Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-10-1998 - Attachment VII
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1998
>
Agenda - 02-10-1998
>
Agenda - 02-10-1998 - Attachment VII
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2013 3:42:05 PM
Creation date
7/23/2010 3:56:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/10/1998
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
Attachment VII
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19980210
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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
/ Il IC1C,kroC�"f <br />CONCLUSIONS /QUESTIONS <br />1. Testing data from drinking water wells throughout Orange County tends to indicate that water quality in <br />wells in the vicinity of the Eubanks Road Landfill is comparable to that in wells elsewhere in the County. <br />Do the other governing boards interpret the data in the same way? <br />2. Does any governing board have an interest in conducting additional testing of wells in the vicinity of the <br />landfill (assuming owner permission)? If so, who should conduct the testing and how should the testing be <br />funded? <br />3. Based on water testing and technical reports received to date, there does not seem to be a causative <br />relationship between landfill operations and water quality concerns that led to the proposal to extend water <br />lines. How do the other jurisdictions view this assessment? <br />4. The individual opinions of the County and Town Attorneys seem to indicate that landfill funds can be used <br />for community benefits only to the extent that the need for those benefits is related to landfill operations. <br />Based on conclusions 1 and 3, it would appear that funds other than landfill tipping fees must be used if the <br />governing boards elect to pursue water line extensions. Do the other jurisdictions concur in this assessment? <br />The County Engineer's analysis estimates water line extension and connection costs on a neighborhood by <br />neighborhood basis. If all neighborhoods are included, the total cost for construction, plumbing <br />connections, acreage fees, and the like is estimated at $2,889,000. What do the other governing boards think <br />about which neighborhoods should be included? Which costs should be covered with public funds, and <br />which costs (if any) should be borne by private property owners? <br />6. If conclusions 1, 3, and 4 are reached, all neighborhoods are included, and all costs are seen as properly <br />borne using public funds, the estimated one time equivalent tax rate impacts are for Orange County - 2 <br />cents; for Chapel Hill - 4.5 cents; and for Carrboro - 6.3 cents (assuming the costs are divided based on <br />current landfill ownership interests). Do the other jurisdictions reach the same estimates? Are there other <br />methods that should be considered for assessing the shares of the public costs of water line extensions? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.