Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-16-1999 - 9c
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1999
>
Agenda - 02-16-1999
>
Agenda - 02-16-1999 - 9c
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2009 8:11:43 AM
Creation date
7/15/2009 8:11:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/16/1999
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
9c
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19990216
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
6 <br />Masonry style structures, complete with restrooms, are estimated to be <br />priced similarly to the modular unit; <br />- Theoretically, design services would not be required, except perhaps for site <br />work specifications (proper grading and drainage) and utility (water and <br />sewer hook ups). Presumably, costs for this service would be minimal (less <br />than $1,000). <br />- Costs associated with site-work, would be contingent upon where the <br />building was placed on the site. It is plausible that site work could be <br />significantly more than what is listed in Option I, if substantial grading is <br />required to attain proper drainage, or for an access road, parking area, etc. <br />- Assuming the freestanding unit would be located in activity areas that are <br />more remote to water and sewer hookups, connecting those utilities could <br />increase the overall cost of construction. While water is fairly available on <br />the site, an on-site septic system or running lines to connect to the sewer <br />could be a significant development cost. <br />Option II Pros/Cons: <br />Pros: <br />- The building could be located exactly where it is determined the best <br />"policing" effort could occur. <br />- Flexibility in future expansion of the existing building is preserved if the small <br />extension is not added. <br />Cons: <br />- Impervious surfaces added to site. <br />- Cost <br />Option III: Reallocate two offices in existing Community Center for use by the <br />Sheriffs Department. <br />Discussion: As previously referenced, the Community Center is used as a Senior <br />Center as well as for various uses by the Community and the Recreation Department. <br />There are two offices in the Center which are currently unallocated and not used for day <br />to day operations. One of the offices is approximately 12' x 15', while the other is <br />approximately 10' x 10'. The Sheriffs Department has indicated that these offices are <br />quite serviceable for their needs in a satellite facility. The restroom facilities are more <br />than adequate for this additional function. In addition, the large outer meeting room <br />could significantly enhance the flexibility of activities that could be carried out in the <br />satellite office. For example, citizens representing the community at the November 24, <br />1998 meeting expressed interest in beginning a "Community Park Watch". This room <br />would easily accommodate such meetings with the Sheriffs Department. <br />Option III Pros/Cons: <br />Pros: <br />- Space is immediately available as is, thereby eliminating the need for a <br />capital expenditure; <br />- Deputies moving in and out of the building while it is occupied during <br />normally scheduled activities allows the deputies and citizens to become <br />more familiar with one another; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.