Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19670511BOOK 6 FACE 594 y< y 1, 1967 Minutes - Continued NAME EFF. DATE Carrie H. Brown 6-1-67 Lydia Mae Blackwood 6-1-67 Dora Liza Ann Winston 6-1-67 AMOUNT REASON REVISIONS 89 to 97 Increase in medical cost & cost of utilities 64 to 71 Increased cost of medical ca 56 to 54 Decrease in cost of medical care. TERMINATION Bart A. Wilson 5-1-67 30.00 Increase in resources. The following letter was read by Chairman Bennett: "As the representative of some 250 women garden club members who live in Chapel Hill, I would like to ask you to consider adopting some kind of zoning ordinance whi would prevent the exploitation of Orange County by any mining company or other ruth- less developer. Because we are gardeners, dedicated to the beautification of our homes and the community, we are unalterably opposed to the destruction of beauty which must result from open strip mining. We are sure that you also want to keep Orange County a pleasant and beautiful place in which to live - after all, your homes are here too - and hope that you will take action to see that it remains so. Sincerely yours, Mrs. James J. Mullen, President" Chairman Bennett advised the Board of his efforts to contact representatives of the U. S. Bureau of Mines through Senator Jordan's office. Discussion ensued concerning the Grand Juries report relative to the conditions of the Orange County jail. Sheriff Knight was directed to write the North Carolina Prison Department and explain the county's position and policy concerning the serving of only two meals a day to confined prisoners. The County Administrator was directed to have the interior walls of the jail painted white and to also secure mattress covers for all beds in the jail. A letter dated April 27, 1967 from Alex K. Brock, Executive Secretary of the State Board of Elections was read by Chairman Bennett. The County Administrator was directed to advise the Local Government Commission that the.County was ready to sell the $130,000 Office Building Bonds. There being no further business to come before the Board said meeting was adjourned to meet again on Thursday, May 11, 1967 at 8:00 P.M. in the Commissioners Room at the Courthouse in Hillsborough, N. C. and on Thursday, May 25, 1967 at 11:00 o'clock A.M. in the Courtroom at the Courthouse in Hillsborough, N. C. for the purpose of canvassing the votes of the $3,000,000.00 School Bond election which is.. being held on Tuesday, May 23, 1967. Betty June Hayes, Clerk S. M. Gattis, Acting Clerk Harvey D. Bennett, Chairman MINUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS May 11, 1967 The Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, met in regular adjourned session at the County Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, in the Commissioners Room at 8:00 o'clock P.M. on Thursday, May 11, 1967. Present: Chairman Harvey D. Bennett, and Commissioners William C. Ray, Ira A. Ward and Henry S. Walker. Absent: Commissioner Carl M. Smith. Thefollowing letter dated May 9, 1967 was presented by Dr. C. T. Kaylor, Chairman of the Orange County Planning Board. 7 Y ? BOOS 6 PACE 595 May 11, 1967 Minutes continued "During its' April 17th meeting the Orange County Planning Board reviewed the items heard at the joint public hearing of the County Commissioners and the Planning Board on April 11, 1967. These items are briefly described below, and the recommendation of the Planning Board is given for each item: fpn. ! Item 4-67-1 Request for Rezoning by John T. Childs. Mr. John T. Childs requested that property owned by him, shown on Tax Map 15A, Block A, Lots 11 and 12 be rezoned from a Residential District to a Mobile Home Park District. The property is located south of Mt. Sinai Road and joins the existing Childs' Mobile Home Park. It is bound on the East by Eastwood Mobile Home Park and on the South and West by Duke University. On motion by Mr. Charles Johnston, seconded by Mr. Robert Strayhorn, the members voted unanimously to recommend to the County Commissioners that Mr. John T. Childs' property be rezoned from a Residential District to a Mobile Home Park District. Item 4-67-2 Request for Rezoning by Landmark Investment Co. Bobby R. Roberts, an officer.of Landmark Investment Co., requested that property owned by Landmark Investment Co., shown on Tax Map 15, Lots 15D and 17, be-rezoned from a Residential District to a Commercial and Apartment District. The property ! consists of approximately 23 acres; six acres in the northwest intersection of Mt. . Sinai Road and Kerley Road, and approximately 17 acres in the southwest intersection A nursing home and three 12-unit apartment houses have been erected on the 17 acre tract. The Durham-Orange County line runs through the 17 acre tract and the three apartment buildings are in Durham County; the nursing home is in Orange County. On motion by Mr. Preston Hogan, seconded by Mrs. Nellie Andrews, the members voted unanimously to recommend that the County Commissioners defer action on this rezoning request, pending consultation with the appropriate authorities of Durham County. Item 4-67--3 Request for Rezoning by George Tate, Jr. Mr. George Tate, Jr., requested that his property consisting of 9 acres, located in - the northeast intersection of Rogers Road and Purefoy Drive, be rezoned from a Residential District to a Mobile Home Park District. y On motion by Mr. Robert Strayhorn, seconded by Mr. Charles Johnston, the members vot d unanimously to recommend to the County Commissioners that Mr. George Tate's property be rezoned from a Residential District to a Mobile Home Park District. Item 4-67-4 Amendment Request by Mr. Dallas Branch. Mr. Dallas Branch appealed to the Planning Board to change the minimum lot size as "kr ; provided in the Zoning Ordinance, from one acre to 20,000 square feet; and to change g the minimum lot width at the setback line from 200 feet to 100 feet. x? On motion by Mr. Robert Strayhorn, seconded by Mr. Preston Hogan the members voted unanimously to recommend that the County Commissioners defer action on this request, pending clarification of the request. It was the feeling of the board members that no action could be taken because Mr. Branch did not specifically state in.-his written appeal that he wishes to amend the Zoning Ordinance." Discussion ensued concerning the recommendations and the following action was adopted by the Board of Commissioners- 1. Upon motion of Commissioner Ward, seconded by Commissioner Ray, the request of John Childs for rezoning of property shown on Tax Map 15A, Block A, Lots 11 and 12 was.classified as a Mobile Home Park. Y, - 2. Upon motion of Commissioner Ward, seconded by Commissioner Ray, the request of George Tate to rezone 9 acres on Purefoy Road was reclassified from Residential to Mobile Home Park. 3. 'Upon motion of Commissioner Ray the request of Dallas Branch relative to changing of minimum lot sizes from 20,000 square feet to 10,000 square feet and the request to change the minimum lot frontage setback line from 200 feet to 100 feet wa deferred pending additional. study of said request by the Planning Board. 4. Paul Roberts representing Landmark Investment Company requested that said property be rezoned. Mr. Roberts stated that this property was purchased about two years ago for the purpose of developing same and that approximately $38,000.00 had been spent in providing a sewer plant for said development. He stated further that the sewer plant was large enough to accomodate the nursing home presently-located on said land and to also accommodate the 250 additional apartment units planned for sai development: Mr. Roberts added further that the denial of a building permit for thi development would place a undue hardship on his project as same was planned and begun prior to the adoption of any zoning ordinance and further that he had invested a substantial amount of money in order to develop said area and that he felt any action other than the issuance of a permit would be unreasonable and unjustified. . BOOK' 6 MCE 596 May 11, 1967 Minutes continued Discussion ensued. Commissioner Ward stated that if-the facts as presented by Mr. Roberts depicted the present situation correctly and since construction on said project had begun prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance that it was his feeling a permit should be issued for the construction of two buildings on lots 5 and 6 as shown on the plat of Landmark Investment Company. Upon motion.of Commissioner Ward, seconded by Commissioner Ray, it was moved and adopted that a building permit be issued to Landmark Investment Company for the construction of two buildings on lets 5 and 6 of said Landmark Investment Company property. May 30, 1967 at 7:30 P.M. was designated as the date for the public hearing on the proposed Chapel Hill Township' Zoning Ordinance Amendments. The courtroom of the courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina was designated as the place of the meeting. Chairman Bennett read the following memorandum from Duke Power Company: "SUBJECT: Service Risers Duke Power Company's service regulations approved by the North Carolina Utilities Commission states that the customer will own and install the entrance conductors from the meter up to the point of attachment of the company's facilities except in t case of residential service entrances of 100 amperes capacity or larger. As an incentive for adequate wiring, the company initiated a promotion plan to install the service entrance conductors for customers that would put in main switches of 100 amperes capacity or larger. When the residential customer dees this, we agree to install and own the single phase cable of the service entrance type on the exterior of the building from the point of attachment to the meter socket. This is a promotional plan by Duke Power Company and offered in our entire area. It is the only time when we install and own the service riser. The cost'of this promotional plan is based on the use of service entrance cable. If we use other than service entrance cable, we are going beyond the limits which the State Utilities Commission approved us to do. This service entrance cable and riser is in conformance with the National Electric Code and the North Carolina Electrical Code as applies throughout the State of North Carolina. Rates for residential customers are designed based on this standard installation and where costlier installations are required, then this throws the situation out of balance for the residential customer group as a whole and shows we are discriminatin on behalf of the customer where we put in more than this. Orange County's practice of requiring conduit for the service riser is over and beyond that required by the National Electrical Code and by the State of North Carolina Electrical Code as passed by the North Carolina Building Code Council which has jurisdicti&n over this under the State Department of Insurance. We feel this is an unnecssary expense imposed'upon the residential customers in Orange County by decision of those issuing electrical permits which is not substantiated by law or by necessity; For us to continue participation in the conduit installation riser practices, places us in conflict with the rules and regulation governing our practices and thus taking steps not in the best interest of our customers as a whole Where the nun of conduit is a straight length of pipe from the meter box to the point of attachment and on the exterior of the building, we will run our service entrance conductors down through this conduit, provided it is of adequate size. Otherwise, we will consider the customer as having elected to install his service risers conductors up to our point of attachment and electing not to take advantage of our incentive program for the installation of main switch equipment 100 amps or larger. We are thus extending the customer in Orange County the same privilege as we extend those elsewhere and will be pleased to provide their service riser whenever it is possible and practical for us to do so. The conduit riser must have the appropriate weather head installed. The wires in our cable are UL approved and of the same type used in conduit. We feel that the continued requirement on residential customers for a conduit riser is detrimental to the customer's welfare in Orange County and that it should be discontinued to avoid placing the Orange County authorities in conflict with existing law and accepted standards. This is merely a recommendation and in no manner seeks to state what the Orange County authorities should do in that they are accountable for their own actions regardless of Duke Power Company's position. We make this recommendation because of our professional knowledge of the electrical field and feel such advice is advantageous to and would be appreciated by those devoted public servants who must administer many areas of technical nature with which they cannot be expected to be professionally proficient." I' BOOK 6 PACE 59`7 Ma 11, 1967 Minutes continued The County Electrical Inspectors stated that in their opinion the proposed change being offered by Duke Power Company would weaken the present electrical code and that they were opposed to the memorandum. Representatives of the University Service Plant were present and stated that they concurred with the opinions expressed by the County Electrical Inspectors. Further discussion ensued. It was agreed that the Board, at this time, would not alter the County Electrical Code. A road petition for Hucleberry Drive was presented and the Clerk was directed to forward same to the State Highway Commission. Dr. Charles Blake of Hillsborough was present and offered his comments relative to strip mining of marginal deposits of ore. It was decided to delay the awarding of the Health Building contract until a conference could be held with the architect. Commissioner Ray was asked to contact and employ, on an hourly basis, a heavy equipment operator in order that a road to the Lake Orange site might be built.. There being no further business to come before the Board said meeting was adjourned to meet again on Tuesday, May 16, 1967 at 2:00 P.M. for the purpose of meeting with representative of the U. S. Bureau of Mines and on Thursday, May 25, 1967 at 11:00 A.M. for the purpose of canvassing the votes of the $3,000,000.00 School Bond election which is being held on Tuesday, May 23, 1967. Harvey D. Bennett, Chairman Betty June Hayes, Clerk S. M. Gattis, Acting Clerk --_•------------------------• --------------------------------------- MINUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS May 16, 1967 The Board of County Commissioners of Orange County met in regular adjourned session in the Community Room of the Orange Savings & Loan Association Building in Chapel Hill, North Carolina at-2:00 P.H. on Tuesday, May 16, 1967. Present: Chairman Harvey D. Bennett, Commissioners William C. Ray, Carl M. Smith Ira A. Ward and Henry S. Walker. Absent: None The following persons were present for said meeting: Dr. Virgil Mann,17U.N.C. Geology Department; Dr. Carlyle Sitterson, Chancellor U.N.C. at Chapel Hill; Phil Green, Assistant Director, Institute of Government; Harry Palmer and Pearson Stewart, Research Triangle Regional Planning Commission and Rbland McClamroch, Mayor Town of Chapel Hill. This meeting was held in order that Lawrence Shirley, Engineer and Official Representative of the U. S. Bureau of Mine$ might present to those present the overall implications of strip mining in an area such as the Durham, Chapel Hill and Research Triangle area. Mr. Shirley stated that open pit mining might be compatable with the basic charac r of this area, with the exception of property owned by Duke Forest, and that he felt su open pit and/or strip mining would not blend well with the designated purpose for whit Duke Forest was established. Mr. Shirley advised that rules and regulations should be formulated prior to the advent of any mining operations as these rules would significa ly . effect the profitability of any proposed mining operation and would thus be a major factor in the companies determining whether or not mining operations would be undertak Upon motion of Commissioner Smith, it was moved and adopted, that the Board of Commissioners inform the press of its complete endorsement of the $3,000,000.00 School Building Bond election which was being held on Tuesday, May 23, 1967. There being no further business to come before the Board said meeting was adjourned to meet on Thursday, May 25, 1967 at 11:00 A.M. in the courtroom for the purpose of canvassing the votes of the $3,000,000.00 School Bond election which is being held on Tuesday, May 23, 1967.