Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-20-1991■ Yr ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REGULAR MEETING NOTE: BACKGROUND MATERIAL TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1991 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. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA II. 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. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION- CONSENT AGENDA (Any item may be removed for separate consideration) A. Carolina Air Care Ground Unit Contract B. Forest Service Contract IV. RESOLUTIONS PROCLAMATIONS A. Proclamation of Women's Equality Day B. Resolution of Appreciation to Local Legislators C. Proclamation for Literacy Week in Orange County V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS VII. REPORTS A. Local Legislation Update B. Vacation and Sick Leave Revisions to the Personnel Ordinance C. Impact Fees for Public School Facilities D. OWASA Quarterly Report VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- REGULAR AGENDA A. Purchase of Phase II Optical Imaging System B. Zoning Enforcement Cases-- Recommendatons on Civil Penalties for Zoning Cases C. Subdivision Regulations Text Amendment-- - Re- Approval of Expired Peliminary Plat D. New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan E. Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Area Boundaries F. Standardized Fire District Contract IX. BOARD COMMENTS X. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT XI. APPOINTMENTS - None XII. MINUTES XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION XIV. AWOURNMENT ( *) Indicates items that need immediate attention. 1 APPROVED 913_191 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 20, 1991 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met on Tuesday, August 20, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. at the Franklin Street Post Office District Courtroom in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., Vice -Chair Stephen H. Halkiotis, Commissioners Alice M. Gordon, Verla C. Insko and Don Willhoit. COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Rod Visser, Commission for Women Director Hope Bethea, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Planners Emily Cameron and Jim Hinkley, Register of Deeds Betty June Hayes, Personnel Director Elaine Holmes, Human Resources Analyst II Darlene Jacobs, Purchasing Director Pam Jones, Fire Marshall Mike Tapp and EMS Director Nick Waters. NOTE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON ALL AGENDA ITEMS IS IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA A discussion on appointments was added to the agenda. II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Chair Moses Carey, Jr. announced that those who have indicated a desire to speak to a specific item will be recognized at the appropriate time. III. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve those items on the Consent Agenda as listed below: A. CAROLINA AIR CARE GROUND UNIT CONTRACT The Board approved a contract with UNC Hospitals to provide ground ambulance services for support to the air transportation program, authorized the Chair to sign the contract and approved one new full - time permanent position in the UNC Hospitals /EMS Contracts Fund. B. FOREST SERVICE CONTRACT The Board approved the annual agreement between Orange County and the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for the provision of support to the NC Forest Service in Orange County. VOTE: UNANIMOUS OA IV. RESOLUTIONS /PROCLAMATIONS A. PROCLAMATION OF WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to proclaim August 26, 1991 as Women's Equality Day in Orange County in accordance with the proclamation as stated below: P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, on August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified; and WHEREAS, that amendment reads as follows: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex "; and WHEREAS, the power of the vote is the gateway to continued improvements in the status of women; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Commission for Women advises the citizens and the Board of Commissioners of Orange County of the status of women in Orange County; and WHEREAS, that status remains unequal, especially economically and politically; and WHEREAS, yet women make significant contributions economically, politically and in myriad ways to Orange County, NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners proclaim Monday, August 26, 1991 as WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY in celebration of women's contributions and their political equality and do hereby urge all citizens full equality for all women. VOTE: UNANIMOUS does hereby right to economic and to work to guarantee B. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LOCAL LEGISLATORS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the resolution as stated below with the addition of Senator Ralph Hunt. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to reconsider the previous motion. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko to honor the four legislators who represent Orange County. That resolution is stated below: LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION FROM ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, The Orange County Board of Commissioners developed and approved a legislative package that was submitted to the Orange County delegation for consideration by the 1991 Session of the North Carolina General Assembly, and P WHEREAS, The Orange County delegation to the General Assembly_ includes Senator Howard Lee, Senator Russell Walker, Representative Anne Barnes and Representative Joe Hackney, and WHEREAS, Members of this delegation demonstrated their support for the proposed legislation by sponsoring and promoting the Commissioners' legislative package for 1991, and WHEREAS, This delegation observed Orange County's best interests in maintaining the high quality of life in the County through its legislative actions during the 1991 Session. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners recognize and express their appreciation for the continued support given to orange County by the members of this Delegation to the General Assembly. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. PROCLAMATION FOR LITERACY WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to proclaim September 8 - 14 as Celebrate Literacy Week in Orange County in accordance with the proclamation as stated below: P R O C L A M A T I O N LITERACY WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, the ability to read is of fundamental importance to all people, and WHEREAS, this nation was founded by, and depends upon, a literate and informed citizenry, and WHEREAS, literacy is a gateway to the full participation in the affairs f of this nation, and WHEREAS, adult new readers should be recognized for their efforts toward personal and civic growth, and WHEREAS, volunteers in adult literacy programs should be commended for their willingness to give the time that is necessary to help others improve their skills, and WHEREAS, September 8 is designated as International Literacy Day, NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby declare September 8th through the 14th as Celebrate Literacy Week in honor of those adults for whom the achievement of literacy, for themselves and others, has become a primary goal. VOTE: UNANIMOUS V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - NONE 4 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE VII. REPORTS A. LOCAL LEGISLATION UPDATE County Manager John Link and County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill presented a report on the results of Orange County's 1991 North Carolina General Assembly legislative items. Legislation approved includes the following: (1) Orange County is now listed as a County which prohibits spotlighting deer during the period from one half hour after sunset to one half hour before sunrise. This action became effective August 1, 1991. (2) An Act to clarify the enabling legislation for subdivision ordinance provisions relating to recreation areas in Orange County is contained in Section 1 of the omnibus bill. The County adopted as part of its compre- hensive plan a recreational element and that element created districts and regions within the county where recreation sites will be located. The County's ordinances implement that plan by requiring dedication of property or contribution of money from the developer. This bill further allows the County to use the money it generates for the development of facilities as well as for the acquisition of land. (3) An Act to amend the enabling legislation for Zoning Ordinance regulations to authorize Orange County to grant density bonuses and other incentives for developers of housing for persons of low or moderate income is now contained in the zoning regulations as a special use. This act will allow the County to provide for density bonuses as a matter of right in all the residential districts of the County. This item will go to public hearing August 26, 1991. (4) An Act to authorize Orange county to levy an occupancy tax with the express authority for the use of some of its proceeds for a county visitors' bureau was implemented by the County Commissioners at their meeting held August 5, 1991. Legislation which will require further action by the Board includes: (1) An Act to authorize Orange County to acquire real property in order to preserve open space and open areas for the preservation, protection and conservation of farmland, watershed areas and drinking water supplies, and to acquire the fee or any lesser interest. This will require a plan and funding before implementation. 5 This amends an existing statute to permit the County to acquire property for either one of these two purposes and makes clear that it does not necessarily have to be part of an urban open space program but can be anywhere in the County where there is a need for farmland or watershed protection. (2) An act to authorize Orange County to require financial security for the repair and operation of community systems of sewage collection, treatment and disposal will require an ordinance amendment which will allow the County to permit alternative systems. The county will be able to require financial security for their construction, design and operation so that if there is a failure there will be some remedy to fix it or have it fixed. (3) An act to amend section 17.1 and 18.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 session laws to make an impact fee ordinance adopted by orange County, insofar as it relates to capital improvements for public schools, applicable to all development that occurs within the County including development that occurs within the corporate limits and the extraterritorial planning jurisdiction of any city, town or other municipal corporation located within Orange County -- this enabling legislation will allow the County to levy these fees. A preliminary report will give the procedures that need to be followed in order to implement these fees. (4) An act adding Orange County to those counties authorized by Chapter 651 of the 1989 Session laws of the General Assembly of North Carolina to regulate trespassing to hunt or fish on private lands by local ordinance will require a local ordinance. (5) A local bill enabling Orange County to adopt a human /civil rights ordinance for Orange County will require a local ordinance. The Impact Tax Bill was not pursued. Chair Carey asked the County Manager to consult with the County Attorney and Human Rights Commission to bring back to the Board on September 17, a timetable -for adopting an ordinance for regulating hunting and an ordinance for human /civil rights. He also asked the Manager to consult with the County Commissioners for recommendations on timing and process. ri B. VACATION AND SICK LEAVE REVISIONS "TO THE PERSONNEL ORDINANCE Human Resources Director Elaine Holmes reported on the proposed revisions to the Vacation Leave and Sick Leave sections of the Orange County Personnel Ordinance. The vacation leave earning proposal would provide for all permanent employees vacation leave earning based on total county service without the five year waiting period. This involves three employees. On the maximum accumulation for vacation leave this change would provide that vacation leave may accumulate without a maximum until January 31 at which time any excess would be canceled. Upon termination, the maximum amount paid would be 240 hours. With regard to the sick leave policy, this change would allow an employee to transfer sick leave and eliminates the current fifteen (15) day limit. The County Commissioners asked that further information be provided on the following items: 1. The number of people who would be affected by the change in the sick leave policy. 2. Financial analysis of what the changes to Section 5.3.1, 5.4 and 6.5 will cost. 3. The number of employees who have 240 days accumulated. C. IMPACT FEES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES John Link and Planning Director Marvin Collins reported on the issues involved in developing an impact fee structure for school capital needs in Orange County. It is hoped that a system of fees can be thoroughly discussed and ready for implementation next July 1. One concern is that whatever fees may be established that they be established in such a way that the cost that new development generates is borne by new development and at the same time not passed on to existing development. In answer to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Marvin Collins explained that in terms of the offsets, as part of the process of establishing fees a decision would need to be made as to the type of facilities the Board wants to finance with these fees. He explained that benefits could be approached in three ways: (1) County as a whole, (2) school districts, or (3) more specific to the types of schools. There could be two geographical zones where in one zone impact fees would not be charged and in the other zone they would be charged. Commissioner Willhoit stated that it may be that the policies of the two school districts in allowing for the transfer of students may affect the County's ability to do it on a countywide basis. He noted that the cost of providing classroom space for one child in the school system is from $8,000 to $12,000. He questioned why the County could not assess a fee of $1,000 per residence and proceed on that basis making it countywide. Geoffrey Gledhill stated that they may need to separate the two districts because the development in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro school district does not impact the capital needs of the Orange County school district. Chair Carey stated that the need is different in each school 7 district and if the standards are different there may be a problem in determining a flat fee. Commissioner Halkiotis asked for additional information on the actual number of residential units and the number of these which are mobile homes. John Link indicated that the staff plans to present to the Board in November a format for implementing an impact fee. They will consult within the next few months with school system staff, homebuilders representatives, the municipalities, etc. He would suggest a public hearing in February, and after adjusting the format make it effective on July 1, 1992. Commissioner Willhoit feels the real issue is how much will the market take -- how much can be assessed and the equity issue of whether or not there will be the same amount assessed on a mobile home as on a 5-- bedroom home. D. OWASA QUARTERLY REPORT Lois Herring, Chair of the OWASA Board of Directors, was available to answer questions. She noted that discussions on the sale of water to Hillsborough ended late last year. OWASA currently can supply Hillsborough with 400,000 gallons of water per day on a 7 -day a week basis. The price is reasonable considering the quality of the water. Selling the pipeline to Hillsborough has never been discussed. Mayor Johnson is on the OWASA agenda for August 29. Lois Herring made additional comments about the recreational facilities for Cane Creek. They hope to start construction on phase one in the near future. VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA A. PURCHASE OF PHASE II OPTICAL IMAGING SYSTEM Betty June Hayes, Register of Deeds, asked that the Board consider the purchase of equipment for Phase II of the Optical Imaging System for the Register of Deeds Office and to appropriate funds in the capital projects fund for this purchase. She explained that the purchase of this work station would be the second phase in the County's conversion to optical imaging. The system will be comprised of one (1) stand alone work station consisting of a CPU, monitor, scanner, optical disk drive, laser printer and all necessary software. Motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the purchase of one stand alone work station at a cost of $44,103 from Southeastern Microfilm, Inc., and the capital project ordinance and budget amendment as stated below: COUNTY CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Source - Fund-Balance $ 44,103 Appropriation - Transfers to County Capital Projects 44,103 INFORMATION NETWORKING PROJECT CAPITAL PROJECT ORDINANCE Be it ordained by the Board of Commissioners that pursuant to Section 8 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the following capital project is hereby adopted. Section 1. The project authorized is for the improvements in Orange County's methods of information processing. The project will be financed by appropriations from the County Capital Reserve Fund, grant funds from the State of North Carolina and user fees. 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 $ 544,190 Transfer from General Fund 13,000 Grant Funds 24,000 Charges for Services 33,000 Total Revenue $ 614,190 Section 4. The following amount is appropriated for this project: Information Networking Project $ 614,190 Section S. This ordinance supersedes all previous Information Networking Capital Project Ordinances. Section 6. This ordinance shall be in effect from the date of adoption until June 30, 1994. VOTE: UNANIMOUS B. ZONING ENFORCEMENT CASES - RECOMMENDATIONS ON CIVIL PENALTIES FOR ZONING CASES Jim Hinkley, Planner II, gave background information on the case of Thomas W. Underwood and the case of Carl Swanson. Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to give Thomas W. Underwood until October 20 to completely clean up his property. If the property is not cleaned up by October 20, the County Attorney is authorized to proceed with civil penalties. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to rescind demand for civil penalties for Carl Swanson. VOTE: UNANIMOUS C. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT - REAPPROVAL OF EXPIRED PRELIMINARY PLAT Under current procedures, the Board of Commissioners may approve a revised phasing plan for an expired Preliminary Plan. If a revision is not approved, the expired portion of the Preliminary Plan must be resubmitted as if it were a new project. In many cases, the resubmitted Preliminary Plan is identical to the original plat and 9 generally approved with little or no change. The proposed amendment would allow staff to reapprove expired Preliminary Plats which meet certain criteria. we have to be able to show that only minor changes have occurred. One change to the original proposal is in III- D- 2 -f(c). This has been changed to read "any substantial change in the location of or decrease in the amount of open space, buffers, or area reserved for recreation use." Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the proposed amendment to Section III- - D-2-f of the Subdivision Regulations as revised by the County Attorney. VOTE: UNANIMOUS D. NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN The Administration recommends that the following steps be taken toward implementation of the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan. Both items 1 and 2 can be included as part of the Joint Planning Area Public Hearing with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro on October 10, 1991. I. Incorporate the Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County; 2. Direct the Planning Staff to coordinate with the Chapel Hill Planning Staff and propose appropriate amendments to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan, including recommendations from the New Hope Corridor Master Plan; and 3. Direct the Planning Staff to provide information to the Rural Character Study Committee, the Planning Board /EDC Work Group, the Planning Board, and the Commissioners and Town Council members working on the Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Zone about the land in private ownership, utility easements, railroad right -of -way, and Duke Forest in the vicinity of University Station Road, Old _.. NC 10, Mt. Hermon Church Road, Pleasant Green Road, and Eno River State Park. Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to approve the Administration's recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS E. HiLLSBOROIIGH COOPERATIVE PLANNING AREA BOUNDARIES Marvin Collins stated that there are still two areas of the Cooperative Planning Area boundaries that the two governing boards have not agreed on. The first area is bounded generally by I -40, Old Chapel Hill - Hillsborough Road, NC. Highway 86, and the current Transition Area boundary; and the second area is bounded generally by U.S. 70 Bypass, U.S. 70 Business, and ' Lawrence Road. The Administration's recommendation is that the Board of Commissioners withhold inclusion of both of these areas as part of the Hillsborough transition area. They also recommend a revision in the timetable, extending the process to give the Board some specifics instead of receiving the Planning Board recommendation on the agreement itself. During that time, a meeting may be held with the governing board of the Town of Hillsborough to review the agreement and discuss specific concerns. The agreement could then Me] be signed the second meeting in September or the first meeting in October. Commissioner Gordon asked about the necessity of holding a public hearing on the Agreement with Hillsborough. She feels that the process would be more open and that comments on the document is important to the process. Geoffrey Gledhill explained that a public hearing is not necessary until the two governing boards develop jointly a cooperative area land use plan and a cooperative area land use map. The Board is not obligated when this.agreement is signed until there is a jointly approved plan and map which creates the district. This agreement is the framework from which the plan and map will be developed. If there is not a consensus on the plan and map the agreement cannot be implemented. It was decided that the agreement will include a provision that if the two governing boards cannot agree on a land use plan and map, that either party can get out of the agreement without having a public hearing. Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the Manager's recommendation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Chair Carey to rescind the previous motion. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Town Commissioner Bob Rose stated that he feels the two transition areas are minor points. However, in the draft copy it states specifically that these two areas will be jointly agreed upon before the plan and map are developed. He expressed a concern about the water and sewer area in that it has been superimposed with rural character. As he recalls, the County Commissioners has not adopted any of the options of the rural character suggestions that are included in this draft agreement. It is unclear to Hillsborough as to density and various other things in the water and sewer area. It is economically advantage or disadvantage as to which way they go with this. If they limit the amount of dwellings per acre and prevent cluster developments, there will be 2 -acre parcels with well and septic tank. Other options may be feasible with cluster development using municipal water and sewer on smaller lots and there would be more open space and no wells or septic tanks. He recommends delay until the next meeting so the two boards can meet. Chair Carey clarified that the Board has always referred to that area as rural character although they have never adopted any recommendations from the Rural Character Study Committee that would be applicable to that area. Adoption of this Study will not change the proposed boundaries of this area, but the use of the area will be more specific. This will not be a change in boundaries between the Rural Character Area and the transition area. Bob Rose feels that the options that are presented, if they were adopted, would not make those areas economically feasible for municipal water and sewer unless there were available. some other options John Link stated that this does need to be addressed. Marvin Collins noted that the concern that Commissioner Rosa has identified is related to the draft strategies that the Rural 11 Character Study Committee is taking around to the various - township meetings now. The strategies that are included in the agreement are those that were prepared for the Rural Buffer. They have not been adopted and were provided only as an illustration of the different development options. The concern is that the Rural Character Study Committee is suggesting that in areas around Hillsborough by in large have a density of one dwelling unit per acre. The Rural Character strategies that are in draft form would in essence change that so that there is a base - density of one dwelling unit per two acres. If this was changed to 40,000 sq.ft. lots, at least a third of the total tract would have to be retained in open space. Rose's concern is that these strategies are in essence decreasing the permitted density below what it is now around Hillsborough. The Board agreed to have a work session with the Town of Hillsborough. They asked the Manager to bring back at the next meeting a revised time schedule. At the work session they can discuss the outcome of the rural character township meetings. F. STANDARDIZED FIRE DISTRICT CONTRACT Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the general form and content of the proposed standardized fire service contract as presented and authorize the Chair to sign individual contracts with each volunteer fire department as they are completed. VOTE: UNANIMOUS IX. BOARD COMMENTS - None X. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT - None XI. APPOINTMENTS Commissioner Willhoit asked that the Board consider the appointment of another citizen to serve on the Southern Human Services Planning Committee. - Motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Hugh and Dot Burford to this Committee. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XII. MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Insko to approve the minutes for August 5, 1991 as amended. VOTE: UNANIMOUS XIV. ADJOURNMENT with no further items to be considered, Chair Carey adjourned the meeting at 10:58 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 3, 1991 at 7 :30 p.m. in the courtroom of the Old Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk Moses Carey, Jr., Chair w� ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Carolina Air Care Ground Unit Contract DEPARTMENT Emergency Management ATTACHMENT(S) Contract with UNC Hospitals 1 Action Agenda Item No JZ' -A PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X INFORMATION CONTACT Nick Waters, 732 -8161 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 --2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To update and renew the contract with UNC Hospitals to provide ground ambulance services for support to the air transportation program. BACKGROUND: The County and UNC Hospitals first entered into a contract for the County to provide neo -natal ground transportation services in August 1989. Charges for these services were $7,000 per month at that time. Prior to that time, UNC Hospitals had contracted for these services with the South Orange Rescue Squad. The contract has proven to be mutually beneficial to the County and the hospital. The proposed contract is essentially similar to the contract for 1990- 91, but there are several important differences. This contract would require the County to provide three full --time positions for drivers, compared to two full -time positions under the previous contract. The County would also be required to make a second ambulance and driver available to the hospital on 30 minutes notice, compared to the one hour notice required for the backup under the previous contract. The County's compensation for providing these services would increase from $9,000 per month to $10,500 per month. The County's revenue for this program has been, and will continue to be, more than sufficient to cover the County's costs. The new position is required to permit the hospital to implement its Adult Transportation Team program, which provides for a ground ambulance to backup the helicopter when it has been dispatched to another call. The position will also help deal with peak hour demand for both the neo -natal and adult ground transportation services, and will reduce dependency on part -time staff for night and weekend on -call duty. The position will also help address actual and projected increases in service calls. Total missions increased from 425 in 1989- 90 to 537 in 1990 -91, and are expected to increase to 650 in 1991 -92. ,J. 1a Hospital budgetary constraints and uncertainty about the hospital's availability of funds for a third full -time position have delayed review and approval of this contract. The contractual stipulations have now been agreed upon by the Director of Carolina Air Care and the Director of Emergency Management Services, and have been approved and signed by the Executive Director of UNC Hospitals. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board: approve the proposed contract renewal; authorize the Chair to sign the contract; and approve one new full -time permanent position in the UNC Hospitals /EMS Contracts Fund. N STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF ORANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITALS AND ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into the 1st day of July 1991 and by and between the University of North Carolina Hospitals, hereinafter referred to as 'THE HOSPITAL" and Orange County, North Carolina., hereinafter referred to as 'THE COUNTY ", for its Office of Emergency Management Services. 1.I MY�41 I; WHEREAS, THE HOSPITAL desires ground transportation services consisting of: 1. A primary ambulance and driver available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year who can arrive at THE HOSPITAL within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care. 2. A second ambulance and driver available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year who can arrive at THE HOSPITAL within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care. 3. Carolina Air Care reserves the privilege to define transport needs and level of transport acuity. The transports include, but are not limited to, patient transports, organ transports, equipment returns, transport of HOSPITAL specialty teams, patient transport to and from THE HOSPITAL and its MRI facility, and transport of Carolina Air Care personnel. All transports are to be at the direction of Carolina Air Care administrative staff. WHEREAS, THE COUNTY desires to provide these services to THE HOSPITAL. WHEREAS, THE HOSPITAL desires to reimburse THE COUNTY for such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the following mutual promises, covenants and conditions, THE HOSPITAL and THE COUNTY agree as follows: 3 COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES 1. To schedule drivers for both primary and secondary vehicles. To hire three full-time drivers and any part-time staff needed to accomodate the Hospital based on the mission requirements stated on page one. 2. Upon request from THE HOSPITAL, to provide a second driver to accompany the primary driver on any transport which exceeds 100 miles one -way and is initiated between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. 3. To provide replacement ambulances in case the primary or secondary vehicles are out of service due to maintenance or repairs, subject to availability of County units at the time of request. 4. To perform daily check -out of each unit and all non - medical equipment aboard the ambulance at the beginning of each shift. Repair or replace any items that require same and ensure a sufficient supply of air and oxygen. S. To properly maintain the vehicles in good working order and to maintain the equipment on board the ambulance in accordance with the North Carolina Emergency Medical Services Act of 1973, as amended, and implementing regulations. 6. To provide liability and property insurance on both primary and secondary vehicles and to provide proof of insurance to THE HOSPITAL upon request. 7. To ensure THE COUNTY's staff is attired in the uniform provided by Carolina Air Care for each Carolina Air Care transport or function. 8. The drivers will ensure that necessary communications regardin,& their status during Carolina Air Care missions are made on a regular basis with the Carolina Aix Care Communications Center. 9. Upon request, the drivers will provide assistance to the medical crew to load /unload equipment and patients. 10. After each transport, restock equipment and make repairs as necessary to ensure the proper operations of all equipment. Leave vehicles fully stocked and full of gas, 02, and air for the on -call driver(s) at night and on weekends.. 11. Provide quarterly expense reports. (Salary, maintenance, fuel, and other associated operating costs.) 4 HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITIES 1. To provide one primary and at least one secondary vehicle. a. The primary vehicle shall be a 1990 Type III Modular truck and shall be equipped with radio and medical equipment to meet all State requirements. In addition, the vehicle shall be equipped with oxygen and compressed gas cylinders of at least H size. The vehicles will be equipped with suction, 110 volt source, a fixture to hold the ventilator used. in the helicopter, a fixture to hold the Life Pak V, and high - intensity directional lighting in the patient care area. The vehicles will be fitted with a device to secure the "pediatric stretcher." There will also be fittings to secure two neonatal transport isolettes of the variety currently used by THE HOSPITAL. The primary vehicle will be identified with a logo and paint scheme similar to the one on THE HOSPITAL helicopter. The primary vehicle is to be used exclusively for Carolina Air Care purposes. b. The secondary vehicles shall be equipped with radio and medical equipment to meet all State requirements. They also will be equipped with identical additional equipment as specified in Section 1 (a). The secondary ambulances will be identified with a logo and paint scheme similar to the one on THE HOSPITAL helicopter. The secondary ambulances may be utilized for Orange County EMS purposes as long as it can be made available within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care for transports. 2. Carolina Air Care Communications will be responsible for notifying Orange Central Communications of the need for the primary or secondary units and their drivers. For MRI transports the Carolina air Care Communications will notify Orange Central Communications if the adult or pediatric team is needed, all other MRI transports will be coordinated from the MRI unit to the Orange Central Communications. 3. THE HOSPITAL retains full authority and responsibility for the care and treatment of its patients and will have administrative and professional supervision of any Orange County EMS employee while said employees are rendering services to THE HOSPITAL under this ageement. During a transport THE HOSPITAL, its employees and members of the Medical Staff will be in charge of the medical aspects of the transports, including the authority to prescribe to the driver the degree of urgency of the transport, and the authority.to order the vehicle to stop and remain parked while medical procedures are being performed. The driver will operate within Orange County EMS policies concerning the safe movement of the vehicle. 4. THE HOSPITAL will reimburse THE COUNTY for the .services provided at the rate of $10,500 per month. TERM OF AGREEMENT 1992. This Agreement shall run from the 1st day of July, 1991 to the 30th day of June, 5 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement or its renewals may be terminated at any time without penalty by either party, provided that written notice of such termination is furnished to the other party at least mnety (90) days prior to termination. In the event of such termination, any payment due shall be prorated to the date of termination. The parties agree and understand that the Director of Orange County Emergency Services may temporarily suspend services under this Agreement in the event of a county -wide disaster. ACCESS OF RECORDS In compliance with 42 U.S.C. 1395x (V) (1) (I) and implementing regulations, Orange County agrees, until the expiration of four (4) years after the services are furnished under this Agreement, to allow the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Comptroller General access to this contract and to the books, documents and records of Orange County necessary to verify the nature and extent of the costs of this contract. If Orange County chooses to subcontract this service, such subcontract shall contain a clause to the effect that, until the expiration of four (4) years after the services are furnished under such subcontract, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Comptroller General shall have access to such subcontract and to the books, documents, and records of the subcontractor necessary to verify the nature and extent of the costs of such subcontract. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties and shall not be altered, amended, or modified, except by an agreement in writing executed by the duly authorized officials of both parties. GOVERNING LAW The laws of North Carolina shall govern the validity and interpretation of the provisions, terms and conditions of this Agreement. P IN WTMESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto signed this Agreement in their official capacities of the day and year listed below. FOR AND ON BEHALF OF: THE UNIVERSITY NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITALS DATE: MUNSON l EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR AND ON BEHALF OF: ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I "I� MOSES CARLY, JR. CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: c- v M .1 l I ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Forest Service Contract DEPARTMENT Budget PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT Agreement for the Protection, Budget Office, Extension 2450 Development and Improvement of TELEPHONE NUMBER Forest Lands in Orange County Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To consider the annual agreement between Orange County and the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for the provision of support to the NC.Forest Service in Orange County. BACKGROUND: This agreement will provide for the continued maintenance by the NC Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources through the NC Forest Service in Orange County for the protection, development and improvement of forest lands in Orange County. The Board of Commissioners has appropriated $42,088 in fiscal year 1991 -92 to match the State appropriation of $63,133 for the provision of this service in Orange County. This is a 40/60 match. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board of Commissioners approve the annual agreement between Orange County and the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources and authorize Chair to sign. FC -42 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA (2 -90) Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources s 105,221.00 Total Cooperative Appropriation $ 63,133.00 State 2 60 % $ 42,088.00 40 % County AGREEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF FOREST LANDS IN ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA THIS AGREEMENT, made under the authority of "An act to authorize Counties to cooperate with State in Forest Protection, Reforestation and promotion of Forest Management," (Section 113 -59 of the General Statutes of North Carolina - 1943), and also under authority of another Section of the General Statutes, namely Section 113 -54, by the North Carolina Department. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (hereinafter called the Department), party of the first part, and the Board of Commissioners of ORANGE County in the State of North Carolina (hereinafter called the Board), party of the second part, witnesseth: That WHEREAS the said Board, recognizing the need for active forest protection, development, reforestation, management and improvement in ORANGE County, has accepted the offer of the Department for cooperation in accomplishing this object: Now, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual convenants hereinafter set forth, the said parties contract and agree to maintain a legally appointed and equipped Forest Ranger organization in said county at the joint cost of the State and County, insofar as the joint funds will permit, as follows: Part I. THE DEPARTMENT AGREES: 1. To select, employ and appoint, after consultation with the Board, a County Forester or County Forest Ranger for the purposes of controlling forest fires in said County; for detecting and extinguishing fires that break out; for investigating the origin of forest, woodland and field fires; for enforcing State forest fire laws; for taking such preventive measures, educational and otherwise, as shall seem necessary to prevent forest fires; for developing and improving the forests through reforestation, promotion and practice of Forest Management practices; and for protection from insects and diseases. 2. To furnish to each Forester or Forest Ranger so employed a badge of office, stationery and report forms, instructional posters for use in the County, leaflets for distributing to landowners and others; to purchase necessary equipment, communication systems, and other Forestry improvements deemed necessary insofar as the joint funds will permit. 3. To pay the Forester or Forest Ranger for all official services rendered, at a fair rate of pay. Rates of pay are to be established by the Department in accordance with existing State salary schedules. 3 MOZ 4. To direct, supervise, instruct, and inspect, through its agents, the work and conduct of the Forester or Forest Ranger, to discipline and, when necessary, discharge such Forester or Forest Ranger. 5. To submit to the Board of Commissioners monthly (or at other mutually satisfactory intervals) an itemized statement of all monies to be paid by the County and those paid by the Department for the proper conduct of the work within said County. 6. To make avail ab a an ll from Sgtate Federal and ott allotted to it, the sum of untd e t iirttZ ttriree dollars ($ 63,133.00 as its share of an annual budget of $ 0 0 f in said County. or carrying on Part II. THE BOARD AGREES: :r funds the work 1. To pay the Department `+0 % of the total cost of the Forester or Forest Ranger salaries and expenses and of other proper expenditures made in connection with the over -all Forestry program in said County, upon receipt and consequent approval of the periodic statements submitted by the Department. 2. To appropriate annually the sum of e°llF e ghihousand dollars ($ 42 088.00 ), which sum shall be available for expenditure under the terms of this Agreement, and shall represent the County's share of the annual budget. Part III. IT IS EXPRESSLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD BY BOTH PARTIES: 1. That this Agreement becomes effective July 1 19 91 2. That the annual a - ppropriations as set forth above may be revised by mutual agreement between the Department and the Board, based on the amount of annual appropriation desirable for the proper conduct of the Forestry work, such revision to become effective at the beginning of a given Fiscal Year. Any unused balance of County funds remaining at the end of a Fiscal Year shall revert to said County unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties. 3. That the Board reimburse the Department as provided in Part II, Item 1, by forwarding a county voucher drawn in favor of the Department for the amount of the County's share of expenditures as set forth in the Department's periodic statement to the Board. That such payments be made by the Board within thirty days following receipt of the Department's billing. 4. The title to all improvements and equipment purchased and /or constructed in connection with this Agreement will rest with the Department; such materials or their equivalent will remain in the County as long as this Agreement is in effect, or as long as they are needed by the Department for the proper conduct of the work therein. 5. That the Forester or Forest Ranger periodically or at the request of the Board, shall present to the Board statements of the work being done within the County, so that said Board may be fully informed at all times regarding the Forestry finances and activities within the County. 4 --3-- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties do hereunto affix their names and seals upon the date herein below specified. For the Board of County Commissioners of Date County. * MMT 1 Provisions for the payment of the monies to fall due under this Agreement have been made by appropriation duly made or by bonds or notes duly authorized, as required by the "County Fiscal Control Act." Date County Finance Officer For the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Date Signature Title 1; ti ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. X- �� ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: PROCLAMATION OF WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY DEPARTMENT: Commission for Women PUBLIC HEARING: Yes yx No ATTACHMENT(S): 1) list of activities sponsored during the month of August 2) proclamation to be signed PURPOSE: INFORMATION CONTACT: Hope Bethea TELEPHONE ;UMBER: Hillsborough - 7312 -8181 Chapel Hill - 967 -9251 Mebane - 227 -2031 Durham - 638 -7331 - To proclaim August 26, 1991, as Women's Equality Day - To recognize the importance of this day by inviting community participation - To show the Orange County Commissioners' support of women in Orange County BACKGROUND: This day celebrates the passage of the Nineteenth (19th) Amendment to the United States Constitution, giving women the right to vote. RECOMMENDATION(S): That the Orange County Commissioners proclaim August 26, 1991 as Women's Equality Day in Orange County 1 2 Orange County Commission for Women Box 8181 * 110 North Churton Street 0 Hillsborough, NC 27278 ACTIVITIES FOR WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY - AUGUST 26, 1991 I. A proclamation of Women's Equality Day will be presented to the Orange County Board of Commissioners on Monday, August 20th, at 7:10 p.m., in the Old Post Office in Chapel Hill. 2. Special voter registration will be.offered in Northern and Southern Orange County on Saturday, August 24th, at wal- Mart and University Mall, from 1 -4 p.m. 3. A brief history of women's rights in North Carolina will be distributed at the special voter registration loca- tions. 4. A workshop will be held for Orange County employees on Wednesday, August 14th, noon to 1:15 p.m., at the Public Works Administration Building. Elaine Johnson of the Edu- cational Opportunity Center will present "Money for College . . . Fact or Fantasy"" and explore financial resources for pursuing a college education. 5. The video, "One Fine Day," will also be shown at the Aug. 14th employee workshop. 6.. A WomanLine radio spot will run on WCHL Radio during August noting the importance of the ratificaiton of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which gave women the right to vote. 7. Press releases regarding Women's Equality Day activities will be handled in a timely manner. Hillsborough 732 -8181 • Chapel Hill 967 -9251 • Mebane 227 -2031 • Durham 688 -7331 3 Orange County Commission for women Box 8181 + 110 North Churton Street • Hillsborough, NC 27278 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, on August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified; and WHEREAS, that amendment reads as follows: "The right of citizens of the Unites States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. "; and WHEREAS, the power of the vote is the gateway to continued improvements in the status of women; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Commission for Women advises the citizens and the Board of Commissioners of Orange County of the status of women in Orange County; and WHEREAS, that status remains unequal, especially economically and politically; and WHEREAS, yet women make significant contributions economical- ly, politically and in myriad ways to Orange County, NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners does hereby proclaim Monday, August 26, 1991 as WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY in celebration of women's contributions and their right to economic and political equality and do hereby urge all citizens to work to guarantee full equality for all women. This the 20th day of August, 1991. Moses Carey, Jr. Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners Hillsborough 732 -8181 • Chapel. Hill 967 -9251 * Mebane 227 -2031 0 Durham 688 -7331 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Resolution of Appreciation to Local Legislators DEPARTMENT County Manager PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT Proposed Resolution County Manager, ext 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To adopt a resolution expressing appreciation to the Orange County legislative delegation. BACKGROUND: During the 1991 Session of,the North Carolina General Assembly, members of the Orange County legislative delegation were instrumental in securing passage of a number of legislative initiatives important to Orange County citizens. The attached resolution expresses the Board's appreciation for their support, through sponsorship and promotion, of the Board's 1991 legislative package. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution. 2 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION FROM ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, The Orange County Board of Commissioners developed and approved a legislative package that was submitted to the Orange County delegation for consideration by the 1991 Session of the North Carolina General Assembly, and WHEREAS, The Orange County delegation to the General Assembly includes Senator Howard Lee, Senator Kenneth Royall, Senator Russell. Walker, Representative Anne Barnes and Representative Joe Hackney, and WHEREAS, Members of this delegation demonstrated their support for the proposed legislation by sponsoring and promoting the Commissioners' legislative package for 1991, and WHEREAS, This delegation observed Orange County's best interests in maintaining the high quality of life in the County through its legislative actions during the 1991 Session. NOW THEREFORE HE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners recognize and express their appreciation for the continued support given to Orange County by the Members of this Delegation to the General Assembly. ADOPTED this 20th day of August, 1991. Moses Carey, Chair Stephen Halkiotis, Vice -Chair Alice Gordon Verla Insko Donald Willhoit ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda «� ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT item No. Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT.: PROCLAMATION FOR LITERACY WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY ---------------------------------- DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X - --- ----------------------- ------- ATTACHMENT(S): YES - PROCLAMATION INFORMATION CONTACT: MOSES CAREY,JR. TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel Hill - 968 -5401 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 PURPOSE: To recognize on the - local -level the Literacy Council - and :their efforts in improving literacy in Orange County. BACKGROUND: International Literacy Day is celebrated each year on September 8. Its purpose is to recognize institutions, organizations, and individuals that have "distinguished themselves by making a particularly meritorious and effective contribution to the struggle against illiteracy.' This Proclamation is an effort on the local level to promote adult literacy in all of Orange County. RECOMMENDATION(S): Proclaim September 8 - 14 as Celebrate Literacy Week in Orange County. P R O C L A M A T I O N LITERACY WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, the ability to read is of fundamental importance to all people, and WHEREAS, this nation was founded by, and depends upon, a literate and informed citizenry, and WHEREAS, literacy is a gateway to the full participation in the affairs of this nation, and WHEREAS, adult new readers should be recognized for their efforts toward personal and civic growth, and WHEREAS, volunteers in adult literacy programs should be commended for their willingness to give the time that is necessary to help others improve their skills, and WHEREAS, September 8 is designated as International Literacy Day, NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby declare September 8th through the 14th as Celebrate Literacy Week in honor of those adults for whom the achievement of literacy, for themselves and others, has become a primary goal. This the 20th day of AugjAst, 1991- Moses Carey, Jr., Chair Attest: Beverly A. Blythe Clerk to the Board 2 t It ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Local Legislation Update DEPARTMENT County Manager ATTACHMENT(S) Senate Bill 623 Letters from NC Wildlife Resources commission Extract from March 20, 1991 Minutes 1 Action Agenda Item No V Z[- A PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X ------------------------------- INFORMATION CONTACT Rod Visser, ext 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To receive an update, for information only, on the results of Orange County's 1991 North Carolina General Assembly legislative agenda. BACKGROUND: At its March 20, 1991 meeting, the Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution representing the 1991 legislative agenda for the County. The legislation that was submitted to the Orange County legislative delegation is outlined in the extract from the March 20 minutes. The Board also requested the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission to include Orange County among those that observe an extended period during which the intentional sweeping of deer areas with lights is prohibited. The Wildlife Resources Commission and the Administrative Rules Review Commission have acted to include Orange County in the list of counties that prohibit spotlighting deer during the period from one half hour after sunset to one half hour before sunrise. This action became effective August 1, 1991, as outlined in the attached correspondence from the Wildlife Resources Commission. The North Carolina General Assembly ratified Senate Bill 623, commonly referred to as the Orange- Chatham County Omnibus Legislation, during the 1991 Session. Sections 1 thru 7 of Senate Bill 623 approved the action /authority sought by the County in items 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, and 9 of the County's legislative agenda. It is important to reiterate that the enabling legislation approved in Section 7 of Senate Bill 623, permitting regulation of hunting and fishing, is not self- executing. Subsequent adoption of an ordinance addressing these activities will be required to implement the contemplated regulations. U FJ Item 5 of the legislative agenda, which sought authority to levy an impact tax on development to help pay for school capital costs associated with development, was dropped from consideration by the General Assembly. However, item 6 was approved by the General Assembly instead, with the result that the County's existing authority to impose impact fees within the County's planning jurisdiction for school capital needs was expanded to encompass authority to impose such fees throughout the County. A more detailed discussion of impact fees is included in another report on this agenda. Finally, item 7 from the County's legislative agenda, dealing with authority to levy an occupancy tax of up to 3% on rental accommodations in the County was approved by the General Assembly as Senate Bill 622. This issue was addressed by the Commissioners during the last regular meeting of the Board on August 5. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends: that the Board receive the report for information only; and that after appropriate discussion at a future date, the Board adopt an ordinance regulating hunting and fishing on private property, as authorized by the Enabling legislation in Senate Bill 623. 3 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD�.OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 20; 1991 The orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Wednesday, March 20, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. iri the Board Room at Lincoln Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. y,. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA A. LOCAL LEGISLATION Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to approve the resolution on spotlighting as stated below: WHEREAS, the Sheriff of Orange County has brought to the attention of the Board of Commissioners the fact that he has received numerous complaints during the 1990 -91 hunting season coming from property owners and citizens about the incidence of unlawful night deer hunting and the great inconvenience to citizens caused by person shining Lights searching for deer; and WHEREAS, members of the Board of County Commissioners have also received such calls; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners advertised ar., conducted a public hearing on this issue at its regular March 4,_1.991 Commissioners meeting held in Hillsborough, North Carolina; and WHEREAS, these same complaints and concerns were-expressed by citizens attending the public hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, PURSUANT TO NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATU'T'ES 113- 291.1(e2), ADOPTS THIS RESOLUTION requesting the-North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission to include orange County among those counties which have the extended period during which th`i e'htientional sweeping of deer areas with lights is prohibited and that the rule prevailing in orange County be changed to prohibit intentional sweeping of deer areas with lights or the - intentional shining of lights on 'deer during the period from one - half hour after sunset until one -half hour before sunrise. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Discussion ensued on the proposed local legislation for the authority to consider a Civil Rights Ordinance. The Board decided to add as number nine this request for enabling legislation. The Attorney will draft the proposed bill for the April Ist Board Meeting at which time a public hearing will-be scheduled. Any amendments made.on that evening will be forwarded to the legislative delegation. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the Impact Tax legislation and asked if there had to be any extra wording for adding municipalities to this legislation. Mr. Gledhill indicated it was okay as written. He has taken the precaution to bring it to the attention of Chapel Hill's legal council. Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Chairman Carey to approve the resolution--for local legislation as stated.below: 4 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County that the Board hereby requests he Senators and Representatives' representing orange County to intz.Pduce and support the following legislative matters: 1. AN ACT TO CLARIFY THE ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS RELATING TO RECRE�,TION AREAS IN ORANGE COUNTY. 2. AN ACT To AMEND THE ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO GRANT DENSITY BONUSES AND OTHER INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS OF HOUSING FOR PERSONS OF LOW OR MODERATE INCOME. 3. AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY IN ORDER TO PRESERVE OPEN SPACE AND OPEN AREAS FOR THE PRESERVATION, PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION OF FARMLAND, WATERSHED AREAS AND DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES; AND TO ACQUIRE THE FEE OR ANY LESSER INTEREST. 4. AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO REQUIRE FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR THE REPAIR AND OPERATION OF COMMUNITY SYSTEMS OF SEWAGE COLLECTION, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL. S. A BILL TO BE`'ENTITLED AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO LEVY A TAX ON THE IMPACT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GENERATING REVENUES TO PAY PART OF THE COSTS OF SCHOOL _CAPITAL FACILITIES AND TO CREATE AN ORANGE COUNTY IMPACT TAX DISTRICT AND TO AUTHORIZE THE DISTRICT TO LEVY A TAX ON THE IMPACT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT IFOP, THE PURPOSE OF GENERATING REVENUES TO PAY PART ._.OF „THE COSTS OF \\SCHOOL CAPITAL FACILITIES REQUIRED BY GROWTH. 6. AN ACT TO AMEND. SECTIONS 17.1 AND 18.1 OF CHAPTER 460 OF THE 1987 SESSION LAWS TO HAKE'AN IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY ORANGE COUNTY, INSOFAR AS IT' "'RELATES TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE COUNTY INCLUDING DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS AND THE EXTRATERRITORIAL PLANNING JURISDICTION OF ANY CITY, TOWN OR OTHER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LOCATED WITHIN ORANGE COUNTY. 7. AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO LEVY AN OCCUPANCY TAX WITH THE EXPRESS AUTHORITY FOR THE USE OF SOME OF ITS PROCEEDS FOR A COUNTY VISITORS' BUREAU. 8. AN ACT ADDING ORANGE COUNTY TO THOSE COUNTIES AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 651 OF THE 1989-'SESSION LAWS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA TO REGULATE TRESPASSING TO HUNT OR FISH ON PRIVATE LANDS BY LOCAL, ORDINANCE. 9. A LOCAL BILL ENABLING ORANGE COUNTY TO ADOPT A HUMAN /CIVIL RIGHTS - :ORDINANCE FOR ORANGE COUNTY`. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that", the Board authorizes the County Attorney to prepare a draft bill enabling Orange County to .adopt a Human /Civil Rights Ordinance for transmittal with this resolution. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chairman Carey to approve the resolution for..local legislation as stated below- BE ST FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY requests its legislative delegation to support: 1. the need for a permanent, stable revenues source instead of the present appropriations to reimburse local governments for past repeal of other local revenues; 2. state -wide enabling legislation authorizing local option revenues including admissions, real estate transfer, occupancy (hotel /motel) and the extension of local sales taxes to the purchase of autos, boats and planes; , 3. more frequent distribution'.of local sales tax proceeds or payment of interest for the period that they are held by the state; 4. state adherence to a. schedule of timely payments of sales tax proceeds to county governments in compliance with state.fiscal policy; 5. the need for a revenue source.to support the Triangle Trans- portation Authority; and 6.. state -wide legislation to encourage recycling of beverage containers through deposit and refund requirements. RECEIVED MAY 2 3 DISTRit; 5 D eU ® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 -1188, 919 - 733 -3391 Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director May 21, 1991 Mr. Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman Orange County Board of Commissioners Post Office Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Mr. Carey: At its meeting on May 17, 1991, the Wildlife Resources Commission adopted the enclosed regulation to include Orange County in the list of counties prohibiting shining lights on deer between the hours of one -half hour after sunset and one -half hour .before sunrise. This regulation has been filed with the Administrative Rules Review Commission for review. upon their approval, it will be filed with the office of Administrative Hearings for an effective date of August 1, 1991. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If we may be of further service to you, please let us know. sincerely, X6104 Richard B. Hamilton Assistant Director RBH/ gm Attachment cc: Captain sterling Baker Division of Wildlife Law Enforcement Commissioner Ovide E. de St. Aubin '� Jr - .F. 6 : 15A NCAC IOB .0115(c) SHINING LIGHTS IN LEER AREAS has been' aiiiended with charges as ,published ill the North Carol inYza.- RegisL rL���}::.;_ read a.� 1036 to s follows. �:",x*irr:.< Volwr,e 5, Issue 22, Page ...: ......;.. 1:: _ . 0115 SHINING LIGHTS IN DEER AREAS (c) too person shall, between the hours of one= half�`hour`after- sunset and one -half hour before sunrise, i_ntentianally shinea =; ': ; : ' 3.ight upon a deer' or intentionally sweep a light in search of deer in the indicated portions of . the following counties-.' r isr (1) Alamance -- entire county; (2) Alexander -- Entire county; (3) Alleghany -- entire county; (4) Anson -- entire county; Ashe entire county; ',: r . ;:.,F._, ,..:.:., (5) A.; er that portion south and east of . HigYiway -, 3 ;.;. (7) Burke entire county; (g) Cabarrus -- entire county; (9) Caldwell entire county; (10) Caswell entice county; (11) Catawba -- entire county; (12) Chatham - enti>_e County; (13) Clay -- entire county; (14) Cleveland -- entire county; (15) Cumberland -- entire county; (16) Davidson -- entire county; (17) Davie -- entire county; (10) Durham -- entire county; (19) Edgecombe -- entire county; 20 F'Ors th Count -- entire county; �y} Gaston --- entire county; Guilford entire county; Halifax entire county +.(2 4_1 Harnett entire county; ^Y��2SL llenderson entire county; 261 11 }'de -- that part bounded oil the north by a line running parallel with and 1000 yards in a northward direction from that part of SR 1304 that leads from llr:,dges' Fork to Rose Ba }�, on the east by the t,7atLamusl;cet National wildlife Refuge boiundary, on Llie southeast by U5 264, and ui: the west and southwest by a line running parallel with and 1000 yards in a west or southwest cli>_'(--r::ti.C,n front the ill? of S12 ] 304 ; t r12 f) 1,it'd'11 entire cOunLy; C :;tA Jo JuhnsS u11 �9t lee entire couilt }'; cl�jloj Lincoln -- entire Count), i G,nt.iL„ r.0 trill y', f3 }( 3) Mitchell -- entire county; �� 34 Northampton -- entire county; Oran e Count entire count �z5�116 Person -- entire county; t; _ S• f36 }L 3? 1 Polk -- entire county; f3 }L38 Randolph -- entire county; {-38 }(39) Robeson .County. entire county; fag }(40) Rockingham_ 7-, entire county;: {49 y , d , 11 }` . .., .< . Rowan -- entire county; - �4? },L4.2 Z Rutherford --- entire county; {- 43 }(4.3) Scotland -- that.part lying west of US 401 north of Laurinburg and north of US 74 west of Laurinburg; 03}_C!4 Stanly entire county; f44 }J45 Stokes -- .ent ire. •county; {-48 }(46) Surry -= entire county; t46 }LL71 Transylvania -- entire county; {- 47- }(48) Union -- entire. county; {-48 } (4 9) Watauga entire-county; {-44 }1501 - Wilkes entire :-,county; j -58 }�1 Yadkin -- ertire-•- county; Yancey entire county; History Note: Statutory Authority G.S. 113 -134; 113- 291.1. S.L. 1981, Ch. 410; S.L. 1981 (Second Session 1982), Ch. 1180; Eff. November 11, 1979; Amended Eff. August lj 1991 August 1, 1990; June 1, 1989; DISTRIBUTED 7'0 /Z'eo i 1 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 -1188, 419 - 733 -3391 Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director July 26, 1991 Mr. Moses Carey, Jr., Chairman Orange County Board of Commissioners Post Office Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Dear Mr. Carey: Our letter of May 21, 1991, advised you of the adoption of the shining lights rule for Orange County by the Wildlife Resources Commission, and stated that the rule would be effective, pending approval by the Administrative Rules Review Commission (ARRC), on the 1st day of August, 1991 We have been advised that this rule was approved by the ARRC at their June 21st meeting, to be effective August 1, 1991. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, Gayle C. Moser Administrative Assistant GCM cc: Captain Sterling Baker Division of Wildlife Enforcement r I GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA 1991 SESSION RATIFIED BILL CHAPTER 246 SENATE BILL 623 AN ACT TO MAKE VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO LAWS APPLICABLE IN ORANGE AND CHATHAM COUNTIES. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: TITLE 1. ORANGE COUNTY. Part 1. Orange County Land Use and Development. Section 1. The first paragraph of G.S. 153A- 331(a), as applicable to Orange County because of Sections 17 and 17.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 Session Laws, reads as rewritten: "A subdivision control ordinance may provide for the orderly growth - and development of the county; for the coordination of streets and highways within proposed subdivisions with existing or planned streets and highways and with Ether public facilities; for the dedication or reservation of recreation areas serving residents of the immediate _eiehber -heed with:_ •L- subdivision and residents of the immediate area within which the subdivision is located and of rights -of -way or easements for street and utility purposes including the dedication of rights -of -way pursuant to G.S. 136 -66.10 or G.S. 136- 66.11; and for the distribution of population and traffic in a manner that will avoid congestion and overcrowding and will create conditions essential to public health, safety, and the general welfare. The ordinance may include requirements that the final plat show sufficient data to determine readily and reproduce accurately on the ground the location, bearing, and length of every street and alley line, lot line, easement boundary line, and other property boundaries, including the radius and other data for curved property lines, to an appropriate accuracy and in conformity with good surveying practice. A subdivision control ordinance may provide that a developer may ere aired to provide funds to the county whereby the county may acquire and develop recreational land or areas to serve the development or subdivision, including the purchase of land which may be used to serve more than one subdivision or development within the immediate area. Sec. 2. G.S. 153A -340, as applicable to Orange County because of Sections 18 and 18.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 Session Laws, is amended by adding a new subsection (al) to read: 10 L-1 2 I .ti earnlrn , less than sixt n income. udiusted for f. ue )artment of rtoutiln . and urban Development hereinafter 'median income' To construct at least twent ercent _VO of [lie total duplex or mulrifamil , units of a hoUSin r development for rent to familir� di ��,�ula,I Income: or viuAL V; \_UUUty to UC useu ror ir:_ purpose of the development of affordable ho using_ provided that the land donated must have suitable soils or to public water and sewer and be sufficient in size for the greater of two or all the bonus units. LIuucu WIICII ueterinintn , 'n inimum rennirPd rn hr- rnnrip Sec. 3. G.S. 153A- 342 reads as rewritten: - - - "§ 153A -342. Districts; zoning less than entire jurisdiction. A county may divide its territorial jurisdiction into districts of any number, shape, and area that it may consider best suited to carry out the purposes ofIthis Part. Within these districts a county may regulate and restrict the erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, or use of buildings, structures, or land. Such districts may include, but shall not be limited to, general use districts, in which a variety of uses are permissible in accordance with general standards; overlay districts, in which additional requirements are imposed on certain properties within one or more underlying general or special use districts; and special ' use districts or conditional use districts, in which uses are permitted only upon the issuance of a special use permit or a conditional use permit. Property may be placed in a special use district or conditional use district only in response to a petition by the owners of all the property, to be included. Except as authorized by the foregoing, and by G.S. 153A -340. all regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of building throughout each district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts. A county may determine that the public interest does not require that the entire territorial jurisdiction -of the County be zoned and may designate one or more portions of that jurisdiction as a zoning area or areas. A zoning area must originally contain at least 640 acres and at least 10 separate tracts of land in separate ownership and may thereafter be expanded by the addition of any amount of territory. A zoning area may be regulated in the same manner as if the entire county were zoned, and the remainder of the county need not be regulated." Sec. 4. G.S. 160A -407 reads as rewritten: 1 160A -407. Definitions. (a) For the purpose of this Part an `open space' or *o n area' is any space or area 0) characterized by great natural scenic beauty &r- ii) whose existing openness, natural condition. or present state of use, if retained. would enhance the present or potential value of abutting or surrounding urban development, or would maintain or enhance the conservation of natural or scenic fe5ettrees. resources (iii) that would as uce preserve, and rotect watershed areas as a basic asset and natural resource so- Senate 2 Bill 623 11 as to urevgnt the im Mairment of drinkin water su lies or iv that would assure preserve rotect and maintain the urity and the uality of reservoir waters and would oromote the health safety and welfare of the eo )le of the State. (b) For the purposes of this Part 'open space' or `open area' and the 'public use and enjoyment' of interests or rights in real property shall also include open space land -and open space uses. Tile term 'open space land' means any undeveloped or Predominantly undeveloped land in an urban area that has value for one or more of the following purposes: (1) park and recreational purposes, (ii) conservation of land and other natural resources, of (iii) historic or scenic ptiPpeseS ; 12ur oses iv farmland or v conservation of watershed areas and drinkin2 water su lies to revent the im airment thereof and assure reserve protect, and maintain the puritV and qualitv of reservoir waters. The term 'open space uses' means any use of open space land for (1) park and recreational purposes, (ii) conservation of land and other natural resources, ar (iii.) historic or scenic ptr� ur oses . (LIV-1 farmland, or tv conservation of watershed areas and drinking water SUDDlie5 to prevent the impairment thereof and assure reserve protect, and maintain the puri.tv and gualirN, of reservoir waters." 11 Sec. 5. G.S. 153A -121 is amended by adding a new subsection to read: d A County rnav h4 ordin-11ra ranllie" ri,- ..._r _1_ . aala.rAla a+ilu u„ ,vain, w rovlue unto «ith oerformance bonds letters of credit or certificates of deposit in amt Fficient to cover i the initial design. installation and erformance of the ;vzr,- A community system of sew-age collection treatment uland idis sal onee which serves more than one user anti is not owned or 013erated by a local government iunit or a North Carolina water and sewer authority." Part 2. Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance. Sec. 6. Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance. (a) The Board of Commissioners of Orange County may adopt an ordinance (hereinafter "Civil Rights Ordinance" or "Human Rights Ordinance ") designed: to promote equal treatment of all individuals; to discourage discrimination based on religion, age, sex, race, disability, or marital status; to help residents find ways to meet and solve problems arising from discrimination by use of public meetings, counseling, mediation where appropriate, and the civil and criminal courts as necessary; to continue to protect the lawful interests of residents and to recognize the dignity of each person so as to make available to the county the full productive and creative capacities of its citizens; to prevent public and domestic strife, crime and unrest; to preserve the public health. safety and general welfare; to promote the policy within Orange County that all individuals, child and adult, female and male, shall have equal rights throughout Orange County and every place subject to its jurisdiction; to carry out in Orange County the policies provided for in various federal rules, regulations, and laws Prohibiting discrimination in housing, employment, places of public accommodation. public transportation, voting and education; and to address the deprivation of the free exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution of North Carolina, not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. (b) The Board of Commissioners of Orange County may, by ordinance or otherwise, create an agency or commission (hereinafter "agency ") of Orange County to assist in the enforcement of an Orange County Civil Rights or Human Rights Ordinance and to receive, initiate, investigate, seek to conciliate, hold hearings on and pass upon complaints, to mediate alleged violations of the ordinance, to issue orders against persons it finds, after notice and hearing, to have violated the ordinance, and to seek court enforcement of its orders. Senate Bill 623 3 12 (c) Judicial review of agency orders shall be in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 150B of the General Statutes (The Administrative Procedure Act). Provided, however, that all petitions for judicial review shall be filed in the Superior Court of Orange County. The term "agency," whenever used in Article 4 of Chapter 150B of the General Statutes, shall mean the agency as authorized or created by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County by authority of this section. (d) An ordinance adopted pursuant to this section applies to any part of Orange County not within a municipally incorporated city, town, or village. The governing board of a city, town, or village within Orange County may, by resolution, permit an Orange County ordinance adopted pursuant to this section to be applicable within its corporate boundaries. A city, town, or village may, by resolution, withdraw its permission to enforce such an ordinance. If it does so, it shall give written notice to Orange County of its withdrawal of permission. Thirty days after the date Orange County receives the permission withdrawal notice, the county ordinance ceases to be applicable within the city, town, or village. (e) This section applies only to Orange County. Part 3. Orange County Hunting and Fishing Regulation. Sec. 7. Section 2 of Chanter 651 of the 1989 Session Laws reads as rewritten: "Sec. 2. This act applies only to .'—z Alamance Orange, and Rockingham Counties." Part 4. Orange County School Payday. Sec. 8. Notwithstanding G.S. 115C- 302(a) and G.S. 115C-316(a), the - Orange County Board of Education may pay its academic teachers, occupational E Education teachers, guidance counselors, assistant principals, and other instructional personnel employe less than 12 months of the school year on the fifteenth day of each month during which they are employed. TITLE II. CHATHAM COUNTY. Sec. 9. Possession and Use of Firearms in Chatham County. (a) It is unlawful for any person to hunt with a firearm or bow and arrow, or to possess any firearm or bow and arron, while on the land of another unless he has, on his person, a paper writing dated and signed by the owner or lessee of the land granting the person permission to hunt or possess a firearm or bow and arrow while on the land. If the land is owned by or leased to a club, the permission must be signed by the club president or other chief executive, by whatever name known. If the land is owned by or leased to a corporation, the permission must be signed by the president or vice - president of the corporation, or the authorized designee of the president or vice - president. Permission shall not be valid for a period in excess of one year, but may be valid for any shorter period stated in the permission. The written permission shall be displayed upon request to any law enforcement officer authorized to enforce this section. b Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section: 1 To hunt - To take wild animals or wild birds. 2 To take - All operations during, immediately preparatory to, and immediately subsequent to an attempt, whether successful or not, to capture, kill, pursue, hunt, or otherwise harm or reduce to possession any wild animal or wild bird. (c) It is unlawful for any person to possess a loaded firearm on the land of another while under the influence of an impairing substance. For purposes of this subsection, a person is under the influence of an impairing substance when he has consumed a sufficient quantity of any impairing substance to cause him to lose the normal control of his bodilv or mental faculties, or both, to such an extent that there is an appreciable impairment of either or both of these faculties. 4 Senate Bill 623 13 (d) It is unlawful for any parent, guardian, or person standing in loco parentis, to knowingly permit his child under the age of 16 years to have the possession, custody, or use in anv manner whatever, of a firearm, whether such weapon is loaded or unloaded, except when the child is under the supervision of the parent, guardian, or person standing in loco parentis. It is unlawful for any person other than a parent, guardian, or person standing in loco parentis, to knowingly furnish a child under the age of 16 years any weapon enumerated herein withuut first obtaining permission of the child's parent or guardian, or of the person standing in loco parentis to the child. (e) Violation of any provision of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00), by imprisonment for a period not to exceed two years in the discretion of the court, ur by both. (f) Any person convicted of violating this section shall be ordered by the presiding judge to complete a hunter safety course as prescribed by G.S. 113 -270.1 A. (g) This section is enforceable by law enforcement officers of the Wildlife Resources Commission, by sheriffs and deputy sheriffs, and by other law enforcement officers with general subject matter jurisdiction. (h) This section applies to Chatham County only. Sec. 10. Sections 1 through 6 and Section 8.of this act apply to Orange County only. Section S of this act becomes effective August 1, 1991. Section 9 of this act becomes effective October 1, 1991. The remainder of this act is effective upon ratification. June, 1991. In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 10th day of E JAMES C. GARDNER James C. Gardner President of the Senate DANIEL 81,44 JP_ Daniel Blue, Jr. Speaker of the House of Representatives Senate Bill 623 I O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Vacation and Sick Leave Revisions to the Personnel Ordinance DEPARTMENT: Personnel ATTACH14ENT (S) : Action Agenda Item # � PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 - Draft revised Article IV, Elaine Holmes, Personnel Director Section 5.0 "Vacation Leave" 2 -- Draft revised Article IV, Section 6.0 "Sick Leave" 3 - Current Article IV, Section 5.0 "Vacation Leave" 4 - Current Article IV, Section 6.0 "Sick Leave" TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: To report on proposed revisions to the Vacation Leave and Sick Leave sections of the Orange County Personnel Ordinance. BACKGROUND: Draft revised Vacation Leave and Sick Leave sections of Article IV of the Personnel Ordinance are included as Attachments 1 and 2 respectively. Shown on Attachments 1 and 2 in the left hand column (in boldface and parentheses) is a cross reference to the affected provision in the current Personnel Ordinance. The current Vacation Leave and Sick Leave sections of the Personnel Ordinance are provided as Attachments 3 and 4 respectively. As a result of feedback from departments and Personnel's review earlier this year, proposed policy changes have been identified in the Vacation Leave and Sick Leave sections of the Personnel Ordinance. In drafting the proposed policy revisions, the Vacation and Sick Leave sections also have been revised to clarify the policy and facilitate use. Among other things, items about the same subject have been grouped together, headers have been added to make reference easier and language has been clarified and made more 1 24 accurate. For example, Section 5.1 and Section 6.1 have been revised to identify clearly the employees eligible to receive Vacation Leave and Sick Leave. This is clarification only and does not constitute any change in employee eligibility. Key policy changes are listed below. VACATION LEAVE New Section 5.3.1 - Currently, an employee with past service as a permanent Orange County employee works five years after returning to permanent County employment before receiving credit for past County service. This revision provides that Vacation Leave is earned based on total years of permanent Orange County employment. It eliminates the five year waiting period. New Section 5.4 - Currently Vacation Leave may not accumulate beyond 240 hours. On a monthly basis, any leave in excess of 240 hours is canceled. This revision provides that Vacation Leave may accumulate without maximum until January 31 of each calendar year. On that date any accumulated Vacation Leave in excess of 240 hours is canceled. As stated in new Section 5.8.1, the maximum amount of Vacation Leave paid out on termination continues to be 240 hours. The effect of the change is to provide more flexibility to employees and departments in scheduling Vacation Leave. Current Section 5.12 - This provision has been deleted. It provided that a new employee may not take Vacation Leave during the probationary period except as approved by the Manager, Register of Deeds or Sheriff. As with other Vacation Leave requests, such a leave request still requires the supervisor's approval. SICK LEAVE New Section 6.5 - Currently a new employee with proper approval may transfer up to 15 days Sick Leave from another local government or State agency in North Carolina. This revised section removes the 15 day limit. It provides that Sick Leave may be transferred if such transfer occurs within 12 months of employment with the local government unit or State agency. Such transfer provides a useful recruitment tool because an employee may apply Sick Leave toward retirement service credit. P1 91 For equity reasons, it is recommended that this transfer provision be applied retroactively for current employees to July 1, 1985 (the date the Personnel Ordinance first permitted transfer of Sick Leave). New Section 6.2 - This revised section provides that Sick Leave may be used for appointments with the Employee Assistance Program provider. This clarifies the current policy and supports employee access to the Employee Assistance Program. RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends the Board accept the report as information. The Manager will recommend the Board adopt the proposed revisions at its September 3, 1991 meeting. 4 ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT REVISED ARTICLE IV, SECTION 5.0 "VACATION LEAVE" 5.0 VACATION LEAVE* 5.1 General The County provides Vacation Leave with pay for Permanent employees, both Full Time and Part Time (OLD (regularly, scheduled at least 20 hours each 5.0 workweek). This includes an employee appointed to REVISED a permanent position serving a probationary & NEW) period. Temporary employees do not earn Vacation Leave. 5.2 Using Vacation Leave Vacation Leave may be used for: (NEW) - Vacation or other personal reasons; (OLD - Sick Leave with the approval of the 5.4 supervisor; REVISED) - Absences due to adverse weather conditions (OLD 5.5 if the County Manager does not authorize REVISED) the use of Administrative Leave; to Funeral Leave for relatives not covered by the Funeral Leave provision of the Personnel ordinance; (NEW) - Religious observance. 5.3 Earning Vacation Leave 5.3.1 Each Permanent employee earns Vacation (OLD 5.0 Leave based on the regular work schedule REVISED) and the total years of Orange County service as a Permanent employee. (OLD 5.0 5.3.2 The earning rate for a Permanent Full Time REVISED) employee regularly scheduled to work 40 hours each workweek is as follows: *Effective 10 -01 -91 I Total Years of Orange Count service Less than 2 2 but less than 5 5 but less than 10 10 but less than 15 15 but less than 20 20 or more Vacation Hours Earned Per Month Per Year 8.0 96.0 9.6 115.2 12.0 144.0 14.4 172.8 16.8 201.6 19.2 230.4 5.3.3 Vacation Leave earning is prorated for a Permanent employee working a regular work of of schedule other than 40 hours. The Personnel Department calculates such a prorated leave earning rate and provides it to the operating department involved. 5.3.4 Vacation Leave is earned in any month (OLD 5.1 during which the employee works or is on REVISED) paid leave one -half or more of the work days in the month. 5.4 Accumulating Vacation Leave Earned Vacation Leave may be accumulated without a (OLD maximum until January 31 of each year. On that 5.6 date, any accumulated Vacation Leave in excess of REVISED) 240 hours is cancelled. The maximum amount of Vacation Leave that can be carried forward to February 1 is 240 hours. 5.5 Approving Vacation Leave 5.5.1 Vacation Leave may be taken only with the (OLD 5.7 approval of the employee's supervisor. The REVISED) department head may require his or her approval for any Vacation Leave. 5.5.2 The scheduling of Vacation Leave must (NEW) take the department's operating requirements into account. (OLD 5.5.3 Vacation Leave is taken in increments of 5.7 one -half hour (30 minutes). REVISED) 5.5.4 A holiday is not charged as Vacation Leave (NEW) when it occurs during a period of scheduled Vacation Leave. 5.6 Responsibility The department head is responsible for maintaining (NEW) accurate Vacation Leave records, including the E7 6 verification of the Orange County "Leave Register" provided monthly, and for the application of the Vacation Leave provisions of the Personnel Ordinance. 5.7 Advancing Vacation Leave (OLD Vacation Leave may not be advanced before it is 5.2 earned unless approved in advance by the County REVISED) Manager. 5.8 Effect of Separation on Vacation Leave 5.8.1 Resignation, Layoff, Probationary Termination or Dismissal The employee is paid in a lump sum for (OLD 5.8 & Vacation Leave accumulated to the date of 5.9 REVISED) separation, not to exceed a maximum of 240 hours. If the employee has taken more Vacation Leave than earned, the employee reimburses the county for all such leave taken. 5.8.2 Death A payment for accumulated Vacation Leave is (OLD 5.11 made in a lump sum, not to exceed 240 REVISED) hours, to the estate of a deceased employee. (DELETED PROVISIONS) (5.0 CHART) (5.2 FIRST AND LAST SENTENCE) (5.3) (5.10 SEE NEW 5.8.1) (5.12) c w ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFT REVISED_ ARTICLE IV SECTION 6.0 "SICK LEAVE" 6.0 SICK LEAVE* 6.1 General The County provides Sick Leave with pay for Permanent employees, both Full Time and Part Time (regularly, scheduled at least 20 hours each (NEW) workweek). This includes an employee appointed to a permanent position serving a probationary period. Temporary employees do not earn Sick Leave. 6.2 Using Sick Leave Sick Leave may be used for: - Physical or mental illness or injury which (OLD prevents the employee from performing the usual 6.1 duties, including a pregnancy - related REVISED) disability. Care of an ill member of the employee's immediate family. For this purpose, immediate family is defined as the employee's spouse, parent or child. Medical or dental appointments, including those necessary for the care of a member of the employee's immediate family. (NEW) - Appointments with the Employee Assistance Program provider. 6.3 Earning Sick Leave (OLD 6.3.1 Each Permanent employee earns Sick Leave 6.6 based on the regular work schedule. REVISED) 6.3.2 A Permanent Full Time employee regularly scheduled to work 40 hours each workweek earns Sick Leave at a rate of eight hours each month or 96 hours each year. 6.3.3 Sick Leave earning is prorated for Permanent employee working a regular work schedule other than 40 hours. The Personnel Department calculates such a prorated leave earning rate and provides it to the operating department involved. *Effective 10 -01 -91 7 8 (OLD 6.3.4 Sick Leave is earned during any month in 6.7 which the employee works or is on paid REVISED) leave one -half or more of the work days in the month. 6.4 Accumulating Sick Leave (OLD 6.12 Unused Sick Leave is cumulative and there is no REVISED) maximum amount which may be accumulated. 6.5 Transferring Sick Leave (OLD 6.5.1 A new Permanent employee may transfer 6.10 earned, unused Sick Leave from another REVISED) local government unit in North Carolina or from a North Carolina State agency if the transfer occurs within 12 months of employment with that unit or agency. 6.5.2 Any Sick Leave transfer requires proper (NEW) verification of accumulated Sick Leave by the unit or agency which the employee is leaving. The employee is responsible for obtaining such verification. 6.5.3 For Permanent employees as of October 1, 1991 this transfer provision is retroactive (NEW) to July 1, 1985 (the date the Personnel Ordinance first permitted transfer of Sick Leave). 6.6 Reinstating Sick Leave (OLD A former Permanent Orange County employee who is 6.8 reinstated as a Permanent employee within one year REVISED) after separation is credited with previously accumulated Sick Leave, upon reinstatement. 6.7 Approving Sick Leave (NEW) 6.7.1 A request for Sick Leave requires the approval of the employee's supervisor. The department head may require his or her approval for any Sick Leave. (NEW) 6.7.2 The employee gives the supervisor reasonable advance notice of any absence for which Sick Leave is requested such as scheduled appointments or anticipated hospitalization. In this way, the supervisor may arrange for coverage during the employee's absence. l I 6.7.3 In the case of unexpected absence for which (OLD Sick Leave is requested, the employee is 6.2 responsible for notifying the supervisor of REVISED) the absence no later than during the first half -hour of work on the day of the absence. Employees in the Sheriff's Department, Emergency Management Services, Public Works, or others as necessary notify the supervisor prior to the time scheduled to go on duty in accordance with departmental operating procedures. 6.7.4 The supervisor may require a physician's (OLD statement regarding the nature of the 6.3 illness and the employee's capacity to REVISED) resume work. (OLD 6.7.5 Failure to notify the supervisor of absence 6.4 or improper use of Sick Leave may result in REVISED) loss of pay and /or disciplinary action. (OLD 6.7.6 Sick leave is taken in increments of one - 6.11 half hour (30 minutes). REVISED) 6.7.7 A holiday is not charged as Sick Leave when (OLD it occurs during the period the employee is 6.13 on Sick Leave. REVISED) 6.8 Responsibility 6.8.1 The department head is responsible for (OLD maintaining accurate Sick Leave records, 6.14 including the verification of the orange REVISED) County "Leave Register" provided monthly, and for the application of these Sick Leave provisions. 6.8.2 The department head assures that: - An employee is not on duty when he or she might endanger his or her health or the so of health of other employees; - An employee is not on duty when due to temporary disability or illness the employee cannot perform essential duties required of the job; - There is no abuse of Sick Leave privileges. ' 6.8.3 The department head consults with Personnel (NEW) as appropriate in applying Section 6.8.2. 6.9 Advancing Sick Leave V 10 (OLD With the approval of the County Manager, Sick 6.15 Leave may be advanced up to a maximum of 12 days. REVISED) Such advance of Sick Leave is granted under extraordinary circumstances for reasons indicated in Section 6.2. 6.10 Effect of Separation on Sick Leave At separation, the employee receives no pay for (OLD accumulated, unused Sick Leave. If the employee 6.9 has taken more Sick Leave than earned, or if Sick REVISED) Leave has been advanced as in Section 6.9, the employee reimburses the County for all such leave taken. (DELETED PROVISIONS) (6.0 FIRST PARAGRAPH) (6 -s) I From Orange County Ordinance Published 9 -6 -90 ATTACHMENT 3 11 CURRENT ARTICLE IV, SECTION 5.0 VACATION LEAVE 5.0 VACATION LEAVE All employees in the County's service, except part -time hourly and temporary employees appointed for six months or less shall earn vacation leave according to their regular work week schedule and the number of years of County service: Hours Worked Per Week: 20 40 42 48 Years of Service Hrs /Mo. Hrs /Yr. Mo. Yr. Mo. Yr. Mo. Yr. under 2 4.0 48.0 8.0 96.0 8.4 100.8 9.6 115.2 5 4.8 57.6 9.6.115.2 .10.2 120.0 11..5 138.0 10 6.0 72.0 12.0 144..0 .12.6 151..2 14.4 172.8 15 7.2 86.4 14.4 172.8 15.1 181.2 17.2 206.4 20 8.4 100.8 16.8 201.6 17.6 211.2 20.1 241.2 over 20 9.6 115.2 19.2 230.4 19.2 241.2 23.0 276.0 5.1 Vacation leave is earned during any month in which the employee works at least one -half the work days within that month. A 12 5.2 All vacation leave is leave with pay. Vacation leave will not be advanced before it is earned. Cash payments in lieu of taking vacation will not be permitted. 5.3 Vacation leave that will exceed three consecutive work days, shall be requested by the employee at least two weeks prior to the date the vacation is to begin. 5.4 Vacation 'leave may be used for'sick leave purposes upon the approval of the department head. 5.5 Vacation leave should be used for absences due to adverse weather conditions if the County Manager does not authorize the use of administrative leave; and for funeral leave of distant relatives. 5.6 Vacation leave may accumulate to a maximum of thirty (30) days or 240 hours. When the maximum has been accumulated, no additional vacation leave will be earned until some of the accrued leave is taken. 5.7 Vacation leave may be taken with the approval of the department head, and must be taken in increments of one -half hour (30 minutes). 5.8 Upon submission of an employee's resignation, the employee will be paid for vacation leave accumulated to the date of separation. Vacation pay will not exceed a maximum of thirty (30) days or 240 hours. 5.9 At the time of separation, if an employee has taken more vacation leave than earned, the employee must pay the County for all extra leave taken. 5.10 For involuntary separation due to failure in performance of duties, or personal conduct, accumulated annual leave may be paid, given the circumstances of each employee's case at the discretion of the County Manager. 5.11 Accumulated vacation leave payments will be made to the estate of a deceased employee for all accumulated vacation leave, not.to exceed thirty (.30) days or 240 hours. 5.12 Vacation leave for a Probationary Employee. A new employee will not be permitted to take vacation leave during probationary period. If denial of such leave will create an unusual hardship, only with the Manager's approval will such leave be granted; or in the Sheriff and Register of Deeds office, with the approval of the Sheriff and Register of Deeds respectively. 44 From Orange County Ordinance Published 9 -6 -90 ATTACHMENT 4 CURRENT ARTICLE IV, SECTION 6.0 SICK LEAVE 6.0 SICK LEAVE Sick leave is a Pnivilege granted by the Board of County Commissioners; it is not a right which an employee may demand. Sick leave should not be abused. It is to be used as insurance for salary continuation in the event an employee is sick. 6.1 Sick leave with pay may be granted to an employee for Amended absences-sue to..physical or mental illness or injury 3/5/90 which prevents an employee from performing the usual duties. This includes disabilities resulting from pregnancy. Sick leave may also be used for absences due to medical and dental appointments or to care for an ill family member. For the latter purpose, a family member is defined as spouse, parents or children. 6.2 An employee unable to attend work due to any of the reasons listed above, must inform the immediate supervisor during the first half -hour of work on the day of illness. Sheriff Deputies, Emergency Medical Services employees, and Sanitation Denartment employees, or other County employees as necessary, must .notify the supervisor of illness prior to the time scheduled to go on duty in accordance with departmental operating procedures. 6.3 The County may require a physician's certificate concerning the nature of the illness and the employee's physical capacity to resume duties for each occasion on which an employee uses sick leave. The employee's department head will be responsible for the application of this provision so that there will be no abuse of sick leave privileges. 6.4 Failure to report illness and improper use of sick leave will result in loss - pay and /or other disciplinary action. 6.5 For sickness in the employee's immediate family requiring more than three (3) days absence, special permission must be obtained from the County Manager, considering the department head's recommendations. 6.6 Full -time permanent and part -time permanent employees will earn sick leave according to their regular work week schedule: Hours ---------------------------------------------------- Worked Per Week: 0 42 48 Hours Earned Per Month: 4.0 _______.6____ :sours Earned Per Year: 48.0 96.0 100.8 115.2 6.7 Sick leave is earned during any month in which the employee works at least one -half the work days within : -1 13 14 the month. 6.8 An employee with permanent status, who terminated employment on good terms with the County may be reinstated.and•returned the unused portion of accrued sick leave if reinstated within one year of termination date. This is contingent upon the County Manager's approval. 6.9 No employee shall be _paid for any accrued sick leave at separation; however, if the employee has taken more sick leave than earned, payment must be made to the County for ail extra leave advanced. (See Article IX Section 7.3) 6.10 A new employee may transfer up to 15 days of sick leave from another local government or state agency within the State of-North Carolina, upon the recommendation of the'-department head and with the approval -of the County Manager. 6.11 Absences for fraction or part of a day that are chargeable to sick leave in accordance with these provisions shall be charged proportionately in amounts not smaller than one --half hour increments (30 minutes). 6.12 Sick leave will be cumulative for an indefinite period, and there will be no maximum amount of sick leave which may be accumulated. 6.13 Holidays or regularly scheduled days off which occur during an employee's sick leave shall not be charged as sick leave for such days off. 6.14 Each department head is responsible for maintaining supporting records, and shall be responsible for the application of these provisions to the end that, (1) employees shall not be on duty when they might endanger their health or the health of other employees, (2) when due to temporary disability or illness the employee cannot perform duties required of the job, and (3) there shall be no abuse of sick leave privileges. 6..15 Extended-,-Sick Leave in addition -to. that earned may be granted .up. to a. maximum of twelve ('12) days with the anproval of the County Manager. Extended sick leave will be granted for the same reasons as indicated in Section 6.1 due to extraordinary circumstances. Sick leave may not be advanced during a leave without pay status. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Impact Fees for Public School Facilities DEPARTMENT County Manager ATTACHMENT(S) Memorandum from Planning Director 1 Action Agenda Item No -VIE (2- PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X INFORMATION CONTACT Rod Visser, ext 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To present a report, for information only, concerning issues involved in developing an impact fee structure for school capital needs in Orange County. BACKGROUND: For a number of years, Orange County has pursued an objective of helping to fund school capital needs created by growth in the County from financial contributions from the owners of development engendering those capital needs. During the 1987 Session, the General Assembly authorized the County to levy impact fees in its planning jurisdiction for a number of needs, including school capital, created by development. A joint governmental work group investigated the possibilities of an impact tax in the County during 1988 -89. The County proposed legislation in the 1991 Session of the General Assembly seeking authority to impose an impact tax for school capital needs in the County. This legislation was withdrawn due to opposition in the legislature. However, the County did receive authority in the 1991 session to impose impact fees for school capital needs throughout the County, not just within the County's planning jurisdiction. The attached memorandum from Marvin Collins explores some of the major considerations involved in developing an impact fee structure and investigates approaches that some other local governments in the United States have taken towards impact fees for school capital needs. Impact fees are still a relatively new funding mechanism, and case law concerning them is still developing. There are complicated statutory and constitutional considerations involved in setting an impact fee structure. For this reason, County staff are working carefully, but steadily, towards development of a recommended fee structure that could become effective July 1, 1992, after Board discussion and approval. we feel it will be important to involve members of the community affected by impact fees in the process of reviewing and fine tuning impact fee recommendations to the Commissioners. z As a target schedule, staff are working towards developing a rough impact fee model by early November. This would then be discussed with staffs of other local governments.in the County, and the resulting product would be presented for initial Commissioner review and direction sometime in December. County staff would then take direction from the Board and work with appropriate community representatives to develop a final recommendation for a reasonable impact fee schedule. A public hearing on this recommendation could be held in February, or sometime thereafter, with Board approval of a final impact fee schedule in place for FY 1992 -93. County staff will be prepared to respond to questions or discussion points during the August 20 meeting. RECOMMENDATION(8): The Manager recommends that the Board receive and discuss the report and provide any direction to staff that it deems appropriate at this time on the subject of impact fees. K3 MEMORANDUM: TO: ROD VISSER, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER r FROM: MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR,, l e..;.CL 6�_ DATE: AUGUST 14, 1991 SUBJECT: IMPACT FEES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES COPIES: JOHN LINK, COUNTY MANAGER GEOFFREY GLEDHILL, COUNTY ATTORNEY ATTACHMENTS: TITLE VI, CHAPTER 460, OF THE 1987 SESSION LAWS CHAPTER 324 OF THE 1991 SESSION LAWS ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND SCHOOL IMPACT FEES As follow -up to our July 1, 1991 discussion, I am providing basic information about a methodology for developing a system of public school impact fees. The information provided in this memorandum is derived almost exclusively from the publication, The Calculation of Pro ortionate -Share Impact Fees, by James Nicholas. This memorandum does not propose a step -by -step approach to developing a public school impact fee for Orange County. Rather, it highlights important factors to be considered in such an undertaking. While the examples provided herein relate solely to public schools, the factors to be considered have application to all types of capital improvements -- schools, parks, streets and roads, water and sewer facilities, etc. Basis for Impact Fees Impact fees are generally imposed as a condition for some, approval to proceed with development. The objective of such fees is not to raise money but to insure adequate public facilities. Where such facilities are inadequate, permitting development runs counter to the responsibility of a local government to protect public health, safety, and welfare. If the question is one of adequate public facilities, the issue, then, is who should be financially responsible for such adequacy? The reality is that the community and the property owner are the only available candidates to bear such responsibility. It may be argued that the community should be financially responsible for needed facilities, because it is the community that benefits - new housing, job creation, and tax base enhancement. However, it may also be argued that imposing such costs upon the community is unfair, since it had no part in the decision to develop the property and may receive no direct benefits from the development. Increasingly, the answer is that a community need not absorb all costs but may impose a proportionate, or fair, share of such costs upon new development. Impact fees presuppose that new development should pay a proportionate share of facility costs. In 4` this context, proportionate share would generally be less than total cost and more than nothing. Use of Im act Fees Impact fees are generally confined to payments for capital facilities and allow the community to provide the capital facilities that new development will require. Nationwide, impact fees have been established to pay for capital improvements to the following facilities and services: Potable Water Solid Waste Arterial Roads Local Roads Parks Fire Protection Public Buildings Emergency Medical Services Sewers Drainage Collector Roads Public Schools Public Libraries Law Enforcement Public Cemeteries Under Title VI, Chapter 460, of the 1987 Session Laws, Orange County may impose impact fees within its planning jurisdiction for land acquisition for open space and greenways, capital improvements to public streets, schools, bridges, sidewalks, bikeways, on and off - street surface water drainage ditches, pipes, culverts, other drainage facilities, water and sewer facilities, and public recreation facilities. Chapter 324 of the 1991 Session Laws enables Orange County to impose impact fees for school capital improvements countywide. Amount of Impact Fees Impact fees vary considerably nationwide and are a response to local conditions. Listed below is a sampling of impact fees for public schools. Impact Fee Per Jurisdiction Sin le-Family Home Florida Broward County $ 4.51 Citrus County $ 135 Hernando County $ 562 Hillsborough County $ 165 St. Johns County $ 381 St. Lucie County $ 452 ar land Anne Arundel County $ 2,096 The sampling of impact fees also indicated that no fees are imposed on office, retail, and industrial establishments. rrw Reasonableness -of Impact Fees The reasonableness of impact fees is usually determined by the rational nexus test. Restated in operational terms, the major tenets of this test are: 1. The need for additional capital facilities that will be financed with impact fees must be a consequence of new development rather than arising from existing developments; 2. The charges or fees imposed upon a new development must be no more than a proportionate share of the local government's cost of those new capital facilities needed to serve new developments; and 3. The revenues raised must be managed and expended at such a time and in such a time that the development paying the fee will receive a substantial benefit from the improved facility. A major issue then becomes the determination of proportionate share. Title VI, Chapter 460, of the 1987 Session Laws requires the County to endeavor to approach the objective of having every development contribute to a capital improvements fund an amount of revenue that bears a reasonable relationship to that development's fair share of the costs. Determining the Quantity-of-Needed Improvements The objective of determining a proportionate share of costs is to insure a degree of fairness in impact fees. Proportionality calculations begin with a determination of physical quantities of facilities that new development will require. This determination should be at both the macro (communitywide) and micro (individual unit of development) levels, and requires, in turn, a standard for each service or facility. These standards must be expressed in terms related to land development. Facility Standards. The standards used in determining need are best established within the comprehensive plan. Moreover, such standards should relate to both existing developments and new developments. The application of the same standard to both components of the community means that new development cannot be required to raise the standard. If the community wants to raise the existing standard of service, it must identify the existing deficiency and make provisions to eliminate those deficiencies by means other than impact fees. Needed. Improvements. The need for capital facilities may be expressed mathematically: Needed Improvements = Service Standard x Demand Unit 5 G� MW I A demand unit is a unit associated with a new development that generates the need for improvements in public facilities. For a single - family home, the demand unit could be school -age children for purposes of schools. On the other hand, a service standard for schools might be: Schools - One student station per pupil Given this standard, a residential unit with 2.5 persons and 0.3 school -age children would require the following: Schools - 0.3 school -age children at one student station per pupil requires 0.3 additional student stations. All services can thus be expressed in terms of demand units and standards of service. Frequently, however, these data are not available. Developing such data would be the first priority in instituting a system of impact fees. Care should be taken when using standards recommended by agencies or associations. Such standards may or may not be applicable to the community. In addition, such standards would still have to be compared with the existing standard. An example of an impact fee for schools is that of Anne Arundel County, Maryland. The demand units for a single - family unit and the service level standards employed by that jurisdiction are as follows: Demand Unit: 0.6977 public school pupils /unit Service Standards: 129 sq.ft. of building area /pupil 1,836 sq.ft. of land area /pupil These standards were subjected to public debate and were adopted by the governing board. The 1980 Census was the basis for dwelling -unit occupancy. This source was used because it was the last official census. Anne Arundel County adjusted these figures, however, to reflect current occupancy. Specifically, the Anne Arundel students per unit estimate was based upon the 1980 census, updated to 1986, and adjusted based upon the ratio of the total size of the school -age cohort to public school enrollment; i.e., private school attendance was factored out. The school standards used were taken from State of Maryland school standards and contrasted with the actual provision within Anne Arundel County. Cost of Accommodating Development Once physical quantities are established, costs must be determined. The manner in which cost information may be obtained or expressed is an important factor in establishing standards because the objective is first to determine capital improvement cost per unit of development and then determine a proportionate share of those costs. It follows that standards, costs, and shares of costs must be in consistent units. 7 The best sources of these data are actual local records. One of the judicial standards is that impact fees should not exceed a proportionate share of the costs that the local government will incur in accommodating the new development. The Anne Arundel County, Maryland, school costs were based on a combination of the prototype facility costs and the cost of recent and current construction programs. The School Board uses a prototype school, and the prototype is the basis for cost. Current costs for the prototype school were available, and the costs were consistent with a current bid. Land acquisition and site development costs were estimated from the actual records of school construction projects over the past five years. Land acquisition and site development costs were also calculated as a percentage of construction costs - no price adjustment was needed. The data used were $83 per square foot for buildings, plus four to five percent for architectural and engineering costs (depending upon school type), and eight percent for equipment. The total building cost per square foot was $87.78. Land acquisition had been running at $10,000 per acre, and site improvement costs were 2.5 percent of construction. The grand total was $98.84 per square foot or $12,767 per student at 129 square feet per student. Multiplying the service provision standards, per demand unit, by the capital cost per unit of service establishes the capital improvement cost per unit of development. This also may be expressed as a formula: Total Cost = Needed Improvements x Cost Per Unit For the Anne Arundel County, Maryland, school impact fees, the calculations for a single - family unit are: Demand Units Standard Needed Improvements Cost Per Square Foot Cost Per Student Total Cost Per Single - Family Unit .6977 student per unit 129.168 square feet per student 90.115 square feet $98.84 $12,767 $8,907 These calculations result in the capital improvement cost per unit of new development - a single - family unit. Proportionate Share of Capital Costs The standard to which an impact fee will be held is that the fee not exceed a proportionate share of the costs that local government will incur to accommodate new development. Normally, new development will pay towards capital improvements in the form of general taxation, debt service payments, and user fees. The task is 8 to calculate how much of capital costs are covered by these payments. Whatever is not paid would then be paid through impact fees. The courts have provided little guidance with respect to setting the amount of impact fees. However, the Utah Supreme Court, in Banberry vs. South Jordan City, set out seven factors that can be considered in establishing a proportionate share of capital costs to be borne by new development. These factors include: 1. The cost of the existing facilities; 2. The methods by which the existing capital improvements were financed; 3. The extent to which new developments have already contributed to the cost of the existing capital improvements; 4. The extent to which new developments will pay for existing capital improvements in the future through user fees, debt service payments or other payments toward the cost of existing capital improvements; 5. The extent to which new developments are required to construct and /or dedicate capital improvements as conditions of development or construction approval; b. Extraordinary costs, if any, in serving the new development; and 7. The time -price differentials inherent in fair comparisons of amounts paid at different times. ftMents.BX New Develo eat Toward Cm ital Cost To determine how capital improvements have been financed, the fiscal structuring of the community must be examined. Each type of facility needs to be analyzed in terms of how it was financed and also in terms of how new development will contribute toward capital finance in the future. It would be unfair to require new development to pay some portion of either existing or future capital improvements and also require them to be totally responsible for the capital improvement costs that new development will need. Thus, a system of "credits" must be identified which recognizes the extent to which to which new developments have already contributed to and will pay for (in the future) the cost of existing capital improvements. Present Va ug. The amounts of concern in impact fee calculation are not one -time payments in the future. Rather, the amounts of concerns are annual payments. This means that there will be a payment in one year, in two years, in three years, etc. Thus, the time -price differentials mentioned in the seventh Banberry 0 factor arise, and the issue becomes one of how to deal with a stream of payments over a number of years in the future. First, there is a need to cut off the analysis off at some point. A common cut -off point is 25 years, although a period as long as 45 years and a period as short as 15 years have been used. Title VI, Chapter 460, of the 1987 Session Laws establishes a cut- off point by requiring Orange County to "estimate the total cost of improvements ... that will be needed...during a reasonable planning period not to exceed 20 years." The task then becomes the provision of fair and reasonable consideration for annual payments toward capital improvements costs over the next 20 years. This is done by calculating the present value for each annual payment. Payments received in the future have a lower value than in the present. The difference between the future and present value is interest. Assuming an interest rate of six percent (6 %), $100 to be received one year from now is worth $94.34 in the present. The method for calculating the present value is to divide the future amount, $100, by one plus the interest rate (expressed in decimal form), or $100 divided by 1.06 equals $94.34. The difference, $5.66, is interest at 6 %. Likewise, $100 to be received two years in the future is worth $89 at present. The way to calculate this is to divide the amount due in two years by the square of one plus the interest rate. For three years, the factor of one plus the interest rate would be cubed, and so forth. The general formulation is thus: Present Value = Future Amount n (1 + i) where n is the number of years between the present and when the amount is to be received, and i is the interest rate. Dedicated Funding Sources. Dedicated funding sources are the easiest to deal with. A State grant for the purpose of school construction is an example of a dedicated funding source. Motor fuel taxes and other highway user charges are examples of such funding for road improvements. Anne Arundel County provides an example of how such grants are incorporated into school impact fee calculation. As mentioned previously, the average public school cost per student is $12,767. The cost for a single- family unit with an average of 0.6977 public school students is $8,907. In Maryland, the State provides funds to school districts to build schools. Over the previous five years, the State of Maryland has provided 52.9 percent of total school construction costs. The local cost was then 47.1 percent or $4,193 for a single - family home. The calculation incorporates the State contribution toward the cost of accommodating new public school students. One advantage of this method is that impact fees would decline if State aid were to be increased. Unfortunately, exactly the opposite is happening, and this characteristic pinpoints a 10- significant problem in dealing with grants. When future grants are relatively certain, but the amount is unknown, the average amount of such grants over the past 5 -10 years is a common means of dealing with the unknown future. This approach, however, will tend to overestimate grants, because there has been a trend toward fewer rather than more grants -in -aid. Nevertheless, grants -in -aid should not be ignored in calculating proportionate share impact fees. General Fund Revenues. The most difficult set of credits to deal with are facilities that are financed out of the General Fund. There is no identifiable funding source nor a systematic means of identifying how new development may have contributed in the past or may contribute in the future. Just because there is no systematic approach, however, does not mean that the issue goes away. Rather, it means that the result will not be systematically derived. A number of Florida impact fees simply employ a percentage reduction in impact fees in recognition of the possible contributions from new development through general revenues. As an example, impact fees have reflected a percentage reduction from total cost in recognition of past and future contributions from the General Fund for school development purposes. Lawsuits that challenge this approach have not yet been heard. Experience has shown, however, that perhaps it is not so important how such matters are incorporated into a system of impact fees as it is that they are addressed. Bond Revenues. The last credit issue to be addressed is bonds. Bonds, whether general obligation or revenue, are commonly used to finance infrastructure. Where bonds exist, they should not be ignored in establishing the amount of the fee. For example, if bonds are used to finance all or a portion of public school facilities, the amount that a single- family home pays to help retire the debt can be credited against [deducted from) the impact fee. Offsets To Im act Fees It is common for developers to provide certain capital improvements. When developers dedicate or build needed facilities, it is a form of payment of impact fees. Thus, it would follow that the amount of impact fees otherwise due would be reduced by the value of that construction. The Banberry Court addressed this in factor #6 - extraordinary costs. Offsets would not be given for on -site improvements or off - site improvements that are needed for or used exclusively by the development. Most impact fee ordinances provide that construction or dedication is a means for payment of impact fees and provide for corresponding reductions. Such a provision insures that a developer is not required to pay more than a proportionate share of capital costs. It makes no difference whether the cost is borne in kind (construction or dedication) or in cash. 11 Title VI,- Chapter 460, of the 1987 Session Laws allows provision to be made for credits against required impact fees when a developer installs improvements of a type that generally would be paid for by impact fees. The enabling legislation also gives the County the right to spell out the circumstances under which a developer would be allowed to install such improvements and receive credits. Benefit-Considerations The amount of an impact fee is only one factor considered in terms of the legality of any impact fee program. The sufficiency of the benefits that are received by fee payers is another criterion set out by the courts for determining the reasonableness of an impact fee. There are three standards that may be used in determining sufficiency of benefit. The main difference among these standards is just who will benefit from (make use of) the facilities to be financed, in whole or in part, with the impact fees. The first standard is exclusive benefit, the second is substantial benefit, and the third is reasonable benefit. In practice, the methods of implementing the latter two are almost identical. A benefit would be exclusive if no one other than the occupants of the development that paid the impact fee could use the facilities provided with those fees. Complying with this standard would imply that the improvements be on -site or in close proximity to the development. Minimal distance between facility and development becomes the indicator of the degree of benefit to the individuals in that development as opposed to those in other developments. When facilities such as public schools are provided, it is impossible to see how use could be confined to individual developments. To a great extent, the provision of exclusive benefit and impact fees are not compatible. However, few, if any, states employ a strict exclusive benefit rule. Rather, the standard is what may be considered to be a preponderance of benefit going to the development paying the fees. In such cases, consideration should be given to the use of relatively small geographic areas for both the collection and expenditure of impact fees. Such small areas would be the evidence of benefit (use). This would involve identifying a number of subareas of the community and establishing impact fee trust funds for each subarea. All receipts coming from such subareas would be spent within those areas. Title VI, Chapter 460, of the 1987 Session Laws addresses the issue of benefits and subareas through the following provision: "In order to insure that impact fees paid by a particular development are expended on capital improvements that benefit that development, the County may establish for each category of capital improvement for which it collects an impact fee at least two geographical districts or zones, and impact fees 12' generated-by developments within those districts or zones must be spent on improvements that are located within or that benefit property located within those districts or zones." For public schools in Orange County, the creation of such geographic districts or zones could be undertaken with little difficulty. If two districts were desired, the Chapel Hill- Carrboro School District could be one, while Orange County School District could be the other. If further distinctions were necessary, the attendance or service areas of individual schools or types of schools could be investigated. All of the benefit tests look for a rationale that establishes how the benefit is to be received. The greater the distance between the point of collection and the point of expenditure, the greater the chance that insufficient benefit will be found. Having improvements that are needed set forth in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) would be the best demonstration of benefit. The Anne Arundel County school impact fee provides a good example of the relationship between development location and benefit received. For the entirety of Anne Arundel County, there was a surplus of approximately 12,000 student stations. The School Board was having to close schools due to insufficient numbers in some parts of the large county. However, the location of excess or surplus classrooms was at a substantial distance from the parts of the county experiencing rapid growth. In growing areas, there was a substantial need for classroom space. Thus, Anne Arundel County imposed no school impact fees in the areas of the county with excess school capacity. This exemption implemented the rational nexus test and provided areas of the county where no fee would be imposed. Additionally, it encouraged growth toward those areas of the county where the infrastructure was already in place. Another benefit criterion is the timing of improvements. Expected use is the overwhelming criterion in matters of benefit. If improvements are in the remote future, benefits will be lessened and perhaps insufficient. The benefit from improvements declines exponentially with respect to time. Facilities improvements usually require large expenditures that can only be met through gradual accumulation of impact fees. In small jurisdictions and those experiencing modest growth, the period of time may be substantial. Most impact fee ordinances have provisions that stipulate the maximum period of time within which the fees must be spent on facilities that benefit the particular development. Once this maximum period is reached, the fees would have to be refunded with interest to the fee payer or successor in title. The most common period is six years, which is based on the normal five -year capital improvements cycle, plus one year to integrate the receipts into the CIP. 13 Concludina Comments To gain an in -depth understanding of how Anne Arundel County calculated its impact fees and the process by which this was accomplished, I am contacting that jurisdiction for information. Another jurisdiction I am contacting and mentioned frequently in the Nicholas publication and others is Broward County, Florida. Although the information may be helpful in developing a school impact fee for Orange County, we will have to tailor the process and resulting fee to our situation. As we discussed previously, and as mentioned in many publications, the development of a system of impact fees should involve representatives from many interest groups. For a public school impact fee, it would be desirable to have representatives from the school districts, municipalities, Orange County, and the homebuilders association as well as citizens. A suggestion made by the Commissioners regarding the purchase of development rights program may also have application here. The Board suggested that the proposal be presented at township meetings to engender support. Such a strategy might be considered for impact fee proposals. I hope this information serves as a starting point for the discussion and eventual development of a system of impact fees. If you have any questions, please advise. M. 1, t GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA 1987 SESSION RATIFIED BILL CHAPTER 460 HOUSE BILL 917 14 AN ACT MAKING SUNDRY AMENDMENTS CONCERNING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN ORANGE AND CHATHAM COUNTIES. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: TITLE VI. ORANGE'COUNTY IMPACT FEES. r Sec. 17. G.S. 153A -331 is amended by identifying the existing provisions as subsection (n) and by adding new subsections to read: "(b) Impact Fees Authorized. (1) Orange County may provide by ordinance for a system of impact fees to be paid by developers to help defray the costs to the County of constructing certain capital improvements, the need for which is created in substantial part by the new development that takes place within the County. (2) For purposes of this subsection, the term capital improvements includes the acquisition of land for open space and greenw•ays, capital improvements to public streets, schools, bridges, sidewalks, bil:ew-ays, on and off street surface writer drainage ditches, pipes, culverts, other drainage facilities, water and sewer facilities and public recreation facilities. (3) An ordinance adopted under this subscction may be made applicahle to all development that occurs within the County. (c) Amount of Fees. In establishing the amount of any impact fee, the County shall cnticavor to approach the objective of having every development contribute to a capital improvements fund an amount of revenue that bears a reasonable relationship to that devcIopmcnt's fair share: of the costs of the capital improvements that are needed in part because of that development. In fulfilling this objective, the County shn1l, among other steps anti actions: (1) Estimate the total'-cost of im )rovements by category (e.g.. streets, sidewalks. drainage %vat's, etc that will be needed to provide in a reasonable manner for the public health, safety and welfare of persons residing within the County during a reasonable planning period not to exceed 20 years. .. The Board • of County Commissioners may divide the County' inic ; -.two or more districts and estimate the costs of needed improvements within each 15 w. dIStrle.'t. These estimates shall he perioJically revic%ked :[nil updated anJ the planning period used may be Changed from time to Lillie. (2) Establish a percentate of the total casts of C.1,11 cateoory of improvement that, in keeping v.ith the objccti\e set IfOrtlt A)u\c, Should fairly he hornc h\' tho�c p:,y ing lhv impact fcc:_ (3) Establish .► l'ornlula that fairly and objectively apportions the: total costs that arc to he borne by those paying impact fees among various types of develupnlenLS. By \way of illustration \\ ithout 11111itatloll: a. In the case of street inlprovenitnts, the impact fee may he related to the nunlhcr of trips per day gener.itcd by different tyrpes of uses .1CCOrding to recogmizecl estinlalGS, L). In the case of drnillagc inlprovenlents, 1110 impact fee may he related to the size of a devclopmcnt, the ;►mount of 111,1])CI'viollS Surface the L avelopnicrit has, or other factors that bear a }loll the decree to wbit:h a de clopinent contribLltes IO the Ileed for CII'aII1:l9C llllpI,Q \GI11C11[:; I'MIC'IC at pUWIC CXl)c:llse. (d) Capital Improvenlcnls I:Cscrvc Funds: Expcnditures. (1) Inlp:ict fees I'GCCIvcd by the County shall he deposited in a C.Ipital i III provcnlunt, rGser\e fund or funds established under Ch.iptcr 159 of the General Statutes, Article 3, Fart 2. SuCh funds n1.Iv be eXpendCd only on the ivpe of capital IniI)ro\'CrllentS for \•.'hill Such illlpact fees \\ere established, and then only in 3ccorclancc with the provision of Subsection (2) of this section. (2) In order to ensure: that imp:,Ct fees paid by a particular dcve)ol)Il cm are expended on capital inlpr0venlc:nt, th.a benefit that dcvclopmGnt, the County ni.,ty estahli:h for each Catcenry of capital improvement for \which it cullccts ,III impact fee at least two tcoor:iphical districts or zones, and impact IGCs oencratccl by Lleveloplllc►lts within those districts Or zones must be spent on Improvements that are located within or that bencfiL property located those districts or zones. (e) Credits for Inlpro\ erl)ents. An in1p ;IC1 fee 01'dinanCC shall make pruviS10,1 for credits against rccluirCLI fees Mien :1 developer installs 1r11prDyL111el1ts of a type that generally would be paid for by the County out Of a capital re:Serve aCCDLI11t fu11CICc1 h'T Impact fees. The ordinalle:G 11MV SI -,ell out the CirC1:111�L:111CCS Under which ;1 rlGVClc�pc r will be allowed to lnst.ill such improvements and rCCCI\'C such credits. (1) Appeals Procedure. Ali ordinance authorizing imp:let feces aj prC)z.•ide:.l h.:rcln may provide that any person :1gGrievCd by a decision regarding .I:1 ir111%.1c:[ e-c. may appeal to the Orange County Board of Adjustment. if the orur:w:«C e;tubiisne5 all appeals procedure, it shall spell out the.. time within which the appeal must bC taken to. the board Of ULIjUstlllent, the possible grounds for an app=.11 and the board's authority in the matter, whether. the fee must be paid prior to resolution of the appeal, and other procedural or substantive matters related to appeals. Any decision by the board of adjustment shall be subject to, review by the. superior court by proceedings in the nature of ceriia:-.ari in the��sal' a manner as is' provided in G.S. 153A -313. (g) Payment of Impact Fccs. An ordinance authorizing irllpaCt feCS as LCrein provided shall spell Out when in the process of 'd vclopnlent :approval and construction impact fees shall be paid and by whom. By . %fay of i}luatr;ttiClI will-laut limitation, the ordinance play provide. that an applicant' fora building permit shall submit the impact fee along with the permit apl1lication and that building permits •shall not be issued until the impact fee has been paid. (h) Refunds. If this section or any ordinance adopted thereunder is declared to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, then any impact fees collected shall be refunded to the person paying them together with interest at the rate established under G.S. 105 - 241.1, being the same rate paid by the Secretary of Revcnue on refunds for tax overpayments. (i) Limitations on Actions,. (1) Any action contesting the validity of an ordinance adopted as herein provided must be commenced not later than nine months after tilt: effective date of such ordinance. (2) Any action seeking to recover an iml)act fee must be commenced not later than nine months after the impact fee is paid." Sec. 17.1. Section 17 of this act shall apply only to Orange County, and applies only within the planning jurisdiction of Orange County. Sec. 13. G.S. 153A -340 is amended by identifying the existing provisions as subsection (a) and by adding new subsections to read: "(b) Impact Fees Authorized. (l) Orange Count- may provide by ordinance for -a system of impact fees to be paid by dc\-elopers to help defray the costs to the County of constructing certain capital improvements, the need for which is created in substantial part by the new development that takes place within the County. (2) For purposes of this subsection. the term capital improvements includes the acquisition- of land for open space and greenways, capital improvements to public streets, schools, bridges. sidewalks, bikev.-ays, on and off street surface water drainage ditches, pipes, culverts, other drainage facilities, water and sewer facilities and public recreation facilities. (3) An ordinance adopted under this subsection may be made ahplicublc to all development that occurs within the County. (c) Amount of Fees,. In est .1blishing the amount of anv impact fee, the County shall endeavor to approach the objective of having every development contribute to a capital improvements fund an amount of revenue that bears a reasonable relationship to that development's fair share of the costs of the capital improvements that are needed in part because of that dcvcloprnent. In fulfilling this objective, the County shall, among other steps and actions: (1) Estimate tiie total cost of improvements by category (e.g., streets, sidewalks, drainage ways, etc.) that will be needed to provide in a reasonable manner for the public health, safety and welfare of persons residing within the County during a reasonable planning period not to exceed 20 years. The Board of County Commissioners may divide the' County into two or more districts and estimate the'- .costs of •nereded improvements within each district. These estimates shall be periodically reviewed and updated and the planning period used may be changed from time to time. (2) Establish a percentage of the total costs of each category of improvement that, in keeping with -the objective set forth above, should fairly he borne by those paying the impact fee. (3) Establish a formt.tl:t that fairly and objectively apportions. the total costs that are to be borne by those paying impact fees among various types of developments. By way of illustration without limitation: House Bill ;17 16 17 - a. In the case of street improvements, the impact fee may be related to the number of trips per clay generated by different type, of uses aCCOrding to reCognizcd estimates; b. in the case of drainage improvements, the impact fee nta) he related to tilt; size of a development, the .►mount of impCryious surface the development has, or other fLIc101's that bear upon the degree to which a devclopment contributes to the need for drainage improvements made at public expense. (d) Capital Improvements Reserve Funds: Expenditures.. (1) Impact fees received by the County shall be deposited in a capital improvements reserve fund or funds established under Chapter 159 of the General Statutes, Article 3, Part 2. Such funds may be expended only on the type of capital improvements for w-hich such impact fees were established, and then only in accordance with the: provision of subsection (2) of this section. (2) In order to ensure that impact fees paid by a particular development are expended on Capital improvements ilia[ benefit that dCVCloprttent, the County may establish for Cacti category of capital improvement for v�hich it colic Cts an impact fee at least t-wo geographical districts or zone,, and impact fees gcncrated by developments within those districts or zones must be spCnt on improvements that arc located within or that benefit property locaLC(l Within those districts or zones. (e) Credits for Improvements. An impact fee ordinance shall make provision for credits against reduirccl fees w-hen a developer installs improvements of a type th,►t generally would be paid for by the County out of a capital reserve account funded by impact fees. The.ordinance may spell out the circumstances under which a developer will be allowed 10 install such improvements and receive sucil credits. (f) Appeals Pro(:eclurc. An ordinance authorizing impact fees as provided herein may provide that any person aggrieved by a decision regarding an impact lee ilia), appeal to the Prange County Board of Adjustment. if the ordinance establishes an appeals procedure, it shall spell out the time within which the appeal must be taken to the board of adjustment, the possible grounds for an appeal and the board's authority in the matter, whether the fee must be paid prior to resolution of the appeal, and other procedur:ll or substantive matters related to appeals. Any decision by the board of adjustment shall be subject to review by the superior court by proceedings in the nature Of certiorari in the s.eme manner as is provided in G.S. 1S3A -345. (g) Payment of Impact Fees, An ordinance authorizing impact fccs as herein provided shall spell - Out when in the process of dev.elopmcnt approval and construction impact fees shall be paid and by whom. By way of illustration without limitation, the ordinance may provide that an applicant for a building permit shall submit the impact fee along with the permit application and that building permits shall not be issued until the! impact fee has been paid. (h) Refunds. If Ellis section or any ordinance adopted thereunder is decl<<red to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, then any _ impact fees collected shall be. refunded to the person paying them together with-..interest at the rate established under G.S. 105- 241.1, being the same rate paid by the Secretary of -Reverltre -_on refunds for tax overpayments. Y. (i) Limitations on Actions. (1) Any action contesting the validity. of an ordinance adopted as herein provided must be commenced not later than nine months after the effective date of such ordinance::.. House Bill 917 18 — (2') Any action sacking to rcc:over an impact fee must be commenced not later than nine months after the impact fee is paid." Sec. 18.1. Section 15 of this act shall apply only to Orang-C County, and applies only within the; planning jurisdiction of OranLc County. r 19 - »- RECEIVED JU;I 2 a 1991 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA 1991 SESSION RATIFIED BILL CHAPTER 324 SENATE BILL 549 AN ACT AMENDING ORANGE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY RELATING TO IMPACT FEES. • The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:. Section 1. Section 17.1 of Chapter 400 of the 1987 Session Laws reads as rewritten: "Sec. 17.1. Section 17 of this act shall apply only to Orange County, and applies only within the planning jurisdiction of Orange County. Provided, however, any portion of an Orange County ordinance that contains a -system.- of impact fees to provide for ca-nital__imorovements to public schools within Orange Countv_ annliPc extraterritorial Tannin - urisdiction of any city, town or municipal corporation within Orange County." Sec. 2. Section 18.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 Session Laws reads as rewritten: "Sec. 18.1. Section 18 of this act shall apply only to Orange County, and applies only within the planning jurisdiction of Orange County. Provided, however. any within Oranize Countv." County. Sec. 3. This act is effective upon ratification and applies only to Orange June, 1991. In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 19th day of JAMES Q GARDNER James C. Gardner President of the Senate DANICL BL11& .1R Daniel Blue, Jr. Speaker of the House of Representatives 20 Appendix A. Community Impact Fees A. Ante Arundel County, Maryland B. Charlotte County, Florida The impact fees of Anne Arundel County, Maryland, Charlotte County, Florida; Citrus County, Florida; and St. Johns County, Florida, have been used as examples of the various aspects of impact fee calculation. In this section, those fees are set out as they were presented in the statement of methodology accompanying the implementing or- dinances. The following are direct quotations from those methodology statements, edited only for grammatical cor- rectness. These statements set out how the fees were calculated and the various data sources that were used. These portions of the methodology statements are includ- ed for several reasons. First, they are included to provide a full demonstration of fee calculations in one place. Second, they are included as an example of a methodology state- ment. A third reason is to show some of the difficulties of C. Citrus County, Florida D. St. Johns County, Florida establishing impact fees and, last, to show the context of im- pact fees. Methodology statements are generally prepared for two reasons. The first is to bring together the exact means, for- mula, and assumptions used in the calculation of the fees and to state the sources used. This is important in the event of litigation or when updates are needed. Staff changes and consultants moving on to other jobs will destroy the abili- ty to recreate the system if it is not committed to paper. The second reason they are prepared is as a tool to convince the public, the press, and, potentially, a court of the reasonableness of the calculations. Thus, there is a clear at- tempt to be persuasive in the statements. Note might be taken of the frequent indirect references to the rational nexus proportionality criteria. A. Anne Arundel County, Maryland, School Impact Fees The following explanation of the proposed Anne Arundel County school impact fee was in 'Technical Report on the Methods Used to Calculate Impact Fees for Anne Arundel County, "March 1987. This fee was adopted in August 1987 and became effective immediately. This methodology statement was prepared by James C. Nicholas for Anne Arundel County, METHODOLOGY The method of calculating school impact is similar to that for roads in that the primary factor is the quantity of physical facilities required to accommodate new develop- ment. Additionally, the proposed fees set out below are based upon the recommendations of the Anne Arundel County Study Committee on Bill 27 -87. Table A -1 sets out the quantity and base -cost parameters. The school board TABLE A.I. PROTOTYPE FACILITIES, ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND Source: Anne Arundel County Public Schools, Planning and Construction Department K-6 7 -9 10--12 Building Area 68,280 115,000 180,000 Site (Acres) 22 40 55 Students Stations 610 800 1,200 Cost Per Sq. Ft. $83.00 $83.00 $83.00 Land Cost (Acre) $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Construction Cost $5,667,240 $9,545,000 $14,940,000 Architectural and Engineering 5% 4% 4% Equipment 8% 8% 8% Total Construction Cost $6,403,981 $10,690,400 $16,732,800 Plus: Land $220,000 5400,000 $550,000 Offsite Costs $160,383 $270,124 $422,802 Total Cost $6,784,364 $11,360,524 $17,705,602 Construction Cost, Per Student Total Construction $10,498 $13,363 $13,944 Site and Site - Related $623 $837 $810 Total Cost, Per Student $11,121 $14,200 $14,754 Source: Anne Arundel County Public Schools, Planning and Construction Department 21 TABLE A.3. SCHOOL CAPITAL NEEDS, COSTS, AND IMPACT FEES, ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND Type of Develo_ment 3- and 4- 5- Family Single - Family 2- Family Family and More Mobile Home Public School Children, Per Unit K -6 0.3534 0.3276 0.2252 0.1356 0.2030 7-9 0.1850 TABLE A.2. SCHOOL COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES, ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY 0.1093 0.0850 - 10 -12 0.1593 0.1224 Funding Source 0.1951 Total Construction Cost Offsite Cost Percent of 0.3100 Percent of Square Feet of Building Area, Per Student Percent of Project (000) (000) Total State (000) Total Local(000) Total Arundel Senior $ 8,830 S 17 0.2 % S 4,675 52.8 % 5 4,155 47.0 `o Coratran Junior 7,283 686 8.6 5,145 64.6 2,138 26.8 West Annapolis 1,775 0 0.0 1,151 64.8 624 35.2 Area III, Special Education 4,076 76 1.8 2,737 65.9 1,339 32.2 Edgewater Elementary 2,457 265 9.7 1,477 54.2 980 36.0 Southern Middle 10,507 0 0.0 5,154 49,1 5,353 50.9 Severn Elementary 5,737 140 2.4 1,812 30.8 3,925 66.8 Total $40,664 $1,184 2.83% 522,151 52.93% $18,514 44,2470 Source: Anne Arundel County Public Schools, Planning and Construction Department, K -6 $11,121 TABLE A.3. SCHOOL CAPITAL NEEDS, COSTS, AND IMPACT FEES, ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND Type of Develo_ment 3- and 4- 5- Family Single - Family 2- Family Family and More Mobile Home Public School Children, Per Unit K -6 0.3534 0.3276 0.2252 0.1356 0.2030 7-9 0.1850 0.1730 0.1093 0.0850 0.1482 10 -12 0.1593 0.1224 0,0822 0.0895 0.1951 Total 0.6977 0.6229 0.4167 0.3100 0.5463 Square Feet of Building Area, Per Student K -6 112 112 112 112 112 K--9 144 144 144 144 144 10 -12 150 150 150 150 150 Construction Cost, Per Student K -6 $10,498 $10,498 510,498 $10,498 $10,498 7 -9 13,363 13,363 13,363 13,363 13,363 10 -12 13,944 13,944 13,944 13,944 13,944 Site Cost, Per Student K -6 $ 623 $ 623 $ 623 $ 623 5 623 7 -9 837 837 837 837 837 10 -12 810 810 810 810 810 Total Cost, Per Student K -6 $11,121 $11,121 $11,121 $11,121 S11,121 7 -9 14,200 14,200 14,200 14,200 14,200 10 -12 14,754 14,754 14,754 14,754 14,754 Cost, Per Dwelling Unit K -6 $ 3,390 $ 2,710 $ 2,645 $ 2,259 $ 2,721 7 -9 2,294 1,830 1,786 1,525 1,837 10 -12 2,230 1,854 1,810 1,546 1,861 Total S 8,004 5 6,394 S 6,241 $ 5,330 $ 6,419 State Contribution $ 4,235 $ 3,383 $ 3,302 $ 3,280 $ 3,396 Local Cost $ 3,769 $ 3,011 $ 2,939 $ 2,050 $ 3,023 Impact Fee' S 3,204 $ 2,559 $ 2,498 $ 2,134 $ 2,570 `This represents the recommended fee pursuant to these methods. The adopted fees were 65.4 percent of the recommended fee. makes use of prototype schools. These prototypes allow for easy calculation of needed school space and the cost of that space for new students. CALCULATIONS The state of Maryland provides financial assistance to school districts in constructing new schools. The problem is that the state grants are insufficient. Tables A -2 and A -3 •r on page 24 show the total school costs and the state fund- ing of those schools. On average, state grants cover 52.9 percent of new school construction costs. This means that the school board faces a deficit of 47.1 percent or an aver- age of 56,010 for each additional student station required. The objective of the school impact fee is to charge this deficit amount to new residential development in propor- tion to its impact on the school system. 22 _m ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. Meeting Date: AUGUST 20, 1991 SUBJECT: OWASA QUARTERLY REPORT ------ - - - - -- ---------------------------------- DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X - - ATTACHMENT(S): YES - REPORT - INFORMATION- CONTACT: MOSES CAREY,JR. TELEPHONE NUMBER - Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel Hill - 968 -5401 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 - - - PURPOSE: To give the Board a report from the OWASA Board of- Directors for April through June, 1991. BACKGROUND: During the Goal Setting Retreat in December, 1990, the Board of Commissioners requested that the OWASA Board of Directors be asked to submit a quarterly report to the County Commissioners. This report will help the County Commissioners identify any areas or issues that may have policy implications for the County. The report has been included as an attachment. A representative from the OWASA Board of Directors will be present to answer any questions the Board may have. RECOMMENDATION(S): Accept the report as information. s 2. f Orange Water and Sewer Authority 400 Jones Ferry Road OWASA P.Q. Box 366 Carrboro, NC 27510 (919) 968 -4421 QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JUNE 30, 1991 Budget On June 12 the Authority adopted a FY 92 Budget with projected revenues and expenditures of just over $10 million dollars. The Board also approved a 6 percent rate increase, effective November 1, that will raise average customer bills less than $2 dollars a month. We will spend more than $3 million dollars next year on capital improvements, including the repair and rehabilitation of major water and sewer lines and the construction of limited recreational facilities at Cane Creek Reservoir. We hope to open Cane Creek for limited recreational use before closing University -Lake for improvements to the dam, scheduled to begin about a year from now. Wastewater Plant Litigation During the past month OWASA successfully resolved the patent challenge to our NUTRIFIED SLUDGE treatment process used at the wastewater plant. As I reported before, this process saves OWASA more than $400,000 a year in chemical costs, while producing very high quality effluent to Morgan Creek and enriched sludge for agricultural use. The financial settlement and royalty arrangements should allow OWASA to recover the substantial legal costs we've incurred defending the patent, and may produce additional income to be used for further research and improvements to the process, or for special purposes such as watershed preservation or Cane Creek recreation. Illegal Dumping in University Lake Watershed During the past several months, OWASA and County staff have collaborated in identifying and correcting several illegal construction dumps in the University Lake watershed. You're probably aware that one of the largest was of our own making, out at the Stone Quarry site on Highway 54. We recently completed An Equal opportunity Employer 4- e Quarterly Report to Orange County Commissioners June 30, 1991 Page 2 removing several thousand yards of soil material that contained small amounts of broken pipe, pavement, and other construction debris — all of which has now been relocated to properly permitted landfills. The only remaining work will be re— seeding the quarry site as soon as the weather cools off. Despite the expense and embarrassment to OWASA, I want to assure you how much we appreciate the vigilance and cooperation of your staff in helping to identify and correct these problems. Water Sunely for the Sumer As you know, the Cane Creek Reservoir now provides plenty of water to meet high seasonal demands. The next step will be to expand our capacity to treat and store more water to meet short term peaks. OWASA's average annual use is around 6.5 million gallons per day, but last summer's Peak day demand was more than 10 mgd. Our present capacity to treat and deliver water is about 12.5. That's why our Capital Improvements Budget includes an expansion of the water plant during the next two years. Although we have the capacity, it's not yet clear whether Hillsborough will request water from OWASA this summer. As you recall, we sold about 300,000 gallons a day to Hillsborough for seven weeks last September and October. Please let me or the OWASA staff know if you would like further information on any of this or other information I may not have reviewed. Up ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No VIII -A ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Purchase of Phase II Optical Imaging System ------------------------- - - - - -- DEPARTMENT: Purchasing & Central Srvs PUBLIC HEARING YES NO x ATTACHMENT(SS) INFORMATION CONTACT- David Cannell 1991 -92 Budget Amendment #2 Information Networking Project TELEPHONE NUMBER Capital Project Ordinance Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To authorize the purchase of equipment for Phase II of the optical Imaging System for the Register of Deeds Office and to appropriate funds in the capital projects fund for this purchase. BACKGROUND: At the April 17, 1990, BOCC meeting a bid was awarded to GENESYS DATA SYSTEMS for two stand alone workstations of the Optical Imaging System for the Register of Deeds Office. The pricing contained in that bid was extended twelve months from the date of the award. SOUTHEASTERN MICROFILM (The distributor for GENESYS) and GENESYS have agreed to honor the pricing contained in the bid for an additional twelve months. The cost of the equipment for Phase II is $44,103.00 The purchase of this workstation would be the second phase in the County's conversion to optical imaging. The system will be comprised of one (1) stand alone workstation consisting of; a CPU, monitor, scanner, optical disk drive, laser printer and all necessary software. The C.I.P. includes in the Information Networking account in future years, funds to purchase additional optical disk equipment in the Register of Deeds Office. Because of space limitations and the upcoming move by the Register of'Deeds into the Government Services Center, it has become important to accelerate this project. In order to do so, we propose increasing the Information Networking project by $44,103. This action will increase this project budget from $570,087 to $614,190. These funds would be allocated from the Capital Projects Reserve Account fund balance. RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board of Commissioners approve the purchase of one stand alone workstation at a cost of $44,103 from SOUTHEASTERN MICROFILM INC., and that the Board approve the attached capital project ordinance and budget amendment. Pa ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1991 -92 BUDGET AMENDMENTS The 1991 -92 Orange County Budget Ordinance, as amended, is amended as follows: BEFORE AFTER AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMENDMENT COUNTY CAPITAL RESERVE FUND (1) Source: Fund Balance $ 138,688 $ 44,103 $ 182,791 Appropriation: Transfers to County Capital Projects $ 946,354 $ 44,103 $ 990,457 To budget for optical disk equipment in the Information Networking Project. ;. INFORMATION NETWORKING PROJECT 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 is for the improvements in Orange County's methods of information processing. The project will be financed by appropriations from the County Capital Reserve Fund, grant funds from the State of North Carolina and user fees. 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 $ 544,190 Reserve Fund Transfer from General Fund 13,000 Grant Funds 24,000 Charges for Services 33,000 Total Revenue $ 614,190 Section 4. The following amount is appropriated for this project: Information Networking Project $ 614,190 Section S. This ordinance supersedes all previous Information Networking Capital Project Ordinances.. -_ Section 6. This ordinance shall be in effect from'the date of adoption until June 30, 1994. Adopted this 20 day of August, 1991. 3 B A O R A N G E C 0 U N T Y r BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: Au ust 20 1991 Action Agenda Item #_VM�-5 SUBJECT: Zoning Enforcement Cases -- Recommendations on Civil Penalties for Zoning Cases DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND PUBLIC HEARING: Yes xx No INSPECTIONS ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Hinkley Extension 2584 Synopsis of Two Zoning Cases TELEPHONES NUMBERS: Medical Letter Hillsborough 732 -8181 Durham 688 -7331 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 PURPOSE: To request the Board of County Commissioners to: (1) make demand for payment of civil penalties for continuing zoning violations; and (2) rescind demand for payment of civil penalties. BACKGROUND: One zoning case (Underwood) has not been re- solved after due procedure. This case is pre- sented for the Board's consideration to make demands for payments of civil penalties. Two extensions have been given by the Board at its May 6, and June 3, 1991, meetings, respectively. Another zoning violation (Swanson) has been cor- rected as of July 8, 1991. Because of concerted continuing progress on the part of Mr. Swanson to rectify violations, the Board granted him three extensions - -the last being on May 6, 1991. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Administration recommends that the Board of County Commissioners take the following actions. 1. Make demand for payment of civil penalties in the following case. #76 Thomas W. Underwood 2. Rescind demand for civil penalties in the following case. #67 Carl Swanson Ll 2 SYNOPSIS OF TWO ZONING CASES Or CASE RECOMMENDED FOR DEMANDING PAYMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES Underwood Case ( #76) Summary Location: 2524 Lannie Drive, Colonial Hills Violations: Storage of goods, outdoors; storage of junk - ed motor vehicles. Status: Mr. Thomas W. Underwood was first contacted by certified mail, return receipt requested, on September 17, 1990 and again on November 13, 1990 (mailed to his mother, Mrs. Margaret Underwood, 4010 Old NC 10, Durham, NC 27705, in accordance with her request); and on Janu- ary 31, 1991 (Explanation and assessment of civil penalties mailed to his mother). Mrs. Underwood acknowledged receiving the three notices. Attempts have been made to make arrangements with salvage people to assist Mrs. Underwood to have the vehicles and trash removed from the premises. She said that her son would not be willing to sell the vehicles for what the salvage people would offer to rectify the violation. Hence, no progress was made on this front. Mr. Underwood has physical disabilities which have been described and verified by his phy- sician, Timothy S. Carey, M.D., M.P.H., of UNC Hospitals. A copy of his letter dated February 19, 1991, is attached. As directed by the Board, photographs of the property were taken the morning after it's May 6, 1991, meeting. On the premises there were found a total of seven motor vehicles, five of which appeared unable to be propelled under their own power - -a Chevrolet service - van, a Ford pick -up truck, a Buick four -door sedan, an aluminum stepvan, and a large three- wheeled motor - scooter van. Also on the property are one circa 1940's mobile home - travel trailer, one open trailer loaded with razed building materials, one covered trailer (Phillips Truck and Auto Service, Durham, N.C.), one trailer frame, a riding lawn mow- er, several stacks of bricks, several tires, several large electric motors, junked home air conditioners, household furniture, and several piles of trash. 3 Newly poured footings, apparently for a stor- y age building, were seen for the first time on May 7, 1991. After an extension was granted by the Board on May 6, 1991, Mr. Underwood acquired a building permit on May 17, 1991. However, photographs of May 7, 1991, show foundation slabs (footings) already in the ground. (No perceivable further construction activity has taken place.) The contractor was listed as the owner. The footings were poured by Edward Underwood, and the structure will be completed by him. This is her only son that is able to work. The 121w X 1511 X 15'h (180 sq. ft.) shed would be large enough to accommodate no more than one sub - compact automobile or truck (c. 61w X 1411 X 51h) and assorted materials on the floor, on shelves, and /or in a loft. It appears that the shed would be able to handle up to half of the various pieces of equip- ment, appliances, furniture, and building materials, excluding motor vehicles, stored outside on the premises. At its June 3, 1991, meeting, the Board pro- vided Mr. Underwood, with a second extension of 30 days based on the building permit is- sued for storage space. Mrs. Underwood was contacted to determine why the violation had not been corrected. She indicated that her son's (Thomas) health re- mained the same and that she was unable to clean up the property because of her physical condition. Additionally, three of her rental properties had leaks in the roofs and had to be fixed first. This work is being done by her son, Edward. The property continues to be in violation as of August 12, 1991. There has been no evi- dence of activity to clean -up the property. Filing Date: September 17, 1990 Date Civil Penalties Began: February 19, 1991 Accumulated Civil Penalties as of August 12, 1991: $17,500 4 W- CASE RECOMMENDED TO BE RESCINDED Swanson Case 67 SRMagy Location: 1903 Adams Place, Colonial Hills Violation: Storage of goods, outdoor Status: Progress to correct the violation took place at a slow but consistent pace after demand for payment of civil penalties was made. Continuing contact with Mr. Swanson and site visits verified that progress was being made. Routine field inspection of Monday, July 8, 1991, revealed that the violation had been corrected. Filing Date: June 5, 1990 Date Civil Penalties Began: November 20, 1990 Accumulated Civil Penalties as of July 7, 1991: $45,800 rw 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA r AT CHAPEL HILL School of Medicine Department of Medicine Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology M. Andrew Greganti, M.D„ Chief 919/966.2276 James A. Bryan II, M.D. 919/%6.2266 Timothy S, Carey, M.U. 919/966 -2276 Marlon Danis. M.D. 919/966 -2276 Arthur T. Evans. M.D. 919/966.2276 kussell Harris. M.D. 919/966.2276 Axalla J. Hoole. M.D. 919/966 -2276 February 19, 1991 Mr. Marvin Collins Planning Director Orange County Planning Department 306F Revere Road ..Hillsborough, NC 27278 gig Dear Mr. Collins: 5 Campus Box 7110, 5039 Old Clinic Building The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599.7110 Mr. Thomas Underwood MRr : 59- 66 --08 -0 Thomas \', Jones. M.D. 919/966 -2276 1. Slcphen Kizer, M -D. 919/966 -1456 Carl 8, Lyle, M.D. 919/966.3509 Robot A. McNutt, M.D. 919/966- 7276 C. Glenn Pickard. M.D. 919/966.1205 Sally J. Trued, M.D. 919/966.5933 Mark E. Williams, M.D. 919/966-5945 I am writing at the request of my patient, Mr. Thomas Underwood. I have followed Mr. Underwood for two years. He has asked me to inform you regarding his health problems. Mr. Underwood has a number of serious health problems. He has cirrhosis of the liver which has resulted in jaundice, severe edema, and ascites (swelling of the abdomen). He takes medication for this which has only partially controlled this condition. Because of his cirrhosis he has a severe tendency to bleed. In addition, Mr. Underwood has diabetes and takes insulin for this. In addition he has difficulty walking because of a severe infection he sustained about 1 1/2 years ago which necessitated surgery, he has scarring left over from the surgery which leaves him with a permanent limp. with all of these problems, Mr. Underwood's ability to perform physical work is significantly impaired. Do not hesitate to give me a call if I can answer any questions regarding'Mr. Underwood's condition. Sincerely yours, ;Z::� -- Timothy S. Carey, M. ., M.P.H. Assistant Professor of Medicine cc: Mr. Thomas Underwood 2524 Lannie Drive Hillsborough, NC 27278 O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS r ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20 1991 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT (Re- approval of Expired Preliminary Plat) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed Amendment 5/28 Public Hearing Minutes (draft) 6/17/91 Planning Board Minutes 1 Action Agenda Item #�- Yes ^x�No INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo Extension 2583 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967 -9251 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations to allow staff re-- approval of expired Preliminary Plats. BACKGROUND: Under current procedures, the Board of Commissioners may approve a revised phasing plan for an expired Preliminary Plat. If a revision is not approved, the expired portion of the Preliminary Plan must be re- submitted as if it were a new project. In many cases, the re- submitted Preliminary Plan is identical to the original plat. If there have been no major changes in subdivision, zoning, or other regulations which affect the proposal, then the Preliminary Plat is generally re- approved with little or no change. Major design considerations and other issues were addressed and resolved prior to the original approval. In many cases, the approval process for the "new" subdivision is oriented largely toward process, rather than substance. The attached amendment is proposed to allow staff to re- approve expired Preliminary Plats which meet certain criteria. The proposed amendment was presented for public hearing on May 28, 1991. one citizen spoke in favor of the proposal. Concerns raised by the Board of Commissioners included fees, and the definition of "minor changes ". The concept of allowing staff re- approval if there were any changes to the original approval was questioned. 2 The nature of any changes would have to be technical ,in nature in order to qualify for administrative approval. The most likely type of minor change would be an adjustment to property line location. Such changes could occur for a number of reasons. For example: - Further research may reveal suitable soils on a site previously designated as "of Restricted Development Potential ", -- Finding additional areas with suitable soils could eliminate the need for a septic easement, - The alignment of the road could be shifted as during design or construction, perhaps to afford better sight distance or avoid rock outcrops. A fee to cover County costs in processing the re- approvals is proposed for public hearing on August 26. public hearing. The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on June 17, 1991 and recommended approval, including provisions allowing approval of minor changes. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment. 3 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REFERENCE: SECTION III -D -2 -f ADMINISTRATIVE RE--APPROVAL ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: ,X Staff Planning Board BOCC Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: _X High Middle Low Comment: EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 28, 1991 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To provide a procedure for administrative re- approval of expired Preliminary Plats. IMPACTS /ISSUES: Under current procedures, an expired Preliminary Plat may be extended upon approval by the Board of Commissioners of a revised phasing plan. There are specific criteria for the Board to consider when determining if the revision will be approved. If a revision to the phasing plan is not approved, then the applicant must re- submit the expired portion of the Preliminary Plan as if it were a new project. In many cases, the re- submitted Preliminary Plan is identical to the original plat which was approved by the Board of Commissioners. If there have been no major changes in subdivision, zoning, or other regulations which affect the proposal, then the Preliminary Plat is generally re- approved with little or no change. Major design considerations and other issues were addressed and resolved prior to the original approval. Where there have been no changes in regulations which affect the subdivision, and no changes to the original proposal are requested, the existing procedure of considering the subdivision as if it were a new project is oriented largely toward process, rather than substance. The attached amendment is proposed to allow staff to re- approve expired Preliminary Plats if: - the original subdivision design and conditions of approval are consistent with regulations in existence at the time of application for re- approval, and - any changes to the original approval are considered "minor changes ", which are technical rather than substantive. 4 The concept of staff approval of minor changes is used in the,-Zoning Ordinance, where Planning Staff may approve minor changes to a Special Use Permit. The criteria for defining a "minor change" in the attached proposal are similar to those applied to Special Use Permits, modified to reflect concerns unique to subdivisions. Administrative re- approval would be one -time only. If a re- approved Preliminary Plat expired, then the applicant could request amendment to the phasing plan by the Board of Commissioners, in accordance with current procedures. EXISTING AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT: III- D -2 -e. Action Subsequent to Approval Upon approval of the Preliminary Plat by the Board of commissioners, the subdivider may proceed with the preparation of the -Final Plat, and the installation of or arrangement for required improvements in accordance with the approved Preliminary Plat and the requirements of this Ordinance. If the application is approved or approved with conditions, the Planning Department may issue applicable development permits required to construct, install and use improvements approved as part of the Preliminary Plat approval. Except for the above improvements, no building permits shall be issued to develop any lot or parcel shown on the approved Preliminary Plat until a Final Plat showing such lot or parcel is approved and recorded under this Section. Except as provided in Section III- D -2 -c, the applicant shall submit an amended application for review as an original application if he /she proposes to substantially amend or modify his /her application after the Board of Commissioners have approved the Preliminary Plat. The approval of a Preliminary Plat shall be effective for a period of one (1) year from the date of approval by the Board of Commissioners. By the end of that time period, approval of the Final Plat must have been obtained from the Planning Department, although the plat need not have been recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds. Any plat or portion thereof not receiving final approval within the time period set forth herein shall be null and void except under the following conditions: 5 (1) The subdivision is built in sections or phases, and a phasing plan was approved as part of the Preliminary Plat; (2) The period between the approval date of the Preliminary Plat and the approval date of the Final Plat for the first phase does not exceed one (1) year; and (3) The period between the approval, date of the Final Plat of the first phase and the approval date(s) of the Final Plat(s) of any subsequent phase(s) does not exceed the time limits specified in the phasing plan of the Preliminary Plat. If no phasing plan is indicated, then the period between Final Plat approvals shall not exceed six (6) months. Where a phasing plan for construction of the subdivision is approved, and construction may not begin until required utilities and /or other facilities are available to serve the development, the expiration date of the Preliminary Plat shall be governed by the time periods) approved as part of the phasing plan. III- D -2 -f. Administrative Re-Approval The Plannin I Director or his her authorized agent may, within one rear of the ex iration of a Preliminary-Plat re-approve the expired Preliminary Plat or ortions thereof as lon as the subdivision des- n and conditions of anproval are in com liance with subdivision and zoning re ulations where Applica ble in effect at the time of a lication for re- approval and chartryes to the on crinal desicrn or conditions of a roval are considered Minor. A change may be considered a minor change if it does NOT involve an17 of the following: al any substantive chan a in a condition of approval_ .b1 an increase in the number of buildincr lots Proposed. cl any substantial change in the location of or decrease in the amount of o en s ace buffers or area reserved for recreation use. 91 any substantial change in pedestrian III- -D -2-g. and/or vehicular access or circulation 6 including road classification. r eL an change in the Rrovision of services such as water supply and wastewater disposal. 1 any substantial chancre in the location of utilities or other easements. The subdivision shall be subject to review by all aRplicable review agencies as is required for original preliminar Plat a roval. If all changes from the original approval are considered minor changes, the Planning Director or his/her authorized agent may re- aRprove the preliminary plat, with condition of aRRroval stated in a format which substantially conforms to the Resolution of ARProval ado ted by the Board of commissioners when approving a preliminary plat. Further Time Extensions Only one administrative re-approval may be approved for any subdivision. If a re- approved Preliminary Plat expires,_ Where � -pew44�d; -ham used, the developer shall be required to resubmit a new Preliminary Plat for the tract or portion thereof for which approval has expired. The new plat shall be subject to all applicable regulations in existence at the time of resubmittal. Provided, however, the development phasing plan approved as part of the Preliminary Plat (hereafter "the phasing plan ") may be amended by the Board of commissioners upon application by the subdivider. In determining whether to approve an amended phasing plan, the Board of commissioners shall consider: (1) whether or not approval of other diligently pursued regulatory requirements can be obtained before the expiration of the time periods established in the phasing plan; and (2) the quality of and length of time of the experience of the subdivider in managing development projects; and (3), whether factors other than market conditions and beyond the control.of the subdivider caused a delay in meeting the phasing plan; and (4) whether the development project, if completed consistent with the approved I Preliminary Plat, will tend to aid or 7 meet an important public policy goal established by the Board of County Commissioners; and (5) whether the application for an amended phasing plan was submitted before the previously approved time limit(s) has lapsed; and (6) the possibility of and practicality of the subdivider and developer completing the development project consistent with Orange County regulations applicable if the phasing plan amendment is not granted; and (7) whether the time by which improvements must be completed or installed would not be extended by the revised phasing plan. After consideration of the evidence submitted by the applicant concerning each of the factors listed above, the Board may, in its discretion and for good cause shown, grant the amendment to the phasing plan unless it concludes that to do so would not maintain or promote, in some specific manner, the general health, safety and welfare. If the Board approves an amendment to the phasing plan, it may require reasonable additional conditions of approval of the unapproved final plat(s). *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOXXITTEE: 4/3/91 PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: 4/22/91 BOCC REVIEW: Planning Board Minutes - 6/17/91 r b. SUBDIVISION REGULA'T'IONS TEXT AMENDMENTS (I) Section III -0 -2 -f (Administrative Re- approval) Presentation by Mary Scearbo. The proposed amendment would allow staff re- approval of expired Preliminary Plats. Under current procedures, the Board of Commissioners may approve a revised phasing plan for an expired Preliminary Plat. if a revision is not approved, the expired portion of the Preliminary Plan must be re- submitted as if it were a new project. In many cases, the re- submitted Preliminary Plan is identical to the original Plat. -- there have been no major changes in subdivision, zoning or other regulations which affect the proposal, then. the Preliminary Plat is generally re- approved with little or no change. Major design considerations and other issues were addressed and resolved prior to the original approval. In many cases, the approval process for the "new" subdivision is oriented largely toward process, rather than substance. A copy of the amendment is an attachment to these minutes on pages The proposed amendment would allow staff to re- approve expired Preliminary Plats which meet certain criteria. The proposed amendment was presented for public hearing on May 28, 1991 0ne ci:.izen spoke in favor of the proposal. Concerns raised by the Board of Commissioners included fees, and the definition of "minor changes". The concept of allowing staff re- approval if there were any changes to the original approval was questioned. A fee to cover County costs in processing the re- approvals would have to be approved by -he Board of Commissioners after a public hearing. The proposed fee could be presented at the August public hearing. it is 1 ` O R A N G E C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN DEPARTMENT: PLANNING ATTACHMENT(S): New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan Technical Appendices (Distributed with 5/20/91 agenda) Master Plan Map 5/28/91 Public Hearing Minutes 6/17/91 Planning Board Minutes Action Agenda Item # V PUBLIC HEARING: Yes —X —No INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Cameron Extension 2580 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 Chapel Hill - 967- 9251/968 -4501 PURPOSE: Consideration of the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan. BACKGROUND: On September 1, 1987, former Mayor Gulley of Durham met with the Mayor of Chapel Hill and the Chairs of the Orange County and Durham County Boards of Commissioners to discuss a cooperative project involving open space preservation along New Hope Creek. The scope of the project was defined to include land along New Hope Creek between Eno River State Park and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers land north of Jordan Lake. During the following fifteen months, staff members from each jurisdiction's planning department met to work out alternatives for project implementation. In December of 1988, the elected officials again met to review the open space plan proposal and agreed to send a resolution to the governing body of each jurisdiction, seeking endorsement of the project. The Resolution (page 17, Technical Appendices) was adopted by the four jurisdictions during the spring of the following year. Coulter Associates, Landscape Architects and Land Planners, were hired as the consultant later that year. Since October 1989, an appointed Advisory Committee representing each of the four jurisdictions met with the consultant and planning staff members t d o pro uce A 2 the New Hope Corridor open Space Master Plan. The Plan rincludes recommendations for acquiring critical environmental areas such as stream beds, floodplains, steep slopes, and larger tracts of historic, educational or recreational value. Acquisition could be through donation, purchase in fee simple, or purchase of development rights. Some of the wildlife corridors should remain in private ownership. The orange County portions of the Corridor are 1. wildlife corridors, including the 100 -year floodplain; a. New Hope Creek Wildlife Corridor - beginning at the point the creek crosses Mt. Sinai Road (SR 1718) extending through Duke Forest to Erwin Road (SR 1737); also includes a portion of the floodplain along Old Field Creek between the Oosting Natural Area and New Hope Creek;. b. Piney Mountain Creek Wildlife Corridor - extending through the Couch Tract of Duke Forest south along Piney Mountain Creek across Mt. Sinai Road to New Hope Creek; c. Rhodes Creek Wildlife Corridor - beginning south of Cornwallis Road extending northeast to Eno River State Park; 2. wildlife Protection Area, including the 100 - year floodplain between Erwin Road and the Durham County line; 3. Unpaved nature trails; and a. Within Duke Forest on existing roads and trails; b. Across Cornwallis Road (SR 1716) connecting the Couch Tract and the Durham Division of Duke Forest; and c. Along Sunrise Road crossing 1-40 to the Korstian Division access point of Whitfield Road; 4. Bike /pedestrian trails. a. in conjunction with a Scenic Road designa- tion along NC 751 and any future extension; and 3 b. Following old NC 10 to Mt. Hermon Church Road, across US Highway 70 to Pleasant Green Road to reach Eno River State Park. One of the implementation recommendations made by the Advisory Committee is that a permanent Advisory Committee be established to oversee progress of the Master Plan, make budget recommendations relating to the corridor, review development proposals affecting the corridor, and encourage citizen involvement in the corridor project. The permanent Advisory Committee could be made up of members of existing open space/ planning groups supplemented by corridor property owners and other interested citizens. It would report to the four governing bodies with jurisdiction over the corridor. In August of 1990, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated New Hope Creek as an "Important Regional Wetland." Preservation of the corridor will serve aesthetic, environmental, educational, recreational, as -well as growth management purposes to benefit not only Orange and Durham Counties, but the entire Triangle region. The'New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan was presented by the consultant at the public hearing on May 28, 1991. Following the presentation, discussion included endorsement of bike paths, protecting open space between Durham and Hillsborough, and a landfill site under consideration that overlaps part of the New Hope Corridor. Minutes of the hearing are attached. On June 17, the Planning Board made the following recommendations concerning the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan: 1. Incorporate the Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County; 2. Direct the Planning Staff to coordinate with the Chapel Hill Planning Staff and propose appropriate amendments to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan, including recommendations from the New Hope Corridor Master Plan; and 3. Direct the Planning Staff to provide information to the Rural Character Study Committee, the Planning Board /EDC Work Group, the Planning Board, and the Commissioners and Town Council members working on the Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Zone about the land in private ownership, utility easements, railroad right -of- ra1� 4 way, and Duke Forest in the vicinity of University Station Road, Old NC 10, Mt. Hermon Church Road, Pleasant Green Road, and Eno River State Park. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the following steps be taken toward implementation of the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan: 1. Incorporate the Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County; 2. Direct the Planning Staff to coordinate with the Chapel Hill Planning Staff and propose appropri- ate amendments to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan, including recommendations from the New Hope Corridor Master Plan; and 3. Direct the Planning Staff to provide information to the Rural Character Study Committee, the Planning Board /EDC Work Group, the Planning Board, and the Commissioners and Town Council members working on the Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Zone about the land in private ownership, utility easements, railroad right -of- way, and Duke Forest in the vicinity of University Station Road, Old NC 10, Mt. Hermon Church Road, Pleasant Green Road, and Eno River State Park. Both Items 1 and 2 can be included as part of the Joint Planning Area Public Hearing with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro in October 1991. a. s J c [KV TAT[ bawl 2. OUR C co t ��G�F car` / f.� • \.v I \:� 1 / . .T� \ `.ter -r • -•I � ` �I.;� ...`' \GNU` : '. • • •: �/� r � r �.: .�I � 1 "`. �.♦ v�� ••� I / �•^:'� \\ \ I'r'e` ���^ J �' � �����/ v� �� moo: •.r1.., ��, � �U?! -,�N! CHAP: L1�1 LEGEND. ', ". ,' . • ' I .usL hoar Iy Ir r_'• 1P0 Ta.a ►l OpohLA lr.h.Dh OLLD Ohar ahACl •r rte« _ ~ ;� .Y " V14h 41ht •a DTtpTDa ♦a IA AAcODa/Taal acacia ' \ ( �j%1. "•J \\ •_L 06 .rr....r...... t. t -2 r-. o•.............. �� co••t V. r•\9••I[cwa er Wry WwL t a—. ..L �' ^ r �� �� �'q -CL[IL COwMAD. o D c >5 a a c .*00-0682 ML .rh .tOiaTLghl t,a.a V' �' yt\ `•� >' _ c_ "'0060th OLTTt7[ t'A. W'+•+ -0 0L0►L[:m •[ h"errptp ) \ - JDwDa• RGtr'r'Ola NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAP rMIF or Du"Ak, Ia.C, CtTr O. Cw►0L4 HILL_ '.G. Duawh" COu'TT 004.*Qg DOVMTT 2OWLTSR ASSOCIATES - Lsntlteeoo 4rchltocis - Lena Planners Durham, N.C. 1 2 3 4 5 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 ��Zj , u 6 A moti'wn was made by Commissioner willhoit, seconded by Commissioner Insko, to refer Rural Route 8, Stoneridge and Sedgefield Subdivisions to staff for further fact finding, to be returned no sooner than June 25, 1991 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN This presentation was made by Emily Cameron. In summary this item was presented to receive citizen comment on the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan. On September 1, 1987, mayor Gulley of Durham met with the Mayor of Chapel Hill and the Chairs of the Orange County and Durham County Boards of Commissioners to discuss a cooperative project involving open space preservation along New Hope Creek. The scope of the project was defined to include land along New Hope Creek between Eno River State Park and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers land north of Jordan Lake. During the following fifteen months, staff members from each jurisdiction's planning department met to work out alternatives for project implementation. In December of 1988, the elected officials again met to review the open space plan proposal and agreed to send a resolution to the governing body of each jurisdiction, seeking endorsement of the project. The Resolution was adopted by the four jurisdictions during the spring of the following year. Coulter Associates, Landscape Architects and Land Planners, were hired as the consultant later that Year. Since October 1989, an appointed advisory Committee representing each of the four jurisdictions met with the consultant and planning staff members to produce the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan. The Plan includes recommendations for acquiring critical environmental areas such as stream beds, floodplains, steep slopes, and larger tracts cf historic, educational or recreational value. Acquisition could be through donation, purchase in fee simple, or purchase of development rights. Some of the wildlife corridors should remain in private ownership. The Orange County portions of the Corridor are a, wildlife Corridors, including the floodplain. b. Wildlife Protection Area, including floodplain between Erwin Road and the line. C. Unpaved nature trails d. Bike /pedestrian trails. 100 -year the 100 -year Durham County Mr. Coulter, Coulter Associates, presented the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan using a slide presentation. He indicated that the plan has been divided into 10 geographic components. A copy of this master plan is incorporated herein by reference and may be found in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. COMME2r'TS AND /OR VESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR n �3 L"J J PLANNING BOARD 2 3 Planning Board Chair Eidenier indicated that Jean Hamilton 4 attended all meetings of this committee. She has represented the 5 Planning Board very well and has kept them informed at each step 6 of the way. She also mentioned that the Transportation Committee 7 of the Planning Board is interested in alternatives to automobile 8 transportation, in particular, bicycle lanes. The Planning Board 9 is very much in favor of the recommendation for the bicycle trail 10 that would go from 751 to NC 10 along Mount Herman Church Road at 11 Pleasant Green Rd. to the Eno River State Park. She mentioned that 12 DOT has indicated that adding the extra two (2) feet for the 13 bicycle lanes is quite expensive and that they need some direction 14 from the Commissioners in order to spend the extra money. 15 16 Commissioner Carey indicated that a preliminary phase in this 17 process includes exploring non - economic and non - regulatory means 18 for acquiring land in this corridor. 20 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT 21 22 Mr. Don Fox commended the planning that has gone into this 23 proposed wildlife corridor. He pointed out that Site r5 for the 24 landfill is at the headwaters of the entire corridor system. He 25 stated that the Land Fill Site Search Committee needs to keep that 26 in mind as they proceed with their search. 27 28 Mr. Pearson Stewart, Chairman, New Hope Creek: Corridor 29 Advisory Committee, pointed out that the original charge by the 30 four governing Boards included investigating a corridor between the 31 Eno River State Park and Jordon Reservoir. From Jordon Lake to 32 Duke Forest was an easy problem to solve. However, north of Duke 33 Forest, crossing I -85 to the Eno River State Park is very difficul t 34 to accomplish. They were not able to come up with a corridor north 35 of Duke Forrest because it was not possible to find a wav to oet 36 across 7-85. They were able to suggest a system of wildlife 37 corridors, to remain in private ownership, for wildlife purposes 38 north of Duke Forest. Orange County is being asked to solve the 39 problem of the different aims of private ownership and wildlife 40 access in the same area. The Board of Commissioners is being asked 41 to make a recommendation as to how that can be done. c 42 recommendation has not been made to establish a new organization 43 for the four County area. He indicated that he believes that each 44 unit of government can solve these problems with the structure they 45 already have in place. 46 47 Commissioner W1111hoit stated that finding a way to extend this 48 corridor north of Duke Forest is a goal that he would like to see 49 accomplished. An additional purpose is served by the corridor in 50 assuring that the urban areas of Hillsborough and Durham will no-- 51 be able to grow together. If that area is set aside as a buffer 52 between the urban centers, then something could be done when , M � LD " n�' �� L 0 1 development i*equests come in for that area. 2 3 THE PIIBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED 4 5 A motion was made by Commissioner Willhoit, seconded by 6 Commissioner Ito be returned refer totthethe Board of Planning Commissioners, no 7 recommendation 8 sooner than August 5th. g VOTE: UNANIMOUS 10 11 A motion was made by Commissioner h'illhoit, seconded by 12 Commissioner Insko, to ask the Planning Board and staff to consider 13 designating an urban buffer that would connect the Eno State Park 14 with the Corridor Plan. 15 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 16 17 3. ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS 18 A. Z -1 -91 James R. Sparrow ,9 This item was presented by Emily Cameron. In summary, 20 this item was presented to receive citizen comment on a proposed 21 Zoning Atlas amendment in Bingham Township. The subject proper -y 22 is located on the north side of NC Highway 54 approximately 900 23 feet east of the Morrow Mill Road.intersection. It is 2.94 acres 24 in size and known as lot 27A on tax map 26 of Bingham Township. 25 The current zoning is Neighborhood Commercial and Agricultural 26 Residential. The applicant is requesting a designation of Local 27 Commercial. The purpose of an LC -1 district is to allow limited 28 commercial uses designed to serve a population at the rural and 29 neighborhood level with convenience goods and personal services. 30 The surrounding land on the north and west is zoned ;.R, buz 31 undeveloped; to the south and east are commercial uses. The area 32 is designated in the Comprehensive plan as the BH -1 Rural 33 Neighborhood Activity Node. Currently, there is no other LC -1 34 zoning within the activity node. 3 5 36 COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN'D /OR 37 PLANNING BOARD 38 None. 39 40 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT 4i 42 Mr. Greg Shepard, Shepard Design Associates, indicated that 43 he was representing Mr. Sparrow on this petition. lie mentioned 44 that in 1989 1.92 acres of this 2.92 acre tract was zoned NC -2. 45 At that point a total of 5 acres in this activity node were zoned 46 NC2. He stated that DOT has done a feasibility study for widening 47 54. Their feasibility study indicates that they would have -o 48 purchase all of the buildable area on this tract. He stated thaz� 49 they feel that they have ,met the four criteria in the zoning 50 ordinance which need to be satisfied in order to propose such a 51 rezoning. 52 11 T MOTION: VOTE: June 17, 1991 Planning Board Minutes the $117.00 would not have to be paid again, only the $60.00 fee. She indicated this would be reviewed and rewritten prior no submittal for public hearing. Waddell asked if the Board could recommend approval of the amendment without the appropriate fee structure. Eidenier responded yes. Scearbo noted than the fee issue would have to go through the Normal process for public hearing in August. She noted also that a fee for site plans could also be presented at the public hearing. More discussion indicated that was no fee at this time for re- approval but that the amendment could be recommended for approval. Scearbo reminded the Board that the fee issue will be presented at public hearing on August 26. Waddell moved approval of the proposed amendment as recommended by the Planning Staff. Seconded by Jobsis. Unanimous. C. NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Presentation by Emily Cameron. ollowing the consultant's presentation an the Public hearing on May 28, !991, discussion included endorsement of bike paths, protecting open space between Durham and Hillsborough, and a landfill site under consideration that overlaps part of the New hope Corridor. The Planning Staff recommends that the following steps be taken toward implementation of the New Hope Corridor Open. Space Master Plan: 1. Incorporate the Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan for Orange County; and 2. Direct the Planning Staff to coordinate with the Chapel Hill Planning Staff and propose appropriate amendments to the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan, including recommendations from the New Hope Corridor Master Plan. Both items 1 and 2 can be included as Dart cf the 9 10 I ,joint Planning Area Public Hearing with the Towns r of Chapel'Hill and Carrboro in October 1991. Eidenier stated that she would like to add an item #3 for the Board of Commissioners to work with the Town of Hillsborough in order to put into effect some of the plan as it applies to the eastern area of the County between Hillsborough and Durham. Eidenier continued that Commissioner Willhoit had states at the public hearing that finding a way to extend this corridor north of Duke Forest is a goal he would like to see accomplished. Discussion followed about the conditions affecting the crossing of I -85 & US 70 and about the width of a corridor to be useful as a buffer as well as a bicycle /wildlife trail. MOTION: Eidenier moved to add item =3 as'follows: Direct the Planning'Staff to provide information to the Rural Character Study Committee, the Planning Board /EDC Work Group, the Planning Board, and the Commissioners and Town Commissioners working on the Hillsborough CPZ about the land in private ownership, utilizY easements, railroad right -of -way, and Duke Forest in the vicinity of University Station Road, Old NC 10, Mt. Hermon Church Road, Pleasant Green Road, and Eno River State Park. Seconded by Burklin. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #9: MATTERS PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC HEARING a. Water and Sewer Policg (1) Goal 3.3.3 Service Capability/ Capacity /Extension Poicies b. Zoning Ordinance (1) Article 6.15.2.a.2a interim Development Standards c. Subdivision Regulations (1) Section IV- c- 2.a.2a Presentation by Emily Cameron. This item is to receive information on propoosedo amendments to the Water and Sewer o -icy, Ordinance, and Subdivision Regulations which would allow water and /or sewer agreements which predated the County's Water and Sewer Policy to 1 ORANGE C O U N T Y BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991_ Agenda Abstract Item SUBJECT: HILLSBOROUGH COOPERATIVE PLANNING AREA BOUNDARIES DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes_g_No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Eidener 7/15/91 Memorandum Planning Director X2592 Draft 7/15/91 Planning Board Minutes PHONE NUMBERS: Carey 7/5/91 Memorandum Hillsborough 732 -8181 Draft 6/17/91 Planning Board Mebane 227 -2031 Minutes Durham 688 -7331 PB /EDC Work Group Schedule Chapel Hill 967 -9251 Hillsborough CPZ Proposal Draft 8/5/91 Commissioners Minutes PURPOSE: To consider proposed additions to the Transition Areas of the Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Area. BACKGROUND: During recent months, two representatives from the governing boards of Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough met to discuss issues and objectives inherent in a cooperative planning and land use agreement. On June 4, 1991, the governing boards met to review a proposal drafted by the work group. The two governing boards agreed to the proposal except for locations in the Transition Area. These included: 1. The area bounded generally by I -40, Old Chapel Hill - Hillsborough Road (South Churton Street Extension), N.C. Highway 86, and the current Transition Area boundary; and 2. The area bounded generally by U.S. 70 Bypass, U.S. 70 Business, and Lawrence Road. Although both areas are currently designated Rural Residential in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, area #1 above is one of three targeted for study by the Planning Board /Economic Development Work Group as an "economic development district." The goal for such districts is to provide 14 2 clear, acceptable performance standards and streamlined approval procedures. A report on area #1 is to be presented to the Board of Commissioners at its October 15, 1991 meeting. The dominant feature in area #2 above is the Occoneechee Golf Course. The area is also characterized by scattered residential development, particularly along U.S. 70 Business. The Land Use Element includes a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node at the intersection of U.S. 70 Bypass and Palmers Grove Church Road. Areas immediately to the south and west of the requested area have already been designated 20 -Year Transition. The two boards agreed to resolve these differences, and the Board of Commissioners indicated it would ask the County Attorney to draw an agreement consistent with the concepts and policies included in the proposal. The Planning Boards of the two jurisdictions would be asked develop appropriate land use plans and development standards for the area. As part of this effort, the Planning Boards will explore ways of providing a "buffer" between Hillsborough and Durham. A similar concern was voiced during the presentation of the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan; e.g., the absence of a clear link between New Hope Creek and the Eno River State Park. The two Planning Boards will also consider adjustments to the boundaries of the Hillsborough Thoroughfare Planning Area. On July 5, 1991, Chairman Carey outlined a time schedule for activities related to the completion of a Cooperative Planning Agreement with Hillsborough. Chairman Carey also asked the Planning Board to prepare a recommendation on whether the two areas ( #1 and #2 above) requested by Hillsborough should be included in the Transition Area. At its July 15, 1991 meeting, the Planning Board voted to recommend that neither area be included in the Transition Area at this time. For area #1, the Planning Board felt that a decision should be withheld until the report of the Planning Board /Economic Development Work Group was presented in October. For area #2, the Planning Board felt that a decision should be withheld until the strategies of the Rural Character Study Committee are presented. The strategies will also determine where and in what manner public water and sewer extensions will be made to the proposed "Water and Sewer Service Area" beyond the Transition Area. A final recommendation of the Planning Board is that discussions be held with the Town of Hillsborough about the methods used to provide water and sewer infrastructure to outlying areas, including the source of water. At its August 5, 1991 meeting, the Board of Commissioners considered the recommendation of the Planning Board. It was the concensus of the Board to adhere to the time schedule outlined in Chairman Carey's July 5, 1991 memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the Board withhold inclusion of the I -40 /South Churton Street area and the area bounded generally by U.S. 70 Bypass, U.S. 70 Business, and Lawrence Road in the Hillsborough Transition Area. The Administration further recommends that the Board of Commissioners adhere to the steps outlined in the Chair's July 5, 1991 memorandum, including the County Attorney's drafting of a formal agreement for consideration of approval. A change is recommended, however, in the time schedule proposed by the Chair. The recommended revised schedule is as follows: Activity County Attorney completes draft of CPZ agreement Draft agreement forwarded to Hillsborough Planning Board prepares recommendation on CPZ agreement Date of Completion 8/14/91 8/19/91 Board of Commissioners makes 8/20/91 decision on inclusion of areas requested by Hillsborough in Transition Areas Planning Board recommendation 9/3/91 on CPZ agreement presented to Board of Commissioners Hillsborough /Orange County TBA governing boards conduct work session 4 Hillsborough /Orange County 9/17/91 governing boards sign CPZ agreement Hillsborough /Orange County 10/7/91 governing boards sign CPZ agreement (optional date) The revised schedule eliminates the joint meeting of the two governing boards at a regular Commissioners meeting. In lieu of such a meeting, a work session could be arranged between 9/3/91 and 9/17/91. The revised schedule also provides options to the Commissioners. If the work session produces concensus on the agreement, it could be signed by both boards on 9/17/91. A 10/7/91 meeting is provided in the event that the two boards wish to consider the agreement further. The issues identified by the Orange County Planning Board can be incorporated into the work of the two Planning Boards; i.e., preparation of land use plan and development standards. Since the work of the two Planning Boards will extend into 1992, the recommendations of the Rural Character Study Committee and the Planning Board /Economic Development Work Group can be considered as part of cooperative planning efforts. Recommendations regarding adjustments to Transition and water and Sewer Service Areas, including the two areas mentioned above, can also made by the two Planning Boards. - . TO: MOSES CAREY, CHAIRMAN ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: BETTY EIDENIER, CHAIRMAN ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD DATE: JULY 15, 1991 ABOUT: AUGUST 5 COMMISSIONERS' MEETING AGENDA ITEMS Moses, since I will not be here August 5, 1 would like to call to your attention the following items decided at our Planning Board meeting tonight: Public Hearing Bill Waddell will be working in my stead for the August 5 public hearing., Carol Cantrell, the vice - chairman, will also be out of town August 5. Please assist Bill in knowing what to do. Hillsborough CPZ The Planning Board recommends that you do not at this time accept either of the areas proposed by Hillsborough as Transition Areas. The one area is being studied by the Planning Board /EDC work group with a report due to you in October. The other area is being studied by the Rural Character Study Committee which is just now setting up public meetings in the township to begin a series of inquiries leading to a report to the Commissioners on development in the area; there will be the need for water and sewer, but the location of development and /or rural villages which require water and sewer may not be within the boundaries under consideration by the Town in this request. The Planning Board recommends that you talk to Hillsborough about how to go about providing the infrastructure to get water and sewer to outlying areas, and to ask how they propose to obtain enough water, and to ask what their response would be to requests to provide water to rural villages. In other words, the Rose proposal to extend services outside the town would fit the rural character plan, but where is to be decided. State Watershed Regulations The Planning Board would like the Commissioners to send representatives to the August 15 public hearing; Commissioner Wilhoit and planner David Stancil would be our choices. The County needs to make some decisions on several issues and have the representatives explain our position. We would like especially to have these items discussed: 5 4 6 r UPPER ENO: Perhaps the Upper Eno WS 2 classification should be north of highway 70, since the Seven ,Mile Creek area is also the area under consideration for economic development. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: Orange County definitions differentiate between gravel and paved surfaces; also, we use a sliding scale to determine the 6% impervious surface ratio. We would like to continue to do this rather than use the state system. EQUITY: .lust as the equity issue was raised in Cane Creek discussions, so it must be in other watersheds... how will the Durham or other water usage affect landowners in Little River, for example? What compensation should there be? HAW CREEK: The Orange County portion of this watershed is already industrial. Will there be an intrajurisdictional allocation of development? Can the rest of this area be built out as industrial? WQCA: The Orange County Area is preferable to Orange County definition quality will most lik would put more land into better protection of the definition of a Water Quality Critical the state one -mile proposal because the is based on a rationale of how the water ely be affected. The state regulations the WQCA but not necessarily afford water. SOUTH HYCO CREEK: The part of this watershed in Orange County is different from how it is used in Person County. The classification should reflect this or questions of equity should be addressed. WATER DETENTION BASIN MONITORING: Who is to monitor the water detention basins if there is a best - management practice put into place? EXISTING DEVELOPMENT: September 30 should not be the cut -off date for determining existing development. While some developer may use the "window" for building in the watershed, it would not be reasonable or fair to limit building until regulations are finally determined as late as 1994. UNC CAMPUS RESTRICTIONS: The County should take the opportunity to show its advocacy and support of the university. a7'j -� M&U"' A VOTE: Excerpt from Draft 7/15/91 Planning Board Minutes 7 Seconded by Waddell. C Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #11: PLANNING BOARD ITEMS 0 a. Boundaries of Hillsborough Cooperative Planning zone (CPZ) Presentation by Marvin Collins. Collins referred to a map which was included in the agenda packet. (A copy of this map is an attachment to these minutes on page .) In addition to the boundaries of the Transition Areas and the water /sewer service area, the two governing boards also considered some other points of the agreement. One of those points was that the Town would agree not to annex any of those areas shown in the water /sewer service area on the map. Their annexations would be limited to only those areas included in the Transition Areas. The Town agreed that water and sewer extensions within the proposed service area and outside the Transition Area would be made initially in the short term along with the Rural Character Study Committee Strategies. For the longer term, water and sewer extensions would be made in accordance with a Land Use Plan that revolves around a transit corridor concept which would be located along I- 40/1 --85 and the railroad. Collins continued that the two Boards agreed on everything except two areas which should or should not be included in the Hillsborough Transition Area. One area is located on the east side of Hillsborough bounded by Business 70, Bypass 70 and Lawrence Road. The other area is south of Hillsborough bounded primarily by I -40 (the Joint Planning Area boundary with Chapel Hill /Carrboro), and New 86 and the Transition Area to the north. Collins referred to a letter from Commissioner Carey, (copy an attachment to these minutes on page ), which includes a timeline for the formal agreement. He continued that Commissioner Carey has asked for a recommendation from the Planning Board for the August 5, 1991 Commissioners' meeting whether to include the areas requested by 8 t Hillsborough into the transition area. Collins stated that the Planning Staff recommendation is that the US 70 area be included as requested by Hillsborough. He continued that the recommendation for the 1--40 area be placed on hold. The Planning Board /EDC is looking at that area in the hopes of creating a conceptual development plan similar to the one in process for the Buckhorn Area. The work of that group should be completed before determining if that area is suitable for urban development. Collins continued that Commissioner Carey's schedule proposes that the CPZ agreement be signed on September 17, 1991 which is a month before the PB /EDC work is scheduled to be completed. Eidenier read the following comments from Clint Burklin, chair of the Rural Character Study Committee: The Rose proposal and the extension of water and sewer lines fit the rural character study, however, where they need to be extended is something that is yet to be decided. There are limitations to Hillsborough's water /sewer infrastructure and that the demand of the transition area would be great. The Rural Character Study Committee is considering planned developments and rural villages in almost any direction from Hillsborough, not just in the areas that are outlined on the plan. Eidenier continued that, therefore, Burklin would like for the Planning Board to recommend to the Commissioners that it would be good for the County to Hillsborough about how to supply water and sewer but to wait on where to supply water and sewer. He also felt that the Commissioners should talk to Hillsborough about whether they would be willing to supply water and sewer to rural villages. Reid expressed support of the comments supplied by Burklin. Waddell expressed support for the Planning Staff recommendation. Eidenier noted that Burklin was concerned with an insufficient water supply and the L9 water supply source. Burklin was also concerned that that may not be the most desirable area for planned development and rural villages. Eidenier continued that it is the desire of the Rural Character Study Committee to meet with and receive public from the citizens in the surrounding area prior to making a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Waddell commented that the water supply for Hillsborough is already insufficient. Eidenier responded that the extension of water is probably based on the purchase of water from Durham. Waddell asked if water and sewer was extended into the transition area would the County or Hillsborough have jurisdiction. Collins responded that it would be a joint planning effort with an agreement similar to the one between Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County. Cantrell asked about the annexation process. Collins responded that a citizen could request annexation by petition and there could be involuntary .annexation. MOTION: Cantrell moved to recommend to the Board of Commissioners to withhold consideration of either of these two areas until they have the opportunity to fully explore the planning concepts, utilities and necessities, and wait for the Rural Character Study Committee recommendation. However, that they explore with Hillsborough how to supply water and sewer to these outlying areas and state that they would be in favor of Hillsborough's providing water and sewer to these areas. Seconded by Reid. Cantrell again stated her support and appreciation for the work of Clint Burklin and the Rural Character Study Committee. She expressed confidence in the in -depth research and recommendations which they had provided. VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Waddell -- felt that the Staff's recommendation was a sound and considered plan more consistent with the plan. Moses Carey, Jr. Alice M. Cordon Stephen H. Halkiotis Verla I. Insko Don Willhoit ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS P.O. Box 8181 HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 10 732 -8181 968 -4501 688 -7331 227 -2031 644 -3004 (Fax) TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners Mayor Horace Johnson and Hillsborough Town Commissioners FROM: Moses Carey, Jr. DATE: July 5, 1991 RE: Hillsborough /Orange County CPZ Meeting Follow -up This is simply to confirm the results of our meeting which focused on a CPZ proposal developed by a joint subcommittee of these boards. Overall, there was general agreement by both Boards with the concepts and key elements presented in the proposal. There also was general agreement',with the maps presented with two exceptions raised by the Town of Hillsborough. These included the Northeast corner of the intersection.of I -40 and Old Chapel Hill Hillsborough Road and the area east of Hillsborough bounded by US 70 Business, US 70 Bypass and Lawrence Road.. Hillsborough wished these to be included in its transition `area...:`While the orange County Board of County Commissioners -could not agree at the meeting to include these areas in the transition area, there was consensus to study the request and notify Hillsborough of the Board's decision prior to approval of the formal agreement. The joint boards agreed to instruct the County attorney to begin drafting language for an agreement consistent with the concepts and policies included in the proposal. They also agreed to refer the concept proposal to the planning boards and staffs of both jurisdictions to begin drafting of an ordinance, policies, and land use plan revisions necessary to implement the agreement. While the work of the planning staffs and boards will continue after the agreement is executed, I have asked the County Attorney to present a draft agreement for consideration by the boards by mid August. I suggest we try to revise as necessary for signing in mid September. I have also asked the Orange County C Page 2 July 5, 1991 Planning Board to make a recommendation to the Commissioners on whether to include the areas requested by Hillsborough into the transition area. This recommendation will come to us by early August for a decision by the board soon thereafter. Therefore, the timeline for formal agreement is as follows: ACTIVITY 1. Planning Boards /Staff drafting ordinance, policies and land use revisions to implement agreement 2. Planning Board recommendation on transition areas requested by Hillsborough 3. Attorney drafting of formal CPZ Agreement 4. Orange County Board of County Commissioners decision on addition of areas requested by Hillsborough in transition area 5. Planning Board review of Draft agreement completed with recommendations to Board of County Commissioners 6. Hillsborough /Orange County Boards review draft agreement 7. Hillsborough /Orange County Boards sign CPZ agreement cc: John Link Marvin Collins Geoff Gledhill Betty Eidenier DATE OF COMPLETION ongoing August 5, 1991 August 14, 1991 August 20, 1991 September 3, 1991 September 3, 1991 September 17, 1991 11 DRAFT 6 -17 -91 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 12 ` designations to promote business; 2. Develop performance standards and project size thresholds which measure the impact of land development; 3. Establish a cooperative planning process involving both boards; 4. Identify ways and means of streamlining the development approval process; and S. Establish procedures for conducting predevelopment conferences with prospective business clients. The draft resolution combines #3 and #5 and, if approved, would establish a cooperative planning process which: 1. Allows the boards to keep each other informed of pending or proposed development applications, policies, and /or regulations that might have impacts on comprehensive land use planning or economic development activities; and 2. Allows the boards the opportunity to offer comments and reactions to each other regarding such applications, policies, and /or regulations. The resolution has been approved by the Joint Planning Board /Economic Development Commission Work Group. The resolution was considered by the EDC at its June 13, 1991 meeting and since there has been no communication from Ted Abernathy it is assumed that it has been approved. Collins reviewed the cooperative planning process and a copy is an attachment to these minutes on pages The Planning Director recommends that the Planning Board approve the resolution and authorize the Chair to sign on behalf of the Board. (A copy of the resolution is an attachment to these minutes on page .) MOTION: Burklin moved approval as recommended by the Planning Director. Seconded by Hamilton. VOTE: Unanimous. 0 b. Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Agreement 13 %_ Presentation by Marvin Collins. During recent months, two representatives from each elected board met to discuss issues and objectives inherent in a cooperative planning and land use agreement. On June 4, 1991, the governing boards of Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough met to review a proposal drafted by the work group. A copy of that proposal and a map of the Transition Area and the Water /Sewer Service Area are attachments to these minutes on pages The two boards agreed to the proposal except for locations in the Transition Area. These included: 1. The area bounded generally by 1 -40, Old Chapel Hill - Hillsborough Road (Old NC 86), NC 86, and the current Transition Area boundary; and 2. The area bounded generally by US 70 Bypass, US 70 Business, and Lawrence Road. The Town of Hillsborough wanted those two areas included in the Transition Area. The justification given was that most of that area is presently within the water /sewer service area including the new elementary school and two mobile home parks owned by Roger Dale Stephenson. They have also been working with other developers which would make this a planned area development. He noted that there was less concern of the US 70 area. The two boards agreed to resolve these differences, and the Board of Commissioners directed the County Attorney to draw an agreement modeled along the lines of the Orange County - Chapel Hill - Carrboro Joint Planning Agreement. Upon approval of the agreement by the governing boards, the planning boards of the two jurisdictions will be asked to develop appropriate land use plans and development standards for the area. As part of this effort, the planning boards will be asked to explore ways of providing a "buffer" between Hillsborough and Durham. A similar concern was voiced during the presentation of the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan; e.g., the absence of a clear link between New Hope Creek and the Eno 14 V River State Park. Collins referred to the map noting that the Urban Transition Area outlined is the one adopted by the Orange County Planning Board. The "sticking point" was whether or not Hillsborough water and sewer service would be confined to that area or whether extensions would be allowed beyond the Transition Area boundary. The agreement that was reached was that there would be a transition area within which Hillsborough would be free to annex and be free to extend water and sewer services. Beyond that there would be a defined water /sewer service area and any extensions into that area would be, initially, only if those extensions helped to implement developments that were being carried out in accordance with rural character strategies. That is defined as Phase I. Phase 11 is a longer range strategy. Water and sewer extensions would be permitted in that service area if they carried out development plans which implemented a transit corridor concept. This would probably be found more often at the Old NC 86/1 -40 interchange. Collins continued that the Hillsborough governing board was in agreement that they would not annex beyond the Transition Area for the next twenty years. They also agreed that they would have authority for processing development applications within the Transition Area, but that both land use and zoning changes outside that area and the ETJ would be governed by the County and the town. It seems to be a very workable strategy. The result of the meeting was to have the County Attorney draw up an agreement which seems to be very similar to the agreement we have with Carrboro and Chapel Hill. Once that agreement is presented to the two governing boards and approved, the work of the two planning boards would begin to work on a land use plan for this area. Eidenier stated that she would like to have this project completed before the November elections. She also asked what the Planning Board could do to help move the process forward. Collins responded that the County Attorney is in the process of drafting the 15 r agreement. The agreement will set up the courtesy review process and provide a time schedule. Once the agreement is approved and signed, the Planning Boards begin work. C. Purchase of Development Rights Program (A copy of the abstract is an attachment to these minutes on pages .) A copy of both PDR reports has been provided to Board members and are also on file in the Planning Department. Collins reviewed and explained the LESA (Land Evaluation and Site Assessment) point system that was included in Report #1. This system is a means of evaluating where agricultural districts and PDR will be pursued. This system reviews the suitability of land for crop purposes or forest production and site assessment characteristics. The Agricultural Advisory Board spent a considerable amount of time developing the LESA System and there are some questions still to be resolved. Collins noted that the PDR program for Orange County would work similar to the one in Forsythe County which has been a successful program since 1987. The only limiting factor has been the amount of funds available for land acquisition. Forsythe County Commissioners have expended 1.5 million in acquisition of development rights. A development right is the difference between the market value of the property and the value of the property for agricultural use. Market value is determined by an appraiser through a study of comparable parcels. The market value generally reflects all the different uses permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. For Orange County that generally averages about $2800 per acre. In the northern part of the County it is about $1500 per acre, near Hillsborough and University Lake Watershed it is about $5000 per acre. Nearer Chapel Hill, the average is _about $10,000 per acre. According to the Use Value System in our tax office, agricultural use value per acre is $430. This would make the development right value approximately $2400 per acre. T-----. 1991 PB/EDC Work Group Schedule July 10 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1- 85Buckhorn) 24 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance /Approval Standards - I.8SBuckhorn) Aucrust 7 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting Final Report - I- 85Buckhont) (Site Analysis - I -40 /Chunon) 21 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1.40 /Chunon) September 2 Labor Dav Holiday 4 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance /Approval Standards - 1 -40 /Chunon) 12 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation - 1- 85Buckhorn) 16 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation - 1- 85/Buckhorn 17 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (Report/Decision - 1.85Buckhorn) 18 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting Final Report - 1-10 /Chunon) Site Analysis • I -85NS 70) October 2 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1 -85/US 70) 8 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation -1-40 /Chunon) 10 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation - 1.40 /Chunon) 15 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (Report/Decision -1.40 /Chunon) 16 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance/Approval Standards -1 -85NS 70) 30 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Final Report - I -851US 70) November 14 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation -1 -85NS 70) 18 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation - 1.85NS 70) 19 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (ReportMecision - 1.85AJS 70) 16 July S M T W T F S 12 3 4 5 February 7 8 S M T W T F S 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 23 24 S M March T W T F S 28 29 30 31 S 1 2 3 4.5 3 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 30 31 November S April T W T F S S M T W T F S 8 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 W T F S May S M T W T F S 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 June S M T W T F S 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 1991 PB/EDC Work Group Schedule July 10 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1- 85Buckhorn) 24 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance /Approval Standards - I.8SBuckhorn) Aucrust 7 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting Final Report - I- 85Buckhont) (Site Analysis - I -40 /Chunon) 21 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1.40 /Chunon) September 2 Labor Dav Holiday 4 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance /Approval Standards - 1 -40 /Chunon) 12 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation - 1- 85Buckhorn) 16 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation - 1- 85/Buckhorn 17 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (Report/Decision - 1.85Buckhorn) 18 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting Final Report - 1-10 /Chunon) Site Analysis • I -85NS 70) October 2 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Site Plan Review - 1 -85/US 70) 8 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation -1-40 /Chunon) 10 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation - 1.40 /Chunon) 15 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (Report/Decision -1.40 /Chunon) 16 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Performance/Approval Standards -1 -85NS 70) 30 5:30pm PB/EDC Work Group Meeting (Final Report - I -851US 70) November 14 5:00pm Economic Development Commission Meeting (Recommendation -1 -85NS 70) 18 7:30pm Planning Board Meeting (Recommendation - 1.85NS 70) 19 7:30pm Board of Commissioners Meeting (ReportMecision - 1.85AJS 70) 16 July S M T W T F S 12 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 2R 29 30 31 13 14 15 September S M T W T F S 1 2 ... -1-.- 4 5 5 M T W' T F S 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 26 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 September S M T W T F S 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 October S M T W T F S 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 November S M T W T F S 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 December S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ?.2 23 24 25 20 27 28 29 30 31 7/6/1991 r L: HILLSBOROUGH CPZ PROPOSAL M PROCESS STATEMENT: A joint work group of two persons from each elected board has reviewed and discussed the objectives and issues inherent in a cooperative planning and land use agreement for several months. The process has included periodically sharing drafts of maps and means for resolving issues with other elected board members and each planning board chair and the Rural Character Study Committee Chairman for feedback. Issues have been resolved so as to reasonably achieve the goals of the Town of Hillsborough while preserving the intent of the orange County Comprehensive Plan. Neither a complete list of Hillsborough goals or a summary of relevant comprehensive plan components will be provided herein. However, a list of issues resolved through mutual agreement of the work group members is included below. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK It is proposed to approach CPZ planning and agreement in two phases. Phase I Rural Character alternative and Phase II Transit Corridor Alternative will be discussed in that order. When agreement is reached, the elected boards will set a time frame for implementing Phase I. The staff and planning boards will develop the appropriate development standards and land use recommendations for elected board approval. Phase II would serve only as issues for discussion and agreement reached only as necessary to pursue town and /or county economic development, transportation planning, land use or other goals. PEASE I - RURAL CHARACTER ALTERNATIVE Strategies have been recommended by the Rural Character Study Committee which could serve to address Hillsborough's concerns and still preserve the intent of the County Comprehensive Plan. The basic strategy is to allow public water /sewer extension outside of transition areas into rural areas but only to serve those development which preserve rural character by providing large amounts of open space in exchange for density bonuses. Five development options have been recommended and have been summarized in attachment A. The rationale for extending a Rural Character District to the south and east of Hillsborough is found in the comprehensive plan. The plan suggests the establishment of a land use designation for the purpose of creating a "buffer" between developing urban areas. 18 a By creating a "Rural Character" district and a larger minimum lot size requirement, it sends a clear signal that increased density and non residential development will not be permitted except through approved rural character preservation strategies. For the Rural Character alternative to be effective, Hillsborough must agree not to annex property in the water /sewer service area beyond the transition area boundary. Hillsborough must also agree not to extend public water and sewer beyond the transition area boundary except in accord with the rural character strategies adopted by Orange County. PHASE II - TRANSIT CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVE In a recent report, the Research Triangle Regional Transit Land Use Stuff, strategies were outlined for the development of a fixed guideway transit system consisting of light rail people mover, dual -mode bus, and /or busway facilities. The strategies included therein have long -range implications for Orange County. Utilization of the land use transit strategies (which will not be summarized here) will address a number of issues which are currently being discussed by the County's Economic Development Commission and Planning Board. These can be the focus of subsequent County /Town planning agreements. CONSENSUS ISSUES The joint work group reached consensus on the following issues and the supporting map #'7 - exhibit B attached. 1. Hillsborough would not annex beyond the transition area limits within the next 20 years. 2. Growth within the transition area would be non - concentric, eg. dispersed growth based on ability to extend gravity sewer and the demand for service around major transportation corridors. 3. Public water and sewer extensions beyond transition area boundaries would be limited to large developments or a combination of smaller developments with the expense of such extensions borne by the developer(s). 4. Orange County would have full control, over zoning in the extended water /sewer service areas (Rural Character Alternative) with Hillsborough providing service only where feasible. 5. The Town would be primarily responsible for processing development applications in the transition area while the county would be primarily responsible for such outside the transition area. Details for joint or courtesy review must be developed. 6. The Land use and Comprehensive Plan in the CPZ area would be reviewed at least every five years. 7. All land use and zoning changes in the transition area must be approved by both the County and the Town. It 19 8. The proposed water and sewer service area would not extend into the Rural Buffer of the Orange County - Chapel Hill - Carrboro Joint Planning Area. 9. The proposed water and sewer service area would not extend so as to encompass the entire Davis Road Area. 10. The proposed water and sewer service area would be limited so as not to extend into a portion of the Upper Eno Protected Watershed (PW -II) district along Orange Grove and Dimmocks Mill Road. CONSENSUS ISSUES WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED BY DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND POLICY CHANGES 1. Protection of the Eno Division of Duke Forest. This can be accomplished by limiting extensions of water and sewer through the tract and developing performance standards applicable to proposed projects on adjoining property. This would insulate Duke Forest from adverse impacts and insure the preservation of wildlife /forest habitat. 2. Orange County's Comprehensive Plan and Water and sewer Policy will have to be changed to reflect the distinction between "urban growth area" and a "water /sewer service area ", a major policy change for the County. 3. Maintenance of Rural Character District between Hillsborough and Durham City to mitigate against potential impact of proposed water line and water sales agreement between Hillsborough and Durham City. This is compatible with the Phase I - Rural Character Alternative. ON 2. to 20 OPTION A EXHIBIT A RURAL CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS Option A allows for two -acre lot single - family . residential subdivisions, as permitted currently in the Rural Buffer. Natural resources would be protected through voluntary conservation and environmentally - sensitive design. AVERAGE LOT* SIZE: 1.84 ACRES REQUIRED -OPEN SPACE * *: 0% OPTION B Option B allows for five -acre lot single- family residential subdivisions, to be treated as Minor Subdivisions with an expedited review process, the option of private roads, and lower fees as incentives. Resources would be protected through voluntary conservation and environmentally - sensitive design. AVERAGE LOT* SIZE: 4.59 ACRES REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * *: 0% SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The maximum tract size for development with the Option B incentive package is 200 acres. Option B developments of greater than 200 acres in size would be permitted in accordance with the provisions of "major subdivisions". OPTION C Ootion C allows for a clustered 1 -acre lot single - family development where 40% of the tract is left in open space (either agricultural or natural). AVERAGE LOT* SIZE: 0.92 ACRES REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * *: 40% OF TRACT 4. OPTION D Option D allows for a planned residential development with a density of 0.72 (72 units per 100 acres) where IL two - thirds, or 67 %, of the tract is left in open space (either agricultural or natural)- a ir- NUMBER OF UNITS: 72 UNITS PER 100 ACRES (DENSITY) REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * *: 67% OF TRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Option D developments should utilize public water and sewer where possible. where public water and sewer extension is not cost - effective, the use of community alternative wastewater systems would be permitted. The use of such systems would be contingent on participation in a Monitoring and Maintenance program adopted by the County, and such systems should also be built to public specifications. 5. OPTION E (RURAL VILLAGE) Allows for the development of a "Rural Village", a planned residential community with a small -scale village -level commercial /service core. The overall residential density of this Rural Village would be 0.84 (84 units per 100 acres). In order to develop under this option, four - fifths, or 80 %, of the tract must be left in open space (either agricultural or natural). NUMBER OF UNITS: 84 UNITS PER 100 ACRES (DENSITY) REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * *: 80% OF TRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Option E is significantly different from other residential options, and should therefore, be permitted with the following conditions: A minimum tract size of 200 acres shall be required for development of a Rural Village. Public water and sewer extension is required. Rural Village developments shall be permitted only within a defined "Development Sector ", to be analyzed and defined in the future through cooperation with local governments and utility entities. Such a sector would factor in the location of arterial and collector roadways and feasible public utility extension to create a logical, cost - effective and easily- defined corridor where such developments would be encouraged. Rural Village developments should be located within one -mile of arterial or collector road- ways for traffic management. reasons. Such developments should not be located on inter- sections, and should be buffered from roadways. R-AI 22 " The Commercial /Institutional core of the Rural Village should be designed at the village level. This should include a road network designed to protect the visual resources of the rural character and discourage passer -by activity. * - Single - family residential lots only. ** - Roadways and easements, except pre - existing utility easements, cannot be placed in or subtracted from open space set- asides. HILLSBOROUGH CPZ - TR.ANSITION AREAS 23 Option Z 7: Rose Proposal (Revised) Exhibit R 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No VM F ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Standardized Fire District Contract DEPARTMENT Emergency Services ATTACHMENT(S) Draft Contract PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X INFORMATION CONTACT Nick Waters, 732 -8161 TELEPHONE NUMBER Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Mebane 227 -2031 Durham 688 -7331 PURPOSE: To consider approval of the form and content of a standardized contract for fire related services between Orange County and various volunteer fire departments. BACKGROUND: During the past 9 -12 months, staff have worked extensively with representatives of volunteer fire departments in Orange County to develop a standardized contract between the County and each fire department. This contract will strengthen the understanding between the County and the departments and will underscore the legal and support requirements each party has of the other. Some of the key points of this contract are: • provides for fire prevention and optional first responder services, in addition to fire protection • the County makes quarterly payments to the fire departments based on the appropriation approved by the Board of Commissioners during the budget process • the fire departments maintain minimum equipment, personnel, and insurance rating standards • the fire departments- conduct required training and submit certain required reports • the fire departments provide an annual accounting of how public funds have been spent • the County provides the format and process for departmental budget requests, which are approved by each department's Board of Directors • the fire departments provide current operating procedures, charters, bylaws, and articles of incorporation - these documents meet minimum standards for North Carolina non - profit organizations and provide for opportunities for citizen participation N The standardized contract will be used for the to of 12 fire districts in Orange County that are served by volunteer non - profit corporations. Agreements for the South Orange and Chapel Hill Fire Districts will be updated in the future with the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill, which provide service to the former and latter fire districts, respectively. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board of Commissioners: approve the general form and content of the proposed standardized fire service contract; and authorize the Chair to sign individual contracts with each volunteer fire department as they are completed. It M NORTH CAROLINA ORANGE COUNTY CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT THIS CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the day of , 1991, by and between the COUNTY of ORANGE, hereinafter referred to as County and the Department; , Inc., hereinafter referred to as Fire W I T N E S E T H: THAT WHEREAS, North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.5 provides that counties may provide for fire protection in a fire district by contracting with an incorporated nonprofit volunteer or community fire department; and WHEREAS, Fire District is a special tax district created pursuant to Chapter 69 of the North Carolina General Statutes; and WHEREAS, Fire Department is a nonprofit corporation organized for fire protection purposes; and WHEREAS, County has elected to provide fire protection and fire prevention services and optional first responder services authorized by North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.7 (hereinafter "services "), within the boundaries of the Fire District, by contracting with Fire Department to provide services; and WHEREAS, Fire Department has the ability to provide and is willing to be the contract provider of services within the boundary of Fire District; and P F WHEREAS, County levies and collects the taxes and is responsible for appropriating said funds for the use of the citizens in Fire District; and WHEREAS, County desires to establish a renewable contract to enable Fire Department to make long -range plans; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and premises herein contained, the parties hereto contract and agree as follows: 1. Each fiscal year, the County will cause to be levied a special tax not exceeding 15 cents ($0.15) per one hundred dollar valuation of all real and personal property subject to taxation in the Fare District unless otherwise limited by law and /or a vote of the people; and will collect said tax as a part of the ad valorem tax collections of the County. The amount levied annually shall be based on a tax rate approved by the Board of County Commissioners following review of the needs projected in the budget estimate submitted to the County by the Board of Directors of the Fire Department. 2. That a special revenue fund shall be maintained by the County for funds collected as a result of said special tax 4 in which fund appropriations will be based on the budget-estimates approved by the County Commissioners. 3. That all appropriations established by the County Commissioners will be remitted to the Fire Department in.quarterly I payments by the 15th day of the first month of each quarter for the first three quarters beginning in July and ending on March 31, and the final quarterly payment will be made based on the County Finance Director's estimate of overall tax collections through the fiscal year end not to exceed the appropriation amount. All late listing penalties and interest on delinquent taxes associated with collections will be retained by the County as cost of collections. 4. The Fire Department shall provide the necessary equipment, personnel, and other resources as determined by the North Carolina Department of Insurance, Fire and Rescue Service Division, and the Insurance Service Office for all property located within the Fire District, will strive to achieve and maintain at least a 9S insurance rating, and will furnish services free of charge to all persons and individuals within the District. 5. That all funds paid to the Fire Department by the County shall be used exclusively by the Fire Department to provide services within said District, and to pay other legitimate expenses. The Fire Department may provide a first responder program, if it is provided under the guidelines provided by Orange County Emergency Management and under the direction of the Emergency Medical Services Medical Director to provide basic emergency medical care to citizens within the fire district. S 4 6 6. The Fire Department shall operate in compliance with all applicable state and local laws and regulations including the Local Emergency Planning Committee Hazardous Materials Training requirements, National Fire Protection Association training and safety standards 1401 and 1500, and North Carolina Fire Incident Reporting System, for which reports shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal's Office on a monthly basis. The Fire Department further agrees to annually file with the Fire Marshal's office a current list of its Board of Directors and a roster of its members with addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers; an annual training report; and a list of fire apparatus including pump and tank size, and specialized fire suppression equipment, no later than July 31. 7. The County may inspect all books and accounts of the Fire Department at any time, upon reasonable notice. The Fire Department will present to the County within 90 days of the close of each County fiscal year (July 1 -June 30), an accounting of how public funds have been expended. 8. The Fire Department will comply with County budgeting procedures and other procedures provided for by State Law and_ agrees to submit annual budget estimates and a supporting letter of request for a proposed tax rate signed by the Board President upon approval by the Board of Directors of the Fire Department. It 5 7 The Emergency Management Office will provide the standard forms used by county departments for presentation to the Board of Commissioners, in accordance with established County budget timetables. The Fire Department will use standard line items for accounting devised or consented to by the County Finance Office. 9. The Fire Department will file with the County Fire Marshal a true copy of the Articles of Incorporation, existing Bylaws, Standard Operating Procedures, and any changes made thereto from time to time. Further, the Fire Department agrees to amend and adopt its charter and bylaws as necessary to meet all minimum legal requirements for a North Carolina nonprofit corporation with or without voting members which charter and bylaws, in addition thereto, have provisions enabling citizens of the community to participate in the affairs of the corporation at least at an annual meeting and vesting in the Board of Directors the authority to manage the affairs of the corporation. 10. This contract shall renew automatically each fiscal year on the 1st day of July, and shall continue in effect until terminated by either party hereto, upon three hundred sixty five days (365) written notice to the other party. Any contracts between the County and the Fire Department now in effect, with respect to the subject matter contained herein, are superseded upon the effective date of this contract. 6 11. This contract was written with the laws of the State of North Carolina in mind. It shall be construed consistent with and interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the County has caused this S instrument to be executed by the chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and attested by the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, and the Fire Department has caused this instrument to be signed in its name by its President, attested by its Secretary, and its corporate seal hereto affixed, all by order of its Board of Directors duly given. ATTEST: ATTEST: (Clerk) (Secretary) ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BY: (Chair) BY: (Fire Department) n ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA Meeting Date: AU1 SUBJECT: MINUTES DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER SEPARATE -COVER Action Agenda ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. 3UST 20, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING YES: - NO: X - -mm - INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY BLYTHE TELEPHONE NUMBER - Hillsborough - 732 -8181 Chapel Hill - 968 -5401 Durham - 688 -7331 Mebane - 227 -2031 --------------------------------------------------- PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes as submitted for consideration: August 5, 1991 - 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. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF ORANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITALS AND ORANGE COUN'T'Y, NORTH CAROLINA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into the 1st day of July 1991 and by and between the University of North Carolina Hospitals, hereinafter referred to as 'THE HOSPITAL" and Orange County, North Carolina, hereinafter referred to as '"THE COUNTY ", for its Office of Emergency Management Services. WTTNESSETH: WHEREAS, THE HOSPITAL desires ground transportation services consisting of: 1. A primary ambulance and driver available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year who can arrive at THE HOSPITAL within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care. 2. A second ambulance and driver available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year who can arrive at THE HOSPITAL within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care. 3. Carolina Air Care reserves the privilege to define transport needs and level of transport acuity. The transports include, but are not limited to, patient transports, organ transports, equipment returns, transport of HOSPITAL specialty teams, patient transport to and from THE HOSPITAL and its MRT facility, and transport of Carolina Air Care personnel. All transports are to be at the direction of Carolina Air Care administrative staff. WHEREAS, THE COUNTY desires to provide these services to THE HOSPITAL. WHEREAS, THE HOSPITAL desires to reimburse THE COUNTY for such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the following mutual promises, covenants and conditions, THE HOSPITAL and THE COUNTY agree as follows: COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES 1. To schedule drivers for both primary and secondary vehicles. To hire three full-time drivers and any part-time staff needed to accomodate the Hospital based on the mission requirements stated on page one. 2. Upon request from THE HOSPITAL, to provide a second driver to accom .Pany the primary driver on any transport which exceeds 100 miles one -way and is initiated between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. 3. To provide replacement ambulances in case the primary or secondary vehicles are out of service due to maintenance or repairs, subject to availability of County units at the time of request. 4. To perform daily check -out of each unit and all non - medical equipment aboard the ambulance at the beginning of each shift. Repair or replace any items that require same and ensure a sufficient supply of air and oxygen. 5. To properly maintain the vehicles in good working order and to maintain the equipment on board the ambulance in accordance with the North Carolina Emergency Medical Services Act of 1973, as amended, and implementing regulations. 6. To provide liability and property insurance on both primary and secondary vehicles and to provide proof of insurance to THE HOSPITAL upon request. 7. To ensure THE COUNTY's staff is attired in the uniform provided by Carolina Air Care for each Carolina Air Care transport or function. 8. The drivers will ensure that necessary communications regardin,& their status during Carolina Air Care missions are made on a regular basis with the Carolina Air Care Communications Center. 9. Upon request, the drivers will provide assistance to the medical crew to load /unload equipment and patients. 10. After each transport, restock equipment and make repairs as necessary to ensure the er operations of all equipment. Leave vehicles fully stocked and full of gas, 02, and air Zr fo the on -call driver(s) at night and on weekends. 11. Provide quarterly expense reports. (Salary, maintenance, fuel, and other associated operating costs.) HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITIES 1. To provide one primary and at least one secondary vehicle. a. The primary vehicle shall be a 1990 Type III Modular truck and shall be equipped with radio and medical equipment to meet all State requirements. In addition, the vehicle shall be equipped with oxygen and compressed gas cylinders of at least H size. The vehicles will be equipped with suction, 110 volt source, a fixture to hold the ventilator used in the helicopter, a fixture to hold the Life Pak V, and high - intensity directional lighting in the patient care area. The vehicles will be fitted with a device to secure the "pediatric stretcher." There will also be fittings to secure two neonatal transport isolettes of the variety currently used by THE HOSPITAL. The primary vehicle will be identified with a logo and paint scheme similar to the one on THE HOSPITAL helicopter. The primary vehicle is to be used. exclusively for Carolina Air Care purposes. b. The secondary vehicles shall be equip ed with radio and medical equipment to meet all State requirements. They also w be equipped with identical additional equipment as specified in Section 1 (a). The secondary ambulances will be identified with a logo and paint scheme similar to the one on THE HOSPITAL helicopter. The secondary ambulances may be utilized for Orange County EMS purposes as long as it can be made available within 30 minutes of a request from Carolina Air Care for transports. 2. Carolina Air Care Communications will be responsible for notifying Orange Central Communications of the need for the primary or secondary units and their drivers. For AM transports the Carolina air Care Communications will notify Orange Central Communications if the adult or pediatric team is needed, all other MRI transports will be coordinated from the MRI unit to the Orange Central Communications. 3. THE HOSPITAL retains full authority and responsibility for the care and treatment of its patients and will have administrative and professional supervision of any Orange County EMS employee while said employees are rendering services to THE HOSPITAL under this agreement. During a transport THE HOSPITAL, its employees and members of the Medical Staff will be in charge of the medical aspects of the transports, including the authority to prescribe to the driver the degree of urgency of the transport, and the authority to order the vehicle to stop and remain parked while medical procedures are being performed. The driver will operate within Orange County EMS policies concerning the safe movement of the vehicle. 4. THE HOSPITAL will reimburse THE COUNTY for the services provided at the rate of $10,500 per month. TERM OF AGREEMENT 1992. This Agreement shall run from the 1st day of July, 1991 to the 30th day of June, r TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement or its renewals may be terminated at any time without penalty by either party, provided that written notice of such termination is furnished to the other party at least ninety (90) days prior to termination. In the event of such termination, any payment due shall be prorated to the date of termination. The parties agree and understand that the Director of Orange County Emergency Services may temporarily suspend services under this Agreement in the event of a county -wide disaster. ACCESS OF RECORDS In compliance with 42 U.S.C. 1395x (V) (1) (1) and implementing regulations, Orange County agrees, until the expiration of four (4) years after the services are furnished under this Agreement, to allow the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Comptroller General access to this contract and to the books, documents and records of Orange County necessary to verify the nature and extent of the costs of this contract. If Orange County chooses to subcontract this service, such subcontract shall contain a clause to the effect that, until the expiration of four (4) years after the services are furnished under such subcontract, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Comptroller General shall have access to such subcontract and to the books, documents, and records of the subcontractor necessary to verify the nature and extent of the costs of such subcontract. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties and shall not be altered, amended, or modified, except by an agreement in writing executed by the duly authorized officials of both parties. GOVERNING LAW The laws of North Carolina shall govern the validity and interpretation of the provisions, terms and conditions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto signed this Agreement in their official capacities of the day and year listed below. FOR AND ON BEHALF OF: THE UNIVERSITY NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITALS ' DATE: 9/ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR AND ON BEHALF OF: ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA CHAIR OF THE ATTEST: DATE: COMMISSIONERS OrangeCounty Co mmission for Women Box 8181 • 110 North Churton Street • . Hillsborough, NC 27278 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, on August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified; and WHEREAS, that amendment reads as follows: "The right of citizens of the Unites States..to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. "; and. WHEREAS, the power of the vote is the gateway to continued improvements in the status of women; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Commission for Women advises the citizens and the Board of Commissioners of Orange County of the status of women in Orange County; and WHEREAS, that status remains. unequal, especially. economically and politically; and.. WHEREAS,.yet women make significant contributions economical- ly, politically and in myriad ways to Orange County, NOW, THEREFORE,-the Orange County Board of Commissioners does hereby proclaim Monday, August 26, 1991 as WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY in celebration of women's Contributions and their right to economic and political equality and do- hereby urge all citizens to work to guarantee full equality for all women. This the 20th day of.August,. 1991. ..4 04A Z04 Moses Carey, Jr. Chair, Orange County rd of Commissioners Hillsborough 732 -8181 • Chapel Hill 967 -9251 • Mebane 227 -2031 • Durham 688.7331 P R O C L A M A T I O N LITERACY WEEK IN ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, the ability to read is of fundamental importance to all people, and WHEREAS, this nation was founded by, and depends upon, a literate and informed citizenry, and WHEREAS, literacy is a gateway to the full participation in the affairs of this nation, and WHEREAS, adult new readers should be recognized for their efforts toward personal and civic growth, and WHEREAS, volunteers in adult literacy programs should be commended for their willingness to give the time that is necessary to help others improve their skills, and WHEREAS, September 8 is designated as International Literacy Day, NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby declare September 8th through the 14th as Celebrate Literacy Week in honor of those adults for whom the achievement of literacy, for themselves and others, has become a primary goal. This the 20th day of Au�ust, 1991. Attest: ever y A. ly he Clerk to t e Board earc' SEP 6b REl I State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Division of Forest Resources 512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 James G. Martin, Governor William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary SF -FC Counties Agreement Orange Co. Finance office Courthouse 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Sir: August 30, 1991 Stanford M. Adams Director Your County's copy of the agreement with the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources is enclosed. This is the basis for our cooperation for the 1991 -92 fiscal year. The original has been retained for our Department records, and the third copy has been sent to our District Office. I am confident that our excellent cooperative relations of the past will continue through the new fisgal year, which should see continued improvement in our State's forestry program. Your County's cooperative efforts are proof of the increasing interest in the forestry program. please contact your County Ranger, the local District Forester, or this office if there are any questions about the cooperative program, incerely, Y f ord M . Adams tor Enclosure. cc: District 11 PO- Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 -7687 Telephone 919 - 733 -2162 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer FC -42 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA (2 -90) - Department of Environment; Health, and Natural Resources $ 105,221.00 Total Cooperative Appropriation $ 63,133.00 60 $ State $ 42,088.00 40 % County AGREEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF FOREST LANDS IN ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA THIS AGREEMENT, made under the authority of "An act to authorize Counties to cooperate with State in Forest Protection, Reforestation and promotion of Forest Management," (Section 113 -59 of the General Statutes of North Carolina - 1943), and also under authority of another Section of the General Statutes, namely Section 113 -54, by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (hereinafter called the Department), party of the first part, and the Board of Commissioners of ORANGE in the State of North Carolina (hereinafter called the Board County second part, witnesseth: )� party of the That WHEREAS the said Board; recognizing the need for active forest protection, development, reforestation, management ORANGE and improvement in county, has accepted the offer of the De cooperation in accomplishing this object: Department for Now, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual convenants hereinafter set forth, the said parties contract aid agree to maintain a legally appointed and equipped Forest Ranger organization in said county at the joint cost of the State and County, insofar as the joint funds will permit, as follows: Part I. THE DEPARTMENT AGREES: 1. To select, employ and appoint, after consultation with the Board, a County Forester or County Forest Ranger for the purposes of controlling forest fires in said County; for detecting and extinguishing fires that break out; for investigating the origin of forest, woodland and field fires; for enforcing State forest fire laws; for taking such preventive measures, educational and otherwise, as shall seem necessary to prevent forest fires; for developing and improving the forests through reforestation, promotion and practice of Forest Management practices; and for protection from insects and diseases. 2. To furnish to each Forester or Forest Ranger so employed a badge of office, stationery and report forms, instructional posters for use in the County, leaflets for distributing to landowners and others; to purchase necessary equipment, communication systems, and other Forestry improvements deemed necessary insofar as the joint funds will permit. 3. To pay the Forester or Forest Ranger for all official services rendered, at a fair rate of pay. Rates of pay are to be established by the Department in accordance with existing State salary schedules. -2- 4. To direct, supervise, instruct, and inspect, through its agents, the work and conduct of the Forester or Forest hanger, to discipline and, when necessary, discharge such Forester or Forest Ranger. 5. To submit to the Board of COMMissioners monthly or at other mutually satisfactory intervals) an itemized statement of all (monies to he paid by the County and those paid by the Department for the proper conduct of the work within said County. 6. To make avail ab e tt allq from Sgtate Federal allotted to it, the sum ofundee' thou anc� o e' • and other funds in tree ndollars ($ 63,133.00 ) as its share of an annual budget of $ 10 0 in said County. for carrying on the work Part II. THE BOARD AGREES: 1. To pay the Department 40 % of the total cost of the Forester or Forest Ranger salaries and expenses and of other pro connection with the over -all Forestry pr Per expenditures made in consequent approval of the periodic statements l ubmit y submitted by the Den receipt and Department. 2- To appropriate annually the sum of ee'i eighth °usand dollars ($ 42 1088. 00 ), which sum shall be available for terms of this Agreement, and shall represent the County's share of the a the budget. annual Part III. IT IS EXPRESSLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD BY BOTH PARTIES. 1. That this Agreement becomes effective July 1 19 91 _ 2. That the annual appropriations as set forth above may be revised by mutual agreement between the Department and the Board, based on the amount of annual appropriation desirable for the proper conduct of the gores such revision to became effective at the beginning try work, Any unused balance of County funds remaining at the end of a Fiscal Year shall revert to said County unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties. 3- That the Hoard reimburse the Department as Item 1, by forwarding a county voucher drawn in favor of the De Part II, the amount of the County's share of Department for Department's periodic statement to the Board expenditures a such set forth in the the Board within thirty days following receipt of the Department's be made by Partment's billing. 4. The title to all improvements and equipment Purchased constructed in connection with this Agreement will rest with the and /or such materials or their equivalent will remain in IIt% the County as long as this Agreement is in effect, or as long as the the proper conduct of the work therein. y are needed by the Department for 5. That the Forester or Forest Ranger periodically or at the r the Board, shall present to the Board statements of the work be equest of the County, so that said Board may be fully informed at all times re within the Forestry finances and activities within the County. egardinq -3- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties do hereunto affix their names and seals upon the date herein below specified- For the Board of County Commissioners of Date :: - 9 Provisions for the payment of the monies to fall due under this Agreement have been made by appropriation duly made or by bonds or notes duly authorized, as required by the "County Fiscal Control Act." Date County Finance Officer For the North Carolina Department partment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Date August 30, 1991 hil A41 Signature Director, Div. of Forest Resources Title /��� g—XJ—lo/ I LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION FROM ORANGE COUNTY WHEREAS, The Orange County Board of Commissioners developed and approved a legislative package that was submitted to the Orange County delegation for consideration by the 1991 Session of the North Carolina General Assembly, and WHEREAS, The Orange County delegation to the General Assembly includes Senator Howard Lee, Senator Russell Walker, Representative Anne Barnes and Representative Joe Hackney, and WHEREAS, Members of this delegation demonstrated their support for the proposed legislation by sponsoring and promoting the Commissioners' legislative package for 1991, and WHEREAS, This delegation observed Orange County's best interests in maintaining the high quality of life in the County through its legislative actions during the 1991 Session. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners recognize and express their appreciation for the continued support given to Orange County by the Members of this Delegation to the General Assembly. ADOPTED this 20th day of August, 1991. I ses Carey, Chair Stephen Halkiotis, Vice - -Chair L� 2LJ�� Alice Gordon 0_1a� - - Verla Insko kL Donald Willhoit w H Q O -j o L a� �a 0 rn -r Q) LLB a m