HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-25-199101
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
AGENDA
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
NOVEMBER 25, 1991
7:30 P.M.
SUPERIOR COURTROOM
ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE (NEW)
106 EAST MARGARET LANE
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
► - ,
NOTE: BACKGROUND MATERIAL
IS AVAILABLE IN THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
OR THE CLERK'S OFFICE
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 966 -4501.
A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIRMAN
B. 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 any fellow citizens. At any time should any member
of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public
charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the
meeting until that 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.
C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. Extended Area Telephone Service
[The Planning Board is not required to be present but may
attend this portion of the hearing. The items that
follow will require a quorum of Planning Board members
to be present.]
2. Planned Development Applications
p3 a. PD -1 -91 Stonegate Mobile Home Park
3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
35 a. Large Day Care Homes
(1) Article 6.27.3 Application Procedure
b. Infrastructure Facilities
41 (1) Article 6.16.12 Telephone Exchanges,
Subscriber Loop Huts, Pressure
Regulator Stations, and Water /Sewer
Pump Stations
I
4. Subdivision Ordinance Text Amendments
49 a. Utility and Drainage Easements
(1) Section III -C -3 Minor Subdivision
Review /Approval Procedures
(2) Section IV -B -2 Land Suitability
(3) Section V -C -5 Utility /Drainage Data
for Preliminary Plats
(4) Section V -D -5 -c Utility /Drainage Data
for Final Plats
59 b. Standards for 10+ Acre Lots
(1) Section III -B Classification of
Subdivisions
(2) Section II Definition of Minor
Subdivision
(3) Section IV Required Minimum Design
Standards
71 C. Environmental Health Endorsement
(1) Section V -D -6 Certificates of
Endorsement /Final Plat
75 d. Mapping Requirements of G.S. 47 -30.
(1) Section V -D Final Plat
(2) Section II Definition of Subdivision
(3) Section V -D -6 Certificates of
Endorsement /Final Plat
D. ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: THE PLANNING BOARD WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION NO SOONER
THAN ITS MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1991. THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS WILL CONSIDER THE ITEMS FOR DECISION NO
SOONER THAN JANUARY 6, 1992.
r
r
APPROVED 1 -6 -92 MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AND
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING
NOVEMBER 25, 1991
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Joint Session
with the orange County Planning Board for the regular Quarterly
Public Hearing on November 25, 1991 at 7 :30 p.m. in Superior
Courtroom, new County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr., Commissioners
Verla Insko, Stephen Halkiotis and Alice Gordon.
BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Commissioner Don Willhoit.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty Eidiener, Chair, and James
Gray, William Waddell, Jr., D. Kent Scott, Paul Hoecke, Amanda
Cantrell, Joan Jobsis, Clint Burklin, and Larry Reid.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Delores Ramsey, Jean Hamilton, and
Virginia Boland.
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT- Geoffrey Gledhill
STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John Link, Assistant County Manager
Rod Visser, County Engineer Paul Thames, Planning-Director Marvin
Collins (arrived at 8:30), Planners Eddie Kirk and Mary Scearbo
(Arrived at 9:05), Public Works Director Wilbert McAdoo, Deputy
Clerk to the Board Kathy Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A.
Blythe and Economic Development Director Ted Abernathy.
A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIRMAN:
Chairman Carey welcomed everyone and made introductory
remarks.
B. PUBLIC CHARGE:
Chairman Carey read the public charge
NOTE: All documents referred to in these minutes are located
in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office.a
C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
1. Extended Area Telephone Service
John Link gave a brief summary of the history of Orange
County's efforts to obtain extended area telephone service. It is
proposed that the Utilities Commission be asked to reconsider their
decision and let the citizens vote on EAS.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR COMMENTS /QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS AND /OR CITIZENS.
Commissioner Insko asked for clarification concerning the
differences in proposed telephone charges. She was assured that
this issue would be clarified during this public hearing.
Ms. Arianna Hoffman, a student at New Hope Elementary School,
spoke in favor of EAS. She stated that she is required to call her
parents collect if she is ill at school or needs to talk to them.
Also she and her classmates are often not allowed to call each
other because they live in different calling areas. Being able to
call friends and talk for extended periods of time is important to
children her age. She asked that the Utilities Commission take her
comments into account.
Ms. Miriam Murdock stated that her phone is on the Mebane
exchange although her address is Chapel Hill. This phone system
divides the members of her church, volunteer groups and friends
into toll calls and non -toll calls. The League of Women Voters and
the Extension Home Makers Club, to which she belongs, also have
members in each calling area. She can not call her Congressman
without making a toll call. Lastly, she feels that the homebound
aged are the most severely affected by this phone system. They
simply cannot afford to call for business or pleasure.
Mr. Ava Ferrell indicated that government employees should
consider the amount of time they spend on the telephone and the
expense created by a divided telephone system.
Mr. C. E. Squires, a Mebane
indicated that he has no interest
calling area and is not willing
others to have this privilege.
resident, spoke against EAS. He
in calling anyone outside of his
to pay an increase in order for
Mr. Alois Callemyn spoke in favor of EAS. He indicated that
he owns a local business with customers in Hillsborough and Chapel
Hill. He indicated that this fragmented system is a great
hinderance to his business.
Hillsborough Mayor Horace Johnson spoke in favor of this
proposal. He stated that it is important to the citizens that the
phone system step out of the dark ages. It is important to be able
to call from the northern to the southern part of the county. A
phone call to a homebound person often means more to them than the
prescription that their doctor writes. These antiquated phone
systems divide the citizens of Orange County.
Mr. Ralph Warren, Chairman of the Orange County School Board,
spoke in favor of this proposal. The effect of having many phone
systems in Orange county is that students, teachers, and school
volunteers have difficulty in reaching each other. Many phone
calls are simply not made and the ones that are made are often cut
short because of the expense.
Ms. Rebecca Clark spoke in favor of this proposal. She
indicated that the elderly Orange County residents need this
extended area service and they would be willing to pay the small
increase. She asked that all phone calls be toll free.
Mr. John Hartwell spoke in support of this proposal. This is
something that the County needs in order to encourage a modern
center of employment in this county. He mentioned several
documented cases of how the telephone system influenced potential
businesses to locate in another area. An improved telephone system
will help to attract modern business to this county to replace some
of the jobs lost in the last decade. He also indicated that there
is a lot of difficulty for Mebane residents because directory
information does not list all local numbers. Mr. Hartwell pointed
out that as new technology is discovered the price decreases. It
should be the same with utilities. All calls should be toll free.
Ms. Helen Nowak stated that she supports this proposal. The
present situation is hindering the efforts of volunteers. Schools
are experiencing a greater need for volunteers. The need to pay for
local calls places an additional hardship on those who volunteer
with the schools. County, church and civic groups attract
volunteers countywide and toll calls limit the amount of
communication these individuals are able to afford. Many times a
volunteer is not kept informed because of the expense of long
distance calls.
Ms. Mary Fox spoke in support of this proposal. She indicated
that she has business and personal phones in her home and that the
expense is exorbitant. She also stated that this area with its
many universities and hospitals should not be burdened with such
an antiquated phone system.
Ms. Gloria Williams, Executive Director of the Joint Orange
Chatham Community Action Agency and Co -Chair of the Extended Area
Telephone Service Task Force, strongly supports this proposal.
Poverty is escalating in our nation and the Utilities Commission
needs to be aware of the hardship the toll charges are placing on
low income citizens. She stated that JOCCA has a mandate to serve
the impoverished and they desperately need to be connected to their
community through the telephone system.
Hillsborough Town Commissioner Bob Rose stated that this
proposal is not a toll free proposal. He indicated that the Town
of Hillsborough twice rejected supporting the expanded telephone
service proposal. However, he does not believe that they are
opposed to a unified telephone service for Orange County. The Town
Board rejected the proposal because of the cost and the manner in
which the proposal was presented. He stated that the cost of this
proposal to Chapel Hill /Carrboro would be approximately $43,920.
The 732 and 644 exchanges would incur expenses in the amount of
$277,115.00 for private citizens and $108,519 for business. Mebane
Home would incur approximately $107,081 in increased fees. The
citizens need to remember that they are going to pay for these
calls through higher monthly rates.
Dr. Greg Smith, a Mebane resident, spoke in support of EAS.
He mentioned that he, as well as hundreds of other people, are not
even listed with the Hillsborough telephone directory assistance,
nor are people routinely told to try the Mebane Home Phone Company
directory. He presented petitions signed by 2000 citizens
supporting this proposal. He asked that the citizens be given an
opportunity to vote on this proposal.
Mr. D. M. Brown spoke in favor of extended area service.
However, he believes that this plan is not inclusive enough to
benefit the northern Orange County area. This proposal needs to
include the Durham area. He mentioned that he spent two days with
the N.C. Utilities Commission in 1971 attempting to get extended
area service for this area.
Ms. Deborah Schledorn spoke in support of this proposal. She
stated that the limited calling area has a negative impact on her
family in all areas, including school, volunteer, work, home and
business. She believes that the western part of Orange County is
becoming a bedroom community for Chapel Hill and RTP. This
extended area service is critical for that development.
Mr. Henry Whitfield spoke in favor of extended area service.
He stated that he did not want to pay 50% tolls. He indicated that
he contacted AT &T, which is the grandparent company of Bell South,
and was informed that they have paid a dividend each year since
1881. AT &T and Bell South pay a larger dividend each year. It is
clear that the phone companies are making a profit and could afford
to go to an extended area calling plan.
Ms. Kathleen Oakley spoke against this proposal. She stated
that most of the people she contacted did not even know that this
was being proposed. Also, this proposal will include only that
part of Mebane which is in Orange County. She feels this is an
increase in the toll charge will not lead to an increase in the
service to most of the Mebane residents.
Dr. Greg Smith stated that all 2000 of the citizens who signed
his petition were, in fact, aware of the increase in tolls.
Mr. Vic Knight, Co -chair of the Extended Area Service Task
Force and President of the Chapel Hill Board of Realtors, stated
that the Board of Realtors, in a unanimous decision at their last
meeting, passed a resolution in support of the county's request
that this issue be put to a vote by Orange County residents. He
mentioned that Orange County has been pursuing extended area
calling for over 20 years. They are asking that this issue be put
to a vote by the citizens of Orange County.
Mr. A. W. Kenion spoke against this proposal. He does not
make long distance calls and does not want an increase in his bill.
Mr. Ken Miller, a resident and business owner in Mebane,
indicated that he is in favor of this proposal. He is a candidate
for the State House in 1992 in the 25th District. He wants to see
this issue put to a vote in Orange county.
Ms. Doris Ray spoke in favor of this proposal. She lives in
the White Cross area. Neighbors who live on different ends of the
same road are on different phone exchanges. She and her husband
are active volunteers in their local area. Communicating with
these groups to coordinate volunteer activities is a financial
burden on those who are assigned the task of calling others.
Mr. Lindsey Efland, business owner and member of the EDC,
spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated that he believes the
future of Orange County depends on area wide calling. Regional
ties and economic develop require that everyone be able to
communicate with each other. This needs to be put to a vote.
Ms. Rachel Edwards, a citizen of Orange County, spoke in favor
of this proposal. She mentioned that her family, church family and
friends all support this proposal. Many of her family members,
including her 89 year old father, live in Mebane and she must limit
her telephone calls because of the expense. She indicated that her
yearly phone bill is more than $2000.
Mr. John Seeley asked if the change in billing will affect the
cost to the county in terms of calls made? Mr. Link indicated that
the county would also incur savings. He indicated that he was in
support of this proposal.
Mr. Sim Efland suggested putting a franchise tax on each of
the telephone companies in Orange county.
Ms. Kay Drake spoke in favor of E.A.S. She indicated that as
an Orange County teacher it is very expensive to communicate with
parents of her students. She does make these phone calls but it
is a financial burden and she hopes that this proposal is put to
a vote so that she can exercise her right of choice.
Mr. Ted Abernathy, Economic Development Director, spoke in
favor of this proposal. He indicated that this antiquated phone
system is a monumental drawback to attracting new business to
Orange County.
Mr. Kevin Mitchell spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated
that something must be done about the fact that he can call across
the country for less money than he can call Durham County.
Ms. Barbara Palmer, Director of the Hillsborough Chamber of
Commerce, spoke in favor of this proposal. She indicated that
although this plan is not free, or perfect, it is a good plan.
Hopefully this proposal will be implemented and then the County can
look to enlarging the extended area further.
Mr. Jimmy Smith spoke in favor of this proposal. He is a
resident of Mebane Oaks Road and his phone bills are in excess of
$2000.00 a year. All of his calls to businesses, church and
friends are toll calls.
Ms. Daryl McGuire spoke in favor of this proposal and she
indicated that this is not a toll free system. However, it is a
much improved option. She asked for the privilege of being allowed
to vote on this proposal.
Ms. Pat Carstaton spoke in favor of this proposal. She asked
to be allowed to vote on this issue.
Mr. Norm Gustaveson spoke in favor of this proposal. He
mentioned that although he had heard several people speak against
the increase in the base rate he had not heard anyone oppose the
calling plan itself. Although there are citizens who are opposed
to the rate increase, there have not been any comments indicating
opposition to the plan itself.
Ms. Joan Jobsis spoke in favor of this plan. She indicated
that she is a resident of Efland and most of her neighbors also
support this plan. The phone system in the Efland community is
creating a hardship for the residents .
Mr. Wayne Rogers indicated that he could not support this
proposal unless changes were made in assigning cost increases.
Mr. Marvin Collins, a resident of Mebane, spoke in favor of
this proposal. He indicated that this phone system was a real
hardship when his son was in high school and dating girls who lived
in Orange County but had long distance phone numbers. He hoped
that he would be given an opportunity to vote on this issue.
Mr. Dick Helwig spoke in support of this proposal. He asked
that it be put to a vote. He indicated that the inequity in rates
is partly that Chapel Hill is already paying approximately $2.00
more per month than Hillsborough and Mebane. He also indicated
that Hillsborough and Mebane are receiving a much greater increase
in the number of lines to which they will be connected than Chapel
Hill is under the proposed plan.
Dr. Harold Murdock spoke in favor of this proposal. He asked
if the meeting with the Utilities Commission could be held in
Orange County. This would make it much easier for a large number
of people to attend.
Mr. Wayne Watts Director of Business Affairs with the Orange
County School System, spoke in support of this proposal. He
indicated that an additional teacher's salary could be paid for if
the money was not going to pay local, long distance charges.
Mr. Jim Ray spoke in favor of this proposal. He asked that
Durham, Alamance and Wake counties be included in this proposal.
Letters in support of this proposal were received from the
Chapel Hill Board of Realtors, Inc., Mebane Packaging Corporation,
Hillsborough Area Chamber of Commerce and the following citizens:
Denise Robinson, Carl and Eva Shy, Kevin and Jeanne Mitchell and
Gail Walker. These letters are located in the permanent agenda
file in the Clerk's office.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED
2. Planned Develo ent A lications
a. PD -1 -91 Stonegate Mobile Home Park
The following people were sworn in by Beverly Blythe,
Clerk to the Board: Mr. Billy Seasoms, Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, and
Mr. Eddie Kirk. This item was chaired by Chairman Carey and
presented by Eddie Kirk. In summary this is a proposed
modification to the existing Planned Development for Stonegate
Mobile Home Park. The applicant is requesting a modification of
the existing Planned Development (PD -H -R4) for Stonegate Mobile
Home Park. Stonegate was approved with 114 mobile home spaces on
October 4, 1982. Sewage treatment was to be provided by a package
treatment plant. The applicant is proposing to remove ten (10)
mobile home spaces and change the type of sewage treatment from a
package plant to a spray irrigation system, thereby adding 19.86
acres to the park. The applicant also proposes to limit the number
of bedrooms in the park to 208, relocate the well and recreation
sites, and to delete a proposed boat storage area, car wash, and
laundry facilities. The property is located on Mount Herman Church
Road (SR 1713) north of the Norfolk Southern Railroad and south of
Interstate 85. The property contains 56.36 acres and is
specifically described as part of Lot 35 of Tax Map 26 in Eno
Township. The current zoning designation of the property is PD-
H-R4 (Planned Development Housing - Medium Intensity Residential) .
The proposed zoning designation is the same. The state Division
of Environmental Management has reviewed, approved and issued a
permit for the proposed spray irrigation system. The County
Engineer has indicated his concern about easements and building
setbacks that should be recorded around the proposed spray
irrigation fields and lagoon. A condition of approval has been
added to address this concern. The spray irrigation system has
been approved by D.E.M. with a 25,000 gallon per day capacity.
Using the figure of 120 gpd (gallons per day) per bedroom, pursuant
to DEM standards and the Orange County Health Department, the park
would use a capacity of 24,960 gpd.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Planner
Eddie Kirk indicated that the number of bedrooms has not been
limited for previous applications. The maximum capacity of the
wastewater treatment system is determined (i.e. 25,000 gals) and
then divided by the 120 gallons per day required for each bedroom.
Mr. Larry Reid asked if the number of units can be increased
by increasing the capacity of the system at a later date. Mr. Kirk
indicated that they would have to increase the size of the spray
irrigation system to increase the capacity.
In response to a question from Commissioner Halkiotis, Mr.
Thames indicated that there are some continuing problems with
septic systems in mobile home parks. However, the state is getting
tougher with these situations which is alleviating the problem
somewhat.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENT
Mr. Billy Seasoms, representing the applicant, presented the
history of this project. He indicated that work stopped on this
project when Mr. Bains disappeared in 1985. He indicated that the
only change in this request is that they hope to use a spray
irrigation system which DEM has suggested. He also mentioned that
Mrs. Bain's children have operator licenses and they will be
qualified to operate this system.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, it was
explained that a pump station with a force main would be used. The
sewage from the trailer park will flow into a main location. It
is then pumped to the treatment plant which is located on the 19
acre tract.
A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by
Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer this item to the Planning Board
for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners
no sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
a. Large Day Care Homes
(1) Article 6.27.3 Application Procedure
This item was chaired by Planning Board Chair Betty
Eidenier and presented by Planner Eddie Kirk. In summary this
proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance will provide a process
for administrative approval of minor changes in approved large day
care homes. Under the current ordinance provisions any change in
the operation of a large day care home will constitute a
modification and require approval of the Board of Adjustment. The
proposed amendment would provide a process where minor changes in
approved large day care homes may be approved by the Zoning
Officer. The standards for evaluation of large day care homes are
specified in Section 6.27.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. In many cases
minor changes may continue to comply with these specific standards.
The proposed amendment would allow minor changes that comply with
requirements in the Zoning Ordinance to be approved by the Zoning
Officer. All changes that do not comply with large day care home
requirements will require approval of the Orange County Board of
Adjustment.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS.
A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by
Chairman Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a
recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no
sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Infrastructure Facilities
(1) Article 6.16.12 Telephone Exchanges, Subscriber
Loop Huts, Pressure Regulator Stations, and
Water/Sewer Pump Stations
This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and
presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance will modify development standards for certain utility
facilities. Article 4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance lists ten types of
uses which are permitted by right in all zoning districts. Several
of these are related to infrastructure facilities which are
essential to the distribution of services. Because they are part
of a larger infrastructure network, there may be limited choice for
their location. Specific standards are applied to some of these
facilities, including water and sewer pumping stations, electric
substations, and County greenbox sites. These standards relate to
design, screening, lot size, and other provisions which assure
compatibility with surrounding residential areas. The proposed
amendment modifies development standards which apply to water and
sewer pump stations, and telephone exchanges.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONS,
PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS.
A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Chairman
Carey to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation
to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than January
6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
4. Subdivision Ordinance Text Amendments
a. Utility and Drainage Easements
(1) Section III -C -3 Minor Subdivision
review /Approval Procedures
(2) Section IV -B -2 Land suitability
(3) Section V -C -5 Utility /Drainage Data
for Preliminary Plats
(4) Section V -D -5 -c Utility /Drainage Data
for final Plats
This item was chaired by Betty Eidenier and
Presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this amendment to the
Subdivision Regulations will incorporate specific provisions for
requiring drainage easements. All subdivisions are reviewed by the
Erosion Control Division to determine if the drainage
characteristics are such that each lot is suitable for development.
Drainage easements are routinely recommended along streams, swales,
or other channels if needed to assure that development of a lot
will be safe and protected from damage caused by stormwater run-
off. There are currently no provisions in the Subdivision
Regulations which refer specifically to drainage easements as a
means of rendering a lot suitable for development in the event that
reservation of drainage easements are recommended by the Erosion
Control Division. The proposed amendments add text which specifies
and clarifies this existing and historical practice used by the
Planning Department to meet site suitability requirements with
respect to drainage.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Insko, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a
recommendation to be returned to the Board of commissioners no
sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Standards for 10+ Acre Lots
(1) Section III -B Classification of Subdivisions
(2) Section II Definition of Minor Subdivision
(3) Section IV Required Minimum Design
Standards
This item was chaired by Betty Eidenier and
presented by Planner Mary Scearbo. In summary these amendments to
the Subdivision Regulations will provide design standards for
subdivision lots larger than 10 acres. GS 153A -335 provides in the
definition of subdivision. A list of land divisions which are not
considered subdivisions. The provisions of the Subdivision
Regulations do not apply to land divisions created under one or
more of these exemptions. One of the exemptions is "the division
of land into parcels greater than 10 acres if no street right -of-
way dedication is involved ". This provision has been interpreted
to mean that all of the lots on a plat exempted under these
provisions must be larger than ten acres. If even one of the lots
fall below the 10 acre minimum, then all lots, including those
larger than 10 acres, are subject to subdivision regulations. The
proposed amendment clarifies the standards which would be applied
to large lots which are included in a subdivision. The Ordinance
Review Committee discussed the proposed amendment on October 3,
1991. There was concern that some of the standards, particularly
those pertaining to road maintenance, may be a disincentive for
including the larger lots on a subdivision plat.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS
A motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by
Commissioner Halkiotis, to refer this item to the Planning Board
for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners
no sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
C. Environmental Health Endorsement
(1) Section V -D -6 Certificates of
Endorsement /Final Plat
This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and
presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary this proposed amendment to
the Subdivision Regulations will revise the current language of the
Environmental Health Certificate for subdivisions. The
Environmental Health Division of the Orange County Health
Department is required to endorse all subdivision Final Plats
certifying that the proposed lots are approved for surface sewage
disposal systems provided public utilities are not available. In
conjunction with the Environmental Health Division the Planning
Department determined that the current endorsement is too general.
The proposed amendment would provide more explicit information
regarding the issuance of septic system permits.
THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMEENTS FROM THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING BOARD OR CITIZENS.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chairman
Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a
recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no
sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Mapping Requirements of G.S. 47 -30
(1) Section V -D Final Plat
(2) Section II Definition of Subdivision
(3) Section V -D -6 Certificates of
Endorsement /Final Plat
This item was Chaired by Betty Eidenier and
presented by Mary Scearbo. In summary these proposed amendments
to the Subdivision Regulations will incorporate changes in Final
Plat mapping and recordation provisions, as required by a recently
ratified amendment to G.S. 47 -30. An amendment to G.S. 47 -30 was
ratified by the General Assembly on June 12, 1991. The changes
went into effect on October 1, 1991. The statute pertains largely
to the recording of plats in the Office of the Register of Deeds.
There are also some provisions within the subdivision Regulations
which relate to this legislation. The proposed amendment provides
consistency with G.S. 47 -30 as amended. The revisions address the
size of plats, the materials on which plats may be drawn, survey
information, certifications and attachments to deeds or other
instructions.
Mr. Jerry Davis spoke in support of this mapping requirement.
A letter he sent Mary Scearbo was entered into the record.
Mr. Alois Callemyn spoke in support of this amendment and
entered a letter from the North Carolina Society of Surveyors into
the record.
commissioner Gordon requested a complete cost and impact
analyses when this is returned to the Board. Ms. Scearbo agreed
to handle this.
A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by
Chairman Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a
recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no
sooner than January 6, 1992.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
•h% * i1�1
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Beverly A. Blythe
a .
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No cl
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25, 1991
SUBJECT: Extended Area Telephone Service
-------------------------------
DEPARTMENT County Manager PUBLIC HEARING YES X NO
ATTACHMENTS) INFORMATION CONTACT
None County Manager, ext 2300
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: 'To receive citizen comments on Extended Area Telephone - -
Service (EAS) and the September 27, 1991 order of the North Carolina
Public Utilities Commission denying EAS in most parts of Orange County.
BACKGROUND: On September 27, 1991, the North Carolina Utilities
Commission issued an order denying the Orange County EAS proposal that
would have provided flat rate EAS between Southern Bell (Chapel Hill -
Carrboro), CENTEL (Hillsborough), and Mebane Home Telephone (Orange
County portion of Mebane) exchanges. It rejected the proposal that
the Public Staff conduct a poll of CENTEL and Mebane Home customers
to determine their level of support for EAS. Polling of Southern Bell
customers had not been proposed, as rate increases associated with EAS
were negligible for the Chapel Hill- Carrboro exchanges.
The Utilities Commission cited three factors in its decision. First,
the EAS proposal "would have a significant financial impact upon Mebane
Home." Second, there would be "substantial disadvantages to splitting
the Mebane exchange." Third, and according to the Commission order,
"most important, Orange County EAS would severely compromise the
effectiveness of the experimental plan process," referring to the
already approved plan for 50% reduction in toll calling Triangle -wide.
Acting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners, the County Attorney has
gained approval from the Utilities Commission for Orange County to
intervene in the EAS case and has submitted a request to the Commission
to reconsider its September 27 order. He has also been directed by the
Board of Commissioners to preserve the County's right to appeal to the
North Carolina Court of Appeals by filing a notice of intent to appeal.
The Board of Commissioners wants to conduct the November 25 public
hearing to gauge the level of support for EAS among the citizens of
Orange County as the Board considers available options in the wake of
the Utilities Commission decision.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board conduct the
Public hearing to receive citizen comment.
D1
02
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
PLANNING BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25, 1991
03
Action Agenda
Item # C 2 (a)
SUBJECT: PD -1 -91 STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK (MODIFICATION)
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING —X —Yes No
ATTACHMENT(S):
Application for Modification
vicinity Map
Staff Memorandum
Agency Comments
Certificate of Mailing
INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk
Extension 2582
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham -688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed modification to
the existing Planned Development for Stonegate Mobile
Home Park.
BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a modification of the
existing Planned Development (PD -H -R4) for Stonegate
Mobile Home Park. Stonegate was approved with 114
mobile home spaces on October 4, 1982. Sewage treatment
was to be provided by a package treatment plant. The
applicant is proposing to remove ten (10) mobile home
spaces and change the type of sewage treatment from a
package plant to a spray irrigation system, thereby
adding 19.86 acres to the park. The applicant also
proposes to limit the number of bedrooms in the park to
208, relocate the well and recreation sites, and to
delete a proposed boat storage area, car wash, and
laundry facilities.
The property is located on Mount Herman Church Road (SR
1713) north of the Norfolk Southern Railroad and south
of Interstate 85. The property contains 56.36 acres and
is specifically described as part of Lot 35 of Tax Map
26 in Eno Township. The current zoning designation of
the property is PD -H -R4 (Planned Development Housing -
Medium Intensity Residential). The proposed zoning
designation is the same.
The State Division of Environmental Management has
reviewed, approved and issued a permit for the proposed
spray irrigation system. The County Engineer has
indicated his concern about easements and buildin
g
o 4.
setbacks that should be recorded around the proposed
spray irrigation fields and lagoon. A condition of
approval has been added to address this concern.
The spray irrigation system has been approved with a
25,000 gallon per day capacity. The applicant is
proposing to limit the number of bedrooms in the park to
208. Using the figure of 120 gpd (gallons per day)
pursuant to DEM standards and the Orange County Health
Department, the park would use a capacity of 24,960 gpd.
A condition of approval has been added to limit the
number of bedrooms in the park to 208.
RECOMMENDATION: Article 8.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the
Zoning Officer's recommendation be presented to the
Planning Board within 45 days of receipt of an
application. The 45 -day period may be extended up to 60
days with the written consent of the applicant. The
public hearing is the time scheduled for presentation of
the Zoning Officer recommendation.
Zoning_ Officer Recommendation
The Zoning Officer has not received information which
would establish grounds for making a negative finding on
the general standards. These standards include
maintaining or promoting the public health, safety, and
general welfare, maintaining or enhancing the value of
contiguous property, and the use being in compliance
with the general plan for the physical development of
the County.
The Zoning Officer has reviewed the application, the
site plan and all supporting documentation and has found
that the applicant does comply with the specific
standards and required regulations concerning the
modification.
Provided the Planning Board and County Commissioners
find in the affirmative on the general standards, the
Zoning Officer recommends approval of the request. The
Zoning Officer does, however, recommend the attachment
of conditions to the approval which are specified as
follows:
1. All existing required conditions of the original
special use permit are fully applicable.
2 . All easement documents to provide access,
construction, and maintenance of the proposed
spray irrigation system must be executed and
submitted. The applicant shall file with the
Orange County Planning Department a copy of all
executed easement documents prior to issuance of
any building permit in the park.
3. Easements around the proposed Sewage Treatment
Lagoon and spray Irrigation System shall be
05
platted to meet N.C. DEM setback requirements.
These easements shall act as setbacks and buffers
to ensure continued compliance with N.C. DEM
standards.
4. In order to ensure compliance with the 25,000 gpd
(gallons per day) capacity of N.C. DEM permit
number WQ0004370 issued to Ms. Dorothy C. Bane,
Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment
and Spray Irrigation System, Orange County, on May
31, 1991, the number of units permitted in the
park shall not exceed 104 with a total number of
bedrooms not to exceed 208. It is the intent of
this provision to limit the number of units in the
park to 104 or less to ensure that the total
number of bedrooms shall not exceed 208 in
combination whether contained in 1, 2, or 3
bedroom units.
5. A final boundary survey, including all easements,
of the amended Planned Development and
improvements shall be recorded by the developer.
No decision on the application is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead, the Planning Board has 60 days within
which to prepare and submit a recommendation to the
Board of Commissioners. Failure of the Planning Board
to submit a recommendation within the required time
shall be considered a favorable recommendation, without
conditions.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the application be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than
January 6, 1992 and no later than February 3, 1992.
06
o�
(PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT - INK ONLY) 8/88
MODIFICATION OF A
APPLICATION FOR/CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
DATE: 10 /_L7 / 91
APPLICATION NUMBER: PD- 1 - 91
Modification of a
I R %) request a/Class A Special Use Permit as provided for in Article g of the
Orange County Zoning Ordinance for modem tionfrhe 5_12prial11sp p2ermit_ planted —
October 14 1982 to Curtis and Dorothv C. Bane for the development of Stone
Home Park as revised and recorded in the name of Dorothy C. Banp. SpptQmber 18- 1989,
The following information is provided in support of this request:
A. PROPERTY INFORMATION:
1Test side Mt. Herman Church Road (SR 1713) one –half mile
Street Address or Location:south of U.S. Inter tote
Orange County Tax Maps 26 & 25 Block Lot( Township Fnn
Zoning District(s):
Lot /Parcel Size: 4fRkRg_wastgw
Number of Existing Buildings: Gross Floor Area: square feet
Number of Proposed Buildings: 104 Gross Floor Area: square fee_
Water Supply: Public (Specify )private wells Communitv Individual
Wastewater Disposal: Public (Specify)i ri ation Community Individual
School District:_ Orange Countv Fire District: Eno
General Land Uses in Area: commercial and rural re i ntial
Critical Areas: Stream /D rain ageway Flood Prone Area
Watershed (Specify) Historic Site
Other (Explain)
B. SITE PLAN INFORMATION:
Twenty -six (26) copies of a Site Plan, prepared by a registered North Carolina
surveyor or engineer, are provided as required by Article 8.8 and which contain the
following information:
North point, scale, and date.
Extent of area to be developed.
Locations and widths of all easements and rights -of -way within or adjacent to
the site.
Location of all existing and proposed structures on the site.
Location of all areas on the site subject to flood hazard or inundation as shown
on flood maps or soils maps.
Location of all water courses on the site, including direction of flow.
Existing topography at a contour interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea
level datum.
Existing and proposed fencing, screening, gates, parking, service, and storage
areas.
Access to site, including sight distances on all roads used for access.
(PLEASE COMPLETE REVERSE SIDE)
f•
C. OTHER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION:
Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development.
Two (2) full -size copies of the applicable Orange County Tax Map, one (1) copy
with the property in question clearly marked.
The names and addresses of the property owner(s) and /or applicant(s), and the
names and addresses are all persons owning property within five hundred
(500) feet of the property in question.
Application fee as set by the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
Traffic impact study as required by Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Additional information regarding the proposed Special Use as required by
Article 8 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Narrative (or letters from appropriate agencies) indicating:
1. Method and adequacy of provision of sewage disposal facilities, solid
waste disposal, and water service. Where public sewer is not
available, a letter from the Orange County Health Department
certifying the suitability of the existing and /or proposed
wastewater treatment system for the property.
2. Method and adequacy of police, fire, and rescue squad protection.
3. Method and adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic
conditions around the site.
I *Y,), the applicant(is), hereby certify that the foregoing application and supporting
documentation is complete and accurate. I understand that it shall be my (our)
responsibility to present evidence to the Board of Commissioners the form of testimony,
exhibits, documents, models, plans, and the like to support the request for approval of the
Class A Special Use Permit.
APPLICANT SI GNAT UREM DOROTHY . BANE
- - _ 10 / -2Z / 91
DATE
NOTE: If title to the above mentioned property is not in the name of the applicant(s),
please include a letter from the owner(s) signifying approval of the request.
##•## 4s# s## s# rrw## s## wsss#### s##### s## s+ p4M4t##### # # # # #ss # #s * # # # # # #s #+e #s # *s # # # ##
FEES: Amount S �ZSQ, Date Paid: A0 / 2Z /�L Receipt # .2 D3/
09
APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF SPECIAL
USE PERMIT FOR STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
In response to a letter from the Planning Department dated August
26, 1991 and pursuant to Section 8.7.3 of the Orange County Zoning
Ordinance, Dorothy C. Bane seeks a modification of her Special Use
Permit (Permit, herein) for the development of Stonegate Mobile Home
Park (Park, herein). This modification is necessitated by a change in
the wastewater disposal system for the Park.
The original Permit was issued in October of 1982 and called for
wastewater to be disposed of via a private wastewater treatment plant
(plant, herein) into Rhodes Creek (Creek, herein). At that time Mrs.
Bane held NPDES Permit No. NC0049808, Stonegate Mobile Home Park,
Orange County which had been granted by the State of North Carolina,
Department of Environmental Management (DEM, herein) effective March
1, 1980 (NPDES permit, herein). The NPDES permit was subject to
renewal each five years upon application six months in advance of its
February 28th expiration date. It had been timely renewed effective
March 1, 1985. The application for renewal to be effective March 1,
1990 was timely filed with and received by DEM on August 30, 1989. On
December 15, 1989 Mrs. Bane was informed by DEM that Rhodes Creek had
been reclassified and DE4 gave notice of intention to deny the
application for renewal of the NPDES permit. DEM suggested several
alternatives to wastewater disposal into the creek, including spray
irrigation and low pressure injection.
After investigating several options, Mrs. Bane decided, upon the
advice of S. V. Credle, Professional Engineer, Credle Engineering
Company, Inc., Durham, North Carolina (Credle, herein), to install a
io
spray irrigation system in order to dispose of wastewater. The spray
irrigation system is identical to the originally proposed plant in
that it uses two 12,500 gallon package units to treat the wastewater.
The only difference is that rather than discharging the treated
wastewater into the creek, it is sprayed on a field. Credle began
work on the renewal application for the NPDES permit and the
application for the spray irrigation system (system, herein) in
conjunction with the DEM and the Orange County Health Department
(Health Department, herein) to develop the design for the system.
This process included several designs and redesigns of the system as
well as a consideration of alternative locations for the field.
Credle began the process in August, 1989, and after extensive
consultation with DEM and the Health Department, approval was granted
for the system and the site. DEM issued Permit No. WQ0004370 to Mrs.
Dorothy C. Bane, Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and
Spray Irrigation System, Orange County on May 31, 1991 (system permit,
herein). A copy is attached. The system as approved will be located
on a 19.86 acre tract of land owned by Mrs. Bane which is part of the
same contiguous tract on which Stonegate Mobile Home Park is being
constructed.
The system has a maximum capacity of 25,000 GPD (gallons of
wastewater per day), a decrease from the 32,400 GPD allowed under the
previous NPDES permits. As a result, the number of units in the park
has been decreased from 114 as shown in the original site plan to the
104 units shown on the revised Site Plan dated 9/16/91 by Credle as
attached. The maximum capacity is calculated at a rate of 120 GPD per
it
bedroom by Credle, pursuant to DEM standards as set out in the North
Carolina Administrative Code, copy of the relevant part attached.
Therefore the Special Use Permit for Stonegate Mobile Home Park will
be amended to include a clause that under no circumstances will the
number of bedrooms exceed 208 requiring a maximum capacity of 24,960
GPD (120 x 208) which is within the system's capacity, thereby
guaranteeing compliance with the system permit.
The revised Site Plan also shows: the location of two wells
which have been drilled and tested and yield 65 gpm (gallons per
minute) and 85 gpm, thus insuring an adequate water supply; the
location of the pipes associated with the fresh water distribution
system; the location of the pipes associated with the wastewater
disposal and spray irrigation system; and all other requirements
incident to the Special Use Permit. Necessary easements from the
railroad are in the process of being obtained. Also attached is form
of easement to allow the sewer line to run across the property of
Mount Hermon Baptist Church. Executed copies of these to follow.
Since the number of units has been reduced, the burden on fire,
police and rescue services will be reduced and the impact of the park
minimized. The same is true as to adequacy of vehicular access to the
site and traffic conditions around the site. overall, the Stonegate
Mobile Home Park pursuant to the revised Site Plan will have a lesser
impact than as originally proposed and this is particularly true with
regards to the wastewater treatment and disposal system. Rather than
discharging into the public waters of this state, the spray irrigation
system will utilize the property of the owner, Mrs. Bane, and will
3
y 12
have such a limited impact that the site of the field will be suitable
for building from the moment the irrigation system is removed.
Except as noted above, the Stonegate Mobile Home Park as
described in the 1982 application for Special Use Permit has not been
changed and therefore a copy of the original narrative portion of the
1982 application is attached. In addition a memorandum presented on
July 11, 1988 to the Orange County Board of Adjustments detailing work
accomplished on Stonegate Mobile Home Park is also attached. A
memorandum updating detail of the work accomplished from 1987 to
current date will follow.
4
19
FIRST ADDENDUM TO NARRATIVE SUBMITTED WITH
OCTOBER 7,1991 APPLICATION FOR
MODIFICATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR STONEGATE
MOBILE HOME PARK
This First Addendum is being submitted on October 18, 1991 to
amend and add to the Narrative submitted with the Application for
Modification of Special Use Permit for Stonegate Mobile Home Park
dated October 7, 1991 in response to Orange County Planning
Department letter of October 10, 1991 to Dorothy Bane and October
11, 1991 conference with the Orange County Planning Department.
The clause to amend the Special Use Permit discussed on page
3 of the Narrative will read as follows:
1124. In order to insure compliance with the 25,000 GPD
capacity of N.C. DEM permit number WQ0004370 issued to Ms. Dorothy
C. Bane, Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray
Irrigation System, Orange County on May 31, 1991, the number of
units permitted in the park shall not exceed 104 with a total
number of bedrooms not to exceed 208. It is the intent of this
provision to limit the number of units in the park to 104 or less
to insure that the total number of bedrooms shall not exceed 208 in
combination whether contained in 1,2, or 3 bedroom units."
As discussed on page 3 of the Narrative, the well sites as
shown on the 1982 site plan had to be changed to conform to the
location where water was found when the wells were drilled. The
following items are attached to indicate that these wells have been
drilled and approved:
1. Three Orange County Health Department well permits issued
and dated in March, April, and May 1989 showing sites as approved.
2. Three Well Certifications by W. W. Maness & Sons dated
June 5, 1989. One Well Certification is for a well not shown on
the Site Plan as it yielded only 2 gallons per minute and will not
14
be attached to the water system.
3. North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Division of
Environmental Health - Public Water Supply Section Approval dated
January 22, 1990 of well sites as shown on the Site Plan.
4. N.C. DEH Bacteriological Analysis and Inorganic Chemical
Analysis for the 3 wells dated March 22, 1991.
5. Twenty -four (24) hour capacity pumping tests by Alamance
Pump Sales- Service, Inc. dated March 22, 1991 as submitted to North
Carolina Environmental Management Commission for the three wells.
The easement documents referred to on page 3 of the Narrative
are in process as follows:
6. Norfolk Southern Corporation. Credle has corresponded
with and made application for as evidenced by attached letter of
Norfolk Southern Corporation dated January 17, 1991 and Credle's
response dated October 15, 1991. It is indicated in the Norfolk
Southern letter that approval will be given upon receipt of the
necessary information.
7. NCDOT. Credle has discussed with DOT and completed Right
of Way Encroachment Agreement as shown on attached Agreement and
drawing. Upon DOT approval fully executed Agreement will be
provided.
8. Mt. Hermon Baptist Church. Resolution and Easement deeds
submitted to and approved by the Congregation in October 13, 1991
business meeting. Resolution has been executed, copy attached.
Deed will be signed by the Trustees within the next several days
and will be provided.
The September 16, 1991 Site Plan has eliminated the boat
I
storage area, carwash pads, and laundry facility as shown on the
1982 site plan. These uses were eliminated as boat storage is not
needed, a separate carwash area is not needed, and the laundry
facilities are not needed since mobile homes have washer -dryer
connections. This area is now designated as a recreation area and
will be grassed. The well areas in circles 1 and 3 and the entire
Duke Power easement have been designated as grassed recreation
areas to provide centrally located recreation areas.
A current list of Landowners Adjoining Stonegate Mobile Home
Park is attached as taken from the Orange County Tax Records.
The Memorandum updating detail of the work referred to on page
4 of the Narrative was submitted with the October 7, 1991
application.
1 V
1
,rte
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27626 -0535
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Ms. Dorothy C. Bane
Stonegate Mobile Home Park
3519 Old Hwy No. 10
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
Dear Ms. Bane:
George T. Everett, Ph.D,
Director
May 31, 1991
Subject: Permit No. WQ0004370
Ms. Dorothy C. Bane
Stonegate Mobile Home Park
Wastewater Treatment and
Sprav Irrigarion System
Orange County
In accordance with your application received November 6, 1990, we are forwardin4
herewith Permit No. WQ0004370, dated May 31, 1991, to Ms. Dorothy C. Bane for the subject
wastewater treatment facilities and spray irrigation system.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 1996, and shall be
subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Please pay particular attention to the
monitoring requirements in this permit. Failure to establish an adequate system for collecting and
maintaining the required operational information will result in future compliance problems.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable to you,
you have the right to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within 30 days
following receipt of this permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming
to Chapter 150B of North Carolina General Statutes, and filed wish .the. Offica.of Admanistraave
Hearings; ;47,"R- d16gil, IvC "37611 =7447. 'Unless such demands are made this
permit shall be final and binding.
One set of approved plans and specifications is being forwarded to you. If you need
additional information concerning this matter, please contact Mr. John Sevmour at 919/ 733 -50S3.
' Sincerely,
/ George T. Everett '
cc: Orange County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office
Groundwater Section
Training and Certification Unit
Credle Engineering Company, Inc.
Facilities Assessment Unit
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.D. Box 29535, Raleigh. North Carolina 27626 -0535 Telephone 919-733-7015
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative action Employcr
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGETMENT COMMISSION 1 '"
�f
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH
SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North
Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Ms. Dorothy C. Bane
Orange County
construction and operation of a 25,000 GPD wastewater collection, treatment and spray irrigation
disposal system consisting of approximately 2,631 linear feet of 8 inch sewer lines: an 8 gpm
grinder pump station with dual pumps and high water alarms; approximately 658 linear feet of 2
inch force main; a 50 gpm grinder pump station with dual pumps, and highwater alarms:
approximately 1,725 linear feet of 3 inch force main; a 7,500 gallon flow equalization tank with
dual 25 cfm blowers; a flow splirter box; a flow measurement weir; two 12,500 GPD package
treatment plants in parallel each consisting of a 12,500 gallon aeration basin, a 2083 Mallon
clarifier, 60 cfm blowers, dual air lift sludge return pumps; a junction box: a chlorinator with an
800 gallon chlorine contact tank; a 1.5 million gallon holding lagoon with an synthetic liner; a
flowmeter; an emergency generator; dual submersible 7.5 HP spray irrigation pumps; a 10.78 acre
spray field with 187 sprinklers (each having a drain valve) and remote control valves: a spray field
soil moisture sensor system; and associated valves, piping, control systems, pumps, and
appurtenances to serve Stonegate Mobile Home Park with no discharge or' wastes to the surface
waters, pursuant to the application received November 6, 1990 and in conformity with the project
plan, specifications, and other supporting data subsequently filed and approved by the Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources and considered a part of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 1996, and shall be
subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must'be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted
facility has been installed in accordance with this permit, the approved plans and
specifications. Mail the Certification to the Permits and Engineering Unit. P.O. Box
29535, Raleigh, NC 27626 -0535.
2. The Raleigh Regional Office, phone no. 919/ 733 -2314, shall be notified at least
forty -eight (48) hours in advance of operation of the installed facilities so that an
in -place inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be
made during the normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. on Monda.,• through
Friday, excluding State Holidays.
3. The spray irri Lscharze -)n facilities shall be effectively mai= (" d and operated at all times so
that there is n to the surface waters, nor any cuntamination of ground waters
1 which will render them unsatisfactory for normal use. In the event that the facilities fail
to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance conditions or failure of the
irrigation area to adequately absorb the wastewater, the Permittee shall take such
immediate corrective action to correct the problem. including actions as may be required
by the Division of Environmental Management.
4. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the .Permittee of the responsibility for
damages to surface or groundwaters resulting from the operation of this facility.
5. The sludge generated from these treatment facilities must be disposed of in accordance
with General Statute 143 -215.1 and in a manner approved by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management.
6. Diversion or bypassing of the untreated wastewater from the treatment facilities is
prohibited.
7. The following buffers shall be maintained:
a) 400 feet between wetted area and any residence under separate ownership,
b) 150 feet between wetted area and property lines,
c) 100 feet between wetted area and wells,
d) 100 -feer between wetted area and' drainageways•orsurface water bodies,
e) 50 feet between wetted area and public right of ways,
f) 100 feet between wastewater treatment units and wells,
g) 50 feet between wastewater treatment units and property lines.
II. nP RATT N AND MAINTENAN E R TRE`T NTS
1. The facilities shall be properly maintained and operated at all times.
2. Upon classificadon of the facility by the Certification Commission, the Permittee shall
employ a certified wastewater treatment plant operator to be in responsible charge of the
wastewater treatment facilities. The operator must hold a certificate of the type and grade
at least equivalent to the classification assigned to the wastewater treatment facilities by
the Certification Commission. Once the facility is classified, the Permittee must submit a
letter to the Certification Commission which designates the operator in responsible
charge within thirty days after the wastewater treatment facilities are 50% complete.
3. A suitable vegetative cover shall be maintained.
4. Irrigation shall not be performed during inclement weather or when the ground is in a
condition that will cause runoff.
5. Adequate measures shall'be taken to prevent wastewater runoff from the spray field.
6. The facilities shall be effectively maintained and operated as a non - discharge system to
prevent the discharge of any wastewater resulting from the operation of this facility.
7. The application rate shall not exceed: a) 0.25 inches per hour per acre and b) 0.6 inches
per week per acre.
S. No type of wastewater other than that from the Sconegate Mobile Home Park shall be
sprayed onto the irrigation area.
2
9. - No traffic or equiF.ent shall be allowed on the disposal . except while installation
occurs or while normal maintenance is being performed.
10. Public access to the land application sites shall be controlled during active site use. Such
controls may include the posting of signs showing the activities being conducted at each
site.
III. MONITORINCz AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Any monitoring (including groundwater, surface water, soil or plant tissue
analyses) deemed necessary by the Division of Environmental Management to
insure surface and ground water protection will be established and an acceptable
sampling reporting schedule shall be followed.
2. Adequate records shall be maintained by the Permittee tracking the amount of wastewater
disposed. These records shall include, but are not necessarily limited to the following
informadon:
a) date of irrigation,
b) volume of wastewater irrigated,
c) field irrigated,
d) length of time Meld is irrigated,
e) continuous weekly, monthly,
for each field,
f) weather conditions, and
g) maintenance of cover crops.
and year -to -date hydraulic (inches /acre) loadings
3. The effluent from the subject facilities shall be monitored by the Permittee at the point
prior to irrigation every March, July and November for the following parameters:
Paramerer
BODS
TSS
Fecal Coliform
pH
as N
4. Three copies of all operarion and disposal records (as specified in condition III 2) and
all effluent monitoring data (as specified. in condition III 3) and any other data as may be
required shall be submitted on or before the last day of the following month to the
following address:
NC Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
Facility Assessment Unit
PO Box 295' )5
Raleigh, NC 27626 -0535
5. Noncompliance Notification:
The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Raleigh Regional Office,
telephone no. 919/ 733 -2314, as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or
on the next working day following the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence
of any of the following:
3
r
��
U a. Any occurrC ; at the wastewater treatment facility Vc . h results in the treatment of
significant amounts of wastes which are abnormal in quantity or characteristic, such
as the dumping of the contents of a sludge digester, the known passage of a slug of
hazardous substance through the facility; or any other unusual circumstances.
b. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that render the facility
incapable of adequate wastewater treatment such as mechanical or electrical failures
of pumps, aerators, compressors, etc.
c. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, or treatment facility resulting in a
by -pass directly to receiving waters without treatment of ail or any portion of the
influent to such station or facility.
d. Any time that self - monitoring information indicates that the facility has done out of
compliance with its permit limitations.
Persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall also file a written report in letter
form within 15 days following first knowledge of the occurrence. This report must
outline the actions taken or proposed to be taken to ensure that the problem does not
recur.
IV. QE_QJJNDWATER REQUTREMENTS
No land application of waste activities shall be under taken when the seasonal high
water table is less than three (3) feet below land surface.
2. Any groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the
Division, shall be provided.
V. IN5PECTTQM
1. Adequate inspection, maintenance, and cleaning shall be provided by the Permittee to
insure proper operation of the subject facilities.
2. The Permittee or his designee shall inspect the wastewater treatment and disposal
facilities to.p�ceventmalfunctiansnnd. dereri.omdon..op=or.,erro�rs and discharges. -which
may cause or lead to the release of wastes to the environment, a threat to human health,
or a nuisance. The Permittee shall keep an inspection log or summary inclading at least
the date and rime of inspection, observations made, and any maintenance, repairs, or
corrective actions taken by the Permittee. This log of inspections shall be maintained by
the Permittee for a period of three years from the date of the inspection and shall be made
available upon request to the Division of Environmental Management or other pertnitring
authority.
.. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or representative of the Division of
Environmental Management may, upon presentation of credentials, enter and inspect
any property, premises or place on or related to the disposal site and facility at any
reasonable time for the purpose of determining compliance with this permit: may inspect
or copy any records that must be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; or
may obtain samples of groundwater, surface water, or leachate.
M
VI. GENERAI CONDOS
21
1. This permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with
the conditions of this permit, the approved plans, specifications, and other supporting
data
2. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes described in
the application and other supporting data.
3. This permit is not transferable. In the event there is a desire for the facilities to change
ownership, or there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit request must be
submitted to the Division of Environmental Management accompanied by an application
fee, documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting materials as may be
appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or
may not be approved.
4. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the
Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division of Environmental Management in
accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143 - 215.6.
5. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any
and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by other
government agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
6. Prior to any transfer of this land, a notice shall be given to the new owner that gives full
details of the materials applied at this site.
7. A set of approved plans and specifications for the subject project must be retained by the
Permittee for the life of the project.
The annual administering' and compliance fee must be paid by the Permittee within thirn,
days after being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee accordingly may cause the
Division to initiate action to revoke this permit as specified by 15 NCAC 2H .020
(c)(4)•
9. The Permittee, at least six (6) months prior to the expiration of this permit, shall request
its extension. upon receipt of the request, the Commission will review the adequacy of
the facilities described therein, and if warranted, will_extendlhe permit.for.such pzriod
--of time and under such conditions and limitations as it may deem appropriate.
Permit issued this the 31st day of May, 1991
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIROIN_LNTAL MANAGEMEXT COM1•IISSION
fr
y 1
j George T. Everett; Diiector\
Division of Environmental l�anaaement
1 By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
5
r2 2
?3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eddie Kirk, Planner II
FROM: Paul Thames. County Engineer
DATE: November 8, 1991
SUBJECT: - Stonegate Mobile Home Park
As per your request, I have reviewed the site plans for the
above referenced project, particularly with regard to the
layout of the waste treatment system.
There are several aspects about this project that trouble me.
While I have not seen or reviewed any design or engineering
information on the spray irrigation treatment system for this
project, I have faith in DEM's permitting design review
procedure, in the treatment quality provided by spray
irrigation systems in general and in the treatment quality
provided by spray systems with pretreatment by package waste
treatment systems in particular. However, DEM has permitted
this particular system with relaxed buffer and setback
requirements. This is apparently because the applicant owns
all of the properties. except the railroad right -of -way,
surrounding the property parcel on which the spray system is
located. Generally, the wetted areas of spray irrigation
fields are required to be buffered 150 feet to property
lines, one hundred feet to right -of -ways. four hundred feet
to occupied dwellings not served by the sewer system in
question, 200 feet to occupied dwellings served by the
treatment system in question and 100 feet to water supply
wells. In addition, waste treatment units such as lagoons
are required to be at least fifty feet from property lines.
In the case of Stonegate's spray fields. the wetted areas
appear to come to within twenty -five feet of property lines
and the lagoon appears to come within ten feet of property
lines. I would recommend that the Planning Department make
some sort of requirement of the owner that waste treatment
easements and building setbacks be platted. deeded and
recorded for all property parcels surrounding the parcel
containing the proposed spray irrigation fields and the
lagoon. If surrounding properties are sold while the spray
system remains in operation and setbacks are not recorded,
the new owners could inadvertently build or plan unsuitable
activities within areas which should be reserved for waste
treatment setbacks.
24
Another concern that I have regarding the proposed treatment
system is the fact that the treatment system may operating
at the permitted maximum capacity before all mobile home lots
are occupied. This would certainly be the situation if some
lots are occupied by units with more than three bedrooms. In
terms of number of units and the corresponding waste loading,
the occupation of spaces by units of more than three bedrooms
is something that could vary significantly with time. The
issuance of CO's by Planning staff could require a bedroom
count for the entire park each time a CO is issued after the
park begins to approach capacity. To me this seems very
inefficient and an undue burden on the Planning Department.
A second alternative would be to let DEM handle the problems
of waste loadings and overburdening the treatment system by
the process of adjudication of the violation(s) of the
system's operating permit. I must warn you, however, that
this process is very clumsy at best and that DEM's
enforcement record in dealing with spray irrigation systems
is somewhat spotty. Spray systems are given a lower
enforcement priority by DEM, because the agency is
understaffed and gives higher priority to systems which
discharge to surface waters. The most simple solution to the
problem of the bedroom count and potential overburden of the
treatment system is to restrict the park to two bedroom units
only.
If I may provide any additional inputi or information, please
advise.
25
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor Edmond John jMaguire
William W [:obey, Jr., Secretary November 18, 199 Regional Manager
1.
To: Eddie Kirk- orange county Planning Department
From: 'Tim Donnelly, DEM- Raleigh Regional Office ,,
Through: Arthur Mouberry, DEM- Regional Supervisor
Subject: Stonegate Mobile Home Park- Permit No. WQ0004370
Special Use Permit Modification,
State Road 1713
orange County
The Raleigh Regional office has reviewed your request concerning
the above named project. The plans which you submitted are those
which we permitted for a spray irrigation wastewater system with
one exception. A set of property lines has been drawn around the
entire wastewater treatment system. Through consultation with the
applicant's engineer, Mr. Sid Credle of Credle Engineering
Company, Inc. of Durham, N.C., these lines are merely drawn to
show that portion of the property which has been dedicated to the
waste disposal. system. These lines have not been surveyed nor
recorded with the register of deeds office. Mr. Credle is aware
of our permit conditions which require buffer distances from the
wastewater system and intends to work with the applicant to
insure that no permit violations occur. Ms. Bane owns all
surrounding land adjacent to the spray system as is noted on the
plans. If you have further questions, please contact me at
571 -4700.
3800 Barrett Drive, Suitc 101 • Raleigh, N,C. 27609
Tcicphone (919) 733.2314 • FAX Numixr (919) 733.7072
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
26
�y
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
306F REVERE ROAD
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
T41 bail
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
FROM: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING AND INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1991
SUBJECT: PD -1 -91 STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK (MODIFICATION)
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Dorothy C. Bane
3519 Old Highway 10
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
LOCATION: Located on Mount Herman Church Road north of
the Norfolk Southern Railroad and south of
Interstate Highway 85.
REQUESTED ACTION: Approval to remove ten (10) mobile home
spaces and change the type of sewage
treatment from a package plant to a spray
irrigation system, thereby adding 19.86
acres to the park. The applicant.also
proposes to limit the number of bedrooms
in the park to 208, relocate the well and
recreation sites, and to delete a
proposed boat storage area, car wash, and
laundry facilities.
LOT SIZE: 56.36 acres or 2,455,041.6 square feet.
EXISTING LAND USE: Stonegate Mobile Home Park
SURROUNDING LAND AND ZONING:
NORTH - Mobile Acres II with 43 lots zoned R -1.
EAST - Mount Herman Church Road, Lamb Distributing
and Carolina Builders zoned GC -4.
SOUTH - Norfolk Southern Railroad and undeveloped
property zoned R -1.
WEST - Undeveloped tract zoned R -1.
28
MEMORANDUM
PD -1 -91 STONEGATE
NOVEMBER 11, 1991
PAGE 2
MOBILE HOME PARK (MODIFICATION)
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
Agricultural area west of Mt. Herman Church Road and
Twenty -Year Transition with a Commercial /Industrial node
overlay east of Mt. Herman Church Road.
ZONING: The property is presently zoned PD -H -R4
(Planned Development Housing - Medium
Intensity Residential).
The intent of the Medium Intensity Residential (R -4) district
is provided in Article 4.2.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
a) Intent
The purpose of the low and medium Intensity
Residential (R -2, R -3, R -4) Districts is to provide
locations for low and moderate intensity
residential development and supporting
recreational, community service and educational
uses in areas where urban services are available or
are to be provided as part of the development
process.
b) Application Criteria
This district will usually be applied where the
following conditions exist:
1. Designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan
as a Transition Area, which can reasonably be
expected to be annexed by a municipality in
the ensuing 10 -20 years.
2. Water and sewer lines should exist at site or
be assured of installation as part of the
development process.
3. Vehicular access must consist of direct access
to a street classified as either arterial or
collector as designated by the adopted
Comprehensive Plan.
29
LANDOWNERS ADJOINING STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP -_TAX MAP 5
Map Number Owner
1. 5--1C James D. Rigsbee
4806 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
ENO
TOWNSHIP - TAX MAP 25
Map-Number
Owner
1.
25 -1
Duke Power Company
Old Hwy 86
Hillsborough, NC 27278
2.
25 -2
Kathy E. Lunsford, et al
Route 5, Box 581
Mebane, NC 27302
3.
25 -3
Louvenia Lunsford Heirs
804 N. Roxboro St
Durham, NC 27701
4.
25 -4
William H. Wyatt
PO Box 474
Lola, NC 28520
5.
25 -5
Sadie Scarlett
c/o James Scarlett
Route 1, Box 272
Durham, NC 27705
6.
25 -5A
William H. Hyatt
PO Box 474
Lola, NC 28520
7.
25 -70
Eno Fire Protection Association
Route 1, Box 274
Durham, NC 27705
8.
25 -70A
Eno Fire Department
9.
25 -70B
Eno Fire Department
10.
25 -70C
William Wayne Kelly
6712 Bealgray Road
Kannapolis, NC 28081
3t�
11.
25 -71
John A. Scarlett
7107 Mt. Herman Church Road
Durham, NC 27705
12.
25 -71A
James I. Scarlett
Route 1, Box 272
Durham, NC 27705
13.
25 -71B
BRD Investments, Inc.
c/o Lucy Ray
PO Box 605
Durham, NC 27702
14.
25 -71C
James Scarlett
Route 1, Box 272
Durham, NC 27705
15.
25 -72
Mary S. Jones, et al
4909 Hwy 70 East
Durham, NC 27703
16.
25 -73
Mary S. Jones
4909 Hwy 70 East
Durham, NC 27703
17.
25 -74A
John L. Browning and Ruth
4708 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
18.
25 -74B
Norman Watkins and Michelle
4716 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
19.
25 -74C
Jacqueline Paschall.
5214 Old Hillsborough Road
Durham, NC 27705
20.
25 -74D
Graham B. Hardison and Agnes
4728 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
21.
25--75
Mount Hermon Baptist Church
Route 1, Box 388
Durham, NC 27705
22.
25 -75A
Durhill Durhill
c/o C. L. Benson 7200 Falls of Neuse,
PO Box 40599 Ste 200
Raleigh, NC 27629 Raleigh, NC 27615
2
23. 25 -75B
24.
25 -76
25.
25 -77
26.
25 -78
27.
25 -A -1
28.
25 -A--2
29.
25 -A -3
30.
25 -A -6
ENO TOWNSHIP - TAX MAP 26
Map Number
1. 26 -32
2. 26 -33
3. 26 -33A
Ruth Lamb
Attn: John T. Lamb, Sr.
PO Box 18825
Greensboro, NC 27419
Gladys T. Jackson
516 Brookwood Drive
Durham, NC 27707
Doris J. Turner
5001 Raintree Road
Durham, NC 27712
Linda Poole Baker
Route 1, Box 398
Durham, NC 27705
Benjamin F. Durham
3301 Greenbrier Dr. Ext
Durham, NC 27705
Charles E. Brown and Marie
3311 Greenbrier Dr. Ext
Durham, NC 27705
Andrew M. Carroll and Beth
3329 Greenbrier Dr. Ext
Durham, NC 27705
Linda Poole Baker
Route 1, Box 398
Durham, NC 27705
Owner
Alice S. Scarlett
Route 1, Box 272B
Durham, NC 27705
J. G. Flowers
7012 Mt. Herman Church Rd
Durham, NC 27705
Carden Investment Corporation
PO Box 317
Durham, NC 27702
31
ti
3''
4.
26 -33B
Carden Investment Corporation
PO Box 317
Durham, NC 27702
5.
26 -34
Mount Hermon Baptist Church Cemetery
Route 1, Box 388
Durham, NC 27705
6.
26 -35A
Eunice B. Coltrane
Route 1, Box 387A
Durham, NC 27705
7.
26 -36
Ola M. Hunt Evans
4200 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
8.
26 -37
Marvin T. Durham and Adrian C.
2508 Hillsborough Road
Durham, NC 27705
9.
26 -37A
Edward Warren Weaver
Route 1, Box 367
Durham, NC 27705
10.
26 -38
Frank Vannie Carden and Ruby
Route 1, Box 633
Durham, NC 27705
11.
26 -39
Margaret W. Underwood
4010 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
12.
26 -40
Harrison S. Marshall
Route 1, Box 368
4007 Old NC 10
Durham, NC 27705
13.
26.41
W. T. Rigsbee and Denitia_ S.
Route 1, Box 363
Durham, NC 27705
14.
26 -41A
Robert F. Robertson
Route 1, Box 365A
Durham, NC 27705
15.
26 -41B
Robert F. Robertson
Route 1, Box 365A
Durham, NC 27705
16.
26 -41C
Robert F. Robertson
Route 1, Box 365A
Durham, NC 27705
4
31
17. 26 -54 Robert R. Holloway
2418 Dellwood Drive
Durham, NC 27705
34
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
306F REVERE ROAD
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENTS
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I, Eddie Kirk, Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Carolina,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about November 8, 1991, I
mailed, by certified mail, postage prepaid, a Notice of the
Public Hearing to be held on the request for a modification
of a Special Use Permit by Dorothy C. Banes located on Mount
Herman Church Road SR 1713 north of the Norfolk Southern
Railroad and south of Interstate 85 in Eno Township to each
property owner as required by Article 20 Section 20.6.3 of
the Orange County Zoning Ordinance.
The notice mailed specified the date, time, place and subject
of the Public Hearing on the zoning classification change.
WITNESS my hand, this the 8th day of November, 1991.
Lg:�' /41�
EDDIE KIRK T
ZONING OFFICER
3'
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25 1991
Action Agenda
Item # 3 a(1)
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
ARTICLE 6.27.3 LARGE DAY CARE HOME - APPLICATION PROCEDURE
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Amendment
PURPOSE:
BACKGROUND:
PUBLIC HEARING —x —Yes No
INFORMATION CONTACT: Eddie Kirk
Extension 2582
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance to provide a process for
administrative approval of minor changes in approved
large day care homes.
Under current ordinance provisions any change in the
operation of a large day care home will constitute a
modification and require approval of the Board of
Adjustment. The proposed amendment would provide a
process where minor changes in approved large day care
homes may be approved by the Zoning Officer.
The standards for evaluation of large day care homes
are specified in Section 6.27.2 of the Zoning
Ordinance. In many cases minor changes may continue
to comply with these specific standards. The proposed
amendment would allow minor changes that comply with
requirements in the Zoning Ordinance to be approved by
the Zoning Officer. All changes that do not comply
with large day care home requirements will require
approval of the Orange County Board of Adjustment.
RECOMMENDATION: Article 20.5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the
Zoning Officer prepare a recommendation for
consideration by the Board of Commissioners and the
Planning Board. This is done at the quarterly public
hearing. There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
36
Zoning Officer Recommendation
The proposed amendment was initiated and developed by
the Planning Staff. The Zoning Officer recommends
approval of the proposed amendment.
No decision on the proposal is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead, the Planning Board must prepare and
submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
If the amendment is initiated by Orange County, there
is no deadline within which the recommendation must be
received. If the amendment is initiated by a citizen,
the Planning Board must prepare and submit a
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners within 60
days of the public hearing date. It is general
practice to present the proposal to the Planning Board
at its first regular meeting after the public hearing
and present the Planning Board recommendation to the
Board of Commissioners at its first meeting
thereafter.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the proposal be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
than January 6, 1992.
3r
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE:
ZONING ORDINANCE
REFERENCE:
ARTICLE 6.27.3
LARGE DAY CARE HOME - APPLICATION
PROCEDURE
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT:
—x— Staff
Planning Board
BOCC
Public
Other:
STAFF PRIORITY
RECOMMENDATION:
High
Middle x Low
Comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC
HEARING DATE:
November 25,
1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To provide a process where minor changes in approved large day
care homes may be approved by the Zoning Officer.
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
Under current ordinance provisions any change in the operation of
a large day care home will constitute a modification and require
the approval of the Board of Adjustment. The proposed amendment
would clarify when a change could be approved by the Zoning
Officer and when Board of Adjustment approval would be required.
In many cases minor changes to approved large day care homes may
comply with the standards for evaluation that are specified in
Section 6.27.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment
would allow minor changes that comply with requirements in the
Zoning Ordinance to be approved by the Zoning Officer. All
changes that do not comply with large day care home requirements
will require approval of the Orange County Board of Adjustment.
EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
6.27.3 Larcre Day Care Home - A22lication Procedure
No large day care home may be operated in a residence
except as permitted under this Ordinance and only after
approval has been issued by the Zoning Officer.
An application for a large day care home shall be filed
with the Zoning Officer and shall be submitted on forms
provided by the Zoning Officer. Such forms shall be
prepared so that when completed "a full and accurate
description of the proposed use, including its
38
location, appearance, and operational characteristics
are disclosed.
In addition to the application, the applicant is
required to submit a site plan of the property on which
the large day care home is to be located. The site plan
shall show the location of the residence in which the
large day care home is to be located in relation to
existing property lines and adjacent homes; the
location, number, and means of access to required
off - street parking areas; and the location and type of
required landscaping and /or screening.
upon a determination that the application is complete,
the Zoning Officer shall cause a review of the
application to be made. The review shall determine if
the proposed large day care home conforms with all
requirements of this Ordinance. Based on the review,
the application will be approved, approved with
conditions, or denied.
If conditions are attached to the approval, they may
address deficiencies in meeting specific Ordinance
requirements or they may address specific impacts which
result from the operation of the large day care home.
In the latter case, the conditions may include, but not
be limited to, limitations on the hours of operation,
location of play area, the number of vehicles to be
parked on the premises, and the location of a storage
area or parking on the property. In addition, the
Zoning Officer may require greater setbacks and /or
additional landscaping or screening to adequately
screen the large day care home from adjoining
properties.
If the application is approved, either with or without
conditions, the Zoning officer shall send the applicant
a letter informing him of the approval and of the
requirements of the Ordinance that apply to the large
day care home. The letter must be signed by the
applicant to indicate his /her willingness to operate
the large day care home in conformance with the
requirements and conditions set forth in the letter.
Each letter shall be kept on file by the Zoning Officer
and shall constitute the approval for the large day
care home in question.
If the application is denied, the Zoning officer shall
notify the applicant of the denial and shall state the
reasons for denial in writing. The applicant may
appeal the decision of the Zoning Officer to the Board
of Adjustment as set forth in Article 21 of this
Ordinance.
3
Each large day care home approved by the Zoning officer
shall be reviewed annually by him /her to assure
compliance with the standards of evaluation for such
facilities. The Zoning officer is authorized to
approve minor changes in the approved large day care
home Rrovided the changes are in harmony with action of
the original approval and provided any change in the
operation complies with the standards of evaluation as
specified in Section 6.27.2 above. Any change in the
operation of the large day care home that does not
comply with the standards for evaluation as specified
in Section 6.27.2 above will constitute a modification
and require the approval of the Board of Adjustment
under the provisions of Article 8 of this ordinance. 3�
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 3, 1991
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: October 21, 1991
BOCC REVIEW:
En
O R A N G E C O II N T Y 41
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25, 1991
Action Agenda
Item # 3 b(1)
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ARTICLE 6.16.12 TELEPHONE EXCHANGES (WITHOUT BUSINESS
OFFICES), SUBSCRIBER LOOP HUTS, PRESSURE REGULATOR
STATIONS, WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PUMPING STATIONS
IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING —X Yes No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo
Extension 2583
Proposed Amendment
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough- 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill -967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on an amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance to modify development
standards for certain utility facilities.
BACKGROUND: Article 4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance lists ten
types of uses which are permitted by right in
all zoning districts. Several of these uses
are related to infrastructure facilities
which are essential to the distribution of
services. Because they are part of a larger
infrastructure network, there may be limited
choice for their location.
Specific standards are applied to some of
these facilities, including water and sewer
pumping station, electric substations, and
County greenbox sites. These standards
relate to design, screening, lot size, and
other provisions which assure compatibility
with surrounding residential areas.
The proposed amendment modifies development
standards which apply to water and sewer pump
stations, and telephone exchanges.
RECOMMENDATION: Article 20.5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires
that the Zoning Officer prepare a
recommendation for consideration by the Board
44
of Commissioners and the Planning Board.
This is done at the quarterly public hearing.
There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
Zoning Officer Recommendation
MeL proposed amendment was initiated and
developed by the Pj_a_Dn jDg_ Staff. The Zoning
Officer recommends approval of the proposed
amendment.
No decision on the proposal is made by either
the Planning Board or Board of Commissioners
at the public hearing. Instead, the Planning
Board must prepare and submit a
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
If the amendment is initiated by Orange
County, there is no deadline within which the
recommendation must be received. If the
amendment is initiated by a citizen, the
Planning Board must prepare and submit a
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners
within 60 days of the public hearing date.
It is general practice to present the
proposal to the Planning Board at its first
regular meeting after the public hearing and
present the Planning Board recommendation to
the Board of Commissioners at its first
meeting thereafter.
Administration_ Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the
proposal be referred to the Planning Board
for a recommendation to be returned to the
Board of commissioners no sooner than January
6, 1992.
43
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE: ZONING ORDINANCE
REFERENCE: ARTICLE 6.16.12 TELEPHONE EXCHANGES (WITHOUT
BUSINESS OFFICES), SUBSCRIBER LOOP HUTS, PRESSURE
REGULATOR STATIONS, WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
PUMPING STATIONS IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: ,x_ Staff Planning Board
BOCC Public
Other:
STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: x High Middle Low
Comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 25, 1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to modify
development standards for certain utility facilities.
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
Article 4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance lists 10 types of uses which
are permitted by right in all zoning districts. Several of these
uses are related to infrastructure facilities which are essential
to the distribution of services. Because they are part of a
larger infrastructure network, there may be limited choice for
their location.
Specific standards are applied to some of these facilities,
including water and sewer pumping station, electric substations,
and County greenbox sites. These standards relate to design,
screening, lot size, and other provisions which assure
compatibility with surrounding residential areas.
The minimum lot area for water and sewer pump station and
electric substations is 5,000 square feet. In 1989, Article
6.16.14 was amended to allow this 5,000 square -foot area to exist
as an easement or leasehold for electric substations without
being subdivided. This same concept was applied to greenbox
sites (although the minimum area is 40,000 square feet).
The proposed amendment would extend this concept to water and
sewer pump stations, as well as to some telephone - related
facilities. The standards for these uses are found in Article
6.16.12. Currently, these uses may be allowed on lots as small
as 5,000 square feet, but there is no provision to allow the lot
to be created by lease or easement.
It is also proposed that Article 6.16.12 be amended to allow
structures for water and sewer pump stations to contain 800
square feet. The current limit is 200 square feet.
44
The issue of size was raised upon review of a proposed pump
station for the Town of Hillsborough, which will contain about
750 square feet. Staff contact with the City of Raleigh Public
Works Department and OWASA confirm that the 200 square -foot limit
is unreasonably low. Pump stations may be above ground or
underground, and can vary in size depending on the size and type
of motors and other equipment. A limit of 800 square feet should
accommodate any facilities which are likely to be proposed in
Orange County, while remaining compatible with residential
areas.
A final change concerns screening and buffers. Again, it is
recommended that existing provisions which apply to electric
substations be applied to pump stations. The provisions relating
to substations do not require screening between two utility
facilities which are side -by -side. Screening requirements must
be met, however, where such facilities abut other types of uses.
EXISTING PROVISIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
4.1 Establishment of „Use Regulations
Except as otherwise provided herein, regulations governing
the use of land and structures are hereby established as
shown in the Schedule of Permitted Uses. Uses not expressly
permitted are prohibited.
Within all districts there are certain uses that are
permitted as a matter of right. The uses are:
1. Above ground and buried utility lines for local
distribution of electricity, telephone, and cable
television service, accessory and appurtenant apparatus
such as poles, guy wires, transformers and switching
boxes.
2. Bona fide farms.
3. Buildings and other temporary structures used in
connection with the construction of a permanent
building.
4. Neighborhood utility facilities located within a public
right of way with the permission of the owner of the
right of way (State, City or Town).
5. off - street parking as a required accessory use to a
permitted use.
6. Public and private streets and roads. Railroad rights -
of -way.
7. Water and sanitary sewer lines, gas and liquid fuel
distribution lines.
8. Telephone exchanges (without business offices),
subscriber loop huts, pressure regulator stations,
water and sanitary sewer pumping stations. (See
4�
Article 6.16.12).
9. Electrical substations, switching and metering stations
and associated transmission lines, where incoming
voltage does not exceed 100 kilovolts (kv). (See
Article 6.16.14).
10. Solid waste collection facilities owned and operated by
a public agency for the purpose of disposal of
household waste by Orange County residents. (See
Article 6.16.15).
Uses requiring special permits must meet certain conditions
specified in this ordinance. Only after the existence of
these specified conditions has been determined by the Board
of Adjustment, or the Board of Commissioners, as
appropriate,.will a special permit be issued; otherwise such
uses are prohibited uses.
Regulations governing the use of land and structures within
a Planned Development district are as established in Article
7.
6.16.12 Telephone Exchanges without business offices),
subscriber Loop buts ressure reqMlator stations
water and sanitary sewer pumping stations in all zoning
districts
The following restrictions shall be applied to the above
uses in all zoning districts:
a) The design of structures shall conform as closely as
possible to the character of the area in which it is
located.
b) Building or structures shall conform to the minimum
building setback distances for the applicable zoning
9
district and shall not exceed a-Q _a(M# square feet in
area.
C) All buildings and structures shall be landscaped and
screened according to the standards that follow:
1. Buildings and structures which resemble
residential accessory structures must be
landscaped and maintained in the character of a
residential area.
2. Any outside storage areas must be fenced with a
minimum 5 foot fence and the area screened from
adjacent property according to the standards in
this section.
3. Lighting in and around these facilities shall be
constructed and shielded so as not to shine
directly on adjoining property used for or zoned
for residential purposes. Electrical and
telephone service to the structure shall be placed
46
d)
underground. Types of lighting to be considered
shall include, but not be limited to, indoor
lights when visible through windows, outdoor
lighting, automobile headlights and signs.
Devices to shield lighting may include shades,
fences, shrubs, trees and natural conditions.
4. Parking areas and driveways used in connection
with facilities constructed pursuant to this
Section 6.16.12 shall either be surfaced or shall
be located and maintained in a condition so that
dust and dirt will not settle on adjoining
properties as a result of their use. Driveway
entrances shall be located in a manner that will
create as few additional traffic hazards as
possible.
5. Buildings, structures, equipment or material shall
be screened by either a durable masonry wall, or a
fence, or by natural planting, designed to be
compatible with the character of adjoining
properties, in order to materially screen the uses
within the subject property from the view of
adi acent properties. ... <> :1:: »:be:: »: eqU ed
.:;. >:..: »:. >e`:? walls and fences
sha' I' Se' at '`' ' "Feet` "'in -"height, but need not
be greater than 7 feet in height, measured from
the ground along the common lot line of adjoining
properties. Walls and fences shall be constructed
and maintained in a safe and sound condition.
Where natural planting is used as screening, a
strip of land at least 10 feet in width shall be
reserved for this purpose. The planting strip
shall be composed of an arrangement of shrubs and
trees. The shrubs shall be evergreen and shall be
arranged in 2 rows as minimum and planted at an
initial height of at least 3 feet, with distance
between shrubs being not more than 5 feet. The
shrubs shall be of such variety that an average
height of at least 6 feet could be expected as
normal growth within no more than 2 years from the
time of planting. Trees, which may be eight
evergreen or deciduous, shall augment the
arrangement of shrubs so that there will be a
screening effect of opacity to materially screen
the use within the subject property from the view
of adjacent properties.
The minimum required lot area for such uses shall be
. .
6.16.14 Electrical substations @y_Lt_chJnq and metering
stations and associated transmission lines where
incomin volts a does not exceed loo kilovolts (ky .
The following restrictions shall be to applied to the
above uses in all zoning districts:
a) Perimeter fencing and setbacks for the utility
structure shall be provided in accordance with the
National Electrical Safety Code.
b) The components of the facility, including but not
limited to towers, transformers, circuit breakers,
metering devices, and supporting latticework,
shall be contained within a geometric area not to
exceed 12,000 square feet.
C) The facility shall be located on a parcel or
easement across the parcel, (whether owned or
leased by the utility) which has been recorded
with the Orange County Register of Deeds.
d) Access easements extending from an approved public
or private road to the facility shall be a minimum
width of 30 feet.
e) A Type E Landscape Buffer shall be provided along
any portion of the perimeter of the parcel,
easement, or leasehold located adjacent to
property zoned for residential use, except where
such property is owned, leased or consists of
other utility easements currently used for
electrical distribution or transmission purposes
or no other purposes.
Existing vegetation within an easement, leasehold
or parcel of a public utility may be used to
satisfy the landscaping requirements.
f) Modification to or replacement of existing
facilities shall be subject to the requirements
set forth in Article 6.16.14. Pre - existing
facilities may remain during construction of
replacement facilities, but shall be dismantled
after the replacement facility is in operation.
g) The parcel or easement across the parcel, (whether
owned or leased by the utility) on which the
facility is located shall contain a minimum area
of 5000 square feet.
6.16.15 Solid vast* collection facilities owned and operated by
aL-2ublic agency for the,ppr�ose of disposal of
household waste hy_Ar_-Anqe__Ccunty residentg,
The following restrictions shall be applied to the
above use in all zoning districts:
a) The site shall consist of a parcel, or easement
across a parcel, (whether owned or leased by the
public agency) which has been recorded by the
Orange County Register of Deeds.
b) The parcel or easement across the parcel, (whether
owned or leased by the public agency) on which the
facility is located shall contain a minimum area
of 40,000 square feet.
C) The parcel or easement shall have frontage on a
State - maintained road.
d) A Type B landscape buffer, 30' in width, shall be
provided along the perimeter of the parcel or
easement.
e) Fencing at least 5' in height shall be provided
between the landscape buffer and the improved
portion of the parcel or easement.
f) An entrance sign shall identify site as a
sanitation collection site, and shall identify the
responsible public agency. The sign shall contain
a maximum of nine (9) square feet and shall not
exceed eight (8) feet in height. Instructional
signs may be erected as needed within the
facility.
g) The entrance to the site shall contain a travelway
a minimum of 30' in width.
*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 23, 1991
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW:
BOCC REVIEW:
49
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25, 1991
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT
SECTION III -C -3 - REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES
(Minor Subdivisions)
SECTION IV -B -2 - LAND SUITABILITY
SECTION V -C -5 - UTILITY AND DRAINAGE DATA
(on Preliminary Plats)
SECTION V -D -S -c - UTILITY AND DRAINAGE DATA
(on Final Plats)
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Amendment
Action Agenda
Item # 4 a (1-4)
PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No
INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo
Extension 2583
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on an amendment to the
Subdivision Regulations which would incorporate
specific provisions for requiring drainage easements.
BACKGROUND: All subdivisions are reviewed by the Erosion Control
Division to determine if the drainage characteristics
are such that each lot is suitable for development.
Drainage easements are routinely recommended along
streams, swales, or other channels if needed to assure
that development of a lot will be safe and protected
from damage caused by stormwater run -off.
There are currently no provisions in the Subdivision
Regulations which refer specifically to drainage
easements as a means of rendering a lot suitable for
development in the event that reservation of drainage
easements are recommended by the Erosion Control
Division. The proposed amendments add text which
specifies and clarifies this existing and historical
practice used by the Planning Department to meet site
suitability requirements with respect to drainage.
RECOMMENDATION: Section VII -D of the Subdivision Regulations requires
that the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board
hear proposals to amend the ordinance at the quarterly
50
public hearing. There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
Planning Staff Recommendation
The proposed amendment was initiated and developed by
the Planning Staff. The Planning Staff recommends
approval of the proposed amendment.
No decision on the proposal is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead, the Planning Board must prepare and
submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
The Planning Board recommendation must be submitted to
the Board of Commissioners within 75 days following
the public hearing date. It is the general practice
of the Planning Department to present the proposal to
the Planning Board at its first regular meeting after
the public hearing, and to present the Planning Board
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners at the
first meeting thereafter.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the proposal be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
than January 6, 1992.
51
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
REFERENCE: SECTION III -C -3 - REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES
SECTION IV -B -2 - LAND Minor
SECTION V -C -5 - UTILITY AND DRAINAGE DATA
SECTION V -D -5 -c `o UTILITY mAND rDRAINAGE DATA
(on Final Plats)
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: Staff Planning Board
BOCC Public
Other: County Attorney
STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: X High Middle Low
Comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 25, 1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To incorporate specific provisions for requiring drainage
easements.
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
All subdivisions are reviewed by the Erosion Control Division
to determine if the drainage characteristics are such that
each lot is suitable for development. Drainage easements are
routinely recommended along streams, swales, or other
channels if needed to assure that development of a lot
will be safe and protected from damage caused by stormwater
run -off.
There are currently no provisions in the Subdivision
Regulations which refer specifically to drainage easements as
a means of rendering a lot suitable for development in the
event that reservation of drainage easements are recommended
by the Erosion Control Division. The proposed amendments
add text which specifies and clarifies this existing and
historical practice used by the Planning Department to meet
site suitability requirements with respect to drainage.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS:
III -C -3. Review and A roval Procedures
Upon acceptance of a minor subdivision application, the
Planning Department shall determine if the plat and
application conform with all applicable regulations,
including any applicable conditions of an approved Special
Use Permit. Auxiliary documents as required by Section
J4.
III -C -2 above shall be submitted by the Planning Department
to the County Attorney for his /her review and recommendation.
After-receiving a complete Final Plat,, the Planning
Department may submit copies of the Final Plat and
accom9anving material to the officials and agencies listed in
Section III- D- 2 -b_£or their review and comment The officers
or agencies to which the plan is submitted shall prgvide a
certification to the Planning Department as to the
suitability, provisional suitability_, or unsuitability of the
proposal. Recommendations of the review officers or agencies
may be incor orated as conditions of aRRroval of the
subdiv sion._
The Planning Department shall take action on an application
solely on its findings as to compliance with applicable
regulations and conditions and shall:
(a) Approve the application;
(b) Approve the application subject to conditions; or
(c) Deny the application.
The Planning Department shall notify the applicant of its
action, including any conditions attached thereto, within
forty -five (45) days following acceptance of the application,
or within such further time consented to by written notice
from the applicant. If the Planning Department fails to
render a decision within the specified time period, or
extensions thereof, the application is approved as submitted.
------------------------------------------------------ - - - - --
SECTION IV. REQUIRED MININUM DESIGN STANDARD$
IV -A. The avoidance of congestion and overcrowding and the
creation of conditions essential to public health,
safety and the general welfare may be best
accomplished through the application of design
standards providing for the distribution of population
and traffic, safe and coordinated street systems,
approved water supply and sewage disposal systems,
usable lots and conformance to plans for Orange County
as recommended by the Planning Board and adopted by
the Board of Commissioners.
IV -B. The following general requirements and principles of
land subdivision shall be observed:
IV -B -1. LOT STANDARDS
(minimum lot size requirements)
IV -B -2. LAND SUITABILITY
In reviewing subdivision proposals, the Planning Board
shall consider the overall design of the proposal in
5 :3
light of the suitability of the land for development
to insure that the platting and development of the
subdivision will not create a danger to the health,
safety, and welfare of Orange County residents.
Land suitability shall be determined by an
investigation of conditions including but not limited
to flood prone areas, soil drainage, drainage
patterns, slope, historic sites, and unique natural
areas. The investigations shall be carried out by the
Planning Board, the Planning Department, or other
agencies, or individuals having the appropriate
technical expertise including those listed in Section
III- D -2 -b.
IV -B -2 -a Flood -Prone Areas
IV- B -2 -b. Suitability for Septic Disposal
IV- B -2 -C. Drainage
Soil suitability, including slope and drainage, shall
also be evaluated according to soil characteristics
indicated by the Orange County Soil Survey and
topography indicated by the U.S. Geological
Topographic Maps.
Each lot shall contain a suitable building area safe
from innundation and erosion. Sanitary-sewer systems,
se tic tank drainfields water systems. wells and
adjacent Rroperties shall also be-protected from
innundation by surface water. Roads driveways and
utilities shall be Protected from damage caused by
im ro er stormwater management.
Mechanical devices drainage easements natural
buffers, large lots, other technical means may
be used to achieve these objectives. Natural
draina ewa s area preferred means of stormwater run-
off removal. The characteristics _ (including capacity)
of natural draina ewa s shall be 12rotected.
Runoff levels from the 25-year storm after the site is
developed shall not be areater than the rate of runoff
on the same site in its natural state.
V -C -S. Utility and Drainage Data
Proposed utility systems shall be shown on the plat,
including but not limited to, public or private
community water supply systems, public or private
community sewage disposal systems, and storm drainage
facilities. including _existing and proposed
a ewa s and channels. Any easements associated
with such utility systems shall also be denoted and
the purpose for the easements designated on the plat.
V- D -5 -e. Utility and Drainage Data
Construction plans shall be submitted to proper
authorities, as required, to document any new public
or private community water supply system, public or
private community sewage disposal system, and storm
drainage facilities. Written approval and a set of
approved construction plans shall be submitted to the
Planning Department prior to approval of the Final
Plat.
The location and purpose of all new easements for
utility systems shall be shown on the Final Plat,
including, but not limited to, sanitary sewers, septic
tanks and nitrification fields, storm sewer lines,
water mains, gas, transmission mains and overhead
electric, telephone and CATV transmission mains, and
any other above or below ground utility systems which
are contained within a designated easement.
The location and purpose of storm drainage easements
shall also be shown including those along an existing
and or 'Proposed drainacre.s3gale or channel.
It is understood that utility distribution systems to
individual lots for gas, electric, telephone, and TV
cable service are customarily covered by "blanket
easements" or "general easements ". If these easements
have been recorded, the recording data shall be shown
on the plat. Otherwise, these easements need not be
denoted on the plat.
III- D -2 -b. Planning Department Review Procedures
Upon acceptance of a preliminary plat application, the
Planning Department shall determine if the plat and
application conform with all applicable regulations,
including any applicable conditions of an approved
Special Use Permit. Auxiliary documents as required
by Section III -D -2 -a above shall be submitted by the
Planning Department to the County Attorney for his /her
review and recommendation.
After having received a complete Preliminary Plat
application from the subdivider, the Planning
Department shall submit copies of the Preliminary Plat
and any accompanying material to other officials and
agencies for review and comment. Officers and
agencies to which the Preliminary Plat shall be
submitted include, but are not limited to, the
55
following:
(1) The District Engineer of the N.C. Department
of Transportation as to proposed public streets,
highways and drainage systems;
(2) The Orange County Health Department as to
proposed on -site water supply and sewage disposal
systems;
(3) The Board of Education of the appropriate school
district as to the reservation of proposed school
sites and the impact of the proposed subdivision
on school enrollment capacities;
(4) The Orange County Erosion Control officer as to
the erosion control and stormwater management
plan;
(5) The Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory
Council as to the location, suitability and
facilities proposed for required recreation
areas;
(6) The Planning Department and /or Planning Board of
the appropriate municipality where a courtesy
review procedure has been established by
agreement between the County and the
municipality;
(7) The appropriate utility provider where public or
community water and /or sanitary sewerage systems
are proposed to serve the subdivision;
(8) The Orange Soil and Water Conservation District
as to a general soils description and
interpretation; and
(9) The County Attorney as to the format and
appropriateness of proposed restrictive
covenants, homeowners association agreements,
road maintenance agreements, performance bonds
and other similar documents.
The officers and agencies designated above shall
review the Preliminary Plat and shall provide a
certification to the Planning Department on the basis
of the suitability, provisional suitability or
unsuitability of the proposal.
Where it is determined that alternative measures are
required in order for the proposal to be classified as
"suitable ", a certification of "provisionally
suitable" shall be provided. If agency approval is
withheld on this basis, the agency shall identify the
reasons for such classification and recommend measures
through which the proposal may be made suitable. The
Planning Board may recommend, and the Board of
J6
Commissioners may approve, such measures as conditions
of approval of the Preliminary Plat; provided,
however, the recommending agency shall have the
authority to enforce such measures.
Where no alternatives are available to address the
concerns of the agency or officer, a classification of
"unsuitable" shall be provided. The agency or officer
shall provide a list of the reasons which resulted in
such designation.
Upon receipt of the comments and recommendations from
review officers and agencies, the Planning Department
shall submit to the Planning Board a written analysis
of the application and its recommendation. The report
shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Board
within eighty -five (85) days of the date of acceptance
of the application or within such further time
consented to in writing by the applicant. If the
Planning Department fails to prepare a report to the
Planning Board within the specified time limit, or
extensions thereof, the application is recommended
without conditions.
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 3, 1991
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW:
BOCC REVIEW:
Sr
V - B. STORM WA^_`B'P M;L AGLmE.N'I
V - B - I. It shall be the responsibility of the
subdivider to provide a design which shall
meet the Following objectives.
A) Provide a suitable building area on each
lot which is safe from inundation and
erosion.
*B) Protect the characteristics and capaci -v
of natural drainage ways, and encourace�
reliance on natural drainage ways for
the removal of runoff by preventing their
impoundment, except where there may be a
site for intentional storm water detention.
C) Prevent natural runoff levels from sub-
stantially increasing by insuring that
the runoff from the 10 year storm on the
developed site shall -not be greater than
the rate of runoff on the same site in
a natural condition.
D) Prevent inundation of surface water into
sanitary sewer systems, septic tank az-
sorption fields, public or individual
water systems, and onto adjacent lots.
E) Protect all roads, driveways, utilities,
and other types of development `rom damacre
caused by improper stormwater management.
F) Generally minimize the disturbance to
natural vegetation, minimize the area of
impervious surface and maximize the in_i_-
tration of storm water into the groundwater
system.
To achieve these objectives the subdivider
may use whatever combinations of mechanical
devices, natural buffers, large lots, or other
technical means that are available. Drainage
easements may be required when necessary.
Such easements shall, be indicated on the Final
Plat. The preliminary plan shall be reviewed
by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer
and the Department of Transportation.
*Amended Effective (January 17, 1979)
z�]
-6q-
58
V - B - 2. Proposed Drainace - The installation of
any part of a cra -nave system which is
necessary because of proposed improvements
as set forth in subsection 1 of this section
may be installed subsequent to the approval
of the Final Plat; provided that plans and
specifications of said improvement shall be
approved by the appropriate agency and
reference to said improvements shall be made
a part of the Final Plat as provided in Sectio;
III, Subsection E - 5 - d herein.
-70-
J�
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 2S, „1991
Action Agenda
Item # 4 b(1 -3)
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT
SECTION III -B - CLASSIFICATION OF SUBDIVISIONS
SECTION II - DEFINITIONS (SUBDIVISION, MINOR)
SECTION IV - REQUIRED MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING, PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Amendment
Letters from County Attorney
INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo
Extension 2583
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on amendments to the
Subdivision Regulations which would provide design
standards for subdivision lots larger than 10 acres.
BACKGROUND: GS 153A -335 provides the definition of subdivision.
The definition includes a list of land divisions which
are not considered subdivisions. The provisions of
the Subdivision Regulations do not apply to land
divisions created under one or more of these
exemptions.
One of the exemptions is "the division of land into
parcels greater than 10 acres if no street right -of-
way dedication is involved ". This provision has been
interpreted to mean that all of the lots on a plat
exempted under these provisions must be larger than
ten acres. If even one of the lots fall below the l0-
acre minimum, then all lots, including those larger
than 10 acres, are subject to subdivision regulations.
The proposed amendment specifies the standards which
would be applied to large lots which are included in a
subdivision.
The Ordinance Review Committee discussed the proposed
amendment on October 3, 1991. There was concern that
some of the standards, particularly those pertaining
to road maintenance, may be a disincentive for
including the larger lots on a subdivision plat.
6o
RECOMMENDATION: Section VII -D of the Subdivision Regulations requires
that the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board
hear proposals to amend the ordinance at the quarterly
public hearing. There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
Planning Staff Recommendation
The proposed amendment was initiated and developed by
the Planning Staff. The Planning Staff recommends
approval of the proposed amendment.
No decision on the proposal is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead,.the Planning Board must prepare and
submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
The Planning Board recommendation must be submitted to
the Board of Commissioners within 75 days following
the public hearing date. It is the general practice
of the Planning Department to present the proposal to
the Planning Board at its first regular meeting after
the public hearing, and to present the Planning Board
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners at the
first meeting thereafter.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the proposal be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
than January 6, 1992.
I
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
REFERENCE: SECTION III -B CLASSIFICATION OF SUBDIVISIONS
SECTION II DEFINITIONS (SUBDIVISION, MINOR)
SECTION IV REQUIRED MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x Staff Planning Board
BOCC Public
Other:
STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: xi High Middle Low
comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 25, 1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To provide design standards for subdivision lots larger than 10
acres.
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
GS 153A -335 provides the definition of subdivision. The
definition includes a list of land divisions which are not
considered subdivisions. The provisions of the Subdivision
Regulations do not apply to land divisions created under one or
more of these exemptions.
One of the exemptions is "the division of land into parcels
greater than 10 acres if no street right -of -way dedication is
involved ". This provision has been interpreted to mean that all
of the lots on a plat exempted under these provisions must be
larger than ten acres. If any of the lots fall below the 10 -acre
minimum, then all lots, including those larger than 10 acres, are
subject to subdivision regulations.
There are several results of this interpretation which are of
concern, as illustrated in the following examples.
Example 1:
A property owner wishes to divide a 50 -acre tract into (4)
10 -acre lots, and (2) 5 -acre lots. If all lots are shown on
one plat, then a major subdivision is created.
All provisions apply to the 10 -acre lots as well as the 2-
acre lots, including landscaping and restrictions on any
further subdivision if a private road is proposed.
The same development could alternatively be done on 2
separate plats. one plat could be recorded for (5) 10 -acre
lots. This requires only the signature of the Planning
b4 W
Department to indicate that no approval is required. A
second plat could be submitted to divide one of the 10 -acre
lots into (2) 5 -acre lots.
The latter option is generally used since it is much quicker
and much less costly to record two exempt plats, than to go
through the subdivision review process, and the lots would
be subject to restricions which would otherwise not apply.
Example 2:
A property owner wishes to divide a 50 -acre tract to create
(1) 5 -acre lot and (1) 45 -acre lot. The 45 -acre lot is
again subject to all subdivision regulations since a 5 -acre
lot is being shown on the same plat. Again, if a private
road were proposed, the 45 -acre lot would be subject to
restrictions on further subdivision.
There are many other scenarios which arise, but the examples
given represent the following fundamental issues:
1) Whether or not subdivision standards apply to lots
which are 10 acres or more in size depends solely on
how the lots are created.
2) The standards contained within the Subdivision
Regulations are geared towards lots smaller than 10
acres, and many are inappropriate for lots greater than
10 acres.
The proposed amendment would specify the regulations which are
appropriate for 10+ -acre lots. Other standards would not be
applied. This would eliminate the need to record multiple plats
to achieve the same end.
The specific standards proposed to apply to 10 -acre lots are
listed in Section IV -D (new) of the attached amendment.
III 78 Classification of Subdivisions
All subdivisions shall be considered major subdivisions
except those defined as minor subdivisions in this
Section.
A "minor subdivision" is defined as the division of a
tract of land that does not:
(1) Create more than five ( 5 ) lots E
%' }<< . Inel"d-inei - tie -area
from any one (1) tract of land in any twenty -four
(24) month period;
(2) Dedicate or improve any new public street other
than widening an existing public street;
(3) Extend public water and /or sanitary sewerage
systems other than laterals to serve individual
lots; and
(4) Necessitate the installation of drainage
improvements which would require easements through
one (1) or more lots to serve other lots.
Minor subdivisions shall be reviewed in accordance with
the provisions of Section III -C. Major subdivisions
shall be reviewed in accordance with the procedures set
forth in Section III -D.
SUBDIVISIONR MINOR - A division of a tract of land that does not:
1 Create more than five (5) lots,
from any one (1) tract of land in any twenty -four
(24) month period;
(2) Dedicate or improve any new public street other
than widening an existing public street;
(3) Extend public water and /or sanitary sewerage
systems other than laterals to serve individual
lots; and
(4) Necessitate the installation of drainage
improvements which would require easements through
one (1) or more lots to serve other lots.
SECTION IV. REQUIRED MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS
IV -A The avoidance of congestion and overcrowding and the
creation of conditions essential to public health,
safety and the general welfare may be best accomplished
through the application of design standards providing
for the distribution of population and traffic, safe
and coordinated street systems, approved water supply
and sewage disposal systems, usable lots and
conformance to plans for Orange County as recommended
by the Planning Board and adopted by the Board of
Commissioners.
IV -B
rotlowing general requirements ---- Ahd. princ'ipl'es "`off "' land
subdivision shall be observed:
1
\�
As
:iii' 4•;C�.J ••
�y ........... ,,
mw t-sab
�.:.:.:::s.:> .....:.... ::... ........, .. ..:
«:..:,...,........., .::....:...::...:...........................<...::................,.. :......................,,......
*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 3, 1991
BOCC REVIEW:
COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON,
BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE
' rrORNEYS AT LAW
.0. DRAWER 1529
129 E. TRYON ST..,;.
HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278
919. 732 -2196
919 -942 -M
CHAPEL HILL OFFICE
SUITE 20, FRANKLIN BUILDING ..Tune 7, 1988
137 E. FRANKLIN STREET
CHAPEL HILL, N. C. 27514
919.929 -7151
ALONZO B. COLEMAN, JR.
STEVEN A. BERNHOLZ
DONALD R. DICKERSON
ROGER B. BERNHOLZ
GEOFFREY E. GLEDHILL
DOUGLAS HARGRAVE
G. NICHOLAS HERMAN Ms. Emily Crudup, ASLA
KIM K. STEFFAN planner II
NATHANIEL E. CLEMENT
MARILYN E. TOMEI Orange County Planning Department
Of Counsel 306F Revere Road
DONNER D. SAWYER Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
(1902.1972) g
Re: Boulder Bluff Subdivision
Dear Emily:
I concur with the Planning Board's recommendations on this
subdivision. Lots greater than 10 acres, when part of a subdivision
over which the County has jurisdiction (where at least one lot is
10 acres or less) are treated exactly the same as lots 10 acres or
less. The Subdivision Regulations can be amended to provide
different requirements for different sized lots provided there
is a rational basis for the different requirements.
Very truly yours,
N ��r
eoffr E. Gledhill
GEG /lsg
xc: Marvin Collins V
6
66
COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ, DICKERSON,
BERNHOLZ, GLEDHILL & HARGRAVE
1TTORNEYS AT LAw
.'.0. DRAWER 1529
129 E. TRYON ST.
HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278
919.732 -2196
919- 942 -8000
CHAPEL HILL OFFICE
SUITE 20, FRANKLIN BUILDING
137 E. FRANKLIN STREET
CHAPEL HILL, N. C. 27514
919 - 929.7151
ALONZO B. COLEMAN, )R.
STEVEN A. BERNHOLZ
DONALD R. DICKERSON
ROGER B. BERNHOLZ
GEOFFREY E. GLEDHILL
DOUGLAS HARGRAVE
G. NICHOLAS HERMAN
KIM K. STEFFAN
NATHANIEL E. CLEMENT
MARILYN E. TOMEI
Of Counsel
BONNER D. SAWYER
(1902 -1972)
June 16, 1988
Mr. Marvin Collins
Director
Orange County Planning Department
306F Revere Road
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Re: Albert Reaves Estate Subdivision
Dear Marvin:
This letter is in response to your December
31, 1987 letter regarding the application of
subdivision requirements for lots greater than ten
acres in size when they are part of a subdivision
containing lots less than ten acres in size. The issue
is one of jurisdiction. That is, does the County have
jurisdiction over lots greater than ten acres in size
when they are part of a subdivision containing lots
less than ten acres in size. The answer is, in my
opinion, yes it does. Only where every lot in a
subdivision (containing no public.street dedication) is
greater than ten acres is the subdivision exempt from
County subdivision regulations.
All subdivision requirements, then, must be
satisfied as to the whole subdivision. Zoning
ordinance requirements must, of course, be satisfied,
regardless of the size of the lots involved (I'm not
sure what the reference to zoning ordinance provisions
in your December 31, 1987 letter means in this
context).
It may be that the subdivision regulation
requirements, and particularly those dealing with
landscaping, were not drafted with large lots in mind.
It may be that the application of some subdivision
requirements, landscaping and others, may be un-
reasonable when applied to lots greater than ten acres.
If so, the regulations should be changed to recognize
I
li
• •,
3
5
e
a
w
7
Z
a
i
z
z
Mr. Marvin Collins Page 2 June 16, 1988
this fact. Likewise, the regulations may need review
with respect to other large lots less than ten acres.
I recognize that requiring large lots to
comply with subdivision regulations when they are shown
on a plat with smaller lots could lead to the County no
longer seeing the large lots when subdivision plans are
presented. That may be and we have no control over
that. We can only review what we're asked to review.
On the other hand., developers should not be encouraged
to divide their developments in a way to avoid sub -
division regulation treatment or advised to do so. All
this should be handled as a matter of course. I'll be
glad to review this in more detail at your request.
GEG /lsg
Very truly yours,
E. Gledhill
69
COLEMAN, BERNHOLZ,
BERNHOLZ, GLEDHTLL, HARGRAVE & HERMAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
THE LAw BUILDING
129 EAST TRYON STREET
POST OFFICE DRAWER 1529
HILLSBOROUGH, NC. 27278
TEL: 919 -732 -2196
919 - 942 -8000
FAX: 919- 732 -7997
SUITE 300, THE CENTER
1506 EAST FRANKLIN STREET
CHAPEL HILL, NC 27514
TEL 919- 929.7151
FAX: 919 -929 -3892
n�, ;, r-.
i �; c.
�.a
August 9, 1991
ALONZO B. COLEMAN, JR.
STEVEN A. BERNHOLZ
ROGER B. BERNHOLZ
GEOFFREY E. GLEDHILL
DOUGLAS HARGRAVE
G. NICHOLAS HERMAN Ms. Jane A. Garrett
KIM K. STEFFAN
JANET B. DUTTON Planner
JOHN D. LOFTIN Orange County Planning Department
Of Counsel 306F Revere Road
BONNER D. SAWYER
(1902-1972) Hillsborou g h, North Carolina 27278
RE: Featherwood, Phase I
Dear Jane:
The enclosed copy of the road maintenance
agreement for Featherwood Court, the private road
located in Phase I of Featherwood, satisfies the Orange
County Subdivision Regulations.
With a copy of this letter to Marvin Collins, I am
confirming our conversation on July 18, 1991 regarding
his July 15, 1991 memorandum to me. The concern
expressed in my July 3, 1991 letter about the so- called
"residual" parcel being excluded from consideration as
part of this subdivision was not a private road
concern. Rather, it was that the division of the 15+
acre parcel is just that. Five lots are being created,
one of which is greater than ten acres. Since the
subdivision was approved wit a priyate road, the
prohibition against further subdivision contained n
Section IV- B -3 -d -1 (the next to last paragraph which
reads: "Restrictive covenants which prevent further
subdivision of the property shall be made a condition
of approval of a private road. ") e� rtain. And, as
indicated in my July 3, 1991 letter, other lot
standards also pertain to the so- called residua
arcel.
I recognize that this minor subdivision has been
approved in the form presented to me with Jane
Garrett's May 31, 1991 letter. For that reason, I do
not think this subdivision should be reconsidered with
the above analysis in mind. I do think we should
develop a plan for establishing standards applicable
70
J
..1
Q
V.7
N
a
z
a
w
N
O
z
x
u
C:]
z
L
Ll:
C
U
Ms. Jane Garrett Page 2 August 9, 1991
for all lots, some of which will pertain only to lots intended to
be immediately developed, others of which will pertain to all
lots
GEG /lsg
Enclosure
xc: Marvin Collins
Very tryily yours,
frey /E. G 'Iedhill
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November-25. 1991
Action Agenda
Item # 4 c (1)
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT
SECTION V -D -6 -c (3) CERTIFICATES OF APPROVAL
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ENDORSEMENT
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING _x —Yes No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Garrett
Proposed Amendment
Extension 2581
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment of
the Subdivision Regulations to revise the current
language of the Environmental Health Certificate for
subdivisions.
BACKGROUND: The Environmental Health Division of the orange County
Health Department is required to endorse all
subdivision Final Plats certifying that the proposed
lots are approved for surface sewage disposal systems,
provided public utilities are not available. In
conjunction with the Environmental Health Division the
Planning Department determined that the current
endorsement is too general.
The proposed amendment would provide more explicit
information regarding the issuance of septic system
permits.
RECOMMENDATION: Section VII -D of the Subdivision Regulations requires
that the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board
hear proposals to amend the ordinance at the quarterly
public hearing. There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
Plannin 9 Staff Recommendation
The proposed amendment was initiated and developed by
the Planning Staff. The Planning Staff recommends
approval of the proposed amendment.
J
�y IrI
No decision on the proposal is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead, the Planning Board must prepare and
submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
The Planning Board recommendation must be submitted to
the Board of Commissioners within 75 days following
the public hearing date. It is the general practice
of the Planning Department to present the proposal to
the Planning Board at its first regular meeting after
the public hearing, and to present the Planning Board
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners at the
first meeting thereafter.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the proposal be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
than January 6, 1992.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
REFERENCE: SECTION V -D -6 -c (3) CERTIFICATES OF APPROVAL
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ENDORSEMENT
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: ,x Staff Planning Board
BOCC Public
Other:
STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: —x— High Middle Low
Comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 25, 1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To revise the current language of the Environmental Health
Division certification for subdivisions.
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
The Environmental Health Division of the Orange County Health
Department is required to endorse all subdivision plats
certifying that the proposed lots, when public utilities are not
provided, are approved for sewage disposal through the
installation and use of surface sewage disposal systems. The
current endorsement is too general.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS:
Section V -D -6 -c Certificates of Approval
(1) A Final Plat for a minor subdivision shall show the
following form for Planning Department endorsement:
"I hereby certify that the subdivision plat shown
hereon has been found to comply with the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations. Provided that this plat shall
be recorded within six (6) months of final approval,
approved by the Orange County Planning Department on
(Date) ."
Planning Director or Authorized Agent
(2) A Final Plat for a major subdivision shall show the
following form for Planning Department endorsement:
r4
"I hereby certify that the subdivision plat shown
hereon has been found to comply with the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations. Provided that this plat shall
be recorded within 1 -year of final approval, approved
by the Orange County Planning Department on
(Date) ."
Planning Director or Authorized Agent
(3) Where sewage disposal within all or a portion of a
subdivision is to be accomplished through the
installation and use of surface sewage disposal
systems, the plat shall show the following form for
Orange County Health Department endorsement:
(4) Where public streets are proposed in a subdivision, the
plat shall contain a certification that the proposed
roads meet the construction standards of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation.
*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 3, 1991
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW:
BOCC REVIEW:
5
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 25 1991
Action Agenda
Item #4 d(1-3)
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT
SECTION V —D — FINAL PLAT
SECTION II - DEFINITIONS (SUBDIVISION)
SECTION V -D -6 - CERTIFICATES AND ENDORSEMENTS TO APPEAR ON
FINAL PLAT
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Amendment
Amendment to GS 47 -30
PUBLIC HEARING —X —Yes No
INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Scearbo
Extension 2583
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment to
the Subdivision Regulations which would incorporate
changes in Final Plat mapping and recordation
provisions, as required by a recently ratified
amendment to G.S. 47 -30 (Plats and Subdivisions;
Mapping Requirements).
BACKGROUND: An amendment to G.S. 47--30 (Plats and Subdivisions;
Mapping Requirements) was ratified by the General
Assembly on June 12, 1991. The changes went into
effect on October 1, 1991.
The statute pertains largely to the recording of plats
in the Office of the Register of Deeds. There are
also some provisions within the Subdivision
Regulations which relate to this legislation. The
proposed amendment provides consistency with G.S. 47-
30 as amended.
The revisions
on which plats
certifications
instruments.
address the size of plats, the materials
may be drawn, survey information,
and attachments to deeds or other
RECOMMENDATION: Section VII -D of the Subdivision Regulations requires
that the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Board
hear proposals to amend the ordinance at the quarterly
76
public hearing. There is no time limit within which a
proposed amendment must be heard.
Planning Staff Recommendation
The proposed amendment was initiated and developed by
the Planning Staff. The Planning Staff recommends
approval of the proposed amendment.
No decision on the proposal is made by either the
Planning Board or Board of Commissioners at the public
hearing. Instead, the Planning Board must prepare and
submit a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
The Planning Board recommendation must be submitted to
the Board of Commissioners within 75 days following
the public hearing date. It is the general practice
of the Planning Department to present the proposal to
the Planning Board at its first regular meeting after
the public hearing, and to present the Planning Board
recommendation to the Board of Commissioners at the
first meeting thereafter.
Administration Recommendation
The Administration recommends that the proposal be
referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation to
be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner
than January 6, 1992.
1
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
REFERENCE: SECTION V -D - FINAL PLAT
SECTION II - DEFINITIONS (SUBDIVISION)
SECTION V -D -6 - CERTIFICATES AND ENDORSEMENTS TO
APPEAR ON FINAL PLAT
ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT:
Staff Planning Board
BOCC Public x Other:
STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: x High. Middle Low
Comment:
EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 25, 1991
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:
To incorporate changes in Final Plat mapping and recordation
provisions, as required by a recently ratified amendment to G.S.
47 -30 (Plats and Subdivisions; Mapping Requirements).
IMPACTS /ISSUES:
An amendment to G.S. 47 -30 (Plats and Subdivisions; Mapping
Requirements) was ratified by the General Assembly on June 12,
1991. The changes will go into effect on October 1, 1991.
The statute pertains largely to the recording of plats in the
Office of the Register of Deeds. There are also some provisions
within the Subdivision Regulations which relate to this
legislation. The proposed amendment provides consistency with G.S.
47 -30 as amended.
A copy of G.S. 47 -30 is attached. The revisions address the size
of plats, the materials on which plats may be drawn, survey
information, certifications and attachments to deeds or other
instruments.
Three sections of the Subdivision Regulations need to be revised to
address these changes.
Section V -D - Final Plat
Section V -D Final Plat specifies plat sizes, drawing medium,
plat material, scale and margins. The current standards
reflect the earlier version of G.S. 47 -30. It is recommended
that most of this Section be deleted altogether. There is a
7b
reference to G.S. 47 -30. Specific technical requirements for
drawing plats need not be repeated. Also, the current
provisions allow a plat to be prepared by a registered land
surveyor or engineer. It is proposed that the reference to
engineers be deleted. Only land surveyors may prepare surveys
and Final Plats. The reference to engineers is out - dated.
Definition - Subdivision
G.S. 47 -30 requires that one of five surveyor certifications
be placed on all plats including exempt plats. A reference to
the certificate requirement in G.S. 47 -30 is proposed as part
of the definition of subdivision.
V -D -6 - Certificates and Endorsements to appear on Final Plat
An additional survey or certification would state that a
subdivision is being created, and that he land is within the
jurisdiction of Orange County Subdivision Regulations. This
is one of the five possible certifications required by G.S.
47 -30.
An earlier draft of the proposed amendment was presented to
representatives of the N.C. Society of Surveyors, the Register of
Deeds, and the County Attorney. Several revisions were made based
on the input received from that meeting.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVISIONS:
V -D. Final Plat
The Final Plat shall be drawn in accordance with the
requirements of G.S. 47 -30 as amended and to the
specifications of this Section. The plat shall be
prepared by a registered land surveyor at a
scale.of not less than one hundred (100) feet to the inch
nor more than twenty (20) feet to the inch. Baeh plat
eleth, !!men, film er ether permanent a--ater-i-al designed
fer drafting or drawing Purposes-.
All Final Plats shall be earefuiiy with india ink
All Final Plats shall have an outside size ef
net mei=e than twenty fatir (24) inehes by thirty six (36)
1-mehem- ner less than eight and ene half (8 !j2) inehes
(I 1�2) inehes fer binding en the left maicglm and
e re-ha f (-a_ ,2) ineh berders an ea eh efthe a -the; =ides
.'here size of - land areas, or suitable Beale to assure
DEFINITIONS
SUBDIVISION - "Subdivision means all divisions of a tract or
parcel of land into two or more lots, building
sites, or other divisions for the purpose of sale
or building development (whether immediate or
future) and includes all division of land involving
the dedication of a new street or a change in
existing streets, provided, however, the following
are not included within the definition and are not
subject to any regulations pursuant to this part.
(1) ' The combination or recombination of portions
of previously subdivided and recorded lots if
the total number of lots is not increased and
the resultant lots are equal to or exceed the
standards of the County as shown in its
Subdivision Regulations.
Resultant lots, as referred to herein shall be
deemed to equal standards of the Orange County
Subdivision Regulations if the following
standards are met:
a. No conforming lot standard becomes
non - conforming as a result of the
recombination; and
b. Any applicable impervious surface
standards are met; and
C. Access is provided to a public road,
either direct, or by recorded easement,
and
d. A site suitable for sewage disposal is
approved by the Orange County Health
Department. Where soil is unsuitable for
sewage disposal, or soil suitability is
undetermined, a notice of restricted
development potential shall be submitted
and the lot(s) in question shall be so
noted on the plat.
(2) The division of land into parcels greater than
to acres if no street right -of -way dedication
is involved.
(3) The public acquisition by purchase of strips
of land for widening or opening streets.
(4) The division of a tract in single ownership of
E6A
the entire area of which is no greater than
two acres into not more than three lots, if no
street right -of- way dedication is involved
and if the resultant lots are equal to or
exceed the standards of the County as shown by
its subdivision regulations.
V -D -6. Certificates and Endorsements to ayoear on Final Plat
V- D -6 -a. Certificatei of Survey and Accurac "' `'` >` "``'` Mal...
The Final Plat shall be made by or prepared under the
supervision of a registered land surveyor licensed to
practice in the state of North Carolina and shall contain
a certificate] as required by Section 47 -30 of the
General Statutes and prepared in substantially the
following form and acknowledged by a notary public:
certify that this plat was drawn
under my supervision from (an actual survey made
under my supervision) (deed description recorded in
Book , Page , etc.) (other); that the
ratio of precision s -1: ; that the
boundaries not surveyed are shown as broken lines
plotted from information found in Book , Page
that this map was prepared in accordance
with G.S. 47 -30 as amended. Witness my hand and
seal this day of , A.D., 19 "
Seal or stamp surveyor
Registration Number
ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: October 3, 1991
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW:
BOCC REVIEW:
81
SEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA
1991 SESSION
RATIFIED BILL
CHAPTER 268
SENATE BILL 764
Sec. 3. O.S 47 -30 reads as rewritten:
"§ 47 -30. Plats and subdivisions; mapping requirements.
(a) Size Requirements. -- All land plats presented to the register of deeds for
recording in the registry of a county in North Carolina after ,
September 30. 1991 5hall-lft� having an outside marginal size of
either 18 inches by 24 inches. 21 inches by 30 inches or 24 inches by 36 inches,
and having a
minimum one and one -half inch border on the left side and a minimum one -half inch
border an e ` 5i on the other sides_ shall be deemed to meet the size recuirements
for recording under this section. 4 � -
_ C Where size of land areas, or suitable scale to
Tats may be laced on two or more sheets with appropriate
assure legibility require, p y p F ..
match lines. Counties may specify a
either:
82
u Only 18 inches by 24 inches;
_A combination of l8 inches by 24 inches and 21 inches by 30
inches;
A� combination of 18 inches by 24 inches and 24 inches by 36
inches;
s;
u A combination of all three sizes.
Sipe is
Provided, that all registers of deeds where ecific sizes
other than the combination of all three sizes have been specified shall be required to
submit said size specifications to the North Carolina Association of Registers of
Deeds for inclusion on a master list of all such counties. The list shall be available in
each re ister of deeds office by October 1 1991.
For purposes of this section, the terms 'plat' and 'map' are
synonymous.
(b) Plats
reproducible
erial plat
to Be .Reproducible. -- Each plat presented for recording shall be a
then orieint
transl2arent ana arcnivai
and submitted in this form
pLat
copy
that
must be such that the
of each recorded plat
purpose and properly
n oolvester film lmvlarl, o
ined by the American N
dra
!it e Hie preeese The recorded
public may obtain legible copies. A direct or photographic
shall be placed in the plat book or plat file maintained for
indexed for use. rr, -
�984' and
(c) Information Contained in Title of Plat. -- The title of each plat shall contain
the followin g information: property designation, name of &eoner, owner the name of
owner shall be shown for indexing urooses only and is not to be construed as title
certification location to include township, county and state, the date or dates the
survey was made; scale or scale ratio in words or figures and bar
gra h; name and address of surveyor or firm preparing the plat.
ad) Certificate; Form. -- There shall appear on each plat a certificate by the person
under whose supervision such survey or such plat was made, stating the origin of the
information shown on the plat, including recorded deed and plat references shown
thereon. The ratio of precision before any
adjustments must be shown. Any lines on the plat that were not actually surveyed
must be clearly indicated and a statement included revealing the source of
information. The execution of such certificate shall be acknowledged before any
officer authorized to take acknowledgments by the registered land surveyor preparing
the plat. All plats to be recorded shall be probated as required by law for the
registration of deeds. Where a plat consists of more than one sheet, only the -€irsE one
sheet must contain the certification and all subsequent.--other sheets must be signed
and sealed.
The certificate required above shall include -the source of information for the
survey and data indicating the ratio of precision of the
survey before adjustments and shall be in substantially the following form:
All ........... , certify that this plat was drawn under my supervision from (ter
an actual survey made under my
supervision (deed description recorded in Book ............ page ........ etc.) (other); that
the boundaries not surveyed are clearly indicated as
Senate Bill 764 5
5'
a]
drawn from information found in Book ............. page ....... that the ratio of precision
as calculated is 1 ...... - that this plat was prepared in accordance with G.S. 47 -30 as
amended. Witness my original signature, registration number and seal this ........ day
of ........ A.D., 19.....
Seal or Stamp
The certificate of the Notary shall read as
................................. ...............................
Surveyor
................................. ...............................
Registration Number'
follows:
`North Carolina, .....County.
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that ................ a
registered land surveyor, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged
the execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and official stamp or
seal, this...... day of ....... 19.....
Seal Stamp Seal or Stam
Notary Public
My Commission expires ...................
Nothing in this reouirement shall iprevent the recording of a mag that was
prepared in accordance with -a previous version of G.S. 47 -30 as amended. properly
l signed, and notarized under the statutes applicable at the time of the signing of the
1 mao. However. it shall be the responsibility of the l2erson resentin the map to
rove that the map was so prepared.
(e) Method of Computation. -- An accurate method of computation shall be used
to determine the acreage and ratio of precision shown on the plat. Area by estimation
is not acceptable nor is area by planimeter, area by scale, or area eepies copied from
another source, except in the case of tracts containing inaccessible sections or areas.
In such case the surveyor may make use of aerial photographs or other appropriate
aids to determine the acreage of such inaccessible areas when such areas are bounded
by natural and visible monuments. In such case the T#e methods used must be fh44,
stated and explai on the €$ee ef Eh-e plat and all accessible areas of the tract shall
remain subject to all applicable standards of this section.
(f) Plat to Contain Specific Information. -- Every plat shall contain the following
specific information:
(1) An accurately positioned north arrow coordinated with any
bearings shown on the plat. Indication shall be made as to whether
the north index is true, magnetic, North Carolina gf46-, grid (`NAD
83' or `NAD 27'), or is referenced to old deed or plat bearings. If
the north index is magnetic or referenced to old deed or plat
bearings, the date and the source (if known) such index was
originally determined shall be clearly indicated.
(2) The azimuth or eettrses course and
}ire distance of every property line surveyed shall be shown.
Distances shall be in feet or meters and decimals thereof. The
number of decimal places shall be appropriate to the class of
survey required.
6 Senate Bill 764
V
[oil
(3) All plat lames distances shall be by horizontal (ies-ei) or 7-rid
measurements. All _G...._.. T lines shown on the plat shall be
correctly plotted to the scale shown. Enlargement of portions of a
plat are acceptable in the interest of clarity, where shown as i- rt1
e —i4t ei-:. inserts. Where the North Carolina grid system is
used the grid factor shall be shown on the face of the ple� at$
plat. If grid distances are used it must be
shown on the plat.
(4) Where a boundary is formed by a curved line, the following data
must be given: actual survey data from the point of curvature to
the point of tangency shall be shown as standard curve data, or as
a traverse of bearings and distances around the curve. If standard
curve data is used the bearing and distance of the long chord (from
point of curvature to point of tangency) must be shown onn
e€ the plat.
(5) Where a subdivision of land is set out on the plat, all streets and
lots shall be e*reFttily accurately plotted with dimension lines
indicating widths and all other information pertinent to
reestablishing all .Lines in the field. This shall include bearings and
distances sufficient to form a continuous closure of the entire
perimeter.
(6) Where control - corners have been established in compliance with
G.S. 39 -32.1, 39 -32.2, 39 -32.3, and 39 -32.4, as amended, the
location and pertinent information as required in the reference
statute shall be plotted on the plat. All other corners which are
marked by monument or natural object shall be so identified on all
plats, and where practical all corners of adjacent owners i� along
.the boundary lines of the subject tract which are marked by
monument or natural object rntt5t shall be with
. shown. ti
(7) The names of adjacent "-` wit4t
.. �..� landowners or lot,
;3Qek &r- block, parcel, subdivision
designations or other legal reference where applicable, shall be
shown where they could be determined by the surveyor.
(8) All visible and apparent rights -of -way, watercourses, utilities,
roadways, and other such improvements shall be accurately located
where crossing or forming any boundary line of the property
shown.
(9) Where the plat is the result of a survey, one or more corners shall,
by a system of azimuths or courses and distances, be accurately
tied to and coordinated with a horizontal control monument of
some United States or State Agency survey system, such as the
Natiafta4 North Carolina Geodetic Survey
where such - monument is within 2,000
feet of -a4el .arse.: the subject ro ertv.-Where the North Carolina
Grid System coordinates of said' monument are on file in the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, the coordinates of both the referenced corner shot!! -1 °e
�d and the monuments used shall be shown in X (easting)
L
and Y (northing) a_+ � coordinates on the lap t he
coordinates shall be identified as based on `NAD 83.' indicating-
North American Datum of 1983 or as `NAD 27,' indicating North
Senate Bill 764 7
d
American Datum of 1927. The tie lines to the monuments shall
also be sufficient to establish true north or grid north bearings for
the plat if the monuments exist in- pairs. - _Within a .previously
recorded subdivision that has been tied to-.grid control,-- control
monuments within the subdivision may be used in lieu of
additional ties to grid control, _Within a previously recorded
subdivision that has not been tied to grid control, if horizontal
control monuments are available w_ ithin 2,000 feet. the above
requirements shall be met: but in the interest of bearing
consistency with previously recorded plats, existing bearing control
should be used where practical. In the absence of Grid Control,
other appropriate natural monuments or landmarks shall be used.
In all cases, the tie lines shall be sufficient to accurately reproduce
the subject lands from the control or reference points used.
(10) A vicinity map location mVj shall appear on Elie a i the plat.
11 Notwithstandin anv other rovision contained in this section it is
the dutv of the survevor, by a certificate on the face of the plat, to
cernty to one of the toiiowing:
a. That the survey creates a subdivision of land within the area
of a county or municipality that has an ordinance that
regulates parcels of land-,
bt That the survey is located in such portion of a _county or
municipality that is unregulated_ as to an ordinance that
regulates parcels _of land
C. That the survev is of an existing parcel or parcels of land:
d. That the survey is of another category, such as the
recombination of existing parcels. a court - orderedsurvey, or
other exception to the definition of subdivision;
C. That the information available to the survevor is such that
the survevor is unable to make a determination to the best
of his or her professional ability as to provisions contained
in (a) through (dLabove.
However- if the nlat contains the certificate of a survevor as stated
in a., d., or e; above, trien the plat snap nave, in aaottion to saia
survevor's certificate. a certification of approval, or no approval
required, as may be required by local ordinance from the
appropriate government authority before the plat is-presented for
recordation. If the plat contains the certificate of a survevor as
stated in b. or c. above, nothing shall prevent the recordation of
the glat if all other provisions have been met.
(g) Recording of Plat. -- For gurposes of recording. the register of deeds shall not
be responsible for:
(1) The provisions of subsection N. as to archival:
2 The provisions of subsection d except for the
3L The orovisions of subsection e • or
L4L The provisions of subdivisions 2 through 9 of subsection
A plat, when proven and probated as provided herein for deeds and other
conveyances, when presented for recording, shall be recorded in the plat book or plat
file and when so recorded shall be duly indexed. Reference in any instrument
hereafter executed to the record of any plat herein authorized shall have the same
effect as if the description of the lands as indicated on the record of the plat were set
out in the instrument.
I:?
Senate Bill 764
r
(h) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent the filing of any plat
prepared by a registered land surveyor but not recorded prior to the death of the
registered land surveyor. However, it is the responsibility of the persgn presenting the
map to prove that the plat was so prepared. For preservation these plats may be filed
without signature. notary acknowledgement or probate, in a special plat file.
(i) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to invalidate any instrument or the title
thereby conveyed making reference to any recorded plat.
6) The provisions of this section shall not apply to boundary plats of areas
annexed by municipalities nor to plats of municipal boundaries, whether or not
required by law to be recorded.
(k) The provisions of this section shall apply to all 4QG counties in North Carolina -
Where local law is in conflict with this section, the provisions in this section shall
apply. Failure of a plat to conform in all requirements of this statute shall be
sufficient grounds for the register of deeds to refuse to accept the plat for recordation.
(1) The provisions of this section shall not apply to the registration of highway
right -of -way plans .provided for in G.S. 136 -19.4 nor to registration of roadway
corridor official maps provided in Article 2E of Chapter 136.
(m) Anv_m_ag_orepared by a registered- land surveyor and submitted for inclusion
Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors. In_ the interest of the
public welfare, and to assure that snaps have not been altered prior to submission for
recordiniZ, and in accordance with G.S. 89C -26 the maos shall have an original
personal si nature and original seal as agprgved by the North Carolina State Board
for Re istration for Professional En ineers and Land Surveyors. Nothing in this
subsection shall prohibit the recordation of a document that includes an attachment
not prepared by a registered land surveyor."
Sec. 4. Section 3 of this act becomes effective October 1, 1991. The
-. remainder of this act is effective upon ratification and applies to any action filed on
or after that date.
In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 12th day of
June, 1991.
�1
J
JAMES C. GARDNER
James C. Gardner
President of the Senate
DANIEL BLUEl JR.
Daniel Blue, Jr.
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Senate Bill 764 9
i dl_ji..' —.. — ,
.. .J'• -i � 'i -,' I'ii L7e i�T1 F- I l ! .":ii_IF�',. .. � '_. � 1 � ..�'" i r. � '-
NORTH CAROLINA SOCIETY OF SURVEYORS, IN(-.
SOC:I =T Y OFF-ICS: P.O. BOX 837 TABOR CITY, NORTH GAROI I N A 2b::c
TELEPHONE (9iS) 653.37W
November 25, 1991
Mary ,Scearbo
Orange County ?1 inning J;?pa►rtmeut
306 Revere Road
Hiiiaborough, N. C.
Dear Mazy,
Jerry Davis, President of the Northwest 'Triangle Chapter of the N.C.
- -8ty of Surveyors has sent me a copy of his letter to you concerning too
. -POSed changes to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations. The N,C.
;,Oci.ety of surveyors worked for over seven years with the rewrite of GS
47 -30, working with many professional organizations before a final draft :!f
Te was ready for introduction to the N.C. Legislature. Our goal
rewrite was to provide a statewide m4thod by which plats cou 1 si caw
far future generations to utilize.
=c e?upPorts the efforts of the Northwest Triangle Chaptpr n workin-
r
}. o b 'l
ring your Subdivision Regulations in step with CS 47 -10
we: iltiect October 1, 1991. Unfortunatal.y, due to prior -
�,v unat)le to attend the public hearing on November 25, and
�: ter_- •,x,ng at the public hearing, z would request that this letter,
;•�:�, Lr. the records of the public hearing.
- ape that you will consider the Suggesti':.ns made by the Norti -,,.,
rr.- chapter concerning certification of zoning jurisdiction an,-i
i
secrs:n (i)(11) Of GS 47 -30. We believe that section (f)(11) cnnraina
proper mechanism for insuring that the Public's best interp?tr i 4
when plats are recorded in the R0%g1*tPr of nppdg offiCe.
1 would 1 ixe tea thank you and tho Orangk: County Planning
f-or allowing NCSS to ztate It's opinion concerning the l�r,�rnye�) ,,: ^.,- , ;�.•,
LI I Car! ce Of any further assistance., or 'if T ran ar.�+wer any
f.�ei frpp to gives me a . -all at (919) 713 -3836,
!;art W. Thueup9on,'Prvf- %ic:r --t
of
AFFILIATE OF i, ;r- -L n.,r.:.�r .!n ��
. _ Ar+�rur
I
Northwestern
Triangle Chapter
North Carolina Society of Surveyors, Inc.
Please address reply to:
Jerry W. Davis, RLS
President, Northwestern Chapter of
North Carolina Society of Surveyors
P.O. Box 14005
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27709
November 21, 1991
Orange County Commissioners
P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, N.C. 27278
Dear Commissioners:
( ) - zs�j
Y want to thank you for hearing us on the proposed Subdivision
Regulations Ordinance Amendment before you. North Carolina Society of
Surveyors and our local chapter, the Northwestern Triangle Chapter,
have both been working with Mary Scearbo on this. She sent us an early
version of the draft proposal in August. On August 29, Gary Thompson,
President of North Carolina Society of Surveyors, Alois Callemyn,
Chairman of our Chapter committee on this topic, and Linda Edmondson,
Chapter Committee member, met with Ms. Scearbo, Geof Gledhill, and
Betty June Hayes. The draft before you now incorporates many of the
ideas that came up in that discussion. Our Chapter commends the
Planning Department and the other public officials for their productive
attitude of cooperation.
Ms. Scearbo also sent us this latest draft. With several excep-
tions, we think it is a very workable Ordinance Amendment. if the two
minor revisions we suggest below are made, our Chapter can endorse this
Amendment wholeheartedly.
The rewrite of G.S. 47--30 went into effect October 1. The North
Carolina Society of Surveyors worked for seven years with the Register
of Deeds Association on this rewrite. The N. C. State Board of Regis-
tration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, the N. C.
Property Mappers Association, the N. C. Bar Association, and the Land
Records Management Division of (now) the Secretary of State's office,
also worked closely with us.' The purpose of the rewrite was to bring
the information required on recorded plats up to date, to make the
plats more long -- lasting, to make the plats easier to index and store,
to make the plats less susceptible to unauthorized alteration, and to
encourage more of these important plats to. be recorded and to be
preserved for the public.
Ms. Scearbo's proposed changes to Section V -D of our Ordinance,
"Final Plat," are totally appropriate. These will streamline the
Ordinance.
We agree with her proposed change to Section II, "Definitions," in
principle. We certainly agree that the Planning Department should
approve a plat for recordation which shows any exempt division of land.
However, as our Chapter was reviewing this draft at our monthly meet-
ing, several questions came up about what the word "status" meant. We
propose that the addition here read "The status of Plats-f-a-l-ling under
exemutions (1) „tbX_oy„gh (4) above must be certified on the plat by the
Planning Department prior to its recordation . . .” This is clearly
consistent with G.S. 47 -30. We also,think this is clearly what Ms.
Scearbo has proposed. The underlined phrase is merely for added
clarity should questions come up in the future.
This Amendment also revises Section V- D -6 -a, "Certificates and En-
dorsements to Appear on Final Plat." We propose that the proposed new
certificate "I, , certify that this survey creates a
subdivision within the regulation jurisdiction of Orange County" be
deleted and replaced with the following: s ve or shall also
cert_i_fy_on the plat as required by G.S. This is the
same requirement Ms. Scearbo proposes in Section II.
These are our reasons for this: First, the purpose of Section
(f)(11) of G.S. 47 -30 is to allow the Register of Deeds to know whether
to record the plat or to require it to show the proper approvals. Mr.
Robert Robinson, Register of Deeds of Brunswick County, and also the
Chairman of the Register of Deeds Legislative Committee, asked for this
section in G.S. 47 -30. The surveyor has five options. Paraphrased,
option (a) is that the survey is a subdivision which needs to be
approved. Option (b) is that the survey is a subdivision in a county
or part of a county where there is no subdivision ordinance. Option
(c) is that the survey is a boundary survey of an existing parcel.
Option (d) is that the survey is a division of land which is exempt
from the subdivision ordinance. Option (e) says the surveyor does not
know which of (a) through (d) apply.
Option (b) does not apply to Orange County, since the entire
county is covered by some subdivision ordinance. In Buncombe County,
for example, a surveyor may certify that his survey is in an area the
subdivision ordinance does not cover. He can do this 1.L-he feels sure
that he c ake t dete 'on with f'dence. If not, he may
certify (e).
Mr. Robinson initially wanted the surveyor to state the jurisdic-
tion. This was so he would know which Planning Department to send
someone to who wanted to record an unapproved subdivision plat. After
objections from the North Carolina Society of Surveyors that a surveyor
could not always tell what jurisdiction a survey fell in, Mr. Robinson
dropped that request.
Page 2
The point is that if the surveyor certifies (b), the plat does not
have to be approved by any Planning Department. The Register of Deeds
records it if it meets the requirements of G.S. 47 -30. If the surveyor
certifies (a), (d), or (e), thS. Plat ust be roved by The Planning
Department. The only reason option (a) mentions jurisdiction is to
acknowledge that in some counties subdivision plats do not have to be
approved. This does not apply to Orange County.
Surveyors who work in Orange County will include the phrase
"within the area of a county or municipality that has an ordinance that
regulates parcels of land" when they choose option (a). G.S. 47 -30
does not require a surveyor to say which jurisdiction a survey falls
into. Since the stated purpose of this Amendment is to make the
Subdivision Regulations consistent with G.S. 47 -30, the Subdivision
Regulations should not require the surveyor to state that a survey is
within Orange County's jurisdiction, either.
Second, there are many situations where a surveyor may not know
whose jurisdiction a property is in. Our Chapter's committee has had
two cases in the last six months where Orange County Planners initially
did not know whether a property was in Orange County's jurisdiction.
Different maps showed. different things. In another case where a
property which straddled the Alamance County line, where the property
was did not control who approved the subdivision. The county which had
it on their assessment roles controlled the jurisdiction. In some
cases where the property is in more than one jurisdiction, the rules
for deciding who will approve the subdivision seem informal and
unwritten.
Please remember that a Registered Land Surveyor is a grgtjessional .
Unlike a property owner, he p nnot ask the Planning Department whether
the property is in their jurisdiction and then certify it. Any cer-
tification must be his own conclusions based on appropriate references
and evidence he has gathered. He has professional liability for his
certifications and opinions just as a doctor has for his diagnoses and
an attorney has for his opinions. He puts his professional reputation
and his livelihood on the line every time he signs a certificate.
For a surveyor to sign a certificate as to jurisdiction, we would
need oil official jurisdiction map. This map would need to show the
dividing boundaries in a way that could be legally described. It would
need to be certified by all controlling parties (probably Orange
County, Town of Hillsborough, Town of Chapel Hill, Town of Carrbaro.
Alamance County, Chatham County, Durham County, Person County, and
Caldwell County). This map would need to be recorded in the Register
of Deeds office.
Third, except for the surveyor's certificate required by G.S. 47-
30, a Registered Land Surveyor is never required to certify yes or no
about anything. In the case of the G.S. 47 -30 certificate, the sur-
veyor is required to certify (1) that he did the survey (or supervised
it); (2) the sources he used; (3) the ratio of precision of his tra-
verse; and (4) that the plat complies with G.S. 47 -30. The exact
Page 3
t
wording of the certificate is up to the surveyor. All of these are
objective things which do not require giving a professional opinion.
In the case of other certificates, there is always the option of given
a qualified professional opinion or saying "I cannot make this deter-
mination in this case." This is in keeping with good professional
practice.
The G.S. 47 -30 rewrite recognized the necessity of a professional
saying "I don't know in this case" by providing option (e) in Section
(f)(11). I do not believe our Board of Registration would have
approved the rewrite without this option.
Fourth, the proposal to require a surveyor to certify that a plat
submitted for subdivision approval is a subdivision is the same. In
most cases, a surveyor can and will easily certify that the plat he
submits for subdivision approval is a subdivision. It is conceivable
in some cases that he may not be sure. This would probably be when one
owner has several adjacent tracts and is only having one surveyed.
Think of the situation where several 25' wide lots were bought. The
surveyor can ask the Planning Department if the survey is a sub-
division. He can submit the survey for subdivision approval based on
the Planning Department opinion. He canngl certify that the survey is
a subdivision unless he is of that professional opinion from his own
knowledge. The option of saying he does not know must be kept open.
Fifth, we do not understand what the overriding interest to the
public welfare or to Orange County is in forcing the surveyor to
certify jurisdiction and that a survey is a subdivision. The N. C.
Legislature has said the owner is the one to state the jurisdiction
(G.S. 153A -332). If the owner has signed a statement saying he wants
Orange County's subdivision approval, what liability does the County
have? This is the system we have used since the Subdivision Regula-
tions Ordinance was adopted, and we are not aware of any problems it
has caused.
I believe with these two changes, the Amendment to the Subdivision
Regulations Ordinance will be a needed tool to let us work together in
the future.
Respectfully,
)) 6411_�
err Davis, RLS
Present, Northwestern Chapter of
Forth Carolina Society of Surveyors
cc: Mary Scearbo
Beverly Blythe
Page 4
113
REALT00
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Orange County Commissioners Office
400 Court Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Commissioners:
CHAPEL HILL BOARD OF REALTORS® INC.
501 WEST FRANKLIN STREET, SUITE 104
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27516
April 16, 1991
The Chapel Hill Board of REALTORS with a membership of 325 individuals
engaged in the real estate and related financial and ancillary professions in Orange
County at its April General Membership meeting unanimously voted to endorse the
following:
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING
EXTENDED AREA SERVICE
IN ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, Orange County is a dynamic community of 94,000 people
and approximately 400 square miles, and
WHEREAS, the County is a community divided by its telephone
service with six telephone toll areas served by -four different
telephone companies, and
WHEREAS, because of this fragmented local telephone service the
community suffers both economically and socially, and
WHEREAS, the telephone barriers are totally out of align with
community development and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners is requesting
extended area service for the county to include all exchanges
except those in Prospect Hill, Timberlake, and the area
adjacent to the Durham County line served by GTE.
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Chapel Hill Board of
REALTORS, Inc. supports the Orange County Board of
Commissioners request for extended area service.
Chapel Hill Board of REALTORS, Inc.
E. Victor Knight, President
Christie K Adams, Secretary
�t A-F ryas 7r
op
mebane packaging corporation
MEBANE INDUSTRIAL PARK . PO. BOX 408 + MEBANE, N.G 27302 . 919 563 -3516 + TELEFAX 919 563 -9664 . TELEX 323073
�n
November 22, 1991
D 0
As a business that operates on the western edge of Orange County in the
Mebane Telephone service area, and being one of the larger tax base
industries in Orange county, we ask the county commissioners to make
sure of the facts and the financial impact that the EAS will have on
industry. First year cost to Mebane Packaging approximately $50,000 for
business cards, stationery, forms of various nature. Plus the
notification of number changes to customers which is also very
expensive. With number of telephone lines that we use our static
charges will be somewhere between $12,000 and $15,000 annually. Is it
really fair that businesses should be picking up the tariff for those
who elected to move out of the city of Chapel hill because the living
expenses are greater than what they now are experiencing.
It appears to those of us in business in the western area of Orange
county that the program as approved recently by the utilities commission
for reduced toll rates is certainly worthy of trial.
It is certainly very possible that this proposal by such a small group
could be very far reaching, especially to the Alamance County customers,
since the utilities commission permits utility companies to make certain
profits.
I hope that the Orange County Commission will get all the facts of this
proposal rather than only the biased information that such a small group
is presenting to you.
A. Don Bradshaw
Vice President
ADB /jh
Denise Robinson
3535 Lonesome Road
Cedar Grove, North Carolina 27231
November 25, 1991
Board of County
Commissioners
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough, N.C. 27278
Dear Commissioners;
I live in an area of Cedar Grove that is served by Mebane Home
Telephone Company. Most of my telephone calls are to other
places in Orange County and are long distance calls. The
school our children attend, our doctor, dentist, church, and
pharmacy are all long distance. We can call only one family
member without an extra charge. This does not even take into
consideration any "social" phone calls.
My parents are not in good health and I would like to be able
to call them each day; but, I cannot afford to make even a
short long distance call every day. I realize that extended
area service would bring a small additional charge but that
charge would be off -set by the reduction in long distance
fees now paid for a few long distance calls.
If we could choose the telephone company that serves our home,
we would choose the one that best fits our needs. However,
this is not possible; so, I urge the Board to continue to work
towards improved telecommunications for Orange County citizens.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
4&xx.�� 1
Denise Robinson
'N-�F
RfllshorouV4 Arica 014amber of Totninerrie
150 East King Street • Phone 732 -8156 • Hillsborough, NC 27278
November 25, 1991
Orange County Commissioners
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
To the Commissioners:
Several months ago the Hillsborough Area Chamber of Commerce wrote a
letter in support of Orange County's plan for toll -free countywide phone
service. We share your disappointment that the utilities commission turned
down this request by refusing to allow a referendum on the matter.
Once again we are letting you know that the Hillsborough Chamber, an
organization that is made up of more than 175 businesses and organizations,
wishes to see this plan carried forward, and pledges the Chamber's support
to work toward its implementation.
Most of our Hillsborough businesses are small -- and they must depend on
loyal customers and users from the surrounding area. Lang- distance calling
is a stumbling block in this relationship; both for the customer who is hesi-
tant to place a toll call, and the company who incurs additional expense for
trying to do business in the Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Mebane and Efland areas.
Our members are also of the opinion that Orange County's economic develop-
ment efforts are hampered by our old-- fashioned telephone system. We feel
strongly that companies who look at our county for site location or relocation
are turned off by our archaic communications system. We also believe that
any increase in cost to customers, both business and residential, would be
off -set in the future by the expanded, diversified tax base that appropriate
new business would bring.
Sincerely,
Barbara B. Palmer
Executive Director
Visit Historic Hillsborough • Chartered Seventeen Hundred Fifty -Nine
-p. -- - �6_F I i -Z9-67l
6626 Bradshaw Quarry Rd.
Efland, N. C. 27243
November 19, 1991
Orange County Board of Commissioners
c/o Clerk to the Board
Court Street Annex
109 Court Street
Hillsborough, N.C. 27278
Dear Members of the Board of Commissioners:
We are writing to strongly support the petition to poll
Orange County subscribers of the Mebane Home Telephone Company
on their willingness to become a part of a county -wide toll
free telephone system. Our home is within the Mebane telephone
system, and the long distance cost to us for telephone calls
within Orange County exceeds $20 monthly. For the past 10
months, these charges totaled $211. We pay long distance charges
for calls to Hillsborough, to Chapel Hill, and even for calls
to our own postoffice in Efland. We would be glad to bear the
monthly charge of $3.61 if these calls were part of our basic
service.
Because Mebane is not considered to be a part of Orange
County in the telephone listings available to directory
assistance operators, persons who attempt to get our telephone
number through directory assistance are regularly told that
they have no listing for our name. This occurs because the
Mebane Home Telephone subscribers are listed under Alamance
County, including those subscribers whose post office address
is Efland. A few years ago, someone tried to reach a visitor
in our home to inform him of his grandmother's death, and even
though the caller knew that our mailing address was Efland in
Orange County, they were told that our number was not listed.
Our visitor received a letter from his father telling of
the grandmother's death and burial and the attempt made to call
him at our home. The young man was extremely upset and we were
furious with the telephone non - service. We sent a letter to
the Utilities Commission who sent us a copy of a letter sent
to the Mebane Home Telephone Company directing it to correct
the situation. We received a call from the phone company telling
us that we would be listed in the Hillsborough directory. We
still aren't.
Recently, we learned that a friend from France tried to
call us. She stated that we lived in Efland when she was asked
what city she was calling. She was told there was no listing
for us.
We dialed information ourselves and asked for our number
only to be told we weren't listed. When we asked that the
I "
operator check again, she repeated that the number was not
listed. Only then did she suggest we call Information again
and ask for the Mebane operator because some of the people in
Efland had Mebane numbers. Thus, not only do we pay long
distance charges for calling most places in Orange County, but
we are not even listed in the phone directory as being in Orange
County.
Because of the cumulative monthly cost of phone calls to
other parts of Orange County, we deliberately do not make a
number of business and private phone calls to Chapel Hill or
Hillsborough that we would otherwise make. Inevitably, these
long distance charges cause us to do less business in Orange
County than if we had toll free access. Orange County is an
economic and social unit, and our telephone system should reflect
this unity.
We strongly advocate
of all telephone systems
extra monthly charges to
throughout Orange County.
Carl M. Shy
polling of the Orange County residents
on their willingness to pay the small
have extended area telephone service
Sincerely
Eve Carol Shy
'-
fy-����
/� ^~~_ ^
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN,
IN REGARDS TO THE PROPOSAL OF TOLL-FREE CALLING FOR THE
TRIANGLE AREA, I AND MY FAMILY ARE IN TOTAL SUPPORT OF THIS
PROPOSAL. WORKING IN DURHAM AND LIVING IN CARRBORO MAKES
COMMUNICATION EXPENSIVE. PLEASE SERIOUSLY CONSIDER 8OIN3
FORWARD WITH THIS ACTION AS SUON AS POSSIBLE.
- -''
THANK-YOU FOR YOUR TIME,
KEVIN AND JEANNE MITCHELL
109-1-3 MILTON DR.
CARRBORO,NC 27510
3226
Cedar Grove,
Orange County Board
of Commissioners
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough, N.C. 27278
Dear Commissioners;
Gail Walker
Carr Store Road
North Carolina 27231
November 25, 1991
As a citizen of Northern Orange County, I urge the Board to
continue to pursue extended area service for the entire County.
I happen to live in an area of Cedar Grove Township that is
served by Mebane Home Telephone Company. At least 90% of all
my calls are to other Orange County citizens or businesses and
are toll calls. Our church, workplace, daycare, pharmacy,
dentist, and doctor are all long distance phone calls. Calls
to most family members are also long distance. Because of the
long - distance charges, we cannot make "social" calls to
friends.
My parents are getting older and are not in very good health.
I would like to be able to pick up the phone each evening and
check on them. As it stands now, I can afford to call only
occasionally.
I understand that extended area service would bring some small
rate increase. However, that increase would be less than the
long distance charges I now pay for a few, occasional calls; I
would then be able make the calls that I cannot afford to make
now.
The citizens of Orange County can make choices about many
things. Unfortunately, we cannot choose the phone company that
serves our individual homes. If we could, we would give our
business to the company that best met our needs.
Again, I urge the Board to continue to work towards an
improved communication situation for Orange County Citizens.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sin erely,
ai ai. er
4 CD
C/) =-0
CD
O n
3 cn
CD a r+
c =o
cn o
Cy CD o2'
�
o co
CD c: CD
C �0
CT =T
C C:
CD
�C m
CD
CL
C m C na
�+ Q
> �-.
_. _.
CD CO
CD n Q CD
CD V
—• m
Q o 0 Q
CD 0- B o
Q� �-
_.
Fn -- n
CD
0 0. o.
0
CD < "a
CD. CCD % CD Q
Q. < c
r � Q Q
CD
m
cn >
f-+ (n
0
D
Z
m
n
0
c
z
K
cD
cr
CD
0
0
0
0
Nftwe
07
0
IN
0
c
0
CD
rn
x
C7
z
G)
rn
�o
rn
cn
D
rn
z
0
rn
co
z
rn
fA
m
o�
oD
o Z
�m
0
zn
>O
oz
m
n C/)
z
D
m
1
-69
69
W
N
0
-.�
cD
-1
CY)
cn
Cy)
rn
x
C7
z
G)
rn
�o
rn
cn
D
rn
z
0
rn
co
z
rn
fA
m
o�
oD
o Z
�m
0
zn
>O
oz
m
n C/)
z
D
m
1
-69
69
c�
(n
0
-.�
cD
-1
CY)
w
CA)
rn
x
C7
z
G)
rn
�o
rn
cn
D
rn
z
0
rn
co
z
rn
fA
m
o�
oD
o Z
�m
0
zn
>O
oz
m
n C/)
z
D
m
1
• • • z
0mc/) _ 0 C
XCD ro� 0�
(a C % -% Coco r
�
CD (D cv � 2) CD --q
� �) � � rn
_ c�'
_ Cn
—3 m�, o o�
CD D
Co CD �• —
a' C 0
3m QL :3 (D zo
CD W
0 (� m
f-+ C. • a) ? —I
CD :3 CD (a CD Cl) 0
�
C
�• >
2) a C� Cn
a
o Q
a z
(C) rD a >
m
CD
i • •
CD VO
CD CL to rn �v
W� ox�oCn =0
C? a � 0 a � -%
CD =3 C-)CCDD�o =co w
Z0 _.� Q� ❑
> c Ca (v CD
� � C) 0 CD o =.
o0Q�
CD moo- �'
C)CD
> - +- Q
07 — 2Z F o � * M
• -v C) :3 m m
.�-
> �� Q
_. co p � C/) V C/)
� * -0 :3 ::3 :r
�-+ > CD 0 a ` CD CD
:3 Q r+ 7;: CD
rn
,0= as CD
CD w :3 CD -0
C B 0 CCD
CD -0 C: C —
a 3o' o
Fn
CD w
Q
•
-0o Q
CD
o
0 = �
CD :2. a
C7
o
CD
� C7
o
�C:
0 :3-
r�
o rn
CD
Q
c
z '`"
cQ
V -
C:
W
r
r�
L0J
m
m
Cl)
ma
0
z
CD
m
z
0
C
0
a
m
0
Cl)
0
z
0
D
Z
m
n
0
c
z
m
D
0 o CD ,� a •�. 0 0� a
0 � -1 =
Ln CD � 3, `�
`C C CD
0
CD z Q
0.0 .c`n C�
cD C 0 -`
cn CD a 0 D 0 CD 0Z
Q ■ f- f. � 0 Imo" G)
�
CD C'- cn' � �o rrn
�'� o p
CD CD
CD CD 0 0
a 0 CD CD z Q
0 cr) N 0 Cs wo CD CD Z Z
CT �? CD f-+ o 000 C7
h o m
�-h m a� m>
CD —h .. Cl) —
0 � C/)
1 m C3 -
-30 > Q
(a CO Z
7e� e
i
4
�,I
r
,r
1&-il
_....._ ..................... ............ -- - - -----....
............................... rfi -..... - ......- ..............
in
ep" L4
ol
V
. � b.
k
.........�_ �iw .... � l.:G.
��
i
r
i
- iii,
r, �....,..�._...�...._.^.._�....� a. � l
w�........_. .... -r.w
F'
;- �!
Y rf
a
;.r i
�.
F'
;- �!
Y rf
HAYWOOD, DENNY, MILLER, JOHNSON, SESSOMS & PATRICK
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
EGBERT L. HAYWOOD ( 1911 -1985)
WACHOVIA BANK BUILDING
EMERY B. DENNY, JR.(1924 -1982)
201 WEST MAIN STREET
GEORGE W. MILLER, JR-
SUITE 400
CHAPEL HILL OFFICE
JAMES H. JOHNSON, 111
POST OFFICE BOX 451
SUITE 530,EUROPA CENTER
B- M. SESSOMS
DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA 27702 -04SI
100 EUROPA DRIVE
MICHAEL W. PATRICK
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514
KEVIN W, BUTTERFIELD
AREA CODE (919) 682 -5747
(919) 942.446?
E. ELIZABETH LEFLER
ROBERT E. LEVIN
TELECOPIER NO -(919) 682 -5740
JOHN J. PADILLA
ANDREW Y LANDAUER November 22, 1991
Mr. Eddie Kirk
Planner II
Orange County Planning Department
306F Revere Road
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
RE: Stonegate Mobile Home Park
Modification for Class A Special Use Permit
PD-H, R -4 Approved October 4, 1982, Revised
And Recorded September 18, 1989
Dear Mr. Kirk:
In connection with the above matter and in furtherance of our
October 7, 1991 Application for Modification, our October 18, 1991
letter, the documents provided with each of these and our several
conferences, we are providing additional documents as follows:
I. Norfolk Southern Corporation. Letter of October 29, 1991
acknowledging receipt of documents in connection with easement and
pipeline crossing indicating that the Application is being considered
by Norfolk Southern.
2. NCDOT. Letter of October 22, 1991 approving and providing
Encroachment Agreement.
3. Mount Hermon Baptist Church. Copy of Deed of Easement dated
November 10, 1991.
4. Memorandum updating detail of the Project work Chronology to
November, 1991.
Letters /statements confirming availability of garbage service,
septic service, fire and rescue service and law enforcement service as
follows:
5. A -OK Home Services (garbage service).
6. McFarland Septic Tank Service (sludge removal service).
Mr. Eddie Kirk
November 22, 1991
Page Two
7. Orange County Emergency Management /Eno Fire Protection
Association (fire and rescue service).
8. Lindy Pendergrass, Orange County Sheriff (law enforcement
service).
This will confirm our discussion of November 20, 1991 and general
agreement regarding additional suggested conditions by the Orange
County Planning Department which are discussed as follows:
1. All conditions of the Special Use Permit recorded in Book
813, Page 599, Orange County Registry, shall be applicable. Some of
the conditions have been modified but these can be included in an
amendment to the Special Use Permit.
2. All easement documents providing for sewer easements and
access for construction and maintenance of the sewer line from the
Norfolk Southern Corporation, North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Mount Hermon Baptist Church and Dorothy C. Bane,
Applicant, are to be provided and recorded, where applicable, prior to
construction. Except for the Norfolk Southern Corporation which is in
process, all such easement documents have been secured and copies are
provided.
3. Easements around the proposed Treatment Plant and Spray
Irrigation Field shall be platted to meet North Carolina Department of
Environmental Management setback and buffer requirements. Such
easements shall act as setbacks and buffers to insure continued
compliance with DEM standards. A copy of the recommended easement
document signed by Dorothy C. Bane, Applicant, and recommended plat of
survey as referred to therein are submitted herewith. We believe
these will satisfy the concerns raised by Mr. Paul Thames, Orange
County Engineer, as they are in accordance with DEM Permit No.
WQ0004370 for Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and
Spray Irrigation System dated May 31, 1991, copy of which we
previously provided.
4. Clause to include in the amended Special Use Permit limiting
the number of units in the Park to 104 with a total number of bedrooms
not to exceed 208 in combination whether contained in one, two or
three bedroom units as follows:
"In order to insure compliance with the 25,000 GPD capacity of
N.C. DEM permit number WQ000437O issued to Ms. Dorothy C. Bane,
Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray Irrigation
System, Orange County on May 31, 1991, the number of units permitted
in the park shall not exceed 104 with a total number of bedrooms not
Mr. Eddie Kirk
November 22, 1991
Page Three
to exceed 208. it is the intent of this provision to limit the number
of units in the park to 104 or less to insure that the total number of
bedrooms shall not exceed 208 in combination whether contained in 1,2,
or 3 bedroom units."
5. Final Boundary Survey including all easements and
improvements shall be recorded.
This provides the documents and information discussed herein and
responds according to previous correspondence and our discussions.
Sincerely yours,
B. M. Sessoms
BMS /pje
Enclosures
cc: Dorothy C. Bane
Sidney V. Credle
NORFOLK
SOUTHERN
Norfolk Southern Corporation D. N. Zureich
Transportation Department Superintendent
Piedmont Division
1120 W. Washington St, °et
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
803 255 -4335
October 29, 1991 HN /jl
4--6 -3 Eno Township, NC
cNi
Mr. Sidney V. Credle, P.E., R.L.S. ca
c- �! O L�-
Credle Engineering Co., Inc. G �ff�•
204 E . Markham Avenue
Durham, North Carolina 27701
Dear Mr. Credle:
This acknowledges your letter dated October 15, 1991
concerning proposed construction of a pipeline crossing
located in Eno Township, Orange County, NC,
Effective June 1, 1990, Norfolk Southern has developed a
Master Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Program to
cover Norfolk southern while contractors working for third
parties are on its property performing construction projects
such as wireline /pipeline crossings. The licensee must
indicate in the license agreement that it wishes to
participate in the program and sign and return the license
agreement along with a check to cover the insurance fee and
any other fees due.
Your application is being forwarded to our Engineering
Department for consideration. I will advise you of decision
reached.
e truly yours, �
D. N. Zureic
superintende
Operating Subsid:aries: Norfolk Southern Railway Company / North American Van Lines. Inc.
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
Orange County
w ST,ir ry.•.y,,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. 0. Box 14996
Greensboro, NC 27415 -49.96 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
October 22, 1991
GEORGE E. WELLS. P.E-
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject_ Encroachment Agreement - Mrs. Dorothy C. Bare
Installation of a 3" Force Main. across SR 1713
and the Installation of an Aerial Electric Line
across SR 1713
Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane
3519 Old Hwy. #10
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Dear Mrs. Bane:
Attached is Riaht of Way_ Encroachment Agreement which has
been properly executed. r
The De_nartment of Transportation does not cuarantee the ric ^t
of wav on this road, nor will it be responsible for any claim
for damaces broucht by anv nromerty owner by reason of the
installation. - - - -
Approval is given subject to posting a S3,000.00 Performance
and Indemnity Bond with the Department of 'Transportation.
All sicninc shall be in conformance with the Manua_ or
Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
All disturbed areas shall he renaired with the fol'_ow4 cr
rates of seed, fertilizer, and limestone in hounds _per acre,
and the areas nronerly mulched and tacked:
25# Re 1 iant Hard Fescue
100# Alta or Kv. 31 Tall Fescue
25# Kenblue Kv. Bluecrass
1000# 5 -10 -10 Fertilizer
4000# Limestone
Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane
October 22, 1991
Page 2
Also, approval of this encroachment is contingent upon
obtaining approval of the Norfolk Southern Railroad Company.
It-"'will be necessary for you or your contractor to rotifv
Mr. J. R. Hopkins, Assistant District Engineer, upon receipt
of this letter to schedule any necessary Preconstructior.
Conference, to provide your anticipated date of starting, or
to review any plan revisions made by the District Office
prior to construction beginning on this encroachment.
Mr. Hopkins can be reached at (919) 228 -1727 between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m., Mondav through Friday.
When the work has been completed please notify Mr. Hopkins by
letter at P. 0. Box 766, Graham, NC 27253 -0766 in order that
a final inspection can be made.
JWW /JMM /cl
Atta.
CC: Mr. A. D. Allison, II
Mr. E. M. Cowan
Sincerely,
W. Watkins
?DIVISION ENGINEER
jT ATE uF LiORT11 C,UIOLINA
ROUTE SR If 1713 PROJECT COUNTY OF Orange
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
FOR NON- UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS ON
-AND- PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HIGHWAYS
Mrs. Dorothy C. 8arDe
3519 Old Hwy. N 10
Chanel Hill, N. C. 27514
THIS AGREEMEN , made and entered into this the ILL day of October P 19 P
by and between the Department of Transportation, party of the first part; and
Dorothy C. Dane party of the second part,
W I T N E 5 5 E T 11
TEAT WHEREAS, the party of the second part desires to encroach on the right of
way of the public road designated as Route SR N 171 located 8741 north of the inter
section of SRH1713 MT.Herman Ch.Rd. & SIM i/1Uoold Hwy 11 1U with the
following: cross SRfl 1713 with a 3" force main encased in 8" steel pipe
and erecting two Poles to carry an electric lne across
WHEREAS, it is to the material advantage of the party of the second part to
effect this encroachment, and the party of the first part in the exercise of author-
ity conferred upon it by statute, is willing to permit the encroachment within the
limits of the right of way as indicated, subject to the conditions of this agree-
ment;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED that the party of the first part hereby grants to
the party of the second part the right and privilege to make this encroachment as
shown on attached plan sheet(s), specifications and special provisions which are
made a part hereof upon the following conditions, to wit:
That the said parry of the ucoad part ►inch and ablltatu hfnanif to ln.tall oval a•Intmin the ancreachi.g facility
In ••.ch so in mnJ ptupec co.Nitlon that it will not int.rfprw wLth at t,dsnpvr travel upon amid hL4hwy, not obstruct nor
io ,fmrm vl th the pc open mointen4ncs thermal, to reimburse the patty of the fLret pert for the test Incurred for any
rivalry err a. tntomm�ca t its to ad rays and structure* necessary due to the lnstallatloo and waletenee of the facilities
of the parr'f e! the attend part, sod If at any time the party of the first part shall tequifd the rural of or ehsagv■
in the locative of the oald foCl3ities. that the Said part? at the mrcond part bird■ bAualf. his Sueeevaecs Red asalgets.
to promptly tmm v. or alter the said facilities, to order to can[arse to the said requirats"t, without ■say cost to the
party of the fire[ part.
That the party of the second part &trees to provide daring eoentrectlom god any ovb•ayvent malntensnes proper
signs. el{n.1 11ghts, flagman and ether warm Lng /molt•• for the frotaetion of traffic In conformance with cha latest
Kennel on_Uoltorr Traffic Control Dowte.e forStreet@ and Righwsve &ad AmGnda ve
nt■ or Supplents thereto. Lmfetrstles
to [home to the [h ru es *ad ralutstione may be _talned flat the Dl+latom UCIn.er of the party of the tint part.
That the party of the sated pert hereby agree[ to ird~lty ea.! seam Aartleso the patty of the first pact Ivey ell
dateges sod claims for datags that any aria by r.4aom of the Lnstallation and saint"amem of this saeroaNrtnt.
1c la clearly understand by the party at the *Stand pert that the party ar the first part will •d•umwi no reepo.—
albility or any .Isom%. thnt .ay be caused to ouch facilities, wlthla ch. hlnh —y rlahta of way Ilmtts. In earhlns out
to cvnv c tmetlan arwl mulnt•n.nca operations.
That the party of the second part stress to reflect 411 areas disturbed during l no" Iletloo and maintenance to the
satisfaction of the Division Engineer of the party of the first pert. The, party of the eacamd part agrees to eaarcles
"all [••eenable precaution during eanetruetian Ord Salntsname to pretest aredtng of soill silting or pollvtiam of
[irar@. ■treme. takma, cssafvelrs, ether water Lopouedmomta, truund surtaeer of other pcapartyt or pollution of the
air. There shell bs compliance with applirwblt6 role@ end regulstLeas of the North Carolina Dists Lon of tattrar++ntal
Ken&gsent, Korth CIroLLta Seditantatina Control Cametatlea, Gott with oedinemse and Mulatlon4 of . -netts taantles.
mtmlctpalltias and ether official agencies twisting to ►atlutlov pre+emcloa and eantrel. wham any Installation or
.-- ariatemoacw opmemclon disturbs the grewnd Surface and the -slat" atmra.d ewer. the party of the second pert agrees to
. rabve and rapt met the red as otherwise reastskllah the gross eater to most the sallsfactiee of the Divisions fngfneer at
the petty at the firs[ pert.
—.
That the party of the [&Curd part agrees to assumo the octaal east of Say Lmp•ctloa of the wart aonaddared to be
OK esM ry by the Dtvialan Engineer of the party of the rivet part.
that the party of the second port .%case to home swsllablp at the encroaching site. at all t, during aunslrue.
.. tion. a copy of this sgreemrnt showing N Wsnaa of approval by the patty of the first pact. The party at the first pact
romerrsa the right to stop ell work vole•• "Waste of sopcoval cas be show.
haw liked the mock contained to this ogrvestat is being perfotted as 4 eorplaled highway epee to [raffle) the party
of the second port •(rasa co give written nutlaa td the ntvieloa tagioser of the party at the first part vhmn all work
contained hereto has boos completed. Dn►u■ ■parlfic@lly requested by the pasty at the first part. written magic■ of
aneplectam a: work on highway projects under eeastruetlom rill sot W required. -
That to the ease of mama e e
pllance with the cor of Chia agromast by the party of the second part. the party of
the flat part cessnve the right, to step all work until the fmcLLtty her been brought late compliance at [&sawed Irem
the. right of way at an cost to the patty of the first part.
That it is sirmd by both ►aril@@ that this ogtooment [halt ►Kama moo W it aetmel aenarruatien of the Vega cma-
:tesplased hereto I. at begun wlchla on. (1) year from the data of mveharlea[ tom by the party of the fine part •slue
wgtttsn walvwr 1a •ecurvd by dr. party of the S +tend part tray the party of the first part.
rnnu D 1 1 L 1 S (T,-,.ann 1aA1 )
iN WIT1itSS I,_L -iEOF, caC - 3f the 1-5Locs to this agreement has .used the same_
tt b�7 execute' the day a.,d year first „Dove written.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BY
XXU6X, XhA)9)=Xd(XXRX41WYtlTXi XYX
DI ION ENGINEER
ATTEST OR WIVESS:
econd Party
TTIC7AIirTTn?4.',
When the applicant is a corporation or a municipality, this agreement must have
the corporate seal and be attested by the corporation secretary or by the
empowered city official, unless a waiver of corporate seal and attestation by
the secretary or by the empowered City official is on file in the Raleigh
office of the Manager of Right of Way. In the space provided in this agreement
for execution, the name of the corporation or municipality shall be typed above
the name, and title of all persons signing the agreement should be typed directly
below their signature.
when the applicant is not a corporation, then his signature must be witnessed
by one person. The address should be included is this agreement and the names
of all persons signing the agreement should be typed directly below their
signature.
This agreement must be accompanied, in the form of an attachment, by plans or
drawings showing the following applicable information:
1. All roadways and ramps.
2. Right of way lines and where applicable, the control of access
lines.
3. Location of the proposed encroachmeet.
4. Length and type' of encroachment.
5. Location by highway survey station number. If station number
cannot be obtained, location should be shown by distance from
some identifiable point, such as a bridge, road, intersection,
etc, (To assist in preparation of the encroachment plan, the
Department's roadway plans may be seen at the various Highway
Division Offices, or at the Raleigh office.)
6. Drainage structures or bridges if affected by encroachment.
Typical section indicating tde pavement design and width, and
the slopes, widths and details for either a curb and gutter or a
shoulder and ditch section, whichever is applicable.
8. Horizontal alignment indicating general curve data, where appli-
cable.
9. Vertical alignment indicated by percent grade, P.I. station and
vertical curve length, where applicable.
10. Amount of material to be removed and /or placed on NCDOT right of
way; '.T applicable.
11. Cross - sections of all trading operations, indicating slope ratio
and reference by station where applicable.
12. All pertinent drainage structures proposed. Include all hydraulic
data, pipe sizes, strizture details and other related information.
13. Erosion and sediment control.
14. Any special provision! or specifications as to the performance
of the work or the method of construction that may be required
by the Departnent mus- be shown on a separate sheet attached to
encroachment agreement. provided that such information cannot be
shown on plans or drawings.
15. The Department's Division Engineer should be given notice by the
applicant prior to actual starting of installation included in
this agreement.
16.' Method of handling t_affic during construction where applicable.
17. Sc- of plans, norta arrow, etc.
,P
i
Ln
of
LO
MT. HERMAN CHURCH
CEMETERY
uNOEP, GTOUND TELEPHONE
CABLE VE.RIr'f LOCATION
IN FIELD
19
a
a�F cl)
MT. HERMAN
CHURCH CEMETERY
R R R /W
(5-STEEL P1 GS PCP
ENCASEMEN- OF 3`
FORCE MAN
NORFOLK SOUTHERN C
FORCE MAIN TO SEWAGE PLANT
STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
DOROTHY C. BANE (owner)
ENO TWP. ORANGE CO.,N_C
C'�L EJ4 Rt? C tflA.�I'l,lL
H I = 40%4 =4' 'r-
0
J
W
1 d
U Z
2
a
a x
W
aw
z
�a
.,
W
ro
Q
LL
_V
S
cr
�J
J 1
0
" J
V
J
0
rn
N
Q
LO
19
a
a�F cl)
MT. HERMAN
CHURCH CEMETERY
R R R /W
(5-STEEL P1 GS PCP
ENCASEMEN- OF 3`
FORCE MAN
NORFOLK SOUTHERN C
FORCE MAIN TO SEWAGE PLANT
STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
DOROTHY C. BANE (owner)
ENO TWP. ORANGE CO.,N_C
C'�L EJ4 Rt? C tflA.�I'l,lL
H I = 40%4 =4' 'r-
Prepared By And Return After Recording To: B. M. sessoms, Esq., Haywood, Denny,
Miller, Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Post Office Box 451, Durham, N. C. 27702
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
DEED OF
EASEMENT
November
THIS DEED, made this 10th day of Ojobadf, 1991 by and between
Claude E. Godwin, C. D. Couch, and Grover A. Clayton
as Trustees of the
Mount Hermon Baptist Church, Grantor, Old Highway #10, Chapel Hill,
North Carolina 27514; and Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, Single, Grantee, 3519
Old Highway #10, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514; all of Orange
County, North Carolina;
W I T N E S S E T H:
THAT WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of a certain lot of land
in the northeast intersection of Mount Hermon Church Road (SR 1713)
and the main railroad line of Norfolk Southern Corporation in Eno
Township, eastern Orange County, the same being the land conveyed to
Grantor by Curtis F. Bane and wife, Dorothy C. Bane, and Nettie S.
Crabtree, Widow, recorded in Book 217, Page 622, Orange County
Registry; and
WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of certain land on the east side of
Grantor's land but separated therefrom by a 50' easement for a spur
line.of the.-Norfolk Southern Corporation; the same being a part of a
tract of land containing 260.75 acres, more or less, which Grantee
inherited from her father, David Crabtree, deceased, as shown on Plat
in Plat Book 16, Page 37, Orange County Registry; which Deed and Plat
are hereby referred to for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, Grantee is developing a portion of her property on the
west side of Mt. Herman Church Road into Stonegate Mobile Home Park;
and the Wastewater Collection, Treatment and Spray Irrigation Disposal
system to service said Mobile Home Park to be located on the land of
the Grantee across the Norfolk Southern Spur Line from the land of the
Grantor as set forth above; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that in so doing Grantee lay a pipeline
for said System across the land of the Grantor.
NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of
Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, to
them in hand paid, do hereby give, grant and convey unto Grantee a
perpetual right and easement, as limited herein, to construct and
maintain across and upon the land of Grantor an underground sewer line
extending from the north right --of -way line of the Norfolk Southern
Corporation across the land of the Grantor as described above and as
shown on Plat showing force main to sewage plant, Stonegate Mobile
Home Park, Dorothy C. Bane (owner), copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A" for a more complete and accurate description of the
easement by metes and bounds;
AND to go upon said lands whenever the same is reasonably
necessary for the purpose of inspecting, maintaining, and repairing
said sewer line; provided that said sewer line shall be placed as near
the common boundary line of Grantor and Norfolk Southern Corporation
as is reasonably possible;
AND that in constructing and repairing said sewer line, said
Grantee will remove all surface earth, make level the surface of the
ground above said sewer line, and interfere as little as is reasonably
.oil.
possible with any plants, fences or other improvements upon the land
of the Grantor.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said right and easement to Grantee and her
successors -in- title; it being agreed that the right and easement
hereby granted is appurtenant to and runs with the land now owned by
Grantor as referred to above; but this easement shall terminate at
such time as the Stonegate Mobile Home Park Sewer System is connected
to a municipal sewer system and the need for the herein described
easement is no longer required for access to the Wastewater
Collection, Treatment and Spray Irrigation Disposal System maintained
by Grantee.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor, has caused this Deed of
Easement to be signed in its common name by its duly authorized
Trustees and its seal to be affixed hereto by authority duly given the
day and year first above written.
MOUNT HERMON BAPTIST CHURCH,
GRANTOR
c
Y:
Trustee
By:
Trustee
BY�r�l��
Trustee
3
r
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
x. 4- a Notary Public of
the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that
.,
as TRUSTEES OF THE MOUNT HERMON BAPTIST CHURCH, Grantor herein, each
personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due
execution of the foregoing Deed.
WITNESS my hand and notarial seal, this = day of -acte'r,
1991.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
5
-f� �y.`e•i -. >N crs_wrry�er r.- � - - - a• ,^ rz•;a `° �,,n f•= .••�:.r•r ,✓t r
.z-• .��-' �•�-" - -�: t •� "".:!- �y ^'r�- -..'.� � �.��� _F.y�.ra.r es"ra ".- "�?' Tiy.= '�>i•''r•T :;"
�•. _ _ _ _ - _ �_ � _ _ .. _ ..ti r _ _ �y� =yam' r ." . ->�s ::. •
•1 y ''�i _; r• •Airf LL" .t:.
- _ +rry�(,�1r•' :•�' - ._ - -__• .'s':�.:'. �,�iv ..�: _.��.. Y �. �-•�� y�►'•�:: qtr —•
�� {y�y.r:.s• a.. .... >.}f .
,: F `. i` - �ti•+_ 'wn. _FM1i.. raj. �' -yy� _i�'
ION
+yy �S ; y.C� •tp
r:
a
7r
Q
OV
'S��•`(. � + W .. . - •- � •I _ ¢mom _ ca _ ° Y.i
uj_...
Z `9 • 'Z� \ N W p t U) ^ 0 0
�'• \' to U. _r• U. i.
cr
Ln
W
ILn0 fsl �:
M1t fl:¢ Ui
En (-;)j
LU
w W.
Syr
h+14 . . W
2 `Jrw�� '' •.
t i
Ln
W \ U Q- I Cc N 1 I I O I co D Q'.:: .
cn
\ m I z�.
ui co ED
ia_ < 1 7N I _\9: I I IR
W, 4 Q, Q I I I h °•.`
° \\ U. cn
o ol_ w CL
Lu
to
o
Uj
Alf-
S _ 1 LO I I' �- p.,� ¢ O`er 0.'m r'
D� -'w. -•
k
.z
1
- •itl
.rte
"=T •.v _�..py�,,ryy��.�
__ - .. - - - '..dui_ "•x:� - - _•a -/'��' -_: f�''..r w -uf
STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
Project Work Chronology
November, 1987 - October, 1991
1987 - 1988
November, 1987 -
July, 1988
July - December,
1988
Orange County Planning Department orally
advises Mrs. Bane to cease work and
reapply for a new Class A Special Use
Permit as work had not "proceeded at a
reasonable rate;" during November,
1987 - January, 1988 Mrs. Bane presents
information to Orange County Planning
Department to show that work had
progressed steadily, but slowly; Orange
County Planning Department rejects
information as inadequate and advises
Mrs. Bane in writing on February 3 and
5, 1988 to cease work, apply for a new
Class A Special Use Permit or appeal the
decision to the Board of Adjustments;
Mrs. Bane enters appeal and with the
assistance of Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys
and Credle Engineering Company, Inc.,
Engineers in perfecting the appeal,
accumulating information and preparing
presentation to Orange County Board of
Adjustments on July 11, 1988 which found
that work had proceeded at a reasonable
rate and approved the appeal which
allowed work to continue on Stonegate
Mobile Home Park; Application and
negotiations leading to Agreement dated
June 20, 1988, effective April 1, 1988,
between Southern Railway Company and
Dorothy C. Bane for an 8" sewer pipeline
to cross under railway property at
Glenn, N.C., located 235' west of Mile
Post H -47 which is west of the
intersection of Mt. Herman Church Road
and Southern Railway Property.
- S.V. Credle, Professional Engineer,
Credle Engineering Company, Inc.,
Durham, N.C., employed to implement
Special Use Permit requirements for
private water system including wells and
water lines; and wastewater collection,
treatment and disposal system under
NPDES Permit No. NC0049808 granted by
State of North Carolina, Division of
1989
Environmental Management, for Stonegate
Mobile Home Park, Orange County which
allowed discharge into a tributary of
Rhodes Creek.
January - June, - S. V. Credle of Credle Engineering
1989 completes plans for fresh water and
wastewater systems in consultation with
Orange County Planning Department which
required some revisions and
negotiations; Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys,
coordinates with Orange County Planning
Department and Orange County Attorney to
revise and update October 4, 1982
Special Use Permit, drafting begins;
Mrs. Bane and Mr. Credle deal with
geologists, hydrologists and well
drillers and two wells are drilled
yielding 65 gpm (gallons per minute) and
85 gpm at sites other than shown on
revised Site Plan, thus requiring
further revisions to Site Plan; wells
permitted by Orange County Health
Department and pump downs completed with
satisfactory results; drafts of Special
Use Permit completed and forwarded to
Orange County Attorney and Orange County
Planning Department.
July - December, - Application for renewal of NPDES Permit
1989 No. NC0049808, Stonegate Mobile Home
Park, Orange County, timely completed
and filed with DEM; revised Site Plans
provided to Orange County Planning in
order to conform with Special Use Permit
requirements; Special Use Permit
approved by Orange County Attorney and
executed by Orange County and Mrs. Bane
and recorded in the Orange County
Registry; Mrs. Bane and Mr. Credle meet
with DEM Representative and initially
obtain oral approval for renewal of
NPDES Permit for discharge into Rhodes
Creek; several weeks later DEM
Representative reverses position upon
reclassification of Rhodes Creek; formal
notice received in December, 1989 of DEM
intention to deny renewal of NPDES
Permit and suggesting alternatives to
N
1990
1991
discharge into Rhodes Creek; Soil
Scientist with orange County Health
Department employed and paid for
completed soil evaluation; Duke Power
electrical service to park completed;
contractor contacted for boring under
Southern Railway Mail Line; Soil Erosion
Plan submitted and approved; GTE South
contacted for telephone service; NCDOT
approves driveway permit.
January - June,
- S. V. Credle investigates various
1990
alternatives suggested by DEM in
conjunction with Orange County Health
Department for on -site subsurface
absorption system, low pressure
injection system and spray irrigation
system; spray irrigation system appears
the most feasible and S. V. Credle
begins process to deal with DEM to
develop wastewater collection, treatment
and spray irrigation system for on -site
disposal of wastewater; several sites
for the location of the system
considered with the Health Department
and DEM to identify acceptable site for
spray irrigation system; soil erosion
devices begun and completed; wells sites
approved by DEM; GTE South telephone
service to park completed.
July - December,
- After extensive work with Health
1990
Department and DEM, acceptable site is
located and Credle Engineering completes
plans and makes application to DEM for
approval of spray irrigation system;
Credle Engineering begins inquiry and
negotiation with Norfolk Southern
Corporation to obtain further easement
in edge of railroad right -of -way for
proposed force main, sewage overflow
line and underground pipeline crossing
Norfolk Southern Corporation's spur
tract.
January - June,
- Extensive design and redesign of spray
1991
irrigation system by Credle Engineering
in consulting with DEM resulting in
issuance of Permit No. WQ0004370 to Mrs.
01
Dorothy C. Bane, Stonegate Mobile Home
Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray
Irrigation System, Orange County on May
31, 1991; Credle Engineering receives
Norfolk Southern Corporation Application
with list of documentation needed for
proposed easement and spur line crossing
of sewer lines in connection with
wastewater treatment and spray
irrigation system; Mrs. Bane contracts
with Alamance Pump Company and purchases
pumps for the wells; obtains a pump down
test to redetermine adequate volume; and
secures chemical analysis and other
tests to determine adequate fresh water
supply which are approved by DEM; E.
Villanova and C. Bane successfully
complete examination and qualify as
Grade I Certified Wastewater Treatment
Operators; Wilson Engineering Soil
Boring analysis completed; received
Carolina Crane estimate to move Sewer
Treatment Plants; Credle Engineering
advises Orange County Planning
Department in response to three 1990 and
1991 letters inquiring in regards to
changes in the Site Plans that no change
had resulted only that wastewater
disposal changed from Rhodes Creek
discharge to spray irrigation system;
Orange County Planning further advised
that when DEN approval had been received
for the wastewater treatment and spray
irrigation system it would be forwarded;
Orange County Planning makes further
inquiries to which Credle Engineering
responds.
July - November, - Credle Engineering makes several
1991 responses to Orange County Planning
inquiries; orange County Planning raises
issue as to whether change from Rhodes
Creek discharge to spray irrigation
system is a minor change or a
modification; Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys,
begin discussion with Orange County
Planning in order to seek modification
of Special Use Permit under Section 8.7
of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance;
Application for Modification prepared
for filing; information accumulated to
4
be filed in support thereof and in
discussions with Mrs. Bane and Mr.
Credle; Application for Modification of
Special Use Permit presented to Zoning
Officer, Orange County Planning
Department, for review including
additional necessary documents and
information in connection with
Application in order to be included on
11/25/91 Orange County Public Hearing
Agenda.
E. Villanova and C. Bane successfully
complete examinations for Grade "C- well"
and "B- Well" Water Treatment Facility
operators, respectively; arrangements
made with A -OK Home Services for garbage
collection, McFarland Septic Tank
Service for sewage sludge disposal,
Orange County Emergency Management for
fire and rescue coverage, Orange County
Sheriff's Department for law enforcement
services; NCDOT reapproves driveway
permit and encroachment agreement for
underground force main crossing and
aerial electric lines crossing Mt.
Herman Church Road; Norfolk Southern
Corporation responds to Application for
Pipeline Crossing.
61
y . A OK
home services
,4 -OK HOME SERVICES
P.0 BOX 627 + CARRBORO. NC 27510
(919) 933 -9388
October 15, 1991
Mrs. Dorothy bane
3519 Old Highway 1�?
Chapel Hill NC 27514
Regarding: Garbage Service for Stonegate Mobile Home Park
Dear Mrs. Bane:
Thank you for contacting A -OK Home Services concerning garbage service
for Stonegate Mobile H,Dr,ie Park on Mt. Herman Church Road. We would be
happy to provide service for the park whenever y„,l would like to
service. We would r•eg1.rir'e approximately one week's rn:tice before the
desired service date.
Please feel free to call 'AS at 933 -9388 if you have any further
questions.
Sincerely,
V
Jon Richardson
President,
A -OK Home Services. Inc.
I
1`I
Cs� 39.3 -sz�9 _
r
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
P.O. Box 9181
929 -8109
732 -8161
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
ORANGE COUNTY
HILLSBOROUGH
NORTH CAROLINA
~• 27278
MEMORANDUM
Ms. Dorothy Bane
3519 Old Highway #10
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
Orange County Emergency Management
Division of Emergency Medical Services
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
FIRE AND RESCUE COVERAGE
October 16, 1991
Communications
Emergency Medical Services
Fire Marshal
In response to your request, Orange County Emergency Medical
Services and Eno Fire Department will provide emergency
medical and fire services for Stonegate Mobile Home Park
located on Mount Hermon Church Road in Durham.
ENO FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
RT. 1, .BOX 274
DURHAM, N. C. 27705
E.%ST ORANGE INSURANCE DISTRICT
u
OFFICE PHONE
HILLSBOROUGH 732.2431
CHAPEL HILL - 94$•8300
LINDY PENDERGRASS
Sheriff of Orange County
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
w
TO: ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: SHERIFF LINDY PENDERGRASS6P
DATE: OCTOBER 17, 1991
REF: STONlEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
RES. PHONE 929.5535
THE Cal�r,:i�ai: C.'C"U +TY SIiLi�IFF' S DEPARTMENT CAN PROVIDE LAW
rn
ter_. .:r: S r,,,Z
E.IFOltL' :t1�...T r'O.i THE JNE HUNDR20 AND FOUR ( '1 4 )
I,OT STCjUE:3r,.':? :.OIsiLE HOMME FAR' LOCATE;: ON MOUNT HERMAN
CHvRirr! RUPL 1 3.
THIS DE.PARTME::T WOULD NOT REQUEST ANY ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
OR EQUIPMEL.T TO PROVIDE ROUTINE SERVICE.
LP /jc
CC: DOROTHY BANE
Prepared By And Return After Recording To: B. M. Sessoms, Esq., Haywood, Denny,
Miller, Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Post Office Box 451, Durham, N. C. 27702
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
DEDICATION OF
EASEMENTS
THIS DEDICATION OF EASEMENTS, made this ��ay of November, 1991
by Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, Single, Grantor, 3519 Old Highway #10, Chapel
Hill, North Carolina 27514; of Orange County, North Carolina;
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of certain land located in Eno
Township, Orange County, North Carolina, the same being a tract of
land containing 260.75 acres, more or less, which Grantor inherited
from her father, David Crabtree, deceased, as shown on Plat of Survey
recorded in Plat Book 16, Page 37, Orange County Registry, to which
reference is made for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is developing a portion of her property on the
west side of Mt. Herman Church Road into Stonegate Mobile Home Park;
and is developing a portion of her property on the east side of Mt.
Herman Church Road with a sewage treatment plant, lagoon and spray
irrigation system to service said Mobile Home Park; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina Department of Environmental Management
(DEM, herein) issued Permit No. WQ0004370 to Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane,
Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray Irrigation
System, Orange County on May 31, 1991 (Permit, herein) which approved
the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System as
shown on Boundary Area Plat of Survey of same by Credle Engineering
Company, Inc. dated July 31, 1991, which Boundary Area Plat of Survey
is recorded in Plat Book , Page , Orange County Registry, and
to which reference is made for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, the Dedication of Easements herein is shown on the
Boundary Area Plat of Survey and includes that property of the Grantor
through which a three inch (311) Force Main crosses beginning in the
northeastern intersection of the right -of -way lines for the main and
spur lines of Norfolk Southern Corporation leading to and including
the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System
together with the required setbacks and buffers as approved by DEM in
the above referenced Permit and which easements, as limited herein,
for the setbacks and buffers are hereby dedicated to insure continued
compliance with DEM standards under the above referenced Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor, for and in consideration of good and
valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby give, grant, convey and dedicate perpetual easements and
rights, as limited herein, in all lands of the Grantor as shown on the
Boundary Area Plat of Survey as recorded which is referred to above to
satisfy DEM setback requirements and buffers between the three inch
(311) Force Main, Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation
System and all property lines for so long as said property shall be
used for and in connection with the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and
Spray Irrigation System as shown on the Boundary Area Plat of Survey
referred to above;
AND with the rights to go upon said lands whenever the same is
reasonably necessary for the purpose of constructing, maintaining,
repairing and inspecting the Force Main, Sewage Treatment Plant,
2
r
Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System as shown on the Boundary Area Plat
of Survey as recorded which is set forth above. Said property of
Grantor is subject to the Special Use Permit for Stonegate Mobile Home
Park recorded in Book , Page , the Orange County Registry.
IT IS THE INTENTION of the Grantor that the easements and rights
hereby granted are appurtenant to and run with the land of the Grantor
as referred to above; but the easements and rights shall terminate at
such time as they are no longer required or needed for the Force Main,
Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System for
Stonegate Mobile Home Park.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor, has hereunto set her hand and
seal, the date and year first above written.
-'" C - SEAL
DOROTHY \,t. BANE, GRANTOR
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
I. , a Notary Public of
the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that DOROTHY C.
BANE, Grantor, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged
the due execution of the foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and notarial seal, this _d,2t day of November,
�4t99 -1 t
_-r-: -,Ad4z C fission Expires:
3
LU
C
Q
r w U)
_0 J c r
43 W -0 d-)
z > -� a CSa
a Q od
c a) E
o.Q `� o �' =.0
uj
L CO
z o Ea ° Ep
••-- •-
Q w o� .�c� �a 0)
cz cO �co 0) 0 E
a� anti ❑ O)
C Q ...... � Q :3
CL
CO
W
rr
Q
2
(n U
W=
�Z
z 0
0.1
0
w0
Z°
rr
Q¢
0 C) w
O
CL
O
a
,I
ii
w
z
w
0
U)
w
cr
(.y
LO
T
Cl)
T
CD T
W
a
a�
6 .
z
69�
,I
ii
w
z
w
0
U)
w
cr
(.y
LO
T
0
O
N
6
a�
0
C)
a�
w
,�
0
D)
0
z
=
0
�.
Q
0
_
C�
0-
-0
cz
X
�
..C.—
cn
—
a�
w
W
Z =3
a 0
U U)
Q
WZ W
a a
c
F— C)
zW Q
::) r) C)
a z a�
O o
W� CO
a
0�
Z2
cz
a
00 co a3
CO >
W _(1)
F— (1)
J Cn
F--- C]
Z) D
z
cz
0 0L
G
Z) o cz
co 0
co CD
cz 0 a rr
0 CD
E cz • >
c a 0
cz cz W cz
C: co CD ...._
cz E a)
CZ CD °5a
. � CL a.
4-w a .F,,.. W
� Jc:
0 4
• — _0 C: C: cz
CD Z 0
> E > 0
_ _ W C.]
z
O _0
r� c
w D CO
❑ 61� E c
U) z •% :D
Q
0) (1) 0
W 0 .� ❑. CO
_0 X CD
�z � w 3
;
O U) U.
Z F- Q � cO
D w 0 O O
o U)
w
CL O
W u) C3 o O
w Q
z0� c0 c�
Q LL c) a)
L� LL O °
Q,.,._ c a
0
I—' O 'i O L
U - co U CO Co
c� as -P E _
Ec
J 43 L cz
o❑ o o���
•o E °
�0
c�
o ° _ CO
t�
i CO
O o
o 0 o -O>
co CO o cz ~
w c CL CL
�i
C.) co -�CL� CO
CC a.
❑ 0 O .� >I Co (3)
CO �, CD E .� O Z O
c 0 c O 0 c O..c
co
cc o x cn a,
LU C:
D I -0 0 (r -mot
L
0
U
Q w w C a
L },
a
C) � a � .—
4
F— Q CO 0 0
Z a�
C7. Cl) a.
0 z o
w -i � - •�
0j 0
� � -
Z0 c v —�❑ .
Q
w 0 a. c a
:7-, -0 � a
0Z 0?a_ 0 0 0
CO >
I— CO
CY) .�
CZ
0 C�; 0 U +, O +�
CL a. 0 try 0 Q
r • •
A
w •L
0 0
.cri V
43 0
a.
'CZ CSJ
o�� a
:D CO _
L U 0
M 0�
0-0 o
c CO
o
co a
L •�
0- 0 E
c 'E a
cy, " U
0 0 , � 0
aC a. ❑ C�
•
�IillsbnrnuvA Area T4amher of Tommerce
150 East King Street • Phone 732 -8156 • Hillsborough, NC 27278
November 25, 1991
Orange County Commissioners
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
To the Commissioners:
Several months ago the Hillsborough Area Chamber of Commerce wrote a
letter in support of Orange County's plan for toll --free countywide phone
service. We share your disappointment that the utilities commission turned
down this request by refusing to allow a referendum on the matter.
Once again we are letting you know that the Hillsborough Chamber, an
organization that is made up of more than 175 businesses and organizations,
wishes to see this plan carried forward, and pledges the Chamber's support
to work toward its implementation.
Most of our Hillsborough businesses are small - and they must depend on
loyal customers and users from the surrounding area. Long- distance calling
is a stumbling block in this relationship; both for the customer who is hesi-
tant to place a toll call, and the company who incurs additional expense for
trying to do business in the Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Mebane and Efland areas.
Our members are also of the opinion that.orange County's economic develop-
ment efforts are hampered by our old- fashioned telephone system. We feel
strongly that companies who look at our county for site location or relocation
are turned off by our archaic communications system. We also believe that
any increase in cost to customers, both business and residential, would be
off -set in the future by the expanded, diversified tax base that appropriate
new business would bring.
BBP: fp
Sincerely,
Barbara B. Palmer
Executive Director
Visit Historic Hillsborough . Chartered Seventeen Hundred Fifty -Nine
6626 Bradshaw Quarry Rd.
Efland, N. C. 27243
November 19, 1991
Orange County Board of Commissioners
c/o Clerk to the Board
Court Street Annex
109 Court Street
Hillsborough, N.C. 27278
Dear Members of the Board of Commissioners:
We are writing to strongly support the petition to poll
Orange County subscribers of the Mebane Home Telephone Company
on their willingness to become a part of a county -wide toll
free telephone system. Our home is within the Mebane telephone
system, and the long distance cost to us for telephone calls
within Orange County exceeds $20 monthly. For the past 10
months, these charges totaled $211. We pay long distance charges
for calls to Hillsborough, to Chapel Hill, and even for calls
to our own postoffice in Efland. We would be glad to bear the
monthly charge of $3.61 if these calls were part of our basic
service.
Because Mebane is not considered to be a part of Orange
County in the telephone listings available to directory
assistance operators, persons who attempt to get our telephone
number through directory assistance are regularly told that
they have no listing for our name. This occurs because the
Mebane Home Telephone subscribers are listed under Alamance
County, including those subscribers whose post office address
is Efland. A few years ago, someone tried to reach a visitor
in our home to inform him of his grandmother's death, and even
though the caller knew that our mailing address was Efland in
Orange County, they were told that our number was not listed.
Our visitor received a letter from his father telling of
the grandmother's death and burial and the attempt made to call
him at our home. The young man was extremely upset and we were
furious with the telephone non - service. We sent a letter to
the Utilities Commission who sent us a copy of a letter sent
to the Mebane Home Telephone Company directing it to correct
the situation. We received a call from the phone company telling
us that we would be listed in the Hillsborough directory. We
still aren't.
Recently, we learned that a friend from France tried to
call us. She stated that we lived in Efland when she was asked
what city she was calling. She was told there was no listing
for us.
We dialed information ourselves and asked for our number
only to be told we weren't listed. When we asked that the
operator check again, she repeated that the number was not
listed. Only then did she suggest we call Information again
and ask for the Mebane operator because some of the people in
Efland had Mebane numbers. Thus, not only do we pay long
distance charges for calling most places in Orange County, but
we are not even listed in the phone directory as being in Orange
County.
Because of the cumulative monthly cost of phone calls to
other parts of Orange County, we deliberately do not make a
number of business and private phone calls to Chapel Hill or
Hillsborough that we would otherwise make. Inevitably, these
long distance charges cause us to do less business in Orange
County than if we had toll free access. Orange County is an
economic and social unit, and our telephone system should reflect
this unity.
We strongly advocate
of all telephone systems
extra monthly charges to
throughout Orange County.
V/�
Carl M. Shy
polling of the Orange County residents
on their willingness to pay the small
have extended area telephone service
Sincerely
Eve Carol Shy
-
'
TO WHOM I� MAY CONCERK,
IN REGARDS TO THE PROPOSAL OF TOLL—FREE CALLING FOR THE
TRIANGLE AREA, I AND MY FAMILY ARE IN TOTAL SUPPORT OF THIS
PROPCSAL. WORKING IN DURHAM AND LIVIN8 !N CARRBORO MAKES
COMMUNICATIJl XPENS-VE. PLEASE SERZOUSLY CONSIDER GOING
FORWARD WITH T! IS ACTION AS BOON AS POSSIEl—E.
THANK—YOU FOR YLD"jR _IME,
KEVIN AND 3EANNE M771-HE' L
109—B MILTON. DR.
�» ^^
�
CARR�ORO NC 275lD '
�
v ^0-1D �
L ^1
��
^~ D , �t w- �
�y oo
u *1�-
K7
/8
~~ �
/ N
40
__
l.
`
_J
-
�-
(�/1 Ur+v-
c
5or
--
1
HAYWOOD, DENNY, MILLER, JOHNSON, SESSOMS & PATRICK
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
E05ERT L. HAYWOOD ( 1911 -1985) WACHOVIA BANK BUILDING
EMERY B. DENNY, JR.(1924 -1982) 201 WEST MAIN STREET
GEORGE W. MILLER, JR-
SUITE 400
CHAPEL MILL OFFICE
JAMES H, JOHNSON, III
POST OFFICE BOX 451
SUITE 580,EUROOA CENTER
S.M. SE5SOMS
DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA 27702-0451
100 EUROPA DRIVE
MICHAEL W- PATRICK
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27514
KEVIN W, BUTTERFIELD
AREA CODE ( 919) 882.5747
(919) 942.4482
E, ELIZABETH LEFLER
ROBERT E.LEVIN
TELECOPIER NO.(919) 552 -5740
JOHN J. PADILLA
November 22, 1991
ANDREW T LANDAUER
Mr. Eddie Kirk
Planner II
Orange County Planning Department
306F Revere Road
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
RE: Stonegate Mobile Home Park
Modification for Class A Special Use Permit
PD -H, R -4 Approved October 4, 1982, Revised
And Recorded September 18, 1989__
Dear Mr. Kirk:
In connection with the above matter and in furtherance of our
October 7, 1991 Application for Modification, our October 18, 1991
letter, the documents provided with each of these and our several
conferences, we are providing additional documents as follows:
1. Norfolk Southern Corporation. Letter of October 29, 1991
acknowledging receipt of documents in connection with easement and
pipeline crossing indicating that the Application is being considered
by Norfolk Southern.
2. NCDOT. Letter of October 22, 1991 approving and providing
Encroachment Agreement.
3. Mount Hermon Baptist Church. Copy of Deed of Easement dated
November 10, 1991.
4. Memorandum updating detail of the Project Work Chronology to
November, 1991.
Letters /statements confirming availability of garbage service,
septic service, fire and rescue service and law enforcement service as
follows:
S. A -OK Home Services (garbage service).
6. McFarland Septic Tank Service (sludge removal service).
Mr. Eddie Kirk
November 22, 1991
Page Two
7. Orange County Emergency Management /Eno Fire Protection
Association (fire and rescue service).
-.8. Lindy Pendergrass, Orange County Sheriff (law enforcement
service).
This will confirm our discussion of November 20, 1991 and general
agreement regarding additional suggested conditions by the Orange
County Planning Department which are discussed as follows:
1. All conditions of the Special Use Permit recorded in Book
813, Page 599, Orange County Registry, shall be applicable. Some of
the conditions have been modified but these can be included in an
amendment to the Special Use Permit.
2. All easement documents providing for sewer easements and
access for construction and maintenance of the sewer line from the
Norfolk Southern Corporation, North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Mount Hermon Baptist Church and Dorothy C. Bane,
Applicant, are to be provided and recorded, where applicable, prior to
construction. Except for the Norfolk Southern Corporation which is in
process, all such easement documents have been secured and copies are
provided.
3. Easements around the proposed Treatment Plant and Spray
Irrigation Field shall be platted to meet North Carolina Department of
Environmental Management setback and buffer requirements. Such
easements shall act as setbacks and buffers to insure continued
compliance with DEM standards. A copy of the recommended easement
document signed by Dorothy C. Bane, Applicant, and recommended plat of
survey as referred to therein are submitted herewith. We believe
these will satisfy the concerns raised by Mr. Paul Thames, Orange
County Engineer, as they are in accordance with DEM Permit No.
WQ0004370 for Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and
Spray Irrigation System dated May 31, 1991, copy of which we
previously provided.
4. Clause to include in the amended Special Use Permit limiting
the number of units in the Park to 104 with a total number of bedrooms
not to exceed 208 in combination whether contained in one, two or
three bedroom units as follows:
"In order to insure compliance with the 25,000 GPD capacity of
N.C. DEM permit number WQ000437O issued to Ms. Dorothy C. Bane,
Stonegate Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray Irrigation
System, Orange County on May 31, 1991, the number of units permitted
in the park shall not exceed 104 with a total number of bedrooms not
Mr. Eddie Kirk
November 22, 1991
Page Three
to exceed 208. It is the intent of this provision to limit the number
of units in the park to 104 or less to insure that the total number of
bedrooms shall not exceed 208 in combination whether contained in 1,2,
or 3 bedroom units."
5. Final Boundary survey including all easements and
improvements shall be recorded.
This provides the documents and information discussed herein and
responds according to previous correspondence and our discussions.
Sincerely yours,
B. M. Sessoms
BMS /pje
Enclosures
cc: Dorothy C. Bane
Sidney V. Credle
r
NORFOLK
SOUTHERN
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Transportation Department
1120 W. Washington Slr °et
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
803 255 -4335
October 29, 1991 HN /j1
4 -6 -3 Eno Township, NC
Mr. Sidney V. Credle, P.E., R.L.S.
Credle Engineering Co., Inc.
204 E. Markham Avenue
Durham, North Carolina 27701
Dear Mr. Credle:
D. N. zureich
Superintendent
Piedmont Division
t� y
N
_L��
This acknowledges your letter dated October 15, 1991
concerning proposed construction of a pipeline crossing
located in Eno Township, Orange County, NC.
Effective June 1, 1990, Norfolk Southern has developed a
Master Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Program to
cover Norfolk Southern while contractors working for third
parties are on its property performing construction projects
such as wireline /pipeline crossings. The licensee must
indicate in the license agreement that it wishes to
participate in the program and sign and return the license
agreement along with a check to cover the insurance fee and
any other fees due.
your application is being forwarded to our Engineering
Department for consideration. I will advise you of decision
reached.
e truly ycurs, r
r
D. N. Zureic
superintende
Operating Subsidiaries: Norfolk Southern Railway Company / North American Van Lines. Inc.
ti
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
Orange County
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. C. Box 14996
Greensboro, NC 27415 -49.96 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
October 22, 1991
GEORGE E. WELLS. P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: Encroachment Agreement - Mrs. Dorothv C. Bane
Installation of a 3" Force Main across SP, 1713
and the Installation of an Aerial Electric Line
across SR 1713
Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane
3519 Old Hwy. #10
Chanel Hill, NC 2.7514
Dear Mrs. Bane:
Attached is Right of Wav_ Encroachment Agreement which has
been properly executed.
The Department of Transportation does not ouarantee t ^e ric ^t
of way on this road, nor will it be responsible For any claim.
for damages brought by anv mron_erty_ owner by reason_ of the
installation.
Approval is given subject to postira a s3,000.00 ?erformance
and Indemnity Bond with the Department of Tra_nsuortation.
All signing shall be in conformance with the Mani;al on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
All disturbed areas shall he repaired with the follow-4-.0'
rates of seed, fertilizer, and limestone it pounds per acre,
and the areas nroperly mulched and tacked:
25: Reliant Hard Fescue
100# Alta or Kv. 31 Tall Fescue
25# Kenblue Ky. Bluegrass
1000# 5 -10 -10 Fertilizer
4000# Limestone
1
S .
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. C. Box 14996
Greensboro, NC 27415 -49.96 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
October 22, 1991
GEORGE E. WELLS. P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: Encroachment Agreement - Mrs. Dorothv C. Bane
Installation of a 3" Force Main across SP, 1713
and the Installation of an Aerial Electric Line
across SR 1713
Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane
3519 Old Hwy. #10
Chanel Hill, NC 2.7514
Dear Mrs. Bane:
Attached is Right of Wav_ Encroachment Agreement which has
been properly executed.
The Department of Transportation does not ouarantee t ^e ric ^t
of way on this road, nor will it be responsible For any claim.
for damages brought by anv mron_erty_ owner by reason_ of the
installation.
Approval is given subject to postira a s3,000.00 ?erformance
and Indemnity Bond with the Department of Tra_nsuortation.
All signing shall be in conformance with the Mani;al on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
All disturbed areas shall he repaired with the follow-4-.0'
rates of seed, fertilizer, and limestone it pounds per acre,
and the areas nroperly mulched and tacked:
25: Reliant Hard Fescue
100# Alta or Kv. 31 Tall Fescue
25# Kenblue Ky. Bluegrass
1000# 5 -10 -10 Fertilizer
4000# Limestone
Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane
October 22, 1991
Page 2 .
Also, approval of this encroachment is contingent upon
obtaining approval of the Norfolk Southern Railroad Company.
It -"Will be necessary for you or your contractor to notify
Mr. J. R. Hopkins, Assistant District Engineer, upon receipt
of this letter to schedule any _ necessary Preconstruction
Conference, to provide your anticipated date of starting, or
to review any plan revisions made by the District office
prior to construction beginning on this encroachment.
Mr. Hopkins can be reached at (919) 228 -1727 between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondav through Friday.
When the work has been completed please notify Mr. Hopk ns by
letter at P. 0. Box 766, Graham, NC 27253 -0766 in order that
a final inspection can be made.
Sincere'_v,
W. Watk =r_s
?DIVISION ENGINEER
JWW /JMM /cl
Atta.
cc: Mr. A. D. Allison, II
Mr. E. M. Cowan
ROUTE SR ## 1713 PROJECT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
•Al D-
3519 Old-Hwy. # 10 -
Chanel Hill. N. C. 27514
.iTATE uF ,iORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Orange
RIGHT OF WAY ENCROACIIMENT AGREEMENT
FOR NON - UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS ON
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HIGHWAYS
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the -2-1 day of October •1 19 911
by and between the Department of Transportation, party of the first part; and
Dorothy C. Bane
WITNESS ET It
party of the second part,
THAT WHEREAS, the party of the second part desires to encroach on the right of
way of the public road designated as Route SR N 1711 located 874' north of the inter
section of SR #1713 MT.Herman Ch.Rd. & TF7lFT11 —old Hw), # iu with the
following: cross SR# 1713 with a 3" force main encased in 8" steel pipe
and erecting two poles to carry an electric ine across
WHEREAS, it is to the material advantage of the party of the second part to
effect this encroachment, and the party of the first part in the exercise of author-
ity conferred upon it by statute, is willing to permit the encroachment within the
limits of the right of way as indicated, subject to the conditions of this agree-
ment;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED that the party of the first part hereby grants to
the party of the second part the right and privilege to make this encroachment as
shown on attached plan sheet(s), specifications and special provisions which are
made a part hereof upon the following conditions, to wit:
That she .a ld parry of the oeco.d part ►end• and obligate@ hLouBelf to LontaLl and wlntain the encroacher$ facility
In worsen prup.•T ennn.lilibn $her It well not tntvrlwce with at r..dmnpr trvwsL upon as ld htAhwy, nor obstruct nor
taterf.fn wt th the props]j rineananc. thatevf, to reLrbu roe the parry of the first pate for the eeet Incurred for say
repairs of eN lntonancs ti lt■ rewerq a and etruetura9 neeess4ry dos to the lnrtallBtlnn and rsirtenee at the laeillttas
of the parry of the eoeond part, ■ed it ■t ■try it" the party o[ lbe Llnt part rheLl Tequl[e tM [eaovel eL a[ ehangu
to the loeatlon of the said facilities, that the 4914 party of the ..teed part Mode bLamelf, his sucey esrm and asmlgeu,
to promptly rsevw or alter the said facilities. to order to eonforet to the raid reauirm g. vlthwt any ease to the
party of the first part.
That the party of the @wood part agrees to prrlde dating evmetr etioi and any subsequent aelnt .... as proper
sign., ol{nal lights, (lstean and ocMf weruing davit.• tot the proteeefon of traffic In eeafetwanee with the lace@%
Kaw.l an Uallara Traffic Coatral Davie" for Stteaes rued 111 hoses e t amandwnts or Svpplraents thereto. Ialartaties
as to the abvvo ruler a [qu tone ry ta med few the Dlreaies Engineer of the party of the first part.
That the par e7 of the reeved ►.K bar .by @,flan to ird�tlfy rd eras hsrmtase the patty of the fine part erne all
ds.ape and eialaa fey damage that goy arise by reason of the Matatlatlon and .afneenaaee of this anervactemant.
It Is clearly understood by the party of the @*tend part that the party of the (trot part will .esu.m no t..pen-
elaility far any nlw4e thnt may he Caused to .woh tacllltt.e. rtthtr the hlehwey flahta of ray limit., In entry Le.a but
Its tuna suet tae mM mint -nonce operslibn4.
That the parry of the second pert @gross to restart alt arras disturbed doring Installation end maintenance to the
■atlataetlon of the Division Engineer at the party of the first part. The party Of the second pare agree$ to a :seen•
.very nnonBbt■ precaution doting construction and smintemmne4 to praveat aredtnt at eelli silting or pallutlei of
t er ern, ■t"a.n, laksa. nnnoln. other weer Lpoved ae non, grovel ear star.. of ether ptopettyt ar pollvclon at the
air. Thor sha11 be compliance with sppllatbls, rules and regulatieere of the Forth Carolina Dtristen of EndlretwncaL
Kuuqueatf Korth CaroLlame Sedlaentatlaa Cantrel Cemn.neleen, end .Sth ardiaaeeea and retulmtions of rarieum aeentles.
elpalitie■ Bud ether official stooei4q telating to pollution prrveetloa and eontfvl. Vb,a any Lnetellaelw at
rLnesn.=a or act— disturbs the ground nrrta.@ and the —Lot" gronatd cower. the natty of the second part agreed to
rt+ove end replace the sod or otherwise nu tsbliah the grams cover to wet the eatlalactloo of the Dlvielon Eng$nset of
the petty of the float pert.
That the party of the second part agrees to sesum the set"L cwt of any inspection of the work considered to be
.wa.meery by the 01v Lsivn thtLeesf Of the patty at the fin% patt.
that the party of she second part @%real to hers srellablp at Cho encroaching elan, at all lava duglnt evp.true-
tivn, a evpy or thle agrseeent shm Lng erlalence at approval by the party at the first part. That patty of the first part
r.rrn.• the right to stop 911 work ual.0 voidance of eppg —fil U. ►a abase.
trwided the wrk n:onulnwd in this adrererat is bring performmd as a eo.pleted highway epeo to traffic( the party
of thug second psrc •Less■ to two wttl@n notice to tM nlrielve Esglnasr at the party of the (It at pert whorl all work
contained hoesto has been ewpleted. Valens specifically reer000td by the party of the tint Porte written notice of
eomplactoe of work on hLgbwq projects ander construction will set be required. -
TLnt to the c4nu of eeeeomp119nee weth the tat.' rot this agrowat by the patty of the aacond pert, the patty at
n
the lit part rarenes the right to stop all work until the (mcil!%y has Was brought into ctnepllancs or swerved from
the right of ray 49 roe Coat to the patty of the !lest part.
That It to agreed by both parties that this rtttv.rnt •hall tocpay sold It Batumi construction of the rack eee-
trptar.d hotels to net begun vlthla one (1) year trom the date of wthoriuclee by the party at the tint port agleam
wyltten walr.r 1s .ee.r.d by the party sl the • +eocnd part ftasi tbei party of the first part.
r^nls v /td 1 4 1 A r T-,nr,,. 1091 1
rA
iN WITNU5 I...:iiE[JF, ear,, )f the to this agreement has _ausr.d
tt b-� exeL�ute�' the day a;,d year first auove written. ,
DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION
ATTEST OR WITNESS:
BY:
,
XA" xnA)gxm KXR1,)WXd(A M%X
DI ION ENGINEER
coed Party
1NGTR11C.TT()N5
When the applicant is a corporation or a municipality, this agreement must have
the corporate seal and be attested by the corporation secretary or by the
empowered city official, unless a waiver of corporate seal and attestation by
the secretary or by the empowered City official is on file in the Raleigh
office of the Manager of Right of Way. In the space provided in this agreement
for execution, the name of the corporation or municipality shall be typed above
the name, and title of all persons signing the agreement should be typed directly
below their signature.
When the applicant is not a corporation, then his signature must be witnessed
by one person. The address should be included is this agreement and the names
of all persons signing the agreement should be typed directly below their
signature.
This agreement must be accompanied, in the form of an attachment, by plans or
drawings showing the following applicable information:
1. All roadways and ramps.
2. Right of way lines and where applicable, the control of access
lines.
3. Location of the proposed encroachment.
4. Length and type' of encroachment.
5. Location by highway survey station number. If station number
cannot be obtained, location should be shown by distance from
some identifiable point, such as a bridge, road, intersection,
etc, (To assist in preparation of the encroachment plan, the
Department's roadway plans may be seen at the various Highway
Division Offices, or at the Raleigh office.)
6. Drainage structures or bridges if affected by encroachment.
Typical section indicating tee pavement design and width, and
the slopes, widths and details for either a curb and gutter or a
shoulder and ditch section, whichever is applicable.
8. Horizontal alignment indicating general curve data, where appli-
cable.
9. Vertical alignment indicated by percent grade, P.I. station and
vertical curve length, where applicable.
10. Amount of material to be removed and /or placed on NCDOT right of
way; -ppl.icable.
11. Cross - sections of all trading operations, indicating slope ratio
and reference by station where applicable.
12. All pertinent drainage structures proposed. Include all hydraulic
data, pipe sizes, structure details and other related information.
13. Erosion and sediment control.
14. Any special provision! or specifications as to the performance
of the work or the method of construction that may be required
by the Departnent must be shown on a separate sheet attached to
encroachment agreemenc provided that such information cannot be
shown on plans or drawings.
15. The Department's Division Engineer should be given notice by the
applicant prior to actual starting of installation included in
this agreement.
16.' Method of handling traffic during construction where applicable,
17. Sc- of plans, norta arrow, etc.
i
MT. HER MAN CHURCH
ro
CEMETERY
01
w
ur,AOr--* =, Gr-k ou Ko iELEPHON E
CABLE VERI *''� LOcP•TION
IN FIELD
in
8'-cL-rE. EL PI Pa ; cCR
EN CASEME N- OF 5'
rORC5 MAN
NORFOLK SOUTHERN C
FORCE MAIN TO SEWAGE PLANT
I STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
DOROTHY C. BANE ( owner)
ENO TWP. ORANGE CO.,N.0
C,FE L MhgZ = GOXPANY,IhZ.•
" DmfAK >zt
H 11-40
o �
�
J
W
U
Z
�{
�
�
uj
O W
z
�a
m
W
,,
LL
C, �]
a
J J
r n
N
N
Q
4�-
f..
h
s r
0
MT. HERMAN
CHURCH CEMETERY
�t R /W
L
NORFOLK SOUTHERN C
FORCE MAIN TO SEWAGE PLANT
I STONEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
DOROTHY C. BANE ( owner)
ENO TWP. ORANGE CO.,N.0
C,FE L MhgZ = GOXPANY,IhZ.•
" DmfAK >zt
H 11-40
Prepared By And Return After Recording To: B. M. Sessoms, Esq., Haywood, Denny,
Miller, Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Post Office Box 451, Durham, N. C. 27702
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
DEED OF
EASEMENT
November
THIS DEED, made this 10th day of Qf&zkvX, 1991 by and between
Claude E. Godwin, C. D. Couch, and Grover A. Clayton
as Trustees of the
Mount Hermon Baptist Church, Grantor, Old Highway #10, Chapel Hill,
North Carolina 27514; and Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, Single, Grantee, 3519
Old Highway #10, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514; all of Orange
County, North Carolina;
W I T N E S S E T H:
THAT WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of a certain lot of land
in the northeast intersection of Mount Hermon Church Road (SR 1713)
and the main railroad line of Norfolk Southern Corporation in Eno
Township, eastern Orange County, the same being the land conveyed to
Grantor by Curtis F. Bane and wife, Dorothy C. Bane, and Nettie S.
Crabtree, Widow, recorded in Book 217, Page 622, Orange County
Registry; and
WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of certain land on the east side of
Grantor's land but separated therefrom by a 50' easement for a spur
line of the Norfolk Southern Corporation; the same being a part of a
tract of land containing 260.75 acres, more or less, which Grantee
inherited from her father, David Crabtree, deceased, as shown on Plat
in Plat Book 16, Page 37, Orange County Registry; which Deed and Plat
are hereby referred to for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, Grantee is developing a portion of her property on the
west side of Mt. Herman Church Road into Stonegate Mobile Home Park;
and the Wastewater Collection, Treatment and Spray Irrigation Disposal
System to service said Mobile Home Park to be located on the land of
the Grantee across the Norfolk Southern Spur Line from the land of the
Grantor as set forth above; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that in so doing Grantee lay a pipeline
for said System across the land of the Grantor.
NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of
Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, to
them in hand paid, do hereby give, grant and convey unto Grantee a
perpetual right and easement, as limited herein, to construct and
maintain across and upon the land of Grantor an underground sewer line
extending from the north right -of -way line of the Norfolk Southern
Corporation across the land of the Grantor as described above and as
shown on Plat showing force main to sewage plant, Stonegate Mobile
Home Park, Dorothy C. Bane (owner), copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A" for a more complete and accurate description of the
easement by metes and bounds;
AND to go upon said lands whenever the same is reasonably
necessary for the purpose of inspecting, maintaining, and repairing
said sewer line; provided that said sewer line shall be placed as near
the common boundary line of Grantor and Norfolk Southern Corporation
as is reasonably possible;
AND that in constructing and repairing said sewer line, said
Grantee will remove all surface earth, make level the surface of the
ground above said sewer line, and interfere as little as is reasonably
2
possible with any plants, fences or other improvements upon the land
of the Grantor.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said right and easement to Grantee and her
successors -in-- title; it being agreed that the right and easement
hereby granted is appurtenant to and runs with the land now owned by
Grantor as referred to above; but this easement shall terminate at
such time as the Stonegate Mobile Home Park Sewer System is connected
to a municipal sewer system and the need for the herein described
easement is no longer required for access to the Wastewater
Collection, Treatment and Spray Irrigation Disposal System maintained
by Grantee.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor, has caused this Deed of
Easement to be signed in its common name by its duly authorized
Trustees and its seal to be affixed hereto by authority duly given the
day and year first above written.
MOUNT HERMON BAPTIST CHURCH,
GRANTOR
By:
Trustee
BY:
Trustee
y:
4:
21p,
Trustee
3
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ,,.....- .- :.•;:�.
I, a Notary Public of
the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that
as TRUSTEES OF THE MOUNT HERMON BAPTIST CHURCH, Grantor herein, each
personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due
execution of the foregoing Deed.
WITNESS my hand and notarial seal, this - day of .D,tebe-r,
1991.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
5
_ - Ate.: ):� `w - •p'•�.� _ �k: ,�•. �- ~r���' „• •LI -•^_; :•�.'•. ♦�.�"!•'Tb nl "'" A
�'• f V� � "w~sY•rr•m: tY -•..F� eta —tsF�
7g, e5l
r
o• z-
n
T d �F
LLJ
CN
W: m w -
0 f4
In
Lj
zw I CN w.
is Q \\ U I m rn I I I m I �j Q Q_ '
z e;, .;..
� as
� :'.r. • � w � � . to : • `xy _
•` Z \\ a I I� V) ;fin
i
i�k .� Q C- w I a-¢ I¢ I. 1 1 U :ter* til'
0 of w 0 x•:
00
Q z . En.
a
1 W cn �
� -
U.
Q.
- - _ - - - - - - - -r•' Oil:
1+,
gn
..k=
_ .- .. - - - - - - __ - e^a-c •.p... ?•. i. ' n -tit
TONEGATE MOBILE HQ_ME PARK
Project Work Chronology
November, 1987 - October, 1991
1987 - 1988
November, 1987 -
July, 1988
July - December,
1988
Orange County Planning Department orally
advises Mrs. Bane to cease work and
reapply for a new Class A special Use
Permit as work had not "proceeded at a
reasonable rate;" during November,
1987 - January, 1988 Mrs. Bane presents
information to Orange County Planning
Department to show that work had
progressed steadily, but slowly; orange
County Planning Department rejects
information as inadequate and advises
Mrs. Bane in writing on February 3 and
5, 1988 to cease work, apply for a new
Class A Special Use Permit or appeal the
decision to the Board of Adjustments;
Mrs. Bane enters appeal and with the
assistance of Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys
and Credle Engineering Company, Inc.,
Engineers in perfecting the appeal,
accumulating information and preparing
presentation to Orange County Board of
Adjustments on July 11, 1988 which found
that work had proceeded at a reasonable
rate and approved the appeal which
allowed work to continue on Stonegate
Mobile Home Park; Application and
negotiations leading to Agreement dated
June 20, 1988, effective April 1, 1988,
between Southern Railway Company and
Dorothy C. Bane for an 8" sewer pipeline
to cross under railway property at
Glenn, N.C., located 235' west of Mile
Post H -47 which is west of the
intersection of Mt. Herman Church Road
and Southern Railway Property.
- S.V. Credle, Professional Engineer,
Credle Engineering Company, Inc.,
Durham, N.C., employed to implement
Special Use Permit requirements for
private water system including wells and
water lines; and wastewater collection,
treatment and disposal system under
NPDES Permit No. NC0049808 granted by
State of North Carolina, Division of
1989
Environmental Management, for Stonegate
Mobile Home Park, Orange County which
allowed discharge into a tributary of
Rhodes Creek.
January - June, - S. V. Credle of Credle Engineering
1989 completes plans for fresh water and
wastewater systems in consultation with
Orange County Planning Department which
required some revisions and
negotiations; Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys,
coordinates with Orange County Planning
Department and Orange County Attorney to
revise and update October 4, 1982
Special Use Permit, drafting begins;
Mrs. Bane and Mr. Credle deal with
geologists, hydrologists and well
drillers and two wells are drilled
yielding 65 gpm (gallons per minute) and
85 gpm at sites other than shown on
revised Site Plan, thus requiring
further revisions to Site Plan; wells
permitted by Orange County Health
Department and pump downs completed with
satisfactory results; drafts of Special
Use Permit completed and forwarded to
Orange County Attorney and Orange County
Planning Department.
July - December, - Application for renewal of NPDES Permit
1989 No. NC0049808, Stonegate Mobile Home
Park, Orange County, timely completed
and filed with DEM; revised Site Plans
provided to Orange County Planning in
order to conform with Special Use Permit
requirements; Special Use Permit
approved by Orange County Attorney and
executed by Orange County and Mrs. Bane
and recorded in the Orange County
Registry; Mrs. Bane and Mr. Credle meet
with DEM Representative and initially
obtain oral approval for renewal of
NPDES Permit for discharge into Rhodes
Creek; several weeks later DEM
Representative reverses position upon
reclassification of Rhodes Creek; formal
notice received in December, 1989 of DEM
intention to deny renewal of NPDES
Permit and suggesting alternatives to
Pa
1990
1991
discharge into Rhodes Creek; Soil
Scientist with Orange County Health
Department employed and paid for
completed soil evaluation; Duke Power
electrical service to park completed;
contractor contacted for boring under
Southern Railway Mail Line; Soil Erosion
Plan submitted and approved; GTE South
contacted for telephone service; NCDOT
approves driveway permit.
January - June, - S. V. Credle investigates various
1990 alternatives suggested by DEM in
conjunction with Orange County Health
Department for on -site subsurface
absorption system, low pressure
injection system and spray irrigation
system; spray irrigation system appears
the most feasible and S. V. Credle
begins process to deal with DEM to
develop wastewater collection, treatment
and spray irrigation system for on -site
disposal of wastewater; several sites
for the location of the system
considered with the Health Department
and DEM to identify acceptable site for
spray irrigation system; soil erosion
devices begun and completed; wells sites
approved by DEM; GTE South telephone
service to park completed.
July - December, - After extensive work with Health
1990 Department and DEM, acceptable site is
located and Credle Engineering completes
plans and makes application to DEM for
approval of spray irrigation system;
Credle Engineering begins inquiry and
negotiation with Norfolk Southern
Corporation to obtain further easement
in edge of railroad right -of -way for
proposed force main, sewage overflow
line and underground pipeline crossing
Norfolk Southern Corporation's spur
tract.
January - June, - Extensive design and redesign of spray
1991 irrigation system by Credle Engineering
in consulting with DEM resulting in
issuance of Permit No. WQ0004370 to Mrs.
3
Dorothy C. Bane, Stonegate Mobile Home
Park Wastewater Treatment and Spray
Irrigation System, Orange County on May
31, 1991; Credle Engineering receives
Norfolk Southern Corporation Application
with list of documentation needed for
proposed easement and spur line crossing
of sewer lines in connection with
wastewater treatment and spray
irrigation system; Mrs. Bane contracts
with Alamance Pump Company and purchases
pumps for the wells; obtains a pump down
test to redetermine adequate volume; and
secures chemical analysis and other
tests to determine adequate fresh water
supply which are approved by DEM; E.
Villanova and C. Bane successfully
complete examination and qualify as
Grade I Certified Wastewater Treatment
Operators; Wilson Engineering Soil
Boring analysis completed; received
Carolina Crane estimate to move Sewer
Treatment Plants; Credle Engineering
advises Orange County Planning
Department in response to three 1990 and
1991 letters inquiring in regards to
changes in the Site Plans that no change
had resulted only that wastewater
disposal changed from Rhodes Creek
discharge to spray irrigation system;
Orange County Planning further advised
that when DEM approval had been received
for the wastewater treatment and spray
irrigation system it would be forwarded;
Orange County Planning makes further
inquiries to which Credle Engineering
responds.
July - November, - Credle Engineering makes several
1991 responses to Orange County Planning
inquiries; orange County Planning raises
issue as to whether change from Rhodes
Creek discharge to spray irrigation
system is a minor change or a
modification; Haywood, Denny, Miller,
Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Attorneys,
begin discussion with Orange County
Planning in order to seek modification
of Special Use Permit under Section 8.7
of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance;
Application for Modification prepared
for filing; information accumulated to
4
be filed in support thereof and in
discussions with Mrs. Bane and Mr.
Credle; Application for Modification of
Special Use Permit presented to Zoning
Officer, Orange County Planning
Department, for review including
additional necessary documents and
information in connection with
Application in order to be included on
11/25/91 Orange County Public Hearing
Agenda.
E. Villanova and C. Bane successfully
complete examinations for Grade "C- Well"
and "B -Well" Water Treatment Facility
Operators, respectively; arrangements
made with A -OK Home Services for garbage
collection, McFarland Septic Tank
Service for sewage sludge disposal,
Orange County Emergency Management for
fire and rescue coverage, Orange County
Sheriff's Department for law enforcement
services; NCDOT reapproves driveway
permit and encroachment agreement for
underground force main crossing and
aerial electric lines crossing Mt.
Herman Church Road; Norfolk Southern
Corporation responds to Application for
Pipeline Crossing.
6
�
*4 OK
home ServlCes
*4.OK HOME SERVICES
P.0 P.0 BOX 627
(919) 933 -9388
October 15, 1951
Mrs. Dorothy Bane
3519 Old Highway 1�1
Chapel Hill NC 2-7514
Regarding: Garbage Service for Stonegate Mobile Home park
Dear- Mrs. Bane:
Thank. YOU fr_r contacting A -OK Home Services concerning garbage service
for St,--,negate Mobile Herne park on i4t. Herman Church Rald.lW W-DlAl be
happy t,_ provide set-vice for the park Whenever yo w
service. We w.:,uld r•egi.tir•e appr- oximately one week's ricA ice before the
desired service date.
please feel free to Call ,.%S at 933 -9588 if you have any further
questions.
Sincerely,
V
Jcm Richardson
President,
F, -OK Home Services, Inc.
-5
WIN
I
2;,4
FMA
114�
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
P.O. Box 9181
929 -8109
732 -8161
TO:
ORANGE COUNTY
HILLSBOROUGH
'NORTH CAROLINA
27278
MEMORANDUM
Ms. Dorothy Bane
3519 Old Highway #10
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
FROM: Orange County Emergency Management
Division of Emergency Medical Services
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
RE: FIRE AND RESCUE COVERAGE
DATE: October 16, 1991
Communications
Emergency Medical Services
Fire Marshal
In response to your request, Orange County Emergency Medical
Services and Eno Fire Department will provide emergency
medical and fire services for Stonegate Mobile Home Park
located on Mount Hermon Church Road in Durham.
et f
ENO FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
RT . 1, BOX 274
DURHAM, N. C. 27705
E.%raT ORANGE INSURANCE 015TRICT
D144-4. /i, 15FY/
�i
- OFFICE PHONE
HILLSBOROUGH -782.2481
CHAPEL HILL 94"M
r
TO:
FROM
DATE:
REF:
LINDY PENDERGRASS
Sheriff of Orange County
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SHERIFF LINDY PENDERGRASSO�P
OCTOBER 17, 1991
ST04NEGATE MOBILE HOME PARK
THE CjA:;:;GL CUDUNTY SIISRIFF' S DEPARTMENT CAN PROVIDE LAW
TOR "HE ONE HCHORED AND FOUR ( -104 )
LOT STcr.1�:�r+'::: :lCLy: LE H dME Pry2 LCCATE:: Off: tiOUNT HERMAN
RES. PHONE 929.5535
THIS DEPARTMENT WOULD NOT REQUEST ANY ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
OR EQUIPMENT T:: PROVIDE ROUTINE SERVICE.
LP /jc
CC: DOROTHY BANE
Prepared By And Return After Recording To: B. M. Sessoms, Esq., Haywood, Denny,
Miller, Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick, Post Office Box 451, Durham, N. C. 27702
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
DEDICATION OF
EASEMENTS
THIS DEDICATION OF EASEMENTS, made this 21 =day of November, 1991
by Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane, Single, Grantor, 3519 Old Highway 110, Chapel
Hill, North Carolina 27514; of Orange County, North Carolina;
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of certain land located in Eno
Township, Orange County, North Carolina, the same being a tract of
land containing 260.75 acres, more or less, which Grantor inherited
from her father, David Crabtree, deceased, as shown on Plat of Survey
recorded in Plat Book 16, Page 37, orange County Registry, to which
reference is made for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is developing a portion of her property on the
west side of Mt. Herman Church Road into Stonegate Mobile Home Park;
and is developing a portion of her property on the east side of Mt.
Herman Church Road with a sewage treatment plant, lagoon and spray
irrigation system to service said Mobile Home Park; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina Department of Environmental Management
(DEM, herein) issued Permit No. WQ0004370 to Mrs. Dorothy C. Bane,
Stonegate Mobile Home Park wastewater Treatment and Spray Irrigation
System, Orange County on May 31, 1991 (Permit, herein) which approved
the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System as
shown on Boundary Area Plat of Survey of same by Credle Engineering
Company, Inc. dated July 31, 1991, which Boundary Area Plat of Survey
is recorded in Plat Book , Page , orange County Registry, and
to which reference is made for greater certainty of description; and
WHEREAS, the Dedication of Easements herein is shown on the
Boundary Area Plat of Survey and includes that property of the Grantor
through which a three inch (311) Force Main crosses beginning in the
northeastern intersection of the right -of -way lines for the main and
spur lines of Norfolk Southern Corporation leading to and including
the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System
together with the required setbacks and buffers as approved by DEM in
the above referenced Permit and which easements, as limited herein,
for the setbacks and buffers are hereby dedicated to insure continued
compliance with DEM standards under the above referenced Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor, for and in consideration of good and
valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby give, grant, convey and dedicate perpetual easements and
rights, as limited herein, in all lands of the Grantor as shown on the
Boundary Area Plat of Survey as recorded which is referred to above to
satisfy DEM setback requirements and buffers between the three inch
(311) Force Main, Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation
System and all property lines for so long as said property shall be
used for and in connection with the Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and
Spray Irrigation System as shown on the Boundary Area Plat of Survey
referred to above;
AND with the rights to go upon said lands whenever the same is
reasonably necessary for the purpose of constructing, maintaining,
repairing and inspecting the Force Main, Sewage Treatment Plant,
2
Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System as shown on the Boundary Area Plat
of Survey as recorded which is set forth above. Said property of
Grantor is subject to the Special Use Permit for Stonegate Mobile Home
Park recorded in Book , Page , the Orange County Registry.
IT IS THE INTENTION of the Grantor that the easements and rights
hereby granted are appurtenant to and run with the land of the Grantor
as referred to above; but the easements and rights shall terminate at
such time as they are no longer required or needed for the Force Main,
Sewage Treatment Plant, Lagoon and Spray Irrigation System for
Stonegate Mobile Home Park.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor, has hereunto set her hand and
seal, the date and year first above written.
P-2-" C- (SEAL)
DOROTHY - BANE, GRANTOR
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF 2J1,a.,,o
I, �.,�_l , =. Ey. 's , a Notary Public of
the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that DOROTHY C.
BANE, Grantor, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged
the due execution of the foregoing instrument.
WITNESS my hand and notarial seal, this -d= day of November,
. pi LC`nmission Expires.
r'�i:• •8'.Z7 9 3
3
E A S YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone p 9( ) g g
,;;�,; -• :. •;. p. one com anies for our exchange listed below and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ........................ . . $5.02 $13.15
Mebane .. . ................. 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ............. 4.65 12.93
Du (excludes calls to Wake Count
2.49
• I'illsl�urc� ........ .
............. 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1) tc 3 a- 5�S1, n CT D= rl,r,m Z71 -70
(4 _ p' r r r �r rrrr. n r
;5 'l`tV ,
7) ��-
3
10) 7 7
- 12) d r � l; . 7,�>m�'r i n � �`• %?• ;' �' • l Igar� � �/Z
15)
16)
18)
20) L 7 z - --
4 " J�
22) Olti� 1 I y.
6 Ito
25)
/. c.� ! -
27) (jq! 9
28)
Ir
'-L- �-[ .[
34) Ci1L1-alit tiC_ `.
"EAS" - YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... . ... . ............ . ............. $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ....... .. ..................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ........... .................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2 -49
Pittsboro............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
Ce
)61
3) j� - 9c 'f 3 �- v 9 7 ,`
/s/i7
4) - -
w Q wg, ^� u
5)�•tru.av 3 iG73 Neff � C"rN
6)��c_;41.�...__ 3:53aG - rr — `/�� rlf-z
`)12 3113 >i
8) y
27U9Olcl NGfU CG, / NiilM%G �/4
/aZ . �0 % (" /Vc
/ Z.7-5/Y
/✓0
g) qaz -D(�b NNE Vg5
fZ ,609 L�6. ct�. l . rj,e .
a 10)
741e;sZ, /ff.
13) 4 46,
1/` r ' 0Q i
14) V �r1� ��`J47G
IJr �' �7cYrn
15)9-
16)
17) Sal
-1
21) ".�,
22) 10
24)1 -7� Sis- 2.75��;� -4ci�
sC- if -t3/i 7 ?•
25) - I l `I o� 7 s; �3 .J J�.�� hay..
)13 V)��sa
26) L��' _ / �' ` drr.. �s f�3 �-.i - tig,c1
27) '77 ` c�,��f
:i�'rS �s r-?� .�f,. „� .!, r,�Y•s.
28) �r- �--r�Y �FP- Z ° /9 !Z9 ��, �
s S> �l I1�. /lica.i /. s A/j
— -7R..3
29) '1 _J6 y '71 �- t=r? '; •. \. T ti �� c+ 1`.:' � ice%
311)
-!�
32) ' �. r i 3 .� ` ! .c > , t �, ►? {�. s Y " f x,,,tiu
35)
36) 9L
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ............. .......................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro......... .. ............................. 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME �. PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
J �
�m' s" 2., Zt t 4/,, !/s .9 717
11 r
3) �
�[} 1, 7''7, i
5) j '� A
AA_—_ r
r
6) /
i/ p
p
7) � � �, 5 s 3 7 �
��.: R
R z �6P - ? . �,, A-; -2 7.-1 �3
� h
r
�'7- /J 7
+ �
�-
1 /
13) W t1,
7
77
14) (
(5-f,. QIZiWct IE - v; iaq r ,r -,�,�"
15) t97 't - z Y(-E
16) Gs`/( -•"2 q �7_i/ /, a
a'
EAS" -YES.
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll-free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll-free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough - - - - -- - - - - - - .......................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane .............. ................... ........ 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ....................... ............. 4.65 12.93
Du rham/Creed moor (excludes calls to Wake County). . . ...... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ................. ....... ............ 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1 ) 17- 7
7_74
3) G -/k- 92 Y33 - 250,rZe IIV,7 -e— 7
16)
2
-C
17)
18)
_a
19)
S/
20)
k
21)
C L
/15ccl.
22)
3:2 2./5f Ll
23)
44 1437
24)
(f
25)
I.-LAN-4
26)
L3
27)
I `�= 1
(V
28)
29)
7
30)
31)
32)
33)
U�
34)
L
35)
36)
q
C
37)
'.4
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and
find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly
for toll-free service into the triangle area.
We uryc. 1he Commission to act swiltly to put this plan into active
service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough . . .....................................
$5.02 $13-15
Mebane ............ ...............................
6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .........................................
4.65 12-93
Du rham/C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) .........
'99 2-49
Pittsboro ..... -------------- ...........
1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
4e-
4441 c) 1510
Lo 4,!0,
(-Im Q 2- rj 7- 7
2 07
3)G- ,101
4)
3 o q (7
iy-
A
k"
17
d( ,r, A,✓
Ofe, 741�—
Ic
-ILI
1+ t U s Aw t4 t t- ( P 6'P-cq
a 'd.26 of r ;il .,orao-K P�- -
izb. P\,DN% lk �lr
/5 if-
v.
■
< < EAS" -- YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies
for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area.
We are willing to pay that amount monthly
for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough .........
...............................
$5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............
...............................
6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .........................................
4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County).........
.99 2 -49
Pittsboro ..................
. ................
- ... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE
PHYSICAL AD ZIP
{ yNAME
/DRESS
2) r /l �i v
7 Z 75
/cE AeIL—Itig'
6) Jr- /�z 90
Z3d - /,!97.' ✓9r t1
do s W • [1� � Its � • J� t,�
7) -/6 y
-
s
8) h - /
—7 141
10) 1
-31 -3 z ► ,, ' ,.. ;L;
12) C'�i. 20
3), .33 .27
,loa' AA-,j 6„14
14) � `�lG
'7�Q�-)z!Tc v��, a � fa���a1�
(Wo
15) �l (� - f�
�� ,� .7a„�, ,P • 1.rfa
3i i -�.'e >� n 1. �e
16)
-
17) ' 1 L`
�3�� C 5 l
i �r. y 0 f b1,jFjz,jn1, AZ,
18)
19) 11 /
20) -1
23) f G L
`)
24) N, 9,"
3��
26) P(-- r,
f27,_- ' �1 ��
b .[ 7)r - A- A
/1
27) ta— l •- 9p
7 S1-s�
-
28) -
�i -9 G( -:'�
29) �Il1i -cl�
�'. -a22L5�
x`17 L.,if`Lx� cnc�l.
31)
>
17
33) 1,1 = _e-
�� =1�?� ( t 1 ^
-� ��u. ���� ..�,J. • •`Jr IUC:z
34)
r 1, .�
i� 7k,
35)
36) -�a _.� L
�fv.7 -` y``
37) l�
7 v7� y �r•y7J �. r f: 1 ��
k C °,
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone . companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to ray that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.0.2 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL AD� SS ZIP
/' 4
1 1/l C/V_C, ► Y ��- A �i- >,rcof. �i /ter
2) .:2 -qS1�
3) „d/ z 1 bk3 r
4) a Q
5) _ 14, GU 6 - 1113 ALL
10) 6- !/L y- 7>z- /0; "V
11) i�;Y 50 732- -3,91.o�
12) - f L 90 7&2 _722,
,
13) v —la - t3 (
14) ,-41 ?L2 722- G9/
15) -1"6 Y - 05/41 t
16) i6 �1r7 Y 6, S�
17)
18) - U 73a- �� Cc
20) L/C' °r 1- 01G92
23)
26) & y • / S� ;4L
27) �fi'v' "i 91 (J-(32-
28) 611 5 Y -oy 3C. Loj_L
30)/�
31) � /6f` f`7f-Tb`t
33) %g ls_b2 a "ate(
34) &L,6�qu
36) lr �G 3 �3 ��I u.$. • .�
37)
kff/ A' 6 A44- 16 U k Ll.t,v 22_22L'
.
r Z;Rq R e
ZVX 6 L 5� 2 72:
J
3 /LS b y //i
l
1 � f� /IA�PfA.,,•l �.Sf 4 ��!�.Lfe.(1 /Y!I S-
(/ &1A,c: 1/.
°iz ,; LI mxf CK LArte , Dsoc a-rr, Z �
l) jYc lc PiS ,dL ��a71, c�'� • `-�r//
T T_
/.�.�=
Fi n
1�1 P��y iiv �'•-
F t
t fa 1.6 -YA 5 _TcC-
%S"•%
6 6 EAS 5 5 —■--- YES =
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ......... ...................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane............. ....... ....................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ............ ... ... ..................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ....... - .. .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............ ................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME HYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
G G -s T 7 -7
2 y, a �r�- 1 �cr� �G a 7 L 7,,L-
3) - 2-32-24-3 t n�1 s. f SE 6.� ! A
4) b - /FC 7e -�rR r, ti
6) 6-16-5C2 1�3 utCoS � Uxxs:m; D¢r� � ✓4 �T .(-e',
7) -,L- `i qQ
8) -� - RO 7 2 - tai.• _� ,w � 1 7 �'r�;�7-
1 Q) & -I U - -D 6-44- lS" c:-�� _ 'Zl(o MFLLLYI -a hLISt�fa °oJG
- ���"72 -7
12) - /- -9D 7. - I?M ?a.p. r [/a G :/•/! ; 72
13)Ur/Le -J LP � "T I,^�lL�t � t�zSCQN 5. s CAP�KLr 7;/�
14) (,� ,C'1ij �'� ( �1Cii1 ��
15) h�.
i � 2 � u rti1� t, ,1L141Y5 1,07- nhw, .
[ I � ic�-5Gl) 3 l� rPr L4Gie �_.e -Zx
16)
17) -id o 7 72- 3zo / n G 5,k ', 7 L-7Y'
18) c`tG D `?3-- 43 �I 7
19) - 11,- S.c '� \� s' C, _a . " 60 \`gib • �� X3:1$
20) - �' �� 7,�- ►� ��1p r` �� - 2� �c1f
21) ' u — "�� ?7� (0 5l
22)
23) L• - �7G 5-- ��iscl� `L "u'u ` `/- CjtAh�� ��. ,�G�'_ ���T CCzr11 ! . J7�
25) J�
26) 732 -�.L - $ZG
27) 732 - h7 Y_ CYPJ 7�
28) rte -I�-01e 73a- 3753 ✓ OeLw44L 39)7 4Ux ,, i
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll-free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $1315
Mebane ............ ........... .................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ..... .. ........................ 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro .................... . ................... 1.12 2.62
14) & - /o
DAT
PHON
NAM '
PHYSICAL ADDR S ZIP IR
l
.
; I IL - d' �
16)
J 2' l
3)
l
—
-/4 57c
f
4)
7 • � 2
y
p�
5)
-A
:9,- 3-
�. 10 �ii "&14 )
:vhl� .��-
6)
•-)
7> r
c
f 1 (N J 4j. (-. I
21)
- 016 7 5 Z
8)
3 & V a -•4-c�
22)
(v ✓GI -�). G -
C'.
9)
1 1 M kA-i 9,A, --uc er
10)
&r
22
11)6-1ip
i�-LcSG3 �GrLCi�Q t f�Il `al►
tl7p�'(]���• t1�l1SbC�+'G� 1.� !�
12)
13)
28)
14) & - /o
15)6/-/,,,
(7 Qu 1 C? '
l
.
; I IL - d' �
16)
J 2' l
/'.% rb Gi
mot- ,5 J
17)
-/4 57c
18)
1A, -90
/ti
c
-A
19)
�. 10 �ii "&14 )
:vhl� .��-
� � Yl hr ` IV 177.E
~ci®
21)
- 016 7 5 Z
3 & V a -•4-c�
22)
(v ✓GI -�). G -
ti
Ca11
1 1 M kA-i 9,A, --uc er
25)
22
28)
29)
�-ira y a 4a5 -0735
30>
- I� -�1�z
;I 'I�
4l' '/ �.
31)
'737 -6- 214
J
5''`;:��r1.��
PAS . !�,cfc
32)
-t+� ~��' 1G -)�- �f �7) -T /-
L
✓.5 T :%I
I?'��a'.f.�.._
/t
r'O X 00 2
33)
C' < <1 /? -i c1 ^C %�•.
_...���
34)
— �(� " 9,n 9,1 ,2 ^,) -
a � •
i �. � p
"` t.(t �t :J � rr
35
, 22
36)
- % ✓° �' 11
l ;_
r
? 1 �,►r.. �i6Zl I(i✓'
'
f
�
11
To
< < EAS
YES
the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
isidered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
I telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and
find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
-free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly
for toll -free service into the triangle area.
urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Isborough ......... ...............................
$5.02 $13.15
: bane ............ ...............................
6.50 16.45
apelHill ...... : ...............................
... 4.65 12.93
irham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) .........
.99 2.49
tsboro ....... .... ............. ..................
1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
d 4
P_f te 14VV .21 2 y.,x je
i/ 3-?� —S 25U 171h1v !
_
u.- && )( —!;-,p
I `1 71-A- S r i o JCj
13 7-
/ 3- e S
/ � f l a ,' t -72;
"76-7 S C)
6I/ (,113 U... - -. 73 V.24
'707 ,l- 491
6-11,0,7 G C/ & 6
6Z' d ?705
LL 757$'
.
G%tre� r �l
-7W�
C, I 3i flt
�t
4n a. -Z' 4 �Ml
P.
Q 2 T 7Y7 3F0 g 14 14
X 46
4C, GCa
6z L
e. M-
e1C
e210 iJ (I 6 t.:..1 s7 -L
/0 ! w!w0"S J Z7)N
Ce
I W* - 1D- &64L' 27A
d 2
2,- e
ex 7 ; /
e. M-
e1C
e210 iJ (I 6 t.:..1 s7 -L
/0 ! w!w0"S J Z7)N
Ce
I W* - 1D- &64L' 27A
"EAS" --
YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for
the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into.the triangle area.
We urge the
Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into
active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
=
Hillsborough
......... ...............................
$5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............
...............................
6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill
.......... ...............................
4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) .........
.99 2.49
Pillsboro ............
...............................
1.12 2.62
DATE
PHONE NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
"...:,,
-- -
1) e j11�'A�i`"�t���_
�}� �c�..�r-.
1ti �.: �1.a_�. ^.���C'k�` -t-1
-
2) %/
Z' Y r7
, J , .3_33 r Gof r� / /5' �r eSS .. rcf'
3) (cy�lr4�
7:'� .. f` 1�t�"�r .�cxl;
l��i ✓2iC�4.d/ "��/r t i -.
4)�'d
/,.;
�f� 7A— i/.✓� //d`,.t�3�
I! % �IiLG'r�te, A1.1 91741,
5)
a
6)
9)
2 9'6 '3 �/� ����ce• --
%�'/ "-� r, - S 2 7 eS;
% / /��
/��,w,._.
12)
C ✓
Anj 7t -2
14) ��
2-cD 0 G3
%crU 7A
17)
3.17o c u 9`O wr ` .A - tir C
19) ��''
� ,_4� a� �Ir �Y r� �.r )<<, 7 r>t nwnn t
tl
20)
4 14 q t ciC d ar,wIn+40.1
[� _F ��
21) C6'
C.` —�7 2
i
23)
_73�-
24) r,
La
�.
G_,�
w
28) I'
3- 6 ' 1 _
L12 -I3— �,. u .77
29) �''
�3_(. ✓=�`� 1._. r , J
�Lrx r3 J �� N, .7
3o >
4 22
31)x. z"
�47 _5672 -r
32)
_. f �r
4P
C
34) 01 Lo
h - 5)�
U a o�,, •{'� Cd' j!�'povti " jam.
36) f
25 t - i - n, t . ,'- t.
37) :1A
n w _ A �� .��, ��,.f�4k v
, jJ
"EAS" - YES
To the Norlh Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area, We have reviewed and
considered the EAS
rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area.
We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough .........
............................... $5.02, $13.15
Mebane ............
............ ................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ........
_ _ . - .. 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor
(excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............
............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
k'
2) C:_ "it
�► G5 ! � ' o ,.- / �- u26q±z�� 6)A: 7- TZ 7?
3)
7b_ !l
4,
5)
q
8)
64 4
9) wa
- "— y- iO J c-. CU, ff
10)
137, - R7.14 C l' 3415 Cana i v is X11 ! S� . a �a
-
12, lo•`�� �/1
n ��� f77r rf,: l%% 1 � .ia
13)
_
17
14)
-G/ 7 b 11_ '
16) U i ij,
15S Sir,
18) �- /6- ��
6� %5 ?Sr -1 9. G ✓ 1� /�S' %Jc.. ,ter =r : /�s� Jlv �cy�
21) A-
22) %� 1U-Z'
732 f . �'k��
r
23) -- / - 9 0
�_7' 605 3C (.�c -aa L� ed
24) 14 ° e
7.3 '7 � 3 Vi c: gym• cX �� /'
-'
25)
7-f 'G' .� ��r ��Zj. 4
27) l - �`iC1
� . -5'r `� ' cfv ' 124 i -r%Gt'�e Cc. `�Y�n, � yaz 717 K
31) w- 1 %, - i
_ 1r ` vl :. gf-i�f :1�laSi� s. ! a 1 i'( /. -4'
33) - 4-
i / ��� Z ,w /. !X17.
34) '( -�
�37_ S 1.� ^,rA�1�. -�C' xi+� �,� ��� �K .� - iL:. r, 272 :)
35) -� ' r
2-3
-?
7'436) J 7?
37)
Z'
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1)
Residential
Business
Hillsborough ............ .. ................... .....•..
$5.02
$13.15
Mebane ............ ... .................... ........
6.50
16.45
Chapel Hill .........................................
4.65
12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County).........
.99
2.49
Pittsboro ............ ...............................
1.12
2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1)
,�,6 , �
%3� � 3 3 � =v� '! ' SDv�
3i u:. �i1z.�< -• ,�c� C� � � -7�
2)
r+v lye
32_ 313
3t>' W - ��Gr �� rv;��. 27 -2 7g
3)
/'9 'G
6 U23 , z77C,
4)
-
zo , Z U
2 LJ . l T pav S 7�7�3
8)
/& G
}' 1
tit 11 •U- �.� c -
a g-
10)
Cs l 11_go
?.z = j Y�3�
aa
12)
.7 s
/� r�oo �2 7,17f
_
1 4)
96 9 44 3
Cl u jA + Z 7.f I G
15)
!
-
, - 94L' u ,
22 i u P.A Wcu.f Cj, zu NL J,;
16)
17)
I
ic4 ,0(' -C� C -2 j4
18)
a
Zvi `� �. is �, ,
(C Q G4 n- , Lf, J
19)
21)
22)
- 6 24�
& - I G. - R
-
"I • i � J 1 � �C�
�—
u ?� r i r 2 C - f ,- , �-
23)
(Q -) rp --to
`7 .? cr sc, -S I rats
Z- 3 Z -2) l "�-� . C �.; i.'-, 113b =a > C: 2:,2
24)
'147 3 t w ��.r 3
25)
-IL C, �' '' - -5 C Ur.
26)
i? - f (= I' '�;
' f: ..\ ..
`` f_,�'- -�' r i .l�l
27)
29)
30)
32) '`i�
'7 S-
34
/.
> .• �,
36)
oo
I
`EAS" YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area- We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ....... _ _ .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12. 2.62
DATE PHONE
NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
4)
r' 9 -4-7 -/
r7a.3i..vl6cy n_
6)
/ lQ ��} ' j 7.__ 3 ; �� i. �.-(1 ;s _Q �' -� I � n K r i i n 1 d, 724
r
a)
-i7
-
11)
- �- ` ��
r�l�n+c�� f.
pg n _ 4 n p2!'S,j j,
12)
(0 16-20 90.1 9:� Z v�
l'�x j� 0���'Qr a �. /t /.G-
13)
/ qD
14)
6 -4'i e,
� • r
"r7^ xrZ nd /-
15)
_r
le, - f �- t7� _'-(
C'
i S w .. .e
16)
e- - 9 a `zi,
v. L A
�.z
17)
/ -:6l 6 s[ i_ /,-2 h 7
4c a -n
�" C3 r�
18)
/r,
17 g _� -� 2 �a'> r1 ��, .� r L c% _
19)
b -i)L' i 3�-`/�3(, ��'�'�.
^ •r-2
l.�i �C� � 6 d
20)
6 - b - 7 0 7,3Z -07*.
!7
�'� _o.
21)
Z 3
.�.� . ' Z
Caw r? _ •. r
22)
ED
23)
SzOo
24)
�- iJ yy ���'
9 '
26)
-I E` 7J - r•wr'7�
n �
� 255X_ Lv D Aw; 2774 .--
28)
�_/���' &Zi`1/ -ti)�
�i�Cr ii G
4
�� w i�
7
-719 7
30)
31)
/ -/ 2," 67:312
�c3-
sct
:7i_�L�
�r2 -a, �..��c r� C.•.r� �.��
32)
,! " H 3
( Y K •
�.j T. r
F s
34)
I Y 1 �4 _7 - q �
cc, r� uL— r
35)
fi . I
6S
S_' ri
36)
�n ��'-�
�lU!A;P ;�iE r!
Q ue 3-6,017 S417 ';-k t 92'1 M X75 I y
37)
" EAS" YES.......
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date
1)
Residential
Business
Hillsborough ......... ...............................
$5.02
$13.15
Mebane............ ...............................
6.50
16.45
Chapel Hill.... ... ...............................
4.65-
�.99
12.93
Du rham/C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) .........
4)
2.49
Pittsboro ............ ...............................
1.12
2.62
1)
DATE
'.� -1�o t�
PHONE NAME
�3a•�Gl�a - _�G.�t? �
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
11`�� -��t- S �1d�1
2)
/
3)-
4 � dJa .. ere-
3)
-i� ��.�
5/r?i_ai�
t'r.� I�� rccL�
w 43�xt2vc5,.�ki�.., nti� •4,.�
4)
(o -fle 90
9
S
c/ /a AEs
5)
(r�
q�
�,_ 4,
_
Lem :�
IA Yo 2T
6)
1 1;
x /77 -> 7rt
'' ia 4
C Pf C- f" 4A A J�'10L
`� • p
��`./
36)
- /I
^i) i r �%
%� • ,Jib
9)
wmulclfo/w_Azt., -4f,5
10)
vu
4,11 �,..
12)
1�U
7 3.;?-,
`
��� _s °r IL 6
13)
2)
41411K
r
r >� �tl � �- z`lilZ
15)
17)
`!/ % `�
' •� G �, /iu, < r'�
3
1 8)
(G''�.' - �V
IJG
6 `7 U- VS,
%�
.G,�i" r rto(r -c�
I I `'I GijLtL� 2 �c•.rr�,7 '` ;N.�.eix� -fir'- 7-7? 7f
19)
it,',w- 5n
%10
�
Llva1
'7gOS 5TA15�9 6W
20)
c I f, - 10
71-1-
;,
21)
ai
22)
/ c� :
x% 3 2 - 7 7 .72
a? j4
23)
9c
73 ,2 -77J-1
4� C
24)
b`1C >v
91[v7
6 ` 73'r -,'?s t
25)
!y- /G- �G�
9G - %�a _
�r,r /� !:i:
-7n*
/lam `�` �z
26)
' -
1 1 -v 7 r
-
,L/ �� ,,, '
•7c:33 :4?,'
27)
(o `
5L- 3 -512 5L
29)
' - L - I,A v3' 3
Sl �s
t 7. Ou9 nr, c,
•,n.
, _
--K . / I_ . --;,
/1., / , r
/J r - •, n ? 79r5
3 1 ) 6-
29- 039
~` W
V
32)
��K3
jX(,rkdJ�*r -Sad
D
e_ &X C
-75i6
33)
G -/ - o
7 Ll - 3 83 ,
6/PwAre d &Lgf?
39z -9 a rzc v
?,�tkV , r»Jt z29s4
34)
4 - -90
7-L2- f
J.1 .S�
&/ el", Ch f d
35)
- 90
3 3 - %G3 ^�
1 c r N+aC r`C,+
KS {�; e "e
`� • p
��`./
36)
- /I
^i) i r �%
%� • ,Jib
"EAS" YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll
-free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential
Business
$5.02
$13-15
6,50
16,45
4,65
12-93
.99
2,49
1.12
2.62
13)
7, 1
DATE
PHONE
NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
ZIP
IA'f
51 (P 617An
16)
2 22
Imnlij
11
7 4, j-1:
to
2)
�C-ecj e,'nb
a- 1�
18)
16
1),;-- 7,17
�P4,v5
3)
ke
f63 316
ZJ, 1 d -5
-5 20 r Op &J,, 6? ✓td----
20)
21)
-5—
L
'7
22)
2 2,71
6)
23)
D
24)
7)
(2)Acc
k2ia
JA
Al:
-7
61/
2–C%)O Slw
26)
27)
4-1
v�
I3 D
3-a,
28)
L4,
9)
29)
3 3-�, - L :-3
10)
Cr, h o'c; /'O"A/
7,
Lcj�'
/I
31)
-c-- I C-
r
b.
4
11
12)
c4f 1)
33)
�422
34)
35)
A
13)
7, 1
14)
15'
-IJIIQP�V
IA'f
51 (P 617An
16)
2 22
Imnlij
17)
to
u 'A tA - DkAzp
�C-ecj e,'nb
t U LJ� f—fN,oeCQA
18)
16
5673 �V5
�P4,v5
3i b La.v I
19)
20)
21)
L
(too 4, ham,
22)
23)
D
24)
(2)Acc
v 3a,
25)
61/
2–C%)O Slw
26)
27)
v�
I3 D
3-a,
28)
L4,
1-4 7 7 7o .7
29)
3 3-�, - L :-3
3a; 6,
Cr, h o'c; /'O"A/
30)
Lcj�'
31)
`I144
I551 iLw�tAc 1A a -7
32)
11
c4f 1)
33)
�422
34)
35)
A
37)
" EAS" -- YES.
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area- We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ............... ... $5.02 $13,15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ..... ............... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro .......... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1)
2)
5�
21) �a6
5) k t U 1
cM 6 2214 14 - 31
6)
23)
7)
-D D -7-7
8)
.z
25) r? LL v -H�-17
10)
5(
-17-3-2-7
2 j19
12) �i/
f o ' �`--
13)�
'� S
��3
14).6 G 9E_— !_ L_` ���7
15)
0 -�a�
16) & Iblio
2
17) 1s „fit 190 1�a 3o
7�-�76
19)
QZ9 �y5
20) ! -)�-��
�324iC
5�
Z'
^ 1.� Y "gj
7
7th a x 7s l
7 7 v
(400-c U41d— G R-„��_t
' �11 �, i5'� Cesar l l Cr r `7751 y
;7nztr' 110
40Z k q Ja u QC L7
.Cf4di I 11 90 /C -277 ,-
�Zl dX Ay g G[e�v r . u� Si b
21) �a6
22) lv
6G7
23)
24)
i-
25) r? LL v -H�-17
-_
26) -
-17-3-2-7
27)
28) Sn_ -�1r' -6
GyY' //J
3p)
7�-�76
31)
32)
33) 0'
35) 6 c�
7�,. - 2LZ' - /s'
37)
93 -
Z'
^ 1.� Y "gj
7
7th a x 7s l
7 7 v
(400-c U41d— G R-„��_t
' �11 �, i5'� Cesar l l Cr r `7751 y
;7nztr' 110
40Z k q Ja u QC L7
.Cf4di I 11 90 /C -277 ,-
�Zl dX Ay g G[e�v r . u� Si b
"EAS" -- YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............ ................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... .............. .....:.... . ...... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE
2)� vY�l
4)
5) �tL
6) Lsl
7) L
J d
une '%J
VIL
10) �c
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17) i t
18) !
19)
20)
21) 4
22) iV
23)05
24) /,' 0
25) [1G
26) l �yr7
27) 9''
28) 1.
29) - `1
31) C
32)
34)
35)
36)
37)
PHONE
5_Z3-5_5_X,?
4 + -i - -4_s -43
(aZ- c{ n v f
41<� -3�z
-732 -fie ;4
—/OX 777
NAME
L 4t
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
�? 7�a
/-illU 6ru��}�- p
0 Ao P4 Rtm4SN OprkFvrestl11"
11,04s,
L0 3 e
2;e '? W
Ylrbn�axi< �7Z�
i IJt;Ytee d C
'z tJ Ak. ,, 22l r
/I(L 9
"EAS" - YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area- We have reviewed and
considered the
EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and
telephone
companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling
area. We are willing to
pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission
to act swiftly
to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough
......... ...............................
$5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............
...............................
6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ..........
...............................
4.65 12.93
Durham
/C reed
moor (excludes calls
to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ..
. ............ . . . .
...................... 1.12 2.62
DATE
PHONE
NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1 j
r�zrA
2)
f 1/w
4 n� -'�/ lrl.
-- a�Li r
r, e t �fY1Qv t, (5 f1n�t I: LiS r ��.
4
7)
' /�•
-7 2.P- Z p 3
2
9)
'
11)
d
L-4 le IiO W; ni-2r-bcrr ws J 6-13
12)
-7 34—V,
�,��h 3iDcam► �`t C,'r
13)
,(. %' L
14)
LA
73-a--1/3 fr'
" / /7x;- e__ 1%7 715,
16)
° !iv
i
1 /o a ,30-.,.c
18)
Lc
rte,.
�-
19)
21)
L///I,
`7 - n f2 c-r
CC6 5 Z�
23)
3 0G,3
c��.�, �i Ttt}Fnri 275/x`
24)
GI w
`/o T `! S ? .
/." 1 �' �•�[� cam, .. - - ���y' >�nv�.� .�!_��.a,, 177<
26)I".-
27
(L . r
�1. ? ) _`tJ `'� ��i - r.'Cid 'ice • Y`. y' A CC t - �y _ c _.(
28)
{�
9/2
967-307Z 252 1 C. rz4:
32}
lG
2J)-- ecx
33)
�i�
�, - °' F
"-0e f
34)
fs
G,` 7
:. ti+ . "�rtiu� (. 'lq f �a.x i:�1� 6 ham = fr
35)
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DAfF_ PHONE
r
1
FAME
i �/
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
7 r,r- i
�-
2)
3) r - ! l
l 3 . 11 X
^,, _7 %1 �
4)
r F l3
}-fVlI tL%F� ell,
jam? d'i 76 ,rla!'s l7-rnw- rr�sr^ .7�7c
5)
6) f I
7) /f /(!{7n
Y/I.i!
33 —P ;Z
flrl /�
(!���:�G�l'" [ l � � ~4 �.r I'ot �,zr!' r! �/�. :Tir: 2-771C
<I� 1✓\ ✓U , 11 /� A(,
�.�
8) r i
r'1 = [T• ��i.�
�'• ' r l 11i '1/ ��Y
�,:C�•CJ� - -Y ,�r - �' '�c�'�,
Y�
11) 4;,li G
93 07
12) r..�3r>
a7- - Sf{
CI
13)
14) / i' `cJ
%32 .1�(r/
GriQ..._di�� "C�'r~R Lc lc�ocl 5rA .x iri.HP #i✓
15) X 2
W - -4.5;17
_J�Ii7 y �f CG/7 GCS`
411�_III) 6�Li'77C % /�df
16) / /_ �l./
77 - /r��iEa'i
ihG !f✓�� %J
/G7USI // %'- ': /•?' /•=� f.,
18) /;6 0
C
15-6 AF l: Sr A/ L� Cr%'c ticj
19) - /(P-QO
-73J 4Iq
Ugo qe_ 0,%
zo) b O. I J
PN r
22>
23) �' "�i�
;j22r�tu ,�,�
�`f / l�l; ll.a` ;_ >� `7)4
/ice
25) r,
% �2 5
?0 .
26) f -10
hUvik
9 Q 5 2 dt ,cam
27) -a, `Ct U
9 -3 Z -_C5 _`w'
14.t tn.�4+ 4:�
j Sic
1 Ii'l-t (:`- A-$,pe -r- LA-A -e-
28) G -11,-
--3-3 2- [L2—
wn�`I� V;t.'A,-GJ
...1!''
aA Ia7- -n -j (;7-
29) r �f���
30) 1p- I f �?r
'7 °�'�� . rj i ^ r't�,r!�ti• - �` 2�- T��
`? L' : v1 xr> 4 ,' 'C.'lr3r• <'
31)
?Ja 9-/o2
�T.:i
32)
A, tl� Al- t :, Ci i~.,�z.. Zi �L)
33) '� `rG'
�fZ �.s
q -� G
/ Jr.. ,.
34) 1 t- `,/
1'�) -7 i`�
/k C -�
u
36) . -� _q
�.,.3� =�7�
_w►ji� ' ; �_ti: L' 47•2 VID
37)`l!:
" EAS 99 -w-
YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for
the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough .................. - - .
.. $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ...............................
6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .................... _ _ - . - .............
4.65— 12.93
-
Durham /Creedmoor excludes calls to Wake Count
(
2.49
Pittsboro . . .......... .....
1.12 2.62
...........................
DATE PHONE C NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
2) ` — b
1 a
3) - 90 0 -5-%/e
a 77
5)�` O 3 fI' M11
5A
6) G - 4d 7 -a�s5
4D�3 [el
7) - '10 3z- i t
O LcQ1'sN
-
9) tan-a
-
10) 4'L It J 11" � � +�
% ��} sc ,96jll
_
13) Z >
> d 7rf Z 75%
14) 6 y o Bid -/� Y
7�i3 �� >� . ��v- �: c
1 �) 27 14 ci' Y
f &,, X�t 2, , -,
7
18)
bZ LILk 0, lir. 51y
20)
21)
22) l I 3 - p
5 T- rnAe �
23)
24) `r 4M l _ r663C� r1
DD Z7L
25) — lonQ
{{
I,IILG 1� L k
26) �r �� `E
N 11 s n ;,;;.1..
� r
� ' �
28) %
/ ' wr
lJi C 6�v -d`7�i
29) 7 3 z Sri %'
;� Tl. �' +` c% 7 a-7
31)
32) (� -lG- g1 3 Lt -3
X751
(-,Sp—
C4. -C Si
34) 0 5 ` ,-
35) - ec,5
. f 0 / s i 36)
. cwi5W ,11, L4 -iir
37)
"EAS" --- YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area,
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... .......... ..................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4,65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE
1) I e 0L
PHONE
lee
NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS
r� -6ni 5, 5F/Irrt,�lnJ /V 5 itlu.aCu %r LP
ZIP
^ 3
2) �' /
`i2 -a21
Yvlo i-/ fez. Pr
.225 11K
3)
F L':_ -' 1_7
cL Ya ce -•
-�
4) 4,
F 9 14/ t
6)
ILf, IS U
„2 4,
7) - Z'24
11) & - %(o - 6
q0 ! - N2 5'T
Dj5!xA t"&[ fty 13 4 k ti i2' i_ 5eiL
12) -/ +-
232, 621
_
9 P r p a
Z
14)
15)
19) 6& %9U
rad -3x76
7_77/3
2 1 ) 61 /:
-
22) G tLli.
Ms -L/L�
/ i S lie �` ./
�•
23) ��� .�� -
i
24)
-- �°
-W,; — a k
E '�
n 7 J
A
28) / 9f
��7
'1 ?� / ?
"7_1
:1�
y
�l c
29) 6, - !' ` 9 C I. J - I9 / 7 a4, U,4Zh u c,/_ ( F !liew S '(-d ? T 7 �
30) 62 2V 3 -2- - 9L
31) �_�!_ - „.� ?_ Cz T „ct,n =-a T•. j /.;lei /�'� -. -�7�
32) -f,' - cd _ �) q l l�,� i 00 M,
33) i` i / r� -��i �' bri4�5 �t) F () �u (l Sr�n'� c><t1E 7.3 Q
35) / ' F X ILL- , r'. ii It ,v k C. 2_77
37) 161 c' `' - r�" - i ! a �..�3? l 3=' 1 ..
"EAS" -- YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ...................................... $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ........ ....................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE
1) U(,/L,7U
2) .
3)
5) r S
6)
7) IG
8)
9)
10) & .�'
11) G 'S
12)
13)
14) %_ /6 Z%o
15)
16)
17) / -
18)�� u
19) r%U
20)
21)
22)
23) 6- 16-
24)
25) -ss
26) li��ya
27)
28) �c Iry
29) J�LS
30)
31)
32) 1(2- lc
33)
34)
35)
36)
37) -i G Jli
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
ZIP (75W
0-17 7
n
'�G X770
77c_a��
1fT1ls Z27�
75�,G
!t
" `EAS" YES.. 1 _
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough...... . ............. .................. $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ........................ .. ... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ..... - - .. 99 2.49
>... .;:. Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
7�
7i
A.*—, Sy C
Chi uC 27� r
6 L EAS 55 - YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area, We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ............ . ........................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane . .................. . . . . .. ... .............. 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill.......... ......................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pitlsboro . . ........... ............................... 1.12 2.62
nATF PHnNF NAMF PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15) 6- /k
16)
17) 1 7YZ -�
18) l(m Rio -Is��
20) / /(. 139' W21
21) % 3 t
22)
-?1)2 376
565 2
23) L 73, 4 6 Zl
24) 471! 3 G z
25) . 20 6�q-OY2t hr.
26) 95171 16_f_
27) 9 v Ke -S'7
28) 6 d `73 ,2-2336
29) 1b ICT • 2
30) - 3 � tv "
31)
32)'/_/_�',� ✓ 7TH
34) G ���` f ri 7 3? 3 S G l
35) bA �_'
36)-!,
37) _ r. 9G.'_�
Vc,e. )%/ A-e nn 11 D Ro 3 q6 Is6u �d.x
, �4 2stiY3 '—)
s:
_r�v2c�c r11Y�t� -FG(1� i-11( 'V kfcX-NJo C7 .-NrPiC 4i C a S /L.
hoc `� 7 2 � .J. �r � Cave, Nsc c � 2 oL_ A'L C Z.�
'�oSG /✓crnc,Lr'd 34af (?-,,r ri C-t-E, F. %r
1CW511
Yr.�/ ��rcta i ®/7 K•cv►'1� �ec�..�no7 �lJ� C.,
—rT —rte
.� 16 �fQxd ? lases l =�s •� NC
f °,
x'79
72
"EAS" -YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill.......... ................. ........... ... 4.65 12.93
Durham /C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 - 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
1)� /%E d3`.•� �j"�.�...._� 5�- .c....,i� -c� �T0G7
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10) C' i 32 -Aya 3i- w. ,
12) / vu 14,5 -9 z S!2 7 Z
13) 96,7 4 q00 ' c� -Lc�, `/d3 -5. S
14) �(�fa '%q3 £�ld'Vki _ 94 r dH +v. Olt e-e j a"dV4Wz , -2 7a7
15) b /liv
16) b. r b
1 7) tQ Ilt q2 9 - J 7 5 f A_",vi .JLJMAJ S -b W LMiArs" Lh (''Ma"",i�l'
7
18) I i 'ic 9 3 3 ----) 4 �:-f a W ¢.n. a Ci (t-. G I d Ri SbU -zs P2, Z) si
19) U a rr-7
20) 11.k. -3.� - (, (LSD /� o I �r�7d�i •'l_� ���&
21) lo,j IL 732--b3o
23) !L1 f gE 7 91?
25) �- `1 I l aN 0
26) S .1 r -1 i k' � 04 Z9 7INef,
27) !" .7- r �r ,z-
a-
�,
28) = Cl7. &1 x'`11, , i_ �.
32) c -f �:2c�
33) W N.L��c,��Gz
35) I' f ��ILi 1 �,�L v.�i -.i ;��� �YCi 1' -�+H1 .�'.�� (,,,•• %�F- I'.r1�'
36) ��::{_ C +(� f "tT! `�{ �l 7t, 3- '�.
37) 4 f i (c 3'� :�2r' •r u f�' a r e J_� i ��; u
"EAS" .- YES
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ..... .......................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill ......................... ............ 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE
NAM
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
MM
2)
-�s�
-� ✓ 9•
_�
4)
`01-2Yf5
�l�, St1, C 1 X1 1- L`7�t.1y
5)
2-E&- �CvZ �c
E I8�7 �/ it` er�� 272-/S
c 7 �z o
� ?,�' / r %_ > �,,.� ,Rye C! , I ., �;,.� � 7 nrr
T7 T�j
8)
I, C3 a
.2
7j(, 7t
9)
11L lqo
_51el
'' tL W c 7 C2
10)
J et, _e, DV, `I ;Q
11)
(� 763f
ayL
` Ivy �' F7sa Z�
12)
73 z
a o." I/ 2- y
13)
j
Cj V c;
14)
15)
l
16)
- /Cv -�a_
732 - 77.32
17)
-16- 4
t,(-! z
18)
46-6 U
",)-0&> S. ,o q.
19)
7- j V,
l m -5' P- p, ,77-72-,
20)
4- ho
9,52
i!l6 aSra htF 2 t I o,►�,
22)
U- 114-gb
H2 `51S
G�U . E`'�pw� zc>t
23)
4
24
r/� -- r%
�J� -; ;: � r
.� rrl� -� '[ J,ld4Yt..Gk : /..s- .f�l•2 -- ` -'
27)
- - � -�, i-
28)
J D (
29)
30)
` - L 4�
732- It - �
�j -C
13i�'fJ
31)
ll
i
32)
Y ----A 7
,7o
33)
C� l io ,'
& 3 - G- 7
1e+�-
34)
% G
35)
r
36)
37)
/ %G
/J7
7 3
57-f -
/1 _-- is 4771, ?7z:
EAS YES'
To the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough .......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Du rham/C reed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
j)
l^ li. `ro
I L60 6 }O,7 P( P C-ff tj&, Cat T 0 Gth*Pec krri •7
7a� % a✓
3)_
r.
-I` 1
Qr- (7 7 _r�:1. /r. � {�.. c i j. _�L �VTG1?
4)
`p" {� `l C3
cjl T.-3.�_-.;L7 % Y;•/
5)
r _ � %✓ ``a. �., i -7 �'i �LS)7 � �d �l - 1� ^I "�.�- 1/} ��^ � � �[J� -i Y�y� �i rr9r•i` \i ,� C
✓
6)
�4 /�i�
y
�r i, - 7.3.x- x•43 9G �� G'vc� ce- "t i� �' ,� . � 7�i,1'
7)
8)
�� /v
Le 1 r0
i 4 44 t i5 C �6 -. Sc.c.;
t 19 r 3 a K, Cq ) e ( ' C t• tr l 'O f _ LP i, boCr.,
g)
-�/ —rE- k 7x5. �•c� [� r!I C�1�rE
`r ''
1 2)
�.! r �r J �!'�
G DY CCs i.L•cP ;. J / �:
I� 4 �r (1', y- �^ �7 G '�'`. �L �A- �
13)
m��
�
3
Dr °>'�7 -37
15) �i�l�G
��(�Z-�i�t -°C�3? ;. _%� � row ��b CrfzL. z -7�
16)
GN /! 10
y(9 I19 `)7� t Ml
17)
18)
LIGI`0
!l
`�j19g33 "(:)yb i °hti �`�3`� -1� ow(!ySipro C.,v,)peLi LL
19)
'Ja�Y✓
y/ ? 3� '. / / :1; t i �' ! � Ur �G^/ ; �.ei�,z ur h %V L 12 72 7
20)
4%
21)
' /��)
q //`- 73a— SC) 9- C, f /L. um l,. "a r�EI�
23)
/ /q0
4/`' - ?cP2 0021? ) ' s'r� yN d1,u d�% '2)
24)
.
i, 1 t
l
� r - 213C, i 1 /✓ �r ✓ A ` ' tALI ' 2y7C
25)�P
c
27)
Lol L �Y�.
- 7 5- C� a i
LGZ.?�/ [� .7Ci _7 cr(rZA�r_i�Ar�2
1
rj
30)
��G`:
��. �/ �f - �v 6� �� / =fin �,9 -
31)
l'Arn ,�1�r.J�a�% l7a J�kfJ % ✓;lf a;l� r , ,
32
r7
yr
33)
:'E i 1
-7-22- — `hl t `� 3g1i:��'� •'�. Z;,;� !r �i ? ✓��'�1
34)
1[
Uri.: v il0 u i.i v . ti�L, �•� I,'-i 1F= y47..a 7
35)
1
"732 - 787 7 00/1 vc 'W.A 104 Walter 6&rk Or. r fA5�11-,CO- 270
36)
_ ^� �D
(l ' _1 a (� t �.
37)
�.
T�� ° ' ' E w.4 .u. / ,�, c l�l. �.�; ,L t.�� /l ,L!L - 5 ,ter ✓�;
PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
" "EAS" -YES
To lhQ Norlh Carolina Utditics Commission.
RETURN TO:
Orange County Commissione
P. 0. sox 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ............................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ............ ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE PHONE A PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
6u
(.061 [ur rrCaa w
u
2) {� LO �D
�3l _W77
(j
3) ,,
11, _1R.2.4 c
4q0
. Nc— a7 7 �3
4) Vi:-/q-
5) //z-
viz
C_.z 7;12,�
6) 6/71 e,
SY(- -220 �
27X3
7) 6
3a6
e #�g uc a7:
g)
Yfo —"6"
_
YGc®
9) G 21 �9d
q.G -LLCL i
�Z�l4l(t�.
4 l k 21sxt
10)(0 21 ci o 5_44-3-;34f
I
c 4 t�ii�� ! 1
i✓ N
1 1) to 24 4D
"E'7R -51$8
na _�S G.�i. &v
iZ7. t Box- a2w -W 6dhmw
jYG 021502
12) G IP41 9
S7s -�83y
Gr44S[i
Ri a 31,9- 6-
V C, --L ZT-z2
13) �� 90
`f�/ �!
6-44
71C .2757/
14)
r - 4 76
. ,
6[�m
15) -a G0
-7g55
16) 6 / O
/ -
`
/ `{ 3 - AIRO.., C44 F,
M-e , 77a
n
18)
19) tM o
M3- 45
(,b(. 6,.+60/JbA✓6
ti/c. L -7-765
20)
f - zs
,
C 7703
21) 0
-'F_yy- 7 51
9�G 2• `f' Aa lt 4 W
041 w NG 7 771
22)
2 i -9 D
T Mh 4t 106
�--1jj ►' �`1Ut:
23) 10A()
k*5
70�
24)
7"7 S-2,53
ZOZ &A
.o 75! D
25)
26)
-�
k(, 357-8 4r 4-L&
' 2- 7 J
27) /z
ql"2q OuRN+F�...uC.2771
29) (, 2.S 90
732 -006-
3032 , >s
/VC-27Z70
30) 6 zc Q
73 'r75
fGf frr�
3d3L1 g, &W- 64 //r
,fcz7z7p-
31)
32)
33)
34)
35)
36)
37)
1,12
RETURN T0:
L L E A S 1 7 YES orange County Commissione
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Ilic Norlh Carolina Utilities Commission
fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
tsidered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
i telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
sborough........................................ $5.02 $13.15
bane ................... . . ................... 6.50 16.45
apel Hill ......................................... 4.65 12.93
rham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
sboro........... ............................... 1.12 2.62 _.
DATE PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
-7/7/10 Yr- r, - JZ 7 3 %7. lee. [L-2i,3 4_d�� 2-) 5- `f
1 `7rsCi _sfe73
r3 Ar , cu-jltd/ Z7.25v,(
� ^�...._.. - - - - -- -- - - - - -- .RETURN T0:
b4,
`` E A S 3 9 -- YES Orange County Commissione
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 2727E
To Ilio Norlh Carolina Utilities Commission:
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ......... ......... ...................... $5.02 $13.15
Mebane ........ . . ............................... 6.50 16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ............................... 4.65 12.93
Durham /Creed moor (excludes calls to Wake County) ......... .99 2.49
Pittsboro ............ ............................... 1.12 2.62
DATE
PHONE NAME PHYSICAL ADDRESS ZIP
L-I fA0- ! u- '-veil ��,q 5 t'/'� Ifi;r, pr. Onf-rbc7 -c � '.t r-,
2)
1 1 o
9332V*2 k y( h R 6)� Dr C'rrbe,re 27 sJ a
3)
A
4) 9b
Jy
117ro /y.g !� l�r�� /.oIC`a'1ESGX(o(//) / /S�o �e s�3Ic�
5)
b -R3- 90
968- 6618
�0.f�sa 5. marder ICD'7 Caachwa Cho v) Hill do a175l&
6)
7)
fl 3
�77c57
8)
0
0'-1511
F Z- '96
S
S� 3/r Sc� r�uv`�. ",, �.� ?�S
9)
(� `t C
`(16 -614
• !c'
611 L�i1 V si i �i� �A / /Yl{vrin I �J7
10)
11)
-A2 A,
3%3 - l, �/
�'�o,, �1' ?t L -( .w a. - p
12)
d3'1'9u
385---9352
Jame5 GorJcn Rt- I box 361 -L Durham '21700
13)
14)
— /71f 3
a 'k
_
Ca' -LC& ✓Ul n [ _'mss a 3 l� 1 " L,s"m
.)(� I ✓�i1M� Q.a'irfTCs� d�
15)
%ln •r F r 1 F� 7,7v. 5
16)
b - �`t - `7 0 �j' [� Lys' c.(.� c Gc7_s l-; ru 9r () t; t� Gv — "7 - 7 0S
17)
:-Z:
51 f
?s%l0 dA lq 2-1k
q
,
z2)
595- lam
lLe Sa�xuC 3��trox a nr,C.�c
23)
6-d9- rid
1231 7100 _;4
4,�z�:C!
25)
TA rq- ice / fi�� Rm 7 -71
26)
U �/ -L
��p� /.? 7G
`q
` r 6 �_ G r1iG G f y ,
27)
gK
471
, ./ x-t-
28)
4(77-.23!
(r 'L�OaA. di/( ( c unha n r, -.177,05
29)
/4*1J -3
30)
ri +l'i�
�s�i3 '(Gr
hi� .`fclr�4 57i;rfxc%
31)
rf /ZL/�6j6
(e$7-
xe-
33)
o
/
r w r c' MIX,7 -2 Ta
34)
CU 5l 0
)-A 1
�'� e� 6 �P� � rr a �lU
.35)
36)
11
GL% l C 02W
37)
s\ "EAS" —YES
To Ilie North Carolina Utilities Cornrnissiow
RETURN To:
orange County Commissions
P. 0. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 2727E
We fully support the concept of regional telephone service for the Research Triangle area. We have reviewed and
considered the EAS rate increase (proposed by the Public Staff) as being reasonable and fair to both subscribers
and telephone companies for our exchange (listed below) and find it to be a reasonable charge for the enlarged
toll -free calling area. We are willing to pay that amount monthly for toll -free service into the triangle area.
We urge the Commission to act swiftly to put this plan into active service at the earliest possible date.
Residential Business
Hillsborough ............................. ...........
$5.02
$13.15
Mebane ............ ...............................
6.50
16.45
Chapel Hill .......... ...............................
4.65
1293
Durham /Creedmoor (excludes calls to Wake County) .........
.99
-x2.49
Pittsboro ............ ...............................
1.12
2.62
DATE
PHONE
NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
ZIP
2) ' l WIL P2 733 ; o sz
Z.71 f , �� l `7 i7%��tdcClC
R4-
'7 7
3) zc%�tY
7�z -�o7Z
seccl;,,_ Greka� i_CZ•5���.;d
,t��ci
o ?7z -'��'
4) G 0
cl t g— 772 Ask
X%n S. C'
z - 2 7J'
6) (� 7t'4Q
�tLQ- `l3�fa84�lavnt
drs
ayg
z 42-L
1 n
1 1) D
-
� C, .2,7A
12) IJ
9
rt.c.c�v
y°O•
1G5 ,c:Q�(�.
7/•�,1'g)%
13) Cid
%3)` 3!
0./7Y•�5
lc
cr
,.
14)
15)
'l! 3
/K
ro,
16) 6 a �0
5°�� 7�a_- Sa2
r,.� --
43ax
6
dW° �ro
17) _ZL' fo
9 7-; 5. %87L
18) L-10 20
(i i cf - -7 12 --i 1 -:0
Z�l
19
20
21
22
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
31)
32)
33)
34)
35)
36)
37)