Orange County NC Website
4 <br /> The BOCC never formally adopted or accepted the McAdams report or its recommendations. However, <br /> in a resolution adopted on November 20, 1984, the BOCC did state that the County would construct the <br /> portion of the system designated as"Phase I of the Project Engineer's Preliminary Report, 5h Edition <br /> dated April 5h, 1984, last revised August 7, 1984". The resolution went on to qualify its intention by <br /> stating that"The System will be undertaken and funded by Orange County only if at least 179 persons, <br /> firms or,corporations located in Phase I of the Project Area apply for connection to and sewer service for <br /> existing dwellings and businesses during the initial application period". The resolution also provided that <br /> an additional fourteen homes and businesses located adjacent to Phase I(primarily in Phase II) could be <br /> served by the initial sewer construction project if it were financially feasible to construct the sewer <br /> collection lines necessary to serve these properties as an addition to the Phase I construction project. <br /> During November and December of 1984 and January of 1985, Orange County Commissioners and staff <br /> and Efland community volunteers organized something similar to a membership drive. The purpose of <br /> the drive was to convince residents of Efland to sign up for sewer service in numbers sufficient to meet <br /> the 179 sewer services minimum established by the BOCC's 11/20/84 resolution. In preparation for the <br /> sewer service sign-up process, 198 sewer service request documents were prepared for the signature of <br /> 178 individuals (or businesses or organizations) to request 213 sewer taps(twenty individuals, <br /> organizations, etc., requested more than one tap). However, twenty-two of the sewer service taps <br /> covered by signed sewer service request documents were on property parcels located outside the <br /> boundaries of Phase I as delineated in the McAdams report. Sewer service request documents for <br /> another twenty four taps which would have been located in Phase I were never signed by the property <br /> owners. Ultimately, one hundred sixty-seven qualifying(meeting the requirements or conditions set forth <br /> in the BOCC's 11/20/84 resolution)requests for sewer service were submitted to or received by Orange <br /> County by the January 31 , 1985 sewer service request deadline. <br /> In February 1985, Orange County engaged another engineering consulting firm, Hazen and Sawyer, to <br /> revise the McAdams' engineering report and to provide actual sewer system design and construction <br /> administration services. Hazen and Sawyer modified McAdams' preliminary sewer design layout (gravity <br /> and force main pipe routing, number and location of pump stations) and slightly revised the delineation of <br /> the individual phases within the overall phasing plan. Hazen and Sawyer's detailed sewer layout work <br /> and cost estimation indicated that construction of the portion of Phase I east of Efland-Cedar Grove <br /> Road (SR 1004)would not be economically feasible, given the funds available from the County and <br /> various state and federal grants and loans. Hazen and Sawyer completed the design for Phase II and the <br /> western portion of Phase I in early 1987. The sewer project bid was configured such that Phase II <br /> portion was bid as an alternate. Bids were taken and, due to cost considerations, Phase II was deleted <br /> and a construction project encompassing only the western portion of Phase I was begun. The Efland <br /> sewer system was completed and began operation in October 1988. <br /> Since 1988, the Efland sewer customer base has expanded only slightly beyond the 115 initial customers <br /> living in the areas served by the portion of the system that was constructed. Twenty-three new taps have <br /> been installed, but two of these taps and approximately fifteen of the first taps that were installed during <br /> system construction have gone unused. The original and the new taps that have been unused were <br /> installed at buildings that have been unoccupied, lacked plumbing facilities or where the home/building <br /> owners have either been unwilling or financially unable to tap on. <br /> 2 <br />