industry.
The value for median income used in calculating
maximum allowable rent shall be adjusted to reflect
the maximum family size appropriate for the number of
bedrooms, as determined by HCD.
7.14.4.5 Disclosure of Contract Terms to Potential Home - Buyers
a) Staff from the Planning Department and the Department
of Housing and Community Development shall meet with
the prospective buyer prior to the purchase to assure
that all terms of the contract are fully understood.
.Explanation of the terms of the contract shall
include the following implication:
i. Building permits for the improvements to the
structure may be obtained if the owner wishes
to remodel or construct an addition, or
construct accessory structures. However, there
is no assurance that the investment will be
regained if the unit is sold prior to the
expiration of the contract due to the
requirement that it be purchased by a moderate
income household.
b) Home - ownership counseling shall be made available to
first -time buyers to provide information on such
topics as insurance and maintenance. The counseling
shall be provided by the Department of Housing and
Community Development.
7.14.4.6 Conveyance of Property to Orange County
Land donated to Orange County pursuant to Article
7.4.14.2.d to enable a developer to obtain a density
bonus shall be donated in trust for the purpose of the
development of affordable housing. An agreement between
the developer and orange County and the instruments of
conveyance shall insure this trust as determined by the
County Attorney.
ARTICLE 22 DEFINITIONS
Family Income (new) - The gross annual sum of all income
received by all adult members of the household, including
- earned income from wages for all family members
over the age of 18:
- income from assets:
- child support, alimony, Welfare payments, Social
Security payments, including SSI, Worker's
Compensation and Unemployment benefits;
- Regular contributions and gifts;
- Income from a business;
- earned income tax credits;
- lump sum payments such as inheritance, insurance
settlements, and proceeds from sale of property;
and
- income from absent military personnel who are
considered family members of the household.
Net Assets (new) - The equity value of real Property such
as land, buildings, Certificates of Deposit, Checking and
Savings accounts, money market accounts, stocks, bonds,
cash, IRA of KEOUGH accounts, gold or precious metals,
and business equipment.
Family or personal assets such as furniture, automobiles,
wheelchairs or other special equipment, household goods,
boats and recreational vehicles are not included.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
D. LEASE PURCHASE PROPOSAL = FIRST WACHOVIA
LEASING
Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by
Commissioner Hartwell to approve a lease purchase proposal submitted
by First Wachovia Leasing for the purchase of a hazardous materials
vehicle and for telecommunications hardware and software, adopt the
required resolution as stated below and to authorize the Chair to
sign the final lease documents, pending completion and review by the
County Attorney, the County Finance Director and the County's Bond
Counsel.
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS OF
ORANGE COUNTY
The Board of Commissioners of orange County, North Carolina
(Lessee) represents that it reasonably expects that it and all
subordinate entities of it will not issue in the aggregate more than
$10,000,000.00 of tax - exempt obligations (not counting private -
activity bonds except for qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as defined in
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended) during calendar year
1990. In addition, Lessee hereby designates the obligation referred
to as Master Lease Agreement between First Wachovia Leasing
Corporation and Lessee as a "qualified tax - exempt obligation" within
the meaning of Section 265(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
XI. APPOINTMENTS
The following appointments were duly approved by the Board:
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - Viola Crowder to a second term
OWASA BOARD OF DIRECTORS - Lois Herring to a second term
BOARD OF HEALTH - Ruth Royster to a third term and Carole
Stemkowsi to a first term
DOMICILIARY HOME ADVISORY COMMITTEE - Randy Brantley, Chester
Cavalito and Ruth Ferguson to a second term and Patricia Sipp
to a probationary training period
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE - Betty Landsberger and
Peggy Pollitzer to a second term and Paula Brittian and Hazel
Quick to a first term
NURSING HOME ADVISORY COMMITTEE - Lucia Anderson and Faye
Cleaton to their first full term
TRIANGLE J EMS COUNCIL - Dr. Fred Hansen and Jeanette Smith
to an additional two year term
XII. MINUTES
Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by
Commissioner Hartwell to approve the minutes for the April 2,
1990 Regular Meeting as circulated.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by
Commissioner Marshall to approve the minutes for the April 17, 1990
Regular Meeting as circulated.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by
Commissioner Marshall to approve the minutes for the May 1, 1990
Regular Meeting as circulated.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
With no further items for consideration, Chairman Carey
adjourned the meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on
June 4, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. in the courtroom of the Old Courthouse in
Hillsborough, North Carolina.
Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Y
a
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: 1989 -90 Audit Contract
DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENT(S):
Action Agenda
Item No. VGA
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Chavious
Ext 490
Contract TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To consider awarding a contract to develop the audit for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1990.
1 14
BACKGROUND: Local governments are required to have an annual audit of
their financial records by an independent auditor. Since 1983,
the firm of Touche Ross and Company has performed the audit
for Orange County. Late in 1989 Touche Ross merged with firm
of Deloitte, Haskins, and Sells, another big eight firm, to
form the firm of Deloitte & Touche. Both firms have had
excellent reputations in the past and we expect that the
quality of service provided to the county will not be
affected. The fees are also competitive with other firms which
perform audits of governments such as Orange County. The
quality of work can be attested by the fact that for seven
consecutive years the County's Annual Financial Statements
have received the highest awards possible.
Deloitte & Touche's proposed contract for the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report and Certification of tax levy is
$28,600, an increase of $1,350 from 1988 -89. The fee for
performance of the single audit of grant funds is $12,900, an
increase of $600 from 1988 -89.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve contract for fiscal year 1989 -90 and authorize the
Chairman to sign.
Deloitte &
buche
/0
April 16, 1990
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Concourse
One Copley Parkway, Suite 600
P.O, Box 13866
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27709 -3866
Telephone: (919) 481 -4474
(919) 683 -2150
Facsimile: (919) 481 -4370
We are pleased to serve as independent accountants and auditors for Orange
County, North Carolina. Mr. Rex Price will be responsible for all services we
perform for you.
It will be the responsibility of Mr. Price to make sure that your management
receives quality service. He will, as considered necessary, call upon other
individuals with specialized knowledge, either in this office or elsewhere in
our Firm.
While auditing and reporting on your annual financial statements is to be the
recurring basic service we provide, we would also like to assist you on issues
as they arise throughout the year. Hence, we hope you will call Mr. Price
whenever you feel he can be of assistance.
Audit of Financial Statements
Report on Audit of Financial Statements
The purpose of our engagement is to audit the County's financial statements for
the year ending June 30, 1990, and to evaluate the fairness of
the statements in conformity ith presentation of
y generally accepted accounting principles, in
all material respects.
Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards which gives consideration to our understanding of the internal
control structure, including the control environment, the accounting system and
the control procedures established by management. Based on this consideration
we will design our audit to provide reasonable assurance of detecting errors
and irregularities that are material to the financial statements.
N
I
S
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Page Two
April 16, 1990
However, because of the characteristics of irregularities, particularly those
involving forgery and collusion, a properly designed and executed audit may not
detect such items. Therefore, an audit conducted in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards is designed to obtain reasonable, rather than
absolute assurance about the financial statements. An audit includes examin-
ing, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting prin-
ciples used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating
the overall financial statement presentation.
The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion on the County's
financial statements. Our ability to express that opinion, and the wording of
our opinion, will, of course, be dependent on the facts and circumstances
at the date of our report. if our auditors' report requires modification, the
reasons therefor will be discussed with you prior to its issuance.
Management's Responsibility
We direct your attention to the fact that the financial statements are the
responsibility of management. in this regard, management has the responsibil-
ity for properly recording transactions in the accounting records, for making
appropriate accounting estimates, for safeguarding assets and for the overall
accuracy of the financial statements.
other Communications Arising from the Audit
In connection with the planning and the performance of our audit generally
accepted auditing standards require that we communicate certain matters to the
Board of County Commissioners. We will communicate to the Board of County
Commissioners, to the extent that they come to our attention, irregularities
and illegal acts that are clearly not inconsequential and reportable condi-
tions. Reportable conditions are significant deficiencies in the design or
_.operation of the internal control system that could adversely .affect the
County's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements.
We may also have other comments for management on matters we have observed and
possible ways to improve the efficiency of your operations or other recommenda-
tions concerning the internal control structure.
With respect to these other communications it is our practice to discuss all
comments, if appropriate, with the level of management responsible for the
matters prior to their communication to senior management and /or the Board of
County Commissioners.
41 f
The Hoard of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Page Three
April 16, 1990
Assistance to be supplied by your personnel, including preparation of schedules
and analyses of accounts, will be discussed with the appropriate personnel.
Timely completion of this work will facilitate the conclusion of our audit.
In addition, as part of our audit engagement, we will perform the following:
a) an examination of the schedules of property taxes receivable and the
related schedule of 1989.tax levy and collections for the year then ended, and
b) a single audit in accordance with The Single Audit Act of 1984 and the State
Single Audit Implementation Act.
Fees
Our fees are based on the amount of time required at various levels of
responsibility, plus actual out -of- pocket expenses, payable upon presentation
of our invoices. We estimate that our fees for the audit engagement will be
$41,500, including expenses. We will notify you immediately of any circum-
stances we encounter which could significantly affect our estimate.
We are, of course, available to assist you in other areas that might arise.
We appreciate this opportunity to serve you and trust that our association will
be a long and pleasant one.
Yours very truly,
LCC4 Z (Aev. M990) CONTRACT TO AUDIT ACCOUNTS .
File in Ttiplicaw
of Orange County, North Carolina
C.Dvanmeaw UK*
On this 16th day of a2zi 1 19-92-y Deloitte & Touche
A &mr
Post Office Box 13866, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 -3866
Mdhag Addr4
5
Board of hereinafter referred, to as
the Auditor, and Comm"rr rommi etsi nnarc of -Orange Count
hereinafter refer.ed
C-ins bo* Cw+rnmetual Unit
to as the Governmental Unit, agree as follows:
1. The Auditor shall examine all statements and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles and
additional required legal statements and disclosures of all funds and /or divisions of the Governmental Unit for the period
Ong July 1, 19M, and ending June 30, v lg 90 The combining, individual. fund,
and account group financial statements and schedules shall be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the examina-
tion of the combined financial statements and an opinion will be rendered In relation to the combined financial statements
taken as a whole. The Audit will have no scope limitations except:
2. The Auditor shall conduct his examination and render his report In accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
The examination shall include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as are considered
by .the Auditor to be necessary in the circumstances, except as follows: (See Item 12.)
3. It is agreed that generally accepted auditing standards include a review of the Governmental Unit's system of internal con-
trol and amounting as same relates to accountability of funds and adherence to budget and law requirements applicable
thereto; that the Auditor will make a written report, which may or may not be a part of the written report of audit, to
the Governing Body setting forth his findings, together with his recommendations for improvement. Ali matters defined
as "reportable conditions" in AU 325 of the AICPA Professional Standards will be communicated to the Governing Board
in writing. The Auditor shall file a oppy of all reports with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
4. After completing his examination, the Auditor shall submit to the Governing Body a written report of audit. This report
shall include, at least, the financial statements and notes thereto prepared in accordance with generally accepted account -
ing principles, combining and supplementary information requested by the client or required for full disclosure under the
law, and the auditor's opinion on the material presented. The Auditor shall furnish 1 copies of the report of audit
to the Governing Body as soon as practical after the dose of the accounting period. The Auditor shall file three
ies of said port of audit 1 My if no single audit is required) with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
5. It is agreed that time is of the essence in this aontracL All audits are to be perforiaed and the report of audit submitted
by October 31, . 19 90
6. Should circumstances disclosed by the audit call for a more detailed investigation by the Auditor than necessary under
ordinary circumstances. the Auditor shall inform the Governing Body in writing of the need for such additional investiga-
tion and the additional compensation required therefor. Upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Com.
mission, this agreement may be varied or changed to include the increased time and compensation as may be agreed upon
by the Governing Body and the Auditor.
7. The Auditor shall perform a compliance etamination for all federal and State financial assistanee programs in accordance
with the Single Audit Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98.502 and G.S. 159.34). The Auditor will file three copies of all reports
re*uired under the Federal and State Single Audit Acts with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. (This
includes the report required in Item 3.) (See Items 15 and 18.)
S. In consideration of the satisfactory performance of the provisions of this agreement, the Governmental Unit shall pay to
the Auditor, upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. a fee which Includes any cost the
Auditor may Incur from work paper reviews by third parties (Federal and/or State agencies) as required under the Federal
and State Single Audit Acts: CAFR and Certification of Tax Levy $28,600; Sinale Audit of
Grant Funds $12,900.
D. All local government and public authority contracts for annual or special audits, financial statement preparation, finance-
related investigations, or any audit - related work in the State of North Carolina require the approval of the Secretary of
the Local Government Commission, Invoices for services rendered under these contracts shall not be paid by the govern-
mental unit until the invoice has been approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. (This also includes
any progress billings.) All invoices should be submitted in triplicate. The original and one copy will be returned to the
auditor and a copy retained by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. Approval Is not required on contracts
and invoices for system improvements and similar services of a non - auditing nature.
10. The contract should be executed and submitted in triplicate to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, 325
North Salisbury Street, Raleigh. North Carolina 27603.1388.
11. Upon approval, the original contract will be returned to the Governmental Unit, a copy will be forwarded to the Auditor,
and a copy retained by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. The audit should not be started before the
contract is approved.
12. This contract contemplates an unqualified opinion being rendered. Any limitations or i esisictions in scope !Which !mould
lmd,to a qualification should be jolly explained in an attachment to this contract. Contracts with such limitations will
not be approved unless satisfactory explanation is made.
13. If an approved contract needs to be varied or changed, the change must be reduced to writing, signed by both parties,
and submitted to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission for approval. No change shall be effective. unless
approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, the Governing Board, and the Auditor.
14. A separate contract should not be made for each division to be audited or report to be submitted. The mope of the audit
and the fee for the audit should be clearly stated. Stated fees include any cost the Auditor may incur from work paper
or pees reviews or any other quality 'assurance program required by third parties (federal and State agencies or other
organizations).
15. Three copies (one copy for units not having a single audit) of the report of audit and any other written report by the Auditor
shall be filed with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission when (or prior to) submitting the invoice for the
services rendered no later than four months after the close of the fiscal year (for fiscal years ending June 30 this would
be October 31). The report of audit, as filed with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, becomes a matter
of public record for Inspection and review in the offices of the Secretary by any interested parties. These reports are used
In the preparation of Official Statements for debt offerings as well as by municipal bond rating services.
16. There are no special provisions except; See engagement letter attached.
17. Whenever the Auditor uses an engagement letter with the client, Item 16 should be completed by referencing the engage-
ment letter and attaching a copy of the engagement letter to the contract to incorporate the engagement letter into the
contract. In case of conflict between the terms of the engagement letter and the terms of this contract, the terms of this
contract will control. Engagement letter terms am deemed to be void unless the conflicting terms of this contract are specifically
deleted in Item 21 of !this contract.
18. A Governmental Unit not having a single audit on federal and State funds would list Item 7 in Item 21 of the contract
as being a deleted provision. An ezolanation must be given in Item 21 for any Governmental Unit not receiving a single
audit on federal and State funds (e.g., a single audit is not required under the Federal and State Singie Audit Acts and
is not being performed).
19. If this audit engagement is subject to the standards for audit as defined in the Government Auditing Standards, issued by
the Comptroller General of the United States, then the Auditor warrants by accepting this engagement that he/she will
meet the requirements for an external quality control review specified in the Govarnment Auditial Standards. Copies of
any written communications that are a result of an external quality control review will be made available W the Secretary
of the Local Government Commission upon his request.
20. There are no other agreements between the parties hereto and no other agreements relative hereto that shall be enforceable
unless entered Into In accordance with the procedure set out herein and approved by the Secretary of the Local Govern-
ment Commission.
21. All of the above paragraphs are understood and shall apply to this agreement, except the following numbered paragraphs
shall be deleted: (Sex Iteras 17 and 18.)
Deloitte & Touche
Aubar
By Rex Price, partner
(P it- ar peiot)
Approved by the Secretary of the LAW Government
Commission as provided in Article 3, Chapter 159 of the
General Statutes or Article 31, Part 3, Chapter 115C of
the General Statutes..
For the Secretary, -1 Mal C.~nmmt CdMM* ion
Mpatme)
Date
Oran a County
caevamestta! Ualt
By Moses Care Jr. Chair
(Please type ar petal awe and !Lie)
(mow)
This instrument has been preaudited in the manner re-
quired by the Local Government Budget and Furl Con-
trol Act or by The School Budget and Fiscal Control Act.
Gorrameatai Unit Fiaaace Officer 0I9na type a PON)
(Sismftm)
Date
I
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Airport Capital Project Ordinance
DEPARTMENT Budget
ATTACHMENT(S)
Proposed Airport Capital
Project Ordinance
PURPOSE:
Action Agenda
Item No y -13
INFORMATION CONTACT
Rod Visser, ext 2151
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
To appropriate North Carolina Department of Transportation
grant funds for the Airport Capital Project.
BACKGROUND:
At the April 2, 1990 meeting, the Board of Commissioners received
the final report of Wilbur Smith Associates concerning their general
aviation airport siting feasibility study. This permitted the County
to file final project paperwork with DOT and to close out the project.
DOT is providing grant funding in the amount of $45,787 at project
closeout to complete funding of the project. The attached capital
project ordinance will incorporate these grant funds into the total
appropriation for the project.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve the proposed capital project ordinance.
2-
AIRPORT
CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE
Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners that pursuant to section
13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina the
following capital project is hereby adopted.
Section 1. The project authorized will provide a feasibility study for
the siting of a new general aviation airport in Orange
County and will be financed by an appropriation from the
County Capital Reserve Fund and by state grant funds.
Section 2. The officers of the County are hereby directed to proceed
with the project within the budget contained herein.
Section 3. The following revenue is anticipated to complete this
project:
Transfer from County Capital
Reserve Fund $ 53,788
Intergovernmental 45,787
Total Revenues $ 99,575
Section 4. The following amount is appropriated for this project:
Airport Project
Total Appropriations
$ 99,575
$ 99,575
Section 5. This ordinance supersedes all previous Airport Capital
Project ordinances.
Section 6. This ordinance shall be in effect from date of adoption
through June 30, 1990.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 1990_.
1
OR AN G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: MAY 15, 1990
Action Agenda
Item # V -L
SUBJECT: RENCHER STREET CDBG PUBLIC FACILITIES CONTRACT -- CHANGE ORDER
#1
DEPARTMENT: HOUSING /COMMUNITY PUBLIC HEARING: Yes _X—No
DEVELOPMENT
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
CHANGE ORDER TARA L. FIKES
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967- 9251/968 -4501
PURPOSE: To execute Change Order #1 to the Rencher Street
Public Facilities Improvements Contract with Billings
and Garrett, Inc. for $14,125.67.
BACKGROUND: On January 8, 1990, the County awarded a contract to
Billings and Garrett, Inc. of Raleigh, N.C. for
$282,083 for public facilities improvements in the
Rencher Street CDBG Area. Due to unforeseen
regulatory requirements and site conditions revealed
after the award of the contract, it has become
necessary to make design changes. More specifically,
field changes were necessary to ensure proper sewer
installation and other construction and to comply with
the related regulatory requirements.
The cost of these changes is reflected in Change
Order #1 and total $14,125.67. The Change order
elements and costs have been reviewed and verified by
the County Engineer.
Execution of this Change Order will allow construction
to continue according to schedule as well as allow
compliance with all related regulatory requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve execution of Change Order #1 with Billings and
Garrett for $14,125.67 and authorize the Chair to sign
the document on behalf of the Board.
2
MMEINER, PEMS & STROUT, LII+IITLD
Consulting Engineers
One Centerview Drive
Greensboro, NC 27407
CHANGE ORDER # 1
PROJECT: Orange County- Rencher St. CDBG
Area Improvements
LOCATION: Orange County North Carolina
DESCRIPTION:
DATE: 3 -22 -90
SECTION:
CONTRACTOR: Billings & Garrett
Item
Description
(Nantity
Unit Price
Total Cost
12.6
Rip Rap and Fabric
133
SY
$ 30.00 /SY
$3,990.00
12.4
Stone Check Dam
6
ea
250.00 /ea
1,500.00
12.5
Erosion Control Fabric
42.22
SY
4.40 /SY
185.77
8.10
Auto. Air Release Valve & MH
1
ea
2,230.00/ea
2,230.00
12.3
Silt Fence (decrease)
30
LF
( 3.50/LF)
(105.00)
5.8
P.S. Area Lighting
1
LS
960.00 /LS
960.00
5.4
P.S. Audible & Visible High
1
LS
375.00/LS
375.00
Water Alarms
14.5
Bituminous Black Base Pavement
32.7 TN
122.00/TN
3,989.40
Replacement
4a.
4 -inch Force Main - Standard Jt.
158
LF
11.50 /LF
1,817.00
4b.
4 7inch Force Main - Restrained Jt.
158
LF
(45.00 /LF)
(7,110.00)
(Decrease)
6a.
6 -inch Water Main- Standard Jt.
45
LF
13.2011Y
594.00
6b.
6 -inch Water Main - Restrained Jt.
45
LF
(51.40 /LF)
(2,313.00)
(Decrease)
4c.
12 -inch Steel Encasement (Decrease)
35
LF
(80.00 /LF)
(21800.00)
1k
16 -inch Steel Encasement (Decrease)
35
LF
(100.00 /LF)
(3,500.00)
1
24-inch Bore (4" FM and 8" sewer)
35
LF
350.0011F
12,250.00
1
Concrete Blocking
2.75
CY
750.00 /CY
2,062.50
Page 1 of 2
I
A
k
t
3
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE
$
282;083.00
CURRENT CONTRACT PRICE Adjusted by Previous CHANGE ORDER(s).
$
282,083.00
CONTRACT PRICE due to this CHANGE ORDER will be
increased by
$
_ _14
125.67
CONTRACT PRICE INCLUDING THIS CHANGE ORDER
$
296,208.67
WE HEREBY RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF THIS CHANGE ORDER.
FINKBEINER, PETTIS & STROUT, LIMITED BY - �^,c.. - -- -- - --
TITLE
BY
TITLE
Page 2 of 2
OWNER
ORANGE COUNTY
HOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Rencher Street CDBG Financial Status Update
DEPARTMENT: Housing /Community Dev.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Status Update
1
Action Agenda
Item No. _Y_a
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: x
INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara L. Fikes
TELEPHONE NUMBER-
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 958 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PURPOSE: To advise the Board of Commissioners of the status of the
Rencher Street CDBG Program.
BACKGROUND: One of the requirements of the County's plan for CDBG
Program Administration for the Rencher Street Project is
the provision of quarterly status updates on expenditures
and accomplishments to the Board of County Commissioners.
In order to comply with this requirement, the Housing and
Community Development Department will submit these updates
to the Board at the end of each quarter until the project
is complete.
This is the sixth update which covers the sixth quarter
which ended March 31, 1990.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Receive as information.
2
RENCHER STREET CDBG FINANCIAL STATUS UPDATE:
EXPENDITURES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
PROJECT AREA: Rencher Street Area
REPORTING PERIOD: Sixth Quarter ending March 31, 1990
REPORTING DATE May 15, 1990
ACTIVITY_ BUDGET_ EXPENDITURES_
Acquisition $ 3,000 -0-
Street Improvements
99,925
$ 18,350
Sewer Improvements
249,441
110,889
Water Improvements
64,718
51,490
Clearance
1,700
-0-
Housing Rehabilitation
185,128
88,354
Administration
81,388
54,182
TOTAL
$ 685,300
$323,265
ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
1. Held quarterly Project Area Committee meeting with neighborhood
residents - February 13, 1990.
2. Began public facilities improvements work.
3. Completed housing rehabilitation work on two (2) houses.
Continuously prepared work specifications for additional work to
be completed.
r
.3
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1
Action Agenda
Item No.-V-E
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Approval to submit application for State planning funds
to develop model County Aging Plan
DEPARTMENT: HSMT PUBLIC BEARING -- YES:- - NO: X- -
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert - Kittrell
RFP Letter- N.C. Division of Aging Jerry Passmore
Membership- HSMT's Aging Plan Tech. Com.TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
------------------------------
PURPOSE: To request approval to apply for a demonstration planning
grant in aging at the local level. The competitive applications
are for $ 20,000 amd will be awarded for fiscal year 1990 -91
(July 1, 1990- June 30, 1991). Deadline for submission is
June 1, 1990.
BACKGROUND: The N.C. Division of Aging is in the process of developing
a State Aging Plan which is required by the N.0 General
Assembly by March, 1991. Part of the process is to fund
four local demonstration planning efforts that could serve
as models for other counties. The Orange County Human
Services Management Team would be designated as the lead
agency to develop the County Aging Plan which would include
community -based long term care. The Aging Director, as HSMT
member, would be assigned the responsibility to oversee the
process, staff HSMT's Aging Plan Technical Committee and
provide liaison with TJCOG.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve submission of application.
4- nL
��
.r�d.
North Carolina Department of Human Resources
Division of Aging
693 Palmer Drive • Raleigh, NC 27603
James G. Martin, Governor April 26, 19 9 0 Al Boyles, Assistant
David T. Flaherty, Secretary Secretary for Aging
MEMO (919) 733 -3983
Fax No. (919) 7330443
TO: County Managers �j•,
FROM: Bonnie M. Cramer
Deputy Director
RE: Planning Demonstration Grants
The Division of Aging is pleased to announce the availability of four
grants to demonstrate approaches to strategic planning in aging at
the local level. The Division will award $20,000 per grant to the
four applicants selected on a competitive basis. The grants will be
awarded for Fiscal Year 1990 --91 (July 1, 1990 -- June 30,1991). These
funds have been made available through a grant from the Kate B.
Reynolds Health Care Trust.
A Lead Agency for the purpose of this planning demonstration project
must be designated by the Board of County Commissioners. The Lead
Agency may be any public or private, non- profit agency. Funds will
be awarded to county governments for direct use or distribution in
accordance with the grant proposal.. The Division reserves the right
to negotiate with the county prior to the award of funds certain
technical details of the proposal. No more than one proposal will be
considered from a county.
Agencies in your county supported with Older Americans Act funding
will be receiving a notice regarding the availability of these
planning grants, but only you are receiving the full application
package. This application package includes the Request for Proposals
(RFP) and a background paper on strategic planning and the
development of a system of services for older adults. You are
encouraged to review all of theis material before making a decision
whether to apply.
The proposal must be submitted directly to the Division of Aging b
5.00 gm., Friday, June 1 1990. It should be sent to the attention
of Judy Smith. A copy of the completed proposal is to be given to
the appropriate Area Agency on Aging at the same time so that the
Area Agency is aware of applications from its region. Staff of the
page 2 planning Demonstration Grants
Area Agency on Aging my be of assistance to the applicant in
developing the proposal-
please
do not hesitate to contact Judy Smith at 919/733 -8400 if you
have any questions.
cc: Area Agencies on Aging
3
N
Orange County
AGING PLAN TECHNICAL, COMMITTEE
Project Support Staff:
Jerry Passmore, Project Director for Aging Plan
David Moser, consultant /liaison with the NCDOA
HSMTSUR2.DOC
(A subcommittee
of the County Human Services Management Team)
April,
1990
Name
Or aniaation
I.
William Baxter
Director,
OPC Mental Health Center
2.
Martha Pryor -Cook
Director,
County Dept. of Social Services
3.
Albert Kittrell
Assistant
Manager, Orange County
4.
Charles Milch
Executive
Director, Home Health Agency of CH
5.
David Moser
Director,
Area Agency on Aging, TJCOG
6.
Jerry Passmore
Director,
County Department on Aging
7.
Dan Reimer
Director,
County Health Department
8.
Gloria Williams
Executive
Director, JOCCA
9.
Sue Schroeder
Co- director, Orange County United Way
Project Support Staff:
Jerry Passmore, Project Director for Aging Plan
David Moser, consultant /liaison with the NCDOA
HSMTSUR2.DOC
I
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. —Y--F
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: RSVP Application for
Augmentation Funds and
New Literacy Initiative
DEPARTMENT: Aging
ATTACHMENT(S):
RSVP Application
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
INFORMATION CONTACT: -
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel
Hill - 968 -4501 Mebane -
227 -2031 Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To consider authorizing submission of the -
RSVP -
application to
ACTION in the amount of $10,081 in Federal Funds by the County
Manager to augment the present ACTION grant and initiate a new
literacy program initiative. These are competitive funds so it
is not guaranteed that funds will be awarded.
BACKGROUND: This is an application to apply for funds to augment the
annualized level of funding by ACTION ($26,010) which has
remained unchanged for several years. The additional funds
would impact two areas: (1) Initiate a program of National
Significance ($5,126) a literacy program of senior citizens
who read to at -risk children at day care centers and pre-
schools. (2) Cover administrative costs ($4,955) (Volunteer
Support Expenses) of which $2,982 would be used to reduce
county funds for professional staff benefits expenses and the
balance ($1,973) for increasing the part -time clerical /data
entry position for the new national significant program.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve RSVP application and authorize Chair to sign
application.
FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
1. TYPE
❑ NOTICE OF INTENT
SUBMISSION
(OPTIONAL)
fMerh am
l3 PREAPPLICATION
m
b
LL- APPLICATION
2. APPLI- a. NUMBER 3. STATE a. NUMBER
CANT'S APPLI-
APPLI- NONE CATION
CATION IDENTI-
FIER I b. DATE rear mae,A der Norm TO BE b. A DATE
ASSIGNED SSIGNED
1990 -05 -01 BY STATE
Leave
Blaah
19
rear maeeh dnr
4. LEGAL APPLICANT/RECIPIENT 5. EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NLlmkiz x114)
a. Applicant Name ORANGE COUNTY
b. Organization Unit :County Government 6. a. NUMBER
c. Street/P.O. Box : P O. BOx 8181 PRO- 7 Z 0
GRAM
d. City Hillsboroughcounty Orange
f State N.C. g. ZIP Code. 27278 f'`""" cam' MULTIPLE ❑
ah. ContactPerson(No . Terri Tyson, RSVP Director b. TITLE Retired Senior
&Trieph;M.N.., Volunteer Program
7. TITLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT (Use section IV.
a IV . of this form to provide a summary 8. TYPE OF APPLICANTIRECIPIENT
description of the project.A -Ste G-Special Purpuae District
-Retired B_,,�r� V r a n g e County-Chapel
H- Zommunity Anion Agency
W C�Swtitunt I- higher Eduertw.ul Inrtitutiao
m Senior Volunteer Program.The project provides
anitatlar d.Indisn Tribe
13pen/pt s
the means by which an individual aged 60 or 0-r-ty K• -0ther E-citr
3 or older may serve the community as a v o I u n t e e -SehoolDidLneL 1-'1
aa. Enter appropriate letter l�
e
! 9. AREA OF PROJECT IMPACT IN- of riam tw.neit•�t .m s v% eft, 10. ESTIMATED NO. OF 11. TYPE OF ASSISTANCE
Z PERSONS BENEFITING A -ac Gmt D- Inaum"M
°. Oran a County, North Carolina r o l lu n a 4 8 0 B- 5uppleswental Grant E -other
g y C -Loan Eefer app Wnate lWh„d EM
12. PROPOSED FUNDING i 13. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF:
a. FEDERAL
$ 10,081 .00
a. APPLICANT
Fourth
15. PROJECT START
DATE Year month day
1 19 90 -07 -C
b. APPLICANT
c. STATE
.00
00
d. LOCAL
00
e. OTHER
•00
18. DATE DUE TO
_ FEDERAL AGENCY •
f Total
Is 10,081 .00
19. FEDERAL AGENCY TO RECEIVE REQUEST
a. ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT (IF APPROPRIATE) b. t
b. PROJECT
Fourth
16. PROJECT
DURATION
L 12 Mae,ha
Year maalh day
14. TYPE OF APPLICATION
A -New
C- Revision E- Augtmentatim
a- Renewal
D- Canunwtion
Enter apprupraak Wrrr EJ
17. TYPE OF CHANGE fFw Nr or lief
A -Immam Dallas
F -Usher fSpenfy)
B- Decr+rae Dallan
d. LOCAL
C- Inaeaaa Duration
.00
0-- Decroaae Duration,
E.- Canrellrtion
f. Total'
$
Eater
[Merl
prior Irlfe.ea,
20. EXISTING FEDERAL
GRANT IDENT. NO.
r (IF KNOWN)
440- 4768/08
c. ADDRES 21. REMARKS ADDED
101 Marietta Street, N.W. Yes EkNo
Atlanta Ga. 30303
p 22. To the hea of my knowledge and belieG dau• a. YES, THIS NOTICE OF INTENT /PREAPPLICATION /APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE
F THE in this pterppikutsoulappluatue are true TO THE STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON:
v APPLICANT and __,I_ Out document has been duly DATE
I` CERTIFIES +uthanud by the governing{ body of the sp.
THAT F pliant and tha applicant will comply with
Lim
pproved, "'""""' d the °"""`i1Ot " b. NO. PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E.O. 12372 0
approved OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW 0
23. TYPED NAME AND TITLE I b. SIGNATURE
REPRE-
SENTATIVE
24. APPLICA
Moses Carey, Chair
Year nun
27. ACTION TAKEN
Its AWARDFD
Z I 1 b RFJWMD
C c RETURNED FOR
AMKNDMRNT
e I t d. UNTURNE0 MR
r ED. 1=72 SUUMMSION
', BY APPLICANT TO
Z STATE
t3 i! i .. DEFERRED
C i f. WITHDRAWN
Mr 125.
28. FUNDING
a.FEDERAL $
'AT PIU74
b. APPLICAN
.00
c. STATE
.00
d. LOCAL
.00
e. OTHER
.00
f. Total'
$
.00
.A N IDENT. NO. 26. FEDERAL GRANT IDENTIFICATION
rear matth dRv ST ar ARTING Ye month dare
29. ACTION DATEip 19 DATE 19
31, CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL 32. rear e.-Wh dohs
INFORMATION ,Nerve o n l kkp%- auabtr, ENDING
DATE 19
33. REMARKS ADDED
Yea 0 No
PAGE 1
p veerbed by OMB Oreular A-102
3
RSVP APPLICATION FOR AUGMENTATION FUNDS AND NEW LITERACY INITIATIVE
BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
F ®ERAL
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJ. NAT'L SIGN
Salaries:
Increase the clerical /data entry 1248
aide's percentage of time from
40% to 50% on a salary of $6240
to allow for additional clerical
support
5% Cost of Living Adjustment for 1186
the Director and Assistant 1116
Coordinator: This position will
be needed under the National 3120
Significance Program at an annual
salary of $12,480 X 25% of time
Fringe Benefits:
At 7.65% for the increase in the 477 239
clerical aide and coordinator
For Director and Assistant: 298
increase in FICA, Life, and
Retirement
Staff Travel: 800 additional 180
miles for 20 site visits = $180
Communications:
Postage: 3 additional mailings to 450
500 volunteers and stations
1500 X .30 =$450 for recruitment
and informational purposes
Volunteer Expenses: Volunteer 1688
travel: The 25 additional
volunteers will travel an
average of 25.miles per month
25 x 25 x 12 x 22.5 cents
Accident Insurance:
25 volunteers x $1.10
Personal Liability Insurance: 79
25 volunteers x 40 cents
Excess Automobile:
15 volunteers x $2.75
TOTAL INCREASE: $4955 $5126
ORANGE COUNTY 1
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No. y- G
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Simplified Access To Human Services Grant
DEPARTMENT: Manager PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
ATTACHMENT(S): Grant INFORMATION CONTACT: Manager's
Office
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To acknowledge support of the Simplified Access to Human
Services Pilot Project Planning Grant.
BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the State Department of Human Resources
announced the availability of funding for pilot projects
designed to simplify access to human services. After
discussions between the Human Services Management Team and
the County Manager, it was decided a grant request would be
submitted to enhance the existing master client index file
project spearheaded by the Social Services Department. On
April 16, 1990 the HSMT submitted a grant application to the
state requesting funding to assist in the development of a
common data base for county human services agencies. This is
the first time this planning pilot grant has been offered by
the state. Although the County requested $20,000 to assist
in the planning /development of the Master Client Index File,
the state has only $80,000 available statewide.
The grant requires letters of support from the Board of
Commissioners, the Area Mental Health Authority, Local Board
of Health and the Social Services Board. The mandated boards
have submitted letters of support since the Master Client
Index File will benefit the clients in their agencies.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Authorize Chair to sign letter of support for
Simplified Access To Human Services Pilot Project
Planning Grant.
Pi
APPLICATION ORANGE COUNTY
PILOT PROJECT PLANNING GRANT APRIL 16, 1990
SIMPLIFIED ACCESS TO HUMAN SERVICES
FUNDS REQUESTED: $20,000
INTRODUCTION
Orange County has long had a commitment to the provision of
human services to its growing population. This is evidenced
by the approximately twenty -five percent of county budget
funds which are allocated yearly to both county human
services departments as well as county private non - profit
agencies. Because of the growing need for human services and
decreasing revenues, coordination of services has become
critical.
Presently, this coordination process is accomplished in two
important ways. First, the County has established a Human
Services Advisory Commission (HSAC) which consists of
representatives of key human services agencies in the County
both public and non - private. See Attachment I. The mission of
this commission is to make recommendations to the Board of
County Commissioners concerning human services programs in
the County in order to improve the quality of life for
County citizens. The HSAC also periodically reviews and
evaluates programs and provides counsel to human services
agencies within the County.
Secondly, the Human Services Management Team (HSMT) comprised
of County human services departments heads strive to
coordinate County human services through information sharing.
A list of team members is included as Attachment 2. It was
the HSMT which recognized the need for further coordination
of services through computer.automation.
IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDS
In 1989, the HSMT acknowledged the need for enhanced human
services delivery through computer automation. This need for
automation was based on the following service delivery goals
set by this team.
* Elimination of duplication in the client intake
process among human services agencies.
* Coordination of services to individual clients and
their families.
* Enhancement of the County human services delivery
system.
* Establishment of a computer tracking system.
01
3
PROPOSED PROJECT
BACKGROUND
To address the gdstemfietheeHumanfServicesnManagement Human
Team
Services Delivery y with
(HSMT) decided that the Department of Social Services,
its many assistancetablgsh s' acoucoordinatedrohumanelservices
the effort to es
automation stablished. decision a
Committee was as e e are:
Marti Pryor -Cook, ACSW, Director
orange County Department of Social Services
Keith Brooks, Director
Data Processing
Albert Kittrell, Assistant County Manager
Orange County
Jerry Passmore, Director
Department on Aging
John Hartwell, Orange County Commissioner and
Social Services Board Member
Martin Whitt, Income Maintenance Director
Social Services
Orange County Department of
Rick Poole, Administrative Officer
Orange County Department of Social Services
Their mission -is to identify County human services computer
strategic plan to address these
needs and develop a
identified needs. The committee has spent the last 12
other
months
local
reviewing the computerization efforts of
systems in order to become more
governments' human services
familiar with potential systems.
Additionally, an outgrowth of this committee has been
the proposed
a sub-
common
committee to identify the elements of
to address the corresponding
ethics
database component and
when information is shared
among
issue which arises
departments.
2
4
PLANNING PROJECT
F
The result of this computer committee work has recognized the
need for an outside consultant to provide technical
assistance and expertise. Orange County proposes to acquire
the services of a qualified computer /data - processing planning
consultant to assist with the creation of a common database.
Development of a common database is considered Phase One of
the Human Services Computerization Process. The HSMT has
identified the following preliminary scope of services which
will be required of a consultant.
1. Review currently identified automation needs and conduct
further needs assessment if deemed necessary.
2. Assist the HSMT and Computer Committee in reaching
consensus regarding the non - confidential information to
be contained in the common database.
3. Develop an implementation plan for creation of a common
database for County human services to include
identification of hardware and software needs, an
implementation schedule /time -line and an estimation of
budgetary resources which would be required for
implementation.
The result of this process should provide the County with:
a common database design which will
• improve client services;
• improve worker productivity; and
• reduce costs associated with client intake.
COUNTY'S ROLE
The Human Service Management Team (HSMT) with assistance from
the computer committee will direct the activities of the
consultant. The Department of Social Services (DSS) has been
designated as the lead agency since many members of the
computer Committee are located in that department.
Specifically, the DSS Administrative officer has been
designated to assist in this process "hands -on ".
Periodically, the Computer Committee will make progress
reports regarding the consultant's work to the HSMT as well
as the Human Service Advisory Commission (HSAC). Involvement
of the HSAC in this manner will allow for participation by
community private non - profit human services providers.
3
W
Once the consultant's work is complete the HSMT will evaluate
the outcome based upon the scope of work initially outlined.
Success will have been achieved by the designing of a common
database to be used in the human services computerization
system.
THE FUTURE
The orange County Board of County Commissioners in the annual
retreat in January 1989 set a goal of computer automation of
the County's human services delivery system. This goal was
reaffirmed in January 1990. Concurrently, county management,
human services departments as well as non - -human services
departments support the achievement of this goal. Therefore,
once an implementation plan is developed. a request for
County general fund monies is expected to be well received.
4
A
BUDGET INFORMATION
BUDGET
ITEM GRANT FUNDS APPLICANT FUNDS TOTAL FUNDS
Personnel $3,507 $ 3,507
Fringe Benefits 772 772
Travel
Equipment
Supplies $ .500 500
Contractual 191500 19,500
Other
Total Direct 20,000 20,000
Charges
Indirect Charges 4,729 4,729
TOTAL CHARGES $20,000 4,729 24,729
PERSONNEL DETAIL
POSITION TITLE ANNUAL SALARY 7 TIME
RATE MONTHS REQUIRED
Administrative Officer $35,018 10 12 $4,729
^
List equipment, explain charges under "other" ^above or give any other
necessary explanation on a separate sheet.
ATTACHMENT 1
ORANGE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION
MEMBERSHIP
Eighteen members are appointed by the Board of Commissioners;
the Board may appoint up to four additional members.
The composition includes a nominee from the following
Boards /Associations:
- Social Services
Mental Health
- Public Health
- Department on Aging
- Orange County United Way
- Chapel Hill- Carrboro United Way
- Orange Congregations in Mission
- InterFaith Council for Social Services
- Extension Council
- Board of Commissioners Liaison
7
ATTACHMENT 2
E:l
HUMAN SERVICES MANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERSHIP
Albert Kittrell, Assistant County Manager
Martha Pryor -Cook, Social Services Director
Dan Reimer, Health Director
Jerry Passmore, Department on Aging Director
Tara Fikes, Housing /Community Director
Janet Sparks, Child Support Enforcement Director
Mary Anne Black, Recreation /Parks Director
Fletcher Barber, Jr., Agriculture Extension Director
Hope Bethea, Commission for Women Coordinator
Brenda Stevens, Orange County Librarian
William Baxter, Director,
orange /Person /Chatham Mental Health
1
A
yam.._
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda
Item No H_
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Tax Refunds Request
DEPARTMENT: Assessor's Office
ATTACHMENT(S):
Individual Request
PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No
INFORMATION CONTACT:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
Hillsborough -- 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To consider 14 request for refund of tax bills.
R1
I
BACKGROUND: General Statutes 105 -381 (b)
Action of Governing Body - Upon receiving a taxpayers written statement
of defense and request for release or refund, the governing body of the
Taxing Unit shall within 90 days after receipt of such a request determine
whether the taxpayer has a valid defense to the tax imposed or any part
- thereof and shall either release or refund that portion of the amount
that is determined to be in excess of the current liability or notify
the taxpayer in writing that no release or. refund will be made.
RECOMMENDATIONS) : Board approve request for refund of tax bills:
MAP # 7.42A.C.10
TRACT # 403844
ACCOUNT # 8041
BILL # 89 -25356
RATE CODE 23
I l
Malhoney, James I. Jr.
2 Cates Ct.
Hillsborough, NC 27278
1 l
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a leased 1988 Nisson in error for 1989.
Leased vehicles are listed by Leasing Company.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED:' Refund 1989 property tax overpayment.
Refund Valuation: $9,050
GO $64.26
G3 40.73
Total Refund: $104.99
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
X211:l;IA
DATE:
I
MAP #
7.101.D.9
TRACT #
707567
ACCOUNT #
29015
1989
BILL #
87 -45096
88 -44027
89 -38795
Ramsey, Gene H. RATE CODE: 21
106 Prince St.
Carrboro, NC 27510
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a'1986 Chev. leased vehicle in error for
1987, 1988, and 1989. vehicle listed by leasing company.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpayment for 1987, 1988, and
Total Refund: $263.32
RECOMMENDATION:
ORDER:
DATE:
Approve
3
1989.
1987
1988
1989
Total
Valuation Refund:
$6,900
$6,275
$5,530
GO:
$41.81
$40.47
$39.26
$121.54
G1:
40.37
36.71
32.35
109.43
CH:
11.39
11.14
9.82
32.35
Total:
$93.57
$88.32
$81.43
$263.32
Total Refund: $263.32
RECOMMENDATION:
ORDER:
DATE:
Approve
3
4
MAP # None
$6,975
TRACT # None
,
ACCOUNT # 129129
39.76
BILL # 89 -45504
12.38
RATE CODE 22
[ l
$101.66
Taylor, Ellen C.
213 Standish Dr.
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a leased 1987 Chev. in error for 1989.
Vehicle listed by leasing company..
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpayment for 1989.
Valuation Refund:
$6,975
GO:
$49.52
G2:
39.76
CH:
12.38
Total Refund:
$101.66
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
P # None
TRACT # None
ACCOUNT # 102894
ILL # 89 -39737
ATE CODE 00
C l
Rigsbee, Juanita Grace
Rt 4, 104 Plantation Dr.
Roxboro, NC 27573
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a 1987 Hyundai incorrectly for 1989.
Did not own vehicle on 1 -1 -89.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpay'ent for 1989.
Valuation Refund: $4,680
GO: $33.23
FA: 1.76
$34.99
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
5
MAP #
7.31.E.6
TRACT #
704428
ACCOUNT #
28332
BILL #
89 -31511
RATE CODE
22
Pendergrass, Albert L.
400 Severin St.
Chapel Hill, NC 27514.
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a 1979 Mercury in error for 1989. Did
not own vehicle on 1 -1 -89.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpayment for 1989.
Valuation Refund: $1,460
GO: $10.37
G2: 8.32
CH: 2.59
$21.28
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
R
7
MAP # 7.85B..7
TRACT # 728687
ACCOUNT # 89563
BILL # 89 -21181
88 -28653
] RATE CODE: 22
Harvey, Robert Herron
211 Church St. A -7
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
� l
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed a leased 1987 Merz. in error for 1988 and
1989. Vehicle listed by leasing company.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpayemnt for 1988 and 1989.
Total Refund: $587.54
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
1988
1989
Total
Valuation Refund:
$23,150
$18,670
GO:
$149.32
$132.56
$281.88
G2:
125.01
106.42
231.43
CH:
41.09
33.14
74.23
$315.42
$272.12
$587.54
Total Refund: $587.54
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
MAP # 3.38.B.7
TRACT # 300489
ACCOUNT # 105350
BILL # 89 -44412
RATE CODE 03
l
Stone, Mark A.
69 Boone Square
Hillsborough, NC 27278
COMMENT: Taxpayer listed two motor vehicles on his business property
tax listing form for 1989. Tax lister incorrectly added same
two vehicles to his personal property tax listing form.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)a. A tax imposed through a clerical error.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund 1989 property tax refund
Valuation Refund: $16,140
GO: $114.59
FB: 4.84
Late List: 23.89
$143.32
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
7
W
MAP #
TRACT #
ACCOUNT #
BILL #
RATE CODE
[ I
Delores Stewart
Rt 4, Box 249A
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
.7.22..19C
732702
106818
89 -44245
11
COMMENT: House was 64e complete on January 1, 1989 but was taxed
at 100% complete because taxpayer failed to indicate
actual percentage complete in appropriate section of
tax listing form.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund 1989 property tax overpayment for 1989.
Valuation Refund: $60,280
GO: $427.99
CH: 107.00
FF: 30.14
Total Refund: $565.13
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
M514 M
DATE:
01
10r
MAP #
TRACT #
ACCOUNT #
4.38.C.3A
402986
5884
BILL # 87 -22135
88 -2006
89 -7842
Virginia C. Bartow RATE CODE: 23
517 Tobacco Quay
Olde Towne
Alexandria, VA 22314
[. I
COMMENT: Old house was destroyed by fire in 1986 and taxpayer
failed to notify tax office for property value adjustment.
REFERENCE: GS 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund property tax overpayment for 1987, 1988,
and 1989.
1987
1988
1989
Total
Valuation Refund: $4,521
$4,521
$4,521
GO: $27.40
$29.16
$ 32.10
$88.66
G3: 20.34
20.34
20.34
61.02
$47.74
$49.50
$ 52.44
$149.68
Total Refund: $149.68
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
ACCT jrr
9551
TRACT r'ru
402045
MAP
4.11.F.2
BILL Arg
86 -37649
� 1
George W. Vaughn Estate
c/o Linda Christie, Executor
2415 Lindmount Ave.
Durham, NC 27704
COMMENT: In 1986 the above referenced parcel included a leasehold doublewide
mobile home owned by Colley Godley and a singlewide mobile home with
an attached addition owned by George W. Vaughn. Mr. Vaughn was
incorrectly assessed for the value of the doublewide mobile home
instead of the addition to the singlewide.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Valuation Difference = $17,389 for 1986
1986 Land $7,816 1986 Appraisal $28,705 (land and doublewide)
1986 Addition 3,500 - 11,316 (land and Addition)
$11,316 $17,389•
GO $113.02
FA 6.95
$119.97 Total Refund
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
ACCT rjr
115111
TRACT
400468
MAP
4.11.F.3
BTJ,L
88 -14274
Michael D. Vaughn
Rt 4, Box'115
Hillsborough, NC 27278
C �
COMMENT: An addition to _a single wide mobile and a shed were incorrectly
appraised with above referenced parcel for 1988.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Valuation Difference = $5800
GO $37.41
FA 1.91
$39.32
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
12
ACCT 7# 115111
TRACT Ar" 400468
MAP 4.11.F.3
BILL m 87 -16297
Michael D. Vaughn ,
Rt 4, Box 115
Hillsborough, NC 27278
COMMENT: An addition to a single wide mobile home was incorrectly appraised with
above referenced parcel for 1987.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund tax overpayment for 1987
Valuation Refund $1800
GO (.00606) $1.0.90
FA (.00035) `.63
$11.53 Total Refund
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
1_j
ACCT rr 115110
TRACT # 432760
UP 4.11.F.2
BSIL f 87 -16296
Michael D. Vaughn
Rt 4, Box 115
Durham, NC 27278
COMMENT: For 1987 the above referenced parcel had been split into two tracts,
4.11.F.2 and 4.11.F.2A. Mr. Vaughn sold 4.11.F.2A to Mr. Colley Godley,
who owned a doublewide mobile home. Mr. Vaught was incorrectly assessed for
the doublewide mobile home instead'of his singlewide mobile home addition.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Valuation Difference $20,103 for 1987
1987 Appraisal $34,028 (land and doublewide)
13,925 (land and addition)
$0,103 Valuation difference,
RECOMMENDATION:
ORDER:
DATE:
GO $121.82
FA 7.03
$128.85 Rotal REfund
Approve
14
Michael D. Vaughn
Rt 4, Box 115
Durham, NC 27278
COMMENT: In 1988 Michael-Vaughn owned the above referenced parcel, purchased in
Dec. 1986 from Mr. George Vaughn. The appraisal incorrectly included the
value of a doublewide mobile home instead of his singlewide addition and shed.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Valuation difference $17,703 for 1988
1988 Appraisal $34,028 (land and doublewide)
- 16,325 (land, addition and shed)
$11,703 Valuation difference
GO $114.18
FA 5.84
$120.02 Total Refund
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
1��110
ACCT rr
TRACT m
432760
M_4P
4.11-F-2
BILL
88 -14273
Michael D. Vaughn
Rt 4, Box 115
Durham, NC 27278
COMMENT: In 1988 Michael-Vaughn owned the above referenced parcel, purchased in
Dec. 1986 from Mr. George Vaughn. The appraisal incorrectly included the
value of a doublewide mobile home instead of his singlewide addition and shed.
REF: G.S. 105- 381(a)(1)b. An illegal tax.
ACTION REQUESTED: Refund Valuation difference $17,703 for 1988
1988 Appraisal $34,028 (land and doublewide)
- 16,325 (land, addition and shed)
$11,703 Valuation difference
GO $114.18
FA 5.84
$120.02 Total Refund
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
ORDER:
DATE:
.y
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No —v TX
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Grant Project Ordinance - Culbreth Park Affordable Housing
Project
DEPARTMENT Budget PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X
ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT
Budget Office, ext 2450
Grant Project Ordinance TELEPHONE NUMBER
CDBG Grant Letter Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688-7331
PURPOSE: To adopt a grant project ordinance for the Culbreth Park
Affordable Housing Project.
BACKGROUND: On December 22, 1989, Orange County received notification
from the North Carolina Department of Economic and Community
Development that the County's application for Commmunity Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding of $2,250,000 for the Culbreth Park
Affordable Housing Project had been approved, subject to certain
conditions. The County has fulfilled the stated conditions required
for the grant to become final, and a grant agreement and funding
approval was executed on April 30, 1990.
The proposed grant project ordinance will authorize the undertaking of
the Culbreth Park Affordable Housing Project, will budget grant
revenues to finance the project, and will make appropriations of
$2,250,000 to complete the project.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve the proposed grant project ordinance.
1
GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE
CULBRETH PARK AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General
Statutes of North Carolina, the following grant project ordinance is
hereby adopted:
Section 1: The project authorized is the Culbreth Park Affordable
Housing Project and is funded by a Community Development
Block Grant award through the North Carolina Department of
Economic and Community Development.
Section 2. The officers of this unit are hereby directed to proceed
with the grant project within the terms of the grant
document(s), the rules and regulations of the North
Carolina Department of Economic and Community
Development, and the budget contained herein.
Section 3. The following revenues are anticipated to be available to
complete this project:
Intergovernmental
$2,250,000
Section 4. The following amounts are appropriated for the project:
Culbreth Park Affordable Housing $2,250,000
section 5. The finance officer is hereby directed to maintain within
the Community Development Fund sufficient specific detailed
accounting records to provide the accounting to the grantor
agency required by the grant agency and federal and state
regulations.
Section 6. Copies of this grant project ordinance shall be made
available to the finance officer for direction in carrying
out this project.
Section 7. This ordinance is effective from date of adoption until
November 30, 1991.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 1990.
M
r
Jr
North Carolina
DeP artment of Economic and Community
JamtS G. l`larhill Secretary
James T. Broy
December 22+ 1989
The Honorable Moses Carey, Jr•+ Chairman
Orange County Board of Commissioners
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
u e,7= a II
Development
J Hobert B. Chandler, Director
DISTRIBUTED
Dear Chairman Carey: Development
Congratulations on Orange
County's preliminary Com�nity _
t (CDBG) award to assist the construction appllcationboftJune provide
Block Gran project_ Based on the county
Affordable Housing
the preliminary
award totals $2,250,000 and will be used to prow
1989, p
construction financing• that a rant agreement may be issued
For the awa�hrtai�econditio•ns mu
le fulfilled.
for the project*
1. An acceptable irrevocab th thetprojectr developer hmust ube
securing the CDBG loan
approved by DCA;
The county must provide an asonlanbe that de in response to
2• will
CDBG construction funds and that the costs
actual Pied documented
by thep county on a regular basis;
be verified by ro ect,
g, Since the town of Chapel Rill is participating in the p j
must agree with the town on re that
the county arsons of
administering the deed of trust restrictioUnitsaforup
the long term availability of the housing
low_ and moderate- income;
Project Source and Use Form must be modified to show costs
that will be paid from Program 4. The �Oj ro ram income;
Commitmen ts must be obtained for funding of Permanent mortgages
S• equals
the amount needed for sale of all units;
that at least eq
Division of Community Assistance Carolina 27605
Suite 270,1307 Glenwood Avenue, Raleir
Telephone 919 - 733.2850 • FAX 919. 733.5262
An E4uA1 OM,rrunrry I Amrmutivc Acn"In Emrl"vcr
The Honorable Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman
Page 2
6. The request of administration funds must be modified such that
no more than $16,000 will be applied to Orange County project
administration costs. No more than $10,000 may be applied to
the neighborhood based non -- profit subrecipient for the
producing financial accounting reports to the county, and
for counseling to low- and moderate- income homebuyers.
7. Assurances must be provided by the county that the income and
residency requirements of the project will be implemented;
8. Assurances must be provided by the county and the developer
that the builder's profit in excess of 10 %, based on the
actual construction cost of each dwelling, shall be divided
evenly between the builder and the county's non - profit
subrecipient;
9. Non - construction "soft costs" accruing to the developer must
be shown on the financial projections as being paid from the
project's program income but no earlier than the time of the
ECD take out.
10. A final copy of the project financial projections must be
received by ECD which include the financial participation
of the town of Chapel Hill.
Additional Special Conditions
1. The County must maintain documentation that the project
activities are necessary or appropriate to achieve its
community development objectives (Reference: 570.200(e)
and 570.204(a)(2);
2. The County must maintain documentation that the project
activities meet the National Objective of the CDSG program
concerning benefit to low- and moderate - income persons.
Should you or your staff have nay questions regarding this letter,
please call John Downs at (919) 733 -2850.
Sincerely,
44,tf 4�n��
Robert E. Chandler
REC /sc:pd
OR AN G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: MAY 15, 1990
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION REPORT
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER
ATTACHMENT(S):
Action Agenda
Item # X)LA
PUBLIC HEARING: Yes —X —No
INFORMATION CONTACT:
MANAGER'S OFFICE - EXTENSION 2300
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967- 9251/968 -4501
PURPOSE: To respond to the Orange County Human Relations
Commission Annual Report.
BACKGROUND: At the April 17 Commissioners Meeting, Jean Bolduc,
Chair of the Orange County Human Relations Commission,
presented an annual report. This report cited a
number of goals to be phased in during 1990 -91. The
Board by consensus asked the Manager to submit a list
of recommendations that may be pursued during 1990 -91.
RECOMMENDATION: The Manager provides the following list of
recommendations:
I. Sexual preference as a category of anti -
discriminatory protection in the Orange County
Government ordinance will be considered as a part
of a general review and recommended revision of
the Orange County Personnel Ordinance during
1990 -91.
2. An Aids Policy Committee has already been
developed and staffed by Albert Kittrell,
Assistant County Manager. A draft of the Aids
Policy is expected within two months.
3. The creation of a Human Rights Office is a concept
worthy of additional study. Discussion at the
Public - Private Partnership meeting in Boulder,
Colorado suggested that a comprehension approach
to human rights inclusive of all jurisdiction and
the University community would be productive. The
Manager recommends that the Human Relations
Commission travel to other counties during the
year and discuss the potential function of such an
office with the University and Municipal officials
and that establishment of this office be
reconsidered in the 91 -92 budget.
4. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will
include funding for legal assistance in drafting a
Human Rights Ordinance.
5. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will
include funding for County -wide "Human Rights Day"
event.
6. The Manager's recommended FY 90 -91 budget will
include funds sufficient for two Human Relations
Commission members to travel to other counties to
learn from other Human Rights Commissions'
experiences.
7. The Fall timetable for developing the Human Rights
Ordinance including strategy for submission of
enabling legislation to the General Assembly is
appropriate and should be adhered to if
legislation is to be presented in a timely way in
Spring of 1991.
1
i
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No. X -A
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date:
SUBJECT: $100 Motor Vehicle Penalty
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC BEARING: Yes No
Assessor's Office
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kermit Lloyd, Ext 2101
18 TELEPHONE NUMBER:
Eillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: The attached copy of GS 105 -312 pertains to
discovered property, appraisal and penalties. Specific
reference is made to paragraph (hl) and the following
paragraphs, concerning the $100 penalty for falsely
certifying that a motor vehicle was listed for property
taxes.
The attached letters are from taxpayers who are appealing the
$100 penalty imposed on them by the enactments of the above
.referenced statute and who wished to exercise their right to
be heard by the governing board.
Walter Bollenbacher David Lamson
Valerie Moore Keith Layden
" Don MacLeod Angie Owens
Cameron Nims Edward Eagle, Jr.
Medora Ebersole Shannon L. Talton
Luis-Manuel Cubeddu Louise James
BACKGROUND: In accordance with GS 105- 312(h1), on page 5 of
this agenda: "If the discovered property is a motor vehicle
and the county assessor determines from records of the
Division of- Motor Vehicles that the owner of the vehicle
falsely certified that he listed the vehicle for property
taxes in violation o-f
GS 20- 50.2(a)(1), the county assessor shall add a penalty of
$100.00 for failure to list that vehicle in that county."
The Orange County Assessor has applied this penalty to
approximately 975 vehicles.
Section 2 of the new act reads: "Effective for taxable years
beginning on or after January 1, 1988, and before December
31, 1989, a county may release or refund all or part of the
penalty imposed by G.S. 105--312(hl) if it determines that the
taxpayer's false certification under that subsection was not
P�
made intentionally to avoid payment of the tax." It further
reads: "The board of county commissioners may, by
resolution, delegate this authority to the county finance
officer or another county official."
The commissioners also need to be aware of GS 105 -380
paragraph (a) and (c) which states:
(a) The governing body of a taxing unit is prohibited from
releasing, refunding, or compromising all or any portion of.
the taxes levied against any property within its jurisdiction
except as expressly provided in this Subchapter.
(c) Any tax that has been released, refunded, or
compromised in violation of this section may be recovered
from any member or members of the governing body who voted
for the release, refund, or compromise by civil action
instituted by any resident of the taxing unit.
Most of the inquiries and explanations concerning the $100
penalty fall into one of the following catagories:
1. A new taxpayer who did not understand North
Carolina requirements for listing property for
taxation.
2. The elderly taxpayer who simply forgot.
3. The taxpayer who listed other vehicles but forgot
to list one.
These explanations along with the evidence as supported by
their prior record of listing property and paying taxes in a
timely manner, would indicate that these taxpayers did not
fail to list their motor vehicle with an intent to evade
paying taxes.
Upon review of the attached letters and upon review of two
years of tax records, I feel that none of the above
appellants falsely certified vehicle registrations to
intentionally evade paying property taxes. It is also, my
opinion, and I think the opinion of the county attorney, that
this provision to refund or release the $100 penalty only
applies to 1988/89 taxes and should.not apply to any 1990
taxes or subsequent years.
RECOMMENDATION: Those who clearly did.not falsely certify
with the intent to avoid paying property taxes be released or
refunded.
i
3
MACHINERY ACT OF NORTH CAROLINA
1989 Edition
§ 105 -312. Discovered property; appraisal; penalty.
(a) Definitions. —For purposes of this Subchapter:
«
(1) The phrase discovered property" shall include property
that was not listed by the taxpayer or any other person
during a regular listing period and also property that was
listed but with regard to the value, quantity, or other mea-
surement of which the taxpayer made a substantial under-
statement in .listing.
(2) The phrase "failure to list property" shall include both the
omission to list property during a regular listing period
and the taxpayer's substantial understatement of value,
. - -= quantity, or other measurement with regard to property
listed. � : �:� - � - - _ .::- .. .•. -� -� . _..r.- :...,: _.:_ ... ....
(3) The phrase "to discover property" shall refer to the�determi-
nation that property has not been listed during a regular
listing period and to the identification of the omitted item.
For discoveries made after July 1, 1971 and in future
years, the phrase shall also refer to the determination that
listed property was returned by the taxpayer with a sub-
stantial understatement of value, quantity, or other mea-
surement.
(4) The phrase "substantial understatement" aomission of e
- definitions shall be interpreted to mean s
material portion of the value, quantity, or other measure-
:ment of taxable property; the determination of materiality
in each case shall be made by the assessor, subject to the
taxpayer's right to review of the determination by - the
- county board of equalizati on. and review or board of com-
missioners and appeal to the Property Tax Commission.
(b) Duty to Discover and Assess Unlisted Property. --- It shall be
the duty of the assessor to see that all property not properly listed
111
§105 -312 MACHINERY ACT §105 -312
during the regular listing period be listed, assessed and taxed as
provided in this Subchapter. The assessor shall file reports of such
discoveries with the board of commissioners in such manner as the
board may, require...
r (c) -- Carrying Forward Real Property. — At the close of the regu-
lar listing period each year, the assessor shall compare the tax lists
submitted during the listing period just ended with the lists for the
preceding year, and he shall carry forward to the lists of the current
year all real property that was listed in the preceding year but that
was not listed for the' current year. When carried forward, the real
property. shall be listed in the name of the taxpayer who listed it in
the preceding year unless, under the provisions of G.S. 105 -302, it
must be listed in the name of another taxpayer. Real property car-
ried forward in this manner shall be deemed to be discovered prop-
erty, and the procedures prescribed in subsection (d), below, shall
be followed unless the property discovered is listed in the name of
the taxpayer who listed it for the preceding year and the property is
not subject to appraisal under either G.S. 105 -286 or G.S. 105 -287
in which case no notice of the listing and valuation need be sent to
the taxpayer.--- ;– . . I .. .
(d) Procedure ,for- Listing, Appraising, and Assessing Discovered
Property: = Subject to the provisions of subsection (c); above, and
the presumptions established -by subsection (f), below, discovered
property shall be listed by the assessor in the name of the person
required by G.S. 105 -302 or G.S. 105 -306. The discovery shall be
deemed to be made on the date that the abstract is made or cor-
rected pursuant to subsection (e) of this section. The assessor shall
also make a tentative appraisal of the discovered property in accor-
dance with the best information available to him.
When a discovery is made, the assessor shall mail a notice to the
person in whose name the discovered property has been listed. The
notice shall contain the following information:
(1) The .name and address of the person in whose name the
property is listed;
(2) A brief description of the property;
.(3) A tentative appraisal of the property;
(4) A statement to the effect that the listing and appraisal will
become final unless written exception thereto is filed with
the assessor within 30 days from date of the notice.
Upon receipt of a timely exception to the notice of discovery, the
assessor shall arrange a conference with the taxpayer to afford him
the opportunity to present any evidence or argument he may have
regarding the discovery. Within 15 days after the conference, the
assessor shall give written notice to the taxpayer of his final deci-
sion. Written notice shall not be required, however, if the taxpayer
signs an agreement accepting the listing and appraisal. In cases in
which agreement is not reached, the taxpayer shall have 15 days
from the date of the notice to request review of the decision of the
assessor by the board of equalization and review or, if that board is
not in session, by the board of commissioners. Unless the request
for review by the county board is given at the conference, it shall be
made in writing to the assessor. Upon receipt of a timely request for review, the provisions of G.S. -105 -322 or G.S. 105 -325, as appropri-
s'- - -r ate;• shall! be . followed::. - ......._ -
. = (e) : Record of Discovered Property.. When property is discov-
ered, the taxpayer's original abstract (if one was submitted) may be
112
4'
.r.
Z =�_
°a
§105-312 ADND NMTRATYON of LISTING §105-312
corrected or a new .abstract may be prepared to reflect the discov-
ery. If a new abstract is prepared, it. may be filed-with the abstracts
..that were submitted during the regular listing period, omit may be
filed separately with abstracts designated `.`Late Ustings ?'•.Regard- -
less of how filed, the listing shall have the same force and effect as
if it had been. submitted during the regular, listing period. -.=
(fl Per in any ear, it When all be p esumed that t should have dbeen
taxpayer in any y
listed by the same taxpayer for the preceding five years unless the
taxpayer shall produce satisfactory evidence that the property was
not in existence, that it was actually listed for taxation,- or that it
was not his duty to list the property during those years or some of
�-- them under the provisions of G.S. 105 -302 and G.S. 105 -306. If it is
shown that the property should have been listed by some other
taxpayer during some or all of the preceding years, the property
shall be listed in the name of the appropriate taxpayer for the
proper years, but the discovery shall still be deemed to have been
made as of the date that the assessor first listed it.
(g) Taxation of Discovered Property. -- When property is discov-
ered, it shall be taxed for the year in which discovered and for any
of the preceding five years during which it escaped taxation in
accordance with the assessed value it should have been assigned in
each of the years for which it is to be taxed and the rate of tax
�T)pand sed i n each such year. The penalties prescribed by subsections
d (hl) of this section shall be computed and imposed regard-
less of the name in which the discovered property is listed. If the
discovery is based upon an understatement of value, quantity, or
other measurement rather than an omission from the tax list, the
tax shall be computed on the additional valuation fixed upon the
property, and the penalties prescribed by subsections (h) and (hl) of
this section shall be computed on the basis of the additional tax.
(h) Computation of Penalties.'— Having computed each year's
taxes separately as provided in. subsection (g), above, there shall be
added a penalty of ten percent (10%) of the amount of the tax for the
earliest year in which the property was not listed, plus an addi-
tional ten percent (10 %) of the same amount for each subsequent
listing period that elapsed before the property was discovered. This
penalty shall be computed separately for each year in which a fail-
ure to list occurred;, and the year, the amount of the tax for that
year, and the total of penalties for failure to list in that year includ-
ing any penalty imposed under subsection (hl) of this section shall
be shown separately on the tax records; but the taxes and penalties
'for all years in which there was a failure to list shall be then
totalled on a single tax receipt. _ -.
�(hl) If the'discovered'property is "a motor.vehicle and the county
assessor- determines'from records of the Division of Motor Vehicles
:that the owner of the vehicle falsely certified that he listed the
Vehicle for property taxes in violation of G.S. 20- 50.2(a)(1), the
county assessor shall add a penalty of $100.00 for failure to list that
Vehicle in that county, which penalty shall be in addition to the
_penalties imposed by subsection (h). This- penalty shall be imposed
:..oaly for the year in which the discovery is made, regardless of•the
- number -of listing periods that elapsed before the motor vehicle was
'discovered, and regardless of whether the owner of the vehicle
falsely certified that he paid takes on the vehicle in previous years.
The civil penalty in this subsection ' shall not be imposed if the
113
5
§105-312
MACHINERY ACT
§105-312
owner of "the vehicle has been criminally punished under G.S.
20-50.2(c) with regard to the same failure to list.
W Collection. — For purposes of tax collection and foreclosure,
the total figure obtained and recorded as provided in subsections (h)'
and- (hl) of this section shall be deemed to be a tax for the fiscal
year beg-inning on July 1 of the calendar year in which the property
was discovered. The schedule of discounts for prepayment and 'in-
terest for late payment applicable to taxes for the fiscal year re-
ferred to in the preceding sentence shall apply when the total figure
on the single tax receipt is paid. Notwithstanding the time limita-
tions. contained, in Ga'105-381,' any property owner•who is re-
quired to pay taxes on discovered property as herein
provided shall
be entitled to a refund of any taxes erroneously paid on the same
property to other taxing jurisdictions in North Carolina. Claim for
refund shall be filed in the county where such tax was erroneously
paid as provided by G.S: 105-381
0) Tax Receipts Charged to Collector. --- Tax receipts prepared as
required by subsections (h), (hl), and (i) of this section for the taxes
and penalties. imposed upon discovered property shall be delivered
to the tax collector, and. he shall be charged with their collection.
Such receipts shall-have the same force and effect as if they had
been delivered to the collector at the time of the delivery of the
regular tax receipts for the current year, and the taxes charged in
the receipts shall be a lien upon the property in accordance with the
provisions of G.S., 105-355.
W Power to Compromise. — After a tax receipt computed and
prepared as required by subsections (g), .(h), and (hl) of this section
has been delivered and charged to the tax collector as prescribed in
subsection G), above, the board of county commissioners, upon the
petition of the taxpayer, may compromise, settle, or adjust the
county's claim for taxes arising therefrom. The board of commis-
: sioners may, by resolution, delegate the authority granted by this
subsection to the board of equalization and review, including any
board created by resolution pursuant to G.S. 105-322(a) and any
special board established by local act.
(1) Except for the _provision in subsection (hl) which imposes'an
additional penalty• for false certification of motor-vehicle listing,
the provisions of this section shall apply to all cities, towns, and
other municipal corporations having the power ,to tax property.
Such governmental units shall designate an appropriate municipal
officer to exercise the powers and duties assigned by this section to the assessor, and the powers and duties assigned to the board of
county commissioners shall be exercised by the overning body of
'
the unit. When the assessor discovers property
having a taxable
situs in a municipal corporation, he shall send a copy of the notice
of discovery required by subsection (d) to the governing body of the
Municipality together with such other information as may be neces-
sary to enable the municipality to proceed. The governing board of
a municipality may, by resolution, delegate the power to compro-
mise, settle, or adjust tax claims granted by this subsection and by
subsection (k) of this section to the county board of equalization and
review, including any board created by resolution pursuant to G.S.
.105-322(a), and any' special. board established by local act. (1939, c.
310, 9. 11M 1971. c., 806, s. 1; 1973,.6..476,'s. 193-'c. 787; 1977,. ci.-
IM 864-�.`.1981'-c'-623; "i 1987,'c.'45. g*. 743, k.A; 2; 1989,; c'.
:522:)
114
6
0
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
AT
CHAPEL HILL
CBM 328% Colder Hall
Department of Biology _ The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
(919) %2 -3775 Chapel Hill, NC 27599.3280
March 26, 1990
Orange County Board
of County Commissioners
Attn. Mr. Kermit Lloyd, Tax Assessor
208 South Cameron Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Commissioners,
On March 23, 1990 I received from the UNC -CH Payroll Office
a notice of Tax Garnishment ( #8954032, 89000150) for $287.33. I
was quite concerned about this because I was unaware that any
taxes were outstanding. On March 23 I spoke with Mr. Lloyd about
the matter, and he informed me that the 1989 tax due was for my
car. I was surprised by this because I take my tax obligations
seriously and have endeavored the 9 years I have lived in Chapel
Hill and Carrboro to meet those obligations. Fortunately, the
conversation with Mr. Lloyd yielded an explanation for why this
tax was not paid, which has resulted im my requesting that I not
be required to pay the penalty of $108.
The reason for an apparent oversight in recording the car
was multiple moves that I made from June 1988 to June 1989.
These moves included the sale of my home in Carrboro (107 Rock
Spring Court), taking up residence with my wife (married June
1989) in her Chapel Hill home (16 Clover Drive), purchasing
property to have our current Chapel Hill home built (729
Pinehurst Drive), and finally moving into our new home June
1989. With these multiple moves came problems with keeping
addresses current and receiving mail. I believe that this is in
part why the car was not listed and why I was not informed by the
Tax Collectors office of any problem with my taxes. When I
inquired with Mr. Lloyd why he did not attempt to contact me
about a possible problem, he indicated that an attempt was made.
Unfortunately, the address used by him was one given by the
State Department of Motor Vehicles, which has not kept up on my
current address, even though I informed them of the new address
and was issued last year a drivers license with the Pinehurst
address. Because of the above and because I have always honestly
declared my personal property and have paid my taxes all the
years I have lived in Chapel Hill, I am requesting that you
1
release me from the penalty. I have payed the tax and penalty,
and thus, if you grant this request I should receive $108.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely yours,
Walter E. Sollenbacher
Professor
K
7a
� eo�K\e
Eck:
n�Z 4W
c's
O.QAA-6
da
March 11. 1990
Dsar Mr. Lloyd,
2 am writing to rou per our telephone conversation,
concerning the tax notice that so received in the mail rece tI
In the first place this is the only notification that wn have
received at all. We left Hillsborough in JuIy, 19B9 and left a«e
forwardinq address with the post office, A , e� our
from friends that did nct have � we have found out
not get forwarded, so if any other notices address everYthing does
roceived them. Also im regards to ^oe�ces were tent we have not
Of the Dodge Caravan I distinctly Penalty for late filling
at the beginning of l, t nc y recsll seeing the tax notice
ae year and no�icing that the Car�van w
not listed. .At that time I then filed the caravan with yoaz
office. 1 don't understand why any one would not Vile when ��'
penalty is so high.
� Nereally have no objections to Paying our taxes we �ust
. eeI this "s un f ezr. I We that this can be remedied soon'
Sincerely,
Don MacLeod
4525 Grand Ave S
Minneapolis, MN
55409
612-825-3457
4,0� MA , u i Ik- 4 :
(f�V'J
l
v
iiiiiiiii
I
I G-L"+
i
10
Ao
GnN. VIA'
11 I 1
av `mil
aU
fcv�
(3-"
4J9�1�
on"" 4L
�\Al� C�.�
*�� a-
t¢o
,i-c�nw:aP
6, � UT "
4 �2�i � � jz P', C
tt
11
Medora Ebersole
29 March, 1990
43 Hamilton Rd.
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Mr. Kermit Lloyd
Orange County Board of County Commissioners
P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278-
Dear Mr. Lloyd:
The Orange County Assesor's Office posted a letter to
my husband and me on Dec. 18th, 1989 regarding the Ad Valorem
taxation of our 1981 Datsun.
Firstly, it was never our intention to not pay Orange County
tax on our vehicle and we apologize for our error.
we responded to your overdue notice, however, by
posting our response in the drive -thru mailbox at the
Estes post office in Chapel Hill, we erred on the postmark.
Although we (I) put the letter in the box that morning of the
18th in order to catch the noon collection, the letter was not
postmarked in Chapel Hill at the Estes station. The letter was
postmarked in Raleigh six days later!
Although I work and have a toddler, I visited the Tax Collector's
office and paid the tax on the vehicle but not the $100.00 fine.
I am asking you to waive the fine aside, and if you are personally
unable to do this, to schedule me for a hearing in order to ask
that the fine be waived aside or at least drastically reduced.
My actions, documented as much as possible, point to my intention
to pay the vehicle tax.
Thank you for considering this matter.
Very 4ruely xours� ,c1 .
Medora Ebersole
re: VINO JN1HT05S8BX135051 1981 Datsun, style SW, $1,600. /value
3/30/90
Kermit Lloyd
Orange County' Tax Supervisor
PO Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Mr. Lloyd,
Recently I received the orange county consolidated city county tax notice
statement. To my surprise I was fined $100.00 for a motor vehicle penalty. I
telephoned you concerning the matter and you were very helpful in explaining to
me why I was fined such amount. You also suggested that I write to you and
explain my situation to appeal and possibly have the $100.00 penalty charge
dropped.
In May 1988 I purchased a 1985 Nissan Sentra valued at $4040.00. .het it be known
that this was my first ever automobile purchase or taxable property purchase of
any kind. Only after recently speaking with you did I became aware that North
Carolina county law requires me to fill a property tax from. As a result of my
negligence I did not fill an orange county property tax form for 1989. For your
information I am not a United States Citizen, but a permanent US resident and
a recent graduate from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
I am enclosing a check for the full amount I owe $174.30 (including the penalty
fine). I hope you understand my situation and credit me the motor vehicle penalty
Of $100.00. If you have any further questions please contact me at work or home.
Thank you,
Luis Manuel Cubeddu
102 -10 Pinegate Cir.
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Phone,: (919) 541 -7258 (work)
(919) 490 -1985 (home)
V
I
I= eo
�- � I I �--� A. -� � �- � � � Ia � .,� to
4
o
0
!CP
aI`
c � �� ��, 'I� � J�� '� II • �1J Ib p I I ,.IS i� L
$eo
rib
C,
IIn
Vz
cl
110
ej
r-6
Lo
CO
Ln
43
CO
m
�A
Kermit: I responded with a letter explaining he V 2 7
will have to pay this bill. Please change �� "� i��
his billing address as he has requested. 14
Thanks
Beverly
Keith Layden
ASU Box 17694
Boone, NC 28608
Board of County Commisioners
P 0 Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278 March 24, 1990
Dear County Commisioners:
I recently received a bill from the Orange County Tax Collector
for the amount of $152.84. I called the tax collector and
was told that the bill was for two years worth of taxes plus a
$100.00 fine for failure to pay the $52.84 by December 31.
When I explained that I did not know that I owed any money,
I was told. that I was sent a thirty day notice after which a
100.00 fine would be added. I was told that the notice was
sent to 7 Dogwood Acres Dr., Chapel Hill, NC 27514. That is
the address of my mother's house in Chapel Hill. I am currently
and have been a student at Appalachian State University in
Boone, NC (since the fall of 1986). I receive all of my bills
both college related and non college related at my P.O. Box
on campus. I only go home (to Chapel Hill) once every 2 -3
months so this is another cause for the lapse of time.
Had I received the thirty day notice, I would have promptly
paid the outstanding balance and been done with it. For these
reasons I ask that the $100.00 fineAwaivered leaving me to pay
only the $52.84 due.
Sincerely,
4141-L
Keith Layden
' 15
Greg and Angie Owens
107 Cheswick Court
Carrboro, NC, 27510
March 5, 1990
Dear Orange.County Commissioners,
Attention: Kermit Lloyd,
My husband and I are residents of Carrboro, NC, as of August 1989.
When finding out about our property taxes for this past year I was in-
formed(from someone at the tax office) that the fee which I paid covered
all taxes, cars as well. Being that these taxes are new to me, and I'm
trying to be a law abiding citizen, I feel it is unjust my husband
and I be charged with a two hundred dollor penalty. I am paying our car
taxes off,but feel I was lead astray, and should not be penilized.
Sincer lyVII.L DWI
Angie Owens
orange County Board of
County Commissioners
c/o Kermit Lloyd
P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Sirs:
205 -4 Conner Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
April 26, 1990
I have spoken with Kermit Lloyd and John Horner, who both strongly recommended
that I ask you for a refund of the $100 motor vehicle penalty. I am requesting
this refund for the following reasons:
1) As a two year graduate student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, I am not and nevgg was a permanent resident of North Carolina. There-
fore, I did not know that I was supposed to file a real and personal pro-
perty tax form.
2) I have never worked in the state of North Carolina, and therefore, do not
file a N.C. state income tax form. I thought that the real and personal
property tax form was for filers of N.C. state income tax forms.
3) No one informed me that I had to file a real and personal property tax form
when I went to register my car. I did not even know the form existed!
4) The original tax form and bill was sent to the wrong address by the Orange
County Assessor's office. I never received any tax form to complete.
These reasons clearly justify the release of the $100 motor vehicle penalty
imposed on me. I would ask that you kindly refund the $100 already paid to
the following address:
Before May 25, 1990:
205 -4 Conner Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
(919) 967 -1994
Aftgr May 25, 1990:
7 Black Pine Drive
Trenton, NJ 08610
(609) 585 -7889
Your prompt response concerning this matter is greatly appreciated. Thank you.
very truly yours,
�� �.
Edward J. Eagle, Jr.
I
I
Shannon L Talton
811 A Arnette Ave
Durham NC 04.
�10range County Tax Collector, John Horner,
i am a former resident of Chapel !dill NC. I paid my taxes to
Durham County In !GCB. ~ , r^��c '8, 1`69 ! received a late notice et my
Present address . ";'hen ! .cerfai;,ed that ! had not paid my taM;
..i� '- 6v ^a,�iR`r� r[:. ::Y �Lc! �.q wlJl �'}'a i�• F «d6L`�4 `r ;:.:, wJr_' ✓'. _ .y'ib�.
,:4r. ;. }. =rte:: ..r,. - -- -�.... ..... ... .........._.__. -
MAY
L "L
L, ti
v
� � �(,L�i.�v� :� 2[• �,, � �� nib
ad
zz-
AALtylk .4U
&C4 4 1.
� � �},{� �'4 Y ✓% ✓� � it
w
a
FQ
\\I
/ 7
.5 7
2 2
\k
IS
2\
£ E |
\ �
k
4 ■-
>_[�
�E� m
( $
�\e
g i ■
C k
� 2 ■
%
\` k ƒ ■
? m
§
4 k
w 00
` A �
I� g
lC,Ma§u
2
2
9§
in
es
\
-CD
B\}k /��
■
.ƒ
0
�
=cE
( /7
#
\
k
■
.
§
�
( E CD
!`,�
.
. \
®
�
§ §
§7gf °E
K
\ -
e
§\ -§M\
/
CD
a
\
\
�fk 7
k
§~
\
°
2
•�
Cu
i®
f
M � f //$
03
F
3 j (
C)
R
_
■
7
a �- §
£
/ b
\
■§
) } o
FQ
\\I
/ 7
.5 7
2 2
\k
IS
2\
£ E |
\ �
k
4 ■-
>_[�
�E� m
( $
�\e
g i ■
C k
� 2 ■
%
\` k ƒ ■
? m
§
4 k
w 00
` A �
I� g
lC,Ma§u
2
2
9§
/§
es
\
-CD
B\}k /��
;
<
�
E■
( /7
is
/\�§
�
( E CD
!`,�
\
. \
®
§ §
§7gf °E
§\ -§M\
/
2
a
\
§/
�fk 7
§~
SCE § /z(
§
i®
f
M � f //$
03
F
3 j (
C)
R
_
a �- §
m
D
■§
) } o
\a§.I(
-
\
\ \`�
E
[CL �:
(.._
�
E�? n,
[
m
n
k
0 ° � E
\
£
E
Q
E ƒ ,
,
B
E
}
c
cr
E ¢ ;
z
E
OR AN G E C O U N T Y 1
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: jLay 15 1990
Action Agenda
Item #
SUBJECT: DURHAM ESTATES - PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
PUBLIC HEARING Yes —x —No
ATTACHMENT (S) :
Amended Resolution of Approval
Letter from Mark 0,Neal
Final Plat
Draft 4/16/90 Planning Board
Minutes
INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk
Extension 2582
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: Consideration of an amendment to the Preliminary Plan
for the Durham Estates subdivision.
BACKGROUND: The Preliminary Plan for the Durham Estates was
approved by the County Commissioners on February 5,
1990. The approval provided for lots 7, 8, and 9 to
receive access from Lumley Drive in Laurel Springs
Subdivision. Lot 6 was to receive access from
Dairyland Road, since it did not have frontage on
Lumley Drive.
The applicant has requested that the Preliminary Plat
be revised to provide a 30 foot access easement
between lots 7 and 8 for access to Lot 6. Several
environmental advantages of access via the easement
are indicated in the attached letter. First, it
shortens the driveway through Lot 6. Second, it keeps
the driveway away from a drainage area leading to
Morgan Creek. Finally, it allows the lot to access
onto a road of lower classification. Lumley Drive is
considered a Minor Street, whereas Dairyland Road is
Collector Street.
The Planning Board, in their April 16 meeting,
recommended that item E3 of the Resolution of Approval
be amended to include a 30 -foot access easement
between Lots 7 and 8 for access to Lot 6, and that
item C2 be amended to reference the watershed
protection standards for University Lake Watershed.
They also added a condition that Lot 6 use the
proposed easement for access and not be allowed to
access Dairyland Road.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval per the
planning Board recommendation.
AMENDED
RESOLUTION
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date May 15, 1990
Name of Subdivision Durham Estates Subdivision (Amendment)
Owner /Applicant W. T. Durham
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves an amendment to the
Preliminary Plat of Durham Estates Subdivision (annroved on February 1
91 90) containing 6 lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements
specified herein.
A. Roads
1. British Lane shall be constructed to Class B private road
standards.
OR
A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall be
submitted to secure for future improvement /construction of
British Lane to the standards specified above. An estimate
of the construction cost must be prepared by a
certified /licensed engineer or grading contractor and
submitted to the Planning Department. The financial
guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by
an accredited financial institution.
2. The private road shall be contained within the right -of -way
indicated on the final plat.
3. A private Road Maintenance Agreement shall be approved by the
County Attorney and recorded with the final plat.
B. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall'be installed or preserved as indicated on
the preliminary plan dated October 30, 1989, and must be
inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections
Department.
2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the
approved landscape plan shall be included in a document
describing development restrictions and requirements to be
4
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the
Final Plat.
3. A Type D Land Use Buffer shall be provided along the Duke
Power transmission line along the north side of the
subdivision. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width and
provide sufficient vegetation to meet the standards of
Section IV- B -8 -e. The existence of the buffer shall be noted
on the plat.
4. A Type A Land use Buffer shall be provided along Dairyland
Road (SR 1112). The buffer shall be 30 feet in width and
provide sufficient vegetation to meet.the standards of
Section IV- B -8 -e. The existence of the buffer shall be noted
on the plat.
C. Drainage
1. The 100 -year floodplain of Morgan.Creek shall be labeled on
the Final Plat.
2. Impervious surface data, as required by the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance for property
located within the Universitv.Lake Watershed shall be
included in a document describing development restrictions
and requirements, to be prepared by Planning Staff and
recorded concurrently with the Final Plat.
3. A stream buffer shall be provided along.Morgan Creek. The
width of the buffer shall be stated on the face of the plat.
Development restrictions within the buffer shall be specified
in a document describing development restrictions and
requirements to be prepared by Planning Staff and recorded
concurrently with the Final Plat.
D. Parkland
1. The applicant shall dedicate to Orange County 2.6 acres of
parkland located along Morgan Creek as shown in a cross hatch
pattern on the Preliminary Plan. The applicant shall also
dedicate a parkland area 30 feet wide along Morgan Creek
extending from the 2.6 acres described above to Dairyland
Road (SR 1112).
S. Miscellaneous
1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map
in accordance with Section V -D -2 and V -D -3 of the Orange
County Subdivision Regulations.
2. The following natural and man -made site features shall be
shown on the plat:
s
5
a. Morgan Creek
b. Intermittent Stream
C. Utility Lines
3. The following easements shall be shown on the plat:
- Proposed 50' private right -of -way on British Lane
50' drainage easement along the branch on the east side
of lots 3, 4 and 5
Existing powerline easements
A 30' easement between lots 7 and 8 for access to lot 6
4. A setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the
edge of right -of -way. Side yards shall be a minimum of 20
feet, and rear yards a minimum of 20 feet. These setback
requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document
describing development restrictions and requirements to be
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the
Final Plat.
5. Receive final approval of easement agreements, restrictive
covenants, and private road maintenance agreement documents
from the County Attorney.
6. A note shall be placed on the plat indicating that lot 6
shall use the access easement between lots 7 and 8 and shall
not receive access from Dairyland Road.
F. Certifications
1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered
Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final
Plat.
2. A Certificate of Dedication and Maintenance signed by the
property owner(s) shall be notarized on the face of the plat.
3. The Department of Environmental Health shall certify that
each lot contains a suitable area for septic disposal.
Signature.of Applicant
Clerk to the Board
I, , accept the above listed conditions of
subdivision approval, and acknowledge that each must be met prior to
recordation of the final plat.
Rt.,"'w
FLAT RIVELKp
RED MOUNTAIN ROAD • ROUTE 3 • BOX ZERO • ROUGEMONT • NC • 27572
PROPERTIES
April 6, 1990
Mary Scearbo
Orange County Planning Department
P.O. Sox 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Ms. Scearbo:
our purpose in resubmitting Durham Estates — Phase I through the planning
review process, is to protect future buyers of lots 6, 7, and 8 from impervious
surface issues created by granting a 30 foot driveway easement to lot 6, along
the bounding of lots 7 and S.
We are requesting that the easement be shown on the final plat with a
footnote that any current or future calculations of impervious surface related
to a gravel or paved driveway be associated with lot 6 and not with lots 7 or 8.
This has several environmental advantages. First, it shortens the driveway
serving lot 6 and therefore the amount of disturbed area. Secondly, it keeps the
driveway on high ground and away from a drainage pattern leading to Morgan Creek.
This change will also channel traffic through the Laurel Springs subdivision
instead of directly on to Dairyland Road.
The owner and the buyers of lots 6 and 7 are concerned about the 'volatile
policy issues under development for the University Lake Watershed. This
modification is designed to clearly identify how impervious surface calculations
will be applied against the easement.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincere
Mark N. O'Neal
Agent for
Mr. W.T. Durham
/keh-
cc: W.T. Durham
go
In
n
E
Society before presentation to the Board of
Commissioners.
MOTION: The suggestion by Collins was accepted as a
motion by Best and seconded by Burklin.
VOTE: Unanimous.
AGENDA ITEM #8: SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
a. Preliminary Plats (1 Lot)
(1) Durham Estates - Plan Amendment
(10 Lots Chapel Hill Township)
Presentation by Eddie Kirk.
The Preliminary Plan for the Durham Estates was
approved by the County Commissioners on February
5, 1990. The approval provided for lots 7, 8 and
9 to receive access from Lumley Drive in Laurel
Springs Subdivision. Lot 6 was to receive access
from Dairyland Road, since it did not have
frontage on Lumley Drive.
The applicant has requested that the Preliminary
Plat be revised to provide a 30 foot access
easement between lots 7 and 8 for access to lot
6. Several environmental advantages of access
via the easement are indicated in a letter from
Mark O'Neal, agent for Mr. W. T. Durham. First,
it shortens the driveway through lot 6. Second,
it keeps the driveway away from a drainage area
leading to Morgan Creek. Finally, it allows the
lot to access onto a road of lower
classification. Lumley Drive is considered a
Minor Street, whereas, Dairyland Road is a
Collector Street.
The Planning Staff recommends that item E3 of the
Resolution of Approval be amended to include a
30 -foot access easement between Lots 7 and 8 for
access to Lot 6, and that item C2 be amended
reference the watershed protection standards for
University lake Watershed. (A copy of the
revised Resolution of Approval is attached to
these minutes on pages .)
Discussion followed regarding the applicant's
proposed easement rather than access onto
Dairyland Road. Concern was noted that lots 7
and 8 would also use the easement as access
rather than driveways on each of those lots.
R
F2i
Collins responded that a condition could be added
that the easement only serve lot 6.
Best expressed anan8ecouldthat
accessafter thethe
easement the
lots, lots 7 agreement.
with a private
Jacobs asked about requiring lot 6 to only access
the easement and not Dairyland Road. Collins
responded that could also be added as a
condition of approval.
MOTION: Best moved approval with the condition that Lot 6
access only the easement and not Dairyland Road.
Seconded by Hamilton.
VOTE: 7 in favor.
1 opposed (Eidenier - felt the lot should access
the road on which it has frontage).
b. Final Plats (8 Lots)
(1) Forest Knolls
(8 Lots - Bingham Township)
Presentation by Mary Scearbo.
The property is located in Bingham Township on
the west side of Dodsons Crossroads (SR 1102) 1.4
miles north of NC Highway 54. It is zoned
Residential -1. Adjacent land uses are
residential.
The total acreag of the cwhich range froms1.11
Eight (8) lots are proposed
to 7.51 acres in size. Class
and by individual wells septic
B private road.
The preliminary plan for Forest Knolls was
approved by the County Commissioners on May 1,
1989 with the following conditions:
1. Include in the restrictive covinants
protection of existing
prohibition andrthebminimumn
30 -foot setbacks, required
setbacks for lot 1.
2. On the final.plat,
and dedicate the 5
of --way and the 10'
Dodsons Crossroads.
change the date to 1989
feet of aitr °anglesgonT
x 70' sight
i
SUBJECT:
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 15 1990
1
Action Agenda
Item #
PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ARTICLE 7.14.4 DENSITY BONUS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Amendment
Orange County Watersheds - map
HUD modeling - sample
8/28/89 Public Hearing Minutes
10/16/89 Planning Board Minutes
2/28/90 Public Hearing Minutes
4/10/90 Planning Board Minutes
PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No
INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo
ext. 2583
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough -- 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To consider a proposal to provide incentives for the
development of housing affordable to low and moderate
income families.
BACKGROUND: The Report of the Low - Moderate Income Housing Task
Force, completed September, 1987, included a
recommendation to amend the Zoning Ordinance to
increase incentives for new construction of low- and
moderate- income housing.
The proposed amendment provides such an incentive by
offering a density increase when affordable housing
opportunities are created by a developer. The density
bonus provisions could be applied to Planned
Developments in one of several ways:
1) A density increase of up to 25% if a percentage
of the units or lots are sold or rented to low or
moderate income households.
2) A density increase of up to 25% if off -site land
area is donated to Orange County for future
development of an equivalent number of affordable
units.
3) A 50% density increase if all of the lots /units
are reserved for qualifying households.
Occupancy would be restricted by a contractual
agreement with the Orange County Department of Housing
and Community Development, and would be binding for at
least 15 years.
7 ""R --.
0
The proposal was first presented for public
hearing August 28, 1989. The initial proposal was
revised based on comments received, and was again
presented for public hearing on February 26, 1990.
Comments at the public hearing focused on how the
provisions would be administered, and are discussed in
the "Proposed Amendment" attached.
The Planning Board recommended approval on April 10,
1990 contingent on further clarification of qualifying
income. Income qualifications have been more clearly
specified, with input from the Director of HCD, and
are discussed in the proposed amendment attached.
RECOMONDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed
amendment.
3
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE: Orange County Zoning Ordinance
REFERENCE: Article 7.14.4
Density Bonus for Affordable Housing (NEW)
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: February 26, 1990
DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT
To add Article density bnus
Developments which ch p p
low- or moderate-
income households.
BACKGROUND:
The Report of the Low- Moderate
recommendat�onito amend FtheeZoningleted
September, 1987, included a
Ordinance to increase incentives The fd densityrbonusnrepresentsnone
moderate - income housing- P ro P ose
tool which may be used to achieve that goal.
This amendment was first introduced at the public hearing on August 28,
lggg, A revision to exclude applicability in Watersupply Watersheds
was presented at the public hearing on November 27, 1989. The
amendment was further revised after Developmentt (HCD),Oandgpresented
Department of Hpusing and
for public hearing on February 27, 1990.
The proposal has been revised to better address and clarify the
following issues and questions raised at the February 27 public
hearing.
1. Hoar is income defined?
Income is defined as the combined gross annual income of all
members of the household. In addition. it is proposed that the
family be allowed up up whwheen an
affordable home, and p
By allowing some assets, a family
which would otherwise qualify
would not be penalized for having some resources available for
sickness, emergencies, education, etc. In the case of those
which could
purchasing abe home,
available forlrepairslandemaintenance1. permitted,
whi
The amount of assets allowed is limited, however, to assure that
4
only those who are in need of affordable housing will qualify. The
amendment has been revised to include definitions of "Family
Income" and "Net Assets" (page 1.0 ). The definitions are based
on eligibilty requirements and definitions used by HUD.
2. Can we be sure that the housing units will be constructed?
Yes. Article 7.14.4.3 specifies provisions which will be included
in the contract between the owner /developer and Orange County when
a density bonus is granted, and the developer plans to construct
affordable units on the bonus (or reserved) lots. Article 7.14.4.4
specifies contract provision when duplex or multi- family rental
units are proposed.
In both instances, the contract will specify a timetable within
which the units will be constructed. Failure to comply with the
timetable would constitute a breach of the contract, as well as a
violation of the provision of the Special Use Permit. Violation of
the Special Use Permit could result in its revocation.
The concept is similar to the requirement for a Phasing Plan for
multi -phase subdivisions. As with other Ordinance requirements,
amendment to the timetable could be requested.
It is also required that once constructed, the unit be occupied
only by qualifying households. The contract would be in effect for
15 years after the unit was first occupied.
3. Now is an "affordable" sales price determined?
The U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development uses a
model to determine housing affordability. A sample run of the
model, prepared for Orange County on January 4, 1990, is attached
(page �1 *> )
The sample run was used to determine what income
purchase a home of average sales price in Orange
average sales price was known ($143,577). The is
that home was calculated by the model ($58,387).
County would be using the model to calculate the
a specified income level.
was needed to
County. The
acome needed to buy
Similarly, Orange
sales price, given
Factors used in the model include the interest rate, amount of
downpayment, mortgage payments, insurance, taxes, utilities,
maintenance, and acceptable % of income to be spent on housing. The
attached sample run includes a listing of each parameter used in
the model, and how it is derived. These assumptions (under "Notes"
in attached sample run on page 13 ) could be specified by HCD if
there was disagreement with figures used by HUD.
w
6i
4. what if improvements are made?
In order to preserve the intended benefits of affordable housing,
any resale of a home during the contract period must be to another
qualifying household. Because the resale price may be below market
value, the it is possible that the investment made in improvements
will not be regained if the property is sold prior to the
expiration of the contract period. It is the recommendation of the
Planning Staff that improvements not be prohibited, however, it is
critical that the owner be aware that the value of the improvements
may not be reflected in the resale price. Article 7.14.4.5
requires that this be disclosed to the potential buyer prior to the
sale, in a meeting with the Planning Department and HCD. All terms
of the contract would be reviewed at that time to ensure that there
is complete understanding on the part of the buyer.
s. what if income increases after occupancy?
Once a home is purchased by a qualifying household, there is no
requirement that income stay within qualifying levels. It is hoped
that income will increase. If the owner wishes to relocate, at
some time during the contract period, there are two options
available. First, the home could be sold to a qualified buyer, as
discussed in *3 and #4 above. Second, the owner could lease the
home to a qualified renter. The second option would be preferable
if, for example, there were only two or three years remaining in
the contract. It is recommended that the minimum term of the lease
be for 2 years.
Likewise, the contract with Orange County would allow for renters
whose income increased to continue to rent the unit. However,
terms of a private lease agreement may dictate otherwise, so that
the property owner would have the option of not renewing a lease or
rental agreement if income had increased. The lease would have
been reviewed and approved by HCD to assure that terms were
reasonable.
6. is there assurance that land donated to the County
will be used for affordable housing?
Yes. Article 7.14.4.6 specifies that land donated to Orange County
in exchange for a density bonus will be donated in trust to Orange
County for that sole purpose. The instruments of conveyance will
be approved by the County Attorney to assure that the use of the
property could not be changed. The property would be earmarked for
the development of affordable housing, independent of any future
changes in regulations or possible action by future Commissioners.
7. Application in watersheds
Article 7.4.4.2a of the proposed amendment originally stated that
the bonus provisions may not apply in Watersupply Watersheds,
except where also designated as Transition Area in the 6
Comprehensive Plan.
This excludes all of the watershed areas with except of the Hwy
70/I -85 Corridor in Cheeks Township (see attached map, page 11. ).
It is likely that a developer would seek to locate the project in a
Transition Area, where public water and sewer could be obtained,
and where the base zoning density would be greater. It is less
likely that zoning which restricts density to one or two acres will
provide sufficient incentive utilize the bonus provisions.
Nonetheless, the exclusion poses a severe limitation as to where
bonus projects may be located.
The Planning Board has expressed opposition to this limitation.
The proposal has been revised to apply the exclusion only to the
University Lake Watershed (ULW), and the Water Quality Critical
Areas of other watersupply watersheds. This change is recommended
because specific protection standards have just been adopted within
the ULW, and the zoning density offers little to no incentive for a
developer to utilize the bonus provisions. Applicability of the
bonus provisions outside of the Water Quality Critical Areas
could be addressed during the development of standards for those
watersheds.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
7.14.4 Affordable Housing
7.14.4.1 Density Increase Permitted
An increase in density may be permitted for Planned
Developments which provide on -site or off -site housing
opportunities for low- or moderate -- income households. A
contract shall be approved by the County Attorney and the
Orange County Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD) as a condition of permit approval guaranteeing that the
reserved units will be purchased by or rented to qualifying
households, and shall be binding for a period of not less
than 15 years from the date on which the unit is first
occupied. The reserved lots or rental units shall be
indicated on the site plan or Preliminary Plan.
7.14.4.2 A22licability
a) A density bonus may not be approved for a Planned
Development project located within the University Lake
Watershed, or within areas designated as Water Quality
Critical Area in the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
7
b) A 25% density bonus for duplex or multi - family units may
be approved if:
i. A minimum of 40% of the units are to be rented to
families earning less than 60% of Orange County
median income, adjusted for family size, as
determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD). (Hereinafter, "median
income ").
OR
ii. A minimum of 20% of the units are to be rented to
families earning less than 50% of median income; or
c) A 25% density bonus for single- family residential
development may be approved if the greater of two (2)
units or all of the bonus units are to be sold to
families earning less than 80% of median income; or
d) A 25% density bonus for single - family residential
development may be approved if land with suitable soils
or access to public water and sewer is donated to Orange
County for the purpose of the development of affordable
housing. The donated land shall contain at a minimum
the land area needed to develop the greater of two (2)
units or the total number of the bonus units, in
accordance with the zoning requirements of the district
in which ize donated land is
located, or with
areas; or
lot s
e) A 50% density bonus may be approved if at least 20% of
the units are to be occupied by families earning less
than 50% of median income and the remaining 80% of units
are occupied by families earning less than 80% of median
been bonus inpex lands w
which have
been
bonus pursuant to d) above.
7. 4.4.3 Contract for Sale of Sin le -famil Residences
Approval of the Special Use Permit shall not occur until
there is a contract between the property owner and Orange
County, which shall The contract shall on owners
reserved lots. beadministeredby (HCD),
and shall include the following provisions:
a) All sales and resales shall be approved b H CDdto with
assure ownership by qualifying buyers
the following eligibility criteria.
i) Family income, as defined in Article 22 of this
Ordinance, at the time of purchase shall not exceed
the limits set forth in Article 7.14.4.2.
8
Qualifying buyers may also own up to $10,000 in net
assets, as defined in Article 22 of this Ordinance,
at the time of purchase.
ii) At least one member of a qualifying household must
have lived or worked in Orange County for the past
12 months.
b. The contract shall apply to each of the reserved lots,
and shall continue to affect a particular lot for a
minimum period of 15 years after the initial sale of
that lot.
C. There shall be no occupancy of the unit prior to its
sale to a qualifying buyer.
d. The contract shall include a timeline by which
construction and sale of the reserved units will be
accomplished.
e. The resale price of any reserved housing unit shall not,
at any time during the life of the contract, exceed the
maximum amount affordable to the purchasing household.
f. The maximum sale or resale price shall be determined by
HCD, calculated by using HUD modeling for housing
affordabililty. HUD modeling takes into consideration
assumptions such as interest rates, percentage of annual
income allowed for housing, and amount of down payment.
g. In the event that the financial status of the buyer
significantly improves prior to the expiration of the
contract period, the buyer may lease the unit, provided
that the lessee and the lease are approved by HCD. HCD
shall use the standards set forth in Article 7.14.4.4 to
determine whether or not to approve the lease. In
addition, the term of the lease shall be for a minimum
period of two years.
h. Violation of any of the terms of the contract required
by this ordinance may constitute grounds for revocation
of the Special Use Permit and rezoning of the land, as
provided in Article 7.9 of this Ordinance.
7,14.4.4 Contract for Rental of Du 1ex or Multi-family Units
Approval of the Special Use Permit shall not occur until
there is a contract between the property owner or developer
and Orange County, which shall also be binding on future
owners of the development. The contract shall be
administered by HCD, and shall include the following
provisions:
a) All rentals shall be approved by (HCD) to assure
9
occupancy by qualifying households in accordance with
the following eligibility criteria.
i) Family income, as defined in Article 22 of this
ordinance, at the time of purchase shall not exceed
the limits set forth in Article 7.14.4.2.
Qualifying renters may also own up to $5,000 in net
assets, as defined in Article 22 of this Ordinance,
at the time of initial rental.
ii) At least one member of a qualifying household must
have lived or worked in Orange County for the past
12 months.
iii) Families whose income increases above the
eligibility requirements may continue to occupy the
rental unit, unless otherwise required through terms
of the rental agreement between the lessor and
lessee.
b. Every change in occupancy during the 15 -year term of the
contract shall be approved by HCD to assure continued
compliance with eligibility criteria.
C. The maximum rent allowed shall be computed by
multiplying the applicable percentage of median income
by the value of median income at the time of the
transaction, then multiplying the resulting value by the
maximum percentage of income spent for housing, as
recommended by the mortgage banking industry.
The value for median income used in calculating maximum
allowable rent shall be adjusted to reflect the maximum
family size appropriate for the number of bedrooms, as
determined by HCD.
.14.4.5 Disclosure of Contract Terms to Potential Some -Bu ers
a) Staff from the Planning Department and the Department of
Housing and Community Development shall meet with the
prospective buyer prior to the purchase to assure that
all terms of the contract are fully understood.
Explanation of the terms of the contract shall include
the following implication:
i. Building permits for the improvements to the
structure may be obtained if the owner wishes to
remodel or construct an addition, or construct
accessory structures. However, there is no
assurance that the investment will be regained if
the unit is sold prior to the expiration of the
contract due to the requirement that it be purchased
by a moderate income household.
1.0
b) Home - ownership counseling shall be made available to
first -time buyers to provide information on such topics
as insurance and maintenance. The counseling shall be
provided by the Department of Housing and Community
Development.
7,14.4.6 of Pro ert to Oran a Count
Land donated to Orange County pursuant to Article 7.4.14.2.d
to enable a developer to obtain a density bonus shall be
donated in trust for the purpose of the development of
affordable housing. An agreement between the developer and
Orange County and the instruments of conveyance shall insure
this trust as determined by the County Attorney.
ARTICLE 22 DEFINITIONS
Family Income (new) - The gross annual sum of all income
received by all adult members of the household, including
- earned income from wages for all family members over
the age of 18:
- income from assets:
- child support, alimony, Welfare payments, Social
Security payments, including SSI, Worker's Compensation
and Unemployment benefits;
- Regular contributions and gifts;
- Income from a business;
- earned income tax credits;
- lump sum payments such as inheritance, insurance
settlements, and proceeds from sale of property; and
- income from absent military personnel who are
considered family members of the household.
Net Assets (new) - The equity value of real property such
as land, buildings, Certificates of Deposit, Checking and
Savings accounts, money market accounts, stocks, bonds,
cash, IRA of KEOUGH accounts, gold or precious metals, and
business equipment.
Family or personal assets such as furniture, automobiles,
wheelchairs or other special equipment, household goods,
boats and recreational vehicles are not included.
2.N.IiN
12
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS
Orange County
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 9.5
;me 4121100 419,133 $5,448 $31,669 437,873 $43,854 $50,889 $60.786 $77,033 195,249
NOTE: For illustrative purposes, one decile equals 10 percentiles.
Thus, six deciles 160x1 of the families in Orange County have income less
than $43,854 in 1989; and ten percent have incomes between $43,854
and 450.889 .
The average price (at sale) for a typical, new, conventionally -built
single - family house in Orange County is about $143477 .
The annual income necessary to qualify for this price home would be
$59,387 , according to the Economists at HUD. Given the current income
distribution of families in Orange County 78 percent of them
cannot afford to purchase a home at this price.
This model was run 04- Jan -90 . The average price for a new house is
based on building inspections office estimates of construction casts
plus HUD estimates of the land cost and builder's profit. The data is
for the year ending OCT 19B9.
Components of monthly housing expense are estimated based on HUD
experience with the Section 203 program and are adjusted to the present
date. Principle and interest are based on thirty-year fixed rate financing
at 9.75 percent interest.
r
NOTES:
COUNTY: Orange County
1 AVERAGE SALES PRICE
2 DOMNPAYMENT
3 MORTGAGE AMOUNT
4 PRINCIPAL & INTEREST
5 MORTGAGE INSURANCE
6 TAXES
7 INSURANCE
8 UTILITIES
9 MAINTENANCE
10 MONTHLY HOUSING EXPENSE
11 ANNUAL INCOME
12 FEDERAL INCOME TAX
13 GROSS INCOME
$143.577
$500
4143,0'•7
41.229
159
468
433
$95
$46
$1.J32
348,359
$10,019
15E,387
y
1 PERMIT ISSUING AGENT " 5 VALUATION PLUS EMAS ESTIMATE OF LOT PRICE AND BUILDER'S PROFIT
2 FIVE PERCENT
3 LINE 1 -2
4 9.75 PERCENT INTEREST FOR THIRTY YEARS
5 .04156% OF MORTGAGE AMOUNT PER MONTH
6 'FHA HOMES' 1983, TABLE 31S, NORTH CAROLINA AVERAGES, ADJUSTED TO 1989
. NORTH CAROLINA AVERAGES, ADJUSTED TO 1989
7 'FHA HOMES" 1983, TABLE 315
8 "FHA HOMES' 1983, TABLE 315, NORTH CAROLINA AVERAGES, ADJUSTED TO 1989
9 'FHA HOMES' 1983, TABLE 31S, NORTH CAROLINA AVERAGES, ADJUSTED TO 1989
10 SUM, LINES 4 THRO06H 10
11 LINE 10 % 12 MONTHS, DIVIDE
BY 3B PERCENT II.E., TOTAL HOUSING EXPENSE = 38% DF EFFECTIVE INCD
12 TAX TABLES
13 LINE 11 + LINE 12
13
i
uado .3T SutdaaH - xaq,020112 uado 11 daaX so sagl"011g �t "ITT a �. i
pue Uor,amxoluT Mau so; a aa, ;g pallmtT .aq PTnogs .41 lTa3_ aq £.
so not amxo ;uT ua,�rsy aag�ra o, SutagaH� laa a aq ,eq� PagvOTPur X3HY3 NhrJJHIWO Z
,egg Pangs ah .T12tlsseir sauotsslmmo] q'�. -+P _ - 1 r
_ •gu �sgT.
amour 0
t ssaovxd aq, g5nosq4 oS 04 paau 6
a - L un do uotzgmxo;ut ,daozg IIV% s.lauolssr�amo] aq� �. Tm usmaaxSs UT sgy g
g� T a samrIzamos suaxlITv `osly •ax npavoxd g�aq�_ q�.•
- ;ou pTP aaq�..,eg �T dn- aetaaas aq ,t1uo pTnov G
a s l8q� pa,eolput aqS .Sulpam pxeog SuruugTd s2T aq; °� L un do pa,daooe aq PTnoo tr_.l
g s saa �gq� 7•nq -apgm sl �uorsloap 2 am . aql T .
.uol,4goTunmmoo -T q 4vq S4nq _aP,sxapun aaq ggq pa goTpuT-•I'IYHS K HaNOISSIAiW00 b -:
uot,2mxo ;uT ua „TxN geq;... _. I I
a o og �l xa ;ax og gSnoua_ltr8OT;TnSTs sum Uot,Bmxo;uT b
•psgog SutuUVId q'� g =i q -e a suoTIvIndils aq, ;o auo .
aq; aaq,agy aurmsa,ap PTnoy sxauoissrmmo] aq q� .q �OTJVmxo uL
• 3 t
uado ;aT st SutxBaK orTgnd -aril = ;T -lggg - pa:lsg �aH - �-
�gql UOT;gmxo ;ut Nall JO; Ly SutlgaH olTgnd aql legg Pat ;roads sl gT ssaTun ssaoo,zd i
a duo uado utgmas TT.- L� Paso 0.1B:3vq� sasusgo aqs •aas TTty £ iI
Mau xgaq T o ° -8 a,esau TT -- P
aq, ;o aouaTot ;3a aqg.; T o a tssod sg_ZIas0TO _Sasaaa ps ar ggg� os aaraoax_S£_,
sxau°rssrmmo] aq, sJVTsa4vM aq, q Tq.”' osa uOTlvDuammooax-g agem aaq� G£
Ly sxauotssrmmo] ;o pa aql UoTlvmxo ;ul aq, TTB.uO P g xa Lsuoa•o,_st FsgOg 9£
TT.- u Sutg1ssa�.a gsggax o, paau }ou o �aq, pug
P S£
� pot - ur�'paUTS,xa�ua tipeaal2
•axo;aq uaddeq svq x g� 8: SurxsaH . lgnd
SutuuaTd aql gggl UOT -4emxo ;ut . .ZuauTlied aql ITu4 amao;ur ssaT. -Suppm sT -pxaog SuruugTd '4£
aaeq Saq;, •suor ;VPUammooaJ 8AT,oa ;; P p e ml °� pamaas gl Zvq� Pals-4s aH ££
a pug ,TnOt ; ;lP axom Sutmooeq ST ssa0oxd aql q� . q
aql P a yo o uor,ou agl.`STTgv% ;toads ._.saxnpaooid SuTxgaH Z£_.
a st Sulxeax oTTgnd aql q ; -
uado „ T a eot ul `SSOadr NMI CLUVOg ONIHNnd . I£
a no g susaouoa p q �{ } q� P � F - -:� 0£
8 a a
otTgnd q� g q gr Lul sqg mos; 'uado ss 6L
a o am,, aqg TT,un alup Suragaq T �. Sr".
•aolstoap Tgut3 q� ; aaa tsuoo aq ugo,s.zauarssTmmo �
nd B maa p1noN guampuam8 aq, pa+osddB ;I P P. 2 2 asnss GZ i
Sulseaq oTlq P o uosToap aql og solid pa,►raoaa U0!lVmxo;ut TT � q=
Sluno] ;0 pxeo3 aqJ ; axa Lsuoo aq lou ,£gm Sulx•eaH olTgnd aq 9Z i.
o st ZUaQpUamv pasodoxd aq, ;° asodxnd aq,L P P. asa Lsuo SZ tz
o a Ls�no P t s qe paniaaaa �UOMT ;sa} aq,L •sxauorsstmm° £c
a,�Taoas Au°mT -say 'uotsToap s� Sulsapuaa ut Spog 5uraeaH aq;
q P
P uT sg pxooas uo sr Sutaeag .Tq
uoT,gmxo; d a em sr uotsTaap TBUl; g TT�un uado ul•amax Surxsaq align
;zuno] ;0 pxeog aq, q P of nd aql o, juampuamv pasodox 1�
dug `pauado aouo ,eqI axTnbax o, suol,2TnSas Sulseaq Tq sr �xemmns uI
a uesaid sum ma,T qza vt,xd (T) O�
aql u° luammoo uazt,To a,�raoas o, ua�SatxvaH vtTgnd 9-OZ T 6
joaxagl aOTION P
saxnpaooxd SUtxgaH otTgnd a $
.4ovdmt 1vluamuoxTAua pug 'suotsua' a L
�sanssT pagsxa,eN SulPnToul `amt, stgl IV passnvs P 5
jamas pug sa,gy `za,osxego Texnx age yoxs xocrm xaq,o sa,tTOAUT SUTsnoq•10 SITutq� Hsu P £
rI0 paTpn,s Sutaq sans �uamapgug� gl a pug aslsuatlasdmoo axom tl sxada asap -q
a2uVa_2UOT aqq o, gogoxdde aaT,oa33 P 2 tns �Ty ssauyopuvl / i
2 xo; a5uvgoxa ut a�suop
° anivA iassaT 10 pUvI alq i g oxd -uvu Aq pazIlT n
xo goutsnoq aTgsp.zo; ;B dolanap o, Sutpua,ut npgaxTe sula`ve.zq amaaUl a,exapom ao r+oT ql
t ,sour axe suotsTAoxd pasodoxd aqZ a,�xasas aze stun so Ol
aq o, STa'I. T a es so •aq .saugdnvoo xo; p asod o 6
ut Sulaq sg i ;tl2nb gotgM splvgasnoq o, T o, do ;v asvaxout i,tsuap 8 �eg� P
SJOT aqJ 3° a3vquaoxad 8 3t Pa�asnxaq
aq xu�lg 1oO-4 auo s,uasasdas ,uampuamg pasod xd 8
Agin o y uaoUl aseas nt 9
st '4I -1205 ,gql a.�atc�oe o, P o uot,ansisuoo you xo ;�xa ma,das pa,ald ao
aqZ •Sutsnoq am0vut_a,exapom Pugeyuammooax B papnTOUr LS61
came 0, UO1q F N aql •saT Lmvl amoouT alvia om
o-Z aoUSUtpxO SutUo aim °aui a,esapv{� -yO1 aq, ;o lioda a T �oxd o, lasod .rd
6aoxo3 gs2.Z SuTsnoH uamdo aaap aq, ao; sa.�t,uaout ap.• £
pug MOT o, Sutsnoq algvpx0 ;3g ;° aluasaxd SVm ma,T stgl Alsmmns uI Z
aql uo }uammoo uazl,TO a•titaoax ° snuog ATsuaa - 6'6i•L aTot,xY (T) l
SntsnoH alggPxO; ;V xo; SuTsnOH a1gsP =o ;;y •P
sagnul i�crr:.n?ad �Z -4rd
68/8Z/8
15 ,
a
1 making a judgment about what's significant enough to be referred back to the Planning
2 Board doesn't work. Obviously, it will be referred back on one occasion and not on
3 others and the citizens will have difficulty understanding why one thing was referred
4 and another was not.
5
5 COUNTY ATTORNEY GEOFFREY GLEDHILL, stated that a
- i leave the Public Hearing open solely For the Possible solution would be to
u
3 recommendation. He indicated that the concern which caused r him toewritenthe letter s was 9 that in reviewing the Planning Board's meeting minutes it became apparent that
0 information was coping into the Public Hearing process that was not a
part of the
1 Hearing, either through staff reports or otherwise. All of that should occur beforebthe
public hearing is closed because it is ,
-' 3 deciding ow to pertinent valuable information. However,
g get it into the process is the problem.. Leaving the Public Hearing open
until all that is left is a decision is one way of getting this information into the
:) process.. Limiting the last round of the Public Heari -ng is a way of accomplishing that "
6 by stating that nothing will be heard at that point the 7 recommendation. The Planning Board's recommendation except
containnwhateverrinformation
g had come to it outside of the Public Hearing.
3 LINK suggested that the statement be made that the "Public Hearing is held open
I until the Commissioner's receive the Planning Board's recommendation.
2
3 CHAIRMAN CAREY stated that when it is held open for the Planning Board's
4 recommendation it must be advertised as a Public Hearing.
6 GLEDHILL stated that if the meeting was "adjourned until no new in was-
8 expected than it is not necessary to readvertise.:;
0 STEVE YUHASZ, Planning Board.member,. stated that he hoped that any information
I coming before the Planning Board would be written and not verbal because the meetings
are barely able to cover all pertinent information as it is. If more verbal comments
2 were included they would not be able to complete the meetings in one evening.
3
_
4 GLEDHILL stated that it is- the area of 'written p
6 technical information, that really -is im itten comments, and in articular
6 _ - portant here.•
~- CHAIRMAN CAREY indicated that w -
g hat he was hearing was that the Commissioners wanted—
to close- .the_hearing and entertain the Planning: Board's recommendation: -
9 w "'w•� `�f: Non - Residential Development Standards (1) Article S.1.2 - Schedule for
-
0� -. Non- Residential Development
2 In summary this item was presented to receive citizen comment on the
3 proposal to- provide floor -area - ratio - (Fax)- requirements for non - residential uses
4- permitted in'residential. zoning districts which are consistent with the actual floor
5-areas of existing facilities.-__Controling the intensity of a land use or the degree to
- which- a
6 propert y is used is one -of planning's goals. Residential land use regulations _
- almost always_deal with density.— In
- non_ - residential districts, intensity - -is most often
—
8 controlled through the use of - standards that - regulate the bulk of a building--
g _.__ ._.._. Floor.. -
9 area ratios (FARs); in conjunction with height limitations, are the principal - standards _-
0 used in the Orange County.Zoning Ordinance to control building volume. Floor area ratio
1
is defined as the maximum floor area permitted for each square foot of land area. In
3recent tears, the Orange County School Board has submitted two requests for a variance
. of. FAR to permit an existing school to expand or a new school to be.built. The
4----inability of the School Board to'comply with the FAR requirements without purchasing
5 sizable land tracts has raised the question -as to whether or not the ratios are too log:,
10/16/99 16
Plannina Board Minutes
Another concern was the forty -five day deadline
for action which has been reduced to twenty -one
(21) days. Staff feels that they can work within
this time frame, provided agency comments are
received promptly.
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the
amendments as presented at public hearing with
the changes for requiring three copies and the
twenty -one day deadline for action on the site
plan once it is complete. The Town of Carrboro
requested that wastewater disposal fields also be
shown on the site plan.
Crudup noted that Article 8.8 is to refer to
Article 14 so that it is consistent with the
information required for site plans for special
uses.
MOTION: Best moved to accept the Planning Staff
recommendation for approval of Article 8.8 and
Article 14 with the changes as indicated.
Seconded by Eidenier.
VOTE: Unanimous. (Boland out of the room during this
vote.)
(3) Article 7.14.4 - Density Bonus for
Affordable Housing
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
This proposal is to put into the Zoning
Ordinance a density bonus which could be applied
in.one of the following ways:
a) A density increase of up to 25% if a
percentage of the units or lots are reserved
for occupancy by low or moderate income
households. The percentages are based on
eligibility criteria for the Low Income
Housing Tax Credit.
b) A density increase of up to 25% if off -site
land area is donated to Orange County for
future development of an equivalent number of
affordable units.
c) A 50% density increase would apply if a,U of
the lots /units are reserved for qualifying
households (20% low - income, 80% moderate -
income).
Occupancy would be restricted by a cortractural
I
-- - 17
1 .particular in residential zoning districts which permit non - residential uses. The
ly
2 proposed amendment to Article 5.1.2 would increase the FAR requirements in the Rn
p districts to 0.$88 for individual lots and 1.000 for planned
3 AR, R -1, and R -2 zoning
4 developments. The FAR requirements with the floorrarealofrexx -istingffacilities
5 district and are more in keeping i
h located in rural areas.
7 Commissioner Marshall, to refer
g A motion was made.by Chairman Carey, seconded by
9
these Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments to the Planning OBo rd for a recommendation to be
0 returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
I \TOTE: UNANIMOUS
2
3 5. SUBDIVISION REGULAT ONS TEX AMENS S
4 a. Section IV -B -6 Reservation of Space for Utilities
5
In summary this item was presented to rec-aive citizen comment on the
6 proposed amendment to require dedication 20-Year TransitioneAreas. The OrangeoCountyn o or P
7 approval for subdivisions within 10 io
Transition Areas. However, use of Public utilities is
8 dater and Sewer Policy allows extension of public water and sewer facilities to serve and
9 subdivisions within 1Q -?0 dear Tran
0 not required. Subdivisions within TransitioroAidese sementslwherelpublic ufacilities s
1 septic tanks are not presently required p
l will not be utilized in the subdivision itsea�er ndisepercextensions. Theeproposed
gap
3 which could create difficulties for future
"allow for utility easements -.as a requirement for subdivision
4 amendment would s approve
55 with designated Transition Areas. _
7 b. Section IV- B -10 -b Cluster Development Application Criteria
.9 In summary this item -was presented to receive citizen comment on the
9 ment to the application criteria for cluster subdditesexclude private road
proposed amend
0 minimum tract size within the Rural Buffer Zoning District, an
1 right-of-way in calculating the number of lots the m 2 g
a minimum tract size of ,400,000 square feet in
3 district, and 200,000 square feet in the R -1 (Rural Residential) district. Cluster
4 developments in all other districts must contain a miminum of 80,000 square
6 feet. The propsed amend ment.aould require 400,000 square feet for cluster developments
in the Rural Buffer,�as_is required in Alwaytfrom the Residential)
calculations zed
7- Article- IV- B-10- b(c).excludes public road-right-Of- d with clust
8- used.to'_ determine the number of lots.luded�as. ells "' Theserchanges� are in keepineropo
9-- that private road.'right- of- way.be__eac and would provide
0,the intent of the'application criteria Ordinance andASubdieisi n Regulations.' set forth in
1 �*i�eater_ consistency_betwe_en_the_ Zoning
3 C. Section VII -D Amendment Procedures- -
4 " In summary this item was presented to receive citizen comment on the proposed amendment to the public hearing regulations to require that once opened, am
5
6" "public hearing - remain " operi- until - "a final decision is- made- by- the Board" of- Counts
7- Commissioners- The testimony received at .a pusldecision g Testimonx received foutside nof
8 considered by the hearing body in rendering it proposed amendment is to
9 the public hearing may not be considered.- The purpose of•the prop
i 3 assure that all information received prior to the decision of the Board "of County
1 Commissioners can be considered. If approved; thtlamendment ofthe final decisionublic hearing
Z as open, from the initial - hearing date until the -- .- -_.
3 . _ ...
4 QUESTIONS AND COAAiENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD
v
18
agreement with the Orange County Department of
Housing and Community Development, and should be
binding for at least 15 years.
The proposed provisions are most likely to be
utilized by non - profit organizations already
intending to develop affordable housing, or by
developers /landowners with suitable land of
lesser value to donate in exchange for a density
increase.
A more comprehensive and effective approach to
the long -range affordability of housing involves
other growth management issues being studied or
discussed at this time, including watershed
issues, the rural character, water and sewer
extensions.
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the!
proposed density bonus provisions including the
addition of a minimum period of 15 years for
contractural agreements. Also, as recommended by
the Town of Carrboro, application of a 50%
density increase when at "least" 20% of the units
are for low- income households and the remainder
for moderate income households.
There was considerable discussion regarding
density bonuses in watersheds and the possible
"trade -off" of watershed protection for
affordable housing. It seemed to be the feeling
that affordable housing and density bonuses
should apply county -wide.
MOTION: Jacobs moved approval of the provision for
density bonuses and recommend that the issue of
its applicability in watersheds and other areas
of restricted development potential be referred
to public hearing November 27, 1989. Seconded by
Eidenier.
VOTE= 9 in favor.
1 opposed (Eddleman - stated that he felt there
are engineering and environmental reasons why
density in watersheds should not be beyond a
certain point and felt density bonuses in a
watershed was a defect in the proposal.
(4) Article 20.6 - Public Hearing /Notice
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
This item is to consider an amendment to the
2/28/90
�RAF'T
1 east along Old US 70 E., south on NC 86, then along Old NC 10 east to the Southern Railway
2 crossing; then north on Lawrence Road, east along Old US 70 E., to Seven Springs Road,
3 returning westward along US 70 E., south on Lawrence Road and west on Old US 70 E. to Old
4 NC 86 (Churton Street). Included in Route 5 are Joppa Oaks, Byrdsvi1le, Strayhorn Hills,
5 Colonial Hills Mobile Home Park, Colonial Hills Subdivision and Piney Grove and Valley
6 Forge Roads. Route 2 Durham encompasses an area beginning at the Durham County line on
7 Ebenezer Church Road, south along Pleasant Green Road to US 70, and includes the following
8 subdivisions: Country Lane Estates, Pleasant Green Estates, Meadow Estates, Brigadoon,
9 and Meadows of Eno. The following roads are also included: Knight Drive, Deerwood Lane,
10 Cole Mill Road, Jones Homestead Road, Cabe Ford Road, Willett Road, Laurel Ridge Road,
11 Linden Road, and US 70 from Linden Road east to the Durham County Line.
12
13 THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD, OR
14 CITIZENS.
15
16 A motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to
17 approve the house and building numbers for Rural Route 2, Durham and Rural Route 5,
18 Hillsborough, followed by notification of the Hillsborough Postmaster, the Durham
19 Postmaster and the N.C. Department of Transportation, as required by G. S. 153A -240.
20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
21
22 2. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS
23
24 a. Article 2.3.3.2 Board of Adjustment Administration
25 This presentation was made by Mary Scearbo. In summary this item was
26 presented to receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to
27 show that the Board of Adjustment meeting is subject to the Open Meetings Law. The
28 proposed amendment provides a reference to the portion of the General Statutes pertaining
29 to Open Meeting Laws (H.S. 143 -318.9 et seq). This portion of the General Statues
30 includes the purposes for which a public body may hold an executive session and exclude
31 the public.
32
33 THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING BOARD
34 OR CITIZENS.
35
36 b. Article 7.14.4 Density Bonus for Affordable Housing
37 This presentation was made by Mary Scearbo. In summary this item was
38 presented to receive citizen comment on a proposal to provide incentives for the
39 development of housing affordable to low and moderate income families. The Report of the
40 Low - Moderate Income Housing Task Force, completed September, 1987, included a
41 recommendation to amend the Zoning Ordinance to increase incentives for new construction
42 of low and moderate- income housing. The proposed amendment provides such an incentive
43 by offering a density increase when affordable housing opportunities are created by a
44 developer. The density bonus provisions apply only to Planned Developments located
45 outside of a protected watershed, and could be applied in one of several ways:
46 1) A density increase of up to 25% if a percentage of the units or lots are sold or rented
47 to low or moderate income households.
48 2) A density increase of up to 25% if off -site land area is donated to Orange County for
49 future development of an equivalent number of affordable units.
50 3) A 50% density increase if all of the lots /units are reserved for qualifying households.
51
52 Occupancy would be restricted by a contractual agreement with the Orange County Department
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
d� „
of Housing and Community Development, and should be binding for at least 15 years.
noted that the Planning Board was against excluding the affordable housing provisions
the watershed restrictions.
QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR THE PLANNING BOARD.
Commissioner Hartwell suggested that the wording for median income be the
throughout the document rather than being "regional median income" and "median
income ". He also asked about the opportunities and restrictions for land donate
the county. In particular, he asked if the county could donate that land to Habitat
Humanity.
Scearbo indicated that the intent of that section was to enable the county to t
donated land to Habitat for Humanity or similar groups.
She
rom
rea
to
for
er
Gledhill indicated that the conveying instrument would assure that the donated Iland
would be used as intended. He indicated that the Ordinance was not an effective wa to
assure the use of the land because the Ordinance could be changed by a future Board.
In response to a question from Commissioner Carey, Scearbo indicated that the i tent
was not to discourage an increase in income of potential renters. Once someone moves into
one of the units they would be allowed to stay there for as long as they chose regardless
of future income. She also indicated that limiting the evaluation of the home to a
specific amount so that the units remain affordable was a goal. However, the mechanism
to assure this has not yet been finalized. In order to reach this goal there are several
different options. Among those options are using the contract and /or the ordinance.
Gledhill pointed out that appreciation of value is not at issue here. The issue is
maintaining the resale price of the home. The resale price will be kept to the same
affordability standards that are established in the program in the beginning.
i
Commissioner Hartwell stated that Item 2.14.4.2.2 needs to be reworded so that it
states the same criteria for resale as is found in Item 7.14.4.1.
In response to a questions from Mike Lewis, Scearbo indicated that the 15 year 'limit
for this program had been chosen because the Low - income Tax Credit had, until recently,
used a 15 year term as had similar types of programs.
Bill Waddell asked about the affordability index which is referred to as a "rule of
thumb" of 2 1/2 times annual income as the affordable purchase price. Scearbo indicated
that HUD used that as a guideline. HUD has studied this region extensively and they have
a model that they use to determine what is affordable to a particular income group, such
as 80% of regional median income. In early January they ran the model for Orange County
to determine those income figures so that they could be used as a guide to determine the
affordable price. The 2 1/2 times is not a fixed amount. Many other factors are taken
into account.
In response to a concern voiced by Commissioner Hartwell, Link indicated that
7.14.4.2.2 states that "all sales and rental transactions shall be approved by HCD to
assure compliance with eligibility criteria." Gledhill indicated that homes stay In the
market unless they are sold in compliance with these criteria.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Commissioner Marshall indicated that a "clearinghouse" needs to exist to keep track
of those who want to buy the house as well as those who are under density bonus. It
cannot be left entirely to the builder to market these homes for sale to low- income
households. The county also needs to address that issue.
In response to a question from Larry Reid, Scearbo indicated that improvements could
be made to the home, however, if the home were sold during the 15 year period it would
need to be sold to a qualifying household regardless of improvements /additions which
might have been made to the home by the owner.
Waddell asked for clarification of the definition of income. The consensus was that
HUD guidelines would be used to determine eligibility. This point will be clarified in
the amendment.
A motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to
refer these items to the Planning Board for recommendations to be returned to the Board
of Commissioners no sooner than April 2nd.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS
a. Section III -D-1 -b Planning Department Review Procedures
This presentation was made by Mary Scearbo. In summary this item was
presented to receive citizen comment on a proposal to provide adequate time for staff
review of major subdivision Concept Plans. Current Subdivision Regulation time limits
do not always allow sufficient time for staff review of major subdivision concept plans.
The proposed amendment would assure a minimum time period of 30 days between project
submittal and its presentation to the Planning Board.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD.
Commissioner Marshall stated that when time is added onto the process at one point,
consideration needs to be given to taking an equal amount of time off at a later point
in the process.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT
Larry Blalock, a resident of Cedar Grove, indicated that he opposed adding time to this
process. He pointed out that adding time also adds to the cost of housing.
Cathy Carroll also requested that time not be added to this process.
A motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis, to
refer this to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of
Commissioners no sooner than April 2nd.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Section IV -B -8 -e Schedule of Required Land Use Buffers
This presentation was made by Emily Crudup. In summary this item was
presented to receive citizen comment on proposed amendments to Section IV -B -8 of the
Subdivision Regulations, Landscaping and Buffer Requirements. Two amendments are proposed
for Section IV -B -8 of the Subdivision Regulations. The first involves interpretation of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the Schedule of Required Land Use Buffers as it applies to subdivisions in the unto ed
townships. The second amendment to Section IV -B -8 will clarify the purpose of the buf er
waiver provisions and extend the scope of IV -B -8 -9 to include waivers for other landscape
requirements contained in the Subdivision Regulations.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD
CITIZENS.
A motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis,
refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Bo
of Commissioners no sooner than April 2nd.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
E. ADJOURNMENT
with no further items for Board consideration, Chairman Carey adjourned
meeting. The next regular meeting will be held on March 5, 1990 at 7:30 p.m., in the
Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina.
Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk
Moses Carey, Jr., Chai
OR
to
and
the
Old
r
23
specifically designed to store the information in
GIS and then be used for each project as needed
and used with other information. He noted that a
problem with this is that this is a proposed
project and the GIS system is land that has
already been subdivided with completed projects.
Thus, he felt this could not be used to project
net impact.
Lewis asked if the developer would be providing
the Fiscal Impact Analysis or the data. Collins
responded that the developer would supply the
data and Planning Staff would produce the Fiscal
Impact Analysis.
d. Hillsborough Cooperative Planning
e. Growth Management Strategies
AGENDA ITEM #6: ITEMS HEARD AT 2/26/90 PUBLIC HEARING
a. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment
(Article 7.14.1 - Density Bonuses for
Affordable Housing)
Eidenier distributed copies of a Proposal for an
exemption to the Paved Roads Requirements to
Affordable Housing written by Ann Joyner of Cedar
Grove Township. (A copy of this proposal an
attachment to these minutes on pages .)
Presentation by Mary Scearbo.
The Report of the Low - Moderate Income Housing
Task Force, completed September, 1987, included a
recommendation to amend the Zoning Ordinance to
increase incentives for new construction of low
and moderate - income housing.
The proposed amendment provides such an incentive
by offering a density increase when affordable
housing opportunities are created by a developer.
The density bonus provisions apply only to
Planned Developments located outside of a
protected watershed, and could be applied in one
of several ways:
1) A density increase of up to 25% if a
Percentage of the units or lots are sold or
rented to low or moderate income households.
2) A density increase of up to 25% if off -site
land area is donated to Orange County for
N
24
future development of an equivalent
number of affordable units.
3) A 50% density increase may if all of the
lots /units are reserved for qualifying
households.
Occupancy would be restricted by a contractural
agreement with the Orange County Department of
Housing and Community Development, and should be
binding for at least 15 years.
The proposal was first presented for public
hearing August 28, 1989. The initial proposal
was revised based on comments received, and was
again presented for public hearing on February
26, 1990. Comments at the public hearing focused
on how the provisions would be administered.
Those comments are discussed in the "Proposed
Amendment" which is an attachment to these
minutes on pages
A copy of the analysis from HUD which calculates
the level of income to qualify for affordable
housing is an attachment to these minutes on
pages Scearbo indicated this would be the
model Orange County would use to determine
qualification for affordable housing.
Scearbo reviewed the proposed amendment and
questions received at the public hearing.
In answer to a question regarding selling price,
Scearbo reviewed the method used for calculation.
She noted that she could have HUD run a model for
Orange County with specifics for a sample family
prior to the public hearing. She indicated that
the most critical factor will be determining
median income.
Waddell expressed concern that the buyer would
not benefit from increased value due to
improvements. Reid expressed the same concern
that it seemed the buyer would have to remain the
entire fifteen years to realize those benefits.
Scearbo responded the target group is one that
would not be able to purchase a home at all
without such a program. She continued that this
effort will by no means solve the affordable
housing dilemna; it is one area where the Count
can provide some opportunities for home
ownership.
Waddell also expressed concern with the
25
possibility of units not selling. Scearbo
responded that distribution of the units would be
one of supply /demand and she indicated she felt
there would be no problem with selling the units.
Scearbo continued reviewing questions from the
Public hearing. Eidenier expressed concern that
when children became adults they would be
required to move out. Scearbo responded that
this would not be required. This would be
considered only in the qualifying process for
the affordable unit. Once the process was
completed and the buyer qualified, the home would
be his.
Tara Fikes, Director of Housing & Community
Development, explained some of the qualifying
criteria. Waddell indicated he felt those
requirements should be specifically defined,
particularly total assets.
MOTION: Jacobs moved approval of the Planning Staff
recommendation for approval of the proposed
amendment. Seconded by Cantrell.
VOTE: 7 in favor.
2 opposed (Lewis & Waddell - both felt there were
some issues not properly addressed, Lewis noted
that there were also problems with some of the
language).
44-
ORANGE
' BOARD OF COI
ACTION AGENDA
Meeting Date: May
SUBJECT: Lease Purchase Proposal;
DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENT(S):
a. Proposal from Wachovia
COUNTY
IMISSIONERS
Action Agen
Item No.
ITEM ABSTRACT
13, 1990
First Wachovia Leasing
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Chavious
Ext. 2430
b. Resolution TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
-
PURPOSE: To consider approval ,:;f a lease purchase proposal submitted by
First Wachovia Leasing for the purchase of a hazardous materials
vehicle and for telecommunications hardware and software.
BACKGROUND: On March 21, 1990, the Board approved a proposal through
First Union to fund hazardous Materials Response Vehicle
and the telephone system in an amount of $417,200. Subsequent
to this approval, First Union withdrew their proposal.
The Finance Director has investigated several other options and
is bringing forward a new proposal from First Wachovia Leasing
Company. First Wachavia is offering a 7.38% rate as compared tc
First union's 7.36% rate, resulting in a very minimal payment
differential. The Wachovia proposal requires payments of
$34,679.20 to be made, in advance, on a quarterly basis for 20
quarters.
RECOMMENDATION(S): To accept the proposal from First Wachovia Leasing
Company, adopt required resolution, and to authorize the Chair to
sign the final lease documents, pending completion and review by
the County Attorney, the County Finance Director and the County's
Bond Counsel.
irar Hfid wWa L ft t* Co po Wim
01 North Main $,me,
nNaoan- ,�rtlena, Nenh COWMW 27130
'191770.660
.
FIRS!'
WKM"
.pril 22, 1990
r. Ken Chavious
inance Director
range County
. 0. Box 8181
illaborough, NC 27278
ear Ken:
a conjunction with the recommendation of Charles Wartman, First Wachovia
easing Corporation is pleased to present the following commitment to lease
quipment to Orange County.Thie commitment will expire in 60 days from the
ate hereof, and is subject to Orange County maintaining a condition
atisfactory to First Wachovia. The details of our are as follows;
Equipment: Northern Telecomm Telephone System and
.Emergency Support Vehicle
Equipment Cost: $417,200.00
Term: A. 59 Months
B. 20 Quarters
Payments: A. Monthly, in advance, plus
applicable taxes.
B. Quarterly, in advance, plus
applicable taxes.
Rate /Rental: A. 7.38 % /$ 8,401.31
B. 7.382/$24,679.20
Purchase Option: $1.00
Documentation: To First Wachovia's satisfaction
including:
1•) Letter from Counsel authorizing
the County's participation in
the Lease.
2.) Addendum to Lease addressing:
a.) fiscal funding cancellation
provisions;
z
r. Ken Chavious
range County
?ril 22, 1990
age 2
Documentation (Continued):
Other Conditions:
b.) provisions for subsequent
changes in the tax rate due
to:
i. tax legislation;
ii. a determination that
lease interest is
includable in the gross
income of First
Wachovia for federal
income tax purposes,
and;
iii. a change in the maximum
percentage rate of
federal income tax
applicable to the
taxable income of First
Wachovia.
3.) Formal Governing Body Resolution
(substantially in the form
attached) designating the lease
as a "qualified tax - exempt
obligation ".
1.) The rates quoted herein assume
the Lease qualifies as a
"qualified tax - exempt obligation"
under the Tax Reform Act of 1986;
should it not, the rate will be
adjusted accordingly.
2.) The County will be responsible
for maintenance, filing fees,
taxes and insurance, including a
minimum of $1,000,000.00 in
general liability coverage for
this vehicle.
3.) The fixed rate of our commitment
shall expire after 30 days, from
the date hereof; thereafter, to
be determined at the time of
lease activation in accordance
with money market conditions.
VIIY�,,.�in�rr�
r. Ken Chavious
range County
prii 22, 1990
age 3
'hank you for the opportunity to present this commitment to Orange County.
_nd I look forward to htaring from you in the near future.
incerely,
'illiam E. McCarthy.
'ice President
IEM/ t a
;cs Charles Wartman
M
N
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD
OF COMMISS1ONERS OF
ORANGE COUNTY
The Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina
(Lessee) represents that it reasonably expects that it and all
subordinate entities of it will not issue in the aggregate more.
than $10,000,000.00 of tax - exempt obligations (not counting
private - activity bonds except for qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as
defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended) during
calendar year 1990. In addition, Lessee hereby designates the
obligation referred to as
between First
Wachovia Leasing Corporation and Lessee as a "qualified tax - exempt
obligation" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
Resolved this day of
1990.
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman
Orange County Board of
Commissioners
I, Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the
County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on as relates in any way
to the adoption of the foregoing Resolution and that said
proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes
of said Board, beginning at page and ending at page
W
WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this
day of , 1990.
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
�
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No.
Meeting Date: May 15, 1990
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS
- ---------------------------- - - -- --
DEPARTMENT: COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
----------------------------------
ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER SEPARATE COVER INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY BLYTHE
Ext. 2130
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
- -
PURPOSE: To maintain membership at effective levels on Commissioner's
appointed boards and commissions.
BACKGROUND: The following recommendations are presented for the Board's
consideration:
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES: Reappoint Viola Crowder to her second
term which will end June 30, 1996. Bylaws of the Library Board specify
that members can serve only two consecutive six -year terms.
OWASA BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Reappoint Lois Herring to a second three -
year term. Her second term will end June 30, 1993.
BOARD OF HEALTH: Reappoint Ruth Royster and Carole Stemkowsi to three
year terms ending June 30, 1993. Ms. Royster will complete her final term
as the Public Representative and Dr. Stemkowski will serve her first full
term as the Veterinarian Representative.
DOMICILIARY HOME ADVISO yy COMMITTEE: Reappoint Randy Brantley,
Chester Cavalito and Ruth Ferguson to their second two -year terms ending
June 30, 1992. Appoint Patricia Sipp to serve a probationary training
period which will end June 30, 1991.
HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Reappoint Betty Landsberger and
Peggy Pollitzer to their second three -year terms ending June 30, 1993.
Appoint Paula Brittian and Hazel Quick to serve three -year terms as At
Large representatives.
NURSING HOME ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Appoint Lucia Anderson and Faye
Cleaton to their first full three -year terms ending June 30, 1992. They
have completed the required probationary training period.
TRIANGLE J EMS COUNCIL: Reappoint Dr. Fred Hansen and Jeanette Smith
to serve another two -year term. Dr. Hansen represents the required
Hospital Administrator position and Jeanette Smith of the EMS staff fills
the required Local Government representation.
RECOMMENDATION(S): As the Board decides.
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Action A ei a
Item NO.JKJJI
Meeting Date: Mav 15,_ 1990
SUBJECT: MINUTES
------------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - --
DEPARTMENT: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER- - -
SEPARATE COVER INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY BLYTHE
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes as submitted for
consideration:
April 2, 1990
April 17, 1990
May 1, 1990
Regular Meeting
Regular Meeting
Regular Meeting
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A -42 of the General Statutes, the
governing Board has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered
into the official journal of the Board's proceedings.
RECOMMENDATION(S): As the Board decides.
Deloitte &
Touche
April 16, 1990
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Concourse
One Copley Parkway, Suite 600
P.O. Box 13866
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27709 -3866
Telephone: (919) 481 -4474
(919) 683 -2150
Facsimile: (919) 481 -4370
We are pleased to serve as independent accountants and auditors for Orange
County, North Carolina. Mr. Rex Price will be responsible for all services we
perform for you.
It will be the responsibility of Mr. Price to make sure that your management
receives quality service. He will, as considered necessary, call upon other
individuals with specialized knowledge, either in this office or elsewhere in
our Firm.
While auditing and reporting on your annual financial statements is to be the
recurring basic service we provide, we would also like to assist you on issues
as they arise throughout the year. Hence, we hope you will call Mr. Price
whenever you feel he can be of assistance.
Audit of Financial Statements
Report on Audit of Financial Statements
The purpose of our engagement is to audit the County's financial statements for
the year ending June 30,•1990, and to evaluate the fairness of presentation of
the statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, in
all material respects.
Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards which gives consideration to our understanding of the internal
control structure, including the control environment, the accounting system and
the control procedures established by management. Based on this consideration
we will design our audit to provide reasonable assurance of detecting errors
and irregularities that are material to the financial statements.
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Page Two
April 16, 1990
However, because of the characteristics of irregularities, particularly those
involving forgery and collusion, a properly designed and executed audit may not
detect such items. Therefore, an audit conducted in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards is designed to obtain reasonable, rather than
absolute assurance about the financial statements. An audit includes examin-
ing, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting prin-
ciples used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating
the overall financial statement presentation.
The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion on the county's
financial statements. Our ability to express that opinion, and the wording of
our opinion, will, of course, be dependent on the facts and circumstances
at the date of our report. If our auditors' report requires modification, the
reasons therefor will be discussed with you prior to its issuance.
Management's Resoonsibilit
We direct your attention to the fact that the financial statements are the
responsibility of management. In this regard, management has the responsibil-
ity for properly recording transactions in the accounting records, for making
appropriate accounting estimates, for safeguarding assets and for the overall
accuracy of the financial statements.
Other Communications Arising from the Audit
In connection with the planning and the performance of our audit generally
accepted auditing standards require that we communicate certain matters to the
Board of County Commissioners. We will communicate to the Board of County
Commissioners, to the extent that they come to our attention, irregularities
and illegal acts that are clearly not inconsequential and reportable condi-
tions. Reportable conditions are significant deficiencies in the design or
operation of the internal control system that could adversely affect the
County's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements.
We may also have other comments for management on matters we have observed and
possible ways to improve the efficiency of your operations or other recommenda-
tions concerning the internal control structure.
With respect to these other communications it is our practice to discuss all
comments, if appropriate, with the level of management responsible for the
matters prior to their communication to senior management and /or the Board of
County Commissioners.
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Page Three
April 16, 1990
Assistance to be supplied by your personnel, including preparation of schedules
and analyses of accounts, will be discussed with the appropriate personnel.
Timely completion of this work will facilitate the conclusion of our audit.
In addition, as part of our audit engagement, we will perform the following:
a) an examination of the schedules of property taxes receivable and the
related schedule of 1989 tax levy and collections for the year then ended, and
b) a single audit in accordance with The Single Audit Act of 1984 and the State
Single Audit Implementation Act.
Fees
Our fees are based on the amount of time required at various levels of
responsibility, plus actual out -of- pocket expenses, payable upon presentation
of our invoices. We estimate that our fees for the audit engagement will be
$41,500, including expenses. We will notify you immediately of any circum-
stances we encounter which could significantly affect our estimate.
We are, of course, available to assist you in other areas that might arise.
We appreciate this opportunity to serve you and trust that our association will
be a long and pleasant one.
Yours very truly,
0
. � J
-N cc-2w (Rev. 1/1990) CONTRACT TO AUDIT ACCOUNTS
File in Triplicate.
of Orange County, North Carolina
GoverrAmeut4i unit
On this 16th day of Al2ri I Deloitte & Touche
Aud kw
Post Office Box 13866, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 -3866
Malting Addr=
Board of hereinafter referred to as
the Auditor, and C nim:Ly Cggrd.5° i pners of Orange County hereinafter referred
Governing Body Governmental Unit
to as the Governmental Unit, agree as follows:
I. The Auditor shall examine all statements and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles and
additional required legal statements and disclosures of all funds and /or divisions of the Governmental Unit for the period
beginning July 1, 19-L9, and ending dune 30, _' 19-20-- The combining, individual fund,
and account group financial statements and schedules shall be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the examina-
tion of the combined financial statements and an opinion will be rendered in relation to the corbined financial statements
taken as a whole. The Audit will have no scope limitations except:
2. The Auditor shall conduct his examination and render his report in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
The examination shall include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as are considered
by the Auditor to be necessary in the circumstances, except as follows: (See Item 12.)
3. It is agreed that generally accepted auditing standards include a review of the Governmental Unit's system of internal con-
trol and accounting as same relates to accountability of funds and adherence to budget and law requirements applicable
thereto; that the Auditor will make a written report, which may or may not be a part of the written report of audit, to
the Governing Body setting forth his findings, together with his recommendations for improvement. All matters defined
as "reportable conditions' in AU 325 of the AICPA Professional Standards will be communicated to the Governing Board
in writing. The Auditor shall file a copy of all reports with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
4. After completing his examination, the Auditor shall submit to the Governing Body a written report of audit. This report
shall include, at least, the financial statements and notes thereto prepared in accordance with generally accepted account-
ing principles, combining and supplementary information requested by the client or required for full disclosure under the
law, and the auditor's opinion on the material presented. The Auditor shall furnish I - copies of the report of audit
to the Governing Body as soon as practical after the dose of the accounting period. The Auditor shall file three
Mies of said Me2rt of audit 1 coPX if no single audit is required) with the Secrete of the Local Government Commission.
S. It is agreed that time is of the essence in this contract. All audits are to be performed and the report of audit submitted
by October 31, 19 90
8. Should eircumstanees disclosed by the audit call for amore detailed Investigation by the Auditor than necessary under
ordinary circumstances, the Auditor shall inform the Governing Body in writing of the need for such additional investiga-
tion and the additional compensation required therefor. Upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Com-
mission, this agreement maybe varied or changed to include the increased time and compensation as may be agreed upon
by the Governing Body and the Auditor.
7. The Auditor shall perform a compliance examination for all federal and State financial assistance programs In accordance
with the Single Audit Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98 -502 and G.S. 159 -34). The Auditor will file three ies of all rqmrts
required under the Federal and State Single Audit Acts with the Secretary-of the Local Government Commission. (This
includes the report required in Item 3.) (See Items 15 and 18.)
$. In consideration of the satisfactory performance of the provisions of this agreement, the Governmental Unit shall pay to
the Auditor, upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, a fee which includes any cost the
Auditor may incur from work paper reviews by third parties (Federal and /or State agencies) as required under the Federal
and State Single Audit Acts: CAFR and Certification of Tax Levy $28,600; sinole Audit of
Grant Funds $12,900.
9. All local government and public authority contracts for annual or special audits, financial statement preparation, finance-
related investigations, or any audit - related work in the State of North Carolina require the approval of the Secretary of
the Local Government Commission. Inooioes for services rendered under these contracts shall not be paid by the govern -
mental unit until the invoice has been approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. (This also includes
any progress billings.) All invoices should be submitted in triplicate. The original and one copy will be returned to the
auditor and a copy retained by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. Approval is not required on contracts
and invoices for system improvements and similar services of a non - auditing nature.
(Continued on Reverse)
a-
10. The contract should be esacuted and submitted In triplicate to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, 325
North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 -1388.
11. Upon approval, the original contract will be returned to the Governmental Unit, a copy will be forwarded to the Auditor,
and a copy retained by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. The audit should not be started before the
contract is approved.
12. This contract contemplates an unqualified opinion being rendered. Any limitations or restrictions in scope which would
lead to a qualification should be fully explained in an attachment to this contract. Contracts with such limitations will
not be approved unless satisfactory explanation is made.
13. If an approved contract needs to be varied or changed, the change must be reduced to writing, signed by both parties,
and submitted to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission for approval. No change shall be effective unless
approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, the Governing Board, and the Auditor.
14. A separate contract should not be made for each division to be audited or report to be submitted. The scope of the audit
and the fee for the audit should be clearly stated. Stated fees include any cost the Auditor may incur from work paper
or peer reviews or any other quality assurance program required by third parties (federal and State agencies or other
organizations).
15. Three copies (one copy for units not having a single audit) of the report of audit and any other written report by the Auditor
shall be filed with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission when (or prior to) submitting the invoice for the
services rendered no later than four months after the close of the fiscal year (for fiscal years ending June 30 this would
be October. 31' ). T he report ai audit, as fi:ea with tl:e Secretary of the Local Govern,aen' Cowzu:.s:un, becomes i matter
of public record for inspection and review In the offices of the Secretary by any interested parties. These reports are used
in the preparation of Official Statements for debt offerings as well as by municipal bond rating services.
16. There are no special provisions except: See engagement letter attached.
17. Whenever the Auditor uses . an engagement letter with the client, Item 16 should be completed by referencing the engage-
ment letter and attaching a copy of the engagement letter to the contract to inoorporate the engagement letter into the
contract. In case of conflict between the terms of the engagement letter and the terms of this contract, the terms of this
contract will control. Engagement letter terms are deemed to be void unless the conflicting terms of this contract are specifically
deleted in Item 21 of this contract.
18. A Governmental Unit not having a single audit on federal and State funds would list Item 7 in Item 21 of the contract
as being a deleted provision. An eEplanation must be &en in Item 21 for any Governmental Unit not receiving a sin le
audit on federal and State funds (e.g., a single audit is not required under the Federal and State Single Audit Acts and
is not being performed).
19. If this audit engagement is subject to the standards for audit as defined in the Government Auditing Standards, issued by
the Comptroller General of the United States, then the Auditor warrants by accepting this engagement that he/she will
meet the requirements for an external quality control review specified in the Gwernrnent Auditing Standards. Copies of
any written communications that are a result of an external quality control review will be made available to the Secretary
of the Local Government Commission upon his request.
20. There are no other agreements between the parties hereto and no other agreements relative hereto that shall be enforceable
unless entered Into In accordance with the procedure set out herein and approved by the Secretary of the Local Covern-
ment t "amre?Kior+_.
21. All of the above paragraphs are understood and shall apply to this agreement, except the following numbered paragraphs
shall be deleted: (See Items 17 and 18.)
Deloitte & Touche
Auditor
By Rex Price, Partner
(P type ar print)
Approved by the Secretary of the Local Government
Commission as provided in Article 3, Chapter 159 of the
General Statutes or Article 31, Part 3, Chapter 115C of
the General Statutes.
Lee Smile
For the k , , , Local rt on
�
(&t6nature) q n
Date MAY % 3 17go
Orange Count
Goverumeacal Udt
By Moses Care Jr. Chair
(Pkue type or =me and title)
This instrument has been preau n the manner re-
quired by The Local Government udget and Fiscal Con-
trol Act or by The School Budget and Fiscal Control Act,.
Kehneth T. Chavious
Governmental Udt Ffaa m offim 04ma tyro or Mal)
Date
Retired Senior Volunteer Program
aer�i�� range l.ounl�
May 11, 1990
Mr. Robert Winston
ACTION
Federal Bldg. - P.O. Century Sta.
300 Fayetteville St. Mall Rm. 131
Raleigh, N. C. 27601
Dear.Mr. Winston:
410 .CALDWELL STREET
CHAPEL HILL, N.C. 27514
TELEPHONE: 842 -7248
HILLSBOROUGH: 732 -8181
EXT. 280
Enclosed is an application for augmentation funds to the
ACTION grant for the Orange County RSVP. We are applying for
administrative support and to initiate a program of national
significance. This is a literacy program of senior citizens
who read to at - risk children at day care centers and pre - schools.
I look forward to hearing from ACTION regarding this
application. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Terri K. Tyson
Director, Orange County RSVP
A DIVISION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT ON AGING
k + 4 AI
FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
2. APPLI• a. NUMBER 3- STATE a. NUMBER
CANTS APPLI-
APPLI- NONE CATION
CATION IDENTI-
IDENTI• b BATE FIER b. DATE
FIER Year .,,,,,w Jay NOTE: TO BE ASSIGNED
ASSIGNED
19 9 0-05- 0 11 BY STATE
Uour
Blank
19
Year rawtA Jay
4. LEGAL APPLICANT/RECIPIENT
1. TYPE
0 NOTICE OF INTENT
S6-
SUBMISSION
(OPTIONAL)
War* op
l7 PREAPPLICATION
a. NUMBER
12 1 J 4011
bug
10- APPLICATION
2. APPLI• a. NUMBER 3- STATE a. NUMBER
CANTS APPLI-
APPLI- NONE CATION
CATION IDENTI-
IDENTI• b BATE FIER b. DATE
FIER Year .,,,,,w Jay NOTE: TO BE ASSIGNED
ASSIGNED
19 9 0-05- 0 11 BY STATE
Uour
Blank
19
Year rawtA Jay
4. LEGAL APPLICANT/RECIPIENT
5. EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMbt ;x(LIN)
a. Applicant Name ORANGE COUNTY
S6-
nnnI97
ktlantaf Ga. 30303
b. Organization Unit :County Government
6•
PRO-
a. NUMBER
12 1 J 4011
c. Street/P.O. Box P •. O .BOX 8181
GRAM
DATE
d. City H i 11 sbo roug h County Orange
-
G THAT m- plieant and the applipnt will comply with
rioeC& die"'"°°"Jt"°°"'ten""
f. State N.C. g. ZIP Code. 27278
rF,um OVA)
MULTIPLE Q
e
h. Contact Person #Name Terri Tyson, RSVP Director
OR
b. TITLE
Retired Senior
b. SIGNATURE
o CERTIFYING
Volunteer Pro ram
ATriclAoneNO -) _
7. TITLE OF APPLICANTS PROJECT (Use section IV. of this form to provide a.summary
A. TYPE OF APPLICANT/RECIPIENT
a description of the project.
orange County - Chapel Hill - Retired
A�tAa
�,, „�
G• Special Punove District
H-Co munAy Action Agency
t„I
Senior Volunteer Program.The project provides
C- 5ustilote
Organ „��rt
1- Ihgher Gduc.twwwl Inuiwlwn
J_IndianTetbe
the means by which an individual aged 60 or
E- my
K- Otherrsprdihr. K
Z I or older may serve the community as a v o l u n t e e
- chow Din^ct Enter appropriate letter
9. AREA OF PROJECT IMPACT uv-m a/rifw& awnar., "aim ♦ru
F Orange County, North Carolina
W
12. PROPOSED FUNDING
10. ESTIMATED NO. OF 11. TYPE OF ASSISI'ANUtr
PERSONSSQ BENEFITING A -Basic Grand D- Irwurar�
N
B- Suapleawnlal Grant 1,(Xher
C -l.rn Enter Awmwwtr lertens)
13, CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF:
a. FEDERAL $ 10 , 081 '00 I a. APPLICANT
b. APPLICANT .00 Fourth
c. STATE .00 15. PROJECT START
d. LOCAL 00 DATE Year month day
19 90-07-
e. OTHER .00
18. DATE DUE TO
f. Total $ 10,081 -00 FEDERAL AGENCY
19. FEDERAL AGENCY TO RECEIVE REQUEST
a. ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT (LF APPROPRIATE) b.
b.PROJECT
Fourth
16. PROJECT
DURATION
L 12 month.
rror month day
14. TYPE OF APPLICATION
A -New C- Revision E- Augmentation
B- Renewal D- Gmunuation
Enter appropriate letter K
17, TYPE OF CHANGE rF'w 044, w 14rl
A- Increase Dollars F -Ulher lspmjyl
B- Deera,ae Dollars
C -Inca Duration
D -0acre Duration
E-Cancellati on
Enter apps. � I
priate lenM.t �J
20. EXISTING FEDERAL
GRANT ]DENT. NO.
440 - 4768/08
21. REMARKS ADDED
c. ADpR
101 Marietta Street, N.W. Yes MV No
ktlantaf Ga. 30303
YES, THIS NOTICE OF INTENT/PREAPPLI CATION /APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE
p 22. To the bag d my knuwlvgtir and belief, dart
F THE in this preapplia tiaNapplication are true
a.
TO THE STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON:
APPLICANT and ��ec4 the documem has been duly
DATE
CERTIFIES ,uthorirad by the governing body d the sp.
-
G THAT m- plieant and the applipnt will comply with
rioeC& die"'"°°"Jt"°°"'ten""
..
b, NO, PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E.O. 12372 0
'pproved
ate
PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW 0
OR
23. a. TYPED NAME AND TITLE
b. SIGNATURE
o CERTIFYING
REPRE- Moses Carey,
Chair e
SENTATIVE
24. APPLICA- Yrar aamth day
r" Ka 9AIP PUTIC ATI N IDENT. NO. 26. FEDERAL GRAN TIFICATION
TION
RECENED 19
27. ACTION TAKEN 28. FUNDING Year Imam dar 30. Yaw matdA dote
11VG
I ; ■. AWARDED
29. ACTON DATE- 19 DATE 19
b. REJECTED
pOE c. RRIURNF:D FOR a. FEDERAL 3
.00 31. CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL 32. Yemr mwrh date
ENDING
AMENDMENT
b. APPLICANT
INFORMATION m rNome and Aei PNnrr brrO
DATE 19
wt I I d. RE URNED FOR
o- E.D. t'1372 SUMMON
c. STATE
.00
•00 33. REMARKS ADDED
zz BY APPUCANTTO
Dv STATE d. LOCAL
•00
5� . ; e. DEFERRED
f. WMIURAWN e.OTHER
OO
Yes No
m
f. Tout)' $
.00
PAGE 1
Prncntwd by OMB Circalar A•102
a
' r
Narrative
The Orange County RSVP will use the additional funding
to provide increased time for the part -time clerical aide and
for increased communications between the project and volunteers
and stations. A cost of living increase for professional staff
is also requested since the grant amount has remained the same
for several years despite the large size of the program.
The National Significance Program will address the need for
literacy training for at -risk pre - school children as the rate of
illiteracy in N.C. continues to be a problem. This program will
build on the "Read a Story to a Tot" program currently sponsored
by RSVP. This is a group of senior citizens who read on a one -
to -one basis at least once a week to children in pre - schools.
Their aim is to help children develop a love for books, as well as
listening skills. Listening time for these children may be
lacking in the home situation.
A program coordinator is needed to recruit 25 extra volunteers
to expand and support the program. Currently 19 volunteers are
serving in the program area in the FY'90 grant. The program
requires a coordinator during the summer and throughout the year
when the volunteer coordinator is out of town. Additional mileage
reimbursement for the coordinator and volunteers are needed.
The funds will be used to increase the total number of
budgeted FY190 volunteers and will be used to supplement the
number of volunteers working in the literacy area.
The Lincoln Center, part of the Chapel Hill Carrboro Schools,
has supported the program with in service trainings by the
Pre- School Lead Teacher several times a year. The school also
publishes and produces a volunteer training manual. The Children's
Librarian at the Chapel Hill Library has provided training on
book selection. A volunteer coordinator also provides training
and placement, but is out of town frequently during the year.
E1
a
0
a
04
M
U2
[x]
}
H
E-4
a
E
H
Z
H
E
A
O
Ei
V)
Ei
z
w
m
E4
U)
A
a
a
C�
Q
C4
Y9
to
M
p
m
.d
d
C
z
4w
4&
W
�
d
�
�
� m
I
o
z
V
C6 m
rA
b
w
`
Lf)
n
°w
Ln
Ln
Ln
a
w
o
Ln
in
-i
v
L,
rn
L,
ON
a
M
.0
4W
0
�z
b02
r�
U
m
Ic
e
CpOp
Y
Qr
CE
O
O
°
5
w
Q
F
Q
O
w
CV
G'J
�p
�O
fp
V
'd
ii
w
%I
A
aL
t`
a
C�
Q
C4
w
U
z
U
H
Cc i ,`T.,
H p
U
a GZ
Z W
O z
H -4 P
< W
z C7
r� A
o
U I
u OS
O d
� a
W
B
d
m
b�
sw�
oz
3
3
W
V
a
a
M
spy
e
�z
U
r7
O
►. m
r�
ti
m �
All
Y
Id
�d
O
w
�
x
U
�
d
ro
W
V
a
a
M
spy
e
�z
U
r7
O
►. m
r�
ti
m �
All
Y
Id
�d
O
w
�
d
W
V
a
a
►. m
r�
ti
All
w
d
ro
w
0
z
EL. m
w IL
e x
7 W
+� m
m „
° IL
00
ON
t-
�—
k
n
n
y° w
r-
I
0
Ln
Ln
W
r-I
M
M
N
m
en
m
en
Vi
M
m
�
m
g
m
�
a
crii
q
d
`.
c>.
C
m
m
r.
C
w
�
La
c
e�
m
A
w
.:
eo
li
x
W
V
a
a
BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJ. NAT'L SIGN
Salaries:
Increase the clerical /data entry 1248
aide's percentage of time from
40t to 50% on a salary of $6240
to allow for additional clerical
support
5%- Cost of Living Adjustment for 1186
the Director and Assistant 1116
Coordinator: This position will
be needed under the National 3120
Significance Program at an annual
salary of $12,480 X 25% of time
Fringe Benefits:
At 7.65% for the increase in the 477 239
clerical aide and coordinator
For Director and Assistant: 298
increase in FICA, Life, and
Retirement
Staff Travel: 800 additional 180
miles for 20 site visits = $180
Communications:
Postage: 3 additional mailings to 450
500 volunteers and stations
1500 X .30 =$450 for recruitment
and informational purposes
Volunteer Expenses: Volunteer 1688
travel: The 25 additional
volunteers will travel an
average of 25 miles per month
25 x 25 x 12 x 22.5 cents
Accident Insurance:
25 volunteers x $1.10
Personal Liability Insurance: 79
25 volunteers x 40 cents
Excess Automobile:
15 volunteers x $2.75
TOTAL INCREASE: $4955 $5126
I
I �
b
a
n
0
U1
0 to w�:r 0 O r• O
N'o E
�
o
w O O m O"a = a
�-?'
O
ri O r+r - m - u•
Ow O
IUI
omo'roo
01o� n
�Jl
D
�nrhrort
riOmNrt
0 (10H
W
cn
m ri ri 0' m to W.
C: c o
O m
I
•
O r• m m O O w C
ri r• m
r n
rr m o •-- O ri C m
fA O P.
c ri
C
C
C
C
m O r• m m 0
O' O
O G
Cj
O
O
O
O
ri (1 w O, w w r y
O l-- m C
rr r•
p
I�
Fj
I—j
r+
ca - rt m 'C cn O�-j
Ph Q m O
m rt
a
G
G
c
C
t"
r -C G O O
p-
m 0
r
O
O
O
O
O m n "o rh rt
Ch C C
ri m
p W
rt
rr
rr
rr
Z
[n m 1•-+ Ora m
m 0 m m
M c
n7 a
A
xl
m
m
m
m
m 0 O 9 O n
ri w
rr
bZ
o
p
m
m
m
m
W
w e 0 'O m ri Zr n
C C 0 N
x a
o
ri
ri
ri
ti
d
Q, m M rr r• (a
r c m In
00
d
m
U1
Ul
(A
UI
N
F ' r•h F--
0 rt c
(a
�"
,
0 w ri r ri h-h m
m
N
ai
n l7
a
E
E
E
C
rt U m m 0 0 r
O
rt
y
P.
r•
H.
H+•
w m w rr n n I-+
ri m a
ro
O
N
h-j
I-j
ri O Di m
Qi r•
H'
x
ti
W
N
r+
rr n r= O rt rr m
- O
Al
`.
r O wri w m m
M n
0
�
ro
m
m
m
Up
m La m 0 ri I-- m
rt 0
m
m
m
m
m
w m La c TI ri
w n C
z
rS
ri
m
ri
O i7 CS' m u C
rr �+ O
m
C
C
C
C
m �- rr w m
r m �-'
O
ro
m
m
m
m
n C ;'m m'C
O c C
rt
o
m m to r- CL p, N
O r* O
r+ �-j nJ�-
m m rr
( O
ro
I
(j
I
m rt w I- zr 0) w 0
m rt
Q, m
O m
rh
h
m m C
ri
°
:r
7
O
a mwmn ri
nwm
C
ri
ri
ri
rt 0 m c rn w E to
O
ri
U1
iA
N
w M'•C C6 v U! P.
Cb
N
.
.
ri r• 7s rt
C.i
G
a
v,
K)
b
10
b
ON .1
n
ri
ri
ri
ri
Q Ort �''
rt
m
rr
m
rt
m
rt
m
to lQ
ri
H m
a
G
m
ri
ri
ri
O O
Q
CO
B
lQ
Q
�
H
H
F•i
H
y
O
C
O
m
a
cr
W
�
a
A
a n a
00 O
N
o �
G
�ro o
n
•0�3
per
,win
y� x
z �
cn
REAFFMI,ATION OF
MEMORANDUM OF UNDkRSIANDING
between
QZAN GE caaJNTY - CHAPEL HILL RETIRED SENIOR VOLIIN= PROGRAM
and
Volunteer Station: ORANGE COUNTY LITERACY PROGRAM
We would like to reconfirm that we desire to be an RSVP Volun-
teer Station, as detailed in the Memorandum of Understanding
signed on January 13, 1986
Are there any changes from the original agreement? (If so,
please specify.)
NI
Do you have any new requests for volunteers? (If so, please
specify the j'ob description and number of volunteers.)
Comments:
—we ' x,
i 4
rvi or's natu /Title for Volunteer Station
//---3 k-1 pi a..,, I ,�-�� //7 e �
Volunteer Address /
14 d07L�
RSVP Director's6tignature
Date
61 �12
Phone
Date
Volunteer Station
Address
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING-
Between
Orange County - Chapel Hill RSVP
410 Caldwell Street
Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514
Phone: 942 -7248
and,
�/%�0. .
Telephone No.
9 1+ l��
It is agreed that the Basic Provisions will guide our working relation-
ship and that the Memorandum of Understanding may be amended, in
writing, at any time with the agreement of both agencies. It will be
reviewed annually to permit needed changes.
BASIC PROVISIONS OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
A. The Retired Senior Volunteer Program will:
1. Recruit, interview, and enroll RSVP volunteers.
2. Provide orientation to the volunteer station staff prior to
the placement of volunteers, and at other times, as the need
arises.
3. Refer volunteers to the volunteer station for assignments, and
review the acceptability of volunteer assignments.
4. Furnish accident, personal liability, and excess automobile
liability insurance coverages as required by program policy.
5: In cooperation with the RSVP Advisory Council, arrange for
an appeals procedure to address problems arising between the
volunteer, the volunteer station,'and /or RSVP.
6. Reimburse Senior Volunteers directly for transportation costs
in accordance with RSVP policies or arrange with the volunteer
station for the transportation of volunteers to and from their
assignments.
7. Arrange with the volunteer station for meals, when possible, for
volunteers on assignments.
8. Periodically discuss and /or assess the needs of the volunteers
and the volunteer station.
B. The Volunteer Station will:
1. Make the final decision on the assignment of volunteers.
2. Implement orientation, in-- service instruction or special
training of the volunteers.
3. When possible, furnish volunteers with any materials or
transportation required to-carry.out the.assignments.
4. Provide for the adequate safety of the--volunteers.
5. Investigate and report accidents and injuries involving
volunteers to RSVP.
6. Collect and sign appropriate volunteer reports and submit
them to RSVP.
7. Provide supervision to the volunteers on assignments.
8. Not request nor assign Senior Volunteers for religious,
sectarian or political activity or instruction.
9. Not assign volunteers to any task which would displace
employed workers or impair existing contracts for services.
10. Prohibit discrimination by actively complying with provisions
of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
C. Se aration from Volunteer Service
The volunteer station may request the removal of a senior
volunteer at any time. The RSVP volunteer may withdraw from
service at the volunteer station or from the Retired Senior
Volunteer Program at any time. When needed, discussion of
individual separations will occur between RSVP staff, the
volunteer station and the volunteer to clarify the reasons,
resolve conflicts, or take remedial action, including placement
with another volunteer station.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR ARRANGEMENTS FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN RSVP
AND THE ORGANIZATION:
The volunteer station representative who will serve as liaison with
RSVP and who w 11 p be responsi for volunteer orientation and super-
vision is �l , -_ : i AAAA
PURPOSE OF THE ORGANIZATION
1 o ro ✓1,4L Vdl u�
om a-
VOLUNT
�� ; �
J45;t"e�-
DEE
TRAINING PR VI ED
�7 f � ti
r
�. �D ro t�ea�i
� arr
V LUN ER A SIGNMEWtS HOURS DAYS
O r•C. CL. e "tO - O I'l S
r �
VOLUNTEER SKILLS REQUESTEDMUMBER OF VOLUNT ERS NEEDS
�`f- cc.��
V o u,t,7+e1e r5 i ✓1 e ct.e•�
ADD I' 1 NA Q4 TSi qe` �, 'g'rri ing6av0 lahle�
Signature
Volunteer
Telephone
Signature
for
Stationg�
RSVP -ire or
Title
Date
:.Date 7
1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between
Orange County - Chapel Hill RSVP
410 Caldwell Street
Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514
Phone: 942 -7248
and
Volunteer Station 0 ho.
r
Address J 1
Telephone No.
It is agreed that the Basic Provisions will guide our working relation-
ship and that the Memorandum of Understanding may be amended, in
writing; at any time with the agreement of both agencies. It will be
reviei4ed annually to permit needed changes.
BASIC PROVISIONS OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
A. The Retired,Senior Volunteer Program will:
1. Recruit, interview, and enroll RSVP volunteers.
2. Provide orientation to the volunteer station staff prior to
the placement of volunteers, and at other times, as the need
arises.
3. Refer volunteers to the volunteer station for assignments, and
review the acceptability of volunteer assignments.
4. Furnish accident, personal liability, and excess automobile
liability insurance coverages as required by program policy.
S. In cooperation with the RSVP Advisory Council, arrange for
an appeals procedure to address problems arising between the
volunteer, the volunteer station, and /or RSVP.
6. Reimburse Senior Volunteers directly for transportation costs
in accordance with RSVP policies or arrange with the volunteer
station for the transportation of volunteers to and from their
assignments.
7. Arrange with the volunteer station for meals, when possible, for
volunteers on assignments.
8. Periodically discuss and /or assess the needs of the volunteers
and the volunteer station.
B. The Volunteer Station will:
1. Make the final decision on the assignment of volunteers.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR ARRANGEMENTS FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN RSVP
AND THE ORGANIZATION:
The volunteer station representative who will serve as liaison with
RSVP and who will be responsible for volunteer orientation and super-
vision is Y.
PURPOSE OF THE ORGANIZATION
�C�
VOLUNTEER TRAINING PROVIDED
DESCRIPTION OF VOLUNTEER ASSIGNMENTS
VOLUNTEER SKILLS REQUESTED /NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS NEEDED
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (eg., parking available)
HOURS /DAYS
Signature for
Volunteer Station Title
Telephone -1 Date 3 C6
Signature Date
R Director
Volunteer Station
Address
Telephone No.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between
orange County - Chapel Hill RSVP
410 Caldwell Street
Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514
Phone: 942 --7248
and
/ / J-4.' /!
a
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR ARRANGEMENTS FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN RSVP
AND THE ORGANIZATION:
The volunteer station representative who will serve as liaison with
RSVP and who will be responsible for volunteer orientation and super-
vision is !v N
PURPOSE OF (THE ORGANIZATION - Fa,-+ �Sl h ee.f Xgo_r_/�,d , S y Cq ntC A - -L/_.
P.Sduc I fs AedlC[ e4 yxzzf �v�.1� I�Q-Qgro P�4, (►id,vlCivQ� �b`/([l� Ck�0( /~5 CIiT)4Z.
c k i W kk _'h � ate+ �; rc �r b � c � � 10 .�Kr1s , efh `I i c y�rG� s
Crt�e.
C 7 3 o._ S. 3 b -ecL4_ Y�v J vi d u: w kvlv_ c, -, p er�
r I\;� d .s d 0 u-e (off Yves -ft�-
VOLUNTEER TRAINING PROVIDED
t , , -
We,
�/. y� r 5 /�
r � �E.d r.'�- �� J c u Yl fr (U Lo 4! i�PQ /(C� 6 5 �r! /S /�- 4
DESCRIPTION OF VOLUNTEER ASSIGNMENTS
--ro AP t� as 4Ur t QU/" bOo�/
cr c t c! 'o re v. aLu O K y v s. e '!�' l
1;,r 0 i,kz- O v r � S -eilil L
basis
HOURS /DAYS
ac'vvC%
1L) ri
a 55 l /U C_/ d
i22.P
C F1��s� ► �i �o�5v1 >< 46 do ass n/x:.17
Phr, r4`
VOLUNTEER SKILLS REQUESTED /NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS
NEEDED
3ove'e q Al a"r ae Q C (C0or t " S lLL! l/5
^071GIe5 o/
V- Ae& -, f vr) /Un 4,, l ,
I
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (eg., parking available)
� `s a �a '`(a 6 �.e a s c Gv�f'C is o
) Lze d Vo /XZZ `,L 1-4 a 60-4/'5 kv_eA
in 4C ox C'v�`ne.nf b�df� s- o ft d L4,b a�shcx5�[_ �-A
Signature for }��, �/
Volunteer Station ! � C�`� Title
Telephone / 7- °] °� Date aI �f SJ�
Signature Pate Is's
P Director
Retired Senior Volunteer Program of'Chapel Hill, Orange County
304 East Franklin Street
Chapel Hill,'N.C. 27514
Name and address of CARU Volunteer Station
(t91(Z10 Lr)0
& 8- 34 sP-1
THIS 1.=P1ORA1\TDUiS CONTAII S U14DERSTA MIDIGS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING PRE -
IDENTIFIED SUBJECTS, PLUS OTHER CATEGORIES OF CONCEP11 ADDED BY THE RE-
TIRED SENIOR VOLUNTEER PROGRA"r: OF THE VOLUNTEER STATIO'3 AND AGREED
TO DY BOTH PARTIES:
1. BASIC POLICIES Senior Volunteers are requested by the Volunteer
Station in accordance with the policies and regulations of the Re-
tired Senior Volunteer Program.
2. NUTIBER OF VOLUNTEERS The Retired Senior Volunteer Program will,
upon request, place as many as Jr Senior Volunteers with the Volun-
teer Station.
3. VOLUNTEER ASSIGIZIENTS (a) A list of planned volunteer assignment:
is attached to this memorandum by the Volunteer Station. A change in
the nature of assignments listed requires that this memorandum be
amended. (b) The Volunteer Station will provide each Senior Volunteer
with a brief, specific description of the volunteer assignment. A
copy will be given to the Retired Senior Volunteer Program. (c) The
Retired Senior Volunteer Program will place Senior Volunteers with the
Volunteer Station and will review assignments to determine if they are
acceptable. (d) The Volunteer Station will have the opportunity for
an interview with each Senior Volunteer before final placement occurs.
4. ORIENTATION OF VOLUNTEERS The Volunteer Station will, in consul-
tation with RSVP staff, be responsible for such orientation to the
Volunteer Station and to individual assignments as the volunteers may
need.
5. ORIENTATION OF A9I111TISTRATIVE AI%7D SUPERVISORY PERS014 EL The Re-
tiree? Senior Volunteer. Program will provide- orientation to administra-
tive personnel and on- the --job supervisors of Senior Volunteers at the
Volunteer Station. Such orientation will occur prior to placement of
Senior Volunteers at the Volunteer Station and at other times as
needed.
M40.RANDUM OF UNDERSTMIDING, Page 4
IN ADDITION, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE TO THE FOLLOT721,?G METHODS OF OP-
ERATION OR ARF.ANGMENTS FOR COOPERATION:
Signature for
Volunteer Station
Title Date
Signature InAQ2, Date
RSVP Director `
I
ITEMS FOR FOLLOWUP
BOARD MEETING DATE:
IT M # TITLE TYPE OF FOLLOWUP
e X.
NOTES:
FOLLOWUP COMPLETED
L� a
a..r
Af />
F�_ 7
�J
AMENDED
RESOLUTION
OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date ____M_a_' -1-5-,- 1990
Name of Subdivision Durham Estates Subdivision (Amendment1
owner /Applicant W. T. Durham
The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves an amendment to the
Preliminary Plat of Durham Estates Subdivision (approved on February
1990) containing 6 lots, subject to the fulfillment of requirements
specified herein.
A. Roads
1. British Lane shall be constructed to Class B private road
standards.
OR -
A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond shall -be
submitted to secure for future improvement /construction Of
British Lane to-the standards specified above.. An estimate_:.
of the construction cost-.must - be. prepared by a-- -
certified /licensed en g ineer or g radin g contractor_ and :.�.._.
,___ ..
submitted to the Planning.-Department. The financial :._-
guarantee must reflect 1105 of that estimate and be issued by-
an accredited financial - institution.
2. The private-.road shall be contained within the right- of-way
indicated on the final plat.''-
3. A private Road Maintenance- Agreement shall be approved -by the.
County Attorney and recorded- with,. the final plat.- • -
B. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall be installed or preserved as indicated on
the preliminary plan dated October 30, 1989, and must be
inspected and approved by the Planning and Inspections
Department.
2. Provisions for protection of existing trees as shown on the
approved landscape plan shall be included in a document
`� describing development restrictions and requirements to be
C.
D.
E.
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the
Final Plat.
3. A Type D Land Use Buffer shall be provided along the Duke
Power transmission line along the north side of the
subdivision. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width and
provide sufficient vegetation to meet the standards of
Section IV- B -8 -e. The existence of the buffer shall be noted
on the plat.
4. A Type A Land use Buffer shall be provided along,Dairyland
Road (SR 1112). The buffer shall be 30 feet in width and
provide sufficient vegetation to meet the standards of
Section IV- B --8 -e. The existence of the buffer shall be noted
on the plat.
Drainage
1. The 100 -year floodplain of Morgan Creek shall be labeled on
the Final Plat.
2. Impervious surface data, as required by L12e Orange County
Subdivision Regulations and Zo --nio Ordinance for roR perty
located within the University Lake Watershed shall be
included in a document describing development restrictions
and requirements, to be prepared by Planning Staff and
recorded concurrently with the Final.Plat.
3. A stream buffer shall be-provided along Morgan Creek. The
width of the buffer shall be stated on.the face of the plat.
Development restrictions within the buffer-shall be specified
in a document describing development''restrictions and
requirements to-be-,prepared by Planning -Staff,and recorded
concurrently with the Final Plat._.,..
Parkland
1. The applicant shall dedicate to Orange.County -2.6 acres of
parkland located along-Morgan-Creek as shown in�a crass hatch.
pattern on the Preliminary. Plan... The.applicant shall also.
dedicate a parkland area 30 feet wide along Morgan Creek
extending from the 2.6 acres - described above-to Dairyland
Road (SR 1112).
Miscellaneous
1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map
in accordance with Section V -D -2 and V -D -3 of the Orange
County Subdivision Regulations.
2. The following natural and man -made site features shall be
shown on the plat:
a
C
LA
0 F.
a. Morgan Creek
b. Intermittent Stream
C. Utility Lines
3. The following easements shall be shown on the plat:
Proposed 50' private right -of --way on British.Lane
50' drainage easement along the branch on the east side
of lots 3, 4 and 5
Existing powerline easements
- A 30' easement bet ween lots 7 and 8 for access to lot 6
4. A setback of 40 feet shall be maintained as measured from the
edge of right -of -way. Side yards shall be a minimum of 20
feet, and rear yards a minimum of 20 feet. These setback
requirements shall be stated on the plat, and in a document
describing development restrictions and requirements to be
prepared by Planning Staff and recorded concurrently with the
Final Plat.
5. Receive final approval of easement agreements, restrictive
covenants, and private road maintenance agreement documents
from the County Attorney.
6_. A note shall be placed on the.plat indicating that lot 6
shall use the access easement between lots 7 and 8 and shall
not receive access from Dair land Road.
Certifications
1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a registered
Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face.-of the Final-
Plat.
2. A Certificate of Dedication.:and Maintenance signed by °-the
property owner(s) shall be notarized on the face of the plat.
3. The Department of Environmental Health shall.certify.that
each lot contains a suitable area for septic disposal.
_�__ fa
. _
Clerk FEZ
i�_
_.
I�' , accept the above listed conditions of
su ivision a r al, and acknowledge that each must be met prior to
recordation of the final plat.
FLAT RIVEF%,�
RED MOUNTAIN ROAD • ROUTE 3 • BOX ZERO • ROUGEMONT • NC • 27572
PROPERTIES
April 6, 1990
Mary Scearbo
Orange County Planning Department
P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Ms. Scearbo:
our purpose in resubmitting Durham Estates - Phase I through the planning
review process, is to protect future buyers of lots 6, 7, and 8 from impervious
surface issues created by granting a 30 foot driveway easement to lot 6, along
the bounding of lots 7 and S.
we are requesting that the easement be shown on the final plat with a
footnote that any current or future calculations of impervious surface related
to a gravel or paved driveway be associated with lot 6 and not with lots 7 or 8.
This has several environmental advantages.- First, it shortens the driveway
serving lot 6 and therefore the amount of disturbed area. Secondly, it keeps the
driveway on high ground and away from a drainage pattern leading to Morgan Creek.
This change will also channel traffic through the Laurel Springs subdivision
instead of directly on to Dairyland Road.
The owner and the buyers of lots 6 and 7 are concerned about the volatile
policy issues under development for the University Lake watershed. This
modification is designed to clearly identify how impervious surface- calculations
will be applied against the easement. - - .
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincere'
Mark N. O'Neal
Agent for
Mr. W.T. Durham
/keh.
cc: W-T. Durham