Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20091119 APPROVED 12/15/2009 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SERSSION November 19, 2009 7:00p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Valerie P. Foushee, and Commissioners Alice Gordon, Pam Hemminger, Barry Jacobs, Mike Nelson, Bernadette Pelissier, and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) 1. Proposed Master Plan — Hollow Rock Access Area at New Hope Preserve Environment and Resource Conservation Director Dave Stancil made this presentation. Dave Stancil reviewed background information on this project for the Board. He said that this 75-acre site is located south of Erwin Road near the intersection with Pickett Road. The property straddles the Orange-Durham county line, and is comprised of multiple land parcels owned separately by Orange County, Durham County, the Town of Chapel Hill and the Triangle Land Conservancy. New Hope Creek forms the western boundary of the property. He said these properties were acquired as part of an overall effort to protect land along New Hope Creek between Duke Forest and US 15/501 as a linear nature preserve, with a planned trail. Durham County refers to its landholdings as the "New Hope Creek Preserve," and Orange County has also used the working title of "New Hope Preserve" to describe its landholdings along New Hope Creek (which includes the Hollow Rock Access Area). He said the purpose of the multi-jurisdictional Hollow Rock Access Area project was to conserve significant natural and cultural resource lands along New Hope Creek and to make portions of the site available for low-impact recreational uses (in this case, the Hollow Rock site). In September 2006, Orange County joined in an interlocal agreement with the City of Durham, Durham County and the Town of Chapel Hill for acquisition and master planning of the property known as the "Hollow Rock Access Area" section of the New Hope Creek corridor. Over an 18-month period, a Master Plan Advisory Committee (known as the Hollow Rock Master Plan Committee) held workshops and open houses to develop a master plan that fulfills the four responsibilities assigned to it by the agreement: 1. To develop recommendations of uses to be allowed within different areas of the Hollow Rock Access area. 2. To develop recommendations of facilities to be available within different areas of the Hollow Rock Access area and proposed locations for said facilities. 3. To provide suggestions on priority phasing for recommended facilities. 4. To hold public input meetings on the recommended uses and facilities. The Master Plan is the result of the Master Plan Committee's work. The plan includes an overview of the process, background and history, public outreach, findings and recommendations for development of the public access area in phases to serve the purposes selected by the advisory group, created after multiple public meetings to solicit input, and discussion of constraints and opportunities on the site. Dave Stancil said the Master Plan includes the following specific priority facility recommendations: • Phase 1 includes trails with some stream crossings, an ADA loop trail, educational and entrance signage, parking, bike racks, temporary restrooms, a picnic area, the old Hollow Rock Store building (relocated to the site), and use of the 2.6-acre Triangle Land Conservancy property. • Phase 2 would occur if and when Pickett Road (which bisects the site) is closed, and would include additional parking, permanent restrooms, loops, trails (and stream crossings) and a gate on Pickett Road. He said that there are some key issues that will require resolution by the elected boards that own the site before facility development or future activities can occur and these are listed below: 1. Pickett Road: Pickett Road bisects the Hollow Rock Access Area. After substantial discussion, including information gathered from NCDOT and the regional and local transportation staff, the Master Plan Committee noted in its findings that the access area would function better with the road closed to through traffic, but notes that this decision is one that requires further review and discussion. As such, the Master Plan is designed so that Phase 1 assumes an open road, and Phase 2 assumes the road is closed. 2. Construction, Operation and Management: The Hollow Rock Access Area includes land in two counties, owned by four different landowners (Orange County, Durham County, Triangle Land Conservancy and the Town of Chapel Hill). The interlocal agreement that governed the acquisition and master planning of the property does not address how the property would be constructed or managed. Further discussions are needed among the owners on how these activities would proceed. At present, no funds have been allocated for facility construction or operation and maintenance. 3. TLC Property: Triangle Land Conservancy agreed to allow its 2.6-acre property that is surrounded by public landholdings on the Orange County side of the site) to be included in the master plan. TLC is interested, however, in selling the property and the master plan includes use of the property as part of the site's envisioned future. Consideration of this idea, cost of acquisition and maintenance of existing buildings on the site are among the issues that will need to be addressed. As relates to the financial impact of this project, Dave Stancil said the estimated cost of Phase 1 of the site development is $425,000 (Phase 1A, described as `essential' elements, is estimated at $250,000-350,000). There is no current funding for this facility, a fact that was shared with the Master Plan Committee prior to planning. The FY 2009-19 CIP reflects potential future funding in the amount of $625,000 in FY 2016-17. Operation and management of facilities constructed on site could be accomplished in a variety of methods, and potential ideas toward this end are included in the attached Key Issues document. The most likely initial issues to require action are 1) whether to allow for the relocation of the old Hollow Rock Store to the site (and associated risk management, upkeep and maintenance issues), and 2) whether the TLC property should be acquired, including cost-share arrangements and the disposition of the existing buildings on the property. Commissioner Nelson arrived at 7:08 PM. Commissioner Gordon arrived at 7:10 PM. Dave Stancil made the following powerpoint presentation: Proposed Master Plan for the Hollow Rock Access Area New Hope Preserve November 19, 2009 Hollow Rock Access Area New Hope Preserve Hollow Rock Access Area New Hope Preserve •2006 Interlocal Agreement (4 jurisdictions) •Master Plan Advisory Committee •12 meetings (Sept 2007 — March 2009) •Public Outreach and Input •Findings and Recommendations •Proposed Master Plan Hollow Rock Access Area New Hope Preserve •Master Plan rationale: —Facilities in keeping with the natural setting, conservation easements, cultural & archaeological resources, safe access •Facility priorities (2 phases) •Issues for further study Commissioner Pelissier asked how the contributions of the four entities were decided as far as funding goes. Dave Stancil said that with the 43 acres purchased by the partners, there was a formula created but the grants they finally received for this project reduced the costs dramatically. He said that there was more of a negotiation between the entities regarding funding and Durham County took the lead in the acquisition. Rich Shaw said that the County's share was about $125,000. Commissioner Gordon said that the way the purchase was negotiated was related to a number of factors. For example, Orange County had just purchased seven acres that were to go into the preserve. Commissioner Hemminger asked about the management of the park. Dave Stancil said that the expectation is that the two counties (Orange and Durham) would take the lead in the operation and management of the site. Frank Clifton said that the park is surrounded mostly by Durham County residents. Commissioner Hemminger said that she is a little concerned about the closing of Pickett Road and she said that this would be a big battle to fight at this time because there is an issue of connectivity. Commissioner Jacobs said that one complicated factor in how the park is run is that Durham County does not have a parks department and Durham City is a small partner in this process. Commissioner Gordon said that if Pickett Road were closed, the fact that traffic would go on Randolph Road would be a topic of discussion. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to approve the Manager's recommendation: 1. Refer the master plan to the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council, Commission for the Environment, and Orange Unified Transportation Board, requesting feedback and comments on the relevant components of the master plan by February 1, 2010; 2. Direct staff to develop more-detailed recommendations on the Pickett Road, operation and management, and TLC property questions for subsequent Board discussion, and 3. Ask the Clerk to schedule an opportunity to discuss the master plan and next steps with the Durham County Board of Commissioners, Chapel Hill Town Council, and Durham City Council during 2010. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. Environmental Responsibility Goal — Status Report David Stancil presented this item. Dave Stancil said on December 5, 2005, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted a new goal entitled, Environmental Responsibility in County Government The Board had asked a number of advisory boards to review the new goal and to develop a series of potential action strategies to facilitate implementation. ERCD along with the Commission for the Environment (CfE) was asked to coordinate the review process. He said during 2006 and 2007, a number of individual activities toward the Goal were initiated, including: • Creation of an in-house Environmental Stewardship Action Committee (ESAC) with representatives from each department. • Solicitation and compilation of action strategies for the 10 Goal objectives, developed by all of the relevant advisory boards, County departments and agencies. • Drafting of a potential Environmental Leadership Policy for Orange County government. • Research into, and consideration of, mechanisms to promote carpooling and more efficient employee commuting patterns, such as the Best Workplaces for Commuters national program. • Discussion of ways to engage County employees in activities promoting environmental awareness and responsibility, and • Familiarization with the Countywide Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Forecast. Dave Stancil presented the following powerpoint presentation: Environmental Responsibility Goal (Adopted 12/5/05) During the next two years: - County advisory boards and departments created draft action strategies to help implement the ER Goal. - Energy, Water and Vehicle Fuel Conservation Policies also adopted. Environmental Stewardship Action Committee •Created in May 2006 Staff reps from all departments •Met in late 2006 and 2007, created subcommittees —Benchmarks and Assessment Subcommittee —Best Workplaces for Commuters —Did not meet, activities deferred during 2030 Comp Plan (late 2007 —2008) Environmental Leadership Policy Draft •Reviewed many examples — many types exist •Broad in scope, to provide future flexibility •Draft policy speaks to a number of areas such as: —Reducing paper consumption, —Vehicle purchase decisions —Improving energy efficiency in County buildings. •Q: Is this the style the Board desires? Strategy/Policy Feasibility Chart Benchmarks &Assessment Subcommittee (BAS) —Reorganized strategies into like topical areas (links to 2030 Comprehensive Plan) — Initial assessment of staff and budgetary needs (feasibility) — Sample metrics to evaluate progress. —Q: Is this a good model /template? Best Workplaces for Commuters Subcommittee 1) Ways to engage County employees in activities promoting environmental awareness and responsibility 2) Researched mechanisms to promote carpooling and more efficient employee commuting patterns. 3) Considered pros and cons of participating in the Best Workplaces for Commuters national program 4) Will need further assessment, with current resource and financial realities Potential Next Steps •Adopt an Environmental Leadership Policy •Review "Best Workplaces for Commuters" program and employee commuting options •Use Strategy/Policy Feasibility Chart feedback to refine for future actions, continue monitoring building conservation practices •Coordinate Greenhouse Gas Emissions reduction efforts with ER Goal and 2030 Plan •Prepare County Energy Strategy (pursue Renewable Energy/Energy Efficiency $) •ED Master Energy Plan (P-10) •Develop and monitor internal policies to make Orange County a Model Government •Participate in national and global efforts RECOMMENDATIONS •Receive the status report; •Approve Leadership Policy in principle, with needed changes, for future adoption; •Provide direction to staff on implementation actions — especially the strategy/policy feasibility chart template; and Note that any direction toward implementation should reflect current financial realities. He said while there was a lull in activity during the completion of the Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan (during the latter part of 2007 and much of 2008), additional work toward achieving the ER Goal has occurred. The ESAC created two subcommittees to explore commuting options, and to vet the draft action strategies identified by departments. Based on work of the ESAC and its two subcommittees, and research into other similar documents created by local governments across the nation, staff prepared a draft Environmental Leadership Policy ( in agenda packet). The draft Policy speaks to a number of areas where Orange County is either active, or could become more environmentally responsible. Three commonly cited areas for improvement (all of which are underway to varying degrees) include: • reducing paper consumption, • purchasing vehicles with lower fuel consumption and/or lower emissions, and • improving energy efficiency in County-owned buildings. In addition to the work accomplished through the ESAC, examples of other studies and initiatives have been undertaken building on the ER Goal. An incomplete summary of these activities is attached; some of the highlights are described below: • The Solid Waste Department has completed and maintains a substantial effort to increase local recycling efforts and reduce landfill waste. • Orange County has, with its municipal partners Chapel Hill and Carrboro, sponsored a Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory, and is in the process of identifying new strategies to reduce carbon emissions. • Orange County was invited to speak at the annual National Association of County Commissioners (NC Chapter) conference in August on its environmental policies and activities. • The recent State of the Environment Report 2009 incorporated much of the work of the ER Goal into its assessment of 19 key indicators, and this periodic document will likely be another good measuring stick for evaluation of progress toward the ER Goal. • The 2030 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in November 2008, contains a number of references toward green building standards for construction and site design - implementation efforts are underway. • County construction and renovation projects have likewise brought the concepts of energy efficiency and green building to the forefront. • Finally, and most recently, Orange County has partnered with the Orange County and Chapel Hill-Carrboro school systems to pursue economic stimulus funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for a joint solar water heater project, and an energy stimulus team that includes many ESAC members is poised to apply for additional renewable energy or energy efficiency funds as they become available. He said In summary, staff from many departments are now engaged in a number of different activities that are linked to environmental responsibility. Progress has been made, but much remains to be done. He said while the ESAC provides an opportunity to share information and update other departments, a more comprehensive or umbrella framework may be the next logical step to tie these initiatives into a single coordinated effort. An assessment and prioritization of the potential action strategies would be a next step, and Board feedback and direction on the draft Sample Action Strategy/Policy Implementation Feasibility Chart in their packet would be very useful. At its last meeting, the ESAC unanimously offered to serve in the role of periodically evaluating and reporting on the County's response toward meeting the objectives of the ER Goal. Dave Stancil said there was no financial impact associated with receiving the status report or subsequently adopting the policy. He said there would be short and long-term costs (as well as potential short and long-term savings) associated with implementing components of the policy. Commissioner Gordon said that the template seems reasonable and it was developed by staff and advisory boards, but there may be gaps. The guiding principles need to match up with strategies and this needs to be reviewed again. She said that the Board priorities were not adopted when this was done, and this goal needs to align with those. Commissioner Pelissier said that she liked the general approach. She said that on the feasibility chart, there is a column that says, "Funding Needs," and the focus is on cost. She thinks that there should also be a line that shows how much money will be saved. In terms of the guiding principles, she would like something to be said about monitoring performance indicators. She also said that her understanding is that this is an internally focused policy and that the external aspect should be left to the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioner Pelissier about the policy being internally driven. He suggested checking with the Board of County Commissioners' adopted priorities and goals. He said that, with the reorganizing of agenda abstracts, there could be an Environmental Impact just like Financial Impact, especially if it is an essential component. Regarding the matrix, he suggested having preferred parking for carpoolers in the parking deck. He would like to pursue this and acknowledge to the public and employees that carpooling is preferred. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to approve the Manager's recommendation to receive the status report; approve in principle - with any needed changes - the Orange County Environmental Leadership Policy, to be placed on a subsequent agenda for formal adoption; and provide direction and feedback to staff on next steps toward implementation of the Environmental Responsibility (ER) Goal — especially regarding the use of the Sample Action Strategy/Policy Implementation Feasibility Chart to evaluate proposed implementation activities, and note that any feedback or direction toward implementing actions should provide for an internal assessment of feasibility, recognizing current financial realities. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Hemminger asked if the County Commissioners could get an update of the list of work session topics for the rolling calendar. Frank Clifton said that he had a meeting in Raleigh and the Manager and Assistant Manager from the City of Durham were there and they talked about extending utilities from the City of Durham into Orange County. There was a very favorable response and he will work on some details and bring it back to the Board. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adjourn the meeting at 7:58 PM. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Valerie Foushee, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board