HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-02-2000-1ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 2, 2000
Action Agenda
Item No. 1
SUBJECT: Oran a Alamance Utili S stem Re ort
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
County Engineers O/A report County Engineer, ext 2303
County Engineer's Efland sewer report Plannin Director, ext 2585
Planning Director's Efland/Cheeks TELEPHONE NUMBERS•
goal issues outline Hillsborough 732-8181
(Under Separate Cover) Chapel Hill 968-0.501
O/A Corporate Bylaws Durham 688-7331
O/A Articles of Incorporation Mebane 336 227-2031
O/A Amended Articles of Incorporation
O/A Orange County Service Area Map
(Previously Provided -- Please
bring to the meeting)
PURPOSE: To provide the BOCC with general information as to the Orange-Alamance
Water System to provide, to the extent possible, answers to specific questions posed by
Commissioner Jacobs.
BACKGROUND: The Orange-Alamance Water System is anon-profit rural membership
corporation that is classified under North Carolina health/environmental health statutes as a
public water supply utility. It was officially incorporated in September 1965 and became
operational in August 1968. In its 32 years of operation, the system has grown from its original
100,000 gallon per day (gpd) demand from 360 customers in Orange and Alamance Counties to
a system which cun'ently serves 3600 commercial, industrial, institutional and residential
customers (approximately 1200 in Orange County, 2400 in Alamance County) with an average
water consumption of 1.0 million gallons per day.
The terms of the Eno River Capacity Use Agreement limit Orange-Alamance to a Stage I raw
water withdrawal of 820,000 gallons per day during periods of low flow, which typically occur for
approximately six months of the year. On several occasions, one lasting for as long as a month,
Orange-Alamance has been limited to withdrawals as low as 700,000 gallons per day. Orange-
Alamance makes up the difference between its Eno River allocations and its actual water
demand by means of purchases of treated water from other water systems and/or by the use of
well water from its single operational high-capacity drinking water well. Another high. capacity
drinking water well is due to become operational in the very near future.
a
Orange-Alamance faces a number of challenges in its effort to meet the ever-increasing water
demand of its growing customer base. ,Although it has transferred some of its larger customers
to other water systems, it probably needs to upgrade the equipment in its water plant and its
water demand often exceeds its treatment capacity. Furthermore, the water supply currently
available to Orange-Alamance is often insufficient to meet to its existing demand.
Orange-Alamance is working to improve its water supply situation, primarily by developing
ground water wells and by entering into water supply contracts with other water utilities.
However, under any circumstance or strategy currently under discussion, it is unlikely that the
Orange-Alamance will be able to accommodate the projected 250;000 gpd water demand
resulting from the build-out of Efland-Cheeks community and the Buckhorn Road Economic
Development District.
Orange-Alamance and its customers have an important part in dealing with many of the issues
related to the development and evolution of the Efland-Cheeks, community. The BOCC has .
developed an overarching Efland goal which consists of a number of critical components,
including: 1) addressing how water and sewer utility service necessary to develop the Buckhom
Road EDD can be provided; 2) defining a realistic and appropriate utility service area for the
Efland-Cheeks community; 3) initiating a small area planning process for the Efland-Cheeks
community; 4) creating and adopting a master plan for the Efland sewer system and expanding
the sewer system; and 5) entering into a joint planning relationship with the City of Mebane.
Consideration and evaluation of Orange-Alamance's role in: a) continuing to provide water
service in the Efland-Cheeks community; b) providing water service to the as-yet unnerved and
developing portions of the community; and c) providing water service to the Buckhorn Road
Economic Development District are essential elements of the process. The BOCC's review and
discussion of the issues either outlined or implied by the contents of the attached report
represents an important initial step in addressing and further delineating the Efland goal.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board accept the report and
attached material as information.
MEMoRANnuM
TO: County Commissioners
COPIES: John Link, County Manager
FROM: Paul Thames, PE, County Engineer
DATE: September 27, 2000
SUBJECT: Expansion of the Efland Sewer System
As per requests from County Commissioners and from the County Manager, the following information
is provided as to how and when the expansion of the Efland Sewer System, and particulazly the portion
to the system expansion to be financed primarily through proceeds of the 1997 Efland Sewer Bond,
might be accomplished.
There aze essentially two primary strategies or options, each with many potential iterations, which
would provide for the expansion of the sewer system.
O_ ption I involves proceeding only with the expansion of the sewer in the azea defined by the 1997
Efland Sewer Bond. That area, shown in the attached map, can be roughly defined as that area bounded
by the Lloyd dairy on the east, McGowan Creek on the north, Efland-Cedar Grove Road on the west and
Southern Railroad on the south.
Option II involves developing and adopting a master plan that defines the ultimate sewer service area
for the Efland Sewer System, integrating the bond referendum defined service area into the master plan
and sequencing the phases of system development.
Each option has its advantages and disadvantages. The primary advantage of Option I is that it would
allow the County to fulfill its commitments as defined by the 1997 bond referendum in the near term. It
1S not llkely that deC1510I1S made by the BOCC as t0 the eXpansiaII of the Sealer Systems to those areas
outside of the bond referendum defined service azea would have a significant impact on the design or
extent of the system within the bond referendum defined area. It is also unlikely that; even if the BOCC
were to immediately direct staff to proceed with the process of acquiring engineering/surveying services
and starting sewer design for the bond defined azea, construction documentation could be made ready
in time for submittal at the March 31, 2001 deadline far the FY 2001-2002 Clean Water Grant
applications. However, if the documents could be gotten ready and if the grant application were
successful, it is probable that all of the funds from the Bond referendum would not have to be spent for
design and construction of the azea outlined in the referendum. Unspent bond funds could then be
applied to the expansion of the sewer system into other areas as tazgeted and prioritized by the BOCC.
The disadvantages to proceeding with Option I revolve azound the lack of coordination with efforts to
construct and fund construction of sewer service to areas beyond the bond referendum defined area. For
example, it is conceivable that the BOCC might ultimately wish to define an expanded service area or a
phase of the service area not significantly lazger than that defined by the bond referendum. If that azea
were constructed in twa phases, the first as the bond referendum defined area and the remainder as
another project, construction costs for the two individual projects would be higher than those for one
combined .project. It is also conceivable that the BOCC could ultimately define an overall service area
that is drastically different from that shown in the existing (though not adopted master plan) and that
would not be properly anticipated or accounted far in the design for the portion of the system which
would serve bond referendum defined area.
However, if the BOCC should chose to proceed with design and construction of the bond referendum
defined service area (Option I), the project timeline should approximate the following:
^ BOCC approvals initiation of process to construct the Efland Sewer
Bond Referendum defined portion of the sewer system .
^ Send out Request for Proposals (RFP) far consulting engineers for
design of Efland Sewer Bond Referendum defined portion of the sewer
system
^ Select engineering consultant, develop contracts, submit consultant
contract to BOCC far approval
^ Complete engineering design,. secure necessary design approvals and
construction permits; begin easement acquisition far BOCGapproved
band and assessment project
Complete engineer's report, environmental assessment, all other
documents necessary to submit Clean Water Grant and revolving loan
fund applications (this step may not be necessary or practicable,
depending on decisions about seeking grant funding and grant funding
-, deadlines)
^ Solicit and awazd construction bids, begin construction
^ Complete system construction
* Complete development and begin implementing BOC,Gapproved sewer
Time 0
Tithe 0 + 2 weeks
Time 0 + 8 weeps
Time 0 + S months
Time 0 + 9 months
Time 0 + 11 months
Time 0 + 27 months
Time 0 + 27 months
use rate structure and sewer assessment process.
The primary advantage of Qption II is that it allows the planning for sewer development to be
integrated, in a comprehensive and orderly fashion, with planning for water utilities and land uses. The
desire for this type of overarching planning process has been expressed by the BCC in its discussion
with staff about an overall Efland Baal which includes elements of joint planning between the County
and Mebane, dealing with water utility issues, developing a small azea planning approach for the Efland-
Cheeks community, developing an Efland Cheeks utility service district boundary as well and sewer
system expansion. Each of these elements is an interlocking piece of plan which depends on, yet
simultaneously supports, each other piece. The long range planning for the ultimate extent of the sewer
system also allows staff and policy makers the opportunity to develop a logical strategy far seeking
construction and community development grant funding and other financing strategies for system
expansion:
The disadvantage to this comprehensive process is that it delays, at least for months and perhaps for
many months, the initiation of the design and construction process by which the County can fulfill its
sewer system expansion commitments as defined by the 1997 bond referendum.
Regardless of the strategy that the BCC chooses to implement the expansion of the Efland Sewer
System, it will take at least two yeazs after that decision to bring sewer service to new azeas of the
Community.
If I may provide additional information or clarification on this issue, please advise.
EFLAND/CHEEKS/SUCKHORN AREA
PLANNING/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTlUTILITY GOAL
ISSUES
1) Orange County/Efland Sewer System Area
a) Existing Area
b) Bond Inclusion Areas
c) Future Phrases
2) .Orange Alamance Water System Service Area
a) Potable Water System
b) Fire Suppression System
3) Efla
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
nd/Cheeks Area
Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Transportation
Infrastructure
Open Space
Water Quality Critical Area
4) Buckhorn/Efland EDD
a) Change of Boundaries
b) Types and location of uses
c) Buildout Conditions
d) Efficient use of public services
5) Intergovernmental Coordination
a) City of Mebane Land Development Plan (In Process)
b) Town of Hillsborough
1. Water and Sewer Boundary
2. Upper Eno Watershed Preservation
3. Intensity/Density Reassignment
6) Timeline for Various Recommendations
a) BOCC December Retreat (12/9) or Worksession (12/12); Discussion of
Options
b) Implementation thereafter with Public Hearings, if required.
~'(J~
NNOJ
O~
M~_,
^ '~
---- - ~pP~ S'7
~c~
~~
~p`~ ~_
^
^ ~
7 ~" ~
------
^
^
~^
^~
^
O
N ~ ~ N
Z ~ O .J N Q
~
w ~ ~ __
~ L N ~' ~ N
G
~ U N C
N U
oo~o .~vv
zti c~~~ oc~cn
~ I
(n m m U) O p~ N O
~
~
~
~
X L ._ ~ L
)[
X
X
WW La1WLl.LCUW
~~~~
•~ ~ 4
~ ~^
o ,.,
,. ~.
i , ,
~~
l
~(vop~,~s) la
^ ^ ~^ ^
,~ _~-
i~' `-
^ ~1
r g
_~-
11``
^